Rodef to save victim?

 It is interesting to note that Rashi (Sanhedrin 73a)goes against the obvious meaning in the law of rodef and says it means to stop a person from sinning even by killing him and it is not primarily to protect the victim as others such as Rambam state

This approach might explain the lack of concern with stopping pedophiles since this doesn't seem to involve a clearly stated sin

Medieval commentators offered the two alternative answers. Rashi interprets: “These are to be saved — from the transgression.”11 Thus, according to Rashi, the purpose of the law is to save the pursuers by preventing him from committing the transgression. On the other hand, Maimonides in his interpretation to the Mishnah writes: “And the purpose of this saving is that we were commanded to save this pursued person from the hands of the pursuer that wants to kill him or to commit a [sexual] violation with him in any way possible, even by killing the pursuer before he will commit the violation and that is the meaning of “at the cost of their lives,” namely, the life of the pursuer.” The same interpretation is offered by R. Meir Halevi Abulafia in his commentary to the Talmud (Yad-Ramah): “These are to be saved – from their pursuers at the cost of their lives, namely, the lives of their 

https://www.academia.edu/6228030/The_Law_of_Pursuer_Rodef_in_Talmudic_Sources

there seems to be a contradiction in the Rambam

Rambam (Commentary to Sanhedrin 8:7): Concerning someone who is trying to commit any sexual sins punishable by kares or death – he can be saved from sinning by killing him…

Rambam (Hilchos Rotzeach 1:9): Our Sages taught that when there is a difficult birth it is permitted to kill the unborn baby because it is like a pursuer trying to kill the mother. However once the head has emerged then it can’t be harmed because we don’t harm one person for the sake of another. This is the natural way of the world.

Rambam (Hilchos Rotzeach 1:6): … However someone who is pursuing another person to kill him – even if the pursuer (rodef) is a child – then every Jew is commanded to save the pursued from the rodef even if the only way to save the pursued is by killing the rodef.

Reb Chaim Brisker (Hilchos Rotzeach 1:9): … It would appear that the Rambam’s understanding of this halacha of killing the unborn baby to save the mother is based on the law of killing the rodef in order to save the nirdaf (victim). His fundamental principle is that the life of the rodef is sacrificed because of the pikuach nefesh (life saving) of the victim. This is stated in Sanhedrin (74a): R’Yonasan ben Shmuel said that a rodef who is trying to kill someone and it is possible to stop him by maiming one of his limbs but he is killed instead – the one who killed the rodef is himself executed for his actions. We see from this the sole justification for killing the rodef is to save the victim. So even though we have a universal rule that “one life is not terminated for the sake of another life” – it is different in the case of rodef because the Torah tells us that the case of rodef is an exception to the rule. The Torah verse that the Rambam refers to that tells us that rodef is an exception is Devarim (22:12): Do not have mercy on the soul of the rodef. In other words the verse tells us that in this case of rodef we don’t apply the rule that ‘one life is not terminated for the sake of another life.” Therefore the life of the rodef is sacrificed [to save the life of the victim].

Tosfos (Sanhedrin 73a): He is saved with his life – the apparent meaning of this is that the victim is saved by killing the rodef (pursuer). But it is not possible to explain it in that way in the case of one who pursues an animal for bestiality and similar cases. Therefore it seems that the explanation is that the pursuer is killed to save him from sinning. However this does not fit with the case of the rape of a

betrothed maiden where is says that she is saved by killing the pursuer….

Tosefta (Sanhedrin 11:11): One who pursues a male [for homosexual relations] whether it is in the house or field – he is saved from sin by killing him. If he is running after a betrothed maiden whether in the house or field – he is to be saved from sin by killing him. If he is running after a betrothed maiden or after any of the prohibited sexual relations mentioned in the Torah – he is to be saved from sin by killing him. However if he pursues a widow and he is the cohen gadol or he pursues a divorce or chalutza and he is an ordinary cohen – he is not to be saved from sin by killing him. If she has already been raped, he is not saved from sin by killing him. Furthermore if there is another way of saving her, he is not saved from sin by killing him R’ Yehuda said that if the pursued woman says to leave the rodef alone – he is still saved from sin by killing him..

Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 425:1): …. Someone who endangers the community such as being involved in counterfeiting in a country where the king strongly objects – then he has the status of rodef and it is permitted to inform on him to the secular authorities…

Rav Sternbuch (1:850): Question: A Jewish driver who normally speeds or doesn’t have a license – is it permitted to report him to the police? Answer: It states explicitly in Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 388:12) that if someone is engaged in counterfeiting and is thus a danger to the community – he should be warned to stop. If he doesn’t listen to the warning it is possible to report him to the police. The Gra there says that the counterfeiter has the status of a rodef (pursuer) even though he does not intend to harm others and even though the harm is an indirect result of his actions and even though the danger is only a possibility not a certainty. There is nothing more dangerous than a reckless driver who is speeding or one who has no knowledge of proper driving skills - as indicated by the fact he has no license. Such people are likely to kill other, chas v’shalom and therefore they have the halachic status of rodef (pursuer). That is why in fact the secular law that requires a skilled driver with a license is in fact a just and obvious law for the welfare of society and we are fully obligated to observe these laws. Anyone who treats these laws with contempt and disobeys them, we are concerned that such a person can come to kill and therefore he deserves serious punishment – even imprisonment… 

Minchas Yitzchok (8:148): Is it permitted to report to the police reckless drivers who are a danger to other motorists and pedestrians? Concerning the question regarding motorists who drive their vehicles in a manner which endangers all those who are on the road with them by means of the means different scenarios that are described in his letter. Is it permitted to report them to the police? This will typically result in a monetary punishment or the cancellation of their driver’s license for a fixed period or incarceration in jail and it serves as a deterrent to actions which endanger others. Answer: Even though halacha prohibits causing a Jew to be given bodily or financially to the secular justice system, nevertheless a Jew who endangers other people is not included in this prohibition. This is explicitly stated by the Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:11) and Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 388:12): “All those who disturb the community and cause it distress it is permitted to give them over to the secular government to be punished whether by beating, imprisonment or fines…” It is obvious that all those who drive carelessly and in a wild manner, endanger the lives of all those are near them. We in fact have been commanded to avoid danger and to prevent it from happening. Perhaps by taking actions against these drivers it will prevent danger and reduce the number of accidents. …Therefore those who are involved in this mitzva of life saving should first go to beis din and to present their claims before them…

Rav Yosef Eliashiv (Nishmas Avraham 4:208-211): Rav Eliashiv told me that there is in fact no difference in halacha between a teacher who is molesting boys or girls since in both cases we are talking about severe mental damages and danger to the public. He cited the Beis Yosef who cites the Rashba regarding R’ Eliezar ben Rav Shimon (Bava Metzia 83a) who reported thieves to the government… Regarding this Rav Eliashiv said that we learn from this that surely in the case of child abuse which is more severe then theft that it would be permitted to first report it to the principal of the school and if he doesn’t do anything to report the matter to the police even in the Diaspora.

Ran (Sanhedrin 73a): Since it is a mitzva to kill the rodef in order to save his victim, why is there a need for the verse of “don’t stand idly by the blood of your fellow” It is clearly a mitzva to exert yourself to save him – such as if he is drowning in the river or being attacked by bandits? The answer is the verse that tells you that you can kill the rodef is only relevant when it is absolutely clear to you that he is intent on killing. Similarly if it is absolutely certain that he will drown in the river if you don’t save him. However in a case of where it is uncertain, we would not know that there is an obligation. Therefore the verse of “don’t stand idly by the blood of your fellow” teaches us that it is also a mitzva to try and save him even though it is uncertain [while the case of certain need is learned from rodef].

Rav Yehuda Silman (Yeschurun 15): Question: Is it permitted to kill someone that there are doubts whether he is in fact a rodef (threat to life)? I was asked concerning a security guard in a public place e.g., the entrance of a restaurant or a mall who notices a man approach and he appears suspicious. The person is acting strangely and appears to be an Arab. When the security guard approaches him, he begins to run. The security guards suspects that he is a terrorist. This is only a suspicion since it is possible that he is in fact a Jew and there are people in the world who act strangely. In addition it is possible that the suspicious stranger is running away simply out of panic. However it is possible that in a short time the stranger will in fact cause a serious terror attack. Is it permitted to kill the stranger when the facts are not clear? This is a common question and a similar question can be asked regarding a bank teller who is suddenly confronted with a bandit with a pistol in his hand. There are many times when it is later determined that the gun was only a toy and even if it were real the bandit didn’t intend to kill but only to scare the bank teller. Nevertheless there is a doubt whether the person is in danger. In such circumstances is it permitted to kill him? Answer:… Conclusions: 1) It appears that we hold in practice that it is permitted to killed a suspected rodef. In other words someone who is doing activities that endanger others even if there are doubts. … 4)Therefore in the two versions of the question that were asked concerning a suspicious person it is permitted to kill him. That is only in a case there are valid bases to suspect that he is trying to kill. 5) In contrast in the case of someone running in the forest or is shooting and there are doubts as to his intent[ - he is not to be viewed as a rodef because we assume he has a legitimate reason for doing these things (chezkas kashrus).

Meiri (Sanhedrin 73a): Sages over the generations have agreed that the rodef is killed to save the pursued – even outside of Israel. It is not necessary to say that this is a judgment decided in beis din, since this law was given for every person to judge. A proof of this is found in the last chapter of Berachos (58a) concerning an incident with R’ Sheila where he decided someone was a rodef and it wasn’t in beis

din.

Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (184:1):… If someone is being beaten or he witnesses another Jew being beaten and it is impossible to save himself or the other person from the assailant without hitting him – it is permitted to hit the assailant.