The Gemara Zevachim (113b) mentions the fish in the sea died:

ואמאי קרי ליה חרבה כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא בדור המבול לא נגזרה גזרה על דגים שבים שנאמר מכל אשר בחרבה מתו ולא דגים שבים

And why does the Torah call it “dry land” during the flood? There was no dry land during the flood. It is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: During the generation of the flood no decree was decreed upon the fish in the sea, as it is stated: “Whatsoever was on the dry land, died” (Genesis 7:22), i.e., only those creatures that had been on dry land, but not the fish in the sea.

Would that mean fish kept in ponds or aquariums would have died?

  • 1
    . . . or rivers? – msh210 Oct 9 '18 at 22:43
  • @msh210 I wondered that too, but thought כָּל־הַנְּחָלִים הֹלְכִים אֶל־הַיָּם (Koheles 1:7) would connect rivers to oceans – NJM Oct 9 '18 at 23:14

Clearly the word "yam" here denotes any body of water, be it an ocean, sea, lake, etc. Jastrow concurs with me that the word has other meanings aside from "sea":

enter image description here

A good thing to know is oftentimes a Hebrew word will have more than one accepted meaning.

  • I don't know that it's so clear. We're talking about the beginning of Genesis, not long after ולמקוה המים קרא ימים – Double AA Oct 10 '18 at 12:18

The Petach Einayim emphasizes that "Mikol asher b'charava" applies specifically to those things that were on dry land from the beginning. As such, even creatures that might have been captured from the sea and brought onto dry land like the scenarios you presented would still have been spared. At least, that's how I'm learning it.

It's too lengthy to quote in full here.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .