Excerpt Browser

This page displays the full text of excerpts.  When viewing a single excerpt, its “Share,” “Switch Article,” and “Comment” functions are accessible.

EXODUS — 23:12 rest

EXOD886 Dr. Bernard Rollin, a secular Jew who spent twelve years in yeshivah (Orthodox religious school) [and "father of veterinary medical ethics"] has argued throughout his career of more than thirty yeas that the major problems of farmed animal welfare today are the result of a failure to update our ethics to take into account our contemporary situation. In today's factory farms unnecessary animal suffering is at least as likely to occur on the farm as it is during slaughter, and responding to this new situation is arguably the most important aim of contemporary animal ethics, including Jewish animal ethics. Ninety-eight percent of the interactions that U.S. citizens have with animals are with those raised for food, and ninety-nine percent of these animals are raised on factory farms. Nonetheless, no movement of Judaism in the United States or Israel has attempted to develop policy on the systematic suffering inflicted upon animals on factory farms during their lives. This situation is likely to change in the near future, and already a committee of the Rabbinic Assembly, the organization of Conservative rabbis, is at work on just such a document as part of its Magen Tzedek program to certify foods as meeting ethical as well as ritual standards. An important resource in formulating a response is the broad legal principle expressed by the rabbis of the Talmud as a command not to cause tza'ar--literally "suffering" and understood to mean the suffering that does not advance some legitimate human good--to ba'alei hayyim-- to "living beings." The Rishonim (leading rabbinic authorities of the eleventh to sixteenth century) associate a variety of laws with this principle. Frequently cited examples include the prohibition against plowing with two animals of unequal strength (paradigmatically an ox and donkey), which causes the weaker animals to suffer (Deut. 22:10), and the already mentioned prohibition on muzzling an ox as it laborers (Deut 25:4)--rabbinically expanded to include all animals. Arguably the most prominent such law, found in both versions of the Decalogue, dictates that animals too are to be included in Sabbath rest [Exodus 20:10, Deut. 5:14]. All of these laws are expanded by rabbinic traditions, creating a massive body of legal material regarding Jewish and human responsibilities to animals. Thus, for example, the participation of animals in the rest of the Sabbath has led both ancient and contemporary rabbis to be lenient in permitting activities that are otherwise prohibited on Shabbat if they function to relieve animal pain (tza'ar ba'alei hayyim). And Rashi, commenting on [this verse], interprets the command to include not simply freedom from labor, but a positive state of contentment, and he thus rules that animals normally must have access to pasture on the Sabbath. Such laws demonstrate a concern for animal lives that takes into account diverse forms of harm such as that caused by the behavior of other animals, by emotional factors, or by constant exertion without respite. While forged largely in relation to laboring animals, the basic thrust of these laws--concern for the physical, social, and emotional lives of animals--would today be most applicable to the systematic forms of abuse inflicted upon find animals being raised for meat, milk, and eggs. (By Aaron S. Gross, "Jewish Animal Ethics")

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:12 rest

EXOD887 In the case of bal tashhit [the prohibition against destroying fruit-bearing trees (Deut. 20:19-20)… [which] the sages understood [] very broadly as including any act of needless destruction… there is an obvious fit with much else in Jewish law and thought. The Torah is concerned with what we would nowadays call "sustainability." This is particularly true of the three commands ordaining period rest: Shabbat, the Sabbatical year, and the Jubilee year. On Shabbat all agricultural work is forbidden "so that your ox and your donkey may rest" [this verse]. It sets a limit to our intervention in and the pursuit of economic growth. We become conscious that we are creations, not just creators. The earth is not ours but God's.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:13 idol

EXOD889 Do not take an oath in the name of an idol. Do not swear an oath in the name of an idol, and do not have a gentile swear such an oath. Some explain that the main prohibition is on doing business with an idol worshipper on one of his religious holidays, for if the gentile profits from the venture he might go and give thanks to his deity and the Jew will have caused the idol’s name to be mentioned and praised. To distance us from possible violation of the prohibition, our Sages even forbid us to say to someone, “Wait for me near idol such and such.” Key concept: To alienate ourselves from idol worship to the greatest degree possible, never thinking about it. [Owing to the fact that idol worship is so abhorrent in Hashem’s eyes, we are warned about it in forty-four places in the Torah.]

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:19 boil

EXOD892 Kashrut: To Separate Ourselves from Our Pagan Neighbors. Much attention--both positive and negative--has focused on how kashrut still has the potential to separate Jews from their non-Jewish neighbors, even though classical paganism is passe. Some view the issues that arise as fertile ground for exploring the tension between assimilation and segregation, for asserting our particular identity within a universalistic ethic. Others, Jewish and non-Jewish, have been quite critical of the potentially isolating effects of the practice for a Jew in modern life. Most liberal Jews who keep kosher make some accommodation to minimize this effect, at least eating off anyone's dishes. In a society that has been sensitized to the growing number of vegetarians and others with their own dietary restrictions, this is generally sufficient to bridge the gap. The tradition supports an alternative focus, however: to separate ourselves from paganism, rather than from the pagans themselves. Boiling a kid in its mother's milk, for instance, was thought to be a pagan rite. In refusing to do it, the Israelites could reject idolatry by the very way they cooked their food. Maimonides surmises as much in his Guide of the Perplexed [3:48]: Perhaps such food was eaten at one of the ceremonies of their cult or at one of their festivals. The confirmation of this may, in my opinion, be found in the fact that the prohibition against eating meat [boiled] in milk, when it is mentioned for the first two times [Exodus 23:19, 34:26], occurs near the commandment concerning pilgrimage.... It is as if it said: When you go on pilgrimage and enter the house of the Lord your God, do not cook there in the way they used to do. Idolatry today is frequently associated with the materialism that pervades every aspect of our society; in this incarnation, it is a worship of money. There are no magical fertility rites, but this contemporary paganism still makes of ultimate importance that which we create and acquire. It enshrines profit above people; it bows to corporate pressures and stock markets instead of to God. And just as in ancient times, it touches the very food we eat. There are countless examples. Florida farm workers are paid 1.2 cents per pound for picking tomatoes. To earn $25 a day, one worker must pick two thousand pounds of tomatoes! Some growers have been cited for slave conditions: armed guards forced laborers to work ten to twelve hours per day, six days a week. Chocolate, coffee, and other foods are similarly “tainted” by horrendous labor practices pursued in the name of the almighty dollar. [Internet sites such as CorpWatch.org offer up-to-date information on these issues.] Genetically modified crops can be seen as technologically advanced versions of the same temptations. They are more resistant to pests or drought, increasing productivity and profit. Agricultural companies will tout the potential to help subsistence farmers, but these altered foods have also been linked to severe allergic reactions, increased soil erosion, and breeding of resistant pests. Dumping of the products in some markets has led to the invasion of species and a weakening of biodiversity. Several corporations are pursuing “terminator” technology--sterile seeds that would guarantee annual seed purchases, ruining small farmers that cannot afford them, and generally devastating the food production chain. [CorpWatch.org, agresearch.cri.nz, mercola.com]. A Reform kashrut should resist these forms of paganism as well. Torah speaks repeatedly of the significance that God created for living organisms with the seed of creation inside them. In addition, many of these modifications violate even a liberal interpretation of restrictions against kilayim, mixing seeds (Leviticus 19:19). While these concerns are not classical elements of kashrut, the biblical instructions at their core link them to Jewish dietary laws. Reform Jews will rightly insist on continuing to eat with their neighbors, even their pagan ones. Here they can separate themselves from the idolatrous practices that pervade the food industry. (By Rachel S. Mikva, “Adventures in Eating: An Emerging Model for Kashrut”)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:19 boil

EXOD891 A great rabbi of a generation or two ago interpreted Scripture's injunction, "You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk," [this verse, Exodus 34:26, Deuteronomy 14:21] to refer to a child.… And he explained: If you allow a child to nestle indefinitely in his mother's arms, over-protected and over-indulged, fearing to subject him to the demands and disciplines of Torah, you "boil him in his mother's milk"; he is "cooked," finished, done for! Hence Scripture states three times, Do not boil a kid in its mother's milk, to imply, apart from the literal meaning, this warning in metaphor.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

RSS
First798081828384858687899192939495969798Last
Back To Top