https://www.ynetnews.com/article/rJ3V0rC9U
Although beaches set
to officially reopen only on Wednesday, thousands of beachgoers could be
seen sunbathing and swimming in the sea over the weekend, despite
restrictions meant to combat COVID-19; police, inspectors fail to
enforce health rules
Oh those chilonim _ always breaking secular law. Think they're above everyone else!
ReplyDeleteDaf Hayomi (telephone)
ReplyDelete“In case it is an individual who has sinned unwittingly, he shall offer a she-goat in its first
year as a sin offering. The priest shall make expiation before the Lord on behalf of the person who erred, for he sinned unwittingly, making such expiation for him that he may be forgiven. For the citizen among the Israelites and for the stranger who resides among them—you shall have one ritual for anyone who acts in error. But the person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly ביד רמה reviles the Lord; that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has spurned the word of the Lord and violated His commandment, that person shall be cut off—he bears his guilt.” (Numbers 15:27-31)
Shabbath 68b-69a
“What is Monabaz's reason? [The analogy on mere grounds of logic is insufficient, since willful and unwitting transgression are obviously dissimilar.] Because it is written, Ye shall have one law for him that doeth unwittingly; and in proximity thereto [it is written], And the soul that doeth aught with a high hand ביד רמה [Numbers 15:30 this obviously applies to deliberate transgression.]: hence unwitting is assimilated to willful transgression [i.e., Scripture itself intimates by this proximity that the two are similar.]. Just as willful transgression involves that he shall have had knowledge, so unwitting transgression implies that he shall have had knowledge [before a sin-offering is incurred]. And the Rabbis: how do they employ this [verse], Ye shall have one law, [etc.]? They employ it even as R. Joshua b. Levi taught his son: Ye shall have one law for him that doeth unwittingly; and it is written, and when ye shall err, and not observe all these commandments [Hor. 8a it is deduced that this refers to idolatry]. And it is written, And the soul that doeth aught with a high hand ביד רמה . . . [that soul shall be cut off]: thus they are all assimilated to idolatry: just as there it is something for the willful transgression of which kareth [i.e., cutting off] is incurred, and for the unwitting transgression a sin-offering is incurred [v. 27], so for everything the willful transgression of which involves kareth, its unwitting transgression involves a sin-offering. [But where willful transgression involves a lesser penalty than kareth, an unwitting offence does not involve a sin-offering]. But according to Monabaz, wherein lies his non-willfulness [when the offender has knowledge at the time of his action]? E.g., if he was ignorant in respect of the sacrifice [He knew that the willful offence involved kareth, but not that the unwitting transgression involved a sin-offering]. But the Rabbis hold that ignorance in respect of the sacrifice does not constitute ignorance.
Why I like Monabaz here. To Monabaz the severe penalty with no possibility of sacrifice to obtain forgiveness is only for the absolute defiant sinner, ביד רמה. This is the language of how the Jews left Egypt: “The Lord stiffened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and
he gave chase to the Israelites. As the Israelites were departing defiantly ביד רמה,” (Exodus 14:8).
To Monabaz the smallest easing of absolute defiance of the sinner, the sinner, if he repents, may bring a sacrifice. The Sages, who disagree with Monabaz, claim that the sinner, though he repents fully, cannot bring a sacrifice for a sin he committed defiantly ביד רמה, though the sinner claims that he had no idea that sin involves a sacrifice.
Sins committed defiantly, ביד רמה are a separate category. Beautiful thought. We must not sin. The Torah warn us about sinning defiantly, ביד רמה.
Did Rabbi Mendel Epstein do his crimes believing that he was acting lawfully within the Torah? If yes, then I say, Rabbi Mendel Epstein fits the definition of who acts defiantly, יד רמב “ But the person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly ביד רמה reviles the Lord; that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has spurned the word of the Lord and violated His commandment, that person shall be cut off—he bears his guilt.” (Numbers 15:30-31)
ReplyDeleteFiled 05/18/15 Pacer:
Page 6: “The options here in the United States are essentially limited to community shunning, public protest and shaming, and excommunication from shul and religious events. The only option available in those situations in which community shunning and excommunication have been ineffective as such measures often are (as in the Aaron Friedman case), is the so called “forced get” which is founded on the notion that an Orthodox Jewish man who obeys the laws of Moses as the foundation of his moral, religious and practical life does not wish to do evil.”
Page 9: “In the videos, Rabbi Epstein engages in rampant puffing, apparently in an effort to justify the fee charged for the planned “forced get” and to assure the FBI agent that the beth din would be successful in obtaining a get, including a reference to the notorious cattle prod that could be used. Notably, when the Government executed the raid on the warehouse, they found no cattle prod, nor any other so called “kidnapping” tools. Crucially, the Government never introduced an order signed by Rabbi Epstein authorizing force, as would be required for the “coerced” get in the sting operation. Additionally, it was clear from the Government’s own witness that the psak kefiyah means compulsion or force, but does not require physical force or coercion, and
that the mere confrontation by a group of people operating pursuant to the psak kefiyah can result in the husband immediately giving the get without any compulsion at all. (Testimony of Rabbi Ralbag, Tr., Vol. 10, 3/9/15, p. 140) In addition to the recordings, emails, and video surveillance of the set up for the sting operation and the sting itself, the Government also introduced a number of prior “forced gets” which it alleged Rabbi Epstein engineered or planned. These prior “forced gets” were not considered Rule 404 (b) evidence but so called “intrinsic” evidence. One such forced get was the attempted kidnapping of Aaron Friedman, who was allegedly accosted at the home of his mother in law when he arrived to drop off his daughter.”
Page 20: “Rabbi Epstein proffered that his religious beliefs were offered not for the purpose of a justification or necessity defense, but as relevant to the issue of whether he possessed the requisite intent to unlawfully seize and hold the recalcitrant husbands against their will to extract gets under duress. (ECF # 225, 2/20/15 Letter Brief; ECF #233, 2/22/2015 Letter Brief). As kidnapping, attempted kidnapping and conspiracy
to kidnap are all specific intent crimes, intent was to be a focal point of the case.”
I say ORA are doing evil . This is tyranny of the minority in http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/280335
“Moreover, it seems to imply that any minority can hold the majority ransom by getting in a huff and threatening to disengage. This is little more than advocation capitulation to the tyranny of the minority –and in this case, a tiny minority.” Only a tiny minority in the USA believe that the woman is always right, that the woman is always believed, that recalcitrant husbands should be jailed. Joe Biden is safe saying: If you believe her then don’t vote for me.
So we should be watching this closely. First the chareidim break the rules with Lag Ba'Omer gatherings. Now large numbers of chilonim break the rules with going to the beach. Yet the number of new infections continues to drop and the number of active cases is dramatically decreasing day by day. This is against what all the official modelling claimed would happen.
ReplyDeleteWhile these beachgoers may get honorary Darwin Awards depending on how close together people were congregating, the reality is that indoor gathering is much more of a problem than outdoors in the sun. Almost all superspreading events to date happened indoors. But if people are close-talking and mixing together, they lose the excuse.
ReplyDeleteCurrent numbers always reflect what happened 2-3 weeks ago. The shutdown impact will linger on in the numbers, and any new transmissions won't even be recognized as such until symptoms develop from them (5-10 days?), let alone new transmissions leading to further spreading. You are always playing "catch up" with current numbers.
ReplyDeleteIt took approx 6 weeks of shutdown in UK to reduce the numbers of deaths to a relatively low level. This is becasue, even with a lockdown, there are further transmissions from those infected at the time. It is not clear what happens next....
ReplyDelete“Defying health orders,”
ReplyDeleteI’m reading Mendel Epstein Pacer APPELLANT EPSTEIN’S PETITION Date Filed: 09/08/2017
Page 8/70: “All three defendants challenge the District Court’s decision under Rules 402 and 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to bar admission of
evidence about Orthodox Jewish marital law and the religious motivations for the kidnappings, arguing that such evidence was relevant to negating the specific intent required for conviction.”
“2 The opinion does quote with approval the district court’s comment that “religious
motivation simply cannot negate the intent to commit a crime.” Id. The panel goes on
to say that it agrees “a religious benefit can constitute a ‘benefit’ under the statute.”
Id. That conclusion, however, goes to the statute’s “purpose” element (“for ransom,
reward or otherwise”), and has no bearing on the particular evidentiary issue,
addressing intent as to involuntariness, advanced in Epstein’s appeal.”
Mendel Epstein got money from the angry wives and also got a good feeling that he was doing a mitzvah, a good deed. This is ORA and Agunah International.
Mendel Epstein cites the Rambam that the recalcitrant husband being flogged in a bet din agrees to give the get with his whole heart and soul, so the get in kosher. Ok, that’s a legal argument, however flimsy, in my view. Surely the recalcitrant husbands never consent to the floggings or to the jailings as done in Israel. I see Mendel Epstein going right back into business when he gets out. Why? He’s so convinced he was doing a mitzvah and the money is so good. No he won’t get caught again. He’ll take more precautions.
“Defying health orders”
ReplyDeleteAllow me to quote Proverbs with the commentary of the Malbim.
“She will guard you from a forbidden woman; From an alien woman whose talk is smooth. From the window of my house, Through my lattice, I looked out And saw among the simple, Noticed among the youths, A lad devoid of sense. He was crossing the street near her corner, Walking toward her house In the dusk of evening, In the dark hours of night. A woman comes toward him Dressed like a harlot, with set purpose. She is bustling and restive; She is never at home. Now in the street, now in the square,
She lurks at every corner. She lays hold of him and kisses him; Brazenly she says to him,
I had to make a sacrifice of well-being; Today I fulfilled my vows. Therefore I have come out to you, Seeking you, and have found you. I have decked my couch with covers
Of dyed Egyptian linen; I have sprinkled my bed With myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon.
Let us drink our fill of love till morning;Let us delight in amorous embrace. For the man of the house is away; He is off on a distant journey. He took his bag of money with him
And will return only at mid-month.”(Proverbs 7:5-20)
Malbim on Mishley by Wengrov p. 69: “5.The strange woman denotes anyone except his own wife---even if she is of his people; the alien woman is a foreigner, who generally has to go to greater lengths to attract : she has to “make her words smooth.” Figuratively, the strange woman, again, represents alien philosophies ---of which there are two degrees: one could conceivably be “married” or integrated into Torah vision, while the other is irredeemably alien, heretical, but employs all the techniques of logic to allure the intellect..
6.The window suggests full, clear vision, while the lattice suggests a partial, secrete glimpse. The Teacher speaks, then, of two kinds of insight: of revealed and of hidden things.
7-14.The harlot inveigles her victim at first with the lure of a supposed mitzva, a purportedly commendable pious deed: it is a righteous act to have the meat of these sacrifices at a repast, and the pleasures she offers at first is therefore a supposedly religious one. 15. At first she speaks as though she had simply seen him pass by and invited him to stay wither, tempting him with the luxury of her furnishings. 17-19.This is reassure the young man that he will not be caught in the act: all is supposedly safe. 20. She continues to reassure him, that her husband will have no need to return home unexpectedly, that indeed he has a definite date he plans to arrive.”
King Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, all the prophets, Moses---talk of adultery figuratively representing idolatry. Sinners are wont to say: “Such is the way of an adulteress: She eats, wipes her mouth, And says, I have done no wrong.” (Proverbs 30:20). Beautiful, yes?
Update on me, please allow. The NYS Court of Appeals may or may not give me a number for my motion return date June 1, 2020. I sent today:
ReplyDelete“1.I request permission to submit these papers concerning my motion return date 6/1/2020. I'm attaching an affidavit of service proving I mailed by UPS a true copy to Susan and to TIAA I hear nothing from Susan. I last heard from TIAA was their email to me May 12, 2020: Dear Mr. Aranoff: We are responding to your recent inquiries concerning your QDRO as it relates to your TIAA retirement annuities, and your attempts to reach Vondell Simmons. As has been communicated to you many times over the years, TIAA cannot and will not take any action or discuss this matter with you unless and until you receive a revised order of the court, dated after July $24$, $2007$. We are obligated to comply with the Court order. Best Regards,
TIAA Customer Care Team Retail Client Services
2.New York's highest appellate court was established to articulate statewide principles of law in the context of deciding particular lawsuits. Question: Once a husband gives a Jewish get to his wife in a rabbinic court in NYS, is her status changed in any way under the laws of NYS? This is what happened to me. I gave Susan a get in Rabbi Aryeh Ralbag's rabbinic court on Susan's initiative on February 17, 1993. Judge Sand cited my February 17, 1993 get in my federal case against TIAA for ERISA violations. See in Pacer: 1:09-cv-02076-LBS Aranoff v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association Leonard B.\ Sand, presiding Date filed: 03/06/2009 Date terminated: 03/06/2009 Date of last filing: 03/06/2009.
3.Rabbi Mendel Epstein fought on behalf of wives angry at their husbands who refused to give them a Jewish get. In Pacer APPELLANT EPSTEIN'S PETITION Date Filed: 09/08/2017
Page 8/70:...
4.Rabbi Mendel Epstein got money from the angry wives and also got a good feeling that he was doing a mitzvah, a good deed. This is ORA and Agunah International: they fight for angry wives that seek a get from their recalcitrant husbands.
Rabbi Mendel Epstein cites the Rambam that the recalcitrant husband being flogged in a bet din agrees to give the get with his whole heart and soul, so the get in kosher. Ok, that's a legal argument, however flimsy, in my view. Surely the recalcitrant husbands never consent to the floggings or to the jailings as done in Israel.
5.Pacer on Rabbi Mendel Epstein a letter May 8, 2020, by R. Joseph Gribko Assistant U.S. Attorney:...
6.May I ask the Court, TIAA, and Susan for a copy, if they have it, of the March 7, 1995 Rigler Order of Separation?”
Don’t we all agree that what Rabbi Mendel Epstein did was horrible? In parsha אמור we see: “If anyone maims his fellow, as he has done so shall it be done to him. fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The injury he inflicted on another shall be inflicted on him” (Leviticus 24:19-20).
Update on Mendel Epstein: Pacer Case 3:14-cr-00287-FLW Document 484 Filed 05/19/20 Page 9 of 17:
ReplyDelete“Considering these factors first, I cannot overstate the serious nature of Defendant’s crime. Defendant’s underlying criminal conduct was severe and violent. He not only relied upon his status in his religious community to recruit young and impressionable men to commit kidnapping-related crimes, he convinced them that their conduct was sanctioned by their religion. While Defendant was only convicted on one count of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, the criminal conspiracy lasted for years, and he was involved in multiple kidnappings where violence occurred. As I stated on the record during Defendant’s sentencing, there is no doubt that he committed a crime that was deserving of a 10-year term of imprisonment.”
Maybe Judge Freda could be moved to be compassionate to Mendel Epstein if he would show regret and remorse that he erred that Judaism sanctioned his severe and violent conduct. Maybe if rabbis of ORA would condemn his severe and violent conduct, this would induce him to show regret and remorse. We on this blog should continue to condemn his severe and violent conduct, yes?
Update on me. This is my letter today to the NYS Court of Appeals:.
ReplyDelete“1.I request permission to submit these papers concerning my motion return date 6/1/2020. I'm attaching an affidavit of service proving I mailed by UPS a true copy to Susan and to TIAA
2.Your new rules state: Parties can request to be relieved of the digital submission requirements based on a showing of undue hardship. I request to be be relieved of the Courts new rules that require digital submissions because I'm in Israel, old, poor, pro se. I don't know how to do digital submissions and I have no one to teach me. Further I request that you read to me letters you send me as you use to. Ordinary air mail is so slow and unreliable in Israel. If you would send to me with UPS I would get the mail promptly. I request to know if you assigned me a number to my motion with return date June 1, 2020. I request to know its status. Your new rules state effective for motions with return date of June 1, 2020. I request to be treated under your old system due to undue hardship.
3.Your not reading on the phone letters you write to me is an extraordinary and compelling hardship for me blocking my efforts to release my pension. This is like Judge Prus 11/18/2016: Mr.\ Aranoff is ordered not to contact this court, the clerk's office or chamber's staff as all his requests are time barred and nothing less than a waste of this court's time and resources.”
Am I up against the resistance? See https://www.wsj.com/articles/flynns-lawyers-ask-appeals-court-to-order-his-criminal-case-dismissed-11589926402?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=4
“In Tuesday’s strongly worded 44-page filing, attorney Sidney Powell disagreed, contending that Mr. Flynn, a retired lieutenant general, had been subject to “egregious” misconduct. She also asked that Judge Sullivan recuse himself from the case, saying that he has shown bias against Mr. Flynn. When Mr. Flynn had first expected to be sentenced to probation in the case, Judge Sullivan questioned Mr. Flynn’s patriotism and criticized his actions that led to his plea.”
Clearly Judge Sullivan is part of the resistance.