Charles Ellicott Commentary Leviticus 11

And the Lord spake unto Moses and to Aaron. — So that the rebuke which Moses publicly administered to the priests would not diminish their influence with the people, whom they had to teach the laws of clean and unclean things laid down in the following chapters, the Lord here honors Aaron, as well as Moses, by making this communication to them jointly. Besides, Aaron as minister was as much concerned with these laws as Moses the legislator. Therefore, when a question of defilement later had to be decided, it was brought for judgment before Moses and Aaron jointly .

These are the beasts which you shall eat among all ... — Better, These are the animals which you may eat of all ... . The dietary laws, which stand first in the general precepts about clean and unclean things, begin with the quadrupeds, or land animals, both domesticated and wild.

This is in accordance with the Hebrew division of the animal kingdom into four principal classes:

1. The land animals
2. The water animals
3. The birds of the air
4. The swarming animals

Although not specified here by name, the parallel regulations in Deuteronomy 14:4-5 enumerate the following ten animals: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the hart, the roebuck, the fallow deer, the wild goat, the pygang, the wild ox, and the chamois, with their various kindred species, which are not mentioned.

From the expression, “These are the animals,” the opinion arose during the Second Temple period that God actually caused specimens of every animal to pass before Moses and Aaron, in order to show them the actual creatures which are clean and unclean, just as the Lord caused every species to come to Noah into the ark.

Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted. —Better, Whatsoever is clovenfooted, and entirely separates the hoofs. The first rule laid down by which the clean quadruped is to be distinguished is that the hoofs must be completely cloven or divided above as well as below, or, as the parallel passage in Deuteronomy 14:6 has it, and cleaveth the cleft into two claws. Such is the case in the foot of the ox, the sheep, and the goat, where the hoof is wholly divided below as much as above. The foot of the dog, the cat, and the lion, though exhibiting a division into several distinct toes or claws, is contrary to the regulation here laid down, since the division is simply on the upper side, the lower side being united by a membrane, and hence the hoof is not “entirely separated.”

And cheweth the cud. —In addition to the foot being perfectly cloven, the quadruped, to be clean, must be ruminating. The canon that prevailed during the Second Temple is thus formulated: “Every quadruped which has no upper teeth is known to be ruminant, and when it is also clovenfooted is clean.” According to the law of Manu, the highest Hindu castes were also forbidden to eat the flesh or drink the milk of quadrupeds with uncloven hoofs. The same was the case with the Egyptian priests: they abstained from eating the flesh of any animal which had uncloven hoofs or many claws.

Nevertheless these shall ye not eat. —As there are some quadrupeds which comply with only one of the two above-named conditions— i.e., which ruminate but do not have their hooves perfectly parted in two, or, vice versa, are cloven-hoofed and not ruminant—it is declared here that such animals must not be eaten.

As the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not ... — Better, though he cheweth the cud, yet he divideth not, as the same phrase is properly rendered in the Authorized Version in Leviticus 11:7. The first animal cited to illustrate this fact is the indispensable camel, or “the ship of the desert,” as it is aptly called. Though cloven-footed above, the toes of the camel are united below in a large elastic pad on which the camel treads, and which is like the sole of a shoe. Hence it does not come within the category of those animals which are thoroughly cloven-hoofed. The Egyptians, the Zebii, and the Hindus, too, did not eat camel’s flesh, because they supposed it to be heating, and to produce cruelty and revenge; while the Persians, the ancient Arabians, and the Moslems feasted upon its milk and flesh.

And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not ... — Better, though he cheweth the cud, yet he divideth not. (See Leviticus 11:4.) The coney, which is the old English name for rabbit, is the meaning of the Hebrew expression shaphan, according to the definition of those who had to explain and administer this law at the time of Christ. As these interpreters lived in Palestine, where they saw the animals in question, the objection that the rabbit is not indigenous in Palestine falls to the ground.

These shrewd Administrators of the law must also have noticed that it was the habit of the feeble conies to seek refuge and build in the fissures of the rocks, which often are on a level with the ground. The rabbit, moreover, well suits the hare, by which it is immediately followed. Modern expositors, however, identify it with the Syrian hyrax, or rock-badger, which is about the size of a well-grown rabbit. It resembles the guinea-pig or the Alpine marmot, has long hair of a brownish grey or brownish-yellow colour on the back, but white on the belly, a very short tail, and short round ears. The action of its jaws when it is at rest resembles that of the ruminants.