Are Llamas Kosher?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Steve Hirsch

unread,
Mar 18, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/18/96
to
Hi,

A question for the chachams on the net. Are llamas kosher to eat?

I looked at one fairly closely the other day, and its hoof seemed
to be split all the way, and it looked like it chewed cud.

Therefore, if I am correct, wouldn't it be kosher?

Thanks,

Steve

AGanapol

unread,
Mar 19, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/19/96
to
Ken Miller wrote:
>
> On Mar 19, 1996 15:28:44 in article <Re: Are Llamas Kosher?>, 'AGanapol
> <agan...@computer.net>' wrote:
>
>
> >IANAR but...
> >
> >I think they are... I believe they are true ruminants and have a true
> >split hoof...
> >
> >But, they are so cute... who would want to eat something so cute...
> >note their eyelashes and neat fur.
> >
> >Be well.
> >
> >Alan Ganapol
> >
>
> Don't they have pads and not hooves? They are in the same biological family
> as camels and camels are ruminants but with padded feet and therefore are
> not kosher.
>

Hmm, now I don't know. I know they are raising Llama's in Israel...
maybe it's for the wool? Where is Encyclopedia Britanica when I need
it?

Alan Ganapol

Im ain ani li, me li?
u-khe-she-ani le-`atzmi, mah ani?
ve-im lo `akhshav, aimathai?

Ken Miller

unread,
Mar 19, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/19/96
to
On Mar 19, 1996 15:28:44 in article <Re: Are Llamas Kosher?>, 'AGanapol
<agan...@computer.net>' wrote:


>IANAR but...
>
>I think they are... I believe they are true ruminants and have a true
>split hoof...
>
>But, they are so cute... who would want to eat something so cute...
>note their eyelashes and neat fur.
>
>Be well.
>
>Alan Ganapol
>

Don't they have pads and not hooves? They are in the same biological family
as camels and camels are ruminants but with padded feet and therefore are
not kosher.

Ken Miller

AGanapol

unread,
Mar 19, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/19/96
to
IANAR but...

I think they are... I believe they are true ruminants and have a true
split hoof...

But, they are so cute... who would want to eat something so cute...
note their eyelashes and neat fur.

Be well.

Alan Ganapol

Im ain ani li, me li?

FreshAgain

unread,
Mar 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/20/96
to
Nope, being related most closely to the camel, which is expressly not
kosher, the llama would stand little chance of being kosher.

bac...@vms.huji.ac.il

unread,
Mar 21, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/21/96
to
In article <4iksgs$rp8$2...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, Steve Hirsch <71055...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> Hi,
>
> A question for the chachams on the net. Are llamas kosher to eat?


(Dumb joke coming up: "LAMA ATA SHO'EYL ?" :-)
[In Hebrew, LAMA is "why"]

Seriously, the llama is related to the camel species and is
therefor NOT kosher. A kosher animal requires 2 signs (SIMMANIM):
it must ruminate (chew its cud) and have completely cloven hooves.
There are only 10 animals that have both signs. Source: Shulchan
Aruch YOREH DEAH, Siman 79.


Josh
bac...@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL

Michael Shimshoni

unread,
Mar 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/24/96
to
In article <1996Mar21.175935.1@hujicc>

bac...@vms.huji.ac.il writes:

>
>In article <4iksgs$rp8$2...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, Steve Hirsch <71055...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>> Hi,
>>
>> A question for the chachams on the net. Are llamas kosher to eat?
>
>
>(Dumb joke coming up: "LAMA ATA SHO'EYL ?" :-)
>[In Hebrew, LAMA is "why"]
>
>Seriously, the llama is related to the camel species and is
>therefor NOT kosher. A kosher animal requires 2 signs (SIMMANIM):
>it must ruminate (chew its cud) and have completely cloven hooves.
>There are only 10 animals that have both signs. Source: Shulchan
>Aruch YOREH DEAH, Siman 79.

Ah, yes! That well known textbook on Zoology! I am sure it
lists Turkey as a Kasher bird as well!

>Josh


>> I looked at one fairly closely the other day, and its hoof seemed
>> to be split all the way, and it looked like it chewed cud.
>>
>> Therefore, if I am correct, wouldn't it be kosher?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Steve

Michael Shimshoni

Herman Rubin

unread,
Mar 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/24/96
to
In article <17754F1B...@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il>,

Michael Shimshoni <MA...@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il> wrote:
>In article <1996Mar21.175935.1@hujicc>
>bac...@vms.huji.ac.il writes:

>>In article <4iksgs$rp8$2...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, Steve Hirsch <71055...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>>> Hi,

>>> A question for the chachams on the net. Are llamas kosher to eat?


>>(Dumb joke coming up: "LAMA ATA SHO'EYL ?" :-)
>>[In Hebrew, LAMA is "why"]

>>Seriously, the llama is related to the camel species and is
>>therefor NOT kosher. A kosher animal requires 2 signs (SIMMANIM):
>>it must ruminate (chew its cud) and have completely cloven hooves.
>>There are only 10 animals that have both signs. Source: Shulchan
>>Aruch YOREH DEAH, Siman 79.

>Ah, yes! That well known textbook on Zoology! I am sure it
>lists Turkey as a Kasher bird as well!

The pad covering the hoof of the camel is the mutated adaptation to
living in sandy deserts; it is one of the many zoological misconceptions
in this section, like the hare "chewing its cud". I do not personally
know if the hoof of the llama is completely cloven. If it is, the
letter and spirit of the Torah would seem to require that it be kosher.

>>Josh

>>> I looked at one fairly closely the other day, and its hoof seemed
>>> to be split all the way, and it looked like it chewed cud.

>>> Therefore, if I am correct, wouldn't it be kosher?

>>> Thanks,

>>> Steve

> Michael Shimshoni


--
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (317)494-6054 FAX: (317)494-0558

Eli D. Clark

unread,
Mar 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/24/96
to
hru...@b.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
>The pad covering the hoof of the camel is the mutated adaptation to
>living in sandy deserts; it is one of the many zoological misconceptions
>in this section, like the hare "chewing its cud". I do not personally
>know if the hoof of the llama is completely cloven. If it is, the
>letter and spirit of the Torah would seem to require that it be kosher.
>
Dear Herman:

Thank you for your posting; I have not read one of your ruling on Jewish
law in a long time.

Here we encounter a small difference of opinion on the hooves of camels.
The Rabbis have for at least two millennia considered a camel to have a
hoof that is not completely cloven. Herman, who has read far more
twentieth century zoology than the Rabbis ever did, points out that what
the Rabbis saw was a mutated adaptation. Herman's unstated conclusion
seems to be that camels should be kosher. (Please correct me if I have
understood you incorrectly.)

In my own humble view, we must ask a different question. Given that
these rules arose so many years before modern zoology, why should we
assume that these rules must be interpreted in light of modern zoological
findings? In other words, if the requirement is for a completely cloven
hoof, does it matter -- from a halakhic point of view -- why the hoof is
not completely cloven? I would suggest that the answer to this question,
should be no. (To suggest an analogy: many halakhic issues turn on the
determination of sunset and sunrise. These terms are defined by halakhah
differently from the contemporary scientific determination. But it would
be anachronistic to import the modern definitions into rules that are two
millennia old.)

Regards,

Eli


FreshAgain

unread,
Mar 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/24/96
to
Doesn't the Torah specifically state the camel to be unclean?

Herman Rubin

unread,
Mar 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/25/96
to
In article <4j4en5$a...@ari.ari.net>, Eli D. Clark <ecl...@gkmg.com> wrote:
>hru...@b.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
>>The pad covering the hoof of the camel is the mutated adaptation to
>>living in sandy deserts; it is one of the many zoological misconceptions
>>in this section, like the hare "chewing its cud".

** I do not personally
**know if the hoof of the llama is completely cloven. If it is, the
**letter and spirit of the Torah would seem to require that it be kosher.


>Here we encounter a small difference of opinion on the hooves of camels.
> The Rabbis have for at least two millennia considered a camel to have a
>hoof that is not completely cloven. Herman, who has read far more
>twentieth century zoology than the Rabbis ever did, points out that what
>the Rabbis saw was a mutated adaptation. Herman's unstated conclusion
>seems to be that camels should be kosher. (Please correct me if I have
>understood you incorrectly.)

I made no such statement. What I was stating is that IF the hoof of
the llama is completely cloven, its kashruth should not depend on the
distant biological relation with the camel, which is at least eighteenth
or nineteenth century biology.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages