A different solution of the difficulty is proposed by Benzinger. In an interesting and suggestive study on Lv 16 (ZATW, 1889, p. 65 0'.), Benzinger points out that the literary form of the chapter is imperfect. Thus v." and v."' are really doublets, suggesting that w.'"'" are derived from another source ; tliere is a sharp break between v.^ and v.^ ; vv.^**" are not really a summary of the fore- going verses, for they introduce some new points (fasting and the date), and, while mentioning the whitegannents of the high priest, say nothing about the more important ceremonies connected with the sprinkling of the blood, and the goat for Azazel ; finally, v.*"" suggests the immediate carrying out of some definite command given to Moses. Ac- cordingly, Benzinger, who is followed by Nowack (Hehr. Arch. ii. 182-194), distinguishes between earlier and later portions of the chapter, and con- siders that the older sections are w.'"*- •-"" (omitting 'which is for himself) i"- !»•»*>> (regula- tions defining the conditions under wliich Aaron, when occasion required, was to enter the Holy of Holies), and vv.''*""* (a law prescribing a relatively simple rite of atonement — substantially identical with the inaugural ceremony of 9'" — to be re- peated annually on behalf of the people and sanc- tuary, and specifying the manner in which the day was to be observed publicly). In this form, he points out, the law for the Day of Atonement would agree closely with Lv 23-'''*', whore also stress is laid on tlie necessity of fasting and ab- stention from work, but no allusion is made tt the special ceremonies prescribed in the central portion of ch. 16. The ' ofiering by fire ' of 23'',
• With Tv.l 13 ("that he die not"), comp. Ex 28" (the con- ditinns under which Aaron may enter the Holy Place); alM Ex 3U20- 21, Xu 4l».
ATONEJIENT, DAY OF
ATONEMENT, DAY OF
'_'Ui
and the ' sin-olfering of atonement' of Nu 29", would both be exphiined by the sacrifices alluded to in Lv lO'-" (or Nu 15^"'-*) and described more fully in Lv 9. The more elaborate ritual [ire- scribed in the rest of the chapter (vv.°- '"'"• "•^)* is, uiion Uenzinger's view, a subsecjuent development of that enjoined in w."- ", which, as it now stands, is interwoven with directions relating to Aaron alone, on account of its having become the custom for the high priest to enter the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement only.
That the ritual prescribed in this chapter was of grattual growth is indeed higlily i>robable ; but it may be doubted whether a merely literary analysis can adequately indicate its successive stages. The words not at all times in v.'' suggest that even when the supposed earlier law was formulated, there were restrictions on the occasion as well as on the mnnner of the high priest's entering the Holy of Holies, and the terms of vv.^-'*' appear to presuppose some preceding regulations, delining more particularly the character of the atoning ceremonies there alluded to.t It is true, 23"'"^- is parallel to le^'*^, in the stress which it lays upon the manner in which the Day is to be ob- served by the people ; but it also presupposes in v.** some special atoning rites, the nature of which it does not itself more closely define, t Hence it seems that to limit the original regulations of the Day of Atonement to v.^**" wovild leave them less systematic and complete than is probable. The more elaborate ritual prescribed for the bIoo<l, as compared with 9'"'°, and even with 4' '■ "■ i", is not necessarily due to its being a later develop- ment : it may be aue to the special solemnity of the occasion, a ceremonial enacted once a year only on behalf of the entire nation. The chajiter undoubtedly deals with two distinct subjects (the conditions under which the high priest might enter the Moat Holy Place, and the annual Day of Atonement for the sins of the nation), which it imperfectly connects together. We may conjec- ture that the a.ssociatioii of these two subjects is due to the fact that the occasions of the high priest's entry into the Most Holy Place came gradually to be limited to tlie single annual Day of Atonement : it is also highly probaljle (esp. in view of Kzk 45""*') that the ritual of this day was originally simpler than that now prescribed in Lv 16 ; but it may be doubted whether the successive stages in the amalgamation and develoinnent of the two ceremonials can be distinguished by means of a literary analysis.
The Mishnic treatise YOmS, (i.e. the Day) gives several fresh details respecting the ceremonies observed on the Day of Atonement in the time of the Second Temple. § Minute directions were given to ensure the ceremonial purity of the high priest on that day. For the seven days preceding he dwelt in a special chamber, and not in his own house. It is expressly stated that ho entered four times into the Most lloly Place, viz. on the three occasions suggested by Lv Ifl'-- '*• ", and again after the evening sacrilice, to bring out the censer, and the plate whicli had held the incense. It is aaid that a stone three lingers high stood in the
• Except ».>"> and v.^Bi (from and make), which B«Dziii),'er tre*t« iw 1at«r hnnnoniBtic gloSHcfl.