John Calvin Commentary Deuteronomy 26:14

"I have not eaten thereof in my mourning, neither have I put away thereof, being unclean, nor given thereof for the dead: I have hearkened to the voice of Jehovah my God; I have done according to all that thou hast commanded me." — Deuteronomy 26:14 (ASV)

I have not eaten of them in my mourning (tristitia). It is clear that the sacred offerings are spoken of here, but the question is what is meant by “eating in mourning.”

The exposition received by almost universal consent is this: although need may have tempted them to theft and fraud, the people assert that, even in their poverty and hardships, they have abstained from the hallowed things. I willingly agree with this view. However, the word “mourning” may also be understood as the anxiety of a mind conscious of its iniquity, in this sense: “I have not knowingly and willingly eaten anything consecrated to God, so that the hot iron (cauterium) of an evil conscience should burn me, in the way that a person’s guilt always torments and troubles them.”

Regarding the second clause, interpreters differ. Some translate the word בער bagnar,²²¹ “to destroy,” as if it meant that they had allowed nothing to perish through uncleanness. Others explain it as, “I have taken away nothing for a profane purpose.” However, my own opinion is that the word טמא, tama, is used adverbially for “impurely,” so that the people testify that they are not polluted or contaminated by withholding anything.²²²

Thus, in my view, some translate it quite well as “by uncleanness,” for it was not possible for the Israelites to apply the tithes to other uses without contracting pollution by their wicked misuse of them.

The ambiguity in the third clause is still greater. Literally, it is, “I have not given any of them to the dead.” In my version, I have followed those who refer it to funeral rites. However, some suppose that the word “dead” is used metaphorically for an unclean thing, while others, in a less natural sense, interpret it as expenses that do not contribute to supporting human life.

But it is not yet clear why it should be said that nothing had been spent on funeral rites. It is true that whatever had touched a dead body was unclean. Therefore, some explain it to mean that the sacrifices had not been defiled by any connection with funeral preparations. But if this sense is preferred, the expression must be taken by synecdoche for anything unclean.

However, my own opinion is that under this particular category, all things are included that have an appearance of piety. The burial of the dead was a praiseworthy duty and a religious exercise;²²³ so it might afford a plausible pretext for particular laxity. In this statement, therefore, God would have the Israelites declare that they offered no excuse if they had misused any of the consecrated things.

²²¹ בער, is to , is to consume, and especially as fire consumes. The verb is here in Pihel, in which conjugation it further signifies to and especially as fire consumes. The verb is here in Pihel, in which conjugation it further signifies to carry away, as rendered in as rendered in A.V. Our author gives the paraphrase of Aben Ezra, as quoted in . Our author gives the paraphrase of Aben Ezra, as quoted in S. M. — W. — W.

²²² “En rien appliquant a soy de ce qui appartenoit a Dieu:” by appropriating anything to themselves of what belonged to God. — :” by appropriating anything to themselves of what belonged to God. — Fr..

²²³ “Telle apparence pouvoit enhardir les gens a y employer les offertes deues a Dieu:” this pretext might embolden the people to employ upon it the offerings due to God. — :” this pretext might embolden the people to employ upon it the offerings due to God. — Fr..