RELIGION OF ISRAEL
RELIGION OF ISRAEL 719
them more fully below in connexion with the sub- ject of sacrifice. But, besides these, we have to do here with the command to consecrate to God all the male firstborn (and therewith all the fur- ther offspring of the same womb), and, following out this idea, to redeem them by a prescribed per- formance from the condition of forfeiture to the Deity (Ex 13", Nu 1816), The same object is aimed at in the requirement of a poll-tax of half a shekel from every adult Israelite as a protective ‘covering’ of his life upon the occasion of the numbering of the people (Ex 30"-). For this last is, as 1t were, an encroaching upon Jahweh’s sphere of sovereignty ; hence an express acknowledgment of His sole claim to the life of all persons is neces- sary, and this takes the form of a poll-tax (Heb. 152 ‘covering,’ ‘atonement’), which is of the same amount for all. A natural result of the same assumption is found, finally, in the injunction (Ly 25%8-) that Israelites, who from any cause have become bondmen, are not to be regarded and treated as real slaves, although in the Book of the Covenant (Ex 21"*) and even in Deuteronomy (15*-) this is treated as quite possible. On the contrary, P demands that, as really the property of Jahweh, they are to rank only as hirelings or téshabhim (Ly 25%), and in any case are to go free in the year of jubile.
(8) But, more clearly than in any way hitherto mentioned, the idea of a people consecrated to God finds expression in the organization of the priest- hood. Properly speaking, all male Israelites ought to discharge priestly functions, and thereby tes- tify their willing devotion to God. But for this an indispensable requisite is such a condition of purity as cannot possibly be maintained by every man amidst the duties of common life. Hence Jahweh has arranged for a permanent representa- tion * of the people, in the form of the hereditary priesthood entrusted to Aaron and his sons. The restriction of the priesthood to the ‘sons of Zadok,’ demanded by Ezekiel (see above, p. 705%), was impossible for P for the reason that his whole legislation dates from Moses, and thus long before the time of Zadok. At the same time, moreover, the deriving of the priesthood from Aaron made it possible to recognize the priestly rights of certain non-Zadokite families.t But, in the main, P’s ‘sons of Aaron’ are just the Zadokites.
In order to be able to approach God and present Israel’s offermmgs to Him without danger, the priests have to guard carefully against all defile- ment. In particular, they are not to incur defile- ment from any dead body (Lv 21), except in unavoidable cases when the body was that of a parent, a brother, an unmarried sister, or one’s own child. Any bodily defect serves of itself to exclude from priestly functions, for one thus affected would ‘desecrate the sanctuaries of Jahweh’ (v.”). But the highest requirements in the matter of outward purity apply to the high priest, in whose person the idea of a personal representation of the holy people reaches its climax. He may not detile himself with any
* It needs no argument to show that the parallel it was once customary to draw between the OT and the Catholic concep- tion of the priesthood is quite a mistaken one. According to the latter, the priest acts the part of God over against the
eople, and hence in God’s name gives absolution and imparts acne: On the other hand, in P the high priest is nothing more than a representative—highly exalted and dignified, indeed —of the God-consecrated people. He represents it before God in every regard (see below). Any (ritual) short- coming on his part involves the whole people in guilt. As to the blessing of Jahweh, again, the high priest, like the other priests, cannot impart this of himself, but must supplicate it of God (cf. Nu 623f., and especially v.27).
+ These have their genealogy traced not to Eleazar but to Ithamar, another son of Aaron. It may be noted that only one head of a family is named in Ezr 8? as a descendant of Ithamar, namely Daniel.
dead body, even that of father or mother, and is not to leave the sanctuary at all, that he may not (by contact with what is profane) ‘desecrate the sanctuary of his God.’ Moreover, his very cloth- ing shows (Ex 28%#-) by various symbols that he represents not only the holiness of the priestly people but also their kingly dignity. He wears a robe of blue and red-purple, and a golden diadem inscribed ‘ Holy to Jahweh,’ and upon his shoulder- piece and breastplate are the names of the twelve tribes engraved on precious stones. In short, in place of the pre-exilic chief priest, who is an official of the king, we have now the sovereign, hereditary high priest. At his death the claim of the avenger of blood upon the life of the man- slayer lapses (Nu 35”). This means simply that with the supreme head of the State ends the period of political life which began with his entry upon office. In like manner the anointing of the high priest, at least according to the theory which represents him alone as anointed (Ex 297; cf. Lv 48. 5. 16 812 ‘the anointed priest,’* Lv 21 ‘the consecration of the anointing oil of his God rests upon him’) is undoubtedly thought of as a parallel to the anointing of the king. In the other theory, which makes all priests anointed, the thought is probably the ancient one (cf. above, p. 659° f.) of an imparting of the spirit as the result of the anoint- ing (Ex 40%; on the other hand, in 2971 and 30° the sprinkling of the priests’ garments with anoint- ing oil seems to be distinguished from the pouring of oil upon the head of Aaron in 29").