^^"^rl
O
f PR-tNCETON. N. J. 4
\ ADDlSON^'- AI^.X^lNDER LIBRARY. |
A * whi'h Aras presented bj /■
|/ Messrs. K. 1. and A. Stuabt. J
1 CVf.sv% Divisiop^^^''^*^^'^
NOTES,
CRITICAL AND PRACTICAL,
ON THE BOOK OF
LEVITICUS
DESIGNED AS A CCNERAI- HELP TO
BIBLICAL READING AND INSTRUCTION.
By GEORGE BUSH,
PROr, OF HTD, AND ORIENT. LIT. N. Y. CITY UNIVERSITY.
NEW-YORK:
PUBLISHED BY NEWMAN AND IVISON,
199 Broadway.
CINCINNATI : MOORE & ANDERSON. AUBURN : J. C. IVISON & CO
CUICAGO : S. C. GRIGGS & CO DETROIT : A. McFARRBN.
1852.
Entered according to act of Congress,
Is the yc»r one thousand eight hundred and forty-twO; by
GEORGE BUSH,
In .heCjcrn's office of the District Court of the Southern District of New- York.
t. W. BENEDICT, 9TERECTYPER AlfD PIUIVTEB
No. 128 Fulton Street, N. Y.
INTRODUCTION
§ 1. Title, Author, Date, SfC.
The Hebrews, according to their usual custom, denominate this, the third book
in the order of the Pentateuch, S^lp'iT va-yikra, and he called, from its initial
word. By the Septuagint it is culled AcvXtikov, leuitikon (levitikori), of which
the Vulgate title ' Leviticus' is the Latinized form ; and this has been retained
by our own and all the modern versions. It is so called from the fact that it
treats principally of the rites and ceremonies, the services and sacrifices, of the
religion of the Israelites, the charge of which was committed to the Levitical
priesthood, that is, to Aaron and his sons, or descendants, who were of the tribe
of Levi, and who alone of that tribe exercised the priestly office. It is not,
therefore, the ministry of the Levites properly so called, who constituted a dis-
tinct order from the priests, and subordinate to them, that forms the subject of
this book, for of their services a much fuller account is contained in the book of
Numbers than in the present. It is of the peculiar functions of the sacerdotal
body usually termed ' the sons of Aaron,' that the book, for the most part, treats,
for which reason it is denominated by the Talmudists Q'^;ri3n Hlin torath hak-
kohanim, the law of the priests, and mDlS*lpn Dllin torath hakkorbanoth, the law
of the offerings. The * sons of Aaron,' or the priests, were mtyely assisted in
the performance of their sacred office by the descendants of the other branch of
Levi's family, who obtained the privilege of officiating as a kind of second order
of the priesthood, in recompense of the ready zeal which they displayed against
idolatry and the worshippers of the golden calf.
That Moses was the real author of this book, is proved, not only by the gen.
eral arguments which demonstrate him to have written the whole Pentateuch,
but by particular passages in other portions of the Scriptures where it is expressly
cited as his inspired work. Thus, Nehem. 8. 14, ' And they found written in the
law which the Lord had commanded 61/ Moses, that the children of Israel should
dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month.' This ordinance is contained
Lev. 23. 34, 42. Again it is said of the mother of Jesus, Luke 2. 22, that ' When
the days of her purification according to the law of Moses, were accomplished,
Ihey brought him to Jerusalem,' a law which is to be found Lev. 12. 6. Once
more, it is said 2 Chron. 30. 16, of the priests and Levites, that ' they stood in
their place, after their manner, according to the law of Moses, the man of the
Lord ; the priests sprinkled of the blood which they received of the hand of the
Levites.' This regulation occurs Lev. 1. 5. The true authorship of the book is
by these passages put beyond question.
The time and place at which the book was written, are determined by the
IV INTRODUCTION.
words occurring th. 27. 34, ' These are the commandments which the Lord com.
manded Moses for the children of Israel in Mount Sinai.' That this is to bff
understood not only of those laws which were orally promulgated at that time
and place, but of those also which were committed to writing, may be inferred
I'rom the parallel expression, Num. 36. 13, ' These are the commandments and
the judgments which the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses, unto the child-
ren of Israel, in the plains of Moab, by Jordan, near Jericho.' As it was in the
plains of Moab here mentioned that Moses died, and as the precepts in the book
of Numbers could not have been written either prior or subsequent to the period
of the sojourn at that station, it is reasonable to conclude, that if in one case
mention is made o[ written laws, the same is to be understood in the other. So
that there is no room to question that this book was written during the encamp-
ment of Israel at the foot of Mount Sinai. This is strikingly confirmed by such
allusions as the following, indicating that the state of the Israelites at the time,
was that of an encampment, instead of a permanent settlement in cities and
villages. Lev. 4. 12, ' The whole bullock shall he carry forth without the campJ
V. 28, ' And afterward he shall come into the camp.'' Ch. 14. 33, ' And the Lord
spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying. When ye be come into the land of
Canaan which I give to you,' &c. implying that they had not yet arrived there.
§ 2. The Period embraced by the History.
Archbishop Usher, who is followed by Mr. Home, supposes that the book
comprises the history of the transactions of a single month, viz. from April 21
to May 21 , of the year 2514, which answers to the first month of the second year
after the departure from Egypt. Others consider it as containing only the ac-
count of what passed during the eight days of the consecration of Aaron and his
sons. The former is the more generally received opinion, but as the book itself
contains no definite data by which the chronological arrangement of its facta
can be adjusted, we can afiirm nothing positive on the subject.
§ 3. Divisions, Contents, ^c.
By the Jews this book is divided into ten STlTU'lS parashoth, or larger divisions,
and twenty-three fci^no siderim, or smaller divisions. These, in the arrange-
ment of our Bibles, are comprised in twenty-seven chapters, of which the
contents may be again subdivided and classified as follows :
Part: I. — Laics concerning Sacrifices.
CHAPTERS
I. Oftheburnt-ofierings, 1
II. Of the meat-ofierings, 2
III. Of the peace-ofl'erings, 3
IV. Of the sin-ofi"erings, 4,6
V Of the trespass-offerings, 6, 7
Part 11.— Institution of the Priesthood.
I. The consecration of Aaron and his sons, fi
II. The offerings at the consecration of the priests, - - D
III. Death of Nadab and Abihu, • - 10
I**
INTRODUCTION. V
CHAPTERS
Part III. — Distinction of Clean and Unclean Animals.
I. Unclean beasts, birds, fishes, &c. specified, .... n
Part IV. — Laws concerning Purification.
I. Of women after child-birth, 12
II. Of persons infected with leprosy, 13,14
III. Of persons having bad issues, 15
Part V. — Various Regulations.
I. Concerning the great day of atonement, 16
II. " the place of offering sacrifices, - .♦ . - 17
III. " things prohibited to be eaten, 17
IV. " incestuous connexions, 18
V. " idolatry and various other crimes, • - • 19-22
Part VI. — Laws concerning the Festivals, Vows, and Tithes.
I. The sabbath, passover, pentecost, feast of trumpets, day of atone-
ment, and feast of tabernacles, 23
II. Various ceremonial and judicial rites relative to sacred festivals, 24
III. Law of the sabbatic year, year of jubilee, &c. .... 25
IV. Prohibition of idolatry, &c. 26
V. Of vows, things devoted, and tithes, 27
§ 4. Argument, Scope, SfC.
Although the book of Leviticus contains some matters purely historical, j'et
its leading scope is to record the laws concerning the sacrifices, ordinances, and
instilulions of that remarkable economy from which it derives its name. The
established worship of the Hebrews was oflTering — not prayer, said or chanted,
nor instrumental music, nor any like form of devotion — but the presenting to the
Deity certain articles of food and drink. This system of worship is not to be
understood as having originated at tlie time to which the book refers. As there
were moral laws in the world by which human conduct was more or less governed
prior to the delivery of the Decalogue from Mount Sinai, so it is evident from
the history of Cain and Abel, of Noah, of Abraham, and other patriarchs, that
sacrificial offerings are to be dated back to the earliest periods of wliich we have
any account. They constituted the prevailing form in which the spirit of devn-
tion was taught to express itself from the very infancy of the race. But as sac-
rifices were ordained to enter largely into the dispensation now about to be estab-
lished, they are in this book instituted, as it were, anew, placed upon their true
foundation, and commanded with circtmistances which gave them greater im-
portance, and served to illustrate their typical character with more effect.
The sacrifices prescribed in the Levitical worship, were of two kinds; the
bloody and the u?ibloody ; or the animal and the vegetable offerings ; the latter
consisting o( fruits and libations.
(I.) The Bloodv Sacrifices. — These consisted, (1.) of Holocausts, which
were oflTered to the Lord entire, and were considered as ranking highest in dig.
1*
VI INTRODUCTION.
nity and excellence, for which reason Moses commences the law of sacrifices with
them. (2.) Sin and Trespass-offerings, distinguished from the holocausts by
certain parts only of the animal being burnt on the altar, while the flesh was
eaten by the priests. (3.) Eucharistical Sacrifices, or Thank-offerings. In
these the fat only was consumed on the altar, a small portion being allotted by
law to the priest, and all the rest being eaten at a solemn and joyful feast by the
offerer and his guests.
(II.) Unbloody Sacrifices, or Meat-offerings. — These consisted of flour,
bread, cakes, and ears of corn and grain roasted, of which a full account is given
in ch. 2. The libations were of wine, and although the mode of pouring them
out is nowhere described, yet it is most likely that the wine was poured out of
some vessel upon the top of the altar.
That these sacrifices had all of them a typical intent ; that they were ' sha-
dows of good things to come,' pointing more or less distinctly to < the body which
is of Christ,' the whole epistle to the Hebrews is a continued proof. The impo-
sition of hands upon the head of the victim, the shedding of its blood, and the
consumption of its members upon the altar, were prefiguralive acts setting forth,
by a kind of dramatic representation, the future offering of the ' Lamb of God
slain from the foundation of the world.' The requisite qualities of these sacri-
ficial victims were emblematical of Christ's immaculate character, and the law
of their oblation was a practical hieroglyphic of the great gospel truth of the
atonement. So also were the outward washings and purifications enjoined by the
Mosaic law, designed to intimate the necessity of inward purity. Indeed, if
these institutions be severed from their New Testament relations, we have no
key to unlock the hidden meaning of the Pentateuch, and the whole ritual con-
tained in it dwindles down to a burdensome round of unmeaning ceremonies.
But when regarded in the light now suggested, the whole service, like the veil
on the face of Moses, conceals a spiritual radiance under an outward covering,
and the wisdom of the various appointments appears at once worthy of its di-
vine Author. To what extent the spiritual import of these riles was actually
understood by the Jews themselves, it may not be easy to determine ; but iliat
something, over and above the simple act of slaying and offering the animal
victim, was required by the spirit of the law is evident from the fact, that the
obedience of the chosen people is frequently represented as faulty, notwith-
standing their scrupulous observance of the outward rile. Tl)us Isai. ]. 11, 12,
' To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord :
I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts ; and I delight
not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.'
But while the Jews probably in great measure fell short of apprehending the
true typical genius of their own dispensation, and consequently rejected iis
divine Fulfiller when he came, an error is often committed on the other hand, in
modern times, by the attempt to elicit more from ihese figurative institutions
than they were intended to convey. It by no means follows that becsiuse cer-
tain portions of the Levilical economy have a typical purport, we have therefore
a right to gwe loose to imagination and multiply types at will, as if llie Scrip-
lures meant all that they can be made to mean. This was the fault of many of
the earlier interpreters, who so abounded in mystical senses as to convert nearly
the whole system into a mass of fancied allegories and typical allusions, which
INTRODUCTION. ^
Luther very properly characterized as the 'froth of scripture.' To such lengths
was this style of interpretation carried by Origen, Hesychius, and their disciples
in later times, that one can scarcely open a volume of their commentaries with*
out reading in the title-page that the ' mystical sense is duly expounded ;' evi-
deiitly implying that the duly of the commentator was by no means discharged
by the accurate grammatical exegesis of the text ; but that he was bound in
addition to penetrate beyond the surface of the letter, and enlighten his readers
by an exhibition of the manifold occult meanings hidden beneath the surface, and
constituting those abysmal depths of import, which the plummet of lexicogra-
phy could never presume to sound.
It may be difficult, indeed, to lay down precise rules which shall be universally
applicable in the way of interpretation, but the grand canon undoubtedly is, to
fallow strictly the apostolical explanations, where we have them j and, where
we have them not, to proceed with extreme caution, adhering rigidly to the
analogy of faitb, and standing as remote as possible from any thing which may
appear fanciful, and give occasion to cavillers to discard typical expositions
uitogeiher. Under these restrictions we may safely recognize a typical import
in many items of the Levitical law which are not expressly affirmed by the New
Testament writers to be possessed of that character; and, in fact, in no other
way will that wondrous polity disclose to us the whole richness of its evangeli-
cal implications.
§ 5. Commentators.
The remark made under this head in the introduction to the Notes on Exo-
dus, holds strictly true of the book of Leviticus, viz. that it has been the subject
of few commentaries except such as have at the same time embraced either the
whole Pentateuch or the whole Bible. In pointing out therefore the sources of
illustration for this portion of the Mosaic writings, I can do little more than
recite the authorities already specified in my preceding volumes. They will be
found enumerated at considerable length in the prolegomena to the work oa
Exodus, with critical estimates of the character and value of each. These it
will be unnecessary to repeat at length in the present connexion, but it may sub-
serve the convenience and information of the reader, to be furnished with the
titles of those works, from which he may hope to derive the most essential aid
in the study of the scope and genius of the Levitical law. The following may
be cited as claiming perhaps the first place in this relation : —
Outram's Dissertations oa the Jewish Sacri- Saurin's Dissertations.
fices. I Michaelis' Comment, on Laws of Moses*
Lowman on the Hebrew Ritual,
J. P. Smith on the Sacrifice and Priesthood
of Christ.
Faber on the Three Dispensation*.
" Hora2 Mosaics.
Willett's Hesapla on Leviticus.
Pictorial Bible.
Lightfoot's Works.
Magee on the Atonement.
Spencer de Legibus Hebrffiorum.
Graves on the Pentateuch.
Warburton's Divine Legation.
Davison on Sacrifices.
Sykes on do.
Bahr's Symbolik of the Mosaic Worship
(Germ.)
Owen'fl Prelim. Dissert, on Epistle to the
Hebrews.
Witsius' Miscellaoea Sacra. I Aintworlh on the Pentateuch.
Vm INTRODUCTION.
• To most of the above works I have had recourse in the preparation of the en-
suing Notes, but to one of the number — The Pictorial Bible — I feel constrained
on this, as on former occasions, to express my indebtedness in a more particular
manner. The Notes of the Editor, Mr. Kitto, can scarcely be consulted on any
point of which he treats without advantage, but it is more especially in the
department of modern oriental manners and usages, that his work is so signally
in advance of any other Biblical Commentary. From having himself spent sev-
eral years as a traveler in the East, he has been enabled to make the existing
institutions, laws, and customs of those ancient regions of the globe most happily
tributary to the explanation of a multitude of passages which had never before the
light of a satisfactory solution cast upon them. On all subjects of this nature,
it will be perceived that I have drawn largely upon his pages, and so also
in the natural history of the beasts, birds, and fishes mentioned in the
eleventh chapter, in laying down the distinction between the clean and the un-
clean. For a very large part of the annotations on that chapter, requiring a
species of knowledge to which a mere critical or practical expositor can seldom
be expected to lay claim, I have been indebted to the results of his accurate
inquiries. Being conscious of the necessity, in this province of my work, of
' entering into other men's labors,' I trust the reader, instead of objecting to my
copious extracts, will rather be grateful that I have provided so liberally from
this source for his information in a field of comment, into which he has probably
often come ' seeking fruit, and finding none.'
In reference to the work now offered as a new korban on the altar of Biblical
learning, a few words will be permitted. The book which I have here under-
taken to illustrate on the plan of my previous volumes, constitutes a part of the
sacred canon less read, and usually accounted less interesting and important,
than almost any other. Although not omitted, of course, in any regular reading
of the Scriptures entire from beginning to end, yet it is seldom relumed to on
any other occasion ; and in Bible-c4ass and Sunday-school instruction is almost
invariably passed by. May I be allowed to express the hope, that the present
volume will be found, in no small measure, to have redeemed this book from the
comparative disparagement which has fallen upon it ? If the ensuing notes
shall have the effect of transferring to the reader, in any good degree, the feel-
ing of intense interest which has pervaded the mind of the author in the prose-
cution of his labors, the book will rise in his estimation with the perusal of every
successive chapter, till at the close he shall acknowledge that revelation is rich
even in its poorest parts, and that without the accurate knowledge of the Law
which he here acquires, he never could so fully have understood the nature and
value of the Gospel.
No apology will be required by the thorough student of the Bible for the very
frequent citation of the original in its appropriate type. The sentences are
always translated, and I doubt not they will in many instances verify to the
reader's mind the remark, which has so often occurred to my own, that a strictly
literal rendering of a passage of Scripture is, in multitudes of cases, the very
best commentary that can be offered upon it. The Hebrew is given without
points, not from any slight esteem of the value of that appendage to the language,
but simply in order to preserve the symmetry of the page by preventing the
lines from being thrown unduly asunder.
THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS.
CHAPTER I.
THK BURNT-OFFERING.
In the system of Jewish sacrifices,
the Burnt-ofFerings, treated of in this
chapter, held the most conspicuous
place. They were of all others the
most ancient ; as the acceptable offer-
ing of Abel was undoubtedly of this
description, and the worship both of
Noah and Abraham, long prior to the
time of Moses, included them as an
essential element. Indeed, the direc-
tions concerning offerings in the chapter
before us, are introduced in such a way
as to indicate that the Lawgiver was
not propounding anew form of worship,
but regulating the ritual of one already
understood and used : ' When any man
of you shall bring an offering to the
Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the
cattle, even of the herd and of tlie flock.'
The earliest records of heathen anti-
quity show, moreover, that such sacri-
fices were in use among nearly all
nations, and distinguished by accompa-
nying rites and ceremonies very similar
to those observed by the Hebrews,
clearly indicating that they derived
thoir origin from the same source, to wit,
a divine institution ordained to the pa-
rents of the race, and kept up among
the antediluvians, from whom, through
Noah and his family, it was transmitted
to all subsequent generations of men,
wherever dispersed over the earth.
The original term for burnt-offering,
n^3J oldh. comes from the root, \i^^
dhlh, to ascend. It is so called, be-
cause it was laid whole on the altar,
and then, with the exception of the skin,
being consumed by fire, the greatest part
of it ascended towards heaven. Its
equivalents in other languages are as
follows; Chal. Hints' alia, ascension;
'^"'^'J kelil,entireness ; JS;'^"i723 gemira,
oblation. Gr. oXoK-aorrc or.5, KaprrM^a, 6,\ -
K-aurw/xi, all conveying the idea of a
fire-offering wholly consumed, which
is also clearly intimated by the Latin
word ' holocaustum,' holocaust. The
sacrifice consisted in the immolating of
a male animal victim, which was some-
times a bull of three years old, some-
times a sheep or goat of one year old,
and sometimes, but more rarely, a tur-
tle-dove, or young pigeon. But from
whatever class of the animal kingdom
it were taken, whether from the herd or
the flock, whether it were bullock, ram,
or goat, one thing was indispensable —
it was to be perfect in its kind, ' a male
without blemish.' This rule was given
to intimate to the people the reverence
and respect with which they should
regard God, and every part of his ser-
vice. It would be highly unbecoming
to offer to liim any thing that was lame,
or blind, or diseased, or in any other
way of little value. He will be served
with every creature's best. But this
i was not all. The animal was to be the
I most excellent of its kind, in order the
I more fitly to shadow forth the excellen-
cies of Him who was to be the great
substance of this type, the Lamb slain
from the foundation of the world, and
who alone of all that ever partook of
our nature was truly without sin. As
he was to be a spotless Savior, so his
representing type was to be a spotless
victim. In addition to this it is to be
observed, that the animal was to be se-
lected from among those that were used
for food, and were most eminently ser-
10
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
viceable to man ; thus teaching him, |
that in serving God we are not to with-
hold from him even that which is most
near and dear to us, which goes to sus-
tain our being and constitute our com-
forts. As we received all from him, so
we must render back all to him. Nor
must we here fail to notice that peculiar
feature of the law, by which the obla-
tion was to be varied according to the
ability of the offerer. While the rich
man presented his bullock, the consider-
ate and benignant spirit of the law made
provision for the poor man also, who,
as his circumstances would permit,
might bring a lamb or a pigeon, with
the assurance of its being equally ac-
ceptable with the costlier gift of his
neighbor. No one was to be discouraged
from approaching God, by the consider-
ation that he was not able to present to
him such an offering as he could wish.
He would have no man, however hum-
ble, excluded from the pleasures and
benefits, to say nolliing of the duties, of
such a religious observance. So legihly
do we find the stamp of the divine bene-
ficence impressed upon the smallest
items of liis institutions.
The various ceremonies connected
with the rile of the Burnt-offering, will
be considered in detail, as we proceed
in our annotations ; but we observe
here, in regard to the occasions on which
this species of offering was made, that
they were both public and private. As
their design was, in the mdi'm, expiatory,
they were presented, partly, in the name
of the whole nation, daily, every morn-
ing and evening, as also in connexion
with a sin-offering on the great day of
atonement, and on the three principal
anniversary festivals ; — partly, on the
solemnity of consecration to office — and
partly by private persons, in order to
be freed irom the condition of Levitical
uncleanness; namely, by women after
child-bearing, at the end of the legally
prescribed period for the purification, —
by lepers when cured, — by Nazariles,
when they had touched a dead body,—
and by those referred to in Lev. 15.
1-15.
We say that the design of thes*!
offerings was mainly expiatory; and
such was undoubtedly the case. At
the same time, it is to be observed, that
in the early ages of the world, when no
other sacrifices were offered but whole
burnt-offerings, this one kind of sacri-
fice was also petitionary and euchU'
ristic. and was in fact applied to every
part of sacred worship, according to the
circumstances and promptings of each
individual. This is clearly deducible
from the inspired history. Noah offered
burnt-offerings as an expression of gra.
titude to God for the preservation of
himself and his family through tlie
perils of the deluge. Job added burnt-
I offerings to prayers, when he interceded
I for forgiveness for liis sons and his
I friends. Balaam, following, beyond
■ doubt, the general custom, directed
; burnt-offerings to be prepared when he
was about to pray for safety to Balak,
and destruction to the Israelites. That
bumf offerings used also to be presented
as votive and voluntary oblations, may
be inferred from the language of David,
Ps. 63. 13-15, ' I will go into thine
house with burnt-offerings ; I will pay
thee my vows, which my lips have
uttered, and my mouth hath spoken,
when I was in trouble. I will offer unto
tl-.ee burnt-sacrifices of fallings, with
the incense of rams ; I will offer bul-
locks with goats.' Ps. 61. IS, 19. ' Do
good in thy good pleasure unto Zion ;
build thou the Vv'alls of Jerusalem.
Then shalt thou be pleased with the
sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt-
offerings and tchole burnt-offerings ;
then shall they offer bullocks upon
thine aliar.' In the former of these
passages is doubtless to be understood
votive offerings ; and in the latter,
voluntary ones.
And it is voluntary offerings, unques-
tionably, w hich are contemplated in the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER I.
11
A
CHAPTER I.
ND the Lorda called unto Mo-
ses, and spake unto himb out
" Ex. 19, 3.
of the tabernacle of the congrega-
tion, saying,
b Ex. 40, 34, 35. Num. 12, 4, 5,
chapter before us. The burnt-ofFerins
about which directions are here given
was not the public offering of the lamb, I
morning and evening, nor one pre-
scribed to the Israelites at any appoint-
ed time, or upon any particular occa-
sion. It had respect to an offering to
be brought by any individual, whenever
he felt himself so disposed. It was
ordered in view of those seasons in the
pious Israelite's experience, when he
felt his mind under more than ordinary
impressions ; when he was sensible of
his general sinfulness and deficiencies ;
and when he would humbly seek mercy
for those manifold offences and failings
which are not particularly specified,
and had no express offering appointed
for them.
As to the leading typical design of
the Burnt-offering, nothing can be clear-
er than that it had a special regard to
the offering of Christ in a human body.
It is so stated in the epistle to the He-
brews ; * When he cometh into the
world he saith, sacrifice and offering thou
wouldst not, but a body hast thou pre-
pared me ; in burnt-offerings and sacri-
fices for sin thou hast no pleasure. Then
said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of
the bocU it is written of me), to do thy
will, O God.' Here were the sins of a
whole world to be atoned for ; here
were innumerable transgressions of in-
numerable persons, which needed mer-
cy. The time was come when the
„'aitle upon a thousand hills would be
no longer accepted, but the offering of
the Son of God was to supersede them
all. He was to be slain, who alone
could present an oblation worthy to be
accepted as an expiation for the sins of
untold millions of human beings. Such
an offering he did present in the sacri-
fice of himself on the cross, and the
intensity of his sufferings in undergoing
that vicarious martyrdom is not inaptly
denoted by the burning of the whole
Burnt-offering which was so expressly
enjoined. But without appearing to
press the coincidences between the
type and the antitype, when every thing
is taken into consideration, we see not
how a doubt can remain that the sacri-
fice of the Burnt-offering was designed
as a piacular substitute for the indivi-
dual in whose behalf it was brought to
the altar. With these remarks we are
prepared to enter upon the explication
of the text.
1. And the Lord called unto Moses f
and spake unto him, 4'^. Heb. S^lp"^!
vayikra, and he called. The word
' Lord,' though inserted by our transla-
tors in the first clause, occurs in the
original only in the second ; — ' And he
called unto Moses, and the Lord said,'
&c. A similar construction occurs in
Lev. 8. 15: ' And he slew it, and
Moses took the blood,' &c. — where it
would seem, from the context, that it
was Moses who slew the sacrifice.
Still the note on that passage will show
that there is some degree of doubt as to
the true construction. The Jerus.
Targ. in this place renders, ' And the
Word of the Lord called,' &c. As the
cloud of glory now filled the tabernacle,
and prevented all access to its interior,
Moses stood without while an audible
voice from the mercy-seat addressed
him in the words immediately follow-
ing. The word ' called,' in the original,
has the last letter written in smaller
character than the rest, intimating, ac-
cording to the Jews, that God now spake,
not with a loud thundering voice, as
upon Mount Sinai, but in lower and
gentler tones, as befitted a milder and
more permanent mode of communica*
12
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, and say unto them,c If any
man of you bring an offering unto
c ch. '2-2, 13, 19.
tion. IF Out of the tabernacle of the
congregation. Heb. 1^1'?2 ^inii^ m'co-
hel mo'td, more correctly rendered ta-
bernacle of meeting, or convention-tent,
i. e., the tent or tabernacle where God
and his people met at stated times.
See Note on Ex. 27. 21, where it is
shown that the term implies the meet-
ing of two parties by previous appoint-
ment. Gr, £K r>7f aKrjvrii tov fiapTVpiov^
from the tabernacle of the testimony.
Compare Num. 11. 53, Acts 7. 14.
By the phrase ' out of the tabernacle,' is
meant, out of the most holy place, from
over the mercy-seat, and between the
cherubim, Avhere God was said pecu-
liarly to reside. Hitherto he had spoken
to Moses out of heaven, or out of the
cloud ; but having taken possession of
the temple prepared for him, he makes
that his audience-chamber, and gives
his servant orders from thence. It
does not appear that Moses was com-
manded to come into the tabernacle,
as the precluding glory probably now
filled the sacred edifice, but we may
suppose that he stood without, at or
near the entrance, and there reverently
listened to the uttered voice of Jehovah.
2. If any man of you bring an offer-
ing. Heb. inip Cr?2 ^^^p-^ ^3 CTJ^
adam ki yakrib mikkem korban, a man
vhen he shall bring of you an offering.
The original word here and elsev.'here
rendered ' offering,' is p^p korban, de-
rived from the verb i^p karab, signify-
ing radically to approach, to draw near
to, and in what is termed the Hiphil, or
causative form, to cause to approach,
to bring near, to present ; hence in the
Hiphil, the verb is generally rendered
in our version to offer, a sense of the
term expressly confirmed by the fact
mat the original v/ords for « bring near,'
and ' ofler,' are used iulerohangoably
the Lord, ye shall bring your of-
fering of the cattle, even of the
herd, and of the flock.
with each other in the following pas-
sages :—l Chron. 16. 1, 'And they
offered (IH'^^p'i yakribu,) burnt-sacri-
; fices and peace-offerings before God ;'
j for which 2 Sam. 6. 17 has, ' And David
offered C^'S'^ yaal,) burnt-offerings and
peace-offerings before the Lord.' In
accordance with this, the noun p^p
korban, Gr. 6cjpov gift, is used to denote
' an oflTering,' or that wliich wasbrought
to the altar, and dedicated to God, whe-
ther it was a thing animate or inani-
mate, a human being or a brute beast.
(On the use of the word in the New
Testament, Mark 7. 11, in reference to
a practice condemned by our Savior,
see Barnes' note, in loc.) Thus the
bread or meat-offering, and the oblation
of the first fruits, Lev. 2. 1-12, have tlie
appellation ' korban ' given them : 'And
when any man will oflier a meat-ofler-
ing (meal-offering,) unto the Lord, his
offering (korban,) shall be of fine fiour,'
&c. So also the silver vessels, cattle,
sheep, StCjoflTered by the princes. Num.
7. 10-17, et inf. are comprehended under
the general name of ' korban.' Nay,
the very wood which was used to burn
the sacrifices on the altar, Nehem. 10.
34, from its being brought for that pur-
pose, is denominated 'korban.' And
what is still more worthy of notice, the
same phraseology is employed in refer-
ence to the Levites as a consecrated
body of men, from their being brought
near and presented to the Lord for the
service of the sanctuary : Num. 8. 10
' And thou shall bring (rij^pil hikrab-
ta,) the Levites before the Lord,' i. e.
Shalt offer them as holy persons dedi-
cated to the service of Jehovah. As
the verb ^^^ kdrab, however, in its
Hiphil form, denotes jirincipally the
bare act of bringing any thing to a par-
ticulnr place or person, though rendered
B. C. 1490.3
CHAPTER I.
13
3 If his offering he a burnt-sacri-
fice of the herd, let him offer a
<1 Exod. 12. 5. ch. 3. 1, and 22. 20, 21.
by the word ^ offer/ it is to be observed,
that when any private individual is said
to ' offer ' an animal or other oblation,
it is to be understood simply of" his
bringing it to the altar, not of his per-
forming any part of the offtce which
was exclusively appropriated to the
Priests and Levites TT Ye shall bring
your offering of the cattle, (even) of the
herd and of the flock. Tlie term ' cattle '
here is generic, including the 'herd'
and the ' flock ' mentioned in connec-
tion. The word 'even' is therefore
properly supplied in our version, to in-
dicate that ' herd' and ' flock' are ex-
egetical of ' cattle.' The Heb. term
•1542 tzon, comprehends both sheep and
goats, as is evident from v, 10. It ap-
pears, therefore, that there were only
five kinds of living creatures which were
accepted in sacrifice, viz. of animals :
beeves, sheep, and goats, including the
young of each kind of eight days old.
Lev. 22. 27 ; and of fowls: turtle-doves
and young pigeons, 1. 44. These being
of the most tame, gentle, and harmless
species of creatures, the most easily ob-
tained, as well as the most serviceable
to man, were well adapted at once to
point out the distinguishing moral attri-
butes of Christ and his people, those
'living sacrifices' which were ' accept-
able to God,' and also to intimate man's
absolute depcndance upon God for those
blessings to which he owes his food and
raiment, the crowning comforts of life.
Besides, as some of the sacrifices were
followed by a feast on the victim, which
was esteemed a covenant rite, therefore
such animals as were allowed for food,
would naturally be required to be offer-
ed in sacrifice.
3. A burnt-sacrifice. Heb. iTt^V olah,
more correctly rendered u-hole burnt-
offering. The prescribed sacrificial
ofierings are distinguished in Hebrew
o
male '^without blemish: he shall
offer it of his own voluntary will
Deut. 15. 21. Mai. 1. 14. Eph. 6. 27.
Heb. 9. 14. IPet. 1. 19.
by two several terms, n'^I^H isheh, and
il"^^ olah, of which the first being a de-
rivative from'i'J^ ishjfire, denotes an of-
fering by fire, and is applied both to of-
ferings burnt wholly, and to those burnt
in part. This word is generally ren-
dered by ' offering by fire.' The word
n^5> olah, on the other hand, literally
signifying ' ascension,' from ni5> alah,
to ascend, because these offerings went
up in flame and smoke into the air, is
applied to sacrifices wholly burnt,
which the Greeks denominated oXokov-
TOifxara holokautomata, or oXoKavGrov ho-
lokauston from which the word ' holo-
caust' has been transferred into our lan-
guage. If rendered in English phrase,
it should properly be ' whole burnt-
offering,' whereas by its being generally
rendered by our translators ' burnt-of-
feritig,' the genuine distinction between
the original words is hidden from the
ordinary reader, as there is no differ-
ence between the expression ' burnt-of-
fering,' and ' offering by fire.' But let
the phrase ' whole burnt-offering' be
employed, and the distinction is ob-
vious. Every holocaust or ' olah,' was
an ' isheh,' or offering by fire, but
every 'isheh,' or fire offering, was not
a holocaust. It may liere be remarked,
that the ' whole burnt-offering' was the
first or principal sacrifice with which
God was daily served by his people,
Num. 28. 3, no part of it being eaten,
but the whole consumed upon tl>e altar.
It pointed to the offering of the body
of Christ, as is evident from Heb. 10.
10. In Deut. 33, 10, it is rendered
' whole burnt sacrifice.' — IT A male
without blemish. Heb. C'^?2M tamim,
perfect ; i. e. having neither deformity,
defect, nor superfluity of mem'ers, and
free from distemper. Wlience the pro-
phet says, Mai. 1.14, 'Cursed be the
deceiver who hath in his flock a male,
14
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
at the door of the tabernacle of
the congregation before the Lord.
4 eAnd he shall put his hand up-
e ch. 4. 15. and 3. 2, 8. 13. and S. 14, ii-
(i. c. a perfect male,) and vowelh and ;
sacrificclh unto the Lord a corrupt I
thing,' where ' corrupt' is opposed to |
* male.' This was a prefiguration of j
the perfect excellence of the sacrifice I
of Christ, who was ' a lamb without
6/emts/i and without spot.' 1 Pet. 1. 19. |
And not only so ; it was doubtless de- '
signed to intimate that we are to offer |
to God the best of all we have ; the '
best of our time and strength, tlie vigor '
of our days, and the utmost of our ta- !
lents. Will he who would have no-
thing but the best of Israel's herds and ,
flocks, be pleased with such poor rem-
nants of our time and thoughts as may
be left from the service of the world ?
Had the Jew brought an inferior beast, ;
It would Irave been rejected by the priest, |
or the ('ffering would have been void by
law. Let us not suppose tliat the de-
fectiveness of our spiritual oblations
will be overlooked by liim who searches
the heart. What a man soweth, that j
shall he rea]). Niggardly and unwilling
gifts, weary and distasteful services,
hasty and perturbed devotions, will
find no more acceptance than the Is-
raelite's blemished ox. — All the Burnt-
offerings of beasts were to be males,
but this is not prescribed in regard to
the low Is. — IT Of his own voluntary
wit!. IJeb. i::r"i^ lirtzono, to his (i. e.
God's) §ood pleasure, or favorable ac-
ceptance. Thus the phrase is rendered
by the Gr. u.rov (.vavn Kifn-r. accepta-
ble before the Lord^ and the Lat. ' ad
placandum sibi Doniiiiuiii,' to render
the Lord propitious to him, and thus
by i!ie Chaldee, ' thai acceptableness
m:\\ be to hitn before the Lord.' This
sensf is moreover confirmed by v. 4
foll.)v.!!ig, and by Lev. 23. 11, ' And he
shall wave tl-.e sheaf before the Lord
to be accepted for you, (D53-Z1^ lirtz-
onekem),^ and by Jer. 6. 20, ' Your
turnt-oderings are not acceptable
(pSii lerdtzon).' RosenmuUer adopts
the same construction. At the same
time, the sense given in our version
does no positive violence to the origi-
nal, and is supported by respectable
names, but we think the other deci*
dedly preferable. — IT At the door of the
tabernacle. Because here in the open
space of the court the altar of Burnt-
offerings was placed, upon which alone,
even on pain of death, these oblations
were to he made. Comp. Lev. 17. 3-7
The additional phrase, ' before the
Lord,' has its usual import of before
the Shekinah, the visible symbol of the
divine presence. By thus bringing his
offering to the place prescribed, the
offerer acknowledged that the Lord
dwelt there in a peculiar manner, and
he moreover publicly, before all the
people acknowledged himself a sinner,
like unto his brethren, and needing mer-
cy no less than the vilest of the human
race.
4. Shall put his hand upon the head,
<5-r. From Lev. 16. 21, it is probable
that by * hand ' here is implied both the
hands. The act denoted that the vic-
tim offered was thereby wholly given
over and devoted to God, being as it
were henceforth solemnly manumitted
from the possession of the offerer, who
from tliis lime ceased to claim any far-
ther interest in it or control over it. It
significantly inlimated, moreover, the
offerer's desire that his transgression
might be put upon the animal thus pre'-
sented, and that the death to which he
now devoted it, might be instead of
that death which he had himself most
justly deserved. The sinner who pre-
sented the victim thus disburdened him-
self of the sin he acknowledged before
Go"d,and laid the weight of it upon the
sacrifice. It ti)Us taught tiie grand gos-
pel doctrine of substitution. TT It
shall be accepted for him. Ileb. IJ
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER I.
1$
on the head of the burnt-offering ;
and it shall be ^accepted for him
gto make atonement for him.
{ ch. 22. 21, 27.
Phil. 4. 18. e ch.
Isai. 66, 7. Rom. 12. 1.
I. 20, 26, 31, 35, and 9. 7,
}12Z"1] nirtzdh lo, from the same root
with "^122") ralzon, above v. 3, and con*
firming the interpretation there given.
-' T To make an atonement for him.
Heb. 1153? ""lEJDi lekapptr ulauv. This
was the great purport of the appoint*
ment. In hope of this the worshipper
brought his offering ; through it he
sought pardon and reconciliation with
God ; and when he offered it rightly, it
became an atonement for him, not for
any value of its own, but by virtue of
that great sacrifice which it prefigured.
The original word "iSiD kaphar signi-
fies primarily to cover ; not so much,
however, in the sense of wrapping as
with a garment, as in that of smearing
or plaistering, it being applied, Gen. G.
14, to the act of coating the ark with
pitch. Its radical sense, therefore, is
rather that of an adhesive than a loose
covering. From this primary notion of
covering, it came to be applied by met-
aphorical usage to the appeasing of
anger, or to that act of an offending
party by which he succeeds in procuring
favor and forgiveness from the person
or party offended. In this sense it is
applied to the appeasing of an angry
countenance. Gen. 32. 20, ' For he said,
I will appease him, (Heb. will cover his
face) with the present.' 2 Sam. 21. 3,
• Wliat sliall I do for you, and where-
with shall I make the atonement (Heb.
cover) V Prov. 16. 14, ' The wrath of a
king is as messengers of death, but a
wise man will pacify it (Heb. will
cover it).' Its predominant usage is in
relation to the reconciliation effected
between God and sinners, in which
sense atonement for sin is the covering
of sin, or the securing the sinner from
punishment. Thus when sin is par-
doned, or its consequent calamity re-
moved, the sin or person may be said to
5 And he shall kill the bbullock
before the Lord : iand the priests,
and 16. 24. Numb. 15. 25. 2 Chron. 29. 23,
24. Rom. 5. 11 h Micah 6. 6. '2 Chron.
35. 11. Heb. 10. 11.
be covered, made safe, expiated, or
atoned. Accordingly we find the par*
don of sin expressly called the covering
of sin, Nehem. 4. 4, 5, ' Our God give
them for a prey in the land of captivity,
and cover not iheir iniquity, and let not
their sin be blotted out from before
thee.' Ps. 32. 1, ' Blessed is he whose
transgression is forgiven, whose sin is
covered.' Ps. 85. 2, ' Thou hast brought
back the captivity of Jacob ; thou hast
forgiven the iniquity of thy people ;
thou hast covered all their sin.' All
such expiatory offerings pointed direct*
ly to Christ, who is the grand atonC'
ment or reconciliation for the sins of
men. Dan. 9. 24. 1 John 2. 2. Heb.
10, 8, 10. The burnt-offering, it is to
be observed, had not, like the sin-offer-
ing, respect to 2iny particular sin, but
was designed to make atonement foj' sin
in general. Thus it is said of Job, ch.
1. 5, That he ' offered burnt-offerings,
(saying.) it may be that my sons have
sinned.'
5. And he shall kill the bullock, Heb.
isn^l ve-shdhat ; in all probably an in-
stance of the usage very common in
Hebrew, where a verb is employed in a
kind of impersonal sense, equivalent lo
the ' on dit,' one says of the French, or
the * man sagt,' id. of the German, both
of which are evidently tantamount to
the passive, it is said. The expression
before us is not intended, we conceive,
lo assert that the offerer, or any one in
particular, was to kill the victim, but
simply to say that one, some one, shall
kill it. In conformity with this idea,
the Gr. preserves the indefinite form of
the expression, by rendering it (rfa^ovciv
they shall slay. A similar phraseology
appears in the following passages, Gen.
11.9,' Therefore is the name of it call-
ed Babel (Heb. ^rils 1?a'r J^^p one called
16
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood,
kand sprinkle the blood round
ibout upon the altar that is by
k ch. 3. S. Heb. 12. 24. 1 Pet. 1. 2.
the name of it Sabel)J Gen. 16. 14,
' Wherefore the well was called (ii^p
one called the well) Beer-lahai-roi.'
Deut. 32. 37, ' And he shall say (ItiS
one shall say — it shall be said) where
are their gods,' &c. Examples of this
usage might be almost indefinitely mul-
tiplied, but those now adduced will
probably be sufficient to confirm our
rendering in the passage before us. It
is highly probable that the ofi'erer him-
self and the common Levites united in
the act of slaughtering the animal.
Indeed Patrick labors to show from
Maimonides, that ' the killing of the
holy things might lawfully be done by
a stranger (one not of Aaron's seed),
yea, of the most holy tilings, whether
they were the holy things of private
persons, or of the whole congregation.'
This would appear to be confirmed by
2 Chron. 30. 17, where it is said that
*' there were many in the congregation
that were not sanctified ; therefore the
Levites had charge of the killing of the
passovers for every one that was not
clean ;' implying that if they had been
clean they would have been authorized
to perform the service themselves.
IT Sprinkle the blood round about, ^-c.
This is doubtless the true sense of the
original, but both the Gr. and the Lat.
render it by the stronger term ' pour,'
' pour out.' The sprinkling may be
supposed perhaps to have been very
copious, as Maimonides tells us that
the priest was to sprinkle the blood
twice on the upper surface of the altar,
and the rest of the blood was to be
poured out at the bottom of the altar
on the south side — a rite to which there
is doubtless allusion, Rev. 6. 9, * I saw
under the altar (i. e. at the bottom of
the altar) the souls of them that were t
Rlain for the word of God.' As the life
the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation.
6 And he shall flay the burnt-
offering, and cut it into his pieces.
or soul was especially in the blood, so
the * souls under the altar,' denotes the
blood of the martyrs plentifully shedi
and flowing as a sacrificial offering un-
der the altar. The act of s])riukling
the blood was, during every jieriod of
the Mosaic economy, exclusively the
prerogative of the priesthood. It was
in the effusion of blood, which is the
life, that the virtue of the sacrifice
consisted, it being always understood
that life went to redeem life. It was
calculated and probably designed to
remind the offerer that he deserved to
have his own blood shed for his sins,
and alluded moreover to the pacifying
and purifying of the blood of Jesus shod
for us for the remission of sins. Every
reader of the New Testament knows
how much our salvation is attributed
to the blood of Christ ; and this great
evangelical truth was thus taught in
shadow to the Israelites under the Law.
They were by this rite most impres-
sively taught that without the shedding
of blood there was no remission of
sins ; and however some of them might
have dim and darkened views on this
subject, while the veil was upon their
minds, we at least know the truth. We
know that the blood of all the animals
shed at the altar of burnt-offering owed
all its excellency to its being a type of
that blood of Jesus by which he hath
obtained eternal redemption for us.
6. He shall flay. Gr. Scipavrci they
having flayed, shall divide,' &c. The
Heb. C'lT^n hiphshit, one shall flay,
doubtless affords another instance of
tlie impersonal form of speech illus-
trated above. The meaning is simply
that those whose oflice it was to per-
form this part of the ceremony should
strip the skin from the victim, and then
cut up tha body into its appropriato
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER I.
17
7 And the sons of Aaron the
priest shall put fire upon the altar,
and Uay the wood in order upon
the fire.
8 And the priests, Aaron's sons,
I Gen. 22. 9.
parts. This would seem from 2 Chron.
29. 34, to have been usually the duty of
the priests ; ' The priests were too few,
and not able to flay all the burnt-offer-
ings ; therefore their brethren the Le-
vites helped them.' The skin in such
cases, it is to be remembered, was a
part of the perquisites of the priest,
Lev. 7. 8. — IT Cut it into his pieces.
That is, into its natural, appropriate,
suitable pieces, such as head, neck,
shoulders, legs, &c., or as the Gr. ren-
ders it, Kara fteXii, according to its mem-
bers. Chal. ' He shall divide it by the
members thereof.' It was to be done
in an orderly and systematic manner,
and not confusedly. ' Why were not
the greater members cut into small
pieces ? Because it is written. He
shall cut it into the pieces thereof, and
not. Shall cut it into pieces.' Maimuni-
des. It is doubtless in allusion to this
that the apostle says, 2 Tim. 2. 15,
' rightly dividing (opSoro/zoDira) the
word of truth.'
7. Shall put fire. Heb. IT'^i^ 13^3
nuthenu ish, shall give fire ; by which
is probably meant stirring up, cherish-
ing, supplying fuel for, the fire that was
originally kindled from heaven, and
which was to be kept perpetually burn-
ing on the altar, as may be seen from
Lev. 6. 11. — IT Lay the wood in order.
Heb. 1;d'1j' areku, implying, as rightly
rendered in our version, an orderly and
methodical arrangement, and spoken
of the setting or furnishing a table,
and marshallin-g the ranks of an army,
Judg. 20. 22 ; also metaphorically of
the proper disposition of words in a
prayer or discourse, Ps. 5. 4. Job, 32.
14.— 37. 19
2*
shall lay the parts, the head, and
the fat, in order upon the wood
that is on the fire, which is upon
the altar.
9 But his inwards and his legs
shall he wash in water: and the
priest shall burn all on the altar,
8. Shall lay the parts. Heb. C^nrin
hannethahim. As the same word is
rendered in v. 6. ' pieces,' it would have
conduced more to the absolute precision
which ought to be consulted in every
translation of the Scriptures to have
preserved that rendering in tlie present
instance. Uniformity's sake alone is
often sufficient to determine a transla-
tor in his choice of one out of two or
more renderings. This regular divid-
ing and laying on of the pieces of the
sacrifice was observed in all cases of
the Burnt-offering. Comp. Ex. 29. 17,
18. 1 Kings, 18. 23, 33. Lev. 8. 20,
21.— 9. 13.
9. His inwards and his legs shall he
wash in water. These parts, in order
that no filthy adhesions might pollute
the sacred offerings, were not to be
burnt upon the altar until they had been
thoroughly cleansed by washing in wa-
ter ; a process which, according to Mai-
monides, was three times repeated be-
fore the ablution was thought to be
complete. The typical import of this
ceremony is distinctly intimated by
the Apostle, Heb. 10. 22, ' Let us draw
near with a true heart, in full assurance
of faith, having our liearts sprinkled
from an evil conscience and our bo-
dies washed with pure water.' — IT The
priest shall burn all on the altar. Heb.
T^upn hiktir, shall burn as a perfume,
as the original properly implies. See
the import of the term fully explained
in the Note on Ex. 29. 13. It is not the
usual word for consuming by fire, and
consequently we lose in our translation
the peculiar expressiveness of the origi-
nal, especially when taken in connex-
ion with what follows. — ' The burning
18
LEVITICUS.
[B. a 1490.
to he a burnt-sacrifice, an offering
made by fire, of a msweet savour
unto the Lord.
] 0 ^ And if his offering he of the
flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of
the goats, for a burnt-sacrifice; he
shall bring it a male ^without
blemish.
11 oAnd he shall kill it on the
side of the altar northward before
the Lord : and the priests, Aaron's
sons, shall sprinkle his blood round
about upon the altar :
12 And he shall cut it into his
pieces, with his head and his fat :
ra Gen. 8. 21. Ezek. 20. 28, 41. 2 Cor. 2.
15. Eph. 5. 2. Phil. 4. 18. " ver. 3. » ver. 5.
and broiling of the beasts could yield
no sweet savor ; but thereto was addt.'d
wine, oil, and incense, by God's appoint-
ment, and then there was a savor of
rest in it. Our prayers, as from us,
would never please ; but as indited by
the Spirit, and presented by Christ, they
are highly accepted in heaven.' — Trapp.
IT An offering made by fire, of a
sweet savor unto the Lord. Heb. n^!P
ni"! mn*i: niritrt/a/i isUeh riha nihovah,
a fire-offering, an odor of rest ; or as
the Gr. renders it, ' a sacrifice of a sweet-
smelling savor,' which words the apos-
tle plainly had in view in writing Eph.
5. 2, ' Christ hath loved us, and hath
given himself for us an offering and a
sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling
savor. ^ See note on Gen. 8. 21. Hence
we learn that the holocaust, or whole
burnt-offering, which, with the excep-
tion of the skin, was entirely consumed,
no part of it being left even for the food
of the priests, typified the sacrifice and
death of Christ for the sins of the world.
Chal. ' Which shall be received with
favorable acceptation before the Lord.'
The Burnt-offering of the Flock.
10. If his offering be of the flocks.
In the divine requirement of the various
oblations, the circumstances of the
offerers were kiiidlv consulted. The
and the priest shall lay them in
order on the wood that is on the
fire which is upon the altar :
13 But he shall wash the in-
wards and the legs with water:
and the priest shall bring it all,
and burn it upon the altar : it is a
burnt-sacrifice, an offering made
by fire, of a sweet savour unto the
Lord.
14 H And if the burnt-sacrifice
for his offering to the Lord be of
fowls, then he shall bring his of-
fering of pturtle-doves, or of young
pigeons.
P ch. 5. 7. and 12. 8. Luke 2. 24.
less wealthy, who could not so well
afford to offer a bullock, would bring a
sheep or a goat ; and those who were
not able to do that were expected to
bring a turtle-dove or a young pigeon.
Thus it appears that the parents of our
Lord, from their humble circumstances
in life, brought this latter kind of offer-
ing up«>n the purification of Mary, Luke
2. 23-25. Indeed it will be observed
throughout, that the directions respect-
ing the poor man's ofiering are as mi-
nute and particular as any ; intimating
that God is no respecter of persons, and
that his ministers are to be as anxious
for the welfare, and as attentive to tlie
interests, of the poorest of their flock,
as of the most opulent.
1 1 . On the side of the altar northicard.
If the victim had been shiin on the east
of the altar, where the ashes were cast,
it might have obstructed the entrance
to the court ; on the south was the
ascent to the altar, and on the west, the
tabernacle ; so that the north was on all
accounts the most convenient quarter
for this purpose, not only for the slaugh-
ter of the sheep, but also of all the other
animals offered.
•
The Burnt-offering of Fowls.
14. Turtle doves or of young pigeons.
From the Heb. ^"^n tur (toor) comes the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER L
19
15 And the priest shall bring it
unto the altar, and wring off his
head, and burn it on the altar :
and the blood thereof shall be
wrung out at the side of the altar :
16 And he shall pluck away his
crop with his feathers, and cast it
qbeside the altar on the east part,
by the place of the ashes :
q ch. 6. 10.
Latin ' turtur,' and the English ' turtle,'
/fenerajly rendered ' turtle-dove.' By a
beautiful metaphor this bird is made by
Ihe Psalmist to denote the church : Ps.
74. 19, ' 0 deliver not the soul of thy
turtle-dove unto the multitude of the
enemies.' And Solomon. Cant. 2. 12,
mentions the return of this bird as one
of the indications of spring : ' The
voice of the turtle is heard in our land.'
Young pigeons (Heb. ' sons of the
dove') were thought preferable for
food to the old, whereas the full grown
turtle-dove was accounted more deli-
cious than the young. The sacrifice
was ordered accordingly.
15. Wring off the head. Heb. n^)a
mdlak. The original term occurs only
here and Lev. 5. 8, so that we are chiefly
dependent upon the ancient versions for
its genuine sense. The Sept. renders it
by (iTo/fn^w, to cut with the nail. It
probably means to make a section or
cut in the head by pinching it with the
fingers and nails, so that the blood
might distil from the wound. In this
case the head was not actually separated
from the body, an idea which would
seem to be confirmed by Lev. 5. 8,
where it is said that the priest should
* wring off his head (Heb ' cut with the
nail ') but sliould not divide it asunder ;'
i. e. should not entirely separate any
one part from another. Though trans-
lated ' wring,' it is to be observed that
it is wholly a different word in the ori-
ginal from that rendered ' wrung ' in the
close of the verse.
16. With his feathers ; or, with the
filth thereof. The latter is undoubtedly
17 And he shall cleave it with
the wings thereof, but rshall not
divide it asunder : and the priest
shall burn it upon the altar, upon
the wood that is upon the fire :
sit is a burnt-sacrifice, an offering
made by fire, of a sweet savour
unto the Lord.
' Gen. 15. 10. » ver. 9. 13.
the true rendering, as in the Heb. the
pronominal suffix for ' his ' is in the
feminine gender, necessarily referring
to ' crop,' and not to ' bird.' The drift
of the precept is to order that the crop
or maw with its contents should be cast
away. This was done in order to ren-
der the sacrifice clean, and it was to be
cast as far as possible from the most
holy place, to intimate that all moral
uncleanness was to be removed from the
worship of God.
17. Shall cleave it with the wings
thereof. That is, with the wings still
remaining, though partially severed
from the body. The sacrifice of birds,
Maimonides observes, was one of the
most difficult services of the sanctuary ;
and as on this account the attention of
the priest was not less engrossed by the
poorest sacrifice than by the most splen-
did, the necessity of attending to minute
details in the duties of religion was
strikingly inculcated.
Remarks.— (1.) God, in his wisdom,
has seen fit, for the most part to address
his creatures through the intervention
of mediators ; and though the moral
law was spoken in thunder and light-
ning from Sinai, the ceremonial law,
pointing to the great gospel sacrifice,
was given in a milder voice from the
mercy seat.
(2.) Those sacrifices and offerings
are peculiarly acceptable to God, which
are prompted rather by volimtary im-
pulse than by legal precept.
(2.) Although the light of nature
alone may suggest to man the duty of
worshipping the Creator, yet ihe proper
20
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
mode of rendering him homage is not
left to human invention, but is matter
of divine revelation.
(3.) It is fit that the offerings which
are designed for the greatest and best
of Beings, the infinitely perfect Jeho-
Vith, should be the best, and most per-
fect of their kind. *A male without
blemish.'
(4.) In all our religious services and
sacrifices our faith should aim to lay
its hand upon the head of the one great
Atoning Victim for sin. Failing of this
our offerings are of little worth.
(5.) Were it not for the solution
afforded in tlie gospel, what an inexpli-
cable mystery would be the whole Jew-
ish ritual ! How strange the fact that
the temple of God should so much re-
semble a slaughter-house !
(9.) How precious in the estimation
of ihe Most High must be the merit of
Christ's sacrifice, that it should avail to
convert the nauseous odor of burning
flesh to a perfumed and refreshing in-
CHAPTER II.
THE JIEAT-OFFERING,
The second in the enumeration of the
legal offerings, and that which occu-
pies the present chapter is the Meat-
offering. The original term is nHj^Q
mill'' hah, from the obsolete root 'n'2)2
mana'h, to give, to bestow, and is equi-
valent to gift, present, oblation. It is
not exclusively, though it is predomi-
nantly, applied to religious offerings of
the bloodless species made to God. In
some cases, it is spoken of gifts pre-
sented to men, as Gen. 32. 13, ' And he
(Jacob) took of that which he had with
him a present (nni'D) for Esau his bro-
ther.' Gen. 43. 11, 'And their father
Israel said unto them, Take of the best
fruits of the land in your vessels, and
carry down the man a present (nreia).'
But the present made by Jacob to Esau
was oi living things, viz. cattle, where-
as th&t carried to Joseph was of things
that had not life. In like manner both
the offering of Cain, w^iich was of the
fruits of the earth, and that of Abel,
which was of ihe firstlings of the flock.
are each of them called ' Min'hah,' Gen.
4. 3 — 5. So that the word in its general
import, does imply things slain as well
as things not slain, although some com-
mentators have maintained the contrary.
But in ordinary usage, its meaning was
restricted to an offering made of fine
flour, whether of wheat or barley. The
common rendering of the term in the
English Bible by ' meat-offering' is in-
correct according to the modern accep-
tation of the word ' meal,' which is
now applied exclusively to flesh, al-
though at the time when our translation
was made it appears to have denoted
very nearly the same as tlie word * food.'
A riiore suitable rendering therefore at
the present day would be ' meal-ofler-
ing,' ' flour-offering,' or even ' bread-
ofiering,' as the flour, before it was of-
fered, was generally, though not in ever)'
case, made into thin cakes or wafers, or
something very nearly resembling
bread. The materials of the Meat-of-
fering were fine flour, with oil poured
on it, and frankincense and salt added
to it. The flour was either that of
wheat or barley, and might be presented
in the form of flour, or it might be pre-
sented after undergoing the process of
baking, or frying, in the form of cakes
or wafers. Sometimes the Meat-offer-
ing, instead of being made of fine flour,
consisted of the first fruits of the corn.
In this case the ears were to be taken
when full, but yet green ; to be parched
or dried before the fire ; the corn to be
beaten out ; and the offering then to be
made with oil, frankincense, and salt,
as before.
The Meat-offerings were either pre-
sented by themselves, or as an accom-
paniment to the stated burnt-ofierings.
In the latter case they, together with
their attendant di ink-offerings, were
wholly consumed oa the altar ; but in
B. C. 1490.J
CHAPTER II.
21
the former, they were burnt only in
part, the remainder being given to the
priests for their support. It is of these
that the present chapter treats. The
part of the offering which was burnt,
together with the frankincense, was
called * tlie memorial' of it, for reasons
which are assigned in the note on v. 2.
The meat-offerings which were not
commanded by the divine law, but were
ihe votive or voluntary oblations of in-
Aividuals, were of five kinds, consisting
of some preparation of flour ; as
1. Fine flour unbaked.
2. Flour baked in a pan or on a flat
plate.
3. Flour baked in a frying pan.
4. Flour baked in an oven.
5. Flour made into a thin cake like a
(vafer.
As to the leading moral design of the
meat-offering, it is perhaps to be re-
garded as mainly a grateful acknow-
Jedgment of the bounty and beneficence
of God, as manifested in those gifts of
his providence to which we owe our
daily bread, and the various ministra-
tions to our physical comfort. At the
same time, it is not, that we are aware,
at all inconsistent with this to suppose,
that it might also have had a typical
purport kindred to that of most of the
sacrificial offerings, which evidently
pointed to Christ, and subordinalcly to
his Church. From several passages it
would seem natural to infer, that a
propitiatory as well as a eucharistic
meaning was couched under this cere-
mony ; and if so, we cannot well avoid
the inference that it pointed to the
offering of the body of Christ as its
grand realizing substance. Thus 1
Sam. 3. 14, ' Therefore I have sworn
unto the house of Eli, that the iniquity
of Eli's house shall not be purged with
sacrifice nor offering (tm'D min'hah)
forever.' 1 Sam. 26. 19, ' If the Lord
have stirred thee up against me, let him
accept (Heb. smell) an offering
(nnj?2).' Therefore when Christ had
come, he caused this Meat-offering as
well as the slain sacrifices to cease ;
Dan. 9. 27, ' He shall cause the sacrifice
and the oblation (nriDTO) to cease.'
And of the poor man's meat offering, it
is expressly said, Lev. 5. 11-13, that it
should ' make atonement for sins.'
I'^om this it appears that the Scriptures
join the Meat-offering with the burnt-
offering as an expiation for sin ; and
consequently that both have a typical
allusion to the atoning sacrifice of
Christ. But in this the import of the
Min'hah does not seem to be exhausted.
It represents also the persons and ser-
vices of believers made acceptable in
Christ, for there is no doubt that both
Christ and his Church are frequently
shadowed out by the same symbolical
ordinances. In accordance with this
we find it said, Is. 66. 20, ' They shall
bring all your brethren for an offering
(nn3?3) out of all nations, &c., as the
children of Israel bring an offering
(nri3?2) in a clean vessel into the house
of the Lord.' The accomplishment of
this, the apostle intimates, is to be re-
cognized in the results of his own min-
istration of the gospel to the Gentiles,
Rom. 15. 16, 'That 1 should be the
minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles,
ministering the gospel of God, that the
offering up (■::poacf)opn,oblation=TiTl'2'?2)
of the Gentiles might be acceptable,
being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.'
But it is not thepcrso7?«only of believers
that we behold typically set forth by
this offering. Their good works, their
devoted services, the fruits of their
graces, are also indicated by this fea-
ture of the ancient economy. Ps. 141.
2, ' Let my prayer be set forth before
thee, and the lifting up of my hands as
the evening sacrifice (nn^lO).' So
when the Most High assured his people,
Mai. 1. 10, that he ' would not accept
an offering at their hands,' he adds, v.
11, ' for from the rising of the sun even
unto the going down of the same, my
name shall be great among the Gen-
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER 11.
And when any will oifer aa meat-
offering unto the Lord, his
a ch. 6. 14. and 9. 17. Num. 15. 4.
tiles ; and in every place incense shall
be offered unio my name, and a pure
offering (nTC'i) ;' and this is fulfilled '
when ' men pray every where, lifting up
holy hands.' — The remaining details \
will be given in the notes that follow. 1
1. And when any will offer. Heb.
Si"!pr, "ij ^£21 venephesh ki takrib,
and a soul when it shall offer ; i. e. a
person or man. See note on Gen. 2. 7.
as to the scriptural import of the word
' soul.' The English idiom is precisely
similar. Thus we say that such a place
contains so many thousand souls ; and
in such a battle, so many souls per-
ished. Shakspeare also speaks of a
ship swallowed in the sea, and the
* freighting souls' within her. — IT A meat-
offering. Heb. n^^2f2 "pip korban
min^hah, a gift-offering, a donative, for
it is to be borne in mind that the offer-
ing prescribed in this chapter Avas also
of the votive or voluntary kind, like the
animal oblations of the foregoing chap-
ter, and therefore equally with them
denominated *p"lp korban. — IT Shall
pour oil upon it. To give it a grateful
relish, making it more palatable to the
priests, who were to eat part of it, v. 3.
Oil was to the food of the Israelites
"What butter is to ours. We see from
this how kindly the Most High consults
the gratification of his servants while
ordering the provisions of his own ta-
ble. But the genius of the Levitical
institute requires us to look beyond this
for the adequate reason for the use of
oil in these rites. This substance also
has a mystical or symbolical scope, as
we have shown in the note on Ex. 29. 7.
Its unquestionable import is, that any
offering which we offer should have
that anotnhng of the Holy One of which
John speaks so largely in his first epis-
tle. That oil of divine grace, that prin-
offering shall be of fine flour ; and
he shall pour oil upon it, and put
frankincense thereon :
2 And he shall bring it to Aaron's
ciple of holiness, which the Spirit of
the Lord pours out upon the true be-
liever's heart, is indispensable to the
acceptance of our spiritual sacrifices.
The unction of love, gratitude, rever-
ence, holy joy, and of every gracious
disposition, the fruit of the Spirit of
grace, must be present to impart its vir-
tues to our oblations, or they avail us
nothing. — tr And put frankincense
thereon. In order to cause a sweet
smell in the court of the tabernacle,
which would otherwise have been of-
fensive in consequence of the vast quan-
tities of flesh burnt there. But this
was not all. The frankincense, like
the oil, had a symbolical allusion. It
represented that divine mediation and
intercession of Christ, by which he
perfumes and renders of a sweet smell
all the prayers, praises, good works,
and holy affections, of his servants.
He is, in the language of the Song of
songs, ch. 3. 6, * like pillars of smoke,
perfumed with myrrh and frankincense,
and all powders of the merchant.' That
the frankincense is applicable prima,
rily and mainly to Christ is evident
from its being wholly consumed by fire.
No part of his work is borne by any but
himself; nothing renders our services
acceptable but his atoning, justifying,
interceding grace. But when this fact
is cordially admitted by us, and all the
favor with which we meet attributed to
the merit and mediation of Christ, then
our services for his honor and glory,
our oblations to his priests or his poor,
our works of beneficence and kindness
wrought for his sake, ' come up as aa
odor of a sweet smell, a sacrifice ac.
ceptable, well-pleasing to God.' As
the sacrifice of Christ himself was most
pleasing unto God, so are the services
of all his people for Christ's sake.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER II.
S3
sons the priests: and he shall take i ing made by fire of a sweet savour
thereout his handful of the flour |unto the Lord:
thereof, and of the oil thereof, with | 3 And cthe remnant of the meat-
all the frankincense thereof, and ' offering shall be Aaron's and his
the priest shall burn ^the memorial sons': ^il is a thing most holy of
of it upon the altar, to be an oifer- the offerings of the Lord made by
fire.
b ver. 9. and ch. 5
Isa. C6. 3. Acts 10 A
15. and 24. 7. c ch. 7. 9. and 10.
i Num. 18. 9.
Exod. 29. 37.
2. Shall take thereout his handful.
Heb. f^apl vekamets, shall grasp. Of
ihis meal-offering a part only, that is to
say, about an handful, was burnt, the
rest being reserved for the priests' use ;
but all the frankincense was burnt be-
cause from it the priest could derive no
odvantage. — — IT Shall burn the memo-
rial of it. Heb. T'tSpn hiktir, shall
reduce it to fume or vapor, shall etapo-
rate it, as in the burning of incense.
See the original term explained in the
note on Ex. 29. 13. The part of the
offering which the priest took out with
his hand is called the ' mennorial ' of
the meal or bread-offering, because it
was a remembrancer of God's supreme
dominion, a grateful acknowledgment
that they held and enjoyed every thing
of him as sovereign Proprietor, and by
this act supplicated the continuance of
it. It was designed to put him in mind,
as it were, of his covenant promise to
accept the services of his people ren-
dered to him according to his command-
ment ; in allusion to which it is said by
the Psalmist, Ps. 20. 4, ' The Lord re-
member all thine offerings, and accept
thy burnt-sacrifices.' Acts 14. 4, * Thy
prayers and thine alms come up for a
memorial before God.' The sin and
jealousy-offerings, on the other hand,
had no oil or incense mixed with them,
because they were no offerings of gra-
cious memorial, but such as brought in-
iquity to remembrance, and were there-
fore devoid of those elements which
made ihem come up as a sweet-smell-
ing savor before the Lord. Comp. Num.
5. 15, Lev, 5, 11. A very prominent
import of oil as a symbol is that of joy,
and hence it was employed in all those
sacrifices which had respect to right-
eousness, and the effects of which were
attended with joy : while on the other
hand it was excluded from those which
had respect to sin, and the effect of
which was attended mainly witli sorrow.
3, The remnant of the meat-offering
shall be Aaron^s and his sons'. That is,
' what remains after the priest has taken
his handful of the flour and the oil, with
all the frankincence, this shall belong
to the priests, and shall be eaten by
them alone, in the court of the taberna-
cle, as a ' thing most holy ;' whereas
the less lioly things, as tithes, first
fruits, &c., might be eaten by their sons
and daughters. Deut. 12. 5. IT A
thing most holy. Heb. ^^Wlp IDlp
kodesh kodoshim, holiness of holinesses ,
the Hebrew mode of expressing the
superlative degree. A common dis-
tinction was made by the Jews between
things most holy and the lighter holy
things, as they termed them. Of the
former class are those of which none
whosoever, or none but the priests and
the sons of priests might eat, and that
only in the sanctuary. Lev. 6. 16-26.
Such were all whole burnt-offerings, all
the sin-offerings, and all the peace-offer-
ings for the whole congregation. The
< lighter holy things ' were such as
might be eaten by those who were not
priests in any place within the camp,
and subsequently within the city of Je-
rusalem, as all the peace-offerings of
particular individuals, t*he paschal lamb,
the tithes, and the firstlings of cattle.
In regard to the meal or bread-offering,
it has been moreover suggested that a
24 LEVITICUS. [B. C. 1490.
4 H And if thou bring an oblation of a meat-offering baken in the
particular sacredness attached to that
from its having been designed as a type
of the Christian sacrifice, or the Lord's
Supper, in which it was virtually con-
tinued in the bread made of fine wheaten
flour, which formed a part of that ordi-
nance.
4. Baken in an oven. Heb. Il^ri
n5X?3 ma'tphih tannoon,the baking of
the oven. As there were several ways
in which the bread offering, or Min'hah
might be prepared, rules are here given
applicable to these several modes ; the
first case being where it was baked in
an oven (Heb. yTJTi tannnr), on which
we subjoin an extended article from the
Pictorial Bible, in loc. ' The ovens
of a people continually on the move
could have little resemblance to our
own, and we can only discover what
they probably were by a reference to
existing usages in the East. The trade
of a baker is only carried on in large
towns ; people bake their own bread
daily in villages and encampments, and
to a very considerable extent in towns
also. It is evident, therefore, that when
individual families bake every day so
much bread only as is required for that
flay, recollecting at the same time that i
fuel is in general scarce, it is necessary j
that the oven should be small, and con- j
suming but little fuel. These requisites j
are fully met in the common family I
ovens of Western Asia. That which
may be considered the most general is '
a circular pit in the earthen floor, !
usually between four and five feet deep,
and about three feet in diameter. This
pit is well plastered within ; and the
dough, which is in large oval or round
cakes — not thicker than pancakes, which
in appearance they very much resemble
when done — is dexterously thrown
against the sides of the pit, which has
been previously heated, and has the
glowing embers still at the bottom.
This cake is not turned ; and, from its
thinness, is completely done in two or
three minutes. Its moisture being then
absorbed, it would fall from the sides
of the oven into the fire, were it not re-
moved in proper time. This bread is
usually flexible and soft, and may be
rolled up like paper ; but if suffered to
remain long enough, it becomes hard
and crisp on the side which has been in
contact with the oven ; but it is seldom
suflfered to attain this state, although
we, who have lived for about two years
on this sort of bread, thought it far pref-
erable in this form. It is to be ob-
served, that this pit is not exclusively
an oven, but, particularly in Persia, is
often the only fire-place for general
purposes which is to be found in cot-
tages, and even in some decent houses.
Whether these were the ' ovens' of the
Hebrews in the desert, it is difficult to
determine. They are formed with
little expense or labor ; but are more
generally found in towns and villages
than among the nomade tribes of the
desert. The other things resembling
ovens, act more or less upon the same
principle as that which we have de-
scribed. They are of various kinds ;
but they may generally be described as
strong unglazed earthen vessels, which
being heated by an internal fire,, the
bread is baked by being stuck against
the sides, in the manner already noticed.
Either the interior or outer surface is
used for this purpose, according to the
construction of the vessel, and the de-
scription of bread required. The com-
mon bread is sometimes baked on the
outside of the heated vessel ; and thus
also is baked a kind of large crisp bis-
cuit, as thin as a wafer, which is made
by the application of a soft paste to the
heated surface, which bakes it in an in-
stant. Of this description, no doubt, is
the wafer-bread which we find men-
tioned in V. 4 and elsewhere. The ovens
of this sort with which the writer is
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER II.
25
oven, it shall be unleavened cakes
of fine flour mingled with oil, or
unleavened wafers eanointed with
oi!.
e Exod. 29. 2.
most rarniliar are nearly ihree iect high,
t'.iid ubdut fifteen inches in diameter at
liie top, which is open. It grddually
widens to ihe bottom, where there is a
tide u'lX the convenience of withdraw-
h;\T I he aslies. When the inside is ex-
vlnNively nsed for b.iking', the oiUside
is ii^uil'y coated with clay, the better
1.) concentrate the heat. We have seen
tliem used under various circumstances.
f:ven the vessels navigating the Tigris
arc usually furnished v,/iih one of them,
•for baking tiie daily supply of bread ;
a'.id tliey are sometimes built to the
d.-cK- for standing use. The Arab sail-
or's have them also in their vessels on
ll.e Red Sea, and elsewhere. Some-
liii.cs a large water-vessel, with the
bottom knocked out, is made to serve
us a substitute, and goes by the same
name. This name (tenur) is as nearly
us possible, the original Hebrew word
~i^;?3 taiinar, translated ' oven ' in the
text. Ovens, somewhat similar, are
frequently used in houses in the place
of the hole in the floor already men-
tioned, especially in apartments which
have not the ground for their floor.
They are then not only used for cooking
and baking bread, but for warming the
apartment. The top is then covered
with a board, and over this a large
cloth or counterpane is spread, and the
people sit around, covering their legs
and laps with the counterpane. So also
the pit in the floor, when not in use for
cooking or baking bread, is in winter
covered over, and warms the apartment,
in much the same manner. It remains
to add, that bread is sometimes baked
on an iron-plate placed over the opening
at the top of the oven. That the ovens
of the Israelites m the desert were some-
thing on the prmciple of these earthen
ovens, there is not much reason to
3
5 H And if thy oblation be a meat-
offering Saken in a pan, it shall be
of fine iiour unleavened, mingled
with oil.
question ; and it is equally probable
that those ovens which are mentione<l
after their settlement in Palestine were
one of the two, or both the modifications
of the same principle which we have
described as being ordinarily exhibited
in the houses of Western Asia.' — Pict.
Bib. "^ Unleavened cakes. Heb. Til^n
ri!ll>2 halloth matzoth, cakes of unlea-
vened7iesses, an intensitive niode of ex-
pressiiin equivalent to ' altogether un-
leavened.' On the import of leaven in
the system of sacrifices see note on Ex.
12. 8. 51 Mingled with oil. See note
on Ex. 29. 2. If the cakes were made
soineuhat thick, the oil w^as poured in
and mingled in the kneading ; but if
they were thin like a wafer, the oil was
only smeared over the surface, simply
to anoint the substance, but whether
before or after the baking, is un::ertain,
though Maimonides supposes the latter.
5. Baken in a pan. Heb. r^ri/On ii3>
al hammahabath. ' Dr. Boothroyd,
availing himself of our now improved
knowledge of the East, translates < on a
fire-plate,' instead oi ' in a pan.' He is
doubtless correct. In the preceding
note we have mentioned a mode of
baking bread on an iron plate laid on
the top of the oven ; but a more simple
and primitive use of a baking plate is
exemplified among the nomade tribes of
Asia. We first witnessed the process
at a small encampment of Eelauts in
the north of Persia. There was a con-
vex plate of iron (copper is often in use)
placed horizontally about nine inches
from the ground, the edges being sup-
ported by stones. There was a slow
fire underneath, and the large thin cakes
were laid upon the upper or convex sur-
face, and baked with the same effect as
when stuck to the sides of an oven ; but
rather more slowly. The thin wafer
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490,
6 Thou shalt part it in pieces,
and pour oil tliereon : it is a meat-
offering.
7 H And if thv oblation be a
bread of soft paste can be baked by the
same process, which is recommended to
the wandering tribes by the s^implicity
and portability of the apparatus. We
believe that a flat plate is sometimes
employed in this way, though we do not
recollect to have witnessed its use.
Chardin thinks that ihis process was in
use long before ovens of any kind were
known ; and he is probably right. Un-
leavened oatmeal cakes, baked on an
iron plate tailed a 'girdle/ are still
very general in Scotland, and also in the
north of England.'— P/c?. Bib.
6. Thou shalt part it in pieces, and
pour oil thereon. ' We here see bread,
after being baked, broken up again and
mingled with oil. Was this an extraor-
dinary and peculiar preparation for the
altar, or was it a preparation in com-
mon use among the Hebrews? We in-
cline to the latter opinion^ as it seems
to differ very little from a common and
standard dish among the Bedouin Arabs.
This is made o{ unleavened paste, baked
in thin cakes, which are afterwards
broken up, and thoroughly kneaded with
butter, adding sometimes honey, and
sometimes milk, but generally employ-
ing butter alone for the purpose. This
second kneading brings it into the state
in which it is eaten with great satisfac-
tion by the Arabs. The only difference
between this and the preparation in the
text, is the use of butter instead of oil ;
and in its not being said here that the
bread was kneaded anew, but only that
it was broken up and mingled with oil.
These points of difference are not very
essential. The Bedouins, as a pastoral
people, have no oil ; but are very fond
of it when it can be obtained : butter,
therefore, as used by them, may be re-
garded as a substitute for the ' oil ' of
the text. And as to the want of a
second kneading in the text, it is by no
meat-offering halen in the frying-
pan, it shall be made of tine flour
with oil.
8 And thou shalt bring the meat-
means certain that such kneading did
not take place, even though it is not
mentioned. Besides the Bedouins do
not always knead the broken bread
again with butter, but are content to
soak or dip the broken morsels in melt-
ed butter. It is probable that the pre-
sent text explains the mingling with oil
mentioned in vv. 4 and 7, better than by
supposing that the paste was tempered
with oil before being baked. Using oil
with bread continues to be a very com-
mon practice in the East ; and the
Bedouin Arabs, and generally other
Orientals, are fond of dishes composed
of broken bread, steeped not only in oil,
butter, and milk, but also in prepara-
tions of honey, syrups, and vegetable
juices. Oil only is allowed in the
' meat offerings,' honey being expressly
interdicted in v, 1], and this shows that
the use of honey with bread was even
thus early common among the Israel-
ites.'—Pjcf. Bih.
7. Baken in the frying-pan. ' There
is in use among the Bedouins and others
a shallow earthen vessel, somewhat re-
sembling a frying-pan, and which is
used both for frying, and for baking one
sort of bread. Something of this sort
is thought to be intended here. There
is also used in Western Asia a modifi-
cation of this pan, resembling the East-
ern oven, which Jerome describes as a
round vessel of copper, blackened on the
outside by the surrounding fire, which
heats it within. This might be either
the ' oven ' or the ' pan ' of the present
chapter. This pan-baking is common
enough in England, where the villagers
bake large loaves under inverted round
iron pots, with embers and slow-burning
fuel heaped upon them. But it is pro-
bable that the fire-plate, which we have
noticed under v. 5, is really intended
here, and that the ' pan ' there, is the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER II.
27
offering that is made of these things
unto the Lord : and when it is
presented unto the priest, he shall
bring it unto the aliar.
9 And the priest shall take from
the meat-otfering <a memorial
thereof, and shall burn it upon the
altar: it is an goffering made by
fire, of a sweet savour unto the
Lord.
10 And inhat Avhich is left of the
meat-offering shall bi Aaron's and
his sons'; it is a thing most holy,
of the offerings of the Lord made
bv fire.
Exod. 29. !S. ^ ver. 3.
* frying-pan ' of ihe present text. This
soenis to us very probable, as the name
given by the Bedouins to this utensil is
(ajen, which is nearly identical with the
name (rrjyavov) which the Septuagint
gives to the ' pan ' in v. 5. It is useful
to obtain this etymological identifica-
tion of the Arabian tajen with one of the
' pans ' of this chapter, but it is of little
importance to determine which ' pan' it
is. Upon the wliole, the oven, the pan,
and the frying-pan of vv. 4, 5, and 7,
may, as it appears to us, be referred
with much confidence to the clay oven,
the metal plate, and the earthen vessel
which we have noticed.' — Pict. Bib.
11. No leaven nor any honey. That
is, as it should seem, neither sour nor
sueet ; nothing of the fermenting kind,
which would have an unkindly effect,
when eaten, upon the animal economy.
But here also, we trace a moral mean-
ing. Leaven is a well-known emblem
of pride and hypocrisy. These swell
the heart, and puff it up with self im-
portance and selfdeceit. This was
especially the leaven of the Pharisees,
■who made their prayers, and gave their
alms, and did all, to be seen of men.
Leaven is also used as an emblem of
malice and wickedness, as we learn
from the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor.
5. 8; ' Therefore let us keep the feast,
11 No meat-offering which ye
shall bring unto the Lord shall be
made with Ueaven : for ye shall
burn no leaven, nor any honey, in
any offering of the Lord made by
fire.
12 H kAs for the oblation of the
first-fruits, ye shall offer them unto
the Lord: but they shall not be
burnt on the altar for a sweet sa-
vour.
13 And every oblation of thy
meat-offering 'shalt thou season
i ch. 6. 17. See Malt. 16. 12. Mark 8.
15. Luke 12. 1. 1 Cor. 5. 8 GaJ. 5. 9.
k Exod. 22. 29. ch. 23. 10, 11. i Mark 9.
49. Col. 4. 6.
not with the old leaven, neither with
the leaven of malice and wickedness,
but with the unleavened bread of sincer-
ity and truth.' Honey, in like man-
ner, may well be considered as the em-
blem of the unwholesome sweetness of
sensual indulgence and worldly plea-
sure. And these we are well assured
are perfectly inconsistent with the ac-
ceptance of any offering which we may
profess to bring to God. The honey of
sensual gratification will make polluted
and abominable any religious oblation
with which it may be mixed.
12. As for the oblation of the first-
fruits, ye shall offer them, fyc. Ains-
worth very plausibly suggests that this
is but a continuation of the ordinance
respecting the use of leaven and honey,
of which, and not of first-fruits, he un-
derstands the word ' them' in this con-
nexion. The verse contains a single
exception to the rule given above.
There was one case in which leaven
and honey might be used, to wit, with
the first-fVuits. With them they might
be offered, but not burnt upon the altar.
This also is the interpretation of Ro-
senmuller.
13. Every oblation of thy meat-offer-
ing shall thou season with salt. Salt is
the opposite to leaven, as it preserves
from putrefaction and corruption, and
2S
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
was therefore used to signify the purity
and persevering fidelity necessary in
the worsliippcis of God. It was called
the ' salt o( the covenant,' because as
salt was incorruptible, so was tiie cove-
n:inl and promise of Jehovah, which on
this account is called 2 Chron. 13. 5, ' a
C'lvenant of salt ;' i. e. an everlasting
ft.vpuant. But in order to obtain an
K.itqiiale idea of the reasons which
}"niuipted the use of this article, and
ui.uie it so indispensable in the services
of the Jewish altar, we are to remem-
ber tiial the sacrifices were a kind of
feast, in wliicli those who partook of
llicni were for the lime being the guests
(if God, and eating and drinking at his
table. But it was by eating and drink-
ing together, that all important cove-
nants were anciently ratified and con-
finned, and as salt was of course never
wanting at such entertainments, it came
;it length to be regarded as a symbol of
friendship, and the phrase * covenant
of salt' was but another name for the
most firm, enduring, and inviolable
compact. In like manner, salt among
the ancients was the emblem of friend-
ship and fidelit}', and therefore was used
in all their sacrifices and covenants.
No part of their religious ceremonies is
more prominent than that which con-
sists in the use of salt. Thus in Vir-
gil, iEn. Lib. II. 1. 133:
' Mihi sacra parari
Et salsae fruges, et circum tempora vittai.'
' For me the sacred rites were prepared,
and the salted cake, and fillets to bind
about my temples.' Servius' explana-
tion is, ' Salt and barley, called salted
meal, with which they used to sprinkle
the forehead of the victim, the sacrifi-
cial fire, and the knives.' From the
* mola salsa,' salted cake, of the Latins,
were derived the words immolo, immO'
latio, to immolate, immolation, and this
by synecdoche came to be applied to
the whole process of sacrificing. So
after the salted meal it was customary
to pour wine on the head of the victim,
which by that ceremony was said to be
macta, i. magis aucta, augmented or in'
creased, whence the term mactalio in
the heathen sacrifices to express the
killing of the victim immediately after
the affusion of the wine. But as to the
sacred use of salt Homer affords several
distinct allusions to it in the religious
rites mentioned in the Iliad. Thus: —
* Then near the altar of the darling king,
Disposed in rank, their hecatoinb tliey bring ;
With water purify their liands and take
The sacred offering of the salted cake.'
II. I. 1. 584
And again : —
' Above the coals the smoking fragment burns,
And sprinkles sacred salt from lifted urns.'
Il, IX. 1. 281.
Nearly every traveler who has visited
the modern nations of the p>ast, lias fur-
nished us with striking anecdotes illus-
trative of the sacredness with which
salt was regarded as an emblem of
fidelity in all their compacts. Thus
Baron Du Tott, speaking of one who
was desirous of his acquaintance, says,
upon his departure, ' He promised in a
short time to return. I had already
attended him half way down the stair-
case, when stopping, and turning briskly
to one of my domestics. Bring me direct-
ly, said he, some bread and salt. What
he requested was brought ; when, taking
a little salt between his fingers, and put-
ting it with a mysterious air on a bit of
bread, he eat it with a devout gravity,
assuring me that I might now rely on
him.' And D'Herbelot remarks, that
' among other exploits which are re-
corded of Jacoub hen Laith, he is said
to have broken into a palace, and having
collected a very large booty, which he
was on the point of carrying away, he
found his foot kicked something which
made him stumble ; putting it to his
mouth, the better to distinguish it, his
tongue soon informed liim it was a lump
of salt ; upon this, according to the
morality, or rather superstition, of the
country, where the people considered
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IL
29
with salt; neither shalt thou suffer
D'the salt of the covenant of thv
God to be lackino- from thy meat-
olfering: "with all thine offerings
thou shall offer salt.
U And if thou offer a meat-offer-
I'Ai^ of thy first-fruits unto the
l.uiii), "fhou shah offer for the
Kieai-cirering of tiiy first-fruits,
.'■iHv'u cars of corn dried by the
'■■ >Ux:uh. 13. 19. " Ezek. 43. 24. » ch.
•:!•; rj. 14.
> lii I- ;i syiiiboi and pledge of hospi-
i ■.: J. , ir- wai so touclied lliul lie lefl all
h-.- i^'^'-y, ifliring wiihoul taking away
J! r, il.i.iy with liiiii." IF NcitJier
s i-iU (uiu suffer, ^-c. That is, ye are
v.<-i to iiiiagiiie, thai because llie Lord's
.-ii;u ■ o; tile oHering is to be consumed
I;, ii.' , ,;iiil not. reall}' eaten, ye may
iii'i!.;ix- ilisj)ense willi seasoning it.
L. i_, tiling' liiat is oflered to him must
!.f- liic i)-i>i an;l most savory of its kind.
14. Gieen earn of corn dried by the
Jiri'. 'i ii<'y di ieti iheiii in the fire, in
ih'- -ft ( u car, because that otlierwise
If. .11 ilieir moisture lliey would not
Hl:;iit of being ground in a mill.
'a C'jrn beaten out of full ears. Heb.
Z"-""]!! 'Il'^Ji gcres karmel, small broken
iMH of the green ear. The original
h'.'b. "J-j^ gcres, has the import of some-
thing crushed, broken, pounded, for
wliich the Chal. has ' broken-grains,' or
us we shouhi term it, ' grits.' The Gr.
ronib.M-s the whole clause vta Tuppvyucva
^^ic.oa cvura young parched grains
broken in the mill. Tliese first fruits
Iwd a typical reference to Christ, who
is thus denominated, 1 Cor. 15.20, and
by whom all the rest of the harvest is
sanctiiied. To the preparatory parch- I
iiig, breaking, and grinding, we see per-
haps an allusion in the words of the pro- |
phet, Is. 53. 5, ' He was wounded for j
our iransgressions, he was bruised for i
ou»" iniquities.'
Peju^rks. — (3.) ' The remnant of the
"V 4-oiTering sliall be Aaron's.' In
:' y dispensation God has evinc^ii a
3*
fire, even corn beaten out of pfuU
ears.
15 And qthou shaft put oil upon
it, and lay frankincense thereon :
it is a meat-offering.
16 And the priest shall burn rthe
memorial of it, part of the beaten
corn thereof, and pari of the oil
thereof, with all the frankincense
thereof: it is an offering made by-
fire unto the Lord.
P 2 Killers 4. 42. q ver. 1. ^ ver. 2.
kind concern for the maintenance of
those who were devoted to ministry in
sacred things. Those who labor in the
word are to be competently supported.
' Do ye not know that they which min-
ister about holy things live of the things
of the temple? And they which wait
at the altar are partakers with ihe altar.
Even so hath the Lord ordained that
ihey which preach the Gospel should
live of the Gospel.' 1 Cor. 9. 13, 14.
(S.) 'When it is presented unto the
priest.' As none of the ancient sacred
offerings were to be presented immC'
diately to God, but were first put into
the hand of the priest, and through him
offered upon the altar, so spiritual
sacrifices under the Gospel are not
available in the sight of God, unless
tendered to him through Jesus Christ,
the great High Priest of the New Tes-
tament.
(II.) Especial care is to be taken
not only that our religious services be
cleansed from the leaven of hypocrisj^,
but that they be thoroughly pervaded by
the 'salt' of grace. Col. 4. 6, 'Let
your speech be always with salt, sea-
soned with grace.' Mark 9, 49, ' Every
sacrifice shall be seasoned with salt.'
(14.) If the 'first-fruits' of the har-
vest field were of old so peculiarly ac-
ceptable to God, how much more must
he be pleased now with the first-fruits
of the Spirit, and the expressions of an
early piety in the young. The ' green
ears' of youthful devotion will naturally
be ;oll<!v.»'ii by the ripened sheaves of a
30
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
godly old age, and in this form gathered
into the garners of eternal life.
CHAPTER III.
THE PEACE-OFFERING.
Pursuing llie scriptural order of the
specified oflerings under the law, we
come in the present chapter to that
wliich is denominated the Peace-ofFer-
ing. Tlio Heb. term thus rendered is
w"'^V- shelJmim, from the root 0^^-13
shulam. to viake up, make good, restore,
repay ; and thence to make up a differ-
ence, to eff'ect a reconciliation, to be at
peace- 'Vhe leading ideas, therefore,
cniive\cd hy the term, are those either
ol' retribution or o[ peace ; and the term
peace in the Scripture generally denotes
either the mutual concord of friends,
OT a state of prosperity. These different
senses assigned to the root have led to
different exj.ositions of the appellation
derived from it. On the one hand, it is
held, that the idea of retribution, or
recompence, is prominent in the name
given to this class of sacrifices, and that
it indicates the divi^iion or distribution
made of them into three parts, one for
God, one for tlie offerers, and one for
the priests. This opinion is maintained
by tlie author of a Jewish treatise en-
tilled J<"l£D Siphra, who says, * they
were so called because a prescribed
portion of them fell to the share of each
party.' On the other hand, it is held
by some, that the other sense of the
rcot, namely, that of concord is domi-
nant m the derivative, and that the
name of these oblations denotes their
being symbols of friendship between
God, the priests, and the offerers, to
each of whom was allotted a certain
portion of them. The opinion, how-
ever, is more simple and natural and
therefore more probable, which regards
the combined ideas of prosperity and
retribution or requital hs prominent in
the term, and that this class of offerings
is so called because they were always
presented in reference to a prosperous
state of affairs, either obtained and
gratefully acknowledged, or supplicat-
ed. A ' sacrifice of peace-offerings'
therefore is properly a ' sacrifice of pay-
offerings, of requitals, of retributions,
or pacifications,' and was offered (1.)
Upon the recovery of peace with God in
consequence of an expiation for some
sin committed ; Hos. 14. 2. (2.) As
an expression of thanksgiving lor mer-
cies received ; Lev. 7. 12. Judg. 20. 26.
I Chron, 21. 26. (3.) On the perform-
ance of a vow, as Ps. 56. 13, ' Tliy vows
are upon me, 0 God; I will render
praises (Heb. * will repay confessions ')
unto thee.' Prov. 7. 14, ' I have peace-
offerings with me (Heb. ' peace-offer-
ings are (were) upon me,' i. e. the obli-
gallon of peace-offerings) ; this day
have I paid my vows ;' this kind of
peace-offering being vowed on condition
that a particular mercy were bestowed,
was performed after the condition was
granted. By the Gr. the original word
IS rendered here and elsewhere dvaia
(jWTrjpiov sacrifice of salvation, (or safe-
ty) ; though sometimes by eiprivfiKt) a
pacifying or peace-offering^ and by
the Chal. a ' a sacrifice of sanctities (or
sanctifications),' probably because none
but clean and sanctified persons were
permitted to eat of it ; Lev. 7. 19, 20.
Sol. Jarchij a Jewish Commentator,
says they are called peace-off'erings,
' because they bring peace into the
world, and because by them there is
peace to the altar, to the priests, and
to the owners.' This, however, is ra-
ther the effect of the expiatory than of
the eucliarislic offerings. Yet it is re-
markable that as these sacrifices re-
ceived their original appellation from
tlieir being offered in thanksgiving or
supplication for prosperity, so because
they were employed by the offerers
themselves in sacred feasts, they were
also very frequently designated by ano-
ther name ti'^riDT zeba'liim, wiiich is
the appropriate term for victims slaugh-
tered for sacrifices and for banquets.
B. C. 1490.3
CHAPTER III.
31
Yet this is plainly a metaphorical sense
of the term, by which we are in no dan-
ger of being misled. From their being
^jriivcipally consumed by llie offerers at
tlie feast that followed the oblation,
Michaelis, Bootliroyd, and others, pre-
Ci-r to translate the term * feast-sacri-
fice' rather than ' peace-ofFering;' while
others iigaia -choose to render the ori-
ginal ' lliunk-oitering.' But we deem
it best to give the uiost literal render-
ing and supjily all deficiencies by the
re|uisile explanations.
-»s intimated above, the Peace-offer-
iiit;s wfie of a threefold character, vol-
tiiit<iry, votive, and eiicharistic. The
i is| ol ihese was offered in view of spe-
ci 1 favors and blessings enjoyed; tlie
two former for mercies desired and im-
tilored. Eh Lev. 7. 11, 12, the Peace-
offering is evidently regarded as an act
<if thanksgiving for mercies received,
and as such is referred to by David, Ps.
101. 22, ^ Lot them sacrijice the sacri-
fices of thanksgiving (nTiri *^nit "nlT'^
yizbe'hu zih'h'c todih), and declare his
works with rejoicing.' So also Ps. 116.
13, 17, * 0 Lord, truly I am thy ser-
vant, 1 am thy servant, and the son of
thine handmaid ; thou hast loosed my
bonds, I will offer to thee the sacri-
fice of thanksgiving (niiri rCt z'iba^h
tod'th), and will call upon the name of
the Lord.' Hence it was that Heze-
kiah, 2 Chron. 29. 20, after having abol-
ished all idolatrous rites, and restored
the ancient worship, directed eucha-
ristic sacrifices to be offered. Such too,
it is evident, were offered by Manasseh,
2 Chron. 33. 16, after his restoration to
i)is country and kingdom. The general
<Ioctrine held by the Jews in respect to
tliis kind of oblations is thus expressed
by Aben Ezra ; ' The design of an eu-
charistic sacrifice is, that any person
delivered from trouble may give praise
to God on account of it.' iiquivalent
to this is the language of Sol. Jarclii ;
' An eucharistic sacrifice ought to be
offered to God by every one who has ex-
perienced any thing like a miracle j who j
I has sailed over the ocean, or traveled
j through c'.?scrts ; who has been deliver-
j cd from prison, or recovered from dis.
ease ; for they are under the greatest
j obligations to praise God.' Allusions
I also to the Peace-offering as a cotive or
voluntary oblation occur in the follow-
I ing passages, from which it will appear
J that such offerings were generally vowed
I in times of danger and distress. Joe.
i 2. 9, < I will sacrifice unto thee with the
I voice of tlianksgiving, I will pay that I
I have vowed ; salvation is of the Lord.'
2 Sam. 15. 8, ' For thy servant vowed a
vow while I abode at Geshur, in Syria,
saying, if the Lord shall bring me again
indeed to Jerusalem, then I will serve
the Lord ;' i. e. will serve him with a
peace or thank-offering. One of the
most striking instances of this kind
occurs in the case of the eleven tribes,
Judg. 20, 2Q^ who from a zeal of God's
j house had undertaken to punish the
j Benjamites for the horrible wickedness
j they had committed. Twice had the
j confederate tribes gone up against the
j Benjamites, and twice been repulsed
i with the loss of twenty thousand men.
j But being still desirous to know and do
the will of God in this matter, as it was
his quarrel only that they were aveng-
ing, ' they went up to the house of God
and wept and fasted until even, and
offered burnt-offerings and peace-offer-
ings unto the Lord ;' and thus God de-
livered the Benjamites into their hands,
so that with the exception of si.x huR-
dred only, who fled, the whole tribe of
Benjamin, male and females, was ex-
tirpated. So Jacob, Gen. 2S. 20-22, and
Jephthah, Judg. 30. 31 ; and so David,
Ps. QQ. 13, 14, ' I will pay tliee my vows,
which my lips have uttered, and my
mouth hath spoken when I was in
trouble.' From this it appears that this
kind of sacrifices was very ancient, and
was grafted upon that innate desire to
testify a mind grateful for divine bene,
fits, the traces of which are discoverable
in all ages and all nations.
The material of the Peace-offering
32
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
was to be either of the herd or the flock,
the greater or lesser animals, but never
of the fowl, probably because their
diminutive size did not admit of the
three-fold division between God, the
priest, and the people. Like the holo-
caustic ofFerings, it must be without
blemish ; but unlike to them, it might
be either male or female. Of the rites
and ceremonies pertaining to the obla-
tion, gome were in common with the
other sacrifices, and some peculiar to
itself. It must be brought to the door
of the tabernacle • the owner must lay
his hand on it ; it must be killed, and
the blood shed and sprinkled on the altar
round about; and finally it must be
burnt upon the altar, except the reserved
parts. In these respects the details of
the oblation are very similar to those
of the burnt-ofiering. But peculiar to
itself was the division of the offering
into three parts — the limitation of the
time for eating it — the addition of leaven
— and the prohibition of fat and blood ;
each of which particulars will be duly
considered in its proper place.
The victim of the Peace-offering was
to be divided between God, and the
priest, and the people ,- to each a por-
tion. The part to be burnt ' before the
Lord upon the altar, upon the burnt-
oflfering,' consisted of all the suet per-
taining to the inwards, the two kidneys,
the caul iipon the liver, and all the fat.
This was the Lord's portion. Another
was assigned to the priest. This con-
sisted of the breast and the right
shoulder. The breast was to be waved
to and fro, and the shoulder was to be
heaved upwards before the Lord, in
token of their being appropriated to his
house and service. The breast was
then given to the priests in general,
while the shoulder remained the per-
quisite of him who officiated. A por-
tion also of the leavened bread was to
be given to the priest. All the remain-
der of the oblation, which was by far
the greatest part, belonged to the ofiTer-
er himself, and was to he eaten by liim-
self and his family and friends, if cere-
monially clean, as a social and hospita-
ble meal. If the Peace-oflfering were
of the eucharistic class, it was to be
eaten the same day it was offered, and
none of it was to be left until the morn-
ing. But if the sacrifice of the offering
were a vow or a voluntary offering, part
of it might be eaten on the day on
which it was offered, and part of it on
the next day; but if any of it remained
unto the third day^ that part must not
be eaten, but must be burnt with fire.
The reason of the difference in the two
cases is perhaps this : the tribute of
love and gratitude was far more pleas-
ing to God, as arguing a more heavenly
frame of mind. In consequence of its
superior excellence the sacrifice that
was offered as a thanksgiving must be
eaten on the same day ; whereas the
sacrifice offered as a vow or voluntary
offering might, being less holy and ac-
ceptable, be eaten also on the second
day.
As to the occasions on which the
Peace-offerings were presented, some
of them were fixed by divine appoint-
ment, and some were altogether op'
tional. The fixed occasions were at
the consecration of the priests, Ex. St).
28 ; at the expiration of the Nazarite's
vow, Num. 6. 14 ; at the dedication of
the tabernacle and temple, Num. 7. 17 ;
and at the feast of first-fruits. Lev. 23,
19. In addition to these, the people
were at liberty to offer them whenever
a sense of gratitude or of need inclined
them to it. It is to occasions of this
kind that the directions in the present
chapter mainly have respect.
Having thus explained the nature of
the Peace-offering, and the various rites
and ceremonies connected with it, it
remains to advert briefly to the moral
lessons which it was calculated to im-
part. And in the outset we may re-
mark, that the rendering of the original
adopted in our version suggests the idea
of a pacifying effect as wrought by this
:^peci^■s of sacrifice, which is to be allrib-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER III.
33
A
CHAPTER HI.
ND if his oblation ^e a a sacri-
fice of peace-offering, if he
=1 ch. 7. 11, 29. and 22. 21.
uted ratlier to the olher class of offer-
ings, whose scope was more distinctly
expiatory. Th-; word peace has a dif-
ferent shade of meaning in the Hebrew
from what it has in our language. With
us it suggests most naturally and legiii-
mately the idea of reconciliation, the
bringing into concord contending far-
ties, — an idea which is more properly
to be associated willi the effects of the
stated burnt-offoring, or the occasional
sin and trespass-offering. In the He-
brew the import of prosperity, of wel-
fare, is predominant to the enjoyment
or the petition of which this offering
was especially appointed. The idea of
grateful acknowledgment therefore is
the leading idea wliich it is calculated
to suggest. But with what expressive
ceremonies was this service marked !
How strongly would it tend to infuse
the spirit of a son and of a friend into
the heart of the worshipper. How em-
phatically would he be reminded of the
blessed privileges which he enjoyed
through his sacrifice. Partaking of the
same viands was ever considered as the
bond and proof of friendship and peace ;
and here ihe Lord, his ])riests, and the
offerer himself, all partook of the same
offerings. They sat down together as
it were at the same table. In this rite
accordingly the Jew would read a happy
assurance of the divine favor towards
him. As he feasted with his family
and friends on the portion assigned him
from the altar, he would enjoy a peace
in his own soul from this instituted
token of reconciliation and friendship.
The whole ceremony was eminently
calculated to produce all the emotions
appropriate to his condition. As he
brought his offering to the altar, he
would think of the great mercy and
condescension of God in thus providing
a way of acceptance for him, and ad.
offer it of the herd, whether it he
a male or female; he shall offer it
^without blemish before the Lord.
b ch. 1. 3
milling liim to his own friendship and
love. He would feel deep abasement
for the alienation and disaffection which
appeared in his own heart. As he laid
his hand on the animal's head, and as
he saw its blood streaming at his feet,
he would think of his own utter unwor-
thiness to appear before God, and he
would be affected to think that lie owed
all his permission to approach him to
the sufferings of another in his stead.
As he saw the smoke of the fat ascend
to heaven, he would rejoice in this ac-
ceptance of his offering. When he
looked upon the waved breast and the
uplifted shoulder, he would be thankful
for the ministry of the appointed serv-
ants of the Most High, and when he
retired from the ceremony he would go
on his way rejoicing that the Lord had
accepted him in his work, and would
eat his food with all the warmest emo-
tions of gratitude, affiance, and love.
Such would be the legitimate influence
of a ceremony of this nature upon the
heart of every pious Jew. It would be
one of his most privileged feasts, though
but a private one, and would throw a
peaceful and hajipy frame over the
whole soul. Thus the evangelical doc-
trines were presented to him, and all
those right feelings towards God, which
are so powerfully called forth by the
gospel, were in a measure according
with his light experienced by a Jev/.
The Peace-offering of the Herd.
1 Ifhia oblation. Heb. i:nip korba-
no, his korban or gift, as usual in this
connection wherever 'offering' or
* oblation ' occurs in our version. Gr.
TO 6o}pOV aVTOV T(0 K.VpU;J, htS gift tO tkC
Lord. In like manner we find ' korban'
explained as a gift by the Evangelist,
Mark 7. 1 1 . ^ Male or female. In
this respect the peace-offering differed
34
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
2 And che shall lay his hand upon
the head of his offering, and kill it
at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation : and Aaron's sons
the priests shall sprinkle the blood
upon the altar round about.
o And he shall offer of the sacri-
fice of the peace-offering, an offer-
ing made by fire unto the Lord ;
dthe fat that coverelh the inwards,
c ch. 1. 4, 5. Exod. 29. 10. ^ Exod. 29.
13,22. ch. 4. 8, 9.
from the holocaust, or whole burnt-
offering, in which a male only was
allowed.
2. Shall lay his hand. The imposi-
tion of hands in this case differed Irom
the same ceremony in the sacrifice of
the holocaust in this, that over the head
of the peace-offering there was no con-
fession of sins, but merely the uttering
of praise and supplication to God.
IT And kill it at the door, ^-c. That is
the priest or some other Levitc shall
kill it. So also v. S. See note on Lev.
1.0. As this olfering belonged to what
were termed the lesser or lighter holy
things, it was not required to be offered,
like the burnt-offering or the sin-offer-
ing, on the north side of the altar, but
in any place of the court. Lev. L IL
IT And Aaron's sons shall sprinkle.
This was to be done according to the
manner prescribed, Lev. L 5. ' For the
burnt-offering,' says Maimonides, ' the
trespass-offering, and the peace-offering,
the sprinkling of the blood of these
three upon the altar w-as ever alike.'
It was obviously a type of the sprink-
ling of Christ's blood, whereby we, our
words and works are sanctified before
God. 1 Pet. 1.2, Heb. 12. 14.
3. Shall offer of the sacrifice. Heb.
niT?3 mizzeba'h. That is, part of the
peace-ofiering ; for of this sacrifice one
part, viz. the fat pieces, the kidneys,
the caul, &c., was to be burnt ; a second,
consisting of the breast and the right
shoulder, was reserved for the priest ;
while all the remainder was appropriat*
and all the fat that is upon the in-
wards,
4 And the two kidneys, and the
fat that is on them, which is by the
j flanks, and the caul above the liv-
er, with the kidneys, it shall he
take away.
! 5 And Aaron's sons eshall burn it
on the altar, upon the burnt-sacri-
fice, which IS upon the wood, that
f ch. 6. 12. Exod. 29. 13.
cd to the offerer, to be eaten by him, his
family and friends, in a sacrificial least.
IT The fat that covereth the innards.
Frequently termed with us ' the suet.'
This was always burned upon the iiltar,
j and would naturally serve to feed the
j fire. See a fuller explanation in the
I Note on Ex. 29. 13. The design of this
j part of the ceremony may be understood
in either of the w:iys following. (1.) As
j the * fat' of any thing is sometimes but
another name for its best or choicest
part (see Note on Gen. 4. 4), and as the
' fat ' was deemed the most valuable
part of the animal, it was offered in
preference to all other parts, implying
that the best of every thing was to be
offered to God. (2.) As, however, the
term is used in other cases to denote the
dullness, hardness, and unbelief of the
heart, Ps. 1I9. 70. Acts 2S. 27, it may
here signify the consuming of our cor-
ruptions by the fire of the Holy Spirit.
The ' kidneys ' also, the supposed seat
of some of the strongest of the sensual
propensities, were burnt probably to
teach the duty of the mortification of
our members which are upon earth, for-
nication, uncleanness, inordinate affec-
lion, &c. Col. 3. 5
4. The caul above the liver. See note
on Ex. 29. 13. IT Which is by the
flanks. Heb. f^^DS keselim, loins.
Gr. and Chal. ' Which is on the thighs.'
Comp. Job 15. 27, ' He coverelh his face
with his fatness, and maketh collops of
fat on his flanks. (^DS kesel.)'
5. Upon the burnt-sacrifice. That is,
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER III.
36
is on the fire : it is an offering
made by fire, of a sweet, savour
unto the Lord.
6 H And if his offering for a sa-
crifice of peace-offering unto the
Lord be of the flock, male or fe-
male; fhe shall offer it without
blemish.
7 If Jie offer a Iamb for his offer-
ing, then shall he offer it before
the Lord.
8 And he shall lay his hand upon
f ver. 1, &c.
in addition to the burnt-offering, laying
it on the altar after tlie daily offering
of the lamb, which always had the pre-
cedency.
The Peace-offering of the Flock. — 1. A
Lamb.
6. If his offering be of the flock.
That is, of sheep or goats, which
are both included under the term flock.
' Peace-offerings,' says IVIaimonides,
'are brouglit of shee.p, of goats, and of
beeves, male or female, and great or
small ; but no fowl is brouglit for a
peace-offering.' The reason of this ex-
ception was that fowls had not fat
enough to be burnt upon the altar.
9. The whole rump. Heb. .T'^JStn
n>3'^?2n hualyah temimah^the perfect or
entire tail. ' Dr. Boolhroyd renders,
more distinctly : — ' The large fiit tail
entire, taken off close to the rump.' It
might seem exlraordmary that the tail
of a sheep (only of a slieep) should be
pointed out with so much care as a suit-
able offering upon God's altar, were it
not distinctly understood what sheep
and what tail is intended. The direc-
tion indicates that the fat-tailed species
were usually offered in sacrifice, if ihe
flocks of the Hebrews were not wholly
composed of tliem. This species is
particularly abundant in Syria and Pal-
estine, equalling or outnumbering the
common Bedouin species. Even the
latter, although in other respects much
the head of his offering, and kill it
before the tabernacle of the con-
gregation : and Aaron's sons shall
sprinkle the blood thereof round
about upon the altar.
9 And he shall offer of the sacri-
fice of the peace-offering an offer-
ing made by fire unto the Lord:
the fat thereof, and the whole
rump, (it shall he take off hard by
the back-bone ;) and the fat that
covereth the inwards, and all the
fat that is upon the inwards,
resembling the common English sheep,
is distinguished by a larger and thicker
tail than any British species possesses.
But the tail of the species peculiarly
called 'fat-tailed,' seems to exceed all
reasonable bounds, and has attracted
the attention of all travelers from the
times of Herodotus to our own. These
tails, or rather tails loaded on each side
with enormous masses of fat, are often
one-fourth the weight of the whole car-
cass, when divested of the head, intes-
tines, and skin. The tails seem to at-
tain the largest size in the countries
with which the Hebrews were most
conversant ; for in countries more east-
ward we never saw them quite so large
as the largest of those described by Dr.
Russell in his ' Natural History of
Aleppo.' He says that a common
sheep of this sort weighs, without the
offal, sixty or seventy pounds, of which
the tail usually weighs fifty or upwards j
but he adds, that such as are of the
largest breed and have been fattened,
will sometimes weigh 150 lbs., the tails
being 50 lbs. These last very large
sheep are kept in yards wdiere they are
in no danger of injuring their tails ; but
in some other places where they feed
in the fields, the shepherds sometimes
afiix a thin piece of board to the under
part of the tail, to prevent its being tora
by bushes and thickets, as it is not
covered underneath with thick wool
like the upper part. Sometimes the-
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
10 And the two kidneys, and the
fat that 25 upon them, which is
by the flanks, and the caul above
the liver, with the kidneys, it shall
he take away.
11 And the priest shall burn it
upon the altar: it is gthe food of
the offering made by fire unto the
L0)^D.
12 ^1 And if his offering be a
goat, then i^lie shall offer it before
the Lord.
13 And he shall lay his hand upon
the head of it, and kill it before the
tabernacle of the congregation :
and the sons of Aaron shall sprin-
kle the blood thereof upon the
altar round about.
14 And he shall offer thereof his
g See ch. 21. 6, S, 17, 21, 22. and 22. 25.
Ezek. 44. 7. Mai. 1. 7, 12. ^ ver. 1. 7- &c.
board is furnished with small wheels,
to enable the sheep to drag it along the
more easily. The mutton of these
sheep is very good, and the fat of the
tail is the most grateful animal fat the
writer ever tasted. It is rich and mar-
rowy, and is never eaten alone, but is
mixed up in many dishes with lean
meat, and is in various ways employed
as a substitute for butter and oil. The
standing Oriental dish, boiled rice, is
peculiarly palatable when lubricated
with fat from the tail of this remarka-
ble species of sheep. Viewed in its
various applications, the tail is an ar-
ticle of great use and delicacy, and
could be no unworthy offering.' — Pict.
Bib.
11. It is the food of the offering, ^-c.
We have before remarked, in speaking
of the general object of the altar, that
the sacrifices ofiered upon it were ac-
counted, in a sense, the provisions of
God's table, the viands upon wliich he
feasted. See Mai. 1. 12. Such offer-
mgs are here called his ' broad,' or
* food,' and the phraseology occurs also
Num. 28. 2 Ezek. 44. 7. and in Lev. 21. :
I offering, even an offering made by
j fire unto the Lord; the fat that
covereth the inwards, and all the
! fat that is upon the inwards,
I 15 And the two kidneys, and the
j fat that is upon I hem, which is by
i the flanks, and the caul above the
' liver, with the kidneys, it shall he
I take away.
j 16 And the priest shall burn them
j upon the altar: it is the food of
I the offering made by fire for a sweet
savour: 'all the fat z5 the Lord's.
17 It shall be a ^perpetual statute
for your generations throughout all
your dwellings, that ye eat neither
ifat nor ^blood.
i ch. 7. 23, 25. 1 Sam. 2. 15. 2 Chron. 7.
7. ^ ch 6. IS. and 7. 36. and 17. 7. and 23.
14. ' ver. 16. compare with Deut, 32. 14.
Neh. 8. 10. "■ Gen 9. 4. ch. 7. 23, 26 and
17. 10, 14. Deut. 12. 16. 1 Sam. 14. 33.
Ezek- 44. 7, 15.
6, S, 17, the priests who burnt them are
expressly said to offer ' the bread of
their God.' The use of this language
represented in a striking manner the
fact that God dwelt, and, as it were,
kept house among them, and that those
who partook with him of these sacri-
fices, were entertained as guests at his
table.
The Peace-offering of the Flock.— 2. A
Goat.
12. If his offering be a goat. The
law concerning this offering coincides
entirely with the preceding respecting
the lamb, except in what relates to the
rump or tail, so that this section requires
very little commentary.
14. He shall offer thereof. That is,
a part of it, the part which he imme-
diately goes on to specify, viz. the fat,
the kidneys, the caul, &c.
17. That ye cat neither fat nor blood.
This jjrohibition respecting the eating
of fat, is to be understood of the fat of
such animals as were offered to God in
sacrifice, and not of others, although the
Jews, we believe, interpret it of all fat,
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
37
wuhout exception. But the contrary is
to be gathered from Lev. 7. 2, ' Ye shall
eai of no manner of fat of ox, or of
tlietp, or of goat ;' implying that the
lat of other animals might be eaten.
As 10 blood J however, the probability is,
although the Rabbinical writers main-
tain tliat that of locusts, iishes, &c. was
Uvvfiil, that it was intended to be uni-
versally forbidden. The prohibition in
(ien. 9. 4, is absolute and unqualified j
* Flesli with the biood thereof shall ye
not eat.' The reasons of the prohibition
doubtless were, (1.) To put a diiference
between the chosen peo}».le and Gentile
idolaters, who used to drink the blood
of their sacrifices; Ps. \Q. 4, 'Their
sorrows shall be multiplied that hasten
after another God : tlieir drink-offer-
ings of blood will I not otler.' (2.) To
restrain any tendency to the acquisition
of a cruel and sanguinary disposition.
(3.) To inspire respect and reverence
for that which was intended to represent
the precious blood of Christ, in which
the virtue of his atonement was to con-
sist.
PvEMARKS. — (].) As the highest re-
compense which God requires for his
benefits towards us is the tribute of a
grateful heart, he that withholds this
clearly proves himself unworthy of the
least of heaven's mercies.
(1.) A cordial thank-offering to God
should ever follow the attainment of
any lawful object upon which our hearts
have been set.
(2.) How kindly are we exempted
from the legal burdens of the Jews ! li'
they wished to express their humilia-
tion or gratitude, it was at the expense
of a part of their property, yielded up
to God by way of sacrifice. No such
necessity is imposed upon us. God
hath not made us ' to serve with an
offering, nor wearied us with incense.'
It is the offering of a Iree heart, or of a
' broken and contrite spirit,' that he
desires of us, and that he will accept in
preference to * the cattle upon a thou-
sand hills.' All that remains for us is
to say, ' Accept, I beseech thee, the
free-will offerings of my mouth.' If
we withhold those, well may we fear
that every beast that was ever slaugh-
tered on these occasions, and every por-
tion ever offered, will appear in judg-
ment against us, to condemn our ingra-
titude and obduracy !
(5.) ' Shall burn it on the altar, upon
the burnt-sacrifice.' The Peace-offer-
ing, whether presented in a way of
thanksgiving or supplication, equally
began with a sacrifice in the way of
atonement. Thus, whatever be the
irame of our minds, and whatever ser-
vice v/e render unto God, we are inva-
riably to fix our thoughts on the atone-
ment of Christ, as the only means
whereby our persons or our services can
find acceptance with God.
CHAPTER IV.
THE SIN-OFFERING.
The Jewish law prescribed two kinds
of piacular sacrifices distinguished in
our language by the appellations Sin-
offering and Trespass-offering — terms
which, though not adequately express-
ing the force (»f the original words, we
are obliged to retain for the want of
belter. The original for Sin-offering
is nitt2n hattiih, or ritwH hat tat h, the
strict rendering of which is i/n, but
which is by metaphorical usage em-
ployed to denote a sin-offering. So in
like manner U'.!;j^ dshdm rendered tres-
pass-offering properly and primarily
signifies trespass. In accordance with
this usage the apostle, 2 Cor. 5. 21, says
God ' made him (Ciirist) to be sin
(auapTiai> o sin-offering) for us, who
knew no sin, that we might be made
the righteousness of God.' The Gr.
word here used by the apostle is the
same by which the Septuagint in more
than eighty places in the Pentateuch
translate the Heb. word riHtOn hattdh,
sin, which in all these places our Eng-
lish version renders sin-offering. Yet
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
it is at the same lime proper to observe
that the term may be taken in this con-
nexion as an abstract for the concrete,
and simply imply lliat God treated the
Savior as if he were a sinner.
The distinction ol' these two kinds of
oftoriiigs is exceedingly difficult to be
determined. In Lev. o. u, 6, tiie terms
are used as signilyinij precisely tlie
same thing, and in the 11th and I2lh
verses the Trespass-oircring is thrice
mentioned as a Sin-olTering. The ex-
planation suggested by Miciiaelis. Jahn,
Gesenius, and others, viz. lliut sin-olier-
ings were presented for otfences of
cominission, and Trespass-ofierings for
those of omission, has of late perhaps
been most generally received. Yet it
fails on examination to yield entire
conviction ; for some otfences mentioned
among trespasses, (as Lev. 5. 2,3.) are
as much of a positive nature, as itny of
the transgressions indicated in a general
way as requiring to be expiated by
Sin-offerings ; and the very occasion of
a Trespass-offering (Lev, 5. 17-19.) is
described in language which most strict-
ly applies to a. positive violation of law.
Nor can we well make the distinction
consist in the offence having been com-
mitted unawares in the one case, and
not in the other ; for if the person
bound to present a Sin-offering, is uni-
formly described as one who has ' sin-
ned through ignorance,' the same too is
the character of transgressions men-
tioned in connexion with Trespass-of-
ferings, Lev. 5. 2, 3, 15. On the whole,
whatever the distinction was, it does
not seem to have been of much import-
ance ; and Winer, (Realwdrterbucli),
after a pretty full discussion of the sub-
ject, which is to be found translated in
J. P. Smith's ' Discourses on the Sa-
crifice and Priesthood of Christ,' re-
marks, that as none of the previous so-
lutions are satisfactory, and ' as in the
statemenis of the law itself nothing is
contained that can in any measure con-
duct us safely to a determination upon
the difference between the Sin-offering
and the Trespass-offering, it seems best
entirely to renounce making a distinc-
tion ' By which he probably does not
mean that there was no distiuciioii, Ijut
that at this day it is very difficult, if
not impossible, to discover it.
The (lifficuliy lies in great measure in
in this, tliat tlie Sin-olfeiing seems to
have respect to a lighter species ol sin,
and yet to require the more solemn
offering ; -VNiliilst ttie Trespass-offering
rchites to considerably heavier offences,
and yet admits of an easier meiiiod of
obtaining forgiveness. Tiiis is evident
from the iacl, that in the Trespass-
offering pigeons or turtle-doves might
be offered, or in case of extreme poverty
a measure ol flour ; but in the Sin-offer-
ing no such abatement or commutatiou
was allowed. But then there were
some peculiarities attaching to the
Trespass-ottering which may perhaps
afford a solution to this apparent anom-
aly, and which we shall ailvert to alter
staling th-' principal points of differ-
ence between the two, (1.) They dif
fered in the occasions on which they
were offered. The Sin-offerings, it ap
pears, were presented on account oi'
something done amiss through igno-
ranee or infirmity, while the Tres-
pass-offering would seem rather to have
been ibr sins committed through inad'
vertence, or the power of tcmjtlation, and
under circumstances which appear to
admit of less apology than the pre.
ceding. Among the latter were sins of
great enormity, such as violence, fraud,
lying, and even perjury itself. Lev. 5.
1,4, — 6. 2, 3. There must of course be
very different degrees of criminality io
these sins, according to the degree of
information the person possessed, and
the degree of conviction against which
he acted. It might be that even in these
things the person had sinned through
ignorance only ; but whatever circum-
stances there might be to extenuate or
aggravate his crime, the Trespass-offer-
ing was the appointed means whereby
he was to obtain mercy and forgiveness.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
39
(2.) They differed in the circumstances
attending them. In the Sin-offering
there was a particular respect to the
raak and quality of the offender. If he
were a priest, he was to offer a bullock ;
wliich was also the appointed offering
for the whole congregation. If he were
a ruler or magistrate, he must offer a
kid, a male ; but if he were a common
individual, a female kid or lamb would
suffice. In the Trespass-offering, no
mention is made of a bullock for any
one, but only of a female kid or lamb,
of turtle-doves or young pigeons, or in
the event of a person's not being able
to afford them, he might offer about five
pints of flour, which would be accepted
in their stead, Lev. 5. 6, 7, 11. This is
the excepted case to which Paul refers
when he says, Heb. 9. 22, ' Almost all
things are by the law purged with blood '
Now thus fur it does appear that the
heavier sins were to be atoned for by
the lighter sacrifices ; but then there
were three things required in the Tres-
pass-offering which had no place in the
Sin-offering, viz. : confession of the
crime, restitution of the property, and
compensation for the injury. Suppose
a person had * robbed God ' by keeping
back a part of his tithes, whether inten-
tionally or not, he must, as soon as it
was discovered, present his offering,
confess his fault, restore what he had
unjustly taken, and add one fifth more
of its value, as a compensation of the
injury he had done. Lev. 5. 5. — 6. 5.
The same process was to take place if
by fraud or violence he had injured a
man. Num. 5. 6-8. This gives a decided
preponderance to the Trespass-offering,
and shows that the means used for the
expiation of different offences bore a
just proportion to the quality of those
offences. We do not affirm that this
observation clears up all the difficulty
respecting the distinction of the two
kinds of ofierings, but that it removes
some part of it we think there can be no
doubt.
The Sin-offerings were of two kinds,
the greater and the less. The greater
I were offered, (1) When the high-priest
i had committed an offence, and thereby
5 brought guilt upon the wliole nation.
In this case he was required to bring
the greatest of all the sacrifices, a young
j bullock, because he was the least ex-
cusable of all men if he knew not the
\ law of God, or heedlessly did any
thing contrary to it. This victim he
was to bring to tlie door of the taberna-
cle, lay his hand upon its head, and kill
it before the Lord. A part of the blood
was then jetted with his finger seven
times towards the separating veil or
j curtain of the sanctuary, a part of it
! was sprinkled on the altar of incense,
j and the remainder poured out on the
] ground at the foot of the altar of burnt-
I offerings. The inward fat was then to
be burnt upon the altar, but the skin
and all the remaining parts were to be
carried out and burnt without the gates
of the camp or city. (2.) When the
whole nation had committed an offence
through ignorance, and afterwards re-
pented. In this case the offering was
the same, a young bullock without
blemish, upon which the elders of the
j congregation were to lay their hands,
I and then the victim was to be slam, and
j the same ceremonies used in the dis-
posal of the blood, as in the similar
offering of the priest. (3.) On the
great day of atonement for the high-
priest and the nation. The ceremonies,
which were more numerous and impos-
ing than usual, will be detailed in the
notes on the I6th ch., where we have
treated at full length of the t,wo-fold
ordinance of the sacrificial and the
scape goat.
The lesser kind of Sin-offerings were
brought in the following cases. (I.)
When a magistrate or ruler committed
an offence through error, which after-
wards came to his knowledge. His
sacrifice was then to be a kid of the
goats without blemish, whose blood
40
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
CHAPTER IV.
\ ND the Lord spake unto Mo
-^*- ses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
was parlly smeared upon the altar, and ,
partly poured upon the ground. The |
fat pieces only came to the altar ; the |
rest fell to the priest. Lev. 4. 22-26. j
(2.) When a private person sinned !
through ignorance. The sacrifice pre-
scribed was a ewe or a female kid.
(3.) When a woman was purified from
a long-continued hemorrhage ; or, after
child-birth, had reached the time of
purification. Lev. 12. 6, 8.— 15. 25-30.
(4.) When one had a running issue, as
mentioned Lev. 15. 2, 14, 15. (5.) When
a Nazarile had touched a corpse, or the
time of his vow was completed. Num.
6. 10, 14. (6.) On the consecration of
a priest or Levite. Lev. 9. 23. Num.
8. 8, 12. (7.) On the purification of a
leper. Lev. 14. 19-31. The other de-
tails of the offering will be noticed as
we proceed.
In contemplating the institution of
the Sin-offering, the strongest impres-
sion perhaps which we receive from it is
that of guilt and responsibility attach-
ing, in the sight of God, to sins of in-
firmity and ignorance ; for it is to such
that it mainly has respect. W^e are
prone to imagine that an offence com-
mitted unintentionally or unawares,
cannot incur the charge of guilt. Men
do not scruple to plead their ignorance,
their infirmities, their natural and ha-
bitual propensities in excuse for their
misdeeds. But the law of God deter-
mines otherwise. It enjoins an onerous
ceremony for the expiation of sins un-
consciously committed. The sin, it is
true, is not so great as if it were done
knowingly, wilfully, and presumptuous-
ly ; yet still il is sin, and as such needs
an atonement. Without the shedding
of blood there was no remission. At
the same time we are not to lose sight
of the consolalioii which flows through
rael, saying, alf a soul shall sin
through ignorance against any of
a ch. 5. 15, 17. Nnm. 15. 22. &c. 1 Sam.
14. 27. Ps 19. 12.
this typical ordinance to the bosom of
the penitent believer. The language
of the Apostle, Heb. 13. 11-13, makes il
evident that the Sin-offering pointed
directly to Christ, through whose effi-
cacious atonement all his sins, whelli'.'r
of greater or less aggravation, are can-
celled and abolished. It is those daily
infirmities, those sins unconsented to,
and yet committed ; those faults too
covert for detection, or too late detect-
ed ; it is they that constitute his daily
struggles, and wage within him an un-
ceasing warfare. And when he has
seen the sins of his wilful alienation
borne away by the atoning sacrifice,
these cleaving vestiges of a corrupt
nature will often vex him with painTul
fears, lest there should still be a demand
of wrath against him. How appropri-
ate then is this exhibition of a continual
offering for our continual need ! * He
that knew no sin was made sin (a sin-
offering) for us.' Here we have par-
don ; not once, to cancel the past debt
and begin on a new score ; but pardon
daily, hourly renewed, as often as the
Sin-offering is pleaded before the Fa-
ther, is brought in faith, and laid upon
the altar before the Lord. We do no-
thing well. If we ^:)ray, it is with cold
and wandering thoughts ; if we hear, it
is with distracted and forgetful minds ;
WG are continuallysurprised, continually
overtaken, continually turned aside by
the current of temptation, that runs so
strong against us, when perhaps we
cannotconvict ourselvesof one indulged,
deliberate sin. Therefore did the God
of mercies ordain this peculiar institu-
tion, prefiguring to them of old the
divine oblation to be once offered, but
forever efficacious, for the pardon of this
and every kind of guilt.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
41
the commandments of the Lord
concerning things which ought
not to be done, and shall do against
any of them;
]. The Sin-offering for the Anointed
Priest.
2. Shall sin through ignorance against
any of the commandments. Heb. U;S3
tiT2)2 ^^?2 n^^rn Kt:rin ^:d mphesh
ki tchetci bishgagdh mikkol mitzvolh
a soul when it shall sin through inad-
vertently erring from any of the com-
mandments. The true construction is,
not ' sinning against,' but ' erring from,'
as the phraseology in the original is in
effect the same with that in Ps. 119. 10.
' Let me not wander from C^i^'lTl ^5^
al tashgcni) thy commandments.'
IT Through ignorance ; i.e. unadvisedly,
unwittingly, unawares. The Heb. u53lI3
shegugdh, here used, comes from na*^
shdgdh, to go astray, to err, to trans-
gress through mistake, ignorance, or
inadvertency. In the Greek it is some-
limes rendered by ayvoia ignorance, but
here, and frequently elsewhere, by
aKovanoi unwillingly, the exact oppo-
site to EKovaiixii willingly or wilfully,
qpcurring Heb. 10.26, and opposite also
to what the law, Num. 15. 57, 30, terms
sinning with a high hand, or presump-
tuously. The import of the term is
fully disclosed, Num. 35. 11, where
mention is made of ' killing a person
at unawares;' Heb. tl^y:] shegdguh,
by error, unwittingly, which, in the
parallel passage, Deut. 19. 14, is ex-
pressed by ignorantly, or literally, with-
out knowledge ; both which terms, for
greater explicitness, are joined together
in Josh. 20. 3, ' The slayer that killeth
any person unawares (na^TD bishga-
gdh, by error), and unwittingly (i.e.
without knowledge),' which is also
opposed to a ' lying in wait,' i. e. with
a set purpose and intention to kill;
Deut. 19. 11. Ex. 21. 13. The Apos-
tie, Heb. 9. 7, denominates such sins
ayvtruaTa ignorances, or ignorant tres-
4*
3 bif the priest that is anointed
do sin according to the sin of the
b ch. 8. 12.
passes, more fully explained, Heb. 5. 3
by two distinct words, where he speaks
of the duty of priests ' to have compas-
sion on the ignorant, and on them that
are out of the way.' These ignorances
or errors therefore occurred when any
one, through not knowing, or forgetting,
or not duly heeding the law, and im-
pelled rather by a casual infirmity, than
by a settled intention, committed some
foul act which God had forbidden. In
such cases, as soon as the transgression
came to the knowledge of the offender,
he was required to offer the sacrifice
here prescribed ; and not to think that
ignorance or inadvertency was an ex-
cuse ibr his sin. But he, on the other
hand, who sinned presumptuously, and
with an avowed contempt of the law
and the law-maker, was to be cut off,
and there remained no more sacrifice for
the sin, Heb. 10. 26, 27. IT And shall
do against any of them. Heb. r!"ii;3>T
^'^1)2 T!n)^)Z vedsdhmeahath mchtnnah,
shall do of (any) one of them. Gr.
TToiricj) iv Ti a-' avruv, shall do any one
thing of them. The phrase ' do against'
does not perhaps materially vary from
a correct rendering, but the obvious
idea of the original is the doing of
something which ought not to be done.
The Jewish writers insist on the fol-
lowing circumstances relative to the
sin mentioned in the text. (1.) Its
being committed through ignorance, or
mistake, or involuntarily. (2.) Its
being against some negative command.
(3.) Its including /ac?s, not words or
thoughts, as appears from the expres-
sion, ' and shall do against any of tliem.'
(4.) Its consisting of such facts as, if
perpetrated willingly, would subject th**
offender to a fil'D kereth, cr capital
cutting off.
3. The priest thai ,s anointed. That
is, the High Priest, as rendered Loth in
42
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
people ; then let him bring for his
sin which he hath sinned, ca young
bullock without blemish unto the
LoKD for a sin-offering.
4 And he shall bring the bullock
dunto the door of the tabernacle of
c ch. 9. 2.
ch. 1.
the Gr. and Chal.; for the High Priest
only was, in afler times, thus honored.
Lev. 21. 10. 16.32. Ex. 29. 29. Thus,
as the apostle says, ' The law made
those high priests who had infirmity,
and who needed daily to offer up sacri-
fices, first, for their own sins, and then
for the people's ;' but our High Priest,
Clirist Jesus, was holy, harmless, unde-
filed, and separate from sinners, and
made higher than the heavens. ——
IT S>in according to the sin of the people.
Heb. tS^n D?2*il"i^^ leashmath hddm, to
the guilt of the people, i. e. so as to
cause the people to transgress and bring
guilt upon themselves, by emboldening
them in iniquity by his pernicious ex-
ample, or involving them, in virtue of
the intimate relation subsisting between
priest and people, in the consequences
of his guilt. Thus 1 Chron.21, 3, ' Why
then doth my Lord require this thing?
Why will he bring a cause of trespass
(ri)2'^iO leashmah) to Israel ?' where
the word rendered ' cause of trespass,'
is the same with that occurring here, and
rendered ' sin.' Gr. rov tov "Saov auapreiv
so that the people sin. Vulg. ' delinquere
faciens populum,' so as to make the
people to offend. Chazkuni, a Jewish
commentator, explains it thus: 'To
make the people guilty, in that he hath
taught and permitted them to do a thing
forbidden.' IT A young bullock. Heb.
'npD *p 'IS par ben bakdr, a young
bullock, by which is meant one little
larger than a calf. It would almost
seem that there was ground for the re-
mark made by some, that in great
offences the sacrifices were compara-
tively small, lest it should be imagined
that pardon was obtained by the value
the congregation before the Lord
and shall lay iiis hand upon the
bullock's head, and kill the bullock
before the Lord.
5 And the priest that is anointed
eshall take of the bullock's blood,
e ch. ir,. 14. Numb. 19. 4.
of the offering. Here the word em-
ployed is "^5 par, properly a calf, while
the victim in the peace-offering was
Ti'J shor, an ox, though rendered less
strictly in our version a bullock. — r^
IT Let him bring for his sin for a
sin-offering. The same original word
^^^L:^ haltah,sin, is used in both cases.
This, as we already remarked, is the
name both for sin and the sin-offering ;
as the word piaculum was among the
heathen, which signified both a great
crime and the expiatory sacrifice for it.
See Rom. 8. 3. 2 Cor. 5. 21, where tho
word aixanna sin, is Used in the same
manner.
4. Shall lay his hands, ^-c. In the
trespass-offering and other sacrifices of
this nature, confession was joined with
the imposition of hands ; but in the sin-
offering it is not mentioned, though
some commentators have supposed it
was implied. But we prefer to adhere
to the simple letter of the record. But
that the offering was, or ought to have
been made in a penitent, believing, and
imploring frame of spirit, there can be
no doubt. 'Neither reconciliation-day
(Lev. 16.), nor sin-offering, nor tres-
pass-offering do make atonement, sav-
ing for theiTi that repent and believe in
their atonement.' — Maimonides. An-
other of the Jewish writers (Nitzachon,
p. 11) observes, ' When a man sacrificed
a beast he was to think, * I am more a
beast than this present ; for I liave sin-
ned, and for the sins which I have com-
mitted, I offer this animal ; though it
were more just that he who sinned
should suffer death than this beast.'
Wherefore by this sacrifice a man was
led to begin his repentance.'
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
43
and bring it to the tabernacle of
tlie congregation :
6 And the priest shall dip his fin-
ger in the blood, and sprinkle of
the blood seven times before the
Lord, before the vail of the sanc-
tuary.
7 And the priest shall ^put some
of the blood upon the horns of the
altar of sweet incense before the
LoED, Avhich is in the tabernacle
of the congregation ; and shall
pour gall the blood of the bullock
at the bottom of the altar of the
burnt-offering, which is at the door
of [he tabernacle of the congrega-
tion.
8 And he shall take off from it
I" ch. S. 15, and 9. 9, and 16. IS. g ch. 5. 9.
5. And bring it to the tabernacle of
the congregation. By which is nieaiit
that it should be brought into the very
sanctuary, as appears from what fol-
l(»ws. The preposition ^i^ c/, might
indeed properly have been rendered
intOj as in the cases mentioned in the
Note on p:x. 28. 30. Gr, £,s mv ok^v^v
into the tabernacle.
6. Sprinkle of the blood seven times.
A mystical number, signifying the full
iUid perfect cleansing oi sin, and carry-
ing with it also an implication of the
aggravated Keinousness of the offence as
committed by a priest j for this, it ap-
pears, was peculiar to this sacrifice for
sin, and to that for the whole congrega-
tion. We do not read of its being
adopted in any other case. It was to
be sprinkled towards the vail of the
sanctuary, where the Lord, who was to
be propitiated, dwelt, and from this
ceremony being practised in no other
instance save in that of the congrega-
tional offering, it would seem to imply
that in respect to offences of this nature,
there was peculiar need of the offerer's
having recourse to that ' blood of sprink-
ling,' which could alone speak peace to
his conscience. Tiie restoration of the
divine favor was not so easily obtained.
all the fat of the bullock for the
sin-offering; the fat that covereth
the inwards, and all the fat that is
upon the inwards,
9 And the two kidneys, and the
fat that is upon them, which is by
the flanks, and the caul above the
liver, with the kidneys, it shall he
take away,
10 I'As it was taken off from the
bullock of the sacrifice of peace-
offerings : and the priest shall burn
them upon the altar of the burnt-
offering.
11 JAnd the skin of the bullock,
and all his flesh, with his head,
and with his legs, and his inwards,
and his dung:
i>ch. 3.3,4, 5. iExod29. 14. Numb. 19. 6.
He must struggle for it. He must urge
the plea of atoning blood aguin and
again. ff Before the vail of the sanc-
tuary. Heb. iijip- rr^s ^:l^ ni<
cth pent paroketh hakkodesh, and be-
fore the vail of holiness. Gr. kutu to
KaTaiicrac-jxa ru ayiov before the holy vail.
The clause is plainly exegetic.il of the
preceding ' before the Lord,' which is
equivalent to ' before the Shekinah,' and
this we know had its residence in the
holy of holies, just behind the separat-
ing vail between the two apartments,
called in Heb. 9. 3, ' the second vail.'
7. And the priest shall put, ^-c. This
also was peculiar to this sacrifice, and
to that for the whole congregation, v.
17. The blood was thus applied to each
horn or spire of the incense-altar, pro-
bably to intimate that no intercessions
or prayers would be accepted from the
sinner till he was absolved from his
guilt by virtue of the atoning blood.
IT Shall pour all the blond ; i. e. all that
is left after the sprinkling. It could
not be absolutely all, but the quantity
of blood sprinkled in tiie sanctuary was
so snmll, that the remainder might,
without impropriety, be termed the
whole. During the Israelites' residence
in the wilderness, it is probable they
44
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
12 Even the whole bullock shall i him on the wood with fire: where
he carry forth without the camp | the ashes are poured out shall he
unto a' clean place, ^where the | be*burnt.
ashes are poured out, and iburn I , ^^^ ^^ ^^ , ^^^ ^3 ^^
lad receptacles under ground with con-
ct-yancos to carry off the blood. After j
ilse biiihiiiig of llio Temple, there were i
two holes, one on the west side of the |
ailur, the other on the south, by which
tlse blood was conveyed into d subter-
lUMcan channel, communicating with
the brook Kodrou.
12. Shail he carry forth uiUiout the
cantp. litb. i^":::"!" hotzi, he or one
shall carry forth ; undoubtedly an in-
siaiK-e i)t lii.it indefinite or impersonal
ioViii of ex: res^iiun, so common in He-
hicw, wheie the singular, like the
Ir r.eli 'on d i I, ' //i t'y say, has the im-
jHMi of ihe j.lural. And thus it is ren-
(Incd bnih here and in v. 21, by the Gr.
il'jiajvjii, they shall carry forth. So
isi V. 24, our ver-sion renders ' in the
place wliere they kill tlie burnt-offering,'
when the original is uH*.!)'^ yish'hat, he
or one kills. Tiiis is an idiom of very
extensive use and of the utmost import-
ance in tlie sacred writings. See it
more fully illustrated in the Note on
Lev. 1. 5. 'Ibis precept has a primary
reference to llie state of tiie Israelites
during their wandering in the wilder-
ness. After their settlement in Canaan
and the erection of the Temple at Jeru-
salem, they carried them out of the city.
Tlie sacrifice, now considered as having
the sin of the priest transferred from
himself to it, by his imjiosition of
hands, was become unclean and abomi-
nable, and was carried as it were out
of God's sight. The ceremony, there-
fore, was strikingly significant of the
sinfulness of this sin. The fat portions
only of the victim, with the kidneys
and caul, after be^ng detached from the
rest were to be burnt upon the allar.
No other part was to come near the
altar, nor was the least share of it per-
nutted to either priest or people, but it
was to be carried out of the camp skin
and all entire, and burnt in a fire on the
ground. By this was denoted the of-
ferer's being in a state of guilt, wholly
unworthy to communicate with God,
and like the offering itself, deserved to
be excluded the society of his people,
till reconciled by the sacrifice now made
in his stead. Thus Clirist, who was
made sin or a sin-oflering lor us, ' sul-
fered without the gate.' Even this
slight accordance of llie type and the
antitype serves to show how comjdetely
all the grand observaiues of the law
had their realization in liim. IT Burn
him on the wood with fire. Not upon
an altar, but on a fire made with woe u
upon the ground, to show the odiou:--
ness of the sin. As the v.hole burnt
sacrifices were barnt on the altar be-
cause they were an ' ofiering of sweet-
smelling savor to God,* so tins was burnt
without the camp upon the ground t >
show that the odor of it was ungrateli I
and abominable. IT Where the ash(6
are poured out. There were two place 6
where the ashes were poured, one by
the side of the altar where they weie
first laid, of which mention is inac'c
Lev. 1. 16 ; the olher, without the pr ;-
cincts of the camp, to uiiich, as to a
general receptacle, the aslies and otbor
refuse matter of the camp was conveyed.
The publicity here given to the burning
of the sin-oflering of the priest, might
be intended to convey u deeper impres-
sion of the enormity of his sin com])ared
j with that of the common people, al-
1 though the same thing was comuiauded
I in case the whole congregation had
sinned. There was, therefore, a pecu-
liar reproach attached to this sacrifice,
intimated by the repetition of the pre-
sent order— from the offence upon which
it was founded.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
45
13 II And mif the whole congre-
gation of Israel sin through igno-
rance, "and the thing be hid from
tlie eyes of the assembly, and they
hive done somewhat against any
of the commandments of the Lord
ciincerning things which should
nor be done, and are guilty ;
l-l When the sin which they have
sinned against it is known, then
t!)e congregation shall offer a young
i}ul!oclc fur the sin, and bring liim
befure the tabernacle of the con-
gregation.
15 And the elders of the congre-
gation oshall lay their hands upon
the head of the bullock before the
Lokd: and the bullock shall be
killed before the Lord.
■'■-' Nmnb. 15. 24. Josh. 7. 11.
3, 4, 17. " ch. 1. 4.
cli. 5. 2,
2.— The Sin-offering for the Whole
Congregation.
13. If the whole congregation sin.
This probably refers to some oversight
in acts of religious worship, or to some
transgression of the letter of the law
coramilted, not presumptuously, but
heedlessly, as in the case mentioned
1 Sam. 14. 32 ; where, after smiting the
Philistines, the Israelites ' flew upon
the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and
calves, and slew them on the ground :
and the people did eat them with the
blood.' This was a congregational sin.
The sacrifices and rites in this case
were the same as in the preceding ; only
here the elders laid their hands on the
head of the victim, in the name of all
the congregation. IT And the thing
he hid from the eyes of the assembly.
Heb. ^til^n haltkdhal, the word properly
BUiswering to our English word church,
as it is well rendered by Ainsworth.
Accordingly Stephen says of Moses,
Acts 7. 38, ' This is he tliat was in the
church in the wilderness witli the angel
that spake to him.' By ' the things
oeing hidden from their eyes,' is meant
16 pAnd the priest that is anoint-
ed shall bring of the bullock's blood
to the tabernacle of the congrega-
tion:
17 And the priest shall dip his
finger in some of the blood, and
sprinkle it seven times before the
Lord, even before the vail.
18 And he shall put some of the
blood upon the horns of the altar
which IS before the Lord, that is
in the tabernacle cf the congrega-
tion, and shall pour out all the
blood at the bottom of the altar of
the burnt-offering, which 2S at the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation.
19 And he shall take all his fat
from him, and burn it upon the
altar.
P ver. 5. Heb. 9. 12, 13, 14.
that they were not for the present sensi-
ble of their error or transgression. The
reference is to a case where they had
ignorantly or inadvertently committed
some act which they presumed at the
time to be lawful, but which subsequent
reflection or instruction convinced them
was sinful. In this case, as soon as
they came to a sense of their wrong-do-
ing, the elders, or heads of the tribes,
as the representatives of the whole body,
were to bring a young bullock to the
tabernacle and present it to the high-
priest, who was to offer it by way of
atonement for them, in the same man-
ner and with tlie same circumstances,
that he did the other for himself.
15. The elders shall lay their hands.
Not the priests in this case, but the
heads and magistrates of the nation,
who were seventy in number. As all
the people could not lay their hands
upon the bullock, it was sufficient that
it were done by the elders, or a part of
them, in the name of the congregation.
Maimonides says, that the number of
elders that officiated on this occasion
was three. This act denoted the faith
of the people in a coming Messiah, ' up-
46
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
20 And he shall do with the bul-
lock as he did qwith the bullock
for a sin-offering, so shall he do
witn this : rand the priest shall
make an atonement for them, and it
shall be ibrijiven them.
21 And he shall carry forth the
bullock without the camp, and burn
him as he burned the first bullock*
it is a sin-offering for the congre-
gation.
22 ^ When a ruler hath sinned,
and sdone somewhat through igno-
rance against any of the command-
ments of the Lord his God con-
cerinng things which should not
be done, and is guilty ;
23 Or tif his sin, wherein he hath
sinned, come to his knowledge ; he
iver. 3. fNum. 15. 25. Dan. 9- 24. Rom.
6. 11. Heb. 2. 17. and 10. 10, 11, 12. iJohn
1. 7. and 2. 2. => ver. 2. 13. ' \ er. 14.
on whom the Lord would lay the ini-
quity of us all. ^ Is. 53. 6.
Z.—The Sin-offering for the Ruler.
22. When a ruler hath sinned. Heb.
fc^iIL^: nasi, prince, i. e. one preferred,
elevated, advanced above others j from
S^TTj ndsd, to lift up. It is a common
a])pellalion both of supreme and subor-
dinate rulers, and is very frequently
used to signify the head of a tribe.
The Jews understand it peculiarly of
the head or prince of the great Sanhe-
drim, who was the king himself, while
they were under kingly government;
but it seems more reasonable lo under-
stand it of all the great officers or ma-
gistrates ; any one who held any kind
of political dignity among the people.
IT And is guilty, or if his sin come
to his knowledge ; i.e. if he is presently
reminded of it by the checks of his own
conscience, or if after a time it be sug-
gested to him by others. The ceremo-
nies in this case differed from those in
the case of the offering of the anointed
priest, inasmuch as the blood of the
ruler's sin-offering, which was a kid of
shall bring his offering, a kid of the
goats, a male without blemish :
24 And "he shall lay his hand
upon the head of the goat, and kill
it in the place where they kill the
burnt-offering before the Lord : it
is a sin-offering.
25 "And the priest shall take of
the blood of the sin-offering with
his finger, and put it upon the
horns of the altar of burnt-offering,
and shall pour out his blood at the
bottom of the altar of burnt-of-
fering.
26 And he shall burn all his fat
upon the altar, as ythe fat of the
sacrifice of peace-offerings : zand
the priest shall make an atonement
for him as concerning his sin, and
it shall be forgiven him.
'-1 ver. 4, &c- ^ ver. 30. y ch. 3. 5. ^ ver.
20- Num. 15. 28.
the goats instead of a bullock, was not
to be brought into the tabernacle, but
was all to be bestowed upon the brazen
altar, nor was the flesh of it to be burnt
without the camp ; which intimated
that the sin of a ruler, thouglj worse
than that of a common person, was not
so heinous as of tliat of the high priest,
or of the whole congregation.
25. Put it upon the horns of the altar.
In every sacrifice for sin the horns of
one or other of the altars were required
to be touched with the blood, but with
this difference, that in the sacrifice for
the sins of the high priest and the
people, when the blood of the victim
was brought into the sanctuary, the
horns of the altar of incense were
sprinkled, in others, those of the altar
of holocaust.
26. He shall burn all his (i. e. its) /a?
upon the altar. Nothing is here said,
as in the case of two of the previous
offerings, v. 12, 21, which were to be
burnt without the camp, of the disposal
that should be made of the flesh of the
the victim. But in Lev. 6. 26, 2.9, and
Num. IS. 9, 10, the prescribed law of
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IV.
47
27 TI And aif any one of the com-
mon peop-ie sin through ignorance,
while he doeth somewhat against
any of the commandments of the
Lord concerning tlivigs which
ought not to be done, and be guilty ;
28 Or bjf his sin which he Jiath
sinned come to Jiis knowledge ;
then he shall bring his offering, a
kid of the goats, a female without
blemish, for his sin which he hath
sinned.
29 cAnd he shall lay his hand
Upon the head of the sin-offering,
and slay the sin-offering in the
place of the burnt-offering.
30 And the priest shall take of
the blood thereof with his finger,
and put it upon the horns of the
altar of burnt-offering, and shall
pour out all the blood thereof at
the bottom of the altar.
31 And dhe shall take away all
the fat thereof, eas the fat is taken
a ver. 2. Num. 15. 27. b ygr. 23. c yer. 4.
24. 't ch. 3. 14. ech. 3. 3.
the Sin-offering is, that the priest and
his sons should eat it in the sanctuary,
and no where else ; provided that they
were free from uncleanness.
4. — The Sin-offering for one of the
common people.
27. Jf any one of the common people.
Heb. y^i^n 'D^'!2 nm t'CD Di< im ne-
phesh ahath meam hddretz, if one soul
of the people of the land ; i, e. as
rightly rendered, any of the common
people, whether private Israelite, priest,
or Levite, with the exception of the
high priest and ruler mentioned above.
28. A kid of the goats. This was
the ordinary sacrifice prescribed on such
occasions : but when the poverty of the
offerer prevented such an oblation, one
of less value was appointed ; Lev. 5.
]1, 12. The ceremonies were nearly
the same as in the preceding cases.
31. For a sweet savor unto the Lord.
A.Ilhough this phrase is used concerning
; away from off the sacrifice of
I peace-offerings ; and the priest
shall burn it upon the altar for a
I fsweet savour unto the Lord : gand
the priest shall make an atonement
I for him, and it shall be forgiven
him.
I 32 And if he bring a lamb for a
I sin-offering, hhe shall bring it a
female without blemish.
33 And he shall lay his hand up-
on the head of the sin-offering,
and slay it for a sin-offering in the
place where they kill the burnt-
offering.
34 And the priest shall take of
the blood of the sin-offering with
his finger, and put it upon the
horns of the altar of burnt-offering,
and shall pour out all the blood
thereof at the bottom of the altar:
35 And he shall take away all
the fat thereof, as the fat of the
lamb is taken away from the sacri-
fExod. 29. 18. ch. 1. 9. ETCr2G. '>ver,
23.
the burnt-offering and the peace-offer-
ing, yet it is nowhere said of the fore-
going sin-offerings ; ' the reason of
which,' says Bp. Patrick, ' I am not
able to give, unless it were to comfort
the lowest sort of people with the hope
of God's mercy, though their offerings
were mean compared with those of
others.'
33. And slay it for a sin-offering in
the place where they kill the burnt-
offering. Here again the Gr. gives
correctly the plural form a6a^ov<Tiv they
shall slay, just as our translation in the
same clause renders t:n'i;'i yish'hat,
though singular, they kill, they are
accustomed to kill,
35. According to the offerings made by
fire unto the Lord. Heb. mn"i "'tZJit "^^
al ishe Yehovah ; which may be render-
ed, upon, with, or beside the offerings
Tuade by fire ; i. e. in addition to the
burnt-offerings which were daily con-
sumed upon the altar. As for the flesh
4S
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
fice of the peace-offerings ; and the
priest shall burn them upon the
altar, iaccording to the offerings
made bv fire unto the Lord : ^and
or bodies of this and the foregoing Sin-
offering of the rulers, they were not,
like iliose of the high priest and the con-
gregation, burnt without the camp, but
were eaten by the priests, as directed,
Lev. 6. 26-30.
Remarks. — (2.) Sins of ignorance,
though of less guilt than sins of pre.
sumption, do as really need the blood
of atonement, and as truly form the
matter of repentance, as any others.
(2.) From the fact that greater sacri-
fices and more burdensome rites were
appointed for the priest and the prince
than for private persons, it is evident
that the sins of some men are of a more
heinous character, more scandalous and
pernicious, than those of others. Per-
sons occupying a public station, which
makes them conspicuous, cannot sin
with impunity, however it may be with
others.
(13.) As there might be among the
people of Israel a sin of the whole con-
gregation, so at the present time there
may be a sin of the whole nation, which
needs, as it were, a national atonement.
(28.) 'If his sin come to his know-
ledge.' Whenever conscience charges
upon us former sins committed, whether
against God or man, we are bound to
make restitution, though years may
have elapsed since the event occurred.
CHAPTER V.
THE TRESPASS- OFFERING.
The original word for Trespass-offer-
ing is tDCi^ dshdm, from a root of the
same letters Q:L"&^ dsham, to fail in
duty, to transgress, to be guilty, or, as
It is for the most rendered in our ver-
sion to trespass. The leading idea is
plainly that of guilt, and it is exten-
sively admitted by lexicographers that
the priest shall make an atonement
for his sin that he hath committed,
and it shall be forgiven him.
■ cli. 3. 5. k ver 2C, 31.
the degree of guilt denoted by the term
is greater than that denoted by the word
i^tsn ^lultd, to sin, Irom which comes
the appropriate term for sin-offerings.
The Trespass- offerings, as we have
already remarked, so greatly resembled
the Sin-offerings, that it is by no means
easy to distinguish between them. The
occasions on which they were offered
were much the same, and the ceremo-
nies much t.he same also. Indeed, v/e
sometimes have the same oblations
called interchangeably Sin-offerings
and Trespass-offerings, as particularly
Lev. 5. 6-S: 'And he shall bring his treS'
pass-offering (1?2T!^ ashflino) unto the
Lord for his sin which he hath sinned,
(Hi2n "ir&5 iriJitsn ^S" al 'hatlatho asher
^hdtd) a female from the flock, a lamb
or a kid of the goats, for a sin-offering.
And if he be not able to bring a lamb,
then he shall bring for his trespass uhich
he hath committed (i^tJn "I'lL'S^ ^TZ'^iH
ashdmo asher 'hutd) two turtle-doves,
or two young pigeons, unto the Lord ;
one for a sin-offering (nt^t^np lehat'
tdth) and the other for a burnt-offering.'
Here it is observable that the offence
committed is called indifferently a sin
smd a trespass, and the sacrifice offered,
a trespass-offering and a sin-offering.
Notwithstanding this there were marked
points of difference between the two.
Sin-offerings were sometimes offered for
the whole congregation ; Trespass-offer-
ings never but for particular persons.
Bullocks were sometimes used for Sin-
offerings, never for Trespass-offerings.
The blood of the Sin-offering was put
on the horns of the altar ; that of the
Trespass-offering was only sprinkled
round about the bottom of the altar.
Still we are left in ignorance of the pre-
cise nature of the distinction, or for
Avhat reasons the law in one case pre-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER V.
49
scribed one, and in another the other.
Lightfoot, guided by rabbinical author-
ity, mikes the difference to consist in
shis, that both indeed were offered for
the same sort of transgressions, but the
frt^ dshum, or trespass-offering was to
be offered when it was doubtful whe-
ther a person had transgressed or not ;
:i.s for instance, suppose that he had
eaten fat, and was afterwards in doubt
^vliether it was the fat belonging to the
muscular flesh, wliich was lawful to be
e.iicn, or the fat of the inwards, which
was unlawful 5 then he was to offer an
d'i^ (ishnm. But if it were certain,
•ind he knew that he had trespassed, he
must offer the ni^t^n ^hattddh, or sin-of-
fering. Maimonides is of opinion that
the offences for which the tlTSi dshdm
was offered were inferior to those for
wiiich the nj^t^n ^hattddh was offered.
Bochart, on the other hand, and we
think with much better reason, holds
that the offences expiated by C^i^
dshdm were more grievous than those
expiated by Hiit:!! 'hattudk. Aben
Ezra makes nj^tsn 'hattddh to signify
a sacrifice offered for purging offences
committed through ignorance of the
law ; t"i-K dshdm for such as were
committed through forgetfulness of it.
Otliers again make the difference to be,
that the ni^tsn ^hattddh was for offences
proved by witnesses ; the Q'i'i^ dshdm
for secret faults known to others only
by the offender's confession. But
against all these "hypotheses very spe-
cious objections may be urged, and it
is therefore to the following that we
are disposed to give the preference.
It is contended, and we think upon
very plausible grounds, by several dis-
titiguished critics, that the class of
offences to which the word QlTii dshdm
is applied, although ultimately com-
mitted against God, were yet always,
or generally, such as involved an injury
towards one's neighbor ; and in this
sense they affirm that our English word
trespass is its most suitable representa-
tive. It is certain, as a matter of fact,
5
that most of the offences which were to
be expiated by the Trespass-offering
w^ere of this character. Indeed, Outram,
whose authority on this subject is per-
haps of more weight than that of any
other writer, observes that in all cases
where the Q"J;;!^% dshdni was required,
there was some wrong or injury done
to a neighbor, except in the case of the
Nazarile defiled by the dead, Num.
6. 12, and of the leper, Lev. 14. 12.
Still we cannot positively affinn that
this is the designed import of the
term, and are obliged therefore to leave
the matter enveloped more or less in
that cloud of obscurity which, as we
have already remarked in the introduc-
tion to the preceding chapter, rests upon
the distinction between the Sin and the
Trespass-offering. Thus much however
is clear, that the class of offences for
which the Trespass-offering was to be
brouglit included those which, though
not amounting to wilful and presumptu-
ous acts, were yet usually committed
against knowledge, and were therefore
of a higher grade of guilt than the sins
of mere ignorance and infirmity which
were contemplated by the Sin-ofterings.
Several such are mentioned in the com-
mencement of this chapter, viz. the
concealing of any part of the truth by a
witness properly adjured ; the touching
any unclean person or thing ; and the
swearing rashly that he would do what
might be sinful, or what he might not
be able to perform. In all these cases
a female lamb or kid was to be offered,
and confession made of guilt. The
ceremonies of oblation were precisely
the same as those of the Sin-offering,
except that the blood, instead of being
put upon the horns of the altar, was to
be sprinkled round about the altar. If
the offender was too poor to give a
lamb, he was to bring two turtle-doves
or two young pigeons, the one for this
particular sin wiiich burdened his con-
science, the other for a burnt-offering
for his sins in general ; making expia-
tion first for that ia which he had more
ao
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
immediately offended. If even this was
beyond liis means, the tenth part of an
ephah of flour, or about five pints, might
be subsiiiutcd.
Another class of offences to which
this offering }iad reference, was that in
which some trespass was committed
ignoranlly or undes«ignedly against the
holy tilings of the Lord, Lev. 5. 15 com-
pared with Lev. 22. These were things
dedicated to the Lord under the cere-
monial law, or prescribed or prohibited
by its rules, and were very numerous.
Thus if one had unwittingly kept back
any of the required offerings, or had
eaten witiiin his private gates the tithes
that belonged to the priests, or had
failed to sanctify the firstlings of the
males ; in these cases he was to bring
as a Trespass-offering a ram without
blemish. But besides this, he was to
make restitution, with the addition of
the fifth part, according to the estimate
formed by the priest. Nay, if he even
only suspected that he had offended in
any of these holy things, he was to
bring the ram as a Trespass-offering,
and to pay the estimated value, but
without the addition of the twenty per
cent.
A third class of offences were those
ol" a somewhat deeper dye — certain
open and wilful injuries and violaiioas
of law, such as thefts, violence, false-
swearing, deceit and fraud. ' If a soul
sin and commit a trespass against tlie
Lord, and lie against his neighbor, &c.'
Thus if one denied what liad been com-
mitted to his trust, or dealt fraudulently
in any concern of partnership, or took
any thing away by open violence, or
secretly deceived his neighbor to his
loss, or denied having found that which
was lost ; in all these cases the delin-
quent must bring a ram for a Trespass-
offering, and must pay the value, esti-
mated by the priest, oi the injury done,
with the addition of the fifth part there-
of. Doing thus, it was said that < the
priest should make an atonement for
him before the Lord, and it should be
forgiven him for any thing of all that
he haih done in trespassing llierein.'
On the general subject of the Sin and
Trespass-offerings we may remark,
that while the purpose and design of
these various ceremonies have been dis-
closed so far as they can convey moral
or spiritual knowledge to oar minds,
there is doubtless much in the esternal
forms that must be referred to the sove-
reign will of God. No other satfsfac-
lory reason can be assigned for the
requirement in certain cases of one of
these species of offerings rather than
another, than that it was the divine
pleasure so to have it. In the ordi-
nances before us it is clear, that the
wilful sins for which a ram was the
largest offering required, were greater
than those infirmities for which a bul-
lock was demanded. If the atonement
had really lain in the type, this would
have borne almost an appearance of in-
justice. But as it was no doubt intend-
ed by every kind of expiation to fix the
attention upon the Great Atonement
thereafter to be made for all sin, the
intrinsic value of the particular offering
was a matter of comparatively little
importance. Indeed it is very conceiv-
able, as we have already remarked,
that a sacrifice of less value may have
been ordained for sins of greater enor-
mity with tlie express purpose of con-
veying the intimation that the atoning
virtue was not in the sacrifice, but in
the better blood which was to be shed
at a future day on Calvary. Com|iared
with this every typical prefiguration,
even the most costly that could be de-
vised fell so infinitely short in value,
that it might have been a special aim
of divine wisdom to ordain a less in
order the more forcibly to impress up-
on the mind the intrinsic inefiicacy of
a greater.
But while it was not especially im-
portant for the worshipper to know why
one animal was chosen to expiate one
sin, and another another, it was import*
aat for him to know that for every par-
B.C. 1490.]
CHAPTER V.
51
CHAPTER V.
\ ND if a soul sin, aand hear the
•^^^ voice of swearing, and is a
'^ 1 Kings 8.31. Matt. 26. 63.
ticular sin there was a remedy pro-
vided I so that no man need incur the
divine wrath, either by reason of his
most secret faults or his most flagrant
violations of ilie law. This is the very
essence ofgospel truth. No sin, not
even the smallest or most unintentional,
could be forgiven without a sacrifice.
But no man need await the judicial
punishment. As soon as he knew his
fault, or suspected it, he had his reme-
dy. He knew what he was to do. If
he did it not the condemnation that en-
sued was self-procured. It was not the
fault of the law, nor the fault of the
judge, nor the fault even of liis own
Kalural weakness or infirmit)'^, if the
evil he had committed was not forgiven
him. This is the gospel. Wliatever
men may think of their natural condi-
tion as an extenuation of their sins ;
liowever they may venture to impugn
the justice that assures their punish-
ment ; this at least cannot be gain-
sayed — the remedy is provided ; the
atonement is made known ; the mode
of making it personably available is
clearly stiitcd ; it is efficacious for
every sin ; it is within the reach of
every sinner. Christ by his one obla-
tion has made satisfaction for the sins
of the whole world. If any man chooses
to abide the consequences of his trans-
j^ressions, rather tlian seek forgiveness
in the way prescribed, the condemna-
tion is his own deliberate choice.
Various offences of Infirmity or Inad-
vertence for which the Trespass-offer-
ing was prescribed.
? — In concealing Knowledge. \
I. And hear the voice of swearing.
Heb. n^S5 b^P n>*?:iLn veshameuh kol \
dlah, and hear the voice of adjuration, [
execration, or oath. That is, when one [
witness, whether he hath seen or
known of it. ; if he do not utter tt,
then he shall bbear his iniquity.
" ver. 17.
and 20. 17
ch. 7 18, and 17. 10, and 19. S,
Numb. 9. 13.
is adjured or put upon his oath as a wit-
ness of any fact whicli is brought into
legal question. Tiie precept does not,
it would seem, relate to the duty of in-
Ibrming against a common profane
swearer, hut to the case of one who is
summoned to give evidence before the
civil magistrate. Judges, auiong the
Jews, had power to adjure not only the
witnesses, but the person suspected
(contrary to the criminal jurisprudence
of modern times, wliich requires no man
to accuse himself), as appears from the
high priest's adjuring our Savior, who
thereupon answered, though lie had be-
fore been silent, Mat. 26. 63, 64. So
the apostle says, 1 Thess. 5. 27, ' I
charge (adjure) you by llie Lord that
this epistle be read unto all the holy
brethren.' Now if a person < heard tiie
voice of swearing,' i. e. if he were ad-
jured by an oath of the Lord to testify
what he knew in relation to atjy matter
of fact in question, and yet through fear
or favor refused to give evidence, or
gave it but in part, he was to ' bear his
iniquity ;' i. e. to bear the punishment
of liis iniquity, if he repented not and
brought not tiie appointed sacrifices It
seems to be implied that sucii an one
should be considered in the sight of God
as guilty of the transgression which he
has endeavored to conceal, as may be
inferred from Prov. 29. 24, ' Whoso is
partner with a thief, hateth his own
soul : he heareth cursing and bewrayeth
it not ;' i. e. he hears the words of the
magistrate adjuring him, and binding
his soul under the penally of a ' curse'
to declare the whole truth, yet he ' be-
wrayeth,' or uttereth it not ; he persists
in wickedly stifling his evidence and
concealing the facts ; surely such an
one is a ' partner' with the culprit, and
by exposing himself to the consequences
82
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 149a
2 Or cif a soul touch any unclean j
thing, whether it be a carcass of |
an unclean beast, or a carcass of j
unclean caitle, or the carcass of,
unclean creeping things, and if it
be hidden from him ; he a4so shall
be unclean, and <^guilty.
3 Or if he touch cihe uncleanness
c ch. 11. 24, 28, 31, 39. Numb. 19 11, 13,
16. ti ver 17. « ch. 12. and 13. and i;5.
of thus williholding the truth, may be
jiisliy said to ' hate his own soul.'
IT And is a witness. The Hebrew can-
ons speak of four different kinds of
oaths; (1.) The oath of pronouncing a
thing (of which see v. 4) ; (2.) Vain
or rash oaths (forbidden Ex. 20. 7) ;
(3.) the oath concerning that which
was delivered to keep ; (4.) the oath
of witness, here mentioned. This they
explain as follows ; ' As wlien witnesses
ciiu give testimony concerning goods,
and the owner rcquirelh them to wit-
ness, and they deny that they can give
testimony, and swear that they cannot,
&,c., lor such an oath they are to bring
the sacrifice here appointed.' — Mai'
monides. IT Whether he hath seen or
known of it. That is, whether it be a
matter which has come under his own
personal knowledge, or which he has
learnt from the information of others.
The spirit of the precept seems to re-
quire a voluntary rendering of testimony
when it was known that information
was sought, as well as a true and faith-
ful declaration when summoned by le-
gal process. IT He shall bear his ini-
quity. Heb. y^[2^ i^rDl venasd avono.
The whole clause may perhaps be
rendered, ' If he do not utter it, and
shall bear his iniquity,' i. e. shall con-
sequently remain subject to the wrath
of God, and liable to condign punish-
ment ; implying that this is a part of
the sinful condition embraced under
the hypothetic particle ' ?/,' which is
not an improbable sense. And so in
respect to the final clause of the three
ensuing verses, we may regard it as
of man, whatsoever uncleanness it
be that a man shall be defiled
withal, and it be hid from him;
when he knowelh of it, then he
shall be guilty.
4 Or if a soul swear, pronouncing
v/ith his lips ho do evil, or gto do
good, whatsoever it be that a man
f See 1 Sam. 25. 22. Acts 23. 12. e See
Mark 6. 23.
a mere continuation of the conditional
language of the verse, and not as declar-
ative of the divine sentence respecting
the offender. This declaration or ap-
pointment is reserved to the olh and 6th
verses, where the corresponding duty ib
enjoined. In the original each of these
clauses is introduced by tii'; particle
' and,' which would seem to have been
improperly omitted by our own and
most other translators.
2. — In touching an unclean Thing.
2. If a soul touch any unclean thing,
whether it be, ^-c. Tliat is, either the
dead body of a clean animal, or the
living or dead body of an unclean crea-
ture. All such persons were required
to wash themselves and their clothes in
clean water, and were considered as
unclean until evening. Lev. 11. 8,24.31.
IT If it be hidden from him. That
is, if he be not aware of the uncleanness
which he has contracted, and goes on
to do those things which he would not
be at liberty to do, provided he were
conscious of his defilement, such as en-
tering the tabernacle or eating of holy
things, then when he comes to be ac-
quainted with the fact he shall look
upon himself as * unclean,' just as if he
knowingly touched the unclean thing,
and consequently excluded from divine
worship till he had offered the sacrifice
appointed v. 6.
3. — In touching an unclean Person.
3. Or if he touch the uncleanness, ^c.
These different kinds of uncleanness
are afterwards specified in detail, Lev.
11-15, where see Notes.
B.C. 1490.]
CHAPTER V.
53
shall pronounce with an oath, and i be guilty in one of these things^
it be hid from him; when he know- that he shall ^confess that he hath
eth of it, then he shall be guilty sinned in that thing:
in one af these.
5 And it shall be, when he shall
4. — In taking a rash Oath.
A. If a soul swear, pronouncing with
his lips, ^-c. That is, when a man
swears raslily that he will or will not
do such and such a thing, as David, that
he would kill Nabal ; Jeplhah, that he
would sacrifice to the Lord whatsoever
should meet him coming out of his
doors, &c. The original word 5<t3D
bcltd, rendered pronounce, has the im-
port of rashly, inconsiderately, or fool-
ishly uttering any thing, as may be
seen, Ps. 106. 33, where it is said of
Moses I hat ' he spake unadvisedly (Heb.
t^tjD"' yehatta) with his lips.' So Pro v.
12. 18, 'There is that speaketh (Heb.
fcitOl bote, speaketh rashly) like the
piercings of a sword.' Thus also Num.
30. 6, 8, the phrase ' uttered ought with
her lips,' is in Heb. i-:;t2Il?2 mibta, the
rash or incautious utterance of the lips.
From the Heb. root is probably formed
the Gr. /Surros battos, and (ia-Tu\oyia
baltologia, rash, vain, heedless speaking,
which occurs Mat. 6. 7, 'But when
ye pray use not vain repetitions (Gr.
pa-To\<iyia battologiu) as the heathens
do ;' i. e. do not indulge in rash or in-
considerate professions ; speak not un-
advisedly lo your Maker in prayer,
either in making vows or promises,
whatever may be the warmth of your
devotions. The import of the precept
is doubtless the same as that contained
Eccl.5.2. ' Be not rash with liiy iiiouth,
and let not thine heart be hasty lo utter
any thing before God.' The present
rendering, ' vain repetitions,' does not
seem to be warranted by sufficient au-
thority.— As to the law itself, * it served
very eiTectually,' says Michaelis, ' to
maintain the honor of oaths, inasmuch
as every oath, liowever inconsiderate,
or unlawful, or impossible, was con-
h ch. 16.21. and :26. 40.
10. 11, 12.
Numb. 5. 7. Ezra
sidered so far obligatory, that it was
necessary to expiate its non-fulfilment
j by an offering ; and it was at the same
time, the best possible means of wean-
ing the people from rash oaths, because
the man who had become addicted to
that unbecoming practice, would find
himself too frequently obliged either to
keep his oaths, how great soever the
inconvenience, or else to make offerings
for their atonement.' — Comment, on
Laws of Moses, v. 4, p. 111. IT And
it be hid from him. It supposes that he
did not rightly understand or duly con-
sider the circumstances of his swearing,
as whether the object were lawful, or
the performance of it in his power. If
these matters were ' hidden from him,'
or he was not properly aware of them,
he was bound to atone for the hastiness
and rashness of his oath by a sacrifice.
^ Then he shall be guilty in one of
these. Rather, ' and he shall be guilty
in one of these,' i. e. one of the three
cases above propounded.
5. When he shall be guilty in one of
these things. That is, in one of the four
j sins just mentioned. The words seem
to be merely a repetition of the final
I clause of the preceding verse.
j IT Shall confess. At the same time
! laying his hands on the head of the vie-
j tim, in token of his faith in the great
j atoning sacrifice. The offering was not
I acceptable unless accompanied with a
penitential confession, and an humble
prayer for pardon. The form of the
confession was substantially this: 'I
I have sinned ; I have dune iniquity; I
; have trespassed, and have done thus and
thus • and do return my repentance before
ihee ; and with this 1 make atonement.'
The animal was then considered to
bear vicariously the sins of the persoa
who brought it.
5$
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
6 And he shall bring his trespass-
offering unto the Lord for his sin
•which he hath sinned, a female
from the flock, a lamb or a kid of
the goals, for a sin-offering; and
the priest shall make an atonement
for him concerning his sin.
6. He shall bring his trespass-offering.
Heb. I^^Ti* ashdmo, which may be ren-
dered guilt-offering, as ihe original
t'lTJ^ asham properly signifies guilti-
ness or trespass, just as the word ren-
dered '' sin-offering,' ch. 4, literally sig-
nifies sin or traiisgression. The one as
well as the other pointed to Christ, of
whom it is said, Is. 53. 10, ' Thou shall
make his soul an offering for sin (D"^!^
asham, a guilt or trespass-offering).'
^ The priest shall make an atone-
ment for him. As the atonement was
not accepted without his repentance, so
his repentance would not justify him
without the atonement. In regard to
the excellent uses of this feature of the
general system of Levitical laws, we
cite the remarks of Prof. Palfrey : — ' If
an offence were committed in ignorance,
the offender, it is true, would not be
culpable, except for having neglected
to inform himself concerning the char-
acter of his act. But his sin done una-
wares might injure his neighbor as much
as if it had been committed against
light ; and society is interested in pre-
venting that ignorance of the law among
its members which allows them to do
it harm. He who had unintentionally
transgressed a law, then, being called
on, as soon as he came to know the ille-
gality of what had been done, to put
himself to expense because of it, found
himself addressed by a motive to avoid
such a mistake in future ; in other
words, to acquaint himself wii^h the law.
The presumptuous offender was pun-
ished, in the form of a Sin or Trespass-
offering, by a fine, by which he ' made
atonement,' just as in our daj', a man
has made his atonement, or his recon-
ciliation, with the society whose laws
7 And iif he be not able to bring
a lamb, then he shall bring for his
trespass which he hath committed,
two kiurile-doves, or two young
pigeons, unto the Lord; one for a
' ch. 12. 8. and 14. 21. k ch. 1. 14.
he has violated, when he has served out
the time of l)is sentence in prison, or
paid the prescribed pecuniary penalty.
To a man who liad offended witliout
detection, except by his own conscience,
the system would have an admirable
application. Ii would never suffer his
conscience to sleep, till he had informed
against himself. It would be perpetu-
ally addressing him with the offer to
restore him to a fair standing, and to
self-respect, as soon as he would come
forward, avow his offence, present his
offering, or (to phrase it differently)
pay his fine, and make restitution to
those whom he had injured, if the case
was such, as to admit of this being
done. And, once more, the system was
of excellent influence in putting llie le-
gal penalty of fine in the form of a re-
ligious offering. The wrong-doer, while
he gave satisfaction to the slate, and
paid the fine of his delinquency, was
thus reminded, that it was not only
against the state that he had offended,
and was at the same time made to ex-
press the penitence of his heart to God.'
— Led. on Jew. Antiq. vol. ],p. 250.
7. And if he be not able to bring a
lamb. Heb. nr "^l 11^ 3?":i:^ 1*3 t&^ im
lo taggia yudo dt seh, if his hand reach
not to the svffciency (or value) of a
lamb. This was ordained that the
means of atonement might be within
the ability of all classes. In reference
to these offerings, Maimonides says,
' If a poor man brought the oblation of
the rich, he was accepted; but if the
rich brought the oblaiion of the poor,
he was not accepted.' Pigeons were so
plenteous in Palestine and the neigh-
boring countries, that he must have oeen
poor indeed, who could not afford a pair.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER V.
55
sin-offerinf^, and the other for a
ournt-offering.
S And he shall bring them unto
the priest, who shall offer thai
which is for the sin-otfering first,
and Uvring off his head from his
neck, but shall not divide iL asun-
der :
9 And he shall sprinkle of the
blood of the sin-offering upon the
side of tiie altar; and '"the rest of
the blood shall be wrung out at
the bottom of the altar : it z5 a sin-
offering.
10 And he shall offer the second
I c!i. 1. 15. m ch. 4. 7, IS, 30, 34.
Adrichomius, the traveler, tells us that
there was a single lower to tiie south
of Jerusalem, in which 5000 doves
nestled. Maundrell also remarks of
Kefteen, in Syria, that ' the adjacent
fields abounding wilh corn give the in-
habitants great advantage for breeding
pigeons, insomuch that you here find
more dove-cotes than other houses.'
IT One for a sin-offering, and the
other for a burnt-offering ; it being
necessary for the sinner first to have
his peace made wilh God by the sin-
ofTering, in order to have his burnt-of-
fering or gift accepted.
S. Wring off his head. Rather ' pinch
or nip the head with the nail,' as ex-
plained in the Note on Lev. 1. 15. It
does not appear that the head was to
be quite separated from the body.
10. According to the manner. Heb.
tjSlL'^OlD kammishpat, according to the
judgment, i. e. according to the ordi-
nance or statute ; the original term
tiiD'I^'O mishpdt being used to signify
the prescribed mode of doing any thing,
particular in the matter of religious
services. IT For his sin. Heb.
ins^tsn?^ mVhattatho, from his sin ;
1. e. cleansing him from it.
11. Btit if he be not able to bring tico
turtle-doves. The kind consideration
of the ability and circumstances of the
offenderj which distinguishes all these
for a burnt-offering, according to
the "manner: oand the priest shall
make an atonement for him for his
sin which he hath sinned, and.it
shall be forgiven him.
11 H But if he be not able to bring
two turtle-doves, or two young pi-
geons; then he that sinned shall
bring lor his offering the tenth part
of an cphah of fine flour for a sin-
offering; qhe shall put no oil upon
it, neither shall he put any frank-
incense thereon : for it is a sin-of-
fering.
12 Then shall he bring it to the
" ch. 1. 14. och. 4. 26. p Numb. 5. 15.
statutes, appears very conspicuous here.
If any one were so impoverished that
even an offering of tv;o or three birds
were not easily within his reach, then a
slight oblation of flwur was acceptable
in its stead. But while we admire the
graciousness of heaven in this respect,
let us not fail to observe that the offence
was invariably to be followed by 5om«
kind of atonement, in order to generate
habits ol' the utmost vigilance and cir-
cumspection in all their deportment.
' God may be represented,' says R. Levi,
' as declaring in this precept. It is not
my will that such things should be done ;
but if any man commit them through
frailty, let him repent heariily, and
keep a stricter guard over himself in
future. Let him offer sacrifices which
may serve to imprint the remembrance
of his guilt on his mind, and likewise
to prevent him from offending again.'
The prescribed offering in this case was
the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour,
or about three quarts, as the ephah con-
tained a little more than seven gallons
and a half. This was to be offered
without oil, not only because that would
make it too costly for the poor, but be-
cause it was a sin-oflering, and there,
fore to show the loathsomeness of the
sin for which it was offered, it must not
be grateful either to the taste by oil, or
to the smell by frankincense.
56
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
priest, and the priest shall take his
handful of it, q even a memorial
thereof, and burn it on the aliar,
^according to the offerings made
by fire unto the Lord : it is a sin-
offering.
13 sAnd the priest shall make an
atonement for him as touching his
sin that he hath sinned in one of
these, and it shall be forgiven him :
and t the remnant shall be the
priest's, as a meat-offering.
14 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
15 ulf a soul commit a trespass,
and sin through ignorance, in the
holy things of the Lord ; then "he
n ch. 2. 2. r ch. 4. 35- s ch. 4. 26. ' ch.
2. 3. '-" ch. 22. 14. ^ Ezra 10. 19.
12. Shall take his handful of it.
Heb. 12?:p aa'^'n r.^f2 V?:p kametz
mimmenu melo kamtzo, shall grasp of
it the fulness of his grasping. This
was peculiar to all the meat-offerings,
that a handful as a memorial should be
burnt on the altar, while the remainder
was eaten by the priests, except in the
case of the priests' own ofierings of this
kind, which were all burnt, as appears
from Lev. 6. 16,22,23. TT According
to the offerings. See Note on Lev. 4. 35.
13. In one of these. That is, by one
of these three before mentioned sacri-
fices, either that of a lamb, or of two
turtle-doves or young pigeons, or of
fine flour, Rashi observes that as there
were three classes of men, the rich, the
poor, and the very poor ; so there are
three kinds of offerings prescribed in
this chapter, adapted to the circum-
stances of these several classes.
5. — For a Trespass committed through
Ignorance.
14. J/ a soul commit a trespass. Heb.
'^^f2 ^y?2n timal maal, trespass a tres-
pass. The original word is different
from that which has hitherto been ren-
dered trespass, and has mainly the im-
shall bring for his trespass unto the
Lord a ram without blemish out
of the flocks, with thy estimation
by shekels of silver, after ythe she-
kel of the sanctuary, for a trespass-
offering :
16 And he shall make amends for
the harm that he hath done in the
holy thing, and zshall add the fifth
part thereto, and give it unto the
priest ; aand the priest shall make
an atonement for him with the ram
of the trespass-offering, and it shall
be forgiven him.
17 If And if a ^soul sin, and com-
mit any of these things which arc
forbidden to be done by the com-
y Exod. 30. 13. ch. 27 25. z ch. 6. 5. and
22. 14. and 27. 13, 15, 27, 31. Numb. 5. 7.
a ch. 4. 26. b ch. 4. 2-
port of prevaricating or dealing fraud-
ulenlly, especially in matters of religion.
IT In the holy things of the Lord.
As for instance by not paying his full
tithes J by neglecting to consecrate or
redeem the first born ; by appropriating
to his own use the first-fruits j or by
eating any of those parts of the sacrifice
which pertained to the priests. This
•was di trespass ; an offence which it is
here supposed might be done througli
mistake, forgetfulness, or want of care
or zeal ; for if it were done presumptu-
ously, in contempt of the law, the
offender died without mercy, Heb. 10.
28. IT With thine estimation. Or,
' with thy valulation.' That is, with
so much money as should be an ade-
quate satisfaction for the wrong done to
the priest. This estimation was to be
made by the priest, as appears from
Lev. 27. S, 12. Or it may mean, as the
ancient versions generally understood
it, that the ram should be at least of the
value of two shekels, the plural for tho
dual. IF After the shekel of the sanc-
tuary. See Note on Ex. 30. 13.
6.— The Doubtful Trespass.
17. If a soul sin, ^c. In order s»ll
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER V.
m
mandments of the Lord ; c though | priest shall make an atonement
le wisi ?7 not, yet is he ''guilty, { lor him concerning his ignorance
and shall bear his iniquity
IS eAnd he shall bring a ram
without blemish out of the flock,
with ihy esiimation, for a trespass-
oflering unto the priest ; ^and the
■■ ver. 15. ch. 4 L', 13, 22, 27. Ps
Luke 1-2. 4S. ■' ver. 1. '2. "^ ver. 15. i
19. 12.
ver li).
more effectually to deter the chosen
race from all irreverence towards any
thing peculiarly dedicated to God and
his service, it is here enacted, that if
any one sinned in regard to tlie use of
things which lie only suspected to be
sacred — about which he was left in sus-
pense wliether he had offended or not —
even in this case, that he might be sure
of being on the safe side, he was to
bring his ram as a tresspasser, and pay
the value of the thing according to the
priest's estimation, as ordered v. 15,
only with this difference, that the addi-
tional jjrescribed fifth -part was here to
be dispensed with, inasmuch as there
■was some uncertainty whether he had
actually transgressed or no. It would
perhaps seem, from the letter of the
two passages, that the case here men-
tioned was the same with that in the
preceding ch., v. 27, yet the diflferent
offerings prescribed seem to preclude
this idea. In tlie formsrcase the sacri-
fice appointed was a kid of the goats or
a female lamb ; but in the present, an
unblemished ram was prescribed. The
previous passage, moreover, is to be
understood of moral prohibitions, of
things concerning others : this on the
other hand, has respect to ceremonial
precepts touching sacrifices or other
things pertaining to divine worship.
Reimarks. — (1.) We are not to ac-
count our duty discharged merely by
avoiding sin ourselves; we are bound to
use our utmost endeavors to prevent it
m others, and not to shrink from the
responsibility or odium of bearing pub-
lic testimony against it. Especially
wherein he erred and wist it not,
and it shall be forgiven him.
19 It IS a trespass-olfering: she
hath certainly trespassed against
the Loud.
s Ezra 10- 2.
does this apply to such sins as brought
dislionor upon the holy name of God.
A man may be patient in regard to
' wrongs done to himself, but not in regard
to those that are done to the Most High.
(5.) ' Shall confess that he hath sin-
ned in that thing.' Confession of sin,
in order to be acceptable, must be par-
ticular. Such was David's confession ;
'I have done this evil;' and such
Achan's. It is not enough to rest in
generals.
(7.) ' If he be not able to bring a
lamb.' It is not the greatness of the
gift but the heart of the giver, which
God regards.
(16.) ' Shall make amends.' Re-
pentance for wrong done to our neighbor
is incomplete unless accompanied by
restitution.
(IS.) ' The priest shall make atone-
ment for him.' The great Christian
doctrine that to the atonement alone we
owe all our pardon and peace, is here
prominently set forth. Contrition, con-
fession, restitution, all the feelings
which accompany, and all the works
which are meet for repentance, are in-
dispensable ; but it is failh in the atone-
ment of Christ which justifies. Upon
that alone must the penitent's hope be
placed. While he weeps tears of grief
and shame, while he renounces all his
evil ways, while he strives to undo all
the evil which he has previously done,
the sacrifice of Christ must be looked to
as the only meritorious cause, as the
only appointed method of mercy. For
this his earnest application must be
made ; without this his professed re«
pentance will avail him nothing.
58
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. MOO.
CHAPTER VI. ] trespass against the Lord, and b He
AND the LoiiD spake unto Mo- I unio his neighbour in thai c which
ses, saying,
2 If a soul sin, and » commit a
Numb. 0. G-
was delivered him to keep, or in
Acts 5. 4. Col. 3. 9. .• Esod.
'■ch. 19. 11
2-2. 7. 10.
CHAPTER VI.
The Trespass-offering for sins of Injus-
tice, Fraud, Robbery, False-Dealing,
2. If a soul sin and commit a trespass.
Gr. -iioi^Mv -apif]i) rai ivroXas Kt'piwi',
despising shall despise the command-
ments of the Lord. In the Heb. the
phraseology is the same as in ch. 5. 15.
It may here be remarked, that the first
seven verses of tiiis chapter are in the
original embraced within the preceding
chapter, to which, perhaps, they more
properly belong. IT Against the Lord.
Although all the inslanoes specified re-
late to our neighbor, yet it is called
a trespass against the Lord, because
though the injury be done immediately
to a fellow creature, yet an afl'ront is
thereby given to the Most High, whose
authority has forbidden the wrong, and
who has made the command of loving
our neighbor second only to that of
loving himself. IT That which was
delivered him to keep. Heb. "^I^ipi:
pikkadon. ' From the present text we
learn, incidentally, that when a person
denied that he had received a deposit,
and no proof of his having done so could
be adduced, he was obliged to lake an
oath to that effect: but if he swore
falsely, and afterwards repented of hav-
ing done so, the sin-offering and restitu-
tion to the injured party afforded him
an opportunity of atonement, without
incurring the extent of punishment to
which he would have been liable had
the crime been judicially proved. The
law is too distinctly announced in Exod.
22. to require enlarged remark ; but as
an important distinction concerning a
deposited beast injured, or stolen from
the person with whom it was deposited,
IS liable to escape notice, as stated in
vv. 9-11 of that chapter, we may ob-
serve, that if the animal were stolen, or
inet with an accident, when out at pas-
ture, the depositary was allowed to
clear himself by oath, and then the
owner had no claim upon him ; but if it
were stolen from his own premises, he
was obliged to make restitution. This
was obviously on the princijde of its
being more difficult to steal a beast
from a house than any thing else ; and
that as he might have liad the jirofit
arisins from the use of it, so li« ought
to bear the loss arising from his neglect
in looking after it, or from accidtMit —
which is of more rare occurrence, and
often difficult to distinguish from neg-
lect (see Michaelis, vol. 2. p. 375).
The importance of dislincl regulations
on tlie subject of deposited pi(ij>erly,
has been strongly felt by all Oriental
legislators ; and it proceeds from the
fact that there were not at any time,
and are not now, any of those responsi-
ble banking establishments which in
modern Europe aff'ord such imj)ortant
facilities for the application, transfer,
and security of properly. Hence, when
a man is apprehensive of oppression or
robbery, or from another cause, wishes
to secure liis properly, he has no other
alternative than either to liide it in
some place of concealment, or to put it
in the hands of some irrrsponsible per-
son, in whom he thinks he has cause to
rely. So also, if a man wishes to leave
his place of residence for a time, he
must either adopt one of these courses,
or else, perhaps at a great sacrifice,
turn his property into money or jewels,
and take it with him, exposing it to all
the dangers of the road ; which, in the
East, are very imminent and great.
Much risk attends all these alternatives.
For individuals to prove unfaithful to
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VI.
59
fellowship, or in a thing taken , these that a man doeth, sinning
away by violence, or hath ^ deceiv- j therein :
4 Then it shall be, because he
hath sinned and is guilty, that he
shall restore that which he took
violently away, or the thing which
he hath deceitfully gotten, or that
which was delivered him to keep,
or the lost thing which he found,
that which is delivered to keep, render-
ed in the Gr. KapaOnvn^ and occurring
2 Tim. ]. 12, ' I am persuaded ihat he is
al)le to keep that which I have commit-
ted tir.to him (-aonQrjKr]) against that
day,' So again, 2 Tim, 1. 14, < That
good thing which was committed unto
thee (rrapadnKn), keep.' 1 Tim. 6. 20,
' O Timothy, keep that which is com-
mitted to thy trust (jiaoaOrjKr}).' • —
tr Or in n thing taken by violence. Le
Clerc lightly observes, that this signi-
fies a case of extortion by f<irce, where
there was no witness at liand who could
give evidence before the judge for the
person robbed. The laws, therefore,
Ex. 22. 7, 15, appear to refer to cases
where the tiling could be proved ; but
here to those in which the person in-
jured could bring no proof against the
offender. IT Or hath deceived his
neighbor. Heb. p'lZJS^ cisak, hath deceit-
fully or fraudulently oppressed. That
is, wronged him by false accusation, or
any unjust means, especially by with-
holding what was due, or extorting wliat
was not. Of this sin Zaccheus cleared
himself by a fourfold restitution, Luke
19. 8. ' Who,' says Maimonides, ' is a
deceitful oppressor ? He that hath his
neighbor's goods in his hand, with the
owner's consent, and when they are de-
manded again, he keeps the goods in his
own hands by force, and returns them
not V
4. He shall restore, SfC. It appears
from Num. 5. 6, 7, that confession of
the sin was required in this and all sim-
ilar instances of ires])ass. It is to be
recollected that by a previous law, Ex.
22. 1, 7, 9, when a person was guilty of
ed his neighbour ;
3 Or e jiave found that which was
lost, and lielh concerning it, and
fsweareth falsely; in any of all
d Prov. 24. 28, and 26. 19. ^ Deut. 22.
I, -2, 3. ■ Exod. u:2. li. ch. 19, 12. Jer. 7. 9.
Zecli. 5. 4.
their trust, as to propertj' deposited
with them, is so very common a cir-
vumsiance, that a large proportion of
the tales with which the Orienlal stor}'-
tL-llers amuse or move their auditors, in
coffee-houses and elsewhere, as well as
of those which are written in books,
turn upon the contrivances to which the
owner of property is obliged to resort in
order to recover it from the person to
vx'hoin it has been intrusted. Men who
would have remained honest under the
ordiuiiry circumstances of life are loo
often drawn aside Irom rectitude by the
temptations of valuable properly com-
mitted to tlieir trust. Continual expe-
rience of this sort has had a very un-
happy effect upon the moral feelings of
Orientals. Men fear to confide in each
otlier : and, in the case of property
winch persons desire to secure, tliey
ol'ten prefer the hazards attending the
other alternative of concealing it under
ground, or in strange places, or even to
build it uj) in the thick walls of their
houses.' — Pict. Bib. IT Or in fellow-
ship. Heb. 1"^ r^ST^r;!! bithsometh yad,
in the putting of the hand. The original
phrase occurring only here, seems to
denote such a stipulation as takes place
in copartnerships, w^here the hand of
one party is given to the other in pledge
of upright and honorable dealing. The
-term is applicable however to any mat-
ter of dealing or trafiic accompanied by
a joining of hands. Gr. -epi Koivuviai,
concerning society or fellowship. Chal.
* Fellowship of the hand.' Some would
render it a thing put or given into the
hand, a deposit ; but this is expressed
by the preceding word il"D5 pikkadon,
60
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
5 Or all that about which he hath I
sworn falsely ; he shall even gre- \
store it in the principal, and shall \
add the fifth part more thereto, I
and give it unto him to whom it i
appertaineth, in the day of his tres- 1
pass-offering. j
6 And he shall bring his trespass-
offering unto the Lord, i^a ram
without blemish out of the flock, [
with thy estimation for a trespass- 1
offering, unto the priest:
s ch. 5. 16. Numb. 6. 7. ii Sam. 12. 6.
Luke 19. 8. ^ ch. 5. 15.
any of the ofiences here specified, and
withholding confession was convicted
of the sanne by witnesses in a court of
law, he was required to make a four-
fold restitution, as we have shown in
the Note on that passage. Here the
mulct is lessened in consideration of a
voluntary acknowledgment. He was
to restore the principal with an addi-
tional fifth part as a compensation to
the owner lor the wrong sustained bj'
him.
5. In the day of his trespass-offering.
That is, in the day wherein he is
found a trespasser, rendered by the Gr.
TT} iiiiEoa ^yyiyx^lh i^ ^^^ ^'^V li-'herein he
is convicted or reprehended ; or it may
be understood as in our present version,
the day wherein his trespass-offering
was presented. The requisite restitu-
tion was not to be delayed.
The Law of the Burnt-offering.
9. This is the laxo of the burnt-offer-
ing. That is, this is the daily burnt-
offering or perpetual sacrifice, consisting
of two lambs offered upon the altar of
burnt-ofiering, one in the morning and
the other in the evening. That of the
morning was offered about sunrise, after
the incense was burnt upon the golden
altar, and before any oiher s<)tTifice.
That of the evening was cflTered in the
decUne of day, before the night began
They were both wholly consumed on
the altar, after the same manner as the
7 iAnd the priest shall make an
atonement for him before the Lord:
and it shall be forgiven him for any
thing of all that he hath done in
trespassing therein.
8 H And the Lord spake unto
PJoses, saying,
9 Command Aaron and his sons,
sayhng, Thisz.s the law of the burnt-
offering: it is the burnt-offering,
because of the burning upon the
altar all night unto the morning,
i ch. 4. 25^
free-will burnt-offering, but by a slow
fire, that they might continue the longer
burning. With each of the victims was
offered a bread-offering and a drink-of
fering of strong wine (see Num. 28.
5-7.), the latter being poured out before
the Lord, or about the altar, as a liba-
tion. The Jewish writers consider that
the morning sacrifice made atonement
for the sins of the preceding night, and
that of the evening for the sins of the
preceding day. It may be regarded as
a daily expression of national as well
as individual repentance, prayer, and
thanksgiving. — Moses having hitherto
given instructions directed more espe-
cially to the people, and pointing out
their duties in respect to their sacred
oblations, now enters upon those which
had particular reference to the priests,
who were charged with the oversight
of all the sacrifices and services of
their religion IT Because of the burn-
ing ; or as it may be rendered, ' It is that
which ascendeth by burning.' It seems
to be designed to give a reason of the
name, which is in Heb. n^iy olah, as-
cension, from its all being burnt and
ascending in smoke and flame. The
words at the same time explain trhat
burnt-oflTering he means, viz. the daily
sacrifice, wliich was tlie })rinLipal of
this kind of offerings, and regulated all
the rest. IT The fire of the attar shall
be burning in (on) it. Heb. Ipin
tukad, shall be made to burn ; as the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VI.
61
and the fire of the altar shall be
burning in it.
10 i« And the priest shall put on
his linen garment, and his linen
breeches shall he put upon his
flesh, and take up the ashes which
the tire hath consumed with the
burnt-offering on the altar, and he
shall put them ' beside the altar.
11 And ni he shall put off his gar-
ments, and put on other garments,
i^ ch. 16. 4. ExoA 28. 39, 40, 41, 43.
Ezek. 44. 17, 18. i ch. 1. 16. "' Ezek. 44. 19.
result of special care ; shall be continu-
ally nouriished.
10. Shall put on his linen garment.
Heb, ^a TT>D middo bad, Gr. x"''^»'«
Xivovvj his linen coat. The original
word 1173 middo is a derivative from
Tn?2 mtidad, to measure, and implies a
garment commensurate to the body, and
therefore one of considerable size. ' It
is the coat,' says Sol. Jarchi, ' and the
vcripture calleth it Middo, because it
was like his measure (Middalho) that
wore it.' The Heb. word for ' linen'
{''\2had) signifies a finer kind of linen
than that made of the common flax, for
which another term is employed, and
therefore the Chal. here renders it by
' garments of Bysse,' of which see Note
on Ex. 25. 4. IT Shall put on other
garments. That is, either their com-
mon garments, or, as some of the Jew-
ish commentators understand, other
holy garments. The garments which
the priests wore in the sanctuary they
were not allowed to wear elsewhere,
Kzek 44. 17, 19, ' And it shall come to
pass that when they shall enter in at
the gates of the inner court, they shall
be clothed with linen garments. And
when they go forth into the outer court,
even into the outer court of the people,
ihev shall putoffliieir garments where-
in they ministered, and lay them in the
holy ciiamhers, and they shall put on
other garments ; and they shall not
sanctify the people with their garments.'
6
and carry forth the ashes without
the camp n unto a clean pl&ce.
12 And the fire upon the altar
shall be burning in it; it shall not
be put out : and the priest shall
burn v/ood on it every morning,
and lay the burnt-offering in order
upon it; and he shall burn thereon
othe fat of the peace-offerings.
L3 The fire shall ever be burning
upon the altar; it shall never go
out.
" ch. 4. 12. 0 ch. 3. 3, 9, 14.
IT Without the camp unto a clean
place. This indicated that some de-
gree of holiness attached to the ashes
as the relics of a sacrifice which had
its accomplishment in the sufferings
and death of Christ.
12. The Jire upon the altar shall be
burning. Heb. Ipir, tukad, shall be
kindled or made to burn. Although
the fire that consumed the sacrifices
originally came down from heaven, yet
it was to be kept perpetually burning
by a supply of fuel. This fuel was to
be exclusively of wood, a store of which
was provided at the expense of the
whole congregation ; and as every thing
pertaining to the service of God was to
be of the best, so the wood according to
the Hebrews, was to be of the choicest
quality ; that which was worm-eaten
being instantly rejected, as also that
which was obtained from the timber of
old demolished buildings, none being
admitted but that which was perfectly
sound. In imitation of this perpetual
fire, the ancient Persian Magi, and their
descendants the Parsees, kept also a
fire constantly burning ; the latter con-
tinue it to the present day. Traces of
the same custom are to be found among
almost all heathen nations. Indee 1 it
can scarcely be doubled that the Greek
' Estia ' and tlie Roman ' Vesta,' goddess
of fire, owed their origin to a Hebrew
source, in which language !L'J< esh,
Chal. esha, signifies jire.
62
LEVITICUS.
[E. C. 1490.
14 H pAnd this is the law of the i
meat-offering. 'J'he sons of Aaron ,
shall offer it before the Lokd, be- |
fore the altar. i
15 And he shall take of it his j
handful, of the flour of tlie meat- j
ofl'ering, and of the oil thereof, |
and all the frankincense which is I
upon the meat-offering, and shall '
burn tt upon the altar fora sweet i
savour, even the q memorial of it, '
unto the Lorii.
16 And rihe remainder thereof
shall Aaron and his sons eat ;
s with unleavened bread shall it be
eaten in the holy place ; in the
court of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation they shall eat it.
P ch. 2. 1. Numb. 15. 4. <i ch. 2 2,9.
r ch. 2. 3 Ezek. 44. 29. s yer. 26. ch. 10.
12, 13. Numb. IS. 10-
The Laii^ of the Meat-offering.
14. This is the law of the meat-offer-
ing. Heb. nnD?2 viin'hah, of wliicli
see Note on Lev. 2. 1-3. This precept
respects not the medt-offerins: which
was to accompany the daily burnt-or-
fering, but thai which was offered alone '
as a Iree- will-offering, and in place of a i
voluntary burnt-offering of greater va-
lue, as described Lev. 2. 1-3. The sum
of the directions here given is, that no
leaven should ever be mixed with such
bread or cakes ; lliat after a small part
of it had been burnt upon the allar as
God's portion, the priests in waiting
were to have the remainder, and that
this was to be eaten in the court of the
tabernacle and nowhere else — in all
wliich particulars the precept corres-
ponds to that given relative to the parts
of the sin and trespass-offerings that
accrued to the prie.sts. IT The sons
of Aaron shall offer it. That is, in
rotation, one at a lime. The ])hrase
' sons of Aaron' may here be taken in
its literal sense, but in after-lime this
expression meant the successors of
Aaron in the holy office, Comp. v. 20.
17 tit shall not be baken with
leaven. " I have given it unto
them for their portion of my offer-
ings made by fire. ^Jt is most
holy, as is the sin-offering, and as
the trespass-offering.
18 y All the males among the
ciiildren of Aaron shall eat of it.
7-11 shall be a. statute for ever ia
your generations concerning the
offerings of the Lord made by fire :
a every one that toucheih them
shall be holy.
19 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
20 b This IS the offering of Aaron
and of his sons, which they shall
t ch. 2. 11. -^ Numb. 13. 9, 19. ^ ver. 25.
ch. 2. 3. and 7. 1. Exod. 29. 37- r ver. 29.
Numb. IS. 10. ^ ch. 3. 17. ^ ch. 22, 3,4, 5,
G, 7. Exod. 29. 37. " Exod. 29. 2.
16. With unleavened bread shall it
be eaten. Tlie insertion of the word
'with' in this place, wliich does not
occur in the original, obscures the true
sense. The meaning is, not that the
remainder of the nieat-offering was to
be eaten by the priests with the addi-
tion of unleavened calces, but that the
meal itself was to be 7nade into unlea-
vened cakeSy and thus eaten. IT In
the holy place. This phrase denotes in
this connexion, contrary to its ordinary
import, tlie court of the tabernacle
where all the holy things were boiled,
baked, dressed and eaten by the Levit-
ical order, w-ho ministered at the altar.
IS. Every one that toucheth them.
Or Heb. 5?^'' TITJ* ^3 kol asher yigga,
all that toucheth; impljing things as
well as persons. The meaning is, that
no unclean person or common vessel
of ministry might touch them. Gr.
TTas bi cav axprjrat avrojv iytaidrjcnraif
whosoever toucheth them shall be sanc-
tified. ' The meaning is,' says Chaz-
kuni, ' that he shall purify liimself be-
fore he touch them j and that any vessel
or implement to be used about them
shall first be sanctified.' Junius, how-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VI.
63
offer unto the Lord m the day
wlien he is anointed ; the tenth
part of an cephah of fine flour for
a meat-offering perpetual, lialf of
it in the morning, and half thereof
at night.
21 In a pan it shall be made with
oil ; and xchen it is baken, thou
shalt bring it in ; and the baken
pieces of the meat-offering shalt
thou offer /or a sweet savour unto
the Lord.
22 And the priest of his sons
c Exod. Ifi. 36.
ever, contends that the ' toucliingJ
refers wholly to persons, and not to
things, because it comes in as a reason
for the eating of thein being confined to
Aaron's sons; while Hesychius ascribes
the sanclificatiou to the touch. Comp.
V. 27.
The Offering at the Consecration of a
Priest.
20. In the day when he is anointed.
From the obvious import of the pre-
cept, we should naturally understand
that this offering, called by the Jews
* the meal-offering of initiation or con-
secration,' was to be presented only on
the day in which any one of the high
priests' line was inducted into office ;
but it is maintained by several of the
Hebrew commentators that the high
priest was bound to offer it daily, be-
ginning from the day in which he was
anointed, and continuing it llirough the
whole period of his office ; so that,
according to them, 'in the day' is
equivalent to 'from the day.' Joseplius
also says, ' The high priest sacrificed
twice every day at liis own charges, and
that this was his sacrifice.' It is, how-
ever, doubtful whether such a construc-
tion can fairly be put upon the passage.
It may be called ' a meal-offering per-
petual,' from its being always statedly
ofit-red at the Higii Priests' initiation
into office. From this we may under-
stand what is intended by its being said
^ that is anointed in his stead shall
offer it : It is a statute fur ever
unto the Lord; e it shall be wholly
burnt.
23 For every meat-offering for
the priest shall be wholly burnt :
it shall not be eaten.
24 If And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
25 Speaiv unto Aaron and to his
sons, saying, fThiszs the law of
the sin-offering: gin the place
<i ch. 4. 3. e Exod. 29. 25. f ch. 4. 2.
s ch. 1. 3, 5, 11, and 4. 24, 29, 33.
that this is ' the offering of Aaron and
his sons, and that they should offer it,'
&c. It is not that lie and they should
offer it together, but Aaron now, and
his sons successively in after times, as
they were inducted in turn into the
priestly dignity.
23. It shall not be eaten. In this res*
pect it differed from the other meaU
offering. The Priest's offering must be
all burnt, because, altliough he figura-
tively bore the sins of the people, yet
there was no one to bear his sins, nor
could he bear them himself There
was, moreover, a general rule (v. 30),
against the eating of any sacrifice, the
blood of which was brought within the
tabernacle ; and such were the offerings
of the Priest and the Congregation.
See Note on v. 30.
The Law of the Sin-offering.
25. This is the law of the sin-offer-
ing. The directions here given are
mainly a repetition of those contained
Lev. 4. 24-31, but with these additional
circumstances, viz. that none but con-
secrated persons or things should touch
any part of it after it was once devoted
to God, but especially the blood that was
spilled for the atonement of the offerer.
And with a view to preserve the strict-
est regard to holy things, if any of its
blood at the time of the slaughter should
chance to dash upon the robes even of
the priest in waiting, it was to be wash-
64
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
where the burnt-ofrerin;^ is killed
shall the sin-ofTering be killed be-
fore the Lord : ^ it is most holy.
26 iThe priest that offereth it
for sin shall eat it : k in the holy
place shall it be eaten, in the court
of the tabernacle of the congrega-
tion.
27 1 Whatsoever shall touch the
h ver. 17. ch. 21. 22. ' ch. 10. 17, 18.
Numb. IS. 9, 10. Ezek. 44. 23, 29. ^ ver. 16.
1 Exod. 29. 37, and 30. 29.
ed out ; but particularly if it fell upon
the clothes of the offerer, it was to be
most carefully cleansed. If it wore
sprinkled upon any earthen vessel into
which it would sink deep, and not be
easily rubbed out, such vessel was to be
broken and laid by ; and if upon a ves-
sel of brass, which from its hardness
would be less apt to imbibe the liquid,
it was to be well scoured and rinsed.
All this went to shadow forth the con-
tagion of sin, and the constant care re-
quisite to cleanse ourselves by repent-
ance and faith from its polluting stains.
Of this truth the ancient Hebrew doc-
tors seem to have had a clear percep-
tion, as R. Menahem says, in speaking
of tliis washing of garments, that the
reason of it was, ' that it was necessary
to do away uncleanness by the w^aters
that are on high.' IT In the place
u-here the burnt-offering is killed shall
the sin-offering be killed. That was
on the north side of the altar, Lev.l. 11,
' Thereby was figured,' says Ainsworth,
' that Christ, our Sin-offering, should be
crucified on Mount Cavalry, which was
on the north-west side of Jerusalem ; as
by the Jews' tradition the morning
sacrifice was killed at the north-west
horn of the altar.'
26. The priest that offereth it for
sin. Heb. ir.ii S^ur^^H "prn hakkohi'n
ham'hatieoiho. the priest thai expiateth-
sin-by-it. Chal. ' That makeih atone-
ment by the blood thereof.' Gr.
avaipcpuv, that offereth. The phraseolo-
gy is remarkable from the fact that the
flesh thereof shall be holy : and
when there is sprinkled of the
blood thereof upon any garment,
thou shalt wash that whereon it
was sprinkled in the holy place.
28 But the earthen vessel wherein
it is sodden m shall be broken : and
if it be sodden in a brazen pot, it
shall be both scoured, and rinsed
in water.
m ch. 11. 33, and 15. 12.
original word comes from the same root
as nx^tsn 'hattlah, sin or siti-offering.
In the Piel form, which here occurs, it
is defined by Gesenius, fo offer as a sin-
offering, to make atonement, to expiate,
to cleanse persons or things by a sacred
rite.
21. Whatsoever shall touch the blood
thereof, fyc. That is, the blood of the
sin-offering, whether it were that which
was to be eaten, or that which was to
be burnt — a rile peculiar to the sin-
offering above all the other most holy
things. As this sacrifice has especial
respect to Christ, who was made sin for
us, so this direction may perhaps point
to the reverential and holy use that is
to be made of the mystery of our re-
demption, of which those that are made
partakers ought to be washed, cleansed,
and sanctified ; to possess the vessels
of their bodies in holiness and honor;
and not to yield their members as in-
struments of unrighteousness unto in-
iquity.
2S. The earthen vessel wherein it was
sodden shall be broken. ' This is a very
remarkable instruction. We all know
that earthen vessels are broken, and
others thoroughly scoured, when sup
posed to be defiled, among the Moham-
medans and Hindoos, as they were also
among the Jews. But the present in-
stance is of a different character. Tlie
earthen vessel was to be broken, and
the copper one scoured and rinsed, not
because they were defiled, but because
the flesh of the sin-oflfering having been
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VI.
65
29 nAU the males among the
priests shall eat thereof: oit is
most holy.
30 p And no sin-offering, whereof
" ver. 18. Numb. IS- 10, ° ver. 25. P ch.
4. 7, 11, 1-2, 18, 21, and 10. 18. and 16. 27.
Heb. 13. 11.
cooked in ihem, ihey had thus become
too sacred for common use. We shall
elsewhere have occasion to remark on
instances in which earthen utensils
were broken, and others scoured in con-
sequence of defilement. At present we
only direct attention to the fact, that at
this time the culinary vessels of the
Hebrews seem to have been exclusively
of earthenware or copper. Iron, though
known to them, was at this time very
little in use for any purpose, and even
when they became better acquainted
with that valuable metal it is doubtful
if their culinary or other vessels were
ever made of it. At least, no pot, pan,
or other vessel is said in all the Scrip-
lure to be of iron. What is translated
' iron pan,' in Ezek. 4. 3, is properly an
' iron plate,' as the context alone suffi-
ciently indicates. In point of fact, the
culinary and other domestic vessels
througliout the East remain to this day,
as we find them thus early in the Mo-
saic history, either of copper, earthen-
ware, or wood (ch. 11. 38; 14. 12),
although no doubt the quality and man-
ufacture have much improved. The
writer, in the course of journeys and
residence in different parts of Western
Asia, does not think that he ever met
with an instance of a cooking vessel of
any other metal than copper : and dishes
and bowls of the same metal tinned are
those which most usually make their
appearance on the tables of kings and
great men. When luxury desires some-
thing more rich and costly for the table
thiui copper, it finds indulgence, not in
silver and gold, but in china and fine
earthenware.' — Pict. Bib.
30. And no sin-offering whereof, SfC.
We see from Lev. 4. 5, 16, that the
6*
any of the blood is brought into the
tabernacle of the congregation to
reconcile withal in the holy place^
shall be eaten : it shall be burnt in
the fire.
blood of the sin-ofierings for the high
priest and the congregation was brought
into the tabernacle, and consequently
they were not to be eaten, but to be
burnt, as we learn was the fact. Lev. 4.
12, 2L As it appears from Lev. 10. 17.
that the eating of the offerings of the
people was in a sense typical of the
bearing and expiating their sins, this
precept tended to show the intrinsic
inability of the Levitical priesthood to
procure a complete reconciliation of
men to God. This will be more evident
from viewing the passage in its evan
gelical connexions. The apostle, Heb
13. 10-13, says, 'We have an altar,
whereof they have no right to eat which
serve the tabernacle. For the bodies
of those beasts, whose blood is brought
into the sanctuary by the high priest
for sin, are burned without the camp.
Wherefore Jesus also, that he might
sanctify the people with his own blood,
suffered without the gate. Let us go
forth therefore unto him without the
camp, bearing his reproach.' Now it
is to be recollected, that under the law
the blood of such sacrifices as were
eaten by the priests came not into the
sanctuary j which argued the unworthi-
ness and incompetency of those sacri-
fices to answer the end of a perfect
atonement. But Christ, with his blood
shed for our sins, entered into the holy
place, not that which was made with
hands, but into heaven itself, and there-
by obtained eternal redemption for us,
Heb. 9. 11, 12, 24. This great sacrifice
therefore does away the availableness
of the Levitical offerings. As the
priests of the law were forbidden to eat
of the propitiatory sacrifices whose
blood was carried within the vail, but
66
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
were commanded to burn them entirely
without the camp, what right can they
have, while they adhere to the legal
institution, to partake of Christ's sacri-
fice ? If lliey continue to adhere to the
legal services of the tabernacle, they
virtually renounce the benefit of the
sacrifice of Christ. Indeed, the apostle }
would intimate, that the Levitical
priesthood is necessarily abolished, for
there is now nothing on which the
priests can live, if not upon that altar
on which they are to feed by faith.
Tliis he proves thus : The bodies of
those beasts whose blood was brought
into the sanctuary by the high priest,
were burnt without the camp. Conse-
quently there was nolliing left of them
for their sustenance. But these sacri-
fices were a most significant type o( the
sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ,
who has become the substance of the
legal shadovs's. "What then shall the
priests eat? Upon what shall they
live, if not by fdilh upon tlie great pro-
pit
? What other altar but the
Ciirislian altar remains? And what
right can they have to this, if they ad-
here to the Jewish ?
Resiarks — (2.) No sentiment should
be more deeply engraven upon our
hearts than that a sin against our
neighbor is a trespass against God. So
David says, ' Against ihee, thee only
have I sinned, and done this evil in thy
sight,' though his offence was primarily
committed against Uriah.
(3.) ' Or have found that which was
lost.' The judgment of every honest
mind is, that he who finds any lost pro-
perty, and makes not all due inquiry to
ascertain the owner, should in equity
be treated as a thief.
(5, 6.) ' Shall bring his trespass-
off"ering unto the Lord, a ram without
blemish.' By this precept we are again
taught that disobedience to God is tlie
groat evil even of those crimes which
are injurious to man, and that repent-
ance, an<l even restitution, though need-
ful, in order to forgiveness, cannot atone
for sin.
(12.) As the priest was to renew the
fire upon the altar every morning, and
to guard with the utmost care against
its going out, so our first work with the
return of the morning light, should be
that the fire of holy love be kindled
afresh in our hearts, and through the
day our study should be to keep it con-
stantly burning.
(22.) ' And the priest shsU ofiTer it.'
Tlie benefits of Christ's atonement, in
order to be available, must be personally
apprehended. However intrinsically'
sulficicnt for the sanation of all men,
none will be tlie belter for it who do
not for themselves make use of it. The
off'ending priest, or ruler, or common
person, must /im.se// bring his sin-offer-
ing, must lay his ou-ti hands upon its
head, must thus show liow nearly ho
fell himself lo be concerned in the cere-
mony ; and every sinner now Uiust in-
dividually bring this sacrifice ol Clirist,
in failli, as the atonement for his own
sin. He must not rest in the mere
generality that ' we are all sinners,'
and ' Christ died for all.' He must feel
and apply all this to himself. He must
in eflecl say, ' Lord, I am indeed a sin-
ner ; a great and grievous sinner against
thee ; but here is my sin-offering ; here
is the sacrifice of ihine own blessed
Son ; here is the atonement of thine ap-
pointinent ; this 1 bring to thee with my
soul's approval, and my heart's desire
that it may be accepted by thee, and
put away ail my sin.'
CHAPTER VII.
Additional Rules and Distinctions rela-
tive to the Trespass-offerings.
1 . This is the law of the trespass-offer-
ing. In the Heb. simjily ti'dH^Ti mC
torath hddsham, the law of the trespass
Gr. h voftos Tov KOtov ruv ttsoi r^TiiiiicXiia^-
the law of the ram for trespass. It is a
law for the direction of the jiriests in
the discharge of their office relative to
B. a 1490.]
CHAPTER VII.
6T
CHAPTER VII.
LIKEWISE a this IS the law of
ihe trespass-offering: bit is
must holy.
2 cin the place where they kill
the burnt-offering shall they kill
the trespass-offering: and the blood
thereof shall he sprinkle round
about upon the altar.
3 And he shall offer of it dall the
fat thereof; the rump, and the fat
that covereih the inwards,
4 And the two kidneys, and the
fat that ts on them, which is by
the flanks, and the caul that ts
» ch. 5. and 6. 1—7- b ch. 6. 17, 25, and
21. -^-2. cch. 1.3, .5, 11, and 4 24,29,33.
d ch. 3. 4, 0, 10, 14, 1.5, 16, and 4. 8. 9. Exod.
29. 13.
the Trespass-offering. IT It is monl
holy. Heb. iiin t'^^lp I^ip kode.sh
kodoshim hoo, it is holiness ofholinesses.
Tlie de-sign is to convey a general sig-
nificant intimation in regard to the na-
ture of these offerings. They, as well
as the Sin-offerings, were to be ranked
in their estimation among the * most
holy things,' and practically treated
accordingly. Comp. v. 6.
2. The blood thereof shall he sprinkle
round about upon the altar. The rites
in regard to the Sin and the Trespass-
offering were for the most part the
same, but there was tliis difference as to
tlie disposal of the blood, viz. that the
blood of the Trespass-offering here men-
tioned was to be sprinkled round the
altar, whereas that of the Sin-offering
was to be put upon the horns of the
altar. Ch. 4. 25, 34, This moreover
was to be a male, the other m^ight be a
female sacrifice. This was always for
a single person, but a Sin-offering might
be for the whole congregation. Lev.
4. 13.
4. The fat that is on them. That is,
chiefly the fat that was found in a de-
tached state, not mixed with the muscles.
6. Every male among the priests shall
above the liver, with the kidneys,
it shall he take away:
5 And the priest shall bum them
upon the altar/yran offering made
by fire unto the Lord: it is a tres-
pass-offering.
ti e Every male among the priests
shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten
in the holy place : fit is most holy.
7 As the sin-offering is, so is g the
trespass-offering : there is one law
for them: the priest that makelh
atonement therewith shall have it.
8 And the priest that offereth
any man's burnt-offering, even the
priest shall have to himself the
skin of the burnt-offering which he
hath offered.
« ch. 6. 16, 17, IS. Numb. IS. 9. 10 f ch.
2. 3. e ch. 6. 25, 26, and 14. 13.
eat thereof. All the fat being offered to
God, the flesh became theporiion of the
priest, who, witli his male children, was
to eat it, but only within the precincts
of the sanctuary.
7. There is one law for them. The
import is, that what has been omitted
in the explanation of the Sm-offering
must be learned from that of the Tres-
pass-offering, and vice versa. IT Shall
have it. That is, by synecdoclie, that
part of it which was by the divine con-
stitution allowed to the priest.
8. The priest shall have to himself
the skin. All the flesh of the burnt-
offerings being consumed as well as the
fat, there could nothing fall to the share
of the priest but the skin ; which must
have been very valuable, as they were
used as mattresses, and probably as car-
pets to sit upon in the day, as they are
still used by some of the inhabitants
and the dervishes of the East. See
Harmer's observations, vol. ]. p. 236.
Bp. Patrick remarks upon this passage,
that ' It is probable that Adam himself
offered the first sacrifice, and liad the
skin given him by God, to make gar-
ments for him and liis wife ; in conform-
ity to which the priests ever after had
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
9 And ^ all the meal-offering that
is baken in the oven, and all that
is dressed in the frying-pan, and in
the pan, shall be the priest's that
offereth it.
10 And every meat-offering min-
gled with oil, and dry, shall all the
sons of Aaron have, one as much
as another.
11 And ithis is the law of the
h ch. 2. 3. 10. Numb. IS. 9. Ezek. 44.29.
i ch. 3. 1, and 22. 18. 21.
the skin of the whole burnt-offering for
their portion : which was a custom
among the Gentiles as well as the Jews,
who gnve ih.e skins of their sacrifices to
the priests when they were not burnt
with the sacrifices.'
9, 10. And all the meat-offerings.
That is, all the baked or fried meat-
offerings, with the exception of that
part called the ' memorial,' ch.2, 4-10,
and which was to be burnt upon the
altar, was to go to the particular priest
that offered it ; but in the case of the
raiv flour-offerings of that kind, the
remainder was to be equally shared by
all the priests in attendance.
Additional Rules respecting the Peace-
offerings.
11. And this is the law, ^c. Direc-
tions had previously been given, ch. 3.
to the people, regulating this kind of
offerings when presented by them ; but
in this connexion more specific orders
are given to the priests on the same
subject. The reason of this was, that
as there were several sorts of peace-
offerings, so there were various rites to
be observed in regard to thein — riles
which are here called 'the law of the
peace-offerings.' In the order in which
the different offerings are spoken of in
ch. 3. the peace-offering occurs the
third ; but m that chapter the law of
peace-offerings is no further slated than
as it accords with the burnt-offering,
and the fuller statement is reserved for
the passage before us. Hence, in the
sacrifice of peace-offerings, which
he shall offer unto the Lord.
12 If he offer it for a thanksgiv-
ing, then he shall offer with the
sacrifice of thanksgiving unleaven-
ened cakes mingled with oil, and
unleavened wafers k anointed with
oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of
fine flour, dried.
13 Besides the cakes, he shall
offer for his offering, i leavened
k ch. 2. 4. Numb. 6. 1.5. ' Amos 4. 5.
enumeration of the different offcrmgs in
v. 37, the peace-offering is fiily-men-
tioned last. IT Which he shall offer.
The word ' he ' here has no express
antecedent. It should be rendered ac-
cording to the frequent idiom of the
Hebrew, ' which one shall offer,' or
' which shall be offered.' See Note on
Lev. 1.5.
1. The Eucharistic Peace-offering.
12, IZ. If he offer it for a thanks-
giving. Heb. min ^y al todah, for a
confession. Gr.-mpi an tucwi. for praise.
Thai is, in token of gratitude for special
mercies and favors received, such as
recovery from sickness, preservation in
a journey, deliverance at sea. redemp-
tion from captivity, all of which are
specified in Psalm 107, and for them
men are called upon to offer the sacri-
fice of thanksgiving. In allusion to this
kind of offering the apostle says, Heb.
13. 15, <■ By him, therefore, let us offer
the sacrifice of praise to God continu-
ally.' In regard to oblations of this
kind, the precept is, that along with
the bullock, goat, or sheep, the offerer
should present pancakes mixed with
pure oil, but unleavened, inasmuch as
part of them was to be offered up to
God with the fat upon the altar, where
leaven was entirely prohibited. Still
leaven was not excluded from another
part of the offering, viz. that of the
bread of the priests, which was not
burnt upon the altar. The occasion of
the offering, it is to be recollected, was
B. C. 1490.3
CHAPTER VII.
bread, wiih the sacrifice of thanks-
giving of his peace-offerings.
14 And of it he shall offer one
out of the whole oblation for an
heave-offering unto the Lord,
m and it shall be the priest's that
sprinkleth the blood of the peace-
offerings.
■^' Numb. 18. 8, 11, 10.
one of gratitude, praise, and rejoicing;
and on such an occas-ion God would
kindly allow a more palatable species
of food for his servants, and accept at
his own table the same bread which
they were wont to use at theirs.
14. Of it he shall offer one. Heb.
']:?2'-i mimmenu, of it ; i. e. of the
bread, one of the leavened cakes or
loaves before-mentioned, which was to
be j)resenled to God as a heave-ofTering.
When this was done, all that remained
was the portion of the priest who
sprinkled the blood of the peace-offer-
ings on the altar. IT For an heave-
offering. Heb. n?2"l"iri terumah, from
ilie root tlT^ ram, to lift up ; so called
from its being heaved or lifted up on
high^ ill token that it was thereby
directed to the God of heaven, and
devoutly proffered to his acceptance.
Gr. and Chal. 'A separation, or sepa-
rated thing.' For a full account of
this kind of offering see Note on Ex.
29. 24, 28.
}o. Shall be eaten the same day that it
is offered. The reason of this injunc-
tion, which was observed in most of the
sacred feasts, especially the passover,
may be learned from the following ap-
propriate extract from Philo : — ' It was
not fit that those holy things should be
put into their cupboards, but immedi-
ately set before those who were in
need ; for they were no longer his who
offered them, but his to whom they
were offered ; who being himself most
liberal and bountiful, would have guests
invited to his table to partake with those
who offered the sacrifice. And these
he would not have to look upon them-
15 nAnd the flesh of the sacrifice
of his peace-offerings for thanks-
giving shall be eaten the same day
that it is offered ; he shall not
leave any of it until the morning.
16 But oif the sacrifice of his
offering be a vow, or a voluntary
» ch. 22. 30. o ch. 19. 6, 7, 8.
selves as masters of the feast, for they
are but ministers of the feast, not mas-
ters or entertainers ; that belongs to
God himself, whose bounty ought not to
be concealed by preferring sordid par-
simony before generous humanity.'
His meaning obviously is, that all the
sacrifice was God's, who graciously
granted to him who offered it a part of
it with which to entertain his friends
and the poor, whom he would have to
be invited forthwith, that no part of it
might be perverted to any other than
the designed use. Add to this, that in
a country like Palestine, it was apt to
putrify ; and as it was considered to
be holy, it would be very improper to
expose that to putrefaction which had
been consecrated to the Divine Being.
2. The Votive, or Voluntary Peace-
offering.
16. If the sacrifice of his offering be
a vow. This was the second kind of
peace-offerings contemplated in this
part of the law. They were such as
were either simply and unconditionally
devoted without special respect to any
past or future favor ; or such as were
vowed upon a condition, as when Jacob
pledged himself. Gen. 28. 20-22, saying,
' If God will be with me, and will keep
me in this way that I go, and will give
me bread to eat and raiment to put on,
so tha.t I come again to my father's
house in peace : then shall the Lord be
my God, and this stone which I have
set for a pillar shall be God's house ;
and of all that thou shalt give me I will
surely give the tenth unto thee.' The
principal point in v.'hich they differed
70
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
offering, it shall be eaten the same
day that he offerelh his sacrifice :
and on the morrow also the re-
mainder of it shall be eaten :
17 But ihe remainder of the flesh
of tlie sacrifice on the third day
shall be burnt with fire.
iiiui) the preceding consisted in tliis,
iliat the offerer and his friends were
required immediately to begin to feast
upon the sacrifice, that they might, if
possible, eat the whole of it on that
day ; but if this were not easily practi-
cable, then they might defer the re-
mainder till the second day. But the
indulgence was never to be extended
beyond that time. Should any of it
remain till the third day it was to be
burnt ; and should the offerer presume
to eat the least part of it then, it would
not only disannul the effect of his sacri-
fice, but render him unclean and guilty
to a high degree. Something analogous
to this obtained in the heathen worship.
Bochart shows from Macrobius, that
the Romans had a sacrifice called ' Pro-
tervia,' in which it was the custom, if
any thing of the feast remained, to have
it consumed in the fire. (Hierozoic
Sac. p. l,c.50.) — ' As the people of the
Kast generally cat their meat the same
day on which it is killed, and almost
never later than the second day, we are
inclined to concur in the view of Harmer
(' Observations,' vol. i. p. 457) who
thinks that this regulation was intended
to preclude anyattempt to preserve the
meat, by potting or otherwise, so that it
might be taken to different parts of the
country, and used superstitiously, per-
haps, as peculiarly holy food, or applied
in some way inconsistent with the in-
tention of the law. That intention was,
that what became the offerer's share of
the sacrifice he had presented, ho should
eat cheerfully before the Lord with his
friends, and that the poor and destitute
should partake in the benefit. This
object was ensured by the regulation
18 And if any of the flesh of the
sacrifice of his peace-offerings be
eaten at all on the third day, it
shall not be accepted, neither shall
it be p imputed unto him that offer-
eth it: it shall be an qabomina-
P Numb. IS. 27.
19.7.
q ch. 11. 10, 11, 41, and
which precluded the meat from being
kept beyond the second day.' — Pict.Bib.
IT A voluntary offering, or Heb.
n^lD nedabah, a free'Uill offering ^
i. e. an offering not required by any law,
but which a person might be prompted
spontaneously to present as the expres-
sion of a grateful heart.
IS. Neither shall it be imputed to him
that offereth it. Heb. D"!')!"' ythdshcb,
Gr. ov \oyisdr](TETai avroi, it shall not he
placed to his account. He shall not be
accounted as having made any oflering
at all. The sense of the term may be
more fully learned by its use in a pas-
sage of opposite import. Num. 18. 27, oO,
' And this your heave-offering shall be
reckoned (jIL'TO nehshab) unto you, as
though it were the corn of the thresh-
ing-floor, and as the fulness of the wine-
press. Therefore thou shah say unto
them, When ye have heaved the best
thereof from it, then it shall be counted
(-"L"n3 nehshab) unto the Levites as the
increase of the threshing-floor, and as
the increase of the wine-press.'
IT It shall be an abomination. Heb.
bl^S piggul, a polluted, foul, fetid
thing. The word is peculiar, and of
rare occurrence. It is met with only
here and Lev. 19. 7, Is. 65. 4, and Ezek
4. 14; in all which cases the leading
idea is plainly that of something ex-
ceedingly loathsome and offensive, par-
ticularly to the smell. Probably our
English word carrion comes the nearest
to a true deflniiion. The Gr. here lias
fiiaofxa miasma, though it elsewhere ren-
ders it by unsacrificeable and profane.
In the version of Aquila, one of the
exactest of translators, the original in
Lev. 19. 7, is rendered azopXrjrov^ Chat
B. C. 1490 ]
CHAPTER VII.
71
lion, and the soul that eateth of it
shall bear bis iniquity.
19 And the flesh that toucheth
any unclean thing shall not be eat-
en ; it shall be burnt with fire :
and as for the flesh, all that be
clean shall eat thereof
20 But the soul that eateth of the
flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offer-
ings that pertain unto the Lord,
<■ having his uncleanness upon hinn,
even that soul s shall be cut off
from his people.
21 Moreover, the soul that shall
touch any unclean things as t the
uncleanness of man, or any u un-
clean beast, or any w abominable
unclean things and eat of the flesh
o^ I he sacrifice of peace-offerings
u^iiich pertain unto the Lord, even
that soul X shall be cut off from his
people.
22 H And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
' ch. 15. 3. s Gen. 17. 14. ' ch. 1'2. and 13.
and 15. u ch. 11. 24, 28. "" Ezek. 4. 14.
J< ver, 20.
which is to be rejected, and accordantly
Willi this the apostle, 1 Tim, 4. 14,
speaking of certain meats which were
noi to be rejected, makes use of precise-
ly ihe same term. IF Shall bear his
iniquity. That is, the punishment of
his iniquity. This law is repeated, and
the sanction enforced, with fearful em-
phasis, in Lev. 19. 5-8: 'And if ye
offer a sacrifice of peace-offerings unto
the Lord, ye shall offer it at your own
will. It shall be eaten the same day
ye offer it, and on the morrow : and if
aught remain until the third day, it
shall be burnt in the fire. And if it be
eaten at all on the third day, it is abomi-
nable ; it shall not be accepted. There-
fore every one that eateth it shall bear
his iniquity, because he hath profaned
the hallowed thing of the Lord ; and
that soul shall be cut off from among
his people.'
19. And the flesh that toucheth. Chal.
23 Speak unto the children of
Israel, saying, y Ye shall eat no
manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep,
or of goat.
24 And the fat of the 7. beast that
dieth of itself, and the fat of that
which is torn with beasts, may be
used in any other use : but ye shall
in no wise eat of it.
25 For whosoever eateth the fat
of the beast, of which men offer
an offering made by fire unto the
Lord, even the soul that eateth it
shall be cut off from his people.
26 a Moreover, ye shall eat no
manner of blood, whether it be of
fowl or of beast, in any of your
dwellings.
27 Whatsoever soul it be that
eateth any manner of blood, even
that soul shall be cut off from his
people.
28 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
y ch. 3. 17. ^ ch. 17. 15. Deut. 14. 21.
Ezek. 4. 14, and 44. 31. » Gen. 9. 4. ch. 3.
17, and 17. 10—14.
'The holy flesh;' so called from its
being consecrated to holy purposes.
This polluting contact might happen
while tlie flesh of the peace-offerings
was being carried from the altar to the
place where it was eaten. IT As for
the flesh. That is, all the flesh that
w^s not defiled by touching any unclean
thing.
20. Even that soul shall be cut off
from his people. See this phrase ex-
plained in the Note on Gen. 17. 14.
Chal. ' That man shall be destroyed.'
Or. a-oXeiTat, shall perish.
Prohibition of Fat and Blood.
23-27. No manner of fat, of ox, or
of sheep, ^c. This explains and limits
the precept contained Lev. 3. 17, re-
stricting it to the fat of the three kinds
of animals offered in sacrifice. We
may perhaps recognize some physical
as well as moral reasons for this pro-
72
LEVITICIT.-
[B. C. 1490.
29 Speak unto the children of
Israel, saying, ^He that offereth
the sacrifice of his peace-offerings
Unto the Lord, shall bring his ob-
lation unto the Lord of the sacri-
fice of his peace-offerings.
80 cPlis own hands shall bring
•lie offerings of the Lord made by
lire; the fat with the breast, it
.-;i;i!l lie bring, that ''the breast
raay be waved /or a wave-offering
before the Lord.
31 e And the priest shall burn the
fat upon the altar : f but the breast
sliall be Aaron's and his sons'.
'> ch. 3. 1. c ch. 3. 3, 4, 9, 14. ^ Exod. 29.
24, 27. ch. 8. 27, and 9. 21. Numb. 6. 20.
' ch. 3.5, 11, 16. fver. 34.
hihiiioii, ' Medically considered, fal is
certainly unwholesome, and particularly
so in warm climates. Besides this, the
eating of the fat pieces in question, and
the use offal in the preparation of food,
is highly injurious to persons particu-
larly subject to cutaneous disorders, as
the Israelites seem to have been. To
this we may add, that, as it was an
object of many laws to discourage any
friendly intercourse between the Israel-
ites and the idolatrous nations, nothing
could be better calculated than the pre-
sent and other dietetic regulations, to
prevent them from joining in the festiv-
ities and social entertainments of iheir
neighbors.' — Pict. Bib. The prohibi-
tion of blood is more general, because
thv? fat was offered to God only by way
of acknowledgment ; but the blood
made atonement for the soul, and so
typified the sacrifice of Christ much
more clearly than the burning of fat ;
to this, therefore, a greater reverence
must be paid, till those types had their
accomplishment in the offering up of
the body of Christ once for all. The
Jews rightly expound this law as for-
bidding only the blood of the life, as
they express it, not that v/hich we call
the gravy, for of that they supposed it
was lawful to eat.
32 And s the right shoulder shall
ye give unto the priest/or a heave-
offering of the sacritices of your
peace-offerings.
33 He among the sons of Aaron
that offereth the blood of the
peace-offerings, and the fat, shall
have the right shoulder for his part.
34 For h the wave-breast and the
heave-shoulder have I taken of the
children of Israel from off the sac-
rifices of their peace-ofierings, and
have given them unto Aaron the
priest, and unto his sons, by a stat-
ute for ever, from among the child-
ren of Israel.
s ver. 34. ch. 9. 21. Numb. 6. 20. h E.xod.
29. 28. ch. 10. 14, 15. Numb. 13. 18. 19.
Deut. 18. 3.
Rules regulating the Priests' portion
in the Peace-offerings.
29. He that offereth, ^c. The drift
of this verse is not very obvious.
Patrick suggests that it is de.signed to
convey the intimation that before the
offerer and his friends feasted together,
v. 15-18, he was to take care out of the
sacrifice of his peace-offerings, ' to bring
his oblation unto the Lord ;' i. e. to see
that God had first his part of the peace-
offering, for until that was done, no one
could lawfully have any thing to do with
the remainder. This interpretation we
have, on the whole, little hesitation in
adopting.
30. His own hands shall bring, fyc.
That is, it was an act which the offerer
himself was to perform ; and yet we
learn elsewhere that this was not to be
independently of the agency of the
priest. For the sacrifice being slain
and duly divided, the priest was to put
what belonged to the Lord, viz. the fat
with the breast and the shoulder, into
the offerer's own hands, that he might
present it himself to the Divine Ma-
jesty. This was to be done with a
waving motion upward, in token of his
devoutly proffering and delivering it
over to God as Lordof heaven and earth.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VIL
73
35 H This is the portion of the
anointing of Aaron, and of the
anointing of his sons, out of the
offerings of the Lord made by fire,
in the daj' u'he?i he presented them
to minister unto the Lord in the
priest's office ;
36 Which the Lord commanded
to be given them of the children
of Israel, i in the day that he anoint-
ed them, by a statute for ever
throughout their generations.
'■ ch 8. 12, 30 Exod 40. 13, 15. kch. G 9.
The act im))lied also an atlcnowledg-
rnent th;it every good thing came down
from God, and an intimation that all the
ways of his peoph^ should fen^i vpirard,
so ihat their conversation should be in
hf aven.
35. This is tlie portion of the anomt-
ing, S,-c. Heb. mr!^ Tb^T zotli mish-
hath, this is the anointing of Aaron, &c.
That is, this wave-breast and heave-
shoulder are the portion or privilege
arising from their being anointed and
consecrated to the priesthood. That
the allusion is to the ' portion,' is evi-
dent from the preceding and succeeding
context ; and in v. 36, it is said, •' which
the Lord commanded to be given them,'
&c. As for ' anointing' being used for
' anointed ones,' it is a phraseology
similar to that by which ' dreams ' is
put for ' dreamers,' Jer. 27. 9, ' spirits '
for ' spiritual gifts,' 1 Cor. 14. 12,
' thanksgivings ' for * companies of
ihanksgivers,' Num. 12. 31, 'circum-
cision ' for ' persons circumcised,' Rom.
2. 26, ' divination ' for the ' rewards of
divination,' Num. 22.7, 'iniquity' for
the ' punishment or desert of iniquity,'
Lev. 7. 18, Job 11. 6, and so in numer-
ous other instances.
CHAPTER VIII.
The Consecration of Aaron and his
sons to the Priesthood.
The sacred writer here passes from
sacred things to sacred persons. The
7
.37 This is the law k of the burnt-
offering, 1 of the meat-offering, m and
of the sin-offering, nand of the ires-
pass-offering, oand of the conse-
I crations, and p of the sacrifice of the
peace-offerings;
j 3S Which the Lord commanded
j Moses in mount Sinai, in the day
j that he commanded the children
I of Israel q to offer their oblations
unto the Lord, in the wilderness
of Sinai.
1 ch. 6. 14. L-i ch. 6. 25. n xer. 1. o ch.
6.20. Exod. 29. 1. Pver. 11. q ch. 1. 2.
present cliapter describes the ceremonies
I previously ordained which marked the
I induction of Aaron and his sons into
' the priestly ofiice. Most of the rites,
however, peculiar to this occasion, are
the same with those commanded Ex.29,
and v.hich are there explained at length.
Consequently but brief comments will
be requisite in this connexion. It may
suffice simply to remark, that the priest-
hood was originally appointed to remain
in Aaron's family through all succeed-
ing generations, and no one who was
I not of that lineage might on any ac-
count intrude into the sacred office.
Aaron was succeeded by Eleazar, his
eldest surviving son, after the death of
Nadab and Abihu, and it continued in
his family through seven generations,
till the time of Eli. On his death it
was removed from that branch for the
wickedness of Eli's sons, and given to
the descendants of Ilhamar, Aaron's
other son. In the time of Solomon it
returned again into the line of Eleazar,
in which it continued till the Babylonish
captivity. Jeshua, the first high priest
after the return of the Jews, was of the
same family; but after his time the
appointment became very uncertain and
irregidar ; and after Judea became a
Roman province, no regard whatever
was paid to this part of the original
divine institution. The office was in
fact in process of time so far desecrated
in the general corruption, that it was
74
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER VIII. j
A ND the LoKD spake unto Mo- 1
-^^ ses, saying, i
2 a Take Aaron and his sons with I
hin), and ^ llie garments, and c the I
anointing oil, and a bullock for the |
sin-offering, and two rams, and a
basket of unleavened bread ; |
3 And gather thou all the con- 1
gregaiion together unto the door of ^
the tabernacle of the congregation.
a Exod. 29. ], a, 3. b Exod. 23. 2, 4.
«: Exod. 30. 24, 25.
often sold to llie highest bidder, whether
of the family or not ; and so things con-
tinued, till linally the nation had filled
up the measure of its iniquities, and
priest, altar, and temple were all swept
away in the abolilion of the Jewish
economy and the dispersion of the race.
2. Take Aaron and his sons with him,
and the garments. That is, the holy
priestly garments which God had be-
fore commanded to be made, and which
vere now ready.
3. Gather thou all the congregation.
That is, the elders and principal men
of the congregation, who represented
the body of the people, as the court
■would hold but few of the many thou-
sands of Israel. This is confirmed by
Lev. 9. 1, where Moses is said to have
called the elders together instead of the
whole congregation, as here.
4. Thcassembly was gathered together.
Heb. m5 tdah ; the same word with
that rendered * congregation ' in v. 2,
and which ought here also, for uniform-
ity's sake, to have been rendered in the
same way. The nature and objects of
the Leviiical priesthood were such as
to make a large attendance of the heads
of the people proper in itself, and they
•»vould moreover serve as witnesses that
Aaron and his sons were not intruders
into the sacred office, but solemnly and
specially inducted into it, according to
the express appointment of Jehovah
himself.
4 And Moses did as the Lof.d
commanded him ; and the assem-
bly was gathered together unto
the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation.
5 And Moses said unto the con-
gregation, d This IS the thing which
the Lord commanded to be done.
6 And Moses brought Aaron and
his sons, eand washed ihem with
water.
d Exod. 29. 4. c Exod. 29. 4.
5. This is the thing which the Lord
commanded to be done. q. d. I am now
about to enter upon that work which
the Lord commanded when I was with
him in the holy mount, Ex. 29. 4. And
so throughout the remainder of the
present chapter, whatever portions of
it are left unexplained, they will be
found illustrated in the corresponding
chapter in Exodus.
6. Washed them with water. That is,
caused them to wash themselves. See
upon this ceremony of ablution the Note
on Ex. 29. 4. We may give, however,
in this connexion the following note
from the Pictorial Bible. 'Here the
ceremonies of consecration commence
with ablutions, and we have seen that
the priests were required to bathe their
hands and feet whenever they entered
the tabernacle. This, doubtless, was
not merely to ensure physical cleanness,
but also to symbolize that spiritual
purity with which man should appear
before God. The present washing,
however, is distinguished from the daily
ablution ; inasmuch as the whole per-
son seems now to have been washed,
but only the hands and feet on common
occasions. The idea of the fitness of
such a practice is so obvious, tliat it
has been more or less in use in most
religious systems. We find at the
heathen temples, lavers of a similar
use to this at the tabernacle. The
Egyptian priests washed themselves
with cold water twice every day, and
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VIII.
75
twice at night ; the Greeks had their
sprinklings, the Romans their lustra-
tions and lavatioiis ; the ancient Chris-
tians practised ablution before receiving
llie sacrament, and also bathed their
eyes on entering a church. The Roman
Calliolic church retains something of
liie practice of ablution before, and
sometimes after mass ; and Calmet
says that the holy-water vessels at the
entrance of their churches are in imita-
tion ol' the lavcr of the tabernacle. The
oriental Clnistians have also their
solenni wasliings on particular occa-
sions, such as Good Friday. The prac-
tice of ablution was adopted by Maliom-
raed in a very full sense ; for his follow-
ers are not only obliged to perform
iheir abluaons before they enter a
mosque, but before they commence the
prayers, wherever offered, which they
are required to repeat five times each
day. This is certainly the most bur-
densome system of ablutioa which ever
existed in ancient or modern times.
The Hindoos also rejoice in the purify-
ing virtues of their idolized Ganges, and
wash also in other waters, because they
believe that such will be equally effect-
ual, if, whilst th y bathe, they say, 'O
Ganges, purify me !' In fact, nothing
is or has been more common than ablu-
tions in tlie worship which different
nations render to their gods ; and there
are few acts connected with their ser-
vice which are not begun or ended with
some rile symbolical of purification.
In the religion of classical antiquity,
the priest was obliged to prepare him-
self by ablution for offering sacrifice;
for which purpose there was usually
water at the entrance of the teniple. In
very ancient times the priests seem to
have previously bathed themselves in
some river or stream. But such ablu-
tions were only necessary in sacrifices
to the celestial gods, sprinkling being
suflScient for the terrestrial and infernal
deities. (See Banier's ' Mythology of
the Ancients,' vol. 1. p. 271.) — We may
here observe, that, from the obligation
of the priests to wash their feet before
entering the tabernacle, and for other
reasons, it has been inferred that they
officiated with bare feet. It is also ob-
served, that in the enumeration of the
articles of the priestly dress, sandals
are not mentioned, neither does Jose-
phus in his account speak of them. It
is true that Plutarcii represents the
Hebrew priest as officiating with bus-
kins ; but his authority is of the least
possible weight on such a subject. We
believe ourselves that the priests did
officiate barefoot, althougii our convic-
tion does not proceed from the reasons
thus stated ; but rather from the knowl-
edge that it was in very ancient times,
asat present,a conmion mark oi' respect
in the East to uncover the feet. (See
Note on Exod. 3. 6.) Even classical
heathenism affords instances of this
usage. ' Adore and sacrifice with naked
feet,' was a maxim of Pythagoras,
which he probably brought, with the
rest of his philosophy, from the East.
The temple of Diana at Crete might not
be entered with covered feet ; the Ro-
man ladies were obliged to be barefoot
in the temple of Vesta ; and the suppli-
ants went barefoot to the temple of
Jupiter when they prayed for rain. The
Mohammedans, and the Asiatic and
Abyssinian Christians, invariably take
off their shoes before tliey enter a place
of worship, as do the Brahmins of India
when they enter their temples. As to
the Jews themselves, it is impossible to
say, unless by inference, what they did
in the tabernacle ; but it seems fair, to
conclude that they did the same as after-
wards in the Temple, and that they
th.ere officiated barefoot we have the
concurrent testimony of various writers.
Maimonides says that none were allow-
ed to enter the Temple with shoes, or
with unclean feet.^or with a staff, or in
the dress in which they worked at their
respective callings. The Talmud is
positive on the same subject, saying
that no priest or layman might enter
with shoes ; but as this regulation, in
76
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
7 fAnd he put upon him the
gcoat, and girded him with the
girdle, and clothed him with the
robe, and put the eohod upon him,
and he girded him wit.i tne curious
girdle of the ephod, and bound it
unto him therewith.
8 And he put the breast-plate
upon him: also he i^put in the
breast-plate the Urim and the
Thurnmim.
9 i And he put the mitre upon his
head; also upon the mitre, even
upon his fore-front, did he put the
f Exod. -20. 5. e Esod. 2S 4. h Exod.
23. 30. i Exod. -29. 6.
conjuiK'tion with their way of life and
the lliiniifss of their official dress, was
injurious to their health, there was a
small apartment or closet, called the
'stove' or 'fire-room,' which had a
heated floor, on which tlie priests might
occasionally warm their feet. (See
Saurin's 'Dissertations,' 44. and 45.;
Cabnet's ' Commontaire Litttral,' on
Exod. 3. 5, and 30. IS, &c.)'
7. And he put upon him the coat, 4"C.
It would seem tliat Moses on this occa-
sion, by an extraordinary commission
from God, executed himself the office
of High-Priest on this and the six fol-
lowing days.
8. He put in the breast-plate the Urim
and Thurnmim. See Note on Ex. 2S. 30.
10. Anointed the tabernacle. Prob-
ably by pulling his finger in the oil
and then smearing it over the tabernacle
and its utensils.
11. Anointed the altar and all his ves-
sels, to sanctify them. The altar by
these rites was sanctified, so that
thenceforward tlirough the sacrifices
daily offered upon it, atonement might
be made for the sins of the people,
whereas afterwards the altar was to be
considered as sanctifying the gifts and
oblations laid upon it, according to
Mat. 23. 19, ' Ye fools and blind ; for
whether is greater, the gift, or the altar
that sanctificth the gift.'
golden plate, the holy crown; as
the Lord ^ commanded Moses.
10 » And Moses took the anointing
oil. and anointed the tabernacle
and all that icas therein, and sanc-
tified them.
11 And he sprinkled thereof upon
the altar seven times, and anointed
the altar and all his vessels, boih
the laver and his foot, to sanctify
them.
12 And he m poured of the anoint-
ing oil upon Aaron's head, and
anointed him, to sanctify him.
k Exod. 28. 37, &c. ' Exod. 30. 26, -21, SS,
29. m ch. 21. 10, U. Exod. 29. 7, and 30. 30,
Ps. 133. 2.
12. Poured of the anointing oil upon
Aaron's head, and anointed him, to sane-
tify him. That is, to set him apart to
his office. ' From comparing this verse
with V, 30, it is thought that Aaron
alone was anointed on the head, his
sons being merely sprinkled ; or, as we
should understand, that Aaron was
sprinkled in common wilh his sons, but
that the anointing or pouring out of oil
upon his head was an addition peculiar
to him. The custom of setting persons
apart for particularly dignified or holy
offices, by anointing, seems to have
originated in the East, and in most
cases appears to have symbolized the
effusion of the- gifts and graces which
they were pre,sumed to receive from
heaven to qualify them for distinguished
offices. Hence this sacred anointing
seems to have been considered as invest-
ing wilh a peculiar sanctity the person
on whom it had been conferred. We
see this in the reverence with which
'the Lord's anointed' is on all occa-
sions mentioned in Scripture. The per-
sons set apart to their offices by anoint-
ing, among the Hebrews, were the
priests, kings, and prophets ; but there
is some doubt about the latter, to which
we shall have occasion to advert, as
well as to the unction of the kings.
The precious oil seems to have been
more profusely expended on Aaron thao
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER VIII.
77
13 nAnd Moses brought Aaron's
sons, and put coats upon them, and
girded them with girdles, and put
bonnets upon them; as the Lord
commanded Moses.
14 oAnd be brought the bullock
fiir the sin-oftt«ring : and Aaron and
his sons plaid their hands upon the
head of the bullock for the sin-
ciferino:.
15 And he slew it; qand Moses
took the blood, and put it upon the
horns of the altar round about with
his tinger, and purified the altar,
and poured the blood at the bottom
ol' the aliar, and sanctified it, to
itiaice reconciliation upon it.
If) ''And he took all the fat that
ivas upon the inwards, and the caul
odovc the liver, and the two kid-
i\f^y^, and their fat, and Moses
burned il upon the altar.
17 But the bullock, and his hide,
ills fiesh, and his dung, he burnt
with fire without the camp; as
the Lord s commanded Moses.
IS "ii 'And he brought the ram
fur the burnt-offering: and Aaron
and his sons laid their hands upon
iht' head of the ram.
19 And he killed it; and Moses
sprinkled the blood upon the altar
round about.
20 And he cut the ram into
n Exod. 29. S 9. o Exod. 29. 10. Ezek.
43 19. Pch. 4.4. q Exod. 29.12, 3G. ch.
4. 7. Ezek. 43. 20, 26. Heb. 9. 22. r Exod.
29. 13. cl). 4. 8. s ch 4. 11, 12, Exod. 29.
11. t Exod. 29. 15
ill any other application. We learn
IVniii Ps. 132. 2, that being poured on
his head, il ran down on his beard and
to the collar of his coal (the robeof ihe
eplidd) — not to the skirts of his gar-
ments, as lliere translated. Tiie Jew-
ish writers have many fancies about the
mode in which ihe oil was applied, into
which we need not enter. If the high-
priest was, as some stale, fully robed
before anointed, the mitre might have
oeen taken off for that ceremony: but
7*
pieces; and Moses burnt the head,
and the pieces, and the fat.
21 And he washed the inwards
and the legs in water; and Moses
burnt the whole ram upon the
altar: it icas a burnt-sacrifice for a
sweet savour, afid an offering made
by fire unto the Lord; uas the
Lord commanded Moses.
22 II And w he brought the other
ram, the ram of consecration : and
Aaron and his sons laid their hands
upon the head of the ram.
23 And he slew it; and Moses
took of the blood of it, and put it
upon the tip of Aaron's ri|^ht ear,
and upon the thumb of his right
hand, and upon the great toe of his
right foot.
24 And he brought Aaron's son's,
and Moses put of the blood upon
the tip of their right ear, and upon
the thumbs of their right hands,
and upon the great toes of their
right feet: and Moses sprinkled
the blood upon the altar round
about.
25 xAnd he took the fat, and the
rump, and all the fat that was upon
the inwards, and the caul above the
liver, and the two kidneys, and
their fat, and the right shoulder:
26 yAnd out of the basket of un-
leavened bread, that icas before
the Lord, he took one unleavened
u Exod. 29, 18. w Exod. 29. 19. 31, x Exod,
29. 22. y Exod. 29 23.
others think that the liara was not put
on till after the anointing.' — Pict. Bib.
15. And he slew it ; and Muses took,
S,-c. Heb. nr?2 np''1 t2n"i;*^l va-yis'kut
va-yikka'li moshth. It would not per-
haps be easy to show that there is
any thing contrary to the grammatical
construction in rendering this passage,
' And Moses slew it, and took,' &c., bui
as the versions are all in favor of the
present rendering, we prefer to abide
by it.
78
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
one wafer, and put ihem on the fat,
and upon the right shoulder:
27 And he put all z upon Aaron's
hands, and upon his sons' hands,
and waved \.\\en\ for a wave-offer-
ing before the Lord.
28 a And Moses took them from
off their hands, and burnt them on
the altar upon the burni-offering:
they were consecrations for a sweet
savour : it is an offering made by
fire unto the LoPwD.
29 And Mioses took the breast,
and waved it for a wave-offering
before the Lord : for of the ram
of consecration it was Moses'
bpart; as the Lord commanded
Moses.
30 And c Moses took of the
anointing oil, and of the blood
v/hich teas upon the altar, and
sprinkled it upon Aaron, anf/ upon
his garments, and upon his sons,
and upon his sons' garments with
him ; and sanctified Aaron, and
his garments, and his sons, and his
sons' garments with him.
31 II And Moses said unto Aaron
2 Exod. 29. 24, &c. ^ Exod. 29. 25. b Exod.
29. 20. c Exod. 29. 21, and 30. 30. Numb.
3. 3. d Exod. 29. 31, 32.
33. Ye shall not go out of the door of
the tabernacle in seven days. That is,
out ol" the court of the labeniacle, wiih
which door of the tabernacle is often
synoninioLis. The Heb. has nrS?3
mippcthah, which might as well be ren-
dered ' from the door,' as ' out of the
door,' for the consecration was not per-
formed u-ithin, but at the door of the
tabernacle. The Gr. has very properly
OTTO Ovpai, from the door. IT For
seven days shall he consecrate you.
That is, Moses shall consecrate you ;
for the command of God is here referred
to, and cited according to the sense,
Ex. 29. 35. So V. 34, 'as he (Moses)
hath done.' The number scren among
the Hebrews was the number of per-
fection, and the seven days of conse-
and to his sons, dBoil the flesh at
the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation; and there eat it
with the bread that Z5 in the basket
of consecrations, as I commanded,
saying, Aaron and his sons shall
eat it.
32 cAnd that which remaineth
of the flesh and of the bread shall
ye burn with fire.
33 And ye shall not go out of the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation in seven days, until the
days of your consecration be at an
end : for f seven days shall he con-
secrate you.
34 g As he hath done this day, so
the Lord hath commanded to do,
to make an atonement for you.
35 Therefore shall ye abide al
the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation day and night seven
days, and h keep the charge of the
Lord, that ye die not : for so I am
commanded.
36 So Aaron and his sons did all
things which the Lord command-
ed by the hand of Moses.
e Exod. 29. 34. f Exod. 29. 30, 35. Ezek.
43 25, 2G. g Heb. 7. 16. h Num. 3. 7, and
9. 19. Dent. 11. 1. 1 Kin?s 2 3.
cjration implied a full and perfect con-
secration to the sacerdotal office, and
correctly intimated, moreover, that
their whole lives were to be devoted to
this solemn service.
34. As he hath done this day. That
is, as hath been done ; another instance
of that indefinite phraseolrgy of which
we have belore so frequently spoken.
See Note on Lev. 1. 5. Thus also 2
Sam. 15. 31, ' And one told David,' i. e.
it was told him. Mark 10. 3, ' And
they brought,' compared with Mat. 19.
13, ' Then were brought.'
CHAPTER IX.
Aaron^s entrance on the Priestly Office.
1. It came to pass on the eighth day.
Not upon the eighth day of the month,
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IX,
79
CHAPTER IX.
AND ait came to pass on the
eighth day, that Moses called
Aaron and his sons, and the elders
of Israel ;
2 And he said unto Aaron, b Take
tliee a young calf for a sin-offering,
cand a rara for a burnt-offering,
without blemish, and offer them
before the Lord.
3 And unto the children of Israel
ihou shalt speak, saying, J Take ye
a kid o{ tiie goats for a sin-offer-
ing; and a calf and a lamb, both
of the first year, without blemish,
for a burnt-offering ;
4 Also a bullock and a ram for
a Ezek. 43. 27. b ch 4. 3, and 8. 14. Exod.
•29 1. <: ch. S, 13. d ch. 4. 23. Ezra 6. 17,
aud 10. 19.
hilt on the first day after their conse^
CJ-ation, which occupied seven days,
and before which they were deemed
unfit to miiuster in holy things, being
considered in a state of imperfection.
All creatures, for the most part, were
considered as in a state of uncleanness
aiid imperfection seven days, and per-
fected on the eighth. So here the
priests were not admitted until the
eighth day to minister in their office.
IT And the elders of Israel. Gr.
mv yF.povaiav lapan^', the eldership or
senate of Israel. These, together wiih
a large body of the people, were assem-
bled in the court, v, 23, 24, where it
was the duty of the elders to impose
their hands'upon the sin-offering of the
congregation.
2. Take thee a young calf for a sin-
offering. Heb. ^pn p ben bcifcdr, son
of the herd. Tl'.is offt-ring is supposed
by the Jewish w^rilers to have been
appointed for Aaron in person, in refer-
ence to his sin in the matter of the
golden calf. Eut it may be sufficient to
hold that this offering respected merely
the general frailties and imperfections
of Aaron., as one of a fallen race, who,
though an high-priest by office, yet stood
peace-offerings, to sacrifice before
the Lord; and ea meat-offering
mingled with oil: for f to-day the
Lord will appear unto you.
5 ^ And they brought'/Aaf which
Moses commanded before the tab-
ernacle of the congregation : and
all the congregation drew near and
stood before the Lord.
6 And Moses said. This is the
thing which the Lord commanded
that ye should do : and g the glory
of the Lord shall appear unto you.
7 And Moses said unto Aaron,
Go unto the altar, and h offer thy
sin-offering, and thy burnt- offering,
and make an atonement for thyself,
e ch. 2. 4. f ver. 6 23. Exod. 29. 43.
S ver. 23. Exod. U. 16. h ch. 4 3. 1 Sam.
3. 14. Heb. 5. 3, and 7. 27, and 9. 7.
in as much need of an atonement as any
of the people whom he represented.
4. To-day the Lord shall appear unto
you. That is, the visible glory of the
Lord will appear in the increased efful-
gence of the cloudy pillar resting over
the tabernacle, and also in sending forth
from the midst of the cloud a fire to
consume the offerings upon the altar.
Chal. ' The glory of the Lord shall be
revealed.' Conip. v. 6. By reason of
this expected appearance, the people
were to prepare and sanctify themselves
by every kind of sacrifice, in allusion to
which it is said of a still more glorious
aj)pearance, of which this was a shadow,
1 John 2. 3, * We know that when he
shall appear we shall be like him, for
we shall see him as he is. And every
man that hath this hope in him purifieih
himself as he is pure.'
5. All the congregation drew near and
stood before the Lord. That is, before
thesanctuary, in the court ; before the
dwelling-place of the Lord's glory.
7. Go unto the altar and offer, ^c.
These further prescribed offerings, so
immediately succeeding those which
had been offered at the consecration,
show very forcibly the consciousness
80
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
and for the people : and i offer the
offering of the people, and make an
atonement for them; as the Lord
commanded.
8 H Aaron therefore went unto
the altar, and slew the calf of the
sin-offering, which was for himself.
9 k And the sons of Aaron brought
the blood unto him : and he .dipped
his finger in the blood, and iput it
upon the horns of the altar, and
poured out the blood at the bottom
of the altar:
10 m But the fat, and the kidneys,
and the caul above the liver of the
sin-offering, he burnt upon the
altar; » as the Lord commanded
Moses.
11 o And the flesh and the hide he
> ch. 4. 16, 20. Heb. 5. 1. k ch. 8. 15.
I See ch. 4. 7. m ch. 8. 16. n ch. 4. 8.
burnt with fire without the camp
12 And he slew the burnt-offer-
ing; and Aaron's sons presented
unto him the blood, p which he
sprinkled round about upon the
altar.
13 qAnd they presented the
burnt-offering unto him, with the
' pieces thereof, and the head : and
he burnt them upon the altar.
14 'And he did wash the inwards
and the legs, and burnt them upon
the burnt-offering on the altar.
15 1[ s And he brought the people's
offering, and took the goat which
icas the sin-offering for the people,
and slew it, and offered it for sin,
as the first.
o ch. 4. 11, and 8. 17. P ch. 1. 5, and
8. 19. q ch. 8. 20. r ch. 8. 21. s yer. 3.
Isa. 53. 10. Heb. 2. 17, and 5. 3.
which even the holiest and most ac-
cepted persons ought to entertain of
their own sinfulness. Those who are
holy by office are stiJl to know and con-
fess that ihey are sinners by nature,
even as others.
8. Aaron therefore went unto the
altar. These being the first offerings
that were ever offered by the Levitical
priesthood, according to the newly
enacted law of sacrifices, the manner of
offering them is particularly related,
that it might appear how exactly they
agreed with the institution. Aaron was
first required to make expiation for
himself, that he might thereby be
qualified to do it for the people.
^r Aiid slew the calf. This olten im-
plies no more than ordered, procured,
i>r superintended the slaying. See Note
on Lev. 1. 5, But in the present in-
stance it is not unreasonable to suppose
that Aaron performed the slaughter in
person.
9. The sons of Aaron hrought the
blood unto him. Having cauglu the
blood in basins, as it run from the vic-
tim when killed, they brought it to him
as he stood waiting at the altar. The
ceremonies that followed have been
already described.
10. He burnt upon the altar. He laid
them in order upon the altar, that they
might be consumed, not with ordinary
fire, but with that which was ere long
to come forth from before the Lord ; for
common fire, it would seem, was no
longer to be used when Aaron's sacri-
fice began, as it had been all along be-
fore. Still it is possible that the mira-
culous fire did not issue forth till the
holocaust of the people came to be
be offered, v. 24.
15. He brought the people's offering
Having duly presented the requisite
offering for himself, he wa% now pre-
pared to officiate in behalf of the people,
which he did according to the mode
prescribed, Ex. 29. 39, 40. Lev. chs.
1. 2. and 7., on which see Notes.
^ Took the goat — and offered it for sin
Heb. ini^LDni ye'hatteihu. It is the
same term with that which occurs Lev.
S. 15, and which is both here and there
rendered by the Gr. KaQcwiatv, cleansed.
The Heb. word ^"CTl 'hotd, in its radical
or Kal form, signifies to sin ; while in
the Piel form it is used to signify jjuj-g--
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER IX.
81
16 And he brought the burnt-
offering, and offered it ' according
to the manner.
17 And he brouglit u the meat-
offering, and took an handful there-
of, and burnt it upon the altar,
x beside the burnt-sacrifice of the
morning.
IS He slew also the bullock and
the ram for ya sacrifice of peace-
offerings, which icas for the people:
and Aaron's sons presented unto
him the blood, which besprinkled
upon the altar round about,
19 And the fat of the bullock, and
t ch. 1. 3, 10. u ver. 4. ch. 2. 1, 2. x Ex.
29. 38. y ch. 3. 1, &c.
ing auay sin by sacrifice. (See Note
on Lev. 6.20.) Tlius Gen.31. 39, ' That
which was lorn of beasts, I bare the
loss of it (nrtDS* a'hatt'tnah, I expiated,
atoned, made satisfaction for it).' Ps.
51. 7, ' Purge me ("^Z^'^Tiri te'haite'tni)
with hyssop, and I shall be clean.'
Lev. 8. 15, • And Moses purified (^^t2^"'
ye'hatti) the altar and sanctified it.'
16. According to the manner. Heb.
i25'i;/2S kammishpiit, according to the
judgment or ordinance. See Note on
Lev. 5. 10. Gr. us KaBnKci, as it teas fit.
Tlie ordinance alluded to is found in the
general law of the first chapter.
17. Beside the burnt sacrifice of the
mai-ning. That is, in addition to the
daily sacrifice of the lamb, which was
not to be superseded by the extra offer-
ings of this or any other occasion.
19. That which covereth, <§-c. ' The
fat that covereth the inwards ' is the fat
thin membrane extended over the intes-
lines, and att.iched to the concave part
of the liver, called the omentum, or caul.
And by ' the caul above the liver,' is
commonly understood, after the Septua-
gint, the great lobe of the liver (major
lobus hepatis), which, although part of
the liver itself, ma/ very properly be
rendered ' the lobe over ' or 'by the
liver.' As to the caul, it was a com-
mon offering in the sacrifices of the
of the ram, the rump, and that
which covereth the inwards, and
the kidneys, and the caul above the
liver :
20 And they put the fat upon the
breasts, ^and he burnt the fat upon
the altar:
21 And the breasts and the right
shoulder Aaron waved ^for a
wave-offering before the Loud; as
Moses commanded.
22 And Aaron lifted up his hand
toward the people, band blessed
them ; and came down from offer-
z ch. 3. 5. 16. a Exod. 29. 24, 26. ch. 7.
30, 31, 32, 33, .34. b Numb. 6. 23. Deut.
21. 5. Luke 24. 50.
ancient heathen ; and Slrabo remarks,
that the Persians, in their sacrifices,
offered nothing else upon the altar.
Calmet, who gives these instances in his
' Commentaire Litttjral,' cites Athenoeus
in evidence that the ancients ate ihe
liver covered with, or enfolded in, the
caul ; and he thinks it probable that the
liver of the victim was, in the same
manner, wrapped up in the caul before
it was laid upon the altar ; and that this
is what Moses means by the ' caul
above' or upon the liver.
22. Aaron lifted up his hand toward
the people, and blessed them. By im-
ploring, and then pronouncing the
divine blessing upon them. The so-
lemnity of blessing the people in the
name of the Lord appertained especially
to the priestly office ; Deut. 10. 8, ' The
Lord separated the tribe of Levi to
bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord,
to stand before the Lord to minister
unto him, and to bless in his name unto
this day.' The form of the benediction
is given Num. 6. 23, 27. Considered as
a type, this was accomplished by our
great high-priest, Christ Jesus, when,
having fini^^hed his ministry on earth,
' he lifted up his hands and blessed' his
disciples, at his ascension into heaven,
Luke 24. 50. IT And came down.
That is, from the bank or elevation
82
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
ing of the sin-offering, and the
burnt-offering, and peace-offerings.
23 And Mioses and Aaron went
into the tabernacle of the congre-
gation, and came out, and blessed
the people: c and the glory of the
LoiiD appeared unto all the people.
c ver. 6. Numb. 14. 10, and 16. 19, 42.
U'hich formed the ascent to the altar, as
steps were forbidden.
23. Moses and Aaron went into the
tabernacle. Aaron, the priest, went in
according to the law, Ex. 30. 7, 9, to
burn incense on the golden altar; Moses
went in with Aaron, in all likelihood to
instruct him in the manner of the ser-
vice that was to be performed there,
such as burning the incense, lighting
the lamps, setting in order the shew-
hread, &c., that he might instruct his
sons in it. IF The glory of the Lord
appeared unto all the people. That is,
the visible sign of God's glorious pre-
sence, indicated either by the fire men-
tioned in the next verse, or by the more
luminous appearance of the cloudy pil-
lar, as in Ex. 16. 10, and 40. 34, or by
both. It was a token of God's gracious
acceptance of them and of their ser-
vices, as in 1 Kings S. 10— 12. The
miraculous fire now sent forth from the
divine presence, was, according to the
Hebrews, kept alive upon the altar till
the time of Solomon. Under the second
temple, the Jews confess that the sacred
fire was wanting.
24. They shouted, ^-c. From the
combined effect of wonder and joy ; de-
voutly and ardently giving thanks to
God for this mark of his special favor.
Thus on a similar occasion, 2 Chron.
27. 3, * When all the sons of Israel saw
how the fire came down, and the glory
of the Lord shone upon the house, they
bowed themselves with their faces to
the ground, upon the pavement, and
worshipped and praised tlie Lord, say-
ing. For he is good, for his mercy en-
4urelh for ever.' Had they not been
24 And d there came a fire out
from before tlie Lord, and consum-
ed upon the altar the burnt-offer-
ing and the fat : uJnch when ali
the people saw, e ibey shouted,
and lell on their faces.
d Gen. 4. 4. Judg. 6. 21. 1 Kings 18. 33.
■2 Chron. 7. 1. Ps. -20. 3. c i Kings 13. 3D.
2 Chron 7, 3. Ezra 3. 11.
previously taught to expect some extra-
ordinary expressions of tlie divine re-
gard, they would probably have been
terrified as Gideon and Manoah were ;
but being prepared, they were filled
with triumph and exullaiion, and rent
the air with their shouts.
CHAPTER X.
We are called, in the present chapter,
to pnss by a melancholy transition from
a scene of high festive, but hoi)-, re-
joicing, to a scene of awful judgment
uiid heart-rending sorrow. The taber-
nacio had been finished j Aaron and his
four sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar
and Illiamar, had been consecrated to
the priesthood ; the victims had been
slain ; Moses and Aaron had solemnly
blessed the congregation; the divine
requirements had all been complied
with ; and in attestation of God's ac-
ceptance of their services, his glory had
appeared to all the peojde, and the fire
of heaven had descended upon the ahar
and kindled a flame never to be quench-
ed. In the midst of these hallowed
solemnities, when all the assembled
host were bowing before the Lord, anil
giving vent to expressions of profound
but chastened joy, an act of rasli, pre-
sumptuous, and sacrilegious daring on
the part of Nadab and Abihu, in a mo-
ment turns the scene of worship into
one of woe, and spreads sackcloth over
the tabernacle ! Scarcely liad the celes-
tial fire come down in mercy to con\ume
the sacrifice, when again it descends in
wrath to consume the sacrificers ! This
tragical event is thus briefly but dis.
linctly recorded by Moses, whosa
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER X.
83
characteristic it is neither to extenuate '
nor set down aught in malice ; ' And ;
Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, !
look either of them iiis censer, and j)ut
fire therein, and put incense thereon, I
and offered strange fire before the Lord,
which he commanded them not. And
there went out fire from the Lord, and
devoured them, and they <lied before
the Lord.' The words are few, but of
fr'arfuUy solemn import, and the whole I
narrative presents a large theme of
• alulary practical remark and admoni-
iiun. The principal reflections sug-
gested by the mournful occurrence will
\,e adduced in the course of our com-
ments on the several verses ; but we
may properly pause, at the outset, to
consider somewhat particularly the
nature, circumstances, and grounds of
the offence wiiich drew down such a
terrible infliction of wrath upon the
perpetrators. Whatever may be deter-
mined as to the precise nature of the
crime, it is clear that it was aggravated |
by the character of those by whom it I
was committed. These w^re the sons,
the tw'o eldest sons, of Aaron the high
Driest. They were, from their relation
lo Aaron, men of name and note in Is-
rael ^ and they had formerly been hon-
nred with the high distinction of
•Accompanying Moses and their father
lo the summit of the hallowed mount,
where tliey were favored with a vision
of God, such as had never before been
accorded to mortal eyes ; Ex. 24. 9.
' Then went up Moses and Aaron, Na-
dab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders
of Israel ; and they saw the God of
Israel : and there^'as under his feet as
it were a paved work of a sapphire-stone,
and as it were the body oi heaven in his
clearness.' None of the seventy elders
are named ; but Moses and Aaron, Na-
dab and Abihu, from their pre-eminence
in the congregation, are expressly
designated. Again, they had just been
consecrated, along with their father, to
the dignity of the priestly office. They
had just been assisting him and Moses
in the sacred offerings. They had been
prominent actors in the solemnities of
an occasion which should above all
others have filled their souls with rev-
erence and holy awe. However it might
have been with others in the congrega-
tion, we can scarcely imagine tisat any
but the devoute&l sentiments should
have penetrated their spirits in view of
the transactions in which they were
engaged. Yet in the midst of it all
they sinned a sin, the enormity of which
is most effectually proclaimed by the
tremendous punishment which it imme-
diately drew after it. They were struck
dead with their censers in their hands,
without a moment's warning • What a
fearful exhibition of the truth, that
God's jealousy burns fiercest about his
altar .'
But the question occurs as to the real
nature of the ofience ior which they
perished. In what did it consist? — a
point on which it is not easy to give a
perfectly satisfactory decision. The
text simply informs us that they ' offer-
ed strange fire before the Lord, which
he commanded them not.' What this
was we shall shortly endeavor to show ;
but we may here remark, that in all
probability their crime was of a com-
plicated nature. From a careful in-
spection of the context, it would appear,
that their sin is not to be resolved into
any one form of disobedience, but tliat
it involved a number. And in the first
place, it would seem that there was
ground for the belief suggested by most
commentators, that they had indulged
too freely in wine. This seems to be
reasonably inferred from the solemn
prohibition, v. 9, 10, * Do not drink wine
nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons
with thee, when ye go into the taberna-
cle of the congregation, lest ye die: it
shall 1 e a statute for ever throughout
your generations : And that ye may put
difference between holy and unholy, and
between unclean and clean.' The con-
jecture therefore is very plausible, that
tliey had rendered themselves incapably
84
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
cf the due discharge of their duty by ,
intemperance ; that they had partaken j
of Ihe drink-offerings to a criminal ex- :
cess ; and thus become incapacitated to j
put a difference between holy and un- i
holy, and between clean and unclean, i
If there be truth in this supposition, ■
what a commentary does it afford on ,
tlie pernicious effects of stimulating i
liquors, especially when used by the I
ministers of the altar ! By clouding j
th.e moral perceptions, and inflaming !
the passions, they render their willing !
subject capable of any sacrilege or im-
piety, and thus expose him to the aveng-
ing stroke of an outraged Divinity !
At the same time, we should hardly
infer from the tenor of the sacred story,
that this, although an element, was the
essence of their crime. There is some
reason to suppose that, apart from the
quality of the fire which they brought,
there was a rash intrusion, and a reck-
less irregularity in their going forward
to officiate at the time, and in the man-
ner they did. The whole transaction,
as recorded, has an air of abruptness
and precipitancy, as if they rushed upon
the service without waiting for instruc-
tions, either from Moses or Aaron ; and
as if they were encroaching upon the
functions of the high-priest. If by the
phrase 'oflered before the Lord,' be
meant, as some suppose, that they ad-
vanced within the most Holy Place, and
there presumed to offer incense before
the Shekinah, this certainly was a bold
invasion of Aaron's prerogative, and
one that would of course expose them
to he at once cut off for their hardihood.
This idea receives some countenance
from Lev. 16. 1, 2, whore we arc told
that ' the Lord spake unto Moses after
the death of the two sons of Aaron,
when they offered before the Lord, and
died : and the Lord said unto Moses,
Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he
come not at all times into the holy
place w ithin the vail, before the mercy-
seat, which is upon the ark ; that he
die not : for I will appear in the cloud
upon the mercy-seat.' Whether this be
the correct inference or not, we hav3 no
evidence from any other part of the
ritual that more than one priest was to
officiate in burning incense at the same
time, and here they are represented as
entering together upon a service to
which it does not appear that either of
them was now called.
But laying aside every thing that is
uncertain in the affair, we find a definite
and aggravated offence laid to their
charge. They sinned by offering strange
fire before the Lord. Instead of filling
their censers with coals from the altar,
where a supernatural fire had been
kindled from heaven, and which was
always to be used in burning incense,
they contemptuously disregarded this
ordinance, and filled their vessels with
common fire. This was the head and
front of their offending, whatever minor
accessaries of guilt may have accom-
panied it.
But where, it is said, is this act ex-
pressly forbidden? Is it any where
ordered, in so many words, that only
one kind of fire should be employed in
the services of the sanctuary? And if
there was no express precept violated,
wherein consisted the essential crim-
inality of their conduct? In reply to
this, we answer (L) That in the phrase
' which he commanded not,' we recog-
nize, according to the idiom of the
sacred writers, a clear intimation that
the thing in question had been expressly
forbidden. This is the true force of
the expression, as we shall evince in
our note on the passage. (2.) In Ex.
30. 9, it is command^ that no ' strange
incense ' should be presented, and the
implication would be inevitable, from
the nature of the case, that ' strange
fire ' was equally contrary to the divine
will. But not only so. From Lev. 16.
12, 13, we learn that on the day of atone-
ment, the priest was to ' lake a censer
full of burning coals of fire from off the
altar before the Lord, and his hands full
of sweet incense beaten small, and
13. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER X.
85
CHAPTER X.
ND aNadab and Abihu, the
- sons of Aaron, b took either of
a ch. 15. 1, and 22. 9.
•2fi. 01. 1 Chroii. 24. 2.
16. IS.
Numb. 3. 3, 4, and
'■' ch. 16. 12. Num.
bring it within the vail : And he shall
[Hit the incense upon the fire before the
Lord, that the cloud of the incense may
cover the mercy-seat that is upon the
testimony, tliat he die not.' The order
contained in this passage was indeed
£(iven subsequent to the event we are
now considering, but the presumption
obviously is, that this was the standing
usage which had been ordained from
the first institution of the legal rites,
and as to which it is not conceivable
that Aaron's sons should have been
ignorant. And as the fire miraculously
kindled on the altar was to be kept per-
petually alive, what other inference
could have been drawn, than that from
this source was all the fire to be de'rived
which was employed in the sacred rites ?
The fact that we do not meet with any
such injunction in express terms, does
not at all abate the force of the proba-
bility that they were perfectly aware
that such was the will of God in regard
to this matter.
The penalty which was inflicted upon
the transgressors was indeed severe.
But the case called for severity. The
rank and station of the offenders was a
high aggravation of their crime. It
was their duty to set. an example of
scrupulous regard to the known will of
God. They had been admitted to more
intimate communion with God than
others, and had seen more of the terrors
of his power, more of the wonders of
his grace. Moreover, the Levitical in-
stitute had been just established, and
was now for the first time going into
operation. It behoved, therefore, that
every thing should be done in exact con-
formity to the divine prescription. The
sanctity of the whole system would be
gone at once, if the ministry of it might
S
them his censer, and put fire there-
in, and put incense thereon, and
offered c strange fire before the
Lord, which he commanded them
not.
c Exod. 30. 9.
with impunity presume, in its setting
out, to dispense with any of its fixed
regulations. As, then, the deed was
daring and high-handed in the extreme,
so the expiation was proportionably
fearful ; and the whole transaction most
forcibly impresses upon us the apposite
admonition of the apostle, ' Let us have
grace whereby we may serve God ac-
ceptably, with reverence and godly
fear ; for our God is a consuming fire.'
The Sin and Death of Nadab and
Abihu.
1. Took either of them his censer.
Or, ' fire-pan ;' a vessel in which coals
of fire were put, to be sprinkled over
with i'rankincense, in order to create an
agreeable odor in the sanctuary. The
event here mentioned probably occurred
at the time of the evening sacrifice,
when the lamps were lighted, and in-
cense burned, unless, as some suppose,
one part of their oflfence was doing that
at another lime of day which was ap-
pointed to be done in the morning or
evening. IT Offered strange fire.
That is, other fire than that which the
Lord had commanded. The Lord had
sent a supernatural fire to consume the
first victim's offered to him. This was
to be kept perpetually alive, and from
it only were the coals to be taken for
the burning of incense. Such, at least,
might have been gathered to be the will
of God, although the injunction, in so
many words, is not expressly recorded
in any part of the preceding narrative.
It is probable, however, that an explicit
command to this effect had been pre-
viously given by Moses, though not
mentioned. The command was after-
wards expressly recorded, Lev. 16. 12,
in allusion to which it is said. Rev. %.5,
LEVITICUS.
\B. C. a490.
2 And there ° went out fire from i This is it that the Lord spake,
the LoKP, and devoured them, and | saying, I will be sanciified in ihem
they died bel'ore the Lord. i e that come nigh me, and before all
3 Then Moses said unto Aaron, | , j,^^j 19. 22, and -29. 43. d.. 21.6, 17,21.
d ch 9. 24. Numb. IG. 35. 2Sam. 6.7. I Isai. 52. 11. Ezek. 20. 41, and 42. 13.
' The angel look the censer and filled it j
with fire of the altar. ^ IT Whick he
commanded them not. This, by <i figure
of speech called meiosis, is probably
equivalent lo saying, * which llie Lord
had pointedly forbidden.' The follow-
ing are instances of a similar usage:
Ps. 78. 50. ' He spared not their soul
from death ;' i. e. he destroyed them
with desolating judgaients. Prov. 12. 3.
' A man shall not be established by
wickedness ;' i. e. he shall be over-
thrown. Prov. 17. 21. * The father of
a fool hath no joy ;' i. e. hath grief and
sorrow. In ihe^e cases under a nega-
tive form of expression, the contrary
affirmative is emphatically implied.
2. There icent out fire from before
the Lord. That is, Irom the Shekinah,
the symbol of the divine presence, be-
fore which tlicy had presumed to ofFer
llie strange fire upon the altar of in-
cense. This stood in front of the most
holy place, just without the vail.
IT And devoured them. The action of
the fire in this instance was peculiar, as
neither their bodies nor their clothes
were consumed by it. Targ. Jon. * It
burned their souls, but not their bodies.'
It was a flash of preternatural fire Irom
the cloud of glory that rested over the
mercy-seal. IT Died before the Lord.
That is, before the vail that covered
the mercy-seat.
3. This is it that the Lord spake. It
does not appear from the record that
these precise words were anywhere pre-
viously spoken, although some suppose
that reference is had to Ex. 19.22, ' Let
the priests which come near the Lord
sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break
forth upon them.' Others again con-
ceive that the words alluded to are
found, Ex. 29. 43, ' And there will I
meet with the children of Israel, and
the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my
glory.' The words might have been
previously spoken, but not written.
Perhajis, however, all that is intended
is, that this was the spirit and purport
of what God had said, not on any par-
ticular occasion, but in the general leimr
of his instructions to the priests.
IT I wilt be sanctified in them that come
nigh me. Heb. 'JJIpfc^ "-"ipi- bikrobai
ekkadosh. in my near ones will I be
sanctified. That is, ihose who approach
near to God in the duties of a lioly min-
istration. Thus the Priests and Levites
were such as are described Ezek.42. 13,
as 'approaching unto the Lord.' So
a^so, Ex. 19. 22, ' Let the priests also,
uhich come near to the Lord, sanclify
themselves;' i. e. those whose office it
is to come near to the Lord. So iu
1 Pet. 4. 17, judgment is said lo begin
' at the house of God ;' and in Kzek. 9 6,
' at the sanctuary.' God is said in the
language of Scripture to be ' sanctified'
by his )ieople, when they demean them-
selves holily and uprightly before him,
duly regarding and reverencing every
thing by which lie makes himself
known ; 1 Pet. 3. 15. ' Sanctify the
Lord God in your hearts,' &c. So also
he is 'sanctified' when he righieously
punishes those who transgress. Ezek.
27. 22, ' Behold, I am against thee, O
Zidon, and I will be glorified in the
midst of thee ; and they shall know
that I am the Lord, when I shall have
executed judgments in her, and shall be
sanctified in her.' So also Ezek. 38.
16.23, 'I shall bring thee against my
land, that the heathen may know me
when I shall be sanctified in thee, 0
Gog, before their eyes. Tiien will I
magnify myself, and sanctify myself;
and I will be known m the eyes of
many nations.' God will either bo
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER X.
87
the people I v/ill be f glorified.
gAnd Aaron held his peace.
4 And iMoses called iVIishael and
Elz.iphan, the sons of h Uzziel the
uncle of Aaron, and said unto ihem,
Come near, i carry your brethren
from before the sanctuary out of
liie camp.
5 So they went near, and carried
them in theircoatsoutof the camp;
as Moses had said.
6 And Moses said unto Aaron, and
unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar, his
sons, k Uncover not your heads,
neither rend your clotiies ; lest ye
die, and lest i wrath come upon all
the people: but let your brethren,
the whole house of Israel, bewail
the burning v/hich the Lokd hath
kindled.
7 m And ye shall not go out from
the door of the tabernacle of the
f Isai. 49. 3. Ezek. 23. 22. John 13. 31,
32. and 14 13. 2 Thess. 1. 10. S Ps. 39. 9.
h Exod. 6. 18, 22. Numb 3. 19 30. i Luke
7. 12. Acts 5. 6, 9, 10, and 8. 12.
sanctified by all his creatures in a way
of active reverence, obedience, and
praise, or upon them in a way of ven-
geance and wrath. IT And Aaron held
his peace. Heb. dT* yiddom, was
hushed, silent, quiescent. The original
word is tliat which occurs Jo.sh. 10. 13,
in reference to the standing still of llie
sun and moon at the command of
Joshua, on which see Note. The mean-
ing is that he yielded in quiet submis-
sion, without a murmur, to the just
judgment of heaven in bereaving him
of his sons. So the Psalmist, Ps. 34. 9.
* I uas dumb, I opened not my mouth,
becauf<e thou didst it.'
4. Cai-ry your brethren from before,
fyc. Tlial is, your kinsmen. This order
was given to the cousins of Nadab and
Abihu, rather than to their immediate
brethren, both that their feelings might
be consulted, and that they might not
be called off from their ministrations at
the altar. Yet as these sons of Uzziel
were merely Leviles, and not priests, it
would have been unlawful for them to
enter into the sanctuary except in con-
sequence of a special command of
Moses.
5. Carried them in their coats out of
the camp. That is, in the tunics or
linen garments in wliich lliey minister-
ed, and in wliich they were doubtless
buried, as they would be considered as
henceforth unfit for any kind of sacred
k Exod. 33 5. ch. 13. 45, and 21. 1. 10.
Numb 6. 6, 7. Deut. 33. 9. Ezek. 24 16, 17.
1 Numb 16. 22. 46. Josh. 7. 1, and 22. 18. 20.
2 Sam. 24. 1. m ch. 21. 12.
service, whereas in ordinary cases the
cast-off dresses of liie priests were con-
verted into wick for the lamps of the
sanctuary.
6. Uncover not your heads. Heb.
lyiCn ^i^ al tiphrdu. Gr. ovk a-o<i6a.
pcjjtre, put not off the mitres. The
original word for uncover, which pri-
marily signifies to make free, and which
is more I'ully explained in the Note on
Jud. 5. 2, would seem also to imply a
prohibition against letting the hair be-
come disarrayed or dishevelled, as was
customary in bewailing the- dead. The
meaning we suppose to be, ' Let none
of the usual signs of grief or mourning
be seen upon you ;' for the reason, pro-
bably, that the crime of their brethren
was so highly provoking to God, and so
fully merited the punishment which he
had inflicted, that their mourning might
be considered as a reflection u})on the
divine justice towards the offenders.
The rending of the clothes was another
sign of sorrow, as appears from Lev.
13. 45, and 21. 10 ; 2 Sam. 13. 21.
IT Let your brethren, fyc. While Aaron
and his sons, for official reasons, were
forbidden to assume the badges of
mourning, the congregation at large
were permitted and commanded to do
it. They must lament not only the
loss of their priests, but especially the
displeasure of God which had occa
sioaed it.
88
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
congregation, lest ye die : nfor the
anointing oil of the Lord is upon
you. And they did according to
the word of Moses.
8 % And the Lord spake unto
Aaron, saying,
n Exod. 2S. 41. ch. 8. 30.
.7. The anointing oil of the Lord is
upon you. That is, ye are devoted by
a solemn unction to the service of God,
which is not to be omitted out of respect
to any earthly relation ; whereas, should
you leave your official station before its
duties are fully performed, it would be
no other than showing greater aifeclion
and respect to a dead friend than to the
living God. The injunction contained
in these two verses seems to have be-
come a standing law for the priests ever
after. This is evident from Lev. 21.
10, 12, ' And he that is high priest
among his brethren, upon whose head
the anointing oil was poured, and that
is consecrated to put on the garments,
shall not uncover his head, nor rend his
clothes. Neither shall he go out of the
sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of
his God ; for the crown of the anointing
oil of his God is upon him.'
8. And the Lord spake unto Aaron.
Hitherto, the Lord on all such occasions
had spoken to Moses ; but now seeing
that Aaron had been very observant of
every thing commanded him, and per-
haps with a design to afford him some
consolation under his heavy affliction,
he does him the honor to speak imme-
diately to him, especially as the pre-
cept uttered had primary respect to the
priests, of whom Aaron was head.
9. Do not drink wine. It is the gen-
eral opinion of the Jewish commenta-
tors, and not improbable in itself, thai
Nadab and Abihu had drank wine to
excess on the occasion which resulted
in ll^eir death, and that the present pro-
hibition was grounded upon the circum-
stance of their attempting to celebrate
the divine service in a slate of inebria-
9 oPo not drink wine nor strong
drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee,
when ye go into the tabernacle of
the congregation, lest ye die : it
shall be a statute for ever through-
out your generations:
o Ezek. 44. 21. Luke 1. 15. 1 Tim. 3. 3.
Tit. 1. 7.
lion. The spirit of the precept requires
of Gospel ministers thai they be ^ sober,
not given to wine,' 1 Tim. 3. 2. 3. * Lest
they drink and forget the law, and per-
vert judgment,' Prov. 31.5; lest they
' err through wine, and through strong
drink are oul of the way,' Is. 28. 7. By
its being forbidden to be used, however,
on a particular occasion, it is implied
that at other times it was not prohibited
to them, as it was not expected that
every priest should be a Nazarite. So
under the Gospel, 1 Tim. 5. 23, ' Drink
no longer water, but use a little wine
for thy stomach's sake, and thine often
infirmities;' where, however, it will be
noted that the precept is specially
guarded, both in respect to the quantity
and the occasion. IT Nor strong
drink. Heb. "iSD shikar, from ^l-D
shdkar, to inebriate, signifying any
kind of intoxicating drink, whether
made of corn, apples, honey, dales, or
olherfi-uits. One of the four prohibited
drinks among the Mohammedans in
India is called ' Sakar,' which signifies
intoxicating drink in general, but espe-
cially date wine. The ancient Egyp-
tians, as we learn from Herodotus,
B. II. c. 77, made use of a liquor fer-
mented from barley. Diod. Siculus,
Lib. I. de Osir. observes that ' where
any region did not admit the growth of
the vine, a drink was prepared from
barley, not much inferior in flavor and
efficacy to wine.' From the original
word, ' Sheker,' preserved in the Gr.
and Lai. in the form of * Sikera,' and
' Sicera,' is probably derived the English
* cider,' a term applied exclusively to
the fermented juice of apples, and so
also probably the word * sugar,' from
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER X.
10 And that j'e may p put differ-
ence between holy and unholy^and
between unclean and clean ;
11 qAnd that ye may teach the
children of Israel all the statutes
which the Lord hath spoken unto
rhem by the hand of Moses.
12 ^ And Moses spake unto
Aaron, and unto Eleazar, and unto
Ithamar, his sons that were left,
Take r the meat-offering that re-
rnaineth of the offerings of the
LoKD made by fire, and eat it with-
out leaven beside the altar: for sit
IS most holy :
13 And ye shall eat it in the holy
place, because it is thy due, and
thy sons' due, of the sacrifices of
the Lord made by fire: for tso I
am commanded.
P ch. 11. 47, and 20. 25. Jer. 15. 19. Ezek.
2:2. 26, and 44. 23. q Deut. 24. 8. Neh. 8.
2, S, 9, 13. Jer. 18. 18. Mai. 2. 7. r Exod.
29. 2. ch. 6. IG. Numb. IS. 9, 10. s ch. 21.
23. t ch. 2. 3, and 6. 16.
Fr. * Sucre.' ^ IVhen ye go into the
tabernacle. That is, into the court of
the tabernacle. IT Lest ye die. Lest
ye do that which shall make you liable
to be cut off by the vindictive hand of
God, as in the melancholy instance be-
fore you.
10. That ye may put difference, SfC.
That is, that you may not by strong
drink so cloud and darken your under-
standings, as to disqualify yourselves
from distinguishing in your ministra-
tions between that which is sacred and
that v.'hich is common ; or from •' sepa-
rating between the precious and the
vile.' As the word, however, in the
original has the causative form, it im-
plies also that they were not to incapa-
citate themselves from teaching the
people to make the due discrimination.
Thus Ezek. 44. 23, ' And they shall
teach njy people (the difference, or,
how to distinguish) between the holy
and the profane, and cause them to dis-
cern between the unclean and the clean.'
With neglecting to do this, the priests
8*
14 And u the wave-breast and
heave-shoulder shall ye eat in a
clean place ; thou, and thy sons,
and thy daughters with thee : for
they be thy due, and thy sons' due,
which are given out of the sacrifices
of peace-offerings of the children
of Israel.
15 ^The heave-shoulder and the
wave-breast shall they bring, with
the offerings made by fire of the
fat, to wave it for a wave-offering
before the Lord; and it shall be
thine, and thy sons' with thee, by
a statute for ever ; as the Lord
hath commanded.
16 H And Moses diligently sought
y the goat of the sin-offering, and
behold, it was burnt: and he was
angry with Eleazar and Ithamar,
the sons of Aaron ivhich icere left
alive, sayiog,
"Exod. 29. 24, 26, 27. ch. 7. 31, 34,
Numb. 13. 11. X ch. 7. 29, 30, 34. )' ch. 9.
3, 15.
are thus charged, Ezek. 22. 26, ' Her
priests have violated my law and have
profaned my holy things ; they have
put no difference between the holy and
the profane, neither have they showed
difference (taught the people the differ-
ence) between the unclean and the
clean.'
12. And Moses spake unto Aaron, &c.
The directions here given are repeated
from those that were formerly deliver-
ed, both because they were as yet but
little practised in the sacred ceremo-
nies, and therefore needed fuller instruc-
tion, and because, from the pressure of
their grief, they might possibly forget
or neglect some part of the divine ordi-
nances.
16. Moses diligently sought. Inti-
mating that he suspected some devia-
tion from the prescribed rule. That
rule was, that if the blood of the sin-
offering of the people was brought into
the holy place, as was that of the sin-
offering ibr the priest, then the flesh
was to be burned without the camp ;
90
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
17 z Wherefore have ye not eaten
the sin-ofiering in the holy place,
seeing it zs most holy, and God
liath given it you to bear the in-
iquity of ihe congregation, to make
atonement for them before the
Lord ?
' 18 Behold, a the blood of it was
not brought in within the holy
place : ye should indeed have
eaten it in the holy place, bas I
commanded.
z ch."6. 26, 29. a ch. 6. 30. b ch. 6. 2G.
otlierwise il was to be eaten by llie
priest in tlie holy place. Now in the
present instance, the blood of the goal
was not brought into the holy place,
and yet, it seems, it was burned without
the camp, whereas it ought to have
been eaten.
17. God hath given it to you to bear
the iniquity of the congregation. Gr.
lua a<pi^nr£, that ye may take aivay.
'l"he phrase ' to bear iniquity,' often
signifies to suffer punishment with-
out forgiveness, as Ex. 28. 43, Lev.
20. 19 ; but in the present instance its
meaning is the reverse of this. It sig-
nifies to bear au-ay, to procure the re-
mission of, the sins of the people.
Thtse sins were in some sense to be
transferred to the priests as types of
Clirist, who 'bore our sins in his own
btjdy on the tree,' and of whom it is
said, ' Behold the Lamb of God, that
talccth away the sins of the world.'
19. And Aaron said unto Moses, &c.
Moses charged the fault upon Eleazar
and Iihamar, but it is probable tliey
acted by Aaron's direction, and there-
lore he apologized for it. In this he
tniikos his affliction his excuse. He
sujtposed that as fasting before the
Lord required a joyful frame of heart,
his being at this time overwhelmed
wiili horrow, would render liim unfit to
eat of l.l)e holy things ; that he could
not do it williout polluting them. And
from the following passages it would
appear that such an inl|)res!^i()n was
19 And Aaron said unto Moses,
Behold, c this day have they offered
tlieir sin-offering, and their hurnt-
oifering before the Lord; and such
things have befillen me : and if I
had eaten the sin-offering to-day,
d should it have been accepted in
the sight of the Lord?
20 And when Moses heard thaly
he was content.
ch.9.8, 12. d Jer. 6. 20, and 14. 12- Hos
L Mai. 1. 10, 13.
not without foundation. When tlie hal-
lowed things were brought according to
tlie precept, Deut. 26. 14, the offerei
was required to say, ' I have not eaten
thereof in my mourning.'' And when
God would refuse the sacrifice ol' the
wicked, he says, Hos. 9. 4, ' They shal
be unto tiiem as the bread of mourners ,
all that eat thereof sliall be jmlkited.'
Moses accordingly admitted the force
of his plea, and acquiesced in it with-
out hesitation. "fT Such things have
befallen me. Chal. * Such tribulations
have befallen me.' Jerus. Targ. ' Great
sorrow liath this day befallen me, for
tlial my two sons are dead, and I mourn
for them.' IT Should it have been ac-
cepted in the sight of the Lord ? Heb.
mn^ ^r>'n ZXli^'^n hayitab becnt Yc-
hovah, should it have been good in the
eyes of Jehovah ? Jerus. Targ. * Lo,
if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day,
were it possible that it could be accept-
able and right before the Lord ?'
20. He was content. Heb.Ti3'^5''D:it3'i"'
yitab becnauv, it uas good in his eyes,
Gr. npeacv aum, it pleased him. So in
other cases the letter of the law was
dispensed with from the pressure of
circumstances, as when David ate the
show-bread, and Hezekiah admitted
some that were not duly cleansed, to
eat of the passover. 2 Chron. 30. 18-20.
Remarks,— (1.) The most joyful
and festive scenes may be suddenly
clouded and turned to gloom by the
B. C. 1490.J
CHAPTER XL
91
unexpected inroad of divine judgments.
Let us therefore rejoice with trembling.
(1.) ' Wliich he commanded not.'
How dangerous to innovoie upon, or
tamper whli, the institutions of Heaven!
God is peculiarly jealous of the purity
of his ordinances, and watches with
avenging vigilance around the worship
of his altar. He will accept of no
' strange fire,' either in the matter or
motives of the ofierings presented to
him. »
(2.) Nadab and Abihu sinned by
s« range fire, and were punished by
strange fire. Men's punishments are
often marked by a striking analogy
with their sins.
(3.) The mind and will of God is
sometimes to be learned by inference
from the general scope and tenor of his
word, instead of express revelation ;
and we ai;e not to suppose that an act
or a practice may be lawfully indulged
in, because it is not, in so many words,
forbidden in the Scriptures. The ques-
tion is, does ihg general spirit of the
Bible forbid it? Of this, every man
must judge as in the sight of God, and
act accordingly.
(3.) It is of infinitely more conse-
quence that the Most High should be
sanctified, and his name glorified, llian
that the lives of our children, however
dear to us, should be preserved.
(3.) The most comforting considera-
tions under affliction, are those which
are drawn from the word of God. There
is no such source of consolation to
mourners as his own precious truth.
(6.) * Uncover not your heads.' The
public concerns of God's glory should
lie nearer our hearts than any private
griefs, pVeasures, or pursuits. The
' sorrow of the world ' is often a great
hindrance to the performance of re-
listious duties.
CHAPTER XI.
The distinction of living creatures
into clean, and unclean^ forming the
basis of the dietetical system of the
Jews, is the subject mainly treated in
the present chapter. As this is a sub-
ject of great importance in the Mosaical
i.islitutes, we shall consider it at some
length, particularly in reference to the
design of the distinctions here estab-
lished, and the principles involved in
them. And we remark, in the outset,
that the distinction of the animal tribes
into clean and unclean, is founded not
so much upon any thing in the nature
of their habits, as more or less cleanly,
but upon the circumstance, that one
class of ihem was to be eaten for food,
and the other not. This appears very
plainly from vv. 46, 47, of this chapter,
where the whole is summed up: * This
is the law of the beasts, and of ihefovi'l,
and of every living creature that moveih
in the waters, and of every creature
that creepelh upon the earth ; to make
a difference between the unclean and
the clean, and between (i. e. even be-
tween) the bfiast that may be eaten and
the beast that may not be eaten.' The
latter clause explains the former, show-
ing, that to say a beast may be eaten
or not eaten, is equivalent to saying it
is clean or unclean. These epithets
are undoubtedly tantamount to ttsual, or
not usual, for food ; and consequently
the distinction is not one with which we
are entirely unacquainted ; for by using
some species of flesh-meat on our tables
and rejecting others, we do in effect
make this very distinction, though we
do not express it in the same form of
words. Indeed it does not appear that
any animal is fojbidden for food in this
chapter, which Abraham or his de-
scendants in any previous period were
probably in the habit of eating; so that
these precepts, like many others in the
Pentateuch, merely convert national
custom into positive law, with perhaps
some slight exclusions on the one hand
and admissions on the other.
If, then, to declare an animal clean
or unclean, was merely to pronounce it
fit or unfit to be eaten, it follows that
there was nothing contemptuous or de«
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
grading in the use of the epithet unclean
in this connexion. Nor is there any
greater mistake than to suppose that
the Jews were forbidden to keep un-
clean animals in their houses or stalls,
or to have any thing to do with them.
On the contrary, the camel, and the
ass, and, in later times, the horse, were
iheir common beasts of burden, though
all the three species were unclean. In-
deed, as Michaelis observes, in this
sense man himself was the most unclean
of all creatures, for he was lacking in
the physical conditions of a clean ani-
mal, and none but a cannibal would ever
think of such a horrid profanation as
eating human flesh.
In considering the design of the enact-
ments contained in this chapter, con-
\erling ancient customs into immutable
laws, we may safely admit that it was
inuinly to keep the Ilchreu-s more per-
fectly separate from all other nations.
They were to continue a distinct people
by themselves, dwelling all together in
Palestine, and having as little inter-
course as possible with the neighboring
nations. There was, indeed, an end
ulterior to this to be answered by their
isolation from the rest of the world.
Cod intended by this arrangement that
they should be preserved from idolatry,
and the concomitant vices then so fear-
fully rife among the Canaanitish tribes.
This is clearly intimated Lev. 20. 25, 26,
ill immediate connexion with the warn-
ing, * Ye shall not walk in the manners
ot the nations which I cast out before
you : for they commftted all these
ihings, and therefore I abhorred' them.'
He then proceeds to say, * Ye shall
therefore put difference between clean
beasts and unclean, and between unclean
fowls and clean : and ye shall not make
your souls abominable by beast or by
fowl, or by any manner of living thing
that creepeth on the ground, which I
have separated from you as unclean.
And ye shall be holy unto me: for I
the Lord am holy, and have severed
you from other people, that ye should
be mine.' And in a subsequent part of
the sacred narrative, we learn the
actual effect that followed from the
overleaping of this separating wall,
Num. 25. 2, 3 : * And they called the
people unto the sacrifices of their gods :
and the people did eat, and bowed doivn
to their gods. And Israel joined him-
self unto Baal-peor: and the anger of
the Lord was kindled against Israel.'
To compass the object of separation,
therefore, nothing could be better adapt-
ed than the enactment of laws interdict-
ing the use of certain articles of food
common among other tribes, which the
rites of hospitality would naturally be
sure to urge upon them. They were
regulations, therefore, tending directly
to break up all social intercourse be-
tween them and their idolatrous neigh-
bors. ' Intimate friendships,' says Mi
chaelis, * are in most cases formed at
table ; and with the man with whom I
can neither eat nor drink, let our inter
course in business be what it may, I
shall seldom become so familiar as
with him whose guest I am, and he mine.
If we have, besides, from education, an
abhorrence of the food which others eat,
this forms a new obstacle to closer in-
timacy.'
The editor of the Pictorial Bible
(Mr. Kitto) confirms this remark by
the results of his own experience : ' The
truth of this observation must be obvious
to every person acquainted with the
East, where, on account of the natives
regarding as unclean many articles of
food and modes of preparation in which
Europeans indulge, travelers or residents
fi'nd it impossible to associate intimate-
ly with conscientious Mohammedans or
Hindoos. Nothing more efifectual could
be devised to keep one people distinct
from another. It causes the diflerence
between them to be ever present to the
mind, touching, as it does, upon so
many points of social and every-day
contact ; and it is therefore far more
efficient in its results as a rule of dis-
tinction than any difference in doctrine,
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XL
worship, or morals, which men could
eiiteriaiii. While the writer of this
note was in Asia, he had almost daily
occasion to be convinced of the incalcu-
lable eflicacy of such distinctions in
krepinj men apart from strangers. A
Mohammedan, for instance, might be
liind, liberal, indulgent ; but the recur-
ViMice of a meal or any eating, threw
him back upon his own distinctive prac-
tices and habits, reminding him that
you were an unclean person from your
liibits of indulgence in foods and drinks
forbidden to him, and that his own
purity was endangered by communica-
tion with \ou. Your own perception
of this feeling in him is not to you less
painful and discouraging to intercourse,
than its existence is to him who enter-
t iins it. It is a mutual repulsion con-
tinually operating ; and its effect may
be estimated from the fact, that no
liaiion, in which a distinction of meats
was rigidly enforced as part of a re-
ligious system, has ever changed its
I'eligion. Oriental legislators have
been generally aware of the effect of
such regulations ,• and hence through
most parts of Asia we find a religious
distinction of meats in very active ope-
ration, and so arranged as to prevent
social intercourse with people of a dif-
ferent faith. In the chapter before us
it is not difficult to discover, that the
l!-raeliles, in attending to its injunc-
tions, must be precluded from social
intercourse with any of their neighbors.
As to the Egyptians, they had them-
selves a system of national laws on this
point, which restrained them from in-
tercourse with strangers. They could
not eat with the Israelites, even in the
time of Jacob. Some of the animals
which the Israelites were allowed to
eat, the cow, for instance, were never
slaughtered by the Egyptians, being
sacred to some god ; while, on the other
hand, the Israelites were interdicted
some animals which the Egyptians ate
freely. Then as to the Canaanites or
Phcrnicians, they seem to have eaten
not only those meats prohibited by-
Moses, which we usually eat, but also
others, of which the flesh of dogs was
one. With regard to the Arabs, they
were nearly related to the Israelites,
and their practices were less corrupt
than those of the Egyptians and Ca-
naanites, whence the difference of food
is not so strongly marked ; but still it
was quite enough to hinder the intimacy
of the two nations. The camel not
only constitutes the principal wealth
of the Arabs, but its flesh is a prin-
cipal animal food ; besides which they
eat the hare, and the jerboa — all these
are forbidden in this chapter, the last
under the name of mouse.' If even at
this distance of time we can discover
such differences between the diet of the
Hebrews and that of their neighbors,
we may easily conceive that a more
intimate acquaintance with the diet of
the latter would exhibit more important
and numerous distinctions.'
Subordinate to the above was another
end to be answered by the prohibition
of the unclean class of animals, viz.,
the furnishing of the covenant people
with a code of wholesome dietetics.
Not, however, that this reason holds in
regard to all the prohibitions relative to
unclean beasts ; for it cannot be ques-
tioned that among the animals denom-
inated unclean, there were many which
might safely and salubriously be used
for food, and which are so used by
different people at the present day. It
is also to be observed that diet connects
itself with climate, temperament, and
general habit, in such a manner, that
what is innocent or salutary in one re-
gion, or one state of society, would be
decidedly noxious in another. Yet that
dietetical considerations did actually
enter into the reasons of these appoint-
ments, is the unanimous opinion of the
ancient Jews, and is a point which
Maimonides especially labors to prove.
(Mor. Nevoch. p. 3, ch. 48.) There
can be no question, at any rate, that we
are thus to account for the prohibition
04
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
of swine's flesh. It has long been con-
ceded that Uie use of tliis food favors
the spread of cutaneous diseases, par-
ticularly where any circumstances of
predisposition from climate or tempera-
ment exist. So also there is good rea-
son to believe that the use of pork tended
to produce the leprosy, a disease which
is presently to come before us in a
diiFerent connexion, and which was of
so shocking a nature, that too severe
precautions could not well be taken to
prevent it. Indeed, we think it would
be found, on a lijorough investigation,
that the nutriment afforded by the flesh
of the interdicted animals in general
was less wholesome, and more favorable
to the production of scrofulous and
scorbutic disorders, than that of almost
any included in the list of permitted
meals. That the Divine Legislator
sliould haTc regard to the well-being of
his people in this respect, and should
enact such laws as would tend to guard
them from the inroads of epidemic and
contagious disease, will appear reason-
able to the slightest reflection, espe-
cially when we consider that his care
extended, in other matters, to the mi-
nutest points that related to tlieir per-
sonal safety and comfort ; as, for in-
stance, to the articles of their apparel
and the style of their building. Nor is
it to be forgotten that the situation of
the people under the Leviiical code
created a peculiar exigency in this re-
spect. Through the whole period of
their wanderings in the wilderness, the
encampment was very much in the
condition of a crowded garrison, and
the breaking out of a violent epidemic
among them would have been equally
easy and destructive. Every tendency,
therefore, to such an occurrence was to
be guarded against with the most vig-
ilant care. And even when settled in
Canaan, the Jews were still to be a very
compact population, inhabiting a terri-
tory small in proportion to their num-
bers, and therefore equally needing a
rigid health police as a security against
the ravages of fatal epidemics among
them.
In addition to the above considera.
tions, some have been disposed to re-
cognize another, in the alleged fact that
the eating of certain animals exercises
a specific influence on the moral tern*
perament ; as if, for instance, the use
of camels' flesh — an animal said to be
of a revengeful temper — tended to im-
part a vindictive propensity to the eater,
and of that of the swine to render one
gross and sensual. But of this fact
there is too little positive proof to make
it of much account in this connexion.
That such an influence may be exerted
to a certain degree, and in certain
forms, need not perhaps be denied ; but
is probably too slight to come within
the range of reasons which dictated the
present discriminations.
But in seeking for the designs of In-
finite Wisdom in the regulations before
us, we do not feel restrained from taking
into view certain moral and typical con-
siderations which we doubt not weigh-
ed, in their measure, with the Most
High in the establishment of these dis-
tinctions. It is a remark of Ainsworih,
that ' by beasts are spiritually signified
peoples of sundry sorts ; and by eating
or not eating, is meant communion with
or abstaining from them, as by the
vision showed unto Peter the Holy
Ghost expounded this law.' In this
vision, it will be recollected, the apostle
saw a great white sheet let down to the
earth, containing all manner of four-
footed beasts, creeping things, and
fowls of the air, and heard at the same
time a voice commanding him, not-
withstanding his scruples, to rise, kill,
and eat, for that that which God had
cleansed was no longer to be accounted
common or unclean. Immediately after
this supernatural exhibition, the apostle
went, under tlie direction of the Spirit,
to the house of Cornelius, a devout
Roman, whom God liad chosen into
that Christian church, of wliich the
visionary sheet was a figure, from its
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XI.
05
comprehending people of all nations,
gathered from the four winds or quar-
ters of the earth, and symbolically in-
closed in white linen, to signify the
Christian purity and rectitudt?. Having
cMiored the house of Cornelius, he ob-
MTved.to those present, ' Ye know how
thai it is an unlawful thing for a man
llitt is a Jew to keep company or to [
come unto one of another nation ; but
God hath showed me that I should not
call any man common or unclean.'
Hire we have an apostolical comment
upon the purport of this vision. God
liiid showed him that he should call no
living creatures unclean; but by these
beasls of all kinds he understands 7nen
of all nations — and in this his interpre-
tation no doubt accorded with the drift
of the Holy Spirit in prompting Ihe
virion. We are conducted then at once
to tiie inference, if the liberty was now
granted to Peter of feeding upon the
llesh of unclean animals, as the sign of
a newly opened intercourse between the
Jews and the Gentiles, that it was the
original intention of the contrary pro-
hibition to forbid the Hebrews holding
fellowship with heathen and idolaters.
For a permission in one of these cases
would not imply a permission in the
other, unless it had been well under-
stood that a restraint in the one had
always implied a restraint in the other.
To say that animals formerly prohibited
as unclean might now be eaten, was in
eflect to say that the heathen might
now be safely conversed with and
preached to. Consequently the contrary
injunction, that these creatures should
not be eaten, was equivalent to a verbal
command that the people of God should
abstain from all familiar intercourse
with the heathen world.
All this is doubtless very obvious.
Under the Jewish economy this rigid
interdict of fellowship with the Gentiles
obtained. Under the gospel dispensa-
tion it is done away ; and accordingly,
when this event is predicted by Isaiah,
he represents it under the image of a
preternatural reconciliation between the
clean and the unclean species of ani-
mals. Is. 11. 6-9, < The wolf also shall
dwell with the lamb, and the leopard
shall lie down with the kid ; and the
calf and the young lion and tiie falling
together; and a little child shall lead
them. And the cow and the bear shall
feed ; their young ones shall lie down
together : and the lion shall eat straw
like the ox. And the sucking child
shall play on tlie hole of the asp, and
the weaned child shall put his hand on
the cockatrice's den. They shall not
hurt nor destroy in all my holy moun-
tain: for the earth shall be full of the
knowledge of the Lord, as the waters
cover the sea.'
But why pre certain animals select-
ed as fitting types of heathen tribes,
and accordingly denominated unclean ?
Nothing is more certain than that the
uncleanness attributed to brute crea-
tures is not actual and inherent; for
they innocently follow their several
instincts — the wolf when it devours the
lamb, and the swine when it wallows
in the mire. The instinct of the wolf
is not cruelty, but appetite ; and the
foulness of the swine is as blameless as
the scent of the dunghill. Yet on these
very accounts they serve as striking
symbols of bad men, who by imitating
the vicious or loathsome propensities
of certain brutes, sink themselves from
the dignity of men and Christians, to a
level with ' the beasts that perish.'
We see, then, an intrinsic aptitude in
certain animals to shadow forth certain
classes of men ; and if the unclean
beasts represented thus symbolically
the depraved Gentiles, the clean ones,
on the same principle, would stand as
the appropriate type of the upright and
obedient Israelites ; and hence the
peculiar pertinency and force of our
Savior's direction to his disciples, ' Go
not into the way of the Gentiles, but go
rather to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel.'
But let us descend to a closer survey
06
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 149a
of the particulars of this institution, and
see what animals are assigned to the
respective classes, and how their quali-
ties, symbolically understood, corres-
pond with the character of the different
persons whom they are intended to
re])resent. The chapter before us pre-
senis on the good and peaceable side,
amongst the clean creatures, the ox, the
tiieep, the goat, the lamb ; all fishes
with fins and scales, and of the fowls,
ilie dove, the pigeon, the lark, &c.,
whose habits are agteeable, and their
fiesh grateful. On the other side we
find arrayed the dog, the swine, the
wolf, the fox, the lion, the tiger j of
birds, the vulture, the kite, the raven,
the owl, the bat j of reptiles, the whole
serpent tribe, with the eel and the
water-snake ; and finally all insects and
worms, and the various species of tes-
tacea.
In regard to all these, and many other
creatures of kindred species, it is evi-
dent, upon the bare recital, that their
properties and instincts render them
most striking representatives of the
several classes of men intended to be
set forth by them ; and yet we have in
the outset of this chapter a still more
compendious mode of distinguishing
the quadrupeds, by certain external
characteristics, strikingly indicative of
their internal natures and dispositions.
Here we see that those only were ad-
mitted into the clean class of animals
which divide the hoof and chew the cud.
Creatures of this class, it is well known,
are generally marked by a harmless and
tractable disposition, besides being of
the utmost service to man for domestic
purposes ; and it might be sufficient to
insist upon these properties alone as a
ground for the distinction in their favor.
But we see no reason to doubt that the
distinguishing traits of these animals
are expressive also of the moral endow-
ments which are prominent in the sub
jects represented. Certain it is, that
an animal with a cloven hoof is more
inoffensive with its feet than the several
tribes of wild beasts whose paws are
armed with sharp claws to seize their
prey, or than the horse, whose feet are
such formidable weapons of offence ;
or the dog, who, though not armed
with claws, like the bear or tiger, is
yet furnished with feet of great swift-
ness. fitting him to pursue and destroy
such creatures as are gentle and de-
fenceless.
Again, another peculiar characteris-
tic of clean beasts, is that of cheicing
the cud — a faculty so expressive of that
act of the mind by which it revolves,
meditates, and reasons upon what it
receives within it, that the word rumi-
nate, from rumen, the s^ottioc/i, distinc-
tive of this class of animals, has be-
come an established metaphorical term
in our language, by which to express
the act of the mind in studious medita-
tion or pondering. An animal thus
employed has remarkably an air of
abstraction in its countenance, as if
engaged in some deep meditation ; so
that we cannot well conceive of a more
fitting symbol of that attribute of a
good man which disposes him to the
I devout contemplation of sacred things,
and which the Psalmist so graphically
portrays, Ps. 1.2,' His delight is in the
law of the Lord, and in his law doth he
meditate day and night.' The word of
God is the true pabulum of the pious
soul ; and when John in vision took the
little prophetical book from the angel's
hand, and ate it, we see by the effects
produced, that the profound study of
its contents, as laden with announce-
ments of woe, could embitter to the
stomach what was exquisitely grateful
to the palate ; thus teaching us that the
pleasure of knowing is sometimes coun-
terbalanced by the pain of the things
known.
It would doubtless be easy to extend
the application of these remarks to the
several orders of terrestrial, aerial, and
aquatic creatures which come into the
enumeration before us ; but as our
preface to the present chapter has
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XJ.
97
CHAPTER XL
\ ND the Lord spake unto Mo-
'^*- ses and to Aaron, saying unto
them,
2 Speak unto the children of
Israel, saying, a These are the
a Deut. 14. 4. Acts 10. V2, 14.
uh-eady far exceeded our usual limits,
we content ourselves with what has
;, 'ready been ofie red. The illustrations
giviMi afford but another evidence of the
consummate wisdom and benignity
which shine through the appointments
of the Levilical code.
The Bistmction of Clean and Unclean
Animals.
1. The Lord spake unto Moses and to
Aaron. As joint representatives of the
magisterial and priestly power. The
cognizance of the following injunctions
bflonged to both. The Priest was to
direct the people where any doubt oc-
curred as to things forbidden or allowed,
ami the Magistrate was to see that the
<lirection was followed. Comp. Num.
9. 6, 2 Chron. 29. 5,-30. IS, Ezek. 44. 23.
2, 3. These are the beasts u-hich ye
shall eat among all the beasts, &c. The
lleb. has here two distinct words for
* beasts,' nTt 'haydh, and rt'J2r]'2 behc-
mah, a distinction which is wholly
lost sight of in our version, and the
same is the case in the Septuagint.
The first properly implies living crea-
tures in general, whether beasts, fishes,
fi)wls, or creeping things; the second
denotes quadrupeds only, especially
those of the domestic kind, usually
denominated cattle. IT Whatsoever
parteth the hoof, Sac. The first grand
rule of distinction laid down has respect
to quadrupeds, and is this — that all
beasts that have their feet completely
cloven, above as well as heloiv, and at the
same time chew the cud, were to be ac-
counted clean. Those which had nei-
ther, or indeed were wanting in one of
these distinguishing marks, were to be
held unclean. The parting of the hoof,
9
beasts which ye shall eat among
all the beasts that ai-e on the earth.
3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof,
and is cloven-footed, and cheweih
the cud among the beasts, that
shall ve eat.
however, in order to bring them within
the specified class, must be perfect, as
is intimated by the additional epithet
'cloven-footed,' or as the Heb. has it,
' that cleaveth asunder (i. e. entirely
asunder) the cleft of the hoofs.' A
division of hoof contrary to that which
is here required is to be seen in the foot
of the dog, the cat, and the lion, where,
though there arc several distinct toes
or claws on the upper side, yet they are
united by a membrane on the lower
side. The .parting, therefore, is not
perfect. \Yhereas in the foot of the ox,
the sheep, and the goat, the cleaving
extends quite through the foot, and as
far below as above. Animals of hoofs
wholly solid, and unparted, as the horse,
were of course unclean. IT Cheiccth
the cud. Heb. ni3 lnjD5/'?3 malilath
gCrah, making the cud to ascend. That
is, such animals as bring up again the
cud from the stomach to the mouth, to
be more thoroughly masticated, as is
the case with the ox, and the other
ruminating animals. The original
word, n"l3 gcrah, comes from a root
signifying to draw, from the chewed
mass being again drawn up into the
mouth to be remasticated ; and the Gr.
/jfj5t)<(7^oj is equivalent, being derived
from niipvo), to revolve, to turn, to toss
over, expressive of the action of the
animal's organs upon the cud. Indeed,
the word ' ruminate ' is derived from
rumen, the name of the first stomach in
the ox or camel, into which the food is
first received, and thence cast up into
the mouth. The word ' cud ' is sup-
posed to be derived either from the
Cambro-British chuyd,a vomit, as it is
the ball of food vomited or thrown up
into the mouth from the stomach ; or a
LEVITICUS,
[B. C. 1490.
4 Nevertheless, these shall ye not cud, hut divideth not the hoof; he
eat, of ihem that chew the cud, or 25 unclean unto you.
of them that divide the hoof: as j 5 And the coney, because he
the camel, because he cheweth the j cheweth the cud, but divideth not
i the hoof; he is unclean vinto you.
contraction of chewed, from the verb to
chew.—' The reader will not fail to ob- |
serve, that ibe beaulirally simple and
scientific division of quadrupeds here
slated on divine aulhorily at so early a
period, is one which has never yet, after
all the improvements in natural liislory,
become obsolete ; but, on the contrary,
is one which the greatest masters of
the science liave continued to consider
useful. Michaelis says this is * won-
derful.' But it is not wonderful when
we recollect who was its author— not
Moses, but God. It would have been
wonderful if, as Michaslis seems to
think, it evinced the progress which
men had then made in the science of
natural history } but it is in fact very
doubtful whether the Israelites, or even
Moses himself, understood the princi-
ples on which the distinction was
established. After staling the general
principle, a few examples are given to
illustrate its application.'— P/c?. Bib.
4. Nevertheless these shall ye not cat,
&c. Having slated ihe general princi-
pie, the writer goes on lo illustrate its
application. When either of the speci-
fied conditions were wanting, whether
in whole or in part, viz., if a beast
chewed the cud, but had not its hoof
perfectly parted in two, as the camel,
the coney, and the hare, or if its hoof
were parted, and yet it did not chew the
cud, as the swine ; then they were pos-
itively interdicted, and the touching
their dead carcasses caused such a de-
filement as legally disqualified one
from engaging in the worship of the
tabernacle till he were ceremonially
cleansed. But in the case of certain
quadrupeds, a doubt might arise whe-
ther they do fully divide the hoof or
ruminate. Whether the hare, for ex-
ample, ruminates, is a point not easily
settled ; and %o while the camel rumi-
nates; the requisite parting of the hoof
might be a matter subject to considera-
ble doubt. In point ol fact, the foot of
the camel is divided into two loes, and
the division below is complete, so lliat
the animal might be accounted clean j
but then it does not extend the whole
length oi' the foot, but only to the fore
part; for behirwl it is not parted, and
we find besides under it, and connected
with it, a kind of cushion or elastic
pad, on which the camel goes. Now
in this dubious stale of circumstances,
Moses authoritatively decides that the
camel has not the hoof fully divided }
and so of the other animals mentioned
in tlie sequel. The accompanying
figure will give a tolerably correct idea
of the form of this anin)al's foot.
The Camel's Foot.
. 5 The coney. Heb. "^Sm hajthsha-
phan. In reference to tliis animal we
give the note of Mr. Kitto on Prov. 30.
26, ' The conies are but a feeble folk,
yet make they their houses in the rocks.'
~-f It is on the sole authority of the
B. C. 1490.] CHAPTER XI.
6 And the hare, because he cheW'
99
eth the cud, but divideth not the
hoof; he is unclean unto you.
Rabbinical writers that tlie Heb. "pUS
shaphan has been identified with the
coney, or rabbit. That this conclusion
cannot be correct is very evident. The
rabbit is not an Asiatic animal, and it
is very far from being solicitous of a
rocky habitation, which is the distin-
guishing characteristic by which the I
sluipkan is here mentioned. Some there- [
fore, who reject this explanation, sup-
pose the Jerboa to be intended ; and \
lliis o])iiiion has the sanction of Bochart,
probably from his being unacquainted
with the Daman, or Hyrax Syriacus,
wliich corresponds far belter than any
other animal that has been found to the
brief intimations which the Scriptures
convey. Daman is the Syrian name of
the animal : the Arabs call it Nabr, and
the Abyssinians Ashkoko. The same
species is found in Lebanon, among the
mountains and rocks of Syria and Pal-
estine, in those of Arabia and Abyssinia,
and probably extends to Southern Afri-
ca. Under its Abyssinian name of
Ashkoko, a very full description of the
animal h.is been given by Bruce, and
the general accuracy of his account has
been attested by more recent observa-
tions. He strongly advocates its iden-
tity with the ahaphan ; and shows how
inapplicable the Scriptural intimations
are to the rabbit. Its size corresponds
nearly to that of the hare ; and its gene-
ral color is gray mixed with a reddish
brown, but white under the belly, and
blackish about the fore feet. It is so much
an animal of the rock, that Bruce says he
never saw one upon the ground, or from
among the large stones at the mouth of
the caves, holes, and clefts of the rock,
in which it resides. They are grega-
rious animals, living in families; they
appear to subsist on grain, fruits, and
roots ; and certainly chew the cud, as
the shaphan is said to do in Levit. 11.5.
Bruce says that they do not appear to
have any cry ; and adds, that ihej' do
not stand upright in walking, but seem
to steal along, as in fear, with the belly
near the ground, advancing a few steps
at a time, and then pausing. * They
have something very mild, feeble-like,
and timid in their deportment ; art-
gentle and easily tamed, though when
roughly handled at first, they will bite.'
Possibly it is to this tlrat Agur refers
in calling them ' a feeble folk:' although
perhaps this may rather allude to their
feet, which are described as being soft
and tender, very liable to be hurt and
excoriated, and which do not enable the
animal to dig its own habitation, as
the rabbit does ; and in this sense, the
text would mean that the shaphan, be-
ing disqualified by the feebleness of its
feet from scooping out its own habita-
tion in the plain, has the sagacity to
seek in the mountain, habitations ready
formed or com.pleted with ease, not'
withstanding that the sharp asperities
of the rocks among whicli it is thus led
to dwell, might be supposed hurtful to
its feet. However this be explained,
it is certain that they are called 'ex-
ceeding wise,' with reference to their
choice of habitations peculiarly suited
to their condition : and they might be
particularly mentioned in tliis view from
the fact that animals of the class to
which they belong, are usually inhabit-
ants of the plains. The flesh of the
shaphan was forbidden to the Hebrews;
and, in like manner, the Mohammedans
and Christians of the East equally ab-
stain from the flesh of the daman. Cu-
vier has some interesting observations,
showing the resemblance, on a small
scale, of this animal's skeleton to that
of the rhinoceros ; and says there is no
animal which more clearly proves the
necessity ofanatomy fordetermining the
true conformities ol animals. '-Pici.^ift.
6. The hare. Heb. T^DIi* arnebeth,
sujjposed to be compounded of n"|K
ardh, to crop, and ^^D 7iib, the produce
100
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
7 And the swine, though he divide ' he chewelh not the cud; clie is
the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet
unclean to you.
c Isai. G5. 4, and 66.
17.
of the ground. ' The propriety of this :
denoiTiinalion will appear from the de- \
vastaiions which in various times and
countries hares are recorded to have
coiniiiilted. The reason given for their i
reJL'clion is, that, though they chew the
cud, they do not divide the hoof — that !
is, that their foot has loo many divi- !
sions — an undivided hoof and a foot '
v.'ith more than a complete division into !
two parts being equally rejected. The
statement that the hare does chew the
cud has been disputed by naturalists.
Michaelis, who says that no two sports-
men concur in giving the same answer
on the subject, considers it one of those
doubtful cases, which, as in the case of
the camel's foot, the legislator was
obliged to decide authoritatively. But
the poet Cowper, who domesticated
three tame hares, and studied their hab-
its with great attention, affirms that
' they cliewed the cud all day till even-
ing,' thus confirming the decision of the
Hebrew legislator. The use of the have
for food is not forbidden to Mohammed-
ans in their Koran, and is distinctly al-
lowed, by the example of Mohammed
himself, in the ' Mischal-ul-Masabiii,'
but the Moslem doctors have classed its
flesh among meats which, although not
legally forbidden, are abominable. Dr.
Russell, who does not seem to be aware
of this fact, in his ' Natural History of
Aleppo,' attributes the abstinence of
the Turks from the hare merely to dis-
like. It is however remarkable, that
the Bedouin Arabs, the Eelauts of Per-
sia, and other Mohammedan nomades,
who in general pay little attention to
religion, pursue hares with great eager-
ness, and eat them openly without the
least scruple. The animals are found
in considerable numbers in the deserts
of Western Asia, which these nomades
inhabit, or through which they fre-
quently pass. They are usually dressed
entire, without any preparation ; being
baked in a hole dug in the ground for
the purpose : and thus cooked are re-
lished by all nomades.' — Fict. Bib.
7. The swine. Heb. ^"^Tn ^hazir.
' The prohibition of the hog is by no
means peculiar to the Hebrews. All
their neighbors, the Egyptians, the
Arabs, and the Phoenicians, concurred
in disliking the hog, and interdicting its
use The principal reason for the
prohibition was probably dietetical.
It was a remark made by the an-
cient physicians, and confirmed by the
modern, that persons who indulged
in pork were peculiarly liable to le-
prosy and other cutaneous disorders.
Michaelis observes on this subject,
* Whoever is afflicted with any cutane-
ous diseases must carefully abstain
from swine's flesh if he wishes to re-
cover. It has likewise been long ago
observed, that the eating of swine's
flesh produces a peculiar susceptibility
of itchy disorders. Now, in the whide
tract of country in which Palestine lies,
something more to the south, and some-
thing more to the north, the leprosy is
an endemic disease : in Egypt it is
peculiarly common, and the Israelites
left that country so far infected with it,
that Moses was obliged to make many
regulations on the subject, that the
contagion might be weakened, and the
people tolerably guarded against its
influence.' He adds, ' every physician
will interdict a person laboring under
any cutaneous disease from eating pork ;
and it has been remarked in Germany,
that such diseases are in a peculiar
manner to be met with in those places
where a great deal of pork is eaten.'
Michaelis also observes, that, although
pork was forbidden as food, the Hebrews
were not forbidden to keep swine as
articles of trade. We agree that they
might do so, but that they actually did
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XL
101
8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat,
and their carcass shall ye not touch ;
^ they are unclean to you.
9 H e These shall ye eat, of all
that are in the waters : whatsoever
hath fins and scales in tlie waters,
in the seas, and in the rivers, them
shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins nor
scales ia the seas, and in the rivers,
of all that move in the waters, and
d Isai. 52. n. See Matt. 15. 11, 20. Mark
7. -2, J 5, 13. Acts 10. 14, 15, and 15. 29.
Rom. 14. 14, 17. 1 Cor. 8. 8. Col. 2. 16, 21.
Heb. 9. 10. c Deut. 14. 9.
is Hoi very likely, when the neighboring
ijuiions were equally averse to pork
with themselves. But we think ihe
extent of this aversion has been exag-
gerated. The Mohammedans detest
the liog quite as much as it was possi-
ble for the Jews to do, and none are
kejjt lor any purpose by them ; but if
ihf y encounter a wild hog, they will
capture it alive or dead, and carry it,
even in their arms, to Christians, either
for sale, or as an acceptable present.
Tl)e only pork we ever tasted, while
residing in Mohammedan Asia, was
(jrr)cured in this manner Irom Moslems.
There is nothing in the law to prevent
I he Jews from doing the same, if they
knew persons by whom pork might be
eaten. Il is true, that if they touched
an animal not allowed for food, they
became unclean till the evening; but
this was equally the case if ihcy touched
a human corpse, or even the carcass of
an animal fit for food, unless it had been
slaughtered in the usual way. There
was nothing to prevent them from
handling hogs or any other unclean ani-
mals while alive.' — FicL Bib.
Distinction of Fishes.
9—1,2. These shall ye eat, of all that
are in the iraters. In these verses the
sacred writer lays down the distinction
that was to be m;Kle in regard to fishes.
All that liave scales and fins were to be
accounted clean, and all others uncb an
9*
of any living thing which is in the
waters, they shall be an ^abomina-
tion unto you :
11 They shall be even an abomi-
nation unto you : ye shall not eat
of their flesh, but ye shall have
their carcasses in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor
scales in the waters, that shall be
an abomination unto you.
13 H sAnd these are they which
ye shall have in abomination among
the fowls; they shall not be eaten,
f ch. 7. IS. Deut. 14. 3. S Deut. 14. 12.
— a distinction equally clear, simple,
and systematic. Even to this day fish
with fins and scales are generally re-
garded as wholesome and often deli-
cious, while others that differ in these
particulars are looked upon with disgust,
and occasionally with horror, under a
belief that they are sometimes poison-
ous. It is interesting to remark how
the sentiments of mankind do generally,
in this matter, coincide with the divine
precept.
Distinction of Fou-ls.
13. These are they which ye shall
have in abomination among the fowls.
Heb. qii^n p min hdoph, of the fowl,
collect, singular. The ordinance re-
specting birds differs from the others in
the absence of any particular distinc-
tion of clean and unclean. It merely
specifies, for the sake of prohibiting,
certain species of known birds, leaving
it to be understood that all others were
allowed. But even in regard to the
permitted species, it is now so difficult
to ascertain them, that we cannot re-
sist the inference that the Law itself
must be considered as abrogated ; for
there is probably not a Jew in existence
who is able to identify the different
classes here mentioned. And the same
remark holds good in respect to many
of the animals and insects designated
in this chapter. They nmst find them-
selves therefore in tlie predicament of
102
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
they are an abomination : the eagle,
and the ossifrago, and the ospray,
14 And the vulture, and the kite
after his kind :
being bound to abstain from eating the
flosh and coming in contact with the
carcasses of various orders of animals
and birds, and yet perfectly ignorant
what ihey are, and not knowing but
they are continually breaking the law
every day ! IT The eagle. Heb. T^D
v.Lsher, from the obsolete root *TJJD
ndshar, to lacerate, to tear in pieces, as
the eagle with its talons and beak.
The Heb. term, however, has a broader
acceptation, and comprehends also a
species of vulture, especially in those
passages where the 'MI^'2 ne'sher is said
to be bald, Mic. 1. 16, and to feed on
carcasses, Job. 39. 27, Prov. 30. 17
(Comp. aiToi, Mat. 24. 28.) As the
character and habits of the eagle, the
king of birds, may be learned in detail
from the common works on natural his-
tory, the reader is referred to them for
all the further information he may de-
sire. Comp. Note on Dout. 32. 11.
IT The ossifrage. Heb. T^S pires, from
CIS P'h'os, to crush, or break, equiva-
lent to which is ' ossifrage,' bone-break-
er, in our version, from the Lai 'os,'
bo7ie, and ' frango,' to break. Ti)is is
cue of the most difficult to be identified
of all the birds in the list. The Tar-
gun) of Onkelos, and the Sept. and Vulg.
versions read it ' vulture,' in which the
majority of versions concur. Others
think it denotes the ' black eagle,' and
some the ' falcon.' Mr. Kilto decides
in favor of the ' great sea-eagle,' a bird
about the size of the golden eagle, and
inhabiting the clifl's and promontories
along the sea-shore. It is spread over
the northern parts of Europe and Asia.
IT The ospray. Heb. n^jTiy oz-
niy'ydh. The ospray, or fish-hauk
{Pandion haliactus,) is a native of
both continents. The upper parts of its
body are of a rich glossy brown ; the
tail barred with brown of different
shades, while the under parts are white.
It subsists entirely upon fish, which it
seizes by darting down with incredible
velocity upon them. Some think the
black eagle is here intended ; but the
probabilities are at least equally in
favor of our version.
14. The vulture. Heb. nj^T darth,
with the import oi flying, or rather of
sailing xcith expanded wings through
the air, and in Deul. 14. 13, HS^^ rdah,
with that of seeing ; but whether from
its remarkable powers of vision, or by
an easy inlerchatige of the similar let-
ters T d and 1 r, is uncertain. The
Chal. here follows the Heb. giving i<n^l
daitha, but in Deut. 14. 13, it renders by
t^533 f>'2 bath kanpha, daughter of the
U'ing. The Gr. renders it by yii//, and
the Lat. Vulg. by ' Milvus,' a kite,
which, from its signification when used
as a verb, seems to be very appropriate.
This verb, when taken in its full appli-
cation, denotes thai kind of flight which
is at once swift, varied, and majestic.
Hence the term agrees well with the
kite, or glede, which is characterized
by the easy and sweeping motion with
which it glides through the air. The
kite (Milvus ict inns), \hough it preys
upon the lesser animals, does not scru-
ple to feed upon garbage, and therefore,
in Egypt, it is often seen in company
with the vultures when at their neces-
sary and useful task of devouring the
carrion and offal of meat, that they
may not pollute the air by decomposi-
tion. IT The kite. Heb. ri"'5* ay yah,
rendered in Job, 2S. 7, ' vulture,' and
that very properly. ' This is a splendid
bird, diffused over the south of Europe,
Turkey, Persia, and Africa, It feeds
on putrid flesh, like the rest of the fam-
ily ; and makes its nest in the clefts of
the rock, irom whence it can survey the
distant jilains, and n)ark the fallen prey.
In length it is about three feet ^ix inches,
with an expanse of wings reaching to
right or nine. The color of the full-
grown bird is a deep rufous gray, be.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XL
103
15 Every raven after his kind;
16 And the owl, and the night-
coming bbck on the quill-fealhers and
tail. The head and nock are not entirely
bare, but are covered wilh a short close
down, and the beautiful rufFis of a pure
white. Travelers, astonished at the ex-
traordinary distance from whicli these
birds can descry a carcass, have debated
nhelher they were guided by sight or by
scent ; but llie beautiful and picturesque
accuracy of the Book of Job, on many
points of natural history, seem here to
alFord us its high authority in ascribing
it to the eye.'— P/cf. Bib. TT After
iii.s kind. Tliis expression is doubtless
used here for the purpose of including
whatever ditTerent varieties there may
chance to be under the same species.
And so in the subsequent verses.
15. The raven. Heb. n*^:? oreb,
which, from its etymology, we might
translate ' the bird of night,' an appel-
lation wliich it owed to the tincture of
its plumage, whicli was dark, like the
livery ol' night, or 'Z'^y ereb. A word
of the same origin is extended by the
Arabian writers to the rook, crow, and
jackdaw, as well as to the raven : in
fact it seems to include all those spe-
cies which are by Cuvier ranged under
the genus Corvus. The predominant
color of these is black, hence Ercb (the
origin of the classic Erebus), im]dyi;ig
a sable hue, is a very proper word as a
generic appellation corresponding to
Corvus.
16. The owl. Heb. rrSI^H ti'2 bath
hayyonah, daughter of the yonah.. Tins
bird is generally agreed to be the * os-
trich,' and to be so called horn vocifera-
tion, or the screeching, mournful noise
which it makes, and which is implied
in the original word HDI*^ yonah. The
;otnparatively little knowledge of natu-
ral history enjoyed by the translators,
must account for their rendering it
<owl.' TT The night-hawk. Heb.
S?2nn tahmdg, from a root implying
rapine and violence. It was in all pro-
hawk, and the cuckoo, and the
hawk after his kind,
bability a species of owl (Lat. Vulg.
' noctua,') so called from its ravenous
and predatory habits. Its scientific de-
signation is the ' Strix Orientalis/ thus
described by Hasselquisi : •' It is of the
bize of the common owl, and lodges in
the large buildings or ruins of Egypt
and Syria, and sometimes even in the
dwelling-houses. The Arabs in Egypt
call it ' Masasa,' and the Syrians ' Bana.'
It is extremely voracious in Syria, to
such a degree that if the windows be
left open in the evenings, it flies into
the houses, and even kills infants, un-
less they are carefully watched ; where-
fore the women are much afraid of him.
"JT The cuckoo. Heb. qn'J sha
'haph. As the Greek version renders
this term by Xap^^v^ and the Vulgate by
larus, we are led to suppose that some
of the lesser kinds of sea-fowl are
meant ; and from the nature of the
original word, which denotes slender'
ness and wasting, one would feel in-
clined to think that the terns must be
here alluded to. The terns (Sterna)
are slender birds, and resemble, with
their long wings and forked tail, the
common swallow ; whence they are
called, in French and English, ' sea-
swallows.' Some writers think the
sea-mew is intended ; but Dr. Shaw in-
clines to the saf-saf—lhe name of which
is not unlike the Hebrew of the text.
This is a graminivorous and gregarious
bird ; of which there are two species
described by the Doctor in his ' Travels,'
p. 252. TT The hau-k. Heb. ^2 n'ttz^
from n!rj=!SJ^3 natzCih, to fly, supposed
to be the common sparrow-hawk, which
abounds over the old continent, and has
long been noted for the celerity of its
flight, and the activity with which it
pursues its prey.
17, The little owl. Heb. CIIj kds, Gr.
vvKTiKopa^. This was perhaps the com-
mon barn-owl, well known in nearly all
countrit's. Our ven^ion gives three
104
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
17 And the little owl, and the
cormorant, and the great owl,
owls in two verses ; but this appears to
be the only real one. Some writers,
however, think that the list of water-
fowl begins here, and that the sea-guU
is intended. IT The Cormorant.
Heb. "T^'O shalak, from a root signify-
ing to throw, cast, or dart down, and
thence well applied to birds which dart
down with great velocity upon their
prey. Hence the Gr. KarappaKrrn, the
cataract, or the bird w\i\oh precipitates
itself upon its prey. Chal. J^3lDblD sha-
lenona, fish-hunter. IT The great
owl. Heb. w)Tr3'^ yansuph, Gr. iPis-
The sacred Ibis, so celebrated in ancient
story, seems lo be the bird intended —
the Ibis rcligiosa of Cuvier. This bird
was embalmed by the Egyptians ; and
specimens have been preserved in a
state of such perfection that not only
the skeleton but the feathers might be
studied, in order- to ascertain its iden-
tity with the living animal. It is about
the size of a common fowl. While
young, the neck is partially covered
with down, or minute feathers, which
fall off when the plumage is complete.
The major part of its feathers are of a
clear and spotless white. The head,
bill, neck, and legs are of a deep black ;
as are also the tips of the quill-feathers,
with a violet reflection. The last four
secondaries are of the same tincture,
and by their length and silky nature
form an elegant plume, mantling over
the hinder parts of the body.
18. The swan. Heb. r?3r:n tinshe-
mcth. The Sept. renders this by
nop(pvpio}va. the purple bird, a bird very
famous among the ancients for the beau-
ty of its plumage, which is indigo min-
gled with red. It inhabits marshy sit-
uations in the neighborhood of rivers
and lakes, and is found universally in
the Levant and the islands of the Medit-
erranean. Miciiaelis, with whom Park-
hurst is disposed to concur, thinks the
goose is intended ; and lienc^ infers
18 And the swan, and the pelicaD;^
and the gier-eagle,
that the modern Jews transgress their
law in using goose-fat, in lieu of other
fat or of butter, in their culinary pre-
parations. IT The pelican. Heb.
Tii^p kaath. As the root nj^Jp kaah
signifies to vomit, the name is supposed
very probably to designate the ' pelican,'
which receives its food into the pouch,
under the lower mandible or jaw, and
by pressing it on its breast with its bill,
throws it up for the nourishment of its
young. Hence the fable which repre-
sents the pelican as wounding her breast
with her bill, that she may feed her
young with her own blood ; a fiction
which has no foundation but in the
above circumstance. — ' We have often
seen one of the species silling on the
ledge of a rock, a fool or two above the
surface of the water, in pensive silence
during the whole day ; the continuity
of its proceeding being only interrupted
at distant intervals by the near approach
of some unlucky fish, upon which it
darted with unerring certainty, and then
resumed its wonted stillness. At other
limes we have observed them urging
their way, with rapid flight, thirty or
forty miles into the country, after a
day's fishing, lo feast in the lonely wil-
derness upon the contents of their well-
stored pouches : and were then reminded
of ihe words, ' I am like a pelican in the
wilderness.' — Pict.Bib. II The gier-
eagle. Heb. tm raUiam. By this
term the Sept. understands the kvkvos,
the swan ; but as the root signifies ten-
derness and affection, it is obviously
intended to point out some bird noted
for its attachment to ils young. This
applies very well to the ' swan,' which,
notwithstanding its meek and inofien-
sive disposition will, in defence of its
young, give battle to the larger animals,
and even to man himself.
19. The stork. Heb. nT^DH 'hasidah,
from "iDn 'hasad, which signifies to be
full, abundant, exuberant in goodnes.i^
B, C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XL
105
19 And the stork, the heron after
kindness, affection. — ' The bird is an
inhabitant of the warmer regions, but
often migrates to higher latitudes to lay
its eggs and hatch its young. It is psr-
ticularly abundant in Egypt and the
western parts of Asia, and is also well
known in ditTtrent parts of Europe ;
and, wherever found, its amiable and
contiding disposition has secured it the
protection and esteem of man. No bird
is mtire lamous for its attachment to its
young ; and, which is more rare among
birds, for its kindness to the old and
feeble of its own race. It has also
acquired a sort of sanctity in different
countries, not less perhaps from its
grave and contemplative appearance
than for its predilection for churches,
mosques, and temples, on the roofs or
towers of which — perhaps because tiiey
are in general tiie loftiest buildings — it
usually prefers to establish its large
and well-compacted nest. It also builds
on the roofs of private houses ; and, in
the East, on the wind-chimneys by
which apartments are ventilated. This
habit brings it into close connexion
with man in Turkey and Persia ; in
most parts of which countries people
sleep at night on the flat roofs of their
houses, and sometimes sit and amuse
themselves there in the cool of the even-
ing. The storks, although th.en full in
view, and themselves observant of all
tlmt passes, do not on any occasion ex-
hibit alarm or apprehension. This may
as well be a consequence as a cause of
the peculiar favor with which they are
regarded. But certain it is, that in
Turkey, Persia, Egypt, or indeed in
any place, even in Europe, to which
these birds resort, a man would be uni-
versally execrated who should molest a
stork, or even disturb its nest during its
absence. In some cases the law ex-
pressly provides for its protection. It
was exactly the same among ancient
nations, the laws in some of which
her kind, and the lapwing, and the
bat.
made it highly penal to kill a stork.
It often appeared to us as if the Orien-
tals in general regarded the stork as a
I sort of household god, whose presence
brought a blessing upon the house on
which it established its nest. They
also do not overlook the importance of
its services in clearing the land of ser-
pents and other noxious reptiles, which
form part of its food. Whether the law
of Moses prohibited the stork as food,
in order to protect its existenee, or be-
cause the nature of its food rendered it
unclean, it is impossible to determine :
perhaps both reasons operated.'— P. Bib.
IT The heron. Heh. nt^Z^ andphiih.
' This bird is only mentioned here and
in Deut. 14. 18 ; and as in both places it
is only named without the mention of
any characterizing circumstance, very
ample latitude has been allowed to con-
jecture in all attempts to determine
tlie species. The crane, the curlew,
the woodcock, the peacock, the kite,
the parrot, and the mountain falcon,
have had their several claims advocated.
The root anaph signifies to breathe
short through the nostrils, to snort as
in anger, and lience, to be angry • and
this has led to the conclusion that a
bird of angry dispositions must be in-
tended. It seems to us so hopeless to
identify the bird in this way, that we
have no desire to disturb the common
reading which has as much and as little
probability as any other. The disposi-
tions of the heron are sufficiently irri-
table to satisfy those who rest upon the
etymology of the name. The bird is
allied to the stork, and, like it, feeds
on fish and reptiles, and is noted for its
voracious appetite. The heron is found
in most countries : in England it was
formerly held in high estimation, its
flesh being counted a great delicacy,
and bore a price equal to that of the
pheasant and curlew. Heronhawking
106
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
20 All fowls that creep, going
upon all four, shall be an abomina-
tion unto you.
21 Yet these may ye eat, of every
flying creeping thing that goeth
upon all iour, Avhich have legs
above tiieir feel, to leap withal
upon the earth ;
and nobles ; on which account laws
were enacted for the preservation of the
species. A person destroying their eggs
was Hable to the then heavy fine of
twenty shillings for each egg. These
birds are gregarious in the breeding
season, and make their nests very near
each other. They niaj^ be tamed when
taken young : llie ancient Egyptians |
used to keep them tame — apparently
to assist in fishing ; and ^han reports,
that they so well understood the human
voice as to become exceedingly angry ^
when any person abused them or charg-
ed them with laziness. If this was true
at the time of the exodus, tha bird must
have been familiarly known to the Is-
raelites, and the probability is thus
strengthened that the heron is really
intended.'— P/c/. Bib. ^ The lap-
wing. Heb. fS'^jll dukiphath. Gr.
cTui//, upupa. We may conclude this
to be the hoopoe, which is often met
with in the writings of antiquity ; it is
an elegant and animated bird, its head
being surmounted with a beautiful crest
of plumes, which by their varying mo-
tion seem to express the feelings of the
wearer. It is spread over all the warmer
regions of the old continent, and occa-
sionally visits this country. It is about
twelve inches long, with a fawn-colored
plumage, barred with black and while
on the wings and lower parts of the
back. Tail black, with a crescent of
white at the base. Its food consists of
insects, worms, and snails, and it was
perhaps on this account forbidden as
an article of diet. IT The bat. Heb.
tl^'ZV atalll'ph, so called according to
most lexicographers from two words
implyingjftiers in darkness. As Mo-
22 Even these of them ye may
eat ; ^ the locust after his kind, and
the bald locust after his kind, and
the beetle after his kind, and the
grasshopper after his kind.
23 But all other Hying creeping
h Matt. 3. 4. Mark 1. 6.
ses begins his catalogue with the Eagle,
the highest and noblest of the feathered
race, so he ends with the Bat, which is
the lowest, and forms the connecting
link between the quadruped and vola-
tile species.
Distinction of Insects.
20. All fouls that creep. That in-
sects are here meant is plain from the
following verse, and therefore the sense
is, all those creatures which fly and
also creep, ' going upon all four,' i. e.
creeping along upon their feet in the
manner of quadrupeds, such as flies,
wasps, bees, &c., together with all
leaping insects ; these are to be avoided
as unclean, with the exceptions in the
two next verses.
21. V/hich have legs above their feet
to leap withal vpon the earth. Insects,
reptiles, and worms, are generally pro-
hibited ; but a previous exception is
here made in favor of those insects,
which besides four walking legs, have
also two longer springing legs (pedes
saltatorii) and which, under the naine
of ' locusts,' are declared clean. Those
particularly enumerated seem to indi
cate the four leading genera of the
locust family, of which the domestic
cricket, the mole-cricket, the green
grasshopper, and the locust may be
taken as representatives.
22. The beetle. Heb. t'5^D solcim.
As this insect is never eaten, a sort of
grasshopper or locust is pro'bably in-
tended ; as it is likely thai either four
species, or four difierenl stages of the
same insect, are intended by tlie four
names in this verse. In Palestine, Ara«
bia, and the adjoining countries, locusts
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER
shall
:i.
107
things, which have four feet
be an abomination unto you.
24 And for these ye shall be un-
clean : whosoever toucheth the
carcass of them shall be unclean
until the even.
25 And whosoever beareth aught
of the carcass of them i shall wash
his clothes, and be unclean until
the even.
26 The carcasses of every beast
which divideth the hoof and is not
cloven-footed, nor cheweth the cud,
are unclean unto you: every one
an<l 15. 6, Numb. 19. 10, 22,
i ch. 14. {
and 31. 24.
are one of the coma»on arlicles of food,
yiid the people would be very ill off if
jKccluded from eating ihem. When a
swarm of lliem desolates the fields, they
prove, in some measure, theniselvts an
untidole to the famine which ihey occa-
sion ; so much so, indeed, that the poor
people iooU forward with anxiety to the
arrival of a swarm of locusts, as yield-
ing them sustenance without any trouble.
* They collect them in great quantities,
not only for their own eating, but for
sale in the b;izaars — for these insects
are highly relished by all classes of
people. In some towns there are shops
exclusively for the sale of locusts,
riiey are so prepared as to be kept for
use a considerable time. There are
different processes ; but the most usual
in Western Asia is to throw them alive
into a pot of boiling water, mixed with
a good quantity of salt. After boiling
a few minutes they are taken out, and
the heads, feel, and wings being pluck-
ed off, the trunks are thoroughly dried
in the sun, and then stowed away in
sacks. They are usually sold in this
condition, and are either eaten without
further preparation, or else are broiled,
i)r stewed, or fried in butler. They are
very commonly mixed with butter, and
80 spread on thin cakes of bread, and
thus eaten, particularly at breakfast.
Europeans have usually an aversion to
the eating of these insects, from being
unaccustomed to them; and we must
confess that we did not ourselves re-
ceive ll:?m at first without some repug-
nance : but, separately from the ques-
tion of us:ige, they are not more repul-
sive than slirimps or })rawns, to which
they do, indeed, in taste and ether
qualities, bear a greater resemblance
than to any other article of food to
which we are accustomed. — The Israel-
ites being in the peninsula of Sinai
when they received this law, it is a
rather remarkable fact that Burckhardt
describes the present inhabitants of
that penin!?ula as the only Bedouins
known to him who do not use the locust
as an article of food.' — Plct. Bib.
23. Shall be an abomination to you.
A thing to be loathed and abominated
as being unclean by the ceremonial law.
All insects appear to be included in this
prohibition except the locvstcs. With
the exception of these, few, if any, of
the tribe of insects, properly so called,
have ever constituted an article of hu-
man food.
Defilement from unclean Carcasses.
24. For these ye shall be unclean.
That is, those which follow, says Ains-
worth ; and so Michaelis and most
others understand it ; confining the un-
cleanness to the dead bodies only of the
beasts and reptiles after mentioned
Indeed if it were extended to the insect
tribes mentioned v. 20-23, it would
scarcely seem possible to have remained
clean a single hour. But whoever ate
any of the interdicted animals, or of the
forbidden fowls or fishes, or came ia
contact with their dead carcasses, con-
tracted thereby a legal uncleanness for
that day ; nor was he to om admitted
to the worship of the sanctuary, nor to
have intercourse with those who were,
till he had purified himself by washing
his clothes and his body, which he was
to do forthwith.
27. IVkatsoecer goetk upon his paws.
108
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
that toucheth them shall be un-
clean.
27 And whatsoever goelh upon
his paws, among all manner of
beasts that go on all four, those
are unclean unto you : whoso
toucheih their carcass shall be un-
clean until the even.
28 And he that beareth the car-
cass of them shall wash his clothes,
j and be unclean until the even
they are unclean unto you.
I 29 ^ These also shall be unclean
1 unto you among the creeping things
: that creep upon the earth ; the
weasel, and kthe mouse, and the
' tortoise after his kind,
30 And the ferret, and the chame-
leon, and the lizard, and the snail,
and the moie.
k Isai. 66. 17.
Heb. 1"^s:1j ^5 al kappauv, upon his
palms ; referring to those animals
whose feet have a kind of resemblance
to the human hand, such as lions, bears,
dogs, cats, apes, monkeys, &c.
Distinction of the creeping things.
29. Among the creeping things that
creep upon the earth. That is, those
which have legs so short that they
creep, as it were, with their bellies upon
the ground, as the mole, the fiekl-mouse,
and the lizard tribe. IT The weasel.
Heb. n^n ^holed, from the Sj-riac n^n
'halad, to creep in. The Septuogint
and the Vulgate agree in rendering this
word by ' weasel,' though it is difficult
to see on what grounds ihe'y should
have classified the weasel among rep-
tiles. The opinion of Bochart is far
preferable, who understands by the "^n
^holed, the mole, wiiose property o[ dig-
ging into the earth, and burrowing
under its surface is well known.
IT The mouse. Heb, '^DiS' akbdr. Gr.
nvg. ' There seems good reason to sup-
pose that the mouse of Scripture was
the Dipus sagitta or Jerboa^ an animal
about the size of a large rat, and char-
acterized by the dis^proporlionate short-
ness of the fore-feet. Its color is a pale
tawny-yellov.^, lighter on the under
parts ; the long tail is terminated by a
tuft of black hair. Tlie brevity of their
fore-feet is compensated by the f-ize and
strength of the tail, by which, as in the
case of the kangaroo, they are enabled
to balance themselves in an upright po-
sition. The form of the head and the
expansion of the ears impress them with
some resemblance to the rabbit. They
are very abundant in Egypt, Syria, and
the north of Africa, and burrow in the
sand or among ruins. Their flesh,
though eaten by the natives of the East,
is unsavory, and hence the interdiction,
which forbade them as food, did not lay
the necessity of much sell-denial upon
the Israelites. As this animal feeds
exclusively on vegetable produce, a
multiplication of its numbers could not
fail to be highly injurious to cultiva-
tion.'—Pfc?. Bib. IT The tortoise,
Heb. H^ tzab. Gr. kookocuXoSj y^EOaaioi;,
crocodilus. Some member of the fam-
ily of lizards is undoubtedly intended
by this term, but the precise variety it
is difficult to determine. J.irchi says
it is a creature ' like a frog,' and nearer
to the truth we have no means of cori>iiig.
IT After his kind. Gr. ra bixoia avry,
things like unto it.
30. The ferret. Heb. np'I* andkah,
from p;j4 (Inak, to groan, to cry out ;
a species of lizard, deriving its name
from its piercing, doleful cry. Such a
description of this animal is found in
countries bordering on the Mediterra-
nean, of a reddish gray color, spoiled
with brown. It is thought at Cairo to
poison the victuals over which it passes,
and especially salt provisions, of which
it is very fond. It has a voice some-
what resembling that of a frog, as is
intimated by its Hebrew name.— -
IT The chameleon. Heb. mS koa'h. Gr.
^ ijjai^euv. Here again we are at a loss
to identify the creature called a ' cha«
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XI.
31 These are unclean to you
among all that creep: whosoever
doth touch them, when they be
dead, stjall be unclean until the
even.
32 And upon whatsoever any of
them, when they are dead, doth
nioleoii ;' and as we are not likely to
oblaiii any thing nnore certain, we may
state the opinion of Kitto, who con-
f-iderss it a species of lizard, found in
Arabia, Nuhia, and Abyssinia, remark-
able for the readiness with which it
forces its way into the sand when pur-
sued— an evidence of the strength and
activity implied in its Hebrew name,
which signifies force, prowess.
IT Tlie lizard. Heb. Hi^ub letduh.
The original word signifies to adhere,
and therefore may apply to a frightful
and venomous species of lizard, well
known in the East, covered with tuber-
cles, and of a grey color. It lives in
holes of the walls, and under stones,
and covers itself with dirt, which is
perhaps alluded to by the sense of
adhering conveyed in the name.
IT The snail. Heb. t:>2n -hornet. This
word in Chaldee signifies to bow down.
It therefore suggests ihe Lacertastellio,
v.'hich is noted for bowing its head, in-
somuch that the followers of Moham-
mcd kill it, because they say it mimics
them in the mode of repeating their
prayers. It is about a foot in length,
and of an olive color shaded with black.
IT The mole. Heb. n^IL^DD tinshe-
meth, from C'lL'D nusham, to breathe.
We may therefore with much proba-
bility adopt the opinion of Bochart, and
apply it to the chameleon, which has
lungs of such vast dimensions, that,
when filled, the body is so much dilated
as to appear transparent. The varying
capacity of tlieir lungs enables ihem,
by exposing a greater or less portion of
blood to the influence of the air, to alter
the tincture of the circulating fluid at
pleasure, which when sent to the sur.
10
fall, it shall be unclean ; whether
it be any vessel of wood, or raiment,
or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel
it be, wherein any work is done,
lit must be put into water, and it
shall be tmclean until the even;
so it shall be cleansed.
1 ch. 15, 12.
face must tend to give a color more or
less vivid to the skin. The chameleon,
or Lacerta Africana, is a native of
Egypt, Barbary, and of the south of
Spain.
32. Upon whatsoever any of them,
when they are dead, doth fall, it shall
be unclean. That is, it might not be
used till it was cleansed. Tliis, how-
ever, was to hold only in regard to cer-
tain kinds of vessels specified in this
verse, viz. either such as were very
solid, and would not imbibe a scent so
as to retain it for a long time, or such
as were of great value, and could not
easily be replaced. Others of a diifer-
ent description, such, for instance, as
were very porous, or earthen vessels of
little value, were to be broken to pieces,
and thrown away. ' The great incon-
veniences which the law connected with
this and other defilements, necessarily
obliged the Israelites to pay great at-
tention to cleanliness : and this was
probably what the laws on this subject
had principally in view. The import-
ance of regulations on such points are
not so fully appreciated in this country
as in the East, where all kinds of rep-
1 tiles, many of them poisonous, find their
way into the most private apartments
I and conceal themselves in recesses,
I crevices, vessels, and boxes. Experi-
I ence taught the writer of this note,
while in the East, to observe the great-
j est caution in examining a box or ves-
sel, which had not very recently been
; disturbed, lest a scorpion, or other nox-
j ious reptile, might be concealed within
I it. On this subject, Micliaelis observes
I that this law was well calculated to
prevent accidents from poisoning: 'Of
no
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
33 And every earthen vessel,
wliereinto any of ihem fallelh,
whaisoever is in it shall be un-
clean; and mye shall break it.
34 Of all meat which may be
eaten, that on which such water
Cometh shall be unclean: and all
drink that may be drunk in every
such vesssel, shall be Uiiclean.
35 And every Ihing whereupon
amj part of their carcass fiillelh,
Ki ch. 6. 28, iind 15. 12.
the poisoiiitig of UquDrs by toads creep-
ing ialo cabks we oflen read ; and Has-
selquist relates an instance where the
poison of a Gecko in a cheese had
nearl}' proved fatal. Mice and rats
likewise sometimes poison meat that is
uncovered, by means of the poison laid
for themselves being vomited upon it.
I remembtr the case of a brewing of
beer, which, to all the people of a town
who had drunk it, occasioned most vio-
lent agonies ; and in regard to which,
aliliongh it was most peremjnorily de-
nied by liie magistrates and the brewers,
there appeared perfectly good reason
for believing that arsenic had in this
manner got among the malt.' ' — P. Bib.
3-1. Of all meat xchich may he eaten,
&c. The meaning undoubtedly is, tha-t
any meat which might otherwise be
lawfully eaten, was made unclean if
water poured out of any of the vessels
named above was to come upon it. For
the water coming out of a defiled vessel
was thereby ils^elf defiled, and commu-
nicated defilement to the meat on which
it fell. On the same principle, all drink
that might be drunk from any such ves-
sel was also unclean and defiling.
35. Whether it be ove7i, or ranges for
pots. Heb. D'^"l"'3 kirayim. By this
is probably meant a kind ol" hearth made
of stones, where fires were made for
boiling their pots or kellles. The ovens,
on the other hand, were the contrivances
for baking bread.
36. Nevertheless, a fountain or pit,
wherein there is plenty of water, shall
shall be unclean ; whether it be
oven, or ranges for pots, they shall
be broken down : fur they are un-
clean, and shall be unclean unto
you.
36 Nevertheless, a fountain or pit,
wherein there is plenty of water,
shall be clean : but that which
toucheth their carcass shall be un-
clean.
37 And if amj part of their car-
cass fall upon any sowing-seed
be clean. Heb. tj-?a nip?2 ll^l V^'^
mayaun u-bor viikvLk rnayim, a foun-
tain or a pit, a gathering of waters.
It is uncertain wheiher the • galliering
of waters ' is intended to be understood
of something distinct from the fonniaiu
or pit mentioned before, or whether it
j is merely exegetical of those terms.
[ To us it seems more probable thai it
; refers to pools, ponds, or lakes, and
' such like collections of waters. Ac-
: cordingly the Gr. renders it with an in-
terjected ' and ' before ' gathering.'
Tliis will periiapsbe more obvious when
we consider the kind and mercilul drift
of the provision. This was to aflford
the means of the speediest possible
cleansing from the pollutions which any
one might ha,ve contracted. For this
I end they were allowed to have recourse
, to any collection of waters, whether in
: pools, cisterns, or ponds, even although
an unclean carcass might have fallen
into it, or an unclean person may have
' just washed himself in it. Considering
! tlie scarcity of water in that country,
I if it had not been for such an allowance
I as this, it might have been extremely
I difiicult for them to have performed the
requisite ablutions after their defile-
ments. IT But that which toucheth
their carcass. R.aiher, * whosoever
toucheth,' referring to persons who
drew out the carcass, instead of the in-
j strument emjiloyed for that purpose,
I as others understand it. So the Gr.
1 6 rtffro^ti'Of, he that toucheth.
1 Zl.. Fall upon any sowing-seed, Ths
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XI.
Ill
which is to be so\yn, it shall be
clean.
38 But if any water be put upon
the seed, and any part of their car-
cass fall ihereoa, it shall be unclean
unto you.
39 And if any beast, of which ye
may eat, die; he that toucheili the
carcass thereof shall be unclean
until the even.
40 And " he that eateth of the
carcass of it shall wash his clothes,
and be unclean until the even; he
also that beareth the carcass of it
shall wash his clothes, and be un-
clean until the even.
n ch. 17. 15, and 22. 8. Deut. 14. 21.
E7.ek. 4. 14, and 44. 31.
41 And every creeping thing that
creepeth upon the earth shall be
an abomination ; it shall not be
eaten.
4.2 Whatsoever goet'i upon the
belly, and whatsoever goeih upon
all four, or whatsoever hath more
feet among all creeping things that
creep upon the earth, them ye
shall not eat ; for they are an
abomination.
43 o Ye shall not make yourselves
abominable with any creeping
thing that creepeth, neither shall
ye make yourselves unclean with
them, that ye should be defiled
thereby.
o cli. 20. 25.
siime exception extended lo the grain
prepared lor sowing. If a mouse, for
itiblaiice, were found dead among a
quantity of wheat, designed for sowing,
il might still be used for thai purpose.
But other wheat, not intended for sow-
ing, thus made unclean, might not be
used, till il was cleansed by washing.
In the case of the seed lo be sown, il
would of course pass through so many
changes of slate before il coiikl become
fond, that the pollution mighl be sup-
posed to be taken away of course.
38. But if any waier be put upon the
seed. Wei seed mighl be supposed lo
liave received some tincture from the
carcass which dry did not ; and not
being in a fit co-.idition to be sown till
il was dry, il was in the mean lime to
be cleansed. Others, however, suppose
the allusion here is not lo seed-corn, but
to such as was prepared for present
food ; and this sense is perhjps counte-
nanced by ihe original, which has 'seed'
in general, instead of 'the seed,' as in
our version, which seems to restrict it
to seed intended for sowing.
39. If any beast of which ye may eat,
die. That is, which eiiher dies of
itself, or is lorn by wild beasts, or is
suffocated, so that the blood remains in
the veins. Such meat hecanse unlawful
not only to be eaten, but lo be touched;
the carcasses o[ unclean animals, whe.
ilier they died by disease or were killed ;
but lliose of clean animals hadihiseffect
only when they died of themselves.
40. He that eateth of the carcass of it
That is, ignoranlly ; for if he did it
knowingly and presumptuously, against
the positive command, it constituted
the high-handed offence against which
the doom of excision, the most fearful
penalty of the law, was threatened.
Num. 15. 30, Deut. 14.21.
41,42. Every creeping thing. This
rule is of course to be understood with
the exceptions staled above, in vv. 21-24,
and all creatures of the creeping kind
that may be ranged under the three
following classes; (1.) Those which
move by the aid of the under part of
ihe stomach and belly, as serpents.
(2.) Those which, though they have
four legs, nevertheless move like rep-
tiles, as lizards, moles. &c. (3) Those
which move by short and almost imiier-
ceptible feet, as caterpillars, centipedes,
millepedes, &c. The 42d verse seems
10 be merely explanatory of v. 41.
43. Ye shall not make yourselves
abominable. Heb. WnrSD '\:^pTi:t\ btS
al teshakketzu naphthosh'ckem, ye shall
not make abominable your souls. They
112
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1^00.
44 For I am the Lord your God ; I to be your God : >• ye shall there-
ye shall therefore sanctify your- j fore be holy, for I ayn holy,
selves, and rye shall be holy'; for I 46 This is ihe law of the beasts,
I am holy : neither shall ye defile | and of the fowl, and of every living
yourselves with any manner of j creature that movelh in the waters,
creeping thing that creepeth upon and of every creature that creepeih
the earth
45 q For lam the Lord that bring-
eth you up out of the land of Egypt,
P Exod. la.
1 Thess. 4. 7.
6. ch. 19. 2, and 20. 7
1 Pet. 1. 15, 16. q Exod. 6. 7
upon the earth :
47 s To make a difference between
the unclean and the clean, and be-
i tween the beast that may be eaten
26. j and the beast that may not be eaten.
r ver. 44. » ch. 10. 10.
would make themselves abominable i^
they ate them, and unclean if they did
but touch them.
44. For I ain the Lord your God, fyc.
See Note on Ex. 3. 15, 18. We have
here the spiritual drift of all these car-
nal and ceremonial ordinances ; for
' meat commendeih us not lo God,' nor
is ' any thing unclean of itself,' nor is
there ' any thing from without a man
which entering in can defile him.' A
grand moral purport was couched under
all these legal rites, and from the de-
claration in these verses we cannot fail
to discern what it is. As God himself
is a being of infinite purity and perfec-
tion,unutterably surpassing all the false
gods of the heathen, so it was his pur-
pose that his owncovcnant people should
be signally separated and distinguished
in their mode of life from all the sur-
rounding nations, and thus by being de-
barred from intercourse with them, be
secured also from participation in their
corruptions and idolatries. IT Nei-
ther shall ye defile yourselves. Heb.
CjT'ITSJ naphshoth'ikem, your souls;
as in the preceding verse. On the pe-
culiar use of this term in Hebrew, see
Note on Gen. 34. 29. In this connexion it
evidently has relation rather to the body
than the mind, as is often the case else-
where.
45. I am the Lord that bringeth you
up out of the land of Egypt, fyc. This
was an act of favor signal and illustri-
ous, and lying so essentially at the
foundation of all other mercies towards
Ihem as a nation, that it is again and
again appealed to with a view to im-
press a sense of their obligations on
their liearts. There could not be a
greater aggravation of their guilt than
to be unmindful of what God had
wrought for them in their deliverance
by a stretched-out arm from the house
of bondage.
46. This is the law of beasts, 4c
That is, this collection of laws in the
present chapter constitutes that code
which is to regulate the distinction of
living creatures into clean and unclean,
and thereby to afford you a rule by
which to distinguish between the dif-
ferent kinds of meat which may and
which may not be eaten.
47. To make a difference between the
unclean and the clean. Heb. ^^Iinb
lehavdil, to separate, to divide. It is
the same word which occurs v. 10 of
the preceding chapter, where the priests
are commanded to be always sober, that
they may be able ' to put a difference
(^i")^np lehavdil) between holy and
unholy, between unclean and clean,'
which they were to do not only for
themselves, but also for others, for * the
priest's lips should keep knowledge.'
Accordingly it is said, Ezek. 44. 23,
' And they shall teach my people the
difference between the holy and profane,
and cause them to discern betv een the
unclean and the clean.' And so also
Jer. 15. 19, ' Therefore thus saith the
Lord, If thou return, then will I bring
thee again, and thou shall stand before
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XII.
113
me : and if thou take forth the precious
from the vile, thou shall be as my
mouih: let them return unto thee ; but
return not thou unto them.' Whereas
the opposite is expressively set forth,
Ezek. 22. 26, ' Her priests have violated
niy lavir, and have profaned mine holy
things : they have put no difference be-
tivecn the holy and profane, neither
have they showed difference between the
unclean and the clean, and have hid
their eyes froiii my sabbaths, and I am
profaned among them.'
General Results. — On a retrospect
of this chapter, it will be seen that the
legal restrictions imposed upon the
Hebrews by the laws of Moses, as to
animal food, were, in their general re-
sults, as follows : —
With the exception of locusts, the
whole of the invertebrate classes are
prohibited.
Of the vertebrate animals, the whole
of the order of reptiles are prohibited.
Of the orders mammalia and pisces,
i. e. quadrupeds and fishes, a classifica-
tion is made, restricting the clean quad-
rupeds to such as parted the hoof, and
v/ere cloven-footed, and chewed the
cud ; and the clean fishes, to such as
had fins and scales. These definitions
are so precise and comprehensive, that
there could not be much difficulty in
determining what was excluded by
them. They permitted the eating only
a few of the graminivorous quadrupeds,
such as oxen, sheep, and deer ; and
such fishes (whether from salt or fresh
water) as had the clear and obvious
character of fins and scales; most, if
not all, of which afibrd a palatable and
nutritious diet.
To prevent the possibility, however,
of mistake, a few of the prohibited
quadrupeds are specified ; viz. the camel,
the jerboa, (a cotnmon animal in the
East) the hare, the mole, the mouse,
and the bat ; the ape and monkey tribe
are excluded, by the apt definition of
animals going upou their paws or fingers.
10«
With respect to birds, it is singular
that no general definition is given of
the clean or unclean ; but certain spe-
cies or genera are enumerated and de-
clared unclean, leaving it to be inferred
that all the rest might be eaten.
According to the view taken above,
all vultures, eagles, falcons, hawks,
crows, ostriches, sea-gulls, owls, peli-
cans, ibises, storks, herons, and hoopoes
were declared unclean. Linnaeus di-
vided the aves (birds) into 78 genera :
not more than eleven of these are pro-
hibited by the laws of Moses. The 67
remaining genera include among them
the whole of the anseres, or goose and
duck tribe ; the whole of the gallince, or
grain-eating tribe, as peacocks, pheas-
ants, partridges, quails, and common
fowls. The whole of the passeres, in-
cluding doves, pigeons, and numerous
genera of small fruit and seed-eating
birds. These, and various other genera
of birds, seem to have been deemed
clean ; from whence, perhaps, it may
be inferred, that the flesh of birds was
considered in that early age peculiarly
wholesome and nutritious food. It is
well known also, that geese, ducks,
quails, pigeons, and birds of that kind,
abound in Egypt and Palestine.
CHAPTER XII.
Laws relative to the Purification of
Women after Child-birth.
The ordinances contained in this
chapter having, like most of the code to
which they belong, been abolished under
the gospel, can have little practical re-
lation to us; yet the perusal of them
cannot but be interesting to the Christian
reader from their connexion with some
of the incidents of the gospel history.
We learn from one of the evangelists,
that when the mother of our Lord went
up to the Temple with her offering in
obedience to this law, she was not able
to offer a lamb, but was obliged to ac-
cept the alternative allowed to the poor,
of offering two turtle doves, or two
114
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XII.
AND tlie Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, saying, If a a woman have
conceived seed, and borne a man-
child, then b she shall be unclean
seven days: c according to the days
of the separation for her infirmity
shall she be unclean.
a ch. 15. 19. b Luke 2. 22. c ch. 15. 19.
3 And in the ^ eighth day the flesh
of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
4 And she shall then continue in
the blood of her purifying three and
thirty days : she shall touch no
hallowed thing, nor come into the
sanctuary, until the days of hec
purifying be fulfilled.
d Gen. 17. 12. Luke 1. 59, and 2. 21.
John 7. 22, 23.
vfiiing pigeons. Tlius an interesting
-fvidtnce is furnished of the low circuni-
siances of the family into which llie
S-.ivior was born. While tlie Israelites
remained in the wilderness, it is proba-
hle thai the women brouglil their ofier-
ings immediately after the period of
their separation hadexpired. Butwhen
they were settled in Palestine, and
many fam.ihes lived at a distance froin
the Temple, it may be presumed that
they were allowed to consult their con-
venience on this point. It is at least
certain that after the birth of Samuel,
1 Sam. 1. 21, his iimlher Flannah did
not go to the tabernacle until the child
was weaaed.
1. The Lord sjpake unto Moses, say-
ing, &c. The directions in lliis chapter
are given to Moses alone, whereas those
in the preceding were delivered to him
and Aaron conjointly, as are those
which follow, ch. 13, respecting the
Leprosy. The reason of this was, that
it peculiarly devolved upon Aaron and
his ions to discriminate in this matter
between the clean and unclean ; and as
it was a matter attended with some
difnculty, they are especially charged
!)Y God in respect to it. But as the
I'gal jjurificalion of a woman was a
ceremony of very obvious import and
easy execution, it was sufficient that
they received tlieir instructions respect-
ing it froi:i Moses.
2. If a woman have conceived seed
and borne a man-child. Heb. 2'"'""iTr,
iazria, hath seeded, or yielded seed,
equivalent to conception, as it is ren-
dered in the Chal. and other versions,
though the usual word to express this
idea is tTiil ^hdrdh, and not >*"it zdra.
The prescribed period of uncleanness
on the birth of a male child was to be
seven days, on that of a female fourteen.
The reason of the distinction is not ob-
vious. Peril. ips the most probable sug-
gestion is, that it was intended to con-
ciliate greater respect toward the mo-
ther of a male child, having reference
to that studied recognition ol' the supe-
riority of this sex which pervades the
Mosaic institutions. IF According to
the days of the sejiaration for her in-
Jirmily. Heb. r.Tm fn2 "'JZ^-lD kimii
niddath devothah, according to the days
of the separation of her sick7iess. On
tins point the reader may consult ch.
15. 19 — 25. Throughout this first period
of her legal uncleanness she neither
partook of any thing that was holy, nor
enjoyed intercourse with any person.
Even her husband did not eal or driidc
with her, and those who attended uj-on
her became thereby unclean. After
seven days the rigor of tiiis separation
was relaxed, as we shall see below.
As to the rite of circumcision which
was to follow on the eighth day, see
Note on Gen. 17. 12.
4. She shall then continue. Heb.
^'iL"ri ti'shib, shall sit ; a common term
to express abiding or continuing in a
particular place or state. 'Jhis ' con-
tinuance' in the blood of her purifying
was to be reckoned from the end of the
seven days above-mentioned, so that
the whole time amounted to forty days.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIII.
115
5 But if she bear a maid-child,
then she shall be unclean two
weeks, as ia her separation : and
she shall continue in ihe blood of
her purifying three-score and six
days.
6 And e when the days of her pu-
rifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for
a daughter, she shall bring a lamb
of the tirst year for a burnt-offering,
and a young pigeon, or a' turtle-
dove, for a sin-offering, unto the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation, unto the priest:
e Luke -2. 22.
During ihis latter portion of the time,
though she was by no means doomed to
an utter separation from all society,
yet she was to be debarred from the
saiicluarj', and from all participation
in the sacrifices of the Passover and the
Peace-offoriiigs, of which she would
otherwise be pormiltcd to eat.
5. But if site have a maid-child. In
the case of the birih of a daughter, the
time of strict separation was just dou-
ble that prescribed at the birth of a
son, and so also was the time of their
subsequent purification, it being sixty-
six days before she was admitted to the
sanctuary. During this time she was
said to ' continue in the blood of her
piirifyins,' by which it is not to be un-
derstood that there was any thing phy-
sically impure in the slate of the blood
at this lime." On the contrary, the
blood is perfectly pure as to ils quality,
though somewhat excessive in quantity,
for reasons well known lo physiologists.
The purification enjoined was wholly
of a ceremonial, and not at all of a
physical, kind.
6. And uhen the days of her purifica-
tion are fuelled, &c. We have here
the divine ordinance as to the manner
ia which the close of this period of
purification should be celebrated. On
the forty-first day from the birth of the
child, if a male, or the eighty-first, if a
female, the mother was to appear at the
7 Who shall offer it before the
Lord, and make an atonement for
her ; and she shall be cleansed from
the issue of her blood. This is the
law for her that hath borne a male
or a female.
8 f And if she be not able to bring
a lamb, then she shall bring two
turtles, or two young pigeons; the
one for the burnt-offering, and the
other for a sin-offering: sand the
priest shall make an atonement
for her, and she shall be clean.
f ch. 5. 7. Luke 2. 24. S ch. 4. 26
tabernacle, with the present of a two-
fold offering, by way of testimony to
her grateful sense of the mercies vouch-
safed to her ; — the one a burnt-offering
of a lamb of the first year, and the
other a sin-offering of a young pigeon
or a turtle-dove. We notice, however,
in the connexion a kindly provision in
behalf of those who were not able,
from extreme povertj', to bring a lamb
on this occasion. Tiiey might com-
mute the offering by doubling the obla-
tion of birds ; and tliis we learn from
the Evangelist, Luke 2. 24, was done
by the mother of our Lord. What a
striking view does this afford us of the
circumstances in which He was usliered
into life, who was not only heir to the
throne of David, but appointed also to
be ' Lord of lords and King of kings !'
CHAPTER XIIL
Among the various diseases to which
the Israelites were subject, none was so
odious, so formidable, so incurable as
the Leprosy, which forms the subject
of the present cliapter. Although this
disease was not peculiar lo the Jews,
as it prevailed in Egypt, Syria, and the
northern part of upper Asia, yet it was
regarded by the chosen people as pro-
ceeding immediately from the hand of.
God, and was always considered as a
punishment for sin. Accordingly it
was usually denominated by them ^^2T^
116
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XIII.
AND the Loud spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 When a" man shall have in the
skin of his flesh a rising, a a scab,
a Deut. ^3. '21. Isai. 3. 17.
hanni'ga, V.yl'^'2 :>a] ni'ga tzaraath, the
stroke or u-ound, i. e. by supplying the
ellipsis, the stroke or wound of the
Lord. The disease, though not unknown
in modern times, is yet comparatively
rare, especially in European countries,
and in our own, is scarcely known at all.
Its leading characteristic, as outwardly
visible, is a spoiled skin. These spots
in the outset are commonly small, re-
sembling the pustules made by the
prick of a pin, but they gradually in-
crease in size, and often for a number
of years, till they become as large as a
coffee-bean, covering the whole body,
and finally terminating in ulcers, which
penetrate inwardly till they have pro-
duced a complete caries of the bones,
and the whole body becomes little
better than a mass of corrupiion. But
spots upon the body resembling these
were not always the effect of leprosy;
t therefore became important to lay
down rules for distinguishing between
leprous spots and those which are harm-
less, and result from other causes.
This is the object of the present chap-
ter ; and no part of the Leviiical code
will appear more worthy of its divine
author than this, when we consider that
it was designed, not wantonly to fix the
charge of being a leper upon an inno-
cent person, and thus to impose upon
him a load of grievous restraints and
inconveniences, but to ascertain in the
fairest and most satisfactory manner
the real subjects of the scourge, and to
separate them from all intercourse
v/ith their fellow-men. As this was the
prominent aim of the laws on this sub-
ject, viz. to secure a fair and impartial
decision of the main question, of the
fact of the disease, Moses has not men-
tioned those signs of leprosy which ad-
or bright spot, and it be in the
skin of his flesh, like the plague of
leprosy; b then he shall be brought
unto Aaron the priest, or unto one
of his sons the priests:
b Deut. 17. 8, 9, and 24. S. Luke 17. 14.
mitted of no doubt, but those only
which might be the subject of conten-
tion, and left it to the priests to distin-
guish between the really leprous, and
those who had only the appearance of
being such.
Rtiles for distinguishing the Leprosy.
2. When a man shall have in the skin
of his flesh a rising, a scab, or bright
spot, and it be in the skin of his flesh
like the plague of leprosy. Heb. tT^m
Vi^'^'S >ri:p vehayah lenega tzaraath,
and it become to a stroke of leprosy.
That is, so as to assume the appearance
and excite the suspicion of leprosy.
The term * leprosy,' is derived from the
Gr. 'Ke-pn, lepra, from 'Xettis, a scale, be-
cause in this disease the body was often
covered with thin white scales, so as to
give it the appearance of snow. Thus
it is said of the hand of Moses, Ex. 4. 6,
that it was ' leprous as snow ;' and of
Miriam, Num. 12. 10, that ' she became
leprous, white as snow ;' so also of
Gehazi, 2 Kings, 5. 27, that ' he went
from his (Elisha's) presence, a leper
as white as snoiv.^ This peculiarity of
the disease is thus accounted for in the
' Medica Sacra' of Mead. ' The seeds
of leprous contagion are mixed with an
acrid and salt humor, derived fron) the
blood, which, as it naturally ought part-
ly to have turned into nutriment, and
partly to have perspired through the
skin, it now lodges and corrodes the
little scales of the cuticlt, and these
becoming dry and wliiie, sometimes
even as while as snow, are separated
from the skin, and fall off like bran.'
The Heb. term is t"i3?*n2 tzaraah, from
a root signifying to strike, or smite as
trilh some venomous or infectious mat'
ter. Hence, the true import of the
8. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIII.
117
3 And the priest shall look on the
plague in the skin of the flesh : and
when the hair in the plague is
turned while, and the plague in
si^ht be deeper than the skin of
his flesh, it is a plague of leprosy:
uiiginal is a fretting soreness, or a
piercing infectious scabbiness, denomi-
iialed also in the scriptures, ' the
plague,' i. e. the ' stroke,' or the
' 'Aouiid'of leprosy, as the Jews regarded
it as :i disease sent directly from God
as a punishment of sin, Moses having
prescribed no natural remedy for the
cure of it. In the Chal. it is termed
r."!'^'^3D segiruth, shutting up, because
it caused men to be secluded from so-
ciety. Tliis dreadful disease which
prevails in Egypt and Syria, generally
inriuilests itself at first, in the manner
described in the text. Its commence-
ment is scarcely perceptible ; there
appearing only a few reddish spots on
Ihe skin which are not attended with
pain or any other symptom, but which
cannot be removed. It increases im-
perceptibly, and continues for some
years to be more and more manifest.
The spots become larger, spreading
over the skin, till at length they cover
the whole body with a leprous scurf.
The disease atT'^cis at the same lime
the marrow and the bones ; so much so,
that the farthest joints in the system
gradually lose their powers, and the
members fall together in such a man-
ner, as to give the body a mutilated and
dreadful appearance. In its final stages,
the whole mass of the patient's flesh
and blood seems to turn to corruption,
and he may be said almost literally to
fall to pieces. This disease, though
very infrequent in Europe, indeed, al-
most extinct, made its appearance about
the year HSO in the western continent,
and spread its ravages in the sugar
islands of the West Indies, particularly
Guadaloupe. M. Peysonnel, who was
sent to that island in order to acquaint
himself with the nature of the disease,
and the priest shall look on him,
and pronounce him unclean.
4 If the bright spot be white in
the skin of his flesh, and in sight
be not deeper than the skin, and
the hair thereof be not turned
observes, after giving the symptoms
as above mentioned, that ' as tiie disease
advances, the upper part of the nose
swells, the nostrils become enlarged,
and the nose itself soft. Tumors ap-
pear on the jaws; the eyebrows swell ;
the ears become thick ; the points of
the fingers, as also the feet and toes,
swell ; the nails become scaly ; the
joints of the hands and feet separate
and drop off. On the palms of the
hands, and on the soles of the feet,ap.
pear deep dry ulcers, which increase
rapidly and then disappear again. In
short, in the last stage of the disease
the patient becomes a hideous spectacle,
and falls in pieces. These symptoms
supervene by very slow and successive
steps, requiring often many years be-
fore they all occur. The patient suffers
no violent pain, but feels a sort of numb-
ness in his hands and feet. During the
whole period of the disorder, those
afflicted with it experience no obstruc-
tion in what are called the Naturalia.
They eat and drink as usual ; and even
when their fingers and toes mortify, the
loss of the mortified parts is the only
consequence that ensues ; for the wound
heals of itself without any medical
treatment or application. When, how-
ever, the unfortunate wretches come to
the last period of the disease, they are
hideously disfigured, and objects of the
greatest compassion.'
3, 4. Pronounce him unclean. Heb.
iriii fc<?2n timm'e otko, shall make him
unclean, or shall pollute him ; a phrase-
ology of not unfrequent occurrence, by
which one is said to do that which he
merely, in a ministerial capacity, pro-
nounces, predicts, or declares to be done.
Thus Ezek. 43. 3, is said to ' destroy
the city,' when he simply pronounced
118
LEVITICUS.
(B. C. 1490.
white; then the priest shall shut
up him that Imtk the plague seven
days:
5 And the priest shall look on
him the seventh day: and beliold,
if the plague in his sight be at a
stay, and the plague spread not in
the skin ; then tlie priest shall shut
him up seven days more :
6 And the priest shall look on
him again the seventh day : and
or prophecied its destruction. In like
manner the apostles, as ministers of
Christ, are said to liavebeen empowered
to hind and to loose, to remit men's
sins, and to retain them, when all that
is intended is, that they were simply to
declare them to be so bound or luoscd,
remitted or retained, according to the
tenor of God's word. It is to be observ-
ed, that tliere are three signs of a
leprosy stated in the first verse ; (1) a
tumor or swelling ; (2) a scab; (3) a
bright spot. Of these indications, the
sacred writer begins with the last, viz.
the bright spot, in which, if the hair
were turned while, and it was not a
superficial whiteness merely, but the
spot seemed to have eaten deeper, even
into the very flesh, then it was beyond
doubt that it was a true leprosy. But
if upon inspection there merely appear-
ed a while spot in the skin, which had
not affected the color of the hair, then
it could not be positively determined
that the disease was leprosy. But it
had some of the symptoms of leprosy,
and might prove to be such ; at any
rate appearances were so far against the
person that it was proper he should be
separated from others long enough to
afford lime for an accurate judgment of
the nature of the affection. The priest
therefore was to shut him up for seven
days, during which lime it would be apt
to develope its true character.
IT Shall shut up him that hath the plague.
The words ' him that hath,' it will be
uoticed, are not found in the text, of
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 c shall wash his clothes, and be
clean.
7 But if the scab spread much
abroad in the skin, after that he
hath been seen of the priest for his
cleansing, he shall be seen of the
priest again :
c ch. 1. 25, and 14. 3.
which the true rendering is, ' Shall shut
up the plague.' Gr. aipopici rrju d'pijv,
shall separate the plague. This is a
usage of the sacred writers, by wliich
the abstract is put for the concrete,
often met with, as ' captivity ' for * cap-
tives,' Ps. 68. 19 ; * the hoary head ' lor
Mioary headed person,' Lev. 19. 32;
'rebellion' for 'the rebellious,' Ezek.
44. 6 ; 'a charge ' for ' those having
charge,' Ezek, 44. 11 ; ' pride ' for
' proud man,' Jer. 50. 31 ; ' circumcision
for ' those circumcised,' Rom. 2. 26.
5. If the plague in his sight be at a
stay. Heb. *^72^ ^^2 n'tga Cimad, the
plague stand. If the priest, at the
week's end, saw no alteration in the
symptoms, as the case remained dubi-
ous, he was to prolong the period of
separation another seven days, and if at
the end of that time the appearance of
the affected part continued the same,
except that the while spot began to as-
sume a somewhat darkish hue, then he
was to pronounce him clean, i. e. free
from the plague of leprosy. Still as
the very cause that had led to his being
suspected showed that there was some
degree of 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.
1. If the scab spread much. The real
leprosy might afier all lurk in the sys-
tem, notwithstanding the rigid exami-
l nation and the probationary seclusion
B. C. UOO.j
CHAPTER XL
11&
8 And if the priest see that be-
hold, the scab spreadeih in the
skin, then the priest shall pro-
nounce him unclean : it is a leprosy.
9 H When the plague of leprosy
is in a man, ihen^ he shall be
brought unto the priest :
10 d And the priest shall see him :
and behold, tf the rising be white
la the skin, and it have turned the
liiiir \yhite, and there be quick raw
iiesh in the rising:
1 1 It is an old leprosy in the skin
d Numb. 12. JO, 12. 2 Kings 5. 27. 2 Chron.
2G. 20.
to which the person had been subjected.
If the scab spread subsequently in the
skin, the symptom was decisive, and
the jiriest was to give his verdict of
' unclean ' accordingly ; and Maimoni-
des tells us, that if any one were so
profane as to neglect his case under
these circumstances, and to forbear
going to tlie priest for his judgment,
the penally was, to have his leprosy
cleave to him through life,
10. If the rising be white in the skin,
&c. These symptoms were peculiar to
the first form of leprosy mentioned,
V. 2, viz. that of the tumor or swelling.
If in addition to the whiteness on the
skin, and the hair turning white, there
was also the presence of quick raw
flesh in the swelling, it was <in indubita-
ble sign of an old or inveterate leprosy,
which had been long seated in the sys-
tem, and the priest was at once to pro-
nounce him unclean, without the cere-
mony of a previous shutting up, wluch
was ordered in doubtful cases only.
Here the case was too plain to admit
of doubt.
Distinction of Leprosy from a Cuta-
neous Eruption very much resem-
bling it.
12, 13. If a leprosy break out abroad,
&c. The precept in this case appears
singular. Why should the partial leper
be pronounced unclean, while the per-
of his flesh, and the priest shall
pronounce him unclean, and shall
not shut him up : for he is unclean.
12 And if a leprosy break out
abroad in the skin, and the leprosy
cover all the skin of him thai hath
the plague from his head even to
his foot, wheresoever the priest
looketh ;
13 Then the priest shall consider:
and behold, if the leprosy have
covered all his flesh, he shall pro-
nounce him. clean that hath the
plague; it is all turned white : he
is clean.
son totally covered with the disease
was to be pronounced clean ? The true
answer perhaps is, that it was owing to
a different species or a different stage
of the disease; the partial being infec-
tious, the total not. The fact moreover
that the disease was driven out to the
surface argued a sound and liealthy
state of tlie system in general. Yet it
is but proper to remark, that Patrick
takes entirely a different view of tlie
drift of this passage. He supposes that
that wluch is here called ' leprosy' was
not truly such, but another disease hav-
ing so strong a resemblance to the lep-
rosy, as to prompt the writer to give it
the snme denomination. But the differ*
ence lay in the fact, that in this quasi-
leprosy the skin was entirely covered
by one continuous scurf, whereas in the
true leprosy, the spots or scabs did not
run together in the manner here inti-
mated, but gave a sort of scaly
appearance to the body. This univer-
sal eruption from head to foot, however
loathsome to the eye, might still be
harmless in itself, and perhaps a relief
to the morbid internal condition of the
body, as in the case of measles and
small-pox. The man, therefore, under
these circumstances was to be pronounc-
ed clean. IT Shall -pronounce him
clean that hath the plague. Heb. ^nt3
>'32n ?15< tdhar eth hanndga, shall clean
the plague ; i. e. shall pronounce cleaa
120
LEVITICUS.
[13. C. 1490.
14 But when raw flesh appeareih i
in him, he shall be unclean. j
15 And the priest shall see the j
raw flesh, and pronounce him to j
be unclean : for the raw flesh is \
unclean : it is a leprosy. |
15 Or if the raw flesh turn again, i
:;i:d be changed into white, he shall '
(•"Hie unto the priest ; !
!7 And the priest shall see iiim : j
;nd behold, if the plague be turned :
i.ilo white; then the priest shall
[•ronounce him clean that hath the |
j'lague : he is clean. j
IS *[\ The flesh also, in which, !
even in the skin thereof, was a j
e boil, and is healed, j
19 And in the place of the bile j
there be a white rising, or a bright \
spot, white, and somewhat reddish,
and it be showed to the priest ;
e Exod. 9. 9.
liim that hath the plague^ as rightly
rendered in the English translation. See
above the Note on v. 3.
14-17. But when raw flesh appeareth
in him, &c. That is, sound flesh, Gr.
Xpojs ^'ov, living flesh. If patclies of
sfiund or natural flesh appeared inter-
mingled with the white scurf or scales,
the presumption was, that the genuine
leprosy w^as upon him, which was to
be thus distinguished from that cuta-
neous eruption mentioned above. Still
even this sign might be fallacious, as
the sound parts of the skin, or the * raw
flesh,' might ere long become white like
t'e rest, and then the proof would be
decisive that it was not leprosy, and
the priest was to pronounce him clean.
Distinction of Leprosy, when occasion-
ed by a former Sore or Ulcer.
18-23. The flesh also in which, even
in the skin thereof, was a boil, &c.
Chal. ' The man also in whose skin,'
&c. In this and the following verses,
the writer treats of those cases of lep-
rosy that rose from old ulcers that had
once been healed. Such cicatrized i
20 And if, when the priest seeth
it, behold, it be in sight lower than
the skin, and the hair thereof be
turned white ; the priest shall pro-
nounce him unclean : it is a plague
of leprosy broken out of the bile.
21 But if the priest look on it, and
behold, thei-e be no white hairs
therein, and if it be not lower than
the skin, but be somewhat dark;
then the priest shall shut him up
seven days :
22 And if it spread much abroad
in the skin, then the priest shall
pronounce him unclean : it is a
plague.
23 But if the bright spot stay in
his place, and spread not, it is a
burning boil ; and the priest shall
pronounce him clean.
24 H Or if there be anij flesh, in
the skin, whereof there is a hot
sores might break out afresh and prove
a real leprosy. A person with any
sore or disposition to contagion, was
more likely to catch the infection from
contact with the diseased person, than
he was whose skin was whole and
sound, and his habits good. The requi-
site rules of discrimination in such
cases, are here given. IT In the place
of the boil. In the place where the boil
formerly broke out, hut seemed after-
wards to be healed. The original word
for 'boil 'is '^'^riD s/ie'/iin, the expla-
nation of which see in the Note on Ex.
9.9.
Distinction of Leprosy, when occasion'
ed by a former Burning.
24-28. In the skin whereof there is
a hot burning. Heb. 'T^K ni-TQ mikvath
'ish, burning of fire. The case alluded
to is probably one where a burning coal,
or hot iron, or something of that nature
had fallen upon the flesh and caused an
inflammation that might easily give
rise to leprosy if a predisposition to it
already existed. Horsley, however,
supposes the ' hot burning' was an
B. C. 1490.]
AFTER Xril.
121
burning, and the quicic fiesh that
burneth have a white bright spot,
somewhat reddish, or white ;
25 Then the priest shall look
(ipon it: and behold, ?/ the hair in
•!ie bright spot be turned white,
;^:.d it be in sight deeper than the
>*iu; it ?l^' a leprosy broken out of
>..-: burning: wherefore the priest
• i.ni pronounce him unclean: it
-v ;he plague of leprosy.
-') out il" ijie priest look on it, and
\i: ij:d, there be no white hair in
Miti bright spot, and it be no lower
^-'-x.\ the other skin, but be some-
vviiat dark; then the priest shall
: I'jt him up seven days:
-1 And the priest shall look upon
l.iui the seventh day: and if it be
.-^(lead much abroad in the skin,
; .^-'D the priest shall pronounce
l.Mi unclean: it is the plague of
:• prosy.
..a And if the bright spot stay in
■i^-i place, a7id spread not in the
s\in, but it be somewhat dark ; il
c.v ,1 rising of the burning, and the
|.;iest shall pronounce him clean:
■.;<• il /5 an inflammation of the
l-Liroing.
■ ') ^[ if a man or Vv'oman have a
;. Iigue upon the head or the beard ;
SO Then the priest shall see the
jiUgue : and behold, if it 6e in sight
Cc-eper than the skin, and there be
\r\ it a yellow thin hair; then the
priest shall pronounce him unclean :
!. IS a dry scall, even a leprosy
■"-.oa the head or beard.
vnjsipelas or St. Anthony^ s fire. What
•vrf it were, the case was to be deter-
iiMiied by the rules here given.
L is- in ct ion of Leprosy from Dry-scall.
29-37. It is a dry-scall. Heb. pt^D
n- iliek. Gr. dpuvafiti cart, it is a broken
sore. The original comes from the
root priD nuthak, to ■plucky tear, or draw
off. and is the name of a disease ])ecn-
har to the head or beard, so called from
<"ht hairs ueiiijr draivn nfffrau) the placr'
u
31- And if the priest look on the
plague of the scall, and behold, it
be not in sight deeper than the skin,
and that there is no black hair in
it; then the priest shall shut up
kirn that hath the plague of the
scall seven days ;
32 And in the seventh day the
priest shall look on the plague : .
and behold,?/ the scall spread not,
and there be in it no yellow hair,
and the scall be not in sight deeper
than the skin ;
33 He shall be shaven, but the
scall shall he not shave; and the
priest shall shut up him that hath
the scall seven days more:
34 A.nd in the seventh day the
priest shall look on the scall: and
behold, if the scall be not spread
in the skin, nor be in sight deeper
than the skin ; then the priest shall
pronounce him clean: and he shall
wash his clothes, and be clean.
35 But if the scall spread much
in the skin after his cleansing;
36 Then the priest shall look on
him : and behold, if the scall be
spread in the skin, the priest shall
not seek for yellow hair; he is
unclean.
37 But if the scall be in his sight
at a stay, and that there is black
hair grown up therein ; the scall
is healed, he is clean : and the
priest shall pronounce him clean.
38 H If a man also or a woman
have in the skin of their flesh bright
spots, even bright white spots ;
where it broke out, and leaving a mor-
bid baldness in its stead. The Hebrews
describe it thus : ' The plague of the
head or beard, is when the hair that is
on them falleth off by the roots, and
the place of the hair remaineth bare j and
this is that which is called ' nethek.' '
Distinction of Leprosy from the ' Bo-
hak ' or Freckled Spot.
3S. If a man also or a woman. The
species of leprosy here defined is dis-
122
LEVITICUS.
[B. G. 1490.
39 Then tlie priest shall look:
and behold, if the bright spots in
the skin of their flesh be darkish
white; it is a freckled spot that
groweih in the skin ; he %s clean.
40 And the man whose hair is
fallen off his head, he ^5 bald ; yet
is he clean.
41 And he that hath his hair
fallen off from the part of his head
toward his face, he is forehead-
bald; yet is he clean.
42 And if there be in the bald
head, or bald forehead, a white
reddish sore; it is a leprosy sprung
up in his bald liead, or his bald
forehead.
linguished from others by the term
pnn boliak, from the Syriac ' hohakj^ to
he while or shining. The word is used
to denote a cutaneous eruption, of which
Niebuhr says, ' I myself saw a case of
the Bohak leprosy in a Jew at Mocha.
The spots ill this disease are of unequal
size. Tliey have no shining appear-
ance ; nor are they perceptibly elevated
above the skin ; and they do not change
the color of the hair. Their color is an
obscure white, or somewhat reddisli.
The rest of the skin of this patient was
blacker than that of the people of the
country is in general ; but the spots
were not so white as the skin of an
European, when not sun-burnt. The
spots, in this species of leprosy, do not
appear on the hands, nor about the
navel, but on the neck and face ; not,
however, on that part of the head where
the hair grows very thick. They gra-
dually spread, and continue sometimes
only about two months ; but in some
cases, indeed, as long as two years, and
then disappear, by degrees, of them-
selves. This disorder is neither infec-
tious nor hereditary, nor does it occa-
sion any inconvenience.'
Distinction of Leprosy from Baldness.
40-44. The man whose hair is fallen
off his headf &c. * Another description
43 Then the priest shall look up-
on it: and behold, if the rising of
the sore be white reddish in his
bald head, or in his bald forehead,
as the leprosy appeareih in the
skin of the flesh ;
44 He is a leprous man, he is un-
clean : the priest shall pronounce
him utterly unclean; his plague is
in his head.
45 And the leper in whom the
plague is, his clothes shall be rent,
and his head bare, and be shall
fput a covering upon his upper
lip, and shall cry, s Unclean, un-
clean.
f Ezek, 24. 17. 22. Mk. 3. 7. S Lam. 4- 15.
of persons, for whose exemption from
the charge and hardsliips of leprosy
Moses look care to provide, were ihoss
whose heads became bald. Among us,
and indeed in any country where leprosy
is not extremely prevalent, such persons
require no such attention ; for nobody
would think of accounting a man leprous
because his head happened to become
prematurely bald, were it e-ven in the
days of his youth. As, however, tl)e
falling of the hair is sometimes, and iu
coftnection with other symptoms, a
strong criterion of leprosy, and as there
actually is a particular kind of leprosy,
which might, perhaps, even then, have
been observed to have the peculiarity
of being limited either to the fore or
hind part of the head, it was not strange
that a person who became bald, and
more especially if not very far advanced
in years, should incur the suspicion of
being leprous. Now in such cases, we
find Moses giving an explanation, viz.
that if no farther symptoms were found
than mere baldness, the person was not
to lie under the suspicion of leprosy, but
to be considered as clean.' — Michaelis
Conduct to be observed by Lepers.
45. The leper in whom the plague is,
his clothes shall be rent. The leprous
person was required to be as one that
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIII.
123
46 All the days wherein the
plague shall he in him he shall be
defiled ; he is unclean : he shall
dwell alone, h without the camp
shuU his habitation be.
47 H The garment also that the
h Numb. 5. 2, auJ 12. 14, 2 Kings 7. 3,
and 15. 5. 2 Chron. 26. 21. Luke 17. 12.
mourned for the dead, or for some great
and public calaiiiilj'. He was to have
his clothes rent in token of extreme
.sorrow ; his head was to be made bare ;
the ordinary bonnet or turban being
omitted, and to have a covering upon
(he upper lip ; or rather, as the original
word ' upper lip' is witli equal proba-
bility interpreted of the whole chin, he
was to have the lower part of his face
bound around with a bandage, leaving
ihe mouth just freedom enough to maUe
the declaration, unclean ! unclean !
which uttered from lips thus muffled up,
must iiave been sounded forth in a
peculiarly doleful accent. The reason
of uttering this cry was to prevent any
per^on from coming near liim, lost de-
iilement might be incurred by contact.
Th.-refore the Chal. renders it, * Be yc
not made unclean ! be ye not made un-
clean !' and Tar. Jon. ' Avoid ! avoid
the unclean !' In allusion to this it is
said. Lam. 4. 15, ' They cried unto
them, depart ye ; (I am) unclean; de-
j.art, depart, touch not,' In the East
lepers are not at this day absolutely in-
terdicted from going abroad, for they
ire not considered as pestilential.
Niebuhr says, ' 1 might have seen num-
bers of them ; hut whenever I observed
any of them meeting me in the streets,
I deemed it prudent to avoid them.'
46. He shall dwell alone ; without the
camp shall his habitation be. Heb.
liT"" "n^ bcldad yisheb, he shall sit
alone. Gr. «£xwpt(7/ji£i/oj KaOnaerai^ he
shall sit separated. This was a salutary
precaution for the sake of the sound,
and the temporary seclusion might
easily be turned to a -useful account
to tlie leper himself ; for there was
plague of leprosy is in, whether it
be a woollen garment, or a linen
garment ;
48 Whether it be in the warp, or
woof, of linen, or of woollen : Avhe-
ther in a skin, or in any thing
made of skin:
49 And if the plague be greenish
every thing in his condition calculated
to admonish him of his moral defile-
ment, and prompt him to seek for an
effectual cleansing of that inner malady
which was so strikingly set forth by the
loathsome leprosy tliut covered his
body. The law here enacted seems to
have been strictly observed. So early
as the second year of the Exodus, lepers
were obliged to reside without the camp,
Numb. 5. 1-4 ; and so strictly was this
law enforced, that the sister of Moses
himself becoming leprous, was expelled
from it. Numb. 12. 14-16. When the
Israelites came into their own land,
and lived in cities, the spirit of the law
thus far operated, that lepers were
obliged to reside in a separate place,
which was called r"i""L;i;n V\^'2 beth
'hophshith, the house of uncleanness ;
and from this seclusion, not even kings,
when they became leprous, were ex-
empted, 2 Kings 15. 5.
The Leprosy of Garments.
47. The garment also that the plague
of leprosy is in. This leprosy in gar-
ments appears so strange to us, that it
has induced some to consider it as an
extraordinary punishment inflicted by
God upon the Israelites, as a sign of
his displeasure against sin , while others
consider the leprosy in clothes, as also
in houses, as having no relation to the
leprosy in man. Indeed, the probability
is that the term ' leprosy,' in this con-
nexion, is not intended to be used in the
same sense in which it is applied to de-
note a disease affecting the human sys-
tem, but has rather a figurative import,
just as ' cancer ' is used by agricultur-
ists in reference to a disease of trees.
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
or reddish in the garment, or in
the skin, either in the warp, or in
the woof, or in any thing of skin ;
it IS a plague of leprosy, and shall
be slioAved unto the priest:
and as, inversely, the word 'rot' is
applied to a disease of sheep, though
primitively used of the decomposition
of limber. The language was no doubt
intended to intimate that the garment
was fretted by a process similar to that
which takes place in the skin in a case
of real leprosy, occasioned in all likeli-
hood, by a species of animalcula or ver-
min, wliich by breeding in the g.irments
must necessarily multiply their kind,
am] fret the threads, i. e. corrode a por-
tion of the finer parts after the manner
of moths, for their nourishment. It is
thus that the human skin is affected in
llie iich, a disease caused by the psora,
or itch animal, which is often commu-
nicated from garments. This plague
of vestments is termed, v. 61, a ' fret-
ting (or raiikling) leprosy,' a word
which is applied in Ezek.2S. 24, to a
'pricking' or 'rankling brier,' and is
strikingly expressive of the sensation
produced by the irritating effect of the
itch in the human subject. We may
suppose, moreover, that the metaphori-
cal term ' leprosy ' was used in this
connexion on account of the disgusting
ideas which, by association with the
human disease, the view of a blemish in
clothing, called also ' leprosy,' would
excite in the mind. So much in respect
to the term. As to the fact indicated
by it, the inquiries of Michaelis on the
subject have brought out the following
results, which are well worth trans-
cribing in his own words. ' The leprosy
of clothes is described as consisting of
green or reddish spots, that remain in
spite of washing, and still spread ; and
by which the cloth becomes bald or
bare, sometimes on the one side, some-
limes on the other. This Moses terms
dropping or losing the hair ; that is, if
we are to eive the literal truth of the
50 And the priest "shall look upon
the plague, and shut up it that hath
the plague seven days:
51 And he shall look on the
plague on the seventh day: if the
Hebrew text, in a passage which might
have its difficulties to a man of learning,
if he knew nothing of the manufacture
of woollen. These symptoms, too, of
leprosj', are said to be found sometimes
only in the warp, and at other limes
only in the icoof. To a person who has
nothing to do with the manufactures of
woollen, linen, or leather, but with
books only, this must doubtless be ob.
} scure ; or, at most, he will be led to
think of specks of rottenness, but still
without being rightly satisfied. I have
not been able to obtain complete infor-
mation on this subject ; but in regard to
wool, and woolen stuffs, I have consult-
ed the greatest manufacturer in the
electorate of Hanover ; and he informs
me, that what he has read in my Ger-
man Bible, at this passage, will be
found to hold good, at any rate with
regard to woollen articles ; and that it
proceeds from what is called dead wool,
that is, the wool of sheep that have died
by disease, not by the knife : that such
wool, if the disease has been but of
short duration, is not altogether useless,
but in a sheep that has Keen long dis-
eased, becomes extremely bad, and
loses the points ; and that, according
to the established usage of honest manu-
facturers. It is unfair to manufacture
dead wool into any article worn by
man ; because vermin are so apt to
establish themselves in it, particularly
when it is worn close to the body and
warmed thereby. When I told him,
that in the countries, with a view to
which I questioned him, the people, for
want of linen and from poverty, had
always worn, and still v/ear, woollen
stuffs next the skin, he stated it as his
opinion that there the disagreeable
effect just mentioned, must take place
in a still higher degree than in countries
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIII.
123
plague be spread in the garment,
either in the warp, or in the woof,
or in a skin, or in any work that
is made of skin : the plague is i a
fretting leprosy; it is unclean.
52 He shall therefore burn that
garment, whether warp or woof,
in woollen or in linen, or any thing
of skin, wherein the plague is: for
it IS ci fretting leprosy; it shall be
hurnt in the tire.
53 And if the priest shall look,
and behold, the plague be not
spread in the garment, either in
tne warp or in the woof, or in any
thing of skin ;
54 Then the priest shall command
that they wash the thing wherein
ihe plague is, and he shall shut it
up ^even days more :
55 And the priest shall look on
ihe plague after that it is washed :
and behold, tf the plafjue have not
changed his colour, and the plague
be nut spread; it is unclean ; thou
siiak burn it in tjie fire; it is fret
[ inward, whether it be bare within
or without.
56 And if the priest look, and be-
hold, the plague be somewhat dark
after the washing of it; then he
shall send it out of the garment,
or out of the skin, or out of the
warp, or out of the woof:
57 And if it appear still in the
garment, either in the warp, or in
the woof, or in any thing of skin ;
it is a spreading plague : thou
shalt burn that wherein the plague
is with fire.
58 And the garment, either warp,
or woof, or whatsoever thing of
skin it be, which thou shalt wash,
if the plague be departed from
them, then it shall be washed the
second time, and shall be clean.
59 This zs the law of the plague
of leprosy in a garment of woollen
or linen, either in the warp or
woof, or any thing of skins, to pro-
nounce it clean, or to pronounce it
unclean.
uliere, according to our German fashion,
wliicli would there be a luxury, a linen
^l;lrl is worn between the woollen
clothes and llie body. He added, that
dead wool was usually manufactured
into saqks and horse-clolhs ; and he
expressed his wish for a statute, in the
style of Moses, which should discourage
Ihe use of dead wool, or inflict a pun-
islnnent on those who either sold it, or
knowingly manufaclured it into liuman
cluihuig. — I ain likewise informed by
IJaiiibur^hers, that in their neiglibor-
hood, many frauds are committed with
dead wool, from its being sold for good
wool ; in consequence of which, the
stuffs made of it not only become very
soon bare, but full first oi' little depres-
sions, and llien of holes.' — Comment,
071 L. M. Art.2\\.
Remarks. — (2.) Nothing that en-
tered into the Leviiiciil system, which '
we are now considering, was more re-
markably fraught with symbolical im-
port than the portion concerning the
treatment of the leper. Other parts of
tlie ritual taught impressively \\ie fear-
ful effects of sin ; this taught its defil'
ing nature. No conceivable aflliclion
or disease could form so striking a re-
presentation of that moral malady which
has befiillen our nature. We see in the
leprosy a lively emblem of that universal
depravity v. hich has corrupted our souls.
Tlie effects of this deadly spiritual de-
filement are typically set Ibrth in lively
colors in the enactments belbre us. He
upon whom it appeared was put out of
the camp or city in which he dwelt,
and was forced to live alone, cut off'
from all social intercourse. So with
sin. It does not indeed literally shut
us out from the society of our fellow-
creatures, but it renders us odious m
the sight of God, separates between us
126
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XIV.
ND the Loud spake unto Mo-
. ses, saying,
and him, precludes us from all cordial
fellowship wilh his people, and unless
we he cleansed from it in the appointed
way, it will effectually forbid our en-
trance into his heavenly temple. The
unpiirified and unrenewed sinner is mor-
ally unclean, and has no spiritual health
in him ; he is without God and without
Christ in the world ; and from the very
necessity of his corrupt nature, he is
excluded from the privileges and bless-
ings of God's people. When king
Uzziah was smitten with the leprosy in
the temple, all the priests with one
accord rose upon him, and ' thrust him
out' of the temple; yea, he himself
also ' hasted to go out.' And thus it
would be in heaven, if by any means an
unrenewed sinner were admitted there ;
he would be ' thrust out,' as unworthy
of a place in that pure abode; and he
would no doubt haste to flee out, from
a consciousness of the same fact.
(2.) Upon the smallest appearance of
the leprosy, the subject of it was to
subject himself to instant examination.
He must not trust to his own judgment,
but must apply to those whom God had
authorized to determine the point, ac-
cording to the rules prescribed. If this
could not be done at once, more time
was taken, till the fact became evident.
What does this show to us, but that we
must take every means of discovering
the phigue-spol of our own hearts?
We must not be afraid of knowing the
worst. We must have recourse to the
word and to the ministers of the word,
that by their help we may know the
evil that is in us. Above all, we must
go to GofI, who searcheth the heart,
and trieih llie reins, and say, 'Search
me, 0 God, and know my heart ; try
me, and know my thoughts.' However
clear we may be in our own eyes, we
must say wilh Paul, ' I judge not mine
own self; for I know nothing by myself
2 This shall be the law of the
leper in the day of his cleansing :
(i. 6. against myself) ; yet am I not
hereby justified, but he that justifieth
me is the Lord.'
(6.) ' The priest shall pronounce him
clean.' But why not pronounce him
cured ? The fact is, there was nothing
prescribed, nor any thing to be attempt-
ed by way of cure lor this disease.
Hence the removal of it is generally
expressed by the w'ord cleansing. And
certain it is, in like manner, that none
but God can deliver us from sin. No
self-righteous works, no superstitious
devices, no human efforts, have ever
been able to expel it out of the soil of
the depraved heart. The blood of
Christ alone can avail to this ; and then
it is not in this life eradicated, but /or-
gifen,just as the Jewish leper is not
said to have been cured, but cleansed,
as though the idea of the defilement were
more prominent in the mind of the law-
giver than that of the disease,
(45.) ' Shall cry. Unclean, unclean !'
Who does not see in this the manner in
which we are to acknowledge and be-
wail the corruption of our nature ?
Who does not recognize the fitting ex-
pression of a gospel penitent, convinced
of
Does he not feel the profound-
est grief and shame? Does he not ac-
knowledge himself a miserable and pol-
luted sinner? So if u-e are made truly
sensible of our own sinful condition, we
shall rend our hearts, and not our gar-
ments ; we shall lay our souls bare
before the heart-searching God ; our
mouths will be stopped, for we shall
know ourselves to be guilly ; we shall
smite each one upon our breast, and cry,
' God be merciful to me a sinner !'
CHAPTER XIV.
The Law of the Purification of the
Leper.
2. This shall be the law of the leper,
&c. That is, this is the mode which
B. C. 1490.1
CHAPTER XIV.
127
He a shall be brought unto the
priest :
3 And the priest shall go forth
out of the camp : and the priest
a Matt. 8. 2. 4. Mark 1. 40, 44.
12, 14, and 17. 14.
Luke
God hath ordained for cleansing a leper,
or qualifying him to be pronounced
clean, and liius restored to the commu-
uion of God's people. ^ He shall be
brought unto the priest. He was to be
conducted from his ' several (separate)
house,' to the borders of the camp,
whither the priest was to go forth to
meet him, and to perform the requisite
examination. As this coming to the
priest was required of the leper in every
instance, however thoroughly he might
have been healed, therefore, our Savior
said to the leper whom he had healed,
Malt. 8. 4, ' Go show thyself to the
priest, and offer the gift that Moses
commanded.'
4. Then shall the priest command to
take for h im , &c. Heb. np^l 'P-n m^Z
tzivvdh hakkoh'Cn ve-lakah, and the
priest shall command, and he shall take ;
i. e. the leper shall take. It was pro-
bably in order to avoid ambiguity as to |
the person, that our translators adopted
the mode of rendering which appears in
the text. Of the cedar wood, hyssop,
clean bird, and scarlet wool, were made
an instrument to sprinkle with. The
cedar served for the iiandle, the hyssop
and living bird were attached to it, by
means of the scarlet wool or crimson
fillet. The bird was so bound to this
handle, as that its tail should be down-
wards, in order to he dipt into the blood
of the bird that !idd been killed. By
this means the blood was sprinkled, and
when this was done, the living bird was
let loose and permitted to go wliiiher-
soever it would. The general purport
of the ceremonies liere prescribed, was
to point out the purification of tlie soul
through the atonement and spirit of
Christ, but it is vain to attempt to fix
with auy positiveness the spiritual im-
shall look, and behold, ?/ the plague
of leprosy be healed in the leper ;
4 Then shall the priest command
to lake for him that is to be cleansed
two birds alive and clean, and
port of each particular rite. Yet it may
not be amiss to give the explanation of
R. Abarbanel who imagines that these
four tilings had reference by contrast to
the four evils under which he had la-
bored, and from which by his cure he
was del ivered. The living bird denoted,
according to him, that the dead fiesh
was restored to its wonted life and
vigor ; the cedar wood, which is not
easily corrupted, that the rottenness
and corruption produced by the leprosy
was cured, and his flesh become sound
and healliiy ; the scarlet wool, that his
blood, by being cleansed of its impuri-
ties, had again sssumed its florid hue,
and given new fresh7iess and bloom to
the complexion ; and the hyssop, a
strongly odoriferous plant, that the ill
savor and every other species of offen-
siveness pertaining to the disease, had
passed away. IT Tivo birds alive.
Heb. fi'^'^l*:;! tzipporim, rendered in
the margin sparrows, as it is also by
Jerome and many other interpreters.
But it is evident from an attentive pe-
rusal of the verse, that it signifies birds
in general ; for if the sparrow was a
clean bird, there could be no use in
commanding a clean one to be taken,
since every one of the species was cere-
monially clean; but if it was unclean
by law, then it could not be called clean.
The term here must therefore signify
birds in general, of which some were
ceremotiially clean, and some unclean ;
which rendered the specification in the
command proper and necessary. From
the terms of the law it appears, that
any species of clean birds miglu be taken
on such occasions, domestic or wild ;
provided only they were clean, and the
use of them conceded by the laws of
Moses to the people- Accordingly the
128
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
b cedar-wood, and « scarlet, and
<J hyssop.
5 And the priest shall command
that one of the birds be killed in
an earthen vessel, over running
water.
6 As for the living bird, he shall
take it, and the cedar-wood, and
the scarlet, and the hyssop, and
shall dip them, and the living bird,
in the blood of the bird that teas
killed over the running water.
7 And he shall e sprinkle upon
him that is to be cleansed from
the leprosy f seven times, and shall
f)ronounce him clean, and shall
et the living bird loose into the
open field.
S And he that is to be cleansed
g shall wash his clothes, and shave
off all his hair, hand wash himself
in water, that he may be clean :
b Xumb. 19. G. c Heb. 9. 19. d Ps. 51. 7.
e Heb 9. 13. f 2 Kings 5, 10, 11. S ch. 13. 6.
hch. 11.25.
Gr. renders it very properly c^uo opvtdia,
two Utile birds. IT And scarlet. That
is, a lock of wool which had been dyed
in purple or scarlet dye. IT Hyssop.
See Note on Ex. 12. 22.
5. Killed in an earthen vessel, over
running water. The question will
here very naturally occur, how the bird
could properly be said to be killed over
* running' water, wlien it was to be at
the same time in an 'earthen vessel.'
But the apparent discrepancy is removed
at once when we remark, thai, the phrase
in the original is tl'^'^n tl'^?^ mayiTn
hayim, living water, and that nothing
more is meant than that the bird was to
be killed over an earthen vessel partly
filled with fresh, spring, or living water,
in opposition to that which had been
employed for any other (jurpose, or was
stale from long standing. And so
wherever the same epithet occurs else-
where in the present chapter. IT Shall
let the living bird loose into the open
field. Porhajis to intimate symboli-
and after that he shall come into
the camp, and > shall tarry abroad
out of his tent seven days.
9 But it shall be on the seventh
day, that he shall shave all his hair
off his head, and his beard, and his
eye-brows, even all his hair he
shall shave off; and he shall wash
his clothes, also he shall wash his
flesh in water, and he shall be clean.
10 And on the eighth day khe
shall take two he-lambs without
blemish, and one ewe-lamb of the
first year without blemish, and
three tenth-deals of fine flour for
la meat-offering, mingled with oil,
and one log of oil.
11 And the priest that maketh
h??n clean, shall present the man
that is to be made clean, and those
things, before the Lord, at the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation.
i Numb. 12. 15. k Matt. 8. 4. Mark 1. 44.
Luke 5. 14. 1 ch. 2. 1. Numb. 15. 4. 15.
cally, that the leper was now released
from his confinement, and'restored to
free intercourse with society, as the
scape-bird was to the rest of its kind.
The Offering required to be brought
fur his further cleansing.
10. And on the eighth day he shall
take two he-lambs, &c. After having
submitted to the seven days' restriction,
or quarantine, in the manner prescribed
above, the recovered leper was required,
on the day immediately succeeding, to
bring, in order to complete his purifica-
tion, a trespass, a sin, and a burnt-offer-
ing ; — a male lamb for each of the for-
mer, and a female for the latter. An-
nexed to each he was to present a meal
offering, consisting of an omer of flour
with oil to make it into bn'ad or cakes,
and another log, or half pint of oil, by
I itself, for another purpose, v. 15. 16.
As the accompanying ceremonies were
; substantially tlie same with those al-
ready detailed in pieceding chapters, it
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIV.
1S9
12 And the priest shall take one
he-lamb, and m offer him for a
trespass-offering, and the log of
oil, and n wave them for a wave-
offering before the Lord.
i:^ And he shall slay the lamb
0 in the place where he shall kill
the sin-offering and the burn [-offer-
ing, in the holy place : for p as the
sin-offering is the priest's, so is the
trespass-offering: qit is most holy.
14 And the priest shall take some
of the blood of the trespass-offer-
ing, and the priest shall put it
r upon the tip of the right ear of
him that is to be cleansed, and
upon the thumb of his right hand,
and upon the great toe of his right
foot.
15 And the priest shall take some
of the log of oil, and pour it into
the palm of his own left hand :
16 And the priest shall dip his
right finger in the oil that is in his
left hand, and shall sprinkle of the
oil with his finger seven limes be-
fore the Lord.
17 And of the rest of the oil that
is in his hand, shall the priest put
upon the tip of the right ear of him
that is to be cleansed, and upon
the thumb of his right hand, and
m ch. 5. 2, 18, and 6. 6, 7. n Exod. -29. 24.
o Exod. 29. 11. ch. 1. 6, 11, and 4 4, 24.
P ch. 7. 7. q ch. 2. 3, and 7. 6, and 21. 22.
- Exod. 29. 20. ch. 8. 23.
will be unnecessary to dwell upon the
various particulars. For these the
reader can consult Ainsworth or Patrick.
14, The priest shall put it upon the
tip of his risht ear, &c. Probably to
denote, by this significant act, that now
his .sin being graciously remitted, and
he received again into communion with
his people, he was laid under fresh ob-
ligatidn to hearken heedfully to the
divine commands, and to render a more
active and strenuous service to his
heavenly Benefactor. See Note on Ex.
29. 20, where this ceremony in refer-
ence to the priests is fully explained.
upon the great toe of his right foot,
upon the blood of the trespass-of-
fering.
18 And the remnant of the oil
that is in the priest's hand he shall
pour upon the head of him that is
to be cleansed: sand the priest
shall make an atonement for him
before the Lord.
19 And the priest shall offer t the
sin-offering, and make an atone-
ment for him that is to be cleansed
from his uncleanness ; and after-
ward he shall kill the burnt-
offering.
20 And the priest shall offer the
burnt-offering, and the meat-offer-
ing upon the altar: and the priest
shall make an atonement for him,
and he shall be clean.
21 And u if he ie poor, and cannot
get so much ; then he shall take
one lamb/or a trespass-offering to
be waved, to make an atonement
for him, and one tenth-deal of fine
flour mingled with oil for a meat-
offering, and a log of oil ;
22 wAnd two turtle-doves, or two
young pigeons, such as he is able
to get ; and the one shall be a sin-
offering, and the other a burnt-
offering.
23 X And he shall bring them on
s ch. 4, 26. t ch. 5. 1, 6, and 12. 7. u ch.
5. 7, and 12. 8. w ch. 12. 8, and 15. 14, 15.
Commutation of Offerings appointed
for the Poor.
21,22. If he be poor, and cannot get
so much. Heb. r.5!:j?2 "l"!"' 'I'^X ain
yado massegeth, his hand attain it not ;
an idiom occasionally elsewhere occur-
ring, and indicating uant of ability, as
below, v. 22, 30, 31. Lev. 27. S. On
the provision itself see the remarks in
the Note on Lev. 5. 7.
23-32. And he shall bring them, kc.
The same circumstances and ceremonies
were to mark the offering of the poor
leper as of the rich. His lamb was to
130
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
the eighth day for his cleansing '
unio the priest, unto the door of
the tabernacle of the congregation,
before the Lord.
24 y And the priest shall take the
lamb of the trespass-offering, and
the log of oil, and the priest shall
v;ave them for a wave-otlering
before the Lord.
25 And he shall kill the lamb of
the trespass-offering, ^ and the
priest shall take 5o?ne of the blood
of the trespass-offering, and put it
upon the tip of the right ear of him
that is to be cleansed, and upon
the thumb of his right hand, and
upon the great toe of his right foot.
26 And the priest shall pour of
the oil into the palm of his own
left hand.
27 And the priest shall sprinkle
with his right finger some of the oil
that IS in his left hand seven times
before the Lord:
28 And the priest shall put of the
oil that IS in his hand, upon the tip
of the right ear of him that is to
be cleansed, and upon the thumb
of his right hand, and upon the
y ver. 1-2. z ver. 14.
great toe of his right foot, upon the
place of the blood of the trespass-
offering.
29 And the rest of the oil that is
in the priest's hand, he shall put
upon the head of him that is to be
cleansed, to make an atonement
for him before the Lord.
30 And he shall offer the one of
a the turtle-doves, or of the young
pigeons, such as he can get ;
31 Even such as he is able to get,
i the one for a sin-offering, and the
[ other/or a burnt-offering, with the
meat-offering. And the priest shall
make an atonement for him that
is to be cleansed, before the Lord.
32 This is the law of him in
whom IS the plague of leprosy,
whose hand is not able to get ^that
xchich perlainelh to his cleansing.
33 % And the Lord spake uuto
Moses and unto Aaron, saying,
34 c When ye be come into the
land of Canaan, which I give to
you for a possession, and I put the
plague of leprosy in a house of the
land of your possession;
a ver. '-22. ch. 15. 15. b ver. 10. = Gen.
17. 18. Numb. 32. 22. Deut. 7. 1, and 32. 49
be waved ; its blood smeared upoa his
ear, thumb, and toe ; which were also
to be anointed with the oil out of the
log ; and his turtle and pigeon offered
to the same efTect, and with like avail-
ableness as in the foregoing cases.
The Detection and Cleansing of Lepro-
sy in Houses.
34. When — I pvt the plague of lepro-
sy in a house, &c. This language would
appear at first blush to countenance the
idea generally entertained by the Jews,
that tlie leprosy was a supernatural dis-
ease, inflicted immediatt-ly by God
himself. But in the Hebrew idiom God
is often said to do what, in the course
of his providence, he merely perrnils to
be done. ' The house-leprosy here de-
scribed has occasioned much perplexity
to inquirers ; and the difficulty has pro-
bably arisen from being led by the name
to look upon this ' leprosy,' as well as
that in clothes, as something akin to
the liuman disease so called. Men,
clothes, and stones have not the same
diseases, but from some analogous cir-
cumstances, real or fanciful, the dis-
eases of men may be, and have been, by
a figure of speech, applied to diseases
in other tl)ings. Indeed, to this day,
tliere are certain disorders of trees in
Egypt and Palestine to wliich the name
ol * leprosy ' is given. In Switzerland,
also, they speak of a cancer in build'
i7igs on the same principle ; and wliy
should we not understand ihe leprosy in
buildings of the present text as some-
thing of a similar description ? If we
believe that the house-leprosy was any
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIV.
131
thing related to the disorder of the
same name in man, it is extremely diffi-
cult to account for the symptoms and
mode of ireatnjent, and we cannot per-
haps do better than agree with the Rab-
bins and some of the early Christian
fathers, who believed that this leprosy
H-as not natural, but was sent by God as
m extraordinary punishment upon evil-
doers, to compel liiem to the public
acknowledgment and atonement of some
undetected crime, wliereby others had
been injured. Calmel, however, seems
to think tliat tiiis disorder was caused
by animalcula, v^hich eroded the stone
like riiites in a cheese, and might then
be called leprosy, because, according to
his theory, the disorder of that name in
man and in clothes was produced in
much the same manner. (See the Dis-
sertation prefixed to his Commentary
on Leviticus.) There is another way
of accounting for its connexion with
human leprosy, which is, by supposing
that the walls had taken a leprous con-
tagion from man, and were in a condi-
tion, when really infected, to transmit
it to men. In this case, the difficulty
remains of understanding the details
which are given of the appearances
which the walls presented. There is
also not a word said which can be con-
strued to intimate that the house-leprosy
was infectious to man ; on the contrary,
tl>e direction to remove the furniture
before the priest entered to inspect the
house, lest it should partake in the sen-
tence of uncleanness which he might
see occasion to pronounce, is the very
way best calculated to have propagated
the leprous contagion, if any capable
of being communicated to man had ex-
isted. Michaelis gives an explanation
which seems more clearly to elucidate
the subject llian any oilier which has
fallen under our notice, and the rejec-
tion of which seems to leave no other
alternative than the accejitance of the
rabbinical interpretation which we have
mentioned. He observes that walls and
houses are often attacked with some-
thing that corrodes and consumes them,
and which is called by the Germans
' saltpetre,' but which we will call
' mural salt.' This njural incrustation,
or efllorescence, chiefly appears in damp
situations, in cellars and ground-floors,
seldom extending to the upj)er stories
of a house ; and its efiects are in many
respects so injurious as to justify, and
indeed to require, in some climates, the
attention of a legislator. The appear-
ances wiiich such walls exhibit corres-
pond very well with the descrijjtion
given in this chapter: the spots, in-
deed, are not often of a greenish or red-
dish hue, though they are sometimes
met with of the latter color. The
analogy is indeed in general so clear,
that Michaelis says he had known more
than one example of children who,
shortly after reading the account here
given of the house-leprosy, have come
with terror to relate that they had dis-
covered it on the walls of the cellar.
They ' described it distinctly or figura-
ti vely to their parents, and were laughed
at for their pains. Laughed at they
certainly ought not to have been, but in-
structed. Their acute vision had shown
them what many a learned man has in
vain sought to find out.' The detri-
mental effects of this efflorescence are
fully detailed by the same author ('Com-
mentaries,' vol. iii. pp. 29S-305). The
following is the substance of his state-
ment. The walls become mouldy, and
that to such a degree, as, in consequence
of the corrosion spreading farther and
firther, at last to occasion their tum-
bling down. The plaster also requires
frequent repairing, as it blisters, as it
is called, that is, detaches itself from
tlie wall, swells, and then falls off*.
The things that lie near the walls thus
affected become damaged, and in the
end spoiled. Books and other articles
that fannot bear dampness and acids
are often ruined from this cause. If
this 'saltpetre' be strong in the occu-
pied apartments, it is very injurious to
health, particularly where people sleep
132
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
35 And he that owneth the house
shall come and tell the priest, say-
ing, It seemelh to me there is as it
were '^ a plague in the house :
36 Then the priest shall command
that they empty the house before
the priest go inlo it to see the
plague, that all that is in the house
be not made unclean ; and afier-
<1 Ps. 91. 10. Prov. 3. 33. Zech. 5. 4.
near ihe wall. If such effects be expe-
rienced in modern Europe, there is
room to conclude that they were more
strongly exhibited at the early period
under notice, and in countries where
domestic architecture never attained
much perfection, and where people gen-
erally live in houses having but one
story. Taking this to be the ' house-
leprosy ' of the Scriptures, the object
of the Mosaic ordinance is sufficiently
intelligible.'— P?cf. Bib.
35. He that oicneth the house shall
come and tell the priest, saying, It
seemelh to me there is as it were a plague
in the house. Tliat is, the plague of
leprosy. The owner, it seems, was to
speak in a qualified and dubious man-
ner, it being the office of the priest to
pronounce a positive sentence on the
subject. ' Although he be a wise man,'
says Maimonides, ' and knoweih cer-
tainly that it is the plague, he may not
determine and say, The plague appear-
eth to me in the house ; but he shall
say, It seemeth to me there is as it
were the plague,' &c. The serious ul-
timate loss he might sustain rendered
it the interest of the owner to give the
earliest intimation on the subject, and
to be attentive to the first indications
of infection. If it gained ground, he
not only lost his house, but probably
his furniture, wiiich we have no reason
to conclude to have been removed pre-
vious to inspection, unless when early
information came Irom ihe owner him-
self; and if the priest, on inspection,
declared the house unclean, it is obvious
ward the priest shall go in to see
the house:
37 And he shall look on the
plague, and behold, if the plague
be in the walls of the house, with
hollow streaks, greenish, or red-
dish, which in sight are lower than
the wall ;
3S Then the priest shall go out
of the house to the door of the
that everything which remained in it
became unclean also.
26. And the priest shall command that
they empty the house. Heb. IjBI
u-pinnu, and they shall prepare ; i. e.
by removing all articles of furniture,
and every thing that would prevent or
impede the due examination of the
premises.
37. JVith hollow streaks. This was in
effect the same kind of criterion ihal
was established for detecting the leprosy
in the human body. If a spot was deeper
than the skin of the flesh it was decid-
edly a bad symptom ; so when these
hollow streaks or rather depressed cavi-
ties appeared in the wall of a house,
showing that corrosion had already
taken place, it was a clear sign that it
was a house-lepros)'. The original word
Till^S/p';!) shekaaruroth, is a compound
word with the import of sunk or loiv-
lying, and here doubtless implies an
effect on the stones which we should
describe by the word pitted. The Gr.
has /c</iA(icc5, little hollows, and the Vulg.
' valliculas,' little vallies. But the idea
of long streaks or creases, conveyed by
our translation, does not seem to be
warranted by the original, nor does
there appear to be any evidence that
this kind of caries or gangrene in stones
corroded them in streaks. It was ra-
ther, we may suppose, in spots.
IT Which in sight are lower than the
wall. That is, which are deeper than
the surface of the wall.
38. Then the priest shall go out of
the house, &c. The particularity with
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIV.
133
house, and shut up the house seven
days:
39 And the priest shall come again
ilie seventh day, and shall look;
and behold, if the plague be spread
in ihe walls of the house;
40 Then the priest shall command
that they take away the stones in
v/hich the plague Z5, and they shall
cast them into an unclean place
witliout the city :
41 And he shall cause the house
to be scraped within round about,
and they shall pour out the dust
that they scrape off' without the
city into an unclean place :
42 And they shall take other
stones, and put ihem in the place
of those stones ; and he shall take
other mortar, and shall plaster the
house.
which these circumstances are men-
tioned, doubtless implies that there
was someling very formal in the manner
of his pausing at the door, and ordering
it to be efTectually closed, that after the
j)rescribed interval he might return and
pronounce a more definite judgment.
The plague would sooner appear in a
vacant than in an occupied house.
40, 41. That they take away the stones
171 which the plague is. That is, as far
lis ihe leprous infection had extended in
the walls. It is remarkable that the
vt-ry same steps are requisite- when a
house in modern times is infected with
the nitrous incrustralion. The spot or
sU:ne which produces it must be abso-
lutely removed ; and the scraping and
Irtsh plastering is also necessary.
When any part ofthe walls impregnated
u itii this substance is suffered to remain,
it always effloresces anew, and beomes
as bad as before. In large European
buildings it is not indeed necessary to
replaster the whole house, and the dif-
Terence in this respect may be accounted
for by the apparent smallness of the
Hebrew houses.
43-45. If the plague come again, &c.
12
43 And if the plague come again,
and break out in the house, after
that he hath taken away the
stones, and after he hath scraped
the house, and after it is plastered ;
I 44 Then the priest shall come and
j look ; and behold, if the plague be
spread in the house, it is e a fret-
ting leprosy in the house: it ts un-
I clean.
j 45 And he shall break down the
j house, the stones of it, and the
! timber thereof, and all the mortar
of the house: and he shall carry
them forth out of the city into an
unclean place.
46 Moreover, he that goeth into
the house all the while that it is
shut up, shall be unclean until the
even.
e ch. 13. 51. Zech. 5. 4.
It was possible that notvi'iihstanding all
the precautions thus ordered to be
taken, their efforts might still be una-
vailing, and the taint of leprosy disclose
itself in the walls ofthe house. Where
this was the case, the only remaining
alternative was utterly to demolish the
building, and cast away the materials
as abhorred and polluted rubbisli, into
some place equally unclean and abom-
inable. A leprous house was not to be
permitted to stand. The injury which
such houses might do to the health of
the inhabitants, or to the articles they
contained, was of more consequence in
the estimation of Moses than the build-
ings themselves. Those to whom this
appears strange, and who lament the
fate of a house pulled down by legal
authority, probably ihink of large and
magnificent houses like ours, of many-
stories high, which cost a great deal of
money, and in ihe second slory of which
the people are generally secure from all
danger ofthe sahpetre; but the houses
of those days were low, and of very
little value.
46, 47. He that gocth into the house,
&c. The bare entering within the door
134
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
47 And he that lieth in the house
shall wash his clothes: and he
that eateih in the house shall wash
his cloihes.
48 And if the priest shall come
in, and look upon it, and behold,
the plague haih not spread in the
house, after the house was plas-
tered : then the priest shall pro-
nounce the house clean, because
the plague is healed.
49 And f he shall take to cleanse
the house two birds, and cedar-
wood, and scarlet, and hyssop :
50 And he shall kill the one of
the birds in an earthen vessel, over
running water :
f ver. 4.
of a suspected house, without making
any slay there, incurred defilement, and
imposed separation during the rest of
the day. But one that ventured to
lodge or eat in the house under these
circumstances, as he was in more dan-
ger ol bringing away the infection, was
required to wash his cloihes before he
could enjoy his usual intercourse with
the people. This was an ordinance
well calculated to convey a moral ad-
monition in respect to the duty of
avoiding all suspected persons and
places, or as the apostle terms it, of
' abstaining from the least appearance
of evil.'
48-53. The priest shall pronounce
the house clean. Heb. nn'J tihar, shall
make clean. Gr. KaOapiei, shall purify.
That is, shall do this declaratively, as
explained above, ch. 13. 3. The verdict
thus pronounced was to be accompanied
wiili the same offerings and riles of
purification as in the case of leprous
persons pronounced clean. ' The se-
rious investigation which the matter
had undergone, and this final and sol-
emn declaralion, that the house was
clean, together with the offering made
on the occasion, was well calculated to
make the fact known, and to relieve the
public mind from any anxiety which
51 And he shall take the cedar-
wood, and the hyssop, and the
scarlet, and the living bird, and dip
them in the blood of the slain bird,
and in the running water, and
sprinkle the house seven limes:
52 And he shall cleanse the house
with the blood of the bird, and with
1 the running water, and with the
I living bird, and with the cedar-
j wood, and with the hyssop, and
with the scarlet:
53 But he shall let go the living
bird out of the city into the open
fields, and g make an atonement
for the house : and it shall be
clean.
e ver. 20.
might be entertained concerning the
spread of the house-leprosy, and at the
same time to exonerate the proprietor
from any inconvenience to which he
might have been exposed from the un-
ascertained suspicion that the infection
was in his house. Michaelis extols the
whole ol this law concerning * house-
leprosy ' exceedingly, under the view
which he was led to take of it, and in
which we have chiefly followed him ;
and although it is probably attended
wiih less evil in Europe, than in the
East, he inclines to wish that some
similar regulations operated in newly,
built cities. It is, however, a remark-
able fact that, so far from this being the
case, the sovereigns of Gern)any. and
probably also in other countries, did all
in their power to encourage the mural
incrustation when saltpetre became
necessary in the manufacture of gun-
powder. They established their right
to the product of the incrustation, even
in private houses, as a sovereign regale ;
and the collectors took care, in scraping
itoffj)eriodically, to leave the roots (if
we may so express it), to form the
source of a future crop; and the inhab-
itants dared not extirpate it altogether.
The collection came, in the end, to be
farmed out by the sovereign ; and the
B. C. 1490.]
54 Tliis 25 the law for all manner
of plague of leprosy, and h scall,
55 And for the i leprosy of a gar-
ment, kand of an house,
h ch. 13. 30. ' ch. 13. 47. k yen 34.
CHAPTER XIV.
56 And ifor a risin
135
saltpetre regale allogeiher formed a
most odious oppression, more biilerly
coniiilained of by the people than al-
most :iny other. On this point see
BfcUmanii's * Hist, of Inventions,' vol.
ii. pp. 476—478; and Michaelis, vol.
iii. p. 304.'— P/cf. Bib.
57. To teach when it is unclean and
when it is clean. That is, to teach
the priest when to pronounce a person
or house clean or unclean. Heb. mir^
''\n':Dn siini i<72t3n ti^n ichoroth be.
yom hattamt u-beyom hattahor, to teach
in the day of the unclean and in the day
of the clean, * Day ' appears here to be
used of the f/(?7?g^,9 or transactions that
should occur in it. ' To teach in the
day ' of any thing, is to teach respect-
ing the works or duties appropriated to
that day or season. Il is a Heb. idiom
of which the full force cannot be very
well expressed in any other language.
Remarks.— (2, 3.) ' He shall be
brouglu unto the priest ; and the priest
shall go forth out of the camp,' &c.
The ministers of righteousness are to be
always ready to meet the returning pen-
itent, who would fain be cleansed I'rom
the defilement of sin, or who hopes he
has been, and welcome him back to the
fold of Christ.
(4.) ' Then shall the priest command
to take for him,' &c. A very remark-
able diiference marks the vast superi-
ority of our great High Priest over the
high priest of the Jews. Tlie latter,
being a mere man, and himself com-
passed with infirmity, could not heal
the leper; lie could only discover by
inspection when lie was already healed
by God, and then by his office declare
this to the people. He was then to
perform the ceremonies appointed for
g, and for a
scab, and for a bright spot :
57 To m teach when it is unclean,
and when it is clean : this is the
law of leprosy.
1 ch. 13. 2. mDeut. 24. 8. Ezek. 44. 23.
his cleansing, and tlius restore him
again to society and to the privileges of
God's house. But the Lord Jesus heals
the leper. ' Lord, if thou wilt thou
canst make me clean ; and Jesus put
I forth liis hand, and touched him, and
said, I will, be thou clean ; and inime-
; dialely his leprosy departed from him
■ and he was cleansed.' To this great
I Physician, then, let us resort, to obtain
j that moral cleansing for wliich there is
tieither cure nor relief in any other
' quarter. Let us cry to him as did the
leper, in the day of his flesh, 'Jesus,
: master, have mercy on us !' and God
himself shall acknowledge and pro-
I nounce us clean. The hyssop is even
I now ready wherewith to sprinkle our
souls. Let us use it by faith, and we
shall experience with David its unfail-
ing efficacy ; ' Purge me with hyssop,
and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I
shall be whiter than snow.' But let us
be sprinkled not once or twice only, but
j ' seven times,' then shall we be ' washed
1 thoroughly from our iniquity, and be
I cleansed from our sin.'
I (9.) The leper did not come at once
into the camp, afler'he had been pro-
nounced clean, and sprinkled according
, to the ordinance. He was not admitted
I to his tent, or restored to society, till
j after living in some place alone for
; seven days more ; and then after again
; washing his body and his clothes, and
' shaving oiFall his hair, even to his eye-
brows, he was reinstated in all his for-
l mcr privileges and comforts. This was
j designed to remind us, liiat the infec-
] lion of nature, the defiling effects of sin,
still remain, even in those who are re-
I generate, and force upon us the necessity
' of a daily wasliing in Christ, in order to
I our perfect cleansing. It is only in
126
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1400.
CHAPTER XV.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses and to Aaron, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
ach. 22. 4. Numb. 5. 2. 2 Sam. 3.29
Matt. 9. 20. Mark o. 25. Luke 8. 43.
heaven that we can be pronounced fully
ilelivered from our remaining corrup-
tions. But there is, as it were, the short
period of a single week before that
event arrives, when we shall be intro-
duced to our Father's house, to our eter-
nal home. The intervening time must
indeed be spent in humiliating and
painful exercises, but those exercises
are only preparing'us for the richer en-
joyment of the promised bliss.
(14.) The application of the blood
and oil to the ear, the thumb, and the
toe of the leper, seems to intimate that
every member of the body, and every
facult}' of the soul, needs a special puri-
fication from guilt and corruption, and
a special consecration in the renewed
man to the service of God. The lan-
guage of the solemn rite was virtually
this : ' Now you are made clean, let all
your faculties and powers be devoted to
the service of God. Let your ears be
open to the commands of God. Let the
•work of your hands be bestowed upon
the business of your high calling, and
the accomplishment of the divine will.
Let your footsteps be ordered in his
word.'
(15.) Neither the blood nor the oil
were on any account to be omitted in
the purification of the leper ; nor can
either of ihem be omitted in the restora-
tion of our souls to God. The oil sig-
nificantly shadowed forth the Holy
Ghost as a spirit of sanclificaiion. By
the blood we are justified, and by the
oil we are sanctified. And it is v.orthy
of remark, that the order to the leper
was, lliat the oil should be put vpo7i
the blood of the trespass-offering, hint-
ing that the blood of Christ must first
be applied for our justification, and that
then the Spirit will be given for our
rael, and say unto them, a When
any man hath a running issue out
of his flesh, because of his issue he
is unclean.
3 And this shall be h.is unclean-
ness, in his issue : whether his
sanctification. This is the more care-
fully to be observed, inasmuch as men
are very prone to reverse this estab-
lished order. We seek sanctification
first, and then make our attainments a
ground of justification. But our plea
on this score will be rejected. We are
' justified /ree/j/ through grace.'
CHAPTER XV.
Of various Personal Uncleannesses and
Purifications.
2. When any man hath a running
out of his flesh. Heb. nt n%Ti "^5
1"l'iDn^ ki yihye'h zab mibbesaro, when
he shall be flowing from his flesh. Gr.
cj ^Mv ycvrj-at pvtng tK tov acj[xaros avrov^
to whomsoever there shall be an issue or
flux from his body. The term ' flesh '
is undoubtedly here an euphemism, it
being used in the same sense in which
it occurs Gen. 17. 13, Ezek. 16. 26. As
to the disease itself which is here men-
tioned, though usually expressed by the
Gr. term yoi'oppciaj gonorrhea, which
has become familiar in English nosolo-
gy, yei it is not certain that it was in-
tended to designate the bad infection
known by it in modern times. If it
were, the disease probably existed in a
much milder form than the virulent
complaint so denominated among us,
and which a retributive providence has
made in general the inseparable conse-
quent of guilty indulgence. But it is
for the most part understood by the
Jews of the natural seed-flux, v. hich
arises from debility of the spermatic
organs.
3. This shall be his uncleanness in
his issue. That is, in these things,
which he goes on to specify, shall cun«
i sist the uncleanness of the man who is
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XV.
137
flesh run with his issue, or his flesh
be stopped from his issue, it is his
uncleanness.
4 Every bed whereon helieth that
haih the issue, is unclean: and
every thing whereon he sitteth,
shall be unclean.
5 And whosoever toucheth his
bed, shall wash his clothes, b and
bathe himself in water, and be un-
clean until the even.
6 And he that sitteth on any thing
whereon he sat that hath the issue,
shall wash his clothes, and bathe
himself in water, and be unclean
until the even.
7 And he that toucheth the flesh
of him that hath the issue, shall
wash his clothes, and bathe him-
self m water, and be unclean until
the even.
8 And if he that hath the issue
spit upon him that is clean ; then
b ch. 11. 25, and 17. 15.
affected by gonorrhoea. IT Or his
flesh be stopped from his issue. That
is, clogged, obstructed, so as to prevent,
by its tliiclcening, a free and easy emis-
sion. In either of the cases mentioned
the man was made unclean, and com-
municated his defilement to the beds,
benches, &c., with which he came in
contact, and through them to any one
who might chance to sit or lie upon them,
so lliat he was required to bathe him-
self in water and wash his clothes, and
be considered unclean till evening.
12. The vessel of earth — shall be bro-
ken ; and every vessel of wood shall be
rinsed in water. A similar command
as to earthen vessels, is given ch. 6. 38,
where it is also directed that vessels of
brass sliould be scoured. ]Michaelis
asks why earthen vessels could not be
as well cleansed by washing as those
of wood or copper. In reply to this,
Mr. Kiito says :— ' Without entering into
the question as to the art of glazing
earthenware, it is our strong impression
that the earthen vessels which Moses
12*
he shall wash his clothes, and bathe
himself in water, and be unclean
until the even.
9 And what saddle soever he rid-
eth upon that hath the issue, shall
be unclean.
10 And whosoever toucheth any
thing that was under him, shall be
unclean until the even : and he that
beareth any of those things, shall
wash his clothes, and bathe him-
self ia water, and be unclean until
the even.
11 And whomsoever he toucheth
that hath the issue (and hath not
rinsed his hands in water) he shall
wash his clothes, and bathe himself
in water, and be unclean until the
even.
12 And the c vessel of earth that
he toucheth which hath the issue,
shall be broken : and every vessel
of wood shall be rinsed in water.
c ch.G. 23, and 11. 32, 33.
directed to be broken were not glazed.
It is evident that glazed vessels may be
as well or better cleansed from every
impurity, by washing, than hard wood,
or even copper ; whereas unglazed ves-
sels, from their porous nature, would
receive a more permanent taint from
any accidental defilement than either.
Indeed, we would venture to be more
definite, and point to a sort of pottery,
which escaped the notice of i^.Iichaelis,
as ir.ost probably that to which the
I direction may be understood with pecu-
{ liar propriety to apply. In Egypt and
Western Asia, the inhabitants iiave, in
common use, vessels of porous clay,
hghtly baked, and rather thin in pro-
portion to the size of the vessel. They
are exclusively used for the purifying
and cooling of water. The water con-
stantly oozes through the minute pores
of the vessel, forming a thick dew or
moisture on the outer surface, the rapid
evaporation of which reduces the tem-
perature of the vessel, and cf the water
it contains, much below that of the at-
138
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
13 And when he that hath an
issue is cleansed of his issue ; then
d he shall number to himself seven
days for his cleansing, and wash
his clothes, and bathe his flesh in
running water, and shall be clean.
14 And on the eighth day he shall
take to him « two turtle-doves, or
two young pigeons, and come be-
fore the Lord, unto the door of the
tabernacle of the congregation, and
give them unto the priest :
d ver. 23. ch. 14. 8. e ch. 14. 22, 23
mosphere ; by which means the iiihab-
ilanls are enabled to obtain, in the
warmest weather, water perfectly cool
for drink. The water, as it passes
through, is filtered to the most perfect
clearness ; and, for family use, there
are large vessels of this sort, propped
upon frames of wood, with olher vessels
of similar clay, but different form,
placed underneath to receive the filtered
water that drops from the outer surface
of the other. Thus -a supply of water,
perfectly clear and refreshingly cool,
is at once secured. Jugs of various
sizes, and elegant but fragile driuking-
cups, of the same clay, are also em-
ployed to keep the filtered water cool
while at hand for occasional use, and
wiiile being actually used. Now the
manufacture of these percolating vessels
originated in Egypt in very ancient
times, and they are still made there in
grenl perfection. If the invention as-
ctMids to the time of Moses, there can
be no question that the Israelites w-ere
jirqnainted with the art of making them,
• id would questionless use them for
lii'- purpose of purifying and refrigerat-
ing ilie generally bad water of the
deserts through which they wandered ;
and as they had vessels of wood and
copjier for other purposes, it is not too
iriuch lo suppose that their earthen ves-
sels were almost exclusively of tliis
description ; for to this day a wandering
people do not like to encutriber them-
selves witii numerous earthen vessels,
: 15 And the priest shall offer them,
j f the one for a sin-offering, and the
other /or a burnt-offering; gand
the priest shall make an atonement
for him before the Lord for his
issue.
16 And bif any man's seed of
copulation go out from iiim, then
he shall wash all his flesh in water,
and be unclean until the even.
17 And every garment, and every
f ch. 14. 30, 31. gch. 14. 19, 31. h ch. 22.
4. Deut. 23. 10.
which are so liable to be broken in their
removals. Assuming, then, tliat such
were their vessels, — the direction lo
break them when defiled is easy lo be
understood, because, from their remark
ably porous nature, whatever spot, slain,
or other impurity they receive, is at
once absorbed into their mass, either
immediately or through the agency of
the water, and it becomes impossible to
cleanse them entirely by any common
process. In fact, we have with our own
hands broken many jugs and drinking-
cups of this description, when they re-
ceived some accidental contaminrtion,
from the spontaneous feeling that they
had become wholly defiled, and could
not be cleansed. It seems to us that
the explanation we have here given will
account more satisfactorily than any
other for the distinction wliich has oc-
casioned so much perplexity to Mi-
chaelis and other commentators. Simi-
lar usages to those which the text
inculcates, as to the ireatmenl of defiled
vessels, prevailed among the ancient
Egyptians, and still do so among the
Mohammedans and Hindoos.' — P. Bib.
13. Then sfiall he number to himself
seven days, &c. During tliis lime he
was to keep himself secluded by way*
of testing the completeness of his cure ;
and if the issue ceased entirely for that
whole week, he was then to consider
himself so far clean as to be entitled to
ofTcr tlie following sacrifices as an atone-
ment for having been legally unclean.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XV.
139
skin whereon is the seed of copu-
lation, shall be washed with wa-
ter, and be unclean until the even.
18 The woman also with whom
rnan shall lie with seed of copula-
tion, they shall both bathe them-
selces in water, and i be unclean
until the even.
19 ^ And k if a woman have an
issue, and iier issue in her flesh be
blood, she shall be put apart seven
days: and whosoever toucheth her
shall be unclean until the even.
20 And every thing that she lieth
upon in her separation shall be un-
clean; every thing also that she
sitteth upon shall be unclean.
21 And whosoever toucheth her
bed shall wash his clothes, and
bathe himself in water, and be un-
clean until the even.
22 And whosoever toucheth any
thing that she sat upon shall wash
his clothes, and bathe himself in
water, and be unclean until* the
even.
23 And if it be on her bed, or on
any thing whereon she sitteth,
when he toucheth it he shall be
unclean until the even.
24 And 1 if any man lie with her
at all, and her flowers be upon him,
he shall be unclean seven days:
and all the bed whereon he lieth
shall be unclean.
25 And if ma woman have an
il Sam. 21.4. k ch. 12, 2. 1 See ch. 20. 18.
IS. The woman also with whom man
shall lie, &c. The sense of this verse is
somewliat doubtful, but, as it should
seem, it refers to the preceding verses,
viz. ilie wife, also, in case that should
happen which is mentioned v. ]6, 17,
shall bathe and be unclean till evening.
24. And if any man lie with her, &c.
That is, without knowing her to be in
that comlition ; for if it was done know-
ingly, both were liable to the punish-
ment of death. Lev. 20. 8. Comp.
J-'^v. 18. 19. See also Ezek. 22. 10.
issue of her blood many days out
of the time of her separation, or if
it run beyond the time of her sepa-
ration ; all the days of the issue
of her uncleanness shall be as the
days of her separation ; she shall
be unclean.
26 Every bed whereon she lieth
all the days of her issue shall be
unto her as the bed of her separa-
tion : and whatsoever she sitteth
upon shall be unclean, as the un-
cleanness of her separation.
27 And whosoever toucheth those
things shall be unclean, and shall
wash his clothes, and bathe him-
self in water, and be unclean until
the even.
^ 2S But n if she be cleansed of her
issue, then she shall number to
herself seven days, and after that
she shall be clean.
29 And on the eighth day she
shall take unto her two turtles, or
two young pigeons, and bring them
unto the priest, to the door^of the
tabernacle of the congregation.
30 And the priest shall off'er the
one /or a sin-offering, and the other
for a burnt-offering; and the priest
shall make an atonement fur her
before the Lord fur the issue of
her uncleanness.
31 Thus shall ye o separate the
children of Israel from their un-
m Matt. 9. 'iO. Mark 5. 25. Luke S. 43.
nver. 13. och. 11. 47. Deut. 24. 3. Ezek.
44. 23.
25. And if a woman have an issue of
her blood, &c. This refers not to any
thing natural or ordiimry, but to a
chronic, morbid issue, constituting the
disease of which mention is made m ilie
gospel, Mat, 9. 20, where a woman
' which was diseased with an issue of
blood twelve years,' is said to have
come behind the Savior and touched the
liem of his garment, and was made
whole.
31. Thus shall ye separate the child-
ren of Israel from their uncleanness.
140
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
cleanness: that they die not in
their uncleanness, when they p de-
file my labernacle that is among
them.
32 q This is the law of him that
hath an issue, rand nf him whose
P Numb. 5. 3, and 19. 13, 20. Ezek. 5. 11,
and 23. 33. 1 ver. 2. r ver. IG.
Heb. Dn*Trn hizzartem, from the root
^^2 ndzar, to separate, from which
comes ' Nazarite,' applied to one who
was peculiarly separated and sajxctificd
to the Lord. The use of the term
plainly implies that the people of Is-
rael, by their abstinence from every
thing forbidden, and by their rigid ob-
servance of all these ordinances, were
to demean themselves before God as a
nation of Nazarites. The Gr. has
£vAu,'3£<j TrnrjfTeTe, ye shall make devoutly
u-ary. IT When they defile my taber-
nacle that is ajnong the.n. Heb. t!X?2uH
betammeum, in their defiling. It is
clear from this, that one special design
of these enacunenls was to secure a
becoming degree of reverence for the
Tabernacle. This was the seat and
throne of the divine glory, and nothing
was to be allowed within its precincts
which would go to lower the general
estimate of the purity and sanctity
which God would have attached to the
J. lace of his peculiar residence. Comp.
Jer. 2. 23, and 7. 30; Ezek. 5. 11.—
14. 11,-22.3,4,-37.23.
32. This is the law of him that hath
an issue. ' We may conclude our re-
marks upon these chapters relating to
contagious disorders, and acts causing
ceremonial uncleanness, by directing
attention to the admirable regulalinns
for preventing contagion. Tlie subject
is now almost entirely overlooked in
the East, excejit so far as regards some
regulations concerning lepers, which
appear to have been derived from thof.e
now before us. We are unacquainted
with any Oriental nations, ancient or
modern, which had a sanatory code in
seed goeth from him, and is defiled
therewith ;
33 s And of her that is sick of her
flowers, and of him that haih an
issue, of the man, tand of the wo-
man, u and of him that lieth with
her that is unclean.
s ver. 19. t ver. '25. " ver 24.
the slightest degree comparable to this,
which is indeed scarcely equalled by
the regulations of the best European
lazarettos. We have been eye-wiine.sses
of the fearful consequences which pro-
ceed in Asiatic countries from the ab-
sence of any measures to prevent the
spread of contagious disorders. In
Mohammedan Asia this may be partly
owing to the medical doctrine of Mo-
hammed, who, in liis ignorant .self-
sufficiency, undertook, according to one
of the received traditions, to declare
that diseases were not contagious.
This dictum had its weight, although it
was contrary to the received opinions
of his time, for, as the Arabian com-
mentator remartis, * It was a belief of
the people of ignorance, that any one
silling near a diseased person, or eating
with one, would take his disease.'
{Mischat-ul-Masabih. Calcutta, 1810.)
It is true that he seems to direct the
avoidance of intercourse with a person
laboring under the ele))hantiasis — but
this is a solitary exception to his gen-
eral rule. Mohammed has adopted
from the chapter before us, and other
parts of the Penlaieuch, the laws re-
lating to ceremonial uncleanness, and
has added many others of his own, i3ut
there is this difference in the result,
that uncleanness under his law does not
generally extend beyond the time when
the unclean persons bathe and wash
any defiling stain from their clothes.
There are some exceptions, diiefly rela-
tive to females, in which the conse-
quences of defilement more nearly coin-
cide with those of the Leviiical law.'— .
Pid. Bib.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
141
CHAPTER XVI.
THE DAY OF ATONEMENT.
The proper place of lliis chapter, as
a]ipears from v. 1, would have been ini-
ir.cdiately afler the tenth ; but the death
of Aaron's two sons, fur their profane
cdntluct in the discharge of their office
as priests, gave occasion to the enact-
ment of the above cited laws respecting
the various uncleannesses which dis-
qualified an Israelite for approaching
the sanctuary. Those ordinances hav-
ing been dispatched in the five preceding
chapters, the regular thread of the
sacred record is now resumed, and
Moses goes on to give directions con-
cerning the great national festival of
atonement in its various details.
Tiiis is called by the sacred writer
tj'^1"ir«ri CT' yom hakkippurim, day
of expiations or atonements, and by the
modern Jews ^15!] kippur. It was so
called from its having been instituted
for the expiation of all the sins, irrev-
orences, and pollutions of all the Israel-
ites, from tlie highest priest to the low-
est people, committed by them through-
out the year. It was observed on the
tenth day of the seventh month, or
Tisri, corresponding to a part of our
September. It was one of the most im-
portant and interesting days in the
whole Jewish calendar ; and though
called occasionally the ' feast of expia-
tion,' yet its genuine character was
rather iliat of a fast— a day for < afflict-
ing their souls,'— and is only called
• feast ' in the sense of a set solemnity.
It is the day alluded to, Acts 27. 9:
' Now when much time was spent, and
when sailing was now dangerous, be-
cause the fast was now already past,
Paul admonished them,' &c. It was in
all its services and ceremonies the full-
est representation, the most perfect
shadow, of the great work of redemp- |
lion ; the high priest prefiguring, in all
lie did, that which Christ, in the fullness
of times, was ordained to do. On this
account a somewhat minute notice of
the observances of the day may be pro-
per in this connexion.
Of so much sacredness was this so-
lemnity regarded, that the people began
their preparation for it seven days be-
fore, by removing the high priest from
his own house to a chamber in the tem-
ple, (after the temple was built), lest
he should contract such a pollulion from
any of his family, as might incur a seven
days' uncleanness,and thereby unfit him
for performing his pontifical duties.
On the third and seventh of these days,
he was besprinkled with the ashes of
the red heifer, lest he might inadvert-
ently have been defiled by a dead body.
On the morning of the day before that
of the atonement, they brought him to
the east gate of the court of the Geo-
tiles, where they made bullocks, and
rams, and lambs to pass before him,
that he might be the better able to make
the proper selection ; and on every day
of the seven they caused him to sprinkle
the blood of the daily sacrifice, to burn
the parts of it upon the altar, to offer
the incense, and to trim the lamps, that
he might be the more familiar with
these offices, when called to perform
them. He was moreover committed,
for a part of each of the days, to some
of the elders of the Sanhedrim, who
read to him the rites of the day in order
to make sure of his going rightly through
the rubric. He was then conducted into
the chamber of incense that he might
learn to handle the incense, and to take
an oath as to the mode of burning it
when he entered into the holiest of all.
Their words on the occasion were as
follows: — 'High priest, we are the
messengers of the Sanhedrim, and thou
art our messenger, and that of the San-
hedrim ; we adjure thee by Him that
caused his name to dwell in this house,
that thou alter not any thing of what
we have spoken unto thee.' The reason
of this solemn adjuration was, that a
Sadducee, in contempt of tlie written
word, and of their traditions, at one
time had dared to kindle the incense
142
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
■without the vail, and to carry it smok-
ing within ; whereas he ought not to
have kindled it till within the vail.
During the night that preceded the
grand soleinnity, he was required to eat
but sparingly, though he was to fust the
whole of the next day, for fear that he
might become drowsy, and thus dese-
crate in some measure the services of
the day. Tliis entire night was spent
in his expounding, or hearing expounded
to him, the written law.
Tiie day having at length arrived, the
high priest laid aside his ordinary dress,
bathed hiiriself the first tiuie, and put
on the rich garments peculiar to his
oiFice. Haijited with these, he instantly
went into the court of the priests, went
to the laver according to priestly usage,
to wash iiis hands and iiis feet i'or tlie
first time ; proceeded thence to the
north side of the altar, to kill the morn-
ing sacrifice; ascended the altar with
the several pieces, and laid them on the
fire ; went into the holy place to trim
the lamp and ofier the incense ; blessed
tlie people on the top of the steps of
the porch ; and in short did all that be-
longed to the ordinary morning service.
Having finished this part of his duty,
the next thing was to solemnize his
own mind and the people's by some
previous sacrifices. These, in Num.
29. 8-11, are said to be as follows: — a
bullock, a ram, and seven Iambs for a
burnt-offering, with their appropriate
meal-offerings ; and a kid of the goats
for a sin-offering. When he had finish-
ed these, he washed his hands and feet
a second time at the laver. He then
retired to a particular chamber of the
temple, and proceeded to strip himself
of his rich habiliments, to bathe himself
in water a second time, and to put on
his plain white linen vestments, the
same dress as that worn by the common
priests, except that he had the sacer-
dotal mitre on his head. Thus attired,
he proceeded to the work of sacrifice.
Going up to the bullock, and standing
with his face towards the temple, he
laid both his hands on the head of the
animal, and solemnly pronounced the
following words : ' 0 Lord, I have sin«
nod, done perversely, and transgressed
before ihee, I and my house. I beseech
thee, 0 Lord, expiate the sins, perver«
sitics, and transgressions whereby I
have sinned, done perversely, and trans-
gressed, I and my house, as it is written
in the law of Moses, thy servant, say-
j ing, For in this day he will expiate for
you, to purge you from all your sins be-
fore the Lord, that ye may be clean j'
referring to v, 30, where these words
are to be found.
Having made this confession, he went
to the north-east corner of the court,
where the two kids of the goats, intend-
ed for the congregation, were ordained
to stand. There he cast lots for the
two goats, by means of two pieces of
gold, put into a box called "^S^p kelphi,
on one of which was written nirT^P
laihovah,for the Lord, and on the other
bTHT^b le-azazel,for Azazel, rendered
in our version, ' for the scape-goat,' i.i
relation to which an extended discus,
sion will be found in tlie ensuing notes
He then proceeded to slay the bulloclc
for his own sins, and the goat upon
which the lot had fallen to be sacrificed
to the Lord ; after which he filled a
censer with burning coals from the altar,
and putting two handfu's of incense
into a vase, he bore them into the holy
of holies. Having here poured the in-
cense upon the coals, he returned, took
the blood of the bullock and the goat,
and went again into the most holy
place. With his finger he.first sprinkled
the blood of the bullock, and afterwards
of the goat, upon the lid of llie ark of
the covenant, and seven times also he
sprinkled it upon the floor before the
ark. He then returned from the most
holy into the holy place, and besmeared
the horns of the golden altar with the
blood of the bullock and the goat, and
jetted the blood seven times over the
surface of the altar.
The next duty of the high priest was
B. C. 1490.J
CHAPTER XVI.
1^
CHAPTER XVI.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses after a the death of the
two sons of Aaron, when they of-
fered before the Lorp, and died :
2 And the Lord said unto Moses,
a ch. 10. 1, 2.
to iriiike an atonement for the holy
place, for the tabernacle, and for the
altar. Tliis was done by sprinkling the
blood of the bullock and the blood of
the goat, each right before the vail,
and then by mingling them together
and sprinkling the horns and the body
of the golden altar oi incense.
We are now come, in the order of the
ceremonies, to the scape-goat, which
was to be sent away into the wilder-
ness. To this animal as he stood in
the court of tlie priests, the high-priest
approached, and laying both hands upon
its head, which was bound around with
a scarlet thread, made over it a solemn
confession of the sins of the people of
Israel, after which it was consigned to
the hands of a person especially ap-
pointed to conduct it to some desert
and desolate region, where it was al-
lowed an unmolested escape. The
mystical or typical design of this trans-
action will be found fully considered in
a subsequent note. The Jewish writers
detail a multitude of additional cere-
monies connected with the dismission
of the scape-goat, but ns they are obvi-
ously of a fabulous cast, we waive en-
tirely the recital of them.
After the sending away of the emis-
sary goat, the high priest put oflf his
white vestments, and assuming his
splendid robes, sacrificed a holocaust
for himself and the people, and then
offered another sin-offering. The Jews
assert that he then went a thii-d time
into the holy of holies for the purpose
of bringing away the censer ; but this is
not certain, as he might have taken it
when he returned the second time for
the blood. However this may be, "he
Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that
he b come not at all limes into the
holy place within the vail, before
the mercy-seat, which is upon the
ark ; that he die not : for c I will
b Exod. 30. 10. ch. 23. 27. Heb. 9. 7, and
10. 10. c Exod. 25. 2i, and 40. 34. 1 Kings
8. 10, 11, 12.
proceeded afterwards to wash his hands
and feet at the laver, after which he
went to the dressing-chamber, that he
might lay aside his linen suit, bathe
liimself for the last time, and resume
his rich official dress, in which to offer
the evening incense and trim the lamps
on the golden candlestick. All this
done, he washed his hands and feet at
the laver for the last time ; went to the
dressing-chamber ; laid aside liis rich
attire ; resumed his ordinary wearing
apparel ; and retired to his own house
accompanied by the muhimde, rejoicing
that God had not mingled his blood
with his sacrifice.
Directions to the High Priest as to eU'
tering into the Holy Place.
2. Speak unto Aaron thy brother that
he come not at all times into the holy
place within the vail. That is, within
the vail separating the holy from the
most holy place, of which see an ac-
count, Ex. 26. 33. Into the holy place
without the vail, the officiating priests
were to enter every day, morning and
evening, in the performance of their
functions ; but they were to know that
the greatest possible sanctity attached
to the inner room, and as none of the
common priests were ever to enter this
apartment at all, so neither was the
high priest to do it at all times, but only
on the particular occasion here specified.
It is generally supposed, however, that
this rule did not preclude his entrance
into the holy of holies to consult the
oracle on extraordinary and pressing
occasions, which concerned the national
welfare, as for instance in the case men-
tioned, Judg. 1. 1,-20. 18. Comp.
144
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
appear in the cloud upon the ' coat, and he shall have the linen
mercy-seat. j breeches upon his flesh, and shall
3 Thus shall Aaron ^come into be girded with a linen girdle, and
the holy place: ewilh a young j wiih the linen mitre shall he be
bullock for a sin-offering, and a ram attired : these are holy garments ;
for a burnt-oflering. i therefore g shall he wash his flesh
4 He shall put on f the holy linen ' in water, and so put them on.
I Ileb. 9. 7, 1-2, 24, 25.
39, 42, 43. ch. 6. 10.
c ch. 4, 3. f Exod.
Ezek. 44. 17, iS.
g Excd. 30. 20. ch. 8. G, 7-
N'lm. 27. 21. This order was given to
Aaron, not merely in his personal ca-
pacity, but as the representative of all
those who should sustain in after ages
the same office. IT For I ivill appear
in the cloud upon the mercy seat. Targ.
Jon. * The glory of my Shekinah shall
be revealed.' The allusion is to the
bright luminous cloud which took its
station over the mercy-seat, and between
the cherubims, and constituted the
standing symbol of the divine presence.
Others, however, understand it of the
cloud of incense mentioned v. 13. But
this is less likely, for in that case we
might properly ask, u-hat then was to be
seen? It is plainly a promise that
something should be made visible on
the occasion referred to ; and though
we admit there was a cloud of incense
filling the inner sanctuary, yet it is de-
clared that something should be seen
over the mercy-seat, and what was this
but the luminous symbol of the divine
presence? The cloud of incense would
no doubt serve to soften the splendor of
the Shekinah, and make the view toler-
able to the eyes of the high priest ; and
it will be observed throughout the
Scriptures, that the accompaniment of
a cloud is generally spoken of in con-
nexion with the manifestation of the
visible divine glory. In like manner,
when the future coming of Christ, the
substance of the Shekinah , is announced,
it is said that he shall come ' in clouds,'
* in the clouds of heaven,'' &c. Dan. 7. 13,
Rev. 1 . 7. The note of RosenmuUer on ;
the passage before us will be found very i
important. See also Vitringa^s Observ. |
Sac, 1. l.,c. 11. I
3. Thus shall Aaron come into the
holy place, &c. Keb. IT'Tp ^i4 i^l"^
j yCtbo el kodesh, which may be rendered,
approach to the holy, i. e, enter upon or
engage in the performance of his lioly
duties. At the same time, as ilie ori-
ginal word is in many instances applitd
to the tabernacle or temple, it may here
have that sense, as it was at the taber-
nacle that these rites were to be per-
formed. But we are not to understand
that these offerings were to be brought
into the holy place, which might pos.
sibly be inferred from the use of this
preposition. ' To ' would be a prefera-
ble rendering of the Heb. ^5^ cl. The
bullock was to be presented as a sin-
offering for himself, his family, and the
whole Levitical priesthood. The rata
for a burnt-offering, to signify that he
and his associates were wholly conse-
crated to, and to be wholly employed in,
the work of the ministry. The cere-
monies with which these two sacrifices
were accompanied, are detailed in the
following verses.
4. He shall put on the holy linen coat,
&c. Heb. kinp "2 ri"ri ketoneth bad
kodesh, the linen tunic of holiness. Gr.
^iTCJva \ivovp riyiaffucfov, the sanctified
linen coat. See this described in the
Note on Ex. 28. 39. There were eight
different garments belonging to the altar
of the high priest, four of which, called
by the Jews ' the white garments,' and
made wholly of linen, are here men-
tioned as to be worn on this day. The
remaining four which are mentioned
Ex. 28. 4, were called * the golden gar-
ments,' from there being a mixture of
gold in them. Inasmuch as the day of
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
145
5 And he shall take of ^ the con-
gregation of the children of Israel
I wo kids of the goats for a sin-of-
fering, and one ram for a burnt-
<ifFering.
G And Aaron shall offer his bul-
lock of the sin-offering, which is
!i See ch. 4. 14. Numb. 'i9. 11. 2 Chron,
'^. 21. Eira 6. 17. Ezek. 45. "22, 23, ' ch.
3 :•. Heb. 5. 2, and 7. 27, 28, and 9. 7.
yloiieinent was a day of sorrow, hu-
iJiiliatiofl, and repentance, the high
•j.riest was Hot to be clad in his rich
j-ontifical robe.s, but in the simple sa
vt'rdotal vestments which were thought
In be more appropriate to this occasion.
Both the priest and the people were to
be reminded, that when he appeared to
ton.Oess and to expiate their sins and
;'iis own, he ought to be clothed in the
!;;irments of humility, for in the charac-
'.> r of sitmers, the highest and the low-
est were upon a level before God. These
jrarnients, however, were to be put off
in the after part of the day, and the or-
dinary a! tire of his office resumed, vv.
23, 24.
5. He shall take of the congregation
fwo kids of the goats. As the former
sacrifices were for himself, so these
were for the congregation at large, who
were hereby significantly taught to re-
gard themselves as sinners having equal
need of the benefits of the blood of atone-
ment to give them acceptance before
God.
6. And Aaron shall offer his bullock,
&c. That is, shall present with a view
to its being offered, for the actual obla-
tion is described v. 11. This presenta-
lion of the victim was accompanied
with a solemn supplicatory prayer, the
form of which is given in our prelimi-
nary remarks. IT And for his house.
Chal. ' For the men of his house,' By
this we are probably to understand not
me:\?ly the private household of the
pdest, but also the whole body of infe-
rior priests and Levites.
f. And he shall take the two goats and
13
for himself, and » make an atone-
ment for him.self, and for his house.
7 And he shall lake the two goats,
and present them before the Lord
at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation.
S And Aaron shall cast lots upon
the two goats ; one lot for the
Lord, and the other lot for the
scape-goat.
present them, &c. Heb. T^^aSTI he-
^emid, make to stand. Gr. cTri(T€t, shall
station. These goats, the Rabbins say,
were to be taken from the same flock,
to be of equal stature, of the same color,
and of the same value ; in a word, com-
plete counterparts of each other as far
as practicable. IT At the door of the
tabernacle. Within the court-yard, as
we liave previousl}' shown. See Note
on Lev. 8. 3.
S. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the
two goats. According to the Jews, the
two lots might be either of wood, stone,
or metal. On one was written for Jie-
hovah, and on the other for the scape-
goal. They v.'ere then put into a vessel,
wliile the goats stood with their faces
to the west. The vessel was then
shaken, and the priest putting in both
his hands, brought out a lot in each.
Being stationed between the two goats,
the lot which was on his right hand he
laid upon the goat that was on his
right ; and that which was in his left
hand he laid upon the goat that was on
his left ; and thus according to what
was written on the lots, the scape goat
and the goat for sacrifice were deter-
mined.
AZAZEL, OR THE SCAPE-GOAT.
If there be any thing calculated to
diminish the pleasure or damp the ardor
of the Biblical expositor in his research-
es, it is the stern necessity under which
he sometimes finds himself placed, of
putting new interpretations upon fa-
miliar texts. The deeper he penetrates
into the mine of Scriptural wealth, and
146
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
ihe wider llie excavation which he
makes on either hand, the greater is the
probability of his here and there under-
mining the adjacoil surface and causing
it occasionally to fall in. But this will
be little to be regretted if the chasms
thus made only open new avenues to
treasures below vastly more precious
than any which had lain above. Still it
is always more or less painful to an in
genuous mind to disturb, in any degree,
a 'throned opinion,' even though that
opinion be founded in error, and he be
able to substitute in place of it an
irrefragable trulli. Knowing with what
fond tenacity men cling to their ancient
and accredited forms of belief, he does
not like rudely to assail them, and it is
only a very rampant spirit of innova-
tion that tan take delight in breaking
up the time-hallowed associations with
which certain phrases and sentences of
holy writ uniformly come before the
mind. Yet it is certain that this result
is in many cases absolutely inevitable.
It is the invariable law of human pro-
gress, whether in the department of
nature or revelation, that as the light
breaks forth upon our previous dark-
ness, new Kiodifications should come
over established ideas. It would there-
fore be the height of injustice to ascribe,
in all cases, to a rage of novelty in
those who suggest them, the new inter-
pretations which an advanced state of
science or philology, or a more extended
and critical inter-collation of passages,
may force upon their convictions. It is
to be remembered that tliey too have
known what it is to be wedded to favor-
ite interpretations, and can tell of the
struggle which it cost them to give
ihem up. But they yielded to the force
of evidence, and embraced the views
which, it may be, they at first strenu-
ously withstood. If then they become
the patrons of these views, and with all
the requisite array of learning and logic,
endeavor to make good their access to
other minds, let it be presumed it is
not owing merely to a prurient prompt-
ing to obtrude a novel exposition upon
the mind of the Christian community,
but to the stern behests of the spirit of
homage to truth, which will not let
them forbear to utter what they sm-
cerely and solemnly believe to be the
sense of revelation.
These remarks will no doubt be per-
ceived to have a direct and prominent
bearing u])on the task which we have
imposed upon ourselves, in the some-
what elaborate investigation of the sub-
ject which now comes before us. —
The typical institution of the Scape-
goat is one of the most striking features
of the Levitical system, and its import
as a symbol has been so long rested in
as shadowing forth the grand doctrine
of the economical transfer of sin and
guilt from believers to Christ, that one
would almost as soon tliink of doubting
ihe fact of such a ceremony, as of call-
ing in question the established sense
which common theological consent has
attached to it. Indeed, it has been re-
marked, that while other types receive
light from their accomplishment in
Christ, this is intrinsically so apt, so
felicitous, so obvious, that it reflects
light upon the gospel itself. The im-
position of hands and the confession of
sins on the head of the emissary goat,
and his subsequent discharge and escape
into the wilderness, seem to afford so
fit an emblem of the bearing and carry-
ing away of the sins of believers by the
substituted divine victim, that it would
appear to be no less a violence done to
the pious sentiments, than to the pon-
dering reason, of the Christian, to at-
tempt to divert the spiritual application
of the symbol to any other subject. But
fealty to truth must predominate over
every other sentiment in the bosom of
the humble disciple of revelation. Un-
der its guidance wc are to shrink from
no results to which we are legitimately
brought. And in this spirit of supreme
deference to the dictates of truth, we
would enter upon the critical exposition
of the passage before us.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
147
The following is the correct rendering
of the verse: — ' And Aaron shall cast
lots upon the two goals ; one lot Hin'^P
lai-hovah,for Jehovah, and the other lot
";Ti5<t5?p la-azazel, for AzazelJ The
goal on which the lot of Jehovah fell
was to he brought and offered up for a
sill-offering, but the goat on which the
lot of Azaze! fell was to be ' presented
uiive before Jehovah to make an atone-
ment with him (Ti^^ alauv, upon or
over him), to let it go for Azazel into
the wilderness.' Of the former, the
blood was to be carried wilhin the vail,
and to be sprinkled upon the mercy-
sejit, and before the mercy-seat, in order
that atonement might be made for the
holy place because of the uncleanness
of ihe cliildren of Israel. When on the
other hand the live goat was brought,
the high priest was to lay both his
iijnds upon ils head and to confess over
il all the iniquities of the children of
Israel, putting tliem upon the head of
the goat ; after which he was to send it
by the hand of a ' fit man' (-inii i:;'^^*
ish itti) that it might bear upon it all
their iniquities mto a land not inhabited.
"~^uch was the ceremony, and we are
now to endeavor to ascertain its typical
or symbolical scope, and especially
what is to be understood by the differ-
ent treatment of the two goats. But in
order to do this, we must in the outset
institute a careful inquiry into the
meaning of the remarkable term ' Aza-
zel,' which occurs in this connexion for
the first and last time, and on the true
sense of which it is evident that every
thing depends.
Etymology and Meaning of the term
Azazel.
To the eye of the Hebrew scholar,
this word presents itself at once as a
compound, but its constituent elements,
and consequently its true significancy,
have long been the theme of learned
debate. Nearly every critical com-
mentator opens his peculiar scholium
upon the text, with a kind of preliminary
groan of * locus vexatissimus !' and
some are disposed to give it up in de-
spair. Bochart, whose stupendous eru-
dition is seldom baffled by the most
formidable difficulties, is here forced to
the humble confession — ' Me de hac
voce ^TS^Ti^ Azazel nihil habere satis
cerium, /^are nothing certain to offer
in regard to this u-ord ;' and nioreover
that — ' prudentiores vocem Hebrosam
relinquunt dvtojjLtvicToi-.' the more pru-
dent leave the Hebrew irord uninter'
preted. Under these circumstances it
can be little discredit for one to fail of
entire success in his attempts to illus-
trate the genuine import of the term.
The failure of our predecessors affords
us a kind of testvdinal panoply against
the shame of a like result.
We shall first state the principal ex-
planations which have been given of the
term.
I. Several of the Rabbinical writers,
including the Targumists, understand
by ^Ti<ti5 Azazel, the name oi the place
to which the scape-goat was conducted.
Thus Jonathan, in liis Targum on v. 10
of this chapter, renders the last clause
— ' to send him away to death in a rough
and rocky place in the desert of Tsuk.'
Here it was supposed by the Talmud-
ists, that the goat was thrown down a
steep precipice of the mountain called
Azazel, and dashed to pieces. (Light-
foot Temp. Ser. p. 177, vol. IX. Pitman's
Ed.) This is favored by the Arabic
versions which have for the Hebrew
^TKtS'^b to Azazel, every where ^25^
ti^t5 ^i* legebel al-azaz, to the Mount
Azaz, or to the rough mountain, as
azaz properly signifies. And to give
still more color to this interpretation,
R. Saadias Gaon supposes the word to
he compounded of ^i^ t7 and TT5 azaz,
so that the mountain ^T&^t3? Azazel, is
by transposition equivalent to ^KT'iS'
Azzael, i. e. rough mountain of God,
just as David, Ps. 36. 7, speaks of lofty
mountains, as ' mountains of God.' But
to say nolliing of the license of altera-
tion which appears in these readings.
148
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
^e find no intimation of any mountain
thus denominated, either in Palestine or
nut of it, to which the scape-goat was
led. We are simplj^ informed that the
!inim;il was to be conveyed into the
wilderness, without any specification
(;(■ the place. Besides, had Moses in-
tended to have designated a particular
I'loiintain, he would doubtless have em-
i loyed the common adjection ' Mount,'
r.iui we should have had -Mount Aza-
Z-I-' just as we now have ' Mount Horeb,'
'.Mount Ebal,' 'Mount Gerizim,' &c.
R^-jecting this interpretation therefore
as untenable, we come upon another
which unites the suffrages of a large
class of the more modern commentators.
IF. This supposes that the term iti^TS^
Azazel is the name, not of a mountain
or place, but of the scape-goat itself.
This, it is contended, is obvTous from
the structure of the word, taken in con-
r.oxion with the structure of the sen-
tiiice : — ' Aaron shall cast lots upon the
two goats, one lot for the Lord,' i. e.
for the goat which was to be sacrificed
to the Lord : * and the other lot for
Azazel,' i. e. for the goat which was to
be sent away into the wilderness. The
word itselfj it is maintained, is easily
and legitimately resolved into ti> ilz, a
goat, and )jTi< azal, to go aivay^ to de-
part^ which gives us the exact idea of
the ceremonial use of the scape-goat,
viz., that of being formally sent away
into the wilderness. The rendering of
several of the ancient versions gives, it
is said, not a little confirmation to this
sense of the term. Symmachus has for
' Azazel,' rpayos anepxojj^cvos, the depart-
ing goat; Aquila rpayns ai:oXc\v}iivoi, the
goat set free or let loose ; and the Sept.
0 dnuTTonnaioi, which Theodoret and
some other of the Greek fathers inter-
pret as equivalent to diriirejxTTd^evos, sent
away. But as we shall show in the se-
quel that there is great reason to ques-
tion the correctness of this interpreta-
tion, the rendering of the lxx must be
taken here as important rather for the
sense which has been put upon it, than
for its own direct and positive testimony
to the meaning of the Hebrew original.
The terms, however, above quoied
are freely used by the ancient Greek
writers, Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria,
and others, in reference to the same
subject, and the Latin vulgate accords
with them by adopting the rendering,
' hircus emissarius,' the emissary goat.
Guided by the same authorities, our
translators have rendered the original
by 'scape-goat.' But to this \ie\v of
the origin and import of the Hebrew
term, it must be admitted that there are
serious objections, among which are the
following.
(1.) It does not appear why such a
singular and anomalous term should
have been employed to express an idea
so simple as that of a goat sent away.
The Hebrew has an appropriate word
for the subject, viz., t3> tz, or '^"'^'O
S(iir,goat, and another n?C?3 meshul-
/a'/i,from Tl^ll^ shala''h, to dismiss, or
send away, for the predicate. Why
then should such a strange compound
word be introduced in this connexion,
especially when it is well known, that
although, in Hebrew, proper names are
often compounded, yet appellatives very
seldom are? The presumption, from
the genius of the language, is most un-
questionably in favor of 'Azazel's'
being a proper name. The force of
this objection is greatly enhanced by
the fact, that neither Onkelos, Jona-
than, nor the Samaritan, have attempt-
ed to translate or paraphrase the term,
which they undoubtedly would Imve
done, had they considered it merely as
an appellative.
(2.) It is objected to this explication
by Bochart, that it involves a gramma-
tical anomaly. Each of the goats was
obviously required to be a male ; but
T3> ez, in the sense of gnat, more appro-
priately signifies a female ; and yet it
is here represented as compounded with
the masculine ^Tit azal. We do not
indeed consider this objection as insu-
perable, as there is some reason to rank
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
149
5? dz among the epicene or hermaphro-
dite nouns ; but we may still say that
we should more naturally have expected,
that for the purpose intended, the unam-
biguous ^TSiT>rm Se'irazel would have
been employed, especially as t)^i'i3>'a
Se'irim, is used in speaking of the two
i^oats in the words immediately pre-
ceding.
(3) But a far more serious difficulty
i'lcauibers the i)roposed interpretation,
r!;)m tho structureof the sentence. The
(lireclion in the text is thus worded: —
< One lot shall be mn"'b for Jehovah,
ni.d the other lot t^Ti^T^^P M AzazeW
Now the obvious impression on reading
I his would be, that a personal antithesis
was intended. Jehovah certainly, the
fir^t party, is a person ; and as precisely
the same formula of expression occurs
ill regard to the other, why should we
not consider that also as a person ? But
according to the present rendering, the
preposition "^for, in the two successive
clauses, is made to bear two entirely
different significations. In the former
it denotes to, in tlie sense oi appropria-
tion— in the latter it denotes /or, in the
sense of designation to a particular
purpose. Is tliis probable? Indeed,
we see not why, if * AzazeP is to be
understood as the name of one goat,
' Jehovah ' is not as properly to be un-
derstood as the name of tlie other. But
from this alternative the mind instinc-
tively shrinks back.
As then the objection to this theory
of the derivation and meaning of the
word appears to be sufficiently valid to
warrant its rejection ; and as we seem
forced, at the same time, to adopt only
such an exposition as shall assume the
personality of ihe ' Azazel' of the text,
the question at once arises, what person
can we suppose to be intended by the
appellation ? Tiiis is indeed a question
of very grave import, and we feel a
strong necessity laid upon us of making
peace with the pre-possessions of our
readers, when we announce our firm
conviction, that not only a personal
13*
being, but an evil demon, real or ima-
ginary, is signified by this unique and
anomalous term.
In presenting our purposed array of
authorities in support of this opinion,
we begin with the translation of the
Seventy. The words of our English
version, ' One lot for the Lord and the
other lot for the scape-goat,' they have
thus rendered: — x^ripov Iva tw Kvf)Ko
/cut K^ijfjov 'iva rt-i diTurofjr:a'io), one lot tO
the Lord, and one lot to the Apopom-
peus, or sender-au-ay. The Greek word
a-r.)To^7rarof, though rendered passively
in our translation, and so understood
and interpreted by several of the early
fathers, yet according to the analogy of
tlie language, and doubtless according
to the intention of the versionists, is
properly a term of active signification.
The reader has only to turn to the learn-
ed pages of Bochart to see this point
established beyond a doubt. (Hieroz,
P. I. L. II. c. 54. T. I. p. 745-7.) In
this sense it is held by many critics of
distinguished name to import one of
that class of demons or deities who
were called by the Ld^l'ms Dii Aver7-un'
ci, or the deities who send au-ay or avert
evils from their votaries, which was
done through the propitiating agency
of prayers, sacrifices, and other offer-
ings. This is confirmed by Gesenius,
from whose Hebrew Lexicon we ex-
tract, in this connexion, what he says
on the word ^THT^ Azazel: 'I render
it without hesitation the averter, ex-
piator, averruncus, dXe^UaKog, i. e. for
bT^TS) Azalzel, from the root ^t3> azalj
to remove, to separate. By this name I
suppose is to be understood originally
some idol that was appeased with sacri-
fices, us Saturn and Mars; but after-
wards, as the names of idols were often
transferred to demons, it seems to de-
note an evil demon dwelling in the
desert, and to be placated with victims,
in accordance with this very ancient
and also Gentile rite. The name Aza-
zel is also used by the Arabs for an evil
! demon. (See Reland de Relig. Moham.
150
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 149a
p. 189. Meninski,h. V.) The etymol-
ogy which we have above proposed, was
expressed of old by the Sept, translator,
although neglected or misunderstood by
most interpreters. Thus he renders it v.
8, TO) ' A-!T:)TTO[nTaToij i. e. ' A.TTOTpi>-ITaTot.
^ AXs^iKUKco, averrunco ; v. 10, etj r)>
d-oirojifiv ad averruncundum ; v. 16,
£?f afsffiv. The ecclesiastical fathers
have referred this ' AiroirofinaTos to the
goat itself, q. d. scape-goat ^ although
obviously in v. S the antithesis lies be-
tween "^T&%T2>? and miTip.' That
drrjTo/jTraiOf is indeed of the active in-
stead of passive signification, not only
has Bochart clearly proved by a long
list of classic citations, but the words
of Josephus in reference to this rite
throw a strong light on this sense of
the Sept. rendering: ' The goat is sent
away into a remote desert as an averter
of ills (d-0TpoTria(TfX(,i) , and a satisfac-
tion for the siiis of the people.' (An-
tiq. Jud. L. III.c. 10.)
It is clear then, we think, both that
the Lxx esteemed the ' AzazeP a per-
son, and that they supposed that person
to be a demon, or deity of the order of
* Averrunci,' or averters. That the
same opinion was held by the early
Christians, we seem to have clear proof
from the words of Origen, who, in at-
tempting to show that the devil was
known in the times of Moses, says
among other things, 'He who is called
in Leviticus d-rro-non-aXos^ and whom the
Hebrew Scriptures coli Azazel; was no
other than the deviC The same con-
clusion was drawn from this language
by the apostate emperor Julian, who
maintained that since Moses speaks of
the devotement of a goal to a dei ty called
aiTo-o^n-aToi in contradistinction from
Jehovah, he in efiect taught the very
same doctrine as tliat inculcated by the
heathen theologists respecting the Lii
Averriinci. He was answered at lengih
by Cyril of Alexandria, but we are not
concerned with the arguments of either,
any farther than as they serve as tesli-
mcaies to the fact of an early belief in
the Christian church that ' Azazel ' in
the Pentateuch \vas the name of an evil
demon. That this belief is to be traced
to the demonology of the Jews, we
think there can be no doubt. Rabbi
Menah^m in his commentary on Leviti-
cus, says that Azazel was one of the
four principal demons whose names he
writes together as follows : Sainmael,
Azazel, Azael, and Mahazael. In like
manner the apocryphal book of Enoch
makes mention of Azalel, or as it was
afterwards written, Azael, among the
fallen angels. The same i? affirmed in
the Rabbinical work entitled Zohar.
Mercer in his commentary on Genesis
relates as a traditional dogn)a of the
Cabalists, that demons and all kinds of
malignant spirits were prone to dwell
in burial places and solitudes, and that
Azazel was the name of one of this
class of beings. Nor are we I'O forget
tliat the New Testament allusions make
it evident, that in the popular belief of
the Jews the deserts and desolate places
were the chosen haunts of the5«e Ibul
fiends. Our Lord underwent his tempt-
ation from the devil in the wilderness,
and it was hither that the legion of evil
demons is said to have driven the pos-
sessed man ere they were ejected from
him by the word of Christ. It is, more-
over, through dry and desert places that
the unclean spirit is represented by the
Savior as walking after he had quilted
the body of the demoniac. It goes also
strikingly to confirm this view of the
subject, that those desert-deities were
generally conceived of as having the
semblance of goats, or rough, hairy,
shaggy creatures, corresponding with
the Satyrs of the Greek and Roman
mythology, which were sylvan deiiiea
or demigods, represented as monsters,
half man and half goat, having horns ok
their heads, hairy bodies, wiih the fee\
and tail of the goat. Thus tlie prophev
Isaiah in predicting the ruin of Babylon,
says, ch. 13. 21, ' Wild beasts of th»
desert shall lie there, and their houses
shall be I'uU of doleful creatures, and
B. C. 1490.3
CHAPTER XVI.
151
ow/ls shall dwell there, and satyrs
(DT^y'i^ Se'irim, goats) shall dance
there ;' where the Gr. has Saijjovta^ de-
mons; the Vulg. ' Pilosi,' shaggy or
hairy animals ; and ihe Glial. ' Demons.'
Tiie popular ideas of the external fornn
and appearance of the devil among the
rude and ignorant of nearly all nations,
Loth ancient and mod'ern, easily connect
themselves willi these early traditions,
and the language of holy writ in the
following passage goes clearly to evince
the origin of the vulgar associations.
Lev. 17. 7, ' And they shall no more
offer their sacrifices unto devils (jZ'y^'S'O
Va. goats) after whom,' &c. 2 Chron.
11.15, 'And -Jie ordained him priests
for the high places, and for the devils
i'QI'yCj goats) and for the calves which
he hud made.' On the peculiar usage
of the original term, Kimchi in his Lex-
icon (voc. '^■'^""J San) remarks, 'They
(demons) are called goals, because they
appear in tJie shape of goats to their
votaries.' It would seem then that
there are good grounds for recognizing
in this term a designed allusion to some
kind of desert-demon to whom the sec-
ond goat was in a manner dedicated,
devoted, or consigned, but not sacrificed,
as this would be a direct contravention
of the precept just quoted from Lev.
17. 7, * They shall no more offer their
sacrifices unto devils.'
Sliil the grand question remains to
be solved, why llie goat was consigned
or devoted at all to Azazel ? The Rab-
bins, who for the most part understand
Azazel to mean the evil spirit, have
advanced some singular notions on this
subject. Substituting the name Sam-
mael for Azazel, R. Eliezer scruples
not to say, that they offer a gift to
Samniael, or Satan, on the day of atone-
ment, lest he should make their obla-
tions fruitless. Indeed, we are told
that it became a current proverb among
the Hebrews, * A gift to Sammael on
the day of atonement.' The idolatrous
character of this offering, Moses Gerun-
dinensis endeavors, indeed, to explain
away, but still in such terms as assure
us of the fact : — ' Our intention when
we let loose the goat, is not to present
him as an oblation to Sammael. God
forbid I — but our desire is to do the will
of our Creator, who has delivered to us
such a commandment.' What is yet
stranger, some of the more ancient
Christians, who used the Greek transla-
tion of the Seventy, were thence led to
imagine that ' of the two goats, one was
sacrificed to God, and the other was sent
into the desert to propitiate an evil and
impure demoa, thus venerated as an
apopompean spirit.' For this impiety
tliey are deservedly censured by Cyril
and Procopius ; and it is well remarked
by i».ouIensis, that * the goat was not
sacrificed to the demon Azazel, for it is
only said that it was conveyed into the
desert ; for it were a great disgrace to
the God of the Hebrews, if he could not
deliver his worshippers from demons,
and if they were compelled to propitiate
the devil lest he should hurt them.*
And in tliis connexion we may advert
to the opinion of Spencer, (De Legib.
Heb. L. iii. Dissert, viii. p. 1040), who
takes the name ' Azazel,' as compound-
ed of TJJ az, strong, and ^Tfi^ azal. to
depart ; implying the strong receder,
or powerful apostate, an appropriate
denomination, he supposes, of the devil
as the arch rebel and revolter ; to which
may be added, that he and other beings
of liis class were prone, according to
popular estimation, to withdraw tiiem-
selves from all frequented places, and
hover about dreary solitudes, tombs,
ruins, and deserts. The reasons which
he assigns for the extraordinary rite of
the consignment of the goat to Azazel,
are the three following: (1.) That the
animal thus laden with the sins of the
people and delivered up to the demon,
might denote the wretched lot of all
sinners. (2.) That the dedication of
this goat thus circumstanced to an evil
demon might serve to show the Israel-
ites the impurity of apostate spirits, and
so divert and take them off, and others
152
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
also, from all pronenoss to hold inter-
course with such beings. (3.) That
since their sins were sufficiently ex-
piated by the piacular goat sent out to
Azazel, they might more willingly ab-
stain from all application to the apo-
pompean gods of the Gentiles.
These reasons, though free from the
absurd impiety of the Rabbinical super-
stition, strike the sober mind as at once
far-fetched and fanciful, and we are shut
up to the necessity of seeking for a
more satisfactory solution of the prob-
lem. In attempting this, let us recur
again to the incidents mentioned in the
text as connected with this singular
transaction. V. 9, 10: 'And Aaron
shall bring the goat upon which the
Lord's lot fell, and offer him for a sin-
offering. But the goat on which the lot
fell for Azazel, shall be presented alive
before the Lord, to make an atonement
with him (T^^S' ^SS? lekappir alauv,
to expiate or atone over or upon him,)
to let him go for Azazel into the wil-
derness.' And then again, after de-
scribing the ceremonies of the slain-
goat, he adds, v. 21, 22, * He shall bring
the live goat, and Aaron shall lay both
his hands upon the head of the live goat,
and confess over him all the iniquities
of the children of Israel, and all their
transgressions in all their sins, putting
them upon the head of the goat, and
shall send him away by the hand of a
fit man into the wilderness: and the
goat shall bear upon him all their in-
iquities unto a land not inhabited: and
he shall let go the goat into the wilder-
ness.'
Typical Import of the Scope-Goat.
The common interpretation given by
divines of this typical rite — an interpre-
tation buiU^ for the most part on the
presumption that ' Aznzel ' was the
name of the scape-goatj is substantially
this : — The two goats constituted in fact
but one offering, having a direct typical
reference to Christ, who laid down his
life for us in the character of a sacrificial
victim, and to whom the load of oui
iniquities was transferred by imputa-
tion. But Christ is contemplated in
this type in a two-fold aspect, one as
dying for our sins, the other as rising
again for our justification. But to this
two-fold phasis of the mediatorial work
of Christ, no single offering could suit-
ably correspond. A double oblation, it
is supposed, was made necessary by the
very nature of the case. One goat slain
could only show us a sacrificed Savior ;
it could not show us a living Savior.
One could not exhibit him ' who liveth
and was dead, and is alive forevermore.'
There must be two to convey the great
truth, that Christ was ' put to death in
the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit ;'
that ' he was delivered for our offences,
and raised again for our justification -'
that ' he was crucified through weak-
ness, and yet liveth by the power of
God.' All this, it is held, is significant iy
taught by the two-fold symbol of the
slain and the emissary goat, the one
designed as a vicarious sacrifice for sin,
the other as a living memorial of its
benign effects. In the latter we see the
sins of believers carried away^ and re-
moved from them as far as the east is
from the west ; in a word, as lost, blot-
led out, extinguished forever from the
divine remembrance.
This view of the typical purport of
the rite before us is very ancient, hav-
ing been held by Theodoret, Cyril, Au-
gustin, and Procopius, and while inge-
nious and plausible in itself, it does not,
that we are aware, go counter to the
general genius of the Mosaic economy,
distinguished, as it was, by a vast and
unspeakable richness of symbolical
imagery. At the same time, we cannot
but suggest, that this explanation labors
under a liability to two objections of
considerable weight. (1.) The sins of
Israel, in the typical ceremony, were
laid upon the head of the live goat,
which was then, as a figure of the risen,
justified, and justifying Savior, to be
sent away into the wilderness. But
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVL
153
how does this correspond with the fiicts
in regard lo the Auiilype. Clirist bore
the sins of men, not as rising, but as
dying. He rose from the dead, and en-
tered into glory ' without sin ;' nor do
we any where learn that he continues
after liis death to sustain the same ex-
piatory office that he did at his death.
On the contrary, we are assured that he
was ' once offered to bear the sins of
many ;' and that * by this one offering
he hath forever perfected them that be-
lieve.' (2.) We learn from v. 26, that
' he that let go the goat for Azazel was
to wash his clothes and bathe his flesh
in water, and afterwards come into the
camp.' From this it appears, that con-
tact with the goat made the person who
handled him, even for the purpose of
sending him away, unclean. This was
in consequence of the sins with which
the scape-goat was putatively charged
and loaded previous to his dismission.
But as no uncleanness can be supposed
to attach to Clirist subsequent to his
resurrection, it is difficult to conceive
how any ceremonial taint should cleave
to his representing symbol.
Influenced by these and other consid-
erations, and dissenting moreover, from
the opinion that * Azazel ' was the name
of the goat, Faber, following the fool-
steps of Witsius, has propounded the
following solution of the spiritual pur-
port of the rite. (Hor. Mos. vol. ii. p.
259, Coinp. Witsius on the Covenants,
vol. ii. p. 230.) * Christ,' he remarks,
' laid down his life for us that we might
go free ; and this sacrifice of himself
upon the cross, was typified by every
bloody sacrifice under the Law, and
therefore, among others, by the piacular
devotement of that goat, which fell by
lot to Jehovah. Here we have the great
mystery of the gospel, so well described
by the apostle, as that which could
alone exhibit God both just and yet the
justifier of them that believe in Christ
Jesus. But this is not the whole of our
Lord's character. At the very com-
mencement of the Bible, it was foretold
that, although the promised seed of the
woman shall finally bruise the head of
the serpent, yet the serpent should first
bruise his heel or mortal part. If then
the serpent was to bruise his mortal
part, that mortal part must needs be
delivered over to the power of the ser-
pent ; for of himself, he could possess
no such superiority, even during a single
moment. Hence it will follow, that
Satan, bent only on satiating liis own
malice, and unconscious that he was
actually subserving the divine purposes
of mercy, was the agent who, through
his earthly tools effected the death of
the Messiah Such being the
Scriptural character of our Lord, it is
evident that no single type can perfectly
exhibit it in both its parts. The various
bloody sacrifices of the Law prefigured
it in one part, viz., that which respected
the atonement made with God for the
sins of man; but they spoke nothing
concerning its other part, viz., that
uhich respected the delivering up of
the Messiah to the infernal serpent,
with the permissive power of bruising
his mortal frame. On this second part
they were silent ; and if it were at all
to be shadowed out under the ceremo-
nial law, such a purpose could only be
effected by the introduction of a new
type, connected indeed with the usual
sacrificial type, but kept nevertheless
studiously distinct from it. A double
type, in short, must be employed, if the
character of Christ under its two-fold
aspect was to be completely prefigured.
Now the two goats, which are jointly
denominated a sin-offering, (Lev.
16.5,) constitute a type of this iden-
tical description. The two together
present ns with a perfect symbolical
delineation of our Lord's official char-
acter, while he was accomplishing the
great work of our redemption. The
goat which fell to the lot of Jehovah
was devoted as a sin-offering, after the
manner of any other sin-offt-ring, by its
being piacularly slain. This type re.
presented the Messiah in the act of
154
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
satisfying the strict justice of God, by
consenting to lay down his life sacri-
ficially in our stead, and on our behalf.
But the goat which fell to the lot of
Azazel was first imputatively loaded
with the sins of the whole people, and
was then symbolically given up to the
rage of the evil spirit, by being turned
loose into the wilderness, which was
deenjed his favorite terrestrial haunt.
This second type represented the Mes-
siah burdened with the transgressions
of all mankind, deserted for a season by
his heavenly Father, and delivered into
the hand of the prince of darkness, with
a full permission granted to the apos-
tate angel, of morially bruising his heel
or human nature. Such I conceive to
be the plain and obvious interpretation
of the ceremonial which was observed
in the great day of atonement. Yet
from a part of the ordinance respecting
the live goat, I think it not improbable
that a special previsionary regard may
have been mysteriously had to a very
remarkable part of our Savior's history.
When the goat was delivered up to tiie
malice of Satan, it was turned loose
into the tenderness. In a similar man-
ner, * Jesus was led up of the Spirit
into the wilderness, to be tempted of
the devil ' (Matt. 4. 1) ; and here, when
he had fasted forty days, and was after-
wards an hungered, the fiend commenced
upon him that series of attacks which
terminated only with his death upon
the cross. Thus perfect throughout is
the similitude between the type and the
antitype.'
This view we submit to the reader
for what he may deem it worth. If we
had not what we esteem a still better
solution to propose, we should be in-
clined to adopt it, at least in preference
to the common and accredited mode of
explication. But we think we can point
out ' a more excellent way ' of solving
the mystery of the scape-goat, and to
this we now invite attention, simply
premising that a hint contained in a
quoiatioa from the old commentator,
Conrad Pellican, whose own work we
have never seen, contains ihe germ of
the exposition, which we have expanded
to much fuller dimensions, and sustain-
ed by a new array of evidence, in the
remarks that follow.
It is evident, that in making out the
proof that * Azazel ' signifies something
else than the scape-goat itself, a new
complexion is given at once to the
whole passage. If the falling of the
lot to Azazel indicated the consignment
of the emissary goat to some real or
imaginary spirit of evil, then it is pal-
pable that a typical or symbolical scope
entirely different Irom the common one
must be recognized in the ceremony.
We do not perceive in what sense, or
with what propriety, an animal could
be dedicated to Satan, and still be con-
sidered as a type of Christ. ' Satan
cometh, and hath nothing in me,'" said
the Savior himself when on earth, and
we cannot but ask, on what ground a
typical rite is to be referred to Him,
the direct and prominent import of
which expressed a peculiar appropria-
tion to Satan, as of something to which
he had an acknowledged and paramount
right. Surely no one can be insensible
to the incongruity which reigns through-
out the whole transaction, viewed in
this light. However plausible the argu-
ments in favor of such an interpretation,
we shrink instinctively from it as de-
rogatory to the pure and sinless nature,
and the holy designation of Jesus.
Whatever else n)ight liave been shadow-
ed forth by this institute of the Jewish
law, we are sure that we are not to look
for a prefiguration of Him who was
dedicated as a divine Deodand to God,
in a goat set apart by mystic ceremo-
nies to the devil.
What, then, are we to understand by
this significant item in the ordinances
of the great day of atonement ? Some-
thing of a symbolical character all will
admit in the di!^mission of llie goat,
loaded with sin, into the wilderness.
Whatever the implication may be, the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI
155
ceremony itself cannot, we think, im- j
ply that the animal, considered in its !
emblematic character, was regarded by
God as acceptable, or looked upon wiilj ,
a complacent eye, but rather the reverse. I
It was something wliich was jmt aicay !
as from a feeling of aversion, while on ;
the contrary, the other goat was retain- j
ed, and, when turned into a saciificial j
offering, came up before the Lord as a j
sweet-scented savor. This utterly di-
verse treatment and disposal of the two
animals, compels us to recognize in
e-ich an anlilypical substance, wliich
was to meet with corresponding enter-
tainment at the hands of Jehovah. The
one victim pointed to a substance which
.was to be pre-eminently well pleasing
to him ; the other, one from which he
would turn away with displacency and
loathing. The former plainly received
Its rea!izati(5n in Christ, the beloved
Son, in whom his soul delighted; the
latter must be accomplished in some-
thing which, in comparison, he abhors.
In looking around for an object which
sliall answer these conditions, we know
of none that so fully and so fairly meets
the demand as the Jewish people them-
selves. It is here, if we mistake not, in
the apostate, derelict, and reprobate
race of Israel, rejected (not irrevocably)
for their rejection of the Messiah, that
we behold the substantiated truth of the
shadow before us.
Certain it is that this signal event of
the judicial rejection of the covenant
jjcopie, was in t!ie prescience of Jeho-
vah ages before it occurred, and we see
nothing incongruous in the idea, that it
might have been mystically fore-shown
by some appropriate rite in the ancient
economy. And if this be granted, what
occasion more suitable for the exhibition
of this rite, than that of the great na-
tional festival of expiation, in which
the atoning death of the divine substi-
tute for sinners was most significantly
set forth? This day was replete with
solemn prognostics of that still more
momentous day when Chri-.t, the true
victim, should make his soul an offering
for sin ; and we well know that it was
in putting tlie jNIessiah to death on that
occasion, that that wicked nation were
so to concentrate and consummate their
guilt as to necessitate, to the divine
counsels, tiieir exclusion from the pale
of tlie covenant, at least for a long lapse
of centuries. We may indeed admit
that such a typical intimation would be
very apt to be in its own nature obscure.
It would be one of peculiarly latent
meaning for the time then being, for the
people would be slow to read the sen-
tence of their own rejection in any of
I the national riles, and in order that it
; might not be read, it was doubtless de-
I signcdly shrouded in a veil not easily
penetrated, and couched in an action so
closely connected with another of dif-
ferent import, that it was in itself easily
susceptible of a construction apparently
sound, yet really fallacious and false.
We are well aware that it may be
objected to this mode of viewing the
transaction, that the sins of the con-
gregation were, by putative transfer,
laid upon the head of the emissary goat,
as their appointed substitute, in whose
rfismission they were to find remission.
The language, moreover, would seem
to be peculiarly exjtress to tliis effect,
when it is said that the scape-goat should
be ' presented alive before the Lord, to
make an atonement with him, to let
him go for Azazel into the wilderness.'
How then does this comport with the
idea of the Jewish peojde being the
substance of the type in question?
Does it not follow that ihey were them-
selves the victim of expiation for their
own sins, instead of their sins being
laid upon Christ, the grand propitiatioa
for the sins ol' the world ? We answer,
undoubtedly it docs. This, in fact, we
conceive to be the very aim and drift of
the ceremony before us, viz., to intimate
that the guilty race were to ' bear their
iniquity,' that they were, upon their
rejection of the Messiah, to be sent
forth into the wilderness of the world,
i56
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
scattered over the broad surface of the
earth, and after being loaded with the
guilt of that blood which they impre-
cated upon their own and the heads of
their children, to be delivered over to
the dominion of darkness, of which Sa-
tan, under the mystic denomination of
Azazel, was I he reputed prince and po-
tentate. This we are certain was the
fact in regard to the great body of the
outcast nation of Israel according to
the flesh, and as before remarked, we
see no grounds to question that an event
of so much moment should have been
darkly, yet significantly, sliadowed
forth in the typical ordinances of that
solemn day which celebrated prospect-
ively the events of the atonement. Nor
do v.'e read any insuperable objection
to this in the language of the institute
itself; ' to make an atonement with
him, and to let him go for a scape-goal
(to or for Azazel) into the wilderness.'
We have already intimated that the
original I^^DS^ "^^-^ lekappcr dlauv,
properly imports, to make an atonement
over, upon, or for him, instead of u-ith
or by him, instrumentally, as rendered
in our translation. The goal in this
act was plainly considered as the su6-
ject, and not the medium, of atonement
or reconciliation. The interposition of
"the particle ^5> is extremely common
after the verb ^t'D kaphar, to denote
the object of expiation or pacification,
expressed by that Hebrew term. Thus,
Lev. 4. 20, ' And the priest shall make
an atonement for them (CniS' ^5lD kip-
per alchcm), and it shall be forgiven
them,' i. e. the congregation. So also
in V. 18 of this chapter : — ' And he shall
go out unto the altar that is before the
Lord, and make an atonement for it,
(T^py 'ISj kipper (ilauv) .'' So again,
V. 30 — ' For on that day shall the priest
make an atonement for you (It'D'^
t3"'iy yekapper ah'kem).' In v. 33,
the same usage repeatedly occurs : —
' And he shall make an atonement for
0>y) the priests, and for (b^) all the
people of the congregation.' From these
instances of tlie usus loquendi, which
might be indefinitely multiplied, it
would seem to be indisputable that the
goat was not viewed in this connexion
as the instrument^ but as the object of
the expiation, and a reference to the
Concordance we believe will show that
the preposition \'$ al is never used in a
similar connexion wiih ^tS kaphar,
but as denoting the person or thing
which is the object of the atonemeut.
Our English translation therefore is un-
questionably wrong in rendering it in
this place ' with liim,' instead of over,
upon, or for liim.'
But still it may be asked how an
atonement or reconciliation was made
for, over, or on account of, the scape-
goat, seeing that all tlie action men-
tioned was confined to the animal itself?
We refer for answer to the passage
under consideration, and beg that its
phraseology may be carefully scanned. ;
' to make an atonement for him, to let
him go to Azazel into the wilderness.'
Our translators have here gratuitously
inserted the word ' and' before ' to let
him go,' which is wanting in the origi-
nal, and the absence of which aflbrds,
we believe, the true clue to the inter-
pretation. The latter clause is exe-
getical of the former. The atonement
was made by the letting go of the goat
to Azazel. He was consigned over, by
way of judgment and punishment, to the
jurisdiction of Satan, as the type of a
similar allotment towards the recreant
and rejected Jews. It was thus, and
thus only, that the Most High was to
be propitiated for their offences, and
we have only to appeal to the truth of
history to learn how accurately the fact
has corresponded with ihe typical pre-
diction.
But this is to be shown more fully by
reference to tlie evangelical narrative,
where, in the details of the crucifixion-
scene, we may expect to rcc( gnize the
fulfilment of ilie 01dTestan)ent earnests.
There we behold the elect and accepted
victim meekly submitting to the fearful
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
157
death which the body of the nation cla-
morously demanded, and by demanding
which they sealed their own doom of
dereliction. And as if on purpose to
make the coincidences more remarka-
ble, the controlling providence of God
so orders it that almost by the decision
of a lot Barabbas is released and Jeb;us
retained for execution. In this incident
we are furnished with a striking coun-
terpart to the ceremonies of tlie expia-
tion-day. In the release of the robber
Barabbas we see the lot coming up with
the inscription, ' for Azazel,' while in
the coiidenmation of Christ, we read the
opposite allotment, ' for Jehovah.' We
cannot refrain from regarding Barabbas
in this transaction as an impersonation,
a representative type, of the whole
people to whom he belonged, and in the
words of Peter on the day of Pentecost,
we more than imagine tliat we see de-
scribed the very process of^ selection and
rejection which stands forth before us
in the prescribed ceremonies of the Jew-
ish Law ; Acts 3. 13-15 : ' The God of
Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob,
the God of our father has glorified his
Son Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and
denied him in the presence of Pilate,
when he was determined to let him go.
But ye denied the Holy One and the
Just, and desired a murderer to be
granted unto you ; and killed the Prince
of life, whom God hath raised from the
dead.' Here we have the typical scene
of the wilderness vividly enacted before
us in its substantiated realities of a far
different place and a far distant age.
In Barabbas released, with all his
crimes upon his head, in accordance
with the emission of the goat loaded
with the sins of the congregation, we
see a lively, and we doubt not, a de-
signed, emblematic presentation of the
iact of the judicial thrusting forth of
that covenant race, with the weight of
the imprecated curse of God abiding
upon them from one generation to ano-
ther. Nay, so precise is the accordance
14
between the items of the adumbration
and of the accomplishment, that we be-
hold in Pilate the fore-shadowed 'fit
man ' by whom the discharged goat was
led forth into the wilderness. ' He
shall send him away by the hand of a
fit man into the wilderness.' The orig-
inal is peculiar : "^T'.'S IU"'55 T^IQ heyad
ish itti, by ike hand of a man timely,
opportune, seasonable. The proper
Greek rendering, as Bochart remarks, is
Katptcj, or tuATtupa), well-timed ; and the
evangelist, in his account of Pilate's
time-serving agency in the events of the
crucifixion, presents us with the very
man for the nonce, who is so significant-
ly designated by the epithet before us.
Matt. 27. 20-26 : ' But the chief priests
and elders persuaded the multitude that
they should ask Barabbas and destroy
Jesus. The governor answered and
said unto them. Whether of the twain
will ye that I release unto you ? They
said, Barabbas. Pilate saiih unto them,
What shall I do then with Jesus, which
is called Christ? They all say unto
him, Let him be crucified. And the
governor said, Why ? what evil hath he
done ? But they cried out the more,
saying. Let him be crucified. V/hen
Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing,
but that rather a tumult was made, he
took water, and washed his hands be-
fore the multitude, saying, I am inno-
cent of the blood of this just person ;
see ye to it. Then answered all the
people, and said. His blood be on us,
and our children. Then released he
Barabbas unto them : and when he had
scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be
crucified.'
We here leave the subject, commend-
ed to the calm consideration of our
readers, to whom we say, in the lan-
guage of Spencer, proposing his views
of the same subject, — ' Si quis lumine
j perspicaciore donatus, hujus in-stitutl
rationes solidiores assignaverit, me
minime periinacem experietur ;' If any
one possessed of clearer discernment
158
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
9 And Aaron shall brin^ the goat
upon which the Lord's lot fell, and
oFier him for a sin-offering.
10 But the goat on which the lot
fell to be ihe scape-goat, shall be
presented alive before the Lord,
to make ^an atonement with him,
a7id to let him go for a scape-goat
into the wilderness.
11 And Aaron shall bring the
bullock of the sin-offering, which
is for himself, and shall make an
atonement for himself, and for his
house, and shall kill the bullock
k 1 John 2. 2.
shall assign better reasons for this ordi-
nance, he IV ill find vie far from being
ohstinalziiiadheringto my own solution.
The Sin-offering for Aaron himself.
11. And Aaron shall bring the bul-
lock, &c. Upon comparing this verse
with V. 6 above, it is quite evident that
the term ' offer' there implies no more
than bringing the bullock to be offered^
and not the actual oblation, whicli di(i
not take phice till after the lots were
cast upon the goats. ^ For his house.
Tliat is, says Sol. Jarchi, ' for his breth-
ren the priests ; for they all are called
his liouse, as it is written, Ps. 135. 19,
* O house of Aaron, bless ye llie Lord.'
And all their atonement was not, save
for the uncleanness of the sanctuary,
and the holy things thereof.'
12. And he shall take a censer full of
burning coals from off the altar, &c.
This censer or fire-pan is called in the
Gr. of the lxx. TTvpeiov, fire-vessel, but
in the New Testament this term never
occurs ; instead of it we have Xi/Jufwroj,
incense-vessel or censer, as Rev. 8. 3,5,
where mention is made of a * golden
censer,' And it is worthy of remark
that the Hebrew writers say, 'Every
(other) day, he whose duty it is to use
the censer, putteth coals on a censer of
silver, &c , but on this day the high
priest putteth coals on a censer of gold.'
of the sin-offering which is for
himself:
12 And he shall take la censer
full of burning coals of fire from
off the altar before the Lord, and
his hands full of m sweet incense
beaten small, and bring it within
the vail :
13 n And he shall put the incense
upon the fire before the Loep, that
the cloud of the incense may cover
the o mercy-seat that is upon the
testimony, that he die not.
1 ch. 10. 1. Numb. 16. 18, 46. Rev. 8. 5.
m Exod.30. 34 n Exod. 30. 1, T, S. Nuir.b.
16. 7, LS 46. Rev. 8, 3, 4. o Exod. -25. 21.
This service of burning incense, it will
be noticed, comes in between the slay-
ing of the bullock and the sprinkling
of the blood in the holj' of holies. Tlie
way into the inner sanctuary was to be
prepared as it were, and the Most High
made still more placable, by this pre-
liminary act of raising a cloud of in-
cense about the mercy-seat. That it
liad a typical purport there can be little
doubt. Ciirist, before he entered with
his own blood into heaven, the true
h(tly of holies, prepared and sanctified
himself and his entrance lliiilier by his
earnest prayer as recorded John 17, the
whole of which chapter viewed in this
connexion seems to resolve itself into a
fragrant cloud of incense coming up be-
fore the Father's throne prior to the
effusion of liis blood in its atoning effi-
cacy. That this incense-offering was
symbolical of prayer will be obvious
upon reference to Rev. 8. 3, 4, ' And
another angel came and stood at the
altar, having a golden censer ; and there
was given unto him nmch incense, that
he should offer it v;ith the prayers of
all saints upon the golden allar which
was before the llirone. And the smoke
of the incense, which came witii the
prayers of the saints, ascended up be-
fore God, out of the angel's hand.' See
Note on Ex. SO. 3.
13. Tke ni-crcy-seat that is vpon the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
159
14 And p he shall take of the blood
of the bullock, and q sprinkle it
with his finger upon the mercy-
seat eastward : and before the
mercy-seat shall he sprinkle of the
blood with his finsrer seven times.
15 H r Then shall he kill the goat
of the sin-offering that is for the
people, and bring his blood « within
the vail, and do with that blood as
Pch. 4. 5. Heb. 9. 13, 25, and 10. 4. q ch.
4. G. r Heb. 2. 17, and 5. -J, and 9. 7, 23.
s rer. 2. Heb. 6. 19, and 9. 3, 7, 1-2.
testimony. That is, upon or over the
tables of the law which were in the ark,
often called the testimony.
14. And he shall take ofthehlood^ &c.
It is to be understood that he had in the
mean time come out of the most holy
place, and now taking the blood, he re-
turned thither, and sprinkled it, as the
Jews maintain, not so properly upon as
totcards the arU ; for it is thus that they
understand the original "^^S ^5> al pent,
ovei' as:ainst or totcards. The Gr. how-
ever has s^i TO 'iXaarnphfj upon the
mercy-seat ; and in v. 15 it is clear that
this must be the sense.
The Sin-offering commanded for the
People.
51. Then shall he kill the goat of the
siJi-offering, &c. After he had sprin-
kled the bullock's blood for himself, he
left it, says IVlaimonides, in the temple,
upon a vase of gold that was there, and
afterwards went out of the temple and
killed the goat for the people. The
blood of this victim he dealt with as
with that of the bullock, as described
in the preceding verse.
16. And he shall make an atonement
for the holy place, &c. That is, by the
ceremonies foregoing, which he has
just described. It was not a separate
J3roceeding by which this expiation was
made. But the ordinance itself is a
most striking commentary upon the
innate and actual depravity of fallen
man. Though the high priest alone en-
he did with the blood of the bul-
lock, and sprinkle it upon the
mercy-seat, and before the mercy-
seat :
16 And he shall t make an atone-
ment for the holy place, because of
the uncleanness of the children of
Israel, and because of iheir trans-
gressions in all their sins; and so
shall he do for the tabernacle of
the congregation that remaineth
t See Exod. 29.
9. 2-2, 23.
Ezek. 45. 13. Heb.
lered into the holy of holies, yet it
thereby became defiled, and must be
purified from the uncleanness contracted
by its contact with his person, even
while engaged in the most sacred du-
ties. So also with ihe tabernacle and
the altar. The defiling power of the
collective iniquities of the people sub-
jected those structures also to the ne-
cessity of a similar purgation.
V The tabernacle of the congregation
that remaineth among them in the midst
of their uncleanness. Heb. "pTirn hash-
shaken, that ahidelh. The root cf the
original word is "p'J shakan, from
which comes shekinah, and it would
scarcely be out of the way to render it
here, — ' that shekinizeth among them.'
The Gr. however has exriafui'ri, builded,
constructed, formed ; and to this word
the apostle doubtless had reference in
Heb. 9. 11, ' through a greater and more
perfect tabernacle, not made with hands,
that is, not of this building (nv ravrm
rrii KTto-cwc).' ' The temple of his body
and the veil of his flesh, John 2. 21,
Heb. 10.20, were by imputation of our
sins made as unclean, and sprinkled
with his own precious blood, that he
might reconcile us to God. Heb. 23.
It was necessary that (Moses' taber-
nacle and Solomon's temple) the pat-
terns ol things in the heavens should be
purified with these (the sacrifices before
mentioned), but the heavenly things
themselves with better sacrifices than
these,' — Ainswortk.
160
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
among them in the midst of their
uncleanness.
17 u And there shall be no man
in the tabernacle of the congrega-
tion when he goelh in to make an
atonement in the holy place, until
he come out, and have made an
atonement for himself, and for his
household, and for all the congre-
gation of Israel.
18 And he shall go out unto the
altar that is before the Lord, and
2^ make an atonement for it; and
shall take of the blood of the bul-
lock, and of the blood of the goat,
and put it upon the horns of the
ahar round about.
u See ExoJ. 34. 3. Luke 1. 10. * Exod.
30.10. ch. 4. 7, 13. Heb.9. 22, 23.
17. And there shall he no man in the
tabernacle, &c. None either of the
people, or the priests who might ordi-
narily be in attendance upon llie servi-
ces of the tabernacle. Throughout this
most important part of the ceremony
the high priest officiated alone. In
this fact the typical character of his
sacred functions appears very conspic-
uous. The whole work of atonement
for our sins was performed by Christ
alone. No one aided him ; no one par-
ticipated with him ; he bore all our
sufferings ; to him all the glory is due.
He trod the wine-press alone, and of
the people there was none with him.
His own arm brought salvation. ' By
himself he purged our sins.' ' His own
S".!/ bare our sins in his own body on
the tree.'
18. Shall go out unto the alta^ that is
before the Lord. The words before
the Lord' would seem to indicate that
the golden altar of incense in the lioly
place is intended ; and so it is generally
understood by the Jewish and Christian
commentators. In this case, the * com-
ing out' mentioned v. 17, must be re-
ferred to his coming out of the holy of
holies into the outer room, where the
altar of incense stood. Patrick, how-
19 And he shall sprinkle of the
blood upon it with his finger seven
times, and cleanse it, and y hallow
it from the uncleanness of the
children of Israel.
20 *[[ And when he hath made an
end of 2 reconciling the holy place,
and the tabernacle of the congre-
gation, and the altar, he shall bring
the live goat:
21 And Aaron shall lay both his
hands upon the head of the live
goat, and confess over him all the
iniquities of the children of Israel,
and all their transgressions in all
their sins, a putting them upon the
y Ezek. 43. 20. z ver. 16. Ezek. 45. 20.
a Isai. 63. G.
ever, contends that the altar of sacrifice
is meant which stood in the outer court,
and that the high priest's ' coming out,'
V. 17, and his 'going out,' v. 18, was
his coming out from the tabernacle.
There is some reason to think this the
correct interpretation, as otherwise we
have no account whatever of tlie outer
altar's being cleansed. The inference,
however, is still uncertain. IT Shall
take of the blood of the bullock and the
goat. The blood of each animal was
to be put into a basin, and thoroughly
mingled together in order to its being
smeared and sprinkled upon the altar.
The Disposal of the Live or Scape-goat.
20. And when he hath made an end
of reconciling the holy place. Heb.
"l5i?2 n^51 vekillah mikkappi-r, and
when he hath finished atonifig, or 7nak-
ing atonement for. In like manner the
original word for orotic (at-one) is often
rendered to reconcile ; and on the oiher
hand the Gr. KaraX'Sayri, reconciliation,
is rendered Rom. 5. 11, by atonement.
As we have gone so fully into the de-
tails of the ceremony of the dismission
of the scape-goat in our introductory
remarks, little need be said by way of
comment on the remainiDg particulars.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVI.
161
head of the goat, and shall send
him away by the hand of a fit man
into the wilderness:
22 And the goat shall b bear upon
22. And the goat shall bear upon him
all thine iniquities unto a land not in'
habited. Heb. n^'iU f*!^ ^^ <^^ ^^^^^
gezciah, unto a land of separation.
As the Rabbinical traditions respecting
this ordinance are well condensed by
Mr. Kiito, we give liis note from the
Pictorial Bible. ' The Rabbins inform
us, thai after the lot had been taken,
the high-priest fastened a long fillet, or
narrow piece of scarlet to the head of
the scape-goat ; and that after he had
confessed his own sins and those of the
people over his head, or (for we are not
quite certain about the point of time)
when the goat was finally dismissed,
this fillet changed color to white if the
atonement was accepted by God, but
else retained its natural color. It is to
this that they understand Isaiah to al-
lude when he says : — ' Though your
sins be as scarlet, they shall be white
as snow ; though they be red like crim-
son, they shall be as wool.' (Isai. 1.18.)
After the confession hud been made
over the head of the scape-goat, it was
committed to the charge of some i)er-
son or persons, previously chosen for
the purpose, and carried away into the
wilderness; where, as we should under-
stand, V. 22, it was set at liberty ; but
the Rabbins give a somewhat different
account. They inform us, (speaking
with a particular reference to Jerusa-
lem and the Temple service), that the
goat was taken to a place about twelve
miles from Jerusalem where there was
a formidable rocky j)recipice ; and they
add, that for this occasion a sort of
causeway was made between Jerusalem
and this place, and that ten tents with
relays were stationed at equal distances
between them. On arriving at the pre-
cipice the goat was thrown down from
its summit, and by knocking against
14*
him all their iniquities unto a land
not inhabited : and he shall let go
the goat in the wilderness.
b Isai. 53. 11, 12. John 1. '29. Heb. 9. 28.
1 Pet. 2. -2^.
the projections, was generally dashed
to pieces before it had half reached the
bottom. It is added that the result of
this execution was promptly communi-
cated, by signals, raised at proper dis-
tances, to the people who were anxiously
awaiting the event at the Temple. It
is also said, that at the same time a
scarlet ribbon, fastened at the entrance
of the Temple, turned red at this instant
of time, in token of the divine accept-
ance of the expiation ; and that this
miracle ceased forty years before the
destruction of the second Temple. We
do not very well understand whether
this fillet is a variation of the account
which places one on the head of the
goat, or whether there were two fillets,
one for the goat and the other for the
Temple. If the latter, we may conclude
that the change took place simultane-
ously in both. However understood, it
is very remarkable that the Rabbins,
who give this account of the fillets, as-
sign the cessation of the miracle by
which the divine acceptance of this ex-
piation was notified, to a period pre-
cisely corresponding with the death of
Christ — an event which most Christians
' understand to have been prefigured by
atoning sacrifices, which they believe
to have been done away by that final
consummation of all sacrificial institu-
tions. The assertion of the Apostle,
that without tlie shedding of blood there
is no remission of sin (Heb. 9. 22), ren-
ders the account of the Rabbins that the
goat was finally immolated, rather than
left free in the wilderness, far from im-
probable, were it not discountenanced
by verse 22. It is however possible
that the Jews may have adopted the
usage described when they settled in
Canaan, and could not so conveniently
as in the wilderness carry the goat to
162
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
23 And Aaron shall come into the I 24 And he shall wash his flesh
tabernacle of the congregation, j with water in the holy place, and
oand shall put off the linen gar- j put on his garments, and come
ments which he put on when he ibrlh, d and ofler his burnt-offering,
went into the holy place, and shall and the burnt-offering of the peo-
leave them there
c Ezek. 42. 14, and 44. 19.
* a land not inhabited.' But they allow
that it sometimes escaped alive inio the
desert, and was usually taken and eaten
by the Arabs, who, of course, were liille
aware of what lliey did. See Calmet,
Arts. ' Azazel,' and ' Expiation ;' ' Jen-
nings' * Jewish Antiquities/ &c.'
The Change of Vestments and the Sub-
sequent Offering.
23. And Aaron shall come into the
tabernacle of the congregation, and
shall put off the linen garmenls, &c.
The ceremonies that followed the dis-
mission ol'ilte goat into the wilderness,
are thus detailed by Maimonides : ' After
he has sent away the goal by the liand
of him that led him, he returns to the
bullock and goat whose blood he had
sprinkled within the sanctuary, and
opens them and takes out the fat, which
lie puts in a vessel, to burn them upon
the altar. And he cuts the restoi iheir
flesh into large pieces, but one cleaving
to another and not parted asimder ; and
these he sends by the hands of others
to be Citrried out to the pi. ice of burning
(without the camp, Lev. 16.27). When
the g'lai is come into the wilderness,
the high priest goes out into the wo-
men's court to read the law. While he
i* reading, they burn the bullock and
the goat in the j)lace of tlie ashes (wiili-
out the city), therefore he that sees the
priest when he reads, sees not the bul-
lock and the goat burnt. When he
reads, all the people stand before him ;
and the minister of the congregation
takes up the book of the law, and gives
it to the chief of the congregation, and
he to the sagan (or second chief priest),
and the sagan gives it to the high priest,
who stands up when he receives it, and
pie, and make an atonement for
himself, and for the people.
d ver. 3. 5.
reads standing the l6ih, and part of ilie
23(1, chapters of Leviticus, reading and
blessing God both before and after.
After this, he puts off his white gar-
ments, and washes liimself, and puts on
his golden garments, and sanctifies Ids
hands and his feet, and offers the go:tt
which is for tiie general addition to this
day's service (Num. 23. 11), and offers
his own ram, and tlie people's ram, as
it is said, Lev. 16.24. He then burns
(on the altar) the fat of the bullock
and of the goat, that were burnt with-
out the camp; and he offers the daily
evening sacrifice (the lamb. Num.
28. 3), and trims the lamps as on other
days. After this he sanctifies his hands
and feet, and puts off the golden gar-
ments, and puts on his own common
garments, and goes to his liouse, whi-
ther all the people accompany him;
and he keeps a feast, for that he is come
out of the sanctuary.' — Ainsuorth.
IT And shall leave them, there. Never
more to be worn again, either by him or
any one else, as they were required to
be renewed every year. This is the
uniform tradition of the Jews.
24. He shall uash his flesh xcith irater
&c. Ileb. ym ra'hatz, usually render-
ed wash, though sometimes lathe, as in
vv. 26, 2S. Uow much of an ablution is
properly implied by the term, it is diffi-
cult to say. That it does not indicate
a complete immersion of the body in
water, would seem evident from the
fact, that we read of no provision being
made for such a rite, either in the holy
place or in the court of the tabernacle.
At the same time, we cannot well doubt
that it signifies something more than
j the mere washing of the hands and feet.
1 On the whole, the idea of a copious
B. C. 1490.1
CHAPTER XVI.
163
25 And e the fat of the sin-offer-
ing shall he hum upon the altar.
26 And he that lei go the goat
for the scape-goat shall wash his
clothes, fand halhe his flesh in
water, and afterward come into
the camp.
27 g And the huWock for the sin-
offering, and the goat for the sin-
ofiering, whose hlood was brought
in to make atonement in the holy
place, shdiii owe carry forth without
e ch. 4, 10. f ch 15. 5. 6 ch. 4. U, 21,
and G. 30. Heb. 13. 11.
affusion seems lo come nearest to the
geiuiine import of ihe term.
25. And the fat of the sin-offering
shall he hvrn upon the altar. H^b.
"T^tSp"! yaktir, shall fume or burn as
incense, according to the explanation
given in the Note on Lev. 1. 9, Ex.29. 13.
The burning of the fat upon the altar,
and the burning of the body without the
camp, is expressed by Moses by two
difTerenl words. The altar upon which
the fat was to be burnt, was of course
the brazen altar in the court yard, for
upon the golden altar nothing of the
kind was permitted. Ex. 30. 9.
26. And he that let go the goat for the
scape-goat. ' Heb. ^-^ym r,5^ n;u;^n
bTKT2>i hammeshalliah eth hassair la-
azazel, he that sent or led away the
goat to Azazel. The reading of the
original decidedly confirms our previous
view of the true purport of Azazel. It
is wholly at variance with the genius
of the Hebrew to express such an idea
as ' a goat for a scape-goat,' by such a
phraseology as we here find. The force
of the preposition ^ to, has another
bearing altogether. It denotes devote-
ment to a particular purpose or object.
The 'fit man ' who was the agent in
this transaction, was considered as hav-
ing contracted so nmch defilement by
the office he performed, thai he was not
permitted to re-enter the camp without
having undergone a previous lustration
of his person.
the camp ; and they shall burn in
the fire their skins, and their flesh,
and their dung.
28 And he that burneth them
shall wash his clothes, and balhe
his flesh in water, and afterward
he shall come into the camp.
29 H And this shall be a statute
for ever unto you: LhaL ^ia the
seventh month, on the tenth day
of the month, ye shall afflict your
souls, and do no work at all, xvhe-
h Exod. 30. 10. ch. -23. 27. Numb. 29. 7.
Isai. 58. .S, 5. Dan. 10. 3, 12.
27. Shall one carry forth without the
camp. For the evangelical import of
this pari of the ceremony, as explained
by the apostle, Heb. 13. 11, see Note on
Lev. 6. SO.
Recapitulation.
29. This shall be a statute for ever
unto you. Heb. tD^IS' Tpn^ lehuk'
kath olcim, for a statute of eternity.
That is, through the whole period of
that economy till Christ, the substance
of ihe Levitical shadows, should come.
See Note on Ex. 21. 6, where this phra-
seology is more fully illustrated.
IT Ye shall afflict your souls. Heb.
d^'^nrC^ r",l< 1D3>n taanu eth naph-
Shothikem. Gr. ra-civucTarc Tag xpv^ai
vfiuji', ye shall humble souls. Our Eng-
lish sense of the word soul does not
come up to the full import either of the
Hebrew or Greek. As wc have already
shown in the Note on Gen. 12. 5, and
elsewhere, the term C5D nephesh is
used as equivalent lo perso7i, and there-
lore includes the body as well as the
soul, — and as fasting was one of the
duties of the day, il is evidently to be
understood in that latitude here. Thus
also Ps. 35. 13, ' I humbled (Heb. afflict-
ed) my soul with fasting.' Is. 58. 5,
' Is il such a fast that I have chosen?
a day for a man to afflict his soul ?^ In
the Hebrew idiom an abstinence from
all corporeal delights, and a voluntary
subjecting ones' self to penances and
164
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
therit be one of your own country,
or a stranger that sojournelh among
you:
30 For on that day shall the priest
make an atonement for you, to
i cleanse you, that ye may be clean
from all your sins before the Lord.
31 kit shall be a sabbath of rest
unto you, and ye shall afflict your
souls by a statute for ever.
32 1 And the priest whom he shall
anoint, and whom he shall m con-
secrate to minister in the priest's
office in his father's stead, shall
make the atonement, and "shall
put on the linen clothes, eoen the
holy garments:
33 And o he shall make an atone-
i Ps. 61. -2. Jer. 33. 8. Eph. 5. 26. Heb.
9. 13, 14, and 10. 1, 2. 1 John 1. 7, 9. k ch.
■23. 32. 1 ch. 4 3, 5, 16. m Exod. ::9. 29, 30.
Numb 20, 26, 28. » ver. 4. o ver. 6, 16,
IS, 19, 24.
mortifications, is termed ' afllicliiig the
soul.' TT Bo no u-ork at all. It being
in fact regarded as a solenin Sabbath,
as we learn from v. 31. It was to be a
day wholly devoted to religious ser-
vices of the most severe and engrossing
character.
30. For on that day, shall the priest
make an atonement for you. The ex-
pression in ihe original is impersonal,
and consequently equivalent to ' atone-
ment shall be made for you.' The Gr.
has correctly e^t^aG€Tal tteoi vi.hov, it shall
be atoned for you. So also in like man-
ner in V. 31, ' the priest whom he shall
anoint' is but another form of saying,
' the priest who shall be anointed,' as is
clearly intimated by the Gr. rendering;
' whom they shall anoint.'
34. For all their sins once a year.
Many ex])iatory ceremonies have alrea-
dy passed under our notice, as required
in various circumstances ; but this was
the grand and general expiation in vvhicii
atoning sacrihces were nmde for all the
sin and all the defilement of the pre-
ceding year. Hence it was pre-emi-
nently distinguished as the Day of
ment for the holy sanctuary, and
he shall make an atonement for
the tabernacle of the congregation,
and for the altar: and he shall
make an atonement for the priests,
and for all the people of the con-
gregation.
34 pAnd this shall be an ever-
lasting statute unto you, to make
an atonement for the children of
Israel for all their sins q once a
year. And he did as the Lord
commanded Moses.
CHAPTER XVII.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto Aaron, and unto his
sons, and unto all the children of
Israel, and say unto them. This is
P cb. 23. 31. Numb. 29. 7. q Exod. 30.
10. Heb. 9. 7, 25.
Atonement. The idea of the institution
seems to have been, that inasmuch as
the incidental and occasional sin-offer-
ings had, from their very nature, left
much sin for which no expiation had
been made, there should be a day in
which all omissions of this sort should
be supplied, by one general expiation,
so that at the end of the year no sin or
pollution might remain for which ihe
blood of atonement had not been shed.
CHAPTER XVII.
The preceding ordinances relative to
the ministration of the High Priest in
the Holy of Holies, are here followed
by others of a miscellaneous nature,
having respect to the whole nation in
the matter of sacrificial offering, and
therefore addressed to them conjointly
with Aaron and his sons.
Precept in regard to the killing of
Cattle.
1, 2. Speak unto Aaron, and unto his
sons. That is, unto the priests ; who
were called ' the sons of Aaron,' by a
usage of perpetual occurrence. As they
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVII.
les
the thing which the Lord hath
commanded, saying,
3 What man soever there be of
ihe house of Israel, a that killeth
a See Deut. 12. 5, 15, 21.
jvere the appointed sacrificers for the
people, the precepts before us were to
ie first addressed to them, and then
.hrough them to the whole collective
people.
3. What man soever there be of the
\ousc of Israel. Heb. TPn;^ :n-«c« 'O'i^
bi^Ti"^ ish ish mibbaith Yisracl, man,
man, of the house of Israd ; to which
'.he Gr. adds, ' or of the proselytes that
»re adjoined unto you ;' which is vir-
nially warranted by the language of
Moses in v. 8. IT That killeth an ox.
Heb. 'CnD'^ yish'hat, a word properly
signifying to slaughter in general, and
not peculiarly limited to the slaying of
aninials by way of sacrifice, although
very frequently employed in that sense.
At the same time, considerable doubt
hangs over its genuine import in this
connexion. Commentators are by no
means agreed as to the true-meant de-
sign of the precept. Michaelis, Rosen-
muller, and others contend that the
point of the enactment is, that the
Israelites sliould bring the animals they
intended to kiW for food to the taberna-
cle, to be dealt wiih -.^s peace-offerings,
the blood being applied and the fat con-
sumed as in such sacrifices, the rest
being eaten by the ufferer, as in the
regular sacrifices of this class. In
proof of this, Michaelis insists on the
import of the original word tSHD sha-
^hat, to kill in general, and its distinc-
tion from KDV zaba^h, to kill for sacri-
fice. But the use of these terms by the
sacred writers is too indiscriminate to
allow of any definite conclusion being
built upon it. Still it is possible that
what Michaelis affirms may be the gen-
uine import of the passage, and the
additional reason that he suggests for it
is not without considerable weight, viz,
the prevention of secret sacrifices to
an ox, or lamb, or goat m tne camp,
or that killeth tt out of the camp,
4 b And bringeth it not unto the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
fa Deut. 12. 5, 6, 13, 14.
idols. ' Considering the propensity to
idolatry which the people brought with
ihem from Egypt, it was necessary to
take care lest, when any one killed
such animals as were usual for sacri-
fices, he should be guilty of supersli-
tiously offering them to an idol. This
precaution was the more reasonable,
because, in ancient times, it was so
very coumon to make an offering of the
flesh which a person intended to eat,
and because the Israelites could but
rarely enjoy that sort of food in the
wilderness. And hence arose a sus-
picion not very unreasonable, that who-
ever killed animals usually devoted to
the altar, ofiered them of course ; and
therefort Moses enjoined the Israelites
not to kill such animals otherwise than
in public, and to offer them all to the
true God, that so it might be out of their
power to make them offerings to idols,
by slaughtering them privately, and
under the pretence of using them for
food.'
But to this view of the subject there
are two objections, apparently formida.
ble, which Michaelis feels himself
called upon to answer. (1.) It is asked
whether it be credible that God would
have imposed such a hardship upon his
people as not to concede to them the
use of animal food, unless it were first
presented before the tabernacle, and
then virtually converted into a religious
offering? (2.) How is the precept,
when thus viewed, to be reconciled with
Deut. 12. 13-15, where, after command-
ing that all the burnt-oflferings should
be offered in one place, it is added,
< Notwithstanding, thou mayest kill and
eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever
thy soul lusteth after, according to the
blessing of the Lord thy God which he
hath given thee : the unclean and the
166
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
gresration, to offer an offering unto
the Loud before the tabernacle of
the Lord: blood shall be c imputed
c Rom. 5. 13.
clean may eat ihereof, as of the roe-
buck, and as of the hart.'
To tlie first of these objections our
author replies, that the Israelites, like
most of the modern Orientals, particu-
hirly the nomade tribes, were but liltle
addicted to the use of flesli-meat ; that
tliey seldom killed beasts but for sacri-
fice ; and that among them seasons of
sacrifice were for the most part the only
seasons of feasting, so that what was
enjoined by iliis law, was what would
ordinarily be done, whether the animals
were formally oflTered ornot. This then
would have been no particular hardship.
Nor must we forget that while the Is-
raelites continued in the wilderness,
and without any appropriated lands,
they could but very seldom have in-
dulged in a flesh diet, without being in
danger of extirpating their herds. In-
deed, properly speaking, only tl>e two
tribes of Reuben and Gad, with the half
tribe of Manasseh, had herds (Num.
32) ; the other tribes being in general
but poorly provided in this respect. In
these circumstances, the Israelites could
easily bear a law which contributed to
the preservation and increase of their
herds ; especially when ve consider
that during their sojourn in the wilder-
ness, their cattle could not be multiplied
as when they had ceased to be a nomade
people.
As to the second objection, founded
upon the grant so expressly recorded
Deut. ]2. 13-15, his solution is equally
plausible. He lliinks the law contained
in the chapter before us was only in-
tended to operate temporarily during
the wandering in the wilderness, and
that the law in Deuteronomy, delivered
just before the entrance ol' the Hebrews
into Canaan, was intended expressly to
repeal that now under consideration.
Indeed the language of that second
unto that man, he hath shed blood j
and that man d shall be cut off
from among his people :
d Gen. 17. 14.
Statute would seem decidedly to favor
this construction, for the amount of it
is (v. 8, 9), that they were not to do in
Palestine every thing which they were
then in the practice of doing in the
desert, every one at his pleasure, not
being yet come to their permanent in-
heritance. It is contended, accordingly,
that the reasons for the repeal are
nearly as obvious as those for the origi-
nal law. A new and more instructed
generation would have arisen than that
which had been so deeply imbued with
the idolatries of Egypt, and tiie occa-
sion for the restriction would therefore
not have been strong. And besides, the
observance ol' the original law would
have been scarcely practicable when
the Hebrews became settled in Pales-
tine. They would naturally then be
disposed to consume more animal food,
as settled people usually do even in the
East, than when nomades ; and yet this
law would nearly have operated as an
interdiction to a great part of the popu-
lation, who, residing at a distance from
the tabernacle or temple, would have
been obliged to take a long journey with
their oxen, sheep, or goats, to offer
them at the altar before they cotild
taste their meat.
On the whole, although Ainsworth,
Patrick, and some others understsmd
this law as having reference solely to
animals killed for sacrifice, yet we are
more inclined to adopt the view stated
above, which is adopted also by Scott
and other expositors of high repute in
modern limes. For farilier remarks
upon the scope of the law itself, and
some apparent exceptions, see Note on
Deut. 12. 13-15.
4. Blood shall be imputed unto that
man. Tliat is, that man shall be ac-
counted a murderer. In shedding the
blood of the animal he shall be deemed
K C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVII.
167
5 To the end that the children
of Israel may bring their sacrifices
e which ihey offer, in the open field,
even that they may bring them
unto the Lord, unto the door of
the tabernacle of ihe congregation,
unto the priest, and offer ihem for
peace-offerings uuto the Lord.
0 Gen. 21. 33, and 22. 2, and 31. 64. Dcut.
1-2. 2. 1 Kings 14. 23. 2 Kings 16. 4, and 17.
10. 2 Chron. 23. 4. Ezek. 20. 28, and 22. 9.
to have shed the blood of a human being,
and guilt shall rest upon him accord-
ingly. So in a ciise where a similar
profanation of a divine ordinance, by
disregarding its spirit, is spoken of, it
is said, Is. 68. 3, ' He that killeth an ox
is as if he slew a man.' IT That man
shall be cut off. Heb. iiinn IL'^KH ITH-D
nikrath haish hahu, which the Gr. ren-
ders E^uXeOpevOfjaerai h ^v^fi iKeiifrj, that
soul shall be destroyed, where it will be
observed that * that soul' in the version
answers to * tliat man' in the original.
On the import of this phrase, see Note
on Gen. 17. 14. The intimation here
undoubtedly is, either that the sentence
of death should be passed upon the of-
fender by the magistrate, or that God
would directly interfere and cut him off
from among the living, though not, we
presume, in a miraculous manner, but
by so ordering his providence, as to en-
sure that result. The latter sense will
perhaps appear the most probable by
comparing the present with v. 10, where
he threatens to execute vengeance with
his own hand against him who should
be guilty of ' eating blood.' If the
punishment should seem severe, we are
to ren«?»iber that the law was intended
to be a preventative to idolatry, and the
penalties enacted for this crime were
necessarily very severe, for the reasons
mentioned in the Introduction to the
Notes on the second volume of Exodus,
to which the reader is referred.
5. To the end, &c. Expressive of
the general scope of the present statute, I
■which is to call ihem off from all prac- \
6 And the priest fshall sprinkle
the blood upon the altar of the
Lord at the door of the tabernacle
of the congregation, and g burn the
fat for a sweet savour unto the
Lord,
7 And they shall no more offer
their sacrifices h unto devils, after
fch. 3. 2. S Exod. 29. IS. ch. 3. 5, 11, 16,
and 4. 31. Numb. 18. 17. '> Deut. 32. 17.
2 Chron. 11. 15, Ps. 106. 37, 1 Cor, 10. 20.
Rev. 9. 20.
tices of an idolatrous tendency, by re-
quiring them to bring the flesh of slain
animals wliich they would otherwise be
in danger of sacrificing to demons in
the open fields, to the precincts of the
tabernacle, and there converting them
to ' peace-ofFerings to the Lord ' before
they were eaten. So if we would have
our daily food most signally blessed to
us, let us first consecrate it to the boun-
teous Giver, and vow to him all the
strength and refreshment that we may
derive from the use of it. IT Which
they offer in the open field. Heb. '^T23i5
mm "1:5 ):>:> D^'n^T en asher him zo-
be'hini al penii hassadeh, which they
(are) sacrificing on the face of the field,
i. e. which they were heretofore in the
habit of offering, or which they might
now be inclined to offer, alter a heathen
fashion, in the open fields and high
places. The Jewish writers say, * Be-
fore the tabernacle was set up, the high
places were lawful ; and the service
was by the first-born ; after the taber-
nacle was erected, the high places were
unlawful, and the service was performed
by the priests.' This limitation as to
the place of worship is graciously done
away under the gospel, Mai. 1, 11, ' My
name shall be great among the Gentiles,
and in every place incense shall be of-
fered unto my name, and a pure of-
fering.'
7. They shall offer no more their sa-
orifices unto devils. Heb. t3">'T^3>mJ)
lasse'irim, to goats ; Chal, Qilia shadimy
wasting or destroying creatures; Gr.
TiHi fxaTaiois, to vain thirigs. Vulg.
168
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490,
whom they i have gone a whoring :
this shall be a statute for ever
unto them throughout their gene-
rations.
S *i[ And thou shah say unto them,
Whatsoever man there be of the
house of Israel, or of the strangers
which sojourn among you, k that
offereth a burnt-offering or sacrifice,
9 And 1 bringeth it not unto the
door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation, to offer it unto the Lord ;
i Exod. 34. 15. ch. 20. 5. Deut. 31. 16.
Ezek. 23. 8. k ch. 1. 2, 3. ' ver. 4.
' Dsenionibus,' to demons. The original
Hebrew term here rendered ' devils,'
properly signifies hairy ones, or crea-
tures rough, rugged, and shaggy in as-
pect; and hence is applied not only to
he-goats, but to certain fabulous beings
or sylvan gods, who were popularly
supposed to appear in the form of goats.
Herodotus says that all goats were
worshipped in Egypt, particularly the
he-goat, and from these sprung Pan,
Silenus, and the innumerable herd of
imaginary beings, satyrs, dryads, fauns,
&c. all woodland gods, and held in ven-
eration among the Egyptians, Greeks,
and Romans. From this source too it
is not unlikely that the popular repre-
sentations of the devil in Christian
countries, in which he is represented as
having a goat-like form, with a tail,
horns, and cloven feet, are borrowed.
Such representations certainly bear a
strong resemblance to what was fan-
cied of the appearance of the ancient
heathen Pan, whose name, from his
striking terror into the popular mind)
has given rise to our English word
panic. The language would seem evi-
dently to imply that the Israelites had
been formerly, or during their residence
in Egypt, addicted to the worship of
these fictitious deities. ^ After whom
they have gone a whoring. Chal. * With
whom they have erred or committed
idolatry.' This term is often employed
in the Scriptures to denote idolatry, be-
even that man shall be cut off from
among his people.
10 If m And whatsoever man ^-^ere
be of the house of Israel, or of the
strangers that sojourn among you,
that eateth any manner of blood ;
n I will even set my face against
that soul thai eateth blood, and
will cut him oft' from among his
people.
m Gen. 9. 4. ch. 3. 17, and 7. 26, 27, and
19. 26. Deut. 12. 10, 23, and Jo. 23. 1 Sam.
14. 33. Ezek. 44. 7. » ch. 20. 3, 5, 6, and
26.17. Jer. 44. 11. Ezek. 14. S, and 15. 7.
cause that was a violation of the cove-
nant between God and his people, which
is repeatedly denominated a marriage
covenant. Comp. Ex. 34. 15, Deut.
31. 16, Judg. 8. 33.
8, 9. And thou shall say unto them,
&c. The law enacted in these two
verses we conceive to differ from the
foregoing, by having respect exclusively
to beasts slain for sacrifice, and not for
food. It is an emphatic declaration
of the divine will as to the place where
all sacrificial offerings should be made.
As God designed there should be one
altar, one high-priest, one sanctuary,
and one commonwealth of Israel, this
unity of the nation and the religion
would be destroyed if various altars and
priests, and various places of offerings,
were allowed. Besides, a plurality of
priests, altars, and sanctuaries, would
very naturally lead to a plurality of
gods, and thus all the evils of idolatry
would be gradually introduced into the
worship of the chosen people. The
statute before us, requiring all their
sacrifices to be presented at one place,
was happily adapted to prevent these
consequences.
The Eating of Blood forbidden.
10. That eateth any manner of blood.
This prohibition is met with twice
elsewhere in the Levitical law. Lev,
3. 17, — 7. 26, besides its being found in
the precepts of Noah, Gen. 9. 4. It is
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVII.
169
Ho For the life of the flesh is in
the blood ; and I have given it to
you upon the altar, p to make an
0 ver. 14. P Matt. 26.28. Mark 14.24.
Rom. 3, 25, and 5. 9. Ephes. ] . 7. Col. 1. 14,
repealed again and again, and much
stress laid upon it as a law that has
more in it than would at first appear.
The reason here annexed to it is con-
I'idered below, in the note on the ensu-
ing verse. It is to be remarked, how-
tver, that the blood of clean fishes, of
Incusls, and of creeping things, is un-
derstood by the Jews to be excepted
irom this prohibition. ^ I will even
set my face against that soul, &c. Heb.
"'ID Tiri3 nuthalti panai, I will give
my face. Gr. emaTriGd} to npnaMTtop ^ov.
Chal. ' I will set mine anger against the
iiiin.' The original word for * face' is
oilen used by the sacred writers for
• anger,' as may be seen by the follow-
ing passages : Gen. 33. 20, ' I will ap-
pease him' (Heb. ' I will appease his
face^y Lam. 4. 15, ' The anger (Heb.
face) of the Lord hath divided them.'
Jer. 3. 12, * And I will not cause mine
anger (Heb. face) to fall upon you.'
1 Pet. 3. 12, ' The face (i. e. anger) of
liie Lord is against them that do evil.'
1 ]. For the life of the flesh is in the
blood. Heb. J^^l Q-ID ^'^"nn TTSS '^S
lei nephcsh habbasdr baddorji hi, for the
life or soul of the flesh it is in the blood.
Gr. // Y"P '/'"X^ TTiiij/is capKoi aijxa avTov
cTTiv, for the life or soul of all flesh is
the blood thereof. This was not per-
haps intended to be affirmed as a strictly
physiologica,l fact, but simply to ex-
l)ress wliat appears to be the truth, and
what was popularly regarded as such.
The seat of vitality was ostensibly in
the blood, because if the blood was shed
life became extinct. Yet it is not a
little remarkable that the researches of
modern anatomists and physiologists
have brought them in the main to the
same conclusion, namely, that the blood
is actually possessed of a principle of
vitality, _ This, it is said, is demon-
15
atonement for your souls: for q it
is the blood that maketh an atone-
ment for the soul.
20. Heb. 13. 12. 1 Pet. 1, 2. 1 John 1, 7
Rev. 1. 5. q Heb. 9. 22.
strated by the following among other
facts. If blood be taken from the arm
in the most intense cold that the human
body can suffer, it will raise the ther-
mometer to the same height, as blood
taken in the most sultry heat. Now it
is known that living bodies alone have
the power of resisting great degrees of
heat and cold, and of maintaining in al-
most every situation, while in liealth,
that temperature which we distinguish
by the name of animal heat. But it is
by no means necessary to insist on this
as implied in the words of our text.
The sacred scriptures have little to do
with the absolute verifies of natural sci-
ence. These we are to ascertain from
other sources, and establish by other
evidence. See Note on Gen. 9. 4.
IT It is the blood that maketh an atone-
ment for the soul. By transgression a
man forfeits his life to divine justice,
and he must die did not mercy provide
him a substitute. The life of a beast
is appointed and accepted by God as a
substitute for the sinner's life ; but as
this life is in the blood, and as the blood
is the grand principle o[ vitality, there-
fore the blood is to be poured out upon
the altar, and thus the life of the beast
becomes a substitute for the life of
the man. But this was a typical ordi-
nance, having direct reference to the
atonement of Christ. Christ not only
died for sinners, but our redemption is
ever ascribed to his blood : for in order
to make a satisfactory atonement, he
not only bowed his head upon the cross
and gave up the ghost, but his side was
opened, the pericardium and the heart
evidently pierced, that the vital fluid
might be poured out from the very seat
of life, and that thus the blood which is
the life should be shed to make expia-
tion for the life of the soul. The forbid-
170
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
12 Therefore I said unto the
children of Israel, No soul of you
shall eat blood, neither shall any
stranger that sojourneth among
you eat blood.
13 And whatsoever man there he
of the children of Israel, or of the
strangers that sojourn among you,
which rhunteth and catcheth any
benst or fowl that may be eaten ;
he shall even spour out the blood
thereof, and ^cover it with dust.
14 "For it is the life of all flesh,
r ch. 7. 26. s Deut. 12. 16, 24, and 15. 23.
'Ezek. 24. 7- u ygr. 11, 12. Gen. 9. 4.
Deut. 12. 23.
ding the ealing of blood therefore would
naturally tend to beget a devout and
reverent regard for that precious fluid
which was visibly represented in the
blood of the victims slain upon the Jew-
ish altar.
12. Therefore I said unto the children
of Israel, &c. Whatever other reasons
might previously have existed for this
prohibition (Gen. 9. 4), yet this is the
reason why it is to be forbidden to the
children of Israel, and to all that saw
fit to adjoin themselves to the holy
people.
Additional Precepts in regard to Blood
and the Carcasses of Beasts.
13. And whatsoever man there be, &c.
In this and the subsequent verses the
law given above respecting the use of
blood of sacrificed beasts is extended to
that of all other creatures common for
food, whether wild or tame, but espe-
cially such as were taken in hunting.
The blood was to be carefully drained
from the body, and decorously covered
over with earth. IT He shall even
pour out the blood thereof and cover it
with dust. Lest it should be licked up by
any other animal, which he would have
them avoid, either because the taste
of blood might generate a destructive
thirst for it, or because he would not
have any thing so sacred as blood ex-
posed to profanation. The covering of
the blood of it is for the life there-
of: therefore I said unto the child-
ren of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood
of no manner of flesh ; for the life
of all flesh is the blood thereof:
whosoever eatelh it shall be cut off.
15 sAnd every soul that eateth
that which died of itself, or that
which was torn ivilh beasts, [iche-
Iher it he one of your own country,
or a stranger) yhe shall both wash
his clothes, zand bathe himself in
xExod. 22. 31. ch. 22. 8. Deut. 14.21.
Ezek. 4. 14, and 44. 31. ) ch. 11. 2o. z en.
16. 6.
the blood also conveyed the intimation
that it should not be imputed as a mat-
ter of guilt to the shedder, as appears
from the contrary, Job 16. 18, ' O earth,
cover not thou my blood, and let my
cry have no place.' Ezek. 24. 7, 8,
* For her blood is in the midst of her ;
she sets it upon the top of a rock ; she
poured it not upon the ground, to cover
it with dust ; that it might cause fury
to come up to take vengeance ; I have
set her blood upon the top of a rock that
it should not be covered ;' where the
blood not covered, signifies a crying to
God for vengeance. The Jews regard
this as a very weighty precept, and
appoint that the blood should be cover-
ed with these words; 'Blessed is he
that hath sanctified us by his precepts,
and commanded us to cover blood.'
15. That which died of itself , or that
which was torn with beasts. This is
still but theap'plicationof the main law
in regard to blood ; for in both cases,
the blood was retained in the body ;
hence the council at Jerusalem forbade
things strangled, as well as blood ;
because in such beasts, the blood was
coagulated in the veins and arteries.
^ He shall wash his clothes. In this
case it is supposed that the person
sinned ignoranily or through inadvert-
ency, not of deliberation or set purpose ;
for any presumptuous sin was to be fol-
lowed by exemplary judgments
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
171
water, and be unclean until the
even: then shall he be clean.
16 But if he wash them not, nor
CHAPTER XVIII.
As the chosen and covenant tribes of
Israel were soon to take up their jour-
ney to the land of Canaan, the inhabit-
ants of which were to be exterminated
for their inullifarious iniquities in the
sight of God, a recital is here made of
some of those aggravated Ibrms of
wickedness which were rife among
them, and which God had determined
signally to punish. This is done not
only to illustrate the justice of the
divine proceedings in their excision, but
also with a view to put the peculiar
people themselves on their guard against
yielding to the contagion of their per-
nicious example, and thus becoming
obnoxious to the same fearful retrib-a-
tions wliich were now about to be visit-
ed upon the Canaanites. The particu-
lar class of abominations more espe-
cially pointed out in this chapter, and
to which the brand-mark of the divine
reprobation is so conspicuously affixed,
is that of incestuous connexions. Not
only had that abandoned race been
guilty of a total apostacy from the wor-
ship of the true God, substituting in his
room the sun, and moon, and host of
heaven, and bowing down to stocks and
stones and creeping things, but they had
mingled with their idolatry every vice
that could degrade human nature and
pollute society. In the black catalogue
of these, the abominations of lust stand
pre-eminent ; and whether in the form
of adultery, fornication, incest, sodomy,
or bestiality, they had now risen to a
pitch of enormity which the forbearance
of heaven could tolerate no longer, and
of which a shuddering dread was to be
begotten in the minds of the people of
the covenant. And in order that no
possible plea of ignorance or uncer-
tainty might be left in their minds as to
bathe his flesh, then a shall he bear
his iniquity.
a ch. 5. 1, and 7. 13, and 19. 8. Numb.
those connexions which were lawful
and those which were forbidden, the
Most High proceeds in the present and
in the 20ih chapter to lay down a num-
ber of specific prohibiiions on this sub-
ject, so framed, as not only to include
the extra-nuptial pollutions, vvliich had
prevailed among the heathen, but also
all those incestuous unions which were
inconsistent with the puriiy and sanc-
tity of the marriage relation. Both
classes of crimes we think are in fact
included ; so that it is doing no violence
to the spirit of the text to regard it as
containing a system of marriage-laws
by v.hich the peculiar people were ever
after to be governed.
As this is the only passage in the
compass of the whole Bible where any
formal enactments are given on this
subject, this and the connected chapters
treating of this theme have always been
deemed of peculiar importance in their
relations to the question of the lawful
degrees, within which the marriage con-
nexion n»ay now he formed by tiiose who
make the law of God the great standard
of moral duty. But it is more especially
with reference to the lawfulness of mar-
riage with a deceased wife^s sister that
the bearings of this chapter become
important to us under the gospel, and
at the present time ; as it is well known
that the occurrence of cases of that kind
has often greatly agitated the religious
communions to which the parties be-
longed, and even at the present day, the
difficulty of effecting an entire unanim-
ity of sentiment among Christians ap-
pears as great as ever. We can scarcely
expect, indeed, within the limits which
the nature of the present work will
allow, to bring the matter to a decisive
issue, even if we were entirely confi-
dent on which side the truth lay, which
we are forced to acknowledge we are
172
LEVITICUS.
[B.' C. 1490.
not. The just decision of the question
necessarily involves the establishment
of several great preliminary principles
of interpretation, besides a display of
the idiomatic usages of the Hebrew
philologically exhibited, which cannot
well be made satisfactory in a small
compass. But as the subject is one on
which ihe truth is perhaps to be reached
only by the gradual accumulation of
evidence, we venture with others to
contribute our small quota of sugges-
tion towards the solution of a very im-
portant point, not of criticism only, but
also of casuistrj'.
It will probably be seen that our
leanings are to the side of the unlaw-
fulness of the connexion ; but recent
discussions have brought forth so strong
an array of arguments in support of the
opposite theory, that it seems, on the
whole, no more than is due to the pre-
sentation of evidence on both sides, that
we should at present hold our judgment
in suspense, simply giving to the reader
a succinct but failhful view of the prin-
cipal reasonings relied upon by the ad-
vocates of each.
1. The Meaning of the Phrase * Near
of Kin.'
In the general enunciation of the law,
V. 6, it is said, ' None of you shall ap-
proach to any that is near of kin to him
to uncover their nakedness.' The orig-
inal phrase is ITl'D "iJi'U sheer besdro,
remainder of his flesh, whereas in other
cases, though not numerous, the term
employed to signify kindred is n"lp
k'Jrob, from «"lp kdrab, to draw nigh.
Michaelis' remarks on the terms in
question (Comment. L.of M. Art. 102),
are as follows: — ' If the reader wishes
to know what these words etymologi-
cally signify, I shall here just state to
him my opinion, but without repeating
the ground on which it rests. Sheer
means, (1.) a remnant ; (2.) the rem-
nant of a meal ^ (3.) a piece of any
thing eatable, such as flesh; (4.) apiece
of any thing in general. Hence we
find it subsequently transferred lo rela-
tionship in the Arabic language ; in
which, though with a slight orthogra-
phical variation, that nearest relation
is called Ta'ir or Thsciir, whom the
Hebrews denominate Goil. In this
way. Sheer, even by itself, would sig-
nify a relation. Basar, commonly ren-
dered flesh, is among the Hebrews
equivalent to body ; and may thence
have been applied to signify relation-
ship. Thus, thou art my flesh, or body,
(Gen. 29. 14), means thou art my near
kinsman. When both words are put
together, Sheer-basar, they may be ren-
dered literally corporeal relation, or by
a half Hebrew phrase, kinsinan ajter
the flesh. In their derivation, there
are no farther mysteries concealed, nor
any thing that can bring the point in
question to a decision ; and what mar-
riages Moses has permitted or com-
manded, we cannot ascertain from Sheer-
basar, frequent and extensive as is its
use in his marriage-laws: but must de-
termine, from his own ordinances, in
which he distinctly mentions what
fSheer-basar, that is, what relations, are
forbidden to marry.' That the ideal con-
nexion of the term "li^^; sheer, w'nh flesh
is somewhat close is evident from the
following instances ; Ps. 73. 26, ' My
flesh C^^aCiIj sheer i) and my heart fail-
eth.' Ps. 78. 20, ' Can he give bread also ?
Can he provide jTfs/i ("M^i:: sheer) for his
people? Prov. 5. 11, ' And thou mourn
at the last when thy flesh and thy body
('TI^TIj'] ^T1'2 besdrka u-she'erika) are
consumed,' where however the original
for ' flesh ' is ^Xl bdsdr, and *15<1L^ sheer
is rendered by * body.' In a few in-
stances, out of the present connexion, it
is rendered, as here, by ' kin ' or ' kins-
man,' as Lev. 21. 2, ' But for his kin
that is near unto him (DIpH l*15<r^
T^iiit lish'cro hakkdrob c'lauv), for his
mother,' &c. Num. 27. 11, ' And if his
father have no brethren, then ye shall
give his inheritance unto his kinsman
that is next to him (T^lbii S^lpH I^S^c)}
Ushi'rn hakkdrob elauv), of his family,'
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
173
&c. The peculiar combination ^i^tU
T»!33 shetr basdr, remainder of flesh,
occurs only in v. 16 of this chapter, and
Lev. 25. 49, ' Either his uncle or his
uncle's son may redeem him, or any
that is 7iigh of kin unto him C^ii^TI^JZ
lliTD mishshecr besaro, any of his re-
mainder of flesh).' The usage of the
Greek in these cases is peculiar. It
seems to be founded on the assumption,
tliiU the kindred here specified were in
the habit of living together, as the term
i> invariably some form of oik^io; do-
7nest/c, including those of the same
household. Thus v. 6, ' None of you
shall approach to any that is near of
kin to him.^ Gr. rrpoi Travra oiKCia (oth.
cop. outiai) (TaoKos avTov, to any domes-
tic {relation) of his own flesh. V. 12,
' Tliou shall not uncover the nakedness
(iC ihy father's sister ; for she is thy
father's near kinswoman.' Gr. oiKcia
yno Trarpjg cov eari^for she is the domes-
tic (relation) of thy father. So also
V. 13, where mention is made of the
mother's sister. And again, v. 17,
' For they are her near kinswomen.' Gr.
oiKEtat yap aov etaiv, for they are thy
domestic (relations).' The tacit refer-
ence .is probably to the nomade mode
of life, in which the tents of near rela-
tives were pitched in the close vicinity
of each other, and their inmates were
in habits of the most unrestrained inter-
course. Indeed Maimonides lays it
down as the general ground and reason
of the following prohibitions, that the
parties here debarred from marriage are
such as were so bound together in do-
mestic intimacy, that unless marriage
were strictly forbidden between them,
a door would have been opened for
scenes of the grossest corruption in the
circle of families and kindred. This
fact in regard to the different modes of
social life prevailing among the ancient
Hebrews and with us, is undoubtedly to
be taken into account in the present
discussion, and should be set down to
the advantage of those whomaintaintiiat
the present laws are not binding upon us. '
15*
But we return to the import of the
expression before us, ' remainder of
flesh.' The phraseology is somewhat
peculiar, as conveying the idea of
nearness of kin. The use of it in this
sense probably arose from the fact that
in the original institution of marriage,
the parties were pronounced to be ' one
flesh.' In this case, therefore, one
might be said to be in relation to the
other, the ' remainder of his or her
flesh ;' and nothing could give a more
impressive idea of the sacred nearness
and oneness constituted between the
parties by the marriage compact. So a
child born of such a union is a ' remain-
der of flesh ' in respect to his parents,
and his parents to him. Thus too a
brother and sister, the ofispring of the
same parents, are the ' remainder of
flesh' to each other ; and this sense of
the phrase is illustrated in the present
connrtcion, vv. 12, 13, where the ex-
pression ' father's near kinswoman,'
and ' mother's near kinswoman,' is in
the original ' father's remainder,' and
' mother's remainder;' (Heb ^54T §hetr,
remainder) . So again, v. 17, * They are
her near A:z7jsu"om€n (mKIL"s/ietra/i,/ie?-
remainder).' It would seem, thereibre,
that the established version is not only
true to the sense of the original, but
also that the expression includes all
the prohibited degrees which follow.
They were all ' remainder of flesh' to
each other, and no language could con-
vey the idea of closer relationship. The
distinction, therefore, often much in-
sisted on in the construction of this
law, between consanguinity and aflinity,
seems not to be recognized at all by
the Holy Spirit. To the same conclu-
sion we shall probably be brought by
a correct view of the intrinsic nature of
the marriage relation, as instituted by
God himself. ' By marriage,' says
Blackstone (Com. B. I. ch. 15, and note),
' the husband and wife are one person
in law. Upon this principle of an union
of person in husband and wife, depend
almost all the legal rights, duties, and
174
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
disabilities that either of them acquire
by marriage. The same degrees by
affinity are prohibited. Affinity always
arises by the marriage of one of the
parlies so related. As a husband is re-
lated by affinity to all the consanguinei
of his wife, and vice versa, the wife to
all the husband's consanguinei ; for the
husband and wife being considered one
llesh, those who are related to the one
by blood are related to the other by
affinity. Therefore a man, after his
wife's death, cannot marry her sister,
aunt, or niece.' By pronouncing the
parties that enter that connexion ' one
flesh,' it would seem to have been the
divine mtenlion that marriage should
be regarded, in the highest sense con-
sistent with the distinct personality of
the married, as constituting a construc-
tive unity of being in man and wife. In
confirmation of this we beg leave to in-
troduce a note from a previous volume
of this series of commentaries, on the
words of the historian. Gen. 39. 10, rela-
tive to the solicitations of Polipher's
wife to Joseph ; ' And it came to pass,
as she spake to Joseph day by day, that
he hearkened not unto her, to lie by her,
or to be with her.' * This passage
affords an instance of a very important
shade oi' meaning being lost to the Eng-
lish reader by the translators' not hav-
ing adverted to, perhaps not being ac-
quainted with, the genuine force of the
original. When we read that Joseph
refused to hearken to his mistress's soli-
citations, or ' to be with her,' we natu-
rally understand the meaning to be,
that he declined being in her company,
that he shunned her presence, and es-
pecially that he avoided, as much as
possible, being alone with her. All this
may indeed have been so ; we think it
very probable that it was ; still this
does not by any means represent the
true sense of the original phrase. The
' or' is not found in the Hebrew, and its
insertion in our translation prevents the
precise drift of the writer from being
apprehended. The true rendering re-
sults from the omission of the particle
— ' he hearkened not unto her to lie by
her, to be with her '—and the import of
'being with her' unquestionably is,
being united, and as it were identified
with her, so as in a sense to co-exist
with her by a constructive reciprocation
of being. This sense is clearly devel-
oped by the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor.
6. 16, 17, ' What? know ye not that he
which is joined to an harlot is one body ?
for two, sailh he, shall be one flesh.
But he that is joined to the Lord is one
spirit.' To be with one, therefore, in this
sense, is, in the eye of the Scriptures,
to have a community of being. This is
the nature of the conjugal union, which
is trenched upon and invaded by every
act of unlawful commerce, such as that
meditated bj' Potiphar's wife.'
If this be a well-lbunded view of the
subject, we see not how to resist the
inference, that a woman's father, mo-
ther, brother, and sister, become by
marriage, in the divine estimation, the
father, mother, brother, and sister of
the man whom she marries, and so vice
versa. It 'may indeed be objected to
this, as Nicodemus objected to the doc-
trine of regeneration, that it is impossi-
ble to see how it can be. But the ques-
tion is, does not God say so ? And may
he not, in the exercise of his sovereign
authority, declare that such and such
relations of a moral or covenant kind
shall exist among his creatures, al-
though they might seem to our short-
sighted reason to contravene the laws
of physical being? It will scarcely be
denied, that notwithstanding the dis-
tinct personality of each individual of
the human race, there yet exists some
kind of economical or federal union be-
tween them and Adam, in consequence
of which their relations to law and
destiny are very materially affected.
W^e see no necessity that such a rela-
tion should be a matter of personal con-
sciousness. It is sufficient that it is a
matter of divine testimony, and the
truth or the fallacy of the position is to
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
175
be determined by a fair and legitimate
construction of the record on the true
sense of which the whole matter rests.
So again it is clearly affirmed by the
Apostle, Rom. 4. 11, 12, that there is a
sense in which, to all that believe,
Abraham becomes a father, though they
1)6 not of the circumcision, like his de-
■icendanlj after the flesh. This also is
not a fact of personal consciousness, but
of divine testimony, which we receive
because, although the idea is one of ra-
ther a subtle nature, we cannot set aside
the evidence on which it rests. In like
manner may it not be possible that
within certain limits defined by God,
the relations formed by affinity shall
be just as near and as sacred as those
resulting from consanguinity ?
For ourselves we know of no more
interesting view of the marriage union,
liian that it creates to each of the par-
ties a new circle of endeared relatives,
bound together by ties which are never
henceforth to be sundered. What a field
is here opened for the extension of the
tenderest charities and the sweetest
sympathies of his life i What a multi-
plication of the cords which, by binding
firmly together, strengthen the great
brotherhood of man ! This end is no
doubt answered to a certain extent on
the opposite theory, that the relation-
ship with a wife's or husband's family
ceases as soon as the one or the other is
removed by death. But the tie will
naturally be regarded of far slighter
force when it is looked upon as merely
temporary in its duration, and though
a mutual friendly intercourse and inter-
est may subsequently be kept up be-
tween the families- yet it is nothing
compared with the cemented fellowship
that subsists between those who regard
each other in the light of permanent
kindred.
It is also to be remarked, that the
view now suggested of the nearness and
sanctity of the marriage relation, would
tend more powerfully perhaps than any
other to counteract those lax and law-
less sentiments in regard to that insti-
tution, which are unhappily at all times
too prevalent among men, and which
generate a dangerous facility in the pro-
curement of divorces. The convictions
upon which thesacredness and stability
of marriage rest, need to be reinforced
by every legitimate collateral influence
which can be brought to bear upon
them; and what can tend more to this
than the consideration, that though the
connexion itself might cease at death,
yet the kindred created by it would sur-
vive and live on undisturbed? — But we
pass on to another department of our
preliminary discussions.
What is meant by the Phrase ' to Un-
cover Nakedness ?'
This expression is evidently of the
utmost importance in this connexion, as
defining the criminal intercourse which
is here forbidden. It is true, indeed,
that the phraseology is occasionally
varied in other parts of the law, as we
find ' to approach to,' ' to lie with,' used
as equivalents to the form of speech be-
fore us. The first of these, * to approach
to,' occurs only in v. 6 and 14 of the
present chapter, in both which cases it
is obviously tantamount to having car-
nal connexion with a woman.. The
second, ' to lie with,' in like manner,
when employed without any thing to
qualify or limit its meaning, has ob-
viously the generic sense of sexual in-
tercourse, whether within or without
the pale of matrimony. It can scarcely
be necessary to show, by an array of
particular citations, that the im])ort of
these phrases fairly includes the sexual
intercourse supposed in the very idea of
marriage, as well as the illicit com-
merce to which the terms fornication
and adultery are applied.
The question returns, then, whether
the expression before us, ' to uncover
nakedness,' is not used with equal lati-
tude, including the conjugal intercourse
of married parties, as well as the sexual
connexion forbidden under the name of
176
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
incestuous fornication and adultery, for
which many contend as the only object
of prohibition in the laws now under
consideration. For ourselves, we are
ready to admit that something more is
prohibited in these chapters than merely
incestuous marriages. Not only the
import of the terms, but the obvious
drift of the law, as indicated by the cir-
cumstances under which it was promul-
gated, convince us that it was intended
to interdict in general the various kinds
of promiscuous sexual commerce which
had prevailed among the abandoned
heathen, and at the same time to em-
brace those incestuous marriage con-
nexions to which many suppose the law
has exclusive reference. But having
made this admission, we again remark,
that there is nothing in the form of the
expression itself which precludes the
sense "of marriage connexions. What-
ever else may be included in it, it is
obvious that the sense of connubial in-
\- tercourse is not necessarily shut out of
its import. It is evidently a euphemis-
tic mode of expression, to convey the
idea of an act which the instinctive sen-
timents of delicacy among all people
agree to shroud in language that shall
rather hint than declare. But let us
refer to the actual usage. In the pre-
sent chapter the phrase occurs thirteen
times ; these instances it will not be
necessary to cite. In the twentieth
chapter, comprising, for the most part,
a repetition of the precepts of this, with
the annexed penalties, it occurs six
times, but with no different shade of
meaning. The next instance in which
it occurs is found Is. 47. 2, 3, in an
address to the ' virgin daughter of Ba-
bylon,' to whom it is said, 'Take the
millstones and grind meal, &c. ; thy
nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy
shame shall be seen.' Here is barely
the implication of unseemly exposure,
without any thing to aid us in deter-
mining the question of its drift in the
connexion before us. The only remain-
ing cases are the following, all occur-
ring in Ezekiel. Ch. 16. 36, ' Because thy
filthiness was poured out, and thy na-
kedness discovered (uncovered) through
thy whoredoms with thy lovers,' &c.
Here it is evident, from the context,
that the allusion is to extra-conjugal
licentiousness, of the grossest character.
Thus again, v. 37, ' Behold, therefore, I
will gather all thy lovers, with whom
thou hast taken pleasure, and all them
that thou hast loved, with all them that
thou hast hated ; I will even gather
them round about against thee, and will
discover (uncover) thy nakedness unto
them, that they may see all thy naked'
ness.' This, of course, is not the un-
covering that belongs to marriage.
Ezek. 22. 10, 'In thee have they dis-
covered (uncovered) their fathers' na-
kedness : in thee have they humbled
her that was set apart for pollution.'
This is entirely parallel to the use of
the phrase in the chapter before us, and
advances us no further towards a definite
result. Ch. 23. 10, ' These discovered
(uncovered) her nakedness : they took
her sons and her daughters, and slew
her with the sword.' There is no room
to question the application of this lan-
guage to the pollutions of illicit love.
It is not a nuptial nakedness of which
the prophet here speaks. Thus too
again, ch. 23. 18, ' So she discovered
(uncovered) her whoredoms, and discov-
ered (uncovered) her nakedness : then
my mind was alienated from her.'
Once more, ch. 23. 29, ' And they shall
deal with thee hatefully, and shall take
away all thy labor, and shall leave thee
naked and bare ; and the nakedness of
thy whoredoms shall be discovered (un-
covered), both thy lewdness and thy
whoredoms.' The nakedness here un-
covered, is expressly said to be that of
' whoredoms,' and consequently cannot
be that of marriage.
These are all the cases in which the
phrase occurs in the Bible, and the gen-
eral result will doubtless be admitted
to be, that although it is incontestably
applied in several of the cited cases to
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
177
forbidden sexual intercourse, yet it is
not equally indubitable that it is used
to denote the lawful intercom se of wed-
lock. At the same time, as there is
nothing in the native import of the
terms employed, which should necessa-
rily forbid its being thus used, and as
nothing can be pointed out in the cir-
cumstances of Its occurrence in the
other cases which absolutely shuts us
up to that as the only sense, we see not
that any conclusive argument can be
drawn Irom the terms of the law to re-
strict its prohibitions simply to acts of
adultery and fornication. At any rate,
it will scarcely be questioned, that in
V. 18, the expression, ' Thou shalt not
take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to
uncover her nakedness,' implies taking
her in marriage, whether it be under-
stood as before the death of the first
wife or after. We observe moreover
that the meaning of the terms is un-
doubtedly to be viewed in connexion
with the scope of the law, and in pro-
portion to the strength of evidence that
the law before us does not contemplate
merely the general enormities of adul-
terous intercourse, but the specific sin
of incest in its several forms, in the
same proportion is the certainty that in
these passages the phrase in question
conveys the idea of marriage.
What then is the ground for believing
that no other than tlie crimes that came
under the category of general lewdness
are here forbidden ? Can any sufficient
reason be assigned, why the crime of
adultery should here be forbidden with
all this minute specification of cases,
when it had been previously so expressly
and so solemnly denounced by the terms
of the seventh commandment ? As all
are necessarily included in the scope of
that prohibition, why does the lawgiver
here forbid only those cases of adultery
which may take place with a mother,
step-mother, sister, half-sister, sister-
in-law, &c. * What would be thought,'
says Mr. Dwight, ' of the wisdom of a
legislature which should enact a similar
statute with regard to any other crime ;
for example, that of horse-stealing : —
' He who steals the horse of any person
shall be imprisoned three years. He
who steals his father's horse, shall be
imprisoned three years. He who steals
his brother's horse, shall be imprisoned
three years. He who steals the horse
of his father's brother, shall be impris-
oned three years,' — and so on through
a succession of thirty-three relations.'
Again, it is not to be forgotten that the
established punishment for adultery was
death. How comes it then, if adultery
is the grand offence interdicted in this
law, that the penalty, in several in-
stances, is merely dying childless? On
the whole, as any adequate reason for
understanding solely the prohibition of
adultery and fornication is wanting,
and as the great mass of the Jewish
and Christian world have agreed in
interpreting these laws of incestuous
marriages, it would seem that there are
very strong grounds for this as the
most legitimate construction. But
though this be granted, still another
question arises as to
The Sense of the word ' Wife ' in this
Connexion.
The position, as is well known, has
been vigorously maintained, that as the
word 'wife' and not 'widow' is the
word uniformly employed in these laws,
they must therefore be understood as
referring to women whose husbands
were still living. But to this it may be
replied, that Hebrew usage in respect
to terms expressive of these relations
must be regarded. The original word
rendered 'wife' is il-'i^ is/ia/i, which
is also the only term that the language
affords for ' woman.' In like manner,
the Gr. word ywri signifies both ' wo.
man ' and ' wife.' In the Hebrew dic-
tion a man's ' wife ' is uniformly his
' woman,' and nothing would be more
natural, from the force of correct ideas
on the subject of the marriage relation,
than to epeak of the surviving partner
178
LEVITICUS.
[E. C. 1490.
of a man deceased as his * woman ' or
* wife.' That this was actually the
usage is obvious from numerous exam-
ples. Thus Gen. 38. 8, 'And Judah
said unto Ouan, Go in unto thy brother's
wife, and marry her.' Deut. 25. 5,
' The wife of the dead shall not marry
without unto a stranger.' Ruth 4. 5,
' Buy it of Ruth, the wife of the dead:
2 Sam. 12. 10, « Thou hast taken the
wife of Uriah.' Matt. 22. 25, ' The
first died and loft his wife.' Acts 5. 7,
' Ananias' wife, not knowing that her
husband was dead,' &c.
Such was the common usage among
the Hebrews, the Greeks, and the Ro-
mans ; and such is that of the French,
the Germans, the Spanish, and the
Italians, as well as of the English. In
none of the versions of the Scriptures in
these languages, is the word widow in-
troduced in such cases. The Hebrew
has indeed the word n;?2i&< almormh,
signifying widow, but it is never used,
as with us, in such a connexion as ' the
widow of such an one', — ' the widow of
a father, brother, son,' &c. Instead of
this, the fixed phraseology in such cases
is always ' wife.' Its use is most pre-
valent in cases where the writer's object
is to make llie state of widowhood, as a
state of desolation and weakness, pecu-
liarly prominent. Thus Ex. 22. 22,
' Ye shall not afflict any widow or child.'
Deut. 14. 29, ' The stranger, the father-
less, and the widow shall come and eat
and be satisfied.' Job. 24. 3, ' They
take the widow's ox for a pledge.' Such
is the more common usus loquendi.
Indeed, it is remarkable, that in several
instances the word n'»l'i< wovian or wife,
is subjoined to nj?^^^* almonah, xcidow,
equivalent to * widow- woman' or ' widow-
wife ' in our language. Both terms are
in these cases generally translated in
our version, though occasionally the
latter is omitted. Thus, 1 Kings 7. 14,
' He was a widow^s son (nj?2^i4 Mlub^ "p
ben ishah almonah, son of a widow-wife)
of the tribe of Naphtali.' But wherever
ihe phrase ' widow- woman ' occurs, it is
[ to be recollected, that according to th<
i original idiom, ' widow-wife ' is ar
equally proper rendering. We cannot
! doubt, therefore, that while the term
i ' wife ' in this connexion is really used
I with such an extension of its import as
; to embrace the idea of widow,' it would
I at the same time have been entirely
contrary to the prevailing idiom of the
I language to have employed that term.
I The truth is, if we mistake not, llie
term 'wife' in the different specifica-
j tions of the law belore us, is so usf d as
to express the continuity of the relation,
i without any regard to the fact of the
! husband's death. Whether he were
I living or dead, it mattered not ; the
I prohibition continued in full force ; and
1 that not only from the common usage
: of speech, but from the nature of the
i propinquity already established between
j the barred parlies. We do do not mean
by this tliat the relation so continued
\ alter the death of either of the parlies,
j as to make it unlawful for the survivor
to marry again ; for in this particular,
a dispensation was kindly granted, and
the words of the apostle, Rom. 7. 2, 3,
apply in all their force ; ' For ti)e wo-
man which hath an husband is bound
by the law to her husband as long as
he liveth ; but if the husband be dead,
she is loosed from the law of her hus-
j band — so that she is no adulteress,
i though she be married to another man.'
j But we do not perceive that this annuls
] the relationships previously existing
I between those who are brought together
I by affinity, nor is there any fairness in
quoting the apostle's words to such a
I puri)ose,as his drift was entirely differ-
ent. Take for instance the case of the
step-mother, the father's wife. What
originally constituted the propinquity
between her and her step-son, that ren-
I dered it unlawful for him to marry her?
: Plainly the fact, that the father had
{ consummated marriage with her. In
[ the language of the law slie then be*
I came ' one flesh' with him. As sooa
I as this became a fact, the propinquity
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
179
became complete. How could the death
of the fullior undo this pre-existent fact,
aiul cause ihe constituted relation be-
tween the step-moiher and the step-sou
to cease ? So as to a sister ; she does
not lose the propinqailj- which she has
in common wiih me, either at my fa-
ther's deatii, or at her marriage ; be-
cause lier propinquity is founded on a
pre-existent fact, which can never cease
to be a fact. How then can we resist
tlie inference, that the sister of a wife
continues to he a sister, after the death
of the wife, just as she was before, and
consequently is never to be approached
in the nuptial relation ? Does the
maxim admit of controversy, that any
person, with whom, at any time, it
would have been incest to cohabit, will
forever remain forbidden ? The ques-
tion seems unequivocally determined
by the principle of affinity arising out
of the nature of the marriage union.
Are these Laws still binding upon ChriS'
tians at the present Bay ?
This of course is a question of the
utmost moment, in the present connex-
ion. It is comparatively a matter of
little consequence to ascertain whether
the marriage in question was forbidden
to tlie Jews, provided the statute re-
specting it was among those portions
of the law which have been abolished
under the gospel. This latter position
IS of course most strenuously maintained
by those who hold to the lawfulness of
the marriage in question. By them it
is contended that these laws are purely
ceremonial, forming a part of that code
which is abrogated by Christ. They
occur, it is said, in the midst of enact-
ments which are confessedly Levitical,
and accompanied by no notes of dis-
crimination which mark them out as
having a moral and permanent authority.
For aught that appears, they are no
more bindi.n^- on us than the precepts
relative to wearing linsey-woolsey gar-
ments, or sowing diverse seeds in the
same field or raising a mixed breed of
cattle. That code, as a code, ha.s be.
come to us antiquated, and if we receive
certain of its moral precepts, it is not
because we admit the authority of the
Levitical law; but because of their own
intrinsic equity or wisdom.
Again, it is affirmed, that if the^e
enactments are binding upo.M us at this
day, it must be because the connexions
forbidden involve an essential immoral-
ity. But in this case, God never would
have sanctioned them under any cir-
cumstances. Yet we perceive as a
matter of fact, that the first marriages
in the family of Adam must necessarily
have been between brother and sister,
so far at least as regards Cain and Abel,
and probably Adam's other children.
It was, moreover, an express statute,
that in case that a brother died child-
less, the surviving brother was not only
permitted, but required to marry his
widow. If such connexions then are
intrinsically wrong, how could they
have been allowed in the instances
cited ?
To this it is replied, on the other
hand, that there is nothing of a ceremo-
nial nature in the law regulating mar-
riage connexions. The institution of
marriage was intended, not for the Jews
but for the whole world. As such, the
laws by which its Author has seen fit
to qualify, guard, and govern it, are
bindmg alike upon all nations and in all
times. These laws are contained in the
chapters before us ; and if they are not
now obligatory, then it follows that we
have nothing in the compass of the
whole Bible regulating the subject of
marriage alliances — nothing to forbid a
man marrying his own mother, sister,,
or daughter ! They occur, indeed, in
the midst of a multitude of enactments,
peculiar to the Levitical economy. But
this is no more than holds good of a
vast variety of other moral precepts,
the universally binding nature of which
no one questions. The moral law is
indeed summarily comprised in the
decalogue, yet the letter and spirit of
180
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
this divme code are illustrated and con-
firmed by subsequent explanatory pre-
cepts, which are intermingled often in
the same chapter, and sometimes in the
same paragraph with the purely ritual
or ecclesiastical laws. One has only
to turn his eye over the three or four
connected chapters in this book, to find
the repeated occurrence of such pre-
cepts as the following: — 'Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thine
heart, and with all thy soul, and with
all thy might.'—* Thou shalt fear the
Lord thy God ; him shalt thou serve,
and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear
hy his name.'—' Thou shalt do that
which is right and good in the sight of
the Lord.' — ' Thou shalt worship no
other God.' — ' Ye shall keep my Sab-
bath, and reverence my sanctuary.' —
' Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy
heart.'—' Thou shalt love thy neighbor
as thyself.' — ' Ye shall not afilict any
widow or fatherless child.' — ' Thou
shalt not arrest judgment, thou shalt
not respect persons, neither take a gift.'
— ' That which is altogether just shalt
thou follow.' — ' Thou shalt have a per-
fect and just weight, a perfect and just
measure shalt thou have.' — ' Thou shalt
keep the commandments of the Lord
thy God, to walk in his ways and to
fear him.'
No one can imagine for a moment
that these precepts are ceremonial and
binding on the Jews only. Many of
them are expressly cited and applied in
the New Testament. But if they were
not, still their authority remains una-
bated. The books of the Old Testa-
ment are received by all Christians as
inspired volumes, and they hesitate not
to accept its moral and ethical code as
equally binding with that of the New.
As every other command of the deca-
logue is recognized and fortified by par-
ticular precepts here and there inter-
spersed, the same may be expected,
a priori, in regard to the seventh. That
command preserved the honor of the
marriage union after it was formed ;
but it left many questions undecided
respecting the parties who might law-
fully enter wedlock. It was extremely
important to be made known whether
the ordinance w-as left free, without any
restraint or limits, or whether there
I were any prohibitions on the score of
degrees of kindred. There must be a
law somewhere in the Mosaic code to
ascertain who may and who may not be
united in marriage. Where shall that
law be found, if not in the chapters be-
fore us ; and if found there, what reason
can be urged for its having become ob-
solete ? Are we to be driven to tlie
alternative of admitting that we are left
without a single passage or paragraph
in the whole compass of revelation
bearing upon the degrees of relationship
Avithin which marriage may or may not
be contracted ?
Again, the connexions forbidden in
these statutes arc those which are pro-
nounced abominable in the depraved
Canaanites and Egyptians. But what
could have rendered incest a crime
among these abandoned heathen ? They
had not the written law, and where there
is no law there is no transgression. If
the prohibitory code was peculiar only
to the Jews, what binding power could
it have upon the Gentiles, who were
strangers to the Jews ? What was the
law which, in this matter, they had
transgressed ? There surely must have
been some flagrant infraction of the
mandates of heaven, to draw down such
dire denunciations, and such wasting
judgments as are spoken of in this con-
nexion. Vv. 24, 25, ' Defile not ye your-
selves in any of these things : for in all
these the nations are defiled which I
cast out before you : and the land is de-
filed : therefore I do visit the iniquity
thereof upon it, and the land itself vom-
iteth out her inhabitants.' What can
account for the severity of this judg-
ment but the fact, that in perpetrating
these enormities, they were transgress,
ing a moral code — a law which, as it
was in force before the existence of the
B. C. M90.1
CHAPTER XVIII.
181
Mosaic dispensation, so it is equally in
iorce after it, even in our own land and
all future lime. That there has been
no repeal of the law under the New
JV^talnellt, is plain from the two in-
^laices which are mentioned but to be
ct'iuleniiied. When John reproved Herod
I'nr laliing his brother's Philip's wife,
i.ul l()>t his life for his fidelity, his de-
iituiciuiou was but an echo of the di-
ri'ci language of the word of God as
!!■ re recorded ; and the horror ex-
pressed by Paul at a man's taking his
iailier's wife, an ofTence not so much as
named among the Gentiles, goes une-
quivocally to prove that he knew nothing
of any abrogation of the law of incest.
As to the objection brought from the
case of marriages in Adam's family,
and from that of the brother's widow
who was childless, we adopt the reply
given by Prof. Hodge (Bib. Rep. July,
1842). * It is obvious the argument
proves too much. If the command that
one brother should take the child-
less widow of another brother as his
wife, proves that it is not wrong for a
man to marry his sister-in-law, then the
command to the immediate sons of
Adam to marry their sisters, proves
that it is right now for brothers to marry
their sisters. This objection is founded
upon the confusion of two very different
things. There are things which are
inherently and essentially wrong, and
can in no possible case be right ; as
hatred of God and malevolence towards
men. The prohibitions of such things
arise out of the very nature of God, and
are as immutable as that nature. But
there are other things which are wrong
only in virtue of a divine prohibition ;
and this prohibition may be founded
either on temporary considerations, or
such as are permanent. But in either
case, whenever the prohibition is re-
moved or the opposite commanded, the
guilt of the action ceases. It was a sin
in any Israelite not to circumcise his
child on the eighth day ; but if God
commanded any one to defer the rite or
omit it altogether, it was of course his
duty to comply. It was forbidden to
the Hebrews to labor on the Sabbath,
but in many cases, labor on that day
was a duty. These are cases of positive
commands. But further than this, it
is sinful to take the property of others
without their consent, but if God com-
manded the Israelites to take the pro-
perty of the Egyptians, it was right for
them to do so. It is a sin to kill a hu-
man being, yet God commanded the
Hebrews to extirpate the Canaanites.
We all admit that bigamy is a sin, but
if any man will produce a command of
God to marry two wives, no one will
deny his right to do so. It is a sin for
a brother to marry his sister, but if re-
quired by a divine command, it is a sin
no longer. Thus, also, if any one can
produce a divine command to marry his
sister-in-law, the lawfulness of the mar-
riage will be readily admitted. All
these commands belong to the same
class ; they all express the will of God
as to the duties of men in the permanent
relations of society, and are therefore
of permanent obligation ; yet any one
or all of them may be set aside by him
in whose hands are all his creatures,
and whose nature and relations, and the
resulting duties, may be modified at
will. That an Israelite, therefore, un-
der peculiar circumstances and for spe-
cified reasons was commanded to marry
his brother's wife, no more proves that
the general law on this subject is not
binding, than the command to Abraham
to sacrifice Isaac proves that the com-
mand, thou shalt not kill, is not moral
and 'permanent. That the Levitical
law of marriage is still binding upon
us, we think is proved by what has
already been said. It is the expression
of the will of God in reference to rela-
tionships which still exist among men.
It tells us what is the duty of near rela-
tives. It tells us that brothers and sisters
must not intermarry, not because they
were Jews, but because of their rela-
tionship. It extends the prohibition to
182
LEVITICUS.
[R. C. 1490.
all who are near of kin, because they
are near of kin. It is as much a law
for us therefore as any other expression
of the will of God. The binding au-
tlioriiy of this law is recognized in the
New Testanieut, just as the continued
obligiition ol' the original law of mar-
iiage is recognized. We find no express
fissertinn that marriage must be between
one man and one woman, but the ex-
pression of the will of God at the crea-
tion, is held to bind all ages and na-
tions. Thus, though there is no ex-
press declaration, that near relatives
must not marry, it is plain from the
language of the apostle to the Corin-
thians, that he considered the original
revelation on this subject as still our
rule of duty.'
Do these Laws include Degrees not ex-
pressly Specified ?
The consideration of this question
we may introduce in the words of
Michaelis, subjoining his own opinion
on it.
* There arises the question, Whether
Moses only prohibits the marriages
which he expressly mentions, or others
beside not mentioned, where the degree
of relationship is the same ? This
question, wliich is of so great impor-
tance in the marriage-laws of Christian
nations, and which from an imperfect
knowledge of oriental customs has been
the subject of so much controversy, pro-
perly regards the following marriages,
viz. : —
1. With a brother's daughter.
2. Willi a sister's daughter.
3. With a maternal uncle's widow.
4. With a brother's son's widow.
5. With a sister's son's widow.
6. With a deceased wife's sister
< These marriages we may, perhaps,
for brevity's sake, be allowed to denom-
inate the six marriages, or the conse-
quential marriages. They are as near
as those which are prohibited. Moses
never mentions them in his marriage
statutes, yet the ground of his prohibi-
tions is nearness of relationship. The
question, therefore, is, Are these mar-
riages to be or not to be considered as
prohibited by just inference from the
letter of his laws?
' In my ojiinion they are not.
* My reasons for denying and protest-
ing against the conclusions are the fol-
lowing :
' 1. Moses does not appear to have
framed or given his marriage-laws with
any view to our deducing, or acting
upon conclusions which we might think
fit to deduce from them: for if this was
his view, he has made several repeti-
tions in ihem which are really very
useless. What reason had he, for ex-
ample, after forbidding marriage with <i
father's sister, to forbid it also with a
mother's, if this second prohibition was
included in the first, and if he meant,
without saying a word on the subject,
to be understood as speaking, not of
particular marriages, but of degrees?
' 2. Moses has given his marriage-
laws in two different places of the Pen-
tateuch, viz. : in both the ISth and 20th
chapters of Leviticus ; but in the latter
of these passages we find only the very
same cases specified which had been
specified in the former. Now had they
been meant merely as examples of de-
grees of relationship, it would have
been more rational to have varied them ;
and if it had been said, for instance, on
the first occasion. Thou shalt not marry
thy father^s sister, to have introduced,
on the second, the converse case, and
said. Thou shalt not marry thy hrother^i
daughter. This, however, is not done
by Moses, who in the second enactment
just specifies the f^ither's sister as be-
fore, and seems, therefore, to have in-
tended that he should be understood as
having in his view no other marriages
than those which he expressly names j
unless we choose to interpret his laws
in a manner to his own meaning and
design.'
It can scarcely be maintained that
there is any thing conclusive in either
B- C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
183
of these remarks. As to the repetitions,
we need to know more respecting the
actual condition and social usages of
the peculiar people before we can pro-
nounce them to be useless. So also as
"to varying the speciticaiions in the I8lh I
and 20lh chapters. We are not com-
petent to say, a priori, what method of
laying down these statutes was the
most proper; and we are always upon
dubious ground in holding it to be ' ra-
tional to expect ' that the word of God
should be constructed in any different
manner from what it is.
The fact is, that certain express pro-
hibitions are contained in these chap-
ters, and the question is, whether, on
legitimate principles of interpretation,
certain other prohibitions touching de-
grees of kindred precisely similar are
not also involved. As to the marriage
with a deceased wife's sister, it is ad-
mitted that we do not find it in so many
words forbidden. But we find the par-
allel case of the brother's widow for-
bidden, and as the relation is the same,
it is contended that by parity of rea-
soning the former also must be under-
stood to be forbidden. The inference
is held to be unimpeachable for the
reason that the degree of relationship
is the very ground of the prohibitions.
A man must not marry his half-sister,
because she is his sister; a man must
not marry his aunt, because she is the
near relative of his father or mother ; a
man must not marry his brother's wife,
because she is so nearly related to his
brother ; a man must not marry the
daughter or grand-daughter of his wife,
' because they arc her near kinswomen ;
it is wickedness.' Relationship to his
wife is the very ground of the prohibi-
tion. The law itself, therefore, both in
its general statement, and in its partic-
ular specifications, gives the rule of its
own interpretation. It is the degree of
kindred which the law itself teaches us
is to be considered. Shall we say then
that a marriage coming within the scope
of any of these prohibitions, is not con-
trary to the mind of God ? Shall God
say that two brothers shall not marry
the sam.e woman, because it is an un-
clean and wicked thing for such near
kindred as a brother-in law and a sister-
in-law to marry ; and shall we say this
law allows two sisters to marry the
same man, although thereby a brother-
in-law and sister-in-law intermarry ?
Are not two sisters as ' near of kin' to
each other as two brothers are? And
is not a sister-in-law just as near of
kin to her brother-in-law in the one case
as in the other ? And is not nearness
of kin the entire ground of all the pro-
hibitions?
Besides, the principle that no one
is bound by any thing which is not
expressly affirmed — that no construc-
tive or inferential duties are ^taught in
the Scriptures — would seem to be one
that leads to the most dangerous results.
If the principle of inference or impli-
cation is not to be employed in the in-
terpretation, then it follows that a man
may lawfully marry his own daughter,
for this is nowhere expressly forbidden.
If inferences are not binding in the in-
terpretation of the divine law, then we
would ask for the express command
which was violated by Nadab and
Abihu in offering strange fire, and which
cost them their lives ? Any prohibition
in set terms on that subject will be
sought for in vain. So again, did not
our Saviour tell the Sadducees that they
ought to have inferred that the doctrine
of the resurrection was true, from what
God said to Moses at the bush ? When
it is expressly declared, moreover, that
' whosoever siealeth a man and selleth
him shall surely be put to death,' is it
an unfair inference that he that stole a
u-oman or a child was to be subjected
to the same punishment ? On the whole
' it seems necessary to admit, that as the
I law makes nearness of kin the sole cri-
: terion by which to determine whether a
given marriage be lawful or not, there-
I fore if it declares a degree of nearness
I of kin in any one case so great as to
184
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XVIII.
3 t After the doings of the land
AND the Lord spake unto Mo- of Egypt wherein ye dwelt, shall
ses, savinsT, i ve not do: and c aftpr thp Hnlno-a
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, and say unto ihera, a I am the
Lord your God.
aver. 4. Exod. 6. 7. ch. 11. 44, and 19.4,
10, 34, aud 20. 7. Ezek. 20. S, 7, 19, -20.
render marriage unlawful, it virtually
declares an equal degree of propinquity
in another case to be an effectual bar to
marriage.
As the ensuing notes will resume the
consideration of various details con-
nected with the subject, it will be un-
necessary to prolong our introductory
remarks. To those who would extend
their inquiries more minutely into the
essential merits of the question, the
following authorities may be indicated
as covering very nearly the whole
ground. Selden de Uxore Hebraica. —
The Cases of Marriages between Near
Kindred, particularly considered with
respect to the Doctrine of Scripture, the
Law ol' Nature, and the Laws of Eng-
land. By John Fry. Lond. 1756 (a
work of rare occurrence). — Pres. Ed-
ward's (the Younger) Works, vol. 2.
Serm. 7.— Rev. Dr. B. Trumbull's Ap-
peal to the Public relative to the Un-
lawiulness of Marrying a Wife's Sister.
— Rev. Dr. J. H. Livingston's Disserta-
tion on the Marriage of a Man with his
Sister-in-law. — Christian Magazine, vol.
4. p. SO, kc. A Brief Inquiry into the
Lawfulness of Marrying a deceased
Wife's Sister.— Rev. S. E. Dwight's
Hebrew Wife ; or the Law of Marriage
examined in relation to the Lawfulness
of Polygamy, and to the Extent of the
Law of Incest. — Marshall's Review of
the preceding work of D wight. — Rev.
C. M'lvers's Essay concerning the Un-
lawfulness of a Man's Marriage with
his Sister by Affinity. — To the above
we may add two very able discussions
of the subject in a more ephemeral
form, both advocating the lawfulness
gf the marriage in question, the one
ye not do: and c after the doings
of the land of Canaan whither°I
bring you, shall ye not do : neither
shall ye walk in their ordinances.
b Ezek. 20. 7, S, and 23. 8. c Exod. 23. 24.
ch. 20. 23. Deut. 12. 4,30, 31.
published in the New York Observer of
Aug. 6, 1842, the other a series of six
letters published in the New England
Puritan, in the months of July and
August, 1842. The report also of the
discussions in the General Assembly
of the Presbyterian Church of 1842,
contained in the New York Observer of
June 11, and in the Princeton Biblical
Repertory of July, 1842, embody a
large mass of valuable argument on the
general subject, the substance of all of
which is well worthy of being pre-
served in more permanent form.
General Preface to the Marriage Laws.
1. Say unto them, I am the Lord your
God. These words constitute the grand
authoritative sanction of all the ensuing
laws, implying that they respect a mat-
ter of the utmost importance, one in
which the honor and glory of the great
God were most deeply involved. Al-
though the God of all, he was in a spe-
cial and emphatic sense the God of the
nation of Israel, with whom they were
in covenant, whom they professed to
serve, and to whom they were under
the greatest obligations imaginable.
The phrase occurs six times in the pre-
sent chapter, and still oftener in the
next.
3. After the doings of the land of
Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not
do. Heb. n'r2??2i kemalisth, according
to the doing or practising. Gr. Kara ra
eirirr]SevfjaTa, according to the customs,
visages, institutes. To what extent the
crimes here forbidden prevailed among
these heathen nations, may be learned
from various intimations scattered here
and there through the Scriptures, and
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
185
4 dYe shall do ray judgments,
and keep mine ordinances, to walk
therein ; I am the Lord your God.
0 Ye shall therefore keep my sta-
d Deut. 4. I
e Ezek. 20. 11,
10. 5. Gal. 3. 12
2, and 6. 1.
13,21. Luke
Ezek. 20. 19.
10. 28. Rom.
from the records of profane history.
Upon these we cannot afford the space
to dwell at any length ; especially as it
is more important for our present pur-
))ose to call attention to the fact, that
these nations, in committing these
abominations, sinned. But against
what law ? Where there is no law
there is no transgression ; and as neither
the Egyptians nor the Canaanites were
in possession of the Mosaical code, it
would seem to follow of necessity, that
the practices here forbidden were vio-
lations of some more primitive law than
the ceremonial institute of the Jewsj
and consequently that they, in being
guilty of them, would be transgressing
not merely a set of positive precepts
delivered by the hand of Moses, but
also that moral constitution which had
been in force from the earliest ages of
the world; — in a word, that the mar-
riages here forbidden were always re-
garded as incestuous, and are therefore
always unlawful. IT Neither shall
ye walk in their ordinances. Heb.
Cn'^ripni behukkothehem ; that is, their
laws, st?.lutes, or institutions; for so
are their iniquitous customs called,
which by general prevalence and coun-
tenance had become so inveterate, and
so deeply rooted and grounded in the
corrupt affections of all classes, that
they had come to be regarded in the
light, and to possess all the force, of so
many laws and solemn institutions.
This laid their abettors open to the woe
denounced against those who ' decreed
unrighteous decrees, and who * framed
mischief by a law.' Indeed, it is pos-
sible that the word may have respect to
positive enactments ; yet whatever they
may have been, the purport of the pre-
16*
tutes and my judgments : e which
if a man do, he shall live in them :
f I am the Lord.
6 H None of you shall approach
to any that is near of kin to him,
f Exod. 6. 2, 6, 29. Mai. 3. 6.
cept to the Israelites is, ' Do ye not
after the manner of these nations, al-
though their conduct may be allowed
by the settled laws of their country ; for
ye are not to regard their practices any
the more justifiable on that account ;'
thus teaching us, that neither common
usage nor statute law can sanctify that
which is in itself wrong.
4. Ye shall do my judgments, Sac.
Peculiar emphasis is here to be put
upon the word ' my,' which is equiva-
lent to ' mine only ;' as the phrase
' Him shalt thou serve,' Deut. 6. 13, is
expounded by our Savior, ' Him only
shalt thou serve,' Mat. 4. 10.
5. Which if a man do he shall live in
them. Rather, * shall live by them.'
This the ancient versions and commen-
tators generally understood as equiva-
lent to ' Shall have eternal life.' Thus
the Chal. ' Shall live by them to life
eternal.' So also Solom. Jarchi, ' Shall
live in the world that is to come.'
But as the term 'life,' 'living,' or 'to
live,' is frequently used in the Scrip-
tures to denote living happily, prosper-
ously, and free from calamity, the prob-
ability is, that it is to be so taken in the
passage before us. He shall in conse-
quence of this his obedience be favored
to enjoy a long and happy life, whereas
by disobedience he shall be exposed to
be judicially cut off. The apostle con-
trasts this legal promise made to works,
with the gospel promise made to faith,
Gal. 3. 11,12. Rom. 10. 5-9.
General Law of Incest.
6. None of you shall approach, &c.
Heb. in^pn ii^ ID^Vi iD^i< isk ish lo
tikrebu, man, man, ye shall not ap'
proach ; i. e. none of you. The phrase
186
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
to uncover their nakedness : I am ] or the nakedness of thy mother,
the Lord. I shalt thou not uncover: she is thy
7 gThe nakedness of thy father, j mother, thou shalt not uncover her
nakedness.
S ch. 20. 11.
is taken in a wide sense by the Tal-
mudists, as equivalent lo neither Jew
nor Gentile ; for all mankind, ihey
affirm, are comprehended under these
laws of incest. Indeed the Karaite
Jews, the most strenuous advocates for
a strict interpetation, and the most
decided opponents to Talmudical com-
ments, insist upon this as the true
sense. The original term is ' approach,'
frequently used by way of euphemism,
to convey the idea of sexual intercourse,
as in Gen. 20. 4, 'Abimelech had not
come near (li^p 5^p lo karab) unto her.'
Is. 8. 3, ' And I went in unto (mpX
ekrab) the prophetess, and she con-
ceived,' &c. Comp. Ezek. 18. 6. In
the particular precepts following in this
chapter and in the twentieth chapter,
this prohibited intercourse is pointed
out by the phrases * to uncover the na-
kedness,' * to lake,' and 'to lie with.'
The first phrase therefore has the same
meaning with each of the other three ;
and they of course with each other. In
Lev. 18. 14, the phrase ' to uncover the
nakedness' is explained by the phrase
* to approach to ;' in Lev. 20. IL by the
phrase ' to lie with,' and in Lev, 20. 21,
by the phrase ' to lake.' These four
phrases then, as used in this law, have
precisely the same meaning. And if it
be asked how far that meaning extends,
we answer, lo every kind of sexual in-
tercourse, but especially that of mar-
riage. There is nothing in cither of
the above phrases which limits its ap-
plication to fornication and adultery
rather than to marriage ; and the gene-
ral usage, as to the above phrases in the
Scriptures abundantly confirms this po-
sition. ' To uncover the nakedness' is
used in several instances (Lev. 18. 18,
1 Sam. 20. 30, Is. 57. 8), to denote con-
jugal intercourse, and the Heb. Hpb
luka'h, to fake, when connected with
nC3^ ishah, woman, or used absolutely,
is the appropriate term for to marry a
wife. IT To any that is near of kin
to him. Heb. I^irn "".i^r: '^2 bii el kol
sheer besaro, to all (any) remainder of
} his flesh, implying that in the relations
about to be specified the parties were,
I in the economy of heaven's institution,
I so intimately united or rather identified,
j that the one was, as it were, ihe remain-
I der of the other. In this case, ihere-
; fore, the Most High lays down thi^
I nearness of kin as the foundation of all
j the following prohibitions, and then
! proceeds to state and determine, by his
I own sovereign authority, between whom
j that nearness of kin subsists. In the
j interpretation of what follows it is im-
; portant to bear in mind, that although
these prohibitions are principally ad-
dressed to the 7«an, yet they are equally
binding upon ihe woman, who stands ia
the same degree of relationship.
Incest forbidden with one^s own Mother.
7. The nakedness of thy father, or
the nakedness of thy mother. Heb.
m^^J ervah, from n"l3' drah, to be made
naked. Gr, acr^rifioavvrj, shame, uncome-
liness. The particle or in this verse
should undoubtedly be rendered ' even,'
as these words are designed lo express
a principle which lies at the foundation
of this whole system of marriage laws:
viz., that husband and wife are put for
one and the same thing, are completely
identified] ' they being no more twain
but one flesh.' This is clear from what
follows, * she is thy mother;' showing
that the mother's nakedness only is
meant, though it is called the father's,
as in Deut. 27. 20, ' Cursed be he that
lieth with his father's wife ; because he
uncovereth his father's skirl,' i. e. his
mother's. The nakedness of the one
th^^refore is the nakedness of the other ;
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
1S7
8 h The nakedness of thy father's
h Gen. 49.4. ch. 20. 11. Deut. 22. 30,
and 27. 20. Ezek. 22. 10. Amos 2. 7. 1 Cor.
•5. 1.
and he that marries his wife's brother's
daughter does the same thing as if he
married his own brother's daughter.
The crime of Lot's daughters was a
transgression of the precept contained
in this verse. The parallel passage in
ch. 20. II, is, ' The man that lieth with
his father's wife hath uncovered his fa-
ther's nakedness ; both of them shall
surely be put to death.' The Hebrew
canonists say on this precept, ' He that
lieih with his mother, and she his fa-
ther's wife, is doubly guilty, whether it
be while his father is living or after his
death ; first, for that she is his mother,
and secondly, that she is his father's
wi fe.' — Maiinonides in Ainsworth. It
is to be remarked also that the Targum
of Jonathan supposes the parallel case
of the woman with her father to be im-
plied ; — •' The woman siiall not lie with
her father, and the man shall not lie
with his mother.' This is important,
as indicating that the Jews considered
the relations of the same degree as vir-
tually included in each of these pre-
cepts. What is forbidden to men is
forbidden also to women standing in the
same relation, though the former only
are mentioned.
According to the above,
A Man may not marry his
Mother,
Daughter :*
Nor a Woman her
Son,
Father.
With a Step-mother.
8. The nakedness of thy fatherh wife
shall thou not uncover. This case dif-
fers from the preceding only in its being
designed to embrace one's step-mother,
as well as his own mother. The divine
lawgiver would, by the most minute
wife shalt thou not uncover : it is
thy father's nakedness.
* The implied cases are italicized.
specification, preclude the possibility
of mistake in regard to the meaning of
a statute aimed against such a horrid
impiety as a man's having illicit con-
nexion with his mother. It was the
incest here forbidden in this precept, of
which Reuben was guilty with Bilhah,
Gen. 35. 22, and Absalom with the
wives of his father David, 2 Sam. 16.
21 , 22. We learn also from the apostle,
1 Cor. 5. 1, that this was a sin held in-
famous by the very heathen. The He-
brew writers speak thus on this subject :
* A man's father's wife, and his son's
wife, and his brother's wife, and his
father's brother's wife, are unlawful for
him for ever; whether they be of the
betrothed or the married, whether
divorced or not divorced, whether their
husbands be alive or dead ; except in
the case of the brother's wife who hath
left nq child, Deut. 25. 5. If he lie
with any of them while her husband is
alive, he is doubly guilty ; first, in re-
spect that she is of his near kin, and,
secondly, that she is another man's
wife.' — Maimonides. IT It is his
father^s nakedness. That is, on the
principle o{ constituted identity between
the parties, as explained in the note on
the preceding verse. This principle is
recognized again in like manner in v. 14,
where the uncovering of an uncle's na-
kedness is explained as the ' approach-
ing to his wife.'
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Step-mother,
Step-daughter,
Daughter-in-law,
Mother-in-law:
Nor a Woman her
Step-son,
Step-father,
Father-in-law,
Son-in-law.
188
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
9 » The nakedness of thy sister,
the daughter of thy father, or
daughter of iliy mother, whelher
she be born at home, or born abroad,
even their nakedness thou shalt not
uncover.
10 The nakedness of thy son's
i ch. 20. 17. 2 Sam. 13. 12. Ezek. 2-2. 11.
With a Sister.
9. The nakedTiess of thy sister, &c. —
u-hether she be born at home, or born
abroad. Heb. rn^1?2 lit tT^n m^1?3
yin moledeth bayith a moledeth hutz,
the birth or offspring of the house, or the
birth or offspring (from) abroad. Chal.
* Which is begotten by the father, of
another wonnan, or by the mother, of
another man.' So Targ. Jon. ' Whom
thy father hath begotten of another
woman or of thy mother ; or whom thy j
mother hath borne by thy father or by :
another man.' The scope of the pre-
cept undoubtedly is to forbid connexion
between a brother and sister, whether
such sister were born in lawful wedlock
or out of it. The penalty annexed to
this particular form of incest is thus
stated, ch. 20. 17: ' And if a man shall
take his sister, his father's daughter, or
his mother's daughter, and see her na-
kedness, and she see his nakedness: it
is a wicked thing ; and they shall be
cut off in the sight of their ])eople : he
hath uncovered his sister's nakedness ;
he shall bear his iniquity.'
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Sister :
Nor a Woman her
Brother.
With a Grand-daughter.
10. The nakedness of thy son's daugh-
ter, &c. The connexion forbidden is
too express to need any particular ex-
planation. We may quote, however,
the remark of Maimonides in respect to
it ; — ' Whoso companieth with a woman
(even) by way of fornication, and be-
daughter, or of thy daughter's
daughter, even their nakedness thou
shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine
own nakedness.
11 The nakedness of thy father's
wife's daughter, begotten of thy
father, (shew thy sister) thou shalt
not uncover her nakedness.
getteth a daughter of her, that daughter
is forbidden to him in the name of his
daughter. And though it be not said in
the law. Thou shall not uncover thy
daughter's nakedness, yet this is be-
cause it forbiddeth the daughter's daugh-
ter ; therefore it keepeth silence con-
cerning the daughter, which yet is for-
bidden by the law (i. e. by the spirit of
the law), and not by the scribes only.'
Other Rabbinical writers hold the same
language. They say that incest with a
man's own daughter is not prohibited,
because it would be irresistibly inferred.
If a grand-daughter, standing in a de-
gree more remote from him, is forbid-
den to his approach, surely his own
daughter must in the nature of the case
be prohibited. And if it could be said
of a sou's or daughter's daughter, ' Her's
is thine own nakedness,' how much
more emphatically could it be said of
an own daughter?
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Grand-daughter,
Grand-mother :
Nor a Woman her
Grand-father,
Grand-son.
With a Half-sister by the Father^s side.
11. The nakedness of thy father^s
wife'' s daughter, begotten of thy father.
Heb. '^'^Zit rnbl?3 moledeth abika, the
birth, generation, or offspring of thy
father, the same word as that rendered
* born,' in v. 9. It is by no means an
easy matter to determine the precise
point of difference between the prohi
bition in this verse and that in v. 9
Perhaps we can hit upon no construction
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
189
12 ^ Thou shalt not uncover the
nakedness of thy father's sister :
she is thy father's near kinswoman.
13 Thou shalt not uncover the
nakedness of thy mother's sister :
K ch. 20. 19.
n- arer the iruih than ihe following : —
'1 h<' 9tlivcr.se cftniains a general pre-
ff'pt forbidding a man to marry his sis-
ter, either ' the daughter of his father
burn a! home,' i. e. his sister-gerir.an,or
fill sister, by fallier or mother ; or ' the
daughter of his mother, born abroad;'
i. e. his half-sister by the mother's side,
and by another father. In the llth
Verse a man is forbidden to marry a
half-sister by his father's side. The
Gr. understands by the sister here men-
"tioned, aoeXbr] bjo-arpia, a sister by the
same father, and with this the Chal.
agrees. After all we must leave the
matter involved in a considerable de-
gree of obscurity, as does Michaelis,
Vv'lio suggests that it Tnay perhaps be
intended as an illustration of v. 9, and
that it was inserted with a view to de-
scribe the marriage in which Abraham
lived in different words, and to prohibit
it a second lime, lest, by reference to
Abraham's example, the first statute
should have been falsely explained.
For the Results see under v. 9. The
two passages together forbid marriage
between a brother and a sister, both of
the whole and the half-blood.
With a Paternal Aunt.
12 Thou shalt not uncover the naked-
ness of thy father's sister. Whether
we are to understand here the full sis-
ter only or the half sister also, is a
matter left undecided. By the Jewish
commentators, both are held to be in-
cluded, and they maintain also that it
made no difference whether she were
legitimately or illegitimately begotten
by his grandfather. Selden informs us
that such marriages were prohibited by
the ancient Romans, although it would
seem that, previous to the Mosaic law.
for she is thy mother's near kins-
woman.
14 iThou shalt not uncover the
nakedness of thy father's brother,
thou shalt not approach to his wife :
she is thine aunt.
1 ch. 20. 20.
they were at least occasionally practised
by the Hebrew nation, for it is generally
admitted that Moses himself was the
offspring of this very connexion between
his father Amram and his aunt Joche-
bed, Ex. 6. 20. ^ She is thy father's
hear kinswoman. Heb. Jj^ln 'l'^3i< ^t^'iZJ
sheer abika hi, she is thy father's re-
mainder. Gr. oiKEia yap varpos cov ecri,
she is the domestic (relation) of thy
father. So near, that as he could not
be permitted to marry her, so the like
interdict was laid upon his son also,
who was but little further removed.
And for the same reason that a man
could not lawfully marry his aunt, it
seems also to follow that he could not
marry his niece — a principle of inter-
pretation on the justness of which we
have already remarked.
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Aunt,
Niece :
Nor a Woman her
Nephew,
Uncle.
With a Maternal Aunt.
13. Thou shalt not uncover the na-
kedness of thy mother's sister. For this
the reason is the same as for the former
prohibition ; the aunt by the mother's
side being as near as the aunt by the
father's. IF She is thy mother's near
kinswoman. Heb. fc^lH yz}^ "liitZ: sheer
immeka hi, she is thy mother's remain'
der, Gr. oiKCia yap fjrirpos aov cari^ she
is the domestic (relation) of thy mother.
Results.
Same as under preceding verse.
With a Paternal Uncle's Wife.
14. Thou shalt not uncover the na-
m
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
nch.20. 21.
Matt. 22. 24.
Matt. 14. 4.
Mark 12.19.
See Deut 25. 5.
15 mThou shalt not uncover the i l6 n Thou shalt not uncover the
nakedness of thy daaghter-in-law : I nakedness of thy brother's wife:
she is thy son's wife, thou shall not I it is thy brother's nakedness,
uncover her nakedness.
m Gen. 38. IS. 26. ch. 20. 12. Ezek. 22. 11,
kedness of thy father^s brother. That
is, as appears from what follows, of thy
failier's brother's u-ife ; called his na-
kcduess, because man and wife are con-
sidered and termed * one flesh.' See
Note on v. 8. By parity of reasoning,
it is to be inferred, that the uncle was
precluded from marrying his brother's
daughter. The Hebrew canonists also
maintain that although the father's
brother's wife only is mentioned, yet
the prohibition fairly embraces the mo-
ther's brother's wife in like manner.
IT Thou shalt not approach. Heb.
!2'1pn fc^i to tikrdb. Gr. ovk eiaeXcvar],
thou shalt not go in unto ; i. e. have
carnal connexion with.
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Uncle's Wife,
Wife's Niece,
Nephew's Wife,
Wife's Aunt.
Nor a Woman her
Husband's Nephew,
Aunt's Husband,
Husband's Uncle,
Niece's Husband.
With a Daughter -in-law.
15. Thou shalt not uncover the na-
kedness of thy daughter-in-law. The
Heb. n^S kallCih is in several instances
elsewhere used to signify a spouse or
bride, and it is here rendered by the Gr.
vvfj<pr]^ of the same signification. But
the next clause makes it clear that
* son's wife ' is meant, on which relation
see Note on v. 8. It mattered not, ac-
cording to the Rabbins, whether she
had been fully married to the son, or
only espoused ; or whether she had
been married, and been afterwards di-
vorced. Under any circumstances, she
was unlawful to him. The prohibition
with the penalty is thus repeated, Lev.
20. 12, ' And if a man lie with his daugh-
ter-in-law, both of them shall surely be
put to death: they have wrought con-
fusion J their blood shall be upon them.'
Results.
See under v. 8.
With a Brother's Wife.
16. Thou shalt not uncover the na-
kedness of thy brother's wife. This
prohibition is repeated ch. 20. 21, with
the annexed penalty as follows, ' And
if a man shall take his brother's wife,
it is an unclean thing: he hath uncov-
ered his brother's nakedness ; they shall
be childless.' This law is of course to
be understood with the exception, that
if the deceased brother died childless,
it was not only lawful for the surviving
brother to znarrry the widow, but he
was obliged to do it, or incur the penalty
of being publicly disgraced in the eyes
of all Israel, Deut. 25. 5-10.
The consideration of the present pre-
cept becomes, as is well known, ex-
tremely important, from its connexion
with the question respecting the lawful-
ness of marriage with a deceased wife's
sister. The leading principles involved
in the discussion of this subject have
been already adverted to in our prefatory
remarks, and the general result to
which we hove been brought stated.
The parallel marriage, it is certain, is
not forbidden in so many terms ; neither
is it expressly forbidden that a man shall
marry his own daughter or his grand-
mother. But who will deny that a man
in doing this would be sinning against
God, or, in other words, acting contrary
to the divine will? The decision of
the question evidently rests on the truth
or falsity of the position, that the pre-
cept expressly naming and prohibiting
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
191
17 o
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her
daughter, neither shalt thou take
o ch. 20. 14.
any particular degree of relation must
be llIuler^lood lo comprise all relations
wiiliin tlie same degree. In the present
ca^e the prdhibitioii, v. 16, against mar-
ry iiig a brollier's wife, is- founded solely
on I he relation existing between the
parties; and as the relation in the sup-
posf-d case is precisely the same, with
tlie exception only of the change of the
sex, it is not easy to conceive what rea-
son shall be assigned why the one is
not equally forbidden with the other.
It is indeed affirmed, that as this law
is subject to the exception mentioned
Deul.25. o-lO, 'If brethren dwell to-
gether, and one of tliem die, and have
no child, the wife of the dead shall not
marry without unto a stranger ; her
husband's brother shall go in unto her,
and take her to him to wife,' &c. ; there-
fore this enactment virtually rescinds
the whole precept against marrying a
sister-in law. But to this it may be re-
plield, that an exception to a general
law, or a proviso in a particular case, is
never considered as a repeal of the law,
but a confirmation of it in all other
cases in which there is no exception nor
proviso. They are only a suspension
of the law in the particular cases spe-
cified, and cannot extend to other cases,
much less to the whole law to which
they relate. The statute in Deut. 25,
is not intended to ascertain the degrees
of kindred within which marriages aTe
prohibited ; this is unequivocally done
in the chapter before us. The only
object of the exception is expressly
mentioned. A brother is directed to
marry the widow of his deceased bro-
ther in a certain emergency. The bro-
ther must have died without male issue.
Had the deceased left a son, the gene-
ral law of incest would have rendered a
marriage with his widow as incestuous
as with any other woman near of kin.
The exception was evidently local in
Its nature, and restricted to the the-
ocracy. It was enacted for the express
purpose of preserving families and in-
heritances unbroken until the Messiah
came. Whatever, then, might be the
scope or operation of the exception, it
must necessarily expire with the llie-
ocracy, leaving the moral part of the
i precept in its full force. But the Le-
1 vitical code has long since answered its
j ends, and is abolished. This particular
feature of the law is therefore no longer
binding ; nor is a similar case at all
possible under the New Testament.
T Consequently it does not appear that
any sanction can be adduced from this
! law for the marriage in question. Chris-
1 lians would seem lo be imperatively
' barred from marrying a sister-in-law,
who has been the wife of a deceased bro-
ther, and still more a sister-in-law who
is the sister of a deceased wife, lo whom
the exception in Deut. never did, and iu
the nature of things never could apply.
The conclusion, therefore, would seem
to be unavoidable, that there is nothing
in the law of Deut. 25. which invali-
dates the moral nature and perpetual
obligation of the law forbidding mar-
riage with a deceased wife's sister —
nothing which in any form or degree
can be binding upon Christians under
the New Testament dispensation — and
nothing in the letter or spirit of that
precept which has the least reference to
the question before us.
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Brother's wife,
Wife's sister :
Nor a Woman her
Husband's brother,
Sister's husband.
With a Step-Daughter or a Grand-
daughter.
17. Thou shalt not uncover the na-
ked ness of a woman and her daughter.
! Heb. r>T.'2''> nri* rn^5 ervath ishah
192
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
her son's daughter, or her daugh-
ter's daughter, to uncover her na-
kedness : for they are her near
kinswomen : it is wickedness.
v-bittah. The phraseology here is pe-
culiiir, and would seem at first blush to
fiMl)i(l a particular form of polygamy,
'•r perhaps some single incestuous act.
(ndeed we are not prepared to say that
this may not be intended. It may pos-
sibly have been designed to inspire a
horror of conjoint cohabitation with
mother and daughter at the same time.
But an equally just sense undoubtedly
is, that one was not at liberty, upon the
death of his wife, to marry her daugh-
ter (not his own), and as a mother and
daughter are 'remainder of fiesh ' to
each other, the marrying of the daugh-
ter, even after the death of the mother,
was a species of marrying both at once,
and therefore the copulative * and ' is
employed — ' a woman and her daugh-
ter.' Upon this class of connexions,
Maimonides writes thus ; — ' When a
man niarrieth a woman, there are six
women of her kin unlawful to him for-
ever, whether his wife live with him or
be divorced ; whether she be alive or
dead : and they are these — her mother,
and her mother's mother, and her fa-
ther's mother, and her daughter, and her
daughter's daughter, and her son's
daughter. And if he he with any of
these while his wife liveth. both of them
are to be burned.' — Ainsworth. The
punishment of burning in such a case is
expressly enacted, ch. 20. 14, where it
will be observed that the original word
here rendered ' woman,' is there ren-
dered ' wife.' ' And if a man take a
wife and her mother, it is wickedness :
they shall be burnt with fire, both he
and they : that there be no wdckedness
among you.' ^ It is wickedness.
Heb. 54in n>2t zimmdh hi. The origi-
nal word is highly emphatic, denoting
properly nefarious wickedness. It is
* deed defined in the Lexicons to sig-
18 Neither shall thou take a wife
to her sister, p to vex her, to un-
cover her nakedness, besides the
other, in her life-time.
P 1 Sam. 1. 6, 3.
nify thought or purpose, but the import
is that of thought or counsel of an atro-
cious character involving some signal
enormity. The Gr. has for it aa-efSrjjxa,
an impiety, an act of gross ungodliness,
from which God would have his people
shrink back with horror.
Results.
A Man may not marry his
Step-daughter,
Wile's grand-daughter:
Nor a Woman her
Step-son,
Husband's grand-son.
With a Wife's Sister.
IS. Neither shall thou take a wife to
I her sister, to vex her, &c. A passage
j of great difficulty, and yet of great im-
portance in its bearing on the question
of marriage with a deceased wife's sis-
ter, which we have made so prominent
in our previous annotations. It is well
known that the advocates of such mar-
riages contend that this verse, by ne-
cessary implication (which in this case
it seems they readily admit, though re-
jecting it in every other), contains an
unequivocal intimation of their lawful-
ness, as they construe the precept thus :
' Thou shall not take another wife, who
is the sister of thy first wife, to vex her,
to uncover her nakedness beside the
other, in her life time ; although thou
mayest take such a sister for a wife
after the death of thy first wife.' As
this construction completely overthrows
the force of all the reasonings adduced
on the other side, it demands a very
rigid exammation ; and upon this we
enter by adverting to the form of ex-
pression in the original. A hint of
this is given to the English reader by
the marginal rendering — ' one wife to
another,' for which many contend as
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
193
the only true version. The Heb. has
npn J<^ nnni* ^14 nCS^ ishah el a'hothdh
lo tikkah, a wife, or woman, to her sis-
ter thou shalt not take. As to the
siieaning of ihe separate terms there is
no doubt. It is admitted on all sides
that r\'2^^ ishah means 'woman' or
' wile,' ii^ el, to, and nnrii^ a'hothdh,
sister. But it is not clear what the
words import when taken altogether,
us we tiad the phrase nrin5< ^ii^ r\'C^
ishah el a.'hoth(ih used idiomatically to
Mainly llie adding of one thing to ano-
ther,na is also the corresponding phrase
T^n'A bit 1L;&% ish el a^hiv, a man to his
brother. 01" these phrases the former —
' a man lo his brother ' — occurs twenty-
Jive limes in the Hebrew scriptures,
*Mid tlie latter — ' a woman to her sister'
— ten times. Neither of the phrases
are conliiied to persons ; ihey are both
frequently, and iu fact generally, spoken
of inanimate substances as will appear
from ihe citations which we give, in-
cluding all the important instances.
(1.) 1^ni< ^S^ 113^5^
A man to his brother.
Gen. 37. 19, ' And they said one to
another, (liriit ^5t ID'^it a man to his
brother).'
Ex. 25. 20, ' And the faces of the
cherubim shall look one to another
(l^riit iit II3"'l!% a man to his brother.)'
Ex. 37. 9, ' The cherubim stood with
their faces one to another (^J^ D'^Jt
Tini< a man to his brother).^
Jer. 13. 14, 'And I will dash them
one against another (1%1J< ^j^ ^a'^j^ a
man to his brother).^
Jer. 25 26, ' And all the kings of the
north one with another (T^Hit ^5% ID^^it
a man to his brother).'
Ezek. 24. 23, ' And mourn one towards
another (T^nst ^it ID^it a man to his
brother).'
In addition to the above we find, in
the masculine form, several equivalent
modes of expression slightly varying
from that now given ; as T^HJ* tlSt C^fit
ish eth a'hiv, a man his brother, i. e.
17
one another ; I'lnjti :a^Jt ish kea'hiv,
a man as his brother,!, e. one man as
another ; 1"init1 ^">J< ish veu'hiv, a man
and his brother, i. e. one man with
another ; "lini<?3 'tlJ^it ish meu'hiv, a
man from his brother, i. e. one man
from another J I'^nst ^"'it ish d'hiv, a
man his brother, i. e. one man another ;
1"iriii "^^^2 ffi"'i5 ish mial d'hiv, a man
from his brother, i. e. one from another ,
I'Tlit^ 113"iit ish led'hiv, a man to his
brother, i. e. one to another. The usage
in these cases is too obvious to need
remark ; but we are more especially
concerned with the feminine form,
which we now proceed to illustrate.
(2.) nrnsij ^jt r:::^
A Woman to her Sister.
Ex. 26. 3, ' The five curtains shall
be coupled together one to another
nrnx pit niL"it a woman to her sister),
and other five curtains shall be coupled
one to another (ntT\^ ^it lltl^it a wo-
man to her sister).'
Ex. 26. 5, ' That the loops may take
hold one of another (nnHit ^Jt niUit a
woman to her sister).'
Ex. 2Q. 6. ' And couple the curtains
together (nnriit iit ilTmHt. a woman to
her sister).'
Ex. 26. 17. ' Two tenons shall be set
one against another (nnriit ^it nc&t a
woman to her sister).'
Ezek. 1.9, and 11. ' Their wings were
joined one to another (nriHit ^fi< H^Jit
a woman to her sister).'
Ezek. 1.23, ' And their wings were
straight one towards another (H^iJi^
nnriit ):it a woman to her sister) .'
Ezek. 3. 10, ' The wings of the living
creatures touched one another (tlffiit
nnnit ^it a woman to her sister).'
These are all the instances, except
the present, where the phrase niUi^
nriHit ^it a wife to her sister occurs,
and it will be observed that in every
one, except the case before us, the ren-
dering in our translation is one to ano-
ther, together, or some phraseology
wholly equivalent. In no other in-
194
LEVITICUS. [B. C. 1490.
stance do we meet with the literal ver-
sion, a wife or woman to her sister. So
in the twenty-five instances of the mas-
culine Ibrni, the rendering of our trans-
lators is uniform, one to another, whe-
ther spoken of persons or things. In
no case do we find any reference to
relationship by blood. The question
therefore arises whether the literal ver-
sion in this place, involving, as it does,
a departure from common usage, is
warranted. It is admitted that the
thirly-four indisputable cases in which
this mode of speech occurs in an idio'
malic sense go very far to establish this
as in all cases the genuine significa-
tion of the phrase. It would seem, al
first view, that such an overwhelming
majority of instances would be com-
pletely decisive of the point in dispute ;
and yet we cannot but concede that
there is in this one case very great rea-
son to doubt. For it will be observed
that in every other instance, not only
are the things which are to be added to
each other inanimate objects of the
feminine gender, but the subject of dis-
course is first mentioned, and by that
is the import of the phrase governed.
If we take the expression here accord-
ing to its import in every other case in
which it occurs, we shall be obliged to
render the verse, ' Thou shalt not take
one to another to vex,' &c. One what ?
— it might properly be asked. If it be
said, one woman, this is immediately
giving a new latitude to the phrase be-
yond what it idiomatically implies ;
and yet its force as an idiom is all that
IS relied upon in proof of its referring
not to a sister, but to any other woman.
The principles then of a fair exegesis
would seem to compel us, if we under-
stand woman or wife by nrst ishah, to
understand sister by rUTl^ a^hothah.
Again, it appears that m every other
case the phrase has a reciprocal import •
that is, a number of things are said to be
so and so one to another. But here we
perceive nothing of this. There is no
trace of mutual, reciprocal action or
relation. It is simply taking one ob-
ject in addition to another, and leaving
the whole phraseology utterly imperfect
as compared with the Hebrew usage.
We cannot but think, therefore, that
' a wife to her sister' is the appropriate
rendering in this place ; and it is not a
matter of small weight in confirmation,
that all the ancient versions, as the
Chal. Targ. of Onkelos, the Samaritan,
the Syriac, and the Arabic, adhere to
the literal construction. The Greek
of the Seventy also, which elsewhere
renders the Heb. phrase by one to ano-
ther, here has ywatHa £77' aStXiprj ov X'ji/'/?,
a woman to her sister thou shalt not
take. At the same time, the advocate
for the idiomatic interpretation has a
right to demand a probable reason for
the change of diction observable in this
verse, when compared with the preced-
ing. Why does it not commence with the
formula H^n nd i^lrm^l UTLHi. tTinS'
ervath eshah ved'hothah lo tegalleh, the
nakedness of a wife and her sister thou
shalt not uncover ? To this it is per-
haps a satisfactory answer, that the
writer wished to introduce the terms for
' uncovering nakedness ' in a little dif-
ferent relation in the subsequent part
of the verse, and so to connect them
with other words as to form a strong
dissuasive against the union forbidden.
On reading the verse entire we should
doubtless find it extremely difficult to
hit upon any mode of expression so
well adapted to convey the sense in-
tended as that which actually occurs,
and this is what necessitated a depart-
ure from the fixed phraseology that runs
through the other precepts, because we
have here not the precept only, but an
argument to enforce it — an argument
drawn from the effects of such a mar-
riage upon domestic happiness. The
lawgiver, in the other verses, speaks for
the most part the language of simple
absolute authority ; in this he hints at a
reason for his command. We might
expect, therefore, a slight change inlhe
form of speech.
B. C. 1490.J
CHAPTER XVIII.
195
But al though we feel constrained to
give up the argument drawn from the
Hebrew id7'om,andusually applied in this
connexion to convert the passage before
us into a direct prohibition of polygamy,
and therefore as having nothing to do
with the question of the disputed mar-
riage ; and though we cannot in fair-
ness avoid admitting that tiie connexion
here forbidden is marriage with a wife^s
sister ; yet we do not for that reason feel
hiid under any necessity of admitting
the iiilerence which is so coninionly
drawn Irom the final clause of the verse.
' Neiih.er shalt thou take a wife to her
lister, to vex her, to uncover her naked-
ness, besides the oilier in her life-time.''
From liiis, it is said, the implication is
palpable, that the obligation of the law
is limited by the life time of the first
wife, and that upon her decease there is
no bar to the husband's marrying her
^^isler. This we must regard as a gross
noil sequitur. The expression ' in her
life time ' is too slight to be allowed to
vacate the Ibrce of all the considerations
which we have before adduced in proof
of the implied prohibitions contained
in the preceding verses. If the infer-
ence which we have shown to be dedu-
cible from v. 16 be intrinsically sound,
it cannot be set aside by any expression
in the verse before us ; for there is no-
thing here more certain than we have
found above. At the very utmost it is
merely setting one inference against
another. The genuine import of the
phrase * in her life time ' in this con-
nexion undoubtedly is, as long as she
/iffs, without the least implication of
any thing that is to follow, or that may
follow. You are not to take a step
which will be sure to embitter the lot
of the first wife during the whole pe-
riod of her life. The consequence of
your rashness, or indiscretion, or ma-
levolence, will be, that she will know
peace no more as long as she lives.
But what, it may be asked, is the real
scope of the precept? Is it a direct
and categorical prohibition of polyga-
my? To this we are for ourselves con-
strained to answer. No. Although po-
lygamy was essentially contrary to the
genius of the marriage institution, and
never truly sanctioned by the Most
High, yet it was evidently tolerated,
and the divine legislation not only re-
cognized its existence, but provided
against its abuses. If the text in ques-
tion contains a positive prohibition of
that sin, the good men of Israel must
have known it. Whatever ambiguity
it may have to us, it could have none
to them ; and can it be supposed that
David, for instance, knew there was
such a law, and yet spent his life in
open violation of it? 'Again,' says
the author of an able series of articles
on this subject in the N. E. Puritan,
' we show that polygamy is not prohib-
ited in this text by a plain reductio ad
absurdum. For in the first place, if that
be the sin forbidden, it is a sin whose
penalty is death. For after completing
the series, the lawgiver says, * Whoso-
ever shall commit any of these abomi-
nations, even the souls that commit
them, shall he cut off from among the
people.^ That these terms import pun-
ishment by death is indisputable. Now
suppose the crime thus threatened, to
have been that of marrying two wives.
Then we have the absurdity of an ex-
press law against bigamy, declaring
that bigamists shall be punished with
death ; and then afterwards a law re-
quiring all bigamists to make a fair dis-
posal of their estates among the children
of their two wives. For in Dent. 21. 15,
we read; 'If a man have two wives,
one beloved and the other hated, and
they have borne him children, both the
beloved and the hated ; and if the first-
born be hers that was hated, then it
shall be, when he maketh his sons to
inherit that which he hath, that he may
not make the son of the beloved first,
born before the son of the hated.' Now
this is a strange law to come in after a
law that had denounced death on any-
one that should have two wives. For
196
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
if the first Iliw were executed, the sec-
ond would be superfluous. The second
supposes men to he living quietly and
rearing families, and making wills at
the close of a peaceful life, when the
previous law supposes them to have
died malefactors. It involves the ab-
Mudity of one law made on the suppo-
Miioi) ihal ihe other would be trampled
II, then, polygamy is not forbidden in
lliis passage, what is? We answer,
Ihal 11 was designed to discountenance
llie practice which is implied in the
plain and literal terms of the text — the
taking simultaneously of two sisters to
wife. This was a practice which, as a
general fact, would be attended with
mihappy consequences to the domestic
relations of all the parlies concerned.
Reference is undoubtedly to be had all
along to the prevalent sentiments and
usages of the Oriental nations. It is
well known that among them the cus-
tom of having more than one w^ife in a
single household is very apt to engender
rivalries, jealousies, and feuds between
those who share the divided marital
favors and alTections of their common
lord. In such a slate of things, there
was something peculiarly repulsive in
the spectacle of Iw'o natural sisters,
who ought to be tenderly bound to each
other by the ties of blood, and studious
of each other's happiness, thrown as a
matter of course into a species of hos-
tile attitude one towards the other, and
thus proving each to each a source of
continual irritation and vexation. Thus
we see it was in the family of Jacob ;
and it is highly probable that as in one
of the foregoing precepts there was a
latent allusion to the case of Abraham,
so here was a designed, though im-
plicit, reference to that of Jacob. The
Most High would so frame the precept
as to counteract the plea of patriarchal
example for its violation.
But all inferences, drawn from the
phrase ' in her life time,' as if that
legitimated, after the death of the one
sister, a marriage which was forbidden
before, are wholly gratuitous. Such
an implication cannot be shown to have
entered at all into the drift of the pre-
cept. Its genuine purport was to inti-
mate that the vexation created by such
a step to the first wife would last as
long as she lived — that there would be
' no discharge in that (domestic) war.'
And with a very malicious or evil-
minded man, this fact might of itself
be in some cases a prompting motive tn
such a union. But upon all such con
siderale cruelty as this, the divine pre
cept would frown in advance.
On the whole, therefore, we are una-
ble to perceive that ihe precept we are
now- considering has any, even the most
remote, relation to the subject of inces-
tuous marriages treated of in the pre-
ceding context. The whole law con-
cerning incest closes with the 17th
verse. The prohibition in the 18th re-
spects altogether another subject, and
is as distinct from incest as any of ihe
other crimes mentioned and forbidden
in the remaining parts of the chapter.
It might indeed appear, from the use
of the word ' neither ' at the commence-
ment of the verse, that it was intimately
connected with the foregoing. But this
rendering is not borne out by the origi-
nal. It is the simple particle 1 ve, and,
which w;e find in the Hebrew text, and
is precisely the same word which in ihe
ihree subsequent verses is translated
respectively, ' also, ' moreover,' and
' and ;' and the usual paragraph dis-
tinction might very properly have been
introduced here.
But we proceed with the exposition.
H To vex her. Heb. '^^'2'^ litzror,
to vex ; i. e. to produce vexation in the
family, to the first wife mainly, no
doubt, but not to her alone, as the ap-
popriate word for 'her' is wanting in
the original. Still it is properly enough
inserted in our translation. The origi-
nal is happily expressive of the mutual
broils and bickerings which are so prone
to arise under a system of polygamy, and
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XVIII.
197
of which we have an example in the
case of Hiinnah and Penninah, in the
family of Elkanah. 1 Sam. 1. 6, 7,
* And her adversary (nD'^lZ tzdrdthdh,
her vexer) also provoked her sore, for
to make her fret, because the Lord had
shut up her womb. And as she did so
J ear by year, when she went up to the
house of the Lord, so she provoked her ;
therefore she wept and did not eat.' If
this was a state of things to be depre-
cated between women who were not
related before marriage, how much
more between sisters I IT To uncover
her nakedness besides the other. Heb.
ri'i^S' nmnS? mi^i legalloth ervathdh
dli'hd, to uncover her nakedness upon
her. The phraseology is somewhat
ambiguous, as it does not at once appear
to wliich of the sisters the suffix ' her'
infers. Is it the one who is vexed
whose nakedness is uncovered, or the
oilier? It is to be observed that
in the original there is no word strictly
answering to ' the other.' That which
our version renders ' besides the other,'
is in the Heb. rT^^S^ upon or by her,
and the feminine suffix H hd, her, un-
doubtedly refers to the same person as
the n hd, her, in nni'^S^ ervathdh, na-
kedness. The true reading then is —
* to uncover her (the first wife's) na-
kedness upon her (the first wife) in her
life-time.' This appears to be the ne-
cessary grammatical construction, but
how does this vex the first wife, to un-
cover her own nakedness upon or by
herself? The solution of the difficulty
we believe is to be found in the fact
clearly intimated in v. 7, that the na-
kedness of the husband is the nakedness
of the wife, and that what is here term-
ed the ' uncovering of her nakedness ' is
really the uncovering of the nakedness
of the husband, and exposing it to the
second wife, which is of course done
by, upon, beside the first, and therefore
to her grievance and vexation. ^ In
her life-time. Heb. n'*''^riS behayehd,
in her life. That is, as intimated above,
durinff the period of her life, as long
17*
as she lives. The next verse affords
a phraseology strikingly equivalent.
' Thou shall not approach unto a wo-
man— as long as she is set apart,' &c.
This is expressed in the Hebrew by the
single word n"I31 beniddath, in her
separation, i. e. during the continuance
of her state of separation. We give in
this connexion the note of Bishop Pa-
trick on this phrase. ' From hence
some infer that a man was permitted
to marry the sister of his former wife,
when she was dead. So the Talmud-
ists ; but the Karaites thought it abso-
lutely unlawful, as Mr. Selden observes,
(De Uxore Hebr. Lib. 1, cap. 4). For
it is directly against the scope of all
these laws, which prohibit men to marry
at all with such persons as are here
mentioned, either in their wives' life-
time or after. And there being a pro-
hibition v. 16, to marry a brother's wife,
it is unreasonable to think Moses gave
them leave to marry their wives' sister.
These words, therefore, ' in her life-
time,' are to be referred, not to the first
words, ' neither shalt thou take,' but to
the next, ' to vex her,' as long as she
lives. In this the ancient Christians
were so strict that if a man, after his
wife died, married her sister, he was,
by the tenth canon of the Council of
Eliberis, to be kept from the commu-
nion for five years.'
We have thus given what, on the
whole, we are constrained to regard as
the genuine sense of this important part
of the Penteteuch, both in its general
scope and in its minuter details. We
may possibly have erred by adopting
false principles of interpretation, or by
a wrong application of those which are
right. But as we have candidly stated
the grounds and evidence of every posi-
tion assumed, the reader will be able to
judge for himself how far the premises
sustain the conclusion, and how far a
sound exegesis sustains the premises.
To our minds the evidence decidedly
preponderates in favor of the opinion
I that the lavvs contained in the present
198
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
19 q Also thoushalt not approach
unto a woman to uncover her na-
kedness, as lon^ as she is put apart
for her uncleanness.
20 Moreover, r ihou shah not lie
qch. 20. 18. Ezek. 18. G, and 22. 10. rch.
20. 10. Exod. 20. 14. Deut. 5. IS, and 22. 22.
Prov. 6. 29, 32. Mai. 3. 5. Matt. 5. 27.
Rom. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 6. 9. Heb. 13. 4.
chapter (v. 6-17), have respect not
merely to lewdness in general, but to
incest — that they are in their nature
moral and not ceremonial, and therefore
universally and perpetually binding —
that the implied prohibitions are equally
authoriialive with the express — and
consequently the marriage with a de-
ceased wife's sister is clearly contrary
to the revealed word of God. At the
same time, we entertain unfeigned re-
spect for the logical and philological
reasonings of those who, under the
promptings of an equally sincere desire
to ascertain the truth, have been brought
to a different conclusion. Many of
their arguments are entitled to very
great weight, and we cannot fully as-
sure ourselves that they have been fairly
and successfully met in the foregoing
series of remarks. But wherever the
truth may lie, we still indulge a strong
confidence that it will eventually be
reached ; and the present awakened
state of the Christian mind in this land
gives a happy presage that this result
will ere long be realized.
Other forms of Sexual Commerce, and
still grosser Crimes, forbidden.
19. Also thou shalt not approach unto
a woman, &c. Heb. HTi^ ^5% el isha,
to a woman, or wife. Consequently not
to one's own wife. The penalty annexed
to this precept is stated ch. 20. IS. The
transgression of it is reckoned among
the crying sins of Israel, Ezek. 22. 10.
20. Moreover, thou shalt not lie car-
nally, &c. Heb. y^T^ ^r-rr '"irr, s^i
lo titten shekobteka lezdra, thou shalt
•not give thy cohabitation (or concum-
carnally with thy neighbour's wife,
to defile thyself with her.
21 And thou shalt not let any of
thy seed s pass through the fire to
tMolech, neither shalt thou upro-
sch. 20. 2. 2 Kings 16. 3, and 21. 6, and
23. 10. Jer. 19. 5. Ezek. 20. 31, and 23. 37,
39. t 1 Kings 11. 7, 33. Acts 7. 43. u ch. 19.
12, and 20 3, and 21. 6, and 22. 2, 32. Ezek.
36. 20, &.C. Mai. 1. 12.
bency) to seed ; i. e. to the effusion of
seed ; a form of expression sufficiently
well represented by our version. Le-
clerc suggests that it may be intended
to distinguish a sinful cohabitation from
that accidental but innocent lying to-
gether which might happen from some
extraordinary accident in a flight or
journey.
21. Thou shalt not let any of thy seed
pass through the fire to Molech. The
name of this idol, which was especially
worshipped by the Ammonites, is de-
rived from Vp!^ mulak, to reign, the
root of n^?2 melek, king, and is sup-
posed to have represented the sun, the
great fountain of fire and of light. In
the inhuman worship of this idol, little
children were either actually burnt
alive in the way of consecration to him,
or were made to pass between two rows
of burning fires, from which they barely
escaped with life, and probably not
always with that. The words ' the fire '
do not here occur in the original, but
they are supplied in Deut. IS. 10, and
2 Kings 11.3, which are elsewhere ex-
plained as apparently equivalent to
' burn in the fire,' 2 Chron. 2S. 3. Le-
clerc supposes very ingeniously that the
term ' pass tlirough,' omitting ' the fire,'
was invented- by the priests of Molech
or Moloch, that the horrid sacrifice
might be expressed by the mildest pos-
sible phrase. This ibrm of idolatry is
mentioned and forbidden in the present
connexion, in the midst of laws relative
to incest and lewdness, from its being
esteemed a kind of spiritual adultery
IT Neither shalt thou profane the
name of thy God. Heb. ^?nn ^c'/ia/Zc/
B. C. 1490.1
CHAPTER XVIII.
199
fane the name of thy God : I am
the Lord.
22 s Thou shall not lie with man-
kind, as with womankind : it ts
abomination.
23 ylNeither shalt thou lie with
any beast to defile thyself there-
vviih : neither shall any woman
X ch. 20. 13 Rom. 1. 27. 1 Cor. 6. 9.
1 Tim 1. 10. y ch. :20. 15, 16. Exod. 22. 19.
pollute ; the cotitrary of hallowing or
sanctifying. The holy name of God is
polluted or profaned not only by irrev-
erent and blasphemous speech, but by
such conduct as tends to give that honor
and allegiance, which is due to him
alone, to another.
22. Thoii shalt not lie vith mankind
as with womankind. Heb. ^^T TUi eth
zukCir^ with a male. The characteristic
sin of Sodom, and thence deriving the
name by which it is known in the crim-
inal codes of modern times. Cornp.
Deut. 23. 17. It is enumerated by the
apostle, Rom. 1. 27, among the preva-
lent abominations of heathenism ; and
the best authorities assure us that under
the name of pederasty ., or hoy-love, it
was pri)ctised not only by several of the
Roman emperors, but by some of the
Greek philosophers. Tlie penalty an-
nexed to this law is stated as follows,
ch. 20. 13: ' If a man also lie with man-
kind, as he lielh with a woman, both of
them have committed an abomination:
they shall surely be put to death ; their
blood shall be upon them.' The pen-
allies enacted by modern legislators
against this and the crime of bestiality,
evince it as the general sense of en-
ligliiened and Christian nations, that
those who thus shockingly degrade
human nature are not worthy to live
among men.
General Dissuasives.
24. For in these all the nations are
defiled which I cast out before you.
Heb. n^ffi73 i:i^ -|!L'J* asher ani mcshal-
Wh, which J am casting out. The
Stand before a beast to lie down
thereto : it is ^ confusion.
24 a Defile not ye yourselves ia
any of these thinofs: bfor in all
these the nations are defiled which
I cast out before you :
25 And cthe land is defiled:
z ch. 20. 12. a ver. 30. Matt. 15. 18,
19,20. Mark 7. 21, 22, 23. 1 Cor. 3, 17.
boh. 20. 23, Deut. 18. 12, c Numb. S5.
34. Jer. 2, 7, and 16, 18, Ezek. 36. 17.
Canaanites being divided into several
clans or tribes, are spoken of in the
plural, as ' nations ;' and they, it appears,
were so completely overrun with these
foul abominations, that a righteous God
could bear with them no longer ; and
as they were now lymg under his curse,
so they were shortly, by his sword,
wielded by the hands of the chosen
people, to be completely destroyed.
By the coming doom of the Canaanites,
therefore, he would have them to take
warning, and not to imagine that any
peculiar favoritism would save them
from a similar destruction, provided
they were guilty of similar crimes. On
the other hand, they might reasonably
anticipate a more aggravated and fear-
ful judgment, according to the declared
principle of the divine administration,
' Because you only have I known of all
the nations of the earth, therefore will
I punish your iniquities.'
25. Therefore I do visit the iniquity
thereof upon it, &c. Heb. TpSi^T
vdephkod, properly I have visited ; i. e.
have punished ; and in the next clause
hath vomited, instead of vomiteth ; the
praeterite being used for greater em-
phasis. The certainty of the result was
such, that it is spoken of as if already
accomplished. IT The land itself
vomiteth out her inhabitants. A bold
rhetorical figure, intimating that ibe
sins of the inhabitants were so unutter-
ably vile and loathsome, that the very
land itselfnauseated and abhorred them,
and threw them out, as the stomach
does the food that offends it.
30. Therefore shall yc keep mine
200
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
therefore I do ^ visit the iniquity
thereof upon it, and the land itself
e Yomiteth out her inhabitants.
26 fYe shall therefore keep my
statutes and my judgments, and
shall not commit any of these
abominations; /ie?7Aer any of your
own nation, nor any stranger that
sojjourneth among you :
27 (For all these abominations
have the men of the land done,
which were before you, and the
land is defiled;)
28 That g the land spue not you
out also, when ye defile it, as it
spued out the nations that were
before you.
29 For whosoever shall commi*
any of these abominations, even
d Ps. 89. 32. Isai. 26. 21. Jer. 6. 9, 29, and
9. 9, and 14. 10, and 23. 2. Hos. 2. 13, and
8. 13, and 9. 9. e yer. 28. f ver. 5, 30. ch.
20. 22, 23. S ch. 20. 22. Jer. 9. 19. Ezek.
36. 13, 17.
ordinance, &c. Heb. r,55 tsn^^^'i:
*^ni>2'l"l'3 shemartem eth mishmarti, ye
shall keep my keepings; i. e. niy charge ;
that which I have delivered you to
keep ; implyiii-g that the only way to
be preserved from all false worship, is
seriously to consider and devoutly to
observe the ordinances of the true re-
ligion.
CHAPTER XIX.
The present chapter is devoted, for
the most part, to the repetition of cer-
tain laws which had been before given,
but which from their intrinsic import-
ance, the divine wisdom saw fit to insist
upon with special emphasis. It will
be seen that they have in the main more
reference to moral than to positive du-
ties, and brief as it is, it may be confi-
dently afiirmed that no merely human
code was ever devised so well calculated
in its observance to promote the well-
being of the race. Except in one
single case we find no special penalty
annexed to the transgression of these
precepts, but they are delivered as self-
the souls that commit them shall
be cut off from among their people.
30 Therefore shall ye keep mine
ordinance, h that ye commit not any
one of these abominable customs,
which were committed before you,
and that ye i defile not yourselves
therein: k I a;n the Lord your God.
CHAPTER XIX.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto all the congregation
of the children of Israel, and say
unto them, a Ye shall be holy: for
I the Lord your God am holy.
3 H b Ye shall fear every man his
mother and his father, and c keep
my sabbaths : I am the Lord your
God.
h ver. 3, 26. ch. 20. 23. Deut. 19. 9.
» ver. 24. k ver. 2, 4. a ch. 11. 44, and 20.
7, 26. 1 Pet 1. 16. b Exod. 20. 12. = Exod.
20. S, and 31. 13.
enforced on the simple supreme author-
ity of Him who enacts them ; * I am
the Lord your God ' — a declaration
which in this connexion is, as it were, a
royal signature to a solemn edict.
2. Say unto them, Ye shall he holy :
for I the Lord your God am holy. The
same sanction had been given before,
ch. 11. 44, in connexion with the pre-
cepts respecting the distinction of
meats, by which they were to be severed
and set apart from all other nations ;
and so here when they are again com-
manded to be distinguished from all
other people by a peculiar system of
moral laws and usages, the same in-
junction is repeated. Indeed one grand
leading sense involved in the term 'holy'
is separated, sequestered, set apart from
that which is common and secular.
Enjoining Reverence of Parents.
3. Ye shall fear every man his mother
and his father. The 'fear' here re-
quired, is virtually the same with the
honor commanded by the fifth com-
mandment. It includes inward rever-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIX.
201
4 II <i Turn ye not unto idols, c nor
make to yourselves molten gods:
I am the Lord your God.
(1 Exod. 20. 4. ch. -25. 1. 1 Cor. 10. 14.
1 John 5. 21. e Exod. 34. 17. Deut. 27. 15.
ence und esteem, outward expression of
respect, obedience to the lawful com-
mands of parents, care and endeavor to
please and render them comfortable,-
and to avoid any thing that may offend
and grieve ihem, or incur their displea-
sure. It will be noticed also that in
this connexion the ' mother ' is men-
tioned before the ' father,' which is con-
trary to prevailing usage. The two
precepts, ' Honor thy father and thy
mother,' and • Fear thy mother and thy
father,' when taken together plainly
evince that both father and mother are
to be regarded as entitled to equal to-
kens of honor, respect, and reverence.
If the 'father' had been uniformly
placed first, it might have impercepti-
bly begotten the impression that the
mother's claims to veneration were but
of a secondary nature. IT Keep my
sabbaths, i. e. not only the seventh day,
but all other appointed days, which
were also called sabbaths. Chal. ' Keep
my sabbath-days,' This precept is
joined with that requiring filial rever-
ence, inasmuch as it is supposed that
if God provides by law for the preserv-
ing of the honor of parents, parents will
use their authority for keeping up in
the minds and conduct of their child-
ren a due regard for the divine institu-
tions, particularly the one in question.
The contempt of parents, and the profa-
nation of the sabbath usually go toge-
ther, and begin the ruin of the young.
The prospects of those children are the
brightest who make conscience of hon-
oring their parents and keeping holy
the sabbath day.
Idolatry forbidden.
4. Turn ye not unto idols. Heb.
tJ'^P'^^i^n i)5^ cZ huelilim, to non-enti-
ties. Gr. ovK ETraKoXovdriccrE fiJojXoif,
5 % And f if ye ofTer a sacrifice of
peace-offering's unto the Lord, ye
shall offer it at your own will.
G It shall be eaten the same day
f ch. 7. 16.
follow not idols. The import of the
original is things of nought, nothings,
vanities, in allusion to which the apos-
tle says, 1 Cor. 8. 4, ' We know that an
idol is nothing in the world.' The
word occurs also in Job 13. 4, * Ye are
forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of
no value (^^^ *'i^51 rophie elil, phy-
sicians of nought),' which gives still
farther light upon the meaning of the
term. To such idols they were not to
' turn ' in a way of heed, affection, con-
sultation, or worship. They were not
to regard them but with the utmost ab-
horrence, and as the chief of all abomi-
nations. They could not turn to them,
without turning away from God, and
this would be downright apostacy.
IT Nor make to yourselves molten gods.
Heb. tl'Z^TZ ^ni5< elohii massekah, gods
of molting, such, for instance, as was
the molten calf fabricated by Aaron at
the instigation of the people, Ex. 32. 4.
The spirit of the precept prohibits, of
course, every species of image, whether
molten or graven, designed as a repre-
sentative of any object of worship.
Habak. 2. IS, ' What profiteth the gra-
ven image that the maker thereof hath
graven it ; the molten image, and (even)
a teacher of lies, that the maker of his
work trusteth therein, to make dumb
idols?'
Concerning Peace-offerings.
5-8. If ye offer a sacrifice of peace-
offerings, &c. As they were to avoid
all idolatry, so they were to be careful
to perform the service due to God in
the prescribed manner. Peace-offerings
are here mentioned as perhaps the most
common, but the spirit of the precept
doubtless applies to all others. The
various rites and ceremonies connected
with this offering have been already
202
LEVITICUS.
[B; C. 1490.
ye offer it, and on the morrow: and
if aught remain until the third day,
it shall be burnt in the fire.
7 And if it be eaten at all on the
third day, it is abominable; it shall
not be accepted.
8 Therefore every one that eateth
it shall bear his iniquity, because
he hath profaned the' hallowed
thing of the Lord; and that soul
detailed, ch. 3. 7, 16. IT Ye shall offer
it at your own will. Or rather, accord-
ing to the Heb. ^^21:^^ lirtzonekem,
' to your favorable acceptation,' i. e. in
such a manner as may secure the divine
favor and acceptance, which it would
not do if it were offered otherwise than
in exact accordance,v,ith the prescribed
mode. .See Note on Lev. 1. 3.
Gleanings to be left for the Poor.
9. When ye reap the harvest of your
land, thou shall not wholly reap, &c.
Ileb. ^T:: r.i^D n^rn i^b lo tekalleh
peath sadeka, thou shall not finish, con-
sumviate,make a full end of, the corner
cf i^^y fi^ld ; tl.ou shalt not make a
clean riddance of it. On this precept
the Jewish canons remark, ' He that
reapeth his field must not reap all the
field wholly ; but must leave a little
standing corn for the poor in the end of
the field, whether he cut it or pluck it
up: and that which is left is called the
corner (njiS pcah). And as he must
.eave of the field, so of the trees, when
he gathereih iheir fruit, he must leave a
little for the poor.' The Jewish writers
say that a sixtieth part was left. How-
ever this may be, the precept is full of
interest, as exhibiting a very amiable
feature of the Levitical law, which in
many of its provisions breathed a spirit
of humane and benevolent consideration,
for which we look in vain to any other
code, either of ancient or modern times,
' The right of the poor in Israel to glean
after the reapers, was thus secured by a
positive law. It is the opinion of some
writers, that although the poor were
shall be cut off from among his
people.
I 9 H And g when ye reap the har-
vest of your land, thou shalt not
I wholly reap the corners of thy field,
neither shalt thou gather the glean-
ings of thy harvest.
] 0 And thou shalt not glean thy
? ch. 23. 22. Deut. 24. 19, 20, 21. Ruth
2. 15. 16.
allowed the liberty of gleaning, the
Israelilish proprietors were not obliged
to admit them immediately into the
field, as soon as the reapers had cut
down the corn, and bound it up in
sheaves, but when it was carried ofi'j
they might choose also among the
poor, whom they thought most deserv-
ing or most necessitous. These opin-
ions receive some countenance from the
request which Ruth presented to the
servant of Boaz, to permit her to glean
' among the sheaves :' and from the
charge of Boaz to his young men, 'let
her glean even among the sheaves;' a
mode of speaking which seems to insin-
uate, that though they could not legally
hinder Ruth from gleaning in the field,
they had a right, if they chose to exer-
cise it, lo prohibit her from gleaning
among the sheaves, or immediately
after the reapers.' — Paxton. IT Nei-
ther shalt thou gather the gleanings of
the harvest. That is, if a few ears of
corn, as they were cutting or binding it
up, fell out of the sheaves or from under
the sickle, they were not to gather them
up from the ground, but to leave them
for the poor. And so also in respect to
the scattered grape-clusters of the vin-
tage. The rule thus given was intended
for the benefit not only of the poor, but
also of the *f ranger ; for as strangers
and foreigners could not hold their pos-
sessions on the same advantageous
terms as native Israelites, they were
very liable to be oppressed by poverty.
It is easy to perceive that the natural
tendency of this law was to inculcate a
kindly, liberal, generous spirit, the
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIX.
203
vineyard, neither shalt thou gather
(■very grape of thy vineyard ; thou
&hak leave them for the poor and
stranger : I am the Lord your God.
1 1 11 h Ye shall not steal, neither
deal falsely, i neither lie one to
another. {
12 1[ And ye shall not '•^svv'-ear by j
n Exod. 20. 15, and 22. 1, 7, 10. Deut. 5. j
iO. ' cIj. 6. i. Eph. 4. 25. Col. 3. 9. i
• £\-od. 20. 7. ch.6.3. Deut. 5. 11, Matt.
5. 33. Jain. 5. 12.
(iiiect reverse of a disposition covetous
uiul griping, and which would prompt a
m ui vigorously to insist on his right in
{.-latlers small and trivial. It is a les-
son which the selfish nature of man
iieeds to have powerfully enforced upon
him, that that is not necessarily lost or
wasted, which goes to relieve the wants
or diminish the woes of our common
J.iumaniiy.
Against Stealing. Lying, False Swear-
ing, and Defrauding.
11-13. Ye shall not steal, Sic. A num-
ber of moral precepts, important to the
upholding of truth and justice in society,
are here inserted. The drift of them is
to inculcate a rigid adherence to truth
in our communications, and to honesty
in our dealings with our fellow men.
Stealing had been before forbidden in
the eighth commandment, and lying in
the ninth ; but they are here repeated
and put together, because they generally
go together. He that will steal will lie
to hide it; and he that will lie shows
that the first moral barrier is broken
down which stands in the way of the
commission of any and all crimes.
^ Thoic shalt not defraud thy neighbor
nor rob him. Heb. pZViTl taas'ok and
PTan tigzol. The first of these terms
signifies in the original to oppress by
fraud, the second, to oppress by vio-
lence. Against both these offences
John the Baptist warned the soldiers
who came to him, Luke 3. 14, ' And he
said unto them, JDo violence to no man,
neither accuse any falsely; and be con-
my name falsely, i neither shalt
j thou profane the name of thy God :
I am the Lokd.
13 11 m Thou shalt not defraud thy
neighbour, neither rob him : ^ the
wages of him that is hired shall
not abide with thee all night until
the morning.
14 H Thou shalt not curse the
1 ch. IS. 21. mMark 10. 19. 1 Thess. 4
6. n Deut. 24. 14, 15. Mai. 3. 5.
tent with your wages.' These sins of
fraudulent oppression and robbery are
often charged by the prophets upon the
nation of Israel. See Is. 3. 14. Jer.
22. 2. nr The wages of him that is
hired shall not abide, &c. Inasmuch as
the wages of the hireling, a day-laborer,
were the support of himself and family,
and they would necessarily be forced to
expend it as fast as it could be earned.
There are few sins marked in the Scrip-
tures more with the emphatic reproba-
tion of heaven than the withholding of
wages from those to whom they are
due. James 5. 1, 4, * Go to now, ye rich
men, weep and howl for your miseries
that shall come upon you. » , Behold,
the hire of the laborers who have reaped
down your fields, which is of you kept
back by fraud, crieth; and the cries of
them which have reaped are entered
into the ears of the Lord of Sabaolh.'
If the Scriptures had approved the sys-
tem of ' credit ' in doing business, it
would scarcely have been so strenuous
in the requisition for prompt payment.
Against taking advantage of the Infirm'
ity of the Deaf or Blind.
14. Thou shalt not curse. Heb.
bipn i^^ lo tekalltl, thou shalt not vili'
fy, defame, contemptuously disparage.
Gr. ovK KaKCJi ipeis, thou shalt not speak
evil of. Not being able to hear, he
could not, of course, vindicate his own
character. In cursing one who could
hear there was no doubt a wicked ma.
lignity; but in cursing the deaf there
was, moreover, an inexpressible meark-
204
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
deaf, o nor put a stumbling-block
before the blind, but shah p fear
thy God : I am the Lord.
15 ^q Ye shall do no unrighteous-
ness in judgment; thou shalt not
respect tlie person of the poor, nor
honour the person of the mighty:
o Deut -27. IS. Rom. 14. 13. P ver. 32.
ch. i5. n. Gen. 42. 18. Eccles. 5. 7. 1 Pet.
2. 17. q Exod. 23. 2, 3. Deut. 1.17, and 16.
19, and 27. 19. Ps. 82. 2. Prov. 24. 23.
James 2. 9.
ness. The case of the absent, who are
out of hearing of the curse, is obviously
the same as that of the deaf, and we see
no reason why the prohibition does not
include both. IT Nor put a stum-
Ming block before the blind. Gr. ov
■!Tpoadn(yctg crK(ii6a\oi/, thou shalt not put
a scandal (a cause of stumbling or
offence). This precept the gospel
makes universal. Rom. 14. 13, 'Let
no man put a stumbling-block (Gr.
cKav6a\ot', a scandal), in his brother's
way.' Again, Matt. IS. 1, < Woe unto
the world because of offences (Gr.
cKavfjoXa^scandals , or stumbling-blocks).'
The spirit of these precepts is to forbid
not only the ridiculing the bodily infir-
mities, but the taking advantage, in
any case, of the ignorance, simplicity,
or inexperience of others, particularly
the giving bad counsel to those that are
simple and easily imposed upon, by
which they may be led to do something
to their own injury. On the contrary,
we are always to do to our neighbor as
we would, upon a change of circum-
stances, that he should do to us.
ir Shalt fear thy God. Though thou
mayest not fear the deaf and the blind,
V'ho cannot call thee to an account, yet
remember that God both sees and hears,
and he will avenge thy wickedness.
Against respect of Persons in Judgment.
15. Thou shalt not respect the person
of the poor. Heb. t)"^::; i^m &^i lo
tiss'e pdnim, thou shalt not lift up or
accept the face. That is, shalt not show
favor from private regards, and thus
but in righteousness shalt thou
judge thy neighbour.
16 ^ r Thou shalt not go up and
down as a tale-bearer among thy
people; neither shalt thou » stand
against the blood of thy neighbour ;
I am the Lord.
r Esod. 23. 1. Ps. 15. 3, and 50. 20. Prov.
II. 13, aud 20. 19. Ezek. 22. 9. » Eiod. 23.
1, 7. 1 Kings 21. 13. Matt. 26 60, 61, and
27. 4.
pervert the cause of justice. See the
phrase explained Gen. 19. 21. Though
the poverty of the poor might plead
strongly in their favor, yet this was not
to intiuence the decisions of the judge.
Against Tale-bearing.
16. Thou shalt not go up and down
as a tale-bearer among thy people. Heb.
))^'D^ ']'^n i<^ lo telek rakil. The orig-
inal p*i«'^ rakil properly signifies a
trader, a pedlar, and is here applied to
one who travels up and down dealing in
slanders and detractions, as a merchant
does in wares, possessing himself of the
secrets of individuals and of families,
and then blazing them abroad, usually
with a false coloring as to motives, and
a distortion of facts. In the Septuagint
the Heb. is rendered, Prov. 11. 13, and
20. 19, by a word signifying 'double-
tongued ;' and in the New Testament
the term seems to be SiaiSo'Xoi diabolos,
false accuser, slanderer, calumniator.
The Chal. renders the present passage
' Thou shalt not divulge accusations, or
detractions, among the people.' In this
sense the word is employed Dan. 6. 24,
in reference to ' the men which had
accused (^iaPo\avTas slandered) Daniel,'
and analogous to this the common name
applied to the Devil in Greek is ciaff-
o'Xoi diabolos, from his character of
calumniator and ' accuser of the breth-
ren,' denominated in the Syriac, Matt.
4. 1,5, 8, &c., a ' divulger of accusa-
tions.' IT Neither shalt thou stand
against the blood, &c. That is, thou
shalt neither be a false witness lo the
B. C. U90.J
CHAPTER XIX.
205
17 *f[tThou shalt not hate thy
brother in thine heart : u thou shalt
t 1 John '1. 9, 11, and 3. 15. " Matt. 18. 15.
Luke 17. 3. Gal. 6. J. Ephes. 5. 11. 1 Tim.
endangering of a man's Hfe, nor shalt
iliou siaiul by and see thy neighbor in-
j"ied, crushed, ruined, and perhaps his
ti.'tr tuken, without an eltort to save him.
This jirecepl is joined with the preced-
ing, Ijecause tale-bearing, by sowing
discord and breeding broils in society
often led to the shedding of blood.
Thus Ezelc. 22. 9, ' In thee are men that
carry tales to shed blood.' The case of
Doeg, ] Sam. 22. 9, 18, is one singularly
in point in the present instance. ' Then
answered Doeg the Edomite, which was
set over the servants of Saul, and said,
I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob,
to Abimelech the son of Ahitub, &c.
And the king said to Doeg, Turn thou
and fall upon the priests. And Doeg
the Edomite turned, and fell upon the
priests, and slew in that day fourscore
and five persons that did wear a linen
ephod.'
Against Hatred and Uncharitableness.
17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in
thine heart. That is, thou shalt not
conceal thy hatred against him for any
wrong that he has done thee ; but shall
mildly yet faithfully rebuke him, en-
deavoring to convince him of the wrong,
and to bring him both to acknowledge
his sin before God, and to make the
adequate reparation. The Jews explain
the precept thus: * When any man sin-
neth against another, he must not in-
wardly hate him and keep silence ; as
it is said of the wicked, And Absalom
spake unto his brother Amnon neither
good nor bad, for Absalom hated Am-
non, 2 Sam. 13. 22 ; but he is command-
ed to make it known unto him, and to
say, Why hast thou done thus unto
me?' This is confirmed by the Gospel
rule, Luke 17. 3, 'If thy brother sin
against thee, rebuke him ; and if he re-
cent, forgive him.' It is possible, how-
18
in any wise rebuke thy neighbour,
and not suffer sin upon him.
5. 20. 2 Thn. 4. 2. Tit. 1. 13, and 2. 15.
See Rom. 1. 32. 1 Cor. 5. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22.
2 John 11.
ever, that the word ' hate,' may here
be intended to be used rather in the
sense oi virtual or constructive hatred,
as when it is said that the parent who
withholds the rod hates the child ; by
which it is evidently implied, that one
who fails to evince the proper tokens
of love, is considered as indulging the
sentiments of hate. God in his word so
regards and speaks of it. Thus, in the
present instance, the man who saw his
brother, i. e. his neighbor, yielding to
or living in sin, and forbore faithfully
to rebuke him on account of it, was to
be considered as acting the part of an
enemy instead of a friend ; and the con-
duct of an enemy is naturally supposed
to be prompted by hatred instead of
love. IT Thou shalt in any wise re-
buke thy neighbor. Heb. rT^Din HSin
'hok'ta'h tokia'h, rebuking thou shalt
rebuke J i. e. thou shalt by all means
rebuke, or, thou shalt freely, plainly,
soundly rebuke. The true force of the
original is to convince, or rather to con-
vict, of wrong by reasoning and argu-
ment. Gr. eXcy^iis rov ir'Xrjaiov aov,
thou shalt convincingly or demonstra-
tively reprove thy neighbor. IT And
not suffer sin upon him. Heb. J^i)
ti^n 1i^:s> i^lL'n to tlssd aiauv Ut, which
may perhaps be correctly rendered,
' Thou shalt not bear sin (or punish-
ment) for him ;' i. e. thou shalt not, on
his account, for his sake, by reason of
neglecting to do your duty to him, con-
tract guilt to your own soul. This is
the usual and appropriate meaning of
the phrase, as appears from Lev. 22. 9,
' They shall therefore keep mine ordi-
nance, lest they bear sin for it.' Num.
18. 32, ' And ye shall bear no sin by
reason of it ;' where the original is the
same as in the present case. And in
this sense both the Greek and the Chal-
daic understand it. The import is, that
206
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
IS Hx Thou shall not avenge, nor I 19 *i[ Ye shall keep my statutes,
bear any grudge against the child- i Thou shalt not let thy cattle gen-
ren of thy people, y but thou shalt I der with a diverse kind : z thou
love thy neighbour as thyself: I i shalt not sow thy field with min-
gled seed: a neither shall a gar-
ment mingled of linen and woollea
come upon thee.
z Deut. 2-2. 9, 10. a Deut. 22. 11.
Lord thy God. We have here in the
midst of the Jewish code the grand
moral law of the gospel, and that wliich
our Savior himself gives as comprising
the sum of the second table of the Deca-
logue, or all the duties which we owe
to our fellow-men. And this law is
enforced by the solemn sanction con-
tained in the words, * I am the Lord
your God ;' q. d. I am he who searches
and perfectly knows your hearts, and
the disjiositions which you cherish, and
who will reward and punish you accord'
ingly. Nothing shows more conclu-
sively how false and groundless are the
charges sometimes brought against the
Mosaic code as not only stern, cruel,
and barbarous, but as insisting solely
on certain outward rites and duties
without any respect to inward disposi
lions and motives.
Against Mixtures in Cattle, Seed, and
Garments.
19. Ye shall keep my statutes. These
words are here inserted lest the ensuing
ordinance should be deemed of little
moment and so be neglected. IT Thou
shalt not let thy cattle gender with a
diverse kind. This might perhaps
have been forbidden in order to impress
the Israelites with a greater abhorrence
of the crime of bestiality, or at least to
afford them among the brute creation
no example of those unnatural com-
mixtures which were prohibited in the
foregoing chapter, v. 22, 23. Yet it
would seem that it was not forbidden
them to use animals produced from such
mixtures, as we find mules very fre-
quently mentioned in the sacred history,
which it is well known are gendered in
arn the Lord.
« 2 Sam. 13. 22. Prov. 20. 22. Rom. 12.
17,19. Gal. 5. 20. Eph. 4.31. 1 Pet. 2. 1.
Jam. 5. 9. y Matt. 6. 43, and 22. 39. Rom.
13. 9. Gah 5. 14. Jam. 2. 8.
a man who failed to reprove sin in ano-
ther rendered himself obnoxious to the
same punishment as the original offend-
er. The phrase, however, may bear
the sense given it in our version, which
is equivalent to saying, ' Thou shalt not
suffer him to go on in sin by neglecting
to inform of it ; shalt not leave him un-
der the guilt of sin unreproved.' The
saying of one of the Jewish rabbins was
long current as a proverb among the
nation, * That Jerusalem had not been
destroyed, but because one neighbor did
not reprove another.'
Against Revenge.
18. Thou shalt not avenge, kc. That
is, thou shalt not take into thine own
hands the. business of redressing thy
wrongs, nor shalt thou refuse to do a
kindness from the remembrance of in-
juries past. Gr. ovK exSiKarai aov rj %£ip,
let not thine hand avenge. IT Nor
h,ear any grudge. Heb. "Iljn K^ lo tit-
tor, thou shalt not watch, mark, or
insidiously observe, the sins of thy peo-
ple ; i. e. thou shalt not harbor resent-
ment, and covertly watch an opportunity
to ' feed fat an ancient grudge.' Gr.
ov f<r?f(c«f, thou shalt not bear inveterate
anger. Chal. ' Thou shalt not keep
(harbor) enmity.' So God is said,
Nah. 1. 2, 'to take vengeance on his
adversaries, and lo keep (watch) for
his enemies.' But not so towards his
people, Jer. 3. 12, ' For I am merciful,
sailh the Lord, and I will not keep
(anger) for ever.' Ps. 103. 9, ' He will
not always chide ; nor keep (his anger)
for ever ;' in all which icases the origi-
nal word is the same. IT Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the
B. C. 14900
CHAPTER XIX.
207
20 H And whosoever lieth car-
nally with a woman that w a bond-
maid betrothed to an husband, and
not at all redeemed, nor freedom
given her; she shall be scourged:
they shall not be put to death, be-
cause she was not free.
this manner. See Note on Gen. 36. 24.
As to seeds, it would in many cases, be
very improper to sow different kinds in
the same spot of ground, as many spe-
cies of vegetables are disposed to mix
and thus produce a very degenerate
crop. Thus if oats and wheat were
sown together, the latter would be in-
jured, the ibrmer ruined. The turnip
and carrot would not succeed conjoiaily,
when either of them separately would
prosper and yield a good crop ; and if
this be all that is intended, the precept
here given is agreeable to the soundest
agricultural maxims. As to garments,
the prohibition might have been merely
intended to keep them aloof from the
superstitious customs of the heathen, or
to intimate how careful they should be
not to mingle themselves with the
Gentiles, nor to weave any profane
usages into God's ordinances.
Relative to the Bond-maid betrothed.
20. Whosoever lieth carnally with a
woman that is a bond-maid. The exact
rendering of the Hebrew is, ' And a man
v.'hen he lieth with a woman (with) the
lyjng of seed,' to which our version
comes sufficiently near. In order fully
to understand the drift of the precept, it
must be borne in mind, that Gentile
servants were often found among the
Hebrews, and these, if proselyted, were
baptized, and that either with a reser-
vation of their servitude, or with a full
and free discharge. But it appears that
there were some in a kind of interme-
diate or half-way condition, partly free
and partly servile, viz., when part only
of their redemption-money had been
paid, a balance yet remaining. Now as
no Israelite might marry such a woman
21 And bhe shall bring his tres-
pass-offering unto the Lord, unto
the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation, even a ram for a tres-
pass-offering.
22 And the priest shall make an
b ch. 5. 15, and 6. 6.
while perfectly a slave ; so, although
he might espouse her when partly free,
and the espousals be valid, yet they
could not be of full force till her enfran*
chisement was complete. Of a bond-
woman in these circumstances the He-
brew doctors understand Moses in this
passage to speak, as Maimonides says
expressly, * The bond-woman betrothed
spoken of in the law, is one that is half a
bond-woman and half a free-woman, and
betrothed to an Hebrew servant.'' Gr.
she shall be reserved a household-ser-
vant for a man. ^ Not at all re-
deemed, nor freedom given her. Ra-
ther, not fully, not entirely redeemed,
but only in part ; and therefore her
freedom not absolutely granted to her.
U She shall be scourged. Heb.
rr^nri ri"lpD blkkoreth tHiyeh, there
shall be a scourging. The original
n^ipn bikkoreth from the root 1p3 bd-
kar, to search, to inquire into, to ex-
amine diligently, to take note of any
person or thing, and thence in the de-
rivative inquisition, animadversion,
punishment, the frequent effect of a
rigid examination, of a close and pry-
ing scrutiny. Gr. iarai eTriaKonr], there
shall be visitation. If she had been
perfectly free both parties would have
been put to death by virtue of the law,
Deut. 22. 23, 25. But not being fully
free, and consequently not fully the
wife of her betrothed, it was not counted
adultery ; and therefore punished only
with scourging. From the literal ren-
dering, ' there shall be scourging,' it
would doubtless seem that both parties
were to share in it alike ; but the He-
brew canons and the current of rabbin-
ical authoritv favor rather the rendering
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
atonement for him with the ram
of the trespass-offering before the
Lord for his sin which he hath
done ; and the sin Avhich he hath
done shall be forgiven him.
23 H And when ye shall come
into the land, and shall have plant-
ed all manner of trees for food ;
of the English text—' She shall be
scourged.' Maimonides says, ' The
lying with this bond-wonnan differeth
from all other unlawful connexions ; for
lo, she is to be beaten, and he is bound
to bring a trespass-offering.' So in the
Talmud (Cheret. c. 2.) it is said, ' in
all unlawful connexions, whether it be
man or woman, they are alike in stripes
and in sacrifice : but in the case of the
bond-woman, the man is not like to the
woman in stripes, nor the woman to the
man in sacrifice.'
Relative to the Fruit of Trees.
23. And when ye shall have come into
the land. That is, into the promised
land, to which alone it would seem this
precept had reference. That it was
based upon any thing beyond natural
reasons, we see no grounds for believ-
ing ; though Spencer and others have
suggested that as the trees which they
would find growing on their entrance
into the land were planted by idolaters,
and probably wdth superstitious cere-
monies, their fruit being considered by
the Israelites as for a time unclean,
would tend to impress their minds with
an idea of the impurity and abominable
nature of idolatry. But it is evident
from the text, that the precept has
reference to such trees as they should
themselves plant, and that it was to be
of like permanent authority with the
other enactments of the Levitical code.
Nor do we doubt that an adequate
knowledge of vegetable physiology
would disclose the utmost propriety in
the direction. Indeed Michaelis says.
Comment, on Laws of Moses, vol. 3.
p. 367-8, ' The economical object of
then ye shall count the fruit thereof
as uncircumcised : three years shall
it be as uncircumcised unto you:
it shall not be eaten of.
24 But in the fourth year all the
fruit thereof shall be holy c to praise
the Lord icithal.
c Deut. 12. 17, IS. Prov. 3. 9,
this law is very striking. Every gar-
dener will teach us not to let fruit-trees
bear in their earliest years, but to pluck
off the blossoms ; and for this reason,
that they will thus thrive the better,
and bear more abundantly afterwards.
Now, if we may not taste the fruit the
first three years, we shall be the more
disposed to pinch off the blossoms ; and
the son will learn to do this from his
father. The very expression, to regard
them as uncircumcised, suggests the
propriety of pinching them off ; I do not
say cutting them off, because it is gen-
erally the hand, and not a knife, that is
employed in this operation.' Although,
however, the use of the fruit was only
interdicted for three years, the produce
did not become available to the propri-
etor till the fifth year, the first-fruits,
that is those of that year, being in this,
as in other instances, one of the dues
from which the priests derived their
subsistence. Perhaps a moral intima-
tion to the effect that men were to re-
strain their appetites, and not to indulge
in premature gratifications, was de-
signed at the same lime to be conveyed
in this precept. Thus this wondrous
code taught its subjects to find 'ser-
mons in trees,' as well as ' good in
every thing.'
24. All the fruit thereof shall be holy
to praise the Lord. Heb fi'i^l^n r:np
mn"'^ kodesh hillulim laihovah, holi-
ness of praises to the Lord. That is,
shall be consecrated to the Lord, and
eaten with demonstrations of joy and
praise, as Judg. 9. 27, * they made
praise ;' that is, they expressed their
joyful emotions by songs of praises,
and probably by dancing, as the Gr, ren-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIX.
209
25 And in the fifth year shall ye
eat of the fruit thereof, that it may
yield unto you the increase there-
of; I am the Lord your God.
d ch. 17. 10, &c. Deut. 12. 23. c Deut.
ders it. The phrase points to some-
what of more than usual festivity.
25. In the fifth year shall ye eat of
the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto
you the increase thereof. Heb. tl^Din^
inifljn d!j^ lehosiph ICikem tebudtho,
to add increasingly to you its product.
The intimation clearly is, that they
would be no losers by waiting to the
fifth year for the fruit of their trees.
The forbearance would be rewarded by
the far more abundant fruitfulness of
the trees themselves.
Against the eating of Blood, and va-
rious Superstitious Observances.
26. Ye shall not eat any thing with
the blood. Heb. Din l^ libSHll Vfi^ lo
tokelu al haddfim, ye shall not eat upon
the blood. Gr. //?? eaders £T!i opEojv eat
not upon the mountains, i. e. after the
manner of idolaters ; an erroneous ren-
dering, arising from the translators
having mistaken tDTH hadddm, blood,
for tD^n harim, mountains, 1 (r) for
T (d), as they have done in numerous
other instances. The sense is intrinsi-
cally good and warranted by Ezek.
IS. 6, but is not the meaning here in-
tended ; although it is not perfectly
obvious what the true meaning really is.
The Rabbinical commentators for the
most part, understand it, especially from
its connexion with what follows, as a
prohibition of certain idolatrous rites
practised in the religion of the heathen,
in which they entered into communion
with demons by gathering the blood of
their sacrifices into a vessel, or a little
ho!e dug in the earth, and then sitting
round it, feeding upon the flesh of the
victims. But a more probable interpre-
tation is that suggested by the usage of
the same phrase, 1 Sam. 14. 33, ' Then
18»
26 ^ d Ye shall not eat any thing
with the blood: e neither shall ye
use ehchaatment, nor observe
times.
18. 10, 11, 14,
17, and 21. 6.
1 Sam. 15. 23. 2 Kings 17.
2Chron.33. 6. Mai. 3. 5.
they told Saul, saying. Behold, the peo-
ple sin against the Lord, in that they
eat u-ith the blood (UIH ^^ al haddilm,
upon the blood). ^ What is meant by
this we infer from v. 32, of the same
chapter ; ' And the people flew upon
the spoil, and took sheep and oxen, and
calves, and slew them upon the ground,
and the people did eat them with the
blood (Qirr iiy al hadddm, upon the
blood).' From this it would appear
that the phrase to eat any thing upon
the blood, means to eat the flesh of the
animal before it is fully dead, and the
blood thoroughly drained from it. Thus
Maimonides ; ' It is unlawful to eat of
a slain beast so long as it trembleth ;
and he that eateth thereof before the
soul (life) of it be gone out, transgress-
eth against a prohibition, Ye shall not
eat upon the blood.' IT Neither shall
ye use enchantments. Heb. TJJnSln fc<^
lo tena'hashu, ye shall not practice au-
gury or divination. It is the root with
which Tl^ni na'hash, a serpent, is so
intimately connected, and the true force
of which is elucidated in the Note on
Gen. 3. 1. It refers to the superstitious
observance of omens, and perhaps
mainly such ceremonies as were under-
stood by the term ophiomancy, or divi-
nation by serpents, similar to which
was the art ofornithomancy, or augury
by birds. This is Bochart's opinion,
who has gone into the subject, as usual,
at great length. IT Nor observe times.
Heb. 13313>n ind lo teon'enu. The doubt-
ful origin of the word makes the sense
doubtful. Aben-Ezra and many others
consider the verb as a denominative
from the root ']jS> dndn, a cloud, and
understand it here to be equivalent to
taking omens from the aspect of the
clouds, and other celestial phenomena —
§10
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
27 f Ye shall not round the cor-
ners of your heads, neither shalt
thou mar the corners of thy beard.
f ch. 21. 5.
15. 2.
Jer. 9. 26, and 48. 37
Isai.
a species of divination lo which respect
seems to be had, Jer. 10. 2, where the
prophet forbids the people to be * dis-
mayed at the signs of heaven, at which
tlie healhen are dismayed.' To this
interpretation Rosenmuller gives the
preference. Jarchi, on llie other hand,
who is followed by Fuller (Miscel.
Sacr. 1. 1, c. 16) gives the noun n;i2>
onch as the etymon which is defined
a set, fixed, or prescribed time. The
phrase, therefore, ' to observe times' is
supposed to imply the noting of certain
days as more lucky than others, and
selecting such as the days on which to
commence a journey, or undertake any
particular business or enterprise. This
is probably the true sense, whether the
etymology above suggested be correct
or not. about which there is considerable
doubt. We may remark that the Gr. has
opvidodKo-jriaiade, signifying augury by
birds ; while the Syriac employs a term
implying fascination by the eye, as if
y'^y ayin, eye, were the root. It seems
impossible to decide with confidence
the exact imjjort. But while v.'e are
left in doubt about the precise meaning
of a term, we are at no loss to discover
the general scope and ground of the
precept. The giving heed to vain signs
and prognostics, the turning to the de-
lu.sive arts of astrology, or fortune-tell-
ing, would naturally beget a disregard
and a practical denial of the doctrine
of an over-ruling Providence, wiiich was
ever to be an object of cordial belief
and unreserved trust to the pious mind.
27. Ye shall nut round the corners
of your head. That is, shall not so
shave oflf the hair of the head around
the temples and behind the ears as to
leave the head wholly bald, except a
dish-like tuft upon the crf)nn. This
28 Ye shall not g raake any cut-
tings in your flesh for the dead, nor
print any marks upon you: lam
the Lord.
g ch. 21. 6. Deut. 14. 1. Jer. 16. 6, and
4S. 37.
was in opposition to the usages of the
heathen. The precept in the following
clause relative to the beard is of equiv-
alent import. They were to let it
grow equally over all the lower part of
of the face.
2S. Ye shall not make any cuttings
in your flesh for the dead. Heb.'L"?^-^
lenephesh, for a soul ; but this is the
sense of the Heb. term in repealed in-
stances, as Lev. 21, Num. 6. 6, Hag.
2. 13. They were not to maim or lace-
rate their persons in any manner in
their mourning ceremonies, as wiih tlie
vain idea of pacifying or propitiating
the infernal spirits in behalf of the dead,
a notion very prevalent among the
heathen idolaters. Mourning habits
they might put on, if they chose, and,
with the exception of the high-priest,
rend their garments in token of grief j
but they were not to disfigure their
bodies. This would be utterly unbe-
coming a people who were instructed to
a belter knowledge of a future state and
of the invisible world than the ignorant
heathen could be supposed to possess.
IT Nor print any marks upon you.
' This is understood lo forbid tlie prac
tice of tattooing, that is, by means of
colors rubbed over minute punctures
made in the skin, to impress certain
figures and characters on different parts
ol the body, and which in general re-
main indelible throughout life. The
figures thus impressed on the arms and
breasts of our sailors will serve in some
degree to indicate the sort of ornament
intended. It is well known to be com-
mon among savages and barbarians in
almost all climates and countries — the
aboriginal inhabitants of our own coun-
try not excepted, who, from having
their naked bodies profusely ornament-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIX.
211
29 IF h Do not prostitute thy
daughter to cause her to be a
h Deut. 23. 17.
ed, apparently in this style, were de-
scribed by the Romans as painted sav-
ages. Il seems in England to be more
commonly regarded as a custom of sav.
age islanders than as any thing more.
Yet it is also an Oriental custom ; and
that too among peoj)le whose proximity
to the Hebrews affords a reason for the
interdiction. The Bedouin Arabs, and
those inhabitants of towns who are in
any way allied to them, are scarcely
less fond of such decorations than any
islanders of the Pacific Ocean. This is
particularly the case among the females,
who in general have their legs and arms,
their front Irom the neck to the waist,
and even their chins, noses, lips, and
other prominent parts of the face dis-
figured with blue stains in the form of
flowers, circles, bands, stars, and various
fanciful figures. They have no figures
of living' objects, such being forbidden
by their religion : neither do they asso-
ciate any superstitions with them, so
far as we were able to ascertain. They
probably did both before the Moham-
medan era, as their descendants in the
island of Malta do at present. The
men there generally go about without
their jackets, and with their shirt sleeves
tucked up above their elbows, and we
scarcely recollect ever to have seen an
arm thus bare which was not covered
with religious emblems and figures of
the Virgin, or of some saint under
whose immediate protection the person
thus marked conceived himself to be.
Thus also, persons who visit the holy
sepulchre and other sacred places in
Palestine, have commonly a mark im-
pressed upon the arm in testimony of
their meritorious pilgrimage. The
Hindoos also puncture upon their per-
sons representations of birds, trees, and
the gods thoy serve. Among them the
representations are sometimes of a
highly offensive description. All Hin-
whore: lest the land fall to whore-
dom, and the land become full of
wickedness.
doos have a black spot, or some other
mark, upon their foreheads. It was
probably the perversion of such figures
to superstitious purposes, or being worn
in honor of some idol, which occasioned
them to be interdicted in the text before
us — if such tattooing is really that
which is here intended. As the marks
are indelible, we of course, in taking
this view, consider that a permanent
fashion rather than a temporary mourn-
ing usage is here prohibited.' — P. Bib.
Against Prostitution.
29. Do nut prostitute thy daughter,
&c. Heb. n^nn ^K at te'haim, do not
make abominable or prof anv. Gr. nv ^tfin-
Xojcrcii thou shalt not profane, desecrate,
or pollute. This alludes to the abom-
inable custom of the heathen, among
whom the women prostituted them-
selves in their temples as an act of re-
ligion. At Babylon this was done, ac-
cording to Herodotus, by women of all
ranks, before they were married ; and
from the following remarks of Mr.
Roberts (Orient. Illust.) it appears that
the same depraved practice is still kept
up in India. — 'Parents, in consequence
of a vow or some other circumstance,
often dedicate their daughters to the
gods. They are sent to the temple, at
the age of eight or ten years, to be in-
iiiated into the art of dancing before
the deities, and of singing songs in
honor of their exploits. From that
period these dancing girls remain in
some sacred building near the temple ;
and when they arrive at maturity (the
parents being made acquainted with the
fact), a feast is made, and the poor girl
is given into the embraces of some in-
fluential man of the establishment*
Practices of the most disgusting nature
then take place, and the young victim
becomes a prostitute for life.' From
all such horrid abominations the sane*
212
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
30 Hi Ye shall keep my sabbaths,
and k reverence my sanctuary : I
am the Lord.
31 H • Regard not them that have
i ver. 3. ch. 26. 2. k Eccles. 5. 1.
tuaryofGod was to be kept free, and
all licentiousness among the people at
large to be discouraged to the utmost.
It can hardly be supposed that any
parent would be so far lost to all the
instincts of natural affection, as know-
ingly and of set design to surrender a
beloved daughter to a life of infamy,
degradation, and sin ; but he might do
this indirectly, by not restraining her
from such customs and associations as
would tend to lead to it; and it is the
usual idiom of the Scriptures to speak
of that as actually done by a person
which he does not prevent when it was
in the power of his hand to do it.
Whether the prohibition is pointed
against the exposing of daughters to
prostitution as a part of religion, is,
we think, considerably doubtful, al-
though it may have been so. But there
is no room to question that the explana-
tion above given is true at any rate.
Parents were not to prostitute their
daughters by suffering them to he ex-
posed to the danger of prostitution.
Enjoining Reverence of the Sabbath
and the Sanctuary.
30. Ye shall keep my sabbaths and
reverence my sanctuary. These pre-
cepts are doubtless here conjoined from
the intimate relation which the observ-
ance of the one has to that of the other.
Neglect or profanation of the Sabbath
not only accompanies, but in great mea-
sure consists in, the habitual disregard
of the worship of the sanctuary.
Against consulting Wizards and them
which have Familiar Spirits.
31. Regard not them that have fa-
miliar spirits. Heb. r.3i^n ^5^ I^Sn ^i^
al tiphnu el hdoboth, turn not to the
familiar spirits, neither seek after
wizards, to be defiled by them: I
am the Lord your God.
1 Exod. 22. IS. ch. 20. 6, 27. Deut. IS. 10*
1 Sam. 23. 7. 1 Chron. 10. 13. Isai. 8. 19-
Acts 10. 16.
oboth. Go not after them to consult
them, nor follow their directions. Gr.
ovK eiTaKo\ovdr](r€(T6€, follow not. We
give the term oboth without translating,
because we have no English word that
precisely answers to it. Its literal
sense is that of leathern bottles or
water-skins, which would of course be
in a state of distension or swelling when
filled with water. This circumstance
seems to have been the ground of the
application of the term to sorcerers,
necromancers, or ventriloquists, (Gr.
EyyaoTpuxvQoi^ Speakers out of the belly),
who, in the practice of their pretended
magical rites and incantations,' and
while under the alleged influence of
the inspiring demon, became greatly
inflated, and in that state uttered their
oracles, as if the spirit himself spoke
from within them. The Chal. has ^^12.
biddin, pythons, to which we have a
distinct allusion Acts 16.16, 'And it
came to pass as we went to prayer, a
certain damsel possessed with a spirit
of divination (Gr. -Kvcv^ia irvdan'o?, spirit
of python), met us,' &c. Python was
a name of Apollo, and this damsel was
actuated as his priests or priestesses
were supposed to be in delivering ora-
cles at Delphos. She was doubtless
of the class of persons denounced in
this passage. Grammatically, we sup-
pose, tll^H oboth in this place requires
the supply of the word ^>D baal,
or n^S/S baalath, master or mistress of
Ob, as it is expressed 1 Sam. 28. 7, in
respect to the witch of Endor, who is
called :m5i tl^S'D baalath ob, vxistresi
of Ob, but translated in our version one
that ' had a familiar spirit.' So by a
like figure of speech 'spirits' is used
for ' spiritual gifts,' and for those who
exercise them, 1 Cor. 14. 12, 32.— 1 John
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XIX.
213
32 H m Thou shah rise up before
the hoary head, and honour the
face of the old man, and n fear thy
God : I am the Lord.
m Prov. -lO. 29. 1 Tim. 5. 1. n ver. 14.
4. 1. IT Neither seek after wizards.
11 tb. L"';>""' yiddeonim , knowing ones,
Tlie lenn in its radical meaning implies
knowledge (from 3>~i ydda, to know),
and is here applied to men as the pre-
ceding is to women. It is agreed that
the word denotes generally those who,
by means of magical and cabalistic
arts, professed to become acquainted
with future events, to know the good or
evil that awaited human life. They
are joined with the masters or possess-
ors of ' familiar spirits ' above-men-
tioned, as like them in sin, and both
were to be put to death by the magis-
trate, according to ch. 20. 27, which
contains the penally of this crime. ' A
man also or a woman that hath a fa-
miliar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall
surely be put to death : they shall stone
them with stones : their blood shall be
upon them.' The reason for this pre-
cept's coming in juxta-position with the
former enjoining reverence of the sanc-
tuary is thus intimated in the paraphrase
of R. Chazkuni : — ' Ye shall reverence
my sanctuary ; therefore turn not to
them that have familiar spirits, nor to
wizards ; for what have you to do with
such? Behold, you have a sanctuary
wherein is Urim and Thummim.'
Respect to be shown to the Aged.
32. Thou Shalt rise up before the
hoary head. Heb, H^'^D ^2^'i2 mippen't
shtbdh, before the greyness or hoari-
ness ; the abstract for the concrete, as
in numerous other instances. Chal.
' Him that is skilful in the law.' How
much praise have the Spartan institu-
lions justly obtained for cherishing this
principle, yet how much more energetic
and authoritative is the language of the
Jewish code, coming as it does directly
from Jehovah himself! In command-
33 H And o if a stranger sojoura
with thee in your land, ye shall
not vex him.
o Exod. 22. 21, and 23. 9.
ing reverence to be paid to the aged, he
in fact ordains it to that which is a feeble
image of his own eternity. He is de-
nominated the ' Ancient of days,' and
when he is represented as having ' the
hair of his head like the pure wool,' he
is pleased to represent himself as hav-
ing the distinguishing characteristic of
old age. There is probably no object
in creation so fitted to inspire reverence
as the sight of the snowy locks of the.
old man, and consequently the duty here
enjoined has been recognized in all civi-
lized nations, as one the violation of
which is deserving of the severest pun-
ishment. Even a heathen Juvenal (Sat.
13.) could say — ' Hoc grande nefas, et
morte piandum, si juvenis vetulo non
assurrexerat.' IF And fear thy God.
Heb. "Iin^i^^a riJ^I"^ yCiritha m'eelohekd,
fear from (before) thy gods. That is,
as many of the Jewish writers under-
stand it, reverence thy judges or magis-
trates, who are repeatedly called C^n^!!^
Elohim, gods, in the sacred writings.
They suppose accordingly that there
are three degrees or ranks of men im-
plied in this verse towards each of
which becoming tokens of honor and
reverence are here expressly enjoined ;
(1.) the aged in general ; (2.) the wise
and learned; (3.) judges and magis-
trates. But if taken as read in our
translation, it clearly shows how inti-
mate is the connexion in God's sight,
between a devout fear of himself and a
becoming reverence of those who are
his most natural representatives to the
eyes of mortals.
The Stranger not to be oppressed,
33. If a stranger sojourn with thee in
your land ye shall not vex him. Heb,
ins< 13iri itb io ionu otho, ye shall not
afflict, oppress him. Gr. ov dXiipsre avrov
214
LEVITICUS.
IB. C. 1490.
34 pBut the stranger that dwell-
elh with you, shall be unto you as
one born among you, and q thou
shalt love him as thyself; for ye
were strangers in the land of
Egypt : I am the Lord your God.
35 ^r Ye shall do no unrighteous-
ness in judgment, in mete-yard, in
weight, or in measure.
36 sJust balances, just weights,
P Exod. 12. 48, 49. q Deut. 10. 19. r ver. 15.
» Deut. 25. 13, 15. Prov. 11. 1, and 16. 11,
and 20. 10.
ye shall not afflict him. By the Targum
of Jonathan and by Sol. Jarchi, it is
understood of vexations of words, such
as saying to him, ' Yesterday thou wast
an idolater, and now thou comest to
learn the law which was given from the
mouth of God.' It is supposed that the
stranger was not an idolater, but a
worshipper of the God of Israel, though
not circumcised ; a proselyte of right-
eousness. If such an one sojourned
among them, they must not vex him,
nor oppress, nor overreach him in a
bargain, taking advantage of his igno-
rance of their laws and customs ; they
must reckon it as great a sin to cheat a
stranger, as to cheat an Israelite. As
all men are children of one common
father, it argues a generous disposition
and a pious regard to God to show kind-
ness to strangers.
Enjoining just Measures, Weights, and
Balances.
35. Ye shall do no unrighteousness
in judgment. The word 'judgment ' in
this connexion is very plausibly referred
by the Hebrew writers to all the par-
ticulars that follow. On this construc-
tion it is held, that Moses uses the word
here in order to intimate of what sol-
emn moment he would have the law
considered, which relates to true mea-
sures and weights. The man that falsi-
fied either was to be regarded as a
corrupter of judgment, an emphatic
designation, equivalent to vile, wicked,
a just ephah, and a just hin shall
ye have : I am the Lord your God,
which brought you out of the land
of Egypt.
37 t Therefore shall ye observe ail
my statutes, and all my judgments,
and do them : I am the Lord.
CHAPTER XX.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
t ch. 13, 4, 5. Deut. 4. 5, 6, and 5. I, and
6. 25.
abominable in a very high degree.'
IT In mete-yard. Heb. m723 bammid-
ddh ; a measure of length or surface,
such as the yard, cubit, foot, span, &c.
IT In weight. Heb. ^p^72n ham-
mishkol ; such as the talent, shekel,
&c. IT In measure. Heb. n*iTIj^2
bammesurah ; by which is denoted
measures of capacity, such as the ho-
mer, ephah, seah, hin, &c. In all these
articles, as well as in the balances or
scales, weight-stones, &c., mentioned
in the next verse, they were to observe
the most honest exactness; and never
allow themselves to practise any spe-
cies of fraud in their dealings and com-
merce, because. they might not think it
of easy detection.
In view of the general contents of
this chapter, who can but feel how ad-
mirable are such language and senii
ments, and how suited to the sacred
original from which they flow ! How
strongly do they attest the divine be-
nevolence which dictated the Jewish
law, and the divine authority which
alone could enforce such precepts by
adequate sanctions, and impress such
sentiments upon the human heart with
practical conviction !
CHAPTER XX.
The principal scope of the present
chapter is to specify the punishments
which it pleased God to annex to the
transgression of the laws contained in
the two preceding chapters. As we
B. C. 14900
CHAPTER XX.
215
2 * Again thou shalt say to the
children of Israel, ^ Whosoever he
be Gf the children of Israel, or of
the strangers that sojourn in Israel,
that giveih any of his seed unto
Molech, he shall surely be put to
acli. IS. 21. b ch, 18. 21. Deut. 12. .31,
and 18. 10. 2 Kings 17. 17, and 23. 10. 2
Chron. .33. 6. Jer. 7. 31, and 32. 35. Ezek.
20. 26, 31
liave already had occasion to consider
most of them in connexion with the
parallel precepts in ch. IS, there remains
little to be said by way of additional
comment.
Against the giving of Seed to Molech.
2. Whosoever he be, &c. Heb. lL''i<
IIj'^'A a man, a man. The law had res-
pect as much to proselytes who had
embraced the Hebrew faith, as to native
Israelites. IT That giveth any of his
seed unto Molech. That is, any of his
children. On the name and character
of this idol, see note on Lev. 18. 21 .
^ He shall be surely put to death. Heb.
Ti^QT' ril^ moth yumSth, dying he shall
be made to die. So afterwards, in vv.
9, 10, 11 , 12, &c. IT The people of the
land. That is, the inhabitants of that
region in which he dwells. Chal. ' The
people of the house of Israel.'
^ Shall stone him with stones. This
was the principal capital punishment in
use among the Jews, and the mode of it
was as follows : — When the criminal
arrived within four cubits of the place
of execution, he was stripped naked, ex-
cept a slight covering about the loins,
and his hands being bound, he was led
up to the fatal spot, which was an emi-
nence about twice the height of a man.
The first executioners of the sentence
were the witnesses, who generally pulled
off their clothes for that purpose. One
of them threw him down with great
violence upon his loins; if he rolled
upon his breast, he was turned upon his
loins again ; and if he died by the fall,
ih". sentence of the law was executed :
death : the people of the land shall
stone him with stones.
3 And c I will set my face against
that man, and will cut him off
from among his people ; because
he hath given of his seed unto
Molech, to '• defile my sanctuary,
and e to profane my holy name.
c ch. 17. 10. d Ezek. 5. 11, and 23. 38, 39
e ch. 18. 21.
but if not, the other witness took a great
stone and dashed it on his breast as he
lay upon his back ; and then, if he was
not despatched, all the people that stood
by, threw stones at him till he died.
- 3. I will set my face against that man.
Heb. irii^ ettcn, uill give ; i. e. will op-
pose, will fix firmly my face ; for which
we have in v. 5 another and more appro-
priate original word for set (T.T^ilJ
samti). It might reasonably be asked,
in what sense God here threatens the
cutting off an offender, who is at the
same time represented as having been
stoned to death in the preceding verse.
To this it is answered by the Jewish
critics, that the meaning is, that where
the sin was not known, or there was
not a suflicient amount of proof to con-
vict the offender of the crime, there
God would interpose, and by his own
act ' cut him off,' by some extraordinary
judgment, from among his people. But
as this case would seem rather to be in-
cluded in that mentioned vv. 4, 5, we
prefer to consider the punishment de-
nounced in this passage as identical
with the ' stoning ' of v. 2. The Most
High declares that in this way his
judicial purpose shall be executed. The
threatening is of fearful import. That
infliction must be awful indeed, in which
the sufferer sees the human agents
merely carrying into effect a divine
sentence which decrees his destruction.
IT To defile my sanctuary ; — which
which was defiled when God was pro-
fessedly worshipped in any ofher place
or in any other manner than he liad
commanded ; or when sacrifices wer«
S16
LEVITICUS.
[-B. C. 1490.
4 And if the people of the land
•lo any ways hide their eyes from
the man, when hegiveth of his seed
unlo Molech, and f kill him not ;
5 'I'hen § I will set my face against
ihat man, and h against his family,
and will cut him off, and all that
i go a whoring after him, to com-
mit whoredom with Molech, from
among their people.
I Deut. 17. 2, 3, 5. S ch. 17. 10. h Exod.
20. 5. i ch. 17. 7.
offered by his people to false gods ; in-
asmuch as the leinple of God hath no
agreement with idols. IT And to
profane my holy name. Heb. ^^H^
le'haUil, the same word as that employ-
ed Lev. 19. 29, ' Do not prostitute
(binn te'hallll) thy daughter,' &c.
The name of God is profaned, dese-
crated, made abominable, when the
honor and reverence due to him alone is
lavished upon idols. See Note on Lev.
18.21.
4. If the people of the land do any
ways hide their eyes. Heb. Q^yn
l^'^^iS'"! haH'cm yaUim, hiding do hide.
Gr. i'lrepoxpei v-epi6u)aiv^ With winking
shall wink at ; i. e. shall overlook, dis-
regard, neglect to punish. The Gr.
word is the same with that occurring,
Acts 17. 30, ' And the times of this ig-
norance God winked at (vTTfjOtJwi'), but
now commandeih,' &c.
5. Then I unll set my face, he. Chal.
' I will set mine anger against that man
and his helpers.' Because others might
wickedly connive at his offence, let him
not therefore promise himself impunity.
The eye of Omniscience would still be
upon him, and the hand which no power
could slay or elude would single him
out for its stroke ; and not him only,
but the judgment, according to the usual
analogy of Providence, would embrace
the circle of his family, and involve
others in its desolating effects. See
Note on Joshua, 7. 15. IT His family.
Gr. rr)v avyyevEiav avrov, his kindred,
IT All that go a whoring after him.
I 6 II And kthe soul that turneil]
I after such as have familiar spirits,
j and after wizards, to go a whoring
after them, I will even set my face
against that soul, and will cut him
off from among his people.
7 H J Sanctify yourselves there-
fore and be ye' holy : for I am the
Lord your God.
8 m And ye shall keep my statutes,
kch. 19. 31. Ich. 11.44, and 19. 2. 1 Pet.
1. 16. m ch. 19. .37.
Chal. ' All who err after him ;' the usual
term for expressing idolatrous apostacy
in that version. Gr. -avras rovs b^iovo-
ovvrai avToy, all who consent with him.
The language is founded upon the pe-
culiarly near and intimate relation,
amounting in fact to a kind of conjugal
union, between God and his covenant
people, an infraction of which on their
part was a virtual act of adultery.
Of consulting Wizards.
6. The soul that turneth after such
as have familiar spirits, &c. The na-
ture of the sin here alluded to has been
already explained. Lev. 19, 31. The
punishment denounced is the same ju-
dicial ' cutting off' which we have be-
fore had frequent occasion to consider,
and of which a fuller exposition will be
found in the Note on Gen. 17. 14. The
case of Saul affords a melancholy in-
stance of the execution of this fearful
sentence ; 1 Chron. 10. 13, 14, ' And
Saul died for his transgression which
he committed against the Lord, even
against the word of the Lord, which he
kept not, and also for asking counsel of
one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire
of it ; and inquired not of the Lord ;
therefore he slew him, and turned the
kingdom unto David.' As the act for-
bidden was in its own nature idolatrous,
it is characterized by the same oppro-
brious term as that which is applied in
the preceding verse to the service of
Molech.
7. Sanctify yourselves therefore, &c.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XX.
217
and do them : « I «m the Lord
which sanctify you.
9^0 For every one that curseth
his father or his mother, shall be
surelyput to death : he hath cursed
his father or his mother: phis
blood shall be upon him.
10 H And q the man that comrait-
" Exod. 31. 13. ch. 21. 8. Ezek. 37 28.
" Exod. 21. 17. Deut. 27. 16. Prov. 20. 20.
Matt. 15. 4. P ver. 11, 12, 13, 16, 27. 2 Sam.
I. 16. q ch, 18. 20. Deut, 22. 22. John 8.
4, 5,
This is not properly to be regarded as
a separate and independent precept, but
raiher as an appendix to the preceding.
The sanctity especially enjoined upon
the chosen people consisted in great
measure in their separation from the
corrupt and idolatrous practices of the
surrounding heathen ; and nothing was
!Tiore natural than that such an injunc-
tion should follow in close connexion a
precept expressly denouncing a particu-
lar form of idolatrous usage. It is as
if he had said, ' Instead of conforming
to these abominable and wicked rites,
and thus contaminating yourselves with
the guilt of necromancy and other ma-
gical arts, sanctify yourselves, i. e. keep
yourselves aloof from all fellowship
with these works of iniquity ; remember
that ye are called to be a chosen and
holy and peculiar people, for the Lord
your God, whose ye are, is a holy God,
infinitely separated from all these lying
vanities which the heathen worship as
gods.'
Of cursing Parents.
9. For every one that curseth his
father or his mother, &c. Heb. ^^p"!
yekallel ; of the genuine force of this
word which radically signifies to make
li^ht of, and refers to any kind of speech
which has a tendency to lessen our pa-
rents in the eyes of others, or in any
way to bring contempt upon them. See
what is said in the Note on tJie fifth
commandment, Ex. 20. 12. The verse
19
teth adultery with another man's
wife, even he that committeth
adultery with his neighbour's wife,
the adulteirer and the adulteress
shall surely be put to death.
11 r And the man that lieth with
his father's wife, hath uncovered
his father's nakedness: both of
them shall surely be put to death :
their blood shall be upon them.
12 sAnd if a man lie with his
daughter-in-law, both bf them shall
r ch. 18. 8. Deut. 27. 23. s ch. 18. 15.
is introduced by the illative * for ' as
indicative of its close connexion with
the precept contained in the preceding
verse ; ' Be ye holy, and keep all my
statutes, or otherwise my judgments
will fall upon you, for every one that
curseth, &c., shall be surely put to
death ;' or as the Heb. has it, fiTZl"^ THTa
moth yumath, dying shall be made to
die. The precise mode of execution is
not specified, but it is understood to be
by stoning. This form of capital pun-
ishment is uniformly to be understood
where no other is stated. IT He hath
cursed his father or his mother. This
is repeated as by a kind of note of ex-
clamation, to aggravate the enormity
of the crime. He shall be put to death,
for, with utter amazement be it said,
he hath cursed his father or his mo-
ther ! ! such a monster must surely die.
IT His blood shall be upon him.
That is, he shall be put to death as a
malefactor justly condemned to die ;
one who has brought his guilt upon his
own head, and who can blame none but
himself for the consequences. Chal.
' He is guilty of death,' i. e. worthy to
be killed. Gr. evoxoi ecrrai, he shall be
guilty. The death in this and all such
cases was stoning. ' Every place where
it is said in the law, ' they shall be put
to death ; their blood (be) upon them,'
it is meant, by stoning.' — Maimonidet
in Ainsworth.
10. See on Lev. 18. 20.
11. See on Lev. 18.8.
218
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
surely be put to death : t they have
wrought confusion ; their blood
shall be upon them.
13 ulf a man also lie with man-
kind, as he lieth with a woman,
both of them have committed an
abomination : they shall surely be
put to death ; their blood shall be
upon them.
14 X And if a man take a wife and
her mother, it is wickedness : they
shall be burnt with fire, both he
and they : that there be no wick-
edness among you.
15 y And if a man lie with a
beast, he shall surely be put to
death : and ye shall slay the beast.
16 And if a woman approach unto
any beast, and lie down thereto,
thou shalt kill the woman and the
beast ; they shall surely be put to
death; their blood shall be upon
them.
17 z And if a man shall take his
sister, his father's daughter, or his
mother's daughter, and see her na-
kedness, and she see his nakedness :
t ch. 18 23. u ch. 18. 22. Dent. 23. 17.
See Gen. 19. 5. Judg. 19. 22. x ch. 18. 17.
Deut. 27. 23. y ch. IS. 23. Deut. 27. 21.
z ch. IS. 9. Deut. 27. 22. See Gen. 20. 12.
12. See on Lev. 18. 15.
13. See oh Lev. IS. 22.
14. See on Lev. 18. 17. IT They
shall be burnt with fire. That is, after
being stoned. See Note on Josh. 7. 15.
15. 16. See on Lev. 18. 23.
17. See on Lev. 18. 9.
18. See on Lev. 18. 19.
19. See on Lev. 18. 12.
20. See on Lev. 18. 14.
21. See on Lev. 18. 16. IT They
shall be childless. ' This does not
mean,' saysMichaelis, * that God would
miraculously prevent the procreation of
children from such a marriage ; for God
no where promises any continual mira-
cle of this nature ; but only that the
children proceeding from it should not
be put to their account in the public
registers ; so that in a civil sense they
it is a wicked thin©' ; and they shall
be cut off in the sight of their peo-
ple : he hath uncovered his sister's
nakedness ; he shall bear his in-
iquity.
18 a And if a man shall lie with
a woman having her sickness, and
shall uncover her nakedness ; he
hath discovered her fountain, and
she hath uncovered the fountain
of her blood : and both of them
shall be cut off from among their
people.
19 b And thou shalt not uncover
the nakedness of thy mother's sis-
ter, nor of thy father's sister: c for
he uncovereth his near kin : they
shall bear their iniquity.
20 '^ And if a man shall lie with
his uncle's wife, he hath uncov-
ered his uncle's nakedness : they
shall bear their sin : they shall die
childless.
21 e And if a man shall take his
brother's wife, it is an unclean
thing : he hath uncovered his bro-
ther's nakedness; they shall be
childless.
22 ^ Ye shall therefore keep all
a ch. 18. 19. See ch. 15. 24. b ch. IS, 12,
13. c ch. 18. 6. d ch. 18. 14. e ch. 18. 16.
would be childless. The Heb. word
'^"iT^S'' ariri, unfruitful, has this mean-
ing, and is applied to the case of a man
who has children, but will not be heired
by them. Thus in Jer. 22. 30, it is said
of a king who certainly had children,
though they did not receive his inherit-
ance, ' Inscribe this man as childless ;
for of his posterity none shall prosper,
nor any sit upon the throne of David.'
For the children of such a marriage
would be ascribed to the deceased bro-
ther; and that, among the Israelites,
where a man made so much of the honor
of being called father, was a very sen-
sible punishment. The lxx, Augus-
tine, and Aben-Ezra, understood our
text in this manner.' — Comment on L.
of M. § 116. It must be admitted to
be not a little remarkable, that God
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXI.
219
my f statutes, and all my judg-
ments, and do them : that the land
whither I bring you to dwell there-
in, g spue you not out.
23 h And' ye shall not walk in
the manners of the nations which
I east out before you: for they
committed all these things, and
'therefore I abhorred them.
24 But 1^1 have said unto you.
Ye shall inherit their land, and I
will give it unto you to possess
it, a land that floweih wath milk
and honey : I am the Lord your
God, J which have separated you
from other people.
25 m Ye shall therefore put dif-
f ch 13. 26, and 19. 37. S ch. 18. 25, 28.
i' ch 13. 3, 24, .30. ' ch. 18. 27. Deut. 9. 5.
k Exod. 3. 17, and 6. 8. 1 ver. 26. Exod. 19.
6, and 33. 16. Deut. 7. 6, and 14. 2. 1 Kings
8. 53, m ch. 11. 47. Deut. 14. 4.
should here threaten a punishment to
be intlicted by his own special inlerpo-
sitioii, when in every other case men-
tioned he ordered it to be done by the
agency of the magistrate. This gives
considerable plausibility to the sugges-
tion above quoted ; viz. that their child-
reti should be bastardized ; at the same
time, we cannot perceive that the case
allows of so much positiveness of tone
as is evident in the language of Mi-
chaelis.
Exhortations to Obedience.
23. They committed all these things,
and therefore I abhorred them. Heb.
C3 fpitl vd-dkutz bdm, and I u-as
vexed with them. Ainsworth; 'I am
irked with them.' Chal. ' My Word
abhorreth them.' The language em-
ployed has a fearful emphasis of import.
It is much for the infinite Jehovah to
say that he will punish men for their
transgressions ; but for him to say that
he abhors them, that they are an offence
and an abomination to him, is calculated
rot only to give us a most affecting- idea
of the halefulness of their sin, but also of
ttie degree of their punishment. For
ference between clean beasts and
unclean, and between unclean
fowls and clean : « and ye shall not
make your souls abominable by
beast or by fowl, or by any man-
ner of living thing that creepeth
on the ground, which I have sepa-
rated from you as unclean.
26 And ye shall be holy unto me :
o for I the Lord am holy, and
p have severed you from othci' peo-
ple, that ye should he mine,
27 ^ q A man also or a woman
that hath a familiar spirit, or that
is a wizard, shall surely be put to
death : they shall stone them with
stones: r their blood shall be upon
them.
nch. 11. 43. 0 ver. 7. ch. 19. 2. 1 Pet.
1.16. P ver. 24. Tit. 2. 14. q ch. 19. 31.
Exod 22. 18. Deut. 18. 10, 11. 1 Sam. 23.
7, 8. r ver. 9.
when the emotion in the divine mind is
abhorrence, what must be the action of
thedivine judgments? It will be seen that
the great argument by which the pecu-
liar people are urged to obedience is
the fact that they had been separated
by a kind of holy external sequestra-
tion from all other people, and they
were consequently in like manner to be
separated by a pre-eminent sanctity of
life, spirit, and demeanor. Their con-
duct was to correspond with their dis-
tinction, and if God says by the prophet
(Is. 49. 2), 'Thou art my servant, 0
Israel, I will be glorious in thee,' they
were so to govern their deportment as
to verify the declaration. And surely
when the Most High makes his people
the depositaries of his glory, they have
a motive to obedience than which it is
impo.ssible to conceive any stronger.
CHAPTER XXI.
Rules regulating the Priests' Mourning.
As the two or three previous chapters
contain a mass of general rules enjoin-
ing sanctity upon the people at large,
we have here a special law pertainmg
m
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XXI.
AND ihe LojiD said unto Mo-
ses, Speak unto the priests
the sons of Aaron, and say unto
them, a There shall none be defiled
for the dead among his people:
a Ezek. 44. 25.
to the priests. As it was their office to
make atonement, and see to the general
purity of the people, it was important
that they should study the greatest de-
gree of personal purity themselves.
The special ministers of the Most High
were to keep themselves at a distance
from every thing that savored in the
least of uncleanness in the estimation
of the people, lest they should counte-
nance that which they were set apart to
prevent.
1. There shall none be defiled for the
dead. Heb. 'C£3p lenephesh ; a term
in repeated instances applied to a dead
body. Gr. ev rats i^u^aij, for souls.
The spirit of the passage forbids that
any priest should assist at laying out a
dead body, or preparing it for interment.
This defilement was contracted not only
by touching a dead body, but by coming
into a tent or house where a dead body
lay, by touching the grave, or by bear-
ing the dead. In such a case they be-
came legally polluted for the space of
seven days, Num. 19. 11, 14, and conse-
quently disqualified for the service of
God, and interdicted from converse with
their fellow Israelites. According to
the Heb. canons, this effect followed if
one came within four cubits, or six feet,
of the dead. Of the reasons of this pro-
hibition, it may not be possible to speak
with assurance. Leclerc observes,
' Perhaps the chief reason why a human
corpse was adjudged to be unclean was,
because it speedily becomes putrid,
especially in a hot climate ; whence
those who aspired to a special clean-
ness above others, abstained from any
contact with it.' Bochart has collected
a large mass of evidence to prove that
the ancient Greeks and Romans held
2 But for his kin, thai is near unto
him, that is, for his mother, and for
his father, and for his son, and for
his daughter, and for his brother,
3 And lor his sister a virgin, that
is nigh unto him, which hath had
that defilement was contracted from the
same source.
2. But for his kin that is near unto
him. Heb. 11^54 ^'^pn T-iJ^r:"^ lishiro
hakkarob ilauv, his remainder (of flesh)
that is near unto him See the import
of this term explained in the Note on
Lev. 18. 6. Compare also Ezek. 44. 25.
The rule here laid down constitutes, of
course, an exception to the general
statute, founded upon a kind regard to
the natural sympathies which grow out
of the various tender relationships of
life. It would have been an extreme
privation for one of llie priestly order
to have been prohibited from paying the
last offices of afieclion to a parent, a
child, a brother, or sister. It is a beau-
tiful exemplification of the great prin-
ciple that God would ' have mercy and
not sacrifice,' where the claims of both
came in competition. The wife, it will
be seen, is not expressly mentioned in
this catalogue of kindred, but that she
was included by implication, no one
can doubt. And this, by the way,
affords a strong confirmation of the prin-
ciple we have before insisted upon in
the interpretation of the marriage-laws,
in Lev. 18., that the implied cases are
equally forbidden with the express.
The case of the prophet Ezekiel, ch.
24. 16-18, is here directly in point. It
was no doubt in virtue of an express
command, suspending for the time being
the operation of this law, that he
was forbidden to exhibit the usual sig-
nals of mourning for his deceased wife,
which would otherwise have been law-
ful for him.
3. Which hath had no husband.
Whereas, had she been married, it
would have been the duty of the sur-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXI.
221
no husband : for her may he be
defiled.
4 But he shall not defile himselt,
being a chief man among his peo-
ple, "to profane himself.
5 b They shall not make baldness
b ch. 19. -27, 28. Deut. 14. 1. Ezek. 44. 20.
upon their head, neither shall they
shave off the corner of their beard,
nor make any cuttings in their flesh.
6 They shall be holy unto their
God, and c not profane the name of
their God: for the offerings of the
c ch. 13. 21, and 19. 12.
viving husband to see to the perform-
ance of all the requisite rites at her
burial, so that the priest her brother
would have been excused.
4. He shall not defile himself being a
chief vian among his people, Heb.
1"?:;>3 ^>'3 baal beammauv, which (by
supplying the probable ellipsis of ^
for) , may be rendered ' for a chief man.'
Chal. &^r:i rabba, a master. That is,
he shall not thus defile himself for any
one that is not near of kin to him,
though the dead person were a chief or
the ciiiefest man among his people, even
the high priest himself. This is the
version of the Vulg. Syr. and Arab., and
is adopted by Ains worth, Gill, Patrick,
Dalhe, Scolt, A. Clarke, and others.
The Gr. has strangely e^amva, suddenly,
which has probably arisen from some
blunder in the reading of the original.
As ^SJQ baal signifies in general a lord,
master, possessor, and is sometimes
applied to ' master of a house,' the idea
of Willet is not improbable, who
thinks the meaning to be, that the priest,
the master of the house, should mourn
for none of the inmates except those
mentioned above. Accordingly Luther
renders it, ' He shall not defile himself
for any one who belongs to him. The
marginal reading which Rosenmuller
after Leclerc adopts, gives entirely ano-
ther complexion to the passage ; — ' Be-
ing a husband among his people, he
shall not defile himself (for his wife),'
&c. This makes it an express prohibi-
tion of mourning for a wife, for which
construction we can perceive no ade-
quate grounds either in the nature of the
case or the structure of the passage.
But the matter is not of sufficient mo-
ment to warrant an extruded critical
discussion. We on the whole prefer the
interpretation suggested by Willet, and
confirmed by Luther.
6. They shall not make baldness on
their heads, &c. This was enacted that
they might not adopt the customs of
the heathen, of whom it is said in the
apocryphal book of Baruch, 6. 31, that
' their priests sit in their temples, with
their clothes rent, and their heads and
beards shaven, and having nothing upon
their heads ; and they roar and cry be-
fore their gods, as men do at the feast
where is dead.' See Note on Lev.
19. 27, 2S. ' In ch. 19. 2S, this is made a
general law, not peculiar to the priests.
They are here forbidden to do that
which had already been prohibited to
the people in general. There is a dif-
ference of opinion as to the interpreta-
tion of the text. Some think that it is
to be understood generally, as interdict-
ing the shaving of the beard. If thus
understood, there seems an adequate
reason for it in the contrary practice of
the Egyptians, who did shave their
beards ; and its repetition to the priests
may have been to show them that they
were not exempted from the general
law, as they might have been led to
conclude from having observed the pe-
culiar scrupulosity of the Egyptian
priests on this point, who, as we are
informed by Herodotus, were particu-
larly careful to shave all the hair off
their bodies every third day. The other
alternative is that which has the sanc-
tion of our translation, and by which it
appears we are to understand the whis-
kers, or upper extremities of the beard.
The object would then appear to be to
keep them a distmct people from the
Arabs, wlio either shaved their whis-
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
Lord made by fire, and ^ the bread
of their God they do offer : there-
fore they shall be holy.
7 e They shall not take a wife
d See ch. 3. 11. e Ezek. 44. 22.
leers or cropped them short. We must
not forget that it was one great object
of many of the Mosaic laws to keep the
Israelites separate from all the neigh-
boring nations ; and, whether the Egyp-
tians or the Arabs were in view, it is
certain that a different fashion of the
beard would have a more marked effect
in assisting such a distinction than can
be readily calculated by those who hold
that appendage in light esteem. That
such a distinction as we have mentioned
did exist, is not only manifested by
existing usages, but by ancient accounts.
Mohammed perceived the effect of this
distinction — for many Jews resided in
Arabia in his time — and strictly en-
joined that it should be kept up. Ac-
cording to the traditions, he used to clip
his own whiskers ; and frequently said,
' He who does not lessen his whiskers
is not our ways :' and he expressly said
that he inculcated this practice in oppo-
sition to the Jews, who were not accus-
tomed to clip either their beards or
whiskers. In these counter regulations
we seem here to perceive the object of
the apparently trivial injunction of the
Hebrew legislator.' — Pict. Bib.
6. The offerings of the Lord made by
fire and the bread of their God, do they
offer. Heb. CnM^Ji tH^ nin"^ ^Xi^
ishe Yehovuh le'hem eloh'them, the fire-
(offerings) of Jehovah, (even) the food
of their God. Thus by a bold figure
of speech are the sacrificial offerings
denominated, which were devoured by
fire to the honor of God, and nothing
could well be said tending to give a
higher idea of their office, or conse-
quently to impose upon them more sol-
emnly the duty of an exemplary sanc-
tity in all their deportment. As the
Israelites in general were separated
from all other nations to be an holy
that is a whore, or profane ; neither
shall they take a woman f put away
from her husband : for he is holy
unto his God.
f See Deut. 24. 1, 2.
people lo the Most High, so the priests
and Levites were in a manner separated
from the rest of the Israehtes with a
like intent.
Restrictions in respect to a Priest's
marrying.
7. They shall not take a wife, &c.
The two words in the original are n2T
zonah, and nb^ilhallalah, of which the
latter, rendered profane, signifies, ac-
cording to the Jews, not so much one
that had been profaned or dishonored,
in which case it would not difier essen-
tially from the preceding, as one who
was born of such a marriage as was for-
bidden to the priests. For as it ap-
pears from V. 9, that a daughter might
profane her father, so a parent, on the
other hand, might profane a daughter,
and so disqualify her from marrying a
priest. The daughter of a widow by a
high priest, for example, would come
under this denomination (v. 14) and so
also the daughter of a divorced woman,
by the present verse. As the Gr., how-
ever, has 0c0n\(x>i^Ltvrjv, profaned, a sense
quite as probable is, one that has been
violated against her will, and that is not
a voluntary prostitute, like the n2T zo-
nah. The use of the epithet carries
with it the striking implication that
chastity invests the person willi a pe-
culiar sacredness, and that it cannot be
lost without the desecration and profa-
nation of that which is in a sense holy,
like a consecrated temple. IT A wo-
man put away. Heb. n'»r"l*l3 n^i?
ishclh gerushuh, a woman driven away.
Gr. EKi3£0)^ri[j£vT,v, cast out. The Heb.
term is stronger than that (nVi)!^ "le*
s/ja/a'/i) which is usually applied to
the simple dismission involved in di.
vorce. Yet there is no doubi thai the
' putting away' here mentioned, was by
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXI.
223
8 Thou shalt sanctify him there-
fore, for he offereth the bread of
thy God : he shall be holy unto
thee : g for I the Lord which sanc-
tify you, am holy.
S ch. iO. 7, 8.
moans of a divorce. The presumption
always was tliat a woman repudiated
among the Israelites, was put away from
her hubband lor some lault. It was not
diicorous, therefore, for a priest to blem-
ibh his good name by marrying a wo-
man who lay under a suspicion of some-
thing bad. ^ He is holy unto his
God. Set apart and consecrated in a
peculiar manner to the service of God,
and therefore not allowed to bring dis-
credit upon his office by doing any thing
of dubious character.
8. Thou shalt sanctify him therefore.
That is, thou, Israel, shalt, one and all,
hold and repute him as holy, and shalt
do all in thy power to keep up the sa-
cred estimation in which, for his office's
sake, he is held. It is possible, how-
ever, that the address may be intended
to be made to Moses, who was to sanc-
tify the priest by commanding him to
be sanclitied, according to a very fre-
quent idiom.
Of the Priest's Daughter who profanes
herself.
9. The daughter of any priest. Heb.
"ip'D llJ-Ji ish kohcn, a vian a priest.
There is great unanimity among the
Jewish commentators in understanding
this of a woman who was married, or
at least espoused. ' Our rabbins,' say
Aben Ezra and Sol. Jarchi, 'confess
with one mouth that one not espoused
is not concerned in this law.' But as
ll.e letter of the law contains no such
limitation, it is doubtless safe to take it
in its widest import. She is said by
such conduct to pollute her father's
name ; whereas if she were married, the
wrong would be rather done to her hus-
band. tr She profaneth her father,
that iS; brings disgrace upon him. Gr.
9 IF ii And the daughter of any
priest, if she profane herself by
playing the whore, she profaneth
her father: she shall be burnt
with fire.
b Gen. 38. 24.
TO ovo^a Tov narpos avrm avrrj /3e/3r]\oi,
she profaneth her father's name. Chal.
' She profaneth her father's holiness.'
By Sol. Jarchi it is thus explained:
' She proianelh and contemnelh his hon-
or, for that men will say of him. Cursed
is he that begat this woman ; Cursed is
he that brought her up.' TT She shall
be burnt with fire. ' It seems, upon the
whole, very doubtful whether this and
other texts of the same import in the
early books of the Old Testament, ex-
press the punishment of burning alive,
or of the ignominious burning of the
body after execution. It is certain we
have no instance of the former punish-
ment; but we have of the latter, as re-
sulting from such a law as that ex-
pressed in the text. Thus in Josh 7. 15,
it is declared that the unknown person
who had taken of the accursed thing
should be ' burnt with fire ;' and when
the man was discovered, we find that
this intention was executed not by burn-
ing him alive, but by stoning him first
I and then burning his remains (v. 15).
We therefore lean to the opinion, that
I stoning, being the common and well-
known punishment, is understood in
these texts, and that only the additional
' punishment of burning the body is ex-
I pressed. Michaelis thinks that burn-
I ing alive was not sanctioned by the
I Mosaic law ; but Home, who generally
[ follows him, seems to consid^-r that
both burning alive and burning after
death are among the punishments men-
tioned by Moses ; and it is rather odd
j that he cites the same texts in proof of
j both — namely, the one before us and
'< that in the next chapter. The testimo-
: ny of the Rabbins is worth very little
in this matter, as many capital punish-
ments were in later times introduced, of
224
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490
10 iAnd he that is the high priest
among his brethren, upon whose
head the anointing oil was poured,
and k that is consecrated to put on
the garments, 1 shall not uncover
his head, nor rend his clothes;
i Exod. 29. 29, 30. ch. S. 1-2, and 16. 32.
Numb. 35. 25. k Exod. 28. 2. ch. 16. 32.
1 ch. 10.6.
which the law of Moses takes no notice.
They say, that because the bodies of
Nadab and Abihu were not consumed
by the fire which slew them, it was
thought unlawful to burn a criminal
alive ; but that he was put to death by
melted lead being poured down his
throat. We may accept this so far as
to show that persons were not consumed
alive in the fire ; but we are bound to
reject the other part, as wholly unsanc-
tioned by the law of Moses. It is pos-
sible that they may had this punish-
ment in after times, when the meaning
of the law had been greatly perverted
by absurd glosses and inferences.' —
Fict. Bib.
Rules regulating the Conduct of the
High Priest.
10. He that is the high priest among
his brethren. Heb. ^n^H Y>^n
l^riH^S hakkohen haggadol ml'e^hauv,
the priest (that is) great among his
brethren, or, greater than his breth-
ren. Gr. h kpevs 0 jJicyag^ the great
priest ; from which the apostle, Heb.
4. 14, applies the same title to Christ,
of whom the Jewish high priest was a
distinguished type. Sustaining, there-
fore, this high character, the Hebrew
pontiff was to be more especially stu-
dious of his sanctity, both in avoiding
defilement by the dead, and in his mar-
riage. This, by the way, is the first
time the title occurs in this form in the
Scriptures. IT That is consecrated to
put on the garments. That is, the
golden garments, as they were called,
which were peculiar to the high priest,
and of which a full account is jriven,
11 Neither shall he mgo ia to any
dead body, nor defile himself for
his father or his mother ;
12 11 Neither shall he go out of
the sanctuary, nor profane the
sanctuary of his God; for othe
m Numb. 19. 14. See ver. 1,2. n ch. 10
7. o Exod. 23. 36. ch. 8. 9, 12, 30.
Ex. 28. The Heb. phrase for ' conse-
crated ' is 'whose hand is filled,' i. e
with sacrifices for offering, as the Chal
explains it, which the Gr. expresses by
the word T£>£tow, to perfect. See the
true import illustrated in the note on
Ex. 29. 9. IT Shall not uncover his
head. Heb. ^^^^ V^ Tl^H'n rosho al
yiphrd, shall not make free his head;
i. e. shall not sufier his hair to go dis-
hevelled and neglected, without trim-
ming, in token of mourning. See the
true force of the original term elucidat-
ed, Judg. 5. 2. Chal. ' Let not his locks
grow.' Gr. ovk a-oKtSapcocei, let him not
put off his mitre. See Note on Lev.
10.6.
11. Neither shall he go in to any dead
body. Heb. fi^ riC£3 ^3 '^5 al kol
naphshoth mi'th, to aiiy souls of the
dead. Gr. ctti naari ipv^r) TSreXevTriKvia,
to any soul that has died. Another in-
stance, in which the usual Heb. and Gr.
terms for ' soul ' are used to signify
•' body.' See Note on Lev. 21. 1. The
interdict here was very rigorous. He
WAS not permitted to go into the house
where his father or mother lay dead,
though this was allowed to the inferior
priests.
12. Neither shall he go out of the
sanctuary, &c. That is, during the
time that he was officially engaged in
the services of the sanctuary. It mat-
tered not who of his family died j he was
not to leave his post till his ministra-
tions were finished. It is intimated
that by so doing he would ^profane the
sanctuary of his God,' i. e. would con-
structively profane it by showing that
he thought more of earthly relation-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXI.
225
crown of the anointing oil of his
God is upon him: I a/n the Lord.
13 And V he shall take a wife in
her virginity.
14 A widow, or a divorced wo-
man, or profane, or an harlot, these
shall he not take: but he shall
take a virgin of his own people to
wife.
15 ISeither shall he profltue his
P ver. 7. Exek, 44. 22.
seed among his people : for ql the
Lord do sanctify him.
16 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
17 Speak unto Aaron, saying,
Whosoever he be of thy seed in
their generations that hath «ny
blemish, let him not r approach to
offer the bread of his God :
q ver. 8. r ch. 10. 3. Numb. 16. 5, Ps.
64. 4. ch. 3. 11.
ships than of his sacred functions ; that
he postponed his duty as a priest to
his promptings as a man. The Gr. has
IK TU)i> ayii^iv, from the holy things.
IT For the crown of the anointing oil of
his God is upon him. Heb. "^J^TD *nT]
nn'U?2 nczer shemen mish^ hath, which
may be understood in two ways ; either
of the golden plate which is called ^T3
nezer, a crown, Ex. 29. 6, and the
anointing oil ; or the latter may be
simply exegeiical of the former, and
oil may be called nezer, a crown or
separation, because it was by it that he
was separated from other men and other
priests. So the Gr. evidently under-
stands it, which has nothing answering
to < crown' separate from the 'oil,'
ayiov iXaiov to ^okttov tov Osov the holy
oil, the chrism (or anointing) of his
God. Adam Clarke very well remarks
upon this, * By his office the (high)
priest represented Christ in his sacri-
ficial character ; by liis anointing, the
prophetic influence ; and by the crown
the regal dignity of our Lord.'
13. He shall take a wife in her vir-
ginity. Heb. (T^piriD bibthulehd in
her virginity, a term derived from ^DDn
bSthal, to separate, set apart, seclude ;
and applied to a virgin from her being
separated and secluded from intercourse
with ineu, which is emineiuly the case
in the East. Compare this and the fol-
lowing verse with verse 7, v;here the
prohibited marriages of common priests
are mentioned. The difference is, that
widows are mentioned among those
whom the high priest might not marry,
but not among those with whom the
common priest is forbidden to contract
alliance. It would therefore seem that
the common priest was allowed to mar-
ry a widow, as Josephus declares. Gro-
tius and others, however, think that a
priest could not marry any widow, but
one whose deceased husband had also
been a priest. This is inferred from
Ezek. 44. 22. The high priest, being
precluded from marrying a widow, was
of course exempt from marrying the
widow of a brother who died without
children. The Mohammedans have no
regulations on this subject, being, in
fact, without any distinct priestly order.
But in India it is not lawful for the
priests to marry any but virgins. As
the high priest was a type of Christ,
his wife, who was to be a virgin, was
a type of the church ; wlierefore the
apostle says, 2 Cor. 11.2, 'I have es-
poused you to one husband, that I may
present you a chaste virgin to Christ.'
15. Neither shall he profane his seed
among the people. That is, he shall
not render his sons unfit for the priest-
hood by marrying contrary to the rules
above laid down, vv. 13, 14. ^ For
I the Lord do sanctify him. That is,
have separated him to my service.
Rules in regard to personal Blemishes.
17. Whosoever he be of thy seed in
their generations. That is, of thy sons
in any generation of thy posterity. The
address is made to Aaron, and by the
sons of Aaron is always to be under-
stood his successors in the priestly of?
226
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
18 For "whatsoever man ^eJe that [
hath a blemish, he shall not ap-
proach : a blind man, or a lame, or j
he that hath a flat nose, or any \
thing s superfluous.
19 Or a man that is broken-footed,
or broken-handed.
20 Or crook-backed, or a dwarf,
or that hath a blemish in his eye,
or be scurvy, or scabbed, or thath
his stones broken ;
21 No man that hath a blemish
of the seed of Aaron the priest shall
come nigh to coffer the offerings of
the Lord made by fire ; he hath a
blemish, he shall not come nigh to
offer the bread of his God.
22 He shall eat the bread of his
s ch. 22. 23. t Deut. 23. 1. u ver. 6.
fice. The directions therefore concern-
ed the priests. It is made a standing
law that no man whose person was any
way disfigured by a blemish should
minister at the altar. No individual of
Aaron's line who was marked by pro-
minent blemishes, defects, or superflu-
ities ; by unseemly or ill-favored fea-
tures ; by deformity in any part of his
body, whether natural or accidental ;
or had any permanent distemper upon
him, as scurvy itch, scurf, scab, &c.,
was admitted to the exercise of the
priestly prerogative. This requirement
is undoubtedly founded upon a just
view of human nature, as men are prone
to judge by the outward appearance,
and to think meanly of any service,
however honorable, which is performed
by agents distinguished by personal de-
fects. It was greatly for the credit of
the sanctuary, therefore, that none
should appear there, who were any way
disfigured by nature or by accident, as
it would be regarded as an indignity to
the Deity to consecrate a blemished or
imperfect man to his service. But
whatever considerations of a subordi-
nate nature may be urged for this stat-
tite, the grand reason is undoubtedly to
be found in the fact, that the priests,
God, both of the ^ most holy, and
of the yholy.
23 Only he shall not go in unto
the vail, nor come nigh unto the
altar, because he hath a blemish;
that z he profane not my sanctu-
aries : for I the Lord do sanctify
them.
24 And Moses told it unto Aaron,
and to his sons, and unto all the
children of Israel.
CHAPTER XXn.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto Aaron and to his
X ch. 2. 3, 10, and C. 17, 29, and 7. 1, and
24. 9. Numb. 18. 9. y ch. 22. 10, 11, 12.
Numb. 13. 19. z ver. 12.
both in their persons and their work,
were types of Him who was the * Lamb
without blemish and without spot,'
holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate
fi om sinners. As the particular defects
mentioned are sufficiently plain to pre-
clude the necessity of comment, we
barely remark, that although these de-
fects disqualified the priests for the sa-
cred functions, they did not exclude
them from their prescribed mainte-
nance, as is evident from v. 22, ' He
shall eat the bread of his God, both of
the most holy and the holy.'
CHAPTER XXII.
Further Directions respecting the Miw
ist rat ions of the Priests.
The same general subject is contin-
ued in the present chapter as in the pre-
ceding, viz. the specification of the va-
rious causes which were to operate as
impediments in the way of the priests'
discharging their appropriate functions.
Of these the prmcipal were the ceremo-
nial uncleanness to which they might
be subject. In the subsequent part of
the chapter the scope of the lawgiver is
to teach, that the sacrifices, as well as
the offerers must be free from blemish,
in order to be acceptable.
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXII.
227
sons, that they a separate them-
selves from the holy things of the
children of Israel, and that ihey
b profane not my holy name in those
things which they c hallow unto
me : I a7n the Lord.
',i Say unto them. Whosoever he
be of all your seed among your
generations, that goeth unto the
holy things, which the children of
Israel hallow unto the Lord, ti hav-
ing his uncleanness upon him, that
soul shall be cut off from my pres-
ence: I am the Lord.
4 What man soever of the seed
of Aaron is a leper, or hath ea run-
ning issue; he shall not eat of the
holy things, funtil he be clean.
a Numb. 6. 3, b ch, 18. 21. c Exod. 28.
38. Numb. 18. 32. Deut. 15. 19. d ch. 7.
20. e cli. 15. 2.
2. Speak unto Aaron and to his sons,
that they separate themselves from the
holy thiiigs, &c. Heb. nTj"^ yinnazerti,
that they be separated. The root of the
verb is IT] nazar, to separate, from
which comes ' Nazarite,' one religious-
ly separated from all secular relations.
Gr. ffpoo-£;^£ra)aaj/ am tojv ayio)v, let them
take heed of the holy things. The pre-
cept has respect to such of the priests
as were ceremonially unclean. During
the time that this uncleanness was upon
them they were to abstain from eating
the holy things which ordinarily belong-
ed to the priests. 11 That they profane
not my holy name. Heb. "^IDIp CiU shem
kodshi, the name of my holiness. But
the equivalent rendering of our version
is confirmed by the Gr. to opoj^a to ayi-
ov fiov, my holy name. The sanctuary
would of course be profaned when its
holy things were defiled, which they
would be when offered or eaten by per-
sons unclean, contrary to the express
commandment of God. Compare vv,
15, 32.
3. Ainong your generations. That
is, either now or at any time hereafter.
!- — IT That goeth unto the holy things.
And g whoso toucheth any thing
that is unclean by the dead, or ba
man whose seed goeth from him ;
5 Or i whosoever toucheth any
creeping thing, whereby he may be
made unclean, or ka man of whom
he may take uncleanness, whatso-
ever uncleanness he hath :
6 The soul which hath touched
any such shall be unclean until
even, and shall not eat of the holy
things, unless he i wash his flesh
with water.
7 And when the sun is down, he
shall be clean, and shall afterward
eat of the holy things, because m it
is his food.
f ch. 14. 2, and 15. 1.3. e Numb. 19. 11, 22.
h ch. 15. 16. i ch. 11. 24, 43, 44. i^ ch. 15.
7, 19. 1 ch. 15. 5. Heb. 10. 22. «« ch. 21.
22. Numb. 18. 11, 13.
That is, for the purpose of eating, as is
to be inferred from vv. 4, 6, 12.
IT Shall be cut off from my presence.
Heb. "^llfi^S mippen'e, from my face or
presence ; with a latent allusion to the
visible signal of the divine presence in
the Shekinah of the tabernacle. The
offender would be cut off before that, as
were Nadab and Abihu.
4. Unclean by the dead. Heb. 5^)2tD
lUSD teme nephesh, unclean (by) a soul.
Gr. V^yx';, soul. For parallel usage see
on Lev. 19. 28, and 21. 1, and of the na-
ture of the uncleanness see Numb.
19. 11, 14,22. The uncleannesses ad-
verted to m the next chapter are such
as were contracted by leprosy, running
of the reins, involuntary seed-llux ;
touching the carcase of any forbidden
creature ; eating of any animal that
died of itself, or was torn to pieces by
a ravenous beast or bird ; or by coming
in contact with any person who was at
the time legally unclean ; with similar
instances, which have been considered
in the previous chapters.
6-9. Shall be unclean until even, &c.
The priest thus rendered unclean was
to remain like other Israelites, in a
228
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
8 ^ That which dieth of itself, or
is torn ivith beasts, he shall not eat
to defile himself therewith : I am
the Lord.
9 They shall therefore keep mine
ordinance, ^ lest they bear sin for
it, and die therefore, if they profane
it : 1 the Loud do sanctify them.
10 p There shall no stranger eat
of the holy thing: a sojourner of
the priest, or an hired servant,
shall not eat of the holy thing.
D Exod. 22. 31, ch. 17. 15. Ezek. 44. 31.
o Exod. 23. 43. Numb. 18. 22. 32. P See 1
Sam. 21. 6.
state of separation for a day, i. e, till
sunset, and be incapable of all priestly
offices and privileges till he had washed
his clothes and his body, and this under
the penalty of ' bearing sin,' or suffer-
ing condign punishment by being cut
off by the immediate hand of God, as
a bold profaner of his service.
Strangers, Sojourners, and Hired Ser-
vants interdicted from eating the
Holy Things.
10. There shall no stranger eat of
the holy thing. That is, not one of
another nation, a foreigner, but one that
is not of the seed of Aaron, of the family
of some priest, is not to be maintained
by him out of his share of the sacrifices.
IT Sojourner. Heb. iffiin tosh'tb,
from I'J'i ydshab, to dwell. Gr. -apoiKos,
a stranger-resident. By a ' sojourner
of the priest' is to be understood one
that should be a boarder or lodger with
him, a transient inmate of his house.
Such an one was not to eat of the con-
secrated things, but was to live upon
what accrued to the priest from his
common tithes. So also with the hired
servant.
11. If the priest buy any soul with
his money. Heb. '^'l5p :L'£3 TOp'i "^IJ
ISDiD ki yikneh nephesh kinyan kispho,
when he shall buy a soul the purchase
of his money. It is evident from this
that there were among the ancient He-
brews persons who were bought with
11 But if the priest buy any soul
with his money, he shall eat of it,
and he that is born in his house :
qthey shall eat of his meat.
12 If the priest's daughter also be
married unto a stranger, she may
not eat of an offering of the holy
things.
13 But if the priest's daughter be
a widow, or divorced, and have no
child, and is Teturned unto her
father's house, s as in her youth, she
q Numb. 18. 11,13. r Gen. 38. 11. s ch.
10. 14. Numb. 18. 11, 19.
money. At the same lime it by no
means follows, that the slavery which
existed among them was of a nature
similar to that which is unhappily es-
tablished among us, or which can be
justly pleaded as a precedent to war-
rant it. Those who were thus * pur-
chased,' and held in this servile rela-
tion, were generally those of their own
nation, who from being reduced to a
stale of poverty, had sold their own
services, or those whose services had
become forfeited by a breach of the
laws, or lastly, those who were obtained
from the surrounding heathen in the
manner which will be considered in the
Notes on Lev. 25. It is certain, hov/-
ever, that from whatever source they
were obtained, they v/ere treated like
the rest of the family to which they
belonged, and had privileges entirely
unknown to modern servitude. See
Note on Gen. 15. 3. IT He that is
born in his house. The children of his
slave.
12, 13. If a priesVs daughter be mar'
ried to a stranger. That is, to one
who was not of the stock or family of
the priests, in relation to whom oihei
Israelites were counted as ' strangers.'
By marrying out of the priestly linf
she of course lost the right which sht
had to her share of the Levitical main-
tenance while she remained at home in
her father's house. An exception tc
this rule is stated in the next verse,
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXII.
229
shall eat of her father's meat ; but
there shall no stranger eat thereof.
14 ^tAnd if a man eat of the
holy thing unwittingly, then he
shall put the fifth part thereof unto
.t, and shall give it unto the priest,
wiih the holy thing.
15 And u they shall not profane
I lie holy things of the children of
Israel which they offer unto the
LoiiD :
16 Or suffer them ^ to bear the
iniquity of trespass, when they eat
« ch. 5. 15, 16. u Numb. IS. 32. x ver. 9.
when a priest's daughter so married
was left a widow, or had been divorced,
without children. In this case, she was
permitted to return and become a mem-
ber of her father's family as before, and
ate of his food, like the rest of his
family.
The case of one who ate of the Holy
Things unwittingly.
14. If a man eat of the holy thing
unwittingly. Heb. n33'i;3 bishgagdh,
throu'gh unadvised error. Though the
act were done ignorantly and uninten-
tionally, yet in order to inspire the ut-
most caution in respect to holy things,
the priest was to afijjc a value to the
thing eaten, which the offender was
obliged to pay, together with a fifth
part of the value in addition ; all which
went to the priest.
15, 16. They shall not profane, &c.
That is, the priests should not profane
the holy things by suffering them to be
eaten by strangers. The phrase in the
next verse, * suffer them to bear the ini-
quity,' may be rendered ' cause them to
bear,' meaning that they shall not by
their negligence cause the people to fall
under the punishment which God would
inflict for such a trespass. Otherwise
it may be understood of the priests
themselves, which appears to be inti-
mated by the marginal reading, ' lade
themselves with the iniquity of trespass
m their eating.' This is favored by the
20
their holy things: fori the Lord
do sanctify them.
17 H And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
18 Speak unto Aaron, and to his
sons, and unto all the children of
Israel, and say unto them, y What-
soever he be of the house of Israel,
or of the strangers in Israel, that
will offer his oblation for all his
vows, and for all his free-will-offer-
ings, which they will offer unto
the Lord for a burnt-ofiering :
y ch. 1. 2, 3, 10. Numb. 15. 14.
Gr. which has eTra^ovai e(j)' eavTovs avoynav,
bring upon them iniquity. But after
all it is scarcely possible to determine
whether the priests or the people are
intended.
Free-will and Thank-offerings for
Vows to be without Blemish.
18. Speak unto Aaron, and to his
sons, and unto all the children of Israel.
As the enactments that follow had re-
spect to the quality of the sacrifices
which were to be offered by the congre-
gallon, the congregation had, of course,
as much concern in them as the priests,
and therefore they are addressed to the
whole people collectively. They con-
stitute a strict injunction that all sacri-
fices by way of present, or free-will
offering to God, made either by Israelite
or proselyte, for thanksgiving for former
mercies, or by way of vow for procur-
ing blessings desired, should be perfect
in their kind. No beast that was mark-
ed by any apparent defect, superfluity,
excrescence, deformity, or disease, was
permitted to come upon the altar. For
the reason of this statute, see Note on
Lev. 1., prefatory remarks. IT Or of
the strangers in Israel. Heb. ^^H ^2
min haggir, from the stranger, collect,
sing. Gr. tuw T:po(rr]\vTiJv tmv KOoaKCi-
fiEvoiv TTpog avTovi cv lo-joarjX, of the pros-
elytes joined unto them in Israel ; i. e.
such of the surrounding heathen na-
lions as had renounced idolatry and be-
S30
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
19 * Ye shall offer at your own
will a male without blemish of the
beeves, of the sheep, or of the goats.
20 ^Biii whatsoever hath a blem-
ish, that shall ye not offer: for it
shall not be acceptable for you.
21 And b whosoever off'ereth a
sacrifice of peace-offerings unto the
Lord c to accomplish his vow, or a
free-will-offering in beeves, or
sheep, it shall be perfect to be ac-
cepted: there shall be no blemish
therein.
22 d Blind, or broken, or maimed,
or having a wen, or scurvy, or scab-
z ch. 1. 3. a Deut. 16. il, and 17. 1. Mai.
1. 8, 14. Eph. 5. 27. Heb. 9, 14. 1 Pet. 1.
19. b ch. 3. 1, 6. c ch. 7. 16. Numb. 15.
3, 8. Deut. i3. 21, 23. Ps. 61. 8, and 65.
1. EccJes. 5. 4, 5. d ver. 20. Mai. 1. 8.
come converts to the faith of Israel, but
had not been circumcised. These were
usually called proselytes of the gate,
and diflered entirely from the strangers
alluded to, v. 25, as will be seen by the
Note in loc.
19. At your own will. Rather, ac-
cording to the Heb. ' for your favorable
acceptance.' See Note on Lev. 1. 3.
Gr. 6cKra, acceptable. Thus too, Sol.
Jarchi, ' Bring the thing that is meet to
make you acceptable before me, that it
may be to your favorable acceptation.'
So in the next verse, the leading word
in the clause, ' it shall not be acceptable
for you.' is in the original precisely the
same ("^IIS"! rdtzon).
23. That hath any thing superfluous
or lacking. That is, deformed by any
peculiar elongation or contraction of its
limbs. ir That mayest thou off er for
a free-will offering. The most obvi-
ous construction of iliis passage is, that
the two kinds of defect just mentioned,
though they prevented the acceptance
of an animal for a vow, did not for
a free-will offering; which would seem
to have been con.^idered of less value.
But the Hebrew writers understand by
free-will offering, in this case, not an
offering for sacrifice on the altar, where
bed, ye shall not offer these unto
the Lord, nor make ean offering
by fire of them upon the altar unto
the Lord.
23 Either a bullock, or a lamb
that hath any thing ^superfluous
or lacking in his parts, that mayest
thou offer for a free-will-offering ;
but for a vow it shall not be ac-
cepted.
24 Ye shall not offer unto the
Lord that which is bruised, or
crushed, or broken, or cut ; neither
shall ye make any offering thereof
in your land.
25 Neither gfrom a stranger's
hand shall ye oflfer ^ the bread of
e ch. 1. 9, 13, and 3. 3, 5. f ch. 21. 18.
§ Numb. 15. 15, 16, hch. 21.6, 17.
a blemished beast under no circum-
stances was allowed, but for the main-
tenance of the priests, or for sacred
uses in general } as, for instance, to be
sold for the reparation of the temple,
&c.
24. Ye shall not offer unto the Lord
that which is bruised, or crushed, or
broken, or cut. That is, castrated ; of
which there were four modes, expressed
by these four terms. IT Neither shall
ye make any offering thereof in your
land. Heb. iryri St^) C»::ni<n beartze-
kem lo taasu, in your land ye shall 7iot
make or do {it). That is, as the He-
brews understand it, ye shall not do this
thing, ye shall not be in the piaclice of
castrating your animals in any part of
your land. Otherwise it may be under-
stood as in our version, which is sustain-
ed by the Greek. See Note on Deut. 23. 1.
25. Neither from a stranger^s hand
shall ye offer. Heb. ^^3 "p Ti?a
miyad b'in nakdr, from the hand of the
son of an alien. That is, a Gentile, a
foreigner, one not of the seed of Israel.
Gr. aWoytvrjs, of another stock. The
Hebrew writers for the most part ex-
pound this of blemished beasts, brought
by Gentiles to be offered to the Lord,
which was sometimes the case with
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXII.
231
your God of any of these ; because
their i corruption zs in them, anc?
blemishes be in them : they shall
not be accepted for you.
26 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
21 k When a bullock, or a sheep,
or a goat is brought forth, then it
shall be seven days under the dam ;
and from the eighth day and thence-
forth it shall be accepted for an of-
fering made by fire unto the Lord.
28 And ivhcther it be cow, or ewe,
ye shall not kill it land her young
both in one day.
i Mai. 1.14. k Exod. 22. 30. 1 Deut. 22. 6.
those who were convinced of the folly
of idolatry, and felt the prompting of a
better service towards God. This is
recognized by Maimonides : ' If the
heathen (Gentile) bringeth peace-offer-
ings, he offereth them for burnt-offerings,
for the heathen's heart is towards
heaven ;' they are often prompted to
worship. We see something of this
kind iu the case of Cyrus, Ezra 6. 8-10.
But though their sacrifices were allow-
ed, yet tlie victims were required to be
no less perfect than those of the Israel-
ites. As ihey were to bring no blem-
ished offering, so they were to take
none such from the hand of a stranger.
Such offerers were obliged to adhere to
the riles of the country observed by the
priests. Thus Alexander the Great,
when he was at Jerusalem, offered sac-
rifice to God according to the directions
of the high priest. Josephus, Lib. 11.,
at the end. IT Because their corrup-
tion is in them. That is, their faults
are in them, the faults above mentioned ;
which might as a general rule be pre-
sumed, coming from the source lliey
did. It would be natural that the ideas
of the heathen on these matters would
be very loose.
The -^ge at which different Animals
were to be offered to God.
27. It shall be seven days under the
29 And when ye will m offer a
sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the
Lord, offer it at your own will.
30 On the same day it shall be
eaten up, ye shall leave n none of it
until the morrow: I am the Lord.
31 o Therefore shall ye keep my
commandments, and do them : I
am the Lord.
32 p Neither shall ye profane my
holy name; butql will be hallowed
among the children of Israel : I
am the Lord which r hallow you,
m ch. 7. 12. Ps. 107. 22, and IIC. 17. Amos
4. 5. n ch. 7. 15. o ch. 19. 37. Numb. 15. 40.
Deut. 4. 40. P ch. 13. 21. q ch. 10. 3.
Matt. 6. 9. Luke 11. 2. r ch. 20. 8.
dam. Before the eighth day they were
not fit for food, and therefore not for
sacrifice, which was the bread or food
of God, as it is frequently termed. See
Note on Ex. 22. 30.
28. Ye shall not kill it and her young
both in one day. This precept seems
to be confined to sacrifices, which were
to be devoid of all appearance of cruelty.
The Jews in general understand it as
inculcating mercy. Maimonides ex-
pressly remarks, that it was designed
to prevent the slaughter of the young
' in the presence of the dam, because
this occasions to animals extreme grief;
nor is there, in this respect, a difference
between the distress of man and that of
the irrational creation.' The Targum
of Jonathan beautifully introduces the
verse with this paraphrase ; — ' And my
people, the children of Israel, as our
Father is merciful in heaven, so be ye
merciful on earth.'
CHAPTER XXIIL
THE JEWISH FESTIVALS.
The present chapter partakes in great
measure of the character of the nine-
teenth, containing a republication of
certain laws. The inspired historian
having previously given full details of
the statutes relative to holy persons,
holy things, and holy places, now enters
1^32
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
33 • That brought you out of the
» Ex. 6. 7. ch. 11. 45, and 19. 36, and 55.
39. Numb. 15. 41.
land of Egypt, to be your God : I
am the Lord.
upon the consideration of holy times.
The laws relative to the annual fast,
the feast of trumpets, and the three
great annual festivals, are here all
brought together in one view, in their
chronological order, along with the law
of tlie Sabbath; and additions to the
ceremonies, as before prescribed, are
interspersed. These festivals consti-
tuted a very peculiar feature of the
Hebrew polity. Their influence, in-
volving as they did the meeting of the
mass of the male population in one
place three times every year, cannot be
too highly estimated. The journey
itself, taking place at the finest season
of the year, would naturally be deemed
rather a recreative excursion than a
hardship, in a country so small as that
which the Hebrews were destined to
occupy. One grand design of these
re-unions appears to have been to coun-
teract the dividing tendency of the sepa-
ration into clans or tribes. By being
thus brought into contact on an equal
footing, they were reminded of their
common origin, and of their common
objects. The fact was brought home
vividly to their thoughts that they were
the sons of the same father, worship-
pers of the same God, and heirs of the
same promises. The beginnings also
of idolatry were likely to be checked
by the frequent renewal of these acts
of worship and homage. Persons of
distant towns and different tribes met
together on terms of brotherhood and
fellowship; and old relations were re-
newed, and new ones formed.
Several sections are devoted by Mi-
chaelis to the statement of the political
and other advantages resulting from
these festivals. Among other conside-
rations, he observes, that if any of the
tribes happened to be jealous of each
other, or, as was sometimes the case,
involved in civil war, still their meet-
ing together in one place for the purpos-
es of religion and sociality, had a ten-
dency to prevent their being completely
alienated, and forming themselves into
two or more unconnected states ; and
even though this had at any time hap-
pened, it gave them an opportunity of
again cementing their differences, and
re-uniting. This is so correctly true,
that the separation of the ten tribes
from the tribe of Judah, under Reho-
boam and Jeroboam, could never have
been permanent, had not the latter ab-
rogated one part of the Law of Moses
relative to festivals.
Another effect of these meetings rb-
garded the internal commerce of the
Israelites. From the annual conven-
tions of the whole people of any country
for religious purposes, there generally
arise, without any direct intention on
their part, annual fairs, and internal
commerce. Such festivals have always
been attended with this effect. The
famous old fair near Hebron arose from
the congregation of pilgrims to the ter-
ebinth-tree of Abraham. The yearly
fairs among the Germans had a similar
origin. Among the Mohammedans
similar festivals have always had the
same results. Witness the annual pil-
grimage to Mecca, which, in spite of
many adverse circumstances, has given
birth to one of the greatest markets in
the world. Now the very same eflects
and to a still higher degree, must, even
without any intention on the part of the
legislator, have resulted from the high
festivals of the Hebrews, to which the
whole people were bound to assemble ;
and more particularly as far as regards
internal trade. Let us only figure to
ourselves what would necessarily fol-
low from such festivals being establish-
ed. Every man would bring along with
him every portable article which he
could spare, and which he wished to turn
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXni.
CHAPTER XXni.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, and say unro them, Concern-
ing a the feasts of the Lord, which
a ver. 4. 37.
into money ; and as several individuals
would go from the same place, they
would contrive various expedients to
render their goods portable ; and this
would be the more readily suggested
by the habit of taking things, some of
them needing carriage, to Jerusalem, as
dues and oiferings. Nor are means of
conveyance expensive in the East, as
they consist not, as with us, of wagons
and horses, but of asses and camels —
beasts which are highly serviceable in
promoting the internal traffic of Syria
and Arabia. There could never be any
want of buyers, where the whole people
were convened ; and the wholesale mer-
chants would soon find it for their ad-
vantage to attend, and purchase the
commodities offered for sale by private
individuals, especially manufactured
goods. Whoever wished to purchase
any particular articles would await the
festivals in order to have a choice ;
and this, too, would lead great mer-
chants to attend with all manner of
goods for sale, for which they could
hope to find purchasers. However,
therefore, Moses may have desired to
discourage the Israelites from engaging
in/oreeg^n commerce, his measures were,
in this instance at least, and whether
intended or not, highly favorable to the
internal intercourse and traffic of the
country.
For a more extended view of the
happy effects, political, social, and eco-
nomical, of these festivals, see Mi-
chaelis' Comment, on Laws of Moses,
vol. Ill § 197-201.
General Introduction.
2. Concerning the feasts of the Lord.
Heb. niri"" 'il^'I'O mocd'e Yehovah, (as
20*
ye shall b proclaim to be holy con-
vocations, even these are my feasts
3 c Six days shall work be done ;
but the seventh day is the sabbath
of rest, an holy convocation : ye
b Exod. 32. 5. 2 Kings 10. 20. Ps. 81. 3
c Exod. 20. 9, and 23. 12, and 31. 15, and 34
21. ch. 19. 3. Deut. 5. 13. Luke 13. 14.
to) the feasts of Jehovah. The origina.
word ^3?1)3 mo'ed, from ^t^^ yuad, to
fix by appointment, literally implies
merely a set time, a stated season, for
any purpose whatever, but is applied
here and often elsewhere to the solemn
feasts of the Israelites, which were ap-
pointed by God, and fixed to certain
seasons of the year. It is sometimes
rendered in the Gr. by eopTrj, a feast, and
sometimes by Travnyvpig, a general as-
sembly, of which the former occurs. Col.
2. 16, ' Let no man judge you in meat,
or in drink, or in respect of an holy day
{copTT}), or of the new moon, or of the
sabbath-days ;' and the other Heb. 12. 23,
' But ye are come to the general
assembly (Trav/jyupfs) and church of the
first-born.' Perhaps a more suitable
rendering of the term would be ' solem-
nities.' IT Which ye shall proclaim
to be holy convocations. The Hebrew
may be rendered more literall}^, ' which
ye shall call (as) callings of holiness;'
i. e. assemblages of the people which
should be convened for holy or sacred
purposes at set times by public procla-
mation, and generally by the sound of
a trumpet. Num. 10. 8-10. IT These
are my feasts. Or, my assemblies, ap-
pointed in honor of my name, and to be
observed in obedience to my command ;
viz. the sabbath, the passover, pente-
cost, the beginning of the new year, the
day of atonement, and the feast of tab-
ernacles ; all which are embraced under
the general name nyi?^ mo'cd, and none
besides.
The Sabbath.
3. Six days shall work be done ; but
the seventh day is a sabbath of rest, &c.
Heb. y\r-2"22 t.T^ shabbath shabbathon,
234
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
shall do no work therein, it is the
sabbath of the Lord in all your
dwellings.
4 ^ d These are the feasts of the
Lord,' even holy convocations,
which ye shall proclaim in their
season*!.
5 e III the fourteenth day of the
first month at even is the Lord's
passover.
rt ver. 2. 37. Exod. 23. 14. e Exod. 12. 6,
14, 18, and 13. 3, 10, and 23 15, and 34. 18.
Numb. 9. 2, 3, and 28. 16, 17. Deut. 16. 1-8.
Josh. 5. 10.
a sabbath of sabbatism ; a highly em-
phatic phrase denoting the greatest de-
gree of consecration to purposes of rest.
Although the main scope of the chap-
ter has relation to other sacred seasons,
yet as the Sabbath was ever to he es-
teemed the grand solemnity, which was
never to be supplanted or eclipsed by
any other, therefore it is introduced here
by way of preface to the others. See
Note on Gen. 2. 3. IT An holy convo-
cation. That is, a time of holy convo-
cation ; from which it appears that
meetings for public worship are an es-
sential part of the due observance of
the day, and that they cannot be ne-
glected or omitted without going con-
trary to one main design of the insti-
tution. ^ Ye shall do no work there-
in. On other holy days they were
forbidden to do any servile work, v. 7,
but un the sabbath, and the day of atone-
ment, (which is also called a sabbath,)
they were to do no work at all, not even
the dressing of meat. IT In all your
dwellings. Heb. fD^t^lXTZ ^m bekol
meshubothekem, in all your dvielling-
plnces ; by which is meant not so much
in their private habitations as in the va-
rious places of their residence over the
country. (ir. tv iraari KaraiKia v^imv^
in all your inhabiting, i. e. in every
place that you may inhabit. The great
feasts were to be kept in one place
where the sanctuary was established ;
but tlio sabbaths in this respect differed
from them. They were to be observed
6 And on the fifteenth day of the
same month is the feast of unleav-
ened bread unto the Lord: seven
days ye must eat unleavened bread.
7 fin the first day ye shall have
an holy convocation ; ye shall do
no servile work therein.
8 But ye shall offer an offering
made by fire unto the Lord seven
days; in the seventh day is an holv
convocation, ye shall do no servile
work therein.
f Exod. 12. 16. Numb. 23. 18. 25.
all over the land wherever they dwelt,
particularly in the synagogues in every
city. Acts 15, 21.
1. The Passover.
5-S. On the fourteenth day of the
first month at even is the Lord^s Pass-
over. Although moons, which began
with the new moon, cannot, with jier-
feet accuracy, be accommodated to our
months, the first month of tlie Hebrew
year must always have fallen within
the month of April.
The Passover, it is well known, was
kept in remembrance of the exodus
from Egypt. The etymology of the
term, and the occasion and circum-
stances of the institution have already
been dwelt upon in our Notes on Ex.
12. We shall consequently be spared
the necessity of any thing more than a
general sketch of the observance of this
feast. On the eve of the 14lh day of
the month (Abib or Nisan) all leaven
was removed Irom their dwellings, so
that nothing might be seen of it during
the week ; a circumstance respecting
which the Jews are very scrupulous
even at this day. Previously to the
commencement of the feast, on the tenth,
the master of a family set apart a ram
or a goat of a year old, usually the for-
mer, which he slew on the fourteenth,
' between the two evenings,' before the
altar ; but in Egypt, where the event
occurred which tlie Passover celebrat-
ed, the blood was sprinkle^ on the post
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIII.
235
9 IT And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
10 Speak unio the children of Is-
of the door. The ram or kid was roast-
ed vvliole, with two spits thrust through
it. the one leiigtluvise, the other trans-
versely, crossing the longitudinal one
near the fore legs, so that the animal
was, in a manner, crucified. The oven
in wliich it was roasted was the circular
pit in the floor [ground], which is still
commonly used in the East. The re-
striction that it was to be roasted, not
boiled or eaten raw, is thought to be
levelled at some idolatrous forms of
sacrifice-feasting. Thus roasted, the
Paschal Lamb was served up with a
salad of wild and bitter herbs, and with
the flesh of other sacrifices (peace-
ofFerings), which are mentioned in
Deut. 16. 2-6. Not fewer than ten, nor
more than twenty persons were admit-
ted to these sacred feasts, which were,
at first, eaten in Egypt with loins girt
about, with sandals on the feet, and
with all the preparations for an imme-
diate journey. But this does not ap-
pear to have been the case at any sub-
sequent period. The command, how-
ever, not to break a bone of the offering,
which was given in consequence of the
people going in such haste (as they
might otherwise have been delayed),
was ever after observed among the Jews,
In later times the celebration became
encumbered with a number of involved
ceremonies, very different from the sim-
plicity and haste of the original institu-
tion. As these derive no authority from
the law, we shall only state such of
them as serve to illustrate the account
of that celebration of the Passover by
Jesus Christ, which to the Christian is
not less interesting than the original in-
stitution was to the Jew. The master
of the family, after the Paschal supper
was prepared, broke the bread, having
first blessed it, and distributed it to all
who were seated around him, so that
each one might receive a «part ; and
rael, and say unto them, gWhen
S Exod. 23. 16. 19, and 34. 22, 26. Numb.
15. 2, 18, and 28. 26. Deut. 16. 9. Josh.
3. 15.
each was at liberty to dip it, before eat-
ing, into a vessel of sauce. There were
four cups of wine ordinarily drank at
this supper, two before and two after
meat. "With the second, the two first
hymns of what was called the lesser
ifa//e/, being Psalms 113. and 114., were
sung or chanted. The third cup, being
the first after supper, was called the
cup of blessing, because over it they
blessed God, or said grace after meat.
This was followed by a fourth and last
cup, over which they completed the
hymn of praise, formed by the remain-
der of the lesser Hallel, and thus the
feast concluded. But it is said that a
fifth cup of wine might be drunk by
those who wished to repeat the great
Halle], which is generally understood
to be Psalm 136. The wine was red,
mixed with water.
The Passover was immediately fol-
lowed by the Feast of Unleavened
Bread, which lasted seven days, so that
the two together seemed to make one
feast of eight days, and were, in fact,
popularly so considered, the names be-
ing often interchanged, so that the Pass-
over day was sometimes considered as
the first day of the feast of unleavened
bread, and, on the other hand, the whole
was often called the Passover Feast.
The first and last days ol' these seven
were to be kept as Sabbaths, save that
only servile labor was interdicted,
which allowed food to be cooked. But
no suspension of labor was required on
the intermediate five days, which were
distinguished chiefly by the abstinence
from leavened bread, and by the unusual
number of offerings at the tabernacle or
temple, and of sacrifices for sin. The
sixteenth of Abib, or the second day of
Unleavened Bread, was distinguished
by the oflTering of a barley sheaf, as
an introduction to the barley-harvest
which was ripe about this time, accom
LEVITICUb.
[B. C. 1490.
ye be come into the land which I
give unto you, and shall reap the
harvest thereof, then ye shall bring
a sheaf of h the first-fruits of your
harvest unto the priest:
11 And he shall i wave the sheaf
before the Lord, to be accepted for
you : on the morrow after the sab-
bath the priest shall wave it.
12 And ye shall offer that day
when ye wave the sheaf, an he-
lamb without blemish of the first
year for a burnt-offering unto the
Lord.
13 kAnd the meat-offering there-
of shall be two tenth-deals of fine
flour mingled with oil, an offering
t Rom. 11.16. 1 Cor. 15. 20. Jam. 1. IS.
Rev. 14. 4. i Exod. 29. 24. k ch. 2. 14-16.
panied by a particular sacrifice, de-
scribed in V. 9-14.
The Sheaf of First Fruits.
10. When ye be come into the land,
&c. The actual observance of this law
was to be deferred till they had arrived
m the land of Canaan, and had become
permanently fixed in their settlements ;
for during their sojourn in the wilder-
ness they could neither sow nor reap.
fr Ye shall bring a sheaf of the
first fruits. A sheaf of the new corn
was brought to the priest who was to
heave it up, in token of his presenting
it to the God of heaven, and to wave it
to and fro before the Lord, as the Lord
of the whole earth, and the bountiful
giver of all its fruits and favors. This
offering of the isheaf of the first fruits
did as it were sanctify to him all the
rest of the harvest. Besides, it served
as a type of Christ, who, as risen from
the dead, is the ' first fruits of them that
slept.' 1 Cor. 15. 20.
14. Ye shall eat neither bread, &c.
This is a precept which would naturally
commend itself to the belter feelings
of every pious and reflecting mind.
Nothing could be more appropriate than
thus to testify a grateful sense of the
made by fire unto the Lord for a
sweet savour: and the drink-offer-
ing thereof shall be of w^ine, the
fourth part of an bin.
14 And ye shall eat neither bread,
nor parched corn, nor green ears,
until the self-same day that ye
have brought an offering unto your
God : it shall be a statute for ever
throughout your generations in all
your dwellings.
15 ^ And lye shall count unto
you from the morrow after the
sabbath, from the day that ye
brought the sheaf of the wave-of-
fering; seven sabbaths shall be
complete:
1 ch. 25. 8. Exod. 34. 21. Deut, 16. 9.
source from whence the crowning bless-
ings of life proceeded. As God was the
bountiful donor of the blessings of the
harvest, it was an ordinance which
would find a response in every right
heart, that he should first be honored
with its fruits before his creatures should
have appropriated any part of them to
their own use. This universal dictate
of a grateful bosom found a fitting ex-
pression in the customs of the ancient
Romans, of whom Pliny says, ' Ne gus-
tabant quidem novas fruges, aut vina,
antequam sacerdotes priniitias libas-
sent,' they did not so much as taste of
their corn or wine, till the priests had
offered the first fruits.
2. Feast of Pentecost.
15. Ye shall count unto you, &c.
From the day of waving the sheaf they
were to count seven sabbaths or weeks
complete, or forty-nine daysj and then
was to be celebrated the second or great
harvest-festival, called Pentecost, from
the Gr. TievrriKoaTT), fifty, from its begin-
x\\n% fifty days after the waving of the
sheaf of the first fruits.
The Feast of Pentecost, here insti-
tuted, is called by various names in the
sacred writings, as ' the feast of weeks/
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIII.
16 Even unto the morrow after
the seventh sabbath shall ye num-
ber m fifty days ; and ye shall offer
na new meat-offering unto the
Lord.
17 Ye shall bring out of your
habitations two wave-loaves of two
lenth-deals : they shall be of fine
flour, they shall be baken with
leaven, they are o the first-fruits
unto the Lord.
IS And ye shall offer with the
bread seven lambs without blemish
of the first year, and one young
bullock, and two rams : they shall
be for a burnt-offering unto the
Lord, with their meat-offering,
m Acts -2. 1. u Numb. 28. 26. o Exod. 23.
16, 19. and 22. 29, and 34. 22, 26. Numb. 15.
17, aud 28. 20. Deut 26. 1.
Ex. 34.22 ; Deut. 16. 10, 16, because of
its being celebrated a week of weeks,
or seven-weeks, after the feast of un-
leavened bread ; the ' feast of harvest,'
Y.x. 23. 16; and also the ' day of first
fiuils,' Num. 16. 26; for this was pro-
perly the harvest-festival at which the
Israelites were to olTer thanksgivings
to God for the bounties of the harvest,
and to present to him the first fruits
thereof in bread baked of the new corn.
It seems, in fact, that the barley har-
vest commenced about the Passover,
and the wheat harvest ended at the
Pentecost in Palestine, where, as in
Egypt, the barley is ripe considerably
earlier than the wheat. This festival
lasted for seven days, during which
many holocausts and offerings for sin
were sacrificed. In later times many
Jews from foreign countries came to
Jerusalem on this joyful occasion.
Even at tliat time, and still more since
then, a greater degree of relative im-
portance seems to have been attached
to this festival than appears to have
been designed by the law. It was dis-
covereil that the date, fifty days after
the Passover, coincided with the deliv-
ery of the law from Mount Sinai,
and their drink-offerings, even an
offering made by fire of sweet sa-
vour unto the Lord.
19 Then ye shall sacrifice pone
kid of the goats for a sin-offering,
and two lambs of the first year for
a sacrifice of q peace-offerings.
20 And the priest shall wave them
with the bread of the first-fruits
for a wave-offering before the
Lord, with the two lambs : r ihey
shall be holy to the Lord for the
priest.
21 And ye shall proclaim on the
self-same day, that it may be an
holy convocation unto you: ye
shall do no servile work therein:
it shall be a statute for ever in all
P ch. 4. 23, 23. Numb. 28. SO. q ch. 3. 1.
r Numb. 13. 12. Deut. 18. 4.
which was fifty days after the depart-
ure from Egypt, and consequently after
the first Passover. Hence, by degrees,
instead of resting on the ground on
which Moses placed it, the festival was
turned into a commemoration of that
great event.
17. Ye shall bring out of your habila-
ations. That is. not out of their houses,
but out of some one or more of the
several places or regions where they
abode, as explained above, in the Note
on V. 3. It cannot be supposed to mean
that each locality where Israelites re-
sided furnished two wave loaves, for
there were to be but two for the whole
nation ; but the leading idea is, that the
flour was to be supplied from some
place in the country, and was then of-
fered in the name of the whole congre-
gation, together with the seven lambs,
the young bullock, the two rams, the
kid, and the two lambs ; all which were
no doubt furnished at the common
charges of the whole people. As the
loaves were not to be burnt on the altar,
they were allowed to be made of leaven,
without contradicting ch. 2. 11, 12.
21. Ye shall do no servile work there'
in. This the Jews understood of every
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
your dwellings throughout your
generations.
22 H And swhen ye reap the
harvest of your land, thou shalt
not make clean riddance of the
corners of thy field when thou
reapest, t neither shalt thou gather
any gleaning of thy harvest: thou
shah leave them unto the poor,
s ch. 19. 9. t Deut. 24. 19.
kind of labor except that which per-
tained to the preparation of food. It
properly denotes that more laborious
kind of service which we understand by
drudgery, such as ploughing, sowing,
reaping, threshing, gathering the vint-
age, &c.
22. When ye reap the harvest, &c.
See Note on Lev. 19. 9. Comp. Deut.
24. 19.
3. The Feast of Trumpets.
24. A memorial of blowing of trum-
pets. Heb. nS'inn "^ll-T zikron te-
rudh, which the Chal. renders a memo-
rial of shouting. As the word in the
original for memorial has the sense of
celebrating or commemorating uith
praise, the innport of the language un-
doubtedly is, ' A festival for commem-
orating or praising God with the sound
of trunnpets.' It was observed with
great solemnity, the trumpets sounding
from sun-rise to sun-set. The priest
wTio sounded the first trumpet, began
with the usual prayer, ' Blessed be God
who hath sanctified us by his precepts,'
&c., subjoining, < Blessed be God who
hath hitherto preserved us in life, and
brought us unto this time.' After this
the people repeated with a loud voice
the following words from Ps. 88. 15:
' Blessed is the people who know the
joyful sound,' &c. As the feast of new
moons was the sanctifying of each
month, so the feast of trumpets was the
sanctifying of each year, and a remind-
ing of the Israelites that all their times
were in God's hand. How rational and
and to the stranger : I am the Lord
your God.
23 If And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
24 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, saying. In the " seventh month
in the first day of the month, shall
ye have a sabbath, x a memorial of
blowing of trumpets, an holy con-
vocation.
u Numb. 29. 1. x ch. 25. 9.
dignified was this conduct throughout
the land of Judea, w^hen compared with
the general practice of other nations !
For, instead of making the new year a
day of devotion, it is commonly a day
of idleness and dissipation. At the
present day, as we are told by Calmet,
Leo of Modena, Buxtorf, and Basnage,
the Jews are accustomed on this even-
ing to wish one another a good year, to
make better cheer than ordinary, and
to sound the trumpet thirty times sue-
cessively. During this feast, which
lasts, it seems, the first two days of the
year, business is suspended, and they
hold, by tradition, that on this day God
particularly judges the actions of the
foregoing year, and disposes the events
of the year following. Wherefore, on
the first days of the foregoing month, or
eight days at least before the least of
trumpets, they generally apply them-
selves to works of penitence, and the
evening before the feast many of them
receive 39 lashes by way of discipline.
On the first evening of the year, and
which precedes the first day of Tizri
(for their evening precedes their morn-
ing,) as they return from the synagogue
they say to one another, ' May you be
written in a good year ;' to which the
other answers, ' And you also.' On
their return home, they serve up at ta-
ble honey and unleavened bread, and
whatever may signify a plentiful and
happy year. Some of them, on the
morning of these two feasts, go to the
synagogue clothed in white, in token of
purity and penitence. Among the G ,r-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIII.
S39
25 Ye shall do no servile work
therein ; but ye shall offer an offer-
ing made by fire unto the Lord.
26 ^ And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
27 y Also on the tenth day of this
seventh month thej'e shall be a day
of atonement ; it shall be an holy
y ch. 16. 30. Numb. 29. 7.
man Jews, some wear the habit whrch
they have appointed for their burial,
and this is done as a mortification.
On this day they repeat in the syna-
gogues several appropriate prayers and
benedictions. They take the Penta-
teuch very solemnly from its chest, and
call upon five persons to read the por-
tion which describes the sacrifice that
was appointed for that day ; then they
twenty times sound a horn, sometimes
very slowly, and at other times quickly,
to remind them, as they explain it, of
the judgments of God, to intimidate
sinners, and induce them to repent.
After prayers they return to their
houses, to take some refreshment, and
spend the rest of the day in hearing ser-
mons, and in other exercises of devo-
tion. The two days of the feast being
observed exactly in the same manner, a
more particular description of the lat-
ter would be unnecessary. It may,
however, be remarked, with respect to
their preparation for the feast, that
many of the Jews plunge themselves in
cold water, confessing, as they descend
into it, their numerous sins, and beating
their breasts ; and they plunge them-
selves over the head, that they may
appear entirely clean before God, for
they think that, on this day, God as-
sembles his council, or his angels, and
that he opens his book to judge all men.
Three sorts of books, they imagine, are
opened ; viz. the book of life for the
just ; the book of death for the wicked ;
and the book of a middle state, for such
as are neither very good nor very bad.
In the two books of life and death they
conceive there are two kinds of pages,
convocation unto you, and ye shall,
afflict your souls, and offer an offer-
ing made by fire unto the Lord.
28 And ye shall do no work in
that same day ; for it is a day of
atonement to make an atonement
for you before the Lord your God.
29 For whatsoever soul it be that
shall not be afflicted in that same
one for this life, and the other for the
next ; for it often happens that ihe
wicked are not punished in this life
according to their demerits, whereas
the just suffer severely, as if they had
incurred the displeasure of God. This
conduct of the Almighty is the reason
why no one can be sure of his state,
but is uncertain whether he be worthy
to be loved or haled. With respect to
the middle class, they think that they
are not written down any where, for
God delays it till the day of annual ex-
piation, which is the tenth day after,
to see if they will reform ; and then
their sentence is fixed either for life or
death. Such are the ceremonies with
which the modern Jews are said to ob-
serve the feast of trumpets ; but it
should ever be recollected, that these
ceremonies are far from being universal ;
for in countries where superstition pre-
vails, they insensibly become tinctured
with it, and in countries where a more
rational mode of thinking is general,
they as naturally adopt a more rational
ritual.
4. The Day of Atonement.
27-32. On the tenth day of this sev-
enth month, there shall be a day of
atonement. This was properly an an-
nual fast, and the only one prescribed
by the law, however fasts may abound
in the presei>t calendar of the Jews. It
occurred on the fi(th day before the
Feast of Tabernacles, or on the tenth
of the seventh month, Tisri (October).
On this day they were to abstain from
I all servile work, to take no food ' from
I evening to evening,' during which thej
240
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
day, a he shall be cut off from
among his people.
30 And whatsoever soul it be that
doeth any work in that same day,
a the same soul will I destroy from
among his people.
31 Ye shall do no manner of
work : it shall be a statute for ever
throughout your generations in all
your dwellings.
32 It shall be unto you a sabbath
of rest, and ye shall afflict your
z Gen. 17. 14. a ch. 20. 3, 5, 6.
were to ' afflict their souls.' The sa-
crificial services of this day were the
most solemn in all the year, but as we
have more fully considered the details
of the festival in our Notes on the I6lh
chapter, it will be unnecessary to re-
peat them here.
5. The Feast of Tabernacles.
34. The fifteenth day of the seventh
month shall be the feast of tabernacles.
This festival is termed in Hebrew 3n
tn^til'hag hassukoth, feast of tents,
or booths,hui by the Chal. is called ' the
shade of clouds,' in allusion to the sha-
dow of the di%une protection in the pil-
lar of cloud that attended the Israelites
in their journey through the wilderness.
The Feast of Tabernacles was insti-
tuted in memoryof the journey through
the Arabian wilderness, and therefore
the people, during its continuance,
dwelt in booths. This lasted seven
days, from the 15th to the 22d of the
seventh month, Tisri (October). It
is usual to state that another object of
this feast was as a Feast of In-gather-
ing, to return thanks, and to rejoice for
the completed vintage and gathering in
of the fruits. But a close examination
will make it probable that this was the
separate object of the eighth day,
which was added to the seven : for it
was only during the seven days that the
people were to dwell in booths. Being
thus closely connected, they got to be
regarded as one festival, and the names
I souls : in the ninthrfay of the month
at even, from even unto even, shall
ye celebrate your sabbath.
33 H And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
34 Speak unto the children of
Israel, saying, b The fifteenth day
of this seventh month shall be the
feast of labernacles/or seven days
unto the Lord.
b Exod. 23. 16. Numb. 29. 12. Deut. 16.
13. Ezra 3. 4. Neh. S. 14. Zech. 14. 16.
John 7. 2.
were confounded and interchanged, as
in the analogous case of the Passover
j and Feast of Unleavened Bread. In*
j stead, therefore, of regarding this as
i one festival of eiglit days, with two
names and two objects, it seems best to
I regard it as a union of two festivals
with different names and objects, the
one of seven days, and the other of one
day.
As in the other festivals of a week's
duration, the first and last days were to
; be observed as Sabbaths, with the ex-
I ception that only servile labor was m-
j terdicted. On the other five days any
j kind of work might be executed. Dur-
! ing all the seven the people were to live
: in booths made of branches of several
[ sorts of trees, which, as mentioned in
Lev. 23. 40, are the palm, the willow,
and two others, which seem to denote
'beautiful trees,' and any 'thick or
bushy wood,' rather than any particu-
lar species. Those named in Nehem.
8. 15, are different, and it seems reason-
able to conclude that it was not the
intention of the law to compel the use
of any particular species, but only such
as were suitable for the purpose and
could be easily procured. It is not ex-
pressly said in the law that the booths
were to be made with those branches,
though the language of the text with
the context, obviously leads to that con-
clusion. It was so understood in the
time of Nehemiah. But the Sadducees
and Pharisees, in later days, split oo
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIII.
241
35 On the first day shall be a holy
convocation : ye shall do no servile
work therein.
.'i6 Seven days ye shall offer an
offering made by fire unto the
Lord; con the eighth day shall
be a holy convocation unto you,
and ye shall offer an offering made
by fire unto the Lord: it is a ^ sol-
emn assembly ; ayid ye shall do no
servile work therein.
^ Numb. 29. 35. Neh. 8. 18.
■^ Deut. 16. 8. 2 Chron. 7. 9.
Joel. J. 14, and 2. 15.
John 7.
Neh. 8.
tliis point ; the former understanding
(hat the booths were to be made of
'Jie boughs, while the latter contended
that they were to be borne rejoicingly
in the hands. The latter practice pre-
vailed ill the time of Christ, as it does
to this day. The Karaites, however,
follow the interpretation of the Saddu-
cees, which seems to be the right one,
although it must be confessed that the
Israelites did not, in the Arabian wil-
derness dwell in green booths, but in
tents. It seems that the people often
made their booths on the flat roofs of
their houses. More public sacrifies
were to be offered on this festival than
on any of the others, as may be seen in
Num.29. 12-39. This feast was cele-
braled with more of outward glee than
any others, though without intemper-
advjc, to which the Hebrews as a nation,
Qii rot appear to have been ever much
addicted. The ceremonies of parading in
procession with branches, chanting ho-
^iinnas, and of drawing water from the
pool of Siloam, to pour out, mixed with
»vinc, on the sacrifice as it lay on the
altar, existed in the time of Christ, and
before 5 but they rest rather upon tra-
dition than upon any express law of
Moses. The eighth day, which we re-
gard as the proper Feast of In-gather-
ing, was kept as a Sabbath (and some^
times must actually have been one)
like the first of the tabernacle feasts.
Notwithstanding its being a distinct
ft'siival, the sacrifices for it were less
21
37 e These are the feasts of the
Lord, which ye shall proclaim to
be holy convocations, to offer an
offering made by fire unto the Lord,
a burnt-offering, and a raeat-ofler-
ing, a sacrifice, and drink-offerings,
every thing upon his day :
38 ffiesides the sabbaths of the
Lord, and besides your gifts, and
besides all your vows, and besides
all your free-will-offerings, which
ye give unto the Lord.
e ver. 2. 4. f Numb. 29. 39,
than those of any of the preceding
seven days.
36. It is a solemn assembly. Heb.
5<in ti^lZ^ atzereth hi, rendered in the
margin a day of restraint. This is a
new term, which does not occur pre*
viously in reference to any of the feasts
here mentioned, and is of somewhat
difficult interpretation. As the verbal
root 12r5> utzar signifies to shut up, to
close, Theodoret renders it to teXos rwv
eoproji'jthe conclusion of the feast. So
also the Gr. of the lxx. has e^o6iov,
outgoing, or close. The term is applied
to the last or concluding day of the
feast of unleavened bread, Deut. 16. 8,
and Josephus remarks, that the feast of
Pentecost, which was kept at the end
of seven computed weeks, was called
aaapda, asartha, evidently from the Heb.
original. This, therefore, as it was the
lOrSt, so it was the great day of the feast,
as it is termed by the Evangelist, John
7. 37. From this it would seem that
any great solemnity or assemblage is
called by this name of Ti^lSJ atzereth,
as 2 Kings 10. 20, Joel 1. 14; although
Gesenius maintains that the noun de-
rives the meaning of assemblage from
that sense of the root which he renders
to stay, restrain, constrain ■ which is
equivalent to the explication of the
Jewish doctors, who make it as imply-
ing restraint or detention, inasmuch as
they were detained at Jerusalem one
day longer than on any other festival,
none of which lasted more than seven
242
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
39 Also in the fifteenth day of the 40 And i>ye shall take you on the
seventh month, when ye have first day the boughs of goodly trees,
g gathered in the fruit of the land, branches of palm-trees, and the
ye shall keep a feast unto the Lord boughs of thick trees, and willow^s
of the brook; i and ye shall rejoice
before the Lord your God seven
days.
hNeh.S. 15. iDeut. 16. 14, 15.
seven days : on the first day shall
be a sabbath, and on the eighth day
shall be a sabbath.
g Exod. 23. 16. Deut. 16. 13.
days. It is one of the cases where the
import of the original is unavoidably
left doubtful.
39. Also in the fifteenth day, &c.
There is here no new injunction, but
merely a reiteration and enforcement
of what was said before. It is simply
an amplification of the particulars of the
feast of tabernacles. The particle ' also'
therefore should be rendered ' surely,'
' truly,' or something equivalent.
40. Ye shall take you on the first day
the boughs of goodly trees. Heb. ^15
lin f y peri ttz hddar, the fruit of
the tree of goodliness, or honor ; im-
plying probably that branches were
taken with the fruit as well as the leaves
upon them, wherever such could be
conveniently obtained. Otherwise com-
mon fruitless boughs were doubtless to
be made use of. Their booths were a
kind of arbors. Maimonides, the ora-
cle of the Jews, following the Jerusalem
Targum, contends that the citron or
pome-citron, is the particular tree whose
loughs were taken on this occasion ;
and so firm in this persuasion are even
the modern Jews, that they fancy the
feast cannot be duly celebrated without
such branches. Numbers, therefore, of
the German Jews send annaally into
Spain, to procure a quantity of branches
with the citrons upon them ; and when
the feast is over they distribute them
as a gift of great value to their friends.
IT Branches of palm-trees. These
jranches, as also the others mentioned
in tliis connexion, the Sadducees under-
stood to be for making their booths, but
the Pharisees contend that they were to
be carried in their hands ; which is the
practice of the modern Jews to this day.
They lie together one branch of palm^
three branches of myrtle, and one of
willow. This they carry in their right
hands, and in their left they have a
brauch of citron with its fruit, whenever
they can procure it. With these they
make a procession in their synagogues
every day of the feast, that is, for seven
days, around their reading desks, as
their ancestors did around the walls of
Jericho, in token of the expected down-
fall of their enemies. While making
this procession, they sing * Hosannah,'
whence the feast itself is sometimes
called by the Rabbins ' the Hosannah ,'
and sometimes the branches are called
by the same name. On the last great
day, which they call ' Hosannah Kab-
bah,' or ' the great Hosannah,' they
make the procession seven limes toge-
ther, in memory of the siege of Jericho.
The form of the Hosannah in their rit-
ual, which they sing on this occasion,
is remarkable : —
For thy sake, 0 our Creator, Hosannah.
For thy sake, O our Redeemer, Hosannah.
For thy sake, 0 our Seeker, Hosannah.
This would seem to be a virtual calling
upon the blessed Trinity to save them
and send them help.
Another distinguishing ceremony on
this occasion was the pouring out of
water, the manner of which was as fol-
lows : — One of the priests, with a golden
flagon, went to the pool of Siloam or
Bttlhesda, where, filling it with water,
he returned to the court of the priests
by the gate on the south side of the
court of Israel, thence called the Water
Gate ; and no sooner did he appear,
than the silver trumpets sounded to
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIV.
243
41 k And ye shall keep it a feasl
unto the Lord seven days in the
year : it shall he a statute for ever
in your generations ; ye shall cele-
brate it in the seventh nionih.
42 lYe shall dwell in booths
seven days; all that are Israelites
born shall dwell in booths :
k Numb. 29 12. Neh. 8. IS. I Neh. 8.
14, 15, 16.
announce his arrival. He continued to
advance and went directly to the lop of
the altar, to the two basons that stood,
the one with the wine for the ordinary
drinU-oifering, the other for the water
whicli he had brought ; where, pouring
tlie water into the empty bason, he
mixed the wine and water together, and
afterwards poured out both together by
way of libation. There is nothing said
about this part of the ceremonies in the
law of Moses, but the Jews pretend to
find authority for it in Is. 12. 3, ' With
joy shall ye draw water out of the wells
ol" salvation.' The conjecture of Pa-
trick is far more probable, that it was
in memory of the water which followed
them during all the time of iheir so-
journing in the wilderness. It is sup-
posed that our Savior alludes to this
custom, where it is said, John 7. 37, 38,
' In the last day, that great day of the
feast, Jesus stood and cried, If any man
thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
He that believelh on me, as the Scrip-
ture hath said, out of his belly shall
flow rivers of living water.' This was
a season of so much rejoicing, that it
passed into a common proverb, that
' he that never saw the rejoicing of
drawing water, never saw rejoicing in
his life.'
42. Ye shall dwell in booths. Heb.
irrn nrcn besukkoth teshebu, ye shall
sit (abide) in booths. These were
afterwards, in Jerusalem, constructed
on the tops of their houses, in their
court-yards, and in the streets. Neh.
8. 16. They were made of the branches
of various trees, as before remarked,
43 mThat your generations may
know that I made the children of
Israel to dwell in booths, when I
brought them out of the land of
Egypt : I am the Lord your God.
44 And Moses n declared unto
the children of Israel the feasts of
the Lord.
m Deut. 31. 13. Ps. 78. 5, 6. n yer. 2.
V. 15, and the Hebrew canons affirm
that they were not to be covered with
any kind of cloth, or any thing that had
not grown out of the earth, or with
aught that was faded or withered, or
that had an ill savor, or that was in any
way unclean. Mairnonides observes
that this feast was fixed to that season
when the people could dwell in booths
with the least inconvenience, as the
weather was then moderate, and they
were not wont to be troubled either
with heat or with rain.
CHAPTER XXIV.
In the series of the foregoing chap-
ters we have seen that, after the setting
up of the tabernacle, directions were
given as to the several kinds of sacri-
fices that should be offered, and the
personal qualifications of those that
should offer them. Aaron and his sons
having been duly consecrated, care is
taken that none of their posterity should
minister before God but such as were
every way perfect ; nor were any blem-
ished animals ever to be allowed to
come upon the sacred altar. The order
of the several anniversary festivals
having been also determined in the pre-
ceding chapter, the writer comes in the
present to treat of the daily service of
God in the sanctuary, which was not
fully settled in all its details till the
princes had made their offerings, Num.
7. 1,2, &c. Its contents, however, are
somewhat of a varied character, several
items of an incidental nature being in-
troduced in the course of it.
au
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
CHAPTER XXIV. 1
AND the Lord spake unto Mo- i
ses, saying,
2 a Command the children of Is- i
rael, thai they bring unto thee pure
oil-olive beaten for the light, to
cause the lamps to burn con-
tinually.
3 Without the vail of the testi-
mony, in the tabernacle of the con-
gregation, shall Aaron order it from
the evening unto the morning be-
fore the Lord continually : it shall
be a statute for ever in your gene-
rations.
a Exod. 27. -20, 21.
The Oil for the Lamps.
2, To cause the lamps to burn. Heb.
"n: rj^NIp lehaaloth ni'r, to cause the
lamp to ascend • i. e. the light or flame
of the lamp. Our version gives ' lamps,'
in the plural, although the Heb. has
'lamp.' Yet in v. 4, the original has
' lamps,' plural. It is doubtless used
here as a collective, all the seven
lamps being considered as forming but
one. In like manner, and in direct al-
lusion to this, tlie Holy Spirit, though
one, is represented by ' seven lamps of
fire before the throne,' Rev. 4. 5 ; for
there are 'diversities of gifts, but one
spirit.' Comp. Ex. 21. 20, Num. 8. 2,
1 Sam. 3. 3. IT Continually. Heb.
"■"/Cri tamid. That is, from night to
night ; not without intermission. So
the * continual burnt-offering' means
that wliich was regularly offered at the
appointed season. So Mephibosheth
was to eat bread at David's table con-
tinually, i. e. at the stated hours of
meals, 2 Sam. 9. 7, 13. In like manner
when the Apostle says, 1 Thess. 3. 17,
* Pray without ceasmg,' his meaning
undoubtedly is, that they were to pray
constantly, morning and evening, at the
stated hours of prayer.
3. Without the vail of the testimony.
That is, ' without the second vail,' as it
is termed, Heb. 9. 3, which separated
4 He shall order the lamps upon
b the pure candlestick before the
Lord continually.
5 H And thou shah take fine flour,
and bake twelve c cakes thereof:
two tenth-deals shall be in one cake.
6 And thou shaltset them in two
rows, six on a row, ^ upon the pure
table before the Lord.
7 And thou shall put pure frank-
incense upon each row, that it may
be on the bread for a memorial,
b Exod. 31. 8, and 39. 37. c Exod. 25. 30.
d 1 Kings 7. 48. 2 Chron. 4. 19, and 13. 11.
Heb. 9. 2.
between the holy and most holy place.
'Die ark of the covenant is here called
' the testimony,' because it contained
the tables of the testimony, as they are
called, Ex.25. 21. IT From the eve-
ning unto the morning. The Hebrew
word '^'22 boker, properly signifies that
portion of the morning which inter-
venes between the break of day and
sunrise. The other word, 1^5 ereb,
implies the time from sunset to dark.
The priests, therefore, were to look
after the lamps from very early in the
morning to late at niglit.
The Ordering of the Table of Shew-
bread.
6. Thou Shalt set them in two rows
six in a row, upon the pure table before
the Lord. These loaves are called
elsewhere the ' bread of the presence,'
the mystical import of which we have
fully considered in the Notes on Ex. 20.
30. They were prepared by the Levites,
and were twelve in number, to corres-
pond with the twelve tribes of Israel.
The table is called * the pure table,'
just as the candlestick is called, v. 4,
* the pure candlestick,' from the pure
gold with which it was overlaid, and
which was doubtless always kept clean
and bright.
7. That it may be on the bread for a
memorial. That is, that the frankiu-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIV.
245
even an oflfering made by fire unto
the Lord.
8 e Every sabbath he shall set it
in order before the Lord continu-
ally, <5»e?/j^ taken from the children
of Israel by an everlasting covenant.
9 And fit shall be Aaron's and his
e Numb. 4. 7. 1 Chron. 9. 32. 2 Chron.
2. 4. I 1 Sam. 21. 6. Matt. 1-2. 4. Mark -2.
26. Luke 6. 4. ? Exod. 29. 33. ch. 8. 3,
and 21. 22.
cense may be burnt upon the altar of
incense, instead of the bread ; as the
liandful of the meal-offering with its oil
and incense, Lev. 2. 2, was to be a me-
morial of the whole. The frankin-
cense stood in a golden saucer upon the
bread during the whole week: on the
Sabbath the bread was taken away to be
eaten, and the frankincense was burnt
in lieu of it. As incense is a symbol
of prayer, there may have been an inti-
mation in this appointment, that our
spiritual food is to be received and
sanctified with prayer. Indeed, when
a good man sits down at his table and
invokes the divine blessing upon his
daily food, we seem to see the realized
substance of the vessels of incense upon
the Levilical loaves.
8. Being taken from the children of
Israel. It was taken from the children
of Israel, inasmuch as it was bought
with the money which they contributed.
The yearly half-sliekel tribute, ordain-
ed Ex. 30. 13, 16, was doubtless devoted
to defraying the expenses of the service
of the sanctuary.
Of the Blaspheming Son of Shelomith.
10. The son of an Israelitish woman
whose father was an Egyptian, went out
among the children of Israel, &c. The
insertion of this historical narrative in
this connexion, in the midst of a body
of ceremonial and moral laws, has some-
what of a singular air, but may perhaps
be satisfactorily explained Irom the
hint afforded v. 22, ' Ye shall have one
manner of law, as well for the stranger,
as for one of )'our own country ; for I
21*
sons' ; g and they shall eat it in th#
holy place : for it is most holy unto
him of the offerings of the Lord
made by fire by a perpetual statute.
10 1[ And the son of an Israelitish
woman, whose father was an Egyp-
tian, went out among the children
of Israel ; and this son of the Israel-
itish woman and a man of Israel
strove together in the camp ;
am the Lord your God.' As the writer
is treating in the present chapter of
several particulars of the criminal laws,
the question would naturally arise whe-
ther and how far those laws were to
bear upon foreigners, dwelling among
them as proselytes. The answer to
this question is not only expressly
stated in v. 22, but the pertinent case
of the Egyptian Israelite is also brought
in by way of illustration. The original
Hebrew, as rendered literally, runs
thus : — ' And there went out a son of
an Israelitess, and he the son of an
Egyptian man, in the midst of, or
among the children of Israel,' &c.,
which the Jewish writers generally un-
derstand as implying that the father
was a proselyte to the Hebrew faith, as
Aben-ezra in particular says, ' he was
received into the number of the Jews.'
This is not, perhaps, improbable in
itself, lor as it was now little more than
a year since they came out of Egypt,
and yet his son was old enough to strive
with a man of Israel, he had no doubt
married the Israelitish woman at least
some fifteen or twenty years before the
exodus ; and if so, the presumption
would no doubt be, that he had embraced
the religion of her whom he had chosen
for a wife. Still there is evidently no
certainty in the intimation, and we must
take it lor what it is worth. It is im.
possible to feel much respect for the
judgment of men who are constantly
prone to give a tongue to the silence of
scripture, and supply its omissions with
the extravagant and silly fictions of
their own teeming fancies j a specimen
246
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
11 And the Israelitish woman's
son h blasphemed the name of the
LORDy and i cursed ; and they
5, 11, 2-2, and 2. 5, 9,
h ver. 16. i Job
10. Isai. S. 21.
of wliich is to be seen in the asserted
genealogy which they have ascribed to
this son of Shelomiih, making his father
to be no other than the nran whom
Moses killed in Egypt. But we know
nothing more, for we are told nothing
more, respecting this bold transgressor,
than that he was now enumerated in the
congregation of Israel, and that he was
guilty of the high-handed crime here
recited. As to the * going out' spoken
of in the text, it is not clear what is to
be understood by the expression ; whe-
ther it refers to his coming out of Egypt,
or simply to his going out of his tent,
and engaging in strife abroad. We in-
cline to the former opinion.
\\. And the Israelitish woman's son
blasphemed the name of the Lord, and
cursed. Heb. p>pii crn Ti^ Dpi
yikkob eth hashshem va-yekalUl, blas'
phemcd the name, and cursed. The
words, ' of the Lord,' it will be per-
ceived, are supplied, not being found in
the original. Nor does any one of the
ancient versions, the Chal., the Sam.,
the Syr., the Arab., the Sept., or the
Vulg., attempt to supply the sacred
name. There can be no doubt, however,
that the words are properly supplied,
and that his crime was a bold and im-
pious profaning the august name of
Jehovah, which name is perhaps omit-
ted by the writer in order to evince a
reverence strikingly in contrast with
the daring hardihood of the offender.
The original word Zp"^ yikkob, from
^pD ncikab, to pierce, bore, or strike
through, is probably used in this con-
nexion to imply that blasphemy is a
kind of striking through or wounding
with the tongue, as it is said in Pro-
verbs, ' There is that speaketh the
piercings of a suord.' It is elsewhere
used in the same sense, as Num. 23. 13,
k brought him unto Moses: (and
his mother's name was Shelomiih,
the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe
of Dan :)
k Exod. 18. 22. 26.
25, Job. 3. 8, — 5. 3. So, also, the Arabic
renders it by a word signifying prima-
rily to cut OT peif orate, and thence used
figuratively for cursing or malediction.
Yet it is certain that the Hebrew term
is employed by way of secondary usage
in the sense of declaring or expressing
distinctly, specifying, calling by name,
as Gen. 30. 28, Num. 1 . 17, Is. 62. 3, and
hence, the Jews, from a very early pe-
riod, considered themselves as prohibit-
ed from uttering the name ' Jehovah,'
except on the most sacred occasions, as
it is well known that in reading their
Scriptures they universally substituted
'^DHi^ adonai, Lord, for nin*^ Yehovah,
wherever it occurs, and in their writings
employ fim hashshem, the name, the
very word in the passage before us. It
is also to be remarked, that the Gr. has
cTTovonaffas to ovo^a, having named the
name, while Onkelos and the Syriac
ha\e, distinctly expressed, and the Arab,
of Erpenius, pronounced. The proba-
bility, we think is, that this idea is act-
ually included in the meaning of the
term ; that there was a distinct and at
the same time opprobrious and profane
utterance of that name which is above
every name, the holy designation of the
infinite and eternal God, which ought
never to be uttered without a trembling
awe upon the spirit. Houbigant, indeed,
and some others, suppose that the blas-
phemer did not use the name of the
true God at all, but had been swearing
by one of the gods of his country, and
that his crime was mentioning the
name of a strange god in the camp of
Israel. But upon reference to the law,
enacted v. 16, there seems no good rea-
son to consider this a sound interpreta-
tion ; for we find that CTL'tl hashshem, the
name, in the latter part of the verse
answers to nin*^ w"^ slum Tehovah,
B. C. 1490.3
CHAPTER XXIV.
247
12 And they iput him inward,
mthat ihe rai'ndof the Lord might
be shewed them.
13 And the Lord spake unto
Moses, saying,
1 Numb. 15. 34.
27, 5, and 36. 5, (
m Exod. 18. 15, IG. Num.
th4: name of Jehovah, ia the former
part. The Jews also frequently use
cm haskshtm, for Jehovah ; and that
it was an ancient custom thus to al-
lude to the Deity, without mentioning
his name, appears from inscriptions
among the Palmyrenians, on whose
marbles we find, * To the blessed name
be fear for ever to the blessed name,
for ever good, and merciful, be fear
to the blessed name for ever be fear,'
&c. IT And cursed. It is not un-
likely that being arraigned bf^fore the
magistrates, and sentence being given
against him, he in a fit of exasperation
spoke blasphemous words against God,
renouncing his worship, and cursing the
judges who had condemned him.
^ And they brought him unto Moses,
&c. The case was new and unprece-
dented, and as there was no law by
which the amount of guilt could be de-
termined, nor, consequently, the de-
gree of punishment, it was necessary
to consult the Great Lawgiver on the
occasion. liloses, no doubt, had re-
course to the tabernacle, and received
the directions afterwards mentioned,
from the Shekinah dwelling between
the cherubim. The answer was proba-
bly by the Urim and Thummim.
12. And they put him in u-ard, that
the mind of the Lord might be shewed
them. Chal. * Until it was expounded
unto them by the decree of the Word
of the Lord.' Gr. huKpivai avrov 6ia
Trpnarayixaroi KvplJV, tO judge him by
the commandment of the Lord. Im-
prisonment is no where mentioned in
the books of Moses, or in the early his-
torical books, as a punishment, but
only as a means of keeping a criminal
ill safe custody till the time of trial.
14 Bring forth him that hath
cursed without the camp ; and let
all that heard him « lay their hands
upon his head, and let all the con-
gregation stone him.
n Deut, 13. 9, and 17. 7.
As a precedent was now to be set for
future ages, it became them to proceed
with due deliberation.
14. Bring forth him that hath cursed
without the camp. As the camp of
Israel was holy, the execution of one
who had rendered himself so abomina-
ble and accursed would bring a defile-
ment upon it which was not to be tol-
erated. IT Lay their hands upon his
head. By this testimony the people
who heard him curse bore their public
testimony in order to his being fully
convicted ; and it was moreover a sig-
nificant mode of saying to the man,
' Thy blood be upon thine own head ;
we hereby clear ourselves of all partici-
pation in thy guilt.' We find no other
instance of this ceremony of the impo-
sition of hands in the case of a con-
demned malefactor, and the Jews hold
it to be peculiar to the sin of blasphemy.
' Of all that are killed,' says Maimoni-
des, * by the Sanhedrin, there is none
upon whom they impose hands save the
blasphemer only.' These remarks will
be found to illustrate the account given
in the New Testament of the deaths of
our Lord and of St. Stephen, who were
both murdered under a false charge of
blasphemy. The crime of the judges
and witnesses in these cases was in de-
claring them guilty of blasphemy, not
in pronouncing blasphemy to deserve
death. The criminal codes of most
Christian countries have denounced
death as the ultimate punishment of
blasphemy, in imitation of the law in
this chapter : but these codes dilTer
very much in the definition of blas-
phemy ; and it is perhaps owing to this
that the capital penalty is at present
nowhere enforced even where it retains
248
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1490.
15 And thou shall speak unto the
children of Israel, saying, Whoso-
ever curseth his God o shall bear
his sin.
16 And he that pblasphemeth the
name of the Lord, he shall surely
be put to death, and all the con-
gregation shall certainly stone him :
o ch. 5. 1, and 20. 17. Numb. 9. 13.
P 1 Kings 21. 10, 13. Ps. 74. 10, 18. Matt.
12.31. Marks. 28, Jam. 2. 7.
its place in the statute-books. In esti-
mating the enormity of the offence, we
must not overlook the circumstance
of aggravation, that the act of blas-
phemy against Jehovah was both a re-
ligious and political crime, he being
not only the God, but the king of the
Hebrew nation.
15. And thou shalt speak, &c. The
present transaction, as might be ex-
pected, gave rise to a standing law on
the subject. Whoever spake disre-
spectfully or reproachingly of God, un-
der any of his titles, was to be put to
death.
16- He that blasphemeth the name of
the Lord, &c. Heb. nm'^ 'D:^ np] no-
ktb sh'tm Yehovah, the blasphemer of the
name of Jehovah. Chal. ' He that ex-
presseth.' Gr. ovojxai^div to ovDfxa Kvpiov,
he that nameth the name of the Lord.
The original is the same word that oc-
curs V. 11, and here, as there, implies a
blasphemous, distinct uttering. Whe-
ther the clause is intended to express a
higher degree of the sin mentioned in
the preceding verse, or whether it is
only a repetition of the same sentence,
with a more express designation of the
punishment, is uncertam. The Jews,
for the most part, understand it of him
only who expressed the 7j<ime, i. e. the
most holy name of God, or Jehovah, as
the Targ. Jerus. says, on Deut. 32.,
' Woe unto those that in their execra-
tions use the holy name, which it is not
lawful for the highest angel to express.'
But Maimonides says, ' There be some
that expound it, tliat he is not guilty of
as well the stranger, as he that is
born in the land, when he blas-
phemeth the name of the LORDy
shall be put to death.
17 II q And he that killeth any
man shall surely be put to death.
18 rAnd he that killeth a beast
shall make it good ; beast for beast.
19 And if a man cause a blemish
q Eiod. 21. 12. Numb. 35. 31. Deut. 19.
11, 12. r ver. 21.
death save for the name ' Jehovah.'
Yet I say, for ' Adonai ' also he is to be
stoned.' It was from this passage es-
pecially that the rabbinical restraint
arose as to uttering the name ' Jeho-
vah,' either in reading the Scriptures or
otherwise, except in the sanctuary,
when the priest blessed the people, ac-
cording to the law, Num. 6. 23-27. And
so long was this practice in vogue
among them that the true pronunciation
of the word has become lost ; the cur-
rent pronunciation depending upon vow-
els that do not belong to it. But there
is no question that this is merely a su-
perstitious scruple, for which nothing
more than a forced traditionary inter-
pretation can be pleaded.
The Law of Murder.
17. He that killeth any man. Heb.
tnj< rSD ^S n^"' yakkeh kol nephesh
ddCim, that smiteth the life, or soul, of
a man. As this statute has been before
explained, Ex.21. 12, the only question
here, is respecting the reasons of its in-
sertion in this connexion. The true an
swer is perhaps to be gathered from the
context. The subsequent verses evince
that both native-born Israelites and
sojourning proselytes were to be sub-
ject to the same penal laws. Inas-
much, then, as a stranger was to be put
to death for killing a man, let no one
deem it hard that he should be punish-
ed for blasphemy with equal severity
with the son of Israel. It seems to be
introduced by way of obviating a query
that might arise as to punishing bias-
B. C. 1490.]
CHAPTER XXIV.
249
in his neighbour ; as s he hath d-one,
so shall it be done unto him :
20 Breach for breach, eye for eye,
tooth for tooth: as he hatJi caused
a blemish in a man, so shall it be
done to him again.
21 tAnd he that killeth a beast,
he shall restore it: "and he that
killeth a man, he shall be put to
death.
s Exod. 21. 24. Deut. 19. 21. Matt. 5. 39,
and 7. 2. t Exod. 21. 33. ver. IS. " ver. 17.
I 22 Ye shall have '^ one manner of
j law, as well for the stranger, as
j for one of your own country : for I
I am the Lord your God.
23 ^ And Moses spake to the
children of Israel, y that they should
bring forth him that had cursed out
of the camp, and stone him with
stones: and the children of Israel
did as the Lord commanded Moses.
X Exod. 12. 49. ch. 19. 34. Xumb. 15. 16.
y ver. 14.
phemy in a foreigner, in so exemplary
II manner.
As to the remaining precepts in this
chapter, the marginal references will
point to the places where they are mi-
nutely explained.
Remarks. — (10-16.) The prominent
reflection suggested by the present nar-
rative is, the greatness and grievous-
ness of the sin of blasphemy. If we
are assured that for every idle word
which men shall speak they shall give
an account thereof in the day of judg-
ment, how much more for every profane
and impious one ! If even neglect of
God be a high offence against him, in
whom we live, and move, and have our
being, and who has given his son to die
for our sins, how much deeper in enor-
mity and blacker in dye must be such
contempt and defiance of his majesty !
How fearful to give way to the evil pas-
sions which prompt the lips to break
forth in irreverent and blasphemous ex-
clamations ! Although the man who is
guilty of this iniquity may not now
come under an express statute that con-
demns him to death, yet let him not
forget that there is an ear which hears,
and a book of remembrance that con-
tains all his * ungodly speeches,' and
will assuredly mete out to him the
due reward of his guilt.
It is moreover to be remembered that
blasphemy is not confined to the mere
profane use of the name or titles of the
Most High. Any kind of disparaging '
or contemptuous reflections thrown out
against the power or grace of God
comes into the same category in the
estimation of the Scriptures. Thus
Rabshakeh is charged with blasphemy
for asserting that the God of Israel had
no more power than the gods of the
heathen. And thus the Psalmist pleads,
' 0 God, how long shall the adversary
reproach, shall the many blaspheme thy
name for ever?' Thus, moreover, Paul
says of himself that he was before his
conversion a blasphemer, because he
had spoken against and opposed the
grace of Christ ; and doubtless it is for
the same reason that James says of the
rich men of his day, ' Do they not blas-
pheme that worthy name by which ye
are called?' And while opposition to
Christ is thus looked upon in Scripture,
how dreadful is the denunciation against
this sin w^hen committed against the
Holy Ghost. From all this we cannot
but be reminded how careful it behoves
us to he not to reproach the Lord in his
word, or works, or ways ; not to object
against the Gospel, or to endeavor to
hinder its progress, and not to detract
from those glorious operations of power
or grace wrought by the Holy Spirit in
the souls of men, lest we incur the guilt
of this fearful sin.
And lastly, let us beware of causing
others to blaspheme. We may lead
men to curse by irritating their passions,
and we may cause them to speak evil
of the Lord by the commission of sins
which shall bring discredit upon reli?
250
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
CHAPTER XXV.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses in Mount Sinai, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, and say unto them, When ye
I come into the land which I give
I you, then shall the land keep a a
sabbath unto the Lord.
gion. See a melancholy instance of this
ill the history of David, and the heavy
charge brought against him on this very
account ; ' Because by this deed thou
hast given great occasion to the ene-
mies of the Lord to blaspheme.' Hear
the strong reproof of the apostle Paul
to the Jews who lived not according to
the principles and precepts of their law,
' The name of God,' says he, ' is bias-
phemed among the Gentiles through
you.' And alas, it is chargeable upon
many nominal Christians, to their great
reproach and shame, that while residing
in foreign lands among heathens, Ma-
hometans, and other rejecters of the Gos-
pel, they live in a manner so negligent
of religion, and so dissolute as to bring
the greatest disgrace upon the sacred
cause of Christianity. The same effects
may be produced by those who live at
home. It is to be feared that many a one
has been encouraged in sin, hardened in
lieart, and driven to the grossest enor-
mities in profane swearing and cursing,
and every breach of the divine law, by
the irreligious and immoral lives of
persons, and by the scoffing and con-
temptuous speech of those professing
the religion of Christ. God forbid that
we should thus dishonor the truth, and
ruin our souls !
CHAPTER XXV.
The Law of the Sabbatical Year.
1. And the Lord spake unto Moses in
Mount Sinai. That is, in the wilder-
ness or region of Sinai, in the vicinity
of the mount, where the people were
now encamped. ' Mount ' is often used
in the Scriptures for ' mountainous re-
gion.' The congregation remained for
!i year in the neighborhood of the hal-
a Exod. 23. 10.
3.21.
See ch. 26. Si, 35. 2 Chron.
lowed mount, from whence they did not
remove till the twentieth day of the
second month of the second year after
their coming out of Egypt, Num. 10.
11, V2. All that is here related was
undoubtedly delivered to Moses in the
first month of the second year after the
exodus, immediately subsequent to the
setting up of the tabernacle, Ex. 40. 17,
2. Then shall the land keep a sabbath
unto the Lord. Heb. Ti'IJ y\i< nrOlD
rrri"'^ shabethah eretz shabbCith laiho-
tah, shall the land sabbatize a sabbath
unto the Lord. Gr. ava-rravcErai {) yn,
the land shall rest. Chal. ' The land
shall be remitted a remission,' which,
though a barbarism in our language,
still conveys an intelligible idea. Tins
year of rest to the land is a very promi-
nent feature of the sabbatic system,
which formed so prominent and distin-
guishing a part of the Hebrew polity.
As man was commanded and privileged
on the seventh day to abstain from that
labor to which he had subjected himself
by sin, so, on the seventh year, the
earth was also to rest, and enjoy, as it
were, a respite from the effects of the
curse. The prominent circumstances
which distinguished the sabbatical year
from common years may be thus enu-
merated. (1.) All agricultural opera-
tions were to be suspended, and the
land was to lie fallow. The whole
country must, in fact, have been thrown
into one vast common, free to the poor
and the stranger, to the domestic cattle
and the game ; for the proprietor of the
land not only ceased to cultivate it, but
had no exclusive right to its spontane-
ous produce, although he might share
in it. (2.) The produce of every sixth
year was promised to be such as would
support them till the harvest of the
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV
251
H Six years ihou shalt sow thy
field, and six years ihou siiall prune
thy vineyard, and gather in the
fruit thereof;
t-iiith year ; a circuiuslancc which
would clearly demonstrate a particular
providence in respect to the institution.
(3.) It was a season of release Irom
debts due from one Israelite to another ;
but not those due from foreigners to
Israelites. (4.) Every Hebrew slave
had the option of being released this
year from liis servitude. At least this
is often inferred from Ex. 21. 2 ; but
it will be seen by reference to the Note
on that passage to be quite doubtlul
whether the seventh year there men- I
tioned was not the seventh year of his
actual servic'!, rather than the sabbat-
ical year. (5.) In the sabbatical year,
at the feast of tabernacles, they were
enjoined to read the law in the hearing
of all the people. This was called by
llie Rabbinical writers ' the reading of
the king,' because tradition made the
king himself the reader on this occasion.
It is not to be supposed that this year
of rest to the land was necessarily
spent by the Hebrews in idleness.
They could ti^h, hunt, take care of their
bees and flocks, repair their buildings
and furniture, manufacture clothes, and
carry on their usual traffic.
In adverting to tlie various political
and moral designs of this institution,
we may observe, in the first place, that
the l.iiid itself would experience the
happy effects of lying fallow one year,
in itself. Incessant culture tends to ex-
haust the strength of the soil, although
this is in great measure counteracted in
modern times by the expedient of a
rotation of crops. But there is no doubt
that among the Israelites the land re-
maining one year untilled, would re-
cruit itself for a more vigorous fertility
afterwards. Again, the institution was
calculated to remind the chosen people
that God was the great Proprietor of all,
and that the v were mere tenants, holding
4 But in the seventh year shall
be a sabbath of rest unto the land,
a sabbath for the Lord: thou shalt
their earthly possessions upon certain
prescribed conditions, with which they
could not safely dispense. Closely
connected with this, was the influence
wliich the Sabbatic year would have in
cherishing appropriate sentiments of
piety, and leading them to a practical
trust in au overruling providence.
When they saw the Sabbatic year at
hand, how forcibly would they be im-
pressed with the goodness of God in
making provision for it ! They would
have three years to live on the produce
of one single year. And when they
beheld their barns overflowing with the
produce of the earth, and their presses
bursting out with new wine, could they
refrain from saying, ' This is the hand
of the Lord ; how can we but feel deep-
ly sensible to his love and kindness ?
How can we refuse to love, serve, and
trust forever so gracious a benefactor? '
The observance of this season was, ia
fact, a test of their belief in the imme-
diate superintendiug providence of God,
and grieved we are to be obliged to
say, that under this lest the Israelites
failed ; and their failure was a na-
tional sin, which constituted one of
the grand procuring causes of their
subsequent long captivity in Babylon.
This fact seems to be anticipated, Lev.
26. 33-35, as not unlikely to happen,
and when the captivity actually came,
the years of its continuance correspond-
ed with the number of the neglected
sabbatic years ; and as these were sev-
enty, this would carry us back about 500
years to the commencement of the
kingly government, as the time at which
the observance was discontinued. After
I the captivity it was more scrupulously
observed.
4. A sabbath of rest unto the land.
Heb. "^ir^tU T-'itJ shabbath shabbathorif
a sabbath of sabbatism ; a phrase of
252
LEVITICUS.
fB. C. 1491.
neither sow thy field, nor prune
thy vineyard.
5 bTh'ai which groweth of its
own accord of thy harvest, thou
shall not reap, neither gather the
grapes of thy vine undressed : for
it is a year of rest unto the land.
6 And the sabbath of the land
shall be meat for you; for thee,
and for tiiy servant, and for thy
»> 2 Kings 19. 29.
great intensity of innport, which we
have previously explained. In its typi-
cal scope the ordinance no doubt pointed
forward to the great sabbatical period
of the world, which according to a very
ancient Jewish tradition, is to succeed
the previous six thousand years. These,
according to the Rabbins, are distributed
as follows ; — Two thousand before the
law ; two thousand under the law j and
two thousand under the Messiah. Then
comes the grand period of bliss and
glory to the world. IT Thou shall
neither sow thy field nor prune thy
vineyard. That is, the superfluous
shoots and branches which the husband-
man cuts to make the trees more fruitful.
5. Neither gather the grapes of thy
vine undressed. Heb. '1'T'T] ^^j5> in-
neb'e nezir'ika, the grapes of thy separa-
tion. Gr. rrjv aTa<pv\r]v tov ayiacnaroi aov,
the grapes of the sanctification. Chal.
* the vine of thy leaving ;' i. c. which
thou art to leave uncultivated.' The
original word ^"T^tD nezir'ika, is de-
rived from ^13 nazar, to separate, from
which comes ' Nazarite,' one separated,
one devoted to God for a season by spe-
cial consecration. One requisite in this
case, was that the hair should be suf-
fered to grow without being shaven ;
and in like manner the vineyard of the
Israelites being in a sense consecrated
to God for the space of the sabbatical
year, it was to be left in the condition
of the Nazarite's head, untouched by
^nife or pruning-hook. This is the rea-
son of its being rendered in our transla-
tion * undreseed.'
maid, and for thy hired servant,
and for thy stranger that sojourn-
eth with thee,
7 And for thy cattle, and for the
beast that are in thy land, shall all
the increase thereof be meat.
8 H And thou shalt number seven
sabbaths of years unto thee, seven
times seven years ; and the space
of the seven sabbaths of years shall
be unto thee forty and nine years.
6. The sabbath of the land shall be
meat for you. ' Sabbath of the land '
is here used by a figure of speech for the
fruit of the sabbath, i. e. of the sabbat-
ical year. In like manner the word
'sabbaths' is used ch. 23. 38, for the
sacrifices of the sabbath. It would
seem from this that the prohibition of
gathering corn and fruits in this year
was not absolute, for the products of
the vine and olive, and the milk and
honey would continue as usual.
The Jubilee.
8. Thou shalt number seven sabbaths
of years. The term ' sabbath ' here is
used in the sense of * week,' as before
explained, so that as a literal week
consisted of seven days, a sabbath of
weeks consisted of seven years. It is
not, however, to be understood that the
jubilee was to be celebrated on the
forty-ninth, but on the fiftieth year,
as is evident from v. 11. The forty-
ninth was the ordinary seventh or sab-
batical year, so that, in fact, two holy
years came together. Thus writes
Maimonides : ' The year of jubilee
Cometh not into the count of the years
of the seven ; but the nine and fortieth
year is the release, and the fiftieth year
the jubilee.' The jubilee, therefore,
was proclaimed on the forty-ninth and
celebrated on the fiftieth year.
The institution here described is one
of the most interesting and important
of all the appointments which charac-
terized the Jewish economy. It com-
menced on the first day of the month
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV.
253
Tisri, that is, the civil new year's day.
lis distinguishing features were the fol-
lowing -. —
(1.) As in the sabbatical year, so in
liiis, the people wore neither to sow nor
to Ff-ap, and the spontaneous products
ol the earth were to be accounted com-
mon property. Tlius there were two
years at every jubilee, when the Jews
ii'-iilier sowed nor reaped ; nanielj', the
jubilee and the year before, which was
always a sabbatical year; and hence
we see the reason why the promise of
support, given in Lev. 25. 20-22, was
from the sixth till the harvest of the
ninth year. We have only two pas-
sages of Scripture where this promise
is alluded to, viz., 2 Kings 19. 29, and
Is. 37. 30.
(2.) The second thing remarkable in
the year of jubilee was, that all the
lands which had been sold by one He-
brew to another, had a reference to this,
being valued according to its proximity
or remoteness, in order to their being
restored in that year ; or might be re-
deemed sooner by giving to the owner
a proper compensation.
(3.) All sales of houses in the coun-
try, were returned likewise at that time,
or could have been redeemed sooner ;
but all dwelling houses in walled cities,
\niless redeemed within a year, re-
mained for ever with the possessor, ex-
cept in the case of houses belonging to
the Levites, which might have been
redeemed at any time, although in wall-
ed cities; and if not redeemed, returned
to them again as a matter of course in
the year of jubilee.
(4.) All Israelites who on account of
poverty had sold themselves, that is to
say their services, to Israelites, were
not to be reckoned as bond, but as hired
servants, and were to return unto their
families and fathers' possessions in the
year of jubilee.
(5.) All poor Israelites who on ac-
comit of poverty had sold themselves to
proselytes, were to be accounted hired
servants, and might be redeemed at any
lime by their relatives or themselves ;
but, if not redeemed, were to obtaiu
their liberty at the jubilee.
(6.) As the Jewish kings had com-
monly much in their power, they were
expressly forbidden, on the one hand,
to seize the possession of any Israelite
as a provision for their family, or on
the other to squander the royal domains
on favorites, as that would liave lessen-
ed the patrimony of the crown ; and if
any such grants were at any time made,
they reverted, of course, to the original
proprietors in the year of jubilee.
Such was the nature of the Jewish
jubilee ; but we do not find that any
particular sacrifices were appointed,
nor even that reading of the law which
was enjoined in the sabbatical year ;
neither is it clear at what hour of the
day of annual expiation the silver trum-
pets sounded to announce its commence-
ment. It is probable, however, that it
was in the evening, after the high priest
had entered the most holy place, the
scape goat had been sent into the wil-
derness, and the people, in full concert
in the temple, had been praising the
Lord for his goodness, and because his
mercy endureth for ever. Imagination
may conceive, but it is beyond the
power of language to describe, the gen-
eral burst of joy that would pervade the
land, when the poor Israelites tasted
aga"in the sweets of liberty, and returned
to their possessions, their families, and
friends. In vain would sleep invite
them to repose — their hearts would be
too full to feel the lassitude of nature ;
and the night would be spent in grati-
tude and praise. What a lively em-
blem of the gospel of Christ ! which is
peculiarly addressed to the poor, which
is fitted to heal the broken hearted, to
give deliverance to the captives, the
opening of the prison doors to them
that are bound, and to preach unto all
the acceptable year of the Lord.
The true origin of the term ' Jubilee '
is somewhat doubtful. We trace it in-
deed to the Heb. '^2']"^ yobi'l, .but the
254
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 149j
genuine sense of this word is the great
mailer of debate. Some derive it from
.Tubal, the inventor of musical instru-
ments. Gen. 4. 21, and suppose that tliis
jear was named after him from its
being a year of mirth and ji>3', on which
n)u>ic is a common attendant. Our
Kiiglish word jovial is traced to tlie
same origin. Others, particularly D.
Kimchi, contend that jobel (yobel) sig-
nities a ram in Arabic, and that this
year was so called because it wns pro-
claimed with trumpets made of rams^
horns. Tiiis is somewhat countenanced
by the Chal. Targ. which occasionally
renders yobel by Jt~ii"iT dikra, a ram.
Bochart and others, however, doubt
wliether rams' horns were ever employed
as trumpets, but think that the * horns,'
' cornets,' &c. of the Scripture were
either the horns of oxen, or brazen
trumpets in the form of rams' horns.
Hottinger is of opinion that yobel is a
word designed to denote rather the pe-
culiar kind of sound made by the instru-
ment, than the instrument itself. Bishop
Patrick espouses this etymology, and
conceives the year to have been called
yobel from the sound every where made,
just as the feast of the Passover was
called nri pesa'h, from the angel's
passing over the Israelites when he
slew the Egyptians. Another, and per-
haps as probable an opinion as any of
the preceding is, that ^21"' yobel comes
from the verb "^"2"^ ydbal, which in Hi-
phil is ^"^Lin hobil, and signifies to
recall, restore, bring back ; because this
year restored liberty to the slaves, and
brought back alienated estates to their
original possessors. This would seem
to be the view which the Sept. takes of
the word by rendering it afeai;, a remis-
sion, and also Josephus, who renders it
t)^£vOr,piau, liberty. From this variety
of interpretations the reader is neces-
sarily lelt by the commentator to choose
that which he deems most plausible.
Absolute certainty is unattainable.
Whatever may be the meaning of the
term, and whatever the nature of the
I instruments employed, it is held by all
llie Jewibh writers that trumpets were
sounded extensively all over the land,
in ihe mountains, in the streets, and at
nearly every door. It was intended as
a universal waking up of all the popu-
lation to ihe occurrence of this joyous
festival. It was not enough tliat the
year and the day should be fixed, and
come round in silence. The spirits
which had been depressed by great re-
verses of fortune were to be exhilaratei^
by the cheering annunciation, and all
indifTerence and torpor to be shaken off.
The Jubilee in fact began on the first
day of the monih Tisri, but the real ob-
jectsof the institution did not develops
themselves till the tenth which was the
great day of atonement. But ilie pre-
vious nine diys were spent in great fes-
tivity and joj', resembling in some
respects the Roman Saturnalia. The
slaves did no work for their masters,
but crowned themselves with garlands,
and ate, and drank, and made merry.
On the tenth day, the proper authori-
ties, called * the house of judgment,' or
the great Sanhedrim, directed the trum-
pets to be sounded ; and at that instant
the bondmen became free, and lands
reverted to their original owners.
The two grand distinguishing charac-
teristics of the Jubilee were evidently
manumission of servants and the resti-
tution of estates. If any of the Israel-
ites had been reduced to a stale of sla-
very, whether he had sold himself
voluntarily, or had been sold for debt,
or theft, or any other cause, by the
sentence of the judge, now was the
season of his release. The day dawned ;
the trumpet-peal was heard, and the
chains of bondage fell from the exulting
slave. With his w ife and children, and
all that he had, he set forth from the
house of his bondage, and felt himself
possessed of liberty which no hand of
power or of fraud might invade. Even
those who had not seen fit to avail
themselves of the emancipation afforded
by the law at the end of six years' ser.
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV.
'^55
9 Then shah thou cause the trum-
pet of the jubilee to sound, on the
vitude, but had expressed their deter-
niinalion, by hiiving their ears bored
with an awl, and fasiened to the door
ofiheir master's house, were now to go
o'ut perfectly free under the general
procl:innaiion ol" liberty to the captive.
How striking a type of the release from
spiritual thraldom as announced at the
Gospel Jubilee, when our Saviour in the
synagogue read from the prophet Isaiah,
' The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he hath anointed me to preach
the gospel to the poor, he hath sent me
to Ileal the broken-hearted, to preach
deliverance to the captives, and recov-
eri»ig of sight to the blind, to set at lib-
erty them that are bruised, to preach
the acceptable year of the Lord ;' and
then added, * This day is this Scripture
fulfilled in your ears.' The Gospel
dispensation is the sinner's jubilee, and
as the word ' jubilee ' implies a joyful
sound, so the word 'Gospel' signifies
glad tidings ; and blessed are they who
hear and welcome the sound of joy
which it sends forth.
No less benign and gracious was the
other feature of this remarkable insti-
tution If any of the Israelites, through
misfortune, imprudence, or misconduct,
had been obliged to sell his patrimonial
lands, or any part of them, they were
returned to him free of incumbrance at
the year of Jubilee, if he could not re-
deem them sooner. No matter how
often the property had changed hands,
it was now restored to the original
owner or to his heirs. The Israelite
whom calamity or improvidence had
driven abroad, needed no longer to wan-
der for want of a home of his own to
welcome him. A home there always
was, would he but choose to reclaim it.
How wise and merciful this appoint-
ment ! How admirably adapted to pre-
serve a wholesome equality of condi-
tion among all classes ! The rich could
tot accunmlute all the lands, nor esta-
tenth day of the seventh month,
blish a permanent monopoly of wealth.
The man of avarice, who had gone on
adding house to house and field to field,
gained no permanent advantage over his
less fortunate neighbor. The fiftieth
year, beyond which no lease could run,
was always approaching with silent but
sure speed, to relax his tenacious grasp.
However alienated, however unworthily
or unthriftily sold, however strongly
conveyed to the purchaser or the usurper
an estate might be, this long-expected
day annulled the whole transaction, and
placed the debtor in the condition which
either himself or his ancestor had en-
joyed. In virtue, moreover, of this
gracious ordinance forbidding the per-
petual alienation of the land, a regular
genealogy of every particular tribe and
family would be preserved, and thus
evidence aflforded of the exact fulfil-
ment of the prophecies respecting the
Messiah, and the stock from which he
should spring.
So marked was the wisdom, so man-
ifold the blessings of this divine institu-
tion ! That its typical import conducts
us onward to the heart of the gospel
economy, as ushered in by Christ, we
have already remarked. But that it
has a reach still more extended, and,
like the sabbatical year, shadows out a
stale of permanent prosperity, happi-
ness, joy, and glory, in the latter periods
of this world's history, we have no
doubt. Like many other features of the
Levitical economy, its substance has
never yet been realized. That is re-
served for that blissful era announced
by the seventh, or jubilee trumpet of
the Apocalypse, when the grand coa«
summation of all prophetic blessedness
shall take place.
9. Thou Shalt cause the trumpet of
the jubilee to sound. Heb. n*l22>n
nS'Tin ^5TtJ haabarta shophtr teruahf
shalt cause to pa^s through the trumpet
of loud sound. That is, shalt cause il
256
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
ein the day of atonement shall ye
make the trumpet sound through-
out all your land.
10 And ye shall hallow the fifti-
eth year, and d proclaim liberty
throughout «// the land unto all the
inhabitants thereof: it shall be a
jubilee unto you; eand ye shall
return every man unto his posses-
sion, and ye shall return every man
unto his family.
11 A jubilee' shall that fiftieth
year be unto you: fye shall not
c ch. 23. 24, 27. <! Isai. 61. 2, and 63. 4.
Jer. 34. 8, 15, 17. Luke 4. 19. e ver. 13.
Numb. 36. 4. f ver. 5.
to be sounded all over the land from one
end to ihe other, that the most general
proclamation might be made. Thus in
Ezra 1. 1, 'The Lord stirred up the
spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, that he
made a proclamation throughout all his
kingdom.' Heb. ' He made a voice to
pass through all his kingdom.' The
Hebrew word answering to ' jubilee ' in
the next verse does not occur here, and
the utmost accuracy would perhaps
have led to the adoption of another
mode of rendering. In Num. 10. 5, the
word for ' loud sound ' is rendered
' alarm' — ' when ye blow an alarm.''
IT In the day of atonement. This was
the general fast-day, in which, with
every returning year, the whole con-
gregation humbled themselves and
afflicted their souls before God, and the
high-priest made atonement for them in
the holy place. The annunciation of
the jubilee was very wisely fixed to
this period, as it might be considered
that they would be better disposed to
forgive their brethren their debts when
they had so recently been receiving the
pardon of their own trespasses. The
Jubilee was a festival of joy, and a
sanctified joy can be preceded by no-
thing more suitable than deep humilia-
lion and godly sorrow for sin.
10. Proclaim liberty. That is, lib-
erty for Hebrew servants to leave the
sow, neither reap that which grow-
eth of itself in it, nor gather the
grapes in it of thy vine undressed.
12 For it is the jubilee; it shall
be holy unto you : g ye shall eat the
increase thereof out' of the field.
1.3 h In the year of this jubilee ye
shall return every man unto his
possession.
14 And if thou sell aught unto
thy neighbour, or buyest aughL ol
thy neighbour's hand, iye shall
not oppress one another:
S ver. 6, 7. h ver. 10. ch. 27. 24. Numb.
36. 4. ' ver. 17. ch. 19. 13. 1 Sam. 12. 3,
4. Mic. 2. 2. 1 Cor. 6. 8.
service of their masters ; particularly
such as had not availed themselves of
the privilege granted, Ex. 21. 2,6, ot
going out of servitude on the seventh
year, but had their ears bored as a sig-
nal of serving * for ever,' or until the
year of jubilee arrived. But now that
year having arrived, their ' ever ' was at
an end, and they went out of course.
IT Ye shall return every man unto
his possession. To his house or land,
which he may have been compelled to
sell, and to his family, from which he
may have been estranged by the loss of
his liberty. The Israelites had a por-
tion of land divided to each family by
lot. This portion of the promised land
they held of God, and were not to dis-
pose of it as their property in fee-sim-
ple. Hence no Israelite could part
with his landed estate but for a term of
years only. When the jubilee arrived
it again reverted to the original owners.
12. Ye shall eat the increase thereof
out of the field. That is, the sponta-
neous increase or produce.
14. If thou sell aught, &c. As the
divine lawgiver took care that the
wealth of some should not oppress the
poverty of others, by the law of jubilee
that a poor man should not lose his land
for ever ; so in buying the land of the
poor he would not have the rich give
less for it than it was worth, any more
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV.
257
15 k According to the number of
years after the jubilee, thou shall
buy of thy neighbour, and accord-
ing unto the number of years of
the fruits he shall sell unto thee :
16 According to the multitude of
years thou shall increase the price
thereof, and according to the few-
ness of years thou shall diminish
the price of it : for according to
the number of the years of the
fruits doth he sell unto thee.
17 lYe shall not therefore op-
press one another ; m but thou
shall fear thy God : for I am the
Lord your God.
IS H n Wherefore ye shall do my
statutes, and keep my judgments,
and do them ; ©and ye shall dwell
in the land in safety.
19 And the land shall yield her
k ch. -27. ly, 23. ■ ver. 14. m ver. 43. ch.
19. 14, 3-2. n ch. 19. 37. « rh. 26. 5. Deut.
1-2. 10. Ps. 4. 8. Prov. 1. 33. Jer. 23. 6.
than he would have the poor man re-
quire more for it than its just value,
computing to the time of the next jubi-
lee. It seems to be a general injunction
of equity, the particular application of
whicli is shown in the verses imme-
diately following.
15. According to the number of years,
&c. The purchases that were to be
made of lands were to be regulated by
the number of years which remained to
the next jubilee. This was something
like buying the unexpired term of a lease
among us ; the purchase being always
regulated by the number of years be-
tween the time of purchase and the ex-
piration of the term. It is easy to
perceive that the nearer the jubilee was.
the less would be the value of the land ;
therefore it is said ; ' According to the
fewness of the years thou shalt diminish
the price.' IT According to the num-
ber of the years of the fruits. They
were to reckon only the productive
years, and therefore must discount for
the sabbatical years.
22*
fruit, and pye shall eat your fill,
and dwell therein in safety.
20 And if ye shall say, qWhat
shall we eat the seventh year?
behold, rwe shall not sow nor
gather in our increase :
21 Then I will s command my
blessing upon you in the sixth year,
and it shall bring forth fruit for
three years.
22 t And ye shall sow the eighth
year, and eat yet of u old fruit until
the ninth year; until her fruits
come in ye shall eat of the old
store.
23 H The land shall not be sold
for ever; for x the land is mine, for
ye are y strangers and sojourners
with me.
P ch. 26. 5. Eiek. 34. 25, 27, 23. q Matt.
6. 25, 31. r ver. 4, 5. s Deut. 28. 8. See
Exod. 16. 29. t 2 Kings 19. 29. " Josh. 5.
IJ, 12. X Deut. 32. 43. 2 Chron. 7. 20. Ps.
85. 1. Joel 2. 18, and 3. 2. y 1 Chron. 29.
16. Ps. 39. 12, and 119. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 11.
17. Thou shalt fear thy God. This
would be the great guaranty for the
strict observance of the foregoing pre-
cepts, as ' by the fear of the Lord men
depart from iniquity.'
Promises to Obedience.
18. Ye shall dwell in the land tn
safety. Heb. nt:nb labeta'h, in confi-
dent-safety. The Heb. word expresses
both the boldness and confidence with
which men that fear and obey God trust
in him, and the safety and security
which they feel in his protection ia
times of doubt or danger.
Law of Redemption of Land.
23. The land shall not be sold for
ever. As the root of the original word
here rendered ' for ever,' signifies to cut
entirely off, the meaning in this case
probably is that the land should not be
sold in such a manner as to be entirely
cut off from redemption; i. e. wholly
and absolutely alienated from the hand
of the proprietor. This was forbidden
258
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
24 And in all the land of your
possession ye shall grant a redemp-
tion for the land.
25 Hz If thy brother be waxen
poor, and hath sold away some of
[lis possession, and if ^any of his
kin come to redeem it, then shall
he redeem that which his brother
sold.
26 And if the man have none to
redeem it, and himself be able to
redeem it.
z Ruth 2. 20, and 4. 4, 6. a See Ruth 3. 2,
9. 12. Jer. 32. 7, 8.
because as God, in a miraculous manner,
gave them possession of this land, they
were lo consider tliemselves merely as
tenants to him ; and, therefore, he as
the great landholder or lord of the soil,
prescribes lo them the conditions on
which they shall hold it.
24. Grant a redemption for the land.
That is, the privilege of redemption ;
so that he who sold it. if he became
able, or his kinsman or relations in case
he died, might redeem it in the interim
before the next jubilee ; but if it was
not done before the year of jubilee, it
was not then redeemed, but was re-
stored gratis in virtue of the jubilee-law.
25. IJ thy brother be uaxen poor, &c.
We learn from Maimonides that it was
s^eldom that houses or lands were sold
among the Jews till the year of jubilee,
except from the pressure of poverty.
For purposes of gainful traffic it was
almost never done. When want and
distress were the prompting cause, pro.
vision was kindly made for their re-
demption. IT If any of his kin come
to redeem it. Heb. ' The redeemer
thereof, he that is near unto him, shall
eome and shall redeem,' The Heb.
word lor redeem (2i43 goi'l), is the term
applied to the kinsman to whom per-
tained the right, according to a very
ancient usage, of redeeming lands,
houses, or persons, and also of avenging
the blood of one slain. The person
sustaining this office wus a lively figure
27 Then b let him count the years
of the sale thereof, and restore the
overplus unto the man to whom
he sold it; that he may return
unto his possession.
28 But if he be not able to restore
tl to him, tlien that which is sold
shall remain in the hand of him
that hath bought it until the year
of jubilee: cand in the jubilee it
shall go out, and he shall return
unto his possession.
b ver. 50, 51, 62. c yer. 13.
of Christ, who, assumed our nature that
he might become our kinsman-redeemer,
bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh,
and in reference to whom it is said. Is.
59. 20, * The redeemer shall come out
ofZion.' He has by his sufferings and
dealh bought back to man that inherit-
ance which had betn forfeited by sin.
IT That which his brother sold.
Heb. T^ns^ n::^?2 mimkar a'hiv, the
sale of his brother.
26. And himself be able to redeem it.
Heb. ' His hand hath attained unto, and
he hath found the sufficiency of the re
demption ;' i. e. the requisite means of
making the redemption. This is con-
strued, however, by the Rabbinical wri-
ters to imply that he must have grown
able from his own means to re-purchase
tiie property, and that he was not lo do
it by borrowing.
27. Then let him count, &c. That
is, let him count the years from the
time the sale was made unto the next
ensuing jubilee ; computing the income
for the years that remain, and paying
for them at the original rate agreed
upon at the time of sale. If, ibr in-
stance, one sold a field to another ten
years before a jubilee, and at the end
of five years wished to redeem it, he
paid ihe purchaser half the price at
which he bought it ; and so on in that
proportion, according to the lime. A
fair estimate was to be made of the
probable proceeds of the land during
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV.
259
29 And if a man sell a dwelling-
house in a walled city, then he
may redeem it within a whole
year after it is sold : icilhiji a full
year may he redeem it.
30 And if it be not redeemed
within the space of a full year,
then the house that is in the walled
city shall be established for ever
to him that bought it, throughout
his generations: it shall not go out
in tlie jubilee.
31 But the houses of the villages
which have no walls round about
them, shall be counted as the fields
of the country : they may be re-
deemed, and they shall go out in
the jubilee.
32 Notwithstanding dthe cities
of the Leviies, and the houses of
d See Numb. 35. 2. Josli. -21. 2, &c.
the interval to the jubilee, and this was
to be allowed to the buyer. This is
termed ' restoring the overplus.'
The Difference in the terms of Redemp-
tion in respect to City and Country
Houses.
29. If a man sell a dwelling-house in
a walled city. Heb. ri?2in ^"^"S ir
'hornah, a city of wall. Houses in wall-
ed cities were more the fruit of their
own industry than land in the country,
which was the immediate gift of God;
and, therefore, if a man sold a house in
a city, he might redeem it any time
within a year after the date, but other-
wise it was confirmed to the purchaser
for ever, and should no more return to
the original proprietor, not even in the
year of jubilee. This provision was
made to encourage strangers and prose-
lytes to come and settle among them.
Though they could not purchase land
in Canaan for them.selves and their
heirs, yet they might purchase houses
in walled cities, which would be most
convenient for them who were sup-
posed to live by trade. But country
villages could be disposed of no other-
wise than as lands might,
the cities of their possession, may
the Levites redeem at any time.
33 And if a man purchase of the
Levites, then the house that was
sold, and the city of his possession
e shall go out in Me year o/jubilee;
I for the houses of the cities of the
j Levites are their possession among
the children of Israel.
34 But f the field of the suburbs
of their cities may not be sold, for
it is their perpetual possession.
35 ^Andif thy brother be waxen
poor, and fallen in decay with thee ;
then thou shalt g relieve him : yea,
though he be a stranger, or a so-
journer; that he may live with
thee.
e ver. 23. f See Acts 4. 36, 37. S Deut.
15. 7, S. Ps. 37. -26, and 41. 1, and 112. 5, 9.
Prov. 14. 31. Luke 6. 35. Acts 11. 29.
Rom. 12. IS. IJohn 3. 17.
Exception in favor of the Levites.
32 Notwithstanding the cities of the
Levites, &c. This was doubtless be-
cause the Levites had no other posses-
sions than the forty-eight cities with
their suburbs which were assigned
them, and God would show that the
Levites were his peculiar care ; and it
was for the interest of the public that
they should not be impoverished or de-
prived of their possessions. Therefore
as their houses in these cities were the
whole of what they could call their own,
they could not be utterly alienated.
Compassion to be had of the Poor.
35. Fallen in decay. Heb. Ill rit3?a
mdtdh yddo, his hand waver eth. Gr.
a^vvuTTjaT] rats ■^tpaiv avrov, is weak in
his hands. That is, disabled from help-
ing himself; one who was unable to
help himself, as if his hand were shak-
ing with the palsy. IT Thou shalt
relieve him. Heb. in npTHn he'hezakta
bo, thou shalt strengthen him. That is,
thou shall extend to him relief, which is
otherwise expressed by holding or
strengthening the hands of the weak
and needy. IT That he may live mth
260
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
36 hTake thou no usury of him,
or increase; but ifear thy God;
that thy brother may live with thee.
37 Thou shalt not give him thy
njoney up(jn usury, nor lend him
thy victuals for increase.
38 kl am the Lord your God,
which brought you forth out of the
h»nd of Egypt, to give you the land
uf Canaan, and to be your God.
39 II And 1 if thy brother that
h Exod. 22. 25. Deut. 23. 19. Neh. 5. 7.
Ps, \b. 5. Prov. 2S. 8. Ezek. 18. S, 13, 17,
and 22. 12. ' ver. 17. Neh. 5. 9. k ch. 22.
\il, 33. 1 Exod. 21. 2. Deut. 15. 12. 1
Kings 9. 22. 2 Kings 4. 1. Neh. 5. 5. Jer.
.34. 14.
thee ; i. e. that he may be enabled to
r'-cover himself out of his calamities
and live prosperously among you.
' Life ' in tlie Scriptures is often used in
opposition to sickness, distress, calam-
ity, as Isai, 3S. 9, ' The writing of Hez-
eliiah king cf Judah, when he had been
sick, and was recovered, (Heb. was
made alive) of his sickness.' Neh. 4.
2, ' Will they revive (Heb. make alive)
ihe stones out of the heaps of the rub-
bish which are burned V 1 Chron. 11. S,
* And Joab repaired (Heb. made alive)
the rest of the city.' Gen. 45. 27, ' And
the spirit of Jacob their father revived,
(Heb. was made alive).'
36. Take thou 7W usury of him. The
original term 'I'r^ neshek comes from
the verb 'li;] nashak, to bite, mostly
applied to the bite of a serpent, and
properly signifies biting tisury, so
called perhaps because it resembles the
bite of a serpent ; for as this is often
so small as to be scarcely perceptible
at first, but the venom soon spreads and
diffuses itself, till it reaches the vitals,
so the increase of usury, which at first
is not perceived, at length grows so
much as to devour a man's substance.
As this law was ordained merely to
prevent cruel exactions, it cannot be
considered as applying to that reason-
able compensation for the use of money
which is known among us by the appel-
dwelleth by thee be waxen poor,
and be sold unto thee ; thou shalt
not compel him to serve as a bond-
servant:
40 But as an hired servant, and
as a sojourner he shall be with
thee, and shall serve thee unto the
year of jubilee :
41 And then shall he depart from
thee, both he and his children
mwith him, and shall return unto
his own family, and nunlo the
possession of his fathers shall he
return.
m Exod. 21. 3. n yer. 23.
lation of simple interest. See Note on
Ex. 22. 25.
An Israelite not to be obliged to serve as
a Slave.
39. And be sold unto thee. Persons
were sometimes sold among the Jews
by judicial process when they had been
guilty of theft, and were not able to
make satisfaction, Ex. 21. 2. Some
were sold by their parents ; i. e. tiiey
disposed of their right of service for a
stipulated sum, and for a number of
years. Others, again, when reduced to
extreme want, sold themselves, as we
have explained more at large, Ex. 21. 2.
The Jewish writers inform us that this
was not considered lawful except in
extreme cases. ' A man might not sell
himself to lay up the money which was
given for him ; nor to buy goods ; nor
to pay his debts, but merely that he
might get bread to eat. Neither was it
lawful for him to sell himself as long
as he had so much as a garment left.' —
Maimonides. IT Thou shalt not com-
pel him to serve as a bond servant. That
is, it must not be supposed that his
master that bought him had as absolute
a property in him as in a captive taken
in war, who might be used, sold, and
bequeathed, at pleasure, as much as a
man's cattle ; but he shall serve thee
merely as a hired servant whose ser*
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXV.
261
42 For they are oray servants
which I hrought forth out of the
land of Egypt ; they shall not be
sold as bond-men.
43 i> Thou shah not rule over
liini q with rigour, but rshalt fear
il)y God.
44 Both thy bond-men and thy
bond-maids, whicii thou shah have,
simll be of the heathen that are
round about you; of them shall ye
buy bond- men and bond-maids.
^' ver. 55. Rom. 6. 22. ] Cor. 7. 23.
P Ephcs. 6. 9. Col. 4. 1. q ver. 46. Exod.
1. 13. r ver. IT. Exod. 1. 17, 21. Deut.
25. 18. Mai. 3. 6.
vices the master maj'^ command, with-
Kiil pretending to a despotic power over
his person.
42. They shall not he sold as bond-
men. Thill is, not in the open public
iiiiinner that other servants or slaves
were sold ; not, as it were, in the mar-
ket j)lace ; but privately and in a more
honorable way. But the spirit of the
passage, as connected with the next
verse, seems to be, that he should not
be taken as a mere slave, but as a hired
servant, or as a brother fallen into ad-
versity, and treated as an Israelite fear-
ing God would desire a brother Israel-
ite to treat himself in the same circum-
stances.
43. Thou shall not rule over him with
rigor. Heb. "llSn bepharek, with
fierceness. See the term explained in
the Note on Ex. I. 13, where it is ap-
plied to the cruelty of Pharaoh's task
masters. Gr. ' Thou shalt not rack nor
afflict them with labors.' But though
forbidden thus to tyrannise over their
own countrymen, were they permitted
to treat their heathen bondmen with
rigor ? On this the Hebrew writers say,
* It is lawful to make a Canaanitish
servant serve with rigor, but notwith-
standing this right, it is the property
of mercy and way of wisdom that a
man should be compassionate, and fol-
low justice, and not make his yoke
heavy upon his servant nor afflict him.'
45 Moreover, of s the children of
the strangers that do sojourn among
you, of them shall ye buy, and of
their families that are with you,
which they begat in your land:
and they shall be your possession.
46 And tye shall take them as
an inheritance for your children
after you, to inherit them for a
possession, they shall be your bond-
men for ever : but over your breth-
ren the children of Israel, uye shall
not rule one over another with
rigour.
s Isai. 5G. 3, 6. t Isai. 14. 2. u ver. 43.
' Labor beyond the person's strength,
or labor too long continued, or in un
healthy or uncomfortable places and
circumstances, or without sufficient
food, &c. is labor exacted with rigor,
and consequently inhuman, and so at
variance not only with the spirit of the
Mosaic dispensation, but with the max-
ims of right conduct among every peo-
ple under heaven.' — A. Clarke.
44. Shall be of the heathen that are
round about you. That is, of the hea-
then inhabiting the countries round
about the Holy Land, but not of the
Canaanites, whom they were required
to destroy. IT Of them shall ye buy
bond-men and bond-maids. Heb. IDpD
tiknu, shall ye obtain, acquire, whether
by purchase or otherwise. We have
already observed, in the full explana-
lion of this term, Ex. 21. 2, that its
general import is that of acquisition,
without specifying the mode. It is not
improbable that heathen bond-men were
occasionally bought by the Israelites,
but the precept has doubtless a primary
reference to such as were taken cap-
lives ia war ; whence the Latin name
mancipia is supposed to be equivalent
to manu capti, captured by the hand,
and servus, slave, to be applied to one
who was preserved alive when he might
otherwise have been killed. The rule
permitted them also to obtain by pur-
chase the children of resident foreign
^2
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
47 If And if a sojourner or a
stranger wax rich by thee, and
xthy brother that dioelleth by him
wax poor, and sell himself unto
the stranger or sojourner by thee,
or to the stock of the stranger's
family :
48 After that he is sold he may
be redeemed again; one of his
brethren may y redeem him :
49 Either his uncle, or his uncle's
son may redeem him, or aiiy that
is nigh of kin unto him of his fam-
^ ver. 25. 35. y Neh. 5. 5. z ver. 26.
ers among them, who, though they
might be proselytes of the gate, yet
were not circumcised ; and whom the
Chal. therefore denominates ' uncir-
cumcised sojourners.'
Of the Redemption of the Israelitish
Bond-man from the hand of the So-
journer.
47. Sell himself unto the stranger.
It will be well, in reference to the laws
concerning slavery in this chapter, to
recollect that Moses is not originating
laws to give a sanction to slavery, but
is interposing, under the divine com-
mand, to regulate for the better a sys-
tem already in operation. We discover
the existence of slavery in the book of
Genesis, and are aware of its early pre-
valence in all countries. Those who
are acquainted with the condition of
slaves in ancient nations will not fail
to recognise the wisdom and mercy of
the various regulations on the subject
vi'hich are given here and elsewhere,
and which, when carefully considered,
will be found in all instances to have
an obvious tendency to protect a bond-
man, and to ameliorate his condition,
whether a native or a foreigner. The
law of the present chapter is so clearly
announced as to require no particular
exposition. On the above-cited verse
we may however observe, that foreign-
ers among the Jews seem to have been
in a much more privileged condition
ily may redeem him ; or if z he be
able, he may redeem himself.
50 And he shall reckon with him
that bought him, from the year that
he was sold to him, unto the year
of jubilee : and the price of his
sale shall be according unto the
number of years, a according to the
time of an hired servant shall it
be with him.
51 li there be yet many years be-
hind., according unto them he shall
give again the price of his redemp-
a Job 7. 1. Isai. 16. 14, and -21. 16.
than they are at present in the same or
any Mohammedan country. We see
that a resident foreigner is allowed to
purchase any Hebrew whose distressed
circumstances make him wish to sell
his liberty. At present no Christian or
Jew in a Mohammedan country is al-
lowed to have as a slave, we will not
say any native, but any Mohammedan
of any country — nor, indeed, any other
than Mohammedans, except negroes —
who are the only description of slaves
they may possess.'— P^c^ Bib.
50. And he shall reckon, &c. In or-
der that no injustice might be done to
the master, they were to compute how
long the bond-man had served him, how
long he had still to serve, and what
price was paid for him ; and then, ac«
cording to the number of years elapsed,
and the number to come, the right sum
was made out. The Jews held, that
the kindred of such a person were bound,
if in their power, to redeem him, lest
he should be swallowed up among the
heathen J and we find from Neh. 5. 8,
that this was done by the Jews on their
return from the Babylonish captivity;
' We, after our ability, have redeemed
our brethren the Jews, who were sold
unto the heathen.' IT According to
the time of a hired servant shall it be
with him. That is, according to the
rate of wages ordinarily allowed to a
hired servant for liie like period of time
shall the sum paid for him be estimated.
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVI.
263
tion out of the money that he was
Dought for.
52 And if there remain but few
years unto the year of jubilee, then
he shall count with him, and ac-
cording unto his years shall he
give him again the price of his
redemption.
53 And as a yearly hired servant
shall he be with him : and the
other shall not rule with rigour
over him in thy sight.
54 And if he be not redeemed in
these years, then b he shall go out
bver. 41. Exod*21. 2, 3.
53. Shalt not rule with rigor over
him in thy sight. That is, with ihy
connivance. Thou, an Israelite, shall
not knowingly suffer a stranger to mal-
treat or abuse one of their own brethren.
It shall be the duty of the magistrates,
upon information, to call such an one
lo account.
54. If he be not redeemed in those
years. Heb. n^S*2 beilleh, in or by
these. As there is no substantive in the
original, it is somewhat doubtful what
word is to be supplied. The Gr. has
Kara ravra, by these things or means,
i. e. neither by himself or others before
the jubilee.
55. For unto me the children of Israel
are servants. The original term is the
same that has hitherto all along been
rendered ' bond-men ;' and the force of
the intended contrast would have been
stronger, had that word been retained.
Let the children of Israel be dealt with
as I have commanded, for they are my
bond-meh in a far higher sense than
they are or can be those of any other.
in the year of jubilee, both he, and
his children with him.
55 For c unto me the children of
Israel are servants, they are my
servants whom I brought forth out
of the land of Egypt: I am the
Lord your God.
CHAPTER XXVI.
YE shall make you a no idols nor
graven image, neither rear
•: you up a standing image, neither
! shall ye set up any image of stone
' in your land, to bow down unto it :
' for I am the Lord your God.
i c ver. 4-2. a Exod. 20. 4, 5. Deut. 5. S,
I and 16. 22, and 27. 15. Ps. 97. 7.
!
of obedience on the one hand, and
threatenings of punishment in case of
disobedience on the other.
CHAPTER XXVI.
The present chapter may be said to
be a solemn practical conclusion to the
main body of the Levitical law, con-
taining a general enforcement of all its
precepts by promises of reward in case
Idolatry forbidden.
1. Ye shall make you no idols. Heb.
tD^">^i< elclim, nothings, vanities. Gr.
Xtiponoirjra, things made with hands.
It is a term expressive of the utmost
possible contempt towards the objects
j intended, and the prohibition comes ia
I very properly in this place, at the head
j of these solemn injunctions, idolatry
being the grand crowning sin which they
were most studiously to avoid. For a
farther explication of the word, see on
Lev. 19. 4. IT Nor graven image.
Heb. ^DS pesel, i. e. any thing hewed
I or sculptured out of wood or stone.
[ See Note on on Ex. 20. 4, IT Stand-
I ing image. Heb. n22?2 matzebuh,piU
lar or statue ; i. e. either a single stone,
I or a pile of stones reared and conse-
I crated to religious purposes. Probably
I the stones or pillars which were at
I first set up and anointed by holy men
I in commemoration of signal interposi-
tions of God in their behalf, were after-
wards abused to idolatrous and super-
stitious purposes, and therefore are for-
bidden. IT Image of stone. Heb
n*^DB:ia pK eben maskith, stone of
imagery, or stone of picture or figure j
i. e. stones curiously wrought and
264
LEVITICUS,
CB. C. 1491.
2 H b Ye shall keep my sabbaths, 3 llcif ye walk in my statutes
and reverence ray sanctuary : I
the Lord.
b ch. 19. 30.
2S. 1-14.
Deut. 11. ]3, 14, 15, and
carved wiili figures in relief, which
were often made use of as objects of
adoration among the ancient heathen. |
Chal. * Stone of worship.' ' In Ezek. S. I
8-1], there is a description of a subter-
raneous vault, the walls of which were
covered with images of quadrupeds and
creeping things, exactly like those of j
Egypt which are covered with hiero- j
glyphic figures. In the 12th verse this
vault is called n^-r?2 "Mil hadar mas- j
kith, wnicn our translation excellently
renders ' chambers of imagery.' Now
the same word being used in two places
with an analogous context, it is fair to
infer, that if an hieroglyphic cave is
intended in Ezekiel, an hieroglyphic
stone is intended here ; which is the
more probable when we recollect that
the Israelites were at this time fresh
Irom Egypt, and deeply infected with
the rank idolatries of that country —
insomuch that whenever Moses inter-
dicts, at this early period, a particular
form of idolatry, we should invariably
feel disposed to look to Egypt, in the
first instance, for the example. It is
well known that the Egyptian priests,
in order to preserve the treasures of
knowledge and their discoveries in
natural science, and at the same time to
render them inscrutable to any but the
initiated few, made use not of common
writing but of hieroglyphics, with
which they inscribed obelisks, walls,
and even subterraneous chambers and
galleries, as well as square stones.
These monuments were deified by the
multitude, who worshipped in them
Thoth, the Egyptian god of learning.
This was a sufficient reason for their
interdiction by Moses. But had he no
further reason ? As this law, if it be
thus rightly understood, would operate
to the exclusion of hieroglyphics, are
we not at liberty to infer that Moses —
or rather his Divine instructor — thus
expressed his abhorrence of a practice
which locked up knowledge to the peo-
ple for the purpose of enabling the priv-
ileged few, by virtue of that power
which knowledge gives, to hold in en-
tire thraldom their minds, bodies, and
estates? Micliaelis, whose view of this
text we have followed, well observe?,
' Had Moses been only a wise and be-
nevolent impostor ; had he given him-
self out for a divine messenger, without
being so, and merely from love to an
oppressed people ; and had his miracles
been nothing more than human devices ;
it is scarcely conceivable how he could
ever have gone the length oi' abolishing
an expedient so artfully contrived, and
so favorable to the views of priestcraft,
for the concealment of the sciences.
The legislator, therefore, who relin-
quished such an expedient, and at the
same time founded his polity on the
commandments of a Deity, could be no
impostor, but must have been an honest
man." — Pict. Bib.
The Sabbath and the Sanctuary to be
Sanctified.
2. Ye shall keep my sabbaths. That
is, my different days of sabbatical rest ;
not only the sabbath day, but other
stated solemnities, which were to be dis-
tinguished by holy convocations. Next
in importance to the charge concerning
idolatry is that respecting the due ob-
servance of the sabbath ; and we ac-
cordingly find in the prophets, that
next to that of idolatry, there is no sin
for which the Jews are more frequently
reproved and threatened, than the pro-
fanation of God's holy sabbaths. The
reverence of the sanctuary here en-
joined is connected with the keeping of
the Sabbath by a tie of intimacy too
obvious to need remark.
Promises to Obedience.
3. If ye walk in my statutes, &c.
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVI.
^65
and keep my commandments, and
<to them ;
4 tiThen I will give you rain in
due season, « and the land shall
yield her increase, and the trees
of the field shall yield their fruit :
5 And f your threshing shall reach
unto the vintage, and the vintage
shall reach unto the sowing-time;
and gye shall eat your bread to
the full, and ^ dwell in your land
safely.
d Isai. 30. 23, Eiek. 31. 26. Joe! 2, 23, 24.
e Ps. 67. 6, and 85. 12. Ezek. 34. 27, and 3G.
30. Zech. 8. 12. f Amos 9. 13. g ch. 25. 19.
Deut. 11.1.5, Joel 2. 19, 26. h ch. 25. 18.
Job 11. 18. Ezek. 34. 25, 27, 28. > 1 Chron.
22.9. Ps. 29. H, and 147, 14. Isai. 45.7.
Hag. 2. 9,
The promises and threatenings which
follow are of a temporal nature ; and it
has been questioned whether they ex-
tend to individuals, or are to be limited
lo the Israelites as a nation. But the
happiness and prosperity of a nation
necessarily involves that of individuals ;
and though individuals might not be
uniformly rewarded or punished accord-
ing to their obedience or disobedience,
yet the temporal retribution announced
was sufficiently uniform to evince the
particular providence which guided the
people of Israel.
4. Then will I give you rain. Heb.
t:S'^?2ir3 ">rnD nathattl gishm'ekem, will
give your rains. So certain should be
their showers in their seasons, so infal-
libly secured by promise, that they
should be entitled to consider and call
them theirs; *I will give your rains.'
5. Your threshing shall reach unto
the vintage. That is, so abundant shall
be your corn-crops that the business of
threshing shall not be completed before
the vintage ; and again, so plentiful
shall be the produce of the vine, that ye
shall not be able to finish the gathering
and pressing of your grapes till sowing
time again arrives. We meet with a
similar sentiment in the prophet Amos,
ch. 9. 13, ' The plowman shall overtake
23
6 And i I will give peace in the
land, and kye shall lie down, and
none shall make you afraid : and I
will rid 1 evil beasts out of the land,
neither shall m the sword go
through your land.
7 And ye shall chase your ene-
mies, and they shall fall before you
by the sword.
8 And n five of you shall chase an
hundred, and an hundred of you
shall put ten thousand to flight:
and your enemies shall fall before
you by the sword.
^ Job 11. 19. Ps. 3. 5, and 4. 8. Isai. 35.
9. Jer. 30. 10. Ezek. .34. 25. Hos. 2. 18.
Zeph. 3. 13. 1 2 Kings 17. 25. Ezek, 5. 17,
and 14. 15. m Ezek. 14. 17. nDeut. 32. 30.
Josh. 23. 10.
the reaper, and the treader of grapes
him who soweth seed.'
6. I will give peace in your land.
Freedom from intestine commotions
and insurrections, which often arise
from poverty and discontent. The lan-
guage seems rather to refer to peace
among themselves, while the ' sword
in the latter clause of the verse points
rather to the ravages of war from for-
eign invasion. The blessings here
promised, it will be noticed, are set ia
contrast with the main judgments which
are elsewhere denounced against the
Israelites, Ezek. 14. 21, to wit, famine,
war, and evil beasts. See also Note
on V. 21.
7. Ye shall chase your enemies, &c.
That is, a few, a mere handful, shall be
more than a match for a great multi-
tude, as it proved in the conquest of
Canaan ; insomuch that Joshua says,
enlarginguponthispromise, Josh.23. 10,
' One man of you shall chase a thou-
sand.' This was signally fulfilled in
the days of Gideon who with three men
put to flight a vast army, Judg. 7. 22.
So also in the case of David's worthies,
of whom one lifted his spear against
eight liundred, and slew three hundred
at one time, 2 Sam. 23. 8, 18, 1 Chron.
11.11. Three men also broke through
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1493-
9 For I will «>have respect unto
you, and p make you fruitful, and
multiply you, and establish my
covenant with you.
10 And ye shall eat qold store,
and bring forth the old because of
the new.
11 'And I will set my tabernacle
among you : and my soul shall not
e abhor you.
o Exod. 2. 25. 2 Kings 13. 23. P Gen. 17.
6, 7. Neh. 9. 23. Ps. 107. 33. q ch. 26. 32.
«• Exod. 25. 8, and 29. 45. Josh. 22. 19. Ps.
76. 2. Ezek. 37. 26, 27, 28. Rev. 21. 3.
s ch. 20. 23. Deut. 32. 19.
the host of the Philistines, 1 Chroa.
11.18. Comp. Deut. 32. 30.
9. For I will have respect unto you.
Heb. M'^^i^ *^n'i35 panithi altkem, I
mill turn my face unto you. Gr.
ei:i3\t\pui e(p' 't)//aj Kai av^avZ 'vfias,
I will look upon you and bless you.
Chal. ' I will have respect by my
Word to do good unto you.' For this
favor David prays, Ps.25. 16, and 69. 17,
and when God had delivered Israel
from their enemies, it is said, 2 Kings
13. 23, ' The Lord was gracious unto
them, and had respect unto thenif be-
cause of his covenant.' IT Establish
my covenant with you. That is, invio-
lably keep my covenant already esta-
blished, and faithfully perform its every
stipulation.
- 10. Ye shall eat old store, &c. That
is, to prevent waste from superabun-
dance, ye shall eat of your old stock of
provisions, notwithstanding the new
crop has come in. IT Bring forth
the old because of the new. That is, ye
shall be forced to ' bring forth,' or re-
move from your barns and garners, the
old stock of your corn, in order to make
room for the new.
11. And I will set my tabernacle
among you. That is, I will firmly and
permanently establish my tabernacle
among you; I will secure its contin-
uance with you. In addition to this, its
primary sense, the passage contains in
«fiect the grand promise of the Gospel
12 t And I will walk among you,
and uwill be your God, and ye
shall be my people.
13 w I am the Lord your God,
which brought you forth out of
the land of Egypt, that ye should
not be their bond-men, "and I have
broken the bands of your yoke, and
made you go upright.
t 2 Cor. 6. 16. u Exod. 6. 7. Jer. 7. 23,
and 11. 4, and 30. 22. Ezek. 11. 20, and 36.
28. w ch. 25. 38, 42, 66. x Jer. 2. 2C
Ezek. 34. 27.
dispensation^ viz. : the presence, man-
ifestation, and in-dwelling of God in
human nature. So John 1. 14, * The
Word was made flesh and dwelt among
us. Gr. ' Tabernacled among us.' Jesus
Christ was the true tabernacle of God,
and though this promise was in an emi-
nent manner fulfilled in the Savior's in-
habitation of our nature while accom-
plishing his work on earth, yet it ap-
pears from Rev. 21. 3, that we are to
look for its fulfilment in a still higher
sense at some future period of this
world's history: 'And I heard a great
voice out of heaven saying, Behold,
the tabernacle of God is with men, and
he will dwell with them.' See Note on
Ex. 29. 45, where this promise is largely
considered. IT My soul shall not ab-
hor you. I will regard you with tokens
of the utmost complacency ; I will take
delight in you, and impart the inward
peace of my spirit. The contrary of
this is threatened, v. 30.
12. And J will walk among you. Chal.
' I will cause my Shekinah to dwell
among you.' I will be familiarly con-
versant among you by the visible sym-
bol of my presence, conducting your
journeys in the wilderness, and abiding
in the tabernacle and temple prepared
for me.
13. And made you go upright. That
is, set you free from bondage ; brought
you into that state of enlargement in
which you are no more bowed down by
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVI.
-267
14 1[y But if you will not hearken
unto me, and will not do all these
commandments;
15 And if ye shall z despise my
statutes, or if your soul abhor my
judgments, so that ye will not do
all my commandments, but that
ye break my covenant :
16 I also will do this unto you, I
will even appoint over you a ter-
ror, b consumption, and the burning
ague, that shall c consume the eyes,
and cause sorrow of heart : and
d ye shall sow your seed in vain :
for your enemies shall eat it.
y Deut. 23. 15. Lam. 2. 17. Mai. 2. 2.
z ver. 43. 2 Kings 17. 15. a Deut. 28. Go,
66, 67, and 32. 25. Jer. 15. 8. b Deut. 23.
22. c 1 Sam. 2. 33. d Deut. 28. 33, 51. Job
31. 3. Jer. 5. 17, and 12. 13. Mic 6. 15.
the heavy burdens laid upon your backs,
nor hanging down your heads in despon-
dency and woe.
Threatenings denounced against Diso-
bedience.
14. If ye will not hearken to me. Gr,
eav 6c jjir] viraKOVGrjTe fxov^ if ye will not
obey me. This is one of the most fre-
quent uses of the original word for
* hear ' or < hearken.' Chal. ' If ye will
not receive my word.' So in v. 18.
The subsequent history of the Jewish
race affords the most conclusive evi-
dence that these predictions were ful-
filled with a fearful exactness. The
limits of our annotations do not permit
us to go into minute detail, but the
volumes of Newton and Keith will pre-
sent a mass of proof on this score which
will be found to be of intense interest,
and such as the most determined skep-
tic will endeavor in vain to gainsay.
16. I will even appoint over you
terror, &c. Heb. M^^iy ^iJinpSH
. hiphkadti alekemj will visit upon you.
At the same time, there is very good
authority for interpreting the verb as is
done in our translation, in the sense of
letting over, constituting guardians of,
investing with authority. The true
17 And e I will set my face against
you, and f ye shall be slain before
your enemies; sthey that hate
you shall reign over you, and h ye
shall flee when nonepursuelh you.
18 And if ye will not yet for all
this hearken unto me, then I will
punish you i seven times more for
your sins.
19 And I will k break the pride
of your power; and I iwill make
your heaven as iron, and your
earth as brass :
20 And your m strength shall be
e ch. 17. 10. f Deut. 28. 25. Judg. 2. 14.
Jer. 19. 7. S Ps. 106. 41. •' ver. 36. Ps.
63 5. Pr(5v. 28. 1. '> 1 Sam. 2. 6. Ps. 119.
164. Prov. 24. 16. k Isai. 25. 11, and 26. 5.
Ezek. 7. 24, and 30. 6. 1 Deut 28. 23.
m Ps. 127. 1. Isai. 49. 4.
force of the term in this form is to cause
to preside over, and Ps. 109. 6, affords a
strikingly parallel example ; ' Set thou
a wicked man over him (Ipttl haph-
k'td), &c.' The language thus construed
is singularly bold and striking. Terror,
consumption, and the burning ague are
personilied, and made the keepers of the
disobedient and apostate Israelites.
They haunt their steps wherever they
go, and keep them continually under
the influence of dismay, feeling indis-
cribable evils, and fearing worse.
18. Then will I punish you seven
times more for your sins. A definite
for an indefinite number, according to
common usage. The import is plainly
that of a great increase of their plagues.
These, by reason of their continued pro-
vocations, were to become more and
more aggravated from age to age, as
history proves to have been the case.
The words contain no allusion to a pe-
riod of time, but simply to the degree
of their punishment.
19. 1 will make your heaven as iron
and your earth as brass. That is, that
part of the heavens which is over your
country shall afford no more rain than
if it were a canopy of iron, and conse-
quently your earth or land shall be as
S68
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491
spent in vain : for nyour land shall
not yield her increase, neither
shall the trees of the land yield
their fruits.
21 1[ And if ye walk contrary
unto me, and will not hearken unto
me, I will bring seven times more
plagues upon you according to
your sins.
22 o I will also send wild beasts
among you, which shall rob you
of your children, and destroy your
catile, and make you few in num-
ber, and pyour high-wdiys shall be
desolate.
23 And if ve q will not be re-
nDeut. 11. 17, and 28. IS. Hag. 1.10.
o Deut. 32. 24. 2 Kings 17. 25. Ezek. 5. 17,
and 14. 15. P Judg. 6. 6. 2 Chron. 15. 5.
Isai. 38. 8. Lam. 1. 4, Zech. 7. 14. q Jer.
2. 30, and 5. 3. Amos 4. 6-12.
barren of fruit as though the soil were
brass.
21. If ye u-alk contrary unto me.
Heb. "lip keri, a term of doubtful im-
port, as appears from the marginal read-
ing of our version, ' at all adventures
with me j' i. e. heedlessly, indiflferently,
reckless of consequences. This sense
is adopted by the Hebrew writers,
though the Gr. and the Chal. give that
of ' contrariety,' and Gesenius and other
lexicographers define it by ' hostile en-
counter,' or ' going counter' to any one.
22. I will send wild beasts among
you. A reference to the following pas-
sages will show the literal fulfilment,
in repealed instances, of this prediction :
1 Kings 13. 24,-20. 36. 2 Kings 2. 24,
—17. 25, 26. Comp. Jer. 2. 15,-4. 7,—
8. 17,-15. 3,— Ezek. 5. 17. IT Your
high-ways shall be desolate. For the
truth of this see Judg. 5. 6, 2 Chron.
15. 5, Is. 33. S.
24. Will punish you yet seven times
for your sins. With seven-fold greater
severity.
25. That shall avenge the quarrel of
my covenant. That shall execute ven-
geance for the violation of my covenant.
formed by me by these things, but
will walk contrary unto me;
24 i-Then will I also walk con-
trary unto you, and will punish
you yet seven times for your sins.
25 And si will bring a sword
upon you, that shall avenge the
quarrel of my ODvenant : and when
ye are gathered together within
your cities, tj will send the pesti-
lence among you : and ye shall be
delivered into the hand of the
enemy.
26 ^ And when I have broken the
staff of your bread, ten women shall
bake your bread in one oven, and
r 2 Sam. 22. 27. Ps. IS. 26. s Ezek. 5. 17,
and 6. 3, and 14. 17, and 29. 8, and 33. 2.
t Numb. 14. 12. Deut. 28. 21. Jer. 14. 12,
and 24. 10, and 29, 17, 18. Amos 4. 10. " Ps.
105. 16. Isai. 3. 1. Eiek. 4. 16, and 5. 16,
and 14. 13.
Chal. * That shall avenge on you the
vengeance for that ye have transgressed
against the words of the law.' So in
Jer. 50. 28, mention is made of the ' ven-
geance of the Lord's temple,' by which
is meant the punishment of the Baby-
lonians for robbing and burning the
temple. IT I will send the pestilence
among you. Gr. Oavaroi, the death.
Chal. id. See Note on Ex. 5. 3. It
implies the cutting oflT by death of man
and beast. See Ezek. 14. 19, 21.
26. Ten women shall bake your bread
in one oven. That is, there shall be
such a scarcity of bread that one ordi-
nary oven shall answer for the baking
of ten, that is a great many families,
whereas in common circumstances one
oven would serve for one family. The
editor of the Pict. Bible gives some-
what of a different turn to the expres-
sion. *In the note to chap. 2. 4, we
remarked that in the East it was a gen-
eral custom for families to bake their
own bread in the sort of ovens which
we there described. The performance
of this duty always falls to the lot of
the women. These ovens are, as we
have seen, small, and only suited to the
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVI.
they shall deliver you your bread
again by weight: and *ye shall
eat and not be satisfied.
27 And yif ye will not for all this
hearken unto me, but walk con-
trary unto me ;
23 Then I will walk contrary
unto you also zin fury ; and 1, even
I, will chastise you seven times for
your sins.
» Isai. 9. 20. Mic. 6. 14. Hag. 1. 6.
y ver 21, '24, z Isai. 59. 18, and 63. 3, and
CG. 15. Jer 21. 5. Ezek. 5. 13, 15, and a. 18.
use of one family ; but it is by no means
impossible to bake at one of them an
adequate suppl)'- of bread for ten fami-
lies, aliliough, of course, the process
would consume time. We therefore do
not, with most expositors, understand
scarcity to be implied in the simple fact
llial len families baked their bread in
an oven for one ; but that ten families,
represented by their females, clubbed
their dough together, and the produce
being no more than an ordinary supply
for one family, it was baked in one
oven, instead of each family, as usual,
making a separate baking. Afterwards,
the caUes ihus baked were proportioned
by weight to the respective contributors
— so precious was the bread. This is
implied in the words, ' shall deliver
you your bread again by weight ;'
which shows that the bread was pre-
viously theirs, and had been baked for
them, not that it was sold to them by
weight.' IT Shall deliver you your
bread again by weight. No language
could be more expressive of the extrem-
ities to which they should be reduced.
As the survivors of a shipwreck, who
put to sea in an open boat, are often
reduced to the most stinted allowance,
and have a small quantity of food and
drink served out to them by weight and
measure, so should it be in the extrem-
ity of famine to which the Israelites
should be brought by their disobedience.
In allusion to this it is threatened again,
Ezek. 4. 16, 17, ' I will break the staff
23*
29 a And ye shall eat the flesh of
your sons, and the flesh of your
daughters shall ye eat.
30 And b I will destroy your high
places, and cut down your images,
and c cast your carcasses upon the
carcasses of your idols, and my
soul shall d abhor you.
a Deut. 28. 53. 2 Kings 6. 29. Ezek. 5.
10. Lam. 4. 10. b 2 Chron. 34. 3. 4, 7.
Isai. 27. 9. Ezek. 6. 3, 4, 5, 6, 13. c 2
Kings 23. 20. 2 Chron. 34. 5. d Lev. 20. 23.
Ps. 78. 69, and 89. 38. Jer. 14. 19.
of bread in Jerusalem, and they shall
eat bread by weight, and with care, and
they shall drink water by measure, and
with astonishment ; that they may want
bread and water, and be astonied one
with another, and consume away for
their iniquity.'
29. Ye shall eat the flesh of your sons,
&c. This was literally fulfilled at the
siege of Samaria, 2 Kings 6. 29, in the
days of Jehoram, and also in that of
Jerusalem, under Titus. Josephus,
J. W. B. 7, c. 2, gives an instance in
dreadful detail, of a woman named
Mary, who in the height of the famine,
during the siege, killed her infant child,
roasted, and had eaten part of it when
discovered by the soldiers.' The fear-
ful accomplishment of the threatened
punishment is thus bewailed by Jere-
miah, Lam. 4. 10, ' The hands of the
pitiful women have sodden their own
children ; they were their meat in the
destruction of the daughter of my
people.'
30. I will destroy your high places.
What those were is not agreed, but
probably they were raised places, arti-
ficial eminences, upon which they were
wont to worship their idols. The word
rendered ' images ' clearly denotes some
specie? of idol, though of what particu-
lar kind is doubtful. Comp. 2 Chron.
34. 7. The probability is that they
were some kind of idolatrous fabrica-
tion, dedicated to the sun. IT And
cast your carcasaes upor the carcasses
270
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
31 e And I will make your cities
waste, and f bring your sanctuaries
unto desolation, and I will not
smell the savour of your sweet
odours.
e Neh. 2. 3. Jer. 4. 7. Ezek. 6. 6. ( Ps.
74. 7. Lam. 1. 10. Ezek. 9. 6, and 21. 7.
of your idols. They shall be denied a
seemly burial or a quiet repose in their
graves. Thus Ezek. 6. 4, 5, 13, ' I will
cast down your slain men before your
idols ; and I will lay the dead carcasses
of the children of Israel before their
idols ; and I will scatter your bones
round about your altars.' Coinp. 2 Kings
23. 20. 2 Chron. 34. 5.
31. I will make your cities waste.
The fulfilment of this minatory predic-
tion has been so signal, that we cannot
refrain from inserting from Keith the
following graphic illustration of its
effects. ' By the concurring testimony
of all travellers, Judea may now be
called a field of ruins. Columns, the
memorials of ancient magnificence, now
covered with rubbish, and buried under
ruins, may be found in all Syria. From
Mount Tabor is beheld an immensity
of plains, interspersed with hamlets,
fortresses, and heaps of ruins. Of the
celebrated cities Capernaum, Bethsaida,
Gadara, Tarichea, and Chorazin, no-
thing remains but shapeless ruins.
Some vestiges of Emmaus may still be
seen. Cana is a very paltry village.
The ruins of Tekoa present only the
foundations of some considerable build-
ings. The city of Nain is now a ham-
let. The ruins of the ancient Sapphura
announce the previous existence of a
large city, and its name is still preserved
in the appellation of a miserable village
called Sephoury. Loudd, the ancient
Lydda and Diospolis, appears like a
place lately ravaged by fire and sword,
and is one continued heap of rubbish
and ruins. Ramla, the ancient Arima-
ihea, is in almost as ruinous a state.
Nothing but rubbish is to be found within
is boundaries. In the adjacent cniintry
32 gAnd I will bring the land
into desolation : and your enemies
which dwell therein, shall be
h astonished at it.
C Jer. 9. 11, and 25. 11. IS. I> Deut. 28.
37. 1 Kings 9. 8. Jer. 18. 16, and 19. 6.
Ezek. 5. 15.
there are found at every step dry wells,
cisterns fallen in, and vast vaulted res-
ervoirs, which prove that in ancient
times this town must have been upwards
of a league and a half in circumference.
Caesarea can no longer excite the envy
of a conqueror, and has long been aban-
doned to silent desolation. The city
of Tiberias is now almost abandoned,
and its subsistence precarious ; of the
towns that bordered on its lake there
are no traces left. Zabulon, once the
rival of Tyre and Sidon, is a heap of
ruins. A few shapeless stones, unworthy
the attention of the traveller, mark the
site of the Saffre. The ruins of Jericho,
covering no less than a square mile, are
surrounded with complete desolation _:
and there is not a tree of any descrip-
tion, either of palm or balsam, and
scarcely any verdure or bushes to be
seen about the site of this abandoned
city. Bethel is not to be found. The
ruins of Sarepta, and of several large
cities in its vicinity, are now * mere
rubbish, and are only distinguishable
as the sites of towns by heaps of dilapi-
dated stones and fragments of columns.'
How marvellously are the predictions
of their desolation verified, when in
general nothing but ruined ruins form
the most distinguished remnants of the
cities of Israel; and when the multitude
of its towns are almost all left, with
many a vestige to testify of their num-
ber, but without a mark to tell their
name.' IT And bring your sanctua-
ries unto desolation. As they had,
properly speaking, but one sanctuary,
the term here is undoubtedly used in a
large sense including the tabernacle,
the temple, and the various synagogues
scattered over the land.
B. C. 1491.3
CHAPTER XXVL
^l
33 And i I will scatter you among
the heathen, and will draw out a
sword after you, and your land
shall be desolate, and your cities
waste.
34 kThen shall the land enjoy
her sabbaths, as long as it lieth
desolate, and ye be in your ene-
mies' land ; even then shall the
land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths,
35 As long as it lieth desolate it
shall rest ; because it did not rest
in your i sabbaths, when ye dwelt
upon it.
36 And upon them that are left
alive of you, ^I will send a faint-
ness into their hearts in the lands
of their enemies; and ^the sound
of a shaken leaf shall chase them;
and they shall flee, as fleeing from
» Deul. 4. 27, and 23. 64. Ps. 44. 11. Jer.
9. 16. Ezek. 1-2. 15, and -20. 23, and 22. 15.
Zech. 7. 14. k ochron. 36. 21. 1 ch. 25. 2.
w Ez€k. 21. 7, 12, 15. n ver. 17. Job. 15.
21. Prov. 23. 1.
33. I u-ill scatter you among the hea-
then. Heb. niTit £zrah^ I will fan or
winnow you. The term properly im-
plies that kind of scattering which is
the effect of vvinuowing grain, where
the chaff is carried away by the wind.
Comp. a similar use of the word, Ps.
44. 12, Zech. 7. 14
34. Then shall the land enjoy her
sabbaths as long as it lieth desolate.
This is shown by Houbigant to have
proved to be a historical fact. From
Saul to the Babylonish captivity are
numbered about 490 years, during which
period there were of course 70 sab-
baths of years. Now the Babylonish
captivity lasted 70 years, and during
that time the land of Israel rested.
Therefore the land rested just as many
years in the Babylonish captivity, as it
should have rested sabbaths, if the Jews
had observed the law relative to the
sabbatic years.
39. They that ure left of you shall
pine away in their iniquity. The most
obvious import of * pining away in ini-
a sword ; and they shall fall, when
none pursueth.
37 And o they shall fall one upon
another, as it were before a sword,
when none pursueth : and p ye
shall have no power to stand be-
fore your enemies.
38 And ye shall perish among
the heathen, and the land of your
enemies shall eat you up.
39 And they that are left of you
q shall pine away in their iniquity
in your enemies' lands ; and also
in the iniquities of their fathers
shall they pine away with them.
40 rif they shall confess their
iniquity, and the iniquity of their
fathers, with their trespass which
o Isai. 10. 4. See Judg. 7. 22. 1 Sam. 14,
15, 16. P Josh. 7. 12, 13. Judg. 2. 14.
q Deut. 4. 27, and 28. 65. Neh. 1. 9. Jer.
3. 25, and 29. 12, 13. Ezek. 4. 17, and 6. 9,
and 20. 43, and 24. 23, and 33. 10, and 36. 31.
Hos. 5. 15. Zech. 10. 9. r Numb. 5. 7. 1
Kings S. 33, 35, 47. Neh. 9. 2. Dan. 9. 3, 4.
Prov. 23. 13. Luke 15. 13. 1 John 1. 9.
quity' is, to consume and perish in the
punishment for iniquity ; in allusion to
which it is said, Ezek. 33. 10, * If our
transgressions and our sins be upon us,
and we pine away in them, how should
we then live?' Comp. Ezek. 24. 23.
Ainsworih suggests that it may likewise
imply the beginning of grace, or a godly
contrition in them that are left, i. e.
' the remnant, according to the election
of grace,' Rom. 11. 5, who by their sore
chastisements are brought to an humb-
ling consciousness of their sins, and
made lo feel that they are pining away
in them ; or as is expressed by the pro-
phet, Ezek. 36. 31, ' Ye shall loathe
yourselves in your own sight for your
iniquities.'
Promises of restored Favor upon Re-
pentance.
40. If they shnll confess their iniqui-
ty, &c. The portion contained between
this verse and the end, may be consider-
ed as the third general division of the
chapter, comprising a series of gracious
272
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 14&1.
they trespassed against me, and
that also they have walked con-
trary unto me ;
41 And thai I also have walked
contrary unto them, and have
brought them into the land of their
3 See Jer. 6. 10, and 9. 25^ 26. Ezek. 44.
assurances of retorning favor, upon
their humble and sincere repentance.
It declares that if. even in their worst
and lowest state, they should penitent-
ly confess their iniquities, and acknow-
ledge the mighty mind of God in their
afflictions, and should meekly accept
them as the punishment of their sins,
then the Lord would again remember
his covenant with their fathers, and re-
store to ihem his favor. The history
of the nation , followed out in its details,
confirms the truth of these promises no
less clearly than it does of the ihreat-
enings recorded above. Never did Is-
rael repent and seek the face of their
God in vain. Whenever they returned
to him in penitence and prayer, putting
away their idols and renewing their obe-
dience, he returned also to them in the
various tokens of his mercy, delivering
them from their enemies, restoring to
them the years which the canker-worm
had eaten, and blessing them with peace
and plenty. A most striking specimen
of the humble confession and fervent
prayer here alluded to, is to be found in
the ninth chapters respectively of Dan-
iel, of Ezra, and in the first of Nehe-
miah. We there see which kind of hu-
miliation is acceptable before God, and
what gracious expressions of kindness
it meets with. And so we learn from
the sure word of prophecy, that there
will yet come again a great and univer-
sal repentance of that ancient, honored,
and afflicted people ; that they shall
look upon him whom they have pierced
and mourn ; that they will return and
seek the Lord their God, and the spirit-
ual David their king ; and that then the
Lord will set his hand a second lime,
and gather them out of all nations
enemies; K then their »uneircum-
cised hearts be t humbled, and they
then accept of the punishment of
their iniquity :
7. Acts 7. 51. Rwn. 2. 29. Col. 2. 11. « 1
Kings 21. 29. 2 Chron. 12. 6, 7, 12, and 32.
26, and 33. 12, 13.
among whom they are scattered, and
plant them again in their own land,
where they shall for a long tract of ages
be partakers in the richest blessings of
the Gospel. IT And the iniquity of
their fathers. The principle of the uni-
ty of the different generations of the
Jewish race is recognized all along the
line of their history. The children were
to repent of the sins of their fathers,
and if they could not be absolved from
their own sins, except on condition of
confessing their fathers', their fathers'
iniquities, unrepented of, became their
own, and also the punishment due ta
them.
4L If then their uncircumcised hearts
he humbled. Chal. ' Gross, or foolish,
hearts.' Targ. Jon. ' Proud hearts.' The
phrase implies a perverse heart j one
which prompted them to resist the spirit
of God. Accordingly we find the Jews
in the apostles' times thus character-
ized : Acts 7. 51, ' Ye stiff-necked and
uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do
always resist the Holy Ghost.' This is
said because, as we learn elsewhere,
Rom. 2. 29, the true circumcision is ' in
the heart,' and * in the spirit.' Con-
formably to this the prophet complains,
Jer. 9. 26, that ' all the house of Israel
are uncircumcised in heart.^ 1i Ac-
cept of the punishment of their iniquity.
Heb. W15 !ni< liS'T^ yirtzu eth avondm,
accept of their iniquity. As the words
' iniquity ' and ' sin ' are often used by
an idiom of the Hebrew for the ' pun-
ishment' due to transgression, so to
accept the same is meekly and willingly
to bear it, and even to be well pleased
with it (the term in the original being
the same with that employed, v. 34, and
rendered ' enjoy'), as the most suitable
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVI.
S73
42 Then will I u remember my
covenant with Jacob, and also my
covenant with Isaac, and also my
covenant with Abraham will I re-
uExod.-2.24,and6. 5.
16. 60.
Ps. 100.
Ezek.
member ; and I will x remember
the land.
43 y The land also shall be left
of them, and shall enjoy her sab-
baths, while she lieth desolate
-'^ Fi. 136. 23. y ver. 34, 35.
means to bring them to repentance.
An illustration of this sentiment occurs,
Mic. 7. 9, 'I will bear the indignation
ri the Lord, for I have sinned against
h:m.'
42. Then will I remember my cove-
nant. This remembrance on tiie part
of God signifies his actual performance
of the mercies promised ; as appears
from Ex. 6. 5, 6, 'I have remembered
my covenant, Sac. and will bring you out
from under the burdens of the Egyp-
tians.' So our remembering God's pre-
cepts is explained, Ps. 103. 18, as equi-
valent to doing them. See Note on
Gen. 8. 1. So again when Christ, ' the
horn of salvation,' was raised up in the
house of David, God is said, Luke 1. 72,
' to perform the mercy promised to our
fathers, and to remember his holy covC'
nant.' It is somewhat singular that in
the original, the preposition answering
to ' with' is omitted before each of the
patriarchs' names in this connexion,
and the fact ought to have been indi-
cated by the usual Italic sign, in our
version. The reason of the omission,
or the bearing it ought to have on the
construction, we are incompetent to
stale. The Gr. has p^/jffS/jo-o/^cat rr/j 6ia-
e?j\»3f IukojB, I uill remember the cove-
nant of Jacob, &c., omitting the suffix
' my' which occurs in the Hebrew.
IT Will remember the land. That is, to
cause it to be repeopled by its former
inhabitants or their seed.
43. The land shall also be left of them.
Heb. tn^D mehem, which may be ren-
dered either by them, or on their account,
for their sakes. This verse, in the
connexion in which it stands, is some-
what obscure. As the tone of the con-
text is bland and encouraging, we nat-
urally inquire how it is that a transition
is suddenly made to the language of
threatening. It seems, on the whole,
on comparing it with what follows, that
the design of its introduction here is to
heighten the expression of mercy in
the ensuing verse. God had said in the
preceding verse that he would ' remem-
ber the land ;' but the favor involved in
such a promise, could only be appre-
ciated by a just view of the condition to
which the land would have been re-
duced by reason of the sins of its inhab-
itants. Notwithstanding it should have
been left destitute of its occupants, who
were driven away into penal exile, and
should thus remain desolate and uncul-
tivated, enjoying the septennial sabbaths
which had been denied it in their sea-
son, yet for all that, he would not for-
get or forego his mercies ; he would re-
member the land by remembering its
possessors, and bringing them back from
their dispersion and planting them
again within its borders. ^ And shall
enjoy her sabbaths. Heb. Ti^ fin
rr^rinS'iU tiretz eth shahbethoth'ilhd. Gr.
irpoaiz^CTai ra vajSiSaTu avrni, shall re-
ceive her sabbaths. The true force of
the language in this verse can be under-
stood only by a correct explication of
the original word for ' enjoy,' which is
employed here and also in the subse-
quent clause, ' shall accept (mi'i yir-
tzv) of the punishment of their in-
iquity.' Its primary meaning is to have
pleasure, delight, complacency in any
thing ; and the drift of the passage is
undoubtedly to convey the idea, by aa
ironical intimation, that while the land
in its desolation was having pleasure in
its sabbaths, the people of Israel were
also, if the expression could be allowed,
having pleasure in the punishment of
their iniquity. There would at least
274
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
without them : and they shall ac-
cept of the punishment of their
iniquity ; because, even because
they zdespised my judgments, and
because their soul abhorred my
statutes.
44 Andyetfor all that, when they
be in the land of their enemies, a I
will not cast them away, neither
will I abhor them, to destroy them
utterly, and to break my covenant
z ver. 14. a Deut. 4. 31. 2 Kings 13. -23.
Rom. 11. -2.
be so much of a parallel in the two
cases, ihat the same form of speech
should be employed in reference to
both. It is indeed a bold figure of
speech to represent the inhabitants as
taking pleasure in the calamities which
they had procured to themselves ; but
as they had voluntarily incurred them
' despising tlie judgments of God and
abhorring his stalules,' when perfectly
aware of the consequences, was he not
authorized to charge them with having
complacency in the course of trans-
gression which tiiey had adopted ? He j
is but staling the legitimate conclusion |
to be drawn from the premises. On '
this view of the language it is not only I
strictly proper, but highly significant
and emphatic, and pointed with the
Sling of a well merited rebulce.
IT Because, even because they despised
my judgments, &c. The particle is
here doubled, to give intensity to the
alleged reason of their calamities, and \
to inlimale that it was nothing else than |
their deliberate rejection of the divine
laws wliich had procured them. If so, !
had they any grounds to be surprised j
that it was charged upon them that
they preferred, were pleased with, en-
joyed, the natural results of their con- '
duct? This interpretation, it will be!
seen, perfectly harmonizes with that
given above.
44. Yet for all that, when they be in
the land of their enemies, &c. The his-
tory of the Jewish people to the pre-
with them : for I am the Lore
their God.
45 But I will bfor their sakes re-
member the covenant of their an-
cestors, c wliom I brought forth out
of the land of Egypt ^in the sight
of the heathen, that I might be
their God : I am the Lord.
46 e These are the statutes, and
b Rom. 11. 28. c ch. 22. 33, and 25. 3S
d Ps. 98. 2. Ezek. 20. 9, 14, 22. « ch. 27.
34. Deut. 6. 1, and 12. 1, and 33. 4. John
1. 17.
sent day, is a standing proof of the
truth of this merciful declaration.
Though scattered and peeled, and press-
ed down by an unprecedented weight
of misfortunes from age to age, yet they
still subsist as a distinct people, and
the covenant of future restoration re-
mains to them unbroken. It may be
remarked, moreover, as their plagues
and aflliciions, as a people, are at this
day vastly mitigated, and every year
growing less and less, by reason of the
increasing humanity of civil codes and
a soflened tone of public sentiment
throughout the civilized world, we are
doubtless warranted to believe that the
period of their deliverance has well-nigh
arrived, and that nothing is needed to
this result but the spirit on their part
of profound repentance and the humble
confession here prescribed.
45. I will for their sakes remember
the covenant, &;c. That is, for their
good and advantage. He does not in-
deed, in this connexion expressly assure
them of their being brought back to
their own land, but the whole scope of
the context requires us to understand it.
How could he effectually remember
them for good when in the land of their
enemies, otherwise than by restoring
their captivity ? And why should he
refer to the deliverance from Egypt,
except to intimate that in like manner
he would bring them to their own bor-
ders?
46. These are the statutes, and judg*
B. C. 149i.]
CHAPTER XXVII.
275
judgments, and laws, which the
Lord made between him and the
cliildren of Israel ^ in mount Sinai
by the hand of Moses.
f ch. io. 1. a Numb. 6. 2. See Judges 1 1.
30, 31, 39. 1 Sam, 1. U, 23.
tnr.nts, and lau's, Sac. This verse ap-
j.o.irs so peculiarly proper, as the con-
clusion of the whole book; that il is ex-
sremely difficult to account for the ad-
d lion of the chapter which Ibllows,
containing matter of a ceremonial kind,
Midi as would coir.e in far more appro-
j naiely in a preceding part of the book.
Ad an Clarke pro|joses to solve the dif-
ficuUy by supposing that there has been
MM accidental transposition of chap. 27,
/roin where it belongs, at the close of
(Iie25ih. Others think that the 27ih was
added after tlie book was finished ; but
aolliing is certain, and we have to re-
ceive the sacred caoon as we find it.
CHAPTER XXVII.
It is and always has been customary
in different countries and under various
systems of religion, for persons in pe-
culiar circumstances of prosperity or
julversily, to vow that ihey will make
certain offerings, or devote certain pro-
perties to the service of God. To such
vows, usually called "i~D neder, most
of the present chapter refers. Under
ihe influence of extraordinary zeal in-
hiduals, for instance, might sometimes
be induced to consecrate themselves,
their children, or estate, to God by what
is iiere termed a ' singular vow.' But
it. was possible that upon reflection, in
a cooler moment, the person might re-
gret the step he had taken, or particular
circumstances might render the literal
performance of this vow inconvenient or
unsuitable, in which case provision is
made in the present chapter for the re'
demption of the persons or things thus
consecrated, and a table of rates is here
given by which the priests were to be
governed in iheir estimation of the value
CHAPTER XXVII.
AND the Lord spake unto Mo-
ses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Is-
rael, and say unto them, a When a
man shall make a singular vow,
of the thing vowed. It does not aj -
I pear that it was the purpose of the law
j to enl'oice the practice, but merelj to
j place a natural impulse of devotion un-
der wise regulations. If an Isra-elite
under such an impulse sliould bind him-
self or his child by a vow, to be a ser-
vant of the sanctuary, he might com-
mute that service by paying a specified
pecuniary equivalent, varying with sex
and age, into the sacred treasury ; and
if he were too poor to pay the prescrib-
ed sum, it was in the discretion of the
priest to fix upon some other, propor-
tioned to his means. If the vow related
to the gift of an animal, it must, by all
means, be oflTeredin sacrifice, if suitable
to be so oflfered ; and whoever was de-
tected in attempting to substitute for it
one of inferior worth, was punished by
the forfeiture of both. If it were an
unclean animal that had been consecrat-
ed, the owner might still retain it, if,
on reflection, such was his wish, on the
payment of one-fifth more than the
priest declared to be its value. On the
same condition a house or a farm, con-
secrated as a religious offering, might
be redeemed. The estimation of the
value of an estate so consecrated was to
have reference to the length of the inter-
val between the time of the consecration
and a jubilee year, at which time it re-
verted to its owner; and this provision
held equally good, if liie estate conse-
crated was one of which the devotee
was only a tenant. But the details of
the various provisionsof the present law
will come before us as we proceed.
The Law of a Singular Vow when it
had respect to Persons.
2. When a man shall make a singular
vow. Heb. "ins fci^D'i "^3 D^i< ish k\
276
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
the persons shall he for the Lord,
by thy estimation.
3 And thy estinaation shall be,
of the male from tAventy years old
yaplili Jiider, a mati when he shall have
singled out, separated, signalized a vow.
The word 's-ingular' in our version is
doubtless tanlamoiint to extraordinary,
and yet as there is no corresponding
epithet in the original, the idea is in-
volved in the force of the verb J*^£*i
yaphii=i~\^Zi'' yaphleh, which latter, as
we have seen (Note on Ex. 8. 22,) has
the import of separating or setting
apart in a ironderful and glorious man-
ner. The usage is still farther illus-
trated by reference to the case of the
Nazarite, Num. 6. 2, ' When a man or
woman shall separate (iiO^^ yaphli)
to vow a vow,' &c., 1. e. shall signally
separate. It is rendered by the Gr.
6s av fi£ya\b>i ev^Erai cvxr}P, whoever shall
greatly vow a vow. So here the idea
is of vowing something in a signal way,
in a mode striking and extraordinary.
By Philo this kind of vow is termed
evx^rj ^leyaXri, the great voiv, as being an
act of special and distinguished devo-
tion. The epithet * singular,' there-
fore, in this connexion is equivalent to
' singling out.' IT The persons shall
be Jor the Lord, by thy esti7nation.
Heb. mn-i^ r'i'53 "j^^S^n beerkekd
nephushoth laihovah, by thy estimation
the souls, or persons (shall be) for the
Lord. A man might dedicate himself
to the service of the sanctuary, and be-
come, as it were, a servant attached
thereto. In the same way he might
vow his child. Samuel was thus devot-
ed by his mother, and remained in the
service qf the sanctuary; for that ap-
propriation being apparently satisfacto-
ry to all parties, he was not redeemed
according to the valuation here fixed for
different ages and sexes. But the actual
personal dedication was seldom prac-
tised, and hence the meaning undoubt-
edly is, that the service of the persons
even unto sixty years old ; even
thy estimation shall be fifty shekels
of silver, ^ after the shekel of the
sanctuary.
b ExcmI. 30. l.-J.
thus devoted was not usually to be em-
ployed in the sanctusiry, but a value set
upon it by the priest, and that eniployetJ
for the Lord, i, e. for holy uses in gen-
eral. The reason for this substitution
probably was, that there was a suffi-
cient number of persons officially de-
signated for all the various work of the
tabernacle ; and this a more numerous
attendance would merely encumber and
retard. On the expression ' thy estima-
tion,' commentators have disputed
whose estimation as intended ; whether
that of the priest, the ruler,, or the wor-
shipper, to be made from time to time.
The obvious sense would seem tobe,thal
it is addressed to the people at large.
It is the language of law addressed to
the community for which it is designed,
RosenmuUer however, suggests that the
original word "tD"^^ erkeku is here to
be taken not in an active but passive
sense — the estimation at which thou
shalt be rated. It was not, he re-
marks, the province of any individual
to fix the rate of redemption, not even
of the priest, except in the cases men-
tioned v. 8, 12, but of God himself, who
in the present chapter proceeds to spe-
cify the terms on his own sovereign
authority. This construction differs lit-
tle from that we have given.
3. Thy estimation shall be of the
male, &c. He begins with the male,
and that too in the prime of life,
when his services would be most valu-
able ; and it will be observed that the
rate is the same for persons of all con-
ditions, to show that God regarded the
vow, and not the rank of those who
made it. The estimation in this case
was to be 50 shekels of silver, which
reckoned in our currency would be not
far from $36. For a woman of the
same age about $?2 } fur a boy from
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVII.
S77
4 And if it be a female, then thy
estimation s-hall be thirty shekels.
5 And if tf be from five years old
even unto twenty years old, then
thy estimation shall be of the male
iweniy shekels, and for the female
ten shekels.
6 And if it be from a month old
even unto five years old, then thy
estimation shall be of the male five
shekels of silver, and for the female
I hy estimation s/ia/Z be three she-
kels of silver.
7 And iHt be from sixty years old
and above ; if it be a male, then thy
five to twenty, $15; for a girl of the
same age, $12 5 a male child, $4; a
female, $3 ; a man above sixty, $11 ; a
woman, $6. The rules of mortality are
the prirtciple on which these rates are
graduated. The value was regulated
according to the probability of life and
service. None wer5 vowed under a
month old : and the first-born, being
considered by a prior law, Ex. 12., the
Lord's property, could not be vowed at
at all.
4. If it he a female. The estimation
of a female is here fixed at little more
than one half that of a man, for the ob-
vious reason that a woman if employed
would not be of so much service in the
sanctuary as the man. It is supposed,
with great probability, that under the
provision contained in this case Jeph-
ihah might have redeemed his daughter.
See the point discussed at full length in
the Note on Judg. 11. 30.
5. If it be from five years old, &c.
It is supposed in this case that the vow
was made by the parents, or one of
them, and not by the child himself, who
at that age was wholly incompetent to
such a thing. Samuel, who was thus
vowed to God, was not redeemed, be-
cause he was a Levite and a particular
favorite, and therefore was employed
in his childhood in the service of the
sanctuary.
8. If he be poorer than thy estimation.
24
estimation shall be fifteen shekels,
and for the female ten shekels.
8 But if he be poorer than thy
estimation, then he shall present
himself before the priest, and the
priest shall value him : according
to his ability that vowed shall the
priest value him.
9 And if it be a beast whereof
men bring an offering unto the
Lord, all that any ma7i giveih of
such unto the Lord shall be holy.
10 He shall not alter it, nor
change it, a good for a bad, or a
bad for a good : and if he shall at
That is, if he who made the vow be not
able to pay the estimated value, then
the priest shall rate the value according
to his ability to pay. IT Then he
shall present himself. Heb. TI"i?23>n
I heemido, he shall make him to stand ;
' i. e. the man who vowed shall present
' either himself or the subject of his vow.
The term in the original is so framed
as to include both.
Respecting, Beasts that are vowed and
their Valuation.
9. A beast whereof men bring an
j offering. That is, of the prescribed
j kinds of which they are accustomed
j to bring an offering ; by which is meant
\ clean beasts, unblemished, viz. bullocks,
I sheep, or goals. These could not be
i redeemed ; and the firstlings, being al-
j ready consecrated to God, could not be
j thus devoted. IT Shall be holy. Set
j apart for God's service according to the
j nature of the vow ; that is to say, it
shall be offered at the altar if given or
vowed for sacrifice ; or shall be given
to the Priests or Levites if vowed for
that end ; or shall be sold and the value
of it employed in the service of the
sanctuary, if given with that intention ;
or left at large to be disposed of as
should be deemed most meet for the
service of God.
10. lie shall not alter or change it.
By ' alter' here is probably meant the
278
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
all change beast for beast, then it
and the exchange thereof shall be
holy.
11 Andifil be any unclean beast,
of which they do not offer a sacri-
fice unto the Lord, then he sliall
present the beast before the priest :
12 And the priest shall value if,
whether it be good or bad : as thou
valuest it u-ko art the priest, so
shall it be.
13 cEut if he will at all redeem
it, then he shall add a fifth part
thereof unto thy estimation.
substituting any other kind of beast or
any other thing in its stead; whereas
to ' change ' it is to give any other beast
of the same species in its place. What-
ever was consecrated to God by a vow
or purpose of heart was considered from
that moment as the Lord's property ;
to change which was impiety ; to with-
hold it sacrilege. IT Then it and the
exchange shall be holy. That is, both
of them shall be consfdered as conse-
crated to the Lord, and henceforth his
property. The man was thus to be
mulcted for his rashness, and the Jew-
ish canonists say that he was to be
beaten with stripes in addition.
IL And if it be any unclean beast.
This may be understood generally of
all unclean beasts, such as asses, cam-
els, or other beasts of burden, which
men might be prompted to vow, with
the excejition of the dog-, of which it is
said, Deut. 23. 18, * Thou shalt not
bring the price of a dog into the house
of the Lord thy God for any vow.' The
Hebrews, however, understood it of
oxen, shee]), or goats, upon which any
blemishes were found, whereby they
became unclean, and were rendered un-
lawful to be ofll'ered upon the altar.
12. Whether it be good or bad. That
IS, whether it be of great or small value.
13. But if he will at all redeem it,
&c. It was at the man's option either
to leave the beast with the priest, or to
14 ^ And when a man shall
sanctify his house to be holy unto
the Lord, then the priest shall es-
timate it, whether it be good or
bad: as the priest shall estimate
it, so shall it stand.
15 dAnd if he that sanctified it
will redeem his house, then he
shall add the fifth part of the
money of thy estimation unto it,
and it shall be his.
16 And if a man shall sanctify
unto the Lord some part of a field
d ver. 13.
pay him the price at which he had
rated it. If lie chose the latter, it was
a sign that he deemed it worth more
than the price which the priest had set
upon it. The law was probably in-
tended to prevent rash vows, by annex-
ing somewhat of a penalty to them in
the form of a peccmiary fine.
The Estimation of a devoted House.
14. When a man shall sanctify his
house to be holy unto the Lord. That
is, sanctify or set it apart by a dedi-
cating vow. T[ As the priest shall
estimate it, so shall it stand. That is,
such shall the value be, neither less nor
more ; no man shall attempt to alter it ;
only the owner if he would redeem it
was to give the additional fifth part of
the value ; inasmuch as he should have
considered well before he vowed it.
The Estimation of a devoted Field.
16. Part of afield of his possession.
The phrase ' field of one's possession *
signifies a field inherited from one's
forefathers, and is used in contradis-
tinction from a ' field which one hath
bought,' spoken of v. 22. Though the
words * some part' are not expressed in
the original, yet it is generally allowed
that they should here be supplied ; as
it was not lawful for a man in this
manner to alienate his whole patri-
mony. He might express his good will
B. C. 1491.]
CHAPTER XXVII.
279
of his possession, then thy estima-
tion shall be according to the seed
thereof: an homer of barley seed
shall be valued at fifty shekels c-f
silver.
17 If he sanctify his field from the
year of jubilee, according to thy
estimation it shall stand.
IS But if he sanctify his field after
the jubilee, then the priest shall
e reckon unto him the money ac-
cording to the years that remain,
even unto the year of the jubilee,
and it shall be abated from thy
estimation.
19 f And if he that sanctified the
field will in any wise redeem it,
then he shall add the fifth 'part of
the money of thy estimation unto
it, and it shall be assured to him.
20 And if he will not redeem the
field, or if he have sold the field
to another man, it shall not be re-
deemed any more. •
e ch. 25, 15, 16. f ver. 13.
for the house of God, but he must not
for this purpose impoverish his own
family, IT Thy estimation shall be
according to the seed thereof. That is,
according to the quantity of the seed
required for sowing it ; or perhaps ac-
cording to the quantity of the produce.
IT An homer of barley seed shall be
valued at fifty shekels of silver. The
meaning is, that as much land as re-
quired a homer of barley to sow it
should be valued at fifty shekels of
silver. The homer was very different
from the omer ; the latter held about
three quarts, the former sevenly-five
gallons and three pints.
18. If he sanctify his field after the
jubilee, &c. That is, the field shall be
reckoned more or less in value accord-
ing to the number of years remaining
to the year ofjubilee.
20. if he have sold the field. That
is, if the priest have sold it to another
man, he who vowed it, could not then
redeem it, though he bad the option of
21 But the field, g when it goeth
out in the jubilee, shall be holy
unto the Lord, as a field ^ devoted :
i the possession thereof shall be
the priest's.
22 And if a 7nan sanctify unto the
Lord a field which he hath bought,
which is not of the fields of this
possession ;
23 1 Then the priest shall reckon
unto him the worth of thy estima-
tion, even unto the year of the ju-
bilee : and he shall give thine
estimation in that day, as an holy
thing unto the Lord.
24 mln theyearof the jubilee the
field shall return unto him of whom
it was bought, even to him to
whom the possession of the land
did belong.
25 And all thy estimations shall
be according to the shekel of the
S ch. 25. 10, 23, 31. h ver. 28. ' Numb.
18. 14. Ezek. 44. 29. k ch. 25. 10, 25.
1 ver. 18. m ch. 25. 28.
doing so before ; and if he who vowed
It did not redeem it ' when it goeth out
(of the possession of the purchaser), in
the jubilee, it shall be holy (set apart)
unto the Lord, as a field devoted (to
his service) ; the possession thereof
shall be the priest's,' v. 21, and the per-
son who vowed it could never redeem it.
22-24. If a man sanctify unto the
Lord a field which he hath bought.
Consequently a field which was no part
of his patrimonial inheritance, but
which he had obtained by purchase
from another source. When landed
property of this kind was vowed, and
of which the purchase or lease was to
expire at the next jubilee, the priest
was to fix a value upon it according to
the number of years that should inter-
vene till the next jubilee, and the vower
might either redeem it or leave it to the
priests ; but whichever he did, it was
to return of course at the jubilee to the
original owner or his heirs.
25. All thy estimation shall be accord
280
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
sanctuary: n twenty gerahs shall
be the shekel.
26 H Only the o firstling of the
beasts, which should be the Lord's
firstling, no man shall sanctify it;
whether it be ox, or sheep : it is
I he Lord's.
27 And if il be of an unclean
beast, then he shall redeem it ac-
cording to thine estimation, I' and
n Exod. 30. 13. Numb. 3. 47, and 13. 16.
Ezek. 45. 1-2. o Exod. 13. -2, U, and '2-2. 30.
Numb. 18. 17. Deut. 1.5. 19. P ver. 11, 12, 13.
ing to the shekel of the sanctuary. So
called, it is supposed, from the fact that
the standard of this as the foundation
of all the other weights and measures
was kept in the sanctuary. A literal
rendering however of the original may
be ' shekel of sanctity, or holiness ;' i. e.
a true, just, honest shekel.
Firstlings not to be Vowed.
26. Only the firstling of the beasts,
&e. These all belonged to God, by
virtue of a previous express law, Ex. 13.
2, 12, 13,-22, 30, and it would be a
kind of mockery to make an offering to
another of that which was his own
before.
The Redemption of unclean Beasts.
27. And ifil be of an unclean beast.
This is understood by Jarchi, of such
unclean beasts as are spokenofv.il,
which a man set apart by vow ' to the
repairs of the sanctuary.' Others, how-
ever, understand it o( the firstling males
of unclean beasts, which, as they were
not consecrated to God by law, might
be dedicated, or rather the proceeds of
them, as votive offerings. Because an
unclean beast might not be offered in
sacrifice, it does not follow that the
price of it might not be used in the re-
pairs of the sanctuary and the mainte-
nance of the priests, and therefore be
the subject of a vow.
Of Things irredeemably devoted.
28. Notu-ithstanding, no devoted thing.
shall add a fifth part of it thereto :
or if it be not redeemed, then it
shall be sold according to thy esti-
mation.
28 q Notwithstanding, no devoted
thing that a man shall devote unto
the Lord of all that he hath, both
of man and beast, and of the field
of his possession, shall be sold or
redeemed : every devoted thing is
most holy unto the Lord.
q ver. 21. Josli. 6. 17, IS, 19.
Heb. G'^n 'herem. Gr. ayaOeua, or
curse. This is not the "113 n'c'der cr
common vow, such as we have previous^
ly considered, but one of a far more sol-
emn kind, and which is but inadequately
represented by the term ' devoted thing'
in our version. It signifies properly a
vow made with imprecations or execra-
tions by the vower on himself or others
if that should not be done in which he
engaged. Of the precise difference be-
tween the form of the *T73 neder and
the Cnn 'herem, we are not particularly
informed by Moses, but it is clear from
this passage that a thing devoted to
God by ^herem, was irrevocably devoted
beyond the power of redemption. A
man, for instance, devoted in this sol-
emn way an ox, a cow, a field, to the
Lord, imprecating a curse to himself if
he withheld it, or ever reclaimed it, and
a curse upon any one who should take
it away or alienate it. Such things by
this law could never be redeemed or
appropriated to any other use ; and it
is evident from the use of the word
'notwithstanding' (^it ak, neverthe-
less), that this rule is introduced as an
exception to the general regulations
concerning vows contained in the pre-
vious part of the chapter, by which re-
demptions were amply provided for.
IT Is most holy unto the Lord. Heb.
lD*^TZ3np C^p kodesh kodoshim, holi-
ness of holinesses. Other things devoted
by a sijople vow were merely holy, but
these, from the greater sanctity attached
B. C. 14010
CHAPTER XXVn.
281
29 'None devoted, which shall be
devoted of men, shall be redeemed :
but shall surely be put to deaih.
30 And 3 all the tithe of the land,
f Numb. 21. 2, 3. » Gen. 28. 22. Numb.
IS. 21, 24. 2 Chron. 31. 5, 6, 12. Neh. 13.
12. Mai. 3. 8, 10.
whether of the seed of the land, or
of the fruit of the tree, is the
Lord's: it is holy unto the Lord.
31 t And if a man will at all re-
deem aught of his tithes, he shall
add thereto the fifth pari thereof.
t ver. 13.
to the transaction, were denominated
most holy, and were not to be touched
except by the priests. It may here be
remarked that the peculiar word harem,
applied to the female part of an oriental
household establishment, is in all pro-
bability derived from the same root
with ^herem, and carries with it the
implication of something set apart by
the most sacred consecration, and which
no one could invade without the danger
of anathema and destruction.
29. None devoted, which shall he de-
voted of man, shall be redeemed. Sec
Heb. tSli^n y2 min haddam, of man.
It appears plain, beyond question, from
V. 28, that human beings as well as
brute beasts were among the subjects
of the 'herem. The present phrase is
undoubtedly correctly rendered ' of
men,' i. e. as the subjects of the vow,
instead of ' by men,' as the agents of it.
Yet we can hardly suppose that the
drift of the passage is to intimate that
a parent or master should or could,
merely from a sudden religious impulse,
devote a child or servant to death, al-
though the case of Jephlhah approxi-
mates very near to such a reckless and
impious act. The legitimate import
seems to be, to repeat in a more em-
phatic manner that part of the precept
in the preceding verse, which had res-
pect toman ; or, in other words, simply
to declare that when a person, whether
child or slave, had been thus most sol-
emnly and irrevocably given away to
God, he was never on any consideration
to be reclaimed or redeemed. But is it
not said, however, that ' he shall surely
be put to death,' and does not this imply
that Israclitish parents and masters had
the power of thus devoting their child-
24*
ren or slaves to death ? To this it may be
answered that the original phrase tn?3
n^T^ moth yumothj dying shall die,
may without violence be interpreted in
this connexion, not of any violent death
in consequence of the vow, but simply
that he should remain in that devoted
state until he died. This is the inter-
pretation proposed by several distin-
guished commentators, and, indeed,
considering this law in relation to the
duty oi private individuals, there seems
to be no other sense that does nol
outrage the spirit of the divine cede,
which breathes such a tender concern
for human life. But the subject, it must
be admitted, assumes another aspect,
when viewed in relation to a national
'herem, which might be made and exe-
cuted against the public enemies of Is-
rael, or those devoted nations who, by
the special appointment of God, were
doomed to remediless destruction. Such
a vow on the part of the peculiar people
was but an echo, as it were, of the
^herem of the Almighty, and it was to
be punctiliously executed. Thus the
Canaanites were vowed to total excision,
because God had thus decreed. Thus too,
the city of Jericho in particular was de-
voted. Josh. 6. 17, and the inhabitants
of Jabesh-Gilead were put to death for
violating the curse pronounced upon
those who came not up to Mizpeh,
Judg. 29. 10. Thus, too, if an Israelii-
ish city introduced the worship of
strange gods, it was in like manner to
be devoted or confessed to God, and to
remain unbuilt for ever. Deut. 13. 16-18.
The Law of Tithes.
30. All the tithe of the land. The
I ' tithe ' of any thing is its tenth part.
282
LEVITICUS.
[B. C. 1491.
32 And concerning the lithe of
the herd, or of the flock, even of
whatsoever upasseth under the
rod, the tenth shall be holy unto
the Lord.
33 He shall not search whether
it be good or bad, j' neither shall
" See Jer. 33. 13. Ezek. 20. 37. Mic. 7.
14. X ver. 10.
Of the yearly products of the land of
the Israelites, the first-fruits were first
deducted ; out of the rest the tenth part
was taken for the Levites, Num. IS. 21 ;
of the nine remaining parts, another
tenth part was to be taken and brought
to Jerusalem, and there eaten by the
owners, Deut. 12. 6 ; though this second
tiihe was every third year distributed
to the poor, Deut. 28. 29.
32. Of whatsoever passeth under the
rod. This is thus explained by the
Rabbinical writers : ' When a man was
to give the tithe of his sheep or calves
to God, he was to shut up the whole
flock in one fold, in which there was
one narrow door capable of letting out
one at a time. The owner about to
give the tenth to the Lord stood by the
door with a rod in his hand, the end of
which was dipped in vermillioa or red
ochre. The mothers of these Iambs or
he change it: and if he change it
at all, then both it and the change
thereof shall be holy ; it shall not
be redeemed.
34 y These are the command-
ments which the Lord commanded
Moses for the children of Israel in
mount Sinai.
y ch. 26. 46.
calves stood without ; the door being
opened, the young ones ran out to join
themselves to their dams; and as they
passed out, the owner stood with his
rod over them, and counted 1, 2, 3, &c.,
and when the tenth came, he touched it
with the colored rod, by which it was
distinguished to be the tithe calf, sheep,
&c., and whether poor or lean, perfect
or blemished, that was received as the
legitimate tithe.' It is probably in
reference to this custom that the pro-
phet speaking to Israel says, Ezek. 20.
37, ' I will cause you to pass under the
rod, and will bring you into the word
of the covenant ;' i. e. you shall be once
more claimed as the Lord's property
and be in all things devoted to his ser-
vice, being marked or ascertained by
special providences and manifestations
of his kindness to be his peculiar people
Date Due
Ir ■: -
•
\r
Uis^i^msm^
■T'
9