The Pulpit Commentary — Leviticus — Section 276

is altogether alien from the spirit of the which were conveyed away and lost in rest of the Mosaic institutions. Where else the depths of the wilderness, whence there is there anything like it? 4. The goat is was no return. Cf. Ps. oiii. 12 "As far presented and offered to Jehovah equally as the east is from the west, so fa~ bath he "ith the goat which is slain. To take that removed our transgressions from us • " and which has been offered (and therefore half Micah vii. 19, " He will tum again, he will sacrificed) to God and give it to Satan, would have compe.ssion upon us; he will subdue he a daring impiety, which is inconceivable. our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their That la-azazel means " for removal" is the sins into the depths of the sea." The opinion of Bahr, Tholuck, Winer, and others. eighth verse should be translated as it stands There is nothing objectionable in this inter- in the Authorized Ver.ion, or, if we ask pretation, but the form of the word azazel for still greater exactness, ..dnd Aaron points rather to an agent than to e.n abstract shall cast lots upon the two goats ; one lot act. A zazel is a word softened (according for the Lord, and one lot for a remove,- o/ to a not unusual custom) from azalzel, just sins. as koka'I! is a softened form of kav-ka'I!, and Vers. 9, 10.-These verses might be trans- as Babel is derived from Balbel (Gen. xi. 9). lated as follows :-And Aaron shall bring in Azalzel is an active participle or participial the goat upon which the lot for the Lord. noun, derived ultimately from azal (con- Jell, and shall offer him for a sin offering. nected with the Arabic word azala, and But the goat, upon which fell the lot for a meaning removed), but immediately from f'emover of sins, shall be presented. alive before t.he reduplicate form of that verb, azazal. the Lord, to make an atonement with him, The reduplication of the consonants of the and lo rend him away for a remover of sin, root in Hebrew and Arabic gives the force into the wilderness. We are justified in of repetition, so that while azal means inserting the words, "of sins," after "a removed, azalzal means removed by a remover," because " the use of the word repetition of acts. Azalzel, or aziizel, azal, from which the word rendered by therefore, means one who removes by a 'remover' is derived, is con.fined in the series of acts. " In this sense the word Hebrew dialect to the single purpose or azazel is strictly expressive of the function institution which is here under considers,. which is ascribed to the scapegoat in vers. tion; so that this particular word must have 21, 22; namely, that he' be sent away, bear- conveyed to the mind of a Hebrew hearer ing upon him all the iniquities of the children or reader this notion of a removal of sina, of Isro1.el into the wilderness.' It properly and none other" (Sir W. Martin, •Semitio denotes one that removes or separates; yet Languages '). The goat is both presented a remover in snch sort that the removal is before the Lord, and subsequently (ver. 20) not effected by a single act or e.t one offered to him, the priest laying his hands moment, but by e. series of minor acts tend- upon him and making a confession of the ing to and issuing in e. complete removal. sins of the people. After he has thus No word could better express the move- become the Lord's, how could he be given ment of the goat before the eyes of the up to Satan ? The purpose of his being people, as it p9..Bsed on, removing at ea.eh set apart is to make an atonement with him step, in a visible symbol, their sins further (not/or him, as some commentators explain and further from them, until, by continued it wrongly). As atonement was made by repetition of the movement, they were the blood of the sacrificed goat ceremonially tarried far away and removed utterly" covering sin, so it we.a also made by the ( Sir W. Martin, 'Semitic Languages'). That live goat symbolically removing sin. But it is the goat that is designated by the word the atonement in both cases has reference azazel is the exposition of the LXX., to God. How could au atonement be made Josephus, Symmachus, Aquila, Theodotion, by au offering to Satan, unless Satan, not the Vulgate, the Authorized English Ver- God, was the being whose wrath was to he sion, and Luther's Version. The interpre- propitiated, and with whom reconoiliation tation is founded on sound etymological was sought? grounds, it suits the context wherever the Ver. 11.-Afterhaving offered the bullock word occurs, it is consistent with the re- for his own sin offering, and presented the maining ceremonial of the Day of Atone- two goats, which constituted the sin offering ment, and it accords with the otherwise of the people, and offered one of them, Aaron known religious beliefs and symbolical kills the bullook for the Bin offering. A con- practices of the Israelites. The two goats siderable interval had to elapse before he were the single sin offering for the people: could make use of the bullock's blood for the one that was offered in sacrifice sym. purposes of propitiation, and during this boliz8?, atonement or covering made by interval, occupied by his entrance into the shedding of blood, the other symbolized holy of holies with the incensel the blood the utter removal of the sins of the people, was held b! an ~tten.dant, probably by one OH, XVL 1-34.] THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS. 241