1. The first portion of Leviticus sets forth the principal statutes concerning sacrifices, and in natural connection with them describes the consecration of the Sanctuary and of the priesthood. We now enter upon the second great division of the Book, the laws of purity (ch. XI-XV). When the "kingdom of priests", as ideally conceived by the author, had been provided with the means of publie worship and atonement, they were to be instructed how to attain and to preserve personal holiness, and how to strengthen holiness by purity. An atmosphere of religion was to surround every relation of practical life. Therefore, the laws of purity follow here in their appropriate place. To indicate the continuity of the narrative, the commands are addressed not to Moses only, but to Aaron also: the latter, as the appointed representative of the sacerdotal order, was principally concerned in the ordinances of purity; both he and the common priests were to be unstained when they entered the Sanctuary to perform their sacred duties, or when they were eating the sacrificial meals; it was their special duty to instruct the Israelites in the distinction between things clean and unclean (X. 10, 11); and they had to officiate at the offerings of expiation in cases of undesigned defilement (V. 2, 3). These are reasons enough, why the laws of sacrifice and priesthood should be supplemented by those of purity. Moreover, the arrangement of the details is, in this division, decidedly more regular than both in the preceding and following sections; indeed, with a few exceptions, it is systematic; it begins with purity in diet, advances to precepts on purity

of persons, garments, and houses, and treats of these subjects in intelligible and judicious subdivisions (comp. Part I. pp. XV. XVI. XXII). We lay no stress on the circumstance, that in the laws of sacrifice already allusion is made to "a carcass of an unclean beast, a carcass of unclean cattle, and the carcass of unclean reptiles"; and in general to "unclean things" and "the uncleanness of men, whatever their uncleanness may be wherewith a man defiles himself" (V. 2, 3; VII. 19-21): for anticipations of this kind must be expected, and could perhaps not easily be avoided, in so complex a code. We are, therefore, justified in supposing, that the whole of this portion was brought into its present order by the same compiler. However, it would be hasty to conclude, that it was entirely written by the same author; on the contrary, a careful analysis of its component parts reveals striking differences of age and conception, and proves, in these as in all other religious precepts, a gradual progress from simplicity to intricate ritualism.

The laws of diet fitly stand first. If the Israelite was, through purity, to be holy because his God is holy, nothing was more important than to regulate the food he takes and blends with his body; for the body, the depository of the Divine image of the soul, and reacting upon it, was deemed sacred; it was not to be mutilated or wantonly disfigured; much less was it to be profaned by its amalgamation with detestable nourishment. In this respect, the dietary laws have even a greater force than the ancient Hebrews probably ever imagined. For it is at present known that, by a constant change of matter carried on

in the human organism, “man is not merely a creature that consumes food, but he himself - with his skin and hair, his bones and brain, his flesh and blood — is nothing else but his own consumed and metamorphosed food". Precepts relating to various kinds of food, as fat and blood, and, are, in a desultory manner, scattered throughout the Pentateuch, especially the middle Books; but the ordinances on clean and unclean animals are here at once given fully and systematically; they comprise nearly everything that the Hebrew law ever fixed on the subject; and they leave but little doubt respecting their object and character. They follow, in general, the classification of the animal kingdom usual among Biblical writers (see p. 50); for, beginning with quadrupeds, they proceed to fishes, then pass to birds, and conclude with the "creeping things" (7). Yet they cannot conceal the traces of considerable additions inserted at different periods. Let us take the corresponding precepts of Deuteronomy as a basis of comparison (Deut.XIV. 3—21). Premising the general principle, "Thou shalt not eat any abominable things", the Deuteronomist enumerates ten species of clean quadrupeds and states their criteria; he next describes the characteristics of clean fishes; advancing to birds, he permits "all clean birds", and specifies twentyone unclean or prohibited kinds; he then unreservedly proscribes "every creeping thing that flies" (a), that is, all winged insects; and he finally forbids the flesh of animals that died of themselves (b), and seething the kid in its mother's milk, which, like the other commands, is introduced by him merely as a dietary regulation. If these comparatively simple injunctions are read by the

side of our present section, it will be found, that the author of Leviticus indeed retained the outlines of the earlier work, but that he materially enlarged, and in some respects completely modified them.(1.) In addition to unclean fishes, "the moving things" of the water (≈ 7¬~), in

cluding especially the crustacea, are pointed out as an abomination (ver. 10). (2.)Of the winged insects, those with springing legs, or certain species of locusts, are expressly declared clean, and permitted for food (vers. 21, 22). — (3.) Among "the creeping things that creep upon the earth”, the Reptiles, Spiders, and Worms are specially dilated upon as detestable, and then all "the creeping things" in general are similarly denounced (vers. 41-43).—(4.) Among the inferior habitants of the land, eight species are signalized as pre-eminently unclean, and guarded against in a manner unprecedented for scrupulous minuteness (vers. 29-38, see Summary). (5.) Above all, the "uncleanness” which results from eating, carrying, or touching any part of the carcass of a forbidden animal, and the lustrations required to re-establish a condition of purity, are stated and insisted upon with an emphatic earnestness which strongly contrasts with the wording and the spirit of former enactments (vers. 8, 11, 24, 26-28, 31 sqq., 39, 40, 43-45). — (6.) Hence commands are inserted with regard to the flesh of lawful animals that died of themselves (ba), but they are meant less as laws of diet than as rules of purity, since they refer not merely to eating, but also to carrying and touching such meat (vers. 39, 40). — (7.) The context is, in one instance, illogically interrupted by additional injunctions of purity concerning the carcass of the great land animals, which had

indeed been treated of before, but as it seemed to the reviser, not with sufficient fulness and rigour (vers. 2628; comp. ver. 8).—(8.) In another instance, with respect to unclean fishes, an almost intolerable tautology is resorted to, reiteration being supposed to add force (vers. 10-12).

We are, therefore, compelled to conclude, that some original ordinances on permitted and forbidden food, probably those preserved in Deuteronomy, were by the subsequent compilers of the more stringent code of Leviticus supplemented and altered with a view of their closer association with the laws of purity, and their more complete union with the levitical system. Indeed the component parts of our section are so transparent, that they may not only be pointed out with safety, but be arranged in chronological order so as to exhibit at a glance the gradual growth of the principles which gave rise to the laws of diet.

Fol

PHILOLOGICAL REMARKS. lowing out the preceding suggestions, we may thus analyse our chapter, and describe its individual parts. (1.) It begins with the older precepts concerning quadrupeds, fishes, birds, and insects (2), vers. 2-20: so far the dietary ordinances are carried in Deuteronomy also, and agree substantially with those of Leviticus; but the latter, now entirely abandoning, or rather passing beyond, the earlier source, first enlarges upon the class of animals treated of last, the insects, and adds (2.) a supplementary rule in favour of edible locusts, vers. 21, 22; yet (3.) prohibits with enhanced severity all other insects as defiling, and prescribes careful lustrations, in case they are touched or carried, vers. 23-25. (4.) As now the aspect of purity was to be more strongly ur

ged, besides that of diet, additional commands are inserted with regard to the carcasses of unclean quadrupeds (a), vers. 26-28. Then follows (5.) a series of regulations concerning a number of lower animals held particularly unclean, vers. 2938, regulations so intricate and almost playful, that their spirit and very late origin cannot be mistaken. Moreover, (6.) distinct injunctions were deemed requisite on the polluting effect of the dead bodies of clean quadrupeds,vers. 39,40; and lastly(7.), as until then the insects alone (

)had been mentioned of all"creeping things" (y), the other classes also, especially the hated reptiles and the crustacea, the spiders and worms

were expressly (שרץ השרץ על הארץ)

proscribed and denounced; and it was chiefly with respect to these most abhorred and most repulsive creatures, that the ideas of defilement and of holiness were forcibly dwelt upon, vers. 41-45; after which a comprehensive statement of the object of the section brings it to a proper conclusion, vers. 46, 47. A logical arrangement of the contents would yield the following order of the verses: (1.) The laws on clean and unclean quadrupeds, vers. 2-8, 26-28, 39, 40. (2.) On fishes and birds, insects, and other "creeping things", vers. 925, 29-38, 41-47. It is, hence, probable that the first portion (vers. 2-20) was concluded, and perhaps diffused, when the remarks on the defilement of unclean quadrupeds were added (vers. 26-28), for else the latter I would no doubt have been inserted after the 8th verse; and that then the injunctions were again carried on to ver. 38, for else the two following verses (39 and 40), treating of quadrupeds and interrupting the laws on creeping things, would probably have been placed after the