The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

CHAP. XV. (Book 15)

VERS. II.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Why do they transgress the Tradition of the Elders?

HOW great a value they set upon their Traditions, even above the Word of God, appears sufficiently from this very place, ver. 6. out of infinite examples, which we meet with in their Writings, we will produce one place only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a 1.1 The words of the Scribes are lovely, above the words of the Law; for the words of the Law are weighty and light, but the words of the Scribes are all weighty.

He that shall say, There are no Phylacteries, transgressing the words of the Law, is not guilty; but he that shall say, there are five Totaphoth, adding to the words of the Scribes, he is guilty.

:〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of the Elders, are weightier than the words of the Prophets.

A Prophet and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an Elder, to what are they likened? To a King sending two of his servants into a Province; of one he writes thus, Unless he shew you my Seal, believe him not: Of the other thus, Although he shews you not my Seal, yet believe him. Thus it is written of the Prophet, He shall shew thee a sign or a miracle; but of the Elders thus, According to the Law which they shall teach thee, &c. But enough of Blasphemies.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

For they wash not their hands, &c.

b 1.2 The undervaluing of the washing of hands is said to be among those things for which the Sanhedrin Excommunicates: and therefore that R. Eliazar ben Hazar was Excommu∣nicated by it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because he undervalued the washing of hands; and that when he was dead, by the command of the Sanhedrin, a great stone was laid upon his Bier. Whence you may learn, say they, that the Sanhedrin stones the very Coffin of every Ex∣communicate person that dies in his Excommunication.

It would require a just volume, and not a short Commentary, or a running Pen, to lay open this mystery of Pharisaism; concerning washing of hands, and to discover it in all its niceties, let us gather these few passages out of infinite numbers.

I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 c 1.3 The washing of hands and the plunging of them is appointed by the words of the Scribes. But, by whom, and when, it is doubted. Some ascribe the institution of this Rite to Hillel and Shammai, others carry it back to Ages be∣fore them. d 1.4 Hillel and Shammai decreed concerning the washing of hands. R. I••si••hen Rabb. Bon, in the name of R. Levi, saith, That Tradition was given before, but they had forgotten it: these second stand forth and appoint according to the mind of the former.

II. e 1.5 Although it was permitted to eat unclean meats, and to drink unclean drinks; yet the ancient Religious eat their common food in cleanness, and took care to avoid uncleanness all their days, and they were called Pharisees. And this is a matter of the highest sanctity, and the way of the highest Religion, namely, that a man separate himself, and go aside from the vulgar, and that he neither touch them, nor eat, nor drink with them: for such separation conduceth to the purity of the body from evil works, &c. Hence that definition of a Pharisee which we have produced before, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Pharisees eat their common food in cleanness: and the Pharisaical Ladder of Heaven, f 1.6 Whosoever hath his seat in the land of Israel, and eateth his common food in cleanness, and speaks the holy language, and recites his Phylacteries morning and evening, let him be confident that he shall obtain the life of the world to come.

III. Here that distinction is to be observed between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 forbidden meats, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 unclean meats. Of both Maimonides writ a proper Tract. Forbidden meats, such as Fat, Blood, Creatures unlawful to be eaten, Levit. II. were by no means to be eaten: but Meats unclean in themselves were lawful indeed to be eaten, but con∣tracted some uncleanness elswhere; it was lawful to eat them, and it was not lawful; or, to speak as the thing indeed is, they might eat them by the Law of God, but by the Ca∣nons of Pharisaism, they might not,

IV. The distinction also between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 unclean, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 profane, or polluted, is to be observed. Rambam, in his Preface to Toharoth, declares it.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Profane or polluted denotes this, that it does not pollute ano∣ther beside it self. For every thing which uncleanness invades, so that it becomes unclean, but renders not another thing unclean, is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 profane. And hence it is said, of every one

that eats unclean meats, or drinks unclean drinks, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That his body is polluted: but he pollutes not another. Note that, the body of the eater is polluted by unclean meats. To which you may add that which follows in the same Maimonides in the place before alledg∣ed. Separation from the common people, &c. conduces to the purity of the body from evil works; the purity of the body conduceth to the sanctity of the soul from evil affections: the sanctity of the soul conduces unto likeness to God, as it is said, And ye shall be sanctified, and ye shall be holy, because I the Lord that sanctifie you, am holy. Hence you may more clearly perceive the force of Christs confutation, which we have, ver. 17, 18, 19, 20.

V. They thought that clean food was polluted by unclean hands, and that the hands were polluted by unclean meats. You would wonder at this Tradition g 1.7 Unclean meats and unclean drinks do not defile a man, if he touch them not, but if he touch them with his hands, then his hands become unclean: if he handle them with both hands, both hands are de∣filed; if he touch them with one hand only, one hand only is defiled.

VI. This care therefore laid upon the Pharisee Sect, that meats should be set on free, as much as might be, from all uncleanness: but especially since they could not always be se∣cure of this, that they might be secure that the meats were not rendred unclean by their hands. Hence were the washings of them, not only when they knew them to be unclean, but also when they knew it not.

Rambam in the Preface to the Tract 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of hands, hath these words, If the hands are unclean by any uncleaness, which renders them unclean; or, if it be hid from a man, and he knows not that he is polluted; yet he is bound to wash his hands in order to eating his common food, &c.

VII. To these most rigid Canons they added also Bugbears and Ghosts to assright them.

:〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 h 1.8 It was a business of Shibta. Where the Gloss is, Shibta was one of the Demo••s who hurt them that wash not their hands before meat. The Aruch writes thus, Shibta is an evil spirit which sits upon mens hands in the night: and if any touch his food with unwashen hands, that spirit sits upon that food, and there is danger from it.

Let these things suffice as we pass along, it would be infinite to pursue all that is said of this rite and superstition. Of the quantity of water sufficient for this washing, of the wash∣ing of the hands, and of the plunging of them, of the first and second water, of the man∣ner of washing, of the time, of the order when the number of those that sat down to meat exceeded five, or did not exceed, and other such like niceties; read, if you have leisure, and if the toyl and nauseousness of it do not offend you, the Talmudick Tract 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of hands, Maimonides upon the Tract 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lavers, and i 1.9 Bab. Beracoth, and this Article indeed is inserted through the whole volume entitled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cleanness. Let this discourse be ended with this Canon, k 1.10 For a cake, and for the washing of hands, let a man walk as far as four miles.

VERS. V.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, &c.

I. BEside the Law alledged by Christ, Honour thy father and thy mother, &c. they ac∣knowledg this also for Law, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l 1.11 A son is bound to provide his father meat and drink, to cloth him, to cover him, to lead him in and out, to wash his face, hands, and feet. Yea, that goes higher, m 1.12 A son is bound to nourish his father, yea to beg for him. Therefore it is no wonder if these things which are spoken by our Sa∣viour, are not found verbatim in the Jewish Pandect; for they are not so much alledged by him, to shew that it was their direct design to banish away all reverence and love to∣wards parents, as to shew how wicked their Traditions were, and into what ungodly consequences they oftentimes fell. They denied not directly the nourishing of their pa∣rents, nay, they commanded it, they exhorted to it; but consequently by this Tradition they made all void. They taught openly indeed that a father was to be made no account of in comparison of a Rabbin that taught them the Law n 1.13; but they by no means openly asserted that parents were to be neglected, yet openly enough they did, by consequence drawn from this foolish and impious Tradition.

II. One might readily comment upon this clause, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, It is a gift (or, as Mark 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, It is Corbam) by what soever thou mayst be profited by me, if he have read the Tal∣mudi•• Tracts Nedarim and Nazir, where the discourse is of Vows and Oaths; and the phrase, which is before us, speaks a vow or a form of swearing.

1. Vows were distinguished into two ranks, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vows of consecration, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vows of obligation, or, of prohibition, A vow of consecration was, when any thing was devoted to holy uses, namely, to the use of the Altar or the Temple: as when a man by a vow, would dedicate this or that for sacrifice, or to buy wood, salt, wine, &c.

for the Altar: or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For the reparation of the Temple, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A vow of obligation or prohibition was, when a man bound himself, by a vow, from this or that thing, which was lawful in it self, As that he would not eat, that he would not put on, that he would not do this or that, &c.

2. This went for a noted Axiom among them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o 1.14 All Epithi∣tes of vows are as the vows themselves. They added certain short forms, by which they signified a vow, and which carried with it the force of a vow, as if the thing were spoken out in a larger periphrasis, as for Examples, p 1.15 If one should say to his neighbour 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Konem, Konah, Kones, Behold, these are Epithites of a thing devoted unto sacred uses.

The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Konem, Rambam thus explains 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 q 1.16 Let it be upon me as a thing devoted. So also R. Nissim, r 1.17 Konem, Koneh, are words of devoting.

We produced before at Chap. V. ver. 33. some forms of Oaths, which were only Asser∣tive; these under our hands are Vo••ive also. In the place from Beracoth, just now al∣ledged, one saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let the wine be Konem, which I shall tast, for wine is ••ard to the ••owels: that is, let the wine which I taste be as de∣voted wine; as though he had said, I vow that I will not tast wine. To which others an∣swered, Is not old wine good for the bowels? Then he held his peace.

III. But above all such like forms of vowing the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Corban was plain∣est of all, which openly speaks a thing devoted and dedicated to sacred use. And the Reader of those Tracts which we have mentioned shall observe these forms frequently to occur, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let it be Konem, whereby I am pro∣fitable to thee, and, let it be Corban whereby I am profitable to thee. Which words sound the very same thing, unless I am very much mistaken, with the words before us, Let it be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Corban, or, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a gift, by whatsoever thou maist be profited by me.

Which words, that they may be more clearly understood, and that the plain and full sense of the place may be discovered, let these things be considered.

First, That the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is rather to be rendred, Let it be a gift, than, It is a gift. For Konem and Corban, as we have noted, signified not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is as something devoted, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let it be as something devoted. And he of whom we had mention before, who said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meant not, The wine which I shall tast, is as some∣thing devoted, but, Let whatsoever wine I shall tast, be as something devoted: that is, To me let all wine be devoted, and not to be tasted.

Secondly, This form of speech 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, A gift by whatsoever thou maist be profited by me, does neither argue that he who thus spake, devoted his goods to sacred uses, nor obliged him (according to the Doctrine of the Scribes) to devote them; but only restrain'd him by an obligation from that thing, for the denying of which he used such a form; that is, from helping him by his goods, to whom he thus spake. He might help others with his wealth, but him he might not.

Thirdly, The words are brought in, as though they were pronounced with indigna∣tion; as if when the needy Father required food from his Son, he should answer in anger and with contempt, Let it be as a thing devoted, whatsoever of mine may profit thee. But now, things that were devoted were not to be laid out upon common uses.

Fourthly, Christ not only cites the Law, Honour thy Father and Mother, but adds this also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He that curseth Father or Mother. But now there was no 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, cursing here at all; if the Son spoke truly and modestly, and as the thing was; namely, that all his Estate was devoted before.

Fifthly, Therefore although these words should have been spoken by the Son irrever∣ently, wrathfully and inhumanely towards his Father, yet such was the folly together with the impiety of the Traditional Doctrine in this case, which pronounced the Son so obliged by these his words, that it was lawful by no means to succour his needy Father. He was not at all bound by these words to dedicate his Estate to sacred uses, but not to help his Father he was inviolably bound. O excellent Doctrine and Charity!

Sixthly, The words of the verse, therefore may thus be rendred, without any additi∣on put between, which many Interpreters do: Whosoever shall say to his Father or Mother, Let it be a (devoted) gift in whatsoever thou maist be helped by me: then let him not honour his Father and Mother at all.

VERS. XI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Defileth the man.

OR, maketh him common, so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seems to be rendred in the Pharisai•• Idiotism, as I may so speak; because they esteemed defiled men for common and vulgar men: on the contrary, a religious man among them is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A singular man. In Act.

X. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Common or unclean, seem to speak the same thing with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 among the Talmudists.

VERS. XX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

With unwashen hands.

HE saith not, with unclean hands, but unwashen; because as we said before, they were bound to wash, although they were not conscious that their hands were un∣clean. In Mark it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. With common, or, def••led hands, Mark VII. 2. Which seem to be called by the Talmudists, Impure hands, meerly because not washed. Judg from that which is said in the Tract Challah: s 1.18 A cake is owing out of that dough which they knead with the juice of fruits. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And it is eaten with unclean hands.

VERS. XXII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

A woman of Canaan.

IN Mark it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, A Greek woman, a Syrophenician by Na∣tion? Chap. VII. 26.

I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of Canaan. It is worthy observing, that the Holy Bible, reckoning up 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The seven Nations which were to be destroyed by the Israelites, names the Pe∣rizzites, who were not at all recited among the Sons of Canaan, Gen. X. and the Cana∣anites as a particular Nation, when all the seven indeed were Canaanites. See Deut. VII. 1. Josh. IX. 1. & XI. 3. Judg. III. 5, &c.

The reason of the latter, (with which our business is) is to be fetched thence, that Canaan himself inhabited a peculiar part of that (Northern) Country, with his first born Sons, Sidon and Heth, and thence the name of Canaanites was put upon that particular progeny, distinguished from all his other Sons; and that Country was peculiarly called by the name of Canaan, distinctly from all the rest of the land of Canaan. Hence Jabin the King of Hazor is called the King of Canaan, Judg. IV. 2. and the Kings of Tyre and Sidon, if I mistake not, are called the Kings of the Hittites, 1 King. X. 29.

II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, A Greek woman, a Syrophenician. Although Judea, and al∣most the whole World, had now a long while stooped under the yoak of the Romans, yet the memory of the Syro-grecian Kingdom, and the name of the Nation, was not yet va∣nished. And that is worthy to be noted, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 t 1.19 In the cap∣tivity they compute the years only from the Kingdom of the Greeks. They said before, u 1.20 That the Romans for a hundred and fourscore years ruled over the Jews before the destruction of the Temple; and yet they do not compute the times to that destruction, by the years of the Romans, but by the years of the Greeks. Let the Jews themselves well consider this, and the Christians with them, who reckon the Roman for the fourth Monarchy in Daniel.

Therefore that woman that is here spoken of, to reduce all into a short conclusion, was a Syro-grecian by Nation, a Phenician in respect of her habitation, and from thence called a woman of Canaan.

VERS. XXVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

To the Dogs.

BY this Title the Jews out of spite and contempt disgraced the Gentiles, whose first care it was to hate, to mock, and to curse all beside themselves. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 x 1.21 The Nations of the world, (that is the Heathen) are likened to dogs; from the common speech of the Nation, rather than from his own sense, our Saviour uses this ex∣pression, to whom the Gentiles were not so hateful, and whose custom was to speak with the vulgar.

This ignominious Name like a stone cast at the Heathen, at length fell upon their own heads; and that by the hand and justice of God directing it: for although they out of pride and contempt fixed that disgraceful name upon the Gentiles, according to their very j••••t desert, the Holy Spirit recoiled it upon themselves. See Psal. LIX. 6. Phil. III. 2. Rev. XXII. 15, &c.

VERS. XXXVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

He gave thanks and brake.

SEE y 1.22 here the Tract Beracoth, where it is discoursed of the manner of giving thanks, when many eat together. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Three who eat together ought to give thanks together: that is, one gave thanks for the rest (as the Gloss writes) in the plural number, saying, Let us give thanks. So when there were ten, or an hundred, or a thousand, or more, one gave thanks for all, and they answered after him Amen, or some words which he had recited. z 1.23

Notes

• a 1.1

  Hieros Berac. fol. 3. 2.
• b 1.2

  In Bab Berac. fol. 46. 2.
• c 1.3

  Maimon. in Mikvaoth, cap. 11.
• d 1.4

  Heros. Schab. fol. 1. 4.
• e 1.5

  Maimon. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• f 1.6

  Hieros. in the place above.
• g 1.7

  Rambam in the place be∣••ore.
• h 1.8

  Bab. Taanith, fol. 20. 2.
• i 1.9

  Fol. 45. 2, &c.
• k 1.10

  Hieros. Chal∣••ah, fol. 58. 3.
• l 1.11

  Tosaphta, in Kiddushin, cap. 1.
• m 1.12

  Hieros. Kid∣dushin. fol. 61. 2. 3.
• n 1.13

  Maimon i•• ••••z lah, cap. 12.
• o 1.14

  Nedarim, cap. 1. Hal. 1.
• p 1.15

  Ibid. Hal. 2.
• q 1.16

  In Bab. Bera••. fol. 51. 1.
• r 1.17

  In Nedarim, cap. 1.
• s 1.18

  Cap. 2. Hal 2.
• t 1.19

  Bab. Avodah Zarah, fol. 10. 1.
• u 1.20

  Fol. 8. 2.
• x 1.21

  Midr. Tillen. fol. 6. 3.
• y 1.22

  Chap. VII.
• z 1.23

  See Halac. 3.