CHAPTER XII

LEGALISM TRIUMPHANT

By putting religion into legal form Ezekiel protected it from a disintegrating syncretism. On the other hand, legalism is always in danger of degenerating into formalism. It is easy for us to exaggerate this danger and to underrate the advantages of a rigid code. The imageless worship of Yahweh was more elevated than the idolatry to which the whole gentile world was addicted. Humanly speaking, it could not have been preserved pure unless it had been guarded by ritual barriers. The terrible earnestness with which the prophet sought to exclude everything unclean from the sanctuary communicated itself to the Jewish community. The fact that the exiles were shut out from participation in civil affairs made them all the more devoted to matters of religion.

The rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem in the time of Darius was doubtless inspired by the Messianic hope. The disappointment which followed seemed to indicate that not enough care had been taken to separate the clean from the unclean. Those who clung to their faith in Yahweh as the only God could imagine no other reason for his delay to reveal himself. Hence came the anxious inquiry for ritual tradition, and a persistent effort to put that tradition into written form. Ritual is, from the nature of the case, capable of indefinite expansion. Deuteronomy, as we have seen, had comparatively few priestly regulations; Ezekiel added to the number; the guild of scribes who came after him carried on the process. Apparently the exiles who lived at a distance from the temple were more zealous in this work

than were the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The very fact that the ritual could not be carried out by those in exile made it easier for them to develop its theory. Evidence of their state of mind is given by the Talmud, which formulates the most elaborate rules for ceremonies though these have not been observed for eighteen centuries. The underlying thought is, of course, that when the kingdom comes everything necessary for a complete service must have been provided for.

For two centuries or more after Ezekiel the industry of the scribes spent itself in the collection of ritual traditions. The result was the elaborate code contained in the middle books of the Pentateuch. It is now almost impossible to disentangle the many strands which have here been interwoven. Some of the material is doubtless ancient, representing customs in vogue at Israelite sanctuaries before the Deuteronomic reform. But whatever its source, all of it has been brought under Ezekiel's point of view. One body of laws has, in fact, been supposed to be the work of Ezekiel, though the evidence is not convincing. This is the so-called Holiness code, which avows its design to protect the sanctity of Yahweh. Its watchword is: "Be ye holy, for I am holy" (Lev. 192). We have already discovered the inadequacy of this translation. It would be more in accordance with the author's idea to read: “Be ye separate from all that is profane because I am thus separate." This code (Lev. 1726) occupies a position intermediate between Ezekiel and the fully developed priestly system. The author uses many of Ezekiel's phrases and may be called a disciple of the prophet. If we may judge from the concluding exhortation of his book, he himself lived in exile, for this section regards dispersion among the gentiles as the supreme misfortune, and it shows the hope of the exiles by the promise that if they repent Yahweh will remember his covenant with the fathers and again be their God.

The scrupulosity of this writer is shown by his inclusion in his code of many things not mentioned in Deuteronomy.

He reveals the power of the antique way of thinking, according to which all the more unusual processes of life are under the control of supernatural powers. These powers are no longer regarded as gods, yet they have a real existence, and must be conciliated or warded off. Diseases are inflicted not directly by Yahweh but by the demons. These demons are taboo to the worshipper of Yahweh; hence the person afflicted by the disease is unclean, and must be shut out of the community. For uncleanness is contagious, and the presence of the sick man in the camp (which here doubtless stands for the sacred city) is a source of danger. The code therefore attempts to guard the community by shutting the leper out of its bounds, and by providing an elaborate rite of purification before he can be readmitted to the sanctuary.

I have used the leper as an illustration because the law concerning him shows most clearly the point of view of this whole school. The regulations concerning the leper seem to belong to one of the later strata of the Pentateuch, but other cases of defilement are treated in the Holiness code. Most surprising to us are the laws concerning the sexual life, especially concerning childbirth. Parallels from other religions show that there was a wide-spread belief that the birth of a child is under the influence of a demon (originally a divinity) of reproduction. The child and mother are therefore unclean after the birth, and there must be an elaborate purification after the forty or eighty days of separation. It would be a mistake to suppose that the Hebrew writers regard the sexual life as sinful in our sense of the word. There is no trace of asceticism in the Old Testament. Marriage is incumbent on all, and the birth of a son is a sign of the grace of Yahweh. The treatment of the young mother as unclean is therefore a survival from early beliefs or usages.

From the same point of view we must judge the elaborate prohibitions of marriage within certain degrees of kinship. These are uttered in conscious opposition to foreign religious practice. The text intimates as much: "After the doings of the land of Egypt wherein you have dwelt you shall not

do, and after the doings of the land of Canaan whither I bring you you shall not do, neither shall you walk in their statutes" (Lev. 18: 3). This sentence prefaces the prohibitions of which I have spoken. The inference is plainthat in these countries marriages within the kin were allowed or encouraged from alleged religious motives. Ezekiel says plainly that sexual license was common in Jerusalem before the fall of the city (Ezek. 22: 10 f.). Probably the worship of a foreign or old Canaanite god of fruitfulness was responsible for these abuses, and the reason for the prohibitions of our code is the acute reaction of the religion of Yahweh against foreign custom. This accounts for the mention of child sacrifice in connection with these sexual offences; it was regarded as Canaanitish in origin. The author takes pains to emphasise his view at the close of the chapter, when he says that the land is defiled by all these things (Lev. 18: 24-30).

As in the case of Ezekiel, all sins are judged from the ritual point of view. Hence the incongruous grouping together of such things as cutting one's hair or beard, tattooing the person, eating with the blood in one class, and prostituting one's daughter, oppression of the client, and the use of false weights and measures in the other. And in the same paragraph we find positive commands to observe the Sabbath, to show reverence to old age, to love the client as one's self (Lev. 19:26-36). From Deuteronomy are repeated the prohibitions of sowing two kinds of seed in one field and of wearing cloth in which two kinds of thread are woven together (1919). We are not able to point out in every case the exact heathen superstition against which the prohibition is directed, but the probability is that such a superstition existed. There is evidence, for example, that in some cases heathen diviners wore a garment in which wool and cotton were woven together. The scrupulosity of the Holiness code is manifest when it makes the touch of an unclean animal a source of defilement (Lev. 11 : 43).

1

1 Goldziher, Zeitschr. d. alttest. Wissenschaft, XX, pp. 36 f.

Since Yahweh has separated the people from all mankind to be his consecrated ones, the obligation to purity rests upon every Israelite. But there are degrees of purity, and the priests who come into the immediate presence of the divinity must exercise more care than the layman who stands at a greater distance. Hence the legislation for the priests, which follows the precedent set by Ezekiel. Bodily blemishes shut a man out from active service, though not from sharing the sacred food (Lev. 21: 16-18). Mourning rites defile the mourner, as we have seen. The demand of bereaved nature, however, is too insistent to be altogether ignored. Hence the concession, according to which the priest may express his grief for father, mother, son, daughter, brother, or unmarried sister (vss. 1-4). Even for these there must be no shaving of the head or making marks in the flesh, these acts being connected with the worship of the manes. The high priest now appears distinctly as the culmination of the sacred caste, in whom therefore separation from the common must be most complete. He must not rend his clothes, must not approach any corpse, and must not observe any of the conventional signs of grief even for his father or his mother (21: 10-15). The code seems to prohibit his leaving the sanctuary at all, lest his sanctity be contaminated (vs. 12), but in practice this was not enforced. The severity of the law is seen in the enactment that any Israelite who approaches the sacred things in a state of defilement shall be cut off from his people (22 :3).

The way in which ancient custom is adopted in this legislation is illustrated by the treatment of a newly-planted vineyard or orchard. For three years the fruit must be regarded as unclean; the fourth year it is all consecrated to Yahweh; after this it becomes the property of the owner. The evident reason for the law is that originally the first three years, or perhaps the first four years, were sacred to the local Baal, that is, it was taboo to man. In this legislation the taboo is recognised as uncleanness, and the special act of consecration to Yahweh in the fourth year is designed