Got Milk? – Timtum haLev and Non-Jewish Milk Donors

Today, infant feeding practices have undergone two major transformations compared to earlier generations. First, the practice of using a “wet nurse” – a woman hired to breastfeed other women’s infants, typically due to situations like the mother’s death r”l or low milk production – was prevalent. Now, it is quite uncommon for women to breastfeed another’s child. Second, the rise of dependable and high-quality milk alternatives has resulted in many mothers choosing formula when breastfeeding is not possible or inadequate. It is widely recognized that mother’s milk provides the best nourishment for infants, especially for premature babies, for whom it is often essential.

Despite the significant impact of the two changes mentioned above, there are still instances where donor breast milk is necessary, particularly for premature infants. As a result, breast milk is collected from altruistic donors and provided to infants in need.

In a forthcoming Teshuva, haGaon Rav Asher Weiss Shlit”a addresses whether there is any prohibition in using human milk that might come from a Nachris since the identity of the milk donors is unknown. He considers various factors, and we will focus on his discussion of Timtum haLev (spiritual blockage of the heart) that results from consuming forbidden foods.

The concept of Timtum haLev from eating forbidden foods originates in the Gemara in Yoma (39a): “An Avera dulls a person’s heart, as it states: ‘Do not defile yourselves with them, lest you become defiled by them‘ (Vayikra 11:43).” The Gemara asserts that the word “v’Nitmesem” can be read instead as “v’Nitamtem”, alluding to Timtum haLev.^[1] The Ramban and Rabbenu Bachya elaborate on this idea; we have discussed this extensively in the past.^[2]

The Gemara in Sotah states (12b):

His [Moshe Rabbenu’s] sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter: “Shall I go and call for you a Hebrew woman to nurse the child?” (Shemos 2:7). Why specifically a Hebrew woman? This teaches us that they presented Moshe to all the Egyptian women but he refused to nurse. He said: “Shall the mouth that will speak with the Shechina nurse from something impure?” As it states: “[To] whom will he teach knowledge, and to whom will he give understanding? Those weaned from milk, drawn from breasts. (Yeshayahu 28:9)“

Clearly, nursing from a non-Jewish woman is permissible me’Ikar haDin. The Gra considers this the source of the Rema’s ruling (Y.D. 81:7) that “the milk of a Nachri woman is equivalent to that of a Jewish woman.”

However, the Rema continues: “Nonetheless, it is preferable not to nurse a child from a Nachri woman if there is a Jewish wet nurse available because the milk of a Nachri woman causes Timtum haLev (Ran, in the name of the Rashba).”

The Rema elaborates in Darchei Moshe:

The Ran at the beginning of Perek Ein Ma’amidin (Avoda Zara 7b) and the end of Perek Cheresh in Yevamos states that some prohibit nursing a child from a Nachri woman when there is a Jewish wet nurse available, since the milk of a Nachri woman is like the milk of a non-kosher animal. However, when no Jewish wet nurse is available it is permissible, as an infant’s life is considered at risk regarding milk. The Rashba, however, holds that the milk of a Nachri woman is like that of a Jewish woman, but as a measure of piety, one should avoid nursing from her. Since Jews are naturally compassionate and modest, their milk carries the same spiritual qualities, and thus it is preferable not to nurse from a Nachri woman. The Hagahos Ashri states (Avoda Zara 2:6): “A nursing woman should be warned not to eat Neveila or pork; certainly, the baby should not be fed non-Kosher foods. This is evident from the case of Acher, whose mother ate from food of Avoda Zara, and this caused him to leave the path in his old age (see Yerushalmi Chagiga 2:1)”.

At first glance, the Rema does not refer to the issue of Timtum haLev resulting from the consumption of Ma’achalos Asuros, as the milk itself is permissible. If the milk is permitted, what basis is there for concerns of Timtum haLev?

One could contend that although the milk itself is not forbidden, the concern of Timtum haLev may arise from the fact that the Nachri woman likely consumes forbidden foods. Indeed, nursing women are specifically advised to avoid Ma’achalos Asuros for this reason. However, while this is a possibility, it is not an actual Halachic principle. Even if a cow eats forbidden foods, its milk or meat does not become forbidden. Similarly, the milk of a Nachri woman is not halachically impure due to her diet.

Therefore, Rav Asher concludes that this is purely a Segula and not a halachic matter:

This Halacha is not related to the concept that an Avera causes Timtum haLev, as there is no Avera involved here. Rather, it is a Segula. As the Darchei Moshe, quoting the Ran, states: “It is an act of piety not to nurse from a Nachri woman, since it is the nature of Jews to be merciful and bashful, their milk also fosters this nature [in the nursing child].

Regarding Elisha ben Avuya’s (Acher’s) mother, Chaza”l say that he strayed from the path of Torah because his mother consumed forbidden food or inhaled its aroma while pregnant. However, even this is understood as a metaphysical matter, not a Halachic consequence. If consuming forbidden foods transferred Timtum haLev to the nursing infant, then any woman who ever ate forbidden foods would be permanently disqualified from nursing. Yet, we do not find such a ruling.

The strongest proof that this is no more than a Segula is that the Shach asserts that the Rema refers to a woman who was permitted to eat forbidden foods due to danger to her life. According to the Shach, ideally she should still not nurse her child, even though she committed no Aveira at all by eating the food.

Rav Asher adds that he elaborates on this point in Minchas Asher al haTorah (Vayikra, 2nd edition, 22), where he states: “It is certainly logical to say that one who eats forbidden food to save his life is not affected by Timtum haLev, for the Gemara states, ‘An Aveira dulls a person’s heart’, not a Mitzva.”

In other words, saving a life is a Mitzva, and it is the Aveira that dulls the heart, not the food itself. If the person is performing a Mitzva by eating the forbidden food due to Pikuach Nefesh, it cannot possibly cause Timtum haLev.

Rav Asher continues:

We must say that this is merely Midas Chassidus, thus, we do not find it stated as an Issur. Rather, it is something to be avoided, as the Hagahos Ashri implies, and even the Rema only states, “one should not nurse,” but it is not an Issur at all, nor does it cause Timtum haLev.

For this reason, Rav Asher rules that if there is even the slightest concern of danger or Pikuach Nefesh, one need not be concerned whatsoever.

[1] תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל עֲבֵירָה מְטַמְטֶמֶת לִבּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְלֹא תִטַּמְּאוּ בָּהֶם וְנִטְמֵתֶם בָּם אַל תִּקְרֵי וְנִטְמֵאתֶם אֶלָּא וְנִטַּמְטֵם

[2] See “Do Ma’achalos Asuros Cause Diseases?”, Sh’mini 5780