What are the animals considered clean and unclean in the Old Testament?

The first time we read of clean and unclean animals is when Noah went into the ark: he was instructed to take seven pairs of each of the clean beasts and clean fowls and only two of the unclean; we have no instructions as to how Noah distinguished them, but it shows that in early days there was a distinction between the clean and unclean. Those called 'clean' were doubtless clean for sacrifice, and not for food, as nothing is said of man eating animal food till after the flood, and then "every moving thing" was given for food. When Noah came out of the ark he offered of every clean beast and every clean fowl for burnt offerings. Gen. 7:2; Gen. 8:20.

With Israel it was different. What animals were to be offered are distinctly specified, and what animals might be eaten as clean and what might not be eaten as unclean are given in detail. Of beasts the clean were those that divided the hoof and chewed the cud: those that had only one of these distinguishing marks were unclean. Of the fishes those only were to be eaten which had fins and scales. Of the fowls a list is given of those that must not be eaten, and of the winged crawling things, that go on all fours, only those 'which have legs above their feet to leap with' might be eaten. The locust, the bald locust, the beetle, and the grasshopper, each after his kind, might be eaten (probably four species of locust); but all other flying, creeping, or swarming things, which have four feet were unclean. 'Every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth' was unclean whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all fours, or hath a multitude of feet, among all creeping things, was unclean. These directions are respecting what might or might not be eaten. Those that were not to be eaten were to be regarded as an abomination, and if the dead bodies of any such fell upon any vessel or garment it rendered it unclean, and any one who touched their carcass must wash his clothes and be unclean until the evening. Lev. 11; Deut. 14:3-20. These animals in their habits and instincts were used of God to teach His people as to habits and ways of the flesh that were unclean in His sight.

We know from other scriptures that the animals described here as unclean are not really so, but good as creatures of God; yet they were by Israel to be regarded as unclean and an abomination. The unclean are mostly those that are flesh-eating.

Sacrifices appointed, and the priests consecrated; Israel are reminded that they are a holy people to the Lord, and must therefore guard against that which would defile, or be cleansed from defilements, as the case might be. And the first subject that is taken up is that of animal food, which necessarily points out the "difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten" (Lev. 11:47).

After the flood, God gave to man a grant of every moving living creature for food. (Gen. 9:3). Here, under the law, He introduces restrictions. Were men, then, contaminated in their souls by the indiscriminate use of animal food? Was that a source of moral defilement? Demons would instil into man's mind that it was. But the Lord has taught us (Matt. 15:18) from whence the moral defilement comes — even from out of the heart of man. Hence abstinence from meats will not promote true piety (1 Tim. 3:16 — 4:5). But why these restrictions? Because the law not only places man at a distance from God, and makes him conscious of it; but it also is meant to teach him the great difference between standing on the ground of its observance, and on the ground of grace. How simple and free was the intercourse between the patriarchs and the Lord Jehovah whenever He made Himself known to them; whereas, though He dwelt in the midst of Israel, it was in thick darkness, and they never could get personally into His presence. How free was the grant to Noah and to his sons? How stringent the restrictions placed on Israel! For, since it was Jehovah who brought them up out of the land of Egypt to be their God, they were to be holy, for He was holy (Lev. 11:45). The privilege of being God's people, which was great, entailed on them responsibilities which were not to be neglected. So it always must be. By Israel, as we are told in this chapter, ceremonial defilement was to be carefully avoided. With Christians the danger arises from that which is within (2 Cor. 7:1).

The distinction between clean and unclean animals was known before the flood (Gen. 7:2). Here, however, the Lord for the first time gives marks by which to distinguish them, whilst in Deut. 14:4-5, Moses, by God's command, mentions the beasts that were clean. The distinguishing marks were two; the one relating to their habit, the other to something which characterised them in their walk. The habit was that of ruminating, or chewing the cud. The characteristic about their walk was that they parted the hoof, and were cloven footed. Thus the habit, and the character of the walk were common to all the beasts of which the Israelites might eat. Such comprised those of the herd, or of the flock, from which alone sacrificial victims could be selected, and the hart, the roebuck or gazelle, and fallow deer, the wild goat, the pygarg or antelope, the wild ox or onyx, the chamois, or perhaps mountain sheep. Of these the hart, roebuck, and fallow deer, were served up daily at Solomon's table (1 Kings 4:23). The rest are not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament.

To be a beast fit for an Israelite's table, it must have had both the above-mentioned distinguishing marks. The presence of the one without the other, whether real or apparent, would not suffice. We say real or apparent, because though neither the coney nor the hare chew the cud, yet they move their jaws in such a way that a common observer might class them as ruminants with the cow and the camel. So to instruct such as would never be naturalised, the law-giver uses language which is not scientifically correct. He spake in a manner that all could understand. This is often the way in Scripture. By the rules laid down, then, the camel, the coney, the hare, and the pig, were all excluded from the list of beasts fit for the people's food. Of their flesh they were not to eat, nor their carcases were they to touch. They were unclean to them. These directions, however, about clean and unclean, rested not here. All animated nature was thus classified, and in a very simple way. Beasts, fishes, birds, insects, and reptiles, were arranged by the Creator in one or other of these classes.

As to fishes, the possession of both fins and scales were requisite for any of them to be reckoned clean. Of birds, all were clean, except certain kinds which are enumerated. Carnivorous, omnivorous, foul-feeding birds, and night birds were unclean. By this standard, eagles, vultures, ravens, hawks, and owls, were shut out, as well as the ostrich, translated "owl" in verse 16, the gull, translated "cuckoo," the ibis, perhaps translated "swan," and the lapwing or hoopoe. Everything, too, which crept, though it had wings, was forbidden, except such as had legs above their feet to leap withal upon the earth, which comprised, it would seem, four species of locusts, among which the beetle could never be classed, for the word chargol, translated beetle (verse 22), must be taken as the name of some kind of locust. Of creeping things that creep upon the earth, the weasel (or perhaps mole), the mouse, and different kinds of lizards, translated in the authorised version tortoise, ferret, chameleon, snail, and the mole (or perhaps the chameleon) are enumerated as unclean. Besides, however, being merely unclean everyone was to be an abomination to them, it was not to be eaten. "Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth on all four, or whatsoever has more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, them shall ye not eat, for they are an abomination" (verses 41, 42).

First, then, we have to learn here as to food, what is clean and what is unclean. The German materialist's bald sophism we are taught to realize in another sense as a most important truth, "man ist was er iszt," — "what we eat we are." Spiritually, our food declares our character, as it also forms it. He that eateth Christ shall not only live by Him, but His life will be practically assimilated to His also. Thus, in what is here permitted to be the food of the people of God, we find depicted the spiritual life of the people of God. And this is the real and ultimate meaning of these divisions. That wholesomeness as diet should go with this would not be wonderful in view of this very symbolism which is in all things round us. That which is fullest in meaning is also truest in fact, as there need be no doubt. Nevertheless, the matter of health is never brought forward: it is not of what is wholesome or unwholesome, but of what is clean or unclean that the law treats.

(1) Of clean beasts — mammals, as they are best distinguished — there is but one class, those that ruminate, or chew the cud; but among these also those are excluded who have not a hoof entirely divided. There must be the union of these two characters, the power of rumination and the divided hoof, to constitute the animal clean for the Israelite.

It is not hard to realize the spiritual meaning of rumination: we are well accustomed to the use of it for "meditation," quiet reflection; and it would seem almost needless to insist upon the necessity of this for proper apprehension of the truth. The cloven foot, besides its suitability for a light, firm tread, and so for speed, prevents miring in soft ground. These opposed hoofs, uniting to give stability in this way, may perhaps intimate to us how the truths of the Word that seem most opposed to one another, in fact only give balance and firm tread to him that rests on them; while they certainly prevent being mired in the very place of pasture. The speed for which the foot is, above all, made surely reminds us that where spiritual digestion is found in the believer, faith that looks at what is unseen makes the Christian course a race. Altogether the type here is a bright and suggestive one: may it speak to our souls with all the power the Spirit of God can give it!

Leviticus 11 has before laid down laws concerning this subject, and these verses reinforce them. A number of animals are listed as being clean and therefore fit for meat for Israel (vs.4-5). These included animals that had cloven hooves and also chewed the cud. Any animal that lacked one of these were not fit for Israel's consumption (v.6). A list of some of these is found in verses 7 and 8.

As to water creatures, all having fins and scales were permitted for food: if not, they were not to be eaten (vs.9-19) No particular feature is mentioned as to birds, however, that were to be refused. Yet those that are mentioned are those that feed on carrion (vs.12-19). In all of these things there is vital spiritual significance. For though under grace there is no longer any restriction as to eating these creatures (1 Tim.4:4-5), yet if we feed on what is spiritually unclean, we shall be badly affected by it. The believer has so much excellent spiritual food that he should fully avoid what is harmful. How well it is that we take to heart the Lord's words, "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feed on Me will live because of Me" (Jn.6:57). Can we dare to make room for a diet that is contrary to this pure and living food?

The foregoing train of thought is awakened by the perusal of the eleventh chapter of the Book of Leviticus. Therein we find Jehovah entering, in most marvellous detail, into a description of beasts, birds, fishes, and reptiles, and furnishing His people with various marks by which they were to know what was clean and what was unclean. We have the summing up of the entire contents of this remarkable chapter in the two closing verses. "This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moves in the waters, and of every creature that creeps upon the earth; to make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten."

With regard to beasts, two things were essential to render them clean, they should chew the cud and divide the hoof. "Whatsoever parts the hoof, and is cloven footed, and chews the cud among the beasts, that shall ye eat." Either of these marks would, of itself, have been wholly insufficient to constitute ceremonial cleanness. The two should go together. Now, while these two marks were quite sufficient for the guidance of an Israelite, as to the cleanness or uncleanness of an animal, without any reference as to why or wherefore such marks were given, or what they meant, yet is the Christian permitted to enquire into the spiritual truth wrapped up in these ceremonial enactments.

What, then, are we to learn from those two features in a clean animal? The chewing of the cud expresses the natural process of "inwardly digesting" that which one eats; while the divided hoof sets forth the character of one's outward walk. There is, as we know, an intimate connection between the two, in the christian life. The one who feeds upon the green pastures of the Word of God, and inwardly digests what he takes in — the one who is enabled to combine calm meditation with prayerful study, will, without doubt, manifest that character of outward walk which is to the praise of Him who has graciously given us His word to form our habits and govern our ways.

With regard to "beasts," Moses is thus instructed to speak to the redeemed people among whom Jehovah dwelt: "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth. Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud among the beasts, that shall ye eat. Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean unto you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch: they are unclean to you." (vv. 2-8.) They were thus directed to distinguish between clean and unclean, so as to feed on some and to refuse others, not even to touch them, but in the most decided way to hold that "they are unclean."

The clean, as we have observed, shadow forth Christ. They were marked by two distinguishing features — parting the hoof and chewing the cud. When an animal was found bearing both these characteristics it was clean, and might be eaten; but if only one of these qualities existed in the beast, no matter however prepossessing it might otherwise seem, it must be entirely rejected. "Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." (v. 8.) The "divided hoof" is clearly suggestive of walk, and "chewing the cud" of meditation on the word of God. Both these were strikingly and perfectly set forth in Jesus the Son of God, whose fellowship with God knew not a moment's interruption until He was made sin and a sacrifice for us on the cross. We know that He walked not after the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the scornful. He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. His delight was in the law of Jehovah, and in His law did He meditate day and night. (Ps. 1:1-2; Heb. 7:28.) From these clean beasts then we are instructed not only to gather up spiritual food, but to go over it, portion by portion, in meditation, that it may be effectual for present comfort and strength in the walk. The importance of meditation on the Word can scarcely be over-estimated. It is more than reading, and one of the essentials of communion. By thus being occupied with the Scriptures, in dependence on the Holy Ghost and in faith, we receive God's thoughts into the mind and heart, and are thus guided and strengthened to walk for His glory. In all this Jesus was our perfect model. Meditating in the law of Jehovah day and night, He did always those things which pleased Him. Obedience was His constant employ. He said, "My meat is to do the will of Him that sent me, and to finish His work." He was "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

On the one hand the camel must be unclean to them, because it had not cloven hoofs, though a ruminating animal. The rock-badger, in the Authorised Version called the coney, was in the same predicament; and similarly, as it appears, the hare. On the other hand stood the swine, which did not chew the cud but swallowed its food voraciously, though it had cloven hoofs and feet quite split open; it should be unclean to them. They must neither eat the flesh nor touch the carcase.

We shall now pass on to the consideration of that which the Levitical ceremonial taught with respect to "all that are in the waters." Here again, we find the double mark. "These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever has fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination to you." (Ver. 9, 10) Two things were necessary to render a fish ceremonially clean, namely, "fins and scales," which, obviously, set forth a certain fitness for the sphere and element in which the creature had to move.

But, doubtless, there was more than this. I believe it is our privilege to discern, in the natural properties with which God has endowed those creatures which move in the waters, certain spiritual qualities which belong to the Christian life. If a fish needs a "fin" to enable him to move through the waters and "scales" to resist the action thereof, so does the believer need that spiritual capacity which enables him to move onward through the scene with which he is surrounded, and, at the same time, to resist its influence — to prevent its penetrating — to keep it out. These are precious qualities. The fin and the scale are pregnant with meaning — full of practical instruction to the Christian. They exhibit to us, in ceremonial garb, two things which we specially need, namely, spiritual energy to move onward through the element which surrounds us, and the power to preserve us from its action. The one will not avail without the other. It is of no use to possess a capacity to get on, through the world, if we are not proof against the world's influence; and though we may seem to be able to keep the world out, yet if He have not the motive power, we are defective. The "fins" would not do without the "scales," nor the "scales" without the "fins." Both were required, to render a fish ceremonially clean; and we, in order to be properly equipped, require to be encased against the penetrating influence of an evil world; and, at the same time, to be furnished with a capacity to pass rapidly on.

A list of the unclean birds is given in Lev. 11:13-20; Deut. 14:12-18. In the A.V. the unclean are called the Bat, Cormorant, Cuckoo, Eagle, Gier Eagle, Glede, Hawk, Heron, Kite, Lapwing, Night Hawk, Ospray, Ossifrage, Owl great and little, Pelican, Raven, Stork, Swan, Vulture, and 'fowls that creep, going upon all four.' This leaves for the clean birds the Bittern, Crane, Dove, Ostrich, Partridge, Peacock, Pigeon, Quail, Sparrow, and Swallow. Of these the Ostrich is supposed to be among the unclean under the name of Owl; the Peacock was not a native bird of Palestine; and the Bittern and Crane were inhabitants of the marshy ground among the reeds, and were probably classed with the unclean under some of the above names. We do not read of the ordinary domestic fowl in the O.T. See under each of the above names.

Lev. 11 distinguishes the clean and the unclean animals for food.