The Jewish Ethicist: Wearing Fur

Q. Many NGO's are calling for a boycott of fur products and even of stores selling fur. Is it wrong to wear fur?

A. The outcry over fur products is rooted in a concern for animal suffering. In Judaism, as in secular ethics, we find two distinct bases for this concern.

Humane relations with animals are primarily governed by the prohibition on tza'ar baalei chaim, literally animal suffering. The basis of this prohibition is the belief that animals are a worthy object of ethical concern; they too have feelings and a capacity for enjoyment or pain, even if these are less than those of human beings.

We acknowledge that man was given dominion over animals and permitted to use them for his needs. The creation story tells us that God gave man "dominion over the fish of the sea, and the birds of the air; the beasts, and the entire land; and all the creatures that creep on the land" (Genesis 1:26). Man gave names to all creatures, showing his position of control; (Genesis 2:20), and after the flood God promises Noah that the animals will be in awe of man's dominant position, and allows mankind to eat meat (Genesis 9:2-3).

But like all privileges in the Torah, this privilege is accompanied by responsibility as well, and we see that Noah bore a heavy responsibility to save animal life.

The result is that only gratuitous pain is actually forbidden -- animal suffering beyond what is necessary or reasonable for human benefit.

A separate concern is an educational one: cruelty to animals can encourage cruel characteristics in people. The Talmud tells us that slaughterers are often "partners to Amalek" (1); Nachmanides explains that slaughterers of large animals often have a tendency towards cruelty. (2)

So far we have seen that use of animals for human needs, including fur, is legitimate; but that no gratuitous suffering should be caused to the animal. So why is fur singled out for particularly harsh criticism, rather than the far larger leather or meat industries? Some of it is no doubt due to the political strength of the industry, and it's pretty hard to take on an economic behemoth like the meat industry. But there are also some characteristics that distinguish furs.

While almost all animals killed for meat and leather are slaughtered, a very large number of fur hides are killed in ways which involve prolonged suffering, such as trapping or clubbing. Anti-fur groups claim that even animals that are raised on farms or ranches and are not trapped, are generally not slaughtered but rather dispatched in more painful ways that don't damage the hide.

Another claim sometimes made is that many furs come from wild species, and even if they are farmed and not trapped this is a unique hardship for a wild animal. There is some support for this idea in Jewish tradition. When the dove returns to Noah with an olive leaf in its mouth, Rashi tells us that he was giving Noah a message: "I prefer a livelihood as bitter as a [wild] olive as an independent creature, over one sweet as honey at the hands of flesh and blood." Soon afterward Noah freed the dove, which never returned to the captive existence of the ark (Genesis 8:10-12).

I think that much of the opposition to fur comes from the fact that furry animals just seem so cute (baby seals) or so noble (foxes). From the point of view of animal suffering this may not matter much, but it does matter for the consideration mentioned by Nachmanides -- the development of character traits. The more we feel a sense of empathy with animals, the more abusing them will dull our sense of ethical sensitivity towards people too.

Finally, furs are viewed as a luxury item and some people are naturally resistant to any kind of conspicuous consumption. This consideration is not completely lacking in support; after all, to the extent that furs are a luxury the killing is closer to being considered gratuitous, and if furs are true conspicuous consumption, to lord it over others, then perhaps it would be better to do away with them even if they don't involve animal suffering.

But I think that most furs are no more conspicuous or luxurious than a great many creature comforts that a few people enjoy and a great many other people wish they could. Five-figure mink stoles are not the mainstay of the fur industry; inexpensive winter jackets trimmed with rabbit fur are far more common. And there are plenty of leather goods which are no less luxurious.

In the end, I think that anti-fur arguments are valid, but limited. I don't see any justification for a total boycott of fur products, certainly not of the sellers of fur products. But I do favor judicious consideration of the source of the fur and the real benefit from wearing it.

SOURCES: (1) Kiddushin 82b. (2) Nachmanides, commentary on the Torah, Deuteronomy 22:6. (3) Berakhot 40a.

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

The Jewish Ethicist is a joint project of Aish.com and the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem. To find out more about business ethics and Jewish values for the workplace, visit the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem at www.besr.org.

Give Tzedakah! Help Aish.com create inspiring
articles, videos and blogs featuring timeless Jewish wisdom.

Published: December 24, 2005

Visitor Comments: 9

(9) Jane, January 1, 2006 12:00 AM

Question of inherited fur

My own reasons for avoiding fur have been summarized in the reader comments: (1) fur is not a by-product of whole animal use, as in the case of goose down or leather, and (2) with down, wool, and synthetics, most people do not need fur for warmth.

My mother owns several fur coats: mink, silver fox, red fox, etc. I'm sure that one day I will most likely inherit her collection. What would be the ethical thing to do with them? The fur is beautiful and soft, of course, but I would not go out and buy it myself - thus promoting the industry, but that impression might be conveyed if I wear or sell the coats!

(8) Rudi Reeves, December 30, 2005 12:00 AM

Fur is wrong

I am sorry to say that whilst the article discusses the issue in line with Halachic principles, I am unable to find any good or positive reasons for wearing fur. Perhaps because there is no good reason for so doing. Electrodes are routinely used in the orifices of animals to prevent any marking to the fur which would be caused by other methods of slaughter. When I see fur, I see ignorance, cruelty and suffering.

(7) Von Matheny, December 28, 2005 12:00 AM

Animal rights

I love your article and respect your views regarding animal treatment. I cannot cause pain to any creature. I think there is more cruelty in the world where animals are concerned than we realize. Furs are nice but I own three fake fur coats that look just like the real thing. This is a better solution than the waste of God's creatures that protect the environment as well. I am not Jewish but my views mimic yours.

(6) Michael Makovi, December 28, 2005 12:00 AM

Fur is unnecessary

What the Torah teaches (mostly with Noach) us is that humans are absolutely allowed (and perhaps required) to use animals when legitimately necessary, but never when otherwise.

In times past when fur was truly the warmest garment available, then those living in cold climates had a legitimate need for fur. But today, with the inexpensiveness of cottom (which used to be an expensive luxury good) and the availability of synthetic fibers, there is no excuse for using fur.

In other words, since today there is a wide availability of warm clothing made from cotton, wool, and other textiles that can be made without hurting animals, there is absolutely no need for fur unless you are trapped in the wilderness and have to make your own clothing (out of fur). This being the case, it seems to me that the use of fur is unnecessary and therefore prohibited.

(5) Andy, December 28, 2005 12:00 AM

unfair comparison

"So why is fur singled out for particularly harsh criticism, rather than the far larger leather or meat industries?"

With the exception of exotic skins which account for only a tiny fraction of the leather industry no animal is raised and killed for it's hide. The vast majority of the leather sold is cowhide and the remainder is primarily pigs,goats and sheep which are also slaughtered for food. The hide would rot and go to waste if not used for clothing. If one advocates complete vegetarianism then one can claim leather in the same way as fur as unnecessary cruelty. It seems to me that the Torah does not take this approach. I think that serving meat and wine is encouraged on Shabbat and festivals and as I understand it according to halacha it was in the past and will again be in third temple times an obligation to eat at least a piece of the Pascal lamb during Passover. Animals raised for their fur are a different situation as fur is not a byproduct.

(4) Richard H, Schwartz, December 26, 2005 12:00 AM

My article on why Jews should not wear fur

Is Fur a Jewish Issue?

Richard H. Schwartz, PH.D.

Jewish worshipers chant every Sabbath morning, "The soul of every living being shall praise God's name" (Nishmat kol chai tva'rech et shim'chah). Yet, some come to synagogue during the winter months wearing coats that required the cruel treatment of some of those living beings whose souls praise God.

To decide whether the use of fur is a significant Jewish issue, we should consider several related questions:

1. What does the Jewish tradition say about the treatment of animals?

2. How much suffering do animals raised or trapped for their fur experience?

3. Does the wearing of fur coats have redeeming factors that would over ride Jewish teachings related to the proper treatment of animals?

JUDAISM AND ANIMALS

Judaism has beautiful and powerful teachings with regard to showing compassion to animals. The following are a few examples:

Moses and King David were considered worthy to be leaders of the jewish people because of their compassionate treatment of animals,when they were shepherds. Rebecca was judged suitable to be a wife of the patriarch Isaac because of her kindness in watering the ten camels of Eliezer, Abraham's servant. Rabbi Yehuda the Prince, the redactor of the Mishna, was punished for many years at the hand of Heaven for speaking callously to a calf being led to slaughter who sought refuge beside him.

Many Torah laws mandate proper treatment of animals. One may not muzzle an ox while it is working in the field nor yoke a strong and aweak animal together. Animals, as well as their masters, are meant to rest on the Sabbath day. The importance of this concept is indicated by the fact that it is mentioned in the Ten Commandments and on every sabbath morning as part of the kiddush ceremony.

The psalmist indicates G-d's concern for animals, stating that"His compassion is over all of His creatures" (Psalm 145:9). And there is a mitzvah (precept) in the Torah to emulate the Divine compassion, as it is written: "And you shall walk in His ways" (Deuteronomy 28:9). Perhaps the Jewish attitude toward animals is best expressed by Proverbs 12:10: "The righteous person considers the soul (life) of his or her animal." The Torah prohibits Jews from causing tsa'ar ba'alei chayim, any unnecessary pain, including psychological pain, to living creatures.

THE PAIN OF FUR-BEARING ANIMALS
Fur is obtained from animals who are either trapped or raised on ranches. Both involve treatment of animals that appears to be far from the Jewish teachings that have been previously discussed:

Animals caught in steel-jaw leg hold traps suffer slow, agonizing deaths. Some are attacked by predators, freeze to death, or chew off their own legs to escape. It has been said that one can get a "feel for fur" by slamming your fingers in a car door. A Canadian Wildlife service report gives an idea of the terror that trapped animals face and their desperate efforts to escape:

The stomachs of [trapped] arctic foxes . . . often contain parts of their own bodies. They may swallow fragments of their teeth broken off in biting the trap, and sometimes part of a mangled foot; almost every stomach contains some fox fur, and a considerable number contain pieces of skin, claws, or bits of bone.

Over 100 million wild animals are killed for their pelts every year. Many species of animals killed for their furs have become endangered or have disappeared completely from some regions. Millions of animals not wanted by trappers, including dogs, cats, and birds, die in traps annually and are discarded as "trash animals." Many trapped animals leave behind dependent offspring who are doomed to starvation.

Treatment of animals raised on "fur ranches" is also extremely cruel. Condemned to lifelong confinement, millions of foxes, beavers, minks, ocelots, rabbits, chinchillas, and other animals await extinction with nothing to do, little room to move, and all their natural instincts thwarted. The animals are simply a means to the maximizing of production and profit, and there is no regard for their physical, mental, or emotional well being. Because of the enforced confinement and lack of privacy, naturally wild animals often exhibit neurotic behaviors such as compulsive movements and self mutilation. The animals finally suffer hideous deaths by electrocution by rods thrust up their anuses, by suffocation, by poisoning, which causes painful muscle cramping, or by having their necks broken.

IS FUR NECESSARY?

Judaism puts human beings on a higher level than animals and indicates that animals may be harmed and even killed if an essential human need is met. However, is the wearing of fur truly necessary for people to stay warm during wintry weather? There are many non-fur coats and hats, available in a variety of styles, that provide much warmth. Imitation fur is produced at such a high level of quality that even among Chasidim there is a small but growing trend to wear synthetic "shtreimlach" (fur-trimmed hats).

Based on the prohibition of tsa'ar ba'alei chayim, Rabbi Chaim Dovid
Halevy, Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv issued a p'sak (rabbinic ruling) in March, 1992, indicating that Jews should not wear fur. Rabbi Halevy asked: "Why should people be allowed to kill animals if it is not necessary, simply because they desire the pleasure of having the beauty and warmth of fur coats? Is it not possible to achieve the same degree of warmth without fur?"

In his book, The Jewish Encyclopedia of Moral and Ethical Issues, Rabbi Nachum Amsel, a modern Israeli educator, states: "If the only reason a person wears the fur coat is to "show off" one's wealth or to be a mere fashion statement, that would be considered to be a frivolous and not a legitimate need.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The Talmud teaches that Jews are "rachmanim b'nei rachmanim," compassionate children of compassionate ancestors (Beitza 32b). One has to wonder if the wearing of fur is consistent with that challenging mandate.

Not only do animals benefit from our compassion and concern -- we, too, benefit by becoming more sensitive and more humane, as Jews and civilized human beings.

(3) al, December 25, 2005 12:00 AM

silence

I have to disagree here. In a world of polyester and faux fur, and a wide variety of attractive materials, the wearing of fur is totally unnecessary. People who wear fur wear it for one reason only....PRIDE.(It is expensive, only rich people can afford it, I am rich or want to look rich.) Pride is in itself a sin...to kill an innocent animal for the sake of that pride, in my mind, humbly, increases the evil of that sin exponentially.

AVP

(2) Tova Saul, December 25, 2005 12:00 AM

Almost, but not quite

Dr. Meir gives all the right reasons why not to buy fur, and does so very eloquently. Why then, were all these wondeful points blurred and blunted by his conclusion that it's OK to buy fur? Almost, but not quite, a perfect article. He also doesn't mention that many furs are from animals (such as lynx, bobcats, raccoons, foxes, coyotes) who are caught in steel leg-hold traps (for those of you who don't know what that means, simply imagine your arms being caught in a slammed car door). These animals are in utter torment until they are clubbed to death days later by the trapper (often boys), or else they chew off their leg to escape, dying later from their mutilation. Heck, I already knew all this when I was in the 8th grade! What's taking the frum world so long to wise up? I have also seen many animals in great pain and distress, and I don't know why Dr. Meir assumes that they feel any less pain than we do. I guess it's more convenient to see their similarities when we use them for experimentation, but conveniently see their disimilarities when we cause them pain.

Thank you, Dr. Meir, for making such great points and trying to educate the abyssmal blind spot in the frum world about realities of human-caused suffering in the animal world. Next time, please don't qualify your points at the end, leaving the readers with a green light to go out and do as they please with free consciences.

(1) sybil, December 25, 2005 12:00 AM

disagree

I do not see the justification in wearing fur of any animal or eating them when there are so many alternatives . especially when people sell it for greed.

See All Comments

stub

About the Author

Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

More by this Author >

Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir is Research Director at the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem (www.besr.org). He studied at Harvard, received a PhD in Economics from MIT, and rabbinic ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Prior to moving to Israel, he worked at the Council of Economic Advisers in the Reagan administration. Rabbi Dr. Meir is also a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Jerusalem College of Technology and has published several articles on business, economics and Jewish law. He is the author of the two-volume, "Meaning in Mitzvot (Feldheim), and his Aish.com columns form the basis of the "Jewish Ethicist" book (ktav.com).

The Jewish Ethicist: Wearing Fur

Is it wrong to wear fur?

Visitor Comments: 9

Submit Your Comment:

About the Author

Related Articles:

Most Popular In:

1.London Horror: Eye for an Eye

2.Oklahoma Tornado

3.Dear Emuna: My Overweight Husband

4.Genetic Screening for Breast Cancer Genes

1.Jtube: An Evening with Nichols and May: The Jewish Mother

2.London Horror: Eye for an Eye

3.Girls' Names

4.5 Things a Man Needs to Do in a Successful Relationship

Sponsors

Aish.com Features

More Articles by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem:

Related Articles:

Like this article on Facebook:

LANGUAGES:

AFFILIATES:

SECTIONS:

EMAIL LISTS:

ABOUT:

FOLLOW US: