LEV195 The Torah speaks of hunting animals or foul [this verse]. The use of the word "Tzayid" clearly signifies hunting, which seems to be permitted in Judaism. But the Torah context of hunting is very different from the concept of hunting in the modern sense. First, in the verse itself, as explained by the commentaries, the "hunt" is for food that is kosher, which will then be eaten by the hunter, and especially refers to the hunting of geese and wild chickens (Rishi Mizrachi and Gur Aryeh commentaries on Leviticus 17:13). Thus, there is no Jewish term for hunting merely for sport. Similarly, when the Mishna uses this term, "hunting," it never refers to a gun, knife, or weapon to be used to kill the animal, but rather to trapping the animal while it is still alive, especially since killing the animal with any weapon would render it non-kosher for eating (Mishna Beitza 3:1-2). Therefore, there is no concept of hunting for sport or killing any animal with a weapon in Judaism. This concept is codified in Jewish law. Shulchan Aruch rules that it is forbidden on Shabbat to "hunt" even a deer (a kosher animal) that is old, blind, sick, or damaged. Rema adds that hunting with trained dogs is not only forbidden on Shabbat, but is prohibited even during the week, since it is a frivolous, non-Jewish activity (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 316:2). Why is hunting forbidden? Rema, in another of his books, explains that hunting is forbidden, whether the purpose is for "fun" or to sell the prey (Darchei Teshuva, Yoreh De'ah 117:44). This is the occupation of the evil Eisav [Esau], which shows a quality of cruelty in praying on animals and killing God's creations. When man curtails life as sport or for fun, it is the opposite of his purpose in life, which is to enhance and expand the world. Not only is Eisav depicted as the classic hunter, but another evil leader, Nimrod, is also call a hunter in the Torah and is viewed very unfavorably in Jewish thought (Genesis 25:27). Sefer HaChinuch forbids hunting as part of the prohibition of needlessly causing pain to animals (Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvah 550). Hunting also violates the general spirit of Judaism, which is to promote peace in the world (Gittin 59b). The most famous discourse on the Jewish opposition to hunting is a responsum of Rabbi Yechezkel Landau (1713-1793). In it Rabbi Landau reviews all the reasons presented above to prohibit hunting. He adds that it is forbidden for a Jew to hunt because part of hunting for sport involves putting oneself in danger in the forest or jungle, which is forbidden. He concludes that the entire activity is disgusting, cruel, and dangerous, and is utterly forbidden for all Jews (Responsa Noda BeYehudah Mahadura Tennina, Yoreh De'ah 10).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV193 Biblical and talmudic laws prohibit eating any animal not killed instantly and with a single stroke, in effect making hunting forbidden to Jews as a method of acquiring food. At most, biblical law does permit an Israelite to capture an animal [this verse] and then slaughter it. But to chase after an animal, often accompanied by pursuing dogs, is proscribed (Avodah Zarah 18b; see Rashi's commentary). In the words of Maimonides, "We should not kill animals… for the purpose of sport (The Guide for the Perplexed 3:17). Also, we should remember that animals are often wounded but not killed by the hunter, and die a prolonged and agonizing death.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV196 ... we need to remember that, for our Rabbis, religious eating was not solely a matter of prohibiting the consumption of certain foods and food combinations. Moving beyond the biblical text, our Sages addressed not only what Jews ate, but how they ate as well. To begin with, their system of kashrut included a method for slaughtering those animals deemed fit to eat. [Derived in part from the priestly sacrificial descriptions, the rules of proper slaughter and “fit” slaughterers are enumerated in Babylonian Talmud, Chulin 9a.] If our Rabbis were unable to formulate a unifying rationale for prohibiting certain foods, they were far more successful in deriving principles of slaughtering that have stood the test of both time and logic. By intertwining the biblical precept that prohibits eating “the blood of any kind of flesh” [Leviticus 17:14. See also Lev. 3:17, 7:26, 19:26; Deut. 12:16.; I Sam. 14:34; Ezek. 33:25, 39:17ff. It should be noted that the context in Leviticus 17 (as well as in Deuteronomy 15) makes specific provision for pouring the blood out on the ground. Most interestingly, Genesis 9:4 also relates this legal precept to Noah and his sons; intrinsically, it seems as if the laws respecting life-blood were attended to hold for all humanity (as R. Chanania b. Gamliel intuits in Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 59a)] with the verse that associates blood with life's essence, our Sages discover a religious principle behind the laws of proper slaughter [on the appositive association of “life” and “blood,” see the interpretation of Gen. 9:4 offered by R. Chanania b. Gamliel in Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 59a)]. They teach that out of respect for all the sacred life that God has created, we must ritually recall that divine creation prior to taking advantage of it for our own gustatory purposes. While we might be entitled to slaughter an animal in order to satiate our own hunger, our religion reminds us that we nonetheless need to remember our secondary role in the transcendent order of the universe; by returning to God the blood representing the divine life that inhabits all, we remember God's primacy in the order of our universe. (By Seth M. Limmer, “ON KASHRUT.)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV197 In the Amidah (Singer's Prayer Book, p. 48), a special blessing is uttered … "Towards the proselytes of righteousness, and towards us also, may Thy tender mercies be stirred, O Lord our God". Some of the most famous sages of the Talmud, like Shemaiah and Abtalion, Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Meir, Ben Bag Bag and Ben He He (Abot v. 25-26) and Rabbi Yehudah ben Gerim (Shabbat 33b) were reputed to be either proselytes themselves or to have been descended from gerei tsedek. That they rose to such eminence proves that no barriers were placed in their paths to greatness. Conditions to-day do not warrant any relaxation in our attitude towards intermarriage [this verse]. Our records reveal that the ger tsedek became an object of affection both to God and to his fellow-Jew. (Deut. x. 18-19; Leviticus xix. 33; Ps. cxlvi. 9. See also Exodus xii. 49; xxii. 20; Leviticus xxiv. 22; Num. ix. 14; xv. 16, 29; Deut. xxiv. 17-18; xxvii. 19.) The ger toshav could claim similar consideration if he abandoned idolatry (Leviticus xviii.2), the practice of sorcery, incest and other abominations, if (Leviticus xviii. 26) he abstained from eating blood (Ibid. xvii.10), from working on the Sabbath (Exodus xx. 10; xiii.12) from eating leavened food on Pesah (Ibid. xii.19) and from violating the Day of Atonement (Leviticus xvi. 29). The prophets all preach humanitarian feelings towards the stranger and the Bible itself features non-Jews as examples of fidelity (Eliezer, the majordomo of Abraham's household), of devotion (Ruth) and of (Job) piety. The Pharisees made it clear that their hatred of the heathen was a hatred of what heathenism stood for in the realm of belief and conduct. Similar hatred was displayed by them towards the Am Ha'aretz, the Jewish boor who was lax in his religious observance. Intermarriage, or truer to its meaning, extermarriage between Jew and Gentile (looked at askance even by enlightened Jews of to-day), is not due to contempt of the Gentile but to the firm conviction that the unity of Judaism and the Jewish people is contingent on the happiness of the home. This happiness is jeopardized by the yoking together of two people with an entirely different background and outlook on life. When one bears in mind the sufferings of the Jew at the hands of a hostile world, such legislation is not to be wondered at. Had the non-Jewish worlds not persecuted the Jew throughout the ages, with a sword in their hands and the words "God is Love" on their lips, those laws cited by Jew-baiters as breathing contempt and hatred for all who are not Jews would not of been admitted into our legislation.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV198 Clearly, part of Judaism itself is to strive to remain separate and unique as a Jew, apart from the surrounding culture. One of the 613 commandments is not to imitate or adopt the customs of the surrounding nations [this verse]. less than two chapters later, this commandment is repeated (Leviticus 20:23-24), but there is an added phrase: "I am the God who has separated you from all the other nations." While the literal verses apply only to the seven Canaanite nations present in the land when the Jews conquered Israel, the rabbis have shown that the customs of all non-Jewish nations may not be practiced by Jews (Maimonides, Hilchot Akum 11:1, based on Avodah Zarah 11a and Sanhedrin 52b). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 178:1) codifies this idea, stating that one may not adopt a non-Jewish custom if it is religious in origin or if its source is unknown, even if it is not practiced today in the same context (See the chapter "Jews in a Non-Jewish Society" for an expansion on this idea).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV199 Many explanations for anti-Semitic feelings and behavior have been put forward. The best place to begin is in the Torah itself. Why was the first Jew, Abraham, hated so much as a Jew? The Midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 38:13) says that Abraham was called a Hebrew because the whole world was on one side and he was on the other side (ever). Therefore, we see that because Abraham was different (in his belief), he was hated. This is somewhat understandable, as it is natural to be uncomfortable around anyone who is a little different. This natural reaction does not make it morally correct or justified, but understandable. Being different is not unique to Abraham, but it has become a characteristic of the Jewish people of all ages. When most nations would assimilate after being conquered, the Jews held fast to their religion, by and large. This is most clearly expressed in the Purim megillah when, at first, Mordechai was different by refusing to bow to Haman. Then, when convincing the king to destroy the Jewish people, Haman's argument was that their laws and religion are different from any other religion. (Megillat Esther 3:8). In fact, the Jewish people are supposed to remain different [this verse] (see chapter "Being Jewish and Being Different"), which causes much anger and hostility by the surrounding non-Jewish community.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV201 The Torah clearly wishes the Jews to keep some distance from the non-Jewish community by explicitly commanding Jews not to copy the customs of the non-Jews [this verse]. What does this commitment precisely mean and how is it performed? Although this verse seems to be referring specifically to the customs of Egypt and of Canaan, two chapters later the same commandment is repeated (Leviticus 20:23-24) without a reference to any specific nation, but with an "explanation" that God has made the Jews different from all other nations. The commentaries have emphasized this general concept and have not restricted this mitzvah to the customs of any particular non-Jewish society. For example, the Sefer Hachinuch (Sefer Hachinuch, Mitzvah #2) explains that one of the main purposes of the brit milah, in the first mitzvah given to all Jews, is to keep Jews separate from other nations, both in name and in physical demarcation. Maimonides (Hilchot Akum 11:1) in explaining the mitzvah of not following non-Jewish customs, says that a Jew should be distinctive from non-Jews through distinctive dress as well as through knowledge and understanding.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV200 May Jews, then, celebrate their birthdays at all? Part of being Jewish is remaining distinctively Jewish in beliefs and actions. Therefore, the Torah forbids imitating the customs of foreign cultures [this verse]. The Mishna also associates birthday celebrations with non-Jewish kings who worshiped idols, and therefore forbids Jews to make a celebration on the day the king celebrates his birthday (Mishna Avodah Zara 1:3 with Rashi and Rabbeinu Chananael commentaries). After much discussion in the Talmudic and post-Talmudic period about the precise implications of the Averah/sin, the Code of Jewish Law rules that any custom that was entirely pagan or idol-worshiping in origin is forbidden to Jews, even if the custom is no longer even religious today (like celebrating Halloween, for example). Similarly, if the original reason for the ritual or custom is unknown, then it is similarly forbidden (since it might have had pagan origins). However, if the custom has legitimacy in and of its own, without pagan ideas, then even if non-Jews originated the particular practice, it is not forbidden to Jews (like hairstyles today or wearing a suit) (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 178). Would this Jewish law forbid or permit celebration of birthdays today by Jews? Although the specific rituals may have been pagan in origin, the celebration of the birth of something or someone is not unique to idol worshipers (as was demonstrated above in sources and will be expanded upon below). Thus the idea of celebrating a birthday in and of itself is not pagan in origin and would be permitted from that perspective. However, the specific rituals that are associated with birthday celebration may be questionable. The use of a cake, even a round cake, does not necessarily signify the pagan origin, as many celebrations involve the baking of cakes (and a round cake is simply the standard, not due to the shape of the moon). However, the use of candles, (especially the blowing out of candles) and attaching magical powers for wishes to these candles is certainly questionable from the Jewish perspective. Therefore, one modern Rabbi forbids the use of candles in Jewish birthday celebrations (Rabbi Avrohom Blumenkrantz, "The Laws of Pesach" (2002), p. 206). Specifically, Jews are never supposed to blow out candles, since King Solomon has taught that a candle represents a human life that should never be extinguished by blowing it out (Kaf HaChaim (Palagi) 31:25, Proverbs 20:27).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV202 Women who rub one against the other--this is forbidden. It is among the acts of Egypt against which we were warned, for it says (Leviticus 18:3): “You shall not copy the practices of the land of Egypt.” The sages said (Sifra, Aharei Mot, 9:8): “What is it that they would do? A man would marry a man, a woman would marry a woman, or a woman would marry two men.” Even though this practice is prohibited, one does not receive lashes, for there is no specific biblical prohibition and it is not called “intercourse” at all. Therefore, they are not prohibited [subsequently from marrying] into the priesthood on account of licentiousness, and a woman is not prohibited to her husband on account of this... but it is appropriate to give them lashes [on rabbinic authority] for rebelliousness, since they have done a prohibited thing. Maimonides (Rambam), Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Intercourse 21:8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV203 "You must not follow their customs" [this verse]. We have been admonished herein to distance ourselves from all Emorite customs, among them the use of incantations and amulets whose proficiency for healing has not been ascertained. … We have referred to some of the things in which many are negligent unknowingly, for no one has made them aware; and to some things which people know are forbidden, but do not know the severity of the prohibition. We have mentioned them so that the erring populace will not stay with them. Let the wise hear and add [his own] learning [Mishlei 1:5], in order to warn the populace concerning all such similar matters. The enlightened will remind others, and they will shine like the brightness of the firmament.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT