|
From
Piskei Teshuvot (collected by Harav Avraham Pietrekovsky
of Lodz) part 2, #164
Quoting from the Imrei David, Harav Hagaon David
Halevi Horowitz zt"l of Stanislav
Though we hope tragic halakhic questions like
the one that follows will never occur again, the
two principles behind the response are far-reaching.
The Tragic Question
A man in Krakow became ill with typhus, a highly
contagious disease. He was, thank G-d, sent a
cure, but was forced to remain in the hospital
for a month of recuperation. He naturally asked
that his tefillin be sent to him. This simple
request, however, created quite a confusion among
the Torah scholars of Krakow. Because typhus is
so contagious, medical policy was that upon leaving
the hospital, all of the patient's possessions
were to be burned. Is it permissible, they asked,
to send tefillin to the recuperating patient,
knowing that doing so will cause their eventual
destruction?
Why Not to Send the Tefillin
A number of aggadic Talmudic passages seem to
indicate that even a sin indirectly brought about
by a person is identified as his.
-
King Shaul is considered responsible for killing
the Givonites (Shmuel II, 21:1 -- There were
three years of famine in David's time. They
inquired from the Urim Vetumim about its cause,
and G-d replied that it came as a result of
Shaul's killing the Givonites). Actually, Shaul
had the inhabitants of the Nob, the city of
Kohanim killed. The Kohanim had been supplying
the Givonites with food. Shaul's killing Nov's
inhabitants only indirectly caused the death
of the Givonites, yet he is called their murderer.
(Yevamot 78b)
-
King David is considered responsible for the
death of Nov the city of Kohanim, Doeig, and
Shaul and his three sons! Even though David
only visited Achimelech the Kohein of Nov, who
gave him food and the sword taken from Goliat
(Shmuel I, 21). Doeig informed Shaul that David
had been to Nov and Shaul ordered the killing.
Yet David is also considered responsible for
their deaths. (Sanhedrin 95b)
-
A number of Amoraim considered themselves responsible
for the death of Rav Ada bar Ahava, even though
his death was a miraculous act of G-d. (See
the long story and Tosafot's comments on Bava
Batra 22a)
-
Tzidkiahu is told by the prophet "You burned
this city (Jerusalem)," (Yirmiyahu 38:23) because,
as Rashi explains, he was the cause of its destruction
and the Babylonians actually burned it.
Similarly,
sending the tefillin to the hospital knowing they
will eventually be burnt is tantamount to burning
them.
Why to Send the Tefillin
Despite all of the above, Rav Horowitz decided
that the tefillin should be sent to the patient.
Putting on tefillin is a mitzva that immediately
obligates the man and their burning is a future
possible -- even probable, even certain -- event.
It is our mandate to do the mitzvot we are obligated
in at the moment despite possible future negative
repurcussions. There are two precedents for this:
- King
Chizkiyahu refrained from having children because
he saw through mystical insight that his son
would be the wicked Menasheh. He was told by
the prophet Yeshayahu, "The secrets of the All
Merciful One are none of your business." You
are obligated to "Be fruitful and multiply,"
even though you correctly know that the son
will turn out wicked.
-
Amram, when he heard of Pharaoh's decree to
throw all of the male children into the Nile,
separated from his wife and all of the Jewish
men followed suit. Why bring children into the
world, only to have them murdered by the Egyptians?
This position was, as his daughter Miriam pointed
out, incorrect. Their obligation was to "Be
fruitful and multiply," even though it would
indirectly bring about the death of their sons
at the hands of the Egyptians.
Similarly,
the mitzva of tefillin should be kept as commanded,
regardless of the seemingly sure tefillin burning
that would follow.
Other Voices
Rav Horowitz points out that the Gaon of Dvinsk
argues and takes the stringent position, not to
send the tefillin. He sticks to his own, though,
and advises sending them and hoping for the best.
|