By Rabbi Berach Steinfeld
In our last article we discussed the question of self-defense in the event the person will be a danger in the future despite the fact the person is not a danger now. We discussed the psak of the Sefer Chasidim that one can kill goyim who might snitch on the Jews that killed robbers. There is a source for this ruling in the Medrash brought by the Meiri Sanhedrin 72a. Rashi says the source of self defense is from the passuk that discusses a robber digging his way in to the house. The Torah allows the homeowner to kill him. The Meiri brings a different source from Medrash Tanchuma Bamidbar 25:17 the torah commands us to kill the Midyanim as they are “Tzorrerim” oppressors. They are always ready to oppress therefore one should take the initiative and kill them first.
One can still question if this will compare to a person going to drink with our case of a person going to rob a house or Goyim going to snitch on Jews. In the cases of a robber and a Goy snitching they have not started the maaseh of “redifa” nevertheless they are considered “Rodfim” as they are ready and willing to do it. The reason they are not physically “Rodfim” is because they are lacking the opportunity. But in the case of the drunk person, he is not a “Rodef” at this point only after he gets drunk does he become violent and his main thought process is not to become a “Rodef” he just wants to get drunk!
In the case of a guy digging in to rob a person the Gemara in Sanhedrin 72a Rava says that he gets judged based on the end result as he is ready to defend himself even at the cost of killing the Baal Habayis who might wake up. We know that a person will not allow himself to be robbed so it will result in him getting killed or kill so he chooses to be ready to kill. The Yad Rema explains that since we have a Chazaka that a person will not allow himself to be robbed therefore the robber is punished based on his end result that he is coming to kill. The Ran, on the hand, says that the robber’s intention is not to kill he just wants money but since if the Baal Habayis will stand up to the robber, he will kill him therefore the torah gave the Baal Habayis the rights to kill him. According to the Ran it would seem that one would be able to stop the drunk despite the fact that he does not want to kill. We can still differentiate that one who digs into the house is doing a “maaseh” that can cause death therefore we are allowed to kill him. On the other hand, the drinking is not a “maaseh” of wanting to kill.
The Panim Yafos in Bereishis 34:15 and The Ohr Hachaim both explain the reason why Shimon and Levi killed the entire city of Shchem. They felt that if they would grab Dina back and force her away from her captors they would get killed. Not only that the whole city would defend their leader therefore they considered them as “Rodfim” and preemptively killed them. They learned it from the case of a robber digging into the house and therefore being eligible to be killed despite the fact he was not in the process of killing. Here we see that based on the “maaseh” of someone trying to rescue someone else will cause them to be killed then the kidnappers are considered “Rodfim.” Therefore, we can “kler” that if one sees someone robbing a car, which if he would stand in front of the car the robber would definitely run him over, can he kill him while he is in the act of robbing the car? Based on the above one might very well be allowed to kill him!