Talmud forbids one to own a dog?

[SonWorshipper]

Was looking around the web for something and found this

The Talmud condemns dog rearing
(see BK 7:7, 83a, Yoma 83b-84a; cf. Kil. 1:6, Ber. 9b, Pes. 113a).
Eastern cultures raise dogs for meat, perhaps the original purpose of
their domestication-- Simoons, Eat Not This Flesh. The biblical name
for dog, ca-lev (like one's heart), however, reflects his role today--
man's best friend.


Anyone have access to the Talmud could you post these passages?

toda Rabah!

 

[SonWorshipper]

Why sigh? Do you follow Talmud?

 

[iitb]

Looking around at torah.org, I found this:

Are Jews allowed to have dogs?

[font=arial, helvetica]The Talmud (Bava Kama 83a) says that keeping dogs is permissible for Jews who live close to non-Jews.[/font]

 

[simchat_torah]

ok, I'm putting together the references now...
I also have Rashi's commentary on all of this (thus you see the little numbers sometimes in the text) if you want, I can post it.

BK 7:7.... I'm not sure what that was in rerference to, but I believe it meant Baba Kama found in Seder Nezkin. I'm assuming all of your references are from the Talmud.

Now, it wasn't specified 7:7a or 7:7b... so:
7:7a

"Again, would not then even the last clause ‘And this even more so applies to sacred property’ be rather illogically phrased?"

7:7b

"R — Aha b. Jacob therefore said: If any analogy could he drawn"[/qoute]

Both of those seem irrelevant... hmmm.

next up is Yoma 83b-84a. Yoma can be found in Seder Mo'ed.
I'll post all of 83b and 84a. First 83b:

Talmud - Mas. Yoma 83a

The wicked are estranged from the womb.1 From her came forth Shabbatai, the hoarder of provisions2 [for speculation].
A SICK PERSON IS FED AT THE WORD OF EXPERTS. R. Jannai said: If the patient says, I need [food], whilst the physician says: He does not need it, we hearken to the patient. What is the reason? The heart knoweth its own bitterness.3 But that is self-evident? You might have said: The physician's knowledge is more established; therefore the information [that we prefer the patient's opinion]. If the physician says: He needs it, whilst the patient says that he does not need it, we listen to the physician. Why? Stupor seized him.4
We learned: A SICK PERSON IS FED AT THE WORD OF EXPERTS. [That implies]: Only upon the order of experts, but not upon his own order? [Further it implies]: Only upon the order of ‘experts,’ but not upon the order of a single expert?5 — This refers to the case that he says: I do not need it. But one should feed him upon the order of one expert? — This refers to the case when someone else is present who agrees that he does not need it. [If so, wherefore state that he] is FED AT THE WORD OF EXPERTS. Surely that is self-evident, for it is a possibility of danger to human life and ‘in the case of the possibility of danger to human life we take a more lenient view’!6 — It refers to a case in which two more people are present who say that he does not need it.7 And although R. Safra said that ‘Two are as a hundred and a hundred are as two’8 applies only to witnesses, but with regard to opinion we go according to the number of opinions, all that applies only to opinions concerning money matters, but here it is a case where there is a possibility of danger to human life. But since in the second part [of the Mishnah] it states: AND IF NO EXPERTS ARE THERE, ONE FEEDS HIM AT HIS OWN WISH, it is to be inferred that in the first part we deal with the case that he said he needed it? There is something missing [in the Mishnah] and this is how it reads: These things are said only for the case that he says: I do not need it; but if he says: I need it, then if two experts are not there, but one who says: He does not need it, then ONE FEEDS HIM AT HIS OWN WISH.
Mar son of R. Ashi said: Whenever he says. ‘I need [food]’, even if there be a hundred who say, ‘He does not need it’, we accept his statement, as it is said: ‘The heart knoweth its own bitterness’. We learned in the Mishnah: If no experts are there one feeds him at his own wish. That means only if no experts are there, but not if such experts were there? — This is what is meant: These things are said only for the case that he says, ‘I do not need it’, but if he says, ‘I need it’, then there are no experts9 there at all, [and] one feeds him at his own wish, as it is said: ‘The heart knoweth its own bitterness’.
MISHNAH. IF ONE IS SEIZED BY A RAVENOUS HUNGER,10 HE MAY BE GIVEN TO EAT EVEN UNCLEAN THINGS UNTIL HIS EYES ARE ENLIGHTENED.11 IF ONE WAS BIT BY A MAD DOG, HE MAY NOT GIVE HIM TO EAT THE LOBE OF ITS LIVER, BUT R. MATTHIA B. HERESH PERMITS IT.12 FURTHERMORE DID R. MATTHIA B. HERESH SAY: IF ONE HAS PAIN IN HIS THROAT, HE MAY POUR MEDICINE INTO HIS MOUTH ON THE SABBATH,13 BECAUSE IT IS A POSSIBILITY OF DANGER TO HUMAN LIFE AND EVERY DANGER TO HUMAN LIFE SUSPENDS THE [LAWS OF THE] SABBATH. IF DEBRIS FALL ON SOMEONE, AND IT IS DOUBTFUL WHETHER OR NOT HE IS THERE, OR WHETHER HE IS ALIVE OR DEAD, OR WHETHER HE BE AN ISRAELITE OR A HEATHEN, ONE SHOULD OPEN [EVEN ON SABBATH] THE HEAP OF DEBRIS FOR HIS SAKE. IF ONE FINDS HIM ALIVE ONE SHOULD REMOVE THE DEBRIS, AND IF HE BE DEAD ONE SHOULD LEAVE HIM THERE [UNTIL THE SABBATH DAY IS OVER].
GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: How did they know that his eyes are enlightened again? When he distinguishes between good and bad [food]. — Abaye said: In the taste thereof. Our Rabbis taught: If one was seized by a ravenous hunger, one feeds him with the less forbidden things first; as between tebel [untithed food] and carrion,14 one should feed him carrion first; between tebel and fruit of the seventh year, one should give him the fruit of the seventh year first.15 As between terumah16 and tebel, Tannaim are of divided opinion. For it was taught: One should feed him tebel, but not terumah. Ben Tema holds: Terumah, but not tebel. Rabbah said: If it is possible [to feed him] with common food,17 there is general agreement that one should prepare it18 for him and feed him with it; the dispute concerns the case when it is not possible [to feed him] with common food; one holds that [the prohibition of] tebel is more severe, the other assuming that the prohibition19 of terumah is the more severe. The one holds that [the prohibition of] eating tebel is more severe because terumah is permissible to priests. the other holding [the prohibition of] terumah more severe, whereas tebel may be rendered right [by tithing].

and now 84a:

Talmud - Mas. Yoma 84a

as to killing it by throwing1 something at it. It was taught in accordance with Samuel: When one kills it, one does so only with something thrown against it. One against whom it rubs itself is endangered; one whom it bites, dies. ‘One against whom it rubs itself is endangered’. What is the remedy?-Let him cast off his clothing, and run . As happened with R. Huna, the son of R. Joshua, against whom one mad dog rubbed itself in the market-place: he stripped off his garments and ran, saying: I fulfilled in myself. ‘Wisdom preserveth the life of him who hath it’.2
‘One whom it bites, dies’. What is the remedy? — Abaye said: Let him take the skin of a male hyena.3 and write upon it: I, So-and-so, the son of that-and-that woman, write upon the skin of a male Hyena: Hami, kanti, kloros. God, God, Lord of Hosts, Amen, Amen, Selah,.4 Then let him strip off his clothes, and bury then, in a grave [at cross-roads],5 for twelve months of a year. Then he should take them out and burn them in an oven, and scatter the ashes. During these twelve months, if he drinks water, he shall not drink it but out of a copper tube, lest he see the shadow6 of the demon and be endangered. Thus the mother of Abba b. Martha, who is Abba b. Minyumi, made for him a tube of gold [for drinking purposes].
FURTHERMORE DID R. MATTHIA SAY. R. Johanan suffered from scurvy. He went to a matron, who prepared something for him on Thursday and Friday. He said to her: How shall I do it on the Sabbath? She answered him,: Then you will not need it [any more]. He said: But if I should need it, what then,? She replied: ‘Swear unto me by the God of Israel7 that you will not reveal it’ [to others]; whereupon he swore: ‘To the God of Israel I shall not reveal it’. She revealed it to him, and he went forth and expounded it in his lecture. But he had sworn to her? — [He swore]: ‘To the God of Israel I shall not reveal it’ [which implies] but to His people I shall reveal it! But this is a profanation of the Name?8 — It was so that he had explained it [the meaning of his oath] to her from the very beginning. What did she give to him? R. Aha, the son of R. Ammi said: The water of leaven, olive oil and salt. R. Yemar said: Leaven itself, olive oil and salt. R. Ashi said: The fat of a goose-wing. Abaye said: l tried everything without achieving a cure for myself, until an Arab recommended: ‘Take the stones of olives which have not become ripe one third, burn them in fire upon a new rake, and stick them into the inside of the gums’.9 I did so and was cured. Whence does [scurvy] come? — From [eating] very hot wheat [-en bread], and from the [overnight] remnants of a pie of fish-hash and flour. What is its symptom? — If he puts anything between his teeth, his gums will bleed.
When R. Johanan suffered from scurvy, he applied this [remedy] on the Sabbath and was healed. How could R. Johanan do that?10 — R. Nahman b. Isaac said: It is different with scurvy, because whereas it starts in the mouth, it ends in the intestines. R. Hiyya b. Abba said to R. Johanan: According to whom is it? According to R. Matthia b. Heresh who said that if one has pains in his throat one may pour medicine into his mouth on the Sabbath?11 — I say: In this case, but in no other.12 Shall we say that the following [teaching] supports his view? If one is attacked by jaundice one may give him to eat the flesh of a donkey; if one was bitten by a mad dog, one may give him to eat the lobe of its liver; and to one who has pains in his mouth may be given medicine on the Sabbath — this is the view of R. Matthia b. Heresh; but the Sages say: These are not considered cures — Now what does ‘these’ mean to exclude? Won't you say it is meant to exclude medicine?13 No, it is meant to exclude blood-letting in case of asphyxia.14 Thus also does it seem logical. For it was taught: R. Ishmael son of R. Jose reported three things in the name of R. Matthia b. Heresh: One may let blood in the case of asphyxia on the Sabbath, and one whom a mad dog has bitten may be given to eat the lobe of its liver, and one who has pains in his mouth may be given medicine on the Sabbath, whereas the Sages hold: These are not considered cures. Now what does ‘these’ exclude? Would you not say ‘these’ excludes the two latter one, and not the first one?15 — No, it means to exclude the first two ones, and not the last one.

ok, this post is getting long so I'll make another for the rest...

 

[SonWorshipper]

OK, P4I, just wondering.

Talmud - Mas. Yoma 84a
as to killing it by throwing1 something at it. It was taught in accordance with Samuel: When one kills it, one does so only with something thrown against it. One against whom it rubs itself is endangered; one whom it bites, dies. ‘One against whom it rubs itself is endangered’. What is the remedy?-Let him cast off his clothing, and run . As happened with R. Huna, the son of R. Joshua, against whom one mad dog rubbed itself in the market-place: he stripped off his garments and ran, saying: I fulfilled in myself. ‘Wisdom preserveth the life of him who hath it’.2
‘One whom it bites, dies’. What is the remedy? — Abaye said: Let him take the skin of a male hyena.3 and write upon it: I, So-and-so, the son of that-and-that woman, write upon the skin of a male Hyena: Hami, kanti, kloros. God, God, Lord of Hosts, Amen, Amen, Selah,.4 Then let him strip off his clothes, and bury then, in a grave [at cross-roads],5 for twelve months of a year. Then he should take them out and burn them in an oven, and scatter the ashes. During these twelve months, if he drinks water, he shall not drink it but out of a copper tube, lest he see the shadow6 of the demon and be endangered. Thus the mother of Abba b. Martha, who is Abba b. Minyumi, made for him a tube of gold [for drinking purposes].

So,,,,,,,, If one is bit by a dog and does not strip and run away what happens next?

Is there anything about your neighbors dog biting you and then they never even say they are sorry for letting it loose?

Is that whole skin of the hyena thing some kind of remedy against rabies? Because it sure sounds strange, just where is one to get the skin of a hyena? I don't think that they will voluntarily take it off and hand it to you.

I can understand the burning of the clothing in case any saliva got on it but if the bite punctured the skin how is drinking from a copper straw going to help? And Yafet, can you explain this because I am at a lose here:

Thus the mother of Abba b. Martha, who is Abba b. Minyumi, made for him a tube of gold [for drinking purposes].

 

[simchat_torah]

Kil. 1:6 is actually in the Mishnah, not the Talmud.
I'll post verses 1-6 to give reference:
Mishna - Mas. Kilayim Chapter 1

"MISHNAH 1. WHEAT AND DARNEL1 DO NOT CONSTITUTE KIL'AYIM2 ONE WITH THE OTHER.3 [LIKEWISE] BARLEY AND OATS, OR SPELT AND RYE, OR BEANS AND CHICK-PEAS, OR BITTER PEAS4 AND TOFAH,5 OR WHITE BEANS AND KIDNEY BEANS,DO NOT CONSTITUTE Kll'AYIM ONE WITH THE OTHER.3
MISHNAH 2. CUCUMBERS AND CUCUMBER-MELONS6"

Ber. 9b:

Talmud - Mas. Berachoth 9b
this righteous man [Abraham] may not say: And they shall serve them, and they shall afflict them1 He did fulfill for them, but And afterward shall they come out with great substance2 He did not fulfill for them. They said to him: If only we could get out with our lives! A parable: [They were] like a man who was kept in prison and people told him: To-morrow, they will release you from the prison and give you plenty of money. And he answered them: I pray of you, let me go free today and I shall ask nothing more!
And they let them have what they asked.3 R. Ammi says: This teaches that they let them have it against their will. Some say, against the will of the Egyptians, and some say, against the will of the Israelites. Those that say ‘against the will of the Egyptians’ cite the verse: And she that tarrieth at home divideth the spoil.4 Those that say: ‘against the will of the Israelites’, say it was because of the burden [of carrying it]. And they despoiled Egypt.5 R. Ammi says: This teaches that they made it like a snare6 without corn. Resh Lakish said: They made it like a pond without fish.
I am that I am.7 The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Go and say to Israel: I was with you in this servitude, and I shall be with you in the servitude of the [other] kingdoms.8 He said to Him: Lord of the Universe, sufficient is the evil in the time thereof! Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Go and tell them: I AM has sent me unto you.9
Hear me, O Lord, hear me.10 R. Abbahu said: Why did Elijah say twice: ‘Hear me’? This teaches that Elijah said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Lord of the Universe, ‘hear me’, that the fire may descend from heaven and consume everything that is upon the altar; and ‘hear me’, that Thou mayest turn their mind that they may not say that it was the work of sorcery. For it is said: For Thou didst turn their heart backward.11
MISHNAH. FROM WHAT TIME MAY ONE RECITE THE SHEMA IN THE MORNING? FROM THE TIME THAT ONE CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN BLUE AND WHITE. R. ELIEZER SAYS: BETWEEN BLUE AND GREEN. AND HE HAS TIME TO FINISH UNTIL SUNRISE. R. JOSHUA SAYS: UNTIL THE THIRD HOUR OF THE DAY, FOR SUCH IS THE CUSTOM OF KINGS, TO RISE AT THE THIRD HOUR. IF ONE RECITES THE SHEMA’ LATER HE LOSES NOTHING, BEING LIKE ONE WHO READS IN THE TORAH.12
GEMARA. What is the meaning of BETWEEN BLUE AND WHITE? Shall I say: between a lump of white wool and a lump of blue wool? This one may also distinguish in the night! It means rather: between the blue in it and the white in it.13 It has been taught: R. Meir says: [The morning Shema’ is read] from the time that one can distinguish between a wolf and a dog; R. Akiba says: Between an *** and a wild ***. Others say: From the time that one can distinguish his friend at a distance of four cubits. R. Huna says: The halachah is as stated by the ‘Others’. Abaye says: In regard to the tefillin,14 the halachah is as stated by the ‘Others’; in regard to [the recital of] the Shema’, as practised by the watikin.15 For R. Johanan said: The watikin used to finish it [the recital of the Shema’] with sunrise, in order to join the ge'ullah with the tefillah,16 and say the tefillah in the daytime. R. Zera says: What text can be cited in support of this? They shall fear Thee with the sun,17 and so long as the moon throughout all generations.18 R. Jose b. Eliakim testified19 in the name of the holy community of Jerusalem:20 If one joins the ge'ullah to the tefillah, he will not meet with any mishap for the whole of the day. Said R. Zera: This is not so! For I did join, and did meet with a mishap. They asked him: What was your mishap? That you had to carry a myrtle branch into the king's palace?21 That was no mishap, for in any case you would have had to pay something in order to see the king! For R. Johanan said: A man should always be eager to run to see the kings of Israel. And not only to see the kings of Israel, but also to see the kings of the Gentiles, so that, if he is found worthy,22 he may be able to distinguish between the kings of Israel and the kings of the Gentiles.
R. Ela said to ‘Ulla: When you go up there,23 give my greeting to my brother R. Berona in the presence of the whole college, for he is a great man and rejoices to perform a precept [in the correct manner]. Once he succeeded in joining ge'ullah with tefillah,24 and a smile did not leave his lips the whole day. How is it possible to join the two, seeing that R. Johanan has said:25 At the beginning of the tefillah one has to say, O, Lord, open Thou my lips,26 and at the end he has to say, Let the words of my mouth be acceptable etc.?27 — R. Eleazar replied: This28 must then refer to the tefillah of the evening. But has not R. Johanan said: Who is it that is destined for the world to come? One who joins the ge'ullah of the evening with the tefillah of the evening? — Rather said R. Eleazar: This must then refer to the tefillah of the afternoon. R. Ashi said: You may also say that it refers to all the tefillahs, but since the Rabbis instituted [these words]28 in the tefillah, the whole is considered one long tefillah. For if you do not admit this, how can he join in the evening, seeing that he has to say the benediction of ‘Let us rest’?29 You must say then that, since the Rabbis ordained the saying of ‘Let us rest’, it is considered one long ge'ullah.30 So here, since the Rabbis instituted these words in the tefillah, the whole is considered one long tefillah.
Seeing that this verse, ‘Let the words of my mouth be acceptable etc.’ is suitable for recital either at the end or the beginning [of the tefillah], why did the Rabbis institute it at the end of the eighteen benedictions? Let it be recited at the beginning? — R. Judah the son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi said: Since David said it only after eighteen chapters [of the Psalms],31 the Rabbis too enacted that it should be said after eighteen blessings. But those eighteen Psalms are really nineteen? — ‘Happy is the man’ and ‘Why are the nations in an uproar’32 form one chapter. For R. Judah the son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi said: David composed a hundred and three chapters [of psalms], and he did not say ‘Hallelujah’ until he saw the downfall of the wicked, as it says, Let sinners cease out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul. Hallelujah.33 Now are these a hundred and three? Are they not a hundred and four? You must assume therefore that ‘Happy is the man’ and ‘Why are the nations in an uproar’ form one chapter. For R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in the name of R. Johanan

I can't quite figure out what Pes. 113a is referring to, I'll keep looking. So until then, I just have all the above references.

shalom!
yafet.

 

[SonWorshipper]

For those curious, I found what I posted, here:

http://shamash.org/tanach/tanach/commentary/top/top.noach-3of5-fullstudy.1999

 

[simchat_torah]

I forgot to list that Ber. stands for Mas. Berachoth (not within any particular Seder, but it's own section within the Talmud).

Shalom!
yafet.

 

[simchat_torah]

SW, did these references help?

 

[SonWorshipper]

NO, not really, I am more confused than ever, heance why I asked the questions I did in post #7 , especially about the mother of Abba b.?

 

[YatzivPatgam]

I gotta get me one of those CD's.

 

[SonWorshipper]

Yatziv, do you have any understanding to add to this ( as I type I have to yell at my two dalmatians to stop fighting, my female is putting my male into his proper place )

 

[simchat_torah]

Yatziv, you can pm me your address and I can mail you one... free on me.

 

[YatzivPatgam]

Yatziv, do you have any understanding to add to this ( as I type I have to yell at my two dalmatians to stop fighting, my female is putting my male into his proper place )

as I understand it ( Owner of an English Bulldog "Winston" myself) is that the animal's needs supercede your own. That means, you have to feed the animal before you eat, etc,etc.

Other then that, I couldn't be able to help you.