Shiltei HaGibborim of Avraham HaRofeh Portaleone, Chapter 79

Perek 79

After tzori, the Torah mentions shecheiles (the operculum of a sea snail—the hard, fingernail-like “door” attached to the snail’s foot that closes the opening of its shell when the animal retracts inside. It is not the entire shell and not the flesh of the snail.) together with some of the other samim of the ketores. I find this very difficult, because I have not seen any of the mefarshim explain clearly what it actually is, except for the Rambam, who explicitly gives its name both in Lashon HaKodesh and in Arabic.

Rashi writes that shecheiles is the root of a fragrant plant, smooth and shining like a fingernail, and that in the language of the Mishnah it is called tziporen. This, he says, is what Onkelos translates as tufra. The Ralbag writes similarly. He also explains the root שחל in this manner, to the point that they are explaining something unknown by means of something else that is itself unclear. Perhaps they did not explain this correctly, because according to some of the scholars, the tziporen is not the root of a fragrant plant.

The Baal HaAruch writes that tziporen is the shecheiles, as we translate “nataf u’shecheiles” as netofa v’tufra. It is an aromatic substance shaped like a human fingernail, and it also has a somewhat shell-like form.

The chacham Don Yitzchak Abarbanel quotes almost the same explanation as Rashi, but adds on his own that in the Roman language it is called “Byzantio.” He even mentions the sea where this substance is found—the sea lying east of the city today called Constantinople, which in ancient times was called Byzantium. But he omitted the actual name of the substance found there, which in Greek is called blatta, written with a doubled t.

The word blatta has two meanings, depending on the language. In Latin it means a moth that eats clothing, while in Greek it means a sea-creature called purpura—the chilazon from which techeiles is dyed.

The Ramban writes:

“These three that are mentioned are not spices in the ordinary sense, because nataf and chelbena are resins, while shecheiles is the tziporen that comes from the sea.”

I am surprised at him. He was a great chacham in Torah, and was also knowledgeable in the secular sciences and thoroughly familiar with Arabic. Why, then, did he reveal one tefach and conceal two? Especially after having seen what the Rambam wrote about it.

The Rambam, however, as I said, explained the matter completely. In the second perek of Hilchos Klei HaMikdash he writes:

“Shecheiles is the tziporen which people place in incense mixtures.”

In Arabic he calls it atzfar tiv. My sons, you should know that, in my opinion, this expression atzfar tiv is not printed correctly, because the printers and proofreaders did not understand what it meant.

A fingernail in Greek is called onyx. Paulus Aegineta, the Greek physician, uses the borrowed name blatta for the fragrant tziporen. Here, however, it does not refer to the chilazon. Therefore some Greeks call it blatta Byzantion, to make clear that it is not the purpura. This may be what Abarbanel intended, although, as I said, he omitted the actual name.

In Latin, the tziporen is called conchula Indica and unguis odorata. In Arabic it is called athfar al-tib or adhfar al-tib, and in the vernacular ungia odorata.

I cannot conceal the fact that I have still not been fully at peace with the Rambam’s identification of the tziporen. I do not understand how something of this type could be suitable for burning in the ketores. Regarding the construction of the Mishkan, Chazal understood that the tachash was a kosher species, because in their view nothing was fit for the meleches Shamayim except the hide of a kosher beheima or chaya, and other things that were themselves tahor.

There is also another difficulty. The Gemara says that shecheiles is considered among the gidulei karka, as stated in the first perek of Kerisos:

Had the Torah written only nataf, I might have thought specifically a species of tree, but not other things that grow from the ground. Therefore it also wrote shecheiles, etc.

Perhaps the Rambam would answer that the skin of a non-kosher beheima or chaya is unfit because the skin actually grows out of, and is formed from, the flesh of the animal itself. The covering of the tziporen, however, is not like that. It is something that attaches to the creature externally and is not produced from its flesh, so that in a certain sense it has no real connection to the animal itself.

Alternatively, one could say that the hides of the techashim specifically had to come from a kosher animal because they remained visibly recognizable. They lay upon the Mishkan without undergoing any fundamental change, transformation, or destruction, remaining intact in the same bodily form and appearance in which they were created.

The tziporen used in the ketores, on the other hand, was not taken together with its flesh and limbs as it existed during the creature’s life. After the entire body had been removed, they would take only its outer covering, bare and clean of any flesh. Furthermore, after being rubbed with boris karshina and soaked in wine, it would then be completely ground and pulverized until its original substance was crushed into dust.

In addition, only the flesh of sea-creatures is prohibited for eating. Their bones and shells are permitted for benefit in every respect. In particular, according to Chazal in the tenth perek of Keilim, Mishnah 1, their skins and bones are not mekabel tumah.

Another possibility is that the tziporen would not be disqualified from the ketores even if it were used whole, together with its flesh and shell, since this ingredient was specifically transmitted to Moshe at Sinai together with the other samim. Just as melikah renders a bird forbidden to a Yisrael but, by Hashem’s decree, makes it fit for the Kohen and the Mizbe’ach, so too this sea-creature could be forbidden to us for eating but permitted for burning as part of the ketores by the mitzvah of Hashem. The pasuk says, “Sheketz hu lachem”—it is an abomination for you; for you, but not for the service of the Above.

One could also say that in a certain sense the tziporen may be called gidulei karka. This creature has only the sense of touch and does not move independently from place to place except incidentally, through the movement of the sea. It is therefore always found firmly attached to the seabed, similar to plants and grasses rooted in the earth, which do not move from their place unless uprooted.

Although these answers do not entirely settle the matter in my mind, for now we will rely on the Rambam’s words until we can learn the true nature of the tziporen more completely, either from reliable people or from books. This is especially so because neither the Ramban nor the Raavad, nor other chachamim who came after them, raised this objection against the Rambam.

And truthfully, although I have read almost everything written by the ancient authors known to us, as well as what later writers of our own times have written concerning all kinds of drugs and fragrances, I have never seen or heard of any fragrant substance in the world that would not be ruined by rubbing it with boris karshina and soaking it in wine. Such treatment should remove all of its pleasant fragrance, no matter how fine and powerful its smell might be—with the sole exception of this tziporen.

In my humble opinion, the reason the tziporen is called shecheiles is not because it resembles a human fingernail, as the Baal HaAruch writes. Rather, it is because it resembles the claw of a lion, which is called shachal in Tanach, as the pasuk says, “The roar of the aryeh and the voice of the shachal.”

Alternatively, it may be called shecheiles because it is a substance taken out of the sea. Thus the Targum of “min hamayim meshisihu”—“I drew him out of the water”—is, according to Onkelos, “arei min maya shechaltihu.”

Dioscorides writes in the second book of his work, chapter 8, that the fragrant tziporen is the covering of a certain sea-creature similar to a conchylion, which is the creature called purpura. It is found in the lakes of India where nard grows.

Perhaps there is a mistake in the text, and instead of nardum it should read malabathrum, which grows on the surface of those lakes. Nevertheless, even though these are two different aromatic plants, they are closely related for our purposes, because both have a pleasant smell and their fragrances are very similar. The tziporen therefore has a good fragrance because the creature feeds exclusively on the nard, or, according to the other reading, on the malabathrum.

It is found in the lakes after they dry up because of the intense heat. The finest tziporen is brought from the Red Sea. Its color tends toward white and it is naturally oily or rich in substance. The tziporen brought from Bavel is black and smaller than the one brought from the Red Sea. Nevertheless, both the Red Sea variety and the Babylonian variety give off a pleasant fragrance, and their smoke produces an equally good incense. Their smell is somewhat similar to the fragrance of castoreum.

This substance is called kastorion in Greek, castori in the vernacular, fiber in Latin, biber in German, bibaro in Spanish, biavri in French, and by various names in Arabic and other languages.

I thought it worthwhile to describe this animal for you, following the description given by Pietro Andrea Mattioli in his commentary on Dioscorides, concerning these great wonders of Hashem’s creation, so that someone who is not a physician and not knowledgeable in the secular sciences will not have to go searching for that book.

The animal from which castoreum comes is a creature that lives both in water and on land. At will it swims and remains in the water, or walks on its legs along the banks of rivers and other bodies of water, and even farther inland, like other land animals.

It is very similar to the animal called in Greek amphibia or enhydra, and in Latin and the vernacular lutra—the otter. The otter differs from the animal producing castoreum mainly in the form of its tail. Its hair, however, is not coarse, but smooth and wet like the hair of the castoreum animal.

Its head is almost round. Its teeth and eyes resemble those of a mouse. Its tongue is like that of a pig. Its jaws are like those of a hare. Its mouth is rounded rather than pointed, with stiff hairs around it like a cat’s whiskers. It also has similar hairs over its eyebrows.

At the front of its mouth are four teeth—two above and two below. They are long, broad, square, sharp, and cutting, hollow on the inside, and have a color somewhere between saffron-green and reddish. The molars on either side, seven in number, are uneven and serrated around their edges like the teeth of a saw.

Its ears are small and round and covered with hair. Its eyes are extremely small in proportion to its head and body.

The front feet are divided into five visible toes with strong and powerful claws. The hind feet resemble the feet of a goose and also have five toes, connected underneath by a kind of black membrane.

Its tail is approximately four fingers wide, shaped somewhat like a tongue, and more than a zeres long. The upper side has scales like those of fish. Underneath it is smooth and hairless, as is the upper surface of much of the tail. It uses this tail together with its hind feet to swim through the water.

The liver of this animal is very large and black, and divided into five lobes. Among the smaller lobes is the gallbladder. Its kidneys are relatively large, while its spleen is smaller than the liver, proportionate to the size of the animal.

Its reproductive organ resembles that of a pig. Its actual testicles are extremely small, enclosed inside the body and attached near the spine, no larger than the testicles of a rooster.

For this reason, one must understand that the castoreum used in medicines is not the animal’s testicles. Rather, it consists of two sacs possessed by both the male and female animal, located beneath the skin between the thigh and the belly, one on the right and one on the left.

These sacs are about the size of chicken eggs, and are sometimes even larger. Each sac has a small opening leading outside the body, located above the genital region near its opening. From these holes emerges an oily liquid, greenish like saffron and foul-smelling. The animal licks this substance with its tongue and spreads it over its entire body.

While it is on the animal’s skin, this substance is oily. If the sacs are removed after the animal’s death and hung in smoke, the liquid becomes thick, like honey, and takes on a chestnut-like color. Later it dries further until it becomes like wax.

The female passes its waste together with its urine and gives birth through a single region, which functions for the intestines, urinary tract, and womb.

As mentioned, the animal has exceptionally strong teeth, with which it cuts branches from trees. With the remarkable natural skill Hashem gave it, it uses these branches to construct a dwelling with several levels, building its home in burrows along riverbanks. It bites with great force and, once it has sunk its teeth into something, does not release its grip until the bone beneath the bite may actually be broken.

Ibn Sina, in the second book of his work, chapter 81, as well as the Arab physician Serapion in his compilation, chapter 151, write concerning the tziporen essentially only what Dioscorides wrote.

Serapion in particular writes that the tziporen has a smell somewhat similar to castoreum. According to this, the correct understanding of the beraisa concerning the ketores is:

“Boris karshina was used to rub the tziporen so that it should be na’ah, and Cyprus wine was used to soak the tziporen because it was azah.”

The word na’ah here does not mean “beautiful” in the ordinary sense. Why would we care whether the tziporen looked attractive? It was going to be thoroughly ground up anyway, and after grinding one could no longer see whether it had originally looked beautiful. All that mattered was that it should be good and of fine quality.

Rather, na’ah here means proper and fit, as in the expression davar na’eh u’miskabel—something appropriate and acceptable.

Since the tziporen is, as explained, the covering of a sea-creature, there is a concern that a small amount of the creature’s flesh might remain tightly attached to some part of the shell. That flesh could decay and spoil its smell. They therefore rubbed it thoroughly with boris karshina on the inside to remove any remaining flesh.

They also rubbed the outside very well, because the soap removes the earthy or dirty material adhering to its outer surface, which would otherwise detract somewhat from its good fragrance.

And when the beraisa says that the tziporen was azah—strong—it means that its odor naturally tends toward the powerful smell of castoreum, as explained above. They therefore soaked it in old white wine in order to weaken and soften that overly strong odor.