Deeper Commentary
Lev 15:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying-
These laws could be read as meaning that a person was made unclean by
involuntary bodily discharges of a sexual nature. Or they can be read as
referring to specific discharges related to sexually transmitted diseases;
see on :3 LXX. The meaning would then be that they were made morally
unclean by their sinful actions, and these were the consequences of those
actions. Cleansing from them was therefore effectively representative of
their cleansing from sin.
Lev 15:2 Speak to the children of Israel, and tell them, ‘When any man has
a discharge from his body, because of his discharge he is unclean-
These laws taught that in essence, it is what
comes from within a person which makes them unclean, rather than what
enters us from outside (Mk. 7:15-23). The idea that demons, evil spirits
or Satan can enter us and make us unclean must be rejected; Jesus
emphasizes that sin comes from
within, therefore it is totally our fault, and we must take
responsibility rather than blaming it on cosmic forces outside of us.
Lev 15:3 This shall be his uncleanness in his discharge: whether his body
runs with his discharge, or if his body has stopped excreting his
discharge, it is his uncleanness-
LXX "whoever has a gonorrhea out of his body, this is his
uncleanness in him by reason of the issue, by which, his body is affected
through the issue". As discussed on :1, the idea of this section may not
be that people are unclean because of issues which are nothing to do with
morality; but rather that these regulations cover the result of sexually
transmitted diseases and therefore cleansing from those consequences was
effectively parallel with forgiveness for the sins related to them. The
fertility cults of Canaan involved the usage of temple prostitutes by the
worshippers, and therefore sexually transmitted diseases were rife in
Canaan. An Israelite who had one of them would have been suffering the
result of such apostasy, either by themselves or by family members. This
would explain why the stricken person in view in this section is a male-
who had slept with the temple / cult prostitutes.
Even if we are no longer sinning, we must remember
that we still stand guilty for past sins unless we have received cleansing
for them. The passage of time and the fading of human memory works only a
pseudo-atonement for sin; it is the blood of Christ and our conscious
identity with it which alone can eternally cleanse our conscience from
sins both past and present.
Lev 15:4 Every bed whereon he who has the discharge lies shall be unclean;
and everything he sits on shall be unclean-
We must note that this legislation follows on from that about
'leprosy' in Lev. 13,14. I suggested on Lev. 13:1 that leprosy in the form
we know it was not in view, but rather a specific stroke of Divine
judgment from God. And the commands we now read about men with discharges
of a sexual nature, and their cleansing, may well refer to a similar being
stricken with a judgment appropriate to sexual sin. This is why the bed of
the stricken person is so emphasized. Effectively, the person was to be
sexually isolated.
Lev 15:5 Whoever touches his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself
in water, and be unclean until the evening-
The implication was that his wife would have to abstain from sexual
relationships with him and he was to be effectively isolated from his
family. The stress upon the stricken person's bed is reflected in the
Psalms, where David speaks of being stricken and lying on his bed,
isolated from family and society because of his running, oozing issue
which oozed in the night (Ps. 38:11; 77:2). It seems he was stricken with
a Divine stroke that led to him secreting unclean fluids from his
reproductive organ, which is the situation in view here (Ps. 6:6; 41:3).
Job likewise complained of how he is isolated upon an unclean bed / couch
(Job 7:13; 33:19 "he is chastened with pain upon his bed"), as if he too
was experiencing a stroke from God which corresponds to the situation
envisaged here in Lev. 15.
Lev 15:6 He who sits on anything whereon the man who has the discharge sat
shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until
the evening-
The Hebrew for 'sitting' here is elsewhere used specifically in the
context of urination or defecation, so the idea would be that the man was
not to use a toilet shared by others.
Lev 15:7 He who touches the body of him who has the discharge shall wash
his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening-
This seems the equivalent of the leper of Lev. 13,14 being isolated
from society. And I suggested on Lev. 13:1 that what was in view there was
not the disease of leprosy, but a specific stroke of Divine judgment. And
I suggest the person with a discharge was likewise. In practice, with such
extreme laws about contact with him or whatever he touched, he would be
isolated from his family and society. We note that the stricken person in
view is presented as male. There is no equivalent legislation about
females. This would make sense if as suggested on :3, the person in view
is one who had slept with the temple / cult prostitutes. The fertility
cults of Canaan involved the usage of temple prostitutes by the
worshippers, and therefore sexually transmitted diseases were rife in
Canaan. An Israelite who had one of them would have been suffering the
result of such apostasy, either by themselves or by family members.
Lev 15:8 If he who has the discharge spits on him who is clean, then he
shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until
the evening-
This law was therefore aimed at ensuring that people kept away from
this stricken person. In primitive society, every day's labour was
valuable, and nobody wanted to run the risk of being made unclean for a
whole day.
Lev 15:9 Whatever saddle he who has the discharge rides on shall be
unclean-
If an involuntary discharge of semen at night is in view, then such
extreme danger of contaminating others would not be in view. In terms of
hygiene, nothing would be achieved by it anyway. For most sexually
transmitted diseases are spread only at body temperature, and not through
sitting on the same chair as an infected person. Therefore we conclude
that a special state of uncleanness and illness is in view, the result of
a Divine stroke. And in practice, if a man had an involuntary emission of
semen at night, then who would know about it, unless he told them? So it
seems more likely that the person in view is a sinner who has been struck
with a Divine stroke.
Lev 15:10 Whoever touches anything that was under him shall be unclean
until the evening. He who carries those things shall wash his clothes, and
bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening-
There was greater culpability the more consciously a
person did things which he or she knew were unclean. Thus to purposefully
carry something unclean required a washing of clothes, whereas just
touching them merited a lesser requirement for cleansing.
Lev 15:11 Whoever he who has the discharge touches, without having rinsed
his hands in water, he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water,
and be unclean until the evening-
Those suffering with the "discharge" are parallel with 'lepers' in
Num. 5:2 as needing to be put out of the camp. The dramatic laws about how
they made everyone else unclean effectively required they be put outside
the camp. I suggested on Lev. 13:1 that "lepers" doesn't refer to those
with Hansen's disease, but to those struck down by Divine judgment. Those
with a "discharge", literally a 'flowing', were in the same category. In
neither case is involuntary disease or human bodily situation a reason for
moral uncleanness. Just as human nature of itself doesn't separate between
God and man; for all we posit about human nature, we say about the
undefiled Lord Jesus who fully had that same human nature.
Lev 15:12 The earthen vessel, which he who has the discharge touches,
shall be broken; and every vessel of wood shall be rinsed in water-
As discussed on :11, the intention of these extreme laws were to
effectively require that the person with such a discharge be put outside
the camp. Otherwise they would render daily life impossible to live if
they remained within it.
Lev 15:13 When he who has a discharge is cleansed of his discharge, then
he shall count to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his
clothes; and he shall bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be
clean-
In the dry wilderness, this would have been from the
river of spring water which followed them from the smitten rock, which
represented Christ who was smitten so that we might have the means of
being cleansed (1 Cor. 10:4).
Lev. 14:8; 15:13 speak of the person healed of 'leprosy' [the Divine stroke] and a "discharge" washing after the cure, in order to be then also ritually clean. As discussed on :11, those with a discharge and the 'leper' were treated the same way; for as with the leper / stricken person, the man with a "discharge" was under Divine judgment, and had not simply experienced an involuntary emission.
Lev 15:14 On the eighth day he shall take two turtledoves, or two young
pigeons, and come before Yahweh to the door of the Tent of Meeting, and
give them to the priest-
Even within the bird offerings there was a gradation. Turtledoves
were larger than pigeons and more valuable, but they are only in Israel at
certain times of the year (Song 2:12; Jer. 8:7); whereas pigeons are in
Israel all year round, were easier to catch and were therefore cheaper.
The various possible levels within God's law reflect our opportunities to
serve on different levels, just as the good soil of the sower parable
brings forth different amounts. Some will make more of God's truth than
others. The very existence of these levels, rather than a simple binary
demand of obedience / disobedience, pass / fail, of itself inspires us to
serve God as extensively as we can. For who can be a minimalist in
response to His love.
Lev 15:15 and the priest shall offer them, the one for a sin offering, and
the other for a burnt offering. The priest shall make atonement for him
before Yahweh for his discharge-
It is no sin to be human, nor to go through the bodily functions
which go along with being human. The atonement was required because the
person had sinned and had been struck with Divine judgment. That ended
when the person repented, hence the language of atonement.
Lev 15:16 If any man has an emission of semen, then he shall bathe all his
flesh in water, and be unclean until the evening-
Like many of the commandments, there was a large
element of personal choice in whether to obey this or not; intimate
matters such as personal discharges were unknown to others. Under the new
covenant, this is even more the case; attitudes of mind which make us
unclean before God are known only to ourselves. The Law of Moses was the
only legal code which had so many clauses which concerned matters which
could never be publically demonstrated. God’s intention even under the old
covenant was to teach and inculcate personal relationship between God and
His people. He did this by giving commandments whose keeping only He and
the individual knew about.
Lev 15:17 Every garment, and every skin, whereon the semen is, shall be
washed with water, and be unclean until the evening-
I suggest that the emission of semen in view is not a result of sex
within marriage. For Paul appears to warn against any such extremist
interpretation by teaching that the marital bed is "undefiled", unlike
that of whores and adulterers (Heb. 13:4). There is nothing in that sense
dirty about the sexual act. What is in view is the immorality which has
given rise to the Divine stroke which now requires repentance and
atonement.
Lev 15:18 If a man lies with a woman and there is an emission of semen,
they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the
evening-
I suggested on :17 that this doesn't refer to sex within marriage.
For the marital bed is "undefiled" (Heb. 13:4). It could refer to sex
outside marriage. The whole theme of this section which began in Lev. 13:1
is of Divine judgment for wrong behaviour, rather than normal bodily
functions making a person unclean before God. If however it does refer to
marital sex, then we reflect that the whole family would have known that ‘mum and dad’
or just mum was unclean. Personal matters like sex and menstruation
thereby became part of normal family awareness, rather than being hived
off in quasi-secrecy and invested with an aura of mystery as they are in
many modern cultures.
The Lord taught that He was the rock, and we like
Israel drink of what came out of Him. The Law of Moses included several
rituals which depended upon what is called " the running water" (Lev.
14:5,6,50-52; 15:18; Num. 19:17). "Running" translates a Hebrew word
normally translated "living". This living water was what came out of the
smitten rock. The Lord taught that the water that would come out of Him
would only come after His glorification (Jn. 7:38)- an idea He seems to
link with His death rather than His ascension (Jn. 12:28,41; 13:32; 17:1,5
cp. 21:19; Heb. 2:9). When He was glorified on the cross, then the water
literally flowed from His side on His death. The rock was "smitten", and
the water then came out. The Hebrew word used here is usually translated
to slay, slaughter, murder. It occurs in two clearly Messianic passages: "
...they talk to the hurt of him [Christ] whom thou hast smitten" (Ps.
69:26); "we esteemed him [as He hung on the cross] smitten of God" (Is.
53:4). The living waters were representative of the Holy Spirit which is
given to us- not the miraculous gifts, but the power of God within the
human spirit, to bring us to have His Spirit and mind which was in Christ.
It is this which now is the cleansing agent, making our sacrifices
acceptable, cleansing our motives in a way in which we cannot do, at least
not by any conscious intellectual process.
Lev 15:19 If a woman has a discharge, and her discharge in her flesh is
blood, she shall be in her impurity seven days; and whoever touches her
shall be unclean until the evening-
This is worded very strangely if in fact a normal period is in view.
I have suggested earlier in this chapter that the "discharge" refers to a
specific stroke of Divine judgment. It could involve a hemorrhage of
blood. The language and grammar seems to imply that the "discharge"
occurred at one time, and then after that point she was impure seven days.
But period bleeding is not a one time event, lasting typically from three
to eight days. If monthly periods are in view here, then the woman would
be impure for up to 15 days / month. And whoever touched her would be
unclean. This would have made family life just about impossible. So I
don't think that monthly periods are in view, but rather a specific Divine
judgment. "Be in her impurity" is s.w. "removed", "set apart", "put
apart". It is the equivalent of being put outside the camp, which was the
judgment for the leper and the man smitten with a "discharge" as Divine
judgment (Num. 5:2). It is also found translated "filthy" in Ezra 9:11
"the filthiness of the people of the lands". But it is not an act of moral
filth to have a period. What is in view is not period bleeding, but a
specific Divine judgment for sin, the female equivalent of the judgment
upon sinful males described in the first half of this chapter.
Lev 15:20 Everything that she lies on in her impurity shall be unclean.
Everything also that she sits on shall be unclean-
The severity of the laws about not coming into contact with such a
woman were designed to make it impossible to have her in society or the
home. She therefore effectively had to be put out of the camp (see on
:19).
Lev 15:21 Whoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe
himself in water, and be unclean until the evening-
Beds were typically shared in family homes, so this was designed to
make the woman leave her home. This would be appropriate for someone
stricken with Divine judgment for serious sin, but not for a woman having
a period.
Lev 15:22 Whoever touches anything that she sits on shall wash his
clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening-
This is the female equivalent of the male judgment of a "discharge".
If involuntary period bleeding is in view, then such extreme danger of
contaminating others would not be in view. In terms of hygiene, nothing
would be achieved by it anyway. For most diseases are spread only at body
temperature, and not through sitting on the same chair as a woman who is
menstruating. Therefore we conclude that a special state of uncleanness
and illness is in view, the result of a Divine stroke. And in practice, if
a woman was menstruating, then who would know about it, unless she told
others? So it seems more likely that the person in view is a sinner who
has been struck with a Divine stroke.
Lev 15:23 If it is on the bed, or on anything whereon she sits, when he
touches it, he shall be unclean until the evening-
This was certainly not for hygienic reasons, for we would all be
hopelessly infected if infection really spread by touching whatever a
menstruating woman has touched. Again, the woman in view is clearly a
sinner under the stroke of Divine judgment, and not simply a menstruating
woman.
Lev 15:24 If any man lies with her, and her monthly flow is on him, he
shall be unclean seven days; and every bed whereon he lies shall be
unclean-
The "monthly flow" is apparently different to the "discharge". The
discharge was, I suggest, a specific Divine judgment for sin. Lev. 20:18
says that if a man sleeps with a menstruating woman then they must both
die. But Lev. 15:24 says that in this case the man must be unclean seven
days. I suggest that the language of uncovering nakedness in Lev. 20:18 is
talking about some form of illicit or perverted relationship. Menstrual
blood was a times drunk or used in various cultic rituals.
Lev 15:25 If a woman has a discharge of her blood many days not in the
time of her period, or if she has a discharge beyond the time of her
period; all the days of the discharge of her uncleanness shall be as in
the days of her period: she is unclean-
The "discharge" and "her period" are grammatically separate. But
perhaps her period is not in view here. LXX "And if a woman have an issue
of blood many days, not in the time of her separation; if the blood should
also flow after her separation, all the days of the issue of her
uncleanness shall be as the days of her separation: she shall be unclean".
As the 'leper' / stricken person was shut up for periods of seven days,
which could be extended if they were impenitent, so here too, the woman
was given a "time" during which her judgment lasted; but it could be
extended, if she were impenitent.
Lev 15:26 Every bed whereon she lies all the days of her discharge shall
be to her as the bed of her period: and everything whereon she sits shall
be unclean, as the uncleanness of her period-
Her laying on a bed "all the days" could imply that she lay on her
bed day and night. Which was impossible for an average Hebrew woman going
about daily life, with so many responsibilities upon her in domestic life.
But it makes more sense if we consider this to be talking about a specific
period of Divine judgment which forced her to be confined to her bed, as
happened to men like David. Again, "her period" may not be in view. LXX
"And every bed on which she shall lie all the days of her flux shall be to
her as the bed of her separation, and every seat whereon she shall sit
shall be unclean according to the uncleanness of her separation"; GNB
gives simply "Any bed on which she lies and anything on which she sits
during this time is unclean".
Lev 15:27 Whoever touches these things shall be unclean, and shall wash
his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening-
There was greater culpability the more consciously a
person did things which he or she knew were unclean. Thus to lie down in
the unclean house required a washing of clothes, whereas just going into
it merited a lesser requirement for cleansing.
Lev 15:28 But if she is cleansed of her discharge, then she shall count to
herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean-
This two stage cleansing process is common in the
Mosaic rituals. She was clean, but in another sense not fully cleansed
until the end of the seven days. We likewise are now cleansed in Christ,
but in a full sense we will only be fully cleansed when He returns and our
bodies are made like His, and the flesh no longer is a part of our
condition of being.
Lev 15:29 On the eighth day she shall take two turtledoves, or two young
pigeons, and bring them to the priest, to the door of the Tent of Meeting-
As discussed on :14, this was the female equivalent to the male
rituals required for a man stricken down with Divine judgment. This is
what is in view, and not menstruation. It can hardly be that every
menstruating woman in all Israel was to come to the door of the Tent of
Meeting every month. Clearly what is in view is a woman under specific
Divine judgment for sin who has now repented, rather than every
menstruating woman.
Lev 15:30 The priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other
for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make atonement for her before
Yahweh for the uncleanness of her discharge-
This repeats the usual progression from sin offering to burnt
offering to peace offering (although that isn't specifically required here). Conviction of sin leads to a desire to make complete
dedication to God, which results in the peace with God celebrated in the
peace offering. So the woman was being convicted of sin, so that
their dedication to Yahweh's service was no mere ritual, but a from the
heart desire to serve Him from gratitude for the forgiveness of sin. Clearly
a judgment for sin is in view; and not menstruation, which isn't sinful of
itself.
Lev 15:31 Thus you shall separate the children of Israel from their
uncleanness, so they will not die in their uncleanness, when they defile
my tabernacle that is in their midst’-
It could be argued from this that these commandments may have had
specific relevance to the Levites, who were the only ones who could enter
the holy places- GNB "so that they would not defile the Tent of his
presence, which was in the middle of the camp. If they did, they would be
killed". This is language more relevant to Levites- for whom this book of
Leviticus was specifically relevant.
The legislation here is very severe- it seems inappropriate for touching something which a menstruating woman had touched, seeing menstruation is not a moral sin. So again I suggest that what is in view is a woman or man struck by God with a 'flowing' of intimate body fluids from their private parts, and not involuntary emissions of semen or blood. The "uncleanness" of Israel refers elsewhere to their actual sins which required repentance and atonement (Lev. 16:16,19; Ezra 6:21; Ez. 36:17). It was this which had led to the woman being struck with a Divinely sent plague, and involuntary menstruation is not in view.
Lev 15:32 This is the law of him who has a discharge, and of him who has
an emission of semen, so that he is unclean thereby-
"Thereby" is a translators' guess. The idea is simply "who is
unclean", with the Hebrew for "unclean" having the sense of moral sin,
s.w. foul, polluted, defiled- always in the sense of having actually
committed sin. It was this sin which led to the discharge or flow of
personal body fluids from intimate private parts, and was a judgment from
God- rather than an involuntary part of being human. The idea is not that
these things rendered an innocent person "thereby" offensive to God and
worthy of being separated from. It is no sin to be human.
Lev 15:33 and of her who has her period, and of a man or woman who has a
discharge, and of him who lies with her who is unclean-
The Hebrew word for "period" isn't used here. AV quaintly gives "sick
of her flowers", but the phrase is literally "sick from her rejection /
filthiness / uncleanness". She had been stricken because of her sin, her
moral filthiness. This seems a separate punishment to the "discharge".
Israel in their sinfulness and separation from God are likened to a woman
in this contaminated state (Ez. 36:17). But Israel, like this woman, were
separated from God because of their actual sins, and not by reason of
simply being human.
Previous Chapter
