Q&A: Cannabis in Jewish Law
Cannabis in Jewish Law
Question
Is cannabis less dangerous and less addictive than alcohol? Is it permitted to smoke according to Jewish law?
If the answer to the previous questions is yes, would it be correct to say that there is some kind of sin in completely refraining from smoking cannabis, all the more so based on the one who deprives himself of wine and is called a sinner, as the Talmud says in tractate Nazir 22a: “For it was taught: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar (son of Rabbi) says: What is the meaning of that which is written (Numbers 6:11), ‘and make atonement for him, for that he sinned by the soul’? Against what soul did he sin? Rather, because he deprived himself of wine he is called a sinner. And if this one, who deprived himself only of wine, is called a sinner, then one who deprives himself of everything all the more so.”
And based on the words of Mesillat Yesharim in chapter 13, in explaining the trait of abstinence: “You thus have the true principle: whatever is not necessary for a person in the matters of this world, it is fitting for him to abstain from; and whatever is necessary for him for whatever reason, once it is necessary for him, if he abstains from it, then he is a sinner. This is a trustworthy principle, but the judgment of the particulars according to this principle is entrusted only to weighed discernment, and a man is praised according to his wisdom, for it is impossible to gather all the particulars, since they are many and the human mind cannot encompass them all, but each matter in its proper time.”
Answer
I am not knowledgeable enough to know what is more dangerous. Either way, I do not see any sin either in taking these things or in refraining from them.
The aggadic statement you cited does not say that a person must partake of every pleasure in the world.
The words of Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto assume that there are no neutral acts, but rather everything is either a commandment or a prohibition (even if not strictly halakhic). I disagree with him about this, and as is known, some have already linked this to a dispute between Duties of the Heart and Maimonides.
Discussion on Answer
Even that formulation is exaggerated in my opinion. The nazirite forbade a pleasure to himself, and that is what is prohibited (and not the mere abstention itself). Beyond that, this is a reason given by the Sages. It does not appear in the Torah, and if I remember correctly, it is disputed between those who hold that a nazirite is a sinner and those who hold that he is performing a commandment. Be that as it may, I assume it should be seen as an educational message and not as a binding principle.
Even available pleasures are not forbidden to refrain from. At most, there is some value in not prohibiting them to yourself.
“The aggadic statement you cited does not say that a person must partake of every pleasure in the world.” I’m sure that’s true; I think the intention is that one may not refrain from known and available pleasures, in general. Certainly one may not refrain from drinking wine, and this is not among the neutral things even according to your view, since the Torah explicitly says that the nazirite must bring an offering for depriving himself of wine. And from that standpoint, there is no great difference between wine and cannabis; both are very widespread (they speak of one and a half to two million users in the country, all this despite the prohibition of the law). Someone who prevents and deprives himself from listening to music as well (let us assume for the sake of discussion that this is at a time when the Temple exists and there is no deficiency in listening to music) violates this prohibition. Do you understand it differently?