web analytics
April 19, 2015 / 30 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Tza’ar Ba’alei Chaim

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In this week’s parshah Bilam agreed to travel to Balak, the king of Moav, for the purpose of cursing Bnei Yisrael. En route, his trusted donkey suddenly refused to continue on its path, instead veering to the side of the road.

At one point the donkey smashed Bilam’s leg into the wall. Bilam hit his donkey three times. The reason that his donkey would not proceed was because it saw a malach standing in the road with his sword drawn. Bilam did not see this and therefore hit his donkey. Hashem then allowed the donkey to speak to Bilam, and the donkey informed him as to why he was not continuing down the road. Hashem allowed Bilam to see the malach as well. The malach said to Bilam, “Why have you hit your donkey three times?”

The Rambam, in Moreh Nevuchim (cheilek 3, perek 17), writes that the pasuk that describes the malach’s rebuke of Bilam for hitting his donkey is the Torah source for disallowing one to cause pain to an animal – known as tza’ar ba’alei chaim. There are many other sources brought by the Rishonim and Acharonim regarding this. Rashi, in Shabbos 128b, says that tza’ar ba’alei chaim is derived from the pasuk in Parshas Mishpatim: “Azov ta’azov imo.” We learn from this that one must help unload his fellow’s animal, due to the strain that the load is causing.

Rabbeinu Peretz, in Baba Metzia 32b, says that there is no Torah source for tza’ar ba’alei chaim; rather, it is a halacha l’Moshe miSinai. The Shita Mekubetzes, in Baba Metzia there, quotes a Raavad that says that we derive this prohibition from the aveirah of placing a muzzle on an ox when he is plowing. The Sefer Chareidim (14:1) says that tza’ar ba’alei chaim is part of the mitzvah of vehalachta bidrachav (and we should follow in Hashem’s ways). The Chasam Sofer, in Baba Metzia there, says that tza’ar ba’alei chaim is derived from the pasuk of “verachamav al kol ma’asav” (and He has mercy on all of His creations).

The source that the Rambam cites, however, is difficult to understand. The Terumas HaDeshen (cheilek 2, siman 105) writes that one may cause tza’ar if there is a legitimate purpose, e.g. for a refuah, among others. The Rama codifies this in Even Haezer 5:14. There, the Shulchan Aruch says that it is prohibited to sterilize an animal. The Rama there says that for a refuah or other legitimate purposes, sterilization and other forms of tza’ar are permitted. He adds, though, that when it is not for refuah purposes, the world’s minhag is not to inflict tza’ar – as this is achzariyos.

But if it is not prohibited when there is a purpose for inflicting the tza’ar, why was Bilam chastised for tza’ar ba’alei chaim? Did he not have a purpose for hitting his donkey, namely to get it to listen to him and cooperate by traveling on the path?

In order to explain this we must understand the fundamental reason why we are ever allowed to cause tza’ar to an animal for our purposes. It is not because our needs outweigh those of animals. Instead, it is because Hashem created animals to serve us. But there is a caveat. This permission is only granted provided that our action is permitted. If one is performing a forbidden action, he has no rights over the animals. It is only to perform the permitted actions that Hashem allows us to use His animals.

Bilam decided to travel to Balak despite Hashem telling him not to. He thought he could find the time when Hashem was, kaviyachol (so to say), angry and then curse Bnei Yisrael against Hashem’s will. Since this trip was not the action that Hashem wanted Bilam to take, Bilam had no rights over the animal kingdom on this trip.

Therefore we can deduce from the malach’s question to Bilam – “Why have you hit your donkey three times?” – that when one is not acting in accordance with Hashem’s ratzon, he will have no authority over animals and thus will not be allowed to inflict tza’ar on them.

The Ohr Sameach (Hilchos Shabbos 25:26) explains the Yerushalmi that riding on an animal on Shabbos is a violation of tza’ar ba’alei chaim. This is because once this is not permitted it now also becomes prohibited to ride on the animal as a result of tza’ar ba’alei chaim.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Tza’ar Ba’alei Chaim”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu reviews details of a "bad deal" with Iran.
Netanyahu Warns of Increased Iran Aggression in Middle East
Latest Judaism Stories
Hertzberg-041715

Lincoln was not a perfect man. But he rose above his imperfections to do what he thought was right not matter the obstacles.

Arch of Titus

Adon Olam: An Erev Shabbat Musical Interlude Courtesy of David Herman

Daf-Yomi-logo

Oh My, It’s Copper!
‘…And One Who Is A Coppersmith’
(Kethubboth 77a)

Grunfeld-Raphael-logo

The omer sacrifice of loose barley flour was more fitting for animal consumption than human consumption and symbolizes the depths to which the Jewish slaves had sunk.

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

When Chazal call not eating treif food a chok, that refers to how it functions.

His mother called “Yoni, Yoni!” Her eyes, a moment earlier dark with pain, shone with joy and hope

Kashrut reminds us that in the end, God is the arbiter of right and wrong.

In a cab with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach & Rav Elayshiv discussing if/when to say tefillas haderech

The successful student listens more than speaks out; wants his ideas critiqued, not just appreciated

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

What do we learn about overcoming loss from the argument between Moses and Aaron’s remaining 2 sons?

Each of the unique roles attributed to Moshe share the common theme that they require of and grant higher sanctity to the individual filling the role.

Because of the way the piece of my finger had been severed, the doctors at the hospital were not able to reattach it. They told me I’d have to see a specialist.

“The problem is that the sum total is listed is $17,000. However, when you add the sums mentioned, it is clear that the total of $17,000 is an error. Thus, Mr. Broyer owes me $18,000, not $17,000.”

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

The Ran asks why the Gemara concludes that since we are unsure which two of the four we must recline for, that we must recline for all four.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The Aruch Laner asks: How can Rashi say that the third Beis Hamikdash will descend as fire from heaven when every Jew prays several times a day for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash?

The Ohr Hachayim rules that one may not manipulate the system; rather he must state his opinion as he see the ruling in the case; not as he would like the outcome of the verdict to become.

He suggests that the general admonition only dictates that a father may not actively enable his son to perform an aveirah.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/tzaar-baalei-chaim-2/2014/07/03/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: