SPORTS AND ATHLETICS

ATHLETICS and competitive games in Talmudic times had, to use an American sporting expression, two strikes against them. In Mishnaic and Talmudic times, public sporting spectacles, public games, etc., were associated with the Greek and Roman heathendom, against which Judaism fought its greatest battles. The Greeks with their public athletics in the stadiums, the Romans with their gladiatorial contests, man against man, man against beast, and beast against beast—all of these were hateful to the Jews for a number of reasons. One, these public spectacles were always dedicated to the gods and hence were part of heathendom; and then, also, a great deal of betting took place at these contests, and gambling was strictly forbidden by Jewish law. The Talmud (in Avodah Zora 18b) forbids attending circuses, stadiums, etc. In the discussion of gambling, too, besides the expected mention of dice play, there was reference to sporting contests. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 25a) develops the Mishnaic objection to those “who fly doves,” speaks of racing pigeons, one against the other, and also (25b) of racing any other animals.

These two objections (heathendom and gambling) were carried over in all medieval discussions in the responsa literature and additional objections were developed. However, the very fact that the question came up century after century, indicates that the people themselves did follow the various sports and therefore the rabbis had to be asked to pass their judgment on the popular practice. Thus it was with mixed dancing, which never was suppressed, and so it was with gambling, concerning which there is a wealth of material in the responsa literature. As for direct references to what might be called games and sport, there is a fair amount in the responsa. Of course, one rarely finds any outright approval of a game or sport because of the shadow of the negative tradition mentioned above.

The subject which occupies most space in the responsa is hunting. Jews from ancient times fished and trapped animals. In medieval Europe, where game was plentiful and hunting was the dominant sport among the nobility, this occupation found its way into Jewish life and there are references to it in almost every century. Isaac of Vienna (early thirteenth century) in Or Zoruah, II, “Laws of Sabbath,” 86:17, discusses the possibility (upon Talmudic grounds) of permitting hunting with dogs, but he says: “But I say whoever hunts animals with dogs, as the Gentiles do, will not have the joy of the Leviathan feast,” (i.e., will not go to heaven). This is cited almost precisely in the next century by the famous authority, Meir of Rothenburg, in his Responsa 27 (edition Berlin).

But hunting continued among the Jews and there are responsa on the subject in almost every generation. In Pachad Yitzchok, by Isaac Lamperonti (seventeenth century) there is one responsum by Sabbatai ben Elisha, another by Isaac Lamperonti himself. It seems clear to the scholars that hunting with dogs is forbidden on the basis of Or Zoruah, quoted above. However, when the result of these various decisions is finally codified in the Shulchan Aruch (Orah Hayyim 316, 2, in the note of Isserles) it is still uncertain whether hunting with dogs is absolutely forbidden- Isserles simply says that on the Sabbath, urging a dog against a beast constitutes “forbidden” hunting, and then adds: “And some say that even on weekdays it is forbidden to hunt with dogs.”

When gunpowder came into general use, and hunting of animals could be followed even without dogs, the questions took another form: Is it permitted to shoot animals? This involved a question frequently discussed in the responsa: Is it permitted consciously to make an animal unfit for food? (Since the animal must be properly slaughtered, if it is shot, it becomes unfit.) This question is, also, not quite settled in the law and is debated extensively. But Samson Morpurgo (1681-1740, Italy) in his responsa, Shemesh Zedakah, 18, uses another argument, that God gave us the animals for food, but not to torture. Shechita is painless, but shooting hot lead into the body of an animal must be terribly painful and, therefore, is forbidden on the ground of cruelty to animals.

The question is discussed as late as the eighteenth-nine-teenth century. Ezekiel Landau of Prague (1713-1793) was asked about a Jewish estate owner who hunted. He adds one more argument to all the preceding ones in the various responsa: He says that it is against Jewish law for a man to bring himself into danger by entering the forests where animals lurk. It is doubtful whether Jews did much hunting in eastern Europe in the early nineteenth century because the only question relating to this matter, answered by Moses Sofer of Pressburg, ( Yore Deah 52, 53) is whether birds and animals found with bullets in them are kosher or not.

While hunting, especially with dogs, was objected to but nevertheless practiced, horseback riding was found less objectionable. Israel Bruna of Ratisbon (fifteenth century) was asked whether Jews may be spectators at horse races and at tournaments. He permits the first on practical grounds and objects to the second without giving an explanation. Of course, he is dubious because the whole sport seems to him to be rather un-Jewish. His wording, perhaps, will be of interest to the modern reader (Responsum 71) : “I was asked whether it is permitted to be a spectator at the pleasures of the Gentiles, when, in their games, they race their horses, and the man whose horse comes first, wins gold. Is this to be forbidden just as hunting of beasts and birds is forbidden in the Talmud in the first chapter of Avodeh Zara? I permitted it, because this is not primarily for pleasure, but to teach skill to buy horses, in order to escape from one’s enemies, as I have seen people do.” (In other words, it was of practical advantage, he thought, for Jews to become expert judges of horses.) Then he adds as follows: “But I doubt whether one (i.e., a Jew) may be a spectator when they run against each other with lances, etc.” (i.e., at the tournaments).

The responsa literature is only interested in the legal questions involved, but incidentally (one might say without intending it) they reveal social history. Moses Minz, rabbi in Germany in the fifteenth century, in his Responsa 73, is discussing the oft-discussed question of whether one may annul a hastily made vow. The whole responsum deals with this question, but incidentally he mentions the reason that the man made the vow: “I was asked concerning this man who loved horseback riding and whose delight was con-stantly to ride in and outside of the city. His mother and father-in-law rebuked him. He, in anger, made the vow, ‘If I ever stride my horse again, I will give a hundred gulden to charity.'” It is evident that horse lovers could hardly have been rare.

With regard to ball games, the law was generally liberal. The only restrictions are whether ball games may be played on the Sabbath or on holidays. The Tosfos (eleventh, twelfth century, to Beza, 12a, at the “bottom of the page) simply says: “It is customary for the people to play ball on the holiday in the public domain. The ball is called Pelota.” In Sheboley ha-Leket, 121, Rashi is quoted as describing the Pelota as a ball covered with hide. Moses Isserles (six-teenth century, in Darche Moshe to Tur, Orah Hayyim 308) cites the statement of the Tosfos that it is permitted to play ball on holidays, even in public. Evidently this game, or ball games of various kinds, were quite popular.

It is interesting to record at least one sport that had met with no disapproval at all and which, also, must have been widespread, since the famous rabbi who records the question involved, demonstrates that he understands the sport well. He must have seen a lot of it. The rabbi, Asher ben Jechiel (thirteenth century) emigrated from Germany to Spain. The matter concerned a wrestling match between two Jews. When one was “thrown,” he was injured and lost the sight of one eye. The question asked was whether the opponent is liable to damages for the injury. Asher ben Jechiel’s answer (Responsa 101:6) is as follows: “These two men wrestle with each other by their common consent, and if one injured the other, it is without any intent to do so; for their only intent when they both wrestle is to cause each other to fall. Now, when one exerts himself against the other, it is impossible for him so to control his strength that the other shall fall gently and not be hurt; for they wrestle with all their strength and each tries to make the other fall.”

In general, sports and games came into medieval Jewish life with a bad heritage from pagan times. The people however, influenced by their environment, enjoyed various sports as is reflected by the frequent discussions in the responsa literature. Hunting, especially with dogs, was largely prohibited. Horseback riding and racing was more or less permitted (although Israel Bruna says nothing about bet ting, which would be frowned upon). Ball games were widely played. Wrestling seems to have been completely approved.