Leviticus 17:13

Lev 17:13 And whatsoever man [there be] of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.

Ver. 13. Which hunteth.] Though he be as hungry as a hunter. See 1Sa 14:32-34.

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.

17:13 cover it with earth: This restriction kept the hunter from using an animal’s blood for food. Just like the blood of animals presented in altar offerings, the blood of wild game also represented life. Uncovered blood was also the sign of violent crime; innocent blood defiled the land (Num 35:33) and cried out to God for justice (Gen 4:10; see Job 16:18). Covering the blood of a slain animal gave it a symbolic burial. This demonstrated reverence both for the animal’s life and for God, the life-giver. The burial signified the return of that life to God, just like the disposal of the blood by the priest in the altar offerings.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Which the law permitteth to be eaten, because it is clean.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

whatsoever man . . . hunteth--It was customary with heathen sportsmen, when they killed any game or venison, to pour out the blood as a libation to the god of the chase. The Israelites, on the contrary, were enjoined, instead of leaving it exposed, to cover it with dust and, by this means, were effectually debarred from all the superstitious uses to which the heathen applied it.

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

(13) And whatsoever man.—Better, what man soever (see Lev_17:3). Hitherto the law mainly discussed the blood of sacrificial animals, or those quadrupeds which were slaughtered at home. In this and the following verses the statute is extended to all other creatures which, though wild, are legally clean and used as food.

Which hunteth and catcheth.—Hunting, which was an amusement with other nations of antiquity, was with the serious Hebrew a matter of necessity. It was resorted to as a matter of necessity to exterminate dangerous beasts (Exo_23:29), but more especially to procure food (Gen_25:27; Pro_12:27). Besides the numerous pitfalls, snares, traps, &c, which are so frequently mentioned in the Bible, the Hebrews also employed arms in catching game (Gen_27:3). When wounded, or when the game had to be killed to facilitate its being carried home, the hunters were liable to become careless about the blood, as is evident from the practice which obtained among some of the ancients. Thus we are told that the Zabians, when they slew a beast, put the blood into a vessel or into a hole which they dug in the ground, and then sat round and feasted on it. It is to prevent such outrages on the sacred blood, which the hunters were especially liable to commit when hungry, that the law is here enacted. An instance of the hungry army flying upon the spoil, killing the cattle in the field, and eating the flesh with the blood, is recorded in 1Sa_14:32-34. (Comp. also Eze_33:25.)

Any beast or fowl that may be eaten.—That is, those wild beasts or fowl which, according to the dietary law, were usually eaten. During the second Temple this was interpreted strictly to apply to the clean wild beasts, but not to those not permitted to be eaten.

He shall even pour out the blood.—The earth, from which all animals came forth at their creation (Gen_1:24), is to receive back again the principle of their life. They proceeded from the womb of the earth, and their life-blood is to return to it. With such scrupulous care was this law observed during the second Temple, that the following Benediction was ordered to be recited when the blood was covered up: “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who hath sanctified us by His precepts, and hath commanded us to cover up the blood.”

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

13. of the children of Israel] The Samaritan text and certain of Kennicott’s Heb. MSS. read ‘house’ here, as in Lev_17:3; Lev_17:5; Lev_17:10. The LXX. (see above) have ‘sons’ in all four places, but the Vulg. follows MT.

the strangers that sojourn among them] Foreigners are here made to be subject to the same law in the matter as the home born. On the other hand, in Deut. (Deu_14:21) that which dieth of itself may be given to ‘the stranger’ or sold to ‘a foreigner.’ According to Dillm. the contradiction arises from a difference in standpoint, the direction in Deut. basing itself on real and practical life, while that of P has in mind an ideal theocracy. More probably, the greater strictness of P is the product of a time (later than Deut.) when emphasis was laid on the binding character of Israel’s laws upon the resident of foreign extraction, who desired to share the advantages afforded him. So Driver.

13, 14. Directions how the blood of beasts or fowls taken in hunting is to be dealt with.

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.

And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you,.... This form of speaking, which is often used in this chapter, is still observed to point out the persons on whom the law is obligatory, Israelites and proselytes of righteousness:

which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; that is, clean beasts and fowls, such as by a former law are observed; and this excepts unclean ones, as Jarchi, but includes all clean ones, whether wild or tame, that may be taken and killed though not taken in hunting; but such are particularly mentioned, because not only hunting beasts and fowl were common, but because such persons were more rustic and brutish and, being hungry, were in haste for their food, and not so careful about the slaying of the creatures, and of, taking care about their blood:

he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust; that it might not be eaten by men, nor licked up by beasts and that there might be kept up a reverend esteem of blood, being the life of the creature; and this covering of it, as Maimonides (l) tells us, was accompanied with a benediction in this form,"Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who hath sanctified us by his precepts, and hath given commandment to us concerning covering of the blood:''and the same writer elsewhere (m) gives us another reason of this law, that the Israelites might not meet and feast about the blood, as the Zabians did, who, when they slew a beast, took its blood and put it into a vessel, or into a hole dug by them, and sat and feasted around it: see Lev 19:26.

(l) Hilchot Shechitah, c. 4. sect. 1. (m) Moreh Nevochim, p. 3. c. 46.

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

Hunting, with nets, or with bow and arrow. If a dog had killed the prey, it would have rendered it unclean. (Tostat) But perhaps dogs were not employed in hunting by the Hebrews. The Persians use lions, &c. (Chardin.) (Calmet) --- Earth, to prevent any abusive custom, such as that of the magicians, who pretended to raise spirits by blood. Tiresias would not disclose the truth to Ulysses, till he had drunk some blood. (Homer, Odyssey xxii.) The Jews abhorred things strangled, and the apostles forbade the primitive Christians to use them, Acts xv. Phocilides, the pagan, says, "abandon such remains to dogs; beasts eat the leavings of beasts." (Eusebius) (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).

Any beast; he instanceth in this kind, either because persons much given to that exercise are commonly too licentious, and being in haste might easily transgress; or because some might think the former prohibition did reach only to the blood of such creatures as were offered to God in sacrifice. Cover it with dust; partly, to beget an honourable respect unto the blood even of beasts, and much more of men; partly, lest the beasts should lick it up, and by tasting the sweetness of it be made more fierce and cruel to devour and destroy others; and partly, as a license from God upon this condition giving them a right to kill and eat such creatures, without any fear of the blood being imputed to them; for as the not covering of the blood portends the punishment which the sin of bloodshedding calls for, Job 16:18; Eze 24:7,8, so covering it notes impunity.

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

13. Pour out the blood… and cover — This prescribes the manner of killing clean wild beasts and birds. Their blood must be treated as something sacred, lest the blood of atonement on their altars might come to be regarded as a common thing. The covering with dust is omitted in the outline in Deu_12:24. Even should the bird be killed by a blow or a shot, it would be unclean unless its throat was immediately cut.

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

Vers. 13, 14. Negatively, it has been ordered that blood shall not be eaten; positively, that it is to be offered to God. But there may be cases where the latter command cannot be caused out, as when animals are killed in hunting. On such occasions the man who kills the animal, whether he be an Israelite or a sojourner, is to pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust, regarding it as a sacred thing.

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

אשר יצוד WHO HUNTETH — I seem to have here only the law that the blood of hunted beasts and fowls caught now by hunting must be covered with dust. Whence do I know that this applies also to geese and fowls which have been kept in the house having already been caught? Scripture therefore states יצוד] ציד], “who hunts a hunted thing"— hunted under any circumstances whether now or before. If this be so why does Scripture at all state אשר יצוד (let it merely state 'אשר ישחט וכו‎)? But it uses the term “hunting” to teach that one should not eat meat except after such toilsome preparation (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 11 2; Chullin 84a).

אשר יאכל THAT MAY BE EATEN — This is especially mentioned to the exclusion of unclean animals (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 11 4).

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.