Questions on the Octateuch 3.1–3.17

Why did God command the sacrifices to be offered? We have spoken about this in many places: in the works written against the Greeks, against the heresies, and against the magi, and besides these in the commentaries on the prophets and on the apostolic letters. Yet I shall say here too, in summary: that God is without need, not even the very foolish, I think, will deny; and that he does not accept such sacrifices either, he taught through very many of the prophets. But since the people, having spent a long time in Egypt, had been taught to sacrifice to demons, he allowed the sacrifices in order to free them from superstition. That they delighted in them, what happened with the calf bears witness. He showed this through the prophet Ezekiel too: “I saw you,” he says, “weltering in your blood, and I said to you, In your blood is life; multiply”; that is, “Seeing you delighting in the blood of sacrifices, I allowed you to enjoy this desire.” Besides this, he also prepared through it another remedy to ward off harm from them. He commanded that what the Egyptians deified be sacrificed to him: of the four-footed animals, the calf, the goat, and the sheep; of the birds, the turtledove and the young of pigeons. We are not unaware that the Egyptians deified many other creatures too; but of the deified creatures he assigned the tamer ones to the sacrifices and called the others unclean, so that they would neither deify the latter, loathing them as unclean, nor take the former for gods, since they sacrificed them, but would worship only him to whom these had to be offered. Since some of them were rich and others lived in poverty, he commanded some to offer a calf, or a lamb, or a goat; others, two turtledoves or two young pigeons; and the very poorest, a little fine flour mixed with oil. Legislating in proportion to their means, he called some of these offerings gifts, as offered not from legal compulsion but from a God-loving intention, and others sacrifices of salvation; the name indicates deliverance from sickness or from other hardships. Sacred rites were also offered for sin, for trespass, and for ignorance. Sin indicates a voluntary transgression of some law; trespass, a lawless act committed through some circumstance, for it happened that someone against his will came near a leper, or a corpse, or one with a discharge. Ignorance has a clear meaning, for not all knew all the laws. The sins of the soul nature itself taught; but these laws, which suited only the Jews, needed teachers. Of these victims some were burned whole; of others only small parts were burned: the omentum of the belly, the kidneys, the fat on them, and the lobe of the liver. We have said what these signify. The sacrifice offered for sin was offered without oil and frankincense. For those who sit in the darkness of sin do not have the nourishment of light; nor do those who ought to groan have cheerfulness (for according to the prophet, “oil makes the face cheerful”); nor do those who have not put away the stench of wickedness have fragrance. Since the law had a shadow of the things to come and not the very image of the realities, according to the divine Apostle, and those under the law had to serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, I do not think I act amiss in saying that those who offer themselves to God resemble the differences among the irrational victims. Those who embrace the life without possessions and free from cares dedicate themselves wholly to the God of the universe, and make themselves a whole burnt offering and a whole sacrifice, leaving nothing to the present life but transferring everything to the ageless life. Those who are lesser than these assign some things to the altar, some to the priests, and the rest to the needs of the body. Some offer the gentleness of sheep; others, like docile calves, gladly bear the Lord's kindly yoke; others, imitating goats, supply the surplus of their needs, like milk, to those in want, according to the apostolic legislation that says, “Your abundance for their lack.” Others bring the chastity of turtledoves, and likewise flee the yoke of a second marriage; others adorn their mind with simplicity and innocence, imitating the young of pigeons. For he did not legislate that full-grown pigeons be sacrificed, since this creature is very hot in mating, but their young, who have innocence and have not tasted intercourse. Neither the patriarch divided the birds, nor does the lawgiver command them to be divided. For those who are winged in mind, loving God with their whole heart, do not divide it between earthly and heavenly things, but send it all upward. Understanding the sacrifices in this way, we shall find the law about them suited to the weakness of the Jews, and such legislation not superfluous for the perfection of the Gospel. The divine Paul too taught us to understand these things so; for having set down the law about oxen, which forbids muzzling oxen when they thresh, he added: “Is it for oxen that God cares? Surely he speaks for our sake; for it was written for our sake, that the ploughman should plough in hope, and the thresher share in his hope in peace.” So the perceptible and surface part of the law suited the Jews, and the spiritual part suits those who embrace the Gospel way of life. One must know this too: the victims burned whole were male, for perfection belongs to men; those sacrificed for sin were female, for when the ruling part in us is weak, the passions prevail. One must note this as well: for sin not lambs but he-goats were offered. Christ the Master shows this too in the Gospels, likening the righteous to lambs and sinners to kids. Whole burnt offerings were also offered from birds; for the perfect and philosophic life is set before the poor as well. Just as of the four-footed animals neither the skin nor the dung was offered to God, so of the birds the crop and the feathers were thrown out far from the camp; and not even these at random, but in a clean place, into which they also threw the ashes of the altar. The crop Theodotion called the “bellows,” and Aquila the “feeder,” for it receives the food and supplies it to the rest of the body; hence the Seventy too called it prolobos, as receiving the food in advance. One must note also that he calls the fine flour offered, and the oven loaves, the griddle loaves, and the cakes from the pan, a sacrifice, comforting by the name those who live in poverty, so that they would not be distressed at lacking animals. One must note this too: he names the one offering an animal “man”: “A man from among you,” he says, “who offers a gift to the Lord from the cattle, from the oxen or from the sheep, shall offer it”; but the one who brings fine flour he calls “soul”: “If a soul,” he says, “offers a gift of sacrifice to the Lord, fine flour shall be his gift.” For the rational offers the irrational, and the soul the soulless. He forbids leavened loaves to be offered, for the reason I gave; for nothing of the Egyptian way of life must be kept. He forbids honey too to be offered on the altar. Some say this is because the bee settles even on unclean places and gathers the materials of honey-making from everywhere; others have said that we are taught to perform sacrifices from our own labors, according to Solomon's exhortation that says, “Honor the Lord from your just labors, and give him the firstfruits of your fruits of righteousness”; and the bee's fruit, they say, is not our labor. But this account is not exact; for honey-making too is human industry: some attend to farming, others to shepherding, some to trade, and others to honey-making. I think, then, that by the leaven the oldness of wickedness is hinted at, and by the honey pleasure is forbidden. Yet he commanded the firstfruits of these to be offered to the priests; for they offer intercessions for our sins, which is why he said of them through the prophet, “They will eat the sins of my people.” He commands salt to be put on the victims, signifying by it the discernment of the soul. Cain's sacrifice lacked this; that is why he heard from the God of the universe, “If you have offered rightly, but have not divided rightly …” And the divine Apostle legislates, saying, “Let your speech always be seasoned with salt”; and the Lord said to the apostles, “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt becomes tasteless, with what will it be salted?” He commands all the victims to be offered unblemished and without fault, though they are different and offered in different ways. By these he teaches those in each way of life to be blameless: those who embrace virginity, to live by its laws; those who choose the yoke of marriage, not to corrupt its bond in their partnership with each other; those who prefer the ascetic life, to keep the rule of perfection; and, in short, those in wealth, in poverty, in slavery, and in power, to keep themselves unharmed and blameless in their own rank. Of the victims, except the whole burnt offerings, some parts were offered on the altar and others given to the priests; that is why the divine Apostle said that they share with the altar. The rest of the meat was assigned to the needs of the offerers. On the whole burnt offerings were laid the parts offered from other sacrifices, such as the kidneys, the fat, and the lobe of the liver, and from some victims also the loin, or, according to the other translators, the tail. For we who are imperfect use those perfect in virtue as intercessors, and offer our prayers through them. The offerer laid his hands on the victim as if laying on it his own actions, for hands signify actions; and he offered the victim for these. He commands them to abstain from blood and from fat, and directs both to be offered at the altar; for the one is the cause of life and the other a sign of virtue, and it is most just to dedicate both to God. He commands the high priest who has transgressed some law to sacrifice an unblemished calf, to offer at the altar the parts we have mentioned, and to burn the flesh and the skin, with the dung, outside the camp. This shows that sin is foreign to the sacred precincts. And if the whole people has dared some such lawlessness, he legislated that an equal sacrifice be offered, teaching how great is the dignity of the priesthood; for he made it equal in weight to the whole people. A ruler who has transgressed some law he directed to offer not a calf but a he-goat, that is, a yearling kid; so far does one entrusted with bodily rule fall short of the high-priestly dignity. One who is neither priest nor ruler, but has sinned, he commanded to sacrifice a she-goat; for the male suits the ruler and the female the ruled, as we said earlier. One who has touched something unclean among the forbidden things; or who has heard someone swearing and has not exposed the one who broke his oath; or who has himself promised to do something or to offer something to God and confirmed the promise with an oath, but has not added the deed to the word: such a one he commands first to confess the sin, and then to offer a ewe-lamb or a she-goat, and in this way to propitiate God. If he is poor, he commands him to offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons; and if he cannot afford even these, to bring a little fine flour without oil and frankincense. For oil signifies cheerfulness and frankincense fragrance, and sin is stripped of both. Very fittingly he joined touching something unclean with concealing the sin of one who swore and lied. For the clean man who touches unclean things is defiled; and one who did not swear, by not exposing the lie, shares in the sin of the one who lied. One should admire the Master's goodness: one who promised to offer something and confirmed the promise with an oath, but did not fulfil it in deed, he punishes neither as ungrateful nor as a perjurer, but heals him with a small penalty.

What does “If a soul is overtaken by forgetfulness and sins involuntarily in the holy things of the Lord” mean? It often happened that someone, caught up in some business, did not offer at the proper time what had been consecrated to God, such as the firstborn, the firstfruits, or what had been vowed. One who fell into this offence he subjects to a greater penalty. He commands him first to pay the divine debt, adding a fifth of its value, and then to offer for the trespass a ram worth fifty shekels as a sacrifice, and so to receive forgiveness of the sin. Having legislated these and similar things about those who sinned involuntarily, he commands those who sinned willingly too, who received a deposit and lied about it, or committed some injustice and increased the sin by a false oath, first to give back to those they wronged what they had unlawfully taken, adding a fifth to the principal, and then to offer a ram and propitiate God. The blessed Zacchaeus did this too: he gave back fourfold what he had wrongfully taken, and then gave half of his goods to the poor.

Why did he command the priest's sacrifice to be wholly burned? He was teaching that the priest must be perfect, and dedicate himself to the God of the universe not partially but wholly.

Why did they sacrifice the sin offerings too in the place of the whole burnt offerings? To encourage the offerers, so that they might know that, being healed by repentance, they are not strangers to the holy things. For this reason too he called them holy of holies.

What does “Everyone who touches its flesh shall be sanctified” mean? He teaches them reverence, commands them to approach divine things with fear, and directs them to stand far from the holy things. One who dares to come near, and then receives a drop of the blood, he commands to attend upon the temple, as being no longer his own master; to attend upon it not as a sacrificing priest, but by performing the other service. For this reason too he commands the garments that receive drops of that blood to be washed, and the vessels, if they are bronze, to be scoured carefully, and if earthenware, to be broken.

Why does he not permit eating of the victims after the third day, and impose a penalty on one who transgresses this law, saying that the sacrifice is not accepted? He wishes them not to feast alone but also to share the meat with the needy. For this reason he commands them to partake of that meat on the first and the second day, and the rest to be burned, so that, pushed by this necessity, they might have the poor as partners in the feast.

Why does he forbid one who has touched a person with a discharge, or a leper, or a carcass, or anything else of those called unclean, to partake of the flesh of the sacrifice? Through these small things he was healing great passions. If natural things defile according to the law, much more do things of the will, which are properly called lawless. That this is so, what follows bears witness. Having commanded all the fat to be offered at the altar, he set apart for human use the fat of carcasses and of animals torn by beasts. Was the one who touched such fat unclean, then? It is clear from this too that he legislates some things by means of others.

Why did he anoint with blood and oil the priest's right ear, and his right hand, and likewise his foot? These are a type of our good things: the blood of the saving blood, and the oil of the all-holy chrism. The right ear is a symbol of praiseworthy obedience, and the hand and the foot of good actions. For this reason the right hand and the right foot were anointed; for there are also left-handed actions, and harmful obedience.

How should the strange fire be understood? The history taught us that when the first sacrifice was performed, the victims were consumed by divine fire. God the Master commanded this to be kept unquenched, and wood to be supplied to the fire night and day, so that hand-made fire would not be mixed with the divine fire. Since Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, transgressed this law and brought in hand-made fire, the divine fire consumed them. We are taught by these things not to quench the Spirit, but to rekindle the grace we have received; to bring nothing foreign into the divine Scripture, but to be content with the teaching of the Spirit; and to loathe the heresies, of which some added myths to the divine oracles, while others preferred their own impious reasonings to the sense of Scripture.

Why does he forbid the priests to drink wine? He did not forbid it entirely, but only at the time of their ministry; for they ministered in turns, some on these days and others on others. The Apostle too commands the priest to be sober, and the deacons not to be given to much wine; and writing to Timothy, he directed him to use a little wine because of his frequent illnesses. For the priest must be perfect, since he has been entrusted with intercession for the people. Indeed, Moses the lawgiver, seeing that the he-goat offered for sin had been wholly burned contrary to the divine law, was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, saying: “Why did you not eat the sin offering in a holy place? For it is holy of holies. Did not the Lord give you this to eat, that you might take away the sin of the congregation and make atonement for them before the Lord?” We are taught again from this that if we eat what is offered by the people, and do not live lawfully nor offer prayers earnestly on their behalf, we are answerable to God. God the Master hinted at this when he said through the prophet, “They will eat the sins of my people.”

What does parting the hoof and chewing the cud signify? Parting the hoof, I think, shows the discernment between good actions and their opposites; and besides, living not only for the present life but also for the life to come, assigning to this one what is necessary, and to that one everything, that is, the soul, the body, and what concerns the body. Chewing the cud signifies meditation on the divine oracles. For as the sheep and the animals like it continually bring up their food again, so the diligent and God-loving man cries to the God of the universe, “How I have loved your law, O Lord! It is my meditation all the day.” Among animals some part the hoof and bring up their food; others do neither, like the ass, the mule, the horse, and the wild beasts; others part the hoof but do not bring up their food, like the pig; others chew the cud but do not part the hoof, like the camel and the hare. So too one can find among human beings the perfect, who embrace meditation on the divine oracles and diligently pursue virtue; the imperfect, who bring forth the divine oracles with the tongue but do not consent to part the hoof, and so resemble the camel; some who have not yet tasted piety, who do not accept the divine oracles but care for praiseworthy works; and others who are both empty of faith and wholly stripped of good action. Of the water creatures he says that those with scales and fins are clean, for these swim above in the waters, while the others roll about below in the mud. Among rational beings too, then, the clean are those not attached to earthly things, but having the wings of faith and fenced about with the covering of virtue; for what the scale is to fish, faith is to men. The blessed Paul puts these on us, speaking of the wings of grace and the weapons of the Spirit. Of the birds he says that the unclean are the predatory, the carrion-eating, and those that delight in darkness, teaching us to abstain from greed, to turn away from the foul-smelling food of sin, and to hate darkness. That we have not understood this amiss, the history of the Acts bears witness: “The blessed Peter saw,” it says, “a sheet let down by four corners, in which were all the four-footed animals of the earth and the birds of heaven; and he heard a voice saying, Rise, Peter, kill and eat.” Then, when he said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything common or unclean,” God the Master said, “What God has cleansed, you must not call common.” That this was said for the sake of Cornelius, who was a gentile and desired salvation, what follows shows. And the Lord said to the apostles, “Many will come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves”; and to the Jews, “Brood of vipers.” And the Apostle says, “Beware of the dogs”; and to the presbyters of Ephesus, “I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.” And the prophets name some men horses mad for females, and others serpents and offspring of flying asps. And again the Lord says, “The kingdom of heaven is like a net cast into the sea and gathering fish of every kind”; and, “Where the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered.” This interpretation, then, agrees with the sense of the divine Scripture. We draw this benefit from these things; but to the Jews he offered another kind of benefit through them. Dividing the land animals, the birds, and the water creatures into two, and calling some unclean and others clean, he persuades them to regard none of these as God. For how could anyone in his senses name as God either what is unclean, which he loathes and turns away from, or what is offered to the true God and eaten by him?

Why does he command an earthen vessel to be broken if one of the unclean things falls into it, but a bronze or wooden vessel, or a sack or a garment, to be washed with water? From this too it is clear that nothing is unclean by nature, but that he called some things unclean and others clean for some purpose. If they were unclean by nature, the bronze and wooden things too would have had to be broken. But since he called them unclean for another reason, he commands those of greater value to be washed and the cheap ones to be broken: by the latter strengthening the law about the unclean, by the former indicating the aim of the law. For this reason too he commands ovens and pot-stands to be pulled down if any of these creatures falls on them; and he calls the water in vessels unclean if a carcass falls into it, but not spring water or cistern water; for he limits such things to small losses. We, in turn, learn how great an evil sin is; for it is sin that imparts the true defilement.

Why does a carcass that falls on seed not defile it if there is no water, but make it unclean if there is water? Because the moisture makes the seed take in the fluid of decay. He says especially that the creatures that crawl on their belly are unclean; for the serpent is the author of evil and the servant of the devil's plot.

Why does he say that a woman who has borne a male is unclean for forty days, and one who has borne a female for twice as many? One must examine the aim of the law. It often teaches some things in place of others, and this is easy to learn here. If the woman who has given birth is unclean, the pregnant woman would be unclean too. I think, then, that the law commands her to rest, as one who has toiled greatly and endured the bitter pains of labor. But if it had simply prescribed this, the men would not have mastered their desire; whereas, being taught that she is unclean, they avoid intercourse, so as not to share in the uncleanness. So the law quenches desire by the principle of uncleanness. The difference in the days some have explained thus: that women endure greater pain in bearing females; so he assigned them twice the time for rest.

What does the law about leprosy mean? Through bodily afflictions he shows the diseases of the soul, and through the involuntary he accuses the voluntary. If natural things seem in some way unclean, much more those of the will. He speaks of differences of leprosy, since there are differences of sins; and of the beginning of leprosy, since there is a beginning of sin. And just as the priest distinguishes the leprosy, so he must also be the judge of the sins of the soul. What is varied in color is called leprous; so too vice, coming upon a soul, makes it leprous.

Why does he call one who has become wholly leprous clean? This law too is full of kindness. Just as he prescribed concerning a carcass that if it falls into a vessel the vessel is unclean, but not if it falls into a spring or a cistern, so he separates from the others one who has received a varied color, as having hope of cleansing; but one who has become entirely white he commands to mix with the others, so that he might not live his whole life separated from other people. This too is a type of spiritual things. The divine law commands us not even to eat with believers who sin; but it does not forbid dining with unbelievers who invite us to a meal. The divine Apostle says: “If one of the unbelievers invites you and you wish to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising questions,” and so on. But about believers who sin he said: “If anyone who is called a brother is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or a drunkard, or a reviler, or a robber, not even to eat with such a one”; and again, “Keep away from every brother who walks disorderly.” Such a one, then, resembles the partly leprous; the unbeliever resembles one who has lost all his natural color. With the latter we converse and associate, but not with the former. The divine Apostle is witness: “I wrote to you,” he says, “not to associate with the sexually immoral; not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy, or robbers, or idolaters; but if anyone who is called a brother,” and so on. He called clean the one who had become wholly white, not as having a healthy body, but as no longer defiling, according to the law, those who came near him.

Why does he command the leper's head to be uncovered and his garments loosened? So that he might be recognized, and those who came near him might not share in the uncleanness. So the Apostle said about sinners: “Keep away from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition you received from us”; and, “If anyone who is called a brother is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or a drunkard, or a reviler, or a robber, not even to eat with such a one.”