Page 288 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta
danger the public in the future. But if he will not do so again, then we
are not permitted to hand him over. And the Chazon Ish refers only
to a situation where if they do not hand him over, the gentiles will kill
all of them, including him, and not to a situation where he would be
saved.
#
1 AnsweR to Question 2
Regarding the question of whether or not it is permissible to change
the date of death on the report, so that they bury the deceased on 9 private letter addressed to another person would certainly constitute
that day, it seems to me that it is a mitzvah to report an incorrect
date so that the deceased be buried on that day. However, if there is a
possibility of chillul Hashem, the physician should not do so.
We learn this in maseches Yevamos (79a) where the Sages ask: If it
says (Devarim 24:16): ”The fathers shall not be put to death for the
children,” then why did the sons of King Shaul die because he at-
tacked the people of Givon? The Gemara answers: Said Rabbi Chiya
bar Abba and Rav Yochanan: It is preferable that one letter of the To-
rah be uprooted than that Hashem’s name be desecrated. And it also
says that ”And Ritzpah, daughter of Ayah, took sackcloth and spread
it for her upon the rock from the beginning of the harvest until water
was poured upon them from Heaven. And she did not allow neither
from the birds in the sky to rest on them by day, nor the beast of the
field by night” (Shmuel II 21:10). And the Gemara asks: But is it not
written (Devarim 21:23): ”You shall not leave his carcass on the tree
unburied.”? The Gemara answers: Rav Yochanan said in the name of
Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: It is better that a letter of the Torah
be uprooted so that Hashem’s name be sanctified. [Since Shaul’s sons
were left hanging on the trees] passersby were inquiring: What kind
of men are these? These are royal princes, they were told. What did
they do? They laid hands on deficient converts (the Givonim), they
were told. “There is no other such nation that is worthy of having
others join it!” they would then exclaim.
Thus, in order to sanctify Hashem’s name, they violated the prohi-
bition of “Do not let his body hang on the tree overnight unburied.”
282 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 9 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Black
he allowed to open it, in order to find out what the gentile is planning
and possibly save himself from harm?
In order to answer this question, we would need to understand
the underlying basis of Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree. Is it because the
Torah says: “And you shall love your brother as yourself ” (Vayikra
19:19), which the Sages interpret to mean “What is hateful to you,
do not do to your friend” (maseches Shabbos 31a)? If so, this prohi-
bition only applies to Jews but not to gentiles. Or, perhaps he made
this decree because of the prohibition against deception? Reading a
deceiving him. This prohibition would apply to a gentile as well (as
ruled in Choshen Mishpat #228:4).
There is a third explanation of Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree. The
author of Responsa Toras Chaim (by the Maharchash, Part 3 #46)
writes that it is prohibited because of stealing. One who borrows
something without the owner’s knowledge has transgressed the pro-
hibition of stealing. If this is the basis of the decree, then it would
also apply to a gentile, because the prohibition of stealing does not
distinguish between a Jew and a gentile.
Accordingly, the Chikekei Lev wrote regarding a Jew who wants to
read a gentile’s letter in order to save himself from possible harm, that
it seems that Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree does not apply to this type
of person, but one should ensure that the gentile does not discover
that he read his letter.
To review, there are three reasons why it is prohibited to open a let-
ter: a) Because “You shall love your fellowman as yourself ”, b) because
of the issur of deception, c) because it is like borrowing without the
owner’s knowledge, which is considered stealing.
In our case, where Dr. Shimon already opened Dr. Reuven’s letter
by mistake, and the question is only whether he is allowed to relate
what he saw in the letter, the first two reasons do not apply. To “love
one’s fellow as oneself ” does not apply, since he is not damaging him,
but will cause him to be paid more in Israel. So, too, deception does
not apply since he looked at the letter by mistake.
I presented all of the above to my father-in-law, Rav Y. S. Elyashiv
Physician wants to reveal secret 2 251
#