Ulla’s Murderous Companion
“Yes! Cut Him Even Deeper ”
(Nedarim 22a)
The Gemara tells the story of Ulla’s trip to Eretz Yisrael, in which he was joined by two companions. During the course of the trip, an argument broke out between the two, and one of them rose up and murdered the other. The murderer then asked Ulla if he was right in killing his fellow. Ulla was loath to censure him. So instead, he replied, “Yes, you were right in killing him. You should cut him even deeper.”
When they arrived in Eretz Yisrael, Ulla visited R’ Yochanan and asked if he gave the correct response. Perhaps, he was guilty of encouraging the wicked. R’ Yochanan condoned Ulla’s response, since it was necessary to save his own life.
The Rishonim offer several explanations of what precisely occurred when Ulla condoned the murderer. Based on the variant explanations, a significant halachic debate seems to arise.
Mercy Killing
The Rosh (gloss on the Gemara) explains, in short, that “in Ulla’s fear, he condoned the murderer, also so that the victim should die quicker.” At first glance, this seems to mean that Ulla had two intentions in telling the murderer, “You should cut him even deeper.” Firstly, he pretended that he condoned the murder, in order to spare his own life. Secondly, he wanted to hasten the death of the victim, seemingly in order to spare the victim a slow and painful death. This explanation is difficult to understand in light of the great value the Torah places on every moment of life. We learn elsewhere (Yoma 85a) that we may desecrate Shabbos to preserve the life of a dying person, even for just a few moments. How then could Ulla have encouraged the murderer to kill his victim quicker to spare him the pain?
Saving One’s Own Life
Rather, we must offer a different interpretation of the Rosh: “In Ulla’s fear, he encouraged the murderer, and also [in his fear, he told the murderer to cut him deeper] so that the victim would die quicker” (see Teshuvos Tzitz Eliezer, 14:104). This implies that Ulla was so scared of the murderer that he actually encouraged him to kill the victim quicker, to convince him that he supported the murder. Accordingly, there is no proof from here that one may hasten the death of a dying person to spare him the pain of a slow death. Ulla did so only to preserve his own life.
This explanation also raises questions. It seems from here that to preserve one’s own life, one may cause the immediate death of a person who would anyway have died soon. In seeming contrast, we find a general rule that one may not kill another person to save his own life. “Why do you think your blood is redder than his?” asks the Gemara (Sanhedrin 74a). In other words, we are usually allowed to violate the laws of the Torah to preserve life, due to the verse, “You shall live by them” (Vayikra 18:5). We learn from this verse that Hashem does not wish us to die in the performance of the mitzvos. He values our lives more than he values the mitzvos (Rashi). However, there is no reason to assume that Hashem values the life of one person more than another. Therefore, when the violation of a mitzvah will lead to the death of another person, it is forbidden.
To explain our Gemara, an answer of far-reaching halachic significance seems to present itself. To save the life of a person who may continue to live for many years, it is permitted to hasten the death of a person who will in any case die soon. We see from here only that one may indirectly cause his death. One may certainly not kill him with his own hands. (Tiferes Yisrael, end of Yoma; Minchas Shlomo 2:86, p.263, #3. See also Minchas Chinuch 296:28; Meiri, Sanhedrin 72b).
Already Dead
This explanation of the Rosh is based on the assumption that the victim was still alive when Ulla told the murderer to cut him deeper. However, this is not necessarily the intention of the Rosh. An alternate explanation is found in the Meiri: “Ulla told the murderer to cut the victim deeper, as if he rejoiced in the murderer’s act and as if he was encouraging him to continue in an even more blatant manner. However, since the victim was already dead, cutting him deeper would have been pointless.”
In other words, since the victim was already dead, Ulla did not mean to tell the murderer to hasten his death. Rather, he wished to stress that he had absolutely no objection to it. Perhaps the Rosh meant to offer a similar explanation. Ulla encouraged the murderer to make the victim die quicker, pretending he thought the victim was still alive. However, Ulla knew that the victim was already dead, and therefore the deeper cut would make no difference.
The Shita Mekubetzes, however, explains that the victim was still alive at that time, and due to Ulla’s suggestion, the murderer hastened his death. Most simply, this also seems to be the Rosh’s intention.
In any case, it seems that our sugya presents a debate among the Rishonim about a far-reaching and controversial topic – whether or not one may indirectly hasten the death of a dying person to save the life of another.
