Wednesday, June 7, 2023

Bombers, molesters & rabbinic guidance with seichel & derech eretz

The purpose of this post is to try and clear up a number of issues from a previous post relating to substance and form of dealing with gedolim and sensitive halachic issues - as well as the need for respect and derech eretz for others - even when you disagree with them.

As most of my readership is aware - I have recently published a 2 volume book dealing with the very sensitive subject of child and domestic abuse. It deals with very sensitive halachic issues such as rodef, mesira, lashon harah. This project was done with the strong encouragement Rav Moshe Sternbuch. While Rav Sternbuch did not read through the material before it was published - we did have a number of discussions. When I asked him to write a teshuva on the material he said simply that I should a write a summary of what we had talked about it and he would review that summary - which he did by carefully reading and annotating and correcting the summary. That corrected material has been included in the book.

It was clear that care needed to be taken in presenting material to him to make sure I presented the context correctly and that I understood the context of his comments. One case which I documented in a post - was when certain chasidim came to me because of their concern with my posting about the Tropper case which they were heavily involved. When they asked him about writing about this while he was walking to Mincha- he told them he saw no need to be involved in the subject. They gleefully pointed out that they had just gotten a psak that I should not write anymore about Tropper and that if I respected Rav Sternbuch's Daas Torah than I should cease and desist from further posting on the subject. I was clearly puzzled by Rav Sternbuch's comments since he had clearly indicated the importance of my writing and publicizing the issue. After Mincha I asked him to clarify his negative comment he had made to the chassidim and the positive comment that I had received. He expressed surprise that I was puzzled. He said he thought he was answering the chassidim what he felt they should do concerning their involvement in the matter while the positive comments were regarding what I should do.

I'd like to address the reason for this post. Franks comments regarding the very serious issue of what to do when faced with a possible life threatening situation - do you need to ask a rabbi's permission to call the police. We are dealing with a case of where there is a real possibility of immediate danger of delaying reporting to the police - in such a case Rav Sternbuch told me one should call the police first.

Frank commented on a previous post about the Santa Monica bomber said...

Micha: Rav Shternbuch specifically said it may only be reported to the authorities in a case where we can determine with certainty that the accused is guilty prior to such reporting. Yes, I have it first hand from Rav Shternbuch. You can ask him directly if you seek to truth.

The above comment is misleading - possible deliberately so. There are a wide number of scenarios that could fit into Franks assertion. (I am assuming that Rav Sternbuch stated what Frank claimed - though it is possible he misunderstood what Rav Sternbuch said.) I am thus questioning what Rav Sternbuch meant to say. For example 1) Did he think that there needs to be 100% certainty or just a reasonable possibility as opposed to merely suspecting that the person was guilty? 2) how likely did Rav Sternbuch think that there might be danger of delaying calling the police? 3) how serious a crime is the person suspected of committing? Are a serial killer treated the same as someone who drives without a driver's license? 4) Is the guilt or innocence readily established by a rabbi or does it need professional expertise. There are a number of other possibilities

Finally Frank tossed in a gratuitous insult "You can ask him directly if you seek the truth" A sneering statement which reveals a basic contempt for me and an assumption that I am not concerned with truth - at least not as much as Frank is.

In sum I stand by my original statement - in the case of the Santa Monica Bomber - one should call the police rather than a rabbi when the bomber was identified and there was even the slightest chance that he might escape or hurt someone i.e., perhaps he had another bomb with him. In addition in reporting molesters or other dangerous people - if there is a possibility that someone will be hurt by the delay or that the rabbis are not qualified to investigate - the police should be contacted.

And yes I did send a letter to Rav Sternbuch with a request for confirmation of my understanding of what to do in a question of doubt in a dangerous situation. If his view differs from what I have understood in the past - I will publicize his answer.

6 comments:

  1. You are coalescing unrelated points. Granting that the Santa Monica Bomber should be immediately reported -- you can assume if he is in a shul there is an immediate risk he may attempt to bomb the shul at that moment -- and there is potentially not a moment to spare in asking a shaila. Your bridging that to conclude that an alleged molester, where his guilt is not ascertained unequivocally, and waiting approximately an hour while you ask a shaila will not result in immediate harm (i.e. a situation where he is not in immediate access to someone he may be harming and/or that you can't separate him from for a short period), is patently wrong. (Of course if he is in immediate contact with potential victims he may be harming at the time, and there is no way to separate him from them [i.e. he refuses - or whatever the inability stems from], that would be a different situation than I refer to, and in which case it would be correct to call the police immediately.)

    And your taking the liberty to extend Rav Moshe Sternbuch's approach in one area - given specific factors - to other dissimilar areas, does not make your view that of RMS. And while I appreciate your - now - seeking clarification from RMS on this point, the fact that you made assumptions in his name until this point and only when challenged sought his direct input, does indicate (to me at least) that you took too many liberties in extending his words to seemingly related cases - but dissimilar in critical points. You wrote "I did send a letter to Rav Sternbuch with a request for confirmation of my understanding of what to do in a question of doubt in a dangerous situation", and I would hope your request for clarification specifically defines what you mean by "a dangerous situation". A situation where one additional moment puts person(s) at immediate risk -- or a situation where there is sufficient time (i.e. an hour or whatever it takes to make the phone call) to ask a shaila and provide the posek the relevant facts of the case (i.e. 1: the certainty of the alleged party's guilt and 2: whether there is an immediate need to remove the person from society - or more remedial steps can be taken by rabbinical authorities without immediately reporting someone to secular authorities.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Frank you are not reading what I write and your basic assumption that I am distorting or making up what Rav Sternbuch said - is nonsense.

    "And your taking the liberty to extend Rav Moshe Sternbuch's approach in one area"

    I am not taking liberties I am reporting what he told me.

    "And while I appreciate your - now - seeking clarification from RMS on this point, the fact that you made assumptions in his name until this point and only when challenged sought his direct input, does indicate (to me at least) that you took too many liberties in extending his words to seemingly related cases - but dissimilar in critical points. You wrote "I did send a letter to Rav Sternbuch with a request for confirmation of my understanding of what to do in a question of doubt in a dangerous situation","

    My sending a letter was only to confirm that he had not changed his mind because of your claim that you had heard something different from him.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I find it pointless to continue the conversation now that my second comment, in as many threads, over the past 4 days has been censored by RDE from appearing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Frank said...

    I find it pointless to continue the conversation now that my second comment, in as many threads, over the past 4 days has been censored by RDE from appearing.

    ================

    Frank I haven't censored any of your comments.

    What normally prevents a comment from appearing is if it too large Blogger simply doesn't show it and provides no error message.

    Please submit it again and if it were a large measure just divide it into smaller sizes

    ReplyDelete
  5. Apologies for implicating you. They were both not large. I also got a confirmation for both that they will appear "pending blog owner approval". I just tested a large post and it didn't accept it, returning a message of "Must be at most 4,096 characters".

    I believe Blogger has a "spam" filter that you can check if it got caught in and unspam it so it appears. Perhaps you can check if two comments of mine went there (from two different threads).

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  6. Please check Blogger's spam filter to see if they got caught there inadvertently (and you can unspam them so they post if they are there.)

    Gut Yom Tov

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.