The Sanctity of Life in Judaism: Who Lives When Only One Can Survive?

The sanctity of life is a foundational value in Judaism. Human life is inviolable, and it is forbidden to interfere with it, even in order to save others. For this reason, Jewish law does not allow the removal of an organ from a living person, even one who is critically ill, to improve or save the life of someone else. Likewise, a person who is suffering greatly may not be disconnected from life sustaining machines. The guiding consideration is not “quality of life,” but the holiness of life itself. We are forbidden to take any action that would shorten a Jewish life.

A Life and Death Question in the Talmud

Accordingly, when the Sages were confronted with grave questions involving human life, they ruled on the basis of this principle. Nearly two thousand years ago, a difficult question was raised in the study hall of the Tannaitic Sages:

Two people are traveling together in the desert. There is no water source in sight, and none nearby. Both are on the verge of dying from thirst. They have before them a small flask of water that belongs to one of them. The amount of water is minimal and cannot sustain both of them. What should be done? Should the owner drink the water and live, or should they divide it and accept whatever outcome follows?

The View of Ben Petura

The Sages, led by a scholar named Ben Petura, ruled decisively that both should drink, and neither should witness the death of the other. It is unthinkable, they argued, that two people should stand in the desert with life saving water before them, and that one should drink and live while the other is left to die. Such behavior contradicts the sanctity of life. Better to refrain from action, even if both ultimately die, than for one person to actively preserve his life at the cost of his fellow’s death. “Do not stand idly by the blood of your fellow” is a Torah prohibition.

Rabbi Akiva’s Ruling

At this point, Rabbi Akiva entered the discussion. Rabbi Akiva was renowned for his extraordinary ability to interpret the verses of the Torah and derive halachic principles from them. In this case, he taught that the Torah itself implies a different conclusion.