Leviticus 4
PATVcr. 1. J1.ND the Lord spake unt o Moses, saying. Having directed him about whole burnt-offerings, and meatofferings (which constantly attended some of them), and peace-offerings, which supposed men to bo in a state of favour with God; he now proceeds to give order about the expiation of their sins, when they had offended him, by doing contrary to his commands; which he continues to the fourteenth verso of the fifth chapter. And this law about sinofferings, seems to have been delivered to Moses at a different time from the former; being about a different matter; but by a voice speaking to him out of the tabernacle, as before, (chap. i. 1.) And bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation.’] Into the very sanctuary; where, as it follows, he was to dip bislinger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord. Vcr. 6. And the priest shall dip his finger in the blodd.] Or rather, dip it into (lie blood. And sprinkle of the blood seten times btfore the Lor,d.] This was peculiar’to his sacrifice tor sin, and done in no other but that for the whole congregation. To signify, perhaps, that their offences were more heinous, and could not he so easily expiated, as those of other men. The number seven, every one knows, was of great account, and thought most powerful in religious actions, even among the heathen. For as Elisha bade Naarnan go and wash seven times in Jordan, to cure him of his leprosy; so Apuleius,ih the beginning of the eleventh book of his Metamorphosis, speaks of dipping the head seven titties in the sea for purification, and gives the reason for it; " Quod eum numeruih preecipue religioni aptissimum divinus ille Pythagoras prodidit;* because the Divine Pythtitjortis (as he calls him) taught this number to be above all other most proper in religion. Which, in all probability, Pythagoras learnt from the truly Divine Moses: to whom God revealed the creation of the world, in six days, and his consecrating the seventh day, oh which he rested; which made the number seven so much used in sacred matters. For not only in this sacrifice, but’ in making the water of separation by burning a red heifer, this rite was used, (Numb. xix. 4.) and in purging a leper, (Lev.‘xiv. 7.) in dedicating the altar, (Exod. xxix. 3?.) when the oil was sprinkled on it seven times, (Lev. viii. 11.) and at the consecration of the priests; (Exod. xxix. 35.) and, to say no more, as every seventh day of the week was holy, so every seventh year the land rested; and after seven times seven there was a jubilee, (Levit. xxv.) They that would see more of this number, and of its sacrdmenta/ds St. Jerome speaks, may read him upon Amos v. 3. and Drusiuson this place, and on Josh. vi.4.andWoIfiustipon Nehemiah Viii. Before the veil of the sanctuary.] Which parted the holy place from themost holy. For that is peculiarly called by the name oiporocheth, which is the word here used, (xxvi. 31. 33. 35. Lev. xvi. 2, &c.) as the other veil, which was befbr’e the door of the tabernacle, is constantly called masach, (Exod. xxvi. 3G, 37.) the like observation upon ver. 22, 23. but it seems too subtle: for m the eighteenth verse Moses only saith, he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar, without adding of sweet incense, (as before, ver. 7.) and yet it is manifest he means the same altar; and what was done in this sacrifice was as acceptable as what was done in the other.
Leviticus 4:2
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Jf a soul shall sin through ignorance, &c. There are three conditions expressed in this verse, of the sin for which the following sacrifice was admitted. First, It was to be committed ignorantly; not wittingly and presumptuously. Secondly, It was for sin against a negative precept (as the Jews call them), i.e. such a commandment as forbade something to be done. So it is said here expressly, concerning things which ought not to be done. As for the omission of such things as were commanded to be done, they might be performed some other time, when men had better bethought themselves; which was much more acceptable to God, than offering sacrifice for the omission. And thirdly, It was for facts committed, not for words or thoughts; so the last words are, and shall do against any of them’.- As for the sins which men might imprudently commit in word and in thought, they were so many, that the whole flocks and herds would not have sufficed for their expiation, nor the altar contained all such sacrifices. The Jews add a fourth condition, that the sacrifice here appointed was such facts, as if they had been committed wittingly, a cereth, i. e. cutting off, was threatened to them by the law: which they gather from Numb. xv. 30. But that phrase, with a high hand, seemsnot to signify any sort of sin, but a certain manner of sinning: as when a man despised God’s commandments, and brought contempt upon the law by his sins, as a very learned friend of mind, now with God, hath observed. And, there- 1 fore, it is probable all sins committed ignorantly were expiated by the following sacrifices, save only those which are appointed to be expiated by other sacrifices, or after another manner. (See Dr. Outram de Sacrificiis, lib. i f cap. 12. n. 2^-4.)
Leviticus 4:3
If the priest that is anointed do sin. And first he prescribes tho sacrifice which he who was to. make the great expiation for all the people, should offer for himself, viz. the high-priest: who only, of all the priests, was constantly anointed at the entrance of his office. And if, after he was put out of his office, he committed any such sin as is here mentioned, ho was to make this offering for his expiation, as much as if he had continued in it. So Mr. Selden observes out of the Misna, lib. ii. de Syncdr. cap. 15. n. 14. According to the sin of the people.] In the manner beforementioned. Or, as 11. Solomon interprets it, if he hide any thing from the people, whereby they err. For so the words run in the Hebrew, if he sin to the guilt ofthepeople (or to the making them guilty), either by misinforming them, or drawing them into error by his example; so that they take a thing to be clean, which is indeed unclean, or the like. Then let him bring for his sin which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish.] It is observed by some, that in great offences the sacrifices were small;. lest they should imagine their pardon was procured by their great expense. For here the word is par ben bachur, a young bullock, that was but a little bigger than a calf. And so this sacrifice is called (par) in the following verses. Whereas that of too peace-offering is called (ver. 10.) shor; an ox (though we translate it also bullock), one that was grown to its full bigness, and consequently of greater value. For a sin-offering.] How chattah, which we translate sin-offering, differs from ascham, which we translate trespass-offering, I shall examine afterward, when Moses came to speak of the latter; and now only observe, that chattah is the name both for sin, and for the sin-offering: as the word piaculum was among the heathen; which signified both a great crime, and the expiatory sacrifice for it. By which those words in the New Testament may be explained, " Christ was made sin for us;" that is, a sacrifice to expiate our sins. And so the word afiapria,sin, certainly signifies, Rom. viii. 3.
Leviticus 4:4
And he shall bring the bullock unto the door of tlve tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord. This, as I take it, >was to be done by himself; who was to present the sacrifice to the Divine’ Majesty, and desire it might be accepted for the purpose to which it was to be offered. And shall lay his hand upon the bullock’s head.] As every one that brought other offerings was bound to do, (see chap. i. 4. iii. 2, &c.) but here for another purpose; vizi to confess their sins unto the Lord, and beseech him to forgive them. (See v. 5.) There is a good gloss upon this, in a very bad book called Nitzachon, not long ago published by the learned Wagenseil: where that author saith, (p. 11.) " When a man sacrificed a beast, he was to think in his mind, I am more a beast than this here present. For I have sinned, and for the sins I have committed, I offer this: but it were more just that he who hath sinned should suffer death, than this beast (which hath not offended):- therefore thus a man, by the help of this sacrifice, began to repent." And kill the bullock before the Lord.] This seems to have been done by him that laid his hand on the head of thebullock, that is, by the hand of the high-priest himself. For the greatest men, in old time, did not think such work below them; but rather esteemed every thing that served* to tho worship of God, to be noble and honourable. So Homer represents king Agamemnon as killing the Iainbs himself; by the blood of which he was to seal the treaty he made with.thc Trojans; (Iliad. 3.) yet in this case, it is likely, the high-priest himself did not kill the sacrifices, but some of the other priests that then ministered. For he that did this seems to be distinguished, by the next words, (vcr. 5.) from the priest that is anointed; i. e. the high-priest. Nor was this sacrifice killed in the ordinary place where sinofferings were killed, (see 24.) being an extraordinary sort of offering, as that which follows also was.
Leviticus 4:5
And the priest that is anointed. Whoever killed the sacrifice, tho high-priest himself, for whom it was of* fered, did what follows. Shall take of the bullock’s blood.] In a bason.
Leviticus 4:7
And the priest shall put some of the blood itpbh tlie horns of the altar of sweet incense, &c. This also Was peculiar to his sacrifice; and to that for the whole congregation, (ver. 17.) And shall pour out all the blood of the bullock.] l*hat is, all the rest of the blood which remained after the sprinkling before the mercy-seat; and the tipping of trie horns of the altar with it. At the bottom of the altar of the burnt-offering.] Where, after the building of the temple, thero were two holes; one on the west Side of the altar, the other oh the South, (as the Jews tell lis in Midddth, cap. 3. se’et. 2.) by which it is’Conveyed into a canal under ground, through Which it ran into the brook Kidron. And there was only this difference (they say) about these two holes, that the blood of the sin-offering (any part of which was carried into the most holy place) was poured out only into that on the west side of the foundation of the altar. And, if wo may believe the V0L - • Digitized by Jews, the gardeners bought this blood of those that were the treasurers of the temple, to enrich their “groutut with it, as Constantine t/Empereur there observes. And wnile they were in the wilderness, and all the time they had only a mdveable tabernacle, it is most likely there were receptacles made under ground, with conveyances to some distant place, where it. sank into the earth, or was covered with flust, as other blood is commanded to be, (xvii. 13.) For Maimonides thinks the pouring out the blood (so that it might not remain in one place) which is constantly and strictly required by the Ik w, was in opposition to an idolatrous custom of the old Zabii; who made a collection “of the blood in a vessel, or in a litt!6 pit, about which they sat, and ate the flesh, imagining their gods feasted upon the blood; as I noted before out of Maimonides, (More Ne- VOch. par. iii. dap. 46.) tVJiich is tit the door of the tabernacle of Hit bongregation.’] For there Was the pUice of it, as hath been observed, Exod. xl. 6.
Leviticus 4:8
And he shall take off from it all the fat of the bullock for the sin-offering, &c. All that follows in this and the two next verses, (ver. 0, 10.) is the same that was ordered to be done about peace-offerings, as appears from ver. 10. Sec therefore the foregoing chapter, ver. 3 — 5.
Leviticus 4:11
And the skin of the bullock, and cill his flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, &c. This Sacrifice was so laborious, to work in them a greater detestation of sin; which was aggravated by the quality of the person that committed it. And Nachmanides hath art observation, which (in some parts of it, at least) is very remarkable; “That all a man doth, being performed in words, in works, or thoughts, God commanded them, when they brought an offering for sin, that they should lay their hands on it, which had respect to the works they had done; and mako confession over it, Which had respect to their words; and burn the inwards and kidneys, which ate the organs of thoughts and desires; the legs, also, had a respect to a man’s hands and feet, by which he doth all his work; and the blood that was sprinkled on the altar signified his own blood. So that While a man did all these things, he was put in mind how he had sinned ag&inst God, both in soul and body, and deserved to have his blood shed, and his body burnt; unless the mercy of th& Creator had accepted a price of redemption for him, viz. a sacrifice; whose blood Was for his blood, and its life iot his life; and the principal members of the Sacrifice, for the members of his body.” By which it appears, that the best sort of Jews had a sense, that the sacrifices for sin Were offered to 6od in their stead, as a rahsom for them. And so we Christians are to understand the sacrifice which Christ made of himself, who " gave himself a ransom for us all,” as the apostle speaks, 1 Tim. ii. 6. and our Lord saith the same, Matt, xx. 28. Mark x. 45. Such sacrifices the heathens themselves had, which they called Lustralia, from the word histrare, which signifies to expiate among the Rorh’ans; and that by paying a price. For the ancient, poet Erinius (ixs bur excellent Mr. Thorhdike hath observed), translating into Latin a Greek tragedy called’EktopoXvTpa (being taken out of Homer, where he speaks of I^riamus ransoming of Itedtor’S corpse from Achilles), entitled Ilettoris lustra, (which shews this is the Latin of Xvrpov,) ransom or redemption: and that aVoAvrpoeo signifies Microsoft ® 2Z [chap. IV, in tho New Testament to deliver by paying a ransom, see his Epilogue, book ii. chap. 27.
Leviticus 4:12
Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp. It was not dissected, as the peace-offerings Hverc, because nobody was to partake of any part of it; being a sacrifice for tho priest’s own sin. And therefore it was to bd carried (though not by himself, but some other person) to be burnt without the camp, to express the abojninableness of the sin. This rite, and the carrying the blood within tho tabernacle, to be. sprinkled before the Lord, were used only in these two cases; of the sin of the Jbigh-priest, and of all the people. For of other sin-offerings the priest might cat, (vi. 2G.) but of this, being for himself, he was not to taste at all, because he was in a state of guilt. Into a clean place, where the ashes are poured out.’) On the east part of the tabernacle there was a place for the ashes to be thrown into, when they are taken from the altar; which afterward were carried into a clean place, without the camp. And so they were carried out after the temple was built at Jerusalem, at the east gate of the city, into a valley which lay lietwcen Jerusalem and Mount Olivet. And burn him on the wood with fire.] Not upon an altar, but in a fire made with wood upon the ground, to shew the bdiousness of the sin, as Maimonides thinks. For as the whole burntsacrifices were burnt on the altar, because they were an offering of sweet-smelling savour unto God; so this was burnt without the camp upon the ground, to. shew that the odour of it was ungrateful and abominable; More Ncvochim, par. iii. cap. 46. where he also observes, that the burning of the beast entirely, being the destruction of it, so that nothing of it remained, it signified in like manner the utter deletion of sin, so that it should be remembered no more. And the bullock being burnt without the camp, I take it to denote, that the people should not suffer for the sin of the priest, which was abolished together with his sacrifice.’. The same Maimonides hath another observation upQn the title Zebachim, that there were three places constituted for the burning of holy things. The first was in the sanctuary, as every one knows; the second was in the mount of the house (as they called the place round about the court of the sanctuary), where, if any blemish happened to a bullock or a goat, they were brought out of the sanctuary, and burnt in a place’called Bira; the third was in this place of the ashes, without the city. Where the ashes are poured out, there shall he be burnt.] This is repeated, that none might presume to take the liberty to burn the bullock in any other place.
Leviticus 4:13
And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance. The Jews generally understood by the whole congregation, the great Sanhedrin, who represented the whole people of Israel. So Maimonides in his More Nevochim, par. iii. cap. 41. and in his treatise of Sacrifices; and K. Levi, of Barcelona, Praccept. cxviii. For they sometimes erred in judgment; and thereby misleading the people, they were bound, when they found their error, to offer this sacrifice. Yet the Talmudists have raised many disputes upon this point, and made various cases: in some of which the house of judgment was bound to offer the sacrifice here appointed, and not they who followed their sentence: and others there were, in which they who followed their sentence were bound, and not the judges themselves. But if Moses’s words be well considered, it will appear, that ho speaks of a sin committed by all the people, in doing something which God had forbidden; by making wrong constructions of the law, or by common false opinions, or popular customs. For the whole congregation is here plainly distinguished from the elders of the people, (ver. 15.) which is certainly tho name for their judges and governors. It was Mr. Selden’s intention to have treated largely of the sense and notion of this law, as appears by what he saith of it, lib. ii. dc Synedriis, cap. 14. n. 4. where he refers his reader to the third book on that subject for an account of this place. In the beginning of which (cap. 1. n. 1.) he signifies his intention to explain, what the office of the Sanhedrin was’, in offering expiatory sacrifices for the whole congregation. Which he repeats again, (cap. 10. n. 1.) with this addition, that they made this sacrifice in the name of all the people, when they offended as a community. But he did not live to pursue his intentions, being diverted by long digressions about other, matters: yet he shews sufficiently his opinion was, that this sacrifice was not offered for the Sanhedrin, but by them for the people. And the thing he hid from the eyes of the assembly.’] They, are not sensible of their mistake for the present; but afterward discover it, either by themselves or by their rulers. And they Itave done somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord, concerning things which ought not 1 to be done.] Have offended against some of the negative precepts (as the Jews speak) which forbid such things to be done. (See ver. 2.) And are guilty.] Are sensible of their guilt.
Leviticus 4:14
When the sin tvhich they have mined against itis known. “When they have discovered what precept they have violated. Then shall the congregation offer a young bullock for the sin.] Without blemish, as was required for. the sin of the high-priest, (ver. 3.). And bring him before the tabernacle of (he congregation.) i.e. Cause the bullock to be brought thither, by some of bis people, in the name of all the rest.
Leviticus 4:15
And the elders of the congregation shall lay tTieir. hands upon the head of the bullock, &e. They were to do this as representatives of the people. (See ver. 13. and the end of laying on their hands, v. 4.). And the bullock shall be killed before the Lord.] Either by some of them, or some of the people whom they appointed. (See ver. 4.)
Leviticus 4:16
And the priest that is anointed. That is, the high-priest: (see ver. 5.) All the rest that follows, to ver. 22, is exactly the same that is prescribed in the foregoing offering, for the high-priest himself. Only R. Solomon Jarchi hath a nice observation on the next verse, that, it is not said in this case (as it is in the fonner) he shall sprinkle of the blood seven times before (he veil of (he. sanctuary, but only before the veil, without the addition of hakkodesh, of the sanctuary, as it is ver. G. Because, saith he, if the high-priest only sin, the holiuess doth not depart: but if all the congregation sin, then it doth depart. As, if a province rebel against a prince, his family stands; but if there be a general defection, he must fall. He hath
Leviticus 4:22
JVlien a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against, &c;. The word nasi, which we translate ruler, signifies the head of a tribe in Numb. i. 4. 16. vii. 2. But4he Jews commonly understand it peculiarly of the head, or prince of the great SanJiedrin; who, when they were under the government of kings, was the king himself. Thus the Misna gathers from these words in the text, when he sinneth against any of the commandments of the Lord his God, which signify him, say the doctors, that hath no superior but the Lord. And so the Gemarists understand it also, as Mr. Selden shews, lib. ii. dc Synedriis, cap. 16. p. 666. But I think it is most reasonable to extend this to all great officers and judges, who had a peculiar relation to God; and therefore were called by his name. Concerning things which should not be done.’] See ver. 2. And is guilty.] Acknowledges that he hath offended God by the sin which he hath committed.
Leviticus 4:23
Or if his sin wherein he hath sinned come to his knowledge. If we retain this translation (and do not render the first word and, but or), then the foregoing words in the latter end of ver. 22, veashem, must be translated (not is guilty, but) and acknowledges his guilt. Which seems to be the true sense; for when men sin they are guilty, though the sin was committed ignorantly; but they do not acknowledge their guilt till they see it; as Moses here supposes they might, when they considered better, or somebody informed them aright. So these words signify, or his sin is made known unto him. Thus L’Empercur very judiciously translates this whole passage, And he acknowledges himself guilty, or his sin be shewn to him: otherwise there is no room for this disjunctive particle. (See his Annot. upon Bava kama, cap. 7. sect. 1. and cap. 9. sect. 4, 5.) And thus we ourselves translate the first part of this “disjunction (in the latter end of the foregoing verse),* Hosea v. 15. acknowledge their offences. He shall bring his offenng, a kid of the goats.] His sacrifice was of less value than the two former. From which Mr. Selden concludes, that the high-priest was not always the head of the Sanhedrin, (lib. ii. de Syncdr. cap. 16. p. 653.) For their sacrifices were very different, which argues a difference in their persons. And the Misna says, if the highpriest were put out of his office, his sacrifice was still the same, viz. a bullock without blemish: but it was not so with the nasi, or ruler, who offered only the sacrifice of a private man if he lost his office. A male without blemish.] It was to be the best of this kind; though not equal to the sacrifice for the high-priest and the whole congregation. (See ver. 28.)
Leviticus 4:24
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat. Of this see ver. 4. And kill it in the place where they kill the burnt-offering before the Lord.] Where that was, see chap. i. ver. 11. Neither of the two forementioned offerings (for the highpriest, or the whole congregation) are ordered to be killed uigiiizea oy iviicroson vb> here; but only before the Lord, (ver. 14, 15.) that is, in any part of the court but that which was proper to the’ burntoffering, and the common sin-offering, as it here follows. It is a sin-offeriiig.] And therefore was to be killed where the burnt-offering was: for so it is ordained (vi. 25.).that all sin-offerings should be there slain. Which doth riot imply that the two former were not sin-offerings, but that they* were not of the common sort; as appears by the carrying of their blood into the sanctuary, and burning their flesh without the camp, which are not ordered either in this or in the following sacrifices.
Leviticus 4:25
And the priest shall take of the blood of the sinoffering with his finger. By dipping his finger into it, (ven And put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering,’] Whereas the blood of the two former was put upon the horns of the golden altar in the sanctuary, (ver. 7. 18.). And shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt-offering.] See ver. 18.
Leviticus 4:26
And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, &c. See chap. iii. 9. It is not here said what should be done with the flesh; which in the two foregoing offerings is ordered to be burnt without the camp, (ver. 12. 21.) But in chap. vi. 26. 29. and xviii. Numb. 9, 10. the law of the sin-offering is set down to be this, that the priest and his sons should eat it, in the sanctuary, and nowhere else; provided also that they jvere free from uncleanness, (xxii. 4.) And the priest shall make an atonement for him, as concerning his sin.] By this sacrifice his guilt was expiated; which must be understood to be the effect of the sacrifice for the high-priest, though it be not expressed, as it is in’ that for the whole congregation, (ver. 20.) And it shall be forgiven him.] So that he should not be liable to the punishment of cutting off, as the Jews understand it; who fancy such sins to which that is threatened’ are here spoken of. (See ver. 1.) Rather, he was restored to communion with the people of God, from which he was* separated while he remained in a known guilt. "
Leviticus 4:27
And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance. Commit the same offence that a ruler or public officer doth. And be guilty; or if his sin which he hath committed come to his knowledge.] See how this ought to be translated, ver.
Leviticus 4:28
Then he shall bring his offering; a kid of the goats, a female without blemish. Being a common person, less was required of him than of a prince; who was to offer a male, (ver. 23.) which in all creatures was of greater value than a female, as Maimonidcs observes: who reckons up three-and-forty offences of this sort, that might be committed imprudently (in his treatise called Sehegagoth), in one of which, viz. worshipping an idol ignorantly, the sacrifice was the same for a private man as for the king, or the high-priest, or the priest anointed for war: but in all the other forty-two a female goat or lamb sufficed for a private man, (cap.l. sect. 4 f ) And this sacrifice they call stated, or -fixed, because no man offered more or less, whether rich or poor, man or woman; except only those’ who ate holy things, or entered into the sanctuary; whose sacrifices were higher or lower, as they speak.. And there were three things, if we may believe them, which, though committed by error, were expiated by no sacrifice, viz* 2Z2 35G [chap. v. blasphemy, neglect of circumcision, and not keeping the Passover. (So 1L Levi of Barcelona, Praccept. cxix.) Which seems to be an unreasonable opinion, since idolatry committed ignorautly, they say, was comprehcndc4 within this law.
Leviticus 4:29
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offaing, &c. This verse and the following, with the bediming of ver. 31. contain nothing but what was ordered about the foregoing sacrifice, (ver. 24 — 26.)
Leviticus 4:31
And the priest shall burn it upon the altar, for a sweet savour unto the Lord. This is a phrase used concerning burnt-offerings, (i. 9. 13.) and peace-ojferihgs,(\ii.5. 16.) but it is not said of any of the foregoing sin-offerings, that the burning of them, or their fat, was for a sweet savour unto Hie Lord. The reason of which I am not able to give, unless it were to comfort the lowest sor^ of people with hope of God’s mercy, though their offering w T as mean, in comparison of those offered by others. Abarbincl gives this reason for it: because a sin of ignorance being a less fault in ^ common man, it was a sign of great probity in him to bring a sacrifice for the expiation of it: but for the high-priest, or senate, or ruler of the people, to be ignorant of the law, wis such a high crime, that it was no commendation to them to bring a sacrifice for their purgation.
Leviticus 4:32
And if he bring a lamb for a sin-offering, &c. For which reason God was pleased to accept a lamb, and that a female, of those who were not able to bring a young kid.
Leviticus 4:33
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the, sin-offering, and slay it, &c. This and tlie next verse differ, not from the foregoing, and therefore need no explication.
Leviticus 4:35
And the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto, the Lord. Or rather upon the offerings, or after the burnt-offering. (See ili.5.)’ And the priest shall make an atonement for his sin, &c] And if by the same error he had committed several sins, there was a distinct atonement to be made for every one of them: so that if he had committed ignorantly the fortythree offences beforementioned, though it were by one and the same error, he was bound to offer as many expiatory sacrifices, (as Maimonidcs resolves ia the forenamed treatise Schegagoth, cap. 4.) This, and such-like things, made this law f a yoke which they were not able to bear,” as St. Peter speaks, Acts xv. 10.