TFN no.5753.3 319-320 - Central Conference of American Rabbis

She’elah
I am a religious school teacher and have been asked by my fourth grade class about the protection of endangered species.

What does Judaism say about this? (Paula J. Dugan, Saratoga Springs, NY)

Teshuvah
The question which your class has raised has no simple answer. However, you may wish to share with your students the

following basic considerations:

While according to the Torah the human species is given mastery over the world (Genesis 1:28), that mastery has never

been considered absolute. Cruelty to animals is prohibited several times, and fruit trees are protected from wanton

destruction even during warfare (see Deuteronomy 20:19).

Still, human beings may use God’s creation in order to satisfy their legitimate needs. Thus, animals may be used for food,

but the killing must be done humanely. And Judaism has never approved of hunting for sport.

Our post-biblical tradition elaborated the basic principle of respecting all creatures and, in fact, all creation. Waste was

considered a contradiction of God’s purpose, and a special term was created for it (bal tashchit, do not destroy or

spoil).

It is quite clear from this that we are here confronted with two principles which may occasionally or even frequently

confront each other. On the one hand, Judaism strongly confirms the need for environmental concerns, but on the other,

it also confirms the need of human beings to lead normal lives (which includes making a livelihood).

Traditionally, Reform Judaism has leaned strongly toward enlarging our concerns for the environment, but at the same

time we are also deeply aware of human needs in a complex society.

Some would say that many species of plants and animals have been extinguished by the forces of nature (like dinosaurs),

and no doubt this process will continue. Are we forbidden to contribute to it?

We cannot answer the question categorically, and think it is important to let the class know that not all questions, however

important or well phrased, have clear yes-or-no answers. Each case has to be decided individually and on its merits. As

with many ethical questions, some form of accommodation might be found that satisfies both sides. For instance, a special

refuge may be found for the Spotted Owl, if indeed the destruction of the trees in question is in itself environmentally

permissible.

In sum, it will be important for your students to realize that deciding a case in favor of one side or the other does not mean

ethical insensitivity. Two scholars, both deeply aware of the issues, might very well come to different conclusions. In

Judaism, the search is very often part of our growth. Each case must be considered on its own merit.

The teacher was referred to The Torah – A Modern Commentary, ed. W. G. Plaut (9th ed. 1994), pp.1478

and 1487; and to Die Lehren des Judentums. ed. S. Bernfeld and F. Bamberger (1928), Part II, Section

IX, pp 417-423, for further references.