Organic Food

Is one obligated by Halakha to eat organic food?

We will begin with a view of how the Torah and the rabbi’s relate to the obligation to preserve one’s health and life.

According to the majority of later Halakhic authorities¹ and some early Halakhic authorities² the following two verses in the Torah, “Only take heed and watch yourself very carefully…” Devarim 4:9 and, “Watch yourselves very carefully…” Devarim 4:15 are the source for a negative³ Torah commandment regarding the protection of one’s life from life-threatening circumstances, things and people. According to one such early authority, the Sefer Hachinuch⁴, this commandment extends not only to the obligation to protect oneself from things that can end one’s life but as well to things that can damage one’s life and body.

We will now examine two quite different Talmudic precedents as further expressions of this understanding of Torah law.

“Our Rabbi’s taught: there was an incident with a pious Jew that he was praying on the road. A ruler came and greeted him and he did not respond to his greeting. The ruler waited till he finished praying, after he finished praying he said to him, ’Empty one! Is it not written in your Torah, ’Only take heed and watch yourself very carefully’? Is it not further written, ’Watch yourselves very carefully’? When I greeted you why did you not respond to my greeting? If I would have chopped off your head with a sword, who would demand an accounting of your life from me?’” Talmud Bavli Berachot 32B

In Mesechet Shavout 36A we have a source that confirms that we can rely on the gentile rulers quotations and understanding of Torah verses!

“Rabbi Yannai says, all agree [that if a person curses himself he transgresses a negative Torah commandment] as it is written, ’Only take heed and watch yourselves very carefully.’”

The sages thus had a tradition that these verses quoted by the gentile ruler applied to the law of protecting one’s life.

When one examines carefully the matters that the sages of blessed memory forbade, one finds that an inordinate amount of these prohibitions are concerned with our ingestion of poison from a snake or other harmful creatures. In the Rambam⁵ one will find no less than 15 Halakhot that touch on the subject of what one may or may not drink or eat in regards to the concern that poison may be found therein.

Likewise, in the Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 427:9-10 we read, ”Many things the sages forbade because they posed a danger to human life…Whoever is not mindful of them and those like them and says, ‘I will endanger myself and what is this to others, or I am not stringent regarding this’ [the rabbinical court would] lash him with lashes of rebelliousness.”

In a more contemporary vein, the Polish 19th-20th century Lomzha Rav in his Halakhic work of responsas entitled Divrie Malchiel 2:53 states, “That certainly it is forbidden to eat anything that leads to any disease because of ‘Watch yourselves very carefully’.”

With these precedents in mind, we need to now inquire regarding issues that pertain to our own generation, as the issue of animal poison is not of general concern today. A person familiar with ecological awareness and concerns will undoubtedly want to understand how these Torah teachings and precedents would apply themselves to the permitted or forbidden status of:

1. Non-Organic earth grown foods-natural or processed

2. Animal foods and dairy products that have hormones, antibiotics or the build up of pesticides, herbicides etc… in them

3. Genetically engineered foods

4. Unfiltered municipal drinking water

It certainly seems to this author, given all the above and my limited knowledge of ecology and alternative medicine, to be within the spirit of Torah to be utterly wary of such foods. However, the possibility within Halakha to forbid them outright is far from simple or realistic for the time being.

The reasons this is the case are:

1. The damage done is neither severe nor immediate.

2. There are other factors in the disease process.

3. There are many establishment medical authorities who deny or de-emphasize the damaging capacity of these foods.

Given that what is under consideration of prohibition does not fit the classical rabbinical precedent of poison, it would far from easy to forbid these foods. This based on the precedent that Halakha makes available regarding danger or damage to human life. In essence, we cannot forbid a person something of such relatively minute or unproven negative impact. It is not that it is good for the person to consume these foods but we cannot realistically say to a person, ”Halakha says you cannot eat a non organic apple or a piece of chocolate”.

This would be the Halakhic reasoning against any general Halakhic rulings in support of an Eco-Kosher diet mandatory on the Torah observant Jewish people.

However, I believe it could be said that if one reasonably believes based on scientific evidence and medical opinion as the author does, that many of these foods are dangerous or even potentially so, certainly the case if these foods become part of one’s lifestyle and regular eating patterns. Than it seems quite clear from all the precedents cited above that one would be under the divine calling if not obligation to stay away from them.

In the words of a prominent Rishon the Ravad⁶, ”It is not necessary to say that a man should guard himself from foods that he recognizes damage him. For the man who eats things that damage him and he is able to be without them, behold he rebelliously sins with his body and with his soul. For he goes after his desire and he does not concern himself with the loss of his body and this is the pathway of the Evil Inclination and the advice of fools, to turn him away from the path of life to the path of death.”

Further, the sages state quite emphatically in Mesechet Chullin 10A that, ”We are more stringent in a case of danger that in a case of normative Torah prohibition.” Further, in contrast to the Ramban, the Rambam who holds that according to Torah legal principles, when in doubt regarding a matter of Torah law one decides leniently. However, when it comes to a matter of danger to human life he holds that, when in doubt the Torah principal is to decide stringently.⁷

In Halakha there is a term that is employed when a sage does not find it appropriate to forbid something to the public although he senses that there is cause for concern. That term is Ba’al Nefesh Yachmir – in translation “A master of the spirit will be stringent”. In a more contemporary translation this term would read, ”A sensitive and disciplined soul will be mindful.” From many years of personal experience with Jews and Jewesses who have knowledge in these areas of wisdom I believe that for now this is the most fitting Halakhic response to the dangerous, corrupt and ignorant times we live in. They that are stringent may blessing come upon them and may they be blessed to educate and enlighten our people regarding the dangers that they so pervasively stumble in.

Lechaim,
Zecharyah Tzvi Goldman

---

FOOTNOTES:

¹ This is the conclusion of Harav Yosef Lerner Shlita author of the acclaimed work Shmirat Haguf Ve’Hanefesh. There he quotes the Tevuot Shor Siman 13:2 “Whoever transgresses the words of the sages that they said were matters of danger transgresses a Torah prohibition.” Also see Levush Iyr Shushan Siman 426:11, Nodah Be’Yehudah Mahedurah Kama Siman 10, Chidushie Chatam Sofer on Mesechta Avodah Zarah 30A, Minchat Chinuch Mitzvah 546 at end. Aruch Hashulchan Choshen Mishpat 427:8 and examine Sefer Shmirat Haguf Ve Hanefesh Chapter 1 for many other significant Achronim cited.

² see Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 546 also see Pe’air Hador Siman 146 to understand Rambam in this light as well.

³ see Shiveim Tamarim Kuntrus Shiva Einaim Ayin Dalet and Talmud Bavli Menachot 99B others hold that these verses are Positive in nature see Chochmat Ha’adam Klal 68:4

⁴ see Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 546

⁵ Yad Hachazakah Hilchot Rotzeach U’shmirat Hanefesh Chapters 11 & 12 also see Yoreh Deah Siman 116 and Tur Yoreh Deah 116 15

⁶ Sefer Baaley Nefesh Sha’ar Hakedushah page 44

⁷ see Pri Megadim as brought in Orach Chaim 4:2 also see Pri Megadim Yoreh Deah Siman 97 & 84. The Rambam holds that the norm today of deciding stringently in a doubt regarding Torah law is of Rabbinical origin. This in contrast to the Ramban who holds that it is of Torah origin see Talmud Bavli Kiddushin 5B “Safek Hi Vechayshinan Mederabanan” and Chidushie Ramban ad loc. for an example of this argument.