The Pulpit Commentary — Leviticus — Section 208

Ilcnce we are able to cxplnin the distinc- of the che.racteristic marks only, the rule is- tion of clean nnd unclean animnls. It does to be construed strictly, As to fish and in- not rest upon a sanitary basis, though the s~ts,equally plain rules,one in each cnse, nre prohibition to eat carnivorous and other l~1d cl_own: _but a.s birds are not readily dis- tmgu1shed mto large classes, the names of" animals repulsive to the taste is probably in those that are unclean are given one by accordanoe with the rules of health. Nor one, the remainder being all of them per- is it based on political reasons, though it is missible. Thus the simple Israelite would probable that the distinction kept the Jews run no risk of incurring unclennness by apart from other nations, and so served an inadvertently eating unclean food, whether of beast, bird, fish, or insect. The object of important political purpose. Nor is the the regulations being to exclude all meets. injunction in the mnin theological, though naturally offensive to the human taste, all we l-I1ow that in Inter times the favourite carnivorous quadrupeds are shut out by the- interpretation was that the clean animals rule of chewing the cud (ver. 3), with the- represented the Jews, and the unclean same purpose, birds of prey and birds that eat offal a.re prohibited (vers. 13-19), anci animals the Gentiles (Acts x. 28). Rather scaleless fish on account of their repulsive· it was that certain creatures were for- appearo.nce (vers. 9-12), as well as beetles, bidden because they were offensive to the maggots, and vermin of all sorts. In the- taste, and, being so offensive, they were case of beasts and fish, the rules laid down llymbolical of vicious things, which must be to mark off those things that are offensive, being general in their application, are such avoia.ed, lest they make those that partake as to include in the forbidden class some few of them or touch them to become vicious which do not appear naturally loathsome. like themselves. This is owing partly to the difficulty of Vers. 2-8 contain the regulations relating classification, partly to a change of feeling to the eating of quadrupeds; vers. 9-12, which experience has wrought in the senti- ments of mankind with regard to such those relating to fish; vers. 13-19, those edibles a.s swine's flesh and shell-fish. relating to birds ; vers. 20-23, those re- Vera. 3, 4.-Whatsoever parteth the hoof, lating to flying insects; vers. 29, 30, those and is olovenfooted, should rather be trans- relating to unwinged creeping things; vers. lated, Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and rom- 41-44, those relating to vermin. Vere. 23 pletel!I divides ii. The camel parts but does- -28 and 31-40 extend the defiling effect not wholly divide the hoof, as there is a ball at the back of the foot, of the nature- to the simple touch of the dead carcases of of a heel. animals, whether edible or not. Ver. 5.-The ooney, Hebrew, ehaphan; Ver. 1.-The Lord apake unto Moses and to the Hyraz Syriacus, or wabr, still called, Ae.ron. Aaron, having now been consecrated in Southern Arabia. taofun, a little animal high priest, is joined with Moses as the similar to but not identical with the rabbit.. recipient of the laws on cleanness and un- " They live in the natural caves and clefte- cleanness in eh. :ri. I; xiii. I ; xiv. 33; of the rocks (Ps. oiv. 18), are very gre- xv. 1. His name is not mentioned in garious, being often seen seated in troop& eh. xii 1; xiv. 1; xvii. 1; xviii. 1; xix. I; before the openings of their caves, and xx. 1; xx.i 1, 16; :nil. 1, 17, 26. Probably extremely timid, o.s they are quite defence- there is no signification in these omissions. less (Prov. xxx. 26). '.fhey are about the- Ver. 2.-These are the beasts that ye shall size of rabbits, of a brownish-grey or e&t. In order that the Israelites might brownish-yellow colour, but white under know how to avoid the uncleanness arising the belly; they have bright eyes, round from the consumption of unclean flesh, ears, and no tail. The Arabs eat them, but plain rules are gi ,·en them by which they do not place them before their guests ,,. may distinguish whe.t flesh is clean and (Keil). what is unclean. The first rule is that any- Ver. 6.-The bare, beoause he oheweth the thing that dies of itself is unclean, whether oud, but divideth not the hoof. There is- it be beast, bird, or fish. The reasons of little doubt thBt the so.me animal as our this are plain: for (I) the flesh still retains hare is meant. Neither the hare, however, the Llood, which no Israelite might eat; and nor the hyrax chews the cud in the strict (2) there is something loathsome in the idea sense of the words. Dut they bo.ve the ap of eating such flesh, Next, as to beasts, a pearance of doing so. The rule respecting. class is marked off as edible by two plainly chewing the cud was given to r,,nd by discernible characteristics, and instanoes llloses as a legislator, not as an anatomist, are given to show that where there is any to serve as a sign by which animals migha doubt owing to the animals possessing one be known to he clean for food. Phenomenal Clll, XI, 1-47.] THE BOOK OF Ll!:VlTICUS. 171,