Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Deuteronomy 22:9
Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
9. thy vineyard ] which in Palestine is frequently so planted that there is room for the growth of vegetables, etc., between the vines. Lev 19:19, thy field. Why D mentions only vineyard is not explicable. The inference that his law is later than that in Lev. (Dillm.) is unjustified. More probably the wider term is the later correcting the narrower.
two kinds ] Only here and Lev 19:19. The Heb. implies mutually exclusive kinds.
whole fruit ] Right; for the Heb., the fulness, means not the overflow (so Ges. as in Exo 22:29 (28)) but the whole ultimate contents of the vineyard, as the rest of the v. explains.
be forfeited ] Lit. as R.V. margin, consecrated, separated unto Jehovah and His sanctuary like things under the ban (Jos 6:19); proof that the prohibited mixture was regarded as a religious, i.e. a ritual, offence.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
9 11. Three Laws against Mixing (1) seeds, (2) animals in ploughing, (3) cloths in a garment. The first and third also in H, Lev 19:19 (cp. P, Lev 11:37, against defiling seed), along with one against cross-breeding; the second peculiar to D. The religious reason given for the first is to be inferred for the other two. To appreciate it we must keep in mind not only the attention of the mind of that time to the distinctness of species as created by God, Gen 1:11 f., Gen 1:21, Gen 1:24 f. (Driver), but the principle stated by Isaiah (Deu 28:24 f.) that all the husbandman’s customs and methods including his discrimination and separation of different kinds of seed were taught him by divine revelation (cp. Lev 19:19: ye shall keep my statutes); and the possibility that in a more primitive society different seeds, animals and the stuffs produced from them were regarded as animated by different spirits whom it was unlucky to offend by confusing them (see on Deu 22:11). But it is remarkable that ammurabi’s Code shows no trace of this. For the later more detailed Jewish law see the Mishnah, ‘Kil’aim.’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Compare the marginal reference. The prohibition of Deu 22:10 was also dictated by humanity. The ox and the donkey being of such different size and strength, it would be cruel to the latter to yoke them together. These two animals are named as being those ordinarily employed in agriculture; compare Isa 32:20.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 9. Divers seeds] See Clarke on Le 19:19.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
With divers seeds; either,
1. With divers kinds of seed mixed and sowed together between the rows of vines in thy vineyard; which was forbidden to be done in the field, Lev 19:19, and here in the vineyard. Or,
2. With any kind of seed differing from that of the vine, which would produce either herbs, or corn, or fruit-bearing trees, whose fruit might be mingled with the fruit of the vines. Now this and the two following precepts, though in themselves small and trivial, are given, according to that time and state of the church, for documents or instructions in greater matters, and particularly to commend to them simplicity and sincerity in all their carriages towards God and men, and to forbid all mixture of their inventions with Gods institutions, in doctrine or worship.
The fruit of thy seed, Heb. the fulness of thy seed, i.e. that seed when it is ripe and full. See Exo 22:29; Num 18:27.
Defiled; either,
1. Naturally corrupted or marred, whilst one seed draws away the fat and nourishment of the earth from the other, and so both are starved and spoiled. Or rather,
2. Legally and morally, as being prohibited by Gods law, and thereby made unclean; as, on the contrary, things are sanctified by Gods word allowing and approving them, 1Ti 4:5. Heb. be sanctified, or, be as a sanctified thing, by an ellipsis of the particle as, i.e. unlawful for the owners use, as things sanctified were. Or, sanctifying is put for polluting, by a figure called euphemismus, which is frequent in Scripture, as when blessing is put for cursing, as Job 2:9, and in other authors, as when they use sacred for execrable.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. Thou shalt not sow thy vineyardwith divers seeds(See on Le19:19).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Thou shall not sow thy vineyards with divers seeds,…. As wheat and barley between the rows of the vines; and this is to be understood only of divers sorts of corn, and of divers sorts of herbs, but not of trees; hence we read of a fig tree in a vineyard, Lu 13:6, and this only respects what is sown with design, and not what is casual, as the Jews interpret it e;
“if a man passes through a vineyard, and seeds fall from him, or they are carried out along with dung, or with water; or when a man is sowing, and a storm of wind carries it behind him (i.e. to a vineyard behind him), it is lawful;”
that is, it may be let grow, and the fruit of it enjoyed; the same here is said of the vineyard as of the field in [See comments on Le 19:19];
lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard; be defiled; that is, lest not only the increase of these divers seeds sown, but also the increase of the vines among which they are sown, become unlawful, and unfit for use, and so a loss of all be sustained: the Targum of Jonathan is,
“lest it be condemned to burning;”
or thou art obliged to burn it; for, according to the Jewish canons f, the mixtures of a vineyard, or the divers seeds of it, and the increase thereof, were to be burnt; and the commentators of the Misnah g frequently explain this phrase by “lest it be burnt”.
e Misn. Celaim, c. 5. sect. 7. f Misn. Temurah, c. 7. sect. 5. g Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Terumot, c. 10. sect. 6. Orla, c. 3. sect. 7. Kiddushin, c. 2. sect. 9.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Verses 9-11:
Nature itself reflects the fact that God has made distinctions throughout the realm of created beings. These distinctions are not to be ignored or altered by the mixing of things which are distinct. The text lists three areas in which this principle applies:
(1) In the sowing of fields and vineyards with mixed varieties or species of seeds. For example, wheat was not to be planted in the same field with grape cuttings, etc.
(2) In cultivating of fields: by the yoking of an ox and an ass together. They differed in ‘size and strength; thus it would be cruel and inhumane to yoke them to the same plow.
(3) In textile manufacture: a “garment of divers sorts,” shaatnez, denoting a fabric of threads of wool and linen interwoven. Some suggest that in certain instances the mixing of fibres in a garment produces adverse effects upon the wearer.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Deu 22:9
. Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard. These four precepts, which all condemn strange medleys, I doubt not to be supplements of the First Commandment; and the reason, which is subjoined in Deuteronomy, directs us to this, where God declares that the produce of the seed and of the vineyard is polluted, if there be divers mixtures. Whence it appears that nothing else is demanded but that they should cultivate purity. The word indeed, which Moses uses, means to “ sanctify, ” קדש kadesh; but, by antiphrasis, it is taken for to “ contaminate. ” To the same effect is what follows, that they should not plough with an ox and an ass together; for this diversity is forbidden on no other account, but because men contract some defilement as soon as they depart from simplicity. Yet, if any one thinks otherwise, I shall not strongly contend with him. It might indeed be objected, that when God forbids animals to be used promiscuously, so that those of different kinds should not be mixed together, He has regard to chastity, (30) and that, by forbidding the fields to be sown with divers seeds, and garments to be woven of divers materials, He would prevent frauds. But the more simple explanation is, that the people were thus retained in purity, lest they should accustom themselves to corrupt habits, and lest they should bring in strange rites from various quarters, or seek, with depraved curiosity, for mixtures which might at length invade the worship of God. For if animals of different species are joined together, the integrity of nature is corrupted, and an adulterine offspring is produced, which degenerates from the institution of God; but, if various kinds of seed should be mixed together, or if a garment should be woven of linen and wool, there would be no danger of deception or fraud in so manifest a matter. It is probable, therefore, that the end which, as I have said, was proposed by God was, that, by cultivating natural and simple habits all their life through, they should keep themselves pure and uncorrupted from every strange vice. On this account Scripture compares strange doctrines to leaven, since by their additions or curtailings they corrupt the pure word of God. (Mat 16:11.) And this was by no means a useless discipline; when, in trifles, and almost things of nought, the rein was applied to them, so that they should not decline from purity in the very least degree. It was a small matter to interweave a thin thread with a thicker one, and perchance such a process would have been profitable for their general advantage; in some fields, too, a better crop is grown, if the seed is compounded of pure wheat, and some other sort of grain ( siligine), as also the union of the horse and ass has been approved of, since thus mules are produced. But God would not allow these things amongst His ancient people, lest, sinking by degrees to greater license, they should at length addict themselves to the practice and customs of the heathen. He therefore uses this preface: “Ye shall keep my statutes,” (Lev 19:19😉 from whence we gather that the people were surrounded with fixed barriers, lest they should defile themselves with foreign vices, and imitate the nations, from which they had been separated. Wherefore this is the sum, that they should abide in God’s statutes.
(30) “ Au septieme commandement de la Loy, qui est d’observer chastet;” to the Seventh Commandment of the Law, which is to observe chastity. — Fr.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(5) FORBIDDEN MIXTURE (Deu. 22:9-11)
9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with two kinds of seed, lest the whole fruit be forfeited, the seed which thou hast sown, and the increase of the vineyard. 10 Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together. 11 Thou shalt not wear a mingled stuff, wool and linen together.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 22:911
368.
Is it a horticultural fact that the mixture of seeds as here described would result in loss? Discuss.
369.
The separation of the ox and the ass had some reason; what was it?
370.
Why not wear wool and linen together?
AMPLIFIED TRANSLATION 22:911
9 You shall not plant your vineyard with two kinds of seed, lest the whole crop be forfeited [under this ban], the seed which you have sown and the yield of the vineyard forfeited to the sanctuary.
10 You shall not plow with an ox [a clean animal] and a donkey [unclean] together. [2Co. 6:14-16.]
11 You shall not wear a garment of mingled stuff, wool and linen together. [Ezek. 4:18; Rev. 19:8.]
COMMENT 22:911
Note the basic concept of separation which runs throughout these verses. The fact that two kinds of seed might grow quite well together, or that one could plow together quite well with an ox and an ass, or that linen (originating from flax) and wool might make a durable, warm, and nice-looking garment when combined, was nothing to the point! God had said they were not to be mixed! His word was to be respected and honored.
As a separated people, they were to live separated lives (Cf. 1Ki. 8:53, etc.) Such laws as this would also distinguish and identify them as Gods own people, different from all others.
Separation is as much a New Testament doctrine as Oldnot the separation here spoken of, but the separation from the world and its ways that has always characterized Gods true children It is still very necessary that the child of God distinguish and differentiate in this worldan ability he develops more and more as he matures and grows into the likeness of his Master. Mature Christians should see the difference between light and darkness, sham and sincerity, truth and falsehood.
The unequal yoke of the ox and ass (Deu. 22:10) perhaps were in the very minds eye of the apostle when he exhorted the Corinthian Christians, Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers, for what fellowship have righteousness and iniquity . . . etc. (see 2Co. 6:14 to 2Co. 7:1).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(9) Defiledor sanctified. Different crops become common at different times. The years corn was freed by the wave-sheaf and wave-loaves. The trees not for five years. The rule about the ox and the ass may rest partly on the ground of humanity, the step and the pull of the two creatures being so very unlike. St. Paul gives a spiritual sense to the precept in 2Co. 6:14. Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers. The ox was a clean animal and fit for sacrifice. The ass was unclean, and must be redeemed with a lamb. The clean and unclean must not till the holy land of Jehovah together.
All these precepts are part of the laws of holiness in Leviticusrules of behaviour arising from the fact that Israel is the special people of a holy God.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(9-11) These precepts appear also in Lev. 19:19, more briefly.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9-11. Not sow divers seeds These prohibitions are similar to those in Lev 19:19, and seem founded on an aversion to mingling things unlike.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Non-Mixing of Unlike Things ( Deu 22:9-11 ).
Unlike things should not be put together as no one could have any idea how they would finally react (compare Lev 19:19). By dealing with things individually many problems could be avoided. There is probably underlying this the idea of respect for the distinctions within creation which must not be blurred. There may also be intended a subtle warning against being involved with the Canaanites, and thus mixing unlike with unlike, for they might be compared to grapes against grain (drunkenness against good bread), ass as against an ox bull or sheep (unclean against clean), or linen as opposed to wool (sophistication against tribal decency).
But the fact that we have three examples does suggest that there is an aspect of incompatibility in mind.
Deu 22:9
‘ You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed, lest the whole fruit be forfeited (literally ‘be made holy’), the seed which you have sown, and the increase of the vineyard.’
Practically speaking the danger of seeking to grow two things on the same piece of land was that there may not be sufficient sustenance for both, thus both might fail to grow properly. It would therefore be something best avoided. But the reference to ‘making holy’ might refer to the produce being seen as Yahweh’s and confiscated by the Sanctuary to save it from idolatrous significance, rather than to its just being naturally forfeited through its not growing properly. If this was so it may have been because such mixing was known to have religious significance among the Canaanites and/or the Egyptians, something which Moses and the people could have learned in Egypt. We know from inscriptions that Egypt had nothing against growing trees amidst grain, and that this was practised in sacred gardens. It may therefore have had an idolatrous taint.
It is, however, quite possible that grain and fruit that did not become edible was, with wry humour, spoken of as being ‘made holy’, that is, not available for eating, which would then support the first idea.
In the same way Lev 19:19 forbids the sowing of two types of seed in a field, presumably together. The folly of this would be that they choked each other and might grow at different rates. Thus harvesting problems would be caused.
But behind it all would seem to be the principle that what was compatible must go with what was compatible, that there be no dissension in creation.
Deu 22:10
‘ You shall not plough with an ox and an ass together.’
This may well have been because one was ‘clean’, and the other was not. To do this would thus be seeming to have a disregard for holiness. Alternately it may have been because of the incompatibility between the two and out of consideration for both. The danger with ploughing with two such different animals in the yoke could be that neither cooperated and that both were uneasy, thus making ploughing difficult. The Arabs did, however, in fact put ox and ass together in the yoke.
On the other hand the aim may have been to prevent a mutual relationship being built up between such unlike animals as they worked together, causing unnecessary distress. Such bonds between disparate animals do occur and would cause great distress on separation. Any way it is looked at the principle appears to have the animals’ welfare in mind.
Compare how Lev 19:19 forbids bringing two types of animal together for the purpose of breeding. This would indeed produce sterile offspring. But the stress is on the incompatability. It would be unseemly.
Deu 22:11
‘ You shall not wear a mixed fabric, wool and linen together.’
The form of the word for ‘mixed fabric’ demonstrates that it was not native Hebrew but was borrowed from another language and was probably an Egyptian loan word. This may suggest that it had a special type of religious implication. If so such a mixing of cloth might then have had connections with idolatry, the occult and magic and constantly have reminded those who wore it of such idolatry or magic, and may even have made them feel entrapped by such things.
Or it may be that we should remember that linen was what was worn by the priests. It might thus have been seen as having an aura of holiness. It may have been felt that to mix this with common wool was to degrade linen’s significance. Others have suggested that it was what prostitutes wore.
But the practical problem with mixing two types of such distinctive cloth was firstly that they might not weave well together, each having different strengths, and secondly that when washed each might react differently thus spoiling the garment (compare the new patch and old garment mentioned by Jesus (Mar 2:21)). That may indeed have been the sole reason for the restriction. Compare again Lev 19:19.
But the threefold repetition of examples would suggest that below all the other reasons lay the fact of incompatibility, and the importance of maintaining distinctions, whether for religious, ethical or practical reasons. And it may be that this principle was then to be extended towards ways of living. How shall two walk together except they be agreed?
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Similar commands we meet with in Lev 19:19 . Certainly there must have been somewhat of a spiritual meaning couched under these things; and what more likely to be intended by it, than that the heart should not be sown with diverse doctrine’s: that the man who plows spiritually, should not mingle anything idolatrous with the true worship of the GOD of Israel: and put not on the woollen garment of his own poor righteousness, with the linen robe of GOD’S righteousness. Precious JESUS! do I not see in this, a clear reference that the Souls of thy people, may never mingle ought of their own, with the perfect and complete robe of thy salvation; which, like the garment that covered thy sacred body in the days of thy flesh, was without seam, wove from the top throughout. Joh 19:23 . And LORD, far be it from me, to make fringes to thy vesture, or fancy my poor offerings can add to thy complete glory, in the great work of salvation! 1Co 3:11-13 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Deu 22:9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
Ver. 9. And the fruit of thy vineyard be defiled. ] Heb., Be sanctified, per antiphrasin, as, auri sacra fames; and Anthony’s fire is ignis sacer. So a whore is called in Hebrew, Kedesha, of kadash, i.e., holiness, Deu 23:17 by a contrary meaning, as most unholy and unchaste.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Deu 22:9
9You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed, or all the produce of the seed which you have sown and the increase of the vineyard will become defiled.
Deu 22:9 You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed This apparently does not specifically refer to the types of grapevines in a field, but it is assumed the principle would dictate only one type per vineyard. This refers to the seasonal crops sowed between the grapevines.
This may reflect (1) a Canaanite practice to appease the gods or (2) the mentality that mixing things causes the loss of purity (cf. Lev 19:19).
defiled Kadosh (BDB 872, KB 1073, Qal imperfect) means set apart for God (cf. Deu 15:19). This could mean (1) it had to be destroyed or (2) given to the priests. Does this principle apply today? I would assert that OT laws must be repeated in the NT to be binding on New Covenant believers (cf. Acts 15; 1 Corinthians 8-10; Galatians 3). Jesus, Himself negated both the sacrificial system and the food laws (cf. Mar 7:17-23). See the whole structure of the NT book of Hebrews (i.e., the superiority of the NT over the OT). Two books that have helped me think through the issue are:
1. How To Read the Bible For All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Doug Stuart
2. Gospel and Spirit by Gordon Fee
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
divers = two kinds. Compare Lev 19:19.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
shalt not sow: Lev 19:19, Mat 6:24, Mat 9:16, Rom 11:6, 2Co 1:12, 2Co 11:3, Jam 1:6-8, Jam 3:10
fruit of thy seed: Heb. fulness of thy seed
Reciprocal: 2Co 6:14 – unequally
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Deu 22:9-10. Divers seeds Either, 1st, With divers kinds of seeds mixed and sowed together between the rows of vines in thy vineyard: which was forbidden to be done in the field, (Lev 19:19,) and here in the vineyard. Or, 2d, With any kind of seed differing from that of the vine, which would produce either herbs, or corn, or fruit-bearing trees, whose fruit might be mingled with the fruit of the vines. Now this and the following precepts, though in themselves small and trivial, are given, according to that time and state of the church, for instructions in greater matters, and particularly to commend to them simplicity in all their carriage toward God and men, and to forbid all mixture of their inventions with Gods institutions in doctrine and worship. An ox and an ass Because the one was a clean beast, the other unclean; whereby God would teach men to avoid polluting themselves by the touch of unclean persons or things.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
22:9 Thou shalt not {f} sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
(f) The tenor of this law is to walk in simplicity and not to be curious about new fads.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
7. Laws arising from the seventh commandment 22:9-23:18
The seventh commandment is, "You shall not commit adultery" (Deu 5:18). Adultery involves mixing people in a way that they should not mix. The Israelites need to keep things properly apart separate.
"Known elsewhere in the ancient Near East as the ’Great Sin,’ adultery epitomizes all that impurity means, whether in family, social, political, or religious life." [Note: Merrill, Deuteronomy, p. 299.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Illustrations of the principle 22:9-12
The laws against mixing seed, animals in yoke, and fibers in clothing (Deu 22:9-11) may have had a double significance. They taught the Israelites the importance of purity and keeping things distinct ". . . because the order of the world must not be endangered." [Note: C. Houtman, "Another Look at Forbidden Mixtures," Vetus Testamentum 24:2 (1984):227.] They may have also illustrated the importance of remaining separate from the Canaanites (cf. 2Co 6:14-18). Oxen and donkeys would have not been a good combination when yoked together because they would pull at different rates. Wool was the fiber from which the Israelites made their clothing. However the Canaanites, especially the Canaanite priests, dressed in linen. [Note: See Calum Carmichael, "Forbidden Mixtures," Vetus Testamentum 32:4 (1982):394-415.] Tassels (Deu 22:12) were also visual aids (cf. Num 15:37-41).
"One of the ways the purity of the people is to be maintained, one that sounds rather strange in the contemporary world, is the insistence that things be kept in order and not mixed up inappropriately." [Note: Miller, p. 162.]