Re’eh: MEAT IS MURDER!!!
P.E.T.A. (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) equates slaughtering animals for food with murder. Does Judaism agree? The answer may surprise you!
The Torah content for the first month of the new school year has been sponsored by the Brevique BrewLid. The BrewLid integrates coffee directly into the lid, offering a cleaner, more convenient, and eco-friendly coffee experience. By eliminating the need for machine contact, it reduces contamination risk, minimizes steps, cuts down on waste, and keeps the aroma around longer while delivering every last drop of flavor. If you love coffee and want to get in on the ground floor of BrewLid, check out the Kickstarter!
Originally posted on 8/14/15. Edited and republished on 8/30/24.
Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.
Re’eh: MEAT IS MURDER!!!
Is slaughtering an animal equivalent to murder? This is a hotly debated topic in contemporary society, especially among those who practice vegetarianism for ethical reasons. While a comprehensive exploration of vegetarianism within Judaism is beyond the scope of this article, we will address the question by examining a mitzvah in this week's parashah.
During the 40 years in the Midbar (Wilderness), Bnei Yisrael were only permitted to slaughter animals in the context of korbanos (sacrifices). If you wanted a steak dinner, you would bring your cow to the Mishkan (Tabernacle), where it would be slaughtered and offered as a korban to Hashem. Its fat and blood would be brought onto the mizbeach (altar), and only afterwards would its flesh become permissible to eat.
In this week's parashah, Moshe Rabbeinu informs Bnei Yisrael of two changes that will occur upon entering the Land of Israel. The first change is that once the Beis ha'Mikdash (Holy Temple) is built, it will become prohibited to slaughter and offer korbanos in any other location, as it is stated: “Beware for yourself lest you bring up your burnt offerings in any place that you see. Rather, only in the place that Hashem will choose ... there shall you bring up your burnt-offerings, etc.” (Devarim 12:13-14).
The second change is that Bnei Yisrael will be permitted to slaughter animals for food outside the context of korbanos, as it is stated in the next pasuk: “However, in your soul's desire you may slaughter and eat meat, according to the blessing that Hashem, your God, will have given you in all your cities” (ibid. 12:15). In other words, if you want a steak, you can slaughter your cow without bringing it as a korban.
The prohibition against slaughtering animals outside the context of korbanos was originally stated in Parashas Acharei Mos. It is there that we find the answer to our question:
"Any man from the House of Israel who will slaughter an ox, a sheep, or a goat in the camp, or who will slaughter outside the camp, and he has not brought it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting to bring it as an offering to Hashem before the Tabernacle of Meeting—it shall be considered as bloodshed for that man; he has shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from the midst of his people" (Vayikra 17:3-4).
It seems that this answers our question: the Torah explicitly states that if a Jew slaughters an animal outside of the context of korbanos, it is considered bloodshed! The Hebrew term used here for “bloodshed” is shfichus damim, the same term the Torah uses for the cold-blooded murder of a human being (see, for example, Bereishis 37:22; Bamidbar 35:33; Devarim 21:7).
How are we to understand this seemingly excessive condemnation of slaughtering an animal outside the Beis ha'Mikdash? After all, the Torah clearly endorses both slaughtering an animal inside the Beis ha'Mikdash and slaughtering it for food! In what sense is the slaughter of an animal not as a korban considered murder?
The Sefer ha'Chinuch (Mitzvah #186) provides an answer. He explains that human beings do not have an inherent right over the lives of animals. We are permitted to take an animal's life only for our physical needs (e.g. food, medicine, materials) or for our "spiritual" needs (e.g., korbanos and other mitzvos). Therefore, taking an animal's life without any useful purpose is a wanton act of destruction, which is why the Torah refers to it as shfichus damim. The Sefer ha'Chinuch further states that slaughtering an animal as a korban outside the Beis ha'Mikdash is wasteful and destructive, as it provides no practical benefit and transgresses Hashem's commandment. It is, therefore, considered an act of bloodshed.
However, the Sefer ha'Chinuch stresses that there is a major difference between killing an animal and killing a human. He writes:
Even though [killing an animal] is not like spilling human blood, due to the superiority of the human and the inferiority of the animal, it is nevertheless called “bloodshed,” since the Torah did not permit spilling [its blood] for no useful purpose.
In truth, the Sefer ha'Chinuch's entire explanation is based on pesukim in Parashas Noach. According to several commentaries (Radak, Bechor Shor, and others), before the Flood, humans were only permitted to eat vegetation; animals were entirely off-limits. After the Flood, as part of the covenant with Noach, Hashem permitted mankind to kill animals for food. In the very same paragraph, He reiterates the prohibition of murder: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the tzelem Elokim (divine form) He made man” (Bereishis 9:6).
We see from the pesukim in Noach and Acharei Mos that the Torah regards taking any creature's life as an act of shfichus damim. However, a person who sheds human blood is liable for the death penalty because man was created b'tzelem Elokim. Sforno (Bereishis 1:26-27), like all other Rishonim, explains that the tzelem Elokim refers to the human intellect—the capacity for rational thought. Since the human body serves as a vessel for the rational soul, the body itself is considered "precious" in God's eyes (so to speak). This is why He demands justice for the blood of anyone who sheds human blood (see Sforno ibid. 9:6).
With animals, this isn't the case. It is clear that Hashem “cares” (so to speak) about the lives of all animals, as we say three times a day in Ashrei: “Hashem is good to all, and merciful to all His creations” (Tehilim 145:9; Bava Metzia 85a). He permits us to slaughter animals only for our physical or spiritual benefit, and taking an animal’s life outside those parameters is a destructive act of bloodshed.
So while P.E.T.A. isn’t entirely right in equating animal slaughter with murder, it’s not entirely wrong either.
What do you think of the opening question and the answer provided here? Do you have alternative answers? Let me know in the comments!
Like what you read? Give this article a “like” and share it with someone who might appreciate it!
Want access to my paid content without actually paying? If you successfully refer enough friends, you can get access to the paid tier for free!
Interested in reading more? Become a free subscriber, or upgrade to a paid subscription for the upcoming exclusive content!
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.
If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.
-----
Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/
Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss
YouTube: youtube.com/rabbischneeweiss
Instagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/
"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com
"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com
"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com
"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com
"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.com
Old Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/
WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0H
Amazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel
PETA has lied about animals in Circuses for decades. PETA directly interfered with the livelihood of 100s if not 1000s of Traditional Circus Families. PETA has consciously, overtly misled the General Public and Media for decades as a way to earn their (PETA) own incomes and profits. http://www.mibba.com/Articles/World/2810/PETA-Hypocrisy-Corruption-and-Exploitation/
Cf ר' דוד צבי הופמן שמות כ"א:כ"ח
סקל יסקל השור – אין זה שהשור נסקל כדי להעניש את בעליו בדרך זו, וכפי שסוברים פרשנים אחדים, שכן אין מקום להענשת בעל השור כאשר שורו נוגח בפעם הראשונה והוא עדיין תם. גם קשה יהיה להבין, מדוע זה ייסקל השור ולא יימסר לקרובי משפחתו של הנהרג. גם אין לראות בהלכה זו מעין תקנה משטרתית המבקשת לבער את השור המזיק מן העולם, כי אז היה אפשר לשחוט את השור וליתן את בשרו לקרובי הנהרג על ידיו. אבל יש בדין סקילתו כדי לקיים את דברי הכתוב 'ומיד כל חיה אדרשנו' (בראשית ט':ה'), כלומר, לא רק מן האדם כי אם גם מבעלי חיים ידרוש ה' את דם האדם השפוך. יש לנקום דם האדם גם מבעלי חיים. אמנם אנו מתקשים להבין, כיצד אפשר להטיל על בעל-חיים אחריות למעשיו. יש שחושבים שהריגת הבהמה נועדה להרשים את האדם וללמדו, שכל מי שהשחית חיי אדם איבד את זכות קיומו ודמו בראשו, אך בכל זאת נראה לנו שיסודה של הלכה זו הוא שגם בעל-חיים בר-עונשין הוא. הן בגן עדן נענש הנחש, בשעת המבול נענשו גם כל בעלי-החיים, לגבי מתן תורה בסיני נאמר 'אם בהמה אם איש לא יחיה', ויש הלכות שיש בהן משום התחשבות בבעלי-חיים, כגון בקשר לשבת. ומן הדין הוא לומר, שכאשר משמעותן המילולית הברורה של מצוות-הלכות לא מובנת לנו כראוי, אל לנו לעוות את כוונתן או אפילו לנסות לכפות את דעתנו על המחוקק האלוקי. ולא בכדי נאמר במשנה: "גם השור ייסקל וגם בעליו
יומת – כמיתת השור כן מיתת הבעלים", כלומר, יש לדון את השור בבית דין כפי שדנים את בעליו, האדם.
If an animal is treated as a person vis a vis responsibility then as a corollary to that it is logical to also treat it as a person vis a vis killing it
Btw I love this line towards the end: ומן הדין הוא לומר, שכאשר משמעותן המילולית הברורה של מצוות-הלכות לא מובנת לנו כראוי, אל לנו לעוות את כוונתן או אפילו לנסות לכפות את דעתנו על המחוקק האלוקי.
Shabbat shalom