CCAR RESPONSA
Contemporary American Reform Responsa
15. Inert Pigment as a Permanent
Cosmetic
QUESTION: An eye surgeon has asked whether there would
be anything in Jewish law against the procedure of inserting an inert pigment into the superficial
dermis at the base of the eyelash. Its purpose is cosmetic in nature and has been requested by
many individuals. Some have physical handicaps which make the application of normal
cosmetics difficult or are allergic to a normal cosmetic. Others have requested it as a
convenience. The procedure has also been suggested to accompany a variety of
surgical procedures used to correct defects or following serious accidents which lead to the loss
of eye lashes. Appropriate tests to assure no allergic reaction will, of course, be made in each
instance. As Judaism is opposed to tattooing, is it permissible to use this procedure on Jewish or
non-Jewish patients? (Rabbi R. Agler, Boca Raton, FL)ANSWER: The Biblical text
of the Book of Leviticus (19.28) states, “you shall not make gashes in your flesh for the dead or
incise any marks on yourself. I am the Lord.” This passage has been interpreted by the
Talmud to deal primarily with incisions made at a time of mourning for the dead (Mak.
20b). However, the next Mishnah prohibits any “incised imprint”; an offender was to be
flogged. There was some discussion in the Talmud whether such an “imprint” refers only
to incisions of the name of God or of idolatrous deities. One authority, Rabbi Malkiah, even
prohibited the covering of a wound with burnt wooden ashes as it might appear like an “imprint”
(Mak. 21a). This prohibition against tattooing included the permanent marking of slaves to avoid
their flight (Git. 86a). Curiously, the writing of the Divine name on top of the skin, and covering it
to avoid erasure during a bath, was permitted (Shab. 120b). In each of these instances in which
tattooing is prohibited, it is done so on the basis of being an idolatrous practice or marring the
human body. Eye makeup and facial makeup is mentioned in the Bible (Jer.
4.30); it was a practice followed by women of doubtful morality, such as Jezebel (II Kings 9.30),
and was condemned by the prophets (Ez. 23.40; Jer. 4.30). In the Mishnaic period, eye makeup
was accepted although sometimes still frowned upon (Tosefta Sotah 3.3; Shab. 95a; M.
B. K. 1.7; B. K. 117a; Ber. 18b, etc.) There was some discussion about which eye makeup might
be provocative (Shab. 11b; 80a). Cosmetics are prohibited during the period of mourning (Ket.
4b). These traditional sources make it clear that there would be nothing wrong with
any temporary application of a cosmetic. They would prohibit its application in a permanent way
as marring the human body. When the procedure is used as a surgical procedure to
restore the eye after an accident, or to correct some other deficiency, it is permissible as any
other surgical procedure. It would also be appropriate for use with handicapped individuals. It
would, however, violate the spirit of tradition to use this procedure in a broad, general
manner.January 1985
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.