By Steven Plaut January 9, 2005
Recent years have seen the growth at the margins of the Jewish community of the United States a number of "Judaism and Animal Rights" groups. They are groups allied to the more general "animal rights" movement, but these are claiming that Judaism and the Bible are themselves authoritative ethical sources for the claim that animals have "rights". A number of books have been published promoting the claim that animal rights have firm foundations in traditional Judaism.
Animal rights have been an ongoing "cause" and banner for the so-called "Eco-Judaism" fringe cult groups and their Tikkun Magazine gurus, including "Rabbi" Michael Lerner (who has no rabbinical ordination from any rabbinic seminary).These are people far more concerned about protecting squirrels than protecting Jews from Islamofascist terror and anti-Semitism, far more worried about the annihilation of whales than about the annihilation of Israel.
Several groups of radical Jewish environmentalists and militant Jewish vegetarians have been promoting the doctrine of "the Jewish foundations" for animal "rights". There have even emerged several "animal rights" groups in Israel, and, in between their vandalizing university laboratories in which animal testing takes place, they have also taken to claiming that animal rights have traditional Biblical and Jewish roots and. Animal rights have shown up in the list of causes promoted by the Reform synagogue movement in the US, and here and there among individual Conservative and other synagogue "social action" committee causes as well.
At the same time, the "animal rights" militant groups have long targeted Jews with special vengeance and ferocity. Kosher slaughtering has long been the target of the animal rights lobbies, which claim that Jewish traditional slaughtering practices are inhumane. Curiously, these same groups generally have NOT targeted Moslem religious slaughter practices, especially in Europe, where they fear antagonizing the large Moslem minorities there. As a result of their lobbying against the "inhumanity" of kosher slaughtering, a growing number of European countries have banned kosher slaughter altogether, creating enormous hardships for Jews in those countries seeking to live a traditional lifestyle.
Meanwhile, PETA, the main animal rights lobby in the US (PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, but I have argued for years that it really should call itself People for the Equitable Treatment of Animals ) has not only denounced kosher slaughter practices but has outraged Jewish groups repeatedly by comparing the eating of meat to the Holocaust of Jews, most notably with its recent scurrilous "Holocaust on your Plate" campaign. (Interestingly, a number of neonazi and Holocaust Denial web sites have picked up on the PETA campaign against kosher practices to denounce Jews and Judaism in general.
A few years back, one of PETA's sister groups in Los Angeles called itself "JIHAD", for Justice through Insurrection by Humans for Animal Defense. These "Jihadniks" were upset at the Carl's Jr. fast food chain because it was running ads for its greasy burgers as part of its "Eat Meat" campaign, which mocked vegetarians. "The vegetarians will get over it," taunted one ad. "Don't let them make you feel guilty, ok?"Deliciously, some Los Angeles area Islamic groups, including the Orange County Islamic Society, led by Haitham Bundaki, were upset with the use of the term "jihad" by the animal rights nuts."Jihad," they insisted, is a term that should be reserved only for the random murder of Jewish children, not for animal rights wackiness.
Ingrid Newkirk, co-founder and vice-president of PETA has stated: "A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy," and so, it thus follows, "Medical research is immoral even if it's essential. Even if animal testing produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it." And best of all: "Six million people died in concentration camps," she told the Washington Post, "but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses." A new counter-PETA group, by the way, is now available on the internet, also calling itself PETA, but this counter-PETA stands for People for Eating Tasty Animals.
While PETA and its sister animalist lobbies are generally dismissed by all non-institutionalized people as little more than crackpots and fruitcakes, what are we to make of those Jewish "animal rights" groups claiming that Biblical and traditional Jewish sources confer "rights" on animals? Is there any basis to these claims?
The simple answer to the question is that animals have no "rights" at all in Judaism and the Bible, and those claiming to confer such "rights" on the basis of Biblical or Talmudic sources are charlatans at best, and pagan-polytheists trying to invent "souls" for animals at worst.
The total absence of any "rights" for animals in Jewish sources should not be confused with any approval of wanton sadism or unnecessary cruelty towards animals.The rule regarding animals is as simple as could be. It is spelled out in the Talmud in the Avoda Zara Tractate (Yud-Alef). "The mistreatment or cruelty towards animals is prohibited ONLY when there is no profit or utility therefrom."
Nothing could be simpler. Cruelty towards animals that does not serve any human purpose, cruelty for its own sake, is prohibited. Cruelty required to serve any human need or desire or benefit is justified, although not mandatory.
Let us be even more clear about this. According to Jewish tradition, we are not talking about restricting cruelty towards animals when it is necessary to save a human life, even in a probabilistic sense, such as in medical experimentation (which the animal rights kooks insist cannot possibly produce any cures for human ailments, dozens of counter-proofs not withstanding).We are talking about any use of animals to serve ANY human desires other than senseless sadism. Period.
In the Bible, animals are part of the bounty of the earth put here by God for humans to enjoy, like trees and rocks. Humans may enjoy these, should they choose, in nature preserves and parks, or they may enjoy them by eating them, turning them into shoes and belts or fur coats, doing medical experiments upon them, keeping them in zoos, or in any other use.
There is absolutely no religious compulsion in Judaism to forgo eating meat or living as vegetarians. In fact, at least once a year vegetarianism is outright prohibited. Refusing to eat the meat in the Passover sacrifice out of concern for the "rights" of animals would have been grounds for expulsion from the Jewish people when the Temple was functioning. While vegetarianism is not explicitly prohibited the rest of the year, it is looked down upon, just like those who foreswear wine are considered to be senseless recluses, upon whose behavior the Bible frowns. Sabbath pleasure and holiday festivals are thought to require the eating of meat, except where it cannot be afforded in terms of budget constraints (see the Shulkhan Arukh).
None of this precludes giving up meat eating for health reasons, for those who believe it is unhealthy. But such Jewish vegetarianism has nothing to do with any imagined "rights" for the animal. Where health requires it, the same Jew would be expected to give up salads, eggs, or spices, things obviously not having any "rights". In other words, the fact that animals and fish might or might not feel pain has absolutely no bearing in the general Jewish traditional affirmation for eating meat and poultry and fish.
Meat eating is nearly everywhere celebrated by Biblical stories and heroes. Among the only cases of Biblical vegetarianism is Daniel, and he gives up meat because he has no access to kosher-slaughtering facilities. Moses, David, Jacob and many others worked as herders of animals, and the animals they raised were for the purpose of being eaten. Animals were eaten in the Temple as party of its daily ritual. Animals were also killed for purposes other than ritual, such as for signing treaties or for establishing a covenant with God. Jewish tradition has long held that the world will dine on whale meat when the Messiah comes.
Animals are killed in the Bible not only for purposes of food and eating. The Children of Israel are explicitly ordered to wrap the holy utensils of the Tabernacle in animal furs when moving from camp to camp; these were furs of animals that were unclean for purposes of eating, which is essentially equivalent to saying they were hunted for their pelts, not killed for food with the fur simply put aside. Animals could be used cruelly for frivolous purposes as well, such as Samson tying torches to the fox tails and setting them loose in the fields of the Philistines. And they could be mass exterminated just to make a point, such as when Moses asks God to exterminate the frogs of Egypt, heaping them in rotting piles, as part of the ongoing negotiations with Pharaoh over the freeing of the Israelite slaves. God chooses to drown all of Egypt's horses and kill the livestock of the Egyptians as part of His plan to liberate the Israelites. Nothing was stopping Him from selecting an alternative plan that did not involve violating the "rights" of these animals.
There is some debate in Judaism over hunting. It is clear that the legitimate killing of animals is NOT restricted in the Bible or in other Jewish sources to purposes of eating, as noted above regarding the use of fur pelts to wrap the Tabernacle utensils.An animal killed by a hunter may not be eaten because its killing was not according to the slaughtering rules needed for the food to be kosher. But its carcass can be used for other purposes, such as making clothing or killing to protect other farm animals or fields, and there is no prohibition on wearing fur. Some Jewish sources frown upon hunting if its only purpose is the sheer enjoyment of the hunt, that is, if the animal is not being hunted for some other use. But decorating a wall with a moose or deer's head, or simply human enjoyment from the hunt itself, could arguably be claimed to be legitimate human purposes, and so one could make a plausible argument in their favor, even though most Rabbinic sources discussing hunting do not go that far.
Any Biblical prohibitions on mistreating animals refer to situations where the mistreatment serves no utilitarian purpose. Maimonides traces the Jewish compassion for animals to the story of Bil?am and his donkey (Numbers 22, 32) and any Jews coming across a talking donkey would be well-advised to treat the beast with respect. The Book of Proverbs says that evil people mistreat animals wantonly (chapter 12, verse 10).Animals rest on the sabbath, but so do machines, so this cannot be considered to be any acknowledgement of an animal's "rights", merely a part of the sabbath shutting down all creative activity for all property owned by a Jew. Fields, unlike animals, get one year "off" out of seven for a sabbatical. There is no prohibition on keeping pets or zoos, although deliberate neutering of animals is often regarded as a violation of one of the commands from God for animals to be fruitful and multiply. None of this contradicts the clear Biblical case for human domination and exploitation of animals and nature.
But when serving a human need, such as medical research, there is no basis whatsoever for hesitation in using animals, even mistreating them if this is what is necessary for the research. An authoritative rabbinic ruling on this was Rabbi Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg in his book "Seridei Esh". There he states explicitly: the only proper role for compassion is to avoid needless suffering of the animal when the suffering serves no human purpose or benefit.
Traditional kosher slaughtering is explicitly designed for the purpose of minimizing unnecessary animal suffering. Traditional Jewish butchers must kill the animal with a razor sharp knife so that the animal feels no pain. Animals killed with a knife with a dent or chink may not be eaten; having suffered unnecessarily, a Jew may not eat the meat, although it may be sold to any non-Jews less concerned with the suffering of the animal who wish to buy it. The intense concern with avoiding pain in kosher-slaughtered animals makes a mockery out of the campaigns by PETA and its sister activist groups against "inhumane" kosher butcher practices. Indeed it reveals these for what they really are - anti-Jewish propaganda campaigns, not very different from those campaigns by neonazis and other anti-Semites who noisily claim that gentiles are being "exploited" by being "coerced" into paying for kosher inspections of food products with kosher certification symbols upon them. (As a side note, some Israeli anti-religious leftists have expressed similar "outrage" to being "coerced" into paying for kosher inspections.) In reality, the presence of so many kosher products on the shelves everywhere is simply a marketing response to the fact that it is profitable for many manufacturers and marketers to sell kosher products sought out by many Jews and non-Jews, and has nothing to do with any "coercion".
There is absolutely no basis in Judaism for arguing that vegetarianism makes people more humane, and there is plenty of counter-evidence, such as the famous concern for animal "rights" by the Nazi German leadership. Ecological concern is alright in Judaism, as long as protecting the environment and endangered species is being done as part of servicing human needs, pleasures, and desires. If it is done for the sake of the animals' "rights", it is nothing better than paganism and is an abomination.
The environmentalist extremists and animalist kooks within the Jewish community tend to emerge close to the Jewish "New Year of the Trees" named Tu B'shvat. They have attempted to hijack the day and turn it into one in which environmentalist extremism is misrepresented as Biblical ethics. There is nothing in the day and nothing in the Bible that can be seen as conferring "rights" on animals. Enjoy your burgers, fish to your heart's content, wear a fur coat and leather shoes with pride! It is what the Bible wants you to do!
Views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.