Commentary on Leviticus, Book · Chapter 12
CHAP. XII.
Ver. 1. Verſe 1 AND the LORD ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying.] The Directions in this Chapter are given to Moſes alone; whereas thoſe in the foregoing were delivered unto Aaron alſo; as thoſe are in like manner which follow about the Leproſie (XIII. 1.) becauſe Aaron and his Sons were peculiarly concerned in thoſe matters, to make an exact difference between clean and unclean, (X. 10, 11. XIV. 57.) in which there was ſome difficulty; and therefore they are charged by God himſelf to attend carefully to the Laws he gave about them. But there was no ſuch difficulty in what belong'd to the Purification of Women; and therefore it was ſufficient that they received Admonitions from Moſes concerning it.
Ver. 2. Verſe 2 If a woman have conceived ſeed, and born a man-child.] Whether it were born alive, or dead; were an Abortive, or come to its full time: this made no difference, as the Hebrew Doctors underſtand it.
She ſhall be unclean ſeven days.] For the firſt ſeven days after the Birth of the Child, ſhe was neither to partake of any holy thing, nor to have common Converſation with others; her Husband not being permitted to eat and drink with her all that time: for they that attended her became unclean alſo. And ſo they were accounted among the Heathen, as Dilherrus obſerves out of Plautus (in his Diſſert. Special. de Cacozelia Gentilium, cap. 3. where he ſaith, the Women that aſſiſted at the Labour ſolemnly waſhed their hands, and had a Sacrifice offered for them on the fifth day after the Delivery. Plautus his words indeed will not warrant all this, which I find in his Truculentus, Act. 2. Scen. 4. where the Harlot ſays, ſhe will Sacrifice for the Child on the fifth day according to the Cuſtom.
Quin Diis Sacrificare hodie pro puero volo
Quinto die, quod fieri oportet.—
Where Scaliger obſerves that the Greeks were wont to purifie their Children on the fifth day; but the Latines on the eighth, if they were Daughters, and on the ninth, if they were Sons; which was called Dies luſtricus.
According to the days of the ſeparation for her infirmity, ſhall ſhe be unclean.] That is, her Caſe ſhall be the ſame with that of a Menſtruous Woman, who was in a ſtate of the higheſt Uncleanneſs, XV. 19, 20. For every thing ſhe touched was unclean, and made thoſe ſo, who touched that thing.
Ver. 3. And on the eighth day, the fleſh of his foreskin ſhall be circumciſed.] This is here mentioned to ſhow, that one reaſon for not Circumciſing the Child till the eighth day, was its Mothers Uncleanneſs the firſt ſeven days of her lying in; which made the Child unclean alſo.
Ver. 4. Verſe 4 And ſhe ſhall then continue.] From the ſeven days end.
In the blood of her purifying.] In the Purification of her Blood: For all the following days were days of Purification; not of entire Separation.
Three and thirty days.] All the days of her Uncleanneſs were forty: And for the firſt ſeven days, ſhe was to be ſeparated from all Converſation with her Neighbours; but the following three and thirty, ſhe had free Converſation with them, and was only excluded from the Sanctuary, and from eating of the Peace-offerings, or the Paſchal Lamb, and (if ſhe were the Wife of a Prieſt) of the Tithes, and other leſſer holy things; of which otherwiſe ſhe might have eaten.
She ſhall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the Sanctuary, until the days of her purification be fulfilled.] If Maimonides may be credited, the Zabij, an ancient ſort of Idolaters in thoſe Eaſtern parts, had a great number of tedious and tireſom Cuſtoms about the Puriſication of their Childbed-women; from all which God freed his People, by reſtraining them only from coming into his Sanctuary, or partaking of holy things; but otherwiſe leaving them at liberty to perform all manner of Offices in their Family, during the time of their Purification, More Nevoch. P. III. cap. 47. It is apparent alſo that other Gentiles kept their Women from their Temples, a long time after their Childbirth; and that Superſtitious People would not ſo much as go within their doors. See Dilherrus in the fore-named Book and Chapter.
Ver. 5. Verſe 5 And if ſhe bear a Maid-child, then ſhall ſhe be unclean two weeks, as in her ſeparation.] The time of ſtrict Separation, when they brought forth a Female, was double to that which was preſcribed (v. 2.) when they brought forth a Male. And ſo alſo was the time of their Purification: which laſted threeſcore and ſix days, as they in the other Caſe by thirty and three. The reaſon of which difference, not only the Jews, but others alſo derive from the greater redundancy (as R. Levi Barcelonita calls it, Praecept. CLXVI.) of Blood in the latter Caſe, than in the former; and from the flowneſs of Nature in its operation, which made the Purgation longer before it was effected. Hippocrates himſelf treats of this difference (in his Book de Natura Puerp.) where he ſaith, Women are ſooner purged after the Birth of Males, than of Females: See Joh. Meurſius in his Syntagma de Puerperio, cap. 6, 7. The natural weakneſſes of Women alſo, during this time, required quiet and little Company: from which the very temper of their Blood in thoſe Climates made a longer Separation more neceſſary, than in theſe colder Regions. But if there were no ſuch apparent reaſon to be given of theſe things, yet vel ex ipſa veneranda antiquitate, & ſimplicitate ſuſcipienda forent, & minimè contemnenda (as Conrad. Pellicanus ſpeaks upon the foregoing Chapter, v. 35.) they ought for the ſake of their venerable antiquity and ſimplicity to be duly regarded, and not to be deſpiſed.
Ver. 6. Verſe 6 And when the days of her Purification are fulfilled, for a ſon, or for a daughter.] Which was not till the end of the fortieth day for a Son, and the eightieth day for a Daughter. And therefore the Offerings here mentioned, were not offered till the day after, viz. the LXI. day for the one, and the LXXXI. day for the other; becauſe till then her Purification was not perfected, as Maimonides obſerves in his Book de Sacrificiis, Tract. V. ſect. 5. where he obſerves alſo, that they might not eat of holy things, till theſe Sacrifices had been offered for them.
And ſhe ſhall bring a Lamb of the first year.] Which then was in its greateſt Perfection, as hath been often noted.
For a burnt-offering.] In gratitude to God for giving her a ſafe Deliverance, and beſtowing a Child upon her, and raiſing her up to her former ſtrength, and bringing her again to his Sanctuary. Where, by this Offering ſhe alſo commended her ſelf and Child to his continued Care and Bleſſing, and implored his Divine Guidance and Aſſiſtance in its Education. For theſe Offerings, as I obſerved before, were a kind of Supplication which they that brought them made to God: and there was nothing that pious People could more earneſtly deſire on ſuch occaſions, than that God would take their little ones into his tuition. Who are continually liable to ſo many Dangers, that without the ſpecial Favour of God, and the Cuſtody of his Angels, they could never grow to be able to take any care of themſelves. They are the words of Conradus Pellicanus upon this place; who thence infers how neceſſary it is, that the People of the Church ſhould be admoniſhed frequently, to commend their Children unto God both by private and by publick Prayers, and take care of their Inſtruction, lest they become like the Horſe, and the Mule, that have no Ʋnderſtanding.
And a young Pigeon, or a turtle Dove for a ſin-offering.] To compleat her Purification from her Uncleanneſs. For that is here meant by Sin; the impurity which the Law made, by Separating ſuch Perſons from others, and from the Sanctuary, for a time. And thus a Sin-offering is commanded to be brought by a Leper, when he was cleanſed; who was charged only with a Legal Uncleanneſs, not a Moral. And it is more plain, from what is ordained concerning menſtruous Women, whoſe Courſes were purely natural, and yet they were to offer a Sin-offering when they were gone, XV. 30. becauſe the Law accounted that a ſtate of Uncleanneſs. And from the caſe of a Nazaarite, who had unwillingly touched a dead Body, V Numb. 11. where it is ſaid, he had ſinned by the dead; i.e. was legally polluted. And this may be the reaſon, perhaps, why a Burnt-offering is here mentioned before the Sin-offering, which is wont to precede the other, v. 7, 8.
It may be conceived indeed that in all the forementioned Caſes, thoſe Perſons (eſpecially Lepers) had ſome way offended God, before or in their ſtate of Separation; and therefore were to have their ſin (properly ſo called) expiated by a Sin-offering. And R. Bechai alſo gives another probable account of it; that this Sacrifice was offered not for her own Sin, but the Sin of her firſt Parent, the Mother of all Living, who brought Sin and Sorrow into the World: for from a bad Stock, there cannot ſprout good Branches; and therefore God appointed this Offering for the Expiation of that primary Sin.
Ʋnto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation, unto the Prieſt.] It was a moſt wiſe Conſtitution (as a Perſon of excellent Learning, Dr. Alix, obſerves) which bound this People, from their firſt coming into the World, to their going out of it, to have a dependence upon the Prieſts and the Levites (who for that purpoſe were diſperſed through all the Tribes of Iſrael, that People might be inſtructed by them, how to govern themſelves in all the paſſages of Human Life) For there are Laws not only about Marriages and Succeſſions, but about their lying in, whether of a Son or Daughter, and about all they were to do while that time laſted, and when it ended; and indeed all the time they lived, and when they went out of the World; in their Funerals, and Mourning for the Dead.
Ver. 7. Verſe 7 Who ſhall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her.] By this Offering ſhe was reſtored to the liberty of God's Houſe, and to partake of holy things. For ſo it follows,
And ſhe ſhall be cleanſed from the iſſue of her blood.] No longer ſeparated from holy Society.
This is the Law for her that hath born a male or a female.] All this principally reſpected the Women; yet not excluding her Child; who (it appears by S. Luke II. 22.) was on this day of his Mothers Purification, preſented unto the LORD. That indeed had reſpect to the Law about the Firſt-born: but a very ancient MS. and the Syriac, and Origen, taking this for the day of their Purification, and not meerly of hers (foreign) it plainly ſhows the Child could not be admitted into the Divine Preſence, no more than the Mother, till the days above-mentioned were accompliſhed.
Ver. 8. Verſe 8 And if ſhe be not able to bring a Lamb, then ſhe ſhall bring two Turtles, and two young Pigeons, &c.] This was a merciful proviſion for the poorer ſort, as in other caſes, V. 7, 11. And from this very place we may learn, in how mean a Condition the Mother of our LORD was; who for her Purification did not bring a Lamb (unto which her Piety, no doubt, would have prompted her, if ſhe had been able) but only this lower ſort of Offering, as we read II Luke 24.
And the Prieſt ſhall make an atonement for her, and ſhe ſhall be clean.] This Sacrifice was as available, as the other, to reſtore her to Communion with God's People. The Greeks imitated this; among whom the fortieth day was inſignis (as Cenſorinus ſpeaks) famous or remarkable upon more accounts than one. For Women with Child did not go to the Temple ante diem quadrageſimum before the fortieth day: and after their Delivery, commonly they were not fit to go out till forty days more, (his words are, quadraginta diebus pleraeque foetae graviores ſunt, nec ſanguinem interdum continent) during which time their little ones were ſickly, never ſmiled, nor were out of danger. Which is obſerved by that great Phyſician Celſus, Lib. II. cap. 1. Maxime, omnis pueritia primum circa quadrageſimum diem periclitatur. And therefore, when this day was paſt, they were wont to keep a Feaſt (as Cenſorinus there tells us, cap. 11. de Die Natali) which they called foreign at which time, it is likely, they offered Sacrifices alſo, as the Jewiſh Women did.