The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 21 (2018) 202–224 brill.com/rrj “Some Animals Die from Eating this Herb:” The Controversy between R. Yosef Caro and R. Moses di Trani Concerning the Common Giant Fennel Abraham Ofir Shemesh Ariel University, P.O.B. 3, Ariel 40700, Israel [email protected] Abstract In 1552, a virulent halakhic polemic opposed R. Joseph Caro and R. Moses Terani. The case happened in a slaughterhouse in Safed where shehita of cattle had taken place. It was found that the animals’ stomachs were in a bad condition. It was argued that the cause was a plant the animals had ingested—Kelekh. The two rabbis published differ- ent halakhic decisions concerning the kashrut of these animals. Caro declared that the meat was not permitted, while Terani allowed consumption of the meat. Kelekh is common giant fennel. The two rabbis addressed three questions: Does the plant ren- der animals ritually unfit for eating? What is the meaning of the pathological symp- toms found in the stomach of the livestock? Which parts of the plant are the source of the problem? The dispute between the rabbis had various consequences for the Jewish community: economic, health-related, and social. Keywords Joseph Caro – Moses Terani – kelech – shehita – common giant fennel – Safed – hiltit – assafoetida 1 Introduction R. Moses ben Yosef di Trani (known by his acronym Mabit) and R. Yosef Caro (Maran) had several disagreements and arguments on halakhic matters during © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/15700704-12341343Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 02:49:59PM via free access “Some Animals Die from Eating this Herb” 203 the time they both served on the local court in Safed.1 One acute controversy emerged in 1552, following a halakhic problem that had arisen in the local slaughterhouse.2 The stomachs of slaughtered sheep and goats were found to be infected, and the pathological findings were ascribed to eating a local plant called kelech.3 The two rabbis issued conflicting halakhic rulings concerning the ritual dietary fitness of the animals: Maran decreed that they were ritually unfit, while the Mabit decided that they could be eaten. The controversy concerning common giant fennel occasioned three rulings published by the two. Meir Benayahu, who briefly recounted the altercation in his book “Yosef Behiri” [Joseph, My Chosen],4 described the course of events as follows:5 Maran issued a prohibition against animals affected by eating kelech, and eight days later the Mabit announced his objection to this prohibition. Neither opinion was published. Maran’s subsequent ruling, published in his responsa, was given in response to the Mabit’s objection.6 The Mabit responded to this ruling by Maran and explained his reasons for allow- ing the animals, and this responsum was the first of his to be published on this issue.7 Several years later, the Mabit published another ruling, in 1 The disagreements between Maran and the Mabit concerned various halakhic issues, as has already been discussed at length by Meir Benayahu, Yosef, My Chosen (Jerusalem: Yad Harav Nissim, 1991), pp. 9–98 [Hebrew], and Chaim Zalman Dimitrovsky, “A Dispute between our Master Rabbi Yosef Caro and Rabbi Moses ben Joseph of Trani,” in Sfunot 6 (1962), pp. 71–123 [Hebrew]. Among the conspicuous topics on which Maran and the Mabit disagreed were Maran’s students, whom the Mabit thought had not reached the level of halakhic teachers (Benayahu, p. 16); the authority of the court (Benayahu, p. 24; Dimitrovsky, p. 91); the affair of permitting Moralish’s agunah (Benayahu, p. 31; Dimitrovsky, p. 95); and disagreements con- cerning religious precepts contingent on the Land of Israel (Benayahu, p. 87). 2 The date of the dispute was noted on the margins of the Mabit’s ruling. See R. Moses ben Yosef di Trani, Mabit Responsa (Jerusalem 1973, facsimilia Lemberg 1861), vol. 1, siman 156. 3 The modern Hebrew name of the plant is Kelech. Its Arabic name is kalch (as follows). I as- sume that the pronunciation of the plant’s name in sixteenth century Safed was close to the Arabic. In spite of that, I shall use the modern pronunciation. 4 Benayahu, Yosef, My Chosen, pp. 19–20, 86. 5 Benayahu, Yosef, My Chosen, pp. 19, 86. Reference to the evolvement of this argument was also presented in the new editions of Responsa Avkat Rochel. See, for example, the intro- duction of Bezalel Landoy to Responsa Avkat Rochel (Jerusalem: Monzon Press, 1960), p. 3, and also in David Avitan edition of Responsa Avkat Rochel (Jerusalem: Siach Israel, 2002), pp. 626–629, n. 1. 6 R. Yosef Caro, Avkat Rochel Responsa (Jerusalem 1960, facsimilia Leipzig 1859), siman 213. 7 Mabit Responsa, vol. 1, siman 156. The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 21 (2018) 202–224 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 02:49:59PM via free access 204 Shemesh which he referred retroactively to the entire issue and to its evolvement, holding on to his initial opinion. This ruling includes no polemical ele- ments; rather it presents a matter-of-fact halakhic debate.8 The halakhic-botanical issue involving common giant fennel has not been submitted to a true and extensive discussion. In this study I deal with several topics that might clarify the setting of the argument and its progression: Which plant is this? Does Maran’s claim that common giant fennel is the hiltit cited in rabbinical literature have any merit? What part of the plant is responsible for the harm inflicted on animals, and to what degree does it indeed affect them? 2 Identification of Kelech in the Responsa of Maran and the Mabit The halakhic debate between the two presents us with several items of infor- mation that may help identify kelech. The relevant details for this identifica- tion are dispersed within the responsa, in specific descriptions of the plant and mainly throughout the discussion of their halakhic contentions. A more or less concentrated description of the plant appears in the Mabit’s two responsa: In Arabic it is called kalch […]. It is said that in a certain part of the winter when they eat this herb some of them die, and later they eat it and are not affected, and all this concerns animals that come from other regions; but the animals from this region are not affected at all […] [rather] most of them show something resembling red spots in their bowels.9 […] They eat an herb called ḥiltit […] when they eat this herb they consume the stem as well.10 Beyond the name kelech and the attempt to identify it as the ḥiltit mentioned in rabbinical literature, the plant is described as growing wild in the region of Safed, where both sages resided. The plant is eaten by sheep and goats in the open pasture, and being poisonous it affects the animals’ stomach and sometimes even causes their death. This information leaves no doubt that this 8 Mabit Responsa, vol. 2, siman 194. The responsum included in the edition we had before us was not dated. Benayahu, Yosef, My Chosen, pp. 20, 86, stated that the Mabit’s respon- sum was published in 1572; however I have not managed to find his source. The date of the responsum is not mentioned in the Mabit’s Responsa (Venice, 1629–1630), published by Benayahu (Jerusalem: Yad Harav Nissim, 1990) nor in the Lvov edition, 1861. 9 Mabit Responsa, vol. 1, siman 156. 10 Mabit Responsa, vol. 2, siman 194. The Review of Rabbinic JudaismDownloaded 21 from (2018) Brill.com09/29/2021 202–224 02:49:59PM via free access “Some Animals Die from Eating this Herb” 205 is the common giantَ fennel (Ferula communis), which has a similar name in �ك�ل��خ Arabic (kalch, � ). This is a perennial leafy plant that grows in leafy scrubland and sprouts flowers on a stem that can reach a height of 2 m. or more. The common giant fennel is found in Mediterranean scrublands and grows in the Land of Israel, among other places, in the Galilee, Judea, and Samaria.11 (Illustration 1) The name kelech is mentioned in various sources in rabbinic literature, but it is doubtful whether these refer to the common giant fennel.12 In M. Shab. 2:1, kelech is mentioned as a base material for preparing wicks for lighting fix- tures. According to one of the explanations in the Babylonian Talmud, it originates from the animal world.13 Some scholars think that this may al- lude to the wick produced from the stem of the common giant fennel, but this is not certain.14 The name kelech (or kalch) was first used for the various Ferula species in the middle ages, in the medical writings of Assaf Harofeh. In “Sefer Refuot” attributed to Assaf Harofeh,15 the kelech is described as 11 Other types of Ferula also grow in Israel, some of them endemic to certain regions, such as Ferula Negevensis and Ferula orientalis (synonym: Ferula samariae Zohary and P.H.Davis), but the regions they grow in do not fit the data cited in the rulings. On the types of Ferula that grow in Israel, see Naomi Feinbrun-Dothan and Avinoam Danin, Anatical Flora of Eretz-Israel (Jerusalem: Cana Publishing House, 1991), pp. 488–490 [Hebrew]. 12 Some have suggested identifying the kalach in Job 30:2 with the common giant fennel. However in my opinion this identification is unfounded. See Uriya Feldman, The Plants of the Bible (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1957), pp. 123–124 [Hebrew]; Nissim Krispil, A Bag of Plants (Jerusalem: Yara Publishing House, 1987), pp. 439–440 [Hebrew]. 13 These are fabrics of poor quality produced from various silkworms, for example Pachypasa otus.