Genesis 38

not only by wearing sackcloth, but in such passionate expressions as these. Ver. 3(>. And the Midiauites. In the Hebrew the word is Medanim (a distinct name from those ver. 33.) who were a people derived from Medan, one of the sons of Keturah, and brother to Midian, (xxv. 2.) They and the Midiauites lived near together in Arabia not far from the Ishmaelites: who all joined together in this caravan, and made one society of merchants; consisting of Medanites, Midianites, and Ishmaelites. An officer.’) The Hebrew word saris, oftentimes signifies an eunuch, by whom the eastern queens were attended. But’it likewise signifies all the great courtiers (as the Chaldce here translates it), such as the bed-chamber-men, the lord chamberlain (as we now speak), and such-like officers of state: and therefore is rightly translated here, for Potiphar had a wife. The truth is, this was the prime signification of the word: till, in aftertimes, the depravation of manners, and the jealousy of the eastern kings, made them set none but slaves, who were castrated, to attend their queens; by whom they were preferred to great offices, and so came to enjoy tins name. Pharaoh.] This was a common name to all the kings of Egypt. 4 (Seexii. 15.) Captain of the guard.) The LXX. translate it,?naster cook: and so Epiphanius calls his wife. T?)v rov’Apx7* a - yttgov, (Hasres. xxxvi. n. 17.) Our margin hath it, chief of the slaughter-men, or executioners. But the word tebachim may better be translated soldiers, than butchers or executioners: and here, some think, may denote him whom we ca,ll the provost-marshal: others will have it the master of the horse. But I see no more proper translation than ours, captain of the guard: or, rather, chief commander of the king’s guard; such an one as Nebuzaradan was; (2 Kings xxv. 20.) for schar is more than one whorn we now call a captain. (See xl. 3.) This phrase schar-hatabachim is explained by Hottinger out of the Ethiopic tongue. (See Smegma Orient, p. 85.) in those days, that if the husband died without issue, the woman must marry his next brother; and as long as any of his brethren remained, they were bound to marry his wife, and preserve their brother’s memory: or else solemnly renounce her, to their great infamy and disgrace. This was so well known, that there is nothing in the law that enjoins any new solemn contract in such a case: because the first husband being dead, she and the next brother were man and wife, without any further agreement, by virtue of the original law: until he renounced her. Yet, by the constitutions afterwards made by their elders, it was ordained, that he should espouse and endow her solemnly before witnesses: as Mr. Selden shews in his Uxor Hebr. lib. i. cap. 12. andiib. ii. cap. 2. and 10. But Judah thought Selah w\is too young to perform this contract, and therefore desired her to stay till he was grown up, and to abide in her own father’s house rather thar^in his; that Selah might not think of marriage, too soon. For he said, Lest peradventiire he die also.] This some make an argument that he never intended to give, her his son. But it is more agreeable to ver. 24. and 26. to think that, according to the custom of those days, he could not refuse it. And therefore he thought it was their youthful folly which made his two other sons perish: which made him resolve to keep (his till he had more discretion, and was better instructed in his duty. Or, if we imagine their sin was known to none but Tamar, the meaning may be, that he thought their marrying too young was the cause of their death. And therefore he determined to keep this only remaining son, till he was of a riper age. wrong: (Moro Nevoch. par. iii. cap. 49.) They that would now have their wicked practices warranted by such examples, should consider, that every thing not punished by men was not allowed by God: and that we now live under another dispensation, which expressly forbids such uncleanness; and declares, that not only adulterers, but whoremongers, God will judge, i. c. punish, (Ilebr. xiii. 4. See ver. 23.) Vcr. 17. A kid from the jlockJ] Which was looked upon as a valuable present in those days; as I have observed before, (xxvii. Ik) Wilt thou give vie a pledge, &c] A pawn, as wc now speak, to bo returned when he sent what he promised. Vcr. 18. T7iy signet.] His ring, wherewith he scaled. Thy bracelets.] The Hebrews generally understand by this word his cloak, or some such garment: others, his girdle. And thy staff, &c] Which, it is likely, had something in it to distinguish it from other men’s staffs. And she asks so many things, that by some or other of them (if not by all) it might be certainly known who was the father, if she proved with child. And he came in tinto her.] Not publicly; but in some bye-place, to which they retired. And she conceived by him.] Though he did not know her, yet she knew him; which aggravated her crime, and made it incest in her, though only fornication in him. Unto which, one would think, she was tempted, by her vehement desire to have a child by one of this family; unto which the promise of the Messiah belonged. For though “she seems to have been one of the seed of Canaan, (as I said before, ver. 6.) yet, embracing the religion of Jacob, she renounced the impiety of the Canaanites: and so is mentioned in the genealogy of our Saviour, as well as Rahab and Ruth. Vcr. 19. Laid by her veil from her, &c] Retired into her father’s house (for within doors they did not wear veils) where she clothed herself again like a widow.

Genesis 38:1

jcLt that time.) It is uncertain whether he mean at the time Joseph was sold (which is just before mentioned), or at the time Jacob returned from Mesopotamia to live in Canaan, (xxxiii. 18.) or when he went to settle with his father at Mamre, (xxxv. 27.) But, take it any of these ways, there was time enough for all the events following, before they went into Egypt; supposing Judah’s children to have married very young: as may be seen in most interpreters. Judah went down from his brethren.) Either upon some business, or in some discontent. AdullatniteJ] A citizen of Adullam; which was a famous town, or city, that fell afterwards to the tribe of Judah, whose king was slain by Joshua, (xii. 19.) and where there was a famous cave, in which David hid himself, (1 Sam. xxii. 1.)

Genesis 38:2

Judah saw there.) So as to fall in love with her. For, according to the old saying,‘Ek rov 6p(tv to lp$v. A daughter of a certain Canaanite.) It was not so bad for a man circumcised to marry the daughter of one uncircumcised, as it was to give their daughters in marriage to an uncircumcised husband, (xxxiv. 14.) For an uncircumcised man was accounted unclean, though he had renounced idolatry: but a woman born of uncircumcised parents was not so accounted, if she embraced the worship of the true God. Whence Salmon, a great man in the tribe of Judah, married Rahab who *was a Canaanite. Such an one we must suppose this woman, whom Judah married, to have been; or else he had offended his father, as much as Esau did Isaac l>y marrying the daughters of Heth. JFIiose name was Shuah.) Her father’s name was Shuah, (ver. 12.) He took her.) To be his wife, (ver. 12.)

Genesis 38:5

And he was at Chezib when she bare him.) Some think this town the same with Achzib, belonging to Judah, (Josh. xv. 44.) But why Moses mentions his absence when this child was born, and w T hy he sets down the place where he then was, we cannot give an account; though there was, no doubt, some special reason for it. Perhaps it is to shew, why she gave the name to this and to her former son, (whereas he himself named the first, ver. 3.) because he was not at home when they were born.

Genesis 38:6

Whose name was Tamar.) She seems also to have been a woman of Canaan; but not an’ idolater.

Genesis 38:7

Was wicked in the sight of the Lord.) i.e. Exceeding impious; and that notoriously. (See Gen. x. 9.) What particular sins he was guilty of is but conjectured. Some fancy they were of the same nature with’ his next brother’s: (see Bonfrere, or Menochius out of him.)) And the Lord slew him.) Cut him off suddenly, by some unusual stroke.

Genesis 38:8

Go in unto thy brother’s wife, &c. This (say the Hebrew doctors) was an ancieht custom, in force before the law of Moses, which only enacted what had been formerly practised, (Maimon. par. iii. cap. 49. Morq Nevoch.) that when a man died without issue, his next brother should marry his wife, (Deut. xxv. 5.) Which custom afterwards extended to the next cousin, if no brother remained. And raise up seed unto thy brother.) Preserve thy brother’s name and family; by begetting a child, which may be accounted his, and inherit his estate- For so tho law was; that the first-born of such a match was not to be looked upon as the child of him that begat him; but as his brother’s, who was the mother’s first husband. All the following children were to be his own.

Genesis 38:9

Onan knew that the seed should not be his. i. e. The first-born should be reputed his brother’s child. Lest he should give seed to his brother.] Or, lest a child shoidd be born in the name of his brother, as the Vulgar Latin interprets it very exactly, according to the opinion of the Hebrews: as Mr. Selden observes, (lib. vii. de Jure N. et G. cap. 3.) Ver.* 10. The thing which he did displeased the Lord.] This made his sin the more heinous, that he acted against the Divine promise made to Abram, concerning the multiplying of his seed: especially against the belief of the promise of the Messiah; that seed for which all good men longed.

Genesis 38:11

Remain a widow in thy father’s house, &c. It seems the contract of marriage at first was so understood

Genesis 38:12

In process of time. In the Hebrew the words are, the days were multiplied, i. e. after some years. To Timnath.] A town not far from Adullam, it is probable, for it was also within the lot of the tribe of Judah, (Josh. xv. 57.) He went up to TimnathJ] Some have made a difficulty about this phrase: for Samson is said to have gone down to Timnath, (Judg. xiv. 5.) But they should have considered (as Bocbart observes, par. i. Hierozoic. lib. iii. cap. 4.) that these were two different places, one called Timnah, the other Timnathah; this in the tribe of Judah, the other in the Iribe of Dan. To this they went up, because it was in a mountainous country; to that they went down, because it was in a valley. To his sheep-shearers.’] It was the custom at such times to make a feast (as we do now), and to invite their kindred and friends to it (as he doth his friend Hirah), which appears sufficiently from the story of Absalom, (2 Sam. xiii. 23.) For in those countries, where they had vast flocks, sheep-shearing was a kind of harvest, which made that time to be observed with such joy, as there used to be in harvest: whence David’s servants said to Nabal, that they were come to him on a good day; for he was shearing sheep, (1 Sam. xxv. 8.) Accordingly Judah, having finished the time of mourning for his wife, went to recreate himself, with his friends, at this festival season.

Genesis 38:14

She put off her widow’s garments. In which, it seems, such persons continued, till they were married to the next brother. But she, at this time, laid them aside, that he might not have the least suspicion she was the person whom he courted. Covered her with a veil.] As all women did, in the eastern countries, when they went abroad: and there are examples of it also in the western parts of the world; as Mr., Selden at large shews, in his Uxor Hebraica, lib. iii. cap. 17, where he produces several passages out of the Alcoran requiring this. Wrapped herself.] Muffled her face with it, as we speak, that she might not be known. And sat in an open place.] Where two ways met, as the Hebrew words seem to import: unless we take it for a proper name, as it is in the margin of our Bibles. Either way it signifies in a public place, where every body might see her. It is commonly noted, that there was so much modesty left in those ancient days, that harlots both went veiled, and also sat without the cities, (see Origen, lib. iv. contra Celsur/i, p. 206.) But, however the latter part of this observation be, the former part of it is not true. For, as Bochartus observes, (par. i. Hierozoic. lib. ii. cap. 4G.) " Proprium fuit meretricum non velari, scd revelari,” it was proper to harlots not to be covered, but to go barefaced: as appears from Isai. xlvii. 3. Nahum iii. 5, &c* All that can be answered to this is, that it might be otherwise in very ancient times. Which I do not take to be true: for all women, as I observed before, were covered; and therefore harlots were distinguished only by their sitr ting in the highways, not by their veils. For she saw that Selah rvas grown, and she was not given, - &c] She resolved, if she could, to have a child by one of this family; and hoped, perhaps, that Selah might come along with his father, and have the same desires his father had:.and in those, days (as I noted before) there were no such solemnities required, as the Jews afterwards used (though the law did not enjoin it) to the making a marriage with, one’s hrothe^s wife. Which was to be contracted, they say, before two witnesses, and by giving a piece of money, or a writing: but this was ordained only by their elders, not by the original law.’ (See ver. 11.). And therefore she thought, if she could have caught Selah.by this device, it would have been held lawful: but this plot fail? ing her, she so far transgressed, as to admit Judah himself to lie with her. *

Genesis 38:15

Because, she covered her face. This is not the reason why he took her for a harlot; but why he did not know her to be his daughter-in-law, (as Mr. Selden observes in the place beforenamed, ver. 14.) because he could not See her face: and he thought her to be a harlot, because she sat in trivio, in the highway; where she publicly exposed herself.. «..’

Genesis 38:16

Let me come in unto thee. There was an express law that there should be no kedeschah (or whore) among the daughters of Israel, i. e. none who should prostitute her body without marriage, (Deut. xxiii. 18. Levit xix, 29.):But before the giving of this law (saith Maimonides), if a man found a single woman in a public place, and they agreed on certain terms, to lie together without being married, they were not punished. (See Mr. Selden, lib. v. de Jure N. et G. cap. 4.) What wilt thou give me?’] That which made such facts not to be punished, was (saith the same Maimonides) because of the contract which passed between them. This reward which he gave the harlot for the use of her body, being like the dowry a man gave his wife when he put her away: which being paid, it was thought he did her no

Genesis 38:21

Where is the harlot?. By this it is apparent that the word kedeschah signifies a common whore (as we speak), who publicly prostituted herself for hire; as the Hebrew doctors observe upon this place, and upon DeuL xxiii. 17. But whence this name should be given to harlots is a great doubt; it coming from a root, which signifies that which is sacred. Which hath inclined some learned men to think, that the women-priests consecrated to the service of Baalphegor, or Priapus, were no better than whores: and the men-priests who served Ashteroth, mentioned 2 Kings xxiii. 7. made all whores be called kedischim, which was the name for those devoted to such impure ministcries, (See Mr. Selden, de Diis Syris, Syntag. i. cap. 5. and Syntag. ii. cap. 2.) But such beastly idolatry, surely, was not so old as the days of Jacob: and it seems more reasonable to me to think, that the original word signifying separation, it was applied cither to those who were separated unto holiness, or unto uncleanncss, as harlots were. And they said, there was no harlot in this place.] They knew of none that publicly professed to be a prostitute: nor had they seen any one sit publicly to invite customers. Vcr. 23. Let her take it to her.] Keep the pledge to herself. Lest tve be ashamed.] Though the fact he had committed was in those days lawful (saith Maimonides), that is, was not punished by the judges; yet men did not publicly boast of it, nor were willing to own it; but were ashamed it should be known (which was a sign they were sensible there was a moral turpitude in it), and therefore endeavoured to hide and conceal it; even with the loss of those goods which were of greatest value. For the sense, saith he, of Judah’s words, is this: " It is better to lose what she hath of ours, than, by inquisition after it, to divulge the business, and increase our shame:" (More Ncvochim, par. iii. cap. 49.) Where he bids his reader observe, this is the moral virtue which ought to be learnt from this history; together with justice and equity: which appears in his performing the agreement he made of sending a kid; of which he desires his friend to be a witness, that he might not lie under any suspicion of having offered violence to her.

Genesis 38:24

Bring her forth. Out of her father’s house, into the place of judgment: where he would have her sentenced to the severest punishment. Let her be burnt.] Not presently (for that had been the highest injustice and cruelty, to burn the child in her belly), but after she was delivered; till which time he would have kept her in such safe custody, that this execution might be done upon her. Some think burning was the punishment for adultery in those days. Others think the punishment depended on the will of the supreme governor, whosoever he was: whom some also take to have been Judah himself; as chief in his own family: and that ho was so severe against her because she had disgraced his family, and he was glad to be rid of her, that he might not give his son Selah to. her. But there are those, who think by burnvig is meant no more but branding her in the forehead, to denote her to be a whore. (See Mr. Selden, lib. vii. de Jure N. ct G. cap. 5.) If Judah did mean burning her at a stake (as we now speak), it was a punishment not then commonly used, but inflicted (as his words are, lib. iii. Uxor. Hebr. cap. 12.) " ex more scu lege aliqua singulari:" by some singular custom or law. All this proceeds upon a supposition, that she really was Selah’s wife, though not solemnly married (as the Jews pretend it was necessary, after the law was given), by virtue of the first contract with his eldest brother: which was the reason of her being kept at her father’s house; that nobody else might pretend to her, but she be reserved for him: otherwise there could have been no ground for proceeding against her as an adulteress.

Genesis 38:26

She hath been more righteous than L. These words do not signify that she had in this matter committed a less sin than he (for she had committed a greater), but that in another matter, which was the occasion of this, he had broken his word withlier, when she had, till uow, kept her faith with him; and lived a widow honestly in expectation of his son. Besides, she committed this fact out of desire. to have a child; he, to satisfy his lust. And he knew her no more.] Which some have translated quito the contrary, and he ceased not to know her, i. e. ho solemnly married her, and took her to be his wife: which was unlawful after the law of Moses was given, but as lawful before, as many other things which they practised. And two ofthe Chaldee paraphrasts have feigned a bath-