sorts before they were two He shall offer it of his own voluntary will In this Translation we follow the Opinion of the Jews who refer this to the Persons that brought this Offering which they might do when they pleased The like expressions we read XIX 5. XXII 19. But the LXX thought it hath respect to God and so the Phrase may be interpreted he shall bring it for his acceptation i. e. that he may find a favourable acceptance with God At the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation Where the Altar of Burnt-offering was placed XL Exod 6 29. And this was so necessary that it is required upon pain of death to be brought hither and offered in no other place XVII 3 4 c. For which cause it is likely the Door of the Tabernacle is here mentioned rather than the Altar that it might be understood to be unlawful to offer at any other Altar but that which stood at the door of the Tabernacle Before the LORD With their Faces towards that holy place where the Divine Majesty dwelt unto whom the Sacrifice was brought and at the door of the Tabernacle received by the Priest from the hand of the Offerer Ver. 4. Verse 4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the Burnt-offering Both his hands as some gather from XVI 21. and as Maimonides saith he was to do it with all his might This was a Rite belonging to Peace-offerings as well as to Burnt-offerings III. 2. and to Sin-offerings also IV. 4. The meaning of which in this sort of Offerings seems to have been that he who brought the Sacrifice renounced all his Interest in it and transferred it wholly to God unto whose Service he intirely devoted it It being like to the old Ceremony among the Romans who laid their hands upon their Servants when they gave them their Liberty and abdicated their own Right in them saying Hunc hominem liberum esse volo I will that this Man be free which was called Manumission In other Offerings it had another meaning as I shall observe in due place and it was imitated by the Gentiles though not without the addition of impious Superstitions For they wreathed back the Head of the Beast upward when they sacrificed to the Gods above and thrust down its Head towards the Ground when they sacrificed to their Infernal Deities as J. Brentius hath observed in his Preface to this Book And it shall be accepted for him to make an atonement for him It shall be so acceptable as to recommend him to the favour of the Divine Majesty For so the Hebrew word Capher seems here to signifie not properly to make an Atonement which was the business of a Sin-offering but to own him to be in a state of Reconciliation with God unto whom he was supposed to give up himself wholly as he did this Beast The Jews indeed who stick to the literal signification of the word fancy that these Burnt-offerings expiated evil Thoughts and Desires but there is no ground for this in Scripture and the most that can be made of it is that God accepted his Prayers which he made in general for the forgiveness of all his sins when he laid his Hand upon the Head of this Sacrifice For it must be here observed that Laying on of Hands was always accompanied with Prayer as appears by Jacob's laying them on the Head of Manasseh and Ephraim XLVIII Gen. 14 16 20. and the High-Priest laying them on the Scape-goat XVIth of this Book 21. Insomuch that laying on of hands signifies sometimes in the New Testament to pray XIX Matth. 15. V Mark 23. and other places But if a Man had committed any sin there are other Sacrifices peculiarly appointed by the Law for their Expiation which he was bound to offer with confession of sin and prayer to God for pardon Ver. 5. Verse 5 And he shall kill the Bullock That is the Man himself who brought it as Rasi interprets it or one of the Levites as others understand it For they killed the Paschal Lamb at that great Passover mentioned 2 Chron. XXX 17. as Bochart observes But he should have added the reason of it which Rasi there gives that a great many of the Congregation having not sanctified themselves as we read in that place therefore the Levites had the charge of the killing of the Passover for every one that was not clean to sanctifie them unto the LORD Otherwise every Man might kill his own Passover XII Exod. 6. as they might do all their other Sacrifices For certain it is this was none of the works of Priests as Maimonides shows in a passage mentioned by Dr. Cudworth in his Book concerning the Lord's Supper p. 27. out of Biath Hammik-dath Where he quotes this very place to prove That the killing of the holy things might lawfully be done by a Stranger yea of the most holy things whether they were the holy things of private Persons or of the whole Congregation The common Objection to this is That none might come into the Court where the Altar was but the Priests To which the Answer is plain That upon this occasion other Persons might come so far within the Court be cause it was indispensably necessary that the Man who brought the Sacrifice should lay his hand upon the Head of it which was to be done at the Altar when it was to be slain Before the LORD See v. 3. And the Priests Aarons sons shall bring the blood Now begins the work of the Priests the receiving of the Blood and that which immediately followed belonging to their Office They received it in a Bason XXIV Exod. 6. as the manner also was among the Heathen which our learned Sheringham observes upon Codex Joma p. 85. out of Homer's Odyss L. III. where Thrasymedes is represented as cutting the Ox asunder with a Cleaver and Perseus as receiving the Blood in a Bason which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A word used in Crete as Eustathius notes for such kind of Vessels which some think was originally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the receiving of the Blood And sprinkle the blood round about upon the Altar c. That this might be done readily one Priest received the Blood and another took it from him and sprinkled it about the Altar or as the Jews understand it on every side of the Altar which they performed by two sprinklings at the opposite Corners of it Which was a Rite also used in Peace-offerings and Trespass-offerings but in Sin-offerings the Blood was poured out at the foot of the Altar See VII 2. Thus the Heathen also themselves took care the Blood of their Sacrifices should not run upon the ground but be received as I said in Vessels prepared for that purpose and then poured upon their Altars and so offered and consecrated to their Gods So Lucian in his Book of Sacrifices represents the Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as pouring the Blood upon the
from them by open violence Neither rob him The same R. Levi expounds this of that which is taken from another by manifest force and doth not belong to him that takes it Praecept CCXXXVII For so the Hebrew word gazilah signifies that which a Man wrests out of the hand of another against his will 1 Chron. XI 23. The wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night till the morning For this was a kind of force and robbery to detain what was owing to him against his will In the XXIV Deut. 15. the words are Thou shalt give him his hire neither shall the Sun go down upon it From whence the Hebrew Doctors conclude there were two sorts of People that wrought for hire one were day-labourers whom Moses speaks of in this Verse another labourers by night of whom he speaks in Deuteronomy Neither of which were to stay for their Wages beyond the time appointed but the one were to have it before the Sun-set the other before Morning for it was due as soon as the day or the night was done So the Misna The Day-labourer requires his wages all night and the night Labourer all day See the fore-named R. Levi Praecept CCXXXVIII who gives this reason for it That the merciful God would have his Creatures subsist which poor Labourers cannot do if they want their wages to buy them Victuals Upon which account the detaining of their Wages is said to be a crying sin in that XXIV Deut. 14. and in St. James V. 4. Ver. 14. Verse 14 Thou shalt not curse the deaf No Israelite whether Man or Woman was to be cursed though he could not hear the Curse and so was insensible of the Injury as R. Levi explains it Praecept CCXXXIX For there was the addition of barbarous baseness in it to curse or revile a Person who was not capable to answer for himself nor do himself right and the Case of the Sick and the Infirm or the Absent was the same with the Deaf As for others who were not Deaf it was forbidden to curse them saith Maimonides because it provoked to Anger and Rage which stirred Men up to take Revenge Nor put a stumbling block before the blind This is as inhuman as the former proceeding from so great Malice that the Hebrew Doctors seem to think Men incapable of it And therefore expound it of giving ill Counsel to simple People and advising them to their Damage So R. Levi Praecept CCXL which is no less contrary to Nature then laying a stumbling-block in the way of those that cannot see to avoid it and a far greater sin because it abused their Minds and might tend to the hurt of their Souls But shalt fear thy God Believing he sees and hears and will avenge the Cause of those who cannot right themselves because they know not who injured them If any Man was convicted of either of these Crimes he was beaten I am the LORD And am therefore to be feared and obeyed Ver. 15. Verse 15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment The Jews take this to be an Admonition to their Judges that they should have an equal regard to the Plaintiff and Defendant and not prefer the one before the other Whence these words are thus explained in Siphra Thou shalt judge thy neighbours justly not letting one party stand and bidding the other sit nor suffering one to speak as much as he pleaseth and bidding the other be short See Selden de Synedr Lib. II. cap. 13. n. 10. But none hath explained this so largely as Maimonides in the whole XXI Chapter of Sanhedrim where he in general defines the just Administration of Justice to consist in an equal respect to both Parties in the Suit so that one of them have not the liberty to say what he will and the other be cut short And then descends to many particulars wherein equal respect to both Parties is to be observed some of which it will be fit to mention because they illustrate the words of St James in the second Chapter of his Epistle v. 2 3 4. If two Parties appear in a Cause one of which is clothed in precious Garments the other is ragged or in a poor Habit let it be said to him that is the more honourable Either do you bestow upon your Adversary as good Apparel as you have on your self or else put on such as he wears that you may be both alike and then appear before the Court of Judgment By no means let the one sit and the other stand but let them both be commanded to stand or if it please the Judges to give them both leave to sit let not one of them sit in a high place the other in a low but both on the same Bench one by the side of the other See R. Levi Barcelonita Praecept CCXVII who observes that Mankind are preserved by righteous Judgment and therefore if a Judge was found to have given an unjust Sentance he was condemned to make Restitution to him whose Cause he had perverted Praecept CCXLI. Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor See XXIII Exod. 3. Nor honour the person of the mighty This R. Levi explains Praecept CCXLII. as he did the first Clause The Judge shall not bid the great man sit down while the meaner stands but both shall stand before the Judge as if they were in the Presence of the Divine Majesty who standeth in the midst of the Judges LXXXII Psal 1. If by the favour of the Judges both were permitted to sit yet when Sentence came to be pronounced both rose up and stood according to XVIII Exod. 13. But in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour The observation of Maimonides seems to be too nice and curious who from this place gathers that though the lowest Court of Judgment ordinarily consisted of no less than three Judges yet by the Law one of them might sit alone as Judge in Matters not Capital because it is said here in the singular Number In righteousness shalt thou judge thy Neighbour For at the same time he acknowledges their wise Men require that he should take some Assessors to him when they say Do not judge by thy self alone for there is no sole Judge but one only viz. God See Selden Lib. II. de Synedr cap. 14. n. 2. and Guil. Schickardi Mishpal Hamelek cap. 4. Theorem XIV Ver. 16. Verse 16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a tale-bearer among thy people The Vulgar Latin takes the Hebrew word Rachil to signifie one that goes about with Calumnies But it may simply signifie as we translate it a Tale-bearer whom Aben-Ezra compares to a Merchant or Pedler as the Hebrew word imports who buys of one what he sells to another and goes about the Country as a Tale-bearer doth from House to House carrying to one what he hath heard at another saying Such a one hath said so and so of you whereby Peace and Concord is destroyed
to preserve the memory of all the Miracles which God did in Egypt out of which he brought them at that time as the Feast of Tabernacles did to preserve the memory of the Signs and Wonders he did in the Wilderness where he afforded them his Divine Protection under a glorious Cloud and preserved them without any Houses both in the cold of Winter and heat of Summer In short there are two ends mentioned in this Chapter of the Institution of this Festival one to give thanks for the Fruits of the Earth which were then gathered v. 39. another and the principal in a grateful remembrance that they dwelt in Booths forty years and were brought into better Habitations when they came to Canaan v. 42 43. Ver. 35. Verse 35 And on the first day shall be an holy Convocation c. It was to be observed as the day of Pentecost v. 21. And they every one carried in their hands the Bough of some goodly Tree as the Hebrews understand the first words of v. 40. Josephus describing this Festivity Lib. III. Antiq. cap. 10. mentions in the first place Boughs of Myrtle Ver. 36. Verse 36 Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD The peculiar Sacrifices with their Meat-offerings which were to be offered on these seven days are distinctly set down in XXIX Numb from the thirteenth Verse to the end Where it will be most proper to consider them On the eighth day shall be an holy Convocation unto you See v. 4. And ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD A Burnt-offering with a Meat-offering attending upon it according to the appointment in XXIX Numb 36 37. It is a solemn Assembly This is a new word which is not used hitherto concerning any of the Feasts here mentioned signifying as we translate it in the Margin a day of restraint or rather a closing or concluding day for then the Solemnity ended And so Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Conclusion of the Feasts Whence the last day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread is also called by this Name of Atzereth XVI Deut. 8. And so is the Feast of Pentecost which was kept in the end of seven Weeks called by Josephus by the same name of Asartha Lib. III. Antiq. cap. 10. This therefore as it was the last so it was the great day of the Feast as St. John calls it VII 37. On which day they read the last Section of the Law and so concluded the reading of the whole five Books of Moses And thence any great Solemnity is called by this name of Atzereth 2 Kings X. 20. I Joel 14. This seems to me to be a far better account of this word then that which the Jews commonly give who render it a day of detention because saith Abarbanel they were bound to detain the Feast to this day whereas no other Feast continued more then seven days staying at Jerusalem till it was over Whence this day seems to him to be to the Feast of Tabernacles as the Day of Pentecost was to the Passover For as they were bound to count seven Weeks from that time and then make this fiftieth day a Feast so they are here commanded after the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles to stay and feast one day more Others of them as R. Solomon Jarchi say this was as if a Man having been entertained by his Friend seven days should to express greater kindness to him be detained one day more And ye shall do no servile work therein But spend their time in Feasting Mirth and Rejoycing with thankful Acknowledgments of God's Benefits to them See v. 7 8. Ver. 37. Verse 37 These are the feasts or Assemblies of the LORD which ye shall proclaim to be holy Convocations This was the Preface to them v. 4. and now is the Conclusion to make them the more observed To offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD a Burnt-offering and a Meat-offering and a Sacrifice c. These Offerings are particularly set down as hath been noted all along in the XXVIII and XXIXth of Numbers And by a Sacrifice seems here to be meant a Sin-offering which is ordered throughout those two Chapters together with Burnt-offerings upon all these Festivals Ver. 38. Verse 38 Besides the Sabbaths of the LORD i. e. Beside the Sacrifices appointed upon all the Sabbaths in the year which were not to be omitted if any of the Feasts here mentioned fell upon the seventh day of the Week And beside your gifts Most understand by Gifts such Presents as Men made to God beyond their First-fruits and Tenths But it may be thought only a general word including the two particulars which follow Vows and Free-will-offerings Ver. 39. Verse 39 Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month when ye have gathered in the fruit of the Land c. Here is no new injunction in this Verse but only an inforcement of what was said before the very same days being appointed to be observed with those named v. 24. Therefore the Hebrew Particle Ak should not have been translated also but surely or certainly or truly as we translate it in other places particularly XXIX Gen. 14. Surely thou art my bone and my flesh LXXIII Psal 1. Truly God is good to Israel II Lament 16. Certainly this is the day that we looked for When ye have gathered in the fruit of the Land These words give a reason of the repetition of the Command because there was something more designed in this Festival than meerly the remembrance of their Condition in the Wilderness which was to express their Thankfulness to God for their desired Harvest which they had now gathered For which cause besides the seven days which were in Commemoration of their dwelling in Tents in the Wilderness there was an eighth added to acknowledge his Mercy of receiving the Fruits of the Earth Ye shall keep a Feast unto the LORD seven days These were the Feasts of Tabernacles which lasted all these seven days On the first day shall be a Sabbath See v. 35. And on the eighth day shall be a Sabbath In the institution of the Feast of Unleavened Bread it is said in the seventh day is an holy Convocation ye shall do no servile work therein i. e. it shall be a Sabbath v. 8. but here the eighth day hath that honour put upon it not the seventh being added to the Festival for a peculiar reason and therefore to be observed in a very solemn manner For the Feast of Tabernacles fell in the time of Vintage when the Fruits of the Earth were in a manner all gathered XVI Deut. 13. From whence it is called by the name of the Feast of Ingatherings XXIII Exod. 16. not because the whole Feast was celebrated on this account but because a principal part of it was kept on this score viz. the eighth day as the other seven days were in memory of their dwelling in Tents But that the eighth
them carried the two rows of Bread six Cakes apiece and the other two carried each of them a golden Dish in which the Frankincense was set upon the Bread See Dr. Lightfoot of the Temple Service Chap. 14. sect 5. Being taken from the Children of Israel At whose charge they were provided though prepared by the Levites See X Nehem. 32 33. By an everlasting Covenant By vertue of that Command which they had all agreed to observe which required the Shew-bread to be set before the LORD alway XXIV Exod. 3. XXV 30. Ver. 9. Verse 9 And it shall be Aaron 's and his sons Who as God's Servants eat of the Bread which came from his Table And they shall eat it in the holy place For the most holy things could be eaten no where else See VI. 26 29. For it is most holy unto him See Chap. II. of this Book v. 3. Of the offerings of the LORD made by fire It need not seem strange that this Bread which was not burnt upon the Altar as Meat-offerings were should be reckoned among the Offerings made by fire for as the Altar where those Meat-offerings were burnt is called God's Table I Mal. 12. so this Table where the Shew-bread stood was really God's Altar Insomuch that the Bread which was set upon it before him was lookt upon as offered upon him and the Frankincense set upon the Bread as a part of it being really burnt it may be called an Offering made by fire Thus the Gentiles also as an excellent Person of our own hath observed thought Tables rightly dedicated unto their Gods to supply the place of Altars So Macrobius saith Lib. III. Saturnal cap. 11. it evidently appeared by Papyrian's Law That arae vicem praestare posse mensam dicatam a Table consecrated might serve instead of an Altar Of which he gives an instance in the Temple of Juno Populonia and then proceeds to give a reason for it because Altars and Tables eodem die quo aedes ipsae dedicari solent were wont to be dedicated on the same day with the Temples themselves From whence it was that a Table hoc ritu dedicata dedicated in this manner was of the same use in the Temple with an Altar See Dr. Owtram de Sacrificiis Lib. I. cap. 8. n. 7. By a perpetual statute As long as these Sacrifices lasted Ver. 10. Verse 10 And the son of an Israelitish woman whose father was an Egyptian went out among the Children of Israel In the Hebrew the words run thus And there went out the son of an Israelitish woman and he was the son of an Egyptian man in the midst of or among the Children of Israel Which last words signifie that though his Father was an Egyptian by birth yet he was become a Proselyte by Religion And was one of those it is probable who went along with the Israelites when God brought them out of Egypt XII Exod. 38. So R. Solomon Jarchi interprets this phrase Among the Children of Israel Hence saith he we learn that he was a Proselyte of Righteousness And Aben-Ezra to the same purpose He was received into the number of the Jews See a great many more in Mr. Selden Lib. II. de Synedriis cap. 1. numb 2. where he observes That it is the common Opinion of the Jews this Man was the Son of him whom Moses kill'd in Egypt II Exod. 12. And this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the Camp When God was delivering the foregoing Laws unto Moses this Case seems to have hapned And the Jews say the Controversie between these two was this The former looking upon himself as having a good right to it by his Mother came and endeavoured to set up a Tent among the Children of Dan in that place where their Tribe had pitched their Tents which was opposed by one of that Tribe who told him the right of his Mother would do him no service unless his Father had been an Israelite for the Law was II Numb 2. that every Man of the Children of Israel should pitch by his own Standard with the Ensign of their Father's House Which Law though given afterward yet they suppose was the Rule before by which this Man was condemned by those that heard the Cause to be in the wrong Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the Israelitish womans son blasphemed the Name of the LORD and cursed Sentence being given against him he uttered blasphemous words against God himself perhaps renounced the LORD and also cursed those Judges that had condemned him The Jews commonly think that this Blasphemy was his pronouncing the peculiar Name of God which he heard at Mount Sinai when the Law was given But this is a meer fancy for there were some reproachful words utter'd against God as well as against the Judges as appears from v. 15. And they themselves acknowledge that a Proselyte was guilty of death whether he cursed by the proper Name of God or any other as Mr. Selden shows Lib. II. de Jure Nat. Gent. cap. 12. Pellicanus thinks it probable that this Man mockt at the foregoing Laws which were delivered about the Worship of God and contemned God himself when he was told by whose Authority they were enacted And they brought him unto Moses If the occasion of their strife was such as the Jews imagine then Mr. Selden thinks it highly probable that the Cause had been heard and judged by some of the lesser Courts established by Jethro's advice XVIII Exod. 21 22. where the Blasphemy had been so plainly proved that he was convicted of it but they doubting about the Punishment of so high a Crime referred the consideration of that to Moses as the Supream Judge And his mothers name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri of the Tribe of Dan. I see no reason of mentioning the name of the Woman from whom he was descended but that all might be satisfied of the Truth of this History Ver. 12. Verse 12 And they put him inward Committed him to Prison that he might be secured till his Punishment was declared That the mind of the LORD might be shewed them In the Hebrew the words are That it might be expounded to them viz. by Moses according to the mouth of the LORD that is as the LORD should declare to him And so Onkelos renders them Till the matter was expounded to them according to the sentance of the word of the LORD For it is noted here by a famous Commentator among the Jews as Mr. Selden observes in the place before mentioned Lib. II. de Synedr c. 1. that God was consulted about this matter because they did not know whether he was to die for this crime or whether his judgment was to be expected from the hand of Heaven or otherwise Whence Jarchi says they did not know whether he was guilty of death or not And so Theodoret Q. XXXIII in Lev. There was no Law as yet about this matter But there was