Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 41

Sat, 26 Jan 2008

• 1. Re: assisted suicide (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 2. Re: assisted suicide (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: assisted suicide (Shmuel Weidberg)
• 4. Re: assisted suicide (Shmuel Weidberg)
• 5. Re: assisted suicide (Zev Sero)
• 6. assisted suicide (Stadlan, Noam)
• 7. Re: assisted suicide (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Re: assisted suicide (Rich, Joel)
• 9. Re: assisted suicide (Rich, Joel)
• 10. Re: assisted suicide (Rich, Joel)
• 11. Praying for the end (Jonathan Baker)
• 12. Re: assisted suicide (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 13. Re: assisted suicide (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 14. Re: assisted suicide (Michael Makovi)
• 15. standing for aseret hadibrot (Eli Turkel)
• 16. Re: Is spam kosher? (Richard Wolpoe)

R' Joel Rich,in response to posts from R"n Toby Katz, wrote:
> ... we know in certain circumstances one can pray for one
> or another's death - why isn't this called hastening? ...
> In fact couldn't one argue that the prayer to the creator
> is more effective and thus more of a life shortner?

When one prays for a death, he is merely expressing his desires, and making a request, to Hashem. But it is Hashem Who will make the decision and carry it out. In contrast, when one does an act, he is essentially forcing Hashem's hand, because Hashem's only choices will be between having the person die, or doing a miracle of some sort.

(There do seem to be some cases where Hashem chooses to keep the person alive, despite the actions of others. I suspect that Karen Ann Quinlan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Ann_Quinlan) might be a good example of this. But because of "ain somchin al hanes", those cases are irrelevant to this discussion.)

Thus, I do not see that praying for someone's death could be considered as murder or any sort of derivative of it, because one is not DOING anything at all. Contrary to what RJR wrote, prayer is much *less* effective than taking a knife and doing something with it.

In the case of praying for someone else's death, it seems to me that the worst he might be guilty of, is praying for a bad thing. Of course, the individual sees the situation and considers the death to be a good thing, or at least not as bad as the continued life. It is quite possible that he is wrong, but I'd hope that his prayer would include the usual "l'tovah" caveats, that Hashem should fulfill the prayer only if it is indeed for the best.

In the case of a person praying for his own death, it seems to me that there could be an additional problem, that of being ungrateful for possible future good things, however small they might be. That's only my opinion, however, and I admit that the halacha does recognize that a person's life could be so difficult that he is justified in asking for it to end.

That might answer R' Michael Makovi's question:
> Indeed, Rabbi Akiva refused to hasten his death and avoid
> the pain of being burnt alive. Apparently pain is not enough?

No, just because he refused to hasten his death, that does not prove that it was forbidden to hasten his death. It is possible that he was allowed, but chose not to. It is possible that despite an incredible amount of pain, a person's desire to live might be even yet stronger.

To change the topic slightly, I would suggest that there is a middle level between a regular death (a clear maaseh) and merely praying for a death (which is not a maaseh at all). And that is the case of "removing an impediment". Rama YD 339:1 explains that this is not a maaseh at all, but (it seems to me) it does "force Hashem's hand" (as I wrote above in the firsst paragraph) and it bothers me very much that we should be allowed to do that. I concede that it may not meet the *technical* definition of a maaseh, but it sure *looks* like one, and it bothers me that we are "relying" on such technicalities to "allow" a person to die.

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Click to help a good cause and make a difference
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3ngVu6nr9oUYvq3teyor097D8kfYPDGFlbZrHgV2x0dbi9hY/

One side-note I noticed in this thread...

We seem to be developing an argument against lumping tefillah under
the ruberic of "hishtadlus" along with physically trying via teva. It
looks like we found a case where one is permissible and the other,
not.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

On Jan 25, 2008 2:07 PM, kennethgmiller@juno.com
<kennethgmiller@juno.com> wrote:
> To change the topic slightly, I would suggest that there is a middle level between a regular death (a clear maaseh) and merely praying for a death (which is not a maaseh at all). And that is the case of "removing an impediment". Rama YD 339:1 explains that this is not a maaseh at all, but (it seems to me) it does "force Hashem's hand" (as I wrote above in the firsst paragraph) and it bothers me very much that we should be allowed to do that. I concede that it may not meet the *technical* definition of a maaseh, but it sure *looks* like one, and it bothers me that we are "relying" on such technicalities to "allow" a person to die.

I don't think that you will find that it is MUTAR to remove an
impediment, only that you are POTUR if you do so.

Regards,
Shmuel

On Jan 25, 2008 2:17 PM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> We seem to be developing an argument against lumping tefillah under
> the ruberic of "hishtadlus" along with physically trying via teva. It
> looks like we found a case where one is permissible and the other,
> not.

I don't really understand why it was proper for the chachamim to daven
that Choni Hameagel should die. Couldn't they have davened that he
come to terms with the fact that he lived in a new generation and had
to make new friends?

Regards,
Shmuel

Shmuel Weidberg wrote:

> I don't really understand why it was proper for the chachamim to daven
> that Choni Hameagel should die. Couldn't they have davened that he
> come to terms with the fact that he lived in a new generation and had
> to make new friends?

Be that as it may, the gemara certainly approves of Rebbi's maid's
actions. 


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

One of the standard halachic approaches to refusal of care is that if a
patient has a terminal illness(usually defined as life expectancy less than
a year) then refusing medical care that does not have a high likelihood of
significantly extending life, especially if it is painful or involves
significant side effects, is an acceptable option.  Similarly, medication or
treatment that alleviate suffering are permissible, even if they have the
potential to kill or shorten the life.  However, administering medication
with the express purpose of killing is obviously forbidden.  Many frum jews,
with rabbinic agreement, forego invasive and painful treatment when it is
clear that the treatment will not result in significant extension of
life(even if they may get a few more months of life if they had the
treatment).

On the discussion of extension of 'natural life', one has a basic obligation
to take care of one's body-shemor nafshecha me'od, and that usually is
accepted to include not only staying away from harmful things(smoking), but
also being proactive in taking care of your body.  Therefore, if there is a
medication that will significantly help your health, unless it causes
significant distress or side effects, I believe you have a halachic
obligation to take it.  Taking your heart medication, diabetes medication,
hypertension medication, daily aspirin, etc. all would fall under taking
care of your body, and are a halachic obligation.  I think a life-extending
drug would fall under the same umbrella.  

Noam Stadlan (MD)

 

JRich@Sibson.com wrote:


>> I think the problem with suicide is that your life belongs to Hashem.
>> Only he has the right to give and take it away. So if he listens to 
>> your tefillos, you were within your rights, as was He.

> perhaps, or perhaps one could say that he's within his rights not to 
> take medicine and if hashem let's him die because of it, then he was 
> within his rights and no harm no foul.

Well, yes.  Does anyone say otherwise?

That it's permitted to pray for the end to come is clear in the gemara.
Not just for oneself but for someone else.

Is there anyone who paskens that one must take medicine to extend beyond
its natural term a life one doesn't want to live?  Surely the only
question we're discussing here is that of active measures to
*shorten* life by human hands.


-- 
Zev Sero             
================================
For ease of discussion change medicine to food.
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

 


R' Joel Rich,in response to posts from R"n Toby Katz, wrote:
> ... we know in certain circumstances one can pray for one or another's

> death - why isn't this called hastening? ...
> In fact couldn't one argue that the prayer to the creator is more 
> effective and thus more of a life shortner?

When one prays for a death, he is merely expressing his desires, and
making a request, to Hashem. But it is Hashem Who will make the decision
and carry it out. In contrast, when one does an act, he is essentially
forcing Hashem's hand, because Hashem's only choices will be between
having the person die, or doing a miracle of some sort.
=====================================
Any more "miraculous" then someone dieing earlier than he should have
due to prayer?  What if the physician set a machine in motion that had a
50/50 chance of killing the patient and said now it's up to Hashem?

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

 

I don't think that you will find that it is MUTAR to remove an
impediment, only that you are POTUR if you do so.

Regards,
Shmuel
_______________________________________________

Interesting-Sources? Are you saying would be chayav at some level in
shamayim?

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

I don't really understand why it was proper for the chachamim to daven
that Choni Hameagel should die. Couldn't they have davened that he come
to terms with the fact that he lived in a new generation and had to make
new friends?

Regards,
Shmuel
_______________________________________________
IIRC Choni prayed for his own death (which was the source of my original
issue)
KT
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

RZS:
>RSW:
>> I think the problem with suicide is that your life belongs to Hashem.
>> Only he has the right to give and take it away. So if he listens to
>> your tefillos, you were within your rights, as was He.

>That it's permitted to pray for the end to come is clear in the gemara.
>Not just for oneself but for someone else.

Huh.  That's interesting.  Where in the gemara?  The way it was explained
to my mother, when her mother was almost completely senile, with occasional
lucid moments marked by crying at "look how far I've fallen", was that she
could not pray for her mother to die, but she could pray for an end to her
mother's suffering - and it was clear she was suffering, when she had the
seichel to understand what was happening to her.

But to actively pray for the end?

--
        name: jon baker              web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
     address: jjbaker@panix.com     blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:07:35 +0200
"Michael Makovi" <mikewinddale@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Perhaps King Shaul's fear was not the pain of dying at their hands
> > (i.e. he killed himself to avoid the torture), but rather the
> > desecration of his body and the chillul hashem of it being davka the
> > king (i.e. he killed himself to avoid not the pain itself, but the
> > humiliation after his death)?
> > Mikha'el Makovi
> 
> Indeed, Rabbi Akiva refused to hasten his death and avoid the pain of
> being burnt alive. Apparently pain is not enough?

Do you mean R. Hanina B. Tradyon [Avodah Zarah 18a]?  If so, don't
forget that he allowed (and perhaps we could say encouraged) the
Kalazt'nori to hasten his death.

> Whereas on Masada and during the Crusades and pogroms, Jews committed
> suicide rather than be faced with conversion and such, because dying
> at their hands en masse would be chillul hashem. Likewise when they'll
> desecrate your body.

The issue is quite controversial.  See, e.g., Dr. Hayim
Soloveitchik's "Halakhah, Hermeneutics and Martyrdom in Medieval
Ashkenaz", JQR V94 N1 Winter 2004; I'm actually currently in the middle
of a long blog post on the issue.


> Mikha'el Makovi

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat

R' Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> I recall seeing in Generation to Generation by R' Dr.
> Twerski that his father refused medical treatment that
> might have prolonged his life a bit.

A similar case would be when Rav Moshe Feinstein declined to get a pacemaker until Rav Tendler was able to convince him that it would not render him a baal mum and unfit for the Sanhedrin.

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Click to discover the secret to promoting your business and make millions.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m53yEMs9B7daPM7QFw0TptrNDXRDidL3rW0LwE2TevIyyXg/

> I recall seeing in Generation to Generation by R' Dr. Twerski that his
> father refused medical treatment that might have prolonged his life a bit.
> Where would that come in the equation? (The obvious difference is that it's
> Shev V'al Taaseh.)
>
> KT,
> MYG

Do a search on Aish.com for Terry Schiavo, and you'll find several
articles by an MD on the halachot of ending a life.

One of the distinctions is between a terminal illness and a terminally
debilitating illness. In the former, the illness itself kills, such as
Alzheimer's in the very final stage. In the latter, the person is
completely stable and could live a normal lifespan; for example,
Schiavo.

In a terminal illness, a person can refuse treatment if it will
prolong suffering with little chance of helping or curing. But in a
terminally debilitating illness, the only way to kill the person is by
cutting food or such, because the illness itself will not kill the
person (and there's no treatment whose denial wil cause death).

Mikha'el Makovi

Rambam has a famous teshuva prohibiting standing for aseter hadibrot
and making it special. If memory serves me ROY has teshuva paskenng
that way for modern day sefardim.
In Madrid not only did they stand but they said some special piyut
before hand. Does anyone know of other minhagim

BTW RYBS has a very nice piece justifying standing in spite of the Rambam
based on the fact that we use taam elyon to layn the aseret hadibrot

-- 
Eli Turkel

On Jan 25, 2008 7:38 AM, Simon Montagu <simon.montagu@gmail.com> wrote:

> (No, not the canned meat)
>
> Have any posekim addressed the question of whether sending unsolicited
> bulk emails is asur? If so, would unsolicited email containing Talmud
> Torah be an exception, or a mitzva habaa mitoch aveira?
>


Apply the simple rule
D'alach snei tlechacrach lo saavid.

If you THINK you don't mind and that others don't mind it should be ok
Otheiwise, no



-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080125/e8e2aa58/attachment.html 

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 41
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."