tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post3027564159002617538..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Did Linnaeus classify the hare as a ruminant?joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-55024522576711130832013-07-15T18:10:15.465-04:002013-07-15T18:10:15.465-04:00This is interesting, but I remain skeptical given ...This is interesting, but I remain skeptical given the motivations implied by belief in the Bible. Even if Linnaeus really said what is alleged (and I'm a bit skeptical of that), it could just mean that he believed what the Bible told him.<br /><br />As an aside, I was not able to easily find via internet search any other "intermediate" tables, but I again am skeptical that he switched it back and forth.<br /><br />There is this entry in about the hyrax in "Lane": <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2002.02.0041:entry=waborN&highlight=hyrax" rel="nofollow">http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2002.02.0041:entry=waborN&highlight=hyrax</a><br /><br />it is [said to be] a ruminant; [but this is not the case;] and therefore it is said in a trad., that when a man in a state of إِِحْرَام kills it, he must sacrifice a sheep or goat: (TA:)<br /><br />The stuff in square brackets are his additions so the original medieval source is indicating that the hyrax is a ruminant. But again, the influence of the Bible cannot be ruled out as the cause.David Ohsiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14254812299720876449noreply@blogger.com