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.
Rambam (Talmud Torah 2:2) A teacher may employ corporal punishment to cast fear upon [the students]. However, he should not beat them cruelly, like an enemy. Therefore, he should not beat them with a rod or a staff, but rather with a small strap.
Makkos(8a): Although the son is already taught, it is still obligatory on the father to chasten, because it is written, Correct thy son and he will give you rest, yea he will give delight to your soul.
Igros Moshe (YD IV #30.4) Question: Is it permissible to hit students? Answer In my humble opinion it is obvious that this should not be done with a cane or anything that can seriously hurt rhe child. It is prohibited for a teacher to hit a student even a light blow or even to threaten to beat him with such or even for a teacher to hold a cane in his hand. . He should have available only a small strap which a father and a teacher are allowed to use when the child misbehaves or isn’t learning properly. (Rambam (Talmud Torah 2:2). It is correctly said that one who hits with a cane violates the Torah prohibition against hitting and this is even for a light blow.that does no damage. It is also obvious that severe beating from anger is prohibited even with a strap or stick The teacher and father have the same restrictions in general. They differ in that a teacher can only hit for issues of learning while the father can hit even for issues of character and similar things and sometimes for minor issues. Obviously this is only when there is some minor complaint – a father can hit but not a teacher
In any sensible Jewish school, the line "They are educating future Nazis" would've gotten him fired in disgrace. Luckily he taught in the Chareidi system.
ReplyDelete