Ch. Leviticus 27:1-34. COMMUTATION OF VOWS AND TITHES (P)

The phraseology of the Priestly Code is conspicuous throughout, e.g. ‘male’ and ‘female’ (3–7), ‘oblation’ (Ḳorbân, 9, 11), ‘most holy’ (lit. holiness of holinesses, 28). Moreover, the law of the Jubile year (Leviticus 27:17 ff.) is assumed to be in force. This fact, and its reference to rights of redemption (ch. 25), may account for the position of the ch. here. The last v. (34) is intended as the conclusion, not merely of this ch., but of the collection of ‘commandments’ contained in P, and referred to the Sinai legislation, just as Leviticus 26:46 of the previous ch. was the conclusion of the ‘Law of Holiness.’ See note there.

The subject of this ch. may be thus analysed:

(1) vows, consisting of (a) persons, Leviticus 27:1-8; (b) cattle, Leviticus 27:9-13; (c) houses, Leviticus 27:14-15; (d) land, Leviticus 27:16-25; but firstborn and ‘devoted’ are excluded, Leviticus 27:26-29. (2) tithes, Leviticus 27:30-33; concluding subscription, Leviticus 27:34.

1–8. The case of persons

2. accomplish a vow] rather, as mg., make a special (lit. hard) vow. For the definition of a vow, as compared with other classes of offerings, see on Leviticus 7:11. It was the utterance, and not merely the intention, that constituted the binding character of a vow (Deuteronomy 23:22). In this first case, viz. that of persons being vowed, the redemption might be made by an offering of money, in accordance with an estimate adapted to the particular case. R.V. mg. is nearer the Heb. than the text, but in strict grammar its ‘of’ should be omitted, ‘persons’ being in apposition to the word ‘vow’ in the original. The pronoun ‘thy,’ if it stands, seems to refer to Moses, but see on Leviticus 27:13. The estimate evidently turned upon the comparative strength and capability of work to be fairly expected in the two sexes and at various periods of life, in fact, in modern phraseology, on their value in the labour market.

3. the shekel of the sanctuary] See on Leviticus 5:15.

8. The case of the poor person. Cp. ch. Leviticus 5:11.

9–13. The case of cattle

Such an animal, when presented as a vow, must not be changed, a bad for a good. Otherwise both animals became dedicated. If the animal so presented was ‘unclean,’ and as such could not lawfully be offered to God, the priest was to set upon it a value in proportion to its worth, whereupon the owner might sell it for that sum and pay over the amount. If, however, he desired to have it back, he must pay in addition one-fifth of the price which the priest had adjudged.

12. thou the priest] or, thou, O priest.

13. thy estimation] Cp. Leviticus 27:15, etc. The pronoun constitutes a difficulty, as in Leviticus 27:2. There Moses, who seems to be referred to, is himself speaking to the people. Here the reference is apparently to the priest in Leviticus 27:12. In Leviticus 27:23 ‘thy’ cannot have either of these references. The LXX. omits it in all the cases. It is thought to be the insertion of a reviser, in order to harmonize with Leviticus 27:15, where the subject is similar and the pronoun presents no difficulty as applied to Moses, who is there addressed. But it may possibly, as is suggested by the anomalous grammar in the Heb. of Leviticus 27:23, be a survival of a phrase from old directions addressed to the priest, and have thus ceased to bear any definite meaning.

14, 15. The case of houses 16–25. The case of lands

The vow, as regards its duration, is thus limited to a maximum of 50 years, being determined by the distance of the year of Jubile. When that year arrives, the field shall return to the owner, to be disposed of as he pleases. But even in the meantime, on payment of a defined sum of redemption-money, the field shall remain in the enjoyment of the owner, and the estimate for the purpose shall be at the rate of fifty shekels of silver for the amount of land (about 3 8/4 acres, according to Kennedy, ad loc.) which would yield one homer (about eleven bushels) of barley, with an abatement in proportion to the number of years to run before the next Jubile. In order to obtain the enjoyment of the field, however, the owner must pay a further sum amounting to one-fifth of the redemption-money. In case the owner do not desire to redeem, or have alienated the land by selling it to another, the law of Jubile is not to operate; the land shall become the possession of the priest. In the case of a man’s vowing land which is his by purchase and not by inheritance, that purchase shall not hold good beyond the Jubile, the purchaser redeeming it in the meantime by a payment calculated on the same principle as above.

16. fifty shekels of silver] meaning apparently that at the rate of one shekel a year this shall be the maximum amount of redemption payment. The standard in these cases was to be ‘the shekel of the sanctuary.’ See Driver, Exodus 30:13 (where the same words are used), for discussion as to the meaning and value of the shekel thus denominated.

23. thy estimation] The Heb. representing these two words presents a grammatical anomaly, although parallels are not absolutely wanting in the MT. But see on Leviticus 27:13.

26, 29. Classes which may not be vowed

Firstlings are already the Lord’s (Exodus 13:2). If the firstling is, that of an animal which is reckoned among the ‘unclean’ (according to the rule laid down, ch. Leviticus 11:3), it is to be valued and redeemed at 1 1/5 of its valuation. Driver, Exodus 13:13 (J), points out that P’s law, as given here, is more favourable to the priests. In Exod. the redemption is to be made by a lamb, a less valuable animal.

28. no devoted thing] The word lit. means set apart, separated (Arab. harama, whence harem, the occupants of the women’s portion of a Mohammedan house, or the apartments themselves). See on Exodus 22:20 for examples of its application, and for the superiority of R.V. over A.V. in the English rendering. For the different species of separation in this sense see HDB., Art. Ban (Kennedy), where a distinction is drawn between objects set apart for God by individuals (the ‘private ban’) referred to in this v., and those persons, such as the idolater or blasphemer, who were subjected to a judicial sentence by the authorities. The latter are those meant in Leviticus 27:29

30–33. Laws concerning tithes

A distinction is here made between the tithe on the yield of the land or of fruit trees, and that on animals. The former according to this passage may be redeemed on payment of 1 1/5th of the estimation. In Numbers 18:21-24 there is no such permission given. See McNeile (C.B.) there for comparison of the two passages. The tithe on cattle here imposed is, as he points out, a fresh demand, found nowhere else in O.T. except 2 Chronicles 31:6.

32. under the rod] the ‘staff’ carried by shepherds (Psalm 23:4; Micah 7:14; Zechariah 11:7), and used (Tal. Bab., Bechoroth, fol. 58 b) for counting the flock when they were entering or leaving their fold. For the phrase, and for the reference by classical writers to similar customs, see Davidson (C.B.) on Ezekiel 20:37.

33. Cp. Leviticus 27:10.

34. See introd. note to this ch.