Chapter XXX: Section XXVIII: The Words used to designate the Washings

The discriminating use of words on this subject, in the original Scriptures is very noticeable, and is susceptible of being brought within the comprehension of any intelligent reader of the English version. There are three which are worthy of special notice.

1. _Shātaph_ means, to overflow, or rush over, as a swollen torrent or a beating rain. Thus,—“Behold the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which, as a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters _overflowing_,” shall beat down the crown of pride. (Isa. xxviii, 2.) Again,—“Say unto them which daub with untempered mortar that it shall fall; there shall be an _overflowing_ shower,” beating it down. (Ezek. xiii, 11-14.) From this, the radical meaning of the word, is derived its use to signify the act of washing or rinsing, by means of water dashed or flowed over the object. It is employed in application to vessels of wood and of brass (Lev. vi, 28; xv, 12), and to the hands of the unclean. (Ib. xv, 11.) In all these places it is translated, to rinse.

2. _Kābas._ The radical meaning of this verb is, to tread, to trample. The participle from it is used to designate the craft of the fuller, who fulled his goods by treading them with the feet. Hence its use to signify the thorough cleansing and whitening of clothing and stuffs. The word occurs in the Old Testament forty-six times, with this uniform meaning. It is used whenever the ritual washing of clothes is spoken of. From it a very striking figure is derived, which appears twice, to indicate the most thorough self-cleansing, under the idea of a garment scoured, with “nitre and much soap” (Jer. ii, 22; iv, 14), and twice, to indicate a like thorough cleansing wrought by the Holy Spirit. “_Wash_ me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.... Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: _wash_ me, and I shall be whiter than snow” (Psa. li, 2, 7), white, as a garment is made by the fuller’s art. (Mark ix, 3.) These passages indicate the essential idea of the word. It is expressive of a scouring, or washing, which searches the very texture of the fabric. It is, however, worthy of notice that in the Targum of Onkelos, on Numbers xix, 19, it is rendered, “to sprinkle.” “The clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean, on the third day and on the seventh day; and on the seventh day he shall be clean; and he _shall sprinkle_ his raiment, and wash with water, and at even he shall be clean.“ This rendering is very noteworthy, as it indicates the manner in which the law was understood on this point. In fact, as we have already seen, sprinkling signified the most thorough cleansing.

_Rāhatz._ While _kābas_ indicates a purifying of the substance, _rāhatz_ signifies a washing of the surface. This is the word which is invariably used to express the ritual self-washings or bathings of the hands, the feet, and the person. It is sometimes assumed that, like the English, to wash, _rāhatz_ is strictly generic in its meaning—that it signifies to cleanse with, or in, water, without any regard to mode. This is an error, as a single fact shows. It is never used for the cleansing of skins, clothes, or garments. Nor is this an accidental omission. Such washings are mentioned nearly fifty times, and in nineteen places they are brought into connection with the bathing of the person. But in no one place is the word in question used either generically, as comprehensive of both the person and garments, or specifically for the latter. In every place where the two processes come in the same connection, the language is accurately discriminated. The directions are, to _wash_, or scour (_kābas_), the clothes, and to _bathe_ (_rāhatz_) the flesh. This word occurs over seventy times. In five or six places, it applies to the washing of sacrificial flesh, before it was placed on the altar. (Lev. i, 9, 13, etc.) In every other instance it refers to the human person. It expresses cleansing with water actively applied to the surface. Thus, when Joseph ”_washed_ his face,” to obliterate the traces of tears (Gen. xliii, 31), and when the Beloved is described, “His eyes, as the eyes of doves by the rivers [rivulets] of waters, _washed_ with milk and fitly set” (Cant. v, 12), the reference is clearly to the familiar mode of washing the face with water applied. When the Lord, by Isaiah, speaks of the time when he “shall have _washed away_ the filth of the daughters of Zion” (Isa. iv, 4), and when the Preacher describes “a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not _washed from_ their filthiness” (Prov. xxx, 12), the idea presented is the same—that of water actively applied to the surface, so as to detach and carry off the dirt. In another place this definition is even more imperatively indicated. “Then (_rāhatz_) washed I thee with water; yea (_shātaph_), I thoroughly washed away thy blood from thee, and I anointed thee with oil.”—Ezek. xvi, 9. Here three things unite to determine the meaning of _rāhatz_. 1. It is explained by _shātaph_, the signification of which we have seen. 2. The defilement from which the washing is promised, is that of _nidda_, for which expressly the sprinkled “water of _nidda_” was appointed and named. 3. The construction is precisely the same in the two clauses of the verse, “I washed thee _with_ water,” and “I anointed thee _with_ oil.” Of the mode of the latter there can be no question. In both clauses the element named is the _instrument_ of the action specified. The ideas of washing and of immersion are not merely different, but sharply contrasted with each other. Where there is an immersion, there may also be a washing. But it must be by additional action. _Rāhatz_ expresses the latter. It neither expresses nor implies the former.