Questions on the Octateuch

Other studious men too have undertaken to resolve what seem to be problems in the divine Scripture: to unfold the meaning of some, to show the reasons for others, and, in a word, to make plain what does not appear plain to most people. But you in particular, Hypatius, dearest of sons, have urged me to do this, insisting strongly that this treatise too would be of benefit to many. For this reason, although my body is not in good health, I have taken on this labor, trusting not in myself but in him who commanded that these things be written as they are. For it belongs to him to show the meaning hidden in the letter. He himself, in the holy Gospels, both offered his teaching in parables and gave the interpretation of what was said in riddles. Having begged, then, to receive from him the ray of understanding, I shall try to venture into the inner sanctuary of the all-holy Spirit. Before all else it must be known that not all who ask questions have the same aim. Some ask impiously, thinking to refute the divine Scripture, now as teaching what is not right, now as teaching contradictory things. Others inquire out of love of learning and long to find what they are seeking. With God's help, then, we shall stop the blasphemous mouths of the former, showing both the harmony of the divine Scripture and its excellent teaching; and to the latter we shall offer, as far as we can, the solution of their difficulties. I shall make the beginning of creation the beginning of these questions; for it is the beginning and prologue of the inspired Scripture.

Why did the writer not place teaching about God before the creation of the universe? The divine Scripture usually measures its lessons to those being taught: to the perfect it offers what is perfect, to the imperfect what is elementary and suited to their capacity. Since, then, the Egyptians deified the visible creation, and Israel, after living among them for a very long time, had come to share in this impiety, he necessarily offers them lessons about creation, and teaches expressly both that it had a beginning of its existence and that it has the God of the universe as its maker. Yet he has not left out the teaching about God either. For by saying that heaven and earth and the other parts of creation came into being, and by showing that their creator is the God of the universe, he provided a teaching about God sufficient for the people of that time. He showed the beginning of the creatures, but could find no beginning of God. Knowing God, then, to be eternal, and naming him maker of the universe, and a good maker, he very wisely joined teaching about God to teaching about nature. Besides, those who were being taught these things had already learned that God is eternal. For when the inspired Moses was sent to Egypt by the God of the universe, he was commanded to say to his kinsmen, “He Who Is has sent me to you.” And “He Who Is” signifies the eternal. It is clear to the studious that those words were spoken before these; for he gave them that teaching while they still lived in Egypt, but wrote these things in the desert.

Why did he not mention the creation of the angels? Those who received the Law had nothing firm or steady about them. At any rate, straight after the many indescribable miracles they proclaimed the image of the calf to be God. Those who so easily deified the likenesses of cattle, what would they not have done if they had received knowledge of the invisible natures? For this reason, until the perfection of Abraham, the God of the universe spoke to none of the people of old through an angel; and it was in the case of Hagar that the inspired Moses first mentioned an angel, and very fittingly, for Hagar is a type of the old covenant, according to the divine Apostle: “For Hagar,” he says, “is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to the present Jerusalem.” Since, then, the Law was given through angels (“ordained,” he says, “through angels by the hand of a mediator,” and again, “If the word spoken through angels proved firm”), very fittingly the God of the universe, through an angel, both reminded her of her servitude and foretold what concerned the child who was to be born. That angels and archangels, and anything else that is incorporeal, except the Holy Trinity, have a created nature, the divine Scripture clearly teaches us. For the prophet David urges these too to sing hymns: “Praise him,” he says, “all his angels; praise him, all his powers.” And, teaching the reason, he added: “For he spoke, and they came into being; he commanded, and they were created.” And again in another psalm: “He who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” And the three blessed young men, weaving the divine hymn in the furnace, after saying that most excellent and very fitting opening, “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord,” added at once, “Bless the Lord, you angels of the Lord, all you powers of the Lord.” But I think it superfluous to speak at length about this; the whole inspired Scripture is full of this teaching.

Do the angels exist before heaven and earth, or did they come into being with them? I for my part have taken such inquiries to be superfluous. What profit will come to those who know the time when the angels were created? I know, too, that the divine Apostle charges the admirable Timothy “to instruct certain people not to teach a different doctrine, nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies.” Yet I will say what I have taken to agree with the aim of the divine Scripture. We have been taught that the divine nature alone is uncircumscribed, inasmuch as it is uncreated, without beginning, and eternal; but things that began to exist plainly have a circumscribed existence. So when we say that the nature of angels is incorporeal, we say that their being is circumscribed. For how could anyone conceive of “thousands of thousands and myriads of myriads,” as the divine Daniel says, without reckoning each to be within its own bounds? But that the angels have a circumscribed substance no one, I think, will deny. For Christ the Master said that each human being is assigned to the care of one: “See,” he says, “that you do not despise one of the least of those who believe in me; for their angels always see the face of my Father in heaven.” And the divine Scripture says that an angel is set over each nation. For the angel conversing with the prophet Daniel spoke of a prince of the Persians, and a prince of the Greeks, and Michael, prince of the Jews. And the great Moses says in his song: “When the Most High divided the nations, when he scattered the sons of Adam, he set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.” If, then, one was appointed to rule these and another those, and each human being is under the care of one, it is plain that they have a circumscribed substance. And if this is true, as indeed it is, they need a place. For only the divine, being uncircumscribed, is not in a place. But if what is circumscribed is in a place, how could the angels exist before heaven and earth? If what bears them did not exist, how could what is borne exist?

“But,” some say, “one must say that the angels existed before heaven and earth. For if there were no angels,” they say, “how was the God of the universe hymned?” But those who say this do not see that this argument makes them both without beginning and eternal. For if the God of the universe needed those who hymn him, and always had them hymning him, then the angels are coeternal with the God of the universe. But if not always, and he created them when he willed, then there was an age in which the God of the universe did not have those who hymn him. … possible. Therefore God the Master does not need those who hymn him, for he has a nature free of need. Out of goodness alone he has granted being to angels and archangels and the whole creation. And what ministry would they have had, existing before creation, when there was no one in need of their help? For that they serve the God of the universe in caring for human beings, the divine Apostle is witness, crying out: “Are they not all ministering spirits sent out for service, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?” It is plain, then, that we need their help, while God is in no way in need of anything; but, being an abyss of goodness, he willed to give a share in being even to what in no way existed. But those who insist that the angels existed before heaven and earth put forward against us, as strong and unanswerable, what the God of the universe said to Job: “When I made the stars, all my angels praised me.” And they do not see that the God of the universe brought forth the stars on the fourth day, together with the sun and the moon. It is likely that the angels were created together with heaven and earth, so that, seeing the light created from no underlying matter, and the firmament made solid in the middle of the water, and the watery substance separated from the earth, and the earth adorned with plants of every kind at the divine word, and all the other things coming to be at the divine will, they might know through what they saw that they too have a created nature, having received their being from him. For the divine Apostle too joins them to the world, saying, “We have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men.” I say this not as a pronouncement; I think it rash to pronounce on what the divine Scripture does not expressly say; but I have said what I took to fit pious reasoning. This, however, it is necessary to know: everything that exists, except the Holy Trinity, has a created nature. Once this is agreed, it does no harm to the doctrine of piety to say that the hosts of angels came into being before heaven and earth. But wrangling over words, which is useful for nothing and ruins those who listen, the divine Apostle expressly forbids.

If the earth already was, how did it come into being? For the writer says, “And the earth was.” The question is very silly and senseless. For he who said, “In the beginning God made heaven and earth,” did not say that the earth was eternal, but that it received its being after heaven, or together with heaven. Besides, the writer did not say absolutely, “And the earth was,” but joined to it what follows, “And the earth was invisible and unformed”; that is, it had come into being by the act of the God of the universe, but it was still invisible, since the water lay upon it, and unformed, since it was not yet adorned with plants, nor blooming with meadows, groves, and crops.

Did Moses not teach us that God created the waters too? Yes, he did: by saying, “The earth was invisible and unformed, and darkness was over the abyss,” he showed that the nature of the waters was created together with the earth. And the God of the universe, giving the law about the Sabbath, said: “Six days you shall work, but the seventh is a Sabbath, a rest to the Lord your God. For in six days the Lord God made heaven and earth and the sea and all that is in them.” So it is plain that anything at all that is in these, whether visible or invisible, perceptible or intelligible, except the divine substance, has a created nature. And the most divine David, having said, “Blessed is he whose helper is the God of Jacob, his hope is in the Lord his God, who made heaven and earth,” added, “the sea, and all that is in them.”

What kind of light, then, was the place within the world suddenly found to lack, so that darkness was over the water? We reason that if anything existed before this perceptible world, it was plainly in light. For neither the ranks of the angels nor all the heavenly hosts passed their existence in darkness, but in light and all spiritual joy. And no one will contradict this who expects the light above the heavens among the promised good things, about which Solomon says, “Light for the righteous always,” and the Apostle, “giving thanks to the Father who has made us fit for a share in the inheritance of the saints in the light.” Since, then, the heaven came into being at God's command, stretched all at once around what was enclosed within its circumference, and having a continuous body able to separate what is inside from what is outside, it necessarily left the space within it without light, cutting off the brightness from outside. For three things must come together for a shadow: the light, the body, and the unlit place. The darkness within the world, then, came about as the shadow of the heavenly body.

If God created light, how did he himself make darkness? For these are opposed to each other. Opposed to each other, yes, but both are necessary for human beings. The one assists people in work and industry, shows what is seen, and prepares them to hymn the maker of these things. The other gives people rest and renews them, and dissolves the weariness that comes from work. It gathers people home, and gives the wild beasts freedom to feed. The divine David teaches us this clearly: “You made darkness,” he says, “and it became night; in it all the beasts of the field will go about; young lions roaring to seize prey and to seek their food from God. The sun rose, and they gathered together, and they will lie down in their dens. Man will go out to his work and to his labor until evening.” Having said this, he marvels at the maker's mighty work and says, “How great are your works, O Lord! In wisdom you have made them all.” That darkness is necessary, then, we have learned precisely. That it is not a substance, but an accident, is easy to see. It is the shadow of heaven and earth; that is why it vanishes when the light rises. But light is a substance and has real existence: when it sets it rises again, and when it departs it returns. For just as our body is a substance, while the shadow it casts is an accident, not a substance, so heaven and earth, the greatest bodies, are distinct substances; but the shadow cast by them when the light is not present is called darkness, and when the light comes in, it does away with the darkness. One could learn this from another quarter too. A house without windows is full of darkness. When a lamp is brought in, it is lit, not because the darkness moves elsewhere (for it has no real existence; it is a thing without substance), but because it is wholly destroyed by the presence of the light. For it is a shadow formed by the roof, the floor, and the walls, and then dissolved by the gleams of the light. We see this happening every day. When the light withdraws, the shadow of heaven and earth produces darkness; when it rises again, this is dissolved. Darkness, then, is neither an uncreated substance nor a created reality, but a necessary condition arising from created things and proclaiming the wisdom of God. So the prophet hymns the God of the universe for this too: “He who made light,” he says, “and fashioned darkness.” He set each word very fittingly: “made” of the light, “fashioned” of the darkness; for it is an accident, arising and dissolving. And the three blessed young men, calling the whole creation to sing hymns, joined night to day and darkness to light. By their succession time is measured and human life is sustained.

What spirit was borne over the water? Some think it is the all-holy Spirit, giving life to the nature of the waters and prefiguring the grace of baptism. But I think the other explanation is truer: that here he calls the air “spirit.” For having said that he made heaven and earth, and having mentioned the waters by speaking of the abyss, he necessarily mentioned the air too, which extends from the surface of the water up to heaven. It is the nature of air to be borne over the bodies lying below. And he said very aptly “was borne” and not “lay upon”; for “was borne” indicated the mobile substance of the air. If anyone does not accept this explanation, because it is written, “The Spirit of God was borne over the water,” let him hear blessed David saying of the God of the universe, “He will blow his wind, and waters will flow.” That he called the wind so is clear even if I do not say it; for when the east wind or the south wind blows, frozen water naturally melts.

To whom does God say, “Let there be light,” and “Let there be a firmament”? He does not command anyone else to create; he calls the things that are not. Here the command is the will; for “whatever God willed,” it says, “he has done.” And if he did use some voice, it was plainly not for the sake of the lifeless elements, but for the sake of the invisible powers, so that they might know that at his command what is not comes to be.

Why did the writer put, “God saw that it was good”? To persuade the ungrateful not to find fault with what the divine verdict names good.

Is there one heaven, or are there two? Since the divine Scripture teaches that in the beginning God made heaven and earth, and then says that after the creation of light, on the second day, the firmament came into being, the question shows great folly in those who ask it. They ought to have recognized the difference both from the time and from the manner of creation. The one was before the light, the other after the light; the one was made from nothing, the other from waters. “Let there be,” it says, “a firmament in the middle of the water, and let it separate between water and water.” Then, having said that the word became deed (for this is what “and it was so” shows), it teaches also how it came to be: “God made the firmament; and God separated between the water that was under the firmament and the water above the firmament. And God called the firmament heaven.” But the first heaven was not called firmament; it was named heaven from the beginning. This one received its name from the thing itself. Since it was formed from the flowing substance of the waters, and the fluid nature became very tight and solid, it was called firmament. Then, as lying above us and fulfilling for us the use of the former heaven, it was named heaven as well. The God of the universe divided the nature of the waters in two: some he set above the firmament, some he left below, so that the waters lying above, by their moisture and coldness, might not allow the fire of the luminaries to harm the firmament, and those remaining below might nourish with their vapors the air, which is dried out and parched by the fire lying above. So the one who disbelieves in the second heaven goes off the straight road, and the one who tries to count more heavens follows myths, despising the teaching of the divine Spirit. The divine Scripture names the heavens in the plural, saying, “The heavens of the heavens,” because the language of the Hebrews cannot name either heaven or water in the singular. One could find many such cases in Greek too. No one names the city of Athens in the singular, but always in the plural; and again no one calls the city of Delphi by a singular name, but always in the plural. So the divine Scripture spoke in the plural not because there are many heavens, but keeping the idiom of the Hebrew tongue. For in another psalm it teaches us this more clearly, leaving aside the idiom of that tongue, and says, “The heaven of heaven is the Lord's.” So it is plain that just as this heaven is a roof for us and the earth a floor, so the visible heaven has the heaven lying above it as its roof.

Why, after speaking of one gathering of the waters, does he afterwards indicate many? For he says, “Let the water under heaven be gathered into their gatherings.” There is one gathering of the waters, for the seas are joined to one another, some below through underground channels, others at the very surface. But again he named the gatherings in the plural, since the Indian Sea is one, the Pontic another, and the Tyrrhenian another; the Propontis is one and the Hellespont another; the Aegean is another, and again the Ionian Gulf another. And outside these lies the greatest sea, which some name the Atlantic and others Ocean. For this reason he named it one gathering as joined together, and gatherings as divided.

Why did God command plants that are not edible to spring up? There are many kinds of irrational animals: some are called wild beasts, others cattle; some are creeping things, others winged. For all of these God prepared food beforehand, and these too he made for the use of human beings. Indeed he says that they too are fed for our sake: “who makes grass spring up for the cattle, and green plants for the service of men.” What is useless to one, then, is useful to another, and what is not needed by human beings suits the creatures made for humanity's sake. Besides this, the Lord, foreseeing that sicknesses would also befall human beings, since because of sin they had received the sentence of death, commanded the earth to put forth not only edible plants but also plants that ward off sicknesses. One could learn this more exactly from those trained in the art of medicine: even what seem to be poisons are remedies for sicknesses; for mixed with other herbs they become protective and productive of health.

When the luminaries had been created, what became of the earlier light? God the Master both makes things from what does not exist and creates from what exists. The first heaven he created from nothing; the second he made from waters. So too he brought forth the earth when it did not exist, but commanded it to put forth the kinds of trees and seeds. In the same way he created the light as he willed. And just as by the firmament he divided the nature of the waters, setting some above and leaving some below, so, dividing that light as he willed, he fashioned the luminaries, the great and the small.

What does “for signs, and for seasons, and for years, and for days” mean? The sun, by rising and setting, makes the days; and by running to the southern and northern regions it completes the yearly cycle. It also produces the turnings, which the divine Scripture called seasons. Passing from the region of the equinox toward the north, it makes spring; then, going on from there up to those limits, it produces the summer solstice; as it proceeds from there toward the south, autumn comes; and returning again, it makes winter. From the course of the moon we learn the number of the months; for it completes its own course in thirty days, less six hours. For this reason we call the number of so many days a month (mēn), since they also call the moon mēnē. But we do not understand “for signs” as the senseless do. For not even Pythagoras, nor Socrates, nor Plato, nor the Stoics accepted the idle talk of casting nativities. If those brought up on myths loathed the impiety of this myth, who that believes the divine oracles would put up with words that are not only impious but utterly senseless? By signs, then, the divine Scripture means knowing the time for sowing, for planting, for pruning, and for cutting wood fit for shipbuilding and house building. From this too seafarers have learned when they should set sail and when bring the vessel into harbor, when they must spread the sail and when take it down; for experience has taught them the risings and settings of the stars. And often we too, on seeing a comet, or a bearded star, or a beam-shaped meteor, have recognized an attack of enemies, or an invasion of locusts, or a destruction of cattle or of men. These, then, it called signs, not those things full of every folly and impiety.

Why did he make the plants before the luminaries, and the animals after them? Animals have eyes, and would not have borne the excess of the light. But this light, divided among the small and great luminaries, sends out a brightness proportioned to the sight of animals. The nature of plants has no share in sensation.

Why did he not bless the plants, but said to the animals, “Increase,” and so on? By his will he filled the whole earth at once with meadows and crops and plants and trees of every kind; but the irrational animals he brought forth two by two. Fittingly, then, he gave them the blessing, so that through their fruitfulness some might fill the seas and lakes and rivers, others the air, and others the earth.

Why did God make wild beasts and creeping things? Children need bogeys and straps and rods; with the first we frighten them, with the others we discipline them, and we do both to secure good order in them. Since, then, God the Master foreknew that we would decline into laziness, he prepared the wild beasts beforehand as a kind of straps and bogeys, so that by frightening us with them he might draw us to himself and prepare us to call on him as our ally. But just as grown men despise both bogeys and straps, so those reared in virtue do not fear the attacks of wild beasts. For the wild beasts stood by Adam before the sin, acknowledging their servitude; and again, when Noah entered the ark, the lion and the leopard and the most deadly of the creeping things followed him like sheep; and the lions stood by Daniel, craving food but not daring to approach, for they saw in him the godlike features of the divine image. So too the viper, sinking its teeth into the Apostle's hand and not finding the slackness and looseness of sin, sprang away at once and leapt into the fire, as if exacting punishment from itself for having attacked a body in no way its own. We, however, fear the wild beasts because we do not live the life of virtue. Even so, God, caring for us in our laziness, allotted them the more deserted places and assigned them the night for feeding: “In it,” he says, “all the beasts of the forest will go about.” To the creeping things he gave the holes in the earth, so that, hiding in them, they might not harm the human race. But so that we might not, remaining entirely unharmed, despise them as quite unable to harm, he who wisely governs our affairs sometimes permits two or three out of many myriads to be stung by scorpions or bitten by snakes, so that we, fearing to suffer something similar, may call on God our maker for help and beg to be guarded by his almighty providence. Besides, wild beasts are not useless to us in other ways either; for from them too the physicians prepare many protective remedies. Let no one, then, examining a wild beast by itself, find fault with the maker; let him look for its use. For the human body too has much beauty and harmony and usefulness in its parts; but it also has mucus and spittle, and the foul-smelling excrement it discharges. Yet no one in his right mind disparages the living creature on that account. It is impossible to live without these things; watered by them, it flourishes. It needs phlegm and blood and both kinds of bile. But just as it is constituted by these, so it is also destroyed by them; for an excess or a deficiency of any one of them destroys the creature. So again, if someone cuts off one joint of a finger, he will see that it is quite useless; but joined to the rest it gives the body very great use. So we too ought to act: not to examine each part of creation by itself, but to ask whether it is useful to the whole. Fire too burns, and not only destroys bodies but also sets fire to houses and ships and crops. Yet it is one of the four elements of which all things are composed, and without it mortal nature cannot live. Water likewise floods the earth, destroys houses, and drowns very many seafarers. It also harms those who choose to drink out of season and beyond measure. Yet no one who is not completely out of his mind has called water deadly; for it waters the earth and nourishes the plants, the irrational animals, and human nature. So, then, we examine each of the other things too, not testing it by itself to see whether it is harmful or beneficial, but asking whether it contributes some use to the common good. For the wild beasts respect man because of the authority over them given him from the beginning; but since he has transgressed the divine law, they sometimes despise him. For wicked slaves too are accustomed to spurn those whom they see deprived of freedom of speech because of offences …

To whom did God say, “Let us make man according to our image and according to likeness”? Some of the heretics of ill-omened name said that he said this to the angels and to the wicked demons, the thunderstruck fools not understanding “according to our image.” For God and the angels do not have one substance, nor the same image: he has an eternal nature, while they have him as their maker and creator, having received their being from him; and the demons, besides, turned to wickedness of their own will. It is the height of folly, then, to suppose that the wicked demons and the ocean of goodness have one image. The Jews ran aground on another madness. They say that the God of the universe said “Let us make man” to himself, in imitation of those entrusted with high office; for prefects and generals usually say in the plural, “We order,” “we write,” “we command,” and the like. And the crazed men did not see that the God of the universe says most things in the singular: “The time of every man has come before me,” and “I have considered that I made man,” and “I will wipe out man”; and “You shall have no other gods besides me”; and “See, I am doing new things, which now spring up”; and “I will open fountains on the mountains and rivers on the hills.” Throughout the divine Scripture, generally speaking, one can hear the God of the universe speaking in the singular. Rarely does he frame his speech in the plural, indicating the number of the persons of the Trinity. For when he confused the tongues, he did not say in the singular, “I will go down and confuse the tongues,” but, “Come, let us go down and confuse their tongues.” Here too, then, since he was fashioning the rational living being, which he was going to renew after many generations, perfecting the all-holy baptism by the invocations of the Holy Trinity, when about to create the nature that would receive those mysteries he indicated in a riddle both the sameness of the substance and the number of the persons. By saying “God said” he showed what is common to the divine nature; by adding “let us make” he revealed the number of the persons. So again, by saying “image” in the singular he showed the sameness of the nature; for he did not say “according to images,” but “according to image”; and by saying “our” he indicated the number of the hypostases. For the God of the universe, foreseeing as already done all that had not yet happened, and foreseeing the enfleshment and becoming man of the Only-begotten, and how he would take this nature from a Virgin, and so join and unite it to himself that one person of God and man would be understood, and one worship would be offered to him by the whole creation, very fittingly honored with the greatest honor the very foundation of the race. First he set a deliberation before the act of creation, to indicate in advance the rational nature of what was being created, and to indicate the number of the persons, so that the one who would offer hymns on earth might receive hints of the teaching about God; and, as though becoming the craftsman of the forming with his own hands, he showed his greater affection for what he formed. This is what the noble Job cries out to him, saying, “Your hands made me and formed me.” The divine David too used these words; and the one who is counted worthy of holy baptism knows clearly that the one who formed him saved him, and the one who saved him formed him. Besides this, the Creator himself says through both Jeremiah and Isaiah, “For we are clay, and he is our potter.” But we do not say that the divine has hands, or needs any deliberation and forethought, so as to fashion its work, as in Plato's myths, according to the idea in its mind; each of these things shows God's greater care for this living being.

What does “according to the image” mean? Some have called the invisibility of the soul the image of God; but they have not spoken truly. For if the invisibility of the soul were the image of God, angels and archangels and all the incorporeal and holy natures would have a better claim to be called images of God, since they are entirely free of bodies and have an unmixed invisibility. Others, out of great simplicity, say that the human body came into being according to the image of God, since they hear the divine voice saying, “Open your eyes and see, and incline your ear and hear,” and “The Lord smelled a fragrant odor,” and “The mouth of the Lord has spoken these things,” and “In his hand are the ends of the earth,” and the like. And the very foolish people did not see that God the Master, speaking to human beings through human beings, measures his words to the weakness of the hearers. Since we see through eyes, he calls his power of sight eyes; and again his power of hearing ears, since we hear through these parts; and his command a mouth. They ought to have listened not only to these words, but also to those that teach that God is uncircumscribed: “Where shall I go from your Spirit,” it says, “and where shall I flee from your face? If I go up into heaven, you are there; if I go down into Hades, you are present,” and so on. And the Lord said to the Samaritan woman, “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” If God is spirit, then he is simple, uncompounded, and without shape. But it is superfluous to lengthen this discussion; their folly is plain. Some of the teachers, then, have understood “Let us make man according to our image and according to likeness” in this way: that the God of the universe, having made the creation, both perceptible and intelligible, formed man last, setting him as a kind of image of himself in the midst of things lifeless and living, perceptible and intelligible, so that the lifeless and the living might bring him their usefulness as a kind of tribute, while the intelligible natures, in their care for him, might show their goodwill toward the one who made him. For this is what the divine Apostle said: “Are they not all ministering spirits sent out for service, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?” And the Lord in the Gospels: “See that you do not despise one of these little ones, the least. For truly I tell you that their angels daily see the face of my Father in heaven.” Others have said that man came into being according to the image of God in respect of rule, using a very clear proof: that the Maker added, “And let them rule over the fish of the sea, and the birds of heaven, and the cattle, and all the earth, and all the creeping things that creep on the earth.” For just as he himself has lordship over the universe, so he has given man authority over the irrational animals. One can find other imitations too, as of an archetype. Man too creates, in imitation of God who made him: houses and walls and cities and harbors and ships and dockyards and chariots and countless other things, copies, as it were, of heaven, and likenesses of sun and moon and stars and men, and images of irrational animals. But the difference in the creating is infinite. The God of the universe creates both from what exists and from what does not, and without toil or time; for as soon as he wills, he brings forth what he has resolved. Man needs matter, needs tools, needs deliberation and thought and time and toil, and other crafts, for making what is made. The builder needs the smith, and the smith the miner and the charcoal-burner; all of them together need the woodcutters, and the woodcutters the planters and farmers; and so each craft gathers what it needs from the other crafts. Yet even creating in this way, man imitates the Maker in some fashion, as an image does its archetype; for an image too has the likenesses of its archetype. It has the form of the parts, but not their activities; for it lacks a soul, by which the body is moved. So again, man also reigns and judges in imitation of the God of the universe. But God, when he judges, needs neither accusers nor witnesses; that is how he condemned Cain, having himself been eyewitness of the crime. Man, when he judges, needs both witnesses and accusers, for he does not know what has happened. So too man was named god, since he was called the image of God: “For a man,” it says, “ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God.” But again, the God of the universe has a divine nature, not a bare title; man, as an image, has only the name, without the reality. So too being uncircumscribed belongs truly and properly to the God of the universe; yet the human mind imitates it in a way, for in an instant it travels around the east and the west, the north and the south, the regions above the heavens and those beneath the earth, not in its substance, but only by the imagination of thought. God, however, is uncircumscribed in substance, in wisdom, and in power. One could find another, more exact imitation in the soul of man. It has in itself both the rational and the vital. The mind begets the word; and a spirit goes forth with the word, not begotten as the word is, but always accompanying the word and going forth with it as it is begotten. But these belong to man as in an image; for this reason the word and the spirit in him have no subsistence of their own. In the Holy Trinity, on the other hand, we understand three hypostases, united without confusion and each subsisting by itself. For God the Word was begotten from the Father before the ages, yet is inseparable from the one who begot him; and the all-holy Spirit proceeds from God the Father, and is also understood in its own hypostasis. “For all these,” it says, “the one and the same Spirit works, distributing to each individually as he wills.” But there is no need to lengthen the discussion about these things; one can find countless proofs of this in the divine Scripture.

Why did God bless the seventh day in particular? Each of the other days received a creation of its own. Since, then, he had created the whole creation by this day, he gave the seventh day a blessing instead of a creation, so that it alone, unlike the others, might not remain without honor. But he put “He sanctified it” in the sense of “he set it apart”; for one can find it understood in this way in many places in the divine Scripture. Of the Medes, for instance, he says, “They are sanctified, and I lead them,” that is, set apart for this purpose. Besides, since he was writing these things for Jews, he necessarily put “He sanctified it,” so that they would give greater reverence to the Sabbath. For this is what he said when giving the law: “In six days the Lord your God made heaven and earth; and on the seventh day he rested from all his works that he had made, and sanctified it.”

What does “A spring went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the earth” mean? Here the writer again recounted in summary what concerns the creation. He taught that God brought forth the elements when they did not exist, that he separated them from one another, that he adorned each of them as he willed, and that, with neither man tilling the earth nor the clouds in labor with rain, the earth put forth plants as its creator willed, having as its watering the moisture and dampness left in it after the separation of the waters. For so Aquila too translated: “And a welling-up went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground.”

If the soul came from the divine breathing, is the soul then from the substance of God? Such a notion belongs to the height of impiety and blasphemy. By this the divine Scripture showed the ease of the creation. Besides this, it hints at the nature of the soul: that it is a created spirit, invisible and intelligent, free from the grossness of bodies. And one must see this too: one would first have to conceive of lungs, and the muscles that compress and contract them, and the windpipe joined to the lungs, and a palate and a mouth, and only then accept the breathing. But if the divine is incorporeal, then the breathing too must be understood in a manner befitting God.

Why did God plant paradise, when he was going to banish Adam from it at once because of sin? First, God the Master does not consent to condemn on the basis of foreknowledge. That is why, though he foresaw the transgression, he gave him a share in the good things. Then, he also wished him to know the divine gifts, so that, once deprived of them, he might hate sin for having stripped him of such great goods. Besides this, the just president of the games had to set before the athletes of virtue the prizes of victory. For this reason he said about the kingdom too: “Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”

Some say that paradise is in heaven. Since the divine Scripture says, “God made to spring up further from the earth every tree beautiful to the sight and good for food,” it is very rash to follow one's own reasonings and abandon the teaching of the Spirit.

Should the tree of life and the tree of knowing what is known of good and evil be called intelligible or perceptible? The divine Scripture said that these too sprang from the earth; so they do not have a nature different from the other plants. Just as the wood of the cross is wood, and is called saving because of the salvation that comes through faith in it, so these too are plants that sprang from the earth; but because of the divine decree one of them was named the tree of life, while the other, because the awareness of sin came about in connection with it, was called the tree “of knowing good and evil.” The contest set before Adam concerned this one; the tree of life lay ready as a kind of prize for him if he kept the commandment. So too the patriarchs gave names to places and wells. They called one the well of vision, not because it bestowed the power of sight, but because the Lord of the universe appeared beside it; and the well of broad room, because the men of Gerar, who had often fought over the other wells, did not trouble those who dug this one. So too the well of the oath, because the oaths were sworn beside it. So Luz was named Bethel, that is, house of God, because the maker of the universe appeared to Jacob in that very place. And the hill of witness, not because the hill was alive, but because they made their agreements with one another in that place. So baptism is called living water, not because the water of baptism has a different nature, but because through that water the divine grace grants eternal life. So too the one was called “tree of life” because of the divine decree, and the other tree of knowledge because of the awareness of sin that arose in connection with it. For they had not yet had experience of sin; then, having partaken of the forbidden fruit, as transgressors of the commandment they felt the stings of conscience.

Did they not, then, have knowledge of good and evil before partaking of the forbidden fruit? And how could those honored with reason and made according to the divine image not have had discernment of good and evil? How would the abyss of righteousness have laid down a law for them, if they did not have this knowledge in their nature, nor knew that keeping the commandment was good and transgressing it ruinous? They had the knowledge, then; the experience they acquired later.

How then did they know after eating that they were naked? Before eating they did not have this awareness. Very young children are not naturally ashamed when stripped of their clothing; but as the body gradually grows and the mind begins to show its own nature, nakedness is no longer bearable to the young; they blush and cover themselves, and if someone takes their clothing away, they cover their private parts with their hands. In many people, habit removes this shame. Sailors who sail naked, and bathers who are seen naked by one another, do not feel this shame there; but if someone is naked outside the baths, he blushes deeply. So too Adam and his wife, as soon as they were formed, being like infants, newly made and uninitiated in sin, were not ashamed to live without clothing; but after the experience they covered some parts of the body with leaves.

How does Moses say that the Tigris and the Euphrates go out of paradise, when some say that they gush up from the mountains of Armenia? One can see other rivers too that come out in one place, then pass into the earth through certain sinkholes and gush up again further on. This has happened with these rivers too. They go out from there, as the divine Scripture says; then, passing through underground channels, they take other sources here. The God of the universe did not arrange this without purpose; he did it to cut off the superfluous curiosity of human beings. If their whole course were visible, some would have tried, travelling along their banks, to spy out the place of paradise. They would have failed in what they longed for, worn out by the length of the journey and perishing for lack of necessities, falling now into rough country, now into deserts, and at times even falling among cruel and barbarous men. Taking forethought for them, then, the compassionate God made the courses of these rivers hidden.

Why did he form the woman from Adam's side? The maker of nature wished to bring the sexes together in concord. For this reason he formed Adam from the earth, and the woman from Adam, in order both to show the sameness of their nature and to implant in them a natural affection for each other. If, even though they came into being in this way, men quarrel with women and women with men, what would they not have done if he had formed the woman from some other source? Wisely, then, he both divided and joined together again. For marriage brings the sexes into one: “For the two,” it says, “shall become one flesh.” That this is true, what happens bears witness: through marital union one fruit springs from both, sown by him, nourished by her, and brought to completion by the creator of nature.

… the serpent prudent, and is it praised? For prudence is a part of virtue. Many names are used equivocally: they have named the idols of the nations gods. This was said, more precisely, about the demon who worked in that serpent. And the foolish have ignorantly called those who occupy themselves with myths wise. So too the divine Scripture says, “God chose the foolish things of the world to put the wise to shame”; and again, “Where is the wise man?”; and through the prophet, “They are wise in doing evil.” So here too it called the serpent “prudent” in the sense of crafty. For so Aquila too translated: “And the serpent was crafty beyond every living thing of the field that the Lord God had made.”

How did the serpent, being irrational, converse with Eve? It was the instrument of the enemy of the truth. The Lord made this plain in the divine Gospels; for having said to the Jews, “You are of your father the devil,” he added, “He was a murderer from the beginning.” It was he, then, who conversed with Eve through the serpent. Since they had received from the God of the universe the rule over all the irrational animals, he brought the snare to her through one of their subjects, so making the deceit more persuasive. That the divine Scripture also calls the one who worked through the serpent a serpent, the prophet Isaiah is witness, crying out: “On that day God will bring his holy sword, the great and strong, upon the dragon, the serpent, the crooked and strong; upon the dragon, the fleeing serpent, the one in the sea.” And the Lord said to the holy disciples, “See, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy.”

What does “The eyes of the two were opened” mean? That even before eating they did not have their eyes shut is plain to those willing to pay attention. How did the woman see that the tree was good for food, pleasing to the eyes to look at, and beautiful to contemplate, unless they had their eyes open? So it is the awareness that came after the sin that the divine Scripture called by this name; for immediately after sin the conscience is stung.

Why is the serpent punished, when it was the devil who brought about the deceit? Properly speaking, God brought the curse upon the one who worked through it. For he too has been named serpent; not that he received this nature from the God of the universe, for he was created good and was created together with the incorporeal powers; but since he turned to wickedness of his own will, he was deprived of the honor he had received from the beginning and was cast down to the earth. And the animal itself received the curse for the benefit of human beings. For when we see the serpent dragging itself along the ground and writhing, we are reminded of the ancient curse, and we learn what great evils sin brings, not only to those who commit it but also to those who assist in it. The serpent itself receives no harm from this, since it is naturally made to move in this way; it has this kind of motion in its nature, and nothing natural seems burdensome. But man reaps much benefit from it.

Why did God create the serpent, foreseeing that it would be the instrument of wickedness? One could say this about man too; for he foreknew that man also would transgress the commandment. Besides, it would have been easy for the devil to bring about the deceit through another beast as well.

Why did he make the devil, knowing that he would be such? God created the whole nature of the incorporeal beings, making it rational and immortal; and free will is proper to what is rational. Of these, some kept their goodwill toward their maker, while others turned aside to wickedness. One can find this among human beings too: some are lovers of virtue, others workers of vice. If, then, anyone finds fault with the creation of the wicked, he deprives the athletes of virtue of the prizes of victory. For if they had possessed the love of virtue not in the choice of their will, but as an unchangeableness implanted by nature, the contenders for piety who are worthy of victory would have gone unnoticed. But since the will has the choice between good things and their opposites, these justly obtain the crowns of victory, and those pay the penalty for the sins they committed by their own will.

You call God good: how then do you attach such severity to him? It is cruel and harsh to inflict so great a punishment for a little food, not only on those who sinned but also on those who sprang from them. First, those who choose to be pious must be convinced that whatever is done or commanded by the God of the universe is holy, just, good, and loving toward humankind. If we confess that he has all these qualities, we must think that what he arranges and commands is of the same kind. Next, one must know that every law, even if it gives directions about small matters, has equal force with one that commands the greatest things to be done, or forbids them; and this is especially true of every divine law. The law commanding circumcision, for example, does no harm to one's neighbor when it is transgressed. Yet the lawgiver says, “Every uncircumcised male who is not circumcised on the eighth day shall be destroyed”; and the punishment he fixed for murderers and adulterers he assigned to this too. But since the heretics of ill-omened name, who openly make war on the Old Scripture, are likely to accuse this law too, I shall make my proofs from the legislation of the Gospel. For in those laws we find that the one who looks lustfully at a woman is judged guilty of adultery; the one who is angry without cause is liable to judgment; the one who calls his brother “Raca” is answerable to the court; the one who calls him “fool” deserves Gehenna; and the one who swears, even if he swears truly, belongs to the devil's company. Why then do they call this lawgiver good, but the lawgiver of the Old Testament harsh? By their own standard these laws are harsher than those. But daring such things belongs to their blasphemy. We know that both these laws and those come from one God; the difference was produced by the character of those who received the law. Like a wise teacher, he offered imperfect things to the imperfect and perfect things to the perfect. Besides this, one must consider that punishments are inflicted without pardon on the first transgressors of laws, so that others, seeing the punishment, may not dare the transgression. This happened with the law of the Sabbath: the man who dared to gather wood on the Sabbath, the first to transgress the law about it, was stoned by the whole people at God's command, so that, having carried out the punishment with their own hands, they might shudder at lawlessness as something that brings punishment. Later, when many transgressed the law of the Sabbath, the lawgiver bore the transgression patiently. So too he subjected Cain, the first murderer, to incurable punishments, to frighten those of his time and those after him from daring anything similar; but later, when there had been many murderers, he did not bring the punishments at once. So Adam too, who first received a law, and a very light law (for he had given him an abundance of fruits of every kind, and forbidden him to eat of one only), had to pay the penalty of his offence for the benefit of the race. But if, being irascible, as Marcion of ill-omened name said, he inflicted the punishment of death for a little food, how is it that, when all human beings had run aground in impiety and lawlessness, he did not bring final and total destruction upon them, but gave his Son and procured salvation through the cross and passion? I say this to those who think that the God of the universe did these things out of some anger, and who do not know the mystery of the dispensation. It is plain, I think, to those taught in divine things that the God of the universe never does anything out of regret; this passion is proper to those who have a changeable nature, who are pleased now with one thing and now with another, and are wholly ignorant of what will be. But the God of the universe has an unchangeable nature, and knows what has not yet happened as already done. So, foreseeing what concerned Adam, and foreknowing that he would become mortal by transgressing the commandment, he prepared his nature beforehand to suit; for he shaped the formation of the body into male and female. Such a constitution of bodies belongs to mortals, who need childbearing for the continuance of the race. Immortal nature does not need the female; that is why the maker brought forth the whole number of the incorporeal beings at once. But of the mortal animals he created male and female, two by two in each kind, and gave them the blessing of increase: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth and have dominion over it.” Foreseeing this, then, the God of the universe not only formed them in this way, but also gave them the law about food: “See,” he says, “I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the earth, and every tree that has in itself fruit of seed for sowing; it shall be food for you, and for all the beasts of the earth, and all the birds of heaven, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, which has in it the breath of life; and I have given you every green plant for food.” The God of the universe said this to Adam before the commandment. But food belongs to mortals; immortal nature needs no nourishment. And the Lord, teaching this, said that after the resurrection “they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” The punishment, then, was not the work of anger, but a dispensation of the greatest wisdom. So that the human race might hate sin as the cause of death, the all-wise one brings the sentence of death after the transgression of the commandment. By this he contrives hatred of sin, while preparing beforehand for the race the remedy of salvation, which, through the becoming man of the Only-begotten, procured the resurrection from the dead and immortality. And what is harsh in the sentence, “You are earth, and to earth you will return”? “I formed you from earth,” he says, “and changed you into a far better nature; but since you would not keep my commandment, return to your former nature.” And why should the sin seem small? He had given him authority over all the plants, and forbidden him to eat from one alone. But he, leaving all the others, plucked this fruit first and only. This is what God the Master reproached him with: “Who told you,” he says, “that you were naked, unless you have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat from this alone?” The devil too made this plain by what he said to Eve: “Why is it that God said, You shall not eat from every tree in the paradise?” If he had seen them eating, he would not have thought that they had received the commandment about all the trees. The transgression, then, was not small: they partook first of the one tree from which alone they had been commanded not to partake.

Why, when God had said, “On whatever day you eat from the tree, you shall surely die,” did he not die at once when he transgressed the commandment? This accusation is the opposite of the last. A little before, you called God harsh; now you accuse his love for humankind. You ought rather to praise the goodness of God, not accuse it. For he usually threatens greater things but brings punishments smaller than the threats; and one can find this in many places in the divine Scripture. Here, however, he called the sentence of mortality death; for so Symmachus too translated: “On whatever day you eat from the tree, you will be mortal.” After the divine sentence he expected death every day, so to speak. So too those who have believed in Christ the Master live even while being slaughtered, awaiting the resurrection and the kingdom of heaven. “For in hope we were saved.”

How should the garments of skin be understood? The allegorists say that the skins are mortal flesh; others have said that they were made from the bark of trees. I accept neither of these; the one is overly curious, the other very fabulous. Since the divine Scripture says that the body was formed even before the soul, how is it not fabulous to say that after transgressing the commandment they received mortal flesh? And to busy oneself about where God got skins, and on that account to invent a new kind of clothing, seems to me superfluous. One must be content with what is written, and know that nothing is impossible for the creator of the universe, and marvel at his boundless goodness: he cares for them even after their transgression, and when they needed clothing he did not overlook them in their nakedness.

What does “See, Adam has become like one of us” mean? Since the devil had said, “You will be like gods, knowing good and evil,” and Adam had received the sentence of death for transgressing the commandment, the God of the universe said this ironically, showing the falsehood of the devil's promise. He prevented him from partaking of the fruit of the tree of life, not because he grudged him immortal life, but to check the course of sin. Death, then, is a cure, not a punishment; for it checks the impulse of sin. “For the one who has died,” it says, “has been justified from sin.” He commanded him to live opposite paradise, so that, remembering the life free of pain, he might hate sin as the cause of a life of toil.

If Cain was grieved because his offerings were not accepted, it is plain that he repented; for grief belongs to those who repent. What vexed him was not his own fault, but his brother's success. Aquila too hinted at this; he put it so: “And Cain was very angry, and his face fell. And the Lord said to Cain, Why are you angry?”

What sign did God put on Cain? God's decree itself was a sign, preventing him from being killed; and the trembling of his limbs made him marked and conspicuous.

Whom did Cain have as wife? His sister, clearly; but this was not then a charge against him, since no law forbade it. Besides, the race could not have increased otherwise. God wished to establish all the nations of human beings from one man and one woman: first, so that they might recognize the sameness of their nature, as sprung from one couple; then, so that they might be joined in concord, as having flowered from one root. For if, even with these things so governed by the God of the universe, countless slaughters are dared, what would they not have dared if they had thought that they had sprung from different fathers? For this reason he formed one man from the earth, made one woman from him, and from them filled the whole world with the race. For this reason, then, he permitted at the beginning the union of brothers and sisters; but when the race had increased, he forbids this marriage as unlawful. That is why, with Noah and his sons, he also saved their wives in the ark, so that their children might be joined to their cousins.

Whom did Lamech kill? Not two, as some have supposed, nor Cain, as others have told in their myths, but one, and a young man at that. “For I have killed a man,” he says, “to my wounding, and a youth to my bruising”; that is, a man young in age. He escaped punishment, however, because he confessed his sin: by pronouncing sentence against himself he prevented the divine sentence.

Where did the God of the universe translate Enoch? One must not seek what has been passed over in silence, but be content with what is written. I think, though, that the God of the universe did this to encourage the athletes of virtue. Abel, the first fruit of righteousness, had been cut down before his time and by the roots, and the hope of the resurrection did not yet encourage human beings; so the God of the universe translated Enoch, who had pleased him, and removed him from the life of mortals, so that each of those who choose piety, being honored with reason, might reckon that he who honored Enoch would not leave Abel without honor, since he is just and governs all things justly. For this reason he allowed the one to be killed and translated the other, to signify by his taking-up the resurrection to come. For the one who did not obtain the rewards of virtue in this life will clearly enjoy them in another life.

Why, when it was Adam who had sinned, did Abel the righteous die first? God wished the foundation of death to be rotten. If Adam had died first, death would have had a strong base, receiving the sinner as its first dead. But since it received first one who was unjustly killed, it has an insecure foundation.

Whom has Moses called sons of God? Some thunderstruck and very foolish people took them to be angels, thinking perhaps that they would have an excuse for their own licentiousness if they accused the angels of such things. They ought to have heard the God of the universe saying, “My Spirit shall not remain among these men for ever, because they are flesh; but their days shall be a hundred and twenty years,” and seen from this that the nature of incorporeal beings has no flesh, and that their life is not bounded by a fixed time; for they were created immortal. What follows has the same sense: “The Lord God, seeing that the wickednesses of men were multiplied on the earth, and that everyone was diligently planning evil in his heart all his days, God considered that he had made man on the earth. And God said, I will wipe out man whom I made from the face of the earth, from man to cattle, and from creeping things to the birds of heaven; for I have considered that I made them.” And again he said to Noah, “The time of every man has come before me, for the earth has been filled with injustice by them; and see, I am destroying them and the earth.” All this shows that they were human beings, who had loved the lawless life. If angels had mingled with the daughters of men, then men were wronged by the angels (for they plainly corrupted their daughters by force), and they were wronged also by God who made them, since they themselves were punished for the lust of the angels. But I think that not even the father of lies himself would dare to say this. The divine Scripture has taught in many ways both that human beings sinned and that the divine sentence was pronounced against human beings. What makes many ignorant is reading the divine Scripture carelessly. For having said that Seth was born from Adam and Enosh from Seth, the writer added: “He hoped to call upon the name of the Lord God.” Aquila translated it in this way: “Then it was begun to be called by the name of the Lord.” The text hints that because of his piety he was the first to obtain the divine name, and was named “God” by his kinsmen; hence those who sprang from him were called sons of God, just as we are called Christians from the name of Christ the Master. If anyone does not accept this interpretation because it rests on Aquila's translation, let him hear God saying through the prophet David: “I said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High”; and, “God stood in the assembly of gods; in their midst he judges gods.” He gives this name to the rulers, as what follows shows: “How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to sinners? Judge for the orphan and the poor; do justice to the lowly and the needy,” and so on. And again: “The God of gods, the Lord, has spoken and called the earth”; that is, plainly, the God of these very men who by grace have been counted worthy of this title. So too the lawgiver says, “You shall not revile gods, and you shall not speak evil of the rulers of your people.” Those men, then, as pious, were named sons of God. For the race of Seth had been kept apart and did not mingle with the descendants of Cain, because of the curse brought on him by the God of the universe. But after a long time had passed (for God brought the flood after more than two thousand years), seeing that the daughters of Cain's kindred were beautiful, and charmed, as is likely, by the musical instruments they had invented (for Jubal, who sprang from them, introduced the harp and the lyre), they mingled with them and corrupted their own nobility. They suffered the same as the Israelites who mingled with the daughters of the Midianites, shared their impiety, and received punishment from God. Of these the divine David too said, “And they mingled with the nations and learned their works, and served their carved images.” So those who traced their descent from Seth were formerly called sons of God as men devoted to virtue; but, enticed by the beauty of the unholy women, they confounded the races that had been kept distinct, and received total destruction as the fruit of their inheritance. One must note, however, that the divine word does not accuse them simply of sin, but of lawlessness pursued with diligence and zeal. This is what “everyone was diligently planning evil in his heart all his days” shows. Those who resent the assault of sin but are overcome by wickedness through the slackness of their mind, and afterwards grieve and groan, have some moderate excuse in a way; but those who incline wholly to licentiousness and wickedness, and make their reason the slave of the passions, so as even to invent further forms of vice, and this not once or twice but all their life long, what pardon do they deserve? And what punishment is not small for those who have so given themselves up to destruction?

Whom does the divine Scripture call giants? Some say those who lived many years; others, men hateful to God and opposed to God. Those who understand it in this way say that these men did not have larger bodies than other men. But when I hear the divine Scripture saying of Anak that he was a descendant of the giants; and of Og, that his bed was of iron, nine cubits long and four cubits wide, and that he was left from the Rephaim; and the spies relating, “We were before them like locusts”; and God confirming their words and saying, “I have delivered to you the Amorite, whose height was like a cedar's, and he was strong as an oak”; and of Goliath, that he was four cubits and a span in height: I think that some men of enormous size did exist. God governed this too wisely, so that people might know that it was not from weakness that the creator assigned human beings their measure (for it would have been easy for him to create them larger); but to cut off pride and hinder arrogance, he did not give human beings very large bodies. If in small bodies they boast, not against one another, but against the maker himself, what would they not have done if they had received very large bodies?

Why did the ancients live a long time? So that the race might increase in the longer time; for this reason too they were joined to many wives. Indeed, even after the flood, down to the patriarchs, they were long-lived; but when they had filled the world, the number of years was reduced.

Why did he destroy the multitudes of men by the flood? He wished to wipe out the race of Cain; but the tribe of the pious had mingled with it, and so it shared in the punishment too. Wishing to make a beginning of a new life, he preserved Noah and his sons with their wives, since Noah was pious and righteous, had sprung from the kindred of the pious, and had hated that lawless mingling. Yet he did not do this, as some say, out of some anger and regret; these are human passions, and the divine nature is free of passions. Besides, regret suits those who learn the nature of things by experience: not knowing what will be, they deliberate beforehand, and then, learning by experience that they did not deliberate rightly, they regret it. But God sees what will be after many generations as already done. Foreseeing and foreknowing, then, he governs all things accordingly. Why, then, should he regret, when he arranges all things according to his own foreknowledge? In God, then, regret is a change of dispensation. “I regret,” he says, “that I anointed Saul king”; that is, “I have resolved to depose him and appoint another.” So here too, “I have considered that I made man” means “I have resolved to destroy the human race”; but being loving toward humankind, he preserved Noah as a seed for nature. And since the kinds of irrational animals were created for human use, they too were destroyed together with the human beings, except those preserved with Noah in the ark. For God the Master ordered two of each kind of those considered unclean to be preserved, but seven of the clean. Since he was going to permit human beings to eat meat, and the nurslings of piety were going to offer him sacrifices, he commanded more of the clean to be kept: the three pairs for the increase of the kind, and the one left over for sacrifice. For as soon as the punishment ceased, Noah offered God a sacrifice of thanksgiving: “from all the clean cattle,” it says, “and from all the clean birds.” So it is plain that the reason he commanded seven of each clean kind to be brought into the ark was this: so that Noah, offering one animal of each kind, would not destroy the pairs.

What did the wild beasts eat in the ark? Clearly fodder and seeds. For God said to Noah, “You shall take for yourself of all the foods that you eat, and gather them to yourself, and it shall be food for you and for them.” He prescribed the same food for human beings too: “See,” he says, “I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon all the earth, and every tree that has in itself fruit of seed for sowing; it shall be food for you, and for all the beasts of the earth, and all the birds of heaven, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, which has in itself the breath of life; and every green plant for food.” So it is plain that both human beings and animals abstained from eating meat and had as their food the fruits that grow from the earth. For “yielding seed” Aquila translated “seeding seed.”

How should “The Lord remembered Noah” be understood? The divine Scripture speaks to human beings in a way suited to them, and reshapes its words so that they can take them in. Just as in God regret is a change of dispensation (“I regret that I anointed Saul king,” meaning, “I have resolved to set up another in his place”), so here too “I have considered that I made man” must be understood as “I have resolved to bring total destruction on them.” And so this “God remembered Noah” does not hint at a previous forgetting; it shows his ineffable love for humankind: because of his affection for Noah he commanded that boundless and immeasurable water to be swallowed up as quickly as possible. Making his indescribable goodness plain, it added, “and all the cattle, and all the birds, and all the creeping things that were with him in the ark.” For our sake he counted these too worthy of his providence. This is what the great David cries: “who makes grass spring up for the cattle, and green plants for the service of men”; and again, “Men and cattle you will save, O Lord.” For on our account he cares for what is ours as well.

What does “The Lord smelled a fragrant odor” mean? He accepted Noah's gratitude; not that he was delighted by the savor of the fat (nothing smells worse than burning bones), but he praised the intention of the one who offered it. For he does not have bodily parts, that we should attribute nostrils to him; smelling is done through nostrils. So he repays him with a blessing; and since Noah was the seed of the race, the root of nature, and a second Adam, he gives him the blessing that Adam had enjoyed as soon as he was formed: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth and have dominion over it; and the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds of heaven, and on all that moves on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea; I have given them under your hand.” And the word became deed: all things fear even the shadow of man, creatures of the water, of the land, and of the air. Then he gave him the law about eating meat, bidding him enjoy meat as he would vegetables.

Why does he forbid partaking of blood? He taught this more clearly in the Law: “What the soul is to a man,” he says, “the blood is to the irrational animals.” If, then, you partake of meat without the blood, you partake of it as you would of vegetables, for a vegetable has no soul. But if you partake of it with the blood, you eat a soul. That is why here too he said: “Only flesh with the blood of its life you shall not eat. For your blood, the blood of your lives, I will require; from the hand of all the wild beasts I will require it; from the hand of a man's brother I will require his life.” Here he hints at the resurrection: not that he will bring the wild beasts to judgment and exact a penalty for eating men, but that he will gather together and raise up the bodies consumed by them. For “in his hand are the ends of the earth,” and it is easy for him to gather our body from everywhere. Here he has shown this in a riddle; through Ezekiel he proclaimed the resurrection more clearly.

Why did he legislate the eating of meat at all? As soon as he created man, he gave him the fruits of the earth, bidding him live on seeds and trees; but after the flood he honors him with greater luxury, bidding him sacrifice and eat birds and fish and land animals. He was driving out one passion with another, and healing the greater with the lesser. For God, foreseeing that those who had fallen into extreme irrationality would deify all these creatures, permits eating them in order to put an end to the impiety; it is the height of stupidity to worship what one eats. For this reason he calls some animals unclean and others clean, so that they would not deify the former, loathing them as unclean, and would not worship the latter, since they eat them.

Why was Noah not blamed when he fell into drunkenness? The failing was one of inexperience, not of intemperance. He was the first of men to press the fruit of the vine, and since he knew neither the measure of drinking nor the manner of partaking (that one must first mix the wine with water and then drink), he suffered the stupor. And there was nothing strange in his being uncovered: even now some uncover themselves while sleeping, since sleep takes away perception; and drunkenness added to sleep makes the excuse for the uncovering more plausible.

Since the law commanding honor to father and mother had not yet been given, why is Ham judged as one who outraged his father? The creator placed the necessary laws in nature. So he condemned Cain, since nature taught him that murder is unlawful. At any rate, using guile as his accomplice, he led his brother far from their parents and killed him; and when God asked, “Where is Abel your brother?” he denied it. Plainly, knowing that what had happened was evil, he denied the deed he had dared. And when convicted by the just judge, he confessed that he had sinned beyond pardon: “My sin,” he says, “is too great to be forgiven.” Adam too, perceiving the divine presence, tried to hide, as knowing that stealing is evil. So too Ham received the charge of outraging his father, as one who had transgressed the law of nature. That nature also taught honoring parents is attested by Ham's brothers: having learned from him of their father's condition, they walked backward with great modesty and covered their father, so as not to see that from which they had been sown and sprung. Very fittingly, therefore, they reaped their father's blessing.

Why, when Ham had sinned, did his son receive the curse? After the flood ceased, all together had shared in the divine blessing. Noah therefore thought it rash to bring a curse on one who had shared in the divine blessing; for this reason he put the curse on Ham's son. And the punishment has its justice too: since Ham sinned against his father as a son, he receives the punishment through the curse on his son. Besides this, one must consider that if Ham himself had received the curse, the punishment would have passed to his whole race; but he passed the chastisement on to the youngest son. And this too one must know: the righteous man's words are a prophecy, not a curse. Since Israel, which traced its descent from Shem, was going to take possession of Palestine, and those sprung from Canaan had long inhabited it, he shapes the prophecy as a curse, foretelling what would be, and frightening those who would come later from offending against their parents. The blessing of Shem teaches us this clearly: “Blessed,” he says, “be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” He did not subject him to both brothers, but to Shem alone. And he foretold numerous offspring for Japheth, and piety for Shem; for he foretold that God would dwell in the tents of Shem. He did dwell among the patriarchs descended from Shem, and among the prophets who sprang from them; first in the tabernacle, and later in Jerusalem. But the prophecy had its exact fulfilment in the mystery of the dispensation, when God the Word himself, the only-begotten Son of God the Father, became flesh and became man, and called his temple the flesh that he took from the seed of David and Abraham; for these too traced their descent from Shem. The servitude of Canaan found its fulfilment in the Gibeonites.

Some of the teachers have said that the bitumen was lime. Those who said this did not know, as is likely, the springs in Assyria, and thought that the tower was built with lime. But I have learned precisely from those who have come from there that there are springs that gush up this substance with water, and that people work it into their buildings and lay baked brick upon it. They say that the tower too was built in this way; and eyewitnesses insisted that they broke off a part of it and established precisely that bitumen is laid under the baked bricks. Besides, they say that stone is scarce in Assyria, and that for this reason they used bricks instead of stones; and without stones how could there be lime?

Which language is older? The names show it. Adam, Cain, Abel, and Noah belong to the Syriac language. The Syrians usually call red earth adamtha; Adam, then, is interpreted “the earthy” or “the one made of dust.” Cain is “acquisition”; Adam said this when praising God: “I have acquired a man through God.” Abel is “mourning,” for he was the first to be seen dead, and the first to bring mourning to his parents. And Noah is “rest.”

Where, then, did Hebrew begin? I think that it is a sacred language. Just as in the Greek temples there were certain special characters of letters, which they called hieratic, so the God of the universe gave this language through Moses: a language that is taught, not natural. Thus, while all others speak the language of the nations among which they are born (those born in Italy using that of the Italians, those in Greece that of the Greeks, those in Persia that of the Persians, and those in Egypt that of the Egyptians), the children of the Hebrews are not found using the Hebrew language from the start, but that of those among whom they were born; then, when they become youths, they are taught the characters of the letters, and through the letters they learn the divine Scripture, written in the Hebrew language. I think the blessed David too hints at this in the eightieth psalm: “He heard a language that he did not know.” But some say that the language was called Hebrew from Eber, since he alone remained in the former language, and that the Hebrews were named from him. I, however, think that they were named Hebrews because the patriarch Abraham came from the land of the Chaldeans into Palestine, crossing the river Euphrates; for in the Syriac language one who crosses over is called ebra. If they were called Hebrews from Eber, then not only these ought to have been so called. For many nations trace their descent from Eber; to pass over all the others, from him come the Ishmaelites, the descendants of Keturah, the Idumeans, the Amalekites, the Moabites, the Ammonites, and those who live in Carrhae, for they trace their descent from Nahor and Laban. Yet none of these uses the Hebrew language. Abraham himself was called so, and the divine Scripture is witness: after the capture of Lot, “someone came,” it says, “and told Abraham the crosser.” I found this word given in the Hebrew as hebrei; and hebrei put into Greek becomes Hebraios. So too in the passage where the Egyptian woman said of Joseph, “You have brought in to us a Hebrew servant to mock us,” the Hebrew has hebrei. But it is superfluous to wrangle about this; it does no harm to the doctrine of piety whichever we accept.

Some say that Pharaoh had intercourse with Sarah. What care, then, did Abraham enjoy from the God of the universe, if God overlooked his wife being made an adulteress? And why did he afflict Pharaoh and his whole house with great and terrible afflictions, if he did not wish to prevent the unlawful union? Pharaoh himself puts forward his ignorance as a defense, blames Abraham for calling his wife his sister, and shows that he took her not to outrage her but wishing to marry her: “What is this,” he says, “that you have done to me, that she is your wife? Why did you say, She is my sister, so that I took her for myself as wife? And now, see, your wife is before you; take her and be off.” And he not only said this but acted on it, and counted him worthy of every kind of care: “Pharaoh,” it says, “commanded men concerning Abraham to escort him, and his wife, and all that he had.” It is plain, then, that as soon as Sarah was seized, the ruler of the universe bound Pharaoh with sickness; the sickness dulled his desire, and the hunter, though he had the prey within his nets, did not enjoy the catch, for the sickness prevented it.

And why did Scripture keep silent here about Sarah's being kept unharmed, while in the account of Abimelech it showed this clearly? Sarah was at that time about to bear Isaac. So, in order that Abraham's seed should not be suspect, the divine Scripture showed clearly there that Abimelech did not touch her. And from both passages one must learn that nature has taught even barbarians that adultery is evil and deserves punishment. Pharaoh showed this by reproaching Abraham; and Abimelech said to the God of the universe: “Lord, will you kill a nation that is ignorant and righteous? Did he not himself say to me, She is my sister, and did she not herself say to me, He is my brother? With a pure heart and with righteousness of hands I did this.” The writer has also put down God's answer: “God said to Abimelech in sleep, I too knew that you did this with a pure heart, and I spared you, so that you should not touch her, so as not to sin against me; for this reason I did not let you touch her. Now, then, give the man back his wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will be saved, you and all your house. But if you do not give her back, know that you will die.” The divine word teaches us that he does not let lovers of righteousness offend through ignorance. It is plain, then, that he prevented Pharaoh too from sinning, since he had taken her by the law of marriage as Abraham's sister. But since Abimelech was better than Pharaoh, as is likely, he kept Pharaoh from lawlessness by chastisement; to Abimelech he did not himself grant pardon for the injury and the offence, but waited for the injured man to ask for it; he counted him worthy of a gentle appearance, and with mild words showed him the lawless thing he had dared. “Abimelech said to Abraham, What did you have in view, that you did this thing? And Abraham said, For I said, Perhaps there is no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife. For truly she is my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother.”

From whom did Melchizedek trace his descent? Since the inspired Paul says, “Without father, without mother, without genealogy,” who could know the truth? It is likely that he was from those nations that inhabited Palestine. For he was king and priest of those nations, but priest of the God of the universe: “He was,” it says, “priest of God Most High.” That is why the patriarch Abraham offered him the tithes of the spoils; and, righteous as he was and the friend of God, he received the blessing from him; for Melchizedek bore the type of the Lord's priesthood. That is why he gave Abraham bread and wine in return, as one perhaps accustomed to offer such things to the God of the universe. For the type had to be shown in this too.

How is Abraham named faithful, when he said to God, “By what shall I know that I shall inherit it?” The words “By what shall I know this” are not those of one who disbelieves, but of one who longs to learn the manner of the inheritance. Since he saw countless multitudes inhabiting Palestine, he wished to learn in what way he would take possession of that land: by the law of war or without war; with its inhabitants living, or killed, or driven out. For this reason, after the sacrifice, the God of the universe said: “Know for certain that your seed will be a sojourner in a land not its own; and they will enslave them and afflict them and humble them for four hundred years. But the nation they serve I will judge. After this they will come out here with many possessions. But you shall go to your fathers in peace, nourished in a good old age. And in the fourth generation they will return here; for the sins of the Amorites are not yet filled up until now.” From the divine answer one can learn the manner of the question. Since he said, “By what shall I know that I shall inherit it?” he was taught how long they would sojourn, how they would suffer hardship, and what providence they would be counted worthy of: those who chose to make war on them would be punished, and his descendants would reap the fruits of their enemies' labors; and he himself, having no experience of these things, would end his life in peace. He also taught the reason for the delay, so that no one might suppose that God the Master was unable to hand over the possession of that land to them because of the number of its inhabitants. He said: “For the sins of the Amorites are not yet filled up until now.” “They have not yet,” he says, “done what deserves total destruction; and punishment must not be inflicted from foreknowledge before the sin.” That there were pious people at that time is clear from Melchizedek, from Abimelech, and from those who lived in Hebron. For they too honored the patriarch with much attention, and one can hear them crying, “You are a king from God among us. Bury your dead in our choice tombs.”

Why did he command a three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old ram, and the rest to be sacrificed? These were riddles of what would happen to the race. So after the sacrifices he added: “Know for certain that your seed will be a sojourner in a land not its own,” and further, “In the fourth generation they will return here.” For this reason he commanded three of the clean four-footed animals, each three years old, to be sacrificed, to indicate the three generations that would continue in sojourning. The turtledove showed the generation that, as it were, flew away and left Egypt and encamped in the desert; for this bird loves the desert. The dove indicated the other generation, which received the promised land; for this creature is tame and loves to dwell in houses. That is why he did not divide the birds, since they hinted at release from slavery; but he divided the four-footed animals, since they signified the ill-treatment in Egypt. The birds that swooped on the divided pieces, which the patriarch drove away from the victims, foreshadowed the murderous intent of the Egyptians, which God the Master made ineffective, confirming his promises to Abraham; for just as Abraham in the type drove away the carrion birds, so the honor in which Abraham was held brought punishment on the Egyptians. The smoking furnace and the torches of fire seen about sunset showed that the victims were accepted, and foretold the appearing of the God of the universe that would take place near the end of the foretold time; for he appeared through fire both to Moses the lawgiver and afterwards to the whole people. Besides this, he was teaching that he would later prescribe that these animals be offered. Some say that God, wishing to show that his promise was sure, made the covenant according to the prevailing custom; for people used, they say, to make their oaths by dividing the victims in two. I have set down both views, so that readers may accept whichever seems truer.

Many licentious people take the patriarch Abraham's having a concubine as an occasion for lust. Each action is judged by the aim of those who do it. Let us, then, consider the matter of Hagar in this way too. If we see the patriarch enslaved to desire, let us call it a blameworthy thing. But his wife had shown the affliction of her nature, saying that the maker had created her womb barren; she had made plain her longing for children, and for this reason had begged him to have relations with Hagar, so that she might obtain a child through her. What sin, then, did Abraham commit? At that time neither nature nor any written law forbade having more than one wife; and his wife, being barren, entreated her husband to have relations with the maidservant, not so that he might be enslaved to pleasure, but so that he by nature and she by adoption might be called parents. That that divine man was superior to shameful pleasure is attested not only by this but also by what follows. When Hagar conceived, she took her pregnancy as an occasion for boasting and raged against her mistress; Sarah was indignant and cried out against the patriarch unjustly; but he, receiving her outburst very gently, handed the maidservant over to her for punishment, without even waiting for the child in the womb to be born: “See,” he says, “your maidservant is in your hands; treat her as you please.”

Why did God command him to be circumcised? Having foretold the sojourning, he devises a safeguard for piety, so that when they mingled with impious men they might not corrupt their nobility, but, looking at the sign, might keep an inextinguishable memory of the one who gave it. That this is true, the desert is witness. Having spent forty years in it, they thought circumcision superfluous, since they were separated from the nations and lived by themselves. But when at length they were being brought into the promised land, the God of the universe commanded Joshua son of Nun to circumcise them all, and so to hand over the possession of the land. For they were about to come near to foreign nations, and so they needed the seal that separated them from the alien peoples. If the Jews pride themselves on circumcision, let them learn that not only the patriarch was circumcised, but also Ishmael, the son of a slave woman, the servants born in the household, those bought with money, the Idumeans, and the descendants of Keturah. The Egyptians too learned from the Israelites to be circumcised. Circumcision, then, does not make people righteous; for all these are accused by the divine Scripture as impious. Nor, then, did circumcision justify Abraham: faith declared him righteous, and virtue made him more illustrious. Circumcision was given as a sign of faith.

The divine Scripture says that the angels ate in Abraham's tent. And the same Scripture says that Abraham saw men. If, then, one is to attend to the bare letter, men, not angels, ate; but if we unfold the meaning, they ate in the way they were seen. Just as they, and their Master with them, having an incorporeal nature, seemed to have bodies (for so they were seen), so they were seen eating; they did not take the food with mouth and stomach, for they did not have bodies, but consumed it as they willed. It is the height of folly to busy oneself with the manner of things that cannot be told.

Why was Lot not accused for having intercourse with his daughters? Since even human beings usually pardon offences committed in ignorance, no one could justly blame Lot for the intercourse; for he did not know what was being done. His drunkenness, though, has some blame mixed with pardon. In deep distress and bewilderment, as one stripped of all he had, and besides everything else of his very wife, he let his daughters offer him wine beyond his need, not knowing what was being contrived, but supposing that what was done was meant for his comfort and consolation. The daughters, however, are wholly free from blame. Having seen the four cities and all the villages burned by the rain of fire, and the inhabitants of Segor swallowed up (the name too signifies this, for Segor is interpreted “swallowing”), they supposed that the whole of human nature had utterly perished. Seeing the desolation that prevailed, and foreseeing the weakness of old age, they wished to contrive both seed for the race and some comfort for themselves. Using this reasoning, and not enslaved to desire, they took the wine as their accomplice, stole their father's perception by making him drink more, and made their father the sower.

Why did God not prevent the unlawful intercourse? He foresaw the impiety of the race. The Moabites served Chemosh, and the Ammonites Melchol. So that the Israelites would not share their impiety as kinsmen, he did not prevent the unlawful union, so that in this way at least he might make them abominable and loathsome to the Jews. The God of the universe shows this too when he ordains through Moses the lawgiver: “An Ammonite and a Moabite shall not enter the assembly of the Lord, even to the tenth generation, and for ever.”

It seems very cruel that Ishmael, young as he was, should be driven from his father's house with only his mother and the skin of water. This plainly shows Abraham's virtue. When Sarah said, “Cast out the maidservant and her son,” he did not obey; but when God commanded it, he at once added the deed to the word, and that though he felt tender affection for Ishmael. For when God promised the birth of a child from Sarah, he himself said, “May this Ishmael live before you.” Yet, though he loved the child dearly, he did what the Master commanded. And he so believed the divine promises that he sent the child from the house without giving him male or female servants, gold or silver, but a few loaves, a skin of water, and his mother. For he knew that the promise of the one who had given the command was without falsehood. God had promised to make him a great nation, since he had been counted worthy of God's tending; and this he fulfilled. As soon as the child cried, longing for a drink, an angel sent from God showed a well full of drinking water. That God also gave the multitude of offspring as he had promised, what is seen bears witness: from the borders of Egypt to Babylon the desert is full of this race. Abraham, for his part, gave names to places out of piety: having planted a field at the well of the oath, he called the name of that place “Eternal God.”

If God foreknows all things, why did he test Abraham? Not so that he himself might learn what he already knew, but to teach those who did not know that he had loved the patriarch very justly. For this reason he put the man's love for God to the test for three days and as many nights. Standing between nature and faith, and pricked from both sides, the patriarch gave the victory to faith. God, having shown his piety, prevented the sacrifice; for he who forbids even the sacrifices of irrational animals, how would he have tolerated such a rite? He continually accused the Jews of this, crying out through David the prophet: “They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons, and poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the carved images of Canaan”; and through Ezekiel: “And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you bore to me, and offered them to your lovers.” Then, showing the excess of the outrage, he added: “beyond all your sexual immorality.” He who accuses those who dare such things, how would he himself have tolerated receiving an only son offered by his father? But these things were a shadow of the dispensation carried out for us. For the Father offered his beloved Son for the world. Isaac was a type of the divinity, and the ram of the humanity. And the time too is equal in number: three days and three nights, both here and there …

What does “Put your hand under my thigh” mean? The patriarch Abraham was sending the chief of his servants to arrange a marriage, knowing that the race of Canaan was accursed and that his own kindred had been counted worthy of blessing. Since, then, he had received both the blessing and the promise of good things in his seed, he commanded the servant to put his hand there, where he had received the sign of faith; for having believed the divine promises, he received the seal of circumcision. He commanded him to put his hand there so that, remembering both the divine promise and circumcision, he might not spoil his master's noble lineage by a foreign marriage. One must know that the hand was put under the thigh, but the oath was taken by the God of the universe: “I make you swear,” he said, “by the Lord, the God of heaven and earth, that you will not take a wife for my son Isaac from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell,” and so on. The servant's question too is very wise: fearing the oath, he asked that the terms of the marriage be made clear to him. “If,” he says, “the betrothed girl does not choose to come here, but bids the suitor go to her, do you command your son to go up to that nation?” Abraham knew that the divine call had brought him out of there, and that he had received no divine law about marriage, but that he himself, as one brought up in piety, wished to betroth his son to a wife from his kindred's household; so he forbids the former, as forbidden by divine law, and entrusts the latter to divine care. Trusting in this, the servant set out. He did not offer that prayer as an omen, as some very foolish people supposed; but since he had taken God as his helper in the betrothal, he begged that certain signs be shown him by which he might know whether the betrothal pleased God. The sign was not beauty of body, nor distinction of family, nor anything else that seems splendid, but hospitality, kindness, and gentleness of mind. “Let it be,” he says, “that the maiden to whom I say, Tip your jar that I may drink, and she says to me, Drink, sir, and I will water your camels until they have finished drinking: this one you have prepared for your servant Isaac; and by this I shall know that you have shown mercy to my master Abraham.” Since the patriarch was especially adorned with these advantages, he wished the bride too to match the character of her father-in-law, so that a difference might not produce strife and contention. That these were not omens, but indications of faith and piety, is shown first by the earnestness of the prayer, and then by his waiting for the will of God. For the divine Scripture teaches this: “The man was watching her closely and kept silent, to know whether the Lord had prospered his journey or not.” While she drew the water and offered it to the camels, he waited to see whether she would supply all of them as he had asked. When the camels had drunk, he at once offered the tokens of betrothal. And on learning her family and her kinship with his master, “the man,” it says, “was well pleased, and bowed down to the Lord, and said, Blessed be the Lord, the God of my master Abraham, who has not forsaken his righteousness and his mercy toward my master. And the Lord has led me on the way to the house of my master's brother.” His whole speech proclaims the piety of his mind. And after the speech too he shows the same aim; for when the girl's parents agreed to the marriage, at once “he bowed down,” it says, “to the ground before the Lord.” What follows has the same sense: “Do not detain me,” he says, “for the Lord has prospered my way.”

Why were the wives of the patriarchs barren? Sarah was barren, and Rebecca likewise, and Rachel too, and Leah: “For the Lord,” it says, “seeing that Leah was hated, opened her womb.” God, wishing to establish the Israelite race, shows that it received its many offspring not by the course of nature but by the generosity of grace. That race obtained this care because Christ the Master, the only-begotten Son of God, was going to spring from it according to the flesh.

Through whom did Rebecca wish to learn about the children she was carrying? Some say that she went to Melchizedek, since he was high priest of God Most High, distinguished in piety and very famous. But since the patriarchs used to build altars to God in the places where they encamped, it is likely that she went to one of these, prayed to the God of the universe, and learned what would happen.

Why does God prevent Isaac from going to Egypt, when the famine was forcing him to do so? God the Master shows his wisdom and care through everything. He allowed the patriarch Abraham to go to Egypt, not because he was unable to feed him in Palestine, but to show the Egyptians the man's piety and to urge them to emulate the patriarch's virtue. But he commanded Isaac to stay where he was, and flooded him with an abundance of necessities, showing that he could have provided for his father too what he generously gave to Isaac. For when everyone was in want and short of necessities, and the land had become barren, Isaac sowed and received an abundant harvest.

Why did Isaac wish to give the blessing to Esau? According to the law of nature, for he was the firstborn; and the firstborn held the first place and received a double portion. His service also increased his father's affection: “For his game was food for him.” Service can soften even the cruellest, let alone a father, and an affectionate father. One could find the divine Apostle too repaying with very many blessings those who had served him …

From where did Rebecca get her confidence that Jacob would obtain the blessing, and such confidence as to say, “Upon me be your curse, child; only obey my voice”? She had learned beforehand from the God of the universe that the elder would serve the younger. Believing that prediction, she tried every means so that Jacob would receive his father's blessing.

Why did God not reveal his own will to Isaac? So that God's care for Jacob might become evident. This is shown by Isaac's being eager to bless Esau, while the divine grace drew the blessing to Jacob even against Isaac's intention. Isaac himself understood this. For he had tried every means: he sent Esau to the hunt; and when Jacob brought the food, he asked several times whether he was Esau the firstborn, and not only asked but also put his hands to his body. Then, when Esau came in, astounded at what had happened, he was not angry at having been deceived by his son, but recognized the divine aim and confirmed the blessing he had given.

Then does Jacob not seem to have lied in saying, “I am Esau your firstborn”? He had bought the privileges of the birthright. In calling himself firstborn, therefore, he was telling the truth.

What is the interpretation of the blessing? Christ the Master, the expectation of the nations, the Savior and Master of the whole world, was going to spring from him according to the flesh. Foreseeing this, the patriarch says: “See, the smell of my son is like the smell of a full field which the Lord has blessed.” That the divine Scripture often calls the world a field, the Lord is witness in the holy Gospels when interpreting the parable: “The field,” he says, “is the world; the one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.” See, then, in Jacob the salvation of the whole world. That is why he prays for him the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth. According to the obvious and surface sense of the letter, these signify the grace from above and the abundance of good things from the earth; but according to the interpretation of the field, they hint at Christ the Master: through the dew his divinity, and through the fatness of the earth the humanity taken from us. For the blessed David, foretelling this, said: “He will come down like rain upon a fleece, and like drops falling on the earth.” For just as dew comes down invisibly, but becomes visible when it gathers below, so God the Word, being invisible, was seen on earth through the flesh, and lived among human beings, and was manifested in the flesh, according to the divine Apostle. And the grain and the wine are a riddle of the divine mysteries. What follows agrees with this sense: “And let nations serve you”; for “all the nations will serve him,” says the divine David. “And let rulers bow down to you”; for “the kings of Tarshish and the islands,” he says, “will offer gifts; the kings of the Arabians and of Saba will bring gifts, and all the kings of the earth will bow down to him.” He confirmed this blessing when he sent Jacob to Mesopotamia: “You will become,” he says, “assemblies of nations, and may the Lord give you the blessing of Abraham your father.” What that blessing is, is easy to learn for anyone who wishes; for the God of the universe said to Abraham: “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.”

Why, after receiving so many blessings, does Jacob run away from his brother and travel alone, deprived of necessities? God's care is shown more clearly in what seem to be misfortunes; those who are in good fortune do not know so well how many goods they enjoy. For this reason he runs away and travels alone, so that, returning with great wealth, he himself might know how great the providence of the God of the universe is, and might teach others. God showed him this care at once through his appearing. He showed him a ladder reaching up to heaven itself, and the holy angels going up and coming down; and he himself, standing above, encouraged him and drove out his fear. The angels signified the divine ministry; for of these the blessed Paul said, “Are they not all ministering spirits sent out for service, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?” Each of these things was enough to put courage into the patriarch; for he is taught that nothing is neglected or uncared for by the God of the universe, but that he himself governs all things, using the holy angels as ministers. He also gave him the blessing he had given to his father and grandfather, concerning the many offspring of his seed and concerning the Master of the world: “For in your seed,” he says, “all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed.” Then he promises him care in the matters at hand: “See, I am with you, guarding you on every way you go, and I will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done all that I have spoken.”

Why does Jacob anoint the stone? He repaid the generous Lord with what he had. Setting up the stone that he had put under his head, he poured oil on it. One can find this done even now by many women who believe in the Lord: they usually anoint with oil, in the divine sanctuaries, the railings of the sanctuary and the shrines of the holy martyrs. This shows the nobility of the soul; and the Lord who loves humankind accepts even small things, welcoming the intention of what is done.

Many make Jacob's having had four wives a pretext for licentiousness. One must examine the aim of each thing that is done. Judging in this way, we shall find that the patriarch Jacob betrothed himself to Rachel alone, and was joined to Leah against his will. At any rate, as soon as he perceived the deceit, he was indignant and cried out against his father-in-law. He had relations with Bilhah not from love of pleasure but to console his wife. For when Rachel was grieved at her childlessness and said unreasonably, “Give me children, or else I shall die,” the patriarch rebuked her piously and pointed to the maker of nature, showing that it is not marriage that creates children, but God, the lawgiver of marriage. He said to her, “Am I in God's place, who has deprived you of the fruit of the womb?” Yet to comfort her he yielded to her request; she had asked him to have relations with her maidservant, so that she might call the child born of her her own. The same happened with Zilpah: Leah, having ceased bearing, again entreated him to sow in that field. These things hint at no love of pleasure; they show the man's reasonableness, and how eager he was to care for his wives. Besides this, one must consider that at that time there was no law forbidding polygamy, and that people then thought those who became fathers of many children thrice blessed. That this is true, the divine promises bear witness. For the God of the universe said to Abraham, “Look up to heaven and see the stars, if you can count them,” and added, “So shall your seed be”; and again, “I will make your seed like the sand by the shore of the sea, which cannot be counted for multitude.” He would not have given him this promise if he had not considered many offspring a very great good.

Why were the wives jealous of each other? They were imperfect, and daughters of an impious man who named carved images gods. For this reason God, when giving the law, forbids such a marriage: “You shall not take,” he says, “a woman as a rival to her sister.”

Why does Scripture mention fortune? Proper to Scripture are the oracles of the Spirit, the divine ordinances, and the words of pious men; the rest it relates as history. One must attend, then, not only to the word but also to the person who speaks it. “Good fortune” is not Jacob's word but Leah's, a woman, as I said, brought up in impiety and only gradually being taught divine things. So too her father said, “I have learned by divination.” But the divine law forbids the use of divination. Let no one, then, think that such words belong to the divine Scripture. The writer sets down what was said by those who were not pious, since he is writing history. So the most divine Moses set down Pharaoh's blasphemous word too: “I do not know the Lord, and I will not let Israel go.” But this word is not the divine Spirit's, but the impious king's. So again we hear Sennacherib saying, “Let not your God, in whom you trust, deceive you, saying, The Lord will deliver Jerusalem out of my hand.” But from this we learn not to blaspheme, but to accuse blasphemy.

But Jacob himself said to Laban, “The Lord has blessed you at my foot.” The meaning of the phrase is clear. He called his coming a “foot”: that is, “through my coming and my care you have enjoyed God-given goods; for God, looking to my piety, counted what you entrusted to me worthy of every blessing.”

Why did he peel the rods and put them where the sheep drank? Just as he married wives because he longed for children, yet placed his hope of children not in marriage but in God, the lawgiver of marriage, so too he peeled the rods, not trusting in them, but awaiting divine help. Hence he also obtained a divine appearing and heard God saying: “Lift up your eyes and see the he-goats and the rams mounting the she-goats, white-striped, speckled, and spotted with grey. For I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. I am your God, who appeared to you in the place of God, where you anointed a pillar for me and vowed me a vow.” For since the dark and the speckled animals had been entrusted to Laban's sons, and their flocks were three days' journey away, the champion of the wronged shows him speckled rams and he-goats mating, so that he might learn by experience how much providence those enjoy who trust in the God of the universe. One must note that, having called the one seen above an angel, Scripture showed that the same one was also God: “For I am,” says God, “the one who appeared to you on the way.” He saw angels going up and down by the ladder, and the Lord fixed above; this one he here named both angel and God: God, as being God by nature; angel, so that we may know that it was not the Father who appeared, but the only-begotten Son. For whose angel is the Father? But the Son is both God and “angel of great counsel”; for he announced to us the mysteries of the Father: “What I have heard,” he says, “from my Father I have made known to you.” So too he named the one who called Abraham both angel and God.

What was the aim of stealing the idols? Some have said that Rachel stole them because she was still devoted to them; but I take the opposite view, that she carried them off wishing to free her father too from superstition. For the divine Scripture teaches her piety: “God remembered Rachel,” it says, “and God heard her and opened her womb.” Having heard Jacob say, “Am I in God's place, who has deprived you of the fruit of the womb?”, she clearly offered a more earnest prayer to God and obtained her request. And when she gave birth she showed her piety: “Rachel said,” it says, “God has taken away my reproach; and she called his name Joseph, saying, May God add to me another son.” How, then, having such a disposition toward God, would she have endured serving gods that do not exist? I think something else too is foreshadowed here. Jacob bore the type of the God of the universe. For God too had two peoples: the elder, with a veil over its heart; the younger, clothed with the beauty of faith. And Jacob had two wives: Leah with weak eyes, and Rachel beautiful in form and very lovely in appearance; the elder with many children, the younger barren. For the church from the nations was barren of old, but afterwards became the mother of many children: “Rejoice,” it says, “O barren one who does not bear; break forth and shout, you who are not in labor; for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her who has a husband.” Since, then, the church, having believed in God the Savior, tore out by the roots the error of its ancestors, and Rachel was its type, she stole her father's idols, to sketch out the truth in this too.

What does “Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac” mean? He called Isaac's piety “Fear”; that is, God, whose fear Isaac carried about in his soul.

Why does the angel wrestle with Jacob? He puts courage into one who feared his brother. That is why he even yielded him the victory, all but saying, “You have beaten me, and are you afraid of a man?” But so that he might not become proud, thinking that he had beaten God, he showed by touching his thigh that the defeat was voluntary; for by the touch he produced numbness. Recognizing the power of the one who appeared, Jacob asks for the blessing; and he grants the request and changes his name: “No longer,” he says, “shall your name be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name; for you have prevailed with God, and with men you will be strong.” He also showed the reason for the victory: “Do not fear a man,” he means, “since I have yielded you the victory.” The thigh remained numb and limping even after he awoke, so that he would not take the vision for a fantasy, but would know more precisely the truth of the dream. For this reason too, when he asked what name the other had, he not only failed to obtain his request but was rebuked as having overstepped the limits of nature: “Why do you ask my name?” he says; “it too is wonderful.” Here too one must note that he called the same one both man and God: “You have prevailed,” he said, “with God, and with men you will be strong.” “And he called the name of that place Form of God; for I have seen God face to face, and my life was preserved.” And again: “The sun rose on him as he passed the Form of God.” Through all these we learn that the only-begotten Son of God, who is God, appeared here too to Jacob. What does “This is Ana, who found Iamin in the desert, when he was pasturing the beasts of burden of Sebegon his father” mean? The Syrian says “a spring”; for a spring is called so in the Syriac language.

From whom does Job trace his descent? From Esau. His own history teaches this: “There was a man,” it says, “in the land of Ausitis.” The blessed Moses too showed this; for, writing the succession of those who reigned from Esau's line, he said: “Balak died, and Jobab son of Zara from Bosora reigned in his place.” This agrees with the history of Job.

Why were Joseph's brothers envious of him? He was loved by his father, as born late, as Rachel's son, and as outstanding in virtue; so they were envious, seeing him preferred. First they tried to set their father against him, using much abuse against him; failing in their aim, they wished to kill him. Then, after taking counsel, they sold him. The dream of the sheaves foretold the obeisance made on account of the grain; for having come into Egypt to buy grain, according to the …

Why did Tamar put on a harlot's dress and deceive her father-in-law? Abraham's race had become very famous because of its piety. Knowing this, Tamar was eager to bear children from that race. Since her father-in-law did not betroth her to his youngest son, fearing that he too would die like his brothers, she was forced to steal the means of bearing children, since she was prevented from obtaining them openly. Besides this, she convicts her father-in-law of not being chaste himself while compelling her to be chaste. He too showed this by his judgment: on learning that she was pregnant, he condemned her to death; but on learning from whom she had conceived, he declared her innocent and condemned himself: “Tamar is more righteous than I,” he said, “because I did not give her to Shelah my son.” That Tamar contrived this for the sake of children and not of pleasure, what followed shows: she was no longer joined either to Judah or to anyone else, but was content to be called the mother of those sprung from that seed …

What did the events concerning Zerah and Perez signify? The two peoples: Perez the Jews, and Zerah those who believed from the nations. For before the Law too there were many nurslings of piety, living by faith, not by law. That is why Zerah put out his hand first, showing the way of life before the Law; for many were pious and virtuous even before the Law. The scarlet thread was a sign of the ancient sacrifices; for those men too propitiated God with sacrifices: Abel, Enoch, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Then, when he drew back his hand, Perez came out; for the Law stands between those before the Law and those after it. That is why the blessed Paul says, “The Law came in besides,” teaching that before the Law too people were justified by faith, and after the Law grace shone forth. And the Lord sprang from Perez according to the flesh: “Of whom,” he says, “are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all”; and in the Letter to the Hebrews: “For it is evident that our Lord Jesus Christ has sprung from Judah.” The blessed Matthew too taught this when writing the genealogy. The blessed Moses set down this story to teach the Jews that the much-celebrated race of David was formed from foreign women, so that they would not boast against those who believed from the nations, as though they had kept their noble descent unmixed.

Granted that Leah, being imperfect in piety, said, “I have had good fortune,” how is it that the historian, writing about Joseph, said, “being a man who succeeded”? Read the preceding phrase and you will find the solution. Having said, “The Lord was with Joseph,” he added, “and he was a man who succeeded”; and he went on, “and he was in the house with his master the Egyptian. His master knew that the Lord was with him, and that the Lord prospers whatever he does.” So he succeeded in everything because the Lord was with him; for he prospered what Joseph did. He said this too when narrating the events in the prison: “For all things were in Joseph's hand, because the Lord was with him, and whatever he did, the Lord prospered in his hands.”

How did the chief cook, being a eunuch, have a wife? In particular, they call both eunuchs and those who are castrated by the same name. And it was not unlikely for one who was a eunuch to have a wife in the house to take care of household affairs.

Why, when so much time had passed, did Joseph not make his slavery known to his father, nor God reveal it to Jacob by a revelation? According to the prophecy given to Abraham, Jacob had to go down into Egypt with his sons and descendants. If he had known what had happened to Joseph, he would surely have sent a ransom and brought him back. For this reason God overlooked his despondency, both to fulfil the dispensation and to make his life afterwards more delightful. Joseph himself teaches his brothers the dispensation of God: “For God has sent me before you for life,” he says, “to nourish a great people.” And David says this: “And he called a famine on the land; he broke every support of bread; he sent a man before them; Joseph was sold as a slave,” and so on. If the patriarch had known of his son's slavery, he would surely have ransomed him; and if he had been ransomed, he would not have lived in prison. If that had not happened, he would not have interpreted the dreams of those servants; not having interpreted them, he would not have become known to Pharaoh; not having become known, he would not have explained the prophecy given through the dreams; not having done this, he would not have been entrusted with the reins of Egypt; and not having received the rule of Egypt, he would not have brought the patriarch with his race into Egypt. From the outcome, then, the aim of the divine dispensation becomes clear.

Then the brothers did not sin, since they served the divine dispensation? Their act was the work of malice and envy; but God, being wise, used their wickedness for the opposite end. By the very means by which they tried to prevent the fulfilment of the dreams, he brought the dreams to fulfilment.

Why did he treat his brothers so harshly as soon as they appeared? Remembering what had been done to him, and not seeing Benjamin, he suspected that Benjamin too had suffered the same at their hands. But when he saw his brother alive, he counted them worthy of pardon and of every kind of care.

What is the meaning of “Psomthom phanech”? He called him an interpreter of secret things, since he had explained the dreams.

Why did he order the second of the brothers, and not the first, to be imprisoned? He knew Reuben's intention, and knew clearly how many words he had spoken on his behalf to the brothers, and how much effort he had made for his safety. Since Simeon had not cooperated with Reuben, he very justly ordered him to be imprisoned; but once the brothers had gone away, he counted him worthy of every attention. While this was happening, their conscience would not keep quiet, but reminded them of the lawless deed done against their brother. “Each said to his brother,” it says, “Yes, we are in sins concerning our brother, because we overlooked the anguish of his soul when he besought us, and we did not listen to him. On account of this all this anguish has come upon us.” And Reuben brings in the reproof at the right moment: “He said to them,” it says, “Did I not speak to you, saying, Do not wrong the boy, and you did not listen to me? And see, his blood is required.” From this one can know clearly the unswerving tribunal of conscience; for it reminds them of a lawless deed done twenty-two years before.

Why did the father not dare to entrust Benjamin to Reuben? Reuben was suspect to him because of his unlawful intercourse and his outrage against his father's bed; and Jacob did not know how much effort he had made for Joseph.

What does “He divines by divination with it” mean? Wishing to increase the charge of the apparent theft, they call the cup an instrument of divination. Joseph himself said this too: “Do you not know that a man like me divines by divination?” He said this not because he used divination and omens, but shaping his words to the matter in hand. One should admire the precision of his words. Not even while playing a part before his brothers did he consent to attribute divination to himself, but rather to someone else entrusted with the same office. For he did not say, “I divine,” but “a man such as I divines by divination.”

Why did he contrive the drama of the cup? He wished to test his brothers' disposition and to know clearly whether they would stand by Benjamin when he was falsely accused; that is why he hid the cup in his sack. When he saw them not merely speaking in his defense but fighting for him, he threw off the mask of the ruler and showed his brother's face. When they cowered and all but wished the earth to open for them, he encouraged them, saying: “Now do not be grieved, and let it not seem hard to you that you sold me here; for God has sent me before you for life.” And very graciously, when sending them off, he advised them: “Do not quarrel on the way,” meaning, “Do not do such things as you dared against me.”

Why did he also acquire for the king the land of the Egyptians and their cattle? In the dearth and scarcity of grain they could neither feed their cattle nor sow the land. So he took these in the time of famine and gave them back afterwards, making it law that they should pay a fifth of the produce, so that in times of want they might have the means of life stored up. He left only the priests' land exempt from service to the king. The priests of the true God do not enjoy this honor; so great was the reverence that the impious gave to gods that do not exist.

Why does Jacob command that his body be buried in Hebron? Not out of concern for a tomb, as some have supposed, but to encourage his race and to teach that God the Master would remove them all from Egypt and give them the promised land. Joseph made this word clearer; for when dying he said: “I am dying; but God will surely visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land that God swore to our fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” And Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, “At the visitation with which God will visit you, you shall carry up my bones from here with you.” So it is plain that both of them, in foretelling the return, gave their commands about burial.

What does “Israel bowed down upon the top of his staff” mean? Being old and weak, he was lying on his bed. Learning that his son had come, he rose and sat up; and using a staff he leaned on it, holding its top with his right hand and resting his face on it. Delighted with his son and with the promise of burial, he bowed down, inclining his head upon the staff. In this, first of all, Joseph's dream received its fulfilment; for he had seen the sun and the moon and eleven stars bowing down to him. Besides this, he foretells the kingship of the tribe of Ephraim and the subjection of the ten tribes. The divine Apostle too said this: “By faith Jacob blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and bowed down upon the top of his staff.” He also gave him a double portion: “Ephraim and Manasseh,” he says, “shall be mine as Reuben and Simeon.” And prophetically he set Ephraim before Manasseh. For when Joseph had kept the privileges for Manasseh as firstborn and placed each in order, the patriarch crossed his hands and laid them on them, the right on the younger and the left on the elder. Then Joseph, thinking that Jacob had done this from ignorance, and supposing that the affliction of his eyes was the cause, said, “Not so, father, for this one is the elder”; and he heard: “I know, child, I know; this one too shall become a people, and this one too shall be exalted; but his younger brother shall be greater than he.” One must note that everywhere those born after the firstborn are preferred. Abel was preferred to Cain; Shem to Japheth, though he was second (for “brother of Japheth the elder,” it says); Isaac to Ishmael; Jacob to Esau; Joseph to Reuben and Judah; and Ephraim to Manasseh. One could find this in later times too: Moses was set before Aaron, and David, though the youngest of seven brothers. The patriarch Jacob, however, taught the reason for the burial by his prophecy: “See,” he said, “I am dying; and God will be with you and will bring you back to the land of our fathers.”

How is Jacob said to bless his sons, when he cursed some of them? The patriarch's last words are neither curses nor blessings, but prophecies. “Gather together,” he says, “that I may tell you what will befall you in the last days.” He also mentioned what some of them had done, not because the sons would pay the penalty for their fathers' sins, but shaping his words into curse and blessing for the common benefit of those who would read them. He blames Reuben for his self-will and rashness, and for his outrage against his father's bed; for this reason he foretells that his descendants will be few. This is what “Do not boil over like water” shows, meaning, “May you not multiply into many offspring.” He is indignant with Simeon and Levi too, lamenting the unjust destruction of the Shechemites, and he prays to have no share in that lawlessness. Yet he curses not them, but their wicked passions, their anger and their wrath. He called anger “desire”; for anger (orgē) takes its etymology from it: the angry man desires (oregetai) to repel his enemy. And this punishment too was a prophecy: “I will divide them in Jacob,” he says, “and scatter them in Israel.” But the tribe of Levi was scattered because of its high honor, so that Levites and priests would be with every tribe and the tribes would reap benefit from them. They did not receive an allotment of their own, but in each tribe certain cities were assigned to them, with a fixed number of cubits of the surrounding land. The tribe of Simeon too had no separate allotment, but, according to the patriarch's prophecy, was scattered among the other tribes. Of Judah he recounts many praises: “Judah, may your brothers praise you; your hands shall be on the back of your enemies; your father's sons shall bow down to you. Judah is a lion's whelp; from a shoot, my son, you went up; lying down you slept like a lion and like a whelp; who will rouse him?” None of this fits Judah himself, but rather the tribe that sprang from him. For it was royal, since David reigned first and then his descendants; and it was the strongest of all the tribes. When King David ordered the people to be counted, he found four hundred thousand of Judah, and nine hundred thousand of the other tribes. And in the desert too, when they were counted, they were found more numerous than the other tribes. But the precise fulfilment of the prophecy came in Christ the Master, who sprang up from a shoot, according to the patriarch Jacob and the prophet Isaiah: “A rod came out from the root of Jesse, and a flower came up from the root.” To him also fits “Lying down he slept like a lion, and like a lion's whelp.” For just as the lion is fearsome even asleep, so the Lord's death became fearsome both to death and to the devil. He called him lion and lion's whelp, as king and son of a king, as God and Son of God; for according to his humanity he sprang from David, and as God he was begotten from the Father before the ages. And “Who will rouse him?” shows his ineffable power; for he raised himself, according to his own prophecy: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it.” He also foretells the time of his appearing: “A ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor a leader from his thighs, until he comes for whom it is laid up; and he is the expectation of the nations.” This is a very clear sign of the Lord's coming. For not only the kings of the Jews failed, but also the high priests and the prophets, so that the fulfilment of the prophecy would be shown. When our Savior was about to be born, foreign kings ruled them, so that the eternal king might be shown, the expectation of the nations, according to the promise given by the God of the universe to the patriarchs. For the God of the universe promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that in their seed he would bless all the nations of the earth. The patriarch Jacob indicated this here too when blessing Judah: “A ruler shall not fail from Judah,” he says, “nor a leader from his thighs, until he comes for whom it is laid up; and he is the expectation of the nations.” Then, pointing to the people formed from nations and Jews: “Binding his ass to the vine, and the foal of his ass to the tendril of the vine.” That Israel was named a vine, all the prophets teach. David says, “You brought a vine out of Egypt,” and so on; Isaiah, “The beloved had a vineyard on a hill, in a fertile place”; through Jeremiah the God of the universe said, “I planted you a fruitful vine, wholly true”; through the lawgiver, “For their vine is from the vine of Sodom”; and the Lord in the holy Gospels: “A man planted a vineyard, let it out to tenants, and went abroad.” He names the people from the nations a foal, as being untamed and never having had a breaker of colts. The Lord too hinted at this when he commanded the apostles to go into the village opposite and untie the ass that was tied and its foal, “on which,” he says, “no one has ever sat.” For neither patriarch, nor lawgiver, nor prophet took care for the salvation of the nations. But the divine apostles, commanded to make disciples of all nations and to baptize them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, untied the ass, that is, the nature of human beings, bound by the cords of sin; and they untied the foal too, the people sprung from it. Putting on it their own garments, that is, the grace they had received (“for as many as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ”), they made the untamed foal docile, set the Master on it, and tied it to the vine, that is, to themselves. For the apostles were from the Jews; and not only they, but also the seventy disciples, and the three thousand whom the first of the apostles caught in his net at one time, and the five thousand, and the many myriads of whom the thrice-blessed James spoke to the most divine Paul. So the believers were joined not only to the apostles but also to the apostles' disciples; and foreseeing this, the patriarch said: “Binding his foal to the vine, and the foal of his ass to the tendril of the vine.” Then he foretells the passion too: “He will wash his robe in wine, and his garment in the blood of the grape; his eyes are gladdening from wine, and his teeth white as milk.” He names his body a robe and his blood wine, since the Master too called the mystical wine blood. And we hear the evangelist John teaching that when the soldier pierced his side, blood and water came out; and these streams ran down over the body. That is why the patriarch says, “He will wash his robe in wine.” Then he shows the gladness that would come from the passion: “His eyes are gladdening from wine”; for the saving passion is the gladness of the world. That he called the passion so, the Lord himself is witness, saying, “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me”; and he said in the same way to the sons of Zebedee, “Can you drink the cup that I am about to drink?” The gladdening of the eyes, then, signifies the gladness after the passion. For after the passion and the resurrection the disciples were sent into the whole world, offering salvation to those who believe. The clarity and transparency of the teaching he likened to very white teeth: “His teeth,” he says, “are white as milk.” So much the patriarch foretold in blessing Judah. Of Zebulun he foretold the dwelling by the sea, and of Issachar the tilling of the land. Of Dan, according to some, he foretold the deeds of Samson; for Samson was from this tribe and is counted among the judges, and that is why he says, “Dan shall judge his own people, as one tribe in Israel.” Others say that he foretold the events of Laisa, which is now called Paneas: certain men setting out from this tribe suddenly attacked this city, took it by force, settled in it, and gave it their own name, calling it Dan. But I think that the divine Spirit, having foretold through the patriarch what concerns our Savior, spoke through this prophecy of what concerns the Antichrist as well. What is written fits him very well: “Dan shall judge his own people, as one tribe in Israel.” For just as from the tribe of Judah our Savior and Lord sprang and will save the world, so from the tribe of Dan a deadly serpent will come forth. This is what he says: “And let Dan be a serpent on the way, lying in wait on the path, biting the horse's heel, and the rider will fall backward, waiting for the salvation of the Lord.” Since he uses deceits of every kind and tries to hunt those he deludes to destruction, he likens him to a serpent lurking beside a path and harming passers-by. By the horse I think he means the body, and by the rider the soul; and “to fall backward,” that is, to lie on one's back, indicates death, for such is the posture of the dead. By the heel he hinted at the deceit. Since he deceives some and inflicts very grievous punishments on others, he has indicated the body by the horse, by whose biting and destruction death comes about … bringing the fruits of hope to those who endure; and the fruit of such hope is salvation. He foretells to Gad the plots that would come upon him from raiding bands; this is what he says: “A band of raiders will raid him.” And he foretells his coming victory: “And he will raid them at their heels.” Likewise he foretells the grain-bearing country of Asher, and the growth of Naphtali into a multitude; this is what he said: “A stem let loose, giving beauty in its offspring.” Then, having shown the envy against Joseph and the plots of every kind, he hymns the divine care by which Joseph overcame those who warred against him: “Their bows were broken with might, and the sinews of their arms were loosened by the hand of the mighty one of Jacob. From there is he who strengthened Israel, from the God of your father. And my God helped you, and blessed you with the blessing of heaven above, and the blessing of the earth that has all things. Because of the blessing of breasts and womb, the blessing of your father and your mother, you have prevailed above the blessing of the enduring mountains and the desire of the everlasting hills; they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the brothers whom he led.” Through all this he hymned his own God, who had made him stronger than the brother who warred against him, and had shown his son invincible though plotted against by so many brothers. “You obtained this care,” he says, “receiving the reward for your service to your parents.” This is what he says: “Because of the blessing of breasts and womb, the blessing of your father and your mother.” For he had been an earnest nurse of his father's old age. And he says that what was done for him was shared by Joseph and his mother; for she too would have enjoyed the same care had she not departed this life sooner. Then he prays for distinction for him, so that he might be renowned among all: “You have prevailed,” he says, “above the blessing of the enduring mountains and the desire of the everlasting hills; they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the brothers whom he led.” The “hills” Aquila translated “mounds.” Since mounds and mountains are seen from afar, he prays that Joseph may become known like them, and the most distinguished of all. Benjamin he called a ravening wolf because of what befell his tribe. That is why he added, “In the morning he will eat, and in the evening he will give out food.” For having won in the first and second engagements, they afterwards perished utterly, except for a very few, whom the victors pitied; they shrank from giving them wives because of their oath, but contrived marriage for them in another way. One must know that some have applied this prophecy to the inspired Paul; for like a wolf he ravaged the church, entering house after house, but afterwards gave out spiritual food to the world. When Jacob had said this and announced his own death, the writer said: “And lifting up his feet onto the bed, he expired and was added to his people.” By these words he hinted at the hope of the resurrection. For if they were utterly destroyed and did not pass into another life, he would not have said, “He was added to his people.” The God of the universe himself said this to Abraham too: “You shall go to your fathers in peace, nourished in a good old age.” From this the Lord too refuted the unbelief of the Sadducees, saying: “That the dead are raised, have you not read, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Glory for ever. Amen.

How should “They became a multitude” be understood? He did not put it insultingly, as some have understood it, but indicated their great number. “They increased so much,” he means, “as to be poured out over all that land.” So too Aquila and his associates translated. What follows shows this too: “For the land multiplied them,” he says; and shortly after, “But the more they afflicted them, the more numerous they became, and they grew very, very strong.”

What does “Because the midwives feared God, they made houses for themselves” mean? When Pharaoh ordered the males to be killed, they out of reverence would not serve the law of child-murder. For this reason God repaid them and gave them an abundance of good things.

How did Pharaoh's daughter know that the child was a Hebrew? Circumcision showed it. Hence it is clear that the Egyptians were not yet circumcised at that time, but later, emulating the Hebrews, embraced the law of circumcision. Hence too the God of the universe said through Jeremiah, “I will visit all who are circumcised in their foreskins: Egypt, and the sons of Edom,” and so on.

Why did Moses marry a foreign wife? He was a type of Christ the Master, who, having sprung from the Jews according to the flesh, called the church from the nations his bride.

Some say that it was an angel who appeared to Moses in the bush. Reading the passage shows who appeared. “An angel of the Lord appeared to him,” it says, “in a flame of fire out of the bush.” And shortly after: “When the Lord saw that he was coming near to see, the Lord called him from the bush.” And again shortly after: “And he said to him, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And at once it added: “Moses turned away his face; for he was afraid to look at God.” And it went on: “I have surely seen the affliction of my people in Egypt, and I have heard their cry,” and so on. And again: “I am He Who Is. Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, He Who Is has sent me to you.” The whole passage shows that the one who appeared was God. But it also called him an angel, so that we may know that the one who appeared is not God the Father (for whose angel is the Father?), but the only-begotten Son, the angel of great counsel, who said to the holy disciples, “All that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you.” Just as it put the name angel not to signify some subordinate service but to indicate the person of the Only-begotten, so again it proclaims his nature and his authority, saying that he said, “I am He Who Is,” and “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; this is my eternal name and memorial for generations.” These words both show the divine substance and indicate the eternal and the everlasting.

What does it signify that the bush was burning and not consumed? It proclaims the power and love of God, in that the inextinguishable fire did not consume the brushwood. I think other things too are indicated by this: that Israel, plotted against by the Egyptians, would not be consumed, but would be stronger than those who warred against it; and that the Only-begotten, becoming man and dwelling in a virgin's womb, would keep her virginity intact. Some say that God appeared in a bush and not in another plant because no one can carve a god out of a bush; for it was likely that the Jews would dare even this if he had been seen in another plant.

Why was Moses commanded to take off his sandal? Some say that it was so that he might throw off the cares of this world, which are bound up with mortal life; for the leather of sandals is dead. Others say that it was so that he might sanctify the ground with bare feet. I accept neither of these. First, he had not yet been appointed either high priest or prophet. Then, since God had consecrated the place and for this reason called it holy, I think it superfluous to say that Moses sanctified the place with his feet. I think that two things are shown by this. First, by this word he makes him more reverent, so that he might not … but might hear the commands with fear as in a holy place. Then, he is taught in advance how the priests must minister in the tabernacle; for they too performed the liturgies with bare feet, and the sacrifices …

Since God foreknew Pharaoh's disobedience, why did he not punish him from the beginning? He showed that he foreknew it: “I know,” he says, “that Pharaoh king of Egypt will not let you go except with a mighty hand. And stretching out my hand I will strike the Egyptians.” Yet, being good and loving toward humankind, he does not consent to punish on the basis of foreknowledge alone, but waits for the outcome of events and shows everyone the justice of the punishment. Besides, it is much more just that Pharaoh's vice and wickedness be laid bare than that God be thought harsh. If he had punished him before the proofs, he would have seemed both cruel and unjust; but now God's long-suffering has been shown, and Pharaoh's impiety and brutality have been exposed.

Why did he give as the first sign the change of the rod into a serpent? Since Pharaoh, being of a rational nature, used cruelty against the Hebrews and made what was godlike in him beastly, God commanded the rod with which he would scourge him to be changed into a serpent, to convict his brutality and to signify his hostility. For to the curse on the serpent he had added this too: “I will put enmity between you and the woman,” and so on.

What does the leprosy of the hand signify? The race of Jacob, reared in piety, entered Egypt; but there it learned the impiety of the Egyptians; and when freed from slavery to them, it recognized the God of the universe. By the change of the hand, then, he showed their leprosy and their cleansing from it. Besides this, God the Master was arranging something else too. Since he was going to lay down the law about lepers and call them unclean, though nothing involuntary is unclean, he used those laws to arrange other things, which we shall explain, God willing, when we come to those passages. He made the lawgiver's hand leprous, teaching those instructed in perfect things that nothing of this kind is unclean. For the right hand that worked those miracles had first become leprous, and then served the divine signs and changed the elements. By this he also taught the lawgiver not to be proud, but to know his nature by remembering the hand that had become leprous.

Since the God of the universe used Moses as his minister, why did he make him weak-voiced and slow of tongue? Because this showed the divine power the more. Just as he appointed fishermen, tax collectors, and leatherworkers as heralds of the truth and teachers of piety, so through a weak voice and a slow tongue he put the wise men of Egypt to shame.

How should “I will harden Pharaoh's heart” be understood? It would have been very easy for God to bring total destruction on him after his first disobedience; but using indescribable long-suffering, he brought moderate chastisements upon him. These made his heart resistant; for, thinking that God could not use greater punishments, he despised the moderate scourges. That this is so the history teaches. First, on hearing those divine words, “Let my people go, that they may serve me in the desert,” he answered, “Who is the Lord, that I should listen to his voice? I do not know the Lord, and I will not let Israel go.” Then, when the rod was changed into a serpent, the divine Scripture says, “And Pharaoh's heart prevailed, and he did not listen to them, as the Lord had told them.” And at once it adds: “And the Lord said to Moses, Pharaoh's heart is made heavy, so as not to let the people go.” Both “Pharaoh's heart prevailed” and “Pharaoh's heart is made heavy” signify that his will was self-chosen; for a heart is made heavy when it is dragged down by wickedness. The blessed David teaches us this clearly: “My iniquities have gone over my head; like a heavy burden they weigh heavily upon me.” And Zechariah saw iniquity bearing a talent of lead in its mouth. The heart that acts in arrogance is said to “prevail,” as resisting God the Master and brashly trying to overcome his power. For the pious heart submits, according to the prophetic exhortation that says, “Submit to the Lord and entreat him.” But the resistant heart, stony as it were, is hardened. Hence the God of the universe said through the prophet Ezekiel about the Jews, “And I will draw out the stony heart from them.” For this reason too the blessed Moses, singing the song of victory over Pharaoh and the Egyptians, said, “They sank into the deep like a stone”; and again, “They sank like lead in the mighty water.” Since they made their heart heavy, they sank like lead; and since they also hardened it, they sank into the deep like a stone. That resistance and hardness of heart come from ourselves, the divine Apostle is witness, saying: “Not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But by your hardness and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will repay each according to his works.” Besides this, one must consider that if Pharaoh had been wicked by nature, he would not have changed his mind; but we see him softened by chastisement and hardened by long-suffering. For when chastised, he entreated the lawgiver, saying, “Pray for me”; and again, “The Lord is righteous; I and my people are impious.” But when the punishment ceased, he grew heavy and spoke against the divine commands. When the dog-fly was brought upon them, he ordered them to sacrifice to God in Egypt; and when the most divine Moses said that this could not be done because of the Egyptians (“for we shall sacrifice,” he says, “what they deify, and they will stone us and kill us”), he allowed them to go into the desert and perform the sacrifices. When upon this the prophet prayed and made the dog-fly vanish, “he made his heart heavy,” it says, “at this time also, and would not let the people go.” The same happened with the plague of the cattle: “Pharaoh saw,” it says, “that not one of all the cattle of the sons of Israel had died; and Pharaoh's heart was made heavy, and he did not let the people go.” In all these things Scripture showed that his will was self-chosen. And after teaching how the affliction of the boils came upon them, and that the sickness struck the sorcerers too, and that the sorcerers could not stand before Moses because of the sores (for they were ashamed, covered with sores and unable to help themselves), it added: “And the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not listen to them, as the Lord had ordered them.” And shortly after he said to Pharaoh himself: “For this reason you have been preserved, that I may show my strength in you, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” And again, shortly after, it said this too: “When Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunders had ceased, Pharaoh went on sinning; and he made his heart heavy, and that of his servants; and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he did not let the sons of Israel go, as the Lord had spoken to Moses.” “As he had spoken” shows God's foreknowledge; that is, the God of the universe was ignorant of none of these things, but foretold them from the beginning. I have gone through all this wishing to show that Pharaoh was not of a wicked nature, and that God the Master did not make his will hard and resistant; for one who inclines now this way and now that shows that his will is self-chosen. And to resolve the difficulty by an image as well: the sun, by the action of its heat, melts wax and dries clay; it softens the one and hardens the other. Just as the sun produces opposite effects by one action, so through the long-suffering of the God of the universe some reap benefit and others harm; some are softened and others hardened. The Lord showed this in the holy Gospels: “For judgment,” he says, “I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.” This does not show the Master's aim, for he did not come in order to make those who see blind; it declares what happened. He himself wills all human beings to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. But since human nature has free choice, those who believed enjoyed salvation, while those who disbelieved brought Gehenna upon themselves. So Judas, who saw (for he was an apostle), was later blinded; while the inspired Paul, blind before, afterwards received his sight. So, through the appearing of the Savior, most of the Jews were blinded, while the nations received sight. Yet it was not right that, because some were going to disbelieve, our Savior's dispensation in the flesh should not take place; for that would have deprived the world of salvation. So too the most divine Simeon said, “See, this one is set for the fall and the rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against.” One must also know that the God of the universe has made the present life a stadium for human beings, so that, contending in it, they may show their own aim; and in the life to come, making a just judgment, he will crown some as victorious contenders and punish others as having become workers of vice. But since not everyone believes in the life to come, the God of the universe very wisely both punishes in this life some who have lived in wickedness, and proclaims others who have cared most for piety. For this reason the divine Apostle named some vessels of wrath and others vessels of mercy, since through the former God the Master is shown punishing justly, and through the latter counting the athletes of virtue worthy of every care and providence. One may see the physicians of bodies too using incisions and cautery to draw up and draw out the hidden humors that cause a grievous disease, and making hidden affections manifest. So too the God of the universe lays bare the wickedness of thoughts by chastisements. For he said this to Israel too in Deuteronomy: “And you shall remember the whole way by which the Lord your God led you these forty years in the desert, to afflict you and test you, and that what was in your heart might be made known, whether you would keep his commandments or not. And he afflicted you and let you hunger,” and so on. And again, just as physicians operate on the incurably sick in the presence of many, not so much to help them (for they know that their disease is incurable) as to teach their students the method of healing, so too God subjected Pharaoh, who had a very cruel and beastly mind, to punishments of every kind, teaching all human beings generally that he himself governs creation, and justly defends the wronged, and justly punishes the wrongdoers. This is what he said to Pharaoh himself: “For this reason you have been preserved, that I may show my strength in you, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” That the memory of what was done spread everywhere, Rahab the harlot is witness, saying to the spies, “The fear of you and the dread of you has fallen upon us; for we have heard that the Lord your God dried up the Red Sea before you”; and the foreigners too bear witness, who, seeing the ark from afar, cried out, “Woe to us; this is the God who struck Egypt.”

Why did God allow the people to suffer these things? So that they would hate not only the Egyptians but also their gods, as having suffered such things from them; and so that they would obey promptly when ordered to leave. For if, even after these things had happened, they remembered the luxury of Egypt and often tried to turn back, who would have persuaded them to leave Egypt if they had suffered nothing terrible there?

Why did the angel wish to kill Moses? His wife supposed that it was because one of the children had not been circumcised according to the law of the Hebrews; at any rate, she at once performed the circumcision on him. Some say that it was because, though he had been sent to free his kinsmen, he had his wife as companion on the journey. They ought to have seen that he was forced to take her in order to convince his father-in-law that he would not despise his wife nor prefer another to her, and not because he served the divine command contemptuously. Indeed, taking the angel as occasion, he ordered his wife to return to her own people. That this is true, the history teaches. For after the exodus from Egypt, when they had crossed the Red Sea and come to Mount Sinai, his father-in-law came to him with his wife. The history says: “Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after she had been sent away, and his two sons, and came to Moses in the desert.” So the angel showed his naked sword to bring about something else. Since the great Moses was afraid of Pharaoh, and often showed this fear, saying now, “Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh king of Egypt?” and now, “Appoint another who is able, whom you will send,” and again, “I am weak-voiced and slow of tongue,” the angel threatens him with punishment, driving out fear by fear, the lesser by the greater, and all but saying through the naked sword: “If you fear Pharaoh, fear me more, who can strike you even invisibly.”

What does “And my name, Lord, I did not make known to them” mean? It teaches with how much honor and favor God counted Moses worthy. The name he had not made known to the patriarchs, he made plain to him; for he said to him, “I am He Who Is.” Among the Hebrews this is called the unutterable name, for they are forbidden to pronounce it with the tongue. It is written with four letters, which is why they call it the tetragram. It was also inscribed on the golden plate that was placed on the high priest's forehead, tied to the band around his head. The Samaritans call it Iabe, and the Jews …

Why did he make known to us not only the father but also the brother of Aaron's wife? He teaches the intermingling of the royal and the priestly tribes. For Nahshon was the son of Amminadab, Amminadab of Aram, Aram of Hezron, Hezron of Perez, and Perez of Judah. Nahshon himself was leader of the tribe of Judah. From their kindred the Lord was born according to the flesh. Not without purpose, then, did he teach the intermingling of the royal and priestly tribes, but to show that Christ the Master sprang from both, being styled both king and priest according to his humanity.

How did Moses become Aaron's god? Just as God gave commands to Moses, so Moses gave commands to Aaron; that is why Aaron was called Moses' prophet.

Why did God allow the sorcerers to do the same things as Moses? There are some even now among those who live in impiety who say that the inspired Moses worked his miracles by sorcery. For this reason God allowed the sorcerers to do some things, so that the difference might be shown. They too changed their rods into serpents, but Moses' rod swallowed theirs; they too changed water into blood, but could not bring the water back to its former nature; they brought out the frogs, but could not rid the houses of the Egyptians of them. For chastising the Egyptians he allowed the sorcerers to act too, but not for stopping the punishment. For since the king of the Egyptians, being punished by God, was not content with the plagues sent from God, but ordered the sorcerers too to increase the punishment, God punished him through them as well, all but saying, “Since you delight in being punished, I chastise you through my servants and punish you through yours.” But seeing him hardened the more, he stopped their activity; and those who had brought out the frog, the larger creature, could not bring out the gnat, the smallest, but called the plague the finger of God. He also brought the boils on their bodies, so that they and their senseless king might learn that they could not only not check the plagues sent by God, but were themselves punished along with the rest. It is shameless, then, to say that Moses worked his miracles by trickery, when the magicians cry out that the signs were the work of divine power. If what he did had been illusion, they too should have produced illusions and exposed their fellow craftsman; but in fact they cry out plainly, “This is the finger of God.”

Why did he bring upon them first the plague of the water? First, because they prided themselves on the river and thought it a god, since it supplied them what clouds supply; then because of the babies of the Jews that had been thrown into it. For when changed into blood it accuses the child-murder that had been committed. For this reason too the waters gushed forth the frogs, sent up in place of the children drowned in them; for babies, when they walk, somehow imitate frogs: not yet able to use their feet alone, they help the weakness of their feet with their hands. And the land stank of the frogs, since the wounds of the Egyptians stank and festered from their very great wickedness.

If all the water was changed into blood, how did the enchanters of the Egyptians do the same with their sorceries? The sea lay near them too, and only the drinking water was changed into blood. They could therefore bring seawater to the palace and change it to the color of blood, God, clearly, allowing them to act for the reasons we have given. One must also note that he brought the frogs out of the waters, the gnats out of the dust, and the dog-fly from wherever he wished, so that they might learn that it was easy for God to bring forth what he wills both without earth and without waters. For this reason too he foretells the punishments, so that they would not suppose that these things happened by chance, but would know that they were plagues sent by God. For the blessed Moses too said this: “… both you and your servants.”

Why, when about to bring the hail, did he warn them to gather their cattle into the houses? The Master, loving humankind, mixes mercy with his punishments. Besides, he knew that some deserved to be spared; the divine Scripture teaches this: “Whoever of Pharaoh's servants feared the word of the Lord gathered his cattle into the houses; but whoever did not pay heed to the word of the Lord left his cattle in the fields.” He brought the hail and the thunderbolts on them to show that he is Master of all the elements. For since both Egyptians and Greeks thought that some gods were heavenly, others earthly, and others beneath the earth; that some ruled the land and others the sea; and that some had authority over the mountains and others over the plains (which is why the Syrians said, “The God of Israel is a God of mountains and not a God of valleys”), the God of the universe very necessarily chastised them not only through the river and the land, but also through the air and the sea, and sent down thunderbolts on them from heaven, teaching that he is the maker of all things; and he said to Pharaoh, “That you may know that the earth is the Lord's …”

Why did he kill the firstborn of the Egyptians? Since Pharaoh had enslaved Israel, God's first-begotten, very harshly (for God the Master himself said, “Israel is my firstborn son”), he very justly sent the firstborn of the Egyptians to death. One must know, however, that the first-begotten also has brothers; for the first-begotten, or firstborn, is the first of many. Let Israel know, then, that it was named God's first people; but the nations, having believed, not only obtained salvation but also enjoyed the rights of the firstborn: “For one people shall surpass a people,” it says, “and the elder shall serve the younger.”

Why do some find fault with God's having commanded the Hebrews to ask the Egyptians for vessels of gold and silver and clothing, and to despoil the Egyptians? (For so Symmachus translated “to equip themselves.”) The people endured a long time in Egypt making bricks, building walls, and building cities. God the Master wished them to receive a wage for their labors; that is why he commanded them to do this. And let no one think it unjust that, though it was Pharaoh who had wronged the people, the wage was exacted from the Egyptians; for they too shared in the injustice, imitating the cruelty of their king.

Why did he command them to celebrate the feast of the Passover as they were fleeing? He wished the memory of their salvation to be kept forever. That is why, when legislating, he said: “If your son asks you, saying, What is the Passover? you shall say, On this day the Lord God brought our fathers out of the land of Egypt and rescued our firstborn, when the destroyer struck the firstborn of the Egyptians.” For this reason he bids those who celebrate this feast to put on the dress of travelers: “Let your loins be girded,” he says, “and your sandals on your feet, and your staffs in your hands; and you shall eat it in haste; for it is the Lord's Passover.” Philo translated pascha as “crossing-feast,” Josephus as “passing over,” Symmachus as “passings over,” while Theodotion put “phasech,” setting down the Hebrew word itself. The Hebrew name signifies the salvation of the firstborn. For he bade them take a bunch of hyssop, dip it in the blood of the sacrificed sheep, and smear the doorposts and the lintel, so that when the destroyer came in to strike the firstborn of the Egyptians, he would see the blood and pass over the houses of the Hebrews. Not that the incorporeal nature needed such signs; but through the symbol they had to learn God's care, and we, who sacrifice the spotless lamb, had to know that the type had been sketched in advance. He commands them to take not only yearling lambs from the sheep but also kids from the goats: not that they should sacrifice both together, but that one who had a sheep should sacrifice it, and one who lacked a sheep, the kid. He directs them to take it on the tenth of the first month, so as to prepare it before the feast, and to sacrifice it on the fourteenth toward evening; for on this evening Christ the Master too was handed over to the Jews. He ordered it to be eaten with bitter herbs, in remembrance of their very bitter life in Egypt and their very harsh slavery. By the unleavened bread he indicates not only the urgency of the journey and the makeshift nature of the food, but also that they must not carry with them even a trace of the Egyptian way of life. For so the Lord interpreted it in the Gospels, saying, “Beware of the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees.” He also commanded as many as sufficed to eat a sheep to sacrifice the Passover together, training them in brotherly love and in mercy toward the poor. For this reason too he bids that the meat left over be burned and not kept for the next day, thereby compelling them to invite the needy to share in the feast. All these things are riddles of our mysteries. For we too anoint with the blood of our lamb not only the lintel but also the two doorposts: visibly, cleansing and sanctifying the tongue and the lips; spiritually, the rational part in place of the lintel, and the spirited and the desiring parts in place of the two doorposts. It suits us too to eat neither raw nor boiled, but roasted with fire. For we neither look only to the letter, but search out the meaning; nor do we bring human reasonings into the divine oracles (Isaiah accused some of this, as mixing wine with water); we use only the divine fire, the grace of the all-holy Spirit. Leaving none of the meat for the next day we understand in this way: the life to come needs no symbols, for in it we see the realities themselves. Those who understand the divine oracles badly and try to carry them over to their own impiety break the bones of the sheep. Taking not only from the sheep but also from the goats proclaims, again, the divine love for humankind; for Christ the Master underwent the saving passion not only for the righteous but also for sinners. He himself taught us to understand it so: he likened the assembly of the saints to lambs and the company of sinners to goats; and the law commanded a goat to be offered for sin. And of those who partake of the divine mysteries, some partake as of a sheep, having acquired perfect virtue; others as of a kid, wiping out the stains of their sins through repentance. So too our Savior fed the crowds who had gathered not only from wheat loaves but also from barley loaves. And the Master commanded us too to have our loins girded, our feet shod, and our lamps burning, as servants awaiting their master. But the Hebrews had this dress as men released from the Egyptians and being brought into the land of Canaan; we have it as those removing from here to another life. That is why the divine Paul too exhorts us, crying, “Clean out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, as you are unleavened”; and he added, “For our Passover too, Christ, was sacrificed for us”; and went on, “So let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” From of old the God of the universe announced beforehand the salvation of the nations; for he commanded proselytes too to share in the Passover. He called the proselyte geiōras and gave him equal rights: “He shall be,” he says, “like a native of the land.” And “It shall be eaten in one house” the faithful observe, partaking of the divine mysteries in the one church of God alone, and loathing the assemblies of the heretics. God the Master also legislated that the firstborn of both cattle and sheep be offered, reminding them of the salvation of their own firstborn; for he himself did not need the sacrifices, but was procuring their benefit. The law itself shows this: “If your son asks you, What is this? you shall say to him, With a strong hand the Lord brought us out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. When Pharaoh was hard-hearted about letting us go, the Lord killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of men to the firstborn of cattle. For this reason I sacrifice to the Lord every male that opens the womb, and every firstborn of my sons I will redeem. And it shall be a sign on your hand and immovable before your eyes; for with a strong hand the Lord brought you out of Egypt.” So each of these things was done not for any need of God's, but for the benefit of the people.

Some say that the sea was divided into twelve divisions, and that each tribe crossed by itself; and they think that the blessed David said this: “To him who divided the Red Sea into divisions.” But I think that the sea was cut in two; for the divine Scripture teaches this: “And the water was a wall to them on the right and a wall on the left.” The road became broad, proportioned to the multitude passing through: “He led them through the deep,” it says, “as through a desert”; and this shows the breadth of the road. Yet that view does no harm to the doctrine of piety either; both this and that are the work of divine wonder-working. One must, however, follow the truth of the divine Scripture. The most just judge gave Pharaoh, with his whole army, over to total destruction by water, since he had killed the babies of the Hebrews by water.

What was the wood that sweetened the water at Marah? It is superfluous and useless to seek what has been passed over in silence. It is enough for us to learn that through the wood the bitter water was changed to a sweet quality. This too foreshadows our salvation; for the saving wood of the cross sweetened the bitter sea of the nations.

How should the Apostle's saying be understood: “All were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ”? The old things were a type of the new; the law of Moses was a shadow, and grace the body. Since the Egyptians pursued the Hebrews, and the Hebrews, having crossed the Red Sea, were freed from the bitter dominion of the Egyptians, the sea bears the type of the font; the cloud, of the Spirit; Moses, of Christ the Savior; the rod, of the cross; Pharaoh, of the devil; the Egyptians, of the demons; the manna, of the divine food; and the water from the rock, of the saving blood. For just as they, after crossing the Red Sea, enjoyed a strange food and an extraordinary stream, so we, after saving baptism, partake of the divine mysteries.

Why was the rock named Christ? As having become a type of Christ the Master. So too the sea was called baptism, although no one was baptized in it; for Israel passed through it covered with dust rather than drenched.

Why did the prophet call the manna the bread of angels? Because angels had ministered the gift of it; for the incorporeal nature needs no food. So too it was called bread of heaven, since it was brought down from above; not from heaven itself, but from the air. So too the creatures that pass through the air are called birds of heaven.

Why was it called manna? As soon as they saw it, they asked one another, “What is this?” So they gave it the name “What is this?”, for this is what “manna” means. The history teaches this too: “When the sons of Israel saw it,” it says, “they said to one another, What is this? For they did not know what it was.” So the question became a name. “Like a cake in honey” Symmachus translated “like a starch cake in honey.” The gomor was a Hebrew measure. The lawgiver teaches that it was the tenth of three measures; as Josephus said, three and a half Attic kotylai …

Why did the manna left until the next day spoil? Because it was a transgression of the law. Teaching them a life free from cares, God promised to supply them each day with the food they needed; but they, disbelieving, kept part of what they had gathered until the next day, and for this reason it stank. That the spoiling did not belong to the nature of the manna is attested by the Sabbath, on which what had been gathered on the day of preparation was kept unspoiled; and it is attested also by what was kept in the ark for many generations.

Why did he not provide the manna on the Sabbaths? Since he legislated the Sabbath rest for them alone, he taught them by deed to keep the commandment. But he did not hinder the course of nature: the sun and the moon rise, the clouds likewise are in labor with rain, winds blow, women give birth, and so do the kinds of irrational animals.

What weapons did they use in fighting Amalek? When the Egyptians had been drowned, their bodies were cast up on the shore with their weapons; having stripped them, the Israelites used these in their wars.

Why did Israel win when Moses' hands were stretched out, and lose when they were lowered? By stretching out his hands he fulfilled the type of the one who was crucified for us. So the power of the truth was shown even in the type. For just as Amalek fell when the servant stretched out his hands, so when the Master stretched out his hands the host of the devil was destroyed. And in that war the namesake of our Savior set up the trophy, having then received this name, and used picked men as his helpers, as Christ the Master used the holy apostles as his ministers.

What does “You shall be to me a special people out of all the nations; for all the earth is mine” mean? “I am the maker and Master of all,” he says, “and as maker I provide for all; but I have consecrated you to myself as a chosen people.” For he added: “You shall be to me a royal priesthood, a holy nation.” Just as he honored the Levites, who were Israelites, above the other tribes and consecrated them to the divine liturgy, not neglecting the others but caring for them through these, so he chose the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: first, since Christ the Master was going to spring from them according to the flesh; then, so as to show his own power through what was done for them, and to teach all human beings the way of the knowledge of God. When this had been said, “All the people answered and said, All that God has said we will do and obey.” This agreement of the people is like the signature on a written bond; hence, having transgressed their own agreement, they were subjected to the curses of the legislation, from which Christ the Master freed those who believed in him: “Christ redeemed us,” it says, “from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.” “Special” Symmachus translated “chosen.”

Why were they commanded not only to purify themselves but also to wash their clothes when they were receiving the Law? Through bodily things he leads them to spiritual things, puts fear in them, and makes them more reverent. For they reasoned from these that it was much more fitting for the mind to be clean. For this reason too there were sounds of trumpets, crashes of thunder, darkness, storm, fire on the summit of the mountain, and indescribable smoke sent forth, so that by all these he might soften their stony heart. For since they had seen the punishments brought on the Egyptians but had themselves had no experience of chastisement, he frightens them by these, as children, so that they might not only love him for his ineffable benefits but also fear him because of his punishments. For this reason too he said of the priests: “Let the priests who draw near to the Lord God be sanctified, lest the Lord do away with them.” Since they were likely to be overconfident, having been entrusted with the divine liturgy, he teaches that those entrusted with ministering to God ought especially to be above earthly things.

How should “You shall have no gods besides me” be understood? Those who confess one substance of the Trinity keep the law of the divine voice; for they do not consent to deify anything other than the divine nature. But those clothed in the defilement of Arius and Eunomius openly transgress the divine law, confessing the Son to be God but calling him created and foreign to the divine substance. For when God says, “You shall have no other gods besides me,” these bring in another God.

What difference is there between an idol and a likeness? An idol has no real existence; a likeness is the image and copy of something. Since the Greeks fashion forms that do not exist, Sphinxes, Tritons, and Centaurs, and the Egyptians dog-faced and bull-headed figures, he calls the imitations of things that do not exist idols, and the copies of things that do exist likenesses, such as images of the sun and moon, stars, men, beasts, creeping things, and the like. He commands them neither to bow down to these nor to serve them. He forbids both not without reason: since it happens that some bow down out of human fear without serving in their soul, he taught that each is impious.

What does “God is jealous” mean? The Law holds the place of a husband, and the people that of a wife. God the Master taught us this, saying through Isaiah, “What is this certificate of divorce of your mother?” and through Jeremiah, “As a woman is faithless to the one who lives with her, so the house of Israel and the house of Judah have been faithless to me, says the Lord”; and again, “If a man sends away his wife, and she goes and becomes another man's, will she ever return to him? Will not that woman be utterly defiled? But you have played the harlot with many shepherds, and you returned to me, says the Lord.” And the Apostle says: “The law rules over a person as long as he lives. For the married woman is bound by law to her living husband; but if the husband dies, she is released from the law of the husband, so that she is not an adulteress if she becomes another man's. So you too were put to death to the law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead.” For this reason he names himself a jealous God, using human names, frightening them and compelling them to be chaste. Just as a husband with a careless wife admonishes her, saying, “I am jealous; I cannot bear to see you talking with another man,” so God the Master, wishing to free them from superstition, called himself not only jealous but also a consuming fire. That such jealousy belongs to affection God himself showed through Ezekiel, saying, “Therefore my jealousy will depart from you”; that is, “When I loved you, I was jealous; having rejected you, I have quenched my jealousy too.” He showed this also through another prophet: “I will not punish your daughters when they commit sexual immorality, nor your brides when they commit adultery.” Jealousy, then, is a sign of love.

How is justice preserved when children are punished for their fathers? With God the Master the threats are greater than the punishments. This is easy to learn from the divine Scripture: “Every uncircumcised male,” it says, “who is not circumcised on the eighth day shall be destroyed.” Yet one finds that those who had been circumcised were killed in various ways in the desert, while those who remained uncircumcised obtained the promise made to their ancestors; for Joshua circumcised them at Gilgal. So too he threatened houses that had leaven with total destruction, but did not bring the punishment as threatened. Here too, then, he uses threats, and says: “Repaying the sins of fathers upon children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.” That attending to the bare letter is impious, God himself teaches by legislating the opposite: “Children shall not die for fathers, nor fathers for children; but each shall die in his own sin.” And through the prophet Ezekiel he says: “What is this parable of yours, who say, The fathers ate sour grapes, and the children's teeth were set on edge? As I live, says the Lord, this parable shall no longer be; but the teeth of those who ate the sour grapes shall be set on edge; for all souls are mine.” What follows has the same sense. But I think that the threat, by frightening those who love their children and care about having children, rather displays the divine love for humankind. For “of those who hate me” is added; that is: “I am patient with fathers who have sinned, and I am patient with their children too; but if the descendants and their offspring emulate the wickedness of their fathers and ancestors, I will bring the punishment; while the piety of the ancestors will procure salvation for the race for a long time.” For he says, “showing mercy to thousands and myriads of those who love me and keep my commandments.” One could find the truth of the divine oracles in the history too: “In the fifth generation,” it says, “the sons of Israel went up out of Egypt.” Although they had served the gods of the Egyptians in Egypt, neither their fathers nor their forefathers paid the penalty; but they themselves, emulating their impiety, were punished, as men who had not spat out their impiety after such great benefits and countless miracles. Their children, having loved God the Savior, enjoyed the promise made to their ancestors. And we see the truthfulness of the promise made to the patriarchs; for the nations obtained the blessing through the seed of Abraham. Since, then, they were going to worship the calf, he added the threat of punishment.

What does “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain” mean? Some say that it forbids giving God's title to vain things, that is, to idols; others, that it forbids lying after swearing an oath. But I think that the divine law commands us not to utter the divine title except in teaching, or prayer, or some necessary need. For some are accustomed, even while joking and laughing, to bring the venerable name onto their tongues at random. This, I think, is what the divine law forbids. If most people usually keep their more costly clothing for feasts, it is much more right to dedicate the divine name to prayers and teaching.

Why did he honor the Sabbath with rest? He was training the people in kindness. For he added: “that your servant and your maidservant may rest, your ox and your beast of burden and all your cattle, and the proselyte who sojourns among you.”

And why did he not command this to be done on another day? One could say the same about any other day: why did he choose this one and not another? Yet this day had a reason able to persuade the harshness of the Jews: that the God of the universe created all things in six days, did nothing on the seventh, and honored it with a blessing. For this is what Moses said: “In six days the Lord your God made heaven and earth and the sea and all that is in them; and he rested on the seventh day and sanctified it.”

What does “If you make me an altar of stones, you shall not build them hewn; for you have put your blade upon it, and it is defiled” mean? That both those who made the wooden parts of the tabernacle and those who worked the gold, silver, and bronze used iron, no one, I think, will deny. And that the priests performed the sacrifices with knives, flaying and cutting, I think is also beyond dispute. One must ask, then, how iron did not defile these things, yet defiled hewn stones. It is clear that he arranges some things by means of others. Since they spent forty years in the desert, continually setting out and changing places, he forbids altars to be built of worked stones, so that, once they had taken the promised land, the neighboring peoples would not perform sacrifices to demons on these altars. For this reason he commanded them to be made either of earth or of natural stones, since each is easily dismantled. That after the building of the temple it was not permitted to sacrifice anywhere else, the law itself teaches; and if the law forbade sacrificing outside the temple, it likewise prevented building an altar. So, to convict the impious, the great Elijah, compelled to offer a sacrifice on Carmel, put together natural stones equal in number to the tribes and offered the sacrifice on them, so that the structure was at once dismantled and no one else offered sacrifice in that place.

Why did he command that the ear of the Hebrew who did not wish to receive his freedom be pierced? He teaches them to prize freedom above all things. The one who does not hold fast to it but embraces slavery he bids receive this sign as a disgrace. Besides this, the sign through the ear indicates obedience, and its being made at the door indicates that he may not go out unless his master permits.

Why is “and he shall serve him forever” added, when human life plainly has its limits? From this it is clear that “forever” does not everywhere signify the infinite, but sometimes also signifies a fixed time. So too the blessed David says, “Our lifetime is in the light of your face,” giving this name to human life.

Why does he bid one who has killed involuntarily to flee? He is healing their murderous disposition, and teaching that if killing against one's will makes one liable to punishment, much more does murder by intention deserve punishment. Besides this, he makes those who cut wood and those who throw stones more careful, and prepares others who do anything of the kind to fear and tremble, lest they harm, against their will, someone near them or far away. And by the flight of the killer he bridles the anger of the relatives of the one killed.

What does “fully formed” mean? They say that when the body has been completely formed in the womb, the embryo is then given a soul. For the maker too first formed Adam's body and then breathed in the soul. The lawgiver, then, commands that when a pregnant woman miscarries in a fight, if the baby comes out fully formed, that is, shaped, the deed is to be called murder and the one who did it is to undergo the equal punishment; but if it does not come out formed, it is not to be reckoned murder, since it miscarried before receiving a soul, but the one responsible is to pay a fine.

Why does he command the goring bull to be killed? Even through irrational animals he is teaching the rational how great an evil murder is.

Why is one who has stolen a calf required to repay fivefold, and one who has stolen a sheep fourfold? Because greater sins deserve greater penalties. So too the Lord taught: “To whom much is given, from him much will be required.”

How should “You shall not revile gods” be understood? He calls the judges gods, as men entrusted with judging in imitation of the God of the universe. The prophet David taught this more clearly; for having said, “God stood in the assembly of gods; in their midst he judges gods,” he added: “How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to sinners? Judge for the orphan and the poor; do justice to the lowly and needy. Rescue the needy and poor; deliver him from the hand of the sinner.” Then, accusing them, he added: “They have not known nor understood; they walk about in darkness.” And he shows his own generosity: “I said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High; but you die like men, and fall like one of the rulers.” So here too: “You shall not revile gods, and you shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.”

Why does he forbid eating meat torn by beasts? He teaches them a more rational life and directs them to have nothing beastly about them; for beasts do not first slaughter and then eat. For this reason, shortly after, he also commands them to care for their enemies: not to overlook the straying ox of one who is hostile, but to bring it back to the enemy's house, and to raise up the fallen beast of burden, and by such kindnesses to contrive reconciliation. By these he teaches that the lawgiver of the Old and New Testaments is one, and that he who gave this law also bestowed the law of the Gospel.

What does “You shall not appear before the Lord your God empty” mean? When you go to worship God the Master, bring the gifts you can. The word teaches us that, if we have money, we should pray to God together with care for the poor; and if we choose the life without possessions, we should not have a soul empty of good things, but one that has the wealth of virtue.

What is the feast of the harvest of the firstfruits, and what is the feast of completion at the end of the year? He calls Pentecost the feast of the firstfruits, and the feast of Tabernacles the feast of completion at the end of the year. Teaching this, he added: “Three times in the year every male of yours shall appear before the Lord your God,” that is, at the feast of the Passover, at Pentecost, and at Tabernacles. The Passover reminds them of the exodus from Egypt and the freedom given them; Pentecost, of the entry into the land of promise, for there they sowed and offered the firstfruits of their produce, whereas in the desert they ate bread that was neither sown nor ploughed; and Tabernacles depicts the life in the desert, for they lived forty years in tents. He bade them gather at the divine temple at these feasts, so that they might remember the divine gifts and be joined in concord and friendship, and, being lovers of feasts, might not revel around the precincts of demons, but enjoy the festal banquet in the temple of him who made them and supplies their good things.

What does “You shall not sacrifice the blood of my sacrifice with leaven” mean? They offered unleavened loaves at the altar; he forbids offering leavened ones, teaching intelligible things through perceptible ones. Since unleavened bread is made on the spot, while leavened bread has something of the old leaven, the law forbids mixing anything of Egyptian teaching with divine things. So too the Lord says to the holy disciples, “Beware of the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees.”

How should “You shall not boil a lamb in its mother's milk” be understood? I have often said that through everything he teaches them kindness. Some say that the law forbids eating the newborn; others, that it forbids boiling it in its mother's milk, for in a way one boils the mother along with it. He also forbids offering to God at the same time a mother and its offspring. And he commanded them, when they found a sparrows' nest, not to catch the mother together with the young; for this would be to wipe out the kind of birds.

How should “I will fulfil the number of your days” be understood? He means the life allotted to human beings; that is, “I will make you reach a long old age.”

What does “I will send the hornets before you” mean? As he sent frogs and gnats and the dog-fly on the Egyptians, so he sent the hornets on the Canaanites and the other nations. This shows the surpassing power of God, that even through small creatures he both helps his own and brings destruction on their opponents. He says this through the blessed David too: “If my people had listened to me, if Israel had walked in my ways, I would have humbled their enemies as nothing”; meaning, “I would very easily and readily have destroyed those who warred against them.”

How is it that God, having promised to give them the land as far as the river Euphrates, did not fulfil the promise? God made this clearer through the prophet Jeremiah: “I will finally speak,” he says, “concerning a nation and a kingdom, to build and to plant; and if that nation turns and does evil, I will not bring upon it all the good things that I have spoken,” and so on. God did bring them into the land he had promised; but since they would not keep the divine law, he did not hand all of it over to them, but left some nations to make war on them continually, so that, being warred against, they would ask for divine help. The history of the Judges teaches this especially. Yet he subjected even these nations to King David: the foreigners paid him tribute, and so did Syria of Damascus and Syria of Soba. Solomon too had this dominion as long as he was pious, but when he turned aside to impiety he fell from his power. He had promised to give them this land on condition that they kept the commandments and the law.

Why did God command the tabernacle to be made? God the Master himself showed the reason; he said: “And you shall make me a sanctuary, and I will be seen among you. And you shall make it according to all that I show you on the mountain, the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its vessels.” Since he had given the Law on Mount Sinai, and some were likely to suppose that the divine was circumscribed, he ordered a tabernacle to be made, so that, making his appearing from there, he might train the people in piety. For just as, when they had taken the promised land, he ordered the temple to be built and legislated that the divine liturgies should take place there, so that they would not do this freely and fall into the error of the accursed demons, so, while they were travelling and crossing the desert, he ordered a tabernacle to be made that could itself move, so that they might offer their prayers and sacred rites in it. These things too were done because of their need. For when the great Moses spent several days on the mountain, they said to Aaron, “Make us gods who will go before us”; and having fashioned the image of the calf, they cried out as they danced, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.” God ordered this tabernacle to be made, and legislated that it should lead them when they set out and stand when they encamped, so that the priests might perform the sacrifices in it. It bore the image of creation. For just as God the Master, having created heaven and earth, stretched out the firmament in the middle and divided the upper regions from the lower, so he commanded the tabernacle to be one, thirty cubits long and ten wide; and stretching the veil in the middle, as a type of the firmament, he divided it in two, and called the part by the door the holy place, and named the part within the veil the holy of holies. And as David says, “The heaven of heaven is the Lord's, but the earth he has given to the sons of men,” so the part outside the veil was accessible to the priests, while the part within was untouchable, inaccessible, a sanctuary; for the law was that only the high priest entered, once a year. There were the images of the cherubim, bearing the type of the incorporeal powers; between them lay the ark, holding the tablets of the Law, the jar of manna, and Aaron's rod that had budded. On the ark lay the mercy seat, shaded by the wings of the cherubim; in it the God of the universe made his appearing. Since the divine nature is without form and shape, invisible and incomprehensible, and it is wholly impossible to fashion an image of such a substance, he ordered the symbols of his greatest gifts to lie within. The tablets indicated the legislation; the rod, the priesthood; the manna, the food in the desert and the bread not made by hands; and the mercy seat was the symbol of prophecy, for the prophecies came from there. For just as from the greatness and beauty of created things their creator is perceived by analogy, so through these the generous giver was made known. The things within the tabernacle, then, bore the type of heavenly things; that is why it was named the holy of holies. That this is true, the divine Apostle is witness, saying: “For Christ did not enter a holy place made by hands, a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us.” And again, discussing the divine hope, he added this: “which we have as an anchor, sure and steadfast, entering into the inner place behind the veil, where Jesus has entered as forerunner for us, having become a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.” So the things within the veil bore the image of the heavenly things, and those outside the veil that of the earthly; that is why they were continually accessible to the priests. These included a lampstand placed on the south side, with seven branches and as many lamps set on them; these indicated the number of the days of the week. On the north side was a golden table, on which he ordered twelve loaves to be set out, and golden bowls full of frankincense and salt. Between the lampstand and the table lay a golden altar of incense. These were riddles of the fruits given to human beings from the earth. Before the tabernacle, outside, was the bronze altar, which received the victims that were offered. This shows that these were superfluous and not pleasing to the God of the universe. Hence he allowed them to be performed because of the weakness of the Jews, but ordered them to be offered outside the tabernacle, as not necessary to those within. We, however, perform the liturgy assigned to those within; for we offer God incense and lamplight, and the mystical sacred rite of the holy table. That the tabernacle was thirty cubits long and ten wide is easy to learn. The south side had twenty boards, and the north side as many (the other translators called the boards pillars). Since each board was a cubit and a half, the twenty boards made up thirty cubits. So again the side facing west had six boards of the same measure, and two at the corners. Of the twelve cubits made up by these, ten made up the inner width, and the other two received the joints of the sides on each side. He commanded the door to be made on the east side, so that the rising sun itself might offer a kind of obeisance to the entrance, sending its rays straight there; and so that those who were commanded to serve God alone would have the sun behind them as they turned toward the tabernacle, and would worship not the sun but its maker. The tabernacle, then, was like an enclosure, with boards fitted to one another on all sides. They had silver bases, and capitals likewise; and the boards themselves were overlaid with gold inside and out. The roof was of embroidered fabrics made in various colors: one was purple, another rose or scarlet, another like hyacinth; and the fine linen had a white color. These too were riddles of the four elements: the hyacinth resembles the air; the rose or scarlet, fire; the purple signifies the sea, since it nourishes the shellfish from which this color comes; and the linen signifies the earth, from which it is said to grow. It also had skins of hair-cloth laid over it, and colored hides, to keep off both rain and heat. On the priests too he put adornment of every kind, both to amaze the people by the variety of the dress and to teach the priests themselves how they must beautify the soul and clothe it with the adornment of virtue. He calls the inner tunic hypodytēs and the outer tunic ependytēs; he ordered the latter to be hyacinth-colored and called it podērēs, since it reached to the tips of the feet. From it he hung golden bells and pomegranates, so that when the high priest entered the inaccessible sanctuary of the tabernacle and heard the sound they made, he might perform the liturgy with fear, bringing to mind the one who had commanded these things and who received the sacred rite that was offered. For this reason the long robe had the color of the air; it was hyacinth, so that by looking at it he might be lifted up. On his head lay a turban imitating heaven. A band, which the Seventy called mitra, covered his forehead; it had in its middle a golden plate bearing inscribed the unutterable name of God, which the Hebrews call the tetragram. God the Master, training the people in reverence, showed this in a riddle: “You shall engrave on it,” he says, “Holiness of the Lord.” He also ordered an over-garment to be made for him, which the Seventy called epōmis; in the books of Kingdoms we find it named ephod, according to the Hebrew language. It had on each shoulder two precious stones with the names of the tribes engraved on them. On the breast was the so-called logion, covering the rational heart. It too had twelve stones fitted to it, of different colors; through these, when a war was joined, either victory or defeat was shown, as the history of Kingdoms teaches. For when the foreigners marched against Israel, Saul did not dare to draw up for battle until he saw the signs of victory: “Bring the ephod,” he says. Then, learning of the victory, he added, “Draw in the ephod,” and so he armed the people. For this reason the God of the universe, having said, “And you shall put the oracle of judgment on Aaron's breast, and join it to the shoulder-piece,” added: “and you shall put on it the Manifestation and the Truth.” He called the signs given from it “Manifestation,” and the infallibility of the signs “Truth.” One must know, however, that since the people of that time were rather gross and unable to reach intelligible things, the all-wise Master procured their benefit through bodily symbols. We understand by the oracle the contemplation of intelligible things, and by the shoulder-piece the practice of virtue; and in the fitting together and joining of the oracle and the shoulder-piece we take the harmony of faith and good action. And the shoulder-piece's being put on first, and the oracle then joined to it, means that good action is the foundation of contemplation.

Why did the priests lay their hands on the victims before sacrificing them? Not on all the victims, but on those offered for themselves, and especially those offered for sin. On the others the offerers themselves laid their hands. This is a symbol of the victim's filling the place of the offerer, receiving slaughter on his behalf. One must note that for the high priest a calf was offered, and again a calf for the whole people; for a ruler a he-goat, and for each individual a she-goat. For the male suits the ruler, and the female the one who is ruled, since from the beginning God subjected the woman to Adam. The calf sacrificed for sin was burned outside the camp; for this reason Christ the Master too, as the divine Apostle says, suffered outside the gate, and set the truth upon the type. To the altar was offered the omentum; this is what it means by “the fat on the belly, and the two kidneys, and the fat on them, and the lobe of the liver,” which the other translators called the “appendage.” These are riddles of the passions within us. The fat covering the belly signifies the disease of gluttony; the kidneys, the pleasures below the belly; and the lobe of the liver, the spirited part, for the gall bladder is joined to it. He commands these to be consecrated, and their wicked activities to be made, as it were, dead. Of the ram of consecration he ordered the right shoulder to be offered, commanding them to offer practical virtue, which is right and pleasing to God. The bread, the cake, and the libation of wine indicate the fruits growing from the earth, whose firstfruits it is holy to offer to God.

What does “it is a burnt offering for a fragrant odor to the Lord” mean? He teaches divine things through human ones. Since we delight in fragrances, he named the sacred rite performed according to the law a fragrant odor. That one must not attend to the bare letter is taught both by the nature of God, for it is incorporeal, and by the foul smell of burning bones; for what smells worse than they? The other translators, however, put “of good pleasure” instead of “of fragrance.”

Why did he command the priest to take the right shoulder and the breast from each sacrifice of salvation that was offered? By the breast he requires of the priest the rational and the contemplative; for the breast is the covering of the heart. By the right shoulder he requires right action. For faith is not enough for salvation; it needs works for perfection.

What is the hin? A Hebrew measure of wine and oil. It holds, as Josephus says, two Attic choes. In these matters one must believe him, since he knew the measures of the nation precisely.

Legislating about the Sabbaths he said, “For it is a sign between me and the sons of Israel throughout your generations.” How then shall we understand this? Just as, when giving circumcision to Abraham, he said, “And it shall be a sign between me and you,” so too, legislating about the Sabbath, he said, “For it is a sign between me and the sons of Israel throughout your generations.” The newness of their way of life always kept the memory of the lawgiver flourishing, and separated them from the other nations. For just as seals mark out flocks and herds, so the distinctive features of the Hebrews' way of life both separated them from the others and taught them to wait upon the lawgiver.

Why did Aaron carve the calf for the people? One must look for the aim of what was done. Examining it in this way, we shall find him not wholly without excuse. When his brother had spent forty days on the summit of the mountain, and the people went mad and set out to return to Egypt, he first tried to bridle their impulse with words. When he saw them disobedient, he asked for the women's gold ornaments, setting passion against passion, the love of adornment and of money against the madness of superstition. But not even this device quenched their frenzy; hence he was forced to carve the calf. And though he had such an aim, he needed the divine love for humankind to escape punishment. The most divine Moses showed this in Deuteronomy: “For I prayed,” he says, “to the Lord my God for Aaron my brother, and he did not die.”

How should “And now let me alone, and, being angered with wrath against them, I will destroy them, and I will make you a great nation” be understood? The word shows both God's impassibility and his love for humankind. One who acts in anger is annoyed even with those who intercede; but God said, “Let me alone, and, being angered with wrath against them, I will destroy them.” No one waits for intercessors in order to be angry, but in order to be appeased. So he said “Let me alone” in the sense of “Stop me.” For since the great Moses did not know of the people's lawlessness, God both made it known to him and roused him to intercede. “I will make you a great nation” foreshadows what concerns us; for what did not happen then has happened after the appearing of our Savior. The lawgiver, even though God had said that he was sufficient to intercede for the people, did not think himself able to stop God's wrath; hence he brought forward the names of the patriarchs as a suppliant's branch, reminded God of the oaths made to them, and begged that the covenants made with them be confirmed.

Why did he break the tablets? He judged the people unworthy of the divine legislation. Since the tablets had the form of a dowry contract, and the bride had turned aside to adultery before the bridal chamber, he very fittingly tore up the dowry contract. One must note that on that occasion the God of the universe, accepting the supplication, postponed the punishment; but he added, “On whatever day I visit, I will bring upon them all their sin.” This resembles what the Apostle said: “Not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But by your hardness and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will repay each according to his works.” The lawgiver, hearing that the God of the universe would not consent to be with them because of their hardness and resistance, but would set an angel over them, asked to know who had been entrusted with their care, and begged not to be given a fellow-servant as leader, but that the Master himself would lead them. When the good God promised to grant him this favor too, he, drunk with a praiseworthy love, longed for things beyond human reach and desired to see the invisible nature; but he learned that it is impossible to see that substance. “For no one has ever seen God,” according to the Lord's word. But the divine dispensations and operations (for this is how one should understand God's “back parts”) can be contemplated by those who, like Moses, are perfect in virtue; and not even by them at random, but by those placed on the rock by God himself. The rock signifies the firmness and steadfastness of faith; and so too does the cleft of the rock, which indicates the eye of faith, contemplating what is inaccessible and invisible to the eyes of sense.

What does the veil placed on the lawgiver's face signify? We have the Apostle's interpretation: “For to this day,” he says, “whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart, not being lifted, because it is abolished in Christ; but whenever one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.” For just as the lawgiver's face was then filled with divine glory, and the radiance sent out from it, brighter than lightning, did not allow those who met him to look at him, but forced them either to turn their faces elsewhere or to shut their eyes, and for this reason he always used the veil when speaking to the people but had his face bare when he turned to God; so the Jews, attending to the letter of the law, do not see the glory but see only the veil. But when they come to the grace of the all-holy Spirit, they are freed from the veil and behold the glory with which Moses was filled. The blessed Paul says this too: “And we all, with unveiled face beholding the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, as from the Lord, the Spirit.” For just as clear mirrors take the impression of those who look into them, so pure hearts receive the glory of God. That is why the Lord said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” And just as Judas, having received the devil, imprinted his wickedness in himself, so the one who approaches divine grace is illumined by the rays that come from it. And just as one who sits in darkness becomes dark, while one in the sun becomes like the sun and full of light, so the one who waits upon God receives godlike features.

Where did they get the incorruptible wood? The boards were ten cubits long; it is likely, then, that the wealthier among them had brought them from Egypt when they came out. The precious stones, the gold, the silver, and the bronze they took from the Egyptians when they departed; for according to the divine command, “a woman asked of her neighbor and of her fellow-lodger vessels of silver and gold, and clothing, and they despoiled the Egyptians.” That is why the God of the universe called what was offered firstfruits, as the choicest portion of the spoils.

What gift did Bezalel and his companions receive? Wisdom in master-building. For there is a wisdom of weaving, a wisdom of farming, and a wisdom of medicine; and each of these is a gift of God, given to human beings for their use.

Why did God command Moses to set up the tabernacle on the new moon of the first month? Because it was at this season that he created the creation. The sprouting of the trees bears witness to this account: “Let the earth sprout,” he says, “the green plant, sowing seed according to kind and according to likeness, and the fruit tree bearing fruit, whose seed is in it according to likeness, according to kind, on the earth.” At the beginning of spring the meadows bloom, the crops wave, and the trees put forth fruit. For this reason too he freed Israel from slavery to the Egyptians at this season; and Gabriel the archangel brought the holy Virgin the good news of the extraordinary birth. At this season too Christ the Master underwent the saving passion. Very fittingly, then, God the Master of the universe commanded the tabernacle to be set up on the first of the first month: both because it was an image of the whole world, and so as to prepare for the feast of the Passover, which the law required the Jews to celebrate first. Then too they were going to celebrate this feast in the desert for the first time; for it was the second year after their release from slavery.

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.”

How should it be understood that leprosy arose in garments? God brought many such chastisements on them. Indeed, about leprous houses too he said this: “When you enter the land of the Canaanites, which I am giving you, and I put a plague of leprosy in the houses of the land you possess,” and so on. By these he teaches that they were plagues sent by God, coming now upon garments and now upon houses. These show God's ineffable love for humankind; for when human beings sinned, he brought the plagues upon garments and houses, offering healing through these to those who owned them. The house of Israel resembles the leprous house: often the offenders were taken out of it like leprous stones, now by the Assyrians, now by the Babylonians, at another time by the Macedonians. But since they had an ingrained leprosy, the lawgiver commanded the house to be torn down completely. Unclean, then, are those who enter their synagogues, as entering a leprous house.

What do the two little birds offered for the leper who is being cleansed signify? This contains the type of the saving passion. For just as one of them was sacrificed, and the other, dipped in the blood of the one sacrificed, was set free, so for leprous humanity Christ the Master was crucified, the flesh receiving death, and the divinity making the suffering of the humanity its own. And just as the leper, sprinkled with the blood of the slaughtered bird mixed with pure water by means of cedar wood, hyssop, and spun scarlet, was shown bright and clean, so one who believes in Christ the Savior and is cleansed by the water of all-holy baptism casts off the stains of sins. The cedar wood is a symbol of the impassible divinity, for this wood does not rot; the spun scarlet, of the humanity composed of soul and body; and the hyssop, of the warmth and fragrance of the all-holy Spirit; for through these the baptized are freed from the leprosy of the soul. The kotylē of oil signifies the spiritual myrrh. The oil smeared on the right ear, the right hand, and the right foot shows that the hearing is set apart for right words, and the hand and the foot for right actions; and poured on the head, it shows the dedication of the rational part. The one who remained leprous lived outside the camp, as one who sins without repentance is cast out of the church.

Why does he call a man with a discharge unclean? I have already said that through natural things he teaches things of the will, and teaches by them how very grievous the latter are. If a flow that occurs by nature is unclean, much more is unlawful lust. He also teaches us again to avoid intercourse with such people; for he said that one who comes near a man with a discharge is unclean. That none of the things that happen by nature is truly unclean, the law itself shows. If a man with a discharge touches an earthen vessel, he commands it to be broken; but if a bronze or wooden one, to be scoured with water. These too should have been broken like the earthen ones, if the one to whom this affliction happened were really unclean. So too he says that one who has a nocturnal emission is unclean, and those who are joined by the law of marriage, although he himself laid down the law about marriage, and that as the first law: “For this reason,” he said, “a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” How, then, does he call unclean one who has intercourse according to the law? It is clear that he teaches moderation even in lawful intercourse, and trains them to make their union for the sake of begetting children and not for love of pleasure. For this reason he calls those who have intercourse unclean and commands them to be purified, so that the trouble of purification might prevent continual intercourse. But the divine Apostle writes to the perfect: “Marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled; but the sexually immoral and adulterers God will judge.”

Why does he call unclean a woman who discharges the excess blood according to nature? What we have said about the man with a discharge we say about her too. Besides this, it is so that no one might have intercourse with such women. For some say that from such intercourse both disfigurement and leprosy are produced, since that excess harms the bodies being formed. For this reason he says that one who has intercourse with such a woman is unclean. He taught the reasons for such laws briefly, saying: “And you shall make the sons of Israel reverent concerning their uncleannesses, and they shall not die because of their uncleanness, by defiling my tabernacle that is among them.” If he said that involuntary things defile, it is clear that voluntary things are much more accursed. These laws were very suitable for them, who were most lustful and lewd; for transgressing them was no great matter, and keeping them made them more fit for perfect things.

When did the high priest enter the holy of holies? On the day of atonement, which God commanded to be held on the tenth of the seventh month. “The Lord said to Moses,” it says, “Speak to Aaron your brother, and let him not go at any time into the holy place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark of the testimony, and he shall not die; for I will appear in a cloud upon the mercy seat.” From this it is clear that God the Master made his appearing on the mercy seat; and, showing his own goodness, he was seen not in darkness and smoke and fire, as by Israel, but in a luminous cloud. He also taught the manner of the sacrifices with which the high priest had to venture into the inner sanctuary. He commanded him to sacrifice a calf for sin and offer a ram as a whole burnt offering, and to offer these for himself; and for the whole people to take two he-goats for sin and one ram for a whole burnt offering. He also commanded the goats to be divided by lot, and one to be sacrificed and the other sent away into the desert. Some, understanding this foolishly, thought there was a demon called Apopompaios (the Averter), since he said, “One for the Lord and one for the sending-away.” This they supposed out of great simplicity. For how could he who said, “You shall have no other gods besides me, and you shall not bow down to or serve another god besides me,” command an equal sacrifice to be assigned to a demon? They ought to have noticed that he commanded the goat that was released to be offered to himself as well: “You shall take the living goat before the Lord,” it says, “to make atonement over it, to send it away for the sending-away into the desert.” This shows that the goat itself was called apopompaios, as being sent away into the desert. What follows shows this too: “And the goat shall bear their iniquities upon itself into the untrodden land.” Symmachus too translated apopompaios thus: “for the goat that goes away, so as to send it away for the sending-away”; and Aquila: “for the goat released into the desert.” It was not sent, then, to some god or demon; both were offered to God, and while one was sacrificed, the other, taking up the sins of the people, was sent away into the desert. For just as in the case of the leper being cleansed, one bird was sacrificed and the other, dipped in its blood, was released, so for the sins of the people two goats were offered: one was sacrificed and the other sent away. These again are types of Christ the Master, the two animals being taken to represent not two persons but two natures. Since it was not possible to sketch in one goat both what is mortal and what is immortal in Christ the Master (for the goat is only mortal), he necessarily commanded two to be brought, so that the one sacrificed might prefigure the passibility of the flesh, while the one released might show the impassibility of the divinity. So too the blessed David, foretelling the passion of Christ the Master, his resurrection, and his ascension into heaven, said: “O God, when you went out before your people, when you passed through the desert, the earth shook, and the heavens poured down.” We have been taught that when Christ the Master was crucified, the earth shook and the rocks were split, and heaven, through the darkened sun, announced the excess of the impiety. The desert is a type of death; for this reason he said, “when you passed through the desert.” Let no one suppose it unfitting that goats should prefigure the Savior's passion, since the great John called him a lamb; let him consider that he offered himself not only for the righteous but also for sinners. The Master himself likened the company of sinners to kids: “He will set the lambs on his right,” he said, “and the kids on his left.” And in the law a kid was offered for sin. The Lord himself also called the bronze serpent a type of himself: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert,” he says, “so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may not perish but have eternal life.” If the type of the goats is unfitting, much more is that of the serpent. These things, then, taught beforehand the salvation of the world. The Jews, as infants, he encouraged by the goat's carrying their sin away into the desert; for it reminded them of the lawlessness they had often dared in the desert, and of the Master's ineffable love for humankind, through which they escaped the punishments they deserved and entered the promised land. Having commanded these things to be done so, he also teaches how the high priest should enter the holy of holies: “Aaron shall bring the calf for sin that is for himself, and make atonement for himself and his house; and he shall slaughter the calf for sin that is his own, and take the censer full of coals of fire from the altar that is before the Lord, and fill his hands with finely compounded incense, and bring it inside the veil, and put the incense on the fire before the Lord; and the vapor of the incense shall cover the mercy seat that is over the testimonies, and he shall not die.” It is clear from this that the altar of incense lay outside the veil; for if it had been inside, he would not have been commanded to take the coals into the censer and to throw the incense on them inside the veil. The blessed Luke too taught us this when narrating the story of Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist; for he too entered the holy of holies at this time and enjoyed the angelic vision. He also commanded him to sprinkle with his finger seven times before the mercy seat the blood of both the calf and the goat. Since life revolves in seven days, and every day, so to speak, we commit offences small or great, the sprinkling of blood was offered equal in number to the days, for the offences committed in them. He says that this cleanses not only them but also the tabernacle: “He shall make atonement for the holy place from the uncleannesses of the sons of Israel and from their wrongdoings in all their sins; and so he shall do for the tent of testimony established among them in the midst of their uncleanness.” He commanded that no one be present while the high priest performed this liturgy. He also gives the time at which these things must be done: “On the tenth of the month,” it says, “you shall afflict your souls, and you shall do no work, the native and the proselyte who sojourns among you. For on this day he shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and you shall be cleansed. It shall be a Sabbath of Sabbaths, a rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls; a perpetual statute.” He called it a Sabbath of Sabbaths, as one says holy of holies; for this feast is far more venerable than the Sabbath. By “affliction” he meant fasting. Then he adds: “It shall be done once a year, as the Lord commanded Moses.” This too prefigures our Savior's dispensation in the flesh. For just as the high priest entered the holy of holies once a year and performed this liturgy, so Christ the Master, having once endured the saving passion, ascended into heaven, having obtained eternal redemption, as the divine Apostle says.

Why does he forbid animals for eating to be slaughtered far from the tabernacle? He knew the impiety of some, and that they would offer sacrifices to demons. He commanded, then, that anyone who wished to slaughter a calf, a sheep, or a goat should bring it to the door of the tabernacle, pour out the blood, and take the meat home; and he commanded that one who did not do this should be charged as guilty of murder: “Blood,” he says, “shall be reckoned to that man; he has shed blood; that soul shall be destroyed from its people.” That the law has the aim I have stated, what follows shows: “The priest,” he says, “shall offer the fat for a fragrant odor to the Lord. And they shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to the vain things after which they play the harlot. It shall be a perpetual statute for you throughout your generations.” This law prevails among the Jews to the present; for the priest slaughters the animals that are to be eaten. He also forbade eating blood and taught the reason: “For the soul of all flesh is its blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for its blood shall make atonement in place of its soul. Therefore I have said to the sons of Israel, No soul among you shall eat blood, and the proselyte who sojourns among you shall not eat blood.” He means: “Just as you have an immortal soul, so the irrational animal has its blood in place of a soul. For this reason he commands the irrational creature's soul, that is, its blood, to be offered in place of your immortal and rational soul. If you eat it, you eat a soul; for it fills the place of a rational soul.” That is why he called the eating of it murder. For this reason he also forbids eating animals that have died, since their blood has not been separated from the body.

Some find fault with the laws about marriages, saying that God forbade things that never happen at all: “Who,” they say, “ever consented to have intercourse with his own mother? Or who ever had intercourse with an animal?” God would not have forbidden what no one had dared; and that this is so, the preface of this law bears witness. For he said: “You shall not do according to the practices of Egypt, in which you sojourned, and you shall not do according to the practices of the land of Canaan, into which I am bringing you, and you shall not walk in their laws.” Having said this, he teaches what they had dared, and forbids such conduct. That many such things are dared, the Persians too bear witness to the present day, joining themselves by the law of marriage not only to sisters but also to mothers and daughters; and many dare the other lawless acts as well.

What does “You shall not give any of your seed to serve a ruler, and you shall not profane my holy name; I am the Lord” mean? The Hebrew has “Molech,” and the other translators put this too. This was an idol. That is why God says through the prophet: “Did you offer me victims and sacrifices in the desert forty years, sons of Israel? And you took up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god Rephan, the figures you made to worship them.” He forbids, then, offering children as temple servants to idols; or, as some say, giving children to foreign rulers to be their servants or bodyguards, so that they would not share their impiety.

What does “that the land may not loathe you when you defile it, as it loathed the nations before you” mean? “May it not abhor you,” he says, “as it abhorred the Canaanites”; that is, “Just as I gave them over to total destruction for their many transgressions and gave the land to you, so I will punish you if you do the same.”

How should “You shall not breed your cattle with another yoke, and you shall not sow your vineyard with a different kind” and “You shall not put on yourself a counterfeit garment woven of two kinds” be understood? I have often said that through perceptible things he teaches intelligible ones. He forbids the mating of different kinds, such as the horse and the ass, so that unlawful intercourse might not pass from the irrational to the rational. For this reason too he calls the garment woven of wool and linen counterfeit, teaching never to pursue contrary actions. That he is not calling the garment counterfeit, but indicating the action through it, the coverings of the tabernacle bear witness, made of various threads. So too must the law about the vineyard be understood. And the Apostle forbids partnership with unbelievers, saying, “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.”

What does “You shall not make a sisoē of the hair of your head, nor mar the appearance of your beard; and you shall not make cuttings on your body for a soul, nor make tattooed letters on yourselves” mean? Some have interpreted sisoē as hair curled by art. But I think the law forbids something else. The Greeks used not to cut the crowns of children's heads but to leave locks there, and after a time to dedicate them to the demons. They also used to shave their beards when they mourned and to cut their cheeks in honor of the dead. And they pricked certain parts of the body with needles and rubbed in ink, in the service of the demons. These things, then, the divine law forbids.

What is a ventriloquist? Some, worked on by demons, deceived many of the foolish, as though they were prophesying; the Greeks called them belly-diviners, since the demon seemed to speak from within.

Why does he legislate about the marriages of the priests in particular? The priest had to be a model of chastity, and his race had to remain pure, giving those who wished to revile no occasion for insult. That is why the divine Apostle too directs that one who ministers to God should have a good testimony even from outsiders, “so that he may not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.” For this reason he commands that an Israelite woman who commits sexual immorality be put to death, but that the priest's daughter who dares the like be burned. Because of the fault-finding of the Jews, he does not allow even those who have some bodily blemish to minister, forbidding through involuntary afflictions those of the will. For blindness of the eyes hints at the lack of knowledge; the cutting off of an ear, at disobedience; the removal of the nose, at the removal of discernment; the cutting off of a hand, at the idleness of the practical part; and the others must be understood in the same way. For this reason too he commands that the victims offered be whole of limb, training the offerers through what is offered to keep the activities of the soul healthy. Among the others he excludes the castrated man and the one with crushed testicles; for one who cares for the divine service must be fruitful in good things.

Why did he direct the firstborn of the flocks to be offered on the eighth day? He knew the impiety and the gluttony of some, and that if they saw that the animal was well fed and handsome, they would perhaps keep it and offer another; for this reason he commanded it to be offered while newborn.

What does “You shall not eat roasted new green grain until you offer the gifts to your God” mean? The land of Palestine, being warmer, bears early fruits. He commands, then, that no one should first pluck new ears, roast them, and eat them, until they have offered God a sheaf of them. He commands this to be offered on the day of the Passover, and then seven weeks to be counted from it, and the feast of Pentecost to be celebrated. For he said: “And you shall count for yourselves from the day after the Sabbath, from the day you offer the sheaf of the set-apart offering, seven full weeks.” The feast of Pentecost was a memorial of the entry into the land of promise; for then they both sowed and reaped, whereas in the desert they ate the manna brought from heaven. Having taught in this way how the feasts of the Passover and Pentecost must be celebrated, he teaches also what must be done in the seventh month. On the new moon he commands them to celebrate the feast of Trumpets; these reminded them of the trumpets on Mount Sinai, when the God of the universe gave the law: “The sound of the trumpet,” it says, “resounded loudly.” On the tenth of the seventh month he commands them to fast, for he calls this day the day of atonement: “You shall humble your souls,” he says, “from the ninth of the month in the evening until the tenth of the month in the evening; you shall keep your Sabbaths. And every soul that is not humbled on it, that soul shall be destroyed from its people.” But the Jews on this very day are not gloomy; they laugh and play and dance, and use licentious words and deeds, fighting directly against the law. On the fifteenth he legislates that they celebrate the feast of Tabernacles, not until the seventh day, as with the other feasts, but he commands them to add the eighth day to the seven: “And the eighth day,” he says, “shall be a holy convocation for you, and you shall offer whole burnt offerings to the Lord; it is the closing; you shall do no servile work.” The closing signifies the end of the feasts; and the feast of Tabernacles reminded them of their life in the desert. The lawgiver said this too: “For I made the sons of Israel dwell in tents when I brought them out of the land of Egypt.” For this reason he directed them to adorn their houses with branches of trees; and among the other branches he included the chaste-tree, as a sign of chastity and a quencher of pleasure. For they say that, whether eaten or spread beneath one, it quenches the flame of pleasures. But he did not command them to use the branches of the chaste-tree medicinally, but through its name to instill the memory of chastity.

How should “Whoever curses God shall bear sin, and whoever names the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death” be understood? Someone was caught blaspheming the God of the universe, and no law had yet been written about blasphemy; for this reason the lawgiver commanded him to be kept in custody. The next day Moses asked God the Master what the accursed man should suffer. He commanded him to be stoned, those who had heard the blasphemy throwing the stones first. And he laid down the law about blasphemy. He called the falsely named god by the same name “God”; and he said that one who reviles him sins, but did not judge him deserving of punishment. It is not the pious man who blasphemes the falsely named god who sins, but the one who believes in him and yet reviles him; for he blasphemes what he reveres. He called such blasphemy sin, then, not because of the worth of the one blasphemed, but because of the opinion of the blasphemer; for he blasphemes him not as a falsely named god but as a true one. But the one who blasphemes the true God he commanded to be killed with stones. Very fittingly he joined the law about murder to the laws about blasphemy; for the blasphemer too, unable to kill, strikes the maker with his tongue.

Why did he command an eye to be put out for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and the like? He legislated this not so that they would suffer these things, but so that they would not do them; for the fear of suffering prevented the deed.

Why does he forbid sowing the land in the seventh year? By this law he chastises their insatiability. Since, desiring more, they sowed continually, and the land, never resting, bore exhausted crops, he directed them to leave the land unsown in the seventh year; and he forbade them to gather or reap what grew of itself, training them in kindness, for he commanded that widows, orphans, and proselytes from outside should share the fruits with them. Besides this, he brings about something else too: in this year there was a release of debts and freedom for Hebrew slaves. For this reason too he legislated that the Jubilee be a year of rest; the name signifies freedom and release. They call the fiftieth year the Jubilee: “You shall count seven weeks of years,” he says, “and you shall proclaim with the sound of the trumpet in all your land on the tenth of the month, on the day of atonement”; on which day, he means, “I am propitiated toward you and forgive your offences; on this day announce the year of release.” Then he commands that in this year the one who sold a field should take it back, and likewise the houses in the fields; that debts be cancelled; and that Hebrew servants be set free. Since some were likely to press their debtors as the year of release drew near, he forbade them to do this too. And so that they would not be anxious about the food they needed, since they would not farm the land in the years of release, he encouraged them with generous promises. He promised that in the sixth year he would supply not only a double but even a triple yield, enough to feed them in the sixth and seventh years and lasting even to the eighth: “You shall sow,” he says, “in the eighth year, and eat old produce until the ninth year; until its produce comes, you shall eat the oldest of the old.” Then he strengthens the law by the memory of his lordship: “For the land is mine,” he says, “because you are proselytes and sojourners before me”; that is, “I gave it to you, and therefore I legislate as its Master.”

What does “Ten women shall bake their bread in one oven” mean? To those who gape after the land he both legislates and threatens. To those who live lawfully he promises the fruitfulness of the land; and again, to transgressors he threatens barrenness of the land, invasion by enemies, and extreme poverty. He shows this here too: “So great a poverty will overtake you that ten women will make their bread in one oven, because of the scarcity of necessities.” For he added this: “And you shall eat and not be satisfied.”

What does “Then the land shall keep its Sabbaths and enjoy its Sabbaths all the days of its desolation” mean? What follows is its interpretation; for he said, “And you shall be in the land of your enemies.” They continued seventy years in slavery in Babylon. From the reign of Saul to the captivity, four hundred and ninety years are counted, and a seventh of these is seventy. This, then, is what he means: that the land will remain unsown and unploughed for seventy years while you live in a foreign land, since along with the other laws you transgressed the commandment of the Sabbath too. For he added this: “And the land shall keep the Sabbaths which it did not keep when you lived in it.” He added another threat too: “And on those of you who are left I will bring cowardice into their heart in the land of their enemies; and the sound of a leaf blown about will chase them, and they will flee as men fleeing from war,” and so on. This prophecy too was fulfilled. In the Chaldean siege many were killed in the engagements, many perished by famine, and those who were enslaved were deported to Babylon; and those who escaped the hands of the enemy fled to Egypt, fearing the attack of the Chaldeans. The prophecy of the most divine Jeremiah teaches us this clearly. After the threats, however, he also promised good things, and announced the return from captivity, not because of their worth but because of the piety of their ancestors. For he said: “And I will remember the covenant of Jacob, and the covenant of Isaac, and the covenant of Abraham; and I will remember their former covenant, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery, before all the nations, to be their God; I am the Lord.” By these he taught the reasons for his love for humankind: “Because of the promises to their fathers,” he means, “I bear with their lawlessness; and because all the nations have learned through the extraordinary miracles that I care especially for them, and they are called my people.” He mentioned Jacob first, since he alone was ancestor of all of them; for Isaac was ancestor of the Idumeans too, and Abraham of the Ishmaelites and of the descendants of Keturah. Beginning, then, from below, he went up in order to Abraham, with whom he had made the covenants from the beginning.

What does “Whoever vows a vow so as to give the price of his vow to the Lord” mean? He calls the promise a vow, which many call a pledge. This law one can find kept even now among some barbarians; for most of the Nomads, I mean the descendants of Ishmael, weigh out silver against their newborn infants and bring it to God. God legislated about this; and knowing, as God, that some of those who promised to give a price for themselves to God would transgress their promise by lessening the price, he commanded the price of a male to be fifty didrachms and of a female thirty, this for those in their prime, the young and the old being excepted. For he defined the middle age as from twenty to sixty years; for those younger and older than these he fixed another price. The poor he left to the judgment of the priests, so that they would fix the prices according to their means. He forbids those who offer dedicated animals to exchange them, and to keep them from doing this he imposes on them the compulsion of a penalty: “If he does exchange it,” he says, “both it and its exchange shall be holy.” He commanded the priest to fix the price of unclean cattle, and commanded the same to be done for a house and for a field. He also defined the amount of the didrachm; for he commanded it to weigh twenty obols; some of the translators called the didrachm a stater. And what had been devoted to God he commanded not to be redeemed.

Why did God order the people to be counted? To show the truth of his own promise. For when he made the promise to Abraham he said, “I will surely multiply your offspring like the stars of heaven and like the sand along the shore of the sea.” And he showed the truth of the promise: from the seventy-five who had gone down into Egypt, within a few years six hundred and three thousand five hundred and fifty men able to fight were counted, and that with the over-aged and the under-aged set apart, and the female sex as well, and the tribe of Levi, for that tribe was not counted with the others. Teaching this power of his, God the Master also said through the prophet Isaiah, “Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you in pain, for he was one, and I called him and blessed him and multiplied him.”

Why is the number of the Levites smaller? Because they were rulers, and rulers must be fewer than those they rule. Besides, they were exempt from fighting and attended only on the divine worship.

How then did the tribe of Judah surpass all the others in number, though it was royal? From the royal tribe one man reigned, but of the Levitical tribe all ministered, some serving as priests and others assisting them. And the royal tribe had to exceed in number, both because of the blessing of Christ the Master, for he was to spring from it according to the flesh, and so that the kings appointed from it would have sufficient support from their fellow tribesmen. Here too he ranged the priests with the royal tribe: for he set the tribe of Judah toward the rising sun and joined the priests with the ark to them. To Dan, however, he allotted the northern quarter: “For from the face of the north,” it says, “evils will be kindled upon all who inhabit the land.” We have said in the blessings of Jacob that the destroyer will be born of the tribe of Dan, who will call himself Christ but do the opposite of the name, and lay claim to what in no way belongs to him. And quite fittingly he assigned the east to Judah, since the divine prophets cry out concerning Christ the Master: “Behold a man, Dawn is his name”; and, “To those who fear me a sun of righteousness will rise, and healing in its wings”; and, “To those who sat in darkness and the shadow of death a light has dawned.”

What were the works of the priests, and what those of the Levites? The God of all himself teaches it. “For the Lord said,” it says, “to Moses: Take the tribe of Levi and set it before Aaron the priest, and they shall minister to him and keep his charges and the charges of the sons of Israel before the tent of witness, to do the works of the tent; and they shall keep all the vessels of the tent of witness and the charges of the sons of Israel, all the works of the tent. And you shall give the Levites to Aaron your brother and to his sons the priests; these are a gift given from the sons of Israel. And you shall appoint Aaron and his sons over the tent of witness, and they shall keep their priesthood and all that concerns the altar and what is within the veil; and the outsider who touches shall die.” From this, then, we have learned that the priests offered the sacrifices, while the Levites were appointed assistants of the priests and guardians of the tent. And in what follows he teaches what the clan of Kohath had to carry, what the clan of Gershon, and what that of Merari.

For what reason did God order the firstborn of the people to be counted? Since he had consecrated the whole tribe of Levi to the divine ministries and freed it from fighting, and it was likely that some of the others would be aggrieved, as if these had been preferred, God the Master persuades the aggrieved that he had ordered nothing unjust. “When,” he says, “the firstborn of the Egyptians were destroyed for your sake, your firstborn were saved. In return for them, then, I have allotted the Levitical tribe to my ministries; and in return for the firstborn of your cattle, the firstborn of the Levites.” And since the firstborn of the other tribes proved to be more than the Levites, he ordered that each of those beyond the equal number give five shekels to the priests, fixing the shekel at twenty obols and calling this measure “holy,” as set apart for divine things and not current among all. Elsewhere, however, he calls the twenty obols a didrachm; this didrachm was also demanded of the Lord, as a firstborn.

Why did he order hyacinth-blue coverings to be put on some of the sacred vessels, and purple on others? The coverings of the more precious ones were of hyacinth only. The colour hints at heaven; for this reason he ordered the things within the veil to be covered with hyacinth coverings, and those outside with purple as well, and the like. For heaven has no punishments, but the earth, because of transgressions of the laws, receives chastisements too. Purple signifies kingship; and God's kingship is divine, without beginning and indestructible. For this reason the things outside the tent were covered with both purple and hyacinth coverings. Taking forethought for the clan of Kohath, he ordered the priests first to go into the inner sanctuary and cover the ark and the other vessels with the coverings mentioned, and only then the clan of Kohath to carry them, so that they would not see what may not be touched or seen and suffer destruction from the extraordinary sight.

Whom does he call “unclean by reason of a soul”? The one who has touched a dead person or come near the bones of a corpse.

Why did he order these, and the lepers, and those with a discharge, to live outside the camp? Teaching great things through small ones. For if the one who touches a corpse is unclean, much more the one who has made a corpse by murder. And if the leper is unclean, much more the one who works the varied forms of wickedness. So too, through the man with a discharge, adultery is condemned: for if what is involuntary is loathsome, surely much more what is dared by choice.

What does “A man or woman who commits any of all the human sins” mean? He has called the lesser sins “human,” since, human nature being changeable, it is impossible to be free of all sins. “For no one,” it says, “is clean from filth, not even if his life is one day.” For this reason the divine David also cries, “Do not enter into judgment with your servant, for no one living will be justified before you.” For Christ the Master alone, both as man and as God, is blameless. Foreseeing this, the prophet Isaiah cried, “Who did no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth.” For this reason he also took up the sins of others, having none of his own. For it says, “He bears our sins and suffers pain for us.” And the great John: “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” This is why he is also “free among the dead,” as one who underwent death unjustly. The divine law, then, teaches how those who have committed moderate offences are to be healed. It commands the one who has done wrong in some dealings first to confess the sin, then to restore what was taken to the one wronged, adding a fifth to the principal. And if the wronged party should happen to end his life before the wrongdoer repents, he is to repay it to the next of kin. By “next of kin” he means the one related by family. The order of kinship is this: first a son, then a daughter, then the father's brother, then the grandfather's. If there is none of these, the nearest relative. And if no relative is found, he directed that what was mentioned be offered to God. For he said this: “If the man has no next of kin, so as to repay the trespass to him, the trespass repaid to the Lord shall be the priest's, besides the ram of atonement, by which he will make atonement for him.” He also ordered the priests to eat the firstfruits that were offered. For the Levites were the firstfruits of the people, and the high priests the firstfruits of the Levites; as firstfruits, then, they received the firstfruits.

Why was barley meal brought by the woman suspected of adultery? The Master himself has explained it: “For it is,” he said, “a sacrifice of jealousy, a sacrifice of remembrance, a sacrifice recalling sin.” Hence he ordered it to have neither oil nor frankincense, for it was deprived both of fragrance and of the light of righteousness. God the Master legislated that this be done because he knew their murderous disposition: so that they would not kill their wives on suspicion, he ordered the suspected woman to be brought to him, since he knows all things clearly, even what is done in secret. “For the priest,” it says, “shall bring the woman and set her before the Lord; and the priest shall take pure running water in an earthen vessel, and some of the earth on the floor of the tent of witness, and the priest shall take it and put it into the water; and the priest shall set the woman before the Lord and uncover the woman's head, and put on her hands the sacrifice of remembrance, the sacrifice of jealousy; and in the priest's hand shall be the water of proof that brings this curse.” He ordered all this to be done to frighten the suspected woman, so that, if she had sinned, she would confess and receive forgiveness through repentance. For this reason he commands that she be brought to God uncovered, teaching that all things are naked and laid bare before him and nothing we do escapes him. That he ordered this done to frighten her, what follows shows: “And the priest shall put her under oath and say to the woman: If no one has lain with you, if you have not transgressed to be defiled while under your own husband, be free from this water of proof that brings the curse. But if you have transgressed while under a husband, or have been defiled, or someone besides your husband has lain with you, may the Lord make you a curse and an oath in the midst of your people, when the Lord makes your thigh fall away and your belly swell.” He also ordered the woman to assent to the curse and say, “So be it, so be it”; and he ordered the curse to be written and wiped off into water and the woman to drink the water, but the sacrifice, that is, the barley meal, to be offered first. Then he teaches that if she is innocent she will be kept healthy, but if guilty and concealing it she will learn the force of the curse by experience, her belly bursting and her thigh falling away. For through the members by which the sin came, through them the punishment comes. The “oath” is to be understood thus: when someone suffers terrible and incurable things, some are accustomed to say when they swear, “May I not suffer what so-and-so has suffered.”

What does “Whoever makes a great vow to vow a purification to the Lord” mean? There are many kinds of promise. Some promised sacrifices, others money, others even themselves; others, for a set number of days, not to drink wine and not to cut the hair of the head. Such were those of whom the divine James said to the inspired Paul: “There are some who have a vow on themselves; take them and purify yourself with them, and pay their expenses,” that is, you provide the sacrifices offered for them according to the law, so as to dispel the suspicion. About these the law here gives directions, and it commands those who make this promise to abstain from vinegar, grapes and grape-skins all the days of the vow (he calls the promise a “vow”), and not to cut the hair of the head until the days are fulfilled that he vowed to the Lord. He calls “holy” the one who lets his hair grow, as one who has consecrated his hair to God. For this is what he said: “He who lets the hair of his head grow shall be holy all the days of his vow to the Lord,” that is: do not cut the hair you consecrated to God until you have brought your promise to its end. And he commands him not to approach a dead father, or brother, or anyone else. Even if, it says, someone dies suddenly and he happens to be present, he must remove all his hair, not on the first day only but on the seventh too, so that the hairs that escaped the razor and grew during the seven days may also be removed; then on the eighth day he is to offer two turtledoves, one for sin and the other as a whole burnt offering, and one lamb for trespass. From this we learn more precisely that he calls the offering for involuntary sins one “for trespass”: for what happened to this man was involuntary, since someone died suddenly and he incurred defilement. And he commands him to count the number of promised days from the beginning: “For the former days,” it says, “shall not be reckoned, because the head of his vow was defiled.” He also taught what sacrifices the one who has fulfilled the promise of purification ought to offer: a lamb for a whole burnt offering and a ewe-lamb for sin (the victims for sin are female, since sin is dared when the rational part grows slack), and also an unblemished ram for a peace offering and a basket of unleavened bread; then, as the sacrifice is performed, he is to put the hair on the sacrifice of the peace offering. The boiled shoulder, placed in the hands of the one who made the vow and taken by the priest, shows that the promised deed has been accomplished; for the boiled shoulder signifies a deed done. He did not legislate these things for nothing, but to teach care for exactness: not to make promises at random, and to fulfil what has been promised. Through them he also trains us to keep our sanctification undefiled; for whoever receives a stain needs cleansing from above and the removal of the defilements through repentance. This is what the blessed Paul said writing to the Galatians: “My little children, with whom I am again in labour until Christ is formed in you.” After this he teaches how the priests ought to bless, and that the divine name supplies blessing to those who approach. “For they shall put my name,” it says, “on the sons of Israel, and I the Lord will bless them.” He also gives the very words of the blessing: “The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face appear upon you and have mercy on you; the Lord lift up his face upon you and give you peace.” By these we are taught that one must first ask the divine gifts for those being blessed (this is what “bless you” means), and then that what is given be kept, for he added, “and keep you.” The second blessing foretells the appearing of our God and Saviour: “The Lord make his face appear,” it says, “upon you and have mercy on you”; for the economy of our God and Saviour in the flesh is full of mercy. Therefore he also granted us reconciliation with God; this is what the next blessing teaches: “The Lord lift up his face upon you and give you peace.” Of this peace the blessed Paul also said, “For he is our peace, who made both one and broke down the dividing wall of the fence, the enmity, in his flesh.” Having been taught these things about the blessing, and having related how he anointed the tent and what the tribal leaders brought, the prophet taught how he received with his ears the divine voice coming from the mercy seat. It rested on the ark and was covered by the wings of the cherubim. He did not write this out of vanity, but to teach that from there God the Master would show his own glory to the high priests who entered once a year, as far as human nature could see it.

Why, when he ordered the Levites to be sanctified, did he command that the whole body be stripped of hair? Hair is a symbol of deadness, for it is dead and feels no pain. He commands those who minister to God, then, to have true life and to have nothing dead or foul-smelling. This the inspired Paul also teaches us: “For I have been crucified with Christ,” he says; “it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me.” For I have consecrated myself, he means, to the divine energies.

Why does he command the Levites to minister from the twenty-fifth year up to the fiftieth? Because the first age does not have full discernment of good and evil, and the last has a weaker body. So he excludes both youth and old age: the one for the immaturity of the soul, the other for the weakness of the body.

For what reason could those unclean by reason of a soul not celebrate the Passover? The reason is given with their excuse. Being in mourning, and having given some of their family to burial, they were unclean according to the direction of the law. Fearing, then, that in fulfilling the commandment of the Passover they would transgress the one laid down about the unclean and fall into a conflict of laws, they told the lawgiver the reason. But not even he dared to answer until he had asked the Master. For Joshua son of Nun fell into this fault, receiving the Gibeonites before asking. God the Master therefore ordered that those who fell into this defilement, or lived far away, and for that reason could not celebrate the Passover on the fourteenth of the first month, should celebrate the Passover on the fourteenth of the second month; and he ordered the proselytes too to share in the same. “For there shall be one law for you,” it says, “both for the proselyte and for the native of the land.” Through these he foreshadows the calling of the nations.

How is “You shall sound the trumpet with a signal when you set out; and when you gather the assembly, you shall sound the trumpet, but not with a signal” to be understood? The all-wise Paul says, “If the trumpet gives an indistinct sound, who will prepare for battle?” There were, then, differences of sound: one signalled a halt, another a march; and one trumpet sounding summoned the leaders, two the people and the leaders. Sounding the trumpet was assigned to the priests alone, since the trumpet announced the summons of God. For he added this: “And if you go out to war in your land against the adversaries who oppose you, you shall signal with the trumpets, and you shall be remembered before the Lord and be saved from your enemies. And on the days of your gladness, and at your feasts, and at your new moons, you shall sound the trumpets over the whole burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings, and it shall be a remembrance for you before your God; I am the Lord your God.” For since God, when he gave the law on Mount Sinai, struck their ears with a very great sound of trumpets, he reminds them of that appearing through the sound of the trumpets. Hence the blessed David said in song, “Sound the trumpet at the new moon, on the well-marked day of your feast.” Through these things we too are taught, when we gather the whole assembly of the people, to use trumpets but not signals: for because of the uninitiated we speak about the divine mysteries without plain signs, but when they have been dismissed we teach the initiated clearly.

Why did the divine Moses, who called his father-in-law Jethro in Exodus, now call him Raguel? He had two names, like Jacob and Israel, like Simon Peter, like Thomas who is called Didymus, like Thaddaeus who is also Lebbaeus. His son was Hobab.

What was the people's grumbling? They resented the toil of the journey.

For what reason does he bring punishments at once on those who sin? The law was at its beginning. The rest, then, had to be brought to their senses by the punishment of the transgressors, for fear suits beginners. Yet kindness was joined to the punishment: when they repented, they enjoyed his goodwill. Thus, when the fire sent by God had consumed part of the camp and then all ran together in supplication, the lawgiver asked forgiveness and the loving Lord granted it. That the punishments were necessarily brought on them, what follows bears witness. For immediately after the punishment stopped, they revived the memory of Egypt, and of the onions and the garlic and the rest, the desire for which the passion of gluttony had kindled. Quite fittingly, then, the writer set God's generosity beside their ingratitude, relating the account of the manna and that it supplied not only the need for bread but also for relish: “For they ground it,” he says, “in the mill, and pounded it in the mortar, and boiled it in the pot, and made cakes of it.” And when they lamented, God the Master was angry, and the prophet was distressed and cried out, saying, “Why have you afflicted your servant, to lay the burden of this people on me? Did I conceive this people in the womb, or did I give birth to them, that you say to me, ‘Take them in your bosom, as a nurse would take a suckling child,’ into the land which you swore to their fathers?” By these words he showed their immaturity and childishness; for he likened them to a suckling child, which can do nothing else but only wants to suck milk. And since the words were those of a man greatly distressed (and what follows has the same sense), he is taught by God the Master that he governs the people not by human power but by divine grace. For he said to him: “Gather for me seventy men from the elders of Israel, whom you yourself know to be elders of the people and their scribes, and you shall bring them to the tent of witness; and they shall stand there with you, and I will come down and speak there with you, and I will take some of the spirit that is upon you and put it upon them; and they shall bear with you the burden of this people, and you shall not bear them alone.” By these words the lawgiver learned that he had received grace sufficient for his task. That is why he said, “I will take some of the spirit that is upon you.” He did not say this because he was short of some other power or grace, but to teach Moses that he had received power sufficient for the need. That in giving to the seventy he did not diminish Moses' grace, the facts bear witness: for he went on governing and working wonders just as he had done before. For as someone who lights countless lamps from one wick neither diminishes it and yet shares its light with them, so the God of all, in giving the seventy a share of Moses' grace, did not lessen the grace given to him. This we see happening now as well. For many tens of thousands of people baptized by one priest and receiving the divine gift do not diminish the priest's grace; and very many ordained by the high priests and receiving priestly rank do not lessen the gift of the one who ordains. The Master, however, confirmed his servant's choice, for he said to him, “Choose those whom you yourself know.”

Why did the prophet doubt when God promised to give meat? Because he was not only a prophet but also a man. But he was taught by God the Master not to hesitate when God promises. For he said to him, “Will the hand of the Lord not suffice? Now you shall know whether my word will overtake you or not.” In promising to give, however, he joined punishment to the generosity. For having said, “You shall eat meat for a month, until it comes out of your nostrils,” he added, “and it shall be to you for cholera,” or, as Symmachus has it, “for indigestion.” For the gluttony brought on the disease, and the stroke sent by God brought death to many. This is why the divine David also said, “While the food was still in their mouth, the wrath of God also came upon them and killed many of them.” Fittingly, then, the all-wise Paul urges, “Make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.”

For what reason did the seventy prophesy as soon as they were appointed, but not afterwards? Because he appointed them not for prophecy but for administration; and this too is one of the gifts of the Spirit. Hence the blessed Paul ranked helps and administrations with the apostles and the prophets and the teachers and the gifts of healing. The seventy were granted this gift. But so that it would be clear to the people that they had indeed received the divine gift, they at once foretold certain things.

Why did Eldad and Modad prophesy, though they were not counted with the seventy? It is likely that they were equal in rank to the seventy and for that reason received the gift. The account also hints that he who knows hidden things often knows to be approved those whom men think unapproved. So too in the case of Cornelius the divine generosity anticipated the ministry of men: for before baptism he gave him the grace of the Spirit. Here too the lawgiver's freedom from envy was shown. For when Joshua said, “My lord Moses, stop them,” he replied, “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord's people were prophets, when the Lord gives his spirit upon them!” Nor did the all-praiseworthy Joshua feel the passion of envy; but thinking the matter presumption and a grab for power, he used these words. That he was free of this passion his praise bears witness, for it says, “And Joshua the son of Nun, who attended Moses, the chosen one, answered and said, ‘My lord Moses, stop them.’”

Who is to be understood as the Ethiopian wife whom Moses took? Josephus said that while he was being brought up in the palace, he was appointed general for the war against the Ethiopians, and then, having won, he married the daughter of that king. And Apollinarius made up a tale much more fabulous than this. For he said that after Zipporah Moses married another, an Ethiopian woman, so that, he says, he might become a type of Christ the Master, who after the Israelite woman betrothed the church from the nations. But Zipporah too was a foreigner. To make up tales, then, is the work not of the divine Spirit but of the opposite one. For the lawgiver cared for purity so much after his calling that he even left Zipporah behind when he went into Egypt. After the departure from there, his father-in-law came to him bringing her with the children, and he added that he brought her after she had been sent away. So he called Zipporah the Ethiopian; for the nation of Saba is Ethiopian. For the Evangelist says, “The queen of the Ethiopians will rise up and condemn this generation,” but the history of the Kingdoms called her the queen of Saba. Saba is the name of the nation of the Homerites, and the Midianites border on them. Since, then, Aaron had married an Israelite woman, but Moses a foreigner, in a fit of pettiness they brought this reproach against him. The brothers' insolence in fact bears witness to the lawgiver's most perfect virtue: plainly at a loss for any other charge, they brought against him the reproach about his wife. And the verdict of the most just judge bears witness to my account, for he said: “If there is a prophet among you, I will be known to him in a vision and speak to him in sleep. Not so with my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. Mouth to mouth I will speak to him, in visible form and not in riddles, and he has seen the glory of the Lord. And why were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?” True, then, is that saying: “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” For we are taught by these things and by those not to retaliate against those who wrong us, but to await the divine verdict, since it takes great care for the wronged, just as then, while Moses kept silent, he brought leprosy on Miriam.

Why, when two had spoken abusively, did she alone pay the penalty? First, because the woman's fault was greater: for both nature and the law subject the female to the male. Then Aaron had some measure of excuse, both as older in years and as one honoured with the high priesthood. Besides this, since the leper was held to be unclean according to the law, and Aaron was the root and foundation of the priests, so that the disgrace would not pass to the whole family, he did not bring the same punishment on him, but through his sister he both frightened and corrected him. For the affliction grieved him so much that, before she who had received it, he himself begged the man he had wronged to end the calamity by his intercession; and Moses did not neglect it, but at once offered the supplication. Then the loving Lord taught that he had corrected her not as a judge but as a father. For he said, “If her father had spat in her face, would she not be ashamed? She shall be put out of the camp for seven days, and after that she shall come in.” Honour too was joined to the dishonour: for the people did not set out until she was freed from the affliction.

For what reason did God order spies to be sent? So that, learning in advance the fertility of the land, they would desire to share its praised fruits; and if they shrank back and faltered, they would have no excuse when punished.

Why, when he sent Hoshea as a spy, did he call him Joshua? Because he was a type of the true Jesus, who imitated the guise of the spies when he administered our salvation. For as spies use the dress and the language of the nations they are spying on, so too God the Word, putting on human nature and using its tongue, administered our salvation.

What does he mean by the race of Anak? He was very famous and much talked of, probably because of the size of his body; and the race no doubt resembled its ancestor.

What is the meaning of “The glory of the Lord will fill the whole earth”? He foretells the rejection of the Jews and the salvation of the world, and he adds an oath to the prediction: “For as I live,” he says, “and as my name lives, the glory of the Lord will fill the whole earth.” Then he pronounces the sentence against all who were counted, except Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun, who, besides the truth of their report, gave the people pious counsel. With this sentence one should compare the one spoken in the Gospels: “The kingdom will be taken from you and given to a nation producing its fruits.” For those who fell in the wilderness through unbelief were a type of the Jews who did not believe, and the uncircumcised children, who in their place received through Joshua the land promised to their forefathers, were a type of the nations who believed.

Why did he legislate so much about the same sacrifices? So that by the repetition of the legislation he would make the memory of the laws firm.

What is the meaning of “A soul that acts with a high hand in arrogance”? Having legislated what sacrifice those who sinned involuntarily must offer, he also legislates about those who have sinned voluntarily. Sins differ. Some, because of weakness of soul, cannot bear the uprising of the passions, and give way and are defeated; others fall into sins from some other circumstance. And there are some who are disposed contemptuously toward the divine laws: these he said sin out of arrogance, as despising the laws willingly. Such a one, he said, will be blotted out, and he added the reason: “Because he has despised the word of the Lord and scattered his commandments, that soul shall be utterly destroyed; its sin is upon it.” For the one who is overcome by the passions through weakness, and then groans and laments, has at least some small excuse; but the one who embraces evil and despises the divine commandments is deprived of every defence.

Why did he order the man who gathered wood on the Sabbath to be stoned? As the first to have transgressed this law, so that he would not become a model of lawbreaking; for his punishment put fear into everyone.

Why did God order them to put a hyacinth-blue thread on the very tassels of their garments? The hyacinth thread imitates the colour of heaven. It reminded them, then, of the lawgiver, who fills all things but is thought to dwell in heaven. For “the heaven of heaven,” it says, “belongs to the Lord”; and, “He who dwells in the heavens will laugh at them.” The law too teaches this: “For you shall see the tassels,” it says, “and remember all the commandments of the Lord, to do them, and you shall not turn aside after your thoughts and your eyes, after which you go whoring.”

Korah's rebellion against the lawgiver has some reason, for he was of the Levitical tribe. But Dathan, Abiram and Eliab, who traced their descent from Reuben, what pretext had they for rebellion? Reuben was the firstborn; and they thought that the priesthood belonged to the firstborn. They did not consider that their ancestor had lost the rights of the firstborn because of his lawlessness.

What does “Do not regard their sacrifice” mean? A contest about the priesthood was taking place, and since both sides were about to offer incense, they had God the Master as judge. The prophet, then, disheartened because of the leaders of the rebellion, begged the Judge not to accept what the rebels were unlawfully offering, and he calls him to witness to his own fairness: “Do not regard their sacrifice,” he says; “I have not taken the desirable thing of any one of them, nor have I harmed any one of them.” And the Judge confirmed their testimony by deed: “Separate yourselves,” he says, “from the midst of this assembly, and I will consume them at once.” Again the all-praiseworthy Moses showed his own gentleness. For, falling down before the Judge, he cried, “O God of the spirits and of all flesh, if one man has sinned, is the wrath of the Lord on the whole assembly?” The loving Lord, accepting his servant's supplication, commands the others to separate themselves from the rebels; and commanding the earth to open, he sent the tents with their men to the depths; and those who had walked through the midst of the sea were swallowed up in the earth. For it is easy for the Maker both to make a dry road in the sea and again to use the earth instead of the sea for punishment. On the Egyptians he brought destruction by water, but Dathan and Abiram and the others he covered with waves of earth. These, then, he sent alive to Hades, and he consumed Korah's company with fire.

Why did God order the censers of those who offered incense to become a covering for the altar? To convict those who were insolent against the priesthood and to confirm those appointed to perform the sacred rites. For he added this: “A memorial for the sons of Israel, so that no outsider who is not of the seed of Aaron may come near to offer incense before the Lord.” For this reason he also ordered the rod that had budded to be placed in the ark; and he legislated again that the priests should perform the sacred rites and the Levites assist, approaching neither the altar nor the sacred vessels. Then he also teaches what the priests ought to receive. He commanded them to eat the firstfruits of wine and grain and oil and bread offered to him. And he also directed that they receive the votive offerings and the firstborn, setting the ransom for the unclean animals: “Its redemption,” he says, “from a month old, the valuation is five shekels, by the holy shekel; they are twenty obols.” Of the clean firstborn he ordered the blood to be poured out at the base of the altar, the fat to be offered, and the meat to be taken by the priests, just as they receive the breast and the shoulder from the other victims. He called the sharing a “covenant of salt,” since, according to the divine Apostle, “those who attend the altar share with the altar.” Some say that, since God ordered salt to be put on the sacrifices, he called what was consecrated to the priests a covenant of salt. Then he teaches both priests and Levites that he does not want them to receive an allotment of land like the other tribes, but that the Levites should receive from all the people the tithes of what grows from the ground, of the profits from flocks and herds, and of trade or any other occupation; and the Levites should offer the tithes of the tithes to the priests. He commands that they partake of these in any place, but eat what is set apart for them from the sacrifices inside the sanctuary. He also calls the tithes a wage for the people's benefit: “While you farm, or trade, or stay at home,” he says, “these attend on my service in place of all of you.” For he said this: “This is your wage in return for your services in the tent of witness.”

How are the directions about the red heifer to be understood? He legislated that it be offered for the sin of the people; but it prefigures the saving passion, which took away the sin of the whole world. He commands a red heifer to be brought, to prefigure the earthly body; for the name of Adam too hints at the red earth from which his body was formed. The heifer's being without blemish foreshows the sinlessness of Christ the Master. And the heifer's never having borne a yoke hints at our Saviour's freedom: for the yoke signifies slavery, and the Lord, when the didrachm was demanded of him, said, “Then the sons are free.” The slaughter of the heifer outside the camp is the Saviour's passion that took place outside the gate. The divine Apostle teaches this more clearly in the Letter to the Hebrews. He ordered the whole heifer to be burned with its hide and the rest, since all that belongs to Christ the Master is pure. The cedar wood was a symbol of the cross: for as cedar does not rot, so the cross gives life. The scarlet was a symbol of the Lord's blood, and the hyssop of the fact that life-giving warmth dissolved the coldness of death. He says, however, that the one who burns the heifer is unclean until evening, as a type of those who crucified Christ the Master. He commanded those who came near a dead person, or touched bones, or were defiled by anything else of the kind, to be sprinkled with this ash mixed with water. “And a man,” he says, “who is not purified, that soul shall be destroyed from the midst of the assembly, because the water of sprinkling was not sprinkled on him.” So also the Lord said in the holy Gospels, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Why does he say that both the one who sprinkles and the one who is sprinkled are unclean until evening? Since according to the law the one who touched a dead man's bone was unclean. So the cleansing belongs to the reality, for the cleansing is through Christ; but being unclean belongs to the law, and the law prefigured grace. And these were unclean until evening, that is, until the end of the law. For the Lord's coming resembles dawn: “To those who sat in darkness and the shadow of death a light has dawned,” as the prophet Isaiah says. And elsewhere God himself said, “But to those who fear me a sun of righteousness will rise, and healing in its wings.” And again, “Behold a man, Dawn is his name.”

Why was God the Master angry with Moses and Aaron when they brought the water out of the rock? While they were disheartened over their sister's death, the people pressed on them, rebelling over the lack of water. Vexed, then, at their great lack of self-control, they used ambiguous words when they brought out the water. For the lawgiver said, “Listen to me, you disobedient ones: shall I bring water for you out of this rock?” For this reason God the Master pronounced the sentence against them, speaking thus: “Because you did not believe me, to sanctify me before the sons of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them.” The divine David too said this in song: “And Moses was afflicted on their account, because they embittered his spirit,” and, “He made a distinction with his lips.” Being angry with them, he uttered the word ambiguously; and the ambiguity was not of the soul but of the tongue. This is what “he made a distinction with his lips” means. It must be known, however, that God pronounced this sentence in managing something else, which we shall show in due time.

Why did God order the snakebites to be healed through the bronze serpent? This too prefigures the saving passion. For sin sprang up through the serpent, which is why it received the curse from the God of all. The serpent, then, is a type both of sin and of the curse. Since Christ the Master appeared “in the likeness of sinful flesh,” as the divine Apostle says (for he truly took a body, but “did no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth”), the saving passion is prefigured in the bronze serpent. For as the bronze serpent was an image of the serpents but did not have the serpents' venom, so the only-begotten Son had a human body but had no stain of sins. And as those bitten by the serpents were saved by looking at the bronze serpent, so those struck by sin, believing without hesitation in our Saviour's passion, are shown to be stronger than death and enjoy eternal life.

If Balaam was a diviner, why did he ask the Lord? He did not ask the true God; yet it was not the one he called upon who answered him, but the one unknown to him. “For God came to Balaam,” it says, “and said to him, ‘Who are these men with you?’” Not because he did not know the reason for their coming, but so that, taking his occasion from the diviner, he might command what was to be done.

For what reason, having commanded him not to go, did he command him again to go? Since Balaam, in love with the money promised, asked again whether he should go with those sent to him, supposing that God the Master had changed his mind, he permitted him to go, all but saying, “Go, then, since you long to do this; but know that you will say whatever I wish.”

Why, having commanded him to go, does he hinder the journey through the angel? He frightens him both by the voice of the donkey, which came about against nature, and by the sight of the angel, so that he would know how much care God takes of the people. Some say that the angel was Michael, the protector of the people.

And what power did the diviner's curse have if God did not will it? It had none, for the opinion held about him was false. But since the people, continually breaking the law, were suffering blows sent by God, God the Master arranged the affair of Balaam to suit their weakness. So that, when they were being chastised by God, they would not think they were falling into calamities because of the diviner's curses, he did not let the diviner use his curses, cutting off the pretexts of the foolish. For it is clear to those instructed in divine things that, even if the diviner's curses had some power, it was easy for the one who fashioned all things to show them to be empty. “For the Lord,” it says, “scatters the counsels of nations; he frustrates the reasonings of peoples, and frustrates the counsels of rulers; but the counsel of the Lord abides for ever.” Balaam, however, though he had learned God's care, tries to change his mind by sacrifices, supposing him to be one of the falsely named gods, whom their worshippers also call changeable. “He went straight on” shows that he truly wished to learn what was to be done. For this reason his unclean mouth received the working of the all-holy Spirit, and he utters what he does not wish, and cries out, “How shall I curse whom the Lord does not curse, and how shall I denounce whom God does not denounce?” And he foretells what will be: “Behold, a people will dwell alone and will not be reckoned among the nations. Who has counted exactly the seed of Jacob, and who the clans of Israel?” Then he asks to share their lot: “Let my soul die among the souls of the righteous, and let my seed be like their seed.” And when Balak, vexed and supposing that he had given the blessing because he saw the multitude of the Hebrews, took him to another place from which only part of the people could be seen, fittingly the all-holy Spirit again says through him: “God is not like a man, to waver, nor like a son of man, to be threatened. Has he said, and will he not do? Will he speak, and not abide by it?” The nature of God, he means, O Balak, is unchangeable and unalterable; it does not have a changeable will like human beings. “Behold, I have been taken to bless; I will bless, and I will not turn back.”

What is the meaning of “Like the glory of a unicorn to him”? The unicorn is an animal with one horn on its head. About it God the Master also said to Job, “Will the unicorn be willing to serve you?”, teaching by this both the animal's strength and its untameableness. Some have likened God the Master to it; but I think this was said about the people: as the unicorn has one horn, so the pious people worships one God. Hence the blessed David also says, “In you we will gore our enemies.” How the one God is to be understood we have said many times. And “There shall be no augury in Jacob, nor divination in Israel; in due time it shall be told to Jacob and to Israel what God will accomplish” is to be understood thus: that neither divination nor the observation of birds has power to foretell what God will accomplish against Israel. For God the Master both foretells to Israel what will be through his own prophets and suggests what is to be done.

What is the meaning of “Balaam did not go as usual to meet the omens”? Having learned by experience that he gained nothing by using his vain art, since the one who turned his tongue to whatever he wished was immeasurably more powerful, he no longer used the customary signs but set his tongue apart for the service of God. It must be known, however, that some thought he foretold nothing about our Saviour. They ought to have noticed that God revealed the coming of our God and Saviour even to Nebuchadnezzar, who was very impious. For he saw a stone cut without hands, striking the image and crushing the gold, the silver, the bronze, the iron, the clay, and becoming a great mountain and covering the whole earth. He who foretold those things through him also foretold the salvation of the world through this man, so that such predictions might be preserved among the nations too. The outcome of events bears witness to this prediction. For he who sprang from Judah according to the flesh plundered not only the leaders of Moab but all the sons of Seth; and all human beings are sons of Seth, for Noah was a descendant of Seth, and the whole of human nature is from Noah. He also foretold the victory of the Macedonians over the Persians: “For one shall come out,” it says, “from the hand of Kittim, and they shall afflict Asshur, and they shall afflict the Hebrews.” Alexander indeed destroyed the kingdom of the Persians; and Antiochus, campaigning against the Jews, took their capital and made the divine temple desolate. These predictions, however, do not belong to false divination but to the working of the all-holy Spirit. For he who commanded the donkey to use a human voice against nature also foretold the future through the diviner's tongue: “For the Spirit of God,” it says, “came upon him.” This happened also in the lawless Saul; hence, because of the strangeness of it, the proverb arose, “Is Saul also among the prophets?” Having had such experience from God, the false diviner devised other schemes against God. Realizing that, walled about by God, they had invincible power, he contrived for them impiety through licentiousness, so that, stripped of divine help because of their impiety, they would be easily taken. He advised the Midianites to arm against them not their men but their women, and to make the beauty of their bodies and the bait of their words their weapon, so that, enticed by their beauty and charmed by their words, they would worship their idols. This the blessed Moses taught us, when after the victory over the Midianites he rebuked those who had taken the women alive. For he said, “Why have you saved every female alive? For these were, by the word of Balaam, the cause of the sons of Israel's falling away and disregarding the word of the Lord for Phogor's sake, and the plague came on the assembly of the Lord.” Phogor is the name of the idol. Of this impiety the divine David also made mention: “And they were initiated into Baal of Peor and ate sacrifices of the dead.” For this reason God also ordered them to be hostile to the Midianites, “because they are hostile to you,” he says, “by deceit, through Phogor.” When the people had sinned, the leaders were hanged, as Symmachus said, as not having removed the evil from among them. And “The kingdom of Gog will be exalted” Symmachus rendered thus: “And his king will be exalted above Og.” The saying shows that even when Og attacked they would prevail, because of the king who would spring from them according to the flesh.

For what reason did God order the people to be counted again? Since he had already pronounced sentence against those who had been counted, and was about to bring their children, of whom they had said that they would become captives, into the promised land, he ordered these too to be counted, to show the power of his own blessing: even though the fathers had been destroyed, the number remained the same.

Why did God order the land to be divided by lot? So as to quench all strife and contention, since God was distributing the land through the lot; for he did not order the matter to be entrusted to some chance. The divine apostles also did this before the all-holy Spirit came upon them: casting lots, they begged the one who knows all things clearly to show the worthier man. So too the divine Paul said about us: “In whom we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.”

Why, when God the Master had testified of Joshua that he had the Spirit of God in him, did he order Moses to lay his hands on him? This also happened with Cornelius: after receiving the grace of the Spirit, they were then granted baptism. And indeed Christ the Master too, having received all the gifts of the Spirit as man before birth, came to John's baptism and ordered the servant's hand to be laid on his head, and he showed the all-holy Spirit coming upon him in the form of a dove. And the apostles, though they had received the Holy Spirit through the Lord's breathing, received the grace that came down from heaven. This also happened with Joshua son of Nun. He had the grace of the Spirit; but so that the people too would believe that he had received his appointment to leadership from God, the lawgiver's hands were laid on him. The divine Moses did this at God's command: “For you shall lay your hands on him,” it says, “and set him before Eleazar the priest, and give him charge before the whole assembly, and put some of your glory on him, so that the sons of Israel may listen to him; and he shall stand before Eleazar the priest,” that is, he will have equal honour with him, and through the oracle of judgment, which lay on Eleazar's breast, he will learn what is to be done. From this we learn how those who receive ordination from the high priests share in spiritual grace. For here too God the Master said, “Put some of your glory on him.” The prophet deserves admiration because, though he had sons, a brother, and a nephew, he appointed none of them leader, but asked God and ordained the man chosen by him. After this, having recalled the feasts and the sacrifices, he legislates about those who promise to offer something to God the Master. First he directed that everyone who promises fulfil the promise in deed; and that, when a woman still under her father's authority makes a promise, the father confirms the promise: if he refuses when she promises, the woman who promised is not liable to blame; but if, when she makes the vow, the father consents or keeps silent, what was promised is to be fulfilled. He legislated the same for a woman joined to a husband, and commanded that the husband's consent confirm the promise.

Why did the lawgiver order the Midianite women who had been joined to a man to be put to death? As women schooled in the doctrines of impiety and able to corrupt those who had enslaved them.

Why did the lawgiver record the stages of the journey? So that those who would live afterwards might know God's care: for having led them through impassable and waterless places, he supplied their needs abundantly.

Why does he set the return of the one who has killed involuntarily after the death of the high priest? Because the death of the high priest according to the order of Melchizedek became the release from human sin. He brought back into paradise the one who had been banished from it. And at that time the killer's flight also softened the anger of the next of kin and bridled their murderous impulse. That the punishment of the fugitives was ended after the priest's death was enough to persuade the kinsmen to quench their anger at last, since the high priest under whom the offence had taken place had died, and the lawgiver had set this as the end both of the offence and of the punishment.

For what reason did he order the tribes to be kept distinct? So that the seed of Judah, through which God promised the blessing to the nations, would be preserved unmixed. The royal and the priestly tribes, however, did intermarry, since Christ the Master is both high priest, as man, and king.

Why was the lawgiver's fifth book called Deuteronomy? God the Master, having brought the people out of Egypt, gave them on Mount Sinai the law by which they were to live. Then in the second year he ordered them to take the land he had promised to give their forefathers. When they refused and would not do this, he swore that he would give that land to none of those counted by the lawgiver, but would consume them all in the wilderness. When forty years had passed, then, and they had perished according to the divine sentence, he ordered their children to be counted, who were of the same age as their fathers when they were counted. About to bring these into the land he had promised, God teaches them through the prophet the law he had given to their lawless fathers. Deuteronomy, then, contains a recapitulation of what was legislated and done in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers; and it states the time and the place at which, and in which, he offered this teaching to the new generation: “Beyond the Jordan,” it says, “in the wilderness, toward the west, in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first of the month, after he had struck Sihon king of the Amorites and Og king of Bashan.” And that he did not give a second law but recalls the former legislation the very opening of the book teaches: “Moses began,” it says, “to explain this law, saying, The Lord our God spoke to us at Horeb.” Then, having said how he commanded them to go in and inherit the land, he added what he had said at that time: “I alone cannot govern so many tens of thousands, and therefore I appointed,” he says, “commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds,” to have them as partners in the government. He recalled these words because he had appointed Joshua son of Nun as successor to the leadership, teaching that even while still alive he had entrusted the care of the people to others, and that they must obey this man readily too and do what he commanded. He reminds them how God ordered them to take the land he had promised; how they themselves asked that spies be sent first; and that when these returned and reported about the land they did not believe the God who had saved them and would not take the land, so that God the Master was angry and pronounced sentence against all those tens of thousands, that none of them would enter that land except Caleb son of Jephunneh: “He,” he says, “shall see it, and to him I will give the land on which he trod, and to his sons, because he followed fully what pertains to the Lord.” He mentioned him alone, and appointed Joshua as ruler, general and prophet; this is what follows shows. For he said, “The Lord was angry with me too because of you,” that is: when you threw me into confusion I did not carry out the divine command as I should, and for this reason I have been prevented from bringing you into that land. And he recalled what God had said to him: “Joshua the son of Nun, who stands by you, he shall go in there; strengthen him, for he shall cause Israel to inherit it.” He says this to teach them that the general had received his appointment from God, so that they would not rebel again over the leadership. He relates to them how afterwards, repenting, they wished to fight the Canaanites; how God prevented them; and that, behaving insolently and going up against the divine command, they were defeated and came back; and how much time they spent in the wilderness, wandering through that impassable and waterless land; what they said to the Edomites and the Moabites without receiving friendly answers; and how they utterly destroyed Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites, with their whole army and the inhabitants of the cities and villages. He also told of the size of Og's body: “For Og's bed,” he says, “was of iron, nine cubits its length and four cubits its breadth.” Then he exhorted and counselled them to keep carefully the commandments of the Master: “Hear,” he says, “the statutes and the judgments which I teach you today to do, that you may live, and go in and inherit the land which the Lord God of your fathers gives you.” Then, of necessity, he brings up the memory of Baal of Peor, and of those who perished in the wilderness because of that impiety. Then, by contrast, he displays the divine benefits: “For what great nation is there,” he says, “that has a god drawing near to them, as the Lord our God is in all things in which we call upon him?” He commands them not only to keep God's laws themselves, but also to bring up their children and descendants in piety and to train them in the divine commandments from childhood. Then he reminded them again how the God of all appeared to them, uttering words through fire but showing no form. For he said this: “You heard the sound of words out of the midst of the fire, and you saw no likeness, only a voice.” He says this to train them not to fashion any image, nor ever to try to make a divine likeness, since they had not seen the form of the archetype. Hence he added again: “Do not act lawlessly and make for yourselves a carved likeness, any image, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any beast on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies under heaven, the likeness of any reptile that creeps on the earth, the likeness of any fish in the waters under the earth.” God made all these things, he means, for your use; it is therefore utter folly to deify the images of what is subject to you. He added this too: “Lest, looking up to heaven and seeing the sun and the moon and all the ornament of heaven, you be led astray and worship them and serve them, which the Lord your God has allotted to all the nations under heaven.” For the Maker, he means, fashioned these for the use of human beings; do not suppose, then, that those which the God of all has set apart to serve human needs are gods. So the other translators also rendered it: “which your God has arranged for the peoples under the whole heaven.” Then he frightens them with threats: if they dare to transgress the divine law, and to make a likeness of any created thing and deify it, he will scatter them over the whole earth, and as slaves they will worship the falsely named gods. Then again, by comparison, he shows God's almighty power: “Ask,” he says, “of the former days that were before you, from the day when God created man on the earth, and from one end of heaven to the other, whether anything has happened like this word, whether you have heard of such a thing, whether a nation has heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as you have heard, and lived.” He also told how he freed them from the bitter slavery of the Egyptians. He teaches them continually that the God of all spoke to them from heaven and legislated using a voice from the midst of the fire, so that they would make no image of the invisible God. He also teaches that it is altogether impossible to make a divine image, for his nature is not only invisible but altogether uncircumscribed: “For the Lord your God,” he says, “he is God in heaven above and on the earth below, and there is no other besides him.” It must be known, however, that the prophet did not say all these things to the people on one day, but gave them the teaching over many days. Hence he often repeats the same words, so as to make the memory firm by repetition. Immediately after this address, for example, he recorded the matter of the cities to which he commanded those who had fallen into involuntary killing to flee. Then he related that he gathered the people again and reminded them of the God-given laws. And that he did not give another law, but instructs in the former law those who because of their immaturity of age could not hear that legislation, the prophet's very words teach: “For the Lord your God,” he says, “made a covenant with you at Horeb. Not with your fathers did the Lord make this covenant, but with you.” For since those had transgressed and perished, and he was giving these the land promised to the fathers, he said that the law had been given to these. Then he states the commandments, whose meaning we unfolded when interpreting Exodus. Here too he showed the purpose of the Sabbath rest. For he said, “So that your manservant and your maidservant and your beast of burden may rest.” As you enjoy these things always, he means, so at least once in the seven days of the week let the menservants and maidservants and beasts of burden enjoy them. Then by the memory of the slavery in Egypt he works for compassion: “Because you were a household slave in Egypt,” he says, “and the Lord brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an uplifted arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day and to sanctify it.” You have learned by experience the bitterness of slavery; remembering it, be gentle and mild to those subject to you, and give them a share, on the seventh day of the week, of the rest you enjoy continually. In what follows, however, he did not forbid spiritual work. For he said, “You shall do no work of service, except what is done for the soul,” such as readings, hearing the divine oracles, psalmody, sacred rites, and things like these.

How is “Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is one” to be understood? We have said many times that “Lord” and “God” signify the divine nature, not the distinction of the persons, while “Father,” “Son” and “Holy Spirit” signify the properties. But it was not possible to offer exact theology to the immature Jews, for they would have made it an occasion of polytheism. For this reason the divine name is put forward in the Old Testament in the singular; yet it holds hints of the Trinity. For “The Lord your God, the Lord is one” both teaches the oneness of the being and indicates the number of the persons: for he has put “God” once and “Lord” twice.

How is “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart,” and what follows, to be understood? The Lord taught us clearly that no one can serve two masters. Here too, then, we are taught not to divide our love between God and gold, God and a wife, God and children, God and friends, but to consecrate the whole power of love to God who made us, and after the Maker to give each their due: parents, wife, children, brothers and friends. For fulfilling these duties too belongs to the love of God: “For whoever loves me,” he says, “will keep my commandments.” And God's commandments give directions about these.

Why does the law direct them to swear by God? So that they would not swear by the falsely named gods. For he said this through the prophet too: “If you remove the names of the Baals from your mouth, and swear, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth.” And here too, having said, “You shall fear the Lord your God and serve him alone, and cleave to him, and swear by his name,” he added: “You shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the nations around you.”

How is “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test” to be understood? The Lord explained it in the holy Gospels. For when the devil said, “Throw yourself down,” he said, “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.” The one who does something recklessly, without reason, puts God to the test.

Why does the law forbid intermarriage with the neighbouring foreign peoples? The law needs no explanation; it interprets itself. For it said, “Because they will turn your son away from me, and he will serve other gods.” Of necessity, however, it also teaches them the reason for God's care: God preferred you, he says, not because you are more numerous than the nations, but because of your forefathers' piety and the promise made to them. Then, showing his truthfulness, he added: “God is faithful, keeping covenant and mercy with those who love him and keep his commandments, to a thousand generations.” And since they were immature and needed milky food and could not hear about eternal goods, he promises them many offspring, fruitful land, thriving flocks and herds, bodily health, victory in war, and all such things. Then again he reminded them of their life in the wilderness and taught the reasons for it: “For he afflicted you,” he says, “and let you hunger, and fed you with manna, to make known to you that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God.” Through this we too are trained not to be vexed when we fall into difficulties, but to accept the divine dispensations and to wait for the end of the trials. He also points out the other benefits: “Your garments were not worn out on you, your feet were not calloused; behold, forty years. And you shall know in your heart that as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God will discipline you; and you shall keep the commandments of the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways and to fear him.” After the trial comes the consolation, after the discipline the comfort: hunger and food, the toil of the journey and the body's well-being, want of necessities and the endurance of garments and sandals that did not wear out. Then he urges them, when they win, not to ascribe the victory to their own strength but to God, their helper and champion.

Whom does he call the sons of Anak? They were descendants of giants, as the history teaches. For he said this: “A people great and tall, sons of Anak, whom you know and of whom you have heard: who will stand against the sons of Anak?” He put “you know and have heard” to recall the words of those who spied out the land; for they said, “We were before them like locusts.” Having thus put down pride in strength, he teaches them not to think highly even of the achievements of the soul: “Do not say in your heart,” he says, “‘Because of my righteous deeds the Lord brought me in to inherit this good land.’ For because of the impiety of these nations the Lord will destroy them before you; not because of your righteousness, nor because of the holiness of your heart, do you go in to inherit the land.” He said this to do two things at once: to teach them moderation and to ascribe everything to God's help, and to foretell that they would suffer the same as those nations if they did the same. At the right moment he also reminded them of the transgressions in the wilderness, confirming the word that they would not inherit the land because of their righteousness: “Remember,” he said, “and do not forget how much you provoked the Lord your God in the wilderness.” And now he brought up the worship of the calf; and that because of their impiety he broke the God-given tablets; and how by offering earnest supplication he appeased God, who was very angry with them and with Aaron: “For the Lord was very angry with Aaron,” he says, “to destroy him, and I prayed for Aaron at that time.” Having gone through the other events in this way, he says: “And now, Israel, what does the Lord God ask of you, but to fear the Lord your God and walk in all his commandments, to serve the Lord your God with all your heart?” And so that they would not suppose God legislated these things because he needed victims, he added: “Behold, to the Lord your God belong heaven and the heaven of heaven, and the earth and all that is in them; yet the Lord chose your fathers to love them, and chose their seed after them, you, above all the nations.” We are taught by this that children enjoy good things because of their forefathers' piety. He also taught what kind of circumcision is dear to God: “Circumcise your hardness of heart,” he said, “and do not stiffen your neck any longer.” And this was said to those whose foreskin had not yet been circumcised, for Joshua son of Nun circumcised them at Gilgal after crossing the Jordan. Yet, though they were uncircumcised, he did not command the foreskin to be circumcised, but the hardness of heart and the stiff neck. The circumcision of the heart, therefore, is more precious. God the Master made this charge against them through the prophet Jeremiah: “For all the nations,” he said, “are uncircumcised in flesh, but the house of Israel are uncircumcised in their hearts.”

How is “For the Lord your God, he is God of gods and Lord of lords” to be understood? He calls the judges “gods”: “You shall not revile gods,” it says, “nor speak evil of a ruler of your people.” And where the Seventy said, “You shall bring him to the court,” Aquila and Symmachus rendered, “You shall bring him to the gods,” calling the judges gods. He said he was God of these gods, not of the falsely named ones. We have already explained this at greater length.

How is “You shall not do all that we are doing here today, each what is pleasing in his own sight” to be understood? In all the places where they encamped they offered sacrifices to God the Master: before the tent was constructed, building altars of natural stones; after its construction, performing the divine services in it. Yet they did not perform them in one place but at each stage, for they were continually moving, having spent forty years in the wilderness. He forbids them, then, to do the same in the land of promise, so that they would not get a pretext for sacrificing to the falsely named gods. He enjoins them to perform the divine services only in the place which the Lord God would choose; in that place he commands them both to sacrifice and to feast: “For the place which the Lord your God chooses, to have his name invoked there, there you shall bring all that I command you today: your whole burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and the firstfruits of your hands and your gifts,” and so on. The other translators rendered “gifts” as “freewill offerings,” that is, whatever you are willing to offer freely. Then, having forbidden them to offer sacrifices in every place, he allowed them, if they desired to eat meat, to eat it in the cities where they lived, the priest slaughtering it and the blood being poured out on the ground. He also commanded that the unclean, along with the clean, might eat such meat without distinction, teaching that such slaughterings are common, not sacred; for the unclean were not permitted to share in the sacrifices. Hence he fittingly added, “Eat it like the gazelle or the deer.” These were clean, but were not offered in sacrifice.

Having legislated that the tithes be brought to the priests, how could he say, “You may not eat in your cities the tithes of your grain and of your oil”? He ordered two tithes of their possessions to be consecrated: one to be brought to the Levites, the other to be sold and its price spent on their own feasting and on the care of the widows, the orphans and the proselytes. He commanded them to feast beside the divine temple. The all-wise Lord legislated these things to free them from the error of the falsely named gods. For since the teacher of impiety, enslaving the human race through gluttony and love of pleasure, had mixed much frivolity into the feasts of demons, the resourceful Lord, freeing Israel from that error, legislated about feasts, allowed sacrifices, tolerated musical instruments and commanded feasting, cutting out the impiety of idols by such diversions.

Why does he continually forbid the eating of blood? The lawgiver himself said that its blood is its life. But I think the law also aims at something else: it heals their murderous disposition. For if eating the blood of irrational animals is eating a life, much more unholy is it to separate a rational soul from its body.

By what power does the prophet who teaches the opposite work wonders? The demons act with God's permission. So Pharaoh's sorcerers too performed the feats of the rod, of the river and of the frogs, the all-wise God allowing it because of the folly of the one who gave the orders. For he commanded them to make the plagues sent by God worse; but they were not able to undo the punishments, nor could they produce the gnats. They did only what God allowed. This he showed here too. For having said, “If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives a sign or wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes to pass of which he spoke to you, and he says, ‘Let us go and serve other gods, whom you do not know,’ you shall not listen to that prophet or to the dreamer of that dream, for the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your mind.” So the false prophet works wonders with God's permission. We are taught not to heed signs when the one who performs them teaches what is contrary to piety. He commanded that the false prophet be killed and the people rid of the evil teaching: “For you shall remove the evil from among you,” he says. And since it happened that a brother, or a friend, or a relative enslaved to the error tried to deceive others too, of necessity he legislated about this as well: he ordered that the teacher of impiety be exposed, and that the one to whom such words had been spoken cast the first stone, and then the whole people stone the … the others ….

What is the meaning of “You shall not practise Phoebus-divination, and you shall not make a bald patch between your eyes for the dead”? [End of question 12:] … the wretch, and by their punishment … brought to their senses. [Answer:] He forbids the customs of the impious nations. By “You shall not practise Phoebus-divination” he expelled divinations, for they called the false prophet Pythian Apollo “Phoebus.” By “You shall not make a bald patch between your eyes for the dead” he forbade excess in mourning. For some of the foreign nations cut off the hair of their heads and offered it to the dead; some that of their beards, others that of their eyebrows. The divine law forbade these things to be done. That he ordered two tithes of everything to be set apart he has shown clearly here: “You shall tithe a tithe of all the produce of your seed, the produce of your field year by year, and you shall eat it before the Lord your God in the place which the Lord your God chooses to have his name invoked there.” If there were one tithe, how could both the Levites receive it and those bringing it feast on it? Clearly, he assigned one tithe to the Levites and another to the feasts of those who brought it. What follows shows this too: “If the way is too long for you,” he says, “sell it, and taking the price go to the place which the Lord your God chooses, and spend the money on whatever your soul desires, on oxen or sheep, on wine or strong drink, or on whatever your soul desires; and you shall eat there before the Lord your God, you and your household, and the Levite who is in your cities, for he has no portion or inheritance with you.” Then he legislates about what is owed to the Levites: “After three years you shall bring out all the tithe of your produce in that year, and lay it up in your cities; and the Levite shall come, because he has no portion or inheritance with you, and the proselyte, the orphan and the widow who are in your cities, and they shall eat and be filled, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the works that you do.” It should be known that Josephus, taking his starting point from this, or rather knowing the custom of the Jews as a Jew, said that the law ordered three tithes to be brought: one to the Levites, another to the orphans and widows, and another to the feasts of those who brought it.

Why does he forbid offering a maimed firstborn? Through the irrational animals he teaches rational beings to have a sound mind, fully equipped for every good work.

What is the reason for the unleavened bread? The law has taught us. For it said, “Seven days you shall eat the bread of affliction, because you came out of Egypt in haste.” We have already spoken sufficiently about this too when interpreting Exodus.

What is the meaning of “You shall pursue what is just justly”? According to the aim of justice, he means: pursue the good not for vainglory, nor to court men, but for the sake of the good itself. For there are some who do not honour justice in their hearts but, because of those who truly honour justice, pretend to honour it.

What is the meaning of “If a matter in judgment is too hard for you, between blood and blood, between judgment and judgment, between stroke and stroke,” and what follows? If, he says, you cannot find the truth when judging, or when examining a leprous body (for this is what he calls a “stroke”) you cannot tell whether it is a white patch or leprosy, neither decide nor judge on suspicion, but go to the divine temple, inform the priest of these things, or the one entrusted at that time with leading the people, and do what is commanded. And if anyone, out of arrogance, contradicts what is said by the high priest or the judge, let him be punished with death and become an example for the benefit of the others.

Why does he command the ruler not to multiply horses? He wants them to trust in God alone. For this reason the blessed David also cried, “A king is not saved by great power, and a giant will not be saved by the greatness of his strength. A horse is a false hope for salvation, and by the greatness of its power it will not be saved.”

Why does he command the captive woman to mourn her family for a set number of days and only then be joined to the man who took her captive? He does not want lament mingled with gladness, nor tears with smiles. For this reason he ordered her to have a time of mourning of thirty days, and then, released from mourning, to share in married intercourse. Besides this, he also curbs the man's desire, commanding that not the passion of pleasure but the reasoned choice of partnership should lead. And if after their union he refuses the marriage, he ordered her to be released, receiving her freedom as the price of the union.

Why does he want the accusation against a son to be made by both parents together? Because the agreement of the accusers bears witness to the truth of the accusation. For it often happens that when the father accuses without cause the mother contradicts, or when the mother blames, the father contradicts. But when both make the same accusation, the truth of the charge will be clear. For this reason he commands that the son so accused be put to death.

Why does he command the one who has found young birds to take them but let the parents go? He teaches kindness. For if he takes the parents and leaves the young, they will certainly perish, there being no one to feed them. And if he catches both these and those, the race of birds will clearly be destroyed, if everyone does the same.

For what reason did he enjoin that a parapet be made for the roof? He taught it in what follows. For he said, “And you shall not bring bloodshed on your house, if anyone falls from it.” Having honoured us with reason, he wants us to use it as we ought, to take forethought for everything, and not foolishly to leave everything to God, but to contribute our own part and then wait for help from above. So when we sow, we do not trust in the earth but await the divine kindness; and when we use physicians, we know that it is God's work to heal through them. For the art can do as much as the one who gave it wills.

What is the meaning of “You shall not sow your vineyard with a different kind, lest the produce be made holy, and the seed which you sow with the produce of your vineyard”? He both cuts out greed and takes thought for the farmers themselves. For when the earth receives more seeds, it yields feeble fruits. He commands, then, neither to sow mixed seeds nor to sow among the vines. Then he sets a penalty for the transgressor, curbing the desire for gain: he ordered such produce to be offered to himself. For this is what he said: “lest the produce be made holy.”

Why does he command that the man who violates a woman betrothed to another be punished like an adulterer? Because she had received the tokens of betrothal; that is why he also called her a wife: “For he humbled his neighbour's wife,” it says. In the same way the holy Virgin too was called Joseph's wife: “Do not be afraid,” it says, “to take Mary your wife.”

Why does he forbid the man with crushed testicles and the eunuch to enter the assembly? Through them he hints at the barrenness of the soul; for unfruitfulness in good things is foreign to God. Moreover, he forbids doing such things not only to human beings but also to animals; for the organs of generation were made for the increase of the race. And as he forbids barrenness, so he also casts out evil fruit: “For one born of a harlot,” he says, “shall not enter the assembly of the Lord.”

Why does he forbid mixing with the Moabites and Ammonites, not for a set time but for ever? First because of their lawless root, for they were born of a lawless intercourse. Then because of the impiety in which they made the Israelites share, by adorning their women and through them ensnaring them into the worship of idols. The Edomite and the Egyptian, however, he commands to be admitted after the third generation: the one as a brother, the other as having been a benefactor in time of need. For when famine struck, their fathers went into Egypt and were fed. The law, then, teaches us not to forget even an old kindness.

What is the meaning of “For the Lord your God walks in your camp”? Air filled with foul smells often causes plague. He commanded them, then, when encamped, to cover up the excrement they discharged. And so that they would not disobey and suffer harm, he necessarily added, “For the Lord your God walks in your camp,” and he teaches the reason: “to deliver you and give up your enemy before you.” Through this he trains them to do nothing lawless; for he adds, “And your camp shall be holy, and no indecent thing shall be found among you.”

What is meant by “one who performs initiations,” and “a man being initiated,” and “a woman being initiated”? As we call those who share in the divine mysteries “the faithful,” so the nations called those taught the mysteries of certain demons “the initiated.” He calls “one who performs initiations,” then, the one who conducts the mystery rites, and “one being initiated” the one who is led into them.

What is meant by “You shall keep what goes out through your lips”? When you make a promise to God, consider the promise a debt; be eager, then, to pay it quickly. For he said this: “You shall not delay to pay your vow, for the Lord your God will surely require it of you, and it will be sin in you.” Then, teaching that it is in the power of one's will to promise or not, he added: “But if you do not wish to vow, there will be no sin in you.” Hence the blessed David too says: “I will pay you my vows, which my lips uttered and my mouth spoke in my affliction.” Again, having set down the law about leprosy, he recalled Miriam, saying, “Remember what the Lord your God did to Miriam on the way,” teaching that the stroke was sent by God, and that God brought it on them when they sinned and again stopped it when they repented. He also resolved the ambiguity of the threat about children. For he said, “Fathers shall not die for children, nor children for fathers; each shall die for his own sin.” For it is likely both that fathers advise their children well but gain nothing because of their disobedience, and that children become better than their fathers.

Why, when God commanded that the offender receive forty lashes, do the Jews inflict one less? Since a larger number dishonours the one being punished: “For if they add to the lashing of him, your brother will be disgraced before you.” They give one less so that, while keeping to the exact number, they do not unwittingly dishonour the one beaten by inflicting an extra one.

What is the meaning of “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is threshing”? The divine Apostle taught us clearly the higher meaning; but the plain sense too is pious. For it is unjust that the one who ploughed the land and cut the sheaves with toil should not share in the fruit.

Why does he command that the man who will not marry the wife of his childless brother be spat upon? Through the dishonour he laid on them a compulsion to brotherly love. It would have been better to provide for the dead man out of natural affection. But since not all respect the law of nature, he imposed on them the compulsion of dishonour.

Why does he command Amalek to be given over to utter destruction? Because they were impious and hated their brothers. For, tracing their descent from Esau, they were the first to take up war against Israel, and that when Israel was far away and had not come near their borders. He taught again, more clearly, that he had ordered two tithes to be set apart. He spoke thus: “When you have finished tithing all the tithe of the produce of your land in the third year, you shall give the second tithe to the Levite, and to the proselyte, and to the widow, and to the orphan, and they shall eat in your cities and be filled.” That the prophet did not give the people this teaching on one day, this too shows: “Moses and the council of elders of Israel commanded,” it says, “saying, ‘Take care to do all these commandments which I command you today.’” Then God the Master commanded that after crossing the Jordan they should set up two great stones, plaster them, and write the commandments on them; then build an altar of natural stones on Mount Ebal and perform the customary sacrifices; and, besides the others, the peace offering as a kind of thank offering, and afterwards feast, singing hymns to God their benefactor.

Why did he subject them to curses and blessings? Christ the Master, offering perfect teachings to the perfect, promised the kingdom of heaven to those who fulfil them and threatened Gehenna to those who transgress. But to the Jews, whose mind was low and grovelling, he assigned curses and blessings belonging to the earth. For those who did not believe even the wonders they saw, how would they have accepted what belongs to the life to come? One should note that he assigned the blessings to the tribes sprung from the free wives (and here he counted the priestly tribe with the people, and ordered Joseph's tribe, though double, to bless as one), and allotted the curses to the half-slave tribes, ranging with them, to make up the number of the tribes, Reuben and Zebulun: the one as having fallen into sin, the other as the last of Leah's sons. He ordered them to curse first of all those who are impious toward the Divine and worship handmade images; then those who sin against their fathers, for after divine things it is right to honour those through whom we were brought into being; then those who mock people deprived of sight and try to turn them from the straight road; and, in short, those who transgress the aforementioned commandments. As the priests said these things, he commanded the people to respond, “So be it, so be it,” receiving this word from them like a signature on a document. To those who keep the divine commandments he gave blessings of every kind: to those living in the cities and villages, good children and many children, abundant increase of flocks and herds, fruitfulness from the earth, life in peace, victory in war, and the like. To the bodily blessings he also added a spiritual one: “May the Lord raise you up for himself as a holy people, as he swore to your fathers.” And he added this condition: “If you listen to the voice of the Lord your God and walk in his ways.” For some seeing these things and others hearing of them will fear, considering the divine care you enjoy. “To be the head and not the tail” means a ruler and not a slave; for he added, “And you shall then be above and not below.” Then he brings on the curses, which are the opposite of the blessings mentioned: childlessness, misfortune, want, disease, misery, famine, plague, war, defeat, drought, barrenness of the earth; for this is what the iron earth and the bronze heaven mean. Then what happens in a siege: “You shall take a wife, and another man shall come and take her; you shall build a house and not live in it; you shall plant a vineyard and not gather its grapes; your calf shall be slaughtered before you, and you shall not eat of it,” and what follows has the same sense. He adds threats of sores, various sufferings, enslavements, and the hardest of all: “The proselyte who is with you,” he says, “shall go up above you, and you shall go down below.” Through these he hints at the piety of the nations; and he foretold to them their unbelief, and the calamities under the Assyrians, the Babylonians and the Macedonians, and finally those of the siege by the Romans. “For you shall eat,” he said, “the offspring of your womb, the flesh of your sons and your daughters, whom the Lord your God has given you, in the distress and in the affliction with which your enemy will afflict you,” and the other things that the prophet Jeremiah spoke of after experiencing them, when he wrote the Lamentations. And he threatened to bring on them not only these but many more punishments if they transgressed the divine commandments. He also threatened them with slavery in Egypt, of which, having experienced it, they kept a fresh memory: “For those who enslave you,” he says, “will sell you.”

These curses and blessings he had not given to their fathers. This book, then, contains some teaching new in comparison with the others. The prophet too pointed this out. For having finished the account of the curses and the blessings, he added: “These are the words of the covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to establish with the sons of Israel in the land of Moab, besides the covenant which he made with them at Horeb.” For since he was about to bring them into the land he had promised, he necessarily both urges them on with promises of good things and strikes them with threats of punishments, and tries every means for the healing of their souls.

Why are the curses more numerous than the blessings? Promises of freedom do not help bad servants as much as threats of the whip.

How is “The Lord your God has not given you a heart to know, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, until this day” to be understood? Like “He gave them up to a debased mind,” and “He gave them up to dishonourable passions,” and “The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart.” For God is the cause of good things but not the cause of evil ones. He shows what should be done and turns people away from the opposite, but he does not force human will; he leaves it to its free choice. And since he permits the opposite to happen, though able to prevent it, and does not consent to prevent it, so that what is done may not be done by force and compulsion (for it is the voluntary character of virtue that is praiseworthy), Scripture has called the permission a cause. Like this is the saying in the divine Gospels: “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart.” And yet he tried every means so that they might enjoy salvation: working wonders, healing maimed limbs, feeding them in the wilderness, giving orders to the elements. So he is not the cause of their unbelief. Why then did the evangelist set down the prophetic testimony? To show that God the Master was ignorant of none of these things but foretold them long before: “For you will indeed hear,” he says, “and not understand, and you will indeed see and not perceive.” So also the present text is to be understood: “The Lord has not given you a heart to know, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, until this day.” If he had not given them sight and hearing and reasoning, why does he curse and punish those who broke the law unwillingly? But I think it superfluous to say more about this. It is clear even to the very foolish that the one who offered such teaching does not take away sight, but guides, enlightens and shows the straight road. What follows also teaches this: “For not with you alone do I make this covenant and this curse, but also with those who travel with you today before the Lord your God, and with those who are not here with you today.” He who takes thought even for those who will exist in the future, how could he have neglected those present and receiving the law? And why would he legislate for those unable to understand? This too should be known: the prophets often use human expressions, as more familiar. Some, when reproaching servants or pupils, are accustomed to say, “God has blinded your heart, God has deafened your ears.” Something like this the prophet has done here too, accusing them of folly in customary words.

How is “If anyone hears the words of this curse and blesses himself in his heart, saying, ‘May holy things be mine, for I will walk in the wandering of my heart’” to be understood? The passage describes the one who is insolent toward the divine commandments. Many transgress the divine law through carelessness; but many despise the commandments through self-will and pride. It is this man he has shown here, as one who chooses the opposite road and prefers the one that leads astray to the straight one. He threatened him with utter destruction, so that he would become an example of impiety to those who see and those who hear. Teaching them that he knows everything done in secret, he added: “The hidden things belong to the Lord our God, but the revealed things to you and your children.” As you know what is done openly, he means, so the very movements of thoughts are plain to me. He also introduces the teaching about repentance. If, he says, having transgressed the divine commandments, you fall under these curses and, taken captive, receive the yoke of slavery, and then, using sober reasoning, seek out the causes of your slavery and appease the lawgiver, he will have pity and bring you back and restore to you your ancestral land. This happened many times, as the book of Judges and the history of the Kingdoms and of the Chronicles clearly teach. Later, however, having raged against the Saviour, they were scattered over all land and sea, and though four hundred years have passed they have not obtained a recall. He also showed how easy it is to keep the laws: “For this commandment,” he says, “which I command you today, is not too heavy, nor is it far from you. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will go up to heaven and get it for us, so that we may hear it and do it?’ Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will cross to the other side of the sea and get it for us, and make it heard by us, and we will do it?’” You need neither wings for flight, he means, nor ships for a voyage, to be taught what you must do; “but the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart and in your hands, to do it.” By the mouth he means meditation on the divine oracles; by the heart, the eagerness of the soul; by the hands, the doing of the commandments. The divine Paul also used this testimony: “For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth one confesses unto salvation.” He has also set out the prizes for keeping the laws and for transgressing them: life and death.

Why did the lawgiver order this book to be read to them after seven years? They had no leisure while they were fighting and besieging the cities; and also after the victory, while they were dividing the land by tribes, by clans, by families and by individuals; then building, farming and doing all the other things that those who have taken possession of a foreign land must do. For this reason he ordered the reading to take place in the seventh year, after they were free of these tasks.

Why was he commanded to call heaven and earth to witness? Not because they are living and rational, but because they contain all created things. The prophet Isaiah also did this: “Hear, O heaven, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord has spoken.” So did the divine Jeremiah: “Heaven was astonished at this, and the earth shuddered greatly, says the Lord.” For since the lawgiver called them as witnesses of the threat, fittingly, after the transgression of the laws, they are said to shudder and be astonished. So too Jacob and Laban named the hill “the hill of witness,” and Abraham the patriarch and Abimelech king of Gerar named the well “the well of the oath,” as having made their agreements there with an oath.

How is “I will make you jealous with what is no nation; with a foolish nation I will provoke you” to be understood? Those who have believed in Christ the Saviour are not one nation but countless ones. And these were once foolish and senseless, as the blessed Paul says: “For we too were once senseless, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various desires and pleasures,” and so on. As you, he means, abandoned the one God and preferred many falsely named ones, so I will reject the one people and give salvation to all the nations. But you, though you honoured those who are not gods, did not make them gods; whereas I will fill the foolish nations with divine wisdom, and you, seeing it, will waste away with envy.

How is “Rejoice, O nations, with his people, and let all the angels of God strengthen them” to be understood? Many tens of thousands of the Jews too believed in Christ the Master, and most of the nations throughout the world; but it was those of the Jews who believed who handed on the teaching to the nations, for the divine apostles were from the Jews. Foretelling these things, then, the prophet said: “Rejoice, O nations, with his people,” that is, with those of the Jews who believed; “and let all the angels of God strengthen them,” that is, those who believed in him. For when our Saviour was born, a choir of angels sang of the divine kindness, crying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will among men.” And Gabriel the archangel foretold that birth without seed and without labour. And in the contest with the devil the companies of angels were present: “For angels came,” it says, “and ministered to him.” They were present at the passion too, and after the resurrection they attended the tomb and said to the women, “Why do you seek the living among the dead?” And after the ascension into heaven they said to the holy apostles, “Why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him going into heaven.” And an angel told Cornelius about the great Peter. And the divine Apostle on the ship said to those sailing with him, “There appeared to me an angel of the God to whom I belong.” One could find many such things if one wished. Having said these things about the believers, the prophet also foretells the punishments of the unbelievers and makes their causes plain. For he spoke thus: “For the blood of his sons is avenged, and he will avenge and repay justice to his enemies, and repay those who hate him; and the Lord will cleanse the land of his people.” He has here called the saints whom the murderers killed “sons of God.” To pass over the slaughter of the prophets and the saving passion of the Master, they stoned the victorious Stephen, they killed the great James with a club, and to please them Herod beheaded the other James; they dared many other murders and plundered the houses of those who believed in the Lord. The divine Apostle showed this too in the Letter to the Hebrews: “And you accepted joyfully the plundering of your property.” And writing to the Thessalonians he said: “For you became imitators of the saints in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and drove us out, and do not please God, and oppose all men.” The Lord too accused them of this in the parable of the vineyard: of the servants, they beat one, killed another and stoned another. For this reason he scattered them over the whole world.

Why, for a small fault, was Moses ordered to see the land from afar but prevented from bringing the people in? Through these things the Master teaches us that he requires the highest virtue of those perfect in virtue; and while he is patient with other people who commit great transgressions, he does not grant this indulgence to the saints. A certain wise man said this too: “For the least is pardonable in mercy, but the mighty will be mightily tested.” And the Lord in the holy Gospels: “From the one to whom little is given, little will be required; but from the one to whom much is given, much will be required.” This too must be known: the Master arranges some things through others. So too he did not let this great prophet bring the people into the land of promise, so that the Israelites would not worship him as a god; for those who deified lifeless things and called the image of a calf a god would clearly have worshipped much more as a god the man who had been the minister of so many good things to them. For this reason God, who wisely governs our affairs, also made his tomb unknown. One should also know that Moses is a type of the law; hence the law too has the name “Moses”: “They have Moses,” it says, “and the prophets”; and, “To this day, whenever Moses is read”; and, “Death reigned from Adam until Moses.” For as we call “Isaiah” not only the prophet but also his book, and Jeremiah and Ezekiel not only the men but also their books, and “the Apostle” not only the herald of truth himself but also his book, so the law is named Moses, while Joshua son of Nun is a type of the Saviour of the world. As, then, Moses brought the people out of Egypt but Joshua brought them into the promised land, so the law frees those who obey it from impiety, but the grace … of heaven.

[End of question 43:] … of the Gospels brings into the kingdom of … [Question 44:] How are the blessings of the tribes to be understood? First the prophet recalled the divine appearing on Mount Sinai: “The Lord came from Sinai,” he says, “and appeared to us from Seir, and hastened from Mount Paran with the myriads of Kadesh; at his right hand angels with him.” In the wilderness of Paran and in Seir they enjoyed the divine care. Here “Kadesh” does not mean the wilderness but the meaning of the name; for in the Hebrew language “Kadesh” means “holy.” He said, then, that many myriads of holy angels were with the holy Master as he granted them his care. And of necessity he added: “And all the sanctified are under his hands, and these are under you.” For even if they have an invisible nature, they are subject to your lordship, for they have you as their maker. He foretells that the one who has now chosen Israel will shortly call all the nations too, and will himself be ruler and king of both: “For there shall be a ruler in the beloved,” he says, “when the peoples are gathered together with the tribes of Israel.” Having said this, he first blesses Reuben and lifts the father's curse, setting his love for his brothers against his lawless act toward his father; and as lawgiver he was free to change the curse into a blessing. “Let Reuben live and not die, and let him be many in number.” For since his father had said, “Do not boil over like water,” that is, do not grow warm in fruitfulness, fittingly he prayed for a multitude of descendants for him. Then, passing over the order, he gives the blessing to Judah, because of the Master who sprang from there according to the flesh. “For it is evident,” says the divine Apostle, “that our Lord arose from Judah.” He also foretells the kingdom of David: “Hear, O Lord,” he says, “the voice of Judah, and may they come to his people; his hands will contend for him, and you will be a help against his enemies.” Having thus blessed the royal tribe, he passes to the priestly one: “Give to Levi his manifestations and his truth, to the holy man.” The oracle lay on the priest's breast, and it held the manifestation and the truth; for many things were made manifest from it; and truth is joined to manifestation because what was manifested did not lie. “Whom they tested with a test, they reviled him at the water of contradiction.” He recalled what had been done to him and his brother. “He who says to his father and his mother, ‘I have not seen you,’ and did not recognize his brothers, and disowned his sons, kept your oracles and guarded your covenant.” The passage teaches the perfection of the priests. For the priest must despise all the things of this life and devote himself to the divine service. For this reason he gave them no allotment and did not legislate that they have property, but that they receive the firstfruits and the tithes from all the people, so that, freed from the cares of life, they might perform the sacred office entrusted to them in holiness. Thus Aaron, the first high priest, was not even allowed to bury his dead sons. And he says this: “Having made themselves perfect, they will make known your judgments to Jacob and your law to Israel; they will put incense in your wrath continually on your altar.” This also happened when the people were being punished: Aaron, by offering the incense, stopped the death sent by God. Then he asks the divine blessing for them: “Bless, O Lord, his strength, and accept the works of his hands.” For those who minister need bodily strength too, so that nothing may hinder their eagerness. “Break the loins of the enemies who rise against him, and let those who hate him not rise up.” By these words he curbs the boldness of those who seize power, and recalls what Korah, Dathan and Abiram suffered when they stirred up rebellion against the priests.

For what reason did he put Benjamin, the last, in fourth place? The capital belonged to this tribe, and the temple was built in it. Fittingly, therefore, he ranked the sacred place with the priestly tribe. The blessing too foretells this: “Beloved by the Lord,” he says, “he will dwell in confidence.” He also showed the cause of the confidence: “And the Lord overshadows him all the days, and he has rested between his shoulders.” For being near the divine temple he continually enjoyed the divine care. “He has rested between his shoulders” he said of God, who, having commanded the temple to be built in Jerusalem, made his own appearing there. After these tribes he blessed Joseph, and offered the blessing to the two tribes together: “From the blessing of the Lord is his land: from the seasons of heaven and dew, and from the springs of the deep below, and from the produce of the sun's turnings in their season, and from the conjunctions of the months, and from the top of the ancient mountains, and from the top of the everlasting hills.” He asked for him the good things given from heaven, the fruits supplied by the earth, which the rains water, the dews nourish and the sun ripens through the cycles of seasons and months; and not only the plain bears them but the mountain land too. To confirm the blessing he recalled the God who appeared in the bush. He says that Joseph also obtained the birthright, and that for this reason the tribe was divided in two and the one became two, since the firstborn received a double share. Teaching the strength of the tribes, he likened them to a unicorn and a bull; and he put Ephraim before Manasseh according to the forefather's blessing. For Zebulun and Issachar, the one living on the coast and the other as its neighbour, he prayed for victory in war, divine help and the good things of the sea: “For they will destroy nations,” he says, “and call there, and offer a sacrifice of righteousness, and they will suck the wealth of the sea and the trade of those who live on the coast.” For those near the sea enjoy not only their own fruits but also the goods brought from everywhere. He likened Gad to a lion; for so too the patriarch Jacob said: “Gad, a raiding band shall raid him, and he shall raid them at their heels.” He called Dan a lion's whelp leaping out of Bashan, since they suddenly attacked the city of Laish, took it, killed its inhabitants and made it their own dwelling. To Naphtali too he announced plenty from land and sea; for he too was a neighbour of the sea, having Galilee to the south. This the prophet and the evangelist also said: “Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali, and the rest who live on the coast, and Galilee of the nations: the people who sat in darkness saw a great light.” “Fullness of acceptable things” Symmachus rendered “fullness of good pleasure”; it has the same sense, for acceptable things are those that please. For Asher too he asks both fruitfulness of land and plenty from the sea. For “He will dip his foot in oil, and his sandal will be iron and bronze” shows the abundance of good things.

Why did he not bless Simeon? Reuben had his brotherly love as an occasion for blessing, for through it he was freed from that curse; and Levi obtained the blessing because of the great Moses, for the one who lifted the curses from others much more lifted his own. But Simeon had no ground for obtaining the blessing. I think he was also the ringleader of the plot against Joseph; evidence of this is that that admirable man let all the others go but ordered this one alone to be seized, bound and imprisoned. Yet he too shared in the blessing; for he gave not only a particular blessing to each tribe, but also a common one to the whole people: “For Israel will dwell in confidence, alone, on the land of Jacob, on a land of grain and wine, and the heaven will be cloudy with dew for you.” And he added much else to the common blessing. After the blessings, God the Master showed the prophet the whole land but prevented him from entering it. This prefigures what was said by our Saviour: “Many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see and did not see it, and to hear what you hear and did not hear it.”

And how does the name “minister” fit our Lord Jesus Christ? For it said about Joshua son of Nun, “The Lord said to Joshua son of Nun, the minister of Moses.” We also hear the Apostle saying, “For I say that Christ Jesus became a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises given to the fathers.” And again: “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.” As one born under the law, then, he was also shown to be a minister of the circumcision. So too he said to the Jews, “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me.” And indeed they had said to Joshua son of Nun, “In everything that we heard from Moses, we will hear you too.”

Why, when God promised to give them every place on which the sole of their feet would tread, and the wilderness and the Anti-Lebanon as far as the great river Euphrates, did he not fulfil the promise? The text is clear and does not need much interpretation. First it is said, “Every place on which you tread with the sole of your feet I will give you.” It is likely, then, that under Joshua's command they did not tread on the rest of the land. And what follows settles the question completely. For he added, “As I said to Moses”; and he did not make the promise to him unconditionally, but “if you keep my commandments and my judgments.” They, then, as having transgressed the law at once, did not obtain the promise in full. But the divine apostles took possession not only of the places on which they trod, but also of those in which their all-wise writings were read; and they made the former wilderness a divine paradise. Of this wilderness the prophet Isaiah also said, “Rejoice, thirsty wilderness; rejoice, wilderness, and its villages.” And God the Master promised through his tongue that he would make the wilderness into marshes and the thirsty land into water channels; and he said that this wilderness would again become like Carmel. The heralds of the truth also inherited the Anti-Lebanon; and this too hints at the salvation of the nations, since Jerusalem was called Lebanon: “The great-winged eagle,” it says, “which has the leading to enter Lebanon, and he cropped the tender shoots of the cedar and the cypress.” He called the Babylonian an eagle, Jerusalem Lebanon, and the king and the rulers the tender shoots of the cedar and the cypress. These our Jesus sent out not only as spies but also as generals. And as the spies sent by Joshua son of Nun saved the harlot who believed, giving her the scarlet cord as a sign of salvation, so the apostles of our Saviour turned the church, once a harlot devoted to various idols, from its former licentiousness and granted it eternal good things, using not a scarlet cord as a sign but procuring salvation by the all-holy blood. Let no one think that Rahab is a type unworthy of the church; let him hear the Apostle saying, “For we too were once senseless, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various desires and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.” And again: “But then, not knowing God, you were slaves to those that by nature are not gods.” And elsewhere: “For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord.” And in another place: “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor men who lie with men, nor idolaters, nor the greedy, nor thieves, nor revilers, nor drunkards, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Then he added, “And such were some of you; but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” So too Rahab was formerly a harlot, but she received the spies faithfully, and when the king ordered them to be handed over she did not yield but hid them; for she believed in the God of the Hebrews, and her words show her faith: “For I know,” she says, “that the Lord your God has given you the land; for the fear of you has fallen upon us. For we have heard that the Lord God dried up the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites who were beyond the Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom you utterly destroyed. And when we heard it our hearts were astonished, and there is no spirit left in anyone because of you, for the Lord your God is God in heaven above and on earth below.” True, then, is that word which God the Master spoke about Pharaoh: “For this very purpose I raised you up, to show my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” For through what was done to him the God of the Hebrews became known to all. And the agreement of the spies agrees closely with the reality: “Anyone,” they said, “who goes out of the door of your house shall be responsible for himself, and we shall be guiltless of this oath of yours.” For us too salvation comes through the church; those outside it do not enjoy eternal life. And the rest of the history too sketched the reality in advance. For when they were about to cross the Jordan, the Lord said to Joshua, “On this day I begin to exalt you before the sons of Israel.” This happened in the reality too. For as Joshua son of Nun was shown by the miracle at the Jordan to be a man dear to God, so also our Jesus, after the Jordan and John's baptism, began his teaching and his miracles. But perhaps to some it seems unfitting that “On this day I begin to exalt you” should be applied to our Lord and Saviour. Let them hear him saying to the Father, “Father, glorify me with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.” And the Apostle says: “Therefore God also highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name.” But in being exalted he did not receive what he did not have; he showed what he had. For, while it was not known that he is the Son of the God of all, he was shown to be this when the Father said at the Jordan, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” The priests carrying the ark of the covenant of the Lord also prefigured John the Baptist; for he too was a priest and a high priest's son. As, then, when the priests carrying the ark had gone first into the Jordan, the whole people crossed over with Joshua the prophet and general, so, when the illustrious John began to baptize and Jesus the Saviour sanctified the nature of the waters, the pious people enter the kingdom of heaven through all-holy baptism. And the twelve men and the twelve stones prefigured the divine company of the apostles; for the same men are both builders and foundations: “Built,” it says, “on the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” And again the same Apostle said, “As a wise master builder I have laid a foundation.” The “heap” Symmachus rendered “swelling”: for the rush of the waters, held back, as it were swelled up and rose to a crest; for the boundary set by the Creator held it back more strongly than any wall of adamant. The crossing took place before the Passover: they crossed on the tenth and celebrated the feast of the Passover on the fourteenth. For in the reality too, the partaking of the spotless lamb follows saving baptism.

How is “He circumcised the sons of Israel a second time” to be understood? This saying foreshadows the reality above all. For to those who had received the Mosaic circumcision the heralds of the Gospels brought the spiritual circumcision: “Believe,” they said, “and let each of you be baptized in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and you will receive the promise of the Holy Spirit.” The divine Apostle called this the circumcision made without hands; and elsewhere: “For circumcision is of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter.” Those of the Jews, then, who believed in the Saviour, having the Mosaic circumcision, received the spiritual one besides. The “second time,” then, prefigures the reality, for it is impossible for the flesh to be circumcised twice. The surface meaning of the letter shows this: as God had given this law to Abraham at the beginning, so a second time he commanded Joshua to circumcise the uncircumcised. The Jews deserve to be lamented, since they cannot see that the circumcised were destroyed, falling into various punishments, while the uncircumcised were saved; the fathers perished, while the children received the promise. So we too, being children, receive the kingdom of heaven, while the Jews, who have the rank of fathers, have fallen from the eternal good things and been cast out of kinship with the patriarchs. They should have learned from this that circumcision is not always necessary. For God the Master, having foretold to Abraham the time of the sojourning, commanded circumcision; but when they had been freed from slavery in Egypt and were living in the wilderness, he did not require the keeping of this law nor exact a penalty for its transgression. For since they were living by themselves, free from mixing with foreign nations, they did not need the sign of circumcision. But when at last he brought them into the promised land, he commanded them to be circumcised, so that mixing would not ruin their piety. For if anyone happened to be led astray by deceit, it was easy to see the sign and to recognize the flock; for marked sheep, even if they get lost, are easily found.

Why did he order them to be circumcised with knives of stone? The crowd being circumcised was very great, and they had to be circumcised quickly and celebrate the feast of the Passover. It was likely, then, that people who had spent so long in the wilderness did not have many knives made of iron. Besides, the stone knives prefigure our circumcision. For Christ the Master is a rock: “For they drank,” it says, “from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.” And the same is also called a sword: “For the Word of God,” it says, “is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword.” His saving teaching brings us the spiritual circumcision. The history taught that many of those born in Egypt too had not received circumcision, their parents, as is likely, being afraid to circumcise them because of the killing of the infants; and all, one might say, except a few of those born in the wilderness remained uncircumcised. The place was named Gilgal, and the name means freedom. Then the God of all said, “This day I have taken away the reproach of Egypt from you.” The saying signifies release from Egyptian slavery and impiety, and the taking of the promised land. And we learn that the one who is granted all-holy baptism and receives the spiritual circumcision puts off the reproach of sin.

Who is to be understood as the commander of the army of the Lord? Some say it was God the Word who appeared; but I think it was Michael the archangel. For when they sinned, the God of all said, “I will not go up with you, because the people is stiff-necked; but I will send my angel before your face, ahead of you.” I think it was he who now appeared to Joshua, encouraging him and signalling the divine help.

How then did he use the divine words, “Loose the sandal from your feet, for the place on which you stand is holy”? Since the God of all had said to him, “As I was with Moses, so I will be with you,” for this reason Joshua hears what Moses heard, so that he might become bolder, as having obtained the same dignity.

Why did he order the city of Jericho to be devoted to destruction? This was the first city they took after crossing the river. As, then, he commanded them to offer the firstfruits of their crops, so he ordered them to offer the first share of the spoils. Besides this, he exercises them through these laws in keeping the necessary laws. And showing them his own power, he arranged for them to take the first city without weapons or siege engines, and destroyed it by the sound of the trumpets alone, so that whenever they were defeated in battle they would know that they themselves had given the occasion for defeat by despising the divine laws.

Why did Rahab, though a foreigner, live among the sons of Israel, as the history teaches? This too prefigures our situation. For the Master said, “I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them too, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.” For this reason, when he gave the law, he said, “There shall be one law for the proselyte and for the native.” And for this reason Moses the lawgiver did not prevent those of the Egyptians who wished to set out with them. And the wild olive had to be grafted into the cultivated olive, as the blessed Paul says.

What is the meaning of “With his firstborn he will lay its foundation, and with his youngest he will set up its gates”? Since he had dedicated the city to God, he fittingly razed it, thinking it improper that what had been assigned to God should become a common dwelling. And he cursed those who would rebuild it, so that the one who tried to cross the boundary would lose the firstborn of his sons when laying the foundations, and the last when setting up the gates. The history of the Kingdoms also mentions the curse.

Why, when Achan stole, was the whole people chastised? The thief supposed that he would escape God's notice as he escaped men's. God wished, then, both to expose him and to put fear into all, so that those who keep the divine laws would expose those who transgress them, since they would share in the punishment that would follow. Aquila rendered the “mantle” as “robe,” and Josephus as “cloak”; and the “tongue” as “a mass of gold.” It is clear from this that the valley the prophets call the valley of Achor is the one in which Achan was stoned; for “Emekachor” means “valley of Achor.”

Why did God order an ambush to be laid against Ai? He teaches them to use human ingenuity too, trusting, of course, in the divine influence. For since they had taken the first city by the sound of the trumpets alone, they very fittingly learn to struggle and toil and to wait for the divine help. And indeed, when they fought, he helped them and destroyed all who fled with thunderbolts and hail. The javelin with which Joshua roused the men in ambush Josephus rendered “shield,” and Symmachus likewise.

Some accuse the prophet of cruelty, because he killed everyone without exception and hanged the kings. Whoever accuses the prophet accuses the one who commanded these things. For the God of all himself, through Moses the lawgiver, commanded that all who had lived in that land be killed without exception, since they had done deeds worthy of utter destruction and had driven on to the extremity of lawlessness. For this reason too he brought the flood long ago, and consumed Sodom and Gomorrah with fire. And the prophet ordered the leaders to put their feet on the necks of the kings, so that, taking courage, they would draw up for battle more eagerly. This our Lord Jesus also commanded: “Behold,” he said, “I have given you authority to tread on snakes and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy.” May we too, then, put our feet on the necks of the hostile spirits.

Why did he make the Gibeonites hewers of wood and drawers of water? They deceived both by their appearance and by the falsehood of their words. And when they should have asked God the Master and only then made agreements with them, they trusted their false words, were persuaded, and confirmed the agreements by oath. But the God of all had commanded that all those peoples be put to death. Caught, then, between the divine command and the oaths, he made them servants of the sacred ministry. To serve God is not a dishonour but the greatest honour. And Noah's prediction had to reach its fulfilment: for he said, “Cursed be Canaan; a servant he shall be to his brothers.” In the Gibeonites the prediction reached its fulfilment.

What is the meaning of “Is this not written in the book that was found”? Having taught us the prophet's power, that by a word alone he stopped the great lights from moving until he had won a complete victory, the writer, suspecting that someone might not believe the account, said that it was found in the old writing. It is clear from this too that someone else of a later time wrote this book, taking its materials from another book. This too prefigures the Saviour's wonder-working. For as the sun stood still while the prophet fought, so when our Saviour was destroying death by death, the sun held back its rays and filled the world with darkness at midday.

How is “It came from the Lord to harden their heart, so that they would come out to war against Israel, that they might be utterly destroyed, and that no mercy might be given them, so that they would be wiped out, as the Lord said to Moses” to be understood? Concerning the other nations God legislated for Israel that, if while they were besieging a city its people sent envoys and sought friendship, they should receive the embassy, lift the siege and make peace. The passage teaches us, then, that God, who governs all things by weight and measure, allowed these to draw up against the people so that they would be granted no mercy but be destroyed according to the divine decree.

Why does Moses distribute the allotments of the land to some, and Joshua to others? This too prefigures the reality. To those beyond the Jordan Moses divided the land, to those across the Jordan Joshua. Those who received their allotments through Moses are a type of the Jews, those who received them through Joshua a type of the nations who believed. And since Israel is the firstborn, the firstborn received their allotments through Moses: Reuben, Gad and Manasseh. Yet these too cross over, armed, before the others; for those of the Jews who believed brought salvation to the nations. The Jebusites, the Canaanites and other foreign nations, however, were left and lived with Israel. Of this type too one can find the reality. For not all received the saving word: both Jews and Greeks continued to contradict it, living in the same cities and villages as we; and one would not go wrong in calling them Canaanites, Hittites and Jebusites. Those who hold the loathsome doctrines of the heresies also deserve this name. For this reason the divine Apostle said, “But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him”; and again, “For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.”

Why did Caleb ask for Hebron? Adorned with piety, he preferred above all others the city in which the most excellent patriarchs had sojourned and been buried. His words show that they divided the land after fighting for seven years. For Caleb spoke thus: “I was forty years old when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land; and now the Lord has kept me alive, as he said. This is the forty-fifth year since the Lord spoke to Moses.” After God's sentence on the six hundred thousand, they spent thirty-eight years living in the wilderness; so seven are what remain of the forty-five. This the Master of all had also foretold through the most divine Moses: “When the Lord your God brings you into the land which he promised to your fathers, after seven years you shall read this law to all the people.” One should note that he calls Jerusalem Jebus and says that it was allotted to Benjamin. Simeon, according to his father's prediction, had a scattered allotment: “For his inheritance,” it says, “was in the midst of the allotment of the sons of Judah.” Then, having named the cities, he added: “This is the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Simeon. For the portion of the inheritance of the sons of Judah was greater than theirs, and the sons of Simeon inherited in the midst of their allotment.”

For what reason did the most divine Joshua, having distributed the land to the others, not assign an allotment to himself, but received Thamnasachar from the people? In this too he imitates the Master's humility: “Learn from me,” he says, “for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” And he embraced the utmost poverty, so as not even to have a house: “For the Son of Man,” he says, “has nowhere to lay his head.” Since, then, his namesake Joshua was a type of him, he did not assign himself an allotment, but accepted the one offered him, teaching those entrusted with any rule to care not for their own interest but for the benefit of their subjects.

Why did he assign cities to the priests in the tribe of Judah, of Benjamin and of Simeon? In the wilderness too, when they journeyed, they were joined with the tribe of Judah, for both the priests and the tribe of Judah received the eastern section; and here again they were allotted together with the tribe of Judah, since there had also been intermarriage between these tribes. Aaron, the first high priest, married the daughter of Amminadab, and Jehoiada, the all-praiseworthy high priest, the sister of Ahaziah. The Master allowed these tribes to intermarry, he who, sprung from Judah according to the flesh, was called not only king but also high priest. They also had to live in the tribe of Benjamin, since the divine temple was to be built in their tribe. And they took some cities from the tribe of Simeon too, since its allotment was also near the temple. For as he assigned to the priests and Levites the tithes of the fruits of the earth and of the cattle, so he commanded that tithes, as it were, of the cities be given them. The patriarch Jacob promised to give these tithes to God: “Of all that you give me,” he said, “I will give a tenth to you.” The people, then, was paying an ancestral debt, not offering a gift. Besides this, it held their allotment of the land. When the war had ended and the division had been made, those who had received their allotments beyond the river were dismissed. Before they crossed the river, they built a very great altar. The nine tribes, not knowing the purpose of the building and supposing it to be the beginning of impiety, wished to march against them in full force, preferring piety to kinship. But the all-wise Joshua and Eleazar sent Phinehas, as one who had shown zeal against impiety in the wilderness, to remind them of their forefathers and of the God-given benefits and to stop the lawlessness they had dared. When they went and learned that the innovation had not been dared for the sake of worship, but realized that the altar had been built to be called a memorial of their fellowship in piety, so that their descendants could point to it to refute those who might try to exclude them from the divine festivals, they returned rejoicing, praising God for the piety of their brothers and the common peace of all. The Jews of today should know and say this too: that their altar was not the true altar but prefigured the true one. When the prophet was about to depart this life, he called together all the people and urged them to make no marriages with the inhabitants of the land, since such mixing provides occasions of impiety. And he added threats to the exhortation: “For if you do this,” he says, “know that the Lord will not again destroy these nations before you; and they will be snares and stumbling blocks to you, nails in your sides and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from this good land which the Lord your God has given you.” The history of the Judges taught us this more clearly. We have also learned the reason why they did not take possession of the whole land according to the divine promise: for embracing kinship with the impious nations and imitating their impiety, they were stripped of divine providence and forced to serve them. His saying about death is admirable and philosophical: “For I,” he said, “am going the way of all the earth.” He also shows them that the divine prediction does not lie: “And you shall know in your heart and in your soul that not one word has failed of all the good words which the Lord your God spoke to you; all that he said to us he has given us; not one of them has failed.” You have learned, he means, the truth of the divine promises from the benefits; for he has fulfilled what he promised. Learn from this, therefore, that the threats too do not lie. For he added: “And as all the good words which the Lord spoke concerning you have come upon you, so the Lord will bring upon you all the evil words, until he destroys you from this good land which the Lord has given you, when you transgress the covenant of the Lord your God which he commanded you.” Teaching that these words are not human, he added: “For thus says the Lord God of Israel.” And he recalls Terah, the father of Abraham and Nahor. He mentioned Nahor because of the maternal line, for from him came Rebekah, Leah and Rachel. Then he teaches that Terah served other gods, and that for this reason God the Master separated Abraham and moved him to that land. He added the descent of Jacob into Egypt and the exodus through Moses; the wonder of the sea and the life in the wilderness; the destruction of the Amorites; the schemes of Balak and the blessings of Balaam against his will; the strange crossing of the river; the destruction of the enemies who rose up; and the enjoyment of every kind of good thing. And he urges them to be freed from the service of foreign gods and to serve only the God who made and saved them. He also set before them a choice: “Choose for yourselves today,” he says, “whom you will serve: whether the gods of your fathers beyond the river, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you live.” Having thus put the choice to the others, he showed the piety of his own mind: “But I and my house will serve the Lord God, for he is holy.” Then, when the people promised to serve only the God who had saved them, the most divine Joshua answered them: “You will not be able to serve the Lord, for God is holy; and, being jealous, he will not bear your lawless deeds and your sins when you forsake the Lord and serve other gods; and he will turn and harm you and consume you, after having done you good.” Do not expect, he means, that you will enjoy the same good things while breaking the law; for God the Master knows not only how to do good but also how to punish transgressors. When they accepted this proposal too and promised to serve the Lord, he necessarily added: “You are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen the Lord, to serve him.” The history has also taught that, having urged them to be freed from the worship of foreign gods and having legislated about piety, he did not leave these things unwritten, but made a written record of them.

Why, having set up the stone, did he say, “Behold, this stone shall be a witness among you, for it has heard all that was said by the Lord, which he spoke to you today”? The stone is lifeless, but to convict living and rational beings he calls lifeless things to witness; and he used the ancient custom. For Jacob and Laban, having made their agreement, called the hill a witness of the agreement. How much a pious and God-loving ruler benefits his people the history teaches: “For Israel served the Lord,” it says, “all the days of Joshua and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, and who had seen all the works of the Lord which he did with Israel.” After their death they turned aside to impiety; for the end of the history taught this too. But they paid the penalty for their impiety: stripped of divine care, they were put under the yoke of slavery and had the king of the Moabites as their master. But the loving Lord, remembering his promise to the fathers, limited the slavery to a period of eighteen years.

Why is the book called Judges? As the book of the Kingdoms contains many different narratives but was named Kingdoms because it recounts what happened to the people in the time of the kings, so the present book was called Judges because it teaches what happened in the time of the judges' leadership. The beginning of this history, however, I think is a recapitulation of what was achieved by Joshua son of Nun. For it mentions Adonibezek, the war against him, his defeat and his death. It also mentions Hebron as assigned to Caleb, and the killing of the three giants, Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai, whom it called descendants of Anak. It is likely that their killing was foretold then and the prediction fulfilled later.

If Jerusalem was laid waste at that time, how did David, when he was king, take it later by siege? The people underwent many changes, as the history of the Judges teaches: sometimes they won and sometimes they were defeated, sometimes they ruled the foreigners and sometimes they served them. It is clear, then, that after Jerusalem was burned the Jebusites rebuilt it, taking advantage of the people's misfortune. I think this book too was written later, using as evidence the fact that the history names this city Jerusalem; for it received this name later, having been called Jebus.

What is the meaning of “Give me the redemption of water, the redemption of the high places and the redemption of the low places”? Symmachus and the others rendered “a watering of water,” and instead of “low places,” “plains.” Achsah was prompted by Othniel her husband to ask for a field. She asked, then, for a watering of water, and received, as she asked, not only plain land but also hill land. “According to her heart” means what she desired. He called the hill country “high places” and the flat land “low places.”

How does he here name the lawgiver's father-in-law Hobab, when he was named Jethro and Raguel in those histories? I have already said that Hobab was his son. He called him “father-in-law” as the brother of his wife; for even now many call such men “in-laws.” The sons of Hobab, then, are descendants of Jethro.

Which city does he call the city of palms? Jericho. I think it was so called because of the fruit of the palm trees. For in the book before this one, as soon as the people had crossed the Jordan, the writer said, “They ate of the fruit of the land, new unleavened bread,” and that on that very day the manna ceased, after they had eaten of the grain of the land; “and the sons of Israel no longer had manna, but they reaped the land of the palms in that year.” And the second book of Chronicles, relating the matter of those whom the ten tribes took captive from the tribe of Judah, said thus: “And they settled them in Jericho, the city of palms, with their brothers.”

How is “And the Lord was with Judah, and he inherited the hill country, for he could not inherit those living in the valley, because Rechab had given them instructions” to be understood? The divine Scripture mentions Rechab in many places as very pious, and says that his piety reached even his descendants. It says that he advised the tribe of Judah to leave the valley and live in the hill country. He too was of the tribe of Judah, as the book of Chronicles teaches. I think he advised them to avoid the valley because of the impiety of the neighbouring peoples, and also because of the nearness of the sea. For those near the sea both receive people who sail in from far away and themselves are drawn to seafaring; and mixing with foreigners was ruining the life of the law.

Why did they not take all the cities, but a multitude of foreign nations lived with them? First, they did not gain control of the whole land through sluggishness; then also through greed. “For he put the Canaanite under tribute,” it says, “and did not drive him out completely.” The writer said this about each tribe. Besides this, having transgressed the divine law and served the gods of the foreigners, they were stripped of divine providence. For this reason the all-wise Lord did not utterly destroy the race of the Canaanite nations, but let many live near them, so that, being warred upon and forced to serve, they would perceive the harm that came from their error, turn to the God who had saved them, and enjoy his aid. And that I say this not using human reasonings but taught by the history itself I will show at once. “For an angel of the Lord,” it says, “went up from Gilgal to the place of weeping, and to Bethel, and to the house of Israel, from Gilgal.” Gilgal was the name given to the place of the foreskins; and in the Hebrew language the name means freedom. He sends the angel from there, reminding them both of the crossing of the river and of the circumcision that took place. Then he tells what the angel said: “The Lord brought you up out of Egypt and brought you into the land which he swore to your fathers to give you, and said to you, ‘I will never break my covenant with you; and you shall make no covenant with those who dwell in this land, nor worship their gods, but you shall break their carved images and tear down their altars.’ But you did not listen to my voice when you did these things. And I,” he says, “will no longer drive out the people whom I said I would expel before you; and they will be troubles to you, and their gods will be a stumbling block to you.” You have transgressed my law, he means, you have not kept my commandments; you have made peace with the teachers of sin and served their gods. Enjoy, therefore, what you longed for, and reap the sheaves of your own seed. For those who escaped death in war will go on making war on you, and their gods will enslave your souls. When the angel had said these things the people wept; hence the place was named Weeping. From this I supposed that most of what was said is a recapitulation of what was done under Joshua. For the writer said: “And Joshua sent the people away, and the sons of Israel went each to his place and each to his inheritance, to inherit the land. And the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, who knew all the great work of the Lord which he did for Israel.” He also tells at what age Joshua died and where each was buried; and he added that another generation arose after them that did not know the Lord or the work he had done for Israel; and that, living with the Canaanites, the Perizzites and the other foreigners, they intermarried with them and through intermarriage shared in their impiety: for they served the Baals and the Ashtaroth. We are taught by these things how much the piety of rulers benefits their subjects, how much anarchy ruins them, and again the rule of the wicked. This history too teaches it: “For the Lord raised up judges for them,” it says, “and saved them from the hand of those who plundered them. And when he raised up judges for them, the Lord was with the judge and saved them from the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge.” And a little later: “And when the judge died, they turned back and acted more corruptly than their fathers, going after other gods to serve them and worship them.” I think there is also another reason why they did not receive the whole promised land, namely this: the keeping of the life of the law required a very small land. For the law commanded them to keep festival three times a year, all running together to one place, in which they built the divine temple. There he commanded them to bring the firstfruits, the tithes, the firstborn of the flocks and the other sacrifices. Fittingly, then, he confined them to a small area, so that even the sluggish could easily gather at the consecrated temple.

How is this passage to be understood: “These are the nations Joshua left, to test Israel by them, all those who had not known the wars of Canaan; only for the sake of the generations of the sons of Israel, to teach them war; only those before them did not know them”? When Joshua son of Nun was general, the people did not win their battles by the art of war but by enjoying help from above: “For I will send the hornets before you,” he said, “and they will destroy the Canaanite and the Hittite,” and so on. And indeed, sending thunderbolts from above and hailstones of great size, he destroyed the enemy. He says, then, that for this reason he did not utterly destroy all who inhabited that land while Joshua son of Nun was general, so that those after him too might be taught God's care by experience and, through the necessity of war, call on the Master as their ally. Symmachus says that he wished to train them by “testing” and to teach them the art of war. And “to test,” as it stands in the Seventy, does not indicate ignorance on God's part. For he did not test Abraham in order to learn Abraham's mind; there too it taught that God knew that Abraham would command his sons and his household after him to keep all the judgments of the Lord God. He does not test, then, so that he himself may learn, but to teach those who do not know. As, then, he had given Adam the commandment to exercise his reason, so here he left some of the nations, to show the piety of some and to expose the impiety of others. For this is what it says: “To test Israel by them, to know whether they would listen to the commandments which he commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses.” The events themselves also teach that they were the cause of their not being entirely freed from those impious nations. For Joshua struck down twenty-nine kings with their armies, besides the commanders of Jericho and Ai, though he had no city, no base of operations, no soldiers trained in the experience of war. But those after him, though they had strong cities, had gained very great wealth from the spoils, had full armour, walls and ramparts, could not overcome those who were left, because of their own impiety.

How is Othniel both Caleb's brother and the son of Kenaz? For Caleb was the son of Jephunneh. It is likely that Jephunneh had two names and was also called Kenaz. It is also likely that they were of different fathers but one mother: that Caleb had Jephunneh as father, and that after his death his mother married Kenaz and bore Othniel. That he called Jericho the city of palms, the account of Eglon teaches: “Eglon went,” it says, “and struck the sons of Israel and took possession of the city of palms.” And a little later: “And Eglon returned from the idols at Gilgal. And Ehud said to Eglon, ‘I have a secret word for you, O king.’” Gilgal is near Jericho. He called the iron of the sword its “flame” and the hilt its “guard.” For this is what he says: “And he took his sword from his right thigh and thrust it into Eglon's belly, and drove in the hilt also after the flame, and the fat closed over the guard.”

The story of Jabin king of Hazor is also told by the history of Joshua. If, then, he was killed in Joshua's time, how did he rise against Israel long afterwards? That one was one man and this another; they had the same name and held the same kingdom. It is likely that this one was even the son of that one. For one can find many who have their fathers' names; thus, for example, the first son of the emperor Constantine was named Constantine.

But the history of Joshua said not only that Jabin was killed but also that Hazor was burned. There is nothing improbable in its being razed then and built again. Yet here it mentions Hazor, but did not say that he lived in it, but in Haseroth. One should also note that it calls the descendants of Jethro Kenites.

Why does a woman prophesy? Because men and women have one nature. For the woman was formed from Adam and shares in reason as he does. Hence the Apostle too says, “In Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female.” So too Moses was a prophet and Miriam a prophetess. I think Deborah was granted prophecy to shame the men of that time; for since none of them was found worthy of the grace, she obtained the gift of the all-holy Spirit. And it was so clear that she had been granted grace from above that Barak did not dare go out to battle without her. She said this in her song too: “The rulers in Israel ceased, until Deborah arose, a mother in Israel.” She also speaks of the impiety of her countrymen: “They chose new gods like barley bread.” By the image she exposed their great folly: as he is foolish who prefers barley loaves to wheat ones, so he is utterly thunderstruck who puts the falsely named gods before the true one. She also shows the faithfulness of her mind: “If I see forty thousand spearmen, my heart is toward what is ordained for Israel.” The divine law prescribed this: “If you see a multitude of enemies, horses and chariots, do not be afraid, for the Lord your God will fight for you.” She commands not only the poor but also those proud of their wealth to praise God: “You mighty ones of the people,” she says, “bless the Lord, riding on beasts of burden, seated on carriages; and utter the sound of those who strike up music amid those who rejoice. There they will ascribe righteousness to the Lord.” “Mosphathem” means fields, and “madaroth” blindness. And “curse Mazor” means “curse in the mighty one.” We are taught by the history that God the Master, using a father's affection, handed the people over to foreigners when they transgressed, as if using a rod and a whip, and again, when they repented, had mercy and granted them every kind of care. Immediately after the benefit through Deborah, for example, when they ran aground on impiety, he handed them over to the Midianites; then, after the chastisement, he granted them help. Through a certain prophet he first exposed their impiety and reminded them of the benefits they had enjoyed; then through an angel he encouraged Gideon and commanded him to draw up against the enemy.

What is the meaning of “Go in this strength of yours, and you will save Israel from the hand of Midian”? When the angel urged him to take command and be confident about the war, he said to him: “If the Lord is with us, why have all these evils found us? And where are his wonders which our fathers told us of, saying that the Lord brought us up out of Egypt? And now the Lord has cast us off and given us into the hands of Midian.” Since, then, he kept the memory of God's wonders and held a firm belief about God, that it was easy for him, if he wished, to free them from the calamities that held them, the angel said, “Go in this strength of yours, and you will save Israel from the hand of Midian,” that is, draw up for battle with this faith, and you will win. Let no one find fault with what follows. For he did not say “My thousand is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house” as one who distrusted God, but out of a modest mind. Hence the angel answered, “Because the Lord is with you, you will strike Midian as one man.” At once, then, believing, he offered a sacrifice. The angel did not seize the divine honour, but fulfilled the office of a priest: striking the rock with his staff, he consumed the sacrifice with a miraculous fire.

Why did he order the bull being raised for Baal to be offered to God? To move them from error to the truth. For this reason he also commanded Baal's altar to be torn down and the grove cut down. For the man granted such grace had not only to be pious himself but to become a teacher of others.

What is the fleece that received the dew a symbol of? First Gideon asked that the dew be on the fleece and all the ground remain dry; and after that, that the ground be watered and only the fleece remain without dew. The passage shows that formerly Israel enjoyed divine grace as the fleece the dew; but later the whole of human nature obtained the spiritual gifts, and Israel became bereft of them, as the fleece was deprived of the dew.

Why did he order only those who had drunk like a dog to go into battle? God the Master himself showed the reason: “The people with you are too many,” he says, “for me to give Midian into their hand, lest Israel boast against me, saying, ‘My own hand has saved me.’” When most had been sent away, he ordered those left to be brought to the river; then, when the majority knelt and drank quickly, while the three hundred, out of sluggishness, did not do so but brought the water to their mouths with their hand, he ordered these alone, as idle and sluggish, to attack the enemy, so that the divine influence would be plain to all. So too through twelve fishermen and tax collectors, and one leather-worker, he destroyed the phalanx of the demons and saved human nature. For this reason the prophet Isaiah compared those events with these and said, “For the Lord has scattered the rod of the disobedient, as on the day of Midian.” For as here he used unarmed soldiers, carrying in the left hand torches hidden in jars and in the right the trumpets, so he sent the holy apostles unarmed into the world, carrying the torch of the miracles and the trumpet of the preaching.

What is the meaning of “Gideon made them into an ephod and set it up in his city, in Ephratha”? What was done was against the law. For only the priests were allowed to use the ephod, since through it what was to be done was revealed. Gideon's aim, however, did not incline to impiety; as ruler and general he wished to learn through the ephod what was to be done. But for the people it became the occasion of lawlessness: “For all Israel went whoring after it there,” it says, “and it became a stumbling block to Gideon and to his house.” In Exodus the ephod was rendered “shoulder-piece,” to which the oracle was attached; and through it victory in war was made known. The history of the Kingdoms teaches this more clearly. For when the foreigners had gathered, Saul ordered the priest to bring up the ephod; then, seeing the enemy thrown into confusion and the victory made plain, he said, “Withdraw the ephod.” It is clear, then, that it was both a woven garment put on the priests and something that indicated beforehand what was to be done; and Aquila called it a “cloak.” The story of Abimelech and the Shechemites teaches us that an evil concord brings utter destruction on those who use it, ending in discord: for having together killed Gideon's sons, they were destroyed by one another.

What is the meaning of “He sowed it with salt”? This signifies barrenness, for nothing grows from salt. One should note that, enjoying a little respite, they at once served idols: “For the sons of Israel again did evil before the Lord,” it says, “and served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of Ammon and the gods of the foreigners.” When God in anger set the king of the Ammonites over them, they cried to God their Saviour and accused themselves, that they had abandoned their benefactor, the true God and Lord, and served the falsely named gods. Then the loving Lord exposed their ungrateful mind (for though they had often enjoyed great care, they preferred the worship of idols) and threatened that he would grant them no care: “For I will not save you again,” he says; “go and cry to the gods you have chosen for yourselves, and let them save you in the time of your affliction.” When, then, they both confessed their own transgressions and removed the foreign gods from among them and served the Lord, they enjoyed his help.

What is the meaning of “Say now ‘Shibboleth’”? The men of the tribe of Ephraim marched against Jephthah, angry that they had not shared in the victory over the Ammonites; then, faring badly, they fled. But Jephthah sent a detachment of his troops and prevented them from crossing the river. Then, when they tried to deceive and said they were of the other tribes, he ordered them to be asked a certain word, which brought their exposure through the tongue. For as the Osrhoenians, the Syrians, the people of the Euphrates region, the Palestinians and the Phoenicians use the Syrian language, yet their speech has many differences, so the twelve tribes were Hebrews but probably had certain peculiarities, like this one. For, as the Syrian says, while the others called an ear of grain “shebla,” the men of Ephraim from some habit said “sebelo.” Knowing this, Jephthah ordered them to say it and killed those who were exposed.

Why did God the Master allow Jephthah's daughter to be slaughtered? Jephthah's promise was very foolish. He ought to have considered that a dog, or a donkey, unclean animals according to the law, might well meet him first. Training others through him, then, to make their promises with understanding and knowledge, God the Master did not prevent the slaughter. That he condemns such sacrifices the blessed David testifies, crying: “And they sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons, and shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the carved images of Canaan; and the land was polluted with blood,” and so on. And God the Master himself says through the prophet Ezekiel: “And you took your sons and your daughters whom you bore to me, and offered them to your lovers; this beyond all your harlotry.” And showing the excess of the impiety, he added, “which I did not think of, nor did it come into my heart.” Wishing to exercise Abraham's love for God, he commanded him to sacrifice his son; but having shown the righteous man's mind, he prevented the slaughter. What follows also shows Jephthah's immaturity. For having promised to offer as a sacrifice whatever met him first, and then seeing that his daughter had done so, he tore his clothes and lamented bitterly, allowed her first to mourn, and then sacrificed her. His daughter was far better than he: “If you have opened your mouth to the Lord concerning me,” she says, “do to me as it went out of your mouth, since the Lord has taken vengeance for you on your enemies, on the sons of Ammon.” Teaching, then, how promises to him should be made, God the Master did not prevent the slaughter. After this the history teaches us the goodwill of the angels toward God. For when Manoah wished to offer him a kid, the divine angel said: “If you constrain me, I will not eat your bread; and if you make a whole burnt offering, you shall offer it to the Lord.” I do not need food, he means; I do not accept sacrifice. For the latter belongs to God, the former to human nature. I neither need food as a man nor seize the divine honour. From this too it is clear that those whom Abraham entertained consumed the food set before them in some other way.

How did Samson, living a dissolute and lawless life, enjoy spiritual grace? From this too it is clear that the Master, for the sake of another dispensation, gives a share of the divine gift even to the unworthy. The Saviour shows this in the holy Gospels: “For many,” he says, “will come on that day and say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And I will say to them, ‘Depart from me, you workers of lawlessness; I do not know who you are.’” God the Master did this here too. For wishing to destroy the power of the foreigners, he gave him strength and might through spiritual grace. For this reason he also allowed him to marry a foreign woman. The history teaches this too: “And his father and his mother did not know that it was from the Lord, that he was seeking an occasion against the foreigners.” “It was from the Lord” signifies not the divine working but the divine permission.

Why, though he was a Nazirite and under the law, did he eat the honeycomb made in the mouth of the lion, which was dead? This too shows that the observance of such laws was not necessary for all. For none of those who transgressed such laws was made to pay a penalty. If anyone supposes that Samson did this as one who was not an exact keeper of the law, let him consider again that when he was thirsty God gave him water, commanding the hollow of the donkey's jawbone to gush forth. According to the law this had a threefold uncleanness: the donkey was unclean when alive, unclean again when dead, and, having become an instrument of slaughter and struck down a thousand foreigners, it had another uncleanness. Yet the lawgiver himself supplied him with water from there and from nowhere else. But this unconquered, invincible man, at whom the myriads of foreigners had long shuddered, a harlot of a woman enslaved. So much harder than the battle line in war is the war of desire. Pleasure made a captive of the man who had fought so nobly and become famous for his extraordinary valour. It also stripped him of divine grace: “For Samson awoke from his sleep,” it says, “and said, ‘I will go out and do as always, and shake myself free.’ And he did not know that the Lord had departed from him.” But the loving God did not abandon him entirely; seeing him mocked, he had pity, heard him when he prayed, and supplied such strength that he shook the columns that bore the house of the idols and brought the roof down with them, burying three thousand men and a far greater number of women.

Where did Samson catch so many foxes? There is a mountain in their country that breeds many foxes; and the history teaches this: “For the Amorite began,” it says, “to live on the mountain of the myrtle grove, where there are bears and foxes.”

What is the meaning of “Micah made an ephod and teraphim”? I have often spoken about the ephod: that it was a priestly woven garment and that through it God made known what was to be done. The teraphim was something of the same kind, but dedicated to idols, not to God. The history teaches this here too: “For he made,” it says, “a carved and a molten image.” Then it adds: “And Micah made an ephod and teraphim, and filled the hand of one of his sons, and he became his priest.” He was not of the Levitical tribe but of Ephraim. It also taught the cause of the lawlessness: “For in those days,” it says, “there was no king in Israel; each man did what was right in his own eyes.” Of so much harm is anarchy the cause.

What follows involves much ambiguity: “There was a young man from Bethlehem, of the people of Judah, of the kindred of Judah, and he was a Levite, and he sojourned there.” For if he was a Levite, how was he of the kindred of Judah? He called Bethlehem “the people of Judah”; and, as I think, he also named the same village “the kindred of Judah.” We have said that God did not set apart a separate allotment for the priests and Levites, but scattered them among all the tribes, so that all might have teachers of piety. So this man, being a Levite, lived in Bethlehem, which belonged to the people and kindred of Judah. If anyone thinks this interpretation forced, let him remember what we have already said: that the two tribes, the royal and the priestly, intermarried. It is likely that this man was a Levite on his father's side but had a mother from the tribe of Judah. Great, however, was the man's lawlessness. First, though God had pitched the tabernacle at Shiloh, he ministered in another place, contrary to the divine law. Then he offered sacrifices to handmade idols (for this is what “the carved and the molten image” means). Besides this he dared another transgression: the law forbade the Levites to act as priests and commanded the priests to minister; so he transgressed this law too by daring to act as priest. He also became ungrateful to the man who had looked after him: taking the instruments of the deceit, he followed those of the tribe of Dan and became the agent of their error concerning idols.

What is the meaning of “In the valley which belonged to the house of Rechab”? Rechab probably lived near that city. In ancient times it was called Laish; when it had been besieged by these men it was renamed Dan; and now it is called Paneas. Here, however, we have clearly learned this Levite's descent: “Jonathan,” it says, “son of Manasseh, son of Gershom, son of Moses, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the captivity of the land. And they set up for themselves Micah's carved image which he had made, all the days that the house of God was in Shiloh.” They acted as priests unlawfully, then, not only serving idols but also daring to perform the priestly work. For they were Levites, not priests; God the Master directed that only the family of Aaron should act as priests. And I think that, because the lawgiver had married a foreign woman, he ordered those born of him to be ranked with the Levites and not with the priests, so that the priestly dignity would not be insulted by reproaches about the kinship. For if a brother and sister brought this reproach against the lawgiver, what would those more prone to rebellion and usurpation not have dared? Those who were insolent against Aaron, who married a girl sprung from the royal tribe, what would they not have done against the sons of Moses, who married the daughter of a Midianite priest of idols?

Why was Israel defeated, when it was moved by zeal and preferred piety to kinship? Because they practised similar lawlessness, and saw the licentiousness of others but overlooked their own. The divine Apostle also said this: “For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, for you, the judge, do the same things.” And again: “Do you suppose, O man, you who judge those who do such things and do them yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness leads you to repentance? But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will repay each according to his works.” This is what these men suffered. For, using a just anger against those who had broken the law at Gibeah, they armed the four hundred thousand; but God, wishing to chastise them as doing the same things, seeing the evil in others but unwilling to see it in themselves, allowed them to be defeated once and twice, and many thousands of them to be killed. But when he saw that they had accepted the chastisement and were imploring him and shedding many tears, he assisted their eagerness and utterly destroyed the lawless tribe, except for a very few who could easily be counted. For those who fought for the licentious men were worse than the licentious themselves: when their kinsmen demanded those who had dared the outrage, they not only did not hand them over but eagerly defended them. For this reason they suffered common destruction. I think this war took place before the other wars, not long after Joshua's death. For “Phinehas,” it says, “son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, stood before the ark in those days.” Eleazar ended his life immediately after Joshua, and Phinehas succeeded to the priesthood; the end of the book of Joshua son of Nun taught us this. I think, then, that the one who wrote this history did not arrange at random, putting last what happened first. He wished first to show us the succession of the Judges, who led first, who second, who third; and then to set down these two narratives …, Laish, and the story of the woman whom the frenzied lust of the licentious killed.

Why did the sons of Israel command the two hundred of Benjamin to seize and marry some of the maidens dancing at Shiloh? All the women of their tribe had been slaughtered; and the others had sworn not to give them their own daughters in marriage. So that they would not, forced by necessity, take foreign wives, they found a way out of an impasse and devised the seizure. [End of question 27:] … narratives: the story of Micah, and the … using and lamenting.

Why was the story of Ruth written? First, because of Christ the Master; for he sprang from her according to the flesh. For this reason the divine Matthew, writing the genealogy, left out the women famous for virtue, Sarah, Rebekah and the others, but mentioned Tamar, Rahab and Ruth, and also the wife of Uriah, teaching that the only-begotten Son of God became man for the sake of all human beings, Jews and the other nations, sinners and righteous. For Ruth was a Moabite, and Bathsheba was joined to the king unlawfully. Rahab too was a harlot, but obtained salvation through faith; and Tamar is made illustrious by the same. For she did not have relations with her father-in-law out of licentiousness; but seeing that he was unwilling to join his son to her, she stole the tillage so that the blessing might spring up. And indeed, after this sowing she received no other seed, but loved the unmarried state. One can also see Ruth, because of her piety, leaving her parents and following her mother-in-law. “For Ruth said,” it says, “‘Far be it from me to leave you or to turn back from following you; for where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge; your people shall be my people; and where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also, if anything but death separates me from you.’” And she said this though often urged by her mother-in-law to return to her parents: “Turn back, my daughters,” she said; “why do you go with me? Have I yet sons in my womb, that they may become your husbands? Turn back, my daughters, for I am too old to have a husband; for I said, ‘I have no hope of having a husband.’ And if I bear sons, would you wait for them until they are grown, or would you refrain for them from having husbands? No, my daughters, for it is more bitter for me than for you, for the hand of the Lord has gone out against me.” I am neither pregnant, she means, so that you might wait to be joined to those born of me, nor can I marry because of old age, so that you might wait for my marriage, the begetting of children and their growing up; for I have received a blow sent by God. The story of Ruth had to be written because of the Master; yet the history in itself is enough to bring every benefit to those who know how to profit from such things. It teaches us Naomi's hard calamities and praiseworthy endurance, and the daughters-in-law's chastity and affection for their mother-in-law, and especially Ruth's, who preferred an old and afflicted woman to her parents because of the piety of her mind and the memory of her husband. It has also taught us the virtue of Boaz. For he not only generously gave Ruth a share of the crop, but also comforted her with words: “Do not go to glean in another field, daughter,” he said, “but stay here with my young women.” And having bidden her eat and drink with the reapers, he added: “It has been fully told me all that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband, and how you left your father and your mother and the land of your birth, and came to a people that you did not know before. May the Lord repay your work, and may your reward be full from the Lord God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to trust.” And the blessing reached its fulfilment: she received a full reward from the Lord, becoming the ancestress of the blessing of the nations. He not only gave her food but served her himself, ordering no one else to wait on her, but himself preparing the roasted grain and very generously offering the loaves. For when she was satisfied she took what was left over to her mother-in-law. Her mother-in-law too gratefully repaid the absent benefactor with blessings: “Blessed be he who took notice of you,” she said, “for he has filled an empty soul, as he did with the one with whom he did it.” For he did not look at your poverty, she means, but at the lawgiver, who directed that every care be taken of widows.

Some find fault with both Naomi and Ruth: with the one as having advised, with the other as having obeyed and acted and lain down at the feet of Boaz. When Ruth heard her mother-in-law say, “The man is near to us; he is one of our next of kin,” she remembered his great care and supposed that Boaz, as a relative of her husband, wished to be joined to her according to the law, so as to preserve the memory of the dead man. What follows shows this: “For Ruth said to her mother-in-law,” it says, “‘He also said, Stay close to my young women until they have finished all my harvest.’” Hearing these words, Naomi advises her to lie at the feet of Boaz, not to sell her youthful beauty; the words of the advice show the opposite: “You will go,” she says, “and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do.” So confident was she in the man's chastity and justice. And the deeds confirmed the words. Following her mother-in-law's advice, when all were asleep Ruth lay down at the feet of Boaz. He asked who she was; she reminded him of the kinship of the dead man. He praised what she had done, but did not betray his chastity; he kept marital intercourse for the law. “Blessed are you of the Lord God, daughter,” he said, “for you have made your last kindness better than the first, in not going after young men, whether poor or rich.” You have shown, he means, by what you did, that you did not do this as a slave to desire. Otherwise you would have gone to those of young age, considering neither wealth nor poverty, but only the enjoyment of pleasure. But you have come to a man who stands in the place of your father; this is what “daughter” signifies. And twice he called her so: “And now, daughter, do not fear; all that you say I will do for you. For the whole tribe of my people knows that you are a woman of worth, and that I am truly a kinsman.” No one will blame me, he means: you are praised by all, and I will make the marriage because of kinship, not because of licentiousness. But since there is another, nearer relative, I must speak with him first, so that if he chooses he may marry according to the law; and if not, then I will put the yoke of marriage on you. So great was the man's virtue that, when a young and beautiful girl came to him by night, he kept his chastity and kept the matter for the law; nor did he rush into marriage contrary to the law, but put the proposal of marriage to the nearer relative; and when he declined the marriage, then at last he was joined to the praiseworthy woman. His words to that man are also admirable. He did not first put the proposal of marriage to him, but spoke about the purchase of the fields. Then, when the other gladly accepted the contract, he added the matter of the marriage, saying that it was right that the one who acquired the dead man's fields should also marry his wife and preserve the dead man's memory by begetting children. And since because of the marriage that man refused the contract for the fields too, he took off his sandal according to the law and gave it, and Boaz married Ruth. That he did not consent to marry as a slave to pleasure his praiseworthy words also show: “For Boaz said,” it says, “to the elders and to all the people, ‘You are witnesses today that I have acquired all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Mahlon and Chilion from the hand of Naomi; and also Ruth the Moabite, the wife of Mahlon, I have acquired for myself as wife, to raise up the name of the dead on his inheritance, and the name of the dead shall not be cut off from among his brothers and from his tribe.’” One should admire both the piety and the exactness of what was said. For I do not transgress the law, he means, in taking a Moabite wife; I fulfil the divine law, striving that the memory of the dead be kept unquenched. The elders confirmed the marriage with a blessing. They spoke thus: “May the Lord make your wife who is coming into your house like Rachel and Leah, who both built the house of Israel, and may you do worthily in Ephratha, and there shall be a name in Bethlehem renowned among all people. And may your house be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah, from the seed which the Lord will give you from this young woman.” The words of the blessing hint that he had another wife too; that is why they mentioned Rachel and Leah together and added, “who both built the house of Israel.” And “may you do worthily in Ephratha, and there shall be a name in Bethlehem renowned among all people” foretells the saving birth, through which Bethlehem became renowned among all people. They mentioned Tamar because she too, being a foreigner, bore Perez, from whom David the king traces his descent, and his descendant, who is also his Master, his Son and his Lord. From Ruth was born Obed, the father of Jesse, who begot David. The women brought this child to Naomi and said, “Blessed be the Lord, who has not left you this day without a kinsman, to make your name called in Israel; and he shall be to you a restorer of the soul.” According to the plain sense this signifies her comfort, but according to the reality, the turning of the world; for from there the salvation of the world blossomed. Since, enjoying divine grace, we have interpreted the book of Moses the lawgiver, of Joshua the prophet, of the Judges and of Ruth, come, begging again to receive the radiance of the same light, let us unfold the histories of the Kingdoms, passing over what is clear and making plain to readers what needs clarification, so that we may not leave your request unfulfilled, Hypatius, dearest of sons. A cause of the obscurity is that the translators took pains to make their translation word for word; the same thing happens to those who render the Italian language into Greek, for those works are full of obscurity. First I will state the subject of the history. There have been very many prophets whose books we have not found, but whose names we have learned from the history of the Chronicles. Each of them used to write down what happened in his own time. Thus the first book of Kingdoms, both among the Hebrews and among the Syrians, is called the prophecy of Samuel. But this is easy to learn for anyone who wishes to read the book mentioned. Those, then, who wrote the book of Kingdoms took their materials from those books and wrote a very long time later. For how could someone who flourished with Saul or David have written of what happened under Hezekiah and Josiah, and the campaign of Nebuchadnezzar, the siege of Jerusalem, the enslavement of the people, the deportation to Babylon and the death of Nebuchadnezzar? It is clear, then, that each of the prophets wrote what was done in his own times, and others, collecting those writings, composed the book of Kingdoms. And again, others became historians of what these had left out, and they called what they wrote the book of Paraleipomena, as teaching what the earlier writers had left out.