[Avodah] Murder a Chok or Logically Compelling

[Rabbi Meir G. Rabi]

R' M Poppers  provided the following -
 "lo tirtzach" is a great example of r'tzon haBorei rather than of a
common-sense law -- as quoted b'sheim RYDS/the Rav z'l' (see

> > https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/02/chukim-mishpatim-no-difference/),
>
Where this illustration is offered
people stranded on a boat, where rescue is most unlikely. All will die of
starvation unless they kill one (or one volunteers - would it be a Mitzvah
for this person to kill themselves?) and the others will survive by
consuming this person's flesh.
Logic concludes that since they're anyway going to die, they ought to
choose life by randomly choosing one to kill.
Torah however rules that this is prohibited as murder, a gezeirat ha’katuv.

How do we know this is the Toirah ruling?
It is clear from Rashi (74a near the bottom of the page) Mai Chazis; "what
makes your blood redder than the other fellow's" that HKBH sees no
difference between one life or the other, the prohibition of murder is the
same be it a Rosh Yeshivah or an Am HaArets. However, it is clear that in
the eyes of HKBH, the death of two is worse than the death of one. If
however, the enforcer is threatening to kill him and his family unless he
kills the target, the Halacha is that he kills the target.


Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.74a.20?lang=bi&with=Rashi
Gemara asks: *From where do we* derive this *halakha* with regard to *a
murderer himself,* that one must allow himself to be killed rather than
commit murder? The Gemara answers: *It is* based on *logical reasoning*
that one life is not preferable to another, and therefore there is no need
for a verse to teach this *halakha*. The Gemara relates an incident to
demonstrate this: *As* when *a certain person came before Rabba and said to
him: The lord of my place,* a local official, *said to me: Go kill
so-and-so, and if not I will kill you, what shall I do? Rabba said to him:
It is preferable that he should kill you and you should not kill. Who is to
say that your blood is redder than his, that your life is worth more than
the one he wants you to kill? Perhaps that man’s blood is redder. This
logical reasoning is the basis for the halakha that one may not save his
own life by killing another.*
Rashi
https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.74a.20?lang=bi&with=Rashi
my translation
It is logically compelling because either way there is loss of only one
life [DeLeKa Ellah Chada Ibbud Neshamah] and the sin of murder, so he may
not transgress; because the Toirah [although it usually] commands that we
transgress in order to live [VaCahy Bahem] this is because HKBH values the
life of a Yid. However, here, since there is anyway a loss of a Y's life,
why might it be permitted to murder? Who can say that HKBH loves one life
more than another? Therefore, HKBHs command may not be transgressed.

BTW if childbirth presents with complications that jeopardizes the mother's
life, we save the m by killing the baby because the baby is not yet a
'life'.
However, once the baby is born, i.e. most of the head has emerged, it is a
'life' and we may not make the decision of which life to save, the b or the
m.
However, it would appear from Rashi [and I do not know if this is possible]
if both babies have emerged, it is now a Q of saving one or two lives, we
save two lives.
Are cojoined babies with two heads one or two lives?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20240806/e89fadb1/attachment.htm>