The Great Fish
Yonah - 2:1
And Hashem prepared a big fish to ingest Yonah and Yonah was in the
belly of the fish three days and three nights (2:1).
We are about to encounter and engage some of the most profound teachings
in Yonah. Unfortunately, before we do so, we must spend some time
discussing how the fish swallowed Yonah and whether and how this is
possible. Ask most people about the book of Yonah and it is likely that
you will hear "Oh, Yonah and the whale." It is deplorable that this minor
detail has become the most well-known feature of the book of Yonah.
Unfortunately, it requires a comment. Though for us it is but a
distraction from the primary goal of uncovering the book's message, it
remains a stumbling block to many serious students of Yonah , who find
themselves unable to advance because of this apparently fantastic
incident. It would, therefore, be a disservice to bypass this topic
without comment.
Is it possible for a person to survive within a fish for three days? If
not, was it a miracle; if so, why does it not say so in the book itself?
A number of attempts have been made to reconcile Yonah's prolonged stay
within the fish with cetacean anatomy and physiology. One plausible
explanation invokes the large and flexible pharynx of sperm whales which
not infrequently have been known to swallow huge octopuses whole. The
large air-filled stomachs of sperm whales may enable a human to access to
sufficient air to breath for some time. Others point to the large air-sacs
of certain species that can accommodate a person in relative comfort. In
1891, there was a widely circulated report of a sailor swallowed by a
sperm whale and cut out from its belly alive on the following day by his
shipmates. As is well-known, no story remains unquestioned and no proof
survives unopposed. The story was subsequently denied by the wife of that
boat's captain in a 1905 publication, and so, the true facts will never be
fully known.
Many classical commentators maintain that it was a miracle or a series of
miracles (See Ibn Ezra, Radak, Malbim). Others lessen the disruption of
natural law by pointing out that this was a special fish, "a great fish"
by the testimony of the verse, prepared specifically for this purpose at
creation (See Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer CH. 10). The miracle may have been
relatively minor, consisting merely in widening the belly of a fish to
enable it to comfortably contain a person (Yalkut 550).
Is it possible that being swallowed by a fish was only a prophetic vision
but that it did not actually happen? Although there are isolated
references to those who maintained such a view, we must reject it on the
basis of the widespread consensus among early and older sources that treat
it as real event. These include Mishna Taanit 2:4 (He who answered Yonah
from the belly of the fish, He shall answer us), apocryphal books of
Tobias (14:4) and Maccabees (6:8), Josephus (Antiquities 9,10,2) and
numerous commentators, early and late. Granted, Joseph Ibn Kaspi in his
commentary to Yonah 2:11 somewhat disapprovingly cites such an opinion, as
does Maimonides quoting "some of the Andulasians" in Guide 1:42. One must,
however, keep in mind that such a view derives not from a disbelief in the
possibility of miracles, as in our day and time, but from an Aristotelean
based insistence that the Perfect Creator created perfect rules of nature
and that He would not allow them to be easily violated. There is also an
attempt by the Ephodi, a rather controversial philosopher and commentator
(known as Profiat Duran after his forcible conversion to Cristianity which
he ultimately renounced) in his commentary to the Guide 3:32 to read this
view into Maimonides himself; however, Abarbanel in his commentary to the
same passage quite convincingly disproves this conjecture. (Those who wish
to explore this topic more fully can consult the introduction to the JPS
edition of Yonah with the commentary of Uri Simon; Shlomo Aviner, Perush
on Sefer Yonah, p. 64; and A. Rivlin, Yonah: Nevua V'Tochacha, p. 43-57.)
It is true that the Vilna Gaon and the Zohar read the book of Yonah as an
allegory that describes the soul's descent into this world and its sojourn
in it. There is no indication, however, that they disputed the literal
sense of the story. Unlike the story of Job, which one Talmudic opinion in
Bava Basra 17 considers a parable, no such precedent exists for the book
of Yonah. Those who propose such an interpretation of Yonah walk, in my
opinion, too close to the line that divides Jewish interpretative
tradition from those beyond it.
In summary, we will follow the traditional approach that sees the fish
that swallowed Yonah as a miracle. This miracle may have been set ready
from Creation or may have consisted in a relatively minor expansion of
natural boundaries, explaining why it was not worthy of being noted in the
narrative itself. The weight of precedent and consensus, as well as the
testimony of early sources, leads us to reject attempts to read the
incident of the fish swallowing Yonah as a prophetic vision. Rather, we
should treat it a real event and interpret accordingly.
With the question of "how could it have happened" out of the way, we now
stand ready to embrace the real lessons of the fish and Yonah's sojourn
within it.
Text Copyright © 2004 by Rabbi Dr. Meir Levin and Torah.org.