Chapter commentary
Leviticus Chapter 22
1
Le 22:1-9.
English original
Le 22:1-9.
THE PRIESTS IN THEIR UNCLEANNESS.
2
Untitled
2. 你吩咐亚伦和他儿子们，使他们与圣物隔离——"隔离"在摩西礼仪的用语中意为"禁戒"；因此这吩咐的意思是，祭司应当禁食那些祭物中归给他们阶层的部分，因为只有不受律法上不洁所拘的祭司才可吃。
免得他们亵渎我的圣名，在献给我为圣的圣物上等——即他们不可因缺乏当有的敬畏，而给亵渎我圣名的机会。对献给神之物的轻率或不敬的使用，会羞辱神的圣名，并对神的敬拜造成不敬。
English original
2. Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, that they separate themselves from the holy things--"To separate" means, in the language of the Mosaic ritual, "to abstain"; and therefore the import of this injunction is that the priests should abstain from eating that part of the sacrifices which, though belonging to their order, was to be partaken of only by such of them as were free from legal impurities.
that they profane not my holy name in those things which they hallow unto me, &c.--that is, let them not, by their want of due reverence, give occasion to profane my holy name. A careless or irreverent use of things consecrated to God tends to dishonor the name and bring disrespect on the worship of God.
3
Untitled
3. 无论何人……就近圣物——祭司因偶然的玷污而受到的繁杂细微的限制，使他们时刻保持警觉，唯恐自己不适合事奉圣事，这有助于充分保持敬畏之心和顺服神之权威的心。每遇一项禁令或吩咐所适用的事例，他们胸中就唤起对罪与本分的意识。但为何要为因大麻风或接触尸体而被取消资格的祭司另立一条明确的条例 [Le 22:4]，因为已有一项普遍的律法在施行，将一切处于那种状况的人排除于社会之外？因为祭司可能会因熟稔而轻忽宗教，在犯下过失或罪时，以圣职为庇护。因此通过了这条律法，明列使不得进入圣所的主要暂时性不洁形式，使祭司不以为自己有资格享有比百姓其他成员更大的宽容；并且使他们不但不能以任何程度豁免律法的制裁，反而因祭司的身份，更有义务在律法的严格字句与最微小的条例上遵行。
English original
3. Whosoever he be . . . that goeth unto the holy things--The multitude of minute restrictions to which the priests, from accidental defilement, were subjected, by keeping them constantly on their guard lest they should be unfit for the sacred service, tended to preserve in full exercise the feeling of awe and submission to the authority of God. The ideas of sin and duty were awakened in their breasts by every case to which either an interdict or an injunction was applied. But why enact an express statute for priests disqualified by the leprosy or polluting touch of a carcass
[Le 22:4],
when a general law was already in force which excluded from society all persons in that condition? Because priests might be apt, from familiarity, to trifle with religion, and in committing irregularities or sins, to shelter themselves under the cloak of the sacred office. This law, therefore, was passed, specifying the chief forms of temporary defilement which excluded from the sanctuary, that priests might not deem themselves entitled to greater license than the rest of the people; and that so far from being in any degree exempted from the sanctions of the law, they were under greater obligations, by their priestly station, to observe it in its strict letter and its smallest enactments.
4
Untitled
4-6. 必用水洗身——任何以色列人若染上了一种使他不得享受平日特权的不洁，又在法律上从那使他取消资格的不洁中得了洁净，就必须以全身浸入水中来表明他已恢复。虽然一切礼仪上的不洁都构成被排除的理由，但不洁有程度之分，导致的被逐期有长有短；要根据情形的轻微或恶性，遵守不同的礼仪来除去。一个人若无意中接触了不洁的动物，就在规定的期限内不洁；之后期满，他便要洗澡，作为他恢复洁净的标记。但大麻风患者只要仍受那病之苦，就持续不洁；当他痊愈时，也要洗澡，并非为洁净自己——水对此无效——而是为表明他已洁净。没有一个例子记载大麻风患者是因使用水而恢复团契的；水只是作为外在可见的记号，表明这样的恢复将要成就。利未记中充满这样的例子，表明在一切礼仪性的洗洁中，正如不洁意味着特权的丧失，水的洗礼则表明恢复那些特权。没有例外；因为不洁的以色列人被逐出会众，不洁的祭司也丧失在圣所中执行圣事的资格；在这两种情形中，都要求同样的遵行——以所设立的洗礼之礼正式表明他们重新得着所丧失的特权。若有人忽略或拒绝遵行这洗洁，他就是违背了一条明确的训令，仍然留于不洁之中；他未肯利用这一特权，因此便被称为从耶和华面前被"剪除"。
English original
4-6. wash his flesh with water--Any Israelite who had contracted a defilement of such a nature as debarred him from the enjoyment of his wonted privileges, and had been legally cleansed from the disqualifying impurity, was bound to indicate his state of recovery by the immersion of his whole person in water. Although all ceremonial impurity formed a ground of exclusion, there were degrees of impurity which entailed a longer or shorter period of excommunication, and for the removal of which different rites required to be observed according to the trivial or the malignant nature of the case. A person who came inadvertently into contact with an unclean animal was rendered unclean for a specified period; and then, at the expiry of that term, he washed, in token of his recovered purity. But a leper was unclean so long as he remained subject to that disease, and on his convalescence, he also washed, not to cleanse himself, for the water was ineffectual for that purpose, but to signify that he was clean. Not a single case is recorded of a leper being restored to communion by the use of water; it served only as an outward and visible sign that such a restoration was to be made. The Book of Leviticus abounds with examples which show that in all the ceremonial washings, as uncleanness meant loss of privileges, so baptism with water indicated a restoration to those privileges. There was no exemption; for as the unclean Israelite was exiled from the congregation, so the unclean priest was disqualified from executing his sacred functions in the sanctuary; and in the case of both, the same observance was required--a formal intimation of their being readmitted to forfeited privileges was intimated by the appointed rite of baptism. If any one neglected or refused to perform the washing, he disobeyed a positive precept, and he remained in his uncleanness; he forbore to avail himself of this privilege, and was therefore said to be "cut off" from the presence of the Lord.
8
Untitled
8. 自死的——人的天性本能对这样的食物反感。这本可留给希伯来人自行裁夺——可以推测（如同一切文明国家的百姓一样）他们即使没有任何明文禁令也会避免食用。但一条明确的训令是必要的，为要向他们表明，凡自然死亡或因疾病而死的，都因那条禁止他们食用带血之肉的律法而被禁止。
English original
8. dieth of itself--The feelings of nature revolt against such food. It might have been left to the discretion of the Hebrews, who it may be supposed (like the people of all civilized nations) would have abstained from the use of it without any positive interdict. But an express precept was necessary to show them that whatever died naturally or from disease, was prohibited to them by the operation of that law which forbade them the use of any meat with its blood.
10
Le 22:10-16.
Le 22:10-16。
祭司家中何人可吃圣物。
10-13. 凡外人不可吃圣物——为供应事奉祭司而分配的祭物部分，限于他家中的专属使用。临时客人或雇工不可吃；但买来的奴仆或家生的奴仆获准例外，因为他是他家中固定的成员。同理，他自己嫁了非祭司之丈夫的女儿也不可吃。然而，她若是寡妇且无子，便可恢复婚前的父家特权。但她若已为人母，由于她的儿女没有祭司职任的特权，她就必须在父家之外另谋生路来供养他们。
English original
Le 22:10-16.
WHO OF THE PRIESTS' HOUSE MAY EAT OF THEM.
10-13. There shall no stranger eat the holy thing--The portion of the sacrifices assigned for the support of the officiating priests was restricted to the exclusive use of his own family. A temporary guest or a hired servant was not at liberty to eat of them; but an exception was made in favor of a bought or homeborn slave, because such was a stated member of his household. On the same principle, his own daughter, who married a husband not a priest, could not eat of them. However, if a widow and childless, she was reinstated in the privileges of her father's house as before her marriage. But if she had become a mother, as her children had no right to the privileges of the priesthood, she was under a necessity of finding support for them elsewhere than under her father's roof.
13
Untitled
13. 外人都不可吃——此处重复（Le 22:10）所记的禁令，为要表明其严格。所有的希伯来人，甚至是祭司最近的邻舍——除了他家中的成员之外——在这方面都被视为外人，因此他们无权吃坛上所献之物。
English original
13. there shall no stranger eat thereof--The interdict recorded
(Le 22:10)
is repeated to show its stringency. All the Hebrews, even the nearest neighbors of the priest, the members of his family excepted, were considered strangers in this respect, so that they had no right to eat of things offered at the altar.
14
Untitled
14. 人若误吃圣物——普通的以色列人可能在不知情之下误吃了作为十分之一、初熟果子等所献之物，发现这无意的错误之后，他不仅要归还他所用去的分量，还要加上五分之一的罚款，交由祭司带进圣所。
English original
14. if a man eat of the holy thing unwittingly--A common Israelite might unconsciously partake of what had been offered as tithes, first-fruits, &c., and on discovering his unintentional error, he was not only to restore as much as he had used, but be fined in a fifth part more for the priests to carry into the sanctuary.
15
Untitled
15, 16. 祭司不可亵渎以色列人所献的圣物——"他们"指谁，存在一些难以确定之处。上文所谈论的主题既围绕祭司，有人认为此处也指他们；那么意思便是：若祭司在不洁的状态下呈献圣物，全民便因祭司的过失而招致罪咎[CALVIN]。照另一些人的看法，"以色列人"是句子中的主语；那么意思是：以色列人不可因触碰供物或留下其中任何部分而亵渎或玷污他们的供物，免得他们招致吃那唯独归祭司之物的罪咎[CALMET]。
English original
15, 16. they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel--There is some difficulty felt in determining to whom "they" refers. The subject of the preceding context being occupied about the priests, it is supposed by some that this relates to them also; and the meaning then is that the whole people would incur guilt through the fault of the priests, if they should defile the sacred offerings, which they would have done had they presented them while under any defilement [CALVIN]. According to others, "the children of Israel" is the nominative in the sentence; which thus signifies, the children of Israel shall not profane or defile their offerings, by touching them or reserving any part of them, lest they incur the guilt of eating what is divinely appointed to the priests alone [CALMET].
17
Le 22:17-33.
Le 22:17-33。
祭牲必须没有残疾。
English original
Le 22:17-33.
THE SACRIFICES MUST BE WITHOUT BLEMISH.
19
Untitled
19. 要献得蒙悦纳——译作"使你们蒙悦纳"更为准确。
没有残疾的公牛——这条律法（Le 1:3）建立在对天然适当性的感受之上，要求在挑选献祭的动物时格外小心。之所以如此谨慎，是因为祭物要么是对神思慈的赞美表达，要么是为求和好或保持他悦纳而设的手段。如果我们假设祭物的意义完全源自其与耶和华的关系，那么任何在其种类中不完全的祭牲，都不能被视为达成这些目的的合适工具。祭物好比臣民献给君王的礼物，因此神对贪恋世俗的犹太人强烈抗议（Mal 1:8）是合情合理的。若会幕以及后来的圣殿被视为大君王的宫殿，那么祭物便相当于臣民在各种场合献给君王的礼物；从这个角度看，它们是百姓对君主之感受的恰当表达。当臣民想要尊崇君主、表示效忠、平息其忿怒、恳求赦免或为他人代求时，便献上礼物；而祭物所包含的一切观念都对应这些情感——感恩、敬拜、祷告、认罪与赎罪[BIB. SAC.]。
English original
19. Ye shall offer at your own will--rather, to your being accepted.
a male without blemish--This law
(Le 1:3)
is founded on a sense of natural propriety, which required the greatest care to be taken in the selection of animals for sacrifice. The reason for this extreme caution is found in the fact that sacrifices are either an expression of praise to God for His goodness, or else they are the designed means of conciliating or retaining His favor. No victim that was not perfect in its kind could be deemed a fitting instrument for such purposes if we assume that the significance of sacrifices is derived entirely from their relation to Jehovah. Sacrifices may be likened to gifts made to a king by his subjects, and hence the reasonableness of God's strong remonstrance with the worldly-minded Jews
(Mal 1:8).
If the tabernacle, and subsequently the temple, were considered the palace of the great King, then the sacrifices would answer to presents as offered to a monarch on various occasions by his subjects; and in this light they would be the appropriate expressions of their feelings towards their sovereign. When a subject wished to do honor to his sovereign, to acknowledge allegiance, to appease his anger, to supplicate forgiveness, or to intercede for another, he brought a present; and all the ideas involved in sacrifices correspond to these sentiments--those of gratitude, of worship, of prayer, of confession and atonement [BIB. SAC.].
23
Untitled
23. 这样的才可以献等——这段经文应译为："若作为乐意的供物或为还愿而献，必不蒙悦纳。"这祭既要求"没有残疾"[Le 22:19]，就在象征上意味着神的子民当以心里真诚的意念全然奉献自己；它既要求"完全才能蒙悦纳"[Le 22:21]，就在预表上引导他们归向那一位——没有他，就没有任何祭物能蒙神悦纳。
English original
23. that mayest thou offer, &c.--The passage should be rendered thus: "if thou offer it either for a freewill offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted." This sacrifice being required to be "without blemish"
[Le 22:19],
symbolically implied that the people of God were to dedicate themselves wholly with sincere purposes of heart, and its being required to be "perfect to be accepted"
[Le 22:21],
led them typically to Him without whom no sacrifice could be offered acceptable to God.
27
Untitled
27-28. 第八日以前，它当在母兽下——动物到第八日才被视为完全，才可供食用。祭物既被称为神的饼或食物（Le 22:25），在它出生后立时献上——那时它还不能食用——便是表示对宗教的轻蔑；此外，这一禁令，以及 Le 22:28 所含的禁令，都教导人对母兽当有仁慈与体贴，同时也使祭物免于一切冷漠残忍的观感。
English original
27, 28. it shall be seven days under the dam--Animals were not considered perfect nor good for food till the eighth day. As sacrifices are called the bread or food of God
(Le 22:25),
to offer them immediately after birth, when they were unfit to be eaten, would have indicated a contempt of religion; and besides, this prohibition, as well as that contained in
Le 22:28,
inculcated a lesson of humanity or tenderness to the dam, as well as secured the sacrifices from all appearance of unfeeling cruelty.
Le 22:1-9.
祭司的不洁。