Shabbat 63 ~ Jews and Their Dogs

“Az a yid hot a hunt, iz oder der hunt keyn hunt nit, oder der yid iz keyn yid nit

If a Jew has a dog, either the dog is no dog, or the Jew is no Jew”

— Sholem Aleichem. Rabtshik. Mayses far Yidishe Kinder. Ale Verk. Warsaw 1903.

For those of you who (like me) own dogs, make sure they are properly trained. Because if they aren’t they may become bad dogs. And today’s page of Talmud offers some strong opinions about bad dogs.

שבת סג, א–ב

כׇּל הַמְגַדֵּל כֶּלֶב רַע בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ מוֹנֵעַ חֶסֶד מִתּוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לַמָּס מֵרֵעֵהוּ חָסֶד״ — שֶׁכֵּן בְּלָשׁוֹן יְוָנִית קוֹרִין לְכֶלֶב ״לַמָּס״. רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: אַף פּוֹרֵק מִמֶּנּוּ יִרְאַת שָׁמַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וְיִרְאַת שַׁדַּי יַעֲזוֹב״

Anyone who raises an evil dog within his home prevents kindness from entering into his home, since poor people will hesitate to enter his house. As it is alluded to in the verse: “To him that is afflicted [lamas], kindness from his friend and awe of the Almighty will leave” (Job 6:14), since in the Greek language they call a dog lamas. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: One who keeps an evil dog in his home even divests himself of fear of Heaven, as it is stated at the end of that verse: “And awe of the Almighty will leave.”

הַהִיא אִיתְּתָא דַּעֲיַילָא לְהָהוּא בֵּיתָא לְמֵיפָא. נְבַח בָּהּ כַּלְבָּא, אִיתְעֲקַר וַלְדַּהּ. אֲמַר לַהּ מָרֵי דְבֵיתָא לָא תִּידְחֲלִי, דִּשְׁקִילִי נִיבֵיהּ וּשְׁקִילִין טוּפְרֵיהּ. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: שְׁקִילָא טֵיבוּתָיךְ וְשַׁדְיָא אַחִיזְרֵי, כְּבָר נָד וָלָד 

A pregnant woman who entered to use the oven in a certain house to bake, the dog in that house barked at her, and her fetus was displaced. The owner of the house said to her: Do not be afraid because his teeth have been removed and his claws have been removed. She said to him: Take your goodness and throw it on the thorns. Your encouragement is useless as the fetus has already been displaced and will certainly die.

This warning against keeping bad dogs is echoed elsewhere in the Talmud:

כתובות דף מא, ב 

ר' נתן אומר: מנין שלא יגדל אדם כלב רע בתוך ביתו, ולא יעמיד סולם רעוע בתוך ביתו? שנאמר: ולא תשים דמים בביתך

Rabbi Natan said: From where do we learn that a person should not raise a bad dog in his house, and should not place a rickety ladder in his house? [From the Torah, where] it states "You shall not place blood in your house" (Deut 22:8).

But it’s not just bad dogs. In Bava Kamma (93a), Rabbi Eliezer opined against all dogs, good and bad.  

רבי אליעזר הגדול אומר: המגדל כלבים כמגדל חזירים

One who breeds dogs is like one who breeds pigs

The American Veterinary Medical Association estimates that in the US there are about 43 million households that own almost 70 million dogs; that means over one-third of the households in the US own a dog.  (Fun Fact: Cats are owned by fewer households in the US, but are more often owned in twos or more. That means that there are more household cats - some 74 million - than there are dogs.) In the UK, a 2007 study estimated that 31% of all households owned a dog.

Bad Dogs

There are some really bad dogs. In a 10 year period from 2000-2009, one paper identified 256 dog-bite related fatalities in the US. Of course that's a tiny number compared to the overall number of dogs owned, but that's still 256 to many; the tragedy is compounded when you read that over half the victims were less than ten years old. 

Partaken, GJ. et al. Co-occurrence of potentially preventable factors in 256 dog bite–related fatalities in the United States (2000–2009). Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2013. 243:12: 1726-1736.

Fatalities from dog bites are rare. Dog bites are not. Over my career as an emergency physician I must have treated hundreds of patients with dog bites. And my experience is pretty typical. One recent study estimated that more than half the population in the US will be bitten by an animal at some time, and that dogs are responsible for 80-90% of these injuries. 

Good Dogs

Although Jews are thought not to have a historical affinity for dogs, one theologian has reassessed the evidence. In his 2008 paper Attitudes toward Dogs in Ancient Israel: A Reassessment, Geoffrey Miller  suggests that in fact dogs were not shunned in Israelite society. He notes that the remains of over a thousand dogs were discovered in a dog cemetery near Ashkelon dating from about the 5th century BC. It was described as "by far the largest animal cemetery known in the ancient world" by Lawrence Stager who also pointed out that during this period, Ashkelon was a Phoenician city - not a Jewish one. Miller surveys several mentions of dogs in the Bible and the Book of Tobit, and concludes that at least some Israelites "valued dogs and did not view them as vile, contemptible creatures."

Joshua Schwartz from Bar-Ilan University surveyed Dogs in Jewish Society in the Second Temple Period and in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud (a study that marked "...the culmination of several years of study of the subject of dogs...").  He found that while "most of the Jewish sources from the Second Temple period and the time of the Mishnah and Talmud continue to maintain the negative attitude toward dogs expressed in the Biblical tradition" there were some important exceptions. There were sheep dogs (Gen. Rabbah 73:11) and hunting dogs (Josephus, Antiquities 4.206) and guard dogs (Pesahim 113a), and yes, even pet dogs (Tobit, 6:2), though Schwartz concedes that "it is improbable that dogs in Jewish society were the objects of the same degree of affection as they received in the Graeco-Roman world or the Persian world."  

“תלמוד ירושלמי (ונציה) מסכת תרומות פרק ח דף מו טור א /ה”ג

זמין חד רבן ואייתיב כלבא גביה אמר ליה ביזיון אנא חייב לך אמר ליה רבי טיבו אנא משלם ליה שביין עלון לקרתא עאל חד מינהון בעא מינסב איתתי ואכל ביציו

A certain person invited a sage to his home, and [the householder] sat his dog next to him. [The sage] asked him, ‘How did I merit this insult?’ [The house-holder] responded, ‘My master, I am repaying him for his goodness. Kidnappers came to the town, one of them came and wanted to take my wife, and the dog ate his testicles.’”

— PT Terumot 8:7

Whatever your feeling about dogs, lets's be sure to remember that they serve alongside soldiers in the IDF, where they save lives. In 1969, Motta Gur (yes, the same Mordechai "Motta" Gur who commanded the unit that liberated the Temple Mount in the Six Day War, and who uttered those amazing words "The Temple Mount is in our hands!" הר הבית בידינו‎,) wrote what was to become a series of children's books called Azit, the Canine Paratrooper (later turned into a popular feature film with the same title (and once available on Amazon). But fighting dogs don't just feature in fiction. They are a fact, and an amazing addition to the IDF, where they make up the Oketz unit.  Here's a news report (in Hebrew) about the amazing work these dogs - and their handlers- perform. Keep them in your prayers.

[Mostly a repost from here.]

Shabbat 61 ~ On the Ubiquity of Amulets

Among the things that may not be carried in public on Shabbat is an amulet, known in Hebrew as a קמיע -kemiah (pl. kemiaot). But that is only true of amulets that have not been demonstrated to be effective, as the Mishnah in yesterday’s page of Talmud (60a) made clear:

לֹא יֵצֵא הָאִישׁ … וְלֹא בְּקָמֵיעַ בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִן הַמּוּמְחֶה

A person may not go out on Shabbat… with an amulet when it is not from an expert…

In today’s page of Talmud, the corpulent Babylonian Rav Pappa (~300-375 CE) clarrified this ruling:

שבת סא,א

וְלֹא בְּקָמֵיעַ בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִן הַמּוּמְחֶה. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לָא תֵּימָא עַד דְּמוּמְחֶה גַּבְרָא וּמוּמְחֶה קָמֵיעַ, אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן דְּמוּמְחֶה גַּבְרָא, אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא מוּמְחֶה קָמֵיעַ 

Nor with an amulet when it is not from an expert: Rav Pappa said: This does not mean that one may only go out with an amulet if the person who wrote it is an expert and the amulet has proven effective. Rather, if the person who wrote it is an expert, even though the amulet has not proven effective, he may go out with it.

According to Rav Pappa, so long as the provenance of the amulet was from an expert, it may be carried. The Talmud then defines an “effective amulet”:

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵיזֶהוּ קָמֵיעַ מוּמְחֶה — כֹּל שֶׁרִיפֵּא, וְשָׁנָה, וְשִׁלֵּשׁ. אֶחָד קָמֵיעַ שֶׁל כְּתָב וְאֶחָד קָמֵיעַ שֶׁל עִיקָּרִין, אֶחָד חוֹלֶה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ סַכָּנָה וְאֶחָד חוֹלֶה שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ סַכָּנָה

The Sages taught in the Tosefta: What is an effective amulet? It is any amulet that healed one person once, and healed him again, and healed him a third time. That is the criterion for an effective amulet, and it applies to both a written amulet and an amulet of herbal roots; both if it has proven effective in healing a sick person who is dangerously ill, and if it has proven effective in healing a sick person who is not dangerously ill. It is permitted to go out with these types of amulets on Shabbat…

In the coming pages of Talmud there will be a long discussion of amulets and talmudic cures. In this age of heightened awareness of the need to disinfect, Talmudology would like to remind its readers not to actually take any of these talmudic remedies. Injecting bleach is also not a good idea. And with that warning let’s take a deep dive into the efficacy of amulets.

“Amulet (noun):
a charm often inscribed with a magic incantation or symbol to aid the wearer or protect against evil such as disease or witchcraft...

...an ornament or small piece of jewelry thought to give protection against evil, danger, or disease.”

Some Talmudic Amulets

Here are some of the many amulets listed in the Talmud:

• A coin would be pressed against a wound to heal it - but this worked only if it had an image on it (משום צורתא, Shabbat 65a)

• A shoe strap worn by a son on his left arm to alleviate the sadness from missing his father who may be traveling, or had perhaps died (Shabbat 66b).

• Madder plants were worn around the neck as a cure. If it had three knots it could ward off illness; five would heal from illness and seven “שבעה אפילו לכשפים מעלי” - would prevent the effects of witchcraft - but only if the knots were not exposed to sunlight or moonlight (Shabbat 66b)

• An even tekumah (preserving stone) which was worn by a woman to prevent miscarriage (Shabbat 66b)

• A locust egg (Shabbat 67a)

• The tooth of a fox (Shabbat 67a)

• The nail that had been used to crucify a person (Shabbat 67a)

• If a person had the ill fortune to have been bitten by a mad dog: “Let him bring the skin of a male hyena and write on it: I, so-and-so, son of so-and-so, am writing this spell about you upon the skin of a male hyena: Kanti kanti kelirus. And some say he should write: Kandi kandi keloros. He then writes names of God, Yah, Yah, Lord of Hosts, amen amen Selah. And let him take off his clothes and bury them in a cemetery for twelve months of the year, after which he should take them out, and burn them in an oven, and scatter the ashes at a crossroads. And during those twelve months of the year, when his clothes are buried, when he drinks water, let him drink only from a copper tube and not from a spring, lest he see the image of the demon in the water and be endangered, like the case of Abba bar Marta, who is also called Abba bar Manyumi, whose mother made him a gold tube for this purpose” (Yoma 84a)

• To avert the spells of the demon Shavrirei, an evil spirit that rules over water: “Knock with the lid on the jug and say: So-and-so, son of so-and-so, your mother said to you to beware of the shavrirei verirei rirei yirei rei, found in white cups.” (Avodah Zara 12b).

Medieval amulet to protect mother and child against attack from the demon Lilith during childbirth. From Sefer Raziel, Amsterdam 1701.

Might a Jew use an Amulet from the Church of the Sepulcher?

Sefer Hasidim (The Book of the Pious) was composed in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and describes the religious life, beliefs and customs of the Jews of medieval Germany. It contains many unusual tales, and here is one of the best:

ספר חסידים # 1352

אישה אחת יהודית חלה בנה באתה [=באה] גויה ואמרה לה תני לבנך על זאת האבן לשתות ויתרפא אמרה היהודית מה טיבה של זאת האבן? אמרה הגויה שהביאו האבן מן השוחה והיא מן האבן שנטמא[יתכן וצ"ל נטמן] בה ישו ולכמה גוים נתנו לשתות ונתרפאו. אמרה היהודית כיוון שאמרה שהיא של ישו אין אנכי חפיצה שישתה בני על האבן ולא רצתה לעשות שום רפואה באותה אבן וזה :(דברים ו, 5) ובכל נפשך (שם יט, 9) לאהבה את ה' אלוקיך

The son of a Jewish woman fell ill. A gentile woman came and told her to give the boy a stone chip to swallow so that he would be cured. The Jewish woman asked, “where is this stone from?” The gentile replied that it was a stone from [the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem] where Jesus had been buried, and that many gentiles had been given similar stones and they had recovered.

The Jew replied that since she had told her it had come from Jesus, “I do not want my son to drink it” and she did not want to use the stone for any form of therapy. This is the meaning of the Torah “You shall love the Lord your God with all your soul,” and to “to love the Lord your God” (Deut. 5:1 and 19:9).

This story describes an attempt to heal a dying Jewish boy with a stone chip from either the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem (or possibly a stone chip from the Rock of Calvary within the same church). It echoes a tale found in the Talmud that points to the efficacy of shrines. Rabbi Akivah was once asked by a person “even though I do not believe that there is any substance to idol worship, don’t we see people who go with broken limbs to worship idols and come back when they are whole?” (לבי ולבך ידע דעבודת כוכבים לית בה מששא והא קחזינן גברי דאזלי כי מתברי ואתו כי מצמדי Avodah Zarah 55a).

In an email, Professor Ephraim Shoham-Steiner from Ben Gurion University explained to Talmudology that “the practice of chipping little stone fragments from the “stone of unction” or the bare rock of Calvary by pilgrims to Jerusalem is very well recorded and such a stone chip could have easily made its way to Europe. The common practice for healing was usually to pour water on the chip and then have the sick person drink the water or use the water as a healing potion.” In his fascinating paper in the Harvard Theological Review, Shoham-Steiner wrote that

Research has shown that both Jewish and Christian pious circles expressed concern over what seems to have been a rather widespread phenomenon, namely the interreligious exchange of domestic remedies, charms, and miracle cures. Attempts to limit and discourage this exchange fits within the larger framework typical of certain pietistic trends in both religions…For devout Jews like Rabbi Judah the Pious of Regensburg (d. 1217), the co-author and editor of the Book of the Pious, such exchanges [of Jewish and Christian domestic and medical knowledge] were especially objectionable when the methods of healing involved the use of ritually impure ingredients or typically non-Jewish (pagan or Christian) folk remedies. For their part, pious Christians objected to Jewish use of the healing powers of Christian saints…

In this story, the author praises a Jewish mother for rejecting her Christian neighbor’s offer to use a stone chip relic from no less then the ultimate Christian shrine — the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

I doubt that any practicing Jew today would consider using an amulet from a religious tradition outside of her own, but this story in Sefer Hasidim was clearly placed to warn the reader who might be tempted that the practice was not permitted. And it demonstrates the degree to which the use of amulets - even Christian ones - had penetrated the medieval Jewish community.

The Use of Amulets in an Israeli Intensive Care Unit

Amulets were not only a feature of medieval Jewish life. As a paper published from Assaf Harofeh hospital in Tel Aviv demonstrates, they certainly remain part of contemporary Jewish practice. The staff asked the parents of every child (Israeli and Arab) admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) over a two-month period to complete a questionnaire, which included demographic data on the patient and the family, the use of talismans or other folk medicine practices, and the perception of the effects of these practices on the patient’s well-being.

They found that an astonishing 30% of the Jewish families used amulets and talismans in the ICU, irrespective of the socioeconomic status of the family or the severity of the patient’s illness. None of the Muslim families used them, but only eight Arab (compared with 42 Jewish) children were surveyed. Amulets and talismans were used significantly more by religious Jews, by families with a higher parental educational level, and where the hospitalized child was very young.

And what were these modern amulets, used by one in three of the families of these very sick children?

“A total of 25 objects were used. These included 16 holy books, a note written by a rabbi, a picture of a rabbi, a thread tied around the patient’s limb, and 6 other talismans. The most common types of amulets and talismans used in our pediatric ICU, in descending order of frequency, were:

Holy books — the whole Bible or a part thereof, e.g., the book of Psalms (Tehilim), placed on the patient’s bed, usually adjacent to his/her head or under the pil- low.

Photograph of a rabbi — usually placed on the patient's bed, or on the wall nearby.

Dollar note — a U.S. dollar note, sent by a well-known rabbi in the USA, usually placed on the patient's bed.

Card or note from a rabbi — with a written blessing, placed adjacent to the patient’s head or under the pillow.

Bottle of "holy water" or "holy oil" — to be applied to the patient's skin, once or several times, or poured in a glass and placed on the floor under the patient's bed. This liquid is usually prepared by a rabbi.

Red thread — tied around the patient's wrist or ankle.

Medallion — pinned to the clothes or hanging on a necklace. Common medallions are blue beads and amulets in the form of an eye or a palm with five fingers (hamsa, meaning five in Arabic).

Blessing by a rabbi — who prays next to the patient's bed or outside the ICU. If the rabbi cannot come personally, one of the patient’s relatives will go to the rabbi to obtain a blessing.

Adding a name — either a new first name or one or several letters. The names of angels in the Bible were usually added to the original names of male patients, and names of known personages in the Bible, or names with a certain meaning (for example, long living), were given to both male and female patients.

Changing the name — from the patient's original first name to a new one, in accordance with the above mentioned considerations.

Other types of talismans, amulets and various kinds of stones with various shapes — the most well-known is the hand-shaped hamsa. Others are hexagonal, circular, knife-shaped, rectangular, hexagram (Star of David), heart-shaped, amuletic rings, etc. These usually contain an inscription, e.g., one of the several names of God (Shaddai, Jehova, etc.), angels (Gabriel, Uriel, Raphael, etc.), rivers in Paradise (Gihon, Pishon, Hiddekel, etc.), and others (Zion, King David, Jerusalem), etc.

“We believe that the frequent use of talismans, as found in this study, might express the families’ need for emotional and psychological support. We therefore suggest that this issue be taken seriously, and that consideration be given to increasing the involvement of psychologists in the global care of the critically ill child. We also contend that a greater awareness and follow-up by the staff is needed to understand, help and encourage families who use amulets as an extra treatment for children in the ICU.”

— Barr, J. et al. Talismans and Amulets in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: Legendary Powers in Contemporary Medicine. IMAJ. 2000: 2; 278-281.

universal beliefs in the power of amulets

The belief in the power of amulets is a powerful one. It was true in talmudic times, and it remains so today. Some of the beliefs of the rabbis might feel strange to our modern minds, but they reflected what everyone believed back then. Galen, the second century Roman physician wrote that assertion that a peony root hung about the neck was effective against epilepsy and that stones of green jasper worn over the stomach cured stomach complaints. And here, as another example, is an amulet against the disease we call malaria, written in the third century by Quintus Serenus Sammonicus (d. 212 CE) who was the physician to the Roman emperor Caracalla.

Inscribis chartae, quod dicitur Abracadabra, Saepius: et subter repetas, sed detrahe summae, Et magis atque magis desint elementa figuris Singula, quae semper rapies et coetera figes, Donec in angustam redigatur litera conum. His lino nexis collum redimire memento.

Write several times on a piece of paper the word ‘Abracadabra,’ and repeat the word in the lines below, but take away letters from the complete word and let the letters fall away one at a time in each succeeding line. Take these away ever, but keep the rest until the writing is reduced to a narrow cone. Remember to tie these papers with flax and bind them round the neck.

After wearing the talisman for nine days, it was to be thrown over the shoulder into an eastward-running stream. Should this treatment fail, Sammonicus recommended the application of lion’s fat, or the wearing of cat’s skin tied with yellow coral and green emeralds around the neck.

Abracadabra written as an amulet remained popular for more than 1,500 years after it was mentioned by Sammonicus. In fact it was widely used during the outbreaks of bubonic plague in London in the seventeenth century, as Daniel Defoe recorded in his book Journal of a Plague Year.

But there was still another madness beyond all this, which may serve to give an idea of the distracted humour of the poor people at that time: and this was their following a worse sort of deceivers than any of these; for these petty thieves only deluded them to pick their pockets and get their money, in which their wickedness, whatever it was, lay chiefly on the side of the deceivers, not upon the deceived. But in this part I am going to mention, it lay chiefly in the people deceived, or equally in both; and this was in wearing charms, philtres, exorcisms, amulets, and I know not what preparations, to fortify the body with them against the plague; as if the plague was not the hand of God, but a kind of possession of an evil spirit, and that it was to be kept off with crossings, signs of the zodiac, papers tied up with so many knots, and certain words or figures written on them, as particularly the word Abracadabra, formed in triangle or pyramid, thus:—

     ABRACADABRA
     ABRACADABR     Others had the Jesuits’
     ABRACADAB         mark in a cross:
     ABRACADA             I H
     ABRACAD               S.
     ABRACA
     ABRAC          Others nothing but this
     ABRA               mark, thus:
     ABR
     AB                   * *
     A                    {*}

I might spend a great deal of time in my exclamations against the follies, and indeed the wickedness, of those things, in a time of such danger, in a matter of such consequences as this, of a national infection. But my memorandums of these things relate rather to take notice only of the fact, and mention only that it was so. How the poor people found the insufficiency of those things, and how many of them were afterwards carried away in the dead-carts and thrown into the common graves of every parish with these hellish charms and trumpery hanging about their necks, remains to be spoken of as we go along.

Rashi, who lived about 500 years earlier than Defoe, recognized Abracadabra and its disappearing letters. Here is his explanation of the talmudic amulet that we have already mentioned, to be used against the demon Shavrirei. To recall, the Talmud (Avodah Zara 12b) states that the incantation should include the phrase “your mother said to you to beware of the shavrirei verirei rirei yirei rei.” And here is Rashi:

רשי, עבודה זרה יב, ב

איזדהר משברירי שברירי ברירי רירי ירי רי בכסי חיורי - לחש הוא ומתמעט והולך משם השד כאשר הוא שומע מיעוט תיבות אות אחר אות עד רי וכן הוא הלחש להבריחו משם

He whispers and reduces the number of letters of the name of the demon. When the demon hears his name loosing letter after letter, until all that is left are the letters “rei” [he vanishes] and the whispering expels him from there…

Robert Boyle and His Powdered Toads

Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is considered the father of modern chemistry. He discovered the law that describes the inversely proportional relationship between the absolute pressure and volume of a gas, and Britain’s Royal Society of Chemistry gives out a Robert Boyle Prize for Analytical Science, named in his honor. But as Margaret Baldwin shows in her fascinating paper Amulet Therapy in Seventeenth-Century Medicine, Boyle was very fond of his amulets.

He believed that amulets of powdered toad cured urinary incontinence, while amulets of excised kidney stones, when tied to the wrists, relieved pain caused by stones in the kidneys. He cited the case of a friend who had been cured of violent cramps by wearing and handling the tooth of a hippopotamus. He had seen cases where plague had been cured, and cases where plague had been averted, by drinking an extract of horse dung and rotting ivy berries.

Boyle attributed the efficacy of amulets to the invisible material effluvia exuded by the chemical or animal substance contained in the externally applied medicine. Such particles entered through the pores of the skin, then passed into the blood and circulated throughout the body until they reached the diseased part, where their shape caused them to produce a lasting alteration in the textures of the body…

Boyle described himself as being of a frail and weak constitution and constantly prone to sickness. He recorded that he had been cured of a violent quotidian fever by amulets made of basalt, hops, and a quarter pound of blue currants tied upon his wrists. Chronically subject to violent nosebleeds, Boyle recounted one incident in which he had been afflicted in this manner while visiting his sister's house. As she happened to have on hand some moss from a dead man's skull (it had been sent her as a present from Ireland, where it was esteemed a useful remedy), Boyle tried the remedy on himself. But rather than stuffing it up his nostrils, as was the custom, he chose to hold it in his hand. Covering the moss with his fist "that the warmth might a little actuate the medicine," he found that the nosebleed stopped speedily, much to the wonder of the bystanders. Moreover, he recounted that he had not been troubled with a nosebleed for several years following the use of the moss. On another occasion, Boyle tried to cure himself of leg cramps by wearing a ring made of elk's hoof provided him by a physician. Boyle candidly reported that the remedy had failed to help his leg cramps, but noted that it had in fact relieved more moderate cramps in his hands and that it was his habit to keep the ring at his bedside for times when the finger cramps returned.

““Well, ah, I did inquire as to the contents, and I was not persuaded of any great good to come therefrom...but the man who sent it is a well-esteemed physician, and he says it is a remedy much thought of among the Florentine doctors who had had a large experience with Plague.”

”But what is it?” I asked again.

”It contains a dried toad,” she said”

— Geraldine Brooks. Year of Wonders. Penguin 2001. 84

Judaism’s Most popular Amulet - The Mezuzah

On the front door of a Jewish home you will find an amulet, called a mezuzah. In fact, it is placed on all of the doors in the house, other than bathrooms and closets. My home has at least fifteen of them. The mezuzah is placed to fulfill the biblical command to “write the words of God on the gates and doorposts of your house" (Deut. 6:9).  The Rav Chaninah of Sura, who lived in the fourth century, suggested that the mezuzah could work to protect the inhabitants of the home in which it was placed:

מנחות לג, ב

אמר רבא מצוה להניחה בטפח הסמוך לרה"ר מאי טעמא רבנן אמרי כדי שיפגע במזוזה מיד רב חנינא מסורא אומר כי היכי דתינטריה 

Rava says: It is a mitzva to place the mezuza in the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Rabbis say that it is in order that one encounter the mezuza immediately upon one’s entrance to the house. Rav Chaninah from Sura says: It is in order that the mezuza protect the entire house, by placing it as far outside as one can.

It is not clear if Chaninah’s position is an outlier. Several other passages in the Talmud can be read either as supporting this position or as suggesting that it is not the mezuzah per se that is protective. Instead, it serves as a reminder of God’s commandments. Nevertheless, later rabbinic literature began to ascribe supernatural powers to the mezuzah, like this passage from the Sheiltot (145), complied by Achai Gaon in the eighth century:

ארטבן שלח לרבינו הקדוש (רבי יהודה הנשיא) מרגלית ( פְּנִינָה ) אחת טובה שאין להעריך את שוויה; ואמר לו - שלח לי דבר שטוב כמותה. כתב לו רבינו הקדוש מזוזה אחת ושלח לו. שלח ארטבן ואמר לו - מה עשית? אני שלחתי לך דבר יקר שאין להעריך את שוויו ואילו אתה שלחת לי דבר ששווה מטבע אחת. שלח רבינו הקדוש ואמר לו - אתה שלחת לי דבר שאני צריך לשמור אותו; ואני שלחתי לך דבר שאתה ישן והיא (התורה) משמרת אותך, שכתוב (משלי ג, טו) ' יְקָרָה הִיא מִפְּנִינִים וְכָל חֲפָצֶיךָ לֹא יִשְׁווּ בָהּ' - חפציי וחפציך לא ישוו בה

מיד נכנס שד בביתו של ארטבן; ולא היה לו אלא בת אחת ובאו כל הרופאים ולא הועילו לה. כיון שנטל ארטבן את המזוזה ושם לה על הפתח - מיד ברחה אותה שדה; ונטל רבינו הקדוש מרגלית לעצמו

Artaban sent to our Holy Rabbi an invaluable pearl together with the message: Send me something as good. He wrote him a mezuzah and sent to him. Artaban sent him (word) and said: I sent you something priceless, and you send me something that is not worth anything.He sent him (an answer): You sent me something that I have to guard, and I sent you something that protects you when you sleep, as it is written “She is more precious than rubies, and all the things you can desire are not to be compared unto her” (Prov. 3:15). Your thing and my thing can not be compared to her.

Immediately entered a demon into the daughter of Artaban and this was his only daughter and all the physicians came and they could do nothing for her, (but) as soon as Artaban took the mezuzah and attached it to the door the demon fled from her at once and our Holy Rabbi kept the pearl to himself.

During the middle ages Jews started to add the names of angels or verses or other symbols with a distinctly magical character onto the parchment of the mezuzah for extra protection. Maimonides was dismayed by this custom, and ruled against it in his Mishnah Torah (Hilkhot Tefilin Mezuzah 5:4):

It is universal custom to write the word Shaddai on the other side of the mezuzah, opposite the blank space between the two sections. As this word is written on the outside, the practice is unobjectionable. They, however, who write names of angels, holy names, a biblical text or inscriptions usual on seals, within the mezuzah, are among those who have no portion in the world to come. For these fools not only fail to fulfill the commandment, but they treat an important precept that expresses the Unity of God, the love of him and his worship, as if it were an amulet to promote their own personal interests, for according to their foolish mind, the mezuzah is something that will secure for them advantage in the vanities of the world.

This didn’t do much to dissuade. In thirteenth century Spain, a kabbalist named Joseph Gikatilla penned Sod Hamezuzah (The Secret of the Mezuzah), in which he wrote:

The Holy One, blessed be He, because of His great love for Israel, gave them these two passages, which are Shema and Vehaya Im Shamoa, and they are the secret of the two passages called Gedulah (grace) and Gevurah (severity). Encompassing Gedulah and Gevurah are all the external forces, and in order to protect Israel from the external forces that surround Gedulah and Gevurah, which are called the mezuzot of the supreme palace, He commanded Israel to place a mezuzah on the gates of their homes, so that there should be no permission for the external forces to enter the homes of Israel, so that they cannot harm them.

And the secret: God shall pass over to plague Egypt, and He shall see the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, and so on (Exod 12:23). Now then, the mezuzah always stands in the place of those things that were done on the night they left Egypt, and the mezuzah guards at the entrance against all the external forces of impurity, so that they may not enter the house. Likewise, when a man goes out the door of his house, those camps of sanctity and purity that are attached to these two passages ‒ namely, Shema and Vehaya Im Shamoa ‒ they all go with the man who has a mezuzah in his doorway, and when he goes out the door of his house, they protect him from the harmful spirits and from all the external forces of impurity until he returns home. The mezuzah therefore protects a person when he enters his home, when he goes out ... and those angels that are appointed for those two passages in the mezuzah protect a man when he goes out the door of his house. And it is about this that it says, For He shall command His angels, for you, to protect you on all your paths, to carry you in His hands (Ps 91:11).

All of this goes to show that the talmudic belief in amulets must be contextualized. It was part of a worldview in which demons and witches were commonplace, and spells could be made or broken with the right ingredients. It was a worldview that continued for over fifteen hundred years. That amulets were once used by everyone should not be a surprise. Far more difficult to explain is the fact that they continue to be used by many Jews today.

Shabbat 57b ~ "A Well-Fleshed Woman"

In a list of the articles of clothing that a woman may wear on Shabbat, Ravina included something called a katla. Rashi explains that the katla was a bib worn by a woman, and that she would deliberatley pull its strings tightly around her neck so that she would appear plump. This is stated explicitly in the Talmud:

שבת נז,ב

הָכָא בְּקַטְלָא עָסְקִינַן, דְּאִשָּׁה חוֹנֶקֶת אֶת עַצְמָהּ — דְּנִיחָא לַהּ שֶׁתֵּרָאֶה כְּבַעֲלַת בָּשָׂר

Here we are dealing with a broad, ornamented strap [katla] hanging around the neck, to which a small bib is attached. A woman does strangle herself with a katla because the strap is broad and tightening it does not cause pain. She tightens it because it pleases her that she will appear fleshy. It was considered beautiful to have flesh protrude from the katla.

Or, as the ArtScroll translation has it “It is agreeable to her that she appear to be a well-fleshed woman.” Which is odd, given that today, the object of most feminine beauty is a thin female body. How, and why, have our proclivities changed?

“Her head was set on (as artists use to say) supported by a round necke, down behind to her rising shoulder, full and plump…her brawny arms, of good flesh and pure colour. ”

— William Sanderson. Graphice, the use of the pen and pensil, or, The most excellent art of painting. Robert Crofts, London 1658. 42

“Venus of Willendorf” discovered in 1908. It was made sometime between 30,000–22,000 BC. Photo by Bjørn Christian Tørrissen.

the paleolithic Venus of Willendorf

The earliest sculpture of the human body is known as the Venus of Willendorf, named for the village in lower Austria from where she was excavated. This curvaceous figurine was created from limestone about 30,000 years ago. According to Walpurga Antl-Weiser from the Natural History Museumin Vienna, it is “a rather realistic representation of an obese woman which combines the natural form with the stylistic scheme of Paleolithic statuettes reflecting past transcendental ideas.”

Why, wonders Nigel Spivey in his excellent book How Art Made the World, did our Paleoloithic ancestors exaggerate “to a grotesque extent” certain features of this and other excavated figurines?

in technical terms these [excessively fleshy] features amount to hypernormal stimuli that activate neuron responses in our brain . . . For palaeolithic people, the female parts that mattered most were those required for successful reproduction: the breasts and pelvic girdle. The circuit of the palaeolithic brain, therefore, isolated these parts and amplified them…

Another way of looking at this is that in art, even art that is 30,000 years old, the shape of the female body which tends to be emphasized is one which accentuates its biological functions.

The female body in Roman and Greek art

As Rosalind Woodhouse points out in her excellent review of obesity in art, the Romans and Greeks did not portray obesity. Their sculpture and pottery art tended to portray the human body in an idealised though still naturalistic way. They often attenuated the limbs, particularly the legs, and downplayed or omitted any deformity or sign of aging or disease, even in portrait sculpture. Indeed Hippocrates believed that obesity was a disease, and Plato advocated for what today we call the “Mediterranean diet.”

Later Portrayals of the body

With the emphasis of the early Church on asceticism (as we noted last time when we discussed bathing in the Talmud), saints and lay people all tended to be shown as slim or even emaciated. This may have been a reflection of the emphasis on fasting and the overall denial of the flesh, but may also just mirror a world where consumption was restricted and many, or perhaps most people, were chronically malnourished. Woodhouse notes that the shape of a woman’s body “might have been more vulnerable to the prevailing conditions than men’s, especially as women generally entered adulthood with a higher percentage of body fat than men.” In the later medieval and early modern period, calorie-dense food crops from the New World, most importantly rice, maize and the potato were introduced, and there was a weakening of religious embargoes on consumption, which led to a more calorie-rich diet. There were also changes in who commissioned works of art and why. Although the Church still remained a patron of the arts, wealthy lay people began to commission paintings. “The body ceased to be a focus of shame, to be depicted modestly, in a stylised way, and started to be a marketable commodity, to be promoted by the sitter or the artist, depending on who held the real power in the transaction.” Here is some more from Woodhouse:

A handful of prominent Flemish and Dutch artists stand out as advocates of the larger body. Among the best known, Rubens (1577–1640) and Rembrandt (1606–1669) both dwelt on the texture of flesh, but whereas Rubens concentrated on allegorical portraits or tableaux featuring the legendary or the lusciously nubile, Rembrandt, chronicler of life’s misfortunes, depicted all conditions of men and women, and was accused in his day of seeking out the gratuitously unappealing. Later, Degas (1834–1917) used a similarly wide range of (mainly female) subjects as Rembrandt for his mainstream work, but it is in his less well-known brothel monotypes that he explores a very different kind of nude: squat, short-necked and very far from his pastel studies of ballet dancers. Renoir’s (1841–1919) women ‘massive, ruddy ... with the weight and unity of great sculpture’ continue in the tradition of Rubens, rather than emulating Degas’ realism. However, in both instances there was an emphasis on fleshiness, either as a mark of sensuality or as a reflection of moral turpitude.

What Men Find attractive - THE waist : hip ratio

Today’s passage of Talmud suggests that women wanted to appear “well-fleshed,” presumably because this was the body shape that was considered desirable. Because concealed ovulation in females forces males to rely on extraneous cues to convey their fecundity and health, human mate selection relies on an emphasis on attractiveness of more salient morphological features. Scientists have long noted that women “choose males based on their high status and ability to provide resources for their offspring, and this is achieved through competition with other members of social and economic hierarchy. Therefore, physical attractiveness is assigned far more significance to women by men rather than vice versa.”

Other than today’s talmudic passage, we do not know what body shapes were appealing to the men in talmudic times, but we have plenty of research about what men find attractive today. It turns out that the best marker of what men find attractive today is the waist:hip ratio, or WHR. In 1993 the late evolutionary psychologist Devendra Singh published an important paper that looked at the role of the WHR in female physical attractiveness in three experiments.

First he looked at the WHR of female models (Miss World winners and Playboy centerfolds). This taxing research revealed that the “WHR for Playboy centerfolds increased slightly from .68 to .71 over the years examined, whereas Miss America contest winners had WHR decrease from .72 to .69.” Most importantly, although the body weight of these models had gone down over the years, the WHR remained in the 0.68-0.71 range. “It seems” he wrote, “that, in Western societies, a narrow waist set against full hips has been a consistent feature for female attractiveness, whereas other bodily features, such as bustline, overall body weight, or physique, have been assigned various degrees of importance over the years.”

Ever the scientist, Singh had to prove that it was the WHR and not some other feature - “such as the size and shape of breasts, legs, etc.” - that was responsible for assessing attractiveness. To this end he found 106 male students to rank a series of line drawings of female figures in order of attractiveness, as well as other features, like “looking youthful”, “sexy” or “capable of having children”.

Stimulus figures representing three body weight categories: underweight (I), normal weight (II), and overweight (III). (Waist-to- hip ratios [WHRs] shown under each figure in each weight category, along with a letter and a number in parentheses identifying body weight category WHR). From Singh D. Adaptive Significance of Female Physical Attractiveness: Role of Waist-to-Hip Ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993. 65 (2): 293-307.

Singh’s student subjects judged both fatness and thinness as unattractive, and these figures were not perceived as having especially high reproductive potential. Other studies had also found a low attractiveness rating assigned to overweight figures, but the low attractiveness for underweight figures, as a group, however, was unexpected.

In a third study, Singh tested older men and their rankings of the line drawings. He used this age group for two reasons. First, in order to label any trait as adaptive it must be demonstrated to be “transgenerationally stable.” If the WHR signals female attractiveness and if attractiveness indeed has adaptive significance, then it should be possible to demonstrate that both younger and older men use WHR to assess female attractiveness. And second, if the ideal of female attractiveness is arbitrary and ever changing, no evidence of transgenerational stability in the meaning of the WHR should be found, as older men are more likely to be exposed to different ideals of attractiveness than are younger men. He found some differences here and there, but overall, the rankings of attractiveness and other attributes were strikingly similar for all age groups, and no age trends were discernible for differential rank assignment as a function of age.

“...body fat and its distribution play a critical role in judgments of female attractiveness, health, youthfulness, and reproductive potential”

These three experiments led Singh to conclude that “body fat and its distribution play a critical role in judgments of female attractiveness, health, youthfulness, and reproductive potential. All of these attributes are associated with a female figure of normal body weight and low WHR. But neither body weight nor WHR alone is associated with female attractiveness. Highly attractive women must have a low WHR; yet deviation from normal body weight, either lower or higher, reduces attractiveness and perceived healthiness.”

Singh also noted that attractiveness and health were strongly linked; figures judged to be highly attractive were also perceived as very healthy. Perhaps then, good health is the defining feature of attractiveness.

the obese Rabbis of THE talmud

It should be noted that while the women of the Talmud would try and emphasize their girth, some of the rabbis of the Talmud were equally proud of their weight. One of these was Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, known as Resh Lakish, who lived in Israel in the third century. Although he had become quite wealthy, he spent most of his money on food and drink, rather than on material possessions. In Gittin (47a) we learn that when his daughter offered him a mattress, Resh Lakish replied בתי, כריסי כרי - “my daughter, my stomach is my mattress!” Not to be outdone, Rav Pappa, who lived a century later in Babylon, was so overweight that he claimed could break a wooden bench if he sat on it (Bava Kamma 10a). But perhaps the most famous description of corpulence in the Talmud is of Rabbis Yishmael and Elazar:

בבא מציעא פד,א

כי הוו מקלעי ר' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי ור' אלעזר בר' שמעון בהדי הדדי הוה עייל בקרא דתורי בינייהו ולא הוה נגעה בהו 

When Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, would meet each other, it was possible for a pair of oxen to enter and fit between them, under their bellies, without touching them, due to their excessive obesity.

These rabbis were so obese that a Roman noblewoman wondered whether, anatomically speaking, they could have sired any children:

אמרה להו ההיא מטרוניתא בניכם אינם שלכם אמרו לה שלהן גדול משלנו כל שכן איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה (שופטים ח, כא) כי כאיש גבורתו איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה אהבה דוחקת את הבשר 

A certain Roman noblewoman [matronita] once said to them: Your children are not really your own, as due to your obesity it is impossible that you engaged in intercourse with your wives. They said to her: Theirs, i.e., our wives’ bellies, are larger than ours. She said to them: All the more so you could not have had intercourse. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: “For as the man is, so is his strength” (Judges 8:21), i.e., our sexual organs are proportionate to our bellies. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: Love compresses the flesh.

Perhaps that is where we should end. Love compresses the flesh. While we may be wired by evolution to find a certain male or female form attractive, beauty remains firmly in the eye of the beholder. It is for this reason that Jewish husbands sing to their wives every Friday night, and remind them that, as the Book of Proverbs (31) puts it:

שֶׁקֶר הַחֵן וְהֶבֶל הַיֹּפִי: אִשָּׁה יִרְאַת־ה', הִיא תִתְהַלָּל

Charm is deceptive and beauty is illusory; But a woman who fears God, she is worthy of praise.

Shabbat 53~ Male Lactation, Gender Fluidity and Mordechai

In today’s page of Talmud there is the miraculous story of a man who grew breasts so that he could feed his hungry child:

מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁמֵּתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהִנִּיחָה בֵּן לִינַק וְלֹא הָיָה לוֹ שְׂכַר מְנִיקָה לִיתֵּן, וְנַעֲשָׂה לוֹ נֵס וְנִפְתְּחוּ לוֹ דַּדִּין כִּשְׁנֵי דַּדֵּי אִשָּׁה וְהֵנִיק אֶת בְּנוֹ 

There was an incident where one man’s wife died, and she left him a son to nurse, and he did not have money to pay the wages of a wet-nurse. And a miracle was performed on his behalf, and he developed breasts like the two breasts of a woman, and he nursed his son.

Milk Producing Male Goats of The Talmud (MPMGOTT)

Later in the Talmud (or earlier, if you already studied it in the last cycle,) the question of males that produce milk is the subject of a discussion about the prohibition of cooking meat and milk together. There are several teachings that are derived from the three places in the Torah where we read “You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk” (לא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִיח בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ). Here is one of them, attributed to Shmuel from the Talmud in Chullin:

חולין קיג, ב

בחלב אמו” ולא בחלב זכר”

“…In its mother’s milk” indicates that one is not liable for cooking meat in the milk of a male goat

A male goat that grows udders and produces milk? Here is how the great exegete Rashi (1040-1105) explains the Talmud:

ולא בחלב זכר - שהיה לו חלב מועט מן הדדים כגון אם נשתנה והיו לו דדים

“And not in the milk of a male goat”: This means that there was a small amount of milk from the udder. For example if the male goat changed and grew udders.

To understand what on earth is going on with these goats, and the science behind the story in today’s page of Talmud, we need to take a detour into the strange world of biologic gender fluidity. Here we go.

Fish

In their helpful 2003 paper Group Sex, Sex Change, and Parasitic Males: Sexual Strategies Among the Fishes and Their Neurobiological Correlates (published, obviously, in the Annual Review of Sex Research) the authors note that there is “tremendous sexual diversity exhibited by fishes” Consider for example the clownfish, also known as the anemonefish. They are sequential hermaphrodites, and first develop into males. These colorful fish thrive unharmed in the poisonous tentacles of the sea anemone, and while several fish may live within the same anemone, there is only one pair that mate. Should the dominant egg-laying female die, one of the largest males steps up does what needs to be done. He changes into a female. This male-to-female change is called protandry. Other fish, like the sea wrasse, are all born female, and as the need arises change into a male. This trick is carried out in at least 500 species of fish, and is called protogyny.

Birds

The male Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) is a bright red color with a black mask over its beak and eyes. The female is a drab olive color, with a grey mask. In 2008 the ornithological world was rocked when a bird was sighted that was half-red and half-olive. Meaning it was half-male and half-female. The bird, sighted in the Black Hawk Forest Nature Preserve in northwestern Illinois, “was perched in a cockspur hawthorn tree.” Its right side was male, and its left, female. The cardinal evaded capture so it was not possible to analyze its genetic makeup. To be clear, this was not a bird that changed sex; it was one that appeared to be both sexes.

Humans

We all should have been taught in school that our gender is determined by which sex chromosomes we receive. If we get two female chromosomes -XX- (one from mom and one from dad) we are female, and if we get one X from mom and a Y from dad -XY- we are male. But like all things, it’s a little more complicated than that. In the 1980s, British researchers discovered the sex-determining gene on a tiny bit of the male Y chromosome and named it the sry gene. That gene tells the body to develop into a male or female appearing body. Sometimes the sry gene sneaks off of the Y gene and makes its way into the DNA of an XX female. As a result, she will develop male anatomy while genetically remaining an XX female. (Please read that sentence again, just to be sure you have understood it.) And sometimes the sry gene on an XY genetic male can mutate and not work. In that case, the genetic male appears to have the organs of a female, which is what occurs in Swyer syndrome. (You can hear more about the amazing sex-changing effects of sry in this fascinating podcast.)

Ready for more? In a small community in the Dominican Republic there have been a number of cases in which little girls grow a penis and turn into little boys. (Again, please re-read that sentence.) These observations were first reported to the scientific community in 1974, and are caused by a deficiency of the steroid 5a-Reductase. Here is how the BBC explained what is going on when they reported about it in 2015.

When you are conceived you normally have a pair of X chromosomes if you are to become a girl and a set of XY chromosomes if you are destined to be male. For the first weeks of life in womb you are neither…Then, around eight weeks after conception, the sex hormones kick in. If you're genetically male the Y chromosome instructs your gonads to become testicles and sends testosterone to a structure called the tubercle, where it is converted into a more potent hormone called dihydro-testosterone. This in turn transforms the tubercle into a penis. If you're female and you don't make dihydro-testosterone then your tubercle becomes a clitoris…the reason [some genetic males] don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.

So the boys, despite having an XY chromosome, appear female when they are born. At puberty, like other boys, they get a second surge of testosterone. This time the body does respond and they sprout muscles, testes and a penis.

So there you have it. Little girls, brought up as little girls, turn into boys, who develop male genitalia, and live as men. You see, they were never really girls in the XX sense. They were XY boys whose lack of sex hormones caused them to look like girls. Which brings us to the Talmud and the strange case of…

That male goat that produced milk

We have seen that there is great deal of natural gender fluidity in the animal world (and if for no other reason, this should make us more sensitive and understanding of those people who want to change their birth gender). But what about that milk-producing male goat? Well according to the website dedicated to “Goat Milk Stuff,” as bizarre as it seems, “there have even been bucks that have been known to give milk (yes, all bucks have teats, and no, a milking buck is not normal).” This was not a case of a male-to-female transformation. It was a case of male lactation.

Writing in the 13th century in his classic commentary on the Talmud called Bet Habechirah, Menachem ben Solomon Meiri, known as the Meiri(1249–1306) wrote that he had seen examples of male milk-producing goats:

בית הבחירה. מכון התלמוד הישראלי השלם.ירושלים, תשל׳ד 432

“There are a few male [goats] in whom the works of creation are slightly changed and whose nipples become larger such that they produce a little milk. And we have seen them with our own eyes...”

— Meiri, Bet Habechirah Chullin, 432

So too, did Khalifa al Nuaimi, a shepherd in the United Arab Emirates: Here is the 2009 report from The National, a newspaper in the United Arab Emirates.

As one of his prized male goats trotted up for some feed, he noticed the animal had seemingly developed a large udder. While he could not quite believe his eyes, the luckless creature proceeded to produce milk on demand, much like his female companions in the pen.

The local farmer made the discovery four days ago at his goat pen in Masakin, a suburb of Al Ain, the government news agency, WAM, reported yesterday. The animal's male organs are said to have been pushed back by the udder, described as "big and bulky". Mr al Nuaimi got a half-litre of good-quality milk from the goat. Dr Martin Wyness, of the British Veterinary Centre in Abu Dhabi, said it was unusual but not unheard of for male mammals to produce milk. "It's absolutely possible," he said.

what may be happening

The structure of the cells involved in producing milk in the male goat has been studied using immunofluorescence and electron microscopy techniques. It turns out they are smaller but higher in number than those found in normal males, which suggests that the anterior pituitary gland, which controls their function is probably acting in a weird way.

Another explanation of the milk-producing male goats of the Talmud (MPMGOTT) is that it is linked to estrogen-like compounds in the plants upon which they were feeding.

“It is now known that more than 50 plant species contain estrogen mimics known as phytoestrogens. Although the mechanisms are not completely understood, several plant secondary metabolites…can mimic the effects of steroidal estrogens. These non-steroidal compounds have similar overall structures or active sites as natural steroidal estrogen and can compete for binding sites on estrogen receptor proteins. Thus, plant compounds can have effects similar to endogenous estrogens”

This comes from an intriguing 2008 paper, Male lactation: why, why not and is it care? published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution. It points out that there are other mammalian species in which the male has been known to lactate, including sheep, rats, free-ranging Dayak fruit bats in Malaysia and the masked flying fox bats of Papua New Guinea. Male lactation was also recorded “in World War II prisoner of war camps when malnourished detainees were later liberated and provided with adequate nutrition. During the period of limited food supply, the prisoners suffered liver, testicular and pituitary atrophy” which messed things up. Once fully nourished, the lactation quickly ended.

But whatever the cause, Shmuel was neither drunk nor hallucinating when he claimed that male goats can produce milk. Because sometimes they do.

mordechai lactating on demand

Male lactation. It’s not just for goats and bats. As we learn in today’s page of Talmud (Shabbat 53b) human males might do it too. And knowing what we now do, perhaps it not as fanciful as it might seem. It’s a pretty impressive miracle, although it may seem a little less miraculous now that we understand so much about the role of the anterior pituitary gland. This man who grew breasts is not identified in the Talmud, but another lactating male is. And his name was Mordechai, the hero of the Purim story. In the Book of Esther (2:7) we read וַיְהִ֨י אֹמֵ֜ן אֶת־הֲדַסָּ֗ה - that Mordechai “raised” or “sustained” Esther. Let’s pickup the story in Beresheet Rabbah (30:8), compiled between 300 and 500 CE.

מָרְדְּכַי זָן וּפִרְנֵס, אָמַר רַבִּי יוּדָן פַּעַם אַחַת חִזֵּר עַל כָּל הַמֵּנִיקוֹת וְלֹא מָצָא לְאֶסְתֵּר לְאַלְתָּר מֵינִיקָה, וְהָיָה מֵינִיקָהּ הוּא, רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה וְרַבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בָּא לוֹ חָלָב וְהָיָה מֵינִיקָהּ. כַּד דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְּצִבּוּרָא גָּחוֹךְ צִבּוּרָא לְקָלֵיהּ,

But did Mordecai really feed and sustain Esther? R. Yudan said: On one occasion he went round to all the wet nurses but could not find one for Esther, so he himself suckled her. R. Berekiah and R. Abbahu said in the name of R. Eleazar: Milk came to him and he suckled her [and he never even tried to find a wet nurse]. When R. Abbahu taught this publicly, the congregation laughed…

They laughed. Of course they did. It sounded like Purim Torah. But it is, at least in theory, an entirely natural event. Regardless, the story in today’s page of Talmud ends with a dispute between Rav Yosef and Abbaye about the meaning of this miracle. Rav Yosef taught that the man who grew breasts must have been a very special person, for a miracle (or an unusual natural event) occurred just for him. Abbaye disagreed: כַּמָּה גָּרוּעַ אָדָם זֶה שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ לוֹ סִדְרֵי בְרֵאשִׁית “On the contrary, how dishonorable is this person that the order of creation was altered on his behalf.” Rav Yehudah added a third viewpoint:

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה קָשִׁים מְזוֹנוֹתָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ עָלָיו סִדְרֵי בְרֵאשִׁית

Rav Yehudah added and said: Come and see how difficult it is to provide for a person’s sustenance. It is so difficult that the order of creation had to be altered on his behalf, which was apparently easier than providing him a source of financial support…

As unemployment in the US tops a record 26 million people, Rav Yehudah reminds us - as if we needed reminding - that the ability to provide for yourself or your family must never be taken for granted. Those who do so are, in their own way, performing the miraculous.

[Partial repost from Chullin 113].