who were present, "Ye know that | reign, and have selected and separated you from all other people; therefore, you must be holy; and, as indicative of this, you are distinguished from all other people by sacred manners and institutions, and especially by a distinction in the arti cles of your food, that you may know yourselves to be set apart from all other nations of the world, and, in your very diet, evidence to them the purity which you should in every thing cherish and preserve.”—As thus Jehovah meant to impress on his people a constant sense of his own infinite purity, as the Holy One of Israel, so he meant to habituate them to regard and honour him as such by the conspicuous purity both of their manners and worship. Not one of the Pagan gods so much as pretended to purity of character, or claimed to be worshiped under the title of the Holy One. Far from this, even the worship of these gods was frequently performed by impure rites, and the use of vile and filthy animals 12, by which the worshippers proclaimed the foul character of their deities. On the contrary, the pure ceremonies of the Hebrews constantly reminded them of the immaculate purity of Jehovah, and this nice distinction of meats was fitted to teach them the rudiments of moral purity or true holiness. Isaiah lxv. 3, 4; lxvi. 17. it is not lawful for a man that is a Jew to keep company with, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should call no man unclean."-" Here," says Mr. JONES, in his Zoologia Ethica, "we have an apostolical comment upon the sense of the vision. God had shewed him that henceforward he should call no living creatures unclean which were in any sense proper for food; and by these brutes of all kinds he understands men of all nations. And, without question, he applied the vision to what the wisdom of God intended to express by it. The case was this: St. Peter, as a Jew, was bound to abstain from all those animals, the eating of which was prohibited by the law of Moses: but God shewed him that he should no longer account these animals unclean. And what does he understand by it? That he should no longer account the heathen so. 'God hath shewed me that I should call no man common or unclean; or, to speak in other words borrowed from the apostle, 'God hath shewed me that a Jew is now at liberty to keep company with or come unto one of another nation;' which, so long as the Mosaic distinction betwixt clean and unclean beasts was in force, it was not lawful for him to do." As several of the remarks adapted to this head were anticipated in the preceding, I go on to state other reasons for the distinction between animals as clean and unclean in the Levitical institute. III. It has been suggested, that the quality of the food itself is an important consideration, and that to the eating of certain animals may be ascribed a specific influence on the moral II. Another reason for the distinction was, that, as the Jews were a people peculiarly devoted to God, they should be reminded of that relation by a particularity of diet, which should serve emblematically as a sign of their obligation to study MORAL PURITY. This is expressly given as the reason, Levit. xi. 43, 44, and 45 (referring to the forbidden animals)," Ye shall not make yourselves unclean with them that you may be defiled thereby; for I am the Lord that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt to be your God, YE SHALL THEREFORE BE HOLY, FOR I AM HOLY.' Alexandr. 1. ix. contra Julian, p. 302. OriThe meaning of which is, "I Jeho- gen, Homil. vii. in Levit. Clem. Alex. vah, who am distinguished from all Strom. 1. v. Opera, tom. ii. p. 677. Novatian, de Cibis Jud. c. iii. Euseb. Emisen. other gods, am your peculiar sove-in Hexapl. Montf. p. 120. 12 This is the prevailing reason assigned by the fathers of the Christian church: See Theodoret, quæst. xi. in Levit. Cyrill. temperament. I introduce this topic, because it is insisted upon so much among the ancient Jewish interpreters, rather than because I consider it of any real force or importance. It savours strongly of the allegorical style of reasoning and interpretation in which the Rabbins delighted. There are several mischnical tracts devoted to this explication. One of them says: "As the body is the seat of the soul, God would have it a fit instrument for its companion, and therefore removes from his people all those obstructions which may hinder the soul in its operations; for which reason all such meats are forbidden as breed ill blood; among which if there may be some whose hurtfulness is neither manifest to us nor to physicians, wonder not at it, for the faithful physician who forbids them is wiser than any of us 13." The moral or tropological reasons, alleged by Aristæus, in Eusebius Præp. Evang. 1. viii. c. 9, are in substance, (for the whole passage is long, though curious,) that the Jews should, by these inhibitions and limitations, be secure and fenced from whatever contagion or immorality might otherwise invade them and spread among them from any heathen or idolatrous quarter; and also to teach them morality even in their food; for the birds and beasts allowed were of the tame and gentler kinds, and not of fierce and voracious natures, to teach them the great truths of justice, moderation, and kindness. The learned Wagenseil, also, in his Annotations on that title in the Mischna called "Sota," fol. 1171, discusses the moral reasons of these precepts. In a volume by the Rev. William Jones, entitled " Zoologia Ethica,' this particular construction is largely insisted upon. The learned Ainsworth, in his Commentary, has extended these reasons to the borders of mysticism. His remarks are: "The parting of 13 Levi Barcelona, Precept. lxxix. the hoof signified the right discerning of the word and will of God, the dif ference between the law and the gospel, and the walking in obedience to the word of GOD with a right foot. The chewing of the cud signified the meditating in the law of God night and day," &c. IV. Another reason for the distinction here made was, without doubt, dietetical, and to make a distinction between wholesome and unwholesome food. Those animals are denominated clean, which afford a copious and wholesome nutriment; and those unclean, whose flesh is unwholesome, and yields a gross nutriment, often the occasion of scrofulous and scorbutic disorders. Maimonides (More Nevochim, p. iii. c. 48) discourses at large upon this subject; Wagenseil (Conf. Carm. R. Lipmanni, p. 556) defends it; and Michaelis, in his Commentary on the Laws of Moses (article cciii.), assigns it as the principal reason 1. The special propriety of it may be found also in the situation of those regions in which the Jews resided, in which the flesh of some animals was more unwholesome than it would be in a more northern climate. Their sultry climate made it necessary to be considerate in the use of food, as they were exposed to inflammatory and putrid disorders. So that the wisdom of the interdiction of those kinds of flesh which tend soon to corruption, is very evident. Blood, in particular, is not only difficult of digestion in the stomach, but easily putrefies; and so the flesh of strangled animals, or of wild animals heated by the chase, and full of blood, soon becomes corrupt. The free use of very fat meat is always prejudicial to health; and is the 14 [Not as the principal reason. His words are: "Besides this main object," (that of "there might, no doubt, in the case of cerseparating the Jews from other nations,) tain animals, interfere dietetical considerations to influence Moses: only we are not to seek for them in all the prohibitions relative to unclean beasts." Smith's Michaelis. vol. iii. p. 230.] Of those animals whose flesh the Israelites were prohibited from eating, most sought their food in filthy places, lived on prey, or fed on carrion; so that their juices were in a state strongly tending to prutrescence; of course, their flesh was very unfit for the purposes of nutri cause of bilious and putrid disorders. | milder sort, of the most common and The flesh of the swine, in particular, domestic animals; creatures of the which is generally supposed to breed cleanest feeding, which afforded the the leprosy, as an aliment must have most palatable and nourishing meat, been highly improper for a people and which by a proper care might so subject to leprosies as the Jews be had in the greatest plenty and appear to have been 15. perfection. If the Jews, as a select and holy people, ought to have any distinction of foods, surely none could have been devised more proper than this. Was not this far better than to license and encourage the promiscuous hunting of wild beasts and birds of prey, less fit for food, more difficult to be procured, and hardly consistent with a domestic, agricultural, and pastoral life? Did not the restrictions in question, tend to promote that health and ease, that useful cultivation of the soil, that diligence, mildness, and simplicity, that consequent happiness and prosperity, which were among the chief blessings of the promised land." tion. Agreeably to this opinion, Dr. James, the learned author of the Medicinal Dictionary, under the article "Alcali," after having made some critical remarks on the nature of alcalescent aliments, and their effects on the human body,-and commented on the various animals clean and unclean, enumerated in the Levitical institute, draws the following conclusion: "From what has been said in relation to the alcalescence of animal aliment, one reason at least will appear, why it pleased the Supreme Being to forbid the Jews, a people that inhabited a very warm climate, the use of many sorts of animals as food, and why they were enjoined to take away a great deal of blood from those which they were allowed to eat." On the whole, as Mr. Lowman justly observes, "the food allowed to the chosen nation was of the 15 Mr. Beloe, in his note upon Herodotus, "Euterpe," lxxii. has the following remark: "Antiphanes in Athenæus, address ing himself to the Egyptians, says, 'You adore the ox; I sacrifice to the gods. Yon reverence the eel as a very powerful deity; we consider it as the daintiest of food.' Antiphanes and the Greek writers, who amused themselves with ridiculing the religious ceremonies of Egypt, were doubtless ignorant of the motive which caused this particular fish to be proscribed. The flesh of the eel, and some other fish, thickened the blood, and by checking the perspiration, excited all those maladies connected with the leprosy. The Priests forbade the people to eat it, and, to render their prohibition more effectual, they pretended to regard these fish as sacred." The following passage, translated from Tertullian (adv. Marc. l. ii. c. 18, in fine), may be a fit conclusion of this dissertation: "If the law takes away the use of some sorts of meat, and pronounces creatures unclean, that were formerly held quite otherwise, let us consider that the design was to inure them to temperance, and look upon it as a restraint laid upon gluttons, who hankered after the cucumbers and melons of Egypt, whilst they were eating the food of angels. Let us consider it too, as a remedy at the same time against excess and impurity, the usual attendants on gluttony. It was partly, likewise, to extinguish the love of money, by taking away the pretence of its being necessary for providing of sustenance. It was, finally, to enable men to fast with less inconvenience upon religious occasions, by using them to a moderate and plain diet." The following catalogue of the BIRDS forbidden, written "in English metre," is extracted from the Bibliotheca Biblica, V. iii. p. 142, ed. 4to. 1725, where it is printed in the old. black letter. "Of feathred Foules that fanne the bucksom aire, Not all alike weare made for foode to Men, For, these thou shalt not eat doth GOD deciare, Twice tenne their nombre, and their flesh unclene: Fyrst the great Eagle, byrde of feigned Which Thebanes worshippe 17, and di- "Next Ossifrage and Ospray (both one kinde 18), Of luxurie and rapine, emblems mete, That haunte the shores, the choicest preye to finde, And brast the bones, and scoope the mar rowe swete: The Vulture, void of delicace and feare, Who spareth not the pale dede man to teare: "The tall-built Swann, faire type of pride confest; The Pelicane, whose sons are nurst with bloode, Forbidd to man! she stabbeth deep her breast, Self-murtheresse through fondnesse to hir broode, They too that range the thirstie wilds emong, The Ostryches, unthoughtful of thir yonge 19. 16 Vid. Natal. Com. de Mythol. 1. ii. cap. de Jove. 17 Diodor. Sicul. lib. i. 18 Gesner, de avib. 19 Job, xxix. 16. "The Raven ominous (as Gentiles holde), What time she croaketh hoarsely a la morte; The Hawke, aerial hunter, swifte and bolde, In feates of mischief trayned for disporte; The vocale Cuckowe, of the faulcon race, Obscene intruder in her neighbor's place: "The Owle, demure, who loveth not the lighte (Il semblance she of wisdome to the Greeke), [Kite, The smallest fouls dradd foe, the coward And the stille Herne, arresting fishes meeke; The glutton Cormorante, of sullen moode, Regardyng no distinction in his foode. "The Storke, which dwelleth on the firtree topp 20, [maye, And trusteth that no power shall hir disAs Kinges, on their high stations place thir hope, Nor wist that there be higher farr than theye 21; The gay Gier-Eagle, beautifull to viewe, Bearyng within a savage herte untrewe : "The Ibis whome in Egypte Israel found, Fell byrd! that living serpents can digest; The crested Lapwynge, wailing shrill arounde, Solicitous, with no contentment blest; Last the foul Batt 22, of byrd and beast first bredde, Flitting with littel leathren sailes dispredde." 20 Psalm civ. 17. 21 Eccles. v. 8. 22 Arist. de animal. I. iv. c. 13. A DICTIONARY OF THE ADAMANT. TOW SCHMIR. AAA- original2. MAZ, Ecclus. xvi. 16. 715DW SHEPHIPHON, Genesis, xlix. A stone of impenetrable hardness. 17, is probably the CERASTES3; a Sometimes this name is given to the serpent of the viper kind, of a light DIAMOND; and so it is rendered, Je- brown colour, which lurks in the remiah, xvii. 1. But the Hebrew sand and the tracks of wheels in the word rather means a very hard kind road, and unexpectedly bites not of stone, probably the SMIRIS, which only the unwary traveller, but the was also used for cutting, engraving, legs of horses and other beasts. By and polishing other hard stones and comparing the Danites to this artful crystals'. The word occurs also in reptile, the patriarch intimated that Ezek. iii. 9, and Zech. vii. 12. In by stratagem more than by open the former place, the Deity says to bravery, they should avenge themthe prophet, "I have made thy fore-selves of their enemies and extend head as an adamant, firmer than a their conquests. rock;" that is, endued thee with undaunted courage. In the latter place, the hearts of wicked men are declared to be as adamant; neither broken by the threatenings and judgments of GOD, nor penetrated by his promises, invitations, and mercies. See DIAMOND. 1 PETHEN, in Psalm lviii. 4; xci. 13, signifies an ASP. We may perhaps trace to this the PYTHON of the Greeks and its derivatives. See ASP. way ACHSUB, found only in Psalm cxl. 3, is derived from a verb which 2 Gen. xlix. 17; Psal. Iviii. 4; xci. 13; cxl. 3; Prov. xxiii. 32. 3 So say St. Jerom and Bochart; and it is so rendered in the Vulgate. There is a serpent, whose name in Arabic is sipphon, which is probably the same that is spoken of above. See Michaelis, Recueil de Quest. lxii. εν δ' αμαθεισιν Ἤ και αματροχιησι παρα στίβεν, ενδυκες ανει. Διπλοις δ' εν βεβωσι, και ιγνυσιν ασκελές αυτός Μοχθος επιτρεφεται. NICANDER, Theriac, v. 262. Lean, dun of hue, the snake in sands is laid, Or haunts within the trench that wheels have made; Against thee straight on onward spires he And bites the horse's leg, or cattle's sides. See also Ælian. 1. xvi. c. 28. Diod. 1. iii. c. 28. Bochart, Hierozoicon, p. ii. 1. iii. c. xii. p. 205. vol. 3. edit. Rosenmuller. C |