Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 22:23
Either a bullock or a lamb that hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer [for] a freewill offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
23. but for a vow ] The three varieties included under the name Peace-Offering were, as has been noticed (see on Lev 7:11), ( a) Thank-Offerings (here mentioned as a separate item in Lev 22:29, ( b) Votive-Offerings, and ( c) Freewill-Offerings. The first (see W.P.Paterson, HDB, Art. Sacrifice, p. 338) was offered in acknowledgment of benefits received, the second and third were combined with prayer for blessings hoped for. These two differed thus, that the Freewill-Offering was simply in support of the prayer, and was made in anticipation of the benefit asked. The vow was promised on fulfilment of the prayer, and thus, unlike the Freewill-Offering, need not be offered if the prayer remained unfulfilled. According to this v., gratitude for the answer was to be indicated by the greater stringency of the regulation as to the nature of the animal to be offered in acknowledgment of the mercy vouchsafed.
For the general prohibition to offer a sacrifice that had a blemish, cp. the rebuke in Mal 1:8; Mal 1:13.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 23. That hath anything superfluous or lacking] The term sarua signifies any thing extended beyond the usual size, and the term kalut signifies any thing unusually contracted; and both mean any monstrosity, whether in redundance or defect. Such things, it seems, might be offered for a freewill-offering, because that was not prescribed by the law; God left it to a man’s piety and gratitude to offer such additional gifts as he could: what the law required was indispensably necessary, because it pointed out the Gospel economy; but he that made a vow to offer such a sacrifice as the law had not required, could of course bring an imperfect offering. Some contend that the last clause of this verse should be thus read: If thou offer it either for a freewill-offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted. It was the opinion of the Jews, and it appears to be correct, that none of these imperfect animals were ever offered on the altar; but the person who made the freewill-offering of such things as he had, sold the animal, and gave its price for the support of the sanctuary.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
That mayest thou offer; either,
1. To the priest, who might, according to the rules given by God, either convert it to his own use, or sell it, and lay out the price of it upon the temple or sacrifices. But in this sense any of the other kinds, as blind, or broken, &c., might be offered, which yet are forbidden to be offered Lev 22:22. Or rather,
2. To the Lord, as is expressed Lev 22:22,24, this being put down by way of opposition to those defects, Lev 22:22, and by way of exception from the general rule, Lev 22:21.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
23. that mayest thou offer,&c.The passage should be rendered thus: “if thou offer iteither for a freewill offering, or for a vow, it shall not beaccepted.” This sacrifice being required to be “withoutblemish” [Le 22:19],symbolically implied that the people of God were to dedicatethemselves wholly with sincere purposes of heart, and its beingrequired to be “perfect to be accepted” [Le22:21], led them typically to Him without whom no sacrifice couldbe offered acceptable to God.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Either a bullock, or a lamb that hath anything superfluous,
or lacking in its parts,…. That has either more members than it should have, as five feet, or two gristles in an ear, as Gersom says, or has fewer than it should have; or, as Jarchi, that has one member longer or shorter than another, as the leg or thigh; according to the Targum of Jonathan, that is redundant in its testicles, or deficient therein; the Septuagint version is, that hath its ear or its tail cut; and so the Vulgate Latin version:
that mayest thou offer [for] a freewill offering: for the repair of the sanctuary or temple, as Jarchi and Gersom; money, or the value of the sacrifices, might be given to the priests for that use, but according to them might not be offered upon the altar: but it rather seems to be an exception to the above law, and allows of the sacrifice of them for freewill offering, though not for a vow, as it follows
but for a vow it shall not be accepted; because the other was according to a man’s will and pleasure, and he might bring what he would on that account; but when he made a vow that he would offer such a sacrifice, it must be of creatures that were perfect, and without blemish.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
As a voluntary peace-offering they might indeed offer an ox or sheep that was , “stretched out and drawn together,” i.e., with the whole body or certain limbs either too large or too small;
(Note: In explanation of these words Knobel very properly remarks, that with the Greeks the sacrificial animal was required to be ( Pollux i. 1, 26), upon which Hesychius observes, .)
but such an animal could not be acceptable as a votive offering.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(23) Either a bullock or a lamb.Better, And bullock and one of the flock.
That hath any thing superfluous.That is one member of the animal being more elongated or contracted than the other, being out of proportion. The same blemish also unfitted the priest for performing sacerdotal functions (see Lev. 21:18).
Or lacking in his parts.This, according to the authorities during the second Temple, denotes contracted hoofs, or undivided hoofs, making them resemble those of an ass or horse.
That mayest thou offer for a freewill offering.Better, that thou mayest make a freewill offering. As Lev. 22:18-20 most emphatically declare that an animal with any blemish whatsoever must not be offered for any manner of freewill offering, it is hardly conceivable that the lawgiver would contradict this enactment within the space of three verses, and say that the animals with those serious organic defects enumerated in the verse before us, thou mayest offer for a freewill offering. Hence, during the second Temple, the passage before us was interpreted to mean that the animals in question were only allowed to be consecrated for the maintenance and repair of the sanctuary, but not to be offered as a sacrifice on the altar. They were sold, or the offerer paid the value himself, and the money was applied to these sacred purposes. The opinion that a freewill offering was of less importance than a vow, and that therefore the lawgiver allows animals with the two kinds of defects here described to be offered for a freewill offering but not for a vow, is contrary to the regulations laid down in Lev. 22:18-20, and is against the practice during the second Temple (see Lev. 7:16). It is far more probable that the text is disarranged, and that it originally was, that thou mayest not offer for a freewill offering, and for a vow it shall not be accepted.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. A freewill offering Since this is a gift, and not a debt, an animal having a member too many or too few may be used. This is the significance of superfluous. See Lev 21:18, note.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Lev 22:23. That mayest thou offer for a free-will-offering, &c. Some render this, If thou offer it either for a free-will-offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted. The Hebrew will certainly bear this interpretation; and the 21st verse both requires and justifies it.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Lev 22:23 Either a bullock or a lamb that hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer [for] a freewill offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
Ver. 23. That mayest thou offer. ] Though it have some kind of defect, yet, in free will offerings, it might pass. This was to signify that our imperfect obedience after that we are once in Christ, is accepted by Christ, who is without all blame and blemish.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
offer = prepare. Hebrew ‘asah. App-43.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
lamb: or, kid
superfluous: Lev 21:18
Reciprocal: Lev 7:16 – a voluntary Lev 7:18 – it shall Lev 19:5 – ye shall Lev 19:7 – it shall Num 15:3 – or in a freewill Luk 11:2 – Hallowed
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 22:23. That mayest thou offer The Hebrew here will bear a different translation, which, indeed, seems necessary to reconcile this with the twenty-first verse, namely, Shouldest thou offer it for a free-will-offering or for a vow, it would not be accepted.