Balak: Muzzled Up
When Balaam (under contract for the Moabite king Balak) attempted to curse the Jewish People, the Torah reports, “Hashem happened [to appear] to Balaam, and He put word [davar] in his [Balaam’s] mouth” (Num 23:16). The Hebrew word for “word” in this sentence (davar) can also mean “thing/object,” so Rashi (following Bamidbar Rabbah §20:20) explains that the “thing” in question actually refers to a resen, which is a mouthpiece put into the mouth of a horse or donkey to control it. Thus, Hashem figuratively put a mouthpiece on Balaam in order to control him and make sure that he will not curse the Jews. In this essay, we explore several others words like resen that also refer to the mouthpiece used to control animals, including meteg, zemam, prumbia, and afsar.
The word resen appears five times in the Bible. The single occurrence of this word in the Pentateuch is as a proper noun, when Assur (the progenitor of the Assyrians) built a city named Resen, that was located between Nineveh and Kalach (Gen. 10:12). The word occurs as a common noun referring to an animal’s mouthpiece another four times in the Bible (Isa. 30:28, Job 30:11, 41:5, Ps. 32:9). For example, when the prophet Isaiah foretells of the destined downfall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, he alludes to their future siege of Jerusalem in which their entire army was miraculously wiped out, by saying that Hashem will figuratively take the form of a “misleading resen on the cheeks of the nations” (Isa. 30:28) leading them to Jerusalem, the bane of their downfall. In that context, Radak (to Isa. 30:28) explains that in general a resen is used to lead an animal where its rider wants it to go. Elsewhere, Radak (Sefer HaShorashim) adds another aspect to the meaning of resen is that it serves as a “muzzle” that blocks the mouth of animal (presumably, so that it will not bite people or eat from other people’s fields).
While the classical lexicographers like Menachem Ibn Saruk (920–970), Yonah Ibn Janach (990–1050), Shlomo Ibn Parchon (the 12th century author of Machberet HeAruch), and Radak (1160–1235) trace the word resen to the triliteral root REISH-SAMECH-NUN, Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (1740–1814) sees the final NUN as non-essential to the core root, leading him to see the word as derived from the biliteral root REISH-SAMECH. He defines the core meaning of that root as “breaking off something into smaller pieces,” which is essentially what infinitive verb la'ros (“to drip/sprinkle”) used in Ezek. 46:14 means. This also accounts for the etymology of the Modern Hebrew word tarsis (“spray”). The nouns resisim (Amos 6:11) and resisei (Song of Songs 5:2) likewise refer to those “smaller pieces” broken off from something bigger.
As Rabbi Pappenheim explains it, resen derives from this core meaning because the mouthpiece bit inside the animal’s mouth causes the animal to drool, and the dripping saliva that comes out of its mouth resembles something small being broken off from something bigger. Rabbi Aharon Marcus (1843–1916) explains the connection between resen and this biliteral root slightly differently, arguing that the resen inside the animal’s mouth serves to bifurcate that space into at least two areas, thus resembling breaking off something small from something bigger.
Interestingly, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (to Ps. 2:2) connects the word resen to the Biblical Hebrew word roznim ("nobles/oligarchs") via the interchangeability of SAMECH and ZAYIN, explaining that the roznim lead the government just like the resen leads an animal. Rabbi Yehudah Aryeh of Carpentras (an 18th century grammarian and dayan) writes in Ohalei Yehuda that the SAMECH of resen can be interchangeable with the letter TZADI, leading him to see the word resen as a portmanteau of ratz (“running”) and ein (“not”), referring to the way that a rider can stop his horse from running by using the resen.
Like the word resen, the word meteg also appears in the Bible precisely five times (II Sam. 8:1, II Kgs. 19:28, Isa. 37:29, Prov. 26:3, and Ps. 32:9). Radak in Sefer HaShorashim explains that the meteg refers to a long piece of metal that is put into an animal's mouth in order to enable one to control/lead the animal. Radak also notes that the meteg is not designed in the same way as a resen, but he does not fully explain the difference between the two.
Ohalei Yehuda explains the etymology of meteg by comparing it to similar words: By seeing the final GIMMEL as interchangeable with KUF, he sees meteg as related to matok ("sweet"), because just as something sweet is desirable and enjoyable, so is it desirable and enjoyable for a rider to have control of his beast. (I would have explained the connection as saying that just as a person wants to keep something sweet in his mouth, so does a rider want to keep the meteg in his horse's mouth.)
Alternatively, Ohalei Yehuda argues that the initial MEM of meteg can be interchangeable with a NUN, plus the final GIMMEL can again be exchanged for a KUF, to relate the word meteg to the word nituk ("untie/release"). As he explains, the whole advantage of a meteg is that it serves as a way of tying down the animal with a strong knot that cannot be easily undone or untied.
Rabbi Yehoshua (Jeremy) Steinberg of the Veromemanu Foundation suggests that perhaps the word meteg relates to the word tugah/yagon (“distress,” or “suffering”) because the meteg is used to lead the animal by causing it pain, thus associating it with “sorrow.”
The fact that the words resen and meteg are closely related in meaning is seen from their appearance as a couplet in Ps. 32:9. Moreover, Targum translates the Hebrew word resen into zemam (Isa. 30:28, Job 30:11) and also translates the Hebrew word meteg into zemam (II Kgs. 19:28, Isa. 37:29). The use of one common Aramaic term for both of these Hebrew words suggests that the two Hebrew words are very close in meaning. Interestingly, in the one verse where resen and meteg appear together, Targum (to Ps. 32:9) translates meteg as zemama, and resen as prumbia (Targum to Job 41:5 also translates resen as prumbia).
But since resen and meteg are two different words, they cannot mean the exact same thing; so what is the difference between them?
Rabbi Avraham Bedersi (a 13th century Spanish scholar) in Chotam Tochnit (the first work on Hebrew synonyms) argues that meteg refers to a “metal bit” used to control a horse or other animal, while resen refers either to a “rope” tied to the animal's neck, or to a “leather bit” used to control an animal. Similarly, another approach favored by Dr. David J. A. Clines in his dictionary of Classical Hebrew argues that meteg refers to the entire “bridle” used for directing an animal, while resen refers specifically to the “mouthpiece” that connects the bridle to the animal’s body or the "reins," which were a long strap held by the rider that was attached to the bridle.
Rabbi Moshe Tedeschi Ashkenazi (1821–1898) in his work Otzar Nirdafim on Hebrew synonyms writes the exact opposite, explaining the word meteg as referring to the leather strap and resen as referring to the metal bit. The way he sees it, meteg is related to word metach (“spreading out” or “stretching out”) via the interchangeability of GIMMEL and CHET.
As Rabbi Amitai Ben-David explains, the Hebrew word meteg later came to refer to a diacritic mark found in the Masoretic texts that serves as neither as a vowel nor cantillation, but rather shows which syllables should be accentuated. This mark is represented by a short vertical line underneath a letter, and in Modern Hebrew came to refer to an “electric switch” because early electric switches also looked like just a short vertical line, and to certain types of worms, which also resemble the Masoretic meteg.
Earlier, we mentioned the Aramaic word zemam, which the Targumim use for rendering the Hebrew words resen and meteg. This term appears in rabbinic literature in several different contexts: The Torah (Deut. 25:4) outlaws muzzling an animal’s mouth when using it to work one’s field; rather one must allow the animal to eat from whatever produce it is helping produce. Now, if a person planted terumah, which may only be eaten by a Kohen and cannot be fed to an animal, this yields produce that one may not allow an animal to eat. Accordingly, the Mishnah says (Terumot 9:3) that when threshing one’s field that consists of terumah with an animal, one should hang a basket containing the same species of produce that the animal is working with (just not terumah) from the animal’s neck, so that the animal will not be restrained from eating while working. The verb used by the Mishnah for “muzzling” an animal in this context is zomem.
When talking about the falling out between Abraham and his nephew Lot, the Bible mentions that there was a dispute between the two, but does not elaborate on what exactly happened (Gen. 13:7). According to rabbinic tradition (cited by Rashi there), Abraham was particular to place a muzzle over his animal’s mouth to block them from grazing in other people’s pastures, while Lot was not as careful about his animals eating only from that which belonged to him. In relating this tradition, Bereishit Rabbah (§41:5), Targum pseudo-Jonathan (to Gen. 13:7), and Targum Yerushalmi (there) all use cognates of the word zemam to denote the “muzzle” placed over an animal’s mouth.
A similar word appears in the Bible — zomem. It seems to be derived from the same root ZAYIN-MEM-(MEM) as zemam, but means something totally different. Zomem in the Biblical sense refers to a “plot/plan” that a person has concocted. For example, the Psalmist refers to the battle between good and evil by saying, “A wicked person plans (zomem) against the righteous man” (Ps. 37:12). The act of “devilishly planning” (zamam) is even ascribed to Hashem (Jer. 51:12, Lam. 2:17, Zech. 1:6), when He plans for various calamities to occur as punishments to those who cross His word. Similarly, witnesses who conspire to falsely accuse an innocent person of crime are said to be zamam against their fellow (Deut. 19:19). These false witnesses who fiendishly collaborated are referred to in the Mishnah as eidim zomemim (Bava Kama 7:3, Sanhedrin 6:2, Makkot 1:3, 1:6). Finally, the Bible condemns fornicating with a woman and her daughter/granddaughter as a zimah (Lev. 18:17, 20:14), which means “[licentious] plot.”
Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (1740–1814) sees the core meaning of the biliteral root ZAYIN-MEM as "intellectual decision." From this, derive the terms zamam ("plan/plot") and yuzma ("enterprise/endeavor"), both of which are the direct results of intellectual decisions that can bring either good or bad. On the other hand, the word zimah refers specifically to the mind's decision to commit a wrongdoing. A corollary of that word is nezem ("nose-ring"), which is an article of jewelry that entices men towards zimah. Rabbi Pappenheim also explains that the words zman ("time") also relates to the core meaning of this root, because situating something in terms of time is only something that a person can comprehend intellectually, but not physically by the senses. Despite this impressive list of derivatives, Rabbi Pappenheim does not explain how zemam in the sense of “muzzle” relates to this core meaning.
But Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785–1865) gives us a slightly different explanation which leaves an opening for us to tie ZAYIN-MEM to the word zemam. He explains that when one makes an intellectual decision, one has essentially “closed off” all the other options and made up his mind about what course of action to take. Based on this, he explains that nezem refers to a piece of jewelry which is likewise “closed,” as the nose-ring must form a complete circle into order to be affixed onto the wearer. In line with this, we may add the a zemam likewise refers to a “muzzle” as a device that “closes” an animal’s mouth and disallows it to eat or bite under inappropriate circumstances. Alternatively, the zemam has to be affixed on the animal’s face just like the nezem is affixed to a human’s face.
The Midrash (Bereishit Rabbah §75:9) alludes to a connection between these two meanings by exegetically interpreting the word zemam in the Biblical sense (Ps. 140:9), as though it referred to a “muzzle,” imaging Jacob as praying to Hashem that He figuratively place a “muzzle” over Esau’s face to block him from realizing the satisfaction of seeing his nefarious plans to completion.
Interestingly, Rabbi Shmuel David Luzzatto — also known as Shadal (to Lev. 18:17) — offers an all-inclusive explanation to account for all the different word related to ZAYIN-MEM that we have been discussing. He explains that what typifies a zamam is that it is a plan/plot that remains within the realm of the mind. By that account, zemamah might typically refer to “evil thoughts,” but theoretically could also refer to “good thoughts.” In the case of illicit fornication, Shadal writes that zimah means “secret thoughts” that a person is careful about holding in, without ever outwardly expressing in words. Accordingly, he writes that of all sins, lying with a woman and her daughter or granddaughter is specifically called zimah, because society considers this an especially heinous sin, so one would be inclined to keep such fantasies a secret and never talk about it. [As an aside, the Talmud (Yevamot 37b) explains the word zimah differently, by parsing it as a portmanteau of the term zu mah hiy ("what is she/this?"), in reference to after-effects of promiscuity, which causes peoples’ genealogical lineage to be called into question due to unclear parentage.]
Following from all this, Shadal writes that just as zamam/zimah refer to that which is locked into one’s mind and cannot leave one’s mouth, so does zemam as “muzzle” refer to that which locks an animal’s mouth and stops it from eating/biting.
Another word we mentioned earlier is prumbia, which appears twice in the Mishnah (Shabbat 5:1, Keilim 11:5). Perhaps more famously, this word appears in a teaching cited in the Babylonian Talmud (Bava Kamma 17b) about an animal that caused damage through the prumbia on its mouth. The word prumbia is also used by Rashi (to Isa. 30:28) as a translation of the Hebrew word resen in that verse.
Dr. Alexnader Kohut (1842–1894) identifies the word prumbia as a permutation of the Greek word φορβειά (pronounced, phorbeia), which refers to a leather strap worn by people who played the aulos (a wind instrument that resembles a pipe and flute) to avoid excessive strain on their lips and cheeks caused by continuous blowing. In Latin and English, this accessory is called a capistrum. In some ways, this device was similar to a muzzle or halter, so it became associated in rabbinic parlance with an animal’s headgear and related paraphernalia. Either way, for some reason, the rabbinic version of this word has an extra MEM vowel in it. Linguists call this phenomenon "epenthetic vowel insertion" or "intrusive vowel."
Another version of this word is used in the Midrashic aphorism (cited by Bereishit Rabbah §45:7), “If someone says that one of your ears is a donkey's [ear], then do not be concerned. [But if someone says that] two [of your ears are donkey ears], then you should make for yourself a muzzle." The word for “muzzle” in this context is either probi or prochi (depending on the edition of the Midrash), which seems to be cognate with prumbia/phorbeia.
Finally, the word afsar/ifsar (from the Persian word afsar) refers to a bit placed in a horse's mouth that allows one to control the animal. In other words, it refers to the “reins” of the animal. According to Halacha, one legally acquires the entire animal, when one takes possession of an animal’s afsar. Because of this, the term afsar in the Babylonian Talmud assumes a legal implication, as it can refer to taking possession of anything (like a deed can be referred to as the afsar of a plot of real estate, for that is the mechanism by which one legally acquires the land), just like it originally referred to the means of taking hold of an animal (see Kiddushin 27a-b, Bava Batra 53b, and Targum pseudo-Jonathan to Num. 19:2).
