‘Torah On the Table’:A Sensual Morality

‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l M o r a l i t y J o n a t h a n B r u m b e r g - K r a u s ‘Is t h e p l e a s u r e w e d e r i v e f r o m e a t i n g m o r a l l y valuable?’ T h i s p a p e r a n s w e r s a n e m p h a t i c ‘Yes!’ S i n c e Plato’s S y m p o s i u m , t h e sensual pleasures of eating h a v e b e e n e m p l o y e d to p r o v o k e intellectual c o n v e r s a t i o n a n d m o r a l action. E a r l y rabbinic tradition a n d s u b s e q u e n t J e w i s h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s o f it a d o p t e d this c o n v e n t i o n o f G r e c o - R o m a n s y m p o s i a in s u c h institutions as Pharisaic table fellowship associations (havurot), t h e Passover seder rite, a n d t h e D e r e k h Eretz literature c o n c e r n e d w i t h table etiquette.1 R a b b e n u B a h y a b e n A s h e r t h e t h i r t e e n t h – f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y S p a n i s h J e w i s h preacher, Biblical exegete, a n d kabbalist, s u m m a r i z e d , synthesized, a n d reinterpreted these s t r e a m s of rabbinic s y m p o t i c traditions a b o u t table talk a n d table ethics – ‘torah o n t h e table’ – i n a n e l e g a n t little h a n d b o o k , S h u l h a n S h e l A r b a [ ‘ T h e F o u r - L e g g e d T a b l e ’ ] . I n it, h e laid t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a s o r t o f t h e o l o g i c a l g a s t r o n o m y , w h i c h idealized t h e f u s i o n of t h e physical pleasures of eating a n d t h e spiritual pleasures of c o n v e r s a t i o n a n d religious insight as the highest f o r m of service t o G o d . R a b b e n u B a h y a t h u s offers u s a n o t e w o r t h y e x a m p l e of a religious case for the m o r a l value of t h e pleasures of t h e table. W h i l e m y p a p e r focuses primarily o n R a b b e n u Bahya’s case for t h e m o r a l value of t h e pleasures of dining, I will also s h o w h o w his ideas are similar to t h o s e in m o r e m o d e r n , h u m a n i s t i c texts of g a s t r o n o m y , i n d e e d to s u c h iconic g a s t r o n o m i c w o r k s as J e a n A n t h e l m e Brillat-Savarin’s Physiology of Taste, Isak D i n e s e n ’ s ‘Babette’s Feast,’ as well as M i c h a e l Pollan’s currently influential b o o k T h e O m n i v o r e ’ s D i l e m m a . P e r h a p s it is n o t totally c o i n c i d e n t a l , s i n c e t h e y t o o a r e t h e heirs of t h e s a m e G r e c o - R o m a n heritage of s y m p o t i c conviviality, albeit t h r o u g h a different c h a i n of tradition. W h i l e these f o u r g a s t r o n o m e s share t h e v i e w that t h e sensual pleasures of t h e table h a v e m o r a l value a n d that t h e conversations at t h e table play a crucial role in c o n n e c t i n g t h e experiences t o m o r a l action, t h e y h a v e b e e n c h o s e n for t h e variety of v i e w s t h e y a s s u m e d their a u d i e n c e s h a d a b o u t t h e relationship b e t w e e n pleasure a n d m o r a l ity. I r e m e m b e r w h e n t h e t o p i c o f ‘ F o o d a n d M o r a l i t y ’ w a s a n n o u n c e d , t h e r e w a s a p a l p a b l e g r o a n a m o n g s o m e participants w h o m I suspect w e r e certain that surest w a y to kill t h e pleasures of t h e table w a s to moralize. R a b b e n u B a h y a b e n A s h e r h a d n o s u c h q u a l m s . A s a m y s t i c a n d Aristotelian, h e w a s quite certain that t h e pleasures of t h e table w e r e a gift of G o d a n d part of o u r natural h u m a n constitution, a n d therefore m u s t b e consistent w i t h t h e m o r a l a n d theological p u r p o s e , telos, for w h i c h h u m a n b e i n g s w e r e created. Later, Brillat-Savarin, a p r o d u c t of t h e F r e n c h E n l i g h t e n m e n t , h a d little n e e d t o r e c o n c i l e t h e p h y s i c a l p l e a s u r e s o f t h e table w i t h religious morality, since in his d a y traditional religion h a d fallen into disfavor; t h e religion of r e a s o n 4 7 ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality 4 8 ruled. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , ‘Babette’s Feast,’ w h i c h K a r e n B l i x e n as Isak D i n e s e n first p u b l i s h e d in t h e Ladies H o m e J o u r n a l in 1 9 5 0 , p l a y e d w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n that p i o u s religious m o r a l i t y a n d t h e sensual pleasures of t h e g o u r m e t table w e r e diametrically o p p o s e d . 2 B u t t h e m o r a l o f h e r s t o r y is t h a t t r u e g a s t r o n o m i c artistry c a n r e c o n c i l e t h e t w o . Finally, M i c h a e l P o l l a n represents a c o n t e m p o r a r y perspective a k i n to t h o s e s e e k i n g alternatives t o traditional o r g a n i z e d religions a n d w h a t is p e r c e i v e d as their authoritarian morality. I n t h e O m n i v o r e ’ s D i l e m m a Pollan tries to p e r s u a d e his readers t o d o w h a t is m o r a l l y right – p r o d u c i n g a n d c o n s u m i n g f o o d that is ecologically a n d e c o n o m i c a l l y s u s t a i n a b l e – b e c a u s e it tastes better!3 T h e s e n s u a l p l e a s u r e s o f t h e s u s tainable table t h e m s e l v e s sustain a n o n - a u t h o r i t a r i a n morality, t h e ethical d i m e n s i o n of n e w secular alternatives to o r g a n i z e d religion – e.g., t h e environmentalist, ‘ S l o w F o o d , ’ local f o o d , a n d o r g a n i c f o o d m o v e m e n t s . B u t as different as their audiences’ a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t t h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y of f o o d a n d m o r a l i t y m a y be, all s u g g e s t t h a t m o r a l a w a r e n e s s is c o n v e y e d i n t h e stories w e tell a b o u t m a t t e r s o f t h e table at t h e table. T h u s , I will s h o w h o w R a b b e n u Bahya’s m e d i e v a l religious J e w i s h h a n d b o o k o n eating anticipates t h e m o r e m o d e r n secular expressions of t h e idea that stories a n d talk a b o u t d i n n e r over the d i n n e r table ( ‘ T o r a h o n t h e table’ as t h e r a b b i s p u t it) n o t o n l y e n h a n c e o u r sensual e n j o y m e n t of t h e m e a l , b u t also c o n n e c t a n d c h a n n e l t h o s e pleasurable experiences into a n i m p e t u s to m o r a l action.4 L e t m e first m a k e clear w h a t I m e a n b y ‘pleasure.’ S i n c e w e are referring h e r e p r i m a r i l y t o t h e p l e a s u r e s o f t h e d i n n e r table, it m a k e s s e n s e t o t u r n t o a d e f i n i t i o n a n d i m p o r t a n t distinction m a d e b y t h e father of m o d e r n W e s t e r n g a s t r o n o m y , J e a n A n t h e l m e Brillat-Savarin. I n T h e Physiology of Taste, h e distinguishes ‘the pleasures of t h e t a b l e … f r o m t h e pleasure of eating, their necessary antecedent,’ as follows: T h e p l e a s u r e of e a t i n g is t h e actual a n d direct s e n s a t i o n o f satisfying a n e e d . T h e p l e a s u r e s of t h e table are a reflective s e n s a t i o n w h i c h is b o r n f r o m t h e various c i r c u m s t a n c e s of place, time, things, a n d p e o p l e w h o m a k e u p t h e s u r r o u n d i n g s of t h e m e a l . T h e p l e a s u r e o f e a t i n g is o n e w e s h a r e w i t h a n i m a l s ; it d e p e n d s solely o n h u n g e r a n d w h a t is n e e d e d t o satisfy it. T h e pleasures of t h e table are k n o w n o n l y to the h u m a n race; t h e y d e p e n d o n careful preparations for t h e serving of t he m e a l , o n the c h o i c e of place, a n d t h e t h o u g h t f u l a s s e m b l i n g of t h e guests. T h e p l e a s u r e o f e a t i n g d e m a n d s a p p e t i t e , if n o t a c t u a l h u n g e r ; t h e p l e a s ures of t h e table are m o s t o f t e n i n d e p e n d e n t of either o n e o r t h e other... D u r i n g t h e first c o u r s e , a n d at t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e feast, e v e r y o n e eats hungrily, w i t h o u t talking, w i t h o u t p a y i n g a n y attention to w h a t m a y b e g o i n g o n a b o u t h i m , a n d n o m a t t e r w h a t his position o r r a n k m a y b e h e ignores e v e r y t h i n g in o r d e r to d e v o t e h i m s e l f to t h e great task at h a n d . B u t as these n e e d s are satisfied, t h e intellect r o u s e s itself, c o n v e r s a t i o n b e g i n s , a n e w o r d e r o f b e h a v i o r ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality asserts itself, a n d t h e m a n w h o w a s n o m o r e t h a n a n eater until t h e n b e c o m e s a m o r e o r less pleasant c o m p a n i o n , a c c o r d i n g to his natural ability.5 I will f o c u s table,’ t h o u g h t h e pleasure of this definition spiritual experi primari it is q u i eating, suggests ences. A [A]t t h e e n d of being. Physically a n i m a t e d , his co his w h o l e b o d y . fly to his lips.6 t h p p d R J o S e ly o n t h e m o r a l value of t h e s e c o n d ty te clear that t h e pleasures of t h e table a n d t h a t t h e y n a t u r a l l y f o l l o w a f t e r it, . T h e pleasures of t h e table inextricabl s Brillat-Savarin g o e s o n to say, a well-savored m e a l b o , at t h e s a m e t i m e that lor heightens, his eyes M o r a l l y , his spirit g r o t h soul a n d a diner’s b r a shine, a n d a w s m o r e perc b o d y i n a w gentl eptiv pe, ‘th are i m as t h e y c o m b e n j a k e n e w a e, a o y a s , h r m t n d c e pleasur p o s s i b l e last p a r a i n e phys es of t h e w i t h o u t g r a p h of ical a n d special well is face g r o w s h creeps o v e r lever p h r a s e s T h i s u n d e r l i n e s t w o m o r e crucial points. First, the pleasures of the table start f r o m h e sensual e x p e r i e n c e of t h e m e a l : t h e tastes, smells, sights, touches, a n d s o u n d s o n e a s i n t h e c o m p a n y o f their t a b l e c o m p a n i o n s . S e c o n d l y , it is t h e talk o v e r t h e t a b l e r o m p t e d b y t h o s e experiences that rouses t h e intellect a n d c o n n e c t s the s e n s o r y leasures of t h e table to a m o r a l sensibility. All of the savants of t h e d i n n e r table I iscuss h e r e e m p h a s i z e b o t h of these p o i n t s in o n e w a y o r another. T h i s conceit of w o r d s a b o u t t h e table o v e r t h e table w a s s o m e t h i n g w i t h w h i c h a b b e n u B a h y a b e n A s h e r w a s quite taken. H i s wit, psychological insight, a n d h i g h s t i m a t i o n of t h e pleasures of t h e table t e m p t m e to describe h i m as a sort of m e d i e v a l e w i s h Brillat-Savarin ( t h o u g h his h a n d b o o k of mystical eating etiquette, S h u l h a n h e l A r b a , is m o r e a t h e o l o g y t h a n a p h y s i o l o g y o f taste) H e k n e w it i n t h e f o r m o f n e m y favorite passages in t h e classic text of rabbinic J u d a i s m , the T a l m u d : R a b b i S it w o r d s d e a d , fo w i t h o u t it w o r d s written L O R D ” . i m e o n said: If three h a v e e a t e n at o n e table a n d h a v e n o t s p o k e n o v e r o f t h e T o r a h , it is a s t h o u g h t h e y h a d e a t e n o f t h e sacrifices o f t h e r it is w r i t t e n ( I s a i a h 2 8 : 8 ) ‘ F o r all t a b l e s a r e full o f v o m i t , n o p l a c e is filthiness.’ B u t if t h r e e h a v e e a t e n a t o n e t a b l e a n d h a v e s p o k e n o v e r o f t h e T o r a h , it is a s if t h e y h a d e a t e n f r o m t h e t a b l e o f G o d , f o r it is (Ezekiel 4 1 . 2 2 ) ‘ H e said t o m e , “ T h i s is t h e table w h i c h is b e f o r e t h e ’ ( m . A v o t 3:3) R a b b e n u B a h y a t o o k this earlier tradition to m tics a n d rabbinic scholars s h o u l d p e p p e r their conv certain k e y passages f r o m t h e T o r a h that talked d i.e., t h e p l e a s u r e s o f t h e table.7 W i t h h i s little h a to p r o v i d e talking points, R a b b e n u B a h y a a d v i s e d e a n that his circle of ersations at the d i n n e irectly o r indirectly a n d b o o k b y their side his c o m p a n i o n s ( a n d fellow m y s r table w i t h b o u t eating, at the table m a n y o t h e r 4 9 ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality J e w s i n s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n s ) literally t o s p e a k ‘ w o r d s o f T o r a h o n – t h a t is, a b o u t , t h e t a b l e – o n , t h a t is, p h y s i c a l l y o v e r t h e table.8 W h y ? B e c a u s e i n R a b b e n u B a h y a ’ s v i e w , t h e pleasures of t h e m e a l , e a t e n w i t h t h e p r o p e r intent, that is b y s a y i n g ‘right w o r d s ’ c a n b e c o m e t h e o c c a s i o n of a n ecstatic divine revelation, a visionary experi ence, equivalent t o t h e visionary e x p e r i e n c e of t h e elders of t h e Israelites at M o u n t Sinai, w h o a c c o r d i n g to scripture, ‘saw G o d a n d t h e y ate a n d d r a n k ’ ( E x 2 4 : 1 1 ) – t h e a u t h e n t i c ‘real eating’ a b o u t w h i c h I s p o k e at the 2 0 0 5 O x f o r d S y m p o s i u m . 9 T h e m o r a l significance of t h e this-worldly a n d o t h e r w o r l d l y pleasures of R a b b e n u B a h y a ’ s ‘four-legged table’ is t h a t t h e y are t h e cause, m e a n s , a n d r e w a r d for h u m a n b e i n g s to b e w h a t t h e y w e r e created for, to p e r f o r m G o d ’ s will that H e revealed in t h e T o r a h . H e says, t h e c of t h there A v o t 5 0 hoicest e T o r a h is n o c 3:17), of e , a n h o i c that n j o y m d for e flou is t o e n t s , this r r, ther say, th t h e e a s e is ere pleasures o n t h e y sa n o T o r a h , w o u l d b e of id a n f o o d w e r e created in t h e C h a p t e r s o n d if n o T o r a h , n o o pleasures of food o n l y for t h e sake f t h e F a t h e r s : ‘If c h o i c e flour’ ( m . .10 R a b b e n u B a h y a m e a n s several things b y this. First, as Brillat-Savarin later c o n curs, t h e spiritual pleasures of t h e table c a n n o t o c c u r until y o u r physical h u n g e r for f o o d is satisfied; y o u c a n n o t b e e n g a g e d i n T o r a h , at least n o t o n a regular basis, o n a n e m p t y s t o m a c h . I n that sense, k e m a h , w h i c h I translated as ‘choice flour’ is just a s y n o n y m for f o o d in general. B u t k e m a h ’ s literal m e a n i n g as finely g r o u n d flour, s u g g e s t t h a t it’s n o t j u s t a n y f o o d , b u t o n l y t h e finest, m o r e d e l i c a t e f o o d s , e.g., ‘ w i n e a n d fragrant foods,’ a n d s m a l l poultry, that s h a r p e n a n d purify the intellect ‘for t h e soul t o b e lifted u p a n d d e v e l o p t h e aptitude to receive the Torah,’ rather t h a n beef, barley, a n d o n i o n s , ‘coarse foods’ typical of t h e diet of t h o s e w i t h a coarseness ofintel lect.’11 Joel H e c k e r aptly called t h e f o r m e r ‘brain foods’ in his discussion of similar ideas in t h e Z o h a r . 1 2 Thirdly, R a b b e n u B a h y a interprets the converse, ‘no c h o i c e flour, if n o T o r a h , ’ t o m e a n t h a t t h e q u a n t i t i e s , t y p e s , a n d o c c a s i o n s t o e a t f o o d s t h a t t h e T o r a h prescribes b e c o m e o c c a s i o n s to k n o w G o d better, since t h e y indicate h o w G o d s u s t a i n s t h e w o r l d . 1 3 It’s p r e c i s e l y t h e k n o w l e d g e o f T o r a h t h a t e n a b l e s a p e r s o n t o t u r n e v e n ‘coarse’ f o o d like b e e f i n t o s o m e t h i n g finer, t h a t is, t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f digestion o n l y a T o r a h scholar c a n raise t h e a n i m a l soul of t h e beef h e eats t o a h i g h e r status nearer to G o d , t h r o u g h a sort of g a s t r o n o m i c m e t e m p s y c h o s i s . 1 4 T h e w o r d s of T o r a h a b o u t t h e table o v e r t h e table direct t h e T o r a h scholars’ m i n d s to divine origin a n d m e s s i a n i c perfection of t h e f o o d s t h e y are presently eating ( a n d t h e joys t h e y are e x p e r i e n c i n g as t h e y eat). T h i s in effect t r a n s f o r m s b o t h t h e m s e l v e s a n d their f o o d (via t h e c o m b u s t i o n - l i k e process of their digestion) into s o m e t h i n g like the sacrificial fires o n t h e altar of t h e a n c i e n t T e m p l e in Jerusalem, w h i c h raise their material f o r m s i n t o s o m e t h i n g m o r e ethereal a n d closer t o G o d in h e a v e n , ‘a p l e a s i n g o d o r b e f o r e t h e Lord.’15 T h i s process underlies t h e final p o i n t R a b b e n u B a h y a m a k e s a b o u t t h e ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality parallelism of t h e (flour) t h e r e is n o f o o d for t h e b o d y a n d soul pleasures are actualized o n l in t h e 4th G a t e of p h r a s e in m . f o o d for t h e s (flour) – b o t h t o w a r d their m y t h r o u g h t h e his b o o k that A v o t 3 : 1 7 , n a m e l y , if t h e r e o u l ( T o r a h ) , a n d if n o f o o d m u s t h a v e their d u e . R e a l e o r a l e n d , for ‘the p o w e r s of b o d y . ’ 1 6 T h i s is w h y R a b b e t h e m e s s i a n i c b a n q u e t rese is n o f o o d for t h e b o for the soul (Torah), a t i n g is a f u s i o n of b o t h e soul are invisible a n u B a h y a is s o insist rved for the righteous t h e w o r l d to c o m e will b e a real material m e a l of t h e flesh of a n d B a r Y o c h n a i , a n d n o t a just a m e t a p h o r as s o m e of the t o o k t h e rabbinic descriptions of this eschatological b a n q u e t to time, t h e soul c a n b e perfected e n o u g h t o h a v e t h e capacity to b o d y is r e s t o r e d b y this m e a l t o its o r i g i n a l i m m o r t a l , p e r f e c t st B a h y a asserts that e a t i n g a n d its c o n c o m i t a n t , f u s e d c o r p o r e a l h a s m o r a l value as t h e highest f o r m of w o r s h i p of G o d : S e f o t h b e so of it e h o w one’s e a t i n g is c o n s i d e r e d a r m s of t h e divine sacrifices, as t h e qu e p o i n t of h a v i n g t h e right i n t e n t i o n o u r i s h e d b y it a n d t a k e its b o d i l y u l b y t h i s a c t o f t h o u g h t is filled, fed real eating of t h e w a y s of H a - S h e m is said, ‘ Y o u r table is laid o u t w i t h r L e v i a m e d i e be. E see G ature. a n d d y n o d y n d ent in t h a n , B e h e m o t h , v a l p h i l o s o p h e r s v e n at t h e e n d of o d o n l y after t h e 17 T h u s R a b b e n u p s y c h i c pleasures perfect act of w o r s h i p like o n e of the intessential c o m m a n d m e n t . A n d this is n at a m e a l at the table – that t h e b o d y p o r t i o n f r o m the b o d i l y eating, a n d t h e , a n d satisfied as if f r o m t h e choicest p a r t s a n d H i s pleasantness, a n d r e g a r d i n g this ich food.’ ( J o b 3 6 : 1 6 ) 1 8 T h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of pleasure m a y also h e l p clear u p a significant m o d e r n m i s c o n c e p t i o n a b o u t religious faith. M a n y a s s u m e that religious faith is n o n - e m p i r i cally b a s e d , b u t p r i m a r i l y o n ‘things u n s e e n . ’ T h e r e f o r e , it c a n b e easily d i s m i s s e d as irrational. N o t s o J e w i s h faith ( a n d m o s t others I suspect as well). R a b b e n u B a h y a e m p l o y s a w o n d e r f u l m e t a p h o r to m a k e this point. Interpreting a peculiar T a l m u d i c phrase, t h e ‘three-legged table,’ h e asks, w h y a three-legged table w h e n p e o p l e o r d i n a r i l y e a t o n a t a b l e o f f o u r legs? B e c a u s e it h i n t s at t h e f o u r t h leg, w h i c h is i n v i s i b l e – t h e divine Reality b e h i n d t h e tangible o n e s w e k n o w t h r o u g h o u r senses.19 H e n c e , t h e title o f R a b b e n u B a h y a ’ s b o o k , ‘ T h e F o u r - L e g g e d Table.’ W h a t ’ s striking is t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e visible t o t h e invisible, 3:1! T r u e faith is f i r m l y r o o t e d i n t h e e m p i r i c a l experiences of o u r senses, w h i c h t h e sensual pleasures of t h e table exemplify, a n d p o i n t to t h e graciousness a n d w i s d o m of G o d , a n d o u r m o r a l obligation of gratitude. N o w w e leave t h e m e d i e v a l w o r l d of t h e J e w i s h m y s t i c s a n d t u r n to o u r e x a m p l e s of m o r e m o d e r n , secular g o u r m a n d s a n d g a s t r o n o m e s , a n d their v i e w s o n t h e m o r a l value of t h e pleasures of t h e table. First w e return to J e a n A n t h e l m e Brillat-Savarin, w h o in T h e Physiology of Taste ( 1 8 2 6 ) reiterates t h e i m p o r t a n c e of c o n v e r s a t i o n for m e d i a t i n g t h e m o r a l benefits of t h e pleasures of t h e table, in particular for e n c o u r a g i n g h a r m o n i o u s social relations: 5 1 ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality G o u r m a n d i s m is o n e o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e s i n o u r social life; it gradually spreads that spirit of conviviality w h i c h brings together f r o m d a y to d a y differing k i n d s of people, m e l t s t h e m into a w h o l e , a n i m a t e s their conversation, a n d softens t h e s h a r p c o r n e r s of t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l inequalities of position a n d b r e e d i n g . It is g o u r m a n d i s m , t o o , w h i c h m o t i v a t e s t h e effort a n y h o s t m u s t m a k e t o g take o o d care of his guests, as well as their o w n gratitude w h e n t h e y perceive t h a t h e h a s e m p l o y e d all his k n o w l e d g e a n d tact t o p l e a s e t h e m ; a n d it is fitting at this v e r y place to p o i n t o u t w i t h s c o r n t h o s e stupid diners w h o g u l p d o w n in disgraceful indifference t h e m o s t n o b l y p r e p a r e d dishes, o r w h o inhale w i t h i m p i o u s inattention t h e b o u q u e t of a l i m p i d nectar. G e n e r a l rule. A n y p r e p a r a t i o n w h i c h springs f r o m a h i g h intelligence d e m a n d s explicit praise, a n d a tactful expression of appreciation m u s t a l w a y s b e m a d e w h e n e v e r it is p l a i n t h a t t h e r e is a n y a t t e m p t t o please.20 s G a t 5 2 a o a s t t a h p t h H e r e , Brillat-Savarin’s h u m a n i s t i c E n l i g h t e n m e n t perspective c o m e s to the fore, ince pleasure e n c o u r a g e s gratitude to one’s fellow h u m a n beings, rather t h a n G o d . o u r m a n d i s m n o t o n l y p r o m o t e s excellent social values, b u t d o e s so in t h e f o r m of p p r o p r i a t e s p e e c h b y intelligent appreciative p e o p l e at t h e d i n n e r table. Brillat-Savarin a p p r e c i a t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e pleasures of table talk as g l u e hat h o l d s society together.21 If in his ideal table conversations, y o u didn’t ‘see G o d , ’ s R a b b e n u B a h y a ’ p r o m i s e d in his, Brillat-Savarin believed y o u c o u l d truly see o n e n o t h e r a n d a p p r e c i a t e d their c o m p a n y , his h u m a n i s t i c equivalent to t h e e x p e r i e n c e f divine revelation. I n Isak D i n e s e n ’ s classic of g a s t r o n o m i c fiction, a n d t h e basis for the m o v i e of t h e a m e n a m e , Babette’s Feast, w e h a v e a m o r e explicit c l a i m that t h e sensual pleasures of h e table at a truly great m e a l e n a b l e s its participants t o ‘see G o d , ’ despite p i o u s fears o t h e contrary.22 Particularly striking is t h e c o n t r a s t t h e s t o r y sets u p b e t w e e n silence n d s p e e c h at t h e table of ‘Babette’s feast.’ T h e elder m e m b e r s of the c o m m u n i t y , o r n b e t w e e n their h o r r o r that t h e sensual pleasures of the s u m p t u o u s m e a l B a b e t t e r e p a r e d for t h e m w o u l d drive t h e m straight t o hell, a n d their gratitude for all s h e a d d o n e for t h e m in their s o u p kitchen, a n d n o w for t h e m o n t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e u n d r e d t h anniversary of t h e p r e a c h e r w h o f o u n d e d their c o m m u n i t y , [they] p r o m i s e d o n e a n o t h e r t h a t … t h e y w o u l d , o n t h e great day, b e s u p o n all m a t t e r s of f o o d a n d d r i n k . N o t h i n g that m i g h t b e set b e f o r e t h e m it f r o g s o r snails, s h o u l d w r i n g a w o r d f r o m their lips. ‘ E v e n so,’ said a w h i t e - b e a r d e d B r o t h e r , ‘ T h e t o n g u e is a little m e m a n d b o a s t e t h g r e a t t h i n g s . T h e t o n g u e c a n n o m a n t a m e ; it is a n u n r u l y full of d e a d l y p o i s o n . O n t h e d a y of o u r m a s t e r w e will cleanse o u r t o n of all taste a n d p u r i f y t h e m of all delight o r disgust of t h e senses, k e e p i n g preserving t h e m for t h e h i g h e r things of praise a n d thanksgiving.23 ilent , b e b e r evil, g u e s a n d ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality n v u c B u t t h o t b e e n r e w h o , illage of o m p a n i o e m e a l a party n o w a his bir n s a n d h a to rea th. h i d quite their c l m a n A s t h e m , a diff o v e n a n of t h e u n a c c erent ef t , G e n e w o r l d , u s t o m e fect r a l at l d w i o n L o e o n g n e t h e t o n w e n h i e last h a w a s ser g u e l m , d r e ved of the a sort t u r n e d to his o n e guest w h o h a d of prodigal s o n f i g h o m e to the s m a l l s o l e m n , silent table G e n e r a l L o e w e n h i e l m , t o o k a s i p o f it, startled, r a i s e d t h e glass first t o h i s n o s e a n d t h e n t o his eyes, a n d sat d o w n b e w i l d e r e d . ‘This is v e r y strange!’ h e t h o u g h t . ‘ A m o n t i l l a d o ! A n d t h e finest A m o n t i l l a d o that I h a v e ever tasted.’ After a m o m e n t , in o r d e r to test his senses, h e t o o k a s m a l l s p o o n f u l of his s o u p , t o o k a s e c o n d s p o o n f u l a n d laid d o w n his s p o o n . ‘ T h i s is e x c e e d i n g l y strange!’ h e said to himself. ‘For surely I a m eating turtle s o u p – a n d w h a t tur tle soup!’ H e w a s seized b y a q u e e r k i n d of p a n i c a n d e m p t i e d his glass. U s u a l l y in B e r l e v a a g p e o p l e d i d n o t s p e a k m u c h w h i l e t h e y w e r e eating. B u t s o m e h o w this e v e n i n g t o n g u e s h a d b e e n loosened. A n o l d b r o t h e r told the story of his first m e e t i n g w i t h t h e D e a n . A n o t h e r w e n t t h r o u g h that s e r m o n w h i c h sixty years a g o h a d b r o u g h t a b o u t his conversion. A n a g e d w o m a n , t h e t o o n e w h o m M a r t i n e h a d first c o n f i d e d h e r distress [ a b o u t t h e m e a l ] , r e m i n d e d h e r friends h o w i n all afflictions, a n y B r o t h e r o r Sister w a s r e a d y t o share t h e b u r d e n of a n y other.24 A n d s o t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n w e n t , until it c u l m i n a t e d i n a m a r v e l o u s s p e e c h b y t h e G e n e r a l , p o i n t i n g t o this m e a l as a striking m a n i f e s t a t i o n of grace, b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d i n g w i t h t h e beautiful i m a g e of h a r m o n y a n d reconciliation in a n allusion to P s a l m 8 5 in Scripture: ‘ M e r c y a n d T r u t h , m y friends, h a v e m e t t o g e t h e r … R i g h t e o u s n e s s a n d Bliss shall kiss o n e another.’ T h o u g h his table c o m p a n i o n s didn’t u n d e r s t a n d e v e r y t h i n g h e said, t h e effect of ‘his collected a n d inspired face a n d the s o u n d o f w e l l k n o w n a n d cherished w o r d s h a d seized a n d m o v e d all hearts.’25 H e r e , the c o m b i n a t i o n of inspired f o o d , inspired speech, a n d a long, c o m p l e x s h a r e d history of the meal’s participants s e e m e d to h a v e t u r n e d Babette’s feast into a joyously m o r a l lesson a b o u t t h e p o w e r of grace. T h e pleasures o f Babette’s feast r e p a i r e d all t h e b r o k e n pieces of t h e w o r l d of t h e characters of D i n e s e n ’ s story: t h e quarreling m e m b e r s of the c o m m u n i t y , t h e u n r e q u i t e d love b e t w e e n t h e p i o u s sisters a n d their frustrated, m o r e w o r l d l y suitors, t h e artists d e n i e d b y fate t h e c h a n c e to practice their art, t h e living separated f r o m their sorely m i s s e d d e a d , t h e p r e s u m a b l y i n s u r m o u n t a b l e c h a s m b e t w e e n t h e pleasures of t h e b o d y a n d t h e pleasures of t h e soul. T h e talk p r o m p t e d b y Babette’s r e m a r k a b l e feast r e c o n n e c t e d its participants t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d t o t h e c o m p l e x w o r l d . Finally, w e t u r n t o M i c h a e l Pollan’s o b s e r v a t i o n a b o u t t h e p o w e r of w o r d s a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e of grace that h e m a k e s at t h e e n d of T h e O m n i v o r e ’ s D i l e m m a o n t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e ‘sustainable’ b a n q u e t h e h o l d s for the friends w h o h e l p e d h i m b r i n g it a b o u t : 5 3 ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality [A of a b u n s ] t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n at t h e table u n f u r l e d like a sail a m i d t h e h a p p y clatter silver, tacking f r o m stories of h u n t i n g to m o t h e r l o d e s of m u s h r o o m s to a l o n e adventures, I realized that in this particular case w o r d s of grace w e r e n e c e s s a r y … A s y o u m i g h t e x p e c t f r o m this c r o w d a n d occasion, the talk at t h e table w a s m a i n l y a b o u t f o o d . Yet this w a s n o t t h e usual f o o d talk y o u h e a r n o w a d a y s ; less a b o u t r e c i p e s a n d restaurants, it r e v o l v e d a r o u n d specific p l a n t s a n d a n i m a l s a n d fungi, t h e places w h e r e t h e y lived. T h e stories t o l d b y this little b a n d of foragers v e n t u r e d a l o n g w a y f r o m t h e table, t h e w o r d s (the tastes, t o o ) recalling u s to a n o a k forest in S o n o m a , to a p i n e b u r n in t h e Sierra N e v a d a , to t h e stinky salt flats of S a n F r a n c i s c o Bay, to slippery b o u l d e r s o n the Pacific coast, a n d to a b a c k y a r d in Berkeley. T h e stories, like the f o o d that fed t h e m , cast lines of relation t o all t h e s e places a n d t h e creatures living ( a n d d y i n g ) i n t h e m , d r a w i n g t h e m all t o g e t h e r o n this table, o n t h e s e plates, i n w h a t t o m e b e g a n t o feel a little like a c e r e m o n y . A n d there’s s e n s e in w h i c h t h e m e a l h a d b e c o m e just that, a t h a n k s g i v i n g o r a secular seder, for e v e r y i t e m o n o u r plates p o i n t e d s o m e w h e r e else, a l m o s t s a c r a m e n t a l l y , tell a little s t o r y a b o u t n a t u r e o r c o m m u n i t y o r e v e n t h e sacred, for m y s t e r y w a s v e r y o f t e n the t h e m e . S u c h storied f o o d c a n feed u s b o t h b o d y a n d soul, the threads of narrative knitting u s together as a g r o u p , a n d knitting t h e g r o u p into the larger fabric of t h e g i v e n w o r l d . 2 6 5 4 T h e stories h e cal picture. G o o d ‘sacramental’ o r ‘ is precisely i n t h e a n f o mys p o d his g u e s t s tell link t h e f o o d p a r t t o t h e w h o l e , c o s m i c , e c o l o g i o d a n d g o o d c o n v e r s a t i o n m a d e M i c h a e l Pollan’s m e a l a ‘sacred,’ terious’ experience. T h e m o r a l value of t h e pleasures of the table w e r of storied f o o d [to] feed u s b o t h b o d y a n d soul, t h e threads of narrative knitting u s together as a g r o u p , a n d knitting t h e g r o u p into t h e larger fabric of t h e g i v e n w o r l d . 2 7 i t c t n ‘ t d s Pollan’s ‘words’ a n d ‘the tastes, too,’ D i n e sen’s ‘ s o u n d of w e l l - k n o w n a n d c h e r shed w o r d s ’ at Babette’s feast, a n d Brillat-Savarin’s ‘spirit of conviviality w h i c h brings ogether … differing k i n d s of people, m e l t s t h e m into a w h o l e , [ a n d ] a n i m a t e s their onversation’ are n o t so far f r o m R a b b e n u Bahya’s call for ‘ w o r d s a b o u t t h e table o v e r h e table.’ All u n i t e t h e pleasures of t h e table i n t o a single e x p e r i e n c e that is b o t h ensual a n d intellectual, e n a b l i n g diners t o b o t h feel a n d k n o w their c o n n e c t e d n e s s o t h e p e o p l e a n d natural w o r l d a r o u n d t h e m – s e e n a n d u n s e e n . S o w e n e e d b o t h the table a n d t h e w o r d s o f T o r a h o v e r t h e table,’ b e c a u s e as t h e Z o h a r says, ‘Blessing o e s n o t rest o n a n e m p t y place.’28 T h u s R a b b e n u B a h y a r e c o m m e n d e d the practice o t o n l y t o say blessings o v e r f o o d before eating, b u t also t o k e e p c r u m b s of f o o d o n ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality table after eating for grace after m e a l s , to d r a w d o w n blessing. F o r o n l y G o d creates s o m e t h i n g f r o m n o t h i n g : w e m u s t create s o m e t h i n g f r o m s o m e t h i n g . 2 9 T h e r e h a s to b e s o m e t h i n g there, to w h i c h w e are a t t a c h e d b o d y a n d soul, s o m e t h i n g s o g o o d for u s w e c a n taste it, if w e a r e t o b e m o v e d t o m o r a l a c t i o n . T h a t is w h y t h e d e m o n s t r a tive is s o i m p o r t a n t i n o u r rituals of d i n n e r . It ‘cast[s] lines of relation’ f r o m w h a t w e are e n j o y i n g directly to t h e b r o a d e r w e b of h u m a n a n d natural c o n n e c t i o n s in o u r stories that d e m a n d a m o r a l r e s p o n s e – this is table of t h e L o r d ; this is m y b o d y , m y b l o o d ; this is t h e w i n e a n d q u a i l I t a s t e d s o m a n y y e a r s a g o i n Paris b e f o r e t h e w a r ; these are t h e truffles w e g a t h e r e d ourselves, a n d t h e b o a r I h u n t e d a n d c a u g h t : these e g g s w e r e f r o m free-range c h i c k e n s f e d o n l y o n o r g a n i c f o o d s w i t h o u t g r o w t h h o r m o n e s ; this s o u p a n d s a l a d is f r o m t h e g r e e n s w e p l a n t e d a n d p i c k e d o u r s e l v e s at o u r local C S A . C a n t h e pleasures of g o o d eating a n d g o o d c o m p a n y get u s to d o t h e m o r a l g o o d ? S p e e c h - c u e d , m i n d f u l acts o f eating, w h i c h , a c c o r d i n g t o all f o u r o f o u r g a s t r o n o m e s , fuse t h e pleasures of t h e b o d y a n d soul, i n d e e d s e e m to give u s t h e i m p e t u s to act morally. A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s I t h a n k Z o e B r u m b e r g - K r a u s for h e r careful r e a d i n g of this p a p e r a n d t h o u g h t f u l editorial s u g g e s tions, m y research assistant L i n d s a y V a n Clief, a n d W h e a t o n C o l l e g e for s u p p o r t i n g m y a t t e n d a n c e at t h e 2 0 0 7 O x f o r d S y m p o s i u m w i t h a M e l l o n S u m m e r F a c u l t y R e s e a r c h S t i p e n d . N o t e s 1. 2. 3. 4. D a n i e l Sperber, A C o m m e n t a r y o n D e r e c h Erez Z u t a . [2], C h a p t e r s Five to E i g h t ( R a m a t - G a n , Israel: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1 9 9 0 ) ; Siegfried Stein, ‘ T h e I n f l u e n c e of S y m p o s i a Literature o n t h e Literary F o r m of t h e P e s a h H a g g a d a h , ’ Journal of Jewish Studies 8 : 1 – 2 ( 1 9 5 7 ) , 1 3 - 4 4 ; Z e ’ e v Gries, Sifrut H a - H a n h a g o t : Toldoteha u - M e k o m a h b e - H a y e H a s i d e R . Yisrael Ba’Al S h e m - T o v ( Y e r u s h a l a y i m : M o s a d Byalik, 1 9 8 9 ) , 1 8 – 2 2 ; J o n a t h a n B r u m b e r g - K r a u s , ‘ M e a l s as M i d r a s h : A S u r v e y of A n c i e n t M e a l s i n J e w i s h S t u d i e s S c h o l a r s h i p ’ i n F o o d a n d J u d a i s m , eds. L e o n a r d J. G r e e n s p o o n , R o n a l d S i m k i n s a n d G e r a l d S h a p i r o , Vol. 1 5 ( O m a h a , N E ; L i n c o l n , N E : C r e i g h t o n University Press; dis tributed b y t h e University of N e b r a s k a Press, 2 0 0 5 ) , 3 0 0 – 3 0 2 . J e a n Schuler, ‘ K i e r k e g a a r d at Babette’s Feast: T h e R e t u r n t o t h e Finite,’ Journal of Religion a n d F i l m 1, n o . 2 ( 1 9 9 7 ) : par. 2, h t t p : / / w w w . u n o m a h a . e d u / j r f / k i e r k e g a . h t m . S e e especially n o w his n e w b o o k I n Defense of F o o d : A n Eater’s M a n i f e s t o ( N e w Y o r k : P e n g u i n Press, 2 0 0 8 ) . B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , ‘ S h u l h a n Shel Arba’, i n Kitve R a b e n u B a h y a , ed. C h a r l e s B e r C h a v e l , 1 9 6 9 ) , 4 5 3 – 5 1 4 ; J e a n A n t h e l m e Brillat-Savarin, T h e Physiology of Taste, O r , Meditations o n Transcendental G a s t r o n o m y , trans. M . F . K . Fisher ( W a s h i n g t o n , D . C : C o u n t e r p o i n t Press, 1 9 9 9 ) ; Isak D i n e s e n , ‘Babette’s Feast’, in Anecdotes of Destiny ; a n d , E h r e n g a r d ( N e w York: V i n t a g e B o o k s , 1 9 9 3 ) , 2 1 – 5 9 ; M i c h a e l Pollan, T h e Omnivore’s D i l e m m a : A N a t u r a l History of F o u r M e a l s ( N e w York: P e n g u i n Press, 2 0 0 6 ) , 450.; J o n a t h a n B r u m b e r g - K r a u s , ‘ M e a t - E a t i n g a n d J e w i s h Identity; Ritualization of t h e Priestly T o r a h of Beast a n d F o w l ( L e v 1 1 : 4 6 ) in R a b b i n i c J u d a i s m a n d M e d i e v a l K a b b a l a h , ’ A J S R e v i e w 5 5 ‘ T o r a h O n t h e T a b l e ’ : A S e n s u a l Morality 5. 76 . 8. 9. 1 0 . 1 1 . 1 2 . 1 3 . 1 4 . 1 5 . 5 6 1 7 . 1 8 . 1 9 . 2 0 . 2 1 . 2 2 . 2 3 . 2 4 . 2 5 . 2 6 . 2 7 . 2 8 . 2 9 . 3 0 . 24, no. 2 (1999), 2 2 7 – 2 6 2 ; ‘ T h e Ritualization of Scripture in R a b b e n u Bahya’s S h u l h a n Shel Arba’,’ W o r l d Congress of Jewish Studies 1 3 (2001): 1 – 1 7 ; ‘“Real Eating”: A M e d i e v a l S p a n i s h J e w i s h V i e w of G a s t r o n o m i c Authenticity’ in Authenticity in the Kitchen : Proceedings of the O x f o r d S y m p o s i u m o n F o o d a n d Cookery, ed. R i c h a r d H o s k i n g (Totnes: P r o s p e c t B o o k s , 2 0 0 6 ) , 1 1 9 – 1 3 1 . Ibid., 1 8 2 . K a s s , T h e H u n g r y Soul, 1 3 4 , cites this p a s s a g e f a v o r a b l y t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t t h e r e is a u n i q u e l y h u m a n w a y of satisfying o u r natural h u n g e r , w h i c h distinguishes u s f r o m o t h e r animals. Brillat-Savarin, Physiology of Taste, 1 8 3 . B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , S h u l h a n Shel Arba’, 4 7 4 . Ibid., 4 6 0 . T h e H e b r e w w o r d ‘al’ i n t h e e x p r e s s i o n ‘divre T o r a h al h a - s h u l h a n ’ f r o m m . A v o t 3 : 3 c a n h a v e this d o u b l e m e a n i n g , especially in the playful w a y t h e rabbis interpreted their texts. Ibid., 4 9 2 – 3 ; B r u m b e r g - K r a u s , ‘Real Eating,’ 1 1 9 – 1 3 1 . T h e relatively n u m e r o u s e x t a n t m a n u scripts a n d p r i n t e d e d i t i o n s o f S h u l h a n Shel A r b a attest t o its popularity, especially a m o n g E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n H a s i d i m , well b e y o n d R a b b e n u Bahya’s elite circle of S p a n i s h kabbalists. S e e Chavel’s i n t r o d u c t o r y c o m m e n t s in B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , Kitve R a b e n u B a h y a , ed. C h a r l e s B e r C h a v e l ( Y e r u s h a l a y i m : M o s a d h a - R a v K u k , 1 9 6 9 ) , 4 5 6 . B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , S h u l h a n Shel Arba’, 4 9 6 . Ibid., 4 9 6 . Joel H e c k e r , Mystical Bodies, Mystical Meals: E a t i n g a n d E m b o d i m e n t in M e d i e v a l K a b b a l a h (Detroit: W a y n e State University Press, 2 0 0 5 ) , 2 8 2 . B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , S h u l h a n Shel Arba’, 4 9 6 – 7 . Ibid., 4 9 6 . T h i s interpretation turns o n t h e similarity of H e b r e w w o r d s for m a n (ish), fire (esh), a n d ‘ M y sacri ficial fire’ o r ‘ M y sacrificial fire offering’ (ishi): A n d f r o m this u n d e r s t a n d t h e m a t t e r of t h e sacrifices, w h i c h are t h e h i d d e n things of t h e T o r a h , a b o u t w h i c h it is w r i t t e n : ‘to M y [ o f f e r i n g b y ] fire, m y p l e a s i n g o d o r ’ [ N u 2 8 : 2 ] . T h e p o w e r o f t h e h i g h e r s o u l i n c r e a s e s a n d is a d d e d t o b y t h e fire o f f e r i n g s i n t h e e a t i n g o f t h e sacri fices, a n d s o o u r r a b b i s s a i d ; 1 6 ‘ M y sacrifice, M y b r e a d , t o M y [ o f f e r i n g b y ] fire.’ … t o M y fire y o u g i v e it, i.e., ‘ M y m a n , ’ t h e T o r a h s c h o l a r , ibid., 4 9 2 . Ibid., 4 9 2 . Ibid., 5 0 4 . A c c o r d i n g to rabbinic tradition, A d a m a n d Eve’s original physical stature i n t h e G a r d e n of E d e n w a s dramatically d i m i n i s h e d as a c o n s e q u e n c e of their eating o f t h e f o r b i d d e n fruit, ibid., 4 5 8 . Ibid., 4 9 7 . Ibid., 4 6 1 . Brillat-Savarin, T h e Physiology of Taste, 1 5 3 . Ibid. D i n e s e n , Babette’s Feast, 2 1 – 5 9 ; Babette’s Feast, directed b y G a b r i e l A x e l ( N e w Y o r k , N . Y . : O r i o n H o m e V i d e o , 1 9 8 9 ) . D i n e s e n , Babette’s Feast, 4 1 . Ibid., 4 8 – 4 9 . Ibid., 5 3 . Pollan, T h e O m n i v o r e ’ s D i l e m m a , 4 0 6 – 4 0 8 . Ibid., 4 0 8 . H e c k e r , Mystical Bodies, Mystical Meals, 1 4 5 – 1 4 6 . B a h y a b e n A s h e r b e n H l a v a , S h u l h a n Shel Arba’, 4 7 7 ; H e c k e r , Mystical Bodies, Mystical M e a l s , 1 4 8 – 1 4 9 .