Verse 1. - And when any will offer a meat offering unto the Lord. The word used in the original for "meat offering" (minchah), means, like its Greek equivalent, δῶρον, a gift made by an inferior to a superior. Thus the sacrifices of Cain and Abel were their "minchah" to God (Genesis 4:3, 4), the present sent to Esau by Jacob was his "minchah" (Genesis 32:13), and the present to Joseph was his brethren's "minchah" (Genesis 43:11). It is therefore equivalent to a gift of homage, which recognizes the superiority of him to whom it is offered, and ceremonially promises loyal obedience to him. Owing to its use in this passage, it came gradually to be confined in its signification to vegetable gifts, - unbloody sacrifices, as they are called sometimes, in contrast to animal sacrifices - while the word "corban" crone to be used in the wider acceptation which once belonged to "minchah." The conditions to be fulfilled by the Israelite who offered a meat offering were the following.

1. He must offer either

(1) uncooked flour, with oil, salt, and frankincense, or

(2) flour made into an unleavened cake (whether of the nature of biscuit or pancake), with oil, salt, and frankincense; or

(3) roasted grains, with oil, salt, and frankincense.

2. He must bring his offering to the court of the tabernacle, and give to the priests at least as much as one omer (that is, nearly a gallon), and not more than sixty-one omers. The priest receiving it from him must:

1. Take a handful of the flour, oil, and salt, or a proportionate part of the cake (each omer generally made ten cakes) in place of the flour, and burn it with all the frankincense as a memorial upon the altar of burnt offering.

2. With his brother priests he must eat the remainder within the precincts of the tabernacle. Here the essentials of the sacrifice are the presentation made by the offerer, and the burning of the memorial on the altar, followed by the consumption of the remainder by the priests. The moral lesson taught to the Israelite completed that of the burnt offering. As the burnt offering taught self-surrender, so the meat offering taught recognition of God's supremacy and submission to it, the first by the surrender of a living creature substituted for the offerer, the second by the gift of a part of the good things bestowed by God on man for the preservation of life which, being given back to God, serve as a recognition of his supremacy. Spiritually the lesson taught the Jew was that of the necessity of a loyal service to God; and mystically he may have learnt a lesson

(1) as to the force of prayer rising up to heaven as the incense which had to be offered with each form of the meat offering;

(2) as to the need of purity and incorruption, symbolized by the prohibition of leaven and honey, and the command to use salt. The supplemental character of the meat offering accounts for the order in which it here stands, not arbitrarily interposed between two animal sacrifices, but naturally following on the burnt offering, as an adjunct to it and the complement of its teaching. So close was the union between the two sacrifices, that the burnt offering was never offered without the accompaniment of the meat offering (Numbers 15:4). It has been also maintained that the meat offering, like the drink offering, was never made independently of the animal sacrifice; but this cannot be proved. On the contrary, the manner in which laws regulating it are here laid down, lead to the inference that it might be offered, when any willed it, by itself. The close connection between the sacrifice of an animal and the offering of cakes of flour, and of wine, is noticeable in heathen sacrifices likewise. The very word, immolare, translated "to sacrifice," is derived from the mola or salt-cake offered with the animal; and the other word ordinarily used in Latin for "sacrifice," that is, mactare, is derived from the victim being enriched (magis auctus) with the libation of wine. Thus we see that the offering of the fruits of the earth was regarded, elsewhere as well as in Judaea, as the natural concomitant of an animal sacrifice, and not only that, but as so essential a part of the latter as to have given a name to the whole ceremony, and not only to the whole ceremony, but to the specific act of the slaughter of the victim. The thought of the heathen in offering the fruits of the earth was probably not much different from that of the Israelites. It was his gift to the superhuman power, to which he thus acknowledged that he owed submission. We may further notice that salt was enjoined in the heathen as in the Jewish sacrifices as indispensable. Pliny says that the importance of salt is seen especially in sacrifices, none of which are completed without the salt-cake ('Hist. Nat.,' 31, 7) The now obsolete use of the word "meat" in the sense of "food," in contrast to "flesh," creates some confusion of thought. "Fruit offering" would be a better title, were it not that the signification of "fruit" is going through a similar change to that which "meat" has undergone. "Flour offering" might be used, but an alteration in the rendering is not imperative.