Noach 5730
Beraishit 1:28-30
And God Blessed them; and God Said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.' And God Said: 'Behold, I have Given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed--to you it shall be for food; and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, [I have Given] every green herb for food.' And it was so.
Ibid. 9:1-7
And God Blessed Noach and his sons, and Said unto them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, and upon all wherewith the ground teemeth, and upon all the fishes of the sea: into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I Given you all. Only flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely your blood of your lives will I Require; at the hand of every beast will I Require it; and at the hand of man, even at the hand of every man's brother, will I Require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the Image of God Made He man. And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; swarm in the earth, and multiply therein.'
Alef.
1) Adam:
And God Blessed them; and God Said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.'
Noach:
And God Blessed Noach and his sons, and Said unto them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth.
Perhaps because after the Flood, animals would be permitted to man for consumption, it would be superfluous to mention that man had dominion over animals. If you can eat them, then clearly you are superior to them hierarchically.
2) Adam:
And God Said: 'Behold, I have Given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed--to you it shall be for food;
Noach:
And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, and upon all wherewith the ground teemeth, and upon all the fishes of the sea: into your hand are they delivered.
While man was herbivorous, there was no fear of animals because animals were not being killed by humans for food. But once man becomes a predator of animals, it is to be expected that animals will respond either by fleeing or fighting back. Therefore a Divine Guarantee is forthcoming that animals will innately fear man and therefore there is no reason not to follow-through with the permission to eat animals.
3) Adam:
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, [I have Given] every green herb for food.' And it was so.
Noach:
Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I Given you all.
Initially man and animals were equal in the sense that they all were herbivores. After the Flood, as far as man was concerned, animal life were to be treated like plant life in terms of their being susceptible to human consumption.
4) Adam:
X
Noach:
Only flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
Obviously a prohibition against consuming blood is irrelevant if you can’t even eat the flesh of animals. Plants do not contain blood.
Beit.
R. Hirsch explains the permission to eat meat as a consequence of man’s reduced life expectancy. Since he now has much less time to accomplish what he could have achieved over centuries, he needs to enrich his source of sustenance with more intense protein foods, i.e., meat.
R. Kook believes that over time greater and greater moral sensibilities will evolve and these will include being sensitive to animals, extending to them the considerations that are currently reserved for mankind. Just as democracy is a progressive program that must evolve over time, the same could be said re animal rights.
Gimel.
1. “Nefesh” according to RaDaK and Abrabanel connotes not only blood, but rather while blood is circulating through the organism, i.e., while the animal is alive.
2. RaDaK: “Nafsho” is a poetical way of describing the specific physical condition, i.e., “Damo”—when the animal’s blood is circulating and therefore keeping it alive.
Abrabanel: When the meat is still with “Nafsho”, and this is defined by “Damo”, the meat cannot be eaten.
3. Abrabanel asserts that the act of eating meat is intrinsically cruel and to eat it from a living animal is just that much crueler.
A traditional view would be that there is nothing inherently unethical in eating meat as long as the animal is dead before it is turned into food. The cruelty factor only begins if limbs are taken from a living animal.
4. It seems to me that Ibn Kaspi is presenting a view that would prohibit the consumption of blood even once the animal is dead. Therefore he is interpreting the verse differently than either RaDaK or Abrabanel.
5. The term “Nefesh” could refer to some sort of spiritual state or metaphysical state independent of the physiological systems such as the circulatory system.
6.
דברים פרק יב (כג) רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם, כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ, וְלֹא־תֹאכַל הַנֶּפֶשׁ עִם־הַבָּשָׂר:
Ibn Kaspi would say that the verse in Devarim is synonymous with Beraishit 9:4. In both instances what is being prohibited is the consumption of animal blood, independent of whether the animal is alive or dead.
Daled.
1. In v. 5, “Dimchem” is a reference to human blood being spilled within the context of murder.
In v. 4, killing an animal is not considered murder (according to R. Kook, at least “not yet”). The prohibition is not about the means by which the animal was put to death, but rather: a) at what point is eating the meat permitted (only after the animal has died) and b) what part of the animal can be consumed (among the prohibitions is an animal’s blood—or at least the blood that is categorized as “Dam HaNefesh”[lifeblood] that is shed during the Shechita process, as opposed to blood that is extracted during the Kashering process and blood that remains within the animal’s tissues after Shechita and Kashering.)
2. RaShI and Bechor Shor are attempting to delineate between the spilling of animal blood and human blood. Even if one might say that killing another human being is immoral and prohibited, it is possible to think that in a “victimless crime”, i.e., where a person spills his own blood, with the extreme being constituted by his committing suicide, that this might be permitted. Therefore the commentators demonstrate that this is not so.
3. RaShI and Bechor Shor are offering different rationales for the Hava Amina that one might be permitted to harm himself, based upon the permission to kill animals.
RaShI: Once I see that murder of an animal is permitted, then inherently spilling blood is not inherently wrong, and perhaps I could spill my own.
Bechor Shor: Because domesticated animals exists because of human activities, and we are permitted to take their lives, similarly, we ourselves exist because of our own efforts, and therefore perhaps our lives are our own to dispatch as we please.
Heh.
1.
Bava Batra 60b
It has been taught: R. Ishmael ben Elisha said: Since the day of the destruction of the Temple we should by rights bind ourselves not to eat meat nor drink wine, only we do not lay a hardship on the community unless the majority can endure it.
And from the day that a Government has come into power which issues cruel decrees against us and forbids to us the observance of the Torah and the precepts and does not allow us to enter into the 'week of the son' (Brit Mila) (according to another version, 'the salvation of the son' [Pidyon HaBen]), we ought by rights to bind ourselves not to marry and beget children, and the seed of Avraham our father would come to an end of itself. However, let Israel go their way: it is better that they should err in ignorance than presumptuously.
Tosafot d.h. “We ought by rights to bind ourselves not to marry”—This is remarkable! Does it (the Tora) not command “Be fruitful and multiply!” Perhaps this assumption is directed towards those who have already fulfilled “Be fruitful and multiply”, i.e., “the seed of Avraham would come to an end of itself” if people will have no more (children) than a son and a daughter.1
1. In Beraishit, it is stated that the men and women who boarded the Ark boarded separately so that no additional children would be born during the time when the rest of the world was drowning. A similar statement is made with regard to Yosef during the years of famine in Egypt, when no additional children were born to him because of his not wishing to flaunt his material situation as ruler when so many in the country he was ruling were hard pressed to find enough food to eat.
The idea is also demonstrated in Shemot when, despite the attempts of Pharoah to diminish the numbers of the Jewish people, they had more and more children:
Shemot 1:12 “But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and the more they spread abroad. And they were adread because of the children of Israel.”
2. Meshech Chachma’s assumption is what is attributed to Amram when he decided to leave Yocheved:
Shemot 2:1 “And there went a man of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.”
RaShI d.h. “And took to wife a daughter of Levi”—He had separated from her due to the decree of Pharoah…
3. If man is created in the Image of God, then each time one has a child, he brings something Godly into the world. Consequently, if this is a good thing, he should not restrain himself unless there are very significant considerations to the contrary, e.g., health, poverty, etc.
MISHNAH. A MAN SHALL NOT ABSTAIN FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THE DUTY OF THE PROPAGATION OF THE RACE UNLESS HE ALREADY HAS CHILDREN. [AS TO THE NUMBER]. BEIT SHAMMAI RULED: TWO MALES, AND BEIT HILLEL RULED: MALE AND A FEMALE, FOR IT IS STATED IN SCRIPTURE, “MALE AND FEMALE CREATED HE THEM.”
Gemora… BEIT SHAMMAI RULED: TWO MALES. What is Beit Shammai's reason? We make an inference from Moshe, in connection with whom it is written, (I Divrei HaYamim 23:15) “The sons of Moshe: Gershom and Eliezer.” And Beit Hillel? — We infer from the creation of the world. Let Beit Shammai also infer from the creation of the world! — The possible cannot be inferred from the impossible. Let Beit Hillel, then, make the inference from Moshe! — They can answer you: Moshe did it with His Consent. For it was taught: Moses did three things on his own initiative and his opinion coincided with that of the Omnipresent. He separated himself from his wife, broke the Tables of Testimony and added one day…
It was taught: R. Natan stated: Beit Shammai ruled: Two males and two females; and Beth Hillel ruled: A male and a female. Said R. Huna: What is the reason which R. Natan assigns for the opinion of Beit Shammai? Because it is written, (Beraishit 4:2) “And again she bore his brother Abel” [which implies:] Abel and his sister; Cain and his sister. And it is also written, (Ibid. 25) “For God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel;” for Cain slew him. And the Rabbis? She was merely expressing her gratitude. Elsewhere it was taught: R. Natan stated that Beit Shammai ruled: A male and a female; and Beit Hillel ruled: Either a male or a female. Said Raba: What is the reason which R. Natan assigns for the view of Beit Hillel? — Because it is said, (Yeshayahu 45:18) “He Created it not a waste, He Formed it to be inhabited,” and he has obviously helped it to be inhabited…
Our Mishnah cannot represent the opinion of R. Yehoshua. For it was taught: R. Yehoshua said, If a man married in his youth, he should marry again in his old age; if he had children in his youth, he should also have children in his old age; for it said, (Kohelet 11:6) “In the morning sow thy seed and in the evening withhold not thine hand; for thou knowest not which shall prosper, whether this or that, or whether they shall both be alike good.” R. Akiba said: If a man studied Torah in his youth, he should also study it in his old age; if he had disciples in his youth, he should also have disciples in his old age. For it is said, “In the morning sow thy seed etc.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment