The Gemara in Bava Metzia 62a brings an argument between Bar Petura and Reb Akiva. The discussion begins on 62a, and focuses on the words in passuk 25:36 וחי אחיך עמך.
א"ר אלעזר רבית קצוצה יוצאה בדיינין אבק רבית אינה יוצאה בדיינין רבי יוחנן אמר אפילו רבית קצוצה נמי אינה יוצאה בדיינין א"ר יצחק מ"ט דרבי יוחנן דאמר קרא (יחזקאל יח) בנשך נתן ותרבית לקח וחי לא יחיה את כל התועבות האלה עשה למיתה ניתן ולא להשבון רב אדא בר אהבה אמר אמר קרא (ויקרא כה) אל תקח מאתו נשך ותרבית ויראת מאלהיך למורא ניתן ולא להשבון רבא אמר מגופיה דקרא שמיע ליה (יחזקאל יח) מות יומת דמיו בו יהיה הוקשו מלוי רבית לשופכי דמים מה שופכי דמים לא ניתנו להשבון אף מלוי רבית לא ניתנו להשבון אר"נ בר יצחק מ"ט דר"א דאמר קרא
דף סב,א גמרא (ויקרא כה) וחי אחיך עמך אהדר ליה כי היכי דניחי ורבי יוחנן האי וחי אחיך עמך מאי עביד ליה מבעי ליה לכדתניא שנים שהיו מהלכין בדרך וביד אחד מהן קיתון של מים אם שותין שניהם מתים ואם שותה אחד מהן מגיע לישוב דרש בן פטורא מוטב שישתו שניהם וימותו ואל יראה אחד מהם במיתתו של חבירו עד שבא ר' עקיבא ולימד וחי אחיך עמך חייך קודמים לחיי חבירך
Two people are traveling in the desert. One has a bottle of water. If they share it, they will both die. If one drinks it, he will live and the other will die. Bar Petura says that better that both drink and both die rather than one drink and see the other die. Reb Akiva learned from our passuk that your life has precedence: the owner of the water should drink and survive. Our duty to preserve our own lives is greater than our duty to save the life of another, and one should not sacrifice his life to extend someone else's life. Everyone reading this knows very well that this Gemara is the foundation stone of thousands of halachos and haskafos and that it has been interpreted in many many ways. I bring it only because of an interesting question asked on this Gemara by several mefarshim, which I haven't seen collected in one place.
The Maharit (Yoseph Trani, 1538–1639, or Yoseph di Trani who lived in Greece), and the Maharam Shif (Meir ben Yavov Hakohen Schiff, 1608-1644, of Frankfort on Main), the Minchas Chinuch (Yoseph ben Moshe Babad, the Av Beis Din of Ternopil, Poland, 1801-1874) (who actually just brings the kashe from the Maharit and uses it to say pshat in a Rambam, as noted below), and Reb Yisrael Salanter (Lithuania, 1810-1883), and Rav Baruch Epstein in the Torah Temimah (Behar כה:לז אות קצד) all point out that this Gemara seems to contradict the Gemara in Kiddushin 20a, The Gemara in Kiddushin discusses the Eved Ivri, and says that the legal requirements of how a one must treat his Jewish slave are so burdensome that buying a Jewish slave is like buying a master.
ת"ר כי טוב לו עמך עמך במאכל עמך במשתה שלא תהא אתה אוכל פת נקיה והוא אוכל פת קיבר אתה שותה יין ישן והוא שותה יין חדש אתה ישן על גבי מוכין והוא ישן על גבי תבן מכאן אמרו כל הקונה עבד עברי כקונה אדון לעצמו
Tosfos there brings a Yerushalmi that if you only have one pillow, the slave gets it and you can sleep without a pillow:
כל הקונה עבד עברי כקונה אדון לעצמו. וקשה מאי אדון די לו להיות כאדונו ויש לומר כדאיתא בירושלמי דפעמים אין לו אלא כר אחת אם שוכב עליו בעצמו אינו מקיים כי טוב לו עמך ואם אינו שוכב עליו וגם אינו מוסרו לעבדו זו מדת סדום נמצא שע"כ צריך למסור לעבדו והיינו אדון לעצמו
All the aforementioned mefarshim point out that the two Gemaros are contradictory. Reb Akiva said that the words וחי אחיך עמך indicate that while you have obligations to the other, you come first, and the Gemara in Kiddushin, or at least the Yerushalmi as read into the Bavli by Tosfos, says that כי טוב אחיך עמך indicates that because of your obligations to the other, he comes first, even at your expense, even when as a result he will have and you will not have. אחיך עמך- you have priority. לו עמך- he has priority. Why? In fact, the Minchas Chinuch suggests that because of the contradiction the Rambam decided that the Bavli and Yerushalmi are indeed arguing. The Minchas Chinuch is in Mitzva 42, here, first column, fourteen lines from the bottom.
The Maharit is in his pirush to Kiddushin on daf 20, here. The Maharam Schiff is in Bava Metzia on 62 and in his Drushim at the end of Chulin. Reb Yisrael Salanter is in his Even Yisrael, Drush 4, on the bottom. DH אך קשה דכאן אמרינן מדכתיב וחי אחיך עמך.
I think the question is very stimulating, and it's more profitable for each of us to think about it and come up with our own approach rather than to be told what the above mefarshim have said about it. Or you can just look them up.
We had a very nice discussion about this question at the kiddush in our home this Shabbos, and afterwards, at a Bar Mitzva, my wife told it over to some other women, and Mrs. Caron Rice, the plant manager at WITS, said a very clever thing- that if you have to go on a trip through the desert, make sure you don't take your Eved Ivri along with you.
A nice drush from the Ponevezer Rav:
ReplyDeleteIn the spring of 1943 Rav Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman, known as the Ponovezher Rav, established an orphanage in B'nei B'rak to absorb and care for the many orphaned children who had been rescued from the Holocaust and were sent to Eretz Yisroel. Unfortunately, with the first group of children scheduled to arrive on a Sunday, the Ponovezher Rav found himself without any linens or pillows for the children to sleep on due to the dire situation in Eretz Yisroel at that time. On Friday, with two days remaining until their arrival, Rav Kahaneman announced that he would be speaking on Shabbos afternoon in the largest synagogue in town.
He began his speech by citing the Gemora in Bava Metzia (62a), which discusses a case in which two people are lost in the desert with only one flask of water. If they split the water between them, both will die before they are able to reach the nearest settlement, but if one of them drinks it, he will be able to survive. Rebbi Akiva derives from our verse that "chayecha kodmin" – your life takes precedence over that of your friend, and therefore the one with the water should drink it all.
On the other hand, the Gemora in Kiddushin (20a) teaches that a person who purchases a Jewish slave in a sense acquires a master for himself due to the Torah's requirement to equate the slave's standard of living to his owner's level of comfort. Tosefos adds that sometimes even this is not sufficient, such as in a case when the owner possesses only one pillow. If he takes it for himself, he violates the Torah's requirement to give his slave equal treatment, and he therefore has no choice but to give his only pillow to his slave, leaving himself with nothing on which to sleep.
Rav Kahaneman noted that this ruling of Tosefos seems to contradict the teaching of Rebbi Akiva. Just as the person who is lost in the desert is permitted to drink all of the water due to the principle of "chayecha kodmin," shouldn't this same reasoning allow the master to keep his sole pillow for himself?
The Ponovezher Rav explained that the two rulings are in fact compatible, as the requirement to give the pillow to the slave actually emanates from the Torah's concern for the primacy of the owner's well-being. If the master were to keep the pillow and lay down in comfort while observing his slave tossing and turning, his conscience would bother him so much that he wouldn't be able to enjoy the pillow and a good night's rest. Therefore, precisely in order to allow the master to be at peace with the arrangement, the Torah requires him to give the pillow to his slave for his own well-being so that he can sleep soundly through the night.
Similarly, the Ponovezher Rav continued, in only one day a large group of Jewish children would be arriving at the new orphanage in B'nei B'rak, which was completely lacking pillows and sheets on which they could sleep. Questioning how any of those present could go home and enjoy a comfortable night's sleep now that they were aware of this situation, he advised them that for their own well-being, they should immediately donate the only pillows and linens in their possessions, a suggestion which was fulfilled by the inspired and touched listeners as soon as Shabbos was finished. (From Parsha Potpourri).
Yasher Kochacha.
ReplyDelete