15 Notwithstanding, you may kill and eat flesh within all your gates, after all the desire of your soul, according to the blessing of Yahweh your God which he has given you: the unclean and the clean may eat of it, as of the gazelle, and as of the hart.
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
Notwithstanding thou mayest kill. What precedes I have introduced in its proper place, viz., that they should not kill the sacrifices anywhere but in the sanctuary, of which there was only one in Judea. Here the permission to eat meat is given, provided that they do not offer the animals to God, but eat of them as of wild beasts. By way of example, two kinds are mentioned, the roe-buck and the hart, of which no offering was made. They are, therefore, freely allowed to eat meat wheresoever they pleased, with this exception, that they should not taste the blood; for, although this was observed by their forefathers before the giving of the Law, God ratifies it anew when He would gather a peculiar people to Himself. We know that immediately after the deluge, Noah and his posterity were commanded to abstain from blood; but, inasmuch as the greater part of mankind soon degenerated, it is probable that all nations neglected God's command, and permitted to themselves a universal license on this point; and it is even questionable whether this observance, which was everywhere fallen into desuetude, prevailed among the family of Shem. Certainly it may be conjectured from the renewed promulgation of the law, that it was altogether obsolete; at any rate, God would have His chosen people distinguished by this mark of separation from heathen nations. The reason of the prohibition which is now mentioned had already been declared, [1] viz., because the blood is the seat of life. But although it, was allowable to kill an animal for food, yet, was it a useful restraint to prevent inhumanity, that they should not touch the blood; for if they abstained from the blood of beasts, much more necessary was it to spare human blood. After God, therefore, has forbidden blood to be eaten, He immediately proceeds to speak of men themselves: "Whose sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." (Genesis 9:4-6.) Hence I have deemed it appropriate to annex all the passages in which God commands the people to abstain from blood, to the Sixth Commandment. In itself, indeed, the eating of blood was a thing of no great importance: since, therefore, God so often inculcates a point of so little weight, it may be inferred that the law has some further object. To this may be added the severity of the punishment, for surely it was not a crime worthy of death to taste the blood of some little bird; and hence, also, it is manifested that the prohibition had another meaning, viz., that cruelty might be abhorred. And the words of Moses show that the eating of blood is not forbidden because it infected man with its uncleanness, but that they might account the life of man to be precious; for it is said, "the blood is the life," which, in the opinion of Augustine, [2] is equivalent to its being "the sign of life;" but Moses rather means that animal life is contained in the blood. Wherefore, blood, which represents the life, was not interdicted without reason, nor was it only sinful to eat the blood by itself, but also together with the flesh, as is expressly declared both in Deuteronomy and in the last passage from Leviticus.
1 - See on Leviticus 3:17, [3]vol. 2, p. 335, whence, however, he refers to Genesis 9:4. C. Society's edition, [4]vol. 1, p. 293.
2 - Quaest. in Leviticum, 57 Section 2. "Illud appellatur anima, quod significat animam." -- Edit. Benedict. tom. 3, p. 1 pag. 516.
While a stringent injunction is laid down that the old rule (compare Leviticus 17:3, etc.) must be adhered to as regards animals slain in sacrifice, yet permission is now given to slaughter at home what was necessary for the table. The ceremonial distinctions did not apply in such cases, anymore than to "the roebuck" (or gazelle) "and hart," animals allowed for food but not for sacrifice.
Thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates - With the proviso that the blood be poured out on the ground.
1. The blood should not be eaten.
2. It should be poured out by way of sacrifice. I think this is the meaning; and not that they should pour out the blood with as little ceremony and respect as they poured water upon the ground, which is the meaning according to Calmet and others.
The roebuck, and - the hart - It is very likely that by צבי tsebi the antelope is meant; and by איל aiyal, the hart or deer. This is the opinion of Dr. Shaw; and from the report of travelers we learn that both these animals are found in that desert to the present day. See Harmer, vol. iv., p. 25, etc. Of the propriety of eating clean animals there could be no question, but the blood must be poured out; yet there were cases in which they might kill and eat in all their gates, cities, and dwellings - such as the roebuck and the hart, or all clean wild beasts, for these being taken in hunting, and frequently shot by arrows, their blood could not be poured out at the altar. Therefore the command appears to take in only such tame beasts as were used for food.
Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, according to the (i) blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee: the unclean and the clean may eat thereof, (k) as of the roebuck, and as of the hart.
(i) As God has given you power and ability.
(k) Everyone may eat equally at home the beast appointed for sacrifice and the other.
Notwithstanding, thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates,.... They might kill such cattle that were allowed for food, and eat the flesh of them in theie own cities and houses in which they dwelt; they were not obliged to bring these to the place God should choose, and kill them there, as they had been wont to bring them to the tabernacle while in the wilderness:
whatsoever thy soul lusteth after; whatever they had a mind to, or their appetite craved, and were desirous of, provided it was not any thing forbidden, but was allowed to be eaten:
according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he hath given thee; which it was in the power of their hands to procure for themselves; they might live according to their abilities, and keep a table answerable to what God had blessed them with; from which they were so far from being restrained, that it was rather commendable in them so to do, provided they did not indulge to luxury and intemperance:
the clean and the unclean may eat thereof; that is, such in their families who laboured under any ceremonial uncleanness by the touch of a dead body, or by reason of issues and menstrues; these, as well as those who were free from anything of this kind, might eat of common food in their houses, though they might not eat of the holy things; see Leviticus 7:20.
as of the roebuck, and as of the hart; that is, as those were clean creatures, and allowed for food, Deuteronomy 14:5 so they might eat of oxen or sheep, or lambs or rams, and goats, though they were creatures used in sacrifice.
Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates--Every animal designed for food, whether ox, goat, or lamb, was during the abode in the wilderness ordered to be slain as a peace offering at the door of the tabernacle; its blood to be sprinkled, and its fat burnt upon the altar by the priest. The encampment, being then round about the altar, made this practice, appointed to prevent idolatry, easy and practicable. But on the settlement in the promised land, the obligation to slay at the tabernacle was dispensed with. The people were left at liberty to prepare their meat in their cities or homes.
according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he hath given thee--The style of living should be accommodated to one's condition and means--profuse and riotous indulgence can never secure the divine blessing.
the unclean and the clean may eat thereof--The unclean here are those who were under some slight defilement, which, without excluding them from society, yet debarred them from eating any of the sacred meats (Leviticus 7:20). They were at liberty freely to partake of common articles of food.
of the roebuck--the gazelle.
and as of the hart--The Syrian deer (Cervus barbatus) is a species between our red and fallow deer, distinguished by the want of a bis-antler, or second branch on the horns, reckoning from below, and for a spotted livery which is effaced only in the third or fourth year.
But if these instructions were really to be observed by the people in Canaan, it was necessary that the law which had been given with reference to the journey through the wilderness, viz., that no animal should be slain anywhere else than at the tabernacle in the same manner as a slain-offering (Leviticus 17:3-6), should be abolished. This is done in Deuteronomy 12:15, where Moses, in direct connection with what goes before, allows the people, as an exception (רק, only) to the rules laid down in Deuteronomy 12:4-14, to kill and eat flesh for their own food according to all their soul's desire. Flesh that was slaughtered for food could be eaten by both clean and unclean, such for example as the roebuck and the hart, animals which could not be offered in sacrifice, and in which, therefore, the distinction between clean and unclean on the part of the eaters did not come into consideration at all.
*More commentary available at chapter level.