Halacha and Habitat

This was a draft for an article for a journal on Judaism and the environment which ceased to exist. 

Environmental changes as reflected in halachic responsa.
Aryeh Shore

“is it possible that cows will no longer thresh grain or plow fields?.. is it possible that the shore will no longer hold back the sea?” Siphra, Haazinu.

The passage of time makes it difficult sometimes to understand the milieu in which rabbinical responsa were written.   Facts that were readily apparent to the authors and therefore taken for granted become an impediment for understanding these responsa in later generations.  The present paper addresses the ecological background of several responsa, e.g. extinction of species, beaching of whales, habitats and availability of natural resources.  These will be considered in the framework of the historical background of the responsa.

1.    Extinction of Species – Bos primigenius

2.    Beaching of whales

3.    Habitat - Acipenser Sturio Acipenser ruthenus

4.    Introduction of new species,

5.    Changes in availability of a natural resource – the availability of bitumen from the Dead Sea and mountain springs (mumia).

Extinction of animals

That an animal may exist for only a certain period of history is mentioned in the Talmudic discussion of the Tachash (Exodus 35:7, Shabbat 28b, Midrash Tanchuma VI). However Rabbi Yisrael Lipschulz  (1781-1860;Tiferet Yisrael, Killaim 8,5) is apparently the first halachic authority to suggest that animals mentioned in the Mishna may now be extinct “like the mammoth”.

Bovis primigenius

The ancestor of all domestic cattle is Bovis primigenius or the Auroch.  There were three lines of this animal but only the European Auroch (Bovis Uris) survived till modern times. Although it seems certain that the bible mentions the Auroch or wild ox, it is not clear which of the terms used: Re’em (JPS Bible) or Tao (Septugent, Targum Yonaton-Forest Ox), both which may refer to the Auroch.

      The wild ox described by Rashi in Sanhedrin (28a), which he presumably saw, could be domesticated. This would be in contrast to the alternative European bison or buffalo (Bison Bonasus) (an endangered species), which was not domesticated. Since the Bovis Uris described by Julius Caesar could be also domesticated (De belli Gallici, 6.XXVIII. De uris, Sed adsuescere ad homines et mansuefieri ne parvuli quidem excepti possunt ) it would appear that the extinction of this animal which occured in the 17^th century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs) was a source of confusion to later generations which did not see this animal. An alternative hypothesis is that the source of confusion stems from the geographical habitat of the water buffalo (Kashrut of Exotic Animals: The Buffalo, Ari Z. Zivotofsky The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Fall 1999/Sukkot 5760, Number XXXVIII).

 Beached whales

Whaling is mentioned only once in halachic sources - in the French Tosephot (12th Century) on Bechorot 7b. “It is permitted to eat the murina (eels) [hareng] found in the stomachs of whales (balaena).”
     Although there was a thriving whaling industry in the Bay of Biscay in the 12th century, the slow moving whale, Eubalina galcialis (an endangered species), that was hunted by the Basques, ingests primarily cephalopods.  It is more likely what is discussed is a beached whale which would be familiar to the Provencal Tosephot.  Beached whales were common along the Provencal coast and the stomach contents could arouse great interest in the local population as described for a 17^th century beaching of a roqual (Zoologische Einblattdrucke und Flugschriften vor 1800 [Zoological broadsides and pamphlets prior to 1800]. Vol. 4 (of 5): Wale, Sirenen, Elefanten. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann Verlag, 2002. 402 pp.).  There is evidence that the roqual does ingest herring (Do minke whales [Baleaenoptera acutorostrata] exhibit particular prey preferences? Skaug HJ, Gjusaeter J, Haug T, Nilseen KT, Linstrom U., J. Northw. Atl. Fish. Sci. 22:91-104, 1997) so herring (hareng) is probably the correct text version.

Habitat

As mentioned above for water buffalo, the geographical distribution of animals which were seen by poskim in some areas but absent in others, could lead to confusion in the responsa of later authorities. A good example is a core responsa on the discussion of the kashrut of fish (Nodeh B’yehuda, Mahadarah 2, 28,29) by R. Shmuel Landau (d. 1834), given in 1822 in Prague. The question asked was whether the sterlet was the esturgeon mentioned in earlier authorities and not the sturgeon.  However there were other factors which determined the response such as the Haskala movement and Sabbatism.

   The North Atlantic sturgeon was fished from earliest times to the end of the 19^th century. During that time it was found along the Mediterranean coasts of Italy and Spain as well as the North Atlantic but due to the massive overfishing of the 19^th century today it is an endangered species confined to the Baltic Sea. The "real" European Sturgeon Acipenser Sturio, der Stoer, up to 4.5 m long, was found regularly until the end of the 19th century in the Atlantic (including North and Baltic Seas) catchment basin. It is rarely found in the Black Sea catchment. But there are many other sturgeon species which are not always accurately determined and named by laymen. The Ruthenian Sturgeon, A. ruthenus, Sterlet (= small sturgeon, a diminutive in German) or sterljad inhabits the effluents to the Black Sea. Jews in Central Europe more frequently met A. sturio. In Eastern Europe the Jews would often see A. ruthenus and other species as Huso huso, A. nudiventris, A. gueldenstaedti etc. Sturgeon was traded intensely, at the beginning not mainly for caviar, but for its fresh or salted meat (The sturgeon [Acipenser sturio L., 1758] in Europe, Z. Okologie u. Naturschutz 6:129-135,1997; Kinzelbach, R. (1994): Ein weiterer alter Nachweis des Sterlet, Acipenser ruthenus, in der worttembergischen Donau. - In: Biologie der Donau. Limnologie aktuell 2: 281-291, Stuttgart.)

   Both Rabbenu Tam (France 12^th century) and the Ramban (Spain 13^th century) approved the use of a fish called esturgeon (Shemesh Tzedakah, 1742 Venice, YD 14). In order to prove that esturgeon was the common sturgeon, Acipenser Sturio, R. Landau used a book on fish written by a Jewish physician from the Jewish community of Berlin. From R. Landau's description, this book was Allgemeine Naturgeschichte Der Fische by Marcus Eliaser Bloch (1723-1799), a Jewish physician and ichthyologist associated with the Haskala movement. R. Landau was particularly impressed with the list of names for sturgeon  given by Bloch in different languages, e.g. esturgeon (Fr.), storione (It.); porcelleto (young sturgeon, It.). The book by Bloch is still reprinted today, albeit more for its artistic depictions than its scientific interest.  R. Landau also uses the book to prove that the sterlet is Acipenser ruthenus based on size and picture.  This would appear to be the first time a modern natural history textbook is cited in a responsa. However he was not alone in using such sources as Landau’s contemporary, R. Y. Lipshultz quoted Die Urwelt by H.F. Link in his commentary on the Mishna (Shore A, 1997).

Acipenser Huso  (Huso huso)                                                    can be purchased at www.oldprintshop.com        

Acipenser Ruthenus                               Gordon Edmondson Sturgeon Collection                                                                         

Acipenser Sturio

  
       Other historical factors can be seen in R. Landau's discussion of the use of sturgeon by the Turkish Jews. (It is not clear to which source he is referring. The Jews of Izmir commonly ate honeyed ovaries but this was mullet roe, [Kinselbach, personal communication]. The objection from the opponents of sturgeon was that there were Sabbateans in Turkey and therefore information from that country was suspect. R. Landau rejected this criticism.

Introduction of new species

Introduction of new species naturally received a lot of attention in the responsa as questions of whether it should be considered either bush or tree or should be considered  fruit or vegetable needed to be decided. Similarly new animals required determination if they were kosher or not.

There were two main periods of halachic discussion:

1. Introduction of new species with rise of the Islamic empire. This resulted in introduction of new species from southeast Asia such as eggplant (Solanum melogena) and sugar cane (Saccahrum officinarum). These have been discussed by Amir (Z. Amir, Agronomic innovations as reflected in medieval biblical commentators and halachic authorities, BDD 3:87-96, 1196, in Hebrew).

2.  Introduction of new species with the discovery of the new world. The impact of these plants and animals on halachic responsa continues to the present day and are addressed in nearly every major halachic work (Shore A.  The use of scientific sources by rabbinical authorities to determine the nature of animal species. Korot (Heb. Univ.) 12 (1996-1997): 7-15; Zivotofsky 1999 op cit; Zivotofsky Is Turkey Kosher? The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, 1998, Vol. 35:79-110.).

Changes in availability of natural resources – mummia

The selling by Jewish merchants of mummy, material presumably derived from Egyptian mummies, presented Halachic problems to several Poskim (R. David ibn Zimra [HaRadbaz, Egypt, 1480-1573], R. Avraham Halevi [Egypt 1650-1710?]; R. Yehuda Rosanes [Constantanople, 1657-1727]. The material is described as small pieces of resilient bones or a tarry dust. The main points raised against the practice were (1) In the case of the merchants being Kohanim, they are not permitted to touch or carry parts of dead people, whether Jewish or not, less they become “tameh”; (2) It is forbidden to derive benefit from the dead and selling is considered a benefit; and (3) It is forbidden to sell food which is forbidden to eat and human flesh is forbidden to eat. These responsa have been dealt with extensively in a monograph by E. Reichman (The impact of medieval medicine on medical Halachah. In: Pioneers in Jewish Medical Ethics. Rosner F., ed., Jason Aronson, Northvale, NJ., 1997, p.27-52).

     The disturbing ethical aspects of selling mummy were not limited to the Jews. Ambrosie Pare (1510-1590) wrote “The ancients…did not contemplate such an abomination but were either thinking of the universal resurrection or of the memory of their dead parents or friends” (Discours de la mumie, Paris 1582). Pare also noted that Jews were widely involved in the selling of mummy.

     The background of these responsa goes back to events thousands of years before they were written.  The areas considered here are the medicinal history of mumia, methods of making mummies, and the Dead Sea bitumen industry. It is also hypothesized that the seismology of the Dead Sea played a role.

What is Mumia?

     The ancient Persians made medicinal use of a black, bituminous substance “mimia”, which oozed from a local mountain (Mumia naturalis persica). The current source of Mumyoe (Russian) is from the floors of mountain caves in Tajikistan. The substance is the digest of ancient flora at the crest of the mountains, which then drops to the base of the caves where it is collected. Although touted in Russia as a food additive with anabolic properties, in Israel it is sold for intestinal disorders, fragile bones, inflammation, chronic bronchitis, glucose regulation and increasing immunity (according to the package insert).

How the mumia became mummy.

The ancient Egyptian used a variety of resin and waxes in their preparation of mummies and these ingredients changed over the centuries.  The use of bitumen from the Dead Sea was limited to the period from 500 BC to the middle of the 1^st century (CE Buckley, S. A. & Evershed, R. P. Organic chemistry of embalming agents in Pharaonic and Graeco-Roman mummies. Nature, 413, 837 - 841, 2001; Ancient and modern medicinal application of Dead Sea asphalt (bitumen), Isr. J. Earth Sci: 48:301-308 1999).  This industry relied on blocks of bitumen rising from the depths of the Dead Sea as described by Hieronymus of Cardia in 312 BC (Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, trans. Oldfather D.H., Heineman, London, 1935).   The disappearance of bitumen at this time coincides with a period of seismic quiescence from 200 to 700 CE. Other historical factors such as high taxes by the Egyptians and the absorption of Egypt into the Roman Empire played a role in the demise of the bitumen industry. It is not known if or how much bitumen from the Dead Sea was exported to Egypt after this time, but a visitor to Egypt in 1200 mentions only the bitumen from mountain springs and that the mumia from mummies was only an alternative source (Abd al-Latif al Baghadidi, Book of Instruction and Admonition on Things and Events Seen in the Land of Egypt, trans. KZ Hafuth, JA Videan, IE Vidan (London:Allen and Unwin, 1964, f 41L,42R). This substitution for mumia naturalis may be due to increased demand as the prominent Persian physicians praised the properties of their locally produced material. However this material was very scarce as there was a royal monopoly (Al Biruni’s book on pharmacy and material medica, trans. H.M. Said, Hamdard Natl. Foundation, Karachi 1973, p. 311, s.v. mumya’u). Interestingly, each batch was tested for its potency to heal a fractured chicken leg (The book of curious and entertaining information The Lata’ if al-ma’arif of Tha’alibi. Trans. CE Bosworth, University Press, Edinburgh, 1968). (This would be a very early example of pre-testing a drug before distribution). However, scarcity alone may not have been the only reason. It was an accepted belief that juices from corresponding parts of a healthy body could be used for curing disease. Since the juice obtained from mummy pieces was extracted from every part of the body, Mumia factitia var. humana or kufr, could be a universal medicine against all diseases (Bosworth, C.E., Evan Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs, and C. Pellat, eds. The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992. s.v. "mumiya," by A.Dietrich).  It was during the 13^th century that medieval Europe learned that the ancient Egyptians used a bitumen mixture call “mumiya” to embalm their bodies and that by melting down this substance one could obtain an oil of great medicinal value. Beginning in that century, and throughout the Middle Ages, thousands of Egyptian mummies were exported from Alexandria to Europe by way of Marseilles - initially for recovery of the bitumen, later, as the effective ingredient was forgotten, to be simply ground to powder altogether. This powder called “mummy” was a standard apothecary ingredient. The use of ground mummy, with a wide variety of fake substitutes, continued to the early part of the 20^th century. Dried mummy (mummia) is still available today in the markets of Cairo (Z. Amir, personnel communication).

Discussion

   The premise of the present paper is to show that information from a variety of sources can increase the understanding of the responsa which contained details that were obvious at their writing but became obscure in later generations. There is an extensive literature on the scientific and biological background of the Bible and Talmud. The sources such as Ibn Sina and Ibn Rhodes which were used by the Sephardic physicians (e.g. Rambam and Ibn Ezra) have also received attention. However, similar information on the vast responsa literature and commentaries of the 11^th to the 19^th century is not readily available. For example, the controversy over the chicken without a heart is a core responsa for the use of science in determining halacha. However, it is not known where the experiment attributed by the Hacham Zvi to Galen is recorded nor how the response of the Halle Medical Society to R. Eybshutz appears in the German records. Similarly, what bestiary did the Bartinura use for his odd description of the leopard as a cross between the wild boar and lion in Avot 5, 20 which differs from the standard bestiary description of it as a cross between the lion (leo) and panther (pard). 

    In passing it should be noted that some of the species discussed here are endangered and some are on the verge of extinction. It may well be that in another hundred years scholars will have to consult natural history books to determine to which extinct species we are referring in modern responsa.

Note on Mummia from Moshe David Gaon (1889-1958). Emunot V'trufot Elil Bkerev Yehudei HaMizrach

When people became desperate they turned to "wise women" who were widely known.  They kept packages of lumps of mummia.  When the preparation was needed the material was mixed with honey and rolled into pills.   It was said that when the Moslem pilgrims went to the Haaj in Mecca, they would bring bones of dried corpses from the Arabian desert, and for a fat price they would sell them to the doctors to make the mummiyah.  More than once these disgusting pills were forced down my throat without an explanation. Later it was explained that it was against paleness in the face, weakness, shortness of breath, neglect of studies (attention deficit disorder??).  It was also a remedy against the Evil  Eye and to distance friends which the parent didn't like.