SELECTED REFORM RESPONSA

do, because the moment that they disconnect- the patient dies. Is this not a form of active killing?

The above mentioned halakhah distinguishes between shortening the life of a goses and removing the impediment which delays the departure of the soul (death): that is the artificial prolongation of the life of a dying person and thereby gives us a clear answer to the question. The instrument artificially delays death. After the physician has reached the conclusion, that there is no more possibility of natural life in the person and that he is indeed moribund, a goses, the action of the instrument is only preventing the departure of his soul, it is only artificially prolonging the sate of dying. Therefore, the person must be disconnected from the respirator or other instrument and leave him in a natural state until he dies."(Assia Vol. 1, 1979, pp. 1971.)

R. Haim David Halevi, Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv , wrote:"Not only is it permitted to disconnect him from artificial respiration, but it is compulsory to do so because the person’s soul which belongs to God has already been taken by his Maker, for immediately when the respirator is removed, he will die."(Responsa Aseh Lecha Rav V:29)

We may, therefore, see that medieval and modern respondents

made halakhic decisions in consonance with the verdict of the Tel Aviv

District Court.

There would be no better way to conclude this responsum than with the words of Justice Haim Cohn , a member of the Academic Council of our Institute , taken from the coda of his essay"On the Dichotomy of Divinity and Humanity in Jewish Law" in Euthanasia(ed. Amnon Carmi).

195