Q&A: Things Forbidden Because of Danger
Things Forbidden Because of Danger
Question
Hello Rabbi Michael Abraham,
Can I permit myself not to follow halakhot that are based on science, where the rationale is explicitly stated in the enactment itself, because science today has discovered that it was mistaken? Do I have to wait for a religious court to descend from heaven and permit these things for me?
It seems ridiculous to me not to touch my eyes/mouth in the morning, not to eat fish with meat out of concern for leprosy, etc.
Answer
Hello Dor.
In principle, if there is a halakha that is based on a mistake from the outset (not on a change in circumstances from then until today), in my opinion a person may permit it for himself. The reason is that they did not enact it with that in mind, as if the enactment was made on that basis alone (like a mistaken transaction). I have to say that this is my personal opinion; most halakhic decisors disagree with it.
But one must be careful to clarify two things well: 1. That this really is a halakha based on a certain fact. 2. That this fact really is a mistake. Sometimes you are interpreting the halakha incorrectly, attributing it to some fact when that is not really the basis of the halakha in question. And sometimes you think there is a factual error here when it is not really an error.
And in fact, דווקא the examples you gave seem to me not unequivocal, and there is considerable room to be careful with them (this is an example of the cautions I mentioned above).
A. Regarding touching the eyes, this is about an evil spirit, not a health danger. Since I do not understand evil spirits and their significance, I do not know whether this is a mistake from the outset, and I would not permit it casually.
B. Regarding fish and meat, several commentators wrote that the leprosy of the Torah is a spiritual illness, not one of the illnesses familiar to us medically. True, nowadays spiritual leprosy has disappeared, and what is called leprosy today (which is itself no longer common) is the familiar medical disease. Still, in my humble opinion there is room to be careful, because if this is talking about spiritual leprosy, perhaps the leprosy is an expression of there being a real problem with eating fish and meat, and that problem still exists even nowadays (except that it no longer expresses itself through leprosy). It is true that the halakhic decisors who treat this as a danger apparently understood it as an ordinary health danger and not as a prohibition, and if so then there is certainly room to be lenient.
In any case, this shows that one must be careful before deciding, and examine the two points I described above.