Abstract

Abstract Aaron’s enigmatic response to Moses’ accusation of cultic malpractice in the disposal of the remains of the ḥaṭṭāt (Lev 10:19) has puzzled exegetes since antiquity. Recent interpreters have concluded that it is not possible to understand Aaron’s reasoning and that his response emphasizes the priesthood’s mystique and its claim to a qualified freedom in interpreting Mosaic law. In contrast, I argue that the crux interpretum can be resolved when we pay particular attention to the pronominal suffixes attached to the word חטאת.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call