BOILING A KID IN ITS MOTHER'S MILK

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D.

The Hebrew Bible prohibits “boiling a kid in its mother’s milk.” The law primarily refers to a young goat, but, most likely , it covers  lambs and calves as well. The prohibition is repeated three times in the Pentateuch: in Ex. 23:19, 34: 26 and Deut. 14:21. However, its meaning is not clear. Ibn Ezra, a medieval commentator of the 12^th century, Spain, admitted that “the reason for this prohibition is concealed from the eyes of the wise” (See his comment on Ex.23:19). Nahum Sarna, a modern critic of the Bible, calls it “an enigma” (Exodus, p. 147). There is nothing similar in any of the ancient Near Eastern legal texts. 

The Aramaic translation of the Bible by Onkelos (3^rd cent. CE), renders it as “you shall not eat meat in/with milk.” Augustine of Hippo (5^th cent. CE), understands it as “a goat that is still suckling on its mother’s milk.” 

Yet, according to the Biblical text, the patriarch Abraham, “took curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared and set these before them (the angels) and he waited  on them under the tree as they ate” ( Gen. 18:8).

Why would anyone want to boil a kid in its mother’s milk? The Arabs considered it a delicacy. The biblical text does not provide a rationale for this prohibition. Maimonides, the Jewish Aristotelian rationalist of the 12^th cent. Spain, guessed that “idolatry had something to do with it. Perhaps such food was eaten at one of the ceremonies of their cult  or at one of their festivals” (Guide, 3: 48). The Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (1^st cent CE) argued that this law dealt with sensitivity towards animals (On the Virtues, 143). 

The ancient Rabbis , based on this law, set up an entire system of kashrut ( laws dealing with foods that are prohibited or accepted) about mixing meat and milk: “No flesh may be cooked in milk , excepting the flesh of fish and locust” (M Hullin, 8:1). Jewish law, using this text, prohibits eating or cooking meat and milk together. In a few extreme cases, some traditional Jews,  have two different plates, one for milk and another for meat. There are those  who even have two different kitchens for each one of them. Jewish law does allow eating meat after cheese: “After eating cheese, we may eat meat immediately thereafter at another meal , but we must carefully examine our hands to make sure that no particle of cheese  cling to them” (Ganzfried-Goldin, Code of Jewish Law, 1963, p. 147). 

Though Orthodox and Conservative Jews keep this law today , most Reform Jews do not abide by this prohibition. As the Pittsburgh platform of 1885 stated  ,these laws of kashrut “originated in ages past and under the influence of ideas altogether foreign to our present mental spiritual state,” and ,therefore, they are “irrelevant.” 

So, while most traditional Jews cannot have a cheeseburger, most liberal Jews can and do.

 

THE JEWISH CALENDAR

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

It is not clear which calendar the biblical Israelites followed, whether lunar or solar. Gen, 1:14 tells us:  “ God said: let there be lights in the expense of the sky to separate day from night; they shall serve as signs for the set times-the days and the years.”  The reference here is to the moon and the sun that had been created by God. The are not to be worshipped as deities. 

Yehudah ha-Parsi (“Judah, the Persian”), a 9^th century rabbinic scholar, argued that the biblical calendar was solar, whereas Ibn Ezra, a 12^th cent. rabbinic commentator, maintained that it was lunar, but even he had to acknowledge that his opinion was based on oral tradition.

On the other hand, the Book of Jubilee (2^nd cent. BCE) upheld a sectarian calendar of 364 days, one day less than the solar calendar, and 10 days longer than the lunar calendar. The Dead Sea Scrolls followed this system, which showed that during the second temple period, their calendar deviated from the biblical priestly calendar found in the Pentateuch and observed in Jerusalem. It may be one of the reasons why the Dead Sea community (the Essenes???) abandoned Jerusalem in protest and moved to their location in the desert. 

Around the year 175 BCE, for tax purposes, the Romans imposed their own lunar calendar on the Jewish community in Israel by removing the high priest Onias the 3^rd, who refused to accept the change, and appointed Jason his brother, who accepted it.

Today, the Jewish (rabbinic) calendar is based on the Babylonian practice and it is a combination of the lunar and solar systems. Even the names of the months are of Babylonian origin. Thus, for example, the first Hebrew month, Nisan is named after the Babylonian month, nisannu; the last month, Adar is named after the Babylonian month, adaru. 

The solar year is 365 days long, whereas the lunar year is 

354 days long, with a difference of about 11 days between the two. So, in order to make up this difference, a leap year is declared every few years. 

In this system, the calculation of the months begins in the springtime following the movement of the moon -thus, Passover is always in the spring, and the years are counted from the fall on- thus Rosh Hashanah, the New year, always falls in the fall. 

It is this combined system that determines all the Jewish holidays every year today. 

SONSINO'S BLOG: THE PROBLEM OF EVIL

SONSINO'S BLOG: THE PROBLEM OF EVIL: Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D. The problem of evil is a recognition that it is impossible to explain how an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-go...

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D.

The problem of evil is a recognition that it is impossible to explain how an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-good God allows suffering to exist. This is the greatest challenge to the belief in a theistically conceived God who appears, in the Bible or rabbinic literature, just as it is present in Christianity and Islam, as a caring, loving, responding God. The prophet Jeremiah gave voice to this question when he stated, “ Why does the way of the wicked prosper?” (Jer. 12:1). Similarly ,the Psalmist had to admit this unfortunate state when he stated, “I saw the wicked at ease.” (73:3).

The Greek philosopher Epicurus (3^rd cent. BCE) had already recognized this dilemma  stating that if  evil exists in the world – and it does in the form of suffering of the innocent- it must be because God is either not all-good, or not all-powerful to eliminate it.  But that goes against the view of God in many of the western  religions. In our time, after the Holocaust that killed 6 million Jews and after the attack on Israel in Oct. 2023 when more than a thousand Israelis were butchered by Hamas criminals out of Gaza it is difficult to talk about a God who is viewed as caring and loving. A modern writer puts the problem thusly: “If God is God, He is not good. If God is good, He is not God” (MacLeish, J.B. p.11)

What do the defenders of theism say about this dilemma? Some argue that free will makes it necessary for  evil to exist. Others take refuge in a definition that evil is simply the negation of good. Some even  claim that in the world to come there will be no evil, much to the despair of the sufferers in this world for actions they did not commit. And there are others who give up and say that God is suffering along his creatures. But this is hardly a consolation to the people who are in pain for nothing. One ancient Rabbi (Yannai, 3^rd cent. CE) gave up and stated, “It is not in our power to explain the wellbeing of the wicked or the suffering of the righteous” (PA: 4: 1).

I prefer to deal with this problem by asserting, like the 17^th century Jewish philosopher Spinoza who taught  that evil cannot be ascribed to God.  God stands for the only substance that exists, and that is nature which is neutral.  If something goes wrong with us ,it is because we are in the wrong place and in the wrong time, and also because we don’t always know how nature really operates. We are still discovering its foibles. There must be a physical reason for evil . It is not caused by God who acts not with free will but with necessity.  God does not cause you to be sick. It is simply because we are  imperfect human beings who are limited by the conditions of our being.

I can live with that. Can you?

TEXTUAL PROBLEMS OF LEVITICUS 1:1

The Book of Leviticus, the third book of the Pentateuch, deals primarily with priests and animal sacrifices. The book contains some of the most obscure and irrelevant (for our times) texts in the Hebrew Bible, while featuring many of the loftiest ethical teachings like Lev.19. 

The first chapter begins with a verb, Vayikra “He called.” The verse literally reads, “He called Moses, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting …when any of you present  an offering (of cattle ” (Lev.1:1). The syntax is unusual. From the rest of the verse we learn that the one who called was God. Furthermore, the letter ALEF at the end of the first word, vayikra , is often written in a smaller size than the other letters. The reason is not known. According to Samuel D  Luzzatto (19^th cent.) , when the last letter  of a word (for ex. Alef in vayikra ) is the same letter found at the beginning of the next word (el , Alef and Lamed “to”), one character often serves for both. This interpretation ,however, does not solve the problem, because the letter Alef still appears in both words, even though the first is smaller. On the other hand, Rabbenu Asher ben Yehiel (14^th cent. Toledo), in his commentary, offers a midrashic solution saying that the small size of the letter reflects the humility of Moses. If he was one, so should we be. ( On the other hand, the large ALEF at the beginning of the word ADAM in I Chr.1:1, is seen as Adam’s arrogance). 

During the medieval times, commentators were puzzled by the unusual form of this opening. In fact, Rashbam (Rabbi Samuel ben Meir, 12th cent. CE, France) suggested that this verse really follows Ex.40:35, found in the last chapter of the Book of Exodus, where Moses, we are told, could not enter the Tent of Meeting because of the divine cloud that had settled upon it. 

Furthermore, we do not know the original purpose of animal sacrifices in the ancient Near East. Often, the animal was slaughtered and burned on an altar,  and the meat was given to the priests to eat it. Some say, this was a means of feeding the gods who smelled the vapors emanating from the burned animal ; others stress the value of propitiation or reverence. The consumption of the flesh of the animal somehow created a communion between the divinity and human beings. When the Second Temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE, a rabbinic Mitzvah (“commandment”) system, along with prayers, replaced the old sacrificial cult. 

We also do not know exactly what this “Tent of Meeting” (ohel moed) looked like. There are various biblical traditions about it. In the book of Exodus, chapter 33, it is described as a tent placed outside of the Israelite encampment. In other priestly texts it receives a much wider description as an enclosed courtyard that contained an altar of burn offering. 

“The Lord called to Moses” (Lev. 1:1): Using this text as a prompter, Rabbi Akiba (2^nd cent. CE) taught a lesson of morality. He said: Better that they should tell you to go up, than they should tell you to go down (Lev. Rabba 1:5-6).  That is wisdom applicable to all. 

HUMOR IN THE BIBLE

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

The Bible is a revered book, and many think that it is strictly serious. Yet, a critical analysis of the text shows that some “biblical writing may have been intended primarily to entertain the reader” (The Anchor Bible Dict.3/325). It is not easy to translate humor from one culture to another, and old texts like the Bible emerged in a social environment that is very different from ours. Still, we find many biblical passages that are humorous and off handed. Here below are some examples:

The patriarch Abraham is a trickster when in Egypt he passes his wife  as his sister (Gen. 12:13).

IN Gen. 18, the matriarch Sarah overhears  an angel (or God)  telling Abraham , 100 years old, that his elderly wife of 90 will bear a child, and Sarah “laughs” (v. 12) at this absurdity. 

We find sarcasm in Gen. 37 when it states that the brothers of Joseph pointed at him saying, “here comes the dreamer” (v. 19).

In Ex. 32, when Moses returns from the mountain and catches the Israelites worshiping  an idol, he demands an explanation from Aaron, his brother ,who said that people gave him gold, and he threw it into the fire, and “ out of it came this calf!” (v.24). 

In Numbers 22, Balaam, a gentile prophet and diviner,  has a donkey that speaks, saying to his master , “Look, I am the ass that you have been riding all along until this day!(v. 30).

In Judg. 3, Ehud, an assassin, visits the obese king Eglon of Moab. Ehud stabs the king’s enormous belly with his sword that disappears  inside him. Ehud escapes and  the servants saw that the doors of the upper chamber were locked and assumed that he is “relieving himself in the cool chamber.” (v.24).

There is ridicule in  I K 18, when it states that in facing the prophets of Baal, the Israelite prophet Elijah  openly mocked them  saying, “shout louder! After all, he is a god. He may be in conversation, he may be detained, or he may be on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and will wake up” (JPS, v. 27). 

WE find humor even in wisdom literature, such as, “ Like a gold ring in a snout of a pig is a beautiful woman bereft of sense” (JPS, v. 11:22).

The book of Esther is a funny political satire, a farce:  Ahasuerus is a clueless king; Haman , the villain, is a buffoon; Esther is a manipulative queen; Mordecai is a courageous fool.  

Biblical writers did have a sense of humor , and they entertained their readers just as they instructed them about God and religion. 

What is your favorite humorous episode in the Bible? 

 

 

CHANGES IN JEWISH IDENTITY IN AMERICA; A PERSONAL OBSERVATION

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

As I survey the changes that have taken place in Jewish identity  today, I note the following:

1.        80 % of world Jewry lives either in the USA (about 7.3 million, out of 349 +million in 2026) or in Israel (about 7.5 million, out of the total population of about 10 million).  NY State has the largest Jewish community in the USA (c.1.7 million).

2.        A recent poll taken about American Jews showed that only 40 % are affiliated with a synagogue. The rest identify themselves simply as “ethnic” Jews. The rate of affiliation is higher among Orthodox Jews. The Jewish Conservative movement in America is on the decline. On the other hand, some Reform congregations are thriving because of good programing for the young and old. There is a lack of rabbinic candidates in all the Jewish seminaries. 

3.        In many Reform congregations in the USA, there is now a tendency to observe more traditional rituals, and to revive long discarded beliefs, such as resurrection (see the popular use of “who revives the dead” in the liturgy ) or the ready acceptance of  miracles, even though both are often interpreted allegorically. 

4.        With regard to the belief in God, many Reform Jews continue to uphold the traditional theistic view of God ( as , father,  redeemer etc.) , whereas a strong but vocal minority (me included) strongly defends a non-theistic and naturalistic  theology where God is viewed as the energy of the universe that does not answer prayers and does not intervene in human affairs. See, our book, A God we Can Believe In (2022). 

5.        The recent rise of antisemitism around the world has shocked Jews who have witnessed attacks on synagogues and other Jewish institutions ,and now many shun the display of Jewish symbols on themselves fearing assault by crazy people. Many blame local Jews for Israel’ s role in Gaza, West bank , and Iran.

6.        Though most Jews enthusiastically support Israel as a legitimate homeland for Jews, other  Jews are uncomfortable with its right-wing government that appeases the “haredim” (the extreme Orthodox Jews in Israel) and keeps legalizing new settlements in the West Bank. 

7.        There is a strong commitment to social action and a greater acceptance of diversity among Reform Jews who welcome gays, lesbians and trans, more than any other ethnic group in America.

As times go by, I trust new identities will emerge and new alliances will appear within the Jewish community.  For, I maintain, “Am Yisrael Hay, “the people of Israel is alive and well, and will find its own way in the future. 

 

Your thoughts?