We have here a law for the limiting of the power of the prince in the disposing of the crown-lands. 1. If he have a son that is a favourite, or has merited well, he may, if he please, as a token of his favour and in recompence for his services, settle some parts of his lands upon him and his heirs for ever (Eze 46:16), provided it do not go out of the family. There may be a cause for parents, when their children have grown up, to be more kind to one than to another, as Jacob gave to Joseph one portion above his brethren, Gen 48:22. 2. Yet, if he have a servant that is a favourite, he may not in like manner settle lands upon him, Eze 46:17. The servant might have the rents, issues, and profits, for such a term, but the inheritance, the jus proprietarium - the right of proprietorship, shall remain in the prince and his heirs. It was fit that a difference should be put between a child and a servant, like that Joh 8:35. The servant abides not in the house for ever, as the son does. 3. What estates he gives his children must be of his own (Eze 46:18): He shall not take of the people's inheritance, under pretence of having many children to provide for; he shall not find ways to make them forfeit their estates, or to force them to sell them and so thrust his subjects out of their possession; but let him and his sons be content with their own. It is far from being a prince's honour to increase the wealth of his family and crown by encroaching upon the rights and properties of his subjects; nor will he himself be a gainer by it at last, for he will be but a poor prince when the people are scattered every man from his possession, when they quit their native country, being forced out of it by oppression, choosing rather to live among strangers that are free people, and where what they have they can call their own, be it ever so little. It is the interest of princes to rule in the hearts of their subjects, and then all they have is, in the best manner, at their service. It is better for themselves to gain their affections by protecting their rights than to gain their estates by invading them.

To the year of liberty - That is, to the year of jubilee, called the year of liberty, because there was then a general release. All servants had their liberty, and all alienated estates returned to their former owners.

After he brought me through the entry, which was at the side of the gate,.... The north gate of the inner court, where the prophet was last, Eze 44:4, through an entry, by the side of that, he was brought by the man his guide:

into the holy chambers of the priests; see Eze 42:13,

and, behold, there was a place in the two sides westward; or, "on their sides westward" (p); on the west side of the chambers; the Targum is at the west end of them: the use of this place follows,

(p) "in lateribus ejus vel eorum, in extremo", Starckius.

The prince's possession is to be inalienable, and any portion given to a servant is to revert to his sons at the year of jubilee, that he may have no temptation to spoil his people of their inheritance, as formerly (compare Ahab and Naboth, 1Ki. 21:1-29). The mention of the year of jubilee implies that there is something literal meant, besides the spiritual sense. The jubilee year was restored after the captivity [JOSEPHUS, Antiquities, 14.10,6; 1 Maccabees 6:49]. Perhaps it will be restored under Messiah's coming reign. Compare Isa 61:2-3, where "the acceptable year of the Lord" is closely connected with the comforting of the mourners in Zion, and "the day of vengeance" on Zion's foes. The mention of the prince's sons is another argument against Messiah being meant by "the prince."