Therefore, based on the prohibition of bal tashâchit, it would be permitted to use leftover meat from the Sabbath during the Nine Days in order to avoid wastefulness. The primary concern during this time is the mourning practices related to the destruction of the Temple, and the principle of not being wasteful does not override this important observance.
It is important to be mindful of both the mourning restrictions and the prohibition against wastefulness in our daily lives, and to find a balance between the two in accordance with Jewish law and tradition.
Regenerate And [since every punishment requires a warning], the warning is here [in this same verse], ‘for you may eat from it, and you shall not cut it down…’
The Gemara (Bava Kamma 91b, Perek HaChovel) explains that this applies not only during a siege but to any cause of deliberate loss. Regarding trees, only a tree that bears fruit may not be cut down, but for an ilan serak, a tree that bears no fruit, the second verse is applicable (Deuteronomy 20:20): “Rak etz asher teda ki lo etz ma’achal hu, oto tash’chit” – Except a tree that you know not to be a tree for food (i.e., a fruit-bearing tree) may you cut and destroy… The verse addresses a case of siege, and even then we are only permitted to destroy the tree when there is a clear need. The Gemara notes that in a case of potential monetary loss, such as where the value of the lumber is greater than that of the fruit (91b – Rashi s.v. ve’im haya me’uleh b’damim), a fruit-bearing tree may be cut down as well.
Thus our question should be further strengthened: If one cooked for the Sabbath without being able to prepare an exact amount [Rema, Orach Chayyim 551:10, is instructive in this regard – one must cook an exact amount and not be left with any extra, alluding to bal tash’chit] and some was left over, should we not permit its consumption, due to the gravity of this lo ta’aseh commandment, overriding the importance that our Sages attached to our mourning observance for this tragic period?
Lest one think that bal tash’chit, as set forth by the Torah in its literal sense of cutting down a fruit-bearing tree, bears little relevance to our modern day and age, this problem is addressed in a recent responsum.
The gaon Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvot VeHanhagot Vol. I, Choshen Mishpat 831) discusses a case where a person wishes to remove from his garden a fruit-bearing tree because he needs that space. The reasons can vary, such as sitting in the garden without fruit falling upon him, or the fruit attracting unwanted creatures or insects. Such cases would allow us to be lenient, as each involves a disturbance to the property’s fundamental purpose, which is the standard we use.
Rabbi Sternbuch notes that if one wishes to clear a path so that one may stroll there, this does not justify cutting down a fruit-bearing tree. He reminds us of R. Chanina’s statement in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 91b), “My son Shib’hat did not die [for any other reason] except for having cut down a fig tree before its time [while it was still bearing fruit].” The Gemara does note Rabina’s statement, “If its value is greater than the fruit it [the tree] produces, then cutting it down is permitted.”
Yet the element of sakana (danger) should be factored into such a decision, and we have a rule (Chullin 10a), “Chamira sakanta me’isura” – we are stricter regarding a danger [to one’s well-being] than with a matter that is forbidden by law,” in that we take even more precautions. Thus, Rabbi Sternbuch concludes, such a decision should be undertaken in consultation with several rabbis.
An obvious question is whether this impending sakana only applies to the specific case noted by the Torah – trees – an example of which resulted in the death of R. Chanina’s son, or whether there is a sakana in any kind of waste. We thus must be very careful regarding any type of waste in all matters of everyday life.
(To be continued)