Year: 1876

| which were made with respect to diet,
especially the division of animals into
clean and unclean, were eminently cal


culared to prevent close connections


with Egyptians and other idolatrous


nations"


To promote health and comfort in the


distinction of animals into clean and


unclean, particular reference seems to


have been made to their suitableness for


food, those being accounted clean which


afforded a considerable proportion of
wholesome nutriment, and those being
considered as unclean which were of a
gross and unwholesome nature. Solid
footed animals, such as the hare and


many-tOed animals, such as the cat, etc.,


are prohibited. Beasts which have


cloven feet, such as the OK, are con-
sidered as proper for food, and there


fore permitted. The former are unclean.


which is explained as unwholesOme,


affording gross nutriment and often


the parent of scrOfulous disorders; the


latter clean, affording wholesome nutri-


ment, and not laying the foundation of
any disease. Illuminating animals digest
their food better than those who swal


low it with little masticatiOn, and there
fore the flesh contains more of the sub
stantial juices and is more easy of diges-
ton and consequently of assimilation to
the solids and fluids of the human body.
On this account they are termed clean,
which is explained As peculiarly whole
some and fit for use- The animals
which do not ruminate do not digest
their food so well and hence they
abound with gross and animal juices,
which yield a comparatively unwhole-
some nutriment to the human system.
Even the animals which have bifid hOofs,
but do not chew their cud, such as the
swine, and those who chew their eud,
but are not bifid, such As the hare and
rabbit, are forbidden, because cOmpara-
lively innutritive. 1t is well known
the meat Of the swine has been con-
sidered by many for many centuries as
been discovered 4 hidden disease in its
flesh, which demonstrates beyond dis
pIte that the old Jewish law, not to eat
the meat of the swine, is not out Of date
and still useful. On the same ground
the wise law giver has forbidden all fish
that have not both fins and scales,
because they as a rule abound in gross
juices and fat which but few are able
TO digest.


Moses forbade the use of pork, of the
hare, etc, of fish without scales and
fins, and all kinds of heavy meats, rs
the fat of the bullock, etc., an inhibition
supremely wise in a country where the
excessive heat, relaxing the fibcrs of
the stomach, rendered digestion pecu-
liarly slow and difficult. The flesh of
the eel and some other fish, says Larcher,
thickened the blood, and by checking
the perspiration excited all those mala-
dies connected with leprosy. From
these and similar views of the dietetic
character Of the Mosaic distinction of
animals into clean and unclean,, ii is
evident that the food allowed to the
Hebrew people as nation were the
gentlsr sort of creatures and of most
common use, such as were bred about
their houses and I'm their fields and
were, in a sort, domestic. They were
creatures of the cleanest feeding, and
which gave the most wholesome nourish-
ment, and were of q better. taste, and
might be had in greater plenty and per-
fectiOn by a proper care of their breed
ing and feeding. They seemed there
fore to be naturally fit to be chosen as
a better kind Of food. 1t surely cannot
ne matter of Indifference what per-
son eats and drinks, to develops a true
religious character. By prohibiting the
eating of those animals which by their
gross and unwholesome nature as food
would induce or increase any vicious
propensities, by symbOlizing the DISPOSE
tions and conduct to be encouraged and
cultivated, or to be abhorred and avoided,
was Israel to become a holy nation.