Page 40 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Magenta
him: Father, your decree is worse than that of Pharaoh, for Pharaoh
only decreed death on the males and you cut off the lives of both
the boys and the girls. Moreover, Pharaoh decreed death only in this
world, and you decreed both in this world and in the World to Come.
Rashi explains her words as follows: While Pharaoh sought to kill the
babies in this world, after which they would come to the World to
#
Come, by preventing their births, you do not allow them to reach the
World to Come as well.
Thus, bringing children into the world is good for them even if
they are drowned right after birth. The fact that they were born enti-
tles them to the World to Come. Likewise we can say that it is better
for a baby to be born, even with blemishes, for the child will merit
eternal life in the World to Come.
As we cited in Sefer Toras Hayoledes (Ch. 37, Note 9), upon the
birth of a blind baby, or a baby lacking a limb, lame, or suffering from
a cleft lip and palate, it is possible that one recites the bracha of Hatov
Vehameitiv. What does it matter if he is handicapped?! The child may
grow up to be a great Torah scholar, such as Rav Yosef who was blind
and Nachum Ish Gamzu who was handicapped and whose merit
protected the entire Jewish People!
There is a question about whether or not one recites the bracha fol-
lowing the birth of a baby with Down’s syndrome. The joy in general
is the fact that a soul from Heaven has come into the world, bringing
closer the coming of the Mashiach who will only arrive once all the
souls in Heaven have been placed in human bodies (Yevamos 62b).
According to this, it seems appropriate for the parents to thank Hash-
em by reciting the bracha. Furthermore, the parents are also fulfilling
the mitzvah of procreation and, according to one view, the child can
be counted for a minyan when he becomes bar mitzvah (see Responsa
Maharil #196).
One Torah scholar says that since the boy certainly exempts his
mother from chalitzah, as he is considered a continuation of his fa-
ther’s name, therefore, the father should recite the bracha of Hatov
Vehameitiv for his handicapped son. But the blessing of Shehecheyanu,
which reflects a joyous heart, should not be recited. In practice, my
34 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 2 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:01 | SR:-- | Black
The question is, does Chazal’s exemption of payment for damages 2
apply only to a physician who heals illnesses or relieves pains, or also
to an optician who prepares glasses to enable the patient to see better?
Moreover, even if we rule that an optician is not included in
Chazal’s exemption, one can still exempt him from paying in a human
court because he did not actively cause damage with his hands but
by indirect causation (g’rama). Since he simply wrote a prescription
which resulted in the damage, the doctor may be halachically exempt
from payment.
On the other hand, one can obligate him to pay for damages based
on the law regarding a mazik begarmi (very indirect causation, cause
of a cause) who was paid for his work. As we learned in maseches
Bava Kamma 99b: “If one shows a coin to a moneychanger and the
latter erred in his evaluation of the coin, if the coin owner already
paid the moneychanger and also said to him” ‘I am relying on you’, the
moneychanger is obligated to pay. This is the ruling in the Shulchan
Aruch (Choshen Mishpat #306:6) as well. It applies even if the error
was completely unintentional, since the owner of the coin explicitly
told him he was relying on his advice.
This may apply in our case as well, for anyone who comes to an
eye doctor relies on the number for the lenses that the doctor gives
him. Therefore perhaps it is considered to be garmi and the doctor is
obligated to pay by a human court, even though he did not directly
damage with his hands. All this applies only if the doctor received
payment. (An expert doctor who works for nothing is exempt from
payment. As the Gemara rules, if the expert moneychanger in the
above scenario had worked for free, he would have been exempt from
paying the damages incurred as a result of his error.)
The Kesef Hakodashim (Choshen Mishpat #25:1) writes as follows:
A moreh hora’ah (rabbinic decisor) who erred in his ruling,
and as a result caused a loss - if he has reached the level of
being a moreh hora’ah, although he is not ordained, he is
halachically considered an expert and thus is exempt from
payment if he made a mistake. If a shochet testified that
Error in Refraction Measurements 2 51
#