Here's a great tip:
Enter your email address and we'll send you our weekly magazine by email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life, week after week. And it's free.
Oh, and don't forget to like our facebook page too!
Printed from chabad.org
All Departments
Jewish Holidays
TheRebbe.org
Jewish.TV - Video
Jewish Audio
News
Kabbalah Online
JewishWoman.org
Kids Zone
Contact Us
Visit us on Facebook

Is blood transfusion permissible in Jewish belief?

Is blood transfusion permissible in Jewish belief?

E-mail

There is nothing in Jewish law that would preclude a person from benefiting from a blood transfusion (or donating blood, for that matter).

Furthermore, according to Jewish belief, saving a life is one of the most important mitzvot (commandments), overriding nearly all of the others. (The exceptions are murder, certain sexual offenses, and idol-worship—we cannot transgress these even to save a life.) Therefore, if a blood transfusion is deemed medically necessary, then it is not only permissible but obligatory.

All the best,

Rochel Chein for Chabad.org

Mrs. Rochel Chein is a member of the chabad.org Ask the Rabbi team.
© Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with Chabad.org's copyright policy.
E-mail
1000 characters remaining
Email me when new comments are posted.
Sort By:
Discussion (12)
December 22, 2013
Shirin Bar Sela's comment
As a Muslim I found Shirin Bar Sela 's comment horrible and violation of G-d's law. There is no medical research indicating that a patient would get healed by eating pork. That would have to be remedy from witches of thousand years ago.
However under Islam pork and meat of other animals is only allowed during the outbreak of famine and war when only no other food is available. You only eat as much to sustain your life in that circumstance and not for enjoyment.
Mohammad Khan
April 14, 2013
As a former Jehovah's Witness that watched her mom die from not having a blood transfusion, even though the doctor said she has a good chance of dying if she did not receive one was upsetting to me. It is not up to your conscious, if you take one you would be disfellowshipped (shunned by friends and family in the religion). They never told the members of her congregation why she really died even though it is on her death certificate, they did not acknowledge it.
Anonymous
Ohio
April 1, 2012
blood of my blood
In England Witnesses go door to door in an attempt to convert people. Sadly this is more often than not greeted with scorn and foul derision. I, on the other hand, as a practising agnostic, invite them in and try to convert them.

Mudz, kudos to you. Porphyria - what a genius question!

Anonymous, what happened to you in those three weeks that caused you to u-turn so vehemently? It should also be noted that medicine evolved as it did because of the certain knowledge that blood is even more essential to life than water. We all know that we've only got a few days without taking in fluids but I challenge anyone to survive for just one second without blood. Why do you think keyhole surgery even exists? It will always be chosen before slicing someone open.

If god really exists then surely he would want us to use our brains for our own benefit.
steve
Yeovil, England
March 16, 2012
Mitzvoh
This was quite enlightening. I am curious though, if blood transfusions were also considered as part of the prohibition and therefore disrespectful to G-d, would the commandment to preserve life override this?
Or another way to put it. If literally eating blood became a medically beneficial procedure that could save lives, which takes precedence?
Mudz
November 11, 2011
Blood transfusions
Abraham -
Rochel Chein is correct. My father was a scholar of Talmud and the Rambam and medicine. Saving a life, or even improving health, take priority over almost all other laws. As long as you are not violating laws such as those stated above, one should do everything within one's power to heal the sick or save a life. It was taught to us that such a mitzvah is so important, that if a doctor says you must eat pork in order to live, that is what you must do.

As for everyone else - please debate J's Witnesses on another forum.

Shabat shalom.
Shirin Bar-Sela
Houston, Texas
February 1, 2011
"Ease up on Mike" Anonymous, Marathon, NY
From the tenor of your response, I am convinced that you are a Jehovah’s witness. Therefore, I know that your mind has already been made up. However, let me just remind you that when I said that witnesses do not have the freedom of using their own conscience, I was talking from the perspective of someone who had a close enough relationship with witnesses in school, at work, and in my neighborhood. Witnesses I have known are generally good people who are doing their best to please God. What kind of conscience are you talking about when the mere acceptance of a blood transfusion can get a witness in serious trouble with the faith? Put your own conscience to the test and prove me wrong. I challenge you to even once try to publicly voice your disagreement with a decision from the headquarters. You will see how fast you will be excommunicated on the basis of your so-called conscience. Believe me, you are not as free as you think, especially when men are allowed to play game with your life.
Anonymous
Queens, NY/USA
November 11, 2010
Ease up on Mike, Anonymous of Queens
Mike was not attacking May Millar so much as providing a logical defense for Jehovah's Witnesses. Mike did some careful and accurate research regarding the latest medical techniques. I don't think May Millar even mentioned any personal experience with Jehovah's Witnesses. What Millar mentioned were the typical accusations Jehovah's Witnesses receive regarding the topic of blood transfusion. Jehovah's Witnesses place a high value on life, and view blood as the equivalent of a person's life. They do not treat this as a light matter. Witnesses understand the concept of death, and especially do not want it for their children. Jehovah's Witnesses do use their conscience on personal matters. How can you be so assured that Jehovah's Witnesses aren't allowed to use their consciences? They choose to have their consciences shaped by Bible principles, so the choice is completely personal. Thank you Mike for that well-researched defense of your faith.
Anonymous
Marathon, NY
September 20, 2010
Mike's Answer to May Millar
Mike,

I must say that I was disappointed that you chose to attack Mr. Millar who was talking from experience. You said: "Your comments concerning Jehovah's Witnesses are based on nothing more than hearsay, biased speculation and ignorance." As someone who has a lot of witness friends, I believe that you did not take the time to think before you answered. I have lost at least two witness friends who refused a critical blood transfusion. Now, I am not ready to criticize them for what they did since they were just following what they believed to be taken from the Bible. Nevertheless, let's be clear here, Jehovah's witnesses were never permitted to use their conscience on such personal matters. It is obvious that your religion has recently toned down the rethoric by allowing some modern procedures such as "cell salvage". However, you must at least acknowledged the fact that many sincere witnesses have already died needlessly because they did not have the "cell salvage" option before.
Anonymous
Queens, NY, USA
September 18, 2010
thax sir
recently i had a discussion with one of my friend as she is doing her Post graduation in nursing.. in their studies she was taught that jews dont do blood transfusion(medical unbelief's in differnt culture)


i totally disagreed to what she said.. but ddnt know to check with whom...

so thanks a lot...

Shalom
abraham
mumbai, india
August 20, 2010
May Milar
Your comments concerning Jehovah's Witnesses are based on nothing more than hearsay, biased speculation and ignorance. Jehovah's Witnesses do not even believe in 'hellfire', as if a God of love would wish to torture anyone. Neither would they 'allow their children to die', nor do they give doctors and nurse a hard time. Jehovah's Witnesses have championed bloodless surgery, have set up almost 2000 hospital liaison committees worldwide. They can now undergo the most invasive surgery without blood transfusions, they can also benefit from numerous bloodless surgery techniques during accident and emergency care. Treatment techniques such as cell salvage, preoperative erythropoietin, bleeding control with the use of sonic scalpels, electrocautery, low central venous pressure anesthesia, blood substitute volume expander mean that it's never a case of 'letting someone die.'
Mike
newport, UK
Show all comments