Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 16:26
And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp.
26 28. The bullock and the goat for the Sin-Offerings were not eaten, as their blood had been brought into the holy place (Lev 6:30). They were carried forth and burnt in the fire. The ordinary Heb. word for ‘burn’ is here used the burning was not sacrificial. The Sin-Offering was most holy (Lev 6:25). Whatsoever touched the flesh thereof was holy (Lev 6:27), and those who carried them out must remove the contagion of holiness by washing their clothes and bathing. The same ceremony was required of the man that let go the goat for Azazel ( Lev 16:26). Whether this goat was regarded as sin-laden and unclean, or whether it shared the holiness of the Sin-Offering (the two goats constitute the Sin-Offering; see Lev 16:5), is not stated. It may be noted that in Lev 4:1-21 those who carried the Sin-Offerings outside are not required to undergo this rite of washing and bathing.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Both he who led away the goat, and he who burned the parts of the sin-offerings had to purify themselves. They who went out of the camp during a religious solemnity incurred uncleanness; hence, the need of purification.
Lev 16:27
Shall burn in the fire – i. e., consume in the fire, not burn sacrificially. See Lev 1:9.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 26. He that let go the goat – shall wash, &c.] Not only the person who led him away, but the priest who consecrated him, was reputed unclean, because the goat himself was unclean, being considered as bearing the sins of the whole congregation. On this account both the priest and the person who led him to the wilderness were obliged to wash their clothes and bathe themselves, before they could come into the camp.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He shall wash his clothes, because he had contracted some degree of ceremonial uncleanness by the touch of the goat.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat,…. Or unto Azazel; who or what Azazel is, [See comments on Le 16:10] and
[See comments on Le 16:21]; for the goat and Azazel are different, not the same, nor to be confounded as they are in our version:
shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water; in forty seahs of water, according to the Targum of Jonathan; so unclean was this person reckoned by what he had to do with the goat sent away by him; which, in a typical and ceremonial sense, had all the sins of the people of Israel on it: and he and his garments were defiled as soon as he could be said to be letting go; and that was, as Gersom says, as soon as he was out of the city; for as long as he was in the city he was in the place from whence the motion was made, but as soon as he was out of it he was in the way, and then he began to be in that motion, and might be then called, “he that let him go”: and from that time the clothes he had on were defiled; according to the Misnah p, from the time he was got without the walls of Jerusalem:
and afterwards come into the camp; of Israel, while in the wilderness, and into the city in later times, and so into the sanctuary, and enjoyed all civil and religious privileges as another man: and something like this obtained among the Heathens, as has been observed by many learned men, particularly out of Porphyry q; who says, all divines agree in this, that such sacrifices as were offered for averting evils were not to be touched, but such needed purifications; nor might any such an one go into the city; nor into his own house, before he had washed his clothes and his body in a river or in a fountain: all this may be an emblem of those who were concerned in having Christ without the gates of Jerusalem to be crucified, and who afterwards, being sensible of their sin, not only had forgiveness of it and were washed from it in the blood of Christ, but, being baptized in water, were admitted into the church of God, Ac 2:37; and in general may show the nature of sin, that such who have anything to do with any who have it on them, though only in a ceremonial way, are defiled by it, and need washing; and also the imperfection of ceremonial rites and sacrifices to take away sin.
p Misn. Yoma, c. 6. sect. 6. q De Abstinentia, l. 2. c. 44.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The man who took the goat into the desert, and those who burned the two sin-offerings outside the camp (see at Lev 4:11, Lev 4:21), had also to wash their clothes and bathe their bodies before they returned to the camp, because they had been defiled by the animals laden with sin.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
26. And he that let the goat go. Since this goat was the outcast ( κάθαπμα) of God’s wrath, and devoted to His curse, he who led it away is commanded to wash his person and his clothes, as if he were a partaker in its defilement. By this symbol the faithful were reminded how very detestable is their iniquity, so that they might, be affected with increasing dread, whenever they considered what they deserved. For when they saw a man forbidden to enter the camp because he was polluted by simply touching the goat, they must needs reflect how much wider was the alienation between God and themselves, when they bore upon them an uncleanness not contracted elsewhere, but procured by their own sin. The same may be said of him who burned the skin, the flesh, and the dung of the bullock and the goat. We have elsewhere seen that these remnants were carried out of the camp in token of abomination. And on this head Christ’s inestimable love towards us shines more brightly, who did not disdain to go out of the city that He might be made an outcast ( rejectamentum) for us, and might undergo the curse due to us.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(26) And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat.Better, And he that leadeth away the goat to zazel (see Lev. 16:10). As the messenger who conducted the sin-laden animal to the author of sin contracted defilement by the impurity which the victim carried away, he had both to wash his clothes and immerse his whole body in water before he was admitted into the camp. During the second Temple he remained in the last booth, which was a mile from Jerusalem, till sundown, when he was re-admitted into the camp.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
“And he who lets go the goat for Azazel shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp.”
Meanwhile the man who let the live goat go in the wilderness must wash his clothes, wash his flesh thoroughly in water, and may then return to the camp. Whether this is to wash off the taint of sin borne by the goat, or the desert dirt and earthiness, or to wash of holiness emanating from this most holy of offerings (compare Lev 16:28) we are not told. But in fact we may see it that all of his part in the ceremony is to be washed off, with all its ramifications. The he-goat has taken all with it. Nothing must return to the camp.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Lev 16:26 And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp.
Ver. 26. Shall wash his clothes. ] To show, (1.) That it was for our sins that Christ suffered; (2.) That all that partake of his benefits must wash their hearts from wickedness. Jer 4:14 ; 2Co 5:15 ; 2Co 7:1
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
he that let go = he that leadeth away the goat to, or for, ‘Azazel, Lev 16:10.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
he that: Lev 16:10, Lev 16:21, Lev 16:22
wash: Lev 16:28, Lev 14:8, Lev 15:5-11, Lev 15:27, Num 19:7, Num 19:8, Num 19:21, Heb 7:19
Reciprocal: Lev 11:40 – shall wash Joh 13:10 – He 2Co 4:18 – for