Leviticus 7:20

Moreover, the soul that shall touch any unclean thing,.... Person or thing, the dead body of a man, or the bone of a dead body, or a grave in which it was laid:

as the uncleanness of man; the issue that runs from a profluvious person:

or any unclean beast; that was so by the law ceremonial; see Lev 11:4,

or any abominable unclean thing; which the Targum of Jonathan interprets of every unclean reptile: see Lev 11:20.

and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, even that soul shall be cut off from his people; See Gill on Lev 7:20.

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

Lev 7:20 But the soul that eateth [of] the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, that [pertain] unto the LORD, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

Ver. 20. Having his uncleanness upon him.] To the unclean all things are unclean, &c. {Tit 1:15} {See Trapp on "Tit 1:15"}

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.

7:20-21 cut off: Three interpretations are possible for this expression, all of them very grave: (1) The person was subject to God’s judgment and faced an early death by natural causes (17:10-14). (2) The person was to be executed by the community (cp. Exod 31:14). (3) The person lost communal membership in Israel, either by banishment (such as by excommunication) or by shunning the person and treating him or her as unclean (Lev 18:24-30; cp. 23:29-30, where “cut off” seems distinct from “destroy”).

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

cut off from his people--that is, excluded from the privileges of an Israelite--lie under a sentence of excommunication.

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 20. Having his uncleanness upon him] Having touched any unclean thing by which he became legally defiled, and had not washed his clothes, and bathed his flesh.

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

(20, 21) But the soul that eateth, &c—Any one who partakes of the Lord’s holy peace offering in a state of legal defilement, arising either from contact with unclean men or objects (see Lev_11:8-44; Lev_15:1-33), incurs the penalty of excision.

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

People excommunicated, or even slain, either by God, or by the judge. (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).

The soul that eateth knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it, Lev 5:2.

Having his uncleanness upon him, i.e. not being cleansed from his uncleanness according to the appointment, Lev 11:24, &c. This verse speaks of uncleanness from an internal cause, as by an issue, &c., for what was from an external cause is spoken of in the next verse.

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

20. The soul… having his uncleanness — This verse implies that there is an order in the religious exercises of the Hebrews. The ceremonially impure could bring but one acceptable oblation, the sin offering, for the removal of his defilement. Eucharistic offerings from hands impure are not a sweet savour unto Jehovah, but a stench in his nostrils. The first duty of an impenitent sinner is not to lay earthly holocausts upon God’s altar, but to “cease to do evil.”

That soul shall be cut off from his people — This must be understood as the punishment of an audacious and defiant trampling down of Jehovah’s authority, a high-handed sin, and not a mere inadvertence. The cutting off denotes not mere excommunication, but, “the punishment of death in general, without defining the manner.” — Gesenius. Probation is made up of small things. These are tests of character more practicable than requirements of greater seeming importance. Divine authority infuses a moral element into mere ritualism.

Hence positive precepts, as the Christian sacraments, are often a higher test of faith than commandments, which find their reason in man’s moral nature. See Butler’s Analogy, part ii, chap. 1.

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

Vers. 20, 21. Divine and human severity.

There is something almost startling in the closing words, "That soul shall be cut off from his people." It suggests thoughts of

I APPARENT DIVINE SEVERITY.

1. That God sometimes seems to be severe in his dealings with men. These particular injunctions must have had to the Jews an aspect of rigour. An Israelite excommunicated for one of these offenses probably felt that he had been hardly dealt with. God"s dealings have an occasional aspect of severity. (see Rom_11:22) So with us. In his providence comparatively slight faults, errors, transgressions, are sometimes followed by most serious evils disgrace, sorrow, loss, death.

2. That the light of after-days often explains his dealing with us. We can see now that the paramount and supreme importance of maintaining the purity of Israel, its separateness from all the abominations of surrounding heathendom, made the most stringent regulations on that subject necessary and wise, and therefore kind. So with us. Looking back on the way by which we have been led, we frequently see that that very thing which at the time was not only distressing but perplexing, was the most signal act of the Divine wisdom and goodness, the providential ordering for which, above every other thing, we now give thanks.

3. That present faith should rise to the realization that, somewhere in the future, apparent severity will bear the aspect of wise and holy love. "What we know not now we shall know hereafter." "Then shall we know," etc. (1Co_13:12)

II OCCASIONAL HUMAN SEVERITY.

1. That we are sometimes obliged to seem severe towards those for whom we are responsible.

a. The statesman is obliged to introduce a severe measure;

b. a father to take a strong and energetic course;

c. a Church to excommunicate a member.

2. That apparent severity is sometimes the only rightful course which wise and holy love can take. It is the action which is (1) due to itself; (Jam_3:17) (2) due to the object of its affection. C. (1Ti_1:20)

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

That eateth - Knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it. Not being cleansed from his uncleanness according to the appointment, chap. xi, 24, &c. This verse speaks of uncleanness from an internal cause, as by an issue, &c. for what was from an external cause is spoken of in the next verse.

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

וטמאתו עליו [BUT THE SOUL THAT EATETH OF THE FLESH OF THE SACRIFICES …] HAVING ITS (or HIS) UNCLEANNESS UPON IT (or HIM) — Scripture is speaking here of the uncleanness of the person (i.e., the words mean: And the soul (person) that eateth of the flesh of the שלמים whilst his uncleanness is upon him; it does not mean: the person who eateth the flesh whilst its uncleanness is upon it) (Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 14 3; Zevachim 43b; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 22:3). But a clean person who eats unclean sacrificial flesh is not punished with excision, as is the case here, but only for transgressing the prohibition in v. 19:“And the flesh, that toucheth any unclean thing [shall not be eaten]”, for which the punishment is lashes. The prohibition referring to the case of “an unclean person who eats holy things” for which our text states the punishment is not expressly mentioned in the Torah but the Sages derived it by means of a verbal analogy (ג"ש) (Makkot 14b). — Three times is the punishment of excision stated in the Torah with reference to people eating holy sacrifices in a state of bodily uncleanness, (here, in v. 21 and in Leviticus 22:3), and our Rabbis explained them in Treatise Shevuot 7a as follows: one is intended as a general statement, the other as referring to a particular case and the third is intended to teach about the קרבן עולה ויורד (the sacrifice of higher or lesser value according to monetary circumstances of him who offers it; Leviticus 5:2, 3), that it is prescribed only as an atonement for communicating uncleanness to the Temple or sacred food by entering the former or eating the latter in a state of uncleanness (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 22:3 and Note thereon).

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.