More Discussions for this daf
1. Chulin 126b The Earth Mouse 2. A Mouse That Is Half Flesh And Half Earth
DAF DISCUSSIONS - CHULIN 126

moshe asked:

The Mishnah says if one touches the flesh of a mouse that is half flesh and half earth kehati says it is a kind of rodent which, rather than procreating, arises from the earth. 1. Is this still around today? Where might i see one ? What is it called? My chvers and me belive it to mean that it was have a fetes that was not full formed dose this sound right? where might i find more information about this rodent? my rebbe my chavers and me are very intersed thank you for any help

moshe schaeffer

The Kollel replies:

You will find a comprehensive, detailed, and fascinating discussion of this topic in my friend Rabbi Nosson Slifkin's book, "Mysterious Creatures -- Intriguing Torah Enigmas of Natural and Unnatural History," published by Targum Press and unavailable in English Judaica bookstores (or at www.targum.com). We wrote a little on this topic in our Insights to Sanhedrin, which I am including below, based on Rabbi Slifkin's research. We do highly recommend that you buy his book, as it addresses almost every "mysterious" creature that is mentioned in Torah.

Y. Shaw

D.A.F.

Jerusalem, Israel

From Insights to the Daf:

Sanhedrin 91

1) THE HALF-MOUSE

OPINIONS: The Gemara relates that a certain heretic challenged Rebbi Ami regarding Techiyas ha'Mesim, saying that it is not possible for a decomposed body, which turns into earth, to rise again as a living body. One of Rebbi Ami's proofs for Techiyas ha'Mesim was the fact that there is a rodent that lives in the valley "that today is half-flesh and half-earth, and tomorrow it becomes completely flesh."

We find this creature mentioned elsewhere in the Gemara in a different context. The Mishnah in Chulin (126b) mentions a mouse "which is half-flesh and half-earth; one who touches the flesh part is Tamei, and one who touches the earth part is Tahor."

According to modern scientific knowledge of the biological world, all living things come about through propagation and regeneration. However, in the times of the Chachamim, it was accepted by all that many creatures are formed from inanimate objects. The Gemara in Shabbos (107b) permits killing, on Shabbos, a louse that is produced from sweat spontaneously (see TOSFOS, Shabbos 12a). The SHULCHAN ARUCH (YD 84:15) prohibits eating birds that grow on trees because of the Isur of Sheretz. It was also commonly believed that flies are produced from rotting meat. (It was only towards the end of the seventeenth century (C.E.) that experiments by Francesco Redi and Louis Pasteur surprised the world by proving that substances that were protected from the air did not produce insects.) The reason Rebbi Ami proves his point from the rodent is because the rodent arises not from a living organism, but from dirt, like the dead who will come to life.

Is there any evidence today to support the existence of rodents that are formed from the earth? (The following discussion is culled primarily from the research of Rabbi Nosson Slifkin (www.zootorah.com), which will be published in his forthcoming book, "Mysterious Creatures," Targum Press, summer 2003.)

(a) The RAMBAM seems to confirm the existence of such a creature. In Perush ha'Mishnayos (Chulin, ibid.) he writes, "This is a well-known matter; there is no end to the number of people who have told me that they have seen it. Such a thing is indeed astonishing, and I have no explanation for it."

The TIFERES YISRAEL (Bo'az, Chulin 9:6) also defends the existence of such a creature. He writes, "I have heard heretics mocking with regard to the creature that is discussed here and in Sanhedrin 91a, and denying it, saying that there is no such thing at all. Therefore, I have seen fit to mention here that which I found written in a Western European work compiled by a scholar renowned among the scholars of the world. His name is Link, and the book is titled 'Auervelt.' In volume I, page 327, he writes that such a creature was found in Egypt in the district of Thebes, and in the Egyptian language that rodent is called 'dipus jaculus;' and in German it is called 'springmaus.' Its forequarters -- head, chest, and hands -- are perfectly formed, but its hindquarters are still embedded in the earth, until after several days when it fully changes to flesh. And I say, 'How great are Your works, Hash-m!'"

(b) However, Professor S. Z. Leiman has raised doubts about the accuracy of the Tiferes Yisrael's understanding of Link's words (in his article entitled, "Rav Yisrael Lipshutz and the Mouse that is Half Flesh and Half Earth," printed in Chazon Nachum, New York, Yeshiva University 1998). Link cites Diodorus Siculus, a Greek historian, who reports that the Egyptians maintain that life first began in Egypt, and as proof of this they note that mice are generated in vast numbers from the soil of their land. Diodorus himself testifies, "Indeed, even in our day during the inundations of Egypt, the generation of forms of animal life can clearly be seen taking place in the pools which remain the longest, for, whenever the river begun to recede and the sun has thoroughly dried the surface of the slime, living animals, they say, take shape, some of them fully formed, but some only half so and still actually united with the very earth."

Link then adds a footnote to Diodorus' account. He writes, "The springmaus (dipus jaculus), which dwells in Upper Egypt and is characterized by very short forelegs, looks as though it is a creature that is not yet fully developed."

This "springmaus" is the jerboa. The jerboa belongs to a family of tiny to large rodents that have very small forelegs (which they hold against their bodies) and long back legs for jumping and dig burrows in which they sleep. One of the three small subfamilies is known as Dipodinae and it includes the genus Jaculus. This is the dipus jaculus mentioned by Link.

It is clear that Link himself, who lived in the nineteenth century and was very familiar with the jerboa, did not believe that it or any other animal grows from the ground. Rather, he is saying that this creature may be the source of the Egyptian myth. Because the jerboa's forelegs are not visible while it is jumping, it appears to be a two-legged mouse (which is why it is called "dipus," or "two legs"). One who observes it sitting on the ground or jumping in the air, it appears that the two hind-legs are actually the forelegs, and the rear part of the mouse has not yet been formed.

Rav Aryeh Carmell suggests that the creature referred to is simply a mole. A dead mole, with clods of earth attached to its body, would appear to have grown from the ground. Alternatively, as it emerges from the earth, people could mistakenly believe that it is growing from the earth. (However, the people in the time of the Gemara seem to have been familiar with moles and burrowing creatures, and thus people would not have been mistaken about the nature of such a creature; see Moed Katan 6b.)

Perhaps we may suggest that the myth developed from the existence of certain species of small amphibians and rodents that burrow in the mud and entomb themselves in a cocoon of solidified mud during the dry season. Entombed, the creatures' bodily functions nearly cease and they remain entirely motionless until the first rain, at which point they shed their cocoon. A creature photographed in such a state unquestionably appears as a clod of earth, and while leaving its cocoon it certainly looks as though it is half-earth and half-creature. One such animal is the burrowing frog, which lives in arid regions and deserts. At the start of a long dry spell, when the pools from the last rainstorms are in the last stages of evaporation, the frog buries itself up to twelve inches deep in the mud. There it settles into a state of suspended animation, with its breathing and heartbeat slowing to a rate just sufficient to keep it alive. After about two weeks, the outer layers of the frog's skin detach and meld together into a membrane that is fully waterproof apart from two tiny tubes to the frog's nostrils. The frog can survive in this state amidst desert drought for many years. Then, when the rainfall finally comes and turns the sand into mud, the frog breaks out if its bag and emerges upon the surface, appearing to have grown from the mud.

If this is indeed the case, such a creature is the prime proof for Techiyas ha'Meisim. It first entered a state of suspended animation that can be likened to death -- in fact, it might even be considered inanimate, Halachically, while in that state -- and then it was "revived" and "returned to life." Even if Chazal were aware of the true circumstances surrounding this creature, they would have cited it as a proof for Techiyas ha'Meisim, and discussed its status regarding Tum'ah and Taharah. (M. Kornfeld)

(c) RAV SAMSON RAPHAEL HIRSCH has an enlightening approach to the subject of how to understand statements like these in the Gemara in light of modern science. In his essay entitled, "Trusting the Torah's Sages" (a letter written in 1876 to Rav Pinchas M. E. Wechsler, published in 1976 in the Jerusalem journal Hama'ayan, Chapter 4), he writes the following:

"Imagine if a scholar such as Humboldt had lived in their times and had traveled to the ends of the world for his biological investigations. If upon his return he would report that in some distant land there is a humanoid creature growing from the ground or that he had found mice that had been generated from the soil and had in fact seen a mouse that was half-earth and half-flesh and his report was accepted by the world as true, would we not expect Chazal to discuss the Torah aspects that apply to these instances? What laws of Tum'ah and Taharah apply to these creatures? Or would we expect them to go on long journeys to find out whether what the world has accepted is really true?

"And if, as we see things today, these instances are considered fiction, can Chazal be blamed for ideas that were accepted by the naturalists of their times? And this is what really happened. These statements are to be found in the works of Pliny, who lived in Rome at the time the second Beis ha'Mikdash was destroyed, and who collected in his books on nature all that was well-known and accepted in his day."

Rav Hirsch explains that the Chachamim were simply giving a ruling for a case that was presented to them. They did not take it upon themselves to verify whether or not such creatures existed, just as the Torah scholars of Rav Hirsch's day would readily accept the testimony of Alexander von Humboldt, a famous German naturalist. The same is certainly true with regard to the proof to Techiyas ha'Mesim that our Gemara brings. The fact that the people who lived at the times of the Amora'im had no trouble accepting the fact that an animal can form from a clod of earth, served as a perfect way for the Amora'im to prove to their contemporaries that Techiyas ha'Mesim is not too great a stretch of the imagination.