(ב) ואומר כי כל מה שאסרתו התורה עלינו מן המאכלים - מזונם מגונה. ואין בכל מה שנאסר עלינו מה שיסופק שאין הזק בו רק החזיר והחלב; ואין הענין כן כי החזיר יותר לח ממה שצריך ורב הפסולת והמותרות ורוב מה שמאסתו התורה לרוב לכלוכו ומזונו בדברים הנמאסים. וכבר ידעת הקפדת התורה על ראית הלכלוכים ואפילו בשדות במחנה - כל שכן בתוך המדינה. ואילו היתה מותרת אכילת החזיר היו השווקים עם הבתים יותר מלוכלכים מ'בית הכסא' - כמו שתראה ארצות הצרפתים היום. כבר ידעת אמרם "פי חזיר כצואה עוברת דמי":
(ג) וכן חלב הקרב משביע ומפסיד העיכול ומוליך דם קר מדובק - ושריפתו היתה יותר ראויה מאכילתו.
(ד) וכן הדם והנבלה קשים להתעכל ומזונם רע וידוע שה'טרפה' "תחילת נבלה היא":
(ה) ודע שאילו הסימנים - רצוני לומר העלאת גרה ושסיעת פרסה בבהמות וסנפיר וקשקשת בדגים - אין מציאותם סיבת ההתר ולא העדרם סיבת האיסור ואמנם הם סימן יודע בו המין המשובח מן המין המגונה:
(2) I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. 11:7), and fat (ibid. 7:23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks. A saying of our Sages declares: "The mouth of a swine is as dirty as dung itself" (B. T. Ber. 25a).
(5) The characteristics given in the Law (Lev. xi., and Deut. xiv.) of the permitted animals, viz., chewing the cud and divided hoofs for cattle, and fins and scales for fish, are in themselves neither the cause of the permission when they are present, nor of the prohibition when they are absent; but merely signs by which the recommended species of animals can be discerned from those that are forbidden.
Questions:
1. What reason(s) does Maimonides give for the prohibited animals?
2. According to Maimonides, why is pig prohibited?
3. According to Maimonides, is there any special significance to the Torah's requirements of cud chewing/split hooves for mammals and fins/scales for fish?
והנה טעם האיסור בעופות מפני אכזריות תולדותם והבהמות יתכן שיהיו כן מפני שאין בבעלי הגרה והפרסה השסועה דורס והשאר כולם יטרופו והנה נמצא בתולדתם שנוי מה שהזכירו חכמים (ע"ז לה) שכל חלב הטהורים עומד וחלב הטמאים כולם איננו נקפא ולא יתגבן לעולם והנה הם משונים ויתכן מזה שיזיקו באיברי הזרע ויהיה הזרע המתאסף מן הלחה שבהם קרה ולחה ולא תוליד כלל או לא תוליד בטוב ונכון מלבד שיש במותרים טובה ידועה בדרך הרפואות וראיתי בקצת ספרי הנסיונות שחלב החזיר אם ינק היונק ממנו יהיה אותו הנער מצורע וזה לאות שיש בכולם סגולות רעות מאד
The reason for certain birds being forbidden as food is on account of their cruel nature. It is also possible that the reason for certain animals being forbidden is similar, since no animal that chews the cud and has a parted hoof is a beast of prey, while the rest all devour others. There has also been found a difference in nature between animals fit for food and those which are unfit, as the Sages have mentioned, namely that all milks of animals fit for food curdle, whereas all milks of those unfit for food do not coagulate and cannot ever be made into cheese. Thus they are physically different. It is possible to say on the basis of this difference in their natures that those animals unfit for food harm human beings who eat them.
Questions:
4. According to Nahmanides (Ramban), what do the non-Kosher birds all have in common?
5. According to Nahmanides, what do all of the non-Kosher mammals have in common?
6. In what way is his explanation similar to Rambam (Maimonides)?
THE EXPLANATION OF THE ABARBANEL
(Introduction and Translation by Rav Michael Hattin)
Many were the thinkers who took the Rambam's thesis to task, attacking it upon textual as well as philosophic grounds. The most outspoken of these critics was the Abarbanel (15th century, Spain) who refused to accept that the Torah was a repository of medical lore (commentary to Parashat Shemini):
…God forbid that I should believe such a thing! If that were the case then the Torah of the Lord would be no more than an insignificant and overly concise medical treatise. This is not the way of the Torah of the Lord or of its profound objectives. Besides, with our own eyes we see how the nations that consume the flesh of the pig, detestable things, the mouse as well as the other impure birds, land animals and fish, are all alive and well, strong and not at all feeble or frail…All of this is a clear indication that the Divine Torah did not come to heal the body or to promote physical health but rather to foster the health of the soul and to heal its afflictions. Therefore, the Torah forbade these foods because they have a deleterious effect on the pure and intelligent soul, breeding insensitivity in the human soul and corrupting its desires. This causes the formation of an evil nature that breeds a spirit of "tuma" and banishes the spirit of "tahara" and holiness, concerning which David implored: "Do not take Your spirit of holiness from me!" (Tehillim 51:13).
Questions:
7. What reason(s) does he give for rejecting the explanation that non-Kosher animals are harmful to us?
8. What explanation does he give instead for which animals are Kosher/non-Kosher?
Big Idea: Dietary Laws can promote self-discipline.
רַב אָמַר לֹא נִתְּנוּ הַמִּצְווֹת אֶלָּא לְצָרֵף בָּהֶן אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת, וְכִי מָה אִיכְפַּת לֵיהּ לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמִי שֶׁשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הַצַּוָּאר אוֹ מִי שֶׁשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הָעֹרֶף, הֱוֵי לֹא נִתְּנוּ הַמִּצְווֹת אֶלָּא לְצָרֵף בָּהֶם אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת.
Rav said: The mitzvoth were only given so that man might be refined by them. Do you really think that The Holy One of Blessing cares if an animal is slaughtered by front or by the back of the neck? Therefore, mitzvot were only given to make humans better.
Question:
9. What does this source suggest about the purpose of Kashrut?
Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch
The leading 19th Century German Rabbi and thinker, Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch, gives his rationale for Kashrut, based on the implicit faith that we should have in G-d:
“You say you do not understand how these forbidden foods can be harmful. Even if you were never to understand and even if experience were never to teach you how the Divine spirit in man is linked with the body, would it not be enough for you that G-d, from whom alone in any case your power of these things derives, has refrained from giving you the right to partake of these foods! You should observe the commandments of the Torah and have regard for its laws, because they are at G-d’s behest, not because you think them correct. Even those commandments whose reason you believe you have understood, you should not fulfil because of your understanding, for then you would be listening only to yourself, whereas you should listen to G-d.” (Horeb p.318-319).
Question:
10. According to Rabbi Hirsch, how should we understand God's commands regarding Kashrut?