[Avodah] Brain Death

[David Riceman]

RMB:

<<My point is that there are two, or perhaps three issues here:

1- Chai vs meis, which for all we know may not be a physical issue.<snip>

2- Diagnosis --<snip>

2b- Chazaqah --<snip>

I still think the machloqes is on the first level.>>

And I think it's on the second level.

An interesting methodological question is whether we can find evidence about which of these opinions is correct.  I tried to do that with the example of the drowned husband, arguing that, according to your opinion, that is equally appropriate as a definition.  You responded

<<that's a
different question.

Someone who almost definitely drowned is meis by whatever that word means.
The question of being very specific in our definitions isn't the central
one to knowing whether or not this woman is an almanah.>>

The problem with this argument is, again, the tshuvah of RMF which RAM cited.  He argues there that, by definition, someone who has been decapitated is dead, and cites ma'amarei Hazal as evidence.  According to you, what's the point?  Someone who has been decapitated is also "meis by whatever that word means".  And in Hazal's time someone whose heart had stopped beating for a sufficient length of time was
"meis by whatever that word means".

If you insist that Hazal must have defined death somewhere, you need a method to distinguish definition from description, and you need to justify that method.

Incidentally, in my previous post I should have cited Shlomoh HaMelech (Koheles 3:19 - - "k'mos zeh kein mos zeh") rather than RMF.

David Riceman