Oylem Goylem wrote: Could Rav Eidensohn possibly give R. Hoffman's audio it's own post?
After the op-ed he wrote for VIN, here is the audio of R. Yair Hoffman speaking on the Martin Grossman saga on the Dov Hikind show.
He's makdim with showering praise on attorney Zweibel and the Moetzes, that he agrees with them on everything except this. A smart move since he would be blacklisted otherwise or worse.
He cites the Noda Bihudah that murderers must be killed otherwise murders will become a hefkerus.
He says that rabbonim were misled with biased information from Grossman's lawyers overstating the case in favor of their client.
He argues there are so many other causes of pikuach nefesh we should get together to fight for first before Grossman - causes that are 100% justified and not "ekeldik" where someone beat a woman to death and burned her body.
This case created tremendous aivah since:
A. Goyim see frum Jews advocate for the death penalty except when it is one of their own
B. Killing of women and police officers generates a lot of moral outrage among the public
R. Hoffman mentioned how numerous meshugoyim had attacked and harassed not only Gov. Crist but also the family of the murdered officer.
At this point, Dov Hikind's behavior was more than I could stomach. He vociferously protested that there are no such thing as meshugoyim in the frum community, (pandering for obvious reasons) especially not among his radio show audience. He got his assistant Charnie to chime in seconding his motion. Why won't many be surprised what a politician does here for votes and ad dollars?
Dr. Katz from the 5 Towns speaks up at this point saying that there has never been a jury who acquitted someone purposely murdering a woman police officer and opines that trying to save Grossman's life goes against dina demalchusa.
We get some comic relief with Dov Hikind mistakenly referring to Shafran as "Dr." Avi Shafran.
After the op-ed he wrote for VIN, here is the audio of R. Yair Hoffman speaking on the Martin Grossman saga on the Dov Hikind show.
He's makdim with showering praise on attorney Zweibel and the Moetzes, that he agrees with them on everything except this. A smart move since he would be blacklisted otherwise or worse.
He cites the Noda Bihudah that murderers must be killed otherwise murders will become a hefkerus.
He says that rabbonim were misled with biased information from Grossman's lawyers overstating the case in favor of their client.
He argues there are so many other causes of pikuach nefesh we should get together to fight for first before Grossman - causes that are 100% justified and not "ekeldik" where someone beat a woman to death and burned her body.
This case created tremendous aivah since:
A. Goyim see frum Jews advocate for the death penalty except when it is one of their own
B. Killing of women and police officers generates a lot of moral outrage among the public
R. Hoffman mentioned how numerous meshugoyim had attacked and harassed not only Gov. Crist but also the family of the murdered officer.
At this point, Dov Hikind's behavior was more than I could stomach. He vociferously protested that there are no such thing as meshugoyim in the frum community, (pandering for obvious reasons) especially not among his radio show audience. He got his assistant Charnie to chime in seconding his motion. Why won't many be surprised what a politician does here for votes and ad dollars?
Dr. Katz from the 5 Towns speaks up at this point saying that there has never been a jury who acquitted someone purposely murdering a woman police officer and opines that trying to save Grossman's life goes against dina demalchusa.
We get some comic relief with Dov Hikind mistakenly referring to Shafran as "Dr." Avi Shafran.
Part II
ReplyDeleteYiddish newspaper journalist Yossi Gestetner comes on at this point and makes several points defending Grossman that cannot be backed up factually. R. Hoffman has an easy job shlogging him up. Some of Gestetner's arguments are really ridiculous and R. Hoffman puts him in his place.
R. Hoffman suggests that some of the behavior surrounding this case is being kafuy tov against this medina shel chesed.
R. Hoffman spoke to the experts who tested Grossman's IQ. The expert who said he had a 77 IQ was hired by the defense and admitted it's his job to make Grossman more defendable. There was another evaluation with a higher IQ that Grossman defenders have covered up. R. Hoffman agreed with the Gov.'s argument that Grossman's behavior to cover up the murder is not indicative of a low IQ.
The Chabad Rabbi Kurinsky who was at the execution comes on and one of his "best" arguments is that Grossman was "possibly" mentally ill at the time of the murder. Which professional made that assessment? The guy sounded very upbeat as if he was extolling some tremendous public kiddush Hashem. Kurinsky offered that he was mechuyev to act for Grossman al pi the Lubavitcher Rebbe's tzavaah.
R. Hoffman cites the Chacham Tzvi that of course every criminal prisoner wants to do teshuva but lav davka that we should make him a hero of the Klal or even let him off the hook.
"Michoel" calls in to attack R. Hoffman for going against the daas Torah of attorney Chaim Dovid Zweibel. This is not a joke as he only named Zweibel and no rabbonim.
A Lakewood caller calls to attack R. Hoffman for going against daas Torah of rabbonim and - I kid you not - the Pope. R. Hoffman answers that he consulted rabbonim who are daas Torah and they agree with him.
A Boro Park caller attacks Dov Hikind for letting R. Hoffman speak.
A Monsey caller attacks R. Hoffman as someone who has no business speaking on the topic.
R. Hoffman opines that the Agudah may have changed their minds if they knew more facts.
R. Hoffman cites the Taz & Bach that we hand over criminals to the umos in cases where the crimes are much less.
The final caller is outraged that the same effort was not made to free Shalom Rubashkin. Unfortunately, R. Hoffman who is generally on the correct side of issues, agrees with this caller. Note that R. Hoffman is an OU employee who cannot go against every OU position and an employee of the 5 Towns Jewish Times who are from the staunchest Rubashkin supporters and has himself gone to shocking lengths to defend Rubashkin which in my view is a stirah to what he argues in the Grossman case.
The way I heard it, Dov and Charnie were joking when they said that there were no meshegoyim in our community, and certainly not among there listeners.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Hoffman did not take it as a joke if that's what Hikind & Charnie meant.
ReplyDeleteDov Hikind asked R. Hoffman two pertinent questions that R. Hoffman danced around but did not answer.
ReplyDelete1. Daas Torah
2. Hishtadlus
1. Dov pointed out that all of Daas Torah - almost unanimously - from OU, Satmar, Agudah, Lubavitch, RCA, NCYI, etc. were calling on Gov. Crist to commute Grossman's sentance to life imprisonment. Yet Hoffman kept saying that NO we should NOT have petitioned the Governor for this. So Dov asked him a few times how can he go against all of the Daas Torah. So R. Hoffman's answer was that "Daas Torah was not monolithic" on the Grossman clemency petition. Yet Hoffman NEVER told anyone who his anonymous "Daas Torah" is who was against petitioning the Governor for clemency.
2. R. Hoffman's argument against clemency was that it was "obvious" it wouldn't be succesful from the outset. Yet Dov appropriately questioned Hoffman that aren't we as Jews supposed to do our Hishtadlus and petition the Gov. and not worry about what the likelihood of success is or whether he thinks it has no chance or not?
R. Hoffman never addressed Dov's direct question to him on this point.
I know of cases where rabbonim are afraid of going on the record because they will be attacked. Rabbi Hoffman could have been protecting those rabbonim.
ReplyDeleteThe crazies out there certainly would have attacked them just the same as the governor and victim's family.
Rav Gifter zl was even once attacked for giving a psak on shidduchim that did not meet certain politically correct perceptions.
For those who earlier demanded Rabbi Hoffman provide mareh mekomos on aivah,
ReplyDeleteWe know there is a concept of aivah.
Why can't someone just use common sense to say there is aivah over the Grossman defense?
Who says that poskim have to outline every single potential case that could come up?
You know, there are certain yeshivos where bochurim are trained not to think for themselves and are instructed to learn only certain meforshim on the blatt and only certain parts thereof of those meforshim and nothing else.
Are these Hoffman critics talmidim of these yeshivos?
That was painful to listen to on many levels.
ReplyDeleteLet's just leave it at that.
Dovid: I know of big Rabbonim, some of the biggest of the big Gedolim, who allow Jews to eat chazar on Purim.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I can't tell you any of their names. I need to protect them from being attacked by the crazies.
But don't worry, go ahead and eat some chazer. It is Daas Torah, I just can't tell you who.
Why did you not publish my previous remark? Are you a personal buddy of Yair Hoffman?
ReplyDeleteFacts that might be of interest due to their relevance to the topic:
ReplyDelete1. One out of 300 murderers actually results in an execution. (Source:Stanford Law Review, 2005 John J. Donohue III, a law professor at Yale with a doctorate in economics, and Justin Wolfers, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote that the death penalty "... is applied so rarely that the number of homicides it can plausibly have caused or deterred cannot reliably be disentangled from the large year-to-year changes in the homicide rate caused by other factors... The existing evidence for deterrence... is surprisingly fragile.")
2. As of November 2009, there have been 139 exonerations (inmate found innocent) from Death Row in 26 States. The vast majority of those exnonerations were African Americans (71 of the 126) although African Americans only comprise 12% of the general population.
3. From 2002- there have been 784 executions in the US. About two out of three executions (65.6%) are conducted in five states: Texas, Virginia, Missouri, Florida and Oklahoma.
4. The vast majority of those executed were poor. About 90% could not afford a lawyer when they went to trial and had to rely upon a court-appointed lawyer.
5. Canada does not have a death penalty and the homicide rate in Canada has been gradually dropping since executions were stopped. This phenomenon has been observed in many other countries who have abandoned the death penalty.
Relatively few other developed countries in the world impose the death penalty. Japan, South Korea, and the U.S. are the only established democracies in the world that still conduct executions. The execution rate in Japan is a small fraction of that in the U.S.
http://www.kulanu.org/about-kulanu/index.php#we
ReplyDeleteKulanu is another group doing gerus outreach to goyim.
http://www.kulanu.org/b2/?p=522
ReplyDeleteKulanu says they were duped by Jorge Puello.
This is a really bizarre story.
Puello was on the front page of the NY Times wearing a big yarmulka but as the story unravels, it seems he's not even Jewish.
Puello is a scam artist and pimp in child prostitution wanted by a half dozen countries & Interpol. When the Baptist missionaries were arrested in Haiti, he contacted the Church, presenting himself as a frum lawyer and President of the Dominican Sephardic Federation who wanted to help. He was wired $40,000. After his picture was broadcast around the world he was recognized by various police depts who started moving to arrest him. Puello then disappeared with the money.
He had earlier been displaying a forged letter from the Spanish & Portugese shul in Montreal saying that the rov had verified his yichus. It turns out there is no Sephardic Federation in Dominican Republic and the two rabbis in the country have never seen or heard of this guy. He has been married at least 4 times to non-Jewish women including a Miami stripper who is 10 years older than him.
Why are there so many smart alecs reading and commenting here like Richard Highman?
ReplyDeleteHere are some examples where rabbonim will not go on the record.
There is a rav hamachshir with very weak standards but who has promoted himself as a heimish hashgocho. No one kimaat wants to come out against him publicly because he is a long time rov at a respectable shul and the truth would create a huge uproar and machlokes.
I do have a problem however that they are basically letting the public eat food that is even non-kosher sometimes. The best that they feel they can do is to privately warn as many people as they know and feel they can trust.
A certain rov has been doing something improper when he is mesader kiddushin. He means well and it is from am haaratzus even though he is a talmid chochom in most miktzaos of learning. When someone on the Moetzes found out about it, he steered a chosson away from what the mesader kiddushin had in mind in a way that his name did not come up as he was afraid of embarrassing the mesader kiddushin.
Some rabbonim (even yeshivish ones) have privately confided that Yigal Amir had justification al pi Hatorah. There are obvious reasons why they will not go on the record.
Dovid: My previous post was agreeing with your previous post.
ReplyDeleteI will try to send my comment again. Yair Hoffman has a lot of chutzpa going against the many Gedolim who stated that we had an obligation to try and save the life of Martin Grossman A"H. This is also the halacha as stated in the Rambam laws of Rotzeach chapter 1 law 14.
ReplyDeleteHow can a Jew not feel pity for a man who sat 25 years in prison and was then executed anyway. Especially considering how much he changed during those years. The Gov had political considerations for not commuting his sentence. But we as Jews had an obligation to try.
Since hashem allows the 'Gedolim' to be silent re Tropper, Kolko, etc. and yet scream bloody murder (thru the organizations listed above, especially Agudah) re A violent murderer like Grossman, it seems to me that He is telling us that we're on our own nowadays. Sigh...
ReplyDeleteJoseph2
Maybe American rabbi and those who think like him can explain their position.
ReplyDeleteIf there is zero chance or close to it that the govt will be mevater, why should we make shmattas out of ourselves for someone who is not exactly innocent? Farkert, he meets the criteria in the poskim of someone to be handed over.
Nowadays there are not many true gedolim, at least not in America. It has happened many times over the last 20 years where photo op gedolim agree on a position but bigger gedolim who are not on the Moetzes do not agree with them.
So what gives American rabbi the right to lambast Rabbi Hoffman when he could have the backing of an adam gadol meod who is bigger than the entire Moetzes combined?
And I'm sure I don't need to remind American rabbi that if someone is chayav misa with Sanhedrin, his misa and teshuva is the kappara and if it's 25 years later it counts for gornisht.
Reply to Joseph:
ReplyDeleteSince you sound like a young person, please consider what I as an older person have to say.
The Gedolim were NOT silent on the Tropper issue. He was forced out of EJF forced out of his yeshiva and foced to sign that he will move out of Monsey in 6 months.
Regarding Kolko,I do not know of any Gadol who said to remain silent except his buddy Rabbi Margolis who is NOT a Gadol.
Regarding Martin Grossman A"H. The man who was executed last week was not the same wild man who committed the crime 26 years ago. He had completely changed. The only reason to put someone to death is if they are a threat to society. Martin was a changed man. The Governor knew this but had him killed anyway for political considerations. But we as Jews had an obligation to try and save him.
American Rabbi said...
ReplyDeleteReply to Joseph:
Since you sound like a young person, please consider what I as an older person have to say.
The Gedolim were NOT silent on the Tropper issue. He was forced out of EJF forced out of his yeshiva and foced to sign that he will move out of Monsey in 6 months.
==============
which gedolim were not silent? Gedolim didn't force him out of EJF nor did they force him to move out of Monsey
DT, how is it that a rosha merusha like "a bissel seichel" is allowed a platform here to post rishus such as calling the Gedolim on the Moetzes "photo op gedolim"?
ReplyDeleteAmerican rabbi,
ReplyDeleteHave you been held incommunicado for the last number of decades?
Kolko is a mesarev by Beis Din of America, Mechon Lehoraah and even the special Agudah beis din who let him get away with ignoring them. R' Shmuel Kaminetzky who was av beis din, copped out that he "must have done teshuva". Never mind that the reoffend rate for pedophiles is at least 99%. Anyone who tried to speak to the Agudah about it was intercepted by their shlock shamess Avi Shafran who was overly rude and hostile in insisting that it is none of the Agudah's business and that no one is allowed to be choshesh him al pi halacha which goes against Chazal & poskim.
Rav Scheinberg told Kolko's victims that they were "not abused according to the Torah because there was no penetration". This also goes against all the poskim. The only limud zechus anyone could come up with is that Rav Scheinberg may have forgotten poshutte halachos in his old age. What about the multiple batei din that disbanded in the 1980s after Rav Scheinberg & Margulies pressured them? What about Chofetz Chaim / Torah Or musmachim who are covering up for Rav Scheinberg's cover up?
Rav Belsky many years ago threatened several boys in Camp Agudah to not speak about Kolko having molested them and more recently issued a hazmana from a private beis din he created for the purpose of intimidating and silencing an askan who started investigating the molestation.
Mendlowitz gave many chances to the Agudah to do something about Kolko before going to the police and newspapers but they chose to initially ignore him then get Rav Salomon & Ephraim Wachsmann to attack Mendlowitz and all bloggers at the next Agudah convention.
Even when Margulies was forced to remove Kolko, he was still proctoring tests at Yeshiva of Brooklyn, forcing Mendlowitz to pursue R' Shlomo Mandel as well.
That American rabbi ignores all this makes anything he says suspect in my view.
Reply to "a bissel seichal"
ReplyDeleteYou may have a little bit of seichel but you surely are lacking in rachmonos. Are you a Navi? Did anyone know for sure that our efforts would not succed? As long as there was a chance to save him, we had to try.
If Yair Hoffman has the backing of a great Gadol then let him come out and name him. He has not done so thus far.
Reply to Rabbi Eidensohn:
ReplyDeleteYou yourself posted the story how the Rabbonim of Monsey made him sign a declaration that he would no longer be involved in the yeshiva and that he agree to move out of Monsey within 6 months. As for his being forced out of EJF, Zeh Poshut.
which gedolim were not silent? Gedolim didn't force him out of EJF nor did they force him to move out of Monsey
ReplyDelete=======================
Gedolim don't have to publicize their chesbonos on every issue. They did or what was right and didn't do what they determined incorrect. They owe the public no explanation on every matter.
Most matters demand silence. And it is up to the Gedolim to determine which issues those are, and act accordingly.
Thank You Gedolim!
The florida courts did exactly what halacha demands of them - set up and enforce dinim. Rambam is clear that this can and should include death penalty for violating sheva mitzvos bnei noach, specifically without warnings or two witnesses.
ReplyDeleteBaba Metzia discusses an Amora who turned Jewish crooks over to the king to be executed. This wasn't seen as a nice thing to do, but according to the Bais Yosef and the Mabit this was not seen as an aveira.
Moreover, we have the Maharam MiRottenberg who says specifically that pidyon shevuyim has to be tempered with the consequences for Jewish society.
Anyone who says that halacha is clear and simple in something as complicated as this is lacking in proper respect for the sophistication and depth of Torah.
American Rabbi said...
ReplyDeleteReply to Rabbi Eidensohn:
You yourself posted the story how the Rabbonim of Monsey made him sign a declaration that he would no longer be involved in the yeshiva and that he agree to move out of Monsey within 6 months. As for his being forced out of EJF, Zeh Poshut.
============
I was responding to your statement:
The Gedolim were NOT silent on the Tropper issue. He was forced out of EJF forced out of his yeshiva and foced to sign that he will move out of Monsey in 6 months.
The rabbis in Monsey - while solid talmidei chachomim are not considered gedolim. They succeeded with the anonymous publication of the video to force Tropper to leave his yeshiva and agree to move out of Monsey. You might recall that it had previously been falsely announced that Tropper had resigned Kol Yaakov.
What gedolim weren't silent?
R' Berel Soloveitchik said that Moishe Sherer was in the business of creating photo op gedolim.
ReplyDeleteR' Shmuel Berenbaum had a problem with the current make up of the Moetzes.
The Bais Hatalmud roshei yeshiva are not goress the current make up of the Moetzes.
I could go on.
Will Baruch hurl his invective at these gedolim who are in a position to say so?
I do agree that Rabbi Hoffman should name the adam gadol he spoke to.
ReplyDeleteIs anyone able to reach him for comment?
That said, it is not fair to attack me as having a lack of rachmonus if there is any man de'amar that I identify with.
Gedolim don't have to publicize their chesbonos on every issue
ReplyDelete===================
That is great. You should continue believing this - despite the lack of evidence. They did not serve a significant role in getting tropper to leave EJF, to get Rav Wachtfogel not to assume leadership of EJF, of convince Rav Reuven Feinstein to stop supporting a corrupt organization, for tropper to leave Kol Yaakov or to leave Monsey.
Tropper was fired by Tom Kaplan - who did not consult the gedolim. Rav Wachtfogel's failure to assume the leadership was not because of the gedolim, Rav Reuven Feinstein still supports EJF, tropper left Kol Yaakov only after the video appeared - not because of the gedolim, ditto for leaving Monsey.
The gedolim had to be pursued to even consider the issue. They kept insisting that the evidence was false or that tropper had done teshuva and therefore there was no need for any action.
DT: Even if everything you wrote is true, so be it. That is the Gedolim's prerogative. They did and didn't do what they deemed correct.
ReplyDeleteYou disagree with their action or lack thereof? Disagree all you want. They are the Gedolim and you are not. Most good folks will trust their judgement over yours; and for anyone else, that is their problems not the Gedolim's and not the Klal's.
Regensberg defrauded mispalelim of the UWS shul where he was gabbai.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61J0NJ20100224
Inmate named in extortion bid of hedge fund SAC
Legal sources identified Hayim Regensberg, 44, as the inmate whom Balkany said he had spoken to about SAC. Regensberg was convicted last year of defrauding about a dozen people in a three-year long Ponzi scheme.
He is now serving an eight-year sentence at the Otisville prison located in the Catskill Mountains that is known to have many observant Jewish inmates.
It is unclear whether Balkany and Regensberg, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing in this case, ever met, sources said. Regensberg's wife did not return several phone messages.
Regensberg's attorney Robert Baum, who defended the investment manager and is working on his appeal, declined to comment on the Balkany case.
Yusill Scribner, a spokeswoman for Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, declined to comment.
A spokesman for SAC Capital also declined to comment.
But Balkany's lawyer, Benjamin Brafman, described his client's actions as being fueled more by "bad judgment" not criminal intent.
"I do not believe Rabbi Balkany's intention was criminal," said Brafman. "I think there is a difference between using bad judgment and acting with criminal intent. This is a case of very bad judgment."
....They succeeded with the anonymous publication of the video to force Tropper to leave his yeshiva and agree to move out of Monsey. You might recall that it had previously been falsely announced that Tropper had resigned Kol Yaakov....
ReplyDelete....tropper left Kol Yaakov only after the video appeared - not because of the gedolim, ditto for leaving Monsey....
---------------------------
it seems tropper leaving kol yaakov is still up in the air.
word is that tropper thinks the deal they cut and his agreement should not be valid since the kol koreh was publicized.
also looks like he found a sympathetic ear with an individual on the monsey bes din.
>Reply to Joseph:
ReplyDeleteSince you sound like a young person, please consider what I as an older person have to say.
The Gedolim were NOT silent on the Tropper issue. He was forced out of EJF forced out of his yeshiva and foced to sign that he will move out of Monsey in 6 months.
Regarding Kolko,I do not know of any Gadol who said to remain silent except his buddy Rabbi Margolis who is NOT a Gadol.
Regarding Martin Grossman A"H. The man who was executed last week was not the same wild man who committed the crime 26 years ago. He had completely changed. The only reason to put someone to death is if they are a threat to society. Martin was a changed man. The Governor knew this but had him killed anyway for political considerations. But we as Jews had an obligation to try and save him.<
Ignoring the question as to my age (since it has nothing to do with anything), I find your ignorance astounding. As someone who has closely followed the Tropper tragedy, it seems obvious to me that the 'Gedolim', except for Rav Shternbuch, were totally silent re an issue that has tremendous implications for all future generations and was a Chillul Hashem of the greatest magnitude. Even worse, many of these silent Gedolim ahad actually received payouts, sometimes for MILLIONS of dollars, from Tropper!!
Regarding Kolko: There is a well-detailed chronology of all the related events and meetings and, IIRC, only Rav Avigdor Miller tz'l seemed to take the (many) accusations against Kolko seriously.
American Rabbi: I think I'm a merciful person (even as a young boy of 8 I'd walk around the streets of Yerushalayim holding coins in my hand as not to embarrass a beggar by having to spend time diggging for change in my pocket or getting off the bus and walking a few blocks after giving up my seat as to not to embarrass them), yet I would've gladly executed Grossman myself (even as I felt a great sadness for having to extinguish Martin's life).
ReplyDeletejoseph2 - What did Rav Miller zt"l do regarding the R. Kolko allegations? (And where can one find this info authoratively?)
ReplyDeletej2:
ReplyDeleteIf you wouldv'e murdered Mr. Grossman yourself, you'd have been chayiv misa al pi din, unlike Mr. Grossman who was not.
YN: How can a state-sanctioned execution of a cold-blooded murderer be considered 'murder'?
ReplyDelete(btw, I'm not implying that all executions ordered by a state or country are legitimate. However, in this case, the basic facts were never in dispute by rational people.)
How could you say you would kill Mr. Grossman? Halachicly (for many reasons) he wasn't chayiv misa.
ReplyDeleteBecause I'm a member of the same society that he murdered (i.e. a murder against any member of that society is really a murder of us all) and 'dina d'malchusa dina' to me means that if a legitimate court decides to execute him I see no reason why anyone -- and that includes me -- shouldn't guiltlessly do so.
ReplyDeletej2:
ReplyDeleteThere are serious limitations on the applicability of Dina D'Malchusa.
Also, the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach don't apply to Jews. And the enforcement of them by the Noachide courts don't apply to Jews. For a Jew, you need witnesses. And warning. And a Beis Din.
And you cannot kill a Jew without a Beis Din's order.
Y. N. said...
ReplyDeletej2:
There are serious limitations on the applicability of Dina D'Malchusa.
Also, the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach don't apply to Jews. And the enforcement of them by the Noachide courts don't apply to Jews. For a Jew, you need witnesses. And warning. And a Beis Din.
And you cannot kill a Jew without a Beis Din's order.
=============
the above is simply not true. Rav Wozner discusses the fact that a Jew can not interfere with a non-Jew fulfilling his mitzvos. One of them is that they need to have a justice system.
Regarding your second point you need to reread Igros Moshe regarding capital punishment that I posted or just look up Bava Metzia 83.
"Rav Wozner discusses the fact that a Jew can not interfere with a non-Jew fulfilling his mitzvos."
ReplyDeleteAnd the Mitzvos Bnei Noach specifically tell the Bnei Noach not to adjudicate matters on Jews, but to allow Beis Din to do so.
So your point is moot.
And the Igros Moshe you quoted doesn't change this point. It is applicable to Non-Jews (i.e. Bnei Noach.)
R' Avigdor Miller was not alone in fighting the Kolko cover up.
ReplyDeleteFrom the gedolim that had it brought to their attention there was also Rav Pam and the alter Tenker rov.
Y. N. said...
ReplyDelete"Rav Wozner discusses the fact that a Jew can not interfere with a non-Jew fulfilling his mitzvos."
And the Mitzvos Bnei Noach specifically tell the Bnei Noach not to adjudicate matters on Jews, but to allow Beis Din to do so.
So your point is moot.
And the Igros Moshe you quoted doesn't change this point. It is applicable to Non-Jews (i.e. Bnei Noach.)
============
the above is not so as I have repeatedly shown. Look at Bava Metzia 83. He gave Jews to be killed by the goyim.
"Look at Bava Metzia 83. He gave Jews to be killed by the goyim."
ReplyDeleteAnd the Gemora admonishes him for doing so. Specifically because a Jew cannot be turned over to be killed by the non-Jews.
Y.N. said...
ReplyDelete"Look at Bava Metzia 83. He gave Jews to be killed by the goyim."
And the Gemora admonishes him for doing so. Specifically because a Jew cannot be turned over to be killed by the non-Jews.
============
the gemora does not admonish him.
that is the minority view expressed by the Meiri. The Rashba, Ritva, Beis Yosef, Rav Eliashiv etc etc disagree
You keep repeating the same arguments over and over again and simply don't read or don't remember that I have answered these points.
Bava Metzia 83b-84a:
ReplyDeleteR. Eleazar son of R. Simeon met a police officer. R. Eleazar said to him, "How can you detect the thieves . . .? Perhaps you take the innocent and leave behind the guilty." The officer replied "And what shall I do? It is the king's command." [R. Eleazar then advised this policeman how to determine who was a thief and who was not] . . . A report was heard in the royal court. They said, "Let the reader of the letter become the messenger." R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon was brought to the court and he proceeded to apprehend thieves. R. Joshua son of Karchah, sent word to him, "Vinegar, son of wine! How long will you deliver the people of our God for slaughter?" R. Eleazar sent the reply, "I eradicate thorns from the vineyard." R. Joshua responded, "Let the owner of the vineyard come and eradicate his thorns."
Rabbi Eliezer was rebuked for assisting the government in the prosecution of criminals, thus indicating that this conduct is not proper.
Rabbi Eliezer was rebuked for assisting the government in the prosecution of criminals, thus indicating that this conduct is not proper.
ReplyDelete=============
you simply don't pay attention. R' Yehoshua rebuked him. But the Ritva, Rashba, Beis Yosef, Rav Moshe Halberstam, Rav Eliashiv etc etc. state that the halacha is in accord with R' Eleazar. Why do you keep repeating the view rejected as halacha?
Since the obligation to create dinim (under Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach) according to Ramban includes in it other obligations clearly not applicable to Jews (such as the creation of a general civil or secular law system governing all other than Jewish), Ramban could not accept a Jewish obligation to participate in dinim.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Bleich writes in Jewish Law and the State's:
ReplyDelete"Nevertheless, one point requires clarification. Punishment of malfeasors may be a royal prerogative. That, however, does not establish an obligation [for Jews] to assist the king in exercising that prerogative. . ."
Y. N. said...
ReplyDeleteSince the obligation to create dinim (under Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach) according to Ramban includes in it other obligations clearly not applicable to Jews (such as the creation of a general civil or secular law system governing all other than Jewish), Ramban could not accept a Jewish obligation to participate in dinim.
===========
conjecture on your part - please cite where the Rambam says this.
Rav Wozner disagrees with your conjecture.
Y. N. said...
ReplyDeleteRabbi Bleich writes in Jewish Law and the State's:
"Nevertheless, one point requires clarification. Punishment of malfeasors may be a royal prerogative. That, however, does not establish an obligation [for Jews] to assist the king in exercising that prerogative. . .
==========
and therefore? Rav Eliashiv disagrees with your understanding of Rabbi Bleich as does Rav Wozner.
Does Rabbi Bleich cite any sources for his assertion?
"please cite where the Rambam says this."
ReplyDeleteRamban, Bereishis 34:14.
DT, if you look at the earlier discussion of this point you will also notice that in addition to the Meiri explaining the Gemorah Bava Metzia 83b like I explained it above, so does Rambam, Hilchos Rotzeach 2:4 and Tosafos, Sanhedren 20b; and the Chasam Sofer Likkutim responsa no. 14.
ReplyDeleteDT, if you look at the earlier discussion of this point you will also notice that in addition to the Meiri explaining the Gemorah Bava Metzia 83b like I explained it above, so does Rambam, Hilchos Rotzeach 2:4 and Tosafos, Sanhedren 20b; and the Chasam Sofer Likkutim responsa no. 14.
ReplyDelete===========
And you should have noticed that apparently the majority of contemporary poskim disagreed with that intepretation
The Chasam Sofer is not "contemporary" enough for you?
ReplyDeleteHow does this Rambam support the Meiri?!
ReplyDeleteרמב"ם רוצח ושמירת הנפש ב:ד
וכל אלו הרצחנים וכיוצא בהן שאינן מחוייבים מיתת בית דין אם רצה מלך ישראל להרגם בדין המלכות ותקנת העולם הרשות בידו, וכן אם ראו בית דין להרוג אותן בהוראת שעה אם היתה השעה צריכה לכך הרי יש להם רשות כפי מה שיראו.
The Ramban you asked for, I believe, is Bereishis 34:14.
ReplyDeleteHow is the Ramban (Bereishis 34) relevant? One does not have to assist but one also does not undermine their system. And if the king commands or the welfare of society requires then a Jew is also required to comply with secular law.
ReplyDeletebtw, the case in the Gemara seems to refer to thieves and Grossman was a murderer. Doesn't that fact make a difference and therefore prevent any comparisons between the two?
ReplyDeleteJoseph2 said...
ReplyDeletebtw, the case in the Gemara seems to refer to thieves and Grossman was a murderer. Doesn't that fact make a difference and therefore prevent any comparisons between the two?
=============
those that R Eleizer reported were executed by the Roman government
YN above asserts that only a Bais Din can kill a Jew. So does that mean that since there hasn't been a comparable Bais Din in two thousand years that a Jewish murderer (and, yes, there have been some!) can never be executed by society?
ReplyDeleteMy gut feeling, which usually turns out to be correct as far as I can tell, is that this cannot be so.
>those that R Eleizer reported were executed by the Roman government<
ReplyDeleteRight. But since they were 'only' thieves, I could see why it'd be wrong to turn them over. Grossman murdered someone (not just anyone but someone whose job it was to protect society).
"So does that mean that since there hasn't been a comparable Bais Din in two thousand years that a Jewish murderer (and, yes, there have been some!) can never be executed by society?"
ReplyDeletej2:
Absolutely correct. Until the Sanhedrin reconvene, there is NO authorization for carrying out the death penalty - your gut feeling notwithstanding.
Y. N. said...
ReplyDelete"So does that mean that since there hasn't been a comparable Bais Din in two thousand years that a Jewish murderer (and, yes, there have been some!) can never be executed by society?"
j2:
Absolutely correct. Until the Sanhedrin reconvene, there is NO authorization for carrying out the death penalty - your gut feeling notwithstanding.
=============
Y.N. you are the one who is wrong. You are obviously not familiar with the teshuva literature.
Rav Sternbuch told me that his grandfather told of a mosair who was killed at the direction of the community rabbis
DT: That's a different issue. Extra-judicial killings are authorized even today. Rav Avigdor Miller zt'l (I believe) also related such an incident. Even today a moiser can be killed. A rodef also can be killed today.
ReplyDeleteBut there are NO judicially ordered death penalty (i.e. for murder or chillul Shabbos) in the absence of the Sanhedrin.
But there are NO judicially ordered death penalty (i.e. for murder or chillul Shabbos) in the absence of the Sanhedrin.
ReplyDelete=============
where have you been? You are just going in circles. Without a Sanhedrin the sanhedrin can not execute someone?!
We have been talking from the very beginning of the right of a society - Jewish or non-Jewish to use capital punishment. See siman 2 in Choshen Mishpat.
Jewish society maintains the ability in exile to "execute" a moiser or a rodef. It lacks that authority for crimes such as murder, Chillul Shabbos, etc.
ReplyDeleteY. N. said...
ReplyDeleteJewish society maintains the ability in exile to "execute" a moiser or a rodef. It lacks that authority for crimes such as murder, Chillul Shabbos, etc.
=============
discussing this with you is simply a waste of time - you simple don't listen.
Simon beis choshen mishpat a society can do what ever is necessary for its well being. In a time when the Jewish community can not legally execute - then it is permitted to aske the secular government - this was done by the Rosh and others.
This is my last response and I am not posting anymore of your comments on this subject.
(If your kind enough to post this final [really!] point of mine - and you can have the final word.)
ReplyDeleteThat applies in a dire circumstance only. It wasn't applicable in every traditional Torah death penalty case (i.e. Avoda Zora or Retzicha.)
1) Martin Grossman posed no dire circumstance to society. And 2) his crime wouldn't have qualified under Jewish law for him to be turned over to the secular authorities based on Choshen Mishpat siman 2.
>Jewish society maintains the ability in exile to "execute" a moiser or a rodef. It lacks that authority for crimes such as murder, Chillul Shabbos, etc.<
ReplyDeleteThere are many kinds of informers... Are there any restrictions as to the kinds of moisers that can be executed? (I sure hope so!)
How can a murderer not be executable when killing him may very well save future lives?
See Shut Chasam Sofer 6:14. It clearly states non-Jewish courts have no right to execute a Jewish person. Period.
ReplyDelete