Presuming that it had been pikuak nefesh, that had compelled someone to steal an animal or vehicle for transportation, what is his responsibility as guardian, in the event of loss or damage?
H David Levine, Roanoke, VA USA
Dear David,
The Gemara (Bava Kama 60b) is pretty clear that in such a situation the thief would be responsible for loss or damage. The Gemara there asks, "Mahu l'Hatzil Atzmo b'Mamon Chaveiro?" The Gemara answers "Asur.". Tosfos (DH Mahu) makes it clear that the question is not whether it is permissible to take or destroy the other person's property -- after all it is Piku'ach Nefesh -- but whether the person is responsible for the property or not. The Rishonim, however, ask why did the Gemara use the language of Isur v'Heter and not of Chayav and Patur? The Yad Ramah (Sanhedrin 74a) says that this teaches us that if there is another way of saving oneself other than taking the neighbor's property then it is forbidden to do so. Other Mefarshim are not so convinced that the language of the Gemara is Lav Davka, not to be taken literally. They suggest that, as important as Piku'ach Nefesh is, it does not override stealing and damaging other property. The Binyan Tziyon (Rav Yaakov Ettlinger) in a Teshuvah (#167) argues that this is, in fact, Rashi's opinion (see Rashi here, DH v'Yatzilah). Obviously, though, it will remain the case that if one does take someone else's property to save himself, he will be responsible for it.
Kol Tuv,
Yonasan Sigler
This is not a Psak Halachah