[Avodah] Threats Against A Judge

[kennethgmiller at juno.com]

I wrote: 
> 1) It seems to me that the prohibiton against murder DOES
> require mesiras nefesh by its very nature: "Who knows whose
> blood is redder?"

R' Micha Berger commented:
> I fail to undertand what you're saying. How does your
> question make shefichas dam more about mesiras nefesh than AZ
> or gilui arayos? What the question you quote shows is why one
> should be moseir nefesh, why this made it to the list of 3.
> But how does it define the very nature of refusing to kill?

It is because both murder and mesiras nefesh involve a loss of life. Therefore one can easily get into a logical discussion about when they conflict.

But AZ and arayos do not involve a loss of life. Therefore weighing them against mesiras nefesh is going to be a more complicated discussion. The discussion *can* take place, but it will be more involved than the simpler case, which I will present now:

R' Zev Sero's response to my comment was:
> It is perfectly logical to put self-preservation above the
> duty not to kill others. My blood may not be redder than yours
> on an absolute scale, but it's redder to ME. My first duty is
> to myself and my own, and therefore if preserving my life, or
> those of my children, means taking yours, then that is what I
> will do.

RZS is treating self-preservation as an important factor in these decisions. I don't. Self-preservation is a desire and an instinct, not a moral imperative.

"It is perfectly logical to put self-preservation above the duty not to kill others." Logical? No, sir. Logic is impartial. Killing is either okay for all, or wrong for all. Logic will not allow killing to be okay for me but wrong for you.

There are many factors which must be weighed when deciding whether an action is Right or Wrong. But my personal negios must not be among them. If murder is reprehensible, then it is reprehensible regardless of which side of the gun I'm on. Who says my blood is redder? I have no right to save my life at someone else's expense!

The case of a rodef is different. His actions cheapen life, and it is not unfair to value his life according to his valuation. The result is that yes indeed, my life *is* more valuable, and he forfeits his.

Or have I misunderstood the whole "whose blood is redder" argument?

Akiva Miller

PS: In the course of writing the above, I recalled a recent discussion very relevant to this very question. I remember a discussion about a criminal who has been justly sentenced to death, by a proper Beis Din, for a crime which he did commit. If he has an opportunity to escape, should he do so? Perhaps the Torah *does* recognize self-preservation as an absolute value? Anyone remember where that discussion was?

____________________________________________________________
Click for a free comparison of top mortage lenders.  Save now.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/PnY6rbv8ImBjOehOmVQZQ4OZx4TEOiCH8gF0yjras416QBy9J9GOG/