Is this squid with scales kosher?

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP

up vote
5
down vote

favorite

A scientific paper in Nature in 1960 entitled "Lepidoteuthis grimaldii—a Squid with Scales" describes a squid that was found in the contents of a whale and (at the time) was the fourth specimen of its kind. Even now specimens are hard to come by.

A more recent photo of a specimen can be found on the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii wikipedia page, and i copy it in here:

Regarding the scales the 1960 paper states: "The 'scales' of these specimens are rather softer than those usually forming the external protection of fish, although... they resemble ganoid scales in general appearance". He then goes on to write that during preservation of the specimen in formalin the scales had softened and that he remembered the fresh condition as being a more 'horny' structure and concludes that they fit with a dictionary definition of scales.

The upper part of the squid are fins that help propel the squid through the water.

Would this species be halachically considered as having 'fins and scales'?

halacha kashrut-kosher non-kosher-species

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

add a comment | 

up vote
5
down vote

favorite

A scientific paper in Nature in 1960 entitled "Lepidoteuthis grimaldii—a Squid with Scales" describes a squid that was found in the contents of a whale and (at the time) was the fourth specimen of its kind. Even now specimens are hard to come by.

A more recent photo of a specimen can be found on the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii wikipedia page, and i copy it in here:

Regarding the scales the 1960 paper states: "The 'scales' of these specimens are rather softer than those usually forming the external protection of fish, although... they resemble ganoid scales in general appearance". He then goes on to write that during preservation of the specimen in formalin the scales had softened and that he remembered the fresh condition as being a more 'horny' structure and concludes that they fit with a dictionary definition of scales.

The upper part of the squid are fins that help propel the squid through the water.

Would this species be halachically considered as having 'fins and scales'?

halacha kashrut-kosher non-kosher-species

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

add a comment | 

up vote
5
down vote

favorite

up vote
5
down vote

favorite

A scientific paper in Nature in 1960 entitled "Lepidoteuthis grimaldii—a Squid with Scales" describes a squid that was found in the contents of a whale and (at the time) was the fourth specimen of its kind. Even now specimens are hard to come by.

A more recent photo of a specimen can be found on the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii wikipedia page, and i copy it in here:

Regarding the scales the 1960 paper states: "The 'scales' of these specimens are rather softer than those usually forming the external protection of fish, although... they resemble ganoid scales in general appearance". He then goes on to write that during preservation of the specimen in formalin the scales had softened and that he remembered the fresh condition as being a more 'horny' structure and concludes that they fit with a dictionary definition of scales.

The upper part of the squid are fins that help propel the squid through the water.

Would this species be halachically considered as having 'fins and scales'?

halacha kashrut-kosher non-kosher-species

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

A scientific paper in Nature in 1960 entitled "Lepidoteuthis grimaldii—a Squid with Scales" describes a squid that was found in the contents of a whale and (at the time) was the fourth specimen of its kind. Even now specimens are hard to come by.

A more recent photo of a specimen can be found on the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii wikipedia page, and i copy it in here:

Regarding the scales the 1960 paper states: "The 'scales' of these specimens are rather softer than those usually forming the external protection of fish, although... they resemble ganoid scales in general appearance". He then goes on to write that during preservation of the specimen in formalin the scales had softened and that he remembered the fresh condition as being a more 'horny' structure and concludes that they fit with a dictionary definition of scales.

The upper part of the squid are fins that help propel the squid through the water.

Would this species be halachically considered as having 'fins and scales'?

halacha kashrut-kosher non-kosher-species

halacha kashrut-kosher non-kosher-species

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

asked yesterday

bondonk

3,90011340

3,90011340

add a comment | 

add a comment | 

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

up vote
3
down vote

R. Natan Slifkin:

Contrary to popular belief, the Torah does not say that a sea creature has to be a fish in order to be kosher. It only speaks of “anything that has fins and scales.” And, uniquely among cephalopods, the Grimaldi squid actually has fins and scales...

[W]hile some authorities are of the view that any scaled and finned aquatic creature is kosher, Rambam and others maintain that it must be a fish.

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
  – b a
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
  – bondonk
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
  – ezra
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

up vote
2
down vote

Nachmanides (Commentary on the Torah, Leviticus 11:9), basing himself on the Talmud, Tosefta and Targumin, explains that the qasqeseth required by the Torah refers to a scale that is separate/removable from the skin of the kosher sea creature:

והם הקליפין העגולים שגלדן דומה לצפורן שהם נפשטין מעור הדג ביד או בסכין אבל כל שהוא קבוע ודבוק בעור הדג ואינו נפרד מן העור כלל אינו קשקשת ובעליו אסור הוא ולכך אמרו בגמרא (שם סו) קשקשת לבושא הוא

The Ramo (YD 83) codifies this interpretation:

וקשקשת - הן הקליפות הקבועות בו. הגה - ודוקא שהם נקלפים ביד או בכלי, אבל אם אי אפשר לקלפן מעור הדג לא מקרי קשקשת (המ"מ פ"א דמ"א):

"And scale" - these are the peels fixed in it (the kosher sea creature). Gloss: Specifically those that are peelable by hand or with a utensil, but if it is impossible to peel them from the skin of the fish, it is not called scales (HM''M 1:41)

The Magid Mishna (Laws of Forbidden Foods 1:24:1) suggests that this requirement is also assumed by Maimonides.

In fact, according to the OU, the "Ramban’s requirement is discussed in the Achronim, but is universally accepted as the halacha."

Furthermore, according to the OU (id), the reason sharks are not considered kosher is because their scales are not easily removed from the skin without tearing the skin. Likewise, "American Eel (Anguilla Anguilla) is known to have scales that could be 'kosher' if not for the fact that they are deeply embedded into the skin."

A very cursory search of the internet does not seem to present much evidence that the superficially scale-like features of the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii correspond to the requirements of the rishonim and achronim for qasqeseth. For example, the "soft-scaled" squid is described more recently as having a "distinctive hexagonal shaped dermal cushion, formerly called 'scaled', that covers the mantle except for the posteroventral part under the posterior half
of the fins."

Similarly, Wikipedia (at the time of writing) cites scientific sources describing the rare squid's "scales" more precisely as dermal cushions that do not sound like they would be any more likely to meet the requirements of qasqeseth than would the scales of sharks and eels:

The overlapping "scales" of Lepidoteuthis grimaldii are actually dermal cushions with a vacuolate internal structure that are continuous with a similarly vacuolate underlying layer of mantle tissue... Structurally very similar (though non-overlapping) dermal cushions are found in Pholidoteuthis adami. It has been proposed that these two species achieve buoyancy by means of the fluid stored in their vacuolate dermal cushions and upper mantle layer. Given their spongy form, these cushions may also play a secondary protective role.

In fact, I'm not clear why this particular squid's dermal cushion should be any more a candidate for qasqeseth than that of less rare species. I'm not personally aware of any source that requires the the scales overlap, which seems to be the seemingly non-halachic, distinctive feature of this particular squid. (Notably, the verse actually seems to require only one scale.) Ultimately, it seems that the Ramban's additional general guideline (id) that kosher aquatic life are found near the surface remains unchallenged by this deep sea-dwelling cephalopod.

(It seems worth noting as well that describing the fins of the Grimaldi "scaled" squid as snapir presupposes that tailfins qualify.)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

add a comment | 

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

up vote
3
down vote

R. Natan Slifkin:

Contrary to popular belief, the Torah does not say that a sea creature has to be a fish in order to be kosher. It only speaks of “anything that has fins and scales.” And, uniquely among cephalopods, the Grimaldi squid actually has fins and scales...

[W]hile some authorities are of the view that any scaled and finned aquatic creature is kosher, Rambam and others maintain that it must be a fish.

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
  – b a
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
  – bondonk
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
  – ezra
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

R. Natan Slifkin:

Contrary to popular belief, the Torah does not say that a sea creature has to be a fish in order to be kosher. It only speaks of “anything that has fins and scales.” And, uniquely among cephalopods, the Grimaldi squid actually has fins and scales...

[W]hile some authorities are of the view that any scaled and finned aquatic creature is kosher, Rambam and others maintain that it must be a fish.

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
  – b a
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
  – bondonk
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
  – ezra
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

up vote
3
down vote

R. Natan Slifkin:

Contrary to popular belief, the Torah does not say that a sea creature has to be a fish in order to be kosher. It only speaks of “anything that has fins and scales.” And, uniquely among cephalopods, the Grimaldi squid actually has fins and scales...

[W]hile some authorities are of the view that any scaled and finned aquatic creature is kosher, Rambam and others maintain that it must be a fish.

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

R. Natan Slifkin:

Contrary to popular belief, the Torah does not say that a sea creature has to be a fish in order to be kosher. It only speaks of “anything that has fins and scales.” And, uniquely among cephalopods, the Grimaldi squid actually has fins and scales...

[W]hile some authorities are of the view that any scaled and finned aquatic creature is kosher, Rambam and others maintain that it must be a fish.

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

share|improve this answer

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

answered yesterday

Joel K

7,4491461

7,4491461

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
  – b a
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
  – bondonk
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
  – ezra
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
  – b a
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
  – bondonk
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
  – Joel K
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
  – ezra
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

2

2

Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
– b a
yesterday

Could you bring the sources for the Rambam and "others"? They aren't quoted directly in the article
– b a
yesterday

1

1

Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
– bondonk
yesterday

Grimaldi squid doesn't necessarily have halachically defined fins and/or scales, so i'd be interested to see how this applies specifically
– bondonk
yesterday

@ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
– Joel K
yesterday

@ba I'm afraid that's sa much as I've got. You can always email R. Slifkin to ask him for his sources - his email address is easy to find online
– Joel K
yesterday

@bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
– Joel K
yesterday

@bondonk R. Slifkin is specifically addressing Grimaldi squid in this article - he seems to assume that its fins and scales fit the halachic criteria
– Joel K
yesterday

There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
– ezra
21 hours ago

There's a lot of discussion on his blog post here. All un-sourced, but some interesting points made on either side of the issue.
– ezra
21 hours ago

add a comment | 

up vote
2
down vote

Nachmanides (Commentary on the Torah, Leviticus 11:9), basing himself on the Talmud, Tosefta and Targumin, explains that the qasqeseth required by the Torah refers to a scale that is separate/removable from the skin of the kosher sea creature:

והם הקליפין העגולים שגלדן דומה לצפורן שהם נפשטין מעור הדג ביד או בסכין אבל כל שהוא קבוע ודבוק בעור הדג ואינו נפרד מן העור כלל אינו קשקשת ובעליו אסור הוא ולכך אמרו בגמרא (שם סו) קשקשת לבושא הוא

The Ramo (YD 83) codifies this interpretation:

וקשקשת - הן הקליפות הקבועות בו. הגה - ודוקא שהם נקלפים ביד או בכלי, אבל אם אי אפשר לקלפן מעור הדג לא מקרי קשקשת (המ"מ פ"א דמ"א):

"And scale" - these are the peels fixed in it (the kosher sea creature). Gloss: Specifically those that are peelable by hand or with a utensil, but if it is impossible to peel them from the skin of the fish, it is not called scales (HM''M 1:41)

The Magid Mishna (Laws of Forbidden Foods 1:24:1) suggests that this requirement is also assumed by Maimonides.

In fact, according to the OU, the "Ramban’s requirement is discussed in the Achronim, but is universally accepted as the halacha."

Furthermore, according to the OU (id), the reason sharks are not considered kosher is because their scales are not easily removed from the skin without tearing the skin. Likewise, "American Eel (Anguilla Anguilla) is known to have scales that could be 'kosher' if not for the fact that they are deeply embedded into the skin."

A very cursory search of the internet does not seem to present much evidence that the superficially scale-like features of the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii correspond to the requirements of the rishonim and achronim for qasqeseth. For example, the "soft-scaled" squid is described more recently as having a "distinctive hexagonal shaped dermal cushion, formerly called 'scaled', that covers the mantle except for the posteroventral part under the posterior half
of the fins."

Similarly, Wikipedia (at the time of writing) cites scientific sources describing the rare squid's "scales" more precisely as dermal cushions that do not sound like they would be any more likely to meet the requirements of qasqeseth than would the scales of sharks and eels:

The overlapping "scales" of Lepidoteuthis grimaldii are actually dermal cushions with a vacuolate internal structure that are continuous with a similarly vacuolate underlying layer of mantle tissue... Structurally very similar (though non-overlapping) dermal cushions are found in Pholidoteuthis adami. It has been proposed that these two species achieve buoyancy by means of the fluid stored in their vacuolate dermal cushions and upper mantle layer. Given their spongy form, these cushions may also play a secondary protective role.

In fact, I'm not clear why this particular squid's dermal cushion should be any more a candidate for qasqeseth than that of less rare species. I'm not personally aware of any source that requires the the scales overlap, which seems to be the seemingly non-halachic, distinctive feature of this particular squid. (Notably, the verse actually seems to require only one scale.) Ultimately, it seems that the Ramban's additional general guideline (id) that kosher aquatic life are found near the surface remains unchallenged by this deep sea-dwelling cephalopod.

(It seems worth noting as well that describing the fins of the Grimaldi "scaled" squid as snapir presupposes that tailfins qualify.)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

add a comment | 

up vote
2
down vote

Nachmanides (Commentary on the Torah, Leviticus 11:9), basing himself on the Talmud, Tosefta and Targumin, explains that the qasqeseth required by the Torah refers to a scale that is separate/removable from the skin of the kosher sea creature:

והם הקליפין העגולים שגלדן דומה לצפורן שהם נפשטין מעור הדג ביד או בסכין אבל כל שהוא קבוע ודבוק בעור הדג ואינו נפרד מן העור כלל אינו קשקשת ובעליו אסור הוא ולכך אמרו בגמרא (שם סו) קשקשת לבושא הוא

The Ramo (YD 83) codifies this interpretation:

וקשקשת - הן הקליפות הקבועות בו. הגה - ודוקא שהם נקלפים ביד או בכלי, אבל אם אי אפשר לקלפן מעור הדג לא מקרי קשקשת (המ"מ פ"א דמ"א):

"And scale" - these are the peels fixed in it (the kosher sea creature). Gloss: Specifically those that are peelable by hand or with a utensil, but if it is impossible to peel them from the skin of the fish, it is not called scales (HM''M 1:41)

The Magid Mishna (Laws of Forbidden Foods 1:24:1) suggests that this requirement is also assumed by Maimonides.

In fact, according to the OU, the "Ramban’s requirement is discussed in the Achronim, but is universally accepted as the halacha."

Furthermore, according to the OU (id), the reason sharks are not considered kosher is because their scales are not easily removed from the skin without tearing the skin. Likewise, "American Eel (Anguilla Anguilla) is known to have scales that could be 'kosher' if not for the fact that they are deeply embedded into the skin."

A very cursory search of the internet does not seem to present much evidence that the superficially scale-like features of the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii correspond to the requirements of the rishonim and achronim for qasqeseth. For example, the "soft-scaled" squid is described more recently as having a "distinctive hexagonal shaped dermal cushion, formerly called 'scaled', that covers the mantle except for the posteroventral part under the posterior half
of the fins."

Similarly, Wikipedia (at the time of writing) cites scientific sources describing the rare squid's "scales" more precisely as dermal cushions that do not sound like they would be any more likely to meet the requirements of qasqeseth than would the scales of sharks and eels:

The overlapping "scales" of Lepidoteuthis grimaldii are actually dermal cushions with a vacuolate internal structure that are continuous with a similarly vacuolate underlying layer of mantle tissue... Structurally very similar (though non-overlapping) dermal cushions are found in Pholidoteuthis adami. It has been proposed that these two species achieve buoyancy by means of the fluid stored in their vacuolate dermal cushions and upper mantle layer. Given their spongy form, these cushions may also play a secondary protective role.

In fact, I'm not clear why this particular squid's dermal cushion should be any more a candidate for qasqeseth than that of less rare species. I'm not personally aware of any source that requires the the scales overlap, which seems to be the seemingly non-halachic, distinctive feature of this particular squid. (Notably, the verse actually seems to require only one scale.) Ultimately, it seems that the Ramban's additional general guideline (id) that kosher aquatic life are found near the surface remains unchallenged by this deep sea-dwelling cephalopod.

(It seems worth noting as well that describing the fins of the Grimaldi "scaled" squid as snapir presupposes that tailfins qualify.)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

add a comment | 

up vote
2
down vote

up vote
2
down vote

Nachmanides (Commentary on the Torah, Leviticus 11:9), basing himself on the Talmud, Tosefta and Targumin, explains that the qasqeseth required by the Torah refers to a scale that is separate/removable from the skin of the kosher sea creature:

והם הקליפין העגולים שגלדן דומה לצפורן שהם נפשטין מעור הדג ביד או בסכין אבל כל שהוא קבוע ודבוק בעור הדג ואינו נפרד מן העור כלל אינו קשקשת ובעליו אסור הוא ולכך אמרו בגמרא (שם סו) קשקשת לבושא הוא

The Ramo (YD 83) codifies this interpretation:

וקשקשת - הן הקליפות הקבועות בו. הגה - ודוקא שהם נקלפים ביד או בכלי, אבל אם אי אפשר לקלפן מעור הדג לא מקרי קשקשת (המ"מ פ"א דמ"א):

"And scale" - these are the peels fixed in it (the kosher sea creature). Gloss: Specifically those that are peelable by hand or with a utensil, but if it is impossible to peel them from the skin of the fish, it is not called scales (HM''M 1:41)

The Magid Mishna (Laws of Forbidden Foods 1:24:1) suggests that this requirement is also assumed by Maimonides.

In fact, according to the OU, the "Ramban’s requirement is discussed in the Achronim, but is universally accepted as the halacha."

Furthermore, according to the OU (id), the reason sharks are not considered kosher is because their scales are not easily removed from the skin without tearing the skin. Likewise, "American Eel (Anguilla Anguilla) is known to have scales that could be 'kosher' if not for the fact that they are deeply embedded into the skin."

A very cursory search of the internet does not seem to present much evidence that the superficially scale-like features of the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii correspond to the requirements of the rishonim and achronim for qasqeseth. For example, the "soft-scaled" squid is described more recently as having a "distinctive hexagonal shaped dermal cushion, formerly called 'scaled', that covers the mantle except for the posteroventral part under the posterior half
of the fins."

Similarly, Wikipedia (at the time of writing) cites scientific sources describing the rare squid's "scales" more precisely as dermal cushions that do not sound like they would be any more likely to meet the requirements of qasqeseth than would the scales of sharks and eels:

The overlapping "scales" of Lepidoteuthis grimaldii are actually dermal cushions with a vacuolate internal structure that are continuous with a similarly vacuolate underlying layer of mantle tissue... Structurally very similar (though non-overlapping) dermal cushions are found in Pholidoteuthis adami. It has been proposed that these two species achieve buoyancy by means of the fluid stored in their vacuolate dermal cushions and upper mantle layer. Given their spongy form, these cushions may also play a secondary protective role.

In fact, I'm not clear why this particular squid's dermal cushion should be any more a candidate for qasqeseth than that of less rare species. I'm not personally aware of any source that requires the the scales overlap, which seems to be the seemingly non-halachic, distinctive feature of this particular squid. (Notably, the verse actually seems to require only one scale.) Ultimately, it seems that the Ramban's additional general guideline (id) that kosher aquatic life are found near the surface remains unchallenged by this deep sea-dwelling cephalopod.

(It seems worth noting as well that describing the fins of the Grimaldi "scaled" squid as snapir presupposes that tailfins qualify.)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

Nachmanides (Commentary on the Torah, Leviticus 11:9), basing himself on the Talmud, Tosefta and Targumin, explains that the qasqeseth required by the Torah refers to a scale that is separate/removable from the skin of the kosher sea creature:

והם הקליפין העגולים שגלדן דומה לצפורן שהם נפשטין מעור הדג ביד או בסכין אבל כל שהוא קבוע ודבוק בעור הדג ואינו נפרד מן העור כלל אינו קשקשת ובעליו אסור הוא ולכך אמרו בגמרא (שם סו) קשקשת לבושא הוא

The Ramo (YD 83) codifies this interpretation:

וקשקשת - הן הקליפות הקבועות בו. הגה - ודוקא שהם נקלפים ביד או בכלי, אבל אם אי אפשר לקלפן מעור הדג לא מקרי קשקשת (המ"מ פ"א דמ"א):

"And scale" - these are the peels fixed in it (the kosher sea creature). Gloss: Specifically those that are peelable by hand or with a utensil, but if it is impossible to peel them from the skin of the fish, it is not called scales (HM''M 1:41)

The Magid Mishna (Laws of Forbidden Foods 1:24:1) suggests that this requirement is also assumed by Maimonides.

In fact, according to the OU, the "Ramban’s requirement is discussed in the Achronim, but is universally accepted as the halacha."

Furthermore, according to the OU (id), the reason sharks are not considered kosher is because their scales are not easily removed from the skin without tearing the skin. Likewise, "American Eel (Anguilla Anguilla) is known to have scales that could be 'kosher' if not for the fact that they are deeply embedded into the skin."

A very cursory search of the internet does not seem to present much evidence that the superficially scale-like features of the Lepidoteuthis grimaldii correspond to the requirements of the rishonim and achronim for qasqeseth. For example, the "soft-scaled" squid is described more recently as having a "distinctive hexagonal shaped dermal cushion, formerly called 'scaled', that covers the mantle except for the posteroventral part under the posterior half
of the fins."

Similarly, Wikipedia (at the time of writing) cites scientific sources describing the rare squid's "scales" more precisely as dermal cushions that do not sound like they would be any more likely to meet the requirements of qasqeseth than would the scales of sharks and eels:

The overlapping "scales" of Lepidoteuthis grimaldii are actually dermal cushions with a vacuolate internal structure that are continuous with a similarly vacuolate underlying layer of mantle tissue... Structurally very similar (though non-overlapping) dermal cushions are found in Pholidoteuthis adami. It has been proposed that these two species achieve buoyancy by means of the fluid stored in their vacuolate dermal cushions and upper mantle layer. Given their spongy form, these cushions may also play a secondary protective role.

In fact, I'm not clear why this particular squid's dermal cushion should be any more a candidate for qasqeseth than that of less rare species. I'm not personally aware of any source that requires the the scales overlap, which seems to be the seemingly non-halachic, distinctive feature of this particular squid. (Notably, the verse actually seems to require only one scale.) Ultimately, it seems that the Ramban's additional general guideline (id) that kosher aquatic life are found near the surface remains unchallenged by this deep sea-dwelling cephalopod.

(It seems worth noting as well that describing the fins of the Grimaldi "scaled" squid as snapir presupposes that tailfins qualify.)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

share|improve this answer

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

edited 6 hours ago

edited 6 hours ago

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

answered 7 hours ago

Loewian

11.3k11442

11.3k11442

add a comment | 

add a comment |