Igros Moshe (YD IV #30.4) Question: Can a student be hit?Answer It is clear and obvious that it is prohibited to hit a child with a stick and anything that can cause serious damage with a strong blow. Even a light blow is prohibited or even to threaten to hit him And a teacher should not even be holding a stick in his hand. Rather he should have available a small strap with which a father or teacher can hit when he misbehaves.(Rambam Talmud Torah 2:2). In fact one who hits with a stick transgresses a clear Torah prohibition which applies even for a light blow. Since it is prohibited to beat the child with a stick it is no different than hitting an adult even if no harm is caused. It is clear that a angry blow is prohibited with a stick or strap. In this matter the father is equated to the teacher. They are different in that the teacher can hit a student only for issues that interfere with his learning. In contrast the father can also hit for other issues sometimes even minor ones as is stated in the gemora (Makkos 8a). Obviously there has to be a reason.
Michtav M’Eliyahu (3:361): My nephew told me that he saw in a sefer that even if the child obeys his parents it is still proper to find an excuse in order to hit him at least a small amount. … the Ibn Ezra (Shemos 20:14) has written that it is not relevant to talk about the love of a peasant to the king’s daughter. Also when the king punishes the peasant with a beating the peasant never thinks about taking revenge against the king and the only lesson he learns from being punished is to be more submissive. That is because it is obvious that he is totally subordinate to the king and the king has the right to punish - but not him. Similar when it is ingrained in a child’s heart the idea that the father is the ruler and total master over him and that he is subservient to his father then because of this subservience he will never learn to hit others just because his father hits him. However our education has become corrupted because the teachers now think that they need to be friends of their students and parents also think this and everything centers on the independence of the children. Because of this, when a father beats his son, the son will retaliate and hit his father or his small brothers… However the secular researchers in their search for new understanding and their desire to destroy the principle of education which were known even by non‑Jews and whose source is in G‑d’s Torah and Prophets - produce things which bring about a reversal of all these basic principles. They are educating future Nazis and brazen people. From this we see to what degree it is necessary to be careful with all aspects of innovation of the secular researchers concerning psychology and education and it is necessary to evaluate and ascertain whether their approach contradicts the words of Chazal and the Rishonim or Jewish practice which itself is Torah. If contradictions are found it is necessary to reject complete all their filthy innovations and not accept anything from them without first examining it with sharp examination and to evaluate it in the light of Torah and Chazal and the words of the gedolim of the Rishonim and Achronim.
It was pretty much that excerpt from MME that made me put the book down and say "I'm done with this nutjob." IIRC, it wasn't "future Nazis" but "Hiterlistim" that was the word he used.
ReplyDelete> Also when the king punishes the peasant with a beating the peasant never thinks about taking revenge against the king and the only lesson he learns from being punished is to be more submissive.
Yeah? Ask Louis XVI, Charles I and Nicholas II about that. Someone's lack of knowledge of European history and human nature is showing here.
This is but one example. The whole book is riddled with sheker and nonsense. That is why Gateshead is such a menuval factory,
Deleteit is why his prize student Louis Jacobs founded the other heretical "Masorti" movement (I say other, because this book itself is full of sheker and kazav).
Btw, out of curiosity, why did King David's sons become such menuvalim and rebel against him and everyone else?
There was a great RY, whose student told him a vort, and the Rav knew it was from a maskil book, so he hit the Talmid.
ReplyDeleteSo much for "Mikol melamdai hiskalti"
DeleteThis issue was addressed by the late R. Chaim Feuerman [an obituary for whom is published at https://www.yu.edu/news/in-memoriam-rabbi-dr-chaim-feuerman-zl ] in his course "Classroom Management" which I was privileged to take at Azrieli Graduate School in the summer of 5766. Rabbi Feuerman professed halakhah le-ma'aseh that teachers cannot hit students [and hence he devised an entire course called "Classroom Management" devoted to diplomatically encouraging student cooperation]. First of all, insisted Rabbi Feuerman, there is the obvious practical issue that the secular law in the United States would require immediately arresting the teacher who assaults a student. But more fundamentally, the point that Chazon Ish makes (Yoreh De'ah 2:16, final paragraph) why we do not use lethal violence to eliminate heretics likewise applies here. Says Chazon Ish: when the Gemara directs us to employ lethal violence to eliminate heretics, it is referring to a utopian society where everyone is a Charedi Jew who understands the Hashgachah of HKB"H, and hence it is obviously a kindness to society to eliminate heretics. But in our unredeemed world, we should only use diplomacy to convince the heretics to become ba'alei teshuvah. The same rationale would augur in favour of avoiding use of corporal punishment in school.
ReplyDelete