Animal classifications

Animal classifications November 22, 2005

Naphtali Meshel of the Hebrew University gave an interesting paper on the dietary laws of Lev and Deuteronomy. He noted that Deut 14 divides animals simply into two categories – pure and impure. Impure animals are both ritually defiling (their corpses are) and are prohibited for consumption; pure animals are not ritually defiling and are permitted for consumption.

Lev 11, however, presents a more complex taxonomy, Meshel argued. First, it divides its concerns between consumption and contact, rather than treating both together. The terminology is different: TAME means both ritually defiling and prohibited for consumption, while SHAQETZ means only prohibited for consumption but not ritually defiling.


Second, in each of these areas of concern the pure/impure distinction is distinguished from the permitted/prohibited distinction. Thus, he argued, it is possible for an animal to be pure in itself but prohibited for consumption, and to be impure but permitted for consumption (the carcass of a cow was his example). He interpreted the phrase “to these you may become defiled” in the light of Lev 21, which gives priests permission to have contact with the corpses of close relatives, an exception to the general rule that priests avoid contamination by corpses. Thus, with regard to rules of contact, there are impure animals that may be handled (cat, crawling things, cow carcass were among his examples). And there are pure animals that may not be touched – the crab, he argued.

Referring to Levi-Strauss’ work on the messages communicated by classification systems, Meshel concluded that the Levitical impurity system sends the message that divine law does not simply arise from nature but is imposed on nature (it is culture/nomos, rather than nature/physis). Certain animals are not unclean in themselves, but only in certain conditions or circumstances. Therefore, prohibitions on contact or consumption do not arise from natural revulsion or disgust (as another paper argued) but simply because of Yahweh’s free determination.


Browse Our Archives