Avodah Zarah 27b (כז:) — the Talmud in English

There is no concern that the gentile might give him harmful advice, because

the gentile assumes that this Israelite, who does not wish to be treated by him but has come only to ask his advice regarding the drug, is wary of him; therefore

the Israelite

will ask him for advice,

asking him about the drug in order to test it,

so that he will advise him,

for after he asks him and the gentile answers him, he

will advise another person,

and the Israelite will consult another doctor, in order to determine whether that gentile physician indeed misled him.

And

for this reason, the gentile will not give him bad advice, because he fears that

that man might come—

the gentile who gives bad advice might himself

damage himself,

harming himself and his reputation if he gives bad advice to his clients.

Rava said that Rabbi Yohanan said—and some say

that this tradition was

Rav Ḥisda said that Rabbi Yohanan said:

If that Israelite was suffering from an illness from which he was

uncertain whether he would live or die

as a result,

one may not be treated by them,

by gentiles. Since it is highly likely that the gentile physician will kill him—for the gentile does not fear killing him, as it is known to everyone that it is uncertain whether he will live—for this reason it is preferable to leave him to the gentile physician, rather than have the physician treat him, in the hope that he will recover from his illness and live.

But if

he will certainly die

as a result of his illness,

one may be treated by them!

Since there is nothing to lose, as in any event he will die from his illness; perhaps at this point the gentile will heal him rather than kill him.

The Gemara asks: Even if he will certainly die from his illness, nevertheless,

is there not

an opportunity for the patient to refrain from being treated by a gentile in order to save, at least,

“temporary life,”

the time that remains for him to live? For the patient will not die immediately from his illness; presumably, he will live for another day or two. And if we leave him to be treated by the gentile, the latter may kill him immediately, and the Israelite will thereby lose the [brief] period of temporary life that still remains for him?

The Gemara answers:

For temporary life—

we are not concerned.

We do not prevent the possibility of having him treated by the gentile on account of that temporary life.

And from where do you derive it,

where do we learn to say

that for temporary

life we are not concerned?

As it is written

with regard to the four lepers who sat at the gate of the city of Samaria when it was under siege, in II Kings [7:4]:

“If we say, ‘We will enter the city,’ when there is famine in the city, and we will die there.

And if we remain here, we will die. Now, therefore, let us go and defect to the camp of Aram. If they keep us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall die.”

The Gemara proves from this [by way of an objection]: How could they say that they should cast themselves into the camp of Aram? Perhaps they would be killed there immediately,

and is there not temporary life,

as, if they entered the city, they would not die immediately from the famine, but only after a day or two?

Rather, is it not

proven from here

that for temporary life—

we are not concerned.

The Gemara raises an objection

from what we learned in a beraita:

A person may not engage in business with the heretics.

And one may not be treated by them,

by the heretics,

even for temporary life!?

And there was

an incident

concerning this,

involving Ben Dama, the son of Rabbi Yishmael’s sister, whom a snake bit. And Yaakov of Kefar Sekhanya came

who was a heretic,

to heal him. But he did not permit him—

he did not allow

Rabbi Yishmael

that heretic to heal him.

And he said to him,

Ben Dama said to his uncle, Rabbi Yishmael:

Rabbi Yishmael, my brother, leave him

that heretic

and let him heal me!

And I

will also bring proof that it is

a verse from the Torah [the Gemara below explains which verse he intended],

that

healing by a heretic

—

is permitted!

But Ben Dama did not manage to finish speaking before his soul departed,

as he said, “It is permitted,” —

and he died!

Rabbi Yishmael recited over him: “Fortunate are you, Ben Dama, for your body is pure, and your soul departed in purity,”

when he said “It is permitted,” which is an expression of permission, indicating something that is permitted and pure,

“and you did not transgress the words of your colleagues!”

For

your colleagues

would say [based on the verse in Ecclesiastes 10:8]

“

And whoever breaks through a wall, a snake will bite him.”

One who breaks through the boundary that the Sages established in their words—a snake will bite him.

But if so, this is difficult: We learned above that for temporary life we are not concerned, and that in a time of danger one may be treated by a gentile?

The Gemara answers:

Heresy is different,

the law regarding treatment by one who is a “heretic” is different, since

it draws,

as heresy draws a person to denial and adherence to it. For this reason, all contact with heretics must be prohibited, since

one may come to be drawn after them,

a person is liable to be drawn after heresy.

The Gemara now returns to discuss the incident involving Ben Dama—

The Master said,

Rabbi Yishmael said about Ben Dama: Fortunate are you, for

you did not transgress the words of your colleagues, who would say, “And whoever breaks through a wall, a snake will bite him.”

The Gemara asks: Why did Rabbi Yishmael not permit him to be treated by the heretic, and recite over him, “Fortunate are you,” meaning that had he been treated by the heretic, a snake would have bitten him, as befits one who breaks through a boundary? But

he himself,

Ben Dama himself,

was also bitten by a snake;

he had been bitten by a snake. If so, he could have been saved from the second bite, which would have come upon him because he transgressed the words of his colleagues, through treatment by that heretic!?

That is to say, even if he would have been bitten by a snake, as the Sages said, “Whoever breaks through a wall, a snake will bite him,” he could have been treated a second time. Why, then, did Rabbi Yishmael recite over him, “Fortunate are you”!?

The Gemara answers:

The snake of the Sages,

the snake that bites by virtue of the curse of the Sages,

has no remedy at all;

there is no cure for it at all; rather, one who transgresses their words is liable to die ! Had he been healed by the heretic, he would ultimately certainly have died from the bite of another snake. And for this bite there is no cure!

We also learned in the incident involving Ben Dama that he wished to bring a verse from the Torah demonstrating that it is permitted to be healed by a heretic.

The Gemara discusses this:

And what was he going to say,

what was the scriptural source that Ben Dama had in mind? For it is written [Leviticus 18:5]: “You shall keep My statutes and My ordinances, which a person shall do

and live by them.”

And we expound: “and live by them”—

and not die by them.

Therefore Ben Dama held that in a case of mortal danger, as was his situation, one must transgress the words of the Torah in order to be saved.

And

if

Rabbi Yishmael,

who did not permit him to be treated by the heretic, holds that

this matter

the ruling that it is permitted to transgress the words of the Torah in order to be saved applies only when the act is performed

in private,

and there is no publicity that they transgressed the words of the Torah in order to be saved.

But

to transgress the words of the Torah

in public is not permitted.

There is no permission for this. Since the act is performed in public, it involves desecration of the Name. It is forbidden to transgress the words of the Torah even in order to save a life when the matter involves desecration of the Name, since the prohibition of desecrating the Name is never set aside, not even in a case of danger to life.

And from where do we know that there is indeed a distinction between an act performed in public and one performed otherwise?

As it was taught: Rabbi Yishmael would say: From where do we know that if they say to a person, “Worship idolatry

and do not be killed,”

the law is that

he should worship and not be killed?

The verse states, “And live by them”—

and not die by them.

One might

think that this is so

even in public?—

The verse states [Leviticus 22:32]:

“And you shall not profane My holy Name.”

A transgression performed in public is a desecration of the Name, and is forbidden even in a case of danger to life.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yohanan said: With regard to any wound for which one desecrates Shabbat,

because it involves danger to life—

one may not be treated by them.

But with regard to a wound that does not involve danger to life, for which one does not desecrate Shabbat—one may be treated by them.

This disagrees with the earlier statement of Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav, who holds that even for a minor treatment, such as a cut, one may not be treated by them.

This disagrees with the statement of Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav above, who holds that even for a minor treatment, such as treating a cut, one may not be treated by them.