The Holiness code is used in biblical criticism to refer to Leviticus chapters 17–26, and sometimes passages in other books of the Pentateuch, especially Numbers and Exodus. It is so called due to its highly repeated use of the word holy (Hebrew: קדוש qəḏōš). Kadash is usually translated as "holy", but originally meant "set apart", with "special", "clean/pure", "whole" and "perfect" as associated meanings. The term Holiness Code was first coined as the Heiligkeitsgesetz (literally "Holiness Law"; the word 'code' therefore means criminal code) by German theologian August Klostermann in 1877. Critical biblical scholars have regarded it as a distinct unit and have noted that the style is noticeably different from the main body of Leviticus. Unlike the remainder of Leviticus, the many laws of the Holiness Code are expressed very closely packed together, and very briefly. According to most versions of the documentary hypothesis, the Holiness Code represents an earlier text that was edited and incorporated into the Priestly source and the Torah as a whole, although some scholars, such as Israel Knohl, believe the Holiness Code to be a later addition to the Priestly source. This source is often abbreviated as "H". Prof. Joel Baden has argued that H, uniquely within P, contains textual references to the Deuteronomist source. A date generally accepted by the proponents of the four-source hypothesis is sometime in the seventh century BC, when it presumably originated among the priests in the Temple in Jerusalem. The Holiness Code also uses a noticeably different choice of vocabulary, repeating phrases such as I, Yahweh, am holy; I am Yahweh; and I am Yahweh, who makes you holy, an unusually large number of times. Additionally, Leviticus 17 begins with This is the thing which Yahweh has commanded, saying ..., and Leviticus 26 strongly resembles the conclusion of a law code, despite the presence of further laws afterward, such as at Leviticus 27, giving the Holiness Code the appearance of a single distinct unit. Professor Christine Hayes discusses a difference between the Holiness Code and the rest of Leviticus: in the Holiness Code, Israel itself is regarded as holy, not just the priestly class:
This theme, and the exhortation, "you shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy," they find their fullest expression in the block of text; Leviticus 17 through 26 that's referred to as the Holiness Code. There's an important difference between Leviticus 1 through 16 and the Holiness Code. According to Leviticus 1 through 16, Israel's priests are designated as holy: a holy class within Israel, singled out, dedicated to the service of God and demarcated by rules that apply only to them. Israelites may aspire to holiness, but it’s not assumed. However, in the Holiness Code, we have texts that come closer to the idea that Israel itself is holy by virtue of the fact that God has set Israel apart from the nations to himself, to belong to him, just as he set apart the seventh day to himself to belong with him.
Identification of Holiness texts
Initially, the Holiness Code was considered part of the Priestly source by some scholars holding to the documentary hypothesis. However, other scholars generally believed it to have been an originally separate legal code (referred to as "H") which the Priestly source edited and chose to embed into their writing after. Some such editing is simply the addition of phrases such as And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, designed to put the code into the context of the remainder of a code being given by God, as is the case for the remainder of Leviticus. By 1955, scholars agreed that the Holiness Code consisted of at least Leviticus 17–26, but some twenty passages outside of it were also identified as H, including Leviticus 11 (verses 1f. and 25–40 being contested), Numbers 15:34–41 and Exodus 31:13f..
H texts in Leviticus Leviticus 11 (verses 1f. and 25–40 contested) It is also alleged by critical scholarship that several additional laws, written with a style unlike that of the Holiness Code but like that of the remainder of Leviticus, were inserted into the body of the text by the Priestly source. These alleged additions are:
The prohibition against consuming the naturally dead (Leviticus 17:15–16) The order to make trespass offerings after sexual involvement with an engaged slavewoman (Leviticus 19:20–22) The prohibition against an anointed high priest uncovering his head or rending his clothes (Leviticus 21:10) The prohibition against offerings by Aaronic priests who are blemished (Leviticus 21:21–22) The order to keep the sabbath, passover, and feast of unleavened bread (Leviticus 23:1–10a) The order to keep Yom Kippur, and Sukkot (Leviticus 23:23–44) The order for continual bread and oil (Leviticus 24:1–9) Case law concerning a blasphemer (Leviticus 24:10–15a and 24:23) The order for a trumpet sounding on Yom Kippur (Leviticus 25:9b) Rules concerning redeeming property (Leviticus 25:23 and 25:26–34) Order to release Israelite slaves at the year of jubilee (Leviticus 25:40, 25:42, 25:44–46) Rules concerning redeeming people (Leviticus 25:48–52, and 25:54) The section concerning continual bread and oil is, in critical scholarship, viewed as part of the description of the structure of the tabernacle, and vestments, present at the end of Exodus, which has accidentally become inserted at this point due to scribal error. The case law example of blasphemy is believed to be the work of one of the later editions of the Priestly source, in which several other case law examples were added, such as that concerning the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 36). The remainder of the alleged additions arguably deform the laws from the manner they would otherwise have, to the laws supported by the Priestly Code. Whether these represent alterations to the law over time, lawmaking by the writer of the political faction supported by the Priestly source, or simply details present but not originally thought worth mentioning, is a matter of some debate.
H texts in Exodus and Numbers
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.


