SACRIFICIAL OFFERING 230 SACRIFICIAL OFFERING
ritual mentions this imposition of the band but in one
case (xvi, 21; comp. the Mishna, Menach. ix, 7; yet see i Cliroii. xxix, i?>), this ceremony being tlie formal consecration of tlic beast to Jeliovah; not the laving of tlie penalty due to sin upon the sacrifice, as Bochart tliinks (JJieroz. i, 330), for tlie ceremony occurs in the case of the thank-oftering. According to the rabbins, a regular form "f words was used in laying the hands on the victim (Maimon. llilch. Kailxin, iii, it) ; then it was slain (Lev. iii, 2; iv, 4, 15, 21; viii, lo, 111), but this might be, and in later times actually was, done by the priests (2 Cljron. xxix, 24) ; perha()s even by the Le- vites, but 2 Chron. xxx, 17 does not prove this. Among the IJoinans, officers called popce or ridinumi slew the victim (Bochart, llieroz. i, 330). The blood was then taken up, ai-.d in different sacrifices variously sprinkled or poured out by ttie priest (Hottinger, l>e Fuitction. ISiicfi: ciicu Vicliin. [Marb. 1700]). According to the varying character of the oftering, the blood was sprin- kled, or brought into the Tem])le and there sprinkled upon the ark of the covenant, and put on the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and the remainder thrown out at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering. The sac- rificer (yet comp. 2 Chron. xxix, 34) then took off the skin of the victim (Lev. i, 6), which belonged, when not burned (iv, 11), either to the priests (vii, 8; only said of the burnt-offering) or to the offerer (comp. the direc- tions in the Talmud — Mishna, Sebach. xii, 2 sq.). So, too, among the Carthaginians (see the lists of offerings foinid in Marseilles, 3, 4, 8, 10). In Sparta the skins of public sacrifices belonged to the kings (Herod, vi, 57), The victim was cut to pieces (Lev. i, 6; viii, 20), which were, in various sacrifices, either all (as the burnt-offer- ings), or certain speciallj' valued pieces (in all other ofterings; comp. Isa. i, 11; Strabo, xv, 732; Catidl. xl, 5), burned by the priest upon the altar. In the latter case the flesh belonged to the priests or to the sacrificer, or must be burned outside of the city. (On the cere- mony of offering the doves, see Lev. i, 14 sq. ; v, 8; comp. Ilottiiigcr, Be Sacr. A vium [Marb. 1706].) The ceremonies of heaving and waving took place in some sacrifices either before or after the victim was kiUed. See Hkavk-ofkeking; Wave-offerinc.
5. The yearly expense of sacrifices, both by individ- uals and the whole people, was not trifling; yet house- lutlders hail at hand most of the necessary offerings, and wood was brought from the forests. (On the limits within which wood was obtained for Temple use in the later age, see the ^Mislma, TaauHh, iv, 5. For the trees used as sacrificial wood, see the tract Tumid, ii, 3.) Later, foreign princes who desired the favor of the Jews applied from their reveiuies a portion to public sacrifices (Kzra vi, 9; 1 Mace, x, 39; 2 INLicc. iii, 3; ix, U) ; Josephus, A nt. xii, 3, 3). (On a pecidiar festival of carrying wood, see Josephus, War, ii, 17, 6. It was held in the beginning of the mouth Klul).
C. As an ex|)ression of pious gratitude and of rever- ence towards Jehovah (Psa. Ixvi, 15; ex, 3; Sir. xxxviii, 4; comp. !Matt. viii, 4; Acts xxi, 2t>), sacrifices were presented in abundance by the Hebrews through all auticiuity, and he who offered none was accounteil irre- ligious (Kcdes. ix, 2; comj). Isa. xliii, 23 s(j.). Oaths were made by the offerings (Matt, xxiii, 18), and in descriptions of golden anticpiity the ideally magnified splenilor of the sacrificial ritual appears (Isa. xix, 21 ; Ivi, 7; Ix, 7; Zech. xiv, 21 ; Jer. xvii, 26; xxxiii, 18), while the want of sacrifice is among the terrors of threatened exile (Hos. iii, 4 ). Vet tlu' Israelites often forgot in the symbol the higher affection of the heart, and their offerings became an opus opertilvm. Accord- ingly tlie prophets occasionally give warning against overvaluing sacrifices, and strive to call fortli a pious disposition, as more pleasing to (iotl than they are, since in them the heart feels notliing (Isa. i, 1 1 ; Jer. vi, 20; vii, 21 s(|. ; IIos. vi, 6; Amos v, 22; .Mic. vi, 6 s(|.; comp. Psa. xl, 7; I, ttsq.; Ii, l«sq.; Prov. xxi,3; Matt, v, 23 8(1.; Sir. XXXV, 1; comp. Plato, AkiO. ri, 150;
Died. Sic. xii, 20 ; Ovid, Heroid. xx, 181 sq. ; Seneca, Benef. i, 6 ; comp. Siebelis Disput. p. 121 sq.). Such representations do not justify us in denying to the older Israelites the anthropopathic view of sacrifices, and forc- ing upon ancient simplicity an artificial doctrine. Yet this is done by Biihr {Symbol, ii, 198 sq. ; comp. Hoff, Die mos. OpJ'tr nach ihrer siiin- n. vorbildl. Bedtut, [Warsaw, 1845J), who, starting with the statement that offerings with blood were the germ of all (in reference to Lev. xvii, 11), finds in the Mosaic sacrifices the doc- trine of symbolic substitution. " The offering and bring- ing near of the nephes/i, or life, in the sacrificial blood upon the altar, as the place of the presence and revela- tion of God, is a symbol of the offering of the nephesh, oi life, of the sacrificer to Jehovah. As this presentation of the blood is a giving-up to death of the animal life, so must also the spiritual life of self, as opposed to God, be given up and die. But since the giving-up is to Je- hovah, the Holy One, it is not merely a ceasing, some- thing negative, but a dying, which in the very act is a becoming alive," etc. Apart from all the assumption in this theory, it is entirely too artificial, one might say too Christian, for Israelitish antiquity. It is necessary, too, to assume that the sacrifices with blood were the original ones, which is not proven ; and the doctrine cannot be extended without violence to any but sin-of- ferings (see Kurtz, Mos. Opfer, p. 7 sq.), in which it cannot be denied that the idea of substitution is found.