Dear Isaac,



A frequent rule in the Talmud and Halachic literature, “You are not commanded to save a gentile” (Pesachim 21b), shows the relationship to gentiles clearly. But before we cite Halachic rulings about healing gentiles, we will cite our words on the portion of Maatot on the relationship to the killing of gentiles; from there we will move on, by way of analogy from minor to major, to his healing.

We learn from the laws that we wrote here that there are three levels of killing one who is not a Jew: One, if he is a Noahide gentile, fulfilling the seven laws–a Jew who kills him is not liable to death by the courts as he would be had he killed a Jew, but he is liable to death by the hands of Heaven. The second is a gentile who does not keep the seven Noahide laws (and we know of no gentile who keeps the seven Noahide laws)–this one may be killed, but the Jews are not commanded to kill him. The third is an actual idolatrous gentile (as halacha considers all Christians): it is a commandment to kill him.

From here it is simple: one may not heal a gentile unless he observes the seven Noahide commandments, and this is what the Shulchan Aruch ruled (Yoreh Deah 158a): “One is forbidden to save a gentile if he is liable to die. A person who saw one of them fall into the sea does not draw him out, even for pay. Therefore it is forbidden to heal them, even for pay, unless refraining from doing so would lead to enmity toward the Jews by gentiles. In such a case one is permitted to heal him, even for free if there is no way to get him to pay.”



Of the incident related in the Talmud, that Rav Shimi the son of R’ Ashi healed a gentile who had fallen ill with leprosy, the sages of France wrote that he did so to avoid enmity or to learn from this healing treatment methods which would, in the end, benefit Jews (author of the Tosaphot on Gittin 70a).



Sincerely,



Daat Emet