CCAR RESPONSA
Contemporary American Reform Responsa
73. Mind Altering Drugs for
Pleasure
QUESTION: What is the Jewish attitude toward using addictive
psychedelic (mind altering) drugs for pleasure in a manner akin to the use of alcohol, tobacco, coffee or tea? (M. D., Miami, FL)
ANSWER: There is very little discussion in the
traditional halakhic literature about the use of drugs. The codes, as well as earlier sources, and the responsa occasionally refer to samim (drugs) and their use; this category includes all drugs. Furthermore, the paucity of references indicate that this was not a serious problem until the latter part of the twentieth century. Even when Jews lived in societies which utilized addictive drugs widely among certain classes, we seem to have escaped that phenomenon.
The Talmud quotes Rav Hiyah who was cautioned by his father,
Rab, “not to get into the habit of taking drugs” (Pes. 113a), but we do not know their nature. This work also recognized that some individuals react distinctively to drugs and that they affect various parts of the body differently (Eruv 54a; Nid. 30b). It warned against use of eye paint which had been mixed with drugs, as the vapors might be injurious when inhaled (Nid. 55b). Interestingly enough, when Rashbam commented on Pes. 113a, he mentions that this was a caution against drugs which may become habit forming, and, therefore, expensive. Then he concluded by stating that drugs should never be used if some other form of medicine was available. From his perspective there was no danger of drug abuse among the Jewish population.
Alcohol was the substance most likely to be abused; tradition was well
acquainted with this problem, and it dealt with it in a straightforward fashion.
In the
Biblical period, abstinence was admired and was one qualification for becoming a Nazirite (Nu. 6.8). This state entered by a vow seems to have been of limited duration. For most people the maximum period was six years (M. Nazir 1.4; Ber. 73a; Ned. 3b). Some people in Talmudic times abstained without taking the vow of a Nazirite (Shab. 139a; B. B. 60b).
Alcohol
was rendered partially harmless through its continual ritual use in the qiddush, which is part of virtually every Jewish holiday and all joyful life cycle events. The limit of consumption was defined as a reviit. Beyond that there are two states of inebriation: shetui and shikur. Shetui refers to a person who may be shaky but can speak coherently in the presence of a king; a shikur is one who can not do so (Eruv 64a). Such an individual may also be called “drunk as Lot” and is likely to be totally incoherent similar to a shoteh (Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 99.1; Yoreh Deah 244.13). If an individual in this state orders a divorce, the scribe may not write it (Yad Hil. Gerushin 2.14). Such an individual is not criminally responsible for his actions even if he causes an injury (Joel Sirkes, Responsa #62). However, when he becomes sober he must pay for the damages done.
An individual who is to act as a judge may not take the slightest drink (Joel
Sirkes, Responsa #41), although if this individual sleeps or walks a certain distance after drinking a small amount, and so counters the effect of the alcohol, he may act as judge (Ibid. #140). There is some discussion about the weaker nature of modern wines in contrast to wines of former times, but the conclusion remains that those who drink can not render judgment (Bet Yosef to Tur; Shulhan ArukhHoshen Mishpat 7.4)
There is even
some discussion in the traditional literature about the statement which exempts a groom from various mitzvot, such as the recitation of the shema. Some authorities felt that this was because the groom should devote himself to conjugal mitzvot (Tosafot; Rosh) while others, like Isserlein, felt that he was not obligated as he might be under the influence of alcohol (Terumat Hadeshen, Vol. I #42; Havot Yair, #66). The Midrashic literature contains numerous citations which deal with the positive effect of wine as well as its negative influence. Moderation is encouraged while over-indulgence should be avoided (Ps. 104.15; Jud. 9.13; Prov. 31.6, 21.17, 9.1-6; Ez. 44.21; Is. 1.13; Ned. 20b; San. 70b; Eruv 65a; Ket. 8b; Meg 7b; Gen. Rabbah 36.7, etc.). For example, Ilai indicated that an individual was judged in three ways, by his drinking, his spending and his temperament (Eruv 65b). Drunkenness, in both men and women, was recognized as an evil which could only lead to wickedness (Ket. 65a; Lev. Rabbah 12.4). There was some discussion by Rambam and others about those who occasionally imbibed too much and those who have become alcoholics (Maimonides, Responsa #16 and 17. Such an individual is disqualified as cantor (Isaac Spector, Ein Yitzhak, Vol. 1, #1).
Tradition has been much slower in dealing with the other habit
forming items such as tobacco, coffee or tea. These can all be considered hazardous to health to a greater or lesser degree. Jewish tradition has prohibited individuals from wounding themselves. In fact, a person should remove all possible dangers to life (Deut. 4.9, 4.15, Ber. 32b; B. K. 91.b; Yad Hil. Rotzeah Ushemirah Hanefesh 11.4; Hil. Shevuot 5.57; Hil. Hovel Umaziq 5.1). Smoking has only recently been condemned through a number of strongly worded responsa and articles (M. Aberbach, Smoking and the Halakhah, Tradition, Vol. 10, pp. 49 ff; F. Rosner, Modern Medicine and Jewish Law, pp. 25 ff; M. Feinstein Noam, Vol. 24; “Ban on Smoking in the Synagogue” in this volume). Moses Feinstein has followed the classical pattern in this matter by stating that as a great many individuals are involved, it is better to leave them ignorant of the prohibition so that they “sin unwittingly rather than knowingly” (Igrot Mosheh, Yoreh Deah, Vol. 2, #49). As a large number of scholars and pious individuals, including Baal Shem Tov, smoked, it was difficult for traditional authorities to move in this direction. The real danger of tobacco did not become known until the middle of the twentieth century.
Although coffee and tea contain drugs which may be dangerous, it is not
currently felt that this is a major health hazard comparable to psychedelic drugs, alcohol or tobacco.
The traditional attitude toward alcohol and tobacco, which are habit-forming,
has been to encourage moderation. Psychedelic drugs are far more dangerous to health and are used without the social controls provided by Judaism for the ritual use of alcohol. We would, therefore, conclude that the use of psychedelic drugs for pleasure is forbidden by Judaism. We should also note that they are also prohibited under the well-known principle of dina d’malakhuta dina (the law of the land is the law). As the law of the United States makes the use of these drugs illegal, we must abide by that law.
May 1985
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.