Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 5:2

Or if a soul touch any unclean thing, whether [it be] a carcass of an unclean beast, or a carcass of unclean cattle, or the carcass of unclean creeping things, and [if] it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.

2, 3. The second case when anyone unwittingly touches an unclean thing. By ‘beast’ is meant a wild animal, by ‘cattle’ one of the herd or of the flock (Lev 1:2).

unclean creeping things ] swarming things; cp. Lev 11:29; Lev 11:31. On the distinction between ‘creeping’ and ‘swarming’ things, and the confusion in the renderings of EVV, see Intr. to Pent. App. II, pp. 209 f., and HDB. i. 518.

the uncleanness of man ] Particular cases are specified in chs. 12 15. For all contact with uncleanness, washing the clothes and bathing the body in water are prescribed in the chapters referred to and also in Lev 11:24-40. The same purification is ordered for eating unclean food in Lev 17:15, and in the following verse is added if he does not wash and bathe, he shall bear his iniquity, i.e. if the proper purification is omitted he is liable to punishment. The cases supposed in Lev 5:2-3 are those where, through ignorance, the purification has been omitted, and a sacrifice is necessary to avert punishment. The traditional explanation is that a Sin-Offering is necessary if, while unclean, a person has done something which may be done only by those who are clean, such as eating of the holy things etc., but there is nothing in the text to support this view. The Sin-Offering seems to be required from anyone in the condition described in Lev 17:16, of whom it may be said ‘he shall bear his iniquity.’

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Lev 5:2

He also shall be unclean.

Moral contagion

This avoidance of unclean animals and places is not without practical illustration in our own personal experience and action. To-day, for example, we avoid places that are known to be fever-stricken. We are alarmed lest we should bring ourselves within the influence of contagion. The strongest man might fear if he knew that a letter were put into his hand which had come from a house where fever was fatally raging. However heroic he might be in sentiment, and however inclined to boast of the solidity of his nervous system, it is not impossible that even the strongest man might shrink from taking the hand of a fever-stricken friend. All this is natural and all this is justifiable, and, in fact, any defiance of this would be unnatural and unjustifiable. Is there, then, no suggestion in all such rational caution that there may be moral danger from moral contagion? Can a body emit pestilence and a soul dwell in all evil and riot in all wantonness without giving out an effluvium fatal to moral vigour and to spiritual health? The suggestion is preposterous. They are the unwise and most reprehensible men who being afraid of a fever have no fear of a moral pestilence; who running away in mortal terror from influences leading towards small-pox, cholera, and other fatal diseases, rush into companionships, and actions, and servitudes which are positively steeped and saturated with moral pollution. That we are more affected by the one than by the other only shows that we are more body than soul. Literally, the text does not refer in all probability to a purely spiritual action, yet not the less is the suggestion justified by experience that even the soul considered in its most spiritual sense may touch things that are unclean and may be defiled by them. A poor thing indeed that the hand has kept itself away from pollution and defilement if the mind has opened wide all the points of access to the influence of evil. Sin may not only be in the hand, it may be roiled as a sweet morsel under the tongue. There may be a chamber of imagery in the heart, i man may be utterly without offence in any social acceptation of that term–actually a friend of magistrates and judges, and himself a high interpreter of the law of social morality and honour, and yet all the while may be hiding a very perdition in his heart. It is the characteristic mystery of the salvation of Jesus Christ that it does not come to remove stains upon the flesh or spots upon the garments, but to work out an utter and eternal cleansing in the secret places of the soul, so that the heart itself may in the event be without spot or wrinkle or any such thing–pure, holy, radiant, even dazzling with light, fit to be looked upon by the very eye of God. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Dread of defilement

Pierius Valerianus, in his book of Egyptian Hieroglyphics, maketh mention of a kind of white mouse, called the Armenian mouse, being of such a cleanly disposition, that it will rather die than be any way defiled, so that the passage into her hole being besmeared with any filth, she will rather expose herself to the mercy of her cruel enemy, than any way seek to save her life by passing so foul an entrance. (J. Spencer.)

Defilement to be avoided

Men have looked into the crater of a volcano to see what was there, and going down to explore, without coming back to report progress. Many and many a man has gone to see what was in hell, that did see it. Many and many a man has looked to see what was in the cup, and routed a viper coiled up therein. Many and many a man has gone into the house of lust, and found that the ends thereof were death–bitter, rotten death. Many and many a man has sought to learn something of the evils of gambling, and learned it to his own ruin. And I say to every man, the more you know about these things the more you ought to be ashamed of knowing; a knowledge of them is not necessary to education or manhood; and they ought to be avoided, because when a man has once fallen into them, the way out is so steep and hard. (H. W. Beecher.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 2. Any unclean thing] Either the dead body of a clean animal, or the living or dead carcass of any unclean creature. All such persons were to wash their clothes and themselves in clean water, and were considered as unclean till the evening, Le 11:24-31. But if this had been neglected, they were obliged to bring a trespass-offering. What this meant, see in Clarke’s notes on “Le 7:38“.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Touch any unclean thing, to wit, ceremonially; of which see more fully Lev 11:24, &c.; Deu 14.

If it be hidden from him; if he do it unwittingly, yet that would not excuse him, because he should have been more diligent and circumspect to avoid all unclean things. Hereby God designed to awaken men to watchfulness against, and repentance for, their unknown or unobserved sins. See Psa 19:12; 1Jo 3:20.

Guilty; not morally, for the conscience was not directly polluted by these things, Mat 15:11,18, but ceremonially.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

2. if a soul touch any uncleanthingA person who, unknown to himself at the time, came incontact with any thing unclean, and either neglected the requisiteceremonies of purification or engaged in the services of religionwhile under the taint of ceremonial defilement, might be afterwardsconvinced that he had committed an offense.

Le5:4-19. FOR SWEARING.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Or if a soul touch any unclean thing,…. Meaning an Israelite, for only such were bound by this law, which pronounced a person unclean that touched anything that was so in a ceremonial sense; this is the general, including whatsoever by the law was unclean; the particulars follow:

whether [it be] a carcass of an unclean beast, as the camel, the coney, the hare, and the swine, Le 11:2

or a carcass of unclean cattle; as the horse, and the ass, which were unclean for food, and their dead carcasses not to be touched,

Le 11:26

or the carcass of unclean creeping things: such as are mentioned in

Le 11:29

and if it be hidden from him; that he has touched them; or the uncleanness contracted by touching, he having inadvertently done it; or being ignorant of the law concerning such uncleanness:

he also shall be unclean; in a ceremonial sense, by thus touching them:

and guilty; of a breach of the command which forbids the touching of them: this is by way of prolepsis or anticipation; for as yet the law concerning unclean beasts, and creeping things, and pollution by touching them, was not given: Jarchi and Gersom interpret this guilt, of eating of holy things, and going into the sanctuary when thus defiled: in the Jewish Misnah w it is said, the word “hidden” is twice used, to show that he is guilty, for the ignorance of uncleanness, and for the ignorance of the sanctuary.

w Misn. Shebuot, c. 2. sect. 5.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

2. Or if a soul touch any unclean thing. This precept seems not only to be superfluous but also absurd; for Moses had already shewn sufficiently how uncleanness contracted by touching a dead body, or any other unclean thing, was to be purged, and had prescribed an easy and inexpensive mode of purification. This repetition appears, therefore, to be useless. But to impose a heavier punishment on an offense which is extenuated by the pretext of error, than where there is no allusion to error, is unjust. But we must remember that not only is the uncleanness itself here punished, but; the inadvertence, from whence it arose that he who was polluted omitted the purification. For it may be that those who thus lie torpid in their sins pollute for a season the service of God. No wonder, then, that a heavier punishment is inflicted, where error, springing from supine and gross security, begets still more sins, that thus believers may be aroused to greater vigilance. Let the reader, therefore, recollect that the offense which is now adverted to did not consist in the mere touching of a dead body, but in the thoughtlessness itself; for if all would diligently meditate on the Law of God, forgetfulness would not so easily steal over them, whereby the distinction between right and wrong is lost. The same is the reason for the following ordinance, where Moses subjects to the same punishment any one who shall have touched an unclean or defiled man: thus the very contact of a woman at a particular period produces pollution.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(2) Or if a soul touch any unclean thing.The second instance adduced which requires this sacrifice is the case of any one touching the dead body of a clean animal, or the living or dead body of an unclean animal or reptile.

And if it be hidden from him.That is, if he, through carelessness, forgot all about it that he had contracted this defilement; as the Vulgate rightly paraphrases it, and forgetteth his uncleanness. The touching of a carcase simply entailed uncleanness till evening, which the washing of the person and his garments thus defiled sufficed to remove (Lev. 11:24; Lev. 11:31). It was only when thoughtlessness made him forget his duty, and when reflection brought to his mind and conscience the violation of the law, that he was required to confess his sin, and bring a trespass offering.

He also shall be unclean, and guilty.Better, and he is unclean, and acknowledgeth that he is guilty. (See Lev. 4:13; Lev. 4:22.) The Greek Version, called the Septuagint, which is the most ancient translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, omits altogether the latter part of this verse, which is represented in the Authorised Version by and if it be hidden from him, he also shall be unclean and guilty, thus showing that the Hebrew manuscript, or manuscripts, from which this old version was made, had not this clause. This is, moreover, supported by the fact that it needlessly anticipates the summary formula of the next verse, which continues the subject, and where it appears in its proper place.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

INVOLUNTARY VIOLATION OF CEREMONIAL PURITY, Lev 5:2-3.

2. If a soul touch The soul is here put for the entire man.

Any unclean thing It is difficult for those who have not been ceremonially trained from infancy to group together things differing so widely as the moral turpitude just mentioned and the accidental and innocent contact with a dead mouse or snail, (Lev 11:23-43😉 yet in the religious development and discipline of the Hebrews there was a perpetual commingling of offences, arbitrary, factitious, and temporal, with immutable and eternal moral principles. It is not for us to deny that this period of ceremonial pupilage was necessary. Things which would be unsuited to the Gospel dispensation, and even ridiculous in contrast with its spiritual sublimities, have their proper place in a law of temporal sanctions, chiefly or solely affecting the present life only.

Shall be unclean He was cut off for the time from certain religious and social privileges, and his citizenship in Israel was in abeyance. From these disadvantages, certain ritualistic acts alone could free him. These were not required in order to magnify the office of the priest, but to impress upon the people a sense of the personality and holiness of God, and of the reality of his covenant. In shadow they suggested the necessity of a spiritual cleansing from moral pollution.

Guilty The verb asham here expresses a different idea from the iniquity committed by the silent witness of wrong. It signifies primarily to be desert, to lie waste; hence, as applied to man, to fail in duty.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments