Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Rabbi Asher Weiss: Jewish law obligates vaccination

Rabbi Asher Weiss, one of the leading halakhik authorities of the generation, participated in the biennial convention of the Conference of European Rabbis in Antwerp, Belgium this week.
Rabbi Weiss addressed many medical issues and presented how Jewish law views the many technological developments made in medicine and genetics.
In his remarks, Rabbi Weiss spoke clearly and decisively on the phenomenon of people choosing not to receive vaccinations or to vaccinate their children. The rabbi emphasized that this is a severe halakhic prohibition and that according to all rules of halakha (Jewish Law), a parent must ensure that his children are vaccinated.
"It's a halakhic obligation to vaccinate our children," Rabbi Weiss said.


  1. Garnel IronheartMay 15, 2019 at 4:18 PM

    Silly people. Don't you know that Daas Torah only matters when it says what you think it should say, not when it says contradicts what you think it should say?

  2. Kalonymus AnonymusMay 15, 2019 at 5:44 PM

    Yes, the Chazon Ish said that Manchester City are the best football team in Europe, so people should support that team. If you want to tell a lie, tell it in the name of someone great and they will believe you.

  3. He says "I do not understand people who are anti vaccination." So then that means he didn't study their position. So then he isn't qualified to issue a ruling.

    And I can't imagine he studied the actual facts much at all. He just is listening to the majority out there who for the most part simply resonate the ideas of each other without any true subject knowledge, so in that sense he's the same as any simple person who draws that conclusion based on the fact that it's what the majority of people say. This doesn't qualify as a authoritative halachic ruling, and it doesn't constitute a psak halacha.

  4. Yitzchak Micha'elMay 16, 2019 at 7:00 AM

    What about the issue of fetal material used in the vaccine industry and we have no way of knowing if any of it was from Jewish Babies either. What about the issue of those who are damaged by vaccines their is no Halachic requirement that I know of to take a something as a suffeq preventative (ie you have no current life threatening situation) add to this that a percentage of people are damaged by the numerous ingredients which even the manufacturers admit that a possible side effects. Now as we know that vaccine side effects do occur some of which cause both mental and physical disabilities and even death in a percentage of cases. Their is no Halachic requirement to put oneself or our children at risk to prevent something that is not life threatening such as Measles, Mumps or Rubella. Whereas the latest studies are showing those with natural immunity from having the traditional childhood disease's have less incidents of cancer and other modern diseases and medical problems.

  5. Great. Now I'd like a ruling on the consumption of sugar.

  6. are you claiming babies are killed to make vaccines?! what issur are you talking about? the poskim dont agree with your allegations

  7. who are you to claim he knows better or that relevant issues were ignored?

  8. Kalonymus AnonymusMay 16, 2019 at 2:47 PM

    Measles is a killer.

  9. Yitzchak Micha'elMay 16, 2019 at 2:48 PM

    Most vaccines are breed on tissue taken from aborted foetuses. If a posek only listens to doctors and data presented by the Vaccine Industry that is to one side of the argument then this is not correct one must weigh the evidence of both sides.

  10. Yitzchak Micha'elMay 16, 2019 at 3:02 PM

    Compared to what? Babies also die from vaccines. Measles deaths are grossly over stated in the media once the actual data is looked at its extremely low and of the rare cases of death from measles other nutritional and health factors contributed to the death. Today we have a situation of dirty unclean ingredients in vaccines that are doing more damage than good they ever did. Moreover recent studies show that natural immunity gained from having measles as a child shows a lower rate of cancer and other health problems as people age.

  11. Kalonymus AnonymusMay 16, 2019 at 3:38 PM

    It means he's heard their arguments, but sees no reasoning behind them

  12. Garnel IronheartMay 16, 2019 at 5:19 PM

    Let's remember that smallpox vaccination had a death rate of 1:10000. On the other hand, smallpox itself had a death rate of 30-50%. So yeah, the idiot would say "Well there's a risk with the vaccine so I shouldn't take it"

  13. g

  14. 1) There is no fetal material used as an ingredient in vaccines. Fetal cells were used only to begin the cell strains that were used in the preparation of the vaccine virus.These cell strains were created over 40 years ago.Descendant cells that are used today were never part of an aborted fetus. This concern sounds more Catholic than Jewish.

    2) Vaccinating is reducing risk to your child not amplifying it. For example, say 1 out of every 100 that contracts X disease suffers either lifelong impairment, disability, or even death VERSUS 1 out of every 500,000 that takes the vaccine and suffers some side effect leading to impairment, disability, or even death. Vaccinating is risk reduction. All things in life carry some risk. So the question is, are you obligated to reduce risks to your child's health and life? Absolutely. To suggest otherwise is absurd.

    3) If you choose not to vaccinate and then contract the virus, and with God's help manage to recover - what about all the other people that you necessarily exposed the virus to along the way? What about the very young, the elderly, and otherwise immuno-compromised individuals that maybe ended up coming in contact with the virus because of you? And what if they end up permanently disabled, or die? Your choice also effects others and places them in danger to. Refraining from vaccination is to allow yourself to be a conduit and cause for other weaker people's impairment and death. We have a duty to each other to keep each other safe. To not vaccinate is a violation of this duty.

    4) Related to the last comment: Rubella, might not be life threatening to you, a presumably healthy adult male... however it can be life threatening under some circumstances, can cause brain damage, bleeding issues, etc. It also poses a very severe risks to developing fetuses, especially in the first and second trimester. Rubella infection during pregnancy can lead to fetal death, premature delivery, and serious birth defects (i.e. baby is born deformed, mental issues, etc.). Do you want to be responsible for transmitting a disease to a growing fetus that could either cause it a life of tremendous suffering (for the baby and the family that raises it), or death?

    5) The claim that exposure to fever inducing infection in childhood reduces the late life adult rate of cancer is based on one study from the mid 90's that hasn't been replicated and re-tested by others. So to latch onto one study isn't all that scientific. There are thousands of studies that are published every year, often with conflicting results. It is re-testing and replicating results and accounting for other variables that would make this worth mentioning. Furthermore, even if we assumed that this test was replicated and accepted as factually accurate by the scientific community (which it is currently not), the study states that OTHER fever inducing infections can have this effect as well. Almost no child reaches adulthood without having had a high fever infection at some point. There is no need to allow them to be exposed from preventable infections that are far more dangerous - and immediately so, at that. To latch onto this shows just how weak the anti-vax position is... it will dredge the depths of an entire corpus of medical literature (which taken as a whole supports vaccination) to try to find one tenuously supportive (to put it charitably) study.

  15. "One must weigh the evidence of both sides?" What kind of narishkeit is this? Must one weigh the evidence that Holocaust deniers present? The suggestion that one must always consider both sides is nonsense. A half-truth is a whole lie. Giving the anti-vax position some credence is to acknowledge a lie and brings great harm to the world.

  16. Yitzchak Micha'elMay 17, 2019 at 5:21 AM

    Smallpox was declared eradicated by World health Authorities around 1980 and is not even administered anymore so its not any longer relevant.

  17. He can't see NO reasoning, because there is in fact reasoning. Unless of course he hasn't studied their position. What he could do is disagree with their reasoning. But to say that he doesn't understand etc, not to give any validity whatsoever? Where are the anti-vaxers coming from? Why do they take that position? It is disingenuous and patently false to assert that are all simply some form of wicked or stupid. They must have some reasoning, and to deny that and thereby make bold statements, is simply wrong. כן נראה לעניות דעתי


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.