Page 299 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta
#
#
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 10 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Black
money based on the fact that she is ill, she cannot do so because the than violate a negative precept. The Shach (#103) writes: “And if there
Gemara does not address that. Moreover, the Maharsham rules that is danger to one of his limbs, we would need to examine whether this
all the above is not the halachah. is likened to giving up money or giving up life… and it seems to me,
that we would rule leniently.” (I.e., we would say that losing a limb is
1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions halachically like losing a life, and that one is not required to give up a
limb so as not to transgress a prohibition.)

1. It is permissible for a physician to certify sick leave based on the (What if a gentile threatened to amputate more of his arm than
possibility of physical collapse. This applies only if there is no necessary if he does not violate a prohibition? Is he allowed to violate
stipulation to the contrary from the authorities. a prohibition in order to prevent that amputation? This requires fur-
ther study.)
2. It seems that it is permissible to give a nursing woman a con- If a man tells his fellow, “Throw your hat into the fire and I will
firmation of illness in order to exempt her from paying a fine. pay you ten dinar for your courage,” it would most probably be per-
However, it is forbidden to do so in order to receive financial missible for him to throw his hat into the fire. This is not considered
benefits.
wasteful destruction because the fire will bring him benefit. However,
Informing someone that he is entitled to compensation if someone burns his store in order to receive compensation from the
insurance company, he transgresses the prohibition of stealing and
also the prohibition of wasteful destruction, since he burned the store
for no reason. Although he will claim compensation, this is pure de-
ception and is considered unjustified destruction of the store.
Likewise, since it is not justified to take money from the govern-
ment and from the insurance company for amputating an extra centi-
meter, this amputation is viewed as wasteful destruction.

1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions

1. He who amputates more than is necessary transgresses the sin
of deception and probably also violates the prohibition of injur-
ing.
2. If the physician amputates more than medically necessary, he
has to repent and to inform the government or the insurance
company.

304 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein Amputating a limb 2 293