TRV
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Leviticus 11:1–8.
Now that Aaron was consecrated a high priest over the house of God, God spoke to him with Moses, and appointed them both as joint-commissioners to deliver his will to the people. He spoke both to Moses and to Aaron about this matter; for it was particularly required of the priests that they should put a difference between clean and unclean, and teach the people to do so. After the flood, when God entered into covenant with Noah and his sons, he allowed them to eat flesh (Gen 9:13), whereas before they were confined to the productions of the earth. But the liberty allowed to the sons of Noah is here limited to the sons of Israel. They might eat flesh, but not all kinds of flesh; some they must look upon as unclean and forbidden to them, others as clean and allowed them. The law in this matter is both very particular and very strict. But what reason can be given for this law? Why may not God's people have as free a use of all the creatures as other people? 1. It is reason enough that God would have it so: his will, as it is law sufficient, so it is reason sufficient; for his will is his wisdom. He saw good thus to try and exercise the obedience of his people, not only in the solemnities of his altar, but in matters of daily occurrence at their own table, that they might remember they were under authority. Thus God had tried the obedience of man in innocency, by forbidding him to eat of one particular tree. 2. Most of the meats forbidden as unclean are such as were really unwholesome, and not fit to be eaten; and those of them that we think wholesome enough, and use accordingly, as the rabbit, the hare, and the swine, perhaps in those countries, and to their bodies, might be hurtful. And then God in this law did by them but as a wise and loving father does by his children, whom he restrains from eating that which he knows will make them sick. Note, The Lord is for the body, and it is not only folly, but sin against God, to prejudice our health for the pleasing of our appetite. 3. God would thus teach his people to distinguish themselves from other people, not only in their religious worship, but in the common actions of life. Thus he would show them that they must not be numbered among the nations. It should seem there had been, before this, some difference between the Hebrews and other nations in their food, kept up by tradition; for the Egyptians and they would not eat together, Gen 43:32. And even before the flood there was a distinction of beasts into clean and not clean (Gen 7:2), which distinction was quite lost, with many other instances of religion, among the Gentiles. But by this law it is reduced to a certainty, and ordered to be kept up among the Jews, that thus, by having a diet peculiar to themselves, they might be kept from familiar conversation with their idolatrous neighbours, and might typify God's spiritual Israel, who not in these little things, but in the temper of their spirits, and the course of their lives, should be governed by a sober singularity, and not be conformed to this world. The learned observe further, That most of the creatures which by this law were to be abominated as unclean were such as were had in high veneration among the heathen, not so much for food as for divination and sacrifice to their gods; and therefore those are here mentioned as unclean, and an abomination, which yet they would not be in any temptation to eat, that they might keep up a religious loathing of that for which the Gentiles had a superstitious value. The swine, with the later Gentiles, was sacred to Venus, the owl to Minerva, the eagle to Jupiter, the dog to Hecate, etc., and all these are here made unclean. As to the beasts, there is a general rule laid down, that those which both part the hoof and chew the cud were clean, and those only: these are particularly mentioned in the repetition of this law (Deu 14:4, Deu 14:5), where it appears that the Israelites had variety enough allowed them, and needed not to complain of the confinement they were under. Those beasts that did not both chew the cud and divide the hoof were unclean, by which rule the flesh of swine, and of hares, and of rabbits, was prohibited to them, though commonly used among us. Therefore, particularly at the eating of any of these, we should give thanks for the liberty granted us in this matter by the gospel, which teaches us that every creature of God is good, and we are to call nothing common or unclean. Some observe a significancy in the rule here laid down for them to distinguish by, or at least think it may be alluded to. Meditation, and other acts of devotion done by the hidden man of the heart, may be signified by the chewing of the cud, digesting our spiritual food; justice and charity towards men, and the acts of a good conversation, may be signified by the dividing of the hoof. Now either of these without the other will not serve to recommend us to God, but both must go together, good affections in the heart and good works in the life: if either be wanting, we are not clean, surely we are not clean. Of all the creatures here forbidden as unclean, none has been more dreaded and detested by the pious Jews than swine's flesh. Many were put to death by Antiochus because they would not eat it. This, probably, they were most in danger of being tempted to, and therefore possessed themselves and their children with a particular antipathy to it, calling it not by its proper name, but a strange thing. It should seem the Gentiles used it superstitiously (Isa 65:4), they eat swine's flesh; and therefore God forbids all use of it to his people, lest they should learn of their neighbours to make that ill use of it. Some suggest that the prohibition of these beasts as unclean was intended to be a caution to the people against the bad qualities of these creatures. We must not be filthy nor wallow in the mire as swine, nor be timorous and faint-hearted as hares, nor dwell in the earth as rabbits; let not man that is in honour make himself like these beasts that perish. The law forbade, not only the eating of them, but the very touching of them; for those that would be kept from any sin must be careful to avoid all temptations to it, and every thing that looks towards it or leads to it.
Historical interpretation
Sixteen Centuries of Reception
6 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
The all-wise Educator, by the lips of Moses, compared association with corrupt men to living with swine when he forbade the ancient people to partake of swine. He made it plain in those words that they who invoke God should not seek the company of the unclean who, like swine, revel in bodily pleasures and filthy habits of life and impure delights, itching for evil-minded pleasures of sex.
He adds too that they are not to eat “kite or mastophage or eagle,” meaning “You shall not go near those who make their livelihood by plundering others.” He says other similar things under some sort of allegory.
It is then proper that the barbarian philosophy, on which it is our business to speak, should prophesy also obscurely and by symbols, as was evinced. Such are the injunctions of Moses: “These common things, the sow, the hawk, the eagle and the raven, are not to be eaten.” For the sow is the emblem of voluptuous and unclean lust of food and lecherous and filthy licentiousness in venery, always prurient, and material, and lying in the mire and fattening for slaughter and destruction.
Fish with rough scales are considered clean, just as persons with austere, rough, unpolished, steadfast and grave traits are commended. Fish without scales are considered unclean, just as loose, fickle, insincere and effeminate traits are censured. What does the law mean when it states, “You shall not eat the camel”? From the example of an animal, it censures an unruly life and one distorted by unpleasantness. What does the law mean when it forbids one to partake of the flesh of swine? It condemns, you can be sure, a foul and filthy life—one that delights in sordid vices by placing its supreme good not in nobility of spirit but in the flesh alone. What does the law want to indicate when it forbids the hare? It denounces nervous, effeminate men. Who would use as food the flesh of the weasel? In it the law condemns theft.Who would dare partake of the skink? The law abhors a capricious and fickle life. Who would eat the newt? The law detests aberrations of the mind. Who would dare partake of the hawk, the kite or the eagle? The law hates marauders and those who live by violence. Who does not loathe the vulture? The law execrates those who look for booty in someone else’s death. Who would eat the crow? The law detests immoral and shady intentions. When the law prohibits ostrich, it disapproves of intemperance. When it condemns the nightjar, it hates those who shun the light of truth. When it bans the swan, it loathes stiff-necked pride. When it excludes the heron, it dislikes a garrulous and undisciplined tongue. When it detests the bat, it condemns those who seek out the darkness of error that is like night. The law execrates these and similar characteristics in animals. Since the animals, however, are born with such characteristics, they are without reproach. Conversely such qualities are reprehensible in humanity, which was not created with them but learns from them by comparison with contrary nature, through the exercise of their own error.
Believing people are forbidden to use fish without its fins for food. Fish with fins and scales even leap up above the water. What do the fish with fins represent if not chosen souls? They alone pass over into the body of the heavenly church.
The cherogrillus: Some suppose it to be the rabbit, others the hedgehog. St. Jerome intimates that it is another kind of animal common in Palestine, which lives in the holes of rocks or in the earth. We choose here, as also in the names of several other creatures that follow (which are little known in this part of the world,) to keep the Greek or Latin names.
Continue studying Leviticus 11:5 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Leviticus 11:5 serves as a specific declaration within God's comprehensive dietary laws, stating that the coney, identified as the hyrax or rock badger, is ritually unclean for consumption by the Israelites. This prohibition is part of a divine mandate establishing clear distinctions between clean and unclean animals, designed to set God's covenant people apart in holiness. The coney, though observed to bring up its cud, fails to meet the second crucial criterion for clean land animals: it does not possess a truly divided hoof, thus rendering it forbidden and underscoring the meticulous nature of God's commands for His chosen nation.
Context
Literary Context
Leviticus 11 marks a pivotal shift in the book's narrative, moving from the consecration of the priesthood and the tragic judgment of Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10 to the practical outworking of holiness in daily life. This chapter initiates a detailed exposition of dietary laws, serving as a foundational text for understanding Israel's ritual purity system. The overarching principle, established in Leviticus 11:3, dictates that land animals must both chew the cud and have a divided hoof to be considered clean. Subsequent verses, including Leviticus 11:4-8, apply these criteria to specific animals, identifying those that fail one or both tests as unclean. The chapter further extends these regulations to aquatic and winged creatures, concluding with stipulations concerning contact with the carcasses of unclean animals, thereby emphasizing the pervasive nature of ritual impurity and the constant need for vigilance in maintaining holiness.
Historical & Cultural Context
The dietary laws given in Leviticus were integral to the Mosaic Covenant, serving as a tangible expression of Israel's unique identity as a holy nation set apart for Yahweh. Unlike many surrounding ancient Near Eastern cultures that consumed a wide variety of animals, Israel's laws were divinely ordained and comprehensive, distinguishing them sharply from their pagan neighbors who often engaged in practices and diets contrary to God's standards. These regulations were not merely arbitrary rules or solely for health reasons, but fundamentally functioned as a daily reminder of Israel's covenant relationship with God and their unique calling to reflect His holiness. The concept of "holiness" (Hebrew: qodesh) permeated every aspect of Israelite life, as God commanded, "You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy" (Leviticus 19:2). Adherence to these laws, including the prohibition against animals like the coney, maintained the ritual purity necessary for worship and fellowship with a holy God, ensuring their distinctiveness amidst the idolatrous and defiling practices of surrounding nations.
Key Themes
Leviticus 11:5 contributes significantly to several overarching themes within the book of Leviticus and the Pentateuch. Foremost is the theme of Holiness, emphasizing that God's people are to be set apart from the nations, reflecting His own perfect character. The dietary laws provide a practical, daily means of living out this holiness. Closely related is the theme of Distinction and Separation, as the clean/unclean categories visually and practically delineate Israel's unique identity and purpose. This separation was not merely for ritual purity but underscored a spiritual reality—the need to be distinct from the defilement of the world. Furthermore, the meticulous nature of these laws highlights God's Sovereignty and Authority, demonstrating His right to establish standards for His creation and His people. Obedience to these detailed commands, even concerning seemingly minor aspects of life like diet, served as a test of Israel's Obedience and Covenant Faithfulness, reinforcing their commitment to the covenant relationship with Yahweh. The entire chapter, including the specific case of the coney, underscores the pervasive nature of God's call to purity, extending to every facet of life, as seen in the broader commands for holiness found in Leviticus 11:44-45.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
From the root sâphan, meaning "to hide," this term refers to a species of rock rabbit, most commonly identified as the hyrax or rock badger. This small, herbivorous mammal is native to the Middle East and Africa. Its inclusion in this list demonstrates the meticulous detail of God's law, addressing specific animals known to the Israelites. Despite its appearance of chewing cud, its physiology and hoof structure do not align with the divine criteria for clean animals.
A primitive root meaning "to ascend, to bring up." In the context of "cheweth the cud," the Hebrew phrase is literally "bringing up the cud" (מעלה גרה, ma'aleh gerah). This refers to the process of rumination, where an animal regurgitates partially digested food to chew it again. While the coney exhibits this behavior, its digestive system is not that of a true ruminant, and this particular verb highlights the observable action, even if the underlying physiology is different from a true ruminant.
Derived from the root ṭâmêʼ, meaning "foul in a religious sense," this word denotes a state of ritual impurity or defilement. In the context of dietary laws, it signifies an animal that is "forbidden for consumption" by God's covenant people. An animal declared ṭâmêʼ was not inherently "evil" or "bad" in a moral sense, but it was designated as unsuitable for the diet of the Israelites, carrying significant implications for their daily life and reinforcing the pervasive nature of the purity laws in maintaining the community's holiness.
Verse Breakdown
"And the coney"
This clause introduces the specific animal under consideration, the shaphan (hyrax/rock badger), a creature familiar to the Israelites in their environment. Its explicit mention underscores the comprehensive and precise nature of God's dietary code, leaving no ambiguity.
"because he cheweth the cud"
This phrase acknowledges that the coney exhibits one of the two primary criteria for a clean land animal—the act of rumination, or "bringing up the cud." This observation aligns with the natural behavior of the hyrax, which appears to re-chew its food, confirming the Israelites' keen and accurate observation of the natural world, even as God's law provides the definitive interpretation.
"but divideth not the hoof"
This is the crucial disqualifying criterion. Despite its cud-chewing behavior, the coney's feet are paw-like, with small nails, and are not truly cloven or divided into two distinct parts as required. The "hoof" (Hebrew: parçâh H6541) refers to the split or cloven foot, which was a clear, observable physical marker. The failure to meet this second characteristic renders the animal unclean.
"he [is] unclean unto you"
This is the definitive divine declaration of the coney's status. It is explicitly forbidden for consumption by the Israelites. The phrase "unto you" emphasizes that these are specific regulations for God's covenant people, distinguishing their practices from those of other nations and reinforcing their unique identity and calling to holiness.
Literary Devices
Leviticus 11:5 employs several literary devices characteristic of the legal and instructional portions of the Pentateuch, reinforcing its didactic purpose. It is a prime example of Legal Code, presenting a direct, unambiguous prohibition within a larger, divinely ordained system of law. The verse also utilizes Categorization, as it systematically places the coney into the "unclean" category based on specific, observable physical criteria (chewing cud but not having a divided hoof). This systematic classification of animals into "clean" and "unclean" is central to the entire chapter, providing clear boundaries for Israelite life. Furthermore, there is a clear instance of Exclusion, where the coney is explicitly excluded from the permissible diet because it fails to meet the dual criteria for inclusion. This binary classification (clean/unclean) reinforces the overarching theological concept of Separation and Distinction that undergirds the entire system of Mosaic law, teaching Israel to discern and separate themselves from anything that defiles or is contrary to God's holy nature.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Leviticus 11:5, situated within the broader context of the dietary laws, profoundly communicates God's sovereignty, His unwavering call to holiness, and the essential principle of distinction for His covenant people. These laws were not merely about hygiene or health, though practical benefits may have existed, but primarily about ritual purity and spiritual separation. By adhering to God's precise instructions, even concerning seemingly minor details like animal diets, Israel was continually reminded of their unique identity as a holy nation set apart for Yahweh. This daily obedience fostered a pervasive awareness of God's presence and His exacting standards, reflecting His own perfect holiness. The distinction between clean and unclean served as a tangible, daily lesson in the spiritual reality of separation from the defilements of the world and unwavering dedication to God.
Reflection and Application
While the specific dietary prohibitions of the Old Testament are not binding for New Testament believers, the underlying principles of obedience, discernment, and holiness remain profoundly relevant for our lives today. Leviticus 11:5 reminds us that God has clear standards for those who bear His name, and true holiness involves a willingness to submit to His revealed will, even when the reasons are not immediately apparent to our human understanding. Our lives are to reflect God's character, not through adherence to ritualistic food laws, but through spiritual purity, moral integrity, and discerning choices in a world that increasingly blurs the lines between what is beneficial and what is harmful. We are called to be set apart, not by external regulations, but by an internal transformation that seeks to honor God in every aspect of our lives—from our thoughts and words to our actions and relationships. This separation is not about self-righteousness, but about a deep desire for spiritual purity and a longing for deeper communion with our holy God, recognizing that His ways are always for our ultimate good and His glory.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What is a "coney" in modern terms, and why was it considered unclean?
The "coney" in the King James Version (KJV) is typically identified as the hyrax or rock badger (Hebrew: shaphan). It was considered unclean because, while it appears to "chew the cud" (ruminate or bring up its food to re-chew), it does not possess a truly "divided hoof." According to the criteria established in Leviticus 11:3, for a land animal to be clean for consumption, it had to meet both criteria: chewing the cud AND having a divided hoof. Since the coney only met one of these two essential requirements, it was explicitly declared unclean and forbidden for the Israelites' diet.
Are the Old Testament dietary laws, including the prohibition of the coney, still binding for Christians today?
No, the specific dietary laws of the Old Testament are generally not considered binding for Christians today. The New Testament teaches that Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19), and the Apostle Peter's vision in Acts 10:9-16 explicitly affirmed that what God has cleansed should not be called common or unclean. The emphasis in the New Covenant shifts from external ritual purity to internal spiritual purity and the transformation of the heart by the Holy Spirit. While believers are called to live holy lives, this is now achieved through faith in Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, not through adherence to the Mosaic dietary code.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
The Old Testament dietary laws, including the specific prohibition of the coney, serve as a profound shadow pointing to the ultimate reality found in Jesus Christ. These regulations established a tangible distinction between clean and unclean, illustrating the deep spiritual truth that sin defiles and creates an insurmountable barrier between humanity and a holy God. The inability of the coney to meet both criteria for cleanness perfectly foreshadows humanity's own inability to achieve righteousness through external adherence to the law. However, Christ, as the perfect Lamb of God (John 1:29), entered a world utterly defiled by sin and, through His atoning sacrifice on the cross, rendered all things truly clean. He fulfilled the law not by abolishing it, but by bringing its underlying principles to their ultimate spiritual conclusion. In Christ, the external distinctions of food laws are superseded by an internal transformation of the heart, where true purity is found not in what we eat or what external rules we follow, but in our redemptive relationship with Him. As Romans 14:17 powerfully declares, "For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Through His death and glorious resurrection, Jesus has made it possible for all who believe to be declared perfectly clean and righteous before God, not by adherence to a dietary code, but by faith in His finished work, making us a new creation, holy and acceptable in His sight (2 Corinthians 5:17). He is our true holiness, our ultimate distinction, and the source of our spiritual purity (1 Corinthians 1:30).