Chain Reaction #94, July 2005

Judaism and the Ecology

Ecology and Environmental Ethics have not traditionally been studied as discrete disciplines by Jewish
scholars. A focus on these areas began to grow in the 1970s partially in response to the historian Lynn
White’s 1967 article The Historical Roots of Our Environmental Crisis. White claimed that the Judeo-
Christian tradition, as rooted in Genesis where man is supposedly given dominion over the world, is
responsible for the environmental crisis. Since then, scholars have highlighted many sections from the Old
Testament, commentaries on the Old Testament, and other Jewish sources which give specific instructions
or commentary on how humans should behave towards the non-human world. As we shall see, broader
environmental philosophies arise out of these more specific cases.

Jewish scholarship is characterised by, and even celebrates, a wide variety of interpretations and points of
view on any particular topic. Bearing this in mind, what I have written here represents some of the more
popular views on Jewish environmental ethics in the books and articles which I have had access to. The
most significant of these are listed. I have tried to situate Jewish environmental ethics within the broader field
of ‘secular’ environmental ethics through comparisons. The Talmud is the earliest level of commentary and
explanation on the Old Testament. I will not refer extensively to biblical or talmudic sources. Readers
interested in more complete proofs or discussions are encouraged to search out the books and articles listed at
the end.

Ecology in the Old Testament and its Commentaries

In these sources, the worldview is neither anthropocentric nor ecocentric. Instead it is theocentric in that the
world belongs to God, and this God inspired world is the source of meaning and value. Humanity is
appointed as a steward of God’s world. This stewardship is implied in various places including Genesis 2:15
where ‘…God…put him (man) into the garden of Eden to till it and to keep it.’ This stewardship is also
implied through the directive to have a Sabbath. During the Sabbath humans (and animals in their charge)
are to create nothing, to destroy nothing and to enjoy the bounty of the earth. This imposition of limits on
human activity re-enforces the notion of stewardship rather than dominion because humans do not even have
dominion over their own activities let alone the rest of the world (Katz, 1993, 59). Jewish scholars have gone
to considerable lengths to dispute the type of complete dominion that White accuses Genesis of allowing, and
have emphasised this notion of stewardship in its place.
Three areas are commonly referred to in discussions of ecology in the context of the Old Testament and its
early commentaries;

‘Bal Tashchit’ – Do not destroy

This principle prohibits wanton destruction of anything in the human or non-human world. The idea first
arises in Deuteronomy 20-19 where the destruction of fruit trees is forbidden. This is later extended to
smashing household goods, tearing clothes, wasting food, demolishing buildings, stopping up a spring, and
other acts which destroy anything in the human or non-human world without purpose.

Attitudes Towards Animals

The Old Testament and its commentaries look to minimise pain for animals. Here are some examples of this.
Proverbs 12:10 states that ‘a righteous man has regard for his animals. The Talmud (Berakhot 4a) states that
‘a man may not sit down to his own meal before he has fed his animals’. Deuteronomy 22:10 states that
‘Though shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together’. These animals are very different in size and
strength and it would be cruel to the weaker animal to plough with them together. This prohibition is
extended to the ‘yoking’ together of any animals of different types. Deutronomy 22:4 states that any fallen
animal should be helped to its feet. Exodus 23 extends this help to the animals of ones enemies. The Talmud
(Avoda Zarah 18b) forbids gladiatorial shows (such as bullfights) and hunting. Genesis 1:29 restricts humans
to a vegetarian diet. After Noah’s flood this is extended to allow the eating of only certain types of meat
(Genesis 9:3) supposedly as a concession to human weakness and scarcity of vegetation at the time. The
Jewish method of slaughtering animals for human consumption (known in Hebrew as Shehitah) is designed
to minimise pain and suffering for the animal.
Leviticus 22:27 and 28 states that a young domestic animal may not be separated from its mother until it is at
least seven days old, and that the killing of an animal together with its young is prohibited in order to prevent
one witnessing the death of the other, but also to reduce the likelihood of extinction. Maimonedes, the twelfth
century Jewish philosopher said of these two verses:

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)

Sabbatical Year

When you enter the land which I give you, the land shall keep Sabbaths to the Lord. For six years you may sow your fields and for
six years prune your vineyards but in the seventh year the land shall keep a Sabbath of sacred rest, a Sabbath to the Lord. You shall
not sow your field nor prune your vineyard…(Leviticus 25 2-4).

This concept is analogous to the weekly Sabbath for humans. The land should be left to rest presumably so
that it can recover its’ nutrient load and continue to be productive for human use into the future. The words
‘…a Sabbath of sacred rest, a Sabbath unto the Lord’ imply theocentric reasons for this sabbatical year
beyond an anthropocentric conservation ethic. This concept is also the linked to social justice. On the
seventh year slaves were to be let free and all debts were to be cancelled.

A General Jewish Environmental Ethic

The examples discussed above, as well as others, substantiate an ethic of conservation and sustainable
developmental use of the non-human world. There is also evidence in Jewish texts of an ecological
worldview; a world where all things are functionally and/or metaphysically interconnected .

‘…for that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea,
they have all one breath; so that man hath no pre-eminence above a beast…’(Ecclesiastes 3:19)

‘The whole world, man, animals and birds, all find their food in what was created in heaven and on earth. All the residents of the
world are governed by one and the same star (ie destiny)’ (Tamma deBei Eliyahu Rabba 2)

The most prevalent view, however, is the theocentric worldview. This perspective can be functionally
equivalent to a non-anthropocentric environmental ethic in that it attributes value to the non-human world
independently of its’ use or appreciation by humans, although for different reasons than, say, Deep Ecology
or Ecofeminism which both give intrinsic value to the non-human world. The theocentric ethic values the
non-human world because it belongs to God, or is part of God’s creative process.
Unlike Deep Ecology and Ecofeminism, the theocentric worldview usually sees humanity as occupying a
privileged place in the scheme of things. This privilege can be constituted by various ideas. One is the notion
that man is created in Gods image, where as animals and the rest of the world were not directly created in
Gods image. Another is the role of stewardship given to humans, which has been discussed previously, and a
third is the Kabbalistic analyis that humans are the only animal capable of decoding the linguistic structures
which ultimately compose the world (Tirsosh Samuelson, 2002, xl).
A detailed description of the type and extent of care that this theocentric world view affords to particular
parts of the non-human world constitutes a more fully developed Jewish environmental ethic (work which is
beyond the scope of this brief summary!), but the specific examples from biblical and talmudic texts above
give an idea of the flavour that this enquiry might take.

Sources
Rose, A., 1993, Judaism and Ecology, Cassell Publishers, New York.
Katz, E., Judaism and the Ecological Crisis in Tucker M. and Grim J. (ed.), 1993 Worldviews and Ecology,
Bucknell University Press, London.
Tirosh-Samuelson, H. (ed.), 2002, Judaism and Ecology: Created World and Revealed Word, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge.

To find out more about Jewish Environmental Activities in Melbourne, go to the Jewish Ecological
coalition (JECO) website at www. jeco.org.au

Ilan Abrahams
This article can be found at: http://www.foe.org.au/mainfiles/cr.htm