tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post6169977593683940475..comments2024-03-28T02:08:17.990+02:00Comments on Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Motti Elon is honored speaker: Dealing with sexual predators in our neighborhoods.Daas Torahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07252904288544083215noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-83429396690490259622014-08-03T00:26:38.280+03:002014-08-03T00:26:38.280+03:00It is worthwhile noting that the Ritva was a Talmi...It is worthwhile noting that the Ritva was a Talmid of the Ramban, and that lends strength to the assumption of many that the Ramban's words apply to a קטנה as well.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-27539694088060075422014-07-31T15:44:42.392+03:002014-07-31T15:44:42.392+03:00The שיטות who hold that one may kill a ספק רודף ar...The שיטות who hold that one may kill a ספק רודף are only talking about when there is a ספק במציאות if he is going to kill/rape - not when we know the מציאות but there is a ספיקא דדינא if there is a דין רודף at all! Chas VeSholom!Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-80529943361335011632014-07-31T15:42:03.171+03:002014-07-31T15:42:03.171+03:00@Chaim -- A sofek rodef is considered the same as ...@Chaim -- A sofek rodef is considered the same as a rodef and can be killed - despite the sofek. This is discussed by Rav Silman in Yeshurun vol 15.<br /><br /><br />Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-12795705561495216632014-07-31T15:38:40.776+03:002014-07-31T15:38:40.776+03:00Rav Gershon Edelstein also learns that the Ramban ...Rav Gershon Edelstein also learns that the Ramban applies to a קטנה as well - Shiurei R' Gershon Kesuvos pages 265-266.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-67125838876865441582014-07-31T15:19:49.477+03:002014-07-31T15:19:49.477+03:00From the Ritva Kesuvos 37a ד"ה מתניתין we see...From the Ritva Kesuvos 37a ד"ה מתניתין we see that he extends the Ramban's סברא to a קטנה as well, i.e. although פתוי קטנה אונס הוא nevertheless there is no דין רודף. The מגיה there (note 34) explains it in this way, and that is the real Pshat, if you learn the whole paragraph there (he is saying the same as Ramban, but adds the case of קטנה).<br /><br /><br />The מגיה writes that he didn't find anybody else saying so; however, we know that the Shita Mekubetzes has a ספק (brought in Haflaah and Minchas Chinuch), and there is nobody who says otherwise - so we return to my original argument: אין ספיקו של השטמ"ק מוציא מידי ודאו של הריטב"א. Of course, even without the Ramban or Ritva you cannot kill someone מספק since the Shita has a ספק.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-53165022999921480912014-07-31T14:56:11.626+03:002014-07-31T14:56:11.626+03:00@Chaim - no I don't agree with you regarding y...@Chaim - no I don't agree with you regarding your extension of the Ramban from Shoteh to child.<br /><br />The Minchas Chinuch however requires further thought - especially regarding the question of what significance it has in practical halacha.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-34658753325795165112014-07-31T01:02:41.232+03:002014-07-31T01:02:41.232+03:00@Chaim - thank you for acknowledging that you misq...@Chaim - thank you for acknowledging that you misquoted the Ramban. Unfortunately I wasted a lot of time trying to find the sources you quoted. Please take the time to verify your sources BEFORE you post. I added a note to the beginning of the thread that the citation from the Ramban is wrong.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-40417534230692367882014-07-31T00:18:46.205+03:002014-07-31T00:18:46.205+03:00R' Druckman has been a big concealer and enabl...R' Druckman has been a big concealer and enabler of sexual abuse in his yeshiva network, stemming back to the scandals at Netiv meir and Mercaz harav 15 years ago, to this present day.<br />I now see why his giur may be tainted (as is the giur of everyone under R' Elyashiv's tainted BD and Tropper).Eddienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-30809319777288538452014-07-30T23:42:13.900+03:002014-07-30T23:42:13.900+03:00You are right - I misquoted the Ramban. But I thin...You are right - I misquoted the Ramban. But I think that if the Ramban says that a Shoteh who willingly is מזנה is not considered אונס in regards to the Halacha of Rodeif, the same would apply to a קטנה (the Dvar Moshe I cited also says this). In fact, it is a כל שכן - as I wrote, the Binas Adam says that it could be that even the Rambam agrees that פיתוי שוטה אונס הוא, so we <br />see that a שוטה is considered more אנוס than a child.<br /><br /><br />On the other hand, it could still be that a very young child is considered to not be able to give consent at all, and is in fact less capable of רצון than a שוטה, and the Halacha of Rodeif would still apply even according to the Ramban. וצ"ע.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-10275543660654900132014-07-30T23:34:17.898+03:002014-07-30T23:34:17.898+03:00@David please look at the commentaries
סמ"ע ...@David please look at the commentaries<br /><br />סמ"ע על שולחן ערוך חושן משפט הלכות מאבד ממון חבירו בידים ומוסר ומלשין סימן שפח סעיף י <br /><br />כט] בגופו או בממונו. דמסור אף דאינו מזיק ממון חבירו בידים גרע ממזיק, וילפי לה בגמרא [ב"ק קי"ז ע"א] מדכתיב [ישעיה נ"א כ'] בניך עלפו שכבו בראש כל חוצות כתוא מכמר, מה תוא זה כשנפל למכמר שוב אין מרחמין עליו, כן ממונם של ישראל, כיון שנפל ליד אומות העולם אין מרחמין עליו ומעלילין עליו עלילות כל כך עד שהרבה פעמים יבוא ע"י לידי סכנת נפשות, משו"ה יש להמסור דין רודף. מיהו לא גרע מרודף דאחר שעבר עבירה אין הורגין אותו בלא התראה ובדין ב"ד דוקא, כן המסור אחר שמסר, אם לא שהוחזק למסור וכדמסיק המחבר בסעיף י"א:Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-28687446442000707222014-07-30T23:17:56.617+03:002014-07-30T23:17:56.617+03:00When the S"A rules the following:
"Even...When the S"A rules the following:<br /><br />"Even if he threatens to hand either the Jew <b>or</b> his property to non <br />Jewish authorities – even if it is a small amount of money – he can <br />legitimately be killed"<br /><br />The S"A is saying even if he is only turning over a small amount of money from the Jew to the government you may kill him beforehand. Turning over a small amount of money from another Jew to the government isn't endangering the other Jews life. And more importantly the S"A did not qualify his ruling -- which is a major serious as possible ruling allowing one Jew to kill another Jew -- the S"A didn't qualify it with that the small amount of money is endangering anyone's life. Surely the S"A would qualify his ruling if the qualification you're giving it were applicable. You can't get more serious than allowing a killing.<br /><br /><br />I apologize if I am coming across as stubborn, but this seems to be a clear cut rulingI am reading in the S"A.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-64262694291940775362014-07-30T23:09:54.608+03:002014-07-30T23:09:54.608+03:00@David again the problem of mesira is that endange...@David again the problem of mesira is that endangered the life of the JewDaas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-71559256594351663502014-07-30T23:05:53.380+03:002014-07-30T23:05:53.380+03:00@ Chaim I can't find the Ramban you mentioned....@ Chaim I can't find the Ramban you mentioned. There is a Ramban (Kesubos 37a) but it is not about a child but a shoteh.<br /><br />חידושי הרמב"ן מסכת כתובות דף לז עמוד א <br /><br />אי דייקת עלה איכא למימר לההיא אוקמתא גופה רישא בשוטה מפותה דפתויה אונס היא דאין מצילין אותה בנפשו שכיון שרוצה לזנות אין אפוטרפוס לעריות ויש לה קנס. <br /><br /><br /><br />The Minchas Chinuch(#600) says<br /><br />מנחת חינוך מצוה תר <br /><br />אבל מפותה אין מצילין בנפשו דהתורה לא הקפידה על העבירה רק אפגמה אבל אם היא בעצמה אינה מקפדת ל"ל בה כן מבואר בש"ס ואפשר אם היא קטנה דפיתוי קטנה אונס הוא לדעת רוב הפוסקים חוץ מהר"מ וכן אם היא שוטית וחרשית דודאי הוי כאונס דלאו בת דעת היא מצילין אותה אף בפיתוי. או אפשר כיון דלאו בת דעת אינה מקפדת על פגמה כלל ועל העביר' לא הקפידה התורה א"כ אפי' רוצה לאונסה אין מצילין אותה בנפשו כלל וצ"ע ע' בגמרא.<br /><br />מנחת חינוך מצוה תר <br /><br />מה שנסתפקתי לעיל אם אמרינן פיתוי קטנה אונס הוא לענין שניתן להצילה בנפשו אף במפותה. שוב ראיתי בס' ש"מ בכתובו' בפרק אלו נערות שנסתפק בזה מ"ש שכתב דאפשר לענין זה הו"ל פיתוי ע"ש.<br /><br />He does not mention rodef and simply says that perhaps one can not kill the seducer of a child because even though we normally say that there is no difference between seduction and rape for a child - in this case we regard it as seduction and don't kill the seducer to stop him.<br /><br /><br />But we would kill him to stop rape and obviously the seducer ca be stopped by anything short of death.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-66228729600655123312014-07-30T22:54:41.260+03:002014-07-30T22:54:41.260+03:00But the S"A says you can kill a moser/rodef e...But the S"A says you can kill a moser/rodef even if it is NOT going to get the Jew imprisoned. The S"A says it's a mitzvah to kill him "even if it is a small amount of money" that he will cause the victim to lose.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-30937968212386954772014-07-30T22:19:34.239+03:002014-07-30T22:19:34.239+03:00@David - changes do happen. It is also interesting...@David - changes do happen. It is also interesting to note that Rav Moshe Feinstein says not to mention to baalei teshuva that sometimes halachos change - because it gets them upset.<br /><br />If the Shulchan Aruch was written at a time when it was a death sentence for a Jew to be reported to the police - it is no longer true. Rav Eliashiv notes that in previous times that going to jail was a death sentence - but since that is no longer true it is permitted to report stealing by a Jew to the police. The Aruch HaShulchan says that the prohibition no longer applies in modern times. <br /><br />If you want to hear a good presentation - Rav Herschel Schacter talks about this at YU.orgDaas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-8699117666150370842014-07-30T19:42:25.780+03:002014-07-30T19:42:25.780+03:00I'm just a bit astounded at the argument of us...I'm just a bit astounded at the argument of using the fact that the S"A was written 500 years ago. It sounds like a recipe to be able to be dismissive of anything the S"A paskens by waiving it off as being 500 years old. Where does it end? That point can be used to dismiss the entire S"A.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-65416696989746427042014-07-30T18:50:21.893+03:002014-07-30T18:50:21.893+03:00The fact that TE does not mention psychological da...The fact that TE does not mention psychological damage does not mean that he doesn't acknowledge its existence - only that he thinks that such damage is not pertinent regarding the Halacha of Rodeif.<br /><br /><br />I will now look up the Chassam Sofer.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-30223538062577709722014-07-30T18:47:18.661+03:002014-07-30T18:47:18.661+03:00I agree that psychological damage is relevant. I d...I agree that psychological damage is relevant. I don't agree that the TE was unaware of such damage, and formulated his conclusion out of ignorance.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-91055284893417406892014-07-30T18:19:13.750+03:002014-07-30T18:19:13.750+03:00@Chaim the Nishmas Avraham and Yeshurun represent ...@Chaim the Nishmas Avraham and Yeshurun represent the most recent discussion of the issue. The abuse was not a halachic issue until recently - it was a straight question of what the halacha is - indepenently of any psychological damage (which in fact is not even mentioned iuntil recently). <br /><br />Thus since psychology is such an important issue today (possibly there was no psychological damage in earlier generations) - it is not relevant to decide halacha without reference to psychological damage.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-71450022243636652572014-07-30T18:10:59.931+03:002014-07-30T18:10:59.931+03:00@David - yes it was all written 500 years ago - s...@David - yes it was all written 500 years ago - so that means you are agreeeing with me that one can not automatically apply rulings based on the reality of 500 years ago to modern times?Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-42763580483510294742014-07-30T18:09:18.041+03:002014-07-30T18:09:18.041+03:00The Tzitz Eliezar does not address the issue of ps...The Tzitz Eliezar does not address the issue of psychological damage or acknowledge that it exists. Thus he is not in agreement with the established reality of abuse - while Rav Eliashi clearly was. As Rav Sternbch told me - you first have to get the metzius right before you can give a meaningful psak. <br /><br />Regarding your last point - see the Chasam Sofer to Gittin 7. Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-44338752499376668502014-07-30T17:32:07.561+03:002014-07-30T17:32:07.561+03:00The entire S"A was written 500 years ago.The entire S"A was written 500 years ago.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-39427647841396501082014-07-30T17:26:01.214+03:002014-07-30T17:26:01.214+03:00I'm sorry that I don't share your view tha...I'm sorry that I don't share your view that the Tzitz Eliezer is בטל ומבוטל when he dares to argue with Rav Eliashiv. As for him "not addressing the issue that Rav Eliashiv raises", that is true, presumably because he disagrees. The TE was very worldly, arguably more so than Rav Eliashiv such as in areas of technology etc.(who was a great Posek whom I am not ח"ו denigrating in any way), and he did not share your viewpoint. It is important not to mislead people into thinking there is only one acceptable opinion on a complex matter.<br /><br />By the way, even according to Rav Eliashiv לכאורה there would only be a היתר מסירה when there is a רבים in danger, not when it is only an individual, as per the aforementioned סעיף:<br /><br />כל המוסר הצבור ומצערן מותר למסרו ביד עובדי כוכבים אנסים להכותו ולאסרו ולקנסו אבל <br />מפני צער יחיד אסור למסרו.Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-90935993749988410252014-07-30T17:15:37.382+03:002014-07-30T17:15:37.382+03:00Anything not quoted by Yeshurun or NA is not Halac...Anything not quoted by Yeshurun or NA is not Halacha!? The Haflaah originally thought that since פיתוי קטנה אונס הוא there should be a Din of Rodeif, but retracted because he saw that the Shita Mekubetzes was מסופק about it. Now we know that the Ramban definitively rules that he is not a Rodeif, with no known Rishonim arguing on him - and you would still kill someone because it is not in Yeshurun! וצע"ג.<br /><br /><br />One point I am in doubt about. The Machlokes Rambam versus the Rishonim about פיתוי קטנה אונס הוא is explained by the Acharonim to refer to a Ketana who is old enough to make decisions competently - only such a girl does the Rambam describe as יש לה רצון להאסר על בעלה. A younger girl (such as a six-year old perhaps) does not have רצון even according to the Rambam, and would therefore not become Ossur to the husband if she were to do זנות.<br />Now perhaps we could suggest - I haven't seen this anywhere - that this חילוק applies to the Din of the Ramban as well. i.e. only with a קטנה who is old enough to make competent decisions (but is nevertheless lacking דעת Halachically and therefore פיתויה אונס הוא), do we say that consensual sex with her is not considered rape in regard to the Din of Rodeif. But a younger girl. whose consent is not recognised even by Rambam, perhaps even "consensual" sex with her IS considered rape even to the extent that we would apply the הלכה of Rodeif. Just a suggestion.<br /><br /><br />(I had a similar doubt regarding a שוטה, because the Binas Adam is מסתפק about whether the Rambam's opinion about a קטנה would apply to a שוטה.)Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-86132788394012900062014-07-30T16:44:49.129+03:002014-07-30T16:44:49.129+03:00@Chaim I don't cite the Tzitz Eliezar because ...@Chaim I don't cite the Tzitz Eliezar because 1) Rav Eliashiv specifically rejects his view 2) he clearly is not addressing the issue that Rav Eliashivs rasies name that pikuach nefesh applies to pscyhological well being as well as phsyical well being. In the same way i didn't mention Rav M Klein because he is totally oblivious to the psychological reality and his view is widely rejected because of that fact. If you want to see all the view - I have them in vol II of Child and Domestic Abuse.<br /><br />It is in the new awareness of the psychological damage that not only abuse but seduction causes that I suggested that the halacha of rodef has greater applicablity than traditionally used.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.com