Difference between revisions of "Prohibition of Blood/2"
m |
m (Text replacement - "Seforno" to "Sforno") |
||
(10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
<div class="overview"> | <div class="overview"> | ||
<h2>Overview</h2> | <h2>Overview</h2> | ||
− | <p>Various reasons have been offered for the prohibition of blood. Many sources focus on the fact that blood represents the animal's life force.  Eating the source of an animal's very vitality reflects a disregard for the sanctity of life and | + | <p>Various reasons have been offered for the prohibition of blood. Many sources focus on the fact that blood represents the animal's life force and how its consumption both demonstrates and invites cruelty.  Eating the source of an animal's very vitality reflects a disregard for the sanctity of life and portrays callousness. Ramban adds that consuming an animal's blood is further dangerous to the individual himself, as the human soul will imbibe the negative characteristics of the animal soul.</p> |
− | <p>Others | + | <p>Others focus not on how eating blood impacts man's behavior and nature, but its role in the worship of Hashem. Ibn Ezra claims that blood is off limits to man because it is dedicated to the altar and forms Hashem's portion of the sacrifice. R. D"Z Hoffmann, instead, points to the role played by blood in attaining atonement, pointing out that it would be inappropriate to consume that which aids one in achieving forgiveness.  Finally, Rambam asserts that the prohibition is one of many aimed at distancing man from idolatrous practices. As idolators would consume blood in an effort to divine the future, we are prohibited from doing so.</p></div> |
<approaches> | <approaches> | ||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<opinion>Sacredness of Life | <opinion>Sacredness of Life | ||
<p>Refraining from eating blood, representative of an animal's vitality and soul, reminds one of the sanctity of all life. Eating it both demonstrates and invites cruelty.</p> | <p>Refraining from eating blood, representative of an animal's vitality and soul, reminds one of the sanctity of all life. Eating it both demonstrates and invites cruelty.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot><multilink><a href="Jubilees6-1-21" data-aht="source">Jubilees</a><a href="Jubilees6-1-21" data-aht="source">6:1-21</a><a href="Jubilees7-24-45" data-aht="source">7:24-45</a><a href="Jubilees11-1-3" data-aht="source">11:1-3</a><a href="Jubilees21-1-25" data-aht="source">21:1-25</a><a href="Jubilees" data-aht="parshan">About Jubilees</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews3-11-2" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews1-3-8" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 1:3:8</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews3-11-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 3:11:2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit1-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:29</a><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>Ramban also speaks of the blood's detrimental effects on human nature and its being allocated to Hashem as reasons for the prohibition.</fn> <multilink><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">Sefer HaChinukh</a><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">148</a><a href="Sefer HaChinukh" data-aht="parshan">About Sefer HaChinukh</a></multilink>,<fn>He also cites the Ramban regarding how eating of the animal's soul introduces animalistic traits into the human soul.</fn> <multilink><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:20</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink> #3,<fn>Abarbanel brings many reasons for the prohibition; this is the third possibility he raises in his commentary on Vayikra 17 and Devarim 12.</fn>  <multilink><a href="KeliYekarVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Keli Yekar</a><a href="KeliYekarVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz (Keli Yekar)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Shadal</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>He also connects aspects of the prohibition to idolatrous practices.</fn> <multilink><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannDevarim12-23-25" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11-14</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannDevarim12-23-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23-25</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink> #2,<fn>See his comments to Devarim 12.  In his commentary on Vayikra 3 and 17, R. Hoffmann also suggests that the prohibition relates to the fact that the blood is sanctified to Hashem.</fn> R. Kook</mekorot> | + | <mekorot><multilink><a href="Jubilees6-1-21" data-aht="source">Jubilees</a><a href="Jubilees6-1-21" data-aht="source">6:1-21</a><a href="Jubilees7-24-45" data-aht="source">7:24-45</a><a href="Jubilees11-1-3" data-aht="source">11:1-3</a><a href="Jubilees21-1-25" data-aht="source">21:1-25</a><a href="Jubilees" data-aht="parshan">About Jubilees</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews3-11-2" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews1-3-8" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 1:3:8</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews3-11-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 3:11:2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit1-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:29</a><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>Ramban also speaks of the blood's detrimental effects on human nature and its being allocated to Hashem as reasons for the prohibition.</fn> <multilink><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">Sefer HaChinukh</a><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">148</a><a href="SeferHaChinukh187" data-aht="source">187</a><a href="Sefer HaChinukh" data-aht="parshan">About Sefer HaChinukh</a></multilink>,<fn>He also cites the Ramban regarding how eating of the animal's soul introduces animalistic traits into the human soul.</fn> <multilink><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:20</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink> #3,<fn>Abarbanel brings many reasons for the prohibition; this is the third possibility he raises in his commentary on Vayikra 17 and Devarim 12.</fn>  <multilink><a href="KeliYekarVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Keli Yekar</a><a href="KeliYekarVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz (Keli Yekar)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Shadal</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>He also connects aspects of the prohibition to idolatrous practices.</fn> <multilink><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannDevarim12-23-25" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11-14</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannDevarim12-23-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23-25</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink> #2,<fn>See his comments to Devarim 12.  In his commentary on Vayikra 3 and 17, R. Hoffmann also suggests that the prohibition relates to the fact that the blood is sanctified to Hashem.</fn> R. Kook</mekorot> |
<point><b>"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ"</b> – These sources point to this phrase as the basis for the prohibition.<fn>Variations of the phrase appear four times in <a href="Vayikra17-1-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a> (twice in verse 11 and twice in verse 14) and once more in <a href="Devarim12-16-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a>, supporting the idea that Torah views this as a central component of the prohibition.</fn> They offer a variety of explanations as to the import of the fact that "blood is the soul":<br/> | <point><b>"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ"</b> – These sources point to this phrase as the basis for the prohibition.<fn>Variations of the phrase appear four times in <a href="Vayikra17-1-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a> (twice in verse 11 and twice in verse 14) and once more in <a href="Devarim12-16-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a>, supporting the idea that Torah views this as a central component of the prohibition.</fn> They offer a variety of explanations as to the import of the fact that "blood is the soul":<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><b>Similar to murder</b> – Jubilees, drawing off the juxtaposition of the prohibitions regarding blood and murder in <a href="Bereshit9-1-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit 9:4-6</a>, repeatedly links the two prohibitions,<fn>See Jubiless 6:10-18, 7:37, 42-45, 11:3, and 21:23-24.</fn> implying that the former is forbidden because it, too, is similar to taking a life.  Eating of an animal's blood/soul is like destroying its very vitality.<fn>R. Hoffmann elaborates, pointing out that originally man was not meant to eat  animals at all. Though this was allowed after the flood, at Sinai, killing animals was once again restricted, permitted only if the animal was being sacrificed to Hashem. Even then, though, Hashem allowed only its meat and not its blood for that would be like eating the animal's very vitality and invite cruelty. See Sefer HaChinukh who similarly makes this last point, "יהיה באכילתו קצת קנין במדת אכזריות שיבלע האדם מבעלי חיים כמותו בגוף, אותו הדבר שבהן, שהחיות ממש תלוי עליו, ונפשם נקשרת בו".</fn> </li> | <li><b>Similar to murder</b> – Jubilees, drawing off the juxtaposition of the prohibitions regarding blood and murder in <a href="Bereshit9-1-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit 9:4-6</a>, repeatedly links the two prohibitions,<fn>See Jubiless 6:10-18, 7:37, 42-45, 11:3, and 21:23-24.</fn> implying that the former is forbidden because it, too, is similar to taking a life.  Eating of an animal's blood/soul is like destroying its very vitality.<fn>R. Hoffmann elaborates, pointing out that originally man was not meant to eat  animals at all. Though this was allowed after the flood, at Sinai, killing animals was once again restricted, permitted only if the animal was being sacrificed to Hashem. Even then, though, Hashem allowed only its meat and not its blood for that would be like eating the animal's very vitality and invite cruelty. See Sefer HaChinukh who similarly makes this last point, "יהיה באכילתו קצת קנין במדת אכזריות שיבלע האדם מבעלי חיים כמותו בגוף, אותו הדבר שבהן, שהחיות ממש תלוי עליו, ונפשם נקשרת בו".</fn> </li> | ||
− | <li><b> | + | <li><b>Similar to eating of a living being</b> – Abarbanel likens the prohibition to that of "אבר מן החי", suggesting that eating flesh and blood is like eating of an animal while it is still alive. Shadal similarly suggests that the prohibition is aimed at preventing man from eating blood when it is still hot and flowing from the animal, "an act of immense cruelty".<fn>Ramban adds a third point, noting the equal status of all souls. He explains that it is not proper for a "soul to eat a soul" for all souls are somewhat equal and belong to Hashem. [Even if the animal and human soul are qualitatively different, the existence of a soul in a living creature gives them some common status. Both animal and human have the knowledge and choice to run away from what is harmful and chase after that which is good and both have an ability to care for / love those who care for them.] As such, though man has dominion over animals, this is true only so far as its flesh is concerned, not its soul.</fn></li> |
− | |||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם"</b> – According to this approach, these words do not comprise the reason for the prohibition, but rather serve to complement it. The principle of the sanctity of life mandates that one not only refrain from eating blood, but also that one try to elevate any blood that has been spilled.  As such, the blood of sacrificed animals is sprinkled on the altar and used for atonement.<fn>One could have alternatively claimed that this is simply the means to ensure that one refrain from eating the blood. Keli Yekar explains that the fact that the blood is given on the altar is itself a reminder that the "blood is the soul".  The reason that blood can atone for man is specifically because it can represent man's soul. As such, when a person sees blood play an atoning role, he will automatically recall that blood is the soul and that it is therefore off-limits.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם"</b> – According to this approach, these words do not comprise the reason for the prohibition, but rather serve to complement it. The principle of the sanctity of life mandates that one not only refrain from eating blood, but also that one try to elevate any blood that has been spilled.  As such, the blood of sacrificed animals is sprinkled on the altar and used for atonement.<fn>One could have alternatively claimed that this is simply the means to ensure that one refrain from eating the blood. Keli Yekar explains that the fact that the blood is given on the altar is itself a reminder that the "blood is the soul".  The reason that blood can atone for man is specifically because it can represent man's soul. As such, when a person sees blood play an atoning role, he will automatically recall that blood is the soul and that it is therefore off-limits.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Covering blood</b> – When it is not possible to sanctify the blood, as when a non-domesticated animal not fit to be sacrificed is killed, Hashem commands that the blood be covered instead. It is possible that this, too, is related to recognition of the sanctity of the animal's life and the cruelty inherent in taking it. <br/> | <point><b>Covering blood</b> – When it is not possible to sanctify the blood, as when a non-domesticated animal not fit to be sacrificed is killed, Hashem commands that the blood be covered instead. It is possible that this, too, is related to recognition of the sanctity of the animal's life and the cruelty inherent in taking it. <br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li>In covering the blood, one admits to a degree of discomfort with the killing of animals and a recognition that though the deed is permitted, it should not be flaunted.<fn>Cf. R" Y Grossman, <a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%9D-%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%97-%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%99-%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D">דם ורצח בעלי חיים</a>, who points to the concept, prevalent in Tanakh, that spilled blood cries out for revenge.  If covered, though, those cries cannot be heard. [See, for example, Bereshit 4:10, Yechezkel 24:7-8 and Iyyov 16:18.] As such, he suggests that here, too,covering the blood serves to prevent the innocent blood from "crying out" and quiets the call for blame.</fn></li> | + | <li>In covering the blood, one admits to a degree of discomfort with the killing of animals and a recognition that though the deed is permitted, it should not be flaunted.<fn>Cf. R" Y Grossman, <a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%9D-%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%97-%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%99-%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D">דם ורצח בעלי חיים</a>, who points to the concept, prevalent in Tanakh, that spilled blood cries out for revenge.  If covered, though, those cries cannot be heard. [See, for example, Bereshit 4:10, Yechezkel 24:7-8 and Iyyov 16:18.] As such, he suggests that here, too, covering the blood serves to prevent the innocent blood from "crying out" and quiets the call for blame.</fn></li> |
<li>Rosenmuller (as brought by Shadal) suggests that covering the blood is a sign of respect, meant to ensure that this life source is not eaten even by animals.<fn>Cf. Netziv below who reads the act in the exact opposite manner, suggesting that it is a sign of disrespect and scorn.</fn></li> | <li>Rosenmuller (as brought by Shadal) suggests that covering the blood is a sign of respect, meant to ensure that this life source is not eaten even by animals.<fn>Cf. Netziv below who reads the act in the exact opposite manner, suggesting that it is a sign of disrespect and scorn.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li> | + | <li>Sefer HaChinukh adds that eating while seeing the spilled soul of the animal in front of one leads the viewer to cruelty.<fn>Cf. <multilink><a href="HoilMosheVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Hoil Moshe</a><a href="HoilMosheVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="HoilMosheVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi (Hoil Moshe)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi</a></multilink>.</fn> </li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
It is not clear, though, according to any of these explanations, why there is no equivalent obligation to also cover the blood of domesticated animals eaten for pleasure (בשר תאווה).<fn>The difficulty is highlighted by the fact that <a href="Jubilees7-24-45" data-aht="source">Jubilees 7:41-43</a> and the Dead Sea Sect (Temple Scroll 53:1-6) do mandate the covering of this blood, not differentiating between domesticated and non-domesticated animals.<br/>This might be, in part, what leads Keli Yekar to suggest that the goal of covering the blood of non-domesticated animals is more simply to ensure that it not be eaten. He explains that such a reminder is not necessary for the blood of domesticated animals eaten for pleasure (בשר תאוה) since one understands that such animals are normally fit for sacrificing specifically because "the blood is the soul". As such, even without further signs, one would know to refrain from eating its blood.</fn></point> | It is not clear, though, according to any of these explanations, why there is no equivalent obligation to also cover the blood of domesticated animals eaten for pleasure (בשר תאווה).<fn>The difficulty is highlighted by the fact that <a href="Jubilees7-24-45" data-aht="source">Jubilees 7:41-43</a> and the Dead Sea Sect (Temple Scroll 53:1-6) do mandate the covering of this blood, not differentiating between domesticated and non-domesticated animals.<br/>This might be, in part, what leads Keli Yekar to suggest that the goal of covering the blood of non-domesticated animals is more simply to ensure that it not be eaten. He explains that such a reminder is not necessary for the blood of domesticated animals eaten for pleasure (בשר תאוה) since one understands that such animals are normally fit for sacrificing specifically because "the blood is the soul". As such, even without further signs, one would know to refrain from eating its blood.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Scope of the prohibition</b> – According to this approach, it is logical that the prohibition extends to all animals.    In fact, the Dead Sea Sect<fn>See the <a href="DamascusDocument" data-aht="source">Damascus Document 12:13</a> .</fn> and Karaites maintain that even the blood of fish is prohibited.<fn>This is but one example of the Sectarian tendency towards stringency with regards to the laws of blood. As mentioned in the above bullet, Jubilees and the Temple Scroll also expanded the law of covering blood to include domesticated animals slaughtered for food (בשר תאווה). <a href="Jubilees21-1-25" data-aht="source">Jubilees 21:22</a> further mandates that one who sacrifices must be careful not to stain his body or clothing with the animal's blood. For other examples and possible reasons for this more strict attitude towards blood, see C. Werman, "דין כיסוי דם ואכילתו בהלכה הכוהנית ובהלכת חכמים", Tarbiz 63b (1994): 173-183.</fn></point> | <point><b>Scope of the prohibition</b> – According to this approach, it is logical that the prohibition extends to all animals.    In fact, the Dead Sea Sect<fn>See the <a href="DamascusDocument" data-aht="source">Damascus Document 12:13</a> .</fn> and Karaites maintain that even the blood of fish is prohibited.<fn>This is but one example of the Sectarian tendency towards stringency with regards to the laws of blood. As mentioned in the above bullet, Jubilees and the Temple Scroll also expanded the law of covering blood to include domesticated animals slaughtered for food (בשר תאווה). <a href="Jubilees21-1-25" data-aht="source">Jubilees 21:22</a> further mandates that one who sacrifices must be careful not to stain his body or clothing with the animal's blood. For other examples and possible reasons for this more strict attitude towards blood, see C. Werman, "דין כיסוי דם ואכילתו בהלכה הכוהנית ובהלכת חכמים", Tarbiz 63b (1994): 173-183.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Context of Vayikra 17</b> – The first part of Chapter 17 mandates that, in the Wilderness Period,<fn>Devarim 12 states that when the nation arrives in Israel, and people live at a distance from the Mikdash, non-sacrificial slaughter will be permitted outside the Temple as well.  Here, too, the Dead Sea Sect differs from Rabbinic law, minimizing this permission.  The Temple Scroll states that only those who live at least a three day distance from the Mikdash may slaughter outside. This interpretation, too, seems to be motivated by a desire to reduce the killing of animals as much as possible.</fn> slaughtering animals for food was permitted only if the animal was brought as a sacrifice,<fn>This is how R. Yishmael in <a href="BavliChulin16b-17a" data-aht="source">Bavli Chulin 16b-17a</a> and many commentators in his wake understand the chapter.</fn> and that transgression of this directive was considered spilling blood.  According to this approach, then, both halves of the chapter revolve around the same theme, the restrictions put on animal slaughter due the sanctity of animal life.<fn>This approach would read Vayikra 17:7's statement, "וְלֹא יִזְבְּחוּ עוֹד אֶת זִבְחֵיהֶם לַשְּׂעִירִם", to be a secondary reason for slaughtering in the Mikdash.</fn> Though an animal can be killed for food, wherever possible this must be done in a way that sanctifies the life taken, with the animal being offered as a sacrifice and its blood sprinkled on the altar.<fn>R. Tamir Granot, <a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A6%D7%95-%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%93%D7%9D-%D7%91%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8-%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%90">"פרשת צו - איסורי הדם בספר ויקרא"</a> , suggests that even the final section of the chapter which discusses the impurity incurred by one who eats a non-slaughtered animal (a נבילה or טריפה) also revolves around this theme.  He suggests that the act of slaughter permits the consumption of an animal because it causes the blood to leave the animal's body. Such an animal is permitted and does not impart impurity because it contains no remnants of its original vitality. An animal that died of natural causes, in contrast, still has its blood, symbol of its vitality, trapped inside its body.and  is therefore both prohibited to eat and a vehicle capabable of imparting impurity.</fn></point> | <point><b>Context of Vayikra 17</b> – The first part of Chapter 17 mandates that, in the Wilderness Period,<fn>Devarim 12 states that when the nation arrives in Israel, and people live at a distance from the Mikdash, non-sacrificial slaughter will be permitted outside the Temple as well.  Here, too, the Dead Sea Sect differs from Rabbinic law, minimizing this permission.  The Temple Scroll states that only those who live at least a three day distance from the Mikdash may slaughter outside. This interpretation, too, seems to be motivated by a desire to reduce the killing of animals as much as possible.</fn> slaughtering animals for food was permitted only if the animal was brought as a sacrifice,<fn>This is how R. Yishmael in <a href="BavliChulin16b-17a" data-aht="source">Bavli Chulin 16b-17a</a> and many commentators in his wake understand the chapter.</fn> and that transgression of this directive was considered spilling blood.  According to this approach, then, both halves of the chapter revolve around the same theme, the restrictions put on animal slaughter due the sanctity of animal life.<fn>This approach would read Vayikra 17:7's statement, "וְלֹא יִזְבְּחוּ עוֹד אֶת זִבְחֵיהֶם לַשְּׂעִירִם", to be a secondary reason for slaughtering in the Mikdash.</fn> Though an animal can be killed for food, wherever possible this must be done in a way that sanctifies the life taken, with the animal being offered as a sacrifice and its blood sprinkled on the altar.<fn>R. Tamir Granot, <a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A6%D7%95-%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%93%D7%9D-%D7%91%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8-%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%90">"פרשת צו - איסורי הדם בספר ויקרא"</a> , suggests that even the final section of the chapter which discusses the impurity incurred by one who eats a non-slaughtered animal (a נבילה or טריפה) also revolves around this theme.  He suggests that the act of slaughter permits the consumption of an animal because it causes the blood to leave the animal's body. Such an animal is permitted and does not impart impurity because it contains no remnants of its original vitality. An animal that died of natural causes, in contrast, still has its blood, symbol of its vitality, trapped inside its body.and  is therefore both prohibited to eat and a vehicle capabable of imparting impurity.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b> – Jubilees, Josephus, and Ramban all understand the prohibition to Noach of | + | <point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b> – Jubilees, Josephus, and Ramban all understand the prohibition to Noach of "אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ  דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ" to refer to eating blood.  As soon as Hashem allowed consumption of animals,<fn>Ramban, Abarbanel and R. Hoffmann assert that, originally, before the flood, man was not allowed to kill living creatures at all. The prohibition regarding consumption of blood, then, is a direct result of this permit.  [See <a href="Permission to Eat Meat" data-aht="page">Permission to Eat Meat</a> for various understandings of why (and if) the directive regarding eating meat might have changed.]</fn> He simultaneously added the restriction that though the flesh may be eaten, the blood, symbolic of the soul, may not.<fn>As mentioned above, this is followed the by the injunction against murder, highlighting how Torah views the consumption of blood as similar to taking a life.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Connection to fat</b> – According to this approach, despite the juxtaposition in the verses, the reasons for the prohibitions of fat and blood are distinct.</point> | <point><b>Connection to fat</b> – According to this approach, despite the juxtaposition in the verses, the reasons for the prohibitions of fat and blood are distinct.</point> | ||
<point><b>Repetition and severity of the punishment</b> – Torah's manifold warning against eating blood and the severity of the punishment is understood in light of this position's viewing it as akin to murder.<fn>See the Damascus Document which claims that one of the reasons that the nation died out in the Wilderness was that they ate blood.</fn></point> | <point><b>Repetition and severity of the punishment</b> – Torah's manifold warning against eating blood and the severity of the punishment is understood in light of this position's viewing it as akin to murder.<fn>See the Damascus Document which claims that one of the reasons that the nation died out in the Wilderness was that they ate blood.</fn></point> | ||
Line 39: | Line 38: | ||
<opinion>Mixing of Animal and Human Nature | <opinion>Mixing of Animal and Human Nature | ||
<p>Ingesting an animal's blood/soul introduces animal-like characteristics into the human soul.</p> | <p>Ingesting an animal's blood/soul introduces animal-like characteristics into the human soul.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot><multilink><a href="IbnEzraDevarim12-25" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim12-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:25</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary9-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 9:4</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary9-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 9:4</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,<fn>This is Ibn Ezra's understanding as expressed in his comments to Devarim 12.  In his comments to Vayikra 3, in contrast, Ibn Ezra explains that blood is prohibited since it Hashem's portion.  It is possible that he differentiates between the reason for the prohibition with regards to domesticated animals (which are fit for sacrificing) and non-domesticated animals (which are not fit for sacrificing).  Since the blood of the latter is not allocated to Hashem, there must be a different reason for the prohibition.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #3, <multilink><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">Sefer Hachinukh</a><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">148</a><a href="Sefer HaChinukh" data-aht="parshan">About Sefer HaChinukh</a></multilink>,<fn>He assumes that blood is detrimental on both the spiritual and physical level.</fn> <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> #3,<fn>Ralbag is somewhat exceptional in this category in that he maintains that eating animal blood affects one's physical health rather than a person's spiritual health.</fn> <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikraPeirush17" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikraPeirush17" data-aht="source">Vayikra Peirush 17</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Abarbanel </a><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:20</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>#2,<fn>Abarbanel brings many reasons for the prohibition; this is the second possibility he raises in his commentary on Vayikra 17 and Devarim 12.</fn> <multilink><a href=" | + | <mekorot><multilink><a href="IbnEzraDevarim12-25" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim12-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:25</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary9-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 9:4</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary9-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 9:4</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,<fn>This is Ibn Ezra's understanding as expressed in his comments to Devarim 12.  In his comments to Vayikra 3, in contrast, Ibn Ezra explains that blood is prohibited since it Hashem's portion.  It is possible that he differentiates between the reason for the prohibition with regards to domesticated animals (which are fit for sacrificing) and non-domesticated animals (which are not fit for sacrificing).  Since the blood of the latter is not allocated to Hashem, there must be a different reason for the prohibition.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #3, <multilink><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">Sefer Hachinukh</a><a href="SeferHaChinukh148" data-aht="source">148</a><a href="Sefer HaChinukh" data-aht="parshan">About Sefer HaChinukh</a></multilink>,<fn>He assumes that blood is detrimental on both the spiritual and physical level.</fn> <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> #3,<fn>Ralbag is somewhat exceptional in this category in that he maintains that eating animal blood affects one's physical health rather than a person's spiritual health.</fn> <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikraPeirush17" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikraPeirush17" data-aht="source">Vayikra Peirush 17</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Abarbanel </a><a href="AbarbanelVayikra17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17</a><a href="AbarbanelDevarim12-20" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:20</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>#2,<fn>Abarbanel brings many reasons for the prohibition; this is the second possibility he raises in his commentary on Vayikra 17 and Devarim 12.</fn> <multilink><a href="SfornoVayikra17-14" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoVayikra17-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:14</a><a href="SfornoVayikra19-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:26</a><a href="SfornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</a></multilink> #2,<fn>He also relates the prohibition to idolatrous practices.</fn> <multilink><a href="OrHaChayyimVayikra17-10" data-aht="source">Or HaChayyim</a><a href="OrHaChayyimVayikra17-10" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:10</a><a href="OrHaChayyimVayikra17-11" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11</a><a href="OrHaChayyimVayikra17-13" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:13</a><a href="R. Chayyim b. Atar (Or HaChayyim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chayyim b. Atar</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RSRHirschVayikra17-10-12" data-aht="source">R. Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschVayikra3-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 3:17</a><a href="RSRHirschVayikra7-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 7:26</a><a href="RSRHirschVayikra17-10-12" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:10-12</a><a href="RSRHirschDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="NetzivVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Netziv</a><a href="NetzivVayikra17-11-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:11-14</a><a href="NetzivDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin (Netziv)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin</a></multilink><fn>Netziv distinguishes between the reason for the prohibition of eating the blood of domesticated and non-domesticated animals and maintains that only the latter is related to the negative effects it will have on man's nature.</fn></mekorot> |
<point><b>"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ"</b> – These sources point to this phrase as the basis for the prohibition. Ramban explains that an animal's blood/soul, as opposed to its flesh, can easily mingle with human blood.<fn>He explains that, being a liquid, it does not require digestion, and so there is no mitigating of the negative qualities held in the blood.</fn>  Thus, if the blood is consumed, the human soul will imbibe the negative characteristics of the animal soul.</point> | <point><b>"כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ"</b> – These sources point to this phrase as the basis for the prohibition. Ramban explains that an animal's blood/soul, as opposed to its flesh, can easily mingle with human blood.<fn>He explains that, being a liquid, it does not require digestion, and so there is no mitigating of the negative qualities held in the blood.</fn>  Thus, if the blood is consumed, the human soul will imbibe the negative characteristics of the animal soul.</point> | ||
<point><b>Spiritual or physical danger</b><ul> | <point><b>Spiritual or physical danger</b><ul> | ||
Line 47: | Line 46: | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם"</b> – According to R. Hirsch, the role played by blood in atonement is not a distinct reason for the prohibition, but integrally related to the need to prevent man from becoming animal-like. He explains that the fact that animal blood stands in for the human soul on the altar could have potentially led one to conclude that the human and animal souls are equal and that the latter is not harmful. To ensure that man recognize that this is not true, Hashem prohibited ingesting blood, announcing that the two are qualitatively different and that animal blood has no place in man.<fn>R. Hirsch notes that blood is not only prohibited to ensure this recognition, but also because it tangibly can affect man's soul, in the manner described above by Ramban.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְכַפֵּר עַל נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם"</b> – According to R. Hirsch, the role played by blood in atonement is not a distinct reason for the prohibition, but integrally related to the need to prevent man from becoming animal-like. He explains that the fact that animal blood stands in for the human soul on the altar could have potentially led one to conclude that the human and animal souls are equal and that the latter is not harmful. To ensure that man recognize that this is not true, Hashem prohibited ingesting blood, announcing that the two are qualitatively different and that animal blood has no place in man.<fn>R. Hirsch notes that blood is not only prohibited to ensure this recognition, but also because it tangibly can affect man's soul, in the manner described above by Ramban.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Covering versus spilling blood</b> – These sources offer two ( | + | <point><b>Covering versus spilling blood</b> – These sources offer two (opposing) explanations for the difference in law between domesticated and undomesticated animals:<br/> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><b>Blood more harmful</b> – Netziv suggests that it is specifically the blood of wild animals which is covered since it is these animals who have the worst traits. Their blood, untamed and wild, deserves to be scorned and hidden from view.<fn>He suggests that this teaches a lesson that all who share such animal characteristics deserve the same.</fn></li> | <li><b>Blood more harmful</b> – Netziv suggests that it is specifically the blood of wild animals which is covered since it is these animals who have the worst traits. Their blood, untamed and wild, deserves to be scorned and hidden from view.<fn>He suggests that this teaches a lesson that all who share such animal characteristics deserve the same.</fn></li> | ||
Line 55: | Line 54: | ||
<point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b><ul> | <point><b>Prohibition to Noach</b><ul> | ||
<li>According to Ibn Ezra, eating blood was already prohibited to Noach. When Hashem allowed meat to be eaten, He already prohibited its blood, knowing that its consumption is detrimental.</li> | <li>According to Ibn Ezra, eating blood was already prohibited to Noach. When Hashem allowed meat to be eaten, He already prohibited its blood, knowing that its consumption is detrimental.</li> | ||
− | <li> | + | <li>Sforno, in contrast, assumes that the command to Noach relates only to eating a limb or blood of a live animal.  Only the chosen Children of Israel were directed not to eat blood of even dead animals so as to protect their souls from absorbing any animalistic tendencies.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Parallels to fat and other forbidden foods</b> – Sefer HaChinukh compares the prohibition of blood to other forbidden foods such as non-kosher animals or fat, maintaining that all are prohibited since they are harmful to the body or soul. [For elaboration, see <a href="Purpose of the Laws of Kashrut" data-aht="page">Purpose of the Laws of Kashrut</a>.]</point> | <point><b>Parallels to fat and other forbidden foods</b> – Sefer HaChinukh compares the prohibition of blood to other forbidden foods such as non-kosher animals or fat, maintaining that all are prohibited since they are harmful to the body or soul. [For elaboration, see <a href="Purpose of the Laws of Kashrut" data-aht="page">Purpose of the Laws of Kashrut</a>.]</point> | ||
Line 93: | Line 92: | ||
<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> #1, <multilink><a href=" | + | <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="SfornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoVayikra17-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 17:14</a><a href="SfornoVayikra19-26" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:26</a><a href="SfornoDevarim12-23" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:23</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</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> #2<fn>This is the first explanation he offers for the command to cover the blood of birds and non-domesticated animals.  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> – Rambam explains that idolaters would eat blood, believing it to be the nourishment of demons and that by participating with them in a meal, the demons would divine the future for them.</point> | <point><b>Connection between blood and Idolatry</b> – Rambam explains that idolaters would eat blood, believing it to be the nourishment of demons and that by participating with them in a meal, the demons would divine the future for them.</point> | ||
<point><b>"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם"</b> – This approach suggests 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 the shared meal. Thus, it is prohibited not only to eat blood, but also to eat "on blood".  The ending of the verse, "לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ וְלֹא תְעוֹנֵנוּ", supports this reading as it, too, speaks of divination practices.</point> | <point><b>"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם"</b> – This approach suggests 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 the shared meal. Thus, it is prohibited not only to eat blood, but also to eat "on blood".  The ending of the verse, "לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ וְלֹא תְעוֹנֵנוּ", supports this reading as it, too, speaks of divination practices.</point> |
Latest revision as of 10:24, 28 January 2023
Prohibition of Blood
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Various reasons have been offered for the prohibition of blood. Many sources focus on the fact that blood represents the animal's life force and how its consumption both demonstrates and invites cruelty. Eating the source of an animal's very vitality reflects a disregard for the sanctity of life and portrays callousness. Ramban adds that consuming an animal's blood is further dangerous to the individual himself, as the human soul will imbibe the negative characteristics of the animal soul.
Others focus not on how eating blood impacts man's behavior and nature, but its role in the worship of Hashem. Ibn Ezra claims that blood is off limits to man because it is dedicated to the altar and forms Hashem's portion of the sacrifice. R. D"Z Hoffmann, instead, points to the role played by blood in attaining atonement, pointing out that it would be inappropriate to consume that which aids one in achieving forgiveness. Finally, Rambam asserts that the prohibition is one of many aimed at distancing man from idolatrous practices. As idolators would consume blood in an effort to divine the future, we are prohibited from doing so.
Blood is the Soul
Blood is prohibited from consumption because blood is symbolic of the animal's soul and life force. This position subdivides regarding why this is problematic:
Sacredness of Life
Refraining from eating blood, representative of an animal's vitality and soul, reminds one of the sanctity of all life. Eating it both demonstrates and invites cruelty.
- Similar to murder – Jubilees, drawing off the juxtaposition of the prohibitions regarding blood and murder in Bereshit 9:4-6, repeatedly links the two prohibitions,7 implying that the former is forbidden because it, too, is similar to taking a life. Eating of an animal's blood/soul is like destroying its very vitality.8
- Similar to eating of a living being – Abarbanel likens the prohibition to that of "אבר מן החי", suggesting that eating flesh and blood is like eating of an animal while it is still alive. Shadal similarly suggests that the prohibition is aimed at preventing man from eating blood when it is still hot and flowing from the animal, "an act of immense cruelty".9
- In covering the blood, one admits to a degree of discomfort with the killing of animals and a recognition that though the deed is permitted, it should not be flaunted.11
- Rosenmuller (as brought by Shadal) suggests that covering the blood is a sign of respect, meant to ensure that this life source is not eaten even by animals.12
- Sefer HaChinukh adds that eating while seeing the spilled soul of the animal in front of one leads the viewer to cruelty.13
Mixing of Animal and Human Nature
Ingesting an animal's blood/soul introduces animal-like characteristics into the human soul.
- Spiritual – Most of these sources speak of the detrimental effects animal blood will have on humans in the spiritual realm, understanding that the blood will affect the human soul itself, introducing ugliness and lowering it to the level of animal.
- Physical – Ralbag,32 in contrast, asserts that the blood affects one on a physical level. Ingesting blood is difficult on the digestive system and harmful to the body.33
- Both – Sefer HaChinukh combines these approaches, noting that blood is detrimental to the body, but since the body is the platform for the soul, when the body is harmed, the soul is affected as well.
- Blood more harmful – Netziv suggests that it is specifically the blood of wild animals which is covered since it is these animals who have the worst traits. Their blood, untamed and wild, deserves to be scorned and hidden from view.35
- Blood less harmful – Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, suggests that the thinner blood of undomesticated animals might have led people to be less cautious in refraining from eating it, assuming that such blood is less likely to harm. As such, a greater reminder was needed to show that it, too, is prohibited.
- According to Ibn Ezra, eating blood was already prohibited to Noach. When Hashem allowed meat to be eaten, He already prohibited its blood, knowing that its consumption is detrimental.
- Sforno, in contrast, assumes that the command to Noach relates only to eating a limb or blood of a live animal. Only the chosen Children of Israel were directed not to eat blood of even dead animals so as to protect their souls from absorbing any animalistic tendencies.
Sanctified to Hashem
Since the blood of animals is thrown on the altar and sanctified to Hashem, it is not fit for human consumption.
- 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.40 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.41
- 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.42
- 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,43 though, concede that this reasoning cannot account for the prohibition regarding non-domesticated animals and suggest that they are prohibited for other reasons.44
- 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.46
Distancing from Idolatry
Consuming blood is prohibited since it is related to idolatrous practices.
- This position might respond that this prohibition is related to אבר מן החי rather than to eating blood.
- Ritva, instead, questions the assumption that there was no idolatry in Noach's generation. Even if previous idolators were wiped out in the flood, Hashem knew that it would not be long before others took their place.