Commentary on Leviticus, Book · Chapter 1
A COMMENTARY UPON THE Third Book of MOSES, CALLED LEVITICUS.
BY The Right Reverend Father in GOD SYMON Lord Biſhop of ELY.
LONDON: Printed for Ri. Chiſwell at the Roſe and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard. MDCXCVIII.
A COMMENTARY UPON LEVITICUS.
THE Third Book of MOSES, CALLED LEVITICUS.
CHAP. I.
THE Greeks and Latins give it this Name of LEVITICUS, not becauſe it Treats of the Miniſtry of the Levites, properly ſo called, (of which the Book of NUMBERS gives a fuller account than this Book doth) but becauſe it contains the Laws about the Religion of the Jews, conſiſting principally in various Sacrifices; the charge of which was committed to Aaron the LEVITE, (as he is called IV Exod. 14.) and to his Sons; who alone had the Office of Prieſthood in the Tribe of Levi: Which the Apoſtle therefore calls a Levitical Prieſthood, VII Hebr. 11.
Verſe 1. Verſe 1 And the LORD called unto Moſes.] That is, bad him draw near, and not be afraid, becauſe of the Glory of that Light which was in the Tabernacle, (XL Exod. 35.) For this is a word of love, as the Hebrew Doctors ſpeak: who obſerve, that God is not ſaid to call the Prophets of the Gentiles; but we only read that God jikar met Balaam; not jikra called to him, as he did here to Moſes. Who, as Procopius Gazaeus hath well obſerved, upon this word, appointed no Service of God, in his Houſe which he had lately erected, without his order: whereas the Worſhip performed in the honour of Daemons, was without any Authority from him. Nay, there were Magical Operations in it, and Invocation of Daemons; and certain tacit Obligations which their Prieſts contracted with them. For which he produces Porphyry as a Witneſs.
And ſpake unto him but of the Tabernacle.] Hitherto he had ſpoken to him out of Heaven, or out of the Cloud; but now out of his own Houſe. Into which, it is not here ſaid he bad him come, (as he did afterwards when the Glory of the LORD dwelt only in the inner part of the Houſe, over the Ark) but he ſtood, it is likely, without the Door of the Tabernacle, till the Sacrifices were appointed (as it here follows) and the High Prieſt entred into it with the Blood of Expiation. I can find no time, in which this can ſo probably be ſuppoſed to have been done, as immediately after the Conſecration of the Tabernacle, as ſoon as the Glory of the LORD entred into it. And ſo I find Heſychius underſtood it, who obſerving this Book to begin with the word And, which is a Conjunction uſed to joyn what follows with that which goes before, thence concludes that the beginning of this Book is knit to the concluſion of the laſt; and conſequently what is here related was ſpoken to Moſes on the ſame day he had ſet up the Tabernacle, and the Glory of the LORD filled it. When Moſes might well think (as the Hieruſalem Targum explains it) that if Mount Sinai was ſo exalted, by the Divine Preſence there for a ſhort ſpace, that it was not ſafe for him to approach it, much leſs come up into it, till God commanded him; he had much more reaſon not to go into the Tabernacle, which was ſanctified to be God's dwelling place for ever, till God called to him by a Voice from his Preſence: nay, he durſt not ſo much as come near the Door, where I ſuppoſe he now ſtood, without a particular Direction from the Divine Majeſty.
Ver. 2. Verſe 2 Speak unto the Children of Iſrael, and ſay unto them.] The Tabernacle being erected, it was fit, in the next place, to appoint the Service that ſhould be performed in it: which conſiſted in ſuch Sacrifices as are here mentioned in the beginning of this Book. There could not be a more Natural order, in ſetting down the Laws delivered by Moſes, than this which is here obſerved.
If any man of you bring.] It is the Obſervation of Kimchi, that in the very beginning of the Laws about Sacrifices, God doth not require them to offer any, but only ſuppoſes they would; having been long accuſtomed to it, as all the World then was. To this he applys the words of Jeremiah, VII. 21. and takes it for an Indication, that otherwiſe God would not have given ſo many Laws concerning Sacrifices, but only in compliance with the uſage of the World; which could not then have been quite broken, without the hazard of a Revolt from him. And therefore they are directed to the right Object, the Eternal God; and limited to ſuch things, as were moſt agreeable to Humane Nature.
An offering unto the LORD.] The Hebrew word Korban, which we tranſlate an Offering, and the Greeks tranſlate a Gift, is larger than Zebach, which we tranſlate a Sacrifice. For as Abarbinel obſerves in his Preface to this Book; though every Sacrifice was an Offering, yet every Offering was not a Sacrifice. A Sacrifice being an Offering that was ſlain; but there were ſeveral Offerings of inanimate things (as thoſe mentioned in the beginning of the ſecond Chapter of this Book) which therefore were not properly Sacrifices; but were accepted of God as much as the Offering of Beaſts, when they had nothing better to give. And therefore the ſame Abarbinel will have the Name of Korban to be given to theſe Offerings, becauſe thereby Men approached to God. For it is derived from a word which ſignifies to draw near: from whence he thinks thoſe words in Deuteronomy IV. 7. What Nation is there that hath God ſo nigh unto them, &c.
Ye ſhall bring.] He ſpeaks in the Plural Number, ſay ſome of the Hebrew Doctors, (who have accurately conſidered theſe things) to ſhow that two Men might joyn together to offer one thing.
Your offering of the Cattle.] I do not know what ground Maimonides had to aſſert in his More Nevochim. Pars III. cap. 46. that the Heathen in thoſe days had brute Beaſts in great veneration, and would not kill them (for it is no Argument there was ſuch a Superſtition in Moſes his time, becauſe there were People in the days of Maimonides, as there are now, who were poſſeſſed with ſuch Opinions). But he thinks God intended to deſtroy this falſe Perſwaſion, by requiring the Jews to offer ſuch Beaſts as are here mentioned; that what the Heathen thought it a great ſin to kill, might be offered to God, and thereby Mens ſins be expiated. By this means, ſaith he, Mens evil Opinions, which are the Diſeaſes and Ulcers of the Mind, were cured; as Bodily Diſeaſes are by their contraries. Yet in the XXXII Chapter of that Book, he ſaith God ordered Sacrifices to be offered, that he might not wholly alter the Cuſtoms of Mankind, who built Temples and offered Sacrifices every where: taking care (it may be added) at the ſame time, that they ſhould be offered only to himſelf, at one certain place, and after ſuch a manner, as to preſerve his People from all Idolatrous Rites. Which if they had conſidered, who contemned this Book of LEVITICUS (as Procopius Gazaeus tells us ſome did) becauſe ittreated too much of Sacrifices, they would not have thought it unworthy of the Creator of the World, eſpecially if they had lookt further to the Wiſdom hidden under theſe things; which were Examples, Shadows, and Patterns of heavenly things, as the Apoſtle ſpeaks VIII Hebr. 4. IX. 13. And ſo was the Tabernacle it ſelf, a Figure, (as we there read v. 9.) for the time preſent, of a greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands.
Even of the herd and of the flock.] That is, Bullocks, Sheep, and Goats. For under the word tzon (which we tranſlate Flock) both Sheep and Goats are comprehended. And ſo Moſes expounds himſelf, v. 10. Theſe were the principal Sacrifices, and moſt acceptable to God, as Abarbinel obſerves in the fore-named place. For though Doves and Turtles were accepted when Men were not able to bring the other; yet in Publick Sacrifices theſe Birds were never allowed: but only the three ſorts of four-footed Beaſts before-mentioned. Which were therefore choſen (as he proceeds) becauſe theſe were the moſt-excellent of all-brute Greatures, on ſeveral accounts; and becauſe they were not hard to be found, but eaſily procured: and therefore no wild Beaſts were required to be offered, becauſe God would not impoſe upon his People (as his words are) ſo great a Burden, as to bring him that which could not be got without ſome difficulty. For which cauſe alſo young Pigeons and Turtles were only offered among Birds. He gives other Reaſons for this, which ſeem to me very far fetcht, and therefore I ſhall not mention them. But this I may further add, That as they were the moſt ready at hand, and in common uſe among Men at their Tables, (which he ſhould have noted as the plaineſt Reaſon of all) ſo they had been in moſt ancient uſe among Religious People in their Sacrifices. See XV Gen. 9. And it is very likely they were reſtrained peculiarly to theſe, that they might not follow the Cuſtoms of the Gentiles; as they would have done, had they not been abridged in their liberty. Now though we find in Homer mention made of Hecatombs (which were a Sacrifice of an hundred Oxen) and of perfect Lambs and Goats, whereby Achilles hoped Apollo might be appeaſed, and moved to ceaſe the Plague he had ſent upon the Greeks; yet there was no more ancient Sacrifice among the Heathen, if we may believe themſelves, then that of Swine. Which made that Learned Roman Varro derive the word foreign (which is the Greek word for that Creature) from foreign, i. e. from a Sacrifice, becauſe it was moſt anciently offered to their Gods; there being no more delicious Food at their own Tables then Swines Fleſh. See Petrus Caſtellanus de Eſu Carnium, Lib. II. cap. 1. And afterwards they alſo ſacrificed not only Harts to Diana, but Horſes to the Sun, Wolves to Mars, nay, Dogs to Hecate; whereby they deſtroyed the very Nature of Sacrifices, or at leaſt of Sacrifical Feaſts; in which People had communion with the Gods whom they worſhipped, by partaking at their Table. For who could endure to eat of ſuch Meat as Horſe-fleſh, and the Fleſh of Wolves, nay Aſſes, which were offered to Priapus?
Ver. 3. Verſe 3 If his offering be a Burnt-ſacrifice.] Having preſcribed what ſort of Creatures ſhould be offered, he firſt directs them about their Holocauſts, as the Greeks call them, which were wholly burnt upon the Altar; and were the moſt ancient Sacrifices that had been in the World. They are often mentioned by the Greeks, particularly by Xenophon in his Cyropaedia, Lib. VIII. where he ſaith foreign, &c. they ſacrificed whole Burnt-offerings of Oxen to Jupiter, and afterwards of Horſes to the Sun. See Bochart. L. II. Hierozoic. cap. 33. P. I. Sometimes indeed the Heathen burnt only a part, and reſerved the reſt to feaſt upon, as he there obſerves: But among the Jews no Man ever partaked of theſe Offerings. For there being four ſorts of Sacrifices preſcribed by the Law (as Abarbinel obſerves in his Preface to this Book, cap. 2.) the whole Burnt-offerings, the Sin-offerings, the Treſpaſs-offerings, and the Peace-offerings. There was this difference made between them; that of the firſt of theſe, whether it was a publick, or a private whole Burnt-offering, no Body partaked, no not the Prieſts themſelves; but it was intirely conſumed, except the Skin. Of the ſecond ſome part was burnt; the reſt the Prieſts had, and were to eat it in the Court of the Tabernacle (though there was one ſort of Sin-offering which was wholly conſumed, as the Burnt-offerings were). The third ſort, which were Treſpaſs-offerings, were only offered for private Perſons; ſome part of which, as in the former, were burnt upon the Altar, and the reſt eaten by the Prieſts. As for the laſt (the Peace-offering) ſome part of ſuch Sacrifices were burnt on the the Altar, the Prieſt had the Breaſt and the right Shoulder; and the remainder he that brought the Sacrifice eat with his Friends. I ſhall add no more, but that theſe whole Burnt-offerings ſeem to have been ſimple Acknowledgments of God the Creator of the World, and Teſtifications that they owned him to be their LORD, and continued in Covenant with him, and implored his Bleſſing upon them. And therefore with reſpect to the firſt and laſt of theſe Conſiderations, the Gentiles were permitted to bring theſe Sacrifices (as the Jews tell us) but no other whatſoever, to be offered unto God.
Of the herd.] As Burnt-offerings were the principal Sacrifices, and therefore mentioned in the firſt place, ſo thoſe of Beeves, were the chief of all Burnt-offerings, both among the Jews and among the Gentiles. Whence foreign, to ſacrifice Oxen, became a Proverb for a magnificent Entertainment.
Let him offer a male.] Theſe were accounted the beſt, and therefore principally appointed. And ſo they were among the Heathen; inſomuch that the Egyptians offered only foreign (as Herodotus tells us Lib. II. cap. 41.) and thought it unlawful to offer Females. Which ſhows that Moſes did not conform his Laws to their Cuſtoms. for he admitted the Sacrifice of Females, III. 1. Nay, it was particularly preſcribed in ſome Caſes, XIX Numb. 2.
Without blemiſh.] Or perfect, as the Hebrew word Tamim ſignifies. Which word Homer expreſly uſes, when Achilles ſpeaks about the Sacrifices to Apollo.
—foreign.
For to the Gods (as Euſtathius there obſerves) who are moſt perfect, foreign, the moſt perfect things ought to be offered. The like paſſage a very learned Friend of mine, now with God (Dr. Owtram) obſerves out of the Scholiaſt upon Ariſtophanes his Acharnenſes, Lib. I. de Sacrificiis, cap. 9. ſect. 3. where more may be ſeen to the ſame purpoſe. Now that is perfect, in which there is no defect in any part; and is not decayed by Age. For which reaſon Abarbanel obſerves, great care is taken in the Law, that this ſort of Creatures were to be offered before they were three years old; and the other ſorts, before they were two.
He ſhall offer it of his own voluntary will.] In this Tranſlation we follow the Opinion of the Jews, who refer this to the Perſons that brought this Offering; which they might do when they pleaſed. The like expreſſions we read XIX. 5. XXII. 19. But the LXX. thought it hath reſpect to God; and ſo the Phraſe may be interpreted, he ſhall bring it for his acceptation, i. e. that he may find a favourable acceptance with God.
At the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation.] Where the Altar of Burnt-offering was placed, XL Exod. 6, 29. And this was ſo neceſſary, that it is required upon pain of death to be brought hither, and offered in no other place, XVII. 3, 4, &c. For which cauſe, it is likely, the Door of the Tabernacle is here mentioned rather than the Altar; that it might be underſtood to be unlawful to offer at any other Altar, but that which ſtood at the door of the Tabernacle.
Before the LORD.] With their Faces towards that holy place, where the Divine Majeſty dwelt: unto whom the Sacrifice was brought; and at the door of the Tabernacle received by the Prieſt, from the hand of the Offerer.
Ver. 4. Verſe 4 And he ſhall put his hand upon the head of the Burnt-offering.] Both his hands; as ſome gather from XVI. 21. and (as Maimonides ſaith) he was to do it with all his might. This was a Rite belonging to Peace-offerings, as well as to Burnt-offerings, III. 2. and to Sin-offerings alſo, IV. 4. The meaning of which in this ſort of Offerings, ſeems to have been that he who brought the Sacrifice renounced all his Intereſt in it, and transferred it wholly to God, unto whoſe Service he intirely devoted it. It being like to the old Ceremony among the Romans, who laid their hands upon their Servants, when they gave them their Liberty, and abdicated their own Right in them, ſaying, Hunc hominem liberum eſſe volo, I will that this Man be free: which was called Manumiſſion. In other Offerings it had another meaning, as I ſhall obſerve in due place: and it was imitated by the Gentiles, though not without the addition of impious Superſtitions. For they wreathed back the Head of the Beaſt upward, when they ſacrificed to the Gods above; and thruſt down its Head towards the Ground, when they ſacrificed to their Infernal Deities; as J. Brentius hath obſerved in his Preface to this Book.
And it ſhall be accepted for him, to make an atonement for him.] It ſhall be ſo acceptable, as to recommend him to the favour of the Divine Majeſty. For ſo the Hebrew word Capher ſeems here to ſignifie, not properly to make an Atonement (which was the buſineſs of a Sin-offering) but to own him to be in a ſtate of Reconciliation with God; unto whom, he was ſuppoſed to give up himſelf wholly, as he did this Beaſt. The Jews indeed, who ſtick to the literal ſignification of the word, fancy that theſe Burnt-offerings expiated evil Thoughts and Deſires: but there is no ground for this in Scripture; and the moſt that can be made of it is, that God accepted his Prayers which he made in general, for the forgiveneſs of all his ſins, when he laid his Hand upon the Head of this Sacrifice. For it muſt be here obſerved, that Laying on of Hands was always accompanied with Prayer, as appears by Jacob's laying them on the Head of Manaſſeh and Ephraim, XLVIII Gen. 14, 16, 20. and the High-Prieſt laying them on the Scape-goat, XVIth of this Book, 21. Inſomuch that laying on of hands ſignifies ſometimes in the New Teſtament to pray, XIX Matth. 15. V Mark 23. and other places. But if a Man had committed any ſin, there are other Sacrifices peculiarly appointed by the Law for their Expiation; which he was bound to offer with confeſſion of ſin, and prayer to God for pardon.
Ver. 5. Verſe 5 And he ſhall kill the Bullock.] That is, the Man himſelf who brought it, as Raſi interprets it; or one of the Levites, as others underſtand it: For they killed the Paſchal Lamb at that great Paſſover mentioned 2 Chron. XXX. 17. as Bochart obſerves. But he ſhould have added the reaſon of it, which Raſi there gives; that a great many of the Congregation having not ſanctified themſelves, (as we read in that place) therefore the Levites had the charge of the killing of the Paſſover, for every one that was not clean, to ſanctifie them unto the LORD. Otherwiſe every Man might kill his own Paſſover, XII Exod. 6. as they might do all their other Sacrifices. For certain it is, this was none of the works of Prieſts, as Maimonides ſhows in a paſſage mentioned by Dr. Cudworth (in his Book concerning the Lord's Supper, p. 27.) out of Biath Hammik-dath. Where he quotes this very place to prove, That the killing of the holy things might lawfully be done by a Stranger; yea, of the most holy things: whether they were the holy things of private Perſons, or of the whole Congregation. The common Objection to this is, That none might come into the Court where the Altar was, but the Prieſts. To which the Anſwer is plain, That upon this occaſion other Perſons might come ſo far within the Court, be cauſe it was indiſpenſably neceſſary, that the Man who brought the Sacrifice ſhould lay his hand upon the Head of it; which was to be done at the Altar, when it was to be ſlain.
Before the LORD.] See v. 3.
And the Prieſts Aarons ſons ſhall bring the blood.] Now begins the work of the Prieſts: the receiving of the Blood and that which immediately followed, belonging to their Office. They received it in a Baſon (XXIV Exod. 6.) as the manner alſo was among the Heathen; which our learned Sheringham obſerves upon Codex Joma (p. 85.) out of Homer's Odyſſ. L. III. where Thraſymedes is repreſented as cutting the Ox aſunder with a Cleaver; and Perſeus as receiving the Blood in a Baſon, which he calls foreign A word uſed in Crete, as Euſtathius notes, for ſuch kind of Veſſels; which ſome think was originally foreign, from the receiving of the Blood.
And ſprinkle the blood round about upon the Altar, &c.] That this might be done readily, one Prieſt received the Blood; and another took it from him, and ſprinkled it about the Altar; or, as the Jews underſtand it, on every ſide of the Altar; which they performed by two ſprinklings, at the oppoſite Corners of it. Which was a Rite alſo uſed in Peace-offerings and Treſpaſs-offerings: but in Sin-offerings the Blood was poured out at the foot of the Altar: See VII. 2. Thus the Heathen alſo themſelves took care the Blood of their Sacrifices ſhould not run upon the ground, but be received, as I ſaid, in Veſſels prepared for that purpoſe; and then poured upon their Altars, and ſo offered and conſecrated to their Gods. So Lucian in his Book of Sacrifices, repreſents the Prieſt, foreign, as pouring the Blood upon the Altar. See Dilheirus Diſput. Philolog. Tom. 2. p. 253.
Ver. 6. Verſe 6 And he ſhall flay the Burnt-offering.] Next followed the taking off the Skin; which God ordered to be given to the Prieſts, VII. 8. Though the Heathen burnt Skin and all, in ſome places, as Bochart obſerves out of Plutarch and Lucian in the fore-named place, (Hieroz. P. I. L. II. p. 324.) But whoſe work it was to flay the Beaſt, is not here expreſſed. The Jews ſay it belonged not to the Prieſts to do this; but to the Man himſelf, who brought the Beaſt to be offered. For (to ſhow in brief what belonged to the owners of the Sacrifice, and what to the Prieſts) it may be fit to note out of Abarbanel, that each of them had five things to do. The Owner of the Sacrifice laid his hand upon it, killed, flayed, cut it up, and waſht the inwards: And then the Prieſt received the Blood in a Veſſel; ſprinkled the Blood; put fire on the Altar; ordered the Wood on the fire; and ordered the pieces of the Sacrifice upon the Wood. And that the Beaſt might more eaſily be flayed, there were eight Stone Pillars (as the Jews tells us in Middoth, cap. 3.) and Beams laid over them: in each of which there were three Iron hooks fixed; That the greater Beaſts might hang upon the higheſt, the leſſer upon the middlemoſt, and the leaſt of all on the loweſt: and ſo be more commodiouſly ſtript of their Skins. Concerning this Excoriation both Homer and Virgil ſpeak, as the afore-named Dilheirus hath obſerved in the ſame Book, p. 255.
And cut it into pieces.] This followed the Excoriation among the Gentiles alſo, as the ſame Author ſhows. And it was done with ſuch accuracy, that Homer ſaith they diſſected the Sacrifice foreign and foreign: from whence ſome great Men have thought St. Paul borrowed the word foreign, to expreſs the Care the Miniſters of the Goſpel ſhould have, in dividing rightly the Word of Truth, 2 Tim. II. 15. Theſe pieces were not the very ſame in Bullocks and Goats, that they were in Sheep, as will appear afterwards; and therefore the greater care was to be uſed in the cutting of them; eſpecially, when beſides thoſe parts which were offered to God, the Prieſts and the People were to have their ſhare alſo.
Ver. 7. Verſe 7 And the ſons of Aaron the Priest ſhall put fire upon the Altar.] This, as I ſaid before, was one of the works of the Prieſts: who did not put fire daily upon the Altar (for being once kindled, they were to keep it always burning, VI. 13.) but ſtirred it up, and blowed the Coals. Which is meant by giving fire, as the Phraſe is in the Hebrew; that is, diſpoſing it ſo, that it might burn quick. Yet, if the fire was taken off from the Altar, as when they removed the Camp, IV Numb. 14. none might lay it on again but the Prieſt. Or, if it were extinct, as it was in the days of Ahaz, who ſhut up the door of the Houſe of God, which was not opened till Hezekiah reigned, (2 Chron. XXVIII. 24. XXIX. 34.) none but they might kindle it again.
And lay the wood in order upon the fire.] This the Prieſts did every Morning and every Night, that the fire might be preſerved from going out. And when the time of the Morning and Evening Sacrifice came, they brought new Wood, and laid it in ſuch order upon the fire, that it might the better conſume the parts of the Sacrifice, that were laid thereon.
Ver. 8. Verſe 8 And the Prieſts Aarons ſons ſhall lay the parts, the head and the fat.] The Hebrew word Peder doth not ſimply ſignifie the Fat, (for which they have another word cheleb) but that Fat which is ſeparated from the reſt of the Fleſh. So it is to be underſtood here, and in III. 9. IV. 35. Which being gathered together, and thrown into the fire, fed the flame, and made it burn more fiercely: by which means the other parts, into which the Sacrifice was divided, were the more eaſily and the ſooner conſumed. Particularly, St. Hierom takes it for that Fat which adhered to the Liver: and both Solomon Jarchi and David Kimchi obſerve that this Peder was thrown upon the Head of the Sacrifice (when it was caſt into the fire) juſt in the place where the Head was cut off from the Body; becauſe otherwiſe the Gore which iſſued from it, might have extinguiſhed the flame. See XXIX Exod. 17.
In order upon the wood, &c.] That they might lye upon the Wood, ſo as to have the ſame ſituation in the Altar that they had in the Beaſt, when it was alive. So Maimonides in Maaſe Korban, cap. 6.
Verſe 9. Verſe 9 But his inwards and his legs ſhall he waſh in water.] Theſe Parts were not to be burnt upon the Altar, till they were well cleanſed by waſhing them in Water. For which end there was a private Room afterward, in the Court of the Temple, (as now it is likely there was in the Tabernacle) called the Waſhing Room, (as we find in Codex Middoth, cap. 5. ſect. 2.) There they having waſhed them privately, and freed the Inwards from their filth, they brought them into the Court, where there were new Marble Tables between the Pillars before-mentioned (v. 6.) and there they were waſhed more exactly, as we read in the ſame Book, cap. 3. ſect. 5. Where Const. l'Empereur obſerves, out of R. Hobadia, the reaſon why they uſed to lay the Fleſh upon ſuch Tables, was, Becauſe Marble made it cold and ſtiff, and preſerved it from ſtinking in very hot weather.
And the Priest ſhall burn all on the Altar.] From whence this Sacrifice is called iſcheh, an Offering made by fire, (from iſch, which ſignifies fire) becauſe it was altogether conſumed in the fire; and no part of it left, ſo much as for the Prieſt to eat of it.
Of a ſweet ſavour unto the LORD.] i. e. Moſt acceptable. For it is a form of Speech taken from Men, who are delighted with the good Scent and Taſte of Meat and Drink. But none can reaſonably imagine it was the meer Sacrifice that was pleaſing unto God, but, as Conrad. Pellicanus well notes, the Devotion, Faith, Obedience, and Sincerity of their Minds who made the Oblation.
Ver. 10. Verſe 10 And if his offering be of the flocks, namely of the ſheep or of the goats, &c.] If a Man were not able to bring a Bullock for a Burnt-ſacrifice, (which could not be ſo well ſpared, being of great uſe in Agriculture) he might bring one of theſe Creatures which were of leſs value; only perfect in their kind, as it here follows.
He ſhall bring it a male without blemiſh.] See XII Exod. 5. What the Blemiſhes were, that made any Animal unfit to be offered on the Altar, Moſes tells us in this Book, XXII. 22, 23, 24. where he mentions twelve, which ſhall be there conſidered.
Ver. 11. Verſe 11 And he ſhall kill it on the ſide of the Altar northward.] The greater Sacrifices, which the Jews call the most holy things, had this peculiar place aſſigned them, where they were to be killed, viz. all the Burnt-offerings, (whether of Bullocks, Sheep, or Goats) and all Offerings for ſin, VI. 25. and all Treſpaſs-offerings, VII. 2. But all the other Sacrifices, which they call the leſſer holy things, (ſuch as the Peace-offerings of particular Men, the Paſchal Lamb, the Firſt-born, and that which was tithed) might be killed in any part of the Court, where the Altar ſtood; there being no peculiar place appointed by the Law for that purpoſe, but only at the Entrance of the Tabernacle. Yet a Peace-offering for the whole Congregation, was lookt upon as belonging to the things most holy; and ſo was ſlain (as Maimonides tells us) at the North-ſide of the Altar: where there were certain Rings fixed, to which the Head, or, as ſome ſay, the Feet of the Beaſt, was tied, in order to its being killed. But they were not perfect Rings, as L'Empereur obſerves, being rather half-ſegments of Rings, one part of which was faſtned to the Pavement, and by the other the Neck of the Beaſt was tied to it. See Codex Middoth, cap. 3. ſect. 5. The reaſon of this difference ſeems to be, only to make a diſtinction between theſe and other Sacrifices. And all this is to be underſtood of the four-footed Beaſts before-mentioned, not of Birds; which were ſacrificed after another manner, as appears from v. 15.
And the Prieſts ſhall ſprinkle his blood round about upon the Altar.] See v. 5. and VII. 2.
Ver. 12. Verſe 12 And he ſhall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat, &c.] This Verſe hath been ſufficiently explained v. 5, 6, 8.
Ver. 13. Verſe 13 And he ſhall waſh the inwards and the legs, &c.] See v. 9. where this alſo is explained.
It is a burnt-ſacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a ſweet ſavour unto the LORD.] As much as to ſay, this is as acceptable to the LORD, as the Sacrifice of a Bullock, when offered with a pious Mind.
Ver. 14. Verſe 14 And if the burnt-ſacrifice for his offering to the LORD be of fowls.] It is well obſerved by Maimonides in his More Nevochim, P. III. cap. 46. that when a Man was not able to go to the charge of a Sheep or a Goat, (much leſs of a Bullock) God was ſo merciful, as to accept of a Bird; only he preſcribes of what ſort they ſhould be. Nay, he that was not able to be at this expence, was accepted if he offered Bread, however prepared, whether in an Oven or a Pan, according to the cuſtom of thoſe Times. And he to whom this was too great a Burden, might worſhip God, by bringing only fine Flour, as will appear in the next Chapter.
Then he ſhall bring his offering of Turtle-doves, or of young Pigeons.] The ſame Author obſerves, that there was a vaſt plenty of theſe Birds in the Land of Canaan; and conſequently they were ſo cheap, that it would put the poorer ſort to no great charge to bring this Oblation. They were alſo very anciently ſacrificed, XV Gen. 9. and of a gentle nature, (as Procopius and others obſerve). And Pigeons being beſt when they are young, and Turtles when full grown, accordingly they are appointed to bring them, when they were moſt eſteemed. Theſe are but ſeldom mentioned in the Sacrifices among the Gentiles, who offered Cocks to Aeſculapius, and Geeſe to Iſis, as we read in ſeveral of their Authors.
Ver. 15. Verſe 15 And the Priest ſhall bring it unto the Altar, and wring off his head.] Pinch it off with his Nail (as the Jews ſay) at one of the Corners or Horns of the Altar: viz. the whole Burnt-offering at the Southeaſt Corner, and the Sin-offering at the North-weſt, as Maimonides ſaith in his Treatiſe called Korbanoth, cap. 5. But their Heads were ſo to be wrung or pinched, as not to be ſeparated quite from the Body, but to be left ſtill hanging to it. For ſo it is ordered in that Sacrifice mentioned V. 8. and therefore they ſuppoſe it was ſo in all.
And the blood thereof ſhall be wrung out, at the ſides of the Altar.] This is the reaſon that the Prieſt alone might kill the Bird, (though others might kill the Beaſts, See v. 5.) becauſe the ſprinkling of the Blood, which none might do but the Prieſt, was immediately conjunct with the wringing off its Head.
Ver. 16. Verſe 16 And he ſhall pluck away his Crop.] Or the Stomach; that the Sacrifice might be clean, and free from all filth.
With his feathers.] Which were no more to be offered, than the Skin of the Beaſts, v. 6.
And cast it beſides the Altar on the east part.] As far as might be from the moſt Holy Place, which was in the Weſt.
By the place of the aſhes.] See IV. 12.
Ver. 17. Verſe 17 And he ſhall cleave it with the wings thereof, but ſhall not divide it aſunder.] The Wings were to be ſo cloven, as not to be quite ſeparated from the Body, but ſtill to remain hanging to it; and ſo Salt being ſprinkled upon the whole Body, it was thrown into the fire. So Maimonides obſerves in the forenamed Treatiſe: where he takes notice alſo, that it was otherwiſe in Fowls offered for ſin; of which nothing but the Blood belonged to the Altar; the Fleſh of them being eaten by the Prieſts and their Sons. Whence it was, that no Sin-offering of Birds was accepted, unleſs it were accompanied with an whole Burnt-offering; that the Altar might not be without a Feaſt, when they that miniſtred there were entertained. Thus it is required in ſeveral Caſes, mentioned V. 7. XII. 6, 8. XIV. 22. XV. 15, 30. and VI Numb. 11. The ſame Maimonides likewiſe obſerves, that this Sacrifice of Birds, was one of the moſt difficult Works in the Sanctuary; whereby the Mind of the Prieſt was kept as intent upon the pooreſt Sacrifice, as upon the moſt ſplendid.
And the Priest ſhall burn it upon the Altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire.] This was in part ſaid before, but here repeated more diſtinctly, to ſhow there was no difference to be made between the Sacrifices of the meaneſt and of the greateſt.
It is a burnt-ſacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a ſweet ſavour unto the LORD.] The ſame is ſaid of this, as of all other Holocauſts, (v. 9, 15.) to ſhow that whether the Oblation was of the greater Animals or the leſs, or only of Birds, it made no difference in its acceptance with God: Who graciouſly ordered theſe various ſorts of Offerings, that the Poor as well as the Rich, might be capable to expreſs their Devotion to him, and be confident to find favour with him.