JE Ph 34a N And this shall "be an "everlasting statute unto you, to make atonement for 5 4 171 NL And Yahweh spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto Aaron, and unto his sons, and 8 NL And thou shalt say unto them, "Whatsoever man there be of the house 10 And "whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the 'strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood; I will 'set my face against that "soul that eateth blood, and will 'cut him off from among his people. 11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and "I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your "souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the "life. 12 mTherefore I said unto the children of Israel, No "soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood. 13 And "whatsoever man there be of the "children of Israel, or of the 'strangers that sojourn among them, which "taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. 14 For as to the life of 'all flesh, the blood thereof is [all one] with the life thereof: "therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: "whosoever eateth it shall be 'cut off. 1834 This clause may have stood originally between 30 and 31. 34b This statement must have belonged to the earlier injunctions, where a single ceremony was imposed upon Aaron, without mention of any repetition. 3-7 in 171 At this point the so-called 'Holiness Code' 17-26 begins. It is here designated Ph. On its name and general characteristics see Introd XIII 8 i 143. The variety of its contents, and its frequent repetitions, show that it has been compiled from various sources, not always in complete agreement with each other. It has been the task of RP to harmonize as far as possible any conflicting data; thus in 17 the opening words bear the plainest marks of Ps, and must, as elsewhere, be assigned to the editor who combined Ph with P. The association of priesthood and laity in legislative address is exceedingly rare in P cp 2218+. 3 Like D Deut 121., Ph opens with a ritual law 3-9. This is itself in two parts 3-7 and 8., which have a common aim. its present form lays down three rules: (1) no slaughter of domestic animals may take place without sacrifice; (2) sacrifice may be offered only to Yahweh; (3) and only at the central sanctuary. 8. repeats (2) and (3). The whole has been adapted to the camp-scheme of legislation by RP, to whom the enunciation of the third principle seems due. Ph does not elsewhere speak of the Dwelling in its technical sense, or refer to the 'entrance of the tent of meeting.' The recurrence of this phrase in both laws and 9 shows it to be editorial. For comparison with other codes see Laws as noted in the margin. On the general implications of this enactment and its relative antiquity compared with the fundamental conception of D see Introd i 146, and cp Driv-Wh, Lev 85 (only available when the Introd and notes had been completed): the slight difference in the view of the stages of the text turns on the use of the 'Dwelling.' + T tabernacle, cp 54°. The parallel with the 'tent of meeting' seems to make it clear that this term is here used in the sense of the Levitical sanctuary, and not in its ideal meaning cp 1531. In that case the clause is an editorial addition founded on Ex 25. Ph only knows of the sanctuary 2112. 6 The whole of this verse may be secondary, cp the ritual in 15. On the other hand the ceremony was no doubt ancient, though its specification is hardly after the manner of Ph. 7 M Or, satyrs.-Is 1321 3414 †. 8 The peculiar opening of this verse and to them thou shalt say,' addressed to the laity cp 202, suggests that the following passage has lost some of its original context. In 8 there seems clearly a doublet of 2b-7: the instructions are rather more developed; the law applies to non-Israelites as well as to the house of Israel; the altar gifts include burnt offering as well as peace offering 5. In 10-16 it must be doubtful whether the prohibition of eating with blood cp 1926 is continuous with 3-7 or with .. The reference to the strangers in 10 13 points to the same source as in 8.; in any case, the editorial work in 10-16 is better assimilated than in 3-7, and cannot be isolated with certainty. 11ab M soul. 13 Some MSS and Sam read house.' On the other hand has children' (sons) in 3 8 10 as well as in this passage. JE Ph P N 15 NLAnd every "soul that eateth "that which dieth of itself, or that which is torn L 6 h None of you shall approach to any that is near of 'kin to him, to L Mk. a woman to her sister, to be a 'rival to her], to uncover her nakedness, 22 P 210 23 And thou shalt not q 192 24 NLS Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the 1715 An appendix, which is probably from the compiler's hand. The law is more rigorous than that of Deut 1421. The 'stranger' who may there buy the food which would pollute an Israelite, here incurs the same uncleanness, and needs the same purification cp 1934 2422. 15b Ma carcase.-Cp 1139. 228. 183 The hortatory introduction in 2b-5 has several parallels in Ph, especially in the form of closing admonitions 24-30 ср 1937 2022-26 2231-33 2518 38, and on a more extended scale 263-45. 5 M Or, by.-Cp Ezek 2011 13 21. 7 The laws in 6-19 find a curious parallel within Ph in 2011-21: on the relation between the two groups see 208N. It is possible that the general introduction in 6, with its plural address, may be due to the writer of 2b-5 (Baentsch). 17 M Or, enormity. 19 M Or, separated for. r 205 8 167a JE P P land vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26 Ye therefore shall 'keep my L 191 And Yahweh spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, NYe shall be holy: for "I Yahweh your God am holy. 3 Ye shall "fear every man his mother, and his father, and ye shall keep my sabbaths: 'I am Yahweh your God. 4 LSTurn ye not unto "idols, nor make to yourselves 'molten gods: 'I am Yahweh your God. 5 And when ye "offer a "sacrifice of peace offerings unto Yahweh, ye shall "offer it that ye may be 'accepted. • It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the 'morrow: and if aught remain until the third day, it shall be burnt with fire. 7 And if it be eaten at all on the third day, it is an abomination; it shall not be accepted: 8 but every one that eateth it shall bear his iniquity, because he hath "profaned the holy thing of Yahweh : and that "soul shall be cut off from his people. L 9 And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly 12 L ye 'steal; 'neither shall ye "deal falsely, nor "lie one to another. And 1830 So as in 3. T customs. Cp 2023. difference of origin. The materials may be to some extent of ancient date, as they have analogies with regulations in several codes where the same subjects have been treated; thus (1) with the Ten Words 3. 11.; (2) with the Book of Judgements (Ex 21-23) 15. 33.; further points of contact exist (3) with J 4 9 20 29, and (4) with D 9 10 13 15 19 26 28 31 33 35: while the phraseology often resembles that of Jer and Ezek (besides Ph words) 7 13 15. 18 20 35. The signs of arrangement into groups are discussed by Briggs, Higher Crit2 245 ff, and more fully by Paton, Orig Form of Lev 17-19; analogy has been found in 3-8 to the laws of the first table of the Decalogue; and in 9-20 to those of the second. 192 The collection of laws in 19 is introduced and closed by brief exhortations showing affinities with 183-5 and 24-30. But the contents are not confined to a single topic, and their variety clearly points to diversity of source. Thus (1) some precepts are repeated 3b and 30a, 14b and 32b, 15a and 35a; (2) the peculiar term 'neighbour' 11 15 17 alternates curiously with the common y 13 16 18; (3) the ritual passage 5-8 does not seem to belong by subject to the rest of the religious moral and social legislation of the context; its incongruity with 715-18 makes it indeed improbable that it is an editorial insertion of the type of 21., but it may rather be taken as belonging to a group of cultus laws of which traces remain in 21-22 retouched by a later hand; (4) the alternate predominance of the singular' thou' 13-19 and the plural 'ye 2-12 and 23-37 seems partly due to 4 M things of nought. See Jer 1414.-Cp Is 28 18 20 1010. 191 3 317 Ezek 3013 al. 8 The formula seems an editorial addition cp 50a: ct 174 9. 223, where the phraseology is different. JE Ph L L P 20 And "whosoever lieth "carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, L C d' 2011And Yahweh spake unto Moses, saying, 2 NMoreover, thou shalt say to the children 1920 M there shall be inquisition.-H. 21 The incongruity of 21. with the context is obvious. The language is that of 4-67 cp 420 67; but the source of the insertion cannot be determined. 26 Cp 1714. In the text reads literally 'on the blood' as in Ezek 3325; cp Ezek 186 229 as corrected by W R Smith, Rel of Sem 324; Smend, AT Rel Gesch 313; Bertholet hesitates; Toy, Ezek (in Haupt's SBOT), concurs. 29 M Or, enormity.-Cp 220. 202 A fresh collection of precepts for the laity is here opened. The contents are less varied than those of 19, as they deal only with different forms of spiritual and sexual unchastity 2-7 and 8-21. The order of the opening words 'And to the children of Israel thou shalt say' recalls 177 cp the subsequent formulae with 1713. The prohibition of the Molech rites 2b-5 seems like an expansion of 1821a (which appears out of place in its present context); while 6 finds a supplement in 27 which has been left out of the collection and added afterwards at the close. (The fundamental conception of 27, however, is not quite N 6 L And identical with that of 6. RV 27 disguises the fact that the 'familiar spirit' is inside the man or woman: Driv-Wh render in whom is a ghost or a familiar spirit': and 6 (cp 1931) 'if there be any one that regards ghosts or familiar spirits.') The first section closes at 7. 2 2b Dillmann suggests that the phrase here and in 4 is due to R cp 427 (Num 149 differently) Ezek 727 1219 332 3913 4522 463 9. There appears to be a contradiction between and inasmuch as 2 prescribes death by stoning, while 3 implies some form of divine judgement. Is this due to careless expression on the part of a single writer (Wellh) or to diversity of source (Dillm)? It is difficult to decide (a third alternative being that 3 and 4. are independent supplements to 2, here editorially amalgamated), but in 4. it is probably correct to find traces of editorial emphasis and expansion; the doom announced in 3 on the single sinner extending in to his family and all who share his guilt. The style of much resembles that of the editorial work in 17. JE P Р 'wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even 'set my face against that L L L L a man lie with his 'daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to L L and 22 Ye shall "therefore "keep all my statutes, and all my judgements, 25 NL Ye shall therefore "separate between the "clean beast and the 208 The introduction to a fresh section cp 22 185. In 9 it is natural to see a parallel to E's 'judgement' Ex 2117: 10 opens a series of laws summed up in the most general form in the seventh of the Ten Words. The relation of 10-21 to 186-19 has been variously estimated: are they from the same hand (Driver) or have they been drafted separately, and, in the latter case, if they are derived from a common original, which is the earlier? The table of prohibited intercourses in 18 contains no penalties, but the order seems better adjusted and the cases are more numerous than in 20, which provides no parallels to 187 10 17b 18. This is so far an indication of later origin. Further, the series in 186. is introduced by a general principle (unless this be the work of the author of 2b-) which is then specifically applied in all possible directions in uniform style. But in 2010.. there are some delicate suggestions of combined sources, or of occa sional addition, eg the duplicate clauses in 10ab, the unexpected 'you' and 'thou in 14b 15b-16 19, and especially the varying formula in 19a which corresponds to the regular form 187... These signs perhaps imply an earlier draft modified by later editorial activity, 2019 owing its retention to the fact that it specified the punishments which were omitted in 18. 10 Apparently an accidental repetition, Abbott, Driv-Wh, Addis probably the result of amalgamation of texts, Dillm. 14 M Or, enormity.—Cp 1817. 16 So as in 15. T kill. 23 So as in 22. T customs. Cp 1830. 24 So HT inherit. 25a The connexion here can hardly be original, as it seems to be founded on the word 'separate.' runs simply and ye shall.' The thought of 25. is cognate with that of 1143-45, and this passage may have once introduced a list similar to that in 11. 25b M creepeth.-49a. |