Page 300 - 20818_park-c_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Magenta
#
the Torah gives a woman seven days of ritual purity, for recovery after
she has ceased bleeding, so too for the baby boy.
The Aruch L’ner in Yevamos (71b, s.v. b’Gemara be’inan) writes that
according to one opinion, the seven days that we wait for a baby after
its temperature has receded are not because of concern for danger,
but because it is so decreed by the Torah. Therefore, even if we accept
the words of the physicians that there is no danger, nevertheless, one
waits seven days because of the decree of the Torah.
The Sefer Yad David (by the Av Beis Din of Karlin, cited in S’dei
Chemed, Kuntres Hametzitzah) deals with the issue of physicians
who, based on their knowledge and experience, contradict our Sages.
He explains that there are things that the Sages accepted as “halacha
given to Moshe at Sinai,” and remedies that they discovered from
“the secrets of Hashem are with those who fear Him.” These types
of things will never change, regardless of what the physicians say.
However, there are remedies that became known to the Sages of the
Talmud from medical practitioners, such as Rav Yochanan’s remedy
for the illness tsafdina, which he learned from a Roman matron, as
explained in Tractate Yoma (84a). This type of thing may be subject
to change over time.
The Sefer Nishmas Chaim (Feinsilver, #34) deals with the story
of a baby who fell from the hands of the kvatter as he was taking
him to be circumcised. There was a possibility that the baby had
internal wounds, because the kvatter was very tall. He ruled that it
is forbidden to circumcise the baby until the physicians declare him
to be healthy. Then he considered whether it was permissible to rely
on the physicians in this matter. According to Tosfos (in Chullin 42a,
s.v. ve’amar) treifos in animals and humans are the same, and since it
is “halacha given to Moshe at Sinai” that an animal that has fallen re-
quires examination to see if there is any damage to its internal organs,
or one must see the animal walking on its feet, how is it possible to
circumcise a baby before it walks on its legs?
We must point out that the Divrei Malkiel (Vol. 2 #131) says that
it is forbidden to extract a drop of blood of circumcision from a baby
who was born circumcised if he has pain in his eyes. The main danger
286 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
of the Torah, because the Torah comes to teach us that causing one’s 10
child to transgress Shabbos is a serious prohibition which is compared
to idolatry. According to this, it is forbidden for a father to instruct
his young son to do prohibited acts on Shabbos even if it is to save an
organ or limb. According to the other Acharonim, such as the Melo
Haro’im and the Imrei Binah (cited in Responsa Achiezer, ibid) who
answer the Mutzal Me’eish in other ways, it is likely that the prohibi-
tion of “your son” is not as stringent as idolatry. This requires further
study.
The Chochmas Shlomo (#228 on #46) was asked about someone
who was stricken with partial blindness. The doctors gave up on find-
ing a cure for him. Then he heard about a gentile hospital willing to
accept him and to find him a remedy that would prevent him from
becoming completely blind, on condition that he eat their treif food.
Was he permitted to go to this hospital? He ruled that only the eye
that has fallen out is considered a danger to life. Blindness is consid-
ered a danger only to a specific organ, and it is prohibited to violate
Torah prohibitions for an organ in danger. It thus seems that the
Chochmas Shlomo does not agree with the views of the Pri Megadim
and Eglei Tal because, according to them, specifically Shabbos is not
set aside because of danger to an organ, but not so other prohibitions.
If so, according to them it would be permissible to eat non-kosher
food in order to save an organ or limb.
1 SuMMaRy and Conclusion
If someone’s finger was cut off his hand, it is probably permissible to
reattach it on Shabbos, because the person is in danger. Due to the
danger to an organ- the finger itself- the Rabbinic rule of violating
the least severe prohibition is set aside, and one can save him from
the danger, even by having to violate numerous prohibitions while
reattaching the finger. This requires further study.
Reattaching finger on Shabbos 2 295