Difference between revisions of "Prohibition of Blood/2"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 37: Line 37:
 
<point><b>Spilling vs. covering blood</b><ul>
 
<point><b>Spilling vs. covering blood</b><ul>
 
<li>These sources explain that since the blood of non-domesticated animals is not sprinkled on the altar, it was necessary to institute a different reminder that it is prohibited to eat of it and thus it is covered. No such reminder is necessary for domesticated animals eaten for pleasure, since those animals are associated with sacrifices and it is known that their blood in general serves to atone on the altar (even if in this particular instance the animal is being eaten).&#160;</li>
 
<li>These sources explain that since the blood of non-domesticated animals is not sprinkled on the altar, it was necessary to institute a different reminder that it is prohibited to eat of it and thus it is covered. No such reminder is necessary for domesticated animals eaten for pleasure, since those animals are associated with sacrifices and it is known that their blood in general serves to atone on the altar (even if in this particular instance the animal is being eaten).&#160;</li>
<li>Ramban adds that in the Wilderness period, eating meat for pleasure, not as part of a sacrifice, was prohibited regardless, so the scenario never arose.&#160; By the time the nation settled in Israel, there was less of a need for a reminder, as the people were already accustomed to not eating blood.<fn>Ralbag explaims that the desire to eat blood was stronger in the first generation that left Egypt, as they had been accustomed to such practices in Egypt.&#160; By the time the nation arrived in Israel and eating meat for pleasure was permitted, there was less of a lust for blood and so less of a need to make a reminder.</fn></li>
+
<li>Ramban adds that in the Wilderness period, eating meat for pleasure, not as part of a sacrifice, was prohibited regardless, so the scenario never arose.&#160; By the time the nation settled in Israel, there was less of a need for a reminder, as the people were already accustomed to not eating blood.<fn>Ralbag explains that the desire to eat blood was stronger in the first generation that left Egypt, as they had been accustomed to such practices in Egypt.&#160; By the time the nation arrived in Israel and eating meat for pleasure was permitted, there was less of a lust for blood and so less of a need to make a reminder.</fn></li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
 
<point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b> – If the prohibition of blood is related to the sacrificial service, one might question why Noach was already commanded, ""אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ" (Bereshit 9:4), centuries before the service was instituted:<br/>
 
<point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b> – If the prohibition of blood is related to the sacrificial service, one might question why Noach was already commanded, ""אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ" (Bereshit 9:4), centuries before the service was instituted:<br/>
Line 51: Line 51:
 
<category>Distancing from Idolatry
 
<category>Distancing from Idolatry
 
<p>Consuming blood is prohibited since it is related to idolatrous practices.</p>
 
<p>Consuming blood is prohibited since it is related to idolatrous practices.</p>
<mekorot><multilink><a href="MorehNevukhim3-46" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="MorehNevukhim3-46" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 3:46</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagVayikraToalot3-17" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagVayikra3-16-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:16-17</a><a href="RalbagVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11-14</a><a href="RalbagVayikraToalot3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra Toalot 3:17</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #2, <multilink><a href="SefornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoVayikra17-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:14</a><a href="SefornoVayikra19-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:26</a><a href="SefornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalVayikra7-26" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalVayikra7-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 7:26</a><a href="ShadalVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="ShadalDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink><fn>This is his first explanation for the command to cover the blood of birds and non-domesticated animals.&#160; Though he does not explicitly state that it is also the reason for the initial prohibition of blood, the two would seem to be connected.</fn></mekorot>
+
<mekorot><multilink><a href="MorehNevukhim3-46" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="MorehNevukhim3-46" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 3:46</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagVayikraToalot3-17" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagVayikra3-16-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:16-17</a><a href="RalbagVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11-14</a><a href="RalbagVayikraToalot3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra Toalot 3:17</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #1, <multilink><a href="SefornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoVayikra17-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:14</a><a href="SefornoVayikra19-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:26</a><a href="SefornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalVayikra7-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 7:26</a><a href="ShadalVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="ShadalDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> 32<fn>This is the first explanation he offers for the command to cover the blood of birds and non-domesticated animals.&#160; Though he does not explicitly state that it is also the reason for the initial prohibition of blood, the two would seem to be connected. [He does, hoever, appear to prefer other reasons for the command.]</fn></mekorot>
<point><b>Connection between blood and Idolatry</b> – Ramban explains that idolaters</point>
+
<point><b>Connection between blood and Idolatry</b> – Ramban explains that idolaters would eat blood, believing it to be the nourishment of demons and that if they participated with them in a meal, the demons would divine the future for them.</point>
<point><b>"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם"</b></point>
+
<point><b>"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם"</b> – These sources suggest that the two prohibitions are intricately related. Rambam explains that those idolaters who found eating blood abhorrent would instead spill it&#160; into a vessel, eat around it, and invite the demons to a shared meal. The ending of the verse, "לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ וְלֹא תְעוֹנֵנוּ", supports this reading as it too speaks of divination practices.</point>
<point><b>Context in Vayikra 17</b></point>
+
<point><b>Context in Vayikra 17</b> – One of the advantages of this understanding is that it connects the two prohibitions of Vayikra 17, giving a common explanation for both. The first half of the chapter deals with the prohibition of slaughtering and sacrificing outside of the Mikdash, with the reason given being, "וְלֹא יִזְבְּחוּ עוֹד אֶת זִבְחֵיהֶם לַשְּׂעִירִם", lest the people come to sacrifice to goat-demons. &#160;</point>
<point><b>"וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת הַדָּם"</b></point>
+
<point><b>"וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת הַדָּם"</b> – Rambam points to the language of the crime's punishment, "וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת הַדָּם" (Vayikra 17:10) as further proof of his understanding.&#160; The phrase&#160; "וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ/ בָּאִישׁ" only appears by three prohibitions: blood, necromancy, and worship of the Molekh, implying that the three are related (all being idolatrous in nature).<fn>See, though, <a href="Giving One's Seed to Molekh" data-aht="page">Giving One's Seed to Molekh</a>, that not all understand the prohibition to relate to idolatry.</fn></point>
 +
<point><b>"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם"</b> – This approach suggests that there is nothing intrinsically positive about sprinkling the blood on the altar; this is simply the safeguard to ensure that it not be used for idolatrous purposes.&#160; Rambam further suggests that since idolaters viewed the blood as impure, Hashem wanted to disabuse people of this notion (and thus of blood's connection to demons). He, therefore, purified it and gave it a purifying role&#160;</point>
 +
<point><b>Inclusion of blood of non-sacrifical animals</b> – As this approach does not focus on the sacrificial role of blood, it is logical that also the blood of non-domesticated animals would be prohibited, as their blood too was used for idolatry.</point>
 +
<point><b>Covering vs. spilling</b> – The blood of non-domesticated animals is not only spilled but also covered to ensure that it is not used to invite demons.<fn>See above that even those who did not eat the blood themselves would often collect it for demons.</fn>&#160; This is more necessary for their blood than for blood of animals eaten for pleasure since the latter were only permitted after arrival in Israel, at which point the lust for blood had mitigated somewhat.<fn>Ralbag explains that the desire to eat blood was stronger in the first generation that left Egypt, as they had been accustomed to such practices in Egypt.&#160; By the time the nation arrived in Israel and eating meat for pleasure was permitted, there was less of a lust for blood and so less of a need to make a reminder.</fn>&#160; In addition, demons were believed to reside in the Wilderness and barren areas, so it was more likely that non-domesticated animals killed in the wild would be used for such purposes than domesticated animals slaughtered in one's yard.</point>
 +
<point><b>"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ"</b> – Ramban questions this approach, pointing out that in explaining the prohibition, the Torah emphasizes the connection between blood and the soul, which this approach ignores. The Ritva responds that these words explain why idolaters thought that blood was the food of demons to begin with.&#160; It was specifically because of the blood's connection to the soul that they thought that the quasi-spiritual (and basically non-corporeal) demons ate of it.</point>
 +
<point><b>Rambam and sacrifices</b> – Rambam's approach to this prohibition is in line with his understanding of the sacrificial service as a whole. According to him, sacrifices (like the prohibition of blood) have no inherent value and are commanded only as a means to wean the nation from idolatry.</point>
 +
<point><b>"רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם"</b></point>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
</approaches>
 
</approaches>
 
</page>
 
</page>
 
</aht-xml>
 
</aht-xml>

Version as of 04:26, 12 December 2019

Prohibition of Blood

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Blood is the Soul

Blood is prohibited from consumption since blood is the source or symbol of  the animal's soul and life force. This position subdivides regarding why this is problematic:

Sacredness of Life

Mixing of Animal and Human Nature

Sanctified to Hashem

Since the blood of animals is thrown on the altar and sanctified to Hashem, it is not fit for human consumption.

"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם" – This verse forms the basis for this approach, but commentators focus on different aspects of it, leading to two related, but somewhat distinct understandings of the prohibition:
  • Apportioned to Hashem – According to Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and Ramban, the crucial point of the verse is that the blood is dedicated to the altar.13 Blood is off limits to man because it is Hashem's portion of the sacrifice (חלק גבוה).
  • Role in atonement – Ralbag, Abarbanel and R. Hoffmann, instead, focus on the blood's role in atonement.
    • R. Hoffmann explains that if the animal's blood is supposed to represent and substitute for the sinner's soul, being sacrificed in the sinner's stead, it is inappropriate for it to be consumed.14
    • Ralbag adds that Hashem wanted to ensure that man recognize the atoning powers of blood so that he feel that his sacrifice was effective in achieving penance. As such, Hashem prohibited its consumption, highlighting its unique role.15
"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ" – According to this approach, this phrase comes to explain not why it is prohibited to eat blood, but why blood was chosen to serve as atonement and is sprinkled on the altar. Since blood represents or is the source of the animal's soul, it can represent man's soul and act as its substitute on the altar.
Why is blood of non-sacrificial meat prohibited? As only the blood of domesticated animals being offered as a sacrifice is sanctified to Hashem and used for atonement, this approach must explain why blood of "בשר תאווה"  (meat eaten for pleasure) and non domesticated animals and birds are also prohibited:
  • Safeguard – Ramban suggests that this is simply a safeguard to ensure that no one err and eat the blood of animals which can be sacrificed.
  • Distinct prohibition – R"Y Bekhor Shor and the Netziv,16 though, concede that this reasoning cannot account for the prohibition regarding non-domesticated animals and suggest that they are prohibited for other reasons.17
Spilling vs. covering blood
  • These sources explain that since the blood of non-domesticated animals is not sprinkled on the altar, it was necessary to institute a different reminder that it is prohibited to eat of it and thus it is covered. No such reminder is necessary for domesticated animals eaten for pleasure, since those animals are associated with sacrifices and it is known that their blood in general serves to atone on the altar (even if in this particular instance the animal is being eaten). 
  • Ramban adds that in the Wilderness period, eating meat for pleasure, not as part of a sacrifice, was prohibited regardless, so the scenario never arose.  By the time the nation settled in Israel, there was less of a need for a reminder, as the people were already accustomed to not eating blood.18
Prohibition to Noach – If the prohibition of blood is related to the sacrificial service, one might question why Noach was already commanded, ""אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ" (Bereshit 9:4), centuries before the service was instituted:
  • Different prohibition – Most of these sources follow Bavli Sanhedrin 59a and assume that the prohibition to Noach did not refer to eating blood but rather to  eating a limb from a live animal (אבר מן החי). 
  • Blood sacred even then - Ibn Ezra and Ramban, in contrast, understand that blood was already prohibited to Noach. If so, perhaps from the very first sacrifices brought by man, blood was already allotted to Hashem and not to man.19
Connection to fat – These sources assume that the two prohibitions share a single explanation; both fat and blood are Hashem's portion and therefore prohibited to man.  It is for this reason that the two prohibitions are often mentioned together.
Biblical parallels – R"Y Bekhor Shor compares the prohibition regarding blood to several other commandments which similarly stem from the fact that an object is sanctified to Hashem. He points to the prohibitions of making incense and the anointing oil or wearing wool and linen (a mixture reserved for priestly garments)20, pointing out that in all these cases "דהוה ליה כמשמש בשרביטו של מלך ואסור", it is as if one is using the scepter of the king and is prohibited.
General view of sacrifices
לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם – These sources suggest that this is a distinct prohibition and says nothing about not eating blood itself. Most, looking to the verse's immediate context of sorcery, relate it to idolatrous divination practices in which blood of an animal was spilled and a meal was eaten in the belief that this would invite demons who could foretell the future.

Distancing from Idolatry

Consuming blood is prohibited since it is related to idolatrous practices.

Connection between blood and Idolatry – Ramban explains that idolaters would eat blood, believing it to be the nourishment of demons and that if they participated with them in a meal, the demons would divine the future for them.
"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם" – These sources suggest that the two prohibitions are intricately related. Rambam explains that those idolaters who found eating blood abhorrent would instead spill it  into a vessel, eat around it, and invite the demons to a shared meal. The ending of the verse, "לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ וְלֹא תְעוֹנֵנוּ", supports this reading as it too speaks of divination practices.
Context in Vayikra 17 – One of the advantages of this understanding is that it connects the two prohibitions of Vayikra 17, giving a common explanation for both. The first half of the chapter deals with the prohibition of slaughtering and sacrificing outside of the Mikdash, with the reason given being, "וְלֹא יִזְבְּחוּ עוֹד אֶת זִבְחֵיהֶם לַשְּׂעִירִם", lest the people come to sacrifice to goat-demons.  
"וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת הַדָּם" – Rambam points to the language of the crime's punishment, "וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת הַדָּם" (Vayikra 17:10) as further proof of his understanding.  The phrase  "וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי בַּנֶּפֶשׁ/ בָּאִישׁ" only appears by three prohibitions: blood, necromancy, and worship of the Molekh, implying that the three are related (all being idolatrous in nature).22
"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם" – This approach suggests that there is nothing intrinsically positive about sprinkling the blood on the altar; this is simply the safeguard to ensure that it not be used for idolatrous purposes.  Rambam further suggests that since idolaters viewed the blood as impure, Hashem wanted to disabuse people of this notion (and thus of blood's connection to demons). He, therefore, purified it and gave it a purifying role 
Inclusion of blood of non-sacrifical animals – As this approach does not focus on the sacrificial role of blood, it is logical that also the blood of non-domesticated animals would be prohibited, as their blood too was used for idolatry.
Covering vs. spilling – The blood of non-domesticated animals is not only spilled but also covered to ensure that it is not used to invite demons.23  This is more necessary for their blood than for blood of animals eaten for pleasure since the latter were only permitted after arrival in Israel, at which point the lust for blood had mitigated somewhat.24  In addition, demons were believed to reside in the Wilderness and barren areas, so it was more likely that non-domesticated animals killed in the wild would be used for such purposes than domesticated animals slaughtered in one's yard.
"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ" – Ramban questions this approach, pointing out that in explaining the prohibition, the Torah emphasizes the connection between blood and the soul, which this approach ignores. The Ritva responds that these words explain why idolaters thought that blood was the food of demons to begin with.  It was specifically because of the blood's connection to the soul that they thought that the quasi-spiritual (and basically non-corporeal) demons ate of it.
Rambam and sacrifices – Rambam's approach to this prohibition is in line with his understanding of the sacrificial service as a whole. According to him, sacrifices (like the prohibition of blood) have no inherent value and are commanded only as a means to wean the nation from idolatry.
"רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם"