Liberal Jewish Values and Practice Leaflets
Animal Welfare by Rabbi Hillel Avidan
Judaism moved early to protect the rights of animals and to
the extent that Christianity and Islam express concern for animals,
they have usually borrowed from Jewish sources. Yet Jews have
been reluctant to proclaim this fact or to demonstrate how modern
animal welfare societies have been inspired (albeit unconsciously
or indirectly) by the teachings of our faith. Jews have cause
to feel both pride and great sadness when they consider the
exacting moral standards of Jewish animal welfare legislation
and homily, and compare those standards with the neglect and
abuse of animals so characteristic of most societies and legal
systems, past and present. Genesis 1:26 states that man may
dominate all other creatures (which would appear inevitable,
given superior human intelligence) but the dominion intended
is a caring and responsible paternalism rather than a callous
exploitation. In the Talmud (Sanhedrin 59b) "dominion"
is interpreted as the privilege of using animals for labour.
The 11th century commentator Rashi understands the verse to
mean that human dominion is granted by God on condition that
animals are not abused. If, argues Rashi, we become unworthy
of the trust placed in us by the Creator, then we will sink
to a level lower than that of any animal. Genesis 1:29 declares
that man was initially meant to be vegetarian. Only after the
Flood (contends Genesis 9:3) was human consumption of animals
permitted and this was later understood as a concession, both
to human weakness and to the supposed scarcity of edible vegetation.
Horror at the slaughter of other creatures for food has, in
our time, prompted a widespread return to vegetarianism, a position
deserving of our attention and respect. Genesis 24 relates how,
when Eliezer went to Haran to find a wife for Isaac, he looked
for a girl who would show kindness both to humans and to animals.
After Rebecca had drawn water for Eliezer and his men she immediately
watered their camels. Later Jewish teaching insisted that it
should be the other way round and so the Talmud states, "A
man may not sit down to his own meal before he has fed his animals"
(Berahot 40a). In Proverbs 12:10 we can read "A righteous
man has regard for the life of his animal", that is, he
shows consideration for its needs and feelings. Such consideration
should not be restricted to one's own animals for Exodus 23:4
teaches that stray animals must be taken care of and returned
to their owners at the earliest opportunity. This applies even
to animals belonging to one's enemy and the very next verse
in Exodus 23 urges the offering of assistance to the fallen
work animal of an enemy. Deuteronomy 22:4 demands that any fallen
animal be helped to its feet. Exodus 20:10 teaches that animals
must rest on the Sabbath Day and the need for such consideration
is repeated in Exodus 23:12 and Deuteronomy 5:14. In Leviticus
22:27 it is stated that a young domestic animal may not be separated
from its mother till at least seven days old and in Leviticus
22:28 it is prohibited to kill an animal together with its young,
mainly in order to prevent the one witnessing the death of the
other.
Commenting on these two verses the 12th Century philosopher
Maimonides wrote, "The pain of animals under such circumstances
is very great. There is no difference in this case between the
pain of humans and the pain of other living beings, since the
love and tenderness of the mother for her young is not produced
by reasoning but by feeling and this faculty exists not only
in humans but in most living things" (Guide of the Perplexed
3:48). Deuteronomy 22:6 and 7 forbid the capture of a mother
bird together with her young or her eggs. If the young or eggs
are required the mother must be absent when they are taken.
In practice young fledglings were of little use to anyone so
that this prohibition tended to protect mother and young together.
Eggs were more likely to be taken but here the bond with the
mother was much weaker. Deuteronomy 22:10 states, "you
shall not plough with an ox and an ass together". These
animals differ greatly in their nature, size and strength and
it is consequently cruel to the weaker animal to yoke them together.
The prohibition extends to the yoking together of any animals
of unequal type. Deuteronomy 25:4 reads, "you shall not
muzzle the ox when he treads out the corn". This prohibition
was extended to include all animals employed in labour. It is
sheer cruelty to excite an animal's desire for food and then
prevent the satisfaction of that desire. In Jewish post-biblical
literature much is written about the need to spare animals from
pain or stress. The Talmud forbids gladiatorial shows and hunting
(Avodah Zarah 18b) so that bull-fighting, dog- fighting, cock-
fighting and fox or big game hunting are quite abhorrent to
the observant Jew. So too is the trapping of animals for such
luxury items as fur coats, the mowing down of elephant herds
for ivory or the merciless hunting of whales for the production
of pet foods. Those who regard themselves as morally sensitive
Jews are bound to avoid the purchase of trapped animal skins
and furs, ivory or whale meat products. None may purchase an
animal till he or she has first purchased the food for that
animal to eat, declares Talmud Yerushalmi (Ketubot 4:8).
A high percentage of the exotic creatures imported for sale
as pets in Britain die of starvation before their crates or
cages are opened. The observant Jew should avoid the purchase
of imported animals, birds or reptiles. A rabbinic parable suggests
that the occupants of the Ark were saved only because of their
compassion towards the animals in their charge. Often, the parable
claims, they would deny themselves sleep at night in order to
feed their charges (Midrash Tehillim on Psalm 37:1). Much has
been written and spoken against the Jewish method of slaughter
but this method (known in Hebrew as shehitah) is actually designed
to minimise animal suffering. As stated earlier, the consumption
of animal flesh was regarded by Judaism as a concession to human
weakness. Even so, the species of animal, bird and fish which
may be consumed are severely restricted. The shehitah method
renders an animal unconscious in a matter of seconds and it
is doubtful if pain can be registered in such a short time.
If it is, it can only be momentary and is as nothing compared
to the life-long suffering endured by so many farm animals in
our day. "Factory Farming" is an abomination and as
the Talmud (in a summary of previous teachings on the subject)
demands that animals be spared pain at all costs (Baba Metsia
31a-32b), the products of intensive animal husbandry must be
considered as unsuitable for Jewish consumption. The Jewish
consumer should purchase free- range eggs rather than battery
eggs and avoid buying chicken or veal which derives from "intensive
farming". To deprive God's creatures of sunlight, fresh
air and exercise is utterly sadistic and it is against intensive
animal husbandry, rather than against particular methods of
slaughter, that the efforts of animal welfare societies ought
to be directed. shehitah is at least as humane as any other
method of slaughter but if one has serious doubts about the
morality of depriving other creatures of life then the honourable
course to pursue is that of vegetarianism.
Criticism may be levelled by Judaism against research laboratories
where millions of animals are yearly tortured supposedly to
advance the frontiers of science. In many cases laboratory animals
are well treated and there is no question of cruelty being practised,
but in other instances it is difficult to avoid the suspicion
that laboratory personnel regard themselves as licensed to indulge
in sadism. At the very least one should distinguish between
experiments intended to assist medical development and those
conducted for the benefit of commerce. "Tzaar baalei hayyim"
(animal suffering) is the rabbinic term employed to embrace
all Jewish law and lore concerned with animal welfare. Such
concern is global and includes reference to animals in the wild,
on farms, in laboratories, in zoos and circuses, in pet shops
and in private homes. The earth has been given by God for the
benefit of all creatures and we humans, as God's stewards, must
exercise restraint and recognise the rights of non-humans, be
they furred, feathered or scaled. |