Leviticus 16
PATAfter that. If there were no return of the flux. She shall be clean.] So as to be restored to common conversation: bat not to the sanctuary, till the following oblations were made. Ver. 21). And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, &c] The same sacrifices which were prescribed in the case of a man who was cured of an issue, (ver. 14.) And this relates only to the extraordinary flux, out of or beyond the usual course of nature, (ver. 25.) for it would have been too burdensome unto some persons, if they had been bound to offer thus once a month. Ver.l. Ji-ND the Lord spake unto Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron.] This chapter would have naturally followed the tenth chapter, whero the death of Ihoso two persons is related, if that had not occasioned the inserting some other laws about uncleanness, (see preface to chapter xi.) which being delivered, Moses now goes on to give direction about the great sacrifice, in which the whole nation was concerned: as he treated of lesser and common sacrifices in the beginning of the book. When they offered before the Lord, and died.] See x. 1. This is mentioned again, to make the priests careful, not only to sacrifice unto the Lord alone, but after such a manner as he ordered. 1 Kings viii. 10, 11.) But the cloud seems to have been on the outside of the tabernacle; and within a glory, or great splendour, only unclouded. And therefore most, I think, understand this of the smoke of the incense, that the highpriest burnt when he entered into the most holy place; which was the cloud wherewith the mercy-seat was then covered, (ver. 13.) And there is great reason for this opinion: for if there had been a cloud in the most holy place, over the mercy-seat, before the high-priest entered, what need had there been to make a new cloud of smoke, (as he is ordered ver. 13.) when the Divine Glory was sufficiently obscured already? Besides, in the place beforementioned, (Exod. xl.) the cloud y as I now observed, is said to be without the tabernacle, and to cover it; the glory only being within: and in the other place of the book of Kings, (and 2 Chron. v. 13, 14.) it is said only to fill the house of the Lord, i. e. the body of the temple: but not to be settled upon the mercy-scat. Where we may very well doubt whether there was any cloud or not; but only the Divine Glory. The only ground that 1 can see for it is, that God is said there to dwell in thick darkness: which seems to import, that the Divine Glory was wrapped up in a cloud. But, however that be expounded, these words, which we here translate, I will appear in the cloud upon the mercyseat, may very well be rendered, I toill be approached in a cloud, (i. e. of incense.) For so this word we translate appear is used Exod. xxiii. 15. not for God’s appearing to to them, but for the people’s appearing before him: and this sense the thirteenth verse seems to enforce, as Campegius Vitringa hath observed, lib. i. Observ. Sacr. cap. 11. tion of the ceremonies under the law, upon this great day of atonement; when the high-priest never put on any of his golden garments for the service of it. And he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh.] To cover his secret parts. For the word flesh is to be understood here as in xv. 2. And shall be girded with the linen girdle, and ivith the linen mitre, &c] These two, with the two foregoing, make up the four white garments: which might possibly, as the Jews say, be made of the finest and richest linen that could be got, that the high-priest might appear splendid in the simplest habit wherein lie ministered. But it is evident he was not allowed to appear in those garments which were wrought with gold, and scarlet, and blue, and purple, (Exod. xxviii. G. 8, &c.) because such very sumptuous apparel, it must be acknowledged, was not so suitable to the service of the day. On which the high-priest (as the Hebrew gloss notes upon this place) did not so much put on the person of a patron, as of an accuser; confessing their sins before God, and begging pardon for them. These are holy garments.] To be used only when he ministered in the sanctuary, (Exod. xxviii. 2.) Therefore he shall ivash his flesh in water, and so put them <?n.] There was no need, upon other days, to wash more than once, in the beginning of Divine service; but on this great day he washed five times, as oft as he shifted his garments, and went from one ministry to another; as, appears in part from ver. 23, 24. where see what I have observed. Hero be seems to speak of his washing after he had offered the morning sacrifice, &c. in his golden garments: and then began the service of the day in these white garments alone. who made two principles, one good and the other bad; which was the ancient belief of. the Chaldeans, and other eastern people, and from them propagated to the Greeks and Romans. Most of whose sacrifices (as another very learned man of our own country halh observed) had respect to these two principles; to one of which they offered in the morning, and to the other at night. See Dr/Windet de Vita Functorum statu, sect. 3. where he observes, that there are plain footsteps of this old erroratthis day,through all the east, as far as China: for there was an endeavour to infect Christianity with it, by Manes the Persian, in the reign of the Emperor Aurelian; nor was there any heresy that spread so far as this dotage did.. Having done what is commanded in the foregoing verses, he came out of the sanctuary, and went to the priest whom he left at the altar of burnt-offering, stirring the blood in the bason, which he delivered to him, (as I observed ver. 11.) and taking it from him, went with it (the second time) within the veil; and standing where he did before, when he burnt the incense, sprinkled it as is directed in the words following. And sprinkle it with his finger.] The very root or essence of a sacrifice (as the maxim of the Jews is) lies in the sprinkling of the blood. Upon the mercy-seat.] One would think, by this translation, that he sprinkled the mercy-seat itself, with some of the blood. But all the Jews understand it quite otherwise: and indeed the Hebrew words are al pene, over against the face, i. e.as they interpret it, (in the Misna beforementioned, cap. 5.) towards the mercy-seat. And so it follows in the next words, and before the mercy-seat shall lie sprinkle. Only this difference there was in the sprinkling: that this particle al> they think, imported that he was to make the first sprinkling, here mentioned, towards the top of the mercy-seat. The Vulgar Latin wholly omits this part of the verse, and only mentions the latter sprinkling, seven times contra propitiatorium, over against the mercy-seat eastward. Eastward.] I. should have thought the observation of onr learned countryman (Air. J. Gregory) very remarkable, if he had been commanded only to sprinkle the blood eastward. For then there might have been room for his conjecture, that though Aaron at all other times turned his face towards the west (where the most holy place was) and at the very killing of the goat and the bullock, not only looked that way himself, but turned their faces towards the west (as the Jews say in Joma), yet, when he came to perform the chief part of this mystery, he turned his back upon the beggarly elements of the world, and sprinkled this blood eastward, to represent the man, whose name is the East, i. e. Christ. But I do not see how this agrees with this sprinkling the blood before the mercy-seat; which could not be done without looking towards the west. And therefore it must be confessed that he did not sprinkle it eastward: but standing eastward of the mercy-seat, with his face towards it, he performed this office, as Mr. Selden observes, (lib. iii. de Synedr. cap. 16. p. 426.) Or it may be said to be done eastward, because that part of the ark before which he sprinkled looked eastward. And before the mercy-seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times.] This is a distinct sprinkling from the foregoing, which was done but once, and towards the upper part of the mercy-scat; but this was done seven times, towards the lower part of it, as the Jews understand it: who say he sprinkled eight times in all, but none of the blood touched the mercy-seat. So the Gemara on that place, and Maimonides in his Jom hakippurim, and Oba* diah Bartenoca, whose words are these; “The drops of blood did not come upon the mercy-scat, but fell upon the ground;” as two of our very learned countrymen have ob^ served, Mr. Shcringham upon Joma, and Dr. Outram, lib i, De Sacrificiis, cap. 16. n. 4. Seven times.] Concerning this number seven, see before, iv. 6. This was the second time of going into the holy of holies upon this day. the beast, was a rite used in all sorts of saqrifices, whether burnt-offerings, peace-offerings, or sin-offerings. See i. 4. iii. 2. iv. 4. 33. In which places, mention is made only of laying on husband: but here the high-priest is commanded to lay on both hands, as he and his sons did in the sacrifice of the bullock and the ram at their consecration, (viii. 14. 18.) The meaning of which was, the more solemnly and entirely to devote the sacrifice to the use for which it was designed; which, in this sacrifice, was to bear all theirsins. For they were all laid upon this sacrifice, unto which the punishment of them was transferred: this rite signifies as much as if they had said, Whatsoever we have done amiss, let not us, but this sacrifice be charged with it: that is, let it bear the punishment which we deserve. Such phrases there are, 2 Sam. i. 16. Esther ix. 25. Psal. vii. 16. and other places. And confess over him.’] This must have been understood, if it had not been expressed; for imposition of hands was always accompanied with prayer, of one sort or other, according to the occasion of it. Insomuch, that the Jews say, “where there is no confession of sin, there is no imposition of hands; for imposition of hands belongs to confession.” (See Dr. Outram De Sacrif. lib. i. cap. 15. n. 8.) And it is observable, that the high-priest made confession three times on this day. First for himself, and then for his brethren the priests, and now for the whole congregation; saying this prayer, (as they tell us in Joma, cap. 6. sect. 2.) " I beseech thee, O Lord, this people, the house of Israel, have done wickedly, and been rebellious, and sinned before thee. I beseech thee now, O Lord, expiate the iniquities, the rebellions, and the sins which thy people the house of Israel have done wickedly, transgressed, and sinned before thee. According as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant (viz. in the thirtieth verse of this chapter),’ on that day he shall make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord.’" Which last word (Lord) as soon as all the priests and the people, that were in the court heard pronounced by the high-priest, they bowed and fell down flat upon their faces, and worshipped, saying, " Blessed be the Lord; let the glory of his kingdom be for ever/’ All the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins.] These three words, iniquities, transgressions, and sins, are the very words used by the high-priest in his confession beforementioned; which comprehend all manner of offences, whether committed deliberately or not against negative or affirmative precepts (as they call them). Grotius, in his notes on this place, hath thus distinguished them, but whether exactly or not cannot be determined. But it is probable that sins signify offences committed by error, not deliberately; iniquities, such as were deliberately committed against the prohibiting precepts; and transgressions, those that were deliberately committed against commanding precepts. All, except those to which cutting o^Twas threatened, which were not expiated by any sacrifice. Putting them upon the head of the goat.] By putting his hand on the head of the goat, and confessing their sins over him (with prayer to God to remit them), they were all charged upon the goat, and the punishment of them transferred from the Israelites unto it. Just as the sins of all mankind were afterwards laid upon our Saviour Christ, (as the prophet speaks, Isa. liii. 6.) " Who his ownself bare our sins in his own body," (saith St. Peter, 1 Ep. ii. 24.) the punishment passing from us to him, “Who was made sin for us/’ (2 Cor. v. 21.) Which expressions are manifest allusions unto this sacrifice on the great day of expiation: which was the most illustrious figure of the sacrifice of Christ; and shews, beyond all reasonable contradiction, that Christ suffered in our stead, and not merely for our benefit. For it is very evident, the sacrifice offered on this day was put in the place of the people; and all their sins, that is, the punishment of them, laid upon its head. And it appears by the form of all other sin-offerings, which were occasionally offered at other times, that he who brought them put off the guilt, which he had contracted, from himself, and laid it on the sacrifice which was to die for him. Which he did by laying his hand on the head of it at the door of the tabernacle while it was yet alive. Then with his hand so placed, he made a confession of his sins, for which he desired forgiveness by the offering of this sacrifice: that is, he prayed by these rites, that, the beast being offered and slain, he might be spared from punishment; which was a plain transferring the guilt from himself unto his sacrifice. Which being yet alive, and thus laden with his guilt, was then brought to the altar, and there slain for the guilty person: that is, it died in his stead; for there was no other reason of its being put to death there in that manner. I have insisted the longer on this, because nothing can better explain the true meaning of Christ’s dying for us: which was by transferring the suffering due to our sins upon him; as the manner was in the legal sacrifices. Which was a thing, let me add, so notorious in the world, that other nations from hence derived the like custom to that here mentioned by Moses. Particularly the Egyptians, as David Chytrseus hath long ago observed, and since him many others out of Herodotus: who tells us, (lib. ii. cap. 39.) that they made this execration over the head of the beast which they sacrificed; Eire fiiWot % (r<pt<rt rotg Svovat, rj Atyv7TT(^ ry <rvfnra<rg icaicbv yzvfoSai, ziq KZ
Leviticus 16:2
Speak unto thy brother Aaron, tltat he come not at all times into the holy place, within the veil. Into the holy place without the veil, he, or some of the other priests* were bound to go every day, morning and evening, when they offered incense: but into this, as none of them might go at all, so he not at all times, when he went into.the other; but only upon one particular occasion, which is mentioned here in this chapter. Before the mercy-seat, which is upon the ark J] This being the place of God’s special presence, nono might enter into it but his principal minister; and he no oftener than the Divine Majesty allowed; which was only once a year, (it appears from ver. 29.) when he offered the great sacrifice here prescribed. And so much was intimated to Moses before, (Exod. xxx. 10.) And the Jews add, that on this day of the year he might go in but four times; once to burn incense; a second time to sprinkle the blood of the bullock; then to sprinkle the blood of the goat; and lastly, to fetch out the censer, wherein he burnt incense. If he went in a fifth time, he died for his presumption, as they say; particularly R. Levi Barzel. (Prsecept, eclxxxvi.) Such sacred places the gentiles had in some countries, which, according to this pattern, were opened only once a year. Particularly Pausanias mentions, in his Boeotica, the temple of Dindymene: which they thought it was not lawful to open more than one day in the year: Mi£ 8* £0* i^urtov etwv yfxlpq, teal ov iriga rb Uobv avotyeiv vojilKovai. And the same he saith of another, in the same book; and in his Eliaca, of the temple of Orcus,‘Avblyvvrai fxtv awali kclW hog tcatrrov, &C. It is opened once every year. (See Dr. Outranks excellent book De Sacrificiis, lib. i. cap. 3.) Lest he die.] As his sons had done for their presumption, in offering Math other fire than God allowed. In the’like danger Aaron himself had been, if he had come into the Divine presence without his leave, and without such caution as is given ver. 13. which is the reason of this order here delivered to Moses, and by him to Aaron, for the prevention of any such dangerous mistake. For I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy-seat.] That was God’s own dwelling-place, where his glory appeared; into which, therefore, none might enter, but when he appointed, and as he directed. The only difficulty is, what is meant by the cloud, wherein ho saith he will appear on the mercy-seat. One would think he meant, as usually, the cloud wherein the Divine Glory resided, (Exod. xl. 34, 35.
Leviticus 16:3
Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place. As he might come into it only once a year; so then with such preparation, and in such a manner, as is here prescribed. And the Jews say, that he was separated from his own house and family seven days before, and dwelt apart from them in a chamber of the temple; that he might the better prepare himself for the offices of this day, by sprinkling the blood of the daily sacrifice, burning incense, and such-like things. And lest he should be either ignorant of his duty (as some proved, in the latter end of their state, when the high-priesthood was bought for money), or forgetful, the* Sanhedrin sent some to read before him the rites of this day; who adjured him also to perform every thing according to God’s command. The night before also they let him eat but little, that no accident in the night might make him unfit to officiate the next day; and that he might awake the sooner, and begin the service of the day betimes, as they did upon all great solemnities. All this, and a great deal more, is related in Codex Joma, cap. 1. And Mr. Selden, likewise, hath observed, out of Sepher Schcbat Jchuda, with what a magnificent pomp the high-priest was conducted from his own house when he went. to the temple, seven days before this day of atonement, accompanied by the king and the whole Sanhedrin, the royal family, and the whole choir of priests, &c. (lib. iii. de Synedr. cap. 11. n. 7.) Something like this was the triumph wherein our blessed high-priest, Christ Jesus, was conducted to Jerusalem, five days before he offered himself there, for the sins of the whole world, (John xii. 1. 12, 13.) With a young bullock for a sin-offering.] To bo offered for himself and for his family, as appears from ver. 6. For no other sacrifice was allowed for the sin of the highpriest (though it were dubious), but only a young bullock", (iv. 2, 3.) And a ram for a burnt-offering.] Which accompanied the sin-offering at his consecration, (viii. 18.) But first of all the morning sacrifice was offered, with the additionals usual on this day (as the Jews say), viz. a bullock, a ram, and seven lambs, all for burnt-offerings.
Leviticus 16:4
He shall put on the holy linen coat, &c. There were eight garments belonging to the attiro of the highpriest: four of which are here mentioned, which the Jews call his white garments; and four more mentioned Exod. xxviii. 4. which they call the golden garments; because there was a mixture of gold in them; whereas these were all made of fine linen. Upon other days, when the highpriest officiated, he was bound to put them on all (not one, of the eight being wanting); but on this day, when he went into the most holy place, he put on only those four, which. w r ere the habit of the ordinary priests as well as his.: This, some conceive, was in token of humility, because this day was appointed for confession of sins, and repentance, &c. Upon which account they imagine, also, these linen garments were coarser than those which he wore everyday with his golden garments. But all the Jews agree, that these garments, which he wore on the day of expiation, were made of the purest and most precious linen of all other: which they call (in Massechet Joma, cap. 3.) fine linen ofPelusium, which was a city in Egypt, famous for the richest and whitest linen, as our Sheringham shews (in his notes on that treatise) out of Pliny and Silius Italicus. And if we may believe the Talmudists, as the high-priest put on fine linen of Pelusium in the morning of this day, so he put on fine linen of India (i. e. in their language, of Ethiopia or Arabia, as Braunius observes, lib. i. de Vest. Sacerd. cap. 7. n. 9.) in the evening of it; which was not of much less value than the other. And this is not disagreeable to Moses, who saith God commanded the priest’s garments to be made for glory and beauty, (Exod. xxviii. 2.) And therefore the high-priest appeared, even upon this day, in a splendid and noble habit; which was not inconsistent with inward humility and lowliness of mind; whereby the comely and beautiful performance of God’s service was not to be obstructed. For whereas, upon other days, the high-priest washed his hands and his feet in the brazen laver; on this day, if we may believe the Jews, he washed them in a vessel of gold, as the same Braunius observes out of Massechet Joma, cap. 4. There arc those who fancy the high-priest went into the most holy placc^with the ephod and breast-plate, whereon were the names of the children of Israel: but that is quite contrary to what Moses here delivers, who mentions no other garments but these of fine linen which he wore upon this day; no, not when he went into the holy place, (ver. 23.) And the Hebrew doctors all thus understand Jt, as Mr. Sclden shews out of them and Josephus, (lib. ii. de Succession, in Pontific. Hebraeor. cap. 7. p. 250.) Yet the Roman church hath grounded a solemn practice upon the forcmentioned fancy; the priests, and bishops too, being wont on Good Friday to minister only in the’ habit of deacons, while they are reading or singing the office of the passion; but when they come to the sacrifice of the mass (as they call it), then they put on richer vestments, proper to their order. Which is a mistaken imita-
Leviticus 16:5
And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel. The former sacrifices (ver. 3.) were for himself: these for all the people. Two kids of the goat for a sin-offering.’] These two goats made but one sin-offering; which is described more largely and particularly, ver. 8 — 10. The former, perhaps, which was sacrificed to the Lord, was to procure those good things which they had forfeited by their sins: and the other (the scape-goat, as we translate it) to avert those evils which they had deserved: for the name that is commonly given it by the Greeks, signifies its power to turn away punishments. Or the simple reason of it might be, that the Israelites, by this double sacrifice (for both were presented before the Lord), might be the more fully satisfied of the expiation of their sins. There is the like example before of two birds appointed for the cleansing of a leper’s house; one of which only was killed, the other let fly away; but both of them are said to cleanse the house, and to be for qtonement, (xiv. 49. 52, 53.) In which some of the ancient fathers thought they saw a notable type of our Lord Christ. Whose sacrifice, as it was prefigured by all the legal sacrifices, (for the paschal lamb itself was a type of him sacrificed for us, 1 Cor. v. 7.) so by this more especially ori the day of expiation. Which was of greater and more universal efficacy than all the rest, and therefore represented him n^ore fully than the other did. Insomuch, that these two goats jpined in one sacrifice, may be thought to represent one Christ, consisting of two natures. For since it wa$ not possible, as Theodoret expresses it, to adumbrate both the " rb Svrjr&y, koi rb aSavarov, that which was mortal, and that which was immortal in Christ; he commanded two to be brought, Iva 6 fitv Suo/isvoc, rig <rapkoc rb -rraSirrbv 7rpoTU7r<J<rp. 6 S£ tnroXvofitvoc Srikway to enra* 0£c rfjc $t<Jrr/Toc* that the goat which was offered in sacrifice, might prefigure the passable nature of his flesh: and that which was let go, might shew the impassable nature of his Divinity, 97 Qunest. xxxii. in Levit. And St. Cyril discourses to the same, purpose, in his ninth book against Julian. And one ram for a burnt-offering.] Which was no more than was appointed for Aaron himself, (ver. 3.) who herein is equalled with all the princes of the people; in whose name this rain seems to have been offered. Ver. G. And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin-offering, which is for himself] Not by killing it, which was done afterwards, (ver. 11.) but only by presenting it before God to be sacrificed; which was done with a solemn prayer, wherein he beseeched God to be propitious unto him and his. The form of it is set down in Massechet Joma, cap, 3. sect. 8. He laid his hand upon the head of the bullock, and said, " I have done amiss, and been rebellious, and sinned before thee, I and my house. I beseech thee now, O Lord, remit my rebellion, and my sin which I have committed, and my house," &c. And make an atonement for himself, and for his house.] For his family, as I said, (ver. 3.) and for all the priests; who are called the house of Aaron, (Psal. cxv. 10. 12. exxxv. 9.) And I do not sec why all the house of Levi should not also be understood; for they are not comprehended under the name of the congregation of the children of Israel (mentioned in the verse before), and therefore must be contained here under the name of the house of Aaron. (See Numb. i. 49.)
Leviticus 16:7
And he shall take the two goats. Mentioned ver. 5. which were to be of equal stature, of the same colour, and the same price, (as the Hebrew doctors say in Joma, cap. G.) both designed to the same end, the expiation of their sins. And present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle, &c] All the sin-offerings which were made for the congregation, were presented either by the high-priest, or by the elders, (iv. 15.) and by them devoted to God, to be sacrificed on his altar. For this presenting of the goat is the same with his offering of the bullock in the verse foregoing; which was nothing else but his solemn consecration of them, as I said, to be sacrificed. According to which pattern, our blessed Lord and Saviour, a little before he suffered upon the cross, and made himself a sacrifice for us, voluntarily offered himself to die for our sins. Which is the meaning of those words of his, John xvii. 19. where, praying for his apostles, he saith, For their sakes I sanctify myself: that is, offer myself to die as an expiatory sacrifice for them. For that ayi&Zstv sometimes signifies as much as wpoafyiptiv, Dr. Outram hath demonstrated, lib. ii. De Sacrificiis, cap. 3. And so St. Chrysostom here expounds these words, I sanctify myself, by Trpoa(j>(pu> <roi $uvtav, I offer thee a sacrifice; or consecrate and devote myself to be sacrificed. And it is not an improbable conjecture of another very learned friend of mine, now also with God (Dr. Spencer), that the appointing of two goats to be both presented to God at the same time, and with the* same rites, was to preserve the Jews in a belief that there is but one Principle of all things: who both bestows good things, and inflicts evil. Contrary to the opinion-of the gentiles,
Leviticus 16:8
And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats.) The manner of it is described in the same treatise, Massechet Joma, (cap. 3. sect. 9.) The high-priest went to the east part of the court, on the north side of the altar, having the sagan (his vicar) on his right hand, and the head of the house of the fathers on his left. There stood two goats with an urn or box, which they call calpi, (the very same name which Lucian, and the scholiast upon Aristophanes, give to the same thing, as our learned Sheringham upon that book, and Bochart in his Hierozoicon, have observed.) Into this urn the two lots were cast, which were made of box-wood (as the Misna here says), and in aftertimes came to be of gold. But Maimonides, in his treatise on this subject, saith, they might be made either of wood or stone, or any metal, provided one of them was not bigger than the other, (nor one of gold, the other of silver, &c.) but both every way equal, as the goats were to be. Upon one of these lots was written the name of the goat which was for the Lord; and on the other that which was for Azazel. And then the priest, shaking the urn, and putting in both his hands, (as it there follows in Joma, cap. 4.) took up a lot in each. And if he brought up God’s lot in his right hand, the sagan, vtho stood there, said, “My lord, lift up thy right hand:” if in his left hand, the head of the fathers said, " Lift up thy left hand" And so the priest let the right hand lot fall upon the goat that stood on the right hand; and his left hand lot upon the other. One lot for the Lord.] To be offered unto the Lord at the altar. The other lot for the scape-goat.] Or, as it is in the Hebrew, for Azazel; as some have anciently translated it.. Now why a goat was offered iri sacrifice, and another goat let go free, laden with their sins, rather than any other creature, may be understood, perhaps, from the inclination of the heathen world in those days, when they worshipped demons in the form of a goat. The Egyptians were famous for this, and the Israelites themselves (it appears from the seventeenth chapter of this book, ver. 7.) were prone to offer sacrifices le seirim; which signifies demons in that form. And therefore, to take them off from such idolatrous practices, God ordained these creatures themselves to be sacrificed and slain, to whom they had offered sacrifice. And the young ones he appointed for this purpose (for so seirim signifies), which the Egyptians most of all honoured, and abhorred to offer or kill. So Juvenal: " Nefas illic fcetum jugulare Capcllaj." Sat. xv. ver. 11. Now from hence, perhaps, it was, that some fancied Azazel vol. I. signified the. devil; as R. Menachcm and R.’ Eliezcr* among the Jews; Julian among the heathen; and some’ great men lately among us. Who conceive, that as the other goat was offered to God at the altar, so this was sent among the demons, which delight to frequent desert places, and there appeared often in the shape of this creature, • But this will not agree with the Hebrew text, which says this goat was for Azazel, as the other was for the Lord. Now none sure will be so profane, as to imagine, that boththese goats being set before the Lord, and presented to him, as equally consecrated to him, he would then order one of them to be for himself, and the other for the devil/ “We must therefore be content with our own translation, which derives the word Azazel from ez, a goat; and azal, to go away; and fitly calls it the scape-goat: so Paulus Fagius, and a great many others: against which I see nothing objected, but that ez signifies a she-goat, not a he. Which made Bochartus fetch this word from the Arabic; in which language azala signifies to remove, or to separate. And this agrees well enough with the name of this goat, according as the ancient translators understood it; some of which, as Symmachus, -render it aicepxofievov, ^ te 9 oat going away: others, as Aquila, atroktkvixivov, the goat let loose: and the LXX. airo-rrofxtraiov. In which they had no thought of the notion of this word among the Greeks/ who called those demons by this name, who were esteemed a\z%iKaKoi and atrorgotraioi (as J. Pollux speaks), averters of evil things fr om them: but simply meant, as Theodoret interprets it, a7ro7r£ju7rdju£i>oc £<c rrjv ipr\fiov, the goat sent away into the wilderness. And so St. Jerome expounds it, Hircu$ emissarius, which agrees with the notion which Bochartus puts upon the word out of the Arabic tongue. This goat being sent away into remote places, there to remain separate from the flock to which he belonged; and that upon a mountain (as the Jews fancy) in the wilderness of Sinai, which from this goat was called ^Izaze/; but I see no ground for this.
Leviticus 16:9
And Aaron shalpbring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell. In the Hebrew the word is, went up; for he first took it up out of the urn, and then let it fall upon the goat. ti And offer him for a sin-offering.] Devote him to God to be a sacrifice for their sins: beseech him to accept of this sacrifice for that end. So the word offer, I observe, signifies, ver. 6. order being’ given afterward for the killing of the goat, (ver. 15.)
Leviticus 16:10
But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the Lord. This shews that the scape-goat was equally consecrated “and devoted to God, as the other was; though not to be killed, but sent away alive; after the other had been offered in sacrifice.’ To make an atonement with him.] For this was a sin-offering, though not slain, no less than the other: as appears from yer. 5. which shews these two goats made but one sin-offering; which was partly slain at the altar, and partly’ let go (as it here follows) to run whither he would; the* more perfectly to represent the taking away of their sins, and removing their iniquity, (as the prophet speaks, Zech/ iii. 9.) by virtue of this offering for them. Some, indeed, h&ve thought that this goat was not sacrificed, but only presented alive before God, and so let go \ lest it shquld be thought God could not forgive their sins, f Microsoft ® 3 G [chap. XVI. unless he was appeased by some slain beast: which imagination was destroyed by letting this sin-offering be left alive, at full liberty to run quite away* But I can see no ground for such a construction; because these were not two but one sin-offering, as I said before: which being slain in part, established that opinion in them, of the impossibility of obtaining reconciliation without a bloody sacrifice. Certain it is, that the whole law supposes this, that withoxtt shedding of blood there is no remission, as the apostle observes, (Heb. ix. 22.) And therefore it will be more agreeable to the Holy Scriptures, if wc think, as some do, that the first goat represented our Lord in his sufferings, and this other in his resurrection; whereby he was freed from the bands of death: both his death and his resurrection being for our deliverance, as tho apostle shews, Rom. iv. tilt.. And let him go free.] Whither he pleased. For so the Hebrew word schalac (send him away, or dismiss him), signifies, in Scripture, entire liberty, such as God demanded for the Israelites from Pharaoh, (Exod. iv. 23. v. 1.) For a scape-goat.] Into remote places. Into the tvilderness.] In token their sins were quite carried away, to be found no more; for the goat was not merely sent into the wilderness, but.into the most desert places of it, as appears from ver. 22.
Leviticus 16:11
And Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sinoffering which is for himself, &c. This former part of the verse is word for word the same with ver. 6. which shews that offering there (as, we translate it) was nothing else but bringing it to be offered; or presenting it before the Lord, to be a sacrifice for himself, and for his family. But now his bringing it was, that it might be killed immediately, as it follows in the latter part of this verse. And shallmake an atonement for himself, and his home.’) By killing it,, as the next words tell us. And shall kill the bullock of the sin-offering which is for himself] He was first to offer for himself, before he could acceptably offer for the people, as the apostle observes, Heb. y. 3. ix.7. And as the Jews tell us, (in Massechct Joma^ cap. 4. sect. 2.) he again put his hand upon the head of the bullock, and made the confession and supplication beforementioned upon ver. 6. And when he had done, then he killed the bullock with his own hands. For though all other sacrifices might be killed by any person, yet the high-priest himself was bound to kill this; as they say in the same place of the Misna, (sect. 3.) And having received the blood of the bullock in a bason, he delivered it to another priest, to keep it in continual agitation, till he had offered incense in tho holy place, that so it might not grow thick and be clotted; but be kept liquid and thin, fit to be sprinkled before thQ mercy-scat..
Leviticus 16:12
And he shall take a censer full of burning coals offire.~. Which he held in his right hand. From the altar before the Lord.~] From tho brazen altar where the bullock was slain: for coals were burning before God no where else but there.. And his hands full of sweet incense beaten small.] AVith his left hand he took as much of the incense, mentioned Exod. xxx. 34. 36. as his hand would hold (besides tho incense which he burnt every morning and evening, which was a whole pound), and put it into a cup. And bring it within the veil.] AVith both these, the. censer of coals, and the cup of focense (the former in his right hand, the other in his left), he went within the veil, which divided the holy place from the most holy, and set down tho censer; and then (as it follows in the next verse, sco there) threw the incense upon the burning coals. This the Hebrew doctors take to have been so difficult a work, that, in the Gemara upon Joma, (cap. 1.) they say some of tho elder priests were sent to him beforehand, to shew him how ho should fill his hand with the incenso. And tho Misna there says, that they adjured him in these words: 11 AVe are the legates of the great Sanhedrin, and thou art our legate and theirs; wc adjure thee, we adjure thee by Him whose name dwells in this house, that thou change not any one thing of all that wc have said unto thee.” And so they parted with tears on both sides. The reason of which solemn adjuration, they say, was, that the Sadducecs affirmed, he might burn the incense without tho veil, and so enter into the most holy place; directly contrary to this text, which required him to do it within; where nobody could seo what the high-priest did, and consequently could not tell whether he performed the service there aright. Therefore they took this oath of him, in the latter ages of their state, when some of the faction of the Sadducecs were thrust into tho priesthood, as Mr. Selden probably conjectures, (lib. iii. de Syncdriis, cap. 11. n. 2.) This was the first time of tho high-priest’s going into the holy - of holies on this great day.
Leviticus 16:13
And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord. He entered (as the Misna saith in Joma, cap. 5.) with his face towards the south; and so went sideways (for he might not look upon the ark, where the Divine Glory was) till he came to the staves of the ark; where he set down the censer, and put on the incense. And having filled the house with a cloud of smoke, he went out backward (out of reverence to the Divine Majesty), into the holy place without the veil. Where, when he was come, he made this short prayer, “May it please thcc,0 Lord God, that this year may be hot and also wet; that the sceptre may not depart. from the family of Judah, nor thy pcoplo Israel want food; and that the prayer of tho wicked may not be heard.” And then he presently went out of the sanctuary, and shewed himself to the people; that they might not suspect he had done amiss, and miscarried in his office.. For so they say it sometimes happened, that the high-priest, having violated these holy rites appointed by God, was struck dead in the holy place. The incense which was burnt every day in the holy place, at the golden altar, representing the prayers of the saints, as St. John teaches us, (Rev. viii. 3, 4.) this incense, which was burnt in the holy of holies, may well he thought to represent the prayers of tho high-priest himself, which he made upon this occasion; as our blessed Saviour did before he offered the great sacrifice of himself (John xvii. of which more hereafter), with the blood of which ho now appears in the heavens before God for us. J’hat the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy-seat that is upon the testimony.] So that nothing of it might bo seen: it being the place of the residence of the Divino Majesty, (Exod. xxv. 21, 22.) whose glory was inaccessible. That he die not.] By gazing on tho Divine Glory. (Sec ver. 2. find Exod. xxxiii. 20.)
Leviticus 16:14
And he shall take of the blood of the bullock.]
Leviticus 16:15
Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering that is for the people. The blood of which was received ill a bason, as that of the bullock was, (see ver, 11.) and he carried it within the veil (as here follows), and did just as he had done before, (ver. 14.) But whether he first burnt incense, as he had done before he brought in the blood of the bullock, is uncertain: it is likely the fume that had been then made still remained; so that there was no need to renew it. And do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle, &e.] For he stood in the same place (as the Misna observes), and there sprinkled once towards the top of the mercy-seat; and then seven times before the bottom of it. Which is not here expressly said, but is to be understood from what goes before; which orders him to do with this blood as he had done with the other. This now was the third time of his going into the most holy place upon this day. (See ver. 2.)
Leviticus 16:16
And he shall make an atonement for the holy place. By the sprinkling beforementioned (both of the blood of the bullock and of the goat, as I gather from ver. 18.) God’s own dwelling-place was purified: the blood (which was sprinkled seven or eight times before the mercy-seat) being thrown, it is probable, towards both sides of it. Because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and. because of their transgressions in all their sins.] The many sins whereby they had transgressed God’s holy laws, the whole year before, had made them so unclean, that it provoked God to leave them, and made this most holy place unfit for his habitation; unless he were reconciled to them: for it was seated among an unclean people, as the rest of the sanctuary was; and on that score might need an atonement. (See Exod. xxix. 36, 37.) And so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation.] When he had done all this within the veil, he was to do the same without in the sanctuary: where he sprinkled first the blood of the bullock, and then the blood of the goat, against the veil which parted the sanctuary from the holy of holies. So the Misna in the place forementioned; and R. Solomon Jarchi upon these words; " Ashe sprinkled part of the blood of both sacrifices, once above, and seven times beneath, in the inward sanctuary; so he sprinkled towards the veil without, once above, and seven times bellow.” For they all agree the blood was not sprinkled upon the veil, but before it: by which sprinkling the sanctuary was purified, as the apostle observes, when he saith, almost alt things were by the taw purged with blood, &c, (Heb. ix. 21—23.) That remaineth among them in the midst of their unclean* ness.] Surrounded by a sinful people, Avho are full of legal, as well as other impurities: and had been likewise defiled by many, who had ignorantly come into it, in their unclean* ness. So Maimonides judiciously observes. It could scarce be avoided, but some or other would ignorantly, and some presumptuously offend, by going into the sanctuary, or eating holy things when they ought not: and therefore God commanded this expiation to be made for the pollutions of the sanctuary and its utensils by such means, (More Ncvoch. par. iii. cap. 47.)
Leviticus 16:17
And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in 3G2 Microsoft® [chap. xv.r. the holy place. During this action none of the priests, who used to attend in the tabernacle, were to coinc into it, till the high-priest had expiated its unclcanncss; which it was supposed to have contracted by their coming into it all the year before. Until he came out.] Of tho holy place. And have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.] Finished all that ho had to do there, for tho expiation of his own sins, and his family’s, and all tho people’s. That is, from the time of his going to offer incense, till he came out to purify the tabernacle. Some of which time he spent in prayer to God, (as I observed ver. 13.) for all the people; as he had done before when he presented the sin-offerings to him; with solemn supplication for himself and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel; the forms of w r hich arc extant in their books. In conformity to which, when our blessed Saviour consecrated himself to be a sacrifice for us, (as I noted upon ver. 7.) he first commended himself to.God, in that solemn’ prayer before his death, John xvii. ver. 1, 2, &c. and then his apostles, who were his household, ver. 9, 10. and so forward to the twentieth verse; and then prayed for all that should believe on him; i. e. the whole congregation of Christian people, from ver. 20. to the end. Immediately after which, he went to the place where ho was apprehended, and led to be condemned and crucified, John xviii. 1. (See Dr. Outram De Sacrifices, lib. ii.: cap. 3. n. 3.).,
Leviticus 16:18
And he sltallgo out unto the altar that is before the Lord. These words, before the Lord, seem to restrain this to the golden altar, where incense was offered in the sanctuary: and so I find it is generally interpreted, even by the Jews themselves, (in Joma,.cap. 5. sect. 5.) as well as Christians. But the words,. he shall go out, plainly signify his coming from the sanctuary, where the golden altar was (and had been cleansed, we may well suppose, together with it, ver. 1G.) in the outward court, to the altar. <>f burnt-offering, which was also before the Lord, (Exod. xxix. 11.) though at a greater distance from him: and which, one would think, stood in need to be cleansed, as much as the altar of incense. Now, unless it was ordered to be cleansed in these words, I can sec no care taken about it at all. In Exod. xxx. 10. there is express mention, indeed, made of making an atonement upon the altar of incense once a year; and nothing said of the other: and • if we will so understand it here, then the words, he shall go put, must haverespect to Jus going into the holy place, mentioned in the verse before. And make an atonement for it.] This is generally understood, as I said, of the golden altar, because such express mention is made of its purification yearly, in the place now mentioned, (Exod. xxx. 10.) And, no doubt, that which is here commanded was done there, when lie made atonement for the table, where it stood: but there being the same need, as I said, to expiate the other altar (where no fewer errors had been committed than here, and which stood nearer to an unclean people, who encompassed it), I cannot but think that it is here included. And shall take of the. blood of the bullock, and of the goat.] He put the blood of the bullock and of the goat together; and then poured them into another vessel, that they might be well mingled., For here is no command in this place, that he should go rounc’ the altar twice; and tip the bonis of it, first with the blood of the bullock, and then of the goat, separate one from the other; as the Misna in Joma observes, cap. 5. sect. 4. And put it upon the horns of the altar round about.] He began at the north-east corner, and so went to the northwest; and from thence to the south-west, and lastly to the south-east: and as he came near to each corner, he put the blood upon it. So the Jews describe this matter in the same place, sect 5.
Leviticus 16:19
And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times. Not upon the middle of the altar, but nigh the corners; viz. in the place where he ended, when he put the blood upon the horns of the altar. So the Jews say in the place abovementioned, (sect. G.) And I do not see why the particle upon should not be expounded here, as in ver. 15. (if their interpretation be true), to signify, that he sprinkled the blood before the altar; which he did not touch. And shall cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanuess of the children of Israel.] The Jews refer this cleansing to his taking the coals and the ashes from the alter, that he might sprinkle the blood in a clean place. And then the words are to be translated, He shall sprinkle the blood, &c. having cleansed and hallowed it. But the conclusion of the verse determines us to another sense, which is, that by sprinkling the blood he cleansed and sanctified it, from the uncleanuess of the children of Israel, whereby it had been defiled: the priests having either come in their uncleanness thither, or not performed their service as they ought there; and the people thereby remaining in their impurities. Now, when the high-priest had done all this, the Jews say (in the Misna beforenamed) he poured the rest of the blood of the. bullock and goat at the bottom of the altar of burnt-offerings (where, I conceive, he concluded this atonement), for there was a conveyance to carry it away, as I observed upon iv. 17. And they make account, also, that if every thing was not done in this order it was ineffectual, and was to be done over again. For example; if the blood of the goat was sprinkled before the blood of the bullock, (contrary to the directions, ver. 14, 15.) he returned, and’ sprinkled the blood of the goat after that of the bullock, &c.
Leviticus 16:20
And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place. Making it fit to continue God’s dwellingplace, (ver. JG.) And the tabernacle of the congregation.] By this, I think, is meant the sanctuary, and every thing in it; particularly the golden altar.’ And the altar.] Of burnt-offerings, where ho ended his atonement for the whole house of God. He shall bring the live goat.] Two had been presented to the Lord, (ver. 7. 10.) that is, solemnly consecrated and devoted to be expiatory sacrifices; one of which having been slain, the other was now brought to be made an expiation for sin, after another manner. And he was brought, no doubt, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, w T herc they were wont to lay their hands upon other sacri- • fices, (i. 3, 4.)
Leviticus 16:21
And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat. Laying of the baud upon the head of
Leviticus 16:22
And the goat shall beariipon him all their iniquities. This shews more fully still the nature of this sacrifice, in which all their iniquities, t. e. the punishment of them was laid, that he might carry them away. For this goat was not capable to bear their sins, but only their punishment; as Christ also did, who knew no sin, and yet was made sin; by having the punishment of our sins laid on him. For, that this scape-goat, which was loaded with their sins, was a sin-offering, is plainly said before in this chapter; and consequently represented Christ (who is our sin-offering), as well as the other part of this sin-offering did, whose blood was carried into the holy place. And in some regard this scape-goat was a very notable representation of him; if it be true, that our Saviour entered upon his office, of being the Mediator of our reconciliation with God, upon this great day of atonement, which was the day on, which he was baptized, as our Dr* Jackson, together with some good chronologers think. For tliough the tradition of the western church be, that his baptism was on the sixth of January, yet, as Jansenius, and some others of the Roman communion, do not think fit to follow it, so ho judges it more probable to have been on the tenth of September. In the beginning of which month, when the feast of blowing of trumpets was celebrated, (as we read xxiii. of this book, 24.) John Baptist began to lift up his voice like a trumpet, and call the Jews to repentance. Who accordingly flocked to him, and, confessing their sins, were baptized by hiin in Jordan; where our Saviour also being baptized on the tenth day, which was the day of atonement, and being declared the Son of God by a voico from heaven, was " immediately driven by the Spirit into the wilderness," as St. Mark tells us, i. 12. Which was a manifest indication (he thinks) to John Baptist, that this was the Redeemer of the world prefigured by the scape-goat; who, going into the wilderness on the day of atonement, immediately after the people had made confession of their sins, gave him to understand (who was w r cll acquainted with the meaning of the legal rites) that he was sent by God to take upon himself the sins of tho world, and carry them away, by being, in due season, offered to God, and slain as a sacrifice to God for them. And this he did at that very time, when the paschal lamb was killed, (as I have shcwTi upon Exod. xii. G.) to the end that they might take notice he was the Lamb of God, whose sacrifice that lamb prefigured: as by being led into the wilderness on the same day as the scape-goat was carried thither, he shewed that tho mystery represented by that ceremony was exactly fulfilled in him. This notion of his I thought good to mention (though, as far as I know, he is singular in it), because it carries some probability in it, if w T hat the apostle saith (Coloss. ii. 17.) be well considered, that the law contained " shadows of things to come, the body of which was Christ." Who was a body consisting of so many different parts, and so complete (as he observes), that no one, nor a few legal ceremonies, could perfectly foreshadow it: but as the ceremonies were many, and almost infinite, so every one did foreshadow some part or piece of this complete body: that is, no remarkable part of it, no special event or action, which concerned our Saviour Christ, but w r as foreshadowed by some or other legal ceremony: see Christ’s Answer to John’s Question, numb. 62 — 64. and his ninth book upon the Creed, concerning the Consecration of the Son of God (which was printed several years after), sect. 4. chap. 24. n. 5 — 8. where he resumes this argument, and endeavours to answer this question; Why, since Christ was to accomplish the legal priesthood and sacrifice, by Iris bloody sacrifice upon the cross, he did not offer himself, and die upon this very day of atonement. To which he gives full satisfaction: but it is too long here to be inserted. Unto a land not inhabited.] So the LXX. translate tho Hebrew word gezera, 7S/V aj3arov, a land into which nobody came, or desolate country. The Hebrew word properly imports a land cut off, (as Bochart observes, lib. ii. Hierozoic. cap. 54. par. i.) that is, from habitable countries; not which cuts off what is sent into it, by its rugged and sharp stones, as the Jews expound it. This still sets out the design of this sacrifice, which was to free men so perfectly from the punishment of their sins, that they should not fear the return of them anymore. For this goat was not merely sent into the wilderness, but into the most uninhabitable and inaccessible part of it (as the Greek word properly signifies), where none were likely ever to see it again. And he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.] When ho came to the last stage, nobody accompanied him that led the goat any further; but he went the tenth mile alone, by himself; and the men in the tabernacle only stood looking to see what he did with it. And tho Misna saith (in the place beforenamed), that he threw it headlong down the rock Tzuk; where, they say, it was broke in pieces before it came to the middle of it; or, as Jonathan said, God raised a storm which blew the goat down with a mighty force. But this is contrary to the very words of Moses, who saith, he was to let the goat go, or dismiss him, in the wilderness, to run whither he would. And it seems contrary also to the intention of this law, which was, that only one of the goats should be killed, the other let go alive. Whereby was represented, that their sins, which were expiated by the blood of tho sacrifice, should not return again to be to 32.) And this appears plainly from the sacrifices themselves that arc.here appointed; which had no virtue in them from their own worth and value, but only from God’s institution, to make expiation for any sin. For the death of a bullock or a goat was not of such account with God, that it could prevail for the taking away of guilt, unless he had given it such a power. And that power which he was pleased to allow unto them, was neither infinite, nor could it be so. For the guilt that they were principally designed to abolish, was not of such a nature as to require such an expiation: it arising from things which were neither good nor evil in themselves; and therefore could not create such a guilt. Such were all the unclcanncsscs from certain natural fluxes, from touching a dead body, and innumerable other such-like impurities; which depending wholly upon the will of God, who by a positive law made such things to bring men under a guilt; by the same will he appointed a proportionable expiation of it l>y these sacrifices, whose power to cleanse depended also purely upon his pleasure. And if they had any virtue to purge men from the real guilt of sins committed against the eternal laws of God; this they had not of themselves, but from the most gracious will of God, who w r as pleased to apply to this purpose the future satisfaction of the immaculate Lamb of God, of which these sacrifices were a shadow and type. For a body being prepared for the Son of God, and he offering himself for us, that was a sacrifice of such infinite value in its own nature, that it expiated all manner of sins of all men. To this effect, that excellent person Joh. Wagenseil discourses, in his confutation of R. Lipman’s Carmen Memoriale, p.
Leviticus 16:23
And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation. All that the high-priest did about the scapegoat was performed at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; where he laid his hands upon him, and confessed over him all their sins, (see ver. 20, 21.) which being done, and he having sent the goat away, he is now ordered to come into the sanctuary itself. And shall put off the linen garments which lie put on when he went into the holy place.] See ver. 4. The Jews say there were two sorts of white garments which he wore on this day: one in the morning, which was made of fine linen of Pelusium, which was a third part of greater value than those he wore in the evening, which were of Indian linen. Now here he speaks only of the garments that he wore in the morning, wherein he had hitherto officiated; but is ordered, after he had done all this, to put them off; there being many other things to be still performed upon this day; yea, he was to go once more into the holy place, in order to which he put on other garments; as will appear in what follows. And shall leave them there.) Never to be used more, either by him, or by any body else. But they were laid up where they were left; and new ones made against the next year, as the Gcmara upon the third chapter of Joma relates. And the same is affirmed by Maimonides, R. S. Jarchi, and others, mentioned by Braunius, lib. ii. de Vest. Sacerd. cap. 25. n. 9. It. Levi Barzelonita also gives the same exposition of it, Pnecept. 99. and see Mr. Scldcn, lib. iii. dc Synedr. cap. xi. p. 143.
Leviticus 16:24
And he sluill wash his flesh with water in tlte holy place. Either in the la ver which stood in the outward court, or in a room in the tabernacle, which in aftertime was called happarvah; where the priest, they say, washed himself upon this day every time he changed his garments. And this agrees well enough with the words of Moses, which here follow, that when he had put on his garments, he should come forth; that is, from this chamber, to perform such offices as are aftermentioned. The end of this washing, in this place, seems to have been, that he might purify himself after he had touched the goat, which bare all their iniquities, (ver, 21.) as the man that carried him into the wilderness was to wash after he had done that business, (ver. 26.) Though others will have it, that it was in token he had nOw finished the expiation. Certain it is, here is another washing, distinct from that mentioned ver. 4. when he put on tho white garments. Which in part justifies what the Misna saith in Joma, cap. iii. sect. 3, that the high-priest washed five times upon this day; all in the house happarvah, except the first; which could not be in the court of the tabernacle, because he was to wash before he entered into it. For there were five ministries to be performed upon this day, at each of which he changed his garments; and between every ministry, when he changed his garments, he washed himself. There is a long discourse about this, and about washing his hands and hi& feet, in Torah Cohanim, quoted by our learned countryman, Mr. Sheringham, in his annotations upon Codex Joma, p. 57, &c. which they endeavoured to ground upon the very words of this verse. * Now as the leading of Christ into the wilderness, upon the day of atonement, was foreshadowed by the ceremony of the scape-goat; so his baptism on the same day was as expressly foreshadowed, or prefigured, as any event concerning him, either was, or could be, by the legal ceremony here mentioned, of Aaron’s washing his body in the holy place. They are the words of Dr. Jackson, in Christ’s Answer to John’s Question, sect. 64. where he endeavours to make out this. And put on his garments.] viz. His other garments, wherein he officiated upon other days; which the Jews call his golden garments, to distinguish them from the white garments; which alone he wore when he went into the most holy place. And the Jews call by this name of golden gar* ments, all the eight garments of the high-priest: four of which were common to him with the lower priests, and were made only of linen (yet they never call them by the name of white garments, which they appropriate to those in which he went to the most holy place); the other four, which gave the name to all the rest, weTC proper only to the highpriest himself; viz. the robe (which had bells of gold at the bottom), the ephod, the breast-plate, and the golden-plate upon his forehead: which being put over the other four common garments, made him appear as if he were all clothed in gold. For they either consisted of solid gold, as the plate on his forehead; or had solid gold appendant, as the robe had; or had gold interwoven, as the ephod and the breast-plate. Now he put on these, after he had put off the linen garments, mentioned ver. 4. 23. which were never used but when he ministered in the holy of holies; where he did not appear with the breast-plate of urim and thummim, and the rest of the golden garments, as’somo learned men have imagined; particularly Corn. Bertram,
Leviticus 16:25
And the fat of the sin-offering shall be burnt upon the altar. This also, I think, should be translated in the same manner, having burnt the fat of the sin-offering: which was done, I suppose, in the morning, when both the bullock and the goat were offered for sin, (ver. 11. 14.) but was not mentioned till now, to shew that their sacrifices were not perfected till both Aaron and the people were reconciled to God; after which their bumt-sacrifices were acceptable to him. This burning of the fat was ordered in all sin-offerings, (iv. 8* 10. 2G.) and therefore, was not now to be omitted. And, perhaps, it was reserved to bo burnt, when the flesh of the bullock and the goat was burnt without the camp, (ver. 27.) which was in the conclusion of all the services of this day.
Leviticus 16:26
And he that let go the goat for the scape-goat. After the man had dismissed the goat, it was not lawful for him to return farther back than one mile to the last tabernacle, where he was permitted to rest himself after his labour, and not remain all night in the wilderness. So they tell us in Joma, cap. G. sect. G. Shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water.] This goat being a public KaSappa, or purgation, (upon whom all their sins were thrown, was extremely impure; and therefore could not be touched, without rendering the person who led him away unclean in the highest degree: which was the reason that he was bound to wash both his clothes and also his whole body in water, before he could so much as come into the camp. Porphyry observes the same custom among the heathen, who lv Svaiaig v7rorpo7rafctc (as his words are), in such kind of sacrifices as those for the averting evils, permitted no man who had meddled with them to come into the city, or to go to his own house, prj 7rp6npov iaOrtra kq\ aw/xa 7rora/io7c v vnyy viroKaSypac, wlw had not first washed his clothes and hip body in some river, or in spring-water, (lib. ii. -mpi’A-jtoxvc* sect. 44.) For nothing is more known than that such a kind of purification for washing themselves, was | custom all the world over; and continues to this day in the eastern, or other hot countries, not only among the Mahometans, but the pagans, who plunge themselves three times, one after another, into their rivers, rising up with their faces to the cast, as all travellers into those parts tell us. And afterward come into the camp.] Have free conversation with his brethren, and, I suppose, without any farther ceremony, be admitted to the sanctuary. ^
Leviticus 16:27
And the bullock for the sin-offering, and the goat for the sin-offering. Mentioned ver. 11. 15. Whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy place.] Of which we read in the same place, ver. Shall one carry forth.] But first they were ripped up, and the imurim, as they call them, (mentioned in iv. 8, 9.) taken out, to be burnt upon the altar. And then the priest dissected them, (as the Misna saith in Joma, cap. G. sect. 7.) not to pieces, as was wont to be done in burnt-offerings, but made only deep incisions, letting the parts hang still together; which being done, four men, saith R. Solomon, carried them forth upon two staves or bars, one being not able to do it: and accordingly the LXX. translate, these words iZofoovm, they shall carry forth. But one person, it is likely, had the principal care to see them burnt; which is the reason he only is mentioned. Without the camp.] Into a clean place, where the ashes were wont to be poured out,*(iv. 12.) There were three camps; (as I noted before, xiii.46.) the camp of the people, unto which Jerusalem answered in aftertimes; the camp of the Levites, unto which answered the mountain of tlie house (as they called it), the whole circuit about the temple; and the camp of God, or the sanctuary with all its courts, unto which answered the temple and its courts. So Maimonides, in his treatise called Beth Habbechira, cap. vii. Now, as these sacrifices were carried to be burnt without the camp of the people, when they were in the wilderness, so they were burnt without the city of Jerusalem, after the temple was built there. Which illustrates the words of the apostle, Heb. xiii. 10, 11, &c. where he takes it for granted, as a thing they all knew, that Jerusalem answered to the camp of Israel: and from thence shews, that the mystery prefigured by this goat, whose blood was brought into the holy place to make atonement (as he speaks in this verse), was accomplished in our blessed Lord and Saviour, who, that he might sanctify tlie people with his own blood, suffered without the gate, as the apostle there observes: that is, without the city, yet near the suburbs of Jerusalem; whose type or figure was the camp of the Israelites in the wilderness. And the intent of the apostle in this, and other such-like observations, was to shew, that our Saviour’s sufferings on the cross were a most true and proper sacrifice; a sacrifice fully satisfactory for the sins of the world: or rather, more satisfactory for all the sins of men against the moral law of God, than the sacrifices on the day of atonement, the Passover, or other anniversary solemnities, were for sins merely against the law of ceremonies: as the apostle shews in the foregoing part of that epistle, (Heb. ix. 13, 14.) And they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung.] Here, it is plain, there was more than one who carried the bodies of these beasts without the camp;
Leviticus 16:28
And h that burnetii them.* The Vulgar Latin, I think, rightly translates it, Quicmique combtisserit, whosoever burneththem: for there was more than one, as I said before, employed in this business. Shall wash his clothes, &c] Being defiled by touching the sacrifices, which were charged with so many sins; as he that carried away the scape-goat was, ver. 26. where there is the very same order in the same words. Now, when all this was done, the Misna saith, (cap. vii. Joma, sect. 4.) the high-priest washed himself again, and put on his white robes, which were proper to this day; and went into the most holy place, to fetch out the censer, with the dish, or cup, which he carried in when he went to burn incense, (ver. 12, 13.) And when he came out from thence, he washed, and put on his golden garments, and offered incense upon the golden altar, and trimmed the lamps. Which being done, they brought him his own garments, which he wore constantly; and when he had put them on, they accompanied him to his house, where he entertained his friends with a. feast, being come out of the sanctuary in peace; that is, safe and in health. For by shifting his garments, and washing so often, he was in danger to catch cold (as we speak), and they did sometimes fall into various diseases upon this occasion, as P. Cunaeus observes out of Maimonides, lib. ii. de Repub. Hcb. cap. 14. and some died in the holy place, not having performed the service duly. Which, made it very reasonable, that he and his -friends should rejoice, when be returned in health and safety.
Leviticus 16:29
And this shall be a statute for ever unto you. Till the coming of Christ, in whom all that these sacrifices signified was accomplished: who put an end therefore to this legal dispensation, (see Exod. xii. 14.) • And in the seventh month.] When they had gathered in all the fruits of the earth, and thereby had the more liberty to attend such a solemn service. Which was the reason, perhaps, why there were more solemnities appointed in this month, than in any other month in the year; as appears from the twenty-third chapter of this book. It had been anciently also the first month in the year, being the month, it is likely, wherein the world was created: but upon the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, the month Abib, by God’s special command, was ordered to be the first. Yet not absolutely, but only in respect of that which was most eminent, viz. for the ecclesiastical account: for as to their civil or. temporal affairs, the seventh month (Tisri) still retained the precedence. On the tenth day of the month.] The Arabians imitated this; calling the fast of the tenth day of the month Moharram, by the name of Ashura; which is exactly the Ashor (tenth day) here mentioned by Moses; from whom these people derived it, before the appearance of Mahomet: who, finding the Jews, when he came to Medina, fasting upon V0L * K Digitized by this Any Ashura, asked them the reason of it: who told him (as the Mahometan writers report) it was in remembrance" of Pharaoh’s being then drowned in the Red Sea: where-* upon he said, I have more to do with Moses than you, and* thereupon commanded his followers to fast on this day; (see* Dr. Pocock upon Abal-Farajius concerning the Manners of the Arabians, p. 309, 310.) But this is plainly an idle tale, invented by him or his followers; for the Jews would rather have feasted, than fasted upon the day of such a deliverance. But it shews that this day was remarkable among the Jews, and solemnly observed by them, wheresoever they were; and was chosen by God, rather than any other day of the month, (if we may believe Maimonides, More Nevoch. par. iii. cap. 43.) because it was the day on which Moses came down from the mount, with the second tables in his hand, and proclaimed to the people the remission of their great sin, in worshipping the golden calf; in memory of which it was ordered to be entirely a day of repentance and of Divine worship. Ye shall afflict your souls.] By fasting and abstinence, not only from all meat and drink, but from all other pleasure whatsoever: insomuch, that they might not wash their faces, much less anoint their heads, nor wear their shoes, nor use the marriage bed, nqr read (if their doctors say true) any portion of the law, which would give them delight: for example, the story of their coming out of Egypt, and leading them through the Red Sea’, &c. so far is the Mahometan story from having any colour of truth. It is likely, also, that to increase their grief’they rent their clothes (as they did in other fasts inaftertimes)’, put on’ sackcloth, girded it cIosq to’ their flesh, sprinkled ashe’son their heads, &c. which were all intended; no doubt, to work in them an inward sorrow for all their sins, with a hearty abhorrence of them, and resolution to mortify and abstain from them. For though’ the word soul be generally expounded the sensitive part of us, which is afflicted hy fasting, (as the prophet Isaiah expounds this phrase, lviii. 3. 5.) yet it is absurd to think that God was pleased with’ this alone, without that inward compunction of mind, which made them break off their sins by righteousness; which the prophet there declares was the only acceptable fast to the Lord. The Hebrew doctors here observe, that they did not afflict little children on this day, by making them fast from all food, till they were of the age of eleven years; but only taught them what they were to do when they came of age, that they might be accustomed to the precept. (See Joma, cap. 8. sect. 4.) And do no work at all.] Not only abstain from all pleasure, but from all labour whatsoever: nothing being to be done upon this day but confession of sins and repentance, as Maimonides expresses it in the place beforemen* tioned. WJiether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you.] The Hebrew word ezrach is extant only here and xxiii. 42. which signifies as much as ono that had his original among them, being born an Israelite, as it is there expressed. The opposite to which is gher (a stranger, we translate it), one that was of another nation, but had embraced the Jewish religion, and lived among them; who in the New Testament is called^ prosehjte. Microsoft ® * H A • COxMMENTARY [chap. XVI.
Leviticus 16:30
And the priest shall make an atonement for her before the Lord, &c. See ver. 15. For on that day shall the priest make an atone* mentfor you.] If upon this day they ailljctcd and humbled their souls (as Conr. Pcllicanus glosses), with fasting and prayer and anguish for their sins, with alms also, beseeching God’s mercy with tears and signs iu sackcloth and ashes; resting from all Semite works, and devoted wholly to the Lord. To cleanse you.] From all the transgressions and sins mentioned ver. 1G. from which both the high-priest, and his family, and all the people were to be purged on this day. For which reason the greatest care was to be used to see it rightly observed, because all their happiness depended upon it. For the land of Canaan was promised them, upon condition that they kept the law; offering all the sacrifices therein prescribed; especially this great sacrifice, which Avas to cleanse them from the guilt of all their neglects or breaches of this law. Which should teach us Christians to conclude, that as the inheritance of that good land was assigned the Jews in consideration of their sacrifices, as the condition of that covenant, by which they were prescribed; so the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven is made over to us by the covenant of grace, in consideration of the obedience and sufferings of Christ Jesus, of # which they were a figure. For it is his blood that cleanseth vs from all unrighteousness (as St* John speaks), and secures our claim to the heavenly inheritance. That ye may be clean from all your sins.] If a man was bound to offer sacrifice for any sin that was certain, he was not excused from it by this sacrifice on the day of expiation; but was bound to make that other sacrifice also. But the day of expiation freed those who were bound to offer sacrifices for dubious offences. SoMaimonides saith, (in his treatise of Offences committed through Error, chap. 3. sect. 9.) that those sins which were known to none but God/ were taken away by this solemn day of expiation, without any other sacrifice. But the Misna, in the last section of Joma, acknowledges very honestly, that the day of expiation did not pnrge men from the guilt of the offences they had committed against their neighbour, unless they first gave him satisfaction. Before the Lord.] Who dwelt among them, and would continue to do so, if they observed his laws, and took care to be thus cleansed from all their sins. But, lest any man should mistake this matter, it may be here fit to observe, that there w r ere no sacrifices at all appointed by the law of Moses for capital offences; and therefore when he speaks here of making them clean from all their sins upon this day, such as these (for instance, murder, adultery, idolatry, &c.) are not included: for this great sacrifice could not obtain a pardon for them, but only for offences committed against the ritual laws contained in this book; and that also when they Averc committed through error or ignorance: for if they were done presumptuously, cutting off was threatened to them: (see Numb. xv. from
Leviticus 16:31
Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness. Take care that they separate themselves; by instructing them, when they are under any of the forenamed impurities, to observe the directions now given. Thus the LXX. and the Vulgar Latin understand these words. That they die not in their uncleanness.] Lest I punish them with death, if they approach unto my sanctuary, having any of the foremeiitioned uncleannesses upon them. Wlien they defile my tabernacle that is among them.] This shews what is meant by separation and putting apart in the foregoing’ verses: which was principally from the tabernacle where God dwelt. Out of respect to which, and to preserve their due regard to it (that is, to God himself), all these cautions were given, as I observed before,’ ver, 15. of this chapter. And see chap. xii. ver; 4. what I noted out of Maimonides, who discourses excellently on this subject, in his More Nevoch. (par. iii. cap. 47.) where he observes, that there could not well be a more notable means contrived, to maintain a holy fear and reverence to the Divine Majesty upon their minds, than to forbid every person that was any way polluted to come unto his sanctuary. For there were so many sorts of pollutions, made by the law, that it was very hard to avoid falling under some of them: and, consequently, a business of great care, circumspection and labour, to approach, as they ought/into the Divine presence. For if a man escaped defilement by a dead body, yet he could not easily avoid being defiled by some of the eight creeping things, which he might chance to tread upon; or might fall on his meat, or his drink: and if he escaped these, yet he might be defiled involuntarily by the means mentioned here, (ver. 16.) or by touching a menstruous woman, or one that had a flux of blood; or, at least, by touching their beds, their seats, or something be T longing to them, &c. All which kept a man from the sanctuary; which he could not enter therefore when he pleased, but was to stay a certain time before he could be admitted to worship God there; and not then neither, till he had washed himself, f f By all which actions, reverence, affection, and devotion, were preserved to the sanctuary; and men were, excited to great humility, which in this was principally regarded." It shall be a sabbath of rest’unto you.] In the Hebrew the words arc a sabbath of sabbaths, i. c. a great or perfect sabbath, like that of the seventh day in every week; on which they might do no manner of work. And so the seventh day is called just as this is, a sabbath of rest, or sabbath of sabbaths: (see Exod. xxxi. 15. xxxv. 2.) which gave occasion to those jeers we meet withal in Mar-„ tial and others, at the Jews’ fasting on their sabbath-days: for reading Moses’s books carelessly, they fancied the Jews observed as strict a fast upon every sabbath-day, as they did on this, which was but once a year., And ye shall afflict your souls by a statute for ever.] See ver. 29.
Leviticus 16:32
This is the law of him tliat hath an issue, &c. In this and the next verse, ho recapitulates the matter of this chapter: as he did in the latter end of the foregoing sum up t\6 contents of that. Vcr.33. And of him that hatji an issue, of the man and of the woman.] Even of the person that hath an issue, whether it be man or wopian, &c. And the priest whom ye shall anoint, &c] The high-priest, who should be anointed and consecrated in his father’s stead (when he was dead), is here ordered to make this atonement yearly. That is, what was now done by Aaron, was to be done by every high-priest successively, when he w r as legally put into his office; by vesting him with the priestly garments, anointing him, and offering the sacrifices of consecration, (viii. 7. 10. 22.) This statute confined the sacred work of this day to the high-priest, who alone could perform it: but it shews withal, as the apostle observes, the great imperfection of this legal priesthood, which could not, by reason of death, continue always in one person: but there were many priests, succeeding one another in the office, which became often vacant. Whereas our great High-priest, because he continued for ever, i. e. never dies, hath an unchangeable priesthood: and therefore is able to save to the uttermost, or evermore, those that come to God by him, (Heb. vii. 23—25.) And shall put on the linen clothes, even the holy garment.] He was to take a special care not to officiate on this day in any other garments but those mentioned ver. 4. which were peculiarly appropriated to this service, and called the white garments; which were a figure, perhaps, of the perfect purity of our great High-priest, who, as it there immediately