Commentary for Sanhedrin 145:4

וכי עונשין מן הדין דבי רבי תנא הקישא הוא (דברים כב, כו) כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש וכי מה למדנו מרוצח

But does it come to teach this? Is it not employed for the following [Baraitha] that has been taught: Whence do we know that if a man sees his fellow drowning, mauled by beasts, or attacked by robbers, he is bound to save him? From the verse, Thou shalt not stand by the blood of thy neighbor! — That in truth is so. Then whence do we know that [the pursuer] must be saved at the cost of his own life? — It is inferred by an ad majus reasoning from a betrothed maiden. If a betrothed maiden, whom he wishes merely to dishonour, yet the Torah decreed that she may be saved by the life of her ravisher, how much more so does this hold good for one who pursues his neighbour to slay him. But can punishment be inflicted as a result of an ad majus conclusion?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. supra 54a. ');">³</span>

Explore commentary for Sanhedrin 145:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.