Sunday, April 12, 2009

Vayikra 11 (Shemini) – Tumah of the animals and separation

Chapter 11 of the book of Vayikra discusses which animals can be eaten and which animals are tamei. Why are animals tamei and why was their tumah recorded in conjunction with the laws of eating? There are at least four possible ways of understanding this apparent connection between tumah of the animals and the laws of eating.

One possibility is that these are two separate laws that happened to be recorded together. However, just the fact that two concepts are recorded together indicates that these are not unrelated ideas. This juxtaposition also occurs in Devarim 14:3-21, which records the animals that can be eaten and again refers to the animals as being tamei though without mentioning the consequences of the tumah.

The second possibility is that the animals cannot be eaten because they are tamei. With this possibility, the tumah of the animals is independent of the laws of eating and is the cause why some animals can be eaten and some cannot. A possible support for this approach is that Nachshoni (1987, p. 440) writes that Chazal understand that eating forbidden foods damages the soul of the person. Why should a soul be so damaged? One possibility is that this damage is from the tumah that resides in the forbidden animals.

Samet (2002, p. 44) also follows this idea that tumah causes animals to be forbidden as food. He claims that all the animals that creep cannot be eaten, 11:41,42, but only eight of them are tamei, 11:29-38, which leads him to argue that the prohibition of eating an animal does not cause the animal to be tamei. Yet, 11:43,44 explicitly record that all beings that creep on the ground are tamei, even though the Torah does not specify in which situation does the tumah exist. The eight animals are animals that creep have more cases of tumah than the other animals that creep.

This approach that tumah is the independent variable implies that there is something intrinsically wrong with the animals that are tamei and this is difficult. As noted by Hoffmann (1953, Introduction to chapter 11, p. 217) the Torah repeatedly writes that they are tamei to you, (11:4-8,27-29,28), and the term “you” implies that their tumah is not intrinsic to the animals. Also, in Vayikra 11, the forbidden fish and birds are referred to as shekets but not as being tamei. In Devarim 14, they are referred as being tamei, but if their tumah was the cause of their being forbidden to be eaten, than this fact should have been mentioned in Vayikra 11, which is the first mention of the laws, and includes an explanation, albeit cryptic, 11:45, for the laws.

The third possible connection between the laws of eating animals and their tumah is the opposite of reason two: The animals are tamei because they cannot be eaten. With this possibility, the independent factor is that animals cannot be eaten for some reason (see our discussion on 11:1-23, "The kosher animals"), and this causes the animals to be tamei. The proof for this approach is that chapter 11 first begins with laws of eating and then discuss the laws of tumah. Also, the fact that the forbidden birds and fishes are only referred to as tamei after chapter 11 (Vayikra 20:25 and Devarim 14:10) implies that they are tamei since they are forbidden to be eaten. The tumah would then be so that one will not come to eat the animals. With this idea, even an animal that is permitted to be eaten, but it dies without being slaughtered (nevelah) is tamei, 11:39,40, since it would be forbidden in the future (Devarim 14:21), in the desert it was forbidden to the priests (22:8) and even for the general population in the desert it was not desired for people to eat such meat, see our discussion on 22:8, "Dead meat I."

The fourth possible connection between the two sets of laws is that both are based on the identical rationale. The concluding sentences to chapter 11, 11:46,47, record “This is the law… that there may be-separation between the tamei and the pure, between the living-creatures that can be eaten and the living-creatures that you are not to eat.” These verses imply that both the laws of eating and the tumah of animals relate to the idea of separation. What does this mean?

The two verses prior to the concluding sentences, 11:44,45, while apparently just referring to laws by the animals that creep and swarm, really provide an explanation for the whole chapter, and they state that the people are to be kadosh and that one should not become tamei. Kedusha is to separate, and tumah is indicative of a lack of separation, see our discussion above on chapters 11-25 "To separate." This separation here is between people and animals that most animals cannot be eaten and a person becomes tamei if one touches them after they died. Eating forbidden animals ends this separation between people and animals and hence reduces the kedusha of the individual. Similarly, when animals are alive there is a natural division between people and animals since animals can move, but when they are dead the animals are tamei to keep them separate from people.

Thus, maybe the reason for both the laws relating to eating and tumah is that since the Jewish people are a separated people they must separate in some way from the animals. This separation between animals and mankind is because man was created in the image of G-d (Bereshit 1:26,27) and animals were not.

Note, one could claim that the third and fourth possibilities are complementary that according to the third possibility, the point of the tumah of the animals is to stop people from eating animals, and it leads to a separation between mankind and the animals, the fourth possibility.

No comments:

Post a Comment