Exodus 25:7

Exo 25:7 Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate.

Ver. 7. In the ephod, and in the breastplate.] Of which see afterwards in Exo 28:1-43.

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.

ephod--a square cloak, hanging down from the shoulders, and worn by priests.

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 7. Onyx stones] We have already met with the stone called שהם shoham, Ge 2:12, and acknowledged the difficulty of ascertaining what is meant by it. Some think the onyx, some the sardine, and some the emerald, is meant. We cannot say precisely what it was; possibly it might have been that fine pale pebble, called the Egyptian pebble, several specimens of which now lie before me, which were brought from the coast of the Red Sea, and other parts in Egypt, by a particular friend of mine, on purpose to add to my collection of minerals.

Stones to be set in the ephod] אבני מלאים abney milluim, stones of filling up. Stones so cut as to be proper to be set in the gold work of the breastplate.

The אפד ephod. - It is very difficult to tell what this was, or in what form it was made. It was a garment of some kind peculiar to the priests, and ever considered essential to all the parts of Divine worship, for without it no person attempted to inquire of God. As the word itself comes from the root אפד aphad, he tied or bound close, Calmet supposes that it was a kind of girdle, which, brought from behind the neck and over the shoulders, and so hanging down before, was put cross upon the stomach, and then carried round the waist, and thus made a girdle to the tunic. Where the ephod crossed on the breast there was a square ornament called חשן choshen, the breastplate, in which twelve precious stones were set, each bearing one of the names of the twelve sons of Jacob engraven on it. There were two sorts of ephods, one of plain linen for the priests, the other very much embroidered for the high priest. As there was nothing singular in this common sort, no particular description is given; but that of the high priest is described very much in detail Ex 28:6-8. It was distinguished from the common ephod by being composed of gold, blue, purple, scarlet, fine twisted linen, and cunning work, i.e., superbly ornamented and embroidered. This ephod was fastened on the shoulders with two precious stones, on which the twelve names of the twelve tribes of Israel were engraved, six names on each stone. These two stones, thus engraved, were different from those on the breastplate, with which they have been confounded. From Calmet's description the ephod seems to have been a series of belts, fastened to a collar, which were intended to keep the garments of the priest closely attached to his body: but there is some reason to believe that it was a sort of garment like that worn by our heralds; it covered the back, breast, and belly, and was open at the sides. A piece of the same kind of stuff with itself united it on the shoulders, where the two stones, already mentioned, were placed, and it was probably without sleeves. See Clarke on Ex 28:2, &c.

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

(7) Onyx stones.—The Hebrew shoham is rendered here by “sard” (LXX.), “sardonyx” (Vulg. And Josephus), and “beryl” (Rosenmüller and others). In Job_28:16, the same word is rendered by the LXX. “onyx.” There is thus considerable doubt what stone is meant. Only three such stones seem to have been required as offerings, one for the high priest’s breast-plate (Exo_28:20), and two for the shoulder- pieces of the ephod (Exo_28:9-12).

Stones to be set in the ephod and in the breastplate.—Heb., stones of insertion for the ephod and for the breast-plate. The stones of the ephod were two only, both probably either onyx or sardonyx; those of the breast-plate were twelve in number, all different (Exo_28:17-20).

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

7. Precious stones.

onyx] Heb. shôham, a precious stone highly valued in OT. times (cf. Gen_2:12, Eze_28:13, Job_28:16, 1Ch_29:1). There is, how ever, some uncertainty what the shôham was, though it is generally supposed to be either the onyx (LXX. in Job; Vulg.) or (RVm.) the beryl (LXX. in Ex.; Targ., Pesh.): see further on Exo_28:20. For the use made of these stones, see Exo_28:17; Exo_28:20.

stones to be set] Cf. 1Ch_29:2; and see on Exo_28:17; Exo_28:20.

for the ephod, and for the pouch] Exo_28:6 ff., Exo_28:13 ff.

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.

Onyx stones,.... So called from their likeness to the nail of a man's finger: the Targum of Onkelos calls them stones of beryl; and the Targum of Jonathan gems of beryl; and the Septuagint version, stones of sardius; and some take them to be the sardonyx stones, which have a likeness both to the onyx and to the sardius:

and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate; two onyx stones were set in the ephod, one of the garments of the high priest, and an onyx stone, with eleven other precious stones, were set in the breastplate of the high priest: these stones were doubtless among the jewels set in gold and silver the Israelites had of the Egyptians, and brought with them out of Egypt.

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

Onyx, emeralds. (Calmet) --- The ephod and the rational. The ephod was the high priests upper vestment; and the rational his breast-plate, in which were twelve gems, &c. (Challoner) --- Ephod means a kind of girdle or stole, peculiar to priests, or used by others only of the highest distinction, (Calmet) and in religious solemnities. (St. Jerome, ad Marcel.) Josephus (Antiquities ii. 8) describes it as different from what it was in the days of Moses. Many other alterations had then taken place; the Urim and Thummim were disused, &c. The Pallium is in imitation of the high priest’s ephod. The rational is so called, because by it the high priest was enabled to give his oracles, chap. xxviii. 15. (Calmet) --- The precise import of the Hebrew cheshen, which Protestants render breast plate, is not known. It was certainly fastened on the ephod over the breast, and consisted of 12 stones, on which the names of the 12 patriarchs were engraven. (Haydock)

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).

Onyx stones, or, sardonyx stones. Note, that the signification of the Hebrew names of the several stones are not agreed upon by the Jews at this day, and much more may we safely be ignorant of them, the religious use of them being now abolished.

Stones to be set in the ephod; stones of fulness, or filling, or perfecting stones; so called either because they did perfect and adorn the ephod, or because they filled up the ouches, or the hollow places, which were left vacant for this purpose. What the ephod and breastplate were, see Exo 28.

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

7. Onyx stones — Already mentioned Gen_2:12. These, and the other precious stones set in the breastplate, are mentioned more fully in Exo_28:17-21.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Onyx stones. On the need of onyx stones, see Exo_28:9, Exo_28:20. Stones to be set in the ephod, etc. Rather, "stones for setting, for the ephod and for the breastplate." The only stones required for the ephod were two large onyx stones; for the breastplate twelve jewels were needed (ibid. 17-20), one of them being an onyx. It has been proposed to translate the Hebrew shoham by "beryl" instead of "onyx;" but onyx, which is more suitable for engraving, is probably right.

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

אבני שהם ONYX STONES — two were required there for the needs of the “ephod” which is mentioned in ואתה תצוה (Exodus 28:6ff.).

מלאים FOR SETTING (lit., filling in) — Because they made for them (for the stones) settings in gold — a kind of indentation — and they put the stone there (in it) to fill the indentation, they were called “filling-up stones”; the spot where the indentation is (i. e. the hollow spot) is called משבצת “setting”.

לאפד ולחשן FOR THE EPHOD AND THE BREASTPLATE respectively: the onyx stones for the ephod and “stones for setting” for the breastplate. Ephod and breastplate are described in ואתה תצוה. They were a kind of ornament worn only by the High-Priest.

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.

AVNEI SHOHAM’ (ONYX STONES) ‘V’AVNEI MILU’IM’ (AND STONES FOR SETTING). “Because they used to make a setting for the stone in gold — a kind of indentation — and they placed the stone there to fill the indentation, they are called avnei milu’im (stones for filling-in), and the place of the indentation is called mishbetzet (setting). FOR THE EPHOD AND THE BREASTPLATE. The onyx stones were for the ephod, and the stones for setting were for the breastplate.” This is Rashi’s language. Similarly Rashi explained: “They shall be inclosed in gold in their settings, — surrounded by gold settings of such a depth that each setting shall be filled by the thickness of the stone. This is the meaning of the word milu’otham (their filling), and this is the meaning of every expression of milui (filling) mentioned in this connection.”But it does not appear to me to be at all correct to say that Scripture calls them already now avnei milu’im, because in some time as yet in the future He was to command that the indentations made for them were to be filled with these stones! Moreover, the onyx stones were also enclosed in settings of gold, Verse 11 — in the case of the ephod. and yet He did not call them milu’im. Again, our Rabbis have already said in the Gemara: “These stones are not incised with a chisel, for it is said b’milu’otham (in their filling).” Now if the explanation b’milu’otham would be, [as Rashi has it], that they fill the indentations with the stones, there would have been no proof at all from this verse that they should not incise the names [of the tribes] on them with a chisel. Besides, the manner of the setting of the stones which the Rabbi [Rashi] mentioned, namely that it was made in a kind of indentation, is not correct. Instead, it is as Onkelos rendered it: [meshubatzim zahav — inclosed in gold] meramtzan didhav, which means that they made at the bottom a gold setting according to the measure of the stone, and from it they projected a fork-like shape of three prongs which would hold the stone. [The word meramtzan mentioned by Onkelos] is similar to the expressions of the Sages: “and they take it out beramtza (with a pointed tool) made of iron;” “as when he bored a hole in it beramtza (with a pick) made of iron.” This is how they also do it today when they set precious stones in rings, in order that they be seen from all angles and that their beauty and splendor should not be hidden in the indentations. You may know that this is so, for the two gold chains inserted in the two rings of the breastplate were attached to the mishb’tzoth on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod. Now if mishb’tzoth were [as Rashi said] frames for the setting of the stone, how would they attach to them the chains? And even [if there were there other mishb’tzoth not for the setting of the stone but for the purpose of inserting the chains] how would the indentations serve that purpose [as they were not perforated for the chains to go through]? Rather, the mishb’tzoth are the fork-like prongs as we have said and the holes for the chains were made in them. Associated with the word mishb’tzoth is, in my opinion, [Saul’s expression, Slay me] for ‘hashabatz’ hath taken hold of me these being the men who hold spear-like weapons with mounted forks on top to catch those that flee the battle-field, just as it is said, and lo, the chariots and the horsemen pressed hard upon him., Verse 6.And the meaning of musaboth mishb’tzoth is that he should fix the gold prongs “around it.” And in the opinion of Onkelos who translated [musaboth as] meshak’on [literally: “depressed,” “sunk”], the stones were sunk into the frames from which came forth prongs surrounding them above and holding them in place.But the sense of the word milu’im is that the stones be whole as they were created, and that they should not be hewn stones which were cut from a large quarry, or from which anything has been chipped off. It is also known in the natural sciences that the complete powers of precious stones and the particular qualities that distinguish them, exist only when in their natural state, as when smooth stones are taken from the river. This is why Onkelos translated [avnei milu’im — avnei] ashlamutha (stones of perfection). But the term milui (filling of) vessels or an indentation [Onkelos] translates literally, — thus: 'va’t'malei' (and she filled) her pitcher, Onkelos translated: u’mleiah (and she filled), and similarly in all other cases — but here he translated the term milui to mean shleimuth (perfection). Similarly, he translated the verse, ‘milei’ (He filled) them with wisdom of heart — ashleim (“He perfected” them with wisdom of heart), as wisdom is not something that you can fill a vessel with, but instead it denotes perfection, that they [i.e. Bezalel and Oholiab — who did the workmanship of the Tabernacle] were perfect in wisdom. This is the intent of the verse, and in cutting of stones 'l’maloth', 31:5. — that they knew how to engrave like the engravings of a signet upon stones in their [natural] perfect state.Now in the case of the stones of the ephod it is said, however, with the work of an engraver in stone, like the engravings of a signet, shalt thou engrave the two stones, according to the names of the children of Israel, Verse 11 — in the case of the ephod. [but it does not say here b’milu’otham — “in their perfect state”], because they made an incision in them when writing the names [of the tribes upon them] as stone engravers do, and thus the stones were no longer in their [natural] perfect state. But in the case of the stones for the breastplate it is written, ‘umileitha’ in it ‘miluath’ of stone, 28:17. and again it is written of them, they shall be ‘b’milu’otham;’, Verse 20. and the stones [of the breastplate] were according to the names of the children of Israel, twelve, according to their names, 39:14. — not the work of engravers [who make incisions upon the stones]. Therefore Moses our teacher could find no way [of inscribing the names of the tribes of Israel upon the twelve stones in the breastplate] except by means of the shamir [a worm that cuts stones with its glance] which our Rabbis mentioned, just as they have said in Tractate Sotah: “These stones are not written upon with ink, for it is said, like the engravings of a signet, Sotah). — The verse is mentioned in connection with the stones of the breastplate. and they are not incised with a chisel, for it is said b’milu’otham (in their perfect state)., Verse 20. — Also in connection with the stones of the breastplate. But instead [Moses] brought the shamir and showed it the stones and they split of their own accord.” Now the word b’milu’otham is said only in connection with the stones of the breastplate. Do not be troubled by what is mentioned in the Agadah (homily, tradition) that the Rabbis said to Solomon: etc.” “There is the shamir with which Moses cut the precious stones of the ephod.” [From this you might argue that the stones of the ephod also had to be b’milu’otham — in their perfect natural state — which would be contrary to what we have said above, that this applied only to the stones of the breastplate! Do not be troubled by this statement,] for the breastplate is called ephod by the Rabbis by way of metaphor, because the breastplate is attached thereto. It is also written, Bring hither the ephod, and it was of the breastplate that they asked [for guidance]. Thus the explanation of the verse before us is as follows: “onyx stones three — two for the ephod and one for the breastplate;, Verse 20. and stones of ‘milu’im’ for the breastplate.” And in case the opinion of our Rabbis was that the stones of the ephod also had to be in their full natural state [as the stones of the breastplate], then both the onyx stones and the stones of ‘milu’im’ were for both, for the ephod and for the breastplate. (in their full natural state), then they derived it from this verse as explained in the text. For — the ephod and the breastplate — had both the onyx stones and the stones of milu’im. Of the ephod it is clearly written that it had two onyx stones (further, 28:9), and according to the Rabbis these were also b’milu’otham (in their full natural state). In the case of the breastplate b’milu’otham is clearly mentioned (ibid., Verse 20) and so is the onyx stone (ibid.). Thus the verse before us, stones of onyx and stones of ‘milu’im’ means that both were for the ephod and for the breastplate.

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.