LEV869 No one has the right to injure his own or anyone else's body, except for therapeutic purposes. Judaism regards the human body as Divine property (Maimonides, Hil. Roze'ah, 1:4) surrendered merely to man's custody and protection. It is an offense, therefore, to make any incisions [this verse and commentaries] or to inflict any injuries on the body, whether one's own or another person's (Hoshen Mishpat, 420:1 ff, 31). One may not as much as strike a person, even with his permission, since the body is not owned by him (Tanya, Shulhan Arukh, Hoshen Mishpat, Hil. Nizkei ha-Guf, 4.) Such injuries, including even amputations (Maimonides, Hil. Mamrim, 2:4) can be sanctioned only for the overriding good of the body as a whole, i.e., the superior value of life and health.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV881 Dispensation to intervene in the natural order [i.e., to heal sickness or injury] is derived from Exodus 21:20 (sic 21:19); (but once such license is given, medical therapy is not simply elective but acquires the status of a positive obligation [footnote omitted]. As indicated by Sanhedrin 73a, this obligation mandates not only the rendering of personal assistance as is the case with regard to the restoration of lost property, but, by virtue of a negative commandment, “You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:16), the obligation is expanded to encompass expenditure of financial resources for the sake of preserving the life of one’s fellow man. This seems to have been the interpretation given to Maimonides’ comments by Rabbi Joseph Caro who, in his code of Jewish law, combined both concepts in stating: “The Torah gave permission to the physician to heal; moreover, this is a religious precept and it is included in the category of saving life; and if the physician withholds his services it is considered as shedding blood.” Yoreh De’ah 336:1.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV886 Sex-change operations involving the surgical removal of sexual organs are clearly forbidden on the basis of the explicit Biblical prohibition [this verse]. Sterilization of women is also prohibited, as recorded in Even ha-Ezer 5:11. Rabbi Meir Amsel (Ha-Ma'or, Kislev-Tevet 5733) notes that yet another prohibition is also applicable to sex-change procedures, a consideration which may extend as well to hormone treatment for purposes of sex-change. The commandment "A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment" (Deuteronomy 22:5) is not limited to the wearing of apparel associated with the opposite sex but encompasses any action uniquely identified with the opposite sex, proscribing, for example, shaving of armpits or dyeing of hair by a male. A procedure designed to transform sexual characteristics violates the very essence of this prohibition.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV903 The subject of suicide is intertwined with the topic of martyrdom since many suicides are committed as an act of martyrdom. The Jewish attitude toward martyrdom is based upon the following passage in Leviticus (18:5): "Ye shall therefore keep my ordinances and my judgments which, if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Eternal." The rabbis deduce from the words "he shall live" that martyrdom is prohibited save for idolatry, adultery and murder (Sanhedrin 74). All other commandments maybe transgressed if life is in danger in order that "he shall live." Martyrdom includes both the ending of one's own life for the sanctification of the name of God [this verse] or allowing oneself to be killed in times of religious persecution rather than transgress Biblical commandments. Perhaps the best known example of martyrdom in Jewish life are the ten famous scholars executed or murdered by the Roman state at different times for their insistence on teaching the Torah.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV950 (Continued from [[GEN715]] Genesis 9:6 in ROSNER-BLEICH 137) R. Meir Simhah of Dvinsk, in his Biblical novella, Meshekh Hokhman, Exodus 35:2, offers an interesting scriptural foundation for this prohibition, demonstrating that, while not a penal crime, the killing of a fetus is punishable by "death at the hands of heaven." He observes that Scripture invariably refers to capital punishment by employing the formula "mot yumat--he shall surely be put to death." The use of the single expression "yumat--he shall be put to death" as, for example, in Exodus 21:29, is understood in rabbinic exegesis as having reference to death at the hands of heaven. Thus, R. Meir Simhah argues, the verse "and he that smiteth a man shall be put to death – yumat [this verse] is not simply a reiteration of the penalty for homicide but refers to such destruction of life which is punishable only at the hands of heaven, i.e. the killing of a fetus. Reference to the fetus as "a man" poses no difficulty since the fetus is indeed described as "a man" in the above stated verse (Genesis 9:6) prescribing death for feticide under the Noachide Code.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV1116 See [[DEUT3]] Deuteronomy 1:11 bless ROSNER-BLEICH 61

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV1124 See [[DEUT3]] Deuteronomy 1:11 bless ROSNER-BLEICH 61

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM28 The Supreme Value of Human Life. The value with which human life is regarded in the Jewish tradition is maximized far beyond the value placed upon human life in the Christian tradition or in Anglo–Saxon common law. In Jewish law and moral teaching the value of human life is supreme and takes presidence over virtually all other considerations. This attitude is the most eloquently summed up in a Talmudic passage regarding the creation of Adam: "Therefore only a single human being was created in the world, to teach that if any person has caused a single soul of Israel to perish, Scripture regards him as if he had caused an entire world to perish; and if any human being saves a single soul of Israel, Scripture regard him as if he had saved an entire world." (Sanhedrin 37a). Human life is not a good to be preserved as a condition of other values but as an absolute basic and precious good in its own stead. The obligation to preserve life is commensurately all-encompassing. Life with suffering is recorded as being, in many cases, preferable to cessation of life and with elimination of suffering. The Talmud, Sotah 22a, and Maimonides, Hilkhot Sotah 3:20, indicate that the adulterous woman who was made to drink "the bitter water" (Numbers 5:11-31) did not always die immediately. If she possessed other merit, even though guilty of the offense with which she was charged, the waters, rather than causing her to perish immediately, produced a debilitating and degenerative state which led to a protracted termination of life. The added longevity, although accompanied by pain and suffering, is viewed as a privilege bestowed in recognition of meritorious actions. (See also Tosafot Yom Tov, Sotah 1:9 and R. Eliezer Waldenberg, Assia, Nisan 5728, pp. 18-19). Life accompanied by pain is thus viewed as preferable to death. (See R. Eliezer Waldenberg, Ziz Eli'ezer, IX no. 47, sec. 5, who declares that despite the presence of pain everything possible must be done, even on the Sabbath, to prolong life "even (sic) the patient himself cries, 'Let me be and do not give me any aid because for me that is preferable.' See also R. Jehiel Michal Tucatzisky, Ha-Torah ve-ha-Medinah, IV (1952), 39). It is this sentiment which is reflected in the words of the Psalmist: Tthe Lord has indeed punished me, but He has not left me to die" (Psalms 118:88).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT3 In his last address to Israel, Moses refers to the fulfillment of the blessing which has multiplied Israel like the stars of the heaven, to which the lawgiver adds his own benediction: "May the Lord, the God of your fathers, increase your numbers a thousandfold, and bless you as He promised you" [this verse]. The reward of obedience to the commandments of God would be prevention of miscarriage (Exodus 23:26). God will multiply Israel, so that there will be no barren one among them, neither male nor female (Deuteronomy 7:13-14; 28:4; Cf. Lev. 26:9) The reverse will happen if God's commandments will be disregarded: "You shall be left few in number, after having been as numerous as the stars in heaven." (Deut. 28:62; Cf. Lev 26:22). The great blessing, then, for the human species is fertility--not because more hands were needed to operate farms or to engage in defense. That the blessing of fertility included all animate beings (particularly those whose usefulness to man is less obvious) precludes its having a utilitarian purpose. The first chapter of Genesis does not conceive of the blessing of fertility as associated with labor, aggression, or defense. In this Chapter, God has designated grass and fruit-trees to serve as food for both men and animals. The hard labor to which man was subjected and the need for many hands to assist him in his back-breaking work was not contemplated in the original plan of creation. Genesis pictures a pacific world in which there is no conflict between man and man or between man and other creatures. Neither does it envision Internecine warfare within the animal kingdom (Cf. Nachmanides, Gen. 1:29; Bahya, ibid.; Cf. also Nachmanides to Lev. 26:4.) The blessing of fertility would appear to have emanated from the great delight experienced by God in creating the world and its inhabitants. "May the glory of Lord endure forever; let the Lord rejoice in His works." (Ps. 104:31).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT97 [In fifteenth-century philosopher Isaac Arama's work Akedat Yizhak, he proves] from Biblical narratives such as the Patriarchs' efforts to save themselves when in danger, and legislation such as the duty to construct parapets around roofs (Deuteronomy 22:8) for the prevention of accidents, that man must not rely on miracles or Providence alone, but must himself do whatever he can to maintain his life and health. Rabbi Hayyim Azulai, an 18th century commentator on Caro's code, writing under the pen name of Birkei Yosef, summarized Jewish thought and practice relating to our questions [on seeking medical attention]. His views are cited by Rabbi Jakobovits as follows: "Nowadays one must not rely on miracles, and a sick man is in duty bound to conduct himself in accordance with the natural order by calling on a physician to heal him. In fact, to depart from the general practice by claiming greater merit than the many saints (in previous) generations, who were cured by physicians, is almost sinful on account of both the implied arrogance and reliance on miracles when there is danger to life… hence, one should adopt the ways of all men and be healed by physicians…" One might arrive at the same conclusion if one were to literally interpret the Pentateuchal admonition "Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves" [this verse].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT