Violating Torah to Save Your Life: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
An overarching principle in the Torah is that we do our utmost to preserve life even at the expense of negating a law of the Torah. There are three major exceptions where it is incumbent upon a person to give up his life in order to follow the halacha. Namely, to avoid murder, [[Avoda Zara]], and illicit relations a person should give up his life rather than violate these critical mitzvot. Surrendering one's life in order to uphold the Torah when it is halachically prescribed is a [Kiddush Hashem]], sanctifying Hashem's name, of the highest order.<ref>Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:1-7, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a. See Baal Hameor (Pesachim 6a s.v. nimsa) who seems to subscribe to this approach as well.</ref>
An overarching principle in the Torah is that we do our utmost to preserve life even at the expense of negating a law of the Torah. There are three major exceptions where it is incumbent upon a person to give up his life in order to follow the halacha. Namely, to avoid murder, [[Avoda Zara]], and illicit relations a person should give up his life rather than violate these critical mitzvot. Surrendering one's life in order to uphold the Torah when it is halachically prescribed is a [Kiddush Hashem]], sanctifying Hashem's name, of the highest order.<ref>Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:1-7, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a. See Baal Hameor (Pesachim 6a s.v. nimsa) who seems to subscribe to this approach as well.</ref>
==The Big Three==
==The Big Three==
# If a person's life is threatened unless he violates murder, [[Avoda Zara]], or illicit relations, he may not violate the law. Rather he should die in fulfillment of the mitzvah of [[Kiddush Hashem]], sanctifying Hashem's name.<ref>Gemara Pesachim 25a, Sanhedrin 74b</ref>
# If a person's life is threatened unless he violates murder, [[Avoda Zara]], or illicit relations, he may not violate the law. Rather he should die in fulfillment of the mitzvah of [[Kiddush Hashem]], sanctifying Hashem's name.<ref>Gemara Pesachim 25a, Sanhedrin 74b, Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:2, Rosh Sanhedrin :3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1</ref>
# Many rishonim hold that even associated prohibitions to the big three prohibitions one should also give up one's life. In technical terms these are called ''avizrayhu'' (Heb. אביזריהו, lit. associated). For example, if one is threatened to give up one's life or hug one of the relatives forbidden to him he would have to give up his life.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1. Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. bchol, Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, and Ritva Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, 27b s.v. aval all hold of the concept of avizrayhu and have two proofs: 1) It is forbidden to heal oneself with asheira wood (Pesachim 25a) and 2) It is forbidden even to speak to a married woman even if that's the only way to heal his illness (Gemara Sanhedrin 75a).
# Many rishonim hold that even associated prohibitions to the big three prohibitions one should also give up one's life. In technical terms these are called ''avizrayhu'' (Heb. אביזריהו, lit. associated). For example, if one is threatened to give up one's life or hug one of the relatives forbidden to him he would have to give up his life.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1. Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. bchol, Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, and Ritva Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, 27b s.v. aval all hold of the concept of avizrayhu and have two proofs: 1) It is forbidden to heal oneself with asheira wood (Pesachim 25a) and 2) It is forbidden even to speak to a married woman even if that's the only way to heal his illness (Gemara Sanhedrin 75a).
* The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:2 records a dispute between Tosfot and the Ran whether one should give up their life as opposed to being healed with [[Avoda Zara]] branches that aren't specified that they are [[Avoda Zara]]. Tosfot is lenient since it doesn't cause himself and others to follow [[Avoda Zara]], while the Ran disagrees since it is ''avizrayhu'' of [[Avoda Zara]]. Shulchan Aruch's first and main opinion is like Tosfot. Shach 155:11 in facts says that the agreement of the poskim is like Tosfot. However, in Rama Y.D. 157:1 it is evident that the Rama holds like the Ran and ''avizrahu'' are worthy for a person to give up one's life. Gra 155:14 and Minchat Chinuch 296:15 s.v. heneh botam pose this issues and leave it unresolved.  
* The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:2 records a dispute between Tosfot and the Ran whether one should give up their life as opposed to being healed with [[Avoda Zara]] branches that aren't specified that they are [[Avoda Zara]]. Tosfot is lenient since it doesn't cause himself and others to follow [[Avoda Zara]], while the Ran disagrees since it is ''avizrayhu'' of [[Avoda Zara]]. Shulchan Aruch's first and main opinion is like Tosfot. Shach 155:11 in facts says that the agreement of the poskim is like Tosfot. However, in Rama Y.D. 157:1 it is evident that the Rama holds like the Ran and ''avizrahu'' are worthy for a person to give up one's life. Gra 155:14 and Minchat Chinuch 296:15 s.v. heneh botam pose this issues and leave it unresolved.  
Mekor Mayim Chaim YD 155 answers that Shulchan Aruch and Rama hold of a mitigated view of ''avizrayhu''. It does not include the prohibition of benefitting from [[Avoda Zara]] as the Ran wrote, yet, includes the prohibition to hug or kiss one of the forbidden relatives since that is more directly linked to the prohibition of illicit relations. Maharam Shik 165 and Dvar Shmuel Pesachim 25b have similar approaches. See Shulchan Aruch 157:3 for further evidence of this approach.
Mekor Mayim Chaim YD 155 answers that Shulchan Aruch and Rama hold of a mitigated view of ''avizrayhu''. It does not include the prohibition of benefitting from [[Avoda Zara]] as the Ran wrote, yet, includes the prohibition to hug or kiss one of the forbidden relatives since that is more directly linked to the prohibition of illicit relations. Maharam Shik 165 and Dvar Shmuel Pesachim 25b have similar approaches. See Shulchan Aruch 157:3 for further evidence of this approach.</ref>
* Lifnei Iver is not included in avizrayhu since it is a general prohibition. Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. chutz, Ritva  Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, and Maharam Chalavah 25b s.v. af.</ref>
#For these three sins one should give up one's life even if the terrorist is threatening one's life for his own benefit.<ref>Ramban Pesachim 6a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1</ref>
===What's included in ''avizrayhu''?===
# Lifnei Iver is not included in ''avizrayhu'' since it is a general prohibition.<ref>Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. chutz, Ritva  Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, and Maharam Chalavah 25b s.v. af.</ref>
#Yichud is not considered something one needs to give up one's life.<ref>Torat Yichud 10:5. See, however, Tuv Taam Vdaat 192 and Shem Aryeh who consider it ''avizrahu''.</ref>
#Yichud is not considered something one needs to give up one's life.<ref>Torat Yichud 10:5. See, however, Tuv Taam Vdaat 192 and Shem Aryeh who consider it ''avizrahu''.</ref>
# Instituting practices to imitate non-Jewish religious practices is a separate biblical prohibition (Devarim 12:30) but not considered ''avizrayhu'' of [[avoda zara]].<ref>Maharam Shik 165</ref>
# Entering a church is forbidden but not ''avizrayhu'' of [[avoda zara]]..<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:3</ref>
# Using something worshipped as [[avoda zara]] is considered ''avizrayhu'' of [[avoda zara]] unless it is given to the patient as a medicinal item and it isn't specified that it was worshipped as [[avoda zara]].<ref>Yerushalmi Shabbat 14:4, Tosfot Pesachim 25a s.v. chutz, Ritva Pesachim 25a, Rashba Avoda Zara 27b s.v. vim, Rashba teshuva cited by Bet Yosef YD 123:2. Ran Pesachim 5b s.v. bchol disagrees. Ritva quotes the Raah who is also strict. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:2 quotes the Tosfot as the main opinion.</ref>
===Public===
# If someone's life is threatened unless he violates a prohibition if the terrorist threatening his life is doing so to negate the Torah if he's in the presence of ten Jews he should die for Kiddush Hashem. This applies to any prohibition and according to some opinions even for violating a minhag one should give up one's life.<ref>Rashi Sanhedrin 75b explains that the small mitzvah described is changing the color of one's shoelaces because it is breaking the minhag of Jews to have modest clothing. However, the Rif Sanhedrin 17b explains that the gemara described a case where one changed one's shoelaces and violated ''lo tilbash'', mimicking non-Jewish ways. Bet Yosef 157:1 interprets the Rambam in line with the Rif. Shach 157:5 cites both Rashi and Rif.</ref>
# If the terrorist is doing it for his own benefit one shouldn't give up one's life.<ref>Gemara Sanhedrin 75b</ref> One may not be strict and instead one must violate the prohibition.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:2, Rabbenu Yerucham 18:3 cited by Bet Yosef 157:1</ref>
# In private one doesn't have to give up one's life. One may be strict to give up one's life.<ref>Bet Yosef 157:1 quotes many who subscribe to the opinion that one could be strict if one wants to. These include the Tur 157:1, Smak 3, Ran Shabbat 22b s.v. umakshu, Rosh Avoda Zara 2:9, and Rabbenu Yerushalmi 18:3. He also cites Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:4 and Ramban (Torat Haadam Sakana s.v. vlinyan) who forbid being strict. Nemukei Yosef Sanhedrin 18a generally forbids being strict unless one is a great distinguished individual and his actions will inspires others and the generation needs his extreme action.</ref>
# One does not have to give up one's life to fulfill a positive mitzvah.<ref>Nemukei Yosef Sanhedrin 18a, Ran Shabbat 22b cited by Bet Yosef 157:1</ref>


==Kiddush Hashem==
==Kiddush Hashem==

Revision as of 23:27, 16 December 2020

An overarching principle in the Torah is that we do our utmost to preserve life even at the expense of negating a law of the Torah. There are three major exceptions where it is incumbent upon a person to give up his life in order to follow the halacha. Namely, to avoid murder, Avoda Zara, and illicit relations a person should give up his life rather than violate these critical mitzvot. Surrendering one's life in order to uphold the Torah when it is halachically prescribed is a [Kiddush Hashem]], sanctifying Hashem's name, of the highest order.[1]

The Big Three

  1. If a person's life is threatened unless he violates murder, Avoda Zara, or illicit relations, he may not violate the law. Rather he should die in fulfillment of the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem, sanctifying Hashem's name.[2]
  2. Many rishonim hold that even associated prohibitions to the big three prohibitions one should also give up one's life. In technical terms these are called avizrayhu (Heb. אביזריהו, lit. associated). For example, if one is threatened to give up one's life or hug one of the relatives forbidden to him he would have to give up his life.[3]
  3. For these three sins one should give up one's life even if the terrorist is threatening one's life for his own benefit.[4]

What's included in avizrayhu?

  1. Lifnei Iver is not included in avizrayhu since it is a general prohibition.[5]
  2. Yichud is not considered something one needs to give up one's life.[6]
  3. Instituting practices to imitate non-Jewish religious practices is a separate biblical prohibition (Devarim 12:30) but not considered avizrayhu of avoda zara.[7]
  4. Entering a church is forbidden but not avizrayhu of avoda zara..[8]
  5. Using something worshipped as avoda zara is considered avizrayhu of avoda zara unless it is given to the patient as a medicinal item and it isn't specified that it was worshipped as avoda zara.[9]

Public

  1. If someone's life is threatened unless he violates a prohibition if the terrorist threatening his life is doing so to negate the Torah if he's in the presence of ten Jews he should die for Kiddush Hashem. This applies to any prohibition and according to some opinions even for violating a minhag one should give up one's life.[10]
  2. If the terrorist is doing it for his own benefit one shouldn't give up one's life.[11] One may not be strict and instead one must violate the prohibition.[12]
  3. In private one doesn't have to give up one's life. One may be strict to give up one's life.[13]
  4. One does not have to give up one's life to fulfill a positive mitzvah.[14]

Kiddush Hashem

Kiddush Hashem

Sources

  1. ↑ Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:1-7, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a. See Baal Hameor (Pesachim 6a s.v. nimsa) who seems to subscribe to this approach as well.
  2. ↑ Gemara Pesachim 25a, Sanhedrin 74b, Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:2, Rosh Sanhedrin :3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1
  3. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1. Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. bchol, Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 25a s.v. bchol, and Ritva Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, 27b s.v. aval all hold of the concept of avizrayhu and have two proofs: 1) It is forbidden to heal oneself with asheira wood (Pesachim 25a) and 2) It is forbidden even to speak to a married woman even if that's the only way to heal his illness (Gemara Sanhedrin 75a).
    • The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:2 records a dispute between Tosfot and the Ran whether one should give up their life as opposed to being healed with Avoda Zara branches that aren't specified that they are Avoda Zara. Tosfot is lenient since it doesn't cause himself and others to follow Avoda Zara, while the Ran disagrees since it is avizrayhu of Avoda Zara. Shulchan Aruch's first and main opinion is like Tosfot. Shach 155:11 in facts says that the agreement of the poskim is like Tosfot. However, in Rama Y.D. 157:1 it is evident that the Rama holds like the Ran and avizrahu are worthy for a person to give up one's life. Gra 155:14 and Minchat Chinuch 296:15 s.v. heneh botam pose this issues and leave it unresolved.
    Mekor Mayim Chaim YD 155 answers that Shulchan Aruch and Rama hold of a mitigated view of avizrayhu. It does not include the prohibition of benefitting from Avoda Zara as the Ran wrote, yet, includes the prohibition to hug or kiss one of the forbidden relatives since that is more directly linked to the prohibition of illicit relations. Maharam Shik 165 and Dvar Shmuel Pesachim 25b have similar approaches. See Shulchan Aruch 157:3 for further evidence of this approach.
  4. ↑ Ramban Pesachim 6a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:1
  5. ↑ Ran Pesachim 6a s.v. chutz, Ritva Avoda Zara 6b s.v. vaf, and Maharam Chalavah 25b s.v. af.
  6. ↑ Torat Yichud 10:5. See, however, Tuv Taam Vdaat 192 and Shem Aryeh who consider it avizrahu.
  7. ↑ Maharam Shik 165
  8. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:3
  9. ↑ Yerushalmi Shabbat 14:4, Tosfot Pesachim 25a s.v. chutz, Ritva Pesachim 25a, Rashba Avoda Zara 27b s.v. vim, Rashba teshuva cited by Bet Yosef YD 123:2. Ran Pesachim 5b s.v. bchol disagrees. Ritva quotes the Raah who is also strict. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:2 quotes the Tosfot as the main opinion.
  10. ↑ Rashi Sanhedrin 75b explains that the small mitzvah described is changing the color of one's shoelaces because it is breaking the minhag of Jews to have modest clothing. However, the Rif Sanhedrin 17b explains that the gemara described a case where one changed one's shoelaces and violated lo tilbash, mimicking non-Jewish ways. Bet Yosef 157:1 interprets the Rambam in line with the Rif. Shach 157:5 cites both Rashi and Rif.
  11. ↑ Gemara Sanhedrin 75b
  12. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 157:2, Rabbenu Yerucham 18:3 cited by Bet Yosef 157:1
  13. ↑ Bet Yosef 157:1 quotes many who subscribe to the opinion that one could be strict if one wants to. These include the Tur 157:1, Smak 3, Ran Shabbat 22b s.v. umakshu, Rosh Avoda Zara 2:9, and Rabbenu Yerushalmi 18:3. He also cites Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:4 and Ramban (Torat Haadam Sakana s.v. vlinyan) who forbid being strict. Nemukei Yosef Sanhedrin 18a generally forbids being strict unless one is a great distinguished individual and his actions will inspires others and the generation needs his extreme action.
  14. ↑ Nemukei Yosef Sanhedrin 18a, Ran Shabbat 22b cited by Bet Yosef 157:1
Retrieved from "http://localhost:80/index.php?title=Violating_Torah_to_Save_Your_Life&oldid=29241"