What do you think?
Rate this book
El levítico como literatura
Tercer libro del Pentateuco, el Levítico, así denominado por los judíos de habla griega, contiene las prescripciones rituales que debían poner en práctica los sacerdotes de la tribu de Leví. A pesar de que el texto fue compuesto en el periodo post-exílico (alrededor del siglo V a.C.), su origen es mucho más antiguo. De ahí que las prohibiciones alimenticias y las reglas relacionadas con la pureza conserven vestigios de una época primitiva, fuertemente marcada por concepciones mágicas. El estilo cuidado, preciso, repleto de términos técnicos y de repeticiones minuciosas, forma parte de la tradición sacerdotal y de la comunidad del Según Templo donde nació el Libro, cuyo mayor interés era asegurar la eficacia de los ritos. Así, dentro de un marco narrativo sencillo, en el Levítico aparecen las leyes que han de regir las ceremonias de los sacrificios, las pautas necesarias para las investiduras de los sacerdotes, los límites entre lo puro y lo impuro, y los bienes y los animales que deben ser consagrados a Dios como respuesta amorosa a la Alianza establecida entre Yahvé y Moisés en el monte Sinaí. En este trabajo, Mary Douglas propone una lectura antropológica del Levítico sin desdeñar una mirada teológica, a la vez que analiza el estilo retórico de los otros libros “sacerdotales” para dar cuenta de una cultura que, aunque lejana en el tiempo, poseía un sentido profundo de la trascendencia divina, traducida en normas legales y en estructuras sociales destinadas a la formación de un pueblo que adoraba a un solo Dios en medio de naciones politeístas. A partir del estudio detallado del pensamiento mítico, que recrea un pasado firme e incuestionable, la autora examina la función de los rituales en el Levítico, que procuraban excluir el culto a los espíritus de los muertos, a los dioses de la fertilidad, a los demonios de formas cambiantes, además de hacer un cuestionamiento a la función de los oráculos, los magos y los adivinos en una época de fuerte agitación política y cultural. Compuesto en la misma época que el Deuteronomio, la lectura atenta del Levítico le sirve a Mary Douglas para observar el estilo literario del texto bíblico, que funciona por analogías, y establecer relaciones significativas con un sistema de pensamiento remoto que, sin embargo, conserva similitudes relevantes con el mundo actual.
312 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
29 people are currently reading
466 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
February 24, 2022
This is one of the best treatments of a seriously underappreciated book in the Bible. Mary Douglas is interesting because she comes from the anthropology field. She wrote a very good book on Purity and Danger, and she applies that in more detail to Leviticus. She argues that purity is not some superstitious "magic contagion" that spreads everywhere but rather something more like the feudalistic notions of honor and proper etiquette. She uses the example of the medieval knight whose armor needs to be treated in a certain way for the knight himself to be honored. In Leviticus, the way an Israelite approached the sanctuary, unclenness, and foods was a way of showing God honor.
Douglas came to these views by looking at the animal laws and noticing that some of the animals were not particularly detestable. For instance, even if you don't like pigs, it seems there's nothing wrong with hares that should make them "detestable." She also appeals to Genesis, which says that all animals are created good. Perhaps Douglas even goes too far, seeing Leviticus as actually preserving animals by having people avoid touching them and making them into products, but I think it's a helpful way of looking at the laws.
The other thing that Douglas does which I think is on the right track, is read the sacrifices as mapping onto the three zones of the Tabernacle and Sinai. She is pretty persuasive on this point, since she goes into how the fat is a barrier to the organs of the sacrificial animals, just as the tents in the tabernacle are, and how this is why the sacrifice is arranged the way it is. She is less persuasive on the issue of the structure of the book as a whole. She argues that it is structured as a walk through the Tabernacle, but she really has to stretch some details to make it work. I do think she is helpful even here though because it seems Leviticus is indeed structured carefully and not so much hodge podge. The first few chapters begin with sacrifices, move on to the priests, and then reach purification issues, climaxing with the Day of Atonement in chapter 16. This chapter is a bridge to the rest of the book which focuses more on the purity of the land and the way God will expel Israel from the land if they do not maintain their purity and righteousness. So I owe Douglas a lot even here.
Probably my favorite thing about this book was that she reminded me of how "primitive" peoples really are terrified of the world and see it as full of tabboos (e.g. disasters are usually attributed to sins, accidental defilement, and other gods that are easy to offend). Reading Leviticus right now, it's pretty easy to interpret it as a book that is stridently monotheistic (excludes demons with perhaps the exception of Azazel) and as making the taboos clear and comparatively few. There's a set process for dealing with impurity that is wonderfully clear and doesn't leave people terrified about accidental violations; there is a way to deal with it.
Mary Douglas's chapter on oracles is particularly good in this respect, because she gets how people in those communities use urim and thumim. Not everything she says is right but she gets at community difficulties that would be resolvable through appeals to God. One of the insights that was useful in reading Leviticus was she observes that some inquiries could allow people to "save face" if they did not believe they sinned. If the oracle said they in fact had, it allowed the Israelite to treat it as a hidden sin. This makes thorny disputes between Israelites just a little less thorny.
Of course, we need to be careful about the liberal temptation to see those "primitives" as illogical and irrational. Thankfully, Mary Douglas comes from the field of anthropology that sees these people as quite logical given their own beliefs about the world.
Douglas came to these views by looking at the animal laws and noticing that some of the animals were not particularly detestable. For instance, even if you don't like pigs, it seems there's nothing wrong with hares that should make them "detestable." She also appeals to Genesis, which says that all animals are created good. Perhaps Douglas even goes too far, seeing Leviticus as actually preserving animals by having people avoid touching them and making them into products, but I think it's a helpful way of looking at the laws.
The other thing that Douglas does which I think is on the right track, is read the sacrifices as mapping onto the three zones of the Tabernacle and Sinai. She is pretty persuasive on this point, since she goes into how the fat is a barrier to the organs of the sacrificial animals, just as the tents in the tabernacle are, and how this is why the sacrifice is arranged the way it is. She is less persuasive on the issue of the structure of the book as a whole. She argues that it is structured as a walk through the Tabernacle, but she really has to stretch some details to make it work. I do think she is helpful even here though because it seems Leviticus is indeed structured carefully and not so much hodge podge. The first few chapters begin with sacrifices, move on to the priests, and then reach purification issues, climaxing with the Day of Atonement in chapter 16. This chapter is a bridge to the rest of the book which focuses more on the purity of the land and the way God will expel Israel from the land if they do not maintain their purity and righteousness. So I owe Douglas a lot even here.
Probably my favorite thing about this book was that she reminded me of how "primitive" peoples really are terrified of the world and see it as full of tabboos (e.g. disasters are usually attributed to sins, accidental defilement, and other gods that are easy to offend). Reading Leviticus right now, it's pretty easy to interpret it as a book that is stridently monotheistic (excludes demons with perhaps the exception of Azazel) and as making the taboos clear and comparatively few. There's a set process for dealing with impurity that is wonderfully clear and doesn't leave people terrified about accidental violations; there is a way to deal with it.
Mary Douglas's chapter on oracles is particularly good in this respect, because she gets how people in those communities use urim and thumim. Not everything she says is right but she gets at community difficulties that would be resolvable through appeals to God. One of the insights that was useful in reading Leviticus was she observes that some inquiries could allow people to "save face" if they did not believe they sinned. If the oracle said they in fact had, it allowed the Israelite to treat it as a hidden sin. This makes thorny disputes between Israelites just a little less thorny.
Of course, we need to be careful about the liberal temptation to see those "primitives" as illogical and irrational. Thankfully, Mary Douglas comes from the field of anthropology that sees these people as quite logical given their own beliefs about the world.
August 23, 2023
This was a fascinating read. While there are some things I disagree with and other things that I find questionable, I still found many explanations to be highly convincing. However, here is what I found most valuable in this book.
1. It provides a method of reading Leviticus that is far more helpful for understanding ancient texts. Douglas proposes that the author of Leviticus writes and things in analogies rather than in practical or rhetorical terms, unlike Deuteronomy. Once the reader starts to understand that everything is analogously based on another, it is easier to draw meaning and significance.
2. Closely related is Douglas' ability to move past 'scientific' or medical explanations of many of the food and purity laws in Leviticus and makes a great attempt to try to read Leviticus from a pre-modern perspective.
3. Less significant but also helpful is how she highlights the differences between Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They are very different books with very different approaches to the law and, if Douglas is right, very different ideologies.
It would take too long to list all that I found interesting in this book. Where I found it most unconvincing was in the last chapter, where Douglas proposes that the two goats in the Yom Kippur ritual represent God's election. One goat is chosen and the other goes free (although carrying the sins of the people). She has a very positive interpretation for the 'scapegoat' and indeed for all the non-elect in Genesis (Ishmael, Esau, etc.). Thus, Leviticus is teaching that (1) God's election does not necessarily mean anything bad and (2) those elected are chosen by not by any merit/fault of their own.
Her method is also suspect, too, because she draws from all sorts of ancient sources. This is often the difficulty with social scientific approaches used to draw parallels that may be unwarranted. Sometimes the parallel is just so faint or speculative, it appears like a huge stretch.
1. It provides a method of reading Leviticus that is far more helpful for understanding ancient texts. Douglas proposes that the author of Leviticus writes and things in analogies rather than in practical or rhetorical terms, unlike Deuteronomy. Once the reader starts to understand that everything is analogously based on another, it is easier to draw meaning and significance.
2. Closely related is Douglas' ability to move past 'scientific' or medical explanations of many of the food and purity laws in Leviticus and makes a great attempt to try to read Leviticus from a pre-modern perspective.
3. Less significant but also helpful is how she highlights the differences between Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They are very different books with very different approaches to the law and, if Douglas is right, very different ideologies.
It would take too long to list all that I found interesting in this book. Where I found it most unconvincing was in the last chapter, where Douglas proposes that the two goats in the Yom Kippur ritual represent God's election. One goat is chosen and the other goes free (although carrying the sins of the people). She has a very positive interpretation for the 'scapegoat' and indeed for all the non-elect in Genesis (Ishmael, Esau, etc.). Thus, Leviticus is teaching that (1) God's election does not necessarily mean anything bad and (2) those elected are chosen by not by any merit/fault of their own.
Her method is also suspect, too, because she draws from all sorts of ancient sources. This is often the difficulty with social scientific approaches used to draw parallels that may be unwarranted. Sometimes the parallel is just so faint or speculative, it appears like a huge stretch.
October 16, 2015
This book is illuminating in many ways.
Pros: it draws upon clear evidence for a three-layered cosmology, and relates those cosmological structures with Mt Sinai, the tabernacle, the macro-structure of Leviticus, and some unique micro-structures as well (e.g. the parts of animal offerings & the kinds of food within dietary laws).
There were many unique insights which I'll never forget. Some are: (1) the quail of Num. 11 being treated as "teeming creatures of the air" which are forbidden food in Torah, (2) the animal offerings being divided according to one's ascent up the three zones of Mt Sinai/Tabernacle, (3) Lev. 11 is actually a very simple chapter which surveys all land animals, classifying all except the herds and flocks of Israel as "unclean," so as not to be eaten OR sacrificed in the Lord's House--so there was a clear connection between animal sacrifice and household/family meals, (4) a translational clarification about unclean foods (i.e. the dietary laws) not being an "abomination" at all, which, remaining mistranslated, actually misleads Christians into believing silly exaggerations about God's Law.
Cons: (1) there are a bunch of source-critical assumptions and observations throughout the book, not all of which are bad, but most of which color the text as a multi-layered, redacted tradition and not an inspired book with one Divine authorial intent & composition, (2) toward the end of the book, the author quickly attempts to interpret statements made in Leviticus regarding homosexual sex (mentioned negatively) as only having to do with "cultic" sins (which, admittedly, do appear within a larger context of "cultic" concerns); so the laws explicitly prohibiting homosexual sex are allegedly only designed to "protect the married state," thereby deflecting any need to draw further conclusions about the immorality mentioned therein (i.e. that the sexual practice itself is called an "abomination") & that moral connection with Gods created sexual design, which is explicitly one-male/one-female coitus.
All-in-all, this book packs a pretty good punch. It's not a commentary though. It's a study in what kind of literature Leviticus is, based on anthropological research & biblical studies.
Pros: it draws upon clear evidence for a three-layered cosmology, and relates those cosmological structures with Mt Sinai, the tabernacle, the macro-structure of Leviticus, and some unique micro-structures as well (e.g. the parts of animal offerings & the kinds of food within dietary laws).
There were many unique insights which I'll never forget. Some are: (1) the quail of Num. 11 being treated as "teeming creatures of the air" which are forbidden food in Torah, (2) the animal offerings being divided according to one's ascent up the three zones of Mt Sinai/Tabernacle, (3) Lev. 11 is actually a very simple chapter which surveys all land animals, classifying all except the herds and flocks of Israel as "unclean," so as not to be eaten OR sacrificed in the Lord's House--so there was a clear connection between animal sacrifice and household/family meals, (4) a translational clarification about unclean foods (i.e. the dietary laws) not being an "abomination" at all, which, remaining mistranslated, actually misleads Christians into believing silly exaggerations about God's Law.
Cons: (1) there are a bunch of source-critical assumptions and observations throughout the book, not all of which are bad, but most of which color the text as a multi-layered, redacted tradition and not an inspired book with one Divine authorial intent & composition, (2) toward the end of the book, the author quickly attempts to interpret statements made in Leviticus regarding homosexual sex (mentioned negatively) as only having to do with "cultic" sins (which, admittedly, do appear within a larger context of "cultic" concerns); so the laws explicitly prohibiting homosexual sex are allegedly only designed to "protect the married state," thereby deflecting any need to draw further conclusions about the immorality mentioned therein (i.e. that the sexual practice itself is called an "abomination") & that moral connection with Gods created sexual design, which is explicitly one-male/one-female coitus.
All-in-all, this book packs a pretty good punch. It's not a commentary though. It's a study in what kind of literature Leviticus is, based on anthropological research & biblical studies.
October 18, 2022
One of those books which illustrates how intelligent unbelievers often read the Bible more carefully and reverently than believers. Learned a ton.
December 10, 2010
There was a lot of really interesting material in here. For a scholarly book on Leviticus, I found Douglas to be very readable. I also had moments of frustration mostly due to Douglas' attempt to interpolate the original audience of Leviticus, using source critical data. Consequently, I found several of her arguments to be highly speculative and at point anthropocentric...but what can you expect from an anthropologist?
August 26, 2024
At the beginning, I had mixed feelings about where this book was headed. Very early, Douglas summarized and weighed in on some very academic and scholarly discussions. While interesting and ultimately helpful to her overall point, the academic tone and textually critical examination of Leviticus, as well as the anthropological approach to its historicity left me feeling like I had made a mistake in my choice of book.
However, as the book progressed I was pleasantly surprised with the observations she made about the Text. While I don’t find the discussion of the various “voices” in Leviticus nor the conclusions she comes to from an anthropological examination helpful or compelling, the interpretation of Leviticus’ laws, rites, and literary structure were beyond helpful in reading and approaching this difficult text.
In the end, the final 3.5 chapters redeemed whatever faults I had with the book. These chapters are masterful at revealing the hidden layers of Leviticus through the literary structure of the book. Mary Douglas, while peeling back the curtain on this book to reveal the treasures within, leaves the work of theological and spiritual interpretation to the reader.
Overall, this book helped me grasp what had been ungraspable in this central book of the Torah. While not answering every question I have about Leviticus, Mary Douglas helped reframe the way I view it so I can ask better questions of the text…which, in my opinion, is better.
However, as the book progressed I was pleasantly surprised with the observations she made about the Text. While I don’t find the discussion of the various “voices” in Leviticus nor the conclusions she comes to from an anthropological examination helpful or compelling, the interpretation of Leviticus’ laws, rites, and literary structure were beyond helpful in reading and approaching this difficult text.
In the end, the final 3.5 chapters redeemed whatever faults I had with the book. These chapters are masterful at revealing the hidden layers of Leviticus through the literary structure of the book. Mary Douglas, while peeling back the curtain on this book to reveal the treasures within, leaves the work of theological and spiritual interpretation to the reader.
Overall, this book helped me grasp what had been ungraspable in this central book of the Torah. While not answering every question I have about Leviticus, Mary Douglas helped reframe the way I view it so I can ask better questions of the text…which, in my opinion, is better.
March 25, 2021
The author argues and shows that the ancient Hebrew book of Leviticus should be read as literary architecture and a memory place; a pilgrimage through the tabernacle / temple courtyard, then inner and most holy places. Here, descriptions and explanations of laws are through cycles of analogy set in contrast and compliment to others, animal and human bodies are metaphors—with the physical mingled with spiritual e.g., bodily fluids, organs, and parts—the horizontal tabernacle is the vertical Mt Sinai of Exodus, and Yahweh's characteristics of justice, mercy, and relationship. There are no surprises in the most holy place, just a concentration of earlier themes… "At the end we see how Leviticus is in a large sense all about the things that have been consecrated and the things that belong to the Lord: blood viz. spiritual life, the priests viz. spiritual humans, the land viz. the spiritual garden, and dedicated animals viz. spiritual microcosm...". It is hard to imagine or to understand the relevance without living on the land and amongst humans and animals with their blood, flesh, fluids, conception, birth, daily ablutions, death, drought, fire, dirt, soil, smell, and stench… but this is the life of a priest and every person.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 26, 2022
Biblical studies and related fields need more input from scholars in primary content areas whose fields they borrow from. As a sociologist, I find a lot of what passes as sociological analyses in NT/OT/Biblical studies and academic theology to be of very poor quality. Commenters in other primary fields have made similar remarks.
This makes Douglas’s work, as an anthropologist, welcome. This book is beautifully written. To be honest, I do not know how much of her primary argument I buy into. I do not share her source/redaction critical foundations for understanding the text. But it is still well argued and beautifully written. And there were certainly valid observations and arguments throughout.
I read this alongside the book of Leviticus and throughly enjoyed the journey.
This makes Douglas’s work, as an anthropologist, welcome. This book is beautifully written. To be honest, I do not know how much of her primary argument I buy into. I do not share her source/redaction critical foundations for understanding the text. But it is still well argued and beautifully written. And there were certainly valid observations and arguments throughout.
I read this alongside the book of Leviticus and throughly enjoyed the journey.
May 9, 2021
While Professor Douglas has some very insightful and interesting comments about pieces of the book of Leviticus/Vaykira and has an interesting overall thesis about its overall construction her argument is weakened by not exploring the second half of the book nearly as intensely or insightfully as with the first half. This strange lack of focus and depth weakens her point about the 'analogical' thinking behind the book and her argument about its overall architecture.
May 16, 2020
Quite a dense read, but Douglas' examination of Leviticus as an anthropologist and comparatively is invaluable. Of particular note are descriptions of the sacrificial system as a model for a way of living, comparing it to Sinai and to the establishment of the Tabernacle is brilliant. Well worth the time investment to read.
April 29, 2022
Read for Hardcore bible study over lent this year. Definitely a unique take on the book of Leviticus/the ancient Hebrew religion in general, but Douglas's analysis neither made Leviticus actually enjoyable or made sense all the time (argument about kosher protecting animals falls apart with Jesus's pronouncements in the New Testament).
July 7, 2024
Dang. Some parts of this were so fascinating and other parts were confusing - but I was also trying to read it while my kids were "having quiet time" 🧐 There are some chapters I might try to reread when I'm guaranteed more quiet in case I might actually understand them better a second time around. It's some heavy duty academic stuff tho, definitely not written for a general audience.
October 31, 2025
⭐ 4,5
This book is a must read!
This book is a must read!
July 30, 2018
A Different View of Leviticus
Reading Leviticus with Mary Douglas was a pleasure. She offers an unique perspective of Leviticus through a feminists, anthropological reading that has many insights for those with eyes to see.
Reading Leviticus with Mary Douglas was a pleasure. She offers an unique perspective of Leviticus through a feminists, anthropological reading that has many insights for those with eyes to see.
November 8, 2014
This book had many parts that were brilliant and immensely helpful for reading and understanding Leviticus and the logic of it. Especially the opening chapters on sacrificial animals, human bodies, the tabernacle, and Mt. Sinai all being analogous microcosms. Though at times drawing on the anthropology of other indigenous peoples can be problematic for explaining the theology of the Bible, her insights from totemic peoples was helpful. The closing chapters on Leviticus as a written tabernacle is phenomenal and simply breath-taking. Leviticus actually walks you through the outer court (ch. 1-17), the sanctuary (ch. 18-24), and the most holy place (ch. 25-27). The screens separating these division are the only two narrative passages in the book - Nadab and Abihu (10) and the blasphemer who is killed (24). Both these are warning passages about challenging God's holiness. I found these claims very convincing.
The section on "teeming" animals is provocative - though I am not sure I was convinced. She seems to see teeming animals as unclean because God wants to protect their life. (A big theme in her reading of Lev. is YHWH's protection of animal life as a part of his justice.) This positive view of being unclean (God doesn't want these animals sacrificed) though interesting, just doesn't seem to match the didactic force of what the Moses intends to teach through the clean and unclean laws.
The biggest problem of the book is dating it in the exile. When she places Leviticus canonically (directly after Exodus), her insights are far more fruitful. She claims that Leviticus does not recognize a centralized shrine (since it is written in the exile and demands that all slaughtered animals are brought to the tabernacle) where as Deuteronomy permits slaughter and therefore must acknowlegde a central tabernacle. A better explanation for the difference in Lev. and Deut. is simply that Lev. was written to the Exodus community in the dessert and Deut. for the community preparing to enter Canaan. This problematic assumption leads to a number of odd ideas in the middle of the book.
That said - definitely worth reading the end. The book opens and closes with its best material.
The section on "teeming" animals is provocative - though I am not sure I was convinced. She seems to see teeming animals as unclean because God wants to protect their life. (A big theme in her reading of Lev. is YHWH's protection of animal life as a part of his justice.) This positive view of being unclean (God doesn't want these animals sacrificed) though interesting, just doesn't seem to match the didactic force of what the Moses intends to teach through the clean and unclean laws.
The biggest problem of the book is dating it in the exile. When she places Leviticus canonically (directly after Exodus), her insights are far more fruitful. She claims that Leviticus does not recognize a centralized shrine (since it is written in the exile and demands that all slaughtered animals are brought to the tabernacle) where as Deuteronomy permits slaughter and therefore must acknowlegde a central tabernacle. A better explanation for the difference in Lev. and Deut. is simply that Lev. was written to the Exodus community in the dessert and Deut. for the community preparing to enter Canaan. This problematic assumption leads to a number of odd ideas in the middle of the book.
That said - definitely worth reading the end. The book opens and closes with its best material.
September 17, 2012
When one is doing a lectio continua of the scriptures it starts out being a literary pleasure — Genesis and and the first part of Exodus are as exciting as anything in ancient literature — but then one comes to the tabernacle descriptions in Exodus and then Leviticus. Leviticus! Surely one of the hardest bits of Scripture to plow through. Those long lists of ritual laws. One of the things that makes the laws so boring is that they seem so arbitrary. Why is suet fat never eaten, but always burned entirely? Leviticus doesn’t say. Of all the books of the Bible Leviticus is perhaps the last one that one would least think of reading as belles-lettres, but that is exactly what the anthropologist Mary Douglas does in Leviticus as Literature. Leviticus, Douglas argues, is not a random collection of arbitrary rules, but an intricately crafted work of analogical thinking. She shows how the body of the sacrificial animal is a kind of model or map of the tabernacle, each part of the dismembered animal corresponds to a part of the tabernacle, and the tabernacle is itself a model of Mount Sinai, which is a model of the universe. The sacrificial rites thus become an enactment of the cosmic order. So the suet over the entrails is sacred to God not because it corresponds to the curtain before the Holy of Holies. But what corresponds to the Holy of Holies itself. Well, that’s where the bridal symbolism comes in: http://sancrucensis.wordpress.com/201...
June 25, 2012
I LOVE this book. If you have any interest at all in Leviticus, it is a must-read. Douglas' ground-breaking work presents the book of Leviticus as a tripartite symbol system which plots the Tabernacle in terms of Mt. Sinai, transforming the interpretation of purity laws and weaving them together with the sacrificial system into something much more grand than a coherent whole. Douglas' style is clear, straightforward, and never loses sight of the overarching schema of Leviticus that she argues, namely, "Leviticus is not the narrow doctrine of a crabbed professional priesthood but a powerful intellectual statement about a religion which emphasizes God's justice and compassion."
August 22, 2010
Recommended by a learned rabbi friend, this book was over my head in parts. I read & assimilated what I could, will return to it when we cycle back to the book of Leviticus again.
I also thought the title was misleading: The book is more an anthropological than a literary investigation of the book of Leviticus.
I also thought the title was misleading: The book is more an anthropological than a literary investigation of the book of Leviticus.
Read
May 18, 2013I really liked this book. I read it really slowly. I'd recommend it if you are interested in the Bible but kind of turned off by Leviticus. It's all told from a pretty leftest anthropologist point of view.
December 31, 2015
Anthropological look at Leviticus, with some interesting insights, some questionable but all in all an interesting read.
March 30, 2017
As usual, Professor Douglas provides thought-provoking insights into ritual purity/uncleanness as a result of her work in anthropology. Furthermore, her ideas regarding the analogical organization of Leviticus are intriguing. That said, there were a number of aspects of the book I found disturbing.
First, she maintains a late date assumption of Leviticus, in other words, that it was written and compiled during or after the late monarchy. According to this view, there were a variety of religious traditions and that the one favoring Leviticus was the winner and that the compiling of Leviticus was a purging of losing views. Yes, the Old Testament documents a high degree of paganism in Israel before and during the First Temple Period, but is that an indicator that Torah books such as Leviticus hadn't been written yet or that people were just not following their teachings?
Second, she makes an argument that divination, prohibited in Leviticus, was absolutely necessary for the function of Levitical religion. In Leviticus, there is discussion of both intentional and unintentional or unknown sin. The latter category consists of sins not done out of rebellion against God or out of ignorance that such actions are sinful. Once an individual recognizes that he has sinned against God, he is responsible for the appropriate sin and/or guilt offerings. How does he go about learning about such a sin? Professor Douglas suggests divination, a common activity among neighboring cultures. Again, it is highly likely that the Israelites love affair with paganism led to use of divination, but that does not necessarily mean that the faithful priests and worshippers of Yahweh would use divination.
I had previously read and enjoyed Professor Douglas' book Purity and Danger. I did not necessarily feel the same about this one. If anything, it provoked me to think more critically about my own views and how to go about organizing and defending them.
First, she maintains a late date assumption of Leviticus, in other words, that it was written and compiled during or after the late monarchy. According to this view, there were a variety of religious traditions and that the one favoring Leviticus was the winner and that the compiling of Leviticus was a purging of losing views. Yes, the Old Testament documents a high degree of paganism in Israel before and during the First Temple Period, but is that an indicator that Torah books such as Leviticus hadn't been written yet or that people were just not following their teachings?
Second, she makes an argument that divination, prohibited in Leviticus, was absolutely necessary for the function of Levitical religion. In Leviticus, there is discussion of both intentional and unintentional or unknown sin. The latter category consists of sins not done out of rebellion against God or out of ignorance that such actions are sinful. Once an individual recognizes that he has sinned against God, he is responsible for the appropriate sin and/or guilt offerings. How does he go about learning about such a sin? Professor Douglas suggests divination, a common activity among neighboring cultures. Again, it is highly likely that the Israelites love affair with paganism led to use of divination, but that does not necessarily mean that the faithful priests and worshippers of Yahweh would use divination.
I had previously read and enjoyed Professor Douglas' book Purity and Danger. I did not necessarily feel the same about this one. If anything, it provoked me to think more critically about my own views and how to go about organizing and defending them.
Read
March 27, 2019- frustrating in the same ways as Milgrom's commentary, but also fruitful
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews