ויקרא 1:1-2
וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יְהֹוָה֙ אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר׃
דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ וְאָמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אָדָ֗ם כִּֽי־יַקְרִ֥יב מִכֶּ֛ם קרְבָּ֖ן לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה מִן־הַבְּהֵמָ֗ה מִן־הַבָּקָר֙ וּמִן־הַצֹּ֔אן תַּקְרִ֖יבוּ אֶת־קרְבַּנְכֶֽם׃
And the Lord called to Moshe, and spoke to him out of the Tent of Meeting, saying,Speak to the children of Yisra᾽el, and say to them, If any man of you bring an offering to the Lord, of the cattle shall you bring your offering, of the herd, and of the flock.
In context, the word adam - אדם – in this verse means person. But the Midrash expounds and takes the word to mean Adam, as in primordial man. Here is that midrash:
ויקרא רבה 2:7
אָמַר רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאָדָם זֶה, אָדָם, יְהֵא קָרְבָּנְךָ דּוֹמֶה לְקָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהָיָה הַכֹּל בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ וְלֹא הִקְרִיב מִן הַגְּזֵלוֹת וּמִן הַחֲמָסִים, אַף אַתָּה לֹא תַקְרִיב מִן הַגְּזֵלוֹת וְלֹא מִן הַחֲמָסִים, וְאִם עָשִׂיתָ כֵן (תהלים סט, לב): וְתִיטַב לַה' מִשּׁוֹר פָּר.
[“When a man [adam] among you sacrifices.”] Rabbi Berekhya said: The Holy One blessed be He said to this man: ‘Man, let your offering be similar to the offering of Adam the first man; everything was in his domain and he did not sacrifice from that which was stolen or extorted. You, too, do not sacrifice from that which was stolen or extorted. If you do so: “It will please the Lord more than a bull”’ (Psalms 69:32).
Rashi liked this midrash, so he cited it in his commentary on the Torah:
רשי, שׁם
אדם. לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? מָה אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא הִקְרִיב מִן הַגָּזֵל — שֶׁהַכֹּל הָיָה שֶׁלּוֹ — אַף אַתֶּם לֹא תַּקְרִיבוּ מִן הַגָּזֵל (ויקרא רבה)
אדם — Why is this term for “man” employed here? Since אדם also means Adam, its use suggests the following comparison: what was the characteristic of the first man (אדם הראשון)? He did not offer sacrifice of anything acquired by way of robbery, since everything was his! So you, too, shall not offer anything acquired by way of robbery (Leviticus Rabbah 2:7).
The Keli Yakar, a commentary written by Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619) liked another midrash, found in the Talmud (Shabbat 28b). So he connected the two:
כלי יקר שם
וזה"ש (שבת כח:) שור שהקריב אדה"ר קרן אחת היה לו במצחו לכך נזדמן לו שור בעל קרן אחת כי היה דומה אל האדם שהיה קרן א' ר"ל שהיה יחידי בעולם ולא גזל משום אדם, ולא נתעורר משום אדם, כ"א מעצמו דהיינו מכם ע"כ עלה קרבנו לרצון נמצא שקרבן לה' הפסיק הענין. ואח"כ אמר מן הבהמה וגו' להוציא זרע פשתן אלא יעשה כהבל שהביא מבכורות צאנו. ומה שאמר תקריבו קרבנכם היינו מחלביהן החלק המובחר שאדם בוחר לעצמו הנקרא קרבנכם אותו תקריב לגבוה ונקט קרבנכם לשון רבים כפירש"י לומר שב' מקריבין בהמה
This is what is referred to [in the Talmud Shabbat 28b] “the ox that Adam sacrificed had but a single horn on its forehead,” mirroring Adam who was a single person in the world…
And here is the talmudic discussion as found in Shabbat:
תלמוד בבלי שבת כח, ב
מִדְּקָאָמַר קֶרֶן אַחַת הָיְתָה לוֹ בְּמִצְחוֹ, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ טָהוֹר הָיָה, דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: שׁוֹר שֶׁהִקְרִיב אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן קֶרֶן אַחַת הָיְתָה לוֹ בְּמִצְחוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְתִיטַב לַה׳ מִשּׁוֹר פָּר מַקְרִין מַפְרִיס״. ״מַקְרִין״ תַּרְתֵּי מַשְׁמַע! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק — ״מַקְרָן״ כְּתִיב
… as Rav Yehuda said in a similar vein: The ox that Adam, the first man, sacrificed as a thanks-offering for his life being spared, had a single horn on its forehead, as it is stated: “And it shall please the Lord better than a horned [makrin] and hooved ox” (Psalms 69:32). The word makrin means one with a horn. The Gemara asks: On the contrary, makrin indicates that it has two horns. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Despite the fact that it is vocalized in the plural, it is written mikeren without the letter yod to indicate that it had only a single horn….
Rabbi Yehudah does not suggest just what animal this might have been, but that doesn’t stop us from trying to do so.
How about a unicorn? To understand this suggestion we need a little more background.
THE RE'EM IN THE BIBLE
The word ראם, re'em appears several times in the Hebrew Bible. Here, for example, is a verse from Deuteronomy (33:17) which describes the offspring of Joseph.
בְּכ֨וֹר שׁוֹר֜וֹ הָדָ֣ר ל֗וֹ וְקַרְנֵ֤י רְאֵם֙ קַרְנָ֔יו בָּהֶ֗ם עַמִּ֛ים יְנַגַּ֥ח יַחְדָּ֖ו אַפְסֵי־אָ֑רֶץ וְהֵם֙ רִבְב֣וֹת אֶפְרַ֔יִם וְהֵ֖ם אַלְפֵ֥י מְנַשֶּֽׁה׃
Like a firstling bull in his majesty, He has horns like the horns of the re'em; With them he gores the peoples, The ends of the earth one and all. These are the myriads of Ephraim, Those are the thousands of Manasseh.
The re'em is specifically identified by the great translator of the Bible Oneklos (~35-120 CE) as one of the species singled out in the Torah as being kosher:
זֹ֥את הַבְּהֵמָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֹּאכֵ֑לוּ שׁ֕וֹר שֵׂ֥ה כְשָׂבִ֖ים וְשֵׂ֥ה עִזִּֽים׃ אַיָּ֥ל וּצְבִ֖י וְיַחְמ֑וּר וְאַקּ֥וֹ וְדִישֹׁ֖ן וּתְא֥וֹ וָזָֽמֶר׃
These are the animals that you may eat; the deer, the gazelle, the roebuck, the wild goat, the dishon, the antelope, the mountain sheep.
Onkelos translates that word דִישֹׁ֖ן into Aramaic as רֵימָא - the re'em. And then there is this passage from the Book of Job (39:9-12):
הֲיֹ֣אבֶה רֵּ֣ים עָבְדֶ֑ךָ אִם־יָ֝לִ֗ין עַל־אֲבוּסֶֽךָ׃ הֲֽתִקְשָׁר־רֵ֭ים בְּתֶ֣לֶם עֲבֹת֑וֹ אִם־יְשַׂדֵּ֖ד עֲמָקִ֣ים אַחֲרֶֽיךָ׃
Most English versions of this passage translate the word re'em as "wild ox"and so read:
Would the wild ox agree to serve you? Would he spend the night at your crib? Can you hold the wild ox by ropes to the furrow? Would he plow up the valleys behind you?
But not the King James Bible. It goes in an entirely different direction:
Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
So according to the King James Bible, the re'em is a unicorn. Why on earth would the translators have chosen, of all creatures, the mythical unicorn as the re'em?
THE RE'EM IS A UNICORN. OR MAYBE NOT.
Well, they didn't. They merely followed the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible from the third century BCE. And the Septuagint translated the Hebrew re'em as μονόκερως - monokeros, or "one horned". Which is why the King James Bible translated it as a unicorn, from the Latin uni meaning "single" and cornu meaning "horn". And since, according to the Talmud, the Septuagint was created at the command of Ptolemy II by seventy-two Jewish sages, you could claim that the King James translation was following a long Jewish tradition.
This translation made its way into later rabbinic commentary. For example, R. Dovid Kimche (1160-1235), in his dictionary of the Hebrew language called Sefer Hashorashim, wrote that the re'em has only one horn. And Abraham Yagel, (1553 – 1623), the Italian rabbi and exegete, mentioned a one-horned re'em that had been captured and brought to Portugal:
Book IV, ch. 45: 108a בית יער הלבנון
ובימנו הובא בארץ פורטוגאלי מן האי האינדי׳ ראם אחד במצודה צדו אותו ומראה צורתו הביאו אח׳כ עוברי אורחות ימים והוא גדול מהפיל ומזרין בקסקשיו בכל עורו וקרן חזות עב על חוטמו אשר בו לחם מלחמות עם הפיל ועם שאר החיות
And in our days a re'em was brought to Portugal from India having been ambushed and trapped, and afterwards sea travellers reported how it looked. It is larger than an elephant and its scales cover all its skin. It has a thick horn on its nose which it uses in fights with the elephant and with other creatures...
As Natan Slifkin points out, what Yagel what was actually describing was a rhinoceros: "It was given to King Manuel of Portugal by Alfonso de Albuquerque, governor of Portuguese India. This was the first rhinoceros to be brought to Europe since Roman times, and it caused quite a sensation." Quite so.
But before we conclude that the re'em was a rhinoceros, there are a couple of problems. First, although it was once found in the Land of Israel, the rhinoceros remains so far discovered only go back to the Mousterian era, which ended about 35,000 years ago. That's quite a few years before the biblical period. Thus it is very unlikely that there were rhinoceri in Israel in the biblical period. And second, the re'em in the Bible is described as having two horns. Two. "וְקַרְנֵ֤י רְאֵם֙ קַרְנָ֔יו" His horns are like the horns of the re'em" (Deut.33:17). So there are challenges identifying the rhinoceros as a unicorn.
Other One-horned creatures “witnessed” by the rabbis
One of the earliest rabbinic texts to discuss rhinoceri (or unicorns) is Shiltei Hagiborim, (#52), written by the physician-polymath Abraham Portaleone and first published in 1612, the year of his death. He enthusiastically cited Aristotle and Pliny who had testified to having seen one-horned animals:
You should know that I have not simply imagined these descriptions [of one-horned animals] without supporting testimony. For Aristotle wrote that the wild donkey has a single horn and non-cloven hooves. In addition, Pliny in chapter twenty-one of his eighth book wrote that in India there are ox like creatures with a single horn on their heads, and with hooves that are not cloven….
In his work on the Shulhan Arukh known as the Pri Hadash, Rabbi Hezekiah da Silva (1659–1698) cited Portalene’s remarks, and expanded upon them.
פרי חדש יורה דעה סימן פ
ועוד ראיתי בספר שלטי הגיבורים בפרק נ"ב [נה, ד] שחברו חכם רופא אחד מהדור שלפנינו שהאריך בענין זה, והביא בשם חכמי האומות מכמה בעלי חיים שהם בעלי קרן אחד והם טמאים, והעידו שחמור הבר יש לו במצחו קרן אחד והוא קלוט ברגליו ובהודו נמצאים שוורים שיש להם קרן אחד במצחם ופרסותיהם קלוטות, וכן יולדו שם בעלי חיים אכזריים דומין בגופן לסוסים ובראשם לאיל ורגליהם דומין לרגלי הפיל, והוסיפו עוד כי זנב הבעלי חיים האלה הוא דומה לזנב החזיר יערי ורוב הפעמים הולכים הלוך וגעו וממצחם יוצא קרן אחד שחור ארוך שתי אמות, וכיוצא בזה רבים אתם. וכל אילו העניינים אינם מבודים מן הלב שכולם אין ספק בדבר שהם עדי ראייה ולא שייך בזה למימר אשר פיהם דיבר שוא
…They testified that the wild donkey has one horn in its forehead and does not have cloven hooves. In India there are oxen that have one horn on their foreheads and their hooves are not cloven, and there are dangerous animals whose bodies are similar to horses and whose heads are similar to rams and whose feet are similar to those of elephants…. And all these things are not impossible, for there is no doubt that they are eyewitnesses accounts and it is not appropriate to think of them as the testimony of those “whose mouths speak lies” (Psalms 144:8)
RABBI YEHUDAH AND THE GREEKS
Perhaps then, the single horned animal that according to Rabbi Yehudah was sacrificed by Adam was the mythical unicorn. Rabbi Yehudah, also known as Yehudah bar Ilai, lived in the Galilee in the second century, some five hundred years after the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible which introduced the re'em as μονόκερως - monokeros, or one horned. And he knew his Greek. In fact he held the Greek language in such a special esteem that he even allowed a Torah to be written in it:
א"ר יהודה אף כשהתירו רבותינו יונית לא התירו אלא בספר תורה
And it is taught in another baraita that Rabbi Yehuda said: Even when our Rabbis permitted Greek, they permitted it only in a Torah scroll, and not for other books of the Bible, which must be written only in Hebrew.
And so the rabbis linked the opening of this week’s parsha to a mythical animal sacrificed by the mythical first human. It is a wonderful flight of rabbinic fancy, on which the famous Rabbi Shmuel Eidels (d.1631) had this to say in his famous Chidushei Maharsha (Chullin 60a):
ולכך כשחזר בתשובה הקריב שור שהיה לו קרן א' מורה על עיקר האחדות
…when Adam repented of sin he sacrificed an animal with one horn to signify God’s unity
Perhaps what we need today is not a sign of God’s unity, but the unity of his people Israel.