tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post2923564009216853548..comments2024-03-19T23:03:01.685-05:00Comments on Beis Vaad L'Chachamim: Achrei Mos, Vayikra 18:5. וָחַי בָּהֶם, Vachai Bahem: The Obligation to Preserve Life Countermands Other Religious ObligationsEliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-69753431854665835992012-04-30T23:56:52.815-05:002012-04-30T23:56:52.815-05:00I was pretty unsatisfied with the 2 answers given ...I was pretty unsatisfied with the 2 answers given there, because they are very limited in scope. I haven't had time to fully process your answers yet, but overall their approach is much more appealing to me.LironKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07626143717577021698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-13042353052205918322012-04-30T15:14:04.725-05:002012-04-30T15:14:04.725-05:00I looked at the Aznaim LaTorah. After discussing ...I looked at the Aznaim LaTorah. After discussing the possibility of a reference to the laws of gentiles, he says two answers: that it applies to women, who are not obligated to be moser nefesh if they are merely used as an object, and that according to the Baal Hama'or (and the Meiri) that if the assailant is doing it for his own pleasure and not to force you to do a sin, you don't have to be moser nefesh.<br><br>Forgive me for saying so, but I think the Lutzker Rov himself would enjoy what we wrote.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-69949279579527457512012-04-30T13:08:33.177-05:002012-04-30T13:08:33.177-05:00Thank you for the reference. I don't have one...Thank you for the reference. I don't have one in my office, and will check later. But tell me, whose answers appeal to you more?Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-2819853197688002692012-04-30T12:39:19.179-05:002012-04-30T12:39:19.179-05:00See the peirush Oznayim LaTorah. He asks this exac...See the peirush Oznayim LaTorah. He asks this exact question and gives 2 answers.LironKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07626143717577021698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-68653940665292372642010-04-23T18:40:08.216-05:002010-04-23T18:40:08.216-05:00I don't think the Chasam Sofer has anything to...I don't think the Chasam Sofer has anything to worry about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-63372585989670645392010-04-22T14:02:52.983-05:002010-04-22T14:02:52.983-05:00>>>Goyim are not chayav in Kiddush Hashem...>>>Goyim are not chayav in Kiddush Hashem <br><br>Not so pashut. See the Parashas Derachim in the beginning of the second derasha who discusses whether this is true; he also mentions it in the first derasha.Chaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-82250829593887141752010-04-21T21:55:35.136-05:002010-04-21T21:55:35.136-05:00the rosh in the beginning of kesuvos extends this ...the rosh in the beginning of kesuvos extends this idea of allowing oneself to be used passively even by avoda zaralesser unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-44716331635000753552010-04-21T19:55:18.042-05:002010-04-21T19:55:18.042-05:00The R' Elchanan is in Koveitz He'Oros #48....The R' Elchanan is in Koveitz He'Oros #48. Nothing to do with whether ones is a ma'aseh aveirah.<br>R' Elchanan explains that Tosfos holds that pikuach nefesh is not nidche because of the big 3. Pikuach nefesh (or v'chai bahem) still applies, but it clashes with the chiyuv to be moseir nefesh. Net result is shev v'al ta'aseh. Ramban disagrees. R' Chaim basically shows that the Rambam holds like this Ramban, but I was calling attention to it because of his hesber for Tosfos which I think answers your question. OK, so maybe you will need to cook up a different answer according to the other Rishonim, but according to Tosfos the lomdus should work.Chaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-71834088097934737452010-04-21T18:10:53.619-05:002010-04-21T18:10:53.619-05:00sorry, sent in my post before I saw the correction...sorry, sent in my post before I saw the correction. I will b"n look at the Reb Chaim when I get home later tonight.lesser unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-22385558173454937042010-04-21T18:07:20.603-05:002010-04-21T18:07:20.603-05:00lesser unknown, as far as retzicha and arayos, loo...lesser unknown, as far as retzicha and arayos, look at the Reb Chaim. And while you might have a point re AZ, it's not relevant here, since the passuk is in the parsha of arayos, a mistake I made and corrected above.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-8055472070223474342010-04-21T17:58:42.464-05:002010-04-21T17:58:42.464-05:00I remember seeing clearly in the rishonim that pas...I remember seeing clearly in the rishonim that passive transgressions of ariyos and rechitza are mutar and according to some a chiyuv when the alternative is death. I don't recall the same being said by avoda zara. It could be that where I was looking it was assumed to be extended to avoda zara also, but I had assumed the opposite; that it was davka by rechitza and ariyos, gufa because of the s'vara by rechitza and then the hekesh to ariyos, which does not extend to avoda zara. If there is a source that even for avoda zara one may passively transgress in order to save their life, I would be interested to see it.<br><br>As for the mehalech itself, assuming that I am correct (which my chavrusa accuses me of doing too often) the pasuk being by v'chai bahem is extraneous, since I would independently know that one can transgress b'shev v'al ta'aseh from the sevara and hekesh. Furthermore, even if I am wrong in my previous assumption, the pasuk should davka be by avoda zara, since that is the only place that it would be needed.lesser unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-82083526533741655112010-04-21T17:19:17.060-05:002010-04-21T17:19:17.060-05:00Chaim, you're right. My point about avoda zar...Chaim, you're right. My point about avoda zara is irrelevant. The passuk is by arayos, so we can say a teretz without addressing avoda zara at all.<br><br>But the tzushtell to Reb Chaim (I know it's in the first piece, thank you, if I didn't know that I would have to check into a nursing home)just makes problems, because Reb Chaim's whole point is to explain the Rambam who holds that shev ahl ta'aseh is yeihoreg by arayos, unlike the other rishonim Reb Chaim brings.<br><br>As for Reb Elchonon in the beginning of Ksuvos, he brings that the Rambam says that an anusah for arayos is only not killed in beis din because of lenaarah lo saaseh davar, but be'etzem she's chayav for the arayos 100%, just that there's a lahv of lo saaseh davar on beis din to kill her.<br><br>So as far as I can tell, your teretz isn't ready to steal yet. It doesn't work in Reb Chaim's Rambam, and it doesn't work in Reb Elchonon. Keep working.Barzilainoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-70057884639685717812010-04-21T16:17:53.574-05:002010-04-21T16:17:53.574-05:00Btw if either of you ever want ot guest post on my...Btw if either of you ever want ot guest post on my blog on the parsha, I'd absolutely love it. Do get in touch!NonymousGhttp://gtorah.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-13806830349324741442010-04-21T16:16:47.818-05:002010-04-21T16:16:47.818-05:00lollolNonymousGhttp://gtorah.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-57079972751456767162010-04-21T13:54:47.775-05:002010-04-21T13:54:47.775-05:00I like your mehalach so much that not only may I s...I like your mehalach so much that not only may I steal it, but then I'll delete both of these comments.<br><br>By the way, as you very well know, the din of Yeihareig is not the same by all three. Retzicha and arayos are learned from mai chazis/kein hadavar hazeh, and AZ is learned from bechol nafshecha. So whatever mehalach you say, you have to make sure it makes sense in both svaros.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-75390909064693378232010-04-21T12:29:21.962-05:002010-04-21T12:29:21.962-05:00I like your Chasam Sofer so much I may steal it. ...I like your Chasam Sofer so much I may steal it. I think the answer is that there still is a din of v'chai bahem even by the three chamuros, but that din comes into conflict with the chiyuv of mesirus nefesh. Since there is no resoution, net result is shev v'al ta'aseh. Nafka minah: there is no chiyuv of mesirus nefesh where you are passive and are not doing a ma'aseh, e.g. you are pushed off a building onto someone else. R' Chaim on the Rambam addresses this in the first piece and says the Rambam disagrees; I think R' Elchanan also talks about it.Chaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.com