Zev Sero wrote: > Nor is kibush ha'aretz listed, and yet it's completely obvious that it > does > override pikuach nefesh. This may be true (it's a machloketh), but it's certainly not "completely obvious". See Sefer haHinnuch #425, Minhath Hinnuch ad. loc. s.v. "v'chathav harav ham'haber" (#3 in the M'chon Yerushalayim edition). David Riceman