In Leviticus 11:5–6, it says that hares chew the cud. Why does the text claim this biological inaccuracy?

Historical and Cultural Context

In the ancient Near Eastern world, animal classification systems often differed from modern scientific taxonomy. Observers described creatures based on visible behaviors rather than strict technical definitions. Leviticus 11:5–6 reads:

“The rock badger, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you. And the hare, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.”

From an ancient perspective, these creatures appeared to “chew” or physically move their jaws in a manner reminiscent of ruminants. The text thus categorizes them, not according to current zoological standards, but based on how they seemed to be re-processing food.

Clarifying the Hebrew Terms

The phrase typically rendered “chews the cud” in many modern translations has its roots in two Hebrew words:

• “עֹלָה (ʿalah)” – “to bring up” or “cause to ascend.”

• “גֵּרָה (gerah)” – often understood as “cud” or something “brought up.”

The expression suggests observable action in the creature’s mouth. Hares and similar animals practice a form of cecotrophy or re-ingestion of partially digested food. Though this is not “cud-chewing” by modern definition, the ancient observer would see the chewing motion and describe it using terms that conveyed what they perceived, matching the functional idea of “bringing something back up” to re-chew.

Natural Observation of Hare Digestion

Modern biological research verifies that rabbits and hares perform what is called cecotrophy. They produce soft fecal pellets (cecotropes), which they reingest to extract additional nutrients. From a purely observational standpoint, even today one can see a hare moving its jaws repeatedly, which might appear like a ruminant’s chewing. Authorities such as the Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition have reported on the specialized digestive processes of rabbits and hares, noting frequent re-chewing of nutrient-rich “night feces.”

While such activity is distinct from the four-chambered stomach system of cattle, the physical jaw movement is often mistaken for chewing cud. This distinction was not readily available to the ancients, but the repetitive chewing is what the biblical text describes.

Ancient Classification Versus Modern Science

Israelite dietary laws drew on practical and observable traits rather than detailed biological classifications. This is consistent with how other ancient cultures grouped animals—by how they moved, how they appeared to eat, whether they had cloven hooves, and so on. Archaeological artifacts and zoological references from Mesopotamian and Egyptian records similarly focus on external features.

• For instance, tablets from ancient Mesopotamia classify animals by visible characteristics without modern taxonomic divisions.

• Egyptian texts, such as those from around the time of the New Kingdom, also show that animals were grouped by external appearance or their perceived habits.

Thus, biblical writers described the hare as an animal “that chews” repeatedly—fitting ancient observation.

Consistency with Scriptural Inerrancy

Biblical inerrancy concerns what Scripture intends to teach. The text in Leviticus 11 does not claim to offer a technically exhaustive zoological treatise; it relays dietary laws using recognizable features. In the 17th century, commentators like Matthew Poole and John Gill recognized that the Israelite descriptions reflected observational classification. Creation scholars (e.g., Henry Morris, The Genesis Record) note that the instruction in Leviticus is concerned with ritual purity rather than modern taxonomy.

Supporting Scriptural Authenticity and Reliability

Despite challenges like Leviticus 11:5–6, multiple lines of evidence affirm the reliability of the Old Testament:

1. Manuscript Evidence – Hebrew manuscripts, including the Dead Sea Scrolls (3rd century BC to 1st century AD), show remarkable consistency in Leviticus. The same reference to the hare’s “chewing” behavior is preserved, indicating an unbroken textual tradition.

2. Archaeological Corroboration – Discoveries such as ancient altars in Israel (e.g., excavations at Tel Megiddo and others) align with Levite worship commands, suggesting historical continuity of Levitical laws.

3. Unity of Biblical Message – Other references in Deuteronomy 14:7 mirror the same classification about hares. The coherence between these passages points to an intentional, unified standard for clean and unclean animals throughout the Torah.

Possible Explanations

1. Observation-Based Language

The ancient authors used the best descriptive terms at their disposal. “Chewing the cud” in their vocabulary encompassed animals that engaged in visible repetitive chewing, regardless of a ruminant’s multi-chambered stomach.

2. Cecotrophy Interpretation

Rabbits and hares reingest partially digested material, making it appear they are continuously chewing. Even if not identical to bovine rumination, this phenomenon still fits the visible pattern that Leviticus references.

3. Non-Technical Classification

Scripture’s focus is theological and practical (clean vs. unclean), not zoological. Thus, there is no conflict if we interpret the language within an ancient Near Eastern framework rather than insisting on modern scientific categories.

Summation

The text in Leviticus 11:5–6 does not present a true “biological inaccuracy” when understood in light of ancient observational classifications. Hares do exhibit a process that results in repeated chewing movements, commonly misunderstood or generalized in antiquity under the phrase “chews the cud.”

The continued agreement among ancient manuscripts, the historical context of dietary laws, and modern studies of hare behavior all serve to show that the biblical authors described what they witnessed in everyday experience. The passage stands intact, conveying truth sufficient for its intended purpose of distinguishing permissible foods and emphasizing the covenantal holiness code.

Much like other cultural and observational expressions in Scripture, the phrasing of “chewing the cud” reflects the normal way an Israelite audience would have recognized an animal that constantly re-chewed its food. This remains consistent with the broader teachings of Scripture and its unified message.