Kedoshim: The Ibn Ezra and Kelaim

קדושים תהיו, you should be holy, is understood by many ראשונים to highlight the value of a life not engaged in inappropriate relationships. It follows the prohibitions at the end of פרשת אחרי מות which list forbidden relationships and so it is logical that קדושים תהיו is a continuation of the same theme.

Interestingly, the אבן עזרא, Avraham ben Meir ibn Ezra who lived at the turn of the 10^th century and was forced to flee Muslim lands after the Almohad’s forced Jewish conversion to Islam, has a different approach that I believe reflects how he will understand the commandments that follow in subsequent פסוקים. The אבן עזרא argues that the need to highlight this important principle of קדושים תהיו is to illustrate to the Jewish people that קדושים תהיו is not accomplished by simply refraining from inappropriate relationships. To accomplish this lofty goal of קדושים תהיו there are many מצוות that need to be strictly kept, specifically treating each other fairly as summarized in what רבי עקיבא called a כלל גדול בתורה, ואהבת לרעיך כמוך.

It is then quite fascinating that the following פסוק is

את חוקתי תשמרו בהמתך לא תרביע כלאים שדך לא תזרע כלאים ובגד כלאים שעטנז לא יעלה עליך

After this cardinal rule of ואהבת לרעיך כמוך we are told of a confusing and seemingly arbitrary prohibition, do not crossbreed two animals, do not crossbreed plants and do not wear a garment made of two different kinds of material.

The אבן עזרא’s explanation of that פסוק further compounds the irrelevance.

להזהיר אחר היותך קדוש, לא תעשה חמס לבן אדם כמוך, גם לא תעשה לבהמה, לשנות מעשה השם.

He highlights that after we are told קדושים תהיו and told the ideal way to treat each other we are then logically told do not do so to animals because לשנות מעשה השם, simply translated, it subverts the natural order that God placed. It is unclear what the logical order of these פסוקים are how does ואהבת לרעיך כמוך inform לשנות מעשה השם?

To be perfectly honest, in a vacuum, arguing that there is a prohibition of violating God’s natural order is not out of character for the אבן עזרא. Elsewhere, he argues that for natural illnesses it is improper to go seek a physician’s help, as how dare we go against the will of God. This assumption has resulted in at least one halachic authority to argue that while the אבן עזרא may know חומש he was not knowledgeable in the halachic process. Nonetheless, here, the אבן עזרא seems to suggest that opposing the natural order is logically consistent with ואהבת לרעיך כמוך.

I would argue that לשנות מעשה השם is not to be understood as simply subverting nature by creating new breeds. Instead, the אבן עזרא underscores that crossbreeding animals is cruel, just as treating a person not as you would want to be treated is cruel, and that cruelty, not interbreeding in it of itself, is a subversion of the natural order, לשנות מעשה השם.

This will also explain the somewhat puzzling explanation of the אבן עזרא regarding the other two forbidden mixtures, interbreeding plants and mixing materials in clothing. The אבן עזרא explains that the reason behind the איסור of כלאים with clothes and plants is that they are simply מצוות לזכר, to remind us that we are not allowed to crossbreed animals. However, if the prohibition is undermining the natural order then the same principle should apply to creating new plants. By the fact that the אבן עזרא assumes the prohibition is simply a reminder, he must have assumed that the reason that interbreeding animals is inappropriate is different than interbreeding plants. This a position that is consistent if the prohibition of interbreeding animals is due to cruelty, something which would not be applicable to plants or clothes.

This analysis of the אבן עזרא’s position is also reflected in how the איוסר כלאים is presented in ספר במדבר. There we are also told of three איסורים but they are not the same three איסורים mentioned here.

לא תזרע כמך כלאים…לא תחרש בשור וחמור יחדו…לא תלבש שעטנז

Instead of prohibiting the interbreeding of two animals, in ספר במדבר we are told we must not allow an ox and donkey to plow together. The אבן עזרא explains, what we have all heard before, that it is cruel to have a powerful animal pull a plow alongside a weaker animal.

It is therefore possible that the אבן עזרא cross-referenced the two sources to understand the prohibition of the one whose positioning in the פסוקים is otherwise difficult to understand. He argued that crossbreeding animals is cruel just as having a stronger and weaker animal pull a plow together and just as not treating your friend as yourself is a form of cruelty.

This then allows for a much more profound understanding of the אבן עזרא’s use of לשנות מעשה השם. He is not arguing that interbreeding and creating new species is against the very nature of God’s will. Instead, he is suggesting that cruelty be it to animals and especially to people is לשנות מעשה השם, subverting the very nature of God’s will.

In other words, according to this presentation of the אבן עזרא the purpose of the איסור כלאים is a reminder to tell us to treat each other as we would like to be treated, otherwise, we are לשנות מעשה השם, subverting the natural order that God intended.