Thank you so much for answering my questions. I really appreciate all the time and effort you put in to answer my questions on the sugya. I had another question on the sugya I was hoping you could answer.
Would avizrahu have the same dinim as the issur its learned from? I was thinking that a possible nafka meenah between the Rebbeinu Yonah and Tosfos was does a person have to give up his life only when he is embarrasing someone with a kom vasah ( eg. making fun of him) or does it apply even in a case of a shev vial tesah (eg. when a borrower sees his lender he is embarrased by the very sight of him). Tosfos in Pesachim 25b says we only say yeharag vial tevar by a kum veasah but not a shev veal tesah. Would this be so by avazrahu also? Does anyone talk about if avizrahu has the same dinim as what its learned from?
Ahron Fishman
(1) The din that one must also sacrifice one's life for avizryahu is paskened in Shulchan Arukh YD 157:1 in Rema and Gra #14. A source for this is Sanhedrin 75a that if a man had a craving for a woman, she is not even allowed to speak with him from behind the other side of the fence. See Ran Yoma 3b in Rif pages DH Chutz, who writes that one learns from this that concerning the 3 cardinal sins it is not only the chief prohibition, but also the "dust" of the prohibition, for which one must give up one's life.
(2) Your comment about giving up one's life not to embarrass someone in public in a passive way, is an extremely interesting one. I would like to suggest that the Rambam maintains that one is obliged to die for this, and I will attempt to prove this.
(3) The Tosfos Pesachim 25b that you mention - that one need not sacrifice one's life in order not to kill someone in a passive way - is cited by Reb Chaim Brisker, in the very first piece in his Sefer on the Rambam Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:1. However Reb Chaim asserts there (end DH v'Y'L) that the Rambam disagrees with Tosfos and maintains that one is obliged to lose one's life even to avoid performing the 3 sins in a passive way.
(4) I cited in a previous reply that the Pri Chadash, in his Sefer on the Rambam, Mayim Chayim to Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:2, writes that the Rambam agrees with Tosfos Sotah 10b that one must sacrifice one's life not to embarrass one's friend in public.
(5) If we now join up the Pri Chadash and Reb Chaim Brisker, it should emerge that according to the Rambam one is obliged to lose one's life in order to refrain from embarrassing one's friend in public even in a passive way. This is a very big chiddush.
(6) I do not know whether Rabeinu Yonah sides with Tosfos or with the Rambam in the dispute I mentioned above (3) and this question requires further study.
(7) In my opinion a lender does not have to lose his life to refrain from appearing in front of the borrower. Even though the Gemara Bava Metzia 75b states that a lender who does this is equivalent to passing the borrower through water and fire, nevertheless the Gemara does not say there that the lender must lose his life for this. This is not similar to the Gemara Sotah, because in Bava Metzia he is not embarrassing him publicly because only the 2 of them know that he owes him money.
(8) However a practical application of the chidush we mentioned above (5), could be if Reuven is sitting in a room and Shimon walks in and everyone in the room knows that something very embarrassing happened once between these 2 people. If Reuven remains in the room this will be extremely unpleasant for Shimon so Reuven would be obliged to give up his life in order to leave the room.
(9) It goes without saying that this whole subject requires a lot more thought.
Kol Tuv
Dovid Bloom
With regard to the question whether one is required to give up one's life to avoid embarrassing someone in a passive way, we can add on an observation that indeed it is not at all clear that the psak is that one must give up one's life even not to do this in an active way.
This is because even though Tosfos maintains that one must give up one's life for this, nevertheless there are Rishonim who disagree with Tosfos.
(1) The simple reading of the Rambam is that one is not obliged to die for this. Even though we cited Pri Chadash above that one must die for this, there is in fact a strong question that can be asked on Pri Chadash. Why does the Rambam only mention our Gemara in one place - in Hilchos Deos 6:8, where he writes "The sages said that someone who makes his friend's face go white has no place in the World to Come"? Why does the Rambam only mention this in Hilchos Deos, which deals with worthy character traits, which are not actually halachically binding but rather merely praiseworthy, and in addition why does the Rambam not mention anything about throwing oneself into the furnace in order to avoid this?
This all suggests that the Rambam maintains that one is not literally obliged to give up one's life for this.
(2) In addition the SMAG (Sefer Mitzvos Godol) written by one of the Rishonim - Rabeinu Moshe of Kutzi who lists all the 613 Mitzvos of the Torah, does not mention anything about throwing oneself in the furnace. This again suggests that he maintains it is not obligatory , merely praiseworthy.
In short, it is probable that the Rambam and Smag disagree with Tosfos.
In addition we can now answer another of your questions - why do none of the Rishonim write that it is only praiseworthy, but not obligatory to give up one's life to avoid embarrassment?
The answer now is that this is just what the Rambam and the Smag maintain, and that is why they do not include our Gemara in their Halachic codes.
A Good Yomtov
Dovid Bloom