Commentary on Leviticus, Book · Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
Ver. 1. Verſe 1 AND the LORD ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying.] Having directed him about whole Burnt-offerings, and Meat-offerings (which conſtantly attended ſome of them) and Peace-offerings, which ſuppoſed Men to be in a ſtate of favour with God; he now proceeds to give order about the Expiation of their Sins, when they had offended him, by doing contrary to his Commands; which he continues to the 14th Verſe of the Vth Chapter. And this Law about Sin-offerings, ſeems to have been delivered to Moſes at a different time from the former; being about a different matter; but by a Voice ſpeaking to him out of the Tabernacle, as before, ch. I. 1.
Ver. 2. Verſe 2 Speak unto the Children of Iſrael, ſaying, If a ſoul ſhall ſin through ignorance, &c.] There are three Conditions expreſſed in this Verſe, of the Sin for which the following Sacrifice was admitted. First, It was to be committed ignorantly; not wittingly and preſumptuouſly. Secondly, It was for Sin againſt a negative Precept (as the Jews call them) i.e. ſuch a Commandment as forbad ſomething to be done. So it is ſaid here expreſly [Concerning things which ought not to be done]. As for the omiſſion of ſuch things as were commanded to be done, they might be performed ſome other time when Men had better bethought themſelves; which was much more acceptable to God, than offering Sacrifice for the omiſſion. And thirdly, It was for Facts committed, not for Words or Thoughts; ſo the laſt words are, and ſhall do againſt any of them. As for the ſins which Men might imprudently commit in word and in thought, they were ſo many, that the whole Flocks and Herds would not have ſufficed for their Expiation, nor the Altar contained all ſuch Sacrifices. The Jews add a fourth Condition, That the Sacrifice here appointed was for ſuch Facts, as if they had been committed wittingly, a Cereth, i. e. cutting off, was threatned to them by the Law: which they gather from XV Numb. 30. But that phraſe with an high hand ſeems not to ſignifie any ſort of ſin, but a certain manner of ſinning: as when a Man deſpiſed God's Commandments, and brought Contempt upon the Law by his ſins, as a very learned Friend of mine, now with God, hath obſerved. And therefore it is probable all ſins committed ignorantly were expiated by the following Sacrifices, ſave only thoſe which are appointed to be expiated by other Sacrifices, or after another manner. See Dr. Owtram de Sacrificiis, L. I. cap. 12. n. 2, 3, 4.
Ver. 3. Verſe 3 If the Priest that is anointed do ſin.] And firſt he preſcribes the Sacrifice, which he who was to make the great Expiation for all the People, ſhould offer for himſelf, viz. the High-Prieſt: who only, of all the Prieſts, was conſtantly anointed at the entrance of his Office. And if after he was put out of his Office, he committed any ſuch ſin as is here mentioned, he was to make this Offering for his Expiation, as much as if he had continued in it. So Mr. Selden obſerves out of the Miſna, L. II. de Synedr. cap. 15. n. 14.
According to the ſin of the people.] In the manner before-mentioned. Or, as R. Solomon interprets it, if he hide any thing from the People, whereby they err. For ſo the words run in the Hebrew, if he ſin to the guilt of the people, (or, to the making them guilty) either by miſinforming them, or drawing them into Error by his Example; ſo that they take a thing to be clean, which is indeed unclean, or the like.
Then let him bring for his ſin which he hath ſinned, a young bullock without blemiſh.] It is obſerved by ſome, that in great Offences the Sacrifices were ſmall; leſt they ſhould imagine their Pardon was procured by their great expence. For here the word is Par ben bachur, a young Bullock, that was but a little bigger than a Calf. And ſo this Sacrifice is called (Par) in the following Verſes. Whereas that of the Peace-offering is called v. 10. Shor, an Ox, (though we tranſlate it alſo, Bullock) one that was grown to its full bigneſs, and conſequently of greater value.
For a ſin-offering.] How Chattah, which we tranſlate Sin-offering, differs from aſcham, which we tranſlate Treſpaſs-offering, I ſhall examine afterward, when Moſes comes to ſpeak of the latter. And now only obſerve, that Chattah is the name both for Sin, and for the Sin-offering; as the word piaculum was among the Heathen; which ſignified both a great Crime, and the Expiatory Sacrifice for it. By which thoſe words in the New Teſtament may be explained, Christ was made ſin for us; that is, a Sacrifice to expiate our ſins. And ſo the word foreign, ſin, certainly ſignifies, VIII Rom. 3.
Ver. 4. Verſe 4 And he ſhall bring the bullock unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.] This, as I take it, was to be done by himſelf; who was to preſent the Sacrifice to the Divine Majeſty, and deſire it might be accepted for the purpoſe to which it was to be offered.
And ſhall lay his hand upon the bullocks head.] As every one that brought other Offerings were bound to do, (See ch. I. 4. III. 2, &c.) but here for another purpoſe; viz. to confeſs their ſins unto the LORD, and beſeech him to forgive them. See V. 5. There is a good Gloſs upon this, in a very bad Book called Nitzachon, not long ago publiſhed by the Learned Wagenſeil: where that Author ſaith, (p. 11.) When a Man ſacrificed a Beast he was to think in his mind, I am more a Beast than this here preſent. For I have ſinned, and for the ſins I have committed, I offer this: but it were more just that he who hath ſinned ſhould ſuffer death, than this Beast (which hath not offended) Therefore thus a Man, by the help of this Sacrifice, began to repent.
And kill the bullock before the LORD.] This ſeems to have been done by him that laid his hand on the head of the Bullock, that is, by the High-Prieſt himſelf. For the greateſt Men, in old time, did not think ſuch work below them; but rather eſteemed every thing that ſerved to the Worſhip of God, to be noble and honourable. So Homer repreſents King Agamemnon as killing the Lambs himſelf; by the Blood of which he was to Seal the Treaty he made with the Trojans, Iliad. 3. yet in this caſe it is likely the High-Prieſt himſelf did not kill the Sacrifice, but ſome of the other Prieſts that then miniſtred. For he that did this, ſeems to be diſtinguiſhed, by the next words (v. 5.) from the Priest that is anointed; i. e. the High-Prieſt. Nor was this Sacrifice killed in the ordinary place where Sin-offerings were killed, (See 24.) being an extraordinary ſort of Offering, as that which follows alſo was.
Ver. 5. Verſe 5 And the Priest that is anointed.] Whoſoever killed the Sacrifice, the High-Prieſt himſelf, for whom it was offered, did what follows.
Shall take of the bullocks blood.] In a Baſin.
And bring it to the Tabernacle of the Congregation.] Into the very Sanctuary; where, as it follows, he was to dip his finger in the Blood, and ſprinkle it ſeven times before the LORD.
Ver. 6. Verſe 6 And the Priest ſhall dip his finger in the blood.] Or rather, dip it into the blood.
And ſprinkle of the blood ſeven times before the LORD.] This was peculiar to his Sacrifice for Sin, and done in no other but that for the whole Congregation. To ſignifie perhaps, that their Offences were more heinous, and could not be ſo eaſily expiated, as thoſe of other Men. The number ſeven, every one knows, was of great account, and thought moſt powerful in Religious Actions, even among the Heathen. For as Eliſha bad Naaman go and waſh ſeven times in Jordan, to cure him of his Leproſy; ſo Apuleius in the beginning of the XIth Book of his Metamorphoſis, ſpeaks of dipping the head ſeven times in the Sea for Purification, and gives the reaſon for it; Quod eum numerum praecipuè religioni aptiſſimum divinus ille Pythagoras prodidit; becauſe the Divine Pythagoras (as he calls him) taught this number to be above all other most proper in Religion. Which in all probability, Pythagoras learnt from the truly Divine Moſes: to whom God revealed the Creation of the World in ſix days, and his Conſecrating the ſeventh day, on which he reſted; which made the number ſeven ſo much uſed in Sacred Matters. For not only in this Sacrifice, but in making the Water of Separation by burning a red Heifer, this Rite was uſed, (XIX Numb. 4.) and in purging a Leper, (XIV Lev. 7.) in dedicating the Altar (XXIX Exod. 37.) when the Oil was ſprinkled on it ſeven times, (VIII Lev. 11.) and at the Conſecration of the Prieſts, (XXIX Exod. 35.) and, to ſay no more, as every ſeventh day of the Week was holy, ſo every ſeventh year the Land reſted; and after Seven times ſeven there was a Jubilee, XXV Levit. They that would ſee more of this number, and of its Sacramenta, as St. Hierom ſpeaks, may read him upon V Amos 3. and Druſius on this place, and on VI Joſh. 4. And Wolfius upon Nehemiah VIII.
Before the vail of the Sanctuary.] Which parted the holy place from the moſt holy. For that is peculiarly called by the name of Parocheth, which is the word here uſed (XXVI Exod. 31, 33, 35. XVI Lev. 2, &c.) as the other Vail, which was before the Door of the Tabernacle, is conſtantly called Maſach, XXVI Exod. 36, 37.
Ver. 7. Verſe 7 And the Prieſt ſhall put ſome of the Blood upon the horns of the Altar of ſweet incenſe, &c.] This alſo was peculiar to his Sacrifice; and to that for the whole Congregation, v. 17.
And ſhall pour out all the blood of the bullock.] That is, all the reſt of the Blood which remained after the ſprinkling before the Mercy-ſeat; and the tipping of the Horns of the Altar with it.
At the bottom of the Altar of the burnt-offering.] Where, after the building of the Temple, there were two holes; one on the Weſt-ſide of the Altar, the other on the South, (as the Jews tell us in Middoth, cap. 3. ſect. 2.) by which it was conveyed into a Canal under Ground, through which it ran into the Brook Kidron. And there was only this difference (they ſay) about theſe two holes, that the Blood of the Sin-offering (any part of which was carried into the moſt holy place) was poured out only into that on the Weſt-ſide of the Foundation of the Altar. And, if we may believe the Jews, the Gardiners bought this Blood of thoſe that were the Treaſurers of the Temple, to inrich their Ground with it, as Conſtantine l'Empereur there obſerves. And while they were in the Wilderneſs, and all the time they had only a moveable Tabernacle, it is moſt likely there were Receptacles made under Ground, with Conveyances to ſome diſtant place, where it ſank into the Earth, or was covered with Duſt, as other Blood is commanded to be, XVII. 13. For Maimonides thinks the pouring out the Blood (ſo that it might not remain in one place) which is conſtantly and ſtrictly required by the Law, was in oppoſition to an idolatrous Cuſtom of the old Zabij; who made a collection of the Blood in a Veſſel, or in a little Pit, about which they ſat, and ate the Fleſh, imagining their Gods feaſted upon the Blood; as I noted before out of Maimonides, More Nevoch. P. III. cap. 46.
Which is at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation.] For there was the place of it, as hath been often obſerved XL Exod. 6.
Ver. 8. Verſe 8 And he ſhall take off from it all the fat of the bullock for the ſin-offering, &c.] All that follows in this and the two next Verſes, (v. 9, 10.) is the ſame that was ordered to be done about Peace-offerings, as appears from v. 10. See therefore the foregoing Chapter, v. 3, 4, 5.
Ver. 11. Verſe 11 And the skin of the bullock, and all his fleſh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, &c.] This Sacrifice was ſo laborious, to work in them a greater deteſtation of ſin; which was aggravated by the quality of the Perſon that committed it. And Nachmanides hath an obſervation which (in ſome parts of it, at leaſt) is very remarkable; That all a Man doth, being performed in Words, in Works, or Thoughts, God commanded them when they brought an Offering for Sin, that they ſhould lay their hand on it, which had reſpect to the Works they had done; and make Confeſſion over it, which had reſpect to their Words; and burn the Inwards and Kidneys, which are the Organs of Thoughts and Deſires; the Legs alſo, had a reſpect to a Man's hands and feet, by which he doth all his work; and the Blood that was ſprinkled on the Altar ſignified his own Blood. So that while a Man did all theſe things, he was put in mind how he had ſinned against God, both in Soul and Body, and deſerved to have his Blood ſhed and his Body burnt; unleſs the Mercy of the Creator had accepted a Price of Redemption for him, viz. a Sacrifice; whoſe Blood was for his Blood, and its Life for his Life; and the principal Members of the Sacrifice, for the Members of his Body. By which it appears that the beſt ſort of Jews had a ſenſe, that the Sacrifices for Sin were offered to God in their ſtead, as a Ranſom for them. And ſo we Chriſtians are to underſtand the Sacrifice which Chriſt made of himſelf, who gave himſelf a Ranſom for us all, as the Apoſtle ſpeaks I Tim. 2. 6. and our LORD ſaith the ſame XX Matth. 28. X Mark 45. Such Sacrifices the Heathens themſelves had, which they called Luſtralia, from the word luſtrare, which ſignifies to expiate among the Romans; and that by paying a price. For the ancient Poet Ennius (as our excellent Mr. Thorndike hath obſerved) tranſlating into Latin a Greek Tragedy called foreign (being taken out of Homer, where he ſpeaks of Priamus ranſoming of Hector's Corps from Achilles) intituled it Hectoris luſtra; which ſhows this is the Latin of foreign, ranſom, or redemption: and that foreign ſignifies in the New Teſtament to deliver by paying a ranſom. See his Epilogue, Book II. Chapt. 27.
Ver. 12. Verſe 12 Even the whole bullock ſhall he carry forth without the Camp.] It was not diſſected, as the Peace-offerings were, becauſe no Body was to partake of any part of it; being a Sacrifice for the Prieſts own ſin. And therefore it was to be carried (though not by himſelf, but ſome other Perſon) to be burnt without the Camp, to expreſs the abominableſs of the Sin. This Rite, and the carrying the Blood within the Tabernacle, to be ſprinkled before the LORD, were uſed only in theſe two Caſes; of the Sin of the High-Prieſt, and of all the People. For of other Sin-offerings the Prieſts might eat, (VI. 26.) but of this, being for himſelf, he was not to taſte at all, becauſe he was in a ſtate of Guilt.
Into a clean place, where the aſhes are poured out.] On the Eaſt-part of the Tabernacle there was a place for the Aſhes to be thrown into, when they were taken from the Altar; which afterward were carried into a clean place, without the Camp. And ſo they were carried out, after the Temple was built at Jeruſalem, at the Eaſt-gate of the City, into a Valley which lay between Jeruſalem and Mount Olivet.
And burn him on the wood with fire.] Not upon an Altar, but in a fire made with Wood upon the Ground, to ſhow the odiouſneſs of the ſin, as Maimonides thinks. For as the whole Burnt-ſacrifices were burnt on the Altar, becauſe they were an Offering of ſweet ſmelling ſavour unto God; ſo this was burnt without the Camp upon the Ground, to ſhow that the odour of it was ungrateful and abominable; More Nevochim, P. III. cap. 46. where he alſo obſerves, that the burning of the Beaſt intirely, being the deſtruction of it, ſo that nothing of it remained, it ſignified in like manner the utter deletion of Sin, ſo that it ſhould be remembred no more. And the Bullock being burnt without the Camp, I take it to denote, that the People ſhould not ſuffer for the ſin of the Prieſt, which was aboliſhed together with his Sacrifice.
The ſame Maimonides hath another obſervation upon the Title Zebachim, that there were three places conſtituted for the burning of holy things. The firſt was in the Sanctuary, as every one knows; the ſecond was in the Mount of the Houſe, (as they called the place round about the Court of the Sanctuary) where if any blemiſh hapned to a Bullock or a Goat, they were brought out of the Sanctuary, and burnt in a place called Bira: and the third was in this place of the Aſhes, without the City.
Where the aſhes are poured out, there ſhall he be burnt.] This is repeated, that none might preſume to take the liberty to burn the Bullock in any other place.
Ver. 13. Verſe 13 And if the whole Congregation of Iſrael ſin through ignorance.] The Jews generally underſtood by the whole Congregation, the great Sanhedrim, who repreſented the whole People of Iſrael. So Maimonides in his More Nevochim, P. III. cap. 41. and in his Treatiſe of Sacrifices; and R. Levi of Barcelona, Praecept. CXVIII. For they ſometimes erred in Judgment; and thereby miſleading the People, they were bound when they found their Error to offer this Sacrifice. Yet the Talmudiſts have raiſed many Diſputes upon this Point, and made various Caſes: in ſome of which the Houſe of Judgment was bound to offer the Sacrifice here appointed, and not they who followed their Sentence: and others there were, in which they who followed their Sentence were bound, and not the Judges themſelves. But if Moſes his words be well conſidered, it will appear, that he ſpeaks of a Sin committed by all the People, in doing ſomething which God had forbidden; by making wrong Conſtructions of the Law, or by common falſe Opinions, or popular Cuſtoms. For the whole Congregation is here plainly diſtinguiſhed from the Elders of the People, (v. 15.) which is certainly the name for their Judges and Governours. It was Mr. Selden's intention to have treated largely of the Senſe and Notion of this Law, as appears by what he ſaith of it, L. II. de Synedriis, cap. 14. n. 4. where he refers his Reader to the third Book on that Subject, for an account of this place. In the beginning of which (cap. 1. n. 1.) he ſignifies his intention to explain what the Office of the Sanhedrim was, in offering Expiatory Sacrifices for the whole Congregation. Which he repeats again cap. 10. n. 1. with this addition, that they made this Sacrifice in the name of all the People, when they offended as a Community. But he did not live to purſue his intentions, being diverted by long Digreſſions about other Matters: yet he ſhows ſufficiently his Opinion was, that this Sacrifice was not offered for the Sanhedrim, but by them for the People.
And the thing be hid from the eyes of the Aſſembly.] They are not ſenſible of their miſtake for the preſent; but afterward diſcover it, either by themſelves or by their Rulers.
And they have done ſomewhat against any of the Commandments of the LORD, concerning things which ought not be done.] Have offended againſt ſome of the negative Precepts (as the Jews ſpeak) which forbid ſuch things to be done. See v. 2.
And are guilty] Are ſenſible of their guilt.
Ver. 14. Verſe 14 When the ſin which they have ſinned against it, is known.] When they have diſcovered what Precept they have violated.
Then ſhall the Congregation offer a young bullock for the ſin.] Without blemiſh, as was required for the Sin of the High-Prieſt, v. 3.
And bring him before the Tabernacle of the Congregation.] i. e. Cauſe the Bullock to be brought thither, by ſome of his People, in the name of all the reſt.
Ver. 15. Verſe 15 And the Elders of the Congregation ſhall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock, &c.] They were to do this, as Repreſentatives of the People. See v. 13. and the end of laying on their hands, v. 4.
And the bullock ſhall be killed before the LORD.] Either by ſome of them, or ſome of the People whom they appointed. See v. 4.
Ver. 16. Verſe 16 And the Priest that is anointed.] That is, the High-Prieſt: See v. 5. All the reſt that follows to v. 22. is exactly the ſame that is preſcribed in the foregoing Offering, for the High-Prieſt himſelf. Only R. Solomon Jarchi hath a nice obſervation on the next Verſe, that it is not ſaid in this caſe (as it is in the former) he ſhall ſprinkle of the Blood ſeven times before the vail of the Sanctuary, but only before the vail; without the addition of hakkodeſh, of the Sanctuary, as it is v. 6. Becauſe, ſaith he, if the High-Prieſt only ſin, the Holineſs doth not depart: but if all the Congregation ſin, then it doth depart. As if a Province rebel againſt a Prince, his Family ſtands; but if there be a general defection, he muſt fall. He hath the like obſervation upon v. 22, 23. but it ſeems too ſubtil: For in the 18th Verſe Moſes only ſaith, he ſhall put ſome of the Blood upon the horns of the Altar, without adding, of ſweet incenſe, (as before v. 7.) and yet it is manifeſt he means the ſame Altar; and what was done in this Sacrifice was as acceptable as what was done in the other.
Ver. 22. Verſe 22 When a Ruler hath ſinned, and done ſomewhat through ignorance against, &c.] The word Naſi, which we tranſlate Ruler, ſignifies the Head of a Tribe, in I Numb. 4.16. VII. 2. But the Jews commonly underſtand it peculiarly of the Head or Prince of the great Sanhedrim; who, when they were under the Government of Kings, was the King himſelf. Thus the Miſna gathers from theſe words in the Text [when he ſinneth against any of the Commandments of the LORD his God] which ſignifie him, ſay the Doctors, that hath no Superior but the LORD. And ſo the Gemariſts underſtand it alſo, as Mr. Selden ſhows L. II. de Synedriis, cap. 16. p. 666. But I think it is moſt reaſonable to extend this to all great Officers and Judges, who had a peculiar relation to God; and therefore were called by his Name.
Concerning things which ſhould not be done.] See v. 2.
And is guilty.] Acknowledges that he hath offended God by the Sin which he hath committed.
Ver. 23. Verſe 23 Or if his ſin wherein he hath ſinned, come to his knowledge.] If we retain this Tranſlation, (and do not render the firſt word and, but or) then the foregoing words in the latter end of v. 22. veaſhem, muſt be tranſlated (not is guilty, but) and acknowledges his guilt. Which ſeems to be the true ſenſe; for when Men ſin they are guilty, though the ſin was committed ignorantly; but they do not acknowledge their guilt till they ſee it; as Moſes here ſuppoſes they might, when they conſidered better, or ſome Body informed them aright. So theſe words ſignifie, or his ſin is made known unto him. Thus L'Empereur very judiciouſly tranſlates this whole paſſage, And he acknowledges himſelf guilty, or his ſin be ſhown to him. Otherwiſe there is no room for this disjunctive Particle. See his Annot. upon Bava kama, cap. 7. ſect. 1. and cap. 9. ſect. 4, 5. And thus we our ſelves tranſlate the firſt part of this disjunction (in the latter end of the foregoing Verſe) V Hoſea 15. acknowledge their offences.
He ſhall bring his offering, a Kid of the Goats.] His Sacrifice was of leſs value than the two former. From which Mr. Selden concludes, that the High-Prieſt was not always the Head of the Sanhedrim, L. II. de Synedr. cap. 16. p. 653. For their Sacrifices were very different, which argues a difference in their Perſons. And the Miſna ſays, if the High-Prieſt were put out of his Office, his Sacrifice was ſtill the ſame, viz. a Bullock without blemiſh: but it was not ſo with the Naſi or Ruler, who offered only the Sacrifice of a private Man, if he loſt his Office.
A male without blemiſh.] It was to be the beſt of this kind; though not equal to the Sacrifice for the High-Prieſt, and the whole Congregation. See v. 28.
Ver. 24. Verſe 24 And he ſhall lay his hand upon the head of the Goat.] Of this ſee v. 4.
And kill it in the place where they kill the burnt-offering before the LORD.] Where that was ſee Chap. I. ver. 11. Neither of the two fore-mentioned Offerings (for the High-Prieſt, or the whole Congregation) are ordered to be killed here; but only before the LORD, v. 14, 15. that is, in any part of the Court but that which was proper to the Burnt-offering, and the common Sin-offering, as it here follows.
It is a ſin-offering.] And therefore was to be killed where the Burnt-offering was: for ſo it is ordained VI. 25. that all Sin-offerings ſhould be there ſlain. Which doth not imply that the two former were not Sin-offerings; but that they were not of the common ſort; as appears by the carrying of their Blood into the Sanctuary, and burning their Fleſh without the Camp; which are not ordered either in this, or in the following Sacrifices.
Ver. 25. Verſe 25 And the Priest ſhall take of the blood of the ſin-offering with his finger.] By dipping his finger into it, v. 6, 17.
And put it upon the horns of the Altar of burnt-offering.] Whereas the Blood of the two former, was put upon the Horns of the golden Altar in the Sanctuary, v. 7, 18.
And ſhall pour out his blood at the bottom of the Altar of burnt-offering.] See v. 18.
Ver. 26. Verſe 26 And he ſhall burn all his fat upon the Altar, &c.] See chap. III. 9. It is not here ſaid what ſhould be done with the Fleſh; which in the two fore-going Offerings is ordered to be burnt without the Camp, (v. 12, 21.) But in chap. VI. 26, 29. and XVIII Numb. 9, 10. the Law of the Sin-offerings is ſet down to be this, that the Prieſt and his Sons ſhould eat it, in the Sanctuary, and no where elſe; provided alſo that they were free from uncleanneſs, XXII. 4.
And the Priest ſhall make an atonement for him, as concerning his ſin.] By this Sacrifice his Guilt was expiated; which muſt be underſtood to be the effect of the Sacrifice for the High-Prieſt; though it be not expreſſed, as it is in that for the whole Congregation, v. 20.
And it ſhall be forgiven him.] So that he ſhould not be liable to the Puniſhment of cutting off, as the Jews underſtand it; who fancy ſuch ſins to which that is threatned are here ſpoken of, See v. 1. Rather, he was reſtored to Communion with the People of God, from which he was ſeparated while he remained in a known Guilt.
Ver. 27. Verſe 27 And if any one of the common people ſin through ignorance.] Commit the ſame Offence that a Ruler or publick Officer doth.
And be guilty; or if his ſin which he hath committed come to his knowledge.] See how this ought to be tranſlated, v. 22, 23.
Ver. 28. Verſe 28 That he ſhall bring his offering, a Kid of the Goats, a female without blemiſh.] Being a common Perſon, leſs was required of him than of a Prince; who was to offer a Male, (v. 23.) which in all Creatures was of greater value than a Female, as Maimenides obſerves: who reckons up three and forty offences of this ſort, that might be committed imprudently (in his Treatiſe called Schegagoth) in one of which, viz. worſhipping an Idol ignorantly, the Sacrifice was the ſame for a private Man, as for the King, or the High-Prieſt, or the Prieſt anointed for War: But in all the other XLII. a female Goat or Lamb ſufficed for a private Man, cap. 1. ſect. 4. And this Sacrifice they call ſtated or fixed, becauſe no Man offered more or leſs, whether Rich or Poor, Man or Woman; except only thoſe who eat holy things, or entred into the Sanctuary; whoſe Sacrifices were higher or lower, as they ſpeak. And there were three things, if we may believe them, which though committed by Error, were expiated by no Sacrifice, viz. Blaſphemy, neglect of Circumciſion, and not keeping the Paſſover. So R. Levi of Barcelona, Praecept. 119. Which ſeems to be an unreaſonable Opinion, ſince Idolatry committed ignorantly, they ſay, was comprehended within this Law.
Ver. 29. Verſe 29 And he ſhall lay his hand upon the head of the ſin-offering, &c.] This Verſe and the following, with the beginning of v. 31. contain nothing but what was ordered about the foregoing Sacrifice, v. 24, 25, 26.
Ver. 31. Verſe 31 And the Priest ſhall burn it upon the Altar, for a ſweet ſavour unto the LORD.] This is a phraſe uſed concerning Burnt-offerings, I. 9, 13. and Peaceofferings, III. 5, 16. but it is not ſaid of any of the foregoing Sin-offerings, that the burning of them, or their Fat, was for a ſweet ſavour unto the LORD. The reaſon of which I am not able to give, unleſs it were to comfort the loweſt ſort of People with hope of God's Mercy, though their Offering was mean, in compariſon of thoſe offered by others. Abarbanel gives this reaſon for it, becauſe a Sin of Ignorance being a leſs Fault in a common Man, it was a ſign of great probity in him to bring a Sacrifice for the Expiation of it: But for the High-Prieſt, or Senate, or Ruler of the People to be ignorant of the Law, was ſuch a high Crime, that it was no commendation to them, to bring a Sacrifice for their Purgation.
Ver. 32. Verſe 32 And if he bring a Lamb for a ſin-offering, &c.] For which reaſon God was pleaſed to accept a Lamb, and that a Female, of thoſe who were not able to bring a young Kid.
Ver. 33. Verſe 33 And he ſhall lay his hand upon the head of the ſin-offering, and ſlay it, &c.] This and the next Verſe differ not from the foregoing, and therefore need no Explication.
Ver. 35. Verſe 35 And the Priest ſhall burn them upon the Altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD.] Or rather upon the Offerings, or after the Burnt-offering. See III. 5.
And the Priest ſhall make an atonement for his ſin, &c.] And if by the ſame Error he had committed ſeveral ſins, there was a diſtinct Atonement to be made for every one of them: So that if he had committed ignorantly the XLIII. Offences before-mentioned, though it were by one and the ſame Error, he was bound to offer as many expiatory Sacrifices, as Maimonides reſolves in the fore-named Treatiſe Schegagoth, cap. 4. This, and ſuch like things, made this Law a Yoke which they were not able to bear, as St. Peter ſpeaks XV Acts 10.