Moshe Kline

Leviticus: The Ways of Holiness

Prologue

The Torah as a Whole

The Torah (Pentateuch) is much more coherent than it appears from a linear reading. The reason that it appears so inchoate is that we cannot easily see its structure. This is especially true of those sections that consist of lists of laws. In the narrative sections, for the most part, we can at least say that the text appears to be organized chronologically. However, temporal order is not a sufficient explanation for many of the larger questions concerning the nature of the Torah, such as: Why is the Torah divided into five books? What is the character of each book? How do they relate to each other and to the whole? If we add the questions of this sort to the perplexity engendered by the intermixing of laws and narrative, we are faced with a conundrum. Simply put, after more than three thousand years of study we know very little about the Torah as a whole. Leviticus: The Holy Ways is intended to contribute to the discussion of the Torah as a literary composition. I will demonstrate principles of organization that make it possible to read the Torah as a coherent document. The single most important finding that I will report is that the legal codes of the Torah are organized according to clear, albeit non-linear, principles. The reading that I will present is consistent with the broad area of Jewish learning know as “the oral Torah,” which is generally held to differ from the direct study of the Torah as a text, which is called “the written Torah.” My overall approach can be described as an attempt to reunite the oral Torah with the written Torah, or perhaps more precisely, to rediscover the oral Torah within the written Torah.

The Torah and the Mishnah

The “oral Torah” is in fact a vast literature that includes the Mishnah, the Talmud, and works of Midrash, as well as the mystical literature of the kabbalah. In discussing the relationship between this veritable sea of literature and the “written Torah,” I will limit myself to the Mishnah as my exemplar of the “oral Torah.” After extensive analysis of the literary structure of the Mishnah, I published a new edition of the Mishnah entitled Hamishnah C’darcah.[i] In it I present each chapter of the text of the Mishnah in the format of a table. This format makes it possible to visualize the inner relationships of the parts of the chapter.

It became quite clear from my study of the Mishnah, that the text is non-linear. The laws do not necessarily follow each other logically. Sometimes a block of two or three laws must be compared with another similar block in order to understand why the individual laws appear together. A linear presentation of the text actually distorts it. One can get the idea from the normal linear format that elements that follow each other in print also follow each other logically. This is one of the great pitfalls of reading the Mishnah. As we will see, it is also true of the Torah. Reading the laws of the Torah linearly can distort the inner relationships between the laws. Moreover, unless one is aware of the rules of the non-linear structure, it is virtually impossible to make sense of the ostensible “collections” of laws in the Torah. This is as true of the most basic collection of laws, the Decalogue, as it is of the most complex collection, the Book of Leviticus.

The specific discovery that I will demonstrate in this book is that the Torah organizes its laws according to the same principles of organization that are used in the Mishnah. Of course the previous sentence is totally unreasonable. The Mishnah was written well over a thousand years after the Torah, so I should say that the Mishnah utilizes the rules of organization promulgated in the Torah. I have reversed the order to say that the Torah uses the same rules as the Mishnah simply because the rules of the Mishnah became apparent before the rules of the Torah. The key point is that the Mishnah is the major piece of evidence concerning the structure of the Torah, outside of the Torah itself.

Secret Teachings in the Torah

The structural similarity between the Torah and the Mishnah could be left as a curiosity for literary historians were it not for other considerations. I will argue that the literary structure of the Torah directs the reader to levels of meaning that are virtually inaccessible without an understanding of the underlying principles of organization. This last point holds for the Mishnah as well. And yet, for all that an overview of the structure can contribute to our understanding of any text, one additional factor places the structures that we will examine in a special category. The principles of organization that dictate the structure of the Torah and the Mishnah are conceptually similar to esoteric teachings that fall under the umbrella of “kabbalah.” In other words, one could say that the kabbalah is embedded in the structure of the Torah and the Mishnah.

I am not proposing a “kabalistic” or “mystical” reading of the Torah. My thesis and analysis must stand or fall on purely literary/philosophical considerations. But if I am successful, my enterprise should contribute to a greater appreciation of just how inseparable the written Torah is from the so-called “oral” Torah. Whether or not my observations concerning the similarities between the literary structure of the Torah and elements of kabbalah are significant, we will nevertheless have to relate to some parts of the Torah as esoteric. This conclusion is inevitable once we see that the formatting of the Mishnah is identical with that of the Torah. In both cases the initiate who understands the principles of organization is capable of reading an aspect of the text that is hidden from the non-initiate.

Chapter One

Focal Symmetry

An Inaccessible Center Point

The Torah utilizes “focal point symmetry”[ii] in prescribing the arrangement of the Israelite encampment during the forty years of wandering in the desert. The arrangement can be pictured schematically as three concentric circles. The innermost circle is that of the Tabernacle, the dwelling place of the Divine presence.  The next circle, moving outward, represents the holy camp of the Levites. The outermost circle represents the unconsecrated camp of the other tribes. Within the innermost circle are three further concentric divisions. The Tabernacle contains a courtyard, an outer chamber, and an inner sanctum, the Holy of Holies, which can only be entered by the High Priest once a year, on the Day of Atonement. Within the Holy of Holies is the Ark of the Covenant, which is sealed to all. This arrangement, too, demonstrates focal-point symmetry. The holiest point, beyond human access, is at the center. The farther any point is from the center, the more accessible it is. A similar symmetry exists in the structure of the Torah itself.

Schematic Structure of the Torah

The five books of the Torah can be read as three structural units: (1) Genesis; (2) Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers; and (3) Deuteronomy. The book of Genesis reads like an introduction to the story of Moses, which is found in the following three books. In a similar manner, the fifth book, Deuteronomy, stands outside the narrative and can be read as a summary of it from Moses’ perspective. At first glance, the three remaining books comprise the “core” of the Torah, the story of the forty years during which Moses led the Israelites through the desert from Egypt to the border of Canaan. Upon closer inspection, however, we see that there is almost no historical narrative in Leviticus. The latter is, in fact, closely connected to the books that precede and follow it, Exodus and Numbers, but by a theme, that of the Tabernacle, rather than by any narrative.

Exodus is clearly divided in half. Only the first half presents an historical narrative. The second half is an enormously detailed description of the construction of the Tabernacle. Leviticus continues the discussion of the Tabernacle, describing the rituals to be performed in it. Numbers, like Exodus, has two principal sections, the second of which picks up the historical narrative that was interrupted in the middle of Exodus. The first section of Numbers deals with the ceremonies connected with the dedication of the Tabernacle.  There is thus a virtually continuous flow of Tabernacle-related material from the middle of Exodus, through Leviticus, to the middle of Numbers. As in the encampment described in the Torah, the text of the Torah also has the Tabernacle at its center. The following illustration demonstrates the literary symmetry that creates this focus.

Table 1 A Schematic Overview of the Torah

Three levels of literary symmetry define the Tabernacle service as the focus of the Torah. The framework of the prologue and epilogue creates the first level. Immediately within this framework, following the prologue, in the first section of Exodus, and preceding the epilogue, in the second section of Numbers, is the historical narrative of the forty years in the desert. Within the framework of the historical narrative, in turn, is the core of the Torah, the discussion of the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle service itself, which is the principal subject of Leviticus, lies between the description of the building of the tabernacle in Exodus and its dedication in Numbers. In physical terms, the service (Leviticus) takes place in the center, within the precincts of the Tabernacle (Exodus b and Numbers a) which is located in the desert (Exodus a, and Numbers b).

This literary topography is similar to the concentric circles of the encampment in the desert. It is even possible to see a direct parallel between the three camps and the concentric rings of the text. The Tabernacle service in Leviticus parallels the central camp of the Divine Presence, the Shekhinah. The next ring of text, going out from the center, describes the mechanics of the Tabernacle and parallels the camp of the Levites, who are assigned to the maintenance of the Tabernacle. The third ring of text, the historical narrative of the Israelites in the desert, parallels the Israelite encampment.

The Source is in the Center

The structure of the book of Leviticus reflects both the divisions within the central holy camp and the focal symmetry of the Torah. Like the format of the Torah as seen in the schematic overview, Leviticus also contains a seven-part symmetrical structure. It, too, can be seen as having a central text and three concentric “rings” around it. The rings of Leviticus are parallel to the concentric enclosures of the Tabernacle: the courtyard, the Holy Chamber, and Holy of Holies. The text at the center of Leviticus, chapter 19, is the equivalent of the Ark of the Covenant within the Holy of Holies.

Identifying the symmetry of Leviticus allows us, finally, to pinpoint the conceptual focus of the Torah as a whole. The significance of the center point appears in Rabbinic discussion of the Tabernacle’s successor, the Temple in Jerusalem. The language of the Rabbis is especially enlightening regarding our notion of virtual concentric circles. They say that the Land of Israel is the center of the world and that Jerusalem lies at the center of the Land. At the center of Jerusalem stands the Temple. In the center of the Temple is the Holy of Holies. At the very center of the Holy of Holies stands the Ark of the Covenant, and beneath it is the “foundation-stone” of the earth. The visible world emanated from this stone.[iii] (In modern terms, it could be thought of as the locus of the “Big Bang.”)  A similar point exists at the center of the Torah, the focal point of Leviticus, in the middle of chapter 19, the very point where the midrash, the Rabbinic commentary, mentions the “foundation-stone”. We will see that the theme of the focal text is generation. This completes the analogy between the text of the Torah and the structure of the encampment. Both are constructed as vessels for the holy life-force that emanates from the focal point.

Reading the Torah from this perspective provides a basis for understanding its inner logic. As a hermeneutical tool, “focal symmetry” sheds new light on several textual difficulties, for example, the problem of Leviticus 18 and 20. Lev 18 lists prohibited relationships, and Lev 20 lists the punishments for them. Why are the chapters separated? Why does chapter 19 come between them? If, as we shall see, chapter 19 is the central text of the Torah, the fact that chapters 18 and 20 relate to each other can then be explained by focal symmetry. They are placed symmetrically around the central text. This is similar to the way the historical narrative of the Torah appears in the first part of Exodus and the second part of Numbers, symmetrically enclosing the Tabernacle material. Even more important than solving any specific textual problem, focal symmetry provides a highly integrated reading of the Torah.

Chapter Two

The Passion for Intimacy

Two Ways

The Book of Leviticus, like the Holy of Holies, is hidden behind a screen. In order to get past the screen, one must first complete a complex process of purification. Only after completing this process can one begin to perceive the light radiating from within this extraordinary book. Having penetrated to the core of enlightenment, the reader begins the second phase of a spiritual journey through Leviticus. If the process of purification is understood as a turning inward, the second phase is a turning outward. It ultimately leads to redemption, both personal and universal. The full process of turning inward towards the depths of the spirit and then returning to the world of action is like the ritual of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement. This is the format of the Book of Leviticus.

I will refer to the two major blocks of text in Leviticus as the Inner Way and the Outer Way. They are placed symmetrically around the centerpiece of the book, Lev 19. In order to understand the notion that the text is like the path of the High Priest on Yom Kippur, consider Lev 19 as the equivalent of the Ark of the Testimony standing in the Holy of Holies. The general movement of the text follows the movements of the High Priest. It begins at the altar of burnt offerings, moves into the holy place of the incense altar and from there into the Holy of Holies. The ark represents the turning point.  After Lev 19, the text sets off on the outer way: moving away from the Holy of Holies, it retraces the High Priest’s path toward it. The difference between the two paths, the inner way and the outer way, is the perspective. The inner way faces toward the Holy of Holies, while the outer way faces toward the world outside it.

In order to understand the stages of the two ways, it is necessary to keep in mind the basic divisions of the Tabernacle. First, it is divided between a courtyard which is open to the sky and an area which is within a structure, the Tent of Meeting. The open space contains the altar upon which all burnt offerings were offered. This is a public area. All the Israelites are instructed to bring their burnt offerings to this area, which is also called “the opening of the Tent of Meeting.” The Tent of Meeting is itself divided into two parts, one within the other. The outer part, known as the Holy Place, also contains an altar, one which is used exclusively for burning incense. This space also houses the menorah, or candelabrum, and the table of the Showbread. The inner chamber is the Holy of Holies, containing the Ark of Testimony, which holds the tablets of the Decalogue. Leviticus uses these three well-defined spaces and the objects they contain as signposts. They serve to prevent the traveler (reader) from getting lost in the labyrinth of details contained in the book. Moreover, they actually define the precise stages of the journey. There are three stages in each direction, going in and going out, forming six major divisions in the text. A seventh division creates the central element which is topologically parallel to the Ark in the Holy of Holies.

The two ways are indicated by two different references to God connected with specific places. The book opens with God calling out to Moses from within the Tabernacle, “The Lord called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting.” This is the sign that we are about to begin the inner way. It is a call to draw inward towards God. The inner way is the path one must follow toward the voice of God calling from within. The second place-related reference to God is at the end of the book, where it is proclaimed that “these are the commandments that the Lord gave Moses for the Israelite people on Mount Sinai.” This is the sign of the outer way, the path that leads out of the Tabernacle and into the world, the world that lives by God’s laws. The two ways appear to be not only opposite in direction, but more significantly, also opposite in value. The inner way begins with chapter after chapter of sacrifice and repentance, negation of the flesh by casting it upon the altar to be converted to something more spiritual: “It is a burnt offering, an offering by fire, of pleasing odor to the Lord.” But at the other extreme, the end of the outer way, we find laws that deal with social economics: the period of a bondsman’s bondage, leases, and even the purchase of sacrosanct goods. To be sure, these are also God’s laws, no less than the laws of sacrifices. It is not the source of the laws that marks the distinction between the two ways, but rather the subject matter. Let us now look at an example of parallel texts illustrating the two ways.

Two Deaths

There are only two narrative sections in Leviticus, and both of them relate acts of blasphemy that lead to death. One, which includes the death of Aaron’s sons, takes place in the Tent of Meeting. The whole framework of this narrative is found in Lev 8-10. The second narrative is in the parallel section of the outer way, Lev 24. The incident parallel to the overzealousness of Aaron’s sons concerns the son of an Egyptian father and Israelite mother who “pronounced the Name in blasphemy.” There are many points for comparison between these two narratives. I will use some of these points in order to indicate distinctions between the inner way and the outer way. The fact that these are the only two narrative sections in the book implicitly “invites” us to make this comparison.

One of the perplexing questions associated with the case of the Egyptian man’s son is: why are we offered so many details about his parents? What does it matter who his father was? Why are we told his mother’s name? However, when we compare this incident with its parallel, we can immediately see that we should compare the fathers: Aaron, the High Priest, and a pointedly nameless Egyptian. Aaron was the highest official in the Israelite nation. As the High Priest, only he was empowered to enter the Holy of Holies. Not only was he part of the “inner circle” of power, but in terms of ritual he stood at the very focus. The Egyptian, on the other hand, was not even part of the community. He was a complete “outsider.” It seems that the text is directing us to compare an “insider” and an “outsider.” This analysis enables us to explain a difficulty with the opening words of the “outsider” incident.

“There came out among the Israelites one whose mother was Israelite and whose father was Egyptian.” “Came out” from where? The Hebrew word translated “there came out” is the first word in this pericope and has no antecedent. Nothing that follows it seems to connect to it. Basically, it adds nothing to the narrative. Furthermore, what could possibly be meant by “came out among”? However, once we have made the distinction between “insider” and “outsider”, the action of the outsider going out becomes a parallel to the insider going in. Aaron’s sons were the insiders, and their sin was to go inside the holy place at their own initiative. Let’s look a bit closer at the events.

There is a whole series of parallels between the narratives. First there is an act of blasphemy. Then the offender is taken out of the camp (dead or alive). After that Moses delivers a set of instructions that were inspired by the incident. Finally, the people do as Moses has instructed them. In both cases, the offenders die. Each of these parallels presents an opportunity to compare the inner way to the outer way. Aaron’s sons’ sin can be viewed as excessive spirituality. They are inspired to make a private incense offering before God in the holy place. Each takes his fire pan and goes in to offer the incense. They are killed indoors, in private, by a fire that comes from the Lord and consumes them. In effect, they are consumed by the fire of their own religious enthusiasm. Their sin, if it is a sin, is before the Lord. The parallel of the Egyptian’s son specifically takes place in public, “in the camp” to which he has gone out. He is apprehended and brought to Moses by the people who hear him blaspheme and utter God’s holy name. He is then taken out of the camp and stoned to death by the entire community. He has committed a public sin and is executed by the public. The distinction between the inner way and the outer way, as illustrated by these incidents, is that the inner way is focused on the individual before God, while the outer way focuses on the community. This distinction is supported by one of the other parallels between the incidents.

In both cases, Moses delivers instruction. In the private matter of Aaron’s sons, Moses speaks to Aaron and his remaining sons in private about personal concerns: “And Moses said to Aaron and to his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, ’Do not bare your heads and do not rend your clothes, lest you die.’” These instructions come directly from Moses, without any divine intervention. The public crime engenders a totally different type of instruction. Moses consults with God, whose response has two parts. First, He instructs Moses about the immediate case: “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Take the blasphemer outside the camp; and let all who were within hearing lay their hands upon his head, and let the whole community stone him.” God then proceeds to deliver a series of laws that cover both capital offenses and torts: “And to the Israelite people speak thus: Anyone who blasphemes his God shall bear his guilt; if he also pronounces the name Lord, he shall be put to death. The whole community shall stone him; stranger or citizen, if he has thus pronounced the Name, he shall be put to death. If anyone kills any human being, he shall be put to death. One who kills a beast shall make restitution for it, etc.” All these laws are delivered to the whole community and are to be enforced by the community. The laws delivered in the outer- way narrative are part of a social and legal framework originating with God, while the laws delivered in the inner-way narrative are personal, applying only to Aaron’s family. How does this last point connect with our earlier distinction between the insider and the outsider and their blasphemy?

Both the inner way and the outer way carry dangers. The text exemplifies these dangers in the narratives of the insider and outsider, while at the same time defining the limits of normative behavior for each of them. The insider, the individual who dedicates his actions to drawing closer to the source of holiness, must take very seriously the negation of the self which is associated with spirituality. The holy is not a place for self-expression. When Moses instructs Aaron and his remaining sons regarding the proper mode of mourning, he indicates that they must avoid the signs of private loss. The instructions come directly from Moses, a family member, not from God, because they involve self-denial, which is appropriate for the inner-directed insider. The outsider finds himself in a state of friction with his surroundings. While the insider suffers a loss of self, the outsider suffers from an excess of self. He is overly iconoclastic, placing himself beyond the limits of the socially acceptable. Moses turns to God to instruct him how to deal with the outsider within the confines of socially regulated actions. In effect, since the outsider has removed himself from the fold, God must create the means for society to deal with him. At the same time, God directs Moses and the community as to how they should judge their fellows. The rule seems to be that socially destructive acts are to be dealt with by society.

The two narratives have enabled us to begin to explore the two directions of Leviticus. I have attempted to limit the discussion to the events as described in the Torah. The alternative would be to read the events as examples of universal principles. While I do think the Torah is dealing with more than the particulars of personal histories, I am wary of drifting off into speculative fantasies. In other words, I will try to determine what the text means without reading meaning into it. If I have succeeded in producing depth of meaning from the narratives while remaining close to their literal sense, it is because of the overview I have developed. The overview provides a system of checks and balances for interpretation by creating a broad context and placing each unit within that context. I would now like to bring another example of how the Torah forces us to compare and connect two separate blocks of text, Lev 18 and 20. Here we will see how the broader context of the inner and outer ways helps us solve a textual problem.

Two Faces of Desire

The obvious problem with Lev 18 and 20 is that Lev 19 falls between them. Chapter 18 lists forbidden sexual unions. Chapter 20 lists the punishments for the sins of chapter 18.  Chapter 19 does not appear to be connected in any way to the subject of forbidden relationships. Why has the Torah separated two chapters that fit together hand in glove? The similarity of Leviticus 18 and 20 is indeed one of the pieces of evidence that Leviticus is symmetrically organized around a central point, chapter 19. In terms of the inner and outer ways, that chapter is the turning point. Up to chapter 18 the text faces inward. From chapter 20 on, the text faces outward. Using the imagery of the High Priest on Yom Kippur, we could describe chapter 18 as the point where the High Priest takes his last step towards the Ark of Testimony. Chapter 20 would then be the point where he takes his first step away from the Ark in order to leave the Holy of Holies. This configuration leads us to some intriguing questions. What happens in the very middle, when he is no longer going in or out? Why is the very instant of revelation, at the source of holiness, clothed in references to unbridled sexuality? Is this the moment of mystical union?

The differing perspectives of chapters 18 and 20 support the speculation that chapter 19 is in some way meant to been seen as the moment of union. The prohibitions listed in chapter 18 are supposed to prevent the act from taking place. The punishments of chapter 20 are for the fait accompli. Between them, logically, falls the act itself. How does this startling analysis relate to the figure of the two ways? In the formal literary sense, Lev 19 is the union between the inner and outer ways. It does not belong to either one separately, but contains clear aspects of both. It is the goal of the inner way and the source of the outer way. Each of the separate ways contains nine individual units of text, without chapter 19. This “double-barreled” chapter completes both ways by simultaneously rounding each of them up to the number ten. In short, the last unit of the inner way is also the first unit of the outer way. This is the structural union that takes place in the central unit of Leviticus, the union of the inner and outer ways. There is also a conceptual union compatible with our earlier analysis of the insider and outsider narratives.

The inner way can be characterized as individually oriented, as opposed to the social orientation of the outer way. From the point of view of the High Priest, his inward journey takes him away from the crowd surrounding the Tabernacle to the point where he is alone with God. This intimacy with God is evidently being compared in some way to sexual intimacy. The explicit direction of the inner way is towards the source of holiness. Each step brings the High Priest closer to the holy. The inner sanctum is itself referred to as the Holy of Holies. The Hebrew word for holy is kadosh. As a verb, kadesh, sanctify, also means to marry, to join in holy union. The inner way leads to union with the holy. The very first verse of Lev 19 says: “You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy.” Man is invited to share God’s holiness. The ultimate inner experience is to become holy like God, to join God in a union of holiness. This is the ultimate goal of the inner way, a personal, intimate experience of the holy.

In Lev 18, at the last step before union in chapter 19, there appear the warnings against forbidden unions. The specific language used in the majority of the injunctions is in itself revealing: “lo tegaleh, do not reveal [the nakedness]”. This exact formulation is used no less than thirteen times in chapter 18. Most of these instances refer to close family relationships, which by their very nature are intimate and private. There is at least a figurative connection between the intimacy within the private chambers of the home and the intimacy within the Holy of Holies. The connection is tightened by the framework of chapter 18. It opens and closes with God revealing Himself: “I am the Lord your God.” The injunctions against revealing intimacies are found within the framework of God revealing His intimate relationship with Israel. The holy union with God which is to take place in Lev 19 demands that the individual renounce all impure unions. As indicated in the framing text, verses 1-5 and 24-30, the action of the individual who indulges in abhorrent sexual practices can affect the relationship between God and Israel and cause the land to spew the people out. At the culmination of the inner way, we see that the individual in the privacy of the inner chambers of his home has the same degree of responsibility for the welfare of the Jewish people as does the High Priest in the Holy of Holies. There is thus a direct link to the narrative of Aaron’s sons. We have noted that their indiscretion was an excessive spirituality, a burning desire to be intimate with the holy. Theirs was a forbidden intimacy, to enter the inner sanctum uninvited. The passion for intimacy burned them up within. The same passion is expressed in the untoward intimacies of chapter 18. Now we will look at the parallel stage in the outer way, chapter 20.

Whereas chapter 18 presents the passionate individual as a threat to the stability of the state, chapter 20 presents the remedy for the threat. “If a man commits adultery with a married woman, committing adultery with another man’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death. If a man lies with his father’s wife, it is the nakedness of his father that he has uncovered; the two shall be put to death; their bloodguilt is upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall be put to death; they have committed incest; their bloodguilt is upon them.” While the prohibitions are addressed to the potential transgressors, the remedy is addressed to the state. The responsibility of preventing forbidden relations and the subsequent degeneration of society resides with the individual. The obligation to punish the transgressor resides with society. The enforcement of capital punishment is also a theme of the narrative of the Egyptian’s son. This is the perspective of the outer way. We can think of it in terms of law, the way society regulates itself. Stylistically, the capital laws of chapter 20 are expressed as case law: “If a man does such and such, then…” This may appear to be simply a stylistic change from the injunctions of chapter 18, but the shift in emphasis indicates a one-hundred-eighty-degree shift in perspective. The laws of Lev 18 are addressed to individuals, while the laws of Lev 20 are addressed to a political body.

We have begun to explore a way of reading Leviticus as a consistent, superbly planned text. Its parts are all connected by way of a single image, the path of the High Priest on Yom Kippur. This path has three components, the inner way, union, and the outer way. The inner way can be characterized as a process of separation and sanctification that reaches its peak in the privacy of the Holy of Holies with some form of holy union. The holy union gives birth to a new impulse, and at the very point where the inner way is completed, the outer way begins. The High Priest, having completed his inward journey, now desires to rejoin his brothers as part of the community of priests and share with them the experience of the holy. The individual who follows the path of the inner way to its end achieves self-realization. At that very point, he faces a choice. He can either stay within and die to the world or make an about-face and rejoin the world. The rest of Leviticus details the way of joining the holy community.

The overview of the inner and outer ways allows the reader to integrate seemingly unrelated parts of Leviticus. It also implies that the text has a focus, a center which itself integrates the two ways. We have noted that the apparent theme of the core text which unites the two opposite sections is union, as evidenced by the laws of chapters 18 and 20. This analysis prepares us to see chapter 19 as the focus of Leviticus and the merger of the inner and outer ways.

Chapter Three

A Structural Analysis of Leviticus

Literary analysis of Leviticus indicates that it has twenty-two identifiable units, while our Bibles divide it into twenty-seven chapters. In most cases, these “literary units” are identical with the conventional “chapters,” but in some cases, a unit includes several chapters. In one case, a chapter is divided into two units. Since this book is a literary analysis of the structure of Leviticus, I will sometimes have to refer to the literary units of the text. When I quote or refer to a specific passage, I will use traditional chapter-and-verse notations. In order to make it possible to relate chapter references to units, and visa-versa, here is a simple table:

Table 2: Units and Chapters

Only six of the twenty-two units are not exactly one chapter in length. The first four units all include multiple chapters, while chapter twenty-two is divided between two units. I will explain the reasons for my divisions when I summarize each unit. For now, I will confine myself to the overall significance of the division into twenty-two units. My main argument for working with these units is that they reflect the “natural” division of the text. Without identifying the inherent divisions within the book, there is no way of speaking about its structure. Once the divisions are identified, it is possible to create an overview that reflects the author’s plan.

The plan of Leviticus

  All of the twenty-two units of Leviticus except one can be grouped together into triads, seven triads in all, plus the one singular unit. Here is a table that gives a structural overview of the whole book:

Table 3: Structural Outline of Leviticus

Once the units and triads have been identified, other relationships between parts of the text become apparent. One of the more important of these relationships is common to all of the triads. The middle unit of each triad is a conceptual middle. It can be read as a synthesis between the other two units of the triad. As a lemma to the principle of the conceptual middle, the first and third units of each triad can be read as opposites. Each triad then can be seen in the format of “thesis, antithesis, synthesis” with the synthesis in the middle between the thesis and the antithesis. For example, look at triad G, which consists of chapters 25-27 and units XX-XXII. All three chapter-units deal with different aspects of redemption. Chapter 25 details the laws of redemption connected to the jubilee year. The redemption of land, slaves and debts are civil acts. Their purpose is to ensure social stability, “You shall observe My laws and faithfully keep My rules, that you may live upon the land in security” (25:18). The antithesis of secular redemption appears in unit XXII, chapter 27. It details the redemption of sacrosanct objects which have been dedicated to God. The synthesis between the secular aspect of redemption in unit XX and the redemption of the sacred in XXII appears in the theme of the relationship between God and Israel in unit XXI. This relationship leads to national redemption, facilitated by God. Therefore we can identify triad G as a structural unit and, in a similar manner, each of the other six triads. Here is a preliminary summary of the subjects of the triads, as well as each of the units as part of a triad.

Table 4: Subjects of the Triads and Units

Once the triads have been identified, aspects of the larger plan of the book begin to appear. Six of the seven triads show a strong similarity in the relationship between their first and third units. In triads A, B and D, there is an apposition between holy or divine in the first unit and human or mundane in the third unit. The same apposition is found in triads E, F and G but reversed: the first unit is mundane or human as opposed to the holy/divine third unit. Triad C is a glaring exception. Its content, the impure, indicates that it may be necessary to remove it, just as the lepers are removed from the holy camp. If we ignore triad C for the moment, we are left with the following outline:

Table 5: The Pure Form of Leviticus

We now have two structurally identical blocks of nine units each which are reflections of each other. (Interestingly, each block has the same structure as the first nine plagues in Exodus, which are also three parallel triads.)  Between the two blocks stands a single unit, XIII, which appears to be a focus or pivot. We are clearly getting closer to the plan. All that remains is to find an overall theme that “fits” the structure as well as explaining the anomaly of triad C. There is a hint in the placement of Lev 19 at the focus. This chapter contains most of the elements of the Decalogue in fragmentary form. It could be a literary representation of the Ark containing the (shattered) stone tablets. That would place it in the “center”, within the Holy of Holies. Following this analogy, triads D and E would be the Holy of Holies, “containing” the Ark. Continuing outward in both directions, triads B and F would represent the outer chamber of the Tent of Meeting, the chamber containing the menorah, the table of the Show-Bread and the incense altar. At the extremes, A and G would be the outer area of the Tabernacle, the courtyard containing the altar upon which the sacrifices were offered. This analogy fits perfectly. The specific objects associated with each area of the Tabernacle are mentioned in the analogous section of the text.

There are still two points to clarify. What is the function of triad C, and why are the two large blocks reversed? A single extension of our analogy answers both questions. We are not looking at a “picture” of the Tabernacle, but rather at a recording of a trip through it. Triads A, B and D record the progress from the outside inward, while triads E, F and G retrace the journey from the inside out. The reversal of direction explains the reversal of the two large blocks: what was on the right going in is on the left going out. Now, for the coup de grace, we can explain triad C. Only the High Priest is allowed to enter the Holy of Holies, and even he only once a year and according to a specific ritual. Before entering the inner sanctum, he is required to fill both chambers with a cloud of smoke. Triad C is a literary smokescreen. Like smoke, it is both there and not there. In order to see the symmetrical structure built around the Ark, we have to ignore, or look through, the smoke screen. Leviticus is a literary conceit constructed according to the path of the High Priest on Yom Kippur. In the following table I have used a color gradient to illustrate the relationships between the units of the book.

Table 6: The Holy Path

[Chapter numbers in parentheses]

The Impure Who Must Leave the Holy Place
(Used as a smokescreen in the text to hide the Holy of Holies)

Now that we have established the overview, we can see how the parts fit into the whole. The format forces our attention on chapter 19, unit XIII, the focus of the book. Because of the obvious importance of this chapter, I have dedicated a large section of this book to analyzing it. For now I want to point out just one structurally-significant element of this unit. Each of the twenty-two units has a clearly identifiable structure. The most common format is like that of the two large divisions of Leviticus, three triads. The structure of Lev 19 is unique in two respects. First it differs in form from all the other units. Second, and more important, it is the only unit in which the author has made a clear effort to define its structural elements for the reader. While the internal division of the other units depends on the reader understanding the subject matter, assisted by a few linguistic hints, unit XIII is pre-divided by the author according to a fixed formula. Each element of this unit ends “I am the Lord” or “I am the Lord your God.” These phrases are simply punctuation marks, dividing the unit into its components. Clearly, it was important to the author that the readers properly identify the structure of unit XIII. Since I discuss this chapter at length elsewhere, I will just lay out its structure here. The fifteen elements of the unit arrange themselves thematically in seven pairs as follows.

Table 7: Structural Outline of Leviticus 19

 There are two large blocks of text separated by a single element, 9. The first block contains four pairs and the second block contains three pairs. If the pairs had been triplets, the structure of this central unit would be absolutely identical to the structure of the book as a whole. One additional factor makes it quite clear that the author did construct the core unit to reflect the structure of the whole. Each individual element in the second block of pairs (10-15) has a solid link to one of the elements in its column in the first block of pairs (1-8). One of the pairs in the first block, like the leper triad, has no connection to the second block. So we can conclude that the core unit, XIII, is the seed or DNA from which the whole of the book grows.

Now let’s see some of the more obvious ways in which the theory of “The Holy Path” explains the features of the Book of Leviticus. The discontinuity between chapters 18 and 20, which according to their content should be successive, is easily explained. Chapter 20 is in the same place on the way out as chapter 18 was on the way in. This same correlation can be seen between other pairs of units, based on the following chart. I will detail the parallels in a separate chapter. For now it should be sufficient to note a few examples. Units VI and XVII both speak of leaving the newborn for seven days. Units IV and XIX contain the only narratives in the book. Units II and XXI describe detailed retribution before God for sins.

Table 8: Paired Units

The 18 units in the nine pairs can also be seen as three pairs of triads (3X2X3).  This is an especially neat arrangement. It is based on the observation that the High Priest visits each triad twice, once on the way in and once on the way out. Moreover, each pair of triads (A and G, B and F, D and E) shares a conceptual realm associated with its relative position, e.g. A and G as the outside pair bring material from the public realm; D and E, the inner pair, from the private realm; and in the middle B and F.

Table 9: The Paired Triads Schematic