"I was approached by a Jewish man who appeared to be a simple Jew from Oberland. In innocent piety he said to me something like this: 'Rabbi! My only son, my dear one so precious to me, is over there among the boys condemned to be burned; and I have the ability to ransom him. Yet we know without a doubt that the Kapos [death camp inmates who willingly took on the job of overseeing the other prisoners and carrying out death camp policies set by the Nazis] will seize another in his place. Therefore I ask of the Rabbi a question of law and practice [in Orthodox Judaism, congregants go to a Rabbi in order to find out how a particular Jewish law might be interpreted in a particular situation]: according to the Torah, am I permitted to saive him? Whatever you decide, I will do.'
"When I heard this question I was seized by trembling: 'My dear friend, how can I render a clear decision for you on a question like this? In such a situation, even when the Temple stood a question concerning whether one would live or die came before a council of 70 Rabbis [the Sanhedrin]. But here I am in Auschwitz without any books of law, without any other Rabbis [to consult with], and without a clear mind because of so much suffering and grief.'
"If it were the way of the wicked Kapos to release the ransomed prisoners first and afterward take another in his place, it might be possible to incline a little toward permitting [the ransom], since after all the Kapos were Jews, and for them it was certainly forbidden by law to do such a thing with their own hands and endanger another life whose fate had not been to burn. Such an act is included in the prohibition, 'One should suffer death rather than transgress' [Sanctification of the Name--Rather than perverting another's life, which is created by G-d, one should sacrifice one's own life for the sanctification of G-d's gift of life]. If so, it is possible to assume that it was not certain that the Kapos would take another's life in place of the ransomed one. For perhaps at the last moment their Jewish soul would be stirred and they would not transgress a severe prohibition like this...However to my sorrow I knew with certainty that it was the Kapos' practice to first take someone else from the camp and only afterward release the ransomed prisoner. Thus they would be sure that none was lacking from the exact number delivered to them by the SS [Nazi Special Commandos], for which they were responsible. If they released the ransomed prisoner, they would pay with their own lives when the SS found that one was missing from the number handed over to them. Obviously there were not sufficient grounds to allow anything.
"Still the father wept and pleaded with me. He asked if there was anything I could tell him that would permit him to ransom his son, for it was very urgent to the father to save his only dear son, while it was still possible to do so. I begged him, 'My dear, precious friend, leave off from asking this question. For I cannot say anything at all to you without studying a book, especially in a situation as fearful and dreadful as this.' But the father continued to plead with me and then said the following:
"'Rabbi, does this mean that you cannot permit me to ransom my only child? Is it not so? Then I will accept with love the decision.'
"I entreated him and protested, saying, 'Dear Jew, I did not say this either, that I do not permit you to ransom your child. I do not decide either yes or no. Do as you wish as if you had not asked me at all.' But still the father stood there and pleaded with me to give him a clear answer. And when he saw that I stood firm in my opinion tha I did not want to render a legal decision [which the father would be liable as a Jew to follow], he responded with emotion and great fervor: 'Rabbi, I did what I could, what the Torah [the Hebrew Scriptures] obligated me to do: I asked a question of a Rabbi, and there is no other Rabbi here. Since you cannot answer me that I am allowed to ransom my child, this is a sign that according to the law you may not permit it. Were it permitted without any hesitation, you surely would have answered me that it is permitted. This means to me that the verdict is that by law I am not allowed to do it. This is enough for me. It is clear that my own child will be burned according to the Torah and the law, and I accept with love and rejoicing. I will do nothing to ransom him, for so the Torah has commanded.'
"Nothing I said to him was of any use. I urged him not to lay the responsibility for this upon me, that I was as if I had never heard his question. But he repeated once again with pious fervor and weeping what he had said, which tore the heart into twelve pieces. So he carried out his words and did not ransom his son."