"Freely Given" - Food with a Conscience

God promises us an abundance of blessings, bestowed upon us by his loving grace, and one of the greatest blessings that we receive is the food we eat on a daily basis. Yes, we do work for it, but is there really a necessity that we should kill for it? Even when we raise animals for food, there is often an intermediate step to harvest before the creatures have to be killed. We raise chickens for eggs, and cows for milk, don't we? Many of the animals we raise offer us some benefits, freely without complaint, before being led to the slaughter.

Yet we should think and consider, if we keep them healthy enough, could we not let them live out the better portion of their lives, before we give them a clean death without suffering? They should not suffer as slaves, in a cage fearing their doom. But neither would anyone want to live with a crippling chronic disease until some catastrophic organ failure. We know when it is a mercy to put down a valuable race horse, or a beloved pet. An animal values its life for its own sake as much as we do. But it probably also knows that there is a reason for it to be raised in captivity. It deserves a proper quality of life, before we claim its final purpose. Economics should not be our primary interest, but gratitude and compassion.

There are also various "products" which are inevitable without regard for when the creature dies. A cow will give its hide, hooves and bones, whether we kill it or not. And a goose will give its feathers. There is no need to rush the issue. These are merely representative examples, from what could become a really long list.

But mostly, "freely given" food is a reference to eating lightly from the land, and low on the food chain. Vegetables and fruits, nuts and beans, herbs and honey, even flowers or fungi that we may grow or recognize along the wayside ... these are all examples of food "freely given" and available for our use and sustenance. And many plants can be harvested without killing them, by taking the fruit, leaves or seeds.

The Earth is a garden, and we were put here to tend and till it. We are its stewards and we must keep and replenish the land, so that we may take our support and sustenance from it. It is a shame that we had forgotten the wisdom of ecology for so many millennia, since we began building cities, but we have recalled it now. And so we remember that the care and mercy with which we guard the landscape and the creatures it harbors, even as we reap the resources we need, renews the bounty that we receive and in which we share.

So, what is "freely given" food? We can begin with the principles of vegetarian simplicity, and go from there. If it is an edible plant growing in a garden, it is fair to eat. What we cultivate is encouraged to proliferate, probably beyond its natural range. If you find it growing in the wild, maybe you don't want to gather too much, as it might stress the community trying to grow there. But if you truly have a "green thumb," you might feel free to collect a few living plants to transplant into a garden or some spot where you think they will flourish.

Be concerned for the survival and spread of any species that you want to use. If it will help you, then you can help it in turn, like planting an acorn or seedlings each time you cut an oak tree. There is a great variety of foods to be gathered from the vegetable kingdom, and a few more among the fungi, that are good to eat. And yes, strict vegetarians can get all the nutrients they need from those sources alone. A well balanced vegetarian diet can be sufficient and healthy for anyone to live with.

But the animals can and do contribute their share to support us as we watch over the lands in our care. We domesticated sheep for wool, and goats for milk, chickens for eggs, and geese for downy feathers. And skins can be removed for leather when the beasts die, if we need it. We need not be ashamed to use them for ourselves, as they have benefited from our husbandry and care, and become far more numerous and widespread than their wild ancestors could have been.

But we are not licensed to abuse them, or treat them like mindless products in an assembly line. They deserve a dignified life, each according to its kind. And if we have good and reasonable alternatives to use, instead of callously stripping their bodies for resources, let us be merciful to respect their dignity in death as well. Soybeans and seaweed are not the only complete proteins we can use to substitute for meat.

For example, we can use hemp, flax and cotton for fabrics, and to make belts and straps instead of leather, unless real leather is more useful for a particular application. It is unlikely that the quality of leather needed would be any better served by killing an immature animal, than by taking a skin after an older animal has died. It serves its purpose in its own time, and has its own right to live, even though we have raised it.

If we want to stand on religious grounds to justify what we should choose to eat, the prescriptions for kosher foods would be perfectly acceptable. And the laws of kashruth allow an even wider leeway of choice, including a few insects for times of famine, if necessary. Kosher foods also include certain fishes and seafood, which we can "farm," husbanding and harvesting from the sea, the same as we do from the land. But again, we must consider mercy and dignity. Remember that there are laws concerning the merciful and painless slaughter of animals for meat, and that consuming the blood is forbidden. Of course, there are health reasons for being circumspect about that as well.

If you are going to use kashruth as your standard, then use the whole thing, as far as you are able to understand. You may object, the prohibitions about mixing meat and milk are fine for orthodox Jews, but the Torah's wording of the law is peculiar and essentially incomprehensible. It probably refers to some act of idolatrous sacrifice and feast. In that context, it is clearly forbidden, but irrelevant today. But the caveat to "avoid taking both the hen and her eggs" is clear enough, as we should have a care for a species' survival.

So, we basically have two standards for choosing what to eat, according to our conscience and according to religious beliefs, and both recognize the need to be good stewards of the earth and merciful to the creatures living upon it. If you don't want to try too hard to think about it, and both standards are in place, it shouldn't be a strain to flip back and forth, and still be sure that mercy and dignity have been served. And yet, by neither standard can we justify raising swine or mollusks for food, especially considering their health risks.

Ecological concerns are incumbent upon all of us today, because we are quite close to the carrying capacity of our planet. And we do well to remember kind, humane practices in dealing with our livestock, because keeping a clear conscience is relevant to our own spiritual health and well-being, whichever faith we may subscribe to. Let us not abuse our place as the dominant species on Earth, and pay the shameful price of ultimately impoverishing the planet we depend on.