Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in The Holin PDF

JBL 138, no.
4 (2019): 721–740
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1384.2019.2
Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in the

Holiness Legislation: A Reassessment
julia rhyder
julia.rhyder@unibas.ch
Universität Basel, Switzerland
This article examines the innovative focus on Sabbath observance that character-
izes the Holiness legislation (H). By comparing H’s conception of the Sabbath
with what is known about this sacred time from other biblical and extrabiblical
sources, I demonstrate that H creatively blends two aspects of the Sabbath that
were not always connected: (1) the idea, already present in the Decalogue and
Gen 2:2–3, that the Sabbath is a time of cessation held every seventh day; and
(2) the more traditional associations of the Sabbath with sacrificial rites at
the shrine. I conclude by assessing the implications of H’s dual requirements of
Sabbath observance—that is, both the cessation of labor and the accompanying
sanctuary rituals—for contextualizing the H materials in the history of ancient
Israel. I suggest that the prominence of the Sabbath in Lev 17–26 may not reflect
H’s origins in the “templeless” situation of the Babylonian exile, as is often argued.
H’s distinctive concept of the Sabbath may rather reflect a Persian-period con-
text, when collective obligations to the cult were renegotiated to ensure the suc-
cess of the Second Temple.
One of the striking features of the Holiness legislation (H), as found in Lev
17–26, is its emphasis on the Sabbath (‫)שבת‬. In these chapters, Sabbath observance
is positioned as an essential precondition of the Israelites’ sanctification via law
observance. It is mentioned, in 19:3, along with revering (‫ ירא‬qal) parents as the
first instruction after the command in 19:2, ‫קדשים תהיו כי קדוש אני יהוה אלהיכם‬,
“you shall be holy, for I, YHWH your god, am holy.”1 It is then repeated, in 19:30,
in the dual command ‫את שבתתי תשמרו ומקדשי תיראו אני יהוה‬, “you shall keep
my Sabbaths and revere my sanctuary: I am YHWH!” The importance of this
A version of this article was presented at the graduate student meeting of the departments
of Hebrew Bible of the universities of Basel, Göttingen, and Lausanne held in Basel in May 2018.
I received many valuable comments at that meeting, which were of great benefit to my overall
argument. I wish also to thank the anonymous reviewers at JBL, whose comments enabled me to
significantly improve the manuscript for publication.
1 Unless otherwise stated, all translations of the biblical text are my own.
721
This article was published in JBL 138/4 (2019) 721–740, copyright © 2019 by the Society of Biblical Literature. To purchase
copies of this issue or to subscribe to JBL, please contact SBL Customer Service by phone at 866-727-9955 [toll-free in
North America] or 404-727-9498, by fax at 404-727-2419, or visit the online SBL Store at www.sbl-site.org.
722 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)
prescription is underscored by its repetition in 26:2, which positions the obligations

of Sabbath observance and sanctuary loyalty as framing all the laws of Lev 19–25.
The Sabbath also figures heavily in chapters 23–25, where it serves as a device for
timing YHWH’s annual festivals (23:2–43), ‫“( תמיד‬regular”) rites (24:5–9), the fal-
low year (25:2–7), and the redemption of land and indentured servants (25:8–55).2
The interest that H exhibits in the Sabbath, and the cessation of labor it
requires, has attracted significant scholarly attention. Several recent studies have
offered thoughtful treatments of the ritualized dimension of the Sabbath prescribed
by H and the complementarity of Sabbath observance and sanctuary loyalty in the
legislation.3 Their focus, however, has not been so much on the cultic rites that must
take place on the Sabbath as on the ritualized rhythm of ceasing labor every Sabbath
day.4 This article seeks to extend the scholarly discussion of the Sabbath in H by
assessing the implications of its dual requirements of Sabbath observance—that is,
both the cessation of labor and the accompanying sanctuary rites—for our under-
standing of the conception of this sacred time in Lev 17–26 and for contextualizing
the H materials in the history of ancient Israel.
I. The Holiness Legislation, Sabbath Rest, and

Regular Rituals at the Shrine
Matters of Terminology
Some words of clarification are in order concerning the term “Holiness legis-
lation” as it is employed in this article. The classical view has been that Lev 17–26
2 On the connection between Sabbath and land in H, see Jeffrey Stackert, “The Sabbath of
the Land in the Holiness Legislation: Combining Priestly and Non-Priestly Perspectives,” CBQ 73
(2011): 239–50.
3 Most notably, Jared C. Calaway, The Sabbath and the Sanctuary: Access to God in the Letter
to the Hebrews and Its Priestly Context, WUNT 2/349 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), 32–58;
and Jeffrey Stackert, “How the Priestly Sabbaths Work: Innovation in Pentateuchal Priestly Ritual,”
in Ritual Innovation in the Hebrew Bible and Early Judaism, ed. Nathan MacDonald, BZAW 468
(Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 79–112, here 98–110; see also Reinhard Achenbach, “Lex Sacra and
Sabbath in the Pentateuch,” ZABR 22 (2016): 101–9, here 104–7.
4 Note, for instance, that Calaway, Stackert, and Achenbach do not include an analysis of
Lev 23:37–38 or 24:5–9—the H passages that most clearly prescribe sanctuary rites on the Sab-
bath—in their discussion of the ritual aspects of ‫שבת‬. Achenbach mentions in passing that the
reference in Lev 23:3 to the Sabbath as a ‫ מקרא קדש‬might suggest that “the celebration of Sabbath
is connected with a convocation of a cultic assembly” (“Lex Sacra,” 105). However, the translation
of ‫ מקרא קדש‬as “holy convocation” is disputed; the expression is arguably better understood to
refer to a “holy day” on which the Israelites must abstain from labor; see further Baruch J.
Schwartz, “Miqra Qodesh and the Structure of Leviticus 23,” in Purity, Holiness, and Identity in
Judaism and Christianity, ed. Carl S. Ehrlich, Anders Runesson, and Eileen Schuller, WUNT 305
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), 11–24, here 15.
Rhyder: Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in the Holiness Legislation 723
originated as an independent legal code, but the majority of scholars now maintain
that these materials were composed as a supplement to the Priestly source (P) that
they postdate.5 Although chapters 17–26 include late additions and supplements,
in addition to traces of earlier source materials, they generally evince structural
integrity and a distinctive linguistic and thematic profile, as well as an overarching
focus on matters of holiness.6 The chapters are also characterized by a persistent
interest in revising the earlier Priestly materials, the legal traditions of Deuteron-
omy, and the Covenant Code (CC).7 They also coordinate various prophetic mate-
rials and especially engage with the book of Ezekiel.8 These structural, linguistic,
and thematic consistencies justify treating Lev 17–26 as a discrete subsection of the
Priestly traditions, with the descriptor “Holiness legislation,” or H.
Yet, if Lev 17–26 warrants the title H, we need also to accommodate the pres-
ence outside these chapters of certain passages that evince strong linguistic, stylis-
tic, and thematic parallels to them. Such “H-like” passages appear to have been
inserted into Priestly texts that were originally composed without knowledge of
Lev 17–26 with the aim of achieving greater continuity across the Priestly traditions
5 See esp. Israel Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995); Baruch J. Schwartz, The Holiness Legislation: Studies in the Priestly
Code [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1999); Christophe Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch:
A Study in the Composition of the Book of Leviticus, FAT 2/25 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007),
395–402.
6 See further the detailed discussion in Julia Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult: The Holiness
Legislation in Leviticus 17–26, FAT 134 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), 25–45.
7 See esp. Eckart Otto, “Innerbiblische Exegese im Heiligkeitsgesetz Levitikus 17–26,” in
Levitikus als Buch, ed. Heinz-Josef Fabry and Hans-Winfried Jüngling, BBB 119 (Bodenheim:
Philo, 1999), 125–96; Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch, 402–545; Jeffrey Stackert, Rewrit
ing the Torah: Literary Revision in Deuteronomy and the Holiness Legislation, FAT 52 (Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
8 An important minority of scholars maintain that the affinities between H and Ezekiel are
due to the latter’s dependence on Lev 17–26, rather than the reverse; see notably Michael Lyons,
From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiel’s Use of the Holiness Code, LHBOTS 507 (London: T&T Clark,
2009); and Ka Leung Wong, The Idea of Retribution in the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup 87 (Leiden: Brill,
2001), 78–156. However, the manner in which H blends the language and themes of Ezekiel with
those of other legal and prophetic traditions—a phenomenon especially visible in Lev 26—sug-
gests that most of the parallels between the two compositions are due to H’s dependence on
Ezekiel. As David M. Carr explains, “Leviticus 26 parallels a complex mix of texts in Ezekiel,
Deuteronomy, P, Amos, etc., while its closest counterpart in Ezekiel 34 does not. A theory such
as Lyon’s [sic] that sees Ezekiel 34 as being dependent on Leviticus 26 must posit that the author
of Ezekiel 34 honed in exclusively on the portions of Leviticus 26 not paralleled by other biblical
texts” (The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction [New York: Oxford University
Press, 2011], 301 n. 101). Such selectivity on the part of the author of Ezek 34 is difficult to explain.
For similar observations, see Reinhard Müller, “A Prophetic View of the Exile in the Holiness
Code: Literary Growth and Tradition History in Leviticus 26,” in The Concept of Exile in Ancient
Israel and Its Historical Contexts, ed. Ehud Ben Zvi and Christoph Levin, BZAW 404 (Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2010), 207–28.
by bringing the earlier materials into alignment with H’s new rulings.9 While schol-
ars disagree as to how many texts outside chapters 17–26 should be included in the
H stratum, I reserve the designation “H-like” for passages outside these chapters
that evince a very high number of linguistic and thematic parallels with Lev 17–26
and can confidently be identified as late additions to their literary contexts. I do not
assume that such passages were written at precisely the same compositional stage
as chapters 17–26, but I remain open to the possibility that H phraseology and
motifs influenced Priestly texts in multiple phases. The analysis of the Sabbath that
follows will thus focus primarily on Lev 17–26 but will also refer to other texts that
meet these criteria for H-like supplements outside these chapters, when these are
relevant to understanding H’s conception of the Sabbath.
Regular Rhythm of Labor Cessation

In Lev 17–26 the Sabbath is frequently associated with the cessation of work
activities. The festal calendar in chapter 23 opens in verse 3 by commanding the
Israelites to recognize the seventh day as a ‫“( שבת שבתון‬Sabbath of total cessation”)
on which it is forbidden to do ‫“( כל מלאכה‬any work”).10 The ‫ שבת‬is also associated
with seven-day intervals in 23:15–16, where the Israelites are instructed to count
‫“( שבע שבתות‬seven Sabbaths”) when calculating the celebration of the firstfruits,
which amounts to a period of ‫“( חמשים יום‬fifty days”). Elsewhere in the calendar,
the Sabbath is referenced in descriptions of festal occasions on which the Israelites
must observe work bans. Leviticus 23:25 refers to the ‫“( זכרון תרועה‬memorial
shout”) on the first day of the seventh month as a ‫“( שבתון‬total cessation”) on which
the Israelites must not do ‫“( כל מלאכת עבדה‬any ordinary work”). Leviticus 23:31–
32 then describes the ‫“( יום הכפרים‬day of purifications”) on the tenth day of the
seventh month as a ‫( שבת שבתון‬v. 32), on which the totalizing ban of ‫כל מלאכה‬
(v. 31) must be observed.11 In the instructions for ‫“( סכת‬booths”) in 23:39–43, the
Israelites are also commanded to observe a ‫ שבתון‬on the first and eighth days
of the festival (see v. 39). Outside the festal calendar, the Sabbath is explicitly
9 Among recent studies to make a similar argument, see Rainer Albertz, Pentateuchstudien,
ed. Jakob Wöhrle, FAT 117 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), 297–327, although note that Albertz
uses the term “PB2” rather than “H-like.”
10 The expression ‫ שבת שבתון‬is found in Exod 31:15; 35:2; Lev 16:31; 23:3, 32; 25:4 and
serves as a superlative construction with an intensifying effect: it indicates a day of total rest from
all forms of labor. The noun ‫( שבתון‬of the qatalān pattern—qatal + the sufformative ān) designates
a “concrete example or the condition of its root meaning” (namely, ‫שבת‬, “cease, rest”) (William
H. C. Propp, Exodus 19–40: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 2A [New
York: Doubleday, 2006], 493). See further Joüon §88Mb; E. Haag, “‫ ַש ָבת‬,” TDOT 14:387–97, here
388; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB
3A (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 1057–58.
11 On the difference between the ban of ‫ כל מלאכה‬and the less-restrictive prohibition of ‫כל‬
‫מלאכת עבדה‬, see David P. Wright and Jacob Milgrom, “‫אכה‬ ָ ‫ ְמ ַל‬,” TDOT 8:328–30, here 328–29.
associated with cessation of labor in the agricultural and manumission laws of Lev
25. Specifically, 25:2–7 employs the term ‫ שבת שבתון‬to describe the seventh-year
rest for the land when no agricultural labor is permitted (see esp. 25:4).
The use of these passages to reconstruct H’s ideas about the Sabbath is com-
plicated by the debates that surround their compositional history. Most scholars
agree that the Sabbath-year commandment of Lev 25:2–7 forms part of the core H
materials of Lev 17–26.12 By contrast, considerable discussion surrounds the liter-
ary development of the references to the Sabbath in the festal calendar. The com-
mand in 23:3 is generally considered a late addition to the chapter.13 As will be
discussed in detail below, the superscription in verses 37–38 lists the Sabbath as
one of the occasions that must be honored ‫“( מלבד‬besides”) the annual ‫מועדי יהוה‬
(“fixed times of YHWH”), which implies that it was not counted as a discrete cel-
ebration among the ‫ מועדי יהוה‬listed in the main body of the calendar. The exclu-
sion of the Sabbath from the ‫ מועדי יהוה‬is consistent with the calendar’s focus on
annual times, as opposed to the more regular rhythm of weekly cessation. More-
over, the presence of two nearly identical superscriptions in verses 2aβ–b and 4
hints that verse 3 was added to the calendar via the technique of repetitive resump-
tion (Wiederaufnahme).14 The reference in verse 39 to ‫ סכת‬as a ‫ שבתון‬may also form
part of a set of secondary materials stretching from verse 39 to verse 43. The sec-
ondary nature of these verses is signaled by their isolation from the first set of
instructions for booths in verses 33–36, which is immediately followed by the sub-
scription in verses 37–38. The subscription seems to form a logical conclusion to
the calendar. The position of the second set of ‫ סכת‬instructions in verses 39–43
after the subscription therefore strongly suggests that it was appended to the cal-
endar secondarily.15 Beyond verses 3 and 39, the somewhat repetitive nature of the
12 Note, however, that there is some debate surrounding the literary link between verse 5
and verses 6–7; see, e.g., Klaus Grünwaldt, Das Heiligkeitsgesetz Leviticus 17–26: Ursprüngliche
Gestalt, Tradition und Theologie, BZAW 271 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999), 107.
13 See recently Achenbach, “Lex Sacra,” 105 n. 15, and the references cited there.
14 Knohl argues against the idea that verse 3 is a late insertion to the calendar (Sanctuary of
Silence, 15–19). Instead, he contends that this verse forms part of a coherent redactional layer that
includes all the references to the Sabbath in Lev 23 (including in the subscription in v. 38) and
was added by H to an earlier P calendar that is fragmentarily preserved in 23:4–8, 23–28aα, 37.
While Knohl offers a rich discussion of the festal calendar, his model struggles to explain why, if
verses 3 and 38 were written as part of a uniform redaction, the latter verse refers to the Sabbath
as though it were excluded from the ‫ מועדי יהוה‬detailed in Lev 23:4–37. The reference to the Sab-
bath as being celebrated ‫ מלבד‬the annual festivals suggests that, at the time the subscription in
verses 37–38 was written, the Sabbath commandment in verse 3 was not yet found at the head of
the calendar. On the broader issues of reconstructing a P calendar in Lev 23, see Christophe
Nihan, “Israel’s Festival Calendars in Leviticus 23, Numbers 28–29 and the Formation of ‘Priestly’
Literature,” in The Books of Leviticus and Numbers, ed. Thomas Römer, BETL 215 (Leuven: Peeters,
2008), 177–231.
15 For similar conclusions, see, e.g., Grünwaldt, Das Heiligkeitsgesetz Leviticus 17–26, 77–78;
Corinna Körting, Der Schall des Schofar: Israels Feste im Herbst, BZAW 285 (Berlin: de Gruyter,
temporal specification ‫“( ממחרת השבת יניפנו הכהן‬the day after the Sabbath the
priest shall raise it”) in the context of verse 11 may also signal that it was introduced
to the calendar secondarily, perhaps with the intention of remedying a perceived
lack of specificity about when the elevation offering should be presented by the
priest.16 The corresponding reference to ‫ ממחרת השבת‬in verse 15a might therefore
also be secondary.
However, in the case of the reference to ‫ שבע שבתות‬when calculating the
firstfruits celebration in 23:15b–16, the word ‫ שבתון‬in verse 24, and the expression
‫ שבת שבתון‬in verse 32, few indicators support removing them as additions. The
integral role of the Sabbath in verse 16 in calculating the seven weeks (literally ‫שבע‬
‫ )שבתות‬that must pass between the offering of the first sheaf and the offering of
‫“( מנחה חדשה‬new grain”) suggests that the reference here to ‫ שבת‬should not be
isolated as secondary. Meanwhile, few signs of disturbance can be detected in the
text surrounding the term ‫ שבתון‬in verse 24 that would warrant isolating it as a
gloss.17 In the case of verse 32, the reference to Sabbath is arguably in keeping with
the emphasis on cessation of labor in the verses just prior, such that there is little
reason to remove it as secondary. While Karl Elliger argued that the entire set of
instructions in verses 26–32 might be redactional, Martin Noth already demon-
strated in his Leviticus commentary that the instructions for ‫ יום הכפרים‬on the
tenth day of the seventh month conform to the overarching structure of the calen-
dar in Lev 23, in which the year is divided between festivals to be held in the first
and seventh months, with the firstfruits celebrations in between.18 This structural
observation militates against removing the ‫ יום הכפרים‬instructions from the core
H materials of chapter 23.
Hence, we can confidently assume that Sabbath cessation of work was refer-
enced in the earliest version of Lev 23. It was not named as a discrete celebration
to be counted among the ‫ מועדי יהוה‬but nonetheless played an important role in
explaining the timing of the festivals, as well as the Israelites’ obligation to cease
work on the sacred days. This finding will prove significant below, when we explore
how H’s ideas about the Sabbath might assist us in contextualizing Lev 17–26 in
the history of ancient Israel; because an interest in the weekly rhythm of the Sabbath
was present in H’s earliest compositional stages, we can confidently use this
1999), 99–101; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27: A New Translation with Introduction and Com
mentary, AB 3C (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 2036.
16 The reference to the priest’s action of raising (‫ נוף‬hiphil) the first sheaf in verse 11b is
somewhat redundant, given that this action is already stipulated in the first half of the verse
(v. 11a). Note also that verse 12 mentions ‫“( ביום הניפכם את העמר‬the day when you raise the
sheaf ”) with seemingly no awareness of the reference to the day of the Sabbath in verse 11b just
prior (and also with a somewhat peculiar change to a second person plural subject [‫)]הניפכם‬.
17 Pace Karl Elliger, Leviticus, HAT 4 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1966), 310–11.
18 Martin Noth, Leviticus: A Commentary, trans. J. E. Anderson, OTL (London: SCM, 1977),
165–76; see further Nihan, “Israel’s Festival Calendars,” 186–95. For Elliger’s argument, see Levi
ticus, 309.
legislative theme to reconstruct the time period in which the core legislation of
chapters 17–26 might have originated.
Cessation of labor is emphasized also in H-like passages outside Lev 17–26
that regulate Sabbath observance. Most notably, Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3 supple-
ment the instructions for the construction of the wilderness sanctuary in Exod
25–31 and the building report of Exod 35–40 with strict commands to cease work
on the weekly ‫שבת‬.19 Both texts show strong dependence on H terminology and
concepts. The Sabbath command of Lev 23:3 is repeated almost word for word in
Exod 35:2. In Exod 31:12–17, typical H phrasing is evident in the expressions
‫“( את שבתתי תשמרו‬you shall keep my Sabbaths,” Exod 31:13; cf. Lev 19:3, 30; 26:2),
‫“( אני יהוה מקדשכם‬I am YHWH who sanctifies you,” Exod 31:13; cf. Lev 20:8; 21:8,
15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 26:2), the command to keep the Sabbath ‫“( לדרתם‬throughout
their generations,” Exod 31:13; cf. Lev 17:7, and see similar formulations in Lev
23:14, 21, 31, 41; 24:3), the threat of being “cut off ” (‫ כרת‬niphal) as punishment for
disobedience (Exod 31:14; cf. Lev 17:4, 9–10, 14; 18:29; 19:8; 20:3, 5–6, 17–18;
23:29), and the reference to the Sabbath as ‫( שבת שבתון‬Exod 31:15; cf. Lev 23:3,
24, 32, 39; 25:4).
Yet, while Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3 evince strong dependence on Lev 17–26,
19 On the secondary nature of both Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3, see, e.g., Klaus Grünwaldt,
Exil und Identität: Beschneidung, Passa und Sabbat in der Priesterschrift, BBB 85 (Frankfurt: Hain,
1992), 170–84; and Walter Groß, Zukunft für Israel: Alttestamentliche Bundeskonzepte und die
aktuelle Debatte um den Neuen Bund, SBS 176 (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998), 71–84.
Saul Olyan (“Exodus 31:12–17: The Sabbath according to H, or the Sabbath according to P and
H,” JBL 124 [2005]: 201–9, https://doi.org/10.2307/30041010) and Jeffrey Stackert (“Compositio-
nal Strata in the Priestly Sabbath: Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3,” JHebS 11 [2011]: art. 15, pp. 1–21,
here 2–20, https://doi.org/10.5508/jhs.2011.v11.a15) argue that Exod 31:12–17 (and also Exod
35:1–3 in Stackert’s case) should be divided between an earlier P Sabbath law and a later H rewor-
king. Olyan identifies the earlier P instruction in Exod 31:16–17 and the H material in 31:12–15,
while Stackert argues that Exod 31:12–13a, 15–17* and Exod 35:1–2* should be assigned to P and
31:13b–14 (plus glosses in v. 15) and 35:3 (along with glosses in v. 2) to H. Although both studies
contain valuable exegetical insights, the evidence of redactional seams in either Exod 31:12–17
or 35:1–3 is arguably insufficient to justify dividing these materials between P and H. Stackert
himself acknowledges that the verses assigned by Olyan to P occasionally mimic non-Priestly
ideas and vocabulary concerning the Sabbath (see the term ‫ נפש‬in Exod 31:17). To retain a P core
in Exod 31:12–17, Stackert must argue that the P materials were first glossed by H and then later
by a pentateuchal redactor. So, too, must the P command of Exod 35:1–2 be rid of H glosses. While
such a complex compositional history is possible, it seems much less likely than the majority
view that Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3 are late Priestly materials that show an awareness of both
Priestly and non-Priestly ideas about the Sabbath, with a particular emphasis on developing
the Sabbath texts of Lev 17–26; see further Christophe Nihan, “Das Sabbatgesetz Exodus 31,12–
17, die Priesterschrift und das Heiligkeitsgesetz: Eine Auseinandersetzung mit neueren Interpre-
tationen,” in Wege der Freiheit: Zur Entstehung und Theologie des Exodusbuches; Die Beiträge eines
Symposions zum 70. Geburtstag von Rainer Albertz, ed. Reinhard Achenbach, Ruth Ebach, and
Jakob Wöhrle, ATANT 104 (Zurich: TVZ, 2014), 134–42.
both passages go beyond Lev 17–26 with their ideas about Sabbath observance.20
Both texts mandate the death penalty (cf. Exod 31:15b, 35:2b) for Sabbath violation,
while Exod 31:13 claims that ceasing work on the Sabbath is a sign of the Israelites’
sanctification by YHWH, something that is never claimed in Lev 17–26.21 Mean-
while, Exod 35:3 introduces further innovation when prohibiting the kindling of a
fire on ‫שבת‬, a prohibition that seems intended to prevent the Israelites from pre-
paring food on the Sabbath (cf. Num 15:32–36).22 Both Exod 31:12–17 and 35:1–3
therefore demonstrate how H language and ideas about Sabbath cessation formed
a suitable foundation on which ever-stricter prohibitions of work and domestic
activities could be introduced to Priestly legislation.
Sabbath Rites at the Shrine

The manifest importance of work cessation to H’s conception of the Sabbath
should not lead us to overlook another ritualized dimension of Sabbath observance
in Lev 17–26—that is, the way in which H also expects the Israelites to pay YHWH
homage at his shrine on ‫שבת‬. The clearest reference to sanctuary rituals on the
Sabbath is found in 24:5–9. These verses form part of a short section of legislative
materials (24:1–9) that expands H’s focus on sacred time in the festal calendar of
chapter 23 with instructions for rites that must take place at daily and weekly inter-
vals.23 Leviticus 24:5–9 nominates the Sabbath as the day when Aaron must replen-
ish the loaves that are displayed on the golden table in the inner sanctum: ‫ביום‬
‫“( השבת ביום השבת יערכנו לפני יהוה תמיד מאת בני ישראל ברית עולם‬Every Sabbath
day he shall arrange them before YHWH regularly, as a permanent requirement
from the Israelites,” 24:8).
This is an innovation when compared to Exod 25:30, where the ‫לחם פנים‬
(“bread of the presence”) is introduced by P but with no comment about when the
loaves should be displayed. By stipulating in Lev 24:5–9 that the bread must be
displayed on the Sabbath, H presents this sacred occasion as a means not only of
regulating the Israelites’ rest from work but also of timing the high priest’s ritual
20 Asdiscussed in greater detail in Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult, 369–71.

21 Achenbach, “Lex Sacra,” 106–7.
22 Stackert, “How the Priestly Sabbaths Work,” 105–6.
23 Because these verses heavily reference the wilderness setting at the tent of meeting and
rely on specific P instructions concerning regular rites at the sanctuary, they were long presumed
to be secondary to H; see, e.g., Elliger, Leviticus, 324–29; and Eckart Otto, Theologische Ethik des
Alten Testaments, ThW (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1994), 240. Following the reversal of the chronol-
ogy of P and H, however, it is unnecessary to see these links with P as evidence of the secondary
nature of Lev 24:1–9. Rather, the strong thematic ties between the ritual instructions of 24:1–9
and the surrounding H materials in Lev 23 and 25, on account of their shared focus on sacred
time, suggest that they form a logical component of the core H materials; see further Knohl,
Sanctuary of Silence, 119–21; and Andreas Ruwe, Heiligkeitsgesetz und Priesterschrift: Literatur
geschichtliche und rechtssystematische Untersuchungen zu Leviticus 17,1–26,2, FAT 26 (Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 298.
activities within the outer sanctum. Beyond this, H introduces further innovation
when it asserts that the Israelites have a communal obligation to ensure that the
weekly rite of the display bread can be successfully carried out by Aaron. While the
meaning of the expression ‫ מאת בני ישראל ברית עולם‬in verse 8 is debated, it most
probably refers to the community’s obligation to ensure that the sanctuary staff has
the grain needed to prepare the loaves each week, so that the high priest can replen-
ish the bread on the Israelites’ behalf.24 H therefore subtly positions the Sabbath as
a weekly reminder to the Israelites that the deity expects them to supply the priest-
hood with the resources needed to prepare and present the Sabbath offerings, even
if they are not physically present when the loaves are displayed within the space of
the sanctuary.
Individual donations on the Sabbath seem also to be commanded in the
nearby context of Lev 24:5–9, in the superscription to the festal calendar in 23:37–
38.
‫אלה מועדי יהוה אשר תקראו אתם מקראי קדש להקריב אשה ליהוה עלה‬37
‫מלבד שבתת יהוה ומלבד מתנותיכם ומלבד‬38 ‫ומנחה זבח ונסכים דבר יום ביומו‬
‫כל נדריכם ומלבד כל נדבותיכם אשר תתנו ליהוה‬
37These are the fixed times of YHWH that you shall proclaim as such; holy days
for presenting food offerings for YHWH—the burnt offering and the cereal offer-
ing, sacrifice and drink offerings, each on its proper day—38besides the Sabbaths
of YHWH, and besides your gifts, and besides all your votive offerings and
besides all your freewill offerings that you give to YHWH.
Following a resumptive statement in 23:37a that closely resembles the superscrip-

tions of 23:2aβ–b, 4, verse 37b commands the Israelites to honor the ‫מועדי יהוה‬
outlined in the calendar as ‫מקראי קדש להקריב אשה ליהוה עלה ומנחה זבח ונסכים‬.
These times of festal sacrifice are then distinguished from the ‫“( שבתת יהוה‬Sab-
baths of YHWH”) as well as from ‫“( מתנותיכם‬your gifts”), ‫“( כל־נדריכם‬all your
votive offerings”), and ‫“( כל נדבותיכם אשר תתנו ליהוה‬all your freewill offerings that
you give to YHWH”), each item being introduced by the word ‫מלבד‬.25
24 JanJoosten (People and Land in the Holiness Code: An Exegetical Study of the Ideational
Framework of the Law in Leviticus 17–26, VTSup 67 [Leiden: Brill, 1996], 119–20), Milgrom
(Leviticus 23–27, 2094), and Thomas Hieke (Levitikus, 2 vols., HThKAT [Freiburg im Breisgau:
Herder, 2014], 2:951) argue that ‫ ברית עולם‬refers to the display bread itself. According to this
reading, H employs the term ‫ ברית עולם‬in verse 8 because the loaves are a physical representation
of the eternal covenant between YHWH and Israel. However, the parallel between ‫ ברית עולם‬at
the end of verse 8 and ‫“( חק עולם‬perpetual due”) at the conclusion of verse 9 suggests that ‫ברית‬
in verse 8 should be translated as “requirement,” which is argued by, e.g., Elliger, Leviticus, 329.
This translation is consistent with the occurrence of the compound preposition ‫“( מאת‬from”)
before the reference to the ‫ בני ישראל‬in verse 8, which suggests that the ‫ ברית עולם‬refers to the
“permanent requirement” that the grain be sourced “from the Israelites.”
25 This is the only occurrence of the form ‫ שבתת יהוה‬in the Hebrew Bible. On the signifi-
cance of its usage for understanding the reference to the Sabbath in Lev 23:8 as a circumlocution
for Sabbath sacrifices, see further Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, 2034–35.
The context and syntax of verse 38 favor the view that ‫ שבתת יהוה‬serves as a
circumlocution for “Sabbath sacrifices.”26 First, it occurs immediately after the
description, in verse 37b, of holy days on which the Israelites must “present” (‫קרב‬
hiphil infinitive construct) offerings and donations. Second, its connection to this
list via ‫מלבד‬, functioning as the preposition “besides,” suggests that the ‫שבתת יהוה‬
are mentioned here because they, too, are considered times of sacrifice that must
be honored in addition to the annual festivals stipulated in the calendar. Third, the
Sabbaths of YHWH are mentioned as the first item in a list in which all the other
items are sacrifices or donations (‫מתנות‬, ‫נדרים‬, and ‫)נדבות‬, which would be difficult
to explain if they too were not understood to refer to a type of sacrifice. This read-
ing is supported, fourth, by the manner in which all the items in verse 38 are
introduced in an identical way (namely, by the word ‫)מלבד‬, which suggests that H
did not perceive any difference between the ‫שבתת יהוה‬, mentioned at the start of
the list, and the sacrifices and donations mentioned subsequently. This favors the
view that H included the ‫ שבתת יהוה‬in verse 38 because the Sabbath was an occa-
sion on which the Israelites were required to offer sacrificial donations in addition
to those presented during the annual festivals. The subscription in verses 37–38
therefore creates a threefold division of the Israelites’ sacrificial obligations: sacri-
fices presented annually on the ‫מועדי יהוה‬, those offered weekly on ‫שבת‬, and those
of a more unpredictable nature, such as freewill or votive offerings.
By prescribing sacrificial rites and other cultic duties on the Sabbath, H effec-
tively asserts a two-part understanding of Sabbath observance in Lev 17–26. The
Sabbath is to be honored as both a day devoid of labor and an occasion on which
YHWH must be presented with offerings and donations at the sanctuary, with the
high priest playing a particularly important role in the accomplishing the required
rites. This complementarity between stopping work and sacrificial rites on the Sab-
bath is, in turn, consistent with the dual command, repeated in Lev 19:30 // 26:2,
that the Israelites must “keep my Sabbaths and revere my sanctuary” as part of their
sanctification via law observance. Since the ritualized rhythm of ceasing labor each
Sabbath must be synchronized with sacrificial rites that take place at the shrine,
Sabbath observance and sanctuary loyalty can be paired as interlocking aspects of
the Israelites’ experience of holiness.
II. Contextualizing H’s Distinctive Sabbath Concept
Sabbath and Cessation: Reinforcing Their Association

The significance of H’s dual conception of the Sabbath is apparent when we
reposition it in relation to the broader evidence that pertains to the history of ideas
26 See ibid., 2034; John H. Hartley, Leviticus, WBC 4 (Dallas: Word, 1992), 389; and Knohl,
Sanctuary of Silence, 56.
surrounding the Sabbath in ancient Israel, and its depiction elsewhere in the pen-
tateuchal traditions. To begin with, the emphasis H places on cessation of labor,
and the association of the Sabbath with intervals of seven, may constitute an inno-
vative understanding of this sacred occasion when compared to earlier under-
standings of the Sabbath in ancient Israel. Although the question of the early history
of the Sabbath is notoriously thorny, several factors support the idea that the Sab-
bath was not originally celebrated in ancient Israel as a weekly event but was rather
a festive celebration within the lunar cycle.27 This association of the Sabbath with
the phases of the moon is suggested by the sheer frequency with which it is men-
tioned in the Hebrew Bible in parallel with ‫“( חדש‬new moon”).28 Furthermore,
given that Mesopotamian sources refer to the fifteenth day of the month as šapattu
(šabattu) (see CAD 17.1:449–50), Heinrich Zimmern and Johannes Meinhold pro-
posed over one hundred years ago that, in ancient Israel, the Sabbath might have
originally referred to the date of the full moon.29 This insight remains influential,
with the majority of scholars agreeing that, in all probability, the term ‫ שבת‬was
originally conceived in association with the lunar cycle and most likely designated
the date of the full moon.30
Moreover, there is compelling evidence that, when the Sabbath was conceived
as a monthly lunar event, it was not necessarily associated with cessation of labor.31
Key texts in the Hebrew Bible that refer to the celebration of the Sabbath in con-
junction with the new moon, such as 2 Kgs 4:22–23, Amos 8:4–7, and Hos 2:11–15,
do not state that work is to be banned on the Sabbath.32 These passages have
27 As already argued by George Smith, Assyrian Discoveries: An Account of Explorations and
Discoveries on the Site on Nineveh, during 1873 and 1874 (New York: Scribner, Armstrong, 1875),
19–20.
28 See esp. Num 28:9–15, 2 Kgs 4:22–23, Amos 8:4–7, Hos 2:11–15, Isa 1:10–14, 66:23, Ezek
45:17, 46:1–10, 1 Chr 23:31, 2 Chr 2:3, 8:13, 31:3, Neh 10:34.
29 Heinrich Zimmern, “Sabbath,” ZDMG 58 (1904): 199–202; and Johannes Meinhold, “Die
Entstehung des Sabbats,” ZAW 29 (1909): 81–112.

30 See, e.g., André Lemaire, “Le sabbat à l’époque royale israélite,” RB 80 (1973): 161–85;
Gnana Robinson, The Origin and Development of the Old Testament Sabbath, BBET 21 (Frankfurt
am Main: Lang, 1988), 27–108, Michaela Bauks, “Le Shabbat: Un temple dans le temps,” ETR 77
(2002): 474–79; and Alexandra Grund, Die Entstehung des Sabbats: Seine Bedeutung für Israels
Zeitkonzept und Erinnerungskultur, FAT 75 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 67–130.
31 As already argued by Johannes Meinhold, Sabbat und Woche im Alten Testament: Eine
Untersuchung, FRLANT 5 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1905); see also Lemaire, “Le
sabbat à l’époque royale israélite,” 161–85; Robinson, Origin and Development, 27–37; Grund, Die
Entstehung des Sabbats, 19–148.
32 The case of Amos 8:4–7 is somewhat complex, since this text suggests that the Sabbath
was a day on which trade within the sanctuary was prohibited. Verse 5 imagines that those who
would mistreat the poor begrudgingly inquire, ‫מתי יעבר החדש ונשבירה שבר והשבת ונפתחה בר‬
(“When will the new moon pass, so we may sell grain, and the Sabbath, so we may offer wheat for
sale?”). While this is sometimes considered evidence that the Sabbath was associated with a work
ban, the text states only that new moon and the Sabbath are days on which normal business and
typically been considered to preserve evidence that the Sabbath was not paired with
a work ban in the preexilic period.33
Yet, even in texts that clearly stem from the Persian period, we find evidence
that the Sabbath was not always celebrated as a time of cessation of labor.34 The
correspondence recovered from the garrison on the island of Elephantine in Egypt
also reveals that the Sabbath was not considered a day of cessation among the
Judeans living there in the fifth and fourth centuries BCE. A number of these
ostraca confirm that “the day of the Sabbath” was known to the Judeans stationed
on the island.35 While many of these references are too fragmentary to shed much
light on the manner in which the Sabbath was celebrated, one ostracon (D7.16:1–9)
all but confirms that the Sabbath at Elephantine was not yet associated with cessa-
tion of labor. This undated piece of correspondence preserves the instructions sent
to a certain Islaḥ to meet an incoming boat “tomorrow on Sabbath” and unload its
cargo of vegetables. The author of this ostracon shows no awareness that such work
activities should be avoided on the Sabbath. In fact, the author explicitly warns
Islaḥ , “by the life of Yahô” that, should he fail to unload the vegetables, “I shall take
your lif[e]!” This strongly suggests that, at least among Judeans living in the dias-
pora, the Sabbath was not associated with a weekly cessation of labor.36
This evidence suggests that the strong association between the Sabbath and
the weekly cessation of labor in H, as well as in H-related passages such as Exod
31:12–17 and 31:1–3, may enshrine an innovative understanding of Sabbath obser-
vance, one that the H scribes sought to normalize and promote. This judgment,
however, must be qualified by recognizing that H probably does not constitute the
first tradition in the Hebrew Bible to make this association between the Sabbath
and a weekly work ban. Rather, this connection was arguably already present in the
non-Priestly pentateuchal traditions and seems to be related to the merger of ‫שבת‬
trade were interrupted. Such interruption could be consistent merely with their status as “days of
religious and cultic activities” (Robinson, Origin and Development, 56). Indeed, the fact that both
new moon and Sabbath are considered days of reduced trade could go against reading Amos 8:4–7
as proof of a specific work ban on the Sabbath, since the new moon does not seem to have been
associated with cessation of labor elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible.
33 The literary histories of these passages, however, are increasingly debated. For a helpful
summary, see Grund, Die Entstehung des Sabbats, 67–73, 79–84.

34 See further, e.g., Achenbach, “Lex Sacra,” 107–8.
35 See TAD D7.10:5; 12:9; 16:1–9; 35:7; perhaps also D7.28:4; 48:4–5.
36 Lutz Doering, Schabbat: Sabbathalacha und praxis im antiken Judentum und Urchristen
tum, TSAJ 78 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 23–42; Bob Becking, “Sabbath at Elephantine: A
Short Episode in the Construction of Jewish Identity,” in ‘Empsychoi logoi’—Religious Innovations
in Antiquity: Studies in Honour of Pieter Willem van der Horst, ed. Alberdina Houtman, Albert de
Jong, and Magda Misset-van de Weg; AJEC 73 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 175–90, here 186; Achenbach,
“Lex Sacra,” 107–8.
with another custom, unrelated to the celebration of the lunar cycle, whereby the
Israelites were to award their workers and animals a rest day every seventh day.37
In Exod 23:12, the seventh day is set aside as a day of cessation on account of
the humanitarian concern that one’s dependents should not be overworked (cf.
Exod 34:21): “Six days you may do your work, but on the seventh day you shall
cease [‫ שבת‬qal] in order that your ox and your donkey might rest, and the home-
born slave and the immigrant might be refreshed.” While this cessation of labor is
described using the verb ‫שבת‬, it seems to be used here with the general meaning
“to cease (work)” with no specific connotation of “keeping the Sabbath.”38 Further-
more, Exod 23:12 does not seem to expect that the seventh-day cessation of labor
will be standardized across the community, such that all Israel will operate accord-
ing to a commonly shared conception of a seven-day week. The text does not state
that the seventh day has an intrinsically holy or honored quality, which would
require the entire community to coordinate their rest to fall on precisely the same
day. Rather, the focus of the prescription is on the humanitarian obligation of indi-
vidual households to ensure that their dependents are never required to work more
than six days in a row. Exodus 23:12 leaves it to the discretion of each household
to structure the seven-day timing of labor according to their particular work or
harvest schedules. So long as their laborers and animals are permitted to rest at an
interval of seven days, the law has been fulfilled.
By the time the seventh-day cessation of labor came to be included in the
Decalogue (Exod 20:1–17 // Deut 5:6–22), the character of this event seems to have
undergone an important modification. Now the seventh-day rest is referred to
using the substantive ‫( שבת‬Exod 20:10 // Deut 5:14) and is considered a holy occa-
sion.39 The two texts, however, provide different rationales for why the Israelites
must observe the seventh day as the Sabbath: Exod 20:11 reminds the Israelites that
YHWH rested from his creative works on the seventh day of creation, while Deut
5:15 cites the exodus as the rationale for granting rest to one’s dependents.
The literary process by which the Sabbath command was included in the
Decalogue remains a point of considerable debate among scholars, making it dif-
ficult to establish a time frame for the conflation of the Sabbath and seventh-day
rest in these texts.40 Nevertheless, it is apparent that, by the time Lev 17–26 was
composed, a version of the Decalogue in which the Sabbath commandment had
already been included was known to the H scribes. As has been frequently noted
37 Grund, Die Entstehung des Sabbats, 133–48.

38 Robinson, Origin and Development, 140–41; and Grünwaldt, Exil und Identität, 123.
39 See further Achenbach, “Lex Sacra,” 102.
40 See, among others, the essays in Christian Frevel and Christoph Dohmen, eds., Die zehn
Worte: Der Dekalog als Testfall der Pentateuchkritik, QD 212 (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2005).
The reference to the P creation account in Exod 20:11 strongly hints that the association of the
Sabbath with the seventh day in this text constitutes a post-Priestly intervention or, at least, that
the rationale was added to the Decalogue of Exod 20 after the composition of Gen 1:1–2:3.
in previous scholarship, H’s treatise on communal holiness in Lev 19 evinces heavy

dependence on the Decalogue.41 This dependence is especially obvious in Lev
19:3–4, where H first introduces the command to keep the Sabbath. H references
four of the Decalogue’s commandments: in 19:3, the commands to revere parents
(cf. Exod 20:12, Deut 5:16) and to keep the Sabbath (cf. Exod 20:8, Deut 5:12); in
19:4, the commands to eschew the worship of other gods (cf. Exod 20:3, Deut 5:7)
and the making of idols (cf. Exod 20:4, Deut 5:8). In addition, a near-verbatim
citation of the prohibition of theft from Exod 20:15 // Deut 5:19 can be observed
in Lev 19:11. We can therefore assume that H was familiar with at least one version
of the Decalogue in which the Sabbath was conceived as a weekly event during
which the Israelites must cease labor.
H may also have been influenced by P’s emphasis on seventh-day cessation in
the creation account. Genesis 2:2–3 recounts how the deity ceased (‫ שבת‬qal) cre-
ative work on the seventh day and consecrated (‫ קדש‬piel) it, “for on it he ceased
from all his work that ‫ אלהים‬had done in creation” (v. 3). While the substantive ‫שבת‬
is curiously missing from these verses, the majority of commentators read Gen
2:2–3 as P’s attempt to elevate the status of the weekly Sabbath (hinted at in the verb
‫ )שבת‬by associating it with the creational order.42 Sabbath cessation is also refer-
enced in the Priestly portions of the story of the provision of manna in Exod 16
(see specifically vv. 22–25). There is little agreement among scholars, however,
whether these passages form part of the P narrative known to H or, rather, stem
from a later compositional phase.43
In any event, we can conclude with confidence that H affirms earlier penta-
teuchal traditions, most notably the Decalogue, when it calls on the community of
41 See esp. Otto, Theologische Ethik, 244; and Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch, 465.
See further Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult, 356–59.
42 The literary history of the reference to Sabbath cessation in Gen 2:2–3 is debated, with a
minority of scholars maintaining that it is an addition to an earlier version of the P creation

account; see Thomas Krüger, “Schöpfung und Sabbat in Genesis 2,1–3,” in Sprachen, Bilder, Klänge:
Dimensionen der Theologie im Alten Testament und in seinem Umfeld; Festschrift für Rüdiger
Bartelmus zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, ed. Christiane Karrer-Grube, AOAT 359 (Münster: Ugarit-
Verlag, 2009), 155–69; and Jürg Hutzli, “Tradition and Interpretation in Gen 1:1–2:4a,” JHebS 10
(2011): art. 12, pp. 1–22, https://doi.org/10.5508/jhs.2010.v10.a12. Others attribute the entire
chapter to the Holiness School; see Yairah Amit, “Creation and the Calendar of Holiness,” in
Tehillah leMoshe: Biblical and Judaic Studies in Honor of Moshe Greenberg, ed. Mordechai Cogan,
Barry L. Eichler, and Jeffrey H. Tigay (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 13*−30*; Jacob
Milgrom, “HR in Leviticus and Elsewhere in the Torah,” in The Book of Leviticus: Composition and
Reception, ed. Rolf Rendtorff and Robert A. Kugler, VTSup 93 (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 26–40, here
33–34; Bill T. Arnold, “Genesis 1 as Holiness Preamble,” in Let Us Go Up to Zion: Essays in Honour
of H. G. M. Williamson on the Occasion of His SixtyFifth Birthday, ed. Iain Provan and Mark Boda,
VTSup 153 (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 331–43. On why Gen 1:1–2:3 should not be included among the
H-like materials of the Pentateuch, see Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult, 245–46 n. 142.
43 On this complex issue, which cannot be entered into in detail here, see, e.g., Christoph
Berner, “Der Sabbat in der Mannaerzählung Ex 16 und in den priesterlichen Partien des Penta-
teuch,” ZAW 128 (2016): 562–78; and Stackert, “How the Priestly Sabbaths Work,” 100–104.
Israel to honor the Sabbath as a time of weekly cessation. The Sabbath is not to be
timed according to local custom or individual need, in H’s view, but rather must be
honored as a community-wide practice in which all Israel adopts a standardized
weekly rhythm. Moreover, any association between the Sabbath and a monthly,
lunar cycle is completely obscured by H in favor of its association with intervals of
seven.
Restored Focus on Sabbath Celebrations at the Shrine

Even if H is not the first tradition to conceptualize the Sabbath as a weekly
occurrence marked by the cessation of labor, its innovation lies in its developing
this conception in directions that are not yet anticipated in earlier pentateuchal
materials. Specifically, H goes beyond both the Decalogue and P when it pairs the
work ban on the Sabbath with the requirement to pay the divinity homage by pre-
senting the deity with Sabbath offerings. Neither Exod 20:8–11 nor Deut 5:12–15
mentions sacrifices or rituals that must take place at the shrine during the Sabbath
day. Nor do Gen 2:2–3 or the Sabbath passages in Exod 16 contain any suggestion
that the Israelites must pair the cessation of labor on the seventh day with ritual
activities. To be sure, these passages do not rule out the possibility of sacrificial
offerings on the Sabbath. However, they lack the explicit concern found in H that
the Israelites must recognize their dual obligation on this sacred occasion: first, to
display their loyalty to YHWH and collective unity by ceasing labor; and, second,
to ensure that collective sacrifices and regular rituals take place at the shrine. H is
thus distinctive in its concern to legislate the sacrificial aspects of the Sabbath
against the narrower conception of this holy time that is found in earlier penta-
teuchal traditions, where it was effectively reduced to a day marked by a work ban.44
One intriguing possibility is that H’s interest in Sabbath rituals is in keeping
with traditional notions surrounding the celebration of the Sabbath that were pre-
dominant when the Sabbath was celebrated as a monthly event linked to lunar
rhythms. While the state of the surviving evidence again makes it difficult to verify
how the lunar Sabbath was celebrated in ancient Israel, extrabiblical sources attest
to the common practice of celebrating the full moon as a time of sacrifice. For
instance, the Ugaritic ritual text RS 24.253 records the elaborate rites held “in the
temple of Ba‘lu of Ugarit” (line 11) on the fourteenth day of the month (the date
corresponding to the full moon), which required the king to undergo ritual bathing
before numerous sacrifices of bulls and rams were presented at the sanctuary.45
44 While Sabbath sacrifices are prescribed in Num 28–29 (see esp. 28:9–10), these chapters
do not form part of the Priestly traditions that pre-date H. They rather build on the festal calendar
of Lev 23 to articulate a more extensive program of regular and festal offerings. See further the
detailed discussion in Nihan, “Israel’s Festival Calendars”; and Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult,
284–86.
45 See Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, ed. Theodore J. Lewis, WAW 10 (Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 29–31.
Akkadian texts from Uruk also attest to elaborate sacrificial rites held on the full
moon as part of the eššešu festival in Neo-Babylonian times.46
While it is difficult to reconstruct which rites might have been practiced on
the lunar Sabbath in ancient Israel, it seems highly probable that they were sacrifi-
cial.47 Several Hebrew Bible passages suggest a strong association between the Sab-
bath, the new moon, and the making of sacrifices, perhaps especially sacrificial rites
at the central sanctuary in Jerusalem. In Isa 1:10–14, the leaders in Jerusalem
(referred to as ‫קציני סדם‬, “the rulers of Sodom,” v. 10aβ) and the Judean population
(referred to as ‫עם עמרה‬, “the people of Gomorrah,” v. 10bβ) are summoned to “hear
the word of YHWH” (v. 10aα) concerning the inadequacy of the sacrifices and
donations that they present at the temple. Crucially, verse 13 associates these sac-
rifices with the Sabbath and new moon specifically: ‫לא תוסיפו הביא מנחת־שוא קטרת‬
‫“( תועבה היא לי חדש ושבת קרא מקרא לא־אוכל און ועצרה‬Do not continue to bring
me offerings in vain. Incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and
proclaimed holy days—I cannot endure wrongdoing and assemblies”).48
Sabbath and new moon are also associated with sacrifice in the book of Eze-
kiel, which, while not stemming from the preexilic period, nonetheless reveals an
imaginative association between these sacred occasions and sacrificial rites in
which royal leadership was particularly important. Ezekiel 45:17 commands the
‫“( נשיא‬prince”) to “make” (‫ עשה‬qal) burnt offerings, cereal offerings, and drink
offerings ‫“( בחגים ובחדשים ובשבתות בכל מועדי בית ישראל‬on the festivals, the new
moons and the Sabbaths, and on all the fixed times of the house of Israel”). Then,
in Ezek 46:1–10, the text decrees that the inner eastern gate of the visionary temple,
which must remain closed on all days except the Sabbath and the new moon, be
used on those days by the ‫ נשיא‬as his personal entrance to the temple. Once inside
the sanctuary, the prince is to stand at the doorposts while the priests prepare burnt
offerings and well-being sacrifices on his behalf. As argued by Steven Shawn Tuell
and Daniel I. Block, this positions the ‫ נשיא‬to provide visual surveillance of the
priests’ actions as they carry out the Sabbath sacrifices, reflecting his role both as
the patron of the Sabbath rituals (in that he provides for the sacrifices) and as their
guardian, since he is responsible for ensuring the correct performance of the sac-
rificial rites.49 Such a text seems therefore to attest not only to the expectation that
46 See, among others, Marc J. H. Linssen, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon: The Temple Ritual
Texts as Evidence for Hellenistic Cult Practises, CM 25 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 45–48.
47 As argued by Fritz Stolz, “Sabbat, Schöpfungswoche und Herbstfest,” WD 11 (1971):
159–75, here 172; Lemaire, “Le sabbat à l’époque royale israélite,” 64–162; Robinson, Origin and
Development, 251–56; Volker Wagner, Profanität und Sakralisierung im Alten Testament, BZAW
351 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005), 30–32.
48 The dating of Isa 1:10–14 is contested and cannot be treated here; see the detailed discus-
sion of Grund, who defends a preexilic date for the passage (Die Entstehung des Sabbats, 73–76).
49 Steven Shawn Tuell, The Law of the Temple in Ezekiel 40–48, HSM 49 (Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1992), 108–9; and Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25–48, NICOT (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 671.
the Sabbath will be a time of sacrificial worship, but also to the idea that the royal
leader will play a special role in overseeing the celebrations.50
The connection between Sabbath, sanctuary, and royal agency may also be
hinted at in 2 Kgs 16:17–18—a text that describes Ahaz’s destruction of items in
the first temple of Jerusalem in a demonstration of loyalty to the king of Assyria.
According to the MT, when Ahaz demolishes ‫“( את מבוא המלך החיצונה‬the outer
entrance of the king”) at the temple, he also destroys ‫“( את מיסך השבת‬the cover-
ing[?] for the Sabbath”). The meaning of ‫מיסך‬, a hapax legomenon, is disputed. Most
commentators and dictionaries consider it to be derived from ‫ סכך‬III, “to screen,
cover,” and therefore to designate a structure of some sort in the temple that was
associated with the celebration of the Sabbath.51 Others propose that ‫ מיסך‬might
be a derivative of ‫ סכך‬I, “to shut off.” In this case, it might refer to a type of barrier
within the shrine that was somehow linked to Sabbath rites.52 Either way, the par-
allel in verse 18 between ‫ מבוא המלך החיצונה‬and ‫ מיסך השבת‬suggests that the
latter was comparable to the king’s entrance to the temple; it may therefore have
served a function similar to that of the imaginary eastern gate of Ezekiel’s temple
vision, insofar as it afforded the king special access to a restricted area within the
royal chapel on the Sabbath. This conclusion, however, is complicated by the evi-
dence of 2 Kgs 16:18 LXX, which contains no mention of the Sabbath, but rather
claims that Ahaz τὸν θεμέλιον τῆς καθέδρας ᾠκοδόμησεν ἐν οἴκῳ κυρίου (“made a
base for the throne in the house of the Lord”). This difference suggests that 2 Kgs
16:17–18 should be used with caution when reconstructing any link between Sab-
bath, sacrifice, and royal agency in the monarchic period.
Nevertheless, there is arguably enough evidence to suggest that H was not the
first tradition to associate ‫ שבת‬with celebratory rituals at the sanctuary. Yet, while
H seems to reinforce a preexisting association of ‫ שבת‬with sacrifice, it does so in a
manner that reconfigures the sacrifices offered on this sacred occasion when com-
pared to the traditional celebrations of the Sabbath at the shrine in light of what we
can reconstruct about those celebrations from what is hazily known from the
Hebrew Bible and other ancient Near Eastern sources. To begin with, H avoids any
association between Sabbath sacrifice and celebrating the lunar cycle and instead
opts for associating the Sabbath with intervals of seven. In this way, the Sabbath
50 The Sabbath is also mentioned elsewhere in Ezekiel in connection with the sanctuary. In
Ezek 23:38–39, defiling (‫ טמא‬piel) the ‫ מקדש‬is paralleled with profaning (‫ חלל‬piel) ‫שבתות‬, while
Ezek 22:8 contrasts the action of profaning (‫ חלל‬piel) ‫ שבתות‬and despising (‫ בזה‬qal), ‫“( קדשי‬my
[YHWH’s] holy things”), which may refer to sacrifices or other items associated with the sanctu-
ary. Note, however, that Ezek 45:17 and 46:1–10 are the only passages in Ezekiel that explicitly
command the Israelites or the royal leader to present sacrifices on the Sabbath.
51 See, e.g., HALOT, s.v. “‫ סכך‬III”; BDB, s.v. “‫ סכך‬I”; Robinson, Origin and Development,
86–88; and Mark W. Hamilton, A Kingdom for a Stage: Political and Theological Reflection in the
Hebrew Bible, FAT 116 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), 32–38.
52 Wagner, Profanität und Sakralisierung, 32–33.
and its associated sanctuary rituals appear in H no longer as forming a discrete

festal celebration but rather as a complement to the Israelites’ obligation to cease
work—that is, they form the appropriate rite to accompany the Israelites’ display
of loyalty to their patron deity when they observe the standardized work ban.
In addition, H depicts the Sabbath sacrifices in such a way that any role for a
royal leader in the festivities is omitted. Unlike Ezek 45:17, 46:1–8, and 2 Kgs 16:17–
18 MT, H offers no hint that a prince or king oversees the Sabbath sacrifices or
enjoys special access to the shrine on that day. Instead, the responsibility for main-
taining the Sabbath sacrifices falls to the community as a whole, which must assume
the role of principal sponsors of the rituals by supplying the donations for the
weekly Sabbath rites. Meanwhile, the description in Lev 24:5–9 of the display bread
advances a new, creative understanding of the ritual roles that will be predominant
on this sacred occasion. Now it is Aaron as high priest who is to assume the right
to enter restricted areas within the shrine on the day of the Sabbath as a display of
his unique ritual agency as cultic leader of Israel. In this way, the Sabbath is framed
by H as a celebration in which the agency of the high priest, rather than a royal
intermediary, is key to ensuring that the Sabbath donations are deemed acceptable
by the patron deity.
What we see, then, in Lev 17–26 is a merger of two concepts of the Sabbath,
each of which appears to have been creatively reinterpreted by H. First, H affirms
the idea, most clearly articulated in the Decalogue, that the Sabbath is connected
to intervals of seven and must be honored by the Israelites with a work ban. Second,
it upholds what was probably the traditional obligation—to offer sacrifices at the
central shrine each and every ‫שבת‬. These sacrifices, however, have been reframed
by H so that they no longer mark a phase in the lunar cycle or an occasion on which
the cultic agency of the royal leader is dominant; rather, they take place at a weekly
interval and rely on collective offerings and the leadership of the high priest.
III. Implications for Contextualizing

the Holiness Legislation
H’s innovative combination of two elements of Sabbath observance raises

important questions as to how we might situate Lev 17–26 in the history of ancient
Israel. In particular, the linking of the elements suggests that we should revisit a
well-established, and persistent, vein of research that interprets H’s interest in the
Sabbath as evidence that this legislation originated in the exilic period.53 In his 2013
monograph (his revised 2010 dissertation), Jared Calaway argues that H empha-
sizes Sabbath observance because its authors wished to establish new ways of
53 For an early articulation of this view, see Theophile James Meek, “The Sabbath in the Old
Testament: Its Origin and Development,” JBL 33 (1914): 201–12, here 209, https://doi.org/10
.2307/3260236.
experiencing sanctity in daily life that could move beyond the space of the shrine—
that is, H articulates how the Israelites can remain connected to the kind of holiness
that was traditionally reserved to sanctuary space, even when they cannot be phys-
ically present at the sanctuary.54 This, Calaway contends, reveals H’s provenance in
the “templeless context” of the Babylonian exile.55 Each Sabbath day, the Israelites
living in exile without access to a functioning shrine were effectively afforded a
“temple in time,” which enabled them to experience a sanctity that had been fun-
damentally compromised by the destruction of the Jerusalem temple.56 Calaway’s
sophisticated argument has subsequently been taken up by David Carr in his
defense of a Neo-Babylonian dating of H. While Carr concedes that the elevation
of the Sabbath was a long process that “apparently persisted in the post-exilic
period,” he argues that such a process was “less likely to have originated then among
groups who had returned home, particularly not once the Second Temple was
established.”57 The prominence of the Sabbath in Lev 17–26 is thus strong evidence,
in Carr’s view, of H’s exilic origins.
Interpretations such as Calaway’s and Carr’s offer stimulating insights, but
they rest on a nearly exclusive focus on the “mundane” practices associated with
the Sabbath in H and, specifically, on the cessation of labor and the holiness that
this affords the Israelites in their day-to-day lives. Neither Calaway nor Carr dis-
cusses the second, complementary dimension of the Sabbath that, as we have seen,
is critical to H’s legislation of the Sabbath—its emphasis on this being a time of
ritual practice at the shrine. This second emphasis might suggest that H is assuming
not a “templeless context” but rather one in which an actual sanctuary provides the
focus for the Israelites’ attention on the Sabbath—that is, H assumes the presence,
rather than the absence, of a shrine at the center of the community. Why else would
H have detailed the dual obligations of the Israelites on the Sabbath—an innovation
when compared to the Decalogue and P—if it had not been seeking to establish
ways in which Sabbath observance could be reconnected to sacrificial practice at
the sanctuary, as per more traditional celebrations of this sacred occasion?
An alternative way of interpreting H’s strong interest in the Sabbath, then, is
to conceive of Lev 17–26 as stemming not from exilic times but from a period when
priestly scribes were seeking to encourage the community of Israel to reengage with
the sanctuary cult. The standardized rhythm of ceasing labor on the seventh day
affirms the need for the Israelites to display collective unity and obedience to the
law by adopting a shared standard for timing the week and the division of labor
within it. Moreover, the Sabbath also serves as a reminder to the Israelites of their
54 See Calaway, Sabbath and the Sanctuary, 45–54; cf. Calaway, “Heavenly Sabbath, Heavenly
Sanctuary: The Transformation of Priestly Sacred Space and Sacred Time in the Songs of the Sab-
bath Sacrifice and the Epistle to the Hebrews” (PhD diss., Columbia University, 2010).
55 Calaway, Sabbath and the Sanctuary, 51.
56 Ibid., 206.
57 Carr, Formation of the Hebrew Bible, 302–3.
obligation to attend to the sanctuary and its need for regular offerings and to affirm
the ritual agency of the high priest to present collective donations within its inte-
rior.
Such a legislative device, it could be further argued, might have been particu-
larly important during the initial decades after the building of the Second Temple
in Jerusalem, a time when the ritual cult was in its fledging stages and when the
priesthood was seeking ways to affirm its relevance for the community.58 As the
temple sought ways to secure communal support in the postmonarchic period—a
time when the traditional support of a royal patron for the regular ritual cult was
no longer available—renewed sacrificial obligations of Sabbath observance might
have implicated the community in maintaining the sanctuary’s sacrificial practice.
Indeed, a weekly rhythm of Sabbath observance might have been considered a fit-
ting mechanism for reminding the community that they must defer to the shrine
with sacrifices and donations and show their loyalty to the sanctuary by ceasing
labor while the offerings are presented. In addition, assigning special actions to the
high priest on this occasion might have assured the community that YHWH has
alternative ritual agents who might maintain the regular cult, now that a royal
intermediary is no longer present.
This proposed scenario, of course, rests on a Persian-period dating of the
legislation of Lev 17–26, a dating that some scholars who view H as stemming from
the First Temple period would contest.59 The issue of H’s date will not be settled on
the basis of an analysis of a single legislative theme like Sabbath observance. How-
ever, the present study invites those who propose a dating for H different from that
which is argued here to find a compelling rationale for both the nexus between the
Sabbath and nonmonarchic sanctuary ritual articulated in Lev 17–26, as well as the
evidence that H coordinates Priestly and non-Priestly traditions about the Sabbath
(including those from Deuteronomy) with traditional conceptions of this sacred
time as a sanctuary celebration.
58 For earlier studies that have linked H to the Persian period, see, among many others,
Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch, 572–75; Stephen C. Russell, “Biblical Jubilee Laws in
Light of Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid Period Contracts,” ZAW 130 (2018): 189–203; and
Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult, 59–63.
59 See, e.g., Knohl, Sanctuary of Silence, 119–224; Joosten, People and Land, 203–7; Jacob
Milgrom, Leviticus 17–22: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 3B (New
York: Doubleday, 2000), 1361–64; Lyons, From Law to Prophecy, 29–46.

Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in The Holin PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in The Holin PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JBL 138, no.

Sabbath and Sanctuary Cult in the

prescription is underscored by its repetition in 26:2, which positions the obligations

I. The Holiness Legislation, Sabbath Rest, and

Regular Rhythm of Labor Cessation

Sabbath Rites at the Shrine

20 Asdiscussed in greater detail in Rhyder, Centralizing the Cult, 369–71.

Following a resumptive statement in 23:37a that closely resembles the superscrip-

II. Contextualizing H’s Distinctive Sabbath Concept

Sabbath and Cessation: Reinforcing Their Association

Sanctuary of Silence, 56.

27 As already argued by George Smith, Assyrian Discoveries: An Account of Explorations and

Entstehung des Sabbats,” ZAW 29 (1909): 81–112.

summary, see Grund, Die Entstehung des Sabbats, 67–73, 79–84.

37 Grund, Die Entstehung des Sabbats, 133–48.

in previous scholarship, H’s treatise on communal holiness in Lev 19 evinces heavy

minority of scholars maintaining that it is an addition to an earlier version of the P creation

Restored Focus on Sabbath Celebrations at the Shrine

Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 29–31.

and its associated sanctuary rituals appear in H no longer as forming a discrete

III. Implications for Contextualizing

H’s innovative combination of two elements of Sabbath observance raises

You might also like