Hatzalah And Other First Responders
‘Your Life Takes Precedence …’
(Bava Metzia 62a)
Our daf cites a dispute regarding the case of two people stranded in the desert and one of them has a flask of water that contains only enough for one. Ben Paturah asserts that rather than drink all the water himself and witness his fellow’s death, it is better that he divide the contents and share it, even though now it will be insufficient to save either of them.
Rabbi Akiva disagrees and rules that the one who possesses the water should drink it all. He derives this from the text (Vayikra 25:36), “Vechai achicha imach – your brother shall live with you.” This implies that one’s own life takes precedence over that of another.
‘Ve’chai Bahem’
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 74a) derives from Vayikra 18:5, “Ve’chai bahem – that he shall live …” that one is not required to forfeit his life for the sake of fulfilling a mitzvah, because the verse implies that he shall live through the (observance of) the mitzvos and not that they should cause his death. (There are three notable exceptions: idolatry, murder and adultery.)
Aruch LaNer (to Yevamos 53b) questions Ben Paturah’s ruling. Even though saving one’s fellow from danger is a great mitzvah: “You shall not stand aside while your fellow’s blood is shed,” (Vayikra 19:16), – the verse “ve’chai bahem” teaches that one is not obligated to forfeit his life for the sake of performing a mitzvah.
Why, then, does Ben Paturah obligate a person to give away half his water for the sake of his friend’s life? Further, why does Rabbi Akiva not cite this verse (ve’chai bahem) to explain the precedence of one’s own life, instead of the one that he cited, “ve’chai achicha imach?” Why seek to formulate now from a different verse?
In answer, Maharam Shick (Yoreh De’ah 155) explains that the Gemara is not referring to a case where dividing the water will be the cause of imminent death for both of them.
Rather, there is a chance that each drinking half the water from the flask might indeed suffice to save them until they travel on. Perhaps then they might find water or they might be rescued.
Thus we see that the verse “ve’chai bahem” precludes sacrificing one’s life for a mitzvah.
Possible Danger
The dispute between Ben Paturah and Rabbi Akiva centers on the situation of safek sakana (possible danger to life). Ben Paturah would have the person place his own life in possible danger to save his fellow’s life. Rabbi Akiva disagrees and sees from the above-cited verse (“Your brother shall live with you”) a preclusion to placing oneself in a dangerous situation even where there is only a possibility of death.
Absolutes And No Absolutes
Mishna Berura (Orach Chayyim 329:sk19, citing Pischei Teshuva, Yoreh De’ah 426) in codifying this halacha, writes that nevertheless one should not automatically seek to excuse himself when his fellow is in danger.
In emergency situations there is very little time for deliberation. Only if there seems to be absolute certainty that rescuing another will cause a definitive danger to life should one refrain from doing so.
Hagahot Maimoniyot (cited by Beis Yosef to Tur, Choshen Mishpat 426) disputes this general halachic ruling and opines that one is indeed required to rescue another when there is only a doubt, a safek sakana.
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe, Yoreh De’ah Vol. 2:174) offers that though one is not halachically required to jeopardize one’s life to save another; nevertheless, if he wishes to do so it is permitted.
He Gave His Life
These rulings, among others, form the basis for decisions (during the Holocaust) by some of our great and sainted roshei yeshiva, among them Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman, zt”l, Hy”d, rosh yeshiva of Baranowitz, Poland, who had come to America to raise funds for his yeshiva and could have saved his own life by remaining and not returning to Europe, as he was advised. He decided that he was duty-bound to return to his beloved students. Unfortunately, he died a martyr’s death.
Another example of such self-sacrifice was Rabbi Chaim Shmulevitz, zt”l, rosh yeshiva of Yeshivas Mir in Jerusalem, also during World War II. Though the yeshiva had escaped war-torn Europe (through the noble efforts of the legendary Rabbi Avraham Kalmanowitz, zt”l, Mirrer rosh yeshiva, Brooklyn) it was now ensconced in Shanghai, China. There they were often at the mercy of the occupying powers, the Japanese authorities. In dealing with them on a daily basis, the rosh yeshiva was known for placing himself at times in great danger, as he cared for the needs of each one of his students.
In our time, as well, we find this same self-sacrifice, above and beyond the letter of the law, by the many members of rescue organizations, such as our local fire and police Departments and, of course, Hatzalah, who often place themselves in dangerous, life-threatening situations on our behalf.
