Ach
et zeh lo tochlu mima’alei hageira umimafrisei haparsah…. V’et hachazir ki
mafris parsah hu v’shosa shesa parsav v’hu geirah lo yigar tamei hu lachem.
Nevertheless these you shall not eat, they that only chew the cud or
they that only splits its hoof…. And the pig because it splits its hoof and is
cloven-footed, but does not chew its cud; it is taboo for you. (Vayikra 11:4,7)
There is a
concept in kashrut of that which goes beyond treif. In some circles it is
referred to as “High Treif.” For example: shark is treif. Lobster is High
Treif. Unkosher beef is treif, but pork is High Treif. High Treif occupies a
different realm. Those who do not keep kosher will often still refrain from
High Treif. In contrast, those who wish to be spiteful in their anti-religious
practice will davka eat High Treif. There is something ingrained in our
collective memory about High Treif; something the Rabbis have always sought to
understand.
As a
sociologist of the Jewish community, this division begins to make sense. In
terms of kosher aquatic animals we are told, “Whatsoever has fins and scales
you may eat.” A shark, while not having scales (kaskeset), does have fins, and
so appears closer to that with which we are comfortable. Shellfish, on the
other hand, are completely foreign to our sensibility of what is allowed, and
so enter into the High Treif domain. When the discussion turns to large land
animals, there is a caveat. We are not only given a rule, but also specific
examples. The camel, the shafan (probably a hyrax, but translated in older
texts as coney) and the hare are mentioned because they appear to chew cud, but
do not have a split hoof. The pig has a split hoof, but does not chew its cud.
Interestingly the camel and rabbit do not seem to enter into this High Treif
category. Camels have purposes beyond being a food source, and so inhabit a
different place in our mindset. The rabbit or hare is so foreign to us as a
food source it is forgotten. Perhaps in a different timeline this would have
also happened with the pig, not a popular food source in ancient Israel.
However, with the invasion of the Greeks and then the Romans, pork became a
food associated with these invaders. It was easy to raise, fed on slop. Wild
boar, indigenous to the forested areas of the Middle East, such as Lebanon and
around the Mediterranean, was not a food source for mostly peaceful
herds-people who lived on the plains. Conversely, for the militaristic Greeks
and Romans, who traveled through these forests, the wild boar was not only a
food source, but hunted as a show of strength with a feast as a reward. Even in
Egypt, pork was a food for the priests.
It is likely
this affected the way we think about pork. The Rabbis explained this verse by
saying that these animals tried to appear kosher. Especially the pig, whose
outward appearance (the split hoof) teaches us to be careful of what we may see
on the surface. Perhaps this is a warning not to take things for granted. In
each case, the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Romans, it appeared as if we
could have a home within the culture. Unfortunately in the end, whether it be
Egyptian enslavement, Greek desecration of the Temple, or the Roman destruction
of Israel, we could not trust the surface. Always delve behind the facade. Look
beyond the first impression, Learn what lies beneath the surface. Knowledge,
and the pursuit of knowledge, is at the basis of our people. It provides us
with a foundation and a future, and keeps us ready for anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment