Abortion permit

שו”ת › Category: philosophy › Abortion permit

asked 4 years ago

Hello Rabbi,
According to the opinion of the poskim that the prohibition of abortion is not a clause prohibiting murder (Tzitz Eliezer and others, and not according to the Letters of Moses), they permitted abortion in cases where it was found that the fetus was very ill with various diseases (such as Tay-Sachs), among other arguments because it would save the fetus that is to be born a lot of grief and it would be better for it not to be born at all.
My question is about the basis of this halakhic argument, is it true? After all, the alternative here is not to exist at all, is it better not to live than to live a life full of torment?

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 4 years ago

This is an argument related to the issue of wrongful procreation. See my article on philosophical good knowledge. But it is possible that from a religious perspective, according to which there is a soul beyond the veil, there is room for such a consideration, since in doing so one does a favor to the soul. As for the question, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel have already disagreed on this and have concluded: It is better for a person not to be created than to be created. Although it follows from this that it is advisable to do this for every person who passes away, there is a prohibition in this. In any case, we learn from it that the Sages did make comparisons of this type.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

שןאל 2 replied 4 years ago

Rabbi, I didn't fully understand, are you claiming that from a religious perspective it is possible and preferable to abort such a fetus in order to “ease” the soul?

Regarding the quote:
It is more convenient for a person not to be created than to be created, now that he has been created – he will scrutinize his actions”.
Convenient and not better.

מיכי Staff replied 4 years ago

Did you read the article? The problem is that there is no plaintiff here, because on the side that has an abortion, he did not exist. But if we see him as a soul in a body (in a non-materialistic picture) then there is a plaintiff here: his soul.

What is the difference? And even if there is a difference, we are still comparing a situation that does not exist to a situation that does exist.