Yoma 83-84 ~ Rabbis and Rabies

If an illness is life-threatening, the usual rules concerning Shabbat or Yom Tov (Jewish festivals) may be overridden. On this page of Talmud the rabbis discuss one of these conditions, the deadly disease we call rabies.

יומא פג, ב

ת"ר חמשה דברים נאמרו בכלב שוטה פיו פתוח ורירו נוטף ואזניו סרוחות וזנבו מונח על ירכותיו ומהלך בצידי דרכים וי"א אף נובח ואין קולו נשמע

The Sages taught in a baraita: Five signs were said about a mad dog: Its mouth is always open; and its saliva drips; and its ears are floppy and do not stand up; and its tail rests on its legs; and it walks on the edges of roads. And some say it also barks and its voice is not heard. 

Many of these features are certainly found in rabid dogs. They are not able to swallow and therefore drool; cranial nerve abnormalities may be the cause drooping ears. It will appear skittish, and because of the way its larynx is affected because it cannot swallow, it cannot bark properly. Thus “its voice is not heard.”

Rabid dogs in the Talmud

Elsewhere the Talmud allows a person to kill a mad dog on Shabbat, even though this is an act that is normally forbidden. The reason is that these dogs are likely to bite people and transmit deadly rabies.

שבת קכא, ב

חֲמִשָּׁה נֶהֱרָגִין בְּשַׁבָּת, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: זְבוּב שֶׁבְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, וְצִירְעָה שֶׁבְּנִינְוֵה, וְעַקְרָב שֶׁבְּחַדְיָיב, וְנָחָשׁ שֶׁבְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל,  

Five creatures may be killed even on Shabbat, and they are: The poisonous fly that is in the land of Egypt, and the hornet that is in Ninveh, and the scorpion that is in Chadyab, and the snake that is in Israel, and a mad dog in any place.

The Cause of Rabies

ממאי הוי רב אמר נשים כשפניות משחקות בו ושמואל אמר רוח רעה שורה עליו

From where did the dog become mad? Rav said: Witches play with it and practice their magic on it, causing it to become mad. And Shmuel said: An evil spirit rests upon it.

Like all infectious diseases, the cause of rabies remained unknown until the germ theory of disease and much later the discovery of viruses. Hence the reasonable suggestion that it was caused by witchcraft or an evil spirit.

But rabies is not caused by witchcraft. It is caused by a virus from the family Rhabdoviridae called Lyssavirus. It is found on all continents except Antartica. (Australia has only a certain variant of rabies which you can read about here.) Because the virus is very fragile it cannot survive outside of its host, so you cannot get it from the environment. An animal has to bite you.

In his famous work History of Animals, Aristotle thought that rabies could not be transmitted from a rabid dog to a human.

Dogs suffer from three diseases; these are named rabies, dog-strangles, foot-ill. Of these, rabies produces madness, and when rabies develops in all animals that the dog has bitten, except man, it kills them; and this disease kills the dogs too. The strangles too destroys the dogs; and only few survive after the foot-ill. Rabies also attacks camels. But elephants are said to be immune to all ailments, but to be troubled by internal winds.

But Aristotle was wrong. Dogs can certainly transmit rabies to people. In fact, rabid dogs are the most common cause of transmission of rabies worldwide. But other mammals can also transmit this dreadful disease, as you can see below.

Global distribution of mammalian rabies reservoirs and vectors. From Charles E Rupprecht, Cathleen A Hanlon, and Thiravat Hemachudha. Rabies Re-examined. Lancet Infect Dis 2002; 2: 327–43

A Case of Rabies in the US

An estimated 59,000 people die worldwide each year from rabies. That’s about one person every nine minutes. In the US the disease is virtually unknown; only between one and three people per year get the disease. Here is a case report of a what happened in 2018 when a man caught rabies in Utah, courtesy of Morbidity and Mortality Reports, published by the Centers for Disease Control.

On October 17 and 18, 2018, a man aged 55 years who lived in Utah sought chiropractic treatment in Idaho for neck and arm pain thought to be caused by a recent work-related injury. On October 19, he was evaluated in the emergency department of hospital A for continued neck pain, nuchal muscle spasms, burning sensation in his right arm, and numbness in the palm of his right hand. He had no fever, chills, or other symptoms of infection. Dehydration was a concern because the patient reported he was unable to drink liquids because of severe pain and muscle spasms. The patient received a prescription for a steroid for muscle spasms and decreased sensation in the right arm and was discharged home.

Two days later, on October 20, the patient developed shortness of breath, tachypnea,{rapid breathing] and lightheadedness and reported he had not been able to sleep for 4 days; he was transported by ambulance to hospital B. The patient continued to have right upper extremity pain and severe esophageal spasms, causing him to refuse oral fluids. Because of his worsening symptoms and acute delirium, he was transferred to hospital C.

On October 21, the patient was intubated for airway protection {ie sedated and connected to a breathing machine]. His symptoms worsened, with fever to 104.7°F (40.4°C), and he became comatose on October 25. Additional exposure history collected from family members included ownership of two healthy dogs and a healthy horse, and a recent grouse-hunting trip where the patient had dressed and cleaned the birds while wearing gloves. High-dose corticosteroid treatment was initiated for presumed autoimmune encephalitis. Because of refractory seizures beginning on October 26, he was transferred to hospital D on October 28, where steroids were continued. On November 3, an infectious disease physician was consulted at hospital D who noted that the patient’s symptom of spasms when swallowing suggested a possible diagnosis of rabies. When specifically questioned about the patient’s exposure to wild animals, family members reported extensive contact with bats that had occupied the patient’s home in the weeks before illness onset… The patient continued to decline, supportive care was withdrawn, and he died on November 4, 19 days after symptom onset.

It took four hospitals over two weeks to diagnose the cause as rabies, because the disease is so very rare in the US that doctors naturally don’t consider it. By then there was nothing that could be done to save the patient. At post-mortem specimens were collected, which indicated that the virus identified was that of a rabies virus variant associated with Mexican free-tailed bats (Tadarida brasiliensis).

The treatment of rabies

Here is the Talmudic remedy for rabies.

יומא פד, א

דנכית ליה מיית מאי תקנתיה אמר אביי ניתי משכא דאפא דדיכרא וניכתוב עליה אנא פלניא בר פלניתא אמשכא דאפא דיכרא כתיבנא עלך כנתי כנתי קלירוס ואמרי לה קנדי קנדי קלורוס יה יה ה' צבאות אמן אמן סלה ונשלחינהו למאניה ולקברינהו בי קברי עד תריסר ירחי שתא ונפקינהו ונקלינהו בתנורא ונבדרינהו לקטמיה אפרשת דרכים והנך תריסר ירחי שתא כי שתי מיא לא לישתי אלא בגובתא דנחשא דילמא חזי בבואה דשידא וליסתכן כי הא דאבא בר מרתא הוא אבא בר מניומי עבדא ליה אימיה גובתא דדהבא 

One bitten by a mad dog will die. The Gemara asks: What is the remedy? Abaye said: 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.

Well, the first sentence is certainly correct: “One bitten by a mad dog will die.” In fact the Jerusalem Talmud (Berachot 8:5) states that you will never hear of a case in which a person was bitten by a mad dog and actually survived, presumably despite the use of male hyena skin.

However, today there is a remedy for a person who was bitten, so long as you get to it quickly. You can give the person rabies immunoglobulin which contains the antibodies to fight the virus. But you have to give it right away, and the patient needs a total of five shots over a month. Once the patient develops symptoms, as the man from Utah did, this intervention does not work, and the disease is uniformly fatal. In all of medical literature there is but a single case report from 2005 of a person who survived after developing the symptoms of rabies. The patient was a 15 year old girl who had been bitten by a bat that she was trying to remove from her room. The doctors thought that her chances of survival were negligible, and offered hospice care as one option and aggressive therapy with antivirals as another. They told the girl’s parents about “the probable failure of antiviral therapy and the unknown effect of the proposed therapy, as well as the possibility of severe disability if the patient were to survive.” Faced with this awful choice the parents requested aggressive care. The girl was in a coma for almost a month, but survived, although she was left with residual neurological problems.

Survival of this single patient does not change the overwhelming statistics on rabies, which has the highest case fatality ratio of any infectious disease. Any regimen may be ineffective in cases associated with extremes of age, massive traumatic inoculation, or delayed diagnosis and must be coupled with strategies to reduce the risk of complications from long-term treatment in the intensive care unit.
— Willoughby R.E et al. Survival after Treatment of Rabies with Induction of Coma. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:2508-2514.


The Mishnah in Yoma (8:6) suggests a controversial remedy for a person bitten by a rabid dog.

 מִי שֶׁנְּשָׁכוֹ כֶלֶב שׁוֹטֶה, אֵין מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ מֵחֲצַר כָּבֵד שֶׁלוֹ, וְרַבִּי מַתְיָא בֶן חָרָשׁ מַתִּיר

If one was bit by a mad dog, they do not feed him the lobe of its liver. But Rabbi Matia ben Harash permits it.

Before you email me with the idea that perhaps this would give the patient some antibodies, you should know that it would not. First, you are likely to get a mouthful of the rabies virus which may increase your exposure dose if you had any open sores or cuts allowing it to enter the bloodstream. Second, a rabid dog won’t have made some or perhaps any antibodies. That’s why it is rabid. And third, You need to get antibodies into the bloodstream. They will be broken down in the harsh environment of the stomach, rendering them useless.

In fact the Talmud Yerushalmi (Yoma 8:5) records that the German servant of Rabbi Yudin was bitten by a mad dog and was given the its liver to eat. But he died, leaving the Talmud to conclude for a second time that you will never hear of a case in which a person survived a dog bite from a rabid dog.

ירושלמי יומא 8:5

גרמני עבדיה דר' יודן נשייא נשכו כלב שוטה והאכילו מחצר כבד שלו ולא נתרפא מימיו אל יאמר לך אדם שנשכו כלב שוטה וחיה

In his commentary on the Mishnah, Maimonides, who was of course a physician himself, ruled that we do not accept the position of Rabbi Matia:

רמב׳ם פירוש המשניות יומא 8:6

ואין הלכה כרבי מתיא בן חרש בזה שהוא מתיר להאכיל לאדם הכבד של כלב שוטה כשנשך כי זה אינו מועיל אלא בדרך סגולה. וחכמים סוברים כי אין עוברין על המצות אלא ברפואה בלבד ר"ל בדברים המרפאין בטבע והוא דבר אמתי הוציאו הדעת והנסיון הקרוב לאמת. אבל להתרפאות בדברים שהם מרפאים בסגולתן אסור כי כוחם חלוש אינו מצד הדעת ונסיונו רחוק והיא טענה חלושה מן הטועה

We do not follow the opinion of Rabbi Matia ben Harash, who permitted feeding the liver of a rabid dog to a person who was bitten, because it does not help, and is only a protective charm (segula). The rabbis only permitted the commandments to be ignored when using real medicines, that is to say, things that have been tested and work, and shown to work with certainty through testing. But it is forbidden to use any kind of charm because they don’t have any power [lit. their power is weak] and experience is limited and this is a mistaken approach…

Although the rabbis of the Talmud suggested remedies for a bite from a mad (rabid) dog, none would work. And today, if you are bitten and show symptoms of rabies, we are basically in the same position, with no medical interventions that work. How humbling.

[Repost from Shabbat 121.]

Print Friendly and PDF

Yoma 74a ~ Gambling, Addiction and the Rabbi who Lost Everything

The Talmud teaches that only certain people may testify as witnesses. When they testify, they must take an “oath of testimony” where one is sworn to give testimony on something that he saw or knew. But this only applies those who are eligible to give testimony. Among those who are excluded are a king and a gambler.

יומא עד,א

שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת אֵינָהּ נוֹהֶגֶת אֶלָּא בִּרְאוּיִין לְהָעִיד. וְהָוֵינַן בַּהּ: לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: לְמַעוֹטֵי מֶלֶךְ.

רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר: לְמַעוֹטֵי מְשַׂחֵק בְּקוּבְיָא. וְהָא מְשַׂחֵק בְּקוּבְיָא — מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא מִיחְזֵי חֲזֵי, וְרַבָּנַן הוּא דְּפַסְלוּהוּ,

dice.jpg

If one who is ineligible to testify swears an oath to give testimony, the oath is invalid even if he does not testify. And we discussed it: The statement: Those who are eligible to give testimony, comes to exclude what? After all, it was already said that the oath does not apply to women, relatives, and other disqualified people. Rav Pappa said: It comes to exclude a king. A king is not disqualified from giving testimony, but he does not testify before a court, due to the requirement to give respect to a king.

Rav Aha bar Ya’akov said: It comes to exclude a gambler [lit “one who plays with dice,”] whom the Sages disqualified from giving testimony. But surely one who plays with dice is eligible by Torah law to give testimony, and it is the Sages who disqualified him. Despite this, an oath of testimony does not apply to him by Torah law, even though the prohibition on his testifying is rabbinic.

According to Rashi, the gambler cannot be a legal witness because he is in the same category as a thief. Since no gambler places a bet knowing they will loose, any money that is lost is lost without the gambler’s true consent.(רשי: דהוי גזלן מדרבנן ופסול לעדות:) It is, in this way, stolen. And just as a thief cannot be a legal witness neither can a gambler.

Is gambling a disease?

“Compulsive gambling, also called gambling disorder,” says the Mayo Clinic’s Patient Information Website, “ is the uncontrollable urge to keep gambling despite the toll it takes on your life.” In the 2021 International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Pathological or Compulsive Gambling disorders are coded as F63.0, though they may also be coded as Z72.6 (a problem related to lifestyle). Excessive gambling was first officially recognized as a psychiatric disorder in the ninth edition of the International Classification of Diseases in 1977. Three years later it was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, third edition (DSM-III) which is used by the American Psychiatric Association. But why should gambling be classified as a disease rather than a fun night out at best, or a moral failing at worst?

As a group of specialists in addictive behavior pointed out, there are several features that are common to both drug addiction and gambling. They include similarities of reward processing which are distinct from impulse control disorders. In impulse control disorders, any “reward” is based on negative reinforcement: people have a feeling of relief after the act. In sharp contrast, substance-induced addictions and gambling offer positive reinforcement, (at least in the early stages of the disease process), when people report a “kick” or a state of “flow”. It is only later in the process that compulsive features and negative reinforcement predominate.

And then there is evidence that suggests “that individuals with gambling or substance use disorders exhibit a hypo-responsive reward circuitry. These results support the view that dopaminergic dysfunction constitutes a common feature of both substance-related and behavioral addictions.”

There is more evidence that dopamine dysfunction is involved in pathological gambling, and it comes from patients with Parkinson’s disease. When some patients are treated with medications that block dopamine in order to control the symptoms, there can be an unfortunate side effect: a sudden onset of gambling together with other reward-driven behaviors, including compulsive shopping and hypersexuality. Pathological gamblers also show “cognitive distortions” during gambling, that change how the gambler thinks about randomness, chance, and skill, and lead him or her to have an inappropriately high expectation of winning during the game.

Overview of possible disorder categories and central research findings in relation to for “Pathological Gambling.”  Abbreviations: IFC: inferior frontal cortex; PFC: prefrontal cortex. From Fauth-Bühler M, Mann K, Potenza MN. Pathological gambling: a review of the neurobiological evidence relevant for its classification as an addictive disorder. Addict Biol. 2017 Jul;22(4):885-897.

Overview of possible disorder categories and central research findings in relation to for “Pathological Gambling.”
Abbreviations: IFC: inferior frontal cortex; PFC: prefrontal cortex.

From Fauth-Bühler M, Mann K, Potenza MN. Pathological gambling: a review of the neurobiological evidence relevant for its classification as an addictive disorder. Addict Biol. 2017 Jul;22(4):885-897.

There is much more research to support the suggestion that pathological gambling is a brain disorder. If you need to recall one fact about the whole business, it is this: Compared with a matched control population, pathologic gamblers have more brain injuries, more fronto-temporo-limbic neuropsychological dysfunctions and more EEG abnormalities, which supports the hypothesis that addictive gambling may be a consequence of brain damage, especially of the frontal and limbic systems.

For most people, gambling is a relaxing activity with no negative consequences. However, others develop excessive behaviour: gambling becomes a disorder or an addiction that manifests itself as an irrepressible impulse to wager money. The activity has negative consequences and dominates the lives of those suffering from pathological gambling. Among other things, excessive gambling leads to the spending of ever-increasing sums of money and creates important personal, familial, occupational, and social problems
— Ladouceur R. Gambling: The Hidden Addiction. Can J Psychiatry 2004:49 (8). 501-503.

Leon de ModEna. Rabbi. teacher. Gambler.

Leon de Modina (1571–1648) was an important rabbi who lived in Italy. He wrote a number of works including Bet Lechem Yehuda, an ethical treatise Tzemach Tzedek, and a book that questioned the authenticity of the Zohar called Ari Nohem. He was also a pathological gambler, whose addiction caused him no end of misery. His autobiography has been published in English, and it is a fascinating and depressing read. In 1608 Leon wrote that as he gambled, “my behavior became so wild that I agreed to go and live away from Venice” (Cohen 105.) In 1620 things got even worse:

During the autumn of 5381 [1620] I also engaged in evil, losing everything by playing games of chance. As a result I was obliged to extend my term of burdensome employment…I am troubled and distressed with many debts…May God take pity on me. (Ibid 116.)

Not surprisingly his son Isaac also began to gamble, “and treading a bad path” (ibid 142.) For Isaac things continued to decline. Around the summer of 1638, Leon noted that his son “began to transgress greatly. Instead of earning money to provide food for his family, as a man should, from morning to evening he played games of chance, mad though they may be…He forsook his family, left his wife lonely, and went to Livorno and from there to Amsterdam…He could have lived peacefully and quietly in his home…But he vanished and has not been seen here …as he wanders about the earth” (idib 150).

Leon’s incessant gambling brought him continued financial hardship.

During the winter [of 1625] I lost so much money playing games of chance that I was compelled at Passover to take a loan of 152 ducats from the members of the Ashkenazic Torah Study Society…to be deducted six ducats a month from my salary, in order to pay my debts. I vowed not to play games of chance until the money was fully deducted, which would take twenty-five months. Today a year has gone by without income and without students and earnings. I do not know how…how I shall find some teaching, or whence will come my help. if not from God in heaven” (idid 129-130).

And so it continued. Mark Cohen, who translated and edited the autobiography, wrote that “Modena also pursued gambling for reasons other than financial gain; the stakes for which he played were enough to ruin him but not enough to raise his socioeconomic status in a significant way….At the gambling table he tried to make up for the deficiencies he felt in his position in his life and his abilities. Whether he won or lost, he could do it in a big way” (ibid 43). Leon was a classic case of ICD F63.0

In a thoughtful review of the consequences of pathological gambling, the psychiatrist Robert Ladouceur noted that “false beliefs of those who gamble can lead to chasing losses, changes in mood, withdrawal, deceitfulness, and important negative consequences. These changes at the individual level, coupled with the large financial loss, can be expected to affect the family life, employment, and social life of the gambler.” He could have been describing the arc of the life of Leon de Modena as well as that of Isaac his son. And at least in this respect, the findings of modern psychiatry support the rabbinic decision to disallow the legal testimony from a gambler, since the gambler is inherently unreliable.

Whence Free Will?

Still, the claim that the pathological gambler has a disease rather than a moral failing has many implications. Perhaps the most important of these is that with this understanding it makes as much sense for the gambler to repent for his lifestyle as it does for a patient with breast cancer to repent for her malignancy. In neither case is it the fault of the one with the illness. Elsewhere on Talmudology we have discussed how our understanding of the biochemical basis of our behaviors, whether based on genetics or trauma or neuropharmacology, is also challenging some of the traditional Jewish notions of free will and responsibility. The pathological gambler brings these questions into focus. Sin requires free will. And free will is rapidly becoming a troubled notion.

Let’s end with the most poetic, and most memorable criticism of the charge that our behavior lies outside of our control. It was penned by William Shakespeare in King Lear (Act I scene ii):

This is the excellent foppery of the world, that, when we are sick in fortune, often the surfeit of our own behaviour, we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars; as if we were villains on necessity; fools by heavenly compulsion; knaves, thieves, and treachers by spherical pre-dominance; drunkards, liars, and adulterers by an enforc’d obedience of planetary influence; and all that we are evil in, by a divine thrusting on. An admirable evasion of whore-master man, to lay his goatish disposition to the charge of a star!

Psychiatric classifications have traditionally recognized a number of conditions as representing impulse control disorders. These have included pathological gambling, intermittent explosive disorder, kleptomania, pyromania, and trichotillomania.
— Grant J et al. Impulse control disorders and “behavioural addictions” in the ICD-11. World Psychiatry 2014. 13:2
Print Friendly and PDF

Yoma 67b ~ Pork, Catfish and Archeological Truths

Today’s page of Talmud teaches that there are two kinds of divine commands. There are logical commands, things that Jews could have figured out without the Torah, like the prohibition against murder. And then there are commands for which there appears to be no logical reason. Had they not been written in the Torah, we would not have deduced them. And the classic example of the latter is the prohibition against eating pork.

יומא סז, ב

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן, ״אֶת מִשְׁפָּטַי תַּעֲשׂוּ״ — דְּבָרִים שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא (לֹא) נִכְתְּבוּ דִּין הוּא שֶׁיִּכָּתְבוּ, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְגִלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים, וְגָזֵל, וּבִרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם. ״אֶת חוּקּוֹתַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ״ — דְּבָרִים שֶׁהַשָּׂטָן מֵשִׁיב עֲלֵיהֶן, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: אֲכִילַת חֲזִיר, וּלְבִישַׁת שַׁעַטְנֵז, וַחֲלִיצַת יְבָמָה, וְטהֳרַת מְצוֹרָע, וְשָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ

וְשֶׁמָּא תֹּאמַר מַעֲשֵׂה תוֹהוּ הֵם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אֲנִי ה׳״, אֲנִי ה׳ חֲקַקְתִּיו, וְאֵין לְךָ רְשׁוּת לְהַרְהֵר בָּהֶן.

The Sages taught with regard to the verse: “You shall do My ordinances, and you shall keep My statutes to follow them, I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 18:4), that the phrase: “My ordinances,” is a reference to matters that, even had they not been written, it would have been logical that they be written. They are the prohibitions against idol worship, prohibited sexual relations, bloodshed, theft, and cursing the Name of God.

The phrase: “And you shall keep my statutes,” is a reference to matters that Satan and the nations of the world challenge because the reason for these mitzvot are not known. They are: The prohibitions against eating pork; wearing garments that are made from diverse kinds of material, i.e., wool and linen; performing the ḥalitza ceremony with a yevama, a widow who must participate in a levirate marriage or ḥalitza; the purification ceremony of the leper; and the scapegoat.

And lest you say these have no reason and are meaningless acts, therefore the verse states: “I am the Lord” (Leviticus 18:4), to indicate: I am the Lord, I decreed these statutes and you have no right to doubt them.

This prohibition against eating pork is perhaps one of the most defining features of the laws of kashrut. “Want some bacon?” Vincent asks Jules in the classic 1994 movie Pulp Fiction, as the two hitmen are sitting in the Hawthorne Grill. “No man, I don't eat pork” replies Jules. Vincent is incredulous.

“Are you Jewish?”

“Nah, I ain't Jewish, I just don't dig on swine, that's all.”

Today we are going to talk about the prohibition about eating bacon, and then pivot to another forbidden food, catfish.

Alongside circumcision and Sabbath observance, the prohibition against pork is considered one of the clearest identifiers of what a Jew does and, as such, who is a Jew.
— Jordan Rosenblum. ‘Why Do You Refuse to Eat Pork?’’ Jews, Food, and Identity in Roman Palestine. The Jewish Quarterly Review 2011. 100 (1): 95–110

From here.

Cursed be he who raises swine

The prohibition against eating pork was so fundamental that the rabbis extended it to cover raising the animal too. “Cursed be he who raises swine,” they said in tractate Menachot (65b). Because this command was so deeply rooted, it has been long taken as a given that archeologists could use the presence (or absence) of pig remains to distinguish a Philistine from an Israelite settlement. For example, in known Philistine sites from Iron Age I (~950-780 BCE) like Ashdod and Ekron, pig bones account for 7-19% of the animal remains, depending on which strata you are excavating. This is a much higher percentage than is found in Israelite settlements of the same period. But in 2013 this assumption was challenged by a group of top-notch Israeli archeologists (including the controversial Israel Finkelstein) who reviewed the evidence for it. They studied data from 35 sites in Israel, and found a remarkable trend. In the territory of what was once the Northern Kingdom of Israel, pig remains account for 3-7% of all animal remains. But in the Southern Kingdom of Judah, pig remains are almost absent. (The site of Aroer is a bit of an anomaly, with more than 3% pigs. However this site seems to have been a rest stop for many international travelers and so may have served a more international cuisine.) There was a dichotomy between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah that was manifest in whether they ate pork.

Sapir-Hen, L. Bar-Oz, G. Finkelstein, I. Pig Husbandry in Iron Age Israel and Judah. New Insights Regarding the Origin of the "Taboo." Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1953-), Bd. 129, H. 1 (2013), pp. 1-20.

Why was there a rapid rise in the frequency of pigs being eaten in northern Israelite sites during Iron Age II (the period between 870 and 680 BCE)? Among the answers proposed is that “the pig taboo could have been another Judahite cultural trait that was opposed to the situation in the north, and which the authors [of the Torah] wished to impose on the entire Israelite population.” Alternatively, it may have been a result of the larger population found in the Northern Kingdom of Israel. “This process” wrote the authors of the paper Pig Husbandry in Iron Age Israel and Judah “brought about shrinkage of the open areas that are important for sheep/goat husbandry, and could have forced the Iron Age IIB population to a shift in meat production, breeding smaller herds of sheep and goats and concentrating more on pigs, which could supply large and immediate sources of meat.” In contrast, the population of the Kingdom of Judah was much smaller than that of Israel. Hence they had more open space to raise livestock.

By the way, it was the Philistines who were responsible for importing European type pigs into the Middle East. Dr Merav Meiri of the Department of Zoology at Tel Aviv University analyzed the DNA of ancient pigs in the area, and found that they possessed a European gene signature. This raises the possibility that European pigs were brought to the region by the Sea Peoples who migrated to the Levant around 900 BCE, bringing their pigs with them.

Archaeologists take pigs very seriously.
— Israel Finkelstein cited in "Who’d Import Pigs to Israel? Ancient Europeans, Researchers Say." New York Times Nov 5, 2014. A7.

Pigs & Ancient Rome

Whether or not pigs were eaten in some parts of Biblical Israel, there is no doubt that not eating pork became synonymous with Jewish practice. In Rome, things were different. There, eating pork was widespread and enjoyed, and it was one of the most common meats associated with its residents. And as Jordan Rosenblum points out in his 2010 paper Why Do You Refuse to Eat Pork?’’ Jews, Food, and Identity in Roman Palestine swine were one of the four most common animals used for sacrifices in Rome. It was used in the most sacred rite of the Roman religion known as the suovetaurilia, in which a pig, a sheep and a goat were sacrificed to Mars, as part of a ceremony consecrating the land to the gods. According to the Roman philosopher Epictetus “the conflict between Jews and Syrians and Egyptians and Romans, [was] not over the question whether holiness should be put before everything else and should be pursued in all circumstances, but whether the particular act of eating swine’s flesh is holy or unholy.”

So pigs turn out to have played more of a role in our history than would be expected. In biblical times, eating pork may have been a marker of whether you came from Israel or Judea.

Whereas the pentateuchal prohibition against eating pork (Lev 11:7; Deut 11:8) has garnered copious scholarly attention, the proscription against eating finless and scaleless aquatic species that appears in the verses immediately afterward (Lev 11:9–12; Deut 14:9–10) has merited significantly less consideration.
— Yonatan Adler & Omri Lernau (2021) The Pentateuchal Dietary Proscription against Finless and Scaleless Aquatic Species in Light of Ancient Fish Remains, Tel Aviv, 48:1, 5-26, DOI: 10.1080/03344355.2021.1904675

From Swine To catfish

Very recently two Israeli archeologists took a look at the prohibition that is listed in the Bible immediately following the ban on all things porcine. “The earliest textual reference to a proscription against the consumption of aquatic species that lack fins or scales is found in a set of passages repeated twice in the Pentateuch, in both instances immediately following a prohibition against the consumption of pork” they wrote in a paper that garnered some attention. The two analyzed the makeup of fish remains at 30 sites throughout the southern Levant from the Late Bronze Age through to the end of the Byzantine period (ca. 1550 BCE to 640 CE). They found that “the consumption of scaleless fish— especially catfish—was not uncommon at Judean sites throughout the Iron Age and Persian periods.” Here for example is their analysis of seventeen sites from the Iron Age II period (ca. 950–586 BCE), “during which inhabitants of the highlands coalesced politically into the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah.”

Table of fish species found in Iron Age II period settlements in Israel. From Yonatan Adler & Omri Lernau (2021) The Pentateuchal Dietary Proscription against Finless and Scaleless Aquatic Species in Light of Ancient Fish Remains, Tel Aviv, 48:1, 5-26.

Table of fish species found in Iron Age II period settlements in Israel. From Yonatan Adler & Omri Lernau (2021) The Pentateuchal Dietary Proscription against Finless and Scaleless Aquatic Species in Light of Ancient Fish Remains, Tel Aviv, 48:1, 5-26.

The archeologists believed they had uncovered an important finding: Biblical Jews ate catfish.

At over three-quarters of the sites with available evidence, scaleless fish remains are present in modest to moderate amounts: 13% on average (excluding outliers below 5% and above 30%). Significantly, all the fish assemblages from sites within the Southern Kingdom—first and foremost Jerusalem— presented evidence of modest to (more often) moderate amounts of scaleless fish remains. While more limited data is available to-date from sites associated with the Northern Kingdom, there is little reason to think that scaleless fish were consumed to a lesser degree there than in Judah (the assemblage from Iron IIA loci at Tel Reḥov notwithstanding). From the time following the end of the Iron II, three assemblages from layers postdating 586 BCE in Jerusalem contain remains that suggest that consumption of catfish in Jerusalem continued into the Persian period.

In a Times of Israel podcast one of the authors of the paper, Ariel University’s Dr. Yonatan Adler had this to say: “We do not have any evidence that the Judean masses prior to the middle of the second century BCE had any knowledge of the Torah or observed the rules of the Torah.” And that proved just a bit much for Drs. Joshua Berman and Ari Zivotovsky of Bar Ilan University who responded in another piece published in The Times of Israel just two weeks ago. “We believe that these assertions are not supported by the evidence and that the media portrayal of this study as “a scoop” is unwarranted” they wrote.

Not so fast- there is something fishy going on here

First, they point out that lots and lots (and lots) of things proscribed in the Bible were ignored by the ancient Israelites.

We know from the Bible’s own testimony that although intermarriage is proscribed by the Torah, intermarriage was rampant during the period of Ezra and Nehemiah. And although the Torah proscribes idol worship, the prophets censure Israel for doing just this, and indeed we find many dozens of figurines in Israelite sites during that time, including locations near where some of these non-kosher fishbones were found. Not dozens, but hundreds of chapters of the Bible chronicle Israel’s failure to observe the words of the covenant with God.

Next, they are critical of the conclusion that “all the fish assemblages from Judah available for analysis contained significant numbers of scaleless fish remains, especially catfish.” That’s not true, from the very evidence contained in the study by Adler. Most of the fish remains are from kosher fish.

This is one of seventeen sites they survey for this period, but with 5,385 fishbones, it contains far more bones than all other sites from this period combined, and triple the number of bones of all other Jerusalem sites combined, and is thus of great significance. Remarkably, 96% of the fish remains here are from kosher fish. Other sites in the City of David have a much higher percentage of non-kosher fishbones. Remarkably, again, these other sites date from the period just prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, broadly a period in which the residents of Judah come in for particularly harsh censure by the prophets of Israel.

It is the prophet of that period, Isaiah who castigated Israel for eating “the swine’s flesh, the abominable things (sheketz) and the mouse” (Isa 66:17).

This passage from Isaiah likewise undermines Adler’s claim that “We do not have any evidence that the Judean masses prior to the middle of the second century BCE had any knowledge of the Torah or observed the rules of the Torah.” The author of this verse in Isaiah describes a reality whereby part of the community is abiding by the dietary standards of Leviticus 11 and part of it is not. Jews in his day may not have recognized his deliberate references to the Torah text of the dietary laws, just as many Jews today – observant or not – are familiar with these laws yet while unfamiliar with the actual words of the verse. But the account of the prophet’s censure in Isaiah 66 has coherence only if there are a group of Jews observing these laws and another group violating them. The prophetic books offer us a vivid window into the social reality of ancient Israel, and it would, here too, require special pleading to maintain that the social reality portrayed in Isaiah 66 is fiction through and through.

Some Jews were eating kosher fish and others were not. That was the reality that Isaiah was rallying against. It was a reality in which the rules of the Torah may have been ignored, but at least the rules were known. Adler and Lernau claimed that “the ban against finless and scaleless aquatic species apparently deviated from longstanding Judean dietary habits,” whereas Berman and Zivotovsky believe that “faunal finds of fishbones – kosher and non-kosher – in ancient Israel reveal a checkered observance of the Torah’s dietary laws that broadly hews to what the Bible itself.” We will no doubt hear more of this interesting academic debate in the future, especially since Adler will be publishing a book next year called The Origins of Judaism: An Archaeological-Historical Reappraisal. But Adler’s findings, and those of other archaeologists support the contention in today’s page of Talmud that when it comes to keeping kosher, Jews have always had an appetite for the forbidden.

From here.

From here.

Print Friendly and PDF

Yoma 65b ~ Counting the Years

There is a special rule about selling a house in a walled city in the Land of Israel. The seller has the right to buy back his property for one year. If he fails to do so in that time it becomes the permanent property of the buyer. This is learned from a verse in Leviticus:

ויקרא 25:30

וְאִ֣ם לֹֽא־יִגָּאֵ֗ל עַד־מְלֹ֣את לוֹ֮ שָׁנָ֣ה תְמִימָה֒ וְ֠קָ֠ם הַבַּ֨יִת אֲשֶׁר־בָּעִ֜יר אֲשֶׁר־[ל֣וֹ] חֹמָ֗ה לַצְּמִיתֻ֛ת לַקֹּנֶ֥ה אֹת֖וֹ לְדֹרֹתָ֑יו לֹ֥א יֵצֵ֖א בַּיֹּבֵֽל׃

If it is not redeemed before a full year has elapsed, the house in the walled city shall pass to the purchaser beyond reclaim throughout the ages; it shall not be released in the jubilee.

The next question is, what is meant by “a full year”? This is the subject of a dispute on today’s page of Talmud:

יומא סה, ב

דְּתַנְיָא: ״שָׁנָה תְּמִימָה״, מוֹנֶה שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת וְשִׁשִּׁים וַחֲמִשָּׁה יוֹם כְּמִנְיָן יְמוֹת הַחַמָּה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: מוֹנֶה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם

It was taught in a baraita: With regard to redeeming houses in a walled city the Torah states: “And if it not be redeemed within the space of a full year” (Leviticus 25:30), which indicates that he counts 365 days, in accordance with the number of days in a solar year; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: He counts twelve months from day to day.

According to the great Rebbi Yehudah HaNasi (135-217 C.E.) a full year usually means a full solar year of 365 days. A solar year is the time it takes the earth to complete one revolution all the way around the sun. (Or for those of you living in a geocentric universe, that is the time taken for the sun to complete one revolution around the earth). Just like Rebbi, we assume that a solar year is 365 days long, but in fact it is a little less than 365 1/4 days: that is to say, 365 days 5 hours, 48 minutes and 46 seconds. Those extra five and a bit hours are the reason we have a leap year every four years or so, when they add up to almost another 24 hours. And there are other kinds of “solar” years.

The Solar Year

The solar year is the average amount of time it takes the sun to return to the same position as seen from the earth. It is usually measured from one vernal equinox to the next. (The vernal equinox is the day on which the length of day and of the night are equal.) You can see this on the drawing below, taken from H. A. Rey’s wonderful book The Stars (and yes, it is the same H.A. Rey of Curious George fame.) In the drawing, a solar year is the time it takes the sun (as seen from the earth) to orbit from one spring equinox to the next, which is about 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes and 30ish seconds, or 365.242 days.

Screen Shot 2021-06-13 at 12.24.26 AM.png

The solar year is also known as the tropical year and it is also the length of our calendar year. In today’s page of Talmud when Rebbi referred to the “מִנְיָן יְמוֹת הַחַמָּה” or “the the number of days in a solar year” this is what he meant.

The sidereal year

Just like a spinning top the earth wobbles as it orbits the sun.

Just like a spinning top the earth wobbles as it orbits the sun.

But there is another way of measuring the year, and it is the amount of time it takes the sun to appear against the same background of fixed stars. It is known as the sidereal year, from the Latin sidus meaning star. And a sidereal year is 20 min 24.5 seconds longer than a tropical year. The sidereal year is longer because of the precession of the equinoxes, the term given to the phenomenon that in addition to orbiting the sun, the earth is wobbling like a spinning top. As the earth returns to the same position it had one full solar orbit ago, the tilt of the earth is not now directly toward the Sun: because of the effects of precession, it is a little way "beyond" this. The sun does not line up against the background of the stars as it did one year ago, and we need to wait an additional few minutes for sun and earth to line up as they did then.

The lunar year

The rabbis were of the opinion that “the year” in question is the period of twelve lunar months that make up a regular (non-leap) Jewish year. That would be 354 days, which is 11 days and some shorter than a solar or sidereal year.

There is no “correct” way to count a year. It is a matter of convention. We have fiscal years and academic years, draconic years and sothic years. Today’s page of Talmud reminds us that so long as we are clear about what we are saying, a year can be defined in a number of different and interesting ways.

Print Friendly and PDF