They Shall Make for Themselves Sisiyoth [Fringes]

They Shall Make for Themselves
Sisith [Fringe/Tassel]

By Hakham Meir Yosef Rekhavi

The miswa [commandment/precept] for wearing sisith [fringe/tassel] is derived from two passages in the Tora:

1. And YHWH said to Moshe saying: Speak to the Children of Yisrael, and say to them, and they shall make for themselves sisith [fringe/tassel] on the extremities of their garments throughout their generations, and they shall place upon the sisith [fringe/tassel] of the extremity a twisted thread of blue. And it shall be to you for sisith [fringe/tassel], that you shall see it, and you shall remember all the commandments of YHWH, and you shall do them, and you shall not seek after your heart and after your eyes, that you go a whoring after them. In order that you remember, and do all my commandments, and you will be holy to your God. I am YHWH your God, who brought you out of the Land of Misrayim [Egypt], to be to you for a God, I am YHWH your God. (Num. 15:37-41)[1]

2. Twisted cords you shall make for yourself on the four extremities of your covering garment with which you cover yourself. (Deut. 22:12)

The word sisith means fringe or tassel, it also means a lock of hair on the forehead, as it is written, "He took me by a lock [sisith] of my head" (Ezek. 8:3). The related Aramaic sisitho or sisitha [depending on pronunciation of dialect] means 'hair on forehead'. Sis is the word used in the Tora for blossom, flower (see Num. 17:23 Aharon's rod, Isa. 40:6&7) and the plate of gold constituting the diadem on front of the Kohen Haggadhol's [High Priest's] mitre on which was inscribed "Kodhesh LaYHWH" [Holy to YHWH] (see Ex. 28:36; 39:30, Lev. 8:9). The related word hesis means to peer or gaze at something intently (see Song of Songs 2:9), thus drawing a parallel with Numbers 15:39, where it is stated that one should look at the sisith in order to remember all the miswoth. The Targum renders sisith as karuspadho or keruspedha [depending on pronunciation of dialect], which has the meaning of edges or hems. In Deuteronomy 22:12 the sisith are called Gedhilim, which is the plural form of gadhil or gedhil, meaning twisted cords. 1 Kings 7:17 gedhilim are festoons of chain work that were on the capitals of the columns outside the entrance to the Beyth Hammikdash [Temple]. A festoon being a wreath or garland hanging in a loop or curve. In Aramaic a twist, cord or plaited lock is gadhilo or gedhila [depending on pronunciation of dialect] while a cord in Babylonian is gidlu.

The Samaritans do not harmonise the passage from Numbers with the passage from Deuteronomy. The reason for this, according to the Samaritans, is that in Numbers the word sisith is used whilst gadhil is used in Deuteronomy. Therefore because each passage uses a different noun the two passages must be referring to two different miswoth. The Samaritans are in agreement with us in that the passage from Deuteronomy is referring to fringes but not so for the passage from Numbers. The Tabbakh[2] harmonises sisith, because of the twisted thread of tekheleth [blue], with the Hoshen [breastplate], on which the jewels of twelve colours were set, worn by the Kohen Haggadhol [High Priest] and held in place by a twisted thread of tekheleth (see Ex. 28:28). By means of this harmonisation he arrives at the conclusion that they are silk fringes, thirty-two in number, comprising the twelve colours belonging to the jewels and of course the twisted thread of tekheleth. Since there is no harmonisation with the passage from Deuteronomy there are not four fringes but only two worn on the sleeves. I do not agree with this form of exegesis, for surely it would be more logical to harmonise the sisith from Numbers with the sis of the Kohen Haggadhol (see above) which was also held in place by a twisted thread of tekheleth. The fact that Numbers and Deuteronomy use two different nouns does not mean that they refer to two different miswoth. For instance when referring to the time of the Korban Pesah [Passover Offering] the Tora designates that part of the day by three different names. In Ex. 12:6 it is called beyn ha'arbayim, meaning twilight, literary between the two evenings. In Deut. 16:6 ba'arev, meaning in the evening and also kevo hashshemesh which means at sunset, literary when the sun comes. Thus all three terms have the same meaning. Nobody in their right mind would hold that the Korban Pesah should be offered up on three different occasions in the same day. Therefore sisith and gadhil are both referring to the same item.

The part of the sisith that does not consist of the twisted thread of tekheleth [blue] is usually dyed white because we are not commanded to dye it any colour and white is classified as a neutral colour. They can be made of any material providing it is ritually pure and not an impure material, in other words sha'atnez[3]. The Rabbanites claim an abominable thing, that the sisith should be made of sha'atnez (Targ. Jon. to Deut. 22:12; B. Men. 39b-40a, 43a), something which is forbidden in the Tora (Lev. 19:19, Deut. 22:11). By their method of homiletic interpretation the Rabbanites connect Deuteronomy 22:12 with the preceding verse "You shall not wear sha'atnez, wool and linen together" (Deut. 22:11) and for some illogical reason then claim that sisith should be sha'atnez. How they come to this conclusion totally baffles me as the ruling in Deuteronomy 22:11 is against the wearing of sha'atnez, and there is no dispensation for this where Deuteronomy 22:12 is concerned i.e. the phrase 'apart from the' is not used at all in connecting these two verses. The Rabbanites also insist that the sisith are modelled after the garments of the Kohanim [priests], which according to the Rabbanites are to be made of sha'atnez. There is no evidence in the entire Mikra that the garments of the Kohanim are to be made of sha'atnez, in fact the opposite is true, "they shall wear garments of linen and shall not put on, on them, wool when they serve" (Ezek. 44:17) and again "Linen turbans there shall be on their heads and linen breeches there shall be on their loins" (Ezek. 44:18). Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews book 3 chapter 7 describes the garments of the Kohanim and the Kohen Haggadhol, no where does he write that their garments were made of sha'atnez but emphatically states that they were made of linen. The fact that white linen cords and dyed woollen cords were found in the Bar Kokheva caves does not prove, as some like to claim, that sisith should be made of sha'atnez. For one, the white linen cords and the dyed woollen cords were not bound together but were found separate from each other, and second the dyed woollen cords were not dyed tekheleth [blue] but were dyed argaman [red-purple/violet], thus they could not have been for sisith.

A twisted thread of blue [tekheleth; Akkadian = takiltu], the colour of the sky (see below), is taken and entwined in the sisith. The way the sisith are bound is not specified in the Tora and it is therefore a matter of custom and personal preference how one binds their sisith. No one way is sanctioned by halakha, but the definitions of the word sisith and gedhilim (see above) might bear some significance on this matter. The colour blue has always been a sign of royalty hence the term 'royal blue' (see Est. 8:15), it is therefore a symbol that Yisrael are a noble people, the princes of YHWH. The sisith are not restricted to the leaders of Yisrael, be they kings, priests or sages, but is the uniform of all Yisrael. The Aron Hakkodhesh [Holy Ark], YHWH's throne, was wrapped in a tekheleth [blue] cloth (Num. 4:6) and tekheleth curtains adorned the Mishkan [tabernacle, literally dwelling place] indicating that it was the palace of the 'King of kings' (e.g. Ex. 26:31,36). Tekheleth was also used in the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol [High Priest] (see Ex. 28:31,37 etc.) and the twisted thread of tekheleth in the sisith is then there to remind us that we belong to "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Ex. 19:6). Like the Kohen Haggadhol we are called to exhibit holiness not only in our outer garb, but in our whole way of life, as it is written "you will be holy to your God" (Num. 15:40).

According to the Rabbanites the blue dye used for the sisith, the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol and for certain fabrics used in the Mishkan, was extracted from the gland of the Murex trunculus sea snail found in shallow waters off the coasts of Eastern Mediterranean countries. It is true that the Murex trunculus was used for obtaining blue dye in the ancient Near East, and incidentally it is only the male that secretes the blue dye, but the Tora itself does not give any indication of the validity of this claim neither does the LXX. Philo and Josephus, both of whom lived towards the end of the 2nd Temple Period, give no indication what so ever that the blue dye for tekheleth was procured from such a source. Even the Mishna, the Rabbanite so-called oral law, is silent as to the source of the blue dye. Thus the whole Rabbanite concept that the blue dye is extracted from the gland of a sea snail dates no earlier than the year 200 C.E. It has been proven that 12,000 snails yield only 1.4 grams of blue dye thus making it an extremely expensive source of blue dye. The Rabbis after claiming that the dye for tekheleth should come only from the Murex trunculus then suspended the requirement of the twisted thread of tekheleth. This was because the price of blue dye from the Murex trunculus became far too expensive for the average Yisraelite too afford due to the decline of the dye industry (B. Men. 42b). In suspending the use of the twisted thread of tekheleth the Rabbis negated a positive miswa and adulterated the Tora, for it is written "You shall not add to it and not diminish therefrom." (Deut. 4:2) The miswa of sisith, inclusive of the twisted thread of tekheleth, was given by YHWH for perpetuity "and they shall make for themselves sisith [fringe/tassel] on the extremities of their garments throughout their generations" (Num. 15:38). Surely YHWH would not command us to extract the much needed dye from a source that would become hard to obtain and be far too expensive for the average Yisraelite too afford and thus cause unnecessary spiritual and material hardship upon his people! The Murex trunculus is a non-kasher animal, an animal whose mere carcass is a source of impurity; "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the streams, from all swarming things in the water, and from living beings that are in the water, they are detestable things to you. And detestable things they will be to you; from their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall detest." (Lev. 11:10-11) Can something so impure be used for something as holy as the Aron Hakkodhesh, the curtains adorning the Mishkan and the vestments of the Kohen Haggadhol?

The Mikra does not exactly state from where the dye for tekheleth is to be procured, and if the blue dye is not obtained from the Murex trunculus from where then is it obtained? To answer this question we must first determine the etymology of the word tekheleth. Tekheleth's regular companion in the Tora is argaman [red-purple/violet], argewan is the alternative spelling found in 2 Chronicles, in Akkadian tekheleth = takiltu and argaman = argamannu. By knowing the possible etymology of argaman we can maybe determine the etymology of tekheleth. It should be noted that both words might not be of Semitic origin. The Indians ranked high as dyers in the ancient world especially for their skills in producing purples and blues from vegetable dye matter. Maybe it is towards India that we should look to find the etymology of argaman. Could then the etymology of argaman/argewan be in the Sanskrit ragamen and ragavan, both adjectives derived from raga = red. If argaman is derived from the Sanskrit might not tekheleth its regular companion be traced to the Sanskrit kala = deep blue, indigo blue? The Talmud states that tekheleth is indistinguishable from kala-ilan. In fact kala-ilan is the Talmudic name for indigo which seems to be derived from the Sanskrit kala and the Aramaic ilan = tree in view of the fact that the indigo plant often attains the height of 2m it could popularly be called a tree. Another possibility is that kala-ilan is a corruption of kala-nilam, nilam being the Sanskrit for indigo or kala-lan, lan being the Chinese for indigo. Could indigo then be the source of the blue dye used in the Mishkan, the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol and sisith? Chemical examinations of specimens of ancient Egyptian blue fabrics by Wilkinson in 1878 proved the dye to be that of indigo; none of the fabrics examined were found to be dyed by Murex trunculus or any other such sea snail. When Yisrael left Misrayim [Egypt] they took with them many items of the Misriym [Egyptians] (see Ex. 12:35-36), these items were later on used in the building of the Mishkan and for the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol. Thus the tekheleth cloth that the Aron Hakkodhesh was wrapped in, the tekheleth curtains that adorned the Mishkan and the tekheleth fabric used in the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol, all of which were procured from Misrayim, had been dyed blue with indigo. The indigo plant, a cheap abundant source that gives a fast dye and is kasher, satisfied the need for blue in the ancient Near East to such an extent that there was no interest in or need for any other blues. Therefore the overwhelming evidence points towards indigo as the source dye for tekheleth and not the Murex trunculus or any other form of sea snail. The Rabbis forbade the use of indigo and classified it as a counterfeit source of blue dye, for they were determined to force upon the people their interpretation of the Tora as the only legitimate one. Their ruling that Murex trunculus was the source for the blue dye was therefore part of their drive for religious and political control of the nation. There is also the plausibility that the Pharisees had an economic interest in the dye industry of the Murex trunculus.

Now that we have ascertained that the tekheleth fabrics and materials mentioned in the Tora were dyed tekheleth by indigo, we are left with the problem of what shade of tekheleth determines the exact colour of the tekheleth in question. While investigating this problem we must bear in mind that the word tekheleth means blue in general and not a specific shade of blue. The introduction of the new word kahol in Hebrew for blue cannot serve as an argument that tekheleth is a specific shade of blue. As seen from above it is possible that deep indigo blue determined the exact shade of tekheleth in question. We will now analyse the evidence for this [4] In the LXX, the oldest Greek translation of the Mikra (about 3rd Century B.C.E), tekheleth is rendered by Iakinthos. The word occurs as the name of a precious stone that is deep blue in colour and was also known as Sappheiros = Sapphire.[5] The Sapphire was so called because of its blue colour. The gem that we now know today as Sapphire, which is blue Corundum, was not the same as the Sapphire of the ancients. The Sapphire of the ancients is the stone that we now call Lapis Lazuli. Hieronymus (4th Century C.E) who lived in Eres Yisrael [Land of Israel] and studied under Jewish masters, states in his commentary to Ezekiel 16:10 that the stone Iakinthos resembled the deep blue of the sky. Ambrosius also defines the colour of Iakinthos as a gem the colour of the serene sky and states that the fabric borrowed its name from the precious stone. Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews book 3 chapter 6 describes the construction of the Mishkan and in section 4 mentions its tekheleth coverings, "great was the surprise of those who viewed these curtains at a distance, for they seemed not at all to differ from the colour of the sky." In all probability Josephus here reflects his personnel experience of the illusion created by the sight of tekheleth from a distance. The Karaite Hakhamim render tekheleth as sky colour as do the Samaritans. In conclusion, tekheleth has the appearance of the deep blue of the serene Western Asiatic sky in bright sunshine. To those unacquainted with the subtropical sky this might seem somewhat strange, the colour of the temperate sky even in the finest weather intends to be rather pale than deep blue. The pale blue of the sky in dull weather was not regarded as the real colour of the sky thus, "like the substance of the heavens in purity" (Ex. 24:10) (see below). Deep indigo blue may thus be taken to be the exact shade of the colour tekheleth in question.

Why has tekheleth been singled out from all other colours? Bearing all of the above in mind I will now propose to answer this question. Tekheleth is like unto the sky and the sky like unto the lapis lazuli and the lapis lazuli is like unto the Throne of Glory, for it is written: "And they saw the God of Yisrael and under his feet[6] like the work of lapis lazuli brick and like the substance of the heavens in purity" (Ex. 24:10). It is also written: "And from above the expanse that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like lapis lazuli" (Ezek. 1:26). Tekheleth therefore has the similarity of the colour of the Throne of Glory as seen in prophetic vision. With this in mind, the symbolic significance of the deep blue of tekheleth, which resembles the sky, is to remind one of heaven and so raises one's feelings and thoughts to higher planes.

Tekheleth occupies a somewhat higher position than argaman in the ladder of sanctity. Thus the Mi'il [outer robe] of the Kohen Haggadhol was made wholly of tekheleth. The Sis[7] on which was inscribed "Kodhesh LaYHWH" [Holy to YHWH], which was attached to the Misnepheth [mitre] by means of a twisted thread [pethil] of tekheleth, and so was the Hoshen [breastplate]. When the tribes broke camp during the wanderings in the dessert the Mishkan was disassemble and the utensils from within the Mishkan were covered with coverings of tekheleth, while the utensils from the courtyard i.e. the Mizbeyah[8] [altar], were covered with coverings of argaman (see Num. 4:5-14). There is then a linear symmetry from the pethil tekheleth of the sisith to the tekheleth of the garments of the Kohen Haggadhol through to the tekheleth within the Mishkan, the tekheleth cloth covering the Aron Hakkodhesh and finally to the tekheleth colour of the Throne of Glory as seen in prophetic vision.

If the tekheleth is missing then the sisith is impaired. The same can be said if the white is missing, for they do not constitute two miswoth but one affirmative miswa. The evidence for the fact that it constitutes one affirmative miswa and not two is as follows. It is written "And it shall be to you for sisith" (Num. 15:39) in the singular and not sisiyoth which is the plural, it is also written "a twisted thread of blue." (Num. 15:38) which is also in the singular, for pethil [twisted thread] is pethilim in the plural, thus signifying a group collective i.e. the white and the tekheleth [blue] forming one miswa. This is further proved by the next part of the verse which is "that you shall see it", 'it' being otho in Hebrew is singular masculine. This can not be referring to the sisith, which is a feminine noun, but must be referring to the sisith and the twisted thread [pethil] as one unit. The Rabbanites hold that they do not impair each other. Therefore, according to the Rabbanites, even if a sisith is all white or all tekheleth it remains valid. As can be seen from above this view is erroneous. No definite number of threads is prescribed in the Tora and it is therefore a matter of custom and personal preference how many threads one includes in their sisith. It has been shown above that the sisith and the twisted thread [pethil] of tekheleth [blue] are both in the singular thus also signifying, on the basis of one for one, that the quantity of white must be equal to the quantity of tekheleth. Anyone who wears a garment with the tekheleth and the white together fulfills the positive miswa.

We can see from Numbers and Deuteronomy that the sisith is attached to the extremities or corners of the garment. The Hebrew kanfey means extremities or literally 'wings'. The Tora states that the garment should be a "covering garment with which you cover yourself". (Deut. 22:12) The word kesuth means a covering garment and is derived from the root k-s-h to cover, in Akkadian: kusu = cover, kusitu = garment. The garment that one is biblically obligated to provide with sisith is one with four extremities/corners (Deut. 22:12) or one that has more than four. Through out the ancient Near East, as can be seen by the art from the period, the hem of the outer garment contained fringes. In one such picture the sisith is clearly evident and takes the form of a flower head, which as shown above is one of the meanings of the word sis. Another picture shows the sisith at quarter points of the hem thereby forming four corners. Yet another shows scalloped skirts with the sisith hanging from where the scallops meet, a scalloped hem is the winged extremity of the garment hence kanaf = extremity/wing. The more important the individual, the more elaborate the fringe was. There is therefore a connection between sisith and status, as mentioned above, that status is to be "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Ex. 19:6).

This now brings us to a question I have been asked quite a few times and that is, 'is the miswa to wear sisith also obligatory for women?' Personally I think that the answer is yes, this is also the opinion of Yuhudha Hadhassi in his Eshkol Hakkofer (see page 14, column b, line 41 of the 1836 Gozlow edition). The Rabbanites claim that women do not wear sisith because women do not have to observe miswoth that are limited to a fixed time (B. Kidd. 35a) and sisith is a miswa limited to a fixed time. Does this mean that women should not keep Shabbath because it has a fixed time in the week? Wearing sisith is no more of a fixed time than observing kashruth is, are they then exempt from the laws of kashruth! This is one of those points where the Rabbanites contradict themselves for rabbinic literature claims that the wearing of sisith is not limited to a fixed time (Tosef. Kid. 1:10). Another Rabbanite argument for women not wearing sisith is the fact that the section on sisith in Numbers commences with "Speak to the Children of Yisrael" (Num. 15:38), thus indicating that it is directed to the males only i.e. children is in the masculine form. This is ridicules, for as any one with a basic understanding of Hebrew grammar will know when one male is present amongst a group of females the tense becomes masculine, therefore Children of Yisrael does not specify males only. When the Kohanim are told to bless the Children of Yisrael is it just males they are to bless? During the dessert wanderings was it just the males who dwelt in booths? For it is written, "In order that your generations will know that in sukkoth [booths] I made the Children of Yisrael dwell, when I brought them out of the Land of Misrayim [Egypt]" (Lev. 23:43). There are many other examples of miswoth which start off "Speak to the Children of Yisrael" i.e. Shabbath, are women exempt from keeping Shabbath? Again the Rabbanites contradict themselves for according to early rabbinic literature women should wear sisith (Sif. Num. 115 and B. Men. 43a).

One should always be heedful of the miswa concerning sisith, since the Tora regards it to be of such importance that all the miswoth have been made to depend on it, as it is written: "that you shall see it, and you shall remember all the commandments of YHWH, and you shall do them." (Num. 15:39) The Rabbanites are under the erroneous impression "that you shall see it" means that the miswa of sisith should only be performed during day light hours (Sif. Num. 115 and B. Men. 43a). This is ludicrous because even at night one can see the sisith and be aware of its presence; it is very rare that there is absolute darkness so one can not see them. It is also written "and you shall remember all the commandments of YHWH, and you shall do them," since when does remembering and observing the miswoth of YHWH apply to day light hours only. The true meaning of "that you shall see it" is that when one looks at the sisith of their garment they will remind them of YHWH's miswoth and that their heart and eyes must not be led astray after those things which are contrary to the Tora. Thus promoting constant meditation on the Tora of YHWH, for prevention is better than cure. Yisrael will then bear in mind that they are YHWH's servants as it is written, "For to me are the Children of Yisrael servants, they are my servants, whom I have brought out from the Land of Misrayim [Egypt], I am YHWH your God." (Lev. 25:55)

If the true meaning of "that you shall see it" is to remind one of YHWH's miswoth and therefore to perform them, does some one who is blind also need to wear sisith? Yes they do, for even if they cannot see the sisith others "shall see it" and will be reminded by them.

J. Milgrom on the strength of "and you shall not seek after your heart and after your eyes, that you go a whoring after them." (Num. 15:39) claims that the passage in Numbers on sisith was placed in chapter 15 to form a verbal inclusion with the episode of the spies recounted in chapters 13-14. In "scouting/seeking" [tur] (see Num. 13:2,25; 14:34), the spies "whored" [zana] (see Num. 14:33) after their eyes and brought a false report. The root of the word zana is z-n-h, which means to fornicate, and is used in connection with any form of moral defect. The eyes and the heart are regarded as the main agents of transgression: 'The eye sees, the heart desires, and the person executes'. So by wearing sisith Yisrael would be prevented from "scouting/seeking" and "whoring" "after their heart and eyes" they therefore act as reminders to be totally loyal to YHWH.

By stating "remember and do all my commandments" (Num. 15:40) the Tora is saying that it is not enough merely to remember the miswoth, but that one must also perform all the miswoth and not pick and choose among them. One must therefore remember the miswoth and perform them all with equal haste, the sisith are then an outward expression of an inward thought. Such a realisation makes a person holy for it is written "and you will be holy to your God" (Num. 15:40). This was YHWH's purpose in taking Yisrael out of Misrayim [Egypt] for the deliverance from Misrayim was conditional upon Yisrael's acceptance of the miswoth. The custom of pressing the sisith to the Tora scroll and the saying of a blessing when one is called up to read from the Tora could have originated as a reaffirmation of one's commitment to the Tora. In both words and in deed one is pledging to live by the miswoth of the Tora.

It is improper for a Yisraelite to exempt themselves from observing this miswa by not wearing a garment with four extremities no matter what the dictates of fashion are. A Yisraelite should always strive to wear a garment that requires sisith, so as to perform this miswa. By the fulfilment of this miswa each Yisraelite is proclaiming that they are not ashamed of what they are, YHWH's servants, for the sisith are YHWH's insignia and every Yisraelite must wear YHWH's insignia just as a vassal wears the insignia of his master. Why should we be shyer of the laws of our faith than the Sikh who always wears his turban? What greater manifestation can there be of loyalty to the Tora than the wearing of sisith, for with wearing them one acknowledges that YHWH is the sole ruler of one's life. This is part of accepting YHWH's yoke and subjugating oneself to his rule for "I am YHWH your God, who brought you out of the Land of Misrayim [Egypt], to be to you for a God, I am YHWH your God." (Num. 15:41) There are those who are in error because they are under the impression that sisith need only be worn during prayer, but it is less important to wear this garment during prayer than to wear it at all other times. The concept of sisith, as shown above, is to act as a warning before one sins, so one will see the sisith and think twice before they commit a sin. One needs this reminder all day and not so much when one is praying and is unlikely to commit a sin.



[1] All the Biblical verses in this article have been translated by the author.

[2] Written by Abul Hasan of Tyre in the 11th Century.

[3] A mixture of wool and linen (Deut. 22:11). In Lev. 19:19 a garment of two kinds of material. Wool and linen is therefore an example of the principle of a mixture between two kinds of material namely an animal source and a vegetable source. For instance "You shall not plough with an ox and with a donkey together." (Deut. 22:10) and "and you shall make a parapet for your roof, and you shall not put blood-(guilt) on your house, if someone falling will fall from it." (Deut. 22:8) are the underlying principles of the halakha i.e. mixing to forms of beasts together for labour (Deut. 22:10) and preventing accidental injury (Deut. 22:8). For example the Tora does not mention making a rail for a stair-way to stop someone falling and injuring themselves but the underlying principle is there in Deut. 22:8.

[4] For this paragraph I found much valuable information in 'Hebrew Porphyrology' by Rabbi I. Herzog, London 1913.

[5] See Ambrosius, Apologia Bk. 11 Ch. 30 and Cains Julius Solinus, Collectanea rerum p. 152, Ed. Mommsen, Berlin 1864.

[6] All anthropomorphism in the Mikra is not to be taken literary but is purely metaphorical.

[7] Plate of gold constituting the diadem on front of the Kohen Haggadhol's mitre.

[8] Literary slaughter site.