Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

Division of the History of Medicine

Haokssah Medical School
Hebrew Universiv
Jerusalem, Israel

The word Talmud means teaching, or learning. The Talmud is a com-

posite work, encyclopedic in nature, but mainly consisting of a detailed
explanation and application of the law that is merely indicated in the
Bible. If Galen (and many others) have composed commentaries on
Hippocrates’ Aphorisms, the part of the Talmud called Gemara (the
Complement) is a subtle scholastic development of the older Mishna -
that is, the oral teaching - completed in its written version about 200
C.E. There are two redactions of the Talmud, the Talmud of Jerusalem,
completed about 400 CE., and the Talmud of Babylon, much more
comprehensive, completed about 500 C.E.
The Midrash, often translated as “legend,” was compiled later, in
the fifth to seventh centuries. It is an anthology of homiletics and
exegeses of the Bible, a type of literature that continued to flourish
late into the Middle Ages. But the Talmud itself is also interspersed
with moral or homiletical tales (the Aggada, meaning narration). These
tales, as well as the legalistic discussions, reflect the knowledge of the
gages on any subject relevant to the debate, including folklore, history,
cosmogony, hygiene, and medicine.
Given the time involved in the composition of the Talmud and the
Midrash, and the many contributions in each, it is often difficult to date
- and therefore to find a source for - any single statement, since it may
have been transmitted previously through several generations of scholars.
In studying these statements, one must be careful not to go too far
beyond what is explicitly said, because the statements are often incom-
plete and merely indicative, the aim of the treatise not being medical or
biological, and the study not being a systematic research effort.
The embryological data contained in the Talmud are mainly related
to the problem of the mother’s impurity after childbirth. The principal
question is: How long does she have to remain in defilement after giving
birth to a male or a female child? These discussions are essentially based
on the biblical paragraph that begins with the verse (Lev. 12:2): “A
woman that will conceive i and give birth to a son . . . ” There are,
1. Literally: “gives forth seed [Tazria] .”

Journal of the History of Biology, vol. 14, no. 2 (Fall 1981), pp. 299-315.
0022~5010/81/0142/0299 $01.70.
Copyrikht 0 1981 by D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, Mass
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

however, several other scriptural references to the early development of

the child,Z and some of them will be recalled later in this paper.

TERMINOLOGY

The embryo was referred to in the Scriptures as “Peri-Beten” - that

is, the fruit of the womb - a term best preserved in the German word
Leibesfnrchr. The Talmudic word ‘Ubbar is still in use in modern He-
brew. It derives either from ‘Ab (thick, swollen) or from ‘Abar (to pass:
perhaps with the meaning of the male seed passing into the female). I
shall not dwell here upon the several synonyms cited in the Talmud,3
each of which corresponds more or less to a given stage of development.
Conception is the first stage of generation. Its literal meaning is to
become pregnant. But I venture a philosophical remark: To conceive
is also to comprehend; it “suggests the apprehension or grasping of
something as a notion” (Webster’s Dictionary). The corresponding
term in Hebrew is Ham, which appears with the second meaning in Isa.
59: 13.4 But the initiative of the act of generation is given to man (Gen.
4:l): “And Adam knew his wife Eve, and she became pregnant.” He
knows and she conceives, knowledge versus conception. It thus appears
that this “intercourse” has both physical and spiritual implications, and
that it adumbrates the dual problem of the development of the body
and it animation.
Fertility (“Poriut ,” that is, fruitfulness) is not considered a natural
phenomenon in the Scriptures. Most of the Mothers suffered from
(temporary) barrenness. Sara, Rebecca, Rachel, and Hanna were
“Aqarot” (rootless) according to some authorities. Although the First
Commandment of the Bible is to multiply and have children (Gen.
1:28), there is a Talmudic adage that “the key of the womb is in the
hands of the Lord” (Ta‘anit, 2a). This homileticalexegesis has obviously
the meaning of bestowing on the act of reproduction a dimension
greater than simply the natural impulse of human animality.

GENERATION

Let me discuss first the famous cheese analogy. We read in Job,

2. See Job lO:lO, Ps. 139:16, Cant. 7:6, Eccles. 115.
3. See J. Needham, A History of Embryology, 2nd ed. (1959), p. 77. Needham
explains the concept ‘Ubbar as meaning “something carried,” an interpretation
that does not exactly agree with mine.
4. Isa. 59: 13: “We have conceived lies in our hearts and repeated them” (ZRe
New English Bible, 1970).

300
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

10: 10-l 1: “Didst Thou not pour me out like milk and curdle me like
cheese; Clothe me with skin and flesh and knit me together with bones
and sinews?“s According to M. H. Segal, the book of Job can be dated
to approximately the last quarter of the sixth century B.C.E., before
Hippocrates and, of course, Aristotle .6 It thus appears that the image of
curdling like cheese did not “begin fresh with Aristotle.“’ Nevertheless,
one of the characteristic passages of Aristotle should be cited here:
“The male contributes to generation . . . the form and efficient cause,
while the female contributes the material. In fact, as in the coagulation
of milk, the milk being the material, the fig-juice or rennet is that which
contains the curdling principle, so acts the secretion of the male, being
divided into parts in the female.” 8
This image was often used during the Middle Ages (by Arabic
commentators on Aristotle, St. Hildegard, and others). It appears also in
old Indian (Hindu) medicine, particularly in the Susruta-Samhita. These
writings have in common with the Talmud the fact that they were slowly
aggregated during centuries and were based on even older traditions.
The text of Job is cited in the Babylonian Talmud,g and appears
with additional details in the Midrash. I translate: “When the womb
of the woman is full of retained blood which then comes forth to the
area of her menstruation, by the will of the Lord comes a drop of
white-matter which falls into it: at once the embryo is created. [This
can be] compared to milk being put in a vessel: if you add to it some
lab-ferment [drug or herb], it coagulates and stands still; if not, the
milk remains liquid .” r”
The Sages of the Talmud accepted the theory of the two seeds. The
main reason is obviously the wording of the Bible (Lev. 12:2): “A
woman that will conceive” and give birth to a male child . . . ” The
Sagesstated:

5. The New English Bible.

6. M. H. Segal, Turbiz, 20 (1950), 3548.
7. Needham, History of Embryology, p. 85. Aristotle himself stated (De
generatione animulium, 1. 19. 727a 3): “It is plain . . . that the catamenia are . . .
analogous in females to the semen in males.” He also said (1. 19.727b 32): “It is
clear that the female contributes the material for generation, and that this is in
the substance of the catamenia.” Quotations are from the English edition of J. A.
Smith and W. D. Ross, trans. A. Platt (1912).
8. Degenerationeanimalium, 1.20. 729a.
9. Tractate Nidda, fol. 25a.
10. Midrash Levit. Rabba, 14,9.
11. Literally, as in note 1. Intercourse with emission of semen is called
“laying down of seed [Shikhvat Zera] .” See Lev. 19:20.

301
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

There are three associates in [the creation of] man: the Lord, the
father, and the mother. The father provides the white-seed, from
which are formed bones and nerves, the nails, the brain, and the
white of the eyes. The mother provides the red-seed, from which
are formed the skin and the flesh, the hair and the black of the eyes.
And the Lord gives spirit and soul, facial expression, faculties of
vision and hearing, power of speaking, movement, comprehension
and intelligence .” l2

Here again I provide a brief reference from the Hippocratic author

of the treatise On Generation. l3 He thought that there were two seeds,
the male one being stronger than the female one, and the sex of the
embryo being determined by the final proportions of the two seeds.This
theory was also defended by several forerunners and contemporaries of
Hippocrates, such as Pythagoras, Alcmaeon, Empedocles, Parmenides,
Democritus, and Epicurus; whereas Diogenes and Anaxagoras recognized
only the male seed.
Regarding the respective contribution of both seeds to the com-
position of the embryo, recall that Galen, who did not devote much
attention to embryology, thought that blood vessels,nerves, tendons,
bones, and cartilage derived from the male seed, while the uterine
membranes originated from the female. As for the muscles, liver, and
other viscera, they were generated directly from the blood.14 The
Hindus (SusrutaSamhita) held that the solid parts (such as hair, bones,
teeth, muscles, veins, and nerves) were provided by the father, whereas
the soft parts (flesh, fat, blood, viscera) originated from the mother.
And J. Needham says in his History ofEmbryology that in New Guinea
the natives make a distinction between the red flesh provided by the
mother and the white bones coming from the father.rs This last instance
is a striking example of the worldwide dispersion of ideas, apparently,
in this case, based originally upon an opposition of colors: white = male,
red = female.
It can be alleged that the Sages of the Talmud were to some extent
aware of the main theories of Greek antiquity on generation. They
seemingly achieved a kind of synthesis of the Hippocratic and Aris-
totelian approaches. On the one hand, they held that both man and

12. Tractate Nidda, fol. 31a.

13. On Generation, in Oeuvres compl29es d’Hippocrate, ed. E. Lit&, 10 ~01s.
(Paris, 1839-1861), VII, 471.
14. Kiihn ed. of Galen, IV, 188 ff.
15. Needham, Histoory of Embryology, p. 18n.

302
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

woman produce seed. On the other hand, they accepted the image of
the catamenial blood’s being curdled by the male seed.
But some of the medieval commentators on the Bible were not
satisfied with such a hybrid theory. I quote from the remarks of the
learned scholar of the thirteenth century Rabbi Moses bar Nahman
(Nachmanides), who was also a trained physician:

It was not meant [in the Scriptures] that the embryo is formed from
the seed of the woman. Although she has “testicles” just as man,
either there is no seed at alI produced in these glands, or that seed is
not l6 coagulated and has no influence on the formation of the child.
But the wording “she brings forth seed” is meant to be the blood of
the womb that accumulated at the end of coition, and becomes
fastened” by the male seed. They [the Sages of the Talmud] hold
that the embryo is formed from the mother’s blood and the father’s
white matter and they refer to both as “seed.“‘*

This theory of generation was developed mainly in mystical writings.

But there is a brief reference to it in the Mishnalc treatise Aboth:
“Aqabia ben Mehalalel said: reflect upon three things . . . From whence
you came? - From a putrefied (or putrefying) drop.“19 There is in this
statement more than a moralizing reflection on the origin of man.
As Needham pointed out,?O such a theory occurs in the works of
Paracelsus, where he describes his “method” for creating a “homun-
culus” : “let human sperm putrefy for forty days and then feed the
solution with human blood for forty weeks.“21 This “experiment” is
16. Another version is extant - “that seed is coagulated,” and, therefore, has
no influence on generation. The word Niqpa means, literally, congealed.
17. Literally: “[the catamenial blood] is seized, or held fast, by the male
semen.”
18. My translation of Nachmanides’ commentary on the controversial verse
Lev. 12:2.
19. Aboth, chap. 3, 1. The author of this statement lived at the end of the
first century B.C.E.
20. Needham, Histow of Embryology, p. 83.
21. On Paracelsus see: Theophrast van Hohenheim, Siimtliche Werke heraus-
gegeben van Karl Stihoff (Munich and Berlin, R. Oldenburg, 1922-1933). The
description of the generation of a “homunculus” appears in Die 9 B&her “‘De
natum rerum” (angebl. Villach 1537), Liber primus, De genemtionibus rerum
natumlium, XI, 317. At the beginning of the treatise we read: “Die Putrefaction
ist der hiichst Grad und such der erst Anfang zu der Generation,” which means:
putrefaction is the highest degree and also the very beginning of generation
@. 312). In the Liber de homuncutis (XIV, 327-336), we read: “So bald der

303
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

in fact less a prefiguration of the test-tube baby than an ultimate

illustration of the power of creation claimed by the Alchemists, and is
not without connection with the Cabbalistic legend of the Golem.
For the Hippocratic author, the seed originates from the whole
body, from the solid and liquid parts.** A kind of foam, it arises in the
spinal cord, and flows thence through the veins to the kidneys, then to
the testicles. This happens in both man and woman. These emanations
from the parental organs determine the corresponding organs of the
fetus. If more matter comes from the father, the child’s organ will
resemble that of his father, and vice versa. The Talmud also deals with
this question:

Can we say that the organ [of the father] produces the [correspond-
ing] organ [of the embryo] ? . . . Or do we say that the seeds [of the
two parents] are mixed together?” The answer is: “of course the
seeds mix together. If not, a blind would produce a blind child, and
a cripple would generate a cripple. It is thus evident that the seeds
are mixedF3

The Hippocratic author briefly mentions this problem, saying that

usually when a limb of a parent is damaged, the child is normal, but
when an organ of one parent is malformed the child often bears the
same blemish.W
Regarding embryogenesis, the Sages of the Talmud, while accepting
the Hippocratic theory of the two seeds, did not clearly agree with
Hippocratic preformationist ideas. *’ Neither did they make theirs the
Aristotelian theory of epigenesis. This great achievement of Aristotle
was generally ignored, as has been often stated, until Harvey revived it
in 1651.
The Talmudic scholars seemingly supported vaguely a pangenetic

Sperma generirt ist . . . so ist petrefactio [sic] do, er sei ausgefallen oder nicht.”
i.e., as soon as sperm is generated, putrefaction is present, whether it falls out [of
the uterus] or not (p. 330).
22. On Generation, VII, 475.
23. Tractate l$ullin, fol. 69a.
24. On Genemtion, W, 485.
25. See Regimen I, chap. 26: “All the limbs are separated and grow simultane-
ously . . . The larger become visible before the smaller, yet they are formed none
the earlier . . . Some [fetuses] have everything visible in forty days, some in two
monthqrsome in three months and others in four.” (Trans. W. H. S. Jones, IV,
263-265).

304
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

approach to embryogenesis. They probably had in mind the somewhat

elliptical description in Ps. 139:16 (my translation):

Thine eyes did see my substance 26

Yet being unperfect
And in thy book all [my members] were fashioned
When [as yet there was] none of themq2’

FETALDEVELOPMENT

In accordance with the verse in Lev. 12:2 that I have repeatedly

cited, the Sages of the Talmud held that the sex of the child is deter-
mined from the moment of generation. A Sage of the Talmud was
asked whether it is lawful to pray after intercourse that the child be a
son. The question was answered affirmatively, but prayer was permitted
only during the forty days following conception. By the fortieth day,
there is a general agreement that the sex is definitely determined. Until
this limit, such a prayer could be helpful in the specific case of husband
and wife having brought forth seed at the same time.2* It is particularly
interesting that the sex of the fetus was considered by the Sagesof the
Talmud to be definitely determined by the fortieth day, an opinion
apparently based on observation of the products of abortion. But this
issue is related to a very curious “experiment” that seems to have had a
strong impact on the scientific world of those times.
There was a controversy between Rabbi Ismael and a group of
Talmudic scholars. Both parties agreed that the male embryo is complete
in its organs (“knitted”)29 by the forty-first day, but they disagreed
about the female embryo. Rabbi Ismael maintained: “It happened that

26. See The Holy Bible, King James’ version. Golem is the informal mass, or
magma, that prefigures the development of the embryo.
27. I.e., all the organs were prefigured beforehand.
28. Tractate Berakhot, fol. 60a. In any other case, the sex of the child was
determined from the moment of conception.
29. The Hebrew “Shaiii Meruqam” - knitted chorion, i.e., fetus - is note-
worthy. At this stage, the fetus is characterized by its membranes, which repre-
sent its limits. It is interesting to note that the Hippocratic school called chorion
the membranes ‘*spreading out of the embryo,” i.e., the placenta, which corre-
sponds to the Hebrew Shilya. See H. Fasbender, Entwickelungslehre, Geburtshiilf
und Gyntikologie in den Hippokratischen Schriften (Stuttgart: F. Enke, 1897),
p. 93. If the word Shafir is usually translated by the term chorion and means
in this context the whole fetus, the word Meruqam means exactly knitted, em-
broidered. The Hebrew modern word Riqma, related to Meruqam, means tissue.

305
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

Cleopatra, the Queen of Alexandria, presented to the physicians some

of her maids who had been condemned to death and they were dis-
sected. It was found that the male embryo is complete after forty-one
days and the female embryo after eighty-one days.” so The other Sages
objected: “You cannot take that as a proof,” because copulation could
have taken place before the experiment began, for instance, with the
maids’ guardian.
Strangely enough, the story appears a second time on the same folio,
but is cited by the Sages as contrary to Rabbi Ismael’s opinion. Their
versions differ as to the results of the experiment: according to what
they heard, there were found, after forty-one days, male and female
embryos at the same stage of completion. Again, the same objections
about the conditions of the experiment were raised, this .time by Rabbi
Ismael. But the Sages replied that an abortive drug31 had been given
previously. Rabbi Ismael was not convinced, thinking that some people
are not receptive to the drug. Needham briefly describes this contro-
versy and adds: “it provides an example . . . of a serious discussion on
scientific method and the planning of an experiment. It demonstrates
how near men could come to the Baconian outlook.“32
Early Greek authors had varying opinions on embryonic formation.
Empedocles (cited by Plutarch) held that “men begin to take form after
the thirty-first day and knit in their parts within forty-nine days.“33
Asclepiades thought that males are shaped within twenty-six days and
are complete in all limbs within fifty days, whereas females require two
months to be formed.%
An interesting and lesser-known source to which I would like to
refer here is the short work Nutriment. Its author is unknown, but he
was probably a pupil of Hera&us. We read:

For formation, 35 days; for movement, 70 days; for completion,

210 days. - Others, for form, 45 days, for movement 90 days, for
delivery, 270 days. - Others, 50 for form; for the first leap, 100; for
completion, 300 days. - For distinction of limbs, 40; for shifting,
80; for detachment, 240 days. It is not and is. There are found

30. Tractate Nidda, fol. 30b; see also Tossefta Nidda, chap. 4,8.
3 1, Literally: a drug that shatters the semen in the womb.
32. Needham, History ofEmbryology, p. 65.
33. Plutarchi Cheronei: De philosophonrm placitis libellus elegantissimus
trans. G. Bud6 (Argentorat., 1516). This work of Plutarch has several times been
claimed to be spurious. The statement by Empedocles appears in Book V.
34. Also cited in the ibid. See Needham, History of Embryology, p. 29.

306
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

therein both more and less, in respect of both the whole and the
parts, but the more is not much more, and the less not much less.35
Here the Pythagorean influence is particularly evident. The power and
the harmony of numbers, which lead also to the doctrine of critical days,
are emphasized. There are four dates that are associated with complete
development. They appear in the order, mentioned above, of seven,
nine, ten, and eight months. Note that the eight-month fetus is listed
last, an indication of its special status.
Regarding animation, the fetus “is not and is,” which means that it
is living, according to the author, a special kind of life.
I need not cite at this point all the Greek sources, but must, never-
theless, recall that the Hippocratic author of On Generation thought
that the female embryo is formed by 42 days at most and the male
by 30 days, and sometimes sooner.% Here I must refer to Aristotle.
Examining a male embryo aborted at the fortieth day, he noted that
it was “as big as one of the large kind of ants; and all the limbs are plain
to see, including the penis, and the eyes also . . . But the female embryo,
if it suffer abortion during the first 3 months, is as a rule found to be
undifferentiated; if however it reach the fourth month it comes to be
subdivided and quickly attains further differentiation.“37 It thus appears
that none of the Greek authors is in full agreement with the statement
in the Talmud, which apparently had an Alexandrinian originss
35. See Hippocrates, trans. W. H. S. Jones, Loeb Classical Library (London,
1948), I, 337-341. The text quoted appears in Jones’s translation on p. 357 (chap.
42). The short, aphorism-like statement renders its interpretation somewhat
difficult, but the numbers could be summed up in the following table:

36. On Generation, VII, 501 and 503. The author states that he has seen in
products of abortion that male fetuses were “articulated” at the age of 30 days
and female ones at the age of 42 days (p. 505).
37. Aristotle, Historia animalium, 7. 3. 583a, ed. J. A. Smith and W. D. Ross.
38. Regarding the “Queen Cleopatra” cited by the Talmud, there were several
queens bearing this name in Egypt. The last one, the lustful wife of Antony,
lived from 69 to 30 B.C.E. A little treatise on gynecology was ascribed to a certain
Cleopatra (?) and was included in the well-known gynecological compendium of
Israel Spach (Strassburg, 1597j, based on the previous works of Caspar Wolf
(1566) and Caspar Bat&in (1586).

307
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

The question of where the embryo begins its development was

discussed by various authors in antiquity. Let me quote first the opin-
ions of the Sages of the Talmud: “It has been taught: Wherefrom does
the formation of the child [begin]? - From his head!” As usual in
Talmudic discussions, the unknown author of this statement brings
biblical verses to support his opinion,39 then continues: “Said Abba-
Saul: [it begins] from its navel, and roots develop in all directions.“4o
The head is the noblest and highest part of the individual, and in the
embryo and young child it is large in relation to the rest of the body.
The Talmudic opinion on the source of the embryo had been defended
by the preSocratic philosophers Anaxagoras, Alcmaeon, and Hippo of
Samos, all of whom held that the head was formed fust in embryonic
development.
The navel, being the organ related to the mother and marking the
middle of the fetus, could also logically be considered the origin of
embryonic differentiation. But the Talmud wants its statement on
this subject to be clearly understood: “This opinion of Abba Saul
only means that this Sage thought that the embryo begins to develop
from its middle. But he agrees that life begins at the nose, according
to the biblical verse Cen. 7:22.”
I shall return later to the controversial problem of the source of the
embryo’s animation. Consider now what the Greeks said about the
navel. The author of On Generation wrote: “The seed is in a membrane
the umbilicus occupies the middle of it . . . and the members are
attached to the umbilicus.“41 Aristotle had the image of the umbilical
cord sending roots hither and thither: “The embryo, then, grows by
means of the umbilicus in the same way as a plant by its root”; and
further : “In viviparous animals, as said before, the embryo gets its
growth through the umbilical cord . . . It straightaway sends off this
cord like a root to the uterus.” But Aristotle also said that the cephalic
parts of the embryo are formed fkst.“2
It should be emphasized that the Talmud does not deal with the
problem of the fnst organ to be completed in embryogenesis (the
heart, according to Aristotle), but is interested only in determining the
topographic origin of the fetus’ development.
A difference of opinion about the priority of appearance of organs
39. Ps. 81:6 and Jer. 7:29.
40. Track&s Sota, fol. 45b and Yoma, fol. 85a.
41. On Generation, VII, 29.
42. De generatione animalium, 2. 4. 740b and 7. 745b; Historia animalium,
8.6.586a; and 742b.

308
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

is also known in early Hindu medicine. The head, navel, and heart had
their respective defenders. The final conclusion, however, was that all
organs originated at once.43
Let me return now to the problem of animation and the beginning
of life. We read in the Mishna: “Antonim@ asked Rabbi Judah Ha-
Nasi:45 ‘At which stage is man animated, at the moment of conception
or when the embryo is shaped?’ The Rabbi answered: ‘When the
embryo is formed.’ But the Roman dignitary remarked: ‘Is it possible
that a piece of meat should stay for three days without salt and not
become spoiled?’ MS Rabbi Judah accepted the objection, and the idea
that the soul enters the body from the moment of conception.
Interestingly enough, this decision had no influence on Jewish law.
Abortion was not regarded as homicide, and, indeed, it was not even
a matter for consideration, having seemingly not been performed in
early Jewish society, although embryotomy in case of danger for the
mother was permitted. 47 The only Jewish authors in antiquity who
associated abortion with homicide were Philo and Josephus, and it is
not a coincidence that both of them were in contact with Greek and
early Christian circles. The Christians were mainly influenced by the
rules formulated by Tertullian (155-222 C.E.), who believed that the
soul is present from the moment of conception, and accepted all the
legal implications of that opinion.
Another point should be added. The emperors named Antonhms,
especially the second, were followers of Stoic philosophy, which denied
the existence of a soul before birth,48 although they agreed that

43. Dhanvantari taught that all the parts develop simultaneously, but some of
them are imperceptible at the beginning (Susruta).
44. Some scholars think that the interlocutor of Rabbi Judah was theEmperor
Antonimrs Pius (86-161); others hold that it was his successor, Marcus Aurelius
Antonhms (121-180), who was in fact a contemporary of Rabbi Judah.
45. Rabbi Judah Ha-Nasi (the Prince), lived about 135-220, was the compiler
of the Mishna. His leading position among the Palestinian Jews brought him into
frequent contact with the Roman administration. For him, the Greek tongue
was to be preferred to the Aramaic (used in the Talmud of Babylon). He once
exclaimed: “What has the Syrian tongue to do with the Land of Israel? Speak
either Hebrew or Greek” (‘Tractate Baba Kama, fols. 82b-83a).
46. Tractate Sanhedrin, fol. 91a-b, and Gen. Rabba, 34,10.
47. On the problem of abortion and the entry of the soul into the body, see
I. Jakobovits, Jewish MedicalEthics (New York, 1967),pp. 174-191.
48. See Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. J. Hastings (Edinburgh,
19081921), VI, 56: “An attempt was made by the Antonines to prevent the loss
of children consequent upon the practice [of abortion] .”

309
SAMUEL S. KOl-TEK

animation occurred on the fortieth day. It thus appears that the

“Antoninus” of the Talmud contradicts the Stoic doctrine.

Embryological descriptions in the Talmud, like many descriptions in

Semitic literature, tend to be lively and flowery, though the Sageswere
not particularly interested in elaborate descriptions. On the general
appearance of the fetus, we read: “Rabbi Eleazar said: ‘To what does a
fetus bear resemblance in its mother’s womb? - To a nut [-shell] in a
vessel full of water. If someone touches it with his finger, it moves
hither and thither?“4g
Regarding the “formed” embryo, which, as I have previously noted,
interested the Sages of the Talmud for several reasons, they gave an
interesting description:

The Sages inquired: “What is a ‘knitted’ embryo?“50 Abba Saul

said: “Its development begins with its head,51 and its eyes are similar
to two drippings of a fly.“” Rabbi IJiyya taught: “its two nostrils
are [at a distance one from another] similar to that of the eyes of
a fly. Its mouth is like a hair-thread and its genitals like a lentil. If it
is a female, it has a longitudinal split as [does] a barley-corn. Arms
and legs are not yet separated [from the body] ,“53

There follows a detailed description of how to differentiate between

male and female embryos, succeeded by a description of the “sandal”
- the fetus compressus - which is a consequence of superfetation;
neither of these will be discussed in detail here.
The descriptions above also appear in the Midrash: “At the begin-
ning, the embryo looks like a locust . . . ” The eyes, mouth, and nostrils
are referred to as in the descriptions above, but the ears are mentioned
also, and the arms, “which are like two threads of silk.” The other

49. Tractate Nidda, fol. 31a.

50. “Shafii Meruqam”; see note 29.
51. There is a second reading, which is retained in the later version of the
Midrash: “it looks like a locust” (perhaps because its head is bent over the rest
of the body). The terms Rosho (his head) and Rushon (locust) could easily have
been exchanged by mistake in early manuscripts.
52. Understood by the commentators as: similar to the two eyes of a fly
(which are black and bulging).
53. Tractate Nidda, fol. 25a.

310
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

organs “are miniatured in [the embryo] as in an unfinished lump.“”

Moreover, “the hands and feet are not yet differentiated.“s5
Then the Midrash has another extensive discussion that also appears
in the Talmud:

Rabbi Simlai taught: To what does a, fetus bear resemblance in its

mother’s womb? To a folded pimqs6 and it lies with its arms
[pressed] against its sides, its elbows on its knees, its heels against
its buttocks. Its head is resting between its knees. Its mouth is closed
and its navel open. It is nurtured from what its mother eats, and
drinks from what she takes in. It does not excrete any waste matter
lest it should cause its mother’s death.57 When it comes out to the
open air, what was closed opens and what was open closes, if not,
the child could not survive one single hour .58

This last description is of a fully developed fetus, in which all the parts
are clearly differentiated.

Let me turn now to the Talmud’s remarks regarding external, or

magical, influences on embryogenesis. We read: f’Rabbi Isaac said: ‘He
who sleeps with his bed set in the direction north-south, will have male
children . . . ’ Rabbi Nachman ben Isaac added: ‘And his wife will be
protected from abortion.‘“59 As usual, the Sages bring verses of the
Bible to support their statement. The famous commentator Rabbi
Solomon ben Isaac (“Rash?‘), who flourished in the eleventh century,
explains that a man should sleep with his head facing the north and
his feet toward the south. The alleged reason is that the divine presence
is located in the east or west and therefore such directions would be
unfitting for intercourse.
More interesting for the medical historian is the explanation of

54. Once again we find the word Golem - an unformed mass, or the un-
finished mass of the sculptor.
55. Lev. Rabba, 14,l.
56. The Greek word pinux means writing tablet, which could be folded. The
derived word pinqus is still used in modem Hebrew for a notebook.
51. A very similar description can be found in Aristotle’s Historia animaiium
(7. 8.586b). The idea that the presence of meconium within the vitelline mem-
brane could harm the mother was current in antiquity, whereas to&y its presence
is a sign of fetal distress.
58. Tractate Nidda, fol. 30b.
59. Tractate Ben&hot, fol. 5b.

311
SAMUEL S. KOT-TEK

Nachmanides (thirteenth century): “They [the Sages] meant of course

that his bed should be put between cold [north] and warm [south]. It
is well known that a child born from a cold drop [of semen] will be
foolish and simple, whereas the one born from a warm drop will be
passionate and irascible. But the child born from a seed of medium
temperature will be clever and level-headed.“60
There is a similar statement in Aristotle: “The shepherds say that it
not only makes a difference in the production of males and females if
copulation takes place during northern or southern winds, but even if
the animals, while copulating, look towards the south or north. So
small a thing will sometimes turn the scale and cause cold or heat, and
these again influence generation.” And some lines later: “For attaining
the artistic and natural product, we need the due mean between the
extremes.“61
Hippocrates also insists on the influence of winds on fertility, for
instance, in “a city that lies exposed to the hot winds . . . and sheltered
from the north winds . . . many [women] are barren through disease
and not by nature, while abortions are frequent.” In cities “facing the
cold winds . . . but sheltered from the hot winds and from the south
. . . many [women] become barren through the waters being hard,
indigestible and cold . . . [But] abortion is rare.“62
The Talmudic statement, however, seems nearer to the idea expressed
by Aristotle, which is based on popular beliefs (“the shepherds say”),
as well as on the old theory of the four properties (cold, hot, dry,
moist).

I do not intend to dwell here on the problem of abortion and of

the “fetus compressus” or other products of abortionH But the
Talmudic Sages, being true polyhistors, took into account experimental
biology as well as popular beliefs. The Babylonian context can easily
explain the fact that some magical practices, such as amulets and

60. Iggereth ha-Kodesh, chap. 3. Most scholars now hold that this work is not
that of Nachmanides, but it still appears among his printed works. The translation
is mine.
61. De generatione animalium, 4. 2. 767a.
62. “‘Airs, Waters, Spaces”, in Hippocrates trans. W. H. S. Jones, Loeb Classical
Library (London, 1948), I, 75-81.
63. See Tractate Nidda, fol. 25a, and T. Jerus., Nidda, III, 50.
64. Sometimes called Shafir (chorion), sometimes Hat&ha (a fragment), the
products of abortion could take all kinds of strange forms. There are several
teratological references in the Talmud, which cannot be presented here.

312
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

incantations, were accepted in the Talmud, although the Scriptures

strongly objected to “black magic.“65 But anything done for the sake
of healing (including prevention) was permitted by the Sages.& One
of these amulets was the “even tequma” - the preserving stone -
which young women were allowed to wear even on the Sabbath,67 and
even without being pregnant, for they could be with child without yet
knowing it. A similar talisman is described by F’lin~.~

Finally, let us consider the problem of the eight-months’ child, a

controversial case in ancient embryology. The author of the brief
Hippocratic treatise on the seven-months’ child was convinced that a
child born after a period of eight months could “certainly not sur-
vive.“@ This idea was very widely accepted in antiquity and the Sages
of the Talmud expressed it several times.x’ Aristotle, however, observed
that such children could sometimes survive,71 and the Sages of the
Talmud were clearly aware of the fact that many an eight-months’
child survived despite predictions to the contrary. The problem found a
rather sophisticated solution in the following discussion: “It is written:
The Lord created [vayitser] ‘* man . . . It thus appears that there are
two types of formation [of the embryo], one for seven months and one

65. See, e.g., Deut. 18:10-14.

66. Tractate Shabbat, fol. 67a, and Hullin, fol. 77b.
67. Tractate Shabbat, fol. 66b. It is generally prohibited to carry anything
from private property onto public property on the Sabbath.
68. For more details and bibliography on this preservation stone, see Jako-
bovits, Jewish Medical Ethics, p. 270, note 82.
69. Of the Seven-Month Fetus (Lat.: De septimestti par&). This little treatise
had been admitted as genuine by Galen (Ad epidem., 6. 6. 27) and by Foes
(Opera, I, 318), but by no modem authority. It appears in Littre’s classification
among the writings of the School of Cos (class IV) and in Adams’s list as the
work of Hippocrates’s disciples, from notes or memory of the master’s teaching
(class II).
70. See, e.g., Tractate Shabbat, Tossefta, 16,4.
71. Historia animalium, 7.4.584b: “In Egypt and in some other places where
the women are fruitful . . . in these places the eight months’ children live and are
brought up, but in Greece it is only a few of them that survive, while most perish.
And this being the general experience, when such a child does happen to survive,
the mother is apt to think that it was not an eight months’ child after all, but that
she had conceived at an earlier period without being aware of it.” Could the
Jewish people be ranged among those where “women are wont to bear many
children without difficulties,” as Aristotle said (ibid.)?
72. The word has an unusual spelling characterized by the duplication of the
letter i (yod), and this point is used to support the following statement.

313
SAMUEL S. KOTTEK

for nine months.“73 Now if the child was scheduled for a seven-months
formation but remained longer in his mother’s womb and was born in
his eighth month, he would live. But if the child was scheduled to be
fully formed after nine months and was born one month earlier, he
would die. This would, of course, also be the case if such a child was
born in his seventh month.
Somebody asked Rabbi Abbahu: “Wherefrom do we know that
a seven-months’ child is viable ?” The Sage answered his Greek inter-
locutor: “I will iuustrate this question in your own language: ‘Zuta
epta, eta octo,’ which means: ‘life at seven, death at eight.“‘74 This
epigrammatic answer, in the manner of Heraclitus, could hardly be
considered an explanation. But it is interesting to note that the Sages,
or at least some of them, mastered the Greek language and even con-
descended to let such a Greek formula enter the Talmudic corpus.

CONCLUSION

In this paper I have not, of course, presented all the embryological

data that can be collected from the Talmudic and Midrashic literature.
More details can be found in Julius Preuss’ classical work on biblical and
talmudic medicine, now available in Fred Rosner’s English translation
and in a French M.D. thesis by Martine Miche1.75 I also did not present
any data on teratology, and did not deal with the very rich Jewish
mystical lore, the Cabbala. But a few comments are in order here about
the material on embryology.
1. There are very few original ideas in the Talmudic corpus on
embryology, but it is obvious that the Sages were well aware of the
Greek and Roman theories on embryology.
2. The fact that the Talmud is a compilation that was built up slowly,
during several centuries, explains why the information recorded in it
cannot be ascribed solely to one school of thought or one clearcut
influence.

‘73. Tractate Yevamot, fol. 42a.

74. Midrash Gen. Rabba, 14, 2. Rabbi Abbahu, who lived about 300 C.E. in
Cesarea, was held in great esteem by the Roman authorities, with whom he was
in close contact. He was learned in mathematics, rhetoric, and Greek, which he
taught his daughters.
75. Julius Preuss, Biblisch Tulmudische Medizin (Berlin: S. Karger, 1911);
Reuss, Biblical and Talmudic Medicine, trans. Fred Rosner (New York: Sanhedrin
Press, 1978); M. Michel-Strub, “Contribution a l’etude de l’embryologie biblique
et talmudique” University of Nancy, 1978.

314
 Embryology in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature

3. When a definite problem was difficult to solve because there were

many different theories about it, the Sages based their opinion on a
famous experiment that seemed to offer guarantees of validity. This
was the case with the controversial problem of the formation of the
embryo and its sexual differentiation, where the Sages made use of an
experiment allegedly initiated by Cleopatra.
4. The Sages were ready to discuss scientific problems with non-
Jewish scholars and even to accept their arguments. This was the case
with the important topic of the time of the entry of the soul into the
embryo. But the legal conclusions drawn from the Sages’opinion were
not consistent with those declared by Churth Fathers such as Tertullian.
Embryotomy, for instance, was permitted by Jewish law.
5. Wide interest, scholarly discussions, suggestive descriptions and
readiness to inquire and to obtain detailed information characterized
the Talmudic discussions of embryology.
In conclusion, I quote a Talmudic text that reviews the whole
process of embryological development through the sequence of prayers
of a faithful Jew who learns that his wife is expecting a baby.

The fast three days, [he should pray to the Lord] that the seed
should not putrefy.
From the third to the fortieth day: that the child should be a
male.
From the fortieth day to the third month: that there should not
occur any superfetation, which could lead the first embryo to be
a fetus compressus.
From the third to the sixth month: that an abortion should not
occur.
From the sixth to the ninth month: that the birth should be
without problemsX

Apart from the still controversial problem of superfetation, there is

nothing in this sequence that contradicts modem views on the develop-
ment of the embryo.

76. Tractate Berakhot, fol. 60a.

315