Alarmism has been at the core of environmental rhetoric for at least 50 years. The sense that an imminent, planetwide disaster is brewing due to humanity’s industrial lifestyle has motivated virtually all calls for environmental action in that time. Indeed, from the point of view of scientists and activists alike, there is much truth to the claim that Earth, as a whole, is in terrible danger. However, this message has so far failed to inspire significant change in the behavior of humanity. It is just too difficult to believe that the lifestyle to which we are accustomed has put us in danger of a catastrophe the size of a planet. The mind boggles, and ultimately rejects this message.
What then is the correct framing for the present moment? What might inspire people to change their lives, even a small amount, to help reduce the harm being done to the planet? I propose a new approach: mutual responsibility instead of danger and alarmism.
The Shulchan Arukh (H”M 103:1) legislates that citizens of a city can force one another to contribute to projects that are necessary to the good of the city. It says:
The residents of a town can force one another to put up a wall with gates and a bolt for the town; and to build a synagogue and to buy a book of the Torah, Prophets and Writings.
The Rema (Rabbi Moshe Iserles, 1530-1572, Krakow) further writes (103:3), “All of the needs of the town, even if some of the members are not in need of them, like a wedding hall or a mikveh, even so, these people too must pay their part.”
The combined message of the Shulchan Arukh and Rema is that everyone must pitch in for the infrastructure to support the security, ritual function, and normal lifestyle of their community. Even if they themselves no longer need things like a wedding hall or a mikveh, as members of the community they are still obligated to participate.
This language could reasonably support claims of a halakhic obligation to support environmental infrastructure. But the language of the Shulchan Arukh is extremely local. It is all about the benefits to a single city. This may be sufficient to start with. Environmental activists have, indeed, taken to encouraging local action in hopes of reaching larger endeavors later on. However, for a global crisis, like climate change, it feels like something more is necessary.
This something is provided by a responsum of Rabbi Yosef Kolon (1420-1480, Italy), known as the Maharik, one of the most important Ashkenazic decisors of the 15th century. In 1475, a blood libel gripped Regensburg, and the Jews of that community were forced to promise a colossal bribe to the local prince to quash the violence. So great was the bribe, however, that they did not have the resources to pay and were reduced to asking other communities for help. These communities, having few enough resources of their own, sent letters to the Maharik inquiring whether they were indeed obligated to aid the Jews of Regensburg.
The Maharik begins his reply by noting that a blood libel is a hazard to all of the Jews of Germany, not just those in Regensburg. Once word of the Regensburg case gets out, there won’t be a city in Germany free of false accusations. He cites a Talmudic passage that all downstream communities must contribute to flood prevention, while all upstream communities must contribute to blockage removals. The essence of his argument is that if a hazard is certain to reach a community eventually, that community is partially responsible for removing the hazard at its source. Finally, he cites the case above of building a city wall and writes,
This shows that in every concern of danger from thieves or bandits, we force everybody related to this concern to help in allaying the concern as in building the door, the bolt, and the lock for the courtyard, and the same with the wall, the double doors, and the bolt. All the more so for a concern as gigantic as this, which is really, God forbid, for life and limb…that we should take care that everyone related to this concern must help.
This ruling is canonized by the Rema (H”M 103:6). He writes:
If a libel is brought upon a certain city, all of the cities where they might be concerned that a similar libel will fall must contribute to this cause.
This is as close as the halakha gets to acknowledging that the entire planet really is a global city. The effects of environmental damage are sure to be detrimental to all of us, even if it takes more time for those effects to be felt in some places than others.
Thus, the obligation to participate in protection of the planet is not based on the strident claim that the world is on the brink of destruction, a claim that is hard to truly internalize. Rather, the claim is that there is harm being done in the world, to other Jews and other human beings. Some of that harm has either already reached us or will inevitably reach us eventually. As citizens of the world who care for our fellow human beings, it is incumbent on us, not just as a value-statement, but as a halakhic obligation, to do what we can to address the problem at the source.
It is my hope that a calmer Torah of the environment will be heard more generously than the anxiety inducing demands of danger and crisis. The halakha demands not radical individual action, but rather participation in the communal, global project of reducing harm and protecting ourselves by protecting others. This Tu B’Shevat, I urge us all to rededicate ourselves to this project, first locally, then globally, as citizens of the world, who wish to allay harm to others, and, in doing so, to protect ourselves as well.
Daf of the Day
