Leviticus 21:4

Lev 21:4 [But] he shall not defile himself, [being] a chief man among his people, to profane himself.

Ver. 4. Being a chief man.] A vir gregis; all whose actions were exemplary, and have not an impulsive only, but a compulsive power and property. "Why compellest thou the Gentiles?" {Gal 2:14} His example was a compulsion.

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.

Lev 21:4. Being — Or, seeing he is a chief man — For such, not only the high-priest, but others also of the inferior priests were. He shall not defile himself — For any other person whatsoever. To profane himself —

Because such defilement for the dead did profane him, or make him as a common person, and consequently unfit to manage his sacred employment.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Priest was permitted to mourn for his next kindred only.

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

But he shall not defile himself--"for any other," as the sense may be fully expressed. "The priest, in discharging his sacred functions, might well be regarded as a chief man among his people, and by these defilements might be said to profane himself" [BISHOP PATRICK]. The word rendered "chief man" signifies also "a husband"; and the sense according to others is, "But he being a husband, shall not defile himself by the obsequies of a wife" (Eze 44:25).

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 4. A chief man among his people] The word בעל baal signifies a master, chief, husband, &c., and is as variously translated here.

1. He being a chief among the people, it would be improper to see him in such a state of humiliation as mourning for the dead necessarily implies.

2. Though a husband he shall not defile himself even for the death of a wife, because the anointing of his God is upon him. But the first sense appears to be the best.

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

(4) But he shall not defile himself, being a chief man . . . —Better, A husband shall not defile himself among his people when he had profaned himself. As the seven exceptions to the general rule began with his wife, whose funeral rites the priestly husband is allowed to attend, the verse before us restricts this permission to his legally prescribed wife. If he contracted a marriage which profaned him, he could not attend to her funeral ceremonies. The last clause, which is here translated, “when he had profaned him,” literally denotes “to profane himself,” “with respect to his profanation”—i.e., with respect to a marriage by which he profaned himself. This is the interpretation which the administrators of the Law attached to the verse, and which is transmitted in the Chaldee version of Jonathan. It is not only in perfect harmony with the context, but does least violence to this manifestly disordered text. The translations exhibited in the Authorised version, both in the text and in the margin, as well as most of those suggested by modern commentators, leave the clause unexplained, since it manifestly means something else than defiling himself by contracting impurity through contact with the dead, as is evident from the fact that it is not added in the other instances where the priest is forbidden to defile himself by attending to the dead. (See Lev_21:1-11.)

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

4. being a chief man] as a husband (R.V. mg.). This rendering limits the cases in which defilement is permissible to those already mentioned, and forbids mourning for a wife. The A.V. follows the Targum.

The wording of the v. suggests a corruption in the text. The Sept. substitute (see R.V. mg.) for ‘a chief man’ is apparently obtained by a transposition in Heb. consonants, but fails to convey any clear meaning. It has been suggested, by a somewhat greater modification in the Heb., to read in mourning. Baentsch (HG. 111A) considers that the words ‘defile himself’ and ‘among his people’ shew that the v. forms an intimate part of the prohibition contained in the previous vv. Inasmuch, then, as the word rendered ‘chief man’ is regularly used of a husband, and as mention of a wife is strangely absent from the MT., he proposes either of two alternative readings, which assume a copyist’s accidental omission of a word or words, expressing wife; so that the precept originally ran, a husband shall not be defiled for his wife. It is, however, difficult, as Dillm. says, to suppose, in the face of the opening words of Lev_21:2, that a priest whose wife died was forbidden to approach the body.

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.

But he shall not defile himself, being a chief man among his people,.... Which is not to be understood of any lord or nobleman or any chief ruler or governor of the people; for the context speaks only of priests, and not of other personages; besides, such might defile themselves, or mourn for their dead, as Abraham did for Sarah; nor of any husband for his wife, for even a priest, as has been observed, might do this for his wife, and much more a private person; nor is there any need to restrain it, as some Jewish writers do, to an adulterous wife, which a husband might not mourn for, though he might for his right and lawful wife; but there is nothing in the text, neither of an husband, nor a wife: the words are to be interpreted of a priest, and either of him as considered as a person of eminence, consequence, and importance, and sons giving a reason why he should not defile himself for the dead, because he was a principal person among his people to officiate for them in sacred things; wherefore if he did not take care that he was not defiled for the dead, which might often happen, he would be frequently hindered from doing his office for the people, which would be attended with ill consequence to them; and therefore the above cases are only excepted, as being such that rarely happened: or rather the words are to be considered as a prohibition of defiling himself "for any chief" (s), or principal man, lord, ruler, or governor, among his people; even for such an one he was not to defile himself, being no relation of his:

to profane himself; make himself unfit for sacred service, or make himself a common person; put himself upon a level with a common private man, and be no more capable of serving at the altar, or doing any part of the work off priest, than such an one.

(s) "in principe populi sui", V. L. so Pesicta & Ben Melech in loc. & Kimchi Sepher Shorash. rad.

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

The sense seems to be that, owing to his position in the nation, the priest is not to defile himself in any cases except those named in Lev 21:2-3. The Septuagint appear to have followed a different reading of the text which would mean, “he shall not defile himself for a moment.” The explanation in the margin of our version is hardly in keeping with the prohibition to Ezekiel on a special occasion. See Eze 24:16.

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

Prince. Hebrew, "Let not the prince (of the priests, Acts xxiii. 5,) render himself unclean," by attending the funerals of any of the people; or "let not the husband," &c. He may be allowed to attend his wife to the grave: or, as others more probably assert, even this is not permitted. She is not one of the persons privileged, ver. 2, and Ezechiel xliv. 25. Ezechiel (xxiv. 16,) receives a command not to bewail the death of his wife. The Romans thought their priests would be defiled, by attending the funerals even of their own wives; and Sylla, going to dedicate a temple to Hercules, sent Metella a bill of divorce, and ordered her to be removed from his house, when she was just expiring. (Plutarch)

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).

Or, seeing he is

a chief man, & c., or ruler, &c., for such not only the high priest, but others also of the inferior priests, were. And therefore though he might defile himself for the persons now named, yet he, above all others, must take heed so to do it that he do not profane himself by doing as follows. Or, for a chief man, &c., the preposition lamed being easily understood from the former verse, where it is oft used, such supplements being not unusual in the Hebrew tongue. So the sense is, he shall not defile himself for any other person whatsoever who is not thus near of kin to him, no, not for a prince or chief ruler among his people, who might seem to challenge this duty from him, to join with all others in their resentment of the public loss; much less shall he defile himself for any other. And so the last word,

to profane himself, may be added as a reason why he should not defile himself for the prince or any other except the persons named, because such defilement for the dead did profane him, or make him as a common person and unclean, and consequently unfit to manage his sacred employment, which was an impediment to the service of God, and a public inconvenience to the people, whose concerns with God he negotiated. And it was not meet such great and important affairs should give place to the ceremonies of a funeral for a stranger.

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

4. Being a chief man — The exegesis of this verse is much disputed. Some, as Knobel, connect it with the preceding verses, and interpret the “chief man” — baal — to signify husband, who is expressly forbidden to mourn for his wife. Out of twenty-three times, it is rendered husband six times in the Pentateuch. Others, with Keil, connect this verse with Lev_21:7, and understand it as a general prohibition which is specialized in that verse as relating to an immoral wife or daughter. The weight of argument seems to be with Knobel. Nevertheless, Eze_24:16-18, has been rightly adduced against this view, where it is counted strange that Ezekiel, a priest, does not mourn for his wife.

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

Being - Or, seeing he is a chief man, for such not only the high- priest, but others also of the inferior priests were. He shall not defile himself for any other person whatsoever. To profane himself - Because such defilement for the dead did profane him, or make him as a common person, and consequently unfit to manage his sacred employment.

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

shave off the corners of their beards

It is impossible to be certain what the writer intended here. Possible meanings are 1) shave off certain parts of their beards or 2) cut or shave any part of their beards.

They must be holy

"They must be set apart"

not disgrace the name of their God

This word "name" is used to represent Yahweh's character. AT: "not disgrace God's reputation" or "not disgrace their God" (See: Metonymy)

the bread of their God

Here "bread" represents food in general. Yahweh does not actually eat these offerings. It is the sincerity of those offering the food that pleases God. (See: Synecdoche)

translationWords

defile

God

name

sacrifice

fire

bread

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 יטמא בעל בעמיו להחלו This means: he shall not defile himself for his wife if she is really unfitted to be his wife (because he is a כהן) and through whom he consequently becomes profaned as a priest, so long as she remains with him (Sifra, Emor, Section 1 15). The following, therefore, is the literal exposition of the verse: לא יטמא בעל, a husband shall not defile himself for his wife's corpse while it is among its people, which means that there are persons who can bury her so that she is not a מת מצוה (cf. Rashi’s explanation of בעמיו on v. 1). And with reference to what kind of wife do I say this? With reference to such a one who להחלו, i. e. who leads to his being profaned and therefore disqualified from his priestly duties so long as she remains with him (cf. Sifra, Emor, Section 1 15; Yevamot 90b).

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.

A husband among his people. A kohein may only defile himself for a relative because in truth the kohein is “בעל בעמיו,” a master among his people, to understand and give rulings [in the Torah], “For a priest’s lips shall guard knowledge, and teaching should be sought from his mouth” (Malachi 27:7). It is fitting that a person like this should behave in a respectful way so that his words will be heard. He should not profane his state of preparedness to enter the Sanctuary and for its holy matters by honoring the dead that are not his relatives, as the Sages said: The burial and eulogy for the dead are honor for the departed one. However, he is permitted to defile himself for relatives, for their honor is his honor.

Sforno on the Tanakh — English translation: “Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.