web analytics
September 18, 2014 / 23 Elul, 5774
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post
Apartment 758x530 Africa-Israel at the Israel Real Estate Exhibition in New York

Africa Israel Residences, part of the Africa Israel Investments Group led by international businessman Lev Leviev, will present 7 leading projects on the The Israel Real Estate Exhibition in New York on Sep 14-15, 2014.



Home » Judaism » Parsha »

The Authority Of The Mishnah


Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In this week’s parshah, Parshas Shemini, we learn which animals may and may not be eaten. The Torah provides signs by which we are to determine whether an animal and a fish are permitted for consumption. An animal must have split hooves and the ability to chew its cud while a fish must have fins and scales. This column will discuss the signs of the fish.

The Mishnah, in Niddah 51b, says that any fish that has scales will have fins. The Gemara, in Chullin 66b, asks why it was necessary for it to be written in the Torah that a fish is required to have fins and scales when the Mishnah in Niddah says that any fish that has scales has fins. It should suffice that a fish is only required to have scales. Based on the rule set in the Mishnah in Niddah, by requiring a fish to have scales, every fish would subsequently have fins. The Gemara concludes that it was indeed unnecessary, and that the Torah wrote it l’hagdil Torah v’yadir.

The Ritvah, in Niddah (ibid.), offers this explanation of the Gemara’s answer: although it was unnecessary to require fish to have fins – since, by default, fins will always be present – the Torah wanted to cite all of the things that render a fish kosher. The Ritvah understands that the kosher signs are not just “signs” indicating that a fish is kosher; rather, they are what actually render the fish kosher. This may also be applied to the kosher signs of an animal, but the Ritvah does not indicate this.

Tosafos, in Chullin (ibid.), asks how Chazal knew the fact that any fish with scales will have fins. Tosafos suggests two answers: 1) Adam harishon, familiar with every species, passed down this information and 2) it is a halacha leMoshe miSinai (Hashem told it to Moshe Rabbeinu on Har Sinai).

Approximately 300 years ago the rule set forth in the Mishnah in Niddah came into question. A fish that had scales but no fins, known as the stincus marinus, was discovered. The Madanei Yom Tov wrote a peirush to the Rush. In the sixth perek of Chullin (daf 66 s”k 5), he writes that the chacham, HaRav Aharon the doctor, brought him a stincus marinus. The fish, however, had four legs, which the doctor said could be considered fins. But the doctor, pointing out that the fish was poisonous, said that he did not understand why Hashem would make a poisonous fish kosher. On the other hand, if its feet were not considered fins, it then contradicts the rule of the Mishnah in Niddah.

The Madanei Yom Tov says that he was unsure at first as to how to reply. After further analysis, though, he decided that the Mishnah was only referring to fish; the stincus marinus is classified as a chayas hayam (wild creatures of the sea).

It is written in the Pri Chadash (Yoreh De’ah 83:4) that because the feet of the stincus marinus serve as fins, it is therefore kosher. As to the question of the poison, he responds that there is a method of removing the poison.

The Chasam Sofer, in Chullin, writes that he conducted a thorough investigation into the stincus marinus. After speaking to several scientists, he concluded that the stincus marinus is not a fish or a chayas hayam. It is a land creature, which occasionally goes into the water like a frog. Thus there is no contradiction with the rule that the Mishnah in Niddah set forth more than 2,000 years ago.

It is indeed fascinating that the Mishanyos made such a statement about the physical world at all. What is even more fascinating is that it has not been contradicted for more than 2,000 years. Although science is constantly finding new species formerly unknown to mankind, until recent times the Mishnah’s statement has not been contradicted – specifically that any fish that has scales will have fins. The exception to this is the stincus marinus, about which many solutions were given. This is an indication that the Mishnayos were written with a chachmah not based solely on the science of its times. This understanding should humble us, as we attempt to understand the Divine wisdom contained in the Torah.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “The Authority Of The Mishnah”

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
The beheading of British aid worker David Haines, Sept. 14, 2014. The terrorist standing beside him threatened that his fellow British aid volunteer, Alan Henning, would be next if UK Prime Minister David Cameron doesn't relinquish his support for the fight against ISIS.
British Muslims Plead for ISIS to Free Captive Alan Henning
Latest Judaism Stories
nitzavim

As Moshe is about to die, why does God tell him about how the Israelites will ruin everything?

Jonah and the Whale (2012) 23 x 23, bronze relief by Lynda Caspe.

Jonah objected to God accepting repentance based on ulterior motives and likely for short duration.

15th century Book of the Torah

This week’s parsha offers a new covenant; a covenant that speaks to national life unlike any other

Leff-091214

All Jews are inherently righteous and that is why we all have a portion in the World to Come.

If mourning is incompatible with Yom Tov, why is it not incompatible with Shabbat?

Since it is a Rabbinic prohibition we may follow the more lenient opinion.

How can the Torah expect me today, thousands of years after the mitzvahs were given, to view each mitzvah as if I’m fulfilling it for the first time?

Torah isn’t a theological treatise or a metaphysical system but a series of stories linked over time

In contrast to her Eicha-like lamentations of the previous hour or more, however, my youngest was now grinning from ear-to-ear.

An Astonishing Miracle
‘Why Bring the Infants to Hakhel?’
(Chagigah 3a)

Question: I recently loaned money to a friend who has been able to repay only part of it. This was an interest-free loan. We exchanged a signed IOU, not a proper shtar with witnesses, since I have always trusted her integrity and only wanted a document that confirms what was loaned and what was repaid. Now that shemittah is approaching, what should I do? Should I forgive the loan? And if my friend is not able to repay it, may I deduct the unpaid money from my ma’aser requirement?

Name Withheld

e are in a time of serious crisis and must go beyond our present levels of chesed.

According to Ibn Ezra, the Torah was stressing through this covenant that hypocrisy was forbidden.

“Tony said that the code in most places in the U.S. is at least 36 inches for a residential guardrail,” replied Mr. Braun. “Some make it higher, 42, or even 52 inches for high porches. What is the required height according to halacha?”

Simcha is total; sahs is God’s joy in protecting us even when we are most vulnerable.

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Since it is a Rabbinic prohibition we may follow the more lenient opinion.

They ask, how can Rabbeinu Gershom forbid marrying more than one wife, when the Torah explicitly permits it in this parshah?

First, how could a beis din of 23 judges present a guilty verdict in a capital punishment case? After all, only a majority of the 23 judges ruled in favor of his verdict.

According to Rabbi Yishmael one was not permitted to eat such an animal prior to entering Eretz Yisrael, while according to Rabbi Akiva one was permitted to eat animals if he would perform nechirah.

Tosafos there takes issue with Rashi’s view that the letters that are formed in the knots of the tefillin are considered part of the name of Hashem.

The Rambam says that in order to honor Shabbos, one must wash his hands, face, and feet with warm water on Friday.

The talmid is not allowed to speak up due to any fear. If he remains silent, he is in violation of this prohibition.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/the-authority-of-the-mishnah/2014/03/20/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: