An interpretation of Leviticus

Leviticus

Dear Reader,

When reading Leviticus, it is important to keep certain things in mind. Like anything, the story is a text which can be taken by its word, or as a story designed to enlighten the average human person in their life. According to Mary Douglas in her article "Justice at the Cornerstone," the story of Leviticus is based on ancient structural elements of storytelling. The form of the story is that of a journey; the reader enters from one end of a tunnel, has to follow the path of the story, and then is led out of that tunnel by the climax of the story. This, she says is an analogy for the story as well as an understanding of the structure. She asks that the reader be willing to reinterpret some of the teachings of Leviticus with the modern understanding of certain terms.

From this, it would seem that the author is asking the reader to understand this as a story, but to utilize the teachings that can be interpreted. With Leviticus in particular, Douglas compares the story to a tabernacle. As it is a "structure of three compartments of unequal size," so too the story is comprised of three parts, of unequal length. The book then parallels the building and is as much a part of the religious understanding as the tabernacle. If her interpretation of the form is correct, then after reading the third portion of Leviticus, the reader should experience something like what it is to enter the final room of the tabernacle. It should be a feeling of understanding and enlightenment.

Most interestingly, Douglas asks the reader to reinterpret some of the passages that people take from Leviticus as arguments against homosexuality. She argues that what the Bible is against are homosexual actions by heterosexual men. The book vilifies prostitution but makes no mention of same-sex love. It is an interesting point that she makes; and a convincing one as well. The same passages that homophobic people utilize to demonize homosexuals are used by Mary Douglas as counterexamples of the same argument. This underlines what Douglas's thesis seems to be; that interpretation of scripture determines human behavior and understanding of what is good or bad.