Sabbath therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days You have no reason to seek it on the Sabbath being provided before-hand with as much as is sufficient for that day Let no man go out of his place The Jews say that a Man went out of his place if he went above Two thousand paces from his dwelling That is if he went beyond the Suburbs of his City XXXV Numb 5. Ver. 30. So the people rested on the seventh day The Reprehension which God gave them by Moses v. 28. and the solemn renewal of the Precept v. 29. wrought so much upon them that for the present they rested upon this day And they not having been used to this rest God did not immediately punish their Disobedience in going abroad to gather Manna though afterward he ordered a Man to be stoned for gathering Sticks on this day for he had often repeated this Law to them before that time Ver. 31. And the House of Israel called the name thereof Manna This is repeated again to show that the name which they gave it at first v. 15. continued to it afterward being so apt and proper to signifie God's Providence over them that they could find no better And it was like Coriander Seed Of a round sigure like that Seed v. 14. White Being like Bedolach as Moses saith XI Numb 7. which signifies Pearl as Bochartus shows in his Hierozoic P. II. p. 678. where he observes the Talmudick Doctors in the Title Joma expresly say it was like Margalith or Margarith i.e. Pearl The taste of it was like Wafers made with honey All things of a pleasant relish are compared in Scripture to Honey Whence those words of David XIX Psalm 11. CXIX 103. Onkelos saith Manna tasted like Escaritae which was a delicious Food at Rhodes as Bochart observes out of Julius Pollux between Bread and Cake like our Bisket I suppose which was so grateful that they who did eat it were never satiated but still desired more In the XI Numb 7 8. Manna is said to taste like fresh Oyl Which doth not contradict this for as Abarbinel and others observe the meaning is that when it first fell before it was prepared it tasted like Honey-wafers but when it was baked then it tasted like fresh Oyl And so the words XI Numb 8. plainly import they took it and beat it in a Mortar and baked it c. and the taste of it i. e. thus prepared was like the taste of fresh Oyl Nay the Jewish Doctors commonly say it had all manner of pleasant savours according to Mens different Palates and thence they fancy it is called v. 29. the Bread Mischne which we translate of two days because it was changed according to the diversity of those that did eat it Children young men and old Which conceit the Author of the Book of Wisdom follows XVI 20 21. Ver. 32. And Moses said This is the thing which the LORD commandeth I have this further Command to deliver from God concerning the Manna Take an Omer of it Just so much as was assigned to every one for his daily Bread v. 16. To be kept for your Generations For your Posterity in future Ages That they may see the Bread wherewith I have fed you c. For seeing with ones eyes saith Isaac Aramah mightily confirms a thing and leaves one in no doubt of it And he took care they should see both the Manna it self and the measure which he bountifully allowed to every one of them Ver. 33. And Moses said unto Aaron What God commanded Moses he now commands Aaron to do Take a Pot. He saith nothing of the matter of this Pot or Vrn which some say was an Earthen Pot others say of Lead Brass or Iron and Abarbinel thinks it was of Glass that one might see what was within But the Apostle hath setled this Controversie by calling it a Golden Pot IX Hebr. 4. and so do the LXX in this place And indeed all the Vessels of the Sanctuary being of Gold it was but reason that this which contained such a precious Monument of God's Mercy should be of the same Metal Lay it up before the LORD i.e. Before the Ark of the Testimony as it is explained in the next Verse Which shows that this Command was given after the building of the Tabernacle and is here mentioned because it belongs to the same matter which Moses relates in this Chapter Others suppose it was spoken by way of Prolepsis which seems not to me so probable Ver. 34. So Aaron laid it up When the Tabernacle was built Before the Testimony This is the same with before the LORD in the foregoing Verse For the Divine Glory dwelt between the Cherubims which were over the Ark which is commonly called the Ark of the Testimony XXX 6. XL. 3 5. But here and XXV 36. is simply called the Testimony by an Ellipsis or leaving out the first word which is very usual in other Instances For thus it is called the Ark of God's strength 2 Chron. VI. 41. but elsewhere the first word being omitted it is called only his strength LXXVIII Psalm 61. CV 4. And therefore the Ark is called the Testimony partly because there God gave them a special Token of his Dwelling among them and partly because the two Tables of Stone were in the Ark which are called the Testimony XL. 20. Where it is said Moses put the Testimony into the Ark and then immediately v. 21. he calls it the Ark of the Testimony Ver. 35. And the Children of Israel did eat Manna forty years Within a Month which wanted to make compleat forty years For it begun to fall just XXX days after they came out of Egypt on the XVth of April and ceased to fall on the XVth or XVIth of March the day after the Passover which they kept in the Fortieth year V Josh 11 12. Now in all Writers some days under or over are not wont to be considered when there is a round Number But there are those who fancy these words were put into this Book after Moses his death for which I can see no ground For it is certain he lived the greatest part of the Fortieth year after they came out of Egypt and brought them to the Borders of Canaan within sight of it I Dent. 3. XXXIV 1 2 c. And therefore may well be supposed to have added these words himself to this History as he did the foregoing v. 32. that all belonging to this matter might be put together in one place Vntil they came to a Land inhabited i. e. To Canaan or the Borders of it as it here follows For these words saith Aben-Ezra have respect to the Wilderness in which they now were which was not inhabited Vntil they came unto the Borders of the Land of Canaan That is saith he to Gilgal which was the Borders when they had passed over Jordan when they did eat of the Corn of the Land and had no
A COMMENTARY UPON THE Second Book of MOSES CALLED EXODUS BY The Right Reverend Father in God SYMON Lord Bishop of ELY LONDON Printed for Ri. Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCXCVII A COMMENTARY UPON EXODUS ADVERTISEMENT BY reason of the Distance of the Author from the Press several Errata's have hapned which the Reader is desired to Correct before he read the Book He will find them printed at the end A COMMENTARY UPON THE Second Book of MOSES CALLED EXODUS CHAP. I. THIS Book hath its Name from the Principal Subject of it viz. the Departure of the Children of Israel out of Egypt For so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies going out or departing from one Place to another It contains an History of about an hundred forty and five years some make it two or three years less from the Death of Joseph to the Building of the Tabernacle For it treats of several Things which went before their Departure and which followed after it but they all relate to that and depend upon it Verse 1. Now these are the Names of the Children of Israel which came into Egypt c. Being to relate the Departure of the Children of Israel out of Egypt it was very proper first to set down the Number of those who came into it and the Heads of them Whereby it might the better appear also how God had fulfilled his Promise to Abraham of multiplying his Seed Which Moses had recorded in his first Book Genesis where he shows this Promise was made at that very time when he declared after a long Affliction in Egypt he would conduct his Posterity into Canaan XV Gen. 5 13 18. Ver. 2 3 4. Reuben Simeon c. He doth not set down their Names in these three Verses according to their Birth but first the Children of Leah then one of Rachels and then those of his Handmaids and last of all in the next Verses Joseph who was in Egypt before Ver. 5. And all the Souls i. e. Persons Who came out of the Loins In the Hebrew out of the thigh which signifies that part whereby Mankind is propagated as was observed upon XLVI Gen. 26. And so the Author of the Tripartite History uses the word femur when he speaks of the Martyrdom of Benjamin as Bochart observes P. 2. Hierozoic L. 5. cap. 15. Alium rursum acutum Calamum in ejus femur unde humana origo descendit jussit immitti For Joseph was in Egypt already In the Hebrew the Particle Vau which we commonly translate and and here for sometimes also signifies with See IV Gen. 20. And so it doth in this place which should be translated seventy Souls with Joseph who was in Egypt already For Joseph is not to be added to the LXX but reckoned among them to make up that number as appears from XLVI Gen. Ver. 6. And Joseph died See Gen. 26. And all his Brethren and all that Generation All that came with Jacob into Egypt Ver. 7. And the Children of Israel were fruitful c. Here are several words for the same thing to show their extraordinary Increase beyond what was usual in that or any other Country And because there are six words in all to express this great Increase some of the Hebrews conclude they brought forth six Children at a Birth Which others of them gather from the second word here used Jischretzu which is a word whereby the Increase of Fishes is expressed in I Gen. 20. So Theodorick Hacspan observes out of Baal-hatturim and Jalkut and thinks the Tradition is not to be rejected because they bring frivolous Conceits to support it For Aristotle saith L. VII Histor Animal c. 4. the Egyptian Women were so fruitful that some of them at four Births brought Twenty Children No wonder then if some of the Israelites brought Six at a time by the extraordinary Blessing of God upon them For Caspar Schottus names the Wife of a Citizen in Florence who had Two and fifty Children and never brought less than Three at a Birth L. III. Phys Curiosae Cap. XXIX where he hath collected a vast number of Examples of such strange fruitfulness But no Body hath explained this Verse now more soberly and unexceptionably than Abarbinel who considers every one of the words here used very judiciously and shows they are not multiplyed in vain For as the first word Were fruitful Signifies he thinks that none among them were barren but brought forth every year as Trees are wont to do So the next word And increased abundantly Signifies that they commonly brought forth more than One at a time as creeping things do to which this word alludes And because when more than one are born at a Birth they are frequently very weak and not long lived Therefore he adds And multiplied Which signifies that they grew up to be Men and Women and lived to have Children of their own And those not feeble but lusty and strong as the next words he thinks imports waxed exceeding mighty of which more presently Now this vast Increase began at their first coming into Egypt XLVII Gen. 27 28. and so continued till the death of all that Generation mentioned in the foregoing Verse When it began to be taken notice of by the Egyptians who thought it might prove dangerous to them For the Israelites having multiplied exceedingly during the space of XVII years that Jacob lived in Egypt there is no doubt they increased proportionably in the space of LIV years more which Joseph lived after the death of his Father And so in LXIV years more from the Death of Joseph to the Birth of Moses must needs be grown so numerous as to fill the Country So that in LXXX years more they were increased to Six hundred thousand Men besides Children XII Exod. 37. And the next year their Number being taken they were found to be Six hundred and three thousand five hundred and fifty Men from Twenty years old and upward as we read I Numb 45 46. And therefore reckoning Women Children and Youths under the Age of Twenty we cannot but think they were three times as many or perhaps Two Millions Which is not incredible by a moderate Computation if we consider how many might spring from LXX Persons in the space of Two hundred and fifteen years which the fore-named Sums make as Bonfrerius and several others from him in our own Language have been at the pains to demonstrate And waxed exceeding mighty This is commonly thought to signifie that they were not only numerous but robust and strong And it may as well denote that their vast Numbers made them very Formidable to the Egyptians who began it appears by the Sequel to be jealous of their power if they should have a will to attempt any thing against them And the Land was filled with them i. e. The Land of Goshen and perhaps some other Parts of the lower Egypt Ver. 8. Now there arose up a New King
Divinations upon the Water as a Magician Hierozoic P. 2. L. IV. Cap. XV. And thou shalt stand by the Rivers brink against he come Perhaps Pharaoh as the same Bochart observes had forbid him to come any more to the Court and so God directs him to take this occasion to meet with him And the Rod which was turned into a Serpent shalt thou take in thine hand To give him the greater Authority and to put Pharaoh in fear at the sight of that Rod which had lately swallowed up all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Greg. Nyssen calls them Magical Staves which encountred him Ver. 16. And thou shalt say the LORD God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee saying See V. 3. To which add that it is plain by this whole Story that all the Messages delivered by Moses and all the Answers which Pharaoh returned were true and formal Treaties of a Solemn Embassage as Dr. Jackson speaks upon which Moses was sent to the King of Egypt from the LORD God of the Hebrews that is their King as he was become in a peculiar manner under whom Moses acted as his Deputy or Viceroy Let my People go that they may serve me c. The merciful kindness of God to an hardned Sinner is here very remarkable in renewing his Message and giving him Warning of what would come upon him if he did not yield Whereas he might in Justice have inflicted it without any Notice of his Intentions He sets before him also his Sin and his Danger in being hitherto Disobedient and behold hitherto thou wouldst not hear i. e. thou hast provoked the Divine Majesty by disregarding several Messages I have brought to thee from him Ver. 17. Thus saith the LORD Attend to this new Message I bring to thee in his Name In this thou shalt know that I am the LORD He had askt in a contemptuous way Who is the LORD and said after a supercilious manner I know him not v. 2. nor indeed cared to know him but slighted him and his Messengers as the word know not sometime signifies being as much as not to regard Therefore now he bids Moses tell him He would make him know that he was the Omnipotent LORD of the World by the change of the Waters of the River which Pharaoh perhaps adored into Blood Behold I will smite with the Rod that is in mine hand God and Moses are represented in this History as one Person according to what he had said v. 1. of this Chapter and therefore it was the same thing to say the LORD whose words Moses had begun to recite will smite or to say I will smite See v. 16. It is to be observed also that Aaron smote the River v. 19. but it being by Moses his Direction and Order it was counted his Act so that he might say I will smite c. The Waters of the River and they shall be turned into Blood This Plague was the more remarkable because as Theodoret here observes they having drowned the Hebrew Children in this River God now punishes them for it by giving them bloody Water to drink XII Wisd 7 8. And if they had the same Notions then that the Egyptians had in future times the Plague was the more terrible because it fell on that which they thought had some Divinity in it and as the same Theodoret observes was honoured as a God because it made Plenty when it overflow'd its Banks The Hebrew Doctors add another reason for this Punishment because the Egyptians had hindred them from their wonted Baptisms as the Authour of The Life and Death of Moses speaks that is saith Gaulmyn from Purifying themselves in the River by Bathing after they had lain in of their Children which in the scarcity of Water in that Country could no where be done but in the River Ver. 18. And the Fish that is in the River shall die c. Here are three grievous Effects of this Plague It deprived them of their most delicious Food for so their Fish were XI Numb 5. And took away the Pleasure they had of washing by the Rivers side because it stank both by the death of the Fish and the corruption of the Blood through the heat of the Sun by which means the Water was made unfit for their Drink Ver. 19. And the LORD spake unto Moses After he had been with Pharaoh and delivered this Message to him Say unto Aaron take thy Rod and stretch out thy hand This Warning being despised by Pharaoh who would not relent God requires them actually to do as he had threatned And now Moses had delivered his Rod to Aaron that he might by his Authority execute this Judgment Vpon the Waters of Egypt These are general words comprehending all the particulurs following Vpon their Streams There were seven Branches into which the River Nile was divided before it fell into the Sea which seem to be here understood being called IX Isa 15. the seven Streams or Rivers of Egypt Vpon their Rivers There were several Cuts made by Art out of every Stream to draw the Water into their Grounds which seem to be here meant by Rivers And upon their Ponds These were digged to hold rain water when it fell as it did sometimes and near the River also they digged Wells it is likely which may be here intended And upon all Pools of Water There were here and there other Collections of Water particularly in their Gardens derived by Pipes from the River into Cisterns In Vessels of Wood or of Stone Wherein Water was kept in private Houses for their present use Ver. 20. And Moses and Aaron did so as the LORD commanded c. This first Plague our Primate Vsher makes account was inflicted about the XVIIIth day of the Sixth Month which in the next year and ever after became the Twelfth Month. Artapanus tells this Story otherwise but it is evident he had heard of it among the Gentiles and Ezekiel the Tragaedian relates it all right together with the following Miracle See Euseb Praepar Evang. L. IX Cap. XXIX p. 442. Nor is there any thing more frequent in the Roman Story as Huetius observes L. II. Alnet Quaestion Cap. XII n. 12. than Relations of Rivers of Blood flowing out of the Earth Pits full of Blood showres of Blood and Waters of Rivers changed into Blood c. And he lift up the Rod and smote the Waters that were in the River c. Here is mention only of Smiting the Water in the River And it is likely that only the Waters of the River were turned into Blood as it here follows at the first lifting up of his Rod and then all the rest of the Waters mentioned in the precedent Verse Ver. 21. And the Fish that was in the River died c. All the effects of this Plague which were threatned v. 18. See there immediately following The first of which was the death of the Fish which perished in such great numbers that
he doth that Pharaoh's eldest Son who was now slain had the Name of Osiris whose sudden Death by this stroke all Posterity lamented in one Night of the year Which was when the Moon was at full as he observes out of Apuleius which still confirms this Conjecture it being at a full Moon when this Slaughter was made and the Israelites delivered out of Egypt For there was not an House where there was not one dead If there were any Children in it Ver. 31. And he called for Moses and Aaron By some of his Servants whom he sent to them as v. 33. seems to signifie By Night He durst not stay till the next Morning for fear he should have been cut off also before that time And said Rise up One would think by this that they found them sleeping securely in their Beds when this deadly blow was given to the Egyptians And get you forth from amongst my People both you and the Children of Israel c. For he was sorely afraid if they staid any longer they would bring some greater Mischief upon him Go serve the LORD as ye have said He had several times made this Concession but was never so much in earnest as now Ver. 32. Also take your Flocks and your Herds c. Though his heart had been often hardned yet this Slaughter of all their First-born made such a deep impression upon him that he comes fully up to their Terms yielding for the present to all they had desired though he did not continue constant in this mind but soon revolted And bless me also Pray for me as the Chaldee translates it Ver. 33. And the Egyptians were urgent upon the People They that brought from Pharaoh a grant of all the Israelites desired and others also who had lost their Children pressed very hard upon them to accept it and that with all speed not out of love to the Israelites but for fear they should perish themselves if they did not leave their Country Pharaoh especially seeing his First-born the Heir of his Crown struck suddenly dead had reason to conclude the next blow would be at his own Life To send them out of the Land of Egypt This shows they were not meerly dismissed but intreated nay importuned to depart Such a change had this Slaughter and the general Outcry that followed upon it made in their hearts In haste They that were unwilling before to hearken to the Israelites Petition now make their Petitions to them and were so glad to be rid of them that they would not suffer them to delay their departure Nay made a Golden-bridge as we speak for their speedy passage out of Egypt v. 35 36. For they said we be all dead men They were desirous the Israelites should enjoy their Liberty rather than lose their own Lives Ver. 34. And the People took their Dough before it was leavened They seem to have newly mixed their Flowre and Water together and kneaded it into a Paste or Dough as we translate it but had not put any leaven into it nor had time to make it into Cakes and bake them Their kneading-troughs The Hebrew word comprehends both the Dough and the Thing wherein it was contained which in VIII 3. we translate Ovens and here Kneading-troughs in which their Dough was carried Being bound up in their Clothes The Hebrew word for Clothes signifies any thing that covers another or wherein it is wrapt as the Dough was in Linnen-clothes it is most likely for that is usual to keep it from the cold Air which was sharp in the Night and would have hindred its rising On their shoulders For we do not read of any Wagons or Horses they had for the Carriage of their Goods out of Egypt Ver. 35. And the Children of Israel did according to the word of Moses Who had commanded them from God to do as it here follows XI 1 2. which was their warrant and justified the Fact And they borrowed of the Egyptians c. So most understand it though some think it was a free gift which the Egyptians bestowed upon them when they were very desirous as we read before to have them gone out of their Country which made them not only intreat but hire them to depart So Jacobus Capellus ad A.M. 2503. They that had denied them leave to go away for a few days saith he now press them to depart with all speed quin praecibus Israelitas demulcent ac donis onerant Egyptii See III. 23. But it is commonly thought that the Egyptians imagined the Israelites only desired to appear as well adorned as they could before their God at the great Feast they were to hold in the Wilderness and so readily lent them these Jewels and sine Clothes to deck themselves withal which they hoped would be restored to them again as soon as the Sacrisice was over Ver. 36. And the LORD gave the People favour c. As he had promised III. 21. and see XI 3. So that they lent them such things as they required Though the Men borrowed as well as the Women XI 3. yet the Women are only mentioned III. 23. because they borrowed most and the Women and Maidens of Egypt might be the more willing to bestow their Jewels and Earings upon them that they might woo their Husbands Children and Relations to be gone with all speed And they spoiled the Egyptians God hath a Supream Right to all things and there was a just cause why he should transfer the Right of the Egyptians unto the Israelites See XI 2. Unto which add this Story which is told in the Gemara of the Sanhedrin that in the time of Alexander the Great the Egyptians brought an Action against the Israelites desiring they might have the Land of Canaan in satisfaction for all that they borrowed of them when they went out of Egypt To which Gibeah ben Kosam who was Advocate for the Jews replyed That before they made this Demand they must prove what they alledged that the Israelites borrowed any thing of their Ancestors Unto which the Egyptians thought it sufficient to say That they found it Recorded in their own Books mentioning this place Well then said the Advocate look into the same Book and you will find the Children of Israel lived four hundred and thirty years in Egypt pay us for all the labour and toil of so many Thousand People as you imployed all that time and we will restore what we borrowed To which they had not a word to answer Tertullian mentions such a Controversie or Plea between the two Nations L. II. advers Marcion where he relates this from an ancient Tradition See Mr. Selden L. VII de Jure Nat. Gent. c. 8. Besides this it is not impertinent to observe that the Egyptians were declared Enemies to the Jews now it is not unlawful to spoil an Enemy nor ought this upon that account to be called a Thest This reason Clemens Alexandrinus joyns to the former See L.
Selden shows L. IV. de Jure N. G. c. 2. An Officer of Justice was not bound to flee if he chanced in the Execution of his Office to kill a Man that resisted him Nor a Master if he killed his Scholar or a Father his Son when he gave him Correction Ver. 14. But if a man come presumptuously The Vulgar Latin rightly translates it industriously or with design to kill him for it is opposed to ignorance The Hebrew word also carries in it a signification of boiling anger which doth not alter the Case For if a Man in the height of his Rage resolved to kill another and laid wait for him to execute his Design it was justly judged to be wilful Murder and punished with Death Which was far more equal than Plato's Law That such a Man should only be banished for three years as he that on a sudden killed a Man in his Anger only for two L. IX de Legibus p. 867. Vpon his Neighbour The Hebrew Doctors by Neighbour understand only an Israelite or a Proselyte of Justice As for others they were not put to death if an Israelite killed one of them Which was not the intent of this Law whereby God would have all Men that lived among them safe and secure from being murdered To slay him with guile By which it appeared the Act was designed and deliberate For two things are denoted by this word with guile first fore-thought and then delay as Isaac Karo observes See L'Empereur in Bava kama cap. 3. sect 6. Thou shalt take him If it be inquired who should take him it seems to be determined XIX Deut. 12. where the Elders of the City were to fetch away a wilful Murderer from the City of Refuge In after times the King ordered it as Moses did while he lived 1 Kings I. ult II. 29. By which places it appears That if a Man refused to come from the Altar being judged upon proof to be a wilful Murderer or other high Offender he might be there killed as Georg. Ritterhusius shows L. de Jure Asylorum c. 8. where he observes out of Plutarch in his Laconioa that Agesilaus declared publickly at the Altar of Pallas where he sacrificed an Ox that he thought it lawful to kill one that treacherously assaulted him even at the Altar And thus the practice was among Christians as he there shows when their Temples became Sanctuaries to Malefactors From my Altar This was an Asylum as well as the Cities of Refuge but under many Limitations both with respect to the part of the Altar and to the Persons that fled thither and to the Crime they had committed as Mr. Selden shows in the place above-mentioned p. 475. That he may die Though he was the High Priest and in the Act of Sacrifice he was to be taken away without delay if he had committed wilful Murder If it was involuntary then he was to be taken from thence and carried to the City of Refuge For God would not have a Pious place as Conradus Pellicanus glosses be a Protection to Impiety See Mr. Selden L. III. de Synedr c. 8. p. 100. Maimonides his Observation is pertinent enough upon this occasion That the Mercy which is shown to wicked Men is no better than Tyranny and Cruelty to the rest of God's Creatures and therefore though such Persons sought to God for his Patronage by betaking themselves to that which was dedicated to his Name he would not afford them any protection but commanded them to be delivered up to Justice More Nevoch P. III. c. 39. Ver. 15. And he that smiteth his Father or Mother So as to wound them and to make the Blood come or to leave a mark of the stroke by making the flesh black and blue as we speak Selden L. II. de Synedr c. 13. p. 556. Shall be surely put to death Strangled say the Hebrews see v. 12. by the Sentence of the Judge there being competent Witnesses of the Fact as in other Cases The giving them saucy words or making mows at them which signified Contempt was punished also with Whipping There was no need to say any thing of killing them for all wilful Murder was punished with Death And Solon it is commonly noted made no Law about this because it was not to be supposed any Man would be so wicked Nor was this Crime known among the Persians as Herodotus saith in his days Nor do we find any mention of it in the Law of the XII Tables But in after times there were most severe Punishments enacted against Parricide which are described at large by Modestinus And Diodorus Siculus tells us of the like among the Egpytians See Hen. Stephanus in his Fontes Rivi Juris Civilis p. 18. Plato would have him that killed either Father or Mother Brethren or Children not only to be put to Death but to be disgraced after his Execution by throwing his dead Body naked into a common place without the City where all the Magistrates in the Name of the People should every one of them throw a Stone at his head and then carrying him out of the Coasts leave him without Burial L. IX de Legibus p. 873. Ver. 16. He that stealeth a Man By a Man the Hebrews understand an Israelite whether he was a Freeman or but a Servant as Mr. Selden observes L. VI. de Jure N. G. c. 2. And selleth him No Israelite would buy him and therefore such Plagiaries sold him to Men of other Nations Which made the Crime to be punished with Death because it was a cruel thing not only to take away his Liberty but make him a Slave to Strangers Or if he be found in his hand Though he had not actually sold him yet his intention was sufficiently known by his stealing him Shall be surely put to death I observed above v. 12. they interpret this Phrase every where to signifie strangling If it be said any where his blood shall be upon him it signifies stoning Maimonides makes this the reason why such a Man was condemned to die because it might well be thought he intended to kill him whom he violently carried away at least as I understand it if he could not find means to sell him More Nevoch P. III. c. 41. Ver. 17. And he that curseth his Father or his Mother c. The Hebrews take this Law to concern those who cursed their dead Parents no less than those who cursed them when they were alive but not without Praemonition and Witnesses as in other Capital Crimes And not unless they cursed their Parents by some proper Name of God as Mr. Selden observes out of the Jewish Doctors L. II. de Synedr c. 13. This and the other Law v. 15. enacted Death as the Punishment of such Crimes because they were a sign saith Maimonides More Nevoch P. III. c. 41. of a desperate Malice and audacious Wickedness being a subversion of that Domestick Order which is the prime part of good Government
time that it had been known to push But if the Ox had formerly been known to be so unruly and he had been told of it and yet did not take care to prevent further mischief then he as well as the Ox were to be put to death The Jewish Doctors indeed have softned this by divers Exceptions As first they say it was to be proved that the Ox had pushed upon three several days for though it appeared he pushed a great many times in one day it would not make the Man liable And secondly it was to be testified not only to the Owner but before the Magistrate that he had pushed so often And lastly they interpret the last words of this Verse the Owner also shall be put to death of Punishment by the Hand of Heaven that is they leave him to God See Bochart in his Hierozoic P. I. L. II. c. 40. But though Abarbinel propound this as the opinion of their Wise men yet he was sensible of its absurdity For he confesses that God doth decree the Sentence of Death should be executed upon the Owner of the Ox only he thinks that he remits something of the strictness of it in the next Verse And there are three Cases here mentioned relating to this matter One in the foregoing Verse where the Ox is ordered to be stoned Another in this where the Owner is also made liable to be put to death And a third in the next Verse where a Pecuniary Mulct is only set upon him Ver. 30. If there be laid upon him a sum of money then he shall give it for the ransome of his life By this it appears there might be a Case wherein the Owner of the Ox should not be put to death but only be fined though the Ox had been wont to push and he was told of it And the Interpretation of this and the foregoing Law which is given by Constantine L'Empereur is not unreasonable upon Bava kama c. 4. sect 5. Either the knowledge which the owner had of the ill Conditions of his Ox was certain or uncertain and his carelesness in preventing the Mischief he was wont to do was greater or lesser and the Friends of him that was killed pressed the strictest Justice or were content to remit it In the former cases if the knowledge was certain the carelesness very gross and the Friends were strict in the Prosecution he was punished with death but if otherwise he was punished only by setting a Fine upon him Certain it is that the foregoing Law might prove too rigorous in many cases as if the Ox pushed being provoked or broke loose when he was tied up or was let go by the negligence of a Servant c. and therefore God permitted the Judges to accept of a Ransom as they saw cause which was to be paid according as the Sanhedrim thought meet So Jonathan Whatsoever is laid upon him He was to submit to the Fine whatsoever it was and it was given to the Heirs of him that was killed If a Man's Wife was killed the Jews say it was given to the Heirs of her Father's Family and not to her Husband Ver. 31. Whether he have gored a son or have gored a daughter c. Because what was said v. 29. of killing a Man or a Woman might have been restrained to the Father or Mother of a Family whose loss was greatest and their lives most precious therefore the same Law is here extended to the Children yet both Jonathan and Onkelos consine it to the Children of Israelites as if all Mankind besides were nothing worth See Bochartus in the place above-mentioned Ver. 32. If an Ox shall push a man-servant or a maid-servant c. Whether the Servant was of greater or lesser value saith Maimonides the Punishment was the payment of thirty shekels and the loss of the Ox half the price of a Free-man who was estimated he saith at sixty shekels More Nevoch P. III. c. 40. He adds in another place in his Treatise of Pecuniary Mulcts that the Owner was not bound to pay this Ransom unless the Ox killed the Man out of his own Ground For if he was killed within in the Owners Ground the Ox indeed was stoned but no Ransom was paid Divers other cases he mentions in that Book as L'Empereur observes upon Bava kama p. 85. where he takes notice that Solon himself wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Law concerning the mischief done by Cattle as Plutarch relates in his Life Ver. 33. And if a man shall open a pit c. In the Street or publick High-way as Jonathan rightly interprets it For if he opened or digged a Pit in his own Ground he was not concerned in this Law though another Man's Beast fell into it And not cover it If he did cover it conveniently though in time the Cover grew rotten and a Beast fell into it he was not bound to make it good as Maimonides resolves the Case Ver. 34. The owner of the pit shall make it good c. There were so many Cases arose upon this Law that it is not easie to number them Maimonides hath amassed together abundance belonging to this matter with wonderful accuracy as Bochartus observes who hath transcribed a great many of them in his Hierozoic P. I. L. 2. c. 40. p. 391 c. Ver. 35. If one mans Ox hurt anothers that he die Which equally belongs to all other Cattle as Maimonides observes for the Law mentions an Ox only for example sake They shall sell the live Ox and divide the money c. Though the Ox that was killed was worth as much more as the other yet satisfaction was to be made only out of the live Ox which did the mischief as the same Maimonides observes who hath several Cases upon this Law as may be seen in the fore-named Book of Bochart's p. 393. But it might so happen that the Ox which was killed was of little value and the live Ox worth many pound in which case it seems so unreasonable the Man whose loss was small should be a great gainer by the Sale of the Ox which did the mischief that the Jewish Lawyers resolve the meaning of this Law is the Man whose Ox was killed should receive half the Damage he had sustained as L'Empereur observes upon Bava kama cap. 1. sect 4. Ver. 36. Or if it be known that the Ox hath used to push c. There is a great difference between what is done casually and what is done constantly The former Verse speaks of the hurt done by a Beast that was not wont to push and this of the hurt done by one that was notoriously mischievous And accordingly greater Damages were given in this latter case than in the former And by this general Rule the Jews regulated all other Cases making those Mischiefs that were done by Beasts which were wont to hurt or were of a hurtful Nature to be punished above as much more than the Mischief done by a