EN ES
HomeThe Laws › Do Not Eat Blood
Commandment #459 · Negative #303

Do Not Eat Blood

כִּי נֶפֶשׁ כָּל בָּשָׂר דָּמוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ הוּא
Leviticus 7:26 · Dietary Laws
וְכָל דָּם לֹא תֹאכְלוּ בְּכֹל מוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם לָעוֹף וְלַבְּהֵמָה
“Moreover, you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places.”

The Life Is in the Blood — Why the Prohibition Is Absolute

Lev 7:26: “you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places.” Lev 17:11: “For the life (nefesh) of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.” The reasoning is theological, not merely hygienic or ritual: blood carries life (nefesh), and life belongs to God. Eating blood is eating life — consuming what belongs to God alone.

The same claim appears in Lev 17:14: “because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites: You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood.” The repetition emphasizes the principle: it is not just that God designated blood as his portion (as with chelev on the altar), but that blood IS life, and life is not a human possession to consume. The blood prohibition expresses a fundamental theological claim about the nature of creaturely life: it is on loan from God, and the blood that carries it returns to God.

From Noah to Sinai — The Universal Prohibition

Gen 9:4: “But you shall not eat flesh with its life (b'nafsho), that is, its blood.” The post-Flood covenant between God and Noah included the blood prohibition as one of its conditions. This makes the blood prohibition pre-Sinaitic and universal — it is a Noahide law applying to all humanity, not a specifically Israelite covenant obligation. The Sinaitic legislation confirms and specifies it within the Israelite context, but the foundation was laid at Noah.

The universality of the blood prohibition reflects its theological foundation. If the reason for the prohibition is that blood carries life and life belongs to God, then this reason applies to all humanity. All creaturely life is on loan from God; all blood carries that life; therefore no human being should eat blood. The Sinaitic specification adds detail (the karet penalty, the specific animals) but does not change the foundational principle that Noah already received.

Salting, Soaking, and the Kosher Practice — A Living Prohibition

The blood prohibition is not a textual curiosity — it generated one of the most distinctive ongoing practices in Jewish life: the kashering of meat. After slaughter, the blood must be drawn out of the meat before it can be eaten. The process involves soaking the meat in water, then salting it generously to draw out the blood, then rinsing it thoroughly. This procedure is required for all meat other than liver (which requires broiling over an open flame because its blood cannot be fully extracted by salting).

The covering of the blood of fowl and wild animals (Lev 17:13: “whoever hunts down a bird or animal that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth”) extends the blood obligation to the point of slaughter itself. The blood does not merely need to stay out of the human digestive system — it must be returned to the earth from which it came. The blood covering is the visible acknowledgment that the life in the blood belongs to God and is being returned to God’s creation rather than being consumed by the hunter.

For reflection and group study
Lev 17:11 says the life is in the blood and it was given to make atonement on the altar. The same substance that is forbidden to eat is given for atonement. What does this dual role of blood — forbidden food and atonement substance — reveal about the Torah’s theology of life and sacrifice? Why can the same substance not be both food and atonement?
The blood prohibition is a Noahide law (Gen 9:4) — universal, not just Israelite. Yet the Sinaitic legislation adds karet as the penalty for Israel’s violation. What does this differentiation reveal about the relationship between universal moral obligations and covenant-specific obligations? Does the Sinai covenant make the prohibition stricter, or just more explicitly accountable?

Read the source passage in the Torah reader.

Read in the Torah Reader — Leviticus 7:26