Radical Torah

Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by Rabbi Peter Stein

Over the last few years, I have come to understand that the laws, teachings and exhortations of the Bible can be summed up in one central idea: What the Bible is trying to teach us is how to build a sustainable society. Specifically, it is trying to teach us how to build a society that is economically, ecologically, socially and spiritually sustainable.

These four criteria are the lens through which we must view everything we do. They are the measure by which we must evaluate every choice we make, whether it is a personal decision, such as where to settle or how to eat; a decision at work, such as what kind of product to market; or a political decision such as land use, taxation or trade policy. Everything is subject to the test of sustainability.

When evaluating a decision by these measures, we must ask many hard questions. I would like to suggest just a few in each area.

When considering if a choice is economically sustainable, we must ask basic questions about propriety and scale and responsibility, the most basic of which is ‘Can I afford this?’ or ‘Can our society afford this?’ We must ask: ‘Will this decision create greater equality or greater inequality?’ ‘Does this choice strengthen the essential connections between ownership, profit and responsibility or does it further abstract these notions, severing these essential connections?’ And most importantly we must ask: ‘How much is enough?’

When considering if a choice is ecologically sustainable, we must first remember the intimate and essential connections between all parts of God’s Creation. Then we must ask: ‘Will this decision lead to greater health for human communities and the natural surroundings on which they depend or will it destroy their health?’ ‘Can this decision be repeated on an on-going basis without degrading the soil, plants, animals, air and water?’ ‘Will this decision deplete the abundance God has blessed us with or enhance it?’

Social sustainability addresses some of the most emotionally and politically charged issues we know, most of which our society is not prepared to deal with. We must ask: ‘Will this decision increase segregation by race and class, or will it reduce it?’ ‘Will it create communities in which people of different racial, ethnic and economic backgrounds live together in close proximity and relate as neighbors and equals?’ ‘Will this choice create opportunities for reconciliation and sharing and trust, or will it promote division, fear and distrust?’

Finally, we must inquire if our choices are spiritually sustainable. This is the most difficult of the four to conceptualize, but I think it can be explained in two ways. On the one hand, it is the sum-total of the other three. If our decisions are not economically, ecologically and socially sustainable, they will not be spiritually sustainable. If we make decisions that perpetuate economic injustice, degrade God’s Creation or provoke social tensions, there is no way that we will be on good terms with God or ourselves.

But spiritual sustainability is more than just the sum of the other three. It has its own meaning and its own set of questions. When considering if a choice is spiritually sustainable, we would ask such questions as: ‘Is it beautiful?’ – for the soul needs beauty to survive and flourish. ‘Will this increase my material needs and dependencies or reduce them? – for a spirit reliant on ever more material goods will never be satisfied. ‘Is it meaningful?’ – for if we spend our time doing things that are void and worthless, we will not feel good about ourselves. And finally: ‘Is it humble?’ – for while we were meant to create and aspire and achieve, if we do so without bounds of humility and propriety, we will suffer despair when we one day, unexpectedly, reach our bounds.

These are the questions we must ask.

And we must be very clear about their implications: if we do not choose what is sustainable, then we have chosen what is unsustainable, and what is unsustainable, by definition, will not last. These questions will be hard and they may make us uncomfortable. They may call into question many of the comforts and material standards to which we have grown accustomed. We may not like the answers we find to these questions. But they are the right and necessary questions.

Rabbi Stein can be reached at peterdstein-at-yahoo-dot-com.

Cross Posted on Jewschool

L’Shana Tova & Shabbat Shalom

It’s Sesame Street in Canaan! Blue skies, rolling hills, brooks, fountains - Oy! All we have to do is expel the people who live there and all good gifts will be handed to us. Did I hear somebody say, “We’ll be welcomed as liberators?” This parsha also warns us that YHWH’s affection for us arises not from our own righteousness but because the Canaanite’s are wicked. Given Israel’s rebellions, blasphemies and general stiff-neckedness, the Canaanites must be REALLY, REALLY WICKED.

- SHABBAT SHALOM! - a & s

Moses continues his trip down memory lane. He remembers some of Judaism’s big hits, including the Ten Commandments and the Shema. He also continues tutoring his younger charges in the finer points of ethnic cleansing; he tells them that they’ll enjoy homes they did not build and vineyards they did not plant. The portion ends with yet another command to “utterly destroy” those on the other side of the Jordan river.

Good thing for old Moses the Iron Age had no International Court of Justice!

- SHABBAT SHALOM! - a & s

As delicious as meat may be to some people, there are serious environmental implications for a carnivorous diet. While global warming has been making headlines in recent months, I believe most people have a limited understanding of some of the causes. On some level it has become a one-dimensional issue; the more I drive, the more I contribute to the slow death of the planet as we know it. But, in fact, according to a 2006 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, what we eat is actually more important that what or how much we drive. It states that animal-based agriculture causes approximately 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, which lead to global warming, an amount greater than that caused by all forms of transportation on the planet combined (about 13.5%).

There are numerous explanations for the laws of Kashrut and the intricate processes required of us if and when we choose to eat meat. These are based on the seemingly simple commandment not to cook a kid in its mother’s milk. One reason given for this statement is that the milk is the life source to the newborn kid. To take its source of nourishment and survival and turn it into the vehicle by which this animal is killed, would be truly disrespectful. I understand the laws of Kashrut as tools towards awareness and mindfulness that there is a life that was taken in order that we may eat. We must recognize the impact of our choices.

So where is the line? When does the impact become so great that we simply decide that we cannot, in good conscience, continue to eat meat? According to Dr. Richard Schwartz, over 70% of the grain grown in the United States is channeled to livestock. The land use practices of the meat industry generally lead to overuse of fuel and water, degrade the land and pollute the water around it, contributing to additional environmental and health problems.

In Schwartz’s article “Global Warming isn’t Kosher,” co-authored by Dan Brooks, it states, “An animal-based diet also uses energy very inefficiently. It requires 78 calories of fossil fuel for each calorie of protein obtained from feedlot-produced beef, but only 2 calories of fossil fuel to produce a calorie of protein from soybeans. Grains and beans require only 2 - 5% as much fossil fuel as beef. The energy needed to produce a pound of grain-fed beef is equivalent to one gallon of gasoline.”

There are numerous studies and articles making a strong case for a vegetarian diet based on moral, environmental, political, economic and spiritual reasons. A few of these are linked below. These sites contain more than just facts but also loads of resources, recipes and information to make this transition smooth. And if you are someone who does eat meat, the shift can be gradual. Become a “meat reductionist” by reducing your meat consumption by one meal a week, and then go from there.

But I also think that the shift to a sustainable and plant-based diet is more than just practical; it is philosophical. It means that we move away from feeling entitled to eat whatever we like, but rather reintroduce the awareness that was required of the Israelites when they were first explained the intricate laws of Kashrut. It means we recognize that we are part of something much larger than our own narrow perspective allows us to see, that we educate ourselves about the repercussions of our lifestyle, and make better, more informed choices.

Signing off,
Nati Passow

Nati Passow is a carpenter, writer and educator living in Philadelphia, PA. He is Co-Director of the Jewish Farm School .

Check out these websites for facts, videos and other resources on the benefits of a vegetarian diet. JewishVeg.com, The Meatrix, GoVeg.com and the E Magazine article, “Another Inconvenient Truth.”