*in its original, non-pejorative meaning: "The resolving of moral problems by the application of theoretical rules."
see https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/casuistry
There is supposed to be humour in what you'll read below. It is also an example of the analytical approach you will have to learn in order to analyze questions of law. There were at least 3 qualified lawyer types, and a gaggle of PHDs from various disciplines, involved in the discussions relating to these deep existential questions.
Ecumenical version of an existential question (being my first obvious breach (or attempt: pace Yoda) of my impracticable unrealistic NYR** to at least increase the quality of my punning if I wasn't going to decrease the quantity)
Is it true that Praying Mantises are not kosher because they don't wear phylacteries when they prey?
** No: Not the "New York Rangers"; or the New [something inappropriate] Rovers, although all of those might work in an odd sense. New Year Resolutions.
If a VRBtP (very rich billionaire-type person) such as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is prepared to publicly admit, or at least imply, that his 2017 resolutions includes either being less, the same, or more ethical than he was in 2016 (see Zuckerberg states that he is no longer an atheist but does not disclose the nature of new (or old) theism(s) that he now might now be considering adopting) then even we NVRBtPs (Not very ...) are entitled to NYRs of metaphorically analogous, even morally equivalent, stature.
Tribal (in-house) version
Is it true that Praying Mantises are not kosher because they don't wear Tefillin*** when they prey?
***"Tefillin" is the Hebrew word meaning phylacteries.
Since this is a law blog site, I'll tell you that you can easily look up the meaning of "phylacteries" using any one of your favourite search engines. I'd recommend you use DuckDuckGo.com but that's preference. In this case, any functional site should do. If you're lazy: go to Wikipedia. It's good enough in this case.
The answer might be in Leviticus, c. 11, versus 20 & onwards. Or not.
Hebrew Torah (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0311.htm)
20 All winged swarming things that go upon all fours are a detestable thing unto you. 21 Yet these may ye eat of all winged swarming things that go upon all fours, which have jointed legs above their feet, wherewith to leap upon the earth; 22 even these of them ye may eat: the locust after its kinds, and the bald locust after its kinds, and the cricket after its kinds, and the grasshopper after its kinds. 23 But all winged swarming things, which have four feet, are a detestable thing unto you. 24 And by these ye shall become unclean; whosoever toucheth the carcass of them shall be unclean until even[ing]. 25 And whosoever beareth aught of the carcass of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even[ing].
Septuagint (http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/Leviticus/index.htm) - older translation
20 And all winged creatures that creep, which go upon four feet, are abominations to you. 21 But these ye shall eat of the creeping winged animals, which go upon four feet, which have legs above their feet, to leap with on the earth. 22 And these of them ye shall eat: the caterpillar and his like, and the attacus and his like, and the cantharus and his like, and the locust and his like. 23 Every creeping thing from among the birds, which has four feet, is an abomination to you. 24 And by these ye shall be defiled; every one that touches their carcases shall be unclean till the evening.
KJV authorized (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Leviticus-11-kjv/)
20 All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you. 21 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; 22 Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. 23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you. 24 And for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean until the even.
And, to update the texts, a colleague, clearly in possession of one of the NURVs of the Old Testament - New Unusually Revised Versions - noted
Here's what Leviticus 11, 23-25 has to say on the matter:
21 But you may eat certain insects that have wings and walk on four feet. You may eat those that have legs with joints above their feet so they can jump. 22 These are the insects you may eat: all kinds of locusts, winged locusts, crickets, and grasshoppers. 23 But all other insects that have wings and walk on four feet you are to hate. 24 Those insects will make you unclean, and anyone who touches the dead body of one of these insects will become unclean until evening. 25 Anyone who picks up one of these dead insects must wash his clothes and be unclean until evening.
Verses 26-30 go on deal with special dispensations for cruise passengers.
which probably helps to explain the number of cruise ships catering to retired Jewish Canadians and Americans docking in Miami Beach each winter.
I didn't ask if his version is missing the negative in any of the 10 Commandments - say the Talmud (Jewish Old Testament) traditional numbers 1-3 - or has a negative in the traditional 4. #4 is the first of the positive Commandments. As biblical scholars know, there's a very famous, very valuable, early misprinted version of the Christian Bible in which the "not" is missing from the original #7. The result of that "oops" is that that version of the CB - which came to be known as the Wicked Bible - is probably the type that would be kept regularly in motel rooms (and the cheaper Vegas and Hollywood hotels) if the Gideon's hadn't got there first to rectify the problem.
I'll add an (in)appropriate image of a graying/greying Praying/Preying Mantis praying/preying when I've either found one or made one.
The source of these deep philosophical issue is a discussion I had with friends as a result of an image on a Christmas card.
As you see, one of the magi is presenting what might well be chocolate-covered bees (not Turtles - these were kosher in Canada when I grew up: said so on the box) - of some sort to a young Jesus and parents. I could not tell from the image whether this is dark chocolate or milk chocolate.
Finally, for now, a very qualified, very eminent, pair of biologists pointed out that either the old Biblical scholars were very bad at counting and math (they didn't add "like too many lawyers" but it was implicit) and not very good at practical science and field work (same point), or insects have managed to grow another pair of limbs in the 6000 odd years since the world was created.
No sane or otherwise minds, or any other portion, of any human or non-human creature was, to my knowledge, harmed in the creation of this post. Appropriate to the situation reasonable precautions were taken and appropriate to the situation reasonable steps were taken to acquire the knowledge required to make these assertions. In addition, no PBS (Peat Bog Squeezings) of any sort (or analogous substances) were consumed in the course of the preparation of this post. It probably would have been better if they had (been). It would have been longer, too.
(This is a revised and improved version of a posting on my 4th Monkey Blog. The version here is better.)
