Leviticus: a commentary on Leueitikon in Codex Vaticanus (Septuagint Commentary) 9004405526, 9789004405523

Citation preview

Leviticus

Septuagint Commentary Series Editors Stanley E. Porter Richard S. Hess John Jarick

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/sept

Leviticus A Commentary on Leueitikon in Codex Vaticanus

By

Mark A. Awabdy

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Awabdy, Mark A., 1981- author. Title: Leviticus : a commentary on Leueitikon in Codex Vaticanus / Mark A. Awabdy. Other titles: Bible. Micah. Greek. Biblioteca apostolica vaticana. 2019. Description: Boston : Brill, 2019. | Series: Septuagint commentary series, 1572-3755 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2019032832 (print) | LCCN 2019032833 (ebook) | ISBN 9789004405523 (hardback) | ISBN 9789004409835 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Bible. Micah–Commentaries. Classification: LCC BS1255.53 .A93 2019 (print) | LCC BS1255.53 (ebook) | DDC 222/.13048–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019032832 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019032833

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill‑typeface. ISSN 1572-3755 ISBN 978-90-04-40552-3 (hardback) ISBN 978-90-04-40983-5 (e-book) Copyright 2020 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

To my remarkable Old Testament students in the Majority World

∵

Contents Preface ix Abbreviations Introduction

xi 1

Text and Translation Commentary

73

180

Bibliography 433 Index of Modern Authors 448 Index of Subjects 451 Index of Scripture 453 Index of Ancient Sources 474

Preface The scribal achievement of Codex Vaticanus (B) is magisterial. This oldest extant Greek Bible materialized the audacious Christian conviction of the unity of the Jewish and Christian scriptures by physically binding the testaments into a single compendium. The manuscript has had an elusive history for the public, which only enhances our gratitude to the Vatican Library for posting on its website, from 2015 to the present, free HD images of B in its entirety. It is my hope that this commentary on Leviticus in Vaticanus, hereafter LeueitikonB or LeuB, will guide others to encounter the manuscript afresh or for the first time. The LeuB text reflects “une ou plusieurs recensions ultérieurs” (Himbaza 2016: 32–33), but its recensional nature should not be overstated because, with LeuA and the fragmentary codices, it contains only a “relatively small number of variants” (Ulrich 1984: 82) against the rightly esteemed papyri (4QLXXLeva, 4QpapLXXLevb, Schøyen MS 2649). Irrespective of its convergences and divergences with the Old Greek, LeuB is worthy to be read as an independent text with its own coherent structure and message, and its own polyphony and complications. This commentary, then, is my attempt to move toward greater solidarity with the voiceless early Greek readers who, in the end, must have made sense of this now timeless manuscript. The original LeuB scribes have preserved a text form that perpetuates all the dense layers of intertextuality—Hebraic syntax and Koine Greek lexical choices, but with B’s own attractive, subdivided format and variant readings that recolor the ancient story of Israel’s encounter with the Lord, who speaks from out of his dwelling tent at the base of the desert mountain. It is only fitting that LeuB even had an idiosyncratic spelling for that nostalgic place: Mount Seina (Σεινά in 7:38[2×]; 25:1; 26:46; 27:34; cf. Σινα “Sina” Bb A GAmb; ‫“ ִסי ָני‬Sinai” MT). I thank the editors of this series for granting me the delight of contributing this volume. Richard Hess alleviated undue pressure through a string of positive responses. His review in tandem with Stanley Porter’s has helped to improve the manuscript. I thank Jan Joosten for his feedback on a portion of the translation and introduction. His encouragement at the 2016 congress of the IOSOT/IOSCS in Stellenbosch compelled me to persevere when I was in the thick of this project. There also, Michaël van der Meer was uplifting and willing to publish my paper on LevLXX 16:1 in their volume, but I had already submitted it elsewhere. At the same congress, I sat with Peter Flint, who, without my prompting, offered his service: “I can tell you anything you would like to know about Leviticus in the Qumran scrolls.” Not even two months later, on Nov. 3, 2016, he died unexpectedly. In our grief, his kindness and scholarship

x

preface

live on as a source of inspiration. I am very grateful to Miika Tucker, who while researching in Helsinki under Professor Aejmelaeus, checked my reproduction of the precorrected text of Leueitikon in Vaticanus. I thank my colleague William Subash for suggesting that LevLXX 18:22 probably exhibits anacoluthon and my colleague Ernest Clark for assisting me in surveying how the NT writings assimilate and adapt Leviticus’ cult and temple motifs; a number of his thoughts appear in the introductory section, The Reception of LeviticusLXX in the New Testament. I am thankful for research assistants, Jim Wilson, who collected sources, and Brad Haggard, who created the indices. I offer my gratitude to Lydia Bax and her team at TAT Zetwerk for their gracious spirit and exemplary editing and formatting work. I thank Rebecca Williams for tirelessly and promptly copy editing the translation and commentary. I am humbled by my astonishing wife and kids for always supporting me in my research, even when it added pressure to our household. At last, I thank ὁ κύριος, the Lord, whom I have come to love and fear more deeply through the perplexing beauty of the Greek version of Leviticus. Mark A. Awabdy Arabian Peninsula

Abbreviations A A* Ac Anast anarth. art. Arab Arm Ath 1 Ath 2 B B* Bc Bc1 Bc2 Bmg Btxt Bunique B*vid BA BG Bo b BrMcL C Chr Clem Co C’ C’’ Cyr 2Cor

Codex Alexandrinus Original scribe of A (a.k.a., prima manu “first hand”) Any subsequent corrector or embellisher of A (cf. Wevers [1986a: 34] “bezeichnet spätere Korrekturen”) Anastasios of Sinai Anarthrous noun (without an article) Articular noun (with an article) Arabic translation Armenian version Athanasius: Selected Works and Letters Athanasius: On the Incarnation of the Word Codex Vaticanus Original scribe of B (prima manu) Any subsequent corrector or embellisher of B, including Bmg Putative first corrector of B (for c1, see Wevers 1986a: 35) Putative second corrector of B (for c2, see Wevers 1986a: 35) Reading added by Bc into the margin Original main text of B (when Bc has added a different reading in the margins) Reading unique to B (no other witnesses) (Wevers 1986b: 59) Probable but questionable reading (ut videtur “seemingly”: Wevers 1986a: 36) La Bible D’Alexandrie [= La Bible Grecque des Septante]: Le Lévitique (1988), Harlé and Pralon La Biblia Griega Septuaginta: Levítico (2008), Fernández Marcos, Díaz-Caro, Reíllo Boharic translation d text group (Wevers 1986b: 27) Brooke and McLean, eds., The Old Testament in Greek (1917) Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus John Chrysostom Clement of Alexandria Coptic translation C’ text group (Wevers 1986b: 27) C’’ group of the C text group (Wevers 1986b: 27) Cyril of Alexandria 2Corinthians

xii D DeutLXX DCH Dsc. d Eth Ethc Eth-CG Eus Eus ExodB ExodosB ExodLXX frag. frags. F F* Fb Fc f gl. 1 Gött Göttc G GenA GL G848 GenLXX GELS GNT LatAug Lev LatAug Loc Latcod 91 Latcod 100 Latcod 101 Latcod 104txt

abbreviations Codex Cottonianus DeuteronomyLXX: majority mss in agreement, no disagreement in an important ms The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (Clines) Dioscorides’s De Materia Medica (ca. 50–70 CE) d text group (Wevers 1986b: 27) Ethiopic translation Correction to the Ethiopic translation Ethiopic translation, without mss. C or G Eusebius Pamphilius of Caesarea Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine Exodos (Exodus) in Codex Vaticanus Exodos (Exodus) in Codex Vaticanus ExodusLXX: majority mss in agreement, no disagreement in an important ms Fragment Fragments Codex Ambrosianus (Ambrosiano A 147 inf.) Original scribe of F (prima manu) Putative second corrector of F (Wevers 1986a: 7) Putative editor of F by shaving “durch Rasur” (Wevers 1986a: 8) f text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) Gloss no. 1 in a lexical entry (likewise, gl. 2, 3, etc.) Septuaginta, Göttingen eclectic text; Leu edited by J. Wevers (1986a) Correction to Gött proposed by Wevers (1997: 483) Codex Sarravianus Genesis in Codex Alexandrinus Lucianic Recension Old Greek fragment, Rahlf’s no. 848 (first century BCE) GenLXX: majority mss in agreement, without B in Gen 1:1–46:28a T. Muraoka, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (2009), cited by pg. no. The Greek New Testament (2014, UBS 5th rev. ed) Augustine’s Quaestiones de Levitico Augustine’s Locutionum in Heptateuchum Latin Codex 91 (Wevers 1986a: 16) Latin Codex 100 (Wevers 1986a: 17) Latin Codex 101 (Wevers 1986a: 17) Correction in the text of Latin Codex 104 (Wevers 1986a: 17, 35)

abbreviations LatHes LatHi Agg LatPsAmbr Lex HALOT Hex Hol IBHS JD JPS LEH LeuA LeuB LeuF Leu(e)itikon LevLXX LSJ L&N LXX

LXX-B LXX-B* LXX-B*G LXXL LXXO M M’ Hex. min mins ms

xiii Hesychius of Jerusalem Hieronymus’s (Jerome) Commentariorum in Aggaeum prophetam ad Paulam et Eustochium liber Pseudo-Ambrosius’s Lex Dei sive Mosaicarum et Romanarum legume collation The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Koehler, Baumgartner and Stamm) Col. 5 of Origen’s Hexapla (a recension of the LXX) Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the OT (Holliday) Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Waltke and O’Connor) Judean Desert Texts (incl. Qumran) Jewish Publication Society Tanakh (1985) Lust, Eynikel and Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (2003), cited by the section (§) nos. in BibleWorks Leueitikon (Leviticus) in Codex Alexandrinus Leueitikon (Leviticus) in Codex Vaticanus Leuitikon (Leviticus) in Codex Ambrosianus The title in the Codices for LeviticusLXX LeviticusLXX: majority mss in agreement, no disagreement in an important ms Liddell, Scott, Jones, McKenzie, eds., A Greek-English Lexicon (1940) Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (2nd ed., 1989) Septuagint (the Old Greek): The majority of Septuagint mss in agreement (for LeuB, this includes B A F papyri frags. and a majority of mins and versions) The Old Greek, but not B (B may be supported by late mss or versions) The Old Greek, but not B* (B* may be supported by late mss or versions) The Old Greek, but not B* or G The Lucianic text of the Old Greek The hexaplaric recension of Origen Codex Coisliniarus with Hexaplaric notes Codex Coisliniarus + papyrus 416 Hexaplaric Notes Minuscule manuscript (other than a text group or recension) Minuscule manuscripts (multiple) (other than a text group or recension) Manuscript

xiv mss MT MTL MTKetib MTQere MTms(s) Muraoka 2016 N NETS NLT NTB NRS NumLXX n O oI OG PentLXX Phil prb. Q RH ref. rell SD SP Sa Sixt superscr sup ras Swete Swetetxt Syh Syr s Tar

abbreviations Manuscripts Masoretic Text (in BHS and forth. BHQ Leviticus, ed. I. Himbaza) Leningrad Codex of the Masoretic Text Ketib (Aram. ‫ ְכִּתיב‬what “is written”) reading in MT main text Qere (Aram. ‫ ְק ֵרי‬what “is read”) reading in MT margin Masoretic manuscript(s) against MTL et al. A Syntax of Septuagint Greek Codex Basiliano-Vaticanus New English Translation of the Septuagint (2009), Büchner (Leuitikon) New Living Translation The New Testament corpus in Codex Vaticanus New Revised Standard Version (1989) NumbersLXX: majority mss in agreement, no disagreement in an important ms n text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) O recension (Wevers 1986a: 26; ibid., 1986b: 61) oI group of the O recension (Wevers 1986a: 26) The Old Greek: The putative first Greek translation of the Pentateuch (prb. c. mid-2nd cent.; see Wright III 2011) PentateuchLXX: Septuagint Greek version of the Pentateuch attested in the primary witnesses (not the putative original OG or LXXGött) Philo of Alexandria probably Codex Marchalianus Septuaginta, Rahlfs and Hanhart’s eclectic text (2006) Referent (grammatical) Remainder of the mss = “reliqui” / “rell” (Wevers 1986a: 36) Septuaginta Deutsch (2009), den Hertog and Vahrenhorst Samaritan Pentateuch Sahadic version (one or more ms or frag.; see Wevers 1986b: 22–23) Sixtina Superscripted Supra rasuram, written on top of erased letters Henry Barclay Swete, ed., The Old Testament in Greek (1909) The text of Swete (against his apparatus or Logos’s electronic edition) Syro-hexaplaric translation Syriac version s text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) Targums

abbreviations TJ TN TO TPJ t Tht Lev Vulg V __vid x z

xv

Targum Jonathan Targum Neofiti Targum Onkelos Targum Pseudo-Jonathan t text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) Theodoret of Cyrus’s Quaestiones in Leviticum Latin Vulgate Codex Venetus ut videtur “seemingly” (Wevers 1986a: 36) x text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) z text group (Wevers 1986b: 29) ‫א‬ Codex Sinaiticus Σ Codex Purpureus Rossanensis 4QLXXLeva Qumran Greek ms containing 26:2–16* (801 in Wevers 1986a: 13) 4QpapLXXLevb Qumran Greek ms containing 1:11–6:5* (802 in Wevers 1986a: 13; SBL 4Q120) 4QExod-Levf Qumran Hebrew ms (SBL 4Q17) 4QLevc Qumran Hebrew ms (SBL 4Q25) 11QpaleoLeva Qumran Hebrew ms (SBL 11Q1) 800–999 Greek papyri and majuscule mss 85’–321’ Ms groups in the s text group (Wevers 1986b: 28) + Plus in the ms. against other LXXmss > Omission (minus) in the ms against other LXXmss _-ms(s) Text group minus the listed ms or mss ms–ms–ms Group of mss ? Unclear reading due to the present condition of the ms √ Lexical form of the noun (nom. sg.) or verb (1st pers. sg.) * Only certain verses are relevant within a biblical citation; e.g., 15:2– 33*

Introduction 1

Text, Translation and Commentary

This commentary on Leueitikon in Codex Vaticanus (LeuB) in no way discredits the value of studies on transmission history, contemporary lexical and religious influences, translation technique, or the production of eclectic editions of the text. The purpose of this volume is to supplement such studies with another research domain altogether, namely, the analysis of the final form of a single Greek manuscript of a biblical book. Jan Joosten offers a definition for this task, “In the concert of Septuagint studies, there is a place for extended commentaries based on the text of one single manuscript. But the focus should be on peculiar characteristics of that manuscript, on its history, its place of origin, its text-type” (2008b: 4). The present study touches on these comparative and diachronic elements, but is optimally concerned to read LeuB as a text on its own terms, with its own formatting, compositional shape and nuanced messages, as received by its earliest users. The choice to confine this study to LeuB is also pragmatic. Vaticanus is the earliest extant biblical codex, and contains the fewest lacunae in the book of Leueitikon (cf. LeuA below; C D no longer include Leu.; ‫ א‬F G M Ven contain fragments of Leu.). Also, when compared to LeuA, LeuB contains fewer readings that are idiosyncratic or erroneous or aberrant from the putative Old Greek Leviticus (with Wevers 1986b: 59–71, but not infrequently I disagree with or question his reconstruction of the Old Greek Leviticus; see The Early History of LeviticusLXX below). When analyzing one manuscript, Joosten further advises that, “The edition of the text should preferably give a very clear and exact representation not only of the text but also of the marginal notes, the corrections, the spacing and the layout” (2008b: 4). After several editions of Codex Vaticanus were published in the nineteenth century, in 1889–1890 a photographic facsimile of the manuscript was published by Cozza-Luzi (and the NT was republished in 1904– 1907 in Milan). In 1999, a color facsimile of B was authorized by the Vatican and published by the Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato as Bibliorum Sacrorum Graecorum Codex Vaticanus B (Roma, 1999). Then in 2015, high-definition digital images of B in its entirety were made available to the public, free of charge on the Vatican Library’s website: http://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr .1209. I attempt to represent this manuscript as it has been preserved today in the following three ways. First, the text of Leueitikon in this volume represents the first published, diplomatic edition of the uncorrected text, the basis of which is my emenda-

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004409835_002

2

introduction

tion of Logos Bible Software’s electronic format of Henry Barclay Swete’s 1909 edition of LeuB in The Old Testament in Greek. I emended Swete’s text toward B* (or Btxt) in 263 places: Leu 1:4, 15; 2:2, 3, 4, 10, 12; 3:9, 12; 4:3, 5(2×), 8, 10, 15, 16, 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 31, 35; 5:1, 6(3×), 10, 11, 13(3×), 16(3×), 18; 6:5, 6, 7, 9, 16, 17, 20, 22(2×), 28, 30, 31, 32, 37, 39; 7:2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 25(2×), 26, 27; 8:2(2×), 7(2×), 10, 11(2×), 12(2×), 15(2×), 17, 18(2×), 19, 20, 21(2×), 22(2×), 26, 28, 29(2×), 30, 31(2×), 32, 33(2×), 34; 9:2, 3, 4, 7(2×), 15, 19; 10:5 (om), 7, 12(2×), 13, 15, 16, 17(2×); 11:6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 29, 34(2×), 35, 44, 46; 12:7, 8; 13:4, 7, 15, 16, 21(2×), 24, 26, 27, 31, 43, 44, 47(2×), 56, 59; 14:9(3×), 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 29, 31, 34, 42, 43, 53; 15:11, 15, 19, 20, 26, 30, 33(3×); 16:5, 6, 7, 9, 10(2×), 11, 15, 16(2×), 17(2×), 18(2×), 20(2×), 21(2×), 22(2×), 24, 26, 27(2×), 30, 32(2×), 33(3×), 34; 17:7, 9, 10, 11(2×); 18:6, 27, 29; 19:4, 6, 9(2×), 10, 16, 17, 22, 30, 31, 35; 20:4; 21:10(2×), 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 24(2×); 22:7, 18, 22; 23:11, 16, 19, 27, 28(2×), 36, 38, 40; 24:12, 19; 25:11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 23, 25, 28, 29(2×), 30(2×), 31, 33(2×), 39, 41, 43, 52, 53; 26:1, 17, 26(3×), 30, 36, 37, 39, 43, 44; 27:4, 5, 6, 7(2×), 9, 20, 21, 29(2×) (see footnotes in Text and Translation below). My emendations replace Swete’s selection of a corrector’s text (Bc) or of another preferred reading (usually from codex A or F) with the original text (B*, Btxt) (Swete does not always correct errors in B*; often where Swete does correct B* or Btxt, BrMcL does likewise). In two places I emended Swete’s word division of the scriptio continua to align with Gött’s word division (22:21; 22:29), and in one place, against both Swete and Gött (27:5). I identified and emended five inaccurate readings in Logos’s electronic edition, based on Swete’s 1909 text, to match the accurate reading in Swete’s 1901 printed edition (see text and apparatus of 14:1; 13:37; 15:23; 18:24; 25:53). I did not alter Swete’s punctuation marks in his Greek edition, although my commentary regularly diverges from his punctuational interpretations. To facilitate reading by undergraduates and specialists alike, the text of LeuB in this commentary appears in a modern Greek lowercase font with diacritical marks. By retaining actual orthographical errors (not itacisms) and solecisms original to LeuB, I am attempting to simulate for contemporary readers how LeuB’s earliest audience would have first encountered the occasionally imperfect manuscript. In this respect, this project aligns with the text-critical aim of Eugene Ulrich, who warns against classifying primary and superior readings against secondary and inferior readings, and instead resolves to restore and appreciate all literary forms and stages of the text (Ulrich 1996: 78–105). Second, I format the paragraphs to the original paragraphs of LeuB, which differ from the paragraph divisions of Swete, Codex A and Gött (see chart in “Appearance and Divisions of LeuB” below). I indicate in the footnotes the present condition of each paragraph. Third, throughout the diplomatic text, I footnote plusses and minuses, morphemes, orthography and word order in B* against a combination of other

introduction

3

primary manuscripts and/or against John Wevers’ Göttingen (Gött) critical edition, and/or against BrMcL’s and Swete’s diplomatic editions when they select Bc (or another reading on rare occasions) over B*. My choice to contrast B with Gött is imperfect (see discussion below), but superior to contrasting B with Rahlfs and Hanhart’s Septuagint, which is not adequately eclectic, but “deren Text in Leviticus im wesentlichen auf einem Vergleich der Unzialen A und B beruht” (Wevers 1986a: 26). In addition to studying the digital images of codices B and A, I have depended on the manuscript evidence presented by Wevers (Gött; pp. 59–71 of Text History; and p. 483 of Notes), Brooke and McLean (pp. 305–405 of The Old Testament in Greek), and Swete (pp. 188–250 of The Old Testament in Greek). Sometimes I note ancient translations, minuscules, other late manuscripts, or when B is followed by a text group or recension (see Wevers 1986a: 59–62; ibid. 1986b: 26–29). I note corrections (Bc) to the original text (B* or Btxt) when such corrections are supported by other primary manuscripts and/or the Gött text. Many corrections are the result of Bc superscripting and interposing letters, or scraping off the ink of letters that we can still identify from the scriptio inferior (B*). Many minor corrections, such as scraping off moveables ν and other corrections that are not supported by major witnesses are not noted in this commentary (for such additional corrections to LeuB, consult Brooke and McLean 1917: 305–405; Swete 1901: 188–250). Readings in my textual apparatus, although recorded in a modern Greek minuscule font to aid students, contain no diacritics in order to represent the first hands of LeviticusLXX’s primary witnesses, codices B, A and F (the exception is in marking certain diacritical changes to Gött proposed by Göttc). I note LeuB readings that are unique, that is, readings not supported by any other extant witness (Bunique, B*unique, Btxt unique; see Wevers 1986b: 59). Nearly unique readings are not specially marked, but are listed in the apparatus and sometimes mentioned in the commentary proper (see also Wevers 1986b: 59). One who consults only the concentrated text-critical apparatus of this commentary is not prepared to evaluate the textual decisions of the Gött editor (for a more exhaustive account of Leu[e]itikon’s witnesses, consult Brooke and McLean 1917: 305–405; Wevers 1986b). My intention, instead, has been to identify the manuscript evidence that shows where and how the text of LeuB is distinctive. Finally, I footnote LeviticusLXX readings that, when retroverted, match a Qumran ms and/or the SP against the MT (see Ulrich 2010: 108–137). In the English translation of LeuB in this commentary I aim toward formal equivalency, but I do offer dynamic renderings when called for by the Greek context and English usage. I considered using Büchner’s excellent translation of Leuitikon in NETS as a base text from which to depart, in the same way that Büchner used the NRSV as his base: “The procedure followed in my translation

4

introduction

was always to start with the NRSV and then to alter it insofar as it did not represent the Greek or the differences between the Hebrew and the Greek. So the reader should as a rule of thumb expect NETS to reveal the differences between the Greek and the Hebrew from a synoptic point of view” (Büchner 2007: 84). However, I discovered that even where Gött (the basis for NETS) and LeuB were identical, as they often are, I regularly chose to render the same words or constructions slightly differently than Büchner did. As a result of these different preferences, but also of my typically more isolate, rather than contextual, translation technique, my translation differs from NETS in most verses and is decidedly, and intentionally, more disjunctive and elusive. Even so, there is still far more continuity than discontinuity between our translations, mainly because Büchner often supplied what I concluded to be the best rendering. Therefore, one can juxtapose NETS and my version to compare and contrast them and be able to identify: one, the distinctiveness of LeuB’s paragraphs and readings over against the Göttingen edition; two, syntax that was unconventional (Hebraic) for fourth century Greek readers in those instances where Büchner offers a contextual translation and so conceals an ungainly or unclear construction; and three, other plausible ways to translate the same words or constructions. The following example from Leu 27:8 illustrates how I attempt to retain in English the same parts of speech in Greek: καθάπερ ἰσχύει ἡ χεὶρ τοῦ εὐξαμένου “just as the hand of the one making the vow is strong” versus NETS, “in accordance with the strength of the hand of the one making the vow.” Original word order is not always as easy to imitate, even in a more formal-equivalent translation. At the same time, I try to follow contemporary English usage when it would not be anachronistic for LeuB. For example, to translate the many futuretense verbs with imperatival force, I prefer “must” to the increasingly antiquated “shall” (NETS). Another issue of translation technique relates to gender inclusivity—for example, how to render ψυχή, which is grammatically feminine but conceptually inclusive (59× in LevLXX, primarily of humans, but also animals in ch. 11). I prefer “life,” which is closer to the contextual renderings “quelqu’un” (BA 465, etc.) and “una persona” (BG 238, etc.), rather than the unnecessary reduction to “soul” (NETS 85, etc.; “eine Menschenseele” SD 100, etc.). However, I also acknowledge the limitations of the English language here with Büchner, who rightly explains, “Sometimes the English of NETS unavoidably misrepresents the Greek. For example in chapter 4 and 7.10, where I have rendered ψυχή (f) by ‘soul,’ the personal pronouns ‘she’ or ‘her’ that follow will be rendered by ‘him’ or ‘his’ in NETS” (NETS 84). The problem extends far beyond the ψυχή contexts, however, since the third person singular verbs throughout LevLXX are not masculine, but common, and often imply an inclusivity of women and men. One way to mitigate this difficulty would be to use

introduction

5

‘one, oneself, one’s’ or ‘they, them, their’ as third person singulars in which both genders are envisioned, as colloquial English allows, but this approach would yield a comprehensively different translation of LevLXX throughout: If his gift is a whole burnt offering from the cattle, he must bring an unblemished male; to the door of the tent of testimony he must bring it, acceptable for him before the Lord. 1:3

If their gift is a whole burnt offering from the cattle, they must bring an unblemished male; to the door of the tent of testimony they must bring it, acceptable for them before the Lord. 1:3

If one’s gift is a whole burnt offering from the cattle, one must bring an unblemished male; to the door of the tent of testimony one must bring it, acceptable for oneself before the Lord. 1:3

Unfortunately, to translate the pronouns as “one, oneself, one’s” depersonalizes the translation with terminology that is becoming archaic in common speech, and to use “they, them, their” fails to communicate the reality that LevLXX often introduces ritual and casuistic legislation with an individual member of the community, not the whole community (cf. Akkadian, šum-ma a-wi-lum, “If a man …”). Also, the LevLXX translator does on occasion use the neuter gender to refer to “humans in a generic, gender-neutral sense, not to particular humans” (Muraoka 2016: 102; i.e., 18:6), but the default is masculine forms (i.e., αὐτός, ἑαυτοῦ, οὗτος and other inflected lemmas) that masculinize sentences, which otherwise would be semantically gender-neutral with third common singular verbs (i.e., 5:15: ψυχὴ ἐὰν λάθῃ αὐτὸν “a life [f.], if it escapes him [m.],” which indicates the translator’s ad sensum shift to masculine as a genus potius: Muraoka 2016: 632–653). My translation technique, then, echoes the patriarchal sociolinguistic culture of the LevLXX translator. LeuB itself was not a translation of a Hebrew source, but a manuscript that was transmitted from a prior Greek manuscript or manuscripts. Nonetheless, because B is “seldom idiosyncratic in Leviticus” (Wevers 1986b: 61), the final form of LeuB vastly reflects the original influences on the shape of the first LXX translation. That is, the LeuB scribes, working in the fourth century CE, inherited morphophonology, vocabulary and syntax that betray the two primary influences on the LXX proper: the Hebrew source texts and third and

6

introduction

second-century BCE Koine usage (see Lee 1983: 11–30). Even if the LXX translators intended for the text to be read, not alongside its source, but as an independent and freestanding “substitute for the Hebrew Scriptures” (Joosten 2007: 178), LeviticusLXX “is more of an isolate type of translation than a contextual one” (Wevers 1997: ix). This means that not all of its Hebraisms will one day be explained away as conventional Greek attested in documentary sources (van der Meer 2011: 70; Joosten 2011: 7–8). Early Greek readers would have recognized LeviticusLXX’s awkward constructions and calques, and so my translation seeks to represent them (similarly, Auld 2005: 1–84). For this reason, at times I retain the redundant prepositional phrases that the LeuB translator mechanistically repeated from Hebrew’s resumptive (a.k.a. retrospective) pronouns, i.e.: LeuB 16:9, τὸν χίμαρρον ἐφ’ ὃν ἐπῆλθεν ἐπ’ αὐτὸν ὁ κλῆρος “as for the billy goat on which the lot fell on it”; or 18:3, γῆς Αἰγύπτου ἐν ᾗ κατοικήσατε ἐπ’ αὐτῇ “the Land of Egypt, in which you lived on it” (contra NETS, BA, BG, but with SD, “des Landes Ägypten, in dem ihr darin gewohnt habt”; see “redundant anaphora” in Muraoka 2016: 737–742). Sollamo concludes that this retrospective pronoun or adverb in the Septuagint of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy is translated formally 70–80 percent of the time, but 50 percent in Genesis and Exodus (Sollamo 1991: 75–85; 1995: 43–62; see also Soisalon-Soininen 1987: 405–406). In Hebrew, ‫ עשׁר‬is indeclinable with no syntactic function, requiring a resumptive pronoun, which in Koine is pleonastic because the prior relative pronoun is declinable and indicates a syntactical function (Dhont 2017: 110). In contrast to its rarity in non-biblical Koine, its regularity in LevLXX indicates the translator’s resolve to render the text literally (Sollamo 1991: 75–85; 1995: 43–62; but Sollamo [1979] also argues that in comparison with the other Pentateuch books, LevLXX is the most free). For the early users of LeuB unversed in Hebrew, they would have perceived the Hebraic syntax and naturally would have attempted to decode it, often with success, but sometimes without. I use American English orthography except when transliterating B’s names that differ from English spelling. For example, when translating ‫( משׁה‬MT; Q) “Moses,” ExodB vacillates orthographically between Μωυσῆς and Μωσῆς, but LeuB prefers the latter, which I transliterate as Mōysēs (Μωυσῆς or inflected, 75×) and Mōsēs (Μωσῆς or inflected, 24×). This conventional transliteration includes the partly misleading ‘y’ (Mōysēs), but it would be awkwardly long to try to mimic the upsilon of Koine Era Pronunciation (Moeewsais) (see Long 2015a: 31–33). Also noteworthy, in contrast to other mss, LeuB characteristically spells the mountain of God Σεινά (cf. Σινα: Bb A GAmb; ‫ִסי ָני‬: MT; no Q ms), which I then transliterate as Seina. Representing LeuB’s orthography this way in my English translation is possible when both English and Greek words are transliterations. Often following NETS, I transliterate certain loanwords from

introduction

7

Hebrew that the Greek translator also transliterated because they did not know their meaning or could not identify equivalent terms in the target language; for example, “oiphi of fine flour” for LeuB* 5:1 οἰφὶ σεμιδάλεως (Heb. ‫“ אפה סלת‬ephah of finely milled flour”). However, at times against NETS, I do not transliterate certain loanwords that the Greek translator transliterated, because LeuB’s users would have made sense of their meanings; for example, “sabbaths” for 23:3 σάββατα (vs. NETS “sabbata”) or “Passover” for 23:5 πάσχα (vs. NETS “pascha”). Recent, modern language translations are based on Wevers’s Göttingen eclectic text (SD 2009: xvii; NETS 2007: 82; BG 2008: 234), or on Rahlfs’s quasieclectic text (the translators of BA [1988: 11] acknowledge dependence on Rahlfs, but make emendations based on Wevers’s Text History), which supplements B with codices A and ‫( א‬Kreuzer [2015: 272] notes that Rahlfs and most Göttingen volumes have “basically followed Manuscript B”). By contrast, my English translation is based exclusively on the diplomatic text of Codex B and, therefore, represents this manuscript’s acceptable readings, plusses and omissions, but also its solecisms, such as impossible inflectional morphemes, that early readers would have encountered. Sometimes my translation represents a different, but legitimate, lexical morpheme formed probably by a scribal error; i.e., δεκατην “tenth” (B A et al.) vs. δεκτην “acceptable” (Fa Gött et al. = MT/SP √‫)רצן‬. To convey LeuB’s solecisms, I provide awkward or nonsensical English translations, or if it is not possible to provide such, I place the word or phrase in italics; e.g., “has seen” in 5:1 (ωρακεν B* for εωρακεν). By these italics, I am suggesting that the reader, by means of the context, may have made sense of the error. There are occasions when, I suspect, most readers would have struggled to rectify the reading: LeuB 25:53 τατενεις αυτον εν τω μοχθω “You must taten him with labor” (cf. ου κατατενεις εν τω μοχθω “you must not overwork him with labor” with Bc and other mss, Swete BrMcL Gött). Exceptional readers might have supplied the correct reading from the context in 25:46, but would have struggled with a different error of the same phrase in LeuB 25:43: “you must not overwork him with a calf” (τω μοσχω B*unique) vs. “you must not overwork him with labor” (τω μοχθω Bc A Fc Gött). The scribal flaws of B* should not be overstated, however, because its textual quality indicates, “the care with which the scribe copied the text. Most of the instances are obvious errors: haplographs, dittographs, parablepses, intrusions from the context” (Wevers 1986b: 60; also Ulrich 1984: 82). Furthermore, there was no standard Greek orthography at the time of LeuB’s production. Instead, spelling was phonetically based, which means that variations are not errors, but different phonetic representations, such as itacisms (a.k.a., iotacisms, √ιωτακισμός); for example, χρειστος B* for χριστος Bc; εξειλασεται B* for εξιλασεται Bc; καταλιφθεν B* for καταλειφθεν Bc, just to mention three of many more (i.e., χρι-

8

introduction

στος is the more common spelling for “anointed one, Christ”; Athanasius’ De incarnatione verbi §39.2: τοῦ ἐξιλάσασθαι τὰς ἀδικίας “in order to propitiate the injustices”). Even if LeuB’s subsequent users—such as the editor (Bc), to give an empirical example—encountered different spellings, they would have discerned the intended word, often subconsciously, as our minds do today: I lvoe ot tsudy Kione Geerk. A more precise analogy to the idiosyncratic spelling in LeuB would be to substitute a single vowel for a diphthong, a diphthong for a vowel, or alter velar nasal combinations: I preefer too reed the Toraeh inn Haebrew rathaer then inn Egnlish. Likely, the orthography of LeuB resulted from a transcriptionist who, not seeing the Greek text, but listening to it from a dictationist, spelled the phonemes in the context of his fourth-century scribal sociolect (see argument for dictation below). Because spelling variations are diachronically intelligible within a given sentence, I do not alter my English translation to represent these variations. As for writing a commentary on LeviticusLXX, Dirk Büchner appropriately raises the question: How does one go beyond the careful and skilled work of someone as eminent as John William Wevers, who had already published his sizable collection of notes to the Greek text of Leviticus? This question continues to linger. By now I can say that it has become less a case of “going beyond” than one of “building on” this detailed scholarship. Büchner 2010b: 107

The commentary proper in this volume also attempts to build on the achievements of its predecessors, but in four unique respects. First, I confine my analysis to LeuB, only contrasting the LXX mss or probable Heb. Vorlagen in order to exposit LeuB (in distinction from Harlé and Pralon 1988; Wevers 1997; Büchner 2010b: 107–117; 2017: 95–122; and forthcoming commentary). There are a number of instances when I mention how the LeviticusLXX reading agrees with SP and/or a Qumran ms against MT (often against Wevers’s conjectures that the changes were translational). I also explain the exegetical implications of B’s meaningful variants, against both Hebrew and Greek mss, including its solecisms. However, identifying where and how LeuB diverges from a putative original LXX tradition is not a verifiable science, a reality that Wevers openly admitted in the introduction to Göttingen edition of Genesis, “Der Herausgeber unterliegt nicht der Illusion, daß er durchgängig den ursprünglichen Septuagintatext wiederhergestellt habe” (Wevers 1974: 63). Likewise, Hans Ausloos (2016) cogently reminds us that the Gött edition is a non-existent text. In the cases where the Gött editor of LeviticusLXX reconstructs a reading without

introduction

9

strong manuscript support or selects a reading against a reasonable reading in the primary witnesses (esp. codices B A and F, or possibly 4QLXXLeva or 4QpapLXXLevb), we cannot determine whether LeuB diverges from the original LXX or simply from the Gött edition. For this reason, rather than commenting on each divergence with the Gött edition, I confine my text-critical comments to the variants that are unique or almost unique to LeuB (see Wevers 1986b: 59–60). Finally, Joosten instructs that, “The translation and commentary, too, should be attentive to everything that makes the manuscript unique, while trying to relate it to other text forms of the Septuagint and to the Hebrew witnesses” (2008b: 4). Analysis of a single manuscript, then, must attend to all features that distinguish it from or associate it with other Greek and Hebrew (MT/SP/Qumran) witnesses, but, I would add, must also attend to the manuscript as an independent artifact. As an unintended consequence of studying LeuB as a composition in its own right, much of the commentary will also describe the other Greek witnesses of LeviticusLXX since they are largely identical. Because of this vast overlap of the attested Greek readings of LeviticusLXX, my hope is that this study will be useful to those interested not only in Vaticanus and the other primary Greek mss, but in the earliest interpretation of the entire Hebrew composition of Leviticus (for translation as interpretation, see Sommer 2000: 43–60; Joosten 2012: 52–62). Finally, I am hopeful that the present research might illuminate allusions to the language, design and theology of the Greek text of Leviticus in the New Testament, Rabbinic literature, and Early Church Fathers. Second, I am primarily concerned to examine the coherence or incoherence of units of discourse as presented in LeuB. I organize my commentary by the paragraph divisions that were original to LeuB, rather than by critically reconstructed divisions (Gött; NETS). In the introduction and commentary, I describe the literary implications of the divisions of the manuscript (unlike commentaries based on an eclectic text: Harlé and Pralon 1988; Wevers 1997). I also investigate the compositional shape of the paragraphs collected under each superscription (“the Lord spoke …”) by observing discursive elements that constrain interpreters (see Dialogical [Divine-Speech] MicroStructure). Because “the Septuagint and the Hebrew text often correspond” (Joosten 2008b: 3), in the introduction, I draw from secondary literature on the Hebrew design of Leviticus to describe the broader shape of LeviticusLXX. However, in the commentary that deals with smaller units of discourse I interact predominantly with research on the Greek text. Third, I read the text as a single Greek manuscript received in the fourth century CE. This reception-historical posture adds a third dimension to interpreting LeviticusLXX, which as Büchner describes, already “has a horizontal dimen-

10

introduction

sion in terms of the relation of Greek words and phrases to each other, and it has a vertical dimension in terms of its subservience to the Hebrew text(s) from which it was translated” (Büchner 2007: 82). Thus, I readily acknowledge that LeviticusLXX betrays the “syntax of a translated text” (Büchner 2010b: 108, praising Hubner 1916), and that its vocabulary was usually intelligible as idiomatic Koine Greek (as shown by Lee 1983, see throughout my commentary; but not denying the occasional, bad lexical choices, i.e., Lev 25:27 and 27:21, noted by Aejmelaeus 2007: 66–69). The result is stated pithily by Dorival: “L’impression d’étrangeté éprouvée devant la Septante ne tient pas tant à son lexique qu’ à sa syntaxe, que le lecteur grec devait toutefois finir par trouver acceptable” (1996: 527; italics mine; similarly Wevers 1997: x). However, the goal of this project is not only to detect intelligibility, but also to form a solidarity with late fourth and early fifth century CE readers who were not versed in the Hebrew language. An intriguing illustration of this distance from the source language of the LXX is found in Augustine’s correspondence with Jerome (c. 394–414), in which Augustine expresses his fear of the ecclesial ramifications of Jerome’s Latin translation of the esoteric Hebrew text, when the Greek Scriptures had already become authoritative (see Letters 28, 71, 75 in O’Meara 1973: 67–68, 84–86, 118, 120–121). I do consider how the Hebrew Vorlage is different than or concealed by the Greek in order to show modern readers where and how the knowledge of the LeviticusLXX translator, informed by his Hebrew source, differed from the knowledge of LeuB’s readers, confined to the Greek text (contrast with the focus on translation technique in Wevers 1997). In order to consider the prehistory of LeuB, I occasionally consider the Hellenistic Greek lexical usage evident in LeviticusLXX, but only rarely note comparative Greco-Roman religion and history (in contrast with Büchner 2010b: 107–117; 2017: 95–122; forthcoming) or the earliest Christian and Jewish reception (in contrast with Harlé and Pralon 1986). Primarily, my attention is fixed on interpretive constraints internal to the composition that would have largely endured five centuries after its original production, such as: synchronic usage (irrespective of diachronic changes from OG Koine), syntax, grammar, semantic relations, discourse and pragmatic devices, and literary design. I also consider intratextuality within LeueitikonB and intertextuality, especially with ExodosB, but other biblical texts as well; both phenomena are preserved, even if modified and sometimes concealed, by the shape of the Greek text. Michael Fishbane, and many others, have shown that internal to the Pentateuch: “Inner-biblical legal exegesis is singularly concerned with the reinterpretation (or extension or reapplication) of pre-existing legal texts” (Fishbane 1985: 283). When analyzing this phenomenon of inner-biblical legal exegesis, I consider only how the readers of the LXX Seina/Sina pericope would have noticed that intertexts in ExodB/ExodLXX

introduction

11

recur and also take on a new form and significance in LevLXX/LeuB. I make no claim that the translators themselves were always aware of this intertextuality, only that in their formal renderings, the latent Hebrew intertextuality reemerges in Greek form for observant readers of the PentateuchLXX. Also, by comparing and contrasting intertexts in LevLXX with those that appeared earlier in the PentateuchLXX, especially the Greek Seina/Sina pericope, I make no claim that the original Hebrew direction of literary influence moved from Exodus to Leviticus, nor do I explore how the present study may illuminate the diachronic development of the Pentateuch (fascinating recent study has considered the possibilities and limits of using the LXX for redaction criticism: Müller and Pakkala 2017, esp. essays by Joosten, de Troyer, and Trebolle and Torijano). To attempt to read LeuB in its original interpretive setting, I also call attention to how some verses or passages were explained or expounded theologically by Vaticanus’s Christian contemporaries, Macarius of Egypt (c. 300–391), Pope St. Leo I (c. 400–461) and the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, including: (Greek) Athanasius (c. 296/298–373), Eusebius (c. 260/265–339/340), Basil the Great (c. 329–379), Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 313–386), Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 329–390), John Chrysostom (c. 347–407), Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393–458), and (Latin) Ambrose of Milan (c. 340–397), Jerome (c. 347–420), Augustine (c. 354–430), John Cassian (c. 360–435) and Pope Leo I (c. 400–461) (others may be interested to consult the slightly later Caesarius of Arles, c. 468/470– 542, who interprets texts like Lev 11:44/19:2 and ch. 26; see Lienhard 2001: 178, 199–203). Whether or not these Fathers ever laid eyes on Codex Vaticanus, and whether they wrote in Greek or Latin is not necessarily relevant, as long as it can be shown that they are reflecting upon the message of a Greek text, or even a Hebrew text, of Leviticus that resembles principally the same message expressed in LeuB. Here it is important to remember that even with the presence of variant readings, LeuB and LevGött are still largely identical. In the commentary (below), my designation for the time of these fathers is c. LeuB, by which I mean it is plausible, if not probable, that they lived and wrote about the Greek Leviticus within a century of LeuB’s probable production. By including the voices of the church fathers, we may or may not be hearing the early reception of LeuB, but we are hearing its Zeitgeist. Fourth, I take seriously that Codex Vaticanus, perhaps for the first time in history, binds together the Old and New Testaments into a single volume, which formalizes the reciprocity of the Testaments and establishes the Scriptures as a Christian document. In support of the ways Christians had already been reading the Scriptures in the first through fourth centuries CE, the documentary format of the early codices, including LeuB, would have reinforced intertextual

12

introduction

and allegorical readings (cf. four-fold sense of Scripture: Steinmetz 1988: 143– 163). Consequently, I comment upon each NT quotation of LeviticusLXX (in one instance, 2Cor 6:16 quotes LeuBA 26:12 against 4QLXXLeva Göttc). I found no evidence to suggest the NT authors quoted the Hebrew text of Leviticus, but rather they followed their modus operandi in representing the LeviticusLXX. I also note in parentheses the probable allusions to LevLXX by the NT authors. However, the reception of LeviticusLXX in the NT cannot be reduced to either quotations or allusions, since echoes and traces, as well as broader motifs from LeviticusLXX and the PentateuchLXX are just as, if not more, influential in NT thought (see Reception below; for the scale of knowability from citation to trace, see Stead 2009: 21–23).

2

The Early History of LeviticusLXX

The putative original Greek translation of the Pentateuch, also known as the Old Greek [OG] or the Septuagint proper, was probably produced by Jews in Alexandria in the late third or mid-second century BCE. However, its historical and social provenance and raison d’être remain in dispute due to disagreements about how to extract and synthesize data from the earliest sources—the Letter of Aristeas, Demetrius the Chronographer, Eupolemus, Ezekiel the Tragedian, Aristobulus, Artapanus, Philo and Josephus (Pietersma 2002: 337–364; Clancy 2002: 207–225; Cook 2005: 441–461; Joosten 2008a: 163–178; Wright III 2011: 303–325). From Aristeas, Benjamin Wright III represents many scholars in his conclusion that, “the author is not a gentile, but a Jew, and the work [LXX proper] was not written during the reign of Ptolemy II, but much later, sometime in the mid-second century B.C.E.” (Wright III 2011: 304). Furthermore, a single papyrus scroll containing all five books of the PentateuchLXX would not have been materially feasible, but we might imagine five scrolls, or volumes, each one approximately 32 meters long; hence, the plural collection τὰ τεύχη “the scrolls” in the Letter of Aristeas (Dorival 64; Skeat 1982: 169–175; De Troyer 2008b: 278). Den Hertog presents a plausible argument that Genesis, Exodus and Deuteronomy were translated first, and Leviticus and Numbers thereafter (den Hertog 2004: 216–228). His strongest premise is that, “An keiner Stelle gab der Befund Anlass, an eine Abhängigkeit des DeuteronomiumÜbersetzers vom griechischen Levitikus zu denken, wohl aber umgekehrt” (den Hertog 2004: 226). Of the books of the Greek Torah, the early text history of the LXX Leviticus is “peculiarly difficult” to reconstruct from the few attested papyri, in contrast to the considerable papyrological materials for Genesis, Numbers and Deuteron-

introduction

13

omy. The extant witnesses to LeviticusLXX have grown little since Wevers’ summary in 1986: “only 858 and the small Qumran fragments, 801 [4QLXXLeva] and 802 [4QpapLXXLevb], are older, whereas other papyri of an age contemporary to B and A, i.e. 931, 936, 947 and 954, are too fragmentary to be of much use for establishing the text history of Leviticus” (Wevers 1986b: 72, 59). Wevers thought 4QLXXLeva, a fragment that today contains only Lev 26:2–16*, was a revision of the original LXX, and he did not adopt any of its readings in his Göttingen eclectic text (Wevers 1997; 2005: 1–24). He summarizes: “The general impression with which the text of the fragment [4QLXXLeva] leaves one is that of carelessness on the part of the scribe. It does not inspire me with a great deal of confidence” (Wevers 2005: 5). Thus, 4Q119 and 4Q120 were thought to be stylistic revisions of the Old Greek (Skehan 1977: 39; Wevers 1982: 235; Petersen 2009: 481–510). On the contrary, Metso and Ulrich have argued persuasively that 4QLXXLeva and 4QpapLXXLevb (containing Lev 1:11–6:5*) are closer witnesses, although not in every reading, to the original OG Leviticus, and that the subsequent LXX ms tradition, including the great Codices, “has revised according to later vocabulary usage or for closer approximation to the emergent MT” (Metso and Ulrich 2003: 247–268, esp. 261–267). This conclusion is reasserted by Theo van der Louw through his own analysis of the variant readings: Nevertheless a good case can be made for the priority of 4QLXXLeva. Not only in chronological, but also in translational respect it comes closer to an original translation than LXXed. Wevers’ claim that it represents an early revision of the original LXX is unconvincing. 4QLXXLeva contains variant readings that can hardly be attributed to revision … The disquieting conclusion—if we accept that 4QLXXLeva is a fragment of a biblical manuscript containing Leviticus as a whole—must be that the textual form of the major uncials testify to a revised Septuagint and that the texts of Alfred Rahlfs and Wevers, which are mainly based on them, can no longer claim to represent the original Septuagint text of Leviticus. van der Louw 2008b: 396

Innocent Himbaza similarly maintains that 4QLXXLeva and 4QpapLXXLevb represent the earliest formation of the LXX Leviticus and “montre plutôt une traduction souvent libre, moins standardisé et moins idéologique,” whereas the later text form of the great Codices represents “une ou plusieurs recensions ultérieurs” (Himbaza 2016: 32–33). It is surprising, however, that Metso and Ulrich have reduced the LeviticusLXX recensional activity to later usage or “closer approximation to the emer-

14

introduction

gent MT” (Metso and Ulrich 2003: 67, also 265; italics mine), because the present study and Ulrich’s own edition of the biblical Qumran scrolls (2010) reveals that in many places the later LevLXX tradition betrays a Vorlage that matches SP against the MT (see The Translation of LeviticusLXX below). Also, we should be cautious to not overemphasize the discrepancies between these fragments and the Codices (see Himbaza 2016: 24–27), since they are still in substantial agreement, and it is not clear that the Greek Q fragments reflect a freer translation that is less ideological (contra Himbaza 2016: 33). Rather, 4QpapLXXLevb, and we may add 4QLXXLeva, “exhibits some perfectly good synonomyous readings alongside the later Septuagint ms tradition” (Ulrich and Metso 2003: 266). Finally, in 2010 Kristin de Troyer published the text of a papyrus that dates to the late second to early third century CE, identified as MS 2649 of the Schøyen Collection (de Troyer 2010: 1–68). From a study of God’s name and the selfidentification formula, “I am the Lord,” in this papyri (MS 2649), she concludes that this witness is a good representation of the OG Leviticus, although it does include a few pre-Hexaplaric adjustments toward the MT (de Troyer 2008a: 329–337). In sum, for reconstructing the OG Leviticus, scholars after Wevers have shown the fragmentary Greek papyri to be indispensable, but for an exegetical analysis of the entire composition of the Greek Leviticus, they sadly help us relatively little. The data expand exponentially in the fourth and fifth centuries CE, with the nearly complete texts of Leu(e)itikon in B and A, respectively. Today, LeuA contains only five illegible sections and LeuB only two from the same stain (recto: LeuB 8:12–16; verso: LeuB 8:20–23).

3

Provenance and History of Vaticanus

Codex B is a quarto volume with quires of ten leaves or five sheets (so also Codices GQ and Σ; contra S with quires of three and four sheets). The text is presented in three columns of majuscule scriptio continua, written in black ink on a 759 fragile vellum leaves of a tan leather hue that are bound by seven stitches. Codex Vaticanus’s calligraphic style, which Guiglielmo Cavallo classifies as maiuscola biblica, was used most extensively in the third century CE, but occurs from the late second to early ninth centuries CE (Birdsall 2003: 33; Cavallo 1967). The consensus that Vaticanus dates to the early fourth century is based on the thirty-ninth Festal Letter of Athanasius composed in 367CE. The letter identifies essentially the same canonical and deutero-canonical (OT) books that are bound together in Codex B. Notably, in contrast to ‫ א‬and A, nei-

introduction

15

ther B nor the Festal Letter of Athanasius contains (or mentions in the case of the Letter) the four books of Maccabees (Hengel 2004: 57; Scheetz 2013: 85). In that archiepiscopal instruction [F. Letter of Athanasius], we find for the first time evidence of canonical status given to the sacred literature of the Old and New Testaments, of the same extent as has been generally accepted in the Church … The date of the Letter thus gives us a marker for the period within which a manuscript with such limits of content might have been produced, yet is only one point in the locus of that period, and thus at best approximate. Birdsall 2003: 33

Athanasius divides the biblical books into κανονιζομενα, the 22 books of the Hebrew Scriptures, and the αναγινωσκομενα, the catechumenal yet still inspired books of Wisdom, Sirach, Esther, Judith and Tobit (Skeat 1999: 600). In B, this so-called αναγινωσκομενα collection is situated between Job and the Minor Prophets. Unlike the Festal Letter, due to corruption B does not presently contain the Pastoral Epistles or Revelation (for book order comparison of the Letter, B and ‫א‬, Skeat 1999: 602). Furthermore, it is an overstatement that the book order of ‫ א‬is “completely different” than that of B (from this Skeat [1999: 601–603] infers that the original scribes of B and ‫ א‬did not work in the same scriptorium). Nevertheless, the obvious differences in the selection and order of books between B, ‫א‬, and the Festal Letter suggest the canonical books were not yet definitively established by the church in the mid-fourth century (Law 2013: 124). The possibility remains that B was among the 50 biblical codices that Constantine I commissioned Eusebius of Caesarea to prepare (Ropes 1926: xxxiv– xxxvii; Skeat 1999: 604–622; Amphoux and Sérandour 2008: 3). Milne and Skeat argue that the colophon designs of ‫ א‬scribe D (secondary) are “remarkably similar” to those added later to B. They offer primary examples from Deuteronomy and Mark and conclude that both manuscripts must have been produced, if not by the same scribe, contemporaneously in the same scriptorium (Skeat 1999: 603). They argue ‫ א‬originated in Caesarea, and therefore B must have also (see Skeat 1999: 604, 609). Others have conjectured to associate B with the codex that Athanasius composed in Alexandria by the request of Emperor Constans (c. 323–350; against this dubious theory, see Birdsall 2003: 34). Furthermore, three internal features have been marshaled in support of B’s Alexandrian origins: one, the Egyptian canonical limits correlate with the books in B; two, we find readings in B that are shared only by the Coptic versions; and three, B’s

16

introduction

Greek orthography might betray Coptic influence. However, Birdsall observes that the orthographical peculiarities, thought to align with the Coptic translations, are much fewer than in many other majuscules, and the universals of the linguistic era, namely, the demotic pronunciation of Greek at this time, dictated the codex’s spelling, not the scribe’s putative Egyptian linguistic background (Birdsall 2003: 33). However, to argue contrarily that B reflects or contains vestiges of a non-Egyptian Koine dialect is even more difficult to do from the sparse evidence in contrast to the relative abundance of Egyptian papyri (see Aitken 2014: 90–91). Some have suggested B was preserved in a domicile in Southern Italy, from which came a number of other codices that now belong to the Vatican Greek library. No evidence exists for this view (Šagi 1973: 5–8; Skeat 2004: 122), and it is improbable that such monastic residences had the means to restore the codex (Birdsall 2003: 34; Skeat 2004: 130–131). The earliest documentation of which we are aware appears in the Vatican Library catalogues of 1475 and 1481 C.E. “in which there are unmistakable references to this manuscript as a complete Bible on parchment bound in red, and, in the later list, ‘in three columns’ ” (Birdsall 2003: 34). The manuscript probably entered the Library less than 32 years prior, because Eugenius IV does not include it in the 1443 inventory of Greek manuscripts, although the Library at that time did possess other unlisted Greek manuscripts (Skeat 2004: 123). The restorative and ornamental work on the manuscript was carried out in the Middle Ages, but precisely when, where and by whom is uncertain (Šagi 1972). Possibly between the ninth and eleventh centuries, a scribe traced the original ink of each letter of Vaticanus, except where the original scribe accidentally repeated a word, phrase or clause, or where the final ⲛ of verbs is followed by a consonant (Payne and Canart 2000: 106). Ironically, the beauty and clarity of the original hand was often distorted by this corrective layer. Ostensibly, by the fifteenth century the manuscript had further deteriorated, and a scribe or scribes supplemented a number of original leaves that were lost, added decorations, such as book titles and Greek (a.k.a., Ionic, Alexandrian) numerals in the margins (Birdsall 2003: 34; see above discussion in Provenance and History). The Vatican has stated that the other improvements represent multiple independent efforts, beginning in the fifteenth, but extending over the course of several centuries: “Adnotaties variae, ut numeri diversarum sectionum et emendations quae volventibus saeculis factae sunt, et praesertim rescriptio totius codicis novo atramento et adornatio litterarum initialium, osendunt codicern per plura saecula, fortasse diversis in locis, in pretio habitum esse et ad stadium adhibitum” (Martini 1968: xvi). To the contrary, T.C. Skeat contends that B underwent a single, yet incomplete, restoration

introduction

17

in the fifteenth century for presentation to the Pope (Skeat 2004: 124–134). This involved seven successive supplements to the manuscript: one, chapter and section numerals, sometimes haphazardly marked; two, rectangular, colored panels at the inception of each book; three, filling in the missing portions of the text (Gen 1:1–46:28; Psa 105:27–137:6; Heb 9:14–13:25; and Revelation); four and five, at the start of Genesis the ostentatious, although inaccurate, title and decorative epsilon, respectively; six, the clumsy changes to the Psalms, such as omitting the first letter of each Psalm and replacing it with an enlarged initial; seven, corrective additions in red ink (Skeat 2004: 124– 134).

4

The Textual Character of Vaticanus

The paleography and textual character of B continues to intrigue textual critics. Constantine Tischendorf believed ‫ א‬in hand D and Vaticanus in hand B reflect a common scribe (Tischendorf 1884; Birdsall 2003: 33). Milne and Skeat (1938) argued contrarily that Vaticanus scribe B and ‫ א‬scribe D were not related, but they identified many affinities between Vaticanus scribe A and ‫ א‬scribe D many affinities. In favor of a common scribe are the similar colophon form, use of diplé, and similarities in marginal notes. Against a common scribe, Vaticanus scribe A does not contain long-pronged omegas characteristic of ‫ א‬scribe D. Tischendorf and others believed two scribes (scribes A and B) composed the Old Testament, and one the New (scribe C) (Tischendorf 1884: 360). T.C. Skeat argued contrarily that only two scribes wrote the entire Codex (scribe A = Genesis–1Kings [pp. 41–334], Psalms–Tobias [pp. 625–944]; scribe B = 1 Kings– 2 Esdra [pp. 335–624]; Hosea–Daniel [pp. 945–1234]; New Testament). He also contends that B2, contemporaneous with the original scribes, and B3, working in the 10th or 11th century, corrected the codex (against Skeat’s argument for a first corrector [B1], see: Metzger 1991: 74). Thakery argues that Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Exodus, Leviticus and Psalms, and possibly others also display an orthographical shift near the middle of the book, suggesting a change of scribes for transcriptional, not translational purposes (Thackeray JTS vol. 4 245, 398; Thackeray 1909: 88–98). The NT text-critical symbols appear to be original since their ink matches that of the ink of the original text, not the ink that was used to trace over the text in the Middle Ages (Payne and Canart 2000: 105). These symbolic dots total 765 and resemble a diéresis or umlaut (Amphoux [2007: 440–466] argues these dots in Mark denoted Latin, rather than Greek, variants and influenced the revision of the Latin that became the Vulgate of the Gospels; but on 1Cor 14:34–35, see Miller 2002: 217–236; Payne 2004: 105–112). I am skepti-

18

introduction

cal of ascertaining precise dates for the corrections and symbols. However, we can distinguish the first scribal hand (B*) from subsequent corrections (Bc), although distinguishing between a first (Bc1) and second corrector (Bc2) is not always possible (see these designations for any ms. in Wevers 1986a: 34; for a fifteenth-century corrector, see Appearance and Divisions of LeuB below). Vaticanus contains many examples of itacistic variation (notably, ει for ι and αι for ε), which might suggest that the manuscript was transmitted by dictation, as some have argued for Sinaiticus (Milne and Skeat 1938: 51–59; but see Cole 2016: 103–107) and for the original LXX translation (van der Louw 2008a: 226). In favor of the dictation of Vaticanus is a scribal culture of this practice of religious translations in antiquity (Skeat 1957: 179–208; Petitmengin and Flusin 1984: 247–262). Of van der Louw’s examples, I call attention to one from Jerome’s letter, De Optimo genere interpretandi (ca. 396), composed the same century that B was: [II 2] Feci, quod voluit; aceito notario raptim celeriterque dictavi ex latere in pagina breviter adnotans, quem intrinsecus sensum singula capita continerent. I complied with his wish. Calling a secretary, I quickly dictated a translation, briefly paraphrasing on the margin the argument in each main section. Arns 1953: 62ff.; quoted by van der Louw 2008a: 216

The majority of LeuB’s distinctive readings are best explained as phonetic representations probably arising from a communal dictation process. Most commonly, dipthong and monothong confusion: i.e., ευωδειας (B*) vs. ευωδιας (Bc Swete BrMcL Gött) (see textual apparatus for phonetically-based orthographic variants in nearly every LeuB paragraph). Some have argued that Codex B revises a Hesychian recension by means of the Alexandrian principle of lectio brevior; thus, we find in B shorter texts of Judges, Tobit, Daniel-Theodotian and the absence of the books of Maccabees (Jellicoe 1963: 409–418; idem. 1968: 155). The Göttingen Septuagint editors, however, neither classify B, or any text for that matter, with a Hesychian recension, nor B with an Alexandrian type (see Fernández Marcos 2001: 244 n. 30). Instead, it has now become clear that the text-type of Codex B in the Old Testament differs from book to book: a rejected text in Isaiah, received text in Ezekiel, and a unique text in Judges that disagrees with most mss, but aligns with the Old Latin, Sahidic and Cyril of Alexandria (see Bogaert 2009: 62–74; Kreuzer 2015: 294). Job contains over 400 partial verses (from Theodotion) that are not found

introduction

19

in the Old Latin and Sahidic. Numbers and Deuteronomy in B, F, et al. reflect a common text tradition against that of A, M, V, et al. (Wevers 1986b: 59, 72). The most important contribution to our understanding of the text-type diversity in Vaticanus comes from Dominique Barthélemy (1963, developing Thackeray 1907: 262–266), who argued that the Naḥal Ḥever Greek Minor Prophets scroll reflects a so-called kaige recension, which is also lucid in Codex B within the books of Samuel and Kings (βγ = 2 Kgdms 10–3 Kgdms 2; γδ = 3 Kgdms 22–4Kgdms 25). He showed that the kaige recension—clustered in B in 1–4Kingdoms (LXX Samuel–Kings), but appearing sporadically in many other manuscripts—has the character of a secondary, scribal adjustment of the Old Greek to the Hebrew text at hand. Building on Barthélemy’s study, Siegfried Kreuzer concludes that the kaige recension was more widespread throughout the Septuagint, and he argues persuasively that certain nonkaige passages also indicate a Hebraizing revision in the Historical Books and “probably also other books,” although these revised nonkaige passages, while themselves the Old Greek, “come much closer” to the Old Greek (a so-called “semikaige recension”: Kreuzer 2015: 295). Consequently, one must be judicious in using B to reconstruct the Old Greek, with an awareness that even the nonkaige sections may reflect a revision toward their Hebrew source. At the very least, Codex B of the fourth century—situated chronologically after the Antiochene fathers, Josephus, the Old Latin and Sahidic translations, and Qumran scrolls (in Hebrew), but before the other great codices and extant Antiochene manuscripts—will always preserve for us a valuable image of an integral phase in the transmission of the Septuagint (Kreuzer 2015: 295).

5

The Textual Character of LeuB

Reassessing the early Greek Leviticus papyri (4QLXXLeva, 4QpapLXXLevb, Schøyen MS 2649) has indicated they do contain primary readings, meaning we can no longer presume that LeuB should have pride of place in our reconstructions of the Old Greek Leviticus (contra Wevers 2005: 5; with Metso and Ulrich 2003: 247–268; Himbaza 2016: 32–33; van der Louw 2008b: 396; de Troyer 2008a: 329–337; cf. Kreuzer 2015: 294–295). We can, however, nuance our description of the textual character of LeuB by comparison and contrast with the other codices. In contrast to NumB and DeutB, which share a text tradition with Ambrosianus (F) against A, “In the Leviticus text tradition A and B are usually together and often represent a tradition supported by only a few other mss over against an overwhelming popular tradition” (Wevers 1986b: 72). A and B are followed closely by Cyril of Alexandria, and B also manifests a kinship with

20

introduction

minuscules 71, 619, 509 and 527 (Bogaert 2009: 63). We may conclude that LeuB shares a text tradition with Leueitikon in Alexandrinus (LeuA), but this conclusion has four caveats. One, this commonality with A does not substantiate the claim that B originated in Alexandria, Egypt, because Codex A’s Egyptian origins are disputed (McKendrick [2003: 1–16] proposes Ephesus over Alexandria or Constantinople). Two, our conclusion is not tantamount to assigning B, or even LeuB in particular, to the so-called Alexandrian text-type to which textual critics often assign readings from B in the NT (Porter 1962: 363–376; Aland and Aland [1995: 109] assigned the NT of B to the superior Category I, with Luke and John aligning with Bodmer 𝔓75 of the late second or early third century CE; Metzger and Ehrman 2005: 278). The hypothesis of an Alexandrian text-type is supported by ample witnesses of the NT (‫ א‬B A C 𝔓46 66 72 75 et al.), but there is insufficient evidence to reconstruct such a text-type for Leviticus (few early papyri; ‫ א‬contains only Leu 20:27–22:30; C does not preserve Leu[e]itikon). Therefore, we must resist the hasty generalization that “elle [B] appartient clairement à la tradition alexandrine” (Amphoux and Sérandour 2008: 3). Three, if LeuB and LeuA do belong to the same text-type, we do not have enough pre-codex evidence to determine the antiquity of their shared tradition. As noted earlier, the priority of various readings in 4Q119 (= 4QLXXLeva, Lev 26:2–16), 4Q120 (= 4QpapLXXLevb, Lev 1:11–6:5[5:24 LXX]), and Schøyen MS 2649 over readings in LeuB or LeuA (often in Gött) suggests that these fragments come closer to the OG and that the codices are corrective recensions rather than literal reproductions (Ulrich 1992: 75–76; Bogaert 2009: 63). Nevertheless, we should not overstate the differences between the later (codices) and earlier (papyri) Leviticus Greek texts since they “are by and large identical both in diction and quantitatively, with allowance made for a few scribal errors, minutely divergent orthography, and the relatively small number of variants listed above” (Ulrich 1984: 82). Four, the texts of LeuB and LeuA themselves are not identical. Wevers has identified: 58 unique and 47 almost unique readings in B; 37 readings shared by B and one or two text groups against A; and A contains even more readings against the primary Leviticus text tradition, whether they are unique readings, almost unique, or shared with other text groups against B (Wevers 1886b: 59–71).

6

The Reception of LeuB

Our knowledge of the reception of LeuB falls into the oblivion of the dark age of the manuscript’s history (ca. 4th–14th centuries; see Provenance and His-

introduction

21

tory of Vaticanus). Consequently, in order to trace LeuB’s literary influence, one must embark on a text-critical analysis of its readings in subsequent literature. Wevers has already observed LeuB’s almost unique readings that are shared by minor witnesses or by one or two recensions or text groups (Wevers 1986b: 60; LeuB’s unique readings are, of course, irrelevant since their reception in other texts is unknown [Wevers 1986b: 59]). Upon examining the NT quotations, allusions and verbal parallels to Leviticus, I did not find any proto-LeuB readings (see GNT 2014: 857, 867). Interestingly, 2Cor 6:16 quotes the LeuBA text form of Lev 26:12, which reads, “they will be my people” (μου λαος) against “they will be to/for me a nation” μοι εθν[ος] (4QLXXLeva Göttc). Probably soon after B’s production, Cyril of Alexandria (c. 375–444) witnesses to five readings found in LeuB that are shared by only one or two other witnesses against the other major codices and other witnesses (see 3:2; 5:11; 6:25; 13:39; 22:3 in Text and Translation below). Saint Augustine (c. 354–430), in his Quaestiones de Levitico, also witnesses to one such reading (20:16). Although unique readings of LeuB in dependent writings may be the only verifiable record of its reception from Late Antiquity through the Middle Ages, our knowledge of the Roman Empire in the fourth century opens for us a small window into some of the sociological demographics of the early users of LeuB. Prior to the foundation of Constantinople in 324, there had been a decline in literacy, and in the Greek half of the Empire in 250–400/450 there was a decrease in epigraphic production, banking and governmental documentation, as bureaucracy increased and systems of record-keeping were less refined (Harris 1989: 285–290). By the fourth century, there were substantially fewer literate freedmen, which likely afforded free-born males with legal skills more opportunity to rise to a higher political and social position. Even the skilled rhetorical pastor John Chrysostom imagines a son from a poor family could advance through the study of rhetoric, suggesting there were at least a few elementary schools available to the poor in the eastern part of the empire in the fourth century (Harris 1989: 288–289). To be clear, Chrysostom wrote for the upper classes in Constantinople, presuming that they should all educate their sons in reading, which represents a culture in which “no member of the upper elite is known to have been illiterate in the fourth century, although the possibility cannot be completely excluded” (Harris 1989: 313). The evidence suggests, however, that common people in the towns, craftsmen, shopkeepers, and those in lower socio-economic classes were predominantly illiterate (Harris 1989: 315; following Jones 1964: 997). When we juxtapose this fourth-century disparity—literate upper classes but an illiterate majority—with the high probability of an imperial production and preservation of Codex Vaticanus (see Provenance and History of Vaticanus

22

introduction

above), the majority would not have had either the ability or the access to read LeuB or the other scriptures with which it was bound. We should not think of the early Christian preference of recording their holy books in codex format, a preference that preceded their non-religious contemporaries, as purely for cost savings, with the ability to now use both sides of the parchment, or for their mobility; surely to refer to the great biblical codices as “pocket editions” gives the wrong impression that it would not be uncommon for individuals transport the scriptures on their person (contra Young 2002: 12; cp. second century biblical papyri fragments from codices with third–fourth cent. transition to the codex for secular writings; Harris 1989: 295–297). Rather, the primary motivations were likely communicative and interpretive: Thus the codex had a number of advantages over the book-roll, and it should in general have made it easier for people to read literary texts. It certainly made it easier to look things up in a technical handbook, or in a legal textbook or in a collection of enactments such as was to be found in the new legal codes of the 290s. The victory of the codex over the bookroll was natural in an age in which religious books were gaining in relative importance, and in which consultation and quotation instead of independent and disinterested reading were becoming commoner. Harris 1989: 297

In the Constantinian era, following the Edict of Milan (313), which regulated religious tolerance for Christianity in the Empire, and the Council of Nicea (325), which resulted in the first creed of the early church, Codex Vaticanus, among the other biblical majuscule codices, was physically suitable for exegetical, theological and pastoral exposition by the Greek fathers, such as Athanasius, Eusebius, Basil the Great, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, John Chrysostom, Theodoret of Cyrus, and the Latin fathers, such as Ambrose of Milan, Jerome, Augustine, John Cassian and Pope Leo I. These theologianpastors, recognized as literate rhetoricians in their own right, would become the conduits of the biblical writings in codex form to their predominantly illiterate, yet aural/oral-learning faith communities, and so fulfill the Apostolic orders, “Preach the word” (2Tim 4:2 NRS), and “shepherd the flock of God that is among you” (1 Pet 5:2 NRS), and by simply reading the NT letters aloud in local church gatherings (2Cor 1:13; Eph 3:4; Col 4:16; 1 Thes 5:27; with many antecedents to public reading: Neh. 8; Luke 4; et al.). When we consider the reception of LeuB and the other Greek forms of Leu(e)itikon by various ecclesial communities, imperial or local, of the fourth centuries and after, we must ultimately see the radical, subversive nature of not merely perpetuating both

introduction

23

Old and New Testaments in their Koine Greek form, but of binding them into a single volume as Christian Scripture: Only from the fourth century do we have evidence of both the Old and New Testament in the same codex. The emergence of the codex is almost entirely the responsibility of early Christians. In the second century, only about 4 percent of the total number of surviving manuscripts are in codex form; however, that number increases to about 80 percent by the fourth century … Why did Christians embrace the codex? … [T]hey wanted to distinguish their own books from Jewish and pagan literature. In the codex Christians could make a claim to have a different literature than that on offer elsewhere. LAW 2013: 120

7

The Reception of LeviticusLXX in the New Testament

In contrast to the elusive reception of the text form of LeuB, the reception of LeviticusLXX in its earliest text forms by Hellenistic, Jewish and early Christian authors is extensively manifest in: the Letter of Aristeas; Pseudo-Phocylides; Philo; cave 4 at Qumran; 22 NT quotations and numerous identifiable allusions; the Sifra (halakhic midrash) and Talmud (Mishna and Gemara); and the Church Fathers (see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 25–28; Voitila 2015: 43–57; UBS5 2014: 857, 867). The intertextual reception of LeviticusLXX and the larger PentateuchLXX in the NT writings operates not only through the literary mediums of citation, quotation and allusion, but also through echo, trace and motif, as shown by the following cursory survey of the extensive cult motif in the NT. In obedience to the Torah, Jesus’ parents offered at his birth purification and dedication sacrifices in the Jerusalem temple (Luke 2:20–24; see Exod 13:2, 12; Lev 12:2–8; cf. Luke 1:5–23). To this temple, still presumed to be God’s dwelling (Matt 23:21), Jesus later returns in order to purify it from the sins of the cultic leadership (see Mark 11:15–18; Luke 19:45–47; John 2:14–16; see Lev 10:1–5; 16:1–34; also Isa 56:1–12; Jer 7:11: see Awabdy and Long 2014: 224–255). Jesus later identified himself as the temple (John 2:19; Mark 14:58). As Jesus’ followers reflected on his life, they likewise presented him as God’s dwelling (Col 2:9) and as the one who entered the heavenly tent (Heb 8:2; 9:11). In his prologue, John describes the enfleshed word tabernacling among his people (John 1:14 √σκηνόω is a denominalization of √σκηνή ‘tent, tabernacle,’ which features prominently in the PentateuchLXX, 50× in LevLXX alone; see also ExodLXX 40:28–29; LevLXX 1:1; 9:4–6, 22–24; 16:2; 26:11–12).

24

introduction

Jesus’ followers also practiced community life as God’s temple from the very first days after Jesus’ resurrection. They sequestered themselves for about a week, similar to the pattern the Lord prescribed for Aaron and his four sons (Luke 24:49–53; Acts 1:13–2:1; see Lev 8:33–36). At the end of that period, wind and fire from heaven came down on the living sacrifices, recalling the Lord’s endorsement of the inaugural priestly sacrifices (Acts 2:2–4; see Lev 9:22–24). At least by the time Luke writes his two-volume work (perhaps late 50s or early 60s), he portrays Jesus and Jesus’ followers as analogous to the Aaronic cult: priests and others serve in the holy place, offer sacrifices, voice prayers, and share the community’s bounty with the poor (Acts 2:43–47; see Lev. 1–7, esp. 7:1–7[MT = vv. 11–18]; 19; 23; 25; 27). Later, Paul regarded the physical body of every believer as a constituant of the fully constructed temple of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:9–11; 1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19; 2Cor 6:16; 2Tim 1:14; cf. John 14:17). Elsewhere, the temple is a work in progress, with Jew and Gentile believers, now reconciled to God and each other, as God’s new temple project that God himself is constructing (1 Pet 2:5; Eph 2:19–22). It was the conviction of the NT authors that Christ is the final high priest, who needed to offer no sacrifice for himself (Heb 9:7; 1 Pet 2:22–24; 3:18; see Lev 16:6, 11, 17, 33), but who offers his own body as a single, definitive sin sacrifice, resulting in propitiation, cleansing and forgiveness for all who trust him (Rom 8:3; Heb 2:17; 9:11–14, 26; 10:12, 18–26; 13:11–12; 1Pet 1:2; 3:18; 1 John 1:7, 9; 2:2; 4:10; Rev 7:14; see Lev. 1–9, 16–17; the sinful error offering, vb. √πλημμελέω or n. πλημμέλεια [Heb. ‘guilt offering’ ‫]אשׁם‬, appears nowhere in the NT, but may have been subsumed under the semantic domain of the ‘sacrifice for sin’). Christ’s blood was fit for Levitical sacrifice, “like that of a lamb without blemish [ἀμώμου] or spot” (1Pet 1:19; see Heb 9:14; animals √ἄμωμος ‘without blemish’ 23× in LevLXX 1–23; 1Pet. adds the rare adj. unattested in the LXX √ἄσπιλος ‘without spot’, which could allude, within its semantic domain, to the ‘spot’ skin-disease motif in Lev 13). The NT writers interpret Jesus’ sacrifice as accomplishing both the Hebrew (√‫ )כפר‬concept of purging or expiating sin (1John 3:5; Heb 10:4–14), and the LXX (mid. √ἐξιλάσκομαι) concept of propitiating or appeasing the Lord’s anger against sin (Rom 3:25; 5:9–11) (see esp. 4:1–6:7 [Heb. 4:1–5:26]; see Büchner 2010a: 237–260). Christ’s sacrifice and ascension up to God both appear to resemble the Heb. burnt offering ‘going up’ to God (Eph 5:2 εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας “as a sweet smell” // LevLXX 1:9, 13, 17; John 13:1–3; Acts 1:8; see ‫‘ עלה‬burnt offering’ in Lev 1:1–17). Christ is presented as the slaughtered Passover lamb (Mark 14:12, 22–24; Luke 22:7–20; 1Cor 5:7; see LevLXX 23:5), and eating his body in the upper room may also recall the “deliverance sacrifice” (θυσία σωτηρίου; ‫זבח‬

introduction

25

‫‘ שׁלמים‬peace offering’), the meat of which was to be eaten by the devotees

and the priests together in the Lord’s presence (see LevLXX 3:1–17; esp. 7:5–11). However, Jesus’ imperative to his disciples, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt 26:27–28; cf. Mark 14:23–25; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25) would have been regarded, even if figuratively, as a scandal in light of the prohibition of ingesting any form of human or animal blood (LevLXX 7:16–17; 17:10– 14). Hebrews contrasts the old covenant priesthood with the new, but indicates only that the sacrifices for sins have ended (Heb 10:12–18; only LevLXX 4:1– 6:8, 25–37). Various NT authors exhort new covenant believers to continue offering real and tangible sacrifices to God, only by a different mode, by the priestly mediation of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit (i.e., Rom 12:1–2; Phil 3:3; Heb 13:10–16; 1Pet 2:5; see the non-sin offerings in LevLXX 1–3; 6:9– 24; 7:1–26; Jesus probably presumes non-sin offerings in Matt 5:23–24). After the death of Jesus (c. 30–33 CE), even after Emperor Titus’ forces destroyed the Jerusalem temple (70CE) until today, Jesus’ followers have no clear theological basis for discontinuing the sacrifices of LevLXX 1–3, which were neither ‘for sin’ or ‘sinful error’ (τῆς ἁμαρτίας or πλημμέλεια). The whole burnt offering could be offered simply as an expression of devotion as a “sweet smell to the Lord” (1:9, 13, 17). However, the WBO does affect propitiation (1:4), ostensibly for unknown, unspecified impurity or sin not covered in 4:1–6:7 (so rabbinic interpretation: Milgrom 1991: 172–177), and this propitiatory affect cannot coexist, in NT thought, alongside Christ’s sacrifice. Consequently, the Pauline language is suggestive that believers offer their own lives as a non-propitiatory whole burnt offering (Rom 6:13; 12:1–2; Eph 5:1–2; cf. Col 1:24), but also offer what closely resembles the Levitical sacrifices of: fine flour (LevLXX 2:1–16, esp. vv. 2, 9. 12; cf. generosity with one’s bounty: Phil 4:18; Heb 13:16; 2 Cor 9:12); praise (περὶ αἰνέσεως [‫‘ תודה‬thanksgiving’], 7:1–5; Heb 12:28; 13:15); vow-prayer or voluntary (√εὐχή or √ἑκούσιος, 7:6–11; Rev 5:8; 6:9; 8:3–4); and drink offering (√σπονδή, 23:13 [also Exod.–Num.], cognate √σπένδω Phil 2:17; 2 Tim 4:6). Paul also views his apostolic service as priestly and his death as a sacrifice to the Lord (Rom 1:9; 15:16; Phil 2:17; 2Tim 4:6). In the spirit of Lev 19:9–36 and the OT prophets, the sacrifices of doing good and giving generously to believers are added to the Christian cultus (Heb 13:16; 2Cor 9:12; Phil 4:18; cf. Gal 6:6–10; see Isa 1:11– 17; Mic 6:6–8). Like the blood sacrifice of Christ “without blemish or spot,” the body and bride of Christ must now be, and will one day be, morally “without blemish” (√ἄμωμος: Eph 5:27; Phil 2:15; 2Pet 3:14; 23× in LevLXX 1–23; to Lev., the NT authors add √ἄσπιλος ‘spotless,’ i.e., ‘unstained,’ unattested in the LXX: 1 Tim 6:14; Jas 1:27; 2Pet 3:14).

26

introduction

The apostolic reflection on the identity of their community as temple probably reflects the OT prophetic visions of transformed cultic worship and ethics in the new covenant following the restoration (drawing upon Pentateuchal imagery, i.e.: Isa 56:1–8; 66:18–23; Ezekiel 40–48; Zechariah 6, 8, 14:16–21; Amos 9:7–15). Thus, as we would expect from these visions, the new temple community was both in continuity and discontinuity with Leviticus and the Mosaic covenant. The council of Jerusalem (c. 50 CE) reaffirmed for all followers of Jesus the prohibitions of eating food sacrificed to idols, blood or strangled animals, as well as sexual immorality (Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25; on aberrant cultic practices and idolatry in LevLXX 18:1–5, 30; 19:4; 26:30–31; eating blood in LevLXX 7:16–17; 17:10–14; on eating πνικτός “what has been strangled,” probably an allusion to eating animals or carcasses with blood still remaining in them, see LevLXX 7:16–17; 17:13–14; in this intertextual context, √πορνεία ‘sexual immorality’ may allude to its various forms in LevLXX 18–20). The Aaronic cult may also stand as the backdrop against which Paul depicts his work of presenting the saints holy and blameless, filled (cf. semantic domain of ‘fulfilled’ hands √τελειόω and √τελείωσις in Lev. 8), taking off and putting on clothes (Lev. 8–9; 16:4), and serving God by giving thanks, singing psalms, among other cult activities (Colossians and Ephesians, read against LevLXX 8–9). Exclusive cultic loyalty and service to the Lord is preserved (Acts 13:2; 14:13–18; 1 Cor 10:20; 2 Cor 6:16, quoting LevLXX 26:12, see also Lev 18:1–5, 30; 19:4; 26:30–31). At the same time, the liberated life in Christ entails a transformed knowledge of aberrant cultic practices and a new orientation to act always for the health of the body of Christ (Gal 5:13; 6:15; 1Cor 8:1; 2Cor 5:17; see Lev. 19, but also 18–20). While Paul adopts technical terminology from LeviticusLXX to exhort Christhonoring ethics, he does not favor the prototypical PentLXX antonyms—holy (ἅγιος) versus profane (βέβηλος), pure (καθαρός) versus impure (ἀκάθαρτος). Rather, he mixes these categories to prefer a holy (ἅγιος) verses impure (ἀκάθαρτος) antonymy (Whittle 2014: 134–152, but on p. 143 while “common” κοινός may be reserved for food, I would argue Paul knew the PentLXX antonym for ἅγιος was not κοινός, but βέβηλος “profane,” which he uses with a similar ethical connotation in 1Tim 1:9; 4:7; 6:20). The argument can be made that Paul assumed and contextualized the OT priestly distinction, yet interplay, between purity and holiness: Just as these word pairings from Israel’s Scriptures set out the way the terms function in approaching the holy God, so they function similarly for Paul: a movement from the impure to the pure (purification) can be identified apart from the movement from the common to the holy (sanctification). Cleansing from impurity leads to holiness inasmuch as in order

introduction

27

to be transferred from the realm of the common to that of the holy, purification must take place: one must be transferred from the impure to the pure. Consecration is the act of setting apart to God, a movement from the common to the holy, which is not, in and of itself, cleansing from impurity. Whittle 2014: 151

It is important to qualify, however, that after Paul encounters the crucified and risen Christ (Acts 9; Phil 3:1–11; Gal 3:11–16), his life and teaching shift from the theological, ethical and cultic (a.k.a., ceremonial, ritual, i.e., but not limited to Lev. 11–15) aspects of Israelite-Jewish holiness and purity, to the theological and ethical (i.e., Lev. 18–20), now redefined through Jesus the Messiah. In the early history of the church, in conjunction with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, circumcision and the dietary code are overturned so as to incorporate non-Jews into the people of God through faith in, and the faithfulness of, the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 10:9–11:18; see [circumcision] Exod 12:48–49; Lev 12:3; and [diet] Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14; here enters the New Perspective discussion begun by Sanders in 1977). Jewish Sabbath observance, while no longer required for Gentile believers (omitted from Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25), is refortified by Jesus’ teaching, “The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27; see Lev 16:31; 19:3, 30; 23:32, 38; 24:8; and Leitmotif in 25:2–26:43/45). Paul still practiced Sabbath, even circumcision in at least one instance, but probably only in order to advance the gospel among the Jews (see Acts 13:14–44; 17:2; 18:4; but he condemns a distortion of rituals, including Sabbath, in Col 2:16; Paul circumcises Timothy [Acts 16:3], but not Titus [Gal 2:3]). Matthew and Mark repeat the hyperbolic diction of the Hebrew prophets that the Lord desires “mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt 9:13; 12:7; from Hos 6:6; cf. the Lord’s delight, “a sweet smell to the Lord,” in LevLXX 1–23; cf. 1 Sam 15:22; Mic 6:6–8; Isa 1:11–18; Psa 51:14–17, with the later redaction of vv. 18–19). For a similar rhetorical purpose, Mark subordinates one LeviticusLXX directive to another: “… and to love one’s neighbor as oneself [LevLXX 19:18], is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices [LevLXX 1–7]” (Mark 12:33). Again, this does not refer to the abolition of Christian sacrifices, but demands with the prophets a holy internal orientation toward God and neighbor. Ultimately, the ethics of this new temple community are founded on the Pentateuch’s imitatio Dei principle, which compels the Lord’s people to emulate his holiness (1 Pet 1:16, quoting LevLXX 19:2) and love (1John 3:11–4:21; Eph 5:1–2; see Lev 19:18, 34; 26:40–45; Deut 10:17–19). The synergistic sanctification process, that is, God’s ongoing work of sanctifying his people as they obey his word echoes the holiness theology of LevLXX 20–22 (divine subj. of act. √ἁγιάζω, see: John 17:17; Eph 5:26; 1Thes 5:23; Heb 2:11; 13:12; esp. LevLXX 20:8; but also 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32).

28

introduction

Finally, without quoting verbatim a single OT verse (see UBS5 2014: 863), the book of Revelation is nevertheless permeated with OT cultic language. The tent theophany in Rev 15:5–8 unmistakably alludes to the theophanies of the LXX Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, by the genitive of apposition: “temple, the tent of witness” (ὁ ναὸς τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, 15:5; see esp. ExodLXX 40:28–29; LevLXX 9:23; NumLXX 14:10; 16:42; 20:6; for the divine king’s cosmic dwelling in Genesis 1–2, followed by his localized dwelling in the tripartite wilderness tabernacle in Exodus–Numbers, see Walton 2011). The climactic New Jerusalem vision in Rev 21:3 (I prefer the shorter reading of ‫ א‬to A) alludes to LevLXX 26:11– 12, even more lucidly in LevF Gött than in LeuBA: “And I will set my covenant [τὴν διαθήκην LeuBA] / tent [ἡ σκηνὴ LevF Gött] among you … And I will walk among you, and I will be to you God, and you will be my people.” LevLXX 26:11–12

… “Look! The tent [ἡ σκηνὴ] of God is with man. He will tent/dwell [σκηνόω] with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them.” Rev 21:3

This penultimate tabernacle image in Revelation 21 is in complete continuity with the Mosaic covenant and the Edenic vista of the climax of LeviticusLXX. However, the ultimate image in Rev 21:22 supplants all antecedent divine dwellings “for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple” (ὁ γὰρ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ναὸς αὐτῆς ἐστιν καὶ τὸ ἀρνίον).

8

Appearance and Divisions of LeuB

LeueitikonB was written on 39 sides, recto and verso, of 20 leaves, extending from pp. 99 col. 2 to 137 col. 3 (see Canart 2009: 44). Excepting the beginning and ending, LeuB’s three columns each contain 44 lines that align horizontally across the page (cf. B elsewhere: 42 lines on pp. 335–534 and 555–759, and 40 lines on pp. 535–554; Skeat 1999: 615). The book of ExodosB (B’s orth.) ends on recto p. 99 with its final 19 lines extending one-third of the way down the left column followed by a later colophon title six lines beneath the text. Leueitikon begins on the same recto p. 99 at the top of col. 2 and ends on verso p. 137 with its final three lines at the top of col. 3. Its colophon, Leueitikon, appears eight lines below the text, probably written by the fifteenth-century scribe in

introduction

29

a minuscule script, with the same design as the title, but bracketed by rightpointing carets instead of plus signs (see title description below). Leueitikon in both the colophon and opening title contained the second epsilon that a later scribe attempted to efface. The header above the opening center column displays five introductory elements drawn by the late, possibly fifteenth-century hand. One, above Leu 1:1 is a navy-blue rectangle, outlined in black, spanning the length of the center margin. Two, above the rectangle are three red plus signs, imperfectly painted and hastily positioned on the left, middle and right, within the length of the center column. Three, above the plus signs, the title, Leu(e)itikon, is written with black ink in an aesthetic majuscule script: a reduced font epsilon and omicron; a three-dot notation (∴) over the iota, but the upper dot has been effaced (cf. this diacritic over iotas and upsilons in the text proper); overlines and underlines before and after the first and last letters; tildes over and under the central tau; and two faded plus signs, one before and one after the title. Four, the opening kappa of the conjunction καὶ is enlarged, positioned in the margin left of col. 2, painted in red and green, outlined in black. Five, the Greek numeral, ⲁ (= 1), with overline (no underline, in contrast to the subsequent numerals) and horizontal tilde above the overline (in contrast to the vertical tildes below the underline of the subsequent numerals) denotes the opening section of text according to LeuB’s scribes, Leu 1:1–9 (see chart below). The lucidity of Leueitikon’s writing fluctuates from leaf to leaf, even column to column: emboldened (i.e., p. 113); clean and clear (i.e., p. 128); legible in spite of holes (recto p. 109, verso p. 110) and creases (i.e., p. 107 col. 3; 108 col. 1); obfuscated by ink that has bled through from the opposite side (i.e., pp. 101–102); faded, but legible with strained examination (i.e., p. 122, cols. 1–2); stained, but legible (p. 114); stained and expunged (p. 107, col. 3, lns. 8–32, and verso p. 108, col. 1, lns. 8–32); and scraped off by a later corrector (Bc), yet the scriptio inferior (B*) is visible to varying degrees. Distinctive of B’s paleography are leftward tails on certain letters, ⲣ ⲩ ⲫ; the horizontal stroke of its ⲡ often lacks a right or left overhang (called an ‘ear’); and its ⲫ is drawn with a proportionately larger oval (cf. 𝔓66 ‫ א‬A D). The text prima manu included no accents or breathing marks, only sparse and rudimentary punctuation (Swete 1901: xvii). A later hand (Bc) inserted diacritics: acute and grave accents; circumflexes marking long or contracted vowels; breathing marks with no visual differentiation between rough (voiceless glottal fricative /h/) or smooth breathing (absence of /h/ or possibly a glottal stop); overlines for nomina sacra, ⲓⲥ̅ⲁ for Ισραηλ “Israēl” and ⲕ︤ⲥ︥ for κύριος “Lord”; and at the end of the lines, a final nu that protrude into the margin are often replaced by an overline above the penultimate letter, e.g. ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏ︤ Μωυσῆν “Mōysē(n).” Superscripted corrections (Bc), both of individual letters

30

introduction

and entire words, have been inserted throughout the composition (i.e., p. 105 col. 1 ln. 12: first epsilon [ⲉ] in ⲕⲁⲧⲁⲗⲉⲓⲫⲑⲉ “[what] is left” [Leu 6:16]; same col. ln. 22, ⲉⲥⲧⲓⲛ “it is” above ⲁⲅⲓⲁⲁⲅⲓⲱⲛ “most holy” [Leu 6:17]). Plusses were recorded in the margins by a secondary scribe (denoted as Bmg = Bc) in 24 places; 11 are one word, 13 range from 2 to 19 words (see apparatus). A secondary sigma-eta sign, looking like an upright flower petal (prolate spheroid, containing a reduced font eta), has been drawn in the margin in at least 19 places (on pp. 110, 111, 120, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 130, 131, 134). This was probably an abbreviation of ση(μειωσαι) “note, of significance,” used to indicate points of textual or interpretive interest (noted by Drew Longacre in a discussion). Where still visible, I identify this sign in the margin next to Leu 10:8; 11:11; 15:30–31; 18:23b; 19:2, 15, 28, 32; 20:2, 9, 14, 16, 18; 21:9, 13, 17; 23:36; 24:16; 26:11 (below this sign at 20:9, the scribe has written a textual variant των for τον, but I am unconfident about the word above due to fading). Other secondary marginal notes in majuscule script appear throughout Leueitikon (pp. 99, 111, 113, 117, 124, 125, 127, 130, 131). Upon examining LeuB digitized by the Vatican, in most but not all instances, I remain unconvinced by BrMcL and Swete that we can confidently distinguish between secondary (Ba = Bc1) and tertiary (Bb = Bc2) corrections. I do mark as Bmg readings that project into the margin or are marked as corrections in the margin, but I assign these readings to Bc in general and do not attempt to delineate them (see Abbreviations). Therefore, I use Bc and Bmg to denote all subsequent corrections to the ms and thereby follow the general practice of the Göttingen LXX editor. The manuscript betrays two systems of divisions, one contemporaneous with the original production, the second dating some time in the Byzantine period (Duplacy 1976: 122–136; Amphoux and Sérandour 2008: 4) or late fifteenth century (Birdsall 2003: 34). The original, prima manu system may reflect a preexisting tradition, but we do not have enough evidence to call the system “Alexandrian” (contra Amphoux and Sérandour [2008: 4], “mais il s’ inscrit déjà dans la tradition alexandrine”). The prima manu text in each column is aligned left, but appears roughly justified since: one, in some cases, words at the end of the line are divided and continue onto the next line; two, in other cases, words are crammed at the end of the line by reducing font and spacing (e.g., Leu 1:2); three, at the end of the lines, final nuns that would protrude into the margin are replaced by an overline above the penultimate letter; four, line length usually vacillates between 17 to 19 letters, although corrected lines may cram as many as 24 letters (p. 100 col. 2. ln. 14), and the last line of each original line may contain as few as 3 letters (LeuB 7:11). These short lines would not have been a consistent indicator of scribal divisions since the last letters of a section could, and often do, extend to the end or near the end of the line. Rather, I would suggest

introduction

31

that prima manu paragraphs were primarily denoted by outdenting (a hanging paragraph) the first letter of the new paragraph: ⲥⲑⲏⲥⲉⲧⲁⲓⲟⲩⲧⲟⲥⲟⲛⲟ ⲙⲟⲥⲧⲏⲥⲗⲉⲡⲣⲁⲥ ⲕⲁⲓⲉⲗⲁⲗⲏⲥⲉⲛⲕⲥⲡⲣⲟⲥⲙⲱ ⲩⲥⲏⲛⲗⲉⲅⲱⲛⲕⲁⲓⲁⲁⲣⲱⲛ 14:57–15:1

When the last sentence of the section extends to the end of the line, the outdentation (hanging paragraph) alone signals the new section: ⲧⲱⲕⲱⲛⲟⲙⲓⲙⲟⲛⲁⲓⲱⲛⲓⲟ ⲕⲁⲓⲉⲝⲏⲗⲑⲉⲛⲩⲓⲟⲥⲅⲩⲛⲁⲓ ⲕⲟⲥⲓⲥⲣⲁⲏⲁⲉⲓⲧⲓⲇⲟⲥⲕⲁⲓⲟⲩ 24:9–10

The scribe in chs. 11–27 on fourteen occasions leaves an extended space at the end of the line, but does not outdent the first letter of the next line to denote a new section (see “noticeable end spaces” marked by [→] in col. 1 of chart below): ⲩⲇⲁⲧⲓⲕⲁⲓⲁⲕⲁⲑⲁⲣⲧⲟⲥⲉ ⲥⲧⲁⲓⲉⲱⲥⲉⲥⲡⲉⲣⲁⲥ ⲕⲁⲓⲡⲁⲛⲉⲣⲡⲉⲧⲟⲛⲟⲉⲣⲡⲉⲓ 11:40–41

One might surmise that these end spaces do not denote new paragraphs, but new sentences within larger units, for three reasons. One, they normally occur in sentences that are subordinate to a main subject or theme. Two, in addition to the fourteen noticeable end spaces there are many small and nearly unnoticeable end spaces (e.g., 19:32). Three, lucid outdentation of new paragraphs occurs throughout the book. The most likely conclusion is that spaces at the end of lines, whether short or long, are functionally interchangeable with internal spaces that appear between numerous sentences throughout the book (i.e., p. 112, col. 2, ln. 21 [11:37–38] ⲧⲟⲥⲉⲥⲧⲁⲓ ⲉⲁⲛⲇⲉⲉⲡⲓⲡⲉ). The aforementioned secondary scribe embellished the appearance of the manuscript and superimposed a second system of divisions. In LeuB this late hand inconsistently added overlines above the first letters of interpolated sections and, more importantly, supplied at the start of each enlarged Alexandrian Greek numerals (ⲁ = ch. 1; ⲃ = ch. 2) with an overline, underline and vertical

32

introduction

tilde beneath the underline (see chart below; Birdsall 2003: 34). The numeral is centered in the margin (to the left of the column) and adjacent to the first line of each section. I would infer that the scribe came before or during the fourteenth century (vs. late fifteenth century) because we know his 61 divisions are more than double the 27 modern chapters that first appeared in print in the 1382 Wycliffe English Bible (some divisions are the same: i.e., Bc = Leu 15, 16, 17, 18). The parameters of these late sections both compare and contrast with the original paragraphs. Probably a separate, secondary scribe added colons, some faded, some omitted where expected, after the last word of each main section, but also between sentences on the same line. In conjunction with some of these colons, an even later scribe less frequently interposed additional divisions by means of marginal brackets ⲕⲁⲓ (the point of division is noted by ˹ in col. 2 of chart below). A single raised or central dot was added between various sentences with an original internal space (p. 112, col. 2, ln. 21 [11:37–38] ⲧⲟⲥⲉⲥⲧⲁⲓ. ⲉⲁ …), without a space (p. 132, col. 1, ln. 6 [25:5–6] …ⲓⲧⲏⲅⲏ.ⲕⲁⲓ …), before the final space of a section (p. 135, col. 2., ln. 35 [27:8–9] ⲁⲩⲧⲟⲛⲟⲓⲉⲣⲉⲩⲥ.). Another much later scribe inserted chapter divisions according to our modern (from the 14th century) chapters of Leviticus. These late chapter markers appear in the top margin above the column containing the new chapter, and less often, on verso larger left margins next to the new chapter. They contain, for example: CAP. XI; where the first symbol correlates with a smaller identical symbol in the margin adjacent to the first line of the chapter; CAP. abbreviates Italian capitolo “chapter”; and XI is the Roman numeral 11. The early audience of LeuB did not see these chapter divisions, the Greek numeral sections or bracketed subsections, but they would have read and been influenced by the original paragraphs fashioned by shorter final lines, outdented initial letters, and in some cases colons with an ensuing space between the sections (Duplacy 1976: 122–136; Amphoux and Sérandour 2008: 3–4). In comparison, Codex Alexandrinus (A) prima manu employs two paragraphing techniques: one, LeuA enlarges the first letter of each section, positions that letter into the margin left of the column (two columns per page; cf. three in LeuB), and often slightly indents the second letter of each section; and two, LeuA places a gap of several letters between sections, and then enlarges the first letter of the next line (not the first letter of the section). Consequently, as in LeuB, the last line of each section may end shorter than the column’s typical length. Sometimes, however, LeuA’s new sections begin on the final line of the previous section, with a space between sections, in which case the enlarged letter in the margin is the first letter of the second line of the new section (see 2:1; 11:1, 46; 12:1; 13:1; 13:12[ⲉⲭⲁⲛⲑⲥⲏ divided between lines, medial ⲑ is enlarged]).

introduction

33

In the chart below provides my observations of the divisions of LeuB (= LeuB*) and LeuA (= LeuA*), the only early codices that still contain Leu(e)itikon today, alongside those of LeuBc and the Göttingen critical edition (C and D no longer contain Leu[e]itikon; ‫ א‬preserves only Leu 20:27–22:30; F G M V are later and fragmentary). The Göttingen editors (Wevers for Leuitikon) propose their reconstruction of the original chapter divisions which they mark by emboldened and enlarged chapter numbers and paragraph indentations. To facilitate comparison, this chart, like this commentary, follows the versification in the Göttingen text, although we should not forget that verse and chapter numbers were never present in the codices. To represent LeuB*, the symbol (→) marks each noticeable space at the end of a line, usually with the aforementioned raised or central dot (.ⲁⲓ. ⲉⲁ …); many other minuscule spaces at the end of lines are present. To represent the secondary additions of LeuBc, the section symbol (§1 = A) marks the main divisions of the embellished Greek numerals, while the symbol (˹) marks the presumable subdivisions. The paragraph divisions of LeuB* (enumerated in col. 1 in Table 1 below) signify each juncture at which the scribe perceived a change in subject, break in cadence, or recurrence of the stereotypical formula or a derivation of it, Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying.” With the exception of this formula at 22:1, the scribes begin a new paragraph at the formula’s 35 other occurrences (see Divine Speech Micro-Structure below). The scribes perceptively format the book’s three primary subscriptions as new paragraphs (7:27–28; 26:46; 27:34). In the Text and Translation I mark in the footnotes the paragraph divisions that are not as pronounced in the format of LeuB, but still discernable (i.e., footnote on ¶ 4:1–12). In total, LeuB exhibits 103 original (outdented) paragraphs, in contrast to 61 paragraphs interposed by a later hand, both of which are fewer than LeuA’s 241 original paragraphs and Wevers’s reconstructed 143 paragraphs. On the one hand, because 25 of B’s original paragraphs are the length of a single English verse (2:4; 10:3, 4; 15:18; 16:1; 18:6, 7–23; 24:17, 23; 26:46; 27:34), and three, half of a verse (18:17a, 17b–d; 18:23a), often atomizing the contents of a larger passage, we may infer that the scribe regarded many of these paragraphs as minor divisions. These stand in contrast to the expanses of the book that display far fewer divisions and thereby group together multiple topoi and even genres. For example, LeuB divides ch. 18 into 21 units, whereas 25:1–26:45 is collected into one unit, which may signal a change of original hands. Any analysis of LeuB must attempt to explain the logic of the divisions, even in the minority of instances when the divisions appear to vacillate inconsistently between fragmented and expansive. The evidence suggests that the scribes that produced LeuB did not strategically plan the divisions in advance (ch. 18 vs. chs. 25–26), but in the process of generating the manuscript,

34 table 1

introduction Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

Göttingen edition

1:1–9

§1 = 1:1–9

1:1–9

1:10–13 1:14–17 2:1–3 2:4 2:5–6 2:7–13

§2 = 1:10–13 §3 = 1:14–17 §4 = 2:1–3 §5 = 2:4 §6 = 2:5–6 §7 = 2:7–13

2:14–3:5

4:1–12

§8 = 2:14–16 §9 = 3:1–5 §10 = 3:6–11 §11 = 3:12–17 §12 = 4:1–12

4:13–21

§13 = 4:13–21

4:22–26 4:27–31 4:32–35 5:1–13

§14 = 4:22–26 §15 = 4:27–35

1:1 1:2–5a 1:5b–10 1:11–12a 1:12b–17 2:1–3 2:4 2:5–6 2:7–13a 2:13b–c 2:14–16 3:1–5 3:6–11 3:12–17 4:1–11 4:12 4:13–14 4:15–21 4:22–26 4:27–31 4:32–35 5:1–10

3:6–17

5:14–19 6:1–7 6:8–18

§16 = 5:1–13

§17 = 5:14–16 §18 = 5:17–19 §19 = 6:1–7 §20 = 6:8–18

5:11–13 5:14–16 5:17–19 6:1–13 6:14–23

6:19–23 6:24–30 6:31–40

§21 = 6:19–23 §22 = 6:24–7:11

6:24–30 6:31–40

1:10–13 1:14–17 2:1–3 2:4 2:5–6 2:7–10 2:11–13 2:14–16 3:1–5 3:6–11 3:12–17 4:1–12 4:13–21 4:22–26 4:27–31 4:32–35 5:1–6 5:7–10 5:11–13 5:14–16 5:17–19 6:1–7 6:8–13 6:14–18 6:19–23 6:24–30 6:31–40

35

introduction Table 1

Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

Göttingen edition

7:1–11

˹ 7:9 ˹ 7:11

7:1–11

7:12–17

§23 = 7:12–17 ˹ 7:12 ˹ 7:14 ˹ 7:16 §24 = 7:18–26 ˹ 7:25 §25 = 7:27–28 §26 = 8:1–36 ˹ 8:6 ˹ 8:18 ˹ 8:22

7:1–5 7:6–7 7:8–11 7:12–17

7:18–26

7:18–24

7:27–28 8:1–12 8:13 8:14–24? (lacuna) 8:25–27 8:28–30 8:31–35 8:36–9:4 9:5–6 9:7 9:8–14 9:15–21 9:22 9:23 9:24? (illegible) 10:1–3? (illegible)

7:25–28 8:1–36

7:18–26 7:27–28 8:1–9:6

§27 = 9:1–10:8 9:7–21 (slight outdent.)

9:22–24

10:1–2 10:3 10:4 (10:5 omitted) 10:6–7 10:8–11 10:12–18

7:12–17

9:1–21

9:22–24

10:1–7

10:4(?)–7 (illegible) §28 = 10:8–20

10:8–20? (illegible)

10:8–11 10:12–15

36 Table 1

introduction Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces) 10:19–20 11:1–47

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

§29 = 11:1–47 ˹ 11:9 ˹ 11:13

11:1–8 11:9–20

→11:28

→11:40 12:1–8 13:1–8 →13:6 13:9–46 (slight outdent.)

˹ 11:46 §30 = 12:1–8 §31 = 13:1–59 ˹ 13:7

13:47–59

14:1–32

§32 = 14:1–32

Göttingen edition

10:16–20 11:1–12 11:13–20

11:21–25 11:26–28 11:29–36 11:37–38 11:39–45 11:46–47 12:1–4 12:5–8 13:1–11

11:21–28

13:12–17

13:9–17

13:18–23 13:24–25 (effaced, but reconstructable) 13:26–28 (“ ”) 13:29–34 13:35–37 13:38–39 13:40–41 13:42–46 13:47–51a 13:51b–52 13:53–56 13:57–59 14:1–13 14:14–20 14:21–23

13:18–23 13:24–28

11:29–38 11:39–45 11:46–47 12:1–8 13:1–8

13:29–37 13:38–39 13:40–46 13:47–59

14:1–9 14:10–20 14:21–32

37

introduction Table 1

Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

14:33–57

§33 = 14:33–57

15:1–15

§34 = 15:1–33

15:16–17 15:18 15:19–33 16:1 16:2–29a

16:29b–34 17:1–14 →17:9

§35 = 16:1–34

§36 = 17:1–16 ˹ 17:10

→17:12 17:15–16 18:1–5 18:6 18:7 18:8 18:9 18:10 18:11

§37 = 18:1–30

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

14:24–32 14:33–37 14:38–47 14:48–53 14:54–57 15:1–2b 15:2c–12 15:13–15 15:16–17 15:18 15:19–31 15:32–33 16:1 16:2–20 16:21–22 16:23–25 16:26–29a 16:29b–34 17:1–7 17:8–9 17:10–11 17:12 17:13–14a 17:14b–16 18:1–2b 18:2c–5 18:6–7 18:8 18:9 18:10 18:11

Göttingen edition

14:33–57

15:1–15

15:16–17 15:18–24 15:25–31 15:32–33 16:1–10

16:11–28 16:29–34 17:1–7 17:8–9 17:10–12 17:13–14 17:15–16 18:1–5 18:6 18:7 18:8 18:9 18:10 18:11

38 Table 1

introduction Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

18:12 18:13 18:14 18:15 18:16 18:17a 18:17b–d 18:18 18:19 18:20 18:21 18:22 18:23a 18:23b–30

19:1–4 →19:2 19:5–19

Göttingen edition

18:12 18:13 18:14 18:15 18:16 18:17

18:12 18:13 18:14 18:15 18:16 18:17–18

18:18–21 18:19–23

18:22–23a

§38 = 19:1–10

§39 = 19:11–25

19:20–22 19:23–25 19:26–37

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

§40 = 19:26–37

18:23b–c 18:24–25 18:26–29 18:30 19:1–3b 19:3c–4 19:5–8 19:9–10 19:11–12 19:13 19:14 19:15 19:16 19:17–19a 19:19b–d 19:20–22 19:23–25 19:26 19:27–28

18:24–30

19:1–4 19:5–8 19:9–10 19:11–14

19:15–18 19:19 19:20–22 19:23–25 19:26–29

39

introduction Table 1

Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

20:1–9

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

§41 = 20:1–27 ˹ 20:9

20:10–17

→20:16 20:18–27

21:1–15

21:16–23 21:24–22:16

§42 = 21:1–15

§43 = 21:16–24 §44 = 22:1–16

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

19:29 19:30–31 19:32 19:33–34 19:35–37 20:1–3 20:4–5 20:6–7 20:8 20:9 20:10 20:11 20:12 20:13 20:14 20:15 20:16 20:17 20:18 20:19 20:20 20:21–22 20:23 20:24–26 20:27 21:1–6 21:7a 21:7b–8 21:9–12 21:13–15 21:16–23 21:24–22:3

Göttingen edition

19:30–32 19:33–37 20:1–21

20:22–26

20:27 21:1–9

21:10–15 21:16–24 22:1–13

40 Table 1

introduction Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

§49 = 23:23–25 §50 = 23:26–32 §51 = 23:33–44

22:4a–bα 22:4bβ–10 22:11–16 22:17–20 22:21–23 22:24 22:25 22:26–27 22:28–32b 22:32c–33 23:1–4 23:5 23:6–8 23:9–13b 23:13c–14 23:15–21 23:22 23:23–25 23:26–32 23:33–38

24:1–9

§52 = 24:1–9

23:39–44 24:1–9

24:10–12 24:13–16

§53 = 24:10–23

22:17–25

§45 = 22:17–25

22:26–33

§46 = 22:26–33

23:1–8

§47 = 23:1–8

23:9–22

§48 = 23:9–22

23:23–25 23:26–32 23:33–44

24:17 24:18–22 24:23 25:1–26:45

§54 = 25:1–26:2

24:10–12 24:13–14 24:15–16 24:17–20 24:21–22 24:23a–c 24:23d 25:1–2

Göttingen edition

22:14–16 22:17–25

22:26–30 22:31–33 23:1–3 23:4–8 23:9–14 23:15–22 23:23–25 23:26–32 23:33–36 23:37–38 23:39–44 24:1–4 24:5–9 24:10–12 24:13–23

25:1–7

41

introduction Table 1

Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

→25:43

→25:55 §55 = 26:3–13 ˹ 26:3 §56 = 26:14–17 §57 = 26:18–20 §58 = 26:21–22 §59 = 26:23– 26 §60 = 26:27– 46

26:46 27:1–27 →27:4

→27:7

§61 = 27:1–34

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

25:3–9aα 25:9aβ–13 25:14–25 25:26–28 25:29–31 25:32–34 25:35–38 25:39–42a 25:42b–44 25:45–46 25:47–49b 25:49c–55 26:1a–d 26:1e–13 26:14–20

Göttingen edition

25:8–12 25:13–24 25:25–34

25:35–38 25:39–46

25:47–54 25:55 26:1–2 26:3–13 26:14–17 26:18–26

26:21–26

26:27–33 26:34–41 26:42–43 26:44–45 26:46 27:1–3 27:4 27:5 27:6 27:7–8

26:27–45

26:46 27:1–8

42 Table 1

introduction Divisions in LeuB, LeuBc, LeuA and Gött (cont.)

LeuB* Prima manu with paragraph outdentations (→ marks noticeable end spaces)

LeuBc with secondary Greek numerals (§1 = ⲁ) and (sub)divisions (˹)

→27:8 →27:10 →27:14

˹ 27:14

→27:26 27:28–33 (slight outdent.)

27:34

LeuA Prima manu with enlarged initial letters

Göttingen edition

27:9–10 27:11–13 27:14 27:15 27:16 27:17 27:18 27:19 27:20–21 27:22–26 27:27 27:28 27:29 27:30 27:31–33a 27:33b–34

27:9–13 27:14–15 27:16–21

27:22–25 27:26–29

27:30–33 27:34

when they encountered a literary marker or felt a shift in topic or subtopic, they outdented the paragraph according to their own impressions. In deference for the acumen of the scribes, I organize my commentary proper according to these original paragraph divisions and explore why the scribes positioned them where he did. Although I will treat larger units more extensively than smaller (cf. 27:1–27 to 18:6), I will analyze every original unit separately to appreciate the impact of the format of LeuB per se.

9

The Source and Translation of LeviticusLXX

In order to concentrate on the final form of one manuscript, I will not attempt to answer questions related to the translation of LeviticusLXX, such as: Was the

introduction

43

primitive translation (or translations) intended to be read interlinearly with its (their) Hebrew source (Pietersma 2002: 337–364; Büchner 2007: 84) or independently (Joosten 2008a: 163–178)? What data and metadata are necessary to elucidate the translation technique (adj. übersetzungstechnisch) or “the relationship between the text of the translation and its Vorlage” (Aejmelaeus 2001: 532; see ibid. 1987: 58–65)? What social and historical dynamics compelled the probable Egyptian Jews to shape its production, and how was it received initially (van der Louw 2006: 25–27)? What are the evidences, especially the internal linguistic features, of the Aramaic and Egyptian backgrounds of the translation of LeviticusLXX (Joosten 2010: 4–8; ibid., 2016: 246–256; ibid., 2017: 79–89)? Constrained by the scope of this study, we will survey only briefly the Hebrew source, technique and stylistic elements of the translation. There exists a consensus that the translation of LeviticusLXX is characteristically constrained by its Hebrew source (Metso and Ulrich 2003: 247). All do not agree, however, on how to interpret the collective significance of the textual variants between the retroverted Hebrew of LeviticusLXX and proto-MT. We can infer from both Milgrom and Wevers that they regarded LeviticusLXX in fundamental continuity with proto-MT and proceed accordingly in their reputable commentaries on the Hebrew and Greek texts, respectively (Milgrom 1991–2001; Wevers 1997). For them the differences are sparse and often insignificant. Milgrom notes each “rare meritorious variant” of the LXX or SP against the MT, as well as the “few interesting variations” in 4Q24 (= 4QLevb) and 4Q26 (= 4QLevd) (Milgrom 1991: 2). By contrast, Zipor draws a different conclusion: Unfortunately, only small parts of the Hebrew Book of Leviticus remained in Qumran; however, from fragments of other biblical books and also from the limited remnants of Leviticus, we see great textual variety. Qumranic Hebrew texts often support the LXX version as opposed to that of MT. As a principle, this may apply to other places in the book, even when there is no such extant Hebrew variant. Such reconstruction of an assumed Hebrew Vorlage can only be denied when a non-biblical expression is created. Zipor 1998: 553; see also Zipor 2001: 553–581

I often came to this inference in my own evaluation of the Leviticus witnesses, but I still try to assume the posture of Metso and Ulrich, who urge textual critics to evaluate impartially each LXX variant—against MT, SP, Qumran mss or early versions—to discern if and how it is better understood as a scribal interpretation or a formal rendering of a different Hebrew Vorlage (Metso and Ulrich 2003: 267–268).

44

introduction

Septuagintalists continue to debate whether the translation technique of the LeviticusLXX translator—revealed in both syntactical and lexical tendencies—should be classified as more literal than Gen/Exod/Num/Deut (SoisalonSoininen 1965) or as more free than Gen/Num/Deut (Sollamo 1979; for formalequivalence/correspondence vs. dynamic/functional-equivalence, see van der Louw 2007: 10). Aejmelaeus (2007: 77–78) has argued that of the Pentateuch books the freest renderings and most natural Greek usage appear in Genesis and Exodus, but the most literal in Deuteronomy (1982: 178), while Leviticus “combines a rather firm word for word method with alternation of equivalents” (2007: 78; on D’s heavy dependence on its source, see Peters 2007: 141–142). Aejmelaeus argues against earlier research that the clusters of dynamic renderings of Hebrew parataxis do not reveal two translators of LevLXX (chs. 1–15, chs. 17–27) but one who shifted in such renderings based on differing blocks of materials (Aejmelaeus 1982: 159–169; contra Thackeray 1909: 88–98; Huber 1916: 95–98). In Voitila’s words, the translation technique of LeviticusLXX “oscillates between very free and extremely literal” (2015: 44). From the present study, I am left with the impression that the LevLXX translation technique scales do not oscillate evenly, but more frequently tip toward literalism. While there are many free renderings of terms (with Aejmelaeus 1982: 180; Sollamo 1979: 280– 289), Büchner is right to emphasize that: … instead of trying to convey meaning in idiomatic Greek from larger Hebrew phrases, he [the translator] works mostly from the individual Hebrew syntactical units and what individual Greek equivalents he has chosen for them. This fact is further born out by the lack of connecting particles found in the Septuagint … On the level of individual words one finds this one-to-one dependence also to be true, in most cases. Büchner 2007: 83

Thus, Wevers’s description is essentially correct that, “Lev is more of an isolate type of translation than a contextual one. A purely ‘isolate’ translation would simply be a word for word set of equivalences for Hebrew lexemes in the Greek with little regard for the context in which such were used” (Wevers 1997: ix, italics mine). Ironically, when we confront Wevers’s own proclivity to explain variants as exegesis rather than source, a new picture emerges that the translator, using a Vorlage that on many occasions differed from our MT, was even more constrained by the individual syntagms of his Hebrew source than Wevers thought (similarly, Metso 2008: 514). The stylistic and literary devices conveyed through the LeviticusLXX translation include but are not limited to the following (developed from Wevers 1997:

introduction

45

ix–xxv; but also see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 28–81; Lee 1983: 31–52, 85–113; Büchner 2010a: 237–260; Aitken 2014: 45–67 and 45–107; Voitila 2015: 47–50, 53–54): – Stereotyped rendering (calque), whereby the translator selects a Greek word, not to convey its common Greek usage, but to represent the lexical meaning of the Hebrew sources – Contemporary usage, whereby the translator selects a Greek word not to convey the meaning of the Hebrew source, but a synchronic meaning attested in extrabiblical Greek sources – Lexical variation, whereby the translator renders the same Hebrew word, use of different Greek synonyms “purely for variety sake” or to make an “important distinction” (Wevers 1997: xi–xii) – Neologism, or more often, new form, whereby the translator creates a new word or a new formation of a preexisting word, such as a compound, prefix addition, verbal or nominal derivation – Indistinct grammatical choices, such as the use of the neuter pronouns αὐτό and αὐτὰ by default when the translator could not determine the Hebrew antecedent – Simplification, whereby the translator clarifies, makes more precise, or explicit an ambiguity in the Hebrew text – Correction, whereby the translator attempts to remove a potential misunderstanding in the text or to change the text to what he thought God intended to say – Contextualization, whereby the translator departs from the Hebrew syntax or style to communicate reasonably in his Alexandrian context – Alignment, whereby the translator makes more consistent a Hebrew passage that uses language inconsistently and confusingly – Obfuscation, whereby the translator confounds the meaning or consistency of the Hebrew, for example, by using different terms for a single Hebrew Leitworte – Leveling, whereby the translator makes the nouns and verbs identical in person and number to overcome the interpretive problem of the Hebrew – Parallelism, whereby the translator makes a lexeme parallel with another to avoid confusion or to align with conventional expression or usage – Anachronism (rare), whereby the translator updates the text to his own Alexandrian milieu – Exegesis, whereby the translator spontaneously or intentionally reinterprets or emends the meaning of the Hebrew, sometimes exposing his own conceptual or even theological beliefs Vahrenhorst (2006: 133–135) attempts to argue that the Pentateuch translators chose multiple Greek words to render a single Hebrew term in order to express

46

introduction

the complexity of the Hebrew idea, but Voitila (2015: 44) retorts, “a Greek reader without Hebrew would not know that the same concept was being referred to,” which is certainly apropos to the LeuB readership. The LeviticusLXX translation includes a number of cases of scribal influence, including theological exegesis (Zipor 1991: 328–337; Wevers 1997: xxii–xxv; Zipor 1998: 554–557), but Voitila rightly challenges the conclusion that the LevLXX version is saturated with deliberate scribal transformations: “Judging from the way our translator did his work—literal and faithful [sic.], working on short segments—a farreaching interpretive activity does not appear plausible. Wevers, as with Harlé and Pralon (Bd’A 3, pp. 14–25), creates the impression that the translator rendered the MT and is therefore to blame whenever there is a deviation from it” (Voitila 2015: 53). As noted throughout the commentary (below), the LeviticusLXX translator on many occasions renders a Hebrew source that matches SP against MT, and on occasion, matches a Qumran manuscript, either with or against SP, but against MT. The impression this gives, contrary to the impression left by Wevers and Harlé and Pralon, is that the modus operandi of the translator was to render formally his Vorlage(n) that certainly cannot be classified as protoMT, but as betraying a diversity of text groups, SP, MT, Q mss, non-aligned (mixed), and LevLXX, in the few cases where LXX scribal interpretation is unlikely and no source matches the LevLXX reading (since every possible retroversion could represent a distinct LXX Vorlage: Zipor 1998: 553; 2001: 553–581). When the LeviticusLXX translator does supply a dynamic rendering against MT, SP and Q (if there is evidence), these renderings are primarily accidental scribal errors and subconscious deviations, but fewer deliberate interpretive maneuvers.

10

Literary Context

Julius Wellhausen believed ancient Israel’s sacrificial system was once spontaneous, complex and vivacious, but in Judaism “Der Athem des Lebens zog nicht mehr hindurch” (repr. 2001: 76). His conclusion has influenced not a few readers to relegate the book of Leviticus, likewise the priestly materials in Exodus and Numbers, to a lifeless and repressive collection of laws. On the contrary, Leviticus in its original Hebrew form(s) and then in its LXX version(s) expresses its own mature worldview (see Milgrom 1991–2001) and is located squarely within the narrative of the Pentateuch. This narratival context and Leviticus’s own narrative framework indicate that the Pentateuch’s editors regarded this composition as a scene (Leviticus) that contributes to the larger Sinai peri-

introduction

47

cope (Exod 19:1–Num 10:10) within the yet larger Torah story (whether Tetra-, Penta-, or Hexateuch). Twentieth- and twenty-first-century scholars have made important contributions in reading Leviticus as literature positioned within its narrative context, but here we will consider its context as nuanced by the shape of LeuB. 10.1 Discrete Composition within the Pentateuch’s Narrative Although we must take precaution to not lapse into chiasmania (cf. parallelomania warning by Sandmel 1962: 1–13), we have substantive reasons to assert that the Pentateuch’s editors deliberately positioned Leviticus at center of the Pentateuch, framed by the parallel content of the books that surround it. The Pentateuch’s inner-frames around Leviticus are formed by narrative blocks in Exodus that have counterparts in Numbers (here I augment Smith and BlochSmith 1997: 289): Genesis Exodus

49–50: in Egypt, anticipating Chanaan (LXX orth.) 1:1–15:21: in Egypt 15:22–ch. 18: in the wilderness 19–40: at Mount Seina Leviticus 1–27: at Mount Seina Numbers 1:1–10:10: at Mount Seina 10:11–ch. 21: in the wilderness 22–36: in Transjordan Deuteronomy 33–34: in Transjordan, anticipating Chanaan Laws, language and narrative episodes correspond between the books of ExodusLXX and Numbers. At Mount Seina, the directives of κύριος–ὁ θεός in Numbers 1–10 arguably complement those in ExodusLXX 19–40, not those in Leueitikon (see Blum 1990: 301–312; see Continuity and Discontinuity below). The editorial comments about the peripatetic “Tent (of the Testimony)” (ἡ σκηνή [τοῦ μαρτυρίου]) guided by the Lord’s cloud and fire in the wilderness do not occur in Leueitikon, but in ExodusLXX 40:28–32 (= MT 40:34–38) and are resumed in Num 9:15–23 and 10:11–12. In the wilderness, the community murmurs (γογγύζω “to murmur,” Exod 17:3; Num 11:1; 14:27, 29; 16:41 [= MT 17:6]; 17:5 [= MT 17:20]; and its compound διαγογγύζω “to mutter, murmur,” Exod 15:24; 16:2, 7, 8; Num 14:2, 36; 16:11; γογγυσμός “murmuring,” Exod 16:7, 8[2×], 9, 12; Num 17:5, 10 [= MT 17:20, 25]; γόγγυσις “murmuring,” Num 14:27; see LEH § 1910–1912); reminisces of Egypt’s pleasures (Exod 16:3; Num 11:5; 14:3–4; 16:13; Num 20:5); and accuses Moses of bringing them out of Egypt to die in the desert (Exod 16:3; 17:3; Num 14:2–3; 16:13; 20:4–5; 21:5–6). Finally, Moses’s poetic blessing of the 12

48

introduction

tribes and death outside Chanaan (LXX orth.) recalls Jacob’s blessing of his 12 sons and death outside Chanaan (Genesis 49–50; Deuteronomy 33–34). Some would regard the Hexateuch as a final framework (from Genesis to Joshua), spanning from the creation of the world/land to the conquest of the land, or from the promise of land to the patriarchs to the fulfillment of the promise to the Israelites under Joshua (see Römer 2011: 25–42). The most explicit framing device is the Pentateuch editors’ exodus-based chronology: “The chronological system formed by the notices in Ex 19:1 and Num 10:11 on the one hand and Ex 40:17 and Num 1:1 on the other frames the book of Leviticus and highlights its distinctive position vis-à-vis Exodus and Numbers” (Nihan 2007: 74). LeviticusLXX 1:1 demarcates ExodusLXX 19–40 from LeviticusLXX 1–26/27, while the penultimate and ultimate colophons (Leu 26:46; 27:34) demarcate LeviticusLXX from NumbersLXX 1–10 (similarly, Otto 2008: 368–369; see Narrative Macro-Structure). The closing of Leueitikon serves as an Einschnitt between Leu 1(1)–26 and Numbers 1–9(10) (Blum 1990: 300), and Numbers 1–10 may be a later addition to the priestly corpus (Otto 1999: 181). Numbers 1:1 also denotes a new dimension of divine revelation at Mount Seina in the wilderness of Seina (ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τῇ Σεινά), preparing readers for the controlling motif of wilderness wanderings in 10:12–36:13 (see Nihan 2007: 70; although note the singular occurrence of this language in LeuB 7:28: ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ Σεινά [LXXGött = Σινά; MT = 7:38]). In sum, LeuB does not obscure that the book is a centrally located, circumscribed collection of divine instructions through Mōysēs to Israel, delivered in the period of one month at Mount Seina. Although it is discrete within the Pentateuch, this composition is part of the continuum of the Lord’s discourses to Mōysēs from Seina. The implied narrator introduces Leueitikon’s discursive framework that is both syntactically and thematically dependent upon the preceding narrative: καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου λέγων Then he called Mōysēs, and the Lord spoke to him from (inside) the Tent of Testimony, saying, Leu 1:1

This superscription may function as a static introduction to the Leueitikon speeches, succinctly presenting the primary characters, stationing them geographically, and supplying “data that are not bound to a specific moment in

49

introduction table 2

The chronological markers in the Seina pericope

Exod 19:1–2 τοῦ δὲ μηνὸς τοῦ τρίτου τῆς ἐξόδου τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ

Exod 40:15

καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ πρώτῳ τῷ δευτέρῷ ἔτει ἐκπορευομένων αὐτῶν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου νουμηνίᾳ,

Leu 1:1

No temporal marker

ἐστάθη ἡ σκηνή· ἤλθοσαν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον τοῦ Σεινά … κατέναντι τοῦ ὄρους (Σινα: Bb; Σινα: A, F) 3rd month of the [1st year of the] exodus

Arrival at Mount Seina in the wilderness of Seina

(= MT 40:17 > ‫)ממצרים‬

1st day of the 1st month of the 2nd year of the exodus

Erection of the Tent at Mount Seina

καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου λέγων

[1st month of the 2nd year]

Num 1:1

ἐν μιᾷ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ δευτέρου ἔτους δευτέρου ἐξελθόντων αὐτῶν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, λέγων

Num 10:11–12 Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἐνιαυτῷ τῷ δευτέρῳ ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ δευτέρῳ εἰκάδι τοῦ μηνὸς …

καὶ ἐξῆραν οἱ υἱοὶ καὶ ἐλάλησεν Ἰσραὴλ σὺν ἀπαρΚύριος πρὸς Μωυ- τίαις αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ σῆν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἐρήμῳ Σεινά τῇ Σεινά, ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου,

1st day of the 2nd month of the 2nd year of the exodus

Instructions to Instructions to Mōysēs in the Mōysēs from Wilderness of inside the Tent at Seina in the Tent Mount Seina

20th day of the 2nd month of the 2nd year of the exodus

Departure from Mount Seina in the wilderness of Seina

Adapted from Nihan 2007: 74

time: they are facts that stand before the time of the story proper” (Alter 1981: 80). The implied subject of ἀνεκάλεσεν is κύριος found throughout Exod 40:1–30 when he delivers his orders to Mōysēs to erect and consecrate the tabernacle, consecrate its functionaries and install its accoutrements. The LXX is more

50

introduction

awkward than the Heb. as κύριος, the subject of ἀνεκάλεσεν, occurs in δόξης Κυρίου in v. 29, but ‫ ענן יהוה‬appears immediately before Lev 1:1a in Exod 40:38 (= Gött/Swete 40:32; no extant Q ms]). Leueitikon 1:1b–c is syntagmatically identical to Exod 40:1 (καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν [αὐτῷ] λέγων), forging a seamless continuity between these discourses, but Leu 1:1 adds that the Lord called and spoke to Mōysēs “from the Tent of Testimony” (ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου). This flags an important and often elusive motif in the Seina pericope, namely, the location of the Lord in relation to his sacred space and his people. In Exod 40:29, Mōysēs cannot enter the Tent of Testimony because the cloud “overshadowed” the Tent (ἐπεσκίαζεν ἐπ’ αὐτὴν; Heb. ‫שׁכן‬ ‫“ עליו‬settled on it” [MT = 40:35]) and “the Tent was filled with the glory of the Lord” (δόξης κυρίου ἐπλήσθη ἡ σκηνή; cf. Heb. active voice ‫וכבוד יהוה מלא‬ ‫)את־המשׁכן‬. This distance between the Lord and Mōysēs is surprising in light of the unmediated and exceptional relationship between the same parties in ExodusLXX 19–24 and 32–34.

∵ Excursus: Mōysēs-Lord relationship In Exod 19:20, Mōysēs ascended to the top of Mount Seina where the Lord had descended in a gloomy cloud (cf. νεφέλη γνοφώδης in Exod 19:16; ἡ νεφέλη in 40:28–29 [= MT 40:34–35]) and smoke (Exod 19:18). After Mōysēs relayed the Decalogue (πάντας τοὺς λόγους τούτους, Exod 20:1) and the “Book of the Treaty (Covenant)” (τὸ βιβλίον τῆς διαθήκης, Exod 24:7; LEH § 2106 “treaty, covenant”; GELS, p. 150, “(1) compact, treaty … (2) covenant”) from the Lord to the people, Mōysēs then resided with the Lord for forty days and nights in the midst of the cloud (τὸ μέσον τῆς νεφέλης, Exod 24:18, see vv. 15–18). Following Israel’s molten calf apostasy (ExodusLXX 32), when Mōysēs entered the Tent, the pillar of cloud (ὁ στῦλος τῆς νεφέλης, Exod 33:9) would descend and stand at the door of the Tent, and the Lord (κύριος, implicit in 33:9; explicit in 33:11) spoke to Mōysēs. At this juncture, the stone tablets and the treaty they represented remained in shambles (Exod 32:19–34:3), and an editor, or in narrative critical terms, the implied narrator, contrasts this fractured relationship with the unparalleled Lord-Mōysēs relationship, “Thus the Lord spoke to Mōysēs in his presence, as someone speaks to his friend” (καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν ἐνώπιος ἐνωπίῳ ὡς εἴ τις λαλήσει πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ φίλον, Exod 33:11) (for ἐνώπιος ἐνωπίῳ as “in his presence,” see Exod 25:29 [= MT 25:30]). After Mōysēs cuts new covenant stones, and the Lord announces that he will enter another covenant

51

introduction

with Israel (Exod 34:1–4), the Lord descends again onto Mount Seina in a cloud and stands with Mōysēs there (κατέβη κύριος ἐν νεφέλῃ καὶ παρέστη αὐτῷ ἐκεῖ, Exod 34:5; αὐτῷ functions as a dative of association “with the Lord,” and ἐκεῖ refers back to “in the cloud”). Then the Lord proclaims his name, his character, to Mōysēs, imparts the so-called ritual Decalogue (Exod 34:11–26), and establishes a second covenant (Exod 34:27–28). Ensuing from this unmediated interface between the Lord and Mōysēs, the implied narrator goes to lengths to explain the “outward appearance of the complexion of his [Mōysēs] face was magnified” (δεδόξασται ἡ ὄψις τοῦ χρώματος τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ, Exod 34:29, see vv. 29–35).

∵ Prior to, during, and after the Israelites broke the Lord’s covenant (ExodusLXX 32), the Mōysēs-Lord relationship does not prepare readers for the surprises of Exod 40:29 and Leu 1:1. Mōysēs was accustomed to entering the Tent upon which the divine cloud descended and stood (accustomed to is indicated by the adverb ὡς + modal particle ἂν “whenever”—ὡς δ’ ἂν εἰσῆλθεν Μωυσῆς εἰς τὴν σκηνήν, Exod 33:9[–11]), but now he is inhibited from entering the Tent precisely because of (ὅτι) the divine presence in the cloud (οὐκ ἠδυνάσθη Μωυσῆς εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου, Exod 40:29). Mōysēs formerly spoke with the Lord without geographical distance (ἐνώπιος ἐνωπίῳ ὡς εἴ τις λαλήσει πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ φίλον “in his presence, as someone speaks to his friend,” Exod 33:11), but now Mōysēs is positioned outside the Tent, and the Lord speaks to him from inside the Tent (ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, Leu 1:1). In the book of Leueitikon, the Lord incrementally breaks down this distance between himself and his people in the midst of whose camp he resides: the Lord reinitiates communication with Mōysēs, albeit from inside the Tent (1:1); all the people see “the glory of the Lord” (ἡ δόξα Κυρίου; 9:23); Aarōn enters the most holy place (16:3, 12–13, 34); and the Lord promises to walk among Israel, which is reminiscent of the Edenic divine-human relationship (cf. ἐνπεριπατήσω ἐν ὑμῖν [26:12]; περιπατοῦντος ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ [Gen 3:8]) (see Nihan 2007: 90–92, 108–110; other textual evidence, especially throughout Exodus, supports the understanding of an original composition of a Genesis 1–Leviticus 26: Tucker 2017). 10.2 Continuity and Discontinuity with Other Legal Materials It has been shown that the Alexandrian Jewish translators of the PentateuchLXX borrowed freely from pagan religious vocabulary in order to contextualize the archaic Israelite cult for the contemporary worship of God in the Jewish religion (Daniel 1966; Chamberlain 1994: 21–28; Vahrenhorst 2006: 117–135). While

52

introduction

the cultic terminology of LevLXX invited its original audience to read culturally in light of their Greco-Roman religious context, the same cultic nomenclature would have later invited LeuB users to read intertextually with the preceding ExodusB 19–40 Sinai materials, and existentially, intersecting the now centuries-removed Greek renderings of the Israelite cult with their own convictions and experiences informed by the NTB. Throughout the commentary, I call attention to the synchronic intertextuality between the cultic intertexts shared by LevLXX/LeuB and the PentLXX/PentB (for the present study of a single Greek ms, Eslinger’s description of inner-biblical exegesis as ahistorical and self-referential is useful: 1992: 47–58). The present study exposes some of the countless layers of continuity and discontinuity between the laws, casuistic and apodictic, and rituals of the PentLXX/PentB with those of LevLXX/LeuB. Initially, readers will notice several threads of continuity. For example, the clean-unclean and sacred-profane/common antitheses function as Leitmotive in LeuB, but recur throughout the Pentateuch: καθαρός “clean, pure” (Gen 7–8; Numbers 5, 8[and shared semantic domain: ἀφαγνίζω; ἁγνισμός], 9, 18, 19[and ἀφαγνίζω], 31[cognate καθαρίζω]; Deuteronomy 12, 14, 15); ἀκάθαρτος “impure, unclean” (Numbers 5, 9, 18, 19[and ἀκαθαρσία; ἀφαγνίζω]; Deuteronomy 12, 14, 15, 23[οὐκ ἔσται καθαρὸς], 26); ἁγιάζω “to make sacred” (GenesisLXX 2, but from a 15th century scribal supplement to B; ExodusLXX 20, 29; NumbersLXX 5[sub. pass. part. τὰ ἡγιασμένα], 17, 18, 20, 27; Deuteronomy 5, 32, 33[sub. pass. part.]); ἅγιος “sacred, holy” (ExodusLXX 3, 12, 15, 16, 19, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36[other versions ch. 39], 37, 40; Numbers 4, 6, 7, 10, 15, 16, 18, 28, 29, 35; Deuteronomy 7, 12, 14, 23, 26, 28 [32:51 and 33:21 transliterate ‫ קדשׁ‬as Καδης]); ἁγίασμα “holy object, holiness” (ExodusLXX 29, 30); βεβηλόω “to profane” (ExodusLXX 31[sub. part.]; Numbers 18, 25, 30) and μιαίνω “to taint, defile” (Genesis 34, 49; ExodusLXX 20, Numbers 5, 6, 19, 35; Deuteronomy 21, 24). This is not an exhaustive reference list, and a host of other legal motifs could be cited, but we would be remiss to not review the recurrence of B’s sacrificial nomenclature in Leueitikon and throughout the Hexateuch. Table 3 (below) follows B’s versification without noting discrepancies with other verse systems. This survey indicates that the sacrificial language of LeviticusLXX, specifically LeuB, generally stands in continuity with other Hexateuchal texts. One, every book of the Hexateuch employs the hypernym θυσία to represent a plurality of particular Hebrew sacrifices (‫עלה‬, ‫אשׁה‬, et al.). Genesis Bc and other LXX mss follow this usage, although the leaves of GenB* are lost. Two, the opposite phenomenon is equally apparent, as the translators of ExodusLXX through JoshuaLXX employ multiple Greek terms to represent, or interpret, one particular Hebrew sacrifice (i.e., ὁλοκαύτωμα, κάρπωμα, ὁλοκάρπωσις for ‫)עלה‬. Three,

53

introduction table 3

A selection of lexemes for sacrifice-offering in the Hexateuch

Lemma

Genesis–Joshua

Leueitikon

ὁλοκαύτωμα “whole burnt offering”

Exod 10:25; 18:12; 20:24; 24:5; 29:18; 30:20, 28; 32:6 Num 6:11, 16; 7:15, 21, 27, 33, 39, 45, 51, 57, 63, 69, 75, 81; 8:12; 10:10; 15:3, 6, 8, 24; 23:6; 28:6, 10–11, 14, 19, 23–24, 27, 31; 29:2, 6, 8, 13, 36, 39 Deut 12:6, 11, 13–14, 27; 27:6 Josh 9:4; 22:23

Leu 1:3, 6, 10; 3:2, 5; 4:7, 24–25, 29– 30, 33, 35; 5:7, 10, 12; 6:25, 32, 38; 7:27; 8:18, 21, 28; 9:2, 7, 12–14, 16–17, 22, 24; 10:19; 12:6, 8; 14:13, 19–20, 22, 31; 15:15, 30; 16:3, 5; 17:4, 8; 22:18; 23:8, 12, 18, 25, 27, 36–37

κάρπωμα “burnt offering”

Exod 29:25, 38, 41; 30:9; 40:6, 8, 26 Num 15:5, 10, 13–14, 25; 18:9, 17; 28:2–3, 13, 19, 24; 29:8, 11, 13, 36 Deut 18:1 Josh 22:26–29

Leu 1:4, 9, 13–14, 17; 2:9–10, 16; 3:3, 5, 9, 11, 14, 16; 6:15, 17–18, 35 7:15, 20, 25; 8:21, 28; 10:12–13, 15; 22:27; 23:37

ὁλοκάρπωσις “whole burnt offering, sacrifice”

Gen 8:20; 22:2–3, 6–8, 13

Leu 9:3

*Above 3 lemmas for MT: ‫עלה‬ “sacrifice which is wholly burned” θυσία “sacrifice, offering”

Gen (Bc) 4:3; 31:54; 46:1 Exod 10:25; 12:27; 18:12; 29:34, 41– 42; 30:9 *The hyponym θυσία is selected Num 4:16; 5:25; 6:15, 17; 7:13, 19, 25, to represent various, particular 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, sacrifices in MT: ‫[“ מנחה‬food] 87; 15:3–6, 8, 24; 16:15; 23:3 (2× offering” [typically grain or meat]; in LXX; 1× in MT), 15; 25:2 (2× ‫“ עלה‬whole burnt offering”; ‫זבח‬ in LXX; 1× in MT); 28:5, 8, 9 (ἐν “sacrifice”; ‫“ אשׁה‬offering made ἐλαίῳ εἰς θυσίαν), 13, 20, 26, 28, by fire”; ‫“ מלאים‬consecration”; ‫איל‬ 31; 29:6, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18–19, 21– “ram”; ‫“ )ב(שׁמן‬oil, fat” (as ἐν ἐλαίῳ 22, 24–25, 27–28, 30–31, 33–34, εἰς θυσίαν) 37–39 Deut 32:38 Josh 22:26–27, 28, 29 (ταῖς θυσίαις σαλαμιν)

Leu 1:9, 13, 17; 2:1(2×), 2, 3(2×), 4– 11, 13, 15; 6:7–8, 13, 14(2×), 15; 6:39–40; 7:6–7, 27; 9:17; 10:12; 14:20–21, 31; 17:5, 7–8; 21:6, 21; 22:29; 23:13(2×), 16, 18(2×), 37; 26:31

θυσία τῆς σεμιδάλεως “offering of the finest wheaten flour”

Leu 5:13; 6:15 (τῆς σεμιδάλεως τῆς θυσίας)

Num 8:8; 15:6, 9; 29:3 (ἡ θυσία αὐτῶν σεμίδαλις)

54 Table 3

introduction A selection of lexemes for sacrifice-offering in the Hexateuch (cont.)

Lemma

Genesis–Joshua

Leueitikon

θυσία (τοῦ) σωτηρίου “deliverance sacrifice” (cf. MT: ‫“ זבח שׁלמים‬sacrifice of peace”)

Exod 24:5; 32:6 Num 6:14 (ἄμωμον εἰς σωτήριον), 17–18; 7:17, 23, 29, 35, 41, 47, 53, 59, 65, 71, 77, 83, 88; 10:10 Deut 27:7 Josh 9:4; 22:23, 27, 29

Leu 3:1, 3, 6, 9; 4:10, 26, 31, 35; 6:12 (στέαρ τοῦ σωτηρίου); 7:1, 3 (θυσίᾳ αἰνέσεως σωτηρίου), 4 (αἷμα τοῦ σωτηρίου), 5 (θυσίας αἰνέσεως σωτηρίου), 10–11, 19(2×), 22, 23 (τὸ αἷμα τοῦ σωτηρίου), 24, 27; 9:4, 18, 22 (τὰ τοῦ σωτηρίου); 10:14; 17:5; 19:5; 22:21; 23:19

*Attested only in Numbers are θυσία ζηλοτυπίας “jealousy offering” (5:15, 18, 25) and “memorial offering” θυσία μνημοσύνου (5:15, 18, 26). *Attested only Deut 33:19 is θυσία δικαιοσύνης “sacrifice of righteousness” *Attested only in Josh 22:23 is θυσία ὁλοκαυτωμάτων “sacrifice of whole burnt offerings”

*Attested only in Leueitikon are θυσία (τῶν) πρωτογενημάτων “offering of (the) first fruits” (2:14[2×]); θυσία (τῆς) αἰνέσεως “offering of praise” (7:12); “offering mixed with oil” θυσίαν πεφυραμένης ἐν ἐλαίῳ (14:10).

Exod 29:14, 36; Num 18:9

Leu 4:8, 20–21, 24–25, 33–34; 5:9, 12; 6:17, 25; 7:27; 8:14

(τῆς) ἁμαρτία(ς) “(of the) sin, sin-offering” τοῦ ἁμαρτήματος αὐτοῦ “… of his sin, sin offering”

Leu 4:29

εἰς ἁμαρτίαν “in regard to, for sin”

Num 6:14

Leu 4:32

περὶ (τῆς) ἁμαρτίας (αὐτοῦ) “for (his) sin”

Num 6:11, 16; 7:16, 22, 28, 34, 40, 46, 52, 58, 64, 70, 76, 82, 87; 8:8, 12; 15:24–25, 27; 28:15, 22; 29:5, 11(2×), 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 38

Leu 4:3, 14; 5:6–9, 11(2×); 6:25, 30; 6:37, 27; 8:2, 14; 9:2–3, 7– 8, 10, 15, 22; 10:16–17, 19; 12:6, 8; 14:13(2×), 19, 22, 31; 15:15, 30; 16:3, 5–6, 9, 11(2×), 15, 25, 27(2×); 23:19

*MT: ‫[“ ]ל[חטאת‬as an] expiation, sin-offering”

*ἁγνισμός (Num 6:5; 8:7; 19:9, 17) “purification, expiation” and B’s lectio brevior (ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος) τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ “(from the blood) of the cleansing” (cf. LXX: καθαρισμοῦ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν “of the cleansing of sin” Exod 30:10) (all for ‫ )חטאת‬are unattested in Leueitikon

55

introduction Table 3

A selection of lexemes for sacrifice-offering in the Hexateuch (cont.)

Lemma

Genesis–Joshua

Leueitikon

πλημμέλεια “offering for sin or error” (LEH §7258)

Num 6:12; 18:9

Leu 5:16, 18; 6:17, 32, 37; 7:27; 14:12– 14, 17, 24, 25(2×), 28; 19:21(2×), 22

*MT: ‫“ אשׁם‬guilt-offering”

*Attested only in Leueitikon are (περὶ οὗ / εἰς ὃ) ἐπλημμέλησεν “(concerning that which / into which) he offended” (5:15, 19; 6:6; 14:21) and περὶ τῆς πλημμελείας “concerning the offering for sin or error” (6:31, 35)

the same five books repeatedly, but not always, translate ‫“ זבה שלםים‬peace offering” as θυσία τοῦ σωτηρίου “sacrifice(s) of deliverance” (possibly LevLXX was content to follow the ExodLXX translator in spite of pagan, Alexandrian cultic associations, see Büchner 2010b: 101–102). This common nomenclature generates a rudimentary continuity between Leueitikon and other legal materials in the Hexateuch, but careful observers will also detect important points of discontinuity. For instance, the stereotypical language and ideology of Leueitikon (i.e., one standard for the προσήλυτος “immigrant” and αὐτόχθων/ἐγχώριος/ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ “native”), as well as the extent of Leueitikon’s discourse on certain topics (i.e., discriminating the sacrifices, clean vs. unclean, holy vs. common) contrast with the Pentateuch’s other legal corpora. The sources used in the composition and redaction of the Heb. Leviticus may be felt in certain isotopic LXX renderings, although it is hard to identify where the LXX scribes may have attempted to smoothen out original source-critical problems (see Müller and Pakkala 2017). Furthermore, the laws of Exodus 25–40 and Numbers 1–10 were to be observed and fulfilled one time only, whereas, by contrast, Leviticus “»festen« baulichen und organisatorischen Institutionen des Jhwh-Volkes die Sammlungen der Regeln und Gebote für das Handeln und Leben in diesen Institutionen umschließt” (Blum 1990: 302). Contrary to popular opinion and to the laws of Leviticus, Exodus 25–40 contains no laws relating to cultic rituals (Blum 1990: 301). Instead, Exodus 25–40 prescribes and then fulfills the construction and consecration of the tent of testimony (LXX), its furnishings and its priesthood. Numbers 1–10 furthers these instructions by enumerating and ordering the 12 tribes around the newly constructed tent, with instructions for the priesthood for transporting the furnishings, which recalls Exodus 25–40 (esp. 40:28–32) and prepares

56

introduction

readers thematically for the wilderness wanderings. The Pentateuch, in Codex B, which characteristically does not significantly transform the basic subject matter or structure of its Vorlagen, maintains this distinction between the instructions of LeviticusB and ExodosB 25–40/Numbers 1–10. LeuB is both integrated into and discrete from the Seina pericope and the Pentateuch to which it belongs.

11

Internal Structure

11.1 Problems with a Bipartite Structure A bipartite organization of chs. 1–16 and chs. 17–26 is implausible for the Hebrew text and the LXX, and specifically in our purview, LeuB. Leviticus 1–16 arguably belongs to the Pentateuch’s P(riestly) materials, but scholars disagree if chs. 17–26 was a H(oliness) composition (Knohl 1995), a supplement in a “Tritoteuch” until a connection with Deuteronomy was established through the book of Numbers (Otto 2008b: 366), or a Pentateuch redaction into a preceding Hexateuch (Otto 1994; Achenbach 2008). The ideations of chs. 17–26 (H) are distinct from those of chs. 1–16 (P), for example: H uses anthropomorphisms whereas P avoids them; H includes prayer and song in worship whereas P excludes the same; and after Exodus 6:2–3, P employs various names for God whereas H uses the name Yhwh exclusively (Knohl 1995, repr. 2007: 124– 198). Holiness in chs. 17–26 extends beyond the temple and priesthood (chs. 1–16) to the people and land (chs. 19–26; Lev 11:43–45 probably belongs to H: Milgrom 1991: 62, 691–698; Knohl 1995: 69). Two ideologies, however, do not necessitate that we read Leviticus in two parts, as Baruch Levine believes we should: “This, then, is how the book is organized. Part One (chaps. 1–16) is addressed to the priesthood and concerns cultic officiation and purity. This section represents tôrâ for priests. Part Two (chaps. 17–27) represents tôrâ of, or by the priests, addressed to the people of Israel, and commanding the pursuit of holiness as the collective goal of religious life” (1992: 312; similarly 1989: xvi). While this statement is intended to be a summary, any such bipartite organization has to downplay important exceptions (informal fallacy of accident). First, chapters 1–16 also address a tôrâ to and for the people of Israel seven times explicitly (1:2; 4:2; 7:13, 19; 11:1; 12:2; 15:1), and perhaps twice implicitly (5:14; 6:1). Instructing a non-priestly audience begins at the outset of LeuB: Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐὰν προσαγάγῃ δῶρα τῷ κυρίῳ “[Mōysēs] speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, if a man among you presents a gift to the Lord” (Leu 1:1d–f). The people participate in sacrifi-

introduction

57

cial rituals (chs. 1–7) and are integral in the narrative of the inauguration and death of Aarōn’s sons (ὁ λαὸς occurs 4× in 9:22–24; ἐν πάσῃ τῇ συναγωγῇ δοξασθήσομαι “among the entire synagogue I will be glorified” [10:3]). It is incumbent on the people to delineate clean and unclean foods (ch. 11), observe childbirth purification and bodily emission purification rituals (chs. 12 and 15, respectively; even as the priest atones for new mothers in 12:8). Even the sections addressed to the priests have direct bearing upon the people of Israel: identifying and purifying skin, garment and house diseases (chs. 14–15); and especially Day of Propitiation: ἐν γὰρ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ἐξιλάσεται περὶ ὑμῶν καθαρίσαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ καθαρισθήσεσθε “For on this day, atonement will be made for you to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord” (16:30). Second, chapters 17–26(27) entail tôrâ not only for the people, but for the priests, which is also lucid in LeuB from the opening superscription: Λάλησον πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸς πάντας υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “[Mōysēs] Speak to Aarōn, his sons, and all the sons of Israel, and say to them” (17:2a–b; so also 22:17). The Lord commands Mōysēs to address Aarōn and sons in 21:1a–c and 22:1–2a, and Aarōn alone in 21:16. Chapter 21– 22’s priestly legislation complements the legislation and narrative of chs. 8–10. The priests would have been keenly interested in the designation of the place of sacrifice (17:2c–9), impurities for which they had to atone (19:22), their special functions at the festivals (see 23:10, 11, 20), and their prerogative to consume the bread in the holy place (24:2–9; the priestly audience in LeuB and the LXX witnesses includes Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ “Aarōn and his sons” in 24:3, probably interpreting proto-MT’s ‫“ אהרן‬Aaron” as a synecdoche; cf. ‫ לאהרן ולבניו‬in 24:9). Third, the conventional source-critical distinction between chs. 16 and 17 has probably been obscured by a unifying redaction (Zenger 1999: 65–76; Jürgens 2001: 180–186; see Narrative Macro-Structure). Fourth, the motif of holiness is by no means exclusive to chs. 17–26, and as Rolf Rendtorff (1996: 31–32) has observed it first occurs not in the opening two chapters, but in 19:2 (but first in 11:43–45!, see Knohl 1995, repr. 2007: 69). In sum, instead of superimposing a bipartite structure, we should follow Joosten’s conclusion that although the Holiness collection stems from a historical context foreign to its present literary context, it “certainly presents itself as a piece of literature, integrated—though loosely so—in a narrative” (Joosten 1996: 26). 11.2 Narrative and Dialogical Organization Christophe Nihan concludes that “the book’s coherence is ultimately given by its narrative structure, and for this reason the attempt to organize all Leviticus

58

introduction

on the basis of divine speeches is bound to fail” (Nihan 2007: 89; italics Nihan; quoted by Otto [2008: 367–368]). In agreement, Otto (2008: 368) explains that the superscripts and postscripts introducing the divine speeches in Leviticus are not structurally relevant; that is, they don’t enhance the fundamental narratival framework, but instead relate to the larger system of inscription notices of divine speeches throughout the Pentateuch: “Damit verkennt der Verf. die Bedeutung und Funktion des Systems von Uber- und Unterschriften im Narrativ des Pentateuch, das nicht der Narrativieruug der Gottesreden durch einen ‚Buchautor‘ dient, sondern mit den Verschriftungsnotizen Teil eines Systems zur rechtshermeneutischen Differenzierung der Gesetzesoffenbarungen im Pentateuch.” This conclusion is essentially correct, yet we cannot avoid the reality that the narration, narratives, stereotypical and unique (or primary) inscriptions are equally presented as the voice of a third-person implied narrator and, therefore, must all contribute in some manner to the Leviticus and Pentateuch narratives. Consequently, it may be more precise to say that the narrative framework—consisting of narration, short narratives and divine speech inscriptions—function together to organize the macro-structure of the book, which also advances the larger Pentateuchal storyline, while the divine speech inscriptions themeselves organize the micro-structure of the book by distinguishing subject matters and continuing the sequence of divine speeches at Mount Seina (see 3. Primary Inscriptions?). To say that the book betrays not only a narrative structure, but a dialogical substructure does not require that substructure to always be intelligible to its earliest Heb. or LXX readers, and certainly not to us today. Indeed, the substructure at times appears to be arbitrary or illogical. To validate its existence, however, we must be able to discern that the Heb. redactors, followed by the Greek witnesses, attempted to position and select the language of the divine speech inscriptions to generate a substructure. Although their attempt is sufficiently clear, their level of success will vacillate throughout the composition. 11.3 Dialogical (Divine-Speech) Micro-Structure The implied narrator has formed the substructure of Leviticus by two techniques: superscription and subscription (1) placement and (2) design. Superscription placement in the Heb. text is reproduced mechanistically in LeuB, whereas superscription design varies in both the Heb. Vorlage(n) and LeuB depending on the subject matter it introduces or summarizes. In Table 4 (below), the superscriptions proper are followed by the opening words of the divine speech that are italicized to assist in comparing the different addressees. This table does not list in detail the specific subject matter of every paragraph original to LeuB, but rather collects the paragraphs by their primary topoi. For

introduction table 4 1:1–2b

1:2c–17 2:1–16 3:1–17 4:1–2b

4:2c–5:13 5:14 5:15–19 6:1 (MT 5:20) 6:2–7 (MT 5:21–26) 6:8–9a (MT 6:1–2a)

6:9b–13 (MT 6:2b–6) 6:14–18 (MT 6:7–11) 6:19 (MT 6:12) 6:20–23 (MT 6:13–16) 6:24–25b (MT 6:17–18b)

6:25c–30 (MT 6:18c–23) 6:31–40 (MT 7:1–10) 7:1–11 (MT 7:11–21) 7:12–13a (MT 7:22–23b)

59

Superscriptions, subscriptions, addressees and primary subject matter Καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then he called Mōysēs, and the Lord spoke to him out of the Tent of Testimony, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Whole burnt offerings Fine flour offerings Deliverance sacrifice Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying,’” Sin offerings Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Sinful error offerings Καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Sinful error offerings Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Ἔντειλαι Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Command Aarōn and his sons, saying,’ ” Whole burnt offering clarifications Fine flour offering clarifications Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Aarōnid’s fine flour offering Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to Aarōn and his sons, saying,’ ” Sin offering clarifications Sinful error offering clarifications Deliverance sacrifice clarifications Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel:’”

60 Table 4 7:13b–17 (MT 7:23c–27) 7:18–19b (MT 7:28–29b)

7:19c–26 (MT 7:29c–36) 7:27–28 (MT 7:37–38) 8:1 8:2–10:7 10:8 10:9–20 11:1

11:2–45 11:46–47 12:1–2b

12:2–8 13:1 13:2–59 14:1 14:2–32 14:33 14:34–53 14:54–57 15:1–2b

15:2–31 15:32–33

introduction Superscriptions, subscriptions, addressees and primary subject matter (cont.) Prohibition of eating hard fat or blood Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λαλήσεις λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘And to the sons of Israel you must speak, saying:’ ” Deliverance offering Subscription: Sacrifices at Mount Seina (1:2c–7:26) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Priestly ‘fulfillment’, propitiation sacrifices, theophany, strange fire Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος τῷ Ἀαρὼν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Aarōn, saying,” Priestly instructions and narrative ensuing from 8:1–10:7 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων Λαλήσατε τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγοντες “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying:’” Clean and unclean animal consumption Subscription: Animal consumption (11:2–45) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Childbirth purification Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying,” Skin disease identification Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Skin disease purification Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying,” House disease identification and purification Subscription: Disease instructions (13:2–14:53) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων καὶ Ἀαρών Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς αὐτοῖς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Now Aarōn, speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Bodily discharge purification Subscription: bodily discharge purification (5:2–31)

introduction Table 4 16:1–2b

16:2c–34 17:1–2b

17:2c–9 17:10–16 18:1–2b

18:2c–30 19:1–2b

19:2c–37 20:1–2a

20:2b–27 21:1a–c

21:1d–15 21:16

21:17–23 21:24 22:1–2a

22:2b–16

61

Superscriptions, subscriptions, addressees and primary subject matter (cont.) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐτελεύτησαν· καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν Λάλησον πρὸς Ἀαρὼν τὸν ἀδελφόν σου “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs after the death of the two sons of Aarōn when they offered strange fire before the Lord, and they died. So the Lord said to Mōysēs, ‘Speak to Aarōn, your brother:’” Day of Propitiation Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸς πάντας υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to Aarōn, his sons, and all the sons of Israel, and say to them:’ ” Designation of the place of sacrifice Prohibition of eating blood Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, and say to them:’ ” Defiling moral behavior Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τῇ συναγωγῇ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the congregation of the sons of Israel, and say to them:’ ” Ethical holiness Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λαλήσεις “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘And to the sons of Israel you must speak:’ ” Severe holiness violations Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰπὸν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἀαρὼν καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Say to the priests, the sons of Aarōn, and say to them:’ ” Priestly holiness Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰπὸν Ἀαρών “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Say to Aarōn:’” Priestly holiness Subscription: Propitiation and holiness (17:2c–21:23? See // with 17:1–2b) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰπὸν Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Say to Aarōn and his sons:’” Priestly holiness

62 Table 4 22:17–18b

22:18–25 22:26 22:27–30 22:31–33 23:1–2b

23:2c–8 23:9–10b

23:10c–22 23:23–24b

23:24c–25 23:26 23:27–32 23:33–34b

23:34c–36 23:37–38 23:39–43 23:44 24:1 24:2–4 24:5–9 24:10–12 24:13 24:14–23

introduction Superscriptions, subscriptions, addressees and primary subject matter (cont.) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ πάσῃ συναγωγῇ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to Aarōn, his sons, and the entire congregation of Israel, and say to them:’” Acceptable offerings Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Acceptable offerings Subscription: Acceptable offerings (22:2b–30 or 22:18–30?) Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Festival Offerings: Introduction, Sabbath and Passover Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰπὸν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Festival Offerings: First Fruits and Weeks Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying:’” Festival Offerings: Trumpets Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Festival Offerings: Day of Propitiation Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying:’” Festival Offerings: Booths Subscription: Festival offerings (23:2c–36) Festival Offerings: Booths Subscription: Festival offerings (23:2c–43 or 23:39–43?) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Tent of Testimony: Lamps Tent of Testimony: Bread Blasphemy narrative Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying,” Blasphemy instructions and narrative resumption

introduction Table 4

Superscriptions, subscriptions, addressees and primary subject matter (cont.)

25:1–2b

25:2c–7 25:8–22 25:23–34 25:35–46 25:47–55 26:1–13 (26:1 = MT 25:55c) 26:14–44 26:45 26:46 27:1–2b

27:2c–33 27:34

63

Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs on Mount Seina, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Sabbath year Release year Land of Chanaan: Redeeming property Land of Chanaan: Generosity to poor native Israelites Land of Chanaan: Redeeming poor native Israelites Covenant blessings for obedience

Covenant curses for disobedience Covenant remembrance by the Lord Subscription: Instructions at Seina (1:2c–26:45) Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς αὐτοῖς “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them:’ ” Votive Offerings in light of Release Year Subscription: Instructions at Seina (Exod 20:22-Leu 27:33 or 1:2c–27:33)

example, 1:2c–17 “Whole burnt offerings” is comprised of LeuB’s original paragraphs of 1:1–9 (whole burnt offering of a bull); 1:10–13 (whole burnt offering from the flock); and 1:14–17 (whole burnt offering from the birds) (see commentary). 11.3.1 Inscriptional Placement The divine speech superscriptions are normally coherent in their placement because they: typically introduce content with a new subject or subset of a subject (i.e., 13:1 for skin disease identification [13:2–59]; 14:1 for skin disease purification [14:2–32]; 14:33 for house disease identification and purification [14:34– 53]); nearly always follow immediately after the book’s subscriptions (7:27– 28→8:1; 11:46–47→12:1–2b; 14:54–57→15:1; 15:32–33→16:1–2b; 21:24→22:1–2a; 22:31– 33→23:1–2b; 23:44→24:1; 26:46→27:1–2b; likewise, 27:34→Num 1:1; one exception: subscription Leu 23:37–38); always introduce the Lord’s verbal response to narrative suspense (10:8 in response to Nadab and Abiud’s death [LXX orth.] [10:1– 7 or 8:2–10:7]; 24:13 in response to blasphemy [24:10–12]); always introduce the book’s probable divisions: 1:1–2b (before chs. 1–7); 8:1 (before chs. 8–10); 11:1 (before chs. 11–15); 16:1–2b (before chs. 16–17); 18:1–2b (before chs. 18–20); 21:1a–

64

introduction

c (before chs. 21–22); and 23:1–2b (before chs. 23–26) (see Narrative MacroStructure). This is also true on a redactional level as superscriptions commence P (1:1–2b), the HC (17:1–2b) and P’s addendum (27:1–2b). Sometimes, however, the superscriptions are incoherent as they bifurcate the preceding from the following materials for no convincing reason: the 6:1 superscription splits the error offering instructions into two sections (πλημμέλεια: 5:15–19; 6:2–7); the 6:19 superscription splits the (grain) offering into two sections (θυσία: 6:14–18; 6:20–23); the prohibition of eating fat (of a potential food offering) (7:13b–17) and the 7:18–19b superscription interrupts the deliverance sacrifice (θυσία [τοῦ] σωτηρίου: 7:1–11; 7:19c–26); the 21:1a–c superscription would have been sufficient to introduce priestly holiness (21:1d–22:16) without the intervening superscriptions at 21:16 and 22:1–2a; the 22:26 superscription splits the acceptable offerings into two sections (22:18–25; 22:27–30). In addition, it remains elusive why some superscriptions assemble together different subjects: the 1:1–2b and 4:1–2b superscriptions demarcate the whole burnt, grain, and deliverance sacrifices (1:2c–3:17) from the sin and error offerings (4:2c–5:13; 5:15–19; 6:2–7), whereas the 6:24–25b and 7:12–13a superscriptions collate the sin, guilt and deliverance sacrifices (6:25c–30; 6:31–40; 7:1–11); the 6:8–9b and 6:19 superscriptions collate the whole burnt and grain offerings (6:9c–18), but exclude the deliverance sacrifice (contra 1:2c–3:17); and finally, we would expect a superscription to introduce the treaty form of the blessings and curses in ch. 26, but instead the 25:1–2b and 27:1–2b superscriptions collate the Sabbath and ‘signal’ release (Heb. ‘Jubilee’) year instructions (ch. 25) with the covenant blessings and curses (ch. 26). Although additional subscriptions would have been more consistent since those present do not appear to summarize all the book’s sections (i.e., chs. 10, 17–19[?], 25), their placement, excepting 23:37–38 which bifurcates the festival instructions, evinces an intentionality by the Heb. redactors that is conveyed in LeuB and other Greek manuscripts. 11.3.2 Inscriptional Design The superscriptions are designed to introduce the content that follows by identifying an intermediary messenger (Mōysēs, Aarōn, or both) and a primary audience (sons of Israel, Aarōn and his sons, et al.) or no audience. No stated audience may imply that the audience is the intermediary alone or the community at large. We deduce that fluctuations in design are deliberate for two reasons: first, the Heb. redactor, followed by the Greek translator, could have exclusively reused the stereotype throughout: Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Λάλησον πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying,’”; two, the superscription designs

introduction

65

often, but not always, correlate with the nature of the subsequent instructions (see commentary). The book’s ten subscriptions summarize the subject matter of a prior unit (with one superscription) or multiple units (with more than one superscription). More often than not, subscription design satisfactorily defines the parameters of its antecedent instructions: 7:27–28 concludes the offerings (1:2c–7:26); 11:46–47, animal consumption (11:2–45); 14:54–57, diseases (13:2–14:53); 15:32– 33, bodily discharges (15:2–31); 23:37–38, festival offerings (23:1–36); and probably 26:46 concludes the collection of Seina instructions (1:2c–26:45). However, four subscriptions have elusive referents. Does 21:24 conclude the atonement and holiness instructions (17:2c–21:23; see parallel with 17:1–2b) or only the priestly holiness instructions (21:1d–23)? Does 22:31–33 conclude the priestly holiness and acceptable offerings (22:2b–30; after the 21:24 subscription) or only the acceptable offerings (22:18–30)? Does 23:44 conclude all festival offering units (23:2c–43) or, in light of the 23:37–38 subscription, only the last (23:39– 43)? Does the 27:34 subscription conclude the Seina instructions of Exod 20:22Leu 27:33, Leueitikon alone, or another collection? These four subscriptions must have generated an irresolvable ambiguity that LeuB does not attempt to clarify. 11.3.3 Primary Inscriptions? Although Otto sees a narrative framework as central to Leviticus’s structure, he also perceives a tripartite structure, chs. 1–10, 11–16, 17–26, marked by three inscriptions: 11:1, the first mention of Moses and Aaron together; 16:34b, the implementation notice, “Aaron did as the Lord commanded Moses”; and 17:1–2, the mention of Moses, Aaron and the Israelites (2008: 368–369). This correlates with his diachronic reconstruction, but he unjustifiably privileges these three inscriptions over others: first, 11:1 is the first inscription to group Moses and Aaron as intermediaries, but Aaron was already identified as intermediary in 10:8 and as the primary audience in 6:24–25b; second, 16:34b is one of many implementation notices (esp. 8:36, but also 8:4, 9, 13, 17, 21, 29; 9:10, 16, 21, 22; 10:5, 7; 24:23), and these notices are not exactly inscriptional in nature—they continue the narrative thread, rather than introduce or conclude divine speeches; third, 17:1–2 enumerates the most comprehensive explicit primary audience, but that same audience must be implicit in earlier inscriptions that introduce instructions drafted for the priests and the community alike. Instead of Otto’s three parts, Erich Zenger (1999: 65–76) identifies a sevenfold segmentation. Each section is demarcated by the divine speech introductory and concluding formulae: “Diese durch die Gottesredeeinleitungs-

66

introduction

formeln angezeigte Siebenerstruktur des Buches Levitikus 1–7.8–10.11–15.16– 17.18–20.21–22.23–26(.27) wird auch durch deutlich markierende Schlußabschnitte dieser Buchteile und durch deren kompositionelle Korrelation unterstützt” (1999: 69). Zenger examines lexical and thematic recurrence and shifts and discerns these six correlating sections with 16–17 in the center (chart from Nihan 2007: 81):

1–7 Opfer

8–10 Priester

11–15 Alltag

16–17 Verschönung

18–20 Alltag

21–22 Priester

23–26.27 Opfer+Feste

Otto, Zenger and others are right to elevate certain inscriptions as more prominent in the book’s organization, but these work in subordination to the book’s broader narrative shape, and while there are good reasons to read the book in three or seven parts, I would submit that there are better reasons to read the LXX composition in four. 11.4 Narrative Macro-Structure Mary Douglas (2000: 195–251) postulates that Leviticus’s two narratives trifurcate the legal materials of the book according to the tripartite design of the tabernacle: 1–7 law [8–10 narrative] 11–23 law [24 narrative] 25–27 law. The narratives function as the two dividing screens of the tabernacle, separating the courtyard (chs. 1–7) from the holy place (chs. 11–23), and the holy place from the most holy place (chs. 25–27). These units correspond to the three levels of divine-human proximity on Mount Sinai: lower slopes, perimeter, summit (Exodus 19–24). Against Douglas, we have insufficient data to verify that the Hebrew priests arranged Leviticus vis-à-vis the tabernacle and Mt. Sinai, and even less to verify that the LevLXX translator recognized such an arrangement. With Douglas, however, we must consider how the narratives relate to each other, to contiguous legal materials, and to the book’s overarching design (see also Bibb 2009; Chavel 2014). In LeuB, the larger narrative framework incorporates inscriptions, instructions and two stories that together indicate a quadripartite composition: chs. 1–7, 8–17, 18–26, and 27. 1. Chapters 1–7 elucidate the offerings of the tent of testimony primarily for the people, secondarily for the priests. The 1:1 superscription introduces the offering prescriptions of 1:2–7:26, but its signal position and unduplicated design indicate that it also introduces the entire composition (1–26/27).

introduction

67

καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου λέγων “Then he called Mōysēs, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Testimony, saying,” 1:1

The first extensive subscription concludes the offering prescriptions of chs. 1–7: οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων καὶ θυσίας καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ τῆς πλημμελίας καὶ τῆς τελειώσεως καὶ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου, ὃν τρόπον ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινά, ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐνετείλατο τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ προσφέρειν τὰ δῶρα αὐτῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ Σεινά. “This is the law for the whole burnt offerings and for sacrifice and concerning sin and for a sinful error and for fulfillment and for the deliverance sacrifice, 28 (38) just as the Lord commanded Mōysēs on Mount Seina on the day he commanded the sons of Israel to bring their gifts before the Lord in the Seina wilderness.” 7:27–28

References to Mount Seina and the wilderness of Seina (7:28) integrate 1:2–7:26 into the Seina story by prescribing offerings for the recently constructed Tent (ExodusLXX 35–40, Leu 1:1). The dative of time ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐνετείλατο “at the time he commanded” (for the temporal ‫ ב‬+ inf. in circumstantial clause) synchronizes Mōysēs’ transmission of 1:2–7:26 to the people with the Lord’s revelation of the same to Mōysēs; chs. 1–7 occurred in a single period of time. The dative of direct object, complementary infinitive, and the plural pronoun τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ προσφέρειν τὰ δῶρα αὐτῶν “(commanded) the sons of Israel to present their gifts” interprets 1:1–2c–7:26 as Mōysēs’s legislation for the people, making no mention of the superscriptions and instructions designated for the priests (see The Implausibility and Dialogical Micro-Structure). 2. Chapters 8–17 initiate the priestly office of Aarōn and his four sons and prescribe responsibilities primarily for them, secondarily for the people. After the decisive break at 7:27–28, the stereotypical superscription at 8:1 introduces the Lord’s command to Mōysēs, not to speak—as with all earlier inscriptions—but to “take Aarōn and his sons” (άβε Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ). This initiates the 8–10 narrative and instructions, which are doubly bound to 11–15. First, in the only divine speech to Aarōn (10:8–11), the Lord commands him, “to distinguish

68

introduction

between holy things and profane things and between unclean things and clean things” (διαστεῖλαι ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἀκαθάρτων καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν καθαρῶν, 10:10). This anticipates the central priestly role in distinguishing the holy and common, clean and unclean in chs. 10–15. Second, the narration in 16:1, “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs after the two sons of Aarōn died, when they presented strange fire before the Lord and died” assembles chs. 10–15 into a single collection of story and law ensuing from the death of Aarōn’s eldest sons (καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ααρων translates protoMT/11QpaleoLeva literally with a temporal inf. clause μετὰ τὸ τελ. antecedent to ἐλάλησεν; MT/SP “when they drew near” ‫[ בקרבתם‬here in 11QpaleoLeva, Ulrich (2010: 121) unconfidently identifies only a ‫]ב‬, but the LXX [with VulgSyr Tgs] “when they presented strange fire before the Lord” ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον). One might conjecture that the reference in 16:1 to Nadab and Abiud’s death in 10:1–3 disassociates chs. 8–9 from 10–15. Instead, the portentous regulations and story in 10:4–20 augment and complete chs. 8–9, and the Nadab and Abiud scene in 10:1–3 lexically and thematically inverts the immediately preceding scene in 9:22–24: “Thus, Lev 9 and 10 function together as a complex symbol illustrating the implications of the new relationship with God initiated by the inauguration of the sacrificial cult” (Nihan 2007: 92–93[93]). The 16:1 superscription serves a Janus function, not only looking back, but pulling forward the death of Aarōn’s sons as the context for the Day of Propitiation ritual of ch. 16. In other words, Leueitikon 16:1 introduces 16:2–34 as a supplement to ch. 10 that further clarifies for Aarōn and his sons how to serve the Lord in his Tent and survive (10:6, ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν συναγωγὴν ἔσται θυμός “lest you die, and wrath come upon all the congregation”; 10:12, τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς καταλειφθέντας “Aarōn’s sons who were left [alive]”; 10:16, τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς καταλελιμμένους “Aarōn’s sons who had been left [alive]”; 16:2, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανεῖται “… and he will not die”; 16:13, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανεῖται “… and he will not die”). One might suppose that the supplemental instructions in 16:2–34 end with their implementation at 16:34, and this may be true of MT, “And he did just as the Lord commanded Mōysēs” (‫ ;ויעשׂ כאשׁר צוה יהוה את־משׁה‬11QpaleoLeva frg. H is broken, but the available line space probably supports MT: Ulrich [2010: 122]). By contrast, LXX 16:34 does not narrate the closure of the unit, but leaves it open to be fulfilled with a future passive, “It shall be done once annually as the Lord commanded Mōysēs” (ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ποιηθήσεται, καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ). Furthermore, any original fissure between the sources of chs. 16 and 17 has arguably been mended by a redaction of shared lexemes and the motif of restoring the Lord-Israel relationship through purification rituals (Zenger 1999: 65–76; Jürgens 2001: 180–186). This is even more true of the LevLXX version

introduction

69

which introduces in 16:29 for the first time in the book, “neither the native nor the immigrant who is attached among you” (ὁ αὐτόχθων καὶ ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν = MT SP), and then repeats these classes just a few verses later in the LevLXX plus in 17:3, “or from the immigrants or from those who are attached among you” (ἢ τῶν προσηλύτων ἢ τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν B A F M mins et al. > MT SP Gött). Moreover, chapter 16’s central ἐξιλάσκομαι “to propitiate” Leitmotiv is inseparable from the rational for blood sacrifice in 17:11: … ἐξιλάσκεσθαι περὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν τὸ γὰρ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐξιλάσεται “to propitiate for your lives; for its blood propitiates instead of the life.” Ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς “instead of the life” interprets ‫בנפשׁ‬, as Wevers suggests, “What ἀντὶ contributes is a notion of exchange” (1997: 268). This Heb. ‫ ב‬could convey instrumentality, causality, or specification, whereas ἀντὶ is more precise and was probably selected to recall the exchange of goats for the community in ch. 16. Finally, Douglas is right to observe that chs. 1 and 17 form an inclusio: “In chapter 17 the lesson of the opening verses is repeated: that all animal slaughter must be brought to the tabernacle to be sacralized … The beginning of chapter 17 echoes the words and reinforces the teaching of chapter 1” (see Lev 1:2–3; 17:3–4; Douglas 2000: 226). This continuity between ch. 17 and what precedes, rather than with the rest of chs. 17–26, does not negate the transition near the middle of chs. 1–17 marked by 7:27–28 and 8:1. 3. Chapters 18–26 inculcate how the Lord requires holiness not only for his tent and priests, but for his name, people and land. Chapters 18 through 26 are conjoined by four literary features. First, chapters 18 and 20 are interconnected by their shared focus on “sexual relationships and pollution of the land” and they frame ch. 19, which functions as “a tôrâ for the holy community (see 19:2)” (Nihan 2007: 99). Chapter 19 “has little to say about cultic and ritual holiness but much about relations and righteousness” (Rendtorff 1996: 31–32), and this stress on communal holiness controls chs. 18 and 20, even though the Heb. ‫“ קדושׁ‬holy” does not occur in ch. 18 (but in 19:2, 8, 24; 20:3, 7, 26[2×]). However, the LevLXX translator apparently understood that ch. 18 conveys this theme by predicating the Lord’s name as holy in v. 21: καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσεις τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἅγιον ἐγὼ Κύριος “and you will not profane the holy name. I am holy” (MT: ‫את־שׁם אלהיך‬ ‫ ;אני יהוה‬4QLev-Numa is broken; the LXX probably harmonizes to 19:2; 20:7, 26). Second, the (null-)copula clause of identification ἐγὼ (εἰμι/ἅγιος) κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν “I am (holy) the Lord your God” is peculiar to chs. 18–26 (18:2, 4, 30; 19:2, 3, 4, 10, 25, 31, 34, 36; 20:7, 24; 23:22, 43; 24:22; 25:17, 38, 55; 26:1, 13; see Wevers 1997: 272–443; outside chs. 18–26, only 11:44, a probable H redaction, see Knohl 1995: 95 n. 119, 105; for Heb. ‫אני יהוה אלהיכם‬, see IHBS § 8.4.1). Third, unlike chs. 1–17 and 27, these chapters characteristically repeat the language of rejecting

70

introduction

the practices of Egypt and the inhabitants of the land/Chanaan and observing the Lord’s statutes. The densest clusters of this language in chs. 18 and 26 form an inclusio that amasses chs. 18–26 (esp. 18:3–4, 24–30; 26:1–3, 14, 30, 43–45; 10 of the 11 references to Egypt occur in 18–26, one in 11:45[H]). Fourth, why the blasphemer episode (24:10–23) has been placed between the instructions of the Tent’s lamp and bread (24:1–9) and the Sabbath and ‘signal’ years (25:1–55) remains elusive, but there are at least three reasons to regard its location within chs. 18–26 as deliberate. One, the aforementioned antagonism toward Egyptian (and Chanaanite) influence in chs. 18–26 is strengthened by the blasphemer’s description: καὶ οὗτος ἦν υἱὸς Αἰγυπτίου “also he was a son of an Egyptian” (24:10b; cf. 18:3). Two, the prohibitions of profaning the name of the Lord occur only in chs. 18–24 (βεβηλόω “to profane” the name: 18:21; 19:12[with ὄμνυμι “to swear,” as 24:11]; 20:3; 21:6; 22:2, 32; 24:11, 16[ὀνομάζων δὲ τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου “names the Lord’s name”]). Three, the Nadab and Abioud episode (10:1–3) illustrates the emphasis of chs. 8–17 that the Lord is holy in the Tent of Testimony, whereas the blasphemer episode illustrates the emphasis of chs. 18–26 that the Lord is holy in the midst of his people (10:3c, Ἐν τοῖς ἐγγίζουσίν μοι ἁγιασθήσομαι [but note 10:3d; 11:44–45]; 24:10, ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ; 24:14, λιθοβολήσουσιν αὐτὸν πᾶσα ἡ συναγωγή; 24:15, τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λάλησον; 24:23, ἐλάλησεν Μωσῆς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ; 24:23, οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ ἐποίησαν καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ). Fourth and finally, the subscription at 26:46, quoted below, appears to distinguish chs. 1–17 and chs. 18–26: “my judgments and my orders” (τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου) are two lexemes that, with the exception of 4:2, occur only in chs. 18–26 (√κρίμα: 18[2×]; 20; 26[3×]; √πρόσταγμα: 18[4×]; 19[1×]; 20[2×]; 24[1×]; 26[4×]); whereas “the law” (ὁ νόμος) occurs in this form only in chs. 1–17 (6[6×]; 7[2×]; 11[1×]; 12[1×]; 13[1×]; 14[4×]; 15[2×]; see Commentary at 26:46 for 19:19, 37) 4. Chapter 27 serves as an appendix that prescribes personal vows and consecrations to the Lord. We infer from the 26:46 and 27:34 colophons that Leviticus’s editors originally perceived Leviticus 26, then 27, as concluding the divine legislation transmitted from the Mountain of God, Seina, and this is no less true of the LevLXX translator and LeuB’s scribe(s): Ταῦτα τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου, καὶ ὁ νόμος ὃν ἔδωκεν Κύριος ἀνὰ μέσον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ. “These are my judgments and my orders,” and [this is] the law that the Lord gave between himself and between the Israelites at Mount Seina by the hand of Mōysēs. 26:46

introduction

71

Αὗταί εἰσιν αἱ ἐντολαὶ ἃς ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινά. “These are the commands which the Lord commanded Mōysēs for the Israelites at Mount Seina”. 27:34

Eckart Otto (2008: 543) correctly observes, “In Lev 26 werden im Munde Gottes die Erzählungen von Schöpfung, Erzeltern, Exodus und Heiligtumsgründung zusammengeführt und so die Gebotsoffenbarung am Gottesberg abgeschlossen, wie das Kolophon in Lev 26,46 zeigt.” Elsewhere, however, Otto argues that this colophon concludes the priestly materials of Leviticus 1–26 (Otto 1999: 181), and this may be true on a redactional level, but early Hebrew and then Greek readers would have seen this postscript as concluding ExodusLXX 19 through LeviticusLXX 26 (ὁ νόμος ὃν ἔδωκεν Κύριος … ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ, Leu 26:46). LeueitikonB 26:46 includes the unique pluses, “these are my judgments and my orders” (Ταῦτα τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου; om. 1st μου: GAmb MT; om. 2nd μου: Bc GAmb MT). Thereby, LeuB doubly closes the composition by the hand of Mōysēs and by the first-person voice of the Lord. Leueitikon 27, then, functions as an appendix that opens with the stereotypical superscript at 27:1 and closes with the final colophon at 27:34 (likewise, the Heb. text: Blum 1990: 300; Otto 1999: 181).

Text and Translation

∵

ΛΕΥΕΙΤΙΚΟΝ

5

10

15

20

⟦1⟧ 1 καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐὰν προσαγάγῃ δῶρα τῷ κυρίῳ, ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν βοῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων προσοίσετε τὰ δῶρα ὑμῶν. 3 Ἐὰν ὁλοκαύτωμα τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν βοῶν, ἄρσεν ἄμωμον προσάξει· πρὸς τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου προσοίσει αὐτό, δεκτὸν αὐτῷ ἐναντίον Κυρίου. 4 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ καρπώματος, δεκτὸν αὐτῷ ἐξειλάσασθαι περὶ αὐτοῦ. 5 καὶ σφάξουσι τὸν μόσχον ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ προσοίσουσιν οἱ ἱερεῖς οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν τὸ αἷμα, καὶ προσχεοῦσιν τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν θυρῶν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· 6 καὶ ἐκδείραντες τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα μελιοῦσιν αὐτὸ κατὰ μέλη· 7 καὶ ἐπιθήσουσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς πῦρ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἐπιστοιβάσουσιν ξύλα ἐπὶ τὸ πῦρ· 8 καὶ ἐπιστοιβάσουσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὰ διχοτομήματα καὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὸ στέαρ ἐπὶ τὰ ξύλα τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ πυρὸς τὰ ὄντα ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, 9 τὰ δὲ ἐνκοίλια αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς πόδας πλυνοῦσιν ὕδατι· καὶ ἐπιθήσουσιν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὰ πάντα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· κάρπωμά ἐστιν, θυσία, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ. 10 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀπό τε τῶν ἀρνῶν καὶ τῶν ἐρίφων εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, ἄρσεν ἄμωμον προσάξει αὐτό, καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ. 11 καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὸ ἐκ πλαγίων τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου πρὸς βορρᾶν ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ προσχεοῦσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ· 12 καὶ διελοῦσιν αὐτὸ κατὰ μέλη, καὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὸ στέαρ· καὶ ἐπιστοιβάσουσιν αὐτὰ οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐπὶ τὰ ξύλα τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ πυρὸς τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, 13 καὶ τὰ ἐνκοίλια καὶ τοὺς πόδας πλυνοῦσιν ὕδατι· καὶ προσοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· κάρπωμά ἐστιν θυσίας, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ Κυρίῳ.

Title: λευειτικον B* A G*; λευιτικον Bc F M’ mins Gött. See aprox. 30 other variations in Wevers 1986a: 43. ExodB concludes 19 lines down col. 1 (recto p. 99), and LeuB begins at the top of col. 2 (recto p. 99), demarcating the latter as a successive but distinct composition (see Intro.). 2 και (1st occ.) The original paragraph of 1:1–9 was justified, but the initial ⲕ was effaced by a later hand (Bc) and replaced with an enlarged, ornamental ⲕ in the margin to the right of col. 2. 4 και (1st occ.) B*; > Bc A F Gött. 7 αυτω B (= MT ‫ > ;)לרצנו‬A F Gött. ‖ εναντιον B; εναντι A F Gött. 8 εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ σφαξουσι B; σφαξουσιν A F Gött. 9 οι ιερεις οι υιοι Ααρων B* Arm; οι υιοι Ααρων οι ιερεις Bc BrMcL Gött. 10 εκδειραντες B* F Gött; δειραντες Bc A. 12 επιστοιβασουσιν (1st occ.) B* Gött; στοιβασουσιν Bc A F. ‖ επιστοιβασουσιν (2nd occ.) present text; Bc στοιβα sup ras; BrMcL and Swete conjecture that B* may have (abv. ‘fort’) read επιθησουσιν. 13 τα (3rd occ.) B* F Gött; > Bc A. 14 ενκοιλια B mins; εγκοιλια A Gött. ‖ αυτου (= MT ‫ )וקרבו‬B O; > A F Gött. 22 τα (2nd occ.) B* F Gött; > Bc A. 23 ενκοιλια B mins; εγκοιλια Fb Gött. 24 θυσιας B; θυσια A F Gött.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004409835_003

LEUEITIKON ⟦1⟧ 1 Then he summoned Mōysēs, and the Lord spoke to him from the tent of testimony, saying, 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: When one of you brings gifts to the Lord, you must bring your gifts from the livestock, both from the cattle and from the sheep. 3 If his gift is a whole burnt offering from the cattle, he must bring an unblemished male; to the door of the tent of testimony he must bring it, acceptable for him before the Lord. 4 And he must put his hand on the head of the offering, acceptable for him to propitiate for him. 5 And they must slaughter the calf before the Lord, and the priests, the sons of Aarōn, must bring the blood. And they must pour out the blood against the sides of the altar that is at the doors of the tent of testimony. 6 And they must flay the whole burnt offering and dismember it limb by limb. 7 And the sons of Aarōn, the priests, must place fire onto the altar, and they must pile up wood onto the fire. 8 And the sons of Aarōn, the priests, must pile up the divided parts and the head and the hard fat onto the wood that is on the fire that are both on the altar, 9 but they must wash its intestines and the feet with water, and the priests must lay everything on the altar. It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord.” 10 “But if his gift to the Lord for a whole burnt offering is from the flocks, both from the lambs and the kids, an unblemished male he must bring, and he must put his hand on its head. 11 And they must slaughter it on the north side of the altar before the Lord, and the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out its blood at the sides of the altar. 12 And they must divide it limb by limb, with its head and the hard fat. The priests must pile these up onto the wood that is on the fire that are both on the altar. 13 And they must wash the intestines and its feet with water. And the priest must bring everything and lay it on the altar. It is an offering, a sweet smell of sacrifice to the Lord.”

76

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

14 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν πετεινῶν κάρπωμα προσφέρῃς δῶρον τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ προσοίσει ἀπὸ τῶν τρυγόνων ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν περιστερῶν τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ· 15 καὶ προσοίσει αὐτὸ ὁ ἱερεὺς πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἀποκνείσει τὴν κεφαλήν· καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ στραγγιεῖ τὸ αἷμα πρὸς τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου· 16 καὶ ἀφελεῖ τὸν πρόλοβον σὺν τοῖς πτεροῖς, καὶ ἐκβαλεῖ αὐτὸ παρὰ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κατὰ ἀνατολὰς εἰς τὸν τόπον τῆς σποδοῦ· 17 καὶ ἐκκλάσει αὐτὸ ἐκ τῶν πτερύγων καὶ οὐ διελεῖ· καὶ ἐπιθήσει αὐτὸ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἐπὶ τὰ ξύλα τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ πυρός· κάρπωμά ἐστιν, θυσία, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ. ⟦2⟧ 1 Ἐὰν δὲ ψυχὴ προσφέρῃ δῶρον θυσίαν τῷ κυρίῳ, σεμίδαλις ἔσται τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ· καὶ ἐπιχεεῖ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ἔλαιον, καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτὸ λίβανον· θυσία ἐστίν. 2 καὶ οἴσει πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς ἱερεῖς· καὶ δραξάμενος ἀπ’ αὐτῆς πλήρης τὴν δράκαν ἀπὸ τῆς σεμιδάλεως σὺν τῷ ἐλαίῳ καὶ πάντα τὸν λίβανον αὐτῆς, καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· θυσία, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ. 3 καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν ἀπὸ τῆς θυσίας Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ, ἅγιον τῶν ἁγίων ἀπὸ τῶν θυσιῶν Κυρίου. 4 Ἐὰν δὲ προσφέρῃ δῶρον θυσίαν πεπεμμένην ἐκ λιβάνου, δῶρον Κυρίῳ ἐκ σεμιδάλεως, ἄρτους ἀζύμους πεφυραμένους ἐν ἐλαίῳ καὶ λάγανα ἄζυμα διακεχρεισμένα ἐν ἐλαίῳ. 5 ἐὰν δὲ θυσία ἀπὸ τηγάνου τὸ δῶρόν σου, σεμίδαλις πεφυραμένη ἐν ἐλαίῳ, ἄζυμά ἐστιν· 6 καὶ διαθρύψεις αὐτὰ κλάσματα, καὶ ἐπιχεεῖς ἐπ’ αὐτὰ ἔλαιον· θυσία ἐστὶν Κυρίῳ. 7 ἐὰν δὲ θυσία ἀπὸ ἐσχάρας τὸ δῶρόν σου, ἐν ἐλαίῳ ποιηθήσεται. 8 καὶ προσοίσει τὴν θυσίαν ἣν ἂν ποιῇ ἐκ τούτων τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ προσοίσει πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· καὶ προσεγγίσας πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον 9 ἀφελεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τῆς θυσίας τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς, καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· κάρπωμα, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ. 10 τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἀπὸ τῆς θυσίας Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ, ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου. 11 πᾶσαν θυσίαν ἣν ἄν προσφέρητε Κυρίῳ οὐ ποιήσετε ζυμωτόν· 1 προσφερης is effaced but legible; προσφερης B A F 936 Sa x; προσφερη Latcod 101 Gött. 2 αυτο B (= MT ‫ > ;)והקריבו‬A F Gött. 3 αποκνεισει B*; αποκνισει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 και ου = ‫ ולא‬4QLevb SP; ‫ לא‬MT. 10 θυσια εστιν = ‫ מנחה ]היא‬4QExod-Levf SP OGBAL; > 4QLevb vid MT OGO Tar Syr Vulg. 11 πληρης Bunique; πληρη Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 τους υιους Bunique; τοις υιοις Bc Swete Gött et al. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 εκ λιβανου B A min Latcod 101; εν κλιβανω F Gött. ‖ δωρον Κυριω B A mins; > F Gött. 17 διακεχρεισμενα B* F*; διακεχρισμενα Bc Fc mins Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 εστιν (1st occ.) B*; εστι Bc; εσται A F Gött. 22 σου + σεμιδαλις Bmg vid G (σιμ.) BrMcL Gött; > B*? Avid min. The diminishing font size of the word and its projection into the margin probably, but not definitively, indicates this plus was a correction. ‖ προσοισει = ‫ והבא‬4QLevb; ‫ והבאת‬MT SP. 23 ποιη B A mins; ποιηση Fb (= Sixt) Gött. 23–24 προσεγγισας Bc scraped off the first σ at the end of the line, and a subsequent hand added another σ in the margin of the beginning of the next line, but the scriptio inferior (B*) is still visible. 26 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 θυσιαν (anarthrous) may render ‫ מנחה‬4QLevb; ‫ המנחה‬MT SP.

Text and Translation

77

14 “But if an offering is from the birds, you must bring a gift to the Lord. And he must bring his gift from the turtledoves or from the pigeons. 15 And the priest must bring it to the altar, and he must wring off its head. And the priest must lay it on the altar, and squeeze out its blood at the base of the altar. 16 And he must remove the crop with the feathers, and he must throw it against the east side of the altar at the place for ashes. 17 And he must break it off from the wings and not divide it. And the priest must lay it on the altar on the wood pile that is on the fire. It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord.” ⟦2⟧ 1 “But if a life brings a gift as a sacrifice to the Lord, his gift will be fine flour. And he must pour olive oil on it, and he must place frankincense on it. It is a sacrifice. 2 And he must carry it to the sons of Aarōn, the priests. And after grasping from it a handful of the fine flour with the olive oil and all its frankincense, then the priest must place its memorial portion on the altar. It is a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord. 3 And the rest of the sacrifice is for Aarōn and his sons; it is a holy of holies from the Lord’s sacrifices.” 4 “But if he brings a gift as a sacrifice baked of frankincense, it must be a gift of fine flour to the Lord, unleavened bread mixed with olive oil and unleavened cakes spread with olive oil.” 5 “But if your gift is a sacrifice from a frying pan, it must be fine flour mixed with olive oil; it is unleavened. 6 And you must break them into pieces and pour oil on them. It is a sacrifice to the Lord.” 7 “But if your gift is a sacrifice from a fireplace, it must be made with olive oil. 8 And he must bring to the Lord the sacrifice that he may make from these, and he must bring it to the priest. And after approaching the altar, 9 the priest must remove from the sacrifice its memorial portion, and the priest must place it on the altar. It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord. 10 But what is left from the sacrifice is for Aarōn and his sons. They are holies of holies from the Lord’s sacrifices. 11 Any sacrifice that you bring to the Lord you must not make with

78

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

πᾶσαν γὰρ ζύμην καὶ πᾶν μέλι, οὐ προσοίσετε ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ καρπῶσαι Κυρίῳ. 12 δῶρον ἀπαρχῆς προσοίσετε αὐτὰ Κυρίῳ· ἐπὶ δὲ τὸ θυσιαστήριον οὐκ ἀναβιβασθήσεται εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδείας Κυρίῳ. 13 καὶ πᾶν δῶρον θυσίας ὑμῶν ἁλὶ ἁλισθήσεται· οὐ διαπαύσετε ἅλα διαθήκης Κυρίου ἀπὸ θυσιασμάτων ὑμῶν· ἐπὶ παντὸς δώρου ὑμῶν προσοίσετε Κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ ὑμῶν ἅλας. 14 Ἐὰν δὲ προσφέρῃς θυσίαν πρωτογενημάτων τῷ κυρίῳ, ἁπαλόν, νέα πεφρυγμένα χίδρα ἐρικτὰ τῷ κυρίῳ· καὶ προσοίσεις τὴν θυσίαν τῶν πρωτογενημάτων· 15 καὶ ἐπιχεεῖς ἐπ’ αὐτὴν ἔλαιον, καὶ ἐπιθήσεις ἐπ’ αὐτὴν λίβανον· θυσία ἐστίν. 16 καὶ ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς ἀπὸ τῶν χίδρων σὺν τῷ ἐλαίῳ καὶ πάντα τὸν λίβανον αὐτῆς· κάρπωμά ἐστιν Κυρίῳ. ⟦3⟧ 1 Ἐὰν δὲ θυσίαν σωτηρίου τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ, ἐὰν μὲν ἐκ τῶν βοῶν αὐτοῦ προσαγάγῃ, ἐάν τε ἄρσεν ἐάν τε θῆλυ, ἄμωμον προσάξει αὐτὸ ἐναντίον Κυρίου· 2 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ δώρου, καὶ σφάξει αὐτὸ ἐναντίον Κυρίου παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ προσχεοῦσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων κύκλῳ. 3 καὶ προσάξουσιν ἀπὸ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ, τὸ στέαρ τὸ κατακαλύπτον τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς κοιλίας, 4 καὶ τοὺς δύο νεφρούς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν, τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μηρίων, καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἥπατος σὺν τοῖς νεφροῖς περιελεῖ. 5 καὶ ἀνοίσουσιν αὐτὰ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, ἐπὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα ἐπὶ τὰ ξύλα τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ πυρὸς ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου· κάρπωμα, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ. 6 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ, θυσίαν σωτηρίου τῷ κυρίῳ, ἄρσεν ἢ θῆλυ, ἄμωμον προσοίσει αὐτό. 7ἐὰν ἄρνα προσαγάγῃ τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ, προσάξει αὐτὸ ἔναντι Κυρίου· 8 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ δώρου αὐτοῦ, καὶ σφάξει αὐτὸ παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ προσχεοῦσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ· 9 καὶ προσοίσει ἀπὸ τῆς θύρας τοῦ σωτηρίου κάῥπωμα τῷ θεῷ, τὸ στέαρ καὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν ἄμωμον· σὺν ταῖς ψόαις περιελεῖ αὐτό· καὶ τὸ στέαρ τῆς κοιλίας, 10 καὶ ἀμφοτέρους τοὺς νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μηρίων, καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἥπατος σὺν τοῖς νεφροῖς περιελὼν 11 ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας, κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ. 12 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν δῶρον αὐτοῦ, καὶ προσάξει ἔναντι Κυρίου· 13 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν 3 ευωδειας B*; ευωδιας Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ διαπαυσετε B* BrMcL Gött; διαπαυσεται A F min. 6 απαλον B* A; > Bc F BrMcL Gött. 7 ερικτα B; ερεικτα Arm Gött. 10 θυσιαν B* A Gött; θυσια Bc F. ‖ τω κυριω = ‫ ליהוה‬4QLevb Latcod 100; > MT SP. 11 αυτου B A F*; αυτο Fb Gött. 12 εναντιον B C’; εναντι A F Gött. 13 εναντιον Κυριου B Cyr 1025; > A F Gött. 19 επι του θυσιαστηριου B A x Cyr mins Arab Sam; > F Gött. 25 θυρας Bunique; θυσιας OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 27 στεαρ (1st occ.) + το επι F (+ additional text) Gött; > B A x-527 mins Arm. 28–29 ανοισει = ‫ והק]ט[יר‬4QLevb SP OG; ‫ והקטירו‬MT Tar. 29 οσμη B A mins Bo Syh; οσμην min Gött. ‖ των + αιγων το Bmg OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here Bmg inserts αιγων to the (bottom) right of col. 1 and το to the (top) left of col. 2. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

79

leaven. For any yeast and any honey, you must not bring from it to offer to the Lord. 12 As a gift of first fruit, you must bring them to the Lord. But they must not be brought up onto the altar to be a sweet smell to the Lord. 13 And every gift of your sacrifice must be salted with salt. You must not bring to an end the salt of the Lord’s covenant from your sacrifices; on each gift of yours, you must present salt to the Lord your God.” 14 “Now if you bring a sacrifice of first fruits to the Lord, tender, new, roasted, pounded groats to the Lord, then you must bring the sacrifice of the first fruits, 15 and you must pour olive oil on it and put frankincense on it. It is a sacrifice. 16 And the priest must offer up its memorial portion from some of the groats, with the olive oil and all its frankincense. It is an offering to the Lord. ⟦3⟧ 1 But if his gift to the Lord is a deliverance sacrifice, if he brings it from his cattle, whether male or female, he must bring it unblemished before the Lord. 2 And he must put his hands on the head of the gift, and he must slaughter it before the Lord at door to the tent of testimony, and the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out the blood at the sides of the altar of whole burnt offerings. 3 And they must bring an offering to the Lord from the deliverance sacrifice: the hard fat that covers the stomach and all the hard fat that is on the stomach 4 and the two kidneys and the hard fat that is on them, on the thigh bones, and he must remove the lobe that is on the liver with the kidneys. 5 And the sons of Aarōn the priests must offer them up on the altar, on the whole burnt offerings on the wood pile that is on the fire on the altar. It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord.” 6 “Now if his gift to the Lord is a deliverance sacrifice from the sheep, male or female, he must bring it unblemished. 7 If he brings a lamb as his gift, he must bring it before the Lord, 8 and he must put his hands on the head of his gift, and he must slaughter it at the door of the tent of testimony. And the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out the blood at the sides of the altar. 9 And he must bring from the door of deliverance an offering to God: The hard fat and the unblemished loin, he must remove it with the pelvic muscles. The hard fat of the stomach 10 and both the kidneys and the hard fat that is on them at the thigh bones, and after removing the lobe that is on the liver with the kidneys, 11 the priest must bring it to the altar. It is a sweet smell, an offering to the Lord. 12 But if his gift is from the ones, he must bring it before the Lord, 13 and he

80

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

αὐτοῦ, καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὸ ἔναντι Κυρίου παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ προσχεοῦσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ. 14 καὶ ἀνοίσει ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ τὸ στέαρ τὸ κατακαλύπτον τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς κοιλίας, 15 καὶ ἀμφοτέρους τοὺς νεφροὺς καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μηρίων, καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ἥπατος σὺν τοῖς νεφροῖς περιελεῖ· 16 καὶ ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· κάρπωμα, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ. πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τῷ κυρίῳ. 17 νόμιμον εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν· πᾶν στέαρ καὶ πᾶν αἷμα οὐκ ἔδεσθε. ⟦4⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων Ψυχὴ ἐὰν ἁμάρτῃ ἔναντι Κυρίου ἀκουσίως ἀπὸ τῶν προσταγμάτων Κυρίου ὧν οὐ δεῖ ποιεῖν, καὶ ποιήσῃ ἕν τι ἀπ’ αὐτῶν· 3 ἐὰν μὲν ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ κεχρεισμένος ἁμάρτῃ τοῦ λαὸν ἁμαρτεῖν, καὶ προσάξει περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν μόσχον ἐκ βοῶν ἄμωμον τῷ κυρίῳ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ. 4 καὶ προσάξει τὸν μόσχον παρὰ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ μόσχου ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ σφάξει τὸν μόσχον ἐνώπιον Κυρίου. 5 καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χρειστὸς ὁ τετελιωμένος τὰς χεῖρας ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου, καὶ εἰσοίσει αὐτὸ ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου· 6 καὶ βάψει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν δάκτυλον εἰς τὸ αἷμα, καὶ προσρανεῖ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος ἑπτάκις ἔναντι Κυρίου κατὰ τὸ καταπέτασμα τὸ ἅγιον· 7 καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τοῦ θυμιάματος τῆς συνθέσεως τοῦ ἐναντίον Κυρίου, ὅ ἐστιν ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ πᾶν τὸ αἷμα τοῦ μόσχου ἐκχεεῖ παρὰ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων, ὅ ἐστιν παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 8 καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τοῦ μόσχου τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας περιελεῖ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, τὸ στέαρ τὸ κατακαλύπτον τὰ ἐνδόσθεια καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐνδοσθίων, 9 καὶ τοὺς δύο νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν, ὅ ἐστιν ἐπὶ τῶν μηρίων, καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἥπατος σὺν τοῖς νεφροῖς, περιελεῖ αὐτό, 10 ὃν τρόπον ἀφερεῖτε αὐτὸ ἀπὸ τοῦ μόσχου τοῦ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου· διανοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τῆς καρπώσεως. 11 καὶ τὸ δέρμα τοῦ μόσχου καὶ πᾶσαν αὐτοῦ τὴν σάρκα σὺν τῇ κεφαλῇ καὶ τοῖς ἀκρωτηρίοις καὶ τῇ κοιλίᾳ καὶ τῇ κόπρῳ, 12 καὶ ἐξοίσουσιν ὅλον τὸν μόσχον ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς εἰς τόπον

3 επ B A F mins; απ Fc (= Sixt) Gött. 6 οσμη B A F mins Bo Syh; οσμην Gött. 9 και Since the initial κ is only slightly outdented, ¶ 4:1–12 (cols. 2–3, recto p. 101–col. 1, verso p. 102) is less noticeably distinguished from the preceding ¶, but clearly distinguished from the subsequent ¶ (4:13–21). 11 κεχρεισμενος B* F*; κεχρισμενος Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 12 του + τον Bc (superscr above λαον) F G M Phil Cyr Gött; > B* A Eus BrMcL. 16 χρειστος B* F*; χριστος Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τετελιωμενος B*; τετελειωμενος Bc (suprsc ε) Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 επι B* A mins; εις Bc Gött. 18 επτακις + τω δακτυλω min Gött; > B A mins Cyr Eth Arab [= MT Tar]. 20 εναντιον B mins Cyr; εναντι A F Gött. 24 ενδοσθεια B*; ενδοσθια Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 26 αφερειτε αυτο B*unique; αφαιρειτε αυτο Bc Swete; αφαιρειται > αυτο F Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 διανοισει B A; και ανοισει F Gött.

Text and Translation

81

must put his hands on its head, and they must slaughter it before the Lord at the door of the tent of testimony. And the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out the blood at the sides of the altar. 14 And he must offer up on it an offering to the Lord: the hard fat that covers the stomach and all the hard fat that is on the stomach, 15 and both the kidneys and all the hard fat that is on them, on the thigh bones, and he must remove the lobe of the liver with the kidneys. 16 And the priest must offer it on the altar. It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord. All the hard fat belongs to the Lord. 17 It is an ordinance forever, for all your generations, in every settlement of yours; you must not eat any hard fat and any blood.” ⟦4⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: If a life sins unintentionally before the Lord from the Lord’s commands, which one must not do, and does any one of them: 3 If even the anointed high priest sins, so that a people sin, then he must bring for his sin that he has sinned an unblemished calf from the cattle to the Lord for his sin. 4 And he must bring the calf to the door of the tent of testimony before the Lord, and put his hand on the head of the calf before the Lord, and he must slaughter the calf in the Lord’s presence. 5 Then after taking some of the calf’s blood, the anointed priest, who has had his hands consecrated, must bring it to the tent of testimony. 6 And the priest must dip his finger into the blood and sprinkle some of the blood seven times before the Lord at the holy curtain. 7 And the priest must put some of the calf’s blood on the horns of the altar of the incense of the composition that is before the Lord, which is in the tent of testimony. And he must pour out all the calf’s blood at the base of the altar of whole burnt offerings, which is at the door of the tent of testimony. 8 And he must remove from it all the hard fat of the calf for the sin: the hard fat that covers the entrails and all the hard fat that is on the entrails 9 and the two kidneys and the hard fat that is on them, which is on the thigh bones, and the lobe that is on the liver along with the kidneys; he must remove it 10 the same way that you remove it from the calf of the deliverance sacrifice. And the priest must carry it over to the altar of offering. 11 And the calf’s skin and all its flesh, with its head and its extremities and its stomach and its excrement, 12 also the whole bull calf they must carry outside the

82

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

καθαρὸν οὗ ἐκχεοῦσιν τὴν σποδιάν, καὶ κατακαύσουσιν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ ξύλων ἐν πυρί· ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκχύσεως τῆς σποδιᾶς καυθήσεται. 13 Ἐὰν δὲ πᾶσα συναγωγὴ Ἰσραὴλ ἀγνοήσῃ ἀκουσίως, καὶ λάθῃ ῥῆμα ἐξ ὀφθαλμῶν τῆς συναγωγῆς, καὶ ποιήσωσιν μίαν ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν Κυρίου ἣ οὐ ποιηθήσεται καὶ πλημμελήσουσιν, 14 καὶ γνωσθῇ αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτον ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ προσάξει ἡ συναγωγὴ μόσχον ἐκ βοῶν ἄμωμον περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ προσάξει αὐτὸν παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 15 καὶ ἐπιθήσουσιν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τῆς συναγωγῆς τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ μόσχου ἔναντι Κυρίου· 16 καὶ εἰσοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χρειστὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου· 17 καὶ βάψει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν δάκτυλον ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου, καὶ ῥανεῖ ἑπτάκις ἔναντι Κυρίου κατενώπιον τοῦ καταπετάσματος τοῦ ἁγίου· 18 καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν θυμιαμάτων τῆς συνθέσεως, ὅ ἐστιν ἐνώπιον Κυρίου, ὅ ἐστιν ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ τὸ πᾶν αἷμα ἐκχεεῖ πρὸς τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν καρπώσεων τῶν πρὸς τῇ θύρᾳ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 19 καὶ τὸ πᾶν στέαρ περιελεῖ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνοίσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· 20 καὶ ποιήσει τὸν μόσχον ὃν τρόπον ἐποίησεν τὸν μόσχον τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, οὕτως ποιηθήσεται· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῶν ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία. 21 καὶ ἐξοίσουσιν τὸν μόσχον ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, καὶ κατακαύσουσιν τὸν μόσχον ὃν τρόπον κατέκαυσαν τὸν μόσχον τὸν πρότερον· ἁμαρτία συναγωγῆς ἐστίν. 22 Ἐὰν δὲ ὁ ἄρχων ἁμάρτῃ καὶ ποιήσῃ μίαν ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν Κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτῶν ἣ οὐ ποιηθήσεται, ἀκουσίως, καὶ ἁμάρτῃ, καὶ πλημμελήσῃ, 23 καὶ γνωσθῇ αὐτῷ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτεν ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ προσοίσει τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ χείμαρρον ἐξ αἰγῶν, ἄρσεν ἄμωμον. 24 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ χειμάρρου, καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὸν ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα ἐνώπιον Κυρίου· ἁμαρτία ἐστίν. 25 καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τῷ δακτύλῳ ἐπὶ τὰ 1 κατακαυσουσιν = ‫ ושרפו‬SP; ‫ ]ושר[ף‬4QLevc MT. 3 ακουσιως B A mins f -129 n x-527 Cyr; > F Gött. 5 πλημμελησουσιν B* A mins b x-509; πλημμελησωσι Bc; πλημμελησωσιν F Gött. 8 Κυριου + και σφαξουσιν τον μοσχον εναντι Κυριου Bmg A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > Btxt mins Co. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 1 and an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↓ and obelus in the margin below col. 1 where he supplied the omitted text. 9 χρειστος B* F*; χριστος Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 > των (2nd occ.), + του οντος Fb Gött; + των, > του οντος B A x 55. 16–17 ποιηθησεται B Ac F Gött; ποιησεται A*. 17 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 μοσχον (1st occ.) + ολον Bmg (right of col. 2) Gött; > B* A mins Latcod 104txt Eth Arab Bo Syh (= MT SP Tar). 19 αμαρτια B A mins Latcod 104 Eth Gött; περι αμαρτιας Fb min; της αμαρτιας min; αμαρτιας Göttc. 20 εαν 4:22–26 is a clearly demarcated ¶ in cols. 2–3 (verso p. 102). Although the initial ε of the subsequent ¶ (4:27–31) is outdented only slightly and parallel with the τ above it, the end of vs. 26 is followed by a space wider than half the column, clearly demarcating the end of ¶ 4:22–26. 22 χειμαρρον B* A F*; χιμαρρον Bc; χιμαρον Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 χειμαρρου B* A F; χιμαρου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 24 αμαρτια B A F mins Gött; αμαρτιας Fb Cyr min Göttc.

Text and Translation

83

camp to a clean place where they must pour out the ashes, and they must burn it completely on the wood pile with fire; at the outflow of the ashes it must be burned.” 13 “But if the entire assembly of Israel acts with ignorance unintentionally and the matter escapes the notice of the eyes of the assembly, and they do one of any of the commandments of the Lord, which must not be done, then they will commit a sinful error, 14 and the sin that they sinned in it should become known to them, then the assembly must bring an unblemished calf from the cattle for the sin and bring it to the door of the tent of testimony. 15 And the elders of the assembly must lay their hands on the calf’s head before the Lord.1 16 Then the anointed priest must bring some of the calf’s blood into the tent of testimony, 17 and the priest must dip his finger in some of the calf’s blood and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord in front of the holy curtain. 18 And the priest must put some of the blood onto the horns of the altar of the incense of the composition that is in the Lord’s presence, which is in the tent of testimony, and he must pour out all the blood at the base of the altar of offerings that is near the door of the tent of testimony. 19 And he must remove from it all the hard fat and offer it up on the altar. 20 And he must prepare the calf the same way he prepares the calf for the sin offering; so it must be done. And the priest must propitiate for them, and the sin will be forgiven for them. 21 And they must carry the calf outside the camp and burn up the calf the same way they burned completely the first calf. It is a sin offering of the assembly.” 22 “But if the ruler sins unintentionally and does one of any of the commandments of the Lord their God which must not be done, and he sins and commits a sinful error, 23 and the sin that he has sinned in it becomes known to him, then he must bring his gift, a young billy goat from the goats, an unblemished male. 24 And he must put his hand on the head of the billy goat, and they must slaughter it at the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offerings in the Lord’s presence. It is a sin offering. 25 And the priest must place with his finger

1 Most other witnesses here include: “And they must slaughter the calf before the Lord.” See footnote in the Greek text after 4:15.

84

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων, καὶ τὸ πᾶν αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐκχεεῖ παρὰ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων. 26 καὶ τὸ πᾶν στέαρ αὐτοῦ ἀνοίσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, ὥσπερ τὸ στέαρ θυσία σωτηρίου· καὶ ἐξιλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. 27 Ἐὰν δὲ ψυχὴ μία ἁμάρτῃ ἀκουσίως ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ τῆς γῆς ἐν τῷ ποιῆσαι μίαν ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν Κυρίου ἣ οὐ ποιηθήσεται, καὶ πλημμελήσῃ, 28 καὶ γνωσθῇ αὐτῷ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτεν ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ οἴσει χείμεραν ἐξ αἰγῶν· θήλειαν ἄμωμον οἴσει περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἧς ἥμαρτεν. 29 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ ἁμαρτήματος αὐτοῦ, καὶ σφάξουσιν τὴν χείμεραν τὴν τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα. 30 καὶ λήμψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς τῷ δακτύλῳ καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων, καὶ πᾶν τὸ αἷμα αὐτῆς ἐκχεεῖ παρὰ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου. 31 καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ περιελεῖ ὃν τρόπον περιαιρεῖται στέαρ ἀπὸ θυσίας σωτηρίου, καὶ ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. 32 Ἐὰν δὲ πρόβατον προσενέγκῃ τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ εἰς ἁμαρτίαν, θῆλυ ἄμωμον προσοίσει αὐτό. 33 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ σφάξουσιν αὐτὸ ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα. 34 καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τῷ δακτύλῳ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῆς ὁλοκαρπώσεως, καὶ πᾶν αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα ἐκχεεῖ παρὰ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως. 35 καὶ πᾶν αὐτοῦ τὸ στέαρ περιελεῖ ὃν τρόπον περιαιρεῖται στέαρ προβάτου ἐκ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου, καὶ ἐπιθήσει αὐτὸ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἐπὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα Κυρίου· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἧς ἥμαρτεν, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. ⟦5⟧ 1 Ἐὰν δὲ ψυχὴ ἁμάρτῃ καὶ ἀκούσῃ φωνὴν ὁρκισμοῦ, καὶ οὗτος μάρτυς ἢ ώρακεν ἢ σύνοιδεν, ἐὰν μὴ ἀπαγγείλῃ, λήμψεται τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. 2 ἢ ψυχὴ ἥτις ἐὰν ἅψηται παντὸς πράγματος ἀκαθάρτου, ἢ θνησιμαίου ἢ θηριαλώτου ἀκαθάρτου ἢ τῶν θνησιμαίων ἢ τῶν βδελυγμάτων τῶν ἀκαθάρτων ἢ τῶν θνησιμαίων κτηνῶν τῶν ἀκαθάρτων, 3 ἢ ἅψηται ἀπὸ ἀκαθαρσίας ἀνθρώπου, ἀπὸ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἂν ἁψάμενος 1 παν = ‫ כל‬MTmss; > MT SP. 3 θυσια B* mins; θυσιας Bc OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 χειμεραν B*; χιμεραν Bc; χειμερραν A F; χιμαιραν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 χειμεραν B* A; χιμεραν Bc; χειμερραν F; χιμαιραν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 εξειλασεται B* A F*; εξιλασεται Bc Fc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 αυτου B* mins d-125 n t Latcod 100 Arm Syh; > Bc A F Gött. 19 ολοκαρπωσεως with Miika Tucker, I think this is the original B* mins (contra Swete ολοκαυτωσεως B*vid with ρπ sup ras); ολοκαυτωσεως A Gött. 22 εξειλασεται Here the ξ is at the end of the line, and the next line begins with λ. It would seem that there is no space for the ε, but B* usually spells the word εξειλασεται B* which also appears in F* vs. εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. I emend Swete toward the probable B* reading. 24–25 ωρακεν B*unique; εωρακεν Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Bc is faded, but has probably superscripted an initial ε. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 εαν (2nd occ.) B Cyr min et al; αν mins C’-528 s-30 t Eus Gött. 27 η των B; > F Gött (for the complexity of readings, see Wevers 1986b: 73).

Text and Translation

85

some of the blood of that which is of sin on the horns of the altar of whole burnt offerings, and he must pour out all its blood at the base of the altar of whole burnt offerings. 26 And he must offer up on the altar all its hard fat, like the hard fat, a deliverance sacrifice. The priest will propitiate for him because of his sin, and it will be forgiven him.” 27 “But if any one life of the people of the land sins unintentionally by doing one of any of the Lord’s commandments that must not be done, and he commits a sinful error, 28 and the sin that he has sinned in it becomes known to him, then he must bring a young nanny goat from the goats; he must bring an unblemished female for the sin that he has sinned. 29 And he must put his hand on the head of his offense, and they must slaughter the nanny goat that is for the sin at the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offerings. 30 And the priest must take some of its blood with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of whole burnt offerings, and he must pour out all its blood at the base of the altar. 31 And he must remove all the hard fat the same way he removes hard fat from the deliverance sacrifice, and the priest must offer it up on the altar as a sweet smell to the Lord. The priest will propitiate for him, and it will be forgiven for him.” 32 “But if he brings a sheep as his gift for sin, an unblemished female he must bring it. 33 And he must put his hand on its head that is for sin, and they must slaughter it in the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offerings. 34 And after taking with his finger some of the blood of that which is for sin, the priest must put it on the horns of the altar of whole burnt offering, and he must pour out all its blood at the base of the altar of whole burnt offering. 35 And he must remove all its hard fat the way that a sheep’s hard fat is removed from the deliverance sacrifice, and the priest must lay it on the altar, on the whole burnt offering of the Lord. The priest will propitiate for him for the sin that he has sinned, and it will be forgiven him.” ⟦5⟧ 1 “If a life sins and hears a sound of taking an oath, and he is a witness or has seen it or knows it, if he does not report it, he will take the sin. 2 Or a life whoever touches any unclean thing, whether a carcass or an unclean animal caught by wild beasts, whether of the carcasses or of the unclean abominations or of the unclean carcasses of livestock, 3 or he touches some uncleanness of a

86

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

μιανθῇ, καὶ ἔλαθεν αὐτόν, μετὰ τοῦτο δὲ γνῷ, καὶ πλημμελήσῃ· 4 ἢ ψυχὴ ἡ ἄνομος ἡ διαστέλλουσα τοῖς χείλεσιν κακοποιῆσαι ἢ καλῶς ποιῆσαι κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἐὰν διαστείλῃ ὁ ἄνθρωπος μεθ’ ὅρκου, καὶ λάθῃ αὐτὸν πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν, καὶ οὗτος γνῷ, καὶ ἁμάρτῃ ἕν τι τούτων. 5 καὶ ἐξαγορεύσει τὴν ἁμαρτίαν περὶ ὧν ἡμάρτηκεν κατ’ αὐτῆς, 6 καὶ οἴσει περὶ ὧν ἐπλημμέλησεν Κυρίῳ, περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἥμαρτεν, θῆλυ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων, ἁμνάδα ἢ χίμεραν ἐξ αἰγῶν περὶ ἁμαρτίας· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ ἡ ἁμαρτία. 7 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἰσχύσῃ ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ τὸ ἱκανὸν εἰς τὸ πρόβατον, οἴσει περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν, δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν Κυρίῳ, ἕνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ ἕνα εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα. 8 καὶ οἴσει αὐτὰ πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, καὶ προσάξει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας πρότερον· καὶ ἀποκνίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ σφονδύλου καὶ οὐ διελεῖ, 9 καὶ ῥανεῖ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐπὶ τὸν τοῖχον τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, τὸ δὲ κατάλοιπον τοῦ αἵματος καταστραγγιεῖ ἐπὶ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου· ἁμαρτίας γάρ ἐστιν· 10 καὶ τὸ δεύτερον ποιήσει ὁλοκάρπωμα ὡς καθήκει· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. 11 Ἐὰν δὲ μὴ εὑρίσκῃ αὐτοῦ ἡ χεὶρ ζεῦγος τρυγόνων ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν, καὶ οἴσει τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ περὶ οὗ ἥμαρτεν τὸ δέκατον τοῦ οἰφὶ σεμιδάλεως περὶ ἁμαρτίας· οὐκ ἐπιχεεῖ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ λίβανον οὐδὲ ἐπιθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτὸ λίβανον, ὅτι περὶ ἁμαρτίας ἐστίν. 12 καὶ οἴσει αὐτὸ πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα. καὶ δραξάμενος ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπ’ αὐτῆς πλήρη τὴν δράκα, τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων Κυρίῳ· ἁμαρτία ἐστίν. 13 καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν ἐφ’ ἑνὸς τούτων, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἔσται τῷ ἱερεῖ, ὡς ἡ θυσία τῆς σεμιδάλεως. 14 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 15 ψυχὴ ἐὰν λάθῃ αὐτὸν λήθῃ καὶ ἁμάρτῃ ἀκουσίως ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων Κυρίου, καὶ οἴσει τῆς πλημμελίας αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ κριὸν ἄμωμον ἐκ τῶν προβάτων τιμῆς ἀργυρίου σίκλων, τῷ σίκλῳ τῶν ἁγίων, περὶ οὗ ἐπλημμέλησεν. 16 καὶ ὃ ἥμαρτεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων ἀποτίσαι αὐτό, καὶ τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον

1 ανομος η B A Fc; η αν ομοση F Gött. 2 χειλεσιν B* BrMcL Gött; χειλεσι Bc A F. 5 αμαρτιας + ης Gött Swete BrMcL OG-B; > Bunique. Here I emend Swete toward B. 6 χιμεραν B; χειμεραν A; χειμερραν F*; χιμαιραν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. ‖ εξειλασεται B* F*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 ισχνση B* oI C’’(-73txt) s mins Gött; ισχυη Phil Cyr mins Göttc. 14 ολοκαρπωμα appears to be original to B* (with Miika Tucker), not ολοκαυτωμα (Swete). 15 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 σεμιδαλεως B 972 Cyr; σεμιδαλιν OG-B Gött. 18 λιβανον (1st occ.) B*unique; ελαιον Bc? A F Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 των B* et al. Gött; επι των min Latcod 100 Göttc. 20–21 αμαρτια B* Gött; αμαρτιας Bc Göttc. 21 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 24 εαν B* A Gött; η αν Bc F. 25 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 27 αποτισαι B* A mins; αποτισει Bc F; αποτεισει Gött. ‖ αυτο B A mins x Cyr LatAug Lev; > F Gött.

Text and Translation

87

person, from any of his uncleanness in which he became unclean by touching, and it went unnoticed by him, but afterwards he comes to know it, and he has commited a sinful error, 4 or the lawless life who by defining with his lips to do evil or to do good, in whatever way the person may define an oath, and if it goes unnoticed before eyes and he comes to know it and sins in one of these, 5 then he must confess his sin concerning the things by which he has sinned. 6 And he must bring to the Lord for the ways he has sinfully erred, for the sin he has committed, a female from the sheep, either a ewe lamb or a young nanny goat from the goats for sin. And the priest will propitiate for him, for his sin that he has sinned, and the sin will be forgiven him. 7 But if his hand is not able for what is sufficient for the sheep, he must bring for his sin that he has sinned two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the Lord, one for sin and one for a whole burnt offering. 8 And he must bring them to the priest, and the priest will bring the one for sin first. And the priest must wring off its head from the neck, and he must not divide it. 9 And he must sprinkle some blood from the one for sin on the wall of the altar, but the remainder of the blood he must squeeze out at the base of the altar; for it is for sin. 10 And the second he must make as a whole burnt offering, as is customary. And the priest will propitiate for his sin that he has sinned, and it will be forgiven him. 11 But if his hand does not find a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons, then he must bring his gift for that which he sinned: one-tenth of an oiphi of fine flour for sin. He must not pour frankincense on it, nor must he place frankincense on it because it is for sin. 12 And he must bring it to the priest. And after grasping from it a handful, the priest must place its memorial portion on the altar of the whole burnt offerings to the Lord. It is a sin offering. 13 And the priest will propitiate for him for his sin that he has sinned on the basis of one of these, and it will be forgiven him. But what is left over will be for the priest, like the offering of fine flour.” 14 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 15 “If a life is unaware of it and forgets and sins unintentionally from the holy things of the Lord, he must bring to the Lord for his sinful error an unblemished ram from the sheep, of the value of silver shekels, according to the shekel of the holy things, for what sinful error he has committed. 16 And that which he has sinned from the holy things, he

88

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

προσθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτό, καὶ δώσει αὐτὸ τῷ ἱερεῖ· καὶ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ κρειῷ τῆς πλημμελίας, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. 17 Καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ ἣ ἂν ἁμάρτῃ καὶ ποιήσῃ μίαν ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν Κυρίου ὧν οὐ δεῖ ποιεῖν, καὶ οὐκ ἔγνω, καὶ πλημμελήσῃ καὶ λάβῃ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, 18 καὶ οἴσει κριὸν ἄμωμον ἐκ τῶν προβάτων τιμῆς ἀργυρίου εἰς πλημμελίαν πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἀγνοίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἠγνόησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὐκ ᾔδει, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ· 19 ἐπλημμέλησεν γὰρ πλημμέλιαν ἔναντι Κυρίου. ⟦6⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Ψυχὴ ἐὰν ἁμάρτῃ καὶ παριδὼν παρίδῃ τὰς ἐντολὰς Κυρίου, καὶ ψεύσηται τὰ πρὸς τὸν πλησίον ἐν παραθήκῃ ἢ περὶ κοινωνίας ἢ περὶ ἁρπαγῆς, ἢ ἠδίκησέν τι τὸν πλησίον, 3 ἢ εὗρεν ἀπωλίαν καὶ ψεύσηται περὶ αὐτῆς, καὶ ὀμόσῃ ἀδίκως περὶ ἑνὸς ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐὰν ποιήσῃ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὥστε ἁμαρτεῖν ἐν τούτοις· 4 καὶ ἔσται ἡνίκα ἐὰν ἁμάρτῃ καὶ πλημμελήσῃ, καὶ ἀποδῷ τὸ ἅρπαγμα ὃ ἥρπασεν, ἢ τὸ ἀδίκημα ὃ ἠδίκησεν, ἢ τὴν παραθήκην ἥτις παρετέθη αὐτῷ, ἢ τὴν ἀπωλίαν ἣν εὗρεν, 5 ἀπὸ παντὸς πράγματος οὗ ὤμοσεν περὶ αὐτοῦ ἀδίκως, καὶ ἀποτίσει αὐτὸ τὸ κεφάλαιον, καὶ τὸ πέμπτον προσθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτό· τίνος ἐστίν, αὐτῷ ἀποδώσει ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐλεχθῇ. 6 καὶ τῆς πλημμελίας αὐτοῦ οἴσει τῷ κυρίῳ κρειὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων ἄμωμον τιμῆς εἰς ὃ ἐπλημμέλησεν. 7καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ περὶ ἑνὸς ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησεν καὶ ἐπλημμέλησεν αὐτῷ. 8 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 9 Ἔντειλε Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ λέγων Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως· αὐτὴ ἡ ὁλοκαύτωσις ἐπὶ τῆς καύσεως αὐτῆς ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ὅλην τὴν νύκτα ἕως τὸ πρωί, καὶ τὸ πῦρ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καυθήσεται ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ, οὐ σβεσθήσεται. 10 καὶ ἐνδύσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς χιτῶνα λινοῦν, καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἐνδύσεται περὶ τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀφελεῖ τὴν κατακάρπωσιν ἣν ἂν καταναλώσῃ τὸ πῦρ, τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν ἀπὸ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ παραθήσει αὐτὸ ἐχόμενον τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου. 11 καὶ ἐκδύσεται τὴν στολὴν αὐτοὺ καὶ ἐνδύσεται στολὴν ἄλλην, καὶ ἐξοίσει τὴν κατακάρπωσιν ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς εἰς τόπον καθαρόν. 12 καὶ πῦρ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον καυθήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὐ σβεσθήσεται· καὶ καύσει ὁ 1 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 2 κρειω B*; κριω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ πλημμελιας B*; πλημμελειας Bc A Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ η (1st occ.) B A (η ψυχη εαν) F*; > A Fb? M Gött. 5 πλημμελιαν B*; πλημμελειαν Bc A Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 πλημμελιαν In agreement with Miika Tucker, there is an unusual amount of space between the letters, but there does not seem to be any erasure here that would warrant reading the grammatically correct reading, πλημμέλησιν Swete Gött. 10 απωλιαν B* BrMcL; απωλειαν Bc A F Gött. 12 εαν B A G mins; η αν F M Cyr mins; αν Eus Gött. 14 απωλιαν B* BrMcL; απωλειαν Bc A F Gött. 16 ελεχθη B; ελεγχθη Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. ‖ κρειον B*; κριον Bc Fc Swete BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 εντειλε B; εντειλαι Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

89

hopes to pay it back, and he must add a fifth to it and give it to the priest. And the priest will propitiate for him with the ram for the sinful error, and it will be forgiven him. 17 And the life that sins and does one of any of the Lord’s commandments, which he ought not to do, and he does not know and commits a sinful error and takes the sin, 18 then he must bring to the priest an unblemished ram from the sheep of the value of silver for a sinful error. And the priest will propitiate for him because of his ignorance of which he was ignorant and he himself did not know, and it will be forgiven him, 19 for he has erroneously sinned a sinful error before the Lord.” ⟦6⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “If a life sins and by overlooking overlooks the Lord’s commandments and lies about things concerning his neighbor, whether in a deposit or concerning a partnership or concerning seizure or he harmed his neighbor in some way, 3 or he found something lost and lied about it, and he swears falsely about one of all that a person may do in order to sin in these ways, 4 then it will be whenever he sins and commits a sinful error and returns the spoil that he seized or the injustice he acted unjustly or the deposit that was entrusted to him or the lost thing that he found, 5 because of every matter of which he swore unjustly about it, he must also repay the sum itself, and he must add one fifth to it. Whoever it is, he must return it to him on the day that he should be convicted. 6 And for his sinful error he must bring to the Lord an unblemished ram from the sheep, of the value of what he sinfully erred. 7 And the priest will propitiate for him before the Lord, and it will be forgiven him for one of all that he did and sinfully erred by it.” 8 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 9 “Command Aarōn and his sons, saying: This is the law for the whole burnt offering. The whole burnt offering itself must be in its burning on the altar all night until the morning, and the fire of the altar must be burnt on it; it must not be extinguished. 10 The priest must put on a linen tunic, and he must put on linen leggings around his body. And he must remove from the altar the whole burnt offering sacrificial ashes which the fire has consumed, and he must lay it close to altar. 11 And he must take off his garment and put on another garment and carry the sacrificial ashes outside the camp to a clean place. 12 And fire on the altar must be burnt on it and must not be extinguished. And the priest must burn wood on it in the

90

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἱερεὺς ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ξύλα τὸ πρωί, καὶ στοιβάσει ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν, καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτὸ τὸ στέαρ τοῦ σωτηρίου. 13 καὶ πῦρ διὰ παντὸς καυθήσεται ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, οὐ σβεσθήσεται. 14 Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς θυσίας ἣν προσάξουσιν αὐτὴν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν ἔναντι Κυρίου ἀπέναντι τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου· 15 καὶ ἀφελεῖ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ τῇ δρακὶ ἀπὸ τῆς σεμιδάλεως τῆς θυσίας σὺν τῷ ἐλαίῳ αὐτῆς καὶ σὺν τῷ λιβάνῳ αὐτῆς, τὰ ὄντα ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας, καὶ ἀνοίσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κάρπωμα· ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας, τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς τῷ κυρίῳ. 16 τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἀπ’ αὐτῆς ἔδεται Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ· ἄζυμα βρωθήσεται ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ, ἐν αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἔδονται αὐτήν. 17 οὐ πεφθήσεται ἐζυμωμένην· μερίδα αὐτὴν ἔδωκα αὐτοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου· ἅγια ἁγίων, ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς πλημμελίας. 18 πᾶν ἀρσενικὸν τῶν ἱερέων ἔδονται αὐτήν· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου· πᾶς ὃς ἐὰν ἅψηται αὐτῶν ἁγιασθήσεται. 19 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 20 Τοῦτο τὸ δῶρον Ἀαρὼν καὶ τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ὃ προσοίσουσιν Κυρίῳ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ᾗ ἂν χρείσῃς αὐτόν, τὸ δέκατον τοῦ οἰφὶ σεμιδάλεως εἰς θυσίαν διὰ παντός, τὸ ἥμισυ αὐτῆς τὸ πρωὶ καὶ τὸ ἥμισυ αὐτῆς τὸ δειλινόν. 21 ἐπὶ τηγάνου ἐν ἐλαίῳ ποιηθήσεται, πεφυραγμένην οἴσει αὐτήν, ἑλικτά, θυσίαν ἐκ κλασμάτων, θυσίαν ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ. 22 ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χρειστὸς ἀντ’ αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ποιήσει αὐτήν· νόμιμος αἰώνιος, ἅπαν ἐπιτελεσθήσεται. 23 καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἱερέως ὁλόκαυτος ἔσται, καὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται. 24 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 25 Λάλησον Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ λέγων Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς ἁμαρτίας· ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα σφάξουσιν τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἔναντι Κυρίου· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν. 26 ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ ἀναφέρων αὐτὴν ἔδεται αὐτήν· ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ βρωθήσεται, ἐν αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 27 πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος τῶν κρεῶν αὐτῆς ἁγιασθήσεται· καὶ ᾧ ἐὰν ἐπιραντισθῇ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς ἐπὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον, ὃς ἐὰν ῥαντισθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτό, πλυθήσεται ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ. 28 καὶ σκεῦος ὀστράκινον οὗ ἐὰν ἑψεθῇ τριβήσεται· ἐὰν δὲ ἐν σκεύει χαλκῷ ἑψεθῇ, 1 πρωι + πρωι (2nd occ.) Bc F G M Cyr Latcod 100 Gött; > B* A mins LatAug Lev. 6 οσμη B A mins Bo Syh; οσμην Arm Gött. 7 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 εζυμωμενην B* Bc2 mins; εζυμωμενη Bc1 OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 αγιων + εστιν Bc F G M mins Cyr Gött; > B* A min Sa. 12 εαν B F 824 s mins Cyr; αν Syh Gött. 14 προσοισουσιν + τω F Mc Gött; > B Mtxt 828 mins b d n x Cyr. ‖ χρεισης B*; χρισης Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 πεφυραγμενην B*; πεφυραμενην Bc Gött. 17 θυσιαν (1st occ.) + εις Bc F G M Gött; > B* b mins Latcod 100 (= MT without ‫)ל‬. ‖ χρειστος B* F*; χριστος Bc Fc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 νομιμος B* mins; νομος Bc OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 τα B min Cyr 829; το OG-B Gött. 24 εαν A B F M’ 829 mins x-509 y-318 z Cyr; αν G mins Gött. ‖ επιραντισθη B; επιρραντισθη Gött. 25 ος B A; ο F G M Cyr Gött. ‖ εαν B A G mins x-509 Cyr; αν Gött (for the complexity of readings, see Wevers 1986a: 88). 26 εαν (1st occ.) B Cyr 829 min; αν mins cI b Gött. ‖ εψεθη (1st occ.) B A F mins; εψηθη Gött; + εν αυτω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* A. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τριβησεται As with εν αυτω of the preceding line, συν is also written in a reduced font in the (left) margin and was probably added by added by Bc to form συντριβησεται. ‖ εψεθη (2nd occ.) B A F G mins; εψηθη Gött.

Text and Translation

91

morning and pile onto it the whole burnt offering, and he must place on it the hard fat of the deliverance. 13 And a fire must be burnt continually on the altar. It must not be extinguished. 14 This is the law for the sacrifice that the sons of Aarōn must bring before the Lord opposite the altar. 15 And he must remove from it by hand some of the fine flour of the sacrifice with its olive oil and with its frankincense that are on the sacrifice, and he must offer on the altar an offering. It is a sweet smell, the memorial portion of it to the Lord. 16 But what is left over from it Aarōn and his sons must eat. It must be eaten unleavened in a holy place. In the court of the tent of testimony they must eat it. 17 It must not be baked as leavened. I have given it as a portion to them from the Lord’s offerings. They are holies of holies, like that which is for sin and like that which is for a sinful error. 18 Every male thing among the priests must eat it. It is an enduring ordinance for your generations from the Lord’s offerings. Anyone who touches them will become holy.” 19 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 20 “This is the gift from Aarōn and his sons, which they must offer to the Lord on the day you anoint him: one tenth of an oiphi of fine flour as a sacrifice for all time, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening. 21 It must be made in a frying pan with olive oil. He must bring it kneaded, rolled, a sacrifice of morsels, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord. 22 The anointed priest who takes his place from his sons must make it. It is a enduring ordinance; it must be completed entirely. 23 And every sacrifice of a priest must be completely burnt and must not be eaten.” 24 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 25 “Speak to Aarōn and his sons, saying: This is the law for the sin offering. At the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offering they must slaughter the things for the sin offering before the Lord. They are holies of holies. 26 The priest who offers it up must eat it. It must be eaten in a holy place, in the court of the tent of testimony. 27 Anyone who touches any of its meat will become holy. And by whomever some of its blood is sprinkled on the garment, whomever is sprinkled by it must be washed in a holy place. 28 And a clay vessel in which it was boiled must be rubbed down.

92

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἐκτρίψει αὐτὸ καὶ ἐκκλύσει ὕδατι. 29 πᾶς ἄρσην ἐν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν φάγεται αὐτά· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστὶν Κυρίου. 30 καὶ πάντα τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὧν ἐὰν εἰσενεχθῇ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῶν εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ, οὐ βρωθήσεται, ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται. 31 Καὶ οὗτος ὁ νόμος τοῦ κρειοῦ τοῦ περὶ τῆς πλημμελίας· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν. 32 ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα σφάξουσιν τὸν κρειὸν τῆς πλημμελίας ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ τὸ αἷμα προσχεεῖ ἐπὶ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου κύκλῳ· 33 καὶ πᾶν τὸ στὲαρ αὐτοῦ προσοίσει ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ κατακαλὺπτον τὰ ἐνδόσθια καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐνδοσθίων, 34 καὶ τοὺς δύο νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν, τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μηρίων, καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἥπατος, σὺν τοῖς νεφροῖς περιελεῖ αὐτά· 35 καὶ ἀνοίσει αὐτὰ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κάρπωμα τῷ κυρίῳ· περὶ πλημμελίας ἐστίν. 36 πᾶς ἄρσην ἐκ τῶν ἱερέων ἔδεται αὐτά, ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ ἔδονται αὐτά· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν. 37 ὥσπερ τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, οὕτω καὶ τὸ τῆς πλημμελίας, νόμος εἷς αὐτῶν· ὁ ἱερεὺς ὅστις ἐξειλάσεται, ἐν αὐτῷ ἔσται. 38 καὶ ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ προσάγων ὁλοκαύτωμα ἀνθρώπου, τὸ δέρμα τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως ἧς αὐτὸς προσφέρει αὐτῷ ἔσται. 39 καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἥτις ποιηθήσεται ἐν τῷ κλειβάνῳ, καὶ πᾶσα ἥτις ποιηθήσεται ἐπ’ ἐσχάρας ἢ ἐπὶ τηγάνου, τοῦ ἱερέως τοῦ προσφέροντος αὐτήν, αὐτῷ ἔσται. 40 καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἀναπεποιημένη ἐν ἐλαίῳ καὶ μὴ ἀναπεποιημένη πᾶσι τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἀαρὼν ἔσται, ἑκάστῳ τὸ ἴσον. ⟦7⟧ 1 Οὗτος ὁ νόμος θυσίας σωτηρίου ἣν προσοίσουσιν Κυρίῳ. 2 ἐὰν μὲν περὶ αἰνέσεως προσφέρῃ αὐτήν, καὶ προσοίσει ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας τῆς αἰνέσεως ἄρτους ἐκ σεμιδάλεως ἀναπεποιημένους ἐν ἐλαίῳ, λάγανα ἄζυμα διακεχρεισμένα ἐν ἐλαίῳ, καὶ σεμίδαλιν πεφυραμένην ἐν ἐλαίῳ· 3ἐπ’ ἄρτοις ζυμεῖταις προσοίσει τὰ δῶρα αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ θυσίᾳ αἰνέσεως σωτηρίου. 4 καὶ προσάξει ἓν ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν δώρων αὐτοῦ ἀφαίρεμα Κυρίῳ· τῷ ἱερεῖ τῷ προσχέοντι τὸ αἷμα τοῦ σωτηρίου, αὐτῷ ἔσται· 5 καὶ τὰ κρέα θυσίας αἰνέσεως σωτηρίου, αὐτῷ ἔσται· καὶ ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ δωρεῖται, βρωθήσεται, οὐ καταλίψουσιν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ πρωί. 6 κἂν εὐχὴ ἢ ἑκούσιον θυσιάζῃ τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ, ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ

3 εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 5 κρειου B*; κριου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 ενδοσθια B*; ενδοσθιαια Bc. 13 ουτω B; ουτως F Gött. 13–14 πλημμελιας B*; πλημμελειας Bc Gött. 14 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτω + αυτω F Gött; > A B mins. 16 κλειβανω B*; κλιβανω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 πασι B; πασιν F Gött. 22 ελαιω (1st occ.) + και Bc F Gött; > B* A min. ‖ διακεχρεισμενα B F*; διακεχρισμενα Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 ζυμειταις B*; ζυμιταις Bc Ac Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τα δωρα B Fc Gött; το δωρον A F* b min Eth Arm Bo Sa (= MT sg. ‫)קרבנו‬. 24 εν Contra Swete (B*vid < εν = Bc?), I think εν is present in B* (with Miika Tucker). 26 καταλιψουσιν B*; καταλειψουσιν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 καν B G (et al.) x-527 mins Cyr; και εαν A F mins Gött. ‖ ευχη B* A; ευχην Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

93

But if it is boiled in a bronze vessel, he must rub it out and wash it with water. 29 Every male among the priests must eat them. They are the Lord’s holies of holies. 30 And none of the things for the sin offering from which some of its blood is brought into the tent of testimony to propitiate in the holy place may be eaten. It must be burned completely with fire.” 31 (7.1) “This is the law for the ram for a sinful error. They are holies of holies. 32 (2) At the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offering they must slaughter the ram for a sinful error before the Lord, and he must pour out the blood around the base of the altar. 33 (3) And from it he must bring all its hard fat and the loin and all the hard fat that covers the entrails and all the hard fat that is on the entrails 34 (4) and the two kidneys and the hard fat that is on them, that is on the thigh bones and the lobe that is on the liver, with the kidneys he must remove them. 35 (5) And the priest must offer them up on the altar as an offering to the Lord; it is for a sinful error. 36 (6) Every male among the priests must eat them; in a holy place they must eat them. They are holies of holies. 37 (7) As is that for sin, so is that for a sinful error; there is one law for them. The priest who propitiates with it will be. 38 (8) And as for the priest who brings a person’s whole burnt offering, the skin of the whole burnt offering that he brings must be his. 39 (9) And every sacrifice that may be made in the oven and everything that may be made in a fireplace or in a frying pan is for the priest who brings it; it must be his. 40 (10) And every sacrifice prepared with olive oil or not prepared will belong to all the sons of Aarōn, to each an equal portion.” ⟦7⟧ 1 (7.11) “This is the law for the deliverance sacrifice that they must bring to the Lord. 2 (12) If he brings it for praise, then he must bring for the praise sacrifice cakes of fine flour prepared with olive oil, unleavened cakes spread with olive oil and fine flour kneaded with olive oil. 3 (13) On leavened cakes, he must also bring his gifts for a praise sacrifice for deliverance. 4 (14) And he must bring one out of all his gifts as a choice portion for the Lord. It must be for the priest who pours out the blood of the deliverance. It must be for him. 5 (15) And the meat of the praise sacrifice for deliverance must be for him, and on the day it is given it must be eaten. They must not leave any of it until the morning. 6 (16)

94

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

προσαγάγῃ τὴν θυσίαν αὐτοῦ, βρωθήσεται, καὶ τῇ αὔριον· 7 καὶ τὸ καταλιφθὲν ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν τῆς θυσίας ἕως ἡμέρας τρίτης ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται. 8ἐὰν δὲ φαγὼν φάγῃ ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ, οὐ δεχθήσεται αὐτῷ τῷ προσφέροντι αὐτό, οὐ λογισθήσεται αὐτῷ, μίασμά ἐστιν· ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ ἥτις ἐὰν φάγῃ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν λήμψεται. 9 καὶ κρέα ὃς ἂν ἅψηται παντὸς ἀκαθάρτου, οὐ βρωθήσεται, ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται· πᾶς καθαρὸς φάγεται κρέα. 10 ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ ἥτις ἐὰν φάγῃ ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου οὗ ἐστιν Κυρίου, καὶ ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτοῦ ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ· ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 11 καὶ ψυχὴ ἣ ἂν ἅψηται παντὸς πράγματος ἀκαθάρτου, ἢ ἀπὸ ἀκαθαρσίας ἀνθρώπου ἢ τῶν τετραπόδων τῶν ἀκαθάρτων ἢ παντὸς βδελύγματος ἀκαθάρτου, καὶ φάγῃ ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου ὅ ἐστιν Κυρίου, ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 12 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 13 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ Πᾶν στέαρ βοῶν καὶ προβάτων καὶ αἰγῶν οὐκ ἔδεσθε. 14 καὶ στέαρ θνησιμαίων καὶ θηριαλώτων ποιηθήσεται εἰς πᾶν ἔργον, καὶ εἰς βρῶσιν οὐ βρωθήσεται· 15 πᾶς ὁ ἔσθων στέαρ ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν ὧν προσάξει αὐτῶν κάρπωμα Κυρίου, ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 16 πᾶν αἷμα οὐκ ἔδεσθε ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀπό τε τῶν πετεινῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν. 17 πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἣ ἂν φάγῃ αἷμα, ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 18 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 19 Καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λαλήσεις λέγων Ὁ προσφέρων θυσίαν σωτηρίου Κυρίῳ οἴσει τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ Κυρίῳ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου· 20 αἱ χεῖρες αὐτοῦ προσοίσουσιν τὰ καρπώματα Κυρίῳ· τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ στηθυνίου καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ἥπατος, προσοίσει αὐτὰ ὥστε ἐπιθεῖναι δόμα ἔναντι Κυρίου. 21 καὶ ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ στέαρ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ ἔσται τὸ στηθύνιον Ἀαρὼν καὶ ἔσται τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ. 22 καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιὸν δώσετε ἀφαίρεμα τῷ ἱερεῖ ἀπὸ τῶν θυσιῶν τοῦ σωτηρίου ὑμῶν· 23 ὁ προσφέρων τὸ αἷμα τοῦ σωτηρίου καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Ἀαρών, αὐτῷ ἔσται ὁ βραχίων ὁ δεξιὸς ἐν μερίδι. 24 τὸ γὰρ στηθύνιον τοῦ ἐπιθέματος καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τοῦ ἀφαιρέματος εἴληφα παρὰ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἀπὸ τῶν θυσιῶν τοῦ σωτηρίου ὑμῶν, καὶ ἔδωκα αὐτὰ Ἀαρὼν τῷ ἱερεῖ καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ, νόμιμον αἰώνιον παρὰ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ. 25 Αὕτη ἡ χρίσεις Ἀαρὼν καὶ ἡ χρίσεις τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου, 1 προσαγαγη B* BrMcL Gött; προσαγη Bc. ‖ καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4 εαν B rell; αν M’ G (et al.) mins Cyr Gött. 5 ος αν B* A mins; οσα εαν Bc Swete; οσα αν F Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 εαν B mins rell; αν G (et al.) d n t mins Gött. 7 ου B* A; ο Bc Gött. 12 Ισραηλ + λεγων Bc A F Gött; > B* mins. 13–14 θηριαλωτων Contra Swete (θηριαλωτον A F* also B*?), it appears rather that B* reads θηριαλωτων (with Miika Tucker) Fc Gött. 15 προσαξει + απ Bc A Gött; > B* A* b. ‖ κυριου B*unique; κυριω A F Gött. 16 γη B*unique; > A Gött; τη γη > Bc F. 18 απο B A min; εκ F Gött. 20 και B* A b min; > Bc F Gött. 23 του θυσιαστηριου B A G min; το θυσιαστηριον F Gött. 24 εσται (2nd occ.) B mins; > A F Gött. 26 το (2nd occ.) B A b mins Eth; > F Gött. 30 χρισεις (1st occ.) B*; κρεισις F*; χρισις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ χρισεις (2nd occ.) B*; κρεισις F*; χρισις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

95

And if it is a vow or if he sacrifices his voluntary gift, it must be eaten on the day that he brought his sacrifice and on the following day. 7 (17) And what is left of the meat of the sacrifice until the third day must be burned completely with fire. 8 (18) But when eating, if he should eat some of the meat on the third day, it will not be accepted for him who brings it, nor will it be accounted to him. It is a defilement, and the life who eats any of it will take the sin. 9 (19) And whatever meat that touches any unclean thing must not be eaten; it must be burned completely with fire. Everyone clean will eat meat. 10 (20) But the life who should eat some of the meat of the deliverance sacrifice, of which is the Lord’s, and his uncleanness is on him, that life must be destroyed from his people. 11 (21) And a life who touches any unclean thing, whether from human uncleanness or from unclean quadrupeds or any unclean abomination, and he eats some of the meat of the deliverance sacrifice, which is the Lord’s, that life must be destroyed from his people.” 12 (22) Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 13 (23) “Speak to the sons of Israel: You must not eat any hard fat of cows or of sheep or of goats. 14 (24) And the hard fat of carcasses or of something caught by wild animals may be for any use, but must not be eaten as food. 15 (25) Anyone who eats the hard fat of animals, which he may bring of them as the Lord’s offering, that life must be destroyed from his people. 16 (26) You must not eat any blood, whether from the birds or from the livestock, in any part of the land, in your settlements. 17 (27) Any life who eats blood, that life must be destroyed from his people.” 18 (28) Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 19 (29) “And to the sons of Israel you must speak, saying: The one who brings a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord must bring his own gift to the Lord, even from the deliverance sacrifice. 20 (30) His hands must bring the offerings to the Lord. The hard fat that is on the breast and the lobe of the liver, he must bring them in order to place a gift before the Lord. 21 (31) And the priest must offer up the hard fat on the altar, and the breast will belong to Aarōn and will be for his sons. 22 (32) And you must give as a choice portion for the priest the right shoulder from your deliverance sacrifices. 23 (33) The one who brings the blood of the deliverance and the hard fat which is from the sons of Aarōn will have the right shoulder as a share. 24 (34) For I have taken the breast of the deposit and the shoulder of the choice portion from the sons of Israel, from your deliverance sacrifices, and I have given them to Aarōn the priest and to his sons as an enduring ordinance from the sons of Israel. 25 (35) This is the anointing of

96

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ προσηγάγετο αὐτοὺς τοῦ ἱερατεύειν τῷ κυρίῳ, 26 καθὰ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος δοῦναι αὐτοῖς ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἔχρεισεν αὐτοὺς παρὰ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς αὐτῶν. 27οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων καὶ θυσίας καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ τῆς πλημμελίας καὶ τῆς τελιώσεως καὶ τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου, 28ὃν τρόπον ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινά, ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐνετείλατο τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ προσφέρειν τὰ δῶρα αὐτῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ Σεινά. ⟦8⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάβε Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰς στολὰς αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον τῆς χρείσεως καὶ τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τοὺς δύο κρειοὺς καὶ τὸ κανοῦν τῶν ἀζύμων· 3 καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν συναγωγὴν ἐκκλησίασον ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 4 καὶ ἐποίησεν Μωυσῆς ὃν τρόπον συνέταξεν αὐτῷ Κύριος, καὶ ἐξεκκλησίασεν τὴν συναγωγὴν ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 5 καὶ εἶπεν Μωσῆς τῇ συναγωγῇ Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ῥῆμα, τοῦτό ἐστιν ὃ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος ποιῆσαι. 6 καὶ προσήνεγκεν Μωυσῆς τὸν Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔλουσεν αὐτοὺς ὕδατι· 7 καὶ ἐνέδυσεν αὐτοὺς τὸν χιτῶνα καὶ ἔζωσεν αὐτοὺς τὴν ζώνην· καὶ ἐνέδυσεν αὐτὸν τὸν ὑποδύτην καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπ’ αὐτῷ τὴν ἐπωμείδα, καὶ συνέζωσεν αὐτὸν κατὰ τὴν ποίησιν τῆς ἐπωμίδος καὶ συνέσφιγξεν αὐτὸν ἐν αὐτῇ· 8 καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπ’ αὐτὴν τὸ λόγιον, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ λόγιον τήν δήλωσιν καὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 9 καὶ ἐπέθηκεν τὴν μίτραν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὴν μίτραν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ τὸ πέταλον τὸ χρυσοῦν τὸ καθηγιασμένον ἅγιον, ὅν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 10 καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωυσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τῆς χρείσεως, 11 καὶ ἔρανεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἑπτάκις· (10b) καὶ ἔχρεισεν τὸ θυσιαστήριον καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτό, καὶ πάντα τὰ σκεύη αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸν λουτῆρα καὶ τὴν βάσιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτά· καὶ ἔχρεισεν τὴν σκηνὴν καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτήν. 12 καὶ ἐπέχεεν Μωσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τῆς χρείσεως ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν Ἀαρών, καὶ ἔχρεισεν αὐτὸν καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτόν. 13 καὶ προσήγαγεν Μωυσῆς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρών, καὶ ἐνέδυσεν αὐτοὺς χιτῶνας καὶ ἔζωσεν 2 εχρεισεν B* F*; εχρισεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4–5 πλημμελιας B* Swete BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 5 τελιωσεως B* F*; τελειωσεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 Σεινα B* G; Σινα Bc A F Gött. 7 Σεινα B* G; Σινα Bc A F Gött. 9 χρεισεως B* F*; χρισεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 κρειους B*; κριους Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 13–14 τουτο εστιν B A x-527; > F Gött. 16 αυτους (1st occ.) B* A mins; αυτον Bc F BrMcL Gött. ‖ αυτους (2nd occ.) B* A min; αυτον Bc BrMcL Gött. 17 επ αυτω is possible (B*vid min) but obfuscated by Bc, which itself is unclear but probably reads επ αυτον Bc vid mins Swete BrMcL Gött; αυτω A mins. Here I emend Swete toward B*vid. ‖ επωμειδα B*; επωμιδα Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 αυτην B M’ mins y-121; αυτο A; αυτον F Gött. 22 χρεισεως B* F*; χρισεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ερανεν B; ερρανεν Gött. 23 εχρεισεν B* F; εχρισεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 24 εχρεισεν B*; εχρισεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 26 χρεισεως B* F*; χρισεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ εχρεισεν B F*; εχρισεν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

97

Aarōn and the anointing of his sons from the offerings of the Lord on the day he brought them in order to serve the Lord as priests, 26 (36) just as the Lord commanded to give to them on the day he anointed them out of the sons of Israel. It is an enduring ordinance throughout their generations.” 27 (37) This is the law for the whole burnt offerings and for sacrifice and concerning sin and for a sinful error and for fulfillment and for the deliverance sacrifice, 28 (38) just as the Lord commanded Mōysēs on Mount Seina on the day he commanded the sons of Israel to bring their gifts before the Lord in the Seina wilderness. ⟦8⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Take Aarōn and his sons and his garments and the anointing olive oil and the calf for sin and the two rams and the basket of unleavened bread, 3 and assemble the whole assembly at the door of the tent of testimony.” 4 And Mōysēs did just as the Lord instructed him, and he gathered the assembly at the door of the tent of testimony. 5 And Mōsēs said to the assembly: “This is the matter, this is what the Lord commanded to do.” 6 Then Mōysēs brought Aarōn and his sons, and he washed them with water. 7 And he clothed them with the tunic and fastened them with the belt. Then he clothed him with the undergarment, and he placed on him the shoulder piece, and fastened him up according to the process of the shoulder piece, and he bound him together with it. 8 And he put on it the oracle, and he put on the oracle the interpretation and the truth. 9 And he put the headband on his head, and on the headband over his face he put on the golden leaf that was consecrated as holy, just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs. 10 And Mōysēs took some of the anointing olive oil 11 and sprinkled some of it on the altar seven times and anointed the altar and consecrated it, also all its utensils and the basin and its base, and he consecrated them. And he anointed the tent and everything in it and consecrated it. 12 And Mōsēs poured some of the anointing olive oil over Aarōn’s head and anointed him and consecrated him. 13 And Mōysēs brought

98

5

10

15

20

Text and Translation

αὐτοὺς ζώνας καὶ περιέθηκεν αὐτοῖς κιδάρεις, καθάπερ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 14 καὶ προσήγαγεν Μωυσῆς τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ μόσχου τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας. 15 καὶ ἔσφαξεν αὐτόν· καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτὸ τοῦ ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ. 16 καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωυσῆς πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐνδοσθίων καὶ λοβὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἥπατος καὶ ἀμφοτέρους τοὺς νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν, καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν Μωυσῆς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· 17 καὶ τὸν μόσχον καὶ τὴν βύρσαν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰ κρέα αὐτοῦ καὶ κατέκαυσεν αὐτὰ πυρὶ ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, ὃν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 18 καὶ προσήγαγεν Μωυσῆς τὸν κρειὸν τὸν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ κρειοῦ. 19 καὶ ἔσφαξεν Μωυσῆς τὸν κρειόν· καὶ προσέχεεν Μωσῆς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ· 20 καὶ τὸν κρειὸν ἐκρεανόμησεν κατὰ μέλη, καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν Μωσῆς τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὰ μέλη καὶ τὸ στέαρ. 21 καὶ τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ τούς πόδας ἔπλυνεν ὕδατι, καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν Μωυσῆς ὅλον τὸν κρειὸν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· ὁλοκαύτωμα ὅ ἐστιν εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, κάρπωμά ἐστι τῷ κυρίῳ, καθάπερ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 22 καὶ προσήγαγεν Μωυσῆς τὸν κρειὸν τὸν δεύτερον, κριὸν τελειώσεως· καὶ ἐπέθηκεν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ κρειοῦ. 23 καὶ ἔσφαξεν αὐτόν, καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ὠτὸς Ἀαρὼν τοῦ δεξιοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τῆς χειρὸς τῆς δεξιᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ποδὸς τοῦ δεξιοῦ. 24 καὶ προσήγαγεν Μωυσῆς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρών· καὶ ἐπέθηκεν Μωυσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος ἐπὶ τοὺς λοβοὺς τῶν ὤτων τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἄκρα τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἄκρα τῶν ποδῶν αὐτῶν τῶν δεξιῶν· καὶ προσέχεεν Μωσῆς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ. 25 καὶ ἔλαβεν τὸ στέαρ καὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς κοιλίας καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ

5 θυσιαστηριου + κυκλω τω δακτυλω καὶ εκαθαρισεν το θυσιαστηριον και τὸ αιμα εξεχεεν επι την βασιν του θυσιαστηριου Bmg (below col. 3) Gött; > Btxt unique. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 3, and marked a corresponding ↓ in the margin below the text of col. 3 where he provides the omitted text. ‖ εξειλασασθαι B* F*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 λοβον απο B*; τον λοβον τον απο Bc; τον λοβον τον επι A? F BrMcL Gött. 8 και (3rd occ.) + την κοπρον αυτου Bmg (right of col. 3) Swete Gött; > Btxt unique. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding obelus in the margin to the right of col. 3 where he supplied the omitted text. 10 κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 κρειου B*; κριου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 12 μωσης B G n; μωυσης A F Gött. ‖ κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 εστι No horizontal line is apparent in B* over the last letter in the line that would indicate a final ν (with Miika Tucker). Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 κρειου B*; κριου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ μωσης B* G n; μωυσης Bc A F Gött. 23 μωσης B G; μωυσης A F Gött.

Text and Translation

99

the sons of Aarōn and clothed them with tunics and fastened them with belts and secured headdresses to them, just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs. 14 And Mōysēs brought the calf for sin, and Aarōn and his sons placed their hands on the head of the calf for sin, 15 and he slaughtered it. And Mōsēs took some of the blood and put it on the horns of the altar,2 and he consecrated it to propitiate on it. 16 And Mōysēs took all the hard fat that was on the entrails and a lobe from the liver and both kidneys and the hard fat that was on them, and Mōysēs offered them up on the altar. 17 And the calf and its hide and its meat also he burned them with fire outside the camp, just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs. 18 And Mōysēs brought the ram that was for a whole burnt offering, and Aarōn and his sons placed their hands on the ram’s head. 19 And Mōysēs slaughtered the ram, and Mōsēs poured out the blood against the sides of the altar. 20 And he divided up the ram limb by limb, and Mōsēs offered up the head and the limbs and the hard fat. 21 And the entrails and the feet he washed with water, and Mōysēs offered up the entire ram on the altar. It is a whole burnt offering that is for a sweet smell. It is an offering to the Lord, just as the Lord commanded Mōysēs. 22 And Mōysēs brought the second ram, a ram of fulfillment. And Aarōn and his sons laid their hands on the ram’s head. 23 And he slaughtered it, and Mōsēs took some of its blood and put it on Aarōn’s right ear lobe and on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. 24 And Mōysēs brought the sons of Aarōn, and Mōysēs put some of the blood on their right ear lobes and on the thumbs of their right hands and on the big toes of their right feet. And Mōsēs poured out the blood against the sides of the altar. 25 And he took the hard fat and the loin and the hard fat that was on the

2 Most other witnesses include v. 15d–e: “with his finger, and he purified the altar and poured out the blood at the base of the altar.” See footnote in the Greek text in 8:15.

100

5

10

15

20

Text and Translation

ἥπατος καὶ τοὺς δύο νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιόν· 26 καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ κανοῦ τῆς τελιώσεως τοῦ ὄντος ἔναντι Κυρίου ἔλαβεν ἄρτον ἕνα ἄζυμον καὶ ἄρτον ἐξ ἐλαίου ἕνα καὶ λάγανον ἕν, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ στέαρ καὶ ἐπέθηκεν τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιόν· 27 καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἅπαντα ἐπὶ τὰς χεῖρας Ἀαρὼν καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς χεῖρας τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν αὐτὰ ἀφαίρεμα ἔναντι Κυρίου. 28 καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωσῆς ἀπὸ τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν αὐτὰ Μωσῆς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, ἐπὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα τῆς τελιώσεως, ὅ ἐστιν ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας· κάρπωμά ἐστιν τῷ κυρίῳ. 29 καὶ λαβὼν Μωσῆς τὸ στηθύνιον, ἀφεῖλεν αὐτὸ ἐπίθεμα ἔναντι Κυρίου ἀπὸ τοῦ κρειοῦ τῆς τελιώσεως· καὶ ἐγένετο Μωσῇ ἐν μερίδι, καθὰ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωσῇ. 30 καὶ ἔλαβεν Μωσῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τῆς χρείσεως καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ προσέρανεν ἐπὶ Ἀαρὼν καὶ τὰς στολὰς αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰς στολὰς τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ μετ’ αὐτοῦ. 31 καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ Ἑψήσατε τὰ κρέα ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ, καὶ ἐκεῖ φάγεσθαι αὐτὰ καὶ τοὺς ἄρτους ἐν τῷ κανῷ τῆς τελιώσεως, ὃν τρόπον συντέτακταί μοι λέγων Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ φάγονται ταῦτα· 32 καὶ τὸ καταλιφθὲν τῶν κρεῶν καὶ τῶν ἄρτων ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται. 33 καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς θύσιας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου οὐκ ἐξελεύσεσθε ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, ἕως ἡμέρα πληρωθῇ τελιώσεως ὑμῶν· ἑπτὰ γὰρ ἡμέρας τελιώσει τὰς χεῖρας ὑμῶν, 34 καθάπερ ἐποίησεν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ᾗ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τοῦ ποιῆσαι ὥστε ἐξειλάσασθαι περὶ ὑμῷν. 35 καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου καθήσεσθε ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, ἡμέραν καὶ νύκτα· φυλάξεσθε τὰ φυλάγματα Κυρίου, ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε· οὕτως γὰρ ἐνετείλατό μοι Κύριος 2 τελιωσεως B*; τελειωσεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 3 επεθηκεν (2nd occ.) B*unique; > Bc BrMcL Gött. 7 τελιωσεως B*; τελειωσεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 μωσης B G mins n; μωυσης A F Gött. ‖ κρειου B*; κριου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 τελιωσεως B*; τελειωσεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ μωση (1st occ.) B mins n-458; μωυσης F; μωυση A Gött. ‖ μωση (2nd occ.) B G n; μωυση A F Gött. 10 μωσης B* G n; μωυσης Bc A F Gött. ‖ χρεισεως B* F*; χρισεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 προσερανεν B; προσερρανεν Gött. 12 αυτου (2nd occ.) + και ηγιασεν Ααρων και τας στολας αυτου και τους υιους αυτου και τας στολας των υιων αυτου μετ αυτου Bmg (above col. 3) F Gött; > Btxt A. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↓ in the margin to the left of col. 3 and an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↑ in the margin above the text of col. 3 where he supplied the omitted text. Since Bc includes μετ αυτου at the end of its marginal text, we see that Bc misplaced the obelus within the text (above and between the υ of αυτου and the μ of μετα), but should have placed it where I inserted the reference above. 14 φαγεσθαι B A; φαγεσθε Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. ‖ αρτους + τους Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* mins t y-392. ‖ τελιωσεως B*; τελειωσεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 ταυτα B* A; αυτα Bc? F Gött. 15–16 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 θυσιας B*unique; θυρας Bc Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 τελιωσεως B; τελειωσεως Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 18 τελιωσει B*; τελειωσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19 η OG-F; > F Gött. ‖ εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθε F*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

101

entrails and the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys and the hard fat on them and the right shoulder. 26 And from the basket of fulfillment that is before the Lord he took one unleavened cake and one olive oil cake and one wafer, and he placed them on the hard fat and he placed the right shoulder. 27 He placed all these on Aarōn’s hands and on his sons’ hands, and he offered them up as a choice portion before the Lord. 28 Then Mōsēs took them from their hands, and Mōsēs offered them up on the altar on the whole burnt offering of fulfillment, which is a sweet smell. It is an offering to the Lord. 29 And after Mōsēs took the breast, he separated it as a deposit before the Lord, from the ram of fulfillment, and it was a portion for Mōsēs, as the Lord commanded Mōsēs. 30 And Mōsēs took some of the anointing olive oil and some of the blood that was on the altar and sprinkled them on Aarōn and his garments, and his sons and his sons’ garments with him.3 31 And Mōysēs said to Aarōn and his sons, “Boil the meat in the court of the tent of testimony in a holy place, and there eat it and the cakes in the basket of fulfillment, just as I was instructed, saying, “Aarōn and his sons must eat these.” 32 And what remains of the meat and the cakes must be burned completely with fire. 33 And from the sacrifice of the tent of testimony you must not go out for seven days until the day of your fulfillment is completed; because for seven days he will fulfill your hands. 34 As he did on this day that which the Lord commanded to do in order that propitiation be made for you. 35 And you must sit at the door of the tent of testimony for seven days, day and night. You must keep the Lord’s orders so that you do not die; for

3 Most other witnesses include v. 30c: “and he consecrated Aarōn and his garments and his sons and his sons’ garments with him.” See footnote in the Greek text after 8:30.

102

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ὁ θεός. 36 καὶ ἐποίησεν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ πάντας τοὺς λόγους οὓς συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωσῇ. ⟦9⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐγενήθη τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ ἐκάλεσεν Μωσῆς Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν γερουσίαν Ἰσραήλ. 2 καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς πρὸς Ἀαρών Λάβε σεαυτῷ μοσχάριον ἁπαλὸν ἐκ βοῶν περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ κρειὸν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, ἄμωμα, καὶ προσένεγκε αὐτὰ ἔναντι Κυρίου· 3καὶ τῇ γερουσίᾳ Ἰσραὴλ λάλησον λέγων Λάβετε χείμαρρον ἐξ αἰγῶν ἕνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας, καὶ μοσχάριον καὶ ἀμνὸν ἐνιαύσιον εἰς ὁλοκάρπωσιν, ἄμωμα, 4 καὶ μόσχον καὶ κρειὸν εἰς θυσίαν σωτηρίου ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ σεμίδαλιν πεφυραμένην ἐν ἐλαίῳ· ὅτι σήμερον Κύριος ὀφθήσεται ἐν ὑμῖν. 5 καὶ ἔλαβον καθὸ ἐνετείλατο Μωυσῆς ἀπέναντι τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ προσῆλθεν πᾶσα συναγωγή, καὶ ἔστησαν ἔναντι Κυρίου. 6 καὶ εἶπεν Μωσῆς Τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα ὃ εἶπεν Κύριος ποιήσατε, καὶ ὀφθήσεται ἐν ὑμῖν δόξα Κυρίου. 7 καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς τῷ Ἀαρών Πρόσελθε πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ποίησον τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας σου καὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμά σου, καὶ ἐξείλασαι περὶ σεαυτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου σου· καὶ ποίησον τὰ δῶρα τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐξείλασε περὶ αὐτῶν, καθάπερ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 8 Καὶ προσῆλθεν Ἀαρὼν πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἔσφαξεν τὸ μοσχάριον τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας· 9 καὶ προσήνεγκαν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν τὸ αἷμα πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ ἔβαψεν τὸν δάκτυλον εἰς τὸ αἷμα καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ τὸ αἷμα ἐξέχεεν ἐπὶ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου· 10 καὶ τὸ στέαρ καὶ τοὺς νεφροὺς καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ἥπατος τοῦ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἀνήνεγκεν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, ὃν τρόπον ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωσῇ· 11 καὶ τὰ κρέα καὶ τὴν βύρσαν κατέκαυσεν αὐτὰ πυρὶ ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς. 12 καὶ ἔσφαξεν τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα· καὶ προσήνεγκαν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν καὶ τὸ αἷμα πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ προσέχεεν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ· 13 καὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα, προσήνεγκαν αὐτὸ κατὰ μέλη, αὐτὰ καὶ τὴν κεφαλήν, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· 14 καὶ ἔπλυνεν τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ τοὺς πόδας ὕδατι καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον. 15 Καὶ προσήνεγκαν τὸ δῶρον τοῦ λαοῦ· καὶ ἔλαβεν τὸν χείμαρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἔσφαξεν αὐτὸ καθὰ καὶ τὸ πρῶτον. 16 καὶ προσήνεγκεν τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐποίησεν αὐτὸ ὡς καθήκει. 17 καὶ προσήνεγκεν τὴν θυσίαν, καὶ ἔπλησεν τὰς χεῖρας ἀπ’ αὐτῆς, καὶ ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον χωρὶς τοῦ ὁλοκαυτώματος τοῦ πρωινοῦ. 18 καὶ ἔσφαξεν τὸν μόσχον καὶ 1 ο θεος B A x-527 y-318 mins Cyr; > F Gött. 2 μωση B G n; μωυση A F Gött. ‖ μωσης B G mins n Cyr; μωυσης A F Gött. 4 απαλον B*unique; > Bc OG-B* Gött. ‖ κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 χειμαρρον B* A F*; χιμαρον Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 κρειον B*; κριον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 μωσης B; μωυσης A F Gött. 12 και This large ¶ Leu 8:6–9:6 has been stained on col. 3, p. 107 and col. 1, p. 108. The lacuna that must be reconstructed from other mss. extends from Leu 8:12–16 (recto) and Leu 8:20–23 (verso). 13 εξειλασαι B*; εξιλασε F*; εξιλασαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 εξειλασε B*; εξιλασε Bc F*; εξιλασαι Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19 του (2nd occ.) B* A b mins Arab Gött; τον επι του Bmg (right of col. 2) F. 20 μωση B; μωυση A F Gött. 22 και (1st occ.) Bunique; > A F G M mins Gött. 26 χειμαρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; κιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτο B A* mins; + και εκαθαρισεν Ac; + αυτον και εκαθαρισεν αυτον F Gött.

Text and Translation

103

so the Lord God commanded me.” 36 Then Aarōn and his sons did all the things that the Lord instructed Mōsēs. ⟦9⟧ 1 And it came about on the eighth day that Mōsēs called Aarōn and his sons and the council of Israel’s elders. 2 And Mōysēs said to Aarōn, “Take for yourself a tender little calf from the cows for sin and a ram for a whole burnt offering, unblemished, and bring them before the Lord. 3 And speak to the council of Israel’s elders, saying, ‘Take a billy goat from the goats, one for sin, and a little calf and an unblemished lamb a year old for a whole burnt offering, 4 and a calf and a ram for a deliverance sacrifice before the Lord, and fine flour mixed with olive oil, because today the Lord will be seen among you.’” 5 And they took them to the front of the tent of testimony as Mōysēs commanded, and the entire assembly approached, and they stood before the Lord. 6 And Mōsēs said: “This is the matter that the Lord said you must do, and the Lord’s glory will be seen among you.” 7 Then Mōysēs said to Aarōn, “Approach the altar, and perform the one for your sin and your whole burnt offering, and propitiate for yourself and your house. And perform the people’s gifts, and propitiate for them, as the Lord commanded Mōysēs.” 8 And Aarōn approached the altar and slaughtered the little calf for sin. 9 And Aarōn’s sons brought the blood to him, and he dipped his finger into the blood, and he put it on the altar’s horns, and he poured out the blood at the base of the altar. 10 And the hard fat and the kidneys and the lobe of the liver of the one for sin he offered up on the altar, just as the Lord commanded Mōsēs. 11 And the meat and the hide he burned them completely by fire outside the camp. 12 And he slaughtered the whole burnt offering. And Aarōn’s sons also brought the blood to him, and he poured it out against sides of the altar. 13 And the whole burnt offering, they brought it limb by limb, them and the head, and he placed them on the altar. 14 And he washed the entrails and the feet with water, and he placed them on the whole burnt offering on the altar. 15 And he brought the people’s gift. And he took the billy goat for the people’s sin, and he slaughtered it like the first time. 16 And he brought the whole burnt offering and completed it as was appropriate. 17 And he brought the sacrifice, and he filled his hands with some of it and placed it on the altar separate from the whole burnt offering from the morning. 18 And he slaughtered the calf

104

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

τὸν κριὸν τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου τῆς τοῦ λαοῦ· καὶ προσήνεγκαν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν τὸ αἷμα πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ προσέχεεν πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ· 19 καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἀπὸ τοῦ μόσχου καὶ τοῦ κρειοῦ, τὴν ὀσφὺν καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ κατακαλύπτον ἐπὶ τῆς κοιλίας καὶ τοὺς δύο νεφροὺς καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῶν καὶ τὸν λοβὸν τὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἥπατος· 20 καὶ ἐπέθηκεν τὰ στέατα ἐπὶ τὰ στηθύνια, καὶ ἀνήνεγκαν τὰ στέατα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· 21 καὶ τὸ στηθύνιον καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιὸν ἀφεῖλεν Ἀαρὼν ἀφαίρεμα ἔναντι Κυρίου, ὃν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 22 Καὶ ἐξάρας Ἀαρὼν τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὸν λαὸν εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς, καὶ κατέβη ποιήσας τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ τὰ τοῦ σωτηρίου. 23 καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Μωσῆς καὶ Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ ἐξελθόντες εὐλόγησαν πάντα τὸν λαόν· καὶ ὤφθη ἡ δόξα Κυρίου παντὶ τῷ λαῷ. 24 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου, καὶ κατέφαγεν τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, τά τε ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ τὰ στέατα· καὶ εἶδεν πᾶς ὁ λαὸς καὶ ἐξέστη, καὶ ἔπεσαν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον. ⟦10⟧ 1 Καὶ λαβόντες οἱ δύο υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν Ναδὰβ καὶ Ἀβιοὺδ ἕκαστος τὸ πυρεῖον αὐτοῦ ἐπέθηκαν ἐπ’ αὐτὸ πῦρ καὶ ἐπέβαλον ἐπ’ αὐτὸ θυμίαμα, καὶ προσήνεγκαν ἔναντι Κυρίου πῦρ ἀλλότριον ὃ οὐ προσέταξεν κύριος αὐτοῖς. 2 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου καὶ κατέφαγεν αὐτούς, καὶ ἀπέθανον ἔναντι Κυρίου. 3 καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς πρὸς Ἀαρών Τοῦτό ἐστιν ὃ εἶπεν Κύριος λέγων Ἐν τοῖς ἐγγίζουσίν μοι ἁγιασθήσομαι, καὶ ἐν πάσῃ συναγωγῇ δοξασθήσομαι· καὶ κατενύχθη Ἀαρών. 4 καὶ ἐκάλεσεν Μωυσῆς τὸν Μισαδαὶ καὶ τὸν Ἐλισαφάν, υἱοὺς Ἀζιήλ, υἱοὺς τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς Ἀαρών, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Προσέλθατε καὶ ἄρατε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑμῶν ἐκ προσώπου τῶν ἁγίων ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς. 6 καὶ εἶπεν Μωσῆς πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ Ἐλεαζὰρ καὶ Ἰθαμὰρ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ τοὺς καταλελιμμένους Τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑμῶν οὐκ ἀποκιδαρώσετε καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια ὑμῶν οὐ διαρρήξετε, ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν συναγωγὴν ἔσται θυμός· οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ὑμῶν πᾶς ὁ οἶκος Ἰσραὴλ κλαύσονται τὸν ἐνπυρισμὸν ὃν ἐνεπυρίσθησαν ὑπὸ Κυρίου. 7 καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου οὐκ ἐξελεύσεσθε, ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε· τὸ γὰρ ἔλαιον τῆς χρείσεως τὸ παρὰ Κυρίου ἐφ’ ὑμῖν. καὶ ἐποίησαν κατὰ τὸ ῥῆμα Μωσῆ. 2 προς (2nd occ.) OG; επι mins C’’ b d n-54 t Co Gött. 3 κρειου B*; κριου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 μωσης B G n mins Cyr; μωυσης A Gött. 19 παση + τη Bc A Gött; > B* mins. 20 μισαδαι B A mins Arm Sa; μισαηλ Gött. ‖ Αζιηλ B min; Οζιηλ A Fb G rell Gött. 21 προσελθατε B* et al. Gött; προσελθετε Fb M’ mins oI C’’d s-30 t x-509 z Göttc. 22 παρεμβολης + v. 5 και προσηλθον και ηραν εν τοις χιτωσιν αυτων εξω της παρεμβολης ον τροπον ειπεν Μωυσης Bmg (below col. 1) OG-Btxt Gött Swete; > Btxt mins Eth Arabtxt. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 1 and with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↓ in the margin above the text of col. 3 where he supplied the omitted text. 23 μωσης B G n; μωυσης A Gött. 24 καταλελιμμενους B; καταλελειμμενους Gött. 25 οι + δε Gött (δ min); > B A mins y-318 Bo. 26 ενπυρισμον B*; εμπυρισον A*; εμπυρισμον Bc Ac Gött (εμπρησμον mins; εμπρισμον mins). Bc not only superscripts the μ, but adds a stroke in the text (from ν to μ). 28 χρεισεως B*; χρισεως Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ μωση B G n; μωυση A Gött.

Text and Translation

105

and the ram of the people’s deliverance sacrifice. And Aarōn’s sons brought the blood to him, and he poured it out towards the sides of the altar, 19 also the hard fat of the calf and of the ram, the loin and the hard fat that covers over the entrails and the two kidneys and the hard fat on them and the lobe on the liver. 20 And he placed the hard fat pieces on the breasts, and he offered up the hard fat pieces on the altar. 21 But the breast and the right shoulder Aarōn removed as a choice portion before the Lord, just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs. 22 And when Aarōn raised his hands over the people, he blessed them. And he came down when he completed the one for sin and the whole burnt offerings and those of the deliverance. 23 Then Mōsēs and Aarōn entered into the tent of testimony, and when they came out, they blessed all the people, and the Lord’s glory was seen by all the people. 24 And fire came out from the Lord and devoured the things on the altar, both the whole burnt offerings and the hard fats. And all the people saw it and were astonished and fell down on their faces. ⟦10⟧ 1 And when Aarōn’s two sons Nadab and Abioud each took his censer, they put fire on it and threw incense on it and brought before the Lord strange fire which the Lord had not ordered them. 2 And fire came out from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord. 3 Then Mōysēs said to Aarōn, “This is what the Lord said, saying, ‘Among those who are near to me I will be sanctified, and among every assembly I will be glorified.’” And Aarōn was stunned. 4 Then Mōysēs summoned Misadai and Elisaphan sons of Aziēl, sons of the brother of Aarōn’s father, and he said to them, “Approach and carry your brothers out of the presence of the holy things, outside the camp.” 54 6 Then Mōsēs said to Aarōn and Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons who remained, “You must not remove the turban from your head, and you must not tear your garments so that you do not die and wrath will be over the entire assembly. Your brothers, the entire house of Israel, must weep over the burning by which they were burnt by the Lord. 7 And you must not go out of the door of the tent of testimony so that you do not die, for the anointing olive oil from the Lord is on you.” And they did according to the word of Mōsēs.

4 Most other witnesses include v. 5: “And they approached and carried [them] by their tunics outside the camp which was the manner Mōysēs had said.” See footnote in the Greek text after 10:4.

106

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

8 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος τῷ Ἀαρὼν λέγων 9 Οἶνον καὶ σίκερα οὐ πίεσθε, σὺ καὶ οἱ υἱοί σου μετὰ σοῦ, ἡνίκα ἂν εἰσπορεύησθε εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου, ἢ προσπορευομένων ὑμῶν πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἀποθάνητε· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν· 10διαστεῖλαι ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἁγίων καὶ τῶν βεβήλων, καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἀκαθάρτων καὶ τῶν καθαρῶν. 11 καὶ συμβιβάσεις τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ πάντα τὰ νόμιμα ἃ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς αὐτοὺς διὰ χειρὸς Μωσῆ. 12 Καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ πρὸς Ἐλεαζὰρ καὶ Ἰθαμὰρ τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς καταλιφθέντας Λάβετε τὴν θυσίαν τὴν καταλιφθεῖσαν ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου, καὶ φάγεσθε ἄζυμα παρὰ τὸ θυσιαστήριον· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν. 13 καὶ ἄγεσθε αὐτὴν ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ· νόμιμον αἰώνιον γάρ σοί ἐστιν καὶ νόμιμον τοῖς υἱοῖς σου τοῦτο ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου· οὕτω γὰρ ἐντέταλταί μοι. 14 καὶ τὸ στηθύνιον τοῦ ἀφορίσματος καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τοῦ ἀφαιρέματος φάγεσθε ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ, σὺ καὶ οἱ υἱοί σου καὶ ὁ οἶκός σου μετὰ σοῦ· νόμιμον γὰρ σοὶ καὶ νόμιμον τοῖς υἱοῖς σου ἐδόθη ἀπὸ τῶν θυσιῶν τοῦ σωτηρίου τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ. 15 τὸν βραχίονα τοῦ ἀφαιρέματος καὶ τὸ στηθύνιον τοῦ ἀφορίσματος ἐπὶ τῶν καρπωμάτων τῶν στεάτων προσοίσουσιν, ἀφόρισμα ἀφορίσαι ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ ἔσται σοὶ καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς σου καὶ ταῖς θυγατράσιν σου μετὰ σοῦ νόμιμον αἰώνιον, ὃν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. 16 Καὶ τὸν χείμαρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ζητῶν ἐξεζήτησεν Μωσῆς, καὶ ὅδε ἐνπεπύριστο· καὶ ἐθυμώθη Μωσῆς ἐπὶ Ἐλεαζὰρ καὶ Ἰθαμὰρ τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς καταλελιμμένους λέγων 17 Διὰ τί οὐκ ἐφάγετε τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ; ὅτι γὰρ ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν, τοῦτο ἔδωκεν ὑμῖν φαγεῖν, ἵνα ἀφέληται τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τῆς συναγωγῆς καὶ ἐξειλάσησθε περὶ αὐτῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου. 18 οὐ γὰρ εἰσήχθη τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον· κατὰ πρόσωπον ἔσω φάγεσθε αὐτὸ ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ, ὃν τρόπον μοι συνέταξεν Κύριος. 19 καὶ ἐλάλησεν Ἀαρὼν πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰ σήμερον προσαγιόχασιν τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα αὐτῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ συμβέβηκέν μοι ταῦτα, καὶ φάγομαι τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας σήμερον, μὴ ἀρεστὸν ἔσται Κυρίῳ; 20 καὶ ἤκουσεν Μωυσῆς, καὶ ἤρεσεν αὐτῷ.

6 μωση B G n Cyr 841; μωυση A Gött. 7 προς (2nd occ.) Gött; > Göttc. 8 καταλιφθεντας B*; καταλειφθεντας Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ καταλιφθεισαν B*; καταλειφθεισαν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 αγεσθε B*unique; φαγεσθε Bc (superscr φ) Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 αιωνιον Bunique; > Gött. 11 ουτω B; ουτος min; ουτως Gött. 17 χειμαρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 μωσης OG-F; μωυσης F Gött. ‖ ενπεπυριστο B*vid min; εμπεπυριστο A F mins b f n y-392 Cyr; ενεπεπυριστο Bc (νε sup ras) Gött. The slightly distinguishable paleography of the letters νε of ενεπε. indicates that Bc has written over an erasure of text. 19 μωσης B G min n Cyr; μωυσης A F Gött. 21 αφεληται B*vid (αφελησται b-537); αφελητε Bc Swete Gött. The αι of B* was effaced and rewritten with an ε by Bc. The extra space around Bc implies B*. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 21–22 εξειλασησθε B*; εξιλασησθε Bc Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 24 προσαγιοχασιν B* F; προσαγηοχασιν Bc; προσαγειοχασιν A Gött.

Text and Translation

107

8 Then the Lord spoke to Aarōn, saying: 9 “You must not drink wine or sikera, neither you nor your sons with you, whenever you enter into the tent of testimony or you are approaching the altar, and you will not die. It is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations 10 to distinguish between holy things and profane things and between unclean things and clean things, 11 and you must teach the sons of Israel all the ordinances that the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Mōsēs.” 12 Then Mōysēs said to Aarōn and to Eleazar and Ithamar, Aarōn’s sons who remained: “Take the sacrifice that is left over from the Lord’s offerings, and you must eat it unleavened near the altar. They are holies of holies. 13 And you must take it with you into a holy place. For it is an enduring ordinance for you and an ordinance for your sons; this is from the Lord’s offerings, for so I have been commanded. 14 And the breast from what has been set apart and the shoulder from the choice portion you must eat in a holy place, you and your sons and your house with you, for it was given as an ordinance to you and as an ordinance to your sons, from the deliverance sacrifices of the sons of Israel. 15 The shoulder of the choice portion and the breast of what was set apart you must bring besides the sacrifices of the hard fats, to set apart what was set apart before the Lord. And it will be for you and for your sons and for your daughters with you as an enduring ordinance.” It was just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs. 16 Then Mōsēs searched and inquired about the goat for sin, and this had been burnt up. And Mōsēs was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, Aarōn’s remaining sons, saying, 17 “Why did you not eat the one for sin in a holy place? For because they are holies of holies, he gave this to you to eat so that it might be taken away, the assembly’s sin, and so that you might propitiate for them before the Lord. 18 For it was not brought with its blood into the holy place. You must eat it in a holy place facing inside, just as the Lord instructed me.” 19 Then Aarōn spoke to Mōysēs, saying, “If today they have brought before the Lord the things for their sin and their whole burnt offerings, and these things have happened to me, and if I must eat the things for sin today, will it be pleasing to the Lord?” 20 And Mōysēs heard this, and it pleased him.

108

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

⟦11⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων 2 Λαλήσατε τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγοντες Ταῦτα τὰ κτήνη τὰ φάγεσθε ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς· 3 πᾶν κτῆνος διχηλοῦν ὁπλὴν καὶ ὀνυχιστῆρας ὀνυχίζον δύο χηλῶν καὶ ἀνάγον μηρυκισμόν, ἐν τοῖς κτήνεσιν, ταῦτα φάγεσθε. 4 πλὴν ἀπὸ τούτων οὐ φάγεσθε, ἀπὸ τῶν ἀναγόντων μηρυκισμὸν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν διχηλούντων τὰς ὁπλὰς καὶ ὀνυχιζόντων ὀνυχιστῆρας· τὸν κάμηλον, ὅτι ἀνάγει μηρυκισμὸν τοῦτο ὁπλὴν δὲ οὐ διχηλεῖ, ἀκάθαρτον τοῦτο ὑμῖν· 5 καὶ τὸν δασύποδα, ὅτι ἀνάγει μηρυκισμὸν τοῦτο καὶ ὁπλὴν οὐ διχηλεῖ, ἀκάθαρτον τοῦτο ὑμῖν· 6 καὶ τὸν χοιρογρύλλον, ὅτι ἀνάγει μηρυκισμὸν τοῦτο καὶ ὁπλὴν οὐ διχηλεῖ, ἀκάθαρτον τοῦτο ὑμῖν. 7 καὶ τὸν ὗν, ὅτι διχηλεῖ ὁπλὴν τοῦτο καὶ ὀνυχίζει ὄνυχας ὁπλῆς, καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀνάγει μηρυκισμόν, ἀκάθαρτον τοῦτο ὑμῖν. 8 ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν αὐτῶν οὐ φάγεσθε, καὶ τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν οὐκ ἅψεσθε· ἀκάθαρτα ταῦτα ὑμῖν. 9 Καὶ ταῦτα ἃ φάγεσθε ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐν τοῖς ὕδασιν· πάντα ὅσα ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς πτερύγια καὶ λεπίδες ἐν τοῖς ὕδασιν καὶ ἐν ταῖς θαλάσσαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς χιμάρροις, ταῦτα φάγεσθε. 10 καὶ πάντα ὅσα οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῖς πτερύγια οὐδὲ λεπίδες ἐν τῷ ὕδατι ἢ ἐν ταῖς θαλάσσαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς χιμάρροις, ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐρεύγεται τὰ ὕδατα καὶ ἀπὸ πάσης ψυχῆς ζώσης τῆς ἐν τῷ ὕδατι, βδέλυγμά ἐστιν. 11 καὶ βδελύγματα ἔσονται ὑμῶν· ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔδεσθε, καὶ τὰ θνησιμαῖα αὐτῶν βδελύξεσθε. 12 καὶ πάντα ὅσα οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῖς πτερύγια καὶ λεπίδες τῶν ἐν τῷ ὕδατι, βδέλυγμα τοῦτό ἐστιν ὑμῖν. 13 Καὶ ταῦτα ἃ βδελύξεσθε ἀπὸ τῶν πετεινῶν, καὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται, βδέλυγμά ἐστιν· τὸν ἀετὸν καὶ τὸν γρύπα καὶ τὸν ἁλιέτον, 14 καὶ τὸν γύπα καὶ ἴκτεινα καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, 16 καὶ στρουθὸν καὶ γλαῦκα καὶ λάρον καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, καὶ ἱέρακα καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, 17 καὶ νυκτικόρακα καὶ καταράκτην καὶ εἶβιν 18 καὶ πορφυρίωνα καὶ πελεκᾶνα καὶ κύκνον 19 καὶ γλαῦκα καὶ ἀρωδιὸν καὶ χαραδριὸν καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, καὶ ἔποπα καὶ νυκτερίδα. 20 Καὶ πάντα τὰ ἑρπετὰ τῶν πετεινῶν ἃ πορεύεται ἐπὶ τέσσερα, βδελύγματά ἐστιν ὑμῖν. 21 ἀλλὰ ταῦτα φάγεσθε ἀπὸ τῶν ἑρπετῶν τῶν πετεινῶν 2 τα (2nd occ.) B*unique; α Bc Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ απο + παντων Bc A F Gött; > B* mins Latcod 100. 8 χοιρογρυλλον B* min; χυρογλυλλιον A mins Bo; χοιρογρυλλιον Bc Fb Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 ουκ B* A; ουχ Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 12 α B A n-127 Eth Arm; > F Gött. 13 χιμαρροις B*; χειμαρροις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 τω υδατι B A G mins x Sa; τοις υδασι F; τοις υδασιν Gött. 15 χιμαρροις B*; χειμαρροις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 εστιν There seems to be a faint horizontal mark, indicating a final ν, which Bc has scratched out (with Miika Tucker). ‖ υμων B* Bo; υμιν Bc OG-B* BrMcL Gött. 18 τω υδατι B A O-15 mins Latcod 100; τοις υδασιν F Gött. 19 α B Latcod 100 Eth Arm; > A F Gött. 20 αλιετον B A Fc mins; αλιαετον Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ και (4th occ.) + τον F Gött; > B A mins f 246 Cyr. ‖ ικτεινα B*; ικτινα Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here emend Swete toward B*. 21 αυτω (1st occ.) + και κορακα και τα ομοια αυτω Bmg (below col. 2) F Gött; > A Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 2 and with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↓ and obelus in the margin below the text of col. 2 where he supplied the omitted text. 22 ειβιν B* BrMcL; ιβειν F; ιβιν Bc A Gött. 23 και γλαυκα OG; > Fb Gött. ‖ αρωδιον B* A Fa mins; ερωδιον Bc F* Gött. 24–25 τεσσερα B* A min; τεσσαρα Bc x Cyr 929; τεσσαρων F Gött.

Text and Translation

109

⟦11⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: These are the animals that you must eat from the animals that are in the land. 3 Any animal that divides the hoof and splits hooves into two hooves and brings up the cud among the animals, these you must eat. 4 But you must not eat from these, from the ones that bring up the cud, and from the ones that divide the hoof and split hooves: the camel, because it brings up the cud but does not split the hoof, this one is unclean for you. 5 And the hare, because this one brings up the cud but does not split the hoof, this one is unclean for you. 6 And the rabbit, because this one brings up the cud but does not split the hoof, this one is unclean for you. 7 And the pig, because this one divides the hoof and pairs the claws of the hoof, but does not bring up the cud, this one is unclean for you. 8 You must not eat any of their flesh, and you must not touch their carcasses; these things are unclean for you. 9 And these are the ones that you must eat of all that are in the waters. All those with fins and scales in the waters and in the seas and in the wadis, these you must eat. 10 And all those without fins or scales in the water or in the seas and in the wadis, of all the things that the waters discharge and of every living life that is in the water, are detestable. 11 And they must be your abominations. You must not eat any of their meat, and you must loath their carcasses. 12 And all those without fins and scales, among those in the water, this is detestable to you. 13 And these are the ones that you must loath among the birds, and they must not be eaten; they are detestable: the eagle and the bearded vulture and the sea eagle 14 and the vulture and kite and those similar to it,5 16 and ostrich and little owl and seagull and those similar to it, and hawk and those similar to it, 17 and horned owl and cormorant and ibis 18 and water hen and pelican and swan 19 and owl and heron and plover and those similar to it, and hoopoe and bat. 20 And all crawling things with wings that walk upon on all fours must be abominations to you. 21 But these you must eat from the crawling things with wings that walk on all

5 Other witnesses include the plus, the entirety of v. 15: “and a raven and those like it.” See footnote in the Greek text at 11:15.

110

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἃ πορεύεται ἐπὶ τέσσερα· ἔχει σκέλη ἀνώτερον τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ πηδᾷν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. 22 καὶ ταῦτα φάγεσθε ἀπ’ αὐτῶν· τὸν βροῦχον καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, καὶ τὸν ἀττάκην καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, καὶ τὴν ἀκρίδα καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῇ, καὶ τὸν ὀφιομάχην καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ. 23 πᾶν ἑρπετὸν ἀπὸ τῶν πετεινῶν οἷς ἐστὶν τέσσαρες πόδες, βδελύγματά ἐστιν ὑμῖν. 24 Καὶ ἐν τούτοις μιανθήσεσθε· πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἕως ἑσπέρας, 25 καὶ πᾶς ὁ αἴρων τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 26 καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς κτήνεσιν ὅ ἐστιν διχηλοῦν ὁπλὴν καὶ ὀνυχιστῆρας ὀνυχίζει καὶ μηρυκισμὸν οὐ μαρυκᾶται, ἀκάθαρτα ἔσονται ὑμῖν· πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 27 καὶ πᾶς ὃς πορεύεται ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς θηρίοις ἃ πορεύεται ἐπὶ τέσσερα, ἀκάθαρτα ὑμῖν ἔσται· πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας, 28 καὶ ὁ αἴρων τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· ἀκάθαρτα ταῦτα ὑμῖν ἐστιν. 29 Καὶ ταῦτα ὑμῖν ἀκάθαρτα ἀπὸ τῶν ἑρπετῶν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς· ἡ γαλῆ καὶ ὁ μῦς καὶ ὁ κορκόδειλος ὁ χερσαῖος, 30 μυγαλῆ καὶ χαμηλέων καὶ καλαβώτης καὶ σαῦρα καὶ ἀσπάλαξ. 31 ταῦτα ἀκάθαρτα ὑμῖν ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἑρπετῶν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς· πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος αὐτῶν τεθνηκότων ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 32 καὶ πᾶν ἐφ’ ὃ ἂν ἐπιπέσῃ ἀπ’ αὐτῶν τεθνηκότων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται, ἀπὸ παντὸς σκεύους ξυλίνου ἢ ἱματίου ἢ δέρματος ἢ σάκκου· πᾶν σκεῦος ὃ ἐὰν ποιηθῇ ἔργον ἐν αὐτῷ εἰς ὕδωρ βαφήσεται, καὶ ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται ἕως ἐσπέρας, καὶ καθαρὸν ἔσται. 33 καὶ πᾶν σκεῦος ὀστράκινον εἰς ὃ ἐὰν πέσῃ ἀπὸ τούτων ἔνδον, ὅσα ἐὰν ἔνδον ἦν ἀκάθαρτα ἔσται, καὶ αὐτὸ συντριβήσεται. 34 καὶ πᾶν βρῶμα ὃ ἔσθεται, εἰς ὃ ἐὰν ἀπέλθῃ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ὕδωρ, ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται· καὶ πᾶν ποτὸν ὃ πείνεται ἐν παντὶ ἀγγίῳ ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται. 35 καὶ πᾶν ὃ ἐὰν πέσῃ ἀπὸ τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἐπ’ αὐτό, ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται· κλείβανοι καὶ κυθρόποδες καθαιρεθήσονται· ἀκάθαρτα ταῦτά ἐστιν, καὶ ἀκάθαρτα ταῦτα ὑμῖν ἔσονται. 36 πλὴν πηγῶν ὑδάτων καὶ λάκκου καὶ συναγωγῆς ὕδατος· ἔσται καθαρόν· ὁ δὲ ἁπτόμενος τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται. 37 ἐὰν δὲ ἐπιπέσῃ τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἐπὶ πᾶν σπέρμα σπόριμον ὃ σπαρήσεται, καθαρὸν ἔσται· 38 ἐὰν δὲ ἐπιχυθῇ ὕδωρ ἐπὶ πᾶν σπέρμα, καὶ ἐπιπέσῃ τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἐπ’ 1 τεσσερα B* A mins; τεσσαρα Bc x Phil min Cyr 929; τεσσαρων F Gött. ‖ τεσσερα + α Bc F Gött; > B* A mins. 5 βδελυγματα B* A Cyr 929 Sa; βδελυγμα Bc F BrMcL Gött. ‖ εστιν υμιν B; υμιν εστιν A F Gött. 6 ακαθαρτος + εσται Bc A F Gött; > B*unique. 10–11 τεσσερα B* A min; τεσσαρα Bc min Cyr 933; τεσσαρων F Gött. 11 υμιν εσται B* min; εστιν υμιν F; εσται υμιν Bc A BrMcL Gött. 12 ιματια + αυτου Bmg (right of col. 1); > B* Swete BrMcL Gött. 14 των + ερποντων F Gött; > B A mins Cyr 933. ‖ κορκοδειλος B* mins; κροκοδειλος Bc Swete BrMcL; κορκοδιλος A F* mins; κροκοδιλος Fb Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 χαμηλεων B A min; ο καμαιλεων F M’ mins (= MT ‫;)הכח‬ καμαιλεων Gött. 19 εαν B mins; αν Gött. 20 εαν B G mins; αν A F M mins Gött. ‖ πεση A B G mins; εμπεση F Gött. 21 εαν B rell; αν mins Gött. ‖ ην B mins; η OG-B Gött. 22 εαν B A mins; αν F Gött. ‖ απελθη B*vid A; επελθη Bc F Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*vid. ‖ πεινεται B; πινεται Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 23 αγγιω B*; αγιω mins; αγγειω Bc Gött. ‖ εαν B A F M’ mins; αν Gött. ‖ πεση B* A mins; εμπεση F; επιπεση Bc G mins Latcod 104. 24 κλειβανοι B*; κλιβανοι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

111

fours: it has upper legs above its feet with which to leap on the ground. 22 And from them, these you must eat: the locust and those similar to it, and another kind of locust and those similar to it, and the grasshopper and those similar to it, and the one that fights snakes and those similar to it. 23 All crawling things among those with wings that have four feet are abominations to you. 24 And by these you will become defiled; anyone who touches any of their carcasses is unclean until evening. 25 And anyone who carries any of their carcasses must wash his clothes and will be unclean until evening. 26 And among all land animals the one that divides the hoof and splits hooves but does not chew the cud, they will be unclean for you. Anyone who touches any of their carcasses will be unclean until evening. 27 And anyone who walks on hands among any animals that walk on all fours will be unclean for you. Anyone who touches any of their carcasses will be unclean until evening. 28 And the one who carries any of their carcasses must wash his clothes and will be unclean until evening. These things will be unclean for you. 29 And these are unclean for you from the crawling things that are on the earth: the weasel and the mouse and the land crocodile, 30 field mouse and chameleon and gecko and lizard and blind rat. 31 These are unclean for you from all the crawling things that are on the earth. Anyone who touches them when they are dead will be unclean until evening. 32 And anything on which any of them falls, when they are dead, will be unclean, whether a vessel of wood or cloth or skin or a sack. Any vessel, which work is done with it, must be dipped into water, and it will be unclean until the evening; then it will be clean. 33 And any clay vessel into which some of these fall inside, whatever was inside it will be unclean, and it must be shattered. 34 And any food that is eaten, concerning which water departs from it, will be unclean. And any drink that is drunk in any container will be unclean. 35 Anything that any of their carcasses falls on will be unclean. Ovens and stands for pots must be destroyed. These are unclean, and these will be unclean for you, 36 Except that springs of water and a cistern and a gathering of water will be clean; but whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean. 37 But if any of their carcasses fall on any seed fit for sowing, it will be clean. 38 But if water is poured on any

112

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

αὐτό, ἀκάθαρτόν ἐστιν ὑμῖν. 39 ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ τῶν κτηνῶν ὅ ἐστιν ὑμῖν τοῦτο φαγεῖν, ὁ ἁπτόμενος τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· 40 καὶ ὁ ἐσθίων ἀπὸ τῶν θνησιμαίων τούτων πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· καὶ ὁ αἴρων ἀπὸ θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 41 καὶ πᾶν ἑρπετὸν ὃ ἕρπει ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, βδέλυγμα τοῦτο ἔσται ὑμῖν, οὐ βρωθήσεται. 42 καὶ πᾶς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐπὶ κοιλίας, καὶ πᾶς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐπὶ τέσσερα διὰ παντός, ὃ πολυπληθεῖ ποσὶν ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς ἕρπουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, οὐ φάγεσθε αὐτό, ὅτι βδέλυγμα ὑμῖν ἐστίν. 43 καὶ οὐ μὴ βδελύξητε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς ἕρπουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ οὐ μιανθήσεσθε ἐν τούτοις, καὶ οὐκ ἀκάθαρτοι ἔσεσθε ἐν αὐτοῖς. 44 ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· καὶ ἁγιασθήσεσθε καὶ ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε, ὅτι ἅγιός εἰμι ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· καὶ οὐ μιανεῖτε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς κεινουμένοις ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς· 45 ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου εἶναι ὑμῶν θεός· καὶ ἔσεσθε ἅγιοι, ὅτι ἅγιός εἰμι ἐγὼ Κύριος. 46 οὗτος ὁ νόμος περὶ τῶν κτηνῶν καὶ τῶν πετεινῶν καὶ πάσης ψυχῆς τῆς κεινουμένης ἐν τῷ ὕδατι καὶ πάσης ψυχῆς ἑρπούσης ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, 47 διαστεῖλαι ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἀκαθάρτων καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν καθαρῶν, καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ζωογονούντων τὰ ἐσθιόμενα καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ζωογονούντων τὰ μὴ ἐσθιόμενα. ⟦12⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Γυνὴ ἥτις ἐὰν σπερματισθῇ καὶ τέκῃ ἄρσεν, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, κατὰ τὰς ἡμέρας τοῦ χωρισμοῦ τῆς ἀφέδρου αὐτῆς ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται· 3 καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ περιτεμεῖ τὴν σάρκα τῆς ἁκροβυστίας αὐτοῦ· 4 καὶ τριάκοντα ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς καθίσεται ἐν αἵματι ἀκαθάρτῳ αὐτῆς· παντὸς ἀγγίου οὐχ ἅψεται, καὶ εἰς τὸ ἁγιαστήριον οὐκ εἰσελεύσεται, ἕως ἂν πληρωθῶσιν αἱ ἡμέραι καθάρσεως αὐτῆς. 5 ἐὰν δὲ θῆλυ τέκῃ, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται δὶς ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας κατὰ τὴν ἄφεδρον· καὶ ἑξήκοντα ἡμέρας καὶ ἓξ καθεσθήσεται ἐν αἵματι ἀκαθάρτῳ αὐτῆς. 6 καὶ ὅταν ἀναπληρωθῶσιν αἱ ἡμέραι καθάρσεως αὐτῆς ἐφ’ υἱῷ ἢ ἐπὶ θυγατρί, προσοίσει ἀμνὸν ἐνιαύσιον ἄμωμον εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ νοσσὸν περιστερᾶς ἢ τρυγόνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· 7 καὶ προσοίσει ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῆς ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὴν ἀπὸ τῆς πηγῆς τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς. οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς τικτούσης ἄρσεν ἢ θῆλυ. 8 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ εὑρίσκῃ ἡ χεὶρ αὐτῆς τὸ ἱκανὸν εἰς ἀμνόν, καὶ λήμψεται δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν, μίαν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ μίαν περὶ ἁμαρτίας· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῆς ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ καθαρισθήσεται. 1 υμιν τουτο B* Gött; τουτο υμιν Bc F M’ O n x mins Syh. 6–7 τεσσερα B* A BrMcL; τεσσερων Bc1; τεσσαρων Bc2 F Gött. 9 πασι B; πασιν A Gött. 12 κεινουμενοις B* A; κινουμενοις Bc Swete BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 κεινουμενης B* A; κινουμενης Bc Swete BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19 εαν B Eus rell; αν mins Cyr Gött. 22 καθισεται B*; καθησεται A mins Cyr; καθεσθησεται Bc F M’ G mins Gött. ‖ αγγιου B* A mins; αγγειου Bc; αγιου F BrMcL Gött. 23 καθαρσεως B* Gött; καθαρισεως Bc F G mins. 26 καθαρσεως B* Gött; καθαρισεως Bc F G mins. 29 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 32 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

113

seed and any of their carcasses fall on it, it is unclean for you. 39 And if any land animal that is for you to eat dies, the one who touches their carcasses will be unclean until evening. 40 And the one who eats from these carcasses must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean until evening. And the one who carries any of their carcasses must wash his clothes and must bathe himself with water, and he will be unclean until evening. 41 And every crawling thing that crawls on the earth, this must be detestable to you; it must not be eaten. 42 And everything that moves on its belly and everything that always walks on all fours, whatever has many feet among all the crawling things that crawl on the earth, you must not eat for it is detestable to you. 43 And you must not make your lives detestable with any crawling things that crawl on the earth, and you must not become defiled by them, and you must not become unclean by them. 44 For I am the Lord your God, and you must be consecrated, and you must be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy. And you must not defile your lives with any of the crawling things that move themselves on the earth. 45 For I who am the Lord who brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God; you must be holy, for I, the Lord, am holy.” 46 This is the law concerning the land animals and birds and every life that moves through the water and every life that crawls upon the earth, 47 to distinguish between the unclean things and between the clean things, between the breeding things that may be eaten and between the breeding things that may not be eaten. ⟦12⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: Any woman, if she is inseminated and bears a male child, then she will be unclean for seven days; according to the days of the discharge of her period, she will be unclean. 3 And on the eighth day she must circumcise the flesh of his foreskin. 4 And for thirty-three days she must remain in her unclean blood; she must not touch any container or enter into the holy place until the days of her purification are completed. 5 But if she bears a female child, then she will be unclean twice seven days, according to her period, and sixty-six days also she must she remain in her unclean blood. 6 And when the days of her purification are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter, she must bring to the priest at the door of the tent of testimony an unblemished lamb a year old as a whole burnt offering and a young bird of a pigeon or of a turtledove for sin. 7 And he must bring it before the Lord, and the priest must propitiate for her and purify her from the source of her blood. This is the law for her who bears a male or female child. 8 But if her hand does not find what is enough for a lamb, then she must take two turtledoves or two young of pigeons, one for a whole burnt offering and one for sin, and the priest must propitiate for her, and she will be clean.”

114

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

⟦13⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων 2 Ἀνθρώπῳ ἐάν τινι γένηται ἐν δέρματι χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ οὐλὴ σημασίας τηλαυγής, καὶ γένηται ἐν δέρματι χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ ἁφὴ λέπρας, καὶ ἀχθήσεται πρὸς Ἀαρὼν τὸν ἱερέα ἢ ἕνα τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ τῶν ἱερέων. 3 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν ἐν δέρματι τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἡ θρὶξ ἐν τῇ ἁφῇ μεταβάλῃ λευκή, καὶ ἡ ὄψις τῆς ἁφῆς ταπεινὴ ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος τοῦ χρωτός, ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν· καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτόν. 4 ἐὰν δὲ τηλαυγὴς λευκὴ ἦν ἐν τῷ δέρματι τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτῆς, καὶ ταπεινὴ μὴ ἦν ἡ ὄψις αὐτῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος αὐτῆς, καὶ ἡ θρεὶξ αὐτοῦ οὐ μετέβαλεν τρίχα λευκήν, αὐτὴν δέ ἐστιν ἀμαυρά, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 5 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἡ ἁφὴ μένει ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ, οὐ μετέπεσεν ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τὸ δεύτερον. 6 καὶ ὄψεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ τὸ δεύτερον, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἀμαυρὰ ἡ ἁφή, οὐ μετέπεσεν ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· σημασία γάρ ἐστιν· καὶ πλυνάμενος τὰ ἱμάτια καθαρὸς ἔσται. 7 ἐὰν δὲ μεταβαλοῦσα μεταπέσῃ ἡ σημασία ἐν τῷ δέρματι μετὰ τὸ ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν τὸν ἱερέα τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτόν, καὶ ὀφθήσεται τὸ δεύτερον τῷ ἱερεῖ· 8 καὶ ὄψεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ μετέπεσεν ἡ σημασία ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· λέπρα ἐστίν. 9 Καὶ ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐὰν γένηται ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, καὶ ἥξει πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· 10 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐλὴ λευκὴ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ αὕτη μετέβαλεν τρίχα λευκήν, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὑγιοῦς τῆς σαρκὸς τῆς ζώσης ἐν τῇ οὐλῇ, 11 λέπρα παλαιουμένη ἐστίν· ἐν τῷ δέρματι τοῦ χρωτός ἐστιν· καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἀφοριεῖ αὐτόν, ὅτι ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν. 12 ἐὰν δὲ ἐξανθοῦσα ἐξανθήσῃ ἡ λέπρα ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ καλύψῃ ἡ λέπρα πᾶν τὸ δέρμα τῆς ἁφῆς ἀπὸ κεφαλῆς ἕως ποδῶν καθ’ ὅλην τὴν ὅρασιν τοῦ ἱερέως, 13 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐκάλυψεν ἡ λέπρα πᾶν τὸ δέρμα τοῦ χρωτός, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφήν· ὅτι πᾶν μετέβαλεν λευκόν, καθαρόν ἐστιν. 14 καὶ ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ ὀφθῇ ἐν αὐτῷχρὼς ζῶν, μιανθήσεται· 15 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν χρῶτα τὸν ὑγιῆν, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ χρὼς ὁ ὑγιής, ὅτι ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν· λέπρα ἐστίν. 16ἐὰν δὲ ἀποκαταστῇ ὁ χρὼς ὁ ὑγιὴς καὶ μεταβάλῃ λευκή, καὶ ἐλεύσεται πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· 17 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ μετέβαλεν ἡ ἁφὴ εἰς τὸ λευκόν, καὶ καθαριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφήν· καθαρός ἐστιν. 18 Καὶ σὰρξ ἐὰν γένηται ἐν τῷ δέρματι αὐτοῦ ἕλκος, καὶ ὑγιασθῇ, 19 καὶ γένηται ἐν τῷ τόπῳ τοῦ ἕλκους οὐλὴ λευκὴ ἢ τηλαυγὴς λευκαίνουσα ἢ πυρρίζουσα, καὶ ὀφθήσεται τῷ ἱερεῖ. 20 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἡ ὄψις ταπεινοτέρα τοῦ δέρματος, καὶ θρὶξ αὐτῆς μετέβαλεν εἰς λευκήν, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· λέπρα ἐστίν, 7 ην (1st occ.) B* A F* mins; η Bc Fb Gött. ‖ αυτης (1st occ.) B*unique; > Bc Gött. ‖ ην (2nd occ.) B mins; η F Gött. 8 αυτης B* d t; > Bc A F Gött. ‖ θρειξ B*; θριξ Bc BrMcL. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτην of which the η has a clear horizontal line above it to imply the ν, but naturally this acc. does not suit the grammar as well as a nom. 15 το (1st occ.) B* A min; του Bc F Swete Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 εξανθηση B* Gött; εξανθησει A F. ‖ η (1st occ.) B* A M’ mins Gött; > Bc F Cyr rell. 26 υγιην B* A min; υγιη Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 33 και (1st occ.) + η A F Gött; > Β x-509 mins.

Text and Translation

115

⟦13⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying: 2 “If any person has on the skin of his body a shiny lesion as an indication, and if there is an infection of a skin disease on the skin of his body, then he must be brought to Aarōn the priest or to one of his sons, the priests. 3 And the priest must look at the infection on the skin of his body, and if the hair in the infected area has turned white and the appearance of the infection is low from the skin of the body, it is an infection of a skin disease, and the priest must look and declare him defiled. 4 But if the shiny spot was white in the skin of his body and its appearance was not low from its skin and his hair has not changed to white hair but it is inconspicuous, then the priest must isolate the infection for seven days. 5 And the priest must look at the infection on the seventh day, and behold, the infection remains before him, the infection has not changed in the skin, then the priest must isolate him seven days for the second time. 6 And the priest must look at him on the seventh day, a second time, and, behold, the infection is inconspicuous, the infection has not changed in the skin, then the priest must declare him clean, for it is an indication, and after washing his clothes he will be clean. 7 But if the indication in the skin changes by altering after he sees the priest for his cleansing, then he must be seen a second time by the priest. 8 And the priest must look at him, and behold, the indication has changed on his skin, then the priest must declare him defiled; it is a skin disease.” 9 “And if an infection of a skin disease happens to a person, then he must come to the priest. 10 And the priest must look, and behold, there is a white lesion in the skin, and it has turned the hair white, and some of the healthy part of the living flesh is in the lesion; 11 it is an aged skin disease; it is in the skin of the body. And the priest must declare him defiled and isolate him because he is unclean. 12 But if, when breaking out, the skin disease breaks out in the skin, and the skin disease covers all the skin of the infection, from head to feet, from everything that the priest sees, 13 then the priest must look, and behold, the skin disease has covered all the skin of the body. And the priest must declare him clean of the infection; because it has all turned white, he is clean. 14 And on the day when living skin appears in it, he must be declared defiled. 15 And the priest must look at the healthy skin, and the healthy skin will defile him because it is unclean; it is a skin disease. 16 But if the healthy skin restores itself and turns white, then he must come to the priest, 17 and the priest must look, and behold, the infection has turned white, and the priest must declare the infected area clean; it is clean. 18 And if the flesh becomes an ulcer in its skin and it heals 19 and in the place of the ulcer there is a white lesion or a shiny one that turns white or reddens, then he must be seen by the priest. 20 And the priest must look, and behold, its appearance is deeper than the skin, and its hair has turned white, then the priest must declare him unclean; it is a skin

116

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

ἐν τῷ ἕλκει ἐξήνθησεν. 21 ἐὰν δὲ ἴδῃ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ θρεὶξ λευκή, καὶ ταπινὸν μὴ ᾖ ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος τοῦ χρωτός, καὶ αὐτῂ ᾖ ἀμαυρά, ἀφοριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 22 ἐὰν δὲ διαχέηται ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν, ἐν τῷ ἕλκει ἐξήνθησεν· 23 ἐὰν δὲ κατὰ χώραν μείνῃ τὸ τηλαύγημα καὶ μὴ διαχέηται, οὐλὴ τοῦ ἕλκους ἐστίν, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς. 24 Καὶ σὰρξ ἐὰν γένηται ἐν τῷ δέρματι αὐτοῦ κατάκαυμα πυρός, καὶ γένηται ἐν τῷ δέρματι αὐτοῦ ὑγιασθὲν τοῦ κατακαύματος αὐγάζον τηλαυγὲς λευκόν, ὑποπυρρίζον ἢ ἔκλευκον, 25 καὶ ὄψεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ μετέβαλεν θρὶξ λευκὴ εἰς τὸ αὐγάζον, καὶ ἡ ὄψις αὐτοῦ ταπεινὴ ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος, λέπρα ἐστίν, ἐν τῷ κατακαύματι ἐξήνθησεν· καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς, ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν. 26 ἐὰν δὲ ἴδῃ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ αὐγάζοντι θρὶξ λευκή, καὶ ταπεινὸν μὴ ἦν ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος, αὐτὸ δὲ ἀμαυρόν, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 27 καὶ ὄψεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ, ἐὰν δὲ διαχύσι διαχέηται ἐν τῷ δέρματι, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν, ἐν τῷ ἕλκει ἐξήνθησεν. 28 ἐὰν δὲ κατὰ χώραν μείνῃ τὸ αὐγάζον καὶ μὴ διαχυθῇ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, αὐτὴ δὲ ᾖ ἀμαυρά, ἡ οὐλὴ τοῦ κατακαύματός ἐστιν, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· ὁ γὰρ χαρακτὴρ τοῦ κατακαύματός ἐστιν. 29 Καὶ ἀνδρὶ καὶ γυναικὶ ἐὰν γένηται ἐν αὐτοῖς ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ ἢ ἐν τῷ πώγωνι, 30 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφήν, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἡ ὄψις αὐτῆς ἐνκοιλοτέρα τοῦ δέρματος, ἐν αὐτῇ δὲ θρὶξ ξανθίζουσα λεπτή, καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· θραῦσμά ἐστιν, λέπρα τῆς κεφαλῆς ἢ λέπρα τοῦ πώγωνός ἐστιν. 31 καὶ ἐὰν ἴδῃ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν τοῦ τραύματος, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐκ ἡ ὄψις ἐνκοιλοτέρα τοῦ δέρματος, καὶ θρὶξ ξανθίζουσα οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν τοῦ θραύσματος ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας· 32 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐ διεχύθη τὸ θραῦσμα, καὶ θρὶξ ξανθίζουσα οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ ὄψις τοῦ θραύσματος οὐκ ἔστιν κοίλη ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος, 33 καὶ ξυρηθήσεται τὸ δέρμα, τὸ δὲ θραῦσμα οὐ ξυρηθήσεται, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ θραῦσμα ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τὸ δεύτερον. 34 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ θραῦσμα τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐ διεχύθη τὸ θραῦσμα ἐν τῷ δέρματι μετὰ τὸ ξυρηθῆναι αὐτόν, καὶ ἡ ὄψις τοῦ θραύσματος οὐκ ἔστιν κοίλη ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· καὶ πλυνάμενος τὰ ἱμάτια καθαρὸς ἔσται. 35 ἐὰν δὲ διαχύσει διαχέηται τὸ θραῦσμα ἐν τῷ δέρματι μετὰ τὸ καθαρισθῆναι αὐτόν, 36 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ διακέχυται τὸ θραῦσμα ἐν τῷ δέρματι, οὐκ ἐπισκέψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς τριχὸς τῆς ξανθῆς, ὅτι ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν· 37 ἐὰν δὲ ἐνώπιον 1 θρειξ B*; θριξ Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 2 ταπινον B*; ταπεινον Bc vid Swete BrMcL Gött. The ε of Bc is so tiny that it is difficult to confirm, however compare the almost as small ε two lines above. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 3 δε + διαχυσει F Gött; > B A mins b n x y Phil Latcod 100 Eth Arm Co. 6 αυτου (2nd occ.) + το Bmg (right of col. 2) F Swete Gött; > B* A. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 αυτω B* mins Arm; τω Bc OG-B* Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ην Bunique; η A F M mins Gött. 13 διαχυσι B*; διαχυσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 ενκοιλοτερα B; εγκοιλοτερα Bc Gött. 20 τραυματος B A mins; θραυσματος F Gött. ‖ ουκ B* A min; ουχι Bc M’ mins; ουχ F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ενκοιλοτερα B; εγκοιλοτερα Bc A Gött.

Text and Translation

117

disease; it broke out in the ulcer. 21 But if the priest looks, and behold, there is no white hair on it, and it is not low in the skin of the flesh but is inconspicuous, the priest must isolate him for seven days. 22 And if it has spread in the skin, then the priest must declare him defiled; it is an infection of a skin disease. It has broken out in the ulcer. 23 But if the shiny spot remains in one area and has not spread, it is a lesion of the ulcer, and the priest must declare him clean. 24 And if the flesh on his skin has a burn by fire and a healthy part of the burn on his skin becomes bright, shiny, reddish or white, 25 then the priest must look at him, and behold, the hair has turned white in the bright spot, and its appearance is low in the skin, it is a skin disease; it has broken out in the burn, and the priest must declare him unclean. It is an infection of a skin disease. 26 But if the priest looks, and behold, there is no white hair in it that shines, and it is not low in the skin but inconspicuous, then the priest must isolate him for seven days. 27 And the priest must look at him on the seventh day, and if by spreading it has spread in the skin, then the priest must declare him defiled. It is an infection of a skin disease. It has broken out in the ulcer. 28 But if the bright spot remains in one area and does not spread in the skin, but it is inconspicuous, it is a lesion from the burn, and the priest must declare him clean; for it is the nature of the burn. 29 And whether a man or a woman, if there is on them an infection of a skin disease on the head or in the beard, 30 then the priest must look at the infection. And behold, its appearance is more hollow than the skin and in it the yellow hair is thin, then the priest must declare him defiled; it is an abscess, a skin disease of the head or a skin disease of the beard. 31 And if the priest looks at the infection of the wound, and behold, its appearance is not more hollow than the skin and there is no yellow hair in it, then the priest must isolate the infection of the abscess for seven days. 32 And on the seventh day the priest must look at the infection, and behold, the abscess has not spread and there is no yellow hair in it and the appearance of the abscess is not hollow in the skin, 33 then the skin must be shaved, but the abscess must not be shaved. And the priest must isolate the abscess for a second seven days. 34 And on the seventh day the priest must look at the abscess, and behold, the abscess has not spread in the skin after he has been shaven and the appearance of the abscess is not hollow in the skin, then the priest must declare him clean. And after washing his clothes, he will be clean. 35 But if by spreading, the abscess has spread in the skin after he was declared clean, 36 then the priest must look, and behold, the abscess has spread in the skin, the priest must not examine for yellow hair because he is unclean. 37 But if the abscess remains evident in an area, and

118

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

μείνῃ τὸ θραῦσμα ἐπὶ χώρας καὶ θρὶξ μέλαινα ἀνατείλῃ ἐν αὐτῷ, ὑγίακεν τὸ θραῦσμα, καθαρόν ἐστιν, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς. 38 Καὶ ἀνδρὶ ἢ γυναικὶ ἐὰν γένηται ἐν δέρματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ αὔγασμα, αὐγάζοντα λευκαθίζοντα, 39 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐν δέρματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ αὐγάσματα αὐγάζοντα λευκαθίζοντα, ἀλφός ἐστιν, καθαρός ἐστιν· ἐξανθήσει ἐν τῷ δέρματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, καθαρός ἐστιν. 40 ἐὰν δέ τινι μαδήσῃ ἡ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ, φαλακρός ἐστιν, καθαρός ἐστιν· 41 ἐὰν δὲ κατὰ πρόσωπον μαδήσῃ ἡ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ, ἀναφάλαντός ἐστιν, καθαρός ἐστιν. 42 ἐὰν δὲ γένηται ἐν τῷ φαλακρώματι αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐν τῷ ἀναφαλαντώματι αὐτοῦ ἁφὴ λευκὴ ἢ πυρρίζουσα, λέπρα ἐστὶν ἐν τῷ φαλακρώματι αὐτοῦ ἤ ἐν τῷ ἀναφαλαντώματι αὐτοῦ· 43 καὶ ὄψεται αὐτὸ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἡ ὄψις τῆς ἁφῆς λευκὴ πυρρίζουσα ἐν τῷ φαλακρώματι αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐν τῷ ἀναφαλαντώματι αὐτοῦ, ὡς εἶδος λέπρας ἐν δέρματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, 44 ἄνθρωπος λεπρός ἐστιν· μία μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς, ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ αὐτοῦ ἡ ἁφὴ αὐτοῦ. 45 Καὶ ὁ λεπρὸς ἐν ᾧ ἐστὶν ἡ ἁφή, τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ ἔστω παραλελυμένα καὶ ἡ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ ἀκάλυπτος καὶ περὶ τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ περιβαλέσθω, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος κεκλήσεται· 46 πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας ὅσας ἄν ᾖ ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ ἡ ἁφή, ἀκάθαρτος ὢν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται· κεχωρισμένος καθήσεται, ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς αὐτοῦ ἔσται ἡ διατριβή. 47 Καὶ ἱματίῳ ἐὰν γένηται ἐν αὐτῷ ἁφὴ λέπρας, ἐν ἱματίῳ ἐραιῷ ἢ ἐν ἱματίῳ, στιπποίνῳ, 48 ἢ ἐν στήμονι ἢ ἐν κρόκῃ, ἢ ἐν τοῖς λινοῖς ἢ ἐν τοῖς ἐρεοῖς, ἢ ἐν δέρματι ἢ ἐν παντὶ ἐργασίμῳ δέρματι, 49 καὶ γένηται ἡ ἁφὴ χλωρίζουσα ἢ πυρρίζουσα ἐν τῷ δέρματι ἢ ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ ἢ ἐν παντὶ σκεύει ἐργασίμῳ δέρματος, ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν, καὶ δείξει τῷ ἱερεῖ. 50 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφήν, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 51 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ· ἐὰν δὲ διαχέηται ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ ἢ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἂν ποιηθῇ δέρματα ἐν τῇ ἐργασίᾳ, λέπρα ἔμμονός ἐστιν ἡ ἁφή· ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν. 52κατακαύσει τὸ ἱμάτιον ἢ τὸν στήμονα ἢ τὴν κρόκην, ἐν τοῖς ἐρεοῖς ἢ ἐν τοῖς λινοῖς ἢ ἐν παντὶ σκεύει δερματίνῳ ἐν ᾧ ἐὰν ᾖ ἐν αὐτῷ ἡ ἁφή· ὅτι λέπρα, ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται. 53 ἐὰν δὲ ἴδῃ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ μὴ διαχέηται ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ ἢ ἐν παντὶ σκεύει δερματίνῳ, 54 καὶ συντάξει ὁ 2 καθαρον B; καθαρος F Swete Gött. Here I emend Logos’s electronic format of Swete (καθαρος) to match B as printed in Swete’s hardcover (καθαρον). 3 αυγασμα B* A mins Sa; αυγασματα Bc F BrMcL Gött. 5 εξανθησει B* 992 mins; εξανθει Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 8 η (2nd occ.) B rell; > F Gött. 9 λεπρα + εξανθουσα F Gött; > B A mins x Latcod 100. 10 αυτο Bunique; αυτον Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. Swete and BrMcL (contra Wevers [1986a: 154; 1986b: 59]) suggest that a corrector may have superscripted a ν (Bb vid), but I see is no indication of this, only a grave accent above the ο. 12 μια B*unique; μιανσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 ακαλυπτος B Mtxt mins; ακαταλυπτος A*; ακατακαλυπτος Ac F Gött. ‖ περιβαλεσθω B F M’ mins Cyr 996; περιβαλλεσθω A Gött. 16 αυτου εσται B mins Cyr 996; εστω αυτου mins; εσται αυτου Gött. 17 εραιω Against Swete (ερειω min also B*vid), I am persuaded that B* spelled the word εραιω (with Miika Tucker); cf. erasure of α in εριω Bc mins; ερεω A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17–18 στιπποινω B*; στιππυινω Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 26 εαν B A mins; αν F Gött. 27 λεπρα + εμμονος εστιν Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A min.

Text and Translation

119

black hair has grown in it, the abscess has healed; with respect to clean, he is, and the priest must declare him clean. 38 And whether a man or a woman, if on the skin of his body there are bright spots, shining, appearing white, 39 then the priest must look, and behold, the bright spots on the skin of his body appear white, it is a eczema; he is clean. It will break out in the skin of his body; he is clean. 40 Now if someone’s head becomes bald, he is a bald man; he is clean. 41 And if his head becomes bald in the front, he is bald on the forehead; he is clean. 42 But if there is on his bald head or on his bald forehead a white or reddened infection, it is a skin disease on his bald head or his bald forehead. 43 And the priest must look at it, and behold, the appearance of the infection is white, turning red on his bald head or on his bald forehead, like the appearance of a skin disease in the skin of his body, 44 he is a skin-diseased person. One the priest must declare him defiled; his infection is on his head. 45 And the skin-diseased person on whom is the infection, his clothes must be loosened and his head uncovered, and let him throw something around his mouth, and he will have been called unclean. 46 All the days the infection is on him he is unclean and he must remain unclean. He must stay separated; he must pass the time outside his camp.” 47 “And as for clothing, if an infection of a skin disease appears in it, in wool cloth or cloth made of tow, 48 whether in the warp or in the weft, or in linens or in wool clothes or in a skin or in any workable skin, 49 and the infection becomes greenish or reddish in the skin or in the clothes, whether in warp or in the weft, or in any vessel made of workable skin, it is an infection of skin disease, and he must show it to the priest. 50 And the priest must look at the infection, and the priest must isolate the infection for seven days. 51 And the priest must look at the infection on the seventh day. And if the infection has spread in the cloth, whether in the warp or in the weft, or in the skin, throughout anything in which skins are made into a product, the infection is an abiding skin disease; it is unclean. 52 He must burn the clothing, whether the warp or the weft, in wool clothes or in linens, or any skin vessel that the infection is in, for a skin disease must be burned with fire. 53 But if the priest looks, and the infection has not spread in the clothing, whether in the warp or in the weft or in any skin vessel, 54 then the priest must command, and he must wash over

120

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

ἱερεύς, καὶ πλυνεῖ ἐφ’ οὗ ἐὰν ᾖ ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ ἡ ἁφή, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἁφὴν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τὸ δεύτερον. 55 καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς μετὰ τὸ πλυθήναι αὐτὸ τὴν ἁφήν, καὶ ἥδε μὴ μετέβαλεν τὴν ὄψιν ἡ ἁφή, καὶ ἡ ἁφὴ οὐ διαχεῖται, ἀκάθαρτόν ἐστιν, ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται· ἐστήρισται ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ. 56 καὶ ἐὰν ἴδῃ ἱερεύς, καὶ ᾖ ἀμαυρὰ ἡ ἁφὴ μετὰ τὸ πλυθῆναι αὐτό, ἀπορρίξει αὐτὸ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἱματίου ἢ ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος ἢ ἀπὸ τοῦ στήμονος ἢ ἀπὸ τῆς κρόκης. 57 ἐὰν δὲ ὀφθῇ ἔτι ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ ἢ ἐν παντὶ σκεύει δερματίνῳ, λέπρα ἐξανθοῦσά ἐστιν· ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται ἐν ᾧ ἐστὶν ἡ ἁφή. 58 καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον ἢ ὁ στήμων ἢ ἡ κρόκη ἢ πᾶν σκεῦος δερμάτινον ὃ πλυθήσεται καὶ ἀποστήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ἡ ἁφή, καὶ πλυθήσεται τὸ δεύτερον· καθαρὸν ἔσται. 59 οὗτος ὁ νόμος ἁφῆς λέπρας ἱματίου ἐρεοῦ ἢ στιπποίνου ἢ στήμονος ἢ κρόκης ἢ παντὸς σκεύους δερματίνου, εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸ ἢ μιᾶναι αὐτό. ⟦14⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τοῦ λεπροῦ, ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ καθαρισθῇ· καὶ προσαχθήσεται πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα,3 καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, καὶ ὄψεται ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἰᾶται ἡ ἁφὴ τῆς λέπρας ἀπὸ τοῦ λεπροῦ. 4 καὶ προστάξει ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ λήμψονται τῷ κεκαθαρισμένῳ δύο ὀρνίθια ζῶντα καθαρά, καὶ ξύλον κέδρινον καὶ κεκλωσμένον κόκκινον καὶ ὕσσωπον· 5 καὶ προστάξει ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ σφάξουσιν τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ἓν εἰς ἄγγιον ὀστράκινον ἐφ’ ὕδατι ζῶντι· 6 καὶ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν, λήμψεται αὐτὸ καὶ τὸ ξύλον τὸ κέδρινον καὶ τὸ κλωστὸν κόκκινον καὶ τὸν ὕσσωπον, καὶ βάψει αὐτὰ καὶ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν εἰς τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ὀρνιθίου τοῦ σφαγέντος ἐφ’ ὕδατι ζῶντι· 7 καὶ περιρανεῖ ἐπὶ τὸν καθαρισθέντα ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας ἑπτάκις, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται· καὶ ἐξαποστελεῖ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν εἰς τὸ πεδίον. 8 καὶ πλυνεῖ ὁ καθαρισθεὶς τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, καὶ ξυρηθήσεται αὐτοῦ πᾶσαν τὴν τρίχα, καὶ λούσεται ἐν ὕδατι, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν παρεμβολήν· καὶ διατρίψει ἔξω τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 9 καὶ ἔσται τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ξυρηθήσεται πᾶσαν τὴν τρίχαν αὐτοῦ, τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸν πώγωνα καὶ τὰς ὀσφύας καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν τρίχαν αὐτοῦ ξυρηθήσεται·καὶ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται. 10 καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ λήμψεται δύο ἀμνοὺς ἑνιαυσίους ἀμώμους, καὶ πρόβατον ἑνιαύσιον ἄμωμον, καὶ τρία δέκατα σεμιδάλεως εἰς θυσίαν πεφυραμένης ἐν ἐλαίῳ, καὶ κοτύλην ἐλαίου μίαν· 11 καὶ στήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ καθαρίζων τὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν καθαριζόμενον καὶ ταῦτα ἔναντι Κυρίου, ἐπὶ 1 εαν B rell; αν mins Gött. 2 αυτο B mins; αυτου A F; > G M rell Gött. 4 εστηρισται B A Mtxt G n mins; εστηρικται F Gött. 5 απορριξει B*; απορρηξει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 η απο του δερματος B* Gött; transposed after κροκης Göttc. 10 δευτερον + και Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins. 11 στιπποινου B*; στιππυινου Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 13 Μωυσην Here I emend Logos’s electronic format of Swete (Μωυωῆν) to match B as printed in Swete’s hardcover (Μωυσῆν). 21 περιρανει B; περιρρανιει A min; περιρρανει Gött. 26 τριχαν B*; τριχα Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 οσφυας B*unique; οφρυς Bc F; οφρυας Α Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τριχαν B*; τριχα Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 29 προβατον + εν F Gött; > B V mins Sa.

Text and Translation

121

whatever the infection is in, and the priest must isolate the infection for a second seven days. 55 And the priest must look at the infection after it has been washed, and this infection has not changed its appearance, and the infection has not spread, it is an unclean thing. It must be burnt with fire; it has been fixed securely in the clothing, whether in the warp or in the weft. 56 And if the priest looks and the infection has become inconspicuous after it is washed, he must tear it from the clothing or from the skin, whether from the warp or from the weft. 57 But if it still appears in the clothing, whether in the warp or in the weft, or in any skin vessel, it is a skin disease that has broken out; whatever the infection is in must be burned with fire. 58 But the clothing, whether the warp or weft, or any skin vessel that must be washed and the infection should leave it, must be washed a second time; it will be clean.” 59 This is the law for an infection of skin disease in clothing of wool or tow, whether in the warp or the weft, or in any skin vessel, in order to declare it clean or to declare it defiled. ⟦14⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “This is the law for the skindiseased person on the day that he is to be cleansed: And he must be brought to the priest, 3 and the priest must go out, outside the camp, and the priest must look, and behold, the infection of skin disease is healed from the skindiseased person, 4 and the priest must command, and they must take for the one who has been cleansed two living clean small birds and cedar wood and scarlet thread that has been spun and hyssop. 5 And the priest must command, and they must slaughter the one small bird in a clay container over living water. 6 And regarding the small living bird, he must take it and the cedar wood and the scarlet-spun thread and the hyssop, and he must dip them and the small living bird in the blood of the small bird that was slaughtered over living water. 7 And he must sprinkle it seven times on the one who was cleansed from the skin disease, and he will be clean; and he must release the small living bird into the field. 8 And the one who was cleansed must wash his clothes and have all his hair shaven and bathe himself in water, and he will be clean. And after these things he must come into the camp and must pass the time outside his house for seven days. 9 And it will be on the seventh day that he must have all his hair shaven. His head and his beard and his loins, even all his hair he must have shaven. And he must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be clean. 10 And on the eighth day he must take two unblemished lambs a year old, one unblemished sheep a year old and three-tenths of fine flour as an offering mixed with olive oil and one cup of olive oil. 11 And the priest who is cleansing must stand the person who is being cleansed, also these things,

122

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου. 12 καὶ λήμψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν ἕνα, καὶ προσάξει αὐτὸν τῆς πλημμελίας, καὶ τὴν κοτύλην τοῦ ἐλαίου, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ αὐτὸ ἀφόρισμα ἔναντι Κυρίου. 13 καὶ σφάξουσιν τὸν ἀμνὸν ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ τὰ περὶ ἁμαρτίας, ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ· ἔστιν γὰρ τὸ περὶ ἁμαρτίας ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς πλημμελίας, ἔστιν τῷ ἱερεῖ· ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν. 14 καὶ λήμψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς πλημμελίας, καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ὠτὸς τοῦ καθαριζομένου τοῦ δεξιοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τῆς χειρὸς τῆς δεξιᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ποδὸς τοῦ δεξιοῦ· 15 καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τῆς κοτύλης τοῦ ἐλαίου ἐπιχεεῖ ἐπὶ τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ ἱερέως τὴν ἀριστεράν, 16 καὶ βάψει τὸν δάκτυλον τὸν δεξιὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τοῦ ὄντος ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς τῆς ἀριστερᾶς, καὶ ῥανεῖ ἑπτάκις τῷ δακτύλῳ ἔναντι Κυρίου. 17 τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἔλαιον τὸ ὂν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ὠτὸς τοῦ καθαριζομένου τοῦ δεξιοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τῆς χειρὸς τῆς δεξιᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ποδὸς τοῦ δεξιοῦ, ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς πλημμελίας· 18 τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἔλαιον τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ ἱερέως ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ καθαρισθέντος, καὶ ἐξιλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου. 19 καὶ ποιήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς τοῦ ἀκαθάρτου τοῦ καθαριζομένου ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ· καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο σφάξει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα. 20 καὶ ἀνοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ τὴν θυσίαν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἀπέναντι Κυρίου· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ καθαρισθήσεται. 21 Ἐὰν δὲ πένηται ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ καὶ μὴ εὑρίσκῃ, λήμψεται ἀμνὸν ἕνα εἰς ὃ ἐπλημμέλησεν εἰς ἀφαίρεμα ὥστε ἐξειλάσασθαι περὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ δέκατον σεμιδάλεως πεφυραμένης ἐν ἐλαίῳ εἰς θυσίαν, καὶ κοτύλην ἐλαίου μίαν, 22 καὶ δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν, ὅσα εὗρεν ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσται ἡ μία περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ ἡ μία εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα· 23 καὶ προσοίσει αὐτὰ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸν πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, ἔναντι Κυρίου. 24 καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν ἀμνὸν τῆς πλημμελίας καὶ τὴν κοτύλην τοῦ ἐλαίου ἐπιθήσει αὐτὰ ἐπίθεμα ἔναντι Κυρίου. 25 καὶ σφάξει τὸν ἀμνὸν τῆς πλημμελίας, καὶ λήμψεται ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς πλημμελίας,

2 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 5 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 6 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 11 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 13 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc Gött. ‖ καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 εξιλασεται B* in this instance does not appear to have the second ε usually erased by the corrector. 16 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ περι αυτου Bunique; > A F M rell Gött. ‖ του ακαθαρτου Bunique; περι A mins Gött. Although, as Wevers (1986b: 59) notes, A includes both lexemes: περι του ακαθαρτου. 18 απεναντι B*unique; εναντι Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 19 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19–20 η χειρ αυτου και μη ευρισκη B*unique; και μη ευρισκη η κειρ αυτου Bc BrMcL; και η κειρ αυτου μη ευρισκη A F Gött. 21 εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθε A; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 πλημμελιας B*; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 27 αμνον + τον Bc F Gött; > B* A V mins Latcod 100 Syh (= MT).

Text and Translation

123

before the Lord, at the door of the tent of testimony. 12 And the priest must take the one lamb and offer it for a sinful error, also the cup of olive oil, and he must set it apart as something set apart before the Lord. 13 And they must slaughter the lamb in the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offerings and the ones for sin, in a holy place, because the one for sin is like the one for a sinful error, it belongs to the priest; they are holies of holies. 14 And the priest must take some of the blood from the one for a sinful error, and the priest must put it on right earlobe of the one who is being cleansed and on the tip of his right hand and on the tip of his right foot. 15 And after taking some of the cup of olive oil, the priest must pour it in the priest’s left hand 16 and dip his right finger with the olive oil that is in his left hand and sprinkle it seven times with his finger before the Lord. 17 But the olive oil that remains in his hand, the priest must put on the right earlobe of the one being cleansed and on the tip of his right hand and on the tip of his right foot, at the place of the blood of the one for a sinful error. 18 But the olive oil that remains in the priest’s hand the priest must put on the head of the one who was cleansed. And the priest must propitiate for him before the Lord. 19 The priest must prepare the one for sin, and the priest of the uncleanness must propitiate for him who is being cleansed from his sin. And after this the priest must slaughter the whole burnt offering, 20 and the priest must offer the whole burnt offering and the sacrifice on the altar opposite the Lord. And the priest must propitiate for him, and he will be clean. 21 But if his hand is poor and does not find, he must take one lamb as a choice portion for the sinful error he has committed, in order to propitiate for him, and a tenth of fine flour mixed with olive oil for a sacrifice and one cup of olive oil, 22 and two turtledoves or two young birds from the doves, which his hand finds, and one will be for sin and one for a whole burnt offering. 23 And on the eighth day he must bring them to the priest in order to cleanse himself, to the door of the tent of testimony, before the Lord. 24 And after the priest takes the lamb for a sinful error and the cup of olive oil, he must place them as a deposit before the Lord. 25 And he must slaughter the lamb for a sinful error, and the priest must take

124

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ὠτὸς τοῦ δεξιοῦ τοῦ καθαριζομένου καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τῆς χειρὸς τῆς δεξιᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ποδὸς τοῦ δεξιοῦ. 26 καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου ἐπιχεεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπὶ τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ ἱερέως τὴν ἀριστεράν· 27 καὶ ῥανεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τῷ δακτύλῳ τῷ δεξιῷ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τοῦ ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ τῇ ἀριστερᾷ ἑπτάκις ἔναντι Κυρίου· 28 καὶ ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν λοβὸν τοῦ ὠτὸς τοῦ καθαριζομένου τοῦ δεξιοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τῆς χειρὸς αὐτοῦ τῆς δεξιᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ ποδὸς αὐτοῦ τοῦ δεξιοῦ, ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ τῆς πλημμελίας· 29 τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τὸ ὂν ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ ἱερέως ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ καθαρισθέντος, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου. 30 καὶ ποιήσει μίαν τῶν τρυγόνων ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν νοσσῶν τῶν περιστερῶν, καθότι εὗρεν αὐτοῦ ἡ χείρ, 31 τὴν μίαν περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ τὴν μίαν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα σὺν τῇ θυσίᾳ· καὶ ἐξιλάσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τοῦ καθαριζομένου ἔναντι Κυρίου. 32 οὗτος ὁ νόμος ἐν ᾧ ἐστὶν ἡ ἁφὴ τῆς λέπρας καὶ τοῦ μὴ εὑρίσκοντος τῇ χειρὶ εἰς τὸν καθαρισμὸν αὐτοῦ. 33 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν λέγων 34 Ὡς ἂν εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν γῆν τῶν Χαναναίων, ἣν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν ἐν κτήσι, καὶ δώσω ἁφὴν λέπρας ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις τῆς γῆς τῆς ἐνκτήτου ὑμῖν, 35 καὶ ἥξει τὶνος αὐτοῦ ἡ οἰκία καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ τῷ ἱερεῖ λέγων Ὥσπερ ἁφὴ ἑώραταί μου ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ. 36 καὶ προστάξει ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀποσκευάσαι τὴν οἰκίαν πρὸ τοῦ εἰσελθόντα ἰδεῖν τὸν ἱερέα τὴν οἰκίαν, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἀκάθαρτα γένηται ὅσα ἐὰν ᾖ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ· καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εἰσελεύσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς καταμαθεῖν τὴν οἰκίαν. 37 καὶ ὄψεται τὴν ἁφὴν ἐν τοῖς τοίχοις τῆς οἰκίας, κοιλάδας χλωριζούσας, καὶ ἡ ὄψις αὐτῶν ταπεινοτέρα τῶν τοίχων· 38 καὶ ἐξελθὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς οἰκίας, καὶ ἀφοριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τήν οἰκίαν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. 39 καὶ ἐπανήξει ὁ ἱερεὺς τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ καὶ ὄψεται τὴν οἰκίαν, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐ διεχύθη ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τοῖς τοίχοις τῆς οἰκίας· 40 καὶ προστάξει ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἐξελοῦσιν τοὺς λίθους· ἔστιν ἡ ἁφή· καὶ ἐκβαλοῦσιν αὐτοὺς ἔξω τῆς πόλεως εἰς τόπον ἀκάθαρτον. 41 καὶ ἀποξύσουσιν τὴν οἰκίαν ἔσωθεν κύκλῳ, καὶ ἐκχεοῦσιν τὸν χοῦν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως εἰς τόπον ἀκάθαρτον. 42 καὶ λήμψονται λίθους ἀπεξυσμένους στερεοὺς καὶ ἀντιθήσουσιν ἀντὶ τῶν λίθων, καὶ χοῦν ἕτερον λήμψονται καὶ ἐξαλίψουσιν τὴν οἰκίαν. 43ἐὰν δὲ ἐπέλθῃ πάλιν ἁφὴ καὶ ἀνατείλῃ ἐν 1 του δεξιου του καθαριζομενου B A Syh; του καθαριζομενου του δεξιου F Gött. 8 καταλιφθεν B*; καταλειφθεν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ απο του ελαιου B A mins Sa Syh (= MT ‫ ;)מן־השׁמן‬ελαιον F Gött. 9 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 κτησι B*; κτησει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 ενκτητου B*; εκτητου Bc; εγκτητου Gött; for the various (mis)spellings in the mss, see Brooke and McLean 1917: 353. 18 οικιαν (2nd occ.) B A F mins Latcod 100 Arm; αφην G M mins Cyr Gött. 19 εαν B A M’ G mins Cyr; αν F Gött. 20 χλωριζουσας + η πυρριζουσας Bmg (right of col. 3) mins F (η πυριζ.) Cyr BrMcL Gött; > Btxt A mins Swete. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding obelus in the margin to the right of col. 3 where he supplied the omitted text. Bc is faded or scraped off, but legible. 24 λιθους + εν οις A F BrMcL Gött; > Bunique. 27 στερεους B A min; ετερους F Gött. 28 εξαλιψουσιν B*; εξαλειψουσιν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. The reading is faded but discernable. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ παλιν + η Bc F Gött; > B* A mins Cyr.

Text and Translation

125

some of the blood of the one for a sinful error and put it on the right earlobe of the one being cleansed and on the tip of his right hand and on the tip of his right foot. 26 And the priest must pour out some of the olive oil in the priest’s left hand, 27 and the priest must sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before the Lord. 28 And the priest must put some of the olive oil that is in his hand on the right earlobe of the one being cleansed and on the tip of his right hand and on the tip of his right foot, on the place of the blood of the one for a sinful error. 29 But what remains from the olive oil that was in the priest’s hand he must put on the head of the one who was cleansed, and the priest must propitiate for him before the Lord. 30 And he must prepare one of the turtledoves or one of the young birds from the doves, as his hand found, 31 one for sin and one as a whole burnt offering, with the sacrifice, and the priest must propitiate before the Lord for the one being cleansed. 32 This is the law in which is the infection of skin disease and of the one who cannot find for his cleansing by his hand.” 33 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn, saying: 34 “When you come into the land of the Chananites, which I give you in an acquisition, and I will give a skin disease in the houses of the land acquired by you, 35 then someone whose house it is must come and report to the priest, saying, ‘Something like an infection has been seen in my house.’ 36 And the priest must command to strip the house before the priest enters to look at the house, and whatever is in the house will not become unclean, and after these things the priest must enter to observe the house. 37 And he must look at the infection in the walls of the house, hollow, greenish, and their appearance is lower than the walls, 38 and the priest, after exiting the house at the door of the house, the priest must then isolate the house for seven days. 39 And the priest must return on the seventh day and look at the house, and behold, the infection has spread in the walls of the house. 40 And the priest must command, and they must take out the stones; it is an infection. And they must throw them outside the city into an unclean place. 41 And they must scrape off the inside of the house all around and pour out the dust outside the city in an unclean place. 42 And they must take solid scraped stones and set them in place of the stones and take other dust and plaster the house. 43 But if an infection returns again and breaks out in the house, after he

126

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

τῇ οἰκίᾳ μετὰ τὸ ἐξελεῖν τοὺς λίθους καὶ μετὰ τὸ ἀποξυσθῆναι τὴν οἰκίαν καὶ μετὰ τὸ ἐξαλιφθῆναι, 44 καὶ εἰσελεύσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ὄψεται· εἰ διακέχυται ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, λέπρα ἔμμονός ἐστιν ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν. 45καὶ καθελοῦσιν τὴν οἰκίαν, καὶ τὰ ξύλα αὐτῆς καὶ τοὺς λίθους αὐτῆς καὶ πάντα τὸν χοῦν ἐξοίσουσιν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως εἰς τόπον ἀκάθαρτον· 46 καὶ ὁ εἰσπορευόμενος εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας ἃς ἀφωρισμένη ἐστὶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας, 47 καὶ ὁ κοιμώμενος ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· καὶ ὁ ἔσθων ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 48 ἐὰν δὲ παραγενόμενος εἰσέλθῃ ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἴδῃ, καὶ ἰδοὺ οὐ διαχύσει οὐ διαχεῖται ἡ ἁφὴ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ μετὰ τὸ ἐξαλιφθῆναι τὴν οἰκίαν, καὶ καθαριεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν οἰκίαν, ὅτι ἰάθη ἡ ἁφή. 49 καὶ λήμψεται ἀφαγνίσαι τὴν οἰκίαν δύο ὀρνίθια ζῶντα καθαρὰ καὶ ξύλον κέδρινον καὶ κεκλωσμένον κόκκινον καὶ ὕσσωπον· 50 καὶ σφάξει τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ἓν εἰς σκεῦος ὀστράκινον ἐφ’ ὕδατι ζῶντι, 51 καὶ λήμψεται τὸ ξύλον τὸ κέδρινον καὶ τὸ κεκλωσμένον κόκκινον καὶ τὸν ὕσσωπον καὶ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν, καὶ βάψει αὐτὸ εἰς τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ὀρνιθίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἐφ’ ὕδατι ζῶντι, καὶ περιρανεῖ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκίαν ἑπτάκις. 52 καὶ ἀφαγνιεῖ τὴν οἰκίαν ἐν τῷ αἵματι τοῦ ὀρνιθίου τοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι τῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἐν τῷ ὀρνιθίῳ τῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ τῷ κεδρίνῳ καὶ ἐν τῷ ὑσσώπῳ καὶ ἐν τῷ κεκλωσμένῳ κοκκίνῳ· 53 καὶ ἐξαποστελεῖ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν ἔξω πόλεως εἰς τὸ πεδίον, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ τῆς οἰκίας, καὶ καθαρὰ ἔσται. 54 Οὗτος ὁ νόμος κατὰ πᾶσαν ἁφὴν λέπρας καὶ θραύσματος, 55 καὶ τῆς λέπρας ἱματίου καὶ οἰκίας, 56 καὶ οὐλῆς καὶ σημασίας καὶ τοῦ αὐγάζοντος, 57 καὶ τοῦ ἐξηγήσασθαι ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἀκάθαρτον καὶ ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ καθαρισθήσεται· οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς λέπρας. ⟦15⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων καὶ Ἀαρών 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς αὐτοῖς Ἀνδρὶ ἀνδρὶ ᾧ ἐὰν γένηται ῥύσις ἐκ τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, ἡ ῥύσις αὐτοῦ ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν. 3 καὶ οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτοῦ· ῥέων γόνον ἐκ σώματος αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῆς ῥύσεως ἧς συνέστηκεν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ διὰ τῆς ῥύσεως, αὕτη ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ· πᾶσαι αἱ ἡμέραι ῥύσεως σώματος αὐτοῦ ᾗ συνέστηκεν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ διὰ τῆς ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσία αὐτοῦ ἐστίν. 4 πᾶσα κοίτη ἐφ’ ᾗ ἐὰν κοιμηθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτῆς ὁ γονορρυὴς ἀκάθαρτός ἐστιν, καὶ πὰν σκεῦος ἐφ’ ὃ ἐὰν καθίσῃ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ὁ γονορρυὴς ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται. 5 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἄν ἅψηται τῆς κοίτης αὐτοῦ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· 6 καὶ 2 εξαλιφθηναι B; εξαλειφθηναι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. The text is faded but legible. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 ου B A mins; > M mins Gött. ‖ εξαλιφθηναι B*vid A; εξαλειφθηναι Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Bc is even more unclear than B*, but may be reconstructed by analogy to Bc in 14:43. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 περιρανει B*; περιρρανει Bc Gött. 16 του (2nd occ.) B*unique; > Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 18 εξω + της Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A. ‖ εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 λεγων και ααρων B; και ααρων λεγων A F M rell Gött. 24 αυτοις B A V O x mins Syh; προς αυτους F M rell Gött. ‖ εαν B rell; αν mins Cyr Gött. 26 ης B Cyr 997 969 rell; η mins b Arm Gött. 28 εαν B min; αν A F Gött. 29 εστιν B Cyr 997 rell; εσται mins Latcod 100 Arm Gött. ‖ εαν B mins; αν A F Gött.

Text and Translation

127

has removed the stones and after the house has been scraped out and after it has been plastered, 44 then the priest must enter and look; if the infection has spread in the house, it is an enduring skin disease in the house; it is unclean. 45 And they must tear down the house, both its wood and its stones, and all the dust they must take outside the city into an unclean place. 46 And the one who enters the house all the days that it is isolated will be unclean until the evening, 47 and the one who falls asleep in the house must wash his clothes and will be unclean until the evening, and he who eats in the house must wash his garments and be unclean until the evening. 48 But if, after coming near, the priest enters and looks, and behold, the infection by not spreading has not spread in the house after the house was plastered, then the priest must declare the house clean, because the infection has healed. 49 And in order to purify the house, he must take two living, clean small birds and cedar wood and scarlet thread that has been spun and hyssop, 50 and he must slaughter the one small bird that is in a clay container over living water, 51 and he must take the cedar wood and the scarlet thread that has been spun and the hyssop and the small living bird and dip them in the blood of the small slaughtered bird over living water and by them sprinkle on the house seven times. 52 And he must purify the house with the blood of the small bird that was also in the living water and with the small living bird and with the cedar wood and with the hyssop and with the scarlet thread that has been spun, 53 and he must send away the small living bird outside a city into the field, and he will propitiate for the house, and it will be clean.” 54 This is the law for every infection of a skin disease and of an abscess 55 and of the skin disease of clothing and of a house 56 and of a lesion and of an indication and of a bright spot 57 and to explain on which day something is unclean and on which day it should be declared clean. This is the law for skin disease. ⟦15⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs saying, and Aarōn: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, say to them: Any man, whoever has a discharge from his body, his discharge is unclean. 3 And this is the law for his uncleanness: when he discharges seed from his body from the discharge from which his body has become compacted through the discharge, this is his uncleanness by it. All the days of the discharge of his body or if his body has become compacted through the discharge, it is his uncleanness. 4 Every bed that someone with spermatorrhea lies on is unclean, and every article that someone with spermatorrhea sits on will be unclean. 5 And a person who touches his bed must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 6 And the one who sits

128

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

ὁ καθήμενος ἐπὶ τοῦ σκεύους ἐφ’ ὃ ἐὰν καθίσῃ ὁ γονορρυὴς πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 7 καὶ ὁ ἁπτόμενος χρωτὸς τοῦ γονορρυοῦς πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· 8 ἐὰν δὲ προσσιελίσῃ ὁ γονορρυὴς ἐπὶ τὸν καθαρὸν, πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· 9 καὶ πᾶν ἐπίσαγμα ὄνου ἐφ’ ὃ ἂν ἐπιβῇ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ὁ γονορρυής, ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 10 καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος ὅσα ἐὰν ᾖ ὑποκάτω αὐτοῦ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· καὶ ὁ αἴρων αὐτὰ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 11 καὶ ὅσων ἐὰν ἅψηται ὁ γονορρυὴς καὶ τὰς χεῖρας οὐ νένιπται, πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα ὕδατι, καὶ ἄθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 12 καὶ σκεῦος ὀστράκινον οὗ ἂν ἅψηται ὁ γονορρυὴς συντριβήσεται· καὶ σκεῦος ξύλινον νιφήσεται ὕδατι, καὶ καθαρὸν ἔσται. 13 ἐὰν δὲ καθαρισθῇ ὁ γονορρυὴς ἐκ τῆς ῥύσεως αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξαριθμήσεται αὐτῷ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας εἰς τὸν καθαρισμόν, καὶ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα ὕδατι, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται. 14 καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ λήμψεται ἑαυτῷ δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν καὶ οἴσει αὐτὰ ἔναντι Κυρίου ἐπὶ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ δώσει αὐτὰ τῷ ἱερεῖ· 15 καὶ ποιήσει αὐτὰ ὁ ἱερεὺς μίαν περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ μίαν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου ἀπὸ τῆς ῥύσεως αὐτοῦ. 16 Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἐὰν ἐξέλθῃ ἐξ αὐτοῦ κοίτη σπέρματος, καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· 17καὶ πᾶν ἱμάτιον καὶ πᾶν δέρμα ἐφ’ ὃ ἐὰν ᾖ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ κοίτη σπέρματος, καὶ πλυθήσεται ὕδατι καὶ ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 18 καὶ γυνή, ἐὰν κοιμηθῇ ἀνὴρ μετ’ αὐτῆς κοίτην σπέρματος, καὶ λούσονται ὕδατι καὶ ἀκάθαρτοι ἔσονται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 19 Καὶ γυνὴ ἥτις ἐὰν ᾖ ῥέουσα αἵματι, ἔσται ἡ ῥύσις αὐτῆς ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτῆς, ἑπτά ἡμέρα ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς· πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος αὐτῆς ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας, 20 καὶ πᾶν ὃ ἂν κοιτάζηται ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται, καὶ πᾶν ἐφ’ ὃ ἂν ἐπικαθίσῃ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται. 21 καὶ πᾶς ὃς ἐὰν ἅψηται τῆς κοίτης αὐτῆς πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 22 καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος παντὸς σκεύους οὗ ἐὰν καθίσῃ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 1 εαν B mins; αν A F Gött. ‖ καθιση + επ αυτο F Gött; > B A V mins Cyr 997 Latcod 100. 2 απτομενος + του Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A min. 6 απτομενος + απο παντων F Gött; > B A mins Bovid. ‖ εαν B A mins; αν F Gött. 8 εαν B A mins; αν F Gött. 9 νενιπται + υδατι Bc F LatAug Lev min rell; > B* A mins Gött. 10 αθαρτος B*; ακαθαρτος Bmg (κα to the right of col. 1) Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 13 καθαρισμον + αυτου Bc F Gött; > B* A. 17 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 εαν B A F M’ mins; αν mins Gött. 20 εαν B A mins; αν F Gött. 24 εαν B A M’ mins; αν F Gött. 25 ημερα B*; ημερας Bc A Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 26 παν + εφ Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 εαν B A V mins; αν F Gött. 29 ου B A V x mins; εφ ου F mins; εφ ο Gött. ‖ εαν B A O y-318 mins; αν F Gött.

Text and Translation

129

on the article that the one with spermatorrhea has sat on must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 7 And the one who touches a skin of the one with spermatorrhea must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 8 But if the one with spermatorrhea spits on one who is clean, he must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 9 And any pack-saddle of a donkey that one with spermatorrhea mounts on will be unclean until the evening. 10 And everyone who touches whatever was under him will be unclean until the evening; and the one who carries these things must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 11 And as many as the one with spermatorrhea touches, and he has not washed his hands, must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 12 And a clay container that the one with spermatorrhea touches must be shattered; and a wooden container must be washed in water, and it will be clean. 13 But if the one with spermatorrhea is cleansed from his discharge, then it will be numbered for him seven days for cleansing, and he must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be clean. 14 And on the eighth day he must take for himself two turtledoves or two young birds from the doves, and he must bring them before the Lord at the door of the tent of testimony and give them to the priest. 15 And the priest will prepare them, one for sin and one for a whole burnt offering, and the priest must propitiate for him before the Lord for his discharge.” 16 And as for a man who has a bed of semen that comes out of him, he also must bathe his entire body in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 17 And all clothing and all skin that a bed of semen is on also must be washed with water, and it will be unclean until the evening. 18 And as for a woman, if a man lies with her in a bed of semen, they also must bathe in water, and they will be unclean until the evening. 19 And as for a woman who is discharging blood, her discharge will be in her body; seven days she will be in her period. Anyone who touches her will be unclean until the evening. 20 And everything that she sleeps on during her period will be unclean, and everything that she sits down on it will be unclean. 21 And anyone who touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 22 And anyone who touches any article that she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will

130

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

23 ἐὰν δὲ ἐν τῇ κοίτῃ αὐτῆς οὔσης ἢ ἐπὶ τοῦ σκεύους οὗ ἐὰν καθίσῃ ἐπ’ αὐτῷ ἐν τῷ ἅπτεσθαι αὐτὸν αὐτῆς, ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 24 ἐὰν δὲ κοίτῃ τις κοιμηθῇ μετ’ αὐτῆς, καὶ γένηται ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτῆς ἐπ’ αὐτῷ, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας· καὶ πᾶσα κοίτη ἐφ’ ᾗ ἂν κοιμηθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτῆς ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται. 25 Καὶ γυνὴ ἐὰν ῥέῃ ῥύσει αἵματος ἡμέρας πλείους οὐκ ἐν καιρῷ τῆς ἀφέδρου αὐτῆς, ἐὰν καὶ ῥέῃ μετὰ τὴν ἄφεδρον αὐτῆς, πᾶσαι αἱ ἡμέραι ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς καθάπερ αἱ ἡμέραι τῆς ἀφέδρου, ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται. 26 καὶ πᾶσαν κοίτην ἐφ’ ἣν ἂν κοιμηθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτὴς πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς ῥύσεως κατὰ τὴν κοίτην τῆς ἀφέδρου ἔσται αὐτῇ, καὶ πᾶν σκεῦος ἐφ’ ὃ ἐὰν καθίσῃ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ἀκάθαρτον ἔσται κατὰ τὴν ἀκαθαρσίαν τῆς ἀφέδρου. 27 πᾶς ὁ ἁπτόμενος αὐτῆς ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται, καὶ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας. 28 ἐὰν δὲ καθαρισθῇ ἀπὸ τῆς ῥύσεως, καὶ ἐξαριθμήσεται αὐτῇ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα καθαρισθήσεται. 29 καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ λήμψεται αὑτῇ δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν, καὶ οἴσει αὐτὰ πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· 30 καὶ ποιήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν μίαν περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ τὴν μίαν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῆς ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου ἀπὸ ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς. 31 Καὶ εὐλαβεῖς ποιήσετε τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀκαθαρσιῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανοῦνται διὰ τὴν ἀκαθαρσίαν αὐτῶν, ἐν τῷ μιαίνειν αὐτοὺς τὴν σκηνήν μου τὴν ἐν αὐτοῖς. 32 οὗτος ὁ νόμος τοῦ γονορρυοῦς, καὶ ἐάν τινι ἐξέλθῃ ἐξ αὐτοῦ κοίτη σπέρματος ὥστε μιανθῆναι ἐν αὐτῇ· 33 καὶ τῇ αἱμορροούσῃ ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς, ὁ γονορρυὴς ἐν τῇ ῥύσι αὐτοῦ, τῷ ἄρσενι ἢ τῇ θηλίᾳ, καὶ τῷ ἀνδρὶ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἀποκαθημένης. ⟦16⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐτελεύτησαν· 2 καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν Λάλησον πρὸς Ἀαρὼν τὸν ἀδελφόν σου, καὶ μὴ εἰσπορευέσθω πᾶσαν ὥραν εἰς τὸ ἅγιον ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος εἰς πρόσωπον τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου, ὅ ἐστιν ἐπὶ τῆς κιβωτοῦ τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανεῖται· ἐν γὰρ νεφέλῃ ὀφθήσομαι ἐπὶ τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου. 3 οὕτως εἰσελεύσεται Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὸ ἅγιον· ἐν μόσχῳ ἐκ βοῶν περὶ ἁμαρτίας, καὶ κριὸν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα. 4 καὶ χιτῶνα λινοῦν ἡγιασμένον ἐνδύσεται, καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ ζώνῃ λινῇ ζώσεται, καὶ κίδαριν λινῆν περιθήσεται· ἱμάτια ἅγιά ἐστιν, καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται αὐτά. 5 καὶ παρὰ τῆς συναγωγῆς τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ 1 εαν (2nd occ.) B A mins C’’-(52)500 f -129 n; αν Latcod 100 Gött. ‖ καθιση B*unique; αυτη καθηται Gött et al. (Göttc reads καθῆται for Gött κάθηται). 2 ακαθαρτον B mins; ακαθαρτος A F Gött. Here I emend Logos’s electronic format of Swete (ακαθαρτος) to match B as printed in Swete’s hardcover (ακαθαρτον). 5 ρυσει B A mins; ρυσιν F Gött. 7 πασαν κοιτην B A b; πασα κοιτη F Gött. 8 ρυσεως + αυτης Bmg (right of col. 3) Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 εαν B mins; αν A F Gött. 13 αυτη B cI’-761 x mins; > A mins; εαυτη F Gött. 15 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 αυτης + και Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* A. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ρυσι B*; ρυσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ θηλια B*; θηλεια Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

131

be unclean until the evening. 23 But if while she is in her bed or on the article that she sat on it, when he touches her, it will be unclean until the evening. 24 But if someone sleeps with her in bed and her uncleanness be on him, then he will be unclean for seven days, and every bed that he sleeps on will be unclean. 25 And as for a woman, if she discharges a discharge of blood for many days, not at the time of her period, even if she discharges after her period, all the days of her unclean discharge are like the days of her period; she will be unclean. 26 And every bed that she sleeps on during all the days of the discharge will be for her as is the bed of her period, and every article that she sits on will be unclean, as in the uncleanness of her period. 27 Anyone who touches her will be unclean and must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be unclean until the evening. 28 But if she is cleansed from the discharge, then it must be counted for her for seven days, and after these she will be cleansed. 29 And on the eighth day she must take for herself two turtledoves or two young birds from the doves, and she must bring them to the priest at the door of the tent of testimony. 30 And the priest must prepare one for sin and one for a whole burnt offering, and the priest must propitiate for her before the Lord because of her unclean discharge. 31 And you must make the sons of Israel cautious about their uncleannesses, and they will not die because of their uncleanness when they defile my tent that is among them.” 32 This is the law for the one with spermatorrhea, and if for someone a bed of semen comes out from him so that he becomes defiled by it, 33 and for her who discharges blood in her period; the one with spermatorrhea in his discharge, whether for a male or for a female, and for the man who sleeps with a woman who is removed. ⟦16⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs after the two sons of Aarōn died, when they brought strange fire before the Lord, and they died. 2 And the Lord said to Mōysēs: “Speak to Aarōn your brother, and do not let him enter at all times into the holy place inside the curtain that faces the propitiatory, which is on the ark of testimony, then he will not die; for I will be seen in a cloud on the propitiatory. 3 In this manner Aarōn must enter the holy place: with a calf from the cattle for sin and a ram for a whole burnt offering. 4 And he must put on the consecrated linen tunic, and linen pants must be on his skin, and he must fasten himself with a linen belt and wrap around a linen headdress; they are holy clothes. And he must bathe his entire body in water and put them on. 5 And he must take from the assembly of the sons of Israel two

132

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

λήμψεται δύο χιμάρρους ἐξ αἰγῶν περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ κριὸν ἕνα εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα. 6 καὶ προσάξει Ἀαρὼν τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ. 7 καὶ λήμψεται τοὺς δύο χιμάρρους καὶ στήσει αὐτοὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου παρὰ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου· 8 καὶ ἐπιθήσει Ἀαρὼν ἐπὶ τοὺς δύο χιμάρρους κλῆρον ἕνα τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ κλῆρον ἕνα τῷ ἀποπομπαίῳ. 9καὶ προσάξει Ἀαρὼν τὸν χίμαρρον ἐφ’ ὃν ἐπῆλθεν ἐπ’ αὐτὸν ὁ κλῆρος τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ προσοίσει περὶ ἁμαρτίας· 10 καὶ τὸν χίμαρρον ἐφ’ ὃν ἐπῆλθεν ἐπ’ αὐτὸν ὁ κλῆρος τοῦ ἀποπομπαίου, στήσει αὐτὸν ἔναντι Κυρίου ζῶντα τοῦ ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ, ὥστε ἀποστεῖλαι αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἀποπομπήν· ἀφήσει αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον. 11 καὶ προσάξει Ἀαρὼν τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὸν αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ μόνον, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ, καὶ σφάξει τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὸν αὑτοῦ. 12 καὶ λήμψεται τὸ πυρεῖον πλῆρες ἀνθράκων πυρὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τοῦ ἀπέναντι Κυρίου, καὶ πλήσει τὰς χεῖρας θυμιάματος συνθέσεως λεπτῆς καὶ εἰσοίσει ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος, 13 καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὸ θυμίαμα ἐπὶ τὸ πῦρ ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ καλύψει ἡ ἀτμίς τοῦ θυμιάματος τὸ ἱλαστήριον τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μαρτυρίων, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανεῖται. 14 καὶ λήμψεται ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου καὶ ῥανεῖ τῷ δακτύλῳ ἐπὶ τὸ ἱλαστήριον κατὰ ἀνατολάς· κατὰ πρόσωπον τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου ῥανεῖ ἑπτάκις ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τῷ δακτύλῳ. 15 καὶ σφάξει τὸν χίμαρρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὸν περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ εἰσοίσει ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος, καὶ ποιήσει τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ὃν τρόπον ἐποίησεν τὸ αἷμα τοῦ μόσχου, καὶ ῥανεῖ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ἱλαστήριον κατὰ πρόσωπον τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου, 16 καὶ ἐξειλάσεται τὸ ἅγιον ἀπὸ τῶν ἀκαθαρσιῶν τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδικημάτων αὐτῶν περὶ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν· καὶ οὕτω ποιήσει τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου τῇ ἐκτισμένῃ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐν μέσῳ τῆς ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῶν. 17 καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔσται ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου, εἰσπορευομένου αὐτοῦ ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ, 1 χιμαρρους B*; χειμαρρους A F*; χιμαρους Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 2 αυτου (1st occ.) Gött; αὑτοῦ Göttc. ‖ εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 3 χιμαρρους B*; χειμαρρους A F*; χιμαρους Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 5 χιμαρρους B*; χειμαρρους A F*; χιμαρους Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ χιμαρρους + κληρους Latcod 100 F Gött; > B A V mins Cyr. 6 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 εναντι Κυριου ζωντα B Arm; ζωντα εναντι Κυριου A F Gött. ‖ εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αποστειλαι B A min Cyr; εξαποστειλαι F Gött. 10 αυτου (1st occ.) Gött; αὑτοῦ Göttc. ‖ και του οικου αυτου μονον B A V x min; > F Gött. 10–11 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19 απο B* A mins Cyr Bo Syh; > Bc F BrMcL Gött. 21–22 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 ουτω B b f z-407 Cyr mins Tht Lev; ουτως A F Gött. ‖ την σκηνην B* F* mins Tht Lev; τη σκηνη Bc A Fc vid Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

133

young billy goats from the goats for sin and one ram for a whole burnt offering. 6 And Aarōn must bring the calf that is for his sin, and he must propitiate for himself and for his house. 7 And he must take the two billy goats and set them before the Lord at the door of the tent of testimony, 8 and Aarōn must place on the two billy goats one lot for the Lord and one lot for the one that carries away. 9 And Aarōn must bring the billy goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and offer it for sin. 10 And as for the billy goat on which the lot fell on it of the one that carries away, he must set it before the Lord alive in order to propitiate on it; to send it into the sending away, he must release it into the desert. 11 And Aarōn must bring the calf that is for his sin and his house’s sin alone, and must propitiate for himself and for his house, and he must slaughter the calf that is for his own sin. 12 And he must take the censer full of coals of fire from the altar that is before the Lord, and he must fill his hands with a fine incense composition, and he must bring it inside the curtain, 13 and he must put the incense on the fire before the Lord, and the smoke of the incense will cover the propitiatory that is on the testimony, and he will not die. 14 And he must take some of the calf’s blood and sprinkle it with his finger onto the propitiatory towards the east; facing the propitiatory he must sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times. 15 And he must slaughter before the Lord the billy goat that is for the people’s sin, and he must bring some of its blood inside the curtain and do with its blood the same way he did with the with the calf’s blood, and he must sprinkle its blood on the propitiatory facing the propitiatory. 16 And he must propitiate the holy place because of the unclean things of the sons of Israel and because of their injustices, concerning all their sins. And thus he must prepare the tent of testimony, for what has been established by them in the midst of their uncleanness. 17 And no person will be in the tent of testimony, when he enters to propitiate in the holy place, until he exits; and he must propitiate for

134

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἕως ἂν ἐξέλθῃ· καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ, καὶ περὶ πάσης συναγωγῆς υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ. 18 καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τὸ ὂν ἀπέναντι Κυρίου καὶ ἐξειλάσεται ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ· καὶ λήμψεται ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ χιμάρρου καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου κύκλῳ, 19 καὶ ῥανεῖ ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τῷ δακτύλῳ ἑπτάκις καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτό, καὶ ἁγιάσει αὐτὸ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁκαθαρσιῶν τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ. 20 καὶ συντελέσει ἐξειλασκόμενος τὸ ἅγιον καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου καὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ περὶ τῶν ἱερέων καθαριεῖ· καὶ προσάξει τὸν χίμαρρον τὸν ζῶντα. 21 καὶ ἐπιθήσει Ἀαρὼν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ χιμάρρου τοῦ ζῶντος, καὶ ἐξαγορεύσει ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ πάσας τὰς ἀνομίας τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ πάσας τὰς ἀδικίας αὐτῶν καὶ πάσας τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐπιθήσει αὐτὰς ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ χιμάρρου τοῦ ζῶντος, καὶ ἐξαποστελεῖ ἐν χειρὶ ἀνθρώπου εἰς τὴν ἔρημον· 22 καὶ λήμψεται ὁ χίμαρρος ἐφ’ ἑαυτῷ τὰς ἀδικίας αὐτῶν εἰς γῆν ἄβατον, καὶ ἐξαποστελεῖ τὸν χίμαρρον εἰς τὴν ἔρημον. 23 καὶ εἰσελεύσεται Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ ἐκδύσεται τὴν στολὴν τὴν λινῆν ἣν ἐνδεδύκει εἰσπορευομένου αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ ἀποθήσει αὐτὴν ἐκεῖ. 24 καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ καὶ ἐνδύσεται τὴν στολὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξελθὼν ποιήσει τὸ ὁλοκάρπωμα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ ὁλοκάρπωμα τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὑτοῦ καὶ περὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ καὶ περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ ὡς περὶ τῶν ἱερέων. 25 καὶ τὸ στέαρ τὸ περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἀνοίσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον. 26 καὶ ὁ ἐξαποστέλλων τὸν χίμαρρον τὸν διεσταλμένον εἰς ἄφεσιν πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν παρεμβολήν. 27 καὶ τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τὸν χίμαρρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ὧν τὸ αἷμα εἰσηνέχθη ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ, ἐξοίσουσιν αὐτὰ ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, καὶ κατακαύσουσιν αὐτὰ ἐν πυρί, καὶ τὰ δέρματα αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ κρέα αὐτῶν καὶ τὴν κόπρον αὐτῶν. 28 ὁ δὲ κατακαίων αὐτὰ πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λούσεται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν παρεμβολήν. 29 Καὶ ἔσται τοῦτο ὑμῖν νόμιμον αἰώνιον· 1 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτου (1st occ.) Gött; αὑτοῦ Göttc. 3 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ επ αυτου B Fc Gött; απ αυτου A; περι αυτου F*. 4 χιμαρρου B*; χειμαρρου A F*; χιμαρου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 5 αυτου B* A min; αυτο Bc F BrMcL Gött. 6 εξειλασκομενος B*; εξιλασκομενος Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 χιμαρρου B*; χειμαρρου A F*; χιμαρου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 12 ανθρωπου + ετοιμου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ χιμαρρος B; χειμαρρος A F*; χιμαρος Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 13 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτου (2nd occ.) Gött; αὑτοῦ Göttc. 18 περι B M’ mins Arm Sa Syh; > A F Gött. 19 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 χιμαρρον B*; χειμαρρον A F*; χιμαρον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αιμα B A min Arm Gött; αιμα αυτων O-58-15 Syh (= MT ‫ )דמם‬Göttc. ‖ εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

135

himself and for his house and for the entire assembly of the sons of Israel. 18 And he must go out to the altar that is before the Lord and propitiate on it, and he must take some of the calf’s blood and some of the billy goat’s blood and put it on and around the horns of the altar. 19 And he must sprinkle on it some of the blood with his finger seven times and declare it clean, and he will sanctify it from the uncleannesses of the sons of Israel. 20 And he must finish atoning the holy place and the tent of testimony and the altar, and he must declare clean the things concerning the priests. And he must bring the live billy goat. 21 And Aarōn must put his hands on the head of the live billy goat and confess over it all the lawless actions of the sons of Israel and all their injustices and all their sins, and he must put them on the head of the live billy goat and send it away into the desert by the hand of a person. 22 And the billy goat will take on itself their injustices to a desolate place, and he must send away the billy goat into the desert. 23 And Aarōn must enter the tent of testimony and take off the linen apparel, which he will have put on when he entered the holy place, and must place it there. 24 And he must bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garment, and after coming out he must prepare his whole burnt offering and the people’s whole burnt offering and must propitiate for himself and for his house and for the people as for the priests. 25 And he must offer up the hard fat for sins on the altar. 26 And the one who sends away the billy goat set apart for release must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and after these things he must enter the camp. 27 And the calf for sin and the billy goat for sin, whose blood was brought in to propitiate in the holy place, they must take them outside the camp and burn them completely with fire, and their skins and their meat and their excrement. 28 But the one who burns them must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and after these things must come into the camp. 29 And this will be an enduring ordinance for you.”

136

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἐβδόμῳ ταπεινώσατε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν καὶ πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσετε, ὁ αὐτόχθων καὶ ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν. 30 ἐν γὰρ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ ὑμῶν, καθαρίσαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ καθαρισθήσεσθε. 31 σάββατα σαββάτων ἀνάπαυσις αὕτη ἔσται ὑμῖν, καὶ ταπεινώσετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν· νόμιμον αἰώνιον. 32 ἐξειλάσεται ὁ ἱερεύς, ὃν ἂν χρείσωσιν αὐτὸν καὶ ὃν ἂν τελιώσουσιν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ ἱερατεύειν μετὰ τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐνδύσεται τὴν στολὴν τὴν λινῆν, στολὴν ἁγίαν· 33 καὶ ἐξειλάσεται τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ ἁγίου, καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου καὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἐξειλάσεται, καὶ περὶ τῶν ἱερέων καὶ περὶ πάσης συναγωγῆς ἐξειλάσεται. 34 καὶ ἔσται τοῦτο ὑμῖν νόμιμον αἰώνιον ἐξειλάσκεσθαι περὶ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν· ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ποιηθήσεται, καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ. ⟦17⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον πρὸς Ἀαρὼν καὶ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸς πάντας υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα ὃ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος λέγων 3 Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἢ τῶν προσηλύτων ἢ τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν σφάξῃ μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον ἢ αἶγα ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ καὶ ὃς ἂν σφάξῃ ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς 4 καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου μὴ ἐνέγκῃ ὥστε ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα ἢ σωτήριον Κυρίῳ δεκτὸν εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, καὶ ὃς ἂν σφάξῃ ἔξω καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου μὴ ἐνέγκῃ αὐτὸ ὥστε μὴ προσενέγκαι δῶρον Κυρίῳ ἀπέναντι τῆς σκηνῆς Κυρίου, καὶ λογισθήσεται τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ αἷμα· αἷμα ἐξέχεεν, ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 5 ὅπως ἀναφέρωσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ τὰς θυσίας αὐτῶν ὅσας ἂν αὐτοὶ σφάξουσιν ἐν τοῖς πεδίοις, καὶ οἴσουσιν τῷ κυρίῳ ἐπὶ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, καὶ θύσουσιν θυσίαν σωτηρίου τῷ κυρίῳ αὐτά· 6 καὶ προσχεεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κύκλῳ ἀπέναντι Κυρίου παρὰ τὰς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ ἀνοίσει τὸ στέαρ εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ· 7 καὶ οὐ θύσουσιν ἐπὶ τὰς θυσίας αὐτῶν τοῖς ματαίοις, οἷς αὐτοὶ ἐκπορνεύουσιν ὀπίσω αὐτῶν· νόμιμον αἰώνιον ἔσται ὑμῖν εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν. 8 Καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος

1 εβδομῳ + δεκατη του μηνος Bmg (right of col. 3) F BrMcL Gött; > Btxt A. 2–3 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 5 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ χρεισωσιν B* F*; κρισωσιν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 τελιωσουσιν B* A F* mins BrMcL; τελειωσωσι Bc; τελειωσουσιν Swete BrMcL; τελειωσωσιν Fb G M mins Gött. 7 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9–10 εξειλασκεσθαι B*; εξιλασκεσθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 καθα B* mins Tht Lev; καθαπερ Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 14–15 η των προσηλυτων η των προσκειμενων εν υμιν A B F M’ mins et al.; > Gött, but there are mss with plusses and minuses of each element of these alternative conjunctive clauses (Wevers 1986a: 195–196). 21 αναφερωσιν B A min; αν φερωσιν F Gött. 22 σφαξουσιν B b mins; σφαζωσιν Mtxt G mins; σφαξωσιν A F Gött. 26 επι B* A F M’ mins Cyr; ετι Bc Fc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

137

“In the seventh month,6 you must humble your lives and must do no work, neither the native nor the immigrant who is attached among you. 30 For on this day he must propitiate for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and you will be clean. 31 This rest will be sabbaths of sabbaths for you, and you must humble your lives; it is an enduring ordinance. 32 The priest whom they anoint him and whose hands they must fulfill to serve as priest after his father, must propitiate and must put on the linen garment, a holy garment. 33 And he must propitiate for the holy of holy, and he must propitiate for the tent of testimony and the altar, and he must propitiate for the priests and for the entire assembly. 34 And this will be an enduring ordinance for you, to propitiate for the sons of Israel from all their sins.” Once a year, it must be done just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs. ⟦17⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to Aarōn and to his sons and to all the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: This is the word that the Lord has commanded, saying: 3 Person by person from the sons of Israel or from the immigrants or from those who are attached among you,7 whoever slaughters a calf or a sheep or a goat in the camp, or whoever slaughters it outside the camp 4 and does not carry it to the door of the tent of testimony, to perform it as a whole burnt offering or a deliverance, acceptable to the Lord as a sweet smell, and whoever slaughters it outside and does not carry it to the door of the tent of testimony, so that he might not bring a gift to the Lord before the Lord’s tent, then blood must be accounted to that person. He has shed blood; that life must be eliminated from its people 5 For this reason the sons of Israel must offer up their sacrifices, whatever they will slaughter in the fields, and they must carry them to the Lord, to the priest at the door of the tent of testimony, and they must sacrifice them as a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord. 6 And the priest must pour out the blood against the sides of the altar before the Lord at the door of the tent of testimony and offer up the hard fat as a sweet smell to the Lord. 7 And they must not sacrifice on their sacrifices to worthless things, with which they go out after them to commit fornication. It will be an enduring ordinance for you throughout your generations. 8 And you

6 Other witnesses here include: “On the tenth of the month.” See footnote in the Greek text at 16:29. 7 Against Gött (followed by SD 118; LBGS 268; NETS 97), all major witnesses (followed by LBDA 156) contain the plus: “or from the immigrants or from those who are attached among you.”

138

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν ποιήσῃ ὁλοκαύτωμα ἢ θυσίαν 9 ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου μὴ ἐνέγκῃ ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ τῷ κυρίῳ, ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ. 10 Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν φάγῃ πᾶν αἷμα, καὶ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τὴν ἔσθουσαν τὸ αἷμα καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτὴν ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 11 ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ ἐγὼ δέδωκα αὐτὸ ὑμῖν ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ἐξειλάσκεθε περὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν· τὸ γὰρ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐξειλάσεται. 12 διὰ τοῦτο εἴρηκα τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ Πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἐξ ὑμῶν οὐ φὰγεται αἷμα, καὶ ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν οὐ φάγεται αἷμα. 13 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν θηρεύσῃ θήρευμα θηρίον ἢ πετεινὸν ὃ ἔσθεται, καὶ ἐκχεεῖ τὸ αἷμα καὶ καλύψει αὐτὸ τῇ γῇ· 14 ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ εἶπα τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ Αἷμα πάσης σαρκὸς οὐ φάγεσθε, ὅτι ἡ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστίν· πᾶς ὁ ἔσθων αὐτὸ ἐξολεθρευθήσεται. 15 καὶ πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἥτις φάγεται θνησιμαῖον ἢ θηριάλωτον, ἐν τοῖς αὐτόχθοσιν ἢ ἐν τοῖς προσηλύτοις, πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἕως ἑσπέρας, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται. 16 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ πλύνῃ τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ τὸ σῶμα μὴ λούσηται ὕδατι, καὶ λήμψεται ἀνόμημα αὐτοῦ. ⟦18⟧ 1 Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· 3 κατὰ τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ἐν ᾗ κατοικήσατε ἐπ’ αὐτῇ, οὐ ποιηθήσεται· καὶ κατὰ τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα γῆς Χανάαν, εἰς ἣν ἐγὼ εἰσάγω ὑμᾶς ἐκεῖ, οὐ ποιήσετε, καὶ τοῖς νομίμοις αὐτῶν οὐ πορεύσεσθε. 4 τὰ κρίματά μου ποιήσετε καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου φυλάξεσθε, πορεύεσθαι ἐν αὐτοῖς· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 5 καὶ φυλάξεσθε πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ πάντα τὰ κρίματά μου, καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά· ἃ ποιήσας ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 6 Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος πρὸς πάντα οἰκία σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ οὐ προσελεύσεται ἀποκαλύψαι ἀσχημοσύνην· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 7 ἀσχημοσύνην πατρός σου καὶ ἀσχημοσύνην μητρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· μήτηρ γάρ σού ἐστιν καὶ οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς.

1 και B*; η Bmg (right of col. 2). 2 θυσιαν + και Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* A Latcod 100. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4 Ισραηλ + η Bc vid F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 εξειλασκεθε B*; εξιλασκεθε Bc A; εξιλασκεθαι Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 εξειλασεται B*; εξιλασεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 ακαθαρτος + εσται Bc BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. 21 κατοικησατε B mins Phil; κατωκησατε A V b mins Clem Eus Gött. ‖ αυτη B* mins BrMcL; αυτης Bc A F Gött. ‖ ποιηθησεται B*unique; ποιησεται Bc; ποιησετε A F BrMcL Gött. 27 οικια B; οικιας F mins; οικεια Fa Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 30 και B A V min b Arab Gött; > Göttc. ‖ την B* BrMcL Gött; > Bc vid F x-509 mins.

Text and Translation

139

must say to them: Person by person from the sons of Israel and from the sons of the immigrants who are attached among you, whoever prepares a whole burnt offering or sacrifice 9 at the door of the tent of testimony, he does not carry it to perform it for the Lord, that person must be eliminated from his people. 10 Person by person from the sons of Israel, from the immigrants who are attached among you, whoever eats any blood, then I will set my face against the life who eats blood and will completely destroy it from its people. 11 For the life of all flesh is its blood, and I have given it to you to propitiate for your lives on the altar, for it is its blood that propitiates in place of the life. 12 Therefore I have said to the sons of Israel: No life among you will eat blood, and no immigrant who is attached among you will eat blood. 13 And person by person from the sons of Israel and from the immigrants who are attached among you, whoever hunts a wild animal as prey or a bird that may be eaten, must pour out the blood and cover it in the earth. 14 For the life of all flesh is its blood, and I have said to the sons of Israel: You must not eat the blood of any flesh because the life of all flesh is its blood; everyone who eats it must be eliminated.” 15 “And every life, among the natives or among the immigrants, that eats a carcass or what has been caught by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he is unclean until the evening; and he will be clean. 16 But if he does not wash his clothes and does not bathe his body in water, he must receive his lawless action.” ⟦18⟧ 1 And the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: I am the Lord your God. 3 It will not be done according to the practices of the land of Egypt, in which you lived on the basis of it, and you must not do according to the practices of the land of Chanaan, into which I am bringing you there, and you must not act by their ordinances. 4 My judgments you must do, and my orders you must keep, to walk in them; I am the Lord your God. 5 And you must keep all my orders and all my judgments, and you must do them; as for the things a person does, he must live by them; I am the Lord your God.” 6 “Person by person must not approach any houses of his flesh to uncover shame; I am the Lord.” 7 “The shame of your father and the shame of your mother you must not uncover, for she is your mother and you must not uncover her shame.”

140

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

8ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· ἀσχημοσύνη πατρός σού ἐστιν. 9 ἀσχημοσύνην τῆς ἀδελφῆς σου ἐκ πατρός σου ἢ μητρός σου, ἐνδογενοῦς γεγεννημένης ἢ ἔξω, οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς. 10 ἀσχημοσύνην θυγατρὸς υἱοῦ σου ἢ θυγατρὸς θυγατρός σου, οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῶν, ὅτι ἀσχημοσύνη ἐστίν. 11 ἀσχημοσύνην θυγατρὸς γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· ὁμοπατρία ἀδελφή σού ἐστιν, οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς. 12 ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· οἰκεία γὰρ πατρός σού ἐστιν. 13 ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς μητρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· οἰκεία γὰρ μητρός σού ἐστιν. 14ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφοῦ τοῦ πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις, καὶ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ οὐκ εἰσελεύσῃ· συγγενὴς γάρ σού ἐστιν. 15ἀσχημοσύνην νύμφης σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· γυνὴ γὰρ υἱοῦ σού ἐστιν, οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς. 16 ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς ἀδελφοῦ σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· ἀσχημοσύνη ἀδελφοῦ σού ἐστιν. 17 ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς καὶ θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· τὴν θυγατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτῆς καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς οὐ λήμψῃ ἀποκαλύψαι τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῶν· οἰκεῖαι γάρ σού εἰσιν, ἀσέβημά ἐστιν. 18 γυναῖκα ἐπὶ ἀδελφῇ αὐτῆς οὐ λήμψῃ ἀντίζηλον, ἀποκαλύψαι τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς ἐπ’ αὐτῇ, ἔτι ζώσης αὐτῆς. 19 καὶ πρὸς γυναῖκα ἐν χωρισμῷ ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς οὐ προσελεύσῃ ἀποκαλύψαι τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς. 20 καὶ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ πλησίον σου οὐ δώσεις κοίτην σπέρματός σου, ἐκμιανθῆναι πρὸς αὐτήν. 21 καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματός σου οὐ δώσεις λατρεύειν ἄρχοντι, καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσεις τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἅγιον· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 22 καὶ μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικεία· βδέλυγμα γάρ ἐστιν. 23 καὶ πρὸς πᾶν τετράπουν οὐ δώσεις τὴν κοίτην σου εἰς σπερματισμὸν ἐκμιανθῆναι πρὸς αὐτό·

3 της B rell; > C’’ b d t z mins Gött. ‖ η + εκ Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* mins. 3–4 γεγεννημενης η B* A min; η γεγεννημενης (η) Bc F BrMcL Gött. 4 αποκαλυψεις + την F Gött; > B A x min. 6 οτι + ση Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins. 13 του B rell; > F b y-121 mins Gött. 30 γυναικεια Against Swete (that B* = γυναικος A F* Gött Swete), the B* text appears to read γυναικεια (with Miika Tucker); γυναικειαν Bc.

Text and Translation

141

8 “The shame of your father’s wife you must not uncover; it is the shame of your father.” 9 “As for the shame of your sister, from your father or your mother, whether she was born in the house or outside, you must not uncover her shame.” 10 “As for the shame of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, you must not uncover their shame, because it is shame.” 11 “The shame of your father’s wife’s daughter you must not uncover; she is your sister by the same father. You must not uncover her shame.” 12 “The shame of your father’s sister you must not uncover, for she is of your father’s household.” 13 “The shame of your mother’s sister you must not uncover, for she is of your mother’s household.” 14 “The shame of your father’s brother you must not uncover, and you must not go in to his wife, for she is your relative.” 15 “The shame of your daughter-in-law you must not uncover, for she is your son’s wife; you must not uncover her shame.” 16 “The shame of your brother’s wife you must not uncover; it is your brother’s shame.” 17 “The shame of a woman and her daughter you must not uncover.” “Her son’s daughter and her daughter’s daughter you must not take to uncover their shame, for they are of your household; it is a profane action.” 18 “You must not take a woman as a rival against her sister, to uncover her shame against her while she is still living.” 19 “And you must not approach a woman in the separation of her uncleanness to uncover her shame.” 20 “And you must not give your bed of semen to your neighbor’s wife, to become defiled with her.” 21 “And you must not give any of your semen to serve a ruler. And you must not profane the holy name. I am the Lord.” 22 “And you must not sleep with a male in a female bed, for it is an abomination.” 23 “And you must not give your bed to any quadruped for insemination to become defiled with it,”

142

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

καὶ γυνὴ οὐ στήσεται πρὸς πᾶν τετράπουν βιβασθῆναι· μυσερὸν γάρ ἐστιν. 24 Μὴ μιαίνεσθε ἐν πᾶσιν τούτοις· ἐν πᾶσι γὰρ τούτοις ἐμιάνθησαν τὰ ἔθνη ἃ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω πρὸ προσώπου ὑμῶν. 25 καὶ ἐμιάνθη ἡ γῆ· καὶ ἀνταπέδωκα αὐτοῖς ἀδικίαν δι’ αὐτήν, καὶ προσώχθισεν ἡ γῆ τοῖς ἐνκαθημένοις ἐπ’ αὐτῆς. 26 καὶ φυλάξεσθε πάντα τὰ νόμιμά μου καὶ πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου, καὶ οὐ ποιήσετε ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν βδελυγμάτων τούτων, ὁ ἐνχώριος ἢ ὁ προσγενόμενος προσήλυτος ἐν ὑμῖν· 27πάντα γὰρ τὰ βδελύγματα ταῦτα ἐποίησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τῆς γῆς οἱ ὄντες πρότεροι ὑμῶν, ἐμιάνθη ἡ γῆ· 28 καὶ ἵνα μὴ προσοχθίσῃ ὑμῖν ἡ γῆ ἐν τῷ μιαίνειν ὑμᾶς αὐτήν, ὃν τρόπον προσώχθισεν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν τοῖς πρὸ ὑμῶν. 29 ὅτι πᾶς ὃς ἂν ποιήσῃ ἀπὸ πάντων βδελυγμάτων τούτων, ἐξολεθρευθήσονται αἱ ψυχαὶ αἱ ποιοῦσαι ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῶν. 30 καὶ φυλάξετε τὰ προστάγματά μου, ὅπως μὴ ποιήσητε ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν νομίμων τῶν ἐβδελυγμένων ὃ γέγονεν πρὸ τοῦ ὑμᾶς· καὶ οὐ μιανθήσεσθε ἐν αὐτοῖς, ὅτι ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. ⟦19⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον τῇ συναγωγῇ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 3 ἕκαστος πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ μητέρα αὐτοῦ φοβείσθω, καὶ τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 4 οὐκ ἐπακολουθήσεται εἰδώλοις, καὶ θεοὺς χωνευτοὺς οὐ ποιήσετε ὑμῖν· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 5 Καὶ ἐὰν θύσητε θυσίαν σωτηρίου τῷ κυρίῳ, δεκάτην ὑμῶν θύσετε· 6 ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ θύσητε βρωθήσεται καὶ τῇ αὔριον· καὶ ἐὰν καταλιφθῇ ἕως ἡμέρας τρίτης, ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται. 7 ἐὰν δὲ βρώσι βρωθῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ, ἄθυτόν ἐστιν, οὐ δεχθήσεται· 8 ὁ δὲ ἔσθων αὐτὸ ἁμαρτίαν λήμψεται, ὅτι τὰ ἅγια Κυρίου ἐβεβήλωσεν· καὶ ἐξολεθρευθήσονται αἱ ψυχαὶ αἱ ἔσθουσαι ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῶν. 9 Καὶ ἐκθεριζόντων ὑμῶν τὸν θερισμὸν τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν, τοῦ ἀγροῦ σου ἐκθερίσαι, καὶ τὰ ἀποπίπτοντα τοῦ θερισμοῦ σου συλλέξεις· 10 καὶ τὸν ἀμπελῶνά σου οὐκ ἐπανατρυγήσεις, οὐδὲ τοὺς ῥῶγας τοῦ ἀμπελῶνός σου συλλέξεις· τῷ πτωχῷ καὶ τῷ προσηλύτῳ καταλίψεις αὐτά· ἐγώ 2 πασιν B Gött; πασι Bc A F Swetetxt. The text of Swete reads πασι (Bc), but in his apparatus he indicates that his text reads πασιν (contra A F). Logos’s edition of Swete corrected this and reads πασιν. 3 αυτοις αδικιαν Bunique; αδικιαν αυτων A; αδικιαν αυτοις F BrMcL Gött. Against the question (?) posed by Swete and BrMcL, I see no indication that Bc attempted to transpose the word order. 4 ενκαθημενοις B; εγκαταλελιμμενοις A; εγκαθημενοις Bc F Gött. 6 ενχωριος B* BrMcL; εγχωριος Bc A F Gött. ‖ η B A min Bo; > min Gött. 7 υμων + και Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* A min. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 9 παντων + των Bc (superscr) Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 επακολουθησεται B A; επακολουθησετε Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 δεκατην B A F x mins; δεκτην Fa BrMcL Gött. 19 καταλιφθη B*; καταλειφθη Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 βρωσι B*; βρωσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 υμων + ου συντλεσετε τον θερισμον υμων Bmg (below col. 2) F Swete BrMcL Gött; > Btxt A min. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 2 and with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↓ and obelus in the margin below the text of col. 2 where he supplied the omitted text. ‖ σου B F*; > M Fc mins Bo Gött. 24 σου (1st occ.) + ου Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 καταλιψεις B A; καταλειψεις Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

143

“and a woman must not stand before any quadruped in order to be mounted, for it is detestable. 24 Do not defile yourselves in any of these things. For in all these things the nations that I am sending out before your face were defiled. 25 And the land became defiled, and I repaid evil to them because of it, and the land became angry with those who reside on it. 26 And you must keep all my ordinances and all my orders, and you must not commit any of all these abominations, whether the inhabitant or the immigrant among you who has come. 27 For the men of the land, who were before you, committed all of these abominations, the land became defiled; 28 otherwise the land will not become angry with you when you defile it, the same way it became angry with the nations before you. 29 For anyone who commits any of everything, these abominations, the lives that do so must be eliminated from their people. 30 And keep my orders, so that you do not commit any of all the abominable customs that have happened before you, and you must not be defiled by them, because I am the Lord your God.” ⟦19⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the assembly of the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: You must be holy because I am holy, the Lord your God. 3 Let each one fear his father and his mother, and you must keep my sabbaths; I am the Lord your God. 4 Idols must not be followed, and you must not make for yourselves gods of cast metal; I am the Lord your God.” 5 “And if you sacrifice a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord, you must sacrifice your tenth. 6 It must be eaten on the day you sacrifice it and on the next day, and if it is left over until the third day, it must be burned completely by fire. 7 But if with respect to eating, it is eaten on the third day, it is not fit to be sacrificed; it will not be accepted. 8 And the one who eats it will receive guilt because he has profaned the Lord’s holy things, and the lives who eat it must be eliminated from their people. 9 And when you reap the harvest of your land8 to harvest your field, then you must gather what falls down of your harvest. 10 And you must not glean your vineyard after the vintage, nor gather the grapes of your vineyard;

8 Other witnesses include: “you must not finish off your harvest.” See note in Greek text at 19:9.

144

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 11 οὐ κλέψετε, οὐ ψεύσεσθε, οὐ συκοφαντήσει ἕκαστος τὸν πλησίον. 12καὶ οὐκ ὀμεῖσθε τῷ ὀνόματί μου ἐπ’ ἀδίκῳ, καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσετε τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 13 οὐκ ἀδικήσεις τὸν πλησίον, καὶ οὐχ ἁρπᾷ, καὶ οὐ μὴ κοιμηθήσεται ὁ μισθὸς τοῦ μισθωτοῦ παρὰ σοὶ ἕως πρωί. 14 οὐ κακῶς ἐρεῖς κωφόν, καὶ ἀπέναντι τυφλοῦ οὐ προσθήσεις σκάνδαλον· καὶ φοβηθήσῃ Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 15 οὐ ποιήσετε ἄδικον ἐν κρίσει· οὐ λήμψῃ πρόσωπον πτωχοῦ οὐδὲ θαυμάσεις πρόσωπον δυνάστου, ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ κρινεῖς τὸν πλησίον σου. 16 οὐ πορεύσῃ δόλῳ ἐν τῷ ἔθνι σου· οὐκ ἐπιστήσῃ ἐφ’ αἷμα τοῦ πλησίον σου· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 17 οὐ μεισήσεις τὸν ἀδελφόν σου τῇ διανοίᾳ σου· ἐλεγμῷ ἐλέγξεις τὸν πλησίον σου, καὶ οὐ λήμψῃ δι’ αὐτὸν ἁμαρτίαν. 18 καὶ οὐκ ἐκδικᾶταί σου ἡ χείρ, καὶ οὐ μηνιεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς τοῦ λαοῦ σου, καὶ ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. 19 Τὸν νόμον μου φυλάξεσθε· τὰ κτήνη σου οὐ κατοχεύσεις ἑτεροζύγῳ, καὶ τὸν ἀμπελῶνά σου οὐ κατασπερεῖς διάφορον, καὶ ἱμάτιον ἐκ δύο ὑφασμένον κίβδηλον οὐκ ἐπιβαλεῖς σεαυτῷ. 20 καὶ ἐάν τις κοιμηθῇ μετὰ γυναικὸς κοίτην σπέρματος, καὶ αὕτη οἰκέτις διαπεφυλαγμένη ἀνθρώπῳ, καὶ αὕτη λύτροις οὐ λελύτρωται ἢ ἐλευθερία οὐκ ἐδόθη αὐτῇ, ἐπισκοπὴ ἔσται αὐτοῖς· οὐκ ἀποθανοῦνται, ὅτι οὐκ ἀπηλευθερώθη. 21 καὶ προσάξει τῆς πλημμελίας αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ παρὰ τὴν θύραν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου κριὸν πλημμελίας· 22 ἔναντι Κυρίου περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἧς ἥμαρτεν, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτεν. 23 Ὅταν δὲ εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν Κύριος ὁ θεὸς δίδωσιν ὑμῖν, καὶ καταφυτεύσετε πᾶν ξύλον βρώσιμον, καὶ περικαθαριεῖτε τὴν ἀκαθαρσίαν αὐτοῦ· ὁ καρπὸς αὐτοῦ τρία ἔτη ἔσται ὑμῖν ἀπερικάθαρτος, οὐ βρωθήσεται. 24 καὶ τῷ ἔτει τῷ τετάρτῳ ἔσται πᾶς ὁ καρπὸς αὐτοῦ ἅγιος αἰνετὸς τῷ κυρίῳ, 25 ἐν δὲ τῷ ἔτει τῷ πέμπτῳ φάγεσθε τὸν καρπόν, πρόσθεμα ὑμῖν τὰ γενήματα αὐτοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 26 Μὴ ἔσθετε ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων, καὶ οὐκ οἰωνιεῖσθε οὐδὲ ὀρνιθοσκοπήσεσθε. 27 οὐ ποιήσετε σισόην ἐκ τῆς κόμης τῆς κεφαλῆς ὑμῶν, οὐδὲ φθερεῖτε τὴν ὄψιν τοῦ πώγωνος ὑμῶν. 28 καὶ ἐντομίδας ἐπὶ ψυχῇ οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν, καὶ γράμματα

4 αρπα Bunique; αρπασεις A F Gött. ‖ μη B A min; > F G M rell Gött. 8 εθνι B*; εθνει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ επιστηση B A V oI-15 mins Latcod 104vid; επισυστηση F Gött. 9 μεισησεις B* A; μισηεις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc vid A F Gött. 19 πλημμελιας B* BrMcL; πλημμελειας Bc vid A Gött. ‖ πλημμελιας + και εξιλασεται περι αυτου ο ιερευς εν τω κριω της πλημμελειας Bc OG-B* Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* mins. Here I emend Swete toward B*. A later scribe (Bc) added these 2.25 lines of text to the bottom of col. 3, resulting in a col. length of 46 lines (vs. the typical 44 lines of LeuB*). Against BrMcL and Swete, who identify the start of this insertion at the beginning of the 45th line (σεσται …), the shorthand κ for και and sloppy paleography signals the start of the insertion by Bc at και εξ. near the end of ln. 44 (so Wevers 1986a: 216). 21 θεος + υμων Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* mins Phil Cyr Arm. 21–22 καταφυτευσετε B mins; καταφυτευσητε A F Gött. 28 εντομιδας B*? Gött; εντομιδα Bc unique. The scriptio inferior (B*) is less clear, but probable.

Text and Translation

145

you must leave them for the poor and the immigrant. I am the Lord your God. 11 You must not steal. You must not lie. Each one must not slander his neighbor. 12 And you must not swear by my name on the basis of injustice, and you must not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord your God. 13 You must not act unjustly towards your neighbor, and you must not seize, and the wages of a hired worker must never rest overnight with you until morning. 14 You must not speak badly about the deaf, nor put a trap before the blind, and you must fear the Lord your God. I am the Lord your God. 15 You must not do anything unjust in judgment. You must not take a person of the poor, nor admire a person of a high position; with justice you must judge your neighbor. 16 You must not walk in deceit among your nation; you must not conspire against the blood of your neighbor. I am the Lord your God. 17 You must not hate your kin in your mind; with reproof you must reprove your neighbor, and you must not receive guilt because of him. 18 And your hand must not avenge, and you must not be angry against the sons of your people, and you must love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord. 19 You must keep my law. You must not cross-breed your animals with an animal of a different kind, and you must not sow your vineyard with anything different, and you must not put on yourself a mingled garment woven from two.” 20 “And if someone sleeps with a woman in a bed of semen, and she is a domestic slave guarded carefully for a man, and she by a ransom price had not been ransomed nor had freedom been given her, they must have an inquiry. They must not die because she had not been freed, 21 and he must bring for his sinful error to the Lord, to the door of the tent of testimony, a ram for a sinful error 229 before the Lord for the sin that he sinned, and the sin that he sinned will be forgiven him.” 23 “When you enter into the land that the Lord God is giving you, then you must plant every kind of eatable tree, and you must clean away its uncleanness. Three years its fruit will be unpurified for you; it must not be eaten. 24 And in the fourth year all its fruit will be holy, praiseworthy to the Lord, 25 but in the fifth year you must eat the fruit, its yields are an increase for you. I am the Lord your God.” 26 “Do not eat on the mountains. And you must not practice divination, nor observe birds for omens. 27 You must not make a curl from the hair of your head, nor ruin the appearance of your beard. 28 And you must not make any

9 All other major witnesses include: “And the priest must propitiate for him with the ram of the sinful error.” See note in Greek text at 19:22.

146

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

στικτὰ οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν ὑμῖν. ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 29 οὐ βεβηλώσεις τὴν θυγατέρα σου ἐκπορνεῦσαι αὐτήν· καὶ οὐκ ἐκπορνεύσει ἡ γῆ, καὶ ἡ γῆ πλησθήσεται ἀνομίας. 30 τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων μου μὴ φοβηθήσεσθε· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. 31 οὐκ ἐπακολουθήσεται ἐνγαστριμύθοις, καὶ τοῖς ἐπαοιδοῖς οὐ προσκολληθήσεσθε ἐκμιανθῆναι ἐν αὐτοῖς. ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 32 ἀπὸ προσώπου πολιοῦ ἐξαναστήσῃ, καὶ τιμήσεις πρόσωπον πρεσβυτέρου· καὶ φοβηθήσῃ τὸν θεόν σου· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 33 ἐὰν δέ τις προσέλθῃ προσήλυτος ὑμῖν ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν, οὐ θλίψετε αὐτόν. 34 ὡς ὁ αὐτόχθων ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσπορευόμενος πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἀγαπήσεις αὐτὸν ὡς σεαυτόν· ὅτι προσήλυτοι ἐγενήθητε ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 35 οὐ ποιήσετε ἄδικον ἐν κρίσι, ἐν μέτροις καὶ ἐν σταθμίοις καὶ ἐν ζυγοῖς· 36 ζυγὰ δίκαια καὶ στάθμια δίκαια καὶ χοῦς δίκαιος ἔσται ὑμῖν· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου. 37καὶ φυλάξεσθε πάντα τὸν νόμον μου καὶ πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου, καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. ⟦20⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λαλήσεις Ἐάν τις ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν γεγενημένων προσηλύτων ἐν Ἰσραὴλ ὃς ἂν δῷ τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτοῦ ἄρχοντι, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω· τὸ ἔθνος τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς λιθοβολήσουσιν αὐτὸν ἐν λίθοις. 3 καὶ ἐγὼ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκεῖνον καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτὸν ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτοῦ ἔδωκεν ἄρχοντι, ἵνα μιάνῃ τὰ ἅγιά μου καὶ βεβηλώσῃ τὸ ὄνομα τῶν ἡγιασμένων μοι. 4 ἐὰν δὲ ὑπερόψι ὑπερίδωσιν οἱ αὐτόχθονες τῆς γῆς τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκείνου, ἐν τῷ δοῦναι αὐτὸν τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτοῦ ἄρχοντι, τοῦ μὴ ἀποκτεῖναι αὐτόν· 5 καὶ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκεῖνον καὶ τὴν συγγενίαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτὸν καὶ πάντας τοὺς ὁμονοοῦντας αὐτῷ, ὥστε ἐκπορνεύειν αὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς ἄρχοντας, ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῶν. 6 καὶ ψυχὴ ἣ ἐὰν ἐπακολουθήσῃ ἐνγαστριμύθοις ἢ ἐπαοιδοῖς ὥστε ἐκπορνεῦσαι ὀπίσω αὐτῶν, ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἐκείνην καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτὴν ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 7 καὶ ἔσεσθε ἅγιοι, ὅτι ἅγιος ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· 8 καὶ φυλάξεσθε τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά, ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων ὑμᾶς. 9 ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν κακῶς εἴπῃ τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ ἢ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ θανάτῳ θανατούσθω· πατέρα αὐτοῦ ἢ μητέρα αὐτοῦ κακῶς εἶπεν, ἔνοχος ἔσται. 3 μη B* min; ου min; > Bc OG-B* Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4 επακολουθησεται B*?; επακολουθησεσθε A mins; επακολουθησητε F; επακολουθησετε Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. Here the activity of Bc (scraping αι and writing ε) is indeterminate due to obfuscation. ‖ ενγαστριμυθοις B; ενγαστριμυθους min; εγγαστριμυθοις Gött. 10 κρισι B*; κρισει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 απο (2nd occ.) B mins Latcod 103 Eth Syh; > A F Gött. ‖ γεγενημενων B mins; προσγεγεννημενων A mins; προσγεγενημενων F Gött. 21 υπεροψι B*; υπεροψη Bc2 (superscr η) υπεροψει Bc1 (interposed ε) Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 συγγενιαν B; συνγενιαν F*; συγγενειαν Bc A Gött. 24 αυτον (2nd occ.) B A mins; αυτους F Gött. 25 η εαν B A (η > A) mins; αν F Gött. 25–26 ενγαστριμυθοις B; εγγαστριμυθοις Gött.

Text and Translation

147

incisions in your body for a soul, nor make any tattooed letters on you. I am the Lord your God. 29 You must not profane your daughter by making her commit fornication, and the land will not commit fornication, and the land will be full of lawlessness. 30 You must keep my sabbaths, and you must not be afraid of my sanctuaries. I am the Lord. 31 He must not be followed by ventriloquists, and you must not attach yourselves to enchanters, to defile yourselves by them. I am the Lord your God. 32 You must rise up in the presence of a grey-haired person and honor the presence of the old, and you must fear your God. I am the Lord your God. 33 But if some immigrant approaches you in your land, you must not oppress him. 34 The immigrant who comes near to you must be as the native among you, and you must love him as yourself because you were immigrants in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God. 35 You must not do anything unjust in judgment in measures and in weights and in scales. 36 You must have just scales and just weights and a just liquid measure. I who am the Lord your God who released you out of the land of Egypt. 37 And you must keep my entire law and all my orders, and you must do them. I am the Lord your God.” ⟦20⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “And to the sons of Israel you must speak: If any of the sons of Israel or any of the immigrants who were born in Israel, whoever gives of his semen to a ruler, by death let him be put to death. The nation in the land must stone him with stones. 3 And I will set my face against that man and will completely destroy him from his people because he has given of his semen to a ruler, to defile my holy things and to profane the name of those consecrated to me. 4 But if by neglect, the natives of the land should overlook with their eyes away from that man when he gives of his semen to a ruler, in order to not kill him, 5 then I will set my face against that man and his family and will completely destroy him and all who are like-minded with him from their people, so that he commits fornication with the rulers. 6 And a life or whoever follows ventriloquists or enchanters in order to commit fornication after them, I will set my face against that life and will completely destroy him from his people. 7 And you must be holy because I the Lord your God am holy. 8 And you must keep my orders and do them; I am the Lord who sanctifies you. 9 Person by person, whoever speaks wickedly with his father or his mother, by death let him be put to death. He has spoken wickedly with his father or his mother; he will be liable.”

148

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

10 ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν μοιχεύσηται γυναῖκα ἀνδρός, ἢ ὃς ἂν μοιχεύσηται γυναῖκα τοῦ πλησίον, θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν ὁ μοιχεύων καὶ ἡ μοιχευομένη. 11 ἐάν τις κοιμηθῇ μετὰ γυναικὸς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, ἀσχημοσύνην τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψεν, θανατούσθω· ἀμφότεροι ἔνοχοί εἰσιν. 12 καὶ ἐάν τις κοιμηθῇ μετὰ νύμφης αὐτοῦ, θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν ἀμφότεροι· ἠσεβήκασιν γάρ, ἔνοχοί εἰσιν. 13 καὶ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἄρσενος κοίτην γυναικός, βδέλυγμα ἐποίησαν ἀμφότεροι· θανατούσθωσαν, ἔνοχοί εἰσιν. 14 ὃς ἐὰν λάβῃ γυναῖκα καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτῆς, ἀνόμημά ἐστιν· ἐν πυρὶ κατακαύσουσιν αὐτὸν καὶ αὐτὰς, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ἀνομία ἐν ὑμῖν. 15 καὶ ὃς ἂν δῷ κοιτασίαν αὐτοῦ ἐν τετράποδι, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω, καὶ τὸ τετράπουν ἀποκτενεῖτε. 16 καὶ γυνὴ ἥτις προσελεύσεται πρὸς πᾶν κτῆνος βιβασθῆναι αὐτὴν ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ, ἀποκτενεῖτε τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ τὸ κτῆνος· θανάτῳ θανατούσθω, ἔνοχοί εἰσιν. 17 ὃς ἐὰν λάβῃ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτοῦ ἐκ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐκ μητρὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἴδῃ τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς καὶ αὕτη ἴδῃ τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτοῦ, ὄνειδός ἐστιν, ἐξολεθρευθήσονται ἐνώπιον υἱῶν γένους αὐτῶν· ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψεν, ἁμαρτίαν κομιοῦνται. 18 καὶ ἀνὴρ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ γυναικὸς ἀποκαθημένης καὶ ἀποκαλύψῃ τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς, τὴν πηγὴν αὐτῆς ἀπεκάλυψεν, καὶ αὕτη ἀπεκάλυψεν τὴν ῥύσιν τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς· ἐξολεθρευθήσονται ἀμφότεροι ἐκ τῆς γενέας αὐτῶν. 19 καὶ ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς πατρός σου καὶ ἀδελφῆς μητρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις· τὴν γὰρ οἰκιότητα ἀπεκάλυψεν, ἁμαρτίαν ἀποίσονται. 20 ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ τῆς συγγενοῦς αὐτοῦ, ἀσχημοσύνην τῆς συγγενοῦς αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψεν· ἄτεκνοι ἀποθανοῦνται. 21 ὃς ἂν λάβῃ τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ, ἀκαθαρσία αὐτοῦ ἐστίν· ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψεν, ἄτεκνοι ἀποθανοῦνται. 22 Καὶ φυλάξασθε πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ τὰ κρίματά μου, καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά· καὶ οὐ μὴ προσοχθίσῃ ὑμῖν ἡ γῆ εἰς ἣν ἐγὼ εἰσάγω ὑμᾶς ἐκεῖ κατοικεῖν ἐπ’ αὐτῆς. 23 καὶ οὐχὶ πορεύεσθε τοῖς νομίμοις τῶν ἐθνῶν, οὓς ἐξαποστέλλω ἀφ’ ὑμῶν· ὅτι ταῦτα πάντα ἐποίησαν, καὶ ἐβδελυξάμην αὐτούς. 24 καὶ εἶπα ὑμῖν Ὑμεῖς κληρονομήσατε τὴν γῆν αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐγὼ δώσω ὑμῖν αὐτὴν ἐν κτήσι, γῆν ῥέουσαν γάλα καὶ μέλι· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν, ὃς διώρισα ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν. 25 καὶ ἀφοριεῖτε αὐτοὺς ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν κτηνῶν τῶν καθαρῶν καὶ ἀνὰ

2 μοιχευομενη + και Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A. 3 απεκαλυψεν + θανατω Bc A F BrMcL Gött MT SP (‫ > ;)מות‬B* min. 3–4 θανατουσθω B* min; θανατουσθωσαν Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 6 αμφοτεροι + θανατω Bc Fc Gött; > B* A F* LatPsAmbr Lex mins Arab Sa Syh MT SP (‫)מות‬. 7 εαν B b n-767; αν A F Gött. 8 ανομια B Fc Gött; ανομημα A F* b d t mins. 11 θανατουσθω B* mins LatAug Lev; θανατουσθωσαν Bc A F BrMcL Gött. ‖ εαν B b n-54* min; αν A F Gött. 17 της γενεας Swete marks B*vid as του γενους; although faded, B* looks like της γενεας with F (with Miika Tucker), instead of του γενους A Gött. 18 οικιοτητα B* F*; οικειοτητα Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 συγγενους B*; συγγενειας Bc A BrMcL Gött. 21 αυτου (2nd occ.) B*unique; > Bc A F BrMcL Gött. ‖ ασχημοσυνην + του Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* b min. 22 φυλαξασθε B A mins Eth Arab; φυλαξεσθε F Gött. 26 κληρονομησατε B mins C’’ d-106 t x-509 mins Latcod 103; κληρονομησετε A F Gött. 27 κτησι B*; κτησει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ γην + ητις εστιν F Gött; > B A V b n x mins Latcod 103. ‖ ρεουσαν B A V b n x mins Latcod 103; ρεουσα F Gött.

Text and Translation

149

10 “A person who commits adultery with a man’s wife or who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, let the adulterer and the adulteress by death be put to death. 11 If anyone sleeps with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s shame, let him be put to death; both of them are liable. 12 And if anyone sleeps with his daughter-in-law, let both of them by death be put to death, for they have acted impiously; they are liable. 13 And whoever sleeps with a male in a woman’s bed, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death; they are liable. 14 Whoever takes a wife and her mother, it is lawlessness; they must burn completely him and the women with fire, and there must not be lawlessness among you. 15 And whoever gives his sleeping with a quadruped, by death let him be put to death, and you must kill the quadruped. 16 And a woman who will approach any animal for her to be mounted by it, you must kill the woman and the animal; by death she must be put to death; they are liable. 17 Whoever takes his sister, whether from his father or from his mother, and sees her shame, and she sees his shame, it is a disgrace; they must be eliminated before the sons of their relatives. He has uncovered his sister’s shame; he will incur guilt.” 18 “And a man who sleeps with a woman who is sitting apart and uncovers her shame, he has uncovered her source, and she has uncovered her discharge of blood; both of them must be eliminated from their generation. 19 And you must not uncover the shame of your father’s sister or of your mother’s sister because he has uncovered his close family; they must carry guilt. 20 Whoever sleeps with one related to him, he has uncovered the shame of the one related to him; they will die without children. 21 Whoever takes his brother’s wife, it is his uncleanness. He has uncovered his brother’s shame; they will die without children. 22 So keep all my orders and all my judgments, and you must do them, and the land into which I am bringing you there to settle in it will never become angry with you. 23 And you must not walk in the customs of the nations that I am sending away from you. Since they did all these things, I also detested them. 24 And I told you: Inherit their land! And I will give it to you in an acquisition, a land flowing with milk and honey. I am the Lord your God who has distinguished you from all the nations. 25 And you must separate them: between the

150

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

μέσον τῶν κτηνῶν τῶν ἀκαθάρτων, καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν πετεινῶν τῶν καθαρῶν καὶ τῶν ἀκαθάρτων· καὶ οὐ βδελύξετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἐν τοῖς κτήνεσιν καὶ ἐν τοῖς πετεινοῖς καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τῆς γῆς, ἃ ἐγὼ ἀφώρισα ὑμῖν ἐν ἀκαθαρσίᾳ. 26 καὶ ἔσεσθέ μοι ἄγιοι, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος, Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν, ὁ ἀφορίσας ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εἶναι ἐμοί. 27 Καὶ ἀνὴρ ἢ γυνὴ ὃς ἂν γένηται αὐτῶν ἐνγαστρίμυθος ἢ ἐπαοιδός, θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν ἀμφότεροι· λίθοις λιθοβολήσατε αὐτούς, ἔνοχοί εἰσιν. ⟦21⟧ 1 Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων Εἰπὸν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἀαρὼν καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς οὐ μιανθήσονται ἐν τῷ ἔθνει αὐτῶν, 2 ἀλλ’ ἢ ἐν τῷ οἰκείῳ τῷ ἔγγιστα αὐτῶν, ἐπὶ πατρὶ καὶ μητρί, καὶ υἱοῖς καὶ θυγατράσιν, ἐπ’ ἀδελφῷ 3 καὶ ἀδελφῇ παρθένῳ τῇ ἐγγιζούσῃ αὐτῷ τῇ μὴ ἐκδεδομένῃ ἀνδρί, ἐπὶ τούτοις μιανθήσεται. 4 ἐξάπινα ἐν τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ εἰς βεβήλωσιν αὐτοῦ. 5 καὶ φαλάκρωμα οὐ ξυρηθήσεσθε τὴν κεφαλὴν ἐπὶ νεκρῷ, καὶ τὴν ὄψιν τοῦ πώγωνος οὐ ξυρήσονται, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς σάρκας αὐτῶν οὐ κατατεμοῦσιν ἐντομίδας. 6 ἅγιοι ἔσονται τῷ θεῷ αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσουσιν τὸ ὂνομα τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτῶν· τὰς γὰρ θυσίας Κυρίου δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτῶν αὐτοὶ προσφέρουσιν, καὶ ἔσονται ἅγιοι. 7 γυναῖκα πόρνην καὶ βεβηλωμένην οὐ λήμψονται, καὶ γυναῖκα ἐκβεβλημένην ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς. ἅγιός ἐστιν τῷ κυρίῳ θεῷ αὐτοῦ, 8 καὶ ἁγιάσει αὐτόν· τὰ δῶρα Κυρίου θεοῦ ὑμῶν οὗτος προσφέρει· ἅγιος ἔσται, ὅτι ἅγιος ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς. 9 καὶ θυγάτηρ ἀνθρώπου ἱερέως ἐὰν βεβηλωθῇ τοῦ ἐκπορνεῦσαι, τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς αὐτὴ βεβηλοῖ. ἐπὶ πυρὸς κατακαυθήσεται. 10 Καὶ ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ μέγας ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ, τοῦ ἐπικεχυμένου ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ ἐλαίου τοῦ χρειστοῦ καὶ τετελιωμένου ἐνδύσασθαι τὰ ἱμάτια, τὴν κεφαλὴν οὐκ ἀποκιδαρώσει καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια οὐ διαρρήξει, 11 καὶ ἐπὶ πάσῃ ψυχῇ τετελευτηκυίῃ οὐκ εἰσελεύσεται, ἐπὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ οὐ μιανθήσεται, 12 καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἁγίων οὐκ ἐξελεύσεται καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσει τὸ ἡγιασμένον τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὃτι τὸ ἅγιον ἔλαιον τὸ χρειστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπ’ αὐτῷ· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 13 οὗτος παρθένον ἐκ τοῦ γένους αὐτοῦ οὐ λήμψεται· 14 χήραν δὲ καὶ ἐκβεβλημένην καὶ βεβηλωμένην καὶ πόρνην, ταύτας οὐ λήμψεται, ἀλλ’ ἢ παρθένον ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ λήμψεται γυναῖκα· 15 καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσει τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτόν. 4 αγιος + ειμι Bc A F M’ x mins Arm Sa; > B* V mins. 5 ενγαστριμυθος B mins; εγγαστριμυθος Gött. For other readings beginning with ενγ., see Wevers (1986a: 229). 6 λιθοβολησατε B A M’ mins Cyr Eth Sa; λιθοβολησετε F Gött. 7 λεγων B et al. Gött; > 15-oII-72 C’’-46s mins Eth-CG Arab Co (= MT) Gottc. 10 και + επ Bc A F BrMcL; επι mins; > B* mins LatHi Agg Co Gött. ‖ αδελφη + αυτου F M’ mins Eth Arab Co (= MT ‫ > ;)ולאחתו‬B* mins Gött. 11 μιανθησεται + ου μιανθησεται Bmg (right of col. 1) F BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins. 16 αυτης + οτι F Gött; > B A M’ V x mins. 16–17 τω κυριω θεω B A mins; κυριω τω θεω Fb. 17 Κυριου + του A F Gött; > B mins. 21 χρειστου B* F*; χριστου Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τετελιωμενου B* F*; τετελειωμενου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22–23 τετελευτηκυιη B; τετελευτηκυια OG-B Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 χρειστον B* F*; χριστον Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ουτος + γυναικα Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A. 26 ου B*unique; > Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 λαου B x-509 mins Cyr 813; > A; γενους F Gött.

Text and Translation

151

clean animals and between the unclean animals, and between the clean birds and between the unclean. You must not make your lives detestable by the animals and by the birds and by any of the earth’s crawling things, which I have separated for you in uncleanness. 26 And you must be holy to me because I am holy, the Lord your God who has separated you from all the nations to be mine. 27 And whether a man or a woman, whoever among them becomes a ventriloquist or an enchanter, by death let them both be put to death. Stone them with stones; they are liable.” ⟦21⟧ 1 Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying: “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aarōn, and you must say to them: They must not be defiled in their lives among their nation, 2 except among their nearest family: for a father and mother and sons and daughters, for a brother 3 and virgin sister who is near to him, who had not been given in marriage to a man, he must be defiled for these 4 suddenly among his people unto his own profanation. 5 And you must not have a bald spot shaven on your head for the dead, and they must not have shaven the beard’s appearance, and they must not cut incisions in their flesh. 6 They must be holy to their God and not profane the name of their God, for they offer the Lord’s sacrifices as gifts of their God, and they must be holy. 7 They must not marry a woman who is a prostitute and who has been profaned, and a woman rejected by her husband. He is holy to the Lord his God, 8 and he will sanctify him. He offers the gifts of the Lord your God; he must be holy because I, the Lord who sanctifies them, am holy. 9 And if a daughter of a man, a priest, profanes herself by going out to commit fornication, she profanes her father’s name; she must be burned completely over fire. 10 And the priest who is great among his brothers, when the anointing olive oil has been poured over his head and when he has been fulfilled to wear the garments, he must not unwrap his head and must not tear his garments. 11 And he must not enter for any dead life; he must not be defiled for his father nor for his mother. 12 And he must not exit from the holy things, and he must not profane what has been consecrated by his God, for God’s holy olive oil of anointing is on him; I am the Lord. 13 He must not marry a virgin from his own relatives, 14 and a widow and woman rejected and profaned and a prostitute; these women he must not marry. Instead, he must marry a wife who is a virgin from his people, 15 and he must not profane his offspring among his people. I am the Lord who sanctifies him.”

152

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

16 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 17 Εἰπὸν Ἀαρών Ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τοῦ γένους σου εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν, τίνι ἐὰν ᾖ ἐν αὐτῷ μῶμος, οὐ προσελεύσεται προσφέρειν τὰ δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτοῦ. 18 πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἂν ᾖ ἐν αὐτῷ μῶμος οὐ προσελεύσεται· ἄνθρωπος χωλός ἢ τυφλὸς ἢ κολοβόρειν ἢ ὠτότμητος, 19 ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῷ σύντριμμα χειρὸς ἢ σύντριμμα ποδός, 20 ἢ κυρτὸς ἢ ἔφηλος ἢ πτίλος τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, ἢ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἂν ᾖ ἐν αὐτῷ ψώρα ἀγρία ἢ λιχὴν ἢ μόνορχις, 21 πᾶς ᾧ ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῷ μῶμος ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος Ἀαρὼν τοῦ ἱερέως οὐ προσεγγιεῖ τοῦ προσενεγκεῖν τὰς θυσίας τῷ θεῷ σου· ὅτι μῶμος ἐν αὐτῷ, τὰ δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ οὐ προσελεύσεται προσενεγκεῖν. 22 τὰ δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων φάγεται· 23 πλὴν πρὸς τὸ καταπέτασμα οὐ προσελεύσεται, καὶ πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον οὐκ ἐγγιεῖ, ὅτι μῶμον ἔχει· καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσει τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς. 24 καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸς πάντας υἱοὺς Ἰσραήλ. ⟦22⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Εἰπὸν Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ, καὶ προσεχέτωσαν ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ, καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἅγιόν μου, ὅσα αὐτοὶ ἁγιάζουσίν μοι· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 3 εἰπὸν αὐτοῖς Εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν προσέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματος ὑμῶν πρὸς τὰ ἅγια ὅσα ἂν ἁγιάζωσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτοῦ ἐπ’ αὐτῷ ᾖ, ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 4 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος Ἀαρὼν τοῦ ἱερέως, καὶ οὗτος λεπρᾷ ἢ γονορρυής, τῶν ἁγίων οὐκ ἔδεται ἕως ἂν καθαρισθῇ· καὶ ὁ ἁπτόμενος πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας ψυχῆς, ἢ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἂν ἐξέλθῃ ἐξ αὐτοῦ κοίτη σπέρματος, 5 ὅστις ἂν ἅψηται παντὸς ἑρπετοῦ ἀκαθάρτου ὃ μιανεῖ αὐτόν, ἢ ἐπ’ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐν ᾧ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν κατὰ πᾶσαν ἀκαθαρσίαν αὐτοῦ, 6 ψυχὴ ἥτις ἂν ἅψηται αὐτῶν ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας· οὐκ ἔδεται ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων, ἐὰν μὴ λούσηται τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ὕδατι 7 καὶ δύ ὁ ἥλιος, καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται· καὶ τότε φάγεται τῶν ἁγίων, ὅτι ἄρτος ἐστὶν αὐτοῦ. 8 θνησιμαῖον καὶ θηριάλωτον οὐ φάγεται, μιανθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 9 καὶ φυλάξονται τὰ φυλάγματά μου, ἵνα μὴ λάβωσιν δι’ αὐτὰ ἁμαρτίαν, καὶ ἀποθάνωσιν δι’ αὐτό· ἐὰν δὲ βεβηλώσουσιν αὐτά, ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς. 10 Καὶ πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς οὐ φάγεται ἅγια·

4 κολοβορειν B*; κολοβορρειν Bc; κολοβοριν Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ ωτοτμητος + η Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A. 6 λιχην B; λιχη min; λιχινη min; λιχινα min; λειχην Gött. 7 ου προσεγγιει B* A; ου προσεγγισει d t; ουκ εγγιει Bc F Gött. 13 κυριος προς μωυσην και B*vid A minvid; μωυσης προς Bc (apparently sup ras, but difficult to see the erasure) F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 14 παντας + τους F Gött; > B A x-509 mins. 17 απο + παντος Bc A F BrMcL Gött (= MT ‫ > ;)מכל־זרעכם‬Β* b mins. ‖ του B min Gött; > A F Anast mins. 19 η (1st occ.) B Cyr min Arm; > A F Gött. 20 γονορρυης B* A 931 Gött; γονορρυη Bc F M’ V 931 mins Cyr. 22 σπερματος + η F 931 Gött; > B A min. 25 δυ B*; δυση mins; δυνη mins; δυθη 931; δυη Bc rell Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 27 τα φυλαγματα μου B A M’ V mins Cyr Arm Syh; μου τα φυλαγματα F Gött. 28 αυτο B* A min Arm; αυτα Bc A Fa BrMcL Gött. ‖ δε B A mins Eth; > 931 Gött. ‖ βεβηλωσουσιν B mins y-121; βεβηλωσιν A min; βεβηλωσωσιν Gött.

Text and Translation

153

16 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 17 “Say to Aarōn: A person from your relatives among your families, if such a person has a blemish in him, he must not approach to bring the gifts of his God. 18 Any person who has a blemish in him must not approach: a person who is lame or blind or has a mutilated nose or cut ear, 19 a person who has a crushed hand or a crushed foot 20 or a crooked back or white specks on the eye or an infection in his eyes, or a person who has on him an uncontrolled itch or a lichen skin growth or has one testicle. 21 Anyone from Aarōn’s offspring who has a blemish in him must not draw near to bring sacrifices to your God; because there is a blemish in him, he must not come near to bring God’s gifts. 22 He must eat God’s gifts, the holies of holies, and from the holy things. 23 However, he must not approach the curtain nor draw near to the altar, because he has a blemish; and he must not profane the holy place of his God because I am the Lord who sanctifies them.” 24 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and10 Aarōn and his sons and to all sons of Israel. ⟦22⟧ 1 And the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to Aarōn and his sons, and let them pay attention because of the holy things of the sons of Israel that they consecrate to me, and they must not profane my holy name; I am the Lord. 3 Say to them: Any person in your generations from your offspring who approaches the holy things, which the sons of Israel consecrate to the Lord, and his uncleanness is on him or, that life must be eliminated from me. I am the Lord your God. 4 And as for a man from the offspring of Aarōn the priest, and this man has a skin disease or spermatorrhea, he must not eat from the holy things until he has been cleansed. And the one who touches anything of a life’s uncleanness or a person whose bed of semen comes out of him, 5 whoever touches any unclean crawling thing that defiles him or because of a person by whom he defiles himself, according to all his uncleanness, 6 a life who touches them will be unclean until the evening. He must not eat from the holy things unless he has washed his body in water. 7 And the sun may set and he will be clean, and then he must eat from the holy things because it is his bread. 8 He must not eat a carcass and what was caught by wild animals, to defile himself by them; I am the Lord. 9 And they must keep my observances so that they may not through them receive guilt and die because of it, and if they will profane them. I am the Lord, the God who sanctifies them. 10 And no foreigner will eat

10

Some other mss read: “Then Mōysēs spoke to Aarōn.” See note in the Greek text at 22:24.

154

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

πάροικος ἱερέως ἢ μισθωτὸς οὐ φάγεται ἅγια. 11 ἐὰν δὲ ἱερεὺς κτήσηται ψυχὴν ἔνκτητον ἀργυρίου, οὗτος φάγεται ἐκ τῶν ἄρτων αὐτοῦ· καὶ οἰκογενεῖς αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὗτοι φάγονται τῶν ἄρτων αὐτοῦ. 12 καὶ θυγάτηρ ἀνθρώπου ἱερέως ἐὰν γένηται ἀνδρὶ ἀλλογενεῖ, αὐτὴ τῶν ἀπαρχῶν τοῦ ἁγίου οὐ φάγεται. 13 καὶ θυγάτηρ ἱερέως ἐὰν γένηται χήρα ἐκβεβλημένη, σπέρμα δὲ μὴ ἦν αὐτῇ, ἐπαναστρέψει ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον τὸν πατρικὸν κατὰ τὴν νεότητα αὐτῆς, ἀπὸ τῶν ἄρτων τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς φάγεται. καὶ πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς οὐ φάγεται ἀπ’ αὐτῶν. 14 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν φάγῃ ἅγια κατὰ ἄγνοιαν, καὶ προσθήσει τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον αὐτοῦ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ καὶ δώσει τῷ ἱερεῖ τὸ ἅγιον. 15 καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσουσιν τὰ ἅγια τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἃ αὐτοὶ ἀφαιροῦσιν τῷ κυρίῳ, 16 καὶ ἐπάξουσιν ἐφ’ ἑαυτοὺς ἀνομίαν πλημμελίας ἐν τῷ ἐσθίειν αὐτοὺς τὰ ἃγια αὐτῶν· ὅτι ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς. 17 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 18 Λάλησον Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ πάσῃ συναγωγῇ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνθρωπος ἂνθρωπος ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἢ τῶν υἱῶν τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐν Ἰσραὴλ ὃς ἂ προσενέγκῃ τὰ δῶρα αὐτοῦ κατὰ πᾶσαν ὁμολογίαν αὐτῶν ἢ κατὰ πᾶσαν αἵρέσιν αὐτῶν, ὅσα ἂν προσενέγκωσιν τῷ θεῷ εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα, 19 δεκτὰ ὑμῖν ἄμωμα ἄρσενα ἐκ τῶν βουκολίων καὶ ἐκ τῶν προβάτων καὶ ἐκ τῶν αἰγῶν. 20 πάντα ὅσα ἂν ἔχῃ μῶμον ἐν αὐτῷ οὐ προσάξουσιν Κυρίῳ, διότιοὐ δεκτὸν ἔσται ὑμῖν. 21 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν προσενέγκῃ θυσίαν σωτηρίου τῷ κυρίῳ, διαστείλας εὐχὴν κατὰ αἵρεσιν ἢ ἐν ταῖς ἑορταῖς ὑμῶν, ἐκ τῶν βουκολίων ἢ ἐκ τῶν προβάτων, ἄμωμον ἔσται εἰς δεκτόν, πᾶς μῶμος οὐκ ἔσται ἐν αὐτῷ. 22 τυφλὸν ἢ συντετριμμένον ἢ γλωσσότμητον ἢ μυρμηκιῶντα ἢ λιχῆνας ἔχοντα, οὐ προσάξουσιν ταῦτα τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ εἰς κάρπωσιν οὐ δώσετε ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τῷ κυρίῳ. 23 καὶ μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον ὠτότμητον ἢ κολοβόκερκον σφάγια ποιήσεις αὐτὰ σεαυτῷ, εἰς δὲ εὐχήν σου οὐ προσδεχθήσεται. 24 θλαδίαν καὶ ἐκτεθλιμμένον καὶ ἐκτομίαν καὶ ἀπεσπασμένον, οὐ προσάξεις αὐτὰ τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν οὐ ποιήσετε. 25 καὶ ἐκ χειρὸς ἀλλογενοῦς οὐ προσοίσετε 1–2 ενκτητον B*; εγκτιτος min; εκκτητον Cyr; εκτητον mins; κτητον min; > Bo; εγκτητον Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 2 εκ B A min; > F Gött. ‖ και (1st occ.) + οι Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* b-19 mins. 4 του αγιου Bunique; των αγιων A F Gött. 5 ην B A b x min; η F 931 Gött. 10 πλημμελιας B; πλημμελειας Bc A Gött. 15 α No horizontal line is visible in B* over the α, the line’s last letter, to indicate a final ν (with Miika Tucker). Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 θεω B A F 952 mins x Cyr Gött; κυριω b (= MT ‫ )ליהוה‬Göttc. 16–17 αμωμα αρσενα B A Fc V 931 952 mins Cyr; αμωμα αρσεν αμωμα F*; αρσεν αμωμα f -53 mins; αρσενα αμωμα Gött. 20 εις δεκτον Gött; εισδεκτον Swete. Here I emend Swete toward Gött’s word division. 21–22 μυρμηκιωντα + η ψωραγριωντα Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 λιχηνας B; λιχμηνας min; λειχηνας Gött. ‖ ταυτα B M’ V mins et al.; αυτα A F Gött. ‖ κυριω B A F V 931 mins et al. (= MT ‫ )ליהוה‬Göttc; θεω ταυτα Cyr; θεω Gött. 24 προσδεχθησεται B* A min; δεχθησεται Bc F 971 BrMcL Gött. 25 προσαξεις B n min Arm Swete; προσαξετε 931 A F Gött. Against Wevers who attributes προσαξεις to Bc (1986a: 243), I believe Swete and BrMcL are correct instead to attribute this to B. The smaller paleography of the final ς of προσαξεις does not indicate a corrected text (cf. the smaller final letters of many lines on this p. 128).

Text and Translation

155

holy things. A temporary resident of a priest or a hired worker must not eat holy things, 11 but if a priest acquires a life by acquisition of money, he must eat from his bread; and his homeborn ones, they also must eat of his bread. 12 And if a daughter of a person, of a priest, belongs to a foreign husband, she must not eat from the first fruits of the holy thing. 13 And if a priest’s daughter becomes a widow or is cast out, but she did not have offspring, she must return to her paternal home, just as in her youth; she must eat from her father’s bread. And no foreigner will eat from them. 14 And whatever person eats holy things out of ignorance, then he must add one-fifth to it and give the holy thing to the priest. 15 And they must not profane the holy things of the sons of Israel, which they separate for the Lord, 16 and bring on themselves lawlessness of a sinful error, by eating their holy things, because I am the Lord who sanctifies them.” 17 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 18 “Speak to Aarōn and to his sons and to the entire assembly of Israel, and you must say to them: Person by person from the sons of Israel or from the immigrants who are attached to them in Israel, whoever brings his gifts according to any confession of theirs or according to any choice of theirs, whatever they might bring to God as a whole burnt offering, 19 acceptable to you are: an unblemished male from the herds of cattle and from the sheep and from the goats. 20 They must not bring to the Lord anything that has a blemish in it, because it must not be acceptable to you. 21 And whatever person brings a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord, expressing a vow according to a choice, or among your festivals, from the herds of cattle or from the sheep, it must be unblemished to be acceptable; there must be no blemish in it. 22 Anything blind or crushed or with a tongue cut out or afflicted with warts11 or having a lichen skin growth, these you must not offer to the Lord, and you must not give from them as an offering on the Lord’s altar. 23 And as for a calf or a sheep that has a cut ear or a stubbed tail, you must perform them as a slaughtering for yourself, but they will not be accepted as your vow. 24 As for a castrated one and a squeezed one and a gelding and one whose testicles were ripped off, you must not bring these to the Lord, and you must not do it on your land. 25 And from a foreigner’s hand you must not bring the gifts of your

11

Other mss include the plus: “or with a severe itch” (NETS: “acute itching”). See note in the Greek text at 22:22.

156

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

τὰ δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν ἀπὸ πάντων τούτων, ὅτι φθαρτά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτοῖς, μῶμος ἐν αὐτοῖς· οὐ δεχθήσεται ὑμῖν. 26 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 27 Μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον ἢ αἶγα, ὡς ἂν τεχθῇ, καὶ ἔσται ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ὑπὸ τὴν μητέρα· τῇ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ καὶ ἐπέκεινα δεχθήσεται εἰς δῶρα, κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ. 28 καὶ μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον, αὐτὴν καὶ τὰ παιδία αὐτῆς, οὐ σφάξεις ἐν ἡμέρᾳ μιᾷ. 29 ἐὰν δὲ θύσῃς θυσίαν εὐχὴν χαρμοσύνης Κυρίῳ, εἰς δεκτὸν ὑμῖν θύσετε αὐτό· 30 αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ βρωθήσεται, οὐκ ἀπολείψετε ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν εἰς τὸ πρωί· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. 31 Καὶ φυλάξετε τὰς ἐντολάς μου καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτάς. 32 καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσετε τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ἁγίου, καὶ ἁγιασθήσομαι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων ὑμᾶς, 33 ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου ὥστε εἶναι ὑμῶν θεός· ἐγὼ Κύριος. ⟦23⟧ 1 Καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Αἱ ἑορταὶ Κυρίου ἃς καλέσετε αὐτὰς κλητὰς ἁγίας, αὗταί εἰσιν ἑορταί μου. 3 Ἓξ ἡμέρας ποιήσεις ἔργα, καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ σάββατα ἀνάπαυσις κλητὴ ἁγία τῷ κυρίῳ· πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσεις, σάββατά ἐστιν τῷ κυρίῳ ὑμῶν ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν. 4 Αὗται αἱ ἑορταὶ τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ αὗται, ἁγίας καλέσατε αὐτὰς ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν. 5 ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ μηνὶ ἐν τῇ τεσσαρεσκαιδεκάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ μηνὸς ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἑσπερινῶν πάσχα τῷ κυρίῳ. 6 καὶ ἐν τῇ πεντεκαιδεκάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ μηνὸς τούτου ἑορτὴ τῶν ἀζύμων τῷ κυρίῳ· ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἄζυμα ἔδεσθε. 7 καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε· 8 καὶ προσάξετε ὁλοκαυτώματα τῷ κυρίῳ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, καὶ ἡ ἑβδόμη ἡμέρα κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν· πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε. 9 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 10 Εἰπὸν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ὅταν εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν καὶ θερίζητε τὸν θερισμὸν αὐτῆς, καὶ οἴσετε δράγμα ἀπαρχὴν τοῦ θερισμοῦ ὑμῶν πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα· 11 καὶ ἀνοίσει τὸ δράγμα ἔναντι Κυρίου δεκτὸν ὑμῖν, τῇ ἐπαύριον τῆς πρώτης ἀνοίσει αὐτὰ ὁ ἱερεύς. 12 καὶ ποιήσετε ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐν ᾗ ἂν φέρητε τὸ δράγμα πρόβατον ἄμωμον

1 φθαρτα B* A mins; φθαρματα Bc F 931 BrMcL Gött. 2 υμιν B* Bo (closer to MT ‫ = לא ירצו לכם‬pl. subject); υμιν ταυτα Bc; υμιν ταυτα A F BrMcL Gött. Although ταυτα is written within the normal line width (filling the extra space before the new ¶), the paleography clearly indicates it is a later addition (Bc). Swete and BrMcL question (vid) if another scribe (so-called Bb) suggests that the corrected text (Bc) be transposed to the word order of A F. 5 η B* A O b mins Eth; και Bc F Gött. 6–7 εις δεκτον BrMcL Gött; εισδεκτον Swete. Here I emend Swete toward the word division of BrMcL and Gött. 7 αυτη A B V b d n t x y mins Cyr; > F Gött. 13 εισιν + αι Bmg (right of col. 1) F Gött; > Btxt A 931 mins BrMcL. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding obelus in the margin to the right of col. 1 where he supplied the omitted text. 14 ποιησεις B 931 Gött; ποιησετε d-125 t mins LatAug Loc Göttc. 15 υμων B* A min; > Bc F BrMcL Gött. 16 αγιας B* A min; αγιαι ας Bc F Gött. 21 η εβδομη ημερα B A V 931 x-619 min; η ημερα η εβδομη F Gött. 26 αυτα B* A n-767 mins; αυτο Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

157

God from any of these because they are corruptible in them; there is blemish in them. It must not be acceptable to you.” 26 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 27 “A calf or a sheep or a goat, when it is born, then for seven days it must be under its mother, but on the eighth day and beyond it must be accepted as a gift, an offering to the Lord. 28 And as for a calf or a sheep, you must not slaughter her and her child on one day. 29 But if you sacrifice a sacrifice, a vow of delight to the Lord, you must sacrifice it as acceptable to you. 30 It must be eaten on that day itself; you must not leave some of the meat until the morning. I am the Lord. 31 And you must keep my commands and do them. 32 And you must not profane the name of the holy one, and I must be sanctified in the midst of the sons of Israel. I am the Lord who sanctifies you, 33 who brought you out of the land of Egypt in order to be your God. I am the Lord.” ⟦23⟧ 1 Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: The festivals of the Lord, which you must call them chosen, holy, these are my festivals. 3 For six days you must do works, and on the seventh day there are sabbaths, a chosen rest, holy to the Lord. You must not do any work; they are sabbaths to your Lord in every settlement of yours. 4 These are the festivals for the Lord, and these you must call them holy in their appointed times. 5 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, in the midst of the approaching of evening, is a Passover to the Lord. 6 And on the fifteenth day of this month is the festival of unleavened bread to the Lord; for seven days you must eat unleavened breads. 7 And the first day must be chosen, holy to you; you must not do any service work. 8 And you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord for seven days, and the seventh day must be called, holy to you; you must not do any service work.” 9 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 10 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: When you enter into the land that I am giving you and you harvest its harvest, then you must carry to the priest a handful as the first fruit of your harvest. 11 And he must raise up the handful before the Lord, acceptable for you; on the day after the first the priest must raise them up. 12 And on the day when you bring the handful, you must do an unblemished sheep

158

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

ἐνιαύσιον εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα τῷ κυρίῳ, 13 καὶ τὴν θυσίαν αὐτοῦ δύο δέκατα σεμιδάλεως ἀναπεποιημένης ἐν ἐλαίῳ· θυσία τῷ κυρίῳ, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ· καὶ σπονδὴ αὐτοῦ τὸ τέταρτον τοῦ ἳν οἴνου. 14 καὶ ἄρτον καὶ πεφρυγμένα χίδρα νέα οὐ φάγεσθε ἕως εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἡμέραν ταύτην, ἕως ἂν προσενέγκητε ὑμεῖς τὰ δῶρα τῷ θεῷ ὑμῶν· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν. 15 Καὶ ἀριθμήσετε ὑμεῖς ἀπὸ τῆς ἐπαύριον τῶν σαββάτων, ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμέρας ἧς ἂν προσενέγκητε τὸ δράγμα τοῦ ἐπιθέματος, ἑπτὰ ἑβδομάδας ὁλοκλήρους· 16 ἕως τῆς ἐπαύριον τῆς ἐσχάτης ἑβδομάδης ἀριθμήσετε πεντήκοντα ἡμέρας, καὶ προσοίσετε θυσίαν νέαν τῷ κυρίῳ. 17 ἀπὸ τῆς κατοικίας ὑμῶν προσοίσετε ἄρτους ἐπίθεμα, δύο ἄρτους· ἐκ δύο δεκάτων σεμιδάλεως ἔσονται, ἐζυμωμένοι πεφθήσονται πρωτογενημάτων τῷ κυρίῳ. 18 καὶ προσάξει μετὰ τῶν ἄρτων ἑπτὰ ἀμνοὺς ἀμώμους ἐνιαυσίους καὶ μόσχον ἕνα ἐκ βουκολίου καὶ κριοὺς δύο ἀμώμους· ἔσονται ὁλοκαύτωμα τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ αἱ θυσίαι αὐτῶν καὶ αἱ σπονδαὶ αὐτῶν· θυσίαν ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ. 19 καὶ ποιήσουσιν χείμαρρον ἐξ αἰγῶν ἕνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ δύο ἀμνοὺς ἐνιαυσίους εἰς θυσίαν σωτηρίου μετὰ τῶν ἄρτων τοῦ πρωτογενήματος· 20 καὶ ἐπιθήσει αὐτὰ ὁ ἱερεὺς μετὰ τῶν ἄρτων τοῦ πρωτογενήματος ἐπίθεμα ἔναντι Κυρίου μετὰ τῶν δύο ἀμνῶν· ἅγια ἔσονται τῷ κυρίῳ· τῷ ἱερεῖ τῷ προσφέροντι αὐτά, αὐτῷ ἔσται. 21 καὶ καλέσετε ταύτην τὴν ἡμέραν κλητήν· ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν αὐτῇ· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πάσῃ τῇ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν. 22 Καὶ ὅταν θερίζητε τὸν θερισμὸν τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν, οὐ συντελέσετε τὸ λοιπὸν τοῦ θερισμοῦ τοῦ ἀγροῦ σου ἐν τῷ θερίζειν σε, καὶ τὰ ἀποπίπτοντα τοῦ θερισμοῦ σου οὐ συλλέξεις· τῷ πτωχῷ καὶ τῷ προσηλύτῳ ὑπολίψῃ αὐτό· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 23 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 24 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων Τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ ἐβδόμου μιᾷ τοῦ μηνὸς ἔσται ὑμῖν ἀνάπαυσις, μνημόσυνον σαλπίγγων, κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν· 25 πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε, καὶ προσάξετε ὁλοκαύτωμα Κυρίῳ. 26 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 27 Καὶ τῇ δεκάτῃ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ ἐβδόμου τούτου ἡμέρα ἐξειλασμοῦ, κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν· καὶ ταπεινώσετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν, καὶ προσάξετε ὁλοκαύτωμα τῷ κυρίῳ. 28 πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ· ἔστιν γὰρ ἡμέρα ἐξειλασμοῦ αὕτη ὑμῖν, ἐξειλάσασθαι περὶ ὑμῶν ἔναντι 2 ευωδιας + τω A Gött; > B F Fb M’ V mins Cyr 1093. ‖ σπονδη B* A min Eth Arm Syh; σπονδην Bc F 931 BrMcL Gött. 7–8 εβδομαδης B*unique; εβδομης Bc A; εβδομαδος F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 προσαξει B* A min; προσαξετε Bc F BrMcL Gött. 13 θυσιαν οσμην B A V n t-370 x y-318 mins Eth; θυσια οσμη F 931 Gött. ‖ ποιησουσι(ν) B A x mins Cyr; ποησετε F Gött. ‖ χειμαρρον B* F*; χιμαρρον A; χειμαρον Bc1; χιμαρον Bc2 Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 κλητην 931 Gött; κλητη A F mins Göttc. 21 υπολιψη B A; υπολειψη Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ αυτο B* Eth; αυτα Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 25–26 ολοκαυτωμα + τω A F Gött; > B x-527 mins. 28 εξειλασμου B*; εξιλασμου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 30 εξειλασμου B*; εξιλασμου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ εξειλασασθαι B*; εξιλασασθαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

159

a year old as a whole burnt offering to the Lord, 13 and as for its sacrifice, twotenths of fine flour prepared with olive oil; it is a sacrifice to the Lord, a sweet smell to the Lord, and its drink offering, one-fourth of a hin of wine. 14 And you must not eat bread and roasted, fresh groats until this very day, until you bring the gifts to your God; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in every settlement of yours. 15 And you must count seven whole weeks from the day after the sabbaths, from the day on which you bring the handful of the deposit. 16 You must count until the day after the last week, fifty days, then you must bring a new sacrifice to the Lord. 17 From your settlement you must bring bread as a deposit, two loaves of bread. They must be of two-tenths of fine flour, baked with leaven, of first produce to the Lord. 18 And he must offer with the bread seven unblemished lambs a year old and one calf from the herd of cattle and two unblemished rams. They will be a whole burnt offering to the Lord, and their sacrifices and their drink offerings; it is a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord. 19 They must also prepare one billy goat from the goats one for sin and two lambs a year old as a deliverance sacrifice with the bread of the first produce. 20 And the priest must place them with the bread of the first produce, with the two lambs, as a deposit before the Lord; they must be holies to the Lord. As for the priest who brings them, they will be his. 21 And you must call this day chosen; it must be holy to you. You must not do any service work on it; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in every settlement of yours. 22 And when you harvest the harvest of your land, you must not finish off the remainder of your field’s harvest when you harvest it, and you must not collect the things that fall off from your harvest; you must leave it behind for the poor and for the immigrant. I am the Lord your God.” 23 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 24 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: In the seventh month, on the first of the month, you must have a rest, a memorial of trumpets; it must be chosen as holy to you. 25 You must not do any service work, and you must bring a whole burnt offering to the Lord.” 26 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 27 “And on the tenth of this seventh month there is a day of propitiation; it must be chosen as holy to you. And you must humble your lives and bring a whole burnt offering to the Lord. 28 You must not do any work on this day itself; for this is a day of propitiation for you,

160

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

Κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν. 29 πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἥτις μὴ ταπεινωθήσεται ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 30 καὶ πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἥτις ποιήσει ἔργον ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ, ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 31 πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσετε· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πάσαις κατοικίαις ὑμῶν. 32 σάββατα σαββάτων ἔσται ὑμῖν, καὶ ταπεινώσετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν· ἀπὸ ἐνάτης τοῦ μηνὸς ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας ἕως ἑσπέρας σαββατιεῖτε τὰ σάββατα ὑμῶν. 33 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 34 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λέγων Τῇ πεντεκαιδεκάτῃ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ ἐβδόμου τούτου ἑορτὴ σκηνῶν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τῷ κυρίῳ. 35 καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη κλητὴ ἁγία, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε. 36 ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας προσάξετε ὁλοκαυτώματα τῷ κυρίῳ· καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ ὀγδόη ἁγία κλητὴ ἔσται ὑμῖν, καὶ προσάξετε ὁλοκαυτώματα Κυρίῳ· ἐξόδιόν ἐστι, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε. 37 αὗται αἱ ἑορταὶ Κυρὶῳ ἃς καλέσετε κλητὰς ἁγίας, ὥστε προσενέγκαι καρπώματα τῷ κυρίῳ, ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ θυσίας αὐτῶν καὶ σπονδὰς αὐτῶν τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν εἰς ἡμέραν· 38 πλὴν τῶν σαββάτων Κυρίου καὶ πλὴν τῶν δομάτων ὑμῶν καὶ πλὴν πάντων τῶν εὐχῶν ὑμῶν καὶ πλὴν τῶν ἐκουσίων ὑμῶν ἃ ἂν δῶτε τῷ κυρίῳ. 39 Καὶ ἐν τῇ πεντεκαιδεκάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ ἑβδόμου τούτου, ὅταν συντελέσητε τὰ γενήματα τῆς γῆς, ἑορτάσατε τῷ κυρίῳ ζʹ ἡμέρας· τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ πρώτῃ ἀνάπαυσις, καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ ἀνάπαυσις. 40 καὶ λήμψεσθε τῇ πρώτῃ καρπὸν ξύλου ὡραῖον καὶ κάλλυνθρα φοινίκων καὶ κλάδους ξύλου δασεῖς καὶ ἰτέας καὶ ἄγνου κλάδους ἐκ χιμάρρου, εὐφρανθῆναι ἔναντι Κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ· 41 νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν. ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἑβδόμῳ ἑορτάσετε αὐτήν· 42 ἐν σκηναῖς κατοικήσετε ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας, πᾶς ὁ αὐτόχθων ἐν Ἰσραὴλ κατοικήσει ἐν σκηναῖς· 43 ὅπως ἴδωσιν αἱ γενεαὶ ὑμῶν ὅτι ἐν σκηναῖς κατοίκισα τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ἐξαγαγεῖν με αὐτοὺς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου. ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 44 καὶ ἐλάλησεν Μωυσῆς τὰς ἑορτὰς Κυρίου τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ. ⟦24⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Ἔντειλαι τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ, καὶ λαβέτωσάν μοι ἔλαιον ἐλάινον καθαρὸν κεκομμένον εἰς φῶς, καῦσαι λύχνον διὰ παντὸς 3 ἔξωθεν τοῦ καταπετάσματος ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καύσουσιν αὐτὸν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας ἕως πρωὶ ἐνώπιον Κυρίου ἐνδελεχῶς· νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν. 4 ἐπὶ τῆς λυχνίας τῆς καθαρᾶς καύσετε τοὺς λύχνους ἔναντι Κυρίου ἕως τὸ πρωί. 5 καὶ λήμψεσθε σεμίδαλιν καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτὴν δώδεκα ἄρτους, δύο δεκάτων ἔσται ὁ ἄρτος ὁ εἷς· 6 καὶ ἐπιθήσετε αὐτοὺς δύο θέματα, ἓξ ἄρτους 10 αγια κλητη Bunique; κλητη αγια A F Gött. 11 ολοκαυτωματα + τω A F Gött; > B V Tht Lev mins. ‖ εστι There is no apparent horizontal line in B* to indicate a final ν (with Miika Tucker). Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 παντων B A min; πασων min? Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B. 17 εορτασατε B mins Cyr; εορτασετε A F Gött. ‖ ζ ημερας B; επτα ημερας A F Gött; > min. 18 λημψεσθε + τη ημερα Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins. 19–20 χιμαρρου B*; χειμαρρου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 ιδωσιν B Cyr min rell; αν ειδωσιν F; ειδωσιν Gött. ‖ κατοικισα B; κατωκησα A M’ mins; κατωκεισα V min; κατωκισα F Gött. 27 μοι B A F mins Ethc BrMcL; σοι M N Gött. 28 μαρτυριου + και Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* b min (= MT).

Text and Translation

161

to propitiate for you before the Lord your God. 29 Any life that will not humble himself on that day itself must be eliminated from his people. 30 And any life that will do work on that day itself, that life must be completely destroyed from his people. 31 You must not do any work; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in all your settlements. 32 It must be to you sabbaths of sabbaths, and you must humble your lives. From the ninth of the month, from the evening until the evening, you must sabbath your sabbaths.” 33 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 34 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: On the fifteenth day of this seventh month is the festival of tents to the Lord for seven days. 35 And the first day is chosen, holy; you must not do any service work. 36 For seven days you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord, and the eighth day must be holy, chosen for you, and you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord; it is a final day, you must not do any service work. 37 These are the festivals to the Lord, which you must call chosen, holy, in order to bring offerings to the Lord, whole burnt offerings and their sacrifices and their drink offerings, each on its proper day, 38 besides the Lord’s sabbaths and besides your gifts and besides all things from your vows and besides your voluntary gifts, which you give to the Lord. 39 And on the fifteenth day of this seventh month, when you complete the yields of the land, celebrate a festival to the Lord for 7 days, a rest on the first day and a rest on the eighth day. 40 And on the first, you must take ripe fruit from a tree, both fronds from date palm trees and bushy branches from a tree and willow trees and branches from a chaste tree from a wadi, to rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days of the year. 41 It is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations. In the seventh month you must celebrate it as a festival. 42 You must live in tents for seven days; every native in Israel must live in tents, 43 so that your generations may see that I made the sons of Israel live in tents when I brought them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God. 44 And Mōysēs told the festivals of the Lord to the sons of Israel.” ⟦24⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Command the sons of Israel, and let them take for me pure olive oil of olives, beaten for light, to burn a lamp continuously 3 outside the curtain in the tent of testimony. Aarōn and his sons must burn it from the evening until the morning before the Lord continually; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations. 4 On the clean lampstand you must burn the lamps before the Lord until the morning. 5 And you must take fine flour and make it twelve loaves of bread; the one loaf will be twotenths. 6 And you must put them in two piles, six loaves in one pile, on the clean

162

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

τὸ ἓν θέμα, ἐπὶ τὴν τράπεζαν τὴν καθαρὰν ἔναντι Κυρίου. 7 καὶ ἐπιθήσετε ἐπὶ τὸ θέμα λίβανον καθαρὸν καὶ ἅλα, καὶ ἔσονται εἰς ἄρτους εἰς ἀνάμνησιν προκείμενα τῷ κυρίῳ. 8 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν σαββάτων προθήσεται ἔναντι Κυρίου διὰ παντός, ἐνώπιον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ διαθήκην αἰώνιον. 9 καὶ ἔσται Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ, καὶ φάγονται αὐτὰ ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ· ἔστιν γὰρ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων τοῦτο αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῶν θυσιαζομένων τῷ κυρίῳ, νόμιμον αἰώνιον. 10 Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν υἱὸς γυναικὸς Ἰσραηλείτιδος, καὶ οὗτος ἦν υἱὸς Αἰγυπτίου ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ. καὶ ἐμαχέσαντο ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ ὁ ἐκ τῆς Ἰσραηλείτιδος καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Ἰσραηλείτης, 11 καὶ ἐπονομάσας ὁ υἱὸς τῆς γυναικὸς τῆς Ἰσραηλείτιδος τὸ ὄνομα κατηράσατο. καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτοὺς πρὸς Μωυσῆν· καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ Σαλωμεὶθ θυγάτηρ Δαβρεὶ ἐκ τῆς φυλῆς Δάν. 12 καὶ ἀπέθεντο αὐτὸν εἰς φυλακήν, διακρεῖναι αὐτὸν διὰ προστάγματος Κυρίου. 13 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 14 Ἐξάγαγε τὸν καταρασάμενον ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, καὶ ἐπιθήσουσιν πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ λιθοβολήσουσιν αὐτὸν πᾶσα ἡ συναγωγή. 15 καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ λάλησον καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἐὰν καταράσηται θεόν, ἁμαρτίαν λήμψεται, 16 ὀνομάζων δὲ τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου θανάτῳ θανατούσθω· λίθοις λιθοβολείτω αὐτὸν πᾶσα συναγωγὴ Ἰσραήλ. ἐάν τε προσήλυτος ἐάν τε αὐτόχθων, ἐν τῷ ὀνομάσαι αὐτὸν τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου τελευτάτω. 17 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν πατάξῃ ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ἀποθάνῃ, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω. 18 καὶ ὃς ἂν πατάξῃ κτῆνος, καὶ ἀποθάνῃ, ἀποτισάτω ψυχὴν ἀντὶ ψυχῆς. 19 καὶ ἐάν τις δὴ μῶμον τῷ πλησίον, ὡς ἐποίησεν αὐτῷ, ὡσαύτως ἀντιποιηθήσεται αὐτῷ· 20 σύντριμμα ἀντὶ συντρίμματος, ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ, ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος, καθότι ἂν δῷ μῶμον τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, οὕτως δοθήσεται αὐτῷ. 21 ὂς ἂν πατάξῃ ἂνθρωπον, καὶ ἀποθάνῃ, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω· 22 δικαίωσις μία ἔσται τῷ προσηλύτῳ καὶ τῷ ἐνχωρίῳ, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 23 καὶ ἐλάλησεν Μωσῆς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ, καὶ ἐξήγαγον τὸν καταρασάμενον ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς καὶ ἐλιθοβόλησαν αὐτὸν ἐν λίθοις· καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ ἐποίησαν καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ.

3 ενωπιον B A x mins Cyr; εν ω παρα F; παρα Gött. 5 αυτων B M’ mins Cyr; αυτο Fb mins; αυτω A F* Gött. 7 ισραηλειτιδος B; ισζραηλιτιδος A; ισραηλιτιδος Bc F Gött. 8 ισραηλειτιδος B; ισραηλιτιδος Bc A F Gött. 9 ισραηλειτης B; ισραηλιτης Bc A F Gött. ‖ ισραηλειτιδος B; ισραηλιτιδος Bc A F Gött. 10 αυτους B*unique; αυτον Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 10–11 σαλωμειθ B* A F M’ mins; σαλαμειθ Bc x mins; σαλωμιθ Gött. 11 δαβρει B M’ V G n mins; δαβρι A F Gött. ‖ διακρειναι B*; διακριναι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 ος B A mins; ανθρωπος F* Gött. 18 πασα + η Bmg (right of col. 2); > B* BrMcL Gött. 21 αποτισατω B; αποτησατε αυτον min; αποτεισατω Gött. 22 δη B A; δω F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 τω ενχωριω B*; εγχωριω A; τω εγχωριω Bc A F Gött. 28 εν B* A b min Sa Tar; > Bc V F G x Arab Syh Gött.

Text and Translation

163

table before the Lord. 7 You must put on the pile clean frankincense and salt, and they will be as loaves for remembrance, set before the Lord. 8 On the day of the sabbaths he must set them before the Lord continuously, before the sons of Israel as an enduring covenant. 9 And they will be for Aarōn and for his sons, and they must eat them in a holy place since they are holies of holies. This is theirs from the things that are sacrificed to the Lord, an enduring ordinance.” 10 And the son of an Israelite woman cane out. Also he was the son of an Egyptian among the sons of Israel. And the one from the Israelite woman and the Israelite person fought in the camp. 11 And when the Israelite woman’s son named the name, he pronounced a curse. And they brought them to Mōysēs; now his mother’s name was Salomeith daughter of Dabrei from the tribe of Dan. 12 And they put him in confinement, to make a decision about him by the Lord’s order. 13 Then the Lord said to Mōysēs, saying: 14 “Take the one who cursed outside the camp, and all who heard must put their hands on his head, and the entire assembly must stone him. 15 Then speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: A person who if he should curse God must receive guilt. 16 And the one who names the Lord’s name, by death let him be put to death; let the entire assembly of Israel stone him with stones. Whether an immigrant or a native, when he names the Lord’s name, let him die.” 17 “And a person who strikes a person’s life, and he dies, by death let him be put to death.” 18 “And whoever strikes an animal, and it dies, let him repay a life in place of a life. 19 And if anyone indeed is a blemish to his neighbor, as he did to him, likewise it must be done to him in return: 20 a wound in place of a wound, an eye in place of an eye, a tooth in place of a tooth; just as someone gives a blemish to a person, in the same way let it be given to him. 21 Whoever strikes a person, and he dies, by death let him be put to death. 22 There must be one judgment for the immigrant and for the local because I am the Lord your God.” 23 Then Mōsēs spoke to the sons of Israel, and they took the one who had cursed outside the camp and stoned him with stones. And the sons of Israel did just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs.

164

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

⟦25⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς Ἐὰν εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν, καὶ ἀναπαύσεται ἡ γῆ ἣν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν σάββατα τῷ κυρίῳ. 3 ἓξ ἔτη σπερεῖς τὸν ἀγρόν σου, καὶ ἓξ ἔτη τεμεῖς τὴν ἄμπελόν σου καὶ συνάξεις τὸν καρπὸν αὐτῆς· 4 τῷ δὲ ἔτει τῷ ἑβδόμῳ σάββατα ἀνάπαυσις ἔσται τῇ γῇ, σάββατα τῷ κυρίῳ· τὸν ἀγρόν σου οὐ σπερεῖς καὶ τὴν ἄμπελόν σου οὐ τεμεῖς, 5 καὶ τὰ αὐτόματα ἀναβαίνοντα τοῦ ἀγροῦ σου οὐκ ἐκθερίσεις καὶ τὴν σταφυλὴν τοῦ ἁγιάσματός σου οὐκ ἐκτρυγήσεις· ἐνιαυτὸς ἀναπαύσεως ἔσται τῇ γῇ. 6 καὶ ἔσται τὰ σάββατα τῆς γῆς βρώματά σοι καὶ τῷ παιδί σου καὶ τῇ παιδίσκῃ σου καὶ τῷ μισθωτῷ σου καὶ τῷ παροίκῳ τῷ προσκειμένῳ πρὸς σέ· 7 καὶ τοῖς κτήνεσίν σου καὶ τοῖς θηρίοις τοῖς ἐν τῇ γῇ σου ἔσται πᾶν τὸ γένημα αὐτοῦ εἰς βρῶσιν. 8 Καὶ ἐξαριθμήσεις σεαυτῷ ἑπτὰ ἀναπαύσεις ἐτῶν, ἑπτὰ ἔτη ἑπτάκις· καὶ ἔσονταί σοι ἑπτὰ ἑβδομάδες ἐτῶν ἐννέα καὶ τεσσεράκοντα ἔτη. 9καὶ διαγγελεῖτε σάλπιγγος φωνῇ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν, ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἑβδόμῳ, τῇ δεκάτῃ τοῦ μηνός· τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, διαγγελεῖτε σάλπιγγι ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν. 10 καὶ ἁγιάσατε τὸ ἔτος τὸ πεντηκοστὸν ἐνιαυτόν, καὶ διαβοήσετε ἄφεσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς πᾶσιν τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν αὐτήν· ἐνιαυτὸς ἀφέσεως σημασία αὕτη ἔσται ὑμῖν, καὶ ἀπελεύσεται εἷς ἕκαστος εἰς τὴν κτῆσιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἕκαστος εἰς τὴν πατρίδα αὐτοῦ ἀπελεύσεσθε. 11 ἀφέσεως σημασίας αὕτη, τὸ ἔτος τὸ πεντηκοστὸν ἐνιαυτὸς ἔσται ὑμῖν· οὐ σπερεῖτε, οὐδὲ ἀμήσετε τὰ αὐτόματα ἀναβαίνοντα αὐτῆς, καὶ οὐ τρυγήσετε τὰ ἡγιασμένα αὐτῆς· 12 ὅτι ἀφέσεως σημασία ἐστίν, ἅγιον ἔσται ὑμῖν· ἀπὸ τῶν παιδίων φάγεσθε τὰ γενήματα αὐτῆς. 13 ἐν τῷ ἔτει τῆς ἀφέσεως σημασίᾳ αὐτῆς ἐπανελεύσεται εἰς τὴν κτῆσιν αὐτοῦ. 14 ἐὰν δὲ ἀποδῷ πρᾶσιν τῷ πλησίον σου, ἐὰν καὶ κτήσῃ παρὰ τοῦ πλησίον σου, μὴ θλειβέτω ἄνθρωπος τὸν πλησίον· 15 κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἐτῶν μετὰ τὴν σημασίαν κτήσῃ παρὰ τοῦ πλησίον, κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἐνιαυτῶν γενημάτων ἀποδώσεταί σοι. 16 καθότι ἂν πλεῖον τῶν ἐτῶν πληθύνῃ τὴν ἔνκτησιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ καθότι ἂν ἔλαττον τῶν ἐτῶν ἐλαττονώσῃ τὴν κτῆσιν αὐτοῦ· ὅτι ἀριθμὸν γενημάτων αὐτοῦ οὕτως ἀποδώσετε σοι. 17 μὴ θλειβέτω ἄνθρωπος τὸν πλησίον, καὶ φοβηθήσῃ Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 18 Καὶ

1 Σεινα B* V G; Σινα Bc A F Gött. 6 αυτοματα + τα A Fb1 Gött; > B F* Fb2 V mins Cyr. 7 εκθερισεις B A F x mins Cyr; εκκαθαριεις min; θεριεις min; εκθεριεις G M mins rell Gött. 13 εν (2nd occ.) B mins Cyr 865 Syh; > A F Gött. 14 αγιασατε B* A mins Eth; αγιασετε Bc F Gött. 16 εις (1st occ.) B z y-318 Cyr min 865; > F Gött. 17 πατριδα B A F* C mins; πατριαν Fc Gött. 17–18 σημασιας B* mins; σημασια Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 19 αυτοματα + τα mins Gött; > B A F V mins Phil. 20 παιδιων B* A; πεδιων Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 21 επανελευσεται + εκαστος Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. ‖ κτησιν B* BrMcL Gött; εγκτησιν Bc F M’ V G s t mins. 22 θλειβετω B*; θλιβετω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 25 ενκτησιν B*; εκτησιν Α mins; εγκτησιν Bc F Gött. ‖ κτησιν B* A b mins; ενκτησιν Bc; εγκτησιν F Gött. 26 ουτως B A V G b x mins; αυτος F* Gött. ‖ αποδωσετε B; αποδωσεται Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ θλειβετω B*; θλιβετω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

165

⟦25⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs on the mountain Seina, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: If you enter into the land that I am giving you, also the land that I am giving you must rest, sabbaths for the Lord. 3 For six years you must sow your field, and for six years you must prune your grapevine and collect its fruit, 4 but in the seventh year there must be sabbaths, a rest for the land, sabbaths for the Lord; you must not sow your field, and you must not prune your grapevine. 5 And you must not fully reap the things that sprout by themselves of your field, and you must not gather in the grapes of what is sanctified for you; it must be a year of rest for the land. 6 And the sabbaths of the land must be food for you and for your male slave and your female slave and your hired worker and for the resident foreigner who is attached to you, 7 also for your livestock and for the wild animals that are in your land. His entire yield must be for food. 8 And you must count for yourself seven rests of years, seven times seven years, and they must be for you seven weeks of years, forty-nine years. 9 And you must declare with a trumpet’s sound throughout all your land, in the seventh month, on the tenth of the month. On the day of propitiation you must declare with the trumpet throughout all your land. 10 Sanctify the year, the fiftieth year, and you must proclaim a release on the land to all its residents; it is a year of release. It must be a signal for you. And one, each one, must depart to his possession, and you must depart, each one to his homeland. 11 This is of a signal of release; it must be the fiftieth year, a year for you. You must not sow or reap the things sprouting by themselves from it, and you must not harvest its things that have been consecrated. 12 Since it is a signal of release, it must be a holy thing to you; from the children12 you must eat its yields. 13 In the year of release, at its signal, he must return to his possession. 14 But if you sell a sale to your neighbor, even if you acquire from your neighbor, let a person not oppress his neighbor. 15 You must acquire from your neighbor according to the number of years after the signal; he must sell to you according to the number of years of yields. 16 To the degree that there is an increase in years, you must increase his property, and to the degree as there is a decrease in years, you must decrease his possession because in this way you will restore to yourself a number of his yields. 17 Let not a person oppress his neighbor, and you must fear the Lord your God; I am the Lord your God. 18 And you must

12

παιδιων LeuBA; or corrected: πεδιων “the fields.”

166

5

10

15

20

Text and Translation

ποιήσετε πάντα τὰ δικαιώματά μου καὶ πάσας τὰς κρίσεις μου, καὶ φυλάξασθε καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά, καὶ κατοικήσετε πεποιθότες· 19καὶ δώσει ἡ γῆ τὰ ἐκφόρια αὐτῆς, καὶ φάγεσθε εἰς πλησμονήν, καὶ κατοικήσετε πεποιθότες ἐπ’ αὐτῆς. 20 ἐὰν δὲ λέγητε Τί φαγόμεθα ἐν τῷ ἔτει τῷ ἑβδόμῳ τούτῳ ἐὰν μὴ σπείρωμεν μηδὲ συναγάγωμεν τὰ γενήματα ἡμῶν; 21 καὶ ἀποστέλλω τὴν εὐλογίαν μου ὑμῖν ἐν τῷ ἔτει τῷ ἕκτῳ, καὶ ποιήσει τὰ γενήματα αὐτῆς εἰς τὰ τρία ἔτη. 22 καὶ σπερεῖτε τὸ ἔτος τὸ ὄγδοον, καὶ φάγεσθε ἀπὸ τῶν γενημάτων παλαιά· ἕως τοῦ ἔτους τοῦ ἐνάτου, ἕως ἂν ἔλθῃ τὸ γένημα αὐτῆς, φάγεσθε παλαιὰ παλαιῶν. 23 Καὶ ἡ γῆ οὐ πραθήσεται εἰς βεβαίωσιν, μὴ γάρ ἐστιν ἡ γῆ· διότι προσήλυτοι καὶ πάροικοι ὑμεῖς ἐστε ἐναντίον μου· 24 καὶ κατὰ πᾶσαν γῆν κατασχέσεως ὑμῶν λύτρα δώσετε τῆς γῆς. 25 ἐὰν δὲ πένηται ὁ ἀδελφός σου ὁ μετὰ σοῦ καὶ ἀποδώσετε ἀπὸ τῆς κατασχέσεως αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔλθῃ ὁ ἀγχιστεύων ἐγγίζων ἔγγιστα αὐτοῦ καὶ λυτρώσεται τὴν πρᾶσιν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ. 26 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ᾖ τινι ὁ ἀγχιστεύων, καὶ εὐπορηθῇ τῇ χειρὶ καὶ εὑρεθῇ αὐτῷ τὸ ἱκανὸν λύτρα αὐτοῦ· 27 καὶ συλλογιεῖται τὰ ἔτη τῆς πράσεως αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀποδώσει ὅπερ ἔχει τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ᾧ ἀπέδοτο ἑαυτὸν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἀπελεύσεται εἰς τὴν κατάσχεσιν αὐτοῦ. 28 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ εὑρεθῇ ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ τὸ ἱκανὸν ὥστε ἀποδοῦναι αὐτά, καὶ ἔσται ἡ πρᾶσις τῷ κτησαμένῳ αὐτὰ ἕως τοῦ ἕκτου ἔτους τῆς ἀφέσεως, καὶ ἐξελεύσεται τῇ ἀφέσι, καὶ ἀπελεύσεται εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν αὐτοῦ. 29 Ἐὰν δέ τις ἀποδῶται οἰκίαν οἰκητὴν ἐν πόλι τετιχισμένῃ, καὶ ἔσται ἡ λύτρωσις αὐτῆς· ἕως πληρωθῇ ἐνιαυτὸς ἡμερῶν, ἔσται ἡ λύτρωσις αὐτῆς. 30 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ λυτρωθῇ ἕως ἂν πληρωθῇ αὐτῆς ἐνιαυτὸς ὅλος, κυρωθήσεται ἡ οἰκία ἡ οὖσα ἐν πόλι τῇ ἐχούσῃ τεῖχος βεβαίως τῷ κτησαμένῳ αὐτὴν εἰς τὰς γενεὰς αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὐκ ἐξελεύσεται ἐν τῇ ἀφέσι. 31 αἱ δὲ οἰκίαι αἱ ἐν ἐπαύλεσιν, αἷς οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐταῖς τεῖχος κύκλῳ, πρὸς τὸν ἀγρὸν τῆς γῆς λογισθήτωσαν· λυτρωταὶ διὰ παντὸς ἔσονται, καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀφέσι ἐξελεύσονται. 32 καὶ αἱ πόλεις τῶν Λευειτῶν, οἰκίαι τῶν πόλεων αὐτῶν

2 κατοικησετε + επι της γης Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A min. 7 το γενημα B A V b n x mins Syh; τα γενηματα F Gött. 8 μη B*unique; εμη Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11 αποδωσετε B*; αποδωσεται Bc A mins y-318 Latcod 100 Swete BrMcL; αποδωτε F V mins; αποδωται Fb Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 11–12 εγγιζων εγγιστα αυτου B* A mins BrMcL; ο εγγιζων αυτω Bc F; ο εγγιστα αυτου Gött. 14 οπερ εχει B* A F mins Sa; ο υπερεχει Bc Gött. 15 εαυτον B x-527 min; αυτον A F Μ’ mins; αυτο Gött. ‖ ευρεθη B* A min Arm; ευπορηθη Bc F BrMcL; ευρη n-54 y-392 Eth Bo Sa Gött. 16 αυτα (1st occ.) B* A min; αυτω Bc F BrMcL Gött. 17 εκτου B A V mins Bo; > F Gött. ‖ αφεσι B*; αφεσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 18 καταπαυσιν B* A min; κατασχεσιν Bc F Gött. ‖ πολι B*; πολει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ τετιχισμενη B*; τετειχισμενη Bc vid Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 20 αυτης B A F mins Cyr 868 Arm Sa; > M Bo Cyr Gött. 21 πολι B*; πολει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 αφεσι B*; αφεσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 23 λογισθητωσαν B* A b 121 Gött; λογισθησονται Bmg (ται to the right of col. 1) F Cyr 868 rell. Here BrMcL accidentally lists B* as λογισθησονται, which is clearly the corrected reading. ‖ εσονται + αυται F* Fb Gött; > B A Fa V G 868 mins Cyr Bo Sa Syh. 24 αφεσι B*; αφεσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ λευειτων B*; λευιτων Bc A Fc Gött; > F*.

Text and Translation

167

perform all my regulations and all my judgments. Guard yourselves, and you must do them, and you must reside by being confident. 19 And the land will give its produce, and you will eat for satisfaction and reside on it by being confident. 20 But if you say: What will we eat in this seventh year if we do not sow or gather our yields? 21 So I will send my blessing to you in the sixth year, and it will make its yield for three years. 22 And you must sow in the eighth year, and you will eat from the old yields until the ninth year. When its yield comes in, you must eat old things of old things. 23 And the land must not be sold permanently, for the land is mine. Therefore you are immigrants and resident foreigners before me. 24 And according to all the land of your possession, you must give ransom for the land. 25 But if your brother who is with you should become poor, then he should sell some of his possession and the closest relative approaching near to him should come, and he must redeem the sale of his brother. 26 But if he does not have one who is a close relative, and he prospers by his hand and enough for his ransom is found by him, 27 then he must calculate the years of his sale and give back what he has to the person who sold himself to him, and he must depart to his possession. 28 But if his hand is not found, what is enough to give them back, then the sale must belong to the one who acquired them until the sixth, the year of release, and at the release it will go away, and he must depart to his rest. 29 But if someone sells a habitable house in a walled city, then its redemption must be; until a year of days is completed, its redemption must be. 30 But if it is not redeemed until its full year is completed, the house that is in a city that has a wall must be confirmed firmly to the one who purchases it, throughout his generations, and it must not go away in the release. 31 But the houses in homesteads, which do not have a wall around them, let them be considered as the field of the land; they must always be redeemable, and they must go away in the release. 32 And as for the cities of the Leueites, the houses of the

168

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

κατασχέσεως, λυτρωταὶ διὰ παντὸς ἔσονται τοῖς Λευείταις· 33 καὶ ὃς ἂν λυτρωσάμενος παρὰ τῶν Λευειτῶν, καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ἡ διάπρασις αὐτῶν οἰκιῶν πόλεως κατασχέσεως αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ ἀφέσι, ὅτι οἰκίαι τῶν πόλεων τῶν Λευειτῶν κατάσχεσις αὐτῶν ἐμμέσῳ υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ. 34 καὶ οἱ ἀγροὶ ἀφωρισμένοι ταῖς πόλεσιν αὐτῶν οὐ πραθήσονται, ὅτι κατάσχεσις αἰωνία τοῦτο αὐτῶν ἐστιν. 35 Ἐὰν δὲ πένηται ὁ ἀδελφός σου καὶ ἀδυνατήσει ταῖς χερσὶν παρὰ σοῦ, ἀντιλήμψῃ αὐτοῦ ὡς προσηλύτου καὶ παροίκου, καὶ ζήσεται ὁ ἀδελφός σου μετὰ σοῦ. 36 οὐ λήμψῃ παρ’ αὐτοῦ τόκον οὐδὲ ἐπὶ πλήθει, καὶ φοβηθήσῃ τὸν θεόν σου· ἐγὼ Κύριος· καὶ ζήσεται ὁ ἀδελφός σου μετὰ σοῦ. 37 τὸ ἀργύριόν σου οὐ δώσεις αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τὸκῳ, καὶ πλεονασμὸν οὐ δώσεις αὐτῷ τὰ βρώματά σου. 38 ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν γῆν Χανάαν ὥστε εἶναι ὑμῶν θεός. 39 ἐὰν δὲ ταπεινωθῇ ὁ ἀδελφός σου παρὰ σοὶ καὶ πραθῇ, οὐ δουλεύσει σοι δουλίαν οἰκέτου· 40 ὡς μισθωτὸς ἢ πάροικος ἔσται σοι, ἕως τοῦ ἔτους τῆς ἀφέσεως ἐργᾶται παρὰ σοί 41 καὶ ἐξελεύσεται τῇ ἀφέσι καὶ τὰ τέκνα αὐτοῦ μετ’ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀπελεύσεται εἰς τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ· εἰς τὴν κατάσχεσιν τὴν πατρικὴν ἀποδραμεῖται. 42 διότι οἰκέται μού εἰσιν οὗτοι οὓς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, οὐ πραθήσεται ἐν πράσει οἰκέτου. 43 οὐ κατατενεῖς αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ μόσχῳ, καὶ φοβηθήσῃ Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου. 44 καὶ παῖς καὶ παιδίσκη ὅσοι ἂν γένωνταί σοι ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν ὅσοι κύκλῳ σού εἰσιν, ἀπ’ αὐτῶν κτήσεσθε δοῦλον καὶ δούλην. 45 καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν τῶν παροίκων τῶν ὄντων ἐν ὑμῖν, ἀπὸ τούτων κτήσεσθε καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν συγγενῶν αὐτῶν ὅσοι ἂν γένωνται ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν· ἔστωσαν ὑμῖν εἰς κατάσχεσιν. 46 καὶ καταμεριεῖτε αὐτοὺς τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν μεθ’ ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἔσονται ὑμῖν κατόχιμοι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα· τῶν ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ, ἕκαστος τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ οὐ κατατενεῖ αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς μόχθοις. 47 Ἐὰν δὲ εὕρῃ ἡ χεὶρ τοῦ προσηλύτου ἢ τοῦ παροίκου τοῦ παρὰ σοί, καὶ ἀπορηθεὶς ὁ ἀδελφός σου πραθῇ τῷ προσηλύτῳ ἢ τῷ παροίκῳ τῷ παρὰ σοὶ ἐκ γενετῆς προσηλύτῳ, 48 μετὰ τὸ πραθῆναι αὐτῷ λύτρωσις ἔσται αὐτῷ· εἷς τῶν ἀδελφῶν σου λυτρώσεται αὐτόν. 49 ἀδελφὸς πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἢ υἱὸς ἀδελφοῦ πατρὸς λυτρώσεται αὐτόν, ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν οἰκείων τῶν σαρκῶν αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῆς φυλῆς αὐτοῦ λυτρώσεται αὐτόν· ἐὰν δὲ εὐπορηθεὶς ταῖς χερσὶν λυτρώσηται ἑαυτόν, 50 καὶ συλλογιεῖται πρὸς τὸν κεκτημένον αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ 1 λευειταις B*; λευιταις Bc A F Gött. 2 λευειτων B*; λευιτων Bc A F Gött. 3 αφεσι B*; αφεσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ εμμεσω B* A F*; εν μεσω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. One cannot distinguish the lectio inferior (B*) from its correction, but the solecism (B*) suggests Bc altered the μ to ν. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4 αγροι + οι F min Gött; > B A 868 mins Cyr. 5–6 αδυνατησει B* F x-527 mins BrMcL; αδυνατηση Bc? A Gött. 9 πλεονασμον B* A min; επι πλεονασμω Bc F BrMcL Gött. 11 πραθη + σοι Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 13 αφεσι B*; αφεσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 πρασει with the ε is the proper spelling (dat.f.s.) and is possibly from Bc, but could be from the first hand; in either case, it was clearly added after writing the word πρασι. ‖ τω μοσχω B*unique; τω μοχθω Bc A Fc (> τω F*) Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 21 των (1st occ.) + δε Bc F Gött; δ mins; > B* A mins BrMcL. 24 σοι + η F Gött; > B A V mins x Arm. 25 αυτω (2nd occ.) B* BrMcL Gött; αυτου Bc F. ‖ σου B*unique; αυτου Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 26 αυτου B rell (= MT ‫;)דדו‬ > A V mins Latcod 100 Syh Gött. 28 λυτρωσηται B* mins Gött; λυτρωται Bc G mins; λυτρωσητε A; λυτρωσεται F rell.

Text and Translation

169

cities of their possession must must always be redeemable for the Leueites. 33 And whoever redeems from the Leueites, then the sale of their houses of a city of their possession must go away in the release, because the houses in the cities of the Leueites are their possession among the sons of Israel. 34 And the fields divided by their cities must not be sold; for this is their enduring possession. 35 But if your brother is needy, then he will become weak beside you in his hands; you must help him as an immigrant and a resident foreigner, and your brother must live with you. 36 You must not take interest from him, nor on the basis of an amount, and you must fear your God; I am the Lord. And your brother must live with you. 37 You must not give him your money on the basis of interest; and you must not give to him your food as unjust gain. 38 I am the Lord your God one who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land Chanaan in order to be your God. 39 Now if your brother with you is humbled and is sold, he must not be subject to you with the slavery of a domestic slave. 40 He must be to you as a hired worker or a resident foreigner; he must work with you until the year of release. 41 And he and his children with him must leave at the release, and he must depart to his relatives; he must go away to his ancestral possession. 42 Because they are my domestic slaves whom I brought out of the land of Egypt, he must not be sold in a sale of a domestic slave. 43 You must not overwork him with the calf, and you must fear the Lord your God. 44 And as for a male and female servant, whomever you may have from the nations that are around you, from them you must acquire a male and female slave. 45 And from the sons of the resident foreigners who are living among you, from these and from their relatives who have been born in your land you must acquire; let them be to you as a possession. 46 And you must distribute them to your children after you, and they must be held in possession by you forever. Of your brothers, the sons of Israel, each one, with respect to his brother, must not overwork him with labor. 47 But if the hand of the immigrant or the resident foreigner who is with you finds, and your brother, being at a loss, is sold to the immigrant or to the resident foreigner with you, an immigrant from birth, 48 after he has been sold to him he must have redemption; one of your brothers must redeem him. 49 A brother of his father or a son of his father’s brother must redeem him, or some of the members of his household of his flesh, of his tribe, must redeem him, but if he has prospered with his hands, he may have redeemed himself. 50 And he must calculate with the one who purchased him from the year when he sold

170

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἔτους οὗ ἀπέδοτο ἑαυτὸν αὐτῷ ἕως τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ τῆς ἀφέσεως, καὶ ἔσται τὸ ἀργύριον τῆς πράσεως αὐτοῦ ὡς μισθίου· ἔτος ἐξ ἔτους ἔσται μετ’ αὐτοῦ. 51 ἐὰν δέ τινι πλεῖον τῶν ἐτῶν ᾖ, πρός ταῦτα ἀποδώσει τὰ λύτρα αὐτοῦ ἀπό τοῦ ἀργυρίου τῆς πράσεως αὐτοῦ· 52 ἐὰν δὲ ὀλίγον καταλιφθῇ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐτῶν εἰς τὸν ἐνιαυτὸν τῆς ἀφέσεως, καὶ συλλογιεῖται αὐτῷ κατὰ τὰ ἔτη αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀποδώσει τὰ λύτρα αὐτοῦ. (53) ὡς μισθωτὸς 53 ἐνιαυτὸς ἐξ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἔσται μετ’ αὐτοῦ· τατενεῖς αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ μόχθῳ ἐνώπιον σου. 54 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ λυτρῶται μετὰ ταῦτα, ἐξελεύσεται ἐν τῷ ἔτει τῆς ἀφέσεως αὐτὸς καὶ τὰ παιδία αὐτοῦ μετ’ αὐτοῦ. 55 ὅτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσίν· παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν οὕς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου. ⟦26⟧ 1 Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· (1) οὐ ποιήσετε ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς χειροποίητα οὐδὲ γλυπτά, οὐδὲ στήλην ἀναστήσεται ὑμῖν, οὐδὲ λίθον σκοπὸν θήσετε ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 2 τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων μου φοβηθήσεσθε· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. 3 Ἐὰν τοῖς προστάγμασίν μου πορεύησθε, καὶ τὰς ἐντολάς μου φυλάσσησθε καὶ ποιήσητε αὐτάς, 4 καὶ δώσω τὸν ὑετὸν ὑμῖν ἐν καιρῷ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἡ γῆ δώσει τὰ γενήματα αὐτῆς, καὶ τὰ ξύλα τῶν πεδίων ἀποδώσει τὸν καρπὸν αὐτῶν· 5 καὶ καταλήμψεται ὑμῖν ὁ ἄμητος τὸν τρύγητον, καὶ ὁ τρύγητος καταλήμψεται τὸν σπόρον, καὶ φάγεσθε τὸν ἄρτον ὑμῶν εἰς πλησμονήν, καὶ κατοικήσετε μετὰ ἀσφαλίας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν, καὶ πόλεμος οὐ διελεύσεται διὰ τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν· 6 καὶ δώσω εἰρήνην ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν, καὶ κοιμηθήσεσθε καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὑμᾶς ὁ ἐκφοβῶν, καὶ ἀπολῶ θηρία πονηρὰ ἐκ τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν. 7 καὶ διώξεσθε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ πεσοῦνται ἐναντίον ὑμῶν φόνῳ· 8 καὶ διώξονται ἐξ ὑμῶν πέντε ἑκατόν, καὶ ἑκατὸν ὑμῶν διώξονται μυριάδας, καὶ πεσοῦνται οἱ ἐχθροὶ ὑμῶν ἐναντίον ὑμῶν μαχαίρᾳ. 9 καὶ ἐπιβλέψω ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς, καὶ αὐξανῶ ὑμᾶς καὶ πληθυνῶ ὑμᾶς, καὶ στήσω τὴν διαθήκην μου μεθ’ ὑμῶν· 10 καὶ φάγεσθε παλαιὰ καὶ παλαιὰ παλαιῶν, καὶ παλαιὰ ἐκ προσώπου νέων ἐξοίσετε· 11 καὶ θήσω τὴν διαθήκην μου ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ οὐ βδελύξεται ἡ ψυχή μου ὑμᾶς· 12 καὶ ἐνπεριπατήσω ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ ἔσομαι ὑμῖν θεός, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθέ μου λαός. 13 ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ὄντων ὑμῶν δούλων, καὶ συνέτριψα τὸν δεσμὸν τοῦ ζυγοῦ ὑμῶν καὶ ἤγαγον ὑμᾶς μετὰ παρρησίας. 14 Ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ὑπακούσητέ μου, μηδὲ ποιήσητε 4 καταλιφθη B*; καταλειφθη Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6 ενιαυτος B* A Swete; ενιαυτον Bc F BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Logos’s electronic format of Swete (ενιαυτον) to match B* as printed in Swete’s hardcover (ενιαυτος). ‖ τατενεις B*; ου κατατενισης A; ου κατενεις mins; ου κατενιεις min; ου κατατενεις Bc rell Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 μετα B A b min; κατα F Gött. 8 εισιν B Eth Bo; > A F Gött. 10 αναστησεται B A min; αναστησετε Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 16 αμητος B* A V Phil Eth mins 4QLXX [801 in Gött] Göttc; αλοητος Bc F BrMcL Gött. 17 ασφαλιας B* BrMcL; ασφαλειας Bc A F Gött. 20 υμων (1st occ.) + και πολεμος ου διελευσεται δια της γης υμων Bmg A F M; > Btxt BrMcL Gött. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with a ↑ in the margin to the left of col. 2 and an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding ↓ and obelus in the margin below col. 2 where he supplied the omitted text. 24–25 διαθηκην B A mins x y LatHes Arm Sa; σκηνην F Gött. 25 ενπεριπατησω B BrMcL; εμπεριπατησω Bc A F Gött. 26 υμιν B* mins Arm Bo Syh (= MT ‫ ;)לכם‬υμων Bc A F BrMcL Gött. ‖ μου λαος B A min 2Cor 6:16 Gött; μοι εθνος 4QLXXLeva (μοι εθν[ος]) Göttc.

Text and Translation

171

himself to him until the year of release, and the money from the sale of himself must be as of hired worker. Year by year he must be with him. 51 But if someone has many years, for these he must pay his ransom costs from the money of his sale, 52 but if a few years remain until the year of release, then he must calculate for him according to his years, and he must pay his ransom costs. 53 Like a hired worker, a year out of a year will be with him. You must taten him with labor in your presence. 54 But if he has not been redeemed after these things, he and his young children with him must go out in the year of release. 55 For the sons of Israel are my domestic slaves; these are my servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt. ⟦26⟧ 1 I am the Lord your God. You must not make for you yourselves things made by hand, nor carved things, nor must you erect a stele for yourselves, nor must you place a stone as a marker in your land, to fall down and worship it. I am the Lord your God. 2 You must keep my sabbaths and be afraid of my sanctuaries. I am the Lord. 3 If you walk by my orders and keep my commandments and do them, 4 then I will give you the rain in its season, and the land will give its yields, and the trees of the fields will give out their fruit. 5 And for you the reaping will overtake the vintage, and the vintage will overtake the sowing, and you will eat your bread for satisfaction and reside in safety on your land, and war will not pass through your land. 6 And I will give peace in your land, and you will fall asleep, and there will not be anyone making you afraid, and I will destroy bad animals from your land.13 7 And you will pursue to your enemies, and they will fall before you by a massacre. 8 And five of you will pursue a hundred, and a hundred of you will pursue tens of thousands, and your enemies will fall before you by sword. 9 And I will look intently on you and increase you and multiply you, and I will establish my covenant with you. 10 And you will eat old things and old things of old things, then you will carry away old things from the presence of new things. 11 And I will set my covenant among you, and my soul will not abhor you. 12 And I will walk among you, and I will be to you God, and you will be my people. 13 I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, while you were living as slaves, and I crushed the bond of your yoke and led you with confidence. 14 But if you

13

Most other mss include the plus: “and war will not pass through your land.” See footnote in the Greek text after 26:6.

172

5

10

15

20

25

30

Text and Translation

τὰ προστάγματά μου ταῦτα, 15 ἀλλὰ ἀπειθήσητε αὐτοῖς, καὶ τοῖς κρίμασίν μου προσοχθίσῃ ἡ ψυχὴ ὑμῶν ὥστε ὑμᾶς μὴ ποιεῖν πάσας τὰς ἐντολάς μου, ὥστε διασκεδάσαι τὴν διαθήκην μου· 16 καὶ ἐγὼ ποιήσω οὕτως ὑμῖν, καὶ ἐπισυστήσω ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς τήν ἀπορίαν τήν τε ψώραν καὶ τὸν ἴκτερα καὶ σφακελίζοντας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ὑμῶν ἐκτήκουσαν· καὶ σπερεῖτε διὰ κενῆς τὰ σπέρματα ὑμῶν καὶ ἔδονται οἱ ὑπεναντίοι ὑμῶν. 17 καὶ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς, καὶ πεσεῖσθε ἐναντίον τῶν ἐχθρῶν, καὶ διώξονται ὑμᾶς οἱ μεισοῦντες ὑμᾶς, καὶ φεύξεσθε οὐθενὸς διώκοντος ὑμᾶς. 18 καὶ ἐὰν ἕως τούτου μὴ ὑπακούσητέ μου, καὶ προσθήσω τοῦ παιδεῦσαι ὑμᾶς ἑπτάκις ἐπὶ ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν· 19 καὶ συντρίψω τὴν ὕβριν τῆς ὑπερηφανίας ὑμῶν, καὶ θήσω τὸν οὐρανὸν ὑμῖν σιδηροῦν καὶ τὴν γῆν ὑμῶν ὡσεὶ χαλκῆν. 20 καὶ ἔσται εἰς κενὸν ἡ ἰσχὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ οὐ δώσει ἡ γῆ ὑμῶν τὸν σπόρον αὐτῆς, καὶ τὸ ξύλον τοῦ ἀγροῦ ὑμῶν οὐ δώσει τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ. 21 καὶ ἐὰν μετὰ ταῦτα πορεύησθε πλάγιοι καὶ μὴ βούλησθε ὑπακούειν μου, προσθήσω ὑμῖν πληγὰς ἑπτὰ κατὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν· 22 καὶ ἀποστέλλω ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς τὰ θήρια τὰ ἄγρια τῆς γῆς καὶ κατέδεται ὑμᾶς καὶ ἐξαναλώσει τὰ κτήνη ὑμῶν, καὶ ὀλιγοστοὺς ποιήσω ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἐρημωθήσονται αἱ ὁδοὶ ὑμῶν. 23 καὶ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐὰν μὴ παιδευθῆτε ἀλλὰ πορεύησθε πρὸς μὲ πλάγιοι, 24 πορεύσομαι κἀγὼ μεθ’ ὑμῶν θυμῷ πλαγίῳ, καὶ πατάξω ὑμᾶς κἀγὼ ἑπτάκις ἀντὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν. 25 καὶ ἐπάξω ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς μάχαιραν ἐκδικοῦσαν δίκην διαθήκης, καὶ καταφεύξεσθε εἰς τὰς πόλεις ὑμῶν· καὶ ἐξαποστελῶ θάνατον εἰς ὑμᾶς, καὶ παραδοθήσεσθε εἰς χεῖρας ἐχθρῶν. 26 ἐν τῷ θλείψαι ὑμᾶς σῖτον διὰ ἄρτων, καὶ πέψουσιν δέκα γυναῖκες τοὺς ἄρτους ὑμῶν ἐν κλειβάνῳ ἑνί, καὶ ἀποδώσουσιν τοὺς ἄρτους ὑμῶν ἐν σταθμῷ· καὶ φάγεσθε καὶ οὐ μὴ ἐμπλησθῆτε. 27 Ἐὰν δὲ ἐπὶ τούτοις μὴ ὑπακούσητέ μου καὶ πορεύησθε πρὸς μὲ πλάγιοι, 28 καὶ αὐτὸς πορεύσομαι μεθ’ ὑμῶν ἐν θυμῷ πλαγίῳ, καὶ παιδεύσω ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ ἑπτάκις κατὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν· 29 καὶ φάγεσθε τὰς σάρκας τῶν υἱῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ τὰς σάρκας τῶν θυγατέρων ὑμῶν φάγεσθε· 30 καὶ ἐρημώσω τὰς στήλας ὑμῶν, καὶ ἐξολέθρευ τὰ ξύλινα χειροποίητα ὑμῶν, καὶ θήσω τὰ κῶλα ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τὰ κῶλα τῶν εἰδώλων ὑμῶν, καὶ προσοχθιεῖ ἡ ψυχή μου ὑμῖν· 31 καὶ θήσω τὰς πόλεις ὑμῶν ἐρήμους, καὶ ἐξερημώσω τὰ ἅγια ὑμῶν, καὶ οὐ μὴ ὀσφρανθῶ τῆς ὀσμῆς τῶν θυσιῶν ὑμῶν· 32 καὶ ἐξερημώσω ἐγὼ τὴν γῆν ὑμῶν, καὶ θαυμάσονται ἐπ’ αὐτῇ οἱ ἐχθροὶ ὑμῶν οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν αὐτῇ· 33 καὶ διασπερῶ ὑμᾶς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, καὶ ἐξαναλώσει ὑμᾶς ἐπιπορευομένη ἡ μάχαιρα· καὶ ἔσται ἡ γῆ ὑμῶν ἔρημος, καὶ αἱ πόλεις ὑμῶν

4 ικτερα B; ικτερον A F G M mins Gött. ‖ και (2nd occ.) B* A b d t mins Latcod 91 Eth Gött; > Bc F Chr min rell (= MT). 7 εχθρων + υμων Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. ‖ μεισουντες B* Α; μισουντες Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 ποιησω B mins Latcod 100 Arm; ποιησει F Gött. 20 θλειψαι B*; θλιψαι Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ σιτον δια B mins; σιτοδια A*; σιτοδειαν Ac F Fb mins Eth; σιτοδεια rell Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 21 κλειβανω B*; κλιβανω Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 22 και (3rd occ.) B A V O-58 x min Latcod 100 Syh; αλλα F Gött. 26 εξολεθρευ B*; εξολοθρευσω Bc; εξολεθρευσω Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*.

Text and Translation

173

do not obey me, nor do you do these orders of mine, 15 but disobey them, and your soul becomes provoked by my judgments so that you do not perform all my commandments so that you scatter abroad my covenant, 16 then I will do thus against you: And I will bring anxiety upon you, both scab and jaundice, and your eyes being infected and your life wasting away. And you will sow your seed in vain, and those hostile to you will eat it. 17 And I will set my face against you, and you will fall down before your enemies, and those who hate you will pursue you, and you will flee even though no one is pursuing you. 18 And if until this, you do not obey me, then I will add to discipline you seven times for your sins. 19 And I will crush the pride of your arrogance, and I will set your sky as made of iron and your land like made of copper. 20 And your strength will be in vain, and your land will not give its sowing, and the tree of your field will not give its fruit. 21 And if after these things you walk crooked and are not willing to obey me, I will add to you seven strikes according to your sins. 22 And I will send against you the wild animals of the land, and they will devour you and consume your livestock, and I will make you few in number, and your roads will be desolate. 23 And if by these things you are not disciplined but walk crooked with me, 24 then I also will walk with you in crooked anger, and I, even I, will strike you seven times because of your sins. 25 And I will bring against you a sword to avenge the penalty of the covenant, and you will flee for refuge to your cities. And I will send out death among you, and you will be handed over into enemy hands. 26 When you are afflicted as wheat through bread, then ten women will bake your bread in one oven, and they will deliver your bread by weight, and you will eat and never be satisfied. 27 But if by these things you do not obey me and you walk crooked with me, 28 then I myself will walk with you in crooked anger, and I am the one who will discipline you seven times according to your sins. 29 And you will eat the flesh of your sons, and you will eat the flesh of your daughters. 30 And I will desolate your steles and completely destroy your wooden things made by hand, and I will put your corpses on the corpses of your idols, and my soul will be provoked by you. 31 And I will make your cities desolate, will make your sanctuaries very desolate, and I will no longer smell the smell of your sacrifices. 32 And I am the one who will make your land very desolate, and your enemies who are inhabiting it will be amazed at it. 33 And I will scatter you into the nations, and the coming sword will consume you, and your

174

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἔσονται ἔρημοι. 34 τότε εὐδοκήσει ἡ γῆ τὰ σάββατα αὐτῆς καὶ πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς ἐρημώσεως αὐτῆς, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθε ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ὑμῶν· τότε σαββατιεῖ ἡ γῆ, καὶ εὐδοκήσει ἡ γῆ τὰ σάββατα αὐτῆς. 35 πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς ἐρημώσεως αὐτῆς, σαββατιεῖ ἃ οὐκ ἐσαββάτισεν ἐν τοῖς σαββάτοις ὑμῶν, ἡνίκα κατῳκεῖτε αὐτήν. 36 καὶ τοῖς καταλιφθεῖσιν ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐπάξω δουλίαν εἰς τὴν καρδίαν αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν ἐχθρῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ διώξεται αὐτοὺς φωνὴ φύλλου φερομένου, καὶ φεύξονται ὡς φεύγοντες ἀπὸ πολέμου, καὶ πεσοῦνται οὐθενὸς διώκοντος· 37 καὶ ὑπερόψεται ὁ ἀδελφὸς τὸν ἀδελφὸν ὡσεὶ ἐν πολέμῳ οὐθενὸς κατατρέχοντος, καὶ οὐ δυνήσεται ἀντιστῆναι τοῖς ἐχθροῖς ὑμῶν. 38 καὶ ἀπολεῖσθε ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, καὶ κατέδεται ὑμᾶς ἡ γῆ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ὑμῶν· 39 καὶ οἱ καταλιφθέντες ἀφ’ ὑμῶν καταφθαρήσονται διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν· ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν ἐχθρῶν αὐτῶν τακήσονται. 40 καὶ ἐξαγορεύσουσιν τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας τῶν πατέρων αὐτῶν, ὅτι παρέβησαν καὶ ὑπερεῖδόν με, καὶ ὅτι ἐπορεύθησαν ἐναντίον μου πλάγιοι, 41 καὶ ἐγὼ ἐπορεύθην μετ’ αὐτῶν ἐν θυμῷ πλαγίῳ· καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν ἐχθρῶν αὐτῶν· τότε ἐντραπήσεται ἡ καρδία αὐτῶν ἡ ἀπερίτμητος, καὶ τότε εὐδοκήσουσιν τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 42 καὶ μνησθήσομαι τῆς διαθήκης Ἰακώβ, καὶ τῆς διαθήκης Ἰσαὰκ καὶ τῆς διαθήκης Ἀβραὰμ μνησθήσομαι· καὶ τῆς γῆς μνησθήσομαι. 43 καὶ ἡ γῆ ἐνκαταλιφθήσεται ὑπ’ αὐτῶν· τότε προσδέξεται ἡ γῆ τὰ σάββατα αὐτῆς ἐν τῷ ἐρημωθῆναι αὐτὴν δι’ αὐτούς, καὶ αὐτοὶ προσδέξονται τὰς αὐτῶν ἀνομίας ἀνθ’ ὧν τὰ κρίματά μου ὑπερεῖδον καὶ τοῖς προστάγμασίν μου προσώχθισαν τῇ ψυχῇ αὐτῶν. 44 καὶ οὐδ’ ὣς ὄντων αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν ἐχθρῶν αὐτῶν οὐκ ὑπερεῖδον αὐτούς, οὐδὲ προσώχθισα αὐτοῖς ὥστε ἐξαναλῶσαι αὐτούς, τοῦ διασκεδάσαι τὴν διαθήκην μου τὴν πρὸς αὐτούς· ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς αὐτῶν. 45 καὶ μνησθήσομαι αὐτῶν τῆς διαθήκης τῆς προτέρας ὅτε ἐξήγαγον αὐτοὺς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου ἐξ οἴκου δουλίας ἔναντι τῶν ἐθνῶν, τοῦ εἶναι αὐτῶν θεός· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. 46 Ταῦτα τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου, καὶ ὁ νόμος ὃν ἔδωκεν Κύριος ἀνὰ μέσον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ. ⟦27⟧ 1 Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων 2 Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς αὐτοῖς Ὃς ἂν εὔξηται εὐχὴν ὥστε τιμὴν τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ, 3 ἔσται

1 και B A mins; > F Gött. 3 η γη B A Eth; > F Gött. 5 καταλιφθεισιν B*; καταλειφθισιν A; καταλειφθεισιν Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ δουλιαν B* min; δουλειαν Bc x mins; διλιαν A F; δειλιαν Gött. 8 δυνησεται B*unique; δυνησεσθαι Bc A; δυνησεσθε F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 10 καταλιφθεντες B*; καταλειφθεντες Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ υμων (2nd occ.) B A min BrMcL; αυτων V N O-58 b n-767 x-527 mins Arm Sa Syh Gött. 17 η γη ενκαταλιφθησεται B*; η γη εγκαταλειφθησεται Bc F V mins Arm Syh (= MT‫ ;)והארץ תעזב‬η γη ενκαταλειφθησεται Swete BrMcL; εγκαταλειφθησεται η γη A Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ υπ αυτων B* Gött; απ αυτων Bc F M’ V mins Eth Arm Syh (= MT ‫)מהם‬. 20 ουκ B* min; ουχ Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 24 δουλιας B min BrMcL; δουλειας Bc A F Gött. 25 μου (1st occ.) B A x min; > F BrMcL Gött. ‖ μου (2nd occ.) B* A x-509 min; > Bc F BrMcL Gött. 26 σεινα B* V G BrMcL; σινα Bc A F Gött. 28 αυτοις B A V G mins Cyr; προς αυτους F Gött. ‖ αυτοις + ανθρωπος F Gött; > B A V mins Latcod 100 Arm.

Text and Translation

175

land will be desolate, and your cities will be desolate. 34 Then the land will enjoy its sabbaths even for all the days of its desolation, and you will be in the land of your enemies. Then the land will keep sabbath, and the land will enjoy its sabbaths. 35 All the days of its desolation, it will keep sabbath which it did not keep sabbath on your sabbaths when you were inhabiting it. 36 And to those of you who are left, I will send slavery into their heart in the land of their enemies, and a sound of a shaken leaf will pursue them, and they will flee as fleeing from war, and they will fall even though no one is pursuing. 37 And brother will despise brother as in a war, though no one is running down, and he will not be able to resist your enemies. 38 And you will be destroyed among the nations, and the land of your enemies will consume you. 39 And those of you who are left will be corrupted because of your sins. In the land of their enemies they will melt. 40 And they will confess their sins and the sins of their fathers, because they deviated from and despised me and because they walked crooked before me, 41 and I walked with them in crooked anger, and I will destroy them in the land of their enemies. Then their uncircumcised heart will feel shame, and then they will be pleased with their sins. 42 And I will remember the covenant of Iakob, and I will remember the covenant of Isaak and the covenant of Abraam, and I will remember the land. 43 And the land will be abandoned by them. Then the land will receive its sabbaths while it was deserted by them, and they themselves will receive their lawlessness because of which they despised my judgments and were provoked in their soul by my orders. 44 And not even as they are living in the land of their enemies did I ever despise them, nor was I provoked by them to destroy them completely, to scatter abroad my covenant with them, because I am the Lord their God, 45 and I will remember their former covenant when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, out of a house of slavery in the presence of the nations, to be their God. I am the Lord.” 46 “These are my judgments and my orders,” and the law that the Lord gave between himself and between the sons of Israel on the mountain Seina by the hand of Mōysēs. ⟦27⟧ 1 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them: Whoever vows a vow to the Lord, for the value of

176

5

10

15

20

25

Text and Translation

ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ ἄρσενος ἀπὸ εἰκοσαετοῦς ἕως ἑξηκονταετοῦς, ἔσται αὐτοῦ ἡ τιμὴ πεντήκοντα δίδραχμα ἀργυρίου τῷ σταθμῷ τῷ ἁγίῳ· 4 τῆς δὲ θηλίας ἔσται ἡ συντίμησις τριάκοντα δίδραχμα. 5 ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ πενταετοῦς ἕως εἴκοσι ἐτῶν, ἔσται ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ ἄρσενος εἴκοσι δίδραχμα, τῆς δὲ θηλίας δέκατέσσερα δίδραχμα. 6 ἀπὸ δὲ μηνιαίου ἕως πενταετοῦς ἔσται ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ ἄρσενος πέντε δίδραχμα ἀργυρίου, τῆς δὲ θηλίας τρία δίδραχμα. 7 ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ ἑξηκονταετῶν καὶ ἐπάνω, ἐὰν μὲν ἄρσεν ᾖ, ἔσται ἡ τιμὴ πέντε καὶ δὲ καὶ δέκα δίδραχμα ἀργυρίου, ἐὰν δὲ θήλια, δέκα δίδραχμα. 8 ἐὰν δὲ ταπεινὸς ᾖ τιμῇ, στήσεται ἐναντίον τοῦ ἱερέως, καὶ τιμήσεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· καθάπερ ἰσχύει ἡ χεὶρ τοῦ εὐξαμένου, τιμήσεται αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς. 9 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν τῶν προσφερομένων ἀπ’ αὐτῶν δῶρον τῷ κυρίῳ, ὃς ἂν δὴ ἀπὸ τούτων τῷ κυρίῳ, ἔσται ἅγιον. 10 οὐκ ἀλλάξει αὐτὸ καλὸν πονηρῷ οὐδὲ πονηρὸν καλῷ· ἐὰν δὲ ἀλλάσσων ἀλλάξῃ αὐτὸ κτῆνος κτήνει, ἔσται αὐτὸ καὶ τὸ ἄλλαγμα ἅγια. 11 ἐὰν δὲ πᾶν κτῆνος ἀκάθαρτον, ἀφ’ ὧν οὐ προσφέρεται ἀπ’ αὐτῶν δῶρον τῷ κυρίῳ, στήσει τὸ κτῆνος ἔναντι τοῦ ἱερέως· 12 καὶ τιμήσεται αὐτὸ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἀνὰ μέσον καλοῦ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον πονηροῦ· καὶ καθότι ἂν τιμηθήσεται ὁ ἱερεύς, οὕτως στήσεται. 13 ἐὰν δὲ λυτρούμενος λυτρώσηται αὐτόν, προσθήσει τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον πρὸς τὴν τιμὴν αὐτοῦ. 14 Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν ἁγιάσῃ τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ ἁγίαν τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ τιμήσεται αὐτὴν ὁ ιερεὺς ἀνὰ μέσον καλῆς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον πονηρᾶς· ὡς ἂν τιμήσεται αὐτὴν ὁ ἱερεύς, οὕτως σταθήσεται. 15 ἐὰν δὲ ὁ ἁγιάσας αὐτὴν λυτρῶται τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ, προσθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτὸ τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον τοῦ ἀργυρίου τῆς τιμῆς, καὶ ἔσται αὐτῷ. 16 Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀγροῦ τῆς κατασχέσεως αὐτοῦ ἁγιάσῃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ ἔσται ἡ τιμὴ κατὰ τὸν σπόρον αὐτοῦ, κόρου κριθῶν πεντήκοντα δίδραχμα ἀργυρίου. 17 ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ τῆς ἀφέσεως ἁγιάσῃ τὸν ἀγρὸν αὐτοῦ, κατὰ τὴν τιμὴν αὐτοῦ στήσεται. 18 ἐὰν δὲ ἔσχατον μετὰ τὴν ἄφεσιν ἁγιάσῃ τὸν ἀγρὸν αὐτοῦ, προσλογιεῖται αὐτῷ ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ ἀργύριον ἐπὶ τὰ ἔτη τὰ ἐπίλοιπα ἕως εἰς τὸν ἐνιαυτὸν τῆς ἀφέσεως, καὶ ἀνθυφαιρεθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς συντιμήσεως αὐτοῦ. 19 ἐὰν δὲ λυτρῶται τὸν ἀγρὸν ὁ ἀγοράσας αὐτόν, προσθήσει τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον τοῦ ἀργυρίου πρὸς τὴν τιμὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσται αὐτῷ. 20 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ λυτρῶται τὸν ἀγρόν, ἀνθρώπῳ ἑτέρῳ, οὐκέτι μὴ λυτρώσηται αὐτόν· 21 ἀλλ’ ἔσται ὁ ἀγρὸς ἐξεληλυθυίας τῆς ἀφέσεως

2 θηλιας B* A F*; θηλειας Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 4 θηλιας B* A F*; θηλειας Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ δεκατεσσερα B*unique; δεκα τεσσερα Swete; δεκα Bc A F BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete by removing the word division. 5 θηλιας B* F*; θηλειας Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 6–7 πεντε και δε και δεκα B*; πέντε καὶ δέκα OG-B Swete BrMcL; πεντεκαίδεκα Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 7 θηλια B* A; θηλεια Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 8 η (1st occ.) + τη Bc A F Gött; > B* b mins BrMcL. 10 δη B A; δω F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 15 τιμηθησεται B min; τιμησεται A F M’ V mins; τιμησηται Gött. ‖ αυτον B* min; αυτο Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 26 αγορασας B*unique; αγιασας Bc A F BrMcL Gött. 27 αγρον + και αποδωται τον αγρον Bmg A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > Btxt Latcod 100. Here I emend Swete toward Btxt. A subsequent scribe (Bmg) marked this omission with an obelus in the text, and marked a corresponding obelus in the margin to the right of col. 1 where he supplied the omitted text.

Text and Translation

177

his life, 3 the value of the male will be from twenty to sixty years old, his value will be fifty silver didrachmas by the holy place standard. 4 But for the female the valuation will be thirty didrachmas. 5 But if one is from five to twenty years old, the value of the male will be twenty didrachmas, but of the female, fourteen didrachmas. 6 And from one month to five years old, the value of the male will be five sliver didrachmas, but of the female, three didrachmas. 7 But if from sixty years and above, if on the one hand, one is a male, the value will be five and, rather, also ten silver didrachmas, but if on the other hand, a female, ten didrachmas. 8 Now if he is humble with regard to a value, he must stand before the priest, and the priest must evaluate him; just as the hand of the one making the vow is strong, the priest must evaluate him. 9 But if a gift to the Lord is from the animals of those that are being brought, whoever indeed from these belongs to the Lord, it must be holy. 10 He must not exchange it, whether good for bad or bad for good. But if by exchanging he exchanges it, an animal for an animal, both it and the one exchanged must be holy. 11 But if a gift to the Lord is any unclean animal from those that are not brought, he must stand the animal before the priest. 12 And the priest must evaluate it between good and between bad; as it must be evaluated, the priest in this way must stand. 13 But if by redeeming he redeems him, he must add one-fifth to its value. 14 And as for a person whoever consecrates his house as holy to the Lord, and the priest must evaluate it, between good and between bad; as the priest evaluates it, so it must be established. 15 But if the one who consecrates it redeems his house, he must add to it one-fifth of the money of its value, and it will be his. 16 But if a person consecrates to the Lord some of the field of his possession, then its value must be according to its sowing: fifty silver didrachmas for a kor of barley. 17 But if he consecrates his field from the year of release, according to its value it must stand, 18 but if he consecrates his field later, after the release, the priest must calculate the money for it according to the years that are still left until the year of release, and it must be deducted from its valuation. 19 Now if the one who purchases it redeems the field, then he must add one-fifth of the money to its value, and it will be his. 20 But if he does not redeem the field,14 it belongs to another person, he must no longer redeem it. 21 But when the release

14

Most other mss include the plus: “and should sell the field.” See footnote in the Greek text at 27:20.

178

5

10

15

20

Text and Translation

ἅγιος τῷ κυρίῳ ὥσπερ ἡ γῆ ἡ ἀφωρισμένη· τῷ ἱερεῖ ἔσται κατάσχεσεως. 22 ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀγροῦ οὗ κέκτηται, ὃς οὐκ ἔστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀγροῦ τῆς κατασχέσεως αὐτοῦ, ἁγιάσῃ τῷ κυρίῳ, 23 λογιεῖται πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸ τέλος τῆς τιμῆς ἐκ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ τῆς ἀφέσεως, καὶ ἀποδώσει τὴν τιμὴν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἅγιον τῷ κυρίῳ· 24 καὶ ἐν τῷ ἐνιαυτῷ τῆς ἀφέσεως ἀποδοθήσεται ὁ ἀγρὸς τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ παρ’ οὗ κέκτηται αὐτόν, οὗ ἦν ἡ κατάσχεσις τῆς γῆς. 25 καὶ πᾶσα τιμὴ ἔσται σταθμίοις ἁγίοις· εἴκοσι ὀβολοὶ ἔσται τὸ δίδραχμον. 26 Καὶ πᾶν πρωτότοκον ὃ ἂν γένηται ἐν τοῖς κτήνεσίν σου ἔσται τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ οὐ καθαγιάσει οὐθεὶς αὐτό, ἐάν τε μόσχον ἐάν τε πρόβατον· τῷ κυρίῳ ἐστίν. 27 ἐὰν δὲ τῶν τετραπόδων τῶν ἀκαθάρτων, ἀλλάξει κατὰ τὴν τιμὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ προσθήσει τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον πρὸς αὐτό, καὶ ἔσται αὐτῷ· ἐὰν δὲ μὴ λυτρῶται, πραθήσεται κατὰ τὸ τίμημα αὐτοῦ. 28 Πᾶν δὲ ἀνάθεμα ὃ ἐὰν ἀναθῇ ἄνθρωπος τῷ κυρίῳ ἀπὸ πάντων ὅσα αὐτῷ ἐστιν, ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου ἕως κτήνους, καὶ ἀπὸ ἀγροῦ κατασχέσεως αὐτοῦ, οὐκ ἀποδώσεται οὐδὲ λυτρώσεται· πᾶν ἀνάθεμα ἅγιον ἁγίων ἔσται τῷ κυρίῳ. 29 καὶ πᾶν ὃ ἐὰν ἀνατεθῇ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων λυτρωθήσεται, ἀλλὰ θανάτῳ θαναθωθήσεται. 30 Πᾶσα δεκάτη τῆς γῆς, ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματος τῆς γῆς καὶ τοῦ καρποῦ τοῦ ξυλίνου, τῷ κυρίῳ ἐστίν· ἅγιον τῷ κυρίῳ. 31 ἐὰν δὲ λυτρῶται λύτρῳ ἄνθρωπος τὴν δεκάτην αὐτοῦ, τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον προσθήσει πρὸς αὐτό, καὶ ἔσται αὐτῷ. 32 καὶ πᾶσα δεκάτη βοῶν καὶ προβάτων, καὶ πᾶν ὃ ἐὰν ἔλθῃ ἐν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ὑπὸ τὴν ῥάβδον, τὸ δέκατον ἔσται ἅγιον τῷ κυρίῳ. 33 οὐκ ἀλλάξεις καλὸν πονηρῷ· ἐὰν δὲ ἀλλάσσων ἀλλάξῃς αὐτό, καὶ τὸ ἄλλαγμα αὐτοῦ ἔσται ἅγιον· οὐ λυτρωθήσεται. 34 Αὗταί εἰσιν αἱ ἐντολαὶ ἃς ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινά. Λευειτικον

1 κατασχεσεως B*unique; κατασχεσις Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 2 αγιαση Against the interp. of Swete and Gött, it appears that B* (not Bc) reads αγιαση A Gött, with no sign of erasure or a different hand (with Miika Tucker); cf. αγιασει F mins Swete. 9 αλλαξει B rell; (αλαξεται) λυτρωσεται/.σηται mins; αλλαξη mins Gött. 12 εαν mins rell B; αν mins Gött. 15 ανθρωπων + ου Bc OG-B* Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique. Here I emend Swete toward B*. ‖ θαναθωθησεται B*; θανατωθησεται Bc Swete BrMcL Gött. Here I emend Swete toward B*. 17 λυτρωται λυτρω B A x mins; λυτρουμενος λυτρωται F Gött. 22 εισιν B A F V d f n t x y mins Eth Arm Co; > M mins Gött. 23 Σεινα B* min BrMcL; Σινα Bc A F Gött. 24 λευειτικον B* A; λευιτικον Bc F Mʹ mins; λευιτηκον V.

Text and Translation

179

has gone away, the field will be holy to the Lord like the land that has been set apart; it will be of a possession for the priest. 22 But if one consecrates to the Lord some of the field that he has acquired that is not from the field of his possession, 23 the priest must consider it as the totality of the value from the year of release, and he must pay the value on that day, something holy to the Lord. 24 And in the year of release the field must be given back to the person from whom he acquired it, whose land possession it had been. 25 And every value must be with holy weights: twenty obols must be a didrachma. 26 And every firstborn that may be born among your animals will belong to the Lord, and no one must dedicate it; whether a calf or a sheep, it belongs to the Lord. 27 But if it is from the unclean quadrupeds, he must exchange it according to its value and add one-fifth to it, and it will be his. But if he does not redeem it, it must be sold according to its valuation.” 28 “But any devoted thing that a person may devote to the Lord from everything he has, from a person to an animal and from his field of possession, it must not be sold or redeemed; every devoted thing must be holy of holies to the Lord. 29 And anything that has been devoted from people must be redeemed, but by death it must be put to death. 30 Every tenth of the land, from the ground’s seed and from the tree’s fruit is the Lord’s; it is holy to the Lord. 31 But if a person should redeem by a ransom his tenth, he must add one-fifth to it, and it will be his. 32 And every tenth of cows and of sheep, and everything that may come into the number under the staff, the tenth must be holy to the Lord. 33 You must not exchange good for bad. But if by exchanging you exchange it, then the one exchanged for it will be holy; it must not be redeemed.” 34 These are the commandments that the Lord commanded to Mōysēs for the sons of Israel on the mountain Seina. Leueitikon

Commentary 1:1–9 Introduction, Superscription and Whole Burnt Offering of a Bull The original title, Leueitikon, appears in the header in col. 2, recto p. 99, above the main text (λευειτικον B* A G*; λευιτικον Bc F M’ mins Gött). The first words of the text assume readerly knowledge of the closing saga of ExodosB (col. 1, same pg.) by embedding the subject of its introductory verb, “Then he summoned Mōysēs” (καὶ ἀνεκάλεσεν Μωυσῆν, 1:1a). The aorist “he summoned” (ἀνεκάλεσεν) has a constative force (so “appela” BA 85; “summoned” NETS 85), presenting the action as a completed whole, whereas the next aorist ἐλάλησεν may have an ingressive force, “the Lord began to speak to him” (1:1b), with the implication that Leu 1:1 serves as the superscription for all of the divine speeches of the book (anarthrous nom. κυρίος for ‫ יהוה‬occurs 957× in PentLXX, articular only 22×: Muraoka 2016: 17–18). This is suggested because “he summoned Mōysēs” is unparalleled in Leueitikon (and the OT) and because only again in Num 1:1 does the Lord speak “from/in the tent of testimony.” The Lord speaks by means of, or more likely, out of the tent of testimony (ἐκ of source), which initiates the gradual reduction of the separation between the Lord and Mōysēs generated by the glory of the Lord in the tent of testimony (Exod 40:35; see “Discrete Composition”). The translation “tent of testimony” (ἡ σκηνή τοῦ μαρτυρίου) is a stereotyped rendering (for Heb. ‫“ אהל מועד‬Tent of Meeting”), found predominantly in ExodusLXX through NumbersLXX, and, more than the Heb. (‫)אהל מועד‬, recalls the “chest [ark] of testimony” (ἡ κιβωτός τοῦ μαρτυρίου, Exod 25:10, 16, 22; 26:33, 34; 30:6; 40:3, 21; Leu 16:2; Num 4:5) and “two tablets of testimony” (αἱ δύο πλάκες τοῦ μαρτυρίου, Exod 31:18; 32:15). Therefore, the tent from which the Lord speaks is redefined by the LXX as a witness to the covenant. The redundant quotative frames in 1:1, using both “he spoke” (ἐλάλησεν) and “saying” (λέγων), slows down the discourse to mark the Lord’s opening speech in 1:2c–3:17 to Mōysēs that he must reiterate to the Israelites (1:2a–b; see Runge 2010: 387). This superscription (1:2a–b) collates nine LeuB paragraphs into a discursive unit: whole burnt offering of a bull (1:1–9); whole burnt offering from the flock (1:10–13); offering from the birds (1:14–17); sacrifice of fine flour (2:1– 3); baked sacrifice (2:4); sacrifice from a pan (2:5–6); sacrifice from a fireplace (2:7–13); sacrifice of first fruits and deliverance sacrifice from the cattle (2:14– 3:5); and deliverance sacrifice from the sheep (3:6–17). We might have expected the LeuB scribe to present 1:1 or 1:1–2b as an independent paragraph, as he does for the pivotal superscription at 16:1 and for the book’s main subscriptions (7:27–28; 26:46; 27:34; see Intro. “Appearance and Divisions”). Instead, by cir-

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004409835_004

commentary

181

cumscribing 1:1–9 as a paragraph, the initial superscription (1:2a–b) introduces the law of the whole burnt offering of the bull (1:2c–9), and only later by implication, 1:10–3:17. This superscription does not explicitly demand that Mōysēs identify the Lord as the original speaker (cf. prophetic speech: “Thus says the Lord”), and therefore could have sounded to the Israelites as the ipsissima verba Mōysēs (cf. explicit in Deut 1:5; 11:32). The non-priestly audience of 1:2a–b (“to the sons of Israel,” repeated in 4:1–2b; 5:14; 6:1) constrains readers to interpret the forthcoming instructions as the responsibility of the people, even though every unit also includes directives for the priests (cf. the more accurate superscriptions of 15:1–2b [probably]; 17:1–2b; 22:17–18b). In Leu 1:2c the dependent clause “When one of you brings” (Ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐὰν προσαγάγῃ, 1:2c) is in a preverbal marked position to give attention to non-priests as agents in 1:2c–4 in distinction from the Aarōnic agents in 1:5– 9 (for VSO as the unmarked order, I follow: Levinsohn 2000: 37–40; Long 2015: xxxix–xliii; in 1:2c Ἄνθρωπος functions as an indefinite substantive, ‘someone’: Muraoka 2016: 61). Modern translators normally understand 1:2c–d to emphasize that gifts of livestock (δῶρα … ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν) to the Lord must be of the acceptable kinds: “When one of you brings gifts of livestock to the Lord, you must bring your gifts from the cattle and from the sheep” (so NETS 85; BA 86). This translation is somewhat unlikely, however, since it separates the hypernym “livestock” (κτῆνος, domestic animals: GELS 416) from its appositional hyponyms “cattle” (βοῦς) and “sheep” (πρόβατον). Interpreting LeuB this way is even more unlikely because it contains an additional καὶ that creates an appositional correlative conjunction: “When one of you brings gifts to the Lord, you must bring your gifts from the livestock, both from the cattle and from the sheep” (ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν βοῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων: + καὶ B*; > καὶ Bc A F Gött). Thus, LeuB 1:2c–d teaches that gifts should be animal sacrifices, in particular, cattle and sheep (1:1–13 and ch. 2 modify this proposition). In 1:3 the predicate nominative shifts the emphasis from agent (1:2c) to “whole burnt offering” (Ἐὰν ὁλοκαύτωμα τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν βοῶν, 1:3), which must be an “unblemished male” (ἄρσεν ἄμωμον in a marked position vs. unmarked in 1:4–8; protasis in v. 3 w/o finite verb: Muraoka 2016: 771; the n. √ὁλοκαύτωμα was presumably coined by the PentLXX translators as a technical term for √‫‘[ עלה‬burnt offering,’ lit. ‘ascending offering’]: Lee 1983: 52; probably the uniqueness of the ‫ עלה‬required its own formation, but the ὁλοκαύτ- word family was still useful since ὁλόκαυτον was the well-known Greek word for a burnt offering: Voitila 2015: 41; Daniel 1966: 249–254; Vahrenhorst 2006: 129). This gift of a whole burnt offering from the cattle, detailed in 1:2c–9, is acceptable for the devotee before the Lord on the conditions that (1) he brings an umblemished or “impeccable” (ἄμωμος GELS 34) bull (2) to the door of the tent of testimony

182

commentary

(1:3). LeuB reads “before [ἐναντίον] the Lord,” a separate, but morphologically related preposition to the other primary LXX witnesses (ἔναντι A F Gött), but with no semantic difference. The plus in LeuB, “it will be acceptable for him [αὐτῷ] before the Lord,” may be a harmonization to 1:4 (δεκτὸν αὐτῷ “acceptable for him”) or a formal rendering of the Heb. object suffix (‫ > ;לרצנו‬αὐτῷ A F Gött). According to LeuB, that which is acceptable here is not the sacrificial gift (τὸ δῶρον … αὐτό; so BA 86; BG 237; SD 99; NETS 85), but the sacrifice (αὐτῷ). The LXX lexical stock includes other terms for entrance (εἴσοδος) and gateway (πύλη, πρόπυλον), so the translator’s selection of “door” (θύρα for the generic ‫“ פתח‬opening”) here and throughout Leueitikon is anachronistic for the tent of testimony (cf. “wooden doors” ταῖς θύραις ξύλα of Solomon’s temple, 1 Kgdms 6:32; “its [the second temple’s] doors” τὰς θύρας αὐτου barred attackers, Neh 6:10). The devotee then must place his hand on the head of the offering (1:4). “He must place” (ἐπιθήσει) is the fourth of four future tense verbs with imperatival force directed toward the devotee (προσοίσετε [2mp], προσάξει, προσοίσει, ἐπιθ.), which I translate “must” because “shall” (NETS) is antiquated and “will” does not convey its directive force (the ‘imperatival’ future is labeled ‘injunctive’ by Muraoka 2016: 285–286). The shift in the LXX from “whole burnt offering” ὁλοκαύτωμα (1:3) to “offering” κάρπωμα (1:4, “cultic offering of any kind” GELS 364; originally meaning “offering of yield [from καρπός]” LEH § 4662) is confusing since both terms refer to the same bull in the same ritual (and render the same Heb. ‫)עלה‬. Using the accusative “acceptable” (δεκτὸν) with the complementary (or telic) “to propitiate” (ἐξιλάσασθαι), instead of a genitive of simple apposition (to “[head] of the sacrifice” [τὴν κεφαλὴν] τοῦ καρπώματος), suggests that faithful ritual observance (1:3–4), not merely the sacrifice itself, is the means by which the devotee can appease the Lord’s anger. The verb ἐξιλάσκομαι, here in the middle voice, means “to propitiate, appease,” which is different than the meaning of its Hebrew source ‫ כפר‬in the D-stem “to purge, expiate” in Leviticus (Büchner 2010a: 237–260; LXX meaning follows the “archetypal” occurrence of ‫ כפר‬in Gen 32:21). The interchange (A, 1, B, 2) of glosses that interrupt the ritual stresses the affect on the divine-devotee relationship: “[A] he must bring it, [1] acceptable for him before the Lord. And [B] he must place his hand on the head of the offering, [2] acceptable for him to propitiate for him.” The absence of terminology for ‘sin’, not appearing in the book until 4:1, indicates that the propitiation mentioned in 1:4 is not for a specific sin by an individual or the community (cf. 5:7 which delineates of a whole burnt offering from a sin offering). The unmarked order in nine of ten verbal constructions in 1:5–9, with the exception in 1:9a, presents a rapid series of priestly obligations. In 1:5, the number shifts to plural, “And they must slaughter the calf” (σφάξουσι LeuB vs.

commentary

183

movable νυ in σφάξουσιν A F Gött; Heb. sg. ‫)ושׁחט‬, which does not likely take the anaphoric devotee as its subject (always sg. in 1:2c–4), but implies the subject that ensues, namely, “the priests, the sons of Aarōn” (οἱ ἱερεῖς οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν LeuB Arm; οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς A F Gött). By not expressing the subject “the priests, the sons of Aarōn” until after the second verb, the text presents the actions of the ritual in a continuum from devotee to priest. Slaughtering “before the Lord” (ἐναντί Κυρίου, 1:5) means “in the eyesight of” the Lord (GELS 233), which is narratively possible by the Lord’s glory and abiding presence in the tent (Exod 40:35; Leu 1:1; 16:2; anarthrous gen. Κυρίου for ‫ יהוה‬occurs 431× in the Pentateuch, articular only 29×: Muraoka 2016: 17–18). The altar to be sprinkled with blood is attributed by the prepositional phrase “that is at the doors of the tent of testimony” (τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν θυρῶν τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου) to help readers distinguish it (ExodusLXX 27–29, et al.) from the altar of incense (ExodusLXX 30–31, et al.). The nouns √θυσιαστήριον ‘altar’ and √ὁλοκαύτωμα ‘whole burnt offering’, so frequently used in LevLXX, were possibly coined by the PentLXX translators as technical terms for the Israelite cultus (Lee 1983: 52). In 1:6 the attendant circumstance participle ἐκδείραντες (cf. sg. Heb. ‫ )והפשׁיט‬adopts the imperatival mood of the main verb, “And they must flay the whole burnt offering and must dismember it limb by limb” (“they must flay” = SP ‫ ≠ והפשיטו‬MT sg.; Wevers [1997: 5] mentions att. circ. but his translation is still temporal [“having flayed”], as are other modern translations: “Et après avoir dépouillé” BA 87; “Y cuando hayan desollado” BG 237; “Und nachdem sie … abgehäutet haben” SD 99 [italics theirs]; “And when they flay” NETS 85). Repeating the expressed subject in 1:7, 8 “the sons of Aarōn, the priests” (οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς transpos. of LeuB 1:5) is unnecessary, but perhaps emphatic (“the priests” = SP ‫ ≠ הכהנים‬MT sg.; Heb. requires the expressed subject due to the sg. verb in 1:6a). Their task in 1:7 of putting fire onto the altar and then piling up wood onto the fire assumes kindling, perhaps by means of a censer (Leu 10:1; 16:12; Num 16:17, 18; 17:11 [Heb. 16:46]). The compound verb “to pile up” (ἐπιστοιβάζω) pieces of wood (pl. ξύλα 1:7), and again “pile up” (1:8) the divided parts, head and hard fat (στέαρ, or “suet” GELS 633; NETS 85) onto the wood that is on the kindled fire on the altar appears to be a neologism (LEH § 17033; GELS 281; confirmed by searching the inscriptional databases). Then “they must wash” (= ‫ ירחצו‬SP ≠ MT sg.) its ἐνκοίλια (1:9, acc. of ἐγκοίλιος), which I italicize as intestines to indicate that the readers of LeuB would likely have corrected this homophonic error of a rare term (ἐγκοίλια Gött w/o mss.; only found here in 1:9, 13). In 1:9 LeuB adds “its intestines” (ἐνκοίλια αὐτοῦ) to adjust to the Heb. (‫ > ;קרבו‬αὐτοῦ A F Gött). This clarifies for readers that the priests, who wash or are washed for service (Exod 29:4; 30:19–21; 40:12), are not to wash

184

commentary

their own stomachs, head and feet (which is possible if “intestines” were modified by “their” αὐτῶν), but that of the bull’s (1:3). When the reader mentally corrects the text, washing the ἐγκοίλιος “intestines, internal organs” (GELS 187; cf. ἐγκοίλος “situated inside and beneath the surface of” GELS 187) and feet of the bull, the parts most succeptible to contamination, could be a synecdoche for ritually cleansing the entire inside and outside of the whole burnt offering. Finally, the priests must place everything (τὰ πάντα, 1:9b), by implication all remaining parts of the carcass, on the burning altar because this is a “whole burnt offering” (ὁλοκαύτωμα, 1:3, 6). In Mark 12:33, the love of God (Deut 6:5) and neighbor (Lev 19:18) are regarded as superior to whole burnt offerings and sacrifices (√ὁλοκαύτωμα and √θυσία). Variations of the concluding proposition in 1:9 recur 19 times in the book: “It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord” (identical in 1:9, 13, 17; cf. 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16; 4:31; 6:15, 21 [= MT 6:8, 14]; 8:21, 28; 17:4, 6; 23:13, 18; 26:31). The first copula is a subset proposition: “It [the bull of the ritual in 1:3–9] is a [subset or type of] offering (κάρπωμά).” Then two nominatives of simple apposition specify the type of offering as animal sacrifice (θυσία) and quality of the offering as “a sweet smell to the Lord” (ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ, lit. “a smell of sweetness to/for the Lord;” “ein Duft von Wohlgeruch für den Herrn” SD 99; calque for ‫ריח־ניחוח‬, see Wevers 1997: 7; articular dat. τῷ κυρίῳ for ‫ ליהוה‬occurs 120× in PentLXX, anarthrous 189×: Muraoka 2016: 17–20). The translation “smell of appeasement [to the Lord]” (Gen 8:21; LEH § 4033) may overinterpret the metaphor, but would reinforce the ritual intent of appeasing or propitiating the Lord in 1:4.

1:10–13 Whole Burnt Offering from the Flock A disjunctive δὲ “but” indicates a separate ritual for the ensuing gift to the Lord for a whole burnt offering (1:10; “to the Lord” τῷ κυρίῳ = SP ‫ > ליהוה‬MT). The classification “from the flock” (ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων; “Kleinvieh” SD 99; “small livestock” GELS 585; “small cattle” NETS 85), recalls the preview of the identical lexeme in 1:2, but here it is apposited by the hyponyms, “both from the lambs and the kids” (ἀπό τε τῶν ἀρνῶν καὶ τῶν ἐρίφων). Like the whole burnt offering of a bull (WBOB, 1:3), the devotee presents his gift of small cattle as an “unblemished male” (but here in 1:10, double accusative of object-complement αὐτό [ref. τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ] = ἄρσεν ἄμωμον). Although 1:10 does not specify “to the door of the tent of testimony he must bring it, acceptable for him before the Lord” (1:3), this location and ritual affect may be assumed (hence, prb. harmonization in SP v. 10 ‫ > אל פתח אהל מועד יקריב אתו‬MT LXX). As in the WBOB (1:4), the devo-

commentary

185

tee “must lay his hand on its head” (καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὴν [possessive force] χεῖρα ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ); the text does not mention the second ritual affect of the WBOB, which again may be assumed (1:4, “… the offering, acceptable for him to propitiate for him”). The next imperatival future in 1:11 shifts to plural, “They must slaughter it” (σφάξουσιν αὐτὸ ≠ MT SP ‫)ושחט אתו‬, which implies a priestly subject that is made explicit with the following verb, “the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out its blood” (καὶ προσχεοῦσιν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἀαρὼν οἱ ἱερεῖς τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ, similarly, 1:5; for προσχέω “pour forth at” GELS 600). These orders are modified by prepositions with spatial force in synthetic parallelism: “[A] And they must slaughter [B] it [C] on the north side of the altar before the Lord, [A1] and the sons of Aarōn the priests must pour out [B1] its blood [C1] at the sides of the altar” (1:11). Explaining why a WBOB was slaughtered “before the Lord” (ἔναντι Κυρίου), but a whole burnt offering from the flock (WBOF), “on the north side of the altar before the Lord” (τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου πρὸς βορρᾶν ἔναντι Κυρίου) puzzles interpreters (“why … is not clear” Wevers 1997: 8). Also “to the north” (πρὸς βορρᾶν), but inside the tent and outside the curtain, was the table of bread that was likewise before the Lord (ἐναντίον μου διὰ παντός “before me forever,” Exod 25:30; 26:35). Next, in v. 12 the priests “must divide it limb by limb, with its head and the hard fat” (pl. διελοῦσιν = SP ‫ ≠ ונתחו‬MT sg.). The verb διαιρέω “divide” (“zerlegen” SD 100; “sépareront” BA 87; “dividirán” “divide up” NETS 85) is different than that of 1:6 (μελίζω), perhaps for variation (Wevers 1997: 8), or in conjunction with the unique mention of head and hard fat, perceives a nuanced process of dismembering cattle smaller than a bull. The ritual omits the priestly duties to ignite the altar and pile the wood, but assumes these prerequisites from the preceding WBOB ritual (1:13; cf. 1:7). The next three steps are almost identical verbally between the WBOB and WBOF: pile parts, wash intestines and feet, and place everything on the altar (1:5– 9, 12–13). The priests “pile up these” (ἐπιστοιβάσουσιν αὐτὰ) onto the kindled altar, where “these” (αὐτὰ n. pl.) refers conceptually not grammatically to the limbs, head and hard fat (1:12). The ritual washing parallels that of the WBOB, and LeuB here reveals its own phonetic orthography: “And they must wash the intestines [ἐνκοίλια] and its feet with water” (1:13; cf. WBOB, 1:9: “but [δὲ] they must wash its [αὐτοῦ] intestines and its feet with water”; ἐγκοίλια Fb Gött). In contrast to 1:9, the singular priest must bring or present all things before placing them on the altar (καὶ προσοίσει ὁ ἱερεὺς τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον; cf. pl. and no presentation in 1:9; Heb. ‫“ והקריב הכהן את־הכל והקטיר‬the priest must present everything and cause it to go up in smoke”). Again “all things” (τὰ πάντα) must refer to all remaining parts, namely, intestines and feet, since limbs, head and hard fat were already piled up on the altar (1:12–13; so 1:8–9). In the

186

commentary

LXX, the concluding theological interpretation of 1:13 replicates 1:9, “It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord,” which indicates that sheep and kids are not less pleasing to the Lord than bulls. Against 1:9, however, LeuB here in 1:13 reads a genitive θυσίας for θυσία (A F Gött): “It is an offering, a sweet smell of sacrifice to the Lord” (κάρπωμά ἐστιν θυσίας ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ Κυρίῳ; or, “It is an offering of sacrifice, a sweet smell …”). Although this could indicate LeuB scribal exegesis, more likely dittography of the σ due to homophony (θυσίαὀσμὴ vs. θυσίαςὀσμὴ; see van der Louw 2008a: 224–226).

1:14–17 Offering from the Birds The next disjunctive δὲ “but” (“aber” SD 100; NETS 85) introduces a distinct ritual for bringing a gift to the Lord as an offering from the birds (1:14). This ritual does not fit the LXX context for four reasons. One, the name “whole burnt offering” (ὁλοκαύτωμα 1:3, 10), which would associate this ritual with the prior two (ὁλοκαύτωμα in 1:3, 10), is substituted with the more generic term “offering” (κάρπωμα 1:14; “cultic offering of any kind” GELS 364; etymologically “offering of yield” [√καρπός “fruit”] LEH §4662). Second, as I have argued, the syntax of 1:2 suggests that gifts (δῶρα) to the Lord must be livestock, whether from the cattle (1:1–9) or flock (1:10–13), and therefore readers are surprised that a gift (δῶρον) to the Lord can also be a bird or, later, a grain offering (1:14–17 and ch. 2, respectively). Three, 1:14 LeuB reads awkwardly: “…, you [προσφέρῃς] must bring a gift to the Lord. And he must bring his gift” (προσφέρῃς B A F 936 Sa x text group; προσφέρῃ Latcod 101 Gött). This reflects a similar, but more intelligible, number shift in 1:2–3: “… you must bring your gifts … if his gift is a whole burnt offering …, he must bring …” Four, in 1:5–13, the priests and their verbs are plural, but here, singular (ὁ ἱερεὺς 1:15, 17). This ritual continues the pattern of two alternative hyponyms of livestock (1:2: bull or flock) and of the flock (1:10: lamb or kid): “And he must bring his gift from the turtledoves or from the pigeons” (1:14; ἀπὸ phrase has a partitive force “from out of the x”; so 1:2). τρυγών specifies a “turtledove” (“tourterelle” BA 88; “Turteltaube” SD 100; “tórtola” LB 238; GELS 689; LEH § 9029; NETS 85), while περιστερά can refer to either a “dove” (NETS 85; “Taube” SD 100; “paloma” LB 238) or “pigeon” (“pigeon” BA 88; lexicons list both pigeon and dove: LEH § 7127; GELS 553; LSJ §34219). The pigeon is always qualified in Leueitikon’s other sacrifices: “(two) young pigeons” ([δύο] acc. of νεοσσός + gen. περιστ.: 5:7, 11; 12:6, 8; 14:22, 30; 15:14), whereas here the age of the pigeon of a WBO is unspecified (cf. Heb. ‫)מן־התרים או מן־בני היונה‬. The third action of the ritual parallels the second: the implied devotee must bring (προσοίσει) the gift from the

commentary

187

birds, and the priest must bring (προσοίσει) the same to the altar (1:15; NETS 85 offers a conceptual parallelism: “And the priest shall do the presenting at the altar”). LeuB supports the parallelism by stating the otherwise implied object: “the priest must bring it” (αὐτὸ Heb. ‫ > ;והקריבו‬A F Gött). This is the first of nine imperativals future, one of them negative, directed to the priests in unmarked word order. The second directive is apropos to a small avian sacrifice, “and he must snip off its head” (also 5:8; ἀποκνίσει “abknicken” [“snap off”] SD 100; “incisera” BA 88; “retorcerá” [“twist”] LB 238; ἀποκνίζω “to nip off” LEH § 1055; “to sever and remove” GELS 76). The translator vascilates between using the article with possessive force, here “its head” (τὴν κεφαλήν; Heb. ‫)ראשׁו‬, and the personal pronoun (i.e., LeuB 1:9 ἐνκοίλια αὐτοῦ; Heb. ‫)קרבו‬. In the WBOB and WBOF (1:9, 13), the priests must lay “all things” on the altar (ἐπιτίθημι + τὰ πάντα [implied in 1:13]), but here in 1:15 the implied object of the same verb is less clear; the nearest conceptual antecent is “its head” (τὴν κεφαλήν), but the context suggests the decapitated carcass since “he must squeeze out its blood at the base of the altar” (1:15). The debatable neologism “squeeze out” (στραγγιεῖ) is again suitable for a handheld animal (NETS 85; “ausdrücken” SD 100; “exprimera” BA 88; “exprimirá” LB 238; στραγγίζω “neol.” LEH §8295; two first-century CE occurrences of the verb [Dsc. 1:30, 2.76, with water as the d.o.] post-date the LXX, but they reduce the probability of LXX innovation; see LSJ § 39849; Aitken 2014: 45–49). Also distinct from the WBOB and WBOF is that the bird’s blood is squeezed out “at the base of the altar” (τὸ αἷμα πρὸς τὴν βάσιν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου), the first of 10 occurrences of this site where blood was to be expressed from the carcass (Leu. 4, 7, 8, 9). The priest then must “remove the crop with the feathers, and he must throw it against the east side of the altar at the place for ashes” (1:16; for various divergences, see Ulrich, Qumran, 109; gen. τὸν τόπον τῆς σποδοῦ indicates purpose, “for ashes”: Muraoka 2016: 154–155). The priest was to remove the “crop” (√πρόλοβος), perhaps since it was unclean internally, a “temporary storage of food prior to digestion” (GELS 587), along “with the feathers,” which were unclean externally (σὺν τοῖς πτεροῖς, dat. of association; “feathers” SD 100; BA 88; GELS 606; NETS 85; not “wings” [“las alas” LB 238; LEH § 37770, I.2–3] because wings are still present in 1:17). This may explain why the priest must throw or cast them out (√ἐκβάλλω LEH §13095; GELS 204) at the east side of the altar, not visible to the holy place (blocked by the altar itself), at the unclean “place containing ashes” (τὸν τόπον τῆς σποδοῦ, gen. of content; neuter gender is used for generic references to an object or objects, especially in the cultic terminology, thus n. αὐτὸ “it” = m. τὸν πρόλοβον “the crop”: Muraoka 2016: 655).

188

commentary

Due to the possible LXX hapax legomenon ἐκκλάω in v. 17 (LEH § 2782; GELS 209), there is some ambiguity as to what the priest must do next: “he must break it open by the wings and not divide it” (NETS 85) or “he must break it off from the wings and not divide it” (so “Und er soll es aus den Flügeln herausbrechen und es nicht zerlegen” SD 100; v. 17 καὶ “and” = 4QLevb SP MTmss ‫ > ו‬MT). The translation “break it open by the wings” (or “slit ‘by its wings’” GELS 209; LB 238) is preferred when one interprets the LXX in light of the underlying Hebrew (‫)ושׁסע אתו בכנפיו‬. However, LeuB’s audience probably understood “break it off from the wings” since the compound verb ἐκκλάω is modified by the same preposition ἐκ (“break off” LEH § 2782; in Leu. 1, ἐκ is used to express relative location [source 1:1, partitive 1:2, 3; spatial ‘at’ 1:11] rather than means). Without crop and wings, the bird is too tiny to be divided further (1:17; cf. Wevers 1997: 12). As with the WBOF (1:12), this bird offering presumes a kindled altar as prescribed in the WBOB (1:7). In the preceding whole burnt offerings, all remaining parts are placed on the altar (ἐπιτίθημι 1:9, 13); here the priest places on the kindled altar the bird itself (“it” αὐτὸ = impl. πετεινός from 1:14 [ἀπὸ τῶν πετ.]; Wevers 1997: 12). The LXX at times emends divine anthropomorphisms (i.e., Wevers 1997: xxii), but this cannot be said of the concluding formula, “It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord” (1:14; 1:9, similarly LeuB 1:13; de Boer 1972: 41). The Lord savors the faithful ritual sacrifice of a bird offering. The LeuB apparently perceived this theological précis in 1:9, 14, 17 as structuring device by which he formats the paragraphs of the chapter (1:1–9; 1:10–13; 1:14–17).

2:1–3 Sacrifice of Fine Flour This ritual diverges from those of ch. 1, first, by stating the agent of the specific offering, “if a life brings a gift as a sacrifice to the Lord” (2:1; cf. 1:3, 10, 14; and double acc. δῶρον θυσίαν, rather than predicates nom.), and second, by requiring that a sacrificial gift must now be fine flour (“the finest wheaten flour” LEH § 7987; GELS 619). This requirement is awkward in the LXX since the sacrifices of ch. 1 were not fine flour; the confusion stems from the selection of θυσία “sacrifice” (for ‫ מנחה‬here “grain offering”) and reading ἔσται as an imperatival future, “it will/must be” (following the imperativals future in ch. 1). The problem is resolved if one interprets ἔσται as assuming the same permissive force of an aor. subj., “it may/can be” (on ‘permissive fut.,’ see Muraoka 2016: 288, who also notes [288] that the future tense “is not an exponent of any aspect,” which also appears to be true in NT usage: Porter 1989: 403–416). The “life” (ψυχὴ “soul” NETS 85) performs the first steps of the ritual, “And he must pour olive oil on it,

commentary

189

and he must place frankincense on it” (2:1; ψυχὴ can be understood contextually as an indefinite substantive “someone”: Muraoka 2016: 61). Against the MT, LeuB with other mss overspecifies by the redundant proposition, “It is a sacrifice” (θυσία ἐστίν = ‫ מנחה ]היא‬4QExod-Levf SP LXXBAL; > 4QLevb vid MT LXXO Tar Syr Vulg). This was probably an exegetical gloss present in LeuB’s Hebrew source that joined this otherwise disjunctive ritual with the sacrifices of ch. 1 (ἐστιν θυσία 1:9, 13[ἐστιν θυσίας ὀσμὴ], 17). He then “must carry [οἴσει] it to the sons of Aarōn, the priests” (2:2), which may befit handling a palm-sized offering (cf. προσφέρω, προσάγω in ch. 1; but unique verbs used for offering a bird, 1:14–17). The priest’s role is given by the Aorist participle antecedent to the main verb: “And after grasping from it a handful, from the fine flour with the olive oil and all its frankincense, then the priest must place its memorial portion on the altar” (καὶ δραξάμενος … ἐπιθήσει ὁ ἱερεὺς …, 2:2). The Hebraic syntax would have been understood by LeuB’s audience as one prespositional phrase (f. [ἀπ’] αὐτῆς = σεμίδαλις in 2:1) clarified by apposition of another: “And after grasping from it a handful, that is, from the fine flour with the olive oil and all its frankincense …” (2:2). Presumably this handful is given the metonym “memorial portion of it” (partitive gen. τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς, 2:2), which the priest lays on the altar in like fashion to the prior animal sacrifices (1:9, 13, 17). Unspecified is the memory, presumably concerning the Lord, that this memorial brings to mind (μνημόσυνον “that which awakens or preserves memory of sth” GELS 465; cf. Num 5:15; see BA 89 for Philo’s symbolic reading). Leueitikon 1:9, 7, 10 all begin their formulaic précis with “it is an offering” (κάρπωμά ἐστιν), but 2:2 omits this element, “(it is) a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord” (θυσία, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ). This would have puzzled LeuB’s users for whom the generic κάρπωμά “offering” masked the specificity of the Vorlage “an offering by fire” (“‫אשׁה‬,” HALOT §932). Since 2:1–2 is not identified as a κάρπωμά, LeuB’s keen students would have inferred that this term refers exclusively to animal sacrifices burnt on the altar (1:9, 13, 17). Although his nonanimal sacrifice of whole flour did not affect propitiation (contra 1:4 for 1:1–17), nevertheless this sacrifice was an equally pleasing scent to the Lord (2:2). The remainder of the sacrifice designated for the benefit of the priests, inferably for baking or consumption (2:3). The LXX dative of advantage “for the benefit of Aarōn and his sons” (Ααρων καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ) is an accusative in B*, which creates a solecism perhaps due to homophony (καὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ; Bc corrects this to a dat.). “The rest of the sacrifice” is apposited by, “It is a holy of holies from the Lord’s sacrifices” (ἅγιον. as nominative of simple apposition to τὸ λοιπὸν.; Aitken [2014: 30, following Barr 1961: 283–284] shows ἅγιος “holy” was not the LXX’s unique choice against the Hellenistic ἱερός, since is ἅγιος is also “well attested in Classical and Hellenistic times”; whether the superlative ἅγιον τῶν

190

commentary

ἁγίων is calqued on the Heb. or reflects CG usage, see Muraoka 2016: 129 n. 1). Not the memorial handful, but the remainder was devoted to the most holy sphere for priestly consumption (see Leu 2:10; 6:17, 25, 29, 31, 36; 10:12, 17; 14:13; 21:22; 24:9).

2:4 Baked Sacrifice This short unit thematically extends 2:1–3 by giving perameters for bringing a gift as a sacrifice that is baked (πεπεμμένην √πέσσω GELS 555; LEH § 7163). The double accusative of object-complement should read “a gift as a sacrifice” (or apposition, “a gift, a sacrifice” NETS 85). LeuB conveys a distinctive sense by its reading “baked with frankincense” (gen. of material ἐκ λιβάνου B A min Latcod 101), versus the corrected text tradition, “baked in an oven” (ἐν κλιβάνῳ F Gött; NETS 85; SD 100). Frankincense was used in the 2:1–2 ritual, but now is the main ingredient baked in a loaf. This variant may seem unpalatable, but priests consume the same in 6:16–17, and some even today ingest pure frankincense oil for indigestion. No obvious scribal error explains LeuB’s plus “a gift to the Lord” (δῶρον Κυρίῳ B A mins; > F Gött), and this authorizes a gift baked with frankincense among the aforestated gifts to the Lord (1:2, 10, 14; 2:1). “It must be a gift of fine flour to the Lord” reminds one of the preceding ritual (but different syntax in 2:1), but here the ingredients are not raw, but baked as bread and cakes without yeast (√ἄζυμος LEH § 164; GELS 12); the bread is mixed with oil, and the cakes are spread with oil. The perfect passive “spread” (διακεχρισμένα), functioning attributively to the cakes, occurs in the LXX only here and in 7:2, which reappropriates the 2:4 ritual as a sacrifice of praise (for διαχρίω “to apply some liquid to the entire surface of” GELS 164). This rare verb is less intelligible for readers of B* which presents a morphological impossibility perhaps due to homophony (διακεχρεισμένα B* vs. διακεχρισμενα Bc mins Swete Gött). Some confusion for LeuB’s readers must have also arisen regarding how the priest was involved in this baked sacrifice ritual, since most of his actions in 2:2 are specific to 2:1–3 and cannot be imported here. Two lexemes from 2:2, however, could have been brought forward by readers into the 2:4 ritual, “and if he brings [to the sons of Aarōn the priests … the priest will place it on the altar].” The ambiguity of the priestly role in 2:4 could have been resolved by early critical interpreters.

commentary

191

2:5–6 Sacrifice from a Pan This unit further extends the 2:1–3 ritual by defining the regulations for a gift “as a sacrifice from a frying pan” (√τήγανον GELS 678; NETS 85; or “saucepan” LEH § 8883; “Pfanne” SD 100; “la poêle” BA 89; “sarten” LB 238; NETS 85). “It must be of fine flour mixed with oil; it is unleavened” is instructed for the pan-fried sacrifice (2:5, θυσία … πεφυραμένη), as it was—with different syntax—for the frankincense-baked bread (2:4, ἄρτους ἀζύ. πεφυραμένους). B* reads “it is unleavened” (pres. ἐστιν) in contrast to the more contextually appropriate imperatival future “it must be unleavened” (ἔσται Bc A F Gött). The next directive, “And you must break them into pieces” (διαθρύψεις αὐτὰ κλάσματα) employs a verb that occurs in Leueitikon only here (cf. διάθρυπτε “break [your bread]” Isa 58:7, et al.; on the double accusative αὐτὰ κλάσματα as causing them to become pieces, see Muraoka 2016: 537–538), whereas “and pour oil on them” resembles the fine flour ritual in 2:1 (√ἐπιχέω + ἐπί + obj. + ἔλαιον). In v. 6, “It is a sacrifice to the Lord [Κυρίῳ]” (˃ MT SP) could reflect a distinct source or LXX assimilation (‫ ליהוה‬9× in ch. 2). The nearest antecedent of v. 6 is the pan-fried sacrifice of v. 5, yet this raises the question as to why a similar theological précis does not also conclude the baked-bread ritual in v. 4 (cf. v. 3, “it is a holy of holies from the Lord’s sacrifices”). This précis would rebut any who elevate baking over pan-frying a sacrifice. Yet, like the baked-bread ritual, the pan-fried sacrifice instructions are directed entirely to the devotee. This again creates a sense of ambiguity regarding the priestly role, although LeuB’s readers could conjecture what that role must have entailed based on 2:2.

2:7–13 Sacrifice-Offering from a Fireplace and Conditions This unit further extends 2:1–3 by defining the ritual for a gift that is “a sacrifice from a fireplace” (θυσία ἀπὸ ἐσχάρας; √ἐσχάρα “brazier” NETS 85; “foyer” [hearth] BA 88; “opferherd” [sacrifice stove]; “fogón” [stove] LB; “hearth” GELS 294). The shift to second person “if your gift” places it in continuity with the preceding pan-fried ritual (2:5–6; contra 3rd per. 2:1–3, 4), but the missing details of the ritual can only be supplemented from the prior fine flour and memorial portion ritual (2:1–3). This sacrifice must be “made with olive oil” (ἐν ἐλαίῳ ποιηθήσεται), which does not specify if the oil should be poured on (as 2:1), spread on (as 2:4) or mixed into the sacrifice (as 2:4, 5). After these preparations, the devotee “must bring to the Lord the sacrifice that he makes from these, and he must bring it to the priest” (2:8). This is the first type of grain offering in ch. 2 that the devotee presents explicitly to or before the Lord (as in 1:3,

192

commentary

10, 13, 14, 17). In LeuB, the relative clause with the present subjunctive “that he makes from these” (ἣν ἂν ποιῇ [B A mins] ἐκ τούτων) reads more naturally than an aorist “that he may make from these” (ποιήσῃ Fb [= Sixt] Gött). The LevLXX recurrence of “he must bring” in v. 8 (καὶ προσοίσει 2×) betrays its source which explicates that the devotee brings his gift to the Lord by the agency of the priest (1o προσοίσει “he must bring” = ‫ והבא‬4QLevb ≠ ‫“ והבאת‬you must bring” MT SP; hence, NETS [85] dynamic rendering of the 2o: “and he shall do the presenting [to the Lord] to the priest”). The final four actions of the ritual are performed by the priests. The attendant circumstance participle “after approaching the altar” (προσεγγίσας πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον) precedes and assumes the imperatival force of the main verb, “the priest must remove” (ἀφελεῖ ὁ ἱερεὺς) the memorial portion from it (2:8–9). The procedure to remove the memorial portion and place it on the altar must be supplied from the sacrifice of fine flour (2:2). As in the sacrifice of fine flour (2:2–3), the theological interpretation, “It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord” (κάρπωμα, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ) applies only to the memorial portion laid on the altar (2:9), not to the remainder that belongs to the priests. Leu 2:10 is conceptually parallel to 2:3, but the lexical variation of 2:9 distinguishes the fireplace ritual (2:7–10) from the fine flour ritual (2:1–3). In both rituals, the memorial portions are an anthropomorphic sweet smell to the Lord, but the fine flour ritual is a “sacrifice” (θυσία, θυσιῶν, 2:3), while the fireplace ritual is first called a “sacrifice” (θυσία, 2:7), then renamed an “offering” (κάρπωμα … καρπωμάτων, 2:10). In 2:3, “the remainder” (καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν) is “for Aarōn” (dat.) “and his sons” (accusative solecism), while in 2:10 “what is left over” (τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν LeuB* vs. Gött .λειφθὲν) is for Aarōn and his sons. The predication “it is a holies of holies” (ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων) is awkward if one infers a singular subject and verb “it is” (= “what is left” τὸ δὲ κ.; so SD 100; BG 238; NETS 85). Instead, in contrast once again to the fine flour ritual (2:3), numerical agreement suggests, “they—the memorial portion and the remander—are holies of holies from the Lord’s offerings” (possibly “choses saintes” BA 90; cf. ἅγια τ. with pl. subjects: 6:17[MT10], 29[MT22]; 7:6[MT6:36]; et al.). Leueitikon 2:11–13 adds the conditions that sacrificial gifts be without leaven or honey, but with salt. Since this could have been accomplished in a single sentence, these verses overspecify by redundancy in order to constrain readers to think in a specific way about the conditions (see Runge 2010: 388). The LeuB scribe does not collect them into a separate paragraph (contra Gött, et al.), but appends them to the fireplace ritual (2:7–10). Even so, they apply more broadly to “every sacrifice” (πᾶσαν θυσίαν), that is, to all four variations of the fine flour ritual (2:1–10; in v. 11, θυσίαν may = 4QLevb ‫ ≠ מנחה‬art. MT SP). The adjective “unleavened” (√ἄζυμος) already attributed the oven-baked and pan-

commentary

193

fried bread sacrifices (2:4[2×], 5), but now the text explicitly prohibits making sacrifices to the Lord with leaven or honey (2:11–12; f. ζύμην is included in n. αὐτοῦ, as the neuter gender is used for generic references to an object or objects, especially in the cultic terminology: Muraoka 2016: 655). Jerome (c. LeuB) seeks to decode the restriction against honey, “And since honey may not be offered in sacrifice to God, you have shown skill in taking off their overmuch sweetness and making them pungent—if I may so say—with a dash of pepper. For nothing that is simply pleasurable or merely sweet can please God. Everything must have in it a sharp seasoning of truth. Christ’s passover must be eaten with bitter herbs” (Schaff 2.6: 151; he also connects sacrificial honey to the prostitute with honey-dripping lips in Prov 5:3: Schaff 2.6: 614). Since the imperatival future is the default in Leueitikon, I preserve this force in the translation: “As a gift of first fruit, you must bring them to the Lord” (προσοίσετε, 2:12; “sollt … darbringen” SD 100; so NETS 85; BA 90; BG 238). However, the context indicates that the Lord will tolerate the use of these ingredients in a gift, so that the fut. is understood as a permissive, or “you may bring them” (for the Heb. yiqtol permissive; see Muraoka 2016: 288). The text next employs a metonym for sacrifice to increase the severity of the prohibition, “But they must not be brought onto the altar to be a sweet smell to the Lord” (εὐωδείας B* vs. εὐωδίας Bc Gött). The imperatival future passive “must not be brought up onto (the altar)” and the telic “(in order) to be” (εἰς) assumes priestly agents with the capacity and intention to present such fermented ingredients in sacrifices in order to please the Lord (hapax leg. within Lev. √ἀναβιβάζω “cause to move higher” GELS 36; cf. 2:2, 9; see Douglas 1999: 166). The conclusion then is that, “First fruits may be sweet or leavened, and may be offered to the Lord, but they may not be sacrificed” (Wevers 1997: 20). It is ambiguous which gifts must be salted (2:13), because the subject “every gift of your sacrifice” (καὶ πᾶν δῶρον θυσίας ὑμῶν), which conceals from Greek readers the specificity of the Hebrew grain offering (‫)וכל־קרבן מנחתך‬, extends prima facie to every type of θυσία mentioned in chs. 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 17, 21– 23, 26 (see Table 3 on pp. 53–55 for references; Voitila [2015: 40–41] notes this problem in LevLXX is compounded further since “both ‫ מנחה‬and ‫ זבח‬and have been translated by θυσία; despite the paradox of ‘food offering’ being rendered as ‘animal sacrifice’”; cf. GenLXX–ExodLXX which distinguish these terms, see Marx 2005: 21–28). The phrase “on each gift of yours” (ἐπὶ παντὸς δώρου ὑμῶν 2:13) would extend the requisite of salt beyond the chs. above to the gifts mentioned in chs. 3, 4, 5, 27. Jerome’s (c. LeuB) tropological reading does not assist us here with the symbolism: “Salt is good, and every offering must be sprinkled. Wherefore also the apostle has given commandment: ‘let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt’ …” (Schaff 2.6: 586). Also reading the text

194

commentary

morally, Macarius of Egypt (c. LeuB) enjoins his audience: “The Spirit takes away the awful stench and cleanses the soul by the strength of his salt. Thus the soul is brought back to health and freed from its wounds by the true salt in order to be again useful and ordered to serve the heavenly Lord. That is why even in the law God uses this example when he ordered that all sacrifices be salted with salt” (Lienhard 2001: 165). LeuB’s readers are aided by ¶2:7–13 (with LeuA 2:7–13a, against Gött 2:7–10, 11–13) by which they could have interpreted these phrases as an ellipsis that assumes salt is limited to sacrificial gifts from a fireplace (2:7). The verb means “cause to cease to exist,” which implies “omit” (GELS 156; “vous n’omettrez pas” BA 91), but the qualified object to be omitted is less clear, “You must not bring to an end the salt of the Lord’s covenant from your sacrifices” (οὐ διαπαύσετε ἅλα διαθήκης Κυρίου ἀπὸ θυσιασμάτων ὑμῶν; cf. Num 18:19). In the LeuLXX 24:7, frankincense and salt must be placed on the stacked bread on the clean table before the Lord (‘salt’ > Heb.), and in 24:8 we find, outside the covenant blessings and curses of ch. 26, the only other reference to covenant in the book whereby the priest arranges the loaves of bread, with frankincense and salt, before the Lord and before the sons of Israel as an “enduring covenant” (διαθήκην αἰώνιον). This indicates a bilateral treaty and may inform the directive of 2:13, such that salt served as a tactile reminder both to the Lord and the Israelites of their respective obligations to the treaty (the contractual dimension is basic to διαθήκη: “compact, treaty, mutual agreement” gloss 1, GELS 150; “alliance” BA 91; “alianza” BG 238).

2:14–3:5 First Fruits Sacrifice and Deliverance Sacrifice-Offering from the Cattle This paragraph includes instructions on the first fruits sacrifice and the deliverance sacrifice from the cattle, and thereby invites comparison that both are labeled as a “sacrifice” (2:15; 3:1) and the portion taken from them is called an “offering to the Lord” (2:16; 3:4), but mainly invites contrast in view of their disparity (thus, the translation of δὲ “But” as a disjunctive in 3:1). Leu 2:14 opens with metacomments that delay, and thereby attract attention to, what will be said by the main verb, which itself is emphasized by its redundancy (see Runge 2010: 386): “Now if you bring a sacrifice of first fruits to the Lord, tender, new, roasted, pounded groats to the Lord, then you must bring the sacrifice of the first fruits.” B and A include the adjective “tender” ἁπαλόν (> Bc F BrMcL Gött), which creates a contrast between the delicate first fruits and the slaughtered and dismembered deliverance sacrifice (2:14; 3:2–4). Ambrose (c. LeuB) under-

commentary

195

stands the second adjective “new” typologically: “The sacrifice should consist of a gift, the newest of the new, or it should be dried or broken into pieces, or it should be unbroken … this refers to those who are renewed by the sacrament of baptism” (Lienhard 2001: 165). Like the sacrifice of fine flour (2:1, 2) and baked sacrifice (2:4), the devotee pours olive oil and places frankincense on it (2:15), and altogether “it is a sacrifice” (θυσία ἐστίν), an equative proposition that overspecifies by redundancy (θυσίαν 2× already in 2:14). The ritual shifts from devotee to priest as the agent who “must offer up its memorial portion” (τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς). The article is anaphoric “the [aforementioned] memorial portion of it [the sacrifice],” which assumes that the priests already grasped or removed this memorial portion from the sacrifice and placed it on the altar, as prescribed in the fine flour and fireplace rituals (2:2; 2:9). The memorial portion that is offered up “is an offering to the Lord” (κάρπωμά ἐστιν Κυρίῳ). The descriptors ‘offering’ (κάρπωμα) and ‘sacrifice’ (θυσία) may at times be semantically interchangeable (cf. 2:2, 9; see LEH §4662, §4358; GELS 364, 334–335) due to the translator’s “love of variation” (Wevers 1997: xi), but the equative proposition at 2:16 appears to distinguish its classification from the “sacrifice” (θυσία[ν], 2:14–15) from which it was taken. The “deliverance sacrifice” (θυσίαν σωτηρίου for ‫“ זבח שלמים‬peace offering” MT SP 4QLevb, e; “offrande de salut” BA 91; “Das Rettungsopfer” SD 101; “sacrificio de salvación” BG 239) to the early Alexandrian audience may have been perceived as a sort of conflation of a Hebrew meat sacrifice—similar to the Greek alimentary θυσία to a deity by an individual (with women, sometimes a “butcher” μάγειρος present, but offering certain internal parts to the deity as Leu 3:1–17)—with a Hellenistic festival performance of a “civic sacrifice of release” (Büchner 2008: 85–100[99]; 2017: 101). This connotation would have been lost for LeuB’s readers (Büchner [2017: 101] quotes Athenaeus’ citation of Theocles, lyric poet from the third century, “All we artists have to-day celebrated with sacrifice the festival of Salvation”). The only distinctive of the ritual, over against a whole burnt offering (1:1–12), is the emphasis on correctly extracting and offering the hard fat (3:3, 9–10, 14–17), but this does not assist readers in classifying the sacrifice. Refering to this sacrifice in ExodB, the descriptor “your delivering things” (τὰ σωτήρια ὑμῶν) are mentioned in the law of the altar (Exod 20:24; NETS “deliverance offerings”) and “victims of deliverance” at the consecration of Aarōn and sons. A “deliverance sacrifice” (θυσίαν σωτηρίου) was offered at the ratification of the covenant (Exod 24:5) and probably to the molten calf (ExodB 32:6 breaks off after θυσίαν and before the putative σωτηρίου F Gött). The shared context of these sacrifices is the Lord’s deliverance of his people from slavery in Egypt (√ἐξάγω in Exod 20:2 and 29:46; √ἀναβιβάζω in 32:4). The sacrifice of LeuB

196

commentary

3:1–17, following ExodB in the codex, may then connote a sacrifice that memorializes the exodus. The phrase “deliverance sacrifice” is restricted to the OT, but in NTB, Jesus is the agent of divine “deliverance, salvation” (√σωτήριον in Luke 2:30; 3:6; Acts 28:28; Eph 6:17) by his sacrificial death (with the cognate √σωτήριος Tit 2:11–14; √σωτήρια in Heb 9:28; see L&N §21:25–31). Not surprisingly, the themes of Jesus’ sacrifice and deliverance are combined by LeuB’s contemporaries, Eusebius (“For our Saviour has left us one feast in commemoration of the day of our deliverance, I mean the day of his most holy passion”: Schaff 2.1: 1306) and Athanasius (“And as, at that time [of Pharoah and Moses], the type of deliverance bore witness every year, so now we commemorate our salvation” Ath 1: 1270). Leueitikon 3:1–5 details the protocols for a deliverance sacrifice of a male or female that the devotee brings from his own cattle to the Lord (“his” αυτου B A F* vs. bring “it” from the cattle, αυτο Fb Gött; idiomatic τε repetition as alternative ‘or’: Muraoka 2016: 228–229, 679). Here LevLXX “to the Lord” (τῷ κυρίῳ) is not a Greek harmonization, but renders a distinct Vorlage (‫ ליהוה‬4QLevb Latcod100 > MT SP). The quadruple protasis in v. 1 (Ἐὰν δὲ … ἐὰν μὲν … ἐάν τε … ἐάν τε) delays and creates anticipation for the main verb and the marked position of the adjective, “unblemished he must bring it before the Lord” (ἄμωμον προσάξει αὐτὸ …). With minor differences in language, most steps of the deliverance sacrifice from the cattle (3:1–5) resemble those of the whole burnt offering of a bull (1:1–7): the devotee brings one of his cattle unblemished before the Lord, puts his hand(s) on the animal’s head, and after it is slaughtered before the Lord, the priests pour out the blood at the sides of the altar at the door of the tent of testimony and offer these sacrifices up by fire on the altar of whole burnt offering. In LeuB the continuity of these rituals is strengthened by slaughtering explicitly “before the Lord” (1:5; see 3:1 εναντιον Κυριου B Cyr 1025; > A F Gött). By contrast, the devotee puts a single hand on the whole burnt offering “acceptable for him to propitiate for him” (1:4), but puts both hands on the deliverance sacrifice without the aim or affect of propitiation (3:2; on the “altar of whole burnt offerings [τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων]” > MT SP). The priests presumably slaughter the whole burnt offering (see comment on 1:5), whereas the devotee slaughters the deliverance sacrifice (3:2). The fundamental distinction, however, is that “all parts” (τὰ πάντα) of the whole burnt offering are consumed on the altar (1:9, 13), while only the hard fats “from” (ἀπὸ) the deliverance sacrifice are consumed (3:3–5; in v. 3, “they must present” προσάξουσιν = Vulg ≠ ‫והקריב‬ 4QLeve MT SP). The priest is not required to clear the altar, but offers up the hard fats on top of the whole burnt offerings (ἐπὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα), that are once again said to be “on the wood pile that is on the fire on the altar” (3:5; overspecification by redundancy in 1:7, 8, 12, 17; επι του θυσιαστηριου “on the altar”

commentary

197

B A x Cyr mins Arab Sam = SP ‫ > על המזבח אשה‬F Gött MT). The variation of the formula “It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord” (κάρπωμα, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ) occurs elsewhere only with the the sacrifice from a fireplace (2:9) and deliverance sacrifice from the sheep (3:16) (cf. 1:9, 13, 17; 2:15). The “offering” (κάρπωμα) in view here appears to be restricted to the portion from the deliverance “sacrifice” (θυσίαν) that the priest offers on the altar (so 2:9, 16).

3:6–17 Deliverance Sacrifice-Offering from the Sheep and the Ones The start of a new paragraph at 3:6 follows the scribe’s precedence in marking the whole burnt offering of a sheep (1:10–13) as a separate paragraph from that of a bull (1:1/3–9). This section provides the protocols for a deliverance sacrifice from the sheep and from the elusive “ones,” an obvious scribal omission in LeuB. In 3:1, the first protasis begins with “deliverance sacrifice” so as to introduce a new sacrificial category, but in 3:6 the word order of the protasis is literally, “Now if from the sheep his gift is, as a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord, male or female” (Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ, θυσίαν σωτηρίου τῷ κυρίῳ ἄρσεν ἢ θῆλυ), so as to foreground and so introduce this new subcategory of the deliverance sacrifice (σωτηρίου prb. = anarth. ‫ שׁלמים‬MT ≠ art. SP). In the LXXB, this subcategory τῶν προβάτων can refer to ‘small livestock’ (GELS 584, gl. 1; BA 92 “petit bétail”; BG 239 “ganado menor”) as a hypernym for “lamb” and “goats” (3:7, 12; see LeuB 1:10), but the primary meaning is “sheep” (NETS 85; “Kleinvieh” SD 101; LEH §7492) which makes most sense in LeuB, which does not mention a subclass of ‘goats.’ The stress is again on presenting it “unblemished,” which is in the marked position (ἄμωμον προσοίσει αὐτό; also 3:1). The deliverance sacrifice from the sheep is divided into vv. 7–11, “If he brings a lamb [ἄρνα] as his gift,” and vv. 12–16b, “If his gift is from the ones [ἀπὸ τῶν].” The deliverance sacrifice of a lamb from among the sheep (vv. 7–11) resembles the same sacrifice from the cattle (vv. 1–5): the devotee brings the sacrificial gift, puts his hands on its head, slaughters it at the door, and the priests pour out the blood around the altar (vv. 7, 12 with a Hebraic apodotic καὶ [wĕ] “then”: Muraoka 2016: 767). There are five primary differences between vv. 1–5 (cattle) and vv. 7–11 (lamb). First, in LeuB 3:9 the singular subject who brings the offering is ambiguous (cf. “priests” in 3:3), possibly referring to the devotee (maybe also v. 14), but more likely to the priest who then brings it to the altar in v. 11 (cf. “priests” in v. 5). Second, this agent “must bring from the door of deliverance an offering to God” (θυρας Bunique; θυσιας LXX-B Swete BrMcL Gött). The “door of deliverance” (θύρας τοῦ σωτηρίου) is an anomaly, and LeuB’s early users may have corrected it mentally, or may have simply understood this to be a

198

commentary

metonym for the place of slaughtering and pouring out the blood of the deliverance sacrifice (v. 8, οἱ ἱερεῖς LXXGött > 4QLeve MT SP LXXmss; τὸ αἷμα “the blood” maybe = SP ‫“ הדם‬the blood” vs. ‫“ דמו‬its blood” MT). Third, the direct object “an offering to God” (κάῥπωμα τῷ θεῷ, 3:9) occurs only here in the LXX against the expected “offering to the Lord” (κάρπωμα [τῷ] κυρίῳ). Fourth, unlike 3:1–5, in v. 9 the text specifies what is to be extracted and offered from the sheep’s carcass: “The hard fat and the unblemished waist he must remove it with the pelvic muscles” (“with” σὺν prb. = ‫ את‬SP MTmss ≠ ‫ ואת‬4QLevb MT SP). Here “the hard fat” (τὸ στέαρ) could summarize the contents of the offering, which are then specified as the hard fat of the stomach, kidneys and thigh bones (3:10–11). Fifth, the phrase “the hard fat that covers the stomach and all the hard fat that is on the stomach” (3:3, 14) is simplified in LeuB 3:9 “the hard fat of the stomach” (τὸ στέαρ τῆς κοιλίας B A x-527 mins Arm; τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς κοιλίας F [with +] Gött). Together with these (vv. 9–10), the priest also removes and brings to the altar the lobe on the liver and kidneys. The typical précis formula that positions ‘sacrifice’ or ‘offering’ as the first proposition is added, but inverted, in LevLXX 3:9, probably for stylistic rather than semantic variation: “It is a sweet smell, an offering to the Lord” (ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας, κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ, also 3:11; here ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας > MT SP). LevLXX 3:11 preserves the correct reading against MT: “the priest must bring” (ἀνοίσει = ‫ והק]ט[יר‬4QLevb SP ≠ V-S disagreement ‫“ והקטירו‬And the priest they will present” MT Tar). The second subclass of the deliverance sacrifice of the sheep is introduced by the nonsensical protasis in LeuB, “But if his gift is from the ones” (Ἐὰν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν δῶρον αὐτοῦ, v. 12; + αιγων το Bmg LXX-B Swete BrMcL Gött; so “chèvres” BA 93; “Ziegen” SD 101; “goats” NETS 86). Early LeuB readers might have corrected this to “from the kids [τῶν ἐρίφων]” (“cabritos” BG 239) by recalling that the whole burnt offering “from the flock” (ἀπὸ τῶν πετεινῶν) was subdivided into lambs and kids (1:10–13), but such a correction is problematic because the deliverance sacrifice is not from the hypernym ‘flock,’ but from the sheep (ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων 3:6). By 7:13 in its context, one can infer that a goat may be offered as a deliverance sacrifice. The language of the protocols of this ritual (3:12–16) is more closely parallel to those of the deliverance sacrifice from the cattle (3:1–5) than those of a lamb (3:6–11). The main difference is that the devotee slaughters the cattle (v. 2), but the priests slaughter the gift from “the ones” (v. 13; “the priests” οἱ ἱερεῖς = ‫ הכהנים‬SP > MT). The agent who “must offer up on it [the altar] an offering to the Lord” is unspecified, but probably the same priest of v. 16 (v. 14: “on it” επ B A F mins; απ Fc [= Sixt] Gött; NETS 86 “of it”). The précis formula of v. 16, “It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord” (= 3:5, but ≠ 3:11), creates an internal division that marks the end of the protocols for the deliverance sacrifice “from the ones” (v. 16 1o “to the Lord” τῷ κυρίῳ = ‫ ליהוה‬SP > MT). Conse-

commentary

199

quently, the substantiation for offering the hard fat of the deliverance sacrifice to the Lord (vv. 16c–17) applies not just to the “ones” (vv. 12–16b), but to all three forms of the deliverance sacrifice in ch. 3. This substantiation is structured by an inclusio of “all hard fat” (πᾶν [τὸ] στέαρ): 16c πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τῷ κυρίῳ. 17 νόμιμον εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν· πᾶν στέαρ καὶ πᾶν αἷμα οὐκ ἔδεσθε. The central element, “ordinance” (νόμιμον), is overspecified: “unto forever, for all your generations, in every settlement of yours” (see Runge 2010: 388). The frames of the inclusio present a point-counterpoint set, where positive and negative alternatives are supplied when one would have been sufficient: “All the hard fat belongs to the Lord” (πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τῷ κυρίῳ as a dative of possession, or advantage: “is for the Lord”) and “You must not eat any hard fat and any blood” (see Runge 2010: 386; accidentally Muraoka [2016: 131] lists πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τῷ κυρίῳ as a non-adnominal genitive of possession, but see p. 503). This would explain why birds, with little hard animal fat, and fine flour, with none, are not options for the deliverance sacrifice (contra 1:14–17; 5:7–13). There is an element of surprise in the second frame with the addition of “and any blood” (καὶ πᾶν αἷμα; these are categorical negations in v. 17 reinforced by πᾶς: Muraoka 2016: 715–716). Unlike the hard fat, blood is never said to belong to or be for the Lord (τῷ κυρίῳ). The priests pour out the blood of every kind of deliverance sacrifice at the sides of the altar (vv. 2, 8, 13), but v. 17b makes explicit for the first time in the book the prohibition of eating blood, which is supplied with a robust theological rationale only later (17:10–14).

4:1–12 Superscription and Ritual for Unintentional Sin of a Life The outdentation (hanging paragraph) of this paragraph is less decisive, but probable (see Text). The second superscription of the book at 4:1–2b is the first occurrence of its most common form: “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying” (Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν λέγων). “Then” is selected to render Καὶ because of the new division in LeuB, and the redundant quotative frames in v. 1 (ἐλάλησεν and λέγων) and again in v. 2 (Λάλησον and λέγων) slows down the discourse to flag the ensuing instructions (see Runge 2010: 387). Mōysēs

200

commentary

must transmit these instructions “to the sons of Israel” (πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ), which like 1:2a–b, constrains readers to understand the addressees to be fundamentally non-priestly, even as the priests are liable for more than half of these rituals’ actions (i.e., 4:5–10/12; other addressees are more specific and precise, i.e., 17:2). This superscription extends to the next at 5:14, and collects together six LeuB paragraphs: ritual for unintentional sin of a life (4:1–12); of the assembly (4:13–21); of a ruler (4:22–26); of one life of the people of the land (4:27–31); with a sheep (4:32–35); and for a life for other sins (5:1–13). I have entitled the present section generically as a ritual because unlike the sacrifices and offerings in chs. 1–3, Leu 4:2c–12 cannot be reduced to a sacrifice, offering or sacrifice-offering, but must be regarded as a more complex ritual that has a five-part structure: offender identification (v. 2), calf sacrifice (vv. 3–4), blood manipulation (vv. 5–7), hard fats offering (vv. 8–10), and carcass burning (vv. 11–12). Of the ritual, the calf sacrifice is the only step that follows the pattern of the whole burnt and deliverance sacrifices: the individual brings the calf to the door of the tent of testimony, places his hand on the head of the animal, slaughters the calf before the Lord, and pours out the blood at the base of the altar (1:3–5; 3:2; 4:4–5, 7). Also, of the ritual, the hard fats is explicitly patterned after the deliverance sacrifice; “he must remove it [the hard fat] the same way that he removes it from the calf of the deliverance sacrifice” (3:3–4; 4:8–10). This ritual is mandated for any unintentional sin committed by an individual, literally “a life” (ψυχὴ), which is fronted within the protasis before the conditional ἐὰν (v. 2, ψυχὴ for MT ‫ ;נפש‬I prefer the contextual “life,” closer to “personne” [BA 94] and “persona” [BG 240], to “soul” NETS 86; “Menschenseele” SD 101; on first introducing the constituent of the protasis, see Muraoka 2016: 726–727). The adverb “unintentionally” (ἀκουσίως; NETS 86; “involuntarily” LEH §320; “versehentlich” SD 101) functions as a Leitwort for this cluster of rituals for those who violate one of the Lord’s commands “not on purpose” (GELS 21; Leu 4:2, 13, 22, 27; 5:16). The overspecification by redundancy probably envisions any violation of the prior commands and prohibitions at Mt. Seina (Exod 20:1–17; 20:23–23:33; 34:10–27): “… sins unintentionally before the Lord from the Lord’s commands, which one must not do, and does any one of them” (v. 2, ὧν οὐ δεῖ ποιεῖν, καὶ ποιήσῃ ἕν τι ἀπ’ αὐτῶν). The agent unknowingly violates a given divine instruction, and therefore, Augustine (c. LeuB) notes, “… although too, in the law, sacrifices are offered for ignorance, as if for sin” (Schaff 1.5: 610). Even the anointed high priest does not have impunity (v. 3), but is liable to observe the ritual for his own inadvertent violations (ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς “high priest” vs. MT/SP ‫“ הכהן‬priest”). In fact, the shift from feminine (ψυχὴ and verbs, v. 2) to masculine (ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς and verbs, vv. 3–4) presents the guilty high priest as

commentary

201

the devotee who performs the ritual, although it is assumed that the ritual must also be followed by “any life” (v. 2). The unintended affect of his sin (ἁμάρτῃ) is expressed by an infinitive of result, “so that a people sin” (τοῦ λαὸν ἁμαρτεῖν as resultative: Muraoka 2016: 340; + τον “the [people]” Bc F G M Phil Cyr Gött; > B* A Eus BrMcL). “A people” here could refer awkwardly to God’s people, but more clearly, to any given people (cf. ‘anaphoric, particularizing’ article τὸν λαὸν [9:22] for the known Israelite people; see Muraoka 2016: 4–6). The high priest’s offense does not make a people guilty by association. Contra the Heb. noun ‘guilt’ (√‫ אשׁמה‬MT/SP/4QLevc Lev 4:3), ἁμαρτάνω is a dynamic verb (vs. stative) that does not have ‘guilt[y]’ as a gloss (GELS 30–31). Instead, the high priest’s action leads a people to sin themselves, perhaps also unintentionally; hence, the need for the priests to distinguish and teach carefully (Leu 10:10–11). John Chrysostom (c. LeuB) understood this heightened priestly accountability: “… wishing to show that sins receive sorer punishment by far when they occur in the case of the Priest than in the case of the laity, He enjoins as great a sacrifice to be offered for the Priest as for the whole people, and this amounts to a proof on his part, that the wounds of the Priesthood need more assistance …” (Schaff 1.9: 117). Irrespective of LeuB’s orthography ὁ χρειστὸς “the anointed one” (B* F*; χριστος Bc Gött), for early Christian readers the guilty high priest stands in contrast to the perfect “anointed one” (i.e., ο χριστος in Heb 5:5, 9:28; see below comments on v. 5). The deferred apodosis is finally stated in 4:3 with overspecification by redundancy, “then he [the anointed high priest] must bring for his sin that he has sinned an unblemished calf from the cattle to the Lord for his sin” (περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν … περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ). The repeated prepositional phrase περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ (+ gen.) may be referential, “concerning his sin,” or possibly representational, “on behalf of his sin” (the phrase is only repeated in the LXX, which adds “his sin” [αὐτοῦ] against MT/SP ‫)לחטאת‬. Whereas the whole burnt offering requires the offering of the entire carcass without the blood (1:6–9), and is not “for sin,” but yet affects propitiation (1:4), the present ritual is concerning sin, and yet is not said to affect propitiation (cf. 4:20). The division of a new paragraph of 4:13–21 in LeuB makes it ambiguous for readers whether the absence of a propitiation statement in 4:1–12 is deliberate; that is, propitiation is not required or affected because the life’s sin is unintentional, or the affect of propitiation at 4:20 applies to 4:1–12, as well. The slaughtered of a “calf from the cattle” recalls the whole burnt offering (1:5), but here “calf” (√μόσχος) indicates a youth (GELS 468; LEH § 6034), whereas the Heb. phrase ‫ פר בן־בקר‬indicates a “bull—irrespective of age” (DCH 6:750) from the class of cattle (see ‫ בן‬of class: IBHS § 9.5.3a). The LXX Vorlage, against MT, included a gloss, an attributive participial phrase that clarifies that

202

commentary

the one who bring the calf’s blood onto (επι B* A mins; εις Bc Gött) the altar is not “the anointed high priest” who is guilty (v. 3), but “the anointed priest [ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χρειστὸς], who has had his hands consecrated [ὁ τετελιωμένος τὰς χεῖρας]” (v. 5, ὁ τετελιωμένος τὰς χεῖρας = SP ‫ > אשר מלא את ידו‬MT). The idiom means, “the anointed priest who has been inducted to priestly office,” where the priest, not τὰς χεῖρας, is the subject of the passivized compound verb (Muraoka 2016: 522). Probably referring to this and parallel LXX intertexts (cf. LevLXX 6:22), Cyril of Jerusalem (c. LeuB) explains that to signify the high priesthood, Moses’ “own brother Aaron he surnamed Christ” (Schaff 2.7: 189). Similarly, Eusebius (c. LeuB) perceives a Christological type in the anointed Aaronid: “… he consecrated a man high priest of God, in so far as that was possible, and him he called Christ. And thus to this dignity of the high priesthood, which in his opinion surpassed the most honorable position among men, he attached for the sake of honor and glory the name of Christ” (Schaff 2.1: 122; John of Damascus, c. LeuB, remarks similarly of Melchisedek [LXX orth.]: “just as that priest [Melchisedek] was a type and image of Christ, the true high-priest,” Schaff 2.9: 740). After bringing the blood, this consecrated priest manipulates it in four ways: he dips his finger into it, sprinkles some seven times before the Lord at the holy curtain, puts some on the horns of the altar of the incense of the composition, and like the whole burnt offering, he must pour out the calf’s blood at the base of the altar of whole burnt offerings (vv. 5–7). In v. 7, “The altar of incense of the composition” (√σύνθεσις; “compound” GELS 657; “combination” NETS 86; “der Weihrauchmischung” SD 101; “compuesto” BG 240) is an abstruse rendering for “altar of incense of fragrant perfumes” (MT SP √‫ סם‬HALOT § 6591; or conflating the LXX and Heb. “compose le parfum” BA 95). The author spatially differentiates this altar “that is before the Lord, which is inside [ἐν] the tent of testimony,” from the altar of whole burnt offerings that is, as readers know well, “at the door of the tent of testimony” (see 1:5; 3:2, 8, 13; LXX 4:7 pl. ὁλοκαυτωμάτων vs. MT/SP sg. ‫)העלה‬. The marked position of the object “And all the hard fat of the calf for the sin, he must remove from it” (καὶ πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τοῦ μόσχου τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας περιελεῖ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ) signals the transition to the next phase of the ritual (vv. 8–10). The attributive phrase contains an ellipsis of the expected preposition περὶ (τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 1:3), “the calf concerning sin.” At 4:10, LeuB uniquely shifts to 2mp direct address, with the affect of personalizing the mandate to mimic the hard fats procedure of the deliverance sacrifice: “he must remove it, the same way that you remove it from the calf of the deliverance sacrifice” (αφερειτε αυτο B*unique; αφαιρειτε αυτο Bc Swete; αφαιρειται > αυτο F Gött). Like the deliverance sacrifices of 3:9–11 and 14–16, the priest removes the hard fat of the two kidneys and the fat on them, on the thigh bones, along with the lobe of the liver, and

commentary

203

offers them on the altar (4:8–9). Actually, LeuB and LeuA have the priest “carry” the fats to the altar, and only by implication, offers them to the Lord (διανοισει B A; και ανοισει F Gött). Here, simply for the translator’s stylistic variation, the altar is renamed “altar of offering” (τῆς καρπώσεως vs. “of whole burnt offering[s]”; Wevers 1997: 39). In distinction from the deliverance sacrifices of ch. 3, several nuances of the hard fat offering of the calf for sin are apparent: explicit mention of “the hard fat that covers the entrails [τὰ ἐνδόσθεια] and all the hard fat that is on the entrails” (vs. “the hard fat of the stomach [τῆς κοιλίας]” in 3:9, 14); there is no mention of extracting “the unblemished waist” (3:9); and the formula is absent, “It is a sweet smell, an offering to the Lord” (3:11, similarly 3:16), as well as the rationale that “all the hard fat belongs to the Lord” (3:16– 17). The formula and rationale may be implied, but possibly not restated here in order to not reduce this complex ritual to a central element, such as the hard fats offering. To transition to the final phase of the ritual, the string of direct and prepositional objects are fronted in the marked position, “And the calf’s skin and all its flesh, with its head and its extremities and its stomach and its excrement, also the whole bull calf they must carry outside the camp” (4:11–12). In the LXX and SP, against MT, an unspecified “they must carry” (ἐξοίσουσιν = SP ‫ ≠ והוציאו‬sg. MT ‫ )והוציא‬the carcass outside the camp, and “they must burn” the carcass on the wood pile (κατακαύσουσιν = SP ‫ ≠ ושרפו‬sg. MT ‫)ושׂרף‬. This could be a pluralization of the aforestated priestly agent (v. 10) because transferring the carcass required several priests, or includes the assistance of non-priests (v. 2). Burning the whole (ὅλον) carcass, excluding the blood and hard fats, outside the camp (also in 6:4; 8:17; 9:11) stands in contrast with burning the whole burnt offering (ὁλοκαύτωμα) on the altar (1:7–9, 12–13, 17). The fuller significance of burning the carcass outside will later be informed by other activities outside the camp: the removal of the corpses of Aarōn’s oldest sons (10:4, 5); segregation of an individual with skin disease (13:46; 14:3, 8, 40, 41, 45, 53); burning of Day of Propitiation carcasses (16:27); slaughtering domestic animals (17:3, 4); and stoning the one who cursed “the name” (24:14, 23) (cf. Heb 13:11–13). Burning the calf’s carcass completely by fire must take place at “a clean place” (τόπον καθαρὸν), which surprisingly for modern readers, is overspecified by the redundant clarification: “where they must pour out the ashes” and “at the outflow of the ashes it must be burned.” This is the first occurrence of the adjective “clean” (√καθαρός) which becomes a Leitwort in chs. 11–16, and the rare term for “ashes” or “heap of ashes” (√σποδιά LEH §8178; GELS 631; more common is σποδός) occurs only here in 4:12(2×) and in the red cow and water of purification ritual of Num 19:10, 17.

204

commentary

4:13–21 Ritual for Unintentional, Then Exposed Sin of the Assembly The LeuB scribe aptly formats this ritual as a new unit, for although it is explicitly patterned after the preceding ritual (see 4:20, 21) and has the same five-part structure—offender identification (v. 2//13–14a), calf sacrifice (vv. 3–4//14b– 15), blood manipulation (vv. 5–7//16–18), hard fats offering (vv. 8–10//19–20), and carcass burning (vv. 11–12//21)—there are several differences. First, the identified offender is not a single life (4:2), but “the entire assembly of Israel” (πᾶσα συναγωγὴ Ἰσραὴλ, 4:13), which is prepositioned before the verb and signals the transition to this second ritual for sin. Second, the lengthy prodasis nuances the nature of the community’s sinful error: “sins unintentionally and the matter escapes the notice of the eyes of the assembly, and they do one of any of the commandments of the Lord, which must not be done, then they will commit a sinful error, and the sin that they sinned in it should become known to them” (4:13–14a; “and they do” ποιήσωσιν is a shift to pl. ad sensum: Muraoka 2016: 642). As in 4:2, the overspecification of the violations in view suggest an exhaustive list of all of the Lord’s prior commands through Mōysēs at Seina (ExodusLXX 20–23; 34). Again as in 4:2, in LeuB and LeuA 4:13, the adverb “unintentionally” (ακουσιως) indicates a Greek scribal gloss that associates this unit with 4:1–12 (ακουσιως B A mins f -129 n x-527 Cyr; > F Gött MT SP). Unlike 4:2, the offense is emphatically done in ignorance (4:13 √ἀγνοέω GELS 6; LEH § 73), which is elucidated by the idiom, “the matter escapes the notice of the eyes of the assembly” (λάθῃ ῥῆμα ἐξ ὀφθαλμῶν τῆς συναγωγῆς). Another distinctive (not said of 4:2) is that the community “will commit a sinful error” (4:13, πλημμελησουσιν B* A mins b x-509; πλημμελησωσι Bc; πλημμελησωσιν [Aor. subj.] F Gött), which in the context connotes an offense less severe than “to trespass” (LEH § 7259; or cause injury “ocasionara perjuicio” BG 241, and “commettent un préjudice” BA 96), but more than the modern sense of “to be in error” (NETS 86). I prefer the balance of “commit a sinful error,” which appreciates the observation by Voitila (2015: 41) and Daniel (1966: 315) that the noun πλημμέλεια (for ‫אשם‬ ‘guilt, guilt offering’; GELS 564) often denotes harm inflicted on others (esp. in 5:15–7:37; similarly, “verfehlen” SD 102). These statements are followed by the progression, “the sin that they sinned in it should become known to them” (4:13–14), which suggests not the concealment then exposure of communal sin, but unawareness then surprise. The delayed apodosis mandates that the entire assembly (ἡ συναγωγὴ) brings an umblemished calf from the cattle for the sin, and it remains unclear how this was executed practically, although “the elders of the assembly” (οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τῆς συναγωγῆς) may have been the representative agents (4:14; ἄμωμον “unblemished” > MT SP). The elders assume this representational role as they

commentary

205

together lay their hands on the the calf’s head before the Lord (cf. 4:3–4; for “the elders” as representatives, see Num 11:16, and Exod 34:30(LXX) probably replaces MT/SP ‫ כל־בני ישׂראל‬with οἱ πρεσβύτεροι Ισραηλ). The elders in LeuB only by implication slaughter the calf, as the main text omits: “And they must slaughter the calf before the Lord” (+ και σφαξουσιν τον μοσχον εναντι Κυριου Bmg A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > Btxt mins Co). The shift to 3ms verbs and subject “the anointed priest” (ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χρειστὸς), or the shortand with an anaphoric article “the [aforestated] priest” (ὁ ἱερεὺς), transitions to the ritual’s next phase of priestly blood manipulation, which repeats the language from the preceding ritual with only minor discrepancies in prepositions and word order (vv. 5–7//16–18). In v. 17a, the LXX contains a probable scribal insertion that clarifies what the Heb. text assumes: “the blood of the calf ” (τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου > MT SP). In v. 17b–18 alone, the LXX displays three readings against the MT that are found in the SP: “the holy curtain” (τοῦ καταπετάσματος τοῦ ἁγίου // v. 6 = SP ‫ > הקדש‬MT); “the priest” (ὁ ἱερεὺς // v. 7 = SP ‫ > הכהן‬MT); and “the altar of the incense of the composition” (τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν θυμιαμάτων τῆς συνθέσεως // v. 7 = SP ‫ > קטרת הסמים‬MT). Naming the altar here was unnecessary since relative clauses in v. 18 (// v. 7) already distinguish this altar spatially from the “altar of offerings.” The object “hard fat” (τὸ πᾶν στέαρ) in the marked position transitions to the penultimate phase of the ritual: “And all the hard fat he must remove from it and offer it up on the altar” (4:19). Readers expect next the anatomical specifications for extracting the hard fats (cf. vv. 8–9), but instead are referred back to the prior ritual: “And he must prepare the calf the same way he prepares the calf for the sin offering; so it must be done” (ὃν τρόπον ἐποίησεν τὸν μόσχον τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, οὕτως ποιηθήσεται, v. 20). The author uses this referral formula again for burning the carcass, “And they must carry the calf outside the camp and burn up the calf the same way they burned completely the first calf ” (v. 21, ὃν τρόπον κατέκαυσαν τὸν μόσχον τὸν πρότερον). The LXX probably changed the sg. Heb. verb to pl. (“they must carry”) because the assembly or elders were the most logical subject (κατακαύσουσιν vs. MT/SP ‫)והוציא‬. It is unclear why the author did not use the same referral formula for the phase of blood manipulation (vv. 5–7//16–18), but consequently, the text draws attention to this phase over the others. Propitiation and forgiveness follow the hard fats offering, but are probably the combined affect of the entire ritual up to this point (vv. 14–20): “And the priest must propitiate for them, and the sin will be forgiven for them” (καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῶν ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία, v. 20). This expression is the first of what becomes a Leitwort in chs. 4–5 (4:20, 26, 31, 35; 5:6, 10, 13, 16, 18, 26). The priest as agent of the active future verb, which I translate as an imperatival future, “the priest must propitiate for them,” that is, he

206

commentary

must perform the ritual and thereby affect the appeasement of the Lord’s anger against the assembly (see Büchner 2010a: 237–260). Here readers may retroject the affect of propitiation (in 4:20) back onto the completed ritual for the unintentional sin of a life (4:1–12), particularly in light of the structural and explicit procedural dependence of 4:13–21 on 4:1–12. The result of propitiation in 4:20 is expressed through a future passive, which personalizes ἡ ἁμαρτία, “The sin will be forgiven them” (καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία; MT SP < ἡ ἁμαρτία; but cf. impersonal passives in vv. 26, 35: Muraoka 2016: 751). The construction is a divine or theological passive, in which the Lord is the implied agent (cf. Porter 1994: 65–66). Because the Lord’s anger is appeased, he can forgive (√ἀφίημι GELS 107), or perhaps more specifically, he can leave the assembly unpunished (for this gloss, see LEH §1529). The literary placement of the propitiation statement before v. 21 suggests that burning the carcass is not a prerequisite for propitiation, but important for maintaining the cleanliness of the tent. However, the paragraph ends with the classification, “It is a sin (offering) of the assembly” (ἁμαρτία συναγωγῆς ἐστίν, v. 21), which incorporates burning the carcass outside the camp as the ultimate step of the ritual (αμαρτια B A mins Latcod 104 Eth Gött; περι αμαρτιας Fb min; της αμαρτιας min; αμαρτιας Göttc).

4:22–26 Ritual for Unintentional Sin of the Ruler This paragraph in LeuB circumscribes the ritual for the unintentional sin of “the ruler” (√ἄρχων GELS 96; NETS 86; “Herrscher” SD 102; “chef” BA 97; “autoridad” BG 241). The term refers earlier in the Seina narrative to a leader of the Israelite community (√ἄρχων Exod 22:27; 34:31; 35:27), and later, a tribal “chief” (gl. in LEH §1344; as in Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, et al.). In Leuitikon, the ruler becomes a snare to whom the Israelites are tempted to offer their semen in some sort of sexual action (Leu 18:21; 20:2, 3, 4, 5; LXX’s mistranslation √ἄρχων for ‫‘ ֶמֶלְך‬king,’ instead of ‫מֶלְך‬ ֹ ‘Molech’; see commentary). The article in 4:22, not in Heb., is ‘generic,’ that is, “the ruler” is a member of the class of rulers (see Muraoka 2016: 8–10). The offense is extremely overspecified by redundancy: “… sins unintentionally and does one of any of the commandments of the Lord their God which must not be done, and he sins and commits a sinful error, and the sin that he has sinned …” (from vv. 22–23; the negated future ἣ οὐ ποιηθήσεται “which must not be done” has an injunctive, prohibitive force: Muraoka 2016: 287). When he becomes aware of his inadvertent sinful error, then he must bring as his gift an unblemished, male “young billy goat” from the hypernym class “goats” (v. 23, √χίμαρος normally a ‘he-goat,’ but with ἐξ αἰγῶν = “a kid”; Wevers 1997: 46). Why the ruler’s sinful error requires a young billy goat is unspecified, but anticipates

commentary

207

the requirement of a billy goat in 9:3 that the elders must bring on behalf of the people, and two billy goats in 16:5 for the Day of Propitiation sin and whole burnt offerings. The ruler places his hand on the kid’s head, and multiple unspecified agents, envisioned by the LXX scribes, slaughter it (v. 24, pl. σφάξουσιν ≠ sg. ‫ ושׁחט‬MT SP 4QLevc 11QPaleoLeva SP) “at the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offerings in the Lord’s presence” (ἐν τόπῳ οὗ σφάζουσιν τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα ἐνώπιον Κυρίου). This spatial adverbial phrase in the LXX links this ritual to the three whole burnt offerings of ch. 1 (pl. τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα vs. sg. MT SP). The ritual in LeuBAF is classified by a predicate nominative, “It is a sin” (ἁμαρτία ἐστίν), which is understood cultically, “It is a sin offering” (LEH § 457 gl. 2; GELS 30 gl. 3; αμαρτια B A F mins Gött; αμαρτιας Fb Cyr min Göttc NETS “for sin”). In v. 25, the priest’s blood manipulation, commanded in the LXX in two verbs (cf. three in MT SP prb. 4QLevc), does not include sprinkling the curtain in the tent of testimony (cf. v. 17), and he must wipe some blood not as we might expect on the horns of the altar “of the incense of composition” (v. 7, 18), but “on the horns of the altar of whole burnt offerings” (ἐπὶ τὰ κέρατα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων). This second explicit reference to whole burnt offerings is fortified with a third, “and he must pour out all its blood at the base of the altar of whole burnt offerings” (cf. a different label “altar of offerings” in v. 18). The LXX object “all its blood” (τὸ πᾶν αἷμα αὐτοῦ), in the stressed preverbal position, feels disjunctive here since some blood was just wiped on the horns (πᾶν = ‫כל‬ MTmss; > MT SP). The priest offers all the hard fat on the altar “like the hard fat, a deliverance sacrifice” (θυσια B* mins; θυσιας Bc LXX-B Swete BrMcL Gött). In LeuB, the ellipsis “like [he offers] the hard fat” is apposited awkwardly by the nominative “deliverance sacrifice,” but readers would have comprehended the need to follow the hard fat protocols of ch. 3. The affect of propitiation and forgiveness (v. 26b–c) ensues after the priest slaughters the kid, places and pours its blood, and offers the hard fats. Unique to the propitiation formula here is the causal ἀπὸ “because of his sin” (ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας; typically: περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας).

4:27–31 Ritual for Unintentional Sin of One Life of the People of the Land The description of the sinful error in this paragraph mirrors that of the preceding ruler (v. 22–23//27–28), but here the offender is “one life of the people of the land” (4:27, ψυχὴ μία [ἁμάρτῃ ἀκουσίως] ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ τῆς γῆς for MT/SP ‫ואם־נפשׁ‬ ‫)אחת ]תחטא בשׁגגה[ מעם הארץ‬. In the context of Leuitikon and the Seina pericope, the phrase does not merely refer “to common people, ordinary folk” (so Wevers 1997: 48), but anticipates life in the land of Chanaan (cf. Leu 14:34; 18:3,

208

commentary

27; et al.), although the precise referent is difficult to identify since the descriptor occurs elsewhere with other referents (Gen. 23; 2 Kgs. 23; 2 Chr. 13, 36; Jer. 52; Ezek. 7, 45; but Num 14:9 is instructive, see below). The referent could be a member of the future Israelite community in the land (similarly 20:2, “the nation in the land” τὸ ἔθνος τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), which might be supported by the imagery of vomiting out “the men of the land who were before you” (οἱ ἄνθρωποι τῆς γῆς οἱ ὄντες πρότεροι ὑμῶν, 18:27). The problems with this view are: one, restricting Leu 4:1–12 to the Israelite community in the Seina desert makes 4:27–31 unecessary; two, the hyperbolic vomiting metaphor in ch. 18 does not eliminate the possibility of lingering inhabitants of the land (in the priestly literature, see Num 33:25; cf. Judges 1); and three, the same Heb. class “people of the land” (‫ )עם הארץ‬in 20:4, which probably does refer to Israelites in the land (see 20:5), is obfuscated by the LXX which instead means the autochthonous residents of Chanaan: “the natives of the land” (οἱ αὐτόχθονες τῆς γῆς). The simplest explanation is that the offenders in 4:27 belonged to the “people of the land” (τὸν λαὸν τῆς γῆς) class referenced in Num 14:9, namely, the native inhabitants of Chanaan. They were culpable to “the Lord’s commandments” as residents of a land that belonged to the Lord (Leu 25:23; cf. non-Israelites in the land subject to the same standard as native Israelites: Leu 16:29; 17:15; 18:26; 19:34; 23:42; 24:16; 24:22). The member of the people of the land who commits a sinful error must offer an unblemished “young nanny goat” (√χίμαιρα; also 5:6) from the hypernym class “goats” (ἐξ αἰγῶν; cf. “young billy goat” for a ruler’s sin in 4:22). The ritual repeats the protocols of the ritual for the ruler (vv. 24–26//29–31), with a few distinctives, such as: one, the offender puts his hand on the head of his “offense” (v. 29 √ἁμάρτημα, so “Sünde” SD 102, or “faute” BA 98; not merely “mistake” NETS 29), which serves as a metonym for the offering for his offense (as parenthetically “(Für-die-)Sunde” SD 102, or dynamically “ofrenda por el pecado” BG 242). Second, the LXX clarifies the object of slaughter, “the young nanny goat” (v. 29 τὴν χείμεραν > MT SP; cf. “it” v. 24). Third, reference to the deliverance sacrifice for how to remove the hard fat is stated lucidly (v. 31 contra v. 26 LeuB). Fourth, the text does not repeat the assumed classification ἁμαρτία ἐστίν (“it is a sin offering” as in v. 24), but does include for the first time since 3:16 a version of the formula, “as sweet smell to the Lord” (εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ). By the ritual, the priest affects propitiation and forgiveness (v. 26//v. 20; in the different context of 2Sam 21:2–3, David feels compelled to “make atonement” [NETS for ἐξιλάσομαι] for the Gibeonites of Chanaan). The implication is that, like the Israelites, the remnant of the people of the land of Chanaan could and must please the Lord, avert his anger and receive forgiveness by performing the sacrificial ritual for their inadvertent sin (cf. immigrant/guest [√προσήλυτος] in Num 15:27–29 who must perform a similar ritual for inadvertent sin).

commentary

209

4:32–35 Replacement of a Sheep for Unintentional Sin By initiating a new paragraph at 4:27, the LeuB scribe presents the provision to bring a sheep (vv. 27–31), not only as a replacement for the nanny goat offered by one life of the people of the land (vv. 27–31), but also for the calf for a life and the assembly (vv. 1–21), and the billy goat for a ruler (vv. 22–26). For inadvertent sin, the sheep (v. 32, 35 √πρόβατον) must be an unblemished female (θῆλυ ἄμωμον in a marked position), in distinction from an unblemished male sheep for a whole burnt offering (1:10), and an umblemished male or female sheep for a deliverance sacrifice (3:6). The provision of offering a female sheep, instead of other animals, appears to be purely to expand the offender’s options, not to accommodate his economic condition (cf. 5:7, 11). The sheep is classified by Leuitikon’s stereotyped rendering “gift” (δῶρον for ‫ ;קרבן‬also 4:23), which detracts from the fact that the gifts to the Lord in chs. 1–3 are optional expressions of devotion, whereas ch. 4 introduces required sacrifices for sin. The ritual repeats the standard protocols for inadvertent sin (4:1–31), with several unique features. First, LeuB adds the pronoun, “on its head that is for sin” (v. 33, τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ τοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας B* mins d-125 n t Latcod 100 Arm Syh; αὐτοῦ > Bc A F Gött MT SP). Second, for stylistic variation, the translator renders two Heb. finite verbs with a termporal participle antecedent to a main verb, “And after taking with his finger some of the blood of that which is for sin, the priest must put” (καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς … ἐπιθήσει, v. 34). Third, the priest pours out the blood at the base of “the altar of whole burnt offerings” (v. 34, τῆς ὁλοκαρπώσεως probably B* mins [also τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως A Gött] = SP ‫ > העלה‬MT; here √ὁλοκάρπωσις, a hapax leg. in Lev, but found in LXX Gen 22:6; Isa 43:23, is a synonym for the more common √ὁλοκαύτωμα and √ὁλοκαύτωσις). Fourth, the affect of atonement is overspecified by the redundancy of the noun followed by its cognate verb, “The priest will propitiate for him for the sin that he has sinned, and it will be forgiven him” (περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἧς ἥμαρτεν, v. 35; this relative clause with a cognate verb, also in v. 28, gains “a little more independent status”: Muraoka 2016: 528).

5:1–13 Ritual for a Life for Other Sins The LeuB scribe helpfully demarcates 5:1–13 as a paragraph since 5:14 is the next superscription and this section diverges in five primary ways from 4:1–35. One, the Leitwort adverb “unintentionally” (adv. ἀκουσίως in 4:2, 13, 22, 27) does not describe any of the offenses in 5:1–5, even though it might be implied. Two, in addition to sinful errors (√πλημμελέω in 4:13, 22, 27; 5:3, 6), 5:1–4 introduces

210

commentary

the new category of conscious violations by “the lawless life” (ἢ ψυχὴ ἡ ἄνομος LeuBA 5:4). Three, the initial action of the ritual is a verbal confession (√ἐξαγορεύω contextually means “confess” LEH §3234; “admit publicly …” GELS 243). Four, there is no reference to “the Lord’s commands” (in 4:2, 13, 22, 27), which might designate these new commands to be added to his commands. Five, the structure of 5:1–13 is unprecedented. This structure begins with an extended list of specific violations for which the ritual is prescribed (5:1–4; contra 4:1–2, 13–14, 22–23, 27–28). This is followed by three alternatives of the ritual, each more economically accommodating than the one before, each with a specified offering (vv. 6b, 7, 11), proptiation affect (vv. 6, 10, 13), and in the second and third, a transition to the accommodation (“But if his hand is not able for what is sufficient for the X”: vv. 7, 11). Three groups of offenses are coordinated syntactically (by the disjunctive ἢ “or” in v. 2, 4) within one, lengthy protasis: witnessing, but not reporting the taking of an oath (v. 1); or touching any unclean animal, carcass or person (vv. 2– 3); or violating one’s own oath (v. 4). Regarding the first group, early readers of LeuB would have probably corrected the untranslatable solecism ωρακεν to “has seen it [the oath]” (ωρακεν B*unique; εωρακεν Bc? Swete BrMcL Gött). The one who witnesses, audibly or visibly, another person make an oath, but fails to report it “will carry the guilt” (λήμψεται τὴν ἁμαρτίαν; more formally, “llevará el pecado” BG 242; “wird er sich Sünde zuziehen” SD 103; or more dynamically, “will assume the guilt” NETS 87, similarly “incur” LEH § 5458). Augustine (c. LeuB) here clarifies that “a man sins when someone swears falsely in his hearing and he knows that man is swearing falsely and remains silent” (Lienhard 2001: 168). The second group of offense, touching an unclean animal (v. 2) or person (v. 3) feels redundant due to the LXX masking the nuances of the Heb. nouns, and one must wait until Leu. 11 to learn what creatures qualify as “the unclean abominations” (τῶν βδελυγμάτων τῶν ἀκαθάρτων, v. 2; η των [βδ.] B; > F Gött; “The” in LeuB may allude to Leu. 11 already known to the speaker, but not yet to the reader; as Muraoka [2016: 5] notes, “Elsewhere, too, the articular syntagm is found where the referent is not apparent from the context and the interlocutor may be left guessing, though the speaker may have known …”). Likewise, readers must wait until Leu. 12–15 for the variations of “some uncleanness of a person” (ἀπὸ ἀκαθαρσίας ἀνθρώπου, v. 3). The third group in LeuBA breaks from the pattern of unintentional sin by introducing “the lawless life” (η ψυχη η ανομος η B A Fc; η ψυχη η αν ομοση F Gött), who sins “by defining with his lips to do evil or to do good, in whatever way the person may define an oath” (5:4). The selection of the verb “defining [or separating, distinguishing]” and “define” nuances the verbal oath-taking (√διαστέλλω for ‫ ;בטא‬formally, “festlegt

commentary

211

[×2]” SD 103; or dynamically, “determining … speak forcefully” NETS 87; “pronunciando … proferir” BG 242–243; √proférer ×2 BA 100). The inclusion of the fronted adverb ‘good’ (καλῶς) in the merism “to do evil or to do good” (κακοποιῆσαι ἢ καλῶς ποιῆσαι, v. 4) indicates that the sin is not the contents of oath per se, but the action of verbally defining the oath (on fronting and underscoring καλῶς, see Muraoka 2016: 632). The offenses of 5:1–4 are associated to ch. 4 and to each other by the theme of knowledge or exposure: “he is a witness or has seen it or knows it” (v. 1); “it went unnoticed by him, but afterwards he comes to know it” (v. 3 for v. 2 also); and “it goes unnoticed before eyes and he comes to know it” (v. 4). John Chrysostom appears to have interpreted the deceitful actions of 1Sam 14:45 in light of Lev 5:1–6, “For they compelled the father of Jonathan to perjure himself, by not surrendering the son to the father. Seest thou how many persons one oath made obnoxious to perjury, willingly and unwillingly; how many evils it wrought, how many deaths it caused?” (Schaff 1.9: 640). The delayed apodosis functions as the first step of the ritual (v. 6), and also, by implication, of the accommodating rituals (vv. 7–13): “and he must confess his sin” (καὶ ἐξαγορεύσει τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, v. 5; dynamically: “bekennen” SD 103; formally: “declarará” BG 243; “declare” NETS 87). Harlé and Pralon add the adverb to convey the public nature of this action, “dira publiquement” (BA 100). This public declaration is needed to remedy the now public knowledge of these offenses, and thereby represents the spirit of the lex talionis articulated later in 24:19–20. The offender next brings to the Lord for his sin “a female from the sheep” (θῆλυ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων), which is expanded semantically to mean ‘flock’ to serve as a hypernym for the options “either a ewe lamb or a young nanny goat” (ἁμνάδα ἢ χίμεραν ἐξ αἰγῶν; on the new formation of √ἀμνάς “ewe lamb” from an existing stem, see Lee 1983: 108). The nanny goat was prescribed for an individual of the people of the land (4:27–31), but the ewe lamb is referenced only here in Leuitikon. Unlike ch. 4, no further protocols are enumerated for the ritual. Because the priest affects propitiation as in ch. 4 (5:6 // 4:20, 26, 31, 35), we should infer an ellipsis of the assumed priestly slaughter, blood manipulation, and fat offering from 4:33–35 or from throughout ch. 4. The overspecification of the propitiation statement follows the SP against MT, and then against both: “And the priest will propitiate for him, for his sin that he has sinned, and the sin will be forgiven him” (v. 6, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἥμαρτεν, καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ [‫ = אשר חטא ונסלח לו‬SP > MT] ἡ ἁμαρτία [> MT SP]). The affect of this ellipsis is to move the reader rapidly on to the first accommodation: “But if his hand is not able for what is sufficient for the sheep, he must bring for his sin that he has sinned two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the Lord, one for sin and one for a whole burnt offering” (5:7).

212

commentary

The transition to an accommodation in vv. 7 and 11 organizes the unit (into vv. 6, vv. 7–10, vv. 11–13). The priest as stated subject (ὁ ἱερεὺς > MT SP) first brings the overspecified “one for sin” (ἕνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας, v. 7; restated in v. 9[2×]; v. 7[1×], 8[1×], 9[2×]; δύο τρυγόνας [f.] ἢ δύο νεοσσοὺς [m.] in v. 7 are referred to by the n. αὐτὰ in v. 8, since neuter gender is used for generic references to an object or objects, notably in the cultic terminology: Muraoka 2016: 656). Like the WBO (1:14–17), he must: wring off its head, not divide it, and sprinkle its blood on the altar’s base and wall (5:8; but for “wall” √τοῖχος cf. “east side of the altar at the place for ashes” in 1:16). Unlike the WBO, in this ritual the offender does not offer the headless bird on the altar, and this step should not be imported from 1:15 (because not this bird, but the second bird is designated “as a whole burnt offering,” 5:10). The second bird he must make, or prepare, “as a whole burnt offering, as is customary” (ὡς καθήκει), an adverbial phrase that explicitly directs the offender and priest to follow the anaphoric protocols of 1:14–17. The participants would have expected the affect of propitiation from 1:17, but the propitiation formula is reiterated in 5:10, which is an overspecification that reinforces confidence that the Lord’s anger will be appeased and thereby the offender left unpunished. For those who could not afford to offer birds (vv. 7–11), a second accommodation is given: “But if his hand does not find a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons, then he must bring his gift for that which he sinned: one-tenth of an oiphi of fine flour for sin” (5:11). Any mental association with the fine-flour offering of 2:1–3 is broken by: a precise one-tenth (5:11) vs. an unspecified amount (2:1–2); the overspecified purpose for sin (περὶ οὗ ἥμαρτεν … περὶ ἁμαρτίας … περὶ ἁμαρτίας ἐστίν, 5:11–12) vs. a voluntary gift (√δῶρον, 2:1); and in LeuB, the unique redundancy of frankincense makes the prohibition emphatic, “He must not pour frankincense on it, nor must he place frankincense on it because it is for sin” (5:12), in contrast to the command “he must place frankincense on it” (2:1) (5:12 λιβανον “frankincense” B*unique; ελαιον “olive oil” Bc? A F Swete Gött). LeuB’s early users are left with the ambiguity as to whether ‘olive oil’ was acceptable or not here for the sin offering at 5:11–13 (cf. 2:1). The LXX transliteration “oiphi” (οἰφὶ) for the unknown Heb. measurement (prb. for SP ‫האיפה‬, rather than MT ‫האפה‬, 5:11) may reflect the translator’s preference to express an ambiguity rather than misrepresent his source. The LeuB scribe may have tried to improve the syntax of an appositional accusative “one-tenth of an oiphi, fine flour [σεμίδαλιν]” to the partititve genitive, “one-tenth of an oiphi of fine flour” (σεμιδαλεως B 972 Cyr; σεμιδαλιν LXX-B Gött; although NETS hides this syntactical problem in Gött with, “one-tenth of an oiphi of fine flour”). The offender brings the sacrifice, without olive oil and frankincense, to the priest who then grasps a handful and places the memorial portion on the altar of whole burnt

commentary

213

offerings to the Lord (5:12). The affect of propitiation is “for his sin that he has sinned on the basis of one of these” (ἐφ’ ἑνὸς τούτων) a probable allusion to the phrase in 5:4 “in one of these” (ἕν τι τούτων), which now refers to any of the violations of 5:1–4 (cf. in 5:4). One of the mysteries in the book is that propitiation can be affected without the blood of an animal sacrifice, which stands in contrast to WBO (1:4) and the rationale in 17:11: “for it is its blood that propitiates in place of the life” (τὸ γὰρ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐξειλάσεται). This is reminiscent of Mōysēs’ propitiation without any stated animal sacrifice for the people’s sin with the molten calf (ἵνα ἐξιλάσωμαι περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν “so that I might propitiate for your sin,” presumably by a verbal petition). In 5:13, propitiation without blood shows that the Lord has profoundly accommodated for the underprivileged. The remaining fine flour, that the priest had not grasped in his hand and offered, belongs to him “like [in] the offering of fine flour” (ὡς ἡ θυσία τῆς σεμιδάλεως 5:13; see 2:3).

5:14–19 Rituals for Sinful Errors of the Holy Things and of Ignorance The LeuB scribe initiates a new paragraph with the next divine speech of 5:15– 19, again introduced by the redundant quotative frames and directed to Mōysēs (5:14). This brief unit collects two types of offenses (vv. 15 and 17) and their respective rituals (vv. 16, 18–19). The first offender identification (v. 15) and ritual (v. 16) augments the aforestated subsets of sinful errors (√πλημμελέω 4:13, 22, 27, 5:3, 6, 15, 17, 19) that are committed unintentionally (ἀκουσίως 4:2, 13, 22, 27; 5:15). The specific inadvertent sinful error here is “from the holy things of the Lord” (ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων Κυρίου, v. 15). The formal LXX rendering of the adverbial ἀπὸ + gen. “from” (for Heb. ‫ )מן‬is difficult to interpret because this preposition does not conventionally convey the sense of “regarding” (as NETS 87 and “aux dépens des” BA 102; cf. uses in Conybeare and Stock § 92). However, Muraoka (2016: 215–216) notes that the diverse functions of prepositions in Hellenistic Greek were once fulfilled by the oblique cases, so that ἀπὸ + gen. may have been stretched here to convey a genitive of respect. Or, is the sin because of the holy things (cause) or by the holy things (agency; improbable are separation, source and partitive uses; appropriately ambiguous are “an” SD 103 and “de” BG 243). Furthermore, even though the expression “holy things” is overspecified by redundancy (v. 15[2×], 16; in v. 16 sg. in MT SP ‫)הקדשׁ‬, its referent is not clarified, although it probably refers to anything belonging to, devoted to, the deity (i.e., 2:3, 10; 4:6, 17). What is clear is that this offense is not against humans, but the Lord (Wevers 1997: 62). Also, the phrase in LeuB*Α “he hopes to pay it back” (αποτισαι αυτο B* A mins; αποτισει αυτο Bc; αποτισει, om. αυτο F;

214

commentary

αποτεισει, om. αυτο Gött) and “he must add a fifth to it and give it to the priest” indicate that this offense involved stealing or defiling one of the holy things in physical domain of the priests. The required sacrifice of an “unblemished ram from the sheep” appears here for the first time in the book (√κριός [vv. 15, 16, 18] as a hyponym of ‘sheep’: “uncastrated male sheep” GELS 414), but becomes a common animal sacrifice hereafter (ch. 7[2×]; 8[9×]; 9[4×]; 16[2×]; 19[2×]; 23). The requisite value of the ram was culturally conditioned by the “value of silver shekels, according to the shekel of the holy things” (v. 15; the genitive “[ram] of a value …” τιμῆς probably elimiates the possible meaning of the Heb. that the sacrifice could be given in monitary form: Milgrom 1991: 326–327). This would have made it impossible for contemporaries of LeuB to determine the valuation of that ram in their currency, but the costly nature of the restitution could be inferred: a ram worth multiple silver shekels and “he must add a fifth to it” (τὸ ἐπίπεμπτον προσθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτό), which could mean restoring the holy thing plus 20 percent of its value, or 120 percent if the violated holy thing was unrestorable. For the first time in Leuitikon, the implication that propitiation involves a sacrificial means is made explicit by the prepositional phrase: “And the priest will propitiate for him with the ram for the sinful error [ἐν τῷ κρειῷ τῆς πλημμελίας], and it will be forgiven him” (v. 16). Voitila (2015: 41, citing Daniel 1966: 315) may be correct in general that πλημμέλεια ‘error’ (I translate ‘sinful error,’ for ‫‘ אשם‬guilt, guilt offering’) indicates an injury inflicted on others (in 5:15–7:37), while ἁμαρτία ‘sin’ (for ‫‘ חטאת‬sin, sin offering’) indicates an injury that affects the sinner himself (in 4:3–7:37). The literary connection between vv. 15–16 and vv. 17–19 hinges on the inclusio of an unaware offender (vv. 15, 18–19) and the allusion, possibly by synechdoche, in v. 18 to the first, fuller description of the standard of valuation: “of the value of silver for a sinful error” (for v. 15, “of the value of silver shekels, according to the shekel of the holy things, for what sinful error he has committed”). Otherwise, the offender identification in 5:17 more closely resembles 4:2 than 5:15, but with a different emphasis: “If a life sins unintentionally [ἀκουσίως] before the Lord from the Lord’s commands, which one must not do, and does any one of them” 4:2

“And the life that sins and does one of any of the Lord’s commandments, which he ought not to do, and he does not know [οὐκ ἔγνω] and commits a sinful error [πλημμελήσῃ] and takes the sin [λάβῃ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν]” 5:17

commentary

215

The sinful error of 5:17 is overspecified with the repetition in v. 18 (εἰς πλημμελίαν), and the verb with its cognate accusative in v. 19, “for he has erroneously sinned a sinful error [sic.] before the Lord” (ἐπλημμέλησεν γὰρ πλημμέλησιν [sic.] ἔναντι Κυρίου; this construction conflates a nominal and a verbal clause in MT SP ‫)אשׁם הוא אשׁם אשׁם ליהוה‬. Although one might also interpret 4:2 retrospectively as a ‘sinful error’ (√πλημμελέω in light of the // languge in 4:13, 22), 5:17 adds the result in an idiom characteristic of the priestly writings, “takes the sin” (λάβῃ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν; more formally, “zieht sich die Sunde zu” SD 104; “llevara pecado” BA 244; “assumes the sin” NETS 87), which means “incurs guilt” (“encourt la faute” BA 103). Additionally, 5:17 is distinct, from 4:2, in its stress on a lack of knowledge, which is then overspecified in the propitiation statement in 5:18: “And the priest will propitiate for him because of his ignorance of which he was ignorant and he himself did not know [τῆς ἀγνοίας αὐτοῦ ἧς ἠγνόησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὐκ ᾔδει], and it will be forgiven him” (v. 18). The offense in v. 15, which is “from the Lord’s holy things,” and this offense of ignorance in v. 18 are not against people, but the Lord: “for he has trespassed before the Lord” (v. 18).

6:1–7 Ritual for Dishonesty toward One’s Neighbor The LeuB paragraph again circumscribes an entire divine speech to Mōysēs, introduced in formulaic style in 6:1. I understand the initial three main verbs as a hendiatris for sinful deception: “If a life sins and by overlooking overlooks the Lord’s commandments and lies about things concerning his neighbor” (v. 2). If we interpret τὰ πρὸς τὸν πλησίον as “the things with his neighbor,” this still does not restrict “the things” to property (contra SD 104 “des Eigentums”), but figuratively, includes any “matters which concern the neighbor” (so Wevers 1997: 65). The remainder of vv. 2–3, then, enumerates particular sins as subsets, or ways, of overlooking the Lord’s commands that pertain to falsification against one’s neighbor. This shared characteristic of dishonesty in the community is repeated in the final action of the apodosis that ostensibly refers back to all the subsets in vv. 2–3, “and he swears falsely about one of all that a person may do in order to sin in these ways” (καὶ ὀμόσῃ ἀδίκως περὶ ἑνὸς ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐὰν ποιήσῃ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὥστε ἁμαρτεῖν ἐν τούτοις, v. 3). In this interpretation, there are five subsets of dishonest actions that are presented as alternatives (Muraoka 2016: 680, 685) by the conjunction ἢ: “in a deposit [1] or concerning a partnership [2] or concerning seizure [3] or he harmed his neighbor in some way [4], or he found something lost and lied about it [5]” (vv. 2–3). The delayed apodosis presumes that the offender will make restitution (√ἀποδίδωμι, v. 4, 5), and overspecifies by reiterating the five subsets, not in

216

commentary

the same or inverted order, but informally as if by memory, “then it will be whenever he sins and commits a sinful error and returns [ἀποδῷ] the spoil that he seized [3 above] or the injustice he acted unjustly [4] or the deposit that was entrusted to him [1] or the lost thing that he found [5], because of every action of which he swore unjustly about it, he must also repay [ἀποδώσει] the sum itself, and he must add one fifth to it” (vv. 4–5). Apparently, by not listing the offenses systematically, the author arbitrarily omitted the “partnership” (κοινωνίας from v. 2), but it can be assumed from the final clause, “because of every matter [παντὸς πράγματος] which he swore unjustly about it” (v. 5). The LXX here follows the SP against MT (πράγματος = ‫“ דבר‬word, matter” > MT). This clause indicates that the lists in vv. 2–3 and vv. 4–5 are not exhaustive, but anticipate that there will be other types of deception. Augustine appears to refer to this text in his exhortation to Christians to observe various OT laws with enduring authority: “… shall we therefore say, that when it is written that whoever finds another man’s property of any kind that has been lost, should return it to him who has lost it, it does not pertain to us?” (Schaff 1.5: 1136). The offender must restore “the sum itself” (αὐτὸ τὸ κεφάλαιον), tantamount to the cost, possession or harm he has affected, similar to the lex talionis (Lev 24:19–22), but also “he must add the one fifth to it” (τὸ πέμπτον προσθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτό). This recompense resembles what was required for sinful errors of the Lord’s holy things in the preceding unit: full restitution, an additional 20 percent, and “an unblemished ram from the sheep, of the value of what he sinfully erred by it” (5:15–16//6:5–6). Also like 5:15, the offender in the LXX and SP of 6:6 brings their gift to the Lord, not explicitly to the priest, even if the priest was the implied intermediary (‫ אל־הכהן‬MT > LXX SP). However, unlike 5:15–16 which lacks a timeframe, 6:5 stipulates, “Whoever it is”—without accommodating to one’s economic level (contra 5:7, 11)—“he must return it to him on the day that he should be convicted.” The verbal selection “convicted” (√ἐλέγχω; so NETS 87) is more than “reproved” (LEH §2960) or questioned publically (cf. GELS 222 gl. 1), since a guilty verdict is assumed (likewise, “überfhürt” SD 104; BG 244; BA 104; GELS 222 gl. 2). The priest will propitiate “for him before the Lord” (ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς ἔναντι Κυρίου), a precise phrase that occurs first here in the book and twice later (14:18, 29; 15:15). The ensuing forgiveness is “for one of all that he did and sinfully erred by it” (περὶ ἑνὸς ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησεν καὶ ἐπλημμέλησεν αὐτῷ), which out of context is nebulous, but here alludes to the preceding language that encompases the various types of deceptions: “for one of all that a person may do” (περὶ ἑνὸς ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐὰν ποιήσῃ ὁ ἄνθρωπος, v. 3) and “whenever he sins and commits a sinful error” (ἡνίκα ἐὰν ἁμάρτῃ καὶ πλημμελήσῃ, v. 4; also √πλημμέλεια in v. 6[2×]). In v. 7, the Hebraic

commentary

217

resumptive pronoun, “sinfully erred by it [αὐτῷ],” has an unclear force: “sinfully erred in it” (sphere), or “by it” (instrumental), or “with reference to it” (respect).

6:8–18 Priestly Clarifications for the Whole Burnt and Fine Flour Offerings As we have seen, there are numerous levels of ritual interdependence within chs. 1–6, not only as the sin offerings (5:1–6:9) appropriate various elements of the whole burnt, fine flour and deliverance sacrifices (chs. 1–3), but even as the phraseology and geography of the fine flour (ch. 2) and deliverance (ch. 3) offerings compare and contrast with the whole burnt offering (ch. 1). The present unit delineated in LeuB is also dependent on chs. 1–3, not as a new ritual, but as the first set of clarifications for the preceding sacrifices of chs. 1–3. The superscription at 6:8 is formulaic (“Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying”), but the divine speech breaks the pattern by directing Mōysēs not to speak to the children of Israel (1:2; 4:2), but to “Command Aarōn and his sons” (Ἔντειλε Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ λέγων). In LeuB, the discontinuity is even stronger with the solecism that readers must have slowed down mentally to restore an aorist middle imperative “command” (εντειλε B; εντειλαι LXX-B Swete BrMcL Gött). This restored text is a bitransitive verb without an expressed second object (Muraoka 2016: 621); the semantic object is the content of vv. 9b–18(ff.) which clarifies various priestly liabilities in the sacrificial process. The internal structure of the chapter is bifurcated by the forward-pointing demonstratives and nulls-copula of vv. 9 and 14: “This the law of the whole burnt offering” (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως), which extends from vv. 9–13, and “This is the law for the sacrifice that the sons of Aarōn must bring before the Lord opposite the altar” (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς θυσίας …). A contextual rendering could be “this is the ritual” (Wevers 1997: 69), but I preserve the formal, “law.” The LXX selection of the label “sacrifice” (√θυσία) is ambiguous (for the technical Heb. ‫)מנחה‬, yet the contents in vv. 15–18 soon make clear that the fine flour sacrifice of ch. 2 is in view. The clarifications for the whole burnt offering in vv. 8–13 center on the priest’s responsibility to keep replenishing the wood of the altar so that the fire will not be extinguished (here ‘extinguish’ √στοιβάζω, only known from LXX [4×] and CE texts, must have been used in Koine, even though it remains unattested: Lee 1983: 41). This instruction is extremely overspecified with: the Leitwort ‘burn’ (√καίω or cognate noun καῦσις ‘burning’), used five times with different objects (WBO [v. 9], fire [v. 9, 12, 13], and wood [v. 12]); three references to the duration (“all night until the morning” [v. 9]; “during the morning” [v. 12]; “continually” [v. 13]), and the threefold repetition of the imperativals

218

commentary

future passive, with implied priestly agents: “And the fire on/of the altar must be burnt (continually) on it; it must not be extinguished” (vv. 9, 12, 13): καὶ τὸ πῦρ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καυθήσεται ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ, οὐ σβεσθήσεται (v. 9) καὶ πῦρ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον καυθήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὐ σβεσθήσεται (v. 12) καὶ πῦρ διὰ παντὸς καυθήσεται ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, οὐ σβεσθήσεται. (v. 13) In v. 12, LeuB*A reads a single accusative, probably for an extent of time: “And the priest must burn wood on it throughout the morning [τὸ πρωί],” which extends v. 9 (“all night until morning”), so that the priest must continue replenishing the wood to maintain the fire throughout the morning hours (+ πρωι [2nd occ.] “morning by morning” [recurring action, see Muraoka 2016: 114] Bc F G M Cyr Latcod 100 Gött; > B* A mins LatAug Lev). In the middle of these verses, in vv. 10– 11, protocols are supplied for wearing the proper priestly attire, transferring the WBO ashes from the altar to its base, and changing into a second garment to then transfer the ashes to a clean place outside the camp (vv. 10–11; cf. 4:11– 12). The anachronistic return to perpetual burning on the altar in v. 12–13, after instructing about the WBO ashes that have been consumed and removed (v. 11), has the affect of presenting vv. 10–11 as an aside to the governing concern that the priests prevent the fire from being extinguished. The obligation to burn the sacrifice continually through the night into the morning was not intimated in 1:7–9, which instead lends toward the opposite, a one-time completion of the ritual as the sons of Aarōn must “place fire onto the altar, and they must pile up wood onto the fire … [and] must lay everything on the altar” (καὶ ἐπιθήσουσιν … πῦρ ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἐπιστοιβάσουσιν ξύλα ἐπὶ τὸ πῦρ … ἐπιθήσουσιν … τὰ πάντα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον). Replenishing the wood is not mentioned, only that the divine endorsement immediately follows, “It is an offering, a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord” (1:9). Leviticus is framed as a narrative (see Narrative Macro-Structure), and its embedded instructions could generate the kinds of readerly responses to narrative that one might expect. Here I would suggest that 1:7–9 leaves readers with “a false certitude of knowledge” (Sternberg 1985: 309), which leads to surprise that the priests had to maintain the altar fire through the night. Whether or not the authors or the Greek translator intended this perlocutionary effect, readers are surprised by the unexpected and even competing instructions in 6:8–14 (even throughout 6:8–7:26). Given that the hard fat of the deliverance sacrifice was to be placed “on the whole burnt offerings on the wood pile that is on the fire on the altar” (3:5), we should not be surprised that the deliverance sacrifice is incorporated into the WBO clarifications by the

commentary

219

synecdochal allusion, “and he must place on it the hard fat of the deliverance [i.e., deliverance sacrifice]” (καὶ ἐπιθήσει ἐπ’ αὐτὸ τὸ στέαρ τοῦ σωτηρίου [6:12]). The second section of the paragraph begins with the elusive, “This is the law for the sacrifice,” which conceals the technical usage of the Heb. as a grain or food offering in the priestly writings (“‫מנחה‬,” HALOT § 5044; “‫מנחה‬,” DCH 5:350–353). Moreover, the modification “that the sons of Aarōn must bring before the Lord opposite [ἀπέναντι] the altar” only obscures this introduction because the fine flour offering, which we perceive by v. 15 is under discussion, states that the priests place its memorial portion “on the altar” (τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, 2:2//2:9). Leueitikon 6:15–16 recapitulates the priestly role from 2:2b–3, with some differences denoted in italics: 2b And after grasping from it a handful of the fine flour with the olive oil and all its frankincense, then the priest must place its memorial portion on the altar. It is a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord. 3 And the rest of the sacrifice is for Aarōn and his sons; it is a holy of holies from the Lord’s sacrifices … 11 you must not make with leaven. 15 And he must remove from it by hand some of the fine flour of the sacrifice with its olive oil and with its frankincense that are on the sacrifice, and he must offer on the altar an offering. It is a sweet smell, the memorial portion of it to the Lord. 16 But what is left over from it Aarōn and his sons must eat … 17 It must not be baked as leavened. I have given it as a portion to them from the Lord’s offerings … They are holies of holies. The variations are primarily stylistic and probably due to recollection of 2:2b– 3 by memory, but nonetheless present even in the LXX a form of inner-biblical interpretation within the book itself (cf. Fishbane 1988: 163–230). Four developments are noteworthy in ch. 6. First, in 2:2, the memorial portion is a composition, whereas in 6:15 the fine flour alone is regarded as the sacrifice with additives (“with its olive oil and with its frankincense that are on the sacrifice” [τὰ ὄντα ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας]). The formula at 6:15 now subsumes from 2:2 the descriptor: “It is a sweet smell, the memorial portion of it [τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς] to the Lord” (6:15). Third, the memorial portion, called a ‘sacrifice’ (√θυσία in 2:2; 6:15[2×]) is redundantly relabled as generic ‘offering’ (√κάρπωμα), which masks that the Heb. term refers to an offering by fire (κάρπωμα as a stereotyped rendering of Heb. ‫אשׁה‬, vv. 15, 17, 18 [Heb. vv. 8, 10, 11]; contra “Feueropfer” [SD 104, italics SD] and “burnt offering” [LEH §4662]; it is better to maintain its generality as a “cultic offering of any kind” GELS 364; so “ofrenda” BG 245; “offrande” BA 105; “offering” NETS 88; in vv. 10, 15, 16 generic neuter pronouns are used for

220

commentary

the cultic objects: Muraoka 2016: 656). The Greek translator appears to have misread the unpointed ‫( מאשׁי‬6:17 = Heb. 6:10) not as “from the offerings (by fire) of me” (‫)ֵמִאָשּׁי‬, but “from the offerings of” (‫ )ֵמִאֶשּׁי‬to which they supplied “the Lord” (Κυρίου > ‫ יהוה‬MT SP). The stress of vv. 14–18, however, is not on these transformations in vv. 14– 18a, but on the exegetical expansion in vv. 16–18. This expansion is set off with a marked frame of reference, preverbal knowable information—“but what is left over from it Aarōn and his sons must eat …” (6:16//2:3, 10)—to transition to the primary concern to restrict the location of eating (cf. Runge 2010: 387; Muraoka 2016: 642): Unleavened it must be eaten in a holy place. In the court of the tent of testimony they must eat it. ἄζυμα βρωθήσεται ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ, ἐν αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἔδονται αὐτήν In ch. 2, the prohibition against cooking fine flour sacrifices in any of its three forms with leaven (2:4–7, 11) or honey (2:11), and the command to add salt (2:11–13), is reduced in 6:17 to one form, “it must not be baked as leavened” (οὐ πεφθήσεται ἐζυμωμένην), with no mention of honey or salt (in v. 11, √ζύμη ‘yeast’, a hapax leg. in LevLXX, but 10× in PentLXX, appears in Aristotle, but not again until the 2nd and 1st cent. authors, which is probably an accident of archaeology: Lee 1983: 46). The imperativals future, and particularly in v. 18, shifts the remainder of the fine flour offering from what belongs to the priests, and by implication seemed to be their prerogative to do with it as they pleased (2:3, 10), to an emphatic and enduring imperative to eat: “Every male thing among the priests must eat it [πᾶν ἀρσενικὸν τῶν ἱερέων ἔδονται αὐτήν]. It is an enduring ordinance [νόμιμον αἰώνιον] for your generations from the Lord’s offerings” (6:18; vv. 14–18 may be alluded to in 1Cor 9:13). Its probable imperatival force changes the Heb. permissive force of the non-perfective (“he may eat” ‫ ;יאכלנה‬cf. IBHS § 31.4d), but

commentary

221

the future tense might have a permissive force (see Muraoka 2016: 288). The LXX here appears to have substituted “Every male among the sons of Aaron” (MT SP) with “from among the priests,” perhaps to eliminate the confusion of “male among the sons.” The neuter “every male thing” (πᾶν ἀρσενικὸν for the masc. ‫ )כל־זכר‬is awkward, but the meaning “male person” is understood in the context (as in “every male member” Muraoka 2016: 644; so NETS 88; cf. masc. in 6:29). The unit also develops the ideology of holiness. There is no mention of holy offerings in the sin and sinful error rituals of 4:1–6:7 (only a holy curtain and “things”), but now readers are surprised to learn in retrospect that, “They [the remainder portion for Aarōn’s sons] are holies of holies, like that which is for sin and like that which is for a sinful error” (ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς πλημμελίας). Finally, “Anyone who touches them will become holy” (πᾶς ὃς ἐὰν ἅψηται αὐτῶν ἁγιασθήσεται, 6:18). This recalls from the Seina narrative that whoever touches the altar and its accoutrements becomes holy (Exod 29:37; 30:29). Now readers learn in 6:18 that holiness will also be ‘contracted’ by direct physical contact with those offerings consecrated to God and his priests (for holiness as a contagion, see Milgrom 1991: 443–456; Douglas 2000: 146).

6:19–23 Fried Sacrifice from the Priests at Their Anointing This unit begins with the formulaic superscription, without stating for whom the instructions are given (cf. 6:9), but it is assumed: “This is the gift” (Τοῦτο τὸ δῶρον, v, 9) that comes from “Aarōn and his sons” (genitives of source: Ἀαρὼν καὶ τῶν υἱῶν) on the day of their anointing, which takes place first in the narrative in ch. 8. Its placement here and not after 7:11, or even after the subscription at 7:27–28, is curious, because it would have been more fluid here to continue the string of clarifications marked by the Leitwort “this is the law for …” (οὗτος ὁ νόμος + gen. case type of sacrifice in 6:9, 14, 24, 31; 7:1, 27). Its unnatural placement, however, has the affect of contrasting the differences of this gift of fine flour (6:20–23) and the immediately preceding clarifications on the sacrifice of fine flour (6:14–18); both are called an “enduring ordinance” (√νόμιμος + √αἰώνιος, 6:18, 22; in v. 22, MT SP plus ‫(“ ליהוה‬enduring sacrifice) for the Lord” > LXX). The gift-sacrifice of fine flour in vv. 20–23 is qualified by a point-counterpoint set, stated positively and negatively when one would have sufficed: “completely burnt and must not be eaten” (v. 23, ὁλόκαυτος ἔσται, καὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται; see Runge 2010: 386). By contrast, the preceding clarifications in vv. 14–18 stress the remainder that must be eaten by the priests (vv. 16–18). Consequently, even as 6:14–18 inner-biblically explicates 2:3, the second part, the ‘remainder,’ of the

222

commentary

fine flour offering to belong to and be eaten by the priests, so 6:20–23 develops an anointing offering that is a derivation of 2:1–2, the first part of the fine flour sacrifice that is placed on the altar as “a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord” (θυσία, ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας τῷ κυρίῳ, 2:2; θυσίαν ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ, 6:21; interestingly, LeuB 6:21 more closely matches 2:2 with the minus: θυσίαν εις ὀσμὴν found in other mss: + εις Bc F G M Gött; > B* b mins Latcod 100 [= MT without ‫)]ל‬. Because Aarōn and sons were to eat the remainder of the “sacrifice” (√θυσία 2:3, 10), which is “holy of holies [which is a part of] the Lord’s sacrifices” (partitive genitive is the most reasonable), the marked object in 6:23 appears hyperbolic: “And every sacrifice of a priest must be completely burnt and must not be eaten” (καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἱερέως ὁλόκαυτος ἔσται, καὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται, 6:23). “The anointed priest who takes his place from his sons” (v. 22), which is in the marked position as the focus, brings the gift comprised of “one tenth of an oiphi of fine flour as a sacrifice for all time” (v. 20). The adjectival “for all time” (εἰς θυσίαν διὰ παντός, v. 20; formally: “für alle Zeit” SD 105; “pour toujours” BA 106; or contextually: “perpetuo” BG 245; “perpetual” NETS 88) implies that every forthcoming day when another Aronid is anointed (v. 20), he must bring, prepare and burn this sacrifice. The transliteration “oiphi” is supplied for the non-transferable or unknown Israelite measurement (prb. for SP ‫האיפה‬, which could have been read as preserving a long internal ‘I,’ rather than ‘e’ vowel; cf. MT ‫)האפה‬. This ‘tenth’ and other connections reveal that these instructions expound not only to 2:1–2, but to the culmination of the consecration of the Aarōnic priests in ExodusLXX 29:38–40. The segregation, “half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening” (6:20), reminds one of the evening and morning sacrifices at the priestly consecration (ExodLXX 29:41; τὸ δειλινόν adverbial adj. ‘in the evening/afternoon’ of √δειλινός, a hapax leg. in LevLXX [4× in PentLXX] and a new adj. formation attested in both Classical and Koine Greek: Lee 1983: 110). The anointed priest must prepare this sacrifice in a frying pan with olive oil, which recalls this optional form of the fine flour sacrifice (2:5– 6), but the double accusatives of object-complement distinguishes it from any known sacrificial form: “he must bring it kneaded, rolled, a sacrifice of morsels” (v. 21, πεφυραγμένην [B* orth.] οἴσει αὐτήν, ἑλικτά, θυσίαν ἐκ κλασμάτων, v. 20; cf. Exod 29:2).

6:24–30 Supplanting the Priestly Expectations for the Sin Offering The LeuB scribe collects these instructions as a unit, distinguishing them from the priests’ gift for their anointing (6:19–23), and resumes from 6:8, 13 the continuum of instructions introduced by the literary marker, “This is the law for …”

commentary

223

(οὗτος ὁ νόμος + gen. sacrifice). Here, the instructions are explicitly for Aarōn and his sons, but the proposition, “This is the law for the sin offering” (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 6:25), does not neatly clarify which prior instructions are being clarified. The reason for this is that in the LXX the lexeme “sin (offering)” (√ἁμαρτία) occurs not only in 4:1–5:13 (the ‘sin offerings’ in Heb.), but also in 5:14–6:7 (at 5:17 and 6:3). Conversely, the verb “commit a sinful error” (√πλημμελέω associated with the nominal cognate √πλημμέλεια), occurs not only in 5:14–6:17 (the ‘guilt offerings’ in Heb.), but also in 4:1–5:13 (at 4:13, 22, 27; 5:3, 6). For sure by 6:31, which introduces “This is the law for the ram [√κριός] for sinful error,” do readers know that 6:31–40 must refer to the ram sacrifices for sinful error in 5:14–6:7 (‘ram’ in 5:15; 6:6), and therefore by deduction, 6:24–30 refers to the prior non-ram sacrifices for sin in 4:1–5:13. The opening specification to slaughter the sin offering “at the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offering” (v. 25) is a metonym for “at the door of the tent” (1:3, 5). The affect, as in 4:24, 29, 33, is to again make explicit the secondary nature of the sin offering ritual (6:25–30) to that of the WBO (1:1– 9; 6:9–13). The LXX contains third-person verbs, “where they slaughter … they must slaughter,” which obscures the intended address from Moses to the priests (≠ MT SP ‫“ תשחט … תשחט‬you slaughter … you must slaughter”). Verses 25c–30 depart from the WBO and supply at last the contents of the earlier forwardpointing comparative, “They are holies of holies, like that which is for sin [ὥσπερ τὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας] and like that which is for sinful error” (6:17). The clarifications are framed by an inclusio, which is inverted: 25 … They are holies of holies (ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστίν). 26 The priest who offers it up must eat it (ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ ἀναφέρων αὐτὴν ἔδεται αὐτήν). It must be eaten in a holy place, in the court of the tent of testimony. 27 Anyone who touches any of its meat will become holy. And by whomever some of its blood is sprinkled on the garment, whomever is sprinkled by it must be washed in a holy place. 28 And a clay vessel in which it was boiled must be rubbed down. But if it is boiled in a bronze vessel, he must rub it out and wash it with water. 29 Every male among the priests must eat them (πᾶς ἄρσην ἐν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν φάγεται αὐτά). They are the Lord’s holies of holies (ἅγια ἁγίων ἐστὶν Κυρίου). In the center (vv. 27–28), the contagion of holiness demands that the one who touches the meat of the sin offering must be washed in a holy place, and rub

224

commentary

down any clay vessel, or rub out and wash out any bronze vessel, used to boil the holy meat (cf. 6:18; v. 28, √ἐκκλύζω is a hapax leg. in the LXX, which I render “wash out” with Lee 1983: 40 n. 13; NETS 88). It appears that LeuB* v. 28 reads uniquely, “a clay vessel in which it was boiled must be rubbed down [τριβήσεται],” which is my contextual rendering of √τρίβω in the passive voice, meaning “to be worn smooth” (LEH §8974) or “to knead” (GELS 686; τρίβω, unattested in NT Greek, is known in CG [see LSJ §43109] and appears in Num 11:8; Prov 15:19; Isa 38:21; Jer 7:18; in Lev 6:28, συν appears to have been inserted by Bc into the left margin to form συντριβησεται “shatter, crush,” which aligns with Lev 11:33; 15:12). In the frames (vv. 25–26, 29), the LXX matches the pl. “the things” (LeuB) with the pl. “holies of holies” (ἅγια ἁγίων vs. “holy of holies” ‫ קדשׁ קדשׁים‬MT SP). The imperativals future “must eat” (ἔδεται and φάγεται) move beyond surprise, as in 6:9–14, to supplanting the earlier legislation in 4:1–5:13 that repeatedly implied that no part of a sin offering of a slaughtered animal was left to be eaten by the priests: the blood sprinkled, hard fats offered on the altar, and the remaining carcass with “all its flesh,” completely burned outside the camp (4:11–12, 21). Like the remainder of the sin offering of fine flour that accommodated the poor (5:11–13), the slaughtered sin offering must now somehow be eaten by the priest. The exegetical maneuver hinges on the location of eating “in the court of the tent of testimony” (ἐν αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου, v. 26) and, in LeuB, on the unspecified “the things” (v. 26, τα B min Cyr 829; το LXX-B Gött; v. 30 τα) and “them” (αὐτά, v. 29), so that before the priest carries the skin, flesh, head, extremities, stomach and excrement outside the camp (4:11–12), he must eat from them “the things” in the courtyard. Verse 30 offers a provisio: “And none of the things for the sin offering from which some of its blood is brought into the tent of testimony to propitiate in the holy place may be eaten.” One could add commas to mark off the Greek relative clause as non-defining (describing the nature of every sin offering), which would be understood as a rejection of priestly eating of 6:26–29 and a return to the most natural understanding of 4:4–12: “None of the ones for sin, some of whose blood is brought … holy place, may be eaten” (NETS 88, but may not have intended this meaning). More likely, v. 30 means that he must eat “the things” before he enters the holy place to perform the step of propitiation at the altar of incense (see 4:7; similarly Wevers 1997: 79; implied by “hineingebracht wurde” SD 105; “se hubiera llevado” BG 246). The point-counterpoint set in v. 30 orders both positive and negative actions, when one would have sufficed: “none of the things … may be eaten” and “It must be burned completely with fire” (as in 6:23; Runge 2010: 386). This emphatic language in 6:30 repeats the languge of total burning in 4:11–12, while at the same time, by implication, condones the innovation that the priest must eat the sin offering carcass prior to propitiation inside the tent.

commentary

225

6:31–40 Priestly Clarifications for the Sinful Error Offering The LeuB unit is subsumed under the superscription at 6:24–25 (Lord→Mōysēs→Aarōn and sons), but distinguishes these laws from 6:25c–30 by the contexualized formula, “This is the law for the ram for a sinful error” (Καὶ οὗτος ὁ νόμος τοῦ κρειοῦ τοῦ περὶ τῆς πλημμελίας, v. 31), which presumes awareness of the requirements in 5:14–6:7. The Leitwort “holies of holies” (ἅγια ἁγίων, vv. 31, 36) associates these instructions with the clarifications of the fine flour and sin offerings (6:17, 25, 29), a literary connection that was already made explicit in 6:17, “They are holies of holies, like that which is for sin and like that which is for sinful error.” The structure of the paragraph is divided into the sinful error clarifications, framed by “sinful error” and “holies of holies” in vv. 31 and 37, followed in LeuBA with four (five in F Gött) propositions of what belongs to the priests for their use. The statement in v. 37, “As is that for sin, so is that for sinful error; there is one law for them” (ὥσπερ τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, οὕτω καὶ τὸ τῆς πλημμελίας, νόμος εἷς αὐτῶν), serves as an economical way to include everything from 6:24– 30 without restating the details. Although this implies an interchangability of the priestly responsibilities for sin and sinful error offerings, and both begin by slaughter “at the place where they slaughter the whole burnt offering” (6:25, 32), what is stated in 6:32–40 is distinct (v. 32 “the ram” τὸν κρειὸν > MT SP). The language depends not on the ritual protocols for a ram for sinful error, which are meagre (5:14–6:7), nor on the WBO (1:2–9), but surprisingly, on the deliverance sacrifice (3:2–5; parallels italicized): 2 … must pour out the blood at the sides of the altar of whole burnt offerings. 3 And they must bring an offering to the Lord from the deliverance sacrifice: the hard fat that covers the stomach and all the hard fat that is on the stomach 4 and the two kidneys and the hard fat that is on them, on the thigh bones, and he must remove the lobe that is on the liver with the kidneys. 5 And the sons of Aarōn the priests must offer them up on the altar, on the whole burnt offerings on the wood pile that is on the fire on the altar. It is an offering, a sweet smell to the Lord. 3:2–5

32 (2) … and he must pour out the blood around the base of the altar. 33 (3) And from it he must bring all its hard fat and the waist and all the hard fat that covers the entrails and all the hard fat that is on the entrails 34 (4) and the two kidneys and the hard fat that is on them, that is on the thigh bones and the lobe that is on the liver, with the kidneys he must remove them. 35 (5)

226

commentary

And the priest must offer them up on the altar as an offering to the Lord; it is for a sinful error. 36 (6) Every male among the priests must eat them; in a holy place they must eat them. 6:31–40

Bringing these texts closer, the LXX scribes at 6:33 probably added the redundant: “and all the hard fat that is on the entrails” (v. 33, πᾶν τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐνδοσθίων [prb. harm. to 3:3, 4:8] > MT SP). Two distinctions are noteworthy. First, both texts are called offerings to the Lord (√κάρπωμα + κυρίῳ 3:5; 6:35), but the deliverance sacrifice, and not the sinful error offering, is said to be “a sweet smell to the Lord” (ὀσμὴ εὐωδίας Κυρίῳ, 3:5). Second, like the sin offering (6:24–30 vis-à-vis 4:1–5:13), the innovation of these clarifications (6:31–37 vis-àvis 5:14–6:7 and 3:1–5) is that they are “holies of holies,” which every male priest must eat in a holy place (6:26, 29, 36). The asyndetic statement “there is one law for them” (6:37) is conjoined to another asyndetic statement, which in LeuBA might reflect parablepsis but originally meant the priest’s possession (“[As for the priest who makes propitiation] with it, it will be his” ἐν αὐτῷ αὐτῷ ἔσται F Gött; ἐν αὐτῷ ἔσται αυτω A B mins). LeuBA emphasises, instead, the priestly role: “The priest will be the one who makes atonement with it” (ὁ ἱερεὺς ὅστις ἐξειλάσεται ἐν αὐτῷ ἔσται). This completes the transition to the second half of the unit (vv. 38–40), which provides four propositions that affirm what belongs to the priests for their use or consumption: the skin of the whole burnt offering (contra 1:8–9; 6:9–14); every sacrifice made in a fireplace or frying pan (2:5–10; 6:20–23), whether “prepared with olive oil or not prepared.” The anomaly in Heb. of a grain offering that was dry (‫חרבה‬, v. 40 [Heb. 7:10]) is hidden in the LXX by the generic “every sacrifice” (πᾶσα θυσία, which could include chs. 1, 3) and by “not prepared” (μὴ ἀναπεποιημένη), which would exclude fine flour sacrifices which were always “prepared” (see √ἀναποιέω in Leu. 6, 23; Num. 6, 7, 8, 15, 28, 29). The text prescribes an equal distribution of these between all Aarōnides (6:40). Thoughtful readers would have been surprised that the priest was now given “the skin of the whole burnt offering” (τὸ δέρμα τῆς ὁλοκαυτώσεως) for his use, which then demands the reinterpretation of “must lay everything [τὰ πάντα] on the altar” as “all things previously mentioned” (1:9; 6:9–14).

7:1–11 Types and Priestly Clarifications of the Deliverance Sacrifice This paragraph forms the second section under the superscription at 6:24 of instruction intendended for the priests (Lord→Mōysēs→Aarōn and sons). A

commentary

227

priestly audience befits the prior materials (6:8–40), but is curious here in 7:1– 11 because this section is framed by instructions for non-priests (7:1–4a; 10–11; cf. 7:13, 19 which specify a non-priestly audience “to the sons of Israel”). The predicate nominative formula introduces the section, “This is the law for the deliverance sacrifice that they must bring to the Lord” (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος θυσίας σωτηρίου ἣν προσοίσουσιν Κυρίῳ), which continues the repetition of the formula (6:9, 14, 25, 31) and invites comparison with the deliverance sacrifice protocols of ch. 3. The “law” introduces not only disparate instructions (as in 6:9–18, 24– 40), but new subcategories, hyponyms, for the generic deliverance sacrifice. These subcategories provide the structure of the unit: “If he brings it for praise” (7:2) for vv. 2–5; “if it is a vow or if he sacrifices his voluntary gift” (v. 6) for vv. 6–8. The remaining vv. 9–11 continue vv. 6–8 without a transition, but their prohibition against eating meat that has become unclean by contact must qualify all forms of the deliverance sacrifice (7:2–8). The LXX προσοίσουσιν in v. 1 could be rendered with the common imperatival future force, “which they must bring,” or anticipatory “which they will bring,” but less obviously as a permissive “which they may offer” (cf. ‘permissive’ in Muraoka 2016: 288; MT SP ‫ יקריב‬read permissively by NRS JPS NLT). The result is that 7:1–11 reenvisions the deliverance sacrifice of ch. 3, an optional gift from the worshipper, into a requirement or expectated custom. The first subcategory, “if he brings it for praise” (περὶ αἰνέσεως; so “alabanza” BG 246; “Lob” SD 105; NETS 88) nuances the Heb. “for thanksgiving” (‫ ;על־תודה‬so “reconnaissance” BA 108). This first requires “praise sacrifice cakes” (τῆς θυσίας τῆς αἰνέσεως ἄρτους), a type of the fine flour sacrifice: unleavened fine flour cakes kneaded and spread with olive oil, but without frankincense (7:2 = 2:4 and “kneaded” πεφυραμένην as in 6:21; Eusebius understood the “sacrifice of thanksgiving” to contain “frankincense”: Schaff 2.1: 1456). “On leavened cakes [ἐπ’ ἄρτοις ζυμεῖταις], he must also bring his gifts for a praise sacrifice for deliverance [θυσίᾳ αἰνέσεως σωτηρίου]” (v. 3; or “in addition to leavened cakes” NETS 88; MT SP read sg. ‫“ קרבנו‬his gift”). There is a legitimate interpretive problem with “leavened cakes” (contra Wevers 1997: 86), because this ritual is based on that of the offering of unleavened fine flour cakes (ἄζυμα 7:2//ἀζύμους 2:4; also 2:5, 11; hence, Origen and mins correct to αζυμιτων, also note αζυμητοις/αζυμηταις F Mʹtxt mins Sa). The new descriptor “praise sacrifice for deliverance” implies that the devotee and priest must at this juncture perform the ritual of the deliverance sacrifice (à la 3:1–17). In LeuB the devotee brings an unspecified number out of all his gifts as a “choice portion to the Lord” (ἀφαίρεμα Κυρίῳ; “advanced deduction” NETS 88; “Abhebe” SD 105; + εν “one” LXX-B* Swete Gött; > B*). This portion belonged emphatically to the officiating priest: the fronted (pendent) dative “for the priest who pours out the blood of the deliverance” (τῷ ἱερεῖ τῷ

228

commentary

προσχέοντι τὸ αἷμα τοῦ σωτηρίου) is replaced by the dative of the copula “It must be for him” (αὐτῷ ἔσται, v. 4; on the fronted then resumed dative, see Muraoka 2016: 725). Here “blood of the deliverance [τοῦ σωτηρίου]” is a metonym for the anaphoric deliverance sacrifice. What exactly belongs to the priest is specified clearly in LXX in v. 5 as “the meat [τὰ κρέα, lit. ‘meats’] of the praise sacrifice for deliverance must be for him [αὐτῷ ἔσται > MT SP].” He must eat it on the day he receives it, not leaving any leftovers for the next morning (v. 5). The second and third subcategories are grouped together in the protasis, “And if it is a vow or if he sacrifices his voluntary gift” (κἂν εὐχὴ ἢ ἑκούσιον θυσιάζῃ τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ; for εὐχὴ as ‘vow’ GELS 307 gl. 1; LEH § 4025 gl. 2; see Num 6:2). The apodosis, unlike the apodosis for praise (v. 2), does not clarify the nature of these types, such as whether they include fine flour and oil cakes, but is concerned rather to instruct that the priest must eat its meat on the sacrificial day and the following (vv. 6–8, among other texts in chs. 6–8, may be alluded to in 1Cor 10:18; the LXX in v. 6, 8 prob. found the Heb. to be verbose: ‫והנותר ממנו‬ ‫ יאכל‬MT SP > LXX; and ‫ > שׁלמיו זבח‬LXX). This distinguishes these types from the praise type, which stipulated a single day for priestly consumption (v. 5). Three-day-old meat must be burnt, and if eaten by a “life” (ψυχὴ, v. 8, priest or non-priest), results in a divine rejection of the offering, defilement, and “the life who eats any of it will take the sin” (τὴν ἁμαρτίαν λήμψεται; formally: “wird sich die Sunde zuziehen” SD 105). The idiom, first in 5:1, was probably understood contextually to mean “assume the guilt” (NETS 88; also “encourra la faute” BA 110; “llevara la culpa” BG 247). Verses 9–11 overspecify by redundancy that if the meat comes in contact with an unclean thing, animal (//5:2–3), or life, the meat must not be eaten, but “be burned completely with fire” (v. 9) and the life must, similarly, “be destroyed from his people” (vv. 10, 12). The choice portion and some of the meat of the deliverance sacrifice belong to the Lord (v. 4, 11), but in v. 10 LeuBA could indicate syntactically that deliverance belongs to the Lord (τοῦ σωτηρίου οὗ ἐστιν Κυρίου; ου B* A; ο Bc Gött; cf. similarly, Gen 49:18; Exod 14:13; 15:2). The repeated consequence “that life must be destroyed from his people” (ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς) functions as a Leitwort in the chapter (vv. 10, 11, 15, 17), and is applied only later to those who would dare to work on the Day of Propitiation (Leu 23:30). Although the middle voice could intimate divine action, “perish from his people” (similarly “wird … zugrunde gerichtet warden” SD 106; √ἀπόλλυμι, see LEH §1080; cf. 10:2), the parallel with “it must be burned” (v. 9) and the scene in Leu 24:23 suggests that human agents were liable to carry out the sentence. Positioned in the middle of this rhetorical language is the small, but important sentence: “Everyone clean will eat meat” (v. 9, πᾶς καθαρὸς φάγεται κρέα). For Greek readers unaware of the Hebrew modality, it may be less

commentary

229

likely that they interpreted the future here like an aor. subj. with permissive force, “Anyone clean may eat meat” (see ‘permissive fut.’ in Muraoka 2016: 288). A gnomic (or imperatival) future is more likely understood, with the implication that all Israelites, when they are ritually clean, must make it a custom to eat with the priests the deliverance sacrifice that they have brought.

7:12–17 Proscription of Eating Hard Fat or Blood After 6:8–7:11, which Mōysēs must deliver “to Aarōn and to his sons” (6:8, 24; cf. 6:19), 7:12–26 resumes 1:1–6:7 in directing the instructions “to the sons of Israel.” An Israelite audience (7:13a) prepares for the proscriptions for everyone in the land (vv. 13, 15, 16, 17). The unit is bifurcated into vv. 13–15 (no eating hard fat) and vv. 16–17 (no eating blood); the second cluster follows the structure of the first: 13 “Any hard fat of cows or of sheep or of goats you must not eat. 14 And the hard fat of carcasses or of something caught by wild animals may be for any use, but must not be eaten as food. 15 Anyone who eats the hard fat of animals, which he may bring of them as the Lord’s offering, that life must be destroyed from his people. 16 Any blood you must not eat, whether from the birds or from the livestock, in any part of the land, in your settlements. 17 Any life who eats blood, that life must be destroyed from his people.” LeuB transitions more quickly to the speech contents without a second redundant quotative frame in v. 13 (+ λεγων Bc A F Gött; > B* mins). The preposed object is stressed in the marked position: “Any hard fat of cows or of sheep or of goats you must not eat” (Πᾶν στέαρ βοῶν καὶ προβάτων καὶ αἰγῶν οὐκ ἔδεσθε, v. 13b). This prohibition was already given in 3:16–17, but here the overspecification in vv. 13–15 by marked usage, delay and redundancy is rhetorically pungent (Runge 2010: 388). Verse 14 augments 3:16–17 with new content, so that all are prohibited from eating not only hard fats of sacrifices, whether small livestock or by implication large (3:3–5), but non-sacrificial animal hard fats as well. In

230

commentary

5:2ff., one must confess and perform the ritual for sinful error if one comes to know that one has touched “any unclean thing, whether a carcass or an unclean animal caught by wild beasts.” By contrast, 7:14 uses a permissive then a prohibitive future to order that the hard fats from these same categories of dead animals “may be for any use, but must not be eaten as food” (ποιηθήσεται εἰς πᾶν ἔργον, καὶ εἰς βρῶσιν οὐ βρωθήσεται; see Muraoka 2016: 286, 288). A loophole in 5:2 is exposed by 7:14, which could expect one to perform the propitiation ritual of 5:1–13 after using and thus manipulating a carcass, which is by nature unclean. Verse 15 returns to the sacrificial categories, cows, sheep, goats, of v. 13: “Anyone who eats the hard fat of animals, which he may bring of them as the Lord’s offering [ὧν προσάξει αὐτῶν κάρπωμα Κυρίου], that life must be destroyed from his people” (κυριου B*unique; κυριω A F Gött). The contribution of v. 15 to 3:1–17 is the punishment, “that life must be destroyed.” The proscription of eating blood in vv. 16–17 had been tagged on as an afterthought to 3:17 (“and blood”), which was instead focused on hard fats (3:14– 17). Therefore, vv. 16–17, much more than 3:17, develops this proscription and prepares readers for the fullest treatment yet in 17:10–14 (both alluded to in Acts 15:20, 29). What is unique in 7:16–17 is the punishment Leitwort (“that life must be destroyed,” v. 17), but also the Greek limiting clauses, the first two are probably adverbial, the third is adjectival: πᾶν αἷμα οὐκ ἔδεσθε ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀπό τε τῶν πετεινῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν. You must not eat any blood, whether from the birds or from the livestock, in any part of the land, in your settlements (v. 16). The second clause recalls 3:17, in which the Israelites were prohibited from eating hard fat or blood “in every settlement of yours,” whereas the first clause is a construction unique to LeuB “in any part of the land” (ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ; + γη B*unique; > A Gött; τη γη > Bc F). Finally, to the prohibition of eating the blood of livestock (in 3:17), 7:16 adds “from birds” (ἀπό τε τῶν πετεινῶν). If the hard fats of vv. 13 and 15 were the product of a deliverance sacrifice (from the // language in 3:16–17), the bird’s blood in v. 16 could come instead from a WBO, sin offering, eating, ritual purifications or hunting (1:14–17; 5:7–10; 11–15; 17:13).

commentary

231

7:18–26 Allocating the Deliverance Sacrifice and Anointing the Priests The redundant quotative frames of the superscription and addressees mark off this ultimate paragraph of sacrificial instructions before the subscription in 7:27–28. As in the prior unit, the divine instructions by the agency of Mōysēs are given for the Israelites (v. 19). The contents do not apply to the community at large, but concern three subjects: the worshipper who brings the deliverance sacrifice (vv. 19–20); the priest who offers the hard fat and receives as his food the breast and shoulder (vv. 21–24); Aarōn and his sons on the day of their anointing (vv. 25–26). These three topoi should not be considered the internal organization, which the unit does not exhibit clearly, because of the curious shifts to second person “you” (δώσετε, v. 22) and (divine) first person “I” (εἴληφα … ἔδωκα, v. 24), and the mistranslation χρίσεις “anointing” (v. 25 [2×], confusing ‫“ ִמְשָׁחה‬portion” for the homonym ‫“ ִמְשָׁחה‬anointing”). The ambiguity of v. 19c, that is, what it is actually commanding, is overcome by v. 20, so that we may translate the unnecessary pronoun αὐτοῦ in v. 19 as reciprocal (unnecessary because the frequent use of the possessive article elsewhere): 19 The one who brings a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord must bring his own gift [τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ] to the Lord, that is, from the deliverance sacrifice. 20 His [own] hands [αἱ χεῖρες αὐτοῦ] must bring the offerings to the Lord. The one who brings a deliverance sacrifice must himself or herself carry it to the Lord. The καὶ in LeuBA may be otiose (see Muraoka 2016: 690), but possibly explanatory: “that is [καὶ], from the deliverance sacrifice” (και B* A b min; > Bc F Gött). This unit presents a contrast of recipients: one must give to the Lord “the hard fat that is on the breast and the lobe of the liver” (v. 21), but one must give—rhetorically in the second person “you must give” (δώσετε)—to Aarōn and his sons the breast and right shoulder of the sacrificed cow, sheep or goat (vv. 21–24; see 3:1–17; 7:13). The contextual stress is on the gifts, which are preposed objects in three separate sentences (v. 20b, τὸ στέαρ…ἥπατος προσοίσει; and v. 22a, καὶ τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιὸν δώσετε; v. 24a, τὸ γὰρ στηθύνιον…ἀφαιρέματος εἴληφα; see Levinsohn 2000: 37–40). The “breast” (v. 21), namely, “breast of deposit” (v. 24) designated for the priest is a diminuitive of the term for the “part of the body enclosed by ribs, ‘chest’” and was a thing placed on the altar (√στηθύνιον of στῆθος GELS 636; √ἐπίθεμα “that which is placed on [the altar]” GELS 272 gl. 2; cf. “cover” LEH §3537). The “right shoulder” (τὸν βραχίονα τὸν δεξιὸν) belongs to the priest “as a share” (ἐν μερίδι, v. 23) and is complemented

232

commentary

by the double accusative “as a choice portion” (ἀφαίρεμα, v. 22, 24; the difficulty in translating this noun is apparent from the modern versions: “advance deduction” NETS 89; “Abhebe” SD 106; “prélèvement” BA 111; “ofrenda aparte” BG 247). The addition of the third τὸ in v. 23 changes the emphasis from “the one among the sons of Aarōn who brings the blood” (F Gött NETS) to “the one who brings the blood of the deliverance and the hard fat that is from the sons of Aarōn [τὸ στέαρ τὸ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Ἀαρών] will have the right shoulder as a share” (το B A b mins Eth; > F Gött). The Lord’s discourse in v. 24 functions as a rhetorical device to ensure that the Israelites give the breast and shoulder to the priests. First, the emphatic descriptor is applied, “an enduring ordinance” (νόμιμον αἰώνιον) (to distinguish this context from the same phrase in 6:18, Wevers [1997: 96–97] translates this “a perpetual custom”). Second, the Israelites’ allocation for the priests is preceded by the Lord’s, which is expressed by intensive (resultative) perfects that convey the ongoing affects of his prior action: “I have taken [εἴληφα] …, and I have given [ἔδωκα].” In the LXX, this divine aside appears to be directed to Mōysēs who belongs to and represents the people, as the addition of “your [ὑμῶν] deliverance sacrifices” may suggest (ὑμῶν > MT SP). In the Heb. text, vv. 25–26 substantiates the designation of the breast and shoulder to the priests, but in the LXX, the selection of χρίσεις “anointing” (for ‫‘ ִמְשָׁחה‬portion’ or separately ‘anointing’) changes the focus from the offerings as a portion to possibly as a means of the anointing of Aarōn and his sons: “This is the anointing of Aarōn and the anointing of his sons from the offerings of the Lord [ἀπὸ τῶν καρπωμάτων Κυρίου] on the day he brought them in order to serve the Lord as priests” (the choice of χρίσεις for ‫ ִמְשָׁחה‬was probably influenced by the verb ‫“ משׁחו‬when he anointed him” in v. 26). The subordinate clause in v. 26, however, returns to the purpose of vv. 21b–24 by the lexeme “to give [δοῦναι] to them,” which implies giving the breast and shoulder on the day of the priestly anointing. Similar instructions were already supplied in greater detail in Exod 29:26–28, which again indicates that this passage is primarily rhetorical; hence, the second occurrence of the proposition now modified by the hyperbole: “It is an enduring ordinance throughout their generations” (νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς αὐτῶν, v. 26b; see v. 24).

7:27–28 Subscription: Enumerating the Sacrifices Commanded at Seina The LeuB scribe suitably delimits this first primary subscription (also 26:46; 27:34), which adopts the formula from the direct context, “This is the law of X” (οὗτος ὁ νόμος + Gen.; Leu 6:9, 14, 20, 25, 31; 7:1; similarly 6:20; 7:25). From the

commentary

233

prior uses of this formula, one expects οὗτος to have a postcedent of instructions, but here the formula enumerates six genitives that recall the antecedent instructions of 1:2–7:26. The singular “law” (ὁ νόμος) should be interpreted as a collection of prescriptions or instructions, which are verbal nouns, which means that the genitives probably function objectively: “This is the instruction for [concerning, about] whole burnt offerings and for sacrifice …” (v. 27). The canonical placement of the subscription constrains readers to include every word associated with each genitive from 1:2–7:26, not just the initial block of teaching. Therefore, “for whole burnt offerings” (τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων) refers not only to 1:1–17, but also 6:8–13; “for sacrifice” (θυσίας) refers to 2:1– 16; 6:14–18; “concerning sin” (περὶ ἁμαρτίας) to 4:1–5:13; 6:24–30; “for a sinful error” (τῆς πλημμελίας) to probably 5:14–6:7, 31–40; and “for the deliverance sacrifice” (τῆς θυσίας τοῦ σωτηρίου) to 3:1–17; 7:1–11, 18–24(–26?); and maybe 7:12– 17. The ambiguity of the referent of θυσίας (v. 27) is resolved by the the same phrase in 6:14, which refers to the fine flour sacrifice (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τῆς θυσίας). However, this cannot be said of “for fulfillment” (τῆς τελιώσεως), which is a term not found in 1:2–7:26, but in ExodusLXX 29 (4×) and Leueitikon 8 (6×) at the installation of the priests (the earlier passages about the anointing in Leu 6:19– 23 and 7:25–26 do not use this lemma). By translating its basic meaning “fulfillment,” I hope to preserve the literalism of this Hebraism for LeuB’s users (see Lee 1983: 51; so “cumplimiento” BG 248; √τελείωσις is “an elliptical Hebraism based on τελειόω τὰς χεῖράς τινος”, GELS 674 gl.; contra contextual translations: “Einwiehung” SD 106; “validation” NETS 89; “habilitation” BA 112). For intertextual readers, “for fulfillment” serves a janus function of looking backward and forward, so that the instructions in ExodusLXX 29 are enacted in Leuitikon 8, but still associated with the day the Lord commanded the Israelites to bring their own gifts (perhaps 8:1–32 is presented as concomitant with the delivery of 1:2–7:26, before 8:33–36). The subordinate clause is a comparative not apparent in the Heb. (‫אשׁר‬ “which”): “just as [ὃν τρόπον] the Lord commanded Mōysēs on Mount Seina on the day he commanded the sons of Israel to bring their gifts before the Lord in the Seina wilderness” (v. 28). The double mention of Seina repositions the 1:2– 7:26 instructions squarely at Mount Seina within the ExodusLXX–NumbersLXX narrative, but without mentioning the tent of testimony (Leu 1:1). If Leu 1:1 serves as an introduction to the entire book (cf. Num 1:1), and 1:2a–b as the introduction to the first speech of 1:2–7:26 (see 1:1–9 above), then the 7:27–28 subscription marks the completion of Mōysēs’ transmission of the next segment of instructions in the larger Seina sequence (Exod 34:32; Leu 7:27–28; 26:46; 27:34; Num 1:19; 9:5). The period “on the day he commanded [ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ

234

commentary

ἐνετείλατο] the sons of Israel to bring their gifts before the Lord in the Seina wilderness,” (v. 28) has no reference external to 1:2–7:26. This means that v. 28 summarizes v. 27 and thus all of 1:2–7:26 as the Lord’s directives not merely to the leadership and not when they institute the cultus in land of Chanaan, but to all the Israelites to bring their gifts before him now in the Seina wilderness.

8:1–5 Introduction to the Ordination of Aarōn and His Sons By circumscribing this unit in LeuB, these brief orders to Mōysēs (v. 2) and his obedience to them (v. 4–5) are presented as a positive introduction to the ordination of the priests in 8:1–9:24. Following a typical superscription (v. 1, Lord→Mōysēs), the readers’ expectation is defied as the first directive is not communication but action: “Take [Λάβε] Aarōn and his sons and his garments and the anointing olive oil and the calf for sin and the two rams and the basket of unleavened bread” (cf. impv. Ἔντειλε “command,” 6:9a). This aorist imperative has seven direct objects, persons and accoutrements, that “sont censés être connus; ils ont été annoncés en Ex 29,1[–8]” (Harlé and Pralon 1988: 112). The second aorist imperative should be understood as concomitant with the first: “and assemble [ἐκκλησίασον] the whole assembly at the door of the tent of testimony” (v. 3). On the free morpheme of this Aorist, ἐκκλησία, Cyril of Jerusalem (c. LeuB) hangs his canonical reading: “Well is the church named ecclesia [‘assembly’], because it calls forth and assembles all men, as the Lord says in Leviticus: ‘Then assemble the whole community at the entrance of the meeting tent.’ It is worthy of note that this word assemble is used in the Scriptures for the first time in the passage when the Lord established Aaron in the high priesthood” (Lienhard 2001: 172– 173). The location, “At the door of the tent of testimony” (ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν …), was just outside the door (Heb. ‘gate’) where the devotee would lay his hands on the sacrificial animal and slaughter it there (chs. 1, 3, 4). In v. 4a–b, the paratactic syntax leaves some ambiguity as to the relationship between v. 4a and 4b: While it is syntactically possible that v. 4b specifies v. 4a, so that Mōysēs obeyed only the second imperative, instead contextually v. 4a–b probably expresses each fulfillment in parallel to each imperative in vv. 2–3 (on parataxis, see Aejmelaeus 1982): “Take Aarōn and his sons” (v. 2), And Mōysēs did just as the Lord instructed him (v. 4a),

commentary

235

“and assemble the whole assembly …” (v. 3), And he gathered the assembly at the door of the tent of testimony (v. 4b). Mōsēs then declares to the assembly in synonomous parallelism in LeuB: Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ῥῆμα, τοῦτό ἐστιν ὃ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος ποιῆσαι. “This is the matter, this is what the Lord commanded to do” (v. 5). An implied object “us” also serves as the unexpressed subject of the infinitive, “the Lord commanded (us) to do” (Muraoka 2016: 592). The two demonstrative clauses, “This is the matter” and “this is what,” have as their semantic postcedent the rituals Mōsēs will now perform to ordain Aarōn and his sons inside the door of the tent (see 8:33), while the assembly waits and presumably watches from outside through the open flap of the gate (see 9:24; LeuB 8:5//9:6, even the orth. Mōsēs; v. 5 2nd τουτο εστιν B A x-527; > F Gött). Of the 25 times his name is spelled Mōsēs, 24 occur in chs. 8–10 (once in 24:23).

8:6–9:6 The Fulfillment of Aarōn and His Sons This large section in LeuB presents a rapid succession of ordination rituals as Mōysēs own enactment of his pronouncement in 8:5b–c. This pattern is repeated as the same phraseology in 9:6 (//8:5) concludes 8:6–9:5, and is similarly enacted in the next section (9:7–21). In 8:6–16 the first 37 main verbs, of which 35 or 36 are performed by Mōysēs (or Mōsēs), are enumerated in an unmarked position (8:6–16). The discourse slows down somewhat in vv. 17–26 (also 33–35) to preposition certain emphasized objects or modifiers in the sacrificial rituals (as was true of chs. 1–7), but concludes with a string of unmarked sentences that interchange from speech to obedience, each audience larger than the last: Mōysēs/Mōsēs instructs Aarōn and his sons (vv. 31–35), then they obey (v. 36); Mōysēs/Mōsēs instructs Aarōn, his sons and the elders (9:1–4), then they obey (v. 5); Mōysēs/Mōsēs instructs the entire assembly (v. 6, pl. impv. ποιήσατε), which generates readerly expectation that the assembly will obey in the next paragraph (9:7–21). Leading into this interchange, the subject matter is divided into six subsections (vv. 6–9, 10–13, 14–17, 18–21, 22–29, 31–36), both by its related ritual contents and the formula at the end of each subsection,

236

commentary

“just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs” (in vv. 9, 13, 17, 21, 29), and, finally, “Then Aarōn and his sons did all the things that the Lord instructed Mōsēs” (in v. 36). Verse 30 stands outside this structure. In the first subsection, vv. 6–8, Mōysēs brings, washes (v. 6) and dresses Aarōn and his sons in priestly attire (vv. 7–9b), “just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs” (ὅν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ, v. 9c). This formula (v. 9c) refers back to the more detailed ExodusLXX instructions for Mōysēs to bring and wash (Exod 29:4), make garments and clothe his brother and nephews (Exod 28:1–39; 29:4–6). This basic understanding of Leu 8:6–9 is perceptible, but in LeuB v. 7c after he clothed them (αὐτοὺς, v. 7[2×]) with the tunic and fastened them with the belt, “then he clothed him with the undergarment [ἐνέδυσεν αὐτὸν τὸν ὑποδύτην]” (√ὑποδύτης for “outer garment” ‫ מעיל‬HALOT § 5431; “robe” DCH 5:396; v. 7[2×] αυτους B* A mins; αυτον Bc F BrMcL Gött). Does “him” refer now to Aarōn alone, and how and why did Mōysēs put an undergarment over a tunic and belt? LeuB readers might have wondered if this undergarment, although over the tunic, was so-called because it was under the shoulder piece (so Wevers 1997: 100; √ἐπωμίς ‘shoulder piece’ alters the meaning of Heb. ‘ephod’, which Lee [1983: 51] notes, but unfortunately still lists the Greek term as ‘ephod’). Also elusive is v. 8 when, “he put on it [ἐπ’ αὐτὴν] the oracle [τὸ λόγιον], and he put on the oracle the interpretation and the truth [τήν δήλωσιν καὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν].” In LeuB, on “it” refers grammatically to “the process of the shoulder piece” (τὴν ποίησιν τῆς ἐπωμίδος), which is confusing (αυτην B M’ mins y-121; αυτο A; αυτον “him” [= Aarōn] F Gött). Also, how did Mōysēs put onto an oracle the interpretation, or “the explanation” (NETS 89; “révélation” BA 114) and “the truth”? This metaphorical translation can be explained as an “etymologizing rendering” (√ἀλήθεια for ‫‘ תמים‬Thummim’, √δήλωσις for ‫‘ אורים‬Urim’: Lee 1983: 51), perhaps to align with synchronous cultural imagery (Harlé and Pralon 188: 113–114). For careful PentLXX interpreters, however, the prior metonym “oracle of judgment(s)” (√λογεῖον + gen. √κρίσις; ExodLXX 28:15, 23, 24[2×], 26) indicates that this “oracle” was the name for a beautiful garment worn for priestly decision making (hence, the need for “interpretation and truth;” cf. LevLXX 10:10). In the next subsection, vv. 10–13, Mōysēs-Mōsēs anoints with olive oil the altar, its accoutrements and Aarōn. These verses are likewise concluded by the formula “just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs” (καθάπερ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ), which refers back to Exod 29:7–9. Sprinkling the altar seven times and pouring oil on Aarōn’s head was the act of anointing, which, even through the paratactic structure, ostensibly results in their consecration: “and he anointed the altar/him and [as a result] consecrated it” (καὶ ἔχρεισεν τὸ θυσιαστήριον/ αὐτὸν καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτό/αὐτόν, vv. 11b–c, 12b–c). Cyril of Jerusalem (c. LeuB) reads

commentary

237

v. 12 as a prefiguration of the gift of the Spirit’s anointing: “You must know that this chrism [chrismation] is prefigured in the Old Testament. When Moses, conferring on his brother the divine appointment, was ordering him high priest, he anointed him after he had bathed in water, and thenceforth he was called ‘christ’ [‘anointed’], clearly after the figurative Chrism” (Lienhard 2001: 173). In v. 10b, the LXX lacks the plus in the MT and SP (perhaps its source eliminated what it perceived as a redundancy in v. 11), but it preserves the narrative redundancy of v. 13 already performed in vv. 6–9: Then Mōysēs brought Aarōn and his sons (v. 6a) … And he clothed them with the tunic and fastened them with the belt (v. 7a–b) … And he put the headband on his head (v. 9a). And Mōysēs brought the sons of Aarōn and clothed them with tunics and fastened them with belts and secured headdresses to them (v. 13). The ‘headband’ (√μίτρα, in LevLXX 2× in v. 9) and ‘headdress’ (√κίδαρις, v. 13; 16:4), render different words and so do not merely indicate stylistic variation (see Wevers 1997: xi–xii); at least the former term (√μίτρα) restricts its generic sense in Koine to a particular Jewish priestly entity (see Lee 1983: 51). In the next two subsections, Mōysēs-Mōsēs brings and performs the rituals of the calf for sin (vv. 14–17) and ram for whole burnt offering (vv. 18–21). The closing formula “just as the Lord instructed/commanded Mōysēs” (vv. 17, 21) alludes to the divine instructions in Exod 29:10–18: 10 And you shall bring near the calf to the doors of the tent of witness, and Aarōn and his sons shall place their hands on the head of the calf before the Lord by the doors of the tent of witness. 11 And you shall slaughter the calf before the Lord by the doors of the tent of witness. 12 And you shall take from the blood of the calf and place on the horns of the altar with your finger. Then all the remaining blood you shall pour beside the base of the altar. 13 And you shall take all the fat upon the intestines and the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys and the fat on them and place on the altar. 14 But the flesh of the calf and the skin and the excrement you shall burn with fire outside the camp, for it is of sin. 15 And the one ram you shall take, and Aarōn and his sons shall place their hands on the head of the ram. 16 And you shall slaughter it, and taking the blood, you shall pour it against the altar round about. 17 And the ram you shall divide limb by limb and wash the entrails and feet with water and place on the divided parts with the

238

commentary

head. 18 And you shall offer up the whole ram on the altar as a whole burnt offering to the Lord for an odor of fragrance. It is a sacrifice for the Lord. Exod 29:10–18, NETS based on Gött

14 And Mōysēs brought the calf for sin, and Aarōn and his sons placed their hands on the head of the calf for sin, 15 and he slaughtered it. And Mōsēs took some of the blood and put it on the horns of the altar, and he consecrated it to propitiate on it. 16 And Mōysēs took all the hard fat that was on the entrails and a lobe from the liver and both kidneys and the hard fat that was on them, and Mōysēs offered them up on the altar. 17 And the calf and its hide and its meat also he burned them with fire outside the camp just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs. 18 And Mōysēs brought the ram that was for a whole burnt offering, and Aarōn and his sons placed their hands on the ram’s head. 19 And Mōysēs slaughtered the ram, and Mōsēs poured out the blood against the sides of the altar. 20 And he divided up the ram limb by limb, and Mōsēs offered up the head and the limbs and the hard fat. 21 And the entrails and the feet he washed with water, and Mōysēs offered up the entire ram on the altar. It is a whole burnt offering that is for a sweet smell. It is an offering to the Lord, just as the Lord commanded Mōysēs. LeuB 8:14–21

The literary dependence on Exod. 29 is extensive; everything italicized (above) is substantively identical. Beyond the shift of imperativals future to aorist indicatives (from command to performance), the secondary text, Leu. 8, removes specifications or actions that are assumed and must be supplied from the source (see Lyons 2009: 61). Rather than delaying the identification of the sacrifices, as “for it is of sin” and “as a whole burnt offering” (Exod 29:14, 18), Leu 8:14, 18 introduces these by new metonyms that assume a knowledge of ExodusLXX 29: “And Mōysēs brought the calf that is for sin [τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας]” and “the ram that was for a whole burnt offering [τὸν κρειὸν τὸν εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα]” (attributive prep. phrases with anaphoric articles; see Muraoka 2016: 4–6). In Exod 29:17, Mōysēs was to wash the entrails and feet, then offer the divided parts on the altar, but the order of these is reversed in Leu 8:20– 21. The largest omission occurs in LeuB 8:15 (+ in Exod 29:12) probably due to homeoteleuton: “[the altar] with his finger, and he purified the altar and poured out the blood at the base of the altar” ([τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου] κυκλω τω δακτυλω καὶ εκαθαρισεν το θυσιαστηριον και τὸ αιμα εξεχεεν επι την βασιν του θυσιαστηριου Bmg [below col. 3] Gött, prb. alluded to in Heb 9:21; > Btxt unique). In Exod 29:14 “and the excrement” is also burned, but LeuB* 8:17 omits this object (την κοπρον αυτου Bmg [right of col. 3] Swete Gött; > Btxt unique). Perhaps the most impor-

commentary

239

tant difference is the addition in Leu 8:15d–e of the purpose infinitive, “and he consecrated it to propitiate on it” (καὶ ἡγίασεν αὐτὸ τοῦ ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ). ‘Consecrating’ actions are central to Exod. 29 (√ἁγιάζω 12×), though not occurring in 29:10–18, but the addition of propitiation in Leu. 8:15 can be explained as an exegetical extension of this Leitwort in the sin and sinful error sacrifices of Leueitikon 4–6 (12×). In the next subsection, vv. 22–29, Mōysēs-Mōsēs offers to the Lord a ram of fulfillment, cakes from a basket of fulfillment, but takes the ram’s breast for himself. All of this was again “as the Lord commanded Mōsēs,” specifically in Exod 29:19–28: 19 And you shall take the second ram, and Aarōn and his sons shall place their hands on the head of the ram. 20 And you shall slaughter it and take some of its blood and place on the lobe of Aarōn’s right ear and on the tip of the right hand and on the tip of the right foot and on the lobes of his sons’ right ears and on the tips of their right hands and on the tips of their right feet. 21 And you shall take from the blood that is from the altar and from the oil of anointing and sprinkle on Aarōn and on his vestment and his sons and the vestments of his sons with him. And he shall be consecrated, and his vestment and his sons and the vestments of his sons with him. But the blood of the ram you shall pour against the altar round about. 22 And you shall take from the ram its fat and the fat covering the intestines and the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys and the fat on them and the right shoulder—for this is validation—23 and a loaf, one from oil, and a cake, one from the reed basket of unleavened things placed before the Lord, 24 and you shall place all these things on the hands of Aarōn and on the hands of his sons, and you shall deduct them as an advance deduction before the Lord. 25 And you shall take these things from their hands and offer up on the altar of the whole burnt offering for an odor of fragrance before the Lord. It is a sacrifice for the Lord. 26 And you shall take the breast from the ram of validation, which is for Aarōn, and set it apart as something set apart before the Lord, and it shall be for you for a share. 27 And you shall consecrate the breast as something set apart, and the shoulder of the advance deduction, which has been set apart and which has been deducted in advance from the ram of validation from Aarōn and from his sons. 28 And it shall be for Aarōn and his sons a perpetual precept from the sons of Israel. For this is an advance deduction, and it shall be an advance deduction from the sons of Israel from the victims of deliverance, an advance deduction for the Lord. Exod 29:19–28 NETS

240

commentary

22 And Mōysēs brought the second ram, a ram of fulfillment. And Aarōn and his sons laid their hands on the ram’s head. 23 And he slaughtered it, and Mōsēs took some of its blood and put it on Aarōn’s right ear lobe and on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. 24 And Mōysēs brought the sons of Aarōn, and Mōysēs put some of the blood on their right ear lobes and on the thumbs of their right hands and on the big toes of their right feet. And Mōsēs poured out the blood against the sides of the altar. 25 And he took the hard fat and the waist and the hard fat that was on the entrails and the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys and the hard fat on them and the right shoulder. 26 And from the basket of fulfillment that is before the Lord he took one unleavened cake and one olive oil cake and one wafer, and he placed them on the hard fat and he placed the right shoulder. 27 He placed all these on Aarōn’s hands and on his sons’ hands, and he offered them up as a choice portion before the Lord. 28 Then Mōsēs took them from their hands, and Mōsēs offered them up on the altar on the whole burnt offering of fulfillment, which is a sweet smell. It is an offering to the Lord. 29 And after Mōsēs took the breast, he separated it as a deposit before the Lord, from the ram of fulfillment, and it was a portion for Mōsēs, as the Lord commanded Mōsēs. 30 And Mōsēs took some of the anointing olive oil and some of the blood that was on the altar and sprinkled them on Aarōn and his garments, and his sons and his sons’ garments with him. LeuB 8:22–30

The articles of “the second ram” (τὸν κρειὸν τὸν δεύτερον), not known from the Leu. 8 context, and the gloss of its purpose in Leu 8:22 “a ram of fulfillment” (κριὸν τελειώσεως), both indicate that Exod 29:19–28 is in view. In 8:22, 24 the LXX probably inserted the name Mōysēs to clarify that he was the verbal subject (> MT SP). The removal of the “waist” or “lower back” (NETS √ὀσφύς, 8:25; or possibly “Hüfte” SD 107; “cadera” BG 249; “hanche” BA 117) was not commanded in Exodus 29, but was for the deliverance sacrifice, which reveals again here the adaptation of the ExodusLXX instructions in light of Leueitikon 1–7 (Leu 3:9; 7:3). According to Leu 7:24, in distinction from the hard fats, the “right shoulder” was for the priests as a share, but in LeuB 8:26 they are combined for the Lord alone: “and he placed them on the hard fat and he placed [ἐπέθηκεν] the right arm” (8:26, επεθηκεν B*unique; > Bc BrMcL Gött). In v. 27, “Le geste du «balancement», tenūpāh en hébreu, est ici gommé dans le grec” (Harlé and Pralon 1988: 117), as the Heb. verb and cognate accusative (‫ נוף‬+ ‫)תנופה‬, “he elevated them as an elevation offering” (JPS) or “waved them … as a wave offering” (NIV) becomes “he offered them up as a choice portion” (ἀνήνεγκεν αὐτὰ ἀφαίρεμα;

commentary

241

NETS 90: “an advanced deduction”). In Exod 29:25, a single cake and wafer was to be placed on the altar, whereas in Leu 8:26, Mōysēs-Mōsēs placed two cakes and a wafer on top of the hard fat, and then “on the whole burnt offering of fulfillment” (in v. 28, “Mōysēs took them,” which must be supplied contextually vs. [‫ את]ם‬4QLevc; ‫ אתם‬MT SP). This metonym is due to a conflation of the ram for whole burnt offering (vv. 18–21) and ram for fulfillment (vv. 22–29) by the genitive (v. 28, ἐπὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα τῆς τελιώσεως vs. MT SP ‫על־העלה מלאים הם‬ “with/on top of the whole burnt offering. They were the ordination offering.” MT SP). The command to sprinkle Aarōn, his sons and their garments with the anointing olive oil and ram’s blood from the altar logically followed the blood manipulation in the ritual instructions (Exod 8:21), but is completed in Leu 8:30 like an afterthought, after the offerings were sacrificed before the Lord and after the concluding formula in v. 29. Also from Exod 8:21, one expects after Leu 8:30 the consecration that results (semantically, not syntactically), but this is a large minus in LeuB*A (και ηγιασεν Ααρων και τας στολας αυτου και τους υιους αυτου και τας στολας των υιων αυτου μετ αυτου “and he consecrated Aarōn and his garments and his sons and his sons’ garments with him” Bmg [above col. 3] F Gött; > Btxt A). For B’s careful readership, the omission in LeuBA 8:29 of the emphatic rearticulation of Exod 29:28 could be explained by LevLXX’s earlier, more extensive coverage the same ‘choice portion’ for the priests (Leu 7:18–26). The next subsection, vv. 31–36, reappropriates Exod 29:30–35 first by shifting from the actions to the direct speech of Mōysēs to Aarōn and his sons. The priests must boil the meat then eat it with the cakes in the basket of fulfillment in the court of the tent of testimony, namely, “in a holy place” (ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ = SP ‫ > במקום הקדש‬MT, v. 31). Readers of LeuBA would probably have rectified the solecism φαγεσθαι to the imperative “eat” φαγεσθε (Swete BrMcL Gött). Through the obscurities of vv. 25–29 in the LXX, and especially in LeuB, here readers now understand that the fulfillment ram’s meat and cakes from the fulfillment basket were left over from what had already been offered (vv. 27–28) or designated for Mōsēs (v. 29, orth. “Mōsēs” [×3]). What Aarōn and his sons did not eat of the meat and cakes must be burned with fire; burning leftover meat has already been mandated (cf. 7:7, 9), but now leftover cakes must be added to the fire (cf. leftover μαν ‘man[na]’ in Exod 16:19). Unique to LeuB*, until their fulfillment is completed, the priests for seven days must not go out “from the sacrifice [θύσιας] of the tent of testimony” (v. 33, θυσιας B*unique; θυρας “door” Bc Swete Gött). This preposed adverbial phrase focuses in LeuB on maintaining nearness to the sacrifices at the altar. In this comprehensible reading, the proximity of the altar of whole burnt offerings to the tent’s door (1:5; 4:7) explains why in LeuB the priests must sit at the door (√θύρα) of the tent day and night

242

commentary

for a week. It also could be perceived as an allusion to the seven-day sacrificial purification of the altar (Exod 29:36–46). Mōysēs-Mōsēs explains in v. 33 that the seven days needed to “fulfill your hands” (τελιώσει τὰς χεῖρας ὑμῶν) is for the purpose that “propitiation be made for you” (ὥστε ἐξειλάσασθαι περὶ ὑμῷν). To “fulfill” or “validate your hands” is a technical expression for “ordain to office” (Wevers 1997: 115), but the idiom itself is a word play on the symbolic completeness of the seven-day waiting period (v. 33). At this juncture, careful readers would expect the performance of Exod 29:36–46, the aforementioned seven-day ritual to purify the altar, but this does not take place until Numbers 7. Instead, the orders of Leu 8:31b–35a are doubly fortified by the warning and divine origins: “You must keep the Lord’s orders so that you do not die; for so the Lord God commanded me” (v. 35; for clarity the LXX probably converted the MT SP agentless pual passive ‫ כי־כן צויתי‬to the active verb, and LeuBA and Cyr state the subject: οὕτως γὰρ ἐνετείλατό μοι Κύριος ὁ θεός; here ο θεος B A x-527 y-318 mins Cyr; > F Gött). The unit is closed by adapting the formula to highlight the Mōysēs-like obedience of Aarōn and his sons: “Then Aarōn and his sons did all the things that the Lord instructed Mōsēs” (v. 31//vv. 9, 13, 17, 21, 29). In the final subsection, 9:1–6, upon the arrival of the eighth day in the narrative, Mōsēs calls Aarōn, his sons and the council of Israel’s elders, then Mōysēs (MT SP “he”) commands Aarōn to “take for yourself” (Λάβε σεαυτῷ) and bring before the Lord “a tender [ἁπαλὸν] little calf from the cows for sin and ram for a whole burnt offering” (vv. 1–2; απαλον B*unique; > Bc LXX-B* Gött; also describes first fruits in 2:14). The Greek text (following Heb.) in 9:2, 3, 8 in LevLXX shifts from the term ‘calf’ (√μόσχος frequent in LevLXX) to the diminuitive ‘little calf’ (√μοσχάριον), which could simply mean ‘calf’ (Lee 1983: 108–109), but for stylistic variation I render it “little calf” (with LEH §6032; “little [?] calf ” GELS 468; in 9:2, n. αὐτὰ = n. μοσχάριον + m. κριὸν, see Muraoka 2016: 655). This rarer term was not necessarily an LXX neologism (? by LEH § 6032), as it was common at least by the 3rd century BCE in papyri (Lee 1983: 109). Just as Mōysēs-Mōsēs brought the calf for sin (8:14–17) and ram for whole burnt offering (8:18–21), now Aarōn must offer them for himself, presumably as patriarchal representative of his sons. Aarōn also must, for the first time in the book, assume the communicative role of Mōysēs-Mōsēs and instruct the council of Israel’s elders, assuming the protocols from chs. 1–7, to take (Λάβετε): a billy goat for sin, calf for a whole burnt offering, calf and ram for a deliverance sacrifice, and fine flour mixed with oil (v. 3, √ὁλοκάρπωσις ‘whole burnt offering’, synonym of √ὁλοκάρπωμα, appearing in LevLXX only here [10× in LXX], was possibly coined by the LXX translators: Lee 1983: 52). One might conclude that a billy goat was needed for the sin of specified leaders in the community, whether a ‘ruler’ or

commentary

243

‘elder’ (4:22–26; 9:3). The motivation for obeying the imperatives, namely, taking the sacrificial animals and elements, in vv. 2–4 is given: “because today the Lord will be seen among you” (ὅτι σήμερον Κύριος ὀφθήσεται ἐν ὑμῖν). This motive clause foreshadows the theophany of 9:23–24, and explains why Aarōn and the elders obey immediately in formulaic fashion, “And they took them to the front of the tent of testimony as Mōysēs commanded” (v. 5). This event is overspecified by redundancy with two more statements, “and the entire assembly approached, and they stood before the Lord” (v. 5; ad sensum shift from sg. προσῆλθεν “approached” to pl. προσῆλθεν ἔστησαν “and they stood”; see Muraoka 2016: 642). Closure to the LeuB unit is formed by the inclusio with 8:5: And Mōsēs said to the assembly: “This is the matter [Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ῥῆμα], this is what the Lord commanded to do [ὃ ἐνετείλατο Κύριος ποιῆσαι].” 8:5

And Mōsēs said: “This is the matter [Τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα] that the Lord said you must do [ὃ εἶπεν Κύριος ποιήσατε], and the Lord’s glory will be seen among you.” 9:6

Like 8:5, which serves a janus function, so 9:6 not only recalls the ritual obedience of vv. 2–4 (Wevers 1997: 119), but anticipates the next series of instructions (9:7–21) and intensifies readerly anticipation for the ensuing theophany (9:23– 24).

9:7–21 Sacrifices to Propitiate for Aarōn, His Household and the People This LeuB paragraph begins with the second of three identical superscriptions that occur in Leueitikon only in chs. 9–10: “Then Mōysēs said to Aarōn” (καὶ εἶπεν Μωυσῆς τῷ [or πρὸς] Ἀαρών, 9:2, 7; 10:3). Mōysēs’ command to Aarōn to now perform the sacrificial rituals with the animals he has taken for himself and the elders have taken for the people (v. 7). Without pause, the text articulates Aarōn’s performance of the rituals first for himself: a little calf for sin (vv. 8–11 finishes v. 2) and whole burnt offering (vv. 12–14 finishes v. 2); then for the people: a billy goat for sin (v. 15 finishes v. 3); whole burnt offering (v. 16 finishes v. 3); “the sacrifice” (τὴν θυσίαν), namely, a fine flour offering (v. 17 finishes v. 4); and calf and ram for a deliverance sacrifice (v. 18–21 finishes v. 4). The motive for completing these rituals, stated in 9:4 and again in 9:6, was the forthcoming theophany, and now in v. 7 the purpose is stated “and propitiate for

244

commentary

yourself and your house” and “propitiate [error ἐξείλασε] for them [the people]” (LeuB readers would have corrected to ἐξ[ε]ίλασαι, and perceived sg. τοῦ λαοῦ was the semantic referent of pl. αὐτῶν “[for] them”; v. 7, among other texts such as 16:3, 6, is alluded to in Heb 5:3; 7:27). The LXX may have had a unique source or changed “for yourself and your people [‫ ”]ובעד העם‬to “and your house” (τοῦ οἴκου σου) because the next phrase “for them” (περὶ αὐτῶν) renders propitiation for “your people” redundant (v. 7). Here “and your house” must include Aarōn’s sons, and maybe his wife, daughters and extended family (cf. 10:14–15). Augustine (c. LeuB) stresses that priests were not sinless since they were required to offer a sacrifice for their own sins, just as Christians are not sinless and must offer the daily sacrifice through prayer, “Forgive us our debts” (Lienhard 2001: 173). Whereas Jerome (c. LeuB) reasons that bishops in the church are like the Aarōnic priests, who serve spiritually, but are served by no one in return: “And then there is the fact that the priest intercedes with God for the sinful people, while there is no one to entreat for the priest” (Schaff 2.6: 733). The narrative assumes knowledge of the protocols of each ritual from chs. 1– 8 and mentions only enough detail to show that Aarōn and his sons performed the sacrifice rituals precisely. The Leitmotif of precise obedience is underscored by the recurring comparatives: “as the Lord commanded Mōysēs” (v. 7); “just as the Lord commanded Mōsēs” (v. 10); “and he slaughtered it like the first time” (v. 15); “and completed it as was appropriate” (v. 16); and to close the unit “just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs” (v. 21). Verse 7 in LevLXX is awkward since Mōysēs refers to himself in the third person, “as the Lord commanded Mōysēs” (+ τῷ Μωσῇ > MT SP). Athanasius (c. LeuB), reading the Greek text, identified the anomaly: “See now here, though Moses be one, Moses himself speaks as if about another Moses, ‘as the Lord commanded Moses’ ” (Schaff 2.4: 1110). This second round of sacrifices in vv. 9–21 does not fulfill any commands articulated in ExodusLXX 29. The implication is that Aarōn, his household and the people must have sinned unintentionally or perhaps knowingly, so that this section can reasonably be read as Mōysēs’ own application of the divine instructions in LevLXX 4:1–6:7 to augment the ExodusLXX 29 vision for consecrating the priests and people. In this way, the “little calf for sin” (τὸ μοσχάριον τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, v. 8) for Aarōn and sons (vv. 9–11) interprets and obeys the caveat of the calf for sin: “If even the anointed high priest sins” (Leu 4:3; in 9:8, the LXX appears to remove the redunadancy “which was for himself” ‫ אשר לו‬MT SP; the diminutive μοσχάριον could just mean ‘calf:’ “little calf” LEH § 6032; but “little (?) calf” GELS 468). A male sheep (“ram” √κριός, v. 2), for the first time in the book, is required for the whole burnt offering (vv. 12–14; also later in Day of Propitiation: 16:3, 5). One might surmise that the protocols would follow those supplied in Leu 1:10–13 (ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων “from the sheep,” 1:10), but the addition of plac-

commentary

245

ing “also the head” (καὶ τὴν κεφαλήν, 9:13 from 1:8) on the altar reveals instead that the protocols follow Leu 1:3–9, the WBO “from the cattle,” for a larger flock animal (and not “from the flocks, lambs and kids,” 1:10; the LXX in 9:13 “on [ἐπὶ] the altar” = MT ‫ ≠ על־המזבח‬SP ‫)המזבח‬. Next, the billy goat for the people’s sin Aarōn slaughters “like the first time” (καθὰ καὶ τὸ πρῶτον, v. 15) or “as also in the first case” (Wevers 1996: 123), which refers in LeuBA to slaughtering the first of the sin offering that was for Aarōn and his household (vv. 8–11; the ἔσφαξεν αὐτὸ B A* mins; + και εκαθαρισεν Ac; + αυτον και εκαθαρισεν αυτον “it and he purified it” [= MT SP ‫ ]ויחטאהו‬F Gött; here Wevers [1996: 123 n. 13] forgets that Harlé and Pralon [1988: 120] used RH without the second Heb. sentence “and he purified it”). The only anaphoric protocols for a billy goat for sin were those prescribed for “the ruler” (ὁ ἄρχων; 4:22–26), and later in the unique Day of Propitiation instructions is a billy goat for sin offered for the community (16:15–20). This leaves some ambiguity, but lends toward adopting the protocols from 4:22–26. The whole burnt offering, earlier specified as an unblemished calf and unblemished year-old lamb (v. 3, ἄμωμα n. pl. modifies both), was completed “as was appropriate” (ὡς καθήκει, v. 16; not “como es conveniente” [BG 251] since more force is implied, as in: “wie es sich gehört” SD 108). Contextually, this means he faithfully implemented the prescriptions of 1:3–9 (√μόσχος “calf” v. 5; cf. μοσχάριον in 9:3) and 1:10–13 (√ἀρήν “lamb” v. 10). In v. 17, Aarōn brought “the sacrifice” (τὴν θυσίαν), which functions as a metonym for the “fine flour mixed with olive oil” in 9:4 (likewise, θυσίας in 7:27 for 2:1–16; 6:14–18). This was offered on the altar “from the morning” (cf. 6:20) in distinction from the WBO (χωρὶς τοῦ ὁλοκ.) (cf. “opposite the altar” ἀπέναντι τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, 6:14). Of the sacrifices offered for the people, the calf and the ram for their deliverance sacrifice is described in the most detail (vv. 18–21). The details recall the original stress of this ritual on blood manipulation and offering hard fats (vv. 18–20 as in 3:1–17) and the added stress on removing the breast and right shoulder as a choice portion before the Lord (v. 21 as in 7:21–24).

9:22–24 Blessing the People Who Witness the Lord’s Sacrificial Fire The paragraph divison here marks vv. 22–24 not as a new narrative, but as the next scene that culminates 8:1–9:21, and more directly 9:1–21, so that vv. 22– 24 functions as the climax of the eighth-day sacrifices for the propitiation of Aarōn’s household and for the people. The scene begins with two aorist participles contemporaneous, or antecedent, to aorist main verbs: “And when Aarōn raised [ἐξάρας] his hands over the people, he blessed [εὐλόγησεν] them. And

246

commentary

he came down [κατέβη] when he completed [ποιήσας] the one for sin and the whole burnt offerings and those of deliverance” (thus interpreting the first and fourth wayyiqtol Heb. forms as adverbials). The LXX “when Aarōn raised his hands” (‫ ידיו‬MTQere) probably interprets the curious singular “his hand” (‫ידו‬ MTKethib SP). The words of such a blessing may be supplied later at Seina in Num 6:24–26 (Kellermann 1970: 96–97). The strongest preceding literary connection in the Seina pericope is found after lightning and smoke on the mountain accompanied the Lord’s presence (see Exod 20:18): “An altar of earth you must make for me, and you must sacrifice on it your whole burnt offerings and your deliverances [τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ σωτήρια ὑμῶν], both your sheep and your calves, in every place where I name my name there. And I will come to you and bless you [ἥξω πρὸς σὲ καὶ εὐλογήσω σε]” (ExodB 20:24; transl. mine). In 9:22, the tripartite taxonomy of the offerings just performed excludes mention of the fine flour sacrifice (vv. 4, 17), but refers likely to what was offered for both the priests and people: “the one for sin” (τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας) somewhat awkwardly recalls both the little calf and the billy goat for sin (vv. 2–3; 8–11, 15); “the whole burnt offerings” (τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα) recall the ram and lamb (vv. 2–3; 12–14, 16); and “those of the deliverance” (τὰ τοῦ σωτηρίου) recall the calf and ram (vv. 4, 18–21). Next Mōsēs and Aarōn “entered into the tent of testimony” (εἰσῆλθεν Μωσῆς καὶ Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου). Prior to this, neither Mōsēs nor Aarōn was able to enter the tent (ExodB 40:28–29) precisely because of the Lord’s glory (δόξης Κυρίου). Here by contrast, they enter, and after they exit, they “blessed all the people, and the Lord’s glory was seen by all the people” (v. 22, √εὐλογέω, again in v. 23, anticipates the content of ch. 26 and the Aarōnic blessing in Num 6:24–26, and their usage not as ‘praise’ or ‘give thanks’, but ‘bless’ [calque for ‫]ברך‬, along with the noun √εὐλογία ‘blessing’ [see Lev 25:21], issuing from or directed toward the deity, can now be shown from certain inscriptions to have developed, perhaps independently, in both the LXX and contemporary Greek religious usage: Aitken 2014: 75–76). The adjective “blessed all [πάντα] the people” was probably the source of the LXX (= 11QLevb [‫ > כו]ל‬MT SP), rather than a leveling to the parallel sentence (contra Wevers 1997: 127). The aor. passive “was seen” or “appeared” (ὤφθη) emphasizes the Lord’s glory and the people as recipients of its appearance, even as they received the blessings (vs. the causative-reflexive N-stem ‫“ וירא‬made itself seen” IBHS §23.4h). Within the Seina pericope of B, this is even more shocking than MT SP as not even Israel’s leaders had seen the Lord, but “they saw the place where the God of Israel stood” (trans. mine of ExodB 24:10: εἶδον τὸν τόπον οὗ ἱστήκει ὁ θεὸς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ vs. ‫“ ויראו את אלהי ישׂראל‬And they saw the God of Israel”).

commentary

247

Due to the paratactic (Hebraic) syntax that does not explain connection of v. 28c, readers may infer from the context that this theophany was the consequence of faithful propitiation ritual performance and the two blessings (9:8– 23b). Verses 22–23 might betray an inverted parallel form, with an ultimate rather than center stress: 22 And when Aarōn raised his hands over the people, he blessed them. And he came down after completing the one for sin and the whole burnt offerings and those of the deliverance. 23 Then Mōsēs and Aarōn entered into the tent of testimony, and when they came out, they blessed all the people, and the Lord’s glory was seen by all the people. It is possible to view v. 24 as the next divine and human actions or as the explanation of the Lord’s glory seen by the people in v. 23: “And fire came out from the Lord and devoured the things on the altar, both the whole burnt offerings and the hard fats. And all the people saw it and marveled and fell down on their faces.” Unclear is whether “fire from the Lord came out” (πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου; similarly, GenA 19:24), or “fire came out from the Lord,” that is, emerged from the Lord. The fire “devoured [κατέφαγεν] the things on the altar, both the whole burnt offerings and the hard fats.” This is the first time the Lord’s fire, rather than fire supplied by the priests, “devoured” or “ate up” (√κατεσθίω gl. 1 GELS; LEH §4995) the sacrificed animal parts. The whole burnt offerings in view are obvious, but “the hard fats” (τὰ στέατα) must refer to those both from the deliverance sacrifices and the sin offerings that follow the deliverance sacrifice protocols for offering hard fats (see 4:1–11, 22–26, esp. vv. 10, 26). The Lord’s consuming fire indicates that his anger has been assuaged by virtue of the propitiation sacrifices (fulfilling v. 7). After quoting v. 24a–b, Ambrose (c. LeuB) explains, “The sacrifice [of v. 24] must be hallowed with this fire only” (Schaff 2.10: 222). The third mention of “all the people” in three verses, this time as agent of the active voice (vs. “was seen” in v. 23) of three verbs of perception, overspecifies and so stresses the community’s response in this scene: “And all the people saw it and were astonished and fell down on their faces” (v. 24c–e). The action “all the people saw it” (sg. εἶδεν = MT ‫ ≠ וירא‬SP ‫ )ויראו‬has an elided object “it” that refers back to the “fire.” The implied consequence is that “they were astonished” (ἐξέστη GELS gl. 1; “were amazed” NETS 90), which could probably be

248

commentary

stated more strongly in the context: “geriet außer sich” (SD 108 [italics theirs]; cf. “confound,” “driven out of their senses” LEH § 3343). The last time “they fell” (ἔπεσαν) in the narrative, it was a euphemism for the death sentence of three thousand Israelites by the sword of the Leuites (Exod 32:28); here falling prostrate is their physical reaction to their encounter with the Lord’s devouring fire.

10:1–2 The Sacrifice by and of Nadab and Abioud The LeuB scribe marks, by outdentation, this new scene in the narrative, although the connective καὶ and the aor. participle contemporaneous with the main verb present this scene as the continuation of the same narrative: “And [καὶ] when Aarōn’s two sons Nadab and Abioud each took [λαβόντες] his censer, they put [ἐπέθηκαν] fire on it” (10:1). Here the adjective “two [δύο] sons” was probably not added by the LeuB (contra Wevers 1997: 129), but was present in the Vorlage of its text tradition (= 11QLevb [‫ > שׁ]ני‬MT SP LeuA). The entire scene appears in Heb. and also in the LXX as the inversion of 9:22–24 (Nihan 2007: 91– 93). Aarōn performs the commanded sacrifices precisely (see literary markers at 9:10, 15, 16, 21, similarly 22), whereas Nadab and Abioud offered “strange fire which the Lord had not ordered them” (ὃ οὐ προσέταξεν κύριος αὐτοῖς, 10:1; κύριος was probably a formal translation of its source: ‫ = ] יהו[ ה‬11QLevb > MT SP; contra Wevers 1997: 129). The “censer” (√πυρεῖον) or “fire-pan” (NETS 90) was made from bronze (ExodB 27:3; 38:23, 24), and although not mentioned yet in Leueitikon, it is assumed that the priest would use this vessel to kindle fire that he would place on the altar, and only then place wood on top of the fire (Leu 1:7, 12, 17). The most striking verbal contrast that LeuB preserves is the divine fire that emerges and eats both the sacrifices and Aarōn’s sons: καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου καὶ κατέφαγεν τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου 9:24

καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου καὶ κατέφαγεν αὐτούς 10:2

And fire came out from the Lord and devoured the things on the altar, 9:24

And fire came out from the Lord and devoured them 10:2

commentary

249

In 9:24, the LXX article τὰ “the things” creates an objective attributive prepositional phrase (only implied in MT SP), that strengthens the contrast with the objective αὐτούς in 10:2. The mystery of the “strange fire” (πῦρ ἀλλότριον) offered to the Lord by Nadab and Abioud may be subsequently, in ch. 16, perceived as their aberration of their father’s incense offering in the Day of Propitiation ritual: And when Aarōn’s two sons Nadab and Abioud each took his censer, they put fire on it and threw incense on it and brought before the Lord strange fire which the Lord had not ordered them … and they died before the Lord. LeuB 10:1–2

And he [Aarōn] must take the censer full of coals of fire from the altar that is before the Lord, and he must fill his hands with a fine incense composition, and he must bring it inside the curtain, and he must put the incense on the fire before the Lord, and the smoke of the incense will cover the propitiatory that is on the testimony, and he will not die. LeuB 16:12–13

Also, it is possible that Nadab and Abioud thought the sin offerings just offered by Aarōn should have included incense (cf. 4:7, 18), and they took the liberty to supply it. The lex talionis principle stated in Leu 24:19–21 is operative here: They offered their fire before the Lord, and by the Lord’s fire they died before the Lord (the contrast between 9:24 and 10:1–2 is observed by Ambrose: Schaff 2.10: 222). Cyril of Jeruslaem (c. LeuB) similarly concluded: “… Nadab and Abihu, for having merely offered incense with strange fire, were with strange fire destroyed, the instrument of their impiety being used for their punishment, and their destruction following at the very time and place of their sacrilege” (Schaff 2.7: 463; for Athanasius, confusing the ontology of God and of man is like “placing strange fire on the altar with that which is divine”: Schaff 2.4: 501).

10:3 Mōysēs Conveys the Lord’s Interpretation to Aarōn The two subsequent speeches of Mōysēs-Mōsēs, possibly his own interpretation of Leu. 1–7 without new direct words from the Lord, were directed to Aarōn, who methodically obeyed (9:2, 7). By contrast, in this discourse to Aarōn, Mōysēs quotes the Lord’s poetic interpretation of what just happened with Aarōn’s sons who disobeyed:

250

commentary

Ἐν τοῖς ἐγγίζουσίν μοι ἁγιασθήσομαι, καὶ ἐν πάσῃ συναγωγῇ δοξασθήσομαι· Among those who are near to me I will be sanctified, and among every assembly I will be glorified. The bicolon exhibits synthetic parallelism. Although the second colon refers to an Israelite assembly, the whole maxim follows and explains the death of Aarōn’s sons, so that the first colon would not contextually refer to the assembly (synonomous //), but to the Lord’s priests. “Among those who are near to me, I will be sanctified,” reflects the ideation that the anointed priests in Lev 1–16 belong to the holy realm of that which belongs to the Lord (see Leu 2:3, 10; 6:16–18, 25–36; 8:9, 31). Although the entire assembly approached the tent (√προσέρχομαι, 9:5), Aarōn and his sons are the ones near to the Lord: they stayed in the tent for seven days (8:33–36), and now on the eighth, had again approached the altar within the tent (√προσέρχομαι, 9:7, 8). Among these near priests “I will be holy” (ἁγιασθήσομαι) or “I will be sanctified,” which has a gnomic future tense insofar as the Lord will always distinguish himself from even those who are consecrated to him if they violate his cultic, and presumably also ethical, imperatives (contextually: “I will be shown holy” NETS 90). The other possibility is that Ἐν τοῖς ἐγγίζουσίν μοι is not spatial, but instrumental, “By [the agency of] those who are near to me, I will be sanctified,” implying that Lord will only tolerate priestly actions that honor his holiness (instrumental: “Durch die, die mir nahe sind” SD 108). The second colon is unique in LeuB* “and among every assembly [πάσῃ συναγωγῇ], I will be glorified” (vs. “the entire assembly” + τη Bc A Gött; > B* mins). The sense of LeuB* could be that every time the Israelites assembled, the Lord will make visible his glory (again a gnomic future, δοξασθήσομαι), which he most recently accomplished by his endorsing and condemning fire (9:23–24; 10:1–2). Or again, if colon two is instrumental, when the Israelites assemble, the Lord will only tolerate their actions that glorify him: “Through every assembly, I will be glorified” (oddly SD reverts back to a spatial: “in der ganzen Versammlung” SD 108). Aarōn’s response to this divine explanation is incisive: “And Aarōn was stunned” (καὶ κατενύχθη Ἀαρών). Unlike the people’s astonishment followed by prostration (√ἐξίστημι, 9:24), Aarōn was “stunned” or “cut to the heart” (√κατανύσσω GELS 378; “pierced to the heart” LEH §4824; “shocked” NETS 91). The

commentary

251

narratival placement of his response here (v. 3e), constrains readers to perceive his shock not merely as his reaction to his sons’ death (v. 2), but to the Lord’s interpretation of it (v. 3a–d). Aarōn’s repeated faithfulness in 9:7–24, which affected propitiation and, mysteriously, affected the theophany (9:4–6, 22–24), did not give his older sons impunity before the Lord.

10:4 Mōysēs Directs Aarōn’s Cousins to Relocate the Bodies In this next scene in the narrative denoted by LeuB, “Mōysēs summoned Misadai and Elisaphan sons of Aziēl.” The “Misadai” (μισαδαι B A mins Arm Sa; μισαηλ Gött) of v. 4 was never mentioned where one might have expected back in the geneaology of ExodB 6:22 (cf. + μισαηλ Gött = ‫ מישׁאל‬MT SP), and the orthography of “Aziēl” here is also distinct from other mss and from ExodusLXX (Αζιηλ B min; Οζιηλ [= Exod 6:22] A Fb G rell Gött). The translator probably for clarification replaced the lectio brevior “Aaron’s uncle” (which meant his “father’s brother:” “‫דּוֹד‬,” HALOT §1990) with the attributive of simple apposition, “sons of the brother of Aarōn’s father” (υἱοὺς τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς Ἀαρών) known from ExodB 6:18, 20, 22 (‫“ דד אהרן‬Aaron’s uncle” MT SP prb. 11QpaleoLeva: ‫)]ע[זי]אל דד א[הרן‬. Mōysēs commanded them: “Approach [Προσέλθατε] and carry [ἄρατε] your brothers out of the presence of the holy things, outside the camp.” The language here connects these imperatives to the prior mandates in chs. 4–9 to carry away from the holy things, that is, from the altar and its accoutrements inside the tent, to a clean place outside the camp: the ashes of the WBO (6:11); and every part of the calf’s carcass from the sin offering, save its hard fats that were offered on the altar (4:12, 21; 8:17; 9:11). It is possible that extraction “from the presence of the holy things” (ἐκ προσώπου τῶν ἁγίων) means from “«les choses saintes» plutôt que «le lieu saint»” (Harlé and Pralon 1988: 123; cf. sg. in v. 18). The object “take your brothers [τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑμῶν]” might intimate that more than ashes were left; but in any case, as in 10:1–3, Nadab and Abioud are likened to an animal sacrifice, which must now be disposed in a ritually clean manner as the animal sacrifices. In LeuB*, the absence of v. 5 suggests that readers would have wondered if Aarōn’s cousins obeyed, given that precise obedience or disobedience is often explicitly stated in the narrative (in the direct context: 9:22; 10:1, 7; in the other mss. v. 5 reads: και προσηλθον[εν Α] και ηραν εν τοις χιτωσιν αυτων εξω της παρεμβολης ον τροπον ειπεν Μωυσης “And they approached and carried [them] by their tunics outside the camp which was the manner Mōysēs had said” = Bmg [below col. 1] A Gött Swete; > Btxt mins Eth Arabtxt).

252

commentary

10:6–7 Mōsēs Instructs Aarōn’s Remaining Sons to Not Mourn Next, Mōsēs (LeuBG orth.) instructs “Aarōn and Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons who remained” (v. 6a). In apposition to Eleazar and Ithamar, the attributive participle “his sons who remained” (τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ τοὺς καταλελιμμένους) may have been an LXX harmonization to 10:12 to reinforce the solemnity that these were the only sons Aarōn had left (> MT SP; here 11QpaleoLeva is broken; with Wevers 1997: 132). Aarōn gives these surviving sons three imperativals future, each with objects as the focus in the marked position: they must not remove their turbans from their heads, nor tear their garments, nor leave the tent (√ἀποκιδαρόω [10:6; 21:10] “take the turban off” appears to have been “created on the spot by the translators to meet a particular need”: Lee 1983: 52). The reason is given: “for the anointing olive oil from the Lord is on you” (τὸ γὰρ ἔλαιον τῆς χρείσεως τὸ παρὰ Κυρίου ἐφ’ ὑμῖν). These instructions were needed because Aarōn’s sons might have thought they were free to remove and rend their garments for customary mourning over Nadab and Abioud’s death, because after their anointing on day one, their seven days of fulfillment had been completed and the propitiation sacrifices consumed (8:7, 12 [//21:12], 33–36; 9:8–24; for these signs of mourning, see: Milgrom 1991: 608–609; see codification in LevLXX 21:10–12). Jerome (c. LeuB) extends this prohibition to all who have put on the priestly garment of Christ, “But we who have put on Christ and according to the apostle are a royal and priestly race, we ought not to grieve for the dead … Rend not your clothes, he says, neither mourn as pagans, lest you die. For, for us sin is death” (Schaff 2.6: 169). The cognate accusative “You must keep the Lord’s orders [φυλάξεσθε τὰ φυλάγματα Κυρίου]” may have been newly created here by the LXX from the verb (for the deverbal creation of √φύλαγμα, attested in one early inscription as a ‘receptacle’ tomb, connoting ‘defense’ or ‘protection’: Aitken 2014: 67). The compound result clause, which provides motivation to abstain from mourning rites, is given: “so that you do not die and wrath will be over the entire assembly” (ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν συναγωγὴν ἔσται θυμός, v. 5; cf. Num 18:15), and again, “so that you do not die” (ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε, v. 7) (in v. 5, ἔσται assumes the force of the aor. subj., see Muraoka 2016: 308). Evading death was already stated as a result clause in 8:35, when Aarōn and his sons were commanded to sit in the tent for seven days and seven nights, but now on the eighth day, their stay in the tent has been extended indefinitely (how long does the anointing oil remain ἐφ’ ὑμῖν “on you” and in effect?), again with lethal ramifications if they exit prematurely. The possibility of the Lord’s anger against the community for breaking these commands recalls his wrath at the golden calf apostacy

commentary

253

and anticipates the covenant curses in Leu 26:14–39 (esp. Exod 32:11[√θυμόω], 12[√θυμός]; Leu 26:24 [√θυμός]). In LeuBA, by an asyndeton and a preposed verbal subject (οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ὑμῶν), a sharp contrast is made between the priests who must refrain from mourning and: “Your brothers, the entire house of Israel, must weep over the burning by which they were burnt by the Lord” (v. 7; οἱ δὲ ἀδελφοὶ Fb G M Gött [δ min]; δε > B A mins y-318 Bo). The pl. aor. passive verb that follows its cognate accusative, “the burning by which they were burnt” (ἐνπυρισμὸν ὃν ἐνεπυρίσθησαν), agrees grammatically within v. 7 to “your brothers, the entire house of Israel” (ἀδελφοὶ ὑμῶν πᾶς ὁ οἶκος Ἰσραὴλ), so that the entire community in v. 3, not merely the disobedient brothers, in some manner experienced the burning (vs. MT SP ‫“ השׂרפה אשׁר שׂרף יהוה‬the burning that Yhwh has burned”; the new verbal formation √ἐμπυρίζω, in PentLXX only here and v. 16, is not not attested in Classical Greek, but in two contemporary Koine texts: Lee 1983: 113; similarly the new noun formation √ἐμπυρισμός ‘burning’ [6× in LXX]: ibid., 100–101). In view of the overspecified gravity of the situation, readers are relieved by the formulaic compliance: “And they did according to the word of Mōsēs” (v. 7b). The phraseology here, the spoken word of Mōsēs (κατὰ τὸ ῥῆμα Μωσῆ), suggests they followed Mōsēs own hermeneutical extension of Leu 8:7, 9, 33–36, which are themselves his slight adaptation, and Aarōn’s observance, of the divine prescriptions from Exod 29:7–9, 30–35 (cf. the Lord’s spoken word [τὸ ῥῆμα] in Leu 8:5; 9:6).

10:8–11 The Lord Speaks to Aarōn to Approach Soberly, Distinguish and Teach This next discourse is fittingly marked as the next section in LeuB, but it cannot be divorced from the grave tone of vv. 1–7 (i.e., v. 9, “and/then you will not die”). For the first and only time in the book, “the Lord spoke to Aarōn” (Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος τῷ Ἀαρὼν), without mention of Aarōn’s sons and without the mediation of Mōysēs (cf. 21:17). The instructions are also intended for Aarōn’s sons (v. 9, “you and your sons with you”) and their progeny (v. 9, “throughout your generations”), but Aarōn here assumes the role of Mōysēs insofar as he hears the divine speech, by implication from out of the tent (1:1), and he must mediate it to his sons. Elsewhere, the Lord receives a first fruits libation containing wine (Exod 29:40; Leu 23:13; Num 15:5–10; 18:12), but here the priests must not “drink wine or sikera” (preposed: οἶνον καὶ σίκερα) when they enter the tent or approach the altar, if once again, they wish to evade the death penalty (now a Leitwort: 8:35; 10:5, 7, 9). LeuB readers would not have known the meaning

254

commentary

of the transliteration “sikera” (σίκερα for ‫ שכר‬MT SP; “sikera” NETS 91; “SikeraRauschgetränk” SD 108; contra “boisson fermentée” [BA 125] which renders the Heb.). However, some would have inferred that this drinkable substance belonged to the semantic domain of alcoholic beverages (also in Num 6:3 for those who “vow a pure vow” [NETS] vs. Heb. ‘Nazerite vow’). Jerome (c. LeuB) supplies a reasonable explanation for the prohibition: “The priests who minister in God’s temple are forbidden to drink wine and strong drink, to keep their wits from being stupefied with drunkenness and to enable their understanding to do its duty in God’s service” (Schaff 2.6: 364). For Jerome, ‘strong drink’ (σίκερα/‫ )שכר‬was an inclusive hypernym, so that, “Whatever intoxicates and disturbs the balance of the mind avoid as you would wine” (Schaff 2.6: 253; abstaining from οἶνος + [καὶ] σίκερα in Num 6:3; Deut 29:6; Judg 13:4, 7, 14; Luke 1:15; celebrating with the same in Deut 14:26; reproving in Isa 5:11, 22; 24:9; 28:7[2×]; 29:9). Elsewhere he warns, “Aaron and the other priests when about to enter the temple, refrained from all intoxicating drink for fear they should die. Whence we learn that they die who minister in the Church without sobriety” (Schaff 2.6: 879). It is unlikely that the LXX scribes have inserted the LXX plus as a gloss without Heb. support, “or you are approaching the altar” (ἢ προσπορευομένων ὑμῶν πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον > MT SP; no evidence from JD). The literary affect recalls the last priestly approach to the altar that was fatal (10:1–2). Next is the formula in v. 9c, “[It is] an enduring ordinance throughout your generations” (νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν), but this formula, as we will see, is distanced syntactically from the prohibition and result v. 9ab (cf. earlier the formula validates an offering from the priests [6:22] and sacrificial meats they are given [6:18; 7:24, 26]). In v. 10, the reader is confronted with an infinitive clause: “to distinguish [διαστεῖλαι] between holy things and profane things and [ellipsis: to distinguish] between unclean things and clean things” (or more formally: “faire séparation” BA 125). Since v. 9a and v. 11 use imperativals future, the force of this infinitive in v. 10 is probably not imperatival (a rare function), nor telic because here the dynamic verb (v. 9a) that could have modified the infinitive is disconnected from v. 10 syntactically because of v. 9b (“and you will not die”). Instead, more simply, the v. 9c formula becomes the predicate nominative of the subjectival infinitive: “An enduring ordinance throughout your generations is to distinguish …” (similarly, Wevers 1996: 134). Nevertheless, the preceding context allows readers to associate vv. 9–10 because Nadab and Abioud, even if not inebriated, acted as such when they failed to delineate these cultic categories when approaching the Lord’s altar (vv. 1–2, 9). Readers have a slim notion of “[of] holy things” (τῶν ἁγίων 5:15[2×], 16; 10:4) and of a “clean” place outside the camp (√καθαρός 4:12; 6:11). How-

commentary

255

ever, what defines a “clean” person is unclear (7:9); the “profane” category (adj. √βέβηλος and vb. √βεβηλόω) is unknown in chs. 1–10; and uncleanness in chs. 5–7 (√ἀκάθαρτος 5:2[4×]; 7:9, 11[4×]) is inchoate and needs a fuller explanation. Therefore, the holy-profane polarity of 10:10, is not developed in chs. 1–10, but anticipates chs. 18–20 (√βεβηλόω only occurs in chs. 18–22, and there 16×), whereas the clean-unclean polarity anticipates chs. 10–15 (which contain the denses clusters of √ἀκάθαρτος [79×] and √καθαρός [23×]; see 10:10//11:47 subscription). The second imperative is given to Aarōn to mediate to his sons: “and you must teach [συμβιβάσεις] the sons of Israel all the ordinances that the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Mōsēs” (10:11; √συμβιβάζω ‘to teach,’ ‘instruct’ GELS 646; or ‘guide,’ ‘advise’ LEH 8426). This recalls Aarōn as Mōysēs’ mediator before the pharaoh in Exod 4:12–16 (Harlé and Pralon 125; cf. Mōysēs teaches [√συμβιβάζω] in Exod 18:16). Although chs. 10–15 and 18–22 would be central to their teaching, the idiom for mediation, “by the hand of Mōsēs” (διὰ χειρὸς Μωσῆ), appears again in the subscript at Leu 26:46, “the law that the Lord gave between himself and the sons of Israel in the mountain Seina by the hand of Mōysēs [ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ].” As a result, Aarōn and his descendents become responsible to teach the Israelites an accruing mass of divine-Mōysēs speaches from 1:1 through 26:46, and later by extension, through the Numbers colophon, where the idiom occurs a final time in the Pentateuch (Num 36:13, ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ).

10:12–18 Mōysēs Reinstructs and Confronts the Priests about Eating the Sacrifices The LeuB section begins with Mōysēs’s second speech to Aarōn and to Eleazar and Ithamar, “Aarōn’s sons who remained” (τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν τοὺς καταλιφθέντας//10:6[–7]; LeuB may diverge from MT SP by not including a second or third πρὸς to remark the i.d.o.: + 2o προς b d-44 mins Latcod 100 Bo Sa Göttc; > B* et al. Gött). The association by the LeuB scribe of the repeated instructions (vv. 12–15) and the saga of Mōysēs’s confrontation (vv. 16–18) rightly understands the saga to emerge from a gap in the instructions. Even before the saga, readers may be curious as to why instructions about priestly eating, already given in chs. 6–7, are repeated here after the propitiation sacrifices were already offered in 9:8–21, and not at least mentioned earlier in 9:2–7. One may ask, have Aarōn’s sons failed to eat the portions of the propitiation sacrifices designated for them? In vv. 12b–13, Mōysēs summarizes 6:16–18, this time with the gravity of the present situation:

256

commentary

16 But what is left over from it Aarōn and his sons must eat. It must be eaten unleavened in a holy place. In the court of the tent of testimony they must eat it. 17 It must not be baked as leavened. I have given it as a portion to them from the Lord’s offerings. They are holies of holies, like that which is for sin and like that which is for a sinful error. 18 Every male thing among the priests must eat it. It is an enduring ordinance for your generations from the Lord’s offerings. Anyone who touches them will become holy. 6:16–18

12 … Take the sacrifice that is left over from the Lord’s offerings, and you must eat it unleavened near the altar. They are holies of holies. 13 And you must take it with you into a holy place. For it is an enduring ordinance for you and an ordinance for your sons; this is from the Lord’s offerings, for so I have been commanded. 10:12b–13

The perfect passive with ingressive force, “for so I have been commanded” (οὕτω γὰρ ἐντέταλταί μοι), functions as an exegetical citation marker to reinforce the abiding authority of these instructions. The fine flour “sacrifice” was to be eaten in a holy place, namely, the court of the tent, which is restated in shorthand, “near the altar” (παρὰ τὸ θυσιαστήριον). Probably by not hearing the voiceless labiodental fricative (φ), the LeuB scribe at 10:13a unknowingly removes the redundancy of 6:18a by the unique reading: “And you take it with you [ἄγεσθε] into a holy place” (αγεσθε [pres. middle ind. 2pl.] B*unique; φαγεσθε Bc [superscr φ] Swete Gött; for middle voice ἄγω + acc. obj.: “to take with oneself” LEH § 106 gl. 1; “to cause to move with one” GELS 8 gl. 1). Certain LeuB readers probably corrected this to φαγεσθε (“you must eat”) from the surrounding verses (vv. 12, 14). In vv. 14–16, Mōysēs summarizes 7:21–24, which designate the breast and the shoulder from all deliverance sacrifices for the priests to eat. 21 (31) And the priest must offer up the hard fat on the altar, and the breast will belong to Aarōn and will be for his sons. 22 (32) And you must give as a choice portion for the priest the right shoulder from your deliverance sacrifices. 23 (33) The one who brings the blood of the deliverance and the hard fat which is from the sons of Aarōn will have the right shoulder as a share. 24 (34) For I have taken the breast of the deposit and the shoulder of the choice portion from the sons of Israel, from your deliverance sacrifices, and I have given them to Aarōn the priest and to his sons as an enduring ordinance from the sons of Israel.

commentary

257

14 And the breast from what has been set apart and the shoulder from the choice portion you must eat in a holy place, you and your sons and your house with you, for it was given as an ordinance to you and as an ordinance to your sons, from the deliverance sacrifices of the sons of Israel. 15 The shoulder of the choice portion and the breast of what was set apart you must bring besides the sacrifices of the hard fats, to set apart what was set apart before the Lord. And it will be for you and for your sons and for your daughters with you as an enduring ordinance. The basic teaching is identical, although the phrasal order is different. In 10:14, Mōysēs adds that these must be eaten “in a holy place” (ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ vs. ‫במקום‬ ‫“ טהור‬in a clean place” MT SP), which brings the earlier instructions into alignment with 10:13 (//6:16 [fine flour]; also eating “in a holy place”: 6:26 [sin offering], 36 [sinful error offering]; 9:31 [fulfillment offering]). Those designated to eat these choice portions in ch. 7 are emphatically identified as Aarōn and his sons (2×: 7:21, 23, 24), and in particular, the one from among them who brings the blood and hard fats from the deliverance sacrifice (7:23). Now in 10:14–15, after the death of Aarōn’s oldest sons, the prerogative to eat the deliverance sacrificial meats is extended to “and your house with you” (καὶ ὁ οἶκός σου μετὰ σοῦ), which may be elucidated in the next verse, “and for your daughters with you” (καὶ ταῖς θυγατράσιν σου μετὰ σοῦ), or may incorporate Aarōn’s entire patriarchal household (cf. Exod 20:10, 17; Leu 25:6). The inclusion “and your daughters” was not an LXX innovation, but a formal representation of its source (‫ ולבנתיך‬SP > MT). Perhaps the constituency was broadened because after Nadab and Abioud’s death, there was now a greater quantity of priestly meat than could be consumed by the only three eligible to eat it. However, clarification on who exactly was eligible to eat the priestly family’s portions must wait until LevLXX 22:2–14. Due to the addition of the name Mōysēs in the LXX in v. 15c, the reported speech of Mōysēs ends after v. 15b, and v. 15c resumes the voice of the implied narrator: “‘… as an enduring ordinance.’ It was just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs” (ὃν τρόπον συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ) (Μωυσῇ > MT SP). This comparative proposition lacks a dynamic verb, which stands in contrast to most preceding comparatives that narrate the active enactment of Mōysēs’ instructions (8:4, 9, 13, 17, 36; 9:21). The meaning of v. 15c, as in 8:31 and 10:18, is that Mōysēs communicated the instructions just as he had received them from the Lord (in 6:16–17; 7:18–26), and, therefore, it is not at all clear that Aarōn and his family actually ate their portions of the fine flour (vv. 12–14) or deliverance sacrifices (vv. 14–15). However, the concern of Mōsēs (LeuB orth.) is not with these portions, but with the preposed “goat for sin:” “Then Mōsēs searched and

258

commentary

inquired about the goat for sin, and this had already been burnt up” (Καὶ τὸν χείμαρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ζητῶν ἐξεζήτησεν Μωσῆς, v. 16; the Heb. adverbial inf. abs. is reflected in “suchte … überall” SD 109; “indagó a fondo” BG 253; but the LXX betrays an attend. circumstance ptc., as in “inquired and sought” NETS 91). With the real possibility of more divine wrath on his mind (10:2, 6, 7), Mōses reacts in anger toward Eleazar and Ithamar, again labeled for rhetorical purposes, “Aarōn’s remaining sons.” Here Mōses’ anger is recollective of the Lord’s impending wrath (√θυμόω v. 16; cognate noun √θυμός v. 6; cf. Mōysēs √ὀργίζω against the molten calf worshippers, Exod 32:19). He reprimands them with language that is overspecified by redundancy, as it was in the source text of 6:26–30: 26 The priest who offers it up must eat it. It must be eaten in a holy place, in the court of the tent of testimony … 29 Every male among the priests must eat them. They are the Lord’s holies of holies. 30 And none of the things for the sin offering from which some of its blood is brought into the tent of testimony to propitiate in the holy place may be eaten. It must be burned completely with fire. 17 Why did you not eat the one for sin in a holy place? For because they are holies of holies, he gave this to you to eat so that it might be taken away, the assembly’s sin, and so that you might propitiate for them before the Lord. 18 For it was not brought with its blood into the holy place. You must eat it in a holy place facing inside, just as the Lord instructed me. Again by means of a citation device, “just as the Lord instructed me” (ὃν τρόπον μοι συνέταξεν Κύριος, 10:18; cf. v. 13c), Mōysēs regards 6:26–30 as binding because the blood of the sin offering had not yet been brought into the holy place. As one may recall, 6:26–30, which directs the priests to eat the slaughtered sin offering meat, is novel, if not problematic, because earlier in ch. 4, aside from the hard fats and blood, all the remaining flesh and members of the carcass was to be entirely burned outside the camp (4:11–12, 21). Because the exclamation “this had been burnt up(!)” (ὅδε ἐνπεπύριστο, v. 16) could mean the goat for sin had been burned up outside the camp, it is plausible that Aarōn opted to follow ch. 4—total burning outside the camp—over ch. 6—eating inside the tent (LeuB* users would probably have supplied the augment to ενπεπυριστο B*vid min; εμπεπυριστο A F mins b f n y-392 Cyr; ενεπεπυριστο Bc [νε sup ras] Gött). Readers will wait until v. 19 for Aarōn to reveal, in rather equivocal terms, what he was thinking.

commentary

259

Perhaps the most profound intra-textual transformation in Mōsēs’ confrontation is the shift of mechanisms regarding what affects propitiation. In Leueitikon, of the combined 58 occurrences of the verb “propitiate” (√ἐξιλάσκομαι) and noun “propitiation” (√ἐξιλασμός), only here in 10:17 does Mōsēs teach that propitiation for the assembly before the Lord is contingent on priestly consumption. Everywhere else, propitiation is affected by the blood ritual: laying on hands, slaughtering before the Lord, sprinkling the blood on the altar, and burning the sacrifice to the Lord. In particular, in contrast to the source text of 6:30, where “some of its blood is brought into the tent of testimony to propitiate in the holy place,” now in 10:17 Mōsēs exclaims: “he gave this to you to eat [φαγεῖν] so that it might be taken away, the assembly’s sin [ἵνα ἀφέληται τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τῆς συναγωγῆς], and so that you might propitiate for them before the Lord [ἐξειλάσησθε περὶ αὐτῶν ἔναντι Κυρίου]” (αφεληται B*vid; αφελητε “you may take away” Bc Swete Gött; for 6:30 [RH 6:24] as the source: “gár … permets un renvoi précis à 6, 23”: Harlé and Pralon 1988: 126). The illocution is that by abstaining from eating the goat, Aarōn and his sons failed to propitiate. This explains Mōsēs’ anger because, although the priests were ‘fulfilled’ (Heb. ‘ordained’, 8:36), he believes that against any appearances to the contrary (in 9:7–24), the Lord’s wrath has not been appeased, nor the people’s guilt removed.

10:19–20 Aarōn’s Excuse Pleases Mōysēs The narrator has created suspense by deferring the disclosure of the fate of Aarōn and his remaining sons (see Sternberg 1985: 265–267; also, the LXX probably inserted the redundant quotative frame λέγων [> MT SP] to slow down the discourse; cf. Wevers 1997: 141). This compact unit in LeuB provides the first and only time in the book that Aarōn directly addresses Mōysēs, and the aforesaid suspense is compounded for B’s readers who recollect that last time Aarōn spoke to an angry Mōysēs at Seina, Aarōn tried to blame his construction of the molten calf on the impulse of the people, which lead the Lord to direct the Leuites to slaughter three thousand Israelites and the Lord to ‘strike’ the community (Exod 32:22–23, 28, 35). Aarōn explains his excuse: “If today they have brought before the Lord the things for their sin and their whole burnt offerings, and these things have happened to me, and if I must eat the things for sin today, will it be pleasing to the Lord?” (v. 19). Mōysēs’ anger was directed specifically at Aarōn’s remaining sons (v. 16), so here in the protasis Aarōn’s defense first concerns his sons (“If they have brought [προσαγιόχασιν] … for their [αὐτῶν] sin and their [αὐτῶν] whole burnt offerings”) and then himself (“and if I must

260

commentary

eat [φάγομαι]”). Although the possessive “their” refers to Aarōn’s sons because they are the implied subject of the preceding verb (προσαγιόχασιν), the plural “whole burnt offerings” (τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα) must refer not only to the ram for the priests (9:2, 12–14), but also the calf for the people (9:3, 16). Mōysēs is concerned that the singular “goat for sin” (τὸν χείμαρον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 10:16; and anaphoric, “the one for sin” τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 10:17) was not eaten, but Aarōn responds with the plurals, “the things for their sin” (τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν, v. 19bα) and “the things for sin” (τὰ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 19bγ). Rather than repeating either of Mōysēs’ two terms, Aarōn’s descriptors may be his way of admitting that he, Nadab and Abioud neither ate the goat for the people’s sin, nor the little calf for sin for himself, his sons and his household (9:2, 7a–c, 8–11). Aarōn’s excuse hinges on the meaning of “and these things have happened to me, and if I must eat the things for sin, will it be pleasing to the Lord?” The question introduced by μὴ anticipates a negative answer, which is inferred: ‘No, it would not be pleasing to the Lord’ (see Muraoka 2016: 719). The semantic, not syntactic, antecedent of “these things” (ταῦτα) is the death of Aarōn’s sons, which “has happened”—an intensive perfect with an ongoing affect—to Aarōn’s detriment (μοι as a dative of disadvantage; formally: BA 126; BG 253; contextually: “mir diese Dinge zugestoßen sind” SD 109; NETS “has befallen me”). Aarōn could have explained that he thought he had to burn the sin offering outside the camp (4:11–12, 21). Or if the sin offering was burnt up on the altar (v. 16?), he could have contended that altar had become defiled by the strange fire and corpses (10:1–3), a reasonable expansion of 5:2–3 (clarified in Leu 21:11; Num 6:9; 19:14), which would have defiled the sin offerings that were then burning on the altar. Instead, Aarōn’s response reveals that he had not forgotten his family’s liability to extract and eat the cooked the meat from the sin sacrifices on the altar, but he consciously allowed the edible meat to be burnt up on the altar. Because Aarōn, Nadab and Abioud were not allowed to leave the tent and express their grief (10:6–7), they did not want to eat when their sons and brothers had just died (for not wanting to eat while mourning the death of a loved one, see: 2Sam 3:35 [cf. Ezek 24:17, 22 which alludes to Lev 10:6]; and fasting while mourning: Deut 26:14; 1Sam 1:7; 2Sam 1:11–12; Joel 2:2). In v. 20, the translator interprets the Heb. idiom (‘good in the eyes of’) dynamically, but preserves the wordplay: Aarōn explains his thinking that eating the priestly portions at the event of the death of his oldest sons would not be pleasing [adj. √ἀρεστός] to the Lord (v. 19), and consequently, this explanation pleased Mōysēs [verbal cognate √ἀρέσκω] (v. 20).

commentary

261

11:1–47 Distinguishing between Clean and Unclean Animals Extending to the 12:1 superscription, this lengthy section in LeuB is initiated by a superscription that recalls the Lord’s speech to Mōysēs and Aarōn, which they must convey to the Israelite community (11:1–2a). After the 8:1 and 10:8 superscriptions, addressed to Mōysēs then to Aarōn, respectively, but with no Israelite audience (cf. 7:19, Mōysēs→Israelites), 11:1 presents the first time Mōysēs and Aarōn together must address the community (//15:1; in 11:1, “saying to them” ‫ אל]י[הם‬MT SP > LXX). The subscription at 11:46–47 (see below) interprets vv. 2b–45 as instruction regarding the Israelite’s interface with a quadripartite taxonomy of animals: terrestrial (vv. 2b–8, 26, 39–40); avian (vv. 13– 19); aquatic (vv. 9–12); crawling (vv. 20–23, 29–38, 41–45). This aligns with the taxonomy of GenGött 1:26 (//1:28) if one regards the addition “all the earth” (καὶ πάσης τῆς γῆς, 1:26) as an extension of the class of cattle: “[1] fish of the sea [2] and the birds of the sky [3] and all the cattle and all the earth [4] and all the creeping things that creep upon the earth” (NETS 6; GenB* 1:1– 46:28a is lost, replaced by a later scribe c. 15th cent.; for the differences of the Gen. 1 and Leu. 11 taxa: cf. Arnold 2012: 336–338). The taxonomy in Leueitikon 11 exhibits the independent logic of an ancient, priestly zoemic system (cf. Deut 14:2–21; see Meshel 2015: 19–45), and therefore should not be discredited because it conflates modern biological classes and orders. For example, the bat of the Mammalia class is listed among members of the Aves class (“birds,” vv. 13–19); and the “crawling things on the earth” (vv. 29–30) combines Mammalia and Reptilia, in this order: weasel (M), mouse (M), land crocodile (R), field mouse (M), chameleon (R), gecko (R), lizard (R), and blind rat (M); and ruminants from two different orders are merged together: eventoed ungulates, a.k.a., Artiodactyla (camel) and Lagomorpha (hare, rabbit). The biblical dietary laws, including Leueitikon 11, “are almost never explicitly justified, other than by divine decree” (Rosenblum 2016: 3), so for our purposes, the aim will be to appreciate the structure and message of Leueitikon 11 without endeavoring to decode its symbolism (contra, i.e., Douglas 2000: 134– 175). Verses 2b–8 supply the criteria that a land animal may be eaten if “brings up the cud” (ἀνάγον μηρυκισμόν) and is an ungulate (“divides the hoof and splits hooves into two hooves” διχηλοῦν ὁπλὴν καὶ ὀνυχιστῆρας ὀνυχίζον δύο χηλῶν, v. 3; here δύο = ‫ שתי‬SP > MT). Here I avoid the term ruminate for those that ‘bring up the cud’ because the types of rabbits (in LXX vv. 5–6), classified today as non-ruminates, were characterized by their chewing appearance, not their physiology of a single-chambered stomach. The limiting attributive prepositional phrase, “from the animals that are in the land [τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς]” conveys

262

commentary

an article that refers to the forthcoming land of Chanaan, in distinction from the “desert of Seina” (in 7:38; see Muraoka 2016: 4–6; the adj. “from all [παντων] of the animals” Bc A F Gött > B* mins Latcod 100). In v. 2b, and throughout ch. 11, readers likely defaulted to read an imperatival future “you must eat” (my transl.; so “you shall eat” NETS 91; or predictively, “vous mangerez” BD 127), but others could have perceived from the context a a permissive, “you may eat” (so “mögt ihr essen” SD 109; “podéis comer” BG 253; on ‘permissive fut.’, see Muraoka 2016: 288). The clauses “divides the hoof and splits hooves into two hooves” in v. 3 (similarly v. 7) should be regarded as a hendiadys, that is, a single criterion, which is simplified as “[not] split the hoof” in vv. 4–6. To identify three zoological genera that do not meet both criteria, and so are unclean and proscribed, the syntax in v. 4b, v. 5, and v. 6 recurs precisely: the pendent accusatives emphasize the genus, “the camel/the hare/the rabbit,” then the identical rationale is repeated: “because it/this one brings up the cud but does not split the hoof, this one is unclean for you” (see Runge 2010: 388; ‘hare’ √δασύπους is a descriptive noun that combines the free morphemes δασύ[ς] ‘hairy’ and πούς ‘foot’; possibly a new LXX formation, as the term appears outside LevLXX11:5 and DeutLXX 14:7 only in post-LXX Koine: Lee 1983: 33; in vv. 2–8, generic neuter “this/these is/are unclean” all refer back to masc. nouns, the four non-kosher animals: see Muraoka 2016: 656). Verses 7–8 diverge from the pattern to accentuate the disqualified pig, which exhibits the inverse characteristics of the genera in vv. 4–6, namely, the pig “divides the hoof and pairs the claws of the hoof, but does not bring up the cud.” Beginning with a preposed partitive for emphasis, “Any of their flesh, you must not eat” (ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν αὐτῶν οὐ φάγεσθε), v. 8 renders unclean one who eats a pig’s meat (as in vv. 4–6) or touches a pig’s carcass. The prior occurrences of the adj. √ἀκάθαρτος “unclean” or “impure” in the book (5:2[4×]; 7:9, 11[3×]; 10:10) have an undefined referent and, therefore, require the categories of chs. 11–15, so that in vv. 4–8 readers discover for the first time that an animal’s physiology renders it unclean; not sinful, but taboo (for this essential distinction between sin and impurity, see Klawans 2000: 75; and Wright [1987: 85, 283–284] differentiates “unpermitted” from “permitted” impurities). Verses 9–12 provide the criteria that an aquatic animal may be eaten if it has both fins and scales. Verse 10 repeats their habitats, from v. 9, most fully in Vorlage of the LXX: “in the water or in the seas [ἢ ἐν ταῖς θαλάσσαις] and in the wadis” (= ‫ בימים‬SP > MT). Unlike vv. 2b–8, which enumerate different genera of land animals, no aquatic animals are listed, either clean or unclean. Instead, these verses overspecify by redundancy, using √βδελύσσω once and its cognate noun √βδέλυγμα three times when once would have sufficed, that the inverse class, those without fins and scales, must not be eaten (οὐκ + √ἐσθίω, v. 11), but

commentary

263

be loathed (√βδελύσσω, v. 11; “feel loathing” NETS 91; “aurez en abomination” BD 129; “abominaréis” BG 254; “verabscheuen” SD 109); and regarded as “abominations” or “detestable” (√βδέλυγμα, vv. 10, 11, 12; this noun formation, 8× in ch. 11, 15× in LevLXX, occurs frequently in LXX, but may not be an LXX neol., contra LEH §1642, since it is attested at least once in extra-biblical Greek, and any Greek speaker could have formed βδέλυγμα subconsciously from βδελύσσω to express τὸ ἐβδελυγμένον: Lee 1983: 47 n. 18). Verses 13–19 concern avian animals, but in contrast to vv. 2b–12, provide no criteria for determining if a given genus or species may be eaten. As in vv. 2b–8, these verses supply examples only of animals “that must not be eaten; they are detestible” (καὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται, βδέλυγμά ἐστιν, v. 12). The ancient Israelite was forbidden to consume: certain birds of prey (eagle, sea eagle, hawk, kite, bearded vulture, vulture, little owl, owl, horned owl); certain aquatic birds (seagull, cormorant, ibis, water hen, pelican, swan, heron); a large, flightless bird (ostrich); a small, multicolored bird (hoopoe); and a nocturnal flyer (bat, √νυκτερίδα of the same free morpheme as νυκτερινός ‘nocturnal’). Distinguishing ‘birds of prey’ from ‘aquatic birds’ is a modern construct, however, because these types are not distinguished in the list. Also, the list in vv. 13– 19 is polysyndetic (with καὶ), inviting readers to consider each creature separately (also polysyndeton in vv. 22, 29–30). In LeuBA, the fourfold expression “and those similar to it” (καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ, fivefold in Bmg F v. 15) is probably an ancient expression for other genera or species of kite (v. 14), seagull (v. 16), hawk (v. 16), and plover (v. 19) (the LXX’s source vascillates in v. 16: 1o καὶ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῷ = ‫ למינו‬SP > MT; 2o = ‫ למינהו‬MT > SP). LeuB*A omits all of v. 15 probably by homoioteleuton: “and a raven and those like it” ([… και τα ομοια αυτω] και κορακα και τα ομοια αυτω Bmg [below col. 2] F Gött; > A Btxt). Athanasius of Alexandria (c. LeuB) may have v. 13 in view in his figural interpretation: “commanding figuratively, ‘Thou shalt not eat the eagle, nor any other bird that feedeth on a dead carcase’ … But these kill the soul with lusts …” (Schaff 2.4: 1282). Notably absent from vv. 13–19 are pigeons and turtledoves because in Leueitikon they are designated for sacrifice, although not explicitly for priestly consumption (Leu 1:14–17; 5:7–10; 12:6–8; 14:22, 30–31; 15:14, 29; for the distinction between birds of sacrifice and birds of prey, see GenGött 15:9– 11). By contrast with vv. 13–19, which do not enumerate criteria and thereby leave open the possibility that other unlisted avian animals may be eaten, vv. 20–23 prohibit the consumption of a class without a list, emphatically by inclusio: And [καὶ= ‫ ו‬SP > MT] all crawling things with wings that walk upon all fours, must be abominations to you (v. 20).

264

commentary

All crawling things among those with wings that have four feet are abominations to you (v. 23). In between this frame in vv. 21–22, however, the text identifies a subset of flying insects that “you shall eat” (impv. future: “you shall eat” NETS 91), or understood with permissive force, “you may eat” (“mögt ihr essen” SD 110; predicitively: “vous mangerez” BD 130; “comeréis éstos” BG 254; on ‘permissive fut.’, see Muraoka 2016: 288). This exceptional class includes the flying insect with “upper legs above its feet with which to leap on the ground” (ἔχει σκέλη ἀνώτερον τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ πηδᾷν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς; phrase ἃ ἔχει “which has” Bc F Gött vs. ἔχει “it has” B* A mins). This includes the locust, “another kind of locust,” the grasshopper, “one that fights snakes” and other species that resemble each of these (“those similar to it” 4×, vv. 22–23; v. 22, √βροῦχος ‘locust’ is attested in 3rd cent. BCE Koine, but not again until the 4th cent. CE: Lee 1983: 42; with our limited knowledge, rather than identifying the possible neologism √ἀττάκης as a “bald locust” NETS 91, I prefer “another kind of locust,” with GELS 101; LEH § 1453; the possible neolog. ὀφιομάχης “one that fights snakes” combines the free morphemes οφι[ς] ‘snake’ and μαχ[η] ‘battle, fight’). Surprisingly, after the closure of the v. 23 inclusio, the subunit is extended through vv. 24–25 by the dative of means with vv. 20 and 23 as its conceptual antecedent: “And by these [ἐν τούτοις] you will be come defiled” (v. 24a). This phrase initiates the second major section in the chapter, vv. 24–45, which focuses more sharply on the clean-unclean polarity with all of the chapter’s references to “clean” (√καθαρός, vv. 32, 36, 37, and subscription v. 47) and 25 of its 29 references to “unclean” (√ἀκάθαρτος). This section, verses 23–45, at last elucidates the offenses mentioned in an incipient form in Leu 5:2 that require a sin offering. What is new in 11:24–25, compared to the uncleanness language in vv. 2b–23, is that the one who touches or carries the carcass of a four-footed, winged crawler (vv. 20, 23) must “wash his clothes” and will remain “unclean until the evening” (2×: ἀκάθαρτος [ἔσται] ἕως ἑσπέρας: 1o v. 24 + εσται Bc A F Gött > B*unique; v. 25, πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια = ‫ יכבס בגדיו‬MT < ‫ יכבס בגדיו ורחץ במים‬SP “and he must wash his clothes and wash himself with water”). Both responses, washing and waiting, indicate an incipient perceptiveness of what microbiologists know today about the lifespans of bacteria and viruses. Verses 24–26 only add the clarification, “unclean until evening,” to the instructions in vv. 7–8 regarding nonruminant ungulates (split-hooved land animals that do not chew the cud), especially the pig, but others by implication. These verses are, therefore, rhetorically redundant; and they do not explicitly mandate that the one defiled should wash one’s clothes (cf. vv. 25, 28, 40). In v. 26, the translator likely interpolated the clarification, “anyone who touches

commentary

265

any of their carcasses,” because “who touches any of them” seemed overly restrictive, not even allowing one to handle nonruminant ungulates, such as a horse, donkey or mule, for farmwork or transportation (τῶν θνησιμαίων αὐτῶν vs. ‫ בהם‬2QpaleoLev MT SP; √θνησιμαῖον can describe human corpses [e.g., 1 Kgs 13:25, 2×], but in Leueitikon always [20×] refers to dead animals). Then, repeating the form of vv. 24–25 (class identification→touch carcass→ unclean until evening→carry carcass→wash clothes→unclean until evening), vv. 27–28 in the LXX introduce a new defiling class: “anyone who walks on hands among any animals that walk on all fours” (πᾶς ὃς πορεύεται ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς θηρίοις ἃ πορεύεται ἐπὶ τέσσερα, v. 27). I have supplied this translation because it reflects the basic interpretation of the nominal clause as referring to humans who, like quadrupeds, use hands and feet to move. First, πᾶς + nominative refers three times in the immediately preceding verses to humans (vv. 24, 25, 26; cf. 5 neuter plural pronouns in vv. 24–26 that refer to non-humans); therefore, πᾶς ὃς should be rendered “anyone who” (so “todo el que” BG 254; less precise, but still apparent: “every one that” NETS 92; Wevers 1997: 153). Second, in Leueitikon, the noun √χείρ never refers in its 60 other occurrences to an animal paw, but always to a human hand (with “»Händen«” SD 110; “sobre las manos” BG 254; contra “on paws” NETS 92; and overly dynamic: “sur les plantes” BD 131; the lexeme χειρῶν = MT SP ‫(“ כפיו‬his) two hands, paws” ≠ [‫גחו]ן‬ “belly” 11QpaleoLeva Cairo Genizah frag. = perhaps assimilation to ‫ גחון‬in v. 42). In this interpretation, the genitive “their [αὐτῶν] carcasses” (v. 28), is understood as masculine (not neut.), and such defiling contact with quadrupedal humans thematically anticipates the more severe violation of sexual contact with a quadruped in Leu 18:23–24. Some readers, however, probably reconfigured v. 28 to mean any quadruped animal by the neuter “these things [ταῦτα] will be unclean to you”; on the other hand, “these things” could still refer to quadrupedal humans (v. 28) as its conceptual antecedent. Verses 29–38 introduce another new class, “crawling things that are on the earth” (ἀπὸ τῶν ἑρπετῶν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), which should not be confused with the class of crawling things with wings, that is, winged insects (vv. 20–25; in v. 29 LeuBA [also mins Cyr 933] does not include the cognate verb after τῶν 2o [so v. 31] > ερποντων “[crawling things that] crawl” F Gött MT SP). After identifying the class as “unclean for you” (v. 29a), the text enumerates animals from the Mammalia (weasel, mouse, field mouse, blind rat) and Reptilia classes (chameleon, gecko, lizard, land crocodile) (v. 29b–30). In vv. 31–38, the concern is not eating (cf. vv. 2b–23), but contact with the carcasses of these crawling animals that transfers their defiling contagion to various entities: humans (v. 31); vessels of wood, cloth, leather, sack, extending to “any vessel, which work is done with it” (πᾶν σκεῦος ὃ ἐὰν ποιηθῇ ἔργον, with the Hebraic

266

commentary

resumptive pronoun, ἐν αὐτῷ, v. 32); clay vessels and what they contain (v. 33); food from which water “comes out,” a unique reading in LeuB (v. 34, ἀπέλθῃ B*vid A vs. ἐπέλθῃ “comes onto” Bc F); drink from a container (v. 35); ovens and pot stands (v. 36); watered seed (v. 38). To purify the entity from the carcass’ contagion: humans must remain in an unclean state until evening (v. 31); vessels must be dipped in water and remain unclean until evening (v. 32); clay pots, shattered (v. 33); ovens and pots, destroyed (v. 35b–c; pl. καθαιρεθήσονται = ‫ יתצו‬SP ≠ ‫ יתץ‬MT); and food and drink, one can only infer, should not be eaten (vv. 34–35a; cf. Nile water contaminated by blood and carcasses: Exod 7:21, 24). The language of these rituals recall 6:27–30, where a sin offering’s flesh or blood is a holy contagion that, upon contact, necessitates purification. For instance, the σκεῦος ὀστράκινον “clay vessel” in 11:33 recalls the identical lexeme in 6:28; both must be smashed when they contact the specified contagion. It is not clear that the food and drink in view was contained in the aformentioned clay vessel, since v. 34 already expressed “whatever was inside it will be unclean” (contra Wevers 1997: 156). The exceptions are marked in vv. 36 by the nominative function of the preposition πλὴν with the genitive: “Except that springs [πλὴν πηγῶν] of water and a cistern and a gathering of water will be clean” (Wevers 1997: 158). This is followed by reasserting, “but whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean” (v. 36b), which might feel out of place (so Wevers 1997: 158), but that is precisely the nature of the chapter, which values recurring rhetoric over logical placement. “Every seed fit for sowing” (πᾶν σπέρμα σπόριμον ὃ σπαρήσεται) on which the carcass of a crawling thing falls will be clean (v. 37), but watered seed of the same fate will be unclean (v. 38) (v. 37 may echo Gen 1:29, so Harlé and Pralon 1988: 131; v. 38 πᾶν > MT SP). Verses 39–40 return to land animals (vv. 2b–8, 26), but this time center on the defiling contagion of any clean and edible land animal that dies, which must not refer to the carcasses of land animals that have longer legs (vv. 2b– 8), because vv. 41–45 refer separately to those animals on the land that crawl close to the earth, such as mice, lizards and land crocodiles (listed first in vv. 29– 30, explicated through v. 38). In v. 40, for eating any of these requires washing one’s clothes and remaining unclean until evening, whereas for carrying them the LXX adds to this the middle voice imperatival future: “and must bathe himself with water” (καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι > MT SP; contra Wevers [1997: 159–160] an LXX leveling to 17:15 seems unlikely; instead this + may reflect a distinct Heb. reading, as known from SP v. 25 ‫ > ורחץ במים‬MT). Verses 39–40 and v. 26 could have been conflated to refer concisely to all land animals, but instead together they overspecify and constrain readers to think about the defiling capacity of both edible and inedible classes (see Runge 2010: 388).

commentary

267

Verses 41–45 overspecify by repeating four times in slightly different ways the same principle that “every crawling thing that crawls on the earth” defiles (vv. 41, 42, 43, 44; v. 45 substantiates vv. 41–44 with the causal ὅτι clause). This message is reinforced by the recurring diction: “what is detestable” (√βδέλυγμα vv. 41, 42: or “… loathsome” GELS 115–116; “abomination” LEH § 1642); the cognate “to make detestable” (act. voice √βδελύσσω, v. 43: or “to make hateful” GELS 116; “to make repulsive” LEH §1646); the passive “to be defiled” (√μιαίνω, v. 43) and active “defile (your lives)” (√μιαίνω, v. 44); and the adjective “unclean” (√ἀκάθαρτος, v. 43). Due to the paratactic syntax, it is unclear whether v. 42 bifurcates or trifurcates this class of crawling things: (1) “everything that moves on its belly,” and (2?) “everything that always walks on all fours,” and (2 or 3) “whatever has many feet among all the crawling things that crawl on the earth.” The first one or two subsets were probably already discussed in vv. 29–31(38), again indicating the rhetorical function of vv. 44–45, but the last subset expands the class to include presumably Chilopoda and Diplopoda (commonly: centepedes and millipedes). One might be immediately inclined to read vv. 44–45 as a theological rationale for the entire chapter, vv. 2b–43, but instead v. 44d, which restates “with any of the crawling things” (ἐν [instrumental] πᾶσιν τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς κεινουμένοις ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), reveals that the rationale of v. 44a–c compels obedience specifically to vv. 41–43. Likewise, v. 45, which contains the book’s first formulae of Egypt-redemption and divine-Israel holiness, modifies vv. 41–43 in particular. This interpretation is substantiated, regardless of whether the ὅτι clause in v. 5a modifies v. 44b or v. 45b, by the parallel imitatio Dei formula in vv. 44 and 45: 44 For I am the Lord your God, and you must be consecrated, and you must be holy, for I, the Lord your God (Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP), am holy. And you must not defile your lives with any of the crawling things that move themselves on the earth. 45 For I who am the Lord (= MT < ‫ אלהיכם‬SP) who brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God; you must be holy, for I, the Lord (Κύριος > MT SP), am holy. Verses 44–45 alternate between divine motive clauses (causal ὅτι + p. nom. of identification) and directives to Israel (1Pet 1:16 quotes verbatim LevLXX 19:2, but possibly also alludes to this intertext in 11:44–45; Jerome likely refers to Lev 19:2/1Pet 1:16, but could have thought of 11:44, so Lienhard 2001: 178). These verses anticipate the covenantal ethics of holiness pronounced in ch. 19 and

268

commentary

characteristic of chs. 17–26 more broadly (see Knohl 1995: 69). Rooting the dietary laws in the holy character of Israel’s covenant God heightens the scandal of Acts 10, which supplants both Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 (also cf. Heb 9:10). The extensive subscription at 11:46–47 (cf. 7:27–28) summarizes the contents and purpose of vv. 2b–45, but does so nonsequentially in a recollective manner, perhaps because the chapter itself is not neatly ordered, but rhetorically redundant: initial instructions for four animal classes (vv. 2b–23) are supplemented dischronologically (vv. 24–26, 39–45), but in the midst of these supplements, three new defiling classes are introduced (vv. 27–38, 42).

Subscription (vv. 46–47)

Contents and purpose (vv. 2b–45)

This is the law concerning the land animals

“animals that are in the land” (vv. 2b–8) “among all land animals” (vv. 26) “any land animal” (vv. 39–40)

and birds

“birds” (vv. 13–19)

and every life that moves through the water

“all that are in the waters” (vv. 9–12)

and (καὶ = ‫ ו‬MT > SP) every life that crawls upon the earth

“crawling things that are on the earth” (vv. 29–38) “every crawling thing that crawls on the earth” (vv. 41–45) Maybe also: “crawling things with wings that walk upon all fours” (vv. 20–23)

to distinguish between the unclean things and between the clean things, between the breeding things that may be eaten and between the breeding things that may not be eaten.

Purpose interspersed throughout vv. 2b– 45, maybe esp. of vv. 24–45 (with the clustered language of “clean” √καθαρός and “unclean” √ἀκάθαρτος)

Verse 47 exhibits an intratextual legal expansion of the Aarōnic vocation of 10:10, yet without an introductory formula to mark the expansion (for this exegetical maneuver, see Fishbane 1988: 187–196):

commentary

269

to distinguish between holy things and profane things and between unclean things and clean things 10:10

to distinguish between the unclean things and between the clean things, between the breeding things that may be eaten and between breeding things that may not eaten 11:46–47

Although vv. 44–45 reflect the holy-profane polarity of 10:10, the absence of any reference to holiness in the preceding contents (vv. 2b–43) or in this subscription (vv. 46–47) where we would expect it to appear, indicates that vv. 2b–43 explicate instead the clean-unclean polarity prominent in chs. 10–15 (containing the most frequent appearances of √ἀκάθαρτος [79×] and √καθαρός [23×]), whereas the holy-profane polarity will be illustrated only later in chs. 18–20 (√βεβηλόω “to profane” only occurs in chs. 18–22, and there 16×). The affect is that the phrase “between the breeding things that may be eaten and between breeding things that may not eaten” interprets all of 11:2b–45 as the rubric by which the Israelites (11:2a) could and must appropriate the cleanunclean polarity in their daily consumption of the viviparous animals in their midst (√ζωογονέω “to be viviparous, to produce alive” LEH 4115; so “vivíparous” BG 256; “breeding things” NETS 92; and dynamically, “die lebendige Wesen hervorbringen” SD 111 [italics theirs]; contra “vivants” BA 133, which is influenced by the Heb. ‫)החיה‬.

12:1–8 Childbirth Purification and Atonement Rituals The LeuB scribe sensibly demarcates 12:1–8 as a unit confined by the superscriptions at 12:1–2b and 13:1. The 12:1–2b superscription introduces the divine speech to be mediated by Mōysēs for an Israelite audience, especially new mothers (vv. 2–8), with the same redundant quotative frames of 1:2: “Speak to the sons of Israel, and you must say to them” (12:2ab//1:2: Λάλησον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς ≠ ‫[ לאמר‬12:2 only] MT SP). The initial nominative in the marked position draws special attention the central agent of the chapter: “Any woman, if she is inseminated and bears a male child” (Γυνὴ ἥτις ἐὰν σπερματισθῇ καὶ τέκῃ ἄρσεν). The intransitive σπερματίζω occurs in the LXX only here and in Exod 9:31: “For the barley was ripe, and the flax was going to seed [σπερματίζον]” (NETS 58); hence, in 12:2 “fertilized” (NETS 92; “fuera fecundada” BG 256; “aura été ensemencée” BA 134), but of living beings, “insem-

270

commentary

inated” may come closer to the connotation (contra the dynamic rendering, “die schwanger wird” [SD 111], which conceals the ‘seed’ imagery; for originally intransitive verbs developing in Koine an intransitive middle or passive voice, i.e., √σπερματίζω, see Lee 1983: 49–50). The unit is divided into vv. 2c–5, which prescribe the purification ritual that every new mother must complete after she gives birth to a son (vv. 2c–4) or daughter (v. 5), and vv. 6–7c, which prescribe the subsequent propitiaton ritual that the mother and officiating priest must execute. The subscription in v. 7d concludes vv. 2c–7c, so that the accommodation of v. 8 functions as an addendum. Verse 2 uses a pseudo-conditional clause with καὶ marking the apodosis (as Heb. ‫)ו‬: the postpartum mother of a male child “then she will be unclean for seven days” (καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας), a duration that is fixed according to what was considered to be the fullness of her monthly period of menstruation (//15:19–24, which illustrates by scenarios how every woman was to navigate life during this unclean state; see Muraoka 2016: 781). During this timespan she must not touch anything holy or enter the ἁγιαστήριον “holy place,” which is probably a new lexical formation limited to the biblical corpus (Lee 1983: 52). After the birth of a daughter (v. 5), however, the length of the mother’s uncleanness is doubled, two sets of seven days. This was probably not a means of female subordination (as thought by Noth 1965: 97; Wenham 1979: 188; cf. Lev 27:2– 7), but a response to postnatal realities understood by Israelite mothers and their midwives (cf. Exod 1:15–22; proposals include: circumcision on day eight limited the duration of impurity after the birth of a boy [Simeon ben Yohai, b. Niddah 31b]; the mother’s vaginal discharge from a female birth may last longer than from a male birth [Macht 1933: 253–260]; and some female babies bleed and/or discharge vaginally a white fluid called physiologic leukorrhea, and thus also required purification [cf. Magonet 1996: 152]). Jerome (c. LeuB) quotes this text, which requires the husband and wife to defer sexual intercourse, to support his belief that Mary, mother of Jesus, was a perpetual virgin (Schaff 2.6: 765). On the eighth day, the LXX requires the mother herself, implied from v. 2, to perform her son’s circumcision: “And on the eighth day she must circumcise [περιτεμεῖ] the flesh of his foreskin” (cf. allusions in Luke 1:59; 2:21; John 7:22; Acts 15:1; here in v. 3, act. περιτεμεῖ + acc. d.o. ≠ MT SP passive N-stem: “the flesh of his foreskin must be circumcised [‫)”] ִימּוֹל‬. In ExodusLXX, Sepphora circumcised her son ostensibly to avert God’s lethal judgment because the boy’s father, Mōysēs, failed to observe this rite (Exod 4:24–26; cf. Gen 17:10–27; Exod 12:44–48). Now in Leu 12:5, this privilege and responsibility is bestowed on new mothers. After one week (for a male child) or two (for a female child), the mother was to “remain in her unclean blood” (vv. 4, 5) for 33 days, if she had

commentary

271

a boy, or 66 days, if a girl. The LXX rendering “unclean blood” (αἵματι ἀκαθάρτῳ ≠ MT SP ‫“ דמ]י[ טהרה‬blood[s] of purifying”) suggests that there is no difference between the mother’s uncleanness in days 1–7 or 1–14 (√ἀκάθαρτος in vv. 2[2×], 5a) and in days 8–33 or 8–66 (√ἀκάθαρτος in vv. 4, 5b). Only the eighth day, which entailed circumcision for a boy, distinguishes these two timespans, so that the entire duration 1–33 or 1–66 is referred to collectively in vv. 4, 6 as “the days of her purification” (αἱ ἡμέραι καθάρσεως αὐτῆς, identical in vv. 4, 6). John of Damascus (c. LeuB) notes that circumcision must have been among the exceptions to rigid Sabbath keeping: “And again, did not all Israel circumcise the child on the Sabbath, if it happened to be the eighth day after birth” (Schaff 2.9: 768). Augustine (c. LeuB) reads v. 3 christologically, insofar as “the rock, the stone with which we are circumcised, was Christ,” and the eighth day was ordered because, “The seventh is finished, the Lord is buried; we are back at the first, the Lord is raised up” (Lienhard 2001: 179). Practically, during this unclean timeframe, according to LeuBA 12:4 the mother should not touch any “container” (αγγιου B* A mins; αγγειου Bc; αγιου “[anything] holy” F BrMcL Gött; similarly, 11:32–35; 15:19–24). Nor was she to “enter into the holy place [εἰς τὸ ἁγιαστήριον οὐκ εἰσελεύσεται] until the days of her purification are completed” (v. 4). The adverbial clause, “until the days of her purification are completed” (ἕως ἂν πληρωθῶσιν αἱ ἡμέραι καθάρσεως αὐτῆς), implies that women had the same prerogative as men to enter the tent to offer sacrifices and offerings to the Lord, which obliges readers to interpret or reinterpret √ἄνθρωπος as any person, male or female (i.e., Leu 1:2; 5:3–4; 6:3, 38; 7:11), and √οἱ υἱοὶ Ισραηλ as the Israelite community including women (i.e., Leu 1:2; 4:2; 7:13, 19, 24[2×], 26, 28; cf. 1Cor 11:5, another restriction that yet implies women’s prerogatives in the assembly). Verse 4, then, offers the converse of Leu 8:33 where Aarōn and his sons were commanded to remain inside the holy place: “And from the sacrifice of the tent of testimony you must not go out [οὐκ ἐξελεύσεσθε] for seven days until the day of your fulfillment is completed [ἕως ἡμέρα πληρωθῇ τελιώσεως ὑμῶν].” Verses 6–7c prescribe a separate propitiation ritual that the new mother of either a son or daughter and the priest must perform only “when the days of her purification are completed” (ὅταν ἀναπληρωθῶσιν …; cf. allusion in Luke 2:22). The mother brings to the priest at the door of the tent of testimony a form of the whole burnt offering implied in 1:10–13 but known explicitly from the elder’s sacrifice in ch. 9 for the people, “an unblemished lamb a year old for a whole burnt offering” (12:6, ἀμνὸν ἐνιαύσιον ἄμωμον εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα // 9:3 without ἄμωμον; also ἀμνός in chs. 14[6×], 23 [3×]). This lamb therefore affected propitiation not for any known or exposed sin or sinful error (4:1–6:7), but as a “sweet smell

272

commentary

of sacrifice the Lord” (as in 1:10–13). The mother brings also a single “young bird of a pigeon or of a turtledove for sin,” which resembles the first accommodative form of the sin offering in 5:7–10, which allowed: “two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the Lord, one for sin [ἕνα περὶ ἁμαρτίας] and one for a whole burnt offering.” The categories in ch. 5 reveal that this “one for sin” for a mother’s postpartum bleeding actually has nothing to do with sin or disobedience (5:1–2, 4), but belongs to the same domain of physical contact with an unclean contagion, referenced in 5:3, that required ritual purification (likewise, in the Heb. texts of Leu. 12:6, Num. 6 [Nazirite vow], 8 [altar], and elsewhere, “the ḥaṭṭā’t is prescribed for persons and objects who cannot have sinned”: Milgrom 1991: 253). In v. 7, the translator presumably clarifies that it was “the priest” (ὁ ἱερεύς > MT SP) who must offer these two sacrifices to the Lord as the combined means by which he “must propitiate for her [ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτῆς] and purify her [καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὴν] from the source of her blood.” This indicates that propitiation serves here as the mechanism for purification, a notion implied in Exod 30:10 and explicit in the telic infinitive of Num 8:21: “Aarōn made propitiation for them [ἐξιλάσατο περὶ αὐτῶν] in order to purify them [ἀφαγνίσασθαι αὐτούς].” The common subscriptional form in v. 7d, “This is the law for [οὗτος ὁ νόμος + gen./περὶ] her who bears a male or female child,” closes the unit proper (cf. 7:27; 11:46), so that v. 8, set off by an adversative δὲ, supplements to assist disadvantaged new mothers. She does not need to bring a lamb, but only two birds as articulated in 5:7 (also 15:29–30; v. 7d, δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν “two turtledoves or two young pigeons” // modified quotation in LukeB 2:24: ζεῦγος τρυγόνων ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶ[ν]). But if his hand is not able for what is sufficient for the sheep, he must bring for his sin that he has sinned two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the Lord, one for sin and one for a whole burnt offering. 5:7

But if her hand does not find what is enough for a lamb, then she must take two turtledoves or two young of pigeons, one for a whole burnt offering and one for sin …. 12:8 = order of MT ≠ SP

The basic and accommodating forms of the sin offering in ch. 5 were supplied for propitiation, which results in divine forgiveness (ἐξιλάσκομαι→ ἀφίημι in vv. 6, 10, 13). The noteworthy difference here in 12:8 is that “the priest must propitiate for her, and she will be clean [καὶ καθαρισθήσεται],” that is, the priest

273

commentary

affects propitiation that results not in her forgiveness, but her ritual purification (for καὶ καθαρισθήσεται functioning as a result clause: “y será purificada” BG 256; “et elle sera purifiée” BA 135; probably “and she shall be clean” NETS 92; contra “und sie soll gereinigt werden” SD 111).

13:1–8 Priestly Examination and Response to Skin Infections The form of the superscription (13:1), introducing speech from the Lord “to Mōysēs and Aarōn” (πρὸς Μωυσῆν καὶ Ἀαρὼν), without mentioning a broader Israelite audience, prepares for the central priestly role in dealing with skin diseases in chs. 13 (likewise, see the inclusion of Aarōn in 13:1; 14:33; 15:1; yet not in 14:1). The LeuB scribe rightly distinguishes vv. (1)2–8 and 9 ff. as separate categories of skin disease, but it is not clear why he did not mark additional paragraphs at v. 18, 24, 29, among others (see one possibility below). The casuistic instruction of the chapter has no overarching design, but instead it evolves by amassing the different permutations of skin and clothing disease that the priests must investigate, identify and respond to appropriately. With the exception of the Hebraic fronting of constituents in the protasis (i.e., vv. 2, 3, 9, 18; see Muraoka 2016: 727), vv. 2–58 are mostly expressed in an unmarked word order, with the affect that the discourse moves the reader systematically through the list of plausible infectious conditions (see other exceptions in vv. 18, 24, 29, 38, 45–47, 58). To highlight the language of the LXX, I attempt in the tables below to map out the progression of the instructions by four common elements: one, the skin infection is detected initially by an unspecified individual, who could also be a priest (Leu 22:4), and who readers would infer is the infected person or those in his or her proximity; two, the priest examines the present condition of the symptoms; three, the priest diagnoses; and four, the priest declares the state of the examined individual and, at times, mandates a required course of action. Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

vv. 2–3

“shiny lesion as an indication” (οὐλὴ σημασίας τηλαυγής; NETS 92: “conspicuous legion indicating a disease”)

1. White hair in infected area 2. Infection appears “low from the skin of the body” (ταπεινὴ ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρματος τοῦ χρωτός)

“infection of a skin disease” (ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν; metaphorically √ἁφή “attack” NETS 83, 92–95)

Declare him defiled

274

commentary

(cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

v. 4

“shiny spot was white in the skin of his body” (τηλαυγὴς λευκὴ ἦν ἐν τῷ δέρματι τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτῆς) (ην B* A F* mins; η Bc Fb Gött)

1. Infection appears “not low from its skin” (v. 4, 2× “its” [αυτης] ref. to τηλαυγής: 1o αυτης B*unique; > Bc Gött; 2o αυτης B* d t > Bc A F Gött) 2. Hair not changed to white (“it [the hair] is inconspicuous” αὐτὴν δέ ἐστιν ἀμαυρά > MT SP; √ἀμαυρός “not clearly visible” GELS 31; the η has a clear vertical line above it to imply the ν of αυτην, but naturally this acc. does not suit the grammar as well as a nom)

“Infection” (√ἁφή)

Isolate him for seven days

v. 5

On seventh day, infection Implied “infection” remains unchanged (“he diagnosis must examine the infection [τὴν ἁφὴν ≠ ‫ ו‬MT > SP]”)

Isolate him another seven days

v. 6

On seventh day, a second time, infection is inconspicuous

“Indication” (√σημασία cf. Lev 25:10 “signal” LEH § 7999; with “visible, concrete symptom”; but unclear as a signal of cleanness: “tache” BA 136; “Narbe” SD 111; “marca” BG 257; or “mark” NETS 93)

1. Declare him clean 2. Wash his clothes (unspecified agent of aor. ptc. πλυνάμενος antecedent to καθαρὸς ἔσται)

Skin disease

Declare him defiled

vv. 7–8

“indication in the skin changes after he sees the priest for his cleansing” (awkward acc. articular inf. τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτόν B* A min vs. telic gen. του. Indication has changed Bc F Swete Gött)

commentary

275

There has been substantial discussion about how best to translate the noun λέπρα (vv. 2–59) and the substantive adj. ὁ λεπρός (vv. 44–45) (see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 44–46; λέπρα is always selected as a calque for the 51 occurences of ‫צרעת‬: Wevers 1997: 170). I opt for ‘skin disease’ (n.) and ‘skin-diseased person’ (sub. adj.) (LEH §5514 gl. 1; prb. Wevers 1997: 170) over ‘leprosy’ and ‘leprous person’ (GELS 429; BA 135–141; NETS 92–94; BG 256–259; SD 111–114). Even though the modern medical terms ‘leprosy’ and ‘leprous’ derive etymologically from the Greek lexeme, none of the advanced stage symptoms of what pathologists today call leprosy (an infection by Mycobacterium leprae) appear in ch. 13: permanent nerve, skin, eye and limb damage, including, loss of tissue and deformed fingers and toes (for pathology and symptoms, see: Swash and Schwartz 1997: 242–246). Therefore, to avoid an anachronistic imposition of ‘leprosy’ onto λέπρα, I prefer to convey the understanding from the context that the translator must have had that this term referred to “any infectious scaly skin disease” (Wevers 1997: 170). Like a physician, the priest examines and diagnoses the skin-infected person, but like an adjudicator, the priest pronounces the status and mandatory (not merely a prescription) course of action for the individual (these two occupations appear juxtaposed in Jer 37:13, and separately elsewhere in the LXX: √ἰατρός “physician, healer”; ὁ κρίνων “the judge” or √κριτής “judge” esp. in Deut.). The priest’s role is distinct, however, insofar as the authoritative text, and not merely his own discernment, serves him as the manual to diagnose the infection before his eyes (hence, the recurring phrase: “It is an X”). Moreover, the goal of vv. 1–8, as a part of the discourse of chs. 11–15, is found in the priest’s performative speech acts by which he pronounces and thereby renders the individual ‘clean’ or ‘unclean’ (v. 3, 6[2×], 8; these verses fluctuate in stating the object of the priest’s inspection: v. 3, “and the priest must look and pronounce him defiled” < ‫[“ ו‬look] at him” MT 11QpaleoLeva; cf. v. 6, αὐτὸν ‫ ו‬MT > SP; v. 8, αὐτὸν > MT SP).

13:9–46 Priestly Examination and Response to More Skin Infections The LeuB outdentations at v. 9 and again at v. 47 denote vv. 9–46 as the next collection of skin infections. The new paragraph at v. 47 is sensible because it marks the transition to clothing ‘infections’ (vv. 47–58 with v. 59 subscript), whereas the reason for outdenting v. 9 is not as obvious, since the discourse on responding to skin infections in vv. 2–8 continues uninterrupted in vv. 9–46. A fair possibility is that the LeuB scribe regarded v. 9 as the basic initial reaction that applies to all the ensuing cases of skin infection in vv. 10–46: “And if

276

commentary

an infection of a skin disease happens to a person, then he must come to the priest” (Καὶ ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐὰν γένηται ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, καὶ ἥξει πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, v. 9; act. ἥξει vs. pass. “be brought” Hoph. ‫ הובא‬MT SP). Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

vv. 9–11

Infection of a skin disease

1. White “lesion” in the skin (√οὐλή “scar” GELS 513; “scar, mark” LEH §6598; contextually “lesion” NETS 93) 2. Hair turned white 3. “Some of the healthy part of the living flesh [τοῦ ὑγιοῦς τῆς σαρκὸς τῆς ζώσης] is in the lesion” (√ὑγιής “healthy, sound, safe” LEH §9071; so SD 112; NETS 93; BA 136; contra the negative “denudado” BG 257)

“Aged” skin disease (ptc. √παλαιόω, so “gealterter” SD 112; “ha hecho vieja” BG 257; but more dynamically, “invétérée” BA 136; “long standing” NETS 92)

1. Declare him defiled 2. Isolate him (contra MT SP “must not [‫ ]לא‬quarantine him”; no duration is specified)

vv. 12–13

“Breaking out, the skin disease breaks out” (Hebraic redundancy for the cognate advb. inf.)

1. Skin disease covers entire body’s skin 2. “It has all turned white”

No stated diagnosis

Declare him clean

vv. 14–15

“living skin appears in it” (prb. shorthand for same phenomenon in v. 11)

Healthy skin

Skin disease

Declare him defiled

vv. 16–17

“Healthy skin restores Infection turned white itself [ἀποκαταστῇ] and turns white” (cf. v. 10, here restoration of the negative ‘healthy skin’ is positive)

No stated diagnosis

Declare it clean

277

commentary (cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

vv. 18–20

“flesh becomes an ulcer [ἕλκος] in its skin and it heals, and in the place of the ulcer there is a white lesion or a shiny one that turns white or reddens” (v. 18, √ἕλκος means simply “llaga” BG 257; but contextually an open sore: “Geschwür” SD 112; “festering sore” NETS 93; “plaie ouverte” BA 137; ἐν τῷ δέρματι αὐτοῦ “in its skin” = ‫ בערו‬MT > SP; on εἰς expressing a process “turned,” see Muraoka 2016: 557).

1. Appears deeper than the skin 2. Hair turned white

Skin disease, broke out in the ulcer

Declare him unclean

1. No white hair on it No stated diagnosis (v. 21[as v. 26], priest “looks” ἴδῃ = ‫יראה‬ SP ≠ ‫ יראנה‬MT “looks at it”) 2. Not low in the skin, but inconspicuous

Isolate him for seven days

“if it has spread [διαχέηται] in the skin” (before this main vb. Hebraic + διαχυσει F Gött > B A mins b n x y Phil Latcod 100 Eth Arm Co)

Infection of a skin disease, “broken out in the ulcer” (v. 22[as v. 27], ἐν τῷ ἕλκει ἐξήνθησεν > MT SP; possibly separate Vorlage)

Declare him defiled

Shiny spot remains in one area, has not spread

Lesion of the ulcer

Declare him clean

v. 21

v. 22

v. 23

278

commentary

(cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

vv. 24–25

“flesh on his skin has a burn by fire [κατάκαυμα πυρός] and a healthy part of the burn on his skin becomes bright, shiny, reddish or white” (formal “une brûlure de feu” [BA 136] is better specified as a gen. of means, “a burn by fire” [SD 112; NETS 93; BG 258]; an attributive gen. is unlikely: “[firey] inflammation” LEH §4745; brackets by LEH; “a healthy part” B* A < το “the healthy part” Bmg F Swete Gött)

1. Hair turned white in the bright spot 2. Appears low in the skin

Infection of a skin disease, broken out in the burn

Declare him unclean

1. No white hair in it No stated diagnosis that shines (v. 26[as v. 21], priest “looks” ἴδῃ = ‫ יראה‬SP ≠ ‫ יראנה‬MT “looks at it”; ἐν αὐτῷ αὐγάζοντι “in it that shines” B* mins Arm; ἐν τῷ αὐγάζοντι “in the shining spot” Bc LXX-B* Swete BrMcL Gött) 2. Not low in the skin, but inconspicuous

Isolate him for seven days

On the seventh day, “by spreading it has spread in the skin” (Hebraic redundancy for the cognate advb. infinitive)

Declare him defiled (καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς = SP w.o ‫וטמא‬ ‫≠ אתו הכהן‬MT w.o. ‫ ;וטמא הכהן אתו‬contra v. 30)

v. 26

v. 27

Infection of a skin disease, “broken out in the ulcer” (v. 27[as v. 22], ἐν τῷ ἕλκει ἐξήνθησεν > MT SP; possibly separate Vorlage)

v. 28

On the seventh day (im- Lesion from the plied), bright spot reburn, the nature of mains in one area, does the burn not spread in the skin, but is inconspicuous

Declare him clean

vv. 29–30 “whether a man or a woman … an infection of a skin disease on the head or in the beard”

1. “infection of the Abscess, a skin diswound [τραύματος]” ease of the head or appears more holbeard low than the skin (τραυματος B A mins vs. θραυσματος “abscess, rupture” F Gött) 2. In it yellow hair is thin

Declare him defiled (καὶ μιανεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς = MT w.o ‫וטמא‬ ‫≠ אתו הכהן‬SP w.o. ‫ ;וטמא הכהן אתו‬contra v. 27)

279

commentary (cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

v. 31

1. Appears not more Infection of the hollow than the abscess skin 2. No yellow hair in it (√ξανθίζω “to be yellow” vs. MT SP ‫שׁחר‬ “black, coal-black” HALOT §9522)

Isolate the infection of the abscess for seven days

v. 32–33

1. On the seventh day, the abscess has not spread (earlier v. 32, τὴν ἁφὴν “the infection” = MT ‫ ≠ הנגע‬SP ‫)הנתק‬ 2. No yellow hair in it 3. Appears not more hollow in the skin

No stated diagnosis

1. “Skin” must be shaved, abscess must not be shaved (prb. to clarify the Heb. reflexive: ξυρηθήσεται τὸ δέρμα vs. MT SP ‫)והתגלח‬ 2. Isolate the abscess another seven days

v. 34

1. On the seventh day after he has shaven, abscess has not spread in the skin 2. Abscess does not appear hollow in the skin

No stated diagnosis

Declare him clean (αὐτὸν “him” = ‫אתו‬ MT > SP)

Abscess has spread in the skin, the priest must not examine for yellow hair because he is unclean (v. 36, priest “must look” ὄψεται = SP ‫וראה‬ ≠ MT ‫“ וראהו‬must look at him”)

“he is unclean”

No stated declaration

vv. 35–36

After declared clean, by spreading, the abscess has spread in the skin

280

commentary

(cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

v. 37

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

1. Abscess remains evident 2. Black hair grown in it

Abscess has healed, Declare him clean “with respect to clean, he is” (καθαρόν ἐστιν B; καθαρός ἐστιν F Swete Gött)

vv. 38–39

“whether man or 1. Bright spots on the woman … bright skin appear white spots, shining, appear- 2. “It will break out” in ing white” his skin (fut. εξανθησει B* 992 mins; pres. εξανθει “it breaks/broke out” Bc A F BrMcL Gött)

“eczema” (ἀλφός), he is clean (with BG [259 n. a] we cannot be confident about the meaning of √ἀλφός, but “lepra blanca” [BG 259] is probably too severe; better “Ekzem” SD 113; LEH §443; described as “a scaly condition” NETS 93; maybe “darter blanche” BA 139)

No stated declaration

vv. 40

“someone’s head No stated examination becomes bald” of symptoms (τινι “someone” here is a dative of disadvantage: Muraoka 2016: 167)

He is a bald man, he is clean

No stated declaration

v. 41

“his head becomes bald in the front”

Bald on the forehead, No stated declaration he is clean

No stated examination of symptoms

281

commentary (cont.) Verses

Skin infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

v. 42–46

“on his bald head or on his bald forehead a white or reddened infection … a skin disease” (“his [αὐτοῦ] bald head” prb. = ‫ ו‬11QpaleoLeva SP > MT; and “on his [αὐτοῦ] bald forehead” prb. = ‫ ו‬SP > MT)

Infection appears white, turning red on his bald head or bald forehead (v. 43, misspelled in B*unique: priest “must look at it [αὐτὸ]” vs. αυτον Swete BrMcL Gött)

Skin-diseased person, infection on his head (overspecified [3×, vv. 43, 44, 45] for stress)

1. “One [μία], the priest must declare him defiled” (μια B*unique, prb. haplography; μιανσει Bc Swete BrMcL Gött) 2. Clothes be loosened, head uncovered, throw something around his mouth, “and he will have been called unclean” (v. 45, “head uncovered [ἀκάλυπτος]” B Mtxt mins, prb. haplography, but close meaning to ακατακαλυπτος Ac F Gött [but ακαταλυπτος A*]) 3. Separated, “pass the time” outside the camp

282

commentary

Early Greek readers unversed in Hebrew had to resolve obvious terminological conflicts. For instance, “some of the healthy part of the living flesh [τοῦ ὑγιοῦς τῆς σαρκὸς τῆς ζώσης] is in the lesion,” is symptomatic not of healthy skin, an individual’s clean state, but of an ‘aged’ or ‘long-standing’ condition that the priest must declare defiled (v. 10–11, for √‫“ מחית‬raw flesh” = √ὑγιής “healthy, sound, safe” LEH §9071; SD 112; NETS 93; BA 136; contra the negative “denudado” BG 257). Also, when “healthy skin restores itself [ἀποκαταστῇ] and turns white,” this is not as one might expect, the “restoration” or “reestablishment” (√ἀποκαθίστημι LEH §1038) of the unclean “healthy skin,” but rather the absence of “healthy skin” that indicates one’s clean condition. In the chapter, only when one reaches v. 35 does it become clear that the priestly speech act of declaring one clean or unclean does not transform one’s ritual status, but validates it (cf. allusion in Matt 8:4; yet in the allusion in Luke 17:14, the lepers must obey Jesus’ command to show themselves to the priest before they knew they would be cleansed on the way). Accordingly, one’s cleanness and uncleanness is identified in vv. 35–41 without mention of a priestly declaration (vv. 36, 39, 40, 41), although a declaration may still be assumed (cf. v. 59 for no explicit declaration in vv. 47–59). Also, in v. 37 one’s ritual condition precedes the priest’s verbal confirmation of it. This is the conclusion that John Chrysostom (c. LeuB) draws in his allusion to Leu 13:2–46: “The Jewish priests had authority to release the body from leprosy, or rather, not to release it but only to examine those who were already released …” (Schaff 1.9: 66). Finally, there is a certain ambiguity as to what vv. 45–46 applies, but no ambiguity that the text overspecifies by the redundancy of ‘unclean’ (√ἀκάθαρτος; see ptc. to render Heb. cognate inf. abs in v. 46: Muraoka 2016: 384): 45 And the skin-diseased person on whom is the infection, his clothes must be loosened and his head uncovered, and let him throw something around his mouth, and he will have been called unclean. 46 All the days the infection is on him he is unclean and he must remain unclean. He must stay separated; he must pass the time outside his camp. One could interpret vv. 45–46 as the obligation specifically for the bald person with a skin disease on his head (vv. 43–44), because “the skin-diseased person” (ὁ λεπρὸς) in v. 45 ostensibly refers to the “skin-diseased person” (λεπρὸς) of vv. 43–44. However, until this point, vv. 2–44 have ordered no course of action for the one declared ‘unclean’ (or the synonym ‘defiled’). Therefore, it

commentary

283

is more natural to see vv. 45–46 as finally supplying those orders, which are incumbent on those declared unclean for any of the unclean skin conditions in vv. 2–44. In this understanding, “the skin-diseased person” (ὁ λεπρὸς, v. 45) functions as a generic article to refer back collectively to the class of skindiseased persons aforenoted in vv. 2–44 (see Muraoka 2016: 8–10[generic], 4– 6[anaphoric]). In LXX vv. 45–46, the unclean skin-diseased person must “pass the time” (expression with ἡ διατριβή) outside the camp, which contributed to a larger system of quarantining, especially evident in chs. 13–14, to support the survival of the community by preventing an endemic (cf. possible allusion in Luke 17:12). From “let him throw something around his mouth” (περὶ τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ περιβαλέσθω, v. 45), readers might infer not only that this would reduce airborne contagion, but that this would obstruct the unclean person from speaking (περιβαλεσθω B F M’ mins Cyr 996; περιβαλλεσθω A Gött). Thus, the future perf. passive, “he will have been called unclean” (καὶ ἀκάθαρτος κεκλήσεται, v. 45), implies someone else has spoken, namely, the priest, who alone was responsible to declare individuals unclean (vv. 3, 8, 11, 15, 20, 25, 27, 30; contra MT SP ‫“ וטמא טמא יקרא‬and he must call out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’”; see vocal lepers in Luke 17:13; the LXX may have understood ‫ִיְק ָרא‬ [MT vocal.] as an N-stem ‫[ ִיָקּ ֵרא‬so Wevers 1997: 190], and ‫ טמא‬as a dittograph).

284

commentary

13:47–59 Priestly Examination and Response to Infected Clothing Verses

Clothing infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest mandates (no explicit declarations)

vv. 47–50

“As for clothing [ἱματίῳ], if an infection of skin disease appears in it … becomes greenish or redish” in the warp or weft, linens or wool, skin or workable skin or vessel made of workable skin (ἱματίῳ as dat. of respect)

Examination but no statement of condition of symptoms

Infection of skin disease

Isolate infection for seven days

On the seventh day, infection has spread in the kinds of cloth (v. 51 as a synopsis of the kinds in vv. 47–51)

“abiding” (ἔμμονος) skin disease, it is unclean (ἔμμονος “abiding, chronic” GELS 226; “chronic” LEH §3003; “lasting” NETS 94)

Burn the clothing with fire (v. 52 synopsis of kinds, unspecified but implied priest as agent from v. 51)

On the seventh day, No stated diagnosis infection has not spread in the cloth (seventh day implied by adversative δὲ and anaphoric article: ἐὰν δὲ ἴδῃ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ μὴ … ἡ ἁφὴ “but if he sees the priest, and the infection has not,” v. 53; “warp or the weft” as synecdoche for the vv. 47–51 kinds)

1. Wash the object containing the infection (prb. implied nonpriest b/c priest “must command” in v. 54) 2. Isolate infection for another seven days

After washed, on the fourteenth day (implied from vv. 54c– 55a), infection appears unchanged, although it has not spread

“Be burnt with fire” (impv. fut. passive κατακαυθήσεται by undefined priest or non-priest agent; cf. prb. non-priest ‫תשׂרפנו‬ “you must burn” [not 3rd pers. “the priest” in v. 55a])

vv. 51–52

vv. 53–54

v. 55

“It is an unclean thing” (ἀκάθαρτόν ἐστιν; neut. form ἀκάθαρτόν occurs only in chs. 11–15[21×] and 27[1×])

285

commentary (cont.) Verses

Clothing infection detected initially

Priest examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest mandates (no explicit declarations)

v. 56

After washed, on the fourteenth day (vv. 54c–55a), infection is inconspicuous

No stated diagnosis

Tear it—implied formerly infected area— from the cloth (sg. subjects … πλυθῆναι … ἀπορρίξει = MT ‫הכבס‬ … ‫ ≠ וקרע‬SP ‫… הכבסו‬ ‫ ;וקרעו‬priest implied as agent from v. 56aα; again synecdoche in v. 56)

v. 57

Probably after tearing (after v. 56), infection “still appears” in the clothing (see discussion below)

Skin disease that has broken out

Object that contained the infection burned with fire

v. 58

Either after seventh or fourteenth days (see vv. 54, 56), the clothing “that must be washed and the infection should leave it”

It will be clean

Washed a second time

After vv. 45–46 serve as a stressed and needed conclusion for vv. 2–44, a new section begins in v. 47, which is marked by an outdentation in LeuB. The syntax of v. 47 flags a transition in the discourse with a fronted dative of reference: “As for clothing [ἱματίῳ], if an infection of skin disease appears in it [ἐν αὐτῷ]” (on fronting a constituent of a protasis, see Muraoka 2016: 726–727). In this section, the breadth of the semantic range of √λέπρα ‘skin disease’ is now expanded to include diseases that may permeate clothing. The basic assumption of vv. 47–58 is that different ‘skin diseases’ that infect human skin (vv. 2–46) can also infect animal skins, whether wool, leather, or clothes or instruments made from them. Consequently, in vv. 47–58 one isolates the infected material, not the person (cf. isolated person in vv. 5, 11, 21, 26, 46; prb. vv. 31, 33). In vv. 55–56, the passive temporal clause, “after it has been washed” (μετὰ τὸ πλυθήναι αὐτὸ, 2× in LeuB), appears to refer back to the seventh-day washing (v. 54), and not to a second washing on the 14th day (a 14th-day washing is stated clearly in v. 58: πλυθήσεται τὸ δεύτερον; v. 55, αὐτὸ “it” [acc. subj. of inf.] B

286

commentary

mins; αυτου “his/its” [solecism] A F; > G M rell Gött). Verse 57 probably refers to a case that “still appears [ὀφθῇ ἔτι]” after the 14th day, that is, after the act of tearing the infected spot out of the clothing (in v. 56); otherwise, v. 57 would unnecessarily repeat v. 55 (which would be impossible, since v. 55 mandated burning). Verse 58, however, could refer to the disappearance of the infection confirmed by the priest on either the seventh or 14th days; because, in either case, “washed a second time [τὸ δεύτερον]” (v. 58) refers back to the first washing in v. 54. The subscription in v. 59 does not conclude all of vv. 2–58, as readers might expect, but summarizes only vv. 47–58 that relate to infections in clothing: οὗτος ὁ νόμος ἁφῆς λέπρας ἱματίου ἐρεοῦ ἢ στιπποίνου ἢ στήμονος ἢ κρόκης ἢ παντὸς σκεύους δερματίνου, εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸ ἢ μιᾶναι αὐτό. This is the law for an infection of skin disease in clothing of wool or tow, whether in the warp or the weft, or in any skin vessel, in order to declare it clean or to declare it defiled. 13:59

It is plausible that this LXX subscription reflects a Vorlage that distinctively aligns with 11QLevb, although the effect, three anarthrous genitives of material, is barely felt on early Greek readers: one, “clothing of wool” (ἐρεοῦ prb. = ‫ צמר‬11QLevb ≠ ‫ הצמר‬MT SP); two, “or tow” (στιπποίνου B* [στιππυινου Bc F] prb. = ‫ פשׁתים‬11QLevb ≠ ‫ הפשׁתים‬MT SP); three, “skin vessel” (δερματίνου prb. = ‫ עור‬11QLevb MT ≠ ‫ העור‬SP). A fourth agreement is uncertain in “to declare it clean” (εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸ maybe = ‫“ לטהרתו‬for his cleansing” 11QLevb [= 14:23 MT LXX, but see 13:7; 15:13] ≠ ‫ לטהרו‬MT SP). The closing infinitives of purpose imply that the instructions of vv. 47–58 enable the priests to fulfill their declarative responsibility, stated in vv. 2–34, 37, but now implied for vv. 47–58: “in order [that the priests might be able] to declare it clean or to declare it defiled” (εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸ ἢ μιᾶναι αὐτό; with μιᾶ. as a simple inf. of purpose; and αὐτὸ [×2] as “any of the possibilities given: ‘garment woolen or linen’ …”: Wevers 1997: 197).

14:1–32 Ritual for Cleansing a Person with a Skin Disease This section in LeuB is enclosed by the superscription in v. 1 (Lord→Mōysēs, without an explicit target audience) with introductory formula in v. 2, “This is the law for the skin-diseased person” (Οὗτος ὁ νόμος τοῦ λεπροῦ), and the

commentary

287

inclusio subscription in v. 32, “This is the law … skin disease” (οὗτος ὁ νόμος … τῆς λέπρας; see discussion below). Both the officiating priest and skin-diseased person, who could also be a priest (see 22:4), participate in the unique and composite ritual cleansing process of vv. 2b–31. The ritual consists of four successive elements: day one, bird sacrifice and water manipulation for cleansing (vv. 2– 8c); days one (part two) through seven, “pass the time” outside the camp (v. 8d); day seven, shave all body hair, wash clothes, bathe for cleansing (v. 9); day eight, sacrifices and blood manipulation for cleansing and propitiation (vv. 10–20); alternative day eight, accommodation to the disadvantaged (vv. 21–31). The formula of v. 2a functions as a forward-pointing (instead of an expected backward-pointing) reference and target to increase attention to vv. 2b–31: “This is the law [οὗτος ὁ νόμος] …” (see Runge 2010: 385–386). Concurrently, the formula presents the ensuing instructions for cleansing (vv. 2b–31) as the necessary augment to the preceding 13:2–46: “This is the law for the skin-diseased person on the day that he is to be cleansed [τοῦ λεπροῦ, ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ καθαρισθῇ]: And he must be brought to the priest” (anaphoric art. τοῦ λ.; for Mark 1:40–44, see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 149; cf. other allusions to 14:2–32 in Luke 5:14; 17:14; Matt 8:4). The priest’s examination and diagnosis of healing in v. 3 functions as a literary shorthand for any occasion when a skin-diseased person is declared clean (in 13:6, 13, 17, 23, 28, 34, 37, 45). In vv. 4–5, the priest issues the orders that for the benefit of the one being cleansed (dat. of adv. τῷ κεκαθ.) of certain undefined agents “they must take” (λήμψονται, v. 4 = SP ‫ ≠ לקחו‬MT ‫ )לקח‬and “they must slaughter” (σφάξουσιν, v. 5 = SP ‫ ≠ שחטו‬MT ‫ )שׁחט‬one small, clean bird in a clay container over “living water” (ὕδατι ζῶντι, v. 5). The formal rendering “living water” throughout is preferable since it preserves the word play with ‘living’ bird (√ζάω; so BA 142; BG 260; NETS 94; but not “fließendem Wasser” SD 114; v. 5, δύο ὀρνίθια ζῶντα καθαρά “two living clean birds” implies knowledge of 11:13–19, 46). In v. 6, the pendent accusative and shift to a third-person subject, probably referring to the priest (as in vv. 5, 7), distinguishes the second clean bird: “And regarding the small living bird, he must take it” (καὶ τὸ ὀρνίθιον τὸ ζῶν, λήμψεται αὐτὸ; here καὶ = ‫ ו‬SP > MT). The priest dips this living bird, with scarlet-spun thread and hyssop, into the blood of the slaughtered bird over living water, then sprinkles the blood seven times onto the one being cleansed and releases the bird back into the field (vv. 6–7; cf. allusion to 14:4, 6 in Heb 9:19; √κόκκινος ‘red, scarlet’, in LevLXX only in ch. 14 [5×], in Koine becomes the normal adj. in place of the Classical √ἐρυθρός, which is still used in the LXX and Koine: Lee 1983: 111–112). The one being cleansed washes his clothes, shaves all his hair and bathes himself (v. 8a–c), then for seven days passes the time outside the camp (v. 8d), and on day seven, again shaves, washes his clothes and bathes (v. 9; on

288

commentary

the difficulty of determining the logical voice of the morphologically passive √ἐξυρημένοι “have shaved” with two objects in vv. 8, 9; 21:5: Muraoka 2016: 550). John of Damascus (c. LeuB) identifies the washing phase as a type of baptism: “The third baptism was that of the Law: for every impure person washed himself with water, and even washed his garments, and so entered into the camp” (Schaff 2.9: 726). LeuB is distinctive in requiring one to shave even the hair from his or her “loins” (οσφυας B*unique “loins, waist” [GELS 510; LEH § 6577]; οφρυς Bc F; οφρυας “eyebrows” Α Swete BrMcL Gött). In vv. 7–9, I preserve the paratactic syntax of the repeated phrase, “and he will be clean” (καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται, 3×), although readers might reconstruct this contextually to be a resultative, “then he will be clean” (in place of ὥστε, ὡς, ὅτι or ἵνα). The recurrence of this phrase (vv. 7, 8, 9, 20) challenges the notion that one’s transfer from unclean to clean occurred in a single moment, but instead envisions several preliminary transferrals into the clean state, with the final transferal occurring after propitiation in v. 20c (see discussion below). In vv. 10–31, on the eighth day, a composite offering is presented, blood manipulated, and sacrifices offered, all for the purpose of propitiation and the finalization of one’s cleansing. In the following chart, the basic form of this propitiation component in vv. 10–20 is juxtaposed with the accommodating option in vv. 21–31.

Basic form (vv. 10–20)

Accomodating option (vv. 21–31) “But if his hand is poor and does not find” (Ἐὰν δὲ πένηται ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ καὶ μὴ εὑρίσκῃ B*unique w. order ≠ Bc BrMcL ≠ A F Gött)

1. Eighth day, one being cleansed (OBC) must take two year-old unblemished lambs, one year-old unblemished sheep, three-tenths of fine flour as an offering mixed with olive oil and one cup of olive oil (v. 10) (OBC agency implied from v. 9; for the appellative “one who is being cleansed” τοῦ καθαριζομένου subst. aor. pass. ptc., v. 14; cf. vv. 7, 11, 14, 18, 19, 25, 28, 31; cf. perf. pass v. 4; “two … a year old [ἑνιαυσίους]” = SP ‫ > בני שנה‬MT; “sheep a year old [ἑνιαύσιον]” B V mins Sa. vs. εν ενια. F Gött; ἐλαίου μίαν = SP w. order ≠ MT)

1. OBC must take one lamb “as a choice portion for the sinful error he has committed, in order to propitiate for him,” a tenth of fine flour mixed with olive oil “for a sacrifice,” a cup of olive oil (v. 21), two turtledoves or young birds from the doves “which his hand finds,” one for sin, one for a WBO (v. 22) (1o ἡ μία “the one” ≠ anarth. MT SP; 2o = art. MT ≠ SP; see propit. discussion below)

2. Priest “who is cleansing” (ὁ καθαρίζων) must stand OBC and “these things” (ταῦτα) before the Lord at the door of the tent of testimony (v. 11)

2. Eighth day, OBC must bring them to the priest “in order to cleanse himself,” to the door of the tent of testimony before the Lord (v. 23)

289

commentary (cont.) Basic form (vv. 10–20) (conceptual antecedents of ταῦτα = v. 10 offerings)

Accomodating option (vv. 21–31) (purpose inf. w/ the transitive aor. εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι αὐτὸν assumes OBC agency from v. 23a and thus is a reflexive: “in order to cleanse himself ”)

3. Priest must offer one lamb for a sinful error, and unidentified “they must slaughter” it where “they slaughter” the WBO; it is a “holies of holies”; priest must set apart the cup of olive oil before the Lord (vv. 12–13) (pl. σφάξουσιν ≠ sg. MT SP; σφάζουσιν = SP ≠ MT)

3. After taking the lamb for sinful error and cup of olive oil, the priest must place them as a deposit before the Lord, and he must slaughter the lamb for sinful error (v. 24–25a) (SP LXX < 2o ‫“ הכהן‬the priest” MT)

4. Priest must place some of its blood on OBC’s right earlobe, tips of his right hand and right foot (v. 14) (ὁ ἱερεὺς 2o = MT > SP)

4. Priest must put some of its blood on the OBC’s right earlobe and tips of his right hand and right foot (v. 25) (v. 25, τὸν ἀμνὸν τῆς πλ. “lamb for sinful error” B* A V mins Latcod 100 Syh = MT vs. τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν τῆς πλ. Bc F Gött)

5. Priest must pour some of the cup of olive oil “in the priest’s left hand” (v. 15), dip his right finger “with the olive oil that is in his left hand,” sprinkle it seven times with his finger before the Lord (v. 16), put remaining olive oil in his hand (implied in the cup) on OBC’s right earlobe and tips of right hand and right foot, “at the place [τὸν τόπον] of the blood of the one for a sinful error” (v. 17) (v. 16, B Gött < ‫ מן־השׁמן‬2o 11QpaleoLeva MT SP LXXmss [M’ O’ mins etc.]; v. 16, τῷ δακτύλῳ “with his finger” = ‫ באצבעו‬11QLevb MT > 11QpaleoLeva SP; v. 17 emphasis on preposed obj. τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἔλαιον τὸ ὂν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ “But the olive oil that remains in his hand”; τὸν τόπον = MTmss SP > ML 11QpaleoLeva)

5. Priest must pour out some of the olive oil in the priest’s left hand (v. 26), sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before the Lord (v. 27), put some of the olive oil in his hand on the OBC’s right earlobe and tips of his right hand and right foot, “on the place of the blood of the one for a sinful error” (v. 28) (v. 26, emphasized preposed object, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου “and some of the olive oil”)

6. “But the olive oil that remains in the priest’s hand” the priest must put on OBC’s head, “And the priest must propitiate for him before the Lord” (v. 18) (emphasis on preposed obj. “But the olive oil that is …” τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἔλαιον τὸ.; LXX obscurity b/c “the olive oil that remains in his hand” [v. 18//v. 17] was already used in v. 17; no difficulty exists in MT SP due to the partitive ‫מן‬ “some of the …” > LXX)

6. Remaining olive oil in his hand, priest must put on the OBC’s head, “and the priest must propitiate for him before the Lord” (v. 29). (stressed preposed object, “but what remains from the olive oil that …” τὸ δὲ καταλιφθὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐλαίου τὸ …; here απο του ελαιου B A mins Sa Syh, prb. = 4QLevd MT ‫ ;מן־השׁמן‬ελαιον F Gött, maybe = SP ‫)בשמן‬.

290

commentary

(cont.) Basic form (vv. 10–20)

Accomodating option (vv. 21–31)

7. Priest must prepare “the one for sin” and the “priest of the uncleanness [του ακαθαρτου] must propitiate for him [περὶ αὐτοῦ] who is being cleansed from his sin” (v. 19). Then the priest must slaughter and offer the WBO and “the sacrifice” on the altar “opposite [ἀπέναντι] the Lord,” “and the priest must propitiate for him, and he will be clean” (v. 20). (v. 19, Bunique “priest of the uncleanness [του ακαθαρτου]” as shorthand for “priest who is officiating for this uncleanness,” or gen. of apposition but not juxtaposed with the head noun: “the priest must propitiate for him, for the uncleanness of him who is being cleansed” [ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεὺς τοῦ ἀκαθάρτου τοῦ καθαριζομένου]; cf. περι mins Gött; A περι του ακαθαρτου; v. 19, περι αυτου Bunique > A F M rell Gött; see propitiation discussion below; ὁ ἱερεὺς 2o and 3o > MT SP; v. 20, απεναντι ‘opposite, in front’ B*unique; εναντι ‘before’ Bc A F BrMcL Gött; απεναντι [and εναντι] Κυρίου = ‫ לפני יהוה‬SP > MT)

7. Priest must prepare one of the turtledoves or one of the young birds from the doves, “as his hand found” (v. 30), one for sin and one as a WBO “with the sacrifice,” then “the priest must propitiate before the Lord for the one being cleansed” (v. 31) (v. 30, “as his hand found” καθότι εὗρεν αὐτοῦ ἡ χείρ, cf. vv. 21, 22, 32; in v. 31, as in ch. 2, the generic τῇ θυσίᾳ “[with] the sacrifice” conceals the nuance of the lexeme ‫[“ המנחה‬with] the grain offering”; v. 31, ὁ ἱερεὺς “the priest” = ‫הכהן‬ 4QLev-Numa MT > SP)

Verses 21–31 supply the book’s third explicit accommodation for the poor (5:7– 10; 11–13; although prb. implied in 1:10–13; 14–17). The idiom “which his hand finds” (ὅσα εὗρεν ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ, v. 22, similarly vv. 21, 30, 32) could refer to “what was available” (Wevers 1997: 208), or to the birds one was able to trap by hand for this sacrifice; however, most readers probably perceived it as a resumption of the metaphor for poverty from v. 21a–b (LXX v. 32a < MT SP ‫אשׁר־תשׂיג ידו‬ “which his hand is able,” prb. a Heb. dittograph [Harlé and Pralon 1988: 144] that some translations remove: Vulg, NLT, ESV; but not Tar, JPS 1985). The accomodating option still requires a lamb for a sin offering (as in 5:6), but replaces the second lamb and the sheep with two birds, one for sin, one for a WBO (vv. 21– 25a; 30–31); this template was established in 5:7–11 (although, unlike 14:10, the basic form in 5:6 required only a single flock animal). Both of the forms in 14:10– 31 reflect a compound ritual with elements known from chs. 1–8: first, the ritual explicitly incorporates a lamb for sinful error (vv. 12–13; 24–25a; from 5:6) that was to be slaughtered where the whole burnt offerings were (esp. 1:5, 11); second, placing blood on one’s right earlobe and tips of the right hand and foot was

commentary

291

already enacted in the priestly validation of the Aarōnids (vv. 14, 25; as in 8:23; cf. Exod 29:20); third, a “sacrifice” (√θυσία, v. 21) of fine flour mixed with olive oil recalls the variations in ch. 2 that omit frankincense (vv. 10–11; 21–23; from 2:5–13); fourth, the cup of olive oil poured on the head and placed on the right earlobe, hand and foot, of the one being cleansed was an action already performed on the priests (vv. 15–17; 26–28; as in 8:12, 30; 10:7; but without sprinkling seven times before the Lord as in 14:16, 27). Remarkably, this atypical blood and olive oil manipulation appears outside ch. 14 only in the validation of the priests in ch. 8, where cleansing is not mentioned. One may speculate the connection of the symbolism between the two, but by contrast, ch. 14 is concerned with the process of ritually cleansing the one whose body hosted an unclean skin disease (√καθαρίζω in vv. 11[2×], 14, 17, 18, 19 [2×], 20, 23, 25, 28, 29, 31; √καθαρισμός in v. 32). In vv. 17–18, 28–29, the substantival aorist participle, “the one who was cleansed” (τοῦ καθαρισθέντος for Hith. ‫ )ַהִמַּטֵּהר‬logically refers to the priest’s declaration of cleansing (ch. 13) or observation of healing (14:2–3) which occurred prior to the current ritual, but in the same verses the translator also employs the present participle, “the one being cleansed” (τοῦ καθαριζομένου again for Hith. ‫)ַהִמַּטֵּהר‬, to refer to the continuous process of one’s cleansing during the ritual (see Muraoka 2016: 274). The skin-diseased person has committed no known sin or sinful error (visà-vis 4:1–6:7), and therefore, readers may infer either that the required sinful error sacrifice is exclusively for physical, not spiritual, purification (cf. Milgrom 1991: 253; cf. 12:6–8), or possibly that cleansing one’s skin necessitates propitiation for unintentional, unexposed sin or sinful errors. In spite of the paratactic syntax, one can infer that propitiation here results in cleansing: “And the priest must propitiate for him, and he will be clean” (καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἱερεύς, καὶ καθαρισθήσεται, v. 20). More precisely, the ‘propitiate’ Leitwort in vv. 10–31 (√ἐξειλάσκομαι [LeuB orth.] in vv. 18 [also spelled ἐξιλ.], 19, 20, 21, 29, 31) indicates that one receives ritual cleansing for a healed skin disease incrementally when the priest affects propitiation in what appears to be two separate stages of the ritual: first by placing the olive oil on the individual’s head (vv. 18; accom. in v. 29), and then again by sacrificing the “one for sin” and the WBO (vv. 19–20; accom. in v. 31). The LXX subscription of v. 32 appears to subdivide vv. 2–31: “This is the law in which is the infection of skin disease” refers to the basic ritual form in vv. 2– 20, “and [καὶ] of the one who cannot find for his cleansing by his hand” refers to the accommodating option in vv. 21–31 (cf. idiom √χείρ + [neg.] √εὑρίσκω in vv. 21, 22, 30). The addition of the connective καὶ (> MT SP) not only formulates a conclusion for the two parts of vv. 2–31, but establishes v. 32 as an inclusio with v. 2a (οὗτος ὁ νόμος is forward-pointing in v. 2a and backward-pointing in

292

commentary

v. 32; contra MT SP v. 32, which concludes only vv. 21–31 due to the second ‫אשׁר‬ which is appositional: … ‫אשׁר־בו נגע צרעת אשׁר לא־תשׂיג‬, i.e. NLT: “These are the instructions for purification for those who have recovered from a serious skin disease but who cannot afford …”; italics mine).

14:33–56 Skin Disease in the Houses of the Land Again the LeuB scribe has justifiably demarcated this section in view of the superscription in v. 33, which here includes Aarōn (Lord → Mōysēs and Aarōn → no explicit audience), and the subscription in v. 56, which expressly concludes not merely this section, but all of 13:1–14:53 (see below discussion). The opening protasis in v. 34 provides the needed frame of reference for processing the instruction in vv. 35ff.: “When you come into the land of the Chanaanites, which I give you in an acquisition, and I will give a skin disease in the houses of the land acquired by you” (for frame of ref., see Runge 2010: 387). The Lord’s double ‘gift’ (√δίδωμι 2×) of the land and of skin diseases in the land’s houses conflates an image of blessing with one of cursing, without any reference to Israel’s actions. This stands in contrast to chs. 18–26 wherein the Lord resolves to bless, in material ways, Israel’s covenant fidelity or curse infidelity in the land (i.e., 18:24–30; 20:22–27; 26:1–46). In the context, the LXX gentilic “Chananites” (Χαναναίων, v. 34) may connote that the succeptible houses they will one day possess presently belong to the Chananite people (vs. toponym ‫“ כנען‬Canaan” MT SP; for inheriting houses and their furniture in the land, cf. Deut 8:10–11). In vv. 34–53, the semantic range of √λέπρα ‘skin disease’ has been expanded once again, beyond human and animal skin, to the ‘skin’ of a house, namely, its walls. Apparently, “a kind of green mold or mildew attacking the plaster in stone houses” is envisaged (Wevers 1997: 212–213). Verses 35–48 resume the pattern in 13:2–58, as detailed in this chart, with a few distinctions discussed below.

293

commentary Verses

House skin infection detected initially

Priest commands, enters, examines the present condition of the symptoms

vv. 35–38

“Something 1. Commands to strip house like an infecbefore entering to examtion has been ine the house, and the seen in my furniture (implied) will house” not be unclean (v. 36, 2o [of 3] οικιαν “house” B A F mins Latcod 100 Arm; αφην “infection” G M mins Cyr Gött; v. 37, ‫“ הכהן‬the priest” SP > MT LXX) 2. Hollow, greenish, appears lower than walls (v. 37, Btxt A mins < η πυρριζουσας “or reddish” Bmg F mins F [η πυριζ.] Cyr Gött; v. 37, ἡ ὄψις αὐτῶν prb. = SP ‫ ≠ מראהן‬MT ‫;מראיהן‬ v. 38, 2o ὁ ἱερεὺς > MT SP)

vv. 39–42

On seventh day, infection has spread in the house walls (v. 39, τὴν οἰκίαν > MT SP)

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

No stated diag- 1. No stated declaration nosis 2. Isolate house for seven days

“It is an infec- 1. No stated declaration tion” 2. Priest commands that (v. 40, εν οις “in they (unidentified) which [is the remove the infected infection]” A F stones and “scrape off” the BrMcL Gött > house’s inside and throw Bunique) them outside the city in

294

commentary

(cont.) Verses

House skin infection detected initially

Priest commands, enters, examines the present condition of the symptoms

Priest diagnoses

Priest declares and mandates

unclean place, replace with “solid scraped stones,” and plaster with “other dust” (v. 41, ἀποξύσουσιν “they must scrape off” = SP ‫ יקצע ≠ יקצעו‬MT; v. 42, στερεους “solid” [√στερεός “firm, solid” GELS 635] B A min; ετερους “other” F Gött; pl. λήμψονται and pl. ἐξαλίψουσιν = SP ≠ sg. MT 4QLev-Numa) vv. 43–45

1. After removal and replastering, “an infection” returns, breaks out, has spread in the house (αφη “an infection” B* A mins Cyr vs. anaphoric “the infection” η αφη Bc F Gött; v. 43, “after he has removed” μετὰ τὸ ἐξελεῖν = sg. MT ≠ pl. SP; v. 44, διακέχυται “has spread” = 4QLevNuma MT ‫ ≠ פשׂה‬SP ‫)פרח‬

It is an enduring skin disease in the house, it is unclean (v. 44, 1o ἐστιν = ‫ הוא‬MT > SP)

1. No stated declaration 2. Tear down house, its wood and stones, take dust outside city to an unclean place (impl. priestly command; v. 45, unidentified pl. καθελοῦσιν “(and) they must tear down” = ‫ ונתצו‬4QLevNuma SP TJ Syr ≠ ‫ונתץ‬ MT; ἐξοίσουσιν “(and) they must take (outside)” ‫ והוציאו‬SP ≠ ‫ והוציא‬MT)

vv. 46–47 “the house all the days that it is isolated,” one who enters it, falls asleep or eats in it will be unclean until the evening and must wash clothes (the periphrastic ἀφωρισμένη ἐστὶν “that is isolated,” or “has been made off-limits,” substitutes for a perf. pass: Muraoka 2016: 403; wash clothes in v. 47[2×], so prb. implied for v. 46; καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας “and will be clean until the evening” 2× in v. 47 > MT SP) vv. 48

After house was plastered, infection “by not [οὐ] spreading has not spread” (ου B A mins > M mins Gött; “by not spreading” > MT SP; διαχεῖται “has (not) spread” = ‫ פשׂה‬4QLev-Numa MT ≠ ‫פרח‬ SP)

Infection has healed

Priest declares house clean

commentary

295

It is evident that 14:35–48 follows the basic pattern of 13:2–58, but with certain distinctions: first, the initial detection of the disease comes explicitly from the one, presumably the patriarch, who owns the infected house (cf. v. 35; cf. ch. 13 which only implies the infected person or clothing owner); second, the priest may order prerequisites before he examines (v. 36); third, the priest never declares a house unclean, although this may be implied (contrast 13:9– 30, but similarly, 13:47–58); and fourth, the pattern in vv. 35–48 is suspended in vv. 47–48 to extrapolate the defiling contagion inside a house during its isolation period. Verses 49–53 supply the ritual for purifying a house, which by implication, must be performed after the skin infection in its walls has “healed” (ἰάθη, v. 48) and after the priest “pronounces the house clean” (καθαριεῖ … τὴν οἰκίαν, v. 48; for this order of ‘healed,’ then ‘purify,’ see 14:3–4 ff.). This ritual innerbiblically repeats, yet artistically adapts, the two-bird ritual for cleansing the skin-diseased person in vv. 4–8 (in v. 49, “he must take [λήμψεται] … two” = ‫ ולקח‬4QLev-Numa MT ≠ ‫ ולקחו‬SP; v. 53 = SP w. order ≠ 4QLev-Numa MT; v. 52 = MT w. order ≠ SP). First, as one would expect, the dependent text (vv. 49–53) removes unnecessary language from the source (vv. 4–8; specifically: “and the priest must command,” v. 5; “and regarding the small living bird … he must take it …,” v. 6; “then it will be clean,” v. 7, perhaps viewed as redundant b/c vv. 8//53). Second, within the new ‘house’ context of vv. 34–53, releasing the living bird “outside a city” (LeuBA ἔξω πόλεως, v. 53 > v. 7), adds the image of flying away from a community of proximate houses (εξω πολεως “outside a city” B* A; εξω της πολεως “outside the city” Bc F BrMcL Gött); later readers discover that the Chanaanite cities envisioned here were walled with outlying farms (Leu 25:29– 31). Third, the entirety of v. 52, which is absent in vv. 4–8, is a redundancy of the details in vv. 49–51, and suggests the sufficiency of this act of sprinkling for purification (contra vv. 14–18, 25–29; in v. 51, “sprinkle on [ἐπὶ] the house” prb. = ‫ על‬4QLev-Numa SP ≠ ‫ אל‬MT; v. 52, “with the blood of the small bird that [τοῦ] was also in the living water” του B*unique > Bc A F BrMcL Gött). Third, and most importantly, vv. 49–53 are not followed by additional stages that culminate in an extensive propitiation ritual (as in vv. 10–20, 21–31). Rather, the two-bird ritual without an altar sacrifice is sufficient to affect propitiation and finalize ritual cleansing: “and he will make atonement for the house and it will be clean” (καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ τῆς οἰκίας, καὶ καθαρὰ ἔσται, v. 53; cf. fine flour only as sufficient for propitiation in 5:11–13). The extensive subscription in vv. 54–57 concludes the instructions that span 13:2–14:53:

296

commentary

Subscription

Instructions alluded to by lexeme

“This is the law [οὗτος ὁ νόμος] for every infection of a skin disease [λέπρας]” (v. 54α)

‘skin disease’ √λέπρα in 13:2–14:44 (30×)

“and of an abscess [θραύσματος]” (v. 54β)

‘abscess’ √θραῦσμα in 13:30–37 (14×)

“and of the skin disease of clothing [ἱματίου]” (v. 55α)

‘clothing’ √ἱμάτιον in 13:47–59 (12×)

“and of a house [οἰκίας]” (v. 55β)

‘house’ √οἰκία in 13:34–53 (29×)

“and of a lesion [οὐλῆς]” (v. 56α)

‘lesion’ √οὐλή in 13:2–28 (6×)

“and of an indication [σημασίας]” (v. 56β)

‘indication’ √σημασία in 13:2–8 (4×)

“and of a bright spot [τοῦ αὐγάζοντος]” (v. 56γ)

‘bright spot,’ ‘shines’ √αὐγάζω in 13:24–39 (6×)

“and to explain on which day something is unclean and on which day it should be declared clean” (v. 57a) “This is the law [οὗτος ὁ νόμος] for skin disease [τῆς λέπρας]” (v. 57b)

The subset propositions of v. 54α and v. 57b arguably relate to three distinct intertexts: first, their conceptual antecedent is the materials from 13:2–14:53 (οὗτος ὁ νόμος, vv. 54, 57, as an unmarked backward-pointing reference and target); second, they form an inclusio with 13:2, “… and if there is an infection of a skin disease [ἁφὴ λέπρας] on the skin of his body”; and third, v. 54α and v. 57b are themselves an inclusio, which, as an overspecification, emphatically closes the segment of chs. 13–14 within the larger discourse of chs. 11–15 (in v. 57, τῆς λέπρας may be called a topical gen. “pertaining to skin disease”: Muraoka 2016: 152). Among the genitives in vv. 54–56 that modify ‘skin disease,’ the alluding lexemes ‘abscess,’ ‘lesion,’ ‘indication’ and ‘bright spot’ (vv. 54–56) probably function together as a merism for all of the permutations of skin disease in 13:2– 46. Although the purification ritual in 14:2–31 has its own subscription (v. 32), 14:54–57 is positioned after the purification ritual of 14:49–53, suggesting that both purification rituals (14:2–31; 49–53) are subsumed under the conclusion of 14:54–57. Lastly, in 14:57 the final-resultative infinitive, τοῦ ἐξηγήσασθαι “and to explain,” recasts all of 13:2–14:53 as a manual that the Aarōnic priests must possess not merely to distinguish the clean from the unclean (as in the 11:47 and

commentary

297

13:59 subscriptions), but also to explain these distinctions to the people and thereby fulfill the spirit of Leu 10:10–11 (√διαστέλλω and √συμβιβάζω in 10:10–11; for τοῦ ἐξηγήσασθαι as a “final-resultative broadly understood”: Muraoka 2016: 339).

15:1–15 Male Discharges, Cleansing and Propitiation Rituals The unit in LeuB commences with the 15:1–2b superscription (Lord → Mōysēs and Aarōn → Israelite audience) and extends through the first three subsections of the chapter: the unclean nature of a male who discharges semen (vv. 2c–3); the unclean contagion from one with spermatorrhea (vv. 4–12); and the eightday ritual for spermatorrhea cleansing and propitiation (vv. 13–15). The redundant quotative frame of the superscription is uniquely ordered in LeuB, “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs saying, and Aarōn” (λεγων και ααρων B; και ααρων λεγων A F M rell Gött). The opening fronted dative focuses on any man who discharges from his body, “Any man [lit. “man to man” Ἀνδρὶ ἀνδρὶ] … his [αὐτοῦ] discharge is unclean” (v. 2c; on repeating a substantive to mean ‘any’ and fronting a constituent of a protasis: Muraoka 2016: 114, 726–727). This is followed by a forward-pointing reference and target to anticipate his orders: “And this is the law for his uncleanness” (v. 3a). In v. 3b, LeuB presents the man’s unclean condition as a single condition, “when he discharges seed from his body from the discharge from which [ἧς] his body has become compacted through the discharge” (ης B Cyr 997 969 rell; η mins b Arm Gött NETS 95 “or if his body has become compacted”). However, in v. 3c, a ‘compacted’ body, presumably ejaculatory duct obstruction, is presented as a separate condition found in the LXX Vorlage, but absent in MT: “All the days of the discharge of his body or if his body has conjoined through the discharge” (πᾶσαι αἱ ἡμέραι ῥύσεως σώματος αὐτοῦ ᾗ συνέστηκεν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ διὰ τῆς ῥύσεως = 11QpaleoLeva SP ‫ > כל ימי זב בשרו או החתים בשרו מזובו‬MT, possibly due to haplography by skipping from ‫ הוא‬to ‫)היא‬. The anarthrous participle in v. 3 is probably temporal with an iterative force, “when he discharges seed from his body” (ῥέων γόνον ἐκ σώματος αὐτοῦ). Along with the possibility of blockage (2× perf. συνέστηκεν, a past action with an enduring effect), these describe the nature of the chonic disorder that vv. 4–15 renames with the substantive adjective, “someone with spermatorrhea” (ὁ γονορρυὴς). That vv. 2c–3 and vv. 4–14 are referring to the same basic condition is supported by the absence of any directives to wash, cleanse, wait or propitiate for the discharge in vv. 2c–3; such directives are found in vv. 13–15 and are required for all instances in vv. 2c– 14.

298

commentary

To render the possible LXX neologism √γονορρυής (8× in vv. 4–14, 32; but v. 4, 9 > MT SP), I prefer ‘spermatorrhea,’ a condition of involuntary ejaculation, because this appears to suit the descriptive clues in vv. 2c–3 (with NETS 95–96; also “el espermatorrecio” BG 264; or generically: “der Samenflüssige” SD 116–117; “having a discharge of semen” GELS 135). The etymological derivation ‘gonorrhea’ (LEH §1920 gl. 2; “le gonorrhéique” BA 147–149) is a mistranslation for what is depicted in vv. 2c–14, because gonorrhea may have no symptoms, and when it does, these can include swelling, testicular pain, burning urination, and a discharge of pus, not merely a discharge of ‘seed’ (√γόνος, v. 3) (similarly, cf. preference of ‘skin-disease’ over ‘leprosy’ for chs. 13–14). Normally, vv. 4–14 prepose its subjects, objects and modifers to stress the most common transmitters of the contagion from the man with spermatorrhea to another person: “his bed” (τῆς κοίτης αὐτοῦ, v. 5); “the article” (τοῦ σκεύους that he sits on, v. 6); “a skin” (v. 7, χρωτὸς [B* A min], possibly including animal skins, as in 13:47–59; του χρωτὸς Bc F BrMcL Gött); and the possible neologism, “spits on [προσσιελίσῃ] one who is clean” (v. 8), probably referring to spitting saliva onto another man, not to emitting semen, because of the masculine “he will be unclean [ἀκάθαρτος] until evening” (contra punishment for homosexual intercourse in 18:22; 20:13; in 17:8, “anspuckt” SD 116; “spits” NETS 96; “espurreara” BG 264; but adding saliva for clarity: “le gonorrhéique projetterait de la salive” BA 147). Other transmitters include: “any pack-saddle of a donkey” (πᾶν ἐπίσαγμα ὄνου, that he sits on, v. 9); “whatever was under him” (ὅσα ἐὰν ᾖ ὑποκάτω αὐτοῦ, v. 10; + απο παντων [οσα.] F Gött > B A mins Bovid); “these things” (αὐτὰ, v. 10b, antec. ὅσα in v. 10a); “as many as [ὅσων] the one with spermatorrhea touches” with unwashed “hands” (τὰς χεῖρας = MT > SP, v. 11); “clay container” (σκεῦος ὀστράκινον, v. 12a); or a “wooden container” (σκεῦος ξύλινον, v. 12b). The six-time recurring mandate is given to cleanse one from the contagion: “he must wash his clothes and bathe in water, and he will be unclean until the evening” (πλυνεῖ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι, καὶ ἀκάθαρτος ἔσται ἕως ἑσπέρας, v. 5, similarly in vv. 6, 7, 8, 10, 11[misspelled “unclean” αθαρτος B* vs. ακαθαρτος Bmg]). In LevLXX, as in idiomatic Koine, the middle voice of √λούω (12× in ch. 15; 23× in 8:6–22:6) indicates “washing the whole body” (with ‘body’ or ‘himself’ a latent d. obj. that can be supplied: Muraoka 2016: 241), while √νίπτω (15:11, 12, but 15× in PentLXX) indicates “washing parts of the body, but it is also used of things,” and likewise √πλύνω (35× in Leu 1:9–17:16) is “applied to a wide variety of objects” (Lee 1983: 36–40, quotes from 36–37). Physically washing with water removed ritually defiling contagion, as John of Damascus (c. LeuB) appears to have recognized, “… the Scripture witnesseth that water has the power of purification” (Schaff 2.9: 725). Chrysostom (c. LeuB) recounts three types of washings—common bathing, the superior bath of grace, and Jewish washing, which “does not merely remove

commentary

299

the uncleanness of the body but also that which clings to a weak conscience” (Lienhard 2001: 184). Curiously, in vv. 9–10a, the saddle on which the man with spermatorrhea mounts, along with the person who touches what was under him, would be unclean until evening, without mention of any requisite washing (but cf. v. 6). In v. 12, clay and wooden containers must be shattered and washed, respectively (as in 11:32–33, but in contrast to rubbing the defiled container in LeuB* 6:28; “and it [= wooden container] will be clean” > MT SP). Unlike 14:8–9, it is unclear if v. 13 envisages a gradated cleansing process for the man with spermatorrhea. In favor of such a process is a consumative, ingressive, or more likely constative, force of the aorist, “if the one with spermatorrhea has been cleansed [καθαρισθῇ] from his discharge,” “has begun to be cleansed,” or “is cleansed,” respectively; all of which imply he already washed his clothes and bathed, as others in contact with him have done in vv. 5–12. However, “cleansed from his discharge” (v. 13) could simply mean that his discharge has stopped flowing (Wevers 1997: 230), as one might deduce from LXX v. 3, “all the days of the discharge … this is his uncleanness.” In either case, “for (his) cleansing” (possibly, poss. art: εις τον καθαρισμον B* A; + αυτου Bc F Gött), he must persist in a (quasi-)unclean state for seven days, presumably inside the camp (contra 14:8), wash his clothes, bathe and then he will be clean. The propitiation ritual in vv. 14–15, requiring one bird for sin, another for a WBO, is imported from the first accommodating form of the sin offering in 5:7–10 (and 14:22, 30–31), which itself is based on the WBO protocols in 1:14–17. The integral prepositions could be read accordingly: By virtue of this two-bird blood ritual (v. 14–15a), the priest must propitiate “for him” (περὶ αὐτοῦ of representation), that is, as his representative before the Lord (ἔναντι Κυρίου) because of the unclean state of his discharge (causal ἀπὸ τῆς ῥύσεως αὐτοῦ).

15:16–17 A Man Who Emits a ‘Bed of Semen’ The LeuB oudentation that distinguishes these two verses indicates a scribal awareness that the preceding cleansing and propitiation ritual was for spermatorrhea alone, and that v. 16 by a fronted constituent of the protasis transitions to a new subject, “And as for a man who has a bed of semen that comes out of him [Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἐὰν ἐξέλθῃ ἐξ αὐτοῦ κοίτη σπέρματος], he also must bathe his entire body in water, and he will be unclean until the evening” (v. 16, see Muraoka 2016: 726–727). The constative aorist ἐξέλθῃ “that comes out” tells us nothing of the internal nature of the action, although perhaps a nocturnal emission is implied by “bed of semen” (κοίτη σπέρματος as a calque for the Heb.: Wevers 1997: 231). However, the sufficiency of immediate washing for cleans-

300

commentary

ing, without a cleansing period or propitiation ritual, distinguishes this as an isolated incident from the chronic condition in vv. 2c–15 (cf. iterative ptc. ῥέων, v. 3). In this respect, it is classified with a woman’s menstrual period as normal physiology (vv. 19–24).

15:18 A Woman Who Lies with a Man on a ‘Bed of Semen’ The “bed of semen” context of vv. 16–17 continues in this outdented verse in LeuB, but the subject in focus now shifts to the fronted constituent of the protasis: “And as for a woman [καὶ γυνή], if a man lies with her [μετ’ αὐτῆς] in a bed of semen [κοίτην σπέρματος], they also must bathe in water and they will be unclean until the evening” (on such fronting, see Muraoka 2016: 726–727). The intransitive middle κοιμηθῇ, followed by the non-direct object accusative κοίτην σπέρματος, suggests anacoluthon, where the translator expects the reader will supply the preposition ἐν or εἰς: “if a man lies with her in a bed of semen” (similarly, 18:22; gen. of content: “bed containing semen”; on anacolouthon, see Muraoka 2016: 774). A wife’s contact with her own husband’s semen is implied because the text does not demand retribution for violating the sexual ethics of the holy community (18:6–23; 19:20–22, 29; 20:10–21; also see this probable SP scribal interpretation in v. 24: ‫“ אישה‬her husband” for ‫ אישׁ‬MT “a man” prb. rendered by τις). Every sexual encounter, then, rendered lovers ritually unclean (cf. Exod 19:15; 1Sam 21:4–5), which again had nothing to do with sinfulness (cf. ch. 12), as the divine covenant blessing of human fertility presupposes sexual intercourse (Leu 26:9 intertext with Gen 1:28).

15:19–32 Female Discharges, Rituals and Subscription This segment in LeuB commences by fronting the subject of the protasis: “And as for a woman who is discharging blood [Καὶ γυνὴ ἥτις ἐὰν ᾖ ῥέουσα αἵματι], her [αὐτῆς] discharge” (similarly, NETS 96; see Muraoka 2016: 726–727). The logic of LeuB in associating vv. 19–27 and vv. 28–30 is apparent because the rituals for cleansing and propitiation (vv. 28–30) are granted only for women (vv. 19–27; for the men, see vv. 13–15). In the format of LeuB, v. 31 (rhetorical) and vv. 32–33 (subscriptional) are appended to the core of vv. 19–30, but must modify all of vv. 2c–30. Verses 19–27 center on the unclean contagion of female genital discharges, with vv. 19–24 elucidating the stipulations for her menstrual period, and vv. 25– 27 for any discharge of blood “not at the time of her period” (οὐκ ἐν καιρῷ τῆς

commentary

301

ἀφέδρου αὐτῆς, v. 25). Both categories of women are introduced by pendents nominative (vv. 19, 25). The tripartite organization of the materials mirrors vv. 2c–15 concerning a man with spermatorrhea: description of the discharging condition (vv. 19a–b, 25//vv. 2c–3); common transmitters of the contagion, interspersed with washing and waiting until evening (vv. 4–12//vv. 19c–24, 25– 27); the cleansing and propitiation rituals (vv. 13–15//vv. 28–30). The sample list of the kinds of transmitters of the contagion to another person or object overlaps substantially with the list pertaining to a man with spermatorrhea, but with a different order (v. 19c//vv. 7, 11; v. 20//v. 4; v. 21//v. 5; v. 22//v. 6) and four primary variances. First, distinctively masculine activities are not repeated here (vv. 9–10: male who “spits,” a pack-saddle or the one who carries “these things”). Second, v. 23 in LeuB adds the scenario that when a male touches a discharging woman who is in her bed or sitting on an article, the article and maybe also the bed become defiled: “But if while she is in her bed or on the article that she sat on it, when he touches her, it [ἀκάθαρτον] will be unclean until the evening” (ακαθαρτον B mins [antec. = τοῦ σκεύους and αὐτῷ, w/ concept. antec. τῇ κοίτῃ?]; ακαθαρτος A F Gött; for “she sat” καθιση B*unique; αυτη καθηται Gött et al). Third, sexual intercourse with a man, which is not explicit in vv. 4–12, appears in the euphemism in v. 24, “someone sleeps with her in bed [τις κοιμηθῇ μετ’ αὐτῆς] … then he [ἀκάθαρτος] will be unclean” (cf. 20:18; here τις prb. = MT ‫“ אישׁ‬a man” ≠ SP ‫“ אישה‬her husband”; prb. preserving the euph.: NETS 96; but “jemand den Beischlaf mit ihr übt” SD 116; “si alguno efectivamente se acostara con ella” BG 256; “quelqu’un couche quand même avec elle” BA 149). Fourth, clay and wooden containers (of v. 12), along with other articles she might touch by hand, are curiously absent in vv. 19–27, perhaps with the implication that women with any kind of discharge could continue to handle cookware and housewares (contra objects on which she sleeps or sits in vv. 20, 22, 23, 24, 26). Unlike menstrual uncleanness, which lasts for seven days (v. 19b), nonmenstrual discharge uncleanness (vv. 25–30), while analogous in nature (see v. 26), ostensibly lasts not seven days, but only as long as the discharge persists: “all the days of her unclean discharge [πᾶσαι αἱ ἡμέραι ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς] are like the days of her period [καθάπερ αἱ ἡμέραι τῆς ἀφέδρου]; she will be unclean” (v. 25, or Wevers [1997: 236] “as the days of her menstrual period shall be, she remains unclean”; cf. allusion to vv. 25–30 in Matt 9:20– 22). Whereas LeuB v. 19b expresses uniquely, “seven days [ἑπτά ἡμέρα] will be in her period” (nom. ημερα B* vs. acc. ημερας Bc A), by contrast the seven-day unclean interval for a non-menstrual discharge begins only after her flow has stopped (v. 28). Menstrual (vv. 19–24) and non-menstrual (vv. 25–27) discharges are both regarded as contagions that defile any who touch her, her discharge or

302

commentary

an object that her discharge touches, and both categories of discharge require her to wash her clothes, bathe in water, and remain unclean until the evening (see recurring phrase in vv. 21, 22, 27). Unique, however, is that not only the discharging woman (v. 28//v. 13), but also a man who sleeps with her in her bed and “her uncleanness be on him” will be unclean for seven days, and every bed he sleeps on will be unclean (v. 24). Verses 28–30 detail the cleansing, then two-bird propitiation ritual is arguably designated for non-menstrual discharges only (vv. 25–27): first, demanding that women undergo an 8-day ritual every time they menstruate would be excessive, even for Leueitikon; and second, although a woman’s menstrual period is a ritual contagion, in v. 30, propitiation for “her unclean discharge” (ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς) probably alludes specifically to “her unclean discharge” (ῥύσεως ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς) in v. 25, which is the metonym used for a non-menstrual discharge in vv. 25–27. As the man, so also the woman takes for her own advantage the eighth-day sacrificial birds (dat. of int. understood reflexively: αυτη B cI’-761 x mins; > A mins; εαυτη [//v. 14] F Gött.). The ritual is basically identical to that for a man with spermatorrhea in vv. 13–15, but with femine subjects and certain omissions that can be assumed from its intertextual dependence on vv. 13–15 (omissions are: v. 13, “for cleansing, and he must wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and he will be clean”; v. 14, “before the Lord”; Harlé and Pralon [1988: 149] note that in Mk 5:25–34 Jesus does not command the woman he has healed from a 12-year discharge of blood to go to the priest, as he does for lepers in Mk 1:40–44). Verse 31 functions as a rhetorical overspecification that solemnifies all of 15:2c–30, not merely vv. 19–30, and anticipates the need to purify the divine tent in 16:20–33 on the Day of Propitiation: “And you [Mōysēs and Aarōn, 15:1] must make the sons of Israel cautious [εὐλαβεῖς ποιήσετε] about their uncleannesses, and they will not die [καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανοῦνται] because of their uncleanness when they defile my tent that is among them [ἐν τῷ μιαίνειν αὐτοὺς τὴν σκηνήν μου τὴν ἐν αὐτοῖς]” (εὐλαβεῖς ποιήσετε = SP ‫“ והזהרתם‬you must caution” [cf. H-stem “‫זהר‬,” HALOT §2432] ≠ MT ‫“ והזרתם‬you must separate” [H-stem “‫נזר‬,” HALOT § 6074]; for motif of evading death, cf.: √τελευτάω, 16:1; √ἀποθνῄσκω, 16:2, 13). Verses 32–33 supply the book’s next extensive superscription (after 14:54–57) that concludes all of 15:2c–31:

commentary

Subscription

303

Instructions alluded to by lexeme

“This is the law (v. 32α) for the one with spermatorrhea [τοῦ γονορρυοῦς]” (v. 32α)

15:2c–15 with ‘spermatorrhea’ √γονορρυής (9×)

“and if for someone a bed of semen comes out [ἐξέλθῃ … κοίτη σπέρματος] from him so that he becomes defiled by it,” (v. 32β)

15:16–17 with “bed of semen … comes out” ἐξέλθῃ … κοίτη σπέρματος, probably also v. 18 (κοίτην σπέρματος)

and for her who discharges blood in her period 15:19–24 with “(a woman) who is discharging [τῇ αἱμορροούσῃ ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς]; (v. 33α) blood … in her period” ᾖ ῥέουσα αἵματι … ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς (v. 19) (ἐν τῇ ἀφέδρῳ αὐτῆς, v. 20) the one with spermatorrhea in his discharge [ὁ γονορρυὴς ἐν τῇ ῥύσι αὐτοῦ], whether for a male or for a female, (v. 33β)

15:2c–15 with ‘spermatorrhea’ √γονορρυής (9×) and 15:25–30 possibly expanded by ‘discharge’ √ῥύσις, (5×) ‘discharges’ √ῥέω (2×)

and for the man who sleeps with a woman who 15:23(?)–24 with “sleeps with her [= ‘woman is removed [τῷ ἀνδρὶ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετὰ ἀποκα- who is discharging blood’ v. 19] in bed and her θημένης]. (v. 33γ) uncleanness be on him” κοίτῃ τις κοιμηθῇ μετ’ αὐτῆς, καὶ γένηται ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτῆς ἐπ’ αὐτῷ (v. 24)

One might deduce that the synecdoches in v. 32β and v. 33γ allude to vv. 18 and 23, respectively, although the placement of v. 33γ is disordered (one expects it within or right after 33α). The asyndetic v. 33β is abstruse because “the one with spermatorrhea in his discharge” is a redundancy with v. 32α, which already covered spermatorrhea in 15:2c–15 (√γονορρυής 9×; asyndeton in B* A < και Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött). Also, the gender expansion, “the one with spermatorrhea in his discharge, whether for a male or for a female [ἢ τῇ θηλίᾳ],” cannot actually refer to spermatorrhea, which is a masculine condition (vv. 2c–15), but appears to latch onto the lexeme ‘discharge’ (√ῥύσις) as an allusion to the non-menstrual discharge of a woman in 15:25–30 (√ῥύσις 5×, √ῥέω 2×; whereas v. 33α refers explicitly to menstrual discharges). Lastly, in contrast to the preceding subscriptions, 15:32–33 proffers no purpose statement, and in this way does not expressly look backward to 10:10 (even if this may be implied), but instead closes chs. 15 and by v. 31 segues into chs. 16–17 (cf. purposes in 11:46–47;

304

commentary

13:59; 14:57; and implicitly 7:28, “to bring their gifts,” and 14:32, “for his cleansing by his hand”; in v. 32, the ὥστε + inf. μιανθῆναι indicates the result of a discharge of semen, but is not the purpose of the instructions; see Muraoka 2016: 340).

16:1 Narratorial Preface to the Day of Propitiation Ritual The LeuB scribe insightfully marks 16:1 as a single unit (as 7:27–28; 26:46; 27:34), which for the first time since 1:1, supplies a narratorial preface just before the formulaic superscription (16:2a–b) for the ensuing divine discourse: Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐτελεύτησαν· Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs after the two sons of Aarōn died, when they brought strange fire before the Lord, and they died 16:1

In this allusion to 10:1–3, more accurately to 9:22–10:3, the temporal infinitive indicates a succession of events: the Lord spoke after the death of Nadab and Abioud (ἐλάλησεν Κύριος … μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι). The cause of their death is expressed with a contemporaneous infinitive, “when they brought strange fire before the Lord” (ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον ἔναντι Κυρίου ≠ MT SP ‫“ בקרבתם לפני־יהוה‬when they drew near before Yhwh”). This is not a clean reproduction of the Greek wording from 10:1, which along with other internal evidence suggests against a Greek scribal harmonization to 10:1, but for a formal rendering of a distinct Vorlage (against MT SP, but with the Targums Vul Syr and possibly 11QpaleoLeva: Awabdy 2017: 580–593; contra Wevers 1997: 240). The Janus affect of the 16:1 allusion to 10:1–3 is, in looking back, to position the lengthy divine discourse of chs. 11–15, that explicates the priestly and communal implications of 10:10, within the aftermath of the fatal beginnings of the priesthood. At the same time, the allusion pulls forward (from ch. 10 to ch. 16) the death of Aarōn’s eldest sons as the event that immediately precedes the Lord’s word concerning the Day of Propitiation ritual in 16:2b–34. Not only does the 10:1–3 narrative context engender a priestly fear of death in the cult and in performing the Day of Propitiation ritual in particular, but it also explains the reason for restricting priestly access into the Lord’s holy place: “do not let him enter at all times into the holy place … then he will not die” (16:2). Finally, the Greek wording of LevLXX 16:1 creates an intertextual contrast between the

commentary

305

unprescribed strange fire of Aarōn’s sons that results in their death and the prescribed altar fire of Aarōn in the Day of Propitiation ritual, which prevents his death (see 16:12–13 below).

16:2–29a The Day of Propititation Ritual The second and third quotative frames of the superscription and audience in 16:2a–b uniquely contain no pleonasms (Lord→Mōyses→Aarōn) and thereby move quickly from the preface (16:1) into the divine instructions for the Day of Propitiation ritual (vv. 2–34). The LeuB scribe marks a new paragraph at v. 29b, which demarcates the ritual proper (vv. 2–29a) from the addendum on date, rest, succession and enduring authority (vv. 30–31 and 32–34, respectively). In the book, only the compounded rituals for the ‘fulfillment’ of Aarōn and his sons in chs. 8–9 rival the complexity of the Day of Propitiation ritual, which unfolds with the following design. vv. 2c–3 vv. 3–4 vv. 5–10

Restriction on times of Aarōn’s entry into the Lord’s holy place Restriction on manner of Aarōn’s entry into the Lord’s holy place Preparation of propitiating sacrifices for the people: ram WBO, two-goat ritual vv. 6, 11 Redundancy of Aarōn’s sin offering for himself and his house vv. 12–13 Interruption with Aarōn’s incense in the holy place v. 14 Resumption of Aarōn’s sin offering (vv. 6, 11) with blood manipulation v. 15 Aarōn sacrifices and manipulates the blood of the billy goat to propitiate for the people’s sin v. 16 Aarōn propitiates for the holy place and tent because of Israel’s sins v. 17 Prohibition of human presence in the tent while Aarōn is in the holy place vv. 18–19 Aarōn propitiates on the altar, manipulating blood, pronouncing it clean, sanctifying it from Israelites impurity vv. 20–25 Aarōn finishes propitiating and pronouncing clean the holy place, tent, altar, priests by sending away the live billy goat with the people’s sins, washing himself and his clothes, performing his and the people’s WBOs vv. 26–28 Sender of billy goat washes clothes, bathes and reenters the camp. Others burn calf and billy goat carcasses outside the camp, then wash clothes, bathe and reenter the camp. v. 29 Confirmation of the ritual as “an enduring ordinance”

306

commentary

In verses 2c–3, Mōysēs must prohibit Aarōn from entering into the Lord’s holy place “at all times” (πᾶσαν ὥραν), although the precise time he may enter is not stated in LeuB*A until v. 34b, “once a year” (whereas in LeuBcF the date is fixed in v. 29; see below). For readers of LeviticusLXX unfamiliar with ExodusLXX, “the holy place” (τὸ ἅγιον) is finally disambiguated. When unqualified, ‘the holy place’ refers to the entire bipartite complex, not only the front room for incense, bread and the lamp, but also the back room containing the ark and propitiatory (so 16:16, 17, 20, 23). Aarōn is not restricted temporally from entering ‘the holy place’ but the holy place’s inner-room: “the holy place [τὸ ἅγιον] inside the curtain that faces the propitiatory” [ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος εἰς πρόσωπον τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου]. His entry will result in his death, following the fate of his eldest sons (v. 1), because of the nearly unmediated divine presence: “For I will be seen in a cloud on the propitiatory” (ἐν γὰρ νεφέλῃ ὀφθήσομαι ἐπὶ τοῦ ἱλαστηρίου). This recalls the divine appearance in the cloud-filled tent that Mōysēs was inhibited from entering (οὐκ ἠδυνάσθη Μωυσῆς εἰσελ.: ExodLXX 40:28–29), but more recently recalls the theophany, followed by death, in LeviticusLXX 9 (see Κύριος ὀφθήσεται ἐν ὑμῖν “The Lord will be seen among you” in 9:4, then √ὁράω in 9:23, 24). The substantive ‘propitiatory’ (√ἱλαστήριον) in LevLXX only occurs here in ch. 16 (vv. 2[2×], 13, 14[2×], 15[2×]) and its precise form and function is contested, as shown by Muraoka’s long gloss: “place where cultic rites for appeasing a divine being are performed with an appropriate building attached” (GELS 340). We may conclude that the term was likely coined by the PentLXX translators to represent the distinctly Israelite “lid on the ark of the covenant” (Lee 1983: 52). The implied narrator’s gloss, “the propitiatory, which is on the ark of the testimony [ὅ ἐστιν ἐπὶ τῆς κιβωτοῦ τοῦ μαρτυρίου],” summarizes ExodLXX 25:10–22; 31:7; 35:11; 38:5–8 for those unfamiliar or who have forgotten (v. 2, √κιβωτός ‘ark’ [cf. √θίβις in Exod 2:3, 5, 6] is the favored term in GenLXX for Noah’s ark [‫ ]תבה‬and throughout Exod–DeutLXX for the ark of the covenant [‫]ארון‬: see Aitken 2014: 13). Implied in the restriction of vv. 2c–3 is that, in the aftermath of the death of Aarōn’s oldest sons (16:1), the Lord authorizes neither Mōysēs nor the priests, but only Aarōn, the anointed high priest, to enter the holy place (so Nihan 2007: 103; see allusions to v. 2–3 in Heb 6:19; 9:7; 9:13). Jerome (c. LeuB) extracts from this constraint the validity of leadership offices in the church: “And how is it that of the priests and Levites, themselves, the high priest alone entered the Holy of Holies where were the cherubim and the mercy-seat?” (Schaff 2.6: 903). In vv. 3–4, the Lord by Mōysēs restricts the manner (οὕτως) of Aarōn’s entry into the holy place; that is, he must enter with a calf for his own sin, a ram for a WBO, bathed in water and clothed in the stated priestly attire (v. 3, ἐν μόσχῳ “with a calf” as dat. of association: Muraoka 2016: 170). Every component here

commentary

307

is anaphoric: first, a calf for sin and a ram for a WBO were both required before the priests’ ‘fulfillment’ in 8:14–17 (calf for sin) and 8:18–21 (ram for WBO) (prior to the additional “ram of fulfillment” 8:22ff.); second, washing with water is the signal protocol in the ‘fulfillment’ (8:6; in 16:4 [see 15:16] “entire [πᾶν] body” = SP ‫ > כל‬MT); third, a “consecrated [ἡγιασμένον] linen tunic” alludes to the physically anointed priests (8:12–13), while a “linen tunic” and “linen leggings” were worn by the priests when burning the WBO on the altar continually (6:10, ‘linen’ √λινοῦς is not explicit in 8:7, but maybe implied); fourth, although “linen belt and wrap around a linen headdress” is nowhere described precisely this way, it probably was understood as referring to the priestly attire of 8:7, 9. A few distinctions are noteworthy. Aarōn does not wear the ‘oracle’ or ‘the interpretation and truth’ (in 8:8), perhaps because the ritual has no concern for priestly inquiry or decision-making (see commentary), nor does Aarōn wear the emblematic ‘golden leaf’ (in 8:9). In contrast to 8:6–21, where Mōysēs is the verbal agent acting on and for Aarōn and his sons, in 16:3–4 and in every verb in vv. 3–25 with the exception of the billy goat that “will take [λήμψεται] on itself their injustices,” Aarōn is the active, passive or direct reflexive (middle voice) subject of every ritual action. In vv. 5 and 7–10, from the Israelite assembly Aarōn must take (v. 5) and set before the Lord two billy goats for sin and a ram for WBO (v. 7). In v. 5, “For sin” (περὶ ἁμαρτίας) modifies both of the “two billy goats from the goats” (δύο χιμάρρους ἐξ αἰγῶν), which doubles the conventional single animal for a sin offering (4:1–12, 13–21 [calf]; 4:22–26 [billy]; 4:27–31 [nanny]; 4:32–35 [sheep]). No protocols are needed from ch. 4 for the billy slaughtered for the people’s sin because 16:7–9, 15–19 is internally sufficient, but the WBO ram for the people (v. 7, 24–25) must be supplemented from 1:2c–13. In LeuBAV v. 8, “Aarōn must place on the two billy goats one lot for the Lord and one lot for the one that carries away” (cf. “place lots [κληρους] … one for” Latcod 100 F Gött > B A V mins Cyr). This divinely-ordered cleromancy is expressed through, probably, datives of possession, belonging to or designated “for the Lord” (τῷ κυρίῳ) and “for one that carries away” (ἕνα τῷ ἀποπομπαίῳ, v. 8). By the rendering “for the one that carries away,” ostensibly the LevLXX translator dynamically interpreted the Heb. scriptio continua as three lexemes, “for the goat of departure” (‫)ל עז אזל‬, rather than two, “for Azazel” (‫לעזאזל‬, possibly a desert goat demon; see Wright 1987: 21–25; Levine 1989: 102; Milgrom 1991: 1020–1021). With this second goat, Aarōn must perform two actions, stated chaistically with the LevLXX plus “he must release it” (ἀφήσει αὐτὸν > MT SP): στήσει αὐτὸν ἔναντι Κυρίου ζῶντα τοῦ ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ,

308

commentary

ὥστε ἀποστεῖλαι αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἀποπομπήν· ἀφήσει αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον. he must set it before the Lord alive in order to propitiate on it; to send it into the sending away, he must release it into the desert (v. 10). The double accusative (object-thing), “he must set it [αὐτὸν] before the Lord alive [ζῶντα],” intimates that without a blood sacrifice, which is clear by vv. 20– 22, the living goat is presented “in order to propitiate on it” (v. 10, see bloodless propitiation in 5:13, but cf. Heb 9:22, where blood is necessary for ‘forgiveness’; εναντι Κυριου ζωντα B Arm; ζωντα εναντι Κυριου A F Gött). However, the contrast of the two actions in the frames, “set it before the Lord” and “release it into the desert,” suggests reading “in order to propitiate on it” and “to send it into the sending away” as two distinct purposes within the live goat ritual, which is a plausible understanding of vv. 21a–c and 21d–22 (see below; for ὥστε as purpose in v. 10, see, e.g.: 14:21; 17:4[2×]; 20:5; prb. 20:6; prb. Wevers 1997: 245; but result in 15:32; also v. 10, αποστειλαι B A min Cyr; εξαποστειλαι F Gött; for the synonomous usage of √ἐπέρχομαι, vv. 9, 10 [also 11:34; 14:43] and √ἐπιπορεύομαι [26:33] as a new Koine development, see: Lee 1983: 88). From these two goats, Theodoret of Cyrus (c. LeuB) abstracts “an anticipative image of the two natures of the Savior; in the one let go, of the impassible Godhead, in the one slain, of the passible manhood” (Lienhard 2001: 185; Theodoret of C. refused to reject Nestorius’ teaching that Christ’s incarnation entailed two hypostases, divine and human, but at Chalcedon Theo. was forced to anathematize Nestorius). Verses 6 and 11 articulate the doublet that Aarōn must bring the calf for his own sin and propitiate for himself and his house: καὶ προσάξει Ἀαρὼν τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ. καὶ προσάξει Ἀαρὼν τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὸν αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ μόνον, καὶ ἐξειλάσεται περὶ αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ, καὶ σφάξει τὸν μόσχον τὸν περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὸν αὑτοῦ. And Aarōn must bring the calf that is for his sin, and he must propitiate for himself and for his house (v. 6).

commentary

309

And Aarōn must bring the calf that is for his sin and his house’s sin alone, and must propitiate for himself and for his house, and he must slaughter the calf that is for his own sin (v. 11). In LeuBAV, v. 11 substantially repeats v. 6, but inserts, “and his house’s sin alone,” and LevLXX (w/ MT SP) adds the directive to slaughter (και του οικου αυτου μονον B A V x min; > F Gött; in both vv. 6, 11: αὐτοῦ Gött; αὑτοῦ Göttc). Because household sin is stated and slaughter is implied in v. 6, v. 11 is a redundancy that adds stress within the ritual on the high priest’s sacrifice for his and his family’s own sin, which is alluded to in Heb 5:3 (but Heb 7:27 refers to daily, not annual, sacrifices). In vv. 12–13, the precondition of filling the Lord’s holy place with incense interrupts Aarōn’s sin offering ritual since v. 14 clearly resumes Aarōn’s blood manipulation of the same sin sacrifice initiated in vv. 6, 11. While the Hebrew text of vv. 12–13 intertextually contrasts 10:1–2, the Greek text stands in a more direct contrast to the plus in LevLXX 16:1 (see Awabdy 2017: 591–592): Καὶ ἐλάλησεν Κύριος πρὸς Μωυσῆν μετὰ τὸ τελευτῆσαι τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ἀαρὼν ἐν τῷ προσάγειν αὐτοὺς πῦρ ἀλλότριον ἔναντι Κυρίου, καὶ ἐτελεύτησαν· καὶ λήμψεται τὸ πυρεῖον πλῆρες ἀνθράκων πυρὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τοῦ ἀπέναντι Κυρίου, καὶ πλήσει τὰς χεῖρας θυμιάματος συνθέσεως λεπτῆς καὶ εἰσοίσει ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος, καὶ ἐπιθήσει τὸ θυμίαμα ἐπὶ τὸ πῦρ ἔναντι Κυρίου· καὶ καλύψει ἡ ἀτμίς τοῦ θυμιάματος τὸ ἱλαστήριον τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν μαρτυρίων, καὶ οὐκ ἀποθανεῖται. Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs after the two sons of Aarōn died, when they brought strange fire before the Lord, and they died. 16:1

And he must take the censer full of coals of fire from the altar that is before the Lord, and he must fill his hands with a fine incense composition, and he must bring it inside the curtain, and he must put the incense on the fire before the Lord, and the smoke of the incense will cover the propitiatory that is on the testimony, and he will not die. 16:12–13

Aarōn’s oldest sons present strange fire from the altar before the Lord and die (v. 1), whereas Aarōn must present fire from the altar before the Lord so that he will not die (vv. 12–13). These shared intertexts could insinuate that Nadab and

310

commentary

Abioud in 10:1–2 burned incense not merely in the holy place (see Exod 30:8–9), but like their father, inside the curtain of the holy, so-called ‘the holy of holy’ (τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ ἁγίου in 16:33). Moreover, in contrast to Mōysēs, who could not enter the tent because it was filled with the overshadowing cloud and the Lord’s glory (ExodLXX 40:28–29), Aarōn now can and must cover the Lord’s holy place, the “propitiatory that is on the testimony,” with incense smoke so that he will not die in his extreme proximity to the Lord. Verses 12–13 are therefore integral Seina narrative progression of “growing intimacy with the divine” (Nihan 2007: 108–110, italics Nihan; note the precise position and nature of the theophanies: ExodLXX 40:28–29; LevLXX 9:4, 23–24; 16:12–13; 26:12; see possible allusion to v. 12 in Heb 6:19; RevLXX 8:5 [B’s leaf is lost]). Verse 14 resumes the instructions for Aarōn’s sin sacrifice for himself and his household (from vv. 6, 11), for whom he must now sprinkle the blood of the calf on the propitiatory seven times, a number symbolic of totality (also see allusions to v. 14 in Heb 9:7, 13). This step is a logical extension of the sevenfold blood-sprinkling of the sin offering ritual (4:6–17) and the first consecration of the altar (8:11). In v. 15, the Lord by the agency of Mōysēs instructs Aarōn to slaughter the billy goat for the people’s sin, followed by sprinkling its blood on the propitiatory, expressly as he did with the calf for his own sin (see v. 14). His actions will affect propitation for the sins of the people (see allusions to v. 15 in Heb 6:19; 7:27; 9:7; 9:13; 10:4). In spite of the paratactic καὶ with more finite verbs in v. 16, the blood manipulation of v. 15 is the presumed medium by which Aarōn in v. 16, “must propitiate [ἐξειλάσεται] the holy place [τὸ ἅγιον] because of the unclean things of the sons of Israel [ἀπὸ τῶν ἀκαθαρσιῶν τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ] and because of their injustices [ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδικημάτων αὐτῶν], concerning all their sins [περὶ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν].” The triad of lexemes for Israel’s infractions is comprehensive: impurities of every variety in every domain (esp. LevLXX 10–15, 21–22), injustices against the community (i.e., 5:1–4; 18–20) and sins against God and humans (esp. 4:1–6:8; 10:1–3; 18–20; 23–26). Wevers thought that, “ ‘making atonement from …’ means that atonement involves cleansing, purification, i.e., getting rid of the ἀκαθαρσιῶν,” but this notion is influenced by Hebrew conceptuality of ‫ כפר‬+ ‫( מן‬Wevers 1997: 249). The holy place must be purged of Israel’s impurities that had transported aerially and fixed onto it, as Milgrom has clarified: “Thus for both Israel and her neighbors impurity was a physical substance, an aerial miasma that possessed magnetic attraction for the realm of the sacred” (1991: 257). As Büchner has argued, the middle voice √ἐξιλάσκομαι in Koine expresses and the LXX implies the deity as the direct object, so that a human agent ‘appeases, pacifies, propitiates the deity’ (see Büchner 2010a: 237–260). This seems convincing elsewhere in LevLXX, but here in v. 16

commentary

311

τὸ ἅγιον is the direct object, which cannot be explained as a formal rendering of the Hebrew (LXX does not represent ‫ ;)על‬hence, the facilitating rendering: “make the holy place ritually acceptable” (NETS 97). Two possibilities are feasible. Either the Hebraic notion bleeds through so that the semantic range of ‘propitiate’ is expanded: “purge the holy place from [ἀπὸ of separation] the unclean things …” Or the holy place, elsewhere “my sanctuaries” (19:30; 20:3; 26:2), is personified and needs to be pacified, in which case, the ἀπὸ phrases are causal (with NETS 97 “because of”; Büchner 2010a: 259) and περὶ is referential. In other words, by blood sacrifice, placement and sprinkling (v. 15), Aarōn appeases the holy place’s anger because of and concerning Israel’s comprehensive violations. Similarly, the land, like the holy place, belongs to the Lord (25:23) and anthropomorphically ‘becomes angry’ because humans have defiled it (LevLXX 18:25, 28; 20:22), even as the Lord becomes angry (26:30; for the association of propitiation and land, see Lev 25:9). In the précis of v. 16bα in LeuBF, the tent of testimony is once again the object of Aarōn’s activity: “And thus he must prepare the tent of testimony [καὶ οὕτω ποιήσει τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου], for what has been established among them in the midst of their uncleanness [τῇ ἐκτισμένῃ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐν μέσῳ τῆς ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῶν]” (ουτω B b f z407 Cyr mins Tht Lev; ουτως A F Gött; and d.o. την σκηνην B* F* mins Tht Lev vs. attributed head noun τη σκηνη Bc A Fc vid Gött; for the irony, see Wevers 1997: 249). In v. 17, the Lord proscribes the presence of “any human” (preposed πᾶς ἄνθρωπος) in the tent while Aarōn alone is propitiating inside the holy place for himself, his house and the assembly (see vv. 2c–3). This is reminiscent of Exodus 19, where the people are forbidden from touching the mountain while the Lord descends and meets with Mōysēs alone (esp. ExodLXX 19:12–13, but Mōysēs with Aarōn in v. 24; and Mōysēs, Aarōn, Nadab, Abioud and the 70 elders in 24:1–11). Verses 18–19, already anticipated in ExodLXX 30:10, direct Aarōn to go out, by implication from the holy place (v. 17), to the altar and “propitiate on it” (ἐξειλάσεται ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ, v. 18; επ αυτου B Fc Gött; απ αυτου A; περι αυτου F*). Rather than understand this as propitiation for, or on behalf of, the altar (prb. Heb. ‫על‬ of advantage: see IBHS §11.2.13c), Aarōn propitiates on the altar by means of sprinkling blood seven times on it and pronouncing it clean (instrumentality seems perceptible through the parataxis). The result is that he sanctifies it from the Israelites’ uncleannesses (v. 19). The noun √θυσιαστήριον ‘altar,’ which is the focus here perhaps more than any other moment in LevLXX, is not attested in Classical Greek, and may have been coined by the Jewish PentLXX translators to name Israel’s distinctive structure for offering various θυσίαι ‘sacrifices’ (see Lee 1983: 52).

312

commentary

In v. 20, the Lord through Mōysēs commands Aarōn to “finish propitiating” (συντελέσει ἐξειλασκόμενος) the holy place, tent and altar, and to pronounce clean the things concerning the priests. I interpret the first imperatival future and complementary participle not as referring back, to finish propitiating with the calf and slaughtered goat vv. 18–19 (contra Wevers 1997: 251), but as referring to the final phases of the ritual in vv. 21–25. Although the propitiation of each locale and class of people was initiated in vv. 5–19, the process by v. 19 is incomplete, as shown by v. 24, which requires the WBO ram by which Aarōn, “must propitiate [ἐξειλάσεται] for himself and for his house and for the people as for the priests.” Finishing the propitiation process, then, required Aarōn to: enact the bloodless, live goat ritual (vv. 21–22), exchange garments, wash his body (v. 23–24b), and offer the WBO rams for himself and for the people (v. 24c–25). In this understanding of v. 20, the LXX plus suggests that after Aarōn propitiates in v. 24c with the sacrifice for himself and his priestly household (two more LXX plusses), then “he must declare clean the things concerning the priests” (καὶ περὶ τῶν ἱερέων καθαριεῖ > 4QLev-Numa MT SP; contra Wevers 1997: 251). Aarōn must bring and place his hands on the head of the live billy goat, confess over it the Israelites’ sins, put them on the goat’s head, and send it away by a person’s hand (v. 21; “his hands” χεῖρας αὐτοῦ prb. for “(two of) his hands” ‫ שתי ידיו‬SP MTQere ≠ “(two of) his hand” ‫ שתי ידו‬MTKetib). Aarōn’s confession (√ἐξαγορεύω) serves as a substitute for a confession from the people because elsewhere in LevLXX the people are expected to confess their own sins (√ἐξαγορεύω 5:5; 26:40). In conjunction with his hand placement on the live billy’s head, Aarōn’s speech act affects the transfer from the people to the goat of another triad of violations, this time, instead of impurities, injustices and sins, v. 21 includes lawless actions, injustices and sins (τὰς ἀνομίας, so: “illégalités” BA 154; “Gesetzlosigkeiten” SD 118; “lawless acts” NETS 97; or dynamically, “los delitos” BG 267). This billy will “take on itself their injustices to a desolate place,” where ‘injustices’ is a synecdoche for the triad (v. 22). The double compound √ἐξαποστέλλω (vv. 21, 22, 26; 2× ch. 14; 3× in chs. 18–26), a new verbal formation in Koine, has the same senses of its Classical base (√αποστέλλω), but “is clearly just a more vigorous form of the older word” (Lee 1983: 94). More importantly here, the usage ‘allow to leave,’ ‘release,’ especially “of releasing an animal” occurs only in the LXX (as a formal rendering of the Heb.: Lee 1983: 94). The repetition of this ‘release’ language may also, at least by v. 26, symbolize a ‘release’ (√ἄφεσις) of sins, namely, forgiveness (√ἄφεσις and verbal cognate; see below; but Heb 9:22). Next Aarōn must enter the tent, remove and leave the linen apparel there, bathe his body in water in a holy place, and put on his garment (v. 22– 24b; in v. 23, the pluperfect “take of the linen apparel, which he will have put on [ἐνδεδύκει]” is a rare substitute for a future perf.: Muraoka 2016: 304).

commentary

313

For Aarōn’s final acts in vv. 24c–25, he must prepare his WBO ram (from v. 3) and the people’s WBO ram (from v. 5) and propitiate for himself, his house, and for the people. The translator of LevLXX v. 24 either followed a different Vorlage or scribally inserted two clauses that equalize the WBO of the priest to the WBO of the people: “and must propitiate for himself and for his house [καὶ περὶ τοῦ οἴκου αὐτοῦ] and for the people as for the priests [ὡς περὶ τῶν ἱερέων]” (see 4:3; περι B M’ mins Arm Sa Syh; > A F Gött). Aarōn must offer up the hard fats for sins, which expects his knowledge of the protocols from 4:8–10 (v. 25). In vv. 26–28, the Lord through Mōysēs details the instructions for burning the carcasses followed by the requisite corporal washings. Verse 26 specifies that the one who sends away the billy must wash his clothes, bathe his body, and then enter the camp (v. 26). There is no precedent for this because the live billy goat ritual is unique in the OT, but the assumption is that the one who handled the live goat has contracted the impurity it acquired from carrying on itself the ‘injustices’ and ‘sins’ of Israel to a desolate place (vv. 21–22). In v. 26, the live goat is given the metonym with an anaphoric article, “the billy goat set apart for release” (τὸν χίμαρρον τὸν διεσταλμένον εἰς ἄφεσιν), which identifies its purpose (εἰς) as its physical release into the desert (// v. 10; also vv. 8, 10 synonyms: √ἀποστέλλω, √ἀποπομπαῖος, √ἀποπομπή). The metonym, however, evinces a wordplay on “for release” (εἰς ἄφεσιν), which can also refer to the goat’s role in spiritual ‘release’ (√ἄφεσις), that is, in the ‘forgiveness’ (√ἄφεσις) of Israel’s sins (see, i.e., √ἀφίημι in 4:20; Harlé and Pralon 1988: 154). In v. 27, an unidentified “they must take outside” (ἐξοίσουσιν) the skins, meat and excrement of the calf for sin and the billy goat for sin and “they must burn them completely” (κατακαύσουσιν = MT ≠ sg. SP) outside the camp, as stipulated in 4:11–12; 6:29 (see allusion to v. 27 in Heb 13:11–12). In contrast to a singular Aarōn, non-priestly agents are implied (see passive verbs in 4:11–12; 6:29). The nonrestrictive relative clause, “whose blood was brought in to propitiate in the holy place” (ὧν τὸ αἷμα εἰσηνέχθη ἐξειλάσασθαι ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ), inner-biblically recalls the same phraseology in 6:29 (v. 27: “[whose] blood” αιμα Β A min Arm Gött; “[of whom] their blood” [NETS 97] αιμα αυτων O-58–15 Syh Göttc = MT SP ‫)דמם‬. This illuminates what is new in the orders given here: those who burn the carcasses must wash their clothes, bathe in water, and return to the camp. The precedent for this comes not from the sin-offering proper (4:11–12; 6:29; not even to deal with 5:2), but from the command to wash after handling animal carcasses (11:24–28; 35–40). Verse 29a closes with the common validation, “And this will be an enduring ordinance for you” (Καὶ ἔσται τοῦτο ὑμῖν νόμιμον αἰώνιον). The conceptual antecedent of “this” (τοῦτο) is not limited to the preceding command in v. 28, but refers to the ritual of vv. 2–28 in its entirety. First, the expression “an endur-

314

commentary

ing ordinance” (νόμιμον αἰώνιον) in LevLXX never validates burning or washing (which concerns vv. 26–28), and all prior occurrences validate constraints on priestly eating and drinking (6:18, 22; 7:24, 26; 10:9, 13, 15). Second, an analogus expansive application of “an enduring ordinance” occurs twice in the next section, referring to the entire ceremony of the day of propitiation (vv. 31c, 34a).

16:29b–34 Do No Work on the Enduring, Annual Day of Propitiation This unit, intelligibly delineated by the LeuB scribe from the closure of v. 29a, functions as an addendum to the Day of Propitiation ritual instructions of 16:2– 29a. What is new in this supplement of vv. 29b–34 is that the ritual is codified not only as an enduring (v. 29a), but as an annual Day of Propitation that requires Sabbath rest from work and high priestly Aarōnic succession. In LeuBA, the opening line in v. 29 omits “on the tenth of the month” (δεκατη του μηνος), with the result that the text does not specify the date, but instructs only: “In the seventh month [ἐν τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἐβδόμῳ], you must humble your lives and must do no work [ταπεινώσατε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν καὶ πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσετε]” (+ Bmg F Gött > Btxt A). Certain LeuBA readers could have perceived the near demonstrative in v. 30, “for on this day” (ἐν γὰρ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ) refered back to a specified day of the month, which is identified later in the reiteration of LevLXX 23:27(–32). Yet others would have regarded “on this day” as whichever day in the tenth month Aarōn initiates the complex propitiation ritual of vv. 2– 29a (as in ExodLXX 13:4; LevLXX 8:34). The second imperatival future clause is paratactic (καὶ), although readers could infer that doing no work was the specified means of humbling their lives (see seven-day no work, but eating unleavened bread [ExodLXX 12:15–20], called “bread of affliction” ἄρτον κακώσεως in DeutLXX 16:3). This may be supported by the juxtaposition, in inverted order, of Sabbath and self-humbling: “This rest will be sabbaths of sabbaths for you, and you must humble your lives” (σάββατα σαββάτων ἀνάπαυσις αὕτη ἔσται ὑμῖν, καὶ ταπεινώσετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν; n. ‘sabbath’ 21× in LevLXX 16:31–26:43; vb. ‘to sabbath’ [NETS ‘sabbatize’] √σαββατίζω 23:32; 26:34–35[3×]). I render the Hebraic superlative of the Aramaic loanword σάββατα σαββάτων “sabbath of sabbaths” (with “sábado de sábados” BG 268; Aram. ‫ ;שׁבתא‬see Lee 1983: 16; Joosten 2010: 8). The transliteration “Sabbata of sabbaths” (NETS 103) to reflect the pluralized head noun σάββατα (Heb. sg.) is unnecessary because it is nonsensical English, whereas a day of rest from work is sufficiently clear and should be rendered with sensible English (as suggested in the dynamic: “Ruhesabbat” SD 118; “sabbat solennel” BA 197; see n. in Harlé and Pralon 1988: 155). The reflex-

commentary

315

ive “humble your lives/souls” (ταπεινώσετε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν, v. 29, similarly v. 31) simulates their affliction in Egypt, recalling the only text outside of LevLXX [6×] that employs this verb in the Exodus–Numbers narrative: “As much as they were humbling them [αὐτοὺς ἐταπείνουν], by so much the more they kept becoming more numerous and stronger, and the Egyptians were disgusted with the sons of Israel” (Exod 1:12 NETS; see DeutLXX 26:6). In tradition, this self-humbling took the form of an annual corporate fast for the Israelites, then the Jews (e.g., IsaLXX 58:5–6; Acts 27:9; Jerome, see quote for ch. 23). In addition to the native Israelite (ὁ αὐτόχθων), “the immigrant who is attached among you” (ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν) was to abstain from work on this day (v. 29). Here is the first of 22 occurrences in the book of the noun √προσήλυτος [stereotyped rendering of ‫]גר‬, which I translate “immigrant” (LevLXX 16:29; 21× in chs. 17–25). If this term connoted a convert to Israelite religion for LeuB readers (as in all NT occurrences: Matt 23:15; Acts 2:11; 6:5; 13:43), for LevLXX readers before the CE the term, possibly a derivative of √προσέρχομαι (Lee 1980: 112–113), simply denoted an immigrant without any religious connotation (for ‘immigrant’ I follow Aitken: 2014: 46; “l’ immigré” BA 155; less likely: “guest” NETS 97; “der Hinzugekommene” SD 118; “el extranjero” BG 268). This non-religious usage is supported by a third-century documentary papyrus (Moffitt and Butera 2011: 201–206) and by its consistent usage as a synonym of √πάροικος ‘sojourner, temporary resident’ throughout the PentateuchLXX (Thiessen 2013: 333–350; see √πάροικος in 22:10; 7× in ch. 25). The attributive participle, “the immigrant who is attached among you [ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν],” probably indicates a temporary residential client of the native Israelite patriarch (also 17:3, 8, 10, 12, 13; 22:18; 25:5; not decisively connoting a client: “der sich unter euch aufhält” SD 118; “installé parmi vous” BA 155; “que reside entre vosotros” BG 268; see also √πάροικος + √πρόσκειμαι in 25:6; cf. 22:10; 25:35, 40, 45, 47; and in Deut.’s nomenclature, see: Awabdy 2014: 43– 48). Verses 30–34 recapitulate the ritual’s purpose of propitiation and cleansing “from all your sin” (v. 30, similarly v. 34) and its effectiveness (“you will be clean” καθαρισθήσεσθε, v. 30), and inculcate that a single anointed and fulfilled priest (cf. 8:30–33; 10:7) will succeed his father Aarōn as the one who must execute the ritual elements, listed now synecdochally for all the priestly actions of vv. 2–29a: put on clothing, propitiate for “the holy of holy,” the tent of testimony, altar, priests and entire assembly (v. 32–33; here ἐξειλάσεται [B orth.] = SP ‫וכפר ≠ יכפר‬, b/c LevLXX always [29×] renders the weqatal ‫ וכפר‬with the conj. καὶ ἐξ.). The metonym “the holy of holy” (τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ ἁγίου, v. 33) is unique with the second term in the singular, but could refer still to the inside the curtain of the holy place containing the ark/testimony and propitiatory (see

316

commentary

v. 13; also ExodLXX 26:34 “in the holy of holies” ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ τῶν ἁγίων). Alternatively, “the sanctuary of the Holy One” is plausible (Muraoka 2016: 129). In v. 34, through the MT pointing, followed by the modern versions, the plotline advances as Aarōn performs the ritual in its entirety, “and he did as the Lord commanded Moses” (wayyiqtol ‫) ַו ַיַּﬠשׂ‬, but the LXX renders the text “it must be done” (ποιηθήσεται reading a Niphal ‫) ְו ֵיָﬠֶשׂה‬, which reinforces the emphasis on annual faithfulness to vv. 29b–34. Naturally, then, the LXX editorial postscript begins with the adverbial “once a year” (ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ), but contextually, the adverbial καθὰ of manner compels not merely annual performance, but precision in executing the ritual as it was received from the Lord by Mōysēs: “Once a year, it must be done just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs” (v. 34b, ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ποιηθήσεται, καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ; not “Once a year, as the Lord instructed Mōysēs, it must be done”; καθα B* mins Tht Lev; καθαπερ Bc A F BrMcL Gött). On the one hand, the annual ritual generates a strong sense of distance from the divine, as Gregory of Nazianzus (c. LeuB) concluded, “so far was the Holy of holies removed from presumptuous access, that it might be entered by one man only once a year; so far were the veil, and the mercy-seat, and the ark, and the Cherubim, from the general gaze and touch” (Schaff 2.7: 463–464; cf. Heb 9:7). On the other hand, the ritual of ch. 16, even moreso in LevLXX, is presented as the necessary (“it must be done,” v. 34) and trustworthy (“you will be clean,” v. 30) mechanism that assuages the Lord’s anger, cleanses the Lord’s dwelling, priests and people, and thereby makes Israel’s proximity to this glorified, holy and dangerous Lord viable (see LevLXX 9:23–10:3; 16:1–2; Ezekiel 8–10; 36:25; 43–45). The necessary and trustworthy nature of the ritual, however, does not negate that it also exposed the ever-returning layers of human sin and ritual impurity that had to be thoroughly cleansed year after year (see allusion to vv. 8–10, 21–22, 26 in HebLXX 10:3–4).

17:1–14 Sacred Slaughter Only and No Blood Consumption By outdenting this section, the LeuB scribe keenly associates the prescriptions for sacred slaughter of every animal (vv. 3–9) and the derivative issue of eating blood from the aforestated slaughter (vv. 10–14). In this association, vv. 15–17, which deal with eating animals that are not slaughtered (i.e., carcasses), are not included but marked as their own paragraph in LeuB. The unit begins with the most expansive superscription of the book, which is highly overspecified by three redundant quotative frames with a total of seven lexemes that all denote oral communication:

commentary

317

Then the Lord spoke [ἐλάλησεν] to Mōysēs, saying [λέγων]: 2 “Speak [Λάλησον] to Aarōn and to his sons and to all the sons of Israel, and you must say [ἐρεῖς] to them: This is the word [τὸ ῥῆμα] that the Lord has commanded [ἐνετείλατο], saying [λέγων]”: The nature of the instructions in vv. 3–14 justify the composite priestly and nonpriestly audience of v. 2a. The forward-pointing reference and target, “This is the word” (Τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα), enhances anticipation for the ensuing commands in vv. 3–14 (Runge 2010: 385). Although the Greek intertexts between chs. 16 and 17 are undeniable, especially with 17:10–14 (perhaps due to a redactional association in the Heb. text: Zenger 1999: 65–76; Jürgens 2001: 180–186), the expanded superscription in 17:1–3 formulates a break from ch. 16, and the contents of 17:3–9 exegetically expand the discourse from LevLXX 1–7 on the WBO and deliverance sacrifice. Verses 3–9 commence decisively with the pendent nominative, “Person by person” (Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος), from the class of Israelites, immigrants or those attached to the Israelites who slaughter an animal inside or outside the camp, it must bring it to the door of the tent of testimony to offer it as a sacrifice to the Lord (the meaning the Hebraic distributive Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος in vv. 3, 8, 10, 13 can be understood contextually as “every single one,” see Muraoka 2016: 114; seealso vv. 8, 10, 13). The addition of the non-Israelite classes in v. 3 may have resulted from a distinct Vorlage (similar to + in 4QLevd), rather than from scribal leveling to v. 8 (which Wevers [1997: 260] claims; η των προσηλυτων η των προσκειμενων εν υμιν “or from the immigrants or from those who are attached among you” A B F M’ mins > Gött MT SP, but for Greek mss with plusses and minuses of each element of these alternative conjunctive clauses, see Wevers 1986a: 195–196; Ulrich [Qumran, 122] retroverts the LXX v. 3: ‫והגר הגר בתוכם‬ which is not identical, but similar to 4QLevd ‫)]והגר ה[גר בישראל‬. Verses 3–4 specify that when anyone slaughters “a calf or a sheep or a goat,” namely, livestock prescribed in the Lord’s sacrificial cult (Leu. 1 and 3), must be offered as either a WBO or deliverance sacrifice “acceptable to the Lord as a sweet smell” (Κυρίῳ δεκτὸν εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, an intertext from Leueitikon 1–3). This meant they had the option of offering their slaughtered animal in its entirety to the Lord, if a WBO (1:1–17, esp. vv. 1–9), or eating its meat, if a deliverance sacrifice (but not eating the blood, hard fats or shoulder: 3:1–17; 7:1–36). The LXX of v. 4 translates a much longer Vorlage than MT: “to perform it as a whole burnt offering or a deliverance, acceptable to the Lord as a sweet smell, and whoever slaughters it outside and does not carry it to the door of the tent of testimony” (= 4QLevd SP > MT, probably parablepsis by homoioarcton, so Wevers 1997: 261). After this plus, for the one who fails to carry slaughtered livestock to the

318

commentary

Lord’s tent, the shockingly severe sentence of capital punishment, expressed as a euphemism, is justified by lex talionis: “then blood must be accounted to that person. He has shed blood; that life must be eliminated from its people [ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκείνη ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς]” (for the connotation of the death penalty: √ἐξολεθρεύω LEH §3356 pass. “to be utterly destroyed”; GELS 253; with “ausgerottet werden” SD 119; “exterminated” NETS 98; BG 268; contra “sera retranchée” BA 157, influenced by the Heb.). Saint Athanasius (c. LeuB) appears to confirm this reading of the text as the death penalty (“he shall perish from among the people”: “To Adelphius, Bishop and Confessor: against the Arians,” Schaff 2.4: 1403), and the same decree is repeated in the Greek lex talonis legislation of vv. 10–14 (but see discussion on 24:18). This penalty, which recurs in LevLXX 17:9; 23:29, is conflated with Deut 18:19 in Peter’s address in Solomon’s portico (Acts 3:23). This teaching of vv. 3–4 is replicated three times in vv. 5–9: first, in the redundancy of v. 4b (//v. 3b), then in vv. 5–6, which convey only a slightly different focus (see below), and then again in the redundancy of vv. 8–9, which further intensifies the message. In vv. 5–6, with no mention of immigrants, whatever an Israelite “will slaughter in the fields” (ἐν τοῖς πεδίοις vs. “outside [the camp]” in vv. 3–4) must be transported to the tent and “offer it up” (αναφερωσιν) as a deliverance sacrifice from which the priest must manipulate its blood and offer its hard fats, two protocols that are characteristic of 3:1–17 (v. 5, σφαξουσιν “[whatever] they will slaughter” B b mins; σφαζωσιν Mtxt G mins; σφαξωσιν “[whatever] they might slaughter” A F Gött; and αναφερωσιν “offer up” B A min; αν φερωσιν “[that] they may bring” F Gött; v. 6, κύκλῳ ἀπέναντι < MT SP prb. 4QLevd, see Ulrich, Qumran, 123). Verses 8–9, marked by the pendent nominative Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος, are substantially redundant, but, by asyndeton in LeuBA at the start of v. 9, appear to prohibit preparing a sacrifice at the tent’s door and not following through to offer it the Lord: “whoever prepares a whole burnt offering or sacrifice 9 at the door of the tent of testimony, he does not carry it to perform it for the Lord, that person must be eliminated from his people” (και > B* A Latcod 100; + και Bc F Swete BrMcL Gött, so NETS 98: “whoever performs a whole burnt offering or sacrifice and does not bring it to the door of the tent of witness to perform it …” [italics mine]). Even if this is the case, the language of v. 8 is highly redundant with vv. 3–4, especially with the repetition in LeuBAFM’ of the classes, “from the immigrants or from those who are attached among you” (contra Gött, and therefore, Wevers [1997: 266], NETS 97; et al.; in v. 8, “and [και B*] from the immigrants” vs. η “or” Bmg, as in v. 3). Verse 7 diverges from the stress of vv. 3–6 and vv. 8–9 by its own diatribe: “And they must not sacrifice on their sacrifices to worthless things, with which they go out after them to commit fornication. It will be an enduring ordinance

commentary

319

for you throughout your generations.” Readers of LeuB v. 7 could infer from 4:27–31 and 18:3 that “they must not sacrifice on their sacrifices to worthless things [ἐπὶ τὰς θυσίας αὐτῶν τοῖς ματαίοις]” referred to placing sacrifices, even to the Lord, on top of Chanaanite sacrifices to their deities (this interpretation suits the majority text: “on [ἐπὶ] their sacrifices” επι B* A F M’ mins Cyr vs. “no longer [ετι] offer their sacrifices” [NETS 98] Bc Fc Swete BrMcL Gött; for MT SP ‫“ לשׂעירם‬to goat deamons”? [cf. “‫ ָשִׂﬠיר‬III,” HALOT § 9179], the LXX selected μάταιος “to worthless things,” which is used elsewhere as a metonym for aberrant cultic sacrifices or images: 3Kgdms 16:2, 13, 26; 4 Kgdms 17:15; 2 Chr 11:15). Verses 10–12 and 13–14 are marked discursively by the pendent nominative, ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος, which functions as the structuring device of vv. 3–14 (vv. 3, 8, 10, 13). Each subunit betrays an internal organization and message: 10 Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν φάγῃ πᾶν αἷμα, καὶ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τὴν ἔσθουσαν τὸ αἷμα καὶ ἀπολῶ αὐτὴν ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς. 11 ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ ἐγὼ δέδωκα αὐτὸ ὑμῖν ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ἐξειλάσκεθε περὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν· τὸ γὰρ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐξειλάσεται. 12 διὰ τοῦτο εἴρηκα τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ Πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἐξ ὑμῶν οὐ φὰγεται αἷμα, καὶ ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ προσκείμενος ἐν ὑμῖν οὐ φάγεται αἷμα. 13 καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων ἐν ὑμῖν ὃς ἂν θηρεύσῃ θήρευμα θηρίον ἢ πετεινὸν ὃ ἔσθεται, καὶ ἐκχεεῖ τὸ αἷμα καὶ καλύψει αὐτὸ τῇ γῇ· 14 ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ εἶπα τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ Αἷμα πάσης σαρκὸς οὐ φάγεσθε, ὅτι ἡ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστίν· πᾶς ὁ ἔσθων αὐτὸ ἐξολεθρευθήσεται. Verses 10aα-β and 12 frame the instruction by an inclusio of the expanded Israelite and immigrant audience and the literary impetus of consuming blood (ὃς ἂν φάγῃ πᾶν αἷμα, v. 10aβ and οὐ φάγεται αἷμα [2×], v. 12; in v. 10, “of the sons [τῶν υἱῶν] of Israel” = ‫ מבני‬Mms Syr [cf. v. 13] ≠ ‫ מבית‬4QLevd MT SP; asyndetic των

320

commentary

προσηλ. B* A mins; “or” η των προσηλ. Bc vid F Swete BrMcL Gött). The rhetorical apex of these verses are the two predictives future in 10aγ-b that are suggestive of divine capital punishment, without human agency, for any person who ingests blood: “then I will set my face against [ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ] the life who eats blood and will completely destroy [ἀπολῶ] it from its people.” The Lord defends this ominous judgment by the two explanatory γὰρ clauses of v. 11, in which the second extrapolates the first: For the life of all flesh is its blood, and I have given it to you to propitiate for your lives on the altar, for it is its blood that in place of the life propitiates. The italicized text “to propitiate” flags a solecism in LeuB that readers would have corrected mentally (εξειλασκεθε B*; εξιλασκεθε Bc A; εξιλασκεθαι Swete BrMcL Gött). Basil (c. LeuB), in attempting to distinguish the ψυχὴ of animals from that of humans, resorts to v. 11 (or v. 14), “the life of every creature is in the blood” (Schaff 2.8: 333; Basil’s Greek text reads: παντὸς ζῴου ἡ ψυχὴ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν; similarly Chrysostom reduces the referent of v. 11 to “the beasts”: Lienhard 2001: 186). Other LXX readers, however, will interpret “the soul of all flesh” (ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς) as inclusive of all vascular life and thus as a faithful rendering of its Heb. source (‫“ כול בשר‬all flesh” [as v. 14] 4QLevd Syr ≠ ‫“ הבשׂר‬the flesh” MT SP). In the LXX, the proposition “for the life/soul of all flesh is its blood” (ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, v. 11) is understood to be convertible, an “identical exchange,” because of the addition of the pronoun αὐτοῦ from its Vorlage (‫(“ בדמו‬in) its blood” 4QLevd [cf. v. 14] ≠ ‫(“ בדם‬in) the blood” MT SP; for “Equation: A equals B” see Muraoka 2016: 812; here I retain the language used by Wallace [1996: 41–42], regarding the same phenomenon in NT usage). The synonomous parallelism within v. 11 orients readers to regard this convertable proposition “for the life/soul of all flesh is its blood” as the logic of why substituting “its blood” (αἷμα αὐτοῦ), the blood of any sacrificial animal, “in place of a life” (ἀντὶ τῆς ψυχῆς), a human life (context. περὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν), will result in appeasing the Lord’s anger (for the middle voice of √ἐξιλάσκομαι as “to propitiate, appease” the deity, see Büchner 2010a: 237–260; orth. εξειλασεται B* vs. εξιλασεται Bc et al.). Thus, Wevers is right to conclude that: “What ἀντὶ contributes is a notion of exchange; what ‘its blood,’ i.e., the blood of the sacrificial animal, does is to substitute atonement for the life” (Wevers 1997: 268–269; cf. probable allusion to v. 11 in Heb 9:22). Verses 13α and 14c frame the instruction by the expansive class of eaters (ἄνθρωπος … ἔσθεται, v. 13, and πᾶς ὁ ἔσθων αὐτὸ v. 14); that is, all who eat wildlife

commentary

321

must never eat its blood or they “must be eliminated” (ἐξολεθρευθήσεται), which is a reassertion of the euphemism for the death penalty from v. 4. must pour out the blood and cover it in the earth. For [γὰρ] the life of all flesh is its blood, and I have said to the sons of Israel: You must not eat the blood of any flesh because [ὅτι] the life of all flesh is its blood Verses 13β–14bβ offer a positive mandate, then an emphatic quotative frame that introduces the negative mandate, each validated by the symbolic physiology of vascular life. At this late juncture in the book, 17:11 finally reveals the conception of how the diverse blood rituals in chs. 1–16 could affect propitiation before the Lord (the exception is bloodless propitiation in 5:11–13). However, the textual preoccupation of all of vv. 10–14, in which v. 11 grammatically modifies v. 10, is instead the proscription of eating animal blood, which Greek readers could infer must have been a temptation for the Israelites in the wilderness or among the Chanaanites (cf. allusion in Acts 15:20, 29). This literary context illuminates the scandal of the Eucharistic theology of the Gospels, not least in JohnB* 6:53– 56: “unless he eats the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves” (v. B*: εαν μη φαγηται [sic.] την σαρκα του υιου του ανθρωπου και πιητε αυτου το αιμα ουκ εχετε ζωην εν εαυτοις; see also Matt 26:26–26; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:18–20; 1Cor 11:23–25). This metaphor is provocative not merely for its cannibalistic overtones, but for its subversion of the categorical divine prohibition of consuming blood in Leu 17:10–14.

17:15–16 Non-sacrificial Carcass Consumption What distinguishes this directive from the prior LeuB collection in vv. 3–14 is that here the individual is not told to bring, or by implication, should not bring “a carcass or what has been caught by wild animals” to the tent for sacrificial presentation to the Lord before consuming its meat. This new unit is also demarcated discursively, as it breaks the pattern of the four-fold ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος pendent nominative (vv. 3, 8, 10, 13), and commences instead with a lengthy preposed nominative to stress the subject: “And every life among the natives or among the immigrants, that eats a carcass or what has been caught by wild animals [καὶ πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἥτις φάγεται θνησιμαῖον ἢ θηριάλωτον, ἐν τοῖς αὐτόχθοσιν ἢ ἐν τοῖς προσηλύτοις] must wash [πλυνεῖ].” The paratactic καὶ may

322

commentary

be reconstrued contextually as a disjunctive, “But every life … must wash,” not only because washing finds no place in vv. 3–14, but because a contrast is drawn between the prohibition of eating blood (οὐ φάγεσθε, v. 14) and the assumption of a normative practice of eating (ἥτις φάγεται, v. 15) a “carcass or what has been caught by wild animals.” For the plausible neologism √θηριάλωτος (so Lee 1983: 52; also 5:2; 7:24; 22:8), which combines the free morphemes θηρι[ον] ‘wild animal’ and ἅλως[ις] ‘capture’ (LEH §448), I follow “une proie prise à la chasse” (BA 159) and “una presa de las fieras” (BG 269), rather than express the inference of a torn animal (as “ein gerissenes [Tier]” SD 119, brackets SD; “what has been torn by wild animals” NETS 98). This law is an intertextual reformulation of 11:39–40, which was anticipated in an inchoate form in 5:2. Each of these texts share in common the conviction that physical contact with animal carcasses rendered one “unclean until evening” (ακαθαρτος εως εσπερας B*unique; ακαθαρτος εσται εως εσπερας Bc BrMcL Gött; √θνησιμαῖος occurs in 5:2; 11:24–40, meaning a “dead body: carcase of an animal, considered ἀκάθαρτος” GELS 331). Even so, ancient readers might infer especially from the context of 17:15–16 that the practice of eating such dead animals, neither captured nor slaughtered by human hands (contra vv. 3, 5, 13), was condoned because the text gives no resultant punishment (contra 17:4, 9, 10, 14). The text requires only washing one’s clothes, bathing and waiting until evening, and “then he will be clean” (καὶ καθαρὸς ἔσται = MT > SP). This is the same purification treatment for many non-sinful impurities, such as sexual intercourse with one’s spouse any time aside from her menstrual period (15:18 vs. 20:18; cf. the blessing of sexual fertility in 26:9, reflecting Gen 1:28; here in 17:15–16 one finds the book’s final formulaic triad to wash-bath-be unclean, which is confined to chs. 14–17). Verse 16 is a rhetorical overspecification that again does not forbid eating per se, but stresses that if or when one eats but does not wash his clothes and bathe his body with water, then “he must receive his lawless action” (ὕδατι “with water” > MT SP). Because ἀνόμημα denotes “illégalité” (n. in Harlé and Pralon 1988: 159; “transgression of the law” NETS 98; cf. 20:14), the expression λήμψεται ἀνόμημα αὐτοῦ for Greek readers may connote, “he must receive the punishment for his lawless action” (contra Wevers [1997: 271] “he shall bear his guilt,” which is influenced by the Heb. ‫)ונשׂא עונו‬.

18:1–5 Directives to Reject Practices of Chanaan but Obey the Lord The new LeuB section commences with two redundant quotative frames (v. 1, then 2a–b), slowing down the discourse by the editorial superscription (Lord→ Mōysēs→Israelites), to increase anticipation for the hortatory address in vv. 2c–

commentary

323

5. The address functions to ground readers in their preexisting relationship with the Lord and his rejection of the practices of Chanaan, which compel readers to not violate the Lord’s sexual code in vv. 6–23a. Verses 2c–5 are framed by the inclusio, “I am the Lord your God” (Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν, vv. 2c, 5d), which reorients the audience toward their covenant relationship with the Lord to motivate a faithful response to the categorical prohibitions and imperatives in vv. 3–5. The synonomous parallelism of v. 3a and v. 3b generates an analogy between the practices of the lands of Egypt (LXX orth. γῆς Αἰγύπτου), where the Israelites resided (Hebraic resumptive pronoun, ἐν ᾗ κατοικήσατε ἐπ’ αὐτῇ; see Muraoka 2016: 738), and those of Chanaan (LXX orth. γῆς Χανάαν), where the Lord will cause them to reside (εἰς ἣν ἐγὼ εἰσάγω ὑμᾶς ἐκεῖ; and perhaps ἐπ’ followed by dat.: “on the basis of it [αυτη]” B* mins BrMcL; “on it [αυτης]” Bc A F Gött). LeuB* 18:3 is unique, perhaps adding stress by the passive: “It will not be done [ποιηθήσεται] according to the practices of the land of Egypt” (vs. ποιησεται Bc; ποιησετε A F BrMcL Gött). The unidentified practices of Egypt and Chanaan could not be less than the alluring sexual customs prohibited in vv. 6–23, as Basil (c. LeuB) observes from v. 3: “It appears that the legislator does not include every kind of sin, but particularly prohibits those of the Egyptians, from among whom Israel had gone forth, and of the Canaanites among whom they were going” (Schaff 2.8: 616). The positive counterpart to these is mandated asyndetically by the preposed objects, “My judgments you must do, and my orders you must keep” (τὰ κρίματά μου ποιήσετε καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου φυλάξεσθε, v. 4). The infinitive in v. 4 is epexegetical in that it elaborates the command, “and my orders you must keep, [that is, you are] to walk in them [πορεύεσθαι]” (see Muraoka 2016: 341). The divine self-identification, “I am the Lord your God” (ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν), in v. 4c would have been a sufficient closure to move on to the prohibitions of vv. 6–23a, but v. 5 overspecifies by repeating the language of v. 4. The rhetoric culminates in v. 5c, which is marked by a pendent accusative, “as for the things a person does [ἃ ποιήσας ἄνθρωπος], he must live by them,” and the redundancy, “he must live by them” (ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς), supplements the earlier metaphor “to walk in them” (πορεύεσθαι ἐν αὐτοῖς, v. 4b). The Apostle Paul supplies two modified quotations of v. 5c that explicate Christ as the end or goal of the law (Rom 10:5), and the curse on all who do not abide by the law (Gal 3:12; cf. other possible allusions to v. 5 in Matt 19:17; Luke 10:28; Rom 7:10). Jerome and John Cassian (c. LeuB) both restrict the life referenced in Leu 18:5 to what one reaps in the present life, not to the rewards of the heavenly kingdom (Lienhard 2001: 187). Augustine (c. LeuB) concludes that the purpose of Leu 18:5 is “that every man may recognize his own infirmity. It is not in his own strength or through the letter of the law (which cannot be) but only by receiving through faith the favor of the Justifier

324

commentary

that he may attain and do and live in righteousness” (Lienhard 2001: 187). In the LevLXX context, the living or walking in view must entail the positive directives in ch. 19, “a tôrâ for the holy community (see 19:2),” which is framed in chs. 18 and 20 by the negative directives against sexual violations and polluting the land (Nihan 2007: 99).

18:6 Do Not Approach Houses of Your Flesh to Uncover Same The LeuB text is formatted with outdentations into the margin at the start of each prohibition in vv. 6–23a (but vv. 23b–30), which is an idiosyncrasy that may manifest a change of scribal hands in the original production of the manuscript (21 units in ch. 18, but, i.e., 25:1–26:45 is a single unit). This signal prohibition in v. 6 begins by stressing the preposed subject and modifier: “Person by person must not approach any houses of his flesh to uncover shame; I am the Lord” (Ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος πρὸς πάντα οἰκία σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ οὐ προσελεύσεται ἀποκαλύψαι ἀσχημοσύνην· ἐγὼ Κύριος). The Hebraic euphemism for sexual intercourse, which occurs 16 times in ch. 18, not once in ch. 19, and then is resumed six times in ch. 20, is expressed formally by the purpose infinitive: “approach in order to uncover shame [ἀποκαλύψαι ἀσχημοσύνην]” (NETS 98–100; LXX formally renders ‫ ;לגלות ערוה‬also maintaining the euph.: “um eine Unschicklichkeit aufzudecken” SD 119; yet dynamically: “para descubrir sus vergüenzas” BG 270; “pour découvrir son indécence” BA 161). In light of the repeated death sentence pronounced in 20:10–21 for many of the same violations of 18:6–23a, readers will conclude that the expression “to uncover shame” is a euphemism not merely for exposing or encountering nudity (as in GenLXX 9:22), but for deliberate sexual contact (as in GenLXX 19:30–38; 35:22; 49:4). The content of vv. 6–23a, implies the prohibitions are directed toward young Israelite males who still lived on their father’s family compound, along with immigrant males (stated in v. 26); a masculine audience is confirmed also by the need to explicitly state and prepose γυνὴ “a woman” as a new subject in v. 23b. The object “any houses of his flesh” (πάντα οἰκία σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ) may first connote entering any house belonging to a member of one’s extended family, tribe or clan in order to have sex (οικια “houses” B; οικιας F mins; οικεια “households” Fa Swete BrMcL Gött; √οἰκία “houses, buildings … households” LEH § 6307; √οἰκεῖος “near kin, belonging to one and the same family” LEH § 6295; for √σάρξ as relatives, see Gen 37:27). This expression in v. 6 may function as a hypernym for all of vv. 7–20, which specifies the different members in “any houses of his flesh” (v. 6; Basil, c. LeuB, interprets v. 6 as refering specifically to one’s wife’s sister, mother, daughter or other family: Schaff 2.8: 617). This may also explain

commentary

325

why the placement of “I am the Lord” (ἐγὼ Κύριος) appears in v. 6, but not again until v. 21; that is to say, the divine self-identification from v. 6 may be assumed by ellipsis throughout vv. 7–20 to motivate sexual constraint among all relatives enumerated.

18:7 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Father and Mother The preposed objects highlight the first members of “any houses of his flesh” (v. 6): “The shame of your father and the shame of your mother you must not uncover” (ἀσχημοσύνην πατρός σου καὶ ἀσχημοσύνην μητρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις). A single verb may indicate here “the belief that the shame of the mother belongs only to the father; it is his shame” (Wevers 1997: 276; thus, “even the shame of your mother”). This is also supported by no mention of one’s father in the causal γάρ clause: “for she is your mother and you must not uncover her shame” (μήτηρ γάρ σού ἐστιν καὶ οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς; και B A V min b Arab Gött > Göttc; see 20:14). This motivation also assumes the reader understands every man’s mother has ascribed honor, inherited at the moment she gave birth to him, and therefore she is worthy of acquired honor (as in Leu 19:3; 20:9; for ascribed [inherited, received by birth] vs. acquired [earned, given] honor, Moxnes 1996: 19–40).

18:8 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Father’s Wife The next prohibition is again initiated asyndetically with the preposed object: “The shame of your father’s wife [ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου] you must not uncover; it is the shame of your father” (see // and death penalty in 20:11). Confusion here and throughout ch. 18 may arise from the Hebrew wordplay that is modified but represented in the Greek √ἀσχημοσύνη: the father acquires public shame by means of his wife’s shame, that is, by sexual intercourse with his son. This would not refer to the son’s birth mother since she was already discussed in v. 7 (Wevers 1997: 276). Rather a second wife, step-mother or concubine is in view, and her shame, through intercourse with the father’s son, is attributed the son’s father. An inverse scenario of the husband’s honor is obtained by the trustworthy wife (γυνή) in Prov. 31:10–11, 12, 23, 26 (also Sir 26:1: γυναικὸς ἀγαθῆς μακάριος ὁ ἀνήρ “Happy is the husband of a good wife”); however, it is important to note that the father’s son, not an untrustworthy wife, is responsible here for exposing their shame (cf. possible allusion in 1Cor 5:1).

326

commentary

18:9 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Sister The pendent accusative, as with the preposed objects (vv. 7–8), is placed under emphasis, and then is doubly qualified: “As for the shame of your sister [ἀσχημοσύνην τῆς ἀδελφῆς σου], from your father or your mother [ἐκ πατρός σου ἢ μητρός σου], whether she was born in the house or outside [ἐνδογενοῦς γεγεννημένης ἢ ἔξω], you must not uncover her shame” (see // and euph. for death penalty in 20:17). I prefer to translate τῆς ἀδελφῆς σου by its generic usage, “your sister.” However, the qualifications here appear to define her as the violator’s halfsister, since the alleged neologism “born in the house” (ἐνδογενοῦς) may refer not to his mother’s daughter, but his father’s daughter by a second wife, and “outside” (ἔξω) likely refers to sharing a mother, but not a father (so Wevers 1997: 276; anarth. and conj.: γεγεννημενης η B* A min; η γεγεννημενης (η) Bc F BrMcL Gött; the adj. √ἐνδογενής may be “une innovation lexicale proper au Lévitique,” and certainly is “unique dans la LXX”: Harlé and Pralon 1988: 161). The specification that he must “not uncover her [αὐτῆς] shame,” which is more contextual (matches sg. “sister”), is not an LXX scribal improvement, but belongs to its parent text (= SP ‫“ ערותן ≠ ערותה‬their [f. pl.] shame” MT). Jerome (c. LeuB) quotes this verse and applies it to the venerable Abraham and Sarah: “ ‘She is indeed my sister, on the father’s side, not on the mother’s,’ that is to say, she was the daughter of his brother, not of his sister. Otherwise, what are we to say of Abraham, a just man, taking to wife the daughter of his own father?” (Schaff 2.6: 773).

18:10 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Son’s Daughter or Daughter’s Daughter The pendent accusative stresses, “As for the shame of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter [ἀσχημοσύνην θυγατρὸς υἱοῦ σου ἢ θυγατρὸς θυγατρός σου], you must not uncover their shame [τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῶν]” (no pendent syntax in MT SP > τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῶν). The prohibition of intercourse with any of a man’s granddaughters is motivated by the causal ὅτι clause of resulting shame, although readers of LeuBA are not told who acquires the shame: “because it is shame” (ὅτι ἀσχημοσύνη ἐστίν; after ὅτι + ση “your” Bc F BrMcL Gött > B* A mins; √σός may here indicate here, “your property … your own” LEH §8142; “parce que c’est ta proper indecence” BA 161). This requires readers to infer whether this is the violator’s shame, because he is the patriarch of the household (cf. 18:12–13), or the shame of the violated granddaughter (cf. 18:9), or the shame of the father of the violated daughter, the son or son-in-law (cf. 18:8), or a distribution of these.

commentary

327

18:11 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Father’s Wife’s Daughter The preposed object here places stress on: “The shame of your father’s wife’s daughter [ἀσχημοσύνην θυγατρὸς γυναικὸς πατρός σου] you must not uncover.” The text defines her relationship to the addressee as his half-sister by another mother, but this definition was not intended as a clarification, but as an asyndetic motivation: “she is your sister by the same father. You must not uncover her shame” (ὁμοπατρία ἀδελφή σού ἐστιν, οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς). The euphemism for intercourse with her by implication results in her acquired shame, although no separate proposition “it is her shame” is stated (cf. 18:8–10).

18:12 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Father’s Sister The marked order again stresses the object of the expected euphemism for sexual intercourse: “The shame of your father’s sister [ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς πατρός σου] you must not uncover, for she is of your father’s household” (see // and guilt in 20:19). The young man’s paternal aunt here was probably unmarried (contrast with 18:14). The motive γὰρ clause, “for she is of your father’s household [οἰκεία πατρός],” probably simply refers to his “father’s family” (Wevers 1997: 278), although some may have understood that she lived in his father’s “household” until she married and joined her husband’s household (i.e., GenLXX 24:51– 58; yet sometimes delaying her move: 24:55; 31:13–16; however, in v. 13 √οἰκεῖος must refer exclusively to blood relationship, not household).

18:13 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Mother’s Sister The preposed object here is identified: “The shame of your mother’s sister [ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφῆς μητρός σου] you must not uncover” (see // and guilt in 20:19). The causal γὰρ clause, “for she is of your mother’s household” (οἰκεία γὰρ μητρός σού ἐστιν), exhibits the attributed honor of his mother’s family, not just his father’s (v. 12), which is a mark of respect for women within a patriarchal society (γὰρ = ‫ כי‬MT > SP).

18:14 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Father’s Brother The marked word order emphasizes again the direct object of the man’s prohibited action: “The shame of your father’s brother [ἀσχημοσύνην ἀδελφοῦ τοῦ

328

commentary

πατρός σου] you must not uncover, …” The next prohibition extrapolates the first not with the expected euphemism “uncover the shame” (of vv. 6–19), but with candid words: “and you must not go in to his wife” (καὶ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ οὐκ εἰσελεύσῃ; which is even more candid than the matching SP source: “and [to] his wife you must not approach” ‫ ≠[ ואל־אשׁתו לא תקרב‬asyndetic MT]). In the motive clause “for she is your relative” (συγγενὴς γάρ σού ἐστιν), the “relative” (√συγγενής; “Verwandte” SD 120; NETS 98) here is not a blood relative, but his father’s sister-in-law (thus, broader than the initial connotation of “parente” BA 161; “of the same kin, related, akin to” LEH §8341; more similar to GELS 641: “not related by blood, but applied to a king’s close associate” in 1 Macc 10:89; 11:31; 1Ezra 3:7; but misleading for Leu 18:14: “consanguínea” BG 270).

18:15 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Daughter-in-Law Attention again is placed on the marked object: “The shame of your daughterin-law [ἀσχημοσύνην νύμφης σου] you must not uncover, for she is your son’s wife” (see // and death penalty in 20:12). Verse 8 is explicit that intercourse with your father’s wife “is the shame of your father,” whereas here it is implicit: “she is your son’s wife” (γυνὴ γὰρ υἱοῦ σού ἐστιν) implies that he will acquire her shame. However, the text accentuates not his shame (contra v. 8), but hers, by the overspecification through redundancy: “you must not uncover her shame” (οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς, already stated in 15a).

18:16 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Brother’s Wife The marked position of the object now focuses readerly attention: “The shame of your brother’s wife [ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς ἀδελφοῦ σου] you must not uncover” (see // and childlessness in 20:21, and probable allusion in Matt 14:3–4; Mark 6:18). The asyndetic motive clause demonstrates that this illicit sexual act with one’s sister-in-law, exposes her shame, which is not hers alone, but belongs to her husband (as in 18:8): “it is your brother’s shame” (ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς ἀδελφοῦ σου).

18:17a Do Not Uncover the Shame of a Woman and Her Daughter The preposed direct object again attracts readerly attention: “The shame of a woman and her daughter [ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς καὶ θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς] you must

commentary

329

not uncover” (see // 20:10). In this instance, the LeuB scribe subdivided v. 17a and v. 17b, which was probably here not accidental, but exhibits awareness that two prohibitions are supplied, even as v. 17b refers back grammatically to v. 17a (see below). The absence of any defined familial relationship in v. 17a (contra vv. 6–16, 17b–18) does not imply sexual activity outside one’s extended family, clan or tribe (note v. 17b, connected to v. 17a, that “they are of your household”). The prohibition presents a form of adultery in which the connective καὶ is the hermeneutical key: “a woman and her daughter.” The text forbids sexual activity with any woman along with her daughter, either simultaneously or on separate occasions.

18:17b Do Not Uncover the Shame of Her Son’s Daughter and Daughter’s Daughter This prohibition refers grammatically back to the woman of v. 17a: “Her son’s daughter and her daughter’s daughter [τὴν θυγατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτῆς καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς] you must not take to uncover their shame” (αὐτῆς [2×] = γυναικὸς, v. 17a). Against the pattern of the preceding verses, a new main verb is employed, followed by a purpose infinitive: “you must not take to uncover their shame” (οὐ λήμψῃ ἀποκαλύψαι). When ‘taking’ has sexual overtones, as it does here, rape can be implied (for √λαμβάνω as part of violating a woman by non-consentual sex: GenLXX 34:2; maybe 38:2). The possibility of rape here may be strengthened by the context of the verse. First, the patriarch is physically stronger and has social influence over his granddaughters who live in his extended household; this status is implied in the motive clause, “for they are of your household” (οἰκεῖαι γάρ σού εἰσιν). Second, as Wevers notes, the classification, “it is a profane action [ἀσέβημά],” is “somewhat stronger than the Hebrew, and puts it in the realm of the irreligious, of ungodliness” (Wevers 1997: 280).

18:18 Do Not Uncover the Shame of Your Wife’s Rival The categorical prohibition is expressed with a double accusative, where acc2 predicates acc1: “You must not take a woman as a rival against her sister” (γυναῖκα ἐπὶ ἀδελφῇ αὐτῆς οὐ λήμψῃ ἀντίζηλον; see Muraoka 2016: 542). Here the subordinate infinitive is one of purpose, or intent, which is modified by the temporal clause, “to uncover her shame against her while she is still living” (ἀποκαλύψαι τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς ἐπ’ αὐτῇ, ἔτι ζώσης αὐτῆς). This verse, therefore, does not proscribe levirate marriage proper (marrying your deceased

330

commentary

brother’s widow; see DeutLXX 25:5–6), but having sex with his wife’s sister while his wife is still alive (for instrumentality, see Wevers 1997: 281). Basil (c. LeuB) rightly infers: “From this it is plain, he argues, that it is lawful to take her when the wife is dead” (Schaff 2.8: 615).

18:19 Do Not Uncover a Woman’s Shame during Her Menstrual Period The word order of the proscription formally reads: “And a woman in the separation of her uncleanness you must not approach to uncover her shame” (καὶ πρὸς γυναῖκα ἐν χωρισμῷ ἀκαθαρσίας αὐτῆς οὐ προσελεύσῃ ἀποκαλύψαι τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῆς). The phrase “a woman in the separation of her uncleanness” alludes only to 15:19–24, her menstrual period, not to other discharges in 15:25–31 (see “her uncleanness” ἡ ἀκαθαρσία αὐτῆς, 15:24; thus, the interpretive translation is accurate: “una mujer en su periodo de su impureza” BG 271). In 15:24, intercourse with one’s wife during her period is not explicitly proscribed, but did require seven days of uncleanness. Consequently, its reappearance here in prohibition form, among many severe violations, is a curious intensification that reaches its shocking climax with the death sentence in 20:18–19.

18:20 Do Not Give Your Bed of Semen to Your Neighbor’s Wife This verse continues the pattern of preposing modifiers for stress, but breaks the pattern of employing the euphemism “uncover the shame” (in vv. 9–19): “And to your neighbor’s wife [καὶ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ πλησίον σου] you must not give your bed of semen to become defiled with her” (see // and death penalty in 20:10). The prohibition, “you must not give your bed of semen [δώσεις κοίτην σπέρματός σου]” is an idiom for sexual intercourse (see 15:18), that will result in his and her joint defilement (purpose inf. ἐκμιανθῆναι πρὸς αὐτήν). Setting aside the ambiguity of 18:17a, v. 20 refers to intercourse with the wife of a neighbor, that is, the wife of one who lives nearby (based on the anarth. advb. πλησίον, which means “near, adjacent, adjoining”: LEH § 7275). Thus, v. 20 initiates the transition is from illicit sex with a relative (vv. 6–19) to non-relatives (vv. 20–22) and animals (v. 23).

commentary

331

18:21 Do Not Give Any of Your Semen to Serve a Ruler The emphasis of this prohibition is placed on the preverbal prepositional phrase that functions as a substantive: “And any of your semen [καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματός σου] you must not give to serve a ruler” (see // and death penalty in 20:2b– 5). Even with the addition of λατρεύειν “to serve” and omission of √κοίτη ‘bed,’ the construction in v. 21 (√δίδωμι + √σπέρμα + σου + i.d.o.) has sexual overtones. Although the noun √σπέρμα can also mean “seed (of plants), … descendents” (LEH §8166), the indisputably sexual connotation of “from your semen” (τοῦ σπέρματός σου) in the preceding verse would have constrained readers to interpret v. 21 as a sexual action (‘semen’ √σπέρμα rendering √‫ ;זרע‬contra “you shall not give any of your offspring to serve a ruler” NETS 98; it is hard to imagine a historical reason why the Alexandrian Jews who translated the LXX proper probably in the service of a Ptolemaic ruler would have resisted giving their own children in the service of a Ptolemaic or other rulers). The LevLXX translator could have easily removed the possibility of a sexual interpretation by rendering the Heb. (‫ )מזרעך‬the way they did in 21:17, ἐκ τοῦ γένους σου “from your families” (for ‫)מזרעך‬. A sexual connotation for 18:21 is reinforced when one arrives at 20:2–5, where the same activity merits the death sentence and is summarized as a non-metaphorical sexual act: “so that he commits fornication [ἐκπορνεύειν] with the rulers” (v. 5). Unknown to LXX users without access to the Hebrew source, the translator here made successive scribal errors as a result of misreading or mishearing his unpointed Hebrew text (for dictation theory of the LXX, see: van der Louw 2008a: 211–229). He first confused the final ‫ ר‬as a ‫ ד‬and thus mistook ‫ְלַהֲﬠִביר‬ [MT] “to make pass over” (i.e., “to offer”) for ‫“ ְלַהֲﬠִביד‬to cause to serve,” which he rendered as λατρεύειν “to serve.” Next he mistook ‫מֶלְך‬ ֹ ‘Molech’ for ‫‘ ֶמֶלְך‬king,’ which he translated ἄρχοντι “ruler” (likewise, 20:2, 3, 4, 5; cf. ‘ruler’ in 4:22–26). This altered purpose clause, “you must not give any of your semen in order to serve a ruler [λατρεύειν ἄρχοντι],” may well depict service to Ptolemaic male leaders and elites by engaging with them in sexual intercourse, which is prohibited in the next verse (v. 22) (less likely would be inseminating Egyptian rulers’ women; see insemination in v. 23, adultery in 18:20; 20:10). Homosexual activity was common in Alexandria during the production of the OG Pentateuch: … in the third century BCE, Ptolemy IV receives repeated criticism for his lack of self-discipline, one manifestation of which is his unbridled relationship with his male lover Agathocles … Alexandria in the Ptolemaic period is the first place in Egypt where mentions of homosexuality appear

332

commentary

with any regularity, in the literary record at least. Models for many of the social and educational bodies for elite men in the cities of Graeco-Roman Egypt were provided by Athenian-style institutions, such as they gymnasium and ephebate. A homosexual atmosphere was an integral part of the culture of these institutions. Montserrat 2011: 143, 145

Of this ethos, however, probably only the sexual overtones of 18:21 were perceived by LeuB’s readership (cf. Isa 57:8–9 and IsaLXX 57:8–9). Restricting oneself from such activity is compelled theologically through a motif that appears only in chs. 18–22: “And you must not profane the holy name. I am the Lord” (καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσεις τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἅγιον· ἐγὼ Κύριος; for ‘profane the name [√βεβηλόω + ὄνομα] of the holy name/your God/those consecrated to me/their God/my holy/holy one/the Lord’: 18:21; 19:12; 20:3; 21:6; 22:2; 22:32; whereas the lexeme √βεβηλόω occurs 17 times in chs. 18–22).

18:22 Do Not Sleep with a Male The preverbal modifier stresses the class of persons: “And with a male [καὶ μετὰ ἄρσενος] you must not sleep in a woman’s bed, for it is an abomination” (see // and death penalty in 20:13). By itself, the middle √κοιμάω means “to fall asleep, to go to bed, to sleep” (LEH §5192; as in 15:4, 26; 26:6), but when the adverbial “with someone” (μετά + gen. τινος) is present, the phrase is always a euphemism for sexual intercourse (15:18, 24, 33; 19:20; 20:11, 12, 13, 18, 20). This precise euphemism occurs in the LXX only in the parallel text in 20:13, and here: “with a male you must not sleep a female [sic.] bed” (οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικεία; cf. possible allusion in Rom 1:27). The LeuB* the attributive adjective γυναικεία is in grammatical disagreement (nom. n. pl.), but with a final ν (Bc) is an acc. fem. sg. that modifies κοίτην “bed” to mean “female bed” (√γυναικεῖος “belonging to women … feminine” LEH §1949; “pertaining to a woman” GELS 138; cf. γυναικός A F* Gött Swete). This reading is synonymous with the phrase ‘a bed of a female’ (√θῆλυς 12× in LevLXX; see 15:33), which does not refer merely to one’s wife’s bed—which can be clearly indicated by a genitive of relationship, “your [σου] wife” (cf. 18:8, 11, 13, 20; 20:10; 20:21)—but refers instead to the antonym of ‘male’ (ἄρσενος), namely, female or woman; hence the contextual rendering, “a woman’s bed,” that is, a bed belonging to a woman (which is a literal rendering by NETS 98 of κοίτην γυναικός Gött). Less clear, however, is the accusative κοίτην, which cannot be the direct object of an intransitive middle κοιμηθήσῃ, and no normal accusatival function is apparent. The sim-

commentary

333

plest explanation is anacoluthon, which expects readers will subconsciously supply the preposition εἰς to govern the acc. κοίτην: “you must not sleep with a male in a female bed” (οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικεία[ν]; more complex would be expecting the insertion of a comparative, although the meaning is equivalent: “comme on couche avec une femme” BA 163; “as in a bed of a woman” NETS 98; “como en lecho de mujer” BG 271; dynamically: “den Beischlaf einer Frau üben” SD 120; on anacolouthon, see Muraoka 2016: 774). The asyndetic motivation, “It is an abomination” (βδέλυγμα γάρ ἐστιν), is the first instance of this recurring vituperation in the closing of ch. 18 (18:22, 26, 27, 29; earlier in 5:2; 7:21; and 8× in ch. 11). The text does not forbid “male homosexuality” (as claimed by Wevers 1997: 283), which could connote homosexual orientation or attraction, but rather forbids the action of homosexual intercourse.

18:23a Do Not Give Your Bed to a Quadruped for Insemination The preverbal modifier emphasizes the object of one’s sexual intercourse: “And to any quadruped [καὶ πρὸς πᾶν τετράπουν] you must not give your bed for insemination to become defiled with it” (v. 23; for unclean √τετράπους “quadruped,” see 7:11; 27:27; and by implication in ch. 11). Here prohibition of the euphemism for intercourse, “you must not give your bed” (οὐ δώσεις τὴν κοίτην σου) is a shorthand for, “you must not give your bed of semen” (as 18:20). The man’s intention in this perverse act of bestiality is not pleasure, but in order to inseminate the animal for fertility, which will result in his defilement (similarly, “for sowing” NETS 98; purpose εἰς w/ deverbal noun σπερμ. and result inf. ἐκμιανθῆναι; either as a gloss or distinct source: εἰς σπερματισμὸν “in order to inseminate” > MT SP).

18:23b–30 Judgment on Defiling Oneself with the Customs of the Land This unit in LeuB supplies the divine judgment for not heeding the generic summons to reject the practices of Chanaan-Egypt (vv. 2c–3), obey the Lord’s instruction (vv. 4–5), and constrain onself by the Lord’s sexual code to preserve the honor of Israelite society in the land (vv. 6–23a, with Leitwort “uncover the shame”). This claim, that vv. 23b–30 relates to vv. 2c–23a, is justified by the analogous language with vv. 2c–5, which forms an inclusio around vv. 6–23a, and by the lexemes “defile onself” (mid. voice √ἐκμιαίνω) and “abomination” (√βδέλυγμα), which link the violations of vv. 20, 22, 23, and by metonymy the entire collection of vv. 6–23a, to the Leitworte “defile” and “abomination” in the judg-

334

commentary

ment in vv. 24–30 (√βδέλυγμα in vv. 26, 27, 29; √μιαίνω [cognate to √ἐκμιαίνω] in vv. 24[2×], 25, 27, 28, 30). The unit begins in LeuB with a focus on the preposed subject in v. 23b: “and a woman must not stand before any quadruped in order to be mounted, for it is detestable” (καὶ γυνὴ οὐ στήσεται πρὸς πᾶν τετράπουν βιβασθῆναι· μυσερὸν γάρ ἐστιν; cf. //20:15). With v. 23a closing the prior LeuB unit, and v. 23b as the signal word of vv. 23b–30, the literary effect may be to present male (v. 23a) and female (v. 23b) bestiality as tipping the scales of divine judgment. The translator may have felt this escalation of perversity, and thus created a neologism in v. 23b, “for it is detestable” (√μυσερός “loathsome” GELS 470; NETS 98; to this LEH § 6073 adds “abominable”; is this adj. formed from the free morpheme μυς ‘mouse, rat,’ an unclean quadruped in 11:29?). This proposition, “it is detestable” (μυσερὸν γάρ ἐστιν), refers back to the vague subject of both male and female bestiality described in v. 23 (with Muraoka 2016: 755). However, in vv. 23b–30, the thrust of the judgment is directed not against women (γυνὴ, v. 23), but against Israelite and immigrant men (masc. nouns in v. 26), who must not emulate the sexual activities of their Chanaanite predecessors: “For the men of the land, who were before you [οἱ ἄνθρωποι τῆς γῆς οἱ ὄντες πρότεροι ὑμῶν], committed all of these abominations, the land became defiled” (v. 27; in v. 26, “whether the inhabitant or [ἢ] the immigrant” B A min Bo > min Gött; v. 25, dat. of disadv. “angry with those who reside [τοῖς ἐνκαθημένοις] on it,” a meaning that appears to stretch the sense of the Greek ‘lie, lie in wait’: see Lee 1983: 51; τοῖς ἐνκαθημένοις is substantival, but not yet a “full-fledged” substantive meaning ‘residents’: Muraoka 2016: 372). In response to defiling the land by emulating these men, the anthropomorphized “land will become angry with you” (v. 28, [ἵνα μὴ] προσοχθίσῃ ὑμῖν ἡ γῆ, which conceals the Heb. anthrop. ‘vomit’ √‫ קיא‬for expulsion from the land). The castigating language in vv. 24–30 is overspecified by redundancy (√βδέλυγμα 3×; √βδελύσσω 1×; √μιαίνω 6×). The text shares multiple intertexts with 20:22–23, but in the direct context, encloses the chapter by inclusio with vv. 2– 5: “And you must keep all my ordinances and all my orders … and keep my orders” (vv. 26, 30) recalls “and my orders you must keep … and you must keep all my orders” (vv. 4, 5) (Leu 18:26 embedded subj. prb. = SP < ‫ אתם‬MT). The outer frame of the entire divine discourse opens and closes with the divine self-identification formula (ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν, vv. 2, 30), and the conclusive causal ὅτι results from the LXX Vorlage, “because [ὅτι] I am the Lord your God” (= ‫ כי‬11QpaleoLeva > MT SP Tar).

commentary

335

19:1–4 Introduction to the Holy Community The LeuB unit opens with the standard superscription (Lord→Mōysēs) with the redundant quotative frame (λέγων), but then diverges by stating Mōysēs’ audience in an unparalled fashion: “Speak to the assembly of the sons of Israel [τῇ συναγωγῇ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ], and you must say to them” (cf. shortened form in NumLXX 16:24; τῇ συναγωγῇ maybe = 11QpaleoLeva ‫ ]ע[דת‬b/c amt. of line space ≠ ‫ כל עדת‬ML SP). This community audience befits the chapter’s contents, even more than chs. 18, 20, 23, 25, whose instructions, while communal, are primarily directed to male, Israelite patriarchs. The LeuB scribe astutely marks vv. 1–4 as a section, which is internally coherent: Ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. ἕκαστος πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ μητέρα αὐτοῦ φοβείσθω, καὶ τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. οὐκ ἐπακολουθήσεται εἰδώλοις, καὶ θεοὺς χωνευτοὺς οὐ ποιήσετε ὑμῖν· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 2 “You must be holy because I am holy, the Lord your God. 3 Let each one fear his father and his mother, and you must keep my sabbaths; I am the Lord your God. 4 Idols must not be followed, and you must not make for yourselves gods of cast metal; I am the Lord your God.” The signal imperatival future is probably a causative middle (voice), “You must cause yourself to be holy,” and is followed by the causal ὅτι clause that theologically grounds the imperative, “because I am holy, the Lord your God” (ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος, inverting the Heb. order ‫קדושׁ אני‬, see Muraoka 2016: 807; on the middle voice, see ibid.: 237–248, but for the causative mid. in NT usage, see Wallace 1997: 423–425). The predicate adjective “holy” is apposited by “the Lord” (Κύριος), apposited in turn by “your God” (ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν). The same imitatio Dei formula in 11:44–45 impelled faithfulness to the dietary code that preceded (11:2–43), whereas here in 19:2 the principle governs the specific ethical directives that follow in 19:3–37.

336

commentary

1Peter 1:16 cites LevLXX 19:2 verbatim, but for contextual reasons excludes “the Lord your God” (Αγιοι εσεσθε οτι εγω αγιος “You must be holy because I am holy”; cf. slight wording difference in LevLXX 11:44: ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε ὅτι ἅγιός εἰμι ἐγὼ [κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν]; see possible echo in Matt 5:48; Augustine cites 1 Pet 1:13–16: Schaff 1.5: 520). Ambrose (c. LeuB) distinguishes the ontology of God and his people here: “… for the creature is sanctified, but the Holy Spirit sanctifies. In which matter, though the word is used in common, there is a difference in the nature. For both the man who receives and God Who gives sanctity are called holy, as we read: ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy.’ Now sanctification and corruption cannot share the same nature, and therefore the grace of the Holy Spirit and the creature cannot be of one substance” (Schaff 2.10: 257). Ambrose (c. LeuB) elsewhere applies Lev 19:2 as God’s basis for judging heritics who want his goodness, but fail to call him good (Schaff 2.10: 538). Furthermore, Jerome (c. LeuB) urges Roman Emperor Julian ‘the Apostate’: “You already build monasteries and support in the various islands of Dalmatia a large number of holy men. But you would do better still if you were to live among these holy men as a holy man yourself. ‘Be ye holy, saith the Lord, for I am holy’ ” (Schaff 2.6: 540). Whereas Pope Leo I (c. LeuB) needed no convincing of the worth of emulating the Lord’s holiness: He himself says, “Be holy, for I am holy,” that is to say, choose me and keep away from what displeases me. Do what I love; love what I do. If what I order seems difficult, come back to me who ordered it, so that from where the command was given help might be offered. I who furnished the desire will not refuse support. Fast from contradiction, abstain from opposition. Let me be your food and drink. None desire in vain what is mine, for those who stretch out toward me seek me because I first sought them. Lienhard 2001: 178

Within its direct context, LeuB 19:2 prefaces the two bicola, v. 3a–b and v. 4a– b, and each bicolon is motivated by its own divine self-identification formula, “I am the Lord your God” (v. 2c, 4c). With the exception of v. 4a, the three other cola prepose their subjects and objects for emphasis. The first bicolon associates, with a connective καὶ, the middle voice directives to fear one’s father and mother and keep the Lord’s sabbaths, while the second bicolon associates, again with a connective καὶ, the passive (in LeuBA) and active voice imperativals future: “Idols must not be followed and you must not make for yourselves gods of cast metal” (“must [not] be followed” επακολουθησεται B A // v. 31; “you must not follow” επακολουθησετε Gött). The integral matters of vv. 2–4 are revisited in 26:1–2, and are inverted in the curses of 26:29–35, 43 (see commentary).

337

commentary

19:5–19 Cult and Ethics of the Holy Community It is not self-evident why the LeuB scribe outendented v. 5 but waited to outdent again until v. 20, although one possibility was that the sexual violation and penalty in v. 20, like the 19 units in 18:6–23a, merited its own independent paragraph. The chapter may cohere in its structure and contents as a “Mini-Torah” (Stewart 2015: 299), and it is framed literarily by the defilement of the land and the correlation of sexual violations and their penalties (see ch. 20; also Nihan 2007: 99). I would estimate that almost half of the legislation in ch. 19 would appear novel to PentLXX readers at this juncture in the continuum of divine speeches from Seina; these innovations I embolden in the right column below. The other half, or slightly more, develop antecedent themes and intertexts from the divine speeches in ExodLXX 20–23, 31 and LevLXX 1–18; these antecedents I quote in the left column, but I place in brackets references to the intertexts that come after ch. 19 in PentLXX.

Antecedent texts in ExodLXX 20–23 and LeuB 1–18

LeuB 19:5–19

7:6–8 6(16) “And if it is a vow or if he sacrifices his voluntary gift, it must be eaten on the day that he brought his sacrifice and on the following day. 7(17) And what is left of the meat of the sacrifice until the third day must be burned completely with fire. 8(18) But when eating, if he should eat some of the meat on the third day, it will not be accepted for him who brings it, nor will it be accounted to him. It is a defilement, and the life who eats any of it will take the sin.” 17:4, 9 “that life must be eliminated from its/his people” 18:29 “the lives that do so must be eliminated from their people”

5 “And if you sacrifice a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord, you must sacrifice your tenth. 6 It must be eaten on the day you sacrifice it and on the next day, and if it is left over until the third day, it must be burned completely by fire. 7 But if with respect to eating, it is eaten on the third day, it is not fit to be sacrificed; it will not be accepted. 8 And the one who eats it will receive guilt because he has profaned the Lord’s holy things, and the lives who eat it must be eliminated from their people.” (anarth. βρωσι B*/βρωσει Bc Gött = SP ‫האכל ≠ אכל‬ 4QLev-Numa MT SP Tar Syr)

[23:22; cf. Deut 24:19–22]

9 “And when you reap the harvest of your land to harvest your field, then you must gather what falls down of your harvest. 10 And you must not glean your vineyard after the vintage, nor gather the grapes of your vineyard; you must leave them for the poor and the immigrant. I am the Lord your God.”

ExodLXX 20:15, 16 “You must not steal … You must not testify falsely against your neighbor as a false witness”

11 “You must not steal. You must not lie. Each one must not slander his neighbor. 12 And you must not swear by my name on the basis of injustice, and you

338

commentary

(cont.) Antecedent texts in ExodLXX 20–23 and LeuB 1–18

LeuB 19:5–19

ExodLXX 20:7 “You must not take the name of the Lord your God as useless. For the Lord will never acquit …” 18:21 “And you must not give any of your semen to serve a ruler. And you must not profane the holy name. I am the Lord.” 6:2–4 2 “If a life sins and by overlooking overlooks the Lord’s commandments and lies about things concerning his neighbor, whether in a deposit or concerning a partnership or concerning seizure or he harmed his neighbor in some way, 3 or he found something lost and lied about it, and he swears falsely about one of all that a person may do in order to sin in these ways, 4 then it will be whenever he sins and commits a sinful error and returns the spoil that he seized or the injustice he acted unjustly or the deposit that was entrusted to him or the lost thing that he found,” [cf. DeutLXX 24:14– 15]

must not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord your God.” (“your God” τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν > MT SP)

[19:32; 25:17; cf. DeutLXX 27:18]

14 “You must not speak badly about the deaf, nor put a trap before the blind, and you must fear the Lord your God. I am the Lord your God.” (“your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP)

ExodLXX 23:2–3 (NETS 67) 2 “You shall not be with the majority for wrongdoing. You shall not associate with a crowd to turn side with the majority so as to turn aside a trial. 3 And a poor person you shall not pity in a trial.” [cf. DeutLXX 1:17; 16:19; 27:19]

15 “You must not do anything unjust in judgment. You must not take a person of the poor, nor admire a person of a high position; with justice you must judge your neighbor.” (“You [pl.] must not do” οὐ ποιήσετε = pl. MT ‫ ≠ לא־תעשׂו‬sg. SP ‫)לא תעשה‬

ExodLXX 23:7 (NETS 67) “From every unjust thing said you shall keep away. An innocent and just person you shall not kill, and you shall not acquit the impious person for the sake of bribes.”

16 “You must not walk in deceit among your nation; you must not conspire against [sic.] the blood of your neighbor. I am the Lord your God.” (“your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP)

13 “You must not act unjustly towards your neighbor, and you must not seize [sic.], and the wages of a hired worker must never rest overnight with you until morning.”

17 “You must not hate [sic.] your kin in your mind; with reproof you must reprove your neighbor, and you must not receive guilt because of him. 18 And your hand must not avenge, and you must not be angry against the sons of your people, and you must love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.”

339

commentary (cont.) Antecedent texts in ExodLXX 20–23 and LeuB 1–18

LeuB 19:5–19

18:4–5 “My judgments you must do, and my orders you must keep …”

19 “You must keep my law.”

[cf. DeutLXX 22:9–11]

“You must not cross-breed your animals with an animal of a different kind, and you must not sow your vineyard with anything different, and you must not put on yourself an adulterated garment woven from two.” (1o καὶ = SP > MT)

Verses 5–8 are a near-verbatim reproduction of 7:6–8, which prohibited, for the different forms of deliverance sacrifice, any consumption of the sacrificial meat on the third day. Two contributions are made here. The first is the decree, “your tenth you must sacrifice” (δεκάτην ὑμῶν θύσετε), which preposes an anaphoric “your tenth,” but this makes no sense without 27:32: “And every tenth of cows and of sheep, and everything that may come into the number under the staff, the tenth must be holy to the Lord” (also 27:33; in 19:5, δεκατην B A F x mins; δεκτην Fa BrMcL Gött). The second appears in the severe LXX penalty that connotes capital punishment: “because he has profaned the Lord’s holy things, and the lives who eat it must be eliminated from their people” (see ‘eliminated from X people/relatives’: 17:4, 9; 18:29; 20:18; 22:3; 23:29; rendered even more brutally by: “sollen … ausgerottet werden” SD 120; “serán exterminadas” BG 272; “shall be exterminated” NETS 99; but influenced by the Heb. “seront retranchées” BA 165). The gleaning law in vv. 9–10 is not found in any analogus form in ExodLXX, but is reinserted later into the festivals of first fruits and weeks (23:22). LeuB* omits “you must not finish off your harvest [ου συντλεσετε τον θερισμον υμων]” (Bmg F Gött > Btxt A min), and oddly reads: “then you must gather what falls down of your harvest” (“you must not [ου] gather” Bc A F Gött; > B*unique). The sense can be reconstructed by analogy to the clear command in v. 10a–b, “And you must not glean your vineyard after the vintage, nor gather the grapes of your vineyard” (19:10[2×], 19: √ἀμπελών “vineyard” is unattested before Hellenistic Greek, with one disputed exception: Lee 1983: 107). This is the first appearance of “the poor and the immigrant” (τῷ πτωχῷ καὶ τῷ προσηλύτῳ) named together as a dyad. The poor were accommodated in the preceding rituals (presumably in 1:14–17; explicitly in 5:11; 12:8; 14:21, 32), but the immigrant so far has only been held accountable to Israelite cultic and ethical standards (16:29; 17:3,

340

commentary

8, 10, 12, 13, 15; 18:26). This is the first indicator in LevLXX that the immigrant (here not said to be ‘attached’) did not own land like native Israelite patriarchs, and therefore would need an allocation of the land’s food to sustain his family. The two agrarian domains of “the harvest of your field” (τὸν θερισμὸν τῆς γῆς ὑμῶν) and “your vineyard (after the vintage)” (τὸν ἀμπελῶνά σου) are hereby converted into mechanisms of bounty as expressions of the benevolence of Israel’s deity: “I am the Lord your God” (see 26:4–5; v. 9, “your [σου] harvest” B F* > M Fc mins Bo Gött). Verse 11 alludes to the Decalogue (ExodLXX 20:14–16) without reciting it precisely, “You must not steal. You must not lie. Each one must not slander his neighbor” (οὐ κλέψετε, οὐ ψεύσεσθε, οὐ συκοφαντήσει ἕκαστος τὸν πλησίον vs. οὐ κλέψεις οὐ φονεύσεις οὐ ψευδομαρτυρήσεις κατὰ τοῦ πλησίον σου μαρτυρίαν ψευδῆ). This triad of stealing-lying-slandering introduces the subordinate cases in vv. 12–16, which cover: [lying] “You must not swear by my name on the basis of injustice” (v. 12; “I am the Lord your God” τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν > MT SP; Matt 5:43 may not not allude to 19:12, but to Num 30:3 [LXX vers. = MT 30:2]); [stealing] “You must not act unjustly towards your neighbor, and you must not seize [sic.], and the wages of a hired worker must never rest overnight with you until morning” (v. 13); [slandering] “You must not speak badly about the deaf, nor put a trap before the blind” (v. 14); [possibly stealinglying-slandering] “You must not do anything unjust in judgment. You must not take a person of the poor, nor admire a person of a high position; with justice you must judge your neighbor” (v. 15; “You [pl.] must not do” οὐ ποιήσετε = pl. MT ‫ ≠ לא־תעשׂו‬sg. SP ‫ ;לא תעשה‬see possible allusions to v. 15 in John 7:24; Acts 23:3); [lying-stealing] “You must not walk in deceit among your nation; you must not conspire against [sic.] the blood of your neighbor. I am the Lord your God” (v. 16). Verse 13 is obfuscated by LeuB’s haplography, but readers probably reconstructed it: “and you must not seize [sic.]” (for αρπα Bunique read: αρπασεις A F Gött). The second prohibition is also intensified in LeuBA: “and the wages of a hired worker must never [οὐ μὴ] rest overnight with you until the morning” (ου μη B A min; ου F G M Gött; conjunctive “and [καὶ] the wages” = SP ‫ו‬ > MT; see possible allusion to v. 13, also Deut 24:14–15, in Matt 20:8; Jas 5:4). Ambrose (c. LeuB) taught the principle found in v. 13: “Why, the very law of the Lord teaches us that this rule must be observed, so that we may never deprive another of anything for the sake of our own advantage. For it says: ‘… It forbids the labourer to be deprived of his hire …’” (Schaff 2.10: 192; also see Deut 24:14– 15). In v. 14, the couplet, “You must not speak badly about the deaf, nor put a trap before the blind,” inserts a fresh contribution to the Seina narrative, and in light

commentary

341

of other known physical special needs (21:18–20), must function as a sample of the ways one could take advantage of those with physical special needs. The motive, “and you must fear the Lord your God [φοβηθήσῃ Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου]. I am the Lord your God,” may refer to both a reverence for Israel’s deity who is predisposed to protect those with special needs, and a fear of his judgment because, while the victims are not able hear or see, the Lord always hears and sees (see 19:32; “your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP). In defending his motives, Jerome (c. LeuB) appears to recall v. 15: “Men may say that I am not so much trying to console a widow in affliction as endeavouring to creep into the imperial court; and that, while I make a pretext of offering comfort, I am really seeking the friendship of the great. Clearly this will not be the opinion of any one who knows the commandment: ‘thou shalt not respect the person of the poor,’ a precept given lest under pretext of shewing pity we should judge unjust judgment” (Schaff 2.6: 403; // Exod 23:2, 3; Deut 1:17; 16:19; 27:19). Verses 17–18, in a semblance of the Decalogue’s tenth word, “You must not covet” (οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις), turn inward to hatred, (reproof), anger, vengeance, and ultimately the inverse, love: v. 17 οὐ μεισήσεις τὸν ἀδελφόν σου τῇ διανοίᾳ σου· ἐλεγμῷ ἐλέγξεις τὸν πλησίον σου, καὶ οὐ λήμψῃ δι’ αὐτὸν ἁμαρτίαν. v. 18 καὶ οὐκ ἐκδικᾶταί σου ἡ χείρ, καὶ οὐ μηνιεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς τοῦ λαοῦ σου, καὶ ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. You must not hate [sic.] your brother in your mind; with reproof you must reprove your neighbor, and you must not receive guilt because of him. And your hand must not avenge, and you must not be angry against the sons of your people, and you must love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord. The unmarked word order moves the reader swiftly through a succession of six imperativals future. A single divine self-identification, “I am the Lord” (ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος), functions to motivate obedience to all six directives together (cf. 19:12, 14, 16). The objects expand sociologically from “your brother” (τὸν ἀδελφόν) to “your neighbor” (τὸν πλησίον σου) to “the sons of your people” (τοῖς υἱοῖς τοῦ λαοῦ

342

commentary

σου), and then breaking the pattern in v. 18c back to “your neighbor” (τὸν πλησίον σου; NETS 99 “kin” goes against the preceding usage in LevLXX, which means a biological brother: 10:4[2×], 6; 16:2; 18:14, 16[2×]; through ch. 21, then in chs. 25– 26 the usage is varied). Above I have offset the two positive commands because they serve as counterparts to their preceding prohibitions: “You must not hate [sic.] … with reproof you must reprove” (v. 17a–b) and “you must not be angry … you must love” (v. 18b–c, the paratactic καὶ is contextually understood as marking a disjunctive clause; in v. 17a, μεισησεις B* A; μισηεις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; as is common in Leu, here οὐ + fut. μεισήσεις has a deontic modality, also see 19:19; 20:9: Muraoka 2016: 702). In this context, LeuBA readers most likely corrected the solecism, “You must not hate [sic.] your kin in your mind” (μεισησεις B* A; μισηεις Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; see possible allusion to v. 17 in Matt 18:15). As a result, v. 17a and v. 18c will be recognized as antonymous directives that encompass the unit: “You must not hate [μεισήσεις] your brother in your mind [τῇ διανοίᾳ σου],” but “You must love [ἀγαπήσεις] your neighbor as yourself [ὡς σεαυτόν].” In v. 18c, to love one’s neighbor was to act for the good of one who was ‘near’ (from the advb. πλησίον ‘near, adjacent, adjoining’: LEH §7275; the preference for √ἀγαπάω in 19:18, 34 and in the LXX was part of a larger phenomenon in Koine Greek in which this verb supplanted √φιλέω: Aitken 2014: 69). The manner of this love is denoted by the comparative adverbial phrase, “as yourself” (ὡς σεαυτόν), with a verbal ellipsis: “love your neighbor [in the same manner] as [you love] yourself” (contra Muraoka [2016: 228], who reads this as a substantivized prep. phrase, “you shall love your neighbor, someone like yourself”). From ExodLXX–Lev 19LXX, the Israelites knew this self-love experientially as they desired and sought their own survival and solidarity in Egypt, through their mass exodus, and most recently, when they craved food in the desert and feared death in the Lord’s presence on the mountain. Furthermore, in the context of the imitatio dei in 19:2, one might even infer that the Lord is the archetype for self-love in v. 18c (“I am the Lord”), that is, he loves Israel as himself; for instance, “My firstborn son is Israel” (υἱὸς πρωτότοκός μου Ισραηλ, ExodLXX 4:22) and “I took you up as though on eagles’ wings, and I brought you to myself … you will be for me a people special above all nations” (ἀνέλαβον ὑμᾶς ὡσεὶ ἐπὶ πτερύγων ἀετῶν καὶ προσηγαγόμην ὑμᾶς πρὸς ἐμαυτόν … ἔσεσθέ μοι λαὸς περιούσιος ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν, ExodLXX 19:4–5*; also see the Lord’s jealousy for his people in ExodLXX 20:5–6; cf. 34:6– 7). The NT authors quote LevLXX 19:18c, “You must love your neighbor as yourself,” eight times and allude to it at least one other time, making it the most frequently quoted OT text in the NT (Psalm 110:1 is quoted 5×, alluded to 3×; the precise representation of LevLXX 19:18c suggests the NT authors cite the

commentary

343

LXX, which nonetheless represents the Heb. formally: Matt 5:43; 19:19; 22:39; Mark 12:31, 33[allusion]; Luke 10:27; Rom 13:9; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8; possible allusion in Rom 12:19). As the definitive interpreter of the Torah, Jesus instructs that on the two commandments of the love of God (DeutLXX 6:4), and the love of neighbor (LevLXX 19:18) “depend the entire Law and the Prophets” (ὅλος ὁ νόμος κρέμαται καὶ οἱ προφῆται, Matt 22:40). Augustine (c. LeuB) establishes the temporal primacy of the Decalogue’s final word and of Leu 19:8 to the incarnation: “Long before Christ it had been said, ‘You shall not covet’; long before it had been said, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ a phrase which, as the apostle says, expresses the fulfillment of the whole law. And no one who loves himself unless he loves God, the Lord says that the whole Law and the Prophets depend on these two commandments” (Lienhard 2001: 189). Citing v. 18, among other commands, Augustine (c. LeuB) instructs that humans need an internal divine enablement to love one’s neighbor: “He, therefore, who wishes to do God’s commandment, but is unable, already possesses a good will, but as yet a small and weak one; he will, however, become able when he shall have acquired a great and robust will. We can, however, ourselves do nothing to effect good works of piety without Him either working that we may will, or co-working when we will” (Schaff 1.5: 1265). He further exhorts that spiritual correction must be carried out of love for one’s neighbor (Schaff 1.5: 1267–1268, also 1270). Following “I am the Lord,” which closes vv. 17–18, the command in v. 19 with the preposed object, “My law [Τὸν νόμον μου] you must keep [φυλάξεσθε],” apparently refers to what follows the triad in v. 19b–d. The dative of association, “You must not cross-breed your animals with an animal of a different kind [ἑτεροζύγῳ],” is a hapax legomenon in the LXX, but appears with a similar use in a third-century BCE Koine text (see Lee 1983: 97). This is followed by two other counterparts: “and you must not sow your vineyard with anything different, and you must not put on yourself a mingled garment woven from two” (for √κίβδηλος “not pure, mingled” LEH §5107; but NETS 99 “adulterated” is too suggestive beyond its semantic domain; better: “nicht zusammengehörenden” SD 121; less accurate: “altéré” BA 169; “no auténtico” BG 272). The calling to emulate the Lord’s holiness (19:2), in contradistinction to Egypt (18:3) and the land’s prior inhabitants (18:24–30), is now extended beyond the cult and ethics into the realms of animal husbandry, viticulture and textiles.

344

commentary

19:20–22 Sex with a Domestic Slave After the collection in vv. 5–19, the LeuB scribe marks a new paragraph here for the first explicit sexual infraction in the chapter (cf. cross-breeding in 19:19).

Intertexts in LeuB 5–6, 18

LeuB 19:20–22

18:20 “And you must not give your bed of semen to your neighbor’s wife, to become defiled with her.” [‘bed of semen’ 15:16–18, 32; 22:4; ‘domestic slave’ 25:39–42, 55]

20 “And if someone sleeps with a woman in a bed of semen, and she is a domestic slave guarded carefully for a man, and she by a ransom price had not been ransomed nor had freedom been given her, they must have an inquiry. They must not die because she had not been freed, 21 and he must bring for his sinful error to the Lord, to the door of the tent of testimony, a ram for a sinful error 22 before the Lord for the sin that he sinned, and the sin that he sinned will be forgiven him.” (v. 20, ἀποθανοῦνται = MT ‫ ≠ יומתו‬SP ‫)יומת‬

5:14–6:7 offerings “for sinful error” 5:14–19 “ram for sinful error” 6:31–40 “ram for sinful error”

Employing the nomenclature of ch. 18, vv. 20–22 formulate a new casuistic law that demands a sin offering (à la chs. 5–6) for sex with a betrothed, yet-to-befreed domestic slave (see Wevers 1997: 303; √οἰκέτις ‘domestic slave’ from Classical Greek is seemingly not attested outside the LXX in post-Classical Greek: Lee 1983: 33). There is no reason to interpret this as rape, but as consensual (cf. 19:29; DeutLXX 22:23–29). The act may have been understood by the translator, if not also by LeuB readers, as effectually nullifying the prior engagement and consummating a union (GenLXX 2:24), as in Roman-era Egypt: “the sexual cohabitation of servile and free persons might be regarded, under the common law, as legitimate marriage” (Westermann 1984: 105). In v. 22, there is a large omission from LeuB*: “And the priest must propitiate for him with the ram of the sinful error” (+ και εξιλασεται περι αυτου ο ιερευς εν τω κριω της πλημμελειας Bc OG-B* Swete BrMcL Gött; > B* mins). Yet, the uncorrected text of B* in vv. 21– 22 is not erroneous and assumes propitiation from the sinful error protocols of chs. 5–6: “and he must bring for his sinful error to the Lord, to the door of the tent of testimony, a ram for a sinful error for the sin that he sinned before the

commentary

345

Lord [κριὸν πλημμελίας ἔναντι Κυρίου περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἧς ἥμαρτεν], and the sin that he sinned must be forgiven him.” The stress of this LeuB* text form is not on propitiation, but on its result, stated paratactically, “and the sin that he sinned will be forgiven him” (καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτεν, in which the offense, normally in the acc., becomes the nom. subject ἡ ἁμαρ. and the person forgiven is placed in the dat. αὐτῷ: Muraoka 2016: 566). This could be a divine passive, “will be forgiven him,” or if human relationships are in view, an imperatival future, “must be forgiven him.”

19:23–25 Pruning the Land’s Unclean Fruit This distinct unit in LeuB, vv. 23–25, appears as a novelty at this point in the Seina pericope, insofar as it stipulates that new fruit trees in the land will not be holy for the Lord until the fourth year, nor permitted to be eaten until the fifth year: 23 “When you enter into the land that the Lord God is giving you, and you must plant any kind of eatable tree, then you must clean away its uncleanness. Three years its fruit will be unpurified for you; it must not be eaten. 24 And in the fourth year all its fruit will be holy, praiseworthy to the Lord, 25 but in the fifth year you must eat the fruit, its yields are an increase for you. I am the Lord your God.” In v. 23, neither of the two B readings are erroneous, but express with a unique appellative two, rather than one, imperativals future: “When you enter into the land that the Lord God [Κύριος ὁ θεὸς] is giving you, then you must plant [καταφυτεύσετε] every kind of eatable tree, and you must clean away its uncleanness” (B* mins Phil Cyr Arm vs. “your [υμων] God” Bc A F Gött; καταφυτευσετε B mins; καταφυτευσητε A F Gött; in Classical Greek √καταφυτεύω meant ‘transplant,’ but in PentLXX means merely ‘plant,’ a use discovered in papyri contemporaneous with PentLXX: Lee 1983: 58). The Israelites once again must imitate God: “And the Lord God planted an orchard in Edem toward the east” (GenLXX 2:8 NETS 7). In both LeuB and LeuAF, the text displays the conceptual world of LevLXX: just as new mothers (ch. 12) or skin-diseased persons (13:46) had to wait before they came into contact with others, so also the unclean fruit of the land must wait before it contacted either the Lord or the Israelites (v. 25, LSJ cites one epigraphic example of the LXX preferred orth. γένημα ‘fruit, produce’ with one ν [also LevLXX 23:39; 8× in ch. 25; 26:4] but today some 250 instances are attested from the time of the PentateuchLXX: Aitken 2014: 49). The land, there-

346

commentary

fore, had to endure the purification process because it had become defiled: “For the men of the land, who were before you, committed all of these abominations, the land became defiled” (18:27, πάντα γὰρ τὰ βδελύγματα ταῦτα ἐποίησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τῆς γῆς οἱ ὄντες πρότεροι ὑμῶν, ἐμιάνθη ἡ γῆ). Although “praiseworthy” (√αἰνετός; “laudable” NETS 99) occurs only here in the PenLXX, “holy [ἅγιος] praiseworthy to the Lord [τῷ κυρίῳ]” is technical language for an acceptable sacrifice (see 19:8; see 23:10). Apparently as an act of God’s kindness, the Israelites did not have to wait seven whole years to consume the land’s tree fruit (cf. 7year schematic of ch. 25, but 26:4).

19:26–37 No Eating Blood, Fornication or Injustice, Then Closure

Antecedent texts in ExodLXX 20–23, 31 and LeuB 1–18

LeuB 19:26–36

[LXX 19:26 conceals 3:17; 7:16–17; 17:14; cf. DeutLXX 18:10–11] [21:5] [21:1, 4, 5; cf. DeutLXX 14:1]

26 “Do not eat on the mountains. And you must not practice divination, nor observe birds for omens.” 27 “You must not make a curl from the hair of your head, nor ruin the appearance of your beard. 28 And you must not make any incisions in your body for a soul, nor make any tattooed letters on you. I am the Lord your God.” (v. 26, “your [ὑμῶν] beard” prb. = pl. SP ‫ ≠ זקנכם‬MT ‫ ;זקנך‬v. 28, “your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP)

18:15, 17, 21 “The shame of your daughter-in-law you must not uncover, for she is your son’s wife; you must not uncover her shame … The shame of a woman and her daughter you must not uncover … And you must not give any of your semen to serve a ruler. And you must not profane the holy name. I am the Lord.” [cf. 21:9; cf. DeutLXX 23:17; ‘commit fornication’ 20:4, 6]

29 “You must not profane your daughter by making her commit fornication, and the land will not commit fornication, and the land will be full of lawlessness.”

ExodLXX 31:13 “And you, instruct the sons of Israel, saying, ‘Observe and you must keep my sabbaths [τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε]. It is a sign in my presence among you for your generations so that you might know that I am the Lord [ἐγὼ κύριος] who sanctifies you.’” [LeuB 19:3; 26:2]

30 “You must keep my sabbaths [τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε], and you must not be afraid of my sanctuaries. I am the Lord [ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος].”

347

commentary (cont.) Antecedent texts in ExodLXX 20–23, 31 and LeuB 1–18 [20:6, 27; cf. DeutLXX 18:11] 18:20 “And you must not give your bed of semen to your neighbor’s wife, to become defiled [ἐκμιανθῆναι πρὸς αὐτήν] with her.” 18:23 “And you must not give your bed to any quadruped for insemination to become defiled [ἐκμιανθῆναι] with it”

LeuB 19:26–36

31 “He must not be followed by ventriloquists, and you must not attach yourselves to enchanters, to defile yourselves [ἐκμιανθῆναι] by them. I am the Lord your God.”

[cf. 19:3; ExodLXX 20:12; 21:15, 17]

32 “You must rise up in the presence of a greyhaired person and honor the presence of the old, and you must fear your God. I am the Lord your God.”

ExodLXX 22:21 “And you must not harm an immigrant, nor oppress him [οὐδὲ μὴ θλίψητε αὐτόν], for you were immigrants in the land, Egypt [ἦτε γὰρ προσήλυτοι ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ].” [19:18]

33 “But if some immigrant approaches you in your land, you must not oppress him [οὐ θλίψετε αὐτόν]. 34 The immigrant who comes near to you must be as the native among you, and you must love him as yourself because you were immigrants in the land of Egypt [ὅτι προσήλυτοι ἐγενήθητε ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ]. I am the Lord your God.” (v. 33, ὑμῖν “you” prb. = pl. SP ‫ ≠ אתכם‬MT ‫)אתך‬

[19:15; cf. Deut 25:13–16] ExodLXX 20:2 “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of a house of slavery” [ExodLXX 6:7; 13:3, 9, 16; 16:6, 32; 20:2; LevLXX 11:45; 22:33; 25:38; 26:13; Num 15:41; 10× DeutLXX; Josh 24:5]

35 “You must not do anything unjust in judgment in measures and in weights and in scales. 36 You must have just scales and just weights and a just liquid measure. I who am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt.”

Verses 26–28 are innovative, and even more so through the LevLXX of v. 26, which states a prohibition, “Do not eat on the mountains” (Μὴ ἔσθετε ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων = retro. ‫ )ההרים‬for the Heb. idiom, “Do not eat on the blood” (‫לא תאכלו‬ ‫)על־הדם‬. The translator either misread a Heb. letter (‫ ד‬as ‫)ר‬, then pluralized the word, or corrected the word to refer to a cultic blood ritual on mountains known from EzekLXX (see 18:11, 15; 22:9; so Wevers 1997: 306). The context constrains readers to regard it as another form of black magic, among: divination (v. 26b); extispicy ‘by means of’ birds (dat. of means, with NETS 99; v. 26b); cutting one’s body “for a soul” (with “pour une âme” BA 171; NETS 99; ἐπὶ ψυχῇ; clarified by “einer Menschenseele” SD 121; less helpful, “por una persona” BG 273); and marking one’s body with tattooed letters (or “characters” NETS 99).

348

commentary

Verse 29 does not refer to forcing one’s daughter into prostitution (see ‘prostitute’ √πόρνη 21:7, 13), but appears to supplement the prohibitions in ch. 18 to ensure that men do not sexually violate their own biological daughters, a prohibition that is strangely lacking in (cf. 18:15, 17, 21). The motive for not raping one’s daughter is given in two clauses that are understood as results, in spite of the paratactic syntax, “and the land will not commit fornication, and the land will be full of lawlessness” (καὶ οὐκ ἐκπορνεύσει ἡ γῆ, καὶ ἡ γῆ πλησθήσεται ἀνομίας). In v. 30, the imperatival future, “You must keep my sabbaths” (τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε) motivated by “I am the Lord” is a verbatim repetition of ExodLXX 31:13, but next LeuB distinctively issues not another command, but a prohibition: “You must not [μὴ] be afraid of my sanctuaries” (μη B* min; ου min; > Bc OG-B* Gött). This is not a solecism, and conceptually it does not need to be rectified. Rather, within the context of black magic in vv. 26–31, the Israelites and their priestly intermediaries must not fear the Lord’s sanctuaries, his sacred spaces, such that they neglect his service. This would be an entirely reasonable command in light of his terrifying theophany in ExodB on Mount Seina (19:12– 24, although ‘astonished’ in LXX 19:18), and again in Leu 9:24 where the people fall on their faces at the sight of the Lord’s consuming fire, and indeed, after the Lord’s fire devoured Nadab and Abioud (10:2; 16:1), and finally two components of the Day of Propitiation ritual are explicitly given to prevent Aarōn’s death (16:2, 13). The Israelites would have been enticed to serve other deities at the easily accessible cultic sites of their neighbors, but to avoid the Lord’s sacred spaces. Although the manuscript in LeuB v. 31 is presently blurry, the text appears to have proscribed: “He must not be followed [ἐπακολουθήσεται] by ventriloquists, and you must not attach yourselves to enchanters, to defile yourselves by them. I am the Lord your God” (επακολουθησεται B*?; επακολουθησεσθε A mins; επακολουθησητε F; επακολουθησετε “you must [not] follow” Bc? Gött; see different MT SP construction in v. 31). In any case, the Israelites must move away from the alluring company of those who practice black magic (cf. forsaking corrupting company: Psa 1:1; Prov 12:26; 13:20; 22:24–25; 1Cor 15:33). The cultural referent of ‘ventriloquist’ would have shifted for LeuB’s users, but in classical Greece it was believed that a ventriloquist’s stomach hosted demons that belched words out of the host’s mouth (Connor 2001: esp. 47–74; ἐγγαστρίμυθος from ἐν ‘in,’ γαστήρ ‘belly’ and μῦθος ‘tale, myth’; hence, the Latin venter ‘belly’ and loqui ‘speak’; √ἐγγαστρίμυθος “ventriloquist” GELS 184; LEH § 2547; NETS 99–100). In Greco-Roman writings, the term ‘enchanter’ or ‘charmer’ (√ἐπαοιδός GELS 260) referred to one, possibly uneducated, who performed cures and exorcisms (vs. a μάγος ‘magician’ who worked with books: Dickie 2001: 251; √ἐπαοιδός possible neol.: LEH §3439).

commentary

349

Verse 32 diverges from the subject of dark magic to compel the formal respect in the presence of the aged as a form of imitatio dei “and you must fear your God. I am the Lord your God” (καὶ φοβηθήσῃ τὸν θεόν σου· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν; “[the Lord] your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP; see possible allusion to v. 32 in 1Tim 5:1). Verse 33 inner-biblically reuses the language of ExodLXX 22:21 to reassert the authority of the earlier law, “But if some immigrant approaches you in your land, you must not oppress him [οὐ θλίψετε αὐτόν] … because you were immigrants in the land of Egypt [ὅτι προσήλυτοι ἐγενήθητε ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ]” (the deponent vb. “approaches” √προσπορεύομαι, in LevLXX only here and 10:9, is always in the present tense in PentLXX, whereas the far more common synonym √προσέρχομαι is never in the present: Lee 1983: 91). What is new in vv. 33–34 is that, in keeping with the equalizing Tendenz in LevLXX, simply not harming or oppressing the ‘immigrant’ is inadequate. Now, “The immigrant who comes near to you must be as the native among you, and you must love him as yourself [καὶ ἀγαπήσεις αὐτὸν ὡς σεαυτόν]” (v. 34). This is astonishing as an intertextual expansion of 19:18: “And your hand must not avenge, and you must not be angry against the sons of your people, and you must love your neighbor as yourself [ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν]. I am the Lord.” Love of neighbor and love of immigrant are now coextensive, and the native Israelite must perform these loves in the same manner (comparative ὡς) that he or she naturally cares for his or her own life (for the distinction between Lev 19:33–34 and Deut 10:18–19: Awabdy 2014: 205–207). This new addition in 19:34 moves beyond oppression (ExodLXX 22:21) to a beneficial disposition and action. With this shift, the motive clause, “because you were immigrants in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God,” may refer not to the era of Egyptian oppression, but to the positive era when Jacob’s family resided as ‘immigrants’ and were treated lavishly as guests (in this instance, supporting ‘guest’ as a dynamic rendering, as NETS 99). The principle, then, would be one of reciprocity: love the immigrant who has come near to you, as the Egyptians loved you when you resided as immigrants in their land (cf. DeutLXX 23:7; see Awabdy 2014: 127–164). If, however, the principle is not reciprocity, but empathy—love the immigrant who has come near to you because you were not loved as immigrants in Egypt—then this text would provide the incipient foundation for Jesus’ imperative to his followers: “Love your enemies” (ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν; Matt 5:44; Luke 6:27, 35). Verses 35–36 repeat the lexeme from v. 15, “You must not do anything unjust in judgment,” but rather than partiality, the text here forbids, for the first time in the Seina pericope, manipulating ‘weights,’ ‘scales,’ ‘liquid measure’ to one’s own advantage in a business transaction. The asyndetic motive clause, “I who am the Lord your God who released you out of the land of Egypt,” may connote

350

commentary

release from the unjust society of Egypt (v. 36, √ἐξάγω [also 9× in chs. 22–26] was often used in Koine for ‘release’ from prison, as GenLXX 40:14; 41:14: Lee 1983: 67). Verse 37 formulates an inclusio with v. 2 as the last fuller form of the chapter that assembles the diverse collection of laws: You must be holy because I am holy, the Lord your God. (v. 2c) And you must keep my entire law and all my orders, and you must do them. I am the Lord your God. (v. 37) (“your God” ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν > MT SP) As 18:24–30 compelled faithfulness specifically to 18:6–23, so the most likely referent of “my entire law and all my orders” (πάντα τὸν νόμον μου καὶ πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου) in 19:37 is neither ExodLXX 20–LevLXX 18, nor LevLXX 1–18, but the circumscribed divine discourse of 19:2c–36. The Lord’s speech is both paragon and diverse enough to operate as its own canon of cultic and ethical holiness within the broader PentateuchLXX.

20:1–9 Death Penalty for Giving Semen, Fornications, Wicked Speech to Parents The section commences with the conventional superscription (Lord→Mōysēs, with redundant q. frame λέγων) to present the instructions for the Isralite audience (τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ) as divinely sourced. The LeuB scribe is insightful here in marking vv. 1–8 as a paragraph that begins with the formulaic speech heading (vv. 1–2a) and ends with a law on talking with parents (v. 9) just before the unified collection of ‘shame-uncovering’ sexual activities (vv. 10–17). The unit moves from the death penalty for those who give, or condone those who give, their semen to a ruler (vv. 2–5), to complete destruction for other forms of fornication (v. 6), to the theological motivation for holy obedience (vv. 7–8) to the death penalty for speaking wickedly with one’s father or mother (v. 9). The extended protasis of v. 2b opens the divine speech: “If any of the sons of Israel or any of the immigrants who were born in Israel, whoever gives of his semen to a ruler [ὃς ἂν δῷ τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτοῦ ἄρχοντι], by death let him be put to death.” This description of the offender clearly presents this text as supplying the penalty for 18:21, which I have argued must have sexual overtones in the LXX version (hence “semen” rather than “offspring”; see commentary on 18:21). Here the sexual overtones of v. 2–3 are made explicit in the telic clause of v. 5, “so that he commits fornication with rulers” (ὥστε ἐκπορνεύειν αὐτὸν εἰς

commentary

351

τοὺς ἄρχοντας; v. 5, αυτον B A mins; αυτους “they” F Gött). There is no convincing reason to read this fornication as a metaphor for idolatry as it is in 17:7 (see sexual √ἐκπορνεύω in: 19:29; 21:9; prb. 20:6 below). In LeuB v. 2b, the lectio brevior γεγενημενων is also the lectio difficilior (not used elsewhere), although it is fully intelligible: “or any of the immigrants who were born in Israel” (ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν γεγενημένων προσηλύτων ἐν Ἰσραὴλ). This expands 18:21 in order to prohibit from this sexual action not only Israelites, but temporary residents who had been born among the Israelites (γεγενημενων “were born” B mins; προσγεγεννημενων A mins; προσγεγενημενων “attached themselves” [“come in” NETS 99] F Gött; for ‘immigrants’ see commentary on 16:29; here, απο B mins Latcod 103 Eth Syh; > A F Gött). For such activity, the Lord commands the death penalty to be carried out by “the nation in the land” (τὸ ἔθνος τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς λιθοβολήσουσιν αὐτὸν ἐν λίθοις, v. 2), probably here a reference to the Israelite nation at that time in the future. The shift to plural is ad sensum, “They must stone” (λιθοβολήσουσιν = Heb. pl.) the perpetrator “with stones” (cognate ἐν λίθοις; see Muraoka 2016: 642). Verses 2bβ–c would have sufficed to state the death penalty by stoning, which renders vv. 3–5 highly rhetorical in accentuating the Lord’s unstoppable and thorough judgment. Giving one’s semen to a ruler not only profanes the Lord’s holy name (18:21), but results “to defile my holy things [ἵνα μιάνῃ τὰ ἅγιά μου] and to profane the name of those consecrated to me [καὶ βεβηλώσῃ τὸ ὄνομα τῶν ἡγιασμένων μοι]” (20:3). The Lord announces “I will set my face against that man” (with determination added to the resumed constituent ἐγὼ ἐπιστήσω τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐπὶ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκεῖνον; see Muraoka 2016: 729). Again he pronounces, “I will set his face against” those natives responsible to kill him (v. 2c) who instead “overlook … in order to not kill him” (v. 5; see overlooking in 5:1). Presumably as a result (although paratactic), the Lord will completely destroy these offenders, whether by human agency (v. 2c), or perhaps in the case of the condoners, by unmediated divine killing (vv. 3, 5: transitive √ἀπόλλυμι “to destroy” GELS 79; “to destroy utterly” LEH §1080 gl. 1). Without any break in thought, in v. 6 this same divine punishment, which completes 19:31, is directed against the stressed pendent nominative, “a life or whoever follows ventriloquists or enchanters [ἐπακολουθήσῃ ἐνγαστριμύθοις ἢ ἐπαοιδοῖς] in order to commit fornication after them [ὥστε ἐκπορνεῦσαι ὀπίσω αὐτῶν]” (v. 6). This gives the impression of being a devolution from 19:31, “He must not be followed [ἐπακολουθήσεται] by ventriloquists” (see effaced B reading at 19:31). Here the ὥστε clause is probably not the result, but like the ὥστε clause in v. 5, it is the purpose (contra Wevers 1997: 317). Deliberate sexual activity in vv. 2–5 provokes the Lord’s identical judgment to that in v. 6 (see commentary on 19:31; v. 6, “completely destroy it [αὐτὴν] from its [αὐτῆς] people” maybe = SP f. ‫אתה‬, f. ‫ ≠ עמה‬MT m.). This may

352

commentary

lead readers to regard fornication with “ventriloquists or enchanters” (ἐνγαστριμύθοις ἢ ἐπαοιδοῖς, see 19:31) not merely as participation in black magic, but also in an associated sexual ritual (for a sexual ‘fornication’ [√ἐκπορνεύω] cultic ritual, see Num 25:1–3). However, metaphorical, or spiritual, fornication is still a possible reading of v. 6, which does not use the idiom ‘give his semen’ (as in vv. 2, 3, 4; cf. 20:27). In vv. 7–8, by adapting the imitatio Dei formula of 19:2, the Lord motivates the community to abstain from the enticements reviewed in vv. 2–6 (see transposed word order, v. 7, ἔσεσθε ἅγιοι, ὅτι ἅγιος ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν and, 19:2, ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν; cf. 11:44; possible awareness of the collective message of 20:7 in 1Pet 1:16, which quotes 19:2). Verse 8 augments the human responsibility in 11:44 and in 19:2 with the first of seven declarations by the Lord in LevLXX 20–22: “I am the Lord who sanctifies you” (ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων ὑμᾶς; see variations in Exod 31:13; Lev 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; Ezek 20:12; 37:28). The verbal aspect of the present participle here is probably durative-linear: “I am the Lord who continuously sanctifies you” (Muraoka 2016: 293–294; similarly in NT usage, ‘gnomic’ and ‘continuous,’ see Wallace 1997: 619–621). There is no human participation in v. 8c, as the Lord is the active subject of the transitive verb (act. √ἁγιάζω). The context is distant from chs. 4–9, 16, so one should not impose ‘forgives’ or ‘cleanses’ on ‘sanctifies’ (act. √ἁγιάζω, “to hallow, to make sacred, to sanctify, to consecrate to” LEH § 53). Also, the object, “sanctifies you [pl. ὑμᾶς]” (v. 8c) refers to the collective Israelite community (20:2a), and therefore v. 8c is not restricted to the Lord’s action toward the priests, as it is in this clause’s subsequent LevLXX occurrences (21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32). Instead, the Lord’s claim is subordinate to the imitatio Dei imperative (v. 7a) and asyndetically follows the hendiadys: “And you must keep my orders and do them” (v. 8a, καὶ φυλάξεσθε τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά; SP + “all [‫ ]כל‬my statutes” > MT LXX). Contextually, then, “I am the Lord who continuously sanctifies you” indicates that the Lord is active in the continuous process of transmuting the Israelite community into the likeness of his holy nature, even while they devote themselves to the Lord by obeying his ethical and cultic imperatives. However, the asyndetic juxtaposition of v. 8b after v. 7–8a likely implies not merely contemporaneity, but divine enablement to observe the Lord’s orders, a concept also attested in Deuteronomy (for Heb. “the Lord God will circumcise …” DeutLXX 30:6: “the Lord will purge your heart and the heart of your offspring, to love the Lord your God with your whole heart …” NETS 168; cf. Josh 24:19; Num 11:29). If so, then as far as the shape of the canon is concerned, LeviticusLXX precedes the new covenant prophetic texts with the notion of divine enablement to obey the divine word (Jer 31:31–34; Ezek 36:24– 28; see possible allusion in Phil 2:12–13; Heb 2:11).

commentary

353

Verses 7–8 not only refer back to vv. 2–6, but like the analogous text in 19:1– 2, the imitatio Dei formula in 20:7–8 immediately precedes the order to respect parents: “Let each one fear his father and his mother” 19:3a

“Person by person, whoever speaks wickedly with his father or his mother, by death let him be put to death. He has spoken wickedly with his father or his mother; he will be liable”. 20:9

With no other counterpart in chs. 18–19 or LevLXX, one may regard ‘speaking wickedly’ as one specific case of failing to fear one’s father and mother as prescribed in 19:2 (cf. Deut 21:18–21; and ExodLXX 21:16, which is quoted in Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10). The construction probably implies πρὸς by anacoluthon, so that the death penalty (as in vv. 2–6) is warranted for any son or daughter who speaks “wickedly” (κακῶς), perhaps even just “badly” or “severely,”with either his father or with his mother (alternative ἢ; κακῶς only 4× in PentLXX: Exod 22:27; Lev 19:14 [“speak badly”]; 20:9[2×]; with v. 9 “severely” NETS 100; but conflating the verb and advb.: “insultera” BA 174; “beleidigt” SD 122; “insultara” BG 274).

20:10–17 Death Penalty for Illicit Sexual Activity The outdented paragraph in LeuB at v. 10 is reasonable, given the reintroduction of the ‘shame-uncovering’ activities in vv. 10–21, but it is unclear why the LeuB scribe truncated this section and marked a new paragraph at v. 18 (see 20:18–27 below). Verses 10–21 pronounce the death sentence for a selection of the sexual violations enumerated in ch. 18. These verses initiate a chain of intertexts with ch. 18 that reveal, upon comparison, that ch. 20 not only identifies the perpetrators who must be put to death, but also makes certain adjustments to the description of the violation (underlined below) and expresses new rhetorical concerns that intensify the seriousness of the violation.

354

Violation in LeuB 18

commentary

Violation in LeuB 20

New rhetoric for the violation in LeuB 20

Perpetrators subject to death penalty in LeuB 20

18:20 “bed of semen to 20:10 “commits adulyour neighbor’s wife, to tery with a man’s wife or become defiled with her” who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife”

Adulterer and adulteress

18:8 “uncover the shame of your father’s wife; it is the shame of your father”

20:11 “sleeps with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s shame”

Possibly both man and father’s wife “let him be put to death [θανατούσθω]; both [ἀμφότεροι] are liable” (+ θανατω “by death” Bc A F Gött MT SP [‫ > ;]מות‬B* min; θανατουσθω B* min; θανατουσθωσαν “let them be put to death” Bc A F BrMcL Gött)

18:15 “uncover the shame of your daughter-in-law”

20:12 “sleeps with his daughter-in-law”

“for they have acted impiously”

Man and his daughterin-law

18:22 “sleep with a male 20:13 “sleeps with a male in a woman’s bed, for it is in a woman’s bed” an abomination”

“both [ἀμφότεροι] have committed an abomination” (ἀμφότεροι = MT w.o. ≠ SP w.o.)

Man and male (+ θανατω Bc Fc Gött MT SP [‫ > ;]מות‬B* A F* LatPsAmbr Lex mins Arab Sa Syh)

18:17 “uncover the shame of a woman and her daughter”

20:14 “takes a wife and her mother”

“it is lawlessness … and there must not be lawlessness among you”

Man and the woman, but implied by omission, not the mother “they must burn completely him and the women with fire”

18:23a “give your bed to any quadruped to become defiled with it”

20:15 “gives his sleeping with a quadruped”

Man and quadruped

18:23b “a woman must not stand before any quadruped to be mounted, for it is detestable”

20:16 “a woman who will approach any animal for her to be mounted by it”

Woman and quadruped

355

commentary (cont.) Violation in LeuB 18

Violation in LeuB 20

New rhetoric for the violation in LeuB 20

18:9 “your sister, from your father or your mother, whether she was born in the house or outside, you must not uncover her shame”

20:17 “takes his sister, “it is a disgrace” whether from his father or from his mother, and sees her shame, and she sees his shame … He has uncovered his sister’s shame”

Perpetrators subject to death penalty in LeuB 20 Man and his sister “must be eliminated before the sons of their relatives” (v. 17, prep. use of ἐνώπιον “before” [cf. adj. ἐνώπιος], once thought to be distinctive of LXX Greek, is attested in early second century BCE inscriptions: Aitken 2014: 83)

Certain euphemisms from ch. 19 are replaced with new euphemisms in ch. 20, for example: “uncover the shame of your father’s wife” (18:18) becomes “sleeps with his father’s wife” (20:11) (similarly: 18:15→20:12); and “give your bed [τὴν κοίτην] to any quadruped” (18:23a) becomes “gives his sleeping with [κοιτασίαν] with a quadruped” (20:15, or “sleeping-with” NETS 100; √κοιτασία not attested before the LXX, possibly a neol.: GELS 404; LEH § 5205; unfortunately removing the euphemism in his gloss: “sexual intercourse, copulation”: GELS 404). Or the euphemism is removed altogether: “bed of semen to your neighbor’s wife” (18:20) becomes “commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife” (20:10). The meaning “uncover the shame of a woman and her daughter” from 18:17 is retained, but its focus is inverted in 20:14: “takes a wife and her mother.” LeviticusLXX 20:10 names ‘adultery’ (√μοιχεύω) the act that is described in 18:20, namely, a man’s sexual intercourse with the wife of a man who is not his relative (see commentary on 18:20; also Ambrose, c. LeuB, may allude to 20:10, or Deut 22:22, in his retelling of the story of the woman caught in adultery from the secondary Greek text of John 7:53–8:11; see Lienhard 2001: 190). Incest, while not ‘adultery’ in the nomenclature of LevLXX, is of course prohibited throughout chs. 18 and 20. However, one might claim to have found a loophole in “you must not give your bed of semen to your neighbor’s wife [γυναῖκα τοῦ πλησίον]” (18:20), that is, that sexual intercourse is forbidden only with non-relatives who live nearby (from the advb. πλησίον ‘near, adjacent, adjoining’: LEH § 7275). LevLXX 20:10 closes any such loophole by adding a clause with the more comprehensive class: “commits adultery with a man’s wife [γυναῖκα ἀνδρός]” (see the ambiguity, “who is my neighbor?” in Luke 10:29).

356

commentary

For the achievement of the ‘new rhetoric’ in the above column, see the discussion of 20:18–27 below. Although the rhetoric of 18:23a–b is not repeated in 20:15–16, it is likely assumed in the new context. Also, the ‘new rhetoric’ column above does not convey all of the evocative language that results from the repeated nominative and accusative pendents and overspecifications through redundancy; for instance, in v. 16: “And a woman who will approach any animal for her to be mounted by it [pend. n: καὶ γυνὴ ἥτις προσελεύσεται πρὸς πᾶν κτῆνος βιβασθῆναι αὐτὴν ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ], you must kill the woman and the animal; by death she must be put to death [overpec.: θανάτῳ θανατούσθω]; they are liable [overspec.: ἔνοχοί εἰσιν]” (θανατουσθω B* mins LatAug Lev // v. 11; θανατουσθωσαν Bc A F Gött). Also, instead of always following the standard (Hebraic) death penalty idiom, “by death, X must be put to death” (as in 20:2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16), several verses demand the death sentence in more provocative terms or means: “must be eliminated before the sons of their relatives” (20:17); and “they must burn completely him and the women with fire” (20:14). These sexual ethics and their incurred death sentence are alluded to variously in the NT writings (see prb. allusion to v. 10 in John 8:5; possible allusion to v. 13, with 18:22, in Rom 1:27; and to v. 21, with 18:16, in Matt 14:3–4; Mark 6:18).

20:18–27 Penalties of Death and Childlessness, Motivations, Black Magic Verses 18–21 should not be detached from vv. 10–17 (see above), against the LeuB outdentation at v. 18 that initiates a new segment. Enigmatic outdentations such as this are infrequent in LeuB and therefore do not discredit the perceptive scribal interpretation evident in the manuscript’s format. Verses 18–27 are framed by the death penalty, opening with additional sexual violations (vv. 18–21), and closing with becoming a ventriloquist or enchanter (v. 27). Verses 22–26 assert yet another constellation of motivations to obey the Lord (earlier see in 18:1–5, 24–30; 19:2, 37), but here the imagery is more variegated, moving from orders and judgments, to detested actions of the nations, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to separation of clean and unclean, and ultimately to the imitatio Dei formula.

357

commentary

Violation in LeuB 18

Violation in LeuB 20

18:19 “approach a woman in the separation of her uncleanness to uncover her shame”

20:18 “sleeps with a woman who is sitting apart and uncovers her shame, he has uncovered her source, and she has uncovered her discharge of blood”

Man and woman “both of them must be eliminated from their generation”

18:12–13 “uncover the shame of your father’s sister … uncover the shame of your mother’s sister”

20:19 “uncover the shame of your father’s sister or of your mother’s sister because he has uncovered his close family” (ἀδελφῆς πατρός σου καὶ ἀδελφῆς μητρός σου = SP w.o. ≠ MT w.o.)

Probably man and sister “they must carry guilt”

18:6 “approach any houses of his flesh to uncover shame”

20:20 “sleeps with one related to him, he has uncovered the shame of the one related [τῆς συγγενοῦς] to him” (συγγενους B*; συγγενειας “kinship” [NETS 100] Bc A Gött)

“they will die without children” Possibly includes the man, any wife of his own, and his female relative (LXX < “they must bear their sin” ‫חטאם‬ ‫ ישׂאו‬1QpaleoLev-Numa [partly broken] MT SP)

18:16 “uncover the shame 20:21 “takes his brother’s of your brother’s wife” wife”

New rhetoric for the violation in LeuB 20

“it is his [αὐτοῦ] uncleanness” (αυτου B*unique; > Bc A F BrMcL Gött)

Perpetrators subject to death penalty in LeuB 20

“they will die without children” Possibly includes the man, any wife of his own, and his brother’s wife

In 20:18, the hyperbolic expression for capital punishment, “both of them must be eliminated from their generation” (ἐκ τῆς γενέας αὐτῶν; B* prb. = της γενεας F vs. του γενους A Gött) is synonomous with v. 17, “eliminated before the sons of their relatives [γένους],” further associating vv. 10–17 and 18–21 (“exterminated” in NETS 97–102). The final penalty, “they will die without children” (ἄτεκνοι ἀποθανοῦνται) in 20:20 and 20:21, may feel anticlimactic to modern readers com-

358

commentary

pared to the death penalty, but infertility was a horrible experience for women and men in ancient Israelite society, “a reason for lament, humiliation, and despair” (King and Stager 2001: 75). Now we can identify how the new rhetoric of 20:10–21, in comparision with its intertexts in ch. 18, functions literarily. First, 18:23a–b bans bestiality as a detestible act that defiles, but this language is not repeated in 20:15–16, not because it is no longer true, but because forbidden sexual acts with other humans are shown to be equally as vile. Chapter 20 supplies new rhetorical descriptions that equate the divine response to bestiality (in 18:23) with the divine response to illicit sex with another person: “acted impiously” (20:15); “abomination” (20:13); “lawlessness” (2× in 20:14); “disgrace” (20:17); and “uncleanness” (20:21). Yet, the main achievement of this added language in ch. 20 in LevLXX is in clarifying that these sexual acts do not merely ‘expose shame,’ which is the LXX expression of a social stigma, but after 19:2 and 20:8, deeply offend the holy Lord, who is both Israel’s ethical exemplar and the one who is sanctifying them. When taking seriously the canonical reciprocity between chs. 18 and 20, it becomes readily apparent that 20:2–5, 10–21 does not repeat the order or precise language of the violations in 18:6–23, but rather makes its own literary contribution. To begin with, five of the incestuous sexual actions from ch. 18 are not revisited in ch. 20 (18:7, 10, 11, 14, 18), which does not mean that the violators are granted impunity by the silence of ch. 20. Rather, this calls attention to the important function of 18:6 and 20:20. In the signal position, the prohibition in 18:6, “Person by person must not approach any houses of his flesh to uncover shame,” is elucidated in the ensuing cases of 18:7–18, but also is decisively broad so as to encompass other unstated cases. Similarly, yet in the penultimate position, the decree in 20:20 for, “Whoever sleeps with one related to him,” is clarified in specific cases (20:11, 12, 16, 19, 21), but semantically encapsulates both the cases of ch. 18 not articulated in ch. 20 (18:7, 10, 11, 14, 18), and others not articulated in either text. Therefore, chs. 18 and 20 invited successive generations to apply the prohibitions of adultery with non-relatives (18:20; 20:10), incest with any relative (18:6; 20:20), and bestiality (20:15–16) to forthcoming cases that would arise in the Israelite community. The non-Johannine late interpolation of John 7:53–8:11 noticeably interfaces with this conceptuality. In this story, Jesus regards adultery as a ‘sin’ and thereby upholds Lev 18:20, but rejects not merely Second Temple Jewish capital punishment prior to 40 CE (see Sifra, Sanhedrin 41a, but codified after 70CE), but also subverts faithful Jewish obedience to Lev 20:10. However, in the established Matthean tradition, Jesus expands ‘adultery’ to include looking at a woman with the purpose of lusting (see Exod 20:17; Deut 5:21), which, without repentance, will result not in the

commentary

359

capital punishment of Lev 20:10, but far worse, torment in hell (Matt 5:27–30; see 4:17; 5:20). Verses 22–26 are enclosed between the severe penalties of vv. 10–21 and v. 27. Because of the governing influence of 19:2 and 20:7–8 within chs. 18–26, one may conclude that the seminal orders in vv. 22–26 appear in the opening hendiatris in v. 22 and closing variation of the imitatio Dei formula in v. 26, “so keep all my orders and all my judgments, and you must do them” (φυλάξασθε πάντα τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ τὰ κρίματά μου, καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά, v. 22) and “you must be holy to me because I am holy” (ἔσεσθέ μοι ἄγιοι, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἅγιος, v. 26) (φυλαξασθε B A mins Eth Arab; φυλαξεσθε F Gött). These commands are actualized in Israel’s separation from the nations in three domains: ethically (‘customs’ √νόμιμος, prb. also cultically, vv. 22–23), which may refer to more, but not less than the contiguous sexual code in vv. 2b–21; geopolitically (v. 24), which alludes to the land inheritance promised in Exodus and anticipates the idyllic community in the land envisioned in Lev 25–26 (see ExodLXX 3:8, 17; 13:5; 33:3); and zoologically (v. 25), which refers to the taxonomy in ch. 11 for separating clean and unclean animals for eating and physical contact (in v. 22 ὑμῖν ἡ γῆ = w.o. 1QpaleoLev-Numa MT ≠ SP; v. 23, “customs of the nations [τῶν ἐθνῶν]” = SP ‫ ≠ הגוים‬MT ‫ ;הגוי‬v. 24, πάντων > MT SP; neut. “the nations” becomes an ad sensum masc. “who” οὓς; see Muraoka 2016: 653). The apparently gnomic and continuous aspect of the present attributive participle in 20:8c, “I am the Lord who [continuously] sanctifies you,” now shifts in 20:26 to an aorist attributive participle with a constative or consummative aspect: “And you must be holy to me because I am holy, the Lord your God who has [already] separated you from all the nations to be mine” (ἅγιος, Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν, ὁ ἀφορίσας ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εἶναι ἐμοί, v. 26; ἅγιος = MT > SP; after ἅγιος + ειμι Bc A F M’x mins Arm Sa; > B* V mins). Even before Israel obeys the imperative “Inherit the land!”, the Lord had already separated Israel from the nations, and now, starting at Mount Seina, Israel must imitate the Lord by separating themselves (v. 24, aor. impv. κληρονομησατε B mins vs. fut. ind. κληρονομησετε A F Gött). Verse 27 returns to capital punishment by stoning and thereby forms an inclusio with v. 2, encompassing the divine speech contents of 20:2b–27 (λίθοις λιθοβολήσατε = SP ‫ ≠ באבנים תרגמום‬MT ‫ ;באבן ירגמו‬λιθοβολησατε B A M’ mins Cyr Eth Sa; λιθοβολησετε F Gött). Sexual overtones are not apparent here (see 20:6). This final mention of ventriloquists and enchanters in the composition of Leueitikon culminates the motif: “He must not be followed by [οὐκ ἐπακολουθήσεται] ventriloquists, and you must not attach yourselves [οὐ προσκολληθήσεσθε] to enchanters, to defile yourselves by them. I am the Lord your God”. 19:31

360

commentary

“And a life or whoever follows [ἐπακολουθήσῃ] ventriloquists or enchanters in order to commit fornication after them, I will set my face against that life and will completely destroy him from his people”. 20:6

“And whether a man or a woman, whoever among them becomes [γένηται] a ventriloquist or an enchanter, by death let them both be put to death. Stone them with stones; they are liable”. 20:27

The motif begins with the culprit being followed and attaching to those who practice black magic resulting in defilement (19:31), then progresses to following those who practice black magic in order to commit fornication with them resulting in the Lord’s total destruction (20:6), to finally becoming one of them and eliciting the community’s liability to stone him (20:27). Of the three, the literary stress is on Lord’s imprecatory speech in 20:6, but the Lord’s command in 20:27 effectively transfers the onus from himself onto the community to execute those who have become a black magicians.

21:1–15 Ethics for the Holy Priests This LeuB section is comprehensible, beginning with the formulaic superscription (Lord→Mōysēs) and redundant quotative frame in B (λέγων, v. 1) and ending with the thematic, “I am the Lord who sanctifies them” (v. 15), which is segregated by the v. 16 superscription and new subject of approaching with physical defects (vv. 16–27; in v. 1, λεγων B et al. Gött; > 15-oII-72 C’’-46s mins Eth-CG Arab Co Gottc = MT). The intended audience is “the priests, the sons of Aarōn” (v. 1b), which suits the materials that deal with ethics tailored for the priests and the unique enticements they faced. The second redundant quotative frame, “and you must say to them” (καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς αὐτούς), further delays the discourse before the solemn prohibitions that are subdivided into six: no defiling “among their nation” (vv. 1d–4); no shaving or cutting for the dead (vv. 5–6); no marrying a prostitute or divorced woman (vv. 7–8); burning a priest’s daughter who fornicates (v. 9); as the anointed great priest, no mourning or exiting for the dead (vv. 10–12); marrying only a virgin from his own people (vv. 13– 15). Although the ethical and cultic directives are codified here for the first time as a collection, four of the six have antecedents in judicial precedent or in legislation already given to the entire community, not limited to the priests.

361

commentary

Statute

Rhetoric of defilement, penalty, divine motivation

1d They must not be defiled by lives among their nation, 2 except among their nearest family: for a father and mother and sons and daughters, for a brother 3 and virgin sister who is near to him, who had not been given in marriage to a man, he must be defiled for these 4 suddenly among his people unto his own profanation.

Judicial precedent or community statute in LevLXX 5:2; 11:43–44 (10:4–5, 16–20)

5 And you must not have a bald spot shaven on your head for the dead, and they must not have shaven the beard’s appearance, and they must not cut incisions in their flesh. (2p ξυρηθήσεσθε = SP MTQere ≠ MTKetib)

6 They must be holy to their God and not profane the name of their God, for they offer the Lord’s sacrifices as gifts of their God, and they must be holy. (“they must be holy [ἅγιοι]” = ‫ קדשים‬SP ≠ ‫ קדשׁ‬MT maybe 11QpaleoLeva)

19:27–28

7a They must not marry a woman who is a prostitute and who has been profaned, and a woman rejected by her husband.

7b He is holy to the Lord his God, 8 and he will sanctify him. He offers the gifts of the Lord your God; he must be holy because I, the Lord who sanctifies them, am holy. (“He is holy” B A M’ V x mins < οτι F Gött; 1o κυρίου > MT SP; ὑμῶν ≠ sg. MT SP)

No precedent

9a And if a daughter of a man, a priest, profanes herself by going out to commit fornication,

9b she profanes her father’s name; she must be burned completely over fire.

19:29

10 And the priest who is great among his brothers, when the anointing olive oil has been poured over his head and when he has been fulfilled to wear the garments, he must not unwrap his head and must not tear his garments. 11 And he must not enter for any dead life; he must not be defiled for his father nor for his mother. 12a And he must not exit from the holy things,

12b and he must not profane what has been consecrated by his God, for God’s holy olive oil of anointing is on him; I am the Lord.

10:6–7

362

commentary

(cont.) Statute

Rhetoric of defilement, penalty, divine motivation

13 He must not marry a virgin from his 15 and he must not profane his offspring own relatives, 14 and a widow and woman among his people. I am the Lord who sancrejected and profaned and a prostitute; tifies him. these women he must not marry. Instead, he must marry a wife who is a virgin from his people, (v. 13, after “He” + γυναικα Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A; before “and [καὶ] a prostitute” = SP > MT)

Judicial precedent or community statute in LevLXX No precedent

Within the collection, vv. 1d–4 are an anomaly with no rhetoric of defilement, penalty or divine motivation. More importantly, their form and meaning in LeuB are at first glance abstruse: “They must not be defiled by lives among their nation” (Ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς οὐ μιανθήσονται ἐν τῷ ἔθνει αὐτῶν, v. 1d). Although the lexeme from v. 11, “for his father nor for his mother” may or may not generate mental association with v. 2 (but less confidently than Wevers 1997: 331), careful Greek readers will recognize the nomenclature from earlier in the book: ἢ ψυχὴ ἥτις ἐὰν ἅψηται παντὸς πράγματος ἀκαθάρτου … ἧς ἂν ἁψάμενος μιανθῇ 5:3

τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς ἕρπουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ οὐ μιανθήσεσθε ἐν τούτοις, 11:43

καὶ οὐ μιανεῖτε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἑρπετοῖς τοῖς κεινουμένοις 11:44

These texts relate to becoming defiled by touching either a carcass or other unclean animal, so that one could deduce that 21:1d–4 will not allow a priest to touch any corpse from the hypernymous class ‘nation’ (√ἔθνος), but only the hyponymous class from his “nearest family” (ἐν τῷ οἰκείῳ τῷ ἔγγιστα), although

commentary

363

this will “suddenly [ἐξάπινα] among his people” result in “his own profanation” (εἰς result clause v. 4, εἰς βεβήλωσιν αὐτοῦ; v. 2, πατρὶ καὶ μητρὶ = SP w.o. ≠ MT w.o.; LXX SP < ‫ ו‬4QLeve MT LXXmss; + ου μιανθησεται Bmg F Gött; > B* A mins; possible allusion to 10:4–5, maybe 16–20). Verses 5–6 expand upon the prohibitions given to the holy community in 19:27–28; in both texts the likely causal ἐπὶ clauses expose necromancy as the intention: 27 You must not make a curl from the hair of your head, nor ruin the appearance of your beard. 28 And you must not make any incisions in your body for a soul [ἐπὶ ψυχῇ], nor make any tattooed letters on you. I am the Lord your God. 19:27–28

5 And you must not have a bald spot shaven on your head for the dead [ἐπὶ νεκρῷ], and they must not have shaven the beard’s appearance, and they must not cut incisions in their flesh. 6 They must be holy to their God and not profane the name of their God, for they offer the Lord’s sacrifices as gifts of their God, and they must be holy. 21:5–6; on tolerative passives, Muraoka 2016: 235–236

In v. 6, probably concerned to distance the Lord from the Egyptian deities who eat their food sacrifices, the translator repeatedly replaces the Hebrew “food [‫ ]לחם‬of their God” with the neutral term, “gifts [δῶρα] of their God” (repeated in 21:6, 8, 17, 21, 22; 22:25, so Wevers 1997: 334). Verses 7–8 and 13–15 relate to restricting priestly marriage and, of the collection of vv. 1d–15, these are the only two laws that have no antecedent. The Lord orders the sons of Aarōn that they must not take a prostitute (contra Hos 1:2) or a woman “who has been profaned [βεβηλωμένην], and a woman rejected by her husband [καὶ γυναῖκα ἐκβεβλημένην ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς],” likely referring to a woman who has been raped and a woman who was divorced (v. 7; these passive ptcs. are rare, but ‘raped’ supported by the sexual action that causes √βεβηλόω in 18:21; 19:29; and ‘divorced’ supported by ἐκβεβλημένην in Ezek 44:22). Repeating this forbidden triad, vv. 13–14 in LeuB uniquely specify that a priest “must not marry [οὐ λήμψεται] a virgin from his own relatives [τοῦ γένους],” but “a virgin from his people [τοῦ λαοῦ]” (ου B*unique; > Bc et al. Gött). There is no solecism in this LeuB reading. However, the contrast created between the semantic range of the two nouns is confusing, not only because it goes against the restrictive development in v. 1d (from hypernym ‘nation’ to hyponym ‘nearest family’), but also because LeuB teaches that the priest is commanded to marry outside his

364

commentary

relatives, that is, outside his “society of individuals with common beliefs and ancestry” (GELS 128; “of his own kin” NETS 101; “aus seinem Geschlecht (zur Frau)” SD 123, italics SD; “de sa lignée” BA 181; “de su linaje” BG 276). These two marriage restrictions in vv. 7–8 and 13–15 are the only ones in the collection substantiated by, “I, the Lord who sanctifies them, am holy” (ἅγιος ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς, v. 8) and “I am the Lord who sanctifies him” (ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτόν, v. 15), which together indicate that the priest’s selection of a spouse will either support or oppose the Lord’s sanctifying work (v. 8, αὐτούς = SP 11QpaleoLeva ≠ MT). From vv. 7, 13, Jerome (c. LeuB) infers that even priests could take more than one wife, a prerogative that he believes Paul (1 Tim 3:2) limits: “Even the very priests might at their own discretion enjoy the same license. He [Paul] gave commandment therefore that the priests of the church should not claim this liberty” (Schaff 2.6: 358). Verse 9 relates intertextually to the 19:29–30 law for all Israelite fathers and, by implication, for the coextensive class of all fathers living in Israel’s land: You must not profane your daughter by making her commit fornication, and the land will not commit fornication, and the land will be full of lawlessness. 19:29–30

And if a daughter of a man, a priest, profanes herself by going out to commit fornication, she profanes her father’s name; she must be burned completely over fire. 21:9

In reaction to those who force their daughters commit fornication, the land by lex talionis commits fornication and fills up with lawlessness, but for priests who do the same, “she profanes her father’s name” (τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς αὐτὴ βεβηλοῖ) and she must be “burned completely over fire” (ἐπὶ πυρὸς κατακαυθήσεται) like a human whole burnt offering (see possible allusion to v. 9 in the now lost leaves of RevB 17:16; 18:8). Reflecting on v. 9, John Chrysostom (c. LeuB) teaches, “But why speak of the men engaged in the ministry? Even the daughters of priests, who are of no significance for the priestly office, incur a far more severe penalty than do others for the same sins, because of their fathers’ dignity. The offense is the same (it is prostitution in both cases) when committed by them and the daughters of ordinary people, but their punishment is far greater. You see how thoroughly God proves to you that he demands much more punishment of the ruler than of the subjects” (Lienhard 2001: 191; cf. Schaff 1.9: 117).

commentary

365

Verses 10–12 inner-biblically codify the prior mandate of Mōsēs (LeuB orth.) to Aarōn and his remaing sons after the death of Nadab and Abioud in ch. 10: 6 Then Mōsēs said to Aarōn and Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons who remained, “You must not remove the turban from your head, and you must not tear your garments so that you do not die and wrath will be over the entire assembly. Your brothers, the entire house of Israel, must weep over the burning by which they were burnt by the Lord. 7 And you must not go out of the door of the tent of testimony so that you do not die, for the anointing olive oil from the Lord is on you.” And they did according to the word of Mōsēs. 10:6–7

10 And the priest who is great among his brothers [ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ μέγας ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ], when the anointing olive oil has been poured over his head and when he has been fulfilled to wear the garments, he must not unwrap his head and must not tear his garments. 11 And he must not enter for any dead life; he must not be defiled for his father nor for his mother [καὶ ἐπὶ πάσῃ ψυχῇ τετελευτηκυίῃ οὐκ εἰσελεύσεται, ἐπὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ οὐ μιανθήσεται]. 12 And he must not exit from the holy things, 12 and he must not profane what has been consecrated by his God, for God’s holy olive oil of anointing is on him; I am the Lord. 21:10–12

What is presented as the idea of Mōsēs in response to the death of his nephews is now taken up and reinstated by the Lord as an enduring statute for all sons of Aarōn. The fundamental addition to the new law is found in v. 10a and v. 11, which clarify that not any anointed and fulfilled son of Aarōn (as in chs. 8–10), but “the priest who is great among his brothers” (i.e., the high priest) must not exit the tent to ‘enter’, that is visit, a corpse and consequently become defiled, even if that corpse is that of his own father or mother (for the gloss ‘visit’ for √εἰσέρχομαι, see LEH §2685; see possible allusion in Luke 9:59–60). This also means vv. 10–12 restrict the great priest from the prerogative granted to the other priests in vv. 1–4. Jerome (c. LeuB) proffers his explanation for why this restriction was placed on the anointed high priest: “In this same book, Leviticus, there is a provision which may perhaps strike some as cruel, yet is necessary to faith: the high priest is forbidden to approach the dead bodies of his father and mother, of his brothers and of his children; to the end, that no grief may distract a soul engaged in offering sacrifice to God, and wholly devoted to the Divine mysteries” (Schaff 2.6: 169).

366

commentary

21:16–23 No Blemished Priest May Approach the Lord’s Sacred Spaces As customary, the LeuB scribe marks a new section at the superscription in 21:16, which is formulaic (Lord→Mōysēs, with redundant quotative frame λέγων), but this is followed by the distinctive aor. imperative and singular audience, “Speak to Aarōn” (Εἰπὸν Ἀαρών), which occurs in LevLXX only in chs. 21:17 and 22:2. If 21:1b–15 was to be conveyed by Mōysēs to and for the all the Aarōnic priests, 21:17–23 was to be conveyed by Mōysēs to and for Aarōn, who himself was responsible to convey the message to his relatives (similarly, but √λαλέω: 10:8; 16:2; 17:2; also see 10:3, 6–7). The unit is redundant in its singular message represented by its two Leitworte: no physically blemished (√μῶμος) Aarōnid will approach (√προσέρχομαι, w/ ‘draw near’ √ἐγγίζω, √προσεγγίζω) to bring the Lord’s sacrificial gifts to the altar or even come close to the outside curtain of the holy place (√μῶμος: 21:7; 18, 21[2×], 23; √προσέρχομαι: vv. 17, 18, 21, 23; 22:3). The noun “blemish” (with NETS 100–103) is introduced to PentLXX here in Lev 21:17–24:20, in which it occurs 10 times as the antonym of the frequently used alpha privative formation ἄμωμος ‘without blemish,’ which only describes acceptable sacrificial animals (23× in chs. 1–23, but not ch. 21; in PentLXX also in NumLXX 19:2; DeutLXX 15:21[2×]; 17:1). In LeviticusLXX the verb ‘approach’ (√προσέρχομαι), when used of drawing near to the Lord’s “holy things” (altar, sacrifices, sacrificial food) or “holy place” (curtain, et al.), occurs only here in chs. 21–22 and elsewhere only in chs. 9–10 (9:5, 7, 8; 10:4, 5). This is likewise true of the synonyms ‘draw near’ √ἐγγίζω (10:3; 21:3, 21, 23) and ‘bring near’ √προσεγγίζω (also cultic setting in 2:8, and in 21:21, ου προσεγγιει B* A [cf. ου προσεγγισει d t; ουκ εγγιει Bc F Gött], which does not need to be read as a redundancy: “come near to bring near”: see LEH § 7603 gl. 2). The text is highly rhetorical with many preverbally stressed subjects and objects, and with the fourfold repetition of “X [with a blemish] must not approach/draw near,” whether with the good intention of offering sacrifices (vv. 17, 21), or for an unspecified reason (vv. 18, 22; intentionality via purpose infinitives: v. 17 προσφέρειν, v. 21 τοῦ προσενεγκεῖν, anarth. προσενεγκεῖν; also v. 21 = MT w.o. ≠ SP w.o., but τῷ θεῷ σου ≠ ‫ יהוה‬MT SP). The restriction of vv. 17–23 is not merely on individuals “from Aarōn’s offspring” (v. 21, ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος Ἀαρὼν), or more broadly “from relatives among your families” (v. 17, ἐκ τοῦ γένους σου εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν), but ostensibly non-priests as well, “any person [πᾶς ἄνθρωπος] who has a blemish in him” (v. 18). The implication of the singular intended recipient (v. 17a) is that Aarōn alone, as both great (Engl. ‘high’) priest and patriarch of his priestly household, was liable not merely to teach the restriction (see 10:11; 15:31), but to ensure personally that his extended fam-

commentary

367

ily members, or any person, with defects did not approach the Lord’s altar or holy place. The sole exception is that Aarōn’s descendents with physical defects were still permitted, even required by the probable imperatival future: “he must eat [φάγεται] God’s gifts, the holies of holies, and from the holy things” (v. 22; “from the holy things” here and regularly elsewhere is a partitive gen.: Muraoka 2016: 134). This supports normative priestly consumption inside the courtyard of the tent, as prescribed in ch. 6, “in a holy place it must be eaten, in the court of the tent of testimony” (ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ βρωθήσεται, ἐν αὐλῇ τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου), but now, in this case, not near the altar or the outer-curtain of the holy place (6:16; also 6:26; 8:31). The blemishes detailed in vv. 18–20 include certain birth defects: “a lame person or blind or one who has a mutilated nose” (ἄνθρωπος χωλός ἢ τυφλὸς ἢ κολοβόρειν). Although “cut ear” (ὠτότμητος) could refer to a birth defect (“ear slit” Wevers 1997: 341), it could also refer to an accidential deep laceration or severed ear (as “mit abgehauenen Ohr” SD 122; cf. “l’ oreille coupée” BA 182; likewise NETS 101; BG 276). The list also mentions: “a crushed hand or a crushed foot or a crooked back or white specks on the eye or an infection in his eyes, or a person who has on him an uncontrolled itch or a lichen skin growth or has one testicle” (σύντριμμα χειρὸς ἢ σύντριμμα ποδός, ἢ κυρτὸς ἢ ἔφηλος ἢ πτίλος τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, ἢ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ἂν ᾖ ἐν αὐτῷ ψώρα ἀγρία ἢ λιχὴν ἢ μόνορχις, vv. 19–20). The precise diagnoses of several of the terms in vv. 18–20 escape us today (LEH thinks four are neologisms), but vv. 19–20 likely include broken bones and surely include diseases or disorders acquired by young or old people who were born without physiological defects (see glosses by Wevers 1997: 341–343: “fractured hand or foot … eye disease in which white specks appear … skin disease of some kind …”; v. 20, “disease with respect to his eyes [τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς]” = ‫ בעיניו‬SP ≠ sg. MT; for this acc. of respect, see Muraoka 2016: 185). This means that the Lord is not discriminating against those with birth defects, a misconception that is at odds with the Lord’s resolve in the book to protect such persons: “You must not speak badly about the deaf, nor put a trap before the blind, and you must fear the Lord your God. I am the Lord your God” (LeuB 19:14). Furthermore, of the four types of special needs, only cases of physical and sensory-impaired are mentioned. No descriptor matches what physicians identify today as developmental (Down syndrome, autism, etc.) or what psychologists identify as emotional and behavioral (clinical depression, anxiety disorders, etc.). Verses 18–20, therefore, place no limitations on priests who displayed only developmental or emotional and behavioral disorders. Moreover, these verses lend no support to the rabbinic interpretation that physical defects must have resulted from personal or parental sin (see John

368

commentary

9:1–3; Ezek 18:20; Babylonian Talmud, b. Shabbat 55a). Most importantly, the prerogative of proximity to the Lord’s sacred spaces is not tantamount to either ethical holiness (chs. 18–20, esp. 21:1d–15) or a cleansed-forgiven condition (Lev 16:6, 11, 17, 33), although both are preconditions placed on the priests to be able to approach the Lord and still survive (i.e., 10:1–3; 16:2). In other words, physical proximity in cultic service is not interchangeable with spiritual nearness to him (explicated by Isa 1:11–18, et al.; physical proximity is enjoyed, but is equally a metaphor for spiritual nearness to the Lord: PssLXX 64:5; 83:2–13; 72:17–28; 145:18). Without decoding its ideology for culturally removed readers, LevLXX 21:17–23 presumes and defends the Lord’s prerequisite that his cultic representatives and their families, just like his sacrificial animals, must be physiologically whole. Violating this prerequisite is presented in v. 23 as a counteraction to the Lord’s gnomic and continuous sanctification of his priests: “and he must not profane the holy place of his God because I am the Lord who is sanctifying them [ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς]” (cf. different contexts for ὁ ἁγιάζων in 20:8; 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32). Verses 16–23 have a rich reception history. For Gregory of Nazianzus (c. LeuB), the priest’s physical wholeness was symbolic of his internal condition: “I know also that not even bodily blemishes in either priests or victims passed without notice, but that it was required by the law that perfect sacrifices must be offered by perfect men—a symbol, I take it, of integrity of soul” (Schaff 2.7: 463). Jerome (c. LeuB) cites several lines from the text to support his tropological interpretation that a priest’s physical blemish or uncleanness symbolizes a bishop’s capacity to harm God’s people spiritually: “And rightly; for since the bishop is appointed in the Church that he may restrain the people from error, how great will the error of the people be when he himself who teaches errs. How can he remit sins, who is himself a sinner? How can an impious man make a man holy?” (Schaff 2.6: 734). Even more clearly than the Heb. text, IsaiahLXX subverts the exclusion of a man who “has one testicle” (μόνορχις) in LevLXX 21:20 (and Deut 23:1): “To the eunuchs [τοῖς εὐνούχοις], as many as keep my sabbaths and choose the things that I want and hold fast my covenant, I will give to them, in my house [ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ μου] and within my wall, an esteemed place [τόπον ὀνομαστὸν]” (Isa 56:5 NETS; “monument” for Heb. ‫יד‬, the noun for ‘hand’ and euphemistically ‘penis’ in Isa 57:8, does not necessarily mean the eunuch himself could enter). In continuity with Isaiah, Jesus apparently esteems “eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν, Matt 19:12). Jesus also heals the “blind and the lame in the temple” (τυφλοὶ καὶ χωλοὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, Matt 21:14), which by allusion to Lev 21:18, may symbolize the inbreaking of the kingdom of God as removing barriers for those formerly distanced from

commentary

369

God’s presence (as with the removal of circumcision and Sabbath from Gentile believers in Acts 10:9–11:18, see Reception; also Acts 3:1–10).

21:24–22:16 No Blemished or Non-Israelite Priest May Eat the Holy Things By marking a new paragraph at 21:24, the LeuB scribe identifies the distinct LeuBA reading at v. 24 as the narrative preface to the superscription of 22:1 (similarly 1:1; 16:1), rather than as Mōysēs’ transmission of the contents of the last, or several of the last, divine speeches: “Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs and Aarōn and his sons and to all sons of Israel,” rather than, “And Mōysēs spoke to Aarōn and his sons and all the sons of Israel” (NETS 101; κυριος προς μωυσην και B*vid A minvid; μωυσης προς Bc [sup ras] F Gött; “all sons” παντας υιους B A x-509 mins ≠ “all the sons” παντας τους υιους F Gött). While the LeuB preface states “all the sons of Israel” (21:24), the intended audience is refined further in the superscription, “Aarōn and his sons” (Ἀαρὼν καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ, v. 2a), which is accurate inasmuch as they must also convey the instructions to their extended family members, and those who thought they were family members, who would be affected directly. The unit is framed by the generic warning in v. 2 and vv. 15–16 to not profane the Lord’s ‘holy things’, a Leitwort in vv. 2–16 that is an appellative for the edible sacrificial offerings (in 22:2–16: art. + pl. √ἅγιος ‘the holy things’: 22:2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 15, 16; but same referent, anarth. v. 10[2×], 14; sg. v. 14). To be clear, ‘the holy things’ refers here not to the meat of the deliverance sacrifice that any clean non-priest person could eat (LevLXX 7:9), but specifically the priestly portion: the remainder of the fine flour sacrifice (2:3, 10; 6:39–40), the shoulder (choice portion) of the deliverance sacrifice (7:21–26), the meat of the sin sacrifice (6:36–40), and in one text, surprisingly, “the skin of the whole burnt offering” (6:38, see commentary). The extension of the priestly portion beyond the male priests to their family members was mentioned by Mōysēs in a passing remark to Aarōn, Eleazar and Ithamar after the death of Nadab and Abihu: “And it will be for you and for your sons and for your daughters [καὶ ταῖς θυγατράσιν σου] with you as an enduring ordinance” (10:15). The generality of this remark necessitates 22:2–14, which defines who is eligible and who is ineligible to eat the priestly family portions. One could also notice inner-frames in v. 3 and v. 14, insofar as verse 9 is a generic and middle-passive rhetorical judgment, but only v. 3 and 14 specifiy a penalty, one, against “any person”/“whatever person,” and two, to be carried out by active human agency. This inner-frame can only be argued semantically, whereas shared intertexts validate the connection between v. 2 and

370

commentary

v. 14 (Jerome, c. LeuB, associates the danger of eating in ignorance in v. 14 with eating the Lord’s Eucharist in ignorance, without caution: Lienhard 2001: 192). Verses 4–8 enumerate classes of defiled Arōnids unfit to eat the holy things, whereas vv. 10–13 shift to classes of foreigners unauthorized to eat the holy things. In the center, verse 9 resonates intertextually with v. 2 and v. 15. 2 Speak to Aarōn and his sons, and let them pay attention because of the holy things of the sons of Israel [ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ] that they consecrate to me [ἁγιάζουσίν μοι], and they must not profane [οὐ βεβηλώσουσιν] my holy name; I am the Lord [ἐγὼ Κύριος] (22:2). 3 Say to them: Any person [πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν] in your generations from your offspring who approaches the holy things [προσέλθῃ … πρὸς τὰ ἅγια], which the sons of Israel consecrate to the Lord, and his uncleanness is on him or that life must be eliminated from me. I am the Lord your God (22:3). (+ παντος Bc A F Gött MT ‫ > ;כל‬Β* b mins; “or” η B Cyr min Arm; > A F Gött) [Vv. 4–8: Classes of Defiled Arōnids] 9 And they must keep my observances so that they may not through them receive guilt and die because of it, and if they will profane [ἐὰν δὲ βεβηλώσουσιν] them. I am the Lord, the God who sanctifies them [ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς]. (αυτο B* A min Arm; αυτα Bc A Fa Gött; δε B A mins Eth > 931 Gött; βεβηλωσουσιν B mins y-121; βεβηλωσιν A min; βεβηλωσωσιν Gött) [Vv. 10–13: Classes of Unauthorized Foreigners] 14 And whatever person [ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν] eats holy things [φάγῃ ἅγια] out of ignorance, then he must add one-fifth to it and give the holy thing to the priest (22:14). 15 And they must not profane [οὐ βεβηλώσουσιν] the holy things of the sons of Israel [τὰ ἅγια τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ], which they separate for the Lord [ἀφαιροῦσιν τῷ κυρίῳ], 16 and bring on themselves lawlessness of a sinful error, by eating their holy things, because I am the Lord [ἐγὼ Κύριος] who sanctifies them [ὁ ἁγιάζων αὐτούς] (22:15).

371

commentary

Inside this framework, vv. 4–13 enumerate the classes of persons within the Aarōnic extended priestly family who, for various stated reasons, are barred from ingesting, even approaching, the holy sacrificial offerings. Verses 4–8 are intertextual reappropriations of antecedent LeviticusLXX laws, whereas vv. 10– 13 inner-biblically develops the ideations of GenesisLXX, ExodusLXX and LeviticusLXX. Awareness of dependence on prior law may be intimated in the unparalleled command in LevLXX 21:2 to Mōysēs, “let them pay attention [προσεχέτωσαν] because of the holy things of the sons of Israel,” that is, ensure that Aarōn and his family are careful to apply what the Lord has spoken about the holy things (√προσέχω in LevLXX only in 21:2). Intertexts earlier in LeviticusLXX

Intertexts in LeuB 22:4–8

13:2–59* ‘skin disease’

4 And as for a man from the offspring of Aarōn the priest, and this man has a skin disease

15:2–33* ‘spermatorrhea’

4 or spermatorrhea,

7:11 “And a life who touches any unclean thing, whether from human uncleanness or from unclean quadrupeds or any unclean abomination” (see also 21:1 ‘be defiled by lives’, possibly also 11:24–40* ‘touches’ [unclean animal life])

4 And the one who touches anything of a life’s uncleanness

15:16–18 ‘bed of semen’ 11:20–44* ‘crawling things’

Appropriation for priestly eating in LeuB 22:4–8 4 he must not eat from the holy things until he has been cleansed.

6 a life who touches them will be unclean until the evening. He must 4 or a person whose bed of semen not eat from the holy things unless he has washed his body in water. 7 comes out of him, And the sun may set and he will be 5 whoever touches any unclean clean, and then he must eat from crawling thing that defiles him the holy things because it is his (“unclean” ἀκαθάρτου = 4QLeve SP bread. ‫ > טמא‬MT)

5:3 “or he touches some uncleanness of a person, from any of his uncleanness in which he became unclean by touching” (also 7:11)

5 or because of a person by whom he defiles himself, according to all his uncleanness, (“or” η F 931 Gött; > B A min)

17:15 “eats a carcass or what has been caught by wild animals” (also 5:2; 7:24; cf. 11:8–40)

8 He must not eat a carcass and what was caught by wild animals, to defile himself by them; I am the Lord.

372

commentary

Without vv. 4–8, the priests had every Levitical text needed to deduce that contact with these contagions would have rendered the priests unclean and unfit for their contact, namely, consumption of the holy sacrifices. The central texts was LevLXX 7:9–11, which emphatically prohibited, one, clean priests and clean non-priests from eating a deliverance sacrifice that had contracted uncleanness, and two, unclean persons from eating a clean deliverance sacrifice. The prerequisites to reestablish priestly permission to eat were, as well known from LeviticusLXX 11–15, bodily washing, then waiting until evening, which in LeuB is restated erroneously in v. 6 probably due to haplography; “And the sun may set [δύ ὁ ἥλιος]” (δυ B*; δυση mins; δυνη mins; δυθη 931; δυη Bc rell Gött). The omission of ‘washing clothes’ would be assumed from LevLXX 11–15, given that they had to be cleansed and wash their bodies (v. 4, 6). The distinction between the contagions “anything of a life’s uncleanness” (v. 4) and “because of a person by whom he defiles himself” (v. 5) is not clear within the context of ch. 22, but in 21:1, “be defiled by lives,” which elusively referred to corpses, may illuminate v. 4, so that v. 5 refered instead to contact with an unclean living person (cf. Wevers 1997: 348). In sum, nothing is new in vv. 4–8, but this text ensures that the priests and their families who were hungry and did not want to bathe and fast until evening did not create a legal loophole that never existed (see possible allusion in Mark 7:1–15 where Jesus supplants honored hand-washing traditions; see Kazen 2013: 176– 179). Antecedent law in GenesisLXX–LeviticusLXX ExodLXX 12:43 “This is the law of the Passover. No foreigner [πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς] will eat of it” ExodLXX 29:33 “a foreigner [ἀλλογενὴς] must not eat from these things [priests’ fulfillment offerings], for they are holy”

Appropriation for foreigners eating in LeuB 22:10– 13 (with LevLXX in important lexemes)

10 And no foreigner [πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς] will eat holy things.

ExodLXX 12:45 “A temporary resident [πάροικος] or a hired worker [μισθωτὸς] must not eat of it”

10 A temporary resident [πάροικος] of a priest or a hired worker [μισθωτὸς] must not eat holy things,

ExodLXX 12:44 “every domestic slave of anyone or one bought with money [ἀργυρώνητον] you must circumcise him, and then he must eat from it” GenLXX 17:13 “and the one bought with money [ὁ ἀργυρώνητος] must be circumcised”

11 but if a priest acquires a life by acquisition of money [ἔνκτητον ἀργυρίου], he must eat from his bread;

commentary

373

(cont.) Antecedent law in GenesisLXX–LeviticusLXX

Appropriation for foreigners eating in LeuB 22:10– 13 (with LevLXX in important lexemes)

GenLXX 17:13 “The homeborn of your household [ὁ οἰκογενὴς τῆς οἰκίας σου] and the one bought with money must be circumcised with circumcision, and my covenant must be on your flesh as an everlasting covenant” (also 17:12, 23, 27)

11 and his homeborn ones [οἰκογενεῖς αὐτοῦ], they also must eat of his bread.

ExodLXX 12:43 “This is the law of the Passover. No foreigner [πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς] will eat of it” ExodLXX 29:33 “a foreigner [ἀλλογενὴς] must not eat from these things [priests’ fulfillment offerings], for they are holy”

12 And if a daughter of a person, of a priest, belongs to a foreign [ἀλλογενεῖ] husband, she must not eat from the first fruits of the holy thing.

LevLXX 6:18 “Every male thing among the priests must eat it [fine flour sacrifice].” LevLXX 6:26 “The priest who offers it up must eat it [meat of the sin offering].” LevLXX 6:36 Every male among the priests must eat them [meat of ram for sinful error]; in a holy place they must eat them. They are holies of holies.

13 And if a priest’s daughter becomes a widow or is cast out, but she did not have offspring, she must return to her paternal home, just as in her youth; she must eat from her father’s bread [ἀπὸ τῶν ἄρτων τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς].

As explained below, probably not: LevLXX 7:9 “Everyone clean will eat meat [of the deliverance sacrifice].” Exod 12:43 “This is the law of the Passover. No foreigner [πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς] will eat of it”

13 And no foreigner [πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς] will eat from them.

Exod 29:33 “a foreigner [ἀλλογενὴς] must not eat from these things [priests’ fulfillment offerings], for they are holy”

The trajectory of the law of the Passover celebrants in ExodLXX12:43–45 is, along with ExodLXX 29:33, extended to LevLXX 22 in order to prohibit the ‘foreigner’ (√ἀλλογενής), ‘temporary resident’ (√πάροικος) and ‘hired worker’ (√μισθωτὸς). In v. 10, the noun √πάροικος (for ‫ תושׁב‬in 22:10; 25:6, 23, 35, 40, 45, 47[2×]), a synonym of √προσήλυτος (Thiessen 2013: 333–350), in Koine inscriptions from the 3rd century forward is used for ‘stranger,’ ‘temporary resident,’ and ‘resident alien’ (Lee 1983: 60–61). However, its usage in the LevLXX contexts is not ‘stranger,’ and ‘resident alien’ (NETS 101–104) connotes foreign origins, which was not necessarily the case. Closer is ‘temporary resident’ (Lee 1983: 60 gl.

374

commentary

1) or ‘sojourner’ (Thiessen 2013: 333–350), so that the genitive πάροικος ἱερέως “a temporary resident of a priest,” a phrase found only here in the LXX, connotes a non-local residing temporarily in the priest’s household. By contrast, in v. 11, those who by implication had foreign origins, but who were ‘homeborn’ (√οἰκογενής) or acquired “by acquisition of money” (ψυχὴν ἔνκτητον ἀργυρίου, see √ἀργυρώνητον) were assimilated into the priest’s household as permanent residents and were permitted to partake with the biological family members in the priestly sacrificial portions. By implication from the abiding authority of GenLXX 17, if they were male, they would have been circumcised. Noticably absent from vv. 10–13 is the ‘immigrant’ (√προσήλυτος) who features prominently in LevLXX (22× in LevLXX 16–25) and is given special attention in ExodLXX 12:48–49 where he, and presumably his family, could eat the Passover meal after the Israelites circumcised the males of his household: “But if any immigrant should draw near to you to observe the Passover to the Lord, you must circumcise every male of his, and then he will draw near to observe it, and he will be just like a native of the land. No uncircumcised man will eat of it” (ExodLXX 12:48, transl. mine; cf. Heb. passive ‫“ זכר המול לו כל־‬all his males must be circumcised”). The text of LevLXX 22:10–13 is silent as to whether a circumcised immigrant (√προσήλυτος), who had taken up residence in Israel and become a client of the priest, could eat the sacrificial offerings designated for the priestly family (see discussion on a client immigrant in 16:29). The likelihood is that the circumcised, clean immigrant could eat the nonpriestly portion of the deliverance sacrifice (as LevLXX 7:9), but not the priestly portion, given that even a client immigrant had not become a permanent resident of the priest’s household. This conclusion is an argumentum ex silentio. As an ideological expansion on ExodLXX 12:43, the priest’s daughter who has a foreigner as a husband is, in addition to her husband, also barred from eating “the first fruits of the holy thing” (LevLXX 22:12). The precise meaning of “the first fruits of the holy thing” (τῶν ἀπαρχῶν τοῦ ἁγίου) in LeuB is elusive, but could restrict her from the fine flour type of “first fruits gift” (δῶρον ἀπαρχῆς), or the first portion at the table, but more likely, would have been taken as a metonym that restricts her from any priestly portion whatsoever (του αγιου Bunique; των αγιων A F Gött). Total restriction was the conclusion that Jerome (c. LeuB) drew, “If on the other hand they take other husbands they are to be kept apart both from their father and from the sacrifices and are to be counted as strangers” (Schaff 2.6: 562). Verse 13 is not necessarily bound to the v. 12, so that if her husband, foreign or native, dies or divorces her, she can return to her father’s household, “just as in her youth.” The clause “but she did not have

375

commentary

offspring” (σπέρμα δὲ μὴ ἦν αὐτῇ) has a causal notion, that is, she returns home because she had no sons to take her into their households (ην B A b x min; η F 931 Gött; see discussion by Wevers 1997: 352). Upon her return, she is once again free to eat “from her father’s bread” [ἀπὸ τῶν ἄρτων τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς] (a permissive future is probably conceived here, see Muraoka 2016: 288). This expression is a metonym, not for the meat of the deliverance sacrifice that all Israelites would eat (as LevLXX 7:9), but specifically the priestly portion.

22:17–25 No Blemished Animal May Be Sacrificed to the Lord The LeuB unit is enclosed by two standard superscriptions in vv. 17 and 26 (Lord→Mōysēs, with r.q. frame λέγων), but the intended priestly audience of the last three divine speeches (see 21:1, 17; 22:2) has now reverted back to include “the the entire assembly” (πάσῃ συναγωγῇ Ἰσραὴλ) which is a metonym for the same Israelite audience in LevLXX 17–20 (a second r.q. frame in 22:18b). This shift to the entire assembly must be deliberate because the adjective “unblemished” (√ἄμωμος), which was a frequent prerequisite for the people’s sacrificial animals in chs. 1–7, is finally illustrated in here (√ἄμωμος 13× in LevLXX 1–5; elsewhere chs. 9[2×], 12[1×], 14[1×], 23[3×] and here in 22:19, 21). Such illustration is necessary because the Lord had commanded not exclusively the priests, but “the sons of Israel to bring their gifts before the Lord in the Seina wilderness” (7:28). Together with ‘unblemished’ (√ἄμωμος), which qualifies only animals in LevLXX, its antonym ‘blemish’ (√μῶμος), which qualifies both animals and humans in LevLXX, form a Leitwort pair that controls the subject matter of vv. 17–25 (here √μῶμος, vv. 20, 21, 25). Verses 18c–25 draw an analogy between the Aarōnic priests who must be “without a blemish [μῶμος]” in order to approach the altar and holy place (21:17b–23) and the Lord’s acceptable animal sacrifices that must be “without a blemish [μῶμος]” (22:18c–25).

Aarōnic priests “without a blemish [μῶμος]” In LevLXX 21:17b–23

Animal sacrifices “without a blemish [μῶμος]” in LevLXX 22:18c–25

16 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 17 “Say to Aarōn:

17 Then the Lord spoke to Mōysēs, saying: 18 “Speak to Aarōn and to his sons and to the entire assembly of Israel, and you must say to them:

A person from your relatives among your families,

Person by person from the sons of Israel or from the immigrants who are attached to them in Israel,

376

commentary

(cont.) Aarōnic priests “without a blemish [μῶμος]” In LevLXX 21:17b–23

Animal sacrifices “without a blemish [μῶμος]” in LevLXX 22:18c–25 whoever brings his gifts according to any confession of theirs or according to any choice of theirs, whatever they might bring to God as a whole burnt offering, 19 acceptable to you are: an unblemished male from the herds of cattle and from the sheep and from the goats. (since no clear line in B* to mark the final ν, then an error “whoever” ος α B* vs. ος αν Swete et al.; “to God” θεω B A F 952 mins x Cyr Gött; κυριω b Göttc MT ‫)ליהוה‬

if such a person has a blemish in him [ἐν αὐτῷ μῶμος], he must not approach to bring the gifts of his God.

20 They must not bring to the Lord anything that has a blemish in it [μῶμον ἐν αὐτῷ], because it must not be acceptable to you. 21 And whatever person brings a deliverance sacrifice to the Lord, expressing a vow according to a choice, or among your festivals, from the herds of cattle or from the sheep, it must be unblemished to be acceptable; (ἢ ἐν ταῖς ἑορταῖς ὑμῶν > 4QLevb MT SP; “according to choice” see Heb. variations: Ulrich 2010: 128)

18 Any person who has a blemish in him [ἐν αὐτῷ μῶμος] must not approach:

there must be no blemish in it [μῶμος οὐκ ἔσται ἐν αὐτῷ]. (+ ‫ ו‬SP > LXX MT)

a person who is lame or blind [τυφλὸς] or has a mutilated nose or cut ear [ὠτότμητος], 19 a person who has a crushed hand or a crushed foot [σύντριμμα χειρὸς ἢ σύντριμμα ποδός] 20 or a crooked back or white specks on the eye or an infection in his eyes, or a person who has on him an uncontrolled itch or a lichen skin growth [λιχὴν] or has one testicle [μόνορχις].

22 Anything blind [τυφλὸν] or crushed [συντετριμμένον] or with a tongue cut out or afflicted with warts or having a lichen skin growth [λιχῆνας], these you must not offer to the Lord, and you must not give from them as an offering on the Lord’s altar. 23 And as for a calf or a sheep that has a cut ear [ὠτότμητον] or a stubbed tail, you must perform them as a slaughtering for yourself, but they will not be accepted as your vow. 24 As for a castrated one [θλαδίαν] and a squeezed one [ἐκτεθλιμμένον] and a gelding [ἐκτομίαν] and one whose testicles were ripped off [ἀπεσπασμένον], you must not bring these to the Lord, and you must not do it on your land. (ταυτα B M’ V mins; αυτα A F Gött; κυριω B A F V 931 mins Göttc MT ‫ ;ליהוה‬θεω ταυτα Cyr; θεω Gött; προσδεχθησεται B* A min; δεχθησεται Bc F 971 BrMcL Gött; προσαξεις B n min Arm Swete; προσαξετε 931 A F Gött)

commentary

377

(cont.) Aarōnic priests “without a blemish [μῶμος]” In LevLXX 21:17b–23

Animal sacrifices “without a blemish [μῶμος]” in LevLXX 22:18c–25

21 Anyone from Aarōn’s offspring who has a blemish in him must not draw near to bring sacrifices to your God [τοῦ προσενεγκεῖν τὰς θυσίας τῷ θεῷ σου]; because there is a blemish in him [ὅτι μῶμος ἐν αὐτῷ], he must not come near to bring God’s gifts. 22 He must eat God’s gifts, the holies of holies, and from the holy things. 23 However, he must not approach the curtain nor draw near to the altar, because he has a blemish [ὅτι μῶμον ἔχει]; and he must not profane the holy place of his God because I am the Lord who sanctifies them.”

25 And from a foreigner’s hand you must not bring your God’s gifts [προσοίσετε τὰ δῶρα τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν] from any of these because [ὅτι] they are corruptible in them; there is blemish in them [μῶμος ἐν αὐτοῖς]. It must not be acceptable to you.” (υμιν B* Bo; υμιν ταυτα Bc; υμιν ταυτα A F BrMcL Gött)

The analogue is lucid, and the distinctives between these two passages can be reduced to the distinct audiences, the priestly family versus Israelites and immigrants (21:17 vs. 22:18), and the distinct types of holy entities that are in focus, namely, the altar, curtain, and sacrifices (21:17–18, 21–22) versus only animal sacrifices (esp. 18–19, 21, 22, 25). The differences in the various blemishes are probably all due to defects that are either characteristically human, such as, “a crooked back,” or animal, such as, “a stubbed tail.” In 22:22, LevLXX contains an additional analogus defect to 21:20 that is omitted in LeuB, probably by homoioteleuton (ιωνταη scriptio continua): “or with a severe itch” (or “acute itching” NETS 101; + η ψωραγριωντα Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique). A human testicular defect (“has one testicle [μόνορχις]”: 21:20) is multiplied by four among the animals likely because they would be domesticated for animal husbandry and agrarian work (esp. in chs. 19–27) and faced the attacks of wild animals (Lev 22:8; 26:6, 22; “a castrated one [θλαδίαν] and a squeezed one [ἐκτεθλιμμένον] and a gelding [ἐκτομίαν] and one whose testicles were ripped off [ἀπεσπασμένον]”: 22:24). In v. 21, the insertion of “or among your festivals” (ἢ ἐν ταῖς ἑορταῖς ὑμῶν), which has no referential meaning yet within the book, only within the Seina narrative, extends the authority of the sacrificial animal perameters of 22:18c– 33 to the festival sacrifices of ch. 23. Verses 18 and 25 form an antithetical inclusio around vv. 18d–24: the Lord allows sacrifices to be offered “from the immigrants who are attached to them in Israel” (τῶν υἱῶν τῶν προσηλύτων τῶν προσκειμένων πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐν Ἰσραὴλ), but by contrast “from a foreigner’s hand you must not bring your God’s gifts from any of these because they are corruptible in them [φθαρτά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτοῖς]; there is blemish in them [μῶμος ἐν αὐτοῖς].

378

commentary

It must not be acceptable to you” (22:25; + τῶν προσκειμένων πρὸς αὐτοὺς LXX; ‫ הגר הגר‬Mmss SP Syr Vul > ‫ הגר‬MT Tar Bo; φθαρτα B* A mins; φθαρματα Bc F 931 Gött). In v. 25, the grammatical antecedent of both phrases “in them” (ἐν αὐτοῖς, n. pl.) is “the gifts [of your God]” (τὰ δῶρα, n. pl., not ‘hand’ or ‘foreigner’). Either foreigners always brought physically blemished animal gifts, or more likely, the animal gifts were blemished ritually upon contact with a foreigner (for the reuse of 22:25 in Ezek. 44, see Awabdy 2012: 685–703). It is, therefore, verbally ironic for the foreigner to bring “the gifts of your [ὑμῶν] God.” The prerogative to offer God’s sacrifices granted to immigrants (√προσήλυτος), but not to foreigners (√ἀλλογενής), may imply the exclusion of ‘temporary residents’ or ‘hired workers’ (as 22:10), and may add support to the conjecture that clean, circumcised immigrants who had be come clients of a priest could eat the priestly portion of the sacrifices (see discussion on 22:10–13; also NumLXX 15:14–16). In NT reception, 1Peter 1:19 may recall the entire LeviticusLXX motif of √ἄμωμος, or may allude to the cluster of verses 17–26 in particular when representing Christ’s precious blood as acceptable to God for sacrificial slaughter: “like that of a lamb without blemish [ἀμώμου] or spot” (1Pet 1:19; see n. in Reception).

22:26–33 Adaptation and Revision of Prior Sacrificial Laws As with 22:17–25, the LeuB unit is circumscribed by the two standard superscriptions in 22:26 and 23:1 (Lord→Mōysēs, with r.q.f. λέγων), but here in v. 26 without a specified audience. The expansive Aarōn—his sons—Israel audience from v. 18 can be assumed by ellipsis, since the contents in vv. 27–33 are again by nature for the entire community. Verses 27–28 appear within the Seina narrative as a literary adaptation of legislation from ExodLXX 22:30, whereas vv. 29–30 inner-biblically revise the law of LevLXX 7:6–8.

Antecedent law in GenesisLXX–LeviticusLXX

Adaptation and revision in LeuB 22:27–30 (with LevLXX in important lexemes)

ExodLXX 22:30 “In the same way you must do with your calf and your sheep [τὸν μόσχον σου καὶ τὸ πρόβατόν σου] and your beast of burden. For seven days it must be under its mother [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἔσται ὑπὸ τὴν μητέρα], but on the eighth day [τῇ δὲ ὀγδόῃ ἡμέρᾳ] you must restore it to me.”

27 “A calf or a sheep [Μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον] or a goat, when it is born, then for seven days it must be under its mother [ἔσται ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ὑπὸ τὴν μητέρα], but on the eighth day [τῇ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ] and beyond it must be accepted as a gift, an offering to the Lord. 28 And as for a calf or a sheep, you must not slaughter her and her child on one day.”

commentary

379

(cont.) Antecedent law in GenesisLXX–LeviticusLXX

Adaptation and revision in LeuB 22:27–30 (with LevLXX in important lexemes)

LeuB 7:6–8 “And if it is a vow [εὐχὴ] or if he sacrifices his voluntary gift, it must be eaten on the day that he brought his sacrifice [ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ προσαγάγῃa τὴν θυσίαν αὐτοῦ, βρωθήσεται] and on the following day. And what is left of the meat of the sacrifice until the third day must be burned completely with fire. But when eating, if he should eat some of the meat on the third day, it will not be accepted for him who brings it [οὐ δεχθήσεται αὐτῷ τῷ προσφέροντι αὐτό], nor will it be accounted to him. It is a defilement, and the life who eats any of it will take the sin.”

29 “But if you sacrifice a sacrifice, a vow [εὐχὴν] of delight to the Lord, you must sacrifice it as acceptable to you [εἰς δεκτὸν ὑμῖν θύσετε αὐτό]. 30 It must be eaten on that day itself [αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ βρωθήσεται]; you must not leave some of the meat until the morning. I am the Lord.” (αυτη A B V b d n t x y mins Cyr; > F Gött)

a προσαγαγη B* BrMcL Gött; προσαγη Bc.

The literary placement of vv. 27–30 after vv. 17–25 and not among the sacrificial supplements in of chs. 6–7 requires the interpretation of vv. 27–30, without its own explicit intended audience (in v. 26), as a supplement to the acceptable animal sacrifices in the prior divine speech (vv. 18c–25). The law from ExodLXX 22:30 which stipulates a seven-day waiting period after the birth of a firstborn animal until the eighth day when it must be restored, that is, sacrificed to the Lord (see Exod 13:2, 12, 15). This law is taken up by LevLXX 22:27, but with four primary adaptations. One, the waiting period for a firstborn is now extended to any potential sacrificial animal: “it must be accepted as a gift, an offering to the Lord” (δεχθήσεται εἰς δῶρα, κάρπωμα Κυρίῳ). Two, because of this, “and beyond” (καὶ ἐπέκεινα) is added so that young animals older than eight days can still be sacrificed. Three, verse 27 replaces “beast of burden” (√ὑποζύγιον or “draft animal” NETS 67) with an explicitly sacrificial animal “a goat” (αἶγα). Four, LeuLXX 22:28 augments the ExodusLXX law with a new restriction, “And as for a calf or a sheep, you must not slaughter her and her child on one day.” In context, the clause-initial accusative that is not resumed, “as for a calf or a sheep” (μόσχον ἢ πρόβατον), especially in LeuBA with the alternative ἢ, refers back to the “calf or sheep” in v. 27 (η B* A O b mins Eth = ‫ או‬MT prb. 4QLevb; και Bc F Gött = SP ‫ ;ו‬see Muraoka 2016: 775). On the eighth day or afterwards one must not slaughter, as a sacrifice to the Lord, both a calf and its mother, perhaps because it was considered perverse to blurr the distinction between life (of a new birth) and death (of both mother and child) (so Milgrom 1990: 144–154; cf. “You must not boil a kid in its mother’s milk”: Exod 23:19; 43:26; Deut 14:21; also see Deut 22:6–7).

380

commentary

The intertexts shared by LeuB 7:6–8 and 22:29–30 suggests that the accusative of simple apposition that defines “a sacrifice” (θυσίαν) as “a vow [εὐχὴν] of delight to the Lord” (22:29) is a metonym for “a vow [εὐχὴ]” in 7:6 (in v. 29, on the unparalleled use of χαρμοσύνης ‘delight’ in PentLXX, see Wevers 1997: 362; read εις δεκτον “as acceptable” with BrMcL Gött, not εισδεκτον Swete; θύσετε αὐτό = SP ‫ ≠ תזבחהו‬MT ‫)תזבחו‬. In this understanding, 22:29–30 inserts an inner-biblical revision of the earlier law so that eating the ‘vow’ or ‘voluntary gift’ on the first or second day, and burning it on the third, has now been restricted to eating it before the first day ends (αυτη A B V b d n t x y mins Cyr; > F Gött). The predicate nominative seals the inner-biblical revision: “I am the Lord” (ἐγὼ Κύριος). Leueitikon 22:31–32 forms an inclusio with 20:7–8 around the book’s six appearances of the Lord’s self-predication as ὁ ἁγιάζων “the one who sanctifies”: καὶ ἔσεσθε ἅγιοι, ὅτι ἅγιος ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· καὶ φυλάξεσθε τὰ προστάγματά μου καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτά, ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων ὑμᾶς. 20:7–8

Καὶ φυλάξετε τὰς ἐντολάς μου καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτάς. καὶ οὐ βεβηλώσετε τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ἁγίου, καὶ ἁγιασθήσομαι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ ἁγιάζων ὑμᾶς, ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου ὥστε εἶναι ὑμῶν θεός· ἐγὼ Κύριος. 22:31–32 (v. 31, after αὐτάς “I am the Lord” ‫ אני יהוה‬MT LXXmss > SP 4QLevb B A Gött)

And you must be holy because I the Lord your God am holy. And you must keep my orders and do them; I am the Lord who sanctifies you. 20:7–8

And you must keep my commands and do them. And you must not profane the name of the holy one, and I must be sanctified in the midst of the sons of Israel. I am the Lord who sanctifies you, who brought you out of the land of Egypt in order to be your God. I am the Lord. 22:31–32

In context, 22:31–32 indicates that Israel’s performance of the animal sacrificial rituals precisely as they have been illustrated in vv. 18c–25 and revised in vv. 27– 30 is essential to cooperate with the Lord who has delivered and is continuously sanctifying Aarōn, his sons, and “the entire assembly” (πάσῃ συναγωγῇ Ἰσραὴλ, 22:18, as the conceptual antecedent of pl. ὑμᾶς “you”, v. 32).

commentary

381

23:1–8 Festivals of Sabbaths, Passover and Unleavened Bread The standard superscription (Lord→Mōysēs, redundant quotative frame λέγων) opens this LeuB paragraph directed to “the sons of Israel” (τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ), which may signal the editors’ awareness that this chapter’s festival instructions reposition Aarōn and sons to play a secondary role (esp. cf. attention to their role in chs. 1–16, 21:1–22:16). In this section, the LeuB scribe collates the chapter’s three shortest festival guidelines for sabbaths (v. 3), Passover (v. 5), and unleavened breads (vv. 6–8). Weekly Sabbath rest (Heb. Shabbat) from work in every Israelite settlement (v. 3) is now surprisingly recast as one of the Lord’s holy festivals by the enclosing repetition of ‘festivals’ in vv. 2c and v. 4: 2c The festivals of the Lord [Αἱ ἑορταὶ Κυρίου], which you must call them chosen, holy, these are my festivals [αὗταί εἰσιν ἑορταί μου]. 3 For six days you must do works, and on the seventh day there are sabbaths, a chosen rest, holy to the Lord. You must not do any work; they are sabbaths to your Lord in every settlement of yours. 4 These are the festivals for the Lord [Αὗται αἱ ἑορταὶ τῷ κυρίῳ], and these you must call them holy in their appointed times. (v. 4, asynd. Αὗται = ‫ אלה‬4QLevb MT ≠ ‫ ואלה‬SP LXXmss; “holy” αγιας B* A min; αγιαι ας Bc F Gött) The inclusion of sabbaths among the festivals is further substantiated by the Sabbath-like requirement in the juxtaposed festival of unleavened bread, “any service work you must not do” (πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε, 2×, vv. 7–8). The direct object, ἔργον λατρευτὸν, occurs six times in LevLXX, all in ch. 23, suggesting an idiom within the festival calendar context (23:7, 8, 21, 25, 35, 36). The adj. λατρευτὸν is attributive, and the archaic rendering ‘servile’ in the lexicons can be updated to ‘service work’ (NETS [102] “work of service” connotes a genitive to Engl. readers; cf. ‘servile’ in GELS 426; LEH § 5483; LSJ § 26024). The adj. λατρευτός may have been formed by the translator (for ‫ מלאכה‬prb. ‘business’) to denote something like “travail dont on peut tirer quelque gain” (Harlé and Pralon 1988: 188, citing Daniel 1966: 329–334). One might further argue that the Leitmotif that characterizes the festivals throughout the chapter is the recurring prohibition of such ‘work’ (√ἔργον 11× in ch. 23: vv. 3[2×], 7, 8, 21, 25, 28, 30, 31, 35, 36; √ἔργον also in 7:24; 11:32; 16:29; Runge 2010: 388; see comparable notion with ἔργον in Koine: Lee 1983: 91 n. 11). When reading the Seina narrative from ExodusB 19:1–NumbersB 10:10 as a series of speeches from the Lord through Mōysēs and Aarōn to various audiences, instructions about how to keep the festivals recur and are adapted mul-

382

commentary

tiple times. In the discussion of ch. 23 that follows, I examine only the intertexts from ExodLXX that I am convinced are shared, and in a canonical reading, modified in LevLXX.

Sabbaths in ExodLXX 35:2–3

Sabbaths in LeuB 23:3

2 For six days you must do works [ἓξ ἡμέρας ποιήσεις ἔργα], but on the seventh day [ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ] there is a rest [κατάπαυσις], holy [ἅγιον], sabbaths [σάββατα], a repose for the Lord [κυρίῳ]. Let everyone who does work in it die. 3 You must not burn a fire in any settlement of yours on the day of the sabbaths [ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν]. I am the Lord.

3 For six days you must do works [Ἓξ ἡμέρας ποιήσεις ἔργα], and on the seventh day there are sabbaths [τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ σάββατα], a chosen rest [ἀνάπαυσις], holy to the Lord [ἁγία τῷ κυρίῳ]. You must not do any work; they are sabbaths [σάββατά] to your Lord in every settlement of yours [ἐν πάσῃ κατοικίᾳ ὑμῶν]. (ποιησεις B 931 Gött; ποιησετε d-125 t mins LatAug Loc Göttc; “your Lord” υμων B* A min; > Bc F BrMcL Gött; ποιησεις and ποιησετε = 4QLevb MT ‫≠ תעשׂה‬ SP ‫)יעשׂה‬

In v. 3, and throughout, the distinctive of “chosen rest” (κλητὴ) aligns with the mandate in v. 4, “you must call them holy in their appointed times” (ἁγίας καλέσατε αὐτὰς ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν, v. 4; αγιας B* A min; αγιαι ας Bc F Gött; see ‘chosen’ in vv. 2, 3, 7, 21, 24, 26, 35, 36, 37). The replacement of “you must not burn a fire” with “you must not do any work” may reflect, from the immediate context in LevLXX, that fire in every settlement could not be prohibited; fire was essential to Israel’s lamp-burning on the Sabbath (24:2–4, see commentary on Israel’s liability), and how could the priests burn the people’s sacrifices to the Lord? (chs. 21–22). Augustine (c. LeuB) interprets v. 3 tropologically since the purest form of rest from servile work is rest from slavery to sin: The sabbath was given to the Jews to be observed literally, like other things, as rites symbolically signifying something deeper. A particular kind of vacation, you see, was enjoined on them. Take care to carry out what that vacation signifies. A spiritual vacation, I mean, is tranquility of heart; but tranquility of heart issues from the serenity of a good conscience. So the person who really observes the sabbath is the one who doesn’t sin. This, after all, is the way the command was given to those who were commanded to observe the sabbath: “You shall perform no servile work.” “Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin”. Lienhard 2001: 192

commentary

383

In 23:5, the Passover protocols from ExodLXX 12:1–13 may be assumed and necessary to fulfill the ritual, whereas in 23:6–8, the reader of the Moses story is confronted with a revision of ExodLXX 12:14–16.

Unleavened bread within passover in ExodLXX 12:14–16 (NETS 59)

Passover, then unleavened bread in LeuB 23:5–8

5 “In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, in the midst of the approaching of evening, is a Passover to the Lord. 14 “And this day shall be a memorial for you, and you shall celebrate it as a feast to the Lord throughout your generations. You shall celebrate it as a perpetual precept. 15 For seven days you shall eat unleavened bread [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἄζυμα ἔδεσθε], but from the first day you shall remove leaven from your houses. Everyone, whoever eats leaven, that soul shall be destroyed from Israel, from the first day until the seventh day. 16 And the first day shall be called holy, and the seventh day shall be designated holy for you. No work of service shall be done on them [καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη κληθήσεται ἁγία καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ ἑβδόμη κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν αὐταῖς], except what shall be done for every soul; this only shall be done for you.”

6 And on the fifteenth day of this month is the festival of unleavened bread to the Lord; for seven days you must eat unleavened breads [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἄζυμα ἔδεσθε]. 7 And the first day must be [καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη] chosen, holy to you [ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν]; you must not do any service work [πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε]. 8 And you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord for seven days, and the seventh day must be called, holy to you; you must not do any service work [καὶ ἡ ἑβδόμη ἡμέρα κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν· πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε].” (v. 8, η εβδομη ημερα B A V 931 x-619 min; η ημερα η εβδομη F Gött)

The prohibition against ‘service work’ on the first and seventh days is preserved (ExodLXX v. 16; LevLXX vv. 7–8). The rhetoric of ExodLXX 12:17–20 against consuming leaven is not revisited, but can be assumed. Most notably, the unleavened bread memorial-festival in ExodLXX 12:14–20 is rooted squarely in between the divine Passover (Heb. Pesach) instructions (12:1–13) and Mōysēs’ transmission and execution of the same to the elders (12:20–28). Here in v. 5, the two are now delineated by specifying the ‘appointed time’ (v. 4) of the Passover to the Lord: “In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, in the midst of the approaching of evening” (v. 5; √ἑσπερινός ‘in the evening,’ hapax leg. in PentLXX, is probably a new Koine adj. formation also attested in a few 3rd cent. documents: Lee 1983: 110). The festival of unleavened bread must now be celebrated the day after Passover. The term √πάσχα ‘pascha’ is not Hellenistic Greek, but an Aramaic loanword of the Jewish sociolect in Egypt, that LeuB readers would have interpreted contextually to refer to the Passover (from ‫פסחא‬, rather than Heb. ‫פסח‬: Lee 1983: 16; Joosten 2010: 7–8). Moreover,

384

commentary

the slaughter of Passover is not adequate for the festival of unleavened bread, which now institutes seven days of whole burnt offerings to the Lord (v. 8). This expects knowledge of 1:1–17, and would concentrate the Israelites on generating a ‘sweet smell to the Lord’ (vv. 9, 13, 17), rather than propitiating for known and exposed sins through sin and sinful error offerings (as in 4:1–6:7).

23:9–22 Festivals of First Fruits of the Harvest and of Weeks The standard superscription occurs in v. 9 (Lord→Mōysēs, r.q.f. λέγων), and is followed by the “sons of Israel” (v. 10b) audience continued from 23:2. The LeuB scribe collects these two festivals into a single unit, which is perceptive in that the start date of the so-called festival of Weeks (vv. 15–21, Heb. Shavuot) is contingent upon, that is, follows exactly seven weeks after the date of the deposit of first fruits of the harvest (vv. 10c–14, Heb. Bikkurim). The two festivals in 23:10c– 14 recall ExodLXX 23:16–19 and 34:22–24, but here in LeuB (and LevLXX) the festivals are supplied with so much more detail that the earlier permutations in ExodLXX are barely recognizable. Rather, what readers of LeuB encounter in 23:10c–22 is a complex ritualistic festival that derives from other sacrificial rituals and directives already stipulated in the book.

Antecedent forms in in LeuB and ExodLXX 29:40

Festival of first fruits of the harvest in LeuB 23:10c–22

2:2 “carry it to the sons of Aarōn … after grasping from it a handful of the fine flour with the olive oil and all its frankincense” 2:14–15 14 “Now if you bring a sacrifice of first fruits to the Lord, tender, new, roasted, pounded groats to the Lord, then you must bring the sacrifice of the first fruits, 15 and you must pour olive oil on it and put frankincense on it. It is a sacrifice. 16 And the priest must offer up its memorial portion from some of the groats, with the olive oil and all its frankincense. It is an offering to the Lord.”

10c “When you enter into the land that I am giving you and you harvest its harvest, then you must carry to the priest a handful as the first fruit of your harvest. 11 And he must raise up the handful before the Lord, acceptable for you; on the day after the first the priest must raise them up. (v. 11, αυτα “them” B* A n-767 mins; αυτο Bc F Gött)

1:10–13 “a whole burnt offering is from the flocks” 2:5–6 “fine flour mixed with oil” (w/o frankincense) ExodLXX 29:40 “And one-tenth of fine flour mixed with beaten olive oil, one-fourth of a hin, and a drink offering, the fourth of a hin of wine, with the one lamb”

12 And on the day when you bring the handful, you must do an unblemished sheep a year old as a whole burnt offering to the Lord, 13 and as for its sacrifice, two-tenths of fine flour prepared with olive oil; it is a sacrifice to the Lord, a sweet smell to the Lord, and its drink offering, one-fourth of a hin of wine.

commentary

385

(cont.) Antecedent forms in in LeuB and ExodLXX 29:40

Festival of first fruits of the harvest in LeuB 23:10c–22 14 And you must not eat bread and roasted, fresh groats until this very day, until you bring the gifts to your God; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in every settlement of yours.

2:11–12 11 Any sacrifice that you bring to the Lord you must not make with leaven. For any yeast and any honey, you must not bring from it to offer to the Lord. 12 As a gift of first fruit, you must bring them to the Lord. But they must not be brought up onto the altar to be a sweet smell to the Lord.

15 And you must count seven whole weeks from the day after the sabbaths, from the day on which you bring the handful of the deposit. 16 You must count until the day after the last week [sic.], fifty days, then you must bring a new sacrifice to the Lord. 17 From your settlement you must bring bread as a deposit, two loaves of bread. They must be of two-tenths of fine flour, baked with leaven, of first produce to the Lord. (“week [sic.]” εβδομαδης B*unique; εβδομης Bc A; εβδομαδος F Gött)

1:10–13 “a whole burnt offering is from the flocks” 1:3–9 “a whole burnt offering is from the cattle” 9:2 “ram for a whole burnt offering” 2:5–6 “fine flour mixed with oil” (w/o frankincense) 23:12–13 (from ExodLXX 29:40)

18 And he must offer with the bread seven unblemished lambs a year old and one calf from the herd of cattle and two unblemished rams. They will be a whole burnt offering to the Lord, and their sacrifices and their drink offerings; it is a sacrifice, a sweet smell to the Lord. (“he must offer” προσαξει B* A min; προσαξετε Bc F Gött)

4:22–26 “he [ruler] sins and commits a sinful error … a young billy goat from the goats” 3:6–11 “deliverance sacrifice from the sheep … a lamb as his gift” 8:29 “And after Mōsēs took the breast, he separated it as a deposit before the Lord” 14:23–31 “And after the priest takes the lamb for a sinful error and the cup of olive oil, he must place them as a deposit before the Lord”

19 Also they must prepare one billy goat from the goats one for sin and two lambs a year old as a deliverance sacrifice with the bread of the first produce. 20 And the priest must place them with the bread of the first produce, with the two lambs, as a deposit before the Lord; they must be holies to the Lord. As for the priest who brings them, they will be his. (v. 19, “They must prepare” ποιησουσι[ν] B A x mins Cyr; “You must prepare” ποησετε F Gött; see variations of v. 19 in Ulrich 2010: 131; in v. 20, “As for the priest …” is a fronted [pendent] dative, likely for prominence, see Muraoka 2016: 725)

23:7–8, 24–25, 35, 36

21 And you must call this day chosen; it must be holy to you. You must not do any service work on it; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in every settlement of yours.

386

commentary

(cont.) Antecedent forms in in LeuB and ExodLXX 29:40

Festival of first fruits of the harvest in LeuB 23:10c–22

19:9–11 9 And when you reap the harvest of your land to harvest your field, then you must gather what falls down of your harvest. 10 And you must not glean your vineyard after the vintage, nor gather the grapes of your vineyard; you must leave them for the poor and the immigrant. I am the Lord your God. (v. 9, “you must not finish off your harvest” in other mss)

22 And when you harvest the harvest of your land, you must not finish off the remainder of your field’s harvest when you harvest it, and you must not collect the things that fall off from your harvest; you must leave it behind for the poor and for the immigrant. I am the Lord your God.” (“when you harvest it” ἐν τῷ θερίζειν σε = MT ‫בקצרך‬ ≠ SP ‫ ;לקצר‬αυτο B* Eth; αυτα Bc A F Gött)

Upon entry into the land that the Lord is giving, when the Israelite landowners harvest the season’s crops, they must carry a handful “as the first fruits of the harvest” to the priest (v. 10c), in the manner one would carry to the priest their fine flour sacrifice from which the priest offers a handful as a ‘memorial portion’ (2:2). The actual composition of “the first fruit of your harvest” is not named in vv. 10c–11, but 2:14–15 already identified what the handful should comprise: “tender, new, roasted, pounded groats to the Lord” (cf. GenLXX 4:3–7; √ἐπαύριον “on the next day” in vv. 11, 15, 16, reflects a new Koine compound formation from √αὔριον [Lev 7:16; 19:6]: Lee 1983: 95). Maybe a handful of tree fruit would also have been acceptable to the Lord, after three years of its purification from its uncleanness (see 19:23–25). On the same day, the landowner must prepare a collection of sacrifices (vv. 12–13) according to anaphoric protocols in LeuB and ExodLXX (1:10–13; 2:5–6, if the non-frankincense type is implied; ExodLXX 29:40, part of the daily offerings not reiterated in LevLXX). Before bread-making or grain-roasting with the new grain from the harvest, one must bring the afforested gifts (vv. 10c–14) to the Lord, for “it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in every settlement of yours.” A straightforward reading suggests that the actual day of the first fruits handful (v. 10c) and accompanying sacrifices (vv. 12–13) may vary from farmer to farmer, depending on when one harvests that seasons’ crops. Then from the day after the Sabbath that follows the day the landowner brought the handful and sacrifices (v. 15), the landowner counts off seven weeks, and then on the fiftieth day, he brings the Lord a new “sacrifice” (vv. 15–16; see allusions to vv. 15–21 and Deut 16:9–12 in Acts 2:1; 20:16; 1Cor 16:8). The sacrifice begins with a deposit of two loaves of bread made from the ingredients of the first fruits, but distinctively “baked with leaven” (ἐζυμωμένοι πεφθήσονται, v. 17; “two loaves

commentary

387

[ἄρτους]” = SP ‫ > חלות‬MT). This exception to the rule (in 2:11) that no sacrifice must be made with leaven was already stated back in 2:12: “As a gift of first fruit, you must bring them to the Lord. But they must not be brought up onto the altar to be a sweet smell to the Lord.” Along with the bread made from the ingredients of the first produce (vv. 17, 20), the landowner must also bring seven lambs, a calf and two rams all as a whole burnt offering, with “their sacrifices and drink offerings” (v. 18), which likely refers back to the same combination offered in vv. 12–13, a billy goat for sin, two lambs as a deliverance sacrifice. The priest deposits them before the Lord as “holies to the Lord,” which means they belong to the priest, and his family (21:14–22:16), for their consumption or use (v. 20). The near-verbatim language of v. 21 was already applied to the festival of unleavened bread (vv. 7–8), and will be applied to subsequent festivals (vv. 24– 25, 35, 36); the festivals are thereby bound together as chosen holy days on which no Israelite may do any “service work” (πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν, v. 21). Verse 21 appears to prohibit physical labor for business profit (see v. 7; likewise, “work of service” NETS 102; “travail servile” BA 190; “dienstbare Arbeit” SD 125; “trabajo servil” BG 280). Consequently, gleanings in v. 22 is not an exception to v. 21. Rather, v. 22 implies that the remainder of the harvest that Israelite landowners must leave behind in their fields “for the poor and the immigrant” (a command from 19:9–11) could be collected by these personae miserae throughout the 50week span of the two harvest festival rituals.

23:23–25 Festival of a Memorial of Trumpets The formulaic superscription (Lord→Mōyses, r.q.f. λέγων) in v. 23 assumes the “sons of Israel” audience from 23:2a, and so continues the discourse on festivals in ch. 23. In the forty-ninth year, Israel was to “declare with a trumpet’s sound” to signal the release year (see 25:9). This is different than the festival of trumpets here, which has no antecedent law, but may allude to the trumpet sound of the theophany in ExodLXX 19–20 (in postexilic Judaism the trumpet sound marked the start of the new year, Heb. Rosh Hashanah; see Wevers 1997: 377).

388

commentary

Trumpets on the holy mountain in ExodLXX 19:13, 16, 19; 20:18 (NETS 65)

Festival of a memorial of trumpets in LeuB 23:24b–25

13 “‘A hand shall not touch it. For he shall be stoned with stones or shot with an arrow. Whether animal or whether human, it shall not live.’ Whenever the sounds and the trumpets [αἱ σάλπιγγες] and the cloud leave the mountain, they shall come up on the mountain.”

24 “In the seventh month, on the first of the month, you must have a rest, a memorial of trumpets [σαλπίγγων]; it must be chosen as holy to you. 25 You must not do any service work, and you must bring a whole burnt offering to the Lord.”

16 And it happened on the third day, when it was toward dawn, sounds and lightning and dark cloud were occurring upon the mountain Sina; the sound of the trumpet [τῆς σάλπιγγος] was ringing loudly, and all the people in the camp were terrified. 19 Now the sounds of the trumpet [τῆς σάλπιγγος], increasing, became much stronger. Moyses was speaking, and God answered him with sound. 20:18 And all the people were perceiving the sound and the flashes and the sound of the trumpet [τῆς σάλπιγγος] and the mountain smoking. Now all the people were afraid and stood at a distance.

The ‘festival of trumpets’ in vv. 24b–25 must be celebrated on the first day of the seventh month. The festival is remarkably simple in that, like Sabbath, it prohibits a single day of service work (μιᾷ τοῦ μηνὸς “on the first,” v. 24) and mandates a single whole burnt offering (προσάξετε ὁλοκαύτωμα “you must offer a whole burnt offering,” v. 25). The only time ‘trumpet’ (√σάλπιγξ) appears in the PentLXX prior to LevLXX is in the cluster, four times, in ExodLXX 19–20, when it signals the dreadful theophany of the Lord on Mount Seina (afterward only in: NumLXX 10 [4×]; 31:6). Most likely, then, LeuB readers would have understood “a memorial of trumpets” (μνημόσυνον σαλπίγγων) as a single day in the year designated to remember the wonderful and terrifying time when the Lord himself descended onto the mountain and established his covenant with his people. Quoting and reflecting on vv. 24–25 (and Num 10:1–10), Ambrose (c. LeuB) instructs allegorically: “Let us, then, investigate what we read in the Old Testament concerning the kinds of trumpets, considering that those festivals which were enjoined on the Jews by the Law are the shadow of joys above and of heavenly festivals … Let us, then, seek the body of Christ which the voice of the Father, from heaven, as it were the last trumpet, has shown to you at the time when the Jews said that it thundered; the body of Christ, which again the last trump shall reveal …” (Schaff 2.10: 437–438). In NT thought, the sound

389

commentary

of the trumpet is an eschatological phenomenon that, like the theophany on Seina, signals the awesome return of the almighty Lord (Matt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thes 4:16; Heb 12:19; Rev 1:10–18; cf. 10× Rev 4:1–11:15).

23:26–32 Refocusing the Day of Propitiation Addendum The LeuB scribe appropriately marks these verses as a unit of discourse. After the stereotypical superscription (Lord→Moyses, redundant quotative frame λέγων, v. 26), but assumes “the sons of Israel” audience (from 23:2, 10, 24).

Day of propitiation addendum in LeuB 16:29b–34

Refocusing on no work in the in LeuB 23:27–32

29b “In the seventh month, you must humble your lives and must do no work, neither the native nor the immigrant who is attached among you. 30 For on this day he must propitiate for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and you will be clean. 31 This rest will be sabbaths of sabbaths for you, and you must humble your lives; it is an enduring ordinance. 32 The priest whom they anoint him and whose hands they must fulfill to serve as priest after his father, must propitiate and must put on the linen garment, a holy garment. 33 And he must propitiate for the holy of holy, and he must propitiate for the tent of testimony and the altar, and he must propitiate for the priests and for the entire assembly. 34 And this will be an enduring ordinance for you, to propitiate for the sons of Israel from all their sins.” Once a year, it must be done just as the Lord instructed Mōysēs.

27 “And on the tenth of this seventh month there is a day of propitiation; it must be chosen as holy to you. And you must humble your lives and bring a whole burnt offering to the Lord. 28 You must not do any work on this day itself; for this is a day of propitiation for you, to propitiate for you before the Lord your God. 29 Any life that will not humble himself on that day itself must be eliminated from his people. 30 And any life that will do work on that day itself, that life must be completely destroyed from his people. 31 You must not do any work; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in all your settlements. 32 It must be to you sabbaths of sabbaths, and you must humble your lives. From the ninth of the month, from the evening until the evening, you must sabbath your sabbaths.” (v. 27, anarth. “a day of propitiation [ἐξειλασμοῦ]” = SP MTmss ‫ ≠ יום כפרים‬art. 11QpaleoLeva MTL ‫יום‬ ‫)הכפרים‬

When reading LeuB 23:26 in light of the earlier addendum to the Day of Propitiation ritual in 16:29b–34, one observes the same ritual now has been refocused. First, due to its new location within the festivals of the Lord in 23:2c–44, the Day of Propitiation is now reclassified as a festival. Second, for LeuBA readers finally in 23:27 the book provides the exact day within the seventh month, the tenth day, on which Israel must observe the propitiation ritual, and now festival (other witnesses of 16:29b include, “On the tenth of the month”). Third, the date is adjusted further in v. 32, which clarifies that the festival begins, in fact, not on the tenth (as v. 27), but, “From the ninth of the month, from the evening until

390

commentary

the evening [ἀπὸ ἐνάτης τοῦ μηνὸς ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας ἕως ἑσπέρας], you must sabbath your sabbaths [σαββατιεῖτε τὰ σάββατα ὑμῶν].” Although the Hebraic verb and cognate accusative are awkward, readers would have made sense of their basic Sabbath prohibition of work (as in vv. 2c–3). Fourth, the omission of ‘immigrant’ from v. 29b is not explained, but could be due to the added concern in 19:10 and 23:22 to leave gleanings “for the poor and the immigrant,” which would then condone these personae miserae to collect gleanings on the propitiation festival and on the Sabbath (vv. 3–4; see NumLXX 15:32–36 for Mōysēs and Aarōn’s uncertainty in how to respond to the man who collected sticks on the Sabbath; see Mark 3:4; Luke 6:9). Fifth, like the festival of unleavened bread following the Passover slaughter, so here in 23:27, even after the Day of Propitiation ritual (16:2b–29a), Israel “must bring a whole burnt offering to the Lord.” Since there are two WBOs in ch. 16, one for Aaron and one for the congregation (vv. 3, 5), 23:27 ostensibly issues a distinctive whole burnt offering to the Lord as a conventional festival celebration. Sixth, and most importantly, the single statement “you must humble your lives and must do no work” in 16:29b now becomes the focus of the propitiation festival. Through the discursive device of overspecification by redundancy, 23:27–32 ardently condemns work on this festival: “You must not do any work on this day itself … Any life that will not humble himself on that day itself must be eliminated from his people … And any life that will do work on that day itself, that life must be completely destroyed from his people. You must not do any work; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations in all your settlements.” Jerome (c. LeuB) was aware of the severity of this prohibition, “Under the law, in the seventh month after the blowing of trumpets and on the tenth day of the month, a fast was proclaimed for the whole Jewish people, and that soul was cut off from among his people which on that day preferred self-indulgence to self-denial” (Schaff 2.6: 630; see allusion to the festival based on these verses and Deut 16:13– 15 in John 7:2, 37).

23:33–44 Festival of Tents, Synopsis of Festivals, Mōysēs Teaches The unit in the format of LeuB is bound by the typical superscription (Lord→ Mōysēs, r.q. frame λέγων, v. 33) and the narrator’s remark that Mōysēs recounted of the festival instructions (v. 44), followed by the next superscription (24:1). The festival of tents (Heb. transl. Sukkot) commences in vv. 34b–35, then is suspended by the interpolation of the synopsis of the various festivals (vv. 37–38), and finally resumed in vv. 39–43. The festival of tents appears first in LevLXX within the PentLXX, then DeutLXX 16:13–17, and so in LevLXX gives the impres-

commentary

391

sion of being novel, but in fact vv. 34b–35 are derived from the LevLXX festival of unleavened bread (23:6–8, which itself partly resembles the Sabbath in v. 3). What is innovative in the Seina pericope are the new perameters for the celebration in vv. 39–43, although these are derived thematically from the earlier ExodLXX narratives.

Intertexts of the festival of unleavened bread in LeuB 23:6–8

Expansion of the festival of tents in LeuB 23:34b– 35

6 And on the fifteenth day of this month [ἐν τῇ πεντεκαιδεκάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ μηνὸς τούτου] is the festival [ἑορτὴ] of unleavened bread to the Lord [τῷ κυρίῳ]; for seven days [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας] you must eat unleavened breads. 7 And the first day must be chosen, holy to you; you must not do any service work [καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε]. 8 And you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord for seven days, and [καὶ προσάξετε ὁλοκαυτώματα τῷ κυρίῳ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας καὶ] the seventh day must be called, holy to you; you must not do any service work [ἡμέρα κλητὴ ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν· πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε]. (η εβδομη ημερα B A V 931 x-619 min; η ημερα η εβδομη F Gött)

34b On the fifteenth day of this [Τῇ πεντεκαιδεκάτῃ τοῦ μηνὸς … τούτου] seventh month is the festival [ἑορτὴ] of tents to the Lord for seven days [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τῷ κυρίῳ]. 35 And the first day is chosen, holy; you must not do any service work [καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ πρώτη κλητὴ ἁγία, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε]. 36 For seven days you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord, and the eighth day must be holy, chosen for you [ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας προσάξετε ὁλοκαυτώματα τῷ κυρίῳ· καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ ὀγδόη ἁγία κλητὴ ἔσται ὑμῖν], and you must bring whole burnt offerings to the Lord; it is a final day, you must not do any service work [πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε]. (v. 36, asynd. πᾶν = MT ‫ ≠ כל‬SP ‫)וכל‬

Both festivals begin on the fifteenth of the given month (vv. 6, 34b), and on the first and last days of the festival, the Israelites are emphatically banned from ‘service work’ by twofold, preposed “any service work [πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν] you must not do [οὐ ποιήσετε]” (vv. 7, 8, 35, 36; Wevers [1997: 381] notes v. 35 replicates v. 7). The festival of tents, however, extends the seven-day festival of unleavened bread into an eight-day festival; service work is banned now on the first and eighth days, and the whole burnt offerings, still brought for the festival’s duration, are stressed on day eight because “it is a final day” (ἐξόδιόν ἐστι, v. 36). Verses 37–38 function as an interpolation that splices the festival of tents’ guidelines into vv. 34b–36 and vv. 39–43, but also form as an inclusio with vv. 2– 4 that encloses the chapter, excepting vv. 39–43: 2 The festivals of the Lord, which you must call them chosen, holy, these are my festivals. 3 For six days you must do works, and on the seventh day there are sabbaths, a chosen rest, holy to the Lord. You must not do any work;

392

commentary

they are sabbaths to your Lord in every settlement of yours. 4 These are the festivals for the Lord, and these you must call them holy in their appointed times (vv. 2–4). 37 These are the festivals to the Lord, which you must call chosen, holy, in order to bring offerings to the Lord, whole burnt offerings and their sacrifices and their drink offerings, each on its proper day, 38 besides the Lord’s sabbaths and besides your gifts and besides all things from your vows and besides your voluntary gifts, which you give to the Lord (vv. 37–38). If the sabbaths in v. 3 are classified as one of the festivals of ancient Israel by their literary placement within “the festivals of/for the Lord” (vv. 2, 4), by contrast in v. 38, the Lord’s sabbaths and other customary sacrificial gifts are excluded from the festivals by polysyndeton: “besides [πλὴν] the Lord’s sabbaths and besides [καὶ πλὴν] your gifts and besides [καὶ πλὴν] all things from your vows and besides [καὶ πλὴν] your voluntary gifts, which you give to the Lord” (“exclusion” of v. 38 from v. 37, so Wevers 1997: 383; “your gifts” τῶν δομάτων ὑμῶν of √δόμα [also 7:30] was a new Koine term, as the Classical terms were √δόσις [not in LevLXX] and √δῶρον [preferred term of LevLXX]: see Lee 1983: 100). Verses 39–43 resume the discourse on the festival of tents by a variation of v. 3: “And on the fifteenth day of this seventh month” (maybe by Wiederaufnahme, repeating vv. 34b and 39a, which would expand the insertion to vv. 35–38). All of v. 39, following the interpolation of vv. 37–38, is a synopsis of vv. 34b–36; the LeuB scribe appears to perceive this and denotes the cardinal by its Greek numeral ζ, hence: “7 days” (ζ ημερας B; επτα ημερας A F Gött; > min). The new instructions for celebrating the festival of tents, given in vv. 39– 43, derive thematically from the post-Egypt but pre-Seina ExodusLXX 13:18–19:2 narratives.

Plausible narrative imagery from ExodLXX 15:22– 27

Festival of tents in LeuB 23:39–43

22 Then Moyses removed the sons of Israel from the Red Sea and led them into the wilderness of Sour. And they were journeying for three days in the wilderness and were not finding water to drink … 25 Then Moyses cried to the Lord, and the Lord showed him wood, and he threw it into the water, and the water became sweet. There he set for him statutes and judgments, and there he tested him. 26 And he said, “If you by paying attention listen

39 And on the fifteenth day of this seventh month, when you complete the yields of the land, celebrate a festival to the Lord for 7 days, a rest on the first day and a rest on the eighth day. 40 And on the first, you must take ripe fruit from a tree, both fronds from date palm trees and bushy branches from a tree and willow trees and branches from a chaste tree from a wadi, to rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days of the year. 41 It is an enduring

393

commentary (cont.) Plausible narrative imagery from ExodLXX 15:22– 27

Festival of tents in LeuB 23:39–43

to the voice of the Lord, your God, and do before him pleasing things, and give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, every disease which I brought upon the Egyptians, I will not bring upon you. For I am the Lord who heals you.” 27 And they came to Ailim, and twelve springs of water and seventy date palm trunks were there. And they camped there by the waters.

ordinance throughout your generations. In the seventh month you must celebrate it as a festival. 42 You must live in tents for seven days; every native in Israel must live in tents, 43 so that your generations may see that I made the sons of Israel live [sic.] in tents when I brought them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God. (v. 39, aor. impv. εορτασατε “celebrate” B mins Cyr [Exod 23:14]; impv. fut. εορτασετε “you must celebrate” A F Gött; v. 40, “on the first” B* A mins; + τη ημερα “on the first day” Bc F BrMcL Gött; v. 43, ιδωσιν B Cyr min rell; αν ειδωσιν F; ειδωσιν Gött).

Verses 39–43 anticipate in the future, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month (vv. 39–41), in the land of Chanaan when Israel’s descendents would celebrate the festival and simulate their ancestors’ ‘tent’ experience by living in tents for seven days (v. 42). In contrast to the explicitly egalitarian Tendenz elsewhere in LevLXX toward the ‘immigrant’ (esp. in LeuBA, see 17:3), only Israelites were liable, “every native in Israel must live in tents,” although this does not preclude immigrants, per se (see 22:18; and ExodLXX 12:48–49; in LevLXX 23:42, κατοικήσει = sg. SP ‫ ≠ ישב‬pl. MT ‫)ישׁבו‬. The purpose of the simulation is theological: “so that your generations may see that I made the sons of Israel live [sic.] in tents” (LeuB v. 43). Strangely, the actual term ‘tent’ (√σκηνή, or pl.) has no precedent in describing the Israelite dwellings from Egypt to Mount Seina, only after Seina (nor the v. √σκηνόω ‘to pitch one’s tent’ or ‘live in a tent’: LEH § 8070; after Seina: Num 16:26, 27; Deut 16:13; “the tent” in Exod 18:7, is ambiguous, but may be God’s dwelling since ch. 18 is dischronologically set at Mount Seina before 19:1–2). However, its semantic relatives, ‘to camp’ (v. √παρεμβάλλω, v. √στρατοπεδεύω) and ‘a camp’ (n. √παρεμβολή), are used, at times, of the non-military camp of Israel’s tents in ExodLXX 13–19. Also, the theme of the Lord’s ‘testing’ (see 15:25; 16:4; 17:7) may be intimated in the rationale for the festival LeuB 23:43 that readers would have corrected: “You must live in tents for seven days; every native in Israel must live in tents, so that your generations may see that I made the sons of Israel live in tents [ἐν σκηναῖς κατοίκισα τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ] when I brought them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God” (κατοικισα B; κατωκησα A M’ mins; κατωκεισα V min; κατωκισα F Gött; √κατοικέω ExodLXX 12:40[in Egypt]; 15:14–15[other nations]).

394

commentary

There are several themes and lexemes in ExodLXX 15:22–27 that may suggest LevLXX 23 is drawing upon the imagery of this earlier scene from the ExodLXX 15:22–19:1 narrative. First, before the only prior occurrence of the ‘date palm tree’ (√φοῖνιξ) is in the the Lord’s provision at Ailim in ExodLXX 15:27 (recounted in NumLXX 33:9). In LevLXX 23:40, “you must take ripe fruit from a tree” (λήμψεσθε τῇ πρώτῃ καρπὸν ξύλου), which implies eating the lush fruit is antithetical to the Israelites’ base wilderness experience, even different than God’s good provision of manna and quail, unless the the symbolism alludes to Ailim (v. 40, + τη ημερα Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A mins). Second, v. 29 redescribes vv. 35–36 as “a rest on the first day and a rest on the eighth day,” which aligns with the Lord’s provision of the paradigmatic restful experience at Ailim (15:27). Third, in v. 43 the use of the contemporaneous infinitive, “I made the sons of Israel live in tents when I brought them out [ἐν τῷ ἐξαγαγεῖν με αὐτοὺς] of the land of Egypt,” to mean after I brought them out, may indicate just when I brought them out, that is ExodLXX 15 and following. Likewise, the movement to Ailim (15:22–16:1) follows immediately after the exodus from Egypt (12:51–14:31) and the celebratory songs of victory (15:1–21). Fourth, the trees used to construct tents for the ritual celebration in v. 40 are known for their healing properties, which is the direct context of Ailim: “For I am the Lord who heals you” (ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι κύριος ὁ ἰώμενός σε). The Israelites were to simulate their ‘tent’ experience by constructing and living in tents made out of trees that must have been accessable in Chanaan, “both fronds from date palm trees and bushy branches from a tree and willow trees [ἰτέας] and branches from a chaste tree [ἄγνου] from a wadi” (v. 40; √ἄγνος GELS 7; √ἰτέα GELS 346; ἄγνου κλάδους “branches from a chaste tree” is a free rendering, but Muraoka overstates that it is “totally independent of H[eb]”: 2016: 487). The willow tree’s bark is known for its antiinflammatory compounds and chaste tree berries have historically been used by Egyptians, Greeks and Romans to treat menstrual problems and ulcers (see, i.e., Hippocrates, part four of “On Ulcers,” c. 400 BCE). The properties of these trees were also thought, at least in post-LeuB tradition, to extinguish sexual desires, as Harlé and Pralon note, “Théodoret [c. 393–458/466] (Quaest. in Lev. 32) voit dans l’usage des branches de saule (arbre qui passait pour éteindre le feu des désirs) un appel à la temperance” (1988: 192). The Ailim scene is surrounded by the bodily cravings of the people (15:23–25; 16:2 ff.). Fourth, in light of the other possible allusions, the reference in v. 40 to ‘a wadi’ (√χείμαρρος, or ‘brook’) in Chanaan, from which they would obtain chaste tree branches, may hint at what must have been a spring-fed wadi, an oasis with a high water table in Ailim. In sum, even as LevLXX 23 envisions a simulation of Israel’s ancestors’ entire ‘tent’ experience outside the land, from ExodLXX 15–DeutLXX 34, the episode leading to Ailim offers a particularly rich collection of images that may be alluded to in LevLXX 23.

395

commentary

In v. 44, the narrator concludes the chapter by Moyses’ faithfulness to the Lord’s command to him in 23:1 to relay the speech to the Israelites: “And Mōysēs told the festivals of the Lord to the sons of Israel” (καὶ ἐλάλησεν Μωυσῆς τὰς ἑορτὰς Κυρίου τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ). Within LeuB, this is the only time the narrator discloses that Mōysēs followed through and communicated the divine words he just received (cf. 21:24 in LeuB as preface to supersc. of 22:1).

24:1–9 Burn Lamps and Eat Piles of Loaves before the Lord Continually The conventional superscription (Lord→Mōysēs, r.q.f. λέγων) opens the new LeuB section. Appropriately, the LeuB scribe associates vv. 1–9 as a paragraph, disginguishing it from the narrator’s closure of the festival speech (23:44) and the next episode of one who curses (24:10–23). The “sons of Israel” are the audience that the Lord orders Mōysēs to “command” (Ἔντειλαι), an aor. middle imperative that occurs only here and at 6:9. It is curious why the Lord did not instruct Mōysēs to “command Aarōn and his sons,” as in 6:9, because 24:2–9 details how the priests were to keep a lamp burning perpetually before the Lord (v. 3) and reload and consume the piles of loaves of bread before the Lord (vv. 5–9). However, the language of vv. 2b–9 focuses not on the priests but, with chs. 17–26 and especially 22:17 onward, on the community’s significance within these priestly rituals (see below). The Lord vascillates in his speech from third-person plural ‘they,’ about the Israelites and Aarōn and his sons (vv. 2–3b), to second-person plural, to the entire community with Mōysēs as intermediary (vv. 4–7), back to third plural, about Aarōn and his sons (vv. 8–9). Verses 2–4 inner-biblically revise the earlier lamp-burning directive in the Seina narrative in ExodLXX 27:20–21, whereas, vv. 5–9 augment the abrupt, even elusive, text in ExodLXX 25:29 with detailed ritual protocols.

Burn the lamp in ExodLXX 27:20–21

Burn the lamp in LeuB 24:2–4 (with LevLXX in most, not all, important lexemes)

20 “And you, order the sons of Israel [σύνταξον τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ], and let them take [καὶ λαβέτωσάν] for you olive oil from olives [ἔλαιον ἐξ ἐλαίων], refined, pure [καθαρὸν], beaten [κεκομμένον], for light [εἰς φῶς] to burn so that the lamp might burn continuously [καῦσαι ἵνα κάηται λύχνος διὰ παντός].21 In the tent of testimony outside of the curtain [ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἔξωθεν τοῦ καταπετάσματος] that is

2 “Command the sons of Israel [Ἔντειλαι τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ], and let them take [καὶ λαβέτωσάν] for me pure [καθαρὸν] olive oil of olives [ἔλαιον ἐλάινον], beaten [κεκομμένον] for light [εἰς φῶς], to burn a lamp continuously [καῦσαι λύχνον διὰ παντὸς] 3 outside the curtain in the tent of testimony [ἔξωθεν τοῦ καταπετάσματος ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου]. Aarōn and his sons must burn it from the evening until the

396

commentary

(cont.) Burn the lamp in ExodLXX 27:20–21

Burn the lamp in LeuB 24:2–4 (with LevLXX in most, not all, important lexemes)

over the covenant, Aarōn and his sons must burn it from evening until morning before the Lord [Ααρων καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ ἀφ’ ἑσπέρας ἕως πρωὶ ἐναντίον κυρίου]. It is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations [νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν] from the sons of Israel.”

morning before the Lord [καύσουσιν αὐτὸν Ἀαρὼν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας ἕως πρωὶ ἐνώπιον Κυρίου] continually; it is an enduring ordinance throughout your generations [νόμιμον αἰώνιον εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν]. 4 On the clean lampstand you must burn the lamps before the Lord until the morning.”

Relatively little is different between these two texts (emboldened above), and the emphasis on continual burning is upheld (see added ἐνδελεχῶς “continually” in LevLXX 24:3). LevLXX 24:3 omits “that is over the covenant” (τοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς διαθήκης), which aligns with a conception of covenant as a descriptor for the divine-Israel relationship only, not associated with the ark (√κιβωτός) behind the curtain (see 2:13; 24:8; 8× in ch. 26; cf. ExodLXX 31:7; 34:28; 39:14). The remainder of what is distinct illuminates the shift, especially in LeuBAF, from the Lord-Mōysēs relationship to the Lord-Israelites relationship. In ExodLXX 27:20– 21, the emphatic pronoun καὶ σὺ “And you” followed by “let them take for you [σοι]” focuses on Mōysēs’ (from 25:1) reception of Israel’s oil, and then Mōysēs becomes the implied agent of the purpose infinitive, “to burn so that the lamp might burn continuously” (καῦσαι ἵνα κάηται λύχνος διὰ παντός). The oil comes from the sons of Israel (maybe also παρὰ τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ in v. 21), but it is for Mōysēs, who at that narrative juncture, was the only individual who had not yet been inhibited from entering the Lord’s presence (prior to ExodLXX 40:28– 29; in the plausible exception in ExodLXX 24:1–18, Mōysēs is granted unequalled access to the Lord). By contrast, in LeuBAF 24:2–4, the Israelites fill Mōysēs’s special role. Now Mōysēs must “let them take for me [μοι]” the pure olive oil, and then the Israelites replace Mōysēs as the implied agents of the purpose infinitive, “to burn a lamp continuously [καῦσαι λύχνον διὰ παντὸς]” (μοι B A F mins Ethc BrMcL; σοι M N Gött; see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 193). This would explain the addition of v. 4, which shifts to a plural number, so that Mōysēs by his word transfers the clean lamp-burning liability to the holy community: “On the clean lampstand [preposed] you must burn [καύσετε] the lamps before the Lord until the morning” (ἕως τὸ πρωί “until the morning” = SP ‫ ≠ עד בקר‬MT ‫)תמיד‬. Aarōn and sons, then, assume the role as intermediary agents who burn the Israelites’ oil before the Lord (v. 3; καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ = SP ‫ > ובניו‬MT; 1o και Bc A F BrMcL Gött; > B* b min MT).

397

commentary

Verses 5–9 supplement the terse loaf-placing order (eight Greek words) in ExodLXX 25:29 with the protocols necessary to enact that ritual.

Place the loaves in ExodLXX 25:29

Place the loaves in LevLXX 24:5–9 (with LevLXX in important lexemes)

“And you must put [καὶ ἐπιθήσεις] on the table [ἐπὶ τὴν τράπεζαν] facing loaves [ἄρτους], in front [ἐναντίον] of me always [διὰ παντός].

5 And you must take fine flour and make it twelve loaves [ἄρτους] of bread; the one loaf will be twotenths. 6 And you must put [καὶ ἐπιθήσετε] them in two piles, six loaves [ἄρτους] in one pile, on the clean table [ἐπὶ τὴν τράπεζαν] before the Lord. 7 You must put on the pile clean frankincense and salt, and they will be as loaves for remembrance, set before the Lord. 8 On the day of the sabbaths he must set them before the Lord continuously [διὰ παντός], before the sons of Israel as an enduring covenant. 9 And they will be for Aarōn and for his sons, and they must eat them in a holy place since they are holies of holies. This is theirs from the things that are sacrificed to the Lord, an enduring ordinance.”

By reading the Seina narrative on its own terms, the insertion of LevLXX 24:5– 9 is surprising since Mōysēs in ExodLXX 40:20–21 had no problem obeying ExodLXX 25:29 when he furnished the Lord’s tent: “And he positioned the table in the tent of witness on the side of the tent of witness towards the north, outside the veil of the tent, and he presented on it loaves of presentation before the Lord, just as the Lord instructed Moyses” (NETS 81; italics mine). ExodusLXX 25:29 presents an enduring (‘always’) ritual that is exclusive to the Mōysēs-Lord relationship: “And you must put [sg. ἐπιθήσεις] on the table facing loaves in front of me [μου] always [διὰ παντός].” By contrast, vv. 5–9, like vv. 2–4, transfer the ritual to the Lord-Israelites relationship, “And you [Israelites] must put [pl. ἐπιθήσετε] … before the Lord [ἔναντι Κυρίου, 2×] continuously [διὰ παντός] … before the sons of Israel [ἐνώπιον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ] as an enduring covenant” (ενωπιον B A x mins Cyr; εν ω παρα F; παρα Gött). The elusive “facing loaves” (ἄρτους ἐνωπίους) of ExodLXX 25:29 is clarified in the new instructions of LevLXX 24:5–9 according to the vision of the book: twelve loaves, two piles of six each, placed on the clean table (à la 11:32–35), are now the most holy portion (superl. “holies of holies”: Muraoka 2016: 128) assigned to Aarōn and sons as “theirs from things that are sacrificed to the Lord” (v. 9, à la 2:3, 10; 6:17, 25, 29, 36; αυτων “theirs” B M’ mins Cyr; αυτο Fb mins; αυτω A F* Gött; on the distributive value of the article

398

commentary

attached to the numerals in vv. 5–6, see Muraoka 2016: 10; see ‘twelve baskets’ of bread in Matt 14:20; Mark 6:43; Luke 9:17; John 6:13; Cyril of Jerusalem, c. LeuB, contrasts the Old Covenant loaves with the New Covenant heavenly bread that sanctifies body and soul; see Lienhard 2001: 196). To the piles Israel must add frankincense and salt, à la the fine flour sacrifice of 2:1–4, 13 (pl. ἐπιθήσετε “you must put” ≠ sg. MT SP; see “salt of the Lord’s covenant” in 2:13). As agents on behalf of the community that must rest on the Sabbath, Aarōn and his sons must eat and replenish the piles continuously on the sabbaths (see 23:2–3; ch. 25) as an “enduring covenant” (διαθήκην αἰώνιον). The special use of διαθήκη (stereotyped rend. of ‫ )ברית‬as a ‘covenant’ between the Lord and Israel in the PentateuchLXX is distinctive of Hellenistic Jewish thought in distinction from common Koine usage as a treaty, contract, or last will and testament (see Lee 1983: 30; BDAG §1847). What was called in ExodusLXX the “loaves of the presence [τῆς προθέσεως]” (ExodLXX 40:21; see 39:18; see Matt 12:4; Mark 2:26; Luke 6:4), which symbolize the divine presence with Mōysēs as mediator, is now given the metonym “loaves for remembrance [ἀνάμνησιν] set before the Lord” (v. 7), which stresses their new function, like the ‘memorial’ portion of the fine flour offering, to cause both Israel and the Lord to remember the established covenant promises and conditions (see 26:42, 45; sharing the same semantic domain: √ἀνάμνησις [v. 7, in PentLXX only in NumLXX 10:10] ‘the means for causing someone to remember’ L&N §29.11; √μνημόσυνον [2:2, 9, 16; 5:12; 6:15] ‘to think about again, to remember’ L&N §29.12; and √μιμνῄσκω [in LevLXX only 26:42, 45] ‘to recall information from memory’ L&N § 28.7–8). Verses 5–9 are strikingly silent as to whether leaven and honey, repudiated in 2:11–13, are forbidden ingredients in this ritual.

24:10–12 An Israelite-Egyptian Pronounces a Curse in the Lord’s Name The LeuB scribe marks as a paragraph the first scene, vv. 10–12, of the book’s second tragic episode; the first was Nadab and Abioud in 10:1–3 (but contextually, 9:23–10:1–3 or chs. 8–10). The literary placement of the episode after vv. 2–9 seems arbitrary, but there is no superscription in v. 10, which presents vv. 10–23 as a continuation of vv. 1–9. Moreover, the LeuB accent in vv. 1–9 on Israel’s liability in the lamp-burning and bread-placing rituals that are intended to cause Israel and the Lord to remember the covenant is starkly contrasted with one who dishonors the Lord’s name in vv. 10–12. An analogous story of one who violates the Sabbath in NumLXX 15:32–36 similarly follows a unit of various offerings (vv. 1–31; see Chavel 2014: 165–195). By the highly selective language of what is already a brief story in vv. 10–23, the narrator leaves a number of gaps

commentary

399

in the reader’s knowledge about both the perpetrator and his crime, like in the Nadab and Abioud incident (10:1–3), which creates “curiosity about the action, the agents, their life and relations below the surface, the world they inhabit” (see Sternberg 1985: 259). The story opens when “the son of an Israelite woman [υἱὸς γυναικὸς Ἰσραηλείτιδος] came out”; this means his mother was ‘local’ (implied αὐτόχθων). The narrator adds, “Also he was the son of an Egyptian among the sons of Israel [υἱὸς Αἰγυπτίου ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ]” (v. 10), which likely means his father was an ‘immigrant’ (implied προσήλυτος), because here there is no need to break up “an Egyptian” from “among the sons of Israel” and read the prepositional phrase as adverbial (contra NETS 103: “And a son of an Israelite woman [and he was the son of an Egyptian] came out among the sons of Israel”). In any case, his father’s origins had a negative connotation in light of the book’s acclamation of the Lord’s redemption out of Egypt (11:45; 8× in 19:36–26:45) and denunciation of Egyptian customs (18:3; but 19:34 is probably positive with Deut 23:7–8 [Heb. 8–9]: Awabdy 2014: 205–207; see Harlé and Pralon 1988: 195). The son is also later identified simply as “the Israelite woman’s son,” who is herself identified by name as “Salomeith daughter of Dabrei from the tribe of Dan.” It is equivocal whether the tribe of Dan had a stigma in the author’s time, and the Greek transliterations “Salomeith” and “Dabrei” conceal the irony of the Hebrew names (Salomeith for ‫ ְשֹׁלִמית‬related to ‫‘ שׁלום‬peace,’ but her son fights, and ‘Dabri’ means ‫‘ ְדָב ִרי‬my word’ or repointed ‫‘ ְדָב ָרי‬my words,’ but her son disregards the Lord’s word in Exod 20:7; Lev 19:12). The Egyptian-Israelite son begins fighting with an Israelite person (NETS 103), perhaps a man (ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Ἰσραηλείτης), who is only an Aristotelian ‘agent’ that leads the antagonist to his offense (see Berlin 1982: 73; καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Ἰσραηλείτης = 11QpaleoLeva 4QLevb(vid) ‫ ≠ והאישׁ הישׂראלי‬MT SP ‫)ואישׁ הישׂראלי‬. The situational irony is that the implied narrator, who exposes the son’s origins and names his mother and names his maternal grandfather, does not name the son who names the divine name: “when the Israelite woman’s son named the name [ἐπονομάσας ὁ υἱὸς τῆς γυναικὸς τῆς Ἰσραηλείτιδος τὸ ὄνομα], he pronounced a curse [κατηράσατο]” (v. 11a). It is plausible that the Egyptian-Israelite cursed the Lord, who could be the implied direct object by analogy to v. 15 “cursed God” (καταράσηται θεόν; possibly SD 126, if ‘ihn’ refers to ‘den Hernn’ and not ‘den Israelitischenmann’: “verfluchte [ihn]” SD 126). The aor. participle would be instrumental: “by pronouncing the name, cursed” (so Wevers 1997: 393). This is not the basic connotation of v. 11a, however, for readers moving incrementally through PentLXX narrative. The transitive verb √ἐπονομάζω (only here in LevLXX) is used earlier in PentLXX for assigning a new name to a person or place (i.e., Exod 2:10, 22; 15:23; 16:31; 17:7, 15), but the Lord has already assigned

400

commentary

himself a name (3:13–14; 6:2); yet relevant to 24:11a, the Lord says, regarding an altar or altars of earth, “in every place, there where I pronounce my name” (ἐπονομάσω τὸ ὄνομά μου; NETS 65). Furthermore, the dep. mid. √καταράομαι most often refers to an act of pronouncing a formal curse, and does not refer to speaking profanity or swear words (see list in LEH § 4874: Gen 5:29; 8:21; 12:3; 27:29; 2Kgs 2:24). Thus, with the aor. ptc. that is likely contemporaneous with the aor. main verb, in the same moment of naming the Lord’s name, that is, saying the Lord’s name out loud, the nameless son pronounced a formal curse against the Israelite he was fighting (with “called down a curse” NETS 103; “echó una maldición” BG 282; cf. 19:12 which involves legal oath-taking in the Lord’s name). A close analogy is found when a band of young children (παιδάρια μικρὰ) jeer at Elisaie (Elisha), and in response he “cursed them in the name of the Lord [κατηράσατο αὐτοῖς ἐν ὀνόματι κυρίου]. And behold, two bears came out of the wood and tore open forty-two children of them” (4 Kgdms 2:24 NETS 321). Unlike Elisaie, the Egyptian-Israelite has no prerogative to pronounce such a curse in the Lord’s name. In v. 11b LeuB uniquely narrates, “And they brought them [αυτους] to Moyses,” that is, both the one who cursed and his opponent, but afterward only the one who cursed is confined (αυτους B*unique; αυτον “him” Bc A F BrMcL Gött). So “they put him [αὐτὸν] in confinement, to make a decision [διακρῖναι as purpose] about him by the Lord’s order [διὰ προστάγματος Κυρίου as means]” (√διακρίνω, hapax leg. in LevLXX [3× in PentLXX], which reflects a new semantic development ‘decide’ of an old word [see OT hapax leg. √διάκρισις ‘separation’ Job 37:16] that resembles the development of συγκρίνω from ‘bring together, combine, compare’ in Classical Gk. to ‘decide’ in Koine: Lee 1983: 70). As is common in PentLXX, the translator here substitutes the anthropomorphism “mouth of the Lord” (‫ )על־פי יהוה‬with “by the Lord’s order” (similarly διὰ ῥήματος κυρίου [Exod 17:1]; διὰ φωνῆς κυρίου 10× from Num 3:16–13:3). The implication of v. 12 may be, following the pattern of 8:8, that Mōysēs would clothe Aarōn with the ‘oracle’ in order to seek a divine oracle from the Lord to know how to proceed with the situation (see n. on 9:8, “And he put on it the oracle, and he put on the oracle the interpretation and the truth”; for the Heb., see Chavel 2014: 47).

24:13–16 Divine Revelation to Stone the One Who Pronounced a Curse In scene two, marked here by LeuB, the narrator leaves no time for suspense since the formulaic superscription (Lord→Mōysēs, r.q.f. λέγων) introduces the Lord’s rapid response with three imperatives in unmarked word order, to three audiences of increasing range: “Take [Ἐξάγαγε sg. Mōysēs] the one who cursed

commentary

401

outside the camp, and all who heard must put [ἐπιθήσουσιν] their hands on his head, and the entire assembly must stone [λιθοβολήσουσιν] him.” The precedent for communal stoning was already established for any man who gives his semen to a ruler (20:2) and any Israelite, man or woman, who becomes a ventriloquist or enchanter (20:27). The stoning must occur outside the camp, where animal carcasses were burned and ashes removed (6× in 4:12–16:27; cf. 17:3). Upon recognizing that the Day of Propitiation ritual (ch. 16) unfolds in a narrative fashion, chs. 10, 16 and 24 share several thematic elements. Most notably: the Lord commands that Nadab and Abioud’s bodies (10:4) and the one who cursed (24:14) be taken outside the camp; an intermediary agent (Aarōn, 16:21, ‘all who heard [him curse],’ 24:14), by laying on hands, transfers the community’s guilt onto the head of the live billy goat (16:21) and onto the head of the one who cursed (24:14); finally, the Lord’s anger is passified and he reveals new, contextualized law to protect the honor of his name among the community forever (10:6–11, also 12–18; 16:29–34; 24:15–22). The second redundant quotative frame (v. 15a–b) assumes v. 13 by ellipsis, and so marks a transition within the same divine speech, moving on from what Mōysēs and the community must do immediately (v. 13) to what Mōysēs must teach the community to do in perpetuity (vv. 15c–16): 15c Ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἐὰν καταράσηται θεόν, [ος B A mins; ανθρωπος F* Gött] ἁμαρτίαν λήμψεται, 16 ὀνομάζων δὲ τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου θανάτῳ θανατούσθω· λίθοις λιθοβολείτω αὐτὸν πᾶσα συναγωγὴ Ἰσραήλ. ἐάν τε προσήλυτος ἐάν τε αὐτόχθων, ἐν τῷ ὀνομάσαι αὐτὸν τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου τελευτάτω. 15c A person who if he should curse God must receive guilt. 16 And the one who names the Lord’s name, by death let him be put to death; let the entire assembly of Israel stone him with stones. Whether an immigrant or a native, when he names the Lord’s name, let him die. The parallelism of the elements in vv. 15c–16—class of persons, then violation, then penalty—suggests against viewing v. 15c and 16a as different violations, which means “curses God” (καταράσηται θεόν) and “names the Lord’s name” (ὀνομάζων τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου) are not two actions, but one (see possible allusions to vv. 15–16 in Matt 26:65–66; Mark 14:64; John 10:33). With God (θεόν) as the

402

commentary

direct object of the curse, vv. 15c–16 convey a new connotation (‘cursing God’ is obfuscated by the LXX renderings in: 1Kgdms 21:10; 21:13; JobLXX 2:9; 1:5; but see allusion in Rev 16:21). Readers might retroactively insert God (θεόν) as the implied direct object of v. 11a and reconfigure the basic sense of the episode in vv. 10–12. Others will be content to read “curse God” (καταράσηται θεόν, v. 15c) as the Lord’s theological interpretation of the incident: when one uses God’s name to curse another human, one curses God himself (see ‘image of God’ in Gen 1:26–27 and holiness theology in chs. 17–26: Tucker 2017: 6, 40; also LevLXX 19:14; Jas 3:9; Matt 5:22; but obfuscated in ExodLXX 22:28 and JobLXX 2:9). The inclusion of the ‘immigrant’ (προσήλυτος) in v. 16b, and again in v. 22, extends this law, beyond the one who cursed, to his Egyptian father who was likely regarded as an ‘immigrant’ that had taken up residence “among the sons of Israel” (v. 10).

24:17 Core of Lex Talionis The LeuB scribe marks the opening element of the Lord’s response as its own outdented unit: “And a person who strikes a person’s life, and he dies, by death let him be put to death” (καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν πατάξῃ ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ἀποθάνῃ, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω). The translator apparently found the Heb. ‘strikes’ to not clearly mean ‘kills,’ and so expands the pendent nominative with “and he dies” (καὶ ἀποθάνῃ > MT SP) from the earlier articulation of the lex talionis law in ExodLXX 21:12 (and leveling to vv. 18, 21: Wevers 1997: 397). Now in the new context of LevLXX 24, the lex talionis law functions as the Lord’s retributive principle that explains why the one who speaks the Lord’s name to curse deserves the death sentence (cf. Exod 20:30; Deut 5:17; Matt 5:21). Mary Douglas remarked, “Death by hurling stones and sin by hurling insults have a weak literary match, but apart from the pun there is no matching of the punishment with the crime” (Douglas 2000: 2012). The pun, however, works in Douglas’ play on the English word ‘hurling,’ but not in Heb. or Greek, and she overlooks the severity of insulting one’s direct authority in ancient Israelite society. If speaking ‘wickedly’ or even just ‘badly’ with one’s parents (see n. on κακῶς εἴπῃ, 20:9) warranted the child’s death, how much more worthy is Israel’s deity, the Lord, to demand death for any who speak his name to curse another human (see aNE royal treaties in which, “Every hostile action against a co-vassal is hostility against the king himself,” and “evil words against the king” warrant the king’s military violence and the divine curses: Mendenhall 1954: 59). Rather, what is striking in vv. 17–22 is how restrained and stoic the Lord’s response is in contrast to his scathing rhetoric of ‘elimination’ (NETS ‘extermination’) common in ch. 20 and overwhelming in 26:14–39.

403

commentary

24:18–22 Derivations of Lex Talionis The LeuB scribe collects the derivations on v. 17 as a separate section in vv. 18–22, which is only a slim selection from the lex talionis pericope in ExodLXX 21:15–25:

ExodLXX 21:12–25 (NETS 66)

LeuB 24:17–22

12 Now if someone strikes someone and he dies, let him be put to death with death [ἐὰν δὲ πατάξῃ τίς τινα καὶ ἀποθάνῃ θανάτῳ θανατούσθω]. 13 But the one who acts unwittingly, but God delivered him into his hands—I will give you a place, there where the killer shall flee. 14 Now if someone attacks his neighbor to kill him treacherously and he flees, from my altar you shall take him to put him to death.

17 And a person who strikes a person’s life, and he dies, by death let him be put to death [καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν πατάξῃ ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ἀποθάνῃ, θανάτῳ θανατούσθω]

[Verses 15–21: various casuistic laws subsumed under the lex talionis principle] 22 Now if two men fight and strike [πατάξωσιν] a pregnant woman and her child comes forth not fully formed, he shall be punished with a fine. According as the husband of the woman might impose, he shall pay with judicial assessment. 23 But if it is fully formed, he shall pay life for life [δώσει ψυχὴν ἀντὶ ψυχῆς], 24 eye for eye [ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ], tooth for tooth [ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος], hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound [τραῦμα ἀντὶ τραύματος], stripe for stripe.

18 And whoever strikes [πατάξῃ] an animal, and it dies, let him repay a life in place of a life [ἀποτισάτω ψυχὴν ἀντὶ ψυχῆς]. 19 And if anyone indeed is a blemish to his neighbor, as he did to him, likewise it must be done to him in return: 20 a wound in place of a wound [σύντριμμα ἀντὶ συντρίμματος], an eye in place of an eye [ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ], a tooth in place of a tooth [ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος]; just as someone gives a blemish to a person, in the same way let it be given to him. 21 Whoever strikes a person, and he dies, by death let him be put to death. 22 There must be one judgment for the immigrant and for the local because I am the Lord your God.

Many overt and subtle divergences appear between these texts and the larger collection in ExodLXX 20:23–23:33, but three are of primary interest here in appreciating the focus of LeuB 24:(17)18–22. One, the incident that gives rise to the lex talionis expansion (‘eye for eye, tooth for tooth …’) in ExodLXX is the struck woman who gives birth prematurely, but in LevLXX it is two cases: one who strikes an animal (v. 18) and one who is indeed (δη LeuBA), that is, ‘gives’ (δω LeuF Gött) a ‘blemish’ to a neighbor, which is a technical term in LevLXX that suggests the offense renders one’s neighbor ritually unacceptable to approach the Lord’s sacred space (√μῶμος 10× in LevLXX, not in ExodLXX; v. 18 may allude to 21:28–36). Two, the core of the lex talionis from v. 17 is repeated in a nearly identical form in v. 21, suggesting retribution for murder is the governing con-

404

commentary

cern of LevLXX. Three, although the ‘immigrant’ (√προσήλυτος) is protected in the same ExodLXX discourse (22:20; 23:9, 12), now in LevLXX the ‘immigrant’ is granted the same legal status as the local insofar as the lex talionis death penalty and all its derivatives (vv. 19–20) are equally demanded as a substitute retribution for the immigrant who suffers or dies (on the ‘hanging’ accusatives in v. 20, see Muraoka 2016: 774). If the mixed Egyptian-Israelite origins of the one who cursed placed him in the ‘immigrant’ class, he was subject to the same judgment. After citing LevLXX 24:20 in his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus teaches his followers to not seek the retributive justice granted to them by the Torah’s lex talionis, but to be like their Father in heaven by loving those who hate them (Matt 5:38–48).

24:23 The Sons of Israel Obey the Lord and Stone the One Who Cursed Only twice in the book, in 23:44 and here, does the narrator record Mōysēs’ obedience to the Lord in conveying the divine speeches: “Then Mōysēs spoke to the sons of Israel” (καὶ ἐλάλησεν Μωυσῆς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ). Unlike 23:44, which states “the feasts of the Lord” as the content (d.o.) of Mōysēs’ speech, here the content is assumed from the context as what the Lord had instructed Mōysēs in vv. 13–14. The Israelites’ immediate (paratactic καὶ) response reveals no sign of deviation from the word of the Lord, “and they took the one who had cursed outside the camp” (= v. 14a), and “and stoned him with stones” serves as a shorthand for both the hand-laying ritual and stoning (v. 14b–c; both text forms express instrumentality: εν λιθοις “with stones” B* A b min Sa Tar; λιθοις “with stones” Bc V F G x Arab Syh Gött). With focus on the Israelites (marked order), the narrator’s assertion of their precise obedience to the divine word appears only here in LeviticusLXX: “And the sons of Israel did just as the Lord had instructed Mōysēs” (καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ ἐποίησαν καθὰ συνέταξεν Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ see variations in PentLXX in ExodLXX 12:35; LevLXX 24:23; similarly ExodLXX 12:50; 16:17; NumLXX 1:54; 2:34; 5:4). This resolves the narrative suspense by implying that the Lord’s anger has been pacified, although some may still wonder what the Israelites would do next, in light of the pattern of precise obedience in chs. 8–9 (10× ‘as the Lord had ordered/commanded’) that is broken tragically by Nadab and Abioud (“which he had not ordered them,” 10:3; same pattern in Exod 19:8; 24:3, 7; 32:1–10; Josh 24:16–24; Judg 2:7–15).

commentary

405

25:1–26:45 Sabbath Rest, Release, and Blessings and Curses The LeuB scribe does not denote any divisions within this large collection, which stands in contrast to the six outdented paragraphs in the preceding ch. 24 (and 21 units in ch. 18). Whether or not this signals a change of hands among the original scribes, the continuum of the Sabbath year of release (ch. 25) into the blessings and curses (ch. 26) draws attention to their literary associations. First, the 25:1 superscription subsumes the materials from 25:2–26:45, which are concluded by a major editorial subscription (26:46) followed by the book’s final superscription (27:1). Second, the motif of Sabbath rest for the land requires both chapters 25 and 26 for their development and fruition with the inclusio: “If you enter the land that I am giving you, also the land … must rest as sabbaths to the Lord” 25:2

“You must keep my sabbaths …” 26:2

“Then the land will receive its sabbaths …” 26:43

Third, the ἐὰν + subj. conditional, “If you enter the land that I am giving you,” is a probable premise (Muraoka 2016: 762), but opens up the possibility that the Israelites might not enter the land (Ἐὰν εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν γῆν; in NT usage, ἐὰν + subj. can indicate an uncertain, although likely, fulfillment, see Wallace 1996: 696–697; so also “Wenn” SD 127; “if” NETS 103; “Si” BG 283; contra “Quand” BA 197). This uncertainty correlates with the conditionality of remaining in the land: “But if by these things you do not obey me … I will scatter you into the nations” (26:27, 33). Fourth, the divine blessing of a fertile land that yields a bumper crop and that is conditioned on Israel’s obedience occurs first in 25:18– 22, then in 26:3–5. Fifth, at the seam of the chapters, the apodictic directives in 26:1b–2, although they follow casuistic laws of domestic slavery, do not align with the generic exhortation in 26:3. Instead, 26:1b–2 continues the string of specific directives from ch. 25, which is apparent from the disagreement over whether the convertable proposition, “I am the Lord your God” (Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν), modifies what precedes in 25:55 (á la versification added to MT SP = 25:55) or what follows in 26:1–2 (LeuBc Gött = 26:1). The 25:1 superscription for 25:2–26:45 reconnects these materials to the continuum of divine communication to Mōysēs “in the mountain Seina” (see Exod

406

commentary

19:20; 24:16; 31:18; 34:4, 32; Leu 7:28[2×]; 25:1; 26:46; 27:34; orth. “Seina” Σεινα B* V G vs. Σινα Bc A F Gött; so “Sina” BA 197; NETS 103; “Siná” BG 283; but Heb. influence: “Sinai” SD 127). Chapter 25 has two central directives that are then extrapolated; the first is a precondition for the second. First, “the land that I am giving you must rest as sabbaths to the Lord” (καὶ ἀναπαύσεται ἡ γῆ ἣν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν σάββατα τῷ κυρίῳ, v. 2cβ) is extrapolated in vv. 3–7, and, second, “Sanctify the year, the fiftieth year, and you must proclaim a release on the land and to all its residents” (καὶ ἁγιάσατε τὸ ἔτος τὸ πεντηκοστὸν ἐνιαυτόν, καὶ διαβοήσετε ἄφεσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς πᾶσιν τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν αὐτήν) is extrapolated in vv. 10c–55. Chapter 25 is presented in something like a stream of consciousness so that the understanding of Sabbath rest and release of the land and its residents evolves by supplementation, which leaves the impression that readers must extend the chapter’s hermeneutical trajectory to unforeseen related issues. The instruction of Sabbath rest for the land every seventh year assumes the signal position of chs. 25–26. If the Israelites enter the land, for six years (preposed twice ἓξ ἔτη, 25:3) they may sow fields, prune grapevines and collect their fruit (αὐτῆς = τὴν ἄμπελόν); but by contrast, in the seventh year (adversative δὲ + preposed τῷ δὲ ἔτει τῷ ἑβδόμῳ) there must be “sabbaths, a rest for the land, sabbaths for the Lord” (v. 4). Instead, LXX readers, as in 16:31 and elsewhere, would have understood the meaning of the Aramaic loanword σάββατα (‫“ )שׁבתא‬sabbaths,” regardless of the number and gender shift, because this nominative is apposited by “a rest for the land” (ἀνάπαυσις ἔσται τῇ γῇ, which the LXX author does not transliterate, showing understanding of the cognate: ‫;שׁבתון יהיה לארץ‬ contra the meaningless Engl. rendering “sabbata” NETS 103). Throughout the translation, I render σάββατα with the recognizable English noun “sabbaths” because the general meaning of the Greek term would have been comprehended through the contiguous expressions of land rest that are overspecified by redundancy (vv. 2, 4, 5, 8). Cyril of Jerusalem (c. LeuB) understood the sense of the LXX transliteration; discussing “the seventh year, the year of Release,” he writes, “For the present sabbatism of our souls can find its cessation there, …” (Schaff 2.7: 754; italics mine). In the seventh year, one must not reap “the things that sprout by themselves” (pl. τὰ αὐτόματα ἀναβαίνοντα = SP ‫ ≠ ספחי‬MT ‫ ;ספיח‬+ τα before ἀναβ. A Fb1 Gött; > B F* Fb2 V mins Cyr). In v. 5, the prohibition “you must not gather in grapes” (οὐκ ἐκθερίσεις B A F x mins Cyr; οὐκ εκθεριεις G M mins rell Gött) uses √ἐκτρυγάω, a hapax legomenon in the LXX, but attested in at least two other Koine texts as part of the linguistic development of new formations of compounds of verbs with prepositions (Lee 1983: 85, 93). One must not gather grapes “of what is sanctified for you” (τοῦ ἁγιάσματός σου), a phrase that exposes the rare phenomenon of influence from a Numbers text (6:3–4), which prohibits one who is “holy to the Lord” (ἅγιος ἔσται κυρίῳ,

commentary

407

Num 6:8 cf. ἁγιάσματός) from eating grapes (for ‫“ נזיר‬unpruned vine stem” [Hol § 5445 gl. 1], the LXX probably read ‫“ נזיר‬pure” [ἁγνείαν; Heb. “Nazirite”] from Num 6:2ff.). Verses 6–7 present a decree that is seemingly contrary to vv. 2–5. Now the land’s sabbaths must be “food” (βρώματά) for seven persons listed as datives of advantage: the patriarchal household (σοι, wife, children and extended family are implied), his male slave, female slave, hired worker, immigrant “who is attached to you” (τῷ προσκειμένῳ πρὸς σέ), possibly connoting a client, and livestock and even “the wild animals that are in your land” (LXX sgs. τῷ παιδί σου καὶ τῇ παιδίσκῃ σου καὶ τῷ μισθωτῷ σου = MT ≠ SP ‫)לעבדיך ולאמהתיך ולשכיריך‬. Although the final pronoun does not agree with its presumed antecedent, “his [m. αὐτοῦ = f. τῇ γῇ “land”] entire yield must be for food,” the sense in light of v. 6 is still perceptible that, in spite of not sowing, pruning, reaping what grows by itself, nor gathering grapes, somehow the sabbath years were still to be “food for you.” This problem is resolved by certain translations that render the verb in v. 5 “you shall not reap completely [ἐκθερίσεις]” (NETS 103; “ganz” SD 127), implying one may reap partially, but this is not necessary (√ἐκθερίζω LEH §2764 has both glosses “reap, mow completely;” whereas GELS 196 indicates only “harvest;” also BA 197; BG 283). Rather, in the context of Leueitikon, the verb by itself in v. 5 denotes that one simply must not reap, because the prior gleaning laws are qualified with unequivocal language that one must not reap everything in the field (Leu 23:22; even with the LeuB omission in 19:9–10, this is clear). Instead, LeuB doubly resolves the problem, initially in its unique reading in v. 12, then most fully in vv. 20–22. In vv. 8–9, on the day of propitiation, performed on the 10th day of the seventh month (as in Leu 23:27–32), in the seventh rest year, that is in year 49, the Israelites were to “declare” (διαγγελεῖτε) with the trumpet sound “throughout all your land,” which may be assimilation to v. 9b by the LXX (Wevers 1997: 405) or by its source (v. 9a, ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν > MT SP). Presumably, this declarative blast was to signal the imminent 50th year (v. 10), which Mōysēs commands the Israelites to “sanctify” and “proclaim a release on the land to all its residents.” These imperativals future (v. 10a–b) provide the heading for the specifications in the next subunit, vv. 10–13, and more extensively, in the rest of the chapter (vv. 10–55). Jerome (c. LeuB) reads these verses anagogically, with view to the eschatological release from the bondage of sin: “every possession returns to its owner, all this refers not to the present, but to the future; for being in bondage during the six days of this world, on the seventh day, the true and eternal Sabbath, we shall be free, at any rate if we wish to be free while still in bondage in the world. If, however, we do not desire it, our ear will be bored in token of our disobedience, and together with our wives and children, whom we

408

commentary

preferred to liberty, that is, with the flesh and its works, we shall be in perpetual slavery” (Schaff 2.6: 893). Verses 10–13, by inclusio and overspecification, stress that the year of the land’s release, the 50th year, functions as a signal (√σημασία vs. Heb. ‫‘ יובל‬ram’s horn, jubilee’) for each patriarch and his family (vv. 12[LeuB], 46) to return to their original possession: 10 … it is a year of release [ἐνιαυτὸς ἀφέσεως > MT SP]. It must be a signal for you. And one [εἷς B Cyr mins > F Gött], each one, must depart to his possession, and you must depart, each one to his homeland [+ SP ‫יובל‬ ‫ > הוא‬MT LXX]. 11 This is of a signal of release; it must be the fiftieth year, a year for you. You must not sow or reap the things sprouting by themselves from it, and you must not harvest its things that have been consecrated. 12 Since it is a signal of release, it must be a holy thing to you; from the children you must eat its yields. 13 In the year of release, at its signal, he must return [+ εκαστος Bc A F Gött > B*unique] to his possession. The problem of eating in the sixth year without sowing and reaping, not even reaping what sprouts by itself, may actually be resolved through the aural error in LeuBA 25:12, which is nonetheless readable: “from the children [παιδίων] you must eat its yields” (παιδιων B* A; πεδιων Bc Swete BrMcL Gött). Whatever children are able to gather, doubtless this would have been a smaller portion, may be eaten in the release year (see inclusion of παιδίον in 25:54; τέκνον in 25:41, 46). Other LeuBA readers could have corrected this to “fields” (πεδιων; cf. 26:4). In vv. 14–17, as in casuistic law collections, provisos are enumerated as conditionals (ἐὰν δὲ ἀποδῷ “But if you sell …” v. 14). The concern here is to not oppress one’s neighbor by failing to sell one’s property, or conversely buy a neighbor’s, at the prorated valuation based on the number of crop years after the most recent 50th year (of restoring properties to their original owners). The LeuB readings oddly change the agent, but not the result of a fair trade: “because in this way you will restore [οὕτως ἀποδώσετε] to yourself a number of his yields” (vs. “he will sell to you;” ουτως B A V G b x mins; αυτος F* Gött; αποδωσετε [2pl.] B; αποδωσεται [3sg.] Swete BrMcL Gött). In 19:33, the imperatival future benefits the immigrant, “you must not oppress him” (οὐ θλίψετε αὐτόν), but here a repeated third person impv. clause, “let not a person oppress his neighbor” (μὴ θλειβέτω ἄνθρωπος τὸν πλησίον, vv. 14, 17) frames the provisio, which is then motivated by the theocentric directive and proposition: “you must fear the Lord your God; I am the Lord your God” (also in 19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43).

commentary

409

In vv. 18–19, generic commands are given to compel obedience not merely to vv. 14–17, but to “all my regulations and all my judgments” (πάντα τὰ δικαιώματά μου καὶ πάσας τὰς κρίσεις μου), a hendiadys that has no precise parallel in Leueitikon, but that resonates with similar phraseology in chs. 18–26 (cf. 18:4, 5; 20:22; 26:3, 43, 46; also 27:34; for chs. 18–26, see Narrative Macro-Structure). The first member of the apodosis in LeuBA, “then you will reside being confident,” lacks “on the land” (+ επι της γης Bc F BrMcL Gött; > B* A min), which is nonetheless explicit in v. 19 (ἐπ’ αὐτῆς = ἡ γῆ). The apodosis of v. 19 anticipates the analogous fecundity in 26:4–5c. In both cases, obedience to the Lord’s orders (25:18; 26:3) is the condition for the divine blessing of a bumper crop in the land (25:6–7; 26:4–5c). In vv. 20–22, the Lord anticipates the people’s question that, as I suggested above, was the unresolved problem of vv. 6–7: “But if you say: ‘What will we eat in the seventh year if we do not sow or gather our yields?’” With predictive future verbs, the Lord pledges: “So I will send my blessing to you in the sixth year,” followed by the result in the second clause, “and it will make its yield for three years” (so Wevers 1997: 413). They would eat the sixth year’s harvest of “old things” and “very old things” (παλαιὰ παλαιῶν, v. 22; also 26:10)—a superlative construction known in Classical Greek—in the seventh and eighth years, sow in the eighth year, and eat new crops in the ninth (for examples of the superl. meaning in Sophocles, see Muraoka 2016: 129 n. 1; with “Überaltes” SD 128; “los más antiguos” BG; contra a rendering to indicate a calque, “old of old things” NETS 104; “de l’ ancienne d’ ancienne” BD 200). The next subunit appears in vv. 23–34, which is introduced by the generic passive prohibition, which does not make sense in LeuB* as a question expecting a negative answer: “And the land must not be sold permanently, for it is not [μὴ] the land, is it?” (μη B*unique; εμη Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött). However, since LeuB* is not a solecism, in order to correct this text before Bc, readers would have had to recall ExodB 19:5: “For the whole earth/land is mine” (ἐμὴ γάρ ἐστιν πᾶσα ἡ γῆ). The section is governed by the Leitmotif to ‘redeem,’ ‘give ransom’ or ‘be redeemers’ for the land to restore it to the possession of the original landowner or close relative (√λυτρόω in vv. 25, 30, 33; √λύτρον vv. 24, 26; λυτρωτής in vv. 31, 32). In vv. 25–28, the concern is with one’s poor “brother” (ἀδελφός), which is here a metonym for a fellow Israelite (as Leu 10:6; cf. “a fellow member of faith community” GELS 9 gl. 1.e.). To survive, he should sell some of his possession to his closest relative to redeem it, that is, purchase it, with the implied result that the land stays within one’s clan or tribe (v. 25; cf. Num 36:6–9; b/c of “the sale of his brother” [v. 25], αποδωσετε “you should sell” B* would be corrected by readers to “he should sell” αποδωσεται Bc A mins y-318 Latcod 100 Swete BrMcL; or αποδωται Fb Gött; cf. αποδωτε F V mins). If, however, he does not have a close

410

commentary

relative, but has sufficient wealth to redeem his former property that he sold, he must buy back his field at the price of the “value of the crops for what remains of the period of possession” (Wevers 1997: 417), that is, until the forthcoming release year when the field returns to him anyway (vv. 26–27). If the original owner does not have the means to buy back his property, the property stays with the present owner until the “sixth, the year of release” (ἕως τοῦ ἕκτου ἔτους τῆς ἀφέσεως), at which time the original owner returns to the property now back in his possession (v. 28; “sixth” εκτου B A V mins Bo; > F Gött). Here the plus “sixth” in LeuBAV is the lectio dificilior, because elsewhere only the 50th year is named “the year of release” (and √ἕκτος only elsewhere in 25:21). Perhaps this betrays a “confusion entre année sabbatique et année jubilaire” (Harlé and Pralon 1988: 200). This may be particularly true of LeuBA because of the second variant, “he must depart to his rest [κατάπαυσιν],” which reminds one of rest in the sabbatical year (καταπαυσιν B* A min vs. κατασχεσιν “possession” Bc F Gött; cf. ‘rest’ in 25:2, 4, 5). In vv. 29–34, the next section turns from land to houses. The one who sells his “habitable house in a walled city” (οἰκίαν οἰκητὴν ἐν πόλι τετιχισμένῃ) has one year to buy it back, but after that year, the sale is final and the house will not be restored to the original owner in the release year (vv. 29–30; it is redeemable within “a year of days” ἐνιαυτὸς ἡμερῶν [v. 29], meaning “a period of one year” Muraoka 2016: 158, cf. Heb “a year of its sale of days” ‫ שׁנת ממכרו ימים‬MT SP 11QpaleoLeva). By contrast (adversative δὲ), unwalled “houses in homesteads” (preposed: αἱ οἰκίαι αἱ ἐν ἐπαύλεσιν) must “be considered” (λογισθήτωσαν) as fields insofar as they should be restored to their owners in the release year (v. 31; λογισθήτωσαν = ‫ יחשבו‬11QpaleoLeva SP ≠ sg. MT). There is some obscurity in the phrase “they must always be redeemers [λυτρωταὶ]” (v. 31//v. 32), although one may guess the meaning in context: “Diese werden jederzeit auslösbar sein” (SD 128, italics SD; less clear “always be redeemed” NETS 104). Likewise, for the “houses of the cities” (οἰκίαι τῶν πόλεων) of the Leueites (Heb. ‫“ לוים‬Levites”), there must be “redeemers,” such that in the release year, the Leueites will return to their homes, which are, uniquely, “their possession among the sons of Israel” (v. 33). The fields of the Leueites that are “divided by their cities,” that is, allocated to them in certain cities, must not be sold at all, even if they become poor and desire to sell a field, because it is their “enduring possession” (contra vv. 14– 17, 25–28). In this twenty-fifth chapter, readers finally encounter the book’s namesake, and rather than unjustifiably elevating vv. 32–33 as the theme of the book, LeuB readers may have already interpreted ‘Leueitikon’ as an appellative for the tribe of Aarōn and sons, or simply as a misnomer. By contrast, NumB, namely, Αριθμοι ‘Arithmoi’, contains over 50 references to the ‘Leueites’ (√Λευειτης in B’s orth.).

commentary

411

In vv. 35–55, the final and largest subunit of ch. 25, the provisos transition from redeeming land and houses to respecting and redeeming people. In vv. 35–38, the Israelite patriarchs are commanded to take into their homes any Israelite (brother), or an immigrant or resident foreigner, who “has become weak beside you in his hands” (ἀδυνατήσει ταῖς χερσὶν παρὰ σοῦ), which is probably an idiom for poverty, not sickness (v. 35; cf. √χείρ in 5:7, 11; 12:8; 14:21, 22, 30, 32; 25:26, 28; also 2nd ὁ ἀδελφός σου = ‫ אחיך‬SP MTmss > 11QpaleoLeva MTL). The Israelites must not charge him interest or give him food “for unjust gain” (πλεονασμον B* A min; επι πλεονασμω Bc F BrMcL Gött), which could mean not sell him food for a profit or even at cost (v. 37; see possible allusion in Luke 6:35). The gravity of exploiting the personae miserae in the land is crystalized by the first of four references in chs. 25–26 to the Lord’s deliverance: “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Chanaan in order to be your God” (Leu 25:38, 42, 55; 26:13, 45). In vv. 39–43, the “brother with you [who] is humbled,” that is, becomes poor, must not be subjected to the slavery of “a domestic slave” (δουλίαν οἰκέτου, see Muraoka 2016: 527), but instead “must be to you as a hired worker or resident foreigner,” which may imply better working conditions, but in this context means he and his family will “go away” to his “ancestral possession” in the release year (v. 41; the term √ἀποτρέχω in Classical Greek means “run away, run off … go free,” but in the LXX Pentateuch uses it to render words that simply mean ‘leave, go away’ [as φεύγω in Modern Greek]: Lee 1983: 125–126; or “depart” NETS 104; contra LEH §1190). The theological rationale against buying, selling or subjecting a fellow Israelite to domestic slave labor is that none were on the slave market, that is, every Israelite already belonged to the Lord as his domestic slaves: “Because they are my domestic slaves whom I brought out of the land of Egypt, he must not be sold in a sale of a domestic slave” (v. 42//25:55, on the cognate dative, see Muraoka 2016: 519). Positioned after this is the scribal error in LeuB 25:43 that creates a new yet intelligible prohibition: “You must not overwork him with the calf [τῷ μόσχῳ], and you must fear the Lord your God” (v. 43; τω μοσχω B*unique; τω μοχθω “toil” Bc A Fc [> τω F*] Gött; here Κύριον > MT SP). The use of the uncommon LXX verb √κατατείνω (only 25:43, 46, 53; and 2× in 4Macc.) is used in 4Macc 9:13; 11:18, as in Homer and other Classical texts, as ‘stretch,’ ‘stretch out,’ ‘rack,’ ‘torture’, but in LevLXX as ‘overwork’ or ‘strain’, a meaning unattested in Koine (Lee 1983: 72; Lee does not note the Classical usage in Macc., but GELS 385). This verb is modified by a generic article with a dative of means: “you must not overwork him by means of a calf,” that is, by a member of the ‘calf’ class (see Muraoka 2016: 8–10[generic art.], 172– 173[instrumental/means dat.]). The calf is common in LeviticusLXX (√μόσχος 42×) and known elsewhere as a beast of burden (Deut 22:10). By LeuB 25:46,

412

commentary

certain readers probably mentally corrected v. 43 to: “You must not overwork him with labor [ἐν τοῖς μόχθοις]” (v. 46, but cf. LeuB 25:53). Contrarily, in vv. 44–46b, male and female servants (√παῖς, √παιδίσκη) from the “nations around you” and “resident foreigners who are living among you” were to be the patriarch’s “possession forever” (κατόχιμοι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα), just as city houses were to be the Leueites’ “enduring possession” (κατάσχεσις αἰωνία, v. 34; in v. 44, παῖς καὶ παιδίσκη = sg. MT ≠ pl. ‫ ועבדיך ואמהתיך‬SP). Servants were even “distributed” (√καταμερίζω + acc. “to divide and give out, ‘portion out’ ” GELS 377; “to part, distribute” LEH §4805) to one’s children to be held “in possession by you forever” (ὑμῖν κατόχιμοι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα; v. 46). LXX 25:46 may not represent MT/SP, but 4QLevb: “and you must distribute them” (so Ulrich 2010: 135; καὶ καταμεριεῖτε = H-stem ‫“ והנחלתם‬give as an inheritance” [HALOT § 6088 gl. 1] vs. MT/SP Ht-stem ‫“ והתנחלתם‬pass on as an inheritance” [HALOT § 6088 gl. 2]). The unstated assumption from the surrounding context, vv. 39–43, 46c– 55, is that these servants of foreign origins would not be released from their servitude in the release year. By asyndeton, LeuBA 46c returns to the subject of the Israelite ‘brother’ (vv. 46c–55 as in vv. 39–43), but now explains that brothers who sell themselves must be regarded, as far as the social classification is concerned, as a hired worker, and not as a domestic slave (+ δε Bc F Gött > B* A mins BrMcL). The sold individual’s paternal uncle or cousin must redeem him, or if he has prospered since selling himself, he must redeem himself, or otherwise wait until the release year for his redemption, and with him his children (vv. 48–49, 54; in LeuB rell 25:49: “his [αὐτοῦ] father’s brother” = ‫ דדו‬MT/SP > A V mins Latcod 100 Syh Gött). If one sells himself to an immigrant or to a resident foreigner, the cost of the sale must be calculated at the sum it would cost to employ a “hired worker” (√μίσθιος) for the number of years until the next release year (v. 50; ἢ τῷ παροίκῳ “or to a resident foreigner” = ‫ ולתושב‬SP ≠ MT 4QLevb ‫ ;תושב‬but Ulrich [2010: 135] retroverts LXXvid as ‫√ ;ותושב‬μίσθιος “hired for pay: hireling, hired laborer” [GELS 464], known in classical Greek with the same meaning: Lee 1983: 112; accusatives in 25:10, 50, 33 indicate an extent of time ἐνιαυτόν “for one year” [v. 10] or a point in time in variations of “from year to year” [vv. 50, 53]: Muraoka 2016: 179–180). Verse 53 is ambiguous, especially in LeuB: “Like a hired worker, a year out of a year will be with him. You must taten him with labor in your presence” (τατενεις B*; ου κατατενισης A; ου κατενεις mins; ου κατενιεις min; ου κατατενεις Bc rell Swete BrMcL Gött; thus LeuB may obfuscate the possible allusion to vv. 43 and 53 in Col 4:1). The second command is quite distorted in LeuB but could be corrected to the idea, albeit not the precise form, of LeuB 25:46, “each one … must not overwork [οὐ κατατενεῖ] him with labor.” The first command, “a year out of a year,” may be understood as one hired on an annual

commentary

413

basis (Harlé and Pralon [1988: 203] describe the adj. √μισθωτός as “salarié;” and contextually, “year by year” NETS 50). For Basil (c. LeuB), the vision of ch. 25 prefigures the present age for the benefit of the eternal age: Seven weeks of years in ancient times produced the celebrated jubilee, in which the earth kept the sabbath, debts were canceled, slaves were set free and, as it were, a new life was established again, the old one in a certain way attaining its fulfillment in the number seven. These things are figures of this present age which revolves through the seven days and passes us by; an age in which the penalties for the lesser sins are paid according to the loving care of the good Lord, so that we may not be handed over for punishment in the age without end. Lienhard 2001: 198

Finally, the subunit of vv. 42–55 is framed by the theological rationale for hiring Israelites as hired workers, not buying and selling them as domestic slaves: Because they are my domestic slaves whom I brought out of the land of Egypt … (v. 42) For the sons of Israel are my domestic slaves; these are my servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt (v. 55). διότι οἰκέται μού εἰσιν οὗτοι οὓς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου … (v. 42). ὅτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσίν· παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν οὕς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου (v. 55). In v. 55, LeuB brings the statements closer by stating the copula (εισιν B Eth Bo > A F Gött), and the LXX “they are my servants [παῖδές μου]” creates a new metaphor—not in MT/SP—for the divine-Israel relationship based on v. 44: the Lord presents himself as a patriarch who buys Israel from Egypt to be both his domestic slaves and his male and female servants (v. 44, √παῖς/√παιδίσκη; in v. 55, MT SP uses √‫ עבד‬2×). In 26:1, the opening divine self-identification, “I am the Lord your God” (Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν), serves a Janus function. This proposition in chs. 25–26 always enforces what precedes (25:36, 38; 26:2, 45), so naturally 26:1 continues the thought of 25:55 to enforce vv. 39–54. However, unless “I am the Lord your God” also initiates ch. 26, the reader is thrust into unrelated apodictic laws

414

commentary

(vv. 1b–2a) without a transition or introduction. Furthermore, the proposition forms an inclusio with v. 2c around what we might call a Pentalogue (cf. Decalogue) of five directives: 1 Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν· οὐ ποιήσετε ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς χειροποίητα οὐδὲ γλυπτά, οὐδὲ στήλην ἀναστήσεται ὑμῖν, οὐδὲ λίθον σκοπὸν θήσετε ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 2 τὰ σάββατά μου φυλάξεσθε, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων μου φοβηθήσεσθε· ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος. I indented the ἐγώ εἰμι clauses since they motivate obedience to the preceding commands, and the final two imperativals future have preposed objects as emphasis “my sabbaths” and “my sanctuaries” (τῶν ἁγίων μου = pl. ‫=[ ִמְק ָדַּשׁי‬ 21:23] ≠ sg. ‫ ִמְק ָדִּשׁי‬MT [SP?]). This discursive unit, as far as the final composition is concerned, is in an intertextual relationship not only with the curses that reuse the same imagery, esp. 26:30–35, but with ch. 19: … I am holy, the Lord your God. 3 Let each one fear his father and his mother, and you must keep my sabbaths; I am the Lord your God. 4 Idols must not be followed, and you must not make for yourselves gods of cast metal; I am the Lord your God … 30 You must keep my sabbaths, and you must not be afraid of my sanctuaries. I am the Lord. 19:1b–4, 30

1 I am the Lord your God. You must not make for you yourselves things made by hand, nor carved, nor must you erect a stele for yourselves, nor must you place a stone as a marker in your land, to fall down and worship it. I am the Lord your God. 2 You must keep my sabbaths and be afraid of my sanctuaries. I am the Lord. 26:1–2

In 26:1, the “stele” and “stone as a marker” could be interpreted as a commemorative block (√στήλη, such as, a king’s victory stele) and a boundary marker, respectively (√λίθος + √σκοπός; cf. √ὅριον in Deut 19:14). Instead, since these terms are contiguous with “things made by hand [χειροποίητα]” and “carved things [γλυπτά],” and since this text alludes to ch. 19, all four objects are presented as forms of “idols” (εἰδώλοις) or “gods” (θεοὺς) (19:4; Wevers [1997: 436]

commentary

415

identifies lexical parallels with Deut 4:16; 16:22; Ezek 8:12; Isa 44:9–20). Only this understanding makes sense of the dative of advantage, “erect a stele for yourselves [ὑμῖν],” and purpose infinitive, “place a stone marker … to fall down and worship it [προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ],” and explains why in the covenant curses the Lord will “desolate the steles” along with idols (26:29–30; in LeuB* v. 30, “completely destroy your wooden things” is written in error: εξολεθρευ B*; εξολοθρευσω Bc; εξολεθρευσω Swete BrMcL Gött). The LeuB 19:30 reading, to “not be afraid” of the Lord’s sanctuaries (μὴ φοβηθήσεσθε; but μὴ > Bc et al.), connotes that devotees should approach the Lord’s sacred spaces freely, whereas the 26:2 directive, to “be afraid” (φοβηθήσεσθε), inverts LeuB 19:30 and connotes that devotees should not approach these sacred spaces, or at least not frivolously. The next subunit, vv. 3–12, begins with a conditional verbal hendiatris, “If you walk [πορεύησθε] by my orders and keep [φυλάσσησθε] my commandments and do [ποιήσητε] them” (v. 3). Probably the first two present subjunctives refer to one’s lifestyle by their imperfective aspect, while the final aorist subjunctive “sums it up” (Muraoka 2016: 297). If Israel obeys the word of the Lord, the result will be a series of divine blessings, 28 by one count, most of which are interdependent and all are stated as predictive futures (vv. 4–12). The immediate referent of the orders in v. 3 that Israel must enact are those of the Pentalogue (vv. 1–3). The verbal subject of the blessings throughout vv. 4–12 vascillates between ‘I’ (the Lord), ‘it’ (creation, land) and ‘you’ (Israel), and a transition occurs from the imagery of the land’s fecundity (vv. 4–5c) and safety (vv. 5d–6) and martial domination (vv. 7–8) to the blessings of the covenant relationship itself (vv. 9–12, but still with fertility and satiety). Basil (c. LeuB) interprets 26:10 tropologically by applying it to the bishop of Neocaesarea, Musonius: “but, as the blessing of Moses has it, he knew how to bring out of the secret and good stores of his heart, ‘old store, and the old because of the new’ ” (Schaff 2.8: 413). As for Ambrose (c. LeuB), v. 10 indicates the continuity of divine nourishment between the Testaments: There ought to be a concurrence of the old and the new, as in the case of the Old and New Testament. It is written, “Eat the oldest of the old store and, new coming on, cast away the old.” Let our food be knowledge of the patriarchs. Let our minds banquet in the prophetic books of the prophets. Such nourishment should our minds partake of, the truth of the body of Christ, and not just the external appearance of a lamb. Our eyes should not be affected by the shadow cast by the law. Rather, the clear grace of the Lord’s passion and the splendor of his resurrection should illuminate our vision. Lienhard 2001: 203

416

commentary

LeuB* 26:6 omits the phrase probably by homoioteleuton (υμων) or to eliminate the redundancy with the identical phrase in v. 5: “and war will not pass through your land” (v. 6, + και πολεμος ου διελευσεται δια της γης υμων Bmg A F M > Btxt BrMcL Gött; contra Wevers [1997: 440], who speculates against the majority text that an original Leu. would not contain this repetition). In 26:11, against the Gött edition, “I will place my tent [σκηνήν] among you” (NETS 105; also SD 130; BG 286), LeuBA reads, “And I will set my covenant [διαθήκην] among you” (“alliance” BA 206; διαθηκην B A mins x y LatHes Arm Sa; σκηνην F Gött). This reading reinforces v. 9b, “I will establish my covenant,” but without “my tent” LeuBA even more consistently envisions the Lord’s ambulatory presence outside the domain of his holy place (for this H ideation in Heb., see Nihan 2007: 106–110; the lost GenB 3:8 leaf may have initiated the divine ‘walking’ motif: κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ περιπατοῦντος ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ = GenGött). Thus, the blessings arrive at their climax in the anthropomorphic pledge with the covenant formula: “And I will walk amoung you [ἐνπεριπατήσω ἐν ὑμῖν] and will be to you God, and you will be my people” (v. 12). The full formula occurs in Leueitikon only here, and LeuB v. 12b aligns more closely with MT, while LeuB v. 12c matches 2Cor 6:16: “and I will be to you [ὑμῖν] God, and you will be my people [μου λαός]” (υμιν [= MT ‫ ]לכם‬B* mins Arm Bo Syh vs. υμων Bc A F BrMcL Gött; μου λαος B A min 2Cor 6:16 Gött vs. μοι εθνος 4QLXXLeva [μοι εθν(ος)] Göttc; on relational gen. and dat. in 26:12, although dat. then gen. in LeuB form, see Muraoka 2016: 146). The imagery of vv. 11–12, especially LevF Gött, but also LeuBA, is decisively alluded to in John’s apocalyptic vision of the New Jerusalem, which was on the now lost leaf containing RevelationB 21: “Look, God’s dwelling place is with humans. He will live with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them [as their God]” (Rev 21:3, my transl. of UBS5; see intro Reception of LevLXX in the NT). Athanasius (c. LeuB) applies this to the Lord’s presence in the Church, specifically when Arians were removed: “For thus we believe that the Lord will dwell with us, who says, ‘I will dwell with them and walk in them’” (Schaff 2.4: 1188). Augustine (c. LeuB) accurately explicates that the covenant blessing presented in v. 12 is God: “God Himself, who is the Author of virtue, shall there be its reward; for, as there is nothing greater or better, He has promised Himself. What else was meant by His word through the prophet, ‘I will be your God, and ye shall be my people,’ than, I shall be their satisfaction, I shall be all that men honorably desire,—life, and health, and nourishment, and plenty, and glory, and honor, and peace, and all good things?” (Schaff 1.2: 1148). Verse 13 returns to 25:55–26:1, which groups together the apodictic laws in vv. 1–2 with the condition(s) and blessings in vv. 3–14:

commentary

417

ὅτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσίν· παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν οὕς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου. 1 Ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν. 25:55–26:1a

ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν ὁ ἐξαγαγὼν ὑμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ὄντων ὑμῶν δούλων, καὶ συνέτριψα τὸν δεσμὸν τοῦ ζυγοῦ ὑμῶν καὶ ἤγαγον ὑμᾶς μετὰ παρρησίας. 26:13

Herein, the metaphor evolves further: in order to lead Israel out of Egypt, when they lived there as slaves, the Lord crushed their yoke and led them with confidence (v. 13). The imagery of the curses inverts that of the blessings, but not through either concentric or parallel symmetry (cf. parallel symmetry in Deut 28:1–44, supplemented with more curses in vv. 45–68). Like the blessings in Leu 26:3–13, the curses begin with a protasis (ἐὰν + subj. for uncertain, but probable fulfillment), which here entails four active verbs expressing a singular condition of disobedience with two result clauses (vv. 14–15). To be more precise, the two ὥστε infinitive clauses in v. 15 are not the purpose nor exactly the result of ἀπειθήσητε and προσοχθίσῃ, but “manifestations in practice” of these actions of disobedience (Muraoka 2016: 344). Unlike the blessings in vv. 3–13, if the Israelites repeatedly and without repentance meet the condition of disobedience, they could incur almost double the number of curses (52) than blessings (28) (vv. 16–39), not even counting the Lord’s punitive rhetoric that recurs in vv. 18, 21, 23–24, 27–28. The intended perlocutionary force of the divine speech has nothing to do with numbering the curses, however, but with inciting an escalating fear, leading to repentance through the considerably lengthier and more graphic discourse of punishment (the seven-fold punishment in vv. 18, 24, 28 may be alluded to in Rev 15:1, 6). The internal design exhibits a fivefold protasis-apodosis interchange: vv. 14–15 v. 16 vv. 16–17 v. 18 v. 18

Protasis I: conditions of disobedience Apodosis IA: “then I will do thus against you” Apodosis IB: specific curses

Protasis II: “And if until this, you do not obey me” Apodosis IIA: “then I will add to discipline you seven times for your sins” vv. 19–20 Apodosis IIB: specific curses

418

commentary

v. 21

Protasis III: “And if after these things you walk crooked and are not willing to obey me” Apodosis IIIA: “I will add to you seven strikes according to your sins” Apodosis IIIB: specific curses

v. 21 vv. 22 v. 23

Protasis IV: “And if by these things you are not disciplined but walk crooked with me” v. 24 Apodosis IVA: “then I also will walk with you in crooked anger, and I, even I, will strike you seven times because of your sins.” vv. 25–26 Apodosis IVB: specific curses v. 27 v. 28

v. 29–39

Protasis V: “But if by these things you do not obey me and you walk crooked with me,” Apodosis VA: “then I myself will walk with you in crooked anger, and I am the one who will discipline you seven times according to your sins” Apodosis VB: specific curses

The second, third, fourth, and fifth interchanges are each more intense than the one before, culminating with the fullest protases (IV–V) and the lengthiest and most disturbing apodosis (IV). The first protasis, “then I will do thus against you” (v. 16), reaches its maturest form with the symbolic totality of a sevenfold beating: “then I also will walk with you in crooked anger, and I, even I, will strike you seven times because of your sins” (v. 24 with κἀγὼ ×2, similarly again in v. 28, but with additive καὶ + αὐτὸς in lieu of 1st nom. pronoun: Muraoka 2016: 40–41). Lex talionis is the governing principle especially evident in the IV–V interchanges: “But if … you walk crooked with me [πορεύησθε πρὸς μὲ πλάγιοι], then I myself will walk with you in crooked anger [καὶ αὐτὸς πορεύσομαι μεθ’ ὑμῶν ἐν θυμῷ πλαγίῳ]” (vv. 27–28, also 23–24; √πλάγιος “deviating from straight line” GELS 560; “on the side” LEH §7222; conveying lex talionis: “verquer … verqueren Geist” SD 130; “sesgadamente … ánimo sesgado” BG 287; “de travers … colère en travers” BA 208; but for style over lex talionis: “sideways … skewed anger” NETS 105). The parallel in v. 23 includes “in crooked anger [θυμῷ],” which is not an LXX leveling to v. 28 (contra Wevers 1997: 451), but a formal rendering of its Vorlage (= ‫ בחמת קרי‬11QpaleoLeva ≠ ‫ בקרי‬MT SP). The first tier of curses are woeful: anxiety, scab, ‘jaundice’ (sic. τον ικτερα B; τον ικτερον A F G M mins Gött), eye infection, decay, sowing in vain, falling

commentary

419

and fleeing from enemies who eat the land’s yield (vv. 16–17, illustrating well how the future tense in ch. 26 can have a “potential modality”: Muraoka 2016: 312). In the second and third tiers, the Lord renders the crops unproductive (v. 19–20) and reduces the animal and human population (v. 22; in v. 20, “and the tree of your field [τοῦ ἀγροῦ] will not give its fruit” = prb. ‫ השדה‬SP ≠ ‫הארץ‬ MTL 11QpaleoLeva). By the fourth tier, the Israelites flee to take refuge from the Lord’s violence against them (vv. 25–26; in v. 25, √καταφεύγω, a hapax leg. in LevLXX [5× in PentLXX], means not merely ‘flee’ [√φεύγω], but in idiomatic Greek means ‘flee for refuge’: Lee 1983: 28). However, by the fifth tier, the curses are appalling (vv. 29–39), as illustrated by the curse in the signal position: “And you will eat the flesh of your sons, and you will eat the flesh of your daughters” (v. 29; see Deut 28:53–57). Consequently, the exilic land will repay the Israelite cannibals in a fitting manner: “and the land of your enemies will consume you” (v. 38; cf. Num 16:32; 23:10). The Lord will also “completely destroy [sic.] your wooden things made by hand,” which refers contextually to “wooden, handmade gods” (Muraoka 2016: 449, who notes τὰ ξύλινα χειροποίητα ὑμῶν is singly articular with an adj. in between; the solecism “completely destroy” εξολεθρευ B* is altered to εξολοθρευσω Bc, but corrected in εξολεθρευσω Swete BrMcL Gött). He will make desolate cities and sanctuaries, scatter his people among the nations, and ignore their worship: “I will no longer smell the smell of your sacrifices” (οὐ μὴ ὀσφρανθῶ τῆς ὀσμῆς τῶν θυσιῶν ὑμῶν, v. 31). The antepenultimate and ultimate metaphors revolve around exile (vv. 31–33, 36–39; also “slavery into their heart,” v. 36) and frame the penultimate metaphor, which teaches that, by means of Israel’s exile, “the land will keep sabbath [σαββατιεῖ ἡ γῆ], and the land will enjoy its sabbaths [καὶ εὐδοκήσει ἡ γῆ τὰ σάββατα αὐτῆς]” (vv. 34–35; η γη [2o] B A Eth; > F Gött.). Along with Israel’s degeneration to eating their own children (v. 29), here again Israel acts inhumanly, whereas the land is humanized: Israel by implication breaks sabbath, then the land will keep sabbath; the Lord will send “slavery into their [Israel’s] heart” (v. 36) and “brother will despise brother” (v. 37; on hapax leg. in LevLXX √κατατρέχω, see Lee 1983: 83), while the land will enjoy its sabbaths (active √εὐδοκέω + acc.n.s. “to enjoy” LEH § 3877; so NETS 105; “wird … genießen” SD 130; “disfrutará” BG 288; or “to accept favourably or approvingly,” i.e., “welcome” GELS 298; “acceptera” BA 209). Nonetheless, these horrific curses are not an end in themselves, but a means: “I am the one who will discipline [παιδεύσω] you” (so “to teach lesson by way of punishment, discipline” GELS 519 gl. 1; “to correct, to discipline, to chastise, to punish” LEH gl. 3; in classical Greek the verb signifies “educate”: Harlé and Pralon 1988: 207). The very presence in the text of a second, third, fourth and fifth protasis-apodosis discloses that the Lord will provide one, two, three, even four chances for Israel to repent (cf. Deut 8:2–5). Perceiving this intent to pro-

420

commentary

duce such a result in the audience, Cyril of Jerusalem (c. LeuB), with the new covenant in view, applies this cycle to himself: “Far be it from me that I should ever, among other chastisements, be thus reproached by Him Who is good, but walks contrary to me in fury because of my own contrariness: I have smitten you with blasting and mildew, and blight; without result” (Schaff 2.7: 516). Due to paratactic syntax, there is no grammatical transition, only a logical one, to the Lord’s covenant faithfulness in vv. 40–45 (καὶ conceals a consequential weqatal after a yiqtol; IBHS §32.2.1c). In contrast to Israel’s recalcitrance (Protases II–IV) toward the Lord’s crooked anger and discipline (Apodoses II– IV), the Lord now predicts “they will confess their sins and the sins of their fathers,” which is, not least, an act of obedience to the commands to confess communal sin in LevLXX 5:5; 16:21 (ἐξαγορεύσουσιν τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας τῶν πατέρων αὐτῶν, v. 40, which, due to the LXX om. in v. 39, does not have the same parallelism as MT SP with the + in v. 39: ‫ואף בעונת אבתם אתם‬ “and also because of the iniquities of their fathers with them”). Yet, even after this is said, the Lord recounts their ‘crooked’ actions and his ‘crooked anger,’ using proleptic aorists, as if their sin and his judgment have already happened (aor. indicatives in v. 40b–41a). After destroying them in the land of their enemies, the Lord’s discourse returns to predictive futures: “Then [τότε] their uncircumcised heart will feel shame [ἐντραπήσεται], and then they will be pleased [εὐδοκήσουσιν] with their sins” (v. 41c–d; √ἐντρέπομαι [also Num 12:14] in the papyri is attested with the meaning “be ashamed, feel shame”: Lee 1983: 83; contra LEH §967, √ἀπερίτμητος “uncircumcised” appears in Toubias [257BCE] and so is probably not an LXX neologism: Lee 1983: 111; cf. possible allusion to v. 41 in Acts 7:51). Israel’s pleasure in their sins, which is probably a mistranslation that confused two homonyms, gives the impression that Israel feels shame before other people, not the Lord (v. 41 [also 2× in v. 34]: √εὐδοκέω [a new, well-attested Koine formation: Lee 1983: 97] for √‫ רצה‬II qal. “to pay, redeem” gl. 1 HALOT § 8959; “pay for, make amends for, make (vicarious) atonement for one’s own sin” DCH 7:542–543; DCH lists 26:41, 43 under ‫ רצה‬II, but leaves the possibility: “unless both ‫ רצה‬I be pleased with”). This portrait of Israel actually correlates, more lucidly than the Heb., with a certain degree of ambiguity concerning the divine-Israel relationship in vv. 40–45. The Lord next announces, “And I will remember the covenant of Iakob, and I will remember the covenant of Isaak and the covenant of Abraam, and I will remember the land” (v. 42; cf. GenesisA 15, 17 [Abraam]; echoes in 26 [Isaak], 28 and 35 [Iakob]; cf. possible allusion in Luke 1:72–73). This recalls the blessings of the covenant relationship in vv. 9–13, but here there is no mention of the Lord’s presence, nor of restoration to or prosperity in the land (contra vv. 4–13). Furthermore, the penultimate metaphor here resumes the imagery of the land’s

commentary

421

rest while the Lord’s people are in exile (vv. 43–44; v. 43 2o ἡ γῆ > MT SP; v. 44 ἡ γῆ > MT SP). The omission of any statement that the Lord will restore Israel to the land is rhetorically potent: the location and quality of Israel’s future residence is contingent on their response to the four rounds of abysmal discipline. Nevertheless, at v. 44 early Greek readers would have probably read the ὣς + gen. absolute clause as a subjective statement, then proleptic aorists that stress that the Lord will not abandon his covenant oath: “And not even as they are living [ὣς ὄντων αὐτῶν] in the land of their enemies did I ever despise [ὑπερεῖδον] them, nor was I provoked [προσώχθισα] by them to destroy them completely, to scatter abroad my covenant with them, because I am the Lord their God” (v. 44; on the “loose syntax” of v. 44, see Muraoka 2016: 415, but for ὣς + gen. abs. as ‘a subjective formulation of a pretext,’ see ibid. 2016: 418–419; “in the land” ἐν τῇ γῇ = ‫ בארץ‬MT ≠ pl. ‫ בארצות‬SP). The result infinitive, “to scatter abroad [τοῦ διασκεδάσαι] my covenant with them,” is a figure of speech that means the Lord will not reject his treaty with Israel (√διασκεδάζω “to reject, throw away as unimportant, unacceptable” GELS 158 gl. 3; figuratively “to disperse, scatter abroad” GELS 158 gl. 2; “to scatter abroad” LEH §2224 gl. 1). The decisive word that concludes the discourse of chs. 25–26 (LeuB) is the last of the nine variations of the formula of the Lord’s deliverance from Egypt (11:45; 19:36; 22:33; 23:43; 25:38, 42, 55; 26:13, 45): “…, and I will remember their former covenant when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, out of a house of slavery in the presence of the nations, to be their God. I am the Lord” 26:45

Only the final two permutations of this deliverance formula, 26:13 and specifically LeuBA 26:45, associate the Lord’s action of bringing Israel out of Egypt with his covenant loyalty (26:11: διαθηκην B A et al. vs. σκηνην F Gött). The elements of “covenant” (LeuB v. 11, also v. 9), the covenant formula, “I will be to you God, and you will be my people” (v. 12), and the Egypt-deliverance formula (v. 13) are all present and compacted within 26:46, with the implication that the same divine-Israel covenant intimacy of vv. 9–13 is still possible in v. 44–45, even if Israel is still imagined to be in exile (vv. 43–44).

26:46 Subscription for Leueitikon Proper After 7:27–28, which concluded the sacrifices of 1:1–7:27, this the second major subscription in the book:

422

commentary

Ταῦτα τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου, καὶ ὁ νόμος ὃν ἔδωκεν Κύριος ἀνὰ μέσον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινὰ ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ. “These are my judgments and my orders,” and [this is] the law that the Lord gave between himself and between the Israelites in the mountain Seina by the hand of Mōysēs. 26:46

I have supplied reasons that militate against interpreting chs. 8–26 (after the 7:28 break) or even the Holiness Code of chs. 17–26 as the book’s second unit, but that favor interpreting chs. 11–17 and 18–26 as distinct collections (see Narrative Macro-Structure). The placement and comprehensive language of this 26:46 subscription might be read as the original ending of the Seina pericope, but more naturally as the conclusion of Leueitikon proper (also, certain LeuB readers may have been aware that both ancient treaties and legal collections ended with curses, or blessings and curses). Consequently, 27:1–33 is presented as a supplementary text that is doubly closed off by the ultimate 27:34 subscription and the unique Num 1:1 inscription. The lexemes of the 26:46 subscription appear to support this view: “my judgments and my orders” (τὰ κρίματά μου καὶ τὰ προστάγματά μου) alludes to chs. 18–26 which, aside from 4:2, contain all other occurrences of these two lexems (√κρίμα in 18:4, 5; 20:22; 26:15, 43, 46; √πρόσταγμα in 18:4, 5, 26, 30; 19:37; 20:8, 22; 24:12; 26:3, 14, 43, 46), whereas “the law” (ὁ νόμος) alludes to chs. 1–17, which contain all occurrences of this precise lexeme (often “this is the law [ὁ νόμος] of X”: 6:9, 14, 22, 25, 31, 37; 7:1, 27; 11:46; 12:7; 13:59; 14:2, 32, 54, 57; 15:3, 32). The other two occurrences of √νόμος in Leueitikon are different than those in chs. 1–17 inasmuch as they have the enclitic, “my law” (τὸν νόμον μου: 19:19, 37), and appear to refer internally to ch. 19, which is circumscribed by the inclusio of chs. 18 and 20 as its own “tôrâ for the holy community” (Nihan 2007: 99). The distinction between these two expressions in 26:46 is strengthened by LeuBA, which includes two plusses that present the first copula as the first-person speech of the Lord, “These are my judgments and my orders;” this separates it from the third-person report that now requires an elliptical verb, “and [this is] the law,” reminding readers even more lucidly of the same expression in chs. 1–17 (“And this is the law”; 1st μου B A x min > F BrMcL Gött; 2nd μου B* A x-509 min > Bc F BrMcL Gött; the syntax of v. 26 therefore differs in LXXGött, see Muraoka 2016: 669). The parlance of “the law that the Lord gave between himself and between the Israelites [ἀνὰ μέσον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ]” has covenantal

commentary

423

overtones from the Patriarchal History, to which LevLXX 26:42 recently alluded (on B* leaves now lost: Gen 9:12, 13, 15, 16, 17; 17:2, 7, 10, 11). The idiom “by the hand of Mōysēs” (ἐν χειρὶ Μωυσῆ) does not refer to writing or inscribing, as the other occurrence in Leu 10:11 makes clear: “you must teach … that the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Mōsēs [διὰ χειρὸς Μωσῆ].” Instead, the expression refers to his mediation of the oral covenant stipulations at Seina (σεινα B* V G BrMcL vs. σινα Bc A F Gött; preserving the ‘hand’ idiom: NETS 105; SD 131; BA 211; BG 288). This idiom becomes common in Numbers (11×), and in Joshua and Judges it reasserts the enduring authority of the instructions Mōysēs had mediated (Josh 22:9; Judg 3:4; later also 1 Chr 16:40; Neh 10:29; Ps 76:21).

27:1–27 Vows, Gifts, Consecrations to the Lord Following the subscription, the LeuB scribe has understandably marked this as a new section that is initiated by the final superscription formula, which culminates the block of divine discourse through Mōysēs intended for the entire congregation in chs. 23–27 (esp. 23:1–2, 9–10, 23–24, 33–34; 24:1–2; 25:1–2; vs. chs. 21–22 instructions for the priests). The unit flows from: vowing to the Lord for a soul (vv. 2c–8); to giving to the Lord from the animals (vv. 9–13); to consecrating to the Lord one’s house (vv. 14–15) or some of one’s field (vv. 16–24). This collection is bound by the shared motif of perameters for giving voluntarily to the Lord from one’s posessions (whether money [in lieu of a life], animals, house, field). The implication is that it was not compulsory for an Israelite to give in any of these ways, but if one chose to, one must follow the divine guidelines set forth. Consequently, a thematic inclusio is formed with Leueitikon 1, which presents the “whole burnt offering” (√ὁλοκαύτωμα) not as a compulsory propitation for exposed or even unknown sin (only later in 4:1–6:7), but as a propitiation that is a sweet smell to the Lord, that is, as a voluntary and costly sacrifice to please the Lord (see commentary on 1:1–10). Verses 2c–8 are introduced with the marked verbal subject as the focus, “Whoever vows a vow to the Lord, for the value of his life” (v. 2c, Ὃς ἂν εὔξηται εὐχὴν ὥστε τιμὴν τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ; see Levinsohn 37–40; nothing meaningful is lost with the minus of ανθρωπος F Gött > B A V mins Latcod 100 Arm). The Hebraic cognate accusative does not mean “prays a prayer,” but “vows a vow;” that is, utters a vow accompanied by an “offering that has been vowed” (√εὔχομαι GELS 307 gl. 1, not gl. 2; √εὐχή GELS gl. 1a–b). Adopting the most frequently attested meaning of ὥστε reads with difficulty, “a vow … for the purpose (or result) of the value of his life” (LEH §9839, for Leu 27:2: “so that” but

424

commentary

“sine verbo”). Rather, Muraoka cites four examples of gloss 4, “to the extent that, so much that,” and accordingly translates v. 2: “makes a vow equivalent to the value of his own life” (italics mine; GELS 750; with √τιμή indicating “that which is given as payment for commodity or service rendered” GELS 681 gl. 2). I preserve the ambiguity as “for the value of a life,” but “equivalent to the value of a life” is understood contextually because the subunit specifies that the required amount of money one should give for one’s vow is equivalent to, that is, determined by, one’s demographic: 20–60-year-old males give 50 didrachmas (v. 3); 20–60-year-old females give 30 didrachmas (v. 4); 5–20-year-old males give 20 didrachmas, whereas 5–20-year-old females give 14 didrachmas (v. 5); 1 month– 5-year-old males give 5 didrachmas, 1 month–5-year-old females give 3 didrachmas (v. 6); 60+-year-old males give 15 didrachmas, 60+-year-old females give 10 didrachmas (v. 7); and in accommodation to the financially “humble,” they give “as the hand of the one making the vow is strong, the priest must evaluate him” (v. 8). LeuB’s unique reading in v. 5 “fourteen didrachmas” (vs. “ten didrachmas”) for a 5–20-year-old female, is closer to the ratio of male- to female-required values in the context: 5/3 (vv. 3–4), 5/3.5 (v. 5), 5/3 (v. 6), 5/3.3̄ (v. 7) (δεκατεσσερα B*unique [δεκα τεσσερα Swete] vs. δεκα Bc A F BrMcL Gött = εἴκοσι/δεκα ratio of 2/1). In v. 7, LeuB probably represents dittography, but can still be interpreted: “five and, rather, also ten (didrachmas)” (πεντε και δε και δεκα B*; πέντε καὶ δέκα LXX-B Swete BrMcL; πεντεκαίδεκα Gött). The idiom of v. 8 is awkward in LeuB without the anaphoric article: “Now if he is humble with regard to a value” (τιμῇ as dat. of respect: Muraoka 2016: 161–162; + τη Bc A F Gött; > B* b mins BrMcL). The meaning is still perceptible that the priest evaluates the disadvantaged person’s means and establishes the amount he is required to give for a vow (cf. accommodation in 5:7; 14:21; 25:28, 39). The translator’s choice of ‘didrachma’ (√δίδραχμον, 8×), an ancient Greek silver coin worth two drachmae (8.6 grams), is an anachronistic currency of a denomination equivalent to the ancient Hebrew shekel (‫ ;שׁקל‬for √δίδραχμον as one of the silver coins known to the LXX translators, see Lee 1983: 64–65; GELS 164; LEH § 2301). The scale used to weigh the didrachmas was to be calibrated “by the sanctuary standard” (τῷ σταθμῷ τῷ ἁγίῳ, dat. standard of measurement: Muraoka 2016: 173), which may be specified later in v. 25: “twenty obols must be a didrachma” (normally, one obole at .72 grams equaled 1/5th to 1/6th of a drachma, or 1/10th to 1/12th of a didrachma; LEH §6268). The genitive of material, “silver [ἀργυρίου] didrachmas,” occurs inconsistently (vv. 3, 6, 7) and is a redundancy since the original Alexandrian audience knew this coin was made of silver (Lee 1983: 64– 65), although this may have been instructive for LeuB’s Byzantine readers (from 330 CE) less familiar with Greek imperial coinage.

commentary

425

Verses 9–13 transition to define acceptable animal gifts to the Lord. The verses are subdivided into clean (vv. 9–10) and unclean animals (vv. 11–13), marked literarily by the unneeded metacomments (italicized) that slow down the discourse before the apodoses: “But if a gift to the Lord is from the animals of those that are being brought, whoever indeed from these belongs to the Lord, it must be holy” (v. 9); and, “But if a gift to the Lord is any unclean animal from those that are not brought, he must stand the animal before the priest” (see Runge 2010: 386; v. 9, “whoever indeed [δη B A] from these” vs. “whoever gives [δω F Swete BrMcL Gött] from these”). The language of an animal not as a vow, per se, but as a “gift” (√δῶρον, vv. 9, 11) recalls the whole burnt and deliverance sacrifices (chs. 1, 3), which could be offered not to propitiate for an exposed sin or sinful error, but to affect propitiation as a “sweet smell to the Lord” (but also, cf. √δῶρον in chs. 2, 4–9, 17, 21, 22, 23). However, the concern in vv. 9–13 is not sacrifice, since one is permitted in vv. 11–12 to bring an unclean animal for the same purpose (also Harlé and Pralon 1988: 212). Verses 9–10 inform that designating an animal gift—whether an animal or a subsequent replacement, which is awkwardly prohibited then condoned (v. 10)—transfers the animal into the holy realm of that which belongs to the deity (vv. 9–10; v. 10a also breaks the protasis-apodosis pattern in vv. 5–9 with the prohibitive fut. οὐκ ἀλλάξει; for the translational problems of v. 10, see Wevers 1997: 470–471). For unclean animals in vv. 11–13, there is understandably no mention of a ‘holy’ status. Instead, the priest assigns a value to the unclean animal gift, then if the devotee decides to purchase it back (√λυτρόω 2×, mimicking Heb. adverbial inf. + verb of same root), he must pay the sum of the priest’s valuation of the animal plus one-fifth (120%; √τιμάω “to assess the value of” GELS 680–681 gl. 3; “he must evaluate it [n. αὐτὸ]” = maybe ‫ אתו‬SP ≠ f. ‫אתה‬ MTL 11QpaleoLeva; but “by redeeming he redeems him [αυτον B* min; “it” αυτο Bc A F BrMcL Gött]” = maybe ‫ו‬. SP 11QpaleoLeva ≠ ‫ה‬. MT). In v. 12, the LeuB reading is unnatural, but because it is an overspecification, the context is sufficient without it: “as it must be evaluated [τιμηθήσεται], the priest in this way must stand” (τιμηθησεται B min vs. τιμησεται A F M’ V mins; τιμησηται Gött: “as the priest sets the value, so it shall stand” NETS 106; see Muraoka 2016: 247). Verses 14–24 shift to one’s prerogative of consecrating to the Lord one’s property, that is, one’s house (vv. 14–15) or field (vv. 16–24). The transition in v. 14 is marked by the fronted nominative which gives the impression of being a pendent, “And whoever consecrates his house as holy to the Lord” (Καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἂν ἁγιάσῃ τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ ἁγίαν τῷ κυρίῳ), but the subject changes and the next clause instead resumes the accusative, “and the priest [ὁ ἱερεύς] must evaluate it [αὐτὴν]” (the same referent reappears in v. 15, so that v. 15 is not a true pro-

426

commentary

lepsis: Muraoka 2016: 731). The active voice “consecrates” (√ἁγιάζω, aor. subj. in vv. 14, 16, 17, 18; aor. subst. ptc. in v. 15), in the context of Leueitikon denotes that one affects the transfer of a cultic object, animal or fine flour sacrifice, or person into the Lord’s possession (in Leu., Mōysēs consecrates the altar, its accoutrements, the tent, Aarōn and his sons, their garments [8:11(3×), 12, 15, 30; similarly 21:8(2×), 15, 23]; Aarōn must consecrate the altar on the Day of Propitiation [16:19]; the Lord consecrates his people and priests [20:8; 22:9]; the Israelites must consecrate offerings and the fiftieth year of release [22:2, 3; 25:10]). As a non-priest could give away offerings to the Lord, which only the priests, their slaves and widowed daughters were permitted to eat (22:10– 16), so now a non-priest could give away his house, crops or field to the Lord. The priests’ role, by analogy, might be implicitly to eat the consecrated crops (v. 16), but explicitly his role is to appraise the value of a house, yield of a field, or an entire field (√τιμάω, v. 14[2×]; √προσλογίζομαι, v. 18; √ἀνθυφαιρέομαι, v. 18; √λογίζομαι, v. 23). This focus in the chapter is reinforced by the nominal Leitwort ‘value’ (√τιμή, 16×), which is expressed twice through the rare term ‘valuation’ (√συντίμησις, vv. 4, 12; which was not necessarily coined by the LXX translators since it is attested in two 3rd cent. Koine texts: Lee 1983: 96). In v. 16, the valuation of a consecrated portion of one’s patrimonial field is “according to its sowing,” which probably means, “according to the seed required for it” (Wevers 1997: 473; thus, a partitive ἀπὸ and objective gen. αὐτοῦ). The precise cost for the seed, “fifty silver didrachmas for a kor [κόρου] of barley,” was probably not known to Greek readers unversed in Hebrew due to this Semitic loanword for a ‘dry measure’ (√κόρος was, however, identified in a third cent. Koine text by Lee 1983: 116). Verses 17–24 assume that the priests, but also the one consecrating, knew the nature and extent of the release year from ch. 25. The Vorlage of LXX v. 17 continues the string of “but if” disjunctives characteristic of ch. 27 (ἐὰν δὲ = ‫ואם‬ SP 4QLev-Numa Mmss ≠ ‫ אם‬ML 11QpaleoLeva). The priest now must assign the value for each consecrated field “from the year of release” (ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ τῆς ἀφέσεως, v. 17), which is undefined and so, even if unintentionally, allowed the priest to calculate from the coming or from the prior release year (cf. 25:15– 16). In place of the anaphoric “if the one who consecrates [ὁ ἁγιάσας]” (from vv. 17–18), LeuB creates a redundancy that is yet comprehensible, “if the one who purchases [ὁ ἀγοράσας] it redeems the field.” The redeemer must pay 120 percent of its value (v. 19, αγορασας B*unique; αγιασας Bc A F BrMcL Gött; √ἀγοράζω “to buy in the market” LSJ §333; “to purchase” GELS 7). If LeuB v. 19 refers to an unspecified one who redeems for himself, but probably still the consecrator of vv. 17–18 is understood, then LeuB v. 20 with its homoioarcton (of τον αγρον) can be understood as that one redeeming “for another person” (prb. dat.

commentary

427

of advantage ἀνθρώπῳ ἑτέρῳ) such as a relative (so 25:25): “But if he does not redeem the field for another person, he must no longer redeem it” (cf. “But if he does not redeem the field, and should sell the field [και αποδωται τον αγρον] to another person”: + Bmg A F Swete BrMcL Gött > Btxt Latcod 100; LXX mid. οὐκέτι μὴ λυτρώσηται αὐτόν vs. MT SP ‫ לא יגאל עוד‬N-stem pass. or refl. w/o obj.). In this case of one’s decision to not redeem the field, it will be “holy to the Lord like the land that has been set apart; it will be of a possession for the priest” (v. 21, which is initiated by the stronger disjunctive ἀλλ’, and in LeuB reads “of a possession for the priest” κατασχεσεως B*unique; κατασχεσις Bc A F Swete BrMcL Gött). Again the parallel is clear: both the Israelites’ offerings and now their unredeemed fields after the release year that are consecrated to the Lord must transfer into the possession of the priests (see 2:3, 10; 6:16–18, 26, 29, 36–40; 7:4– 8, 21–26; 22:10–16). In v. 22, although the subject is unstated (and so could be an extension of vv. 17–21), the preposed objects in parallel with v. 16 clarify that this is a new subject: “But if some of the field of his possession a person consecrates to the Lord, …” (v. 16) “But if some of the field that he has acquired that is not from his possession one consecrates to the Lord, …” (v. 22) The term “possession” (√κατάσχεσις) refers throughout ch. 25, the assumed basis for 27:14–33, to one’s ancestral land (13× in ch. 25; explicitly “ancestral possession” in 25:41; in v. 22: “Besitzerwerbs” SD 132; “holding” NETS 106; “propriété” BA 213; “propiedad” BG 290). The one who consecrates his acquired land must pay the value that the priest assigns to it “from the release year,” which again as in v. 17, may be reconstrued to mean the remaining years until the coming release year or completed years since the past release year (also v. 17). As one might infer from 25:23–28, the acquired and now consecrated property must return to the original ancestral owner in the release year (v. 24). Verses 25–27, which deal with holy weights and dedicated animals, modify the instructions of vv. 2–24. “With holy weights” (σταθμίοις ἁγίοις) is not an idiomatic dat. of means for operating the weights and scales in a holy manner (cf. Prov 16:11; 20:23), but a dat. of measurement, that is, “according to/in conformity with holy weights” (see Muraoka 2016: 173–174; √στάθμιον “weight of balance” GELS 632). This appears to define “the sanctuary standard” (in v. 3, τῷ σταθμῷ τῷ ἁγίῳ, with anaphoric art. known culturally, see Muraoka 2016: 4– 6) as 20 obols to one didrachma; this standard is used not only for monetary vows, but “every value” (πᾶσα τιμὴ, v. 25) in vv. 2–24 (see above for ‘obol’; τιμὴ

428

commentary

ἔσται σταθ. = ‫ יהיה‬MT > SP). As a caveat to clean animal gifts (vv. 9–10), in v. 26 “every firstborn” (πᾶν πρωτότοκον) calf or sheep already belongs to the Lord, and therefore, cannot be dedicated (√καθαγιάζω, “to dedicate, to consecrate,” a verb that occurs 6× in the LXX; in Leu 8:9, the golden leaf on the priestly headband is a “dedicated” holy object; also cf. 1Chr 26:20; 2 Macc 1:26; 2:8; 15:18; πᾶν = ‫ כל‬SP > MT). The term “firstborn” (√πρωτότοκος) is a hapax legomenon within Leuitikon, and therefore a fuller understanding requires knowledge from Exod 22:29; 34:19–20 (first in 13:2, 13, 15), where the Lord demands for himself every firstborn male human, cow and sheep, and where the Lord also demands that every firstborn male human must be redeemed, that is, must not be sacrificed to the Lord, but be bought back by the patriarch (in Exod 4:22– 23, the Lord calls Israel his √πρωτότοκος, and as the tenth sign in Egypt, the Lord strikes down every Egyptian human and animal √πρωτότοκος, male and female: Exod 11:5; 12:12, 29;). Then as a caveat to unclean animal gifts (Leu 27:11– 13), in v. 27, one who dedicates an animal to the Lord from the quadrupeds must either sell the animal and give the money to the Lord, probably to the priests (cf. v. 22), or “must exchange” (ἀλλάξει), that is, redeem the animal by paying 120 percent of its value (αλλαξει B rell; [αλαξεται] λυτρωσεται/.σηται mins; αλλαξη mins Gött; as in LXX Exod 13:13, αλλαξει is associated with ‘redeem,’ as is clear from the inverse “if he does not redeem …,” v. 27dα; see Wevers 1997: 479). What is shocking is that the Lord accepts the dedication of a ‘quadruped’ and the proceeds from its sale, since everywhere else in Leueitikon this class has a negative connotation: these animals could make one unclean by touch and could be subjected to the perverse act of bestiality (√τετράπους in 7:11; 18:23[2×]; 20:15[2×]; Heb. ‫ בהמה‬means more generically, “animals, beasts, cattle,” but in Leu. 18–19, “contact with ʹ‫ ְבּ‬forbidden … inbreeding not allowed”: HALOT §1089).

27:28–33 Regulations for Devoted Things and Tithes The LeuB scribe was perceptive to mark this as the penultimate paragraph in the book in view of the shift of Leitworte to √ἀνατίθημι “to devote, dedicate” (4×, vv. 28–29) and √δέκατος “tenth, tithe” (4× in vv. 30–32, implied in v. 33). Also, while vows (vv. 2–8), animal gifts (vv. 9–13), and house and field consecrations (vv. 14–24) can be redeemed under certain restrictions, v. 28 seems to invert this by teaching that every person, animal or field that one devotes to the Lord “must not be sold or redeemed; every devoted thing must be holy of holies to the Lord.” The categories of v. 28 allude back to the tripartite organization of vv. 2–24: “from a person” (ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου) alludes to vows for a life in vv. 2–8; “to

commentary

429

an animal” (ἕως κτήνους) alludes to animal gifts in vv. 9–13; “and from his field of possession” (καὶ ἀπὸ ἀγροῦ κατασχέσεως αὐτοῦ) alludes to field consecrations in vv. 14–24. Consequently, v. 28 is not referring to different objects directed to the Lord. Instead, the difference between vv. 2–24 and v. 28 is the selection of the verb “devote” (√ἀνατίθημι) and its preposed, emphasized, nominal cognate “devoted” (√ἀνάθεμα), which denotes a distinct way of designating one’s life or property to the Lord that is ἅγιον ἁγίων “holy of holies,” a descriptor not found in vv. 2–24 (contra the generic “ofreciera” BG 290; contra “weiht” SD 132, b/c SD uses this same verb to translate √καθαγιάζω in v. 26; on the debate whether ἅγιον ἁγίων is a calque or reflects CG usage as a superlative: Muraoka 2016: 128, 129 n. 1, 197). The active voice ἀναθῇ (aor. act. subj.) indicates “may devote” or “may dedicate” (NETS 106; GELS 46), taking an acc. obj., “whatever,” and dat. i.d.o. “to the Lord” (see this usage in Jdt 16:19; also 2Macc 5:16, as a pass. ptc.; however, in the oversight of GELS 46, the act. voice 1 Sam 31:10; 2 Sam 6:17 do not mean “devote,” but “A: to set up and leave (in a place)”: LEH § 669). The Hebraic notion “devote to destruction” is not conveyed in the Greek lexeme (contra LEH § 669 gl. 2, citing Leu 27:28 as, “all devoted things, that a man has dedicated to destruction”; also “a voué à l’interdit” BA 214; these renderings are influenced by ‫ חרם‬I: DCH 3:317–318; HALOT §3233). Now as a genuine contradiction to v. 28, LeuB v. 29, in which οὐ is omitted by haplography perhaps due to the assonance of dictating ου and λυ., reads: “And anything that has been devoted from people must be redeemed [λυτρωθήσεται], but by death it must be put to death” (+ ου Bc Swete BrMcL Gött; > B*unique). This LeuB reading actually eliminates the redundancy of the majority LXX text between v. 28 and v. 29a (which obfuscates the Heb.), but it exacerbates the problem already apparent in LXX v. 29b, that the devoted entities in v. 28—people, animals, fields—“by death must be put to death” (θανάτῳ θαναθωθήσεται, v. 29b). One way out of this interpretive impass is to understand ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου in v. 28, as I argued above, as an allusion to the vow for the “value of a life” (v. 2), that is the monetary equivalent for a vow for a life. By contrast, the plural, partitive ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων in v. 29b, which modifies πᾶν ὃ ἐὰν ἀνατεθῇ, indicates not an equivalent value, but a person from the class of people who himself or herself has been devoted to the Lord. When read literarily after Leu 17:11 and 24:21, one may surmise that this person, devoted to the Lord, who must be killed, has committed murder, blasphemy or a commensurate offense (esp. see Leu. 20). In vv. 30–33, “every tenth from the land” (Πᾶσα δεκάτη τῆς γῆς), whether from the ground’s seed or tree’s fruit, belongs to the Lord (cf. possible allusion to v. 30 in Matt 23:23; Luke 11:42). The landowner can buy back this tenth with a ransom price equal to 120 percent of the value of the produce (v. 31; cf. vv. 12, 27; in LeuBA

430

commentary

v. 31, the pres. mid. subj. is followed by an instrumental dative: “should redeem by a ransom”: λυτρωται λυτρω B A x mins; λυτρουμενος λυτρωται F Gött). As for every tenth of cows and sheep, probably meaning the tenth ones to be born, are to be “holy to the Lord” (v. 32). The idiom “and everything that may come into the number under the staff” (πᾶν ὃ ἐὰν ἔλθῃ ἐν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ὑπὸ τὴν ῥάβδον) is enhanced by the probable Greek scribal addition of “into the number” (ἐν τῷ ἀριθμῷ) to indicate every animal that the herdsman numbers (which is prb. understood in Heb. without this phrase: Levine, Leviticus, 200). Verse 33 closely resembles v. 10 to prohibit swapping out animals, but the LXX converts v. 33 from third to second person, and in v. 33 only exchanging a good tithe animal for a bad is mentioned (√πονηρός ‘bad’ in LevLXX 26:6; 27:10[2×], 12, 14, 33 does not convey a uniquely biblical sense, as it can elsewhere in LXX: Lee 1983: 51). If one does this, however, both the good animal and the bad replacement will belong to the Lord (√ἀλλάσσω “to take in exchange for another, ‘substitute, replace,’” GELS 27 gl. 2, citing 27:10; ‫“ ולא ימירנו‬and he must not make a substitute for it” MT SP > LXX, which Harlé and Pralon [1988: 214] assert is a harmonization to v. 10). An inclusio between Leueitikon 1 and 27 is generated: the Israelite offers his √βοῦς “cattle” (1:2, 3) or √πρόβατον “flock” (1:2, 10) as a whole burnt offering (1:2, 3, 10), and now every tenth βοῶν καὶ προβάτων (27:32) belongs to the Lord. Because 27:30–33 does not specify what the Lord does with these tenth animals that belong to him, one might infer from the inclusio the possibility that they could be offered as a whole burnt offering, not for any exposed sin or sinful error (4:1–6:7), but purely as a propitiation that produced a sweet smell to the Lord (1:9, 13[, 17]). This possibility is later restricted by NumB 18:21, 24, 26, at which juncture the Lord instructs that all tithes are given to the landless Leuites whose inheritance is the Lord.

27:34 Subscription That Incorporates 27:1–33 into Leueitikon If 26:46 concludes the collection from 1:1–26:45 (see above), the function of the 27:34 subscription, which LeuB marks as the final unit, is to endorse the addition of 27:1–33 to the authoritative discourse of chs. 1–26: Αὗταί εἰσιν αἱ ἐντολαὶ ἃς ἐνετείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωυσῇ πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ ἐν τῷ ὄρει Σεινά. These are the commandments that the Lord commanded Mōysēs for the sons of Israel in the mountain Seina. 27:34

commentary

431

Harlé and Pralon speculate, “Le term unique entolaí, «prescriptions», semble bien ne viser que le chap. 27” (1988: 214). Instead, the near demonstrative subject and interchangeable proposition, “These are the commandments,” more simply refer back to the divine instructions throughout LeviticusLXX (so Wevers 1997: 482; for divine √ἐντολή in the book: 4:13, 22, 27; 5:17, 21; 22:31; 26:3, 15; the majority text tradition states the copula: εισιν B A F V d f n t x y mins Eth Arm Co > M mins Gött). The “commandments” in view do not appear to reach beyond LeviticusLXX into ExodusLXX, however, because there the Lord promised, inscribed and gave stone tablets of the commandments and book of the covenant (24:12; fulfilled in 31:18, and again in 34:1–28). Also, the repeated tabernacle blueprints, with interspersed construction, in Exod 35:1–40:13 were fulfilled in 40:14–27. In Leu 26:46, the emphasis was on Mōysēs as mediator of the divine-Israel covenant stipulations, whereas here in 27:34, with a cognate accusative, the Lord commands the commands to Mōysēs (i.d.o. τῷ Μωυσῇ) that are intended “for the sons of Israel” (πρὸς τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ prob. an adj. purpose clause; the aor. ἐνετείλατο could be consummative “he has commanded”; thus “the dat. c. pers. and πρὸς τινα are not free variants: the commandments were communicated to Moses and addressed to the Israelites to be observed by them”: Muraoka 2016: 123). The spatial “in [ἐν] the mountain Seina,” is a calque that I translate formally, especially since the translator knew how to specify “on the mountains” (ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων, 19:26; see ἐν τῷ ὄρει for ‫ בהר‬in 7:28; 25:1; 26:46; 27:34; cf. GELS 233 gl. 18; contra translations that render the Heb.: “on” NETS 106; “sur” BA 214; “am” SD 132; but ambiguous: “en” BG 290). The association with the mountain Seina (LeuB orth.) now situates the fullest form of Leueitikon within the Seina pericope (Σεινα B* min BrMcL; Σινα Bc A F Gött; cf. location of Num 36:13 “at the west of Moab, at the Jordan down from Iericho” NETS 140). After seven blank lines, the original colophon “Leueitikon” is centered in col. 3, recto p. 137 (λευειτικον B* A; λευιτικον Bc F Mʹ mins; λευιτηκον V). The rest of the column is blank (with only ink from the verso that has bled through), and at the top of the next page, verso p. 138, “Arithmoi” (Αριθμοι “Numbers”) begins. Therefore, in addition to the internal features that distinguish LeviticusLXX as the third book of the so-called πεντάτευχος “five scrolls,” the format of Codex Vaticanus categorically distinguishes LeuB from NumB and, in the same way, from ExodB (earlier, the Letter of Aristeas refered to the PentLXX as τὰ τεύχη “the scrolls”: De Troyer 2008b: 278). This format invites all to read Leueitikon as a discrete revelation within the Seina pericope, after the divine presence fills the constructed tabernacle and after the anachronistic reference to the divine cloud’s customary guidance (Exod 40:34–38), but before the divine revelation and movement of the cloud “in the wilderness of Seina” (Num 1:1; 10:11).

Bibliography Achenbach, Reinhard. “Das Heiligkeitsgesetz und die sakralen Ordnungen des Numeribuches im Horizont der Pentateuchredaktion.” Pages 145–175 in The Books of Leviticus and Numbers. Edited by Thomas Römer. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium 215. Leuven: Peeters, 2008. Aejmelaeus, Anneli. Parataxis in the Septuagint: A Study of the Renderings of the Hebrew Coordinate Clauses in the Greek Pentateuch. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae 31. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1982. Aejmelaeus, Anneli. “What Can We Know about the Hebrew Vorlage of the Septuagint?” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 99 (1987): 58–89. Aejmelaeus, Anneli. “What We Talk about When We Talk about Translation Technique.” Pages 531–552 in X Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Oslo, 1998. Edited by Bernard A. Taylor. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 51. Atlanta: SBL, 2001. Aejmelaeus, Anneli. On the Trail of the Septuagint Translators: Collected Essays. Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 50. Rev. and exp. ed. Leuven: Peeters, 2007. Aitken, James K. No Stone Unturned: Greek Inscriptions and Septuagint Vocabulary. Critical Studies in the Hebrew Bible 5. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2014. Aland, Kurt and Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. 2nd ed. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Amphoux, Christian and Arnaud Sérandour. “La composition de Jérémie LXX d’ après les divisions du Codex Vaticanus (B).” Pages 3–21 in XIII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Ljubljana, 2007. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 55. Edited by Melvin K.H. Peters. Atlanta: SBL, 2008. Amphoux, Christian. “Codex Vaticanus B: Les Points Diacritiques Des Marc.” Journal of Theological Studies 58 (2007): 440–466. Arnold, Bill T. “Genesis 1 as Holiness Preamble.” Pages 332–344 in Let Us Go Up to Zion: Essays in Honour of H.G.M. Williamson on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Supplements to Vetus Testamenum 153. Edited by Ian Provan and Mark J. Boda. Boston: Brill, 2012. Arns, Evaristo. La technique du livre d’après Saint Jérôme. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1953. Auld, A. Graeme. Joshua: Jesus Son of Nauē in Codex Vaticanus. Septuagint Commentary Series. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Ausloos, Hans. “Sept Défis à une Théologie de la Septante.” Paper presented at the triennial congress of the International Organization for the Study of the Old Testament. Stellenbosch, South Africa, September 7, 2016.

434

bibliography

Awabdy, Mark A. “Yhwh Exegetes Torah: How Ezek 44:7–9 Bars Foreigners from the Sanctuary.” Journal of Biblical Literature 31 (2012): 685–703. Awabdy, Mark A. Immigrants and Innovative Law: Deuteronomy’s Theological and Social Vision for the ‫גר‬. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 67. 2 Reihe. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Awabdy, Mark A. “Did Nadab and Abihu Draw Near before Yhwh? The Old Greek among the Witnesses of Leviticus 16:1.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 4 (2017): 580– 593. Awabdy, Mark and Fredrick J. Long. “Mark’s Inclusion of ‘For All Nations’ in 11:17d and the International Vision of Isaiah.” The Journal of Inductive Biblical Studies 2 (2014): 224–255. Baars, Willem. New Syro-Hexaplaric Texts: Edited, Commented upon and Compared with the Septuagint. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Barr, James. The Semantics of Biblical Language. London: Oxford University Press, 1961. Barthélemy, Dominique. Les devanciers d’Aquila. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 10. Leiden: Brill, 1963. Bauer, W., F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. Berlin, Adele. “Characterization in Biblical Narrative: David’s Wives.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 23 (1982): 69–85. Bibb, Bryan D. Ritual Words and Narrative Worlds in the Book of Leviticus. New York/London: T&T Clark, 2009. Bibliorum Sacrorum Graecorum Codex Vaticanus B. Roma: Istituto poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1999. Birdsall, J. Neville. “The Codex Vaticanus: Its History and Significance.” Pages 33–41 in The Bible as a Book: The Transmission of the Greek Text. Edited by S. McKendrick and O.A. O’Sullivan. London: The British Library/New Castle, Del.: Oak Knoll Press, 2003. Blum, Erhard. Studien zur Komposition des Pentateuch. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 189. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1990. Bogaert, Pierre-Marie. “Le Vaticanus graecus 1209 témoin du texte grec de l’ Ancien Testament.” Pages 47–76 in Le manuscrit B de la Bible (Vaticanus graecus 1209). Histoire du texte biblique 7. Edited by P. Andrist. Lausanne: Éditions du Zèbre, 2009. Bogaert, Pierre-Marie. Prolegomena to Codex Vaticanus B. Codex vaticanus graecus 1209. Bibliorum sacrorum graecorum. Vatican City: Bibliotheca Apostolicae Vaticanae & Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca della Stato, 1999. Brenton, Lancelot Charles Lee. The Septuagint version of the Old Testament with an English translation, and with various readings and critical notes. London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1884.

bibliography

435

Brooke, Alan E. and McLean, Norman, eds. The Old Testament in Greek: According to the text of Codex Vaticanus, Supplemented from Other Uncial Manuscripts, with a Critical Apparatus Containing the Variants of the Chief Ancient Authorities for the Text of the Septuagint. Vol. 1: The Octateuch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917. Büchner, Dirk L. “Leuitikon.” Pages 82–106 in A New English Translation of the Septuagint: A New Translation of the Greek into Contemporary English—An Essential Resource for Biblical Studies. Edited by Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Büchner, Dirk L. “The Thysia Soteriou of the Septuagint and the Greek Cult: Representation and Accommodation.” Pages 85–100 in “Florilegium Lovaniense. Studies in Septuagint and Textual Criticism in Honour of Florentino García Martínez.” Edited by H. Ausloos, B. Lemmelijn and M. Vervenne. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 224. Leuven: Peeters, 2008. Büchner, Dirk L. “ἐξιλάσασθαι: Appeasing God in the Septuagint Pentateuch.” Journal of Biblical Literature 129 (2010a): 237–260. Büchner, Dirk L. “Some Reflections on Writing a Commentary on the Septuagint of Leviticus.” Pages 107–117 in “Translation is Required”: The Septuagint in Retrospect and Prospect. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 56. Edited by Melvin K.H. Peters. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2010b. Büchner, Dirk L. “Leuitikon 3.1–17: The Sacrifice of Deliverance.” Pages 95–122 in The SBL Commentary on the Septuagint: An Introduction. Edited by Dirk Büchner. Atlanta: SBL, 2017. Canart, Paul. “Le Vaticanus graecus 1209: notice paléographique et codicologique.” Pages 19–45 in Le manuscrit B de la Bible (Vaticanus graecus 1209). Edited by Patrick Andrist. Lausanne: Éditions du Zèbre, 2009. Cavallo, Guiglielmo. Richerce sulla maiuscola biblica. Studi e testi di papirologica 2. Florence: Le Monnier, 1967. Chamberlain, Gary Alan. “Cultic Vocabulary in the Septuagint.” Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 27 (1994): 21–28. Chavel, Simeon. Oracular Law and Priestly Historiography in the Torah. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 71. 2 Reihe. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Clancy, Frank. “The Date of LXX.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 16 (2002): 207–225. Clines, David J.A., ed. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. 8 Vols. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press. 1993–2016. Cole, Zachary J. “An Unseen Paleographical Problem with Milne and Skeat’s Dictation Theory of Codex Sinaiticus.” Journal of Biblical Literature 135 (2016): 103–107. Conybeare, F.C. and St. George Stock. A Grammar of Septuagint Greek. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1905.

436

bibliography

Connor, Steven. Dumbstruck: A Cultural History of Ventriloquism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Cook, Johann. “Reconsidering Septuagintal Origins.” Journal for Semitics 14 (2005): 441– 461. Daniel, Suzanne. Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante. Etudes et commentaries 61. Paris: Klineksieck, 1966. De Boer, P.A.H. “An Aspect of Sacrifice.” Pages 27–47 in Studies in the Religion of Ancient Israel. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 23. Leiden: Brill, 1972. De Troyer, Kristin. “On the Name of God in the Old Greek Schøyen Leviticus Papyrus.” Pages 329–337 in Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by A. Voitila and J. Jokiranta. Supplements to Journal for the Study of Judaism 126. Leiden: Brill, 2008a. De Troyer, Kristin. “When did the Pentateuch come into Existence? An Uncomfortable Perspective.” Pages 269–286 in Die Septuaginta—Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten. Edited by Martin Karrer and Wolfgang Kraus. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 219. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008b. De Troyer, Kristin. “Leviticus.” Pages 1–68 and Plates I–XVI in Papyri Graecae Schøyen, PSchøyen II. Edited by D. Minutoli and R. Pintaudi. Papyrologica Florentina, XL/ Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Greek Papyri V/II. Florence: Gonnelli, 2010. Den Hertog, Cornelis G. “Erwägungen zur relative Chronologie der Bücher Levitikus und Deuteronomium innerhalb der Pentateuchübersetzung.” Pages 216–228 in Im Brennpunkt: Die Septuaginta. Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament 161. Edited by S. Kreuzer and J.P. Lesch. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2004. Dhont, Marieke. Style and Context of the Old Greek Job. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 183. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Dickie, Matthew W. Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World. London: Routledge, 2001. Dorival, Gilles. “Les Origins de la Septante.” Pages 39–82 in La Bible grecque des Septante: Du judaïsme hellénistique au christianisme ancient. Initiations au christianisme ancien 5. Edited by Marguerite Harl, Gilles Dorival and Olivier Munnich. Paris: Cerf, 1988. Dorival, Gilles. “Dire en grec les choses juives: Quelques choix lexicaux du Pentateuque de la Septante.” Revue des études grecques 109 (1996): 527–547. Douglas, Mary. Leviticus as Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Duplacy, Jean. “Les divisions du texte de l’épitre de Jacques dans B(03) du Nouveau Testament (Vatican. gr. 1209).” Pages 122–136 in Studies in NT Language and Text: Essays in Honour of George D. Kilpatrick. Novum Testamentum Supplements 44. Edited by J.K. Elliot. Leiden: Brill, 1976. Repr. pages 169–183 in Études de critique textuelle du NT. Edited by J. Delobel. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium 78. Leuven: Peters, 1987.

bibliography

437

Eslinger, Lyle. “Inner-biblical Exegesis and Inner-biblical Allusion: The Question of Category,” Vetus Testamentum 42 (1992): 47–58. Fernández Marcos, Natalio. The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Version of the Bible. Translated by Wilfred G.E. Watson. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Fernández Marcos, Natalio, Ma Victoria Spottorno Díaz-Caro, and José Manuel Cañas Reíllo. La Biblia Griega Septuaginta. Vol. 1: El Pentateuco. Ediciones Sígueme: Salamanca, 2008. Fishbane, Michael. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon, 1985. Hallo, William W., K. Lawson Younger, eds. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 1 of The Context of Scripture. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Hallo, William W., K. Lawson Younger, Harry A. Hoffner, Robert K. Ritner, eds. Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World. Vol. 2 of The Context of Scripture. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Harlé, Paul and Didier Pralon. Le Lévitique. Vol. 3 of La Bible d’ Alexandrie. Paris: Cerf, 1988. Harris, William V. Ancient Literacy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1989. Hengel, Martin. The Septuagint as Christian Scripture: Its Prehistory and the Problem of Its Canon. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004. Hiebert, Robert J.V. “Genesis.” Pages 1–42 in A New English Translation of the Septuagint: A New Translation of the Greek into Contemporary English—An Essential Resource for Biblical Studies. Edited by Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Himbaza, Innocent. “Quelle est la Septante du Lévitique?” Journal of Septuagint and Cognate Studies 49 (2016): 22–33. Huber, Karl. Untersuchungen über den Sprachcharakter des griechischen Leviticus. Giessen: Töpelmann, 1916. Jellicoe, Sidney. “The Hesychian Recension Reconsidered.” Journal of Biblical Literature 82 (1963): 409–418. Jellicoe, Sidney. The Septuagint and Modern Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968. Jones, A.H.M. The Latter Roman Empire, 284–602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey. Vol. III. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1964. Joosten, Jan. People and Land in the Holiness Code: An Exegetical Study of the Ideational Framework of the Law in Leviticus 17–26. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Joosten, Jan. “Reflections on the ‘Interlinear Paradigm’ in Septuagintal Studies.” Pages 163–178 in Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo. Leiden: Brill, 2008a. Joosten, Jan. Review of Susan Brayford, Genesis, Review of Biblical Literature [http:// www.bookreviews.org] (2008b). Joosten, Jan. “The Aramaic Background of the Seventy: Language, Culture and History.” BIOSCS 43 (2010): 1–22.

438

bibliography

Joosten, Jan. “Interpretation and Meaning in the Septuagint Translation.” Pages 52–62 in Translation—Interpretation—Meaning. Edited by Anneli Aejmelaeus and Päivi Pahta. Studies across Disciplines in the Humanities and Social Sciences 7. Helsinki: Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, 2012. Joosten, Jan. “Septuagint Greek and the Jewish Sociolect in Egypt.” Pages 246–256 in Die Sprache der Septuaginta/The Language of the Septuagint. Edited by Eberhard Bons and Jan Joosten. Band/Vol. 3 of Handbuch zur Septuaginta/Handbook of the Septuagint. Gütersloh: Gütersloher, 2016. Joosten, Jan. “The Egyptian Background of the Septuagint.” Pages 79–89 in The Library of Alexandria: A Cultural Crossroads of the Ancient World. Edited by Christophe Rico and Anca Dan. Jerusalem: Polis Institute Press, 2017. Jürgens, Benedikt. Heiligheit und Versöhnung: Leviticus 16 in seinem literarischen Kontext. Herders biblische Studien 28. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2001. Kazen, Thomas. Scripture, Interpretation, or Authority? Motives and Arguments in Jesus’ Halakic Conflicts. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 320. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013. Kellermann, Diether. Die Priesterschrift von Numeri 1,1 bis 10,10. literarkritisch und traditionsgeschichtlich untersucht. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 120. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 1970. King, Philip J. and Lawrence E. Stager. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Klawans, Jonathan. Impurity and Sin in Ancient Judaism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Klostermann, August. “Ezechiel und das Heiligkeitsgesetz.” Zeitschrift für lutherische Theologie 38 (1877): 401–445. Repr., idem. Pages 368–417 in Der Pentateuch: Beiträge zu seinem Verständnis und seiner Entstehungsgeschichte. Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1893. Knohl, Israel. Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. Repr., Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Koehler, L., Baumgartner, W., Stamm, J.J. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of M.E.J. Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1994–1999. Kreuzer, Siegfried. “B or Not B? The Place of Codex Vaticanus in Textual History and in Septuagint Research.” Pages 69–96 in Text-Critical and Hermeneutical Studies in the Septuagint. Edited by Johan Cook and Hermann-Josef Stipp. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 154. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Repr., idem. Pages 272–297 in The Bible in Greek: Translation, Transmission, and Theology of the Septuagint. Atlanta: SBL, 2015. Law, Timothy Michael. When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Lee, J.A.L. “Equivocal and Stereotyped Renderings in the LXX.”Revue Biblique 87 (1980): 104–117.

bibliography

439

Lee, J.A.L. A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 14. Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1983. Levine, Baruch A. Leviticus. The JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1989. Levine, Baruch A. “Leviticus, Book of.” Pages 311–321 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Levinsohn, Stephen H. Discourse Features of New Tesatment Greek: A Coursebook on the Information Structure of New Testament Greek. 2nd ed. Dallas: SIL International, 2000. Levinson, Bernard M. Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Liddell, H., R. Scott, H.S. Jones, and R. McKenzie, eds. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1940. Lienhard, Joseph T., S.J., ed. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament 3. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2001. Long, Fredrick J. Koine Greek Grammar: A Beginning-Intermediate Greek Exegetical and Pragmatic Handbook. Wilmore, Ky.: GlossaHouse, 2015a. Long, Fredrick J. “Word Order and Preposed Sentence Elements.” Pages xxxix–xliii in 2Corinthians: A Handbook on the Greek Text. Baylor Handbook on the Greek Text. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2015b. Louw, Johannes E., and Eugene A. Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains. 2nd ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989. Lust, Johan, Erik Eynikel and Katrin Hauspie. Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003. Lyons, Michael A. From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiel’s Use of the Holiness Code. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 507. New York: T&T Clark, 2009. Macht, D.I. “A Scientific Appreciation of Leviticus 12:1–5.” Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1933): 253–260. Magonet, Jonathan. “‘But if It Is a Girl, She Is Unclean for Twice Seven Days’: The Riddle of Leviticus 12.5.” Pages 144–152 in Reading Leviticus: A Conversation with Mary Douglas. Edited by John F.A. Sawyer. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 227. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996. Martini, C.M. Introductio ad Novum Testamentum e codice Vaticano graeco 1209 (Codex B) tertia vice phototypice expressum in civitate Vaticana. Vatican: Bibliotheca Vaticana, 1968. Marx, Alfred. Les systems sacrificiels de l’Ancien Testament: Formes et fonctions du culte sacrificial à Yhwh. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 105. Leiden: Brill, 2005. McKendrick, Scot. “The Codex Alexandrinus: Or the Dangers of Being a Named Man-

440

bibliography

uscript.” Pages 1–16 in The Bible as a Book: The Transmission of the Greek Text. Edited by S. McKendrick and O.A. O’Sullivan. London: The British Library/New Castle, Del.: Oak Knoll Press, 2003. McLean, Paul D. “4 Reigns.” Pages 320–341 in A New English Translation of the Septuagint: A New Translation of the Greek into Contemporary English—An Essential Resource for Biblical Studies. Edited by Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Mendenhall, George E. “Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition.” The Biblical Archaeologist 17 (1954): 50–76. Meshel, Naphtali S. “What is a Zoeme? The Priestly Inventory of Sacrificial Animals.” Pages 19–45 in Current Issues in Priestly and Related Literature: The Legacy of Jacob Milgrom and Beyond. Resources for Biblical Study 82. Edited by Roy E. Gane and Ada Taggar-Cohen. Atlanta: SBL, 2015. Metso, Sarianna and Eugene Ulrich. “The Old Greek Translation of Leviticus.” Pages 247–268 in The Book of Leviticus: Composition and Reception. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 93. Edited by R. Rendtorff and R. Kugler. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Mesto, Sarianna. “Evidence from the Qumran Scrolls.” Pages 507–519 in Houses Full of All Good Things: Essays in Memory of Timo Veijola. Publications of the Finnish Exegetical Society 95. Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society, 2008. Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Metzger, Bruce M. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Palaeography. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. Milgrom, Jacob. “Milk and Meat: Unlikely Bedfellows.” Pages 144–154 in By Study and Also by Faith. Vol. 1: Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday. Edited by John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks. Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret, 1990. Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 1–16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1991. Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 17–22. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2000. Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 23–27. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2001. Miller, J.E. “Some Observations on the Text-Critical Function of the Umlauts in Vaticanus, with Special Attention to 1Corinthians 14.34–35.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 26 (2003): 217–236. Milne, H.J.M., and T.C. Skeat. Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus. London: British Museum, 1938. Moffitt, D.M., and C.J. Butera. “P.Duk.Inv. 727: A Dispute with ‘Proselytes’ in Egypt.” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 177 (2011): 201–206. Montserrat, Dominic. Sex and Society in Graeco-Roman Egypt. Rev. ed. London: Routledge, 2011.

bibliography

441

Moxnes, Halvor. “Honor and Shame.” The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation. Edited by Richard Rohrbaugh. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996. Muraoka, T. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Leuven: Peeters, 2009. Muraoka, T. A Syntax of Septuagint Greek. Leuven: Peeters, 2016. Müller, Reinhard, and Juha Pakkala. Insights into Editing in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East: What Does Documented Evidence Tell Us about the Transmission of Authoritative Texts? Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 84. Leuven: Peters, 2017. Nestle, Eberhard, and Constantin von Tischendorf. Bible: Vetus Testamentum Graece iuxta LXX interpretes textum vaticanum romanum emendatius ed., argumenta et locos Novi Testamenti parallelos notavit, omnem lectionis varietatem codicum vetustissimorum Alexandrini, Ephraemi Syri, Friderico Augustani subiunxit, prolegomenis uberrimis instruxit Constantinus de Tischendorf. S.l.: Brockhaus, 1880. Nihan, Christophe. From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch: A Study in the Composition of the Book of Leviticus. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 25. 2 Reihe. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. Noth, Martin. Leviticus: A Commentary. Translated by J.E. Anderson. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1965. O’Meara, John J., ed. An Augustine Reader. Garden City, NY: Image, 1973. Otto, Eckart. “Das Heiligkeitsgesetz Leviticus 17–26 in der Pentateuchredaktion.” Pages 65–80 in Altes Testament. Forschung und Wirkung: Festschrift für Henning Graf Reventlow. Edited by Peter Mommer and Winfried Thiel. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1994. Otto, Eckart. “Innerbiblische Exegese im Heiligkeitsgesetz Levitikus 17–26.” Pages 125– 196 in Leviticus als Buch. Edited by H.-J. Fabry and H.-W. Jüngling. Bonner Biblische Beiträge 119. Berlin: Philo, 1999. Otto, Eckart. “Das Heiligkeitsgesetz im Narrativ des Pentateuch und die Entstehung der Idee einer mosaisch-mündlichen Tradition neben der schriftlichen Tora des Mose.” Pages 539–546 in Altorientalische und biblische Rechtsgeschichte: Gesammelte Studien. Edited by Eckart Otto. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008. Otto, Eckart. “Das Buch Levitikus zwischen Priesterschrift und Pentateuch.” Zeitschrift für Altorientalische und Biblische Rechtsgeschichte 14 (2008): 365–407. Repr. pages 107–142 in Die Tora: Studien zum Pentateuch: Gesammelte Schriften. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für Altorientalische un Biblische Rechtsgeschichte 9. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009. Payne, Philip B. “The Text-Critical Function of the Umlauts in Vaticanus, with Special Attention to 1Corinthians 14.34–35: A Response to J. Edward Miller.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 27 (2004): 105–112. Payne, Philip B., and Paul Canart. “The Originality of Text-Critical Symbols in Codex Vaticanus.” Novum Testamentum 42 (2000): 105–113.

442

bibliography

Perkins, Larry J. “Exodus.” Pages 43–81 in A New English Translation of the Septuagint: A New Translation of the Greek into Contemporary English—An Essential Resource for Biblical Studies. Edited by Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Peters, Melvin K.H. “Deuteronomion.” Pages 141–173 in A New English Translation of the Septuagint: A New Translation of the Greek into Contemporary English—An Essential Resource for Biblical Studies. Edited by Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Petersen, Nicholas. “An Analysis of Two Early LXX Manuscripts from Qumran: 4QLXXNum and 4QLXXLeva in the Light of Previous Studies.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 19 (2009): 481–510. Petitmengin, Pierre and Bernard Flusin. “Le livre antique et la dictée. Nouvelles recherches.” Pages 247–262 in Mémorial A.J. Festugière. Antiquité païenne et chrétienne. Cahiers d’Orientalisme X. Edited by Enzo Lucchesi and Henri D. Saffrey. Geneva: Patrick Cramer, 1984. Pietersma, Albert. “A New Paradigm for Addressing Old Questions: The Relevance of the Interlinear Model for the Study of the Septuagint.” Pages 337–364 in Bible and Computer: The Stellenbosch AIBI-6 Conference. Edited by J. Cook. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Porter, Calvin L. “Papyrus Bodmer XV (P75) and the Text of Codex Vaticanus.” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962): 363–376. Porter, Stanley E. Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood. Studies in Biblical Greek 1. New York: Peter Lang, 1989. Porter, Stanley E. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. Biblical Languages: Greek 2. London: Sheffield Academic, 1994. Rahlfs, Alfred, and Robert Hanhart, eds. Septuaginta: Edito Altera. Stuttgart: Deutsch Bibelgesellschaft, 2006. Römer, Thomas. “How Many Books (teuchs): Pentateuch, Hexateuch, Deuteronomistic History, or Enneateuch?” Pages 25–42 in Pentateuch, Hexateuch, or Enneateuch? Identifying Literary Works in Genesis through Kings. Edited by Thomas B. Dozeman, Thomas Römer, and Konrad Schmid. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011. Ropes, James Hardy. The Text of Acts. Vol. 3 of The Beginnings of Christianity: The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by F.J. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake. London: Macmillan, 1926. Repr., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979. Rosenblum, Jordan D. The Jewish Dietary Laws in the Ancient World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Runge, Steven E. Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament: A Practical Introduction for Teaching and Exegesis. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2010. Ruwe, Andreas. “Heiligkeitsgesetz” und “Priesterschrift”: Literaturgeschichtliche und rechtssystematische Untersuchungen zu Lev 17,1–26,2. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 26. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999.

bibliography

443

Šagi, Janco. “Problema Historiae Codicis B.” Divus Thomas: Commentarium de Philosophia et Theologia 85 (1972): 3–29. Šagi, Janco. “Problema historiae codicis B.” Divus Thomas (1973): 3–29. Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1977. Sandmel, Samuel. “Parallelomania.” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962): 1–13. Schaff, Philip, ed. Ambrose: Selected Works and Letters. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 10. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 4. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. Basil: Letters and Selected Works. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 8. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 7. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 1. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Vol. 6. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. St. Augustine: Anti-Pelagian Writings. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 1. Vol. 5. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. St. Augustine’s City of God and Christian Doctrine. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 1. Vol. 2. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890. Repr., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Schaff, Philip, ed. St. Chrysostom: On the Priesthood; Ascetic Treatises; Select Homilies and Letters; Homilies on the Statutes. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 1. Vol. 9. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Edinburgh: T&T Clark; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. Scheetz, Jordan M. “Christian Preaching and the Old Testament.” Pages 77–99 in Not Weary of Well Doing: Essays in Honor of Cecil W. Stalnaker. Edited by Thomas J. Marinello and H.H. Drake Williams III. Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2013. Skeat, T.C. “The Use of Dictation in Ancient Book Production.” Pages 179–208 in Proceedings of the British Academy. Vol. 42. London: Oxford University Press, 1957.

444

bibliography

Skeat, T.C. “The Length of the Standard Papyrus Roll and the Cost-Advantage of the Codex.” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 45 (1982): 169–175. Skeat, T.C. “The Codex Sinaiticus, The Codex Vaticanus, and Constantine.” Journal of Theological Studies. 50 (1999): 583–625. Skeat, T.C. “The Codex Vaticanus in the Fifteenth Century.” Pages 122–134 in The Collected Biblical Writings of T.C. Skeat. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 113. Edited by J.K. Elliott. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Skehan, Patrick W. “4QLXXNum: A Pre-Christian Reworking of the Septuagint.”Harvard Theological Review 70 (1977): 39–50. Smith, Mark S. and Elizabeth M. Bloch-Smith. The Pilgrimage Pattern in Exodus. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 239. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997. Soisalon-Soininen, Ilmari. Die Infinitive in der Septuaginta. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae B 132,1. Helsinki: Suomalainen tiedeakatemia, 1965. Soisalon-Soininen, Ilmari. “The Rendering of the Hebrew Relative Clause in the Greek Pentateuch.” Pages 401–406 in Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol. 1. Edited by Avigdor Shinan. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1980. Repr., Helsinki: Suomalainen tiedeakatemia, 1987. Sollamo, Raija. Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae: Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum 19. Helsinki: Suomalainen tiedeakatemia, 1979. Sollamo, Raija. “The Pleonastic Use of the Pronoun in Connection with the Relative Pronoun in the Greek Pentateuch.” Pages 75–85 in VII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Leuven, 1989. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 31. Edited by Claude E. Cox. Atlanta: Scholars, 1991. Sollamo, Raija. “The Pleonastic Use of the Pronoun in Connection with the Relative Pronoun in the LXX of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.” Pages 43–62 in VIII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Paris, 1992. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 41. Edited by Leonard Greenspoon and Olivier Munnich. Atlanta: Scholars, 1995. Sommer, Benjamin D. “Translation as Commentary: The Case of the Septuagint to Exodus 32–33.” Textus 20 (2000): 43–60. Stackert, Jeffrey. Rewriting the Torah: Literary Revision in Deuteronomy & the Holiness Legislation. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 52. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. Stead, Michael R. The Intertextuality of Zechariah 1–8. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 506. New York/London: T&T Clark, 2009. Steinmetz, David C. “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis.” Pages 143–163 in Memory and Mission: Theological Reflections on the Christian Past. Nashville: Abingdon, 1988.

bibliography

445

Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985. Stewart, David Tabb. “Leviticus 19 as Mini-Torah.” Pages 299–323 in Current Issues in Priestly and Related Literature: The Legacy of Jacob Milgrom and Beyond. Resources for Biblical Study 82. Edited by Roy E. Gane and Ada Taggar-Cohen. Atlanta: SBL, 2015. Swash, Michael and Martin S. Schwartz. Neuromuscular Diseases: A Practical Approach to Diagnosis and Management. 3rd ed. London: Springer-Verlag, 1997. Swete, Henry Barclay. The Old Testament in Greek, according to the Septuagint, vols. 1–3: Genesis–4Maccabees. Logos Bible Software. Print ed.: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1901. Thackeray, Henry St. John. “The Bisection of Books in the Primitive Septuagint MSS.” Jounal of Theological Studies 9 (1909): 88–98. Theocharous, Myrto. Lexical Dependence and Intertextual Allusion in the Septuagint of the Twelve Prophets: Studies in Hosea, Amos and Micah. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 570. New York: T&T Clark, 2012. Thiessen, Matthew. “Revisiting the προσήλυτος in ‘the LXX’.” JBL 132 (2013): 333– 350. Tischendorf, Constantinus. Novum Testamentum Graece, editio octava critica major. Vol. 3. Edited by Caspar Rene Gregory. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1884. Tucker, Paavo N. The Holiness Composition in the Book of Exodus. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017. Ulrich, Eugene. “The Greek Manuscripts of the Pentateuch From Qumrân, Including Newly Identified Fragments of Deuteronomy (4QLXXDeut).” Pages 71–82 in De Septuaginta: Studies in Honor of John William Wevers on his Sixty-fifth Birthday. Edited by A. Pietersma and C. Cox. Mississuaga, Ontario: Benben, 1984. Ulrich, Eugene. “The Septuagint Manuscripts from Qumran: A Reappraisal of Their Value.” Pages 49–80 in Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings: Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the Septuagint and Its Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings (Manchester, 1990). Septuagint, Scrolls, and Cognate Studies 33. Edited by G.J. Brooke and B. Lindars. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Ulrich, Eugene. “Multiple Literary Editions: Reflections toward a Theory of the History of Biblical Text.” Pages 78–105 in Current Research and Technological Developments on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Conference on the Texts from the Judaean Desert, Jerusalem, 30 April 1995. Studies on the Texts from the Judaean Desert 20. Edited by Donald W. Perry and Stephen D. Ricks. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Ulrich, Eugene, ed. The Biblical Qumran Scrolls: Transcriptions and Textual Variants. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 134. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Vahrenhorst, Martin. “Greek Religious and Cultic Terminology in LXX Pentateuch.”

446

bibliography

Pages 117–135 Beyond Reception: Mutual Influences between Antique Religion, Judaism, and Early Christianity. Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity 1. Edited By Anders-Christian Jacobsen, Christine Shepardson and Jörg Ulrich. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2006. Vahrenhorst, Martin. “Levitikon.” Pages 98–132 in Septuaginta Deutsch: Das griechische Alte Testament in deutscher Übersetzung. Edited by Wolfgang Kraus and Martin Karrer. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2009. Van der Louw, Theo A.W. Transformations in the Septuagint: Towards an Interaction of Septuagint Studies and Translation Studies. Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 47. Leuven: Peeters, 2007. Van der Louw, Theo A.W. “The Dictation of the Septuagint Version.” Journal for the Study of Judaism 39 (2008a): 211–229. Van der Louw, Theo A.W. “Translation and Writing in 4QLXXLeva.” Pages 383–397 in The Books of Leviticus and Numbers. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium 215. Leuven: Peeters, 2008b. Van der Louw, Theo A.W. “Approaches in Translation Studies and Their Use for the Study of the Septuagint.” Pages 17–28 in XII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies. Leiden, 2004. Edited by Melvin K.H. Peters. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 54. Atlanta: SBL, 2006. Van der Meer, Michaël N. “Problems and Perspectives in Septuagint Lexicography: The Case of Non-Compliance (ἀπειθέω).” Pages 65–86 in Septuagint Vocabulary: Prehistory, Usage, Reception. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 58. Atlanta: SBL, 2011. Voitila, Anssi. “Leviticus.” Pages 43–57 in T&T Clark Companion to the Septuagint. Edited by J. Aitken. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015. Vroom, Jonathan, and Mark J. Boda. Review of Jeffrey Stackert, Rewriting the Torah. Shofar 27 (2009): 188–190. Walton, John H. Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011. Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996. Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972. Repr., Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1992. Wellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2001. Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1979. Westermann, William L. The Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1955. Repr., 1984. Wevers, John William. Genesis. Edited by John William Wevers and Udo Quast. Vol. I of Septuaginta Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974.

bibliography

447

Wevers, John William. “An Early Revision of the Septuagint of Numbers.” Eretz-Israel 16 (1982): 235–239. Wevers, John William. Leviticus. Edited by John William Wevers and Udo Quast. Vol. II, 2 of Septuaginta Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986a. Wevers, John William. Text History of the Greek Leviticus. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. Philologisch-Historische Klasse. Dritte Folge 153. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986b. Wevers, John William. Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 44. Atlanta: Scholars, 1997. Wevers, John William. “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint.” Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 38 (2005): 1–24. Whittle, Sarah. “Purity in Paul.” Pages 134–152 in Purity: Essays in the Bible and Theology. Edited by Andrew Brower Latz and Arseny Ermakov. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2014. Wright III, Benjamin. “The Letter of Aristeas and the Question of Septuagint Origins Redux.” Journal of Ancient Judaism 2 (2011): 303–325. Wright, David P. The Disposal of Impurity: Elimination Rites in the Bible and in Hittite and Mesopotamian Literature. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 101. Atlanta: Scholars, 1987. Young, Frances M. Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Repr., Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2002. Zenger, Erich. “Das Buch Levitikus als Teiltext der Tora/des Pentateuch. Eine synchrone Lektüre mit kannonischer Perspektive.” Pages 47–83 in Leviticus als Buch. Edited by H.-J. Fabry and H.-W. Jüngling. Boner Biblische Beiträge 119. Berlin/Bodenheim b. Mainz, 1999. Zipor, Moshe A. “Notes Sur Les Chapitres XIX à XXII Du Lévitique Dans La Bible D’Alexandrie.” Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses 67 (1991): 328–337. Zipor, Moshe A. “The Greek Version of Leviticus.” Biblica 79 (1998): 551–562. Zipor, Moshe A. “The Use of the Septuagint as a Textual Witness: Further Considerations.” Pages 553–581 in X Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Oslo, 1998. Edited by Bernard A. Taylor. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 51. Atlanta: SBL, 2001.

Index of Modern Authors Achenbach, Reinhard 56 Aejmelaeus, Anneli 10, 43, 44 Aitken, James K. 15, 45, 187, 189, 246, 252, 306, 315, 342, 345 Aland, Kurt and Barbara Aland 20 Alter, Robert 49 Amphoux, Christian 17 Amphoux and Sérandour 15, 20, 30, 32 Arnold, Bill T. 261 Arns, Evaristo 18 Auld, Graeme A. 6 Ausloos, Hans 8 Awabdy, Mark A. 304, 309, 315, 349, 378, 399 Awabdy A., Mark and Fredrick J. Long 23 Barr, James 189 Barthélemy, Dominique 19 Berlin, Adele 399 Bibb, Bryan D. 66 Birdsall, J. Neville 14, 15–16, 30, 32 Blum, Erhard 47, 48, 55, 71 Bogaert, Pierre-Marie 18, 20 Brooke, Alan E. and Norman McLean 3 Büchner, Dirk L. 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 24, 43, 44, 45, 55, 182, 195, 206, 310, 311, 320 Canart, Paul 28 Cavallo, Guiglielmo 14 Chamberlain, Gary 51 Chavel, Simeon 66, 398, 400 Clancy, Frank 12 Cole, Zachary J. 18 Connor, Steven 348 Cook, Johann 12 Daniel, Suzanne 51, 181, 204, 214, 381 DCH 219, 236, 420, 429 De Boer, P.A.H. 188 De Troyer, Kristin 11, 14, 19, 431 Den Hertog, Cornelius G. 12 Dhont, Marieke 6 Dickie, Matthew W. 348 Dorival, Gilles 10, 12 Douglas, Mary 66, 69, 193, 221, 261, 402 Duplacy, Jean 30, 32

Eslinger, Lyle 52 Fernández Marcos, Natalio 18 Fishbane, Michael 10, 219, 268 GELS 50, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 188, 197, 200, 219, 224, 228, 231, 242, 244, 247, 250, 255, 256, 264, 267, 274, 275, 276, 284, 288, 298, 306, 318, 322, 328, 332, 334, 348, 351, 355, 364, 381, 394, 407, 409, 411, 412, 418, 419, 421, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 429, 430, 431 HALOT 189, 219, 236, 251, 279, 319, 412, 420, 428, 429 Harlé, Paul and Didier Pralon 8, 9, 10, 23, 45, 46, 211, 234, 236, 240, 244, 251, 255, 259, 266, 275, 287, 290, 302, 313, 314, 322, 326, 381, 394, 396, 399, 410, 413, 419, 425, 430, 431 Harris, William V. 21, 22 Hengel, Martin 15 Himbaza, Innocent 13, 14, 19 Hol (Holliday) 407 Huber, Karl 10, 44 IBHS (Waltke, O’Connor) 220, 246, 311, 420 Jellicoe, Sidney 18 Jones, A.H.M. 21 Joosten, Jan 1, 6, 9, 11, 12, 43, 57, 314 Jürgens, Benedikt 57, 68, 317 Kazen, Thomas 372 Kellerman, Diether 246 King, Philip J. and Lawrence E. Stanger 358 Klawans, Jonathan 262 Knohl, Israel 56, 69, 268 Kreuzer, Siegfried 7, 18, 19 Lee, J.A.L. 6, 10, 45, 181, 183, 211, 217, 220, 222, 233, 236, 242, 252, 253, 262, 264, 270, 287, 298, 306, 311, 312, 314, 315, 334, 339, 343, 344, 345, 349, 350, 373, 381, 383, 386, 392, 398, 400, 406, 411, 412, 420, 424, 426, 430

449

index of modern authors LEH (Lust, Eynikel, Hauspie) 47, 50, 182, 184, 186, 187, 188, 216, 219, 224, 228, 231, 242, 247, 248, 250, 255, 256, 263, 264, 267, 269, 274, 276, 278, 280, 282, 284, 288, 298, 318, 322, 324, 326, 328, 330, 331, 332, 334, 342, 343, 348, 351, 352, 355, 365, 366, 367, 381, 393, 400, 407, 411, 418, 419, 420, 421, 423, 424, 429 Levine, Baruch A. 56, 307, 430 Levinsohn, Stephen H. 181, 231, 423 L&N 196, 398 Long, Fredrick J. 181 Longacre, Drew 30 LSJ (Liddell, Scott, Jones) 186, 187, 224, 345, 381, 426 Lyons, Michael A. 238 Macht, D.I. 270 Magonet, Jonathan 270 Martini, C.M. 16 Marx, Alfred 193 McKendrick, Scot 20 Mendenhall, George E. 402 Meshel, Naphtali S. 261 Metso, Sarianna 44 Metso, Sarianna and Eugene Ulrich 13–14, 19, 43 Metzger, Bruce M. 17 Metzger, Bruce M. and Bart D. Ehrman 20 Milgrom, Jacob 25, 43, 46, 56, 214, 221, 252, 272, 291, 307, 310, 379 Miller, J.E. 17 Milne, H.J.M and T.C. Skeat 15, 17, 18 Moffitt, D.M. and C.J. Butera 315 Montserrat, Dominic 331–332 Moxnes, Halvor 325 Müller, Reinhard and Juha Pakkala 55 Muraoka, T. 5, 6, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 193, 196, 197, 199, 200, 201, 202, 204, 206, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 217, 218, 220, 221, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 235, 238, 242, 243, 252, 260, 262, 264, 270, 273, 277, 280, 283, 285, 288, 291, 294, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 304, 306, 312, 316, 317, 320, 323, 329, 333, 334, 335, 342, 345, 351, 359, 363, 367, 375, 379, 394, 397, 398, 404, 405, 409, 410, 411, 412, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 421, 422, 424, 425, 426, 427, 429, 431

Nihan, Christophe 48, 51, 57–58, 66, 68, 69, 248, 306, 310, 324, 337, 416, 422 Noth, Martin 270 O’Meara, John J. 10 Otto, Eckart 48, 56, 58, 65, 71 Payne, Philip B. 17 Payne, Philip B. and Paul Canart 16, 17 Peters, Melvin K.H. 44 Petersen, Nicholas 12 Petitmengin, Pierre and Bernard Flusin 18 Pietersma, Albert 12, 43 Porter, Calvin L. 20 Porter, Stanley E. 188, 206 Rendtorff, Rolf 57, 69 Römer, Thomas 48 Ropes, James Hardy 15 Rosenblum, Jordan D. 261 Runge, Steven E. 180, 192, 194, 199, 220, 221, 224, 229, 262, 266, 287, 292, 317, 381, 425 Šagi, Janco 16 Sanders, E.P. 27 Sandmel, Samuel 47 Scheetz, Jordan M. 15 Skeat, T.C. 12, 15, 16–17, 28 Skehan, Patrick W. 13 Smith, Mark S. and Bloch-Smith, Elizabeth M. 47 Soisalon-Soininen, Ilmari 6, 44 Sollamo, Raija 6, 44 Sommer, Benjamin D. 9 Stead, Michael R. 12 Steinmetz, David C. 12 Sternberg, Meir 218, 259, 399 Stewart, David Tabb. 337 Swash, Michael and Schwartz, Martin S. 275 Swete, Henry Barclay 2, 29 Thackeray, Henry St. John 17, 19, 44 Thiessen, Matthew 315, 373, 374 Tischendorf, Constantinus 17 Trebolle and Torijano 11 Tucker, Paavo N. 51, 402 Ulrich, Eugene, 2, 7, 20, 68, 187, 317, 412

450 Vahrenhorst, Martin 45, 51, 181 Van der Louw, Theo A.W. 13, 18, 19, 43, 44, 186, 331 Van der Mer, Michaël N. 6 Voitila, Anssi 23, 44, 45, 46, 181, 193, 204, 214 Walton, John 28 Wallace, Daniel B. 320, 335, 405 Wellhausen, Julius 46 Wenham, Gordon J. 270 Westermann, William L. 344 Wevers, John William 1–3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 33, 43, 44, 45, 46, 69, 183, 184, 185, 188, 193, 195, 203, 206, 207, 213, 215, 217, 224, 227, 232, 236, 242, 243,

index of modern authors 244, 246, 248, 252, 254, 259, 265, 266, 275, 283, 286, 290, 292, 299, 301, 304, 308, 310, 312, 317, 322, 325, 326, 327, 329, 330, 333, 344, 347, 362, 367, 372, 375, 380, 387, 391, 392, 399, 402, 407, 409, 410, 414, 416, 418, 425, 426, 428, 431 Whittle, Sarah 26–27 Wright III, Benjamin 12 Wright, David P. 262, 307 Young, Frances M. 22, 23 Zenger, Erich 57, 65–66, 68, 317 Zipor, Moshe A. 43, 46

Index of Subjects Blessings and Curses 413–421 Childbirth Rituals 269–273 Codex Vaticanus History 14–16 Provenance 16–17 Text Character 17–19 Day of Propitiation (Heb. Day of Atonement) Annual Observance 314–316 Preface 304–305 Ritual 305–314 Deliverance Sacrifice Offering (Heb. Peace Offering) From Cattle 195–197 From Sheep 197–199 Priestly Clarification 226–229 Dietary Prescriptions Clean and Unclean Animals Aquatic 262–263 Avian 263–265 Crawling 265–266 Land 261–262, 266 Rationale 267–269 Hard Fat and Blood 229–230, 347 Festivals Day of Propitiation 389–390 First Fruits 384–387 Memorial Trumpets 387–389 Passover 383–384 Sabbaths 381–382 Tents (Sukkot) 390–395 First Fruits Sacrifice 194–195 Grain Offering Baked 190 From a Fireplace 191–194 From a Pan 191 Of Fine Flour 188–190 Priestly Clarification 219–221 Holy Community Cursing Name of Lord Israelite/Egyptian 398–399 Punishment 400–402 Execution 404

Domestic Slaves 344–345 Ethics 336–343 Fruit of the Land 345–346 Injustice 346–350 Introduction 335–336 Lex Talionis 402–404 LeuitikonB Appearance 28–30 Commentary 8–12 Divisions 30–42 English Translation 3–8 History 12–14 In New Testament 23–28 Literary Context 46–56 LXX Translation 42–46 Manuscript 1–3 Reception 20–23 Source 45–46 Structure 56–71 Tripartite 56–57 Dialogical 58–63 Inscriptions 63–66 Narrative 66–71 Organization 57–58 Subscription 421–423, 430–431 Text Character 19–20 Nadab and Abioud (Heb. Abihu) Aaron’s Commission 253–255 Moses’ Response 249–251 Mourning 252–253 Relocating Bodies 251 Sacrifice 248–249 Priestly Allocation Aaron’s Excuse 259–261 Deliverance Sacrifice 231–232 Moses’ Confrontation 255–259 Priestly Ethics 360–365 Blemished Animals 375–378 Blemished Priests In Temple 366–369 Provisions 369–375 Lamp Service 395–396 Loaves Service 397–398

452 Priestly Examination Clothing 284–286 House 292–297 Skin 273–283 Priestly Ordination Aaron and His Sons 234–235 Blessing of Lord’s Fire 245–248 Fried Sacrifice 221–222 Fulfillment 235–243 Propitiatory Offering 243–245 Ritual Cleansing “Bed of Semen” 299–300 Female Discharges 300–304 Male Discharges 297–299 Skin Disease 286–292 Ritual for a Life (Heb. Guilt Offering) Other Sins 209–213 Of Holy Things 213–215 Ritual for Dishonesty 215–217 Sabbath Rest General 405–406 Jubilee Year 408–413 Sabbath Year 406–408 Sacrificial Adaptation 378–380 Seina (Heb. Sinai) 232–234 Sexual Regulations Bestiality 333 Death Penalty Black Magic 359–360 Childlessness 356–359 Fornication 350–353 Illicit Sex 353–356

index of subjects Incest 324–328 Generational 328–329 Menstruation 330 Neighbors 330 Reject Chanaan (Heb. Canaan) 322–324, 333–334 Rival Wife 329–330 Serving a Ruler (Heb. Molech) 331–332 With a Male 332–333 Slaughter Consumption 316–321 Of Carcasses 321–322 Sin Offering/Sacrifice Exposed Sin Ritual 204–206 Of a Ruler 206–207 Of One Life 207–208 Priestly Clarification 225–226 Priestly Exceptions 222–224 Replacing a Sheep 209 Ritual Pattern 199–203 Vows, Gifts, Consecrations 423 Animal Gifts 425 Devoted Things 428–429 Property 425–427 Redeeming Vows 423–424 Tithes 429–430 Valuation 427–428 Whole Burnt Offering (Heb. Burnt Offering) Of Birds 186–188 Of a Bull 180–184 Of the Flock 184–186 Priestly Clarification 217–219

Index of Scripture Genesis 1:1 1:26 1:28 1:29 2:8 2:24 3:8 4:3 5:29 8:20 8:21 9:12 9:13 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:22 12:3 15:1 15:9 17:1 17:2 17:7 17:10 17:11 17:12 17:13 17:23 17:27 19:24 19:30 22:2–3 22:6 22:6–8 22:13 23 24:51 24:55 27:29 31:13 31:54 32:21 34:2 35:22 37:27

28, 261 261, 402 300, 322 266 345 344 51, 416 53, 386 400 53 184, 400 423 423 423 423 423 324 400 420 263 374, 420 423 423 270, 423 423 373 372, 373 373 373 247 324 53 209 53 53 208 327 327 400 327 53 182 329 324 324

38:2 40:14 41:14 46:1 49:4 49:18 49–50 Exodus 1:1 1:12 1:15 2:3 2:5 2:6 2:10 2:22 3:8 3:13 3:17 4:22 4:24 6:2 6:7 6:18 6:20 6:22 7:21 7:24 8:21 9:31 10:25 12:1 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17 12:27 12:35 12:40 12:43 12:44 12:45 12:48–49 12:50 13:2

329 350 350 53 324 228 47, 48

47 315 270 306 306 306 399 399 359 400 359 342, 428 270 56, 400 347 251 251 251 265 265 241 269 53 383 383 314, 383 383 383 53 404 393 372, 373, 374 372 372 27, 374, 393 404 23, 379, 428

454 Exodus (cont.) 13:3 13:4 13:9 13:12 13:13 13:15 13:16 13:12 14:13 15:2 15:14 15:22 15:23 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:27 16:2 16:3 16:6 16:7 16:8 16:9 16:12 16:17 16:31 16:32 17:1 17:3 17:7 17:15 18:7 18:12 18:16 19:1–2 19:5 19:12 19:13 19:15 19:16 19:18 19:19 19:20 20:1 20:2 20:5 20:7 20:10

index of scripture

347 314 347 379 428 359, 379, 428 347 23 228 228 393 392, 394 399 47 392 392–393 393, 394 47 47 347 47 47 47 47 404 399 347 400 47 399 399 393 53 255 47, 49, 393 409 311, 348 388 300 388 50, 348 388 50, 406 200 347 342 338, 399 257

20:14 20:15 20:16 20:17 20:18 20:23 20:24 20:30 21:12 21:13 21:14 21:16 22:20 22:21 22:22 22:23 22:24 22:25 22:27 22:28 22:29 23:2–3 23:7 23:9 23:12 23:16 23:19 23:20 24:5 24:7 24:10 24:12 24:16 24:18 25:10 25:16 25:22 25:29 25:30 26:33 26:34 26:35 27:3 27:20 27:21 28:1 28:15 28:23 28:24

340 337 337 358 246, 388 200 53, 195, 246 402 402, 403 403 403 353 404 347, 349 403 403 403 403 206, 353 402 428 338, 341 338 404 404 384 379 378 53, 54, 195 50 246 431 406 50, 396 180, 306 180 180 50, 397 185 180 180 185 248 395, 396 395–396 236 236 236 236

455

index of scripture 28:26 29:1 29:2 29:4 29:7 29:10 29:11 29:12 29:13 29:14 29:15 29:16 29:17 29:18 29:19 29:20 29:21 29:22 29:23 29:24 29:25 29:26 29:27 29:28 29:30 29:33 29:34 29:36 29:37 29:38 29:40 29:41 30:6 30:8 30:9 30:10 30:19 30:20 30:28 30:29 31:7 31:13 31:18 32:6 32:11 32:15 32:19 32:22 32:28

236 234, 244 222 183, 236 236, 253 237, 239 237 237 237 54, 237 237 237 237 53, 238 239 239, 291 239 239 239 239 53, 239, 241 232, 239 239 239 241, 253 372, 373 53 54, 242 221 53, 222 253, 384, 386 53, 222 180 310 53 272, 311 183 53 53 221 306, 396 346, 348, 352 180, 406, 431 53, 54 253 180 258 259 248, 259

32:25 33:3 33:9 33:9–11 33:11 34:1 34:4 34:5 34:6 34:10 34:11–35 34:19 34:22 34:28 34:30 34:31 34:32 35:1 35:2–3 35:11 35:27 38:5 38:23 38:24 39:14 40:1 40:3 40:6 40:8 40:12 40:14 40:15 40:20 40:21 40:26 40:28 40:29 40:28–32 40:34 40:35 40:38 43:26 Leviticus 1:1

259 359 50 51 50 51, 431 51, 406 51 342 200 51 428 384 396 205 206 233, 406 431 382 306 206 306 248 248 395 50 180 53 53 183 431 49 397 180, 398 53 23, 28, 50, 246, 306, 310, 396 50, 51 47, 55 431 180, 183 50 379

23, 29, 48, 49, 50, 51, 59, 63, 64, 66–67, 180, 183, 188, 195, 196, 233, 253, 317, 369, 384, 423

456 Leviticus (cont.) 1:2 30, 56, 59, 63, 69, 181, 184, 186, 188, 190, 200, 217, 225, 269, 271, 307, 430 1:3 5, 53, 181, 182, 184, 186, 188, 191, 200, 223, 244, 385, 430 1:4 2, 25, 53, 182, 184–185, 196, 201 1:5 182, 183, 185, 186, 196, 202, 223, 241, 290 1:6 53, 183, 185, 201 1:7 183, 188, 196, 248 1:8 183, 196, 226, 245 1:9 24, 25, 53, 183, 184, 186, 188, 189, 196, 218, 226, 384, 430 1:10 53, 63, 184, 186, 190, 192, 198, 209, 244, 271, 272, 290, 384, 385, 386, 430 1:11 185, 290 1:12 185, 188, 196, 248 1:13 24, 25, 53, 184, 185, 186, 189, 192, 196, 384, 430 1:14 63, 186, 190, 192, 199, 212, 230, 263, 290, 299, 339 1:15 2, 186, 187, 212 1:16 187, 212 1:17 24, 25, 53, 184, 186, 192, 196, 248, 384, 430 2:1 32, 53, 59, 180, 188, 189, 190, 195, 212, 222, 233, 244, 398 2:2 2, 25, 53, 184, 189, 192, 195, 219, 384, 386, 398 2:3 2, 53, 189, 221, 250, 369, 397, 398, 427 2:4 2, 33, 53, 180, 190, 191, 193, 195, 220, 227, 398 2:5 180, 191, 193, 222, 226, 227, 291, 384, 385, 386 2:6 191 2:7 180, 191, 194 2:8 191–192 2:9 25, 53, 184, 192, 195, 197, 219, 398 2:10 2, 190, 192, 250, 369, 397, 427 2:11 192, 220, 385, 387, 398 2:12 2, 25, 184, 193, 385, 387 2:13 53, 193, 194, 396 2:14 180, 194, 195, 384, 386 2:15 53, 194, 195, 384

index of scripture 2:16 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:16 3:17 4:1

4:2 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:21 4:22 4:23

53, 194, 195, 398 25, 54, 59, 196, 197, 198, 226, 227, 230, 231, 233, 244, 318 21, 53, 196, 198, 199, 200, 202, 225 53, 54, 195, 196, 198, 225, 229 194, 196, 225 53, 184, 196–197, 198, 218, 225 54, 180, 197, 209, 226, 385 197 198, 199, 202 2, 53, 54, 195, 197, 198, 202, 203, 240 198 53, 184, 198, 203 2, 197, 198 198, 199, 202 53, 195, 198, 202, 203 53, 184, 197, 198, 199, 203, 209, 229 199, 230, 346 33, 59, 64, 181, 199, 206, 223, 224, 226, 233, 244, 247, 271, 307 56, 59, 70, 199, 200, 201, 203, 204, 214, 215, 217, 271 2, 54, 200, 201, 205, 244 200 2, 200, 202 310 53, 200, 202, 207, 224, 241, 249 2, 54, 200, 202, 313 203 2, 54, 200, 202, 203, 247 200, 203, 224, 258, 260, 313 203, 251, 254 200, 201, 204, 206, 209, 307, 431 54, 204 2 2 205 205, 207, 249 205 2, 54, 201, 204, 205, 206, 313 54, 205, 206, 224, 251, 258, 260 200, 206, 208, 209, 243, 244, 247, 307, 331, 385, 431 2, 206, 209

457

index of scripture 4:24 4:25 4:26 4:27 4:28 4:29 4:30 4:31 4:32 4:33 4:34 4:35 5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:7

5:8 5:9 5:10 5:11 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15 5:16 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:21 5:25 5:26 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:5 6:6 6:7

2, 53, 54, 207, 223 53, 54, 207 2, 54, 205, 207, 208, 247 200, 207, 208, 209, 211, 307, 319, 431 2, 209 53, 54, 223 53 2, 54, 184, 205, 208 200, 209, 307 53, 54, 209, 211, 223 54, 209 2, 53, 54, 205, 209 2, 7, 200, 209, 210, 213, 228, 272, 351 210, 228, 230, 260, 262, 264, 322, 361, 371 209, 210, 211, 271, 272, 362, 371 210, 211, 213, 272 312, 420 2, 54, 205, 209, 210, 211, 272, 290 53, 182, 186, 199, 209, 210, 211, 212, 230, 263, 272, 290, 299, 411, 424 187, 212 54 2, 53, 205, 210, 212, 272 2, 21, 54, 186, 209, 210, 212, 224, 230, 290, 295, 339, 411 53, 54, 212, 213, 398 2, 53, 205, 210, 213, 272, 308 56, 59, 181, 200, 209, 213, 223, 225, 344 59, 213, 214, 215, 216, 254 2, 55, 205, 213, 214, 254 213, 214, 215, 223, 431 2, 55, 205, 214, 215 214, 215 431 5 205 56, 59, 64, 181, 215 59, 215, 216, 338 215, 216, 271 203, 215, 216 2, 215, 216 2, 216, 223 2, 53, 216–217

6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:12 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:16 6:17 6:18 6:19 6:20 6:21 6:22 6:23 6:24 6:25 6:26 6:27 6:28 6:29 6:30 6:31 6:32 6:33 6:34 6:35 6:36 6:37 6:38 6:39 6:40 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4

59, 64, 217, 222, 229, 233 2, 59, 64, 217, 218, 221, 224, 226, 227, 232, 234, 395, 422 218, 220, 307 218, 251, 254 54, 217, 218, 219 53, 217, 218, 222 53, 59, 217, 221, 227, 232, 233, 244, 422 53, 184, 217, 219, 398 2, 30, 190, 219, 250, 255–256, 257, 367, 427 2, 30, 53, 54, 55, 190, 192, 220, 223, 225, 256, 397 220, 221, 224, 232, 254, 256, 314, 373 59, 64, 221, 229, 233 2, 59, 221, 222, 226, 232 184, 222, 227 2, 221, 222, 254, 314 221, 222, 224 59, 64, 65, 221, 223, 225, 226, 227, 229, 233 21, 53, 54, 59, 190, 223, 224, 226, 227, 232, 250, 422 223, 224, 257, 258, 367, 373, 427 54, 223, 265 2, 223, 224, 299 190, 192, 223, 224, 226, 258, 313, 397 2, 54, 224, 258, 259 2, 59, 221, 223, 225, 227, 232, 344, 422 2, 53, 55, 225 225, 226 225 53, 225, 226 190, 225, 226, 257, 369, 373, 397, 427 2, 54, 55, 225, 226, 422 53, 226, 271, 369 2, 53, 226, 369 226 24, 25, 54, 59, 221, 227, 232, 233, 422 2, 190, 227, 228 2, 54, 227, 240 54, 228, 427

458 Leviticus (cont.) 7:5 2, 25, 54, 228 7:6 2, 25, 53, 192, 227, 228, 337, 339, 378, 379, 380 7:7 2, 53, 241, 337 7:8 228, 337 7:9 2, 227, 228, 241, 255, 262, 369, 372, 373, 374, 375 7:10 54, 227, 228 7:11 30, 54, 221, 228, 229, 255, 262, 271, 371 7:12 59, 64, 228, 229, 233 7:13 56, 60, 198, 227, 229, 230, 231, 271 7:14 229, 230 7:15 53, 228, 229, 230 7:16 25, 26, 229, 230, 346, 386 7:17 228, 229, 230 7:18 60, 64, 233, 241, 257 7:19 54, 56, 60, 227, 231, 271 7:20 53, 231 7:21 231, 244, 256, 257, 369, 427 7:22 54, 232, 256 7:23 54, 231, 256, 257 7:24 54, 231, 232, 240, 254, 256, 257, 271, 314, 322, 371 7:25 2, 53, 231, 232, 233 7:26 2, 232, 254, 271, 314 7:27 2, 33, 53, 54, 55, 60, 63, 65, 66, 69, 221, 231, 232–233, 244, 304, 421, 422 7:28 33, 48, 66, 233, 234, 271, 304, 406 8:1 60, 63, 67, 69, 233, 234, 261 8:2 2, 54, 60, 234 8:3 234, 235 8:4 65, 234, 235, 257 8:5 235, 243, 253 8:6 235, 236, 237, 307 8:7 2, 235, 236, 237, 252, 253, 307 8:8 236, 307, 400 8:9 65, 236, 237, 250, 253, 257, 307, 428 8:10 2, 235, 236 8:11 2, 236, 310, 426 8:12 2, 236, 252, 291, 307, 426 8:13 65, 236, 237, 257 8:14 54, 235, 237, 238, 242, 307 8:15 2, 238, 426

index of scripture 8:17 8:18 8:19 8:20 8:21 8:22 8:23 8:24 8:25 8:26 8:27 8:28 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:32 8:33 8:33 8:34 8:35 8:36 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:21 9:22 9:22–24 9:23 9:24

2, 65, 203, 235, 236, 237, 238, 251 2, 53, 235, 237, 238, 242, 307 2, 238 2, 238 2, 53, 65, 184, 236, 237, 238 2, 235, 239, 240, 307 240, 291 240 240, 241 2, 240, 241 240, 241 2, 53, 184, 240, 241 2, 65, 236, 240, 241, 385 2, 236, 240, 241, 291, 315, 426 2, 235, 241, 242, 250, 257, 367 2 2, 233, 242, 252, 253 23, 241, 242, 250, 271 2, 314 252, 253 65, 235, 236, 257, 259 242 2, 53, 54, 242, 243, 246, 249, 255, 260 2, 53, 54, 207, 242, 243, 244, 260, 271 2, 23, 54, 243, 244, 246, 251, 306 243, 250, 366 235, 243, 253 2, 53, 54, 243, 244, 249, 250, 251, 259, 260, 366 54, 242, 243, 244, 246, 250, 252, 255, 260, 366, 400 54, 65, 244, 248 203, 251 53, 246, 260 2, 54, 243, 244, 246, 248 53, 65, 243, 244, 246, 248, 260 53, 243, 246 54, 243, 244, 246 2 65, 244, 248, 257 53, 54, 65, 244, 247, 248, 251, 304 23, 24, 57, 68, 251 28, 51, 243, 247, 250, 306, 316 53, 235, 247, 248, 249, 306, 348

459

index of scripture 10:1

10:2 10:3 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:12 10:13 10:14 10:15 10:16 10:17 10:18 10:19 10:20 11:1 11:2 11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:8 11:9 11:10 11:11 11:12 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:16 11:19 11:20 11:21 11:22

23, 68, 70, 183, 248, 250, 254, 260, 304, 309, 310, 368, 398, 399 248, 249, 251, 254, 258, 348 33, 57, 70, 243, 249, 250, 251, 253, 304, 366, 404 33, 68, 203, 251, 252, 254, 342, 361, 363, 366, 401 65, 203, 251, 252, 253, 366 68, 252, 255, 258, 260, 342, 365, 366, 401, 409 2, 65, 251, 252, 253, 258, 291, 315 30, 60, 63, 65, 253, 261, 366 60, 253, 254, 314, 349 68, 201, 255, 262, 268, 269, 297, 303 254, 255, 366 2, 53, 68, 190, 252, 255, 256, 257, 401 2, 53, 256, 257, 314 54, 244, 256, 257 2, 53, 257, 315, 369 2, 54, 68, 253, 255, 258, 259, 260, 361, 363 2, 54, 190, 258, 259, 260 257, 258 53, 54, 258, 259, 260 260 32, 56, 60, 65, 261 60, 261, 263, 266, 267, 268, 269 262 261–262 261 2, 261 262 2, 224, 262, 371 2, 261, 262, 268 2, 263 30, 262, 263 263 2, 261, 263, 268, 287 2, 263 263 263 263 261, 263, 264, 265, 268, 371 264 264

11:23 11:24 11:25 11:26 11:27 11:28 11:29 11:30 11:31 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:36 11:37 11:38 11:39 11:40 11:41 11:42 11:43 11:44 11:45 11:46 11:47 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:4 13:5 13:6 13:7 13:8 13:9 13:10 13:11 13:12 13:13

264 264, 265, 268, 313, 322 264, 265 261, 264–265, 266, 268 265 264, 265 2, 261, 265, 266, 267, 268, 334 265, 266 265 264, 266, 299 266 2, 308 2, 266, 313 264, 266 31, 32, 264 266 261, 266, 268, 322 31, 264, 266 261, 266, 267, 268 267 56, 267, 361, 362 2, 69, 267, 335, 336, 362 70, 267, 347, 399, 421 2, 32, 60, 63, 65, 261, 268, 269, 287, 303, 422 255, 264, 268, 269, 296 32, 60, 63, 261, 269, 345 23, 56, 60, 269, 270 27, 270 270, 271 270, 271 53, 54, 186, 263, 271, 272 2, 271, 272, 422 2, 53, 54, 57, 186, 272–273, 339, 411 32, 60, 63, 269, 273, 275 60, 273, 275, 282, 287, 292, 295, 296, 371 273, 275, 283 2, 274 274, 285 274, 275, 287 2, 274, 286 274, 275, 283 273, 275, 276, 295 275, 276, 282 275, 276, 283, 285 32, 276 276, 287

460 Leviticus (cont.) 13:14 276 13:15 2, 276, 283 13:16 2, 276 13:17 276, 287 13:18 273, 277 13:19 277 13:20 283 13:21 2, 277, 285 13:22 277 13:23 277, 287 13:24 2, 273, 278 13:25 278, 283 13:26 2, 278, 285 13:27 2, 278, 283 13:28 278 13:29 21, 273, 277, 278 13:30 278, 283 13:31 2, 279, 285 13:32 279 13:33 279, 285 13:34 279, 287 13:35 279, 282 13:36 279, 282 13:37 280, 282, 287 13:38 273, 280 13:39 280, 282 13:40 280, 282 13:41 280, 282 13:42 281 13:43 2, 281, 282 13:44 2, 275, 281, 282 13:45 281, 282, 283, 285, 287 13:46 203, 281, 282, 283, 285, 345 13:47 2, 275, 284, 285, 286, 295, 298 13:48 284 13:49 284 13:50 284 13:51 284 13:52 284 13:53 284 13:54 284, 285, 286 13:55 284, 285, 286 13:56 2, 285, 286 13:57 285, 286 13:58 285, 286 13:59 2, 275, 282, 286, 296, 304, 422 14:1 60, 63, 273, 286 14:2 60, 286, 287, 291, 296, 422

index of scripture 14:3 14:4 14:5 14:6 14:7 14:8 14:9 14:10 14:11 14:12 14:13 14:14 14:15 14:16 14:17 14:18 14:19 14:20 14:21 14:22 14:23 14:24 14:25 14:26 14:27 14:28 14:29 14:30 14:31 14:32 14:33 14:34 14:35 14:36 14:37 14:38 14:39 14:40 14:41 14:42 14:43 14:44 14:45 14:46 14:47 14:48 14:49

203, 287, 295 287, 288 287, 295 287, 295 287, 288 203, 287, 288, 299 2, 287, 288 287, 288, 289, 290 288 55, 289, 290 53, 54, 190, 289 288, 289, 291 289, 291 289, 291 2, 55, 289 2, 288, 289, 291 2, 53, 54, 290, 291 2, 53, 288, 290, 291 2, 53, 287, 288, 291, 292, 308, 339, 411, 424 53, 54, 186, 263, 288, 291, 299, 411 286, 288, 289, 291, 385 55, 289, 290 288, 289, 291 289, 291 289, 291 55, 216, 289 2, 216, 289, 291 186, 263, 290, 299, 411 2, 53, 54, 288, 290, 291 287, 291–292, 304, 339, 411, 422 60, 63, 273, 292 2, 60, 63, 207, 292 293, 295 293, 295 293 293 293 203, 293 203, 293, 294 2, 293 2, 294, 308 294 203, 294 294 294, 295 294, 295 295

461

index of scripture 14:51 14:52 14:53 14:54 14:55 14:56 14:57 15:1 15:2 15:3 15:4 15:5 15:6 15:7 15:8 15:9 15:10 15:11 15:12 15:13 15:14 15:15 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:19 15:20 15:21 15:22 15:23 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 15:29 15:30 15:31 15:32 15:33 16:1 16:2

16:3 16:4 16:5

295 295 2, 203, 295 63, 65, 296, 422 296 292, 296 31, 296, 304, 422 56, 60, 63, 181, 261, 273, 297 60, 297, 298, 300, 301, 302, 303, 371 297, 298, 300, 422 297, 298, 301, 332 298, 299, 301 298, 301 298, 301 298 298 298 2, 298, 301 224, 298, 299, 301 297, 299, 300, 301, 302 186, 263, 299 2, 53, 54, 216, 299 299, 303, 307, 371 299–300 33, 300, 303, 322, 330, 332 2, 300, 301, 302, 303, 330 2, 301 302 301, 302 301, 303 301, 302, 303, 330, 332 300, 301, 302, 303, 330, 393 2, 301, 332 302 300, 301, 302 263 2, 30, 53, 54, 302 30, 366 60, 63, 65, 298, 302, 303, 422 2, 302, 303, 332 23, 33, 61, 63, 68, 304, 306, 309, 316, 348, 369 23, 61, 68, 180, 183, 302, 304, 305, 306, 311, 313, 348, 366, 368, 390 51, 53, 54, 244, 305, 306, 307 26, 237, 305, 306, 307, 393 2, 53, 54, 207, 305, 307, 312

16:6 16:7 16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:12 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22 16:23 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:27 16:28 16:29 16:30 16:31 16:32 16:33 16:34 17:1 17:2 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8 17:9 17:10 17:11 17:12 17:13

2, 24, 54, 244, 305, 308, 309, 368 2, 305, 307 305, 307, 313 2, 6, 54, 305 2, 305, 307–308, 313 2, 24, 54, 305, 308, 309, 368 51, 249, 305, 309, 310, 342 68, 302, 305, 309, 310, 348 305, 309, 310 2, 54, 244, 305, 307, 310, 311 2, 305, 306, 310, 311 2, 24, 305, 306, 311, 368 2, 305, 311, 312 241, 305, 311, 426 2, 302, 305, 306, 308, 312 2, 305, 308, 312, 401, 420 2, 305, 312 305, 306, 312 2, 305, 311, 312, 313 54, 305, 313 2, 305, 312, 313, 314 2, 54, 203, 305, 313 305, 313 69, 208, 305, 314, 315, 316, 339, 351, 389, 401 2, 57, 305, 314, 315, 389 27, 314, 315, 389, 406 2, 305, 315, 389 2, 24, 315, 368, 389 2, 51, 65, 68, 306, 314, 316, 389 61, 64, 65, 181, 316, 317 57, 61, 200, 317, 366 69, 203, 315, 316, 317, 318, 322, 339, 393 53, 184, 203, 308, 318, 321, 339 53, 54, 318, 337 184, 318 2, 53, 318–319, 351, 393 53, 298, 315, 317, 318, 340 2, 318, 337, 339 2, 25, 26, 199, 230, 315, 316, 317, 319, 320, 321, 340 2, 69, 213, 319, 320, 321, 333, 429 315, 319, 340 230, 315, 317, 319, 320, 321, 340

462 Leviticus (cont.) 17:14 319, 320, 321, 322, 346 17:15 208, 266, 316, 321, 322, 340, 371 17:16 322 18:1 26, 61, 322 18:2 61, 69, 322, 323, 333 18:3 6, 70, 207, 319, 323, 343, 399 18:4 69, 323, 333, 339, 409, 422 18:5 323, 409, 422 18:6 2, 5, 33, 300, 323, 324, 325, 328, 330, 333, 350, 357, 358 18:7 33, 325, 358 18:8 325, 326, 328, 354 18:9 326, 355 18:10 326, 358 18:11 327, 358 18:12 326, 327, 357 18:13 327 18:14 327–328, 342, 358 18:15 328, 346, 348, 354 18:16 328, 342, 357 18:17 33, 328–329, 346, 348, 354 18:18 329–330, 355, 358 18:19 330, 357 18:20 330, 331, 333, 344, 347, 354, 355 18:21 69, 206, 325, 331, 332, 346, 348, 350 18:22 298, 300, 332, 333, 354 18:23 30, 33, 265, 324, 330, 331, 333, 347, 354, 358 18:24 70, 292, 334, 343, 350 18:25 311, 334 18:26 208, 324, 334, 340 18:27 2, 208, 334, 346 18:28 311, 334 18:29 2, 334, 337, 339 18:30 26, 69, 334 19:1 61, 335, 414 19:2 27, 30, 61, 69, 267, 324, 335, 336, 342, 343, 350, 352, 353, 358 19:3 27, 69, 325, 335, 336, 353, 414 19:4 2, 26, 69, 335, 336, 414 19:5 54, 337, 339 19:6 2, 337, 386 19:7 337

index of scripture 19:8 19:9 19:10 19:11 19:12 19:13 19:14 19:15 19:16 19:17 19:18 19:19 19:20 19:21 19:22 19:23 19:24 19:25 19:26 19:27 19:28 19:29 19:30 19:31 19:32 19:33 19:34 19:35 19:36 19:37 20:1 20:2 20:3 20:4 20:5 20:6 20:7 20:8 20:9 20:10 20:11 20:12 20:13 20:14 20:15

3, 69, 337, 346 2, 337, 339, 386, 387, 407 2, 69, 337, 339, 386, 390 337, 340, 386 332, 337, 340, 341, 399, 400 338, 340 338, 340, 341, 353, 367, 402, 408 30, 338, 340, 341, 349 2, 338, 340 2, 338, 341, 343 27, 184, 338, 341, 342, 343, 349 70, 339, 343 300, 332, 337, 344 55, 344 2, 55, 57, 344 345, 386 69, 345 69, 345 346, 347 346, 347, 363 30, 346, 347 346, 348, 351, 364 2, 27, 311, 346, 348, 414, 415 2, 69, 336, 347, 348, 351, 352, 359, 360 30, 31, 338, 341, 347, 349, 408 347, 349, 408 27, 69, 208, 347, 349, 398 2, 347, 349 69, 347, 349, 350, 421 70, 350 61, 350 30, 61, 206, 208, 331, 350, 356, 358, 401 69, 70, 206, 311, 332, 351 2, 206, 331 206, 208, 331, 350, 351 347, 350, 351, 352, 360 69, 352, 380 27, 352, 358, 359, 368, 380, 426 30, 325, 342, 350, 353, 356, 365 300, 324, 329, 331, 350, 353, 354, 355, 356, 358, 359, 427 325, 332, 354, 355, 356, 358 328, 332, 354, 356, 358 298, 332, 354, 356, 358 30, 69, 325, 354, 356, 358 354, 356, 358

463

index of scripture 20:16 20:17 20:18 20:18 20:19 20:20 20:21 20:22 20:23 20:24 20:25 20:26 20:27 21:1 21:2 21:3 21:4 21:5 21:6 21:7 21:8 21:9 21:10 21:11 21:12 21:13 21:14 21:15 21:16 21:17 21:18 21:19 21:20 21:21 21:22 21:23 21:24 22:1 22:2 22:3 22:4 22:5 22:6 22:7 22:8 22:9

21, 30, 354, 356, 358 326, 355, 356, 358 301, 322, 332, 353, 356 30, 330, 339, 357 327, 330, 357, 358 332, 357, 358 328, 357, 358 292, 311, 359, 409, 422 359 359 359 69, 359 347, 356, 359, 360, 401 57, 61, 64, 360, 361, 362, 368, 372, 375 361, 369, 371 361 346, 361 346, 360, 361, 363 53, 70, 332, 361, 363 348, 360, 361, 363, 364, 366 27, 352, 361, 363, 364, 368, 426 30, 346, 351, 360, 361 2, 252, 360, 361, 365 2, 260, 361, 365 2, 361, 365 2, 30, 348, 360, 362, 363, 364 362 27, 352, 360, 362, 368, 369, 426 57, 61, 64, 360, 366, 375 30, 61, 253, 331, 366, 368, 375– 376, 377 2, 341, 366, 367, 368, 376 2, 367, 376 367, 376, 377 53, 366, 377 190, 366, 367, 377 27, 352, 366, 368, 377, 426 2, 61, 63, 64, 369, 395 33, 57, 61, 63, 64, 369, 395 61, 70, 257, 332, 366, 369, 370, 375, 426 21, 339, 366, 369, 370, 426 273, 287, 369, 371, 372 371 369, 371, 372 2, 369, 371 322, 371, 377 27, 352, 368, 370, 426

22:10 22:11 22:12 22:13 22:14 22:15 22:16 22:17 22:18 22:19 22:20 22:21 22:22 22:23 22:24 22:25 22:26 22:27 22:28 22:29 22:31 22:32 22:33 23:1 23:2 23:3 23:4 23:5 23:6 23:7 23:8 23:9 23:10 23:11 23:12 23:13 23:14 23:15 23:16 23:17 23:18 23:19 23:20 23:21 23:22 23:23 23:24 23:25

369, 372, 373, 374, 426 372, 373 369, 373, 374 371, 373, 374 369, 370 369, 370 27, 62, 352, 368, 369 57, 62, 181, 375, 395 2, 53, 62, 315, 375–376, 377, 393 375, 376 376 2, 54, 375, 376, 377 2, 376, 377 376 376 377, 378 375, 378 53, 62, 378, 379 378 53, 379, 380 62, 63, 64, 380, 431 27, 70, 332, 352, 368, 380 347, 421 62, 63, 64, 378, 381, 423 62, 381, 382, 389, 390, 391 7, 381, 382, 391–392 381, 392 7, 24, 383 391 381, 382, 383, 385, 387, 391 53, 381, 383, 384, 391 62, 384, 423 57, 62, 346, 384, 386, 389 2, 57, 384 53, 384, 386 25, 53, 184, 253, 384, 386 385 385, 386 2, 53, 385, 386 385, 386–387 53, 184, 385, 387 2, 54, 385 57, 385, 387 381, 382, 385, 387 69, 337, 339, 386, 387, 390, 407 62, 387 62, 382, 385, 388, 389 53, 381, 387, 388

464 Leviticus (cont.) 23:26 62, 382, 389 23:27 2, 53, 62, 314, 389, 390, 407 23:28 2, 389 23:29 318, 339, 389, 394 23:30 228, 389 23:31 389 23:32 27, 314, 389–390 23:33 62, 390, 423 23:34 62, 390, 391 23:35 381, 382, 385, 387, 391 23:36 2, 30, 53, 381, 382, 385, 387 23:37 53, 62, 64, 65, 382, 392 23:38 2, 27, 392 23:39 62, 345, 392, 393 23:40 2, 392, 393, 394 23:41 392–393 23:42 208, 393 23:43 69, 393, 394, 421 23:44 62, 63, 65, 390, 395, 404 24:1 62, 63, 70, 311, 390, 395, 423 24:2 57, 62, 382, 395, 396 24:3 57, 395–396 24:4 395, 396 24:5 62, 395, 397, 398 24:6 397, 398 24:7 194, 397, 398 24:8 27, 194, 396, 397 24:9 31, 32, 57, 190, 397, 398 24:10 62, 70, 395, 398 24:11 70, 399, 400 24:12 2, 400 24:13 62, 400, 401, 404 24:14 62, 70, 401 24:15 70, 399, 401, 402 24:16 30, 208, 401, 402 24:17 33, 402, 403 24:18 318, 403 24:19 2, 211, 403 24:20 403, 404 24:21 403, 429 24:22 69, 208, 403 24:23 33, 65, 70, 228, 235, 404 25:1 63, 64, 70, 405, 406, 423 25:2 63, 405, 406, 410 25:3 406 25:4 406, 410 25:5 315, 406, 407, 410 25:6 257, 373, 407, 409

index of scripture 25:7 25:8 25:9 25:10 25:11 25:12 25:13 25:14 25:15 25:16 25:17 25:18 25:19 25:20 25:21 25:22 25:23 25:24 25:25 25:26 25:27 25:28 25:29 25:30 25:31 25:33 25:35 25:36 25:37 25:38 25:39 25:40 25:41 25:42 25:43 25:44 25:45 25:46 25:47 25:48 25:49 25:50 25:52 25:53 25:54 25:55 26:1 26:2

407 63, 406, 407 311, 387, 407 406, 407, 408, 412, 426 2 2, 407, 408 2, 408 408, 410 426 2 2, 69, 338, 408 405, 409 409 407 246, 410 409 2, 63, 208, 311, 409, 427 409 2, 409, 410, 427 409, 410, 411 10, 410 2, 411, 424 2, 295, 410 2, 409, 410 2, 409, 410 2, 409, 410, 412 63, 373, 411 408 411 69, 347, 411, 421 2, 411, 412, 424 373 2, 408 411, 413, 421 2, 408, 411 412, 413 373 408, 411, 412 63, 373 412 412 412 2 2, 7, 411, 412 408 69, 405, 411, 413, 416, 417, 421 2, 63, 69, 70, 292, 336, 405, 413, 414, 416, 417 311, 405, 414, 415

465

index of scripture 26:3 26:4 26:5 26:6 26:7 26:8 26:9 26:10 26:11 26:12 26:13 26:14 26:15 26:16 26:17 26:18 26:19 26:20 26:21 26:22 26:23 26:24 26:25 26:26 26:27 26:28 26:29 26:30 26:31 26:33 26:34 26:36 26:37 26:39 26:40 26:41 26:42 26:43 26:44 26:45 26:46

27:1 27:2 27:3 27:4 27:5 27:6

405, 409, 415, 417, 431 340, 345, 346, 408, 415 340, 415, 416 332, 377, 415, 416, 430 415 415 300, 322, 340, 416, 420 409 23, 28, 30, 416 12, 51, 416 69, 347, 411, 416, 417, 421 63, 70, 253, 402, 417 417, 422, 431 417, 418, 419 2, 417, 419 417 417, 419 417, 419 418 418, 419 418 253, 418 418, 419 2, 418, 419 405, 418 418 336, 415, 418, 419 2, 53, 70, 311, 414 26, 53, 184, 419 405 314, 316, 419 2, 419 2, 419 2, 420 27, 312, 420 420 398, 420, 423 2, 70, 336, 409, 421, 422 2, 421 63, 398, 411, 421 33, 48, 63, 65, 70, 71, 233, 255, 304, 405, 406, 409, 421, 422– 423, 431 63, 64, 71, 405, 422, 423 63, 423, 428 424 2, 424 2, 424 2, 424

27:7 27:8 27:9 27:10 27:11 27:12 27:13 27:14 27:15 27:16 27:17 27:28 27:20 27:21 27:22 27:24 27:25 27:26 27:27 27:28 27:29 27:30 27:31 27:32 27:33 27:34

Numbers 1:1 1:19 1:54 2:34 4:5 4:16 5:4 5:25 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:5 6:8 6:9 6:11 6:12 6:14 6:15 6:16 6:17

2, 424 4, 32, 424 2, 423, 425, 429 425, 430 425 425, 429, 430 425 423, 425, 426, 427, 429, 430 425, 426 423, 425, 426, 427 426 426 2 2, 10 427, 428 427 424, 427 428 333, 428, 429 428, 429 2, 428, 429 429–430 429 339, 430 339, 430 33, 48, 63, 65, 70, 71, 233, 304, 406, 409, 430–431

48, 49, 63, 233, 422, 431 233 404 404 180 53 404 53 272 228, 407 254, 406 54 407 260 53, 54 55 54 53 53, 54 53, 54

466 Numbers (cont.) 6:24 246 7:1 242 7:13 53 7:15 53 7:16 54 7:17 54 7:19 53 7:21 53 7:22 54 7:23 54 7:25 53 7:27 53 7:28 54 7:29 54 7:31 53 7:33 53 7:34 54 7:35 54 7:37 53 7:39 53 7:40 54 7:41 54 7:43 53 7:45 53 7:46 54 7:47 54 7:49 53 7:51 53 7:52 54 7:53 54 7:55 53 7:57 53 7:58 54 7:59 54 7:61 53 7:63 53 7:64 54 7:65 54 7:69 53 7:70 54 7:71 54 7:73 53 7:75 53 7:76 54 7:77 54 7:79 53 7:81 53 7:82 54

index of scripture 7:83 7:87 7:88 8:1 8:7 8:8 8:12 8:21 9:5 9:15–23 10:1 10:10 10:11 11:1 11:5 11:8 11:15 11:29 12:14 14:2 14:3–4 14:9 14:10 14:27 14:36 15:3 15:5 15:6 15:8 15:9 15:10 15:13–14 15:14 15:24 15:25 15:27 15:32 15:41 16:11 16:15 16:17 16:26 16:32 16:41 16:42 17:5 17:10 17:11 18:5

54 53, 54 54 53, 272 54 53, 54 53, 54 272 233 47 388 53, 54, 398 47, 49, 431 47 47 224 205 352 420 47 47 209 28 47 47 53 53, 253 53 53 53 53 53 378 53, 54 53, 54 54, 208 390, 398 347 47 53 183 393 419 47 28 47 47 183 252

467

index of scripture 18:9 18:12 18:17 18:19 18:21 18:24 19:2 19:9 19:10 19:14 19:17 20:5 20:6 21:5–6 22:1 22:9 23:3 23:6 23:10 23:15 25:2 28:2–3 28:5 28:6 28:8 28:9 28:10–11 28:13 28:14 28:15 28:19 28:20 28:22 28:23–24 28:26 28:27 28:28 28:31 29:2 29:3 29:5 29:6 29:8 29:9 29:11 29:13 29:14 29:16 29:18

53, 55 253 53 194 430 430 366 54 203 260 54 47 28 47 47 339 53 53 419 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 53 53 54 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 53 53 53 53, 54 53 53 53, 54 53

29:19 29:21 29:22 29:24 29:25 29:27 29:28 29:30 29:31 29:33 29:34 29:36 29:37 29:38 29:39 30:3 31:6 33:9 33:25 36:6 36:13 Deuteronomy 1:5 1:17 4:16 5:17 5:21 6:4 6:5 8:2 8:10 12:16 12:11 12:13–14 12:27 10:17–19 10:18 11:32 14:1 14:2 14:7 14:21 14:26 15:21 16:3 16:9 16:13 16:19

53, 54 53 54 53 54 53 54 53 54 53 54 53 53 54 53 340 388 394 208 409 255

181 341 415 402 358 343 184 419 292 53 53 53 53 27 349 181 268, 346 261 262 379 254 366 314 386 390, 393 341

468

index of scripture

Deuteronomy (cont.) 16:22 415 17:1 366 18:1 53 18:10 346 18:19 318 19:14 414 21:18 353 22:6 379 22:10 411 22:23 344 23:1 368 23:7 349, 399 23:17 346 24:14 240, 340 24:19 337 25:5–6 330 26:6 315 26:14 260 27:6 53 27:7 54 27:18 338 27:19 341 28:1 417 28:45 417 28:53 419 29:6 254 30:6 352 32:38 53 32:51 52 33–34 48 33:21 52 Joshua 9:4 22:9 22:23 22:26–29 24:5 24:16 24:19

53, 54 423 53, 54 53, 54 347 404 352

Judges 2:7–15 3:4 13:4 13:7 13:14

404 423 254 254 254

1Samuel 1:7 14:45 15:22 21:4 21:10 21:13 31:10

260 211 27 300 402 402 429

2Samuel 1:11 3:35 6:17 21:2–3

260 260 429 208

1Kings 6:32 13:25 16:2 16:13 16:26

182 265 319 319 319

2Kings 2:24 17:15 23

400 319 208

1Chronicles 16:40 26:20

423 428

2Chronicles 11:15 13, 36

319 208

Ezra 3:7

328

Nehemiah 6:10 10:29

182 423

Job 1:5 2:9 37:16

402 402 400

Psalms 1:1

348

469

index of scripture 51:14–17 64:5 72:17 76:21 83:2 110:1 145:18

27 368 368 423 368 342 342

Proverbs 5:3 12:26 13:20 15:19 16:11 20:23 22:24 31:10 31:12 31:23 31:26

193 348 348 224 427 427 348 325 325 325 325

Isaiah 1:11–17 5:11 5:22 21:20 24:9 28:7 29:9 38:21 43:23 44:9 56:1 56:5 57:8–9 58:5 58:7 66:18–23

25, 27, 368 254 254 368 254 254 254 224 209 415 23, 26 368 332, 368 315 191 26

Jeremiah 7:11 7:18 31:31 37:13 52

23 224 352 275 208

Ezekiel 7

208

8–10 8:12 18:11 18:15 18:20 20:12 22:19 24:15 24:22 36:24 36:25 36:43 37:28 40–48 44 44:22 45

316 415 347 347 368 352 347 260 260 352 316 316 352 26 378 363 208

Hosea 1:2 6:6

363 27

Joel 2:2

260

Amos 9:7–15

26

Micah 6:6–8

25, 27

Zechariah 6 8 14:16–21

26 26 26

Judith 16:19

429

1Maccabees 10:89 11:31

328 328

2Maccabees 1:26 2:8 5:16 15:18

428 428 429 428

470

index of scripture

4Maccabees 9:13 11:18

411 411

Sirach 26:1

325

Matthew 5:21 5:22 5:23–24 5:27 5:38 5:43 5:44 5:48 8:4 9:20 12:4 14:3 14:3 14:20 15:4 18:15 19:12 19:17 19:19 20:8 21:14 22:39 22:40 23:15 23:21 23:23 24:31 26:26 26:65 26:27–28

402 402 25 359 404 340, 343 349 336 282, 287 301 398 328 356 398 353 342 368 323 343 340 368 343 343 315 23 429 389 321 401 25

Mark 1:40–44 2:26 2:27 3:4 5:25 6:18 6:43 7:10 7:1–15

302 398 27 390 302 328, 356 398 353 372

9:13 11:15–18 12:7 12:31 12:33 14:12 14:22 14:23 14:48 14:64

27 23 27 343 27, 184, 343 24 24, 321 25 23 401

Luke 1:5–2:3 1:15 1:59 1:72 2:20–24 2:21 2:22 2:24 2:30 3:6 5:14 6:4 6:9 6:27 6:35 9:17 9:59 10:27 10:28 10:29 11:42 17:12 17:14 19:45–47 22:7–20 22:18 22:20 24:49–53

23 254 270 420 23 270 271 272 196 196 287 398 390 349 349, 411 398 365 343 323 355 429 283 282, 287 23 24 321 25 23

John 1:14 2:14–16 2:19 6:53 7:2 7:22 7:24

23 23 23 321 390 270 340

471

index of scripture 7:37 7:53 8:5 9:1–3 10:33 13:1–3 14:17 17:17

390 355, 358 356 367–368 401 24 24 27

Acts 1:3–2:1 1:8 2:1 2:2–4 2:11 2:43–47 3:1–10 3:23 6:5 9 10 10:9–11:18 13:2 13:14–44 13:43 14:13–18 15:1 15:20 15:29 16:3 17:2 18:4 20:16 21:25 23:3 27:9 28:28

23 24 386 23 315 23 369 318 315 27 268 27, 369 26 27 315 26 270 26, 27, 230, 321 26, 27, 230, 321 27 27 27 386 26, 27 340 315 196

Romans 1:9 1:27 3:25 5:9–11 6:13 7:10 8:3 8:9–11 10:5 12:1–2

25 332 24 24 25 323 24 24 323 25

12:9 13:9 15:16

343 343 25

1Corinthians 3:16–17 5:1 5:7 6:19 8:1 9:13 10:18 10:20 11:5 11:23 11:25 15:33 15:52 16:8

24 325 24 24 26 220 228 26 271 321 25 348 389 386

2Corinthians 1:13 5:17 6:16 9:12

22 26 12, 21, 24, 26, 416 25

Galatians 2:3 3:11–16 3:12 5:13 5:14 6:6–10 6:15

27 27 323 26 343 25 26

Ephesians 2:19–22 3:4 5:1–2 5:2 5:27 5:26 6:17

24 22 25, 27 24 25 27 196

Philippians 2:12 2:15 2:17 3:3

352 25 25 25

472

index of scripture

Philippians (cont.) 3:1–11 27 4:18 25 Colossians 1:24 2:9 2:16 4:1 4:16

25 23 27 412 22

1Thessalonians 4:16 389 5:23 27 5:27 22

10:3 10:4 10:4–14 10:12 10:12–18 10:18–26 12:9 12:28 13:10–16 13:11 13:12 13:15 13:16

316 310 24 24 25 24 389 25 25 24, 203, 313 27 25 25

James 1:27 2:8 3:9 5:4

25 343 402 340

24 27, 267, 336, 352 24, 378 24, 25 24 24 22

1Timothy 1:9 3:2 4:7 5:1 6:14 6:20

26 364 26 349 25 26

2Timothy 1:14 4:2 4:6

24 22 25

1Peter 1:2 1:16 1:19 2:5 2:22–24 3:18 5:2

Titus 2:11–14

196

2Peter 3:14

25

Hebrews 2:11 2:17 5:3 5:5 6:19 7:27 8:2 9:7 9:11 9:13 9:14 9:19 9:21 9:22 9:26 9:28

27, 352 24 244, 309 201 306, 310 244, 309, 310 23 24, 306, 310 23, 24 306, 310 24 287 238 308, 312, 320 24 196, 201

1John 1:7 1:9 2:2 3:5 3:11–14:21 4:10

24 24 24 24 27 24

Revelation 1:10 4:1 5:8 6:9 7:14 8:3–4 8:5 15:1

389 389 25 25 24 25 310 417

473

index of scripture 15:5–8 15:6 16:21 17:16

28 417 402 364

18:8 21:3 21:22

364 28, 416 28

Index of Ancient Sources Ambrose Man’s Perfection in Righteousness Lienhard 165 194–195 Lienhard 203 415 Exposition of the Christian Faith II.13 Schaff 2.10:531 336 Letter 68 Lienhard 190–191 355 On the Decease of His Brother Satyrus Schaff 2.10:431 388 On the Duties of Clergy III.3 Schaff 2.10:186 340 On the Duties of Clergy III.17 Schaff 2.10:216 247, 249 On the Holy Spirit I.5 Schaff 2.10:250 336 Athanasius Ath 1:1270 196 De incarnatioine verbi 8 De Decritis Schaff 2.4:496 249 Festal Letters 39 14 335 (Schaff 2.4:1263) 263 Letter LX Schaff 2.4:1384 318 Orationes contra Arianos IV Schaff 2.4:1096 244 Tomus ad Antiochenos Schaff 2.4:1172 416 Augustine Against Two Letters of the Pelagians Schaff 1.5:1128 216 City of God Schaff 1.2:1138 416 Letter 28 10 Letter 177 Lienhard 173 244 Lienhard 189 343 Man’s Perfection in Righteousness Schaff 1.5:516 336 On the Spirit and the Letter Lienhard 187 323–324

Proceedings of Pelagius Schaff 1.5:605 200 Sermon 169.3 Lienhard 179 271 Sermon 270 Lienhard 194 382 Treatise on Grace and Free Will Schaff 1.5:1255 343 Schaff 1.5:1257–1258 343 Quaestiones de Levitico 21 Lienhard 168 210 Babylonian Talmud b. Shabbat 55a

368

Basil The Hexaemeron Schaff 2.8:330 320 Letter 260 Lienhard 198 413 To the Church of Neocaesarea Schaff 2.8:410 415 To Diodorus Schaff 2.8:607 330 Schaff 2.8:608 323 Schaff 2.8:608–609 324 Cyril of Jerusalem Lecture III Lienhard 173 Lecture IV Lienhard 196 Lecture X Schaff 2.7:189 Lecture XVII Lienhard 172–173 On the Holy Pentecost Schaff 2.7:754 Oration II Schaff 2.7:463 Oration XVI Schaff 2.7:51

420

Eusebius Church History I Schaff 2.1:119

202

236–237 398 202 234 406 249

475

index of ancient sources Life of Constantine II Schaff 2.1:1302 196 Oration of Constantine Schaff 2.1:1452 227 Gregory of Nazianzus Oration II Schaff 2.7:463–464 316, 368 Hippocrates On Ulcers 4

394

Jerome Against Jovianus II Schaff 2.6:877 254 Schaff 2.6:891 407–408 Schaff 2.6:901 306 Against theLuciferians Schaff 2.6:731 244 Schaff 2.6:732 368 Against the Pelagians I Lienhard 192 370 De Optimo genere interpretandi 18 Homily 76 Lienhard 187 323 Letter XXXI Schaff 2.6:152 193 Letter XXXIX Schaff 2.6:170 252, 365 Letter LII Schaff 2.6:253 254 Letter LXIX Schaff 2.6:357 364 Letter LXIX Schaff 2.6:363 254 Letter LXXIX Schaff 2.6:401 341 Letter CXVIII Schaff 2.6:538 336 Letter CXXIII Schaff 2.6:560 374 Letter CXXV Schaff 2.6:584 193 Letter CXXVII Schaff 2.6:612 193 Letter CXXX Schaff 2.6:628 390

Sermon 94 Lienhard 178 267 Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary Schaff 2.6:766 270 Schaff 2.6:771 326 John Cassian Conference 21.5.2 Lienhard 187

323

John Chrysostom Baptismal Instructions Lienhard 184 299 Homilies on Genesis 13 Lienhard 186 320 Homily XIV Schaff 1.9:639 211 On the Christian Priesthood Lienhard 191 364 Schaff 1.9:65 282 Schaff 1.9:116 201 John of Damascus Exposition of the Orthodox Faith Schaff 2.9:723 298 Schaff 2.9:724 288 Schaff 2.9:736 202 Schaff 2.9:764 271 Leo the Great Sermon 94.2 Lienhard 178

336

Macarius of Egypt Homily 1.5 Lienhard 165

193–194

Sifra Sanhedrin 41a

358

Simenon ben Yohai Niddah 31b

270

Theodoret of Cyrus Dialogue 3 Lienhard 185

308