another.

Lusts.

there can hardly be any doubt that, as the administrators of the law during the second Temple interpreted it, if he married either of them and she died, he could not marry the other any more, and that this prohibition did not apply to cases of illicit commerce. Criminal intercourse with one did not preclude him from marrying the other. For contracting the kind of polygamy here forbidden, the offenders were punished with death by fire. (See chap. xx. 14.)

66

(18) A her sister.-That is, man is here forbidden to take a second sister for a mile to or in addition to the one who is already his wife, and who is still alive. This clause therefore forbids the Jews, who were permitted to have several wives, a particular kind of polygamy, i.e., a plurality of sisters. According to the administrators of the law during the second Temple, the expression "sister" here not only denotes a full sister by the same father and the same mother, but a half-sister either by the same father or the same mother. The marginal rendering in the Authorised Version, "one wife to another," which makes this a prohibition of polygamy, and which was first proposed by Junius and Tremelius in 1575, is (1) contrary to the expressions "wife" and sister,' which, in every verse of these prohibitions (see verses 8, 9, 11-17), invariably mean wife and sister. (2) Whenever the phrase, 66 a man to his brother," or "a woman to her sister," is used metaphorically in the sense of " one to or "one with another (Exod. xxvi. 3, 5, 6, 17; Ezek. i. 9, 23; iii. 13, &c.), the words have always a distributive force, and are invariably preceded by a plural verb, and the things themselves to which they refer are mentioned by name. Thus, for instance, in Ezek. i. 23, it is, "their wings were straight one toward the other," which is not the case in the passage before us. (3) This rendering is at variance with the Mosaic code, which bases its legislation upon the existence of polygamy, and thus authorises it, as will be seen from the following facts. It permits a father, who had given his son a bondwoman for a wife, to give him a second wife of "freer birth," and prescribes how the first is to be treated under such circumstances (Exod. xxi. 9, 10). It ordains that a king "shall not multiply wives unto himself " (Deut. xvii. 17), which, as Bishop Patrick rightly remarks, "is not a prohibition to take more wives than one, but not to have an excessive number"; thus, in fact, legalising a moderate number. The law of primogeniture presupposes the case of a man having two wives (Deut. xxi. 15-17), and the Levitical law expressly enjoins that a man, though having a wife already, is to marry his deceased brother's widow (Deut. xxv. 17). Hence we find that the judges and kings of Israel had many wives (Judg. vii. 30, x. 4, xii. 9; 1 Sam. i. 2; 2 Sam. iii. 7). David, the royal singer of Israel, "their best king," as Bishop Patrick remarks, "who read God's word day and night and could not but understand it, took many wives without reproof; nay, God gave him more than he had before by delivering his master's wives to him" (2 Sam. xii. 8), and the case adduced in the previous verse plainly shows that polygamy continued among the

nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness. (20) Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her.

Jews after the destruction of the second Temple (verse 10). (4) The Jews to whom this law was given to be observed in their every day life, and to whom the right understanding of its import was of the utmost importance, inasmuch as it involved the happiness of their families, the transgression of it being visited with capital punishment, have, as far as we can trace it, always interpreted this precept as referring to marriage with two sisters together. Hence the ancient it is embodied in Conical Venterpretation of in the tone of her sister thou shalt not take," in the LXX., Vulg., the Syriac, and all the ancient versions.

To vex her.-That is, by marrying also the younger sister, the first, who is already the wife, would be roused to jealousy, and the natural love of sisters would thus be converted into enmity, thus precluding the occurrence of a case like that of Jacob with Leah and Rachel. (See Gen. xxix. 30.)

In her life-time.-This limits the prohibition to her lifetime, that is, as long as the sister who was first married is still living, he must not marry another of her sisters, but he may marry her when the first one is dead. According to the authorities during the second Temple, "in her lifetime" also includes a woman who had been divorced from her husband, and though she is no longer his wife, yet as long as she lives he is forbidden to marry her sister. When the wife died, he was not only free to marry her sister, but in case the deceased left issue, it was regarded as a specially meritorious thing for the widower to do so. the Jews from time immemorial have afforded the bereaved husband special facilities to marry his deceased wife's sister, by allowing the alliance to take place within a shorter period after the demise of his first wife than is usually the case.

Hence

(19) Also thou shalt not approach.-Literally, thou shalt not approach. The marriage laws are now followed by sexual impurities, which to some extent are suggested by the subjects that had necessarily to be discussed or hinted at in regulating the alliance in question.

con

As long as she is put apart.-Put apart, i.e., seven days. (See chap. xv. 19.) For consorting with her without being aware of her condition the man tracted defilement for seven days (see chap. xv. 24), and for committing this gross act presumptuously, both parties to it were visited with death. (See chap. xx. 18.) Ezekiel refers to the transgression of this law as one of the heinous sins perpetrated by the people of Israel (Ezek. xviii. 16; xxii. 10).

(20) Thy neighbour's wife.-For committing adultery, which is here branded as a defilement, whether with a betrothed or married woman, both guilty parties incurred the penalty of death by stoning. (See chap. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22; Ezek. xvi. 38, 40; John viii. 5.) In Egypt the adulterer received a thousand strokes with a stick, and the guilty woman had her nose cut off, and to this day the criminal wife among the Bedouins is executed by her husband, father, or brother, without any mercy. Both criminals were also punished with death among other Eastern nations.

Unlawful

a

23. 10.

C

(24) Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations

Lusts.

Moloch.

c ch. 20. 15.

(21) And thou shalt not let any of thy seed.Literally, And thou shalt not give any of thy seed. Those who violate the sanctity of the marriage ties will readily sacrifice their children. Hence the prohibition to offer up their children to idols follows the law about unchastity.

Pass through the fire to Molech.-Literally, to let it pass to Molech, that is, to put the child into the hands of the figure of Molech, when it fell into the fire which was kindled in the hollow statue of this idol. Molech, also called Milcom, which denotes king, is described as the hideous idol, or "the abomination of the Ammonites" (1 Kings xi. 5, 11). The following graphic description has been handed down traditionally of this idol and its worship:-" Our sages of blessed memory say that whilst all other idols had temples in Jerusalem, Molech had his temple outside Jerusalem, in a place by itself. It was a brass and hollow image, bull-headed, with arms stretched out like a human being who opens his hands to receive something from his neighbour. Its temple had seven compartments, into which the offerers went according to their respective gifts. If one offered a fowl, he went into the first compartment; if a sheep, into the second; if a lamb, into the third; if a ram, into the fourth; if a bullock, into the fifth; if an ox, into the sixth; and if he offered his son, he was conducted into the seventh compartment. He first kissed the image, as it is written, let the sacrificers of men kiss the calf' (Hosea xiii. 2), whereupon a fire was kindled in Molech till its arms became red hot; the child was then put into its hands, and drums were beaten to produce tremendous noises so as to prevent the shrieks of the child reaching the father's ears, lest he should be moved with pity towards his offspring." It was to this idol that Solomon erected a temple on the southern side of Mount Olivet (2 Kings xxiii. 13). This idolatrous worship was punished with death by stoning. (See chap. xx. 2.)

Neither shalt thou profane.-Better, And thou shalt not profane, that is, by causing other nations to say that the Israelites regard their God as an inferior deity, and hence offer unto him animals, whilst to Molech they sacrifice their own children. Hence any act which is done in violation of his commands, or misrepresents God, or by which He is put on a par with other gods, is called "profaning the name of God." (See chaps. xix. 12; xx. 3; xxi. 6; xxii. 2, 32, &c.)

(22) As with womankind.-This was the sin of Sodom (Gen. xix. 5), whence it derived its name, and in spite of the penalty of death enacted by the Law against those who were found guilty of it (see chap. xx. 13), the Israelites did not quite relinquish this abominable vice (Judges xix. 22; 1 Kings xiv. 24), to which the sur

rounding nations were addicted and which was so prevalent in the time of the Apostles (Rom. i. 27; 1 Cor. vi. 9; Gal. v. 19; 1 Tim. i. 10). By the law of Christ those who are guilty of this sin are excluded from the kingdom of God (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10), whilst the laws of civilised Europe rightly inflict the severest penalties upon offenders of this kind.

(23) Any beast.-The necessity for the prohibition of this shocking crime, for which the Mosaic law enacts the penalty of death (see chap. xx. 15, 16; Exod. xxii. 18), will appear all the more important when it is borne in mind that this degrading practice actually formed a part of the religious worship of the Egyptians in connection with the goat deities.

(24) Defile not ye yourselves.-The Lawgiver who solemnly introduced these precepts by five verses of preamble at the beginning of the chapter (verses 1-5), now concludes by an equally solemn appeal to God's people sacredly to observe them in all their integrity, since the violation of them (verses 6—23) has branded those nations with infamy, and brought about their national destruction, and expulsion from the very land which is now to be given to the Israelites.

(25) The land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. From the creation the earth shared in the punishment of man's guilt (Gen. iii. 17), and at the restitution of all things she is to participate in his restoration (Rom. viii. 19-22). The physical condition of the land, therefore, depends upon the moral conduct of man. When he disobeys God's commandments she is parched up and does not yield her fruit" (Deut. xi. 17). "The land is defiled" when he defiles himself. When he walks in the way of the Divine commands she is blessed (Levit. xxv. 19; xxvi. 4); "God is merciful unto his land and to his people " (Deut. xxxii. 43). Hence, "the earth mourneth when her inhabitants sin (Isa. xxiv. 4, 5), and "the earth is glad" when God avenges the cause of His people (Ps. xcvi. 11-13). It is owing to this intimate connection between them that the land, which is here personified, is represented as loathing the wicked conduct of her children and being unable to restrain them. She nauseated them. The same figure is used in verse 28; chap. xx. 22; and in Rev. iii. 16.

(26) Ye shall therefore keep my statutes.— As the perpetration of the above named abominations entailed such disastrous consequences both to the land and to its inhabitants, the strict observance of the Divine statutes is enjoined upon all alike, whether they be Israelites by race or strangers who took up their abode amongst them and joined the Jewish community. (See chap. xvii. 9.)

(27) For all these abominations.-Though the contents of this verse are substantially the same as

those in verses 24, 25, yet the wording is different. In the former the Israelites are exhorted not to pollute themselves as the different tribes or nations have both polluted themselves and the land, whilst here the inhabitants of Canaan are more specifically described as having practised the abominations. The repetition of the same sentiments in different words, as is frequently the case in Hebrew, is designed to impart emphasis. The parentheses are unnecessary.

(28) That the land spue not you out also.— Better, Lest the land vomit you out. By unnecessarily translating the same word differently into "vomiteth in verse 25, and "spue " here, as is done in the Autho rised Version, the striking connection between the two verses is somewhat weakened.

(29) For whosoever shall commit.-This clause, according to the interpretation which obtained during the second Temple, particularises every individual, and is intended to indicate that any one, whether it be male or female, who is guilty, will incur the punishment prescribed for these sins.

Shall be cut off.-That is, in case the transgression escapes the ken of the tribunal, God himself will inflict the punishment upon the criminals, since some of the crimes specified in this chapter are, according to chap. xx., to be visited with death by the hand of man. (30) Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance. As God is no respecter of persons, and as He will assuredly visit His own people with the same punishment which He inflicted upon the former occupants of the land, the Israelites are to take special care to keep inviolate His ordinances.

A

Commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you. -Better, Do not any one of these abominable statutes which were done, as the Authorised Version translates the word in Deut. vi. 24, xvi. 12, xxvi. 16. These abominations were not practised simply as customs, but were legally enacted as statutes of the land, and formed part of their religious institutions (see verse 3). similar state of degeneracy is described by Isaiah, who tells us that the Divine statutes, which is the same word used in the passage before us, were changed. By deviating here from the usual rendering of this phrase the Authorised Version mars the import of the passage. I am the Lord your God.-This is the declaration with which this group of laws was introduced. Its repetition at the end imparts peculiar solemnity to these enactments. (See verse 1.)

XIX.

(1) And the Lord spake unto Moses.-The prohibitions in the preceding chapter, which are designed to regulate the moral conduct of relations and connections towards each other in their family circles, are now followed by precepts which affect the Israelite's

Lusts.

defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God.

CHAPTER XIX.-(1) And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, (2) Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, a Ye shall be holy for I the LORD your God am holy.

(3) Ye shall fear every man his mother,

life in all its bearings, both towards God and man. Hence the authorities during the second Temple regarded it as "embodying the Decalogue," for which reason, as well as for the fact that "it contains the sum and substance of the precepts of the Law, it is read in public." The precepts in this chapter are divided into sixteen groups, eight of which end with the emphatic reiteration, "I am the Lord your God' (verses 2-4, 10, 25, 31, 34, 36), and eight with the shorter formula, "I am the Lord" (verses 12, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30, 32, 37).

(2) Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel. The importance which the Lawgiver Himself attaches to this epitome of the whole Law, as this section is called, may be seen from the fact that God commands Moses to address these precepts" to all the congregation of the children of Israel" -a phrase which occurs nowhere else in Leviticus in this formula, and which is only to be found once more in the whole Pentateuch (Exod. xii. 3), at the institution of the Passover, the great national festival which commemorates the redemption of the Israelites from Egypt.

I the Lord your God.-Around this solemn declaration, which is repeated no less than sixteen times, both in its full and shorter form (see verse 1), cluster the different precepts of this section. It is this solemn formula which links together the various injunctions in the chapter before us. As the Lord who is their God is Himself holy, they who are His people must also be holy, or as the saying which obtained during the second Temple expresses it, "the surroundings of the king must bear the moral impress of the sovereign;" or, in other words, your nearness to God not only demands that your conduct should not be in contradiction to His holy nature, but that your life should bear the impress and reflect the image of God. (See chap. xi. 44; Matt. v. 48; 1 Peter i. 15.)

(3) Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father.-The first means to attain to the holiness which is to make the Israelite reflect the holiness of God, is uniformly to reverence his parents. Thus the group of precepts contained in this chapter opens with the fifth commandment in the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 12), or, as the Apostle calls it, the first commandment with promise (Eph. vi. 2). During the second Temple, already the spiritual authorities called attention to the singular fact that this is one of the three instances in the Scriptures where, contrary to the usual practice, the mother is mentioned before the father; the other two being Gen. xliv. 20 and Lev. xxi. 2. As children ordinarily fear the father and love the mother, hence they say precedence is here given to the mother in order to inculcate the duty of fearing them both alike. The expression "fear," however, they take to include the following:-(1) Not to stand or sit in the place set

and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God.

(4) Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the LORD your God.

(5) And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace a ch. 23. 22. offerings unto the LORD, ye shall offer it at your own will. (6) It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow and if ought remain until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire.

apart for the parents; (2) not to carp at or oppose their statements; and (3) not to call them by their proper names, but either to call them father or mother, or my master, my lady. Whilst the expression "honour," which is used in the parallel passage in Exodus xx. 12, they understand to include (1) to provide them with food and raiment, and (2) to escort them. The parents, they urge, are God's representatives upon earth; hence as God is both to be honoured" with our substance (Prov. iii. 9), and as He is to be "feared" (Deut. vi. 13), so our parents are both to be "honoured" (Exod. xx. 12) and "feared" (chap. xix. 3); and as he who blasphemes the name of God is stoned (chap. xxiv. 16), so he who curses his father or mother is stoned (chap. xx. 9).

66

And keep my sabbaths.-Joined with this fifth commandment is the fourth of the Decalogue. The education of the children, which at the early stages of the Hebrew commonwealth devolved upon the parents, was more especially carried on by them on Sabbath days. In these leisure hours, when the Israelites were strictly forbidden to engage in any secular work, they found it a pleasant task and a welcome occupation to instruct their children in the many symbols, rites, and ceremonies which formed part of the service of the Sabbaths. Hence the observance of the day implied the instruction of the people in the fear and admonition of the Lord, and in acquiring the holiness which is the keynote of this chapter. Hence, too, the violation of the sanctity of the Sabbath is denounced as the greatest Isin which the Israelites committed (Ezek. xx. 12, xxii. 8, xxiii. 38, &c.). It is probably for this reason that the administrators of the law during the second Temple say that the commandment about the Sabbath has here been selected to limit the duty of filial obedience. Its combination with the fifth commandment is to show that though children are admonished to obey their parents, yet if they should order the profanation of this holy day, the children must not obey. (See chap. xxiii. 3.)

(4) Turn ye not unto idols.-As the Lord is their God, and there is no other God besides Him, the Israelites must never turn their affections nor address prayers or enquiries to idols. This part of the verse therefore corresponds with the first commandment of the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 3). The expression here rendered "idols," which, apart from the Prophets and Hagiographa, only occurs once more (see chap. xxvi. 1), denotes non-entities-nothings, and it is in allusion to this import of the word that the Apostle remarks, We know that an idol is nothing in the world" (1 Cor. viii. 4). According to the administrators of the law during the second Temple, the injunction here “turn not means "face not," and forbids even the looking at or the examination of an idol.

66

the Peace Offering.

(7) And if it be eaten at all on the third day, it is abominable; it shall not be accepted. (8) Therefore every one that eateth it shall bear his iniquity, because he hath profaned the hallowed thing of the LORD: and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

(9) And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy

Nor make yourselves molten gods.-This part of the verse corresponds with the second commandment in the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 4—6), though the phrase "molten gods" only occurs once more where the same prohibition is enforced (Exod. xxxiv. 17).

(5) And if ye offer a sacrifice. From chap. xvii. 3-7, it will be seen that the Israelites were in the habit of sacrificing to idols the animals intended for private consumption, and that this practice gave rise to the enactment that when any of the three kinds of quadrupeds are to be slaughtered for daily meat, they should first be devoted to God as peaceofferings. Hence the transition here from the prohibition of idolatrous worship to the peace-offerings. The simple abstention from sacrifice to idols and offering them to God is not enough. If the Israelites bring a peace-offering to the Lord it must be offered in the prescribed manner.

Ye shall offer it at your own will.-Better, ye shall offer it for your acceptance (see chap. i. 3), that is, ye are to do it in such a manner as will secure for you the Divine acceptance.

(6) It shall be eaten the same day... and on the morrow. The fact that the flesh of the animal might be eaten both on the day on which it was offered and on the following day, according to the authorities during the second Temple, shows that the second class of peace-offering is here meant, described in chap. viii. 16, since the flesh of the first class of peace-offerings had to be eaten on the same day. (See chap. vii. 15).

Until the third day.-See chap. vii. 17.

(7) If it be eaten at all on the third day.— See chap. vii. 18.

(8) Therefore every one that eateth it.-See chap. vii. 18-20.

That soul shall be cut off from among his people.-Better, That soul shall be cut off from his people, as the Authorised Version renders it in four out of the six instances (see chap. vii. 20, 21, 25, 27) in which this phrase occurs in the Book of Leviticus. When so important a legal formula, threatening death by excision, is used in a limited number of cases, it is most important that it should be rendered uniformly in a translation. (See Note on chap. xxii. 3.)

(9) And when ye reap.-Benevolent consideration for the poor is another means whereby the Israelite is to attain to that holiness which will enable him to reflect the holiness of God. As the Lord is merciful to all, and provides for the wants of every living creature (Ps. cxlv. 15, 16), the Israelite, too, is to regard the wants of the needy. By this injunction the Law moreover establishes the legal rights of the poor to a portion of the produce of the soil, and thus

releases him from private charity, which, in its exercise, might have been capricious and tyrannical.

The harvest of your land. The expression "harvest," which is subject to this law, the administrators of the law during the second Temple defined to consist of the following produce of the soil (1) all edible and nutritious plants, but not those used for dyeing and colouring; (2) plants which are cultivated, but not those which grow wildly; (3) those which strictly belong to the soil, but not mushrooms, sponges, &c., since these are not so much dependent upon the soil for their growth, but upon humidity, and grow also upon wet wood, &c.; (4) those which ripen at the same time of the year and are all gathered in at the same time, thus excluding figs and similar fruits of trees which are gathered later and gradually, and (5) the produce which is not for immediate consumption, but is garnered up, thus excluding vegetables.

Thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field. The extent of the "corner to be thus left for the poor, like that of filial duty and the study of the Divine law, has designedly been left undefined by the administrators of the law. It is among the things which have "no fixed measures.' But though the maximum is not given, the minimum is stated to be no less than the sixtieth part of the field. The corner was generally left at the end of the field, so that the poor could easily get at it. The time when the poor came was morning, noon, and at the evening sacrifice, which was about three o'clock in the afternoon. The morning was intended for the accommodation of those mothers who had young children, who were then asleep; the middle of the day to accommodate the nurses, whilst the evening suited the elderly people. The gleanings of thy harvest.-The expression 'gleaning" is defined by the authorities during the second Temple to be the ears which fall from the hand or from the sickle in the time of reaping, provided that the quantity which has thus dropped from the hand of the plucker or cutter does not exceed one or two ears. When these ears have thus been dropped they belong to the proprietor and not to the gleaner. If a wind arose after the corn had all been cut, and scattered the harvest over the gleanings, the field was measured, and a certain quantity was allotted as gleanings; if the owner had gathered in all the harvest without leaving any gleanings, he was obliged to give a certain portion to the poor, though the corn had been ground into flour and baked; and if the harvest was lost or burnt after he had thus gathered it without leaving the gleanings, he was beaten with stripes.

66

(10) And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard. -In gathering in the vine care is to be taken only to cut off the large clusters, but not the infantas, as the expression literally denotes, which is here rendered by "glean." Those branches or twigs which had only one or two grapes on them were to be left to the poor.

Neither shalt thou gather every grape.Better, Nor shalt thou gather the scattered grapes,

of sundry Laws. falsely, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.

(13) & Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.

(14) Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumblingblock before the

that is, those single grapes which had either fallen to the ground during the process of cutting off the branches, or those which were scattered about the ground after the vintage was completed. Like the gleanings of the field these grapes were the portion of the poor both of Jewish origin and proselytes.

(11) Ye shall not steal.-This injunction, which forms the eighth commandment of the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 15), most probably has here a primary reference to the conduct of the owners of fields and vineyards. They are cautioned that by depriving the poor of his prescribed right to the corner of the fields, and to the gleanings of the harvest and vintage, they commit theft. Hence the Jewish canonists laid it down that he who puts a basket under a vine at the time of gathering grapes robs the poor.

(12) And ye shall not swear.-This corresponds with the third commandment of the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 7).

(13) Thou shalt not defraud.-Here oppression by fraud and oppression by violence are forbidden. It is probably in allusion to this passage that John the Baptist warned the soldiers who came to him: "And he said to them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages (Luke iii. 14).

The wages of him that is hired.-From the declaration in the next clause, which forbids the retention of the wages over night, it is evident that the day labourer is here spoken of. As he is dependent upon his wages for the support of himself and his family, the Law protects him by enjoining that the earnings of the hireling should be promptly paid. This benign care for the labourer, and the denunciation against any attempt to defraud him, are again and again repeated in the Scriptures (Deut. xxiv. 14, 15; Jer. xxxii. 13; Mal. iii. 5; James v. 4). Hence the humane interpretation which obtained of this law during the second Temple : "He who treats a hireling with harshness sins as grievously as if he hath taken away life, and transgresses five precepts."

(14) Thou shalt not curse the deaf.-To revile one who cannot hear, and is therefore unable to vindicate himself, is both inexpressibly mean and wicked. The term deaf also includes the absent, and hence out of hearing (Ps. xxxviii. 14, 15). According to the administrators of the law during the second Temple, this prohibition was directed against all cursing whatsoever. For, said they, if to curse one who cannot hear, and whom, therefore, it cannot grieve, is prohibited, how much more is it forbidden to curse one who hears it, and who is both enraged and grieved by it.

Nor put a stumblingblock before the blind. -In Deut. xxvii. 18 a curse is pronounced upon those who lead the blind astray. To help those who were thus afflicted was always regarded as a meritorious act. Hence among the benevolent services which Job rendered to his neighbours, he says "I was eyes to the blind" (Job xxix. 15). According to the interpretation