A Jew that's terminally ill R"l, and the only treatment is through a bone marrow transplant. He has a very special type of blood (this is not a biological question).

So theoretically and Halachicly (if a Bais Din has the needed powers):

  • Can a Beis Din force another Jew who was found to match that blood type to do the procedure?

  • If yes, how far can a Bais Din go to force him to do so?

  • If yes, how painful the procedure should be to so it can not be forced (from a blood test to, say, a kidney transplant)?

  • What if there are two Jews that have the needed blood type and each one says "force the other one"?

It is worth noting, that we do have numerous examples when the Halachah obligates a Beis Din to force a Jew into performing a positive Mitzvah: marriage, divorce, Tzedakah, Succah and theoretically all others positive Mitzvos.

  • A Bais Din proably can force one to save anothers life in many scenarios, but the examples you gave are likely exceptions, since they involve a not-insignificant danger to the person doing the saving. Aug 10, 2018 at 13:37
  • I am aware of several publicized cases of rabbis who arranged for the purchase and sale of organs from living persons for transplant into members of their community. Although some claim poor people were targeted out of their desperation, there
    – JJLL
    Aug 10, 2018 at 13:50
  • This sounds a bit similar to the claims Rav Weismandl tried to claim in the aftermath of the Jewish Agency's failure to fund his Europa Plan to pay off the Natzis to allow Jews to escape transport. I think he was one of the heads of Bet Din, and he claimed that their refusal to fund the project was equivalent to intentional direct murder.
    – DanF
    Aug 10, 2018 at 14:20
  • @Salmononius2 "...to save anothers life in many scenarios", would you give some other examples with a greater danger you mean?
    – Al Berko
    Aug 10, 2018 at 15:44

1 Answer 1


As per רדב״ז it's מדת חסידות:

שו״ת רדב״ז ג:תרכז
אין סכנת אבר דוחה שבת אבל שיביא הוא האונס עליו מפני חבירו לא שמענו ... אע"ג דחייב להצילו בממונו אבל לא בסכנת איבריו ... ותו דכתיב דרכיה דרכי נועם וצריך שמשפטי תורתינו יהיו מסכימים אל השכל והסברא ואיך יעלה על דעתנו שיניח אדם לסמא את עינו או לחתוך את ידו או רגלו כדי שלא ימיתו את חבירו הלכך איני רואה טעם לדין זה אלא מדת חסידות ואשרי חלקו מי שיוכל לעמוד בזה ואם יש ספק סכנת נפשות הרי זה חסיד שוטה דספיקא דידיה עדיף מוודאי דחבריה


  • Thank you, so he does not agree with the rule.
    – Al Berko
    Aug 31, 2021 at 18:58
  • You should add the English translation to your answer Aug 31, 2021 at 23:15
  • Please provide additional details in your answer. As it's currently written, it's hard to understand your solution.
    – Community Bot
    Aug 31, 2021 at 23:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .