- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I think it would be nice to talk in learning specifically the DAF YOMI since it bring all of Klall Yisroel together.
Yesterdays Daf Avodah Zara daf YUD CHES. The gemara tells us the Roman General asked Reb Chanina Vechulu , my question is why didn’t Reb Chanina ask him to save him? you see the Roman was moiser nefesh so what would be the difference?
The Gemara describes the tragic death of Rebbi Chanina Ben Teradyon. The Romans wrapped him in his Sefer Torah, surrounded him with bundles of branches, and ignited them. To make him suffer even more, they soaked sponges of wool in water and placed them on his heart so that his death would be slow and torturous. His students cried out, “Open your mouth and let the flame enter (so that you should not suffer)!” Rebbi Chanina replied, “It is better that the One who gave life should take it away, and let man not injure himself.” Rebbi Chanina in effect took his own life lifnim mishuras hadin, opening the entire question of whether martyrdom is permissible.
“my question is why didn’t Reb Chanina ask him to save him?”
With the other Roman solders around saving him would have been totally impossible. This is by any one solder, even one willing to sacrifice his own life.
“It is better that the One who gave life should take it away, and let man not injure himself.”
My best understanding is that when there is a requirement for martyrdom it is only for allowing oneself to be killed, not a requirement that one kills himself.
Josh31,
Tosfos to the daf (DH v’Al) says that when one is concerned that he will be forced to sin (such as by being tortured until he sins), he is permitted to kill himself. The Gemara in Gittin (57b) relates the tragic story of four hundred Jewish children who were captured and were being taken to be used for immoral purposes, who chose to drown themselves in the sea rather than to be forced to sin. According to the opinion of R’ Nachman Bar Yitzchak in Gittin 57b, it refers to Chachamim who give their lives for learning, which may clearly be the case with R’ Chanina.
Basically, where there is a question of yehareg v’ al yaavor, chosing death over violating the three cardinal sins of Judaism , as was the case with the children in Gittin 57b and R’ Chanina, the requirement does extend to active suicide, according to Rabbeinu Tam in the same Tosfos, citing the same story of the children in Gittin. The Chiddushei HaRitva here also allows such acts of suicide. Even in instances where one would be forced to violate even the smallest detail of observance, during times of persecution, martyrdom must be accepted; in a time of general persecution of Jews one should prefer martyrdom when required to transgress a law even in private(Sanhedrin 74b-75a, Yesodei HaTorah 5:1-4, and the Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 157:1). The Rosh says that one one is allowed to accept martyrdom even in cases where the halacha doesn’t require it (Avodah Zarah 2:9). One who transgresses the halacha instead of submitting to martyrdom where martyrdom is enjoined, can not be punished in the courts, since the transgression is committed under duress, but he must be regarded as a defiler of G-d’s name; and if he persists in living in the same place and in continuing the transgression when he can escape, he forfeits his portion in the future world and will be assigned to the lowest chambers of hell, according to the Rambam.
There is a clear makor for active suicide; i.e. taking one’s life when there is the possibility one will be faced with transgressing the Torah.
However, these rishonim which hold like Rabbeinu Tam in Tosfos seem to overlook the fact that R’ Chanina’s act of suicide was seen as punishment for his pronouncing the Havayah in public and his entire family is believed to have suffered immensely for that. The Midrash, in Breshis Rabbah 82:8, seems to indicate that suicide is considered unnatural, even when done on behalf of the Torah.
He was destined to be burned for the aveira of being Hogeh Es ha’Shem; He was he punished because he did so in public. Tosfos, on DH Hogeh, on this daf, say that Hogeh Es ha’Shem is to explicitly read the letters of Shem ha’Meyuchad like the letters of other words. So, while one can take their own life for the sake of avoiding transgressing mitzvos in time of persecution, it seems as if R’ Chanina’s death was bound to occur since he was Hogeh Es HaShem b’farhesya. The Roman executioner removed the sponges that artificially prolonged his life, and he too jumped into the fire, with the Yalkut Shimoni holding that both were given a place in olam haba. The Roman was rewarded for showing him mercy at the end by lessening the torture; R’ Chanina was given reward for choosing death over a transgression.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.