web analytics
May 28, 2015 / 10 Sivan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


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.

Current Top Story
American dollars.
IRS $50M Cyber Security Scandal Stretches to Russia
Latest Judaism Stories
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Tosafos suggests several answers as to how a minor can own an item, m’d’Oraisa.

Naso Lecture

This week’s video discusses the important connection between the Priestly Blessing and parenting.

Mosaic of 12 Tribes

Many of us simply don’t get the need for the Torah to list the exact same gift offering, 12 times!

Leff-052215

There is a great debate as to whether this story actually took place or is simply a metaphor, a prophetic vision shown to Hoshea by Hashem.

Every person is presented with moments when he/she must make difficult decisions about how to proceed.

One does not necessarily share the opinions of one’s brother. One may disapprove of his actions, values, and/or beliefs. However, with brothers there is a bond of love and caring that transcends all differences.

This Shavuot let’s give G-d a gift too: Let’s make this year different by doing just 1 more mitzvah

Question: Should we wash our hands in the bathroom with soap and water, or by pouring water from a vessel with handles three times, alternating hands? I have heard it said that a vessel is used only in the morning upon awakening. What are the rules pertaining to young children? What is the protocol if […]

God and the divine origin of His Torah are facts even though we do not fully comprehend them.

So if we basically live the same life, why should he get eternal reward and not me?”

The question is: What about pidyon haben? Can one give the five sela’im required for pidyon haben to a kohen’s daughter?

In Parshas Pinchas the Torah introduces the Mussaf for Shavuos by describing it as Yom HaBikurim when we bring the new offering.

Rachel was thrown by the sight and began to caringly think whom this person might be.

The desert, with its unearthly silence & emptiness, is the condition in which the Word can be heard

The census focused on the individual, proving each is created as irreplaceable, unique images of God

Jewish survival in a dysfunctional world requires women assuming the role Hashem gave them at Sinai

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

Tosafos suggests several answers as to how a minor can own an item, m’d’Oraisa.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The question is: What about pidyon haben? Can one give the five sela’im required for pidyon haben to a kohen’s daughter?

The mitzvah that parents must give their son a bris milah is a mitzvah that they must perform for someone else – namely their son.

The Bach writes that he mentioned his insights to many of the leading gedolim and no one disproved him.

The Bais Halevi answers that we must properly define what is considered to be “in the middle of a mitzvah.”

In this case one could reason that by applying halach achar harov we could permit the forbidden bird as well.

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

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: