2

(This question was inspired by my comment on this question - Are you allowed to save a non-Jew's life on shabbos? (The comment is quoted at the bottom of my question.))

R. Simeon b. Menassia is quoted in Tractate Yoma 85b (Babylonian Talmud) as saying that it is better to desecrate one shabbat to save a Jew's life in order that s/he may live one more week in order to observe shabbat again.

I am seeking to determine whether or not this statement of R. Simeon applies even to Jews who are not sabbath-observers.

So, if one must break shabbos to save another Jew's life... What if the Jew whose life he is saving is that of a Jew who is not shomer shabbos? – Adam Mosheh Apr 11 at 4:09

(My question had gone by unanswered in that comment thread, so that is why I am asking it as a question here.)

Community
  • 1
Adam Mosheh
  • 6,025
  • 1
  • 34
  • 59
  • I'm not sure how I should phrase what I am seeking... "Jews who are not sabbath-observers" or "Jews who are not sabbath-observant"? Or is there no practical difference between the meanings of those two? – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 20:39
  • 2
    we know that this statement from Yoma doesn't hold strong nowadays, because we even desecrate shabbat for a non-Jew, who will keep no future shabbatot. – Baal Shemot Tovot Jun 13 '12 at 20:43
  • 5
    Are you assuming that a Jew who is not shomer shabbat never will be? – Monica Cellio Jun 13 '12 at 20:45
  • @MonicaCellio - I am talking about a Jew known to be a sabbath-desecrator. Maybe that is relevant stipulation. After all, mitzvot tzrichot kavanah implies that aveirot tzrichot kavanah. Perhaps the only reason why some people do not keep shabbat is because they need to work seven days a week in order to make a living. Other people might hate a Judaism that requires them to observe many "apparently" pointless rituals that have been commanded by a "God" Who exacts ultimate vengeance against sinners for every single transgression (even minor ones). (cont.) – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 20:52
  • @MonicaCellio - God does exact ultimate vengeance, but lovingly gives countless opportunities for doing teshuvah. Jews who do not keep shabbat may in the future, but not ones who deny that Shabbat is a commandment. That is what this is talking about. هه - Who said that any given non-Jew is never going to convert? I know it is not the traditional reason given, but maybe another possible reason why we save them is because there is potential that they would convert eventually. – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 20:55
  • @MonicaCellio Maybe we follow the majority (a majority of Jews who don't keep Shabbos didn't start to keep it) – ertert3terte Jun 13 '12 at 20:59
  • @ShmuelBrin - Could you please explain what you mean in your comment? It doesn't make sense to me... – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 21:00
  • @MonicaCellio - http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/17044/saving-a-jews-life-on-shabbos-if-s-he-does-not-observe-shabbos#comment37661_17044 - The answer is no. Please read my other comments (if you haven't already done so). – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 21:02
  • @MonicaCellio asked that how could one assume that a Jew will never keep Shabbos. Maybe he'll do Teshuva? (so perhaps one can save even a non-Shomer Shabbos Jew as he will later keep Shabbos). I answered that maybe we go after the majority. As a majority of people (unfortunately) did not do Teshuva, maybe one can assume Bechazaka that he will not do Teshuva later, and therefore your question still stands. – ertert3terte Jun 13 '12 at 21:03
  • @AdamMosheh even if you don't want to go by Rov, you can still ask in a case where the person was Mechalel Shabbos under the assumption that he will do Teshuva. It says about such a person that Hashem won't help him return, and it is very difficult to do so on one's own. Maybe there it could be more of a Chazaka (or Anan Sahadi) than even a Rov. – ertert3terte Jun 13 '12 at 21:05
  • @ShmuelBrin - I don't like your logic. How do you know that every Jew doesn't repent after every sin, but then their ta'avot (or something else) just twists their arm into forcing them to sin again? You are assuming that they are all mumarim, when that might not actually be the case. Hevey dan et kol ha-adam lekaf zekhut. – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 21:05
  • @ShmuelBrin, do you know of any other cases where we say "people don't usually do X, therefore we assume this person won't do X"? Drawing a conclusion for a community could be different from doing so for an individual, particularly when a life is at stake. – Monica Cellio Jun 13 '12 at 21:10
  • @ShmuelBrin - What is Anan Sahadi... Something in Aramaic about a witness...? And what is the difference whether or not they did Teshuva? According to the opinion that mitzvot EINAN tzrichot kavanah, it doesn't matter what they thought in their minds at all. And maybe they might even be embarrassed to admit that they did Teshuvah if they were not sure if they would be able to completely comply with what the the mitzvah demands of them. What is the status of a "partial Teshuvah" like that? – Adam Mosheh Jun 13 '12 at 21:11
  • @MonicaCellio, re "do you know of any other cases where we say 'people don't usually do X, therefore we assume this person won't do X'", yes, halacha says that about X=dying, if I'm not mistaken. – msh210 Jun 13 '12 at 22:30
  • 1
    @AdamMosheh my point is not regarding their place in olam habah. My point is just that if there is such an overwhelming majority (which is an annan sahadi [lit. we are witnesses, means that we can assume things as being true 100% without actually seeing it happen. For example, a woman is allowed to remarry if she heard that her husband was sent to Aushwitz, even though there were survivors]) against the chance that the person will become Shomer Shabbos, perhaps one can then ask your question. If not, (if we assume that one may become shomer Shabbos), then your question has no basis. – ertert3terte Jun 13 '12 at 23:29
  • quoting from ונתנה תקף the idea that anyone might do tshuva so who are we to ignore that possibility: כִּי אִם בְּשׁוּבו מִדַּרְכּו וְחָיָה וְעַד יום מותו תְּחַכֶּה לּו אִם יָשׁוּב מִיַּד תְּקַבְּלו. – rosends Jun 14 '12 at 00:12
  • I heard from a rabbi that what we say that it is in order that he keep many Shabasos, that is only to save him if he was captured but his life was not in danger; but if his life was in danger, we anyway save his life. I don't know his source. – b a Jun 14 '12 at 00:48
  • @AdamMosheh you're trying to tell me that we assume a non-Jew will convert but not that a Jew will return? – Baal Shemot Tovot Jun 14 '12 at 00:50
  • @msh210, in what context? Assessing the danger of something? (e.g. people don't usually die from fasting so we fast?) – Monica Cellio Jun 14 '12 at 01:24
  • @MonicaCellio I don't know what msh210 was referring to, but check out Sukkah 23 where it discusses whether we worry about people dying in certain cases (despite the apparent chazaka that they are alive). – Double AA Jun 14 '12 at 02:23
  • @ShmuelBrin Interesting psak about Auschwitz. Can you source that somewhere? – Double AA Jun 14 '12 at 02:23
  • @DoubleAA The Tshuva is here, http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=921&st=&pgnum=113 – ertert3terte Jun 14 '12 at 04:02
  • @DoubleAA A few pages earlier, however, he says that he relied on Rov (a person was sent on a transport to an extermination camp) only for the purposes of Chalitza. – ertert3terte Jun 14 '12 at 04:07
  • @هه - No, in fact even the opposite. – Adam Mosheh Jun 14 '12 at 08:10

2 Answers2

7

The gemara actually asks (basically) your question. A few lines later, Rava asks R. Simeon ben Menassia: based on your reasoning I understand why we break Shabbat when it will for sure lead to more net Shabbat observance. But how do you learn that we break Shabbat even when it is only doubtful that there will be more net Shabbat observance? Rava (and the conclusion of the gemara) thus rejects R. Simeon ben Menassia's logic as the real reason for the rule that we break Shabbat to save lives.

So yes, R. Simeon ben Menassia's proposal is incomplete; it does not prove the rule that the gemara wants and therefore is rejected.

Double AA
  • 98,894
  • 6
  • 250
  • 713
4

According to the Pri Megadim (OC 328 M”Z 6) we do not desecrate Shabbos in order to save the life of someone who publicly breaks Shabbos for his own enjoyment [as the Gemora (Eruvin 69b, Chullin 5a) considers such a person like a gentile]. However the Maharam Shik (OC 140) disagrees, and brings the Shu”t Chasam Sofer (YD 341) that even an idolater has thoughts of Teshuva at near death and similarly one who desecrates Shabbos, when he is in a life threatening situation will have thoughts of Teshuva and one is permitted to break Shabbos to save him; he concludes that one must use his discretion to discern whether the person at stake indeed had Teshuva thoughts. The Shu”t Kol Yehuda (Halperin Siman 7) differentiates between a Torah desecration of Shabbos (where we do not save him) and a Rabbinic desecration of Shabbos (where we do save him). The K’tzos Hashulchan (139 Badei Hashulchan 5) writes that from Mishna Berura 329:9 it seems that we would break Shabbos even for one who publicly desecrates Shabbos.

(Based on Mishna Berura Hamevuar (Oz Vehadar) on 359:9 footnote 48)

b a
  • 24,685
  • 2
  • 54
  • 112
Michoel
  • 18,944
  • 1
  • 57
  • 91
  • 2
    It seems like this discussion is missing an important modern component http://judaism.stackexchange.com/a/11733/759 – Double AA Oct 16 '12 at 02:39