[Avodah] What is chelev?

[Akiva Miller]

.
Since beginning Sefer Vayikra a few weeks ago, I've gotten interested in
understanding more about chelev. Not its halachos so much, but its
identification from a biological and linguistic perspective.

For example, "chelev" is consistently translated in every Chumash I've seen
either as "forbidden fat" or simply as "fat" without any qualifier. This
has made me wonder whether a non-Jewish butcher or veterinarian would
distinguish between chelev and shuman; perhaps the only difference is
halachic. But this seems not to be the case. The English Wikipedia
(articles titled "Chelev" and "Suet") clearly identifies chelev as a
particular kind of fat, namely the kind that is called "suet" in English.

A detailed article on Sefaria titled "Chelev - Suet: What is it, and why
was it forbidden?" (https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/309732?lang=bi) also
identifies chelev as suet, and cites the Ramban Vayikra 3:9: <<< The term
cheilev (fat) in the Sacred Language indicates that part of the fat which
is separate from the meat and not joined to it. Shuman, on the other hand,
is that fat which is intertwined with the meat and cannot be separated from
it, ... But cheilev is the fat which is separate from the meat and covered
by a membrane, and is easily peeled off. The Hebrew language never
interchanges these terms [cheilev and shuman] in any place. Thus we say,
basar shamen (fat meat), but not basar cheilev [since cheilev, as
explained, is the fat which is separate and distinguished from the meat].
Similarly in languages of other nations these terms are separate. ... This
is confirmed by doctors who in their studies of nature have established the
fact that cheilev [fat which is separate from the meat], is never to be
found [in the animal] near the hide, nor in a limb which is always in
movement [such as the tail]. The doctors have further said that the nature
of shuman found in the ribs, sides and tail, which is not separate from the
meat, is warm and moist, whilst that fat which can be separated from the
meat, such as that which is upon the kidneys, is cold and moist, thick and
coarse; ... >>>

So my first question is this: If shuman and chelev are so different, and
English has words for each of them, why does everyone (Jewish or not)
translate chelev as fat? As a sample test case, I did a Google search for
translations of Shemos 23:18; I found dozens where chelev was translated as
"fat", and not even one case of "suet'.

I don't remember why, but I went to my concordance to look for the root
shin-mem-nun. Of course, there were many many cases of the noun "shemen -
oil". There were also several cases of the adjective "shamayn - fat/oily",
and the verb "shaman - to become fat/oily".  But I did not find even one
example of the noun "shuman - fat".

Jastrow lists a few examples of "shuman", but they are all post-Tanach. Why
would this be? I have one guess: Nowadays, we perceive shuman and chelev to
be two varieties of the same thing, namely fat. Maybe that's not how they
were perceived back then. Ramban (see above) explained that shuman is
"intertwined with the mean and cannot be separated from it", whereas chelev
is always mentioned in the context of sacrificial organs. Apparently, they
considered chelev to be an organ, i.e. a distinct part of the body, just
like the kidneys, the blood, the skin, and other parts -- which is
something that cannot be said about the shuman. To a Tanach-era person,
shuman was a non-entity. (I had intended for this paragraph to be my second
question in this post, but I guess I figured it out. Even so, all comments
are welcome.)

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20230411/2633e4a3/attachment-0002.htm>