Priestly Code: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:25, 17 June 2008

Revision as of 07:29, 9 July 2008

Line 3:

It is termed the ''priestly'' code due to its large concern with ritual and the priesthood, and also, in critical scholarship, it is defined as the whole of the law code believed to be present in the [[Priestly Source]] except for the Holiness Code. It should be understood that, under the [[documentary hypothesis]], while the Priestly Code is believed to be created to rival the Ethical Decalogue and Covenant Code, it is thought, however, to have been intended as only supplementary to the Holiness Code.

==Constituent Partsparts==

Although several of the portions of the code form the bulk of Leviticus, there are several laws which appear in several other places in the torah. The code is generally regarded to contain the following laws <!--this list is present in the (public ___domain) Jewish Encyclopedia article "Priestly Code", it is also supported by most academics, not least because it is very obvious simply from reading the torah-->:

Line 93:

Likewise, the ritual of the Red Heifer at Numbers 9:1-13, in which ''water of cleansing'' is produced, is generally thought by academic criticism to be early. The idea of this liquid, with which to wash away ritual uncleanliness, is thus thought to have become superseded by the more naturalistic idea that such uncleanliness merely needs to be atoned for, by a sacrificial offering, an idea represented elsewhere.

This change from more supernatural ideas methods to naturalistic ones is present also in aspects of law other than completely sacrificial rituals. Numbers 5:12-31 presents the law concerning the treatment of a suspicion of adultery, and is believed, in critical scholarship, to contain two versions of the law. These two versions are thought to be intricately woven together, but netherthelessnevertheless the general content of the rituals are still thought able to be separated. One version is considered to only involve a ''jealousy offering'', of [[barley]], being placed in the woman's hands, and then waved by the priest, with a handful being subsequently burnt, the other version involving the woman drinking [[curse]]d water. The version involving the less naturalistic idea of a curse making a woman's thigh ''rot'' is thought to represent the earlier law, which subsequently evolved into the other version more concerned with atoning.

===Increasing Precisionprecision===

Leviticus 11, discussing clean and unclean animals, mentions carcasses at Leviticus 11:8, and then lists which animals are unclean, appearing to end the list at Leviticus 11:23. Leviticus 11:24-31 expands on the subject of carcasses, and then mentions several other animals which are unclean. Since both of these features are expansions, and appear out of place, rather than the details concerning carcasses being mentioned after Leviticus 11:8, and the additional animals being part of the list, it is generally considered amongst textual critics that Leviticus 11:24-31 is a later addition to the chapter, added in order to make it more precise. Leviticus 11:32-38 also is regarded as appearing out of place, since it returns to the subject of carcasses, the subject having previously moved away. This segment offers even more precision, detailing the uncleanliness of objects which have made contact with carcasses, and is thus usually thought of, by critical scholars, as an even later addition than Leviticus 11:24-31.

than Leviticus 11:24-31.

Leviticus 4 is of this vein, extending the laws of the ''"sin-offering''" to specify the penalty for each level of sin. Additionally, the ritual for the offering itself is more elaborate than that described elsewhere, for example at Leviticus 9:8-11, and utilizes a bullock, rather than the goat that is required according to Leviticus 9:15, 16:8, and Numbers 15:24. Critical scholars, therefore, regard this chapter as being a much later addition to the ''sin-offering'' laws.

Different stages of precision are also thought evident in Numbers 8. Numbers 8:15b-26 repeats the rules of Numbers 8:6-15a, but also connects the ownership of the firstborn with [[the Exodus]] from Egypt, as well as adding rules concerning a minimum age and a [[retirement]] age. Standard textual criticism, as well as the repetition, is thought to indicate that the second portion is by a different writer, creating an explanation that wasn't originally present.

Line 110 ⟶ 109:

There are also examples of clauses which appear to water down preceding laws. Leviticus 14:21-32 provides for the substitution of two turtledoves (or pidgeons) for a lamb, reducing the cost to the provider of the sacrifice. While this is presented as being a response for poor sinners, critical scholarship interprets the section as indicating that, historically, an earlier sacrificial ''offering'', of a lamb, was increasingly being replaced, over time, by a pair of turtledoves.

Modification of a this kind is also thought to be found twice in succession within Leviticus 5:1-13. A sacrifice involving a lamb or kid (of a goat) is described at Leviticus 5:1-6, whereas Leviticus 5:7-10 states that two turtledoves or two pidgeons suffice, whereas Leviticus 5:11-13 further states that mere [[flour]] is sufficient. Biblical critics assert that it is difficult to see why anyone would go to the extent of bringing a lamb, when flour is enough, and similarly, if flour is sufficient, they assert that mentioning more costly losses, such as lambs, would be unexpected from a single writer of the law. Textual criticism identifies quite different writing styles between each of these three sections, the first section not detailing any ritual whatsoever, merely what should be brought, the second giving quite detailed instructions of ritual, and each being progressively more verbose, the first merely writes ''shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin'', whereas the thirthird produces ''shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these''. For these reasons, critical scholars usually identify Leviticus 5:7-10 as a later addition to Leviticus 5:1-6, and Leviticus 5:1-13 as an even later addition, reflecting the ritual gradually being watered down over time.

d produces ''shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these''. For these reasons, critical scholars usually identify Leviticus 5:7-10 as a later addition to Leviticus 5:1-6, and Leviticus 5:1-13 as an even later addition, reflecting the ritual gradually being watered down over time.

==Provenance==

Despite the disparate nature of the Priestly Code, it is netherthelessnevertheless believed possible to identify a few authors who have worked on more than one of the laws. The most noticeable of these is an author who writes, unlike the remainder, in the style of a teacher, and is consequently sometimes referred to, in critical scholarship, as the ''priestly teacher'' (''Pt''). The laws typically ascribed to this supposed author are either started by a phrase such as ''this is the law of...'', as is the case, for example, with Numbers 19:14-22; or end with a colophon of the form ''this is the law of [subject A], [summary of the law concerning subject A], [subject B], [summary of the law concerning subject B], ...'', as is the case with Numbers 6:1-21, and the more naturalistic parts of Numbers 5 (the portion thought by critics to be the later version of the remainder).

Another aspect of the ''"priestly teacher's'''" apparent style is a concentration on atonement for uncleanliness and sin, particularly via rituals involving ''"wave offerings''". In textual criticism, the laws attributed to this writer are seen as having formed an earlier independent collection of laws, which were later added to the Priestly Code by an editor, and may, slightly, pre-date the Priestly Source.

Another set of distinctive colophons are those of the form ''this is the law of [subject A], and [subject B], and [subject C], ....'', which occur for Leviticus 7:28-38, 11:1-47, 13:47-59, 14:33-57, and 15:1-31. Of these, Leviticus 15 is noticeably repetitive, repeating both ''bathe [itself] in water'' and ''be unclean until the even'', for almost every verse, as well as the detail of the atonement sacrifice. This chapter is therefore, under academic criticism, viewed as a late expansion of an earlier, much shorter, law, which simply laid out the basic rule that ''running issue'' of bodily fluids is ritually unclean, and contact with it, including with the person that possesses it, is ritually unclean, rather than detailing the atonement sacrifice, and listing examples of what constitutes contact.