Home › Forums › Bais Medrash › Saving a Relative's Life First
- This topic has 46 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 9 months ago by Joseph.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 26, 2016 4:32 pm at 4:32 pm #617298JosephParticipant
According to the Halacha ((Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 252:8 learnt from the Mishna) that there is kedimah in whose life to save first, if someone’s mother’s life was in danger would the son be obligated, based on Kibud Av V’Eim to save her first (in a triage situation where there are multiple victims) despite the Halacha in S”A? While Kibud Eim presumably would give her priority, there seems to be no similar basis to provide priority when it comes to a sister, wife or daughter.
February 26, 2016 7:51 pm at 7:51 pm #1139481JosephParticipantSam, ubiq, the floor is yours.
February 26, 2016 8:24 pm at 8:24 pm #1139482newbeeMemberI always hated this kedima structure because I am a gizbar, so if I get stuck on a sinking ship with an amarkal I am basically a dead man. Also, for a mother, I believe she takes precedence of your own life as well.
February 26, 2016 9:41 pm at 9:41 pm #1139483The QueenParticipantI don’t know the halacha, but I would hope that my father, mother, husband, sister, brother, daughter, or son would try to save me before they save a stranger. I would definitely save them first, what’s even the question?
February 26, 2016 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #1139484JosephParticipantQueen: And if Halacha says otherwise, would you still hope that if it is in contravention to Halacha?
February 26, 2016 9:59 pm at 9:59 pm #1139485JosephParticipantnewbee: What’s your source that you save a parent’s life before your own? That doesn’t seem correct.
February 26, 2016 10:08 pm at 10:08 pm #1139486The QueenParticipantJoseph: As I said I don’t know the halacha. In an emergency would you grab your baby out of the fire or a stranger first. Would you call your rav to get a psak first under the circumstances?
February 28, 2016 12:08 am at 12:08 am #1139487newbeeMember??? ????? ?????. ????? ????? ??????
??? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?
February 28, 2016 12:39 am at 12:39 am #1139488JosephParticipantQueen: Assuming you knew the Halacha in advance, and it was that someone else should be given priority in being rescued, would you hope that Halacha was adhered to?
February 28, 2016 4:57 am at 4:57 am #1139489The QueenParticipantI don’t like ‘assuming’ what is the halacha do you know?
Sure he knows, and he has been hoping someone would ask. That’s why he keeps resubmitting this subject in posts and threads, am I right Joe?
February 28, 2016 6:33 am at 6:33 am #1139490JosephParticipantWell, I stated the Halacha in the pre-edited OP, but a mod in his wisdom felt it should remain unstated. Whilst I disagree, they are da bosses here so I won’t repost it. You can read my discussion with the mod in the below link, or this threads url, if you want to venture a guess:
I also cited the precise location in S”A, so you can consult your local talmid chochom that you’ve previously referenced.
February 28, 2016 4:07 pm at 4:07 pm #1139491Josh31Participant???? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?
The case is where you are a male and you have resources to redeem one captive, and only the women but not men are subject to abuse by the captors.
February 28, 2016 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #1139492Josh31ParticipantNext case: Besides your mother, you also have another woman to whom you sold a “captivity redemption contract”.
February 28, 2016 4:58 pm at 4:58 pm #1139493YW Moderator-29 👨💻ModeratorWell, I stated the Halacha in the pre-edited OP
That was one of many times you have posted this topic, which makes me question your motive/intent. And sometimes intent trumps content.
February 29, 2016 12:16 am at 12:16 am #1139494JosephParticipantTwenty Nine, of the other posts, none recent nor close in time to each other, none were approved to my recollection. The intent was never anything other than an honest halachic discussion – and as I asked in the post I linked to above, I honestly would like to know what is objectionable. I was wondering if mentioning the halachic order regarding triage in life saving was objectionable because in doesn’t fit into contemporary society’s egalitarianism, thus stating the Halacha will offend the modern crowd, and if it would have been more acceptable and non-objectionable to mention the halacha if the halacha had been the reverse, since the reverse would in fact have fit into modern society’s chivalrous expectations?
And I still comment that you seem to have a need to discuss this particular subject, so much so that it keeps getting reposted even though, as you admit, it gets deleted.
February 29, 2016 12:40 am at 12:40 am #1139495JosephParticipantIt seems this compromise where it is indirectly referenced was acceptable to everyone. It was a matter of finding the right formula on how to discuss it. It appears to be a reasonable solution and it was a matter of finding an acceptable presentation for the discussion. Nevertheless, I honestly don’t understand what is objectionable to directly quoting the Halacha, as I asked above if it would have been objectionable to quoting it if the Halacha was the reverse.
You asked that instead of answering the question of why you are so stuck (need I say obsessed) with this type of topic. You say interest in discussion although if you read the thread you don’t really discuss it, you try baiting a couple posters and then talk to me about the concept of posting such threads. Looks to me like Josh31 tried discussing and you weren’t interested. C’mon Joe, own up
February 29, 2016 3:54 am at 3:54 am #1139496newbeeMemberI will tell you I have heard a roshe yeshiva, one of the most respected, say not to bring up this mishna as it will cause people to go off the derech. The priority structure for saving is not followed today lemeisa by anyone. Also, halacha sometimes has to be very simplistic and it can be misconstrued so people who dont know how halacha works might think the hierarchy is indicative of some sort of superiority.
Two male witnesses are believed for instance who we dont know anything about, but one witness is not believed even if its Rov Moshe Feinstein. Does that make the two witnesses “superior” to Rov Moshe Feinstein? Certainly not. But thats how halacha works, its often simplistic.
Halacha also allows for slavery. It allows the slave owner to breed their slaves. It allows to stone people to death and calls for mass genocide. Why dont you talk about those halachos?
February 29, 2016 4:03 am at 4:03 am #1139497newbeeMemberJoseph, in my humble opinion, I dont think the motive for you asking these questions is coming from your neshama, I think its coming from your yetzer hara.
February 29, 2016 4:38 am at 4:38 am #1139498JosephParticipantWhich rosh yeshiva? No serious rosh yeshiva ever said we stop following a halacha in Shulchan Aruch in our days or that we shouldn’t talk about a mishna.
February 29, 2016 4:43 am at 4:43 am #1139499YW Moderator-29 👨💻ModeratorIf you insist that “talk about a mishna” is somehow the equivalent of “post threads in anonymous forums about topics in mishna” than reasoning isnt much of an option.
February 29, 2016 5:03 am at 5:03 am #1139500Sam2ParticipantAnd enter Joseph, arbiter of who is a serious Rosh Yeshiva and who isn’t.
Sometimes we in the CR forget that Joseph is the true Gadol HaDor who gets to determine what opinions Talmidei Chachamim can and can’t have. Thank you for that reminder.
February 29, 2016 6:16 am at 6:16 am #1139501JosephParticipantRight, an anonymous claim on an anonymous forum that an anonymous rosh yeshiva claimed that we shouldn’t talk about a Chazal or Mishna and that a halacha in Shulchan Aruch “is not followed today” cannot be challenged despite being unable to cite a single sh”ut psak that the S”A is wrong.
February 29, 2016 6:23 am at 6:23 am #1139502YW Moderator-29 👨💻ModeratorEven if you disagree with him and his unknown rav 100%, you still cannot call what you are doing “talking about a mishna” in the sense that the rabbeim meant it.
Even if NO rav said not to bring it up, your own rabbeim wouldn’t give consent for you to be here at all let alone here discussing these mishnayos in this venue.
February 29, 2016 6:24 am at 6:24 am #1139503JosephParticipantOn what basis do you so say vis-a-vis what my rebbeim would say?
Insofar regarding intent, you aren’t correct.
The quoted text is from newbee.
February 29, 2016 1:38 pm at 1:38 pm #1139504WolfishMusingsParticipantnm
February 29, 2016 6:28 pm at 6:28 pm #1139505Sam2ParticipantJoseph: Not being able to quote a single SHU”T Psak? Look at the Tzitz Eliezer 18:1 (maybe 18:3).
February 29, 2016 6:31 pm at 6:31 pm #1139506newbeeMember“No serious rosh yeshiva ever said we stop following a halacha in Shulchan Aruch in our days or that we shouldn’t talk about a mishna.”
Yes, I asked if a Kohen should be saved before a Yisroel and he said a Kohen is not saved first because they are only safek kohanim. I believe we have already had this talk. And for women, it only applies when everything else is exactly equal. And things are never exactly equal. So its not lemeisa. The poskim will find a way out of these things.
And yes, a serious Roshe Yeshiva has told me halacha like these will make people on the fence go off the derech and we should not talk about them to certain people. For privacy reasons I dont want to say his name. Of course, you have the right to disagree and I personally disagree with any sort of censorship.
February 29, 2016 6:33 pm at 6:33 pm #1139507newbeeMemberJoseph, can we put an end to this once and for all: did you actually ask a question what to do lemeisa to a Posek and he told me lemeisa to save a man before a woman? And he told you lemeisa to save a kohen before a levi?
February 29, 2016 6:44 pm at 6:44 pm #1139508newbeeMemberYes, I asked a posek if a Kohen should be saved before a Yisroel and he said a Kohen is not saved first because they are only safek kohanim. I believe we have already had this talk. And for women, it only applies when everything else is exactly equal. And things are never exactly equal. So its not lemeisa. The poskim will find a way out of these things.
February 29, 2016 6:44 pm at 6:44 pm #1139509JosephParticipantYes, I asked and was told that Shulchan Aruch is followed today on this siman and chelek discussing this point as much as any other part of S”A, and we most certainly do follow this halacha as it is written in S”A today as we always have.
You weren’t the first person to be dismissive of a halacha that doesn’t fit into modern sensibilities.
And you are offbase that it is never the case that everything isn’t always equal. The Mechaber wasn’t recording the halacha (based on the Mishna) for theoretical never-applicable circumstances. Their certainly are applicable circumstances. Say a boat with all strangers is sinking that you have nothing to do with or even know who anyone is, for example. Or any situation where between two people you have nothing other than the kedima stated in halacha.
February 29, 2016 7:18 pm at 7:18 pm #1139510Sam2Participantnewbee: Safek Kohanim? That doesn’t make any sense. I mean, it does, but no one since the before the Chasam Sofer and R’ Akiva Eiger have held that Kohanim were actually Safek Kohanim. We assume our Kohanim are real Kohanim and that a Ksav Yichus is just a Chumra by doing the Avodah. Otherwise we wouldn’t do Pidyon HaBen.
February 29, 2016 10:00 pm at 10:00 pm #1139511newbeeMember“Safek Kohanim? That doesn’t make any sense. I mean, it does, but no one since the before the Chasam Sofer and R’ Akiva Eiger have held that Kohanim were actually Safek Kohanim. We assume our Kohanim are real Kohanim and that a Ksav Yichus is just a Chumra by doing the Avodah. Otherwise we wouldn’t do Pidyon HaBen.”
I asked my rov a while ago he told me since they are only safek it does not warrant saving a life. I got an email from another Rabbi saying the same thing. I asked another rov about giving a kohen kedima in tzedaka and he told me not to so as well. The email gave me these sources: See “Shulchan Aruch” Y.D. 251:9 and “Aruch HaShulchan” 11 there. R’ Tam on Taz 128:39 and others i can look back at the email if you want
February 29, 2016 10:01 pm at 10:01 pm #1139512newbeeMember????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ?????? ???, ?? ?????? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ??????? ????? ????, ???? ?”? ????? ???????? ???? ????? …????? ????? ????? ???? ????
….???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????
…??? ???”? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ??????”?
??”? ???? ???? ???? ????
February 29, 2016 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm #1139513newbeeMember???? ???? ?????, ???????? ?????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????, ????? ???? ???? ????? ???’, ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???, ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??????,
???”? ????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?
February 29, 2016 10:19 pm at 10:19 pm #1139514JosephParticipantRav Moshe has a teshuva in the Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat 4 that the order of kedima outlined in the Mishna and S”A when saving people is applicable today. The Shach and Taz say the same.
February 29, 2016 10:47 pm at 10:47 pm #1139515newbeeMemberWell obviously not from what I quoted earlier and also I remember Rav Eliezer Waldenberg saying it does not apply to saving- many Rabbis dont hold by that today. Rav Moshe would also consider many people today who are kohanim not to be because he requires more proof than most poskim. Rov Moshe also says its only when all else is equal which we could never know. So one way or another halacha has adapted not to follow this order lemeisa.
I would challenge you to tell me one real-life case this has actually happened where a man was saved before a woman because of this. It has been relegated into the impossible and non-practical.
It is NEVER followed in real life. Does hatzola follow this order? Do doctors? Do frum firemen? No one follows this lemeisa.
edited
February 29, 2016 11:00 pm at 11:00 pm #1139517JosephParticipantThat’s your own boich sevora bubbe maaisa. I already gave some examples where things are otherwise equal. The Mechaber, Rav Moshe, the Shach, the Taz aren’t giving pilpul about things that don’t happen; they’re paskening halacha l’maaisa for real situations that are very applicable. It’s true that it is infrequent where you have a situation where you can’t save everyone and you have to make choices who to save; infrequent but not non-existent. Just be honest with yourself and say you don’t like the halacha. If the Titanic had followed halacha it would have been another example of where things are otherwise equal. L’maaisa they followed the goyish kedima which is the opposite of the halacha. But, as I earlier asked, let’s hypothetically say that the halacha was the opposite order for the genders, would you then also be saying “let’s hush-hush this halacha and not say it out loud – and we should totally ignore it”?
February 29, 2016 11:03 pm at 11:03 pm #1139518newbeeMember“Say a boat with all strangers is sinking that you have nothing to do with or even know who anyone is, for example. Or any situation where between two people you have nothing other than the kedima stated in halacha.”
There has not been a case in the past 100 years I am aware of where a man was saved over a woman and the woman was left to drown or a yisroel was saved before a convert because of any halacha. Not one case. If there has been a case please tell me I would sincerely like to know.
February 29, 2016 11:13 pm at 11:13 pm #1139519JosephParticipantI guess the rabbonim 100 years ago had a Vatican Council and repealed parts of the Shulchan Aruch. I’m not aware of someone being declared a mamzer or any number of other types of halacha l’maaisa situations; so if I’m not aware of it “obviously” it never happened and the halacha became rusty and inapplicable. Otherwise when it happened the person who followed it would’ve made a klap on the bima to announce he followed it and it would’ve been reported in the Hamodia.
February 29, 2016 11:15 pm at 11:15 pm #1139520newbeeMemberI was not saying hush hush it, a roshe yeshiva said that. I personally think if it is the halacha and no one knows about it it should be taught to hatzola and doctors and made public in every young israel since no one knows about it.
But saying I dont like it is like saying I dont like the halacha that allows me to enslave a human being, breed him with another slave against his will and keep his children as slaves after he is set free.
Halacha changes. Situations change with every generation. If it is truly halacha lemeisa you have to tell me why you cant tell me ONE time it was EVER practiced or why every Rabbi I ask says we dont follow it.
February 29, 2016 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm #1139522Sam2ParticipantJoseph: I looked at Igros Moshe CM 1:4 and 2:4. Nothing about what you claim is mentioned there.
February 29, 2016 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm #1139523newbeeMemberIts not my own “boich sevora bubbe maaisa” I literally emailed a rov, asked mine in person, and called a halacha hotline. They all told me the same thing.
February 29, 2016 11:37 pm at 11:37 pm #1139524Sam2Participantnewbee: The Shulchan Aruch and Aruch Hashulchan prove Joseph wrong. They say nothing about Kohanim nowadays not counting.
February 29, 2016 11:52 pm at 11:52 pm #1139525JosephParticipantSam: It is in the 4th volume of the Igros Moshe. I can try to find the maare makom if you’d like. I said nothing about Kohanim in particular. All I said was reference the Shulchan Aruch, Shach, Taz and Rav Moshe.
newbee: Which halacha hotline. I’d like to give them a call, lol.
February 29, 2016 11:55 pm at 11:55 pm #1139526newbeeMemberI quoted the chelkas yaakov, rambam and taz about the kohanim having a lesser status today. But its good you looked into the igros about what Yoseph hatzadik was saying.
March 1, 2016 12:01 am at 12:01 am #1139527newbeeMember“I’m not aware of someone being declared a mamzer”
Thats a great example of how certain halacha works. Rabbis found a way not to declare people mamzerim and sell our chametz and build an eruv.
“made a klap on the bima to announce he followed it and it would’ve been reported in the Hamodia”
Im pretty sure there is a difference between that and about never hearing about this happening once- ever in modern history. If a woman was left to drown even once I am sure we would have heard about.
March 1, 2016 12:16 am at 12:16 am #1139528JosephParticipantNo you wouldn’t have heard about it, in all likelihood.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.