Source: HPB03 Leviticus 27 annotated pages; cross-checked with Mansfield Expositor Chapter 27
Chapter Overview
Leviticus closes with voluntary dedication brought under precise Divine regulation. A vow may arise from gratitude, but once made it cannot be manipulated according to later convenience.
The chapter distinguishes redeemable vows from what already belongs to Yahweh by prior right and from cherem, irreversible devoted status. Fixed valuations are administrative cultic values; they are not statements of a person’s human worth.
Valuation Of Persons — Leviticus 27:1–8
Leviticus 27:1–2 — a special vow involving the valuation of persons
The opening phrase is difficult but concerns a pele’/special vow connected with the ’erkekha, prescribed valuation, of nephashot/persons to Yahweh. The person is not being sold to God as property; the law provides a monetary valuation within the vow system.
Nephesh here means person/life, not an immortal soul.
Leviticus 27:3–7 — fixed values by age and sex
The schedule sets sanctuary-shekel valuations: ages twenty to sixty, male fifty and female thirty; five to twenty, male twenty and female ten; one month to five years, male five and female three; sixty and above, male fifteen and female ten.
The text gives no theological reason for the sex differences. Mansfield’s attempt to explain them from Eve’s transgression is speculative and is not retained as a factual explanation. These are cultic/economic valuations within an ancient vow schedule, not rankings of human dignity.
Leviticus 27:8 — poverty receives priestly adjustment
If the vower is too poor for the fixed valuation, the person is presented before the priest, who values according to what the vower’s hand can afford.
Voluntary dedication has real cost, but poverty is explicitly recognised rather than exploited.
Animals And Houses — Leviticus 27:9–15
Leviticus 27:9–10 — a sacrificial animal once vowed is holy
An animal suitable for Yahweh’s offering becomes holy and may not be exchanged good for bad or bad for good. If an exchange is attempted, both the original and substitute become holy.
The rule prevents second thoughts from turning a vow into a bargain-hunting exercise.
Leviticus 27:11–13 — non-sacrificial/unclean animal may be redeemed
An animal not suitable for altar sacrifice is presented to the priest for valuation. If the owner redeems it, one fifth is added to the assessed value; otherwise the priest’s valuation stands.
“Unclean” here concerns sacrificial eligibility, not moral evil in the animal.
Leviticus 27:14–15 — dedicated house
A house sanctified to Yahweh is valued by the priest. If the owner redeems it, one fifth is added.
The law makes consecration costly enough to be serious while still allowing specified redemption.
Fields And Jubilee — Leviticus 27:16–25
Leviticus 27:16–18 — inherited field valued by seed capacity and Jubilee years
An ancestral field is valued according to sowing capacity: land requiring a homer of barley seed is assigned fifty shekels of silver at the full Jubilee basis. The value is adjusted according to years remaining until Jubilee.
Homer is a large dry measure and must not be confused with the much smaller ‘omer of Exodus/Leviticus 23. Exact modern litre equivalents vary by reconstruction.
Leviticus 27:19–21 — redemption or irreversible loss of the vowed field
If the original owner redeems the dedicated field, one fifth is added. But if he does not redeem it and it is sold to another, it may no longer be redeemed by him; at Jubilee it becomes holy to Yahweh “as a field devoted” and becomes priestly possession.
The special consequence discourages manipulating sacred dedication through an intervening sale.
Leviticus 27:22–25 — purchased field returns to original inheritance owner
A field the vower purchased, rather than inherited ancestrally, is valued by the priest according to years until Jubilee. The assessed value is paid to Yahweh, but at Jubilee the land returns to the person whose ancestral possession it originally was.
This preserves the Leviticus 25 inheritance structure even when a temporary purchaser makes a vow.
Leviticus 27:25 — sanctuary shekel
Valuations use the sanctuary shekel, explicitly defined here as twenty gerahs. Modern currency conversions are misleading because purchasing power and weight systems differ.
What Cannot Be Treated As An Ordinary Vow — Leviticus 27:26–29
Leviticus 27:26–27 — firstborn already belongs to Yahweh
A firstborn clean animal cannot be newly sanctified by a person because, as firstborn, it already belongs to Yahweh. One cannot present as a special voluntary gift what God already claims by prior law.
A firstborn from a non-sacrificial/unclean animal is treated according to valuation and may be redeemed with an added fifth; if not redeemed, it is sold according to valuation.
Leviticus 27:28 — cherem is not an ordinary redeemable vow
Anything placed under cherem, devoted/ban status, whether person, animal or inherited field, is not sold or redeemed; it is most holy to Yahweh.
Cherem is a distinct legal-sacral category from the ordinary vows discussed earlier.
Leviticus 27:29 — human cherem and judicial ban
“None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed; but shall surely be put to death.” This difficult verse concerns a human already under an irreversible cherem/judicial ban; it must not be read as permission for private individuals to vow a person to death as a human sacrifice.
Israel’s Torah elsewhere condemns human sacrifice. The verse therefore belongs to the legal category of an imposed ban/judgment, not voluntary cult killing.
Tithes — Leviticus 27:30–33
Leviticus 27:30–31 — land tithe belongs to Yahweh
A tenth of seed/crop and tree fruit is Yahweh’s and holy. If a person redeems part of the tithe, one fifth is added.
Because the tithe already belongs to Yahweh, it cannot honestly be presented as if it were an extraordinary voluntary gift.
Leviticus 27:32–33 — every tenth animal under the rod
Every tenth animal of herd or flock passing under the rod is holy to Yahweh. The owner must not inspect/select it as “good or bad” or exchange it.
If an exchange is attempted, both animals become holy and cannot be redeemed.
The Close Of Leviticus — Leviticus 27:34
Leviticus 27:34 — commandments given through Moses at Sinai
The book closes: “These are the commandments, which Yahweh commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai.”
From the first offering to the final vow, fellowship and holiness remain governed by Yahweh’s revealed terms rather than human improvisation.
Voluntary Before The Vow; Binding Afterward
New Testament caution about words and vows
Ecclesiastes 5:4–5 already warns that when a vow is made to God it should be paid. Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5:33–37 presses disciples toward truthful speech that does not depend on manipulative oath-making. Mansfield’s warning against rash spiritual enthusiasm is therefore well grounded.
Principal Themes
- A special vow is voluntary in origin but governed by fixed rules once made.
- The personal valuations are administrative cultic values, not measurements of human worth.
- The text gives no reason for male/female valuation differences; speculative explanations should not be presented as fact.
- Poverty explicitly allows priestly adjustment of a vow valuation.
- A vowed sacrificial animal cannot be swapped to improve personal advantage.
- Ancestral and purchased fields are distinguished so Jubilee inheritance rules remain intact.
- Homer and ‘omer are different measures and must not be confused.
- The firstborn cannot be “newly” given as a special gift because it already belongs to Yahweh.
- Cherem is an irreversible devoted/ban category distinct from ordinary redeemable vows.
- Leviticus 27:29 does not authorise private human sacrifice; it concerns a person already under judicial/devoted ban.
- Tithes already belong to Yahweh and are not optional generosity.
- Leviticus ends by reaffirming that holiness and dedication are defined by Divine command.
EDITORIAL VERIFICATION AND RECOVERED READINGS
| Location | Checked or corrected reading | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Lev. 27:2 | special vow / valuation of persons | Difficult phrase; administrative vow valuation, not sale of human worth. |
| Lev. 27:2 | nephashot | Persons/lives, not immortal souls. |
| Lev. 27:3–7 | age/sex valuation table | Fixed cultic-economic schedule; text gives no reason for sex differential. |
| Lev. 27:3–7 | Mansfield Eve explanation | Speculative and not stated by Leviticus; omitted as factual basis. |
| Lev. 27:8 | according to ability | Priest lowers valuation for poverty. |
| Lev. 27:9–10 | no animal exchange | Attempted substitution makes both animals holy. |
| Lev. 27:11–13 | unclean/non-sacrificial animal | Valued by priest; redeemable + 20 percent. |
| Lev. 27:15 | house redemption | Add one fifth. |
| Lev. 27:16 | homer | Large dry measure; not the smaller ‘omer. |
| Lev. 27:16 | 50 shekels per homer-seed field | Baseline field valuation tied to Jubilee. |
| Lev. 27:18 | years to Jubilee | Valuation prorated by remaining years. |
| Lev. 27:20–21 | unredeemed + sold ancestral field | Becomes devoted/priestly at Jubilee. |
| Lev. 27:22–24 | purchased field | Returns at Jubilee to ancestral owner, not permanently to vower. |
| Lev. 27:25 | shekel = 20 gerahs | Explicit sanctuary-weight definition. |
| Lev. 27:26 | firstborn | Cannot be newly sanctified; already Yahweh’s. |
| Lev. 27:28 | cherem | Irreversible devoted/ban category; no sale/redemption. |
| Lev. 27:29 | human cherem | Judicial/devoted ban; not permission for private human sacrifice. |
| Lev. 27:30 | land tithe | Already Yahweh’s and holy. |
| Lev. 27:32–33 | every tenth under rod | No selective grading; attempted exchange makes both holy. |
| Lev. 27:34 | book conclusion | Commands delivered through Moses for Israel at Sinai. |
Residual uncertainties
The precise mechanics of personal vows in verse 2 and the legal scope of human cherem in verse 29 have generated substantial interpretation. The chapter does not explain the rationale for different male/female valuations, so Mansfield’s theological explanation is not treated as established. Ancient measures and silver values should not be converted into confident modern monetary equivalents.