It seems clear that the Egyptian passover rite was a rite of threshold
covenanting, as ordered of God and as understood by the Israelites. Its
sacrifice was on the threshold of the homes of the Hebrews on the
threshold of a new year,[573] and on the threshold of a new nationality.
Then Israel began anew in all things. Moreover, it was recognized as the
rite of marriage between Jehovah and Israel; as the very Threshold
Covenant had its origin in the rite of primitive marriage.
That first passover night was the night when Jehovah took to himself in
covenant union the “Virgin of Israel,” and became a Husband unto her.
From that time forward any recognition of, or affiliation with, another
God, is called “whoredom,” “adultery,” or “fornication.”[574] In this
light it is that the prophets always speak of idolatry.
Jeremiah recognizes the first passover night as the time of this
marriage covenant, when he says:
“Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah,
That I will make a new covenant
With the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers
In the day that I took them by the hand
To bring them out of the land of Egypt;
Which my covenant they brake,
Although I was an husband unto them, saith Jehovah.”[575]
And Jehovah, speaking through Ezekiel of his loving choice of the Hebrew
daughter of the Amorite and the Hittite, says: “Now when I passed by
thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I
spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto
thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord God, and
thou becamest mine.”[576]
It seems to be in recognition of the truth that the Egyptian passover
was the rite of marriage between Jehovah and Israel, that the Song of
Songs, the epithalamium of the Hebrew Scriptures, is always read in the
synagogue at the passover service. This idea of the relation of Jehovah
and Israel runs through the entire Old Testament, and shows itself in
the Jewish ritual of to-day.
In the primitive marriage rite the stamp of the red hand of the
bridegroom is the certification of the covenant union, at the doorway of
the family. But in the Egyptian passover it was the virgin of Israel who
certified to the marriage covenant by the bloody stamp on the doorway.
Hence it was a feminine symbol, in a bush of hyssop, that was dipped in
the blood and used for this stamping.[577] The tree, or bush, is a
universal symbol of the feminine in nature. This is shown, for example,
in the tree or brush-topped pole as the symbol of Ashtaroth,
“wife,”[578] as over against the pillar or obelisk as the symbol of
Baal, or “lord,” or “husband.”[579]
-----
Footnote 524:
The recognition of this truth is a reason for the infibulation of
female children among primitive peoples. (See, for example, Captain
J.S. King’s “Notes on the Folk-Lore, and some Social Customs of the
Western Somali Tribes,” in the London _Folk-Lore Journal_, VI., 124;
also Dr. Remondino’s _History of Circumcision_, p. 51.)
Footnote 525:
See Appendix.
Footnote 526:
See “Satapatha Brâhmana,” 1. Kânda, 2 Adhyâya, 5 Brâhmana, 14–16, in
_Sacred Books of the East_, XII., 62 f.; also “Satapatha Brâhmana,”
III., 5, 1, 11, in _Sac. Bks. of East_, XXVI., 113.
Footnote 527:
“Satapatha Brâhmana,” I., 3, 1, 18; I., 9, 2, 5–11, 21–24; II., 1, 1,
4, in _Sac. Bks. of East_, XII., 74, 257, 262, 277; also “Satapatha
Brâhmana,” III., 3, 1, 11; III., 8, 4, 7–18, in _Sac. Bks. of East_,
XXVI., 61, 211–214.
Footnote 528:
See _Rig-Veda_, II., 36, 4; X., 18, 7. Comp. “Satapatha Brâhmana,” I.,
7, 2, 14, in _Sac. Bks. of East_, XII., 194; also “Satapatha
Brâhmana,” IV., 1, 2, 9; IV., 1, 3, 19, with note, in _Sac. Bks. of
East_, XXVI., 260, 269. See, also, Hopkins’s _Religions of India_, p.
490, and note.
Footnote 529:
Compare Sir Monier Monier-Williams’s _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, pp.
33, 54 f., 223 f., and Wilkins’s _Hindu Mythology_, p. 233 f.
Footnote 530:
Sir Monier Monier-Williams’s _Buddhism_, pp. 371–373. This writer,
speaking of the prominence in India of the symbolism of the _linga_
and _yoni_ combined, ascribes it to the theory of the two essences,
“Spirit regarded as a male principle, and Matter, or the germ of the
external world, regarded as a female.” He says: “Without the union of
the two no creation takes place. To any one imbued with these
dualistic conceptions the _linga_ and the _yoni_ are suggestive of no
improper ideas. They are either types of the two mysterious creative
forces ... or symbols of one divine power delegating procreative
energy to male and female organisms. They are mystical
representatives, and perhaps the best impersonal representatives, of
the abstract expressions ‘paternity’ and ‘maternity,’” [and their
conjunction in marital union]. (_Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 224 f.)
Footnote 531:
This legend is found in _Pirqe de R. Eliezer_, Chap. XXX. The Hebrew
words _saph_ and _miphtan_ are here employed for “threshold.” It is
also given in Maçoudi’s _Les Prairies d’Or_, chap. 39, p. 94. Here the
Arabic is _ʿatabah_, for “threshold.” See, also, Sprenger’s _Life of
Mohammad_, p. 53 f.
Footnote 532:
See Lane’s _Arabic-English Lexicon_, s. v. “ʿAtabah.” and Dozy’s
_Supplément aux Dictionnaires_ Arabes, s. v. “ʿAtabah.”
Footnote 533:
Buxtorf’s _Lex. Chald. Tal. et Rabb._, s. v. “Pethakh.” See, also, the
Talmudic treatise _Niddâ_, “Mishna,” § 2, 5.
Footnote 534:
See, for example, illustration in Maspero’s _Dawn of Civil._, p. 657;
also Sayce’s _Relig. of Anc. Babyl._, p. 285.
Footnote 535:
Wilkinson’s _Ancient Egyptians_, III., 3, 8, 14, 18, 21, 22, 31, 36,
37, 40, 41, 45, 46, 60, 63, 66, 87, 100, 107, 109, 115, 118, 122, 129,
133, 135, 137, 146, 156, 158, 163, 170, 172, 175, 177, 179, 180, etc.
Footnote 536:
See Perrot and Chipiez’s _Hist. of Art in Phœnicia and Cyprus_, I.,
80, 320. See, also, Layard’s _Nineveh and its Remains_, II., 168–170
(Am. ed.); and an article by Hommel, in “Proceedings of the Society of
Biblical Archæology” for January, 1893.
Footnote 537:
Hearn’s _Glimpses of Unfamiliar Japan_, II., 397, note; Lowell’s
_Occult Japan_, pp. 270–273.
Footnote 538:
See Bancroft’s _Native Races and Antiq._, III., 504–506.
Footnote 539:
_Voyages of Capt. James Cook_, “First Voyage” at May 14, 1769. Also
Voltaire’s _Les Oreilles du Comte de Chesterfield_, Ch. VI. See
Appendix.
Footnote 540:
See Cook’s _Voyage to Pacific Ocean_, volume of plates; also Ellis’s
_Poly. Res._, II., 217.
Footnote 541:
See Exod. 12 : 1–20.
Footnote 542:
Exod. 12 : 11.
Footnote 543:
Exod. 12 : 21, 27.
Footnote 544:
Exod. 12 : 22.
Footnote 545:
Exod. 2 : 23–25; 3 : 7–10; 5 : 1, 2; 6 : 1–7; 10 : 21–29.
Footnote 546:
Exod. 11 : 4–7.
Footnote 547:
Exod. 12 : 23.
Footnote 548:
Compare Josh. 2 : 1–21; 6 : 16–25.
Footnote 549:
See, for example, Judg. 19 : 27; 1 Kings 14 : 17; 2 Kings 12 : 9, 13;
22 : 4; 23 : 4; 25 : 18; 1 Chron. 9 : 19, 22; 2 Chron. 3 : 7; 23 : 4;
34 : 9; Esther 2 : 21; 6 : 2; Isa. 6 : 4; Jer. 35 : 4; 52 : 19, 24;
Ezek. 40 : 6, 7; 41 : 16; 43 : 8; Amos 9 : 1; Zeph. 2 : 14; Zech. 12 :
2.
Footnote 550:
See, for example, Jer. 52 : 19.
Footnote 551:
See pp. 109–111, _supra_.
Footnote 552:
See _Septuagint_, in loco.
Footnote 553:
See _Vulgate_, in loco.
Footnote 554:
Philo’s _Opera_, Mangey, 2 : 292.
Footnote 555:
Liddell and Scott’s _Greek-English Lexicon_, s. v.
Footnote 556:
Cited in Levy’s _Neuheb. Wörterb._, s. v. “Saph.”
Footnote 557:
This on the authority of Prof. Dr. H.V. Hilprecht.
Footnote 558:
Among primitive peoples it was a common thought that the first fruits
of life in any sphere belonged of right to God, or the gods. This was
true of the fields, of the flocks and herds, and of the family. (See,
for example, Frazer’s _Golden Bough_, II., 68–78, 373–384; also W.
Robertson Smith’s _Religion of the Semites_, pp. 443–446.) As in Egypt
particular gods were supposed to have power over men and beasts in
special localities, the first-born belonged to them, and stood as
representing their power and protection; yet Jehovah claimed to be
Lord over all. And now, at the close of the contest between God and
the gods, Jehovah took to himself out of the homes of his enemies the
devoted first-born of man and of beast, in evidence of the truth that
the gods of Egypt could not protect them.
Footnote 559: