The Holiness of
Blood
Rabbi Yaakov
Bieler
Parshat Re’eh,
5765
With respect to the halachically
acceptable consumption of animal protein by human beings, the Bible suggests
that meat becomes a permitted food only after a prolonged
period of time during which man was expected to be exclusively
herbivorous.[1]
Although man is told in Beraishit
1:28, “…and fill the earth and dominate it, and rule over the fish
of the sea and the birds of heaven and all living things that move on the land,”
in light of 1:29 (see fn. 1), “domination” and “rule”, at least originally, did
not include eating animal flesh. Furthermore, the description of Adam and
Chava’s son Hevel as a herdsman (Ibid. 4:2), in contrast to his brother Kayin
the farmer, suggests that animals were once productively raised for their wool
and hides, even if eating their flesh was originally prohibited.[2]
Eating animals becomes permitted only after the Flood,[3]
when according to RaMBaN on VaYikra 17:11, Noach, by means of his offering
sacrifices in Beraishit 8:20-21 demonstrated that he truly appreciated the
sanctity of animal life. Yet the Divinely sanctioned option[4]
to do so was also accompanied by certain restrictions remaining in
place. Limitations on man’s eating meat are functions of: 1) the species
of animal that can be consumed, 2) the manner in which it is to be
slaughtered, and 3) the specific portions of the
animal’s body that are deemed “Kosher” (lit. prepared, appropriate to be
eaten by Jews).[5],[6]
Parshat Re’eh contains a verse reiterating in a
strangely poetic manner one of the negative prohibitions previously formulated
concerning eating meat.
Devarim
12:16
Certainly blood (of an
animal) you must not eat; on the ground you must spill it like
water.
In the book of VaYikra (see fn.
4), the Tora unambiguously and repeatedly asserts that consuming animal blood is
prohibited,[7]
which leads us to wonder why must one more negative directive to this effect
be given altogether? Is it to introduce an apparent positive Commandment
concerning how the blood associated with the ritual slaughter of a Kosher
domesticated animal is to be disposed of, i.e., it must be deliberately poured
onto the ground?[8]
Furthermore, aside from purposeful
and constructive irrigation of growing plants, is the analogue to blood, i.e.,
water, itself primarily intended to be spilled on the ground, as opposed to
being drunk or used for other purposes? What is being suggested by the textual
equation between animal blood and water?[9]
Although the laws of Kashrut are
typically categorized among the Commandments of the bible known as “Chukim”
(lit. statutes, laws whose rationales are difficult to clearly ascertain),[10]
therefore suggesting that asking philosophical questions such as those listed
above with regard the “Chok” of “Kashrut” is an exercise in futility,
commentators have nevertheless eternally attempted to offer explanations that
would allow a person to sense that s/he is adhering to a code of law that is not
only God’s Will but also personally meaningful. An intriguing interpretation of
Devarim 12:16 that deals with the intrinsic spiritual quality of blood as
the basis for its not being available for human consumption, is offered by
NeTzIV in his commentary “HaEmek Davar”, who proceeds to connect this
verse with an earlier passage in VaYikra, developing further an idea previously
discussed by RaMBaN on VaYikra 17:11.
HaEmek Davar on Devarim
12:16
Based upon the same reason that we
explicated (in our commentary) with regard to Parshat Acharei Mot, i.e., that it
(animal blood) is worthy for the Exalted One
(HaShem), so too in the Land of Israel, even though it becomes permitted
for people to eat non-sacrifices,[11]
nevertheless, it (the blood) is the portion of the animal that is worthy for the
Exalted One. For this reason it is appropriate to pour it on the ground and not
eat it.
HaEmek Davar on VaYikra
17:11 (Parshat Acharei
Mot)
(“Because the soul of the flesh is
in the blood, and I Gave it to you on the altar as a means for
achieving atonement for your souls since the blood is in the soul in order
to attain atonement.”)
The verse is offering a reason for
the prohibition against the consumption of animal blood of a non-sacrifice,[12]
because the soul of the animal resides within the blood. It is for this reason
that the blood is used as part of the sacrificial service in order to achieve
atonement on behalf of a Jewish individual who sinned due to his inability to
discipline his passions and desires.
Since the blood is therefore
considered the portion of the Exalted One, in the same manner as the “Cheilev”
of the animal (is similarly the portion of HaShem),[13]
therefore it cannot be eaten, even if it derives from a non-sacrifice, or a
“Ba’al Mum” (a sacrifice that has developed an imperfection and becomes
disqualified). For this is the natural state of things, i.e., that the blood and
“Cheilev” of even a non-sacrificial animal belongs to the Exalted One. It is for
this reason that it (the blood) does not require “Kisui HaDam”,[14]
even when it comes from a non-sacrifice or a “Ba’al Mum”.[15]
It is not because of a sense of shame/disparagement that the blood is prohibited
from being eaten (and must be covered so that it will not be seen), as is the
case with respect to the blood of the undomesticated animal and the fowl…but
rather because it is the portion of the Exalted One (therefore it can remain
exposed instead of covered, but still must not be
consumed)…
HaEmek Davar on VaYikra
17:13 (Parshat Acharei
Mot)
“And every person from the Jewish
people as well as from the sojourner who sojourns in your midst who hunts
wildlife, wild animals or fowl that he intends to eat, and he will spill its
blood (as opposed to drinking it) and cover it with
earth.”
With respect to the explanation
for the prohibition against the consumption of blood, these (symbolized by the
blood requiring covering mentioned in this verse) are the people whose
lives are shameful to their souls since they are so undisciplined, as we
will explain. It is for this reason that the introduction to this verse is “who
hunts”, for although most undomesticated animals and fowl require being hunted,
and they roam free without a yoke, the Commandment of “Kisui HaDam” also applies
to those same species that would not require hunting (e.g., one would raise in
captivity species of animals and birds that ordinarily live in the wild), for
the inherent soul of the undomesticated animal and fowl is to be unfettered, to
roam free…
“And cover it with earth”—to teach
us that one whose soul is undisciplined, it is appropriate to do this to
him/her. As it is stated in Midrash Eicha Rabba 3:6—
(Eicha 3:16) “He has Broken my
teeth with gravel stones”
It is told of the son of R.
Chanania ben Teradyon that he became associated with a band of robbers whose
secret he disclosed, so they killed him and filled his mouth with dust and
pebbles.
After three days they placed him
in a coffin and wished to pronounce a eulogy over him out of respect for his
father, but the latter would not permit it.
He said to them, “Allow me and I
will speak concerning my son.” He opened his discourse with the text, (Mishlei
5:13 ff.) “Neither have I listened to
the voice of my teachers, nor inclined my ear to them that instructed me. I was
closely involved with all evil in the midst of the congregation and
assembly…
It
would appear from the ritualistic emphasis upon the pouring of the blood, one of
the “holy” parts of the animal, onto the ground and allowing it to remain there
uncovered, that at least two possible themes are being conveyed. On the one hand
the required “wasting” of this innately spiritual substance,
whereby instead of the blood being used for atonement, it is simply poured onto
the ground, as one would treat the most insignificant of liquids, water, is a
continuous reminder that eating meat outside of a sacrificial context is
no more than “BeDiavad” (aposteori), a concession to human frailty and
desire. When engaged in eating meat in order to satisfy a personal desire, man
has to watch helplessly as the potential means for gaining forgiveness for his
sins is frittered away, splashing purposelessly onto the ground. Whereas NeTzIV
suggests that the covering of the blood of undomesticated animals and birds
symbolize the shortcomings of certain types of human beings, it could also be
argued that the Tora could be conveying a different idea. Perhaps Devarim 12:16
is connoting that the person choosing to pass up the opportunity to offer a
sacrifice, and instead prefers to use an animal exclusively for his/her own
sensual gratification, is demonstrating a serious insensitivity to the
holiness of Creation, and his/her role in the world to sanctify all with
which s/he comes into contact.
However,
a significantly more positive spin could alternatively be applied to the
need to spill animal blood on the ground.
When it is noted that blood derived specifically from sin offerings
sacrificed in the Tabernacle/Temple service, was poured on the base of
the altar (see VaYikra 4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34) it is possible to posit that
even when an animal is slaughtered in a non-sacrificial context in the Land
of Israel, that animal’s blood takes on quasi-sacrificial status, and
the pouring of its blood onto and therefore into the ground, is an indication
that the entire Holy Land has the status of at least a
metaphorical altar. Consider the following source:
Ketubot
111a
Said
R. Anon: Whoever is buried in the Land
of Israel
it is as if he is buried under the altar
(of the Temple).
It is written here (Shemot 20:20) “You will make for Me an altar of earth and
you will offer upon it your whole burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your
sheep and your cattle, in every place where I will Mention My Name, I will Come
to you and Bless you,” and it is written (Devarim 32:43) “Therefore you nations,
make the lot of His People a happy one. For He will Avenge the blood of His
Servants, and vengeance will fall back on His Enemies, and His Earth will atone
for His People.”
Just
as a person usually has no reticence about pouring water onto the ground, he
should similarly not be concerned about doing the same with the blood of the
animal that he has just ritually slaughtered since he has engaged in a type of
sacrifice comparable to those offered by Noach following the Flood. Rather than
negatively contrasting that atoning quality of the blood referred to in VaYikra
11:17 with an irreverent handling of blood in Devarim 12:16, one can rather
assert a parallelism between them, i.e., that in both instances atonement is
achieved.
An
even more profound implication can be derived from this second line of positive
reasoning with regard to pouring non-sacrificial animal blood on the ground. It
may be less of a challenge to have the proper holy intention and
mindset to achieve atonement when one finds himself inside the
Tabernacle/Temple engaged in offering a sacrifice, than when one is
outside that framework, preparing food for his family and himself. Just
as one of the aspects of Shabbat observance is
to effect the rest of the weekdays and elevate their sanctity, so too the
offering of sacrifices is perhaps designed to raise up the manner in which we
approach general food preparation, particularly with regard to that food which
under other circumstances could have been presented as a form of sacrifice.
Shabbat
Shalom, and may we look to extend sanctity to all that we do, in all
surroundings and in all situations.
[1]
Beraishit
1:29
Behold I have Given to you (Adam
and Chava) all of the grasses that reseed themselves that is on the face
of the entire earth and every tree that there is on it the fruit of the
tree that reseeds itself for you to eat.
Ibid.
2:17
From every tree of the
Garden you (Adam and Eve) may freely eat…
Ibid.
3:19
And you (Adam and Eve) shall eat the herb of the field; by the sweat of your face you shall eat bread…
[2] One wonders regarding the
permissibility of drinking animal milk during the period before animal flesh
became a legitimate human food. On the one hand, extracting the milk does not
entail taking the animal’s life; on the other, a strict interpretation of
Beraishit 1:29 would seem to limit man’s food intake to that which either grows
directly from the ground or on trees.
[3]
Beraishit. 9:3
Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you (Noach and his family), like the herbs of the field (until this point) I have Given to you everything (to eat from this point forward).
[4] The first time there is an actual
obligation to eat meat according to Jewish law is the Commandment to consume the
Pascal Sacrifice in Shemot 12:8.
[5]
Beraishit 9:4
But flesh with its life/soul, which
is its blood you shall not eat. (Although this verse could be understood
as an early prohibition against the consumption of blood, it is typically
interpreted as serving as the source for the Noachide Commandment against eating
meat before the animal has completely ceased to live. Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzva
#452 identifies Devarim 12:23, “…Do not eat the ‘soul’ with the flesh” as the
source for the prohibition of “Eiver Min Hachai”.)
Ibid.
32:33
Therefore (as a result of the
temporary injury suffered by Yaakov during his struggle with the angel prior to
his encounter with his brother Eisav) the Children of Israel do not eat the
“Gid HaNasheh” (sinew of the vein), which is upon the hollow of the thigh
to this day…
Shemot
22:30
…Neither shall you eat any meat
that is “Teraifa” (torn by beasts) in the
field…
Ibid. 23:19; 34:26; Devarim
14:21
…You shall not cook a
kid in its mother’s milk. (The unique dimension of this
prohibition is whereby each of the elements being combined, i.e., the milk and
the meat, are permissible in their own rights—Kosher—as long as they are kept
separate, when they are combined, they create a prohibited entity that no longer
can not only not be consumed by an observant Jew, but that cannot provide any
benefit to him/her whatsoever.)
VaYikra
3:17
It is an eternal statute for your
generations in all of your habitations all “Cheilev” (prohibited animal
fat, as opposed to “Shuman” animal fat that is permitted for consumption) and
all blood you shall not eat.
Ibid.
7:23-7
…All “Cheilev” of an ox, a
sheep or a goat you shall not eat.
And “Cheilev” from “Neveila”
(an animal that dies naturally, as opposed to via proper ritual slaughter) and
“Cheilev” from “Teraifa” (an animal that dies as the result of another
predator, or an improper act of ritual slaughter) can be used for all work; but
you shall surely not eat it. (This
verse, rather than coming to prohibit the eating of “Cheilev” of animals that
died in ways other than ritual slaughter, would appear to focus upon the
permission to use “Cheilev from these sources for other purposes, something that
without an explicit statement to such an effect, might be thought to be
prohibited. Once the eating of “Neveila” and “Teraifa” are prohibited in general
(Shemot 22:30; Devarim 14:21), there would be no basis to
assume that their “Cheilev” would be permitted as food for
Jews.)
For whoever eats “Cheilev”
from the animal where portions of it are offered up to God, that person who eats
will be ritually excised from his people.
And
all blood you shall not eat in all your habitations, whether from fowl or
animals.
And
anyone who eats any blood and that person will be ritually excised from
among his people.
Ibid. 11:2-3 ff.; Devarim 14:4
ff.
…These are the beasts which you
shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.
Whatever has split hooves
and is cloven-footed and chews its cud among the beasts you
shall eat.
Ibid.
17:10-14
And every person belonging to the
House of Israel, and from among the sojourners sojourning within their midst who
eats any blood, and I will Place My Face against that individual who eats
blood and I will ritually Excise him from the midst of his
people.
Because the soul of the flesh is in
the blood, and I gave it to you on the alter as a means for achieving
atonement for your souls since the blood is in the soul in order to
attain atonement.
Therefore I Said to the Children of
Israel: Every individual amongst you must not eat blood, as well as the
sojourner who sojourns in your midst should not eat
blood.
And every person from the Jewish
people as well as from the sojourner who sojourns in your midst who hunts
wildlife, wild animals or fowl that he intends to eat, and he will spill its
blood (as opposed to eating it) and cover it with
dust.
Because the soul of all flesh,
“Damo BeNafsho Huh” (its blood is in its soul) and He Said to the
Children of Israel: The blood of all flesh do not eat, because the soul
of all flesh is its blood; all those who eat it will be ritually cut off.
Ibid.
19:26
You shall not eat anything with its
blood; nor shall you engage in divination or necromancy. (The
juxtaposition between blood and forms of witchcraft suggests that it is not only
Kashrut that the Tora is concerned with in this verse.)
Devarim 12:15,
21
You may slaughter animals
and eat their flesh to thy heart’s desire (as part of the sacrificial
cult, exclusively in the location which has been chosen for all sacrifices
to be offered, and only those portions of the animals that are not to be burnt
or given to the Kohanim)…
If the place which the Lord your
God has Chosen to Place His Name there (the place of first the Mishkan and
subsequently the Temples) is too far from you (and therefore it is extremely
inconvenient for you to go there in order to be able to eat meat as part of a
sacrifice), then you shall kill from your herd and your flock, which the Lord
has Given to you, and I have commanded you (i.e., you will
slaughter the animals in accordance with the Commandments of HaShem which
are part of the Oral Tradition), and you shall eat (meat) within your gates to
thy heart’s desire.
Ibid.
14:21
You shall not eat “Neveila”
(an animal that dies naturally)…
Ibid.
15:23
Only its blood (that of a
first born animal that has a disqualifying blemish) you shall not eat; on the
ground you will spill it like water.
[6] Another restriction which limits
man’s access to at least some of his animals and thereby constitutes a further
hindrance to the unbridled consumption of meat, are the rules governing the need
to give to Kohanim unblemished first-born animals in one’s flock (Shemot
13:2, 15; BaMidbar 3:13; 8:17; 18:15, 17*; Devarim 12:6; 15:19*) and the
tithing of one tenth of one’s animals (VaYikra 27:32). It could be
countered that while having to remove these particular animals from one’s flock,
removes the possibility of their owners from eating them, nevertheless, someone
else, e.g., the Kohen to whom the tithes are brought, can either eat them
himself or sell them to someone else who qualifies to be able to eat them.
[7] VaYikra 3:17; 7:26; 17:10-14;
19:26.
[8] Compilations of Mitzvot, such as
Sefer HaMitzvot of RaMBaM, or Sefer HaChinuch by Rav Aharon HaLevi of Barcelona,
take note of “Kisui HaDam”, (SHM—Mitzva 147; SHC—Mitzva #187), but do not list
the need to spill the blood of a Kosher domesticated animal on the ground as a
separate positive Commandment. It would appear that as long as there is no need
to cover the blood, nothing further has to be said, let alone that it is to be
spilled upon the ground like water.
[9] An approach that several
commentators, such as RaShI, Chizkuni and R. S.R. Hirsch adopt with regard to
understanding the verse in question, is explaining it entirely in Halachic
terms, as manifested in the Midrash Halacha and the Talmud. The specific laws
that these commentators associate with Devarim 12:16, and would not have been
arrived at without the analogy between animal blood and water, include:
a) There is no need to perform “Kisui
HaDam” (the covering of the blood of a ritually slaughtered undomesticated
Kosher animal or bird with dirt or ashes), discussed in VaYikra 17:13, on the
blood that issues from the ritual slaughter of a Kosher domesticated animal.
Just like water does not require “covering”, so too blood from a Kosher
“Beheima” (domesticated animal). (Sifre #71)
b) The blood that
results from Halachic ritual slaughter is permitted for uses other than eating,
just as there are no limitations on the use of water. (Pesachim
22a)
c) Just as water is
one of the seven liquids that once they come into contact with grains and
produce that have been harvested, these agricultural products become susceptible
to being “infected” with ritual impurity should they then subsequently come into
contact with particular forms of objects already “Tamei”, blood from a properly
slaughtered Kosher animal intended for private consumption is to be considered
among the seven liquids as well, a quality that is not shared by blood that
originates from animals slaughtered for the purpose of ritual sacrifice.
(Pesachim 22a)
However, since the usual focus of
these essays on “Parshat HaShavua” are possible Hashkafic
and
theological implications of the
Biblical text, we will prefer to seek out commentators pursuing a
more
philosophical, as opposed to
Halachic, perspective regarding Devarim 12:16.
[10] A general understanding of this
entire category of Jewish law would suggest that rules that appear to defy
rational explanation are designed to instill nothing more than discipline and
self-control among those who observe them. However some claim that it is
entirely appropriate to attempt to identify specific reasons and spiritual
teachings for individual “Chukim”. For a discussion concerning whether “Chukim”
have no reasons discernable to the human mind, or that their reasons are merely
more difficult to ascertain, but nevertheless attainable if one invests time and
effort, see RaMBaN on Devarim 22:6.
[11] Originally the only meat that was
available to the Jewish people post-Sinai, were the portions of sacrifices that
were not burnt on the alter or distributed to the Kohanim. Once the Jews entered
Israel, and many of them lived quite a
distance from the central location where sacrifices were allowed to be offered,
“Chullin” (lit. non-holy things, animals that were not sacrifices) became
permitted. A somewhat pejorative
term is applied to Kosher meat that is not offered as a sacrifice, “Basar
Ta’ava” (meat of lust/desire), reminiscent of the sin of the Mixed Multitude
when it “lusted” after meat at Kivrot HaTa’ava, described in BaMidbar 11:4 ff.
The implication of “Basar Ta’ava” is that if s/he chose to, s/he could exercise
sufficient self-control and defer his/her desire for meat until s/he would be
“Oleh Regel” (lit. go up by foot, participate in the pilgrimage Festivals) and
come to the central location of the Tabernacle/Temple in order to offer his/her
sacrifices.
[12] It is clear from the manner in
which the blood of sacrifices plays a key role in the Tabernacle and
Temple service—see e.g., VaYikra 1:5;
3:2; 4:6, 7, 17, 18; 8:15, 19, 24, 30; 9:9, 12, 18, etc.—that such blood has
special spiritual significance. However, it could nevertheless have been
maintained that blood that comes from an animal that was not sanctified as a
sacrifice is not to be viewed as any more holy than the rest of the
non-sacrificial animal. Consequently, NeTzIV sees VaYikra 17:11, which raises
the issue of the use of blood in sacrifices within the context of
non-sacrifices, as contending that all blood is holy and to be treated with
great respect. Consequently, it is not something that human beings can consume
under any circumstances, regardless of the nature of the animal from which the
blood issues.
[13] NeTzIV is equating the prohibition
against consuming blood from a non-sacrifice with the restriction against eating
the “Cheilev” of such an animal—see VaYikra 3:17; 7:23-5. In the same manner that blood
plays a central role in the sacrificial service (see fn. 7 above), “Cheilev” is
also entirely burnt on the alter rather than being distributed for consumption
to the Kohanim or the individuals bringing the sacrifice, as described in Shemot
29:13, 22; VaYikra 3:3, 4, 9, 10, 14, 15, etc. The commentator contends that the
prohibition regarding blood and “Cheilev” in non-sacrifices therefore stems from
the holy status of these substances during the offering of sacrifices during the
Tabernacle/Temple service.
[14] See fn. 5
a).
[15] Obviously, to do “Kisui HaDam” on
the blood of a sacrifice would prevent the sacrificial service from properly
taking place. In the event that the blood collected at the time of the slaughter
of the sacrifice is spilled before it can be either sprinkled, poured or
manually applied to the various parts of the alter, the sacrifice is
disqualified and another animal must be brought in order to fulfill one’s
obligation. However, since there is no such requirement to do anything in
particular with the blood of a non-sacrifice or a “Ba’al Mum” one might think
that it is more respectful if the blood that results from the ritual slaughter
would be covered, as in the case of the slaughtering of a Kosher undomesticated
animal or wild bird, creatures that cannot be brought as sacrifices. NeTzIV’s
insight contends that regardless of the type of animal from which the blood
originates, it maintains a status of holiness, and is not to be treated as the
blood deriving from an animal that does not have the potential to be a
sacrifice.