Commentary on Genesis, Chapter 38
CHAP. XXXVIII.
Ver. 1. AT that time.] It is uncertain whether he mean at the time Joſeph was ſold (which is juſt before mentioned) or, at the time Jacob returned from Meſopotamia to live in Canaan, XXXIII. 18. or, when he went to ſettle with his Father at Mamre, XXXV. 27. But, take it any of theſe ways, there was time enough for all the Events following, before they went into Egypt; ſuppoſing Judah's Children to have married very young: As may be ſeen in moſt Interpreters.
Judah went down from his Brethren.] Either upon ſome buſineſs, or in ſome diſcontent.
Adullamite.] A Citizen of Adullam; which was a famous Town or City, that fell afterwards to the Tribe of Judah: Whoſe King was ſlain by Joſhua, XII. 19: And where there was a famous Cave, in which David hid himſelf, 1 Sam. XXII. 1.
Ver. 2. Judah ſaw there.] So as to fall in Love with her. For, according to the old Saying, foreign.
A Daughter of a certain Canaanite.] It was not ſo bad for a Man circumciſed to marry the Daughter of one uncircumciſed; as it was to give their Daughters in Marriage to an uncircumciſed Husband, (XXXIV. 14.) For an uncircumciſed Man was accounted unclean, though he had renounced Idolatry: But a Woman born of uncircumciſed Parents, was not ſo accounted; if ſhe embraced the worſhip of the True God. Whence Salmon, a great Man in the Tribe of Judah, married Rahab who was a Canaanite. Such a one we muſt ſuppoſe this Woman, whom Judah married, to have been; or, elſe he had offended his Father, as much as Eſau did Iſaac, by marrying the Daughters of Heth.
Whoſe name was Shuah.] Her Father's Name was Shuah, verſe 12.
He took her.] To be his Wife, verſe 12.
Ver. 5. And he was at Chezib when ſhe bare him.] Some think this Town the ſame with Achzib, belonging to Judah, Joſh. XV. 44. But why Moſes mentions his abſence when this Child was born, and why he ſets down the Place where he then was, we cannot give an account: Though there was, no doubt, ſome ſpecial Reaſon for it. Perhaps it is to ſhow, why ſhe gave the Name to this and to her former Son, (whereas he himſelf named the firſt, verſe 3.) becauſe he was not at home when they were born.
Ver. 6. Whoſe name was Tamar.] She ſeems alſo to have been a Woman of Canaan; but not an Idolater.
Ver. 7. Was wicked in the ſight of the LORD.] i. e. Exceeding impious; and that notoriouſly. See Gen. X. 9. What particular Sins he was guilty of, is but conjectured. Some fanſie they were of the ſame nature with his next Brother's. See Bonfrere, or Menochius out of him.
And the LORD ſlew him.] Cut him off ſuddenly, by ſome unuſual ſtroke.
Ver. 8. Go in unto thy Brother's Wife, &c.] This (ſay the Hebrew Doctors) was an ancient Cuſtom, in force before the Law of Moſes: Which only enacted what had been formerly practiſed, (Maimon. P. III. cap. 49. More Nevoch.) that when a Man died without Iſſue, his next Brother ſhould marry his Wife, Deut. XXV. 5. Which Cuſtom afterward extended to the next Couſin, if no Brother remained.
And raiſe up Seed unto thy Brother.] Preſerve thy Brother's Name and Family; by begetting a Child, which may be accounted his, and inherit his Eſtate. For ſo the Law was; that the Firſt-born of ſuch a match was not to be lookt upon as the Child of him that begat him; but as his Brother's, who was the Mother's firſt Husband. All the following Children, were to be his own.
Ver. 9. Onan knew that the Seed ſhould not be his.] i. e. The Firſt-born ſhould be reputed his Brother's Child.
Leſt he ſhould give Seed to his Brother.] Or, leſt a Child ſhould be born in the name of his Brother, as the Vulgar Latin interprets it very exactly, according to the Opinion of the Hebrews; as Mr. Selden obſerves, L. VII. de Jure N. & G. cap. 3.
Ver. 10. The thing which he did diſpleaſed the LORD.] This made his Sin the more heinous, that he acted againſt the Divine Promiſe made to Abraham, concerning the multiplying of his Seed: Eſpecially againſt the Belief of the Promiſe of the Meſſiah; that Seed for which all good Men longed.
Ver. 11. Remain a widow in thy Father's houſe, &c.] It ſeems the Contract of Marriage at firſt, was ſo underſtood in thoſe Days, that if the Husband died without Iſſue, the Woman muſt marry his next Brother; and, as long as any of his Brethren remained, they were bound to marry his Wife, and preſerve their Brother's Memory: Or, elſe ſolemnly renounce her, to their great infamy and diſgrace. This was ſo well known, that there is nothing in the Law, that enjoyns any new ſolemn Contract in ſuch a Caſe: Becauſe the firſt Husband being dead, ſhe and the next Brother were Man and Wife, without any further Agreement, by Virtue of the Original Law: Until he renounced her. Yet by the Conſtitutions afterwards made by their Elders, it was ordained, that he ſhould eſpouſe and endow her ſolemnly before Witneſſes: As Mr. Selden ſhows in his Ʋxor Hebr. Lib. I. cap. 12. and Lib. II. cap. 2. and 10.
But Judah thought Selah was too young to perform this Contract; and therefore deſired her to ſtay till he was grown up: And to abide in her own Father's Houſe, rather than in his; that Selah might not think of Marriage too ſoon.
For he ſaid, Leſt peradventure he die alſo.] This ſome make an Argument, that he never intended to give her his Son. But it is more agreeable to verſe 24, and 26. to think that according to the Cuſtom of thoſe Days, he could not refuſe it. And therefore he thought it was their youthful Folly, which made his two other Sons periſh: Which made him reſolve to keep this till he had more Diſcretion, and was better inſtructed in his Duty. Or, if we imagine their Sin was known to none but Tamar; the meaning may be, that he thought their marrying too young was the cauſe of their death: And therefore he determined to keep this only remaining Son, till he was of a riper Age.
Ver. 12. In proceſs of time.] In the Hebrew the words are, The Days were multiplied, i. e. after ſome Years.
To Timnath.] A Town not far from Adullam, it is probable, for it was alſo within the Lot of the Tribe of Judah, Joſh. XV. 57.
He went up to Timnath.] Some have made a difficulty about this Phraſe: For Sampſon is ſaid to have gone down to Timnath, Judg. XIV. 5. But they ſhould have conſidered (as Bochart obſerves, P. I. Hierozoic. L. III. cap. 4.) that theſe were two different Places, one called Timnah, the other Timnathah: This in the Tribe of Judah; the other in the Tribe of Dan. To this they went up, becauſe it was in a mountainous Country: To the other they went down, becauſe it was in a Valley.
To his Sheep-ſhearers.] It was the Cuſtom at ſuch times to make a Feaſt, (as we do now) and to invite their Kindred and Friends to it, (as he doth his Friend Hirah) which appears ſufficiently from the Story of Abſalom, 2 Sam. XIII. 23. For in thoſe Countries, where they had vaſt Flocks, Sheep-ſhearing was a kind of Harveſt: Which made that time to be obſerved with ſuch Joy, as there uſed to be in Harveſt. Whence David's Servants ſaid to Nabal, that they were come to him on a good Day; for he was ſhearing Sheep, 1 Sam. XXV. 8. Accordingly Judah having finiſhed the time of mourning for his Wife, went to recreate himſelf, with his Friends, at this Feſtival Seaſon.
Ver. 14. She put off her Widows Garments.] In which, it ſeems, ſuch Perſons continued, till they were married to the next Brother. But ſhe, at this time, laid them aſide, that he might not have the leaſt ſuſpicion ſhe was the Perſon whom he courted.
Covered her with a Veil.] As all Women did, in the Eaſtern Countries, when they went abroad: And there are Examples of it alſo in the Weſtern Parts of the World; as Mr. Selden at large ſhows, in his Ʋxor Hebraica, L. III. cap. 17. Where he produces ſeveral Paſſages out of the Alcoran requiring this.
Wrapt her ſelf.] Muffled her Face with it, as we ſpeak, that ſhe might not be known.
And ſat in an open place.] Where two Ways met, as the Hebrew words ſeem to import: Unleſs we take it for a proper Name, as it is in the Margin of our Bibles. Either way, it ſignifies, in a Publick Place, where every Body might ſee her. It is commonly noted, That there was ſo much Modeſty left, in thoſe ancient Days, that Harlots both went veiled, and alſo ſat without the Cities, (ſee Origen L. IV. contra Celſum, p. 206.) But, however the latter part of this Obſervation be, the former part of it is not true. For, as Bochartus obſerves, (P. I. Hierozoic. Lib. II. cap. 46.) Proprium fuit meretricum non velari, ſed revelari; it was proper to Harlots not to be covered, but to go bare-faced: As appears from Iſai. XLVII. 3. Nahum III. 5, &c. All that can be anſwered to this is, That it might be otherwiſe, in very ancient Times. Which I do not take to be true: For all Women, as I obſerved before, were covered; and therefore Harlots were diſtinguiſhed only by their ſitting in the High-ways, not by their Veils.
For ſhe ſaw that Selah was grown, and ſhe was not given, &c.] She reſolved, if ſhe could, to have a Child by one of this Family; and hoped, perhaps, that Selah might come along with his Father, and have the ſame Deſires his Father had: And in thoſe Days (as I noted before) there were no ſuch Solemnities required, as the Jews afterwards uſed (though the Law did not enjoyn it) to the making a Marriage with one's Brother's Wife. Which was to be contracted, they ſay, before two Witneſſes, and by giving a piece of Money, or a Writing: But this was ordained only by their Elders, not by the Original Law. See verſe 11. And therefore ſhe thought if ſhe could have caught Selah by this Device, it would have been held Lawful: But this Plot failing her, ſhe ſo far tranſgreſſed, as to admit Judah himſelf to lie with her.
Ver. 15. Becauſe ſhe covered her face.] This is not the reaſon why he took her for an Harlot; but why he did not know her to be his Daughter-in-law, (as Mr. Selden obſerves in the place before-named, verſe 14.) becauſe he could not ſee her Face: And he thought her to be an Harlot, becauſe ſhe ſat in trivio, in the High-way; where ſhe publickly expoſed her ſelf.
Ver. 16. Let me come in unto thee.] There was an expreſs Law that there ſhould be no Kedeſhah (or Whore) among the Daughters of Iſrael, i. e. none who ſhould proſtitute her Body without Marriage, Deut. XXIII. 18. Levit. XIX. 29. But before the giving of the Law (ſaith Maimonides) if a Man found a ſingle Woman in a Publick Place, and they agreed on certain terms, to lie together without being married, they were not puniſhed. See Mr. Selden L. V. de Jure N. & G. cap. 4.
What wilt thou give me?] That which made ſuch Facts not to be puniſhed, was (ſaith the ſame Maimonides) becauſe of the Contract which paſſed between them. This Reward which he gave the Harlot for the uſe of her Body, being like the Dowry a Man gave his Wife, when he put her away: Which being paid, it was thought he did her no wrong. More Nevoch. P. III. cap. 49. They that would now have their wicked Practices warranted by ſuch Examples; ſhould conſider that every thing not puniſhed by Men, was not allowed by God: And that we now live under another Diſpenſation, which expreſly forbids ſuch uncleanneſs; and declares, that not only Adulterers, but Whoremongers, God will judge, i. e. puniſh, Hebr. XIII. 4. See verſe 23.
Ver. 17. A Kid from the Flock.] Which was lookt upon as a valuable Preſent, in thoſe Days; as I have obſerved before, XXVII. 9.
Wilt thou give me a Pledge, &c.] A Pawn, as we now ſpeak, to be returned, when he ſent what he promiſed.
Ver. 18. Thy Signet.] His Ring, wherewith he ſealed.
Thy Bracelets.] The Hebrews generally underſtand by this word, his Cloak, or ſome ſuch Garment. Others, his Girdle.
And thy Staff, &c.] Which, it is likely, had ſomething in it, to diſtinguiſh it from other Mens Staffs. And ſhe asks ſo many things, that by ſome or other of them (if not by all) it might be certainly known, who was the Father, if ſhe proved with Child.
And he came in unto her.] Not publickly; but in ſome bye place, to which they retired.
And ſhe conceived by him.] Though he did not know her, yet ſhe knew him: Which aggravated her Crime, and made it Inceſt in her, though only Fornication in him. Unto which, one would think, ſhe was tempted, by her vehement deſire to have a Child, by one of this Family; unto which the Promiſe of the Meſſiah belonged. For though ſhe ſeems to have been one of the Seed of Canaan, (as I ſaid before, verſe 6.) yet embracing the Religion of Jacob, ſhe renounced the Impiety of the Canaanites: And ſo is mentioned in the Genealogy of our Saviour, as well as Rahab and Ruth.
Ver. 19. Laid by her Veil from her, &c.] Retired into her Father's Houſe (for within Doors they did not wear Veils) where ſhe cloathed her ſelf again, like a Widow.
Ver. 21. Where is the Harlot?] By this it is apparent that the word Kedeſchah, ſignifies a common Whore (as we ſpeak) who publickly proſtituted her ſelf for hire: As the Hebrew Doctors obſerve upon this place, and upon Deut. XXIII. 17. But whence this Name ſhould be given to Harlots is a great doubt; it coming from a Root, which ſignifies that which is Sacred. Which hath inclined ſome learned Men to think, that the Women-Prieſts conſecrated to the Service of Baalphegor, or Priapus, who were no better than Whores; and the Men-Prieſts, who ſerved Aſhteroth, mentioned 2 Kings XXIII. 7. made all Whores be called Kedeſchim, which was the Name for thoſe devoted to ſuch impure Miniſteries. See Mr. Selden, de Diis Syris Syntag. I. cap. 5. and Syntag. II. cap. 2. But ſuch beaſtly Idolatry, ſurely, was not ſo old, as the Days of Jacob: And it ſeems more reaſonable to me to think, that the Original word ſignifying Separation; it was applied either to thoſe who were ſeparated unto Holineſs, or unto Uncleanneſs, as Harlots were.
And they ſaid, There was no Harlot in this place.] They knew of none, that publickly profeſſed to be a Proſtitute: Nor had they ſeen any one ſit publickly to invite Cuſtomers.
Ver. 23. Let her take it to her.] Keep the Pledge to her ſelf.
Leſt we be aſhamed.] Though the Fact he had committed was in thoſe Days Lawful, (ſaith Maimonides) that is, was not puniſhed by the Judges; yet Men did not publickly boaſt of it, nor were willing to own it; but were aſhamed it ſhould be known, (which was a ſign they were ſenſible there was a moral turpitude in it) and therefore endeavoured to hide and conceal it; even with the loſs of thoſe Goods which were of greateſt value. For the Sence, ſaith he, of Judah's words is this, It is better to loſe what ſhe hath of ours, than by inquiſition after it, to divulge the buſineſs, and increaſe our ſhame, More Nevochim, P. III. cap. 49. where he bids his Reader obſerve, this is the Moral Vertue, which ought to be learnt from this Hiſtory; together with Juſtice and Equity: Which appears in his performing the Agreement he made of ſending a Kid; of which he deſires his Friend to be a Witneſs, that he might not lie under any ſuſpicion of having offered Violence to her.
Ver. 24. Bring her forth.] Out of her Father's Houſe, into the place of Judgment: Where he would have her ſentenced to the ſevereſt Puniſhment.
Let her be burnt.] Not preſently, (for that had been the higheſt Injuſtice and Cruelty, to burn the Child in her Belly) but after ſhe was delivered: Till which time he would have her kept in ſuch ſafe Cuſtody, that this Execution might be done upon her. Some think burning was the Puniſhment for Adultery in thoſe Days. Others think the Puniſhment depended on the Will of the Supreme Governor, whoſoever he was: Whom ſome alſo take to have been Judah himſelf; as Chief in his own Family: And that he was ſo ſevere againſt her becauſe ſhe had diſgraced his Family, and he was glad to be rid of her, that he might not give his Son Selah to her. But there are thoſe, who think by burning is meant no more, but branding her in the Fore-head, to denote her to be an Whore. See Mr. Selden, L. VII. de Jure N. & G. cap. 5. If Judah did mean burning her at a Stake, (as we now ſpeak) it was a Puniſhment not then commonly uſed, but inflicted (as his words are L. III. Ʋxor Hebr. cap. 12.) ex more ſeu lege aliqua ſingulari: By ſome ſingular Cuſtom or Law.
All this proceeds upon a ſuppoſition, that ſhe really was Selah's Wife, though not ſolemnly married (as the Jews pretend it was neceſſary, after the Law was given) by Virtue of the firſt Contract with his eldeſt Brother. Which was the reaſon of her being kept at her Father's Houſe; that no Body elſe might pretend to her, but ſhe be reſerved for him: Otherwiſe there could have been no ground for proceeding againſt her as an Adultereſs.
Ver. 26. She hath been more righteous than I.] Theſe words do not ſignifie, that ſhe had in this matter committed a leſs Sin than he, (for ſhe had committed a greater) but that in another matter, which was the occaſion of this, he had broken his word with her, when ſhe had, till now, kept her Faith with him; and lived a Widow honeſtly in expectation of his Son. Beſides, ſhe committed this Fact, out of deſire to have a Child; he, to ſatisfie his Luſt.
And he knew her no more.] Which ſome have tranſlated quite contrary, and he ceaſed not to know her, i. e. he ſolemnly married her, and took her to be his Wife: Which was unlawful after the Law of Moſes was given, but as lawful before, as many other things which they practiſed. And two of the Chaldee Paraphraſts have feigned a Bath-coll to have come from Heaven, to countenance the Fact. See Mr. Selden, L. V. de Jure N. & G. cap. 9. and L. VII. cap. 5. But, it is not likely, he would take his Son's Wife, to be his own. And likewiſe having known her, though by an Error, moſt think Selah himſelf afterward had her not to Wife: But ſhe rather did Penance (as we now ſpeak) in Widowhood all her Days. For Selah, we find, had Children by another, Numb. XXVI. 19.
Ver. 28. This came out firſt.] Perceiving there were Twins ſtruggling in her Womb, the Midwife, to diſtinguiſh this from the other, as the Firſt-born, bound this Thred about his Wriſt.
Ver. 29. How haſt thou broke forth?] What is the Cauſe of this? Or, what a Violence is this? Speaking as one aſtoniſhed at his eruption. For it was without Example; and therefore the Novelty of the thing, made her break out into this Exclamation. Though, if it be true which a learned Anatomiſt affirms; that where Twins are of the ſame Sex, they are wrapped in the very ſame Secundines, as they call them, (whereas thoſe that are of a different, are ſeparated by diſtinct Incloſures) the other Son being ſtronger and more vigorous, might force his way the more readily, when his Brother was nearer to the Birth. Fernelius L. VII. Phyſiolog. cap. 12.
This breach be upon thee.] Take thy Name from this Breach. Be thou ever called Eruption or Breach; as Bochart interprets it. Hierozoic. P. I. L. II. cap. 30.
Ver. 30. Called Zarah.] Which moſt think ſignifies as much as, he ariſeth, (being uſed commonly of the Sun's riſing) becauſe this Child appeared firſt, by putting out his Hand before the other.