Bible Commentaries
Leviticus 2

Verses 1-16

B.—OBLATIONS (MEAT-OFFERINGS)

Leviticus 2:1-16

1And when any [a soul,1] will offer a meat-offering [an offering of an oblation2] unto the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil upon it, and put frankincense thereon:3 2and he shall bring it to Aaron’s sons the priests: and he shall take thereout his handful of the flour thereof, and of the oil thereof, with4 all the frankincense thereof; and the priest shall burn the memorial of it upon the altar, to be an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord: 3and the remnant of the meat-offering [oblation2] shall be Aaron’s and his sons’: it is a thing most holy of the offerings of the Lord made by fire.

4And if thou bring an oblation of a meat-offering [an offering of an oblation2] baken in the oven, it shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, or unleavened wafers anointed with oil. 5And if thy oblation be a meat-offering [offering be an oblation2] baken in a pan, it shall be of fine flour unleavened, mingled 6with oil. Thou shalt5 part it in pieces, and pour oil thereon: it6 is a meat-offering 7[an oblation2]. And if thy oblation be a meat-offering [offering be an oblation2] baken in the frying-pan [boiled in the pot7], it shall be made of fine flour with oil.8And thou shalt bring the meat-offering [oblation2] that is made of these things unto the Lord: and when it is presented unto the priest, he shall bring8 it unto the altar. 9And the priest shall take from the meat-offering [oblation2] a memorial thereof, and shall burn it upon the altar: it is an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord. 10And that which is left of the meat-offering [oblation2] shall be Aaron’s and his sons’: it is a thing most holy of the offerings of the Lord made 11by fire. No meat-offering [oblation2], which ye shall bring unto the Lord, shall be made with leaven: for ye shall burn no leaven, nor any honey, in any offering of the Lord made by fire. 12As for the oblation [As an9offering2] of the first-fruits, ye shall offer them unto the Lord: but they shall not be burnt on the altar for a sweet savour. 13And every oblation of thy meat-offering [offering of thy oblation2] shalt thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thy meat-offering [oblation2]: with all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt. 14And if thou offer a meat-offering [an oblation2] of thy [the] first-fruits unto the Lord, thou shalt offer for the meat-offering [an oblation2] of thy first-fruits, green ears of corn [grain10] dried [roasted11] by the fire, even corn 15[grain10] beaten out of full ears. And thou shalt put oil upon it, and lay frankincense thereon: it12 is a meat-offering [an oblation2]. 16And the priest shall burn the memorial of it, part of the beaten corn [grain10] thereof, and part of the oil thereof, with all the frankincense thereof: it is an offering made by fire unto the Lord.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

Leviticus 2:1. נֶפֶשׁ.—As this word is generally rendered a soul in the A. V., especially in the similar places, Leviticus 4:2; Leviticus 5:1-2; Leviticus 5:4; Leviticus 5:15; Leviticus 5:17; Leviticus 6:2, etc., it seems better to preserve as far as may he uniformity of translation.

Leviticus 2:1. The words here translated in the A. V. meat-offering are the same as those rendered in Leviticus 2:4 an oblation of a meat-offering. In this technical language of the law it is certainly desirable to preserve a strict consistency of translation, even if it must sometimes cause an appearance of tautology. The word קָרְבָּן will therefore be rendered throughout offering; gift might be in itself considered a better translation; but as it is already rendered offering twenty-nine times in Lev., and almost universally (with only two exceptions) in Num., less change is required to make that translation uniform. On the other hand מִנְהָה is already always in Lev. meat-offering in the A. V., and generally so in Num.; but the sense of meat has so generally changed since that version was made, that the term had better be replaced. In this book therefore it will be always rendered oblation, as it is in the Vulg. very frequently oblatio.

Leviticus 2:1. The Sam. and LXX. add oblation est, i. e., this is the law of the oblation.

Leviticus 2:2. With: for a similar construction of עַל, see Exodus 12:8.

Leviticus 2:6. ‬‬פָּתוֹת; on this use of the Infin. abs. comp. Exodus 13:3; Exodus 20:8.

Leviticus 2:6. The ancient form הוא is here changed in ten MSS. and in the Sam. to the later היא.

Leviticus 2:7. מַרְחֶשֶׁת, derived (Gesenius, Fuerst) from רָחַשׁ, to boil up, and interpreted by Maimonides, Knobel, Keil and others of a pot or kettle for boiling;—“a deep vessel suitable for boiling flour and other substances thoroughly.” Kalisch.

Leviticus 2:8. “נגשׁ in Hiph. is here used as the enhanced, second power of קרב in Hiph. as in Jeremiah 30:21.” Lange.

Leviticus 2:12. The A. V. is singularly unfortunate; this clause plainly refers to the leaven and honey of Leviticus 2:11.

Leviticus 2:14. Corn is in this country so generally understood of maize that it seems better to substitute the more general word.

Leviticus 2:14. Dried does not sufficiently give the sense of קָלוּי=roasted.

Leviticus 2:15. Eighteen MSS. and the Sam here again, as in Leviticus 2:6, read היא.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The oblation, or meat-offering, naturally follows next after the burnt-offering, because it was usually an accompaniment of that offering. That it was invariably so has been often maintained (Outram, Bähr, Kurtz, etc.), and indeed it was always offered, and also a drink-offering, with most of the other sacrifices (Numbers 15:2-13); but from this chapter with Leviticus 6:14, and with Numbers 5:15, it appears that the oblation might be offered separately, although the reasons given for this by Kalisch need not be admitted. It is also associated with the burnt-offering in the generality of its signification as opposed to the more special offerings which follow. Lange: “It signifies not so much resignation as giving, or a return, in the sense of childlike thankfulness, resignation of the support of life, of the enjoyment of life. Its motive is not through a divine demand as the performance of a duty or a debt, but through an instinctive desire of communion with Jehovah. Hence it is here indeed the soul, נֶפֶשׁ, that brings the sacrifice, not the אָדָם as in the burnt-offering; and in spite of the grammatical equivalence of both expressions, we must not obliterate this distinction.” The word מִנְחָה itself originally means a present with which one seeks to obtain the favor of a superior (Genesis 32:21-22; Genesis 43:11; Genesis 43:15, etc.); then κατ̓ έξοχήν, what is presented to God, a sacrifice. At first it was used alike of the bloody and the unbloody sacrifice (Genesis 4:3-4); but under the law it is restricted absolutely to bloodless offerings. The full expression, as in Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:4, is מִנְחָה קָרְבָּן, LXX. δῶρον θνσία, although often either δῶρον or θυσία alone. Besides the kinds of oblation mentioned here, there were others, as the shew-bread and the jealousy-offering. With those enumerated in this chapter salt was always to be used (Leviticus 2:13) and oil (Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:4-7; Leviticus 2:15); and with those of flour and grain, incense also (Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:15).

Only a handful of these oblations was to be burnt upon the altar, the rest being eaten by the priests in “a holy place.” The oblation of unprepared flour or of flour simply mingled with oil (Leviticus 7:10) was the common property of the priests (Leviticus 2:3); while that which was cooked belonged to the officiating priest (Leviticus 7:9-10).

“While the bloody sacrifice is to be purified of its unclean portions, the unbloody sacrifice is to be enriched by the addition of oil, incense and salt; i.e. the enjoyment of life becomes enriched and preserved clean through spirit and through prayer, and especially through the salt of the covenant—through the hard spiritual discipline which keeps pure the divine fellowship. In its nature the “meat-offering” [oblation] is closely related to the salvation (or peace) offering; yet the latter has reference to the enjoyment or desire of uncommon prosperity, while the former relates to the enjoyment of usual and quiet existence. The meat-offering culminates in the shew-bread (Exodus 25:30; Leviticus 24:5).” Lange. “In all these cases the sacred character of the offering was conveyed not only by the admixture of oil, the type of holiness and sanctification, the addition of frankincense, the emblem of devotion, and the use of salt, the agent of preservation, and therefore called ‘the salt of the covenant;’ but more decidedly still by the rigid prohibition of honey and leaven, representing fermentation and corruption, by the portion devoted to God and burnt in His honor as a ‘memorial’ to bring the worshipper to His gracious remembrance, and lastly by the injunction to leave to the priests the remainder as most holy.” Kalisch.

Three kinds of oblation are here mentioned, the second of which had three varieties: I. Fine flour with frankincense (Leviticus 2:1-3); II. Cakes or pastry: (a) of unleavened cakes mixed with oil and baked in an oven (Leviticus 2:4), or (b) of thin cakes, also unleavened, baked and then broken up and oil poured over them (Leviticus 2:5-6), or (c) of fine flour boiled in oil (Leviticus 2:7); the directions common to all these varieties occupy Leviticus 2:8-10, while those concerning all oblations are in Leviticus 2:11-13; III. Parched kernels of the first-fruits of grain with frankincense.

I. The first kind of oblation. Leviticus 2:1-3.

Leviticus 2:1. A soul=a person, any one of either sex.

Fine flour—סֹלֶת, a word of uncertain derivation, but clearly meaning fine flour, whether as separated from the bran, or as sifted from the coarser particles. The Syr. here renders puram, and in Genesis 18:6 it is put in apposition with סְאִים קֶמַח. It is probable that this flour was generally of wheat (see Exodus 29:2), and the LXX. always translate it σεμίδαλις. The Vulg. has similia.סֹלֶח does not occur in connection with the jealousy-oblation of barley, Numbers 5:15.

Put frankincense thereto.—The incense was not mixed with the flour and oil, but so added that it might be wholly removed with the “handful” which was taken to be burned with the incense upon the altar. Frankincense was “a costly, sweet-smelling, pale yellow resin, the milky exudation of a shrub, used for sacred fumigations” (Fuerst), and also for purposes of royal luxury (Song of Solomon 3:6). It is considered to have been a product of Southwestern Arabia. Its use in the oblations presented with the animal sacrifices must have been important. Maimonides (More Neboch., lib. III., c. 46): Elegitque ad eam thus, propter bonitatem odoris fumi ipsius in illis locis, ubi fœtor est ex carnibus combustis.

Leviticus 2:2. And he shall take.—The A. V. like the Heb. leaves the antecedent of the pronoun somewhat uncertain; but the Targ. Onkelos and the Vulg. are undoubtedly right in referring it to the priest, see Leviticus 6:15, and comp. also Leviticus 5:12. The transfer of the handful from the offerer to the priest who was to burn it would have been inconvenient.

Handful.—Plainly what the hand could hold, and not, as the Rabbins have it, with the thumb and little finger closed, leaving three fingers open.

Memorial.—אַזְכָרָה, applied only to that part of the oblation which was burnt upon the altar (Leviticus 2:9; Leviticus 2:16; Leviticus 6:15), to the corresponding part of the sin-offering of flour (Leviticus 5:12), of the jealousy-offering (Numbers 5:26), and also to the frankincense placed upon the shew-bread (Leviticus 24:7), which last was also burnt upon the altar. The LXX. render by μνημόσυνον, and the figurative application of that word to the prayers and alms of Cornelius (Acts 10:4) throws light upon the significance of the oblation.

An offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.—The same expression as is applied to the burnt-offering, Leviticus 1:9; Leviticus 1:13; Leviticus 1:17.

Leviticus 2:3. And the remnant,etc.—So far as the offerer was concerned, the oblation was as wholly given to the Lord as the burnt-offering; nothing of it was restored to him. There was a difference in the method by which it was given: the burnt-offering was wholly burned except the skin, which was given to the priest; the oblation had only an handful burned, together with all the incense, and the bulk of it was consumed by the priests.

A thing most holy.—קֹדִשׁ קָדָשִׁים, lit. holy of holies. This term is applied to all sacrificial gifts which were wholly devoted to God, yet of which a part was given to Him by being given to His priests. It is not applied to the burnt-offerings, nor to the priestly oblations (Leviticus 6:19-23), nor to any other sacrifices which were wholly consumed upon the altar. All sacrifices were holy, and the phrase most holy is not to mark those to which it is applied as holier than the others; but is used only in regard to those which, having been wholly devoted, might possibly be perverted to other uses. Thus it is used of the oblations (Leviticus 2:3; Leviticus 2:10; Leviticus 6:17; Leviticus 10:12) of such of the sin and trespass-offerings as were not burned without the camp (Leviticus 6:25; Leviticus 6:29; Leviticus 7:1; Leviticus 7:6; Leviticus 10:17; Leviticus 14:13; Numbers 18:9), and of the shew-bread (Leviticus 24:9). Its use is similar when applied to other things than sacrifices; thus, Exodus 40:10, it is used of the altar in contradistinction to the tabernacle which is called holy (Leviticus 2:9), because the altar was thus to be guarded from the touch of the people, while there was no danger in regard to the tabernacle proper, since they were forbidden to enter it at all (comp. Exodus 29:37); so the term is applied to the sacred incense (Exodus 30:36), and to all objects devoted by vow, whether man or beast or field (Leviticus 27:28). The parts of all “most holy” sacrifices which were not placed upon the altar must be eaten by the priests themselves in “a holy place” (Leviticus 6:26; Leviticus 7:6; Leviticus 10:17, etc.); and this “holy place”—not the sanctuary itself—is more particularly described (Leviticus 6:26) as “in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation,” and “beside the altar” (Leviticus 10:12). Whereas the priests’ portion of other sacrifices might be eaten with their families in any “clean place” (Leviticus 10:14).

II. The second kind of oblation. Leviticus 2:4-13.

This included several varieties of cakes or pastry all prepared from fine flour and with oil, but without frankincense.
(a) The first variety, Leviticus 2:4.

Leviticus 2:4. Baken in the oven.—תַּנּוּר is an oven of any kind, but must here mean a portable oven, or rather a large earthen pot or jar, such as is still in use in the East for baking cakes, such as is mentioned in Leviticus 11:35 as capable of being broken; this was heated by a fire inside.

Cakes.—חַלּוֹת from חָלַל =to be perforated. A thick kind of cake pierced with holes after the fashion of our bakers’ biscuit. These were mixed up with oil before baking.

Wafers—from רָקַק= to beat or spread out thin, This denotes a kind of cake well described by wafer. It is often cooked by the Arabs on the outside of the same vessel in which the חַלּוֹת are baked at the same time. The oil was applied to these after they were baked.

(b) The second variety, Leviticus 2:5-6.

Leviticus 2:5. In a pan.—ַעל־הַמַּחֲבַת. Authorities differ as to whether this is to be understood as in the text of the A. V. of a frying-pan, or as in the margin of a flat plate. The LXX. render τήγανον which seems to be equally perpetuated in the iron frying-pans of the Cabyles of Africa, and the earthen plates of the Bedouins of the East, both being called tajen. The distinction of this variety of oblation from the former will be more marked if we may understand it of fried cakes, according to the translation of the A. V. in 1 Chronicles 23:29. This was both to be made up with oil, and to have oil poured on it after it was cooked and broken into pieces.

(c) The third variety, Leviticus 2:7.

Leviticus 2:7. Boiled in a pot.—This is another variety made up with oil and boiled, perhaps also boiled in oil. Lange notes that with each successive advance in the form of the oblation “the addition of the oil seems to rise, as if the varying grade of spiritual life was distinguished by the consecration of life’s enjoyment. (See Keil, Knobel, 363.) But throughout the oil of the Spirit is the peculiar or appropriate vital essence of the offering, especially in the burnt-offering and the thank-offering, and above all in the sacrifice of the priests.”

Directions common to both these varieties of oblation. Leviticus 2:8-10. These scarcely differ from the directions in Leviticus 2:2-3, except in the omission of incense which was not used with the cooked oblation. The הֵרִים מִן in Leviticus 2:9 has the same sense with the קָמַץ מִן of Leviticus 2:2 (comp. Leviticus 3:3 with Leviticus 4:8; Leviticus 4:31; Leviticus 4:35; Leviticus 4:10 with Leviticus 4:31; Leviticus 4:35), and means simply to lift off the part to be burned. It does not denote, as the Rabbins and others assert, any special waving ceremony.

Leviticus 2:11-13. General directions concerning all oblations.

Ye shall burn no leaven, nor any honey.—These were strictly prohibited as offerings to be laid upon the altar, but not for those offered to God by being given to His priests; thus they are allowed in Leviticus 2:12. Leavened bread is also required in the peace-offering to be used as a heave-offering (Leviticus 7:13-14), and in the Pentecostal loaves to be waved before the Lord (Leviticus 23:17; Leviticus 23:20), and honey is expressly enumerated among the first-fruits offered under Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 31:5). The reason for the exclusion of these from the altar was undoubtedly their fermenting property (for honey was anciently used in the preparation of vinegar, Plin. Nat. Hist. xi. 15; xxi. 48); fermentation has ever been recognized “as an apt symbol of the working of corruption in the human heart” (Clark) both in Scripture (Luke 12:1; 1 Corinthians 5:8; Galatians 5:9), and among the ancients generally (Aul. Gell. Noct. Att. x. 15), and hence was unsuitable for the altar of Jehovah, although as abundantly shown by Bochart (Hieroz. Ed. Rosen. III., p. 394 sq.) continually offered to the heathen deities. Honey was also by the ancient interpreters generally connected with the deliciæ carnis so destructive of the spiritual life. “The leaven signifies an incongruous fellowship with the world, easily becoming contagious, which must be excluded from the priestly fellowship with Jehovah. The honey, on the other hand, signified in contrast with the leaven, the dainty enjoyment of children, or especially infants (Isaiah 7:15), and was no food for the communion of priestly men with Jehovah.” Lange.

Leviticus 2:12. As an offering.—The sense is plainly that while leaven, i.e. anything made with leaven, and honey might not be burned upon the altar, they were yet allowable as offerings of first-fruits to be consumed by the priests.

Leviticus 2:13. This verse gives directions applicable to all oblations, and in fact to all sacrifices. The salt of the covenant of thy God.—A covenant of salt is a perpetual covenant, Numbers 18:19; 2 Chronicles 13:5; and this expression is said to be still in use among the Arabs at this day. Salt in its unalterable and preserving property is the opposite of leaven and of honey. Its symbolical meaning is therefore plain; the purifying and preserving principle must never be wanting from any offering made in covenant-relation with God.

With all thine offerings.—From the connection of this clause it might, with Knobel, be taken as applicable only to oblations; but as salt was used with all offerings (Ezekiel 43:24 : Mark 9:49), not only among the Hebrews, but other nations also (Plin. Nat. Hist. xxxi. 41 insacris ... nulla conficiuntur sine mola salsa), and as on account of this universally recognized usage no other direction is anywhere given about it in the law, it seems better to take the words as a parenthetical clause meant to apply to all offerings of every kind.

III. The third kind of oblation. Leviticus 2:14-16. This kind of oblation is separated from the others probably because it was not like them offered in connection with the bloody sacrifices, but by itself, like the same kind of offering mentioned in Numbers 18:12-13. That offering, however, was obligatory, while this was voluntary. Lange, however, considers that “this direction looks back to Leviticus 2:12, completing it. It is true that the leavened loaves of the first-fruits might not be brought to the sacrificial fire; but it is not on that account to be said that in general the first-fruits were not to be offered. Accordingly the form is now prescribed.” These precepts are of course to be understood of private and voluntary oblations of first-fruits; both the time (on the morrow after the Passover-Sabbath, Leviticus 23:11) and the material (barley—for this only was ripe at that time) of the public and required oblation grain were prescribed.

Leviticus 2:14. Green ears of grain.—Ears freshly gathered of the maturing grain scarcely yet quite ripe. Stalks of wheat with the ears, gathered before they are entirely ripe, roasted by the fire, and the kernels of grain then beaten out, is still a favorite food in the East.

Leviticus 2:15-16. Oil and frankincense were to be added, and the oblation treated as that in Leviticus 2:2-3.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

I. As the burnt-offerings were of such domestic animals as were used for food, and yet not from every kind of them; so the oblations were of certain kinds of farinaceous food in common use—not indeed of all kinds, but of a sufficient variety to place the material of the offering always within easy reach. Both kinds of offerings, which were entirely voluntary, were thus made easily accessible to the people, and they were taught that the things of the daily life were to be sanctified by offerings to God. As the perfect animal was required for the burnt-offering, so the fine flour was demanded for the oblation; that which is given to God is to be of the best man has.

II. That which is once absolutely given to God may not afterwards be turned aside to any other use. However voluntary the gift, when it has once been stamped “most holy,” it belongs to Him alone. The principle is recognized in the N. T. in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. Yet what is given to God must often, as in the oblation, be largely consumed by those who minister on His behalf, and by secondary instrumentalities generally. This is recognized by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:13-14, and must necessarily be true of the great mass of the gifts in the Christian Church given to God for the upholding and advancement of His kingdom on earth.

III. In the exclusion from the oblation of all ferment and the requirement of the salt of purity and preservation is plainly taught that approach to God must be free from contamination of “the leaven of hypocrisy,” and must have in it both purity and steadfastness.
IV. In the oblation, recognizing as a whole that man gives back to God of that which God has given to him, the use of the oil seems to have a more special significance. As an article of food it meant also what was meant by the fine flour; but inasmuch as oil is constantly in Scripture the emblem of Divine grace given through the Spirit, it was perhaps intended by its use in the oblation to signify also the acknowledgment that spiritual gifts are from God and belong to Him.

V. Much of the ritual of the oblation is applied in the N. T. to Christian duties and affections, sometimes in what is common to this with other offerings, sometimes in what belonged to this alone. Several such passages have already been pointed out; others may be added: Matthew 16:6, Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees: Mark 9:49-50, Every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.….Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another; 1 Corinthians 5:7-8; Colossians 4:6, Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt; Hebrews 13:15, through Christ, Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to His name.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The oblation to God, though unbloody and among the least of the sacrifices, must still be the best of its kind, of fine flour. It must have upon it the oil of an act of the Spirit, and the sweet frankincense of prayer. That it may be truly a gift to God, and acceptable, it is only necessary that a mere handful of it be actually burned upon His altar; the rest is still a gift to Him, although consumed by those who minister in His service. “It is joined with the burnt-offering like blessing with faithful discharge of duty.” Lange.

Every variety of food, fit for the altar, must be sanctified by an oblation. We ever ask: “Give us this day our daily bread,” and receiving it, we are called upon to acknowledge the Giver by giving to Him an offering of that which is His own. Even the leaven and the honey, which, from their fermenting properties, may not go upon the altar, may yet be offered as first-fruits. There is none of God’s gifts which we may use ourselves, with which we may not show our gratitude to the Giver.

In the worship of God “we may not adopt our own inventions, though they may be sweet and delicious as honey to our own palates.… Honey is good in its proper place, and heaven itself is typified by ‘a land flowing with milk and honey’ (Exodus 3:8; Exodus 13:5); but if God forbids it, we must abstain from it, or we shall not come to that heavenly Canaan.” Wordsworth.

That seasoning of salt, which the apostle requires for our conversation (Colossians 4:6), may not be wanting from our gifts to God. They are not to be insipid, but having “that freshness and vital briskness which characterizes the Spirit’s presence and work.” Alford.

Of first-fruits especially is an oblation to be brought. Not only should we give to God as He blesses us all along; but especially with each new harvest received from His bounty should a first portion be laid aside for His service.

Footnotes:

Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:1. נֶפֶשׁ.—As this word is generally rendered a soul in the A. V., especially in the similar places, Leviticus 4:2; Leviticus 5:1-2; Leviticus 5:4; Leviticus 5:15; Leviticus 5:17; Leviticus 6:2, etc., it seems better to preserve as far as may he uniformity of translation.

Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:1. The words here translated in the A. V. meat-offering are the same as those rendered in Leviticus 2:4 an oblation of a meat-offering. In this technical language of the law it is certainly desirable to preserve a strict consistency of translation, even if it must sometimes cause an appearance of tautology. The word קָרְבָּן will therefore be rendered throughout offering; gift might be in itself considered a better translation; but as it is already rendered offering twenty-nine times in Lev., and almost universally (with only two exceptions) in Num., less change is required to make that translation uniform. On the other hand מִנְהָה is already always in Lev. meat-offering in the A. V., and generally so in Num.; but the sense of meat has so generally changed since that version was made, that the term had better be replaced. In this book therefore it will be always rendered oblation, as it is in the Vulg. very frequently oblatio.

Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:1. The Sam. and LXX. add oblation est, i. e., this is the law of the oblation.

Leviticus 2:2; Leviticus 2:2. With: for a similar construction of עַל, see Exodus 12:8.

Leviticus 2:6; Leviticus 2:6. ‬‬פָּתוֹת; on this use of the Infin. abs. comp. Exodus 13:3; Exodus 20:8.

Leviticus 2:6; Leviticus 2:6. The ancient form הוא is here changed in ten MSS. and in the Sam. to the later היא.

Leviticus 2:7; Leviticus 2:7. מַרְחֶשֶׁת, derived (Gesenius, Fuerst) from רָחַשׁ, to boil up, and interpreted by Maimonides, Knobel, Keil and others of a pot or kettle for boiling;—“a deep vessel suitable for boiling flour and other substances thoroughly.” Kalisch.

Leviticus 2:8; Leviticus 2:8. “נגשׁ in Hiph. is here used as the enhanced, second power of קרב in Hiph. as in Jeremiah 30:21.” Lange.

Leviticus 2:12; Leviticus 2:12. The A. V. is singularly unfortunate; this clause plainly refers to the leaven and honey of Leviticus 2:11.

Leviticus 2:14; Leviticus 2:14. Corn is in this country so generally understood of maize that it seems better to substitute the more general word.

Leviticus 2:14; Leviticus 2:14. Dried does not sufficiently give the sense of קָלוּי=roasted.

Leviticus 2:15; Leviticus 2:15. Eighteen MSS. and the Sam here again, as in Leviticus 2:6, read היא.