Saul M. Olyan. Animal Rights and the Hebrew Bible. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2023.
In Animal Rights and the Hebrew Bible, Saul Olyan reflects on whether the Hebrew Bible ascribes some form of legal personhood to animals and how this might inform contemporary animal rights debates. Through careful analysis of select biblical legal texts, alongside prophetic and wisdom texts, Olyan argues that several texts not only voice a concern for animals, but in Gary L. Francione’s words, grant a “type of protection that does not evaporate in the face of consequential considerations.” (p. 4) In other words, certain biblical texts suggest that animals are given some sort of legal consideration and that their status cannot simply be understood as legal property. Connecting rights to the definition of legal persons rather than property, is a key argument for animal rights advocates such as Steven Wise and Gary Francione. If animals can be treated as legal persons, then they too deserve the rights associated with humans today, including “the right to bodily integrity, the right to bodily liberty, the right to life, the right to due process,” and more. (p. 5)
The book is explicitly crafted for two primary purposes. Firstly, Olyan notes the reluctance among Bible specialists to entertain rights-based approaches to their field. Simultaneously, non-specialists in law and philosophy have tended to criticize the Hebrew Bible as a catalyst for animal oppression. Secondly, recognizing the enduring influence of the Bible among religious adherents, the author aims to persuade both religious and non-religious readers alike that several biblical texts acknowledge animals as possessing some semblance of legal personhood. This endeavor is driven by Olyan's aspiration to contribute meaningfully to ongoing academic, legal, and public discourses surrounding the status of animals and the debate on animal rights (p. 2). Thus, Olyan endeavors to make his arguments accessible beyond the confines of academia, with the intention of informing not only religious readers but also legal scholars and a broader audience about the legal standing of animals within the Hebrew Bible.
Animal Rights and the Hebrew Bible stands out as a much-needed monograph that confronts both scholarly and popular concerns regarding the status of animals. Saul Olyan skillfully addresses the pervasive assumption, often left unexamined, that ancient texts such as the Hebrew Bible, particularly reinforced by hierarchical creation narratives like Genesis 1:26-28, offer definitive insights into the relationship between humans and animals. This assumption has been a focal point in modern scholarship, tracing back to Lynn White's seminal thesis proposing a correlation between technological advancement, Christianity, and the onset of ecological crises, despite White not being a biblical scholar.[1] However, biblical scholarship acknowledges the Hebrew Bible as a polyphonic text, comprising diverse authors and genres that present a spectrum of perspectives which may align, diverge, or even contradict each other. This complexity extends to the discourse on animal rights within biblical texts. In order to illustrate how Olyan makes his arguments accessible beyond the confines of academia while simultaneously attending to the complexity of Hebrew Bible, I present two chapters in more depth to provide readers a sense of how Olyan crafts his argument.
In his first chapter, titled “Four Legal Texts in the Hebrew Bible that Evince a Concern for Animal Rights,” Olyan tracks the development of biblical legal collections in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy to argue that they “accord a limited legal personhood and situation-specific rights to animals.” (p. 23) He begins with Exodus 23:20-11, where the poor and wild animals are granted the ability to gather from agricultural lands during the seventh year when landowners are commanded to let their land lie fallow. Thus, the poor and animals are granted limited legal rights that are not contingent upon the action of the person and do not evaporate in the face of consequential considerations, for example, the interest of a competing party. While Olyan recognizes there aren’t instructions on how this type of legal right would function, it is hard to argue that some right is not granted to the poor and wild animals. In addition, Leviticus 25:2-7 extends this right to domestic animals, and allows the poor and animals to gather from the land simultaneously rather than according to the hierarchy imposed in Exodus 23:10-11. As Olyan concludes, “The fact that the right to Sabbath rest cannot be manipulated or suspended due to circumstances is a fundamental characteristic of genuine rights as Francione has characterized them.” (p. 35)
Meanwhile, chapter four considers symmetrical and asymmetrical treatments of animals and humans, suggesting that in both cases animals possess some sort of value independent of human social and monetary systems. Perhaps his most interesting example explores the Law of the Firstborn in Exodus 22:28b-29, where the law treats a firstborn son among humans and animals as belonging to YHWH. (p. 89) The example advances Olyan’s claim that humans and animals are afforded the same legal value and status within this ritual setting. He provides several other examples, such as the symmetrical consignment to eradication (ḥērem) and the treatment of priests and sacrificial animals who possess defects, the law of the firstborn in Exodus 34:19-20 and Exodus 22:28b-29 where YHWH maintains the same claim on firstborn sons and animals, and several others (pp. 88-89, 91-93). How does a(symmetry) inform current debates about animal rights? Olyan argues, especially based on the substitution pattern of the firstborn, that “at least for the purposes of sacrifice, the two lives have an equivalent value” (p. 98). The argument that Olyan poses seems to suggest that animals in ritual systems are not purely instrumental. Not only are they not assigned a simple, fixed monetary value, but they attain social value when refracted through legal and ritual systems.
Olyan concludes his study by underscoring the complexity present in a polyvocal text compiled over centuries, asserting that exclusive reliance on texts like Genesis 1:26-28 and Genesis 9:2-3 distorts the richness of the Hebrew Bible and disregards its diverse viewpoints on animals, their worth, and their significance (p. 133). Through a shrewd focus on legal texts within the Hebrew Bible, Olyan demonstrates the presence of limited legal rights afforded to both humans and animals, echoing Francione’s conceptualization. In particular, insights from Pentateuchal scholarship reveal interconnectedness among these legal frameworks, enabling Olyan to conduct comparative analyses that would otherwise be absent from narratives elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible.
There is good reason that Olyan centers legal texts, as they most explicitly discuss legal rights and responsibilities, but it might also be worth considering narrative texts within the Hebrew Bible to further support his claim. To be clear, chapter two is dedicated to animals as covenant partners in Genesis 9:8-17 and Hosea 2:20; there are biblical narratives the author explores beyond the Pentateuch. But there are also lengthy narratives that might be fruitfully explored to provide additional texture to Olyan’s argument. The book of Jonah, for example, contains animals both wild and domestic in all of its chapters excluding the song in chapter 2. And while the animals don’t appear in legal contexts, traditional modern interpretations of the book highlight the ethical issues surrounding the destruction of persons and animals in the final chapter.[2] Moreover, a recent interest in animal studies and the Bible has reinvigorated Jonah scholarship, providing ample evidence for the centrality of animals in the narrative.[3] In other words, while readers may not conclude that the book of Jonah confers legal rights to animals within the narrative, they do serve significant plot points and constitute a serious source of ethical inquiry for the reader. They challenge the perspective that Olyan introduces at the beginning of his book, which centers the hierarchical arrangement espoused by the beginning chapters of Genesis.
The book is uncommon in its scope and excellently pairs the author’s expertise with a contemporary social issue. In particular, the author addresses religious communities like the Roman Catholic Church, mainline Protestant denominations, and non-Orthodox Jewish movements who have adopted some of the principles of biblical scholarship (p. 130). Indeed, these audiences in particular would benefit from Olyan’s treatment since they have adopted, at least in part, the academic tools of biblical scholarship, take the Bible seriously as a text of moral significance, and could theoretically affect social and political change in a way that is not limited to academic circles. And while outside the scope of the book, engaging with the New Testament and its treatment of animals would undoubtedly benefit Roman Catholic and mainline Protestant denominations.
In summary, Saul Olyan’s Animal Rights and the Hebrew Bible commendably delves into texts within the Hebrew Bible that confer limited legal rights to animals, challenging the prevailing notion of its unequivocal opposition to animal rights. By examining various passages prescribing such rights to both domestic and wild animals, Olyan effectively dismantles this perspective. Importantly, the book is crafted with the intention of reaching audiences beyond academia, presenting its arguments in an accessible manner in order to have a broad impact on a pressing contemporary social issue. Olyan, drawing upon his expertise as a biblical scholar, navigates this complex terrain with clarity and accessibility in mind, offering a fresh perspective on a challenging subject. In doing so, he encourages readers to envision the multi-voiced nature of the Hebrew Bible and its implications, thereby charting a new path forward in the ongoing discourse on animal rights.
Aron Tillema is a Lecturer in Religious Studies at Santa Clara University.
[1] Lynn White. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 155, no. 3767 (1967): 1203–1207.
[2] James Limburg. Jonah: A Commentary. (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), 34-36; Hans Walter Wolff. Obadiah and Jonah: A Commentary. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub. House, 1986), 86.
[3] See Yael Shemesh. “‘And Many Beasts’ (Jonah 4:11): The Function and Status of Animals in the Book of Jonah.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 10 (2011); Schalk Willem Van Heerden. “Shades of Green - or Grey? Towards an Ecological Interpretation of Jonah 4:6-11.” Old Testament Essays 30, no. 2 (2017): 459–477.