Where does the Jewish prohibition against pork come from?

There is a fascinating conversation going on around the internet ( in response to Shmarya Rosenberg's article at Tablet magazine where she speculates on the source of the prohibition of pork in Jewish food laws.

In one sense the answer is ultimately that God said so in Leviticus 11 where the Israelites are instructed not to eat certain animals:  

"The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “Say to the Israelites: ‘Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat: You may eat any animal that has a divided hoof and that chews the cud. There are some that only chew the cud or only have a divided hoof, but you must not eat them...the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you." 

Despite the simplicity of this answer to the question, there is all kinds of speculation about how these laws may have emerged in the history of the people. This is true for kosher food laws and all the other religious food laws we're learning about this year.

The common speculation I've heard regarding pork is that through experiences with trichinosis people came to see the meat as unsafe to eat so when it came time to lay down the law, those laws formalized the hard-earned folk wisdom of the people.

Rosenberg points out that the prohibition against pork is one among many prohibitions against meat but it stands alone as the definitive Jewish food law. She points out that despite the Jewish law against eating shellfish:

Archaeological digs in Israel have uncovered ancient biblical-era Israelite settlements where remains of shellfish are plentiful, but pig bones were not found. And even today there are many Jews like my friend’s family who eat shrimp and crab without a trace of guilt but would never eat pork. What could be so bad about pigs?

Rosenberg takes her cure from Christopher Hitchens to explain the exemplary power of the pork prohibition:

In God is not Great, Hitchens notes uneasy similarities between humans and pigs: Porcine DNA and human DNA are very similar, so much so that porcine heart valves can be transplanted into humans; pigs are noticeably smarter than other farm animals; and pig skin looks almost human, so much so that the smell and look of suckling pig and roasting human infants is, according to those who have had the misfortune of smelling and seeing both, disconcertingly similar. And make no mistake about it—many ancient Israelites had that misfortune. Hitchens thought this was the basis for the Jewish taboo against eating pork...

She puts it in the context of animal and child sacrifice that was common in that time and speculates that it was a way to steer people clear of the common practice of child sacrifice in the ancient world. She suspects that sacrificing and eating pigs was a slippery slope to child sacrifice.

Hitchens dismissed Judaism’s anti-pork taboo as a Bronze Age superstition. But was it? Or was the Torah—divine, divinely inspired, or simply man-made—trying to do whatever it could to wean humans away from the perceived need to murder their own children? 

Go here for a fascinating rundown of other possibilities at Andrew Sullivan's Dish. 

image from cdn.greenprophet.com

Comments

[Keith Vetter]

My neighbor has a pump in his heart (LVAD). A couple days ago he got sick. He's is in the hospital right now. The neighbor on the other side told me his uncle got a "pig valve". He said that they call him "piggie".

[Keith Vetter]

"Piggie" is doing so good that he got off the human heart transplant list. Richard has been bumped up in line for a human one.

[Keith Vetter]

Knock knock

[Glenn]

I think this over complicates the reason for pork being prohibited.
Pigs are a domestic variety of the Western European wild boar. They are mostly a temperate forest dwelling creature. In it's natural state pig meat doesn't even look or taste like pork.

The boar isn't really native to the Middle East.So when Jewish people encountered pork being eaten by Romans and then Christians, their scholars would have looked at the domesticated pig, decided that it wasn't compatible with the Torah and simply added it to the list of prohibited meat.

The notion that pork is innately unclean or tastes like human flesh makes little sense. When cooked properly it carries no more risk than chicken and sometimes even tastes a little like chicken too. Turkey rashers taste a lot like bacon. So I think it's just a case of local farming practices and religious teachings encountering a food stuff that there was no real tradition of and which fell outside the rules. It's thus hardly surprising that you do not find pig bones in a region that doesn't have a tradition hunting boar or keeping pigs. Sometime the bones are absent because the animal was not local to the area.

[Sarah]

Interesting article. By the way, Shmarya is a he and not a she. An easy mistake to make. =)

Speculating the reasoning why some meat is kosher, and others are not is… just baseless speculation. A lot of people like to point to why we don’t eat pork, but the truth is we don’t really know the reason. The Torah doesn’t say why.

The reason that the pig is so prominent in Jewish culture is probably because it’s specially listed as a food that is forbidden, and is followed by the word, “unclean”. The pig appears to be kosher because it has a cloven foot, but the Torah is warning us that looks may be deceiving and we’ve got to take the care and concern to look deeper and consider both qualifications before dining. Horses are also not kosher, and even though they do chew their cud, they are lacking cloven feet. Unlike the pig, the horse easily passes a visual inspection and is quickly determined to be non-kosher.

(This deliberation to check and recheck is a theme that I find frequently in Judaism.)

Equally traif (non-kosher), by the way, is monkey meat, dog, and snake. Like the horse, these other animals appear to be traif so they’re not named specially. We can just glance at them and see that all of them lack cloven hooves and the case is closed.

Shellfish is not kosher, and is not consumed by observant Jews. No self-respecting Jew who considers themselves to be kosher eats shellfish. There is no distinction between one being more traif than the other. They’re both forbidden equally, and this is practiced in every genuinely kosher home that I’ve been in, including my own.

As for non-kosher Jews, there are those who will eat meat that is inherently traif (pork and shellfish), and there are those who will only eat meat that is found in traditional Jewish homes such as lamb, chicken or beef. It’s been my experience that those who eat pork or shellfish will freely eat both or none, and will not hold one in some kind of higher regard than the other.

If they do believe that pork is more traif than shellfish, then it is most likely due to misinformation rather than a cultural or religious tolerance for one or the other.

If shellfish remains were legitimately found in Jewish settlements, then it could be that there were non-Jews living among the Jews, or that there were secular Jews who disregarded Torah law. We find abundant examples of both in our history. What it does not mean, however, is that shellfish was ever a Torah-permitted, or culturally acceptable food in the Jewish cuisine.

Incidentally, only dead pig is considered to be unclean. Live pig is fine. To that end, dead humans and any animal not ritually slaughtered is unclean.

We are permitted to make use of dead pig, particularly to save a life. A pig’s valve is an appropriate substitute for a human valve, because in using it, a life has been saved. If, hypothetically, a Torah observant Jew was stranded on a desert island and pork was only available food source, then it would be permissible to eat it because refusing to would likely result in death by starvation. ALL mitzvot (or Torah Laws) may be transgressed for the purpose of saving a life.