Exodus 12:19

Exo 12:19 Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses: for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a stranger, or born in the land.

Ver. 19. No leaven found.] {See Trapp on "Exo 12:15"}

Shall be cut off.] For a small fault, as it may seem to some: but the less the matter the greater is the contempt in denying to do it. Keep therefore God’s commandment as the sight of thine eye. Look to those minutula legis, that ye may live.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

stranger--No foreigner could partake of the passover, unless circumcised; the "stranger" specified as admissible to the privilege must, therefore, be considered a Gentile proselyte.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 19. No leaven found in your houses] To meet the letter of this precept in the fullest manner possible, the Jews, on the eve of this festival, institute the most rigorous search through every part of their houses, not only removing all leavened bread, but sweeping every part clean, that no crumb of bread shall be left that had any leaven in it. And so strict were they in the observance of the letter of this law, that if even a mouse was seen to run across the floor with a crumb of bread in its mouth, they considered the whole house as polluted, and began their purification afresh. We have already seen that leaven was an emblem of sin, because it proceeded from corruption; and the putting away of this implied the turning to God with simplicity and uprightness of heart. See on Ex 12:8, and See Clarke on Ex 12:27.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(19) A stranger—i.e., a foreigner in blood, who has been adopted into the nation, received circumcision, and become a full proselyte. It is not improbable that many of the “six hundred thousand” reckoned to “Israel” (Exo_12:37) were of this class—persons who had joined themselves to the nation during the sojourn in Egypt, or even earlier. (See Note on Gen_17:13.) When the “exclusiveness” of the Hebrews is made a charge against them, justice requires us to remember that from the first it was open to those who were not of Hebrew blood to share in the Hebrew privileges by accepting the covenant of circumcision, and joining themselves to the nation. It was in this way that the Kenites. and even the Gibeonites, became reckoned to Israel.

Born in the land.—Hob., natives of the land: i.e., of Canaan. Canaan was regarded as belonging to Abraham and his descendants from the time of the first promise (Gen_12:7). Thenceforth it was their true home: they were its expatriated inhabitants.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19. Repeated, with slight alterations of phraseology, from v. 15, and with the new regulation that what has been laid down is to apply equally to the ‘sojourner,’ or resident foreigner (see on v. 48), and to the native Israelite.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Seven days there shall be no leaven found in your houses,..... Wherefore, on the fourteenth day the most diligent search was made, and whatever was found was burnt, or cast into the sea, or dispersed with the wind; about which the traditionary writers of the Jews, give many rules and canons; see Gill on Exo 12:15,

for whoso eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel; which is repeated to deter them from the breach of this ordinance; See Gill on Exo 12:15, and it is added for further explanation, of whom it concerns:

whether he be a stranger, or born in the land; by a "stranger" is meant, not a mere Heathen, who was not bound by this law, but a proselyte; and not a proselyte of the gate, one that was only a sojourner among them, and observed the commandments of the sons of Noah; but a proselyte of righteousness, who professed the Jewish religion, and proposed to conform to it in all respects, and therefore was obliged to observe this as other precepts: and by one "born in the land", is intended a native of the land of Canaan, whither they were now going in order to possess it, or a real Israelite, such as were born of Israelitish parents, and proper inhabitants of Canaan, which they would be put into the possession of.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Born in the land - A stranger or foreigner might be born in the land, but the word here used means “a native of the land,” belonging to the country by virtue of descent, that descent being reckoned from Abraham, to whom Canaan was promised as a perpetual inheritance.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Stranger. Hebrew ger, signifies also a proselyte. (Menochius) See ver. 43. --- Only those men who had been circumcised were allowed to eat the Phase. Women, belonging to the Hebrews, might partake of it. The unclean were excluded. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

A stranger, to wit, a proselyte; for strangers unconverted to the Jewish religion were not obliged nor admitted to the celebration of the passover or feast of unleavened bread. Though I see no inconvenience, if all strangers, though heathens, were forbidden to have or use any unleavened bread at that time, lest the Jews who conversed with them might be tempted to desire or partake of it with them.

In the land, to wit, of Canaan, which I have promised to you, and to which I am now leading you, which was so well known to all of them, that it was needless to express it in this place.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

This is not a mere "vain repetition" of verse 15. It adds an important extension of the punitive clause soul shall be cut off from Israel from Israelites proper to proselytes. We are thus reminded, at the very time when Israel is about to become a nation and to enter upon its inheritance of exclusive privileges, that no exclusion of the Gentries by reason of race or descent was ever contemplated by God, either at the giving of the law, or at any other time. In Abraham all the families of them were to be blessed. (Gen_12:3) It was always open to any Gentiles to join themselves to Israel by becoming "proselytes of justice," adopting circumcision and the general observance of the law, and joining the Israelite community. The whole law is full of references to persons of this (Exo_20:10 Exo_23:12; Lev_16:29 Lev_17:10 Lev_18:26 Lev_20:2; Num_35:15; Deu_5:14 Deu_16:11-14 Deu_24:17, 19 27:19 29:11, etc.) It must have been largely recruited in the times immediately following the exodus from the "mixed multitude" which accompanied the Israelites out of Egypt, (Exo_12:38) and from the Kenites who joined them in the wilderness (Num_10:29-31; Jud_1:16) Born in the landi.e. , an Israelite by birth land" is, no doubt, Canaan, which is regarded as the true "Land of Israel" from the time when it was assigned by God to the posterity of Abraham. (Gen_15:18)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A stranger - A proselyte. Heathens were not concerned in the passover.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

no yeast must be found in your houses

This can be stated in active form. AT: "there must not be any yeast in your houses" (See: Active or Passive)

must be cut off from the community of Israel

The metaphor "cut off" has at least three possible meanings. They can be expressed in active form: 1) "the people of Israel must send him away" or 2) "I will no longer consider him to be one of the people of Israel" or 3) "the people of Israel must kill him." See how you translated "must be cut off from Israel" in Exodus 12:15. (See: Metaphorand Active or Passive)

bread made without yeast

This can be stated in active form. See how you translated this in Exodus 12:08. AT: "bread which you have made without yeast" (See: Active or Passive)

translationWords

yeast

alien

life

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

לא ימצא בבתיכם NO LEAVEN SHALL BE FOUND IN YOUR HOUSES — Whence may we derive that this applies also to the external properties which belong to you? From what Scripture states, (Exodus 13:7) “[Neither shall leaven be seen with thee] in all thy boundaries”. If this be so, why then need Scripture specify here “in your houses” (since this term is comprised in the more general term “in all thy boundaries”)? It is for the purpose of defining the latter term through the former. How is it the case of thy house? Everything contained in it is under thy control! So, too, the term “[leaven in all] your boundaries” means only such leaven as is in your boundaries and under your control, thereby excluding such leaven belonging to a non-Israelite as is deposited with an Israelite but for which he has accepted no responsibility (Mekhilta).

כי כל אכל מחמצת FOR WHOSOEVER EATETH THAT WHICH LEAVENETH — The purpose of this statement is to mention the punishment of excision for eating שאור (a synonym for מחמצת, which is something that causes the leavening process to set in, such as yeast etc., whilst חמץ denotes food which has become leavened). But has not Scripture already mentioned this punishment for eating leavened food (v. 15)? But the mention of this punishment is repeated here in connection with leaven מחמצת, in order that you should not argue as follows: For eating leavened food — a thing which is fitted to be eaten — it mentions this punishment, but if one eats leaven itself — which is something not fitted to be eaten — one should not be punished for it. If, however, it had mentioned the punishment for eating leaven but had not mentioned the punishment for eating leavened food, I might have said: For eating leaven — a thing which has the property of making other things leavened — it mentions the punishment, but if one eats leavened food — which is something that does not possess the property of making other things leavened — one should not be punished for it; therefore they are both mentioned (Mekhilta; cf. Beitzah 7b).

בגר ובאזרח הארץ WHETHER HE BE A STRANGER OR A NATIVE OF THE LAND — Because the miracle of the Exodus was performed for Israel it is necessary expressly to include the stranger who has become an Israelite in this command (Mekhilta).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

NO LEAVEN SHALL BE FOUND IN YOUR HOMES. “Whence do we know that this applies also to the borders? Scripture therefore says, Neither shall there be leaven seen with thee, in all thy borders. Why then need Scripture say here, in all your homes, [since these are already included in the comprehensive term of borders]? It is to teach us that just as what is in your home is under your control, so also what is in thy borders must be under your control. Thus there is excluded [from this prohibition] leavened bread actually owned by a non-Israelite but deposited with an Israelite for which the latter has accepted no responsibility.” This is the language of Rashi.I do not find it correct. The purport of the term “under your control” is not to exclude leavened bread owned by a non-Israelite [which is deposited with an Israelite], since that is indeed under the Israelite’s control. Homes and borders are both alike in this respect since both of them are under his control and the leavened bread belongs to others. Moreover, the case of leavened bread owned by a non-Israelite [and deposited with an Israelite for which the Israelite] has accepted no responsibility, is not covered by this analogy, since the term “home” indicates permission no more than does the term “border.” Instead, the term “home” implies prohibition, as is obvious from the language of this verse before us, it shall not be found in your homes [under any circumstance]. We derive the permission from the expression, Neither shall there be seen leaven with thee, [i.e., that which actually belongs to you, as the Rabbis commented upon it]: “You may not see [leaven or leavened bread] which is yours, but you may see that of others and that which belongs to the Temple-treasury. I know only that this principle applies to the borders, [since the expression with thee is stated in connection with the borders, as it says, Neither shall there be leaven seen ‘with thee’ in all ‘thy borders’]. Whence do I know this applies also to the homes? Scripture therefore uses the identical word s’or (leaven) in the case of both home and border,”, “an equal expression.” Where a verbal congruity appears between two laws in the text of the Torah, it indicates that a law mentioned in one case applies equally to the other. In the case before us, the word s’or (leaven) appears here in Verse 19 where “home” is mentioned, and is also mentioned further, 13:7, where the border is mentioned. Now in the case of the border, the Torah clearly stated that the prohibition applies only where it actually belongs to the owner. On the strength of the gzeirah shavah, the same law applies to the case of the home. The gzeirah shavah is one of the thirteen rules by which the Torah is interpreted. One cannot establish, though, an analogy from congruent expressions of one’s own accord; the application of the similarity of expression must be authorized by tradition. as is explained at the beginning of Tractate Pesachim. But this Midrash [mentioned by Rashi], which explains, “just as what is in your home is under your control, so also what is in thy borders must be under your control,” is only intended to exclude [from this prohibition] an Israelite’s leavened bread which is deposited with a non-Israelite. And thus it is taught in the Mechilta: “In your homes. Why is this said? Because it is stated, in all thy borders, which I might understand literally, [i.e., that we are not to leave our leavened bread in all our borders even if it is deposited with a non-Israelite]. Scripture therefore says, in your homes; just as what is in your home is under your control, so also what is in thy border must be under your control. Thus there is excluded [from this prohibition] an Israelite’s leavened bread which he deposited with a non-Israelite. Even though the Israelite may destroy it, he could not do so because he does not have complete control over it. [Also] excluded [from this prohibition] is the leavened bread of a non-Israelite which is deposited with an Israelite, and [an Israelite’s] leavened bread buried under debris, for although it is under the control of the Israelite [or in his territory], he has not the right to destroy it, [or in the case of debris, he does not have the physical ability of actually destroying it], etc.”The explanation of this Mechilta is as follows: One might have thought that the intent of the verse, Neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy borders, is to prohibit the leaving of our leavened bread in all our borders, even in the house of a non-Israelite. Therefore the Torah wrote in your homes to exclude [from this prohibition] the house of a non-Israelite. Thus we learn from this Beraitha that by law of the Torah we are admonished only against keeping our leavened bread under our control, whether it be in our homes or in our borders. But if we have deposited it with a non-Israelite in his home, we do not transgress [the two prohibitions], Neither shall there be leaven seen with thee, and There shall no leaven be found in your homes. And it must necessarily be so. If you do not say thus, then it should follow that for his own leavened bread, an Israelite will transgress the commandments even if he deposited it with a non-Israelite who is beyond the sea, while for a non-Israelite’s leavened bread, even though it be in the Israelite’s home, the Israelite does not violate the prohibitions. If that is the case, why does Scripture say [in one place], in your homes, and in another, in thy borders, when there is no difference between our homes and our borders and the homes and borders of the non-Israelites! Instead, we must conclude that by law of the Torah, we are admonished [against keeping and seeing leaven or leavened bread] only when it is in our control. But by enactment of the Sofrim, [the Rabbis of the pre-tannaitic period beginning with Ezra], we are obligated to destroy our leavened bread under all circumstances.Accordingly, the Rabbis have said in the Gemara: “If the Israelite singled out a room [to the non-Israelite and said to him, ‘This corner is for you to keep your leavened bread’], the Israelite does not violate [the prohibitions against keeping or seeing leavened bread in his possession].” This teaches us that for a non-Israelite’s leavened bread for which the Israelite has accepted responsibility, even though it be deemed as belonging to the Israelite, it is forbidden only when it is under the control of the Israelite, but if it be under the control of the non-Israelite, it is permissible. [In this case where the Israelite singled out a room for him to keep his leavened bread, “it is as if the Israelite assumed responsibility for the non-Israelite’s leavened bread which is in the non-Israelite’s home”], and even by law of the Rabbis, nothing was decreed against it. The Rabbi [Rashi], however, is not of this opinion in his commentary on the Gemara Pesachim. It is this principle which is the purport of the Beraitha we have cited: “Thus there is excluded [from this prohibition] leavened bread owned by a non-Israelite which is deposited with an Israelite.” [It is excluded] on account of the analogy between the homes and the borders:, as explained above. just as in the case of the borders it is permissible because it says with thee, meaning, “you may not see [leaven or leavened bread] which is yours, but you may see that of others and that which belongs to the Temple-treasury,” so too in the case of the home it is also permissible. Excluded also is the case of an Israelite’s leavened bread buried under great debris where it is impossible for him to clear away the ruin, and it is lost to him and everyone. It is permissible since it is no longer called “his.”

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.