Commentary on Leviticus, Book · Chapter 22
CHAP. XXII.
Ver. 1. Verſe 1 AND the LORD ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying.] Theſe Commands that follow, were delivered at the ſame time with the foregoing; belonging to the ſame matter. For though the Prieſts, who had a blemiſh, might eat of the holy things, yet he would have them know that neither they, nor ſuch as were unblemiſhed, ſhould preſume to do it in their Uncleanneſs.
Ver. 2. Verſe 2 Speak unto Aaron, and to his ſons, that they ſeparate themſelves.] Viz. When they were in their Uncleanneſs, v. 3.
From the holy things of the Children of Iſrael.] Abſtain from eating (v. 3, 4, 12.) of that part of the Sacrifices which belonged to the Prieſts; but was to be eaten only by ſuch of them as were free from Legal Impurities, VII. 20, 21. Nor were they to eat of the Firſt-fruits which were alſo their portion, (XVIII Numb. 12, 13.) but they might eat of the Tythes, which were allowed for their conſtant Suſtenance.
And that they profane not my holy Name.] This is the very ground of this Prohibition; that they might preſerve in their minds a due reverence to the Divine Majeſty: unto whom, as they might not approach, ſo they might not meddle with any thing Conſecrated to him, in a ſtate of Legal Impurity. All great Perſons are to be approached with a great deal of Ceremony, eſpecially when any are invited to their Table; otherwiſe they might fall into contempt. And therefore much more was this reverence to be ſhown to the Divine Majeſty, that they might entertain high Apprehenſions of him, by abſtaining from all things belonging to him, when they were under any pollution.
In thoſe things which they hallow unto me.] Which the Children of Iſrael devoted unto God: For ſo the foregoing words, and the next Verſe explain it.
I am the LORD.] The greateſt regard is to be paid to my Majeſty.
Ver. 3. Verſe 3 Say unto them, whoſoever he be of your ſeed.] Of the Prieſts.
Among your generations.] In ſucceeding times.
That goeth unto the holy things.] To eat of them; as appears from v. 4, 6, 12.
Which the Children of Iſrael hallow unto the LORD.] Offer to him at his Altar.
Having his uncleanneſs upon him.] For which they were to ſeparate themſelves, v. 2.
That ſoul ſhall be cut off from my preſence.] Thruſt out of the Prieſts Office; no more to miniſter at the Altar; and then it was the act of a Judge: or cut off from the Land of the Living; which was done by the Hand of Heaven.
I am the LORD.] Who will vindicate my own Honour.
Ver. 4. Verſe 4 What man ſoever of the ſeed of Aaron.] Theſe words of the ſeed of Aaron include his Daughters, as well as his Sons; who might eat of ſome holy things, (XVIII Numb. 11, 19.) but not in their Uncleanneſs.
Is a leper, or hath a running iſſue.] There are eleven Fountains of Uncleanneſs (as the Hebrews ſpeak) two of which are theſe here mentioned; as appears from XIII. 3. XV. 2.
He ſhall not eat of the holy things until he be clean.] See XIV. 2. XV. 13.
And whoſo toucheth any thing that is unclean by the dead, or a man whoſe ſeed goes from him.] Theſe were two other Fountains of Uncleanneſs, XI. 31, 32, &c. XV. 16.
Ver. 5. Verſe 5 Or whoſoever toucheth any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean.] See XI. 24, &c.
Or a man of whom he may take uncleanneſs.] XV. 7.
Whatſoever uncleanneſs he hath.] Suppoſe the Leproſie, XIII. 45. Theſe are two ſuch Fountains of Uncleanneſs as the former.
Ver. 6. Verſe 6 The ſoul which hath touched any ſuch, ſhall be unclean until even, and ſhall not eat, &c.] So the Law was in the forenamed Caſes; as appears by the places above-mentioned.
Ver. 7. Verſe 7 And when the Sun is down, he ſhall be clean.] Having waſhed his fleſh with water.
And ſhall afterward eat of the holy things, becauſe it is his food.] God was ſo gracious as not to keep a Prieſt any longer in a ſtate wherein he ſhould want his neceſſary, or comfortable Suſtenance.
Ver. 8. Verſe 8 That which dieth of it ſelf, or is torn with beaſts, he ſhall not eat, to defile himſelf therewith.] This was forbidden before to all the Iſraelites, XVII. 15. but made a Prieſt no longer unclean than an ordinary Man, becauſe of the foregoing reaſon.
I am the LORD.] Who will have my Miniſters pure from all ſuch pollutions. The remainder of which were the uncleanneſs of the Water of Separation, as Maimonides ſpeaks, XIX. 21. and of the great Sacrifice of Expiation, XVI. 28. and of a menſtruous Woman, XV. 9. and of a Woman in Childbed, XII. 2. But nothing made Men ſo unclean, as the dead Body of a Man; which defiled not only him that touched it, for ſeven days, but all that came into the Houſe, and every thing that was in the Houſe where he died, XIX Numb. 11.14. which was the reaſon of the foregoing Law, that the High-Prieſt ſhould not go in to the dead Body of his Father or Mother; nor any inferiour Prieſt be defiled for any, but their near Relations, XXI. 1, 2, 11.
Ver. 9. Verſe 9 They ſhall therefore keep mine Ordinance.] Obſerve this Conſtitution; becauſe I, who am their LORD, make it.
Lest they bear ſin for it.] Be puniſhed, if they break it.
And die therefore.] As Nadab and Abihu did; who preſumed to break another Law about holy things.
If they profane it.] By eating of the holy things in their Uncleanneſs.
I the LORD do ſanctifie them.] Separate them to my Service: and by ſuch Conſtitutions teach them carefully to avoid all pollutions.
Ver. 10. Verſe 10 There ſhall no ſtranger eat of the holy thing.] The holy thing here mentioned, is that before-named, X. 14. and by a Stranger he doth not mean one of another Nation, but one that is not of the Seed of Aaron, or is not one of his Family. For the word in the Hebrew is not Nechar, which properly ſignifies ſuch a Stranger as is not an Iſraelite; but Zar, which ſignifies any one to whom a thing doth not belong; as holy things did not to thoſe, who were not at leaſt part of the Prieſts Family, though not of his Race. For that ſuch might eat of them who were not of their Race, provided they belonged to them as a part of their Family, appears from the next Verſe.
A ſojourner of the Prieſt.] Who boards with him (as we now ſpeak) or dwells in a part of his Houſe as ſome underſtand it) but hath a diſtinct Family.
Or an hired ſervant.] Such were thoſe who ſerved by the day, (XIX. 13.) or for a certain time: and after that might diſpoſe of themſelves as they pleaſed.
Shall not eat of the holy thing.] None of theſe might eat of the Prieſts portion, (X. 14. XVIII Numb. 11.) becauſe they were not Members of his Family.
Ver. 11. Verſe 11 But if the Priest buy any ſoul (i.e. Perſon) with his money.] There were thoſe of their own Nation, who by their Poverty were compelled to ſell themſelves, or their Children, (XXV. 39.) and others they bought of other Nations, (v. 44, 45, &c.) who becoming Proſelytes to the Jews Religion, were permitted to eat of the Prieſt's Meat, becauſe they became part of his Family.
And he that is born in his houſe, &c.] They that were born of ſuch purchaſed Servants were their Maſters Goods; and ſuch a part of their Family, that they left them to their Children who ſucceeded them. And therefore they alſo were allowed to eat of the Meat of the Prieſt.
Ver. 12. Verſe 12 If a Priests daughter alſo be married unto a ſtranger.] Unto one that is not of the Family of the Prieſts.
She may not eat of an offering of the holy things.] She loſt her right to eat of thoſe holy things, which ſhe did partake of while ſhe remained a part of her Father's Family. For that intitled Perſons to this Priviledge; inſomuch that a Prieſt, taking a Wife out of another Family, ſhe might eat of them, becauſe ſhe was one with him, and therefore had more right than a Servant. But for the ſame reaſon a Prieſt's Daughter married to a Stranger, might not eat of them, becauſe ſhe was gone out of his into another Family.
Ver. 13. Verſe 13 But if the Priests daughter be a widow, or divorced, and have no child.] If ſhe had any Children, they and ſhe made another Family: and they being begotten by a Father, who was not a Prieſt, had no right to eat of the Prieſt's meat. But if ſhe was left without Children, then ſhe was accounted ſtill one of her Father's Family; provided ſhe returned (as it follows) to live with him.
And is returned to her fathers houſe, as in her youth.] To be a part of his Family, as ſhe was before ſhe married, X. 14.
She ſhall eat of her fathers meat.] Have the ſame priviledge ſhe had when ſhe was a Virgin.
But there ſhall no ſtranger eat thereof.] This ſeems, as I ſaid, particularly to relate unto her Children, if ſhe had any; who being begotten by one of another Family, were lookt upon as Strangers. See v. 10.
Ver. 14. Verſe 14 And if a man.] Who hath no right to them.
Eat of the holy thing unwittingly.] Not knowing it to be an holy thing.
Then he ſhall put the fifth part thereof unto it.] Beſides his Sacrifice which he was bound to offer for his Treſpaſs. See V. 15.
And ſhall give it unto the Priest, with the holy thing.] He could not give the Prieſt the holy thing, which he had eaten: but the meaning is, that he ſhould make ſatisfaction to the Prieſt for the Damage done to him, by paying him the true worth of the thing, and the fifth part more of its value. See V. 16.
Ver. 15. Verſe 15 And they ſhall not profane the holy things of the Children of Iſrael, which they offer unto the LORD.] This ſeems to refer to the Perſons before-named; none of which ſhould preſume to profane Sacred things, by eating them, when they did not belong to them. The Prieſts ſeem alſo to be concerned in it, who were not to ſuffer them to eat ſuch holy things, as it follows in the next Verſe. Or, if it intirely relate to the Prieſts, the meaning is, they ſhould not profane holy things, by eating them in their uncleanneſs, v. 9. And one reaſon was, becauſe the Children of Iſrael, whoſe Offerings theſe were, might be diſcouraged from bringing them to the LORD, when they ſaw them ſo prophaned.
Ver. 16. Verſe 16 Or ſuffer them.] i.e. The People.
To bear the iniquity of treſpaſs, &c.] To fall under the puniſhment which God will inflict for their Treſpaſs, in eating things which do not appertain to them. The Marginal Tranſlation refers this alſo wholly to the Prieſts, in this manner, Or, lade themſelves with the iniquity of Treſpaſs in their eating holy things; viz. in their Uncleanneſs, and with ſuch Perſons (it may be added) as ought not to eat of them.
For I the LORD do ſanctifie them.] Theſe words ſeem to juſtifie this laſt Interpretation. See v. 9.
Ver. 17. Verſe 17 And the LORD ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying.] The following Laws, no doubt, were delivered at the ſame time with the former; becauſe they ſtill concern the ſame matter.
Ver. 18. Verſe 18 Speak unto Aaron, and to his ſons, and unto all the Children of Iſrael.] For they were all concerned in the perfection of the Sacrifices, as they were in the perfection of the Prieſts that offered them. See XXI. 24.
And ſay unto them, whoſoever he be.] The Hebrew Doctors ſay, that the phraſe iſch, iſch, (Man, Man, i. e. any Man) is here uſed, as it was XVIII. 6. to ſhow that Gentiles are comprehended under this Law, as well as Jews; as Mr. Selden obſerves out of the Gemara Babylon, Tit. Cholin. See Lib. III. de Jure Nat. & Gent. cap. 4. p. 289.
Of the houſe of Iſrael, or of the ſtrangers in Iſrael.] They underſtand by ſtrangers in Iſrael, ſuch as they called Proſelytes of the Gate; who were not Circumciſed, but had renounced Idolatry, and joyned themſelves to the God of Iſrael. R. Levi ben Gerſom takes perfect Proſelytes to be here meant (whom they called Proſelytes of Righteouſneſs) yet not excluding the other.
That will offer his oblation for all his vows, and for all his free-will-offerings.] See VII. 16.
Which they will offer unto the LORD for a Burnt-offering.] If a Gentile brought a Peace-offering to the LORD, it was offered as a Burnt-offering; and no Meat-offering was permitted to be offered with it, as Maimonides obſerves. See Selden in the place before-named; and v. 25. of this Chapter. And Dr. Lightfoot gives a large account of it in his Temple Service, chap. 8. ſect. 4.
Ver. 19. Verſe 19 Ye ſhall offer at your own will.] So theſe words are commonly underſtood; that the Sacrifices, both of Jew and Gentile, ſhould be ſpontaneous, as well as without blemiſh: though they will bear another ſenſe, as I obſerved Chap. I. v. 3.
A male without blemiſh, of the beeves, and of the ſheep, and of the goats.] See Chap. I. v. 3, 10. All Burnt-offerings were to be Males; though Peace-offerings might be Females, III. 1, 6. and ſo might Sin-offerings alſo, IV. 32. but all without blemiſh. For as God accepted only ſome kind of Creatures, (viz. Beeves, Sheep, and Goats, and no other of the Herd) ſo he would have a choice to be made out of them, of the very beſt; as had been often before directed.
Ver. 20. Verſe 20 But whatſoever hath a blemiſh, that ſhall ye not offer.] This general Rule is here repeated, becauſe he is going to ſpecifie what Creatures they ſhould account blemiſhed.
For it ſhall not be acceptable for you.] This ſeems to juſtifie the Expoſition which I ſaid might be given of that phraſe in the foregoing Verſe, at your own will; or for your acceptation. See upon I. 3.
Ver. 21. Verſe 21 And whoſoever offereth a Sacrifice of Peace-offerings unto the LORD.] Which were either to obtain bleſſings, or to give thanks for them when they were obtained.
To accompliſh his vow.] It was uſual to make ſuch Vows, for procuring from God what they deſired, when they undertook a Journey, or went to Sea, or were ſick, or in any danger, &c. An example of which we have in I Jonah 16. where we read the Mariners in a Storm offered a Sacrifice to the LORD, and made Vows: i. e. they vowed a Sacrifice to God, (for they could not Sacrifice on Ship-board) when he had brought them to a ſafe Port. And ſo Cicero ſpeaks of certain Mariners, who being toſſed in a Tempeſt, vowed, if they gained their Haven, Ei Deo, qui ibi eſſet, ſe vitulum immolaturos, They would offer a Calf to the God of that place. And Homer in like manner brings in the Mother of Telemachus, vowing perfect Hecatombs unto all the Gods, if ſhe might obtain her deſire, Odyſſ. XVII. v. 59.
Or a free-will-offering.] This alſo was a Peace-offering for obtaining Bleſſings: not when they were in diſtreſs, I ſuppoſe, but in general to procure God's favour to them and theirs.
In Beeves, or Sheep.] And likewiſe Goats: for all theſe were allowed in Peace-offerings, III. 1, 6, 12.
It ſhall be perfect, to be accepted.] That was accounted perfect, which wanted none of its parts, nor had any defect in any of them. The Heathen themſelves did not think any other would be accepted, and therefore made a careful choice of their Sacrifices; as appears by thoſe words of Virgil, Lib. IV. AEneid. v. 57. —Mactant lectas de more bidentes. Which he calls elſewhere eximij, ſingled out as moſt excellent. Lib. IV. Georg. v. 550.
Quatuor eximios praeſtanti corpore tauros.
And that they might be ſuch, there was probatio victimarum, a proof made of Sacrifices, as Pliny ſpeaks, Lib. VIII. cap. 45. where he ſaith ſuch as were lame, or had one leg ſhorter than the other, were rejected. Which probation was to be made by thoſe that brought the Sacrifices; but if they did not do their duty, the Prieſt upon examination refuſed to admit them to be offered.
There ſhall be no blemiſh therein.] This is an explication of what he means by perfect. Which Solon (who ſeems to have taken the Rites of Religion from Moſes) called foreign: in the explication of which word, Heſychius, after ſeveral other expreſſions, concludes with this foreign, which neither hath any part more or leſs than it ſhould have. Julius Pollux (who reports this of Solon) hath a great number of other words to expreſs the perfection required in Sacrifices, which were to be foreign, Lib. I. cap. 1. ſome of which are of the ſame ſignification, and ſerve only to ſhow how compleat their Sacrifices were to be.
Ver. 22. Verſe 22 Blind, or broken, &c.] In this and the following Verſes he mentions XII blemiſhes, which render any Beaſt unfit for Sacrifice. And the firſt is blind; under which the Hebrews comprehend that which the Latins call Cocles, a Beaſt that hath but one eye.
Or broken.] In the Bones of the Thighs, or the Legs.
Or maimed.] Moſt take it for that which the Latins call mutilum, that which lacketh any part. The LXX. took it more particularly for that which had its Tongue cut out. The Hebrew Doctors for that whoſe Eye-brows or Lips were ſlit, or cut off. Which is nearer to the Hebrew word charuts than the Vulgar, which tranſlates it only a Scar.
Or having a wen.] The Hebrews generally underſtand by the word jabbeleth, that which the Latins call Verruca, a Wart, or hard Knob riſing in the fleſh: which is better than the Vulgar, who tranſlates it papulas, which properly ſignifies Pimples, Puſhes, or Wheals. But I think our Tranſlation cannot be mended; a Wen being a more manifeſt deformity, and more common in Beaſts than the other.
Or Scurvy.] This is that which the Greeks call foreign, the Itch.
Or ſcabbed.] Some take this word to ſignifie the ſame with the Latin impetigo, i. e. a Ring-worm or Tetter, which ſpreads in the skin with a dry Scab: though others take it for that which they call Porrigo, for which I know no Engliſh word, unleſs it be the mangy. The Hebrews take it for the Porrigo AEgyptiaca, as Bochart obſerves, a Scabby Diſeaſe of this kind frequent among the Egyptians.
Ye ſhall not offer theſe unto the LORD.] Not ſo much as preſent them to be offered in Sacrifice.
Nor make an offering by fire of them upon the Altar unto the LORD.] Much leſs burn them upon the Altar, for the LORD will not accept ſuch Sacrifices.
Ver. 23. Verſe 23 Either a Bullock or a Lamb that hath any thing ſuperfluous.] This word we had before (which we tranſlate ſuperfluous) XXI. 18. but it properly ſignifies the inequality and diſproportion that there is between thoſe parts that are pairs, as the Eyes or Legs; and particularly when one of them exceeds its juſt bigneſs: ex. gr. when one Leg is longer than it ſhould be.
Or lacking in his parts.] This word ſignifies juſt the quite contrary to the other; when one part is leſs and more contracted than it ſhould be: one Leg ſuppoſed ſhorter than ordinary. So all the Hebrews underſtand theſe words; particularly Onkelos and Jonathan.
That mayeſt thou offer for a free-will-offering.] A very learned Perſon of our own takes theſe words for an Exception to the foregoing general Rule; that ſuch defects as theſe two ſhould not hinder the acceptation of a Beaſt for a Free-will-offering, though not for a Vow. And it muſt be acknowledged that is the moſt plain and ſimple ſenſe. But the Jews, as he obſerves, particularly R. Solomon Jarchi, expound them otherwiſe; and will not have this Offering to ſignifie the Sacrifice of ſuch things at the Altar, but the giving them to the Prieſt for ſome Sacred uſe; to be ſold, for inſtance, for the reparation of the Temple, for which they were accepted. See Dr. Owtram, Lib. I. de Sacrificiis, cap. 9. n. 2.
But for a vow, it ſhall not be accepted.] Free-will-offerings were much different from Vows, there being no obligation upon them to offer the former, as there was to offer the latter: and a leſs perfect Creature would be accepted in the one caſe, though not in the other.
Ver. 24. Verſe 24 Ye ſhall not offer unto the LORD that which is bruiſed, or cruſhed, or broken, or cut.] That is, as the Hebrews interpret it (and ſo do the LXX. and the Vulgar) any Beaſt whoſe Teſticles were compreſſed or bruiſed, &c. For theſe four ways they uſed to caſtrate a Lamb (for inſtance) and make it a Wether: and ſo they did with Kids and Calves, as Bochart obſerves out of Ariſtotle and others, in his Hierozoicon, P. I. Lib. II. cap. 46.
Neither ſhall you make any offering thereof in your land.] The word Offering is not in the Hebrew: and this paſſage may be thus exactly tranſlated, Neither in your Land ſhall ye make, or do. So the LXX. the ſenſe of which the Vulgar expreſſes by adding the word this, i.e. the fore-named caſtration, either by compreſſion, or contuſion, or any other way. For Joſephus ſaith it was unlawful among them to geld any Creature; which was prohibited, to keep them from doing ſo with Men, which they were taught to be abominable. And theſe words ſuggeſted as much, being thus tranſlated, Neither in your Land ſhall it be done. See Selden, Lib. VII. de Jure Nat. & Gent. cap. 3. p. 799.
Ver. 25. Verſe 25 Neither from a ſtrangers hand.] By bennechar, the Son of a Stranger (as it is in the Hebrew) who is called (XXV. 47.) a Stranger and Sojourner, (viz. a Gentile that dwelt among them) is meant a pious Man of another Nation, who had renounced Idolatry, and abſtained from Blood, and obſerved the reſt of the Precepts of the Sons of Noah (as they called them) but was not Circumciſed, which would have obliged him to the whole Law of Moſes. Such Perſons, being worſhippers of the true God, were permitted to bring him Sacrifices to be offered at his Altar. See Grotius, Lib. I. de Jure Belli & Pacis, cap. 1. ſect. 16. n. 3.
Shall ye offer the bread of your God from any of theſe.] Some have taken theſe words, as if no Sacrifice was to be accepted from a Gentile, but only Money, with which the Prieſt might buy a Sacrifice, and offer it for him. But this is confuted by v. 18. and here it is evident, he only forbids them to accept of any Sacrifice which had the fore-named blemiſhes, from a Gentile. Who might think them not unacceptable, becauſe the Gentiles made no ſcruple to offer ſuch as theſe laſt mentioned to their Gods; though their Laws, in ſome places, were againſt it. The Bread of your God: The Hebrews underſtand hereby to be meant only Burntofferings; which Maimonides ſaith were accepted from a Gentile, even Burnt-offerings of Birds, though he had not yet renounced Idolatry. But they were not to accept from him Peace-offerings or Meat-offerings, or Sacrifices for Sins of Ignorance (IV. 27.) or Treſpaſsofferings (mentioned VI. 6.) nor was a Burnt-offering to be accepted, unleſs it was a Free-will-offering, or a Vow, as Mr Selden obſerves, Lib. III. de Jure Nat. & Gent. cap. 4. But if he brought ſuch ſpontaneous Offerings as had the fore mentioned blemiſhes, the Prieſt was to reject them (though the Gentiles might ſay they were ſuch as had been accepted by his Gods) or elſe he was to be ſcourged. So this Law is briefly expounded by the Jews when they reckon it up among their Precepts, that a defective Sacrifice is not to be accepted, no not from the hand of a Gentile, as he obſerves in the ſame Book, cap. 7. where he diſcourſes at large on this Subject. And it need not ſeem ſtrange a Gentile ſhould bring any ſuch Sacrifices (when their Laws, as I obſerved before, required a choice to be made) for they were not ſo curious in their choice, as the Hebrews; but as Tertullian upbraids them ſacrificed enecta, tabidoſa, & ſcabioſa, Apolog. adv. Gentes, cap. 13. Which the better ſort of People perhaps did not offer, but the Vulgar did: and the Prieſts made no ſcruple to accept them.
Becauſe their corruption is in them, and blemiſhes be in them.] The word corruption ſeems particularly to relate unto the fore-mentioned caſtration: for it ſignifies ſuch a Corruption as is the deſtruction of any Member. See Bochart in his Hierozoicon, p. 2. Lib. V. cap. 4. And blemiſhes relate to other defects, which made them unacceptable. Twelve of which, as I ſaid, are here mentioned; but the Hebrews look upon them only as Examples and Specimens of other the like defects; which they make in all to be fifty, as I obſerved before out of Selden, Lib. II. de Succeſſ. ad Pontific. cap. 5. Maimonides gives us a Catalogue of them in his Treatiſe of Entrance into the Sanctuary, cap. 7. but to make up that full number, he is conſtrained to add theſe three, which have no example among the XII. here mentioned, viz. ſuch as tremble by age, or by ſome diſeaſe, or are torn by wild Beaſts.
Ver. 26. Verſe 26 And the LORD ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying.] Theſe Laws following being of the ſame nature, were in all likelyhood delivered at the ſame time with the foregoing.
Ver. 27. Verſe 27 And when a Bullock, or Sheep, or Goat is brought forth.] Theſe were the only Beaſts that were allowed to be ſacrificed, v. 19.
Then it ſhall be ſeven days under the dam, and from the eighth day and thenceforth, it ſhall be accepted for an offering, &c.] They were not fit for Food when they were not ſeven days old, and therefore not for Sacrifice; which was the Bread or Food of God, as it is called v. 25. But this hath been ſufficiently explained before XXII Exod. 30. I ſhall only add, that I have ſince obſerved that P. Cunaeus hath briefly expreſſed the ſenſe of Maimonides, which I there repreſented, (Lib. III. de Republ. Hebraeor. cap. 5.) and that the Gentiles were ſo far from offering Creatures ſo young, that they thought them fitteſt for Sacrifice, when they were two years old; as appears from the words of Virgil before-mentioned, — Mactant lactas de more bidentes. where Servius ſaith that bidentes were ſo called, becauſe they were biennes, two years of age; for it was not lawful to Sacrifice thoſe that were younger, nor thoſe that were older.
Ver. 28. Verſe 28 And whether it be Cow, or Ewe, ye ſhall not kill it, and her young both in one day.] Leſt the young one, ſaith Maimonides, ſhould happen to be killed before the Dam, which would have given the greateſt grief to her, More Nevoch. P. III. cap. 48. Any thing that lookt like Cruelty therefore, was by this Law baniſhed from among them; for they might not ſo much as kill both the Young and the Dam on the ſame day, to offer them to God himſelf; of which he is here ſpeaking.
Ver. 29. Verſe 29 And when ye will offer a Sacrifice of Thankſgiving unto the LORD.] He had mentioned Freewill-offerings and Vows before v. 21. and now briefly touches upon the third ſort of Peace-offerings. See VII. 15, 16.
Offer it at your own will.] Male or Female; of the Herd, or of the Flock, III. 1, 7, 12. Or the meaning may be (as hath been often ſaid) He ſhall offer it in ſuch a manner, as that it be accepted. See I. 3.
Ver. 30. Verſe 30 On the ſame day it ſhall be eaten, &c.] See VII. 15.
Ver. 31. Verſe 31 Therefore ſhall ye keep my Commandments, and do them, &c.] Becauſe he had ſaid before v. 30. and now repeats it again in the concluſion of this Verſe, I am the LORD. To whom they owed obedience; eſpecially when he required they ſhould reverently uſe all holy things.
Ver. 32. Verſe 32 Neither ſhall ye profane my holy Name.] This may refer either to what goes before, (that they ſhould not make him and his Service contemptible, by offering ſuch things as were defective, &c.) or, be taken as a Precept by it ſelf. And then the Name of God was profaned three ways, (as Mr. Selden obſerves) beſides the moſt grievous of all, by Blaſphemy. Either when a Man, for fear of death, violated the Divine Law; or when he contemptuouſly and wantonly broke any Precept; or when a Man of great note, for Knowledge and Piety gave a Scandal to others by doing ſuch things, as were not perhaps directly againſt the Law, yet made him loſe all his Authority. See Lib. II. de Jure Nat. & Gent. juxta Diſc. Hebr. cap. 10.
But I will be hallowed among the Children of Iſrael.] Either by the obſervation of his Laws, or by puniſhing thoſe who tranſgreſſed them: For ſo this phraſe is uſed, X. 3.
I am the LORD which hallow you.] Have ſeparated you to my ſelf, as a ſpecial People, from all others, by Laws different from theirs, and more excellent.
Ver. 33. Verſe 33 That brought you out of the Land of Egypt, to be your God.] And moreover, diſtinguiſhed you from all others, by ſingular Benefits: particularly by delivering you from the moſt grievous Slavery, that I might make you a happy People.
I am the LORD.] When you remember my benefits, remember I am your Soveraign, who expect your Obedience.