Leviticus 14:10

On the following (the eighth) day he brings his sacrifice to the usual place, the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. In the Temple the leper, after bathing in a chamber at the N.W. corner of the Court of the Women, was brought to the gate of Nicanor, between the Court of the Women and the Court of Israel, where he presented his offerings.

tenth partsof an ephah] See on Leviticus 23:17. For -parts" A.V. has -deals," a substantive of the same meaning, but now surviving as such only in the common phrase, -a great deal," although the verbis still in ordinary use. Cp. dole, and the German Teil, portion.

log a liquid measure approximately equal to an English pint.

The ritual here enjoined is peculiar:

(1) The first offering is a Guilt-Offering a he-lamb.

(2) The whole lamb is waved with the log of oil before the Lord.

(3) The blood of the sacrifice and the oil are applied to the leper with a ceremonial similar to that used at the consecration of the priests (Leviticus 8:12; Leviticus 8:23 f., Leviticus 8:30).

The he-lamb was of the first year, and younger than the ram usually brought for a Guilt-Offering; the waving of the whole animal was unusual; certain parts only of a sacrifice were waved, and the ceremony of waving was not practised with the Guilt-Offering and Sin-Offering. So that in respect of the animal employed, the act of waving, and the matter waved, this sacrifice was different from the ordinary Guilt-Offering.

The Nazirite who had been defiled by a dead body brought a Sin-Offering, a Burnt-Offering, and a Guilt-Offering; they were offered in this order, and no special regulations about the Guilt-Offering are given (Numbers 6:10-12). But in the case of the leper, the fact that the Guilt-Offering is brought first, with an accompanying ritual of marked significance, invests this sacrifice with a special importance and distinguishes it from the Guilt-Offering brought by the Nazirite. The Guilt-Offering with its accompanying ritual is the prominent feature in the leper's sanctuary service. It seems to imply that the disease of leprosy had removed him who had been smitten from the -kingdom of priests" (Exodus 19:6); that a re-consecration was necessary, before he could again take his place among his brethren. But it may also mean that leprosy was thought to imply some sin for which atonement must be made by fine or compensation.

The reason why this sacrifice should be a Guilt-Offering is not apparent. The distinctive character of the Guilt-Offering was that it involved restitution for wrong done, whether in respect of -the holy things of the Lord" (Leviticus 5:15), or against a neighbour (Leviticus 6:2 f.). As the Nazirite had vowed a period of separation, it might be considered that the defilement of that separation (Numbers 6:12), though involuntary, was a wrong done in respect of -the holy things of the Lord"; but it seems doubtful whether the leper's enforced absence from the sanctuary during the period of his uncleanness can be so regarded. If it is urged that every Israelite in virtue of his priesthood (Exodus 19:6) is dedicated to the service of God, then a Guilt-Offering would be required after any prolonged illness, and after cases of lengthened uncleanness such as those mentioned in chs. 12 and 15; but no Guilt-Offering is prescribed for these persons. Can there be here a remnant of some older practice of which no certain traces survive? The Heb. word "âshâm, used for the Guilt-Offering in P, is applied in the older literature to certain offerings and fines (1 Samuel 6:3; 2 Kings 12:17). Was an "âshâmor money payment required in earlier times on the recovery of a leper? This would explain the demand for a Guilt-Offering in P.