Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions
Answer: According to our research, your idea is unlikely to bring the results you expect. Namely, mature grapevines generally survive without irrigation (Hashem gave trees great survival "skills"), although lack of water is among conditions that will decrease yield. Possibly, if you learn how to improve your care for the vines, you can still enjoy the grapes and want to keep them. However, we are not experts, and in any case, "to each his own." We will investigate your question, first according to your assumptions, and then deal with practical halachic advice.
While it is forbidden to be destructive with anything of value (bal tashchit), destroying a fruit tree (including a grapevine) is more severe and forbidden more broadly than other objects (see Bava Kama 91b; Rambam, Melachim 6:8). The Rambam (ibid., based on Sifrei, Devarim 203) rules that it is forbidden not only to cut down a fruit tree but even to divert water flowing to it in order to dry it up. There are different opinions as to how severe a sin it is to divert the water (see Etz Hasadeh 1:4).
What you are asking about is more lenient than the Rambam’s case, as the Rambam discusses a case where the damager performs an action, albeit one which brings on the damages indirectly. You ask about refraining from doing something that is critical for the tree’s survival. On the other hand, you are refraining from something basic and with intention to kill the tree.
Contemporary poskim cite on the withholding of water with the intention to dry up a tree from a compilation of the Chazon Ish on the Rambam. He writes (on Rambam ibid.) that it is permitted to withhold water. Since the Torah forbids destruction, lack of action, by not providing, cannot be included. The Chazon Ish claims that this is compelling because the Torah forbids destruction equally if done by the owner or someone else, and it is inconceivable that someone other than the owner would be required to provide water. Shevet Halevi (VI:112) claims that it is common practice for those who want to cut down a tree to first kill it by withholding water. We note, though, that the Chazon Ish says that it is still objectionable (not bal tashchit), to withhold water if there is no need for it.
Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (660)
Rabbi Daniel Mann
618 - Ask the Rabbi: Having a Non-Jew Build a Sukka and Assemble Arba’a Minim
619 - Ask the Rabbi: Depriving a Tree of Water
620 - Ask the Rabbi: Mincha after Sunset
Load More
We have discussed elsewhere (Living the Halachic Process I, H-10; ibid. VI, G-13) when need (for space, damage from tree) permits cutting down a tree. You do not sound close to that, although it might be enough for the Chazon Ish’s leniency for killing it by not watering. Additionally, since lack of watering does not generally kill a mature vine, how could it be forbidden for you to withhold the water, especially if watering requires you to spend time and money on vines from which you do not get benefit?
In summary, you are not required to water the vines but due to botanical and halachic reasons, it is unlikely that this will enable you to uproot them anytime soon.
Rabbis in Midrash
Lessons
fast navigation
Various Events FOR WHOM NOT TO VOTE
Rav Zvi Yehuda Kook stressed that Israeli politics is G-dly, so I have no problem answering this common question on a Torani blog. Also, Free-Will is a G-d-given right and obligation, to "destine one's fate" (R. Soloveichik, Kol Dodi Dofek, 67), so I obviously don't tell others how to vote. But once not a few (especially young) have already asked, a couple of personal words from experience and thoughts from chazal & Rav Kook which may be of help to others, mainly for whom NOT to vote.
P'ninat Mishpat Fallout from Failure to Install Elevator – part II
based on ruling 85007 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
