Professional Documents
Culture Documents
During the holiday and vacation period, one of the most frequently quoted pesukim is a verse in our Parashah:
"Guard yourselves very carefully." However, aside from the timely vacation issues, there are several common
questions that relate to the issue of guarding one's health: is it permitted to perform plastic surgery? May one go on
a "heavy" diet? This week's article deals with the obligation to avoid physical damage and injury, including various
contemporary matters whose halachic status emerges from a discussion of the sources.
Preserving the Body
Guard yourselves very carefully… (Devarim 4:15)
In its true context, the words quoted above form part of the Torah's warning concerning idolatry: we are
warned lest we make an image of any form or likeness. The full verse reads as follows: "But you shall
greatly beware for your souls, for you did not see any likeness on the day Hashem spoke to you at Horeb,
from the midst of the fire, lest you act corruptly and make yourselves a carved image …"
Nonetheless, the verse is often quoted in everyday speech as a warning to give our physical bodies due
consideration, urging us to keep the body from all damage and to sustain its healthy condition as best we
can. The source for this surprising reading of the verse is a passage of the Gemara (Berachos 32b), which
teaches as follows:
A pious man was once praying on the road. A minister approached him and greeted him, yet the
pious man did not respond. The minister waited until he had finished praying, and then said to
him: "Empty one! Is it not written in your Torah: 'Take heed and watch yourself carefully (Devarim
4:9), and 'Guard yourselves very carefully' (Devarim 4:15)?' When I greeted you, why didn't you
answer? If I had cut off your head with my sword, who would have sought vengeance for your
life?"
The Gemara records the response of the pious man, who compared the act of prayer before Hashem to
somebody who stands in front of an earthly king. The minister readily agreed that while addressing an
earthly king, one must not interrupt the conversation for the sake of responding to another's greeting. "If
this is true", continued the pious man, "it is all the more forbidden to interrupt one's prayer before the
King of Kings!" The Gemara concludes that the minister was appeased immediately, and the pious person
returned home in peace.
The source for using the verse as an instruction to be wary for one's physical wellbeing is thus the
application of the non‐Jewish minister. Nonetheless, it has become common usage, both among the lay
and in halachic parlance (see, for instance, Kesav Sofer, Even Ha'ezer 19)
Indeed, the pasuk is quoted in Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (32:1) as a source for the obligation to aspire for
good health: "Because possessing a healthy body is among the ways of Hashem, for a sick man cannot
know or comprehend anything of Divine knowledge, therefore a person must distance himself from
things that damage the body, and to cling to ways that heal and maintain the body. Of this the verse
states, 'Guard yourselves very carefully.'" The obligation as based on the pasuk is also mentioned in Pri
Megadim (Orach Chaim 328:6).
The Prohibition of Injuring Oneself
Although we have mentioned the verse in our parashah as a possible source for the prohibition of causing
bodily harm to oneself, it must be noted that the great majority of poskim do not quote the verse as a
source for the obligation to maintain good physical health—though it is mentioned by a small number of
authorities (see Rashbash 1; Chavas Yair 163; Chasam Sofer, Yoreh De'ah 241; see also Tosefos, Shevuos
36a).
Barring the obligation based on the verse, what (if any) is the source for this commonly quoted
obligation?
The Gemara in Bava Kama (91b) cites a dispute between the Mishnah and a Beraisa with regard to
whether or not it is permitted for a person to cause himself bodily harm. The Mishnah (Bava Kama 90b),
quoting the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, states that it is forbidden for one to injure oneself; the Beraisa,
however, also quoting Rabbi Akiva, states that it is permitted for a person to harm himself physically.
It is noteworthy that the case mentioned by the Mishnah implies that even a monetary need does not
permit one to cause oneself bodily harm. The Mishnah tells the tale of a certain man who uncovered a
woman's hair in the marketplace, thereby causing her shame (which is equivalent to bodily harm). Rabbi
Akiva found him liable to pay four hundred Zuz as compensation for the shame he inflicted on the
woman.
The man, who was none too pleased with the decision, connived to show that he should be exempt from
penalty, for the woman did not care about her own shame. This he did by breaking a jug of oil in the
market in front of the woman, at which the woman revealed her hair and began to gather the spilling oil
and applying it to her uncovered hair. The man brought his proof before Rabbi Akiva, stating: "To this
woman I should pay four hundred Zuz?"
Rabbi Akiva, however, was not impressed: "One who injures himself, even though it is prohibited, is
exempt. If another injures him he is liable."
As mentioned, the Gemara writes that the question of injuring oneself is disputed between two Tanaic
sources—both quoting from Rabbi Akiva. Rambam, followed by Shulchan Aruch and other poskim, rule in
accordance with the Mishnah: one may not injure oneself. As Tosefos point out (91b, s.v. elah)—and as
implied by the Mishnah—this prohibition applies even for a need, such as the financial need of the
Mishnah.
The Opinion of Rav Chisda
An additional source poses something of a contradiction to the above conclusion. The Gemara (loc. cit.)
quotes from Rav Chisda, who used to pull up his cloak while he walked in a field of thorns. Although his
legs were scratched as a result, Rav Chisda deemed it worthwhile to save his cloak from tearing at the
expense of scratching his legs. "These," he adjoined, "will heal, but this will not heal."
This statement implies that it is permitted to inflict physical harm on oneself for the sake of avoiding
monetary harm—a ruling that would appear to contradict the above ruling prohibiting self‐injury even for
the sake of monetary gain. Indeed, we find that Rama (quoted in Shita Mekubetzes, Bava Kama 91b, and
in Tur, Choshen Mishpat 420) rules (based on the Gemara) that it is permitted for a person to cause
himself injury. As Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kama) writes, this ruling would only apply when there is a need,
but not when there is no benefit gained by the injury.
Yet, another source suggests that Rav Chisda had a unique opinion with regard to the question of causing
oneself bodily harm. In Maseches Shabbos (140b) we find Rav Chisda stating that one who is able to eat
barley (cheap) bread, yet eats wheat (expensive) bread, transgresses the prohibition of bal tashchis (his
eating an expensive food is considered an act of wastefulness). The Gemara, however, states that the
ruling of Rav Chisda is incorrect, because "bal tashchis of the body takes preference." Wheat bread is
healthier than barley bread, and its consumption in place of barley bread is therefore not considered
wastefulness: it is more important to avoid "wasting" one's body than "wasting" food.
Rav Chisda, it would appear, maintained that it is permitted to "waste" one's body in order to prevent the
waste of something else. This explains both the ruling concerning rolling up one's cloak at the expense of
scratching one's legs, and the ruling prohibiting eating a healthier, yet more expensive food (this idea is
found in the commentary of Rav Yehudah Perlow to Rasag, 47‐48). The halachah, however, does not
follow the opinion of Rav Chisda: it would be prohibited to damage one's body for the sake of preserving
one's clothing, and permitted to eat healthy yet expensive food.
Making Use of the Body
We will be able to deepen our understanding of the issues mentioned above by introducing the rationale
behind the prohibition of injuring oneself. Why is this act prohibited?
With regard to the halachah whereby a person is not believed with regard to his being liable to corporal
punishment, Radvaz (commentary on Rambam, Hilchos Sanhedrin 18:6) explains that a person's body is
not his own property, but the property of Hashem. Concerning the prohibition of injuring oneself,
Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Nizkei Guf Venefesh 4) uses the same rationale: "A person does not have
jurisdiction over his body to injure or shame it, or to cause it any pain, even by refraining from eating and
drinking."
According to this rationale, it would follow that a person's need or desire would not suffice to permit
injuring oneself. The body is not a person's property, and one has no right to damage it.
However, the wording of the Gemara in Shabbos (140b, as quoted above) implies that the prohibition of
damaging the body is a concern of bal tashchis, a question of being wasteful. This is not necessarily in
contradiction with the above rationale of the body not being ours. The body is not ours, yet Hashem has
given it over to us for use in achieving human purposes. Under certain circumstances, it might be
permitted to make use of the body even when this would imply a degree of injury.
Thus, although Shulchan Aruch HaRav states that the body is not ours to damage, he continues that it is
permitted to refrain from eating and drinking, thereby causing physical discomfort, for the sake of
repentance: "This pain is good for the person, saving his soul and it is therefore permitted to fast for the
purpose of repentance … and even for the purpose of training the spirit for Hashem, for there is no good
greater than this …"
Bal Tashchis of the Body
We have seen that the Gemara states that bal tashchis of the body takes preference over bal tashchis of a
person's possessions. Nonetheless, the definition of the prohibition of injuring oneself as bal tashchis can
lead to important ramifications.
One such ramification is that the prohibition might not apply, or may not be as stringent, for injuries that
heal. This would explain why Rav Chisda could roll up his cloak in order to save it from tearing, at the
expense of injuring his legs. He considered it permitted to inflict temporary injury to his body, in order to
save permanent damage to his property.
In his kuntress acharon (2), Shulchan Aruch HaRav states that it is permitted to suffer injury for the sake
of earning money—contrary to the rulings of Tosefos and Yam Shel Shlomo. He proves this from Yaakov
Avinu, whose body was consumed by the cold and the heat in his work for Lavan. Once more, we might
suggest that suffering from cold and heat is a case of temporary damage or discomfort, and is therefore
permitted for the sake of earning a salary.
In a similar vein, Shulchan Aruch HaRav states that it is permitted for a person to undergo shame for the
purpose of earning money, proving his point from the Talmudic instruction to perform degrading labor
(skinning animals in the marketplace) rather than receive alms from others. The feelings of shame will
heal, and it is permitted to cause them for the sake of earning a living.
According to Shulchan Aruch HaRav, it would appear that Rabbi Akiva prohibits causing temporary
damage to the body (or causing shame) only when the intention is merely for the sake of pleasure, as in
the case of the woman who uncovered her hair so that she would be able to apply the oil.
One possible distinction that could be made is between monetary gain and monetary loss: perhaps it is
prohibited to inflict bodily harm for the purpose of monetary gain, yet permitted to injure oneself in
order to prevent loss.
Dieting and Cosmetic Surgery
Another important distinction is made by Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggros Moshe, Choshen Mishpat vol. 2,
no. 66). Addressing the question of whether a woman is permitted to undergo plastic surgery for
cosmetic purposes, he writes that the prohibition of injuring oneself applies only when the injury is
caused in a destructive or degrading manner, and not when the injury is constructing and respectful.
Basing himself on a number of sources, he therefore permits the surgical treatment.
This distinction can also be related to the definition of the prohibition as bal tashchis of the body.
Because the prohibition is hashchasah—destruction—it applies only to acts that are destructive and
degrading, and not to an act defined as positive and constructive.
Without a doubt, adds Iggros Moshe (ibid, no. 65), it is permitted for somebody to go on a diet, for
medical and even for cosmetic purposes, even though the diet causes a degree of bodily discomfort. If the
diet is for health purposes, its purpose is to preserve the body rather than destroy it, and the diet is
certainly permitted; even for cosmetic purposes, the pleasure a girl takes in her appearance outweighs
the discomfort of refraining from certain foods, and there would be no prohibition.
However, he writes that it would be prohibited for a girl to diet to a degree that causes pains of hunger.
This would be considered injuring oneself, and it is forbidden to do so merely for cosmetic purposes.
There are many other related questions that we have not dealt with: blood donations, organ donations,
and of course the issue of eating healthily and smoking. Concerning the latter, the word venishmartem! is
bound to remain the definitive warning.
The Basic Obligation of Giving Charity
This week we begin a new series of halachic summaries, which will please G‐d cover a
broad range of highly relevant topics. The series is written by the Av Beis Din and Rosh
Kollel, Rabbi Yosef Fleischman.
1. Even the destitute must fulfill the mitzvah of tzedakah. Although someone without income and reliant
on charity is not subject to the obligation (or custom) of maaser kesafim,1 he remains obligated in the
basic mitzvah of charity.2
2. The amount that fulfills the elemental obligation of tzedakah3 is one third of a (Torah) shekel per
year.4 This comes to 0.165 onkios (a weight), or 4.68g of silver, a relatively small sum.5 According to
Chazon Ish, the amount comes to 6.4g of silver.6
3. If somebody is so impoverished that his donation to charity would deny him his very sustenance, and
leave him reliant on charity donations, authorities dispute whether he remains obligated in giving
charity.7
1
The details of the obligation or custom of giving (at least) a tenth of one's income to charity will be dealt with in a later
shiur.
2
See Rambam, Laws of Giving the Poor 7:5; Tur and Shulchan Aruch, YD 248.
3
Bava Basra 9a: "A person should never give less than one third of a shekel per year." Rambam (Laws of Giving the Poor
7:5) writes that the optimal fulfillment of the mitzvah is to give one fifth (of one's income), the median amount is one
tenth, and less than this is considered miserly. He continues, "However, a person should never give less than one third
of a shekel per year, which is the minimal amount that can fulfill the mitzvah. Even a poor man who is sustained from
charity must give charity to another." Shulchan Aruch (YD 248:3) thus rules that a poor person is not obligated in giving a
fifth or a tenth, but must give a third of a shekel.
4
The amount need not be given in a single donation, but can be spread over the year (see Shach, YD 249:4). There is
room to consider whether the year spans from Rosh Hashanah to Rosh Hashanah, from Adar to Adar (when shekalim
were donated for communal sacrifices), or from Nisan to Nisan (when the sacrifices were brought from the new
donations of Adar).
5
This is based on Rashi (Shemos 21:32), who writes that one shekel is equivalent to half an onkia. This measure is
validated by Ramban (letter, printed at the end of Toras Ha‐Adam), who found an ancient shekel coin whose weight
proved Rashi's correspondence with the onkia. On sixth of today's onkia comes to 4.677g of silver, whose value (as of 26
Iyar 5770, 05.10.10) is just over three dollars ($3.0405), or 11.46 shekels.
6
Chazon Ish bases his measure on the opinions cited in Ramban and Rashba (Shevuos 38b) who expressed the measure
of a perutah as the weight of half a kernel of barley. One shekel contains 768 perutos (see Kiddushin 12a), which means
that one third of a shekel comes to 6.4 grams of silver.
7
See Rema, YD 251:3, which implies that somebody who relies on charity for his sustenance need not give tzedakah.
Shach (YD 248:1) notes that this appears to contradict the undisputed ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (see above, note 2),
and resolves the contradiction by differentiating between levels of poverty. See also Nachalas Tzvi, who disputes the
ruling; see Taz (OC 694), Aruch Ha‐Shulchan (YD 248:3), and annotations of Yad Aharon.
Besha'ah Tovah
Everybody has a sha'ah tovah.
It might be a business deal.
It might be a shidduch.
It might be a treatment.
It might be an examination.
And it might be one of those key events
that touch our life and leave it forever
changed.
Time is time.
In times when all others are on
vacation, Torah study in Kollel
Choshen Mishpat continues unabated.
The flow of time (the zeman), and
with it the sweetness of Torah study,
rarely ceases (the learning schedule
continues as usual for two of the three
bein hazemanim weeks).
Time is time; hours are hours; minutes
are minutes. We aim to make the most
of them. All the time.
Rabbi Asher Flegg associate Rosh Hakollel will invoke tefillos on behalf of donors who
wish that their names be mentioned during Yom Kippur Kattan prayers at the Kosel on
erev Rosh Chodesh.