Chapter Forty-Three

The Lord in His temple and His altar. 1–12. The return of the Lord to the temple. 13–17. The altar. 18–27. The ordinance for the consecration of the altar.

Ezekiel 43:1. Then he brought me to the gate facing east. The prophet with his heavenly guide is located since (Ezek 42:19) outside the space occupied by the temple, on the western (according to the Heb. text) or southern (according to the LXX) side of this space. From here he is led (“led” without subject, see explanation of Ezek 40:17) “to the gates,” about which at first is not said which ones, consequently, to the gates κατ εξοχην, the eastern ones, which however the prophet now and clarifies: “to those gates (repetition, as Ezek 42:12), which are facing east.” Through these gates, as the principal ones, God was to enter His temple.

Ezekiel 43:2. And behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the east, and His voice was like the sound of many waters, and the earth was bright with His glory. Now the most important moment of the present vision (hence “behold”—see explanation of Ezek 1:15): the “glory of the God of Israel,” which in the prophet Ezekiel is a synonym for God Himself (see explanation of Ezek 2:1), “came from the east,” whither it had departed in (Ezek 11:23). The place of the dwelling of paradise and the place of God’s first manifestation on earth, the east was the most natural starting point for the procession of God, “the Sun of Righteousness, to whom the name is East” (Maldonenus). The prophet does not at once indicate the form in which the Glory of God came now, but the two most important ways of its manifestation or procession in this case are common to chapter I. The procession of it made itself known simultaneously to hearing and sight, being perceived thus at once by all the chief senses of man, by his entire being. “His voice was like the sound of many waters”—from the series of corresponding comparisons (Ezek 1:24) the first is chosen, as the most characteristic (compare Rev 1:15). The LXX give an expansive periphrasis: “and the voice of the host (παρεμνολης, camp, an addition according to Gen 22:3; see explanation of Ezek 1:24), as the voice of those multiplying (διπλασιαζοντων) much” (any multitude, if doubled?). For vision the glory of God made itself known, naturally, by light, as in (Ezek 1:4); (compare 13), for “God dwells in inaccessible light” (1 Tim 6:16) and is the Father of lights. By this light of God’s glory the earth was now made bright, not such a small space as in (Ezek 10:4) the court of the temple, but in general the “earth,” plunged heretofore in deep darkness (Isa 60:1-2).

Ezekiel 43:3. This was the vision I saw when I came to destroy the city, and the visions were like the vision I saw by the River Kebar. And I fell upon my face. The present vision of the prophet was, so to speak, the common vision of his life, repeated more than once (the beginning of the verse literally “and as the vision, this vision, which I saw”; LXX do not have “as the vision”). Beyond the present occasion, the prophet had this vision at two other places and at two important moments (by reason of the most solemn reiteration: “exactly such as which I saw,” literally “as the vision (noun already the 3rd time in the verse), which I saw,”—the verb already the 2nd time). 1) “when I came (Heb.: “I”; but the Vulgate and Jerome “He”) to destroy (literally; “when I came to destroy, to kill—the prophet represents himself as himself destroying Jerusalem, as in (Ezek 22:18); (Jer 1:10)) the city”; 2) on the river Chebar; again reiteration “and visions” (plural because of the complexity of the vision; LXX: “and vision of the chariot, which I saw,” which indicates that before the prophet there now repeated the entire Chebar vision with cherubim, this wise chariot of Divinity, and the wheels, and not part of the vision, for instance, He Who Sat Upon the throne), like the visions (singular; 5th time in the verse a noun), which I saw” (3rd time verb). It is not mentioned that the same vision occurred in (Ezek 3:23), as it, being so soon after the first and representing an exact repetition of it, and having moreover only the purpose of final confirmation of the prophet in his decision to begin his ministry, was by essence identical with the Chebar one: it was a call to prophecy. The vision of chapters VIII-XI is called first, as more akin to the present one in meaning.—“And I fell upon my face”—see explanation of Ezek 2:1.

Ezekiel 43:4. And the glory of the Lord entered the temple by the way of the gate facing east. Ezekiel 43:5. And the Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court, and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple. “As soon as Ezekiel is within the domain of God’s glory, the agent which determines his actions, not his own will, but the supernatural ruach, Spirit” (Bertholet). The prophet is brought into the inner court so that he may be assured that the glory of God has returned to the temple and fills it, probably in a manner similar to (1 Sam 8:1) and following, (Exod 40:34) and following. For this same reason the prophet cannot be brought into the temple itself.

Ezekiel 43:6. And I heard someone speaking to me from the temple, while the man stood beside me. Now the prophet receives revelation. It is given to him not as the previous explanations, which were accompanied by the “man”—the Angel; when the “man” (it is remarkable that in the Heb. without the article: this may be, a sign of the prophet’s uncertainty, whether it is the same man who led him, or simply explained by the later writer’s freedom in the use of the article) stood beside the prophet, the latter hears “someone speaking” (in the Heb. one participle; LXX: “and I stood, and behold a voice from the temple speaking”) to him from the temple (literally “from the house,” the building of the sanctuary and Holy of Holies), that is, of course, from the Holy of Holies; deliberately, as in (Ezek 2:2), the speaker is not indicated. To hear this voice, incidentally, the prophet was brought into the inner court, as in (Ezek 44:4).

Ezekiel 43:7. And He said to me, “Son of man, this is the place of My throne and the place of the soles of My feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever; and the house of Israel shall no more defile My holy name, neither they, nor their kings, by their harlotry and by the corpses of their kings at their high places. From the “Speaker” the prophet receives revelation, which is the seed and essence of all this part of the book. The temple examined by the prophet and measured in his presence will be the place (in the Heb. accusative without governing verb; therefore the LXX: “Did you see the place?”) of God’s very throne, such a place as only heaven had been formerly. In it God will dwell directly (“the place for the soles of My feet”—an intensification of the expression: “the place of My throne”). This dwelling became possible because the “house of Israel shall no more defile the holy name” of God. This defilement was produced from two sides and was of two kinds. Besides the fact that, defiling God’s name, the whole people together (“they”), defiled it, in particular, the kings of Israel defiled it. The former did this by “harlotry” (usually in Ezekiel the designation of idolatry; compare chapters VIII, XVI, XXIII). The latter, not limiting themselves to this defilement (common to them with the people), so to speak, perpetual in life, extended it beyond the limits of earthly life, defiling the temple by the proximity to it of the corpses of their dead, which they ordered to be buried apparently in some place in immediate proximity to the temple. Already David and Solomon were buried not outside the city, but in the “city of David” (1 Sam 2:10), that city, on one of the hills of which the temple stood, namely in the south-west part of Zion (Nehem 3:16). Although the author of the book of Kings speaks of this without a hint of disapproval, this perhaps is because the concept of ceremonial defilement was not then so refined. The kings Manasseh and Amon, however, were apparently buried still closer to the temple, in some “garden of Uzza” (2 Sam 21:18). According to the opinion of the rabbis, in the prophet Ezekiel here precisely the speech is about the place of burial of Manasseh and Amon. The royal gardens were located in the lowland near Siloam, at the intersection of the valleys of Hinnom and Jehoshaphat. This was beside the temple itself. “On their high places,” Heb. bamotam, “their burial mounds”; if one reads bemotam, then “at their death” (Targum, Symmachus). LXX: “in the murders of their elders in their midst” (executions).

Ezekiel 43:8. They set their threshold by My threshold, and their doorposts beside My doorposts, with only a wall between Me and them, and they defiled My holy name by the abominations which they committed, wherefore I have consumed them in My anger. The kings were buried in such offensive proximity to the temple, because they lived—their palaces were (and the kings often were buried in the palaces) in so insulting a proximity to the temple that the thresholds and doorposts of the royal palace and temple immediately adjoined each other. It is remarkable that this proximity is not excused in the sight of God and the prophet by the fact that the royal palace was older than the temple, and consequently earlier occupied its place. “Here is not meant the proximity with the temple of the city, although the latter in the prophet is removed from the new temple to 1/3 of a mile: (Ezek 45:1) and following (Smend). This proximity would not have been so offensive if the palace adjacent to the temple had not been defiled by “abominations” (Slavic “in iniquities”) of various kinds, but chiefly by idolatry. For the latter in particular God “consumed them”—Israel and its kings “in My anger,” called forth by the abominations and the proximity of them to the temple.

Ezekiel 43:9. Now let them remove their harlotry and the corpses of their kings from Me, and I will dwell in their midst forever. God repeats, as a sign of immutability, His promise that Israel will remove from Him both its abominations and even the tombs of its kings (“corpses” the LXX: “the murders of their elders”), which will make the dwelling of God among Israel eternal.

Ezekiel 43:10. You, son of man, describe the temple to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities, and let them measure the plan. The vision of the temple, even more mysterious than the vision of chapter I, must not, however, remain a personal revelation to the prophet. The latter is to make it public. Upon the house of Israel this revelation should produce a shattering effect: “let them be ashamed (Rus. “so that they be ashamed,” LXX: “and let them depart from sins”; Vulgate et confundatur) of their iniquities, and let them measure the plan” (Rus.: “so that they measure,” Vulgate metiantur fabricam): LXX † “and his vision and his arrangement”: two actions, evidently closely related to each other. The Hebrews will then be ashamed of iniquities when they measure the temple as the angel has measured it before the prophet. To measure in this case means to understand the plan of this mysterious building. When will the house of Israel show itself capable of such understanding is not said.”

Ezekiel 43:11. And if they are ashamed of all that they have done, show them the design of the temple and its arrangement, its exits and entrances and all its designs and all its statutes and all its laws; and write it down in their sight, so that they may keep the whole design and all its statutes and carry them out. The mentioned action and its condition: shame for behavior and measurement of the temple—have also a reverse order: to understand the arrangement of the temple, and especially to carry it out, will be possible for Israel only “if they are ashamed (LXX: “and they will accept punishment”; instead of “him,” if, read gem, they, evidently disturbed by the reverse in comparison with verse 10 of the order of condition and consequence; so also the Vulgate: et erubescant) of all that they did” (not only that indicated in verse 8, but all the evil). Under this condition, the prophet can only acquaint the people with the mysterious temple: without this condition, its vision, though recorded and read by the people, will have no meaning for them, will be a riddle and strange, as it appears to many to this day. Under this same condition, all in the described temple will be understood by the people, perhaps shown to it (“show,” yada, make known). Then in detail it is indicated what in the mysterious temple should be shown the people and understood (yada) by them: 1) “the design of the temple,” tzurat bayt. Tzura in the present enumeration named 4 times (Rus. transmits by words: “design,” “outline,” “image,” “outline”) and not used elsewhere, if we do not consider it identical with tzur (Ps 58:18), transmitted by Rus. “power,” Slavic “help” and having a kethiv (variant) tzir according to (Isa 45:16) “idol,” that is, image; on this basis the present word is also assigned the latter meaning. The LXX consider it a verb, reading probably tzarta, “and you shall paint the temple.” Apparently, may be meant the external appearance (Vulgate. figuram) of the temple in distinction from its internal plan, denoted by; 2) “its arrangement,” Heb. tekunato, LXX: “and its preparation,” ετοιμασιαν, which the Vat. and others do not have. Vulgate. fabricae (definition for the preceding). Parallel with the general appearance and plan of the temple there must be shown (and were previously described), that is, with special detail, the most important particulars in the temple, such are: 3) “its exits” and 4) “its entrances,” because they determine for the temple the most careful protection from any defilement, that is, from the approach to it not only of all sinful, but also of the mundane; therefore, the entire description of the temple was, in essence, the description of these exits and entrances, meaning by them not only the gates, but also the portico, the chambers for the priests, and the rear building of the temple. 5) “All its outlines” is the same tzura as under № 1; incomprehensible repetition in the plural; LXX: “and its being”; Vulgate.: “descriptionem”. 6) “And all its statutes,” Heb. hukkotav, LXX: “commands,” praecepta, ordinances, which should be performed in the temple, not yet described, the description of which will be now and in the following chapters. 7) “And all its images,” again tzurato, already omitted by the LXX, Vulgate. ordinem, in view of which also for its similarity to the following word “torotav,” its laws, it is considered an insertion by a copyist (De Lagarde noted that when a copyist could not read the first letter of a word, he placed beside it two possible readings); 8) “All its laws,” so also in Slavic, Vulgate leges, laws, perhaps those concerning sacred persons and their behavior in the temple, and laid out in chapter XLIV, or perhaps all the important laws of the temple, contained in all the present section of the book, including chapters XLV-XLVIII. All this the prophet must not only announce (yada) to the people, but also “write it down before their eyes,” in view of the special importance of the revelation, for firm keeping of it, and because it is appointed not so much for contemporaries as for future generations. But not to know and penetrate only with the mind must Israel into all this most mysterious revelation: it must “keep” and “do” (literally “make,” Vulgate. faciant) these “outlines” (again tzurato) and “laws” of the temple; from the eight points enumerated, one main from each of two classes of them is named: the structure of the temple and the cult in it. How Israel can keep these “outlines,” and especially “perform” them (the “laws” of the temple, described in chapters XLIV-XLVIII, cannot literally be carried out), is not explained by the prophet, of course because it could not then be explained, any more than now. To warn the reader from the literal understanding of the prophet’s expression that Israel should after captivity literally carry out in Palestine the prophet’s designs, the LXX changed here the pronoun “his” (of the temple) to “Mine” (in Heb. the pronominal suffixes “i” and “o” are very similar): “and they shall furnish all My righteousness and all My commandments, and shall do them.”

Ezekiel 43:12. This is the law of the temple: all its territory round about on the top of the mountain shall be most holy. Behold, this is the law of the temple. After mention of the “laws” of the temple, the most important of these laws is named, on which all the rest “hang” (LXX: “and the description of the temple,” reading tor instead of gora, but at the end of the verse: “this is the law of the temple”): this is the greatest holiness—the “holy of holies”—not only of the temple, but of the whole space of the mountain round about the temple (see explanation of Ezek 40:2; compare Ezek 42:20). Divinity should not be mixed with anything created and mundane; and not only it, but also all connected with it and partaking of it (compare the Orthodox understanding of the holiness of holy things, imparted to them only from God, in opposition to pagan demigods and the modern idea of some kind of ecclesiastical deification, at variance with the deification of the one Son of God alone).

Ezekiel 43:13. These were the measurements of the altar by cubits (the cubit being a cubit and a handbreadth): its base was one cubit high and one cubit wide, and its border around its edge one span; and this was the height of the altar; The prophet has already described the temple. Now he can proceed to depict the cult performed in this mysterious temple. A transition to this second part of the present vision is the description of the altar. “The altar” (Slavic “furnace”), about which until now only brief mention was made at its place (Ezek 40:47), is the most essential part of the temple for the people, inasmuch as through it it mediates the people’s communion with God, raises the people’s sacrifices to God and brings down God’s grace upon the people. Therefore, it deserved no less careful, than anything in the temple, a measurement (description), and this measurement is most suitably placed here as a transition to the description of the cult. In that this measurement of the altar is given separately from the description of the whole temple, the altar is placed on the same level as the whole temple, appears as something independent and self-valuable beside it, which it was in antiquity, often taking the place of the temple.—In view of the importance of the measurement, it is repeated before it the definition of the unit of measurement given in (Ezek 40:5): “and behold, the measurements of the altar by cubits, the cubit being a cubit and a handbreadth,” literally: “in cubits; a cubit: a cubit and a handbreadth”; LXX concisely: “in a cubit, a cubit and a palm.” The measurement of the altar begins with its hek,—a term of unknown, even to the ancients, meaning. The LXX render it here κολπωμα, “bosom,” in verse 14 κοιλωμα, “hollow,” in verse 17 κϋκλωμα, “enclosure,” consequently, assign it, as in the Vulgate. sinus, the meaning of some kind of depression on the altar or at the altar, into which, evidently, the blood had to flow (so that it would not wet the clothes of the priests, and from it through underground pipes into the Kidron. Haneb. Älth. 1869, 5. 303. Smend). But the Targum assigns to the word the meaning of foundation, base of the altar (so also Rus.: “base”), and Kraetzschmar unites these meanings so that the channel for blood flow was made in the foundation of the altar. As to the measure of the hek, it is given in two directions, but the first is not named, and simply said: “hek of a cubit”; whether the hek was a channel for blood flow or a foundation, the expression is equally clear: in the first case, it could mean only depth (a big one!), and in the second case—height, because further width is indicated. This width also was a cubit. The LXX supplement the Hebrew text; “bosom of depth, a cubit (not in Gk.) of a cubit and a cubit in width,” that is, the channel was 1 cubit in depth and 1 cubit in width. See the diagram abcd. After the channel (or: foundation) the measure of gevul, Rus. “border,” is indicated, LXX γεισος, “ledge,” Vulgate. definitio, that is, a border. This border, belonging, as shown by its feminine gender (omitted in the LXX and Rus. trans.) to the hek, not the altar (which in Heb. is masculine), went around its edges (literally “to its lips,” LXX “its opening,” Vulgate. ad labium ejus, which speaks for the first meaning of hek), evidently restraining the blood from spilling from the hek and directing it along it. See diagram bc. Its measure (not indicated in which direction; rather in height than in width) was “a span,” Heb. zeret, also in (Exod 28:16); (1 Sam 17:4); (Isa 40:12), a word probably of Egyptian origin (dzrt—hand),—but verse 17—1/2 cubit. And “behold, the gab of the altar” the prophet concludes this description; if to attribute to the word gab its usual meaning, back, “rear side” (Rus. trans.), the expression will be incomprehensible; therefore Vulgate. fossa (ditch around the altar), while the LXX, reading govag and translating: “and thus the height of the furnace,” relate the expression to the following verse. Perhaps by the time of Ezekiel gab had acquired a different meaning, for instance, a plinth, foundation, or projection (here perhaps a lower one?).

Ezekiel 43:14. From the base on the ground up to the lower ledge shall be two cubits, with a width of one cubit; and from the smaller ledge to the larger ledge shall be four cubits, with a width of one cubit. The altar was constructed in steps, and the described hek (abcd-qpo), foundation or channel of it, was its first step. Each of the next 2 steps was the same width (that is, it also projected one cubit bd, ef, gh), but twice the height of the previous one: the hek was 1 cubit high (a, b), the second step is 2 cubits (de), and the third is 4 cubits (fg). This is expressed in the prophet, as is all in this mysterious vision, with some singularity. “From the base, which is in the earth,” literally: “from hek of the earth,” that is, from the lower hek (perhaps in distinction from the hek of verse 17; LXX freely “from the depth (?, that is, the beginning of the hollow”) “to the lower ledge,” that is, evidently, up to the place where the lower, 2nd step of the altar begins—“two cubits, with a width (consequently, height was indicated) of it (the lower step) of one cubit” (ef). The Heb. azara, translated here according to context and according to the Vulgate. (crepido—cliff) as “ledge,” in (2 Chr 4:9), as in the Mishnah and Targum, means the court of the temple; from Assyr. ezeru, to bound, ezurtu, boundary, it can mean casing, facing, frame (also verses 17, 20; (Ezek 45:19). From the “azara small,” the prophet continues his description of the mysterious altar, calling the same step (“lower”) small because of its twice smaller height in comparison to the following, up to azara great (Rus.: “from the smaller ledge to the larger ledge 4 cubits (fg) with width (consequently, height was indicated) of it one cubit” (gh). The idea of these ledges could be that they protected the holiness of the sacrifice from the approach of all unclean, chiefly from the body of the priest. It is not without thought that to them is given the same name as to the courts of the temple, which protect it from the same. Characteristic is the naming of these ledges also in the LXX: expiation, ιλαστηριον: as the cover of the ark they were not only sprinkled, but continuously watered and washed with the blood of sacrificial animals.

Ezekiel 43:15. The altar proper, the hearth, shall be four cubits high; and from the altar hearth shall ascend four horns. Upon the described second part of the altar rested the third, upper and most sacred part of it, the altar in the proper sense. To this part is assigned the name breathing with sacred antiquity, garyeal, literally “mountain of God,” according to the keri and further description, ariel (LXX and here “Ariil”), “hearth of God” (compare Isa 29:1-2) and the inscription of Mesha: “I took from Ataroth the ariel of David”; it can also mean “lion of God”; if “l” is a flexion, then simply “hearth”; perhaps gareEl is a folk corruption of ariel). This most sacred part of the altar was of the same height as the second part—4 cubits (hi). Like the altar of the tabernacle and temple, the present altar, more precisely its gareEl or ariel, had 4 horns, symbols of strength and abundance. To them, perhaps, were bound the animals offered in sacrifice. Such horns had themselves Egyptian altars (Trochon), consequently, this was a natural symbol in the altar. The LXX read instead of arba, four, ama, cubit: the horns of 1 cubit, in which case the number of horns is not indicated as self-evident.

Ezekiel 43:16. The altar hearth shall be twelve cubits long and twelve cubits wide, square on its four sides. Now, having indicated the height of the three component parts of the altar, the area, length, and width are indicated, and this measurement is given, naturally, in reverse order, from the upper side, with which the measurement of height ended, to the lower. The upper part of the altar, its ariél (Slavonic «ariil», Russian «altar»; not gareel as in verse 15, see explanation), represented a square, which was always considered perfect on account of its regularity (Rev 21:16), 12 cubits (“cubits” are not named in the Hebrew text as self-evident: the LXX has them) in length and width (il). Literally from the Hebrew: “12 length, 12 width, quadrangular on 4 sides,” – a descriptive expression of the concept of a square; 12 is a symbolic number. Moses’ altar was 5 × 5 (Exod 27:1).

Ezekiel 43:17. And on the base platform fourteen cubits in length and fourteen in width on all four sides of it, and around it a border of half a cubit, and its foundation a cubit around, and steps to it on the east. From the earlier proportions (verse 13, 14) it follows that the “base platform,” Hebrew azara, LXX “cleansing place,” namely the upper of the 2 azara (see explanation of verse 14) will be 2 cubits wider than the altar proper, the ariél, that is, a square (“on all four sides of it” see explanation of verse 16) of 14 × 14 cubits (“cubits” again are not named). Although this follows from the measurements of verse 14, the prophet, precise in his description, says this still about the upper “platform” (azara), but does not speak about the lower (en 16 l.), still more because the lower foundation of the altar, on account of its small height, was not so visible. Instead the prophet, by repeating the measure for the very lowest foundation (hek) Slavonic “border” and the border (gevul), Slavonic “enclosure” (see explanation of these terms in verse 13), returns at the end of his description to its beginning. The width of the altar at its lowest foundation (12 c., ariél + 2 cubits of upper projections + 2 cubits of lower projections + 2 c. heks) – 18 c. stands in relation 3 to its height, (1 c. hek + 2 c. 1 azara + 4 c. 2nd + 4 c. ariél + 1 c. horns according to LXX) 12 cubits, a relationship beloved by Ezekiel (Ezek 41:22). Prof. Muretov finds that Ezekiel’s altar “not only by its terrace-like construction and threefold number of steps, but even by the ratio of the heights of steps to each other and to the overall height of the altar, presents mathematically precise correspondence with the proportions between the heights of different parts of Solomon’s temple, – thus: the foundation or plinth of the temple comprises 1/6 of the overall height of the building (60:10); likewise the lower or foundational step of the altar relates to the overall height of the altar as 2 to 12 or 1/6” (Old Chr. 367). In the opinion of Prof. Olesnitsky, Ezekiel’s altar served as a model for the post-captivity altar, which in comparison with it was merely doubled in scale: according to Midd. III, 1 it had at its foundation 32 square cubits, and the upper board 24 square; the 1st step, called yesod, was 1 cubit from the pavement, and the 2nd step, sobek, 5 cubits from this (Old Chr 483). – The verse concludes with indication of steps to the altar, which apparently is presupposed on a slope; the steps, the number of which is not indicated, led to the altar from the eastern, front side. In the altar of the tabernacle, standing on level ground, contrary steps were forbidden: Exod 20:26. And in general the appearance of the altar deviates both from Exod 27:1-8 and from 2 Chr 4:1, thereby signifying its newness pertaining to the new covenant.

Ezekiel 43:18. And he said to me, son of man! Thus says the Lord God: behold, the ordinances of the altar, for the day when it shall be made, for offering upon it whole burnt offerings and for sprinkling upon it blood. In the altar, this central part of the temple, the instrument of God’s sanctification to the people, as are its dimensions, the manner of its sanctification is important. Since concerning the sanctification of the mystical temple the prophet speaks nothing, and the sanctification of the altar is described in detail, then the latter, obviously, takes the place of the former, is equivalent to it. The ordinance of sanctification of the altar, called by the prophet “ordinances of the altar” (Slavonic “precepts of the ritual”), because only by sanctifying the altar does it deserve its name, is proclaimed to the prophet (“he said”), by whom is not indicated (as in verse 6, see explanation) – with the warning 1) that this is God’s word (solemn formula “Thus says the Lord God,” – there is not even one in verse 7; and in the present section it is for the first time); 2) that this ordinance is subject to fulfillment “on the day” (tame, and LXX precisely from the Hebrew: Russian “on the day”), when the altar “shall be made,” and it will be made, certainly, not before the mystical temple exists, unless it also arises after the temple itself; 3) that the purpose of the altar: a) the offering upon it of whole burnt offerings, that is, the burning upon it completely of this holiest sacrifice and others, which are understood under its name as the principal, b) the sprinkling (Slavonic “to be poured”) upon it with blood, that is, the pouring of blood upon it, – the second component part of every sacrifice, which in certain kinds replaced the burning of them on the altar.

Ezekiel 43:19. To the priests of the tribe of Levi, those of the line of Zadok, who draw near to Me, to minister to Me, says the Lord God, give a young bull of the herd for a sin offering. The sanctification of the altar, as an inanimate thing, or what is the same – its cleansing from all defilement, must be reduced, or at least begun, with the cleansing of its servants. Therefore its sanctification begins with the offering of a sin offering (see explanation of Ezek 42:13) of the priests. But the new priesthood, remarks the prophet here, is not entirely identical with the ancient one; its scope has changed (as if to increase its sanctity): it is composed not of the whole posterity of Aaron, but only of the line of Zadok, owing to the apostasy of other branches (see explanation of Ezek 40:46). A sin offering, different for different classes of society, for priests is appointed the largest, most honorable and consequently holiest – a young bull (Lev 8:14; Exod 29:1; cf. also Ezek 1:7).

Ezekiel 43:20. And take of its blood and put it on the four horns of it and on the four corners of the base, and on the border all around, and so cleanse it and consecrate it. The sanctification of the altar itself must consist in sprinkling sacrificial blood on all the most prominent parts of it; not only a) on the horns, which were sprinkled with blood also according to Mosaic legislation (Exod 29:12), but also b) on the corners, that is, also a kind of horns, of the platform, azara, the word translated in verse 14 (see explanation) as projection (here all of them are designated collectively) and c) on the border, gevul (see explanation of verse 13). The blood of sprinkling signifies, according to Jerome, “the blood of the Savior; that four horns of the altar are sprinkled, this signifies four parts of the world; that the border of the cleansing place, or the foundation all around, is sprinkled, this signifies the cleansing of all and that this cleansing is firm.” By such sprinkling the altar will not only be cleansed (is there not in view, Smend thinks, a prescription Exod 20:25, violated in the construction of the present altar?), but also sanctified. The rites of sanctification God commands the prophet to perform, which cannot be understood in the direct sense in which it was once commanded to Moses, but in the sense of prophecy: 2nd person singular instead of 3rd person plural, which is why the LXX almost everywhere put 3rd person plural: “will take,” “will lay.” And so further.

Ezekiel 43:21. And take the bull for a sin offering, and burn it in a prescribed place of the house, outside the sanctuary. According to Mosaic law, the sin offering, as carrier of uncleanness, was burned outside the camp. This present mystical sacrifice also must be burned outside the sanctuary: but on the other hand, it should be, as more sacred than the Mosaic, not entirely outside the temple, but in a special place of it (“House”), called by the prophet miphkad, a word which at Nehem 3:31 designates one of the eastern gates of the city, having consequently a close relationship to the temple or direct connection with it, and indeed with the western, rear part of the temple, where according to Ezekiel there was a special building of less noble and sacred purpose and gizra; although this does not provide grounds for identifying miphkad with this latter place of the temple and still less with the priestly kitchens Ezek 46:19-20 (Ewald). About this place one can with certainty say only that it lay not outside the temple area Ezek 45:2 call it “in the separated (αποκεχωρισμενω) temple” (read miphrad, instead of miphkad), apparently assuming a special building. The place thus served a half-sacred, half-unclean purpose (a subtlety of the prophet’s distinction between sacred and unsacred). According to Mosaic law, not all the sin offering was burned outside the camp: on the altar the fat and blood of it were burned. So it should be with Ezekiel’s sacrifice, concerning which it is not mentioned, perhaps, only as self-evident. Or perhaps there is here a difference from Moses: only the purest part of the sacrifice – blood (and that not all, but only what is necessary for sprinkling) – is worthy to be offered to God through sprinkling from the sacrifice that had taken sin upon itself.

Ezekiel 43:22. On the second day, bring for a sin offering from the goat herd a male goat without blemish, and they shall cleanse the altar as they cleansed it with the bull. By the sin offering – the bull and its blood sprinkled on the altar – the latter is not yet fully cleansed; only the beginning of its cleansing is made, for the completion of which a symbolically complete number of 7 days is required. But in the remaining 6 days (cf. verse 25) no longer such a large sacrifice as a bull is required for the altar’s cleansing. The bull is replaced by a goat from the goats (according to Rosenmüller, a tender expression, as in Zech 9:9; perhaps indicating youth: young, a sucker, Russian: “from the goat herd a goat”, LXX: “two”, probably by analogy with the day of cleansing). This sacrifice must be brought with the same rites directed to cleansing the altar, with which the bull was brought on the first day of the altar’s sanctification, that is, with the sprinkling of the sacrifice’s blood on the prominence of the altar and its burning in a special place. Such a sin offering was brought daily at the great feasts: Ezek 45:23. According to Mosaic law, for the sanctification of the tabernacle a ram – a less large sacrificial animal than a goat – was brought daily.

Ezekiel 43:23. When you have finished cleansing it, you shall bring from the herd a young bull without blemish and from the flock a ram without blemish; When the altar shall be cleansed by the sin offering, not on the seventh day, when this cleansing shall be entirely completed, but, as verse 25 shows, on the first day of cleansing, after the first purifying sacrifice on it, it becomes fit for the holiest sacrifice, the sacrifice par excellence, the sacrifice of sacrifices, whole burnt offering. This sacrifice, by its very greatest holiness and completes alongside the daily sin offering the daily cleansing of the altar. It must consist of unblemished (the word, twice as a sign of the special importance of the requirement) young bull and ram; each is morally more perfect than a goat. “From the herd” – see explanation in verse 22.

Ezekiel 43:24. And offer them before the Lord; and the priests shall throw salt on them and offer them as a whole burnt offering to the Lord. This will be the first true sacrifice to the Lord (“offer them before the Lord”) on the new altar, a whole burnt offering. It must be salted (only in a ritual sense: by casting salt upon it) by the priests (for the first time they appear as agents in this cult). According to Mosaic law, salting was required only for the bloodless sacrifice (Lev 2:13), but practice extended it to all sacrifices: Mark 9:49, and Josephus Ant. 3:9, 1. The high symbolism of salting a sacrifice is evident already from the designation of salt in the Old Testament as “salt of the covenant” (Num 18:19; 2 Chr 13:5). “Originally each sacrifice was a common feast of the worshiper with his god, and received such preparation in which men ate it; and salt even now in the east symbolizes hospitality” (Bertholet).

Ezekiel 43:25. Seven days you shall present a sin offering day by day; also they shall present a whole burnt offering – a young bull from the herd and a ram from the flock, both without blemish. The sacrifice is to be brought for 7 days, a symbolic number of fullness and holiness, adopted in the Old Testament law for all sacred periods lasting longer than one day. During these days both a sin offering, consisting of a goat (more precisely: a bull for the first day, and a goat for the following 6 days; here for brevity, a generalization), and the true “sacrifice,” that is, a whole burnt offering – a bull and a ram – are to be brought on the cleansed and sanctified altar.

Ezekiel 43:26. Seven days they shall make atonement for the altar and purify it, thus consecrating it and filling the hands of the priests. In all the rites enumerated, filling the 7 days, shall consist a) the cleansing of the mystical altar from all that is created and unclean in it, b) its sanctification for divine purpose; both one and the other appear for it c) as a kind of filling of its hands (according to ketiv yadav, his hands; according to keri – yado, his hand; according to LXX yadayim, their hands, i.e. the hands of the priests) similar to that filling of the hands of the priests being consecrated with sacrificial meat, which was the concluding rite of their consecration (Exod 29:9; Lev 8:33). It is remarkable that concerning the consecration of priests for their service nothing is said here (unless one counts the indication of this in the last word of the verse in the LXX reading). And neither is there mention of anointing the altar and temple with oil. Thus, the rites of sanctification of the new temple differ from the Mosaic not only in the kind and quantity of sacrifices of sanctification (see explanation of verse 20 and following), but also in the very character and essence of sanctification, distinguished by greater simplicity and so to speak objectivity.

Ezekiel 43:27. And when these days are finished, on the eighth day and beyond, the priests shall offer your whole burnt offerings and your peace offerings upon the altar; and I will accept you, says the Lord God. From the eighth day onward, on the new altar sacrifices will commence in the usual order – two main kinds: whole burnt offering and peace offering, LXX: “of salvation,” in other places: “of peace,” – differing in the quantity of what is burned: in the first case everything was burned, in the second fat and blood. These sacrifices, in contrast to the old ones on the old altar, will be accepted (LXX, Russian version even stronger “I will be merciful to you”; Hebrew terminus technicus ratzah should probably better be translated by LXX) by God, in which He assures solemnly with His word as God.