Leviticus 9

Leviticus 9:1

Augustine of Hippo: And it came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called Aaron and his sons and the senate of Israel. What some of our translators call senado (senatum), the Greek calls it gerousan. The Latin translator literally followed that word, because senatus (senado) seems to come from senium (old age). In Latin it would not be said correctly: he called the old age of Israel instead of: he called the old or the old. Although it would be the same expression if it were said: he called the youth of Israel instead of: he called the young people. But this expression is used in the Latin language and that other is not. Because this would be a proper saying if it were said: he called Israel’s old age. That is why some, thinking that sometimes is also translated by Senate, translated: the order of the elders. In short, perhaps it would be better said: he called the elders of Israel. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 25 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Leviticus 9:3

Augustine of Hippo: Moses says to Aaron: Speak to the senate of Israel, saying, “Take a goat from the goats for the sin offering and a ram and a bull and a one-year-old bull, without blemish, for the burnt offering; and a young bull of the oxen and a ram for the sacrifice of salvation before the Lord and fine flour mingled with oil; because today the Lord will appear to you ». The Scripture mentions here four species of animal sacrifices: the holocaust, the sacrifice for sin, the sacrifice of salvation and the sacrifice of consummation. But the sacrifice of consummation belongs to the sanctification of the priest. Therefore, the other three kinds of sacrifices are commanded here and this is said to the elders of Israel, so that it corresponds to all the people. In this text, the sacrifice for sin has three animals: the kid, the ram and the bull. The lamb of one year belongs to the holocaust. The bull and the ram belong to the sacrifice of salvation. Therefore, it is not necessary to distinguish, affirming that in the sacrifice by the sin it is only necessary to understand that a kid was offered, whereas the other three animals were offered in the holocaust, that is to say, the ram, the steer and the lamb of one year. Rather it is rather that the first three were offered in the sacrifice for sin. And for that, the words of the Scripture: Take a kid of the goats for the sacrifice for sin and a ram and a bull, they refer to the sacrifice for sin, and the lamb of one year for the burnt offering remains. The reason we have made this observation is that the following distinction can also be made: Take a goat from the goats for the sacrifice for sin. And the rest of the passage would refer to the holocaust. The words that are added later: without defect, can refer to all. Now, as there is doubt about which is the best way to separate the words, it comes to the solution that we have given that the first three animals refer to the sacrifice for sin, since before it was ordered to offer a kid for sin of the boss (Cf Leviticus 4,23). For the sin of each one of the people when they sin before the Lord doing something that should not be done, he ordered to offer a ram (Cf Leviticus 5,18). And for the sin of the whole assembly, a steer (Cf Leviticus 4,14). Therefore, it was advisable that, in telling the Senate what all the people had to offer, it would be logical that they should offer a goat for the chiefs and a ram for the sin of each person, and a bull for the sin of all the Assembly. Because it is one thing for the people to have their sin and that everyone can have their own, and another thing when sin is common, that it is done with one intention and something is committed with only one will, the community. But the fact that the Scripture commands to offer a bull and a ram as sacrifices of salvation, is that it sends the main thing, for the sake of all the people. But when he spoke before the sacrifices of salvation, he ordered that either a male or a female be offered indistinctly, as long as they were either cows and sheep or goats (Cf Leviticus 3,1-11; 12-17). If you inquire why he ordered that two animals be offered, a bull and a ram, it is difficult to know. Unless it is said that he ordered to offer a bull, as a sacrifice of salvation for all the people, and one ram for each, as if it were each and every one, because it seems that he also ordered to offer as two species of sacrifices. of salvation: one, who was like everyone else and who called the sacrifice of salvation (Cf Leviticus 3,1), and another when he said: If someone offered the sacrifice of their salvation (Leviticus 7,19 29). In this text we also found a difference, because in that place where he spoke of the sacrifice of salvation, the fat of the chest, which had to be offered to the Lord, was not mentioned and said that the priest had to be given the chest and the right leg (Cf Leviticus 7,20.21 30.31). But in that passage he ordered that what was later called the sacrifice of his salvation be done, a sacrifice that may be private, of each one of the faithful, and not public, of all. Because even Moses offered sacrifices of salvation, and there was no mention (sacrifices) of his salvation. I think he offered the sacrifice for all the people, because where everyone is, everyone is also there; but where each one is, they are not necessarily all there. For everything can exist without the totality; but all can not exist except from each one in particular; since each one united to the others or taken as a sum do the whole. It must be noted, of course, that when sacrifices are offered by the people, it is commanded to offer not only sacrifices for sin, but also burnt offerings and sacrifices of salvation. On the other hand, sacrifices for sin and holocausts and sacrifices of consummation are offered by the priest, but not sacrifices of salvation. The sacrifice of consummation was offered when the priests were consecrated to exercise the priesthood, and these are the sacrifices offered by Moses for Aaron and for his children (Cf Leviticus 8). But then, Aaron himself, once consecrated and already performing the priestly functions, was ordered to offer for himself a bull as a sacrifice for sin and a ram as a holocaust (Cf Leviticus 9,2ss). He did not receive the order to offer the consummation sacrifice himself, because it was then offered precisely so that it would be consummated with the consecration and able to perform the priestly functions, and, since he already performed them, it did not have to be consummated again. . — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 26 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Leviticus 9:7

Augustine of Hippo: It seems that they have not paid sufficient attention to the fact that Zachary was a priest and that all priests at that time were obliged by the law of God to offer sacrifice first for their own sins and then for those of the people. Therefore, as it is now proved by the sacrifice of prayer that we are not sinless, since we are [daily] commanded to say, “Forgive us our debts,” so it was proved then by the sacrifice of animal victims that the priests were not sinless, since they were commanded to offer the victim for their own sins. — LETTER 177

Augustine of Hippo: And Moses said to Aaron, “Come near the altar and offer the sacrifice for your sin and your burnt offering and make atonement for yourself and your household.” It is striking that he first says that he must offer the sacrifice for sin and then the burnt offering, when shortly before he orders the sacrifices for sins to be placed on top of the burnt offerings (Cf Leviticus 4,35), except when it comes to birds (Cf Leviticus 5, 8-10). Or is it that what is done before, that is, the holocaust, is mentioned here? For here it is not said as when the birds were spoken: first do this and then that, but say: do this and that. The instruction set out above indicates what needs to be done before. It says that the sacrifice for sins must be placed on top of the holocaust. The fact that the Scripture says, in addition that Aaron did what he was commanded, poses a serious problem, because first he is reminded that he must make the sacrifice for sin and then the holocaust. But it would not be safe for him to have done it first or the Scripture would have narrated first what was done next, as is often the case in many places, unless it was read in the text what I said earlier, when the author tried to sacrifice the sin. For the text says: And the priest shall put it on the altar upon the burnt offering of the Lord. And the priest will make atonement for him, for the sin he committed and he will be forgiven (Leviticus 4,35). How could this be put on the holocaust, if the holocaust was not put on before? But about the sacrifice of salvation, he was ordered to stand on top of the burnt offering (Cf Leviticus 3,5). And as this is not said in all places, nor for all the sacrifices of salvation, nor for all the sacrifices for sin, it may be said that this was not regularly prescribed, but was said there only to be done in the sacrifice of salvation, when a bullock is offered-for there it was ordained thus-and in the sacrifice for sin, when a female of the sheep is offered. On the other hand, it is not necessary that the other sacrifices, whether of salvation or sin, be placed on the burnt offerings. The question is also raised that, when Aaron made the offering of the people (Cf Leviticus 9,7), mentioned above, it is not said that all the things that were commanded were sacrificed, but only the kid for sin and the burnt offering. And there was no express mention of the lamb of a year old. And the other two things we said that belonged rather to the sacrifice for sin than to the holocaust, that is, the ram and the bull, were omitted. Unless the author wanted to refer to the whole by the part, so that, mentioning only the kid, we considered that other things had taken place. When the Scripture describes how Aaron made the people’s sacrifices of salvation, he says the following about the bull and the ram: He also immolated the bullock and the ram of the people’s sacrifice of salvation. And the sons of Aaron brought him the blood and poured it all around the altar. And they brought to him also the fat of the bull and the ram, the loin and the fat that covers the belly, and the two kidneys and the fat that is on them, and what is left by the liver. And he put these fats on the breasts of the victims and put the fats on top of the altar. And Aaron removed his breast and his right leg, as a thing taken away from the Lord, as the Lord had commanded Moses. When speaking of the two animals, the bull and the ram, the Scripture speaks sometimes in the singular and sometimes in the plural. Thus, when talking about the two kidneys, we must understand that it is about the two animals and, therefore, there are four kidneys. And so on from the rest. But what do the words mean: And he put the fats on the breasts of the victims, being that he did not order to place the breasts on the altar - because they had to be given to the priest with the right legs? Or should we understand the text like this: And put the fats on the breasts? Because he put them to place on the altar once removed from the breasts. In effect, that’s what he had sent before. Then he goes on: And he put the fats on the altar, and Aaron removed his chest and his right leg as a thing taken away from the Lord. Now he speaks in the singular and mentions, certainly, the breast of the two animals, which he had previously called breasts in the plural. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 27 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Leviticus 9:22

Origen of Alexandria: Something of this sort has also been written about Aaron in the book of Leviticus, namely, that “he raised up his hands over the people and blessed them.” I gather from this that the saying expresses a mystery, namely, that the one who blesses someone must be adorned with works that distinguish him from the many and raise him above them. For when he is going to bless the people, the hands of Aaron are raised on high. So if someone has his hands down toward earthly things, he does not intend to bless anyone. — FRAGMENT ON THE GOSPEL OF Luke 257

Augustine of Hippo: And he continues: And Aaron, lifting up his hands toward the people, blessed them and went down, having offered the sin offering, and the burnt offerings and the sacrifice of salvation. What does this mean? Where did he do this but on the altar, standing next to the altar and serving the altar? Therefore, he came down from where he was. It seems clear that the solution to that question that we had raised in the Exodus about how he could have served the altar, which was three cubits high, can benefit from this testimony. There we were forbidden to admit that they were tiered, because God had forbidden it, so that the prudent parts of the officiant would not be exposed on the altar, which would happen if the step was a part of the altar, that is, if it were united in compact form. Finally, this was forbidden there where it was an altar made of several pieces. For the altar would be a thing with the tier, and the tier would be a part of the altar, and that is why it was forbidden. But here, where the height of the altar had been so great that if the priest had not been standing on something, could not properly officiate, you have to understand that whatever it was that was put and removed during the time of the offices, was not a part of the altar and, therefore, did not go against the precept that prohibited the altar had tiers. The Scripture omitted to speak of this, whatever it was, and that is why the problem has arisen. But now, when he says that the priest, when he offered the sacrifices, came down, after placing the immolated things on the altar, it is evident, evidently, that the priest had to be somewhere so that he could get down from there. And since he had been there, he could serve and officiate at an altar three cubits high. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 28 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Leviticus 9:24

Augustine of Hippo: And the whole town contemplated it and became demented. Other translators have said: he was frightened (expavit), trying to reproduce what the Greek exéste says, whence comes éktasis word that in the Latin Bible appears many times with the sense of “loss of judgment” (mentis excessus). — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 29 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Augustine of Hippo: And fire came out from the Lord and devoured what was on the altar, burnt offerings and fats. We can ask what it means to Domino (on behalf of the Lord). Perhaps it is that it was done as directed or by the will of the Lord, or because fire came from that place where the ark of the covenant was. It is clear that the Lord is not in one place as if it were not in another. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 30 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)