Violating Torah to Save Your Life: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
Violating Torah to Save Your Life (view source)
Revision as of 21:57, 4 January 2021
, 4 January 2021→Monetary Loss
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
==Sacrificing to Do Mitzvot== | ==Sacrificing to Do Mitzvot== | ||
===''Pikuach Nefesh''=== | ===''Pikuach Nefesh''=== | ||
# One does not have to give up his life in order to avoid violating a prohibition, aside from the big three described above. This principle is called ''pikuach nefesh'' (Heb. פיקוח נפש; lit. concern for life). In all cases of a concern for a loss of life it is permitted to violate the Torah, whether it be that the threat is from a terrorist trying to cause a person to violate the mitzvah, a life threatening situation caused by a person,<ref>Although the Pitchei Teshuva YD 157:2 cites the Mishnat Chachamim (Intro to Avoda Zara) who is unsure about this point, whether ''pikuach nefesh'' permits violating the Torah if the danger is caused by a person and it isn't a terrorist trying to cause him to violate the Torah, his opinion is dismissed. The Pitchei Teshuva also cites the Taz 179:4 and Hafalah Ketubot who permitted violating the Torah for ''pikuach nefesh'' even when caused by a person. Gilyon Maharsha YD 179 agrees with the Taz but is unsure why it was even a question. Minchat Chinuch 295:2 agrees with the Taz and Haflah.</ref> animal,<ref>Gemara Brachot 33a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 104:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 179:7, Taz 179:4, Taz 157:6</ref> or illness.<ref>Gemara Pesachim 25a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3</ref> In all cases the halacha is clear that to protect life it is permitted to violate the Torah. | # One does not have to give up his life in order to avoid violating a prohibition, aside from the big three described above. This principle is called ''pikuach nefesh'' (Heb. פיקוח נפש; lit. concern for life). In all cases of a concern for a loss of life it is permitted to violate the Torah, whether it be that the threat is from a terrorist trying to cause a person to violate the mitzvah, a life threatening situation caused by a person,<ref>Although the Pitchei Teshuva YD 157:2 cites the Mishnat Chachamim (Intro to Avoda Zara) who is unsure about this point, whether ''pikuach nefesh'' permits violating the Torah if the danger is caused by a person and it isn't a terrorist trying to cause him to violate the Torah, his opinion is dismissed. The Pitchei Teshuva also cites the Taz 179:4 and Hafalah Ketubot 19a s.v. tosfot s.v. damar who permitted violating the Torah for ''pikuach nefesh'' even when caused by a person. Gilyon Maharsha YD 179 agrees with the Taz but is unsure why it was even a question. Minchat Chinuch 295:2 agrees with the Taz and Haflah.</ref> animal,<ref>Gemara Brachot 33a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 104:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 179:7, Taz 179:4, Taz 157:6</ref> or illness.<ref>Gemara Pesachim 25a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3</ref> In all cases the halacha is clear that to protect life it is permitted to violate the Torah. | ||
# For example, pikuach nefesh allows for violating Shabbat. See [[Medicine on Shabbat]] for details. | # For example, pikuach nefesh allows for violating Shabbat. See [[Medicine on Shabbat]] for details. | ||
===''Sakanat Ever''=== | ===''Sakanat Ever''=== | ||
# If one's limb is in danger (Heb. סכנת אבר; trans. ''sakanat ever'') is it permissible to violate a prohibition? If a loss of limb is considered like a loss of money then it is necessary to upkeep the Torah even at the expense of the health of one's limb. If a loss of limb is considered like a loss of life then it is permitted to violate the prohibition to save one's limb. The conclusion of the poskim regarding other prohibitions, besides Shabbat, is to judge loss of limb like loss and life and it is permitted to violate a prohibition.<ref>Shach 157:3 citing Rivash 387 and O.C. 328:17. See Radvaz 3:627 who seems to hold a similar position.</ref> | # If one's limb is in danger (Heb. סכנת אבר; trans. ''sakanat ever'') is it permissible to violate a prohibition? If a loss of limb is considered like a loss of money then it is necessary to upkeep the Torah even at the expense of the health of one's limb. If a loss of limb is considered like a loss of life then it is permitted to violate the prohibition to save one's limb. The conclusion of the poskim regarding other prohibitions, besides Shabbat, is to judge loss of limb like loss and life and it is permitted to violate a prohibition.<ref>Shach 157:3 citing Rivash 387 and O.C. 328:17. See Radvaz 3:627 who seems to hold a similar position.</ref> | ||
| Line 37: | Line 38: | ||
# In order to fulfill a positive mitzvah one only has to spend a fifth of one's money.<ref>Rama O.C. 652, Shach 157:3</ref> | # In order to fulfill a positive mitzvah one only has to spend a fifth of one's money.<ref>Rama O.C. 652, Shach 157:3</ref> | ||
# To avoid a rabbinic prohibition a person should give up all of his money.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva 157:4 quotes the Pri Megadim who was unsure about this. Chavot Yair 183 says you do, while in Chavot Yair 182 contradicts this. Radvaz 1:145 also holds that to avoid a rabbinic prohibition one should give up all of his money. Igrot Moshe EH 1:57, Gra 157:4, Chafetz Chaim (Klal Rechilut Bear Mayim Chayim 1:12) concur.</ref> | # To avoid a rabbinic prohibition a person should give up all of his money.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva 157:4 quotes the Pri Megadim who was unsure about this. Chavot Yair 183 says you do, while in Chavot Yair 182 contradicts this. Radvaz 1:145 also holds that to avoid a rabbinic prohibition one should give up all of his money. Igrot Moshe EH 1:57, Gra 157:4, Chafetz Chaim (Klal Rechilut Bear Mayim Chayim 1:12) concur.</ref> | ||
===Forbidden Foods=== | |||
# It is permitted to eat forbidden foods in order to save one's life. Nonetheless, one may not have intent to benefit from the food.<ref>Rambam Machalot Asurot 14:12, Even Haezel Shabbat 1:5 s.v. ivra</ref> | |||
==Sacrificing an Individual to Save a Group== | ==Sacrificing an Individual to Save a Group== | ||
#If terrorists threaten a group of women that if they don't give up one of them to be violated they will all be violated, ''chas vshalom'', they can't give up a single woman even if they specified which one they want.<ref>Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:5. Taz 157:9 that according to the opinion that anytime one is specified to be killed that person could be given over to save everyone else, the same would apply to the case of women being violated. However, according to the Rambam and the halacha that we can't give up someone even if they're specified unless they're sentenced to death by some legal system then for woman being violated that is never relevant and always forbidden to give up one woman.</ref> | #If terrorists threaten a group of women that if they don't give up one of them to be violated they will all be violated, ''chas vshalom'', they can't give up a single woman even if they specified which one they want.<ref>Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:5. Taz 157:9 that according to the opinion that anytime one is specified to be killed that person could be given over to save everyone else, the same would apply to the case of women being violated. However, according to the Rambam and the halacha that we can't give up someone even if they're specified unless they're sentenced to death by some legal system then for woman being violated that is never relevant and always forbidden to give up one woman.</ref> | ||
#If the terrorists threaten a group of women that if they don’t give up one of them to be violated they will all be killed they may give up one woman.<ref>Taz 157:9 explains that it is permitted to give up a woman to be violated in order to save their lives since a woman being violated passively isn’t considered ''hereg v’al yavor''.</ref> | #If the terrorists threaten a group of women that if they don’t give up one of them to be violated they will all be killed they may give up one woman.<ref>Taz 157:9 explains that it is permitted to give up a woman to be violated in order to save their lives since a woman being violated passively isn’t considered ''hereg v’al yavor''.</ref> | ||
#It is forbidden to give up one life to save another and even to save an entire group. If the individual that they specify is liable to death by a legal system<ref>Taz 157:8 explains that even if the person isn't liable to death by Bet Din and only by the government even a non-Jewish government they can be given over.</ref> they can be given over.<ref>The Mishna Trumot 8:12 states that if terrorists threaten an entire group that if they don't give up one of them to be killed all of them will die, they may not give up any of them. If the terrorists specify one of them then they may give him up to save the group. The Yerushalmi Trumot 8:4 cites a dispute between Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish as to how to understand the halacha. Rabbi Yochanan says that as long as the person is specified he can be given over, while according to Reish Lakish he can only be given over if he is liable to death. Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:5 rules like Reish Lakish, and Hagahot Maimoniyot (Yesodei Hatorah 5:6) disputes this and accepts Rabbi Yochanan. Rama 157:1 cites both opinions. Taz 157:7 follows the Rambam.</ref> Even when the person is culpable to death and it is permitted to give him over to be killed to save the group, a rabbi should avoid giving such a verdict directly and avoid doing it himself.<ref> | #It is forbidden to give up one life to save another and even to save an entire group. If the individual that they specify is liable to death by a legal system<ref>Taz 157:8 explains that even if the person isn't liable to death by Bet Din and only by the government even a non-Jewish government they can be given over.</ref> they can be given over.<ref>The Mishna Trumot 8:12 states that if terrorists threaten an entire group that if they don't give up one of them to be killed all of them will die, they may not give up any of them. If the terrorists specify one of them then they may give him up to save the group. The Yerushalmi Trumot 8:4 cites a dispute between Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish as to how to understand the halacha. Rabbi Yochanan says that as long as the person is specified he can be given over, while according to Reish Lakish he can only be given over if he is liable to death. Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:5 rules like Reish Lakish, and Hagahot Maimoniyot (Yesodei Hatorah 5:6) disputes this and accepts Rabbi Yochanan. Rama 157:1 cites both opinions. Taz 157:7 follows the Rambam.</ref> Even when the person is culpable to death and it is permitted to give him over to be killed to save the group, a rabbi should avoid giving such a verdict directly and avoid doing it himself.<ref>Taz 157:7 ponders the meaning of the Rambam Yesodei Hatorah 5:5 who concludes that a rabbi shouldn't initially render a ruling to give over a person to save the masses even if that individual is culpable to death. He says that it is not a pious measure to rule the opposite and cause everyone to die but it is advisable that he not do so himself. The prooftext for the Rambam is the Yerushalmi Trumot 8:4 which states that in such a situation Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Levi gave over a Jew even though it was permitted, Eliyahu Hanavi stopped visiting him because of it. Taz interprets this to mean that he shouldn't have done it himself. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=628&pgnum=151 Bet Yakov 107] disputes the Taz because it isn't a worthy pious act to sacrifice the community for that individual. Rather it means that it most proper not to give asylum to a criminal which might later lead to having to give him up. It is better not to take him in the first place since it might cause you to have to give him over to death.</ref> A person must try to find any option possible to avoid this.<ref>Darkei Moshe 157:4 citing Hagahot Maimoniyot (Constantinople edition, Yesodei Hatorah 5:6), Shach 157:15</ref> | ||
==Kiddush Hashem== | ==Kiddush Hashem== | ||
