Dear Daf Yomi,
I tried to find Aruch Laner's comment about why erasing the name of G' was not a simple matter of pikuach nefesh overriding everything, which the Artscroll edition cites on 53b footnote 2 but without quoting). I found Aruch LaNer to Succah on HebrewBooks.org.
However I couldn't figure out where the citation was after searching for David, Hamelech and Tehom... Can you tell me how Aruch LaNer phrases the question and what his answer his (in Hebrew, please)? A verbatim quote would be great, please.
Gabriel G, Jerusalem, Israel
We have uploaded the explanation of the Aruch La'Ner (both in Sukah and in his commentary to Makos, to which he refers us here) at the following link -
www.dafyomi.co.il/sukah/discuss/suka-053.qa5.pdf
In our Insights to the Daf, we addressed this issue at length. Besides the Aruch la'Ner, we cited a number of other approaches. I include our article below.
Be well,
Mordecai Kornfeld
Kollel Iyun Hadaf
2) ERASING THE NAME OF HASH-M IN ORDER TO SAVE THE WORLD
QUESTION: The Gemara relates that when David ha'Melech dug the Shisin (the hollow under the place where the Mizbe'ach of the Beis ha'Mikdash eventually would be built, into which the water and wine libations flowed), he inadvertently removed a potsherd that covered (and plugged) the hole of the Waters of the Deep. The waters arose and threatened to drown the world. David ha'Melech inquired whether he was permitted to write the name of Hash-m on the potsherd and to throw it back into the water in order to stop the deluge. No one gave him an answer, until he pronounced a curse on anyone who knew the ruling but would not reveal it to him. Achitofel told him that he was permitted to write the name of Hash-m on the potsherd and throw it into the water, even though Hash-m's name would be erased by the water.
What was David ha'Melech's question? Any situation of Piku'ach Nefesh, where human life is in danger, overrides almost all prohibitions (except Avodah Zarah (idolatry), Shefichus Damim (murder), and Giluy Arayos (immorality)). The waters posed a mortal danger to the world, and thus David ha'Melech certainly was permitted to erase the name of Hash-m to save the world.
ANSWERS:
(a) The ARUCH LA'NER answers that David ha'Melech was concerned that his action might involve a Chilul Hash-m. The transgression of Chilul Hash-m does not override Piku'ach Nefesh.
(b) The RAMBAN in Sanhedrin (73a, as cited in He'oros b'Maseches Sukah) writes that the law that Piku'ach Nefesh does not override the prohibitions of Avodah Zarah, Giluy Arayos, and Shefichus Damim ("Yehareg v'Al Ya'avor"), includes any branch ("Abizraihu") of those prohibitions. Accordingly, David ha'Melech was unsure whether or not erasing the name of Hash-m is included in a subcategory of Avodah Zarah, and therefore he waited until he received a Halachic ruling in the matter.
(c) RAV YOSEF SHALOM ELYASHIV shlit'a (quoted in He'oros b'Maseches Sukah) suggests that the water posed no actual mortal danger to the world. Rather, the rising water threatened to disrupt the normal lifestyle and routine of the world's inhabitants. There was no question of Piku'ach Nefesh, and therefore David ha'Melech waited until he received a Halachic ruling in the matter.
(d) Perhaps David ha'Melech's doubt can be understood based on the words of the RAMBAM (in MOREH NEVUCHIM, cited by the RASHBA in Teshuvos 1:413; see Insights to Shabbos 67:2:b). The Rambam rules that one may not desecrate Shabbos in order to heal a person in a manner that is not medically proven and accepted. David ha'Melech's doubt was whether this ruling also applies to violating any Torah prohibition in an unconventional manner in order to save a life, such as by erasing Hash-m's name in order to stop a flood.