Bein adam l'chavero sins - only if done to hurt & vanquish the other

Considering this is the period of Sefira, it is appropriate to talk about bein adam l'chavero sins. One important consideration started with the question that since hitting another is a doreissa sin - why is it permitted to hit children for chinuch which is only a rabbinic mitzva?  The basic  prohibition of hitting is described by the Rambam

Rambam(Hilchos Chovel 5:1): It is prohibited for a man to injure himself or others. Not only is injury prohibited but anyone who hits a good Jew - whether it is a child (koton) or adult (gadol) whether it is a man or woman – derech netzayon (in a manner of strife) - transgresses a negative commandment. As it says concerning flogging a criminal in Devarim (25:3), Do not beat him beyond that which is prescribed as punishment. If the Torah warns us about hitting a criminal beyond which is prescribed as punishment - than surely it is prohibited to hit a righteous person.

Rav Elchanon Wasserman focuses on the phrase derech netzayon (in the manner of stife) in his commentary on Yevamos. He then produces an important generalization.

Kovetz Ha’aros (Yevamos #70): ...It would seem that all that is prohibited between people (bein adam l’chavero) is only prohibited when done in a harmful and destructive manner without justification. For example regarding the prohibition of “Not hating your brother.” This is only prohibited for gratuitous hatred (sinas chinom). In other words when he is not doing anything wrong (davar ervah). However if he is doing something wrong then it is permitted to hate him. It is important to note that the reason for hatred being permitted in this case is not because of the fact that a sinful person is not considered your “brother.” Tosfos (Pesachim 113b) explains that if you hate this sinful person for another reason then you transgress the prohibition. The hatred is only permitted because of the bad (davar ervah) that you see in him. Similarly regarding the prohibition of beating another, the Rambam writes that it is prohibited only if done as fighting (derech netzoyan). This is clear from the fact that it is permitted for a teacher to his student. And this that we noted before in Sanhedrin (84b) – that is only a rabbinic restriction. And similarly concerning the prohibition of causing anguish to a widow or orphan, Rambam (Hilchos De’os 6:10) writes that if it is done to teach Torah or a trade – there is no prohibition. Similarly concerning the prohibition of lashon harah, it is permitted against people who cause discord and quarrels in order to stop the fight. Similar concerning using words to cause anguish (onas devarim), it is permitted publicly criticize someone publicly if it is for the sake of chastisement. It is even permitted to publicly embarrass someone if it is done for the necessity of chastisement for a person who has not stopped his bad behavior after being rebuked in private. In such a case it is even permissible to curse him. In fact this is what was done by the prophets in the past as the Rambam (Hilchos De’os 6:8) notes. We thus shown from all this, that all the prohibition involving interpersonal actions do not apply when the act is beneficial.

 The above is an important conceptualization. My son had a related conversation with the Rosh Yeshiva of Slabodka Yeshiva in Bnei Brak. He said that the Chazon Ish didn't understand the need for the extensive scholarship provided in the Chofetz Chaim's sefer regarding lashon harah. He stated the prohibition of lashon harah is simply not to cause harm to others through speech.

In short, the common way of viewing these mitzvos is that they are severe prohibitions for which there are limited heterim in special circumstances. The mitzvos and heterim are so complicated and nuanced that only a major posek can know when and how the heterim apply. Consequently people commonly are machmir to avoid transgressing the prohibition - and end up causing unnecessary harm to others (See the Piskei Teshuva O.C. 156). In contrast Rav Elchonon Wasserman's conceptualization is that the prohibitions only apply in situations where the intent and goal is to hurt another person. In a situation where the purpose is to help, and this is best way to help - there is no prohibition in the first place. 

This latter point is important. One can not speak lashon harah and  hurt another simply by claiming that it is  will also be beneficial.  The orientation of being focused on helping is critical. Thus Rav Wasserman is not providing a heter to permit actions which are harmful. One can not desire to cause damage and then find some benefit  and therefore claim that it is permitted because of the addition of the benefit. The concern has to be to help the other and not hurt him,
=======================
See note [י]

District Court says woman wearing talis at Kotel is ok

Haaretz   The Jerusalem District Court ruled Thursday that women praying at the Western Wall with prayer shawls and tefillin does not constitute a violation of “local custom” or a provocation, and therefore, no justification exists for detaining and interrogating women who engage in these practices. 

The ruling is a major victory for the Women of the Wall organization in its ongoing battle against police and the Orthodox authorities in charge of prayer rules at the holy site. 

The district court also ruled that contrary to police interpretations of a previous Supreme Court ruling, there is no prohibition preventing women from holding their own prayer services at the Western Wall nor any requirement that they congregate instead at the nearby Robinson’s Arch.[...]

Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz said he will look into the ruling and consult with state's legal representative to examine its consequences.  

"The Western Wall is the last unifying place we have," he said. "It is easy to enflame the Western Wall it divineness. It is much more difficult to the find the middle route that will allow everyone to feel included and wanted at the Western Wall."

"I beg the authorities as well as the silent majority who care deeply for the Wall, to prevent extremists from turning it into a site antagonism between brothers," Rabinowitz added.

'Women needlessly abused for years'

Yair Lapid's Fascinating 20 minutes in the Knesset by RaP

Guest post from RaP: Yair Lapid's Fascinating 20 minutes in the Knesset: The Charedim will have to come up with a MUCH better response!

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waFyYgKn_e4

Yair Lapid recently made a fascinating and powerful 20 minute appearance before the Knesset in the presence of the Charedi representatives. It is worth watching, especially if you have some understanding of the language. Lapid is an experienced and charismatic personality and communicator with a very big agenda!

While it is obvious he is a secular Israeli, but he is NOT his father Tommy who was virulent and an embittered Holocaust survivor. Yair his son has more obvious empathy and he is a skilled communicator who uses logic with a friendly manner who makes sense and only by countering with even greater SECHEL can such debates be won.

Screaming and shouting, even in the Knesset where it is a common practice, will NOT accomplish anything.

The Charedim will have to come up with better responses not just acting out-of-control in paroxysms of anger because, plainly and calmly, Lapid does make some very valid points, that need to be answered in a rational and logical and calm manner, even though by standards of the Knesset it seems acceptable to scream and shout at the loudest pitch to drown out opponents.

Lapid seems genuine when he says he does NOT "hate" the Charedim, that they do not have a controlling monopoly on the state, that in a democracy you get to be in the opposition as well, but that they sat in the government for the last 30 years and contributed to the deficit that must now be fixed, and that parents have to be the first ones to take care of their children because it is not the responsibility of the state or other people that must take care of the children, even though he says no child will hungry in Israel. 

He says quite simply that the proposals are not just his and have been approved by the top bankers and finance people in the government.

Lapid tells them not to tell him what to do on Shabbat -- for posting on Facebook -- because he is "not Shommer Shabbat" as he does not tell them what to do on Shabbat -- and in the background the Speaker of the Knesset can be heard humorously admonishing MK Gafni of UTJ that he is sure that Gafni does not even go on the Internet meaning how can he talk about "Facebook", a very good question.

Lapid is responding as a typical Chiloni. Therefore at this time when so much Kiruv is on the go, surely Kiruv people would now give a better response to such situations and NOT act like bizarre people in the Knesset? Maybe it is time to put Uri Zohar or some Kiruv professionals from Ohr Somayach or Chabad personalities like Manis Friedman in the Knesset, someone who is FRIENDLY and has experience how to smile in front of cameras and win over an audience!!! Aish HaTorah and Ner Yisroel already have Dov Lipman, and that should also be countered with people who can sell a counter-message! But surely the same Gedolim who support Kiruv can choose a select group of people able to sell Yiddishkeit because everything is now done in front of the cameras and no one will like the Charedim any more if all they see when they look at them yell at Lapid who is making sense (mostly) while they are having infantile TANTRUMS. Just as the people who formed and rallied around Yesh Atid were brilliant enough to chose a master communicator and someone who acts friendly (remember Lapid has been trained to do this career-wise for a long time as popular TV host.) 

If Charedim will just go on with spoiler tactics and not come up with better strategies to sell their point of view and win the debate (always a tall order, now even harder), then expect Lapid and Yesh Atid not just to stay in the government for a VERY long time, but to become the main party of Israel that sweeps the next elections and beyond.

See an article about that below:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/167373#.UXfzflI9WKI

"Lapid: Israel 'Sick of Taking Orders' from Hareidi MKs 

Lapid tells hareidi Jews he does not hate them, ‘the state is just sick of taking your orders,’ in stormy Knesset session.

(Israel National News) By Maayana Miskin 4/22/2013

The Knesset’s summer session got off to a stormy start Monday with an afternoon session that saw Finance Minister Yair Lapid clash with representatives from the hareidi-religious Yahadut Hatorah (Gimmel) party.

MK Meir Porush of Yahadut Hatorah criticized Lapid, accusing him of hating the hareidi community. Porush also took Lapid to task for his fiscal policy, saying, “I heard that he’s going to impose harsh economic decrees on the state of Israel. This man lives life based on what he’ll look like tomorrow.”

Lapid lashed back in his own speech to Knesset later in the session. “The previous government that created this deficit – were you not in it?” he asked the hareidi representatives. “Were you on Mars?”

“You sat in every government for the past 30 years, and this deficit has your names on it. I need to deal with the deficit that you created, you were not cheap coalition partners,” he said.

“You talk about hatred of hareidim,” he continued. “Nobody hates you, and you keep arguing that they hate you… The only thing that happened is that you aren’t in the coalition, and that’s called democracy… The state is sick of taking orders from you, and now you aren’t on the Finance Committee.”

“You need to understand that we don’t hate you,” he added. “But you aren’t registered as the rightful owners of the government.”..."

Doctors are bringing people back from the dead

BBC   Carol had had a cardiac arrest - her heart had stopped beating. Luckily, an elderly neighbour knew the rudiments of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and quickly began to work on her chest. 

Paramedics soon took over, and at a point between 30 and 45 minutes after her collapse - no-one noted the exact time - Carol's heart started beating again.

"While 45 minutes is absolutely remarkable and a lot of people would have written her off, we now know there are people who have been brought back, three, four, five hours after they've died and have led remarkably good quality lives," says Dr Sam Parnia, the director of resuscitation research at Stony Brook University in New York. 

Most people regard cardiac arrest as synonymous with death, he says. But it is not a final threshold. 

Doctors have long believed that if someone is without a heartbeat for longer than about 20 minutes, the brain usually suffers irreparable damage. But this can be avoided, Parnia says, with good quality CPR and careful post-resuscitation care. 

He says it is vital that chest compressions occur at the right rate and force and that patients are not over-ventilated. CPR would be considerably prolonged, with machines doing the work.

Doctors also have new ways to care for patients after their hearts have been restarted. ==============================
Wired

Sam Parnia practices resuscitation medine. In other words, he helps bring people back from the dead — and some return with stories. Their tales could help save lives, and even challenge traditional scientific ideas about the nature of consciousness.[...]

It sounds supernatural, and if their memories are accurate and their brains really have stopped, it’s neurologically inexplicable, at least with what’s now known. Parnia, leader of the Human Consciousness Pro [...]

 Wired: In the book you say that death is not a moment in time, but a process. What do you mean by that?

Sam Parnia: There’s a point used to define death: Your heart stops beating, your brain shuts down. The moment of cardiac arrest. Until fifty years ago, when CPR was developed, when you reached this point, you couldn’t come back. That led to the perception that death is completely irreversible. [...]

R Michael Broyde: More serious allegations uncovered

TJCTV  A new investigation by The Jewish Channel suggests a deception related to Rabbi Michael Broyde’s academic work that academic ethics experts say would represent a much greater breach of academic ethics than the revelations from a previous investigation published by The Jewish Channel on April 12.

The Jewish Channel has previously revealed that Rabbi Michael Broyde — a prominent rabbi who was reportedly on the shortlist to be chief rabbi of England and is a law professor at U.S. News & World Report’s 23rd-ranked law school at Emory University — created a fake professional identity, Rabbi Hershel Goldwasser, that Broyde used over the course of nearly 20 years. The Goldwasser character joined a rival rabbinic group and gained access to its members-only communications, to argue with other members of that group under the fake identity, to submit letters to scholarly journals that in some cases touted his own work, and engage in other scholarly deceptions.

But a second identity uncovered by The Jewish Channel might have gone farther down the road of academic misconduct than did the Goldwasser character. The second identity, claiming to be an 80-something Ivy League graduate and Talmud scholar in 2010, alleged he’d had conversations with now long-dead sages in the late 1940s or early 1950s. The alleged conversations were used to produce a manufactured history of statements from long-dead scholars that buttressed an argument that Broyde had made in a highly-touted article published in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. Broyde, in a later publication, subsequently quoted this second identity’s alleged findings as further proof of his original argument. [...]

Toronto imam reported alleged terror plot to police

LA Times   An imam in the Toronto area came forward more than a year ago with concerns about one of the two suspects now charged with an alleged terrorism plot, an attorney who handled the tip said Tuesday. Toronto attorney Naseer Syed said the imam, who wants to remain anonymous, first came to him with his concerns about Raed Jaser, 35, who was arrested Monday by Canadian police.  

“The community has always struggled with, at what point does some behavior or activity or words cross a certain threshold?” Syed said in a telephone interview with the Los Angeles Times. “He noticed some of the activities and became concerned enough that he consulted with me and felt it should be reported to authorities. … He asked me to make the first call,” the attorney said.

Syed said he immediately contacted Canadian authorities with the tip. It is unclear what part the information played in the lengthy investigation that led up to the arrests of Jaser and Montreal-area resident Chiheb Esseghaier, 30, who were charged with conspiring to commit murder in connection with a terrorist group. Canadian police told reporters their investigation began last August.

Israeli Rabbinate: Supports Direct Metzitza

 As we reported last week - Daas Torah - Direct Metzitza - official rabbinate position   the official position of the Israel Rabbinate is that metzitza is a valid procedure. As they clearly state the parents have the option of either direct oral contact or using a tube. This was clearly described on the Rabbinate Web site in great detail. The fact that the guidelines are dated from a year ago clearly indicates that despite - some mistaken assertions to the contrary - the Rabbinate has not changed its position. All they have done is offered clarifications which some  have misunderstood to indicate that they changed their guidelines.

Arutz 7   In an official letter published by the Director of the Britot (Circumcisions) Department of the Chief Rabbinate, Rabbi Moshe Morciano clarified that the position of the Rabbinate supports traditional circumcision procedure which includes "metzitza bepeh" (oral suction). This is done to ensure the health of the baby.  The procedure is conditional upon the good health of the mohel himself, and the agreement of the family should be obtained by the Mohel (Circumciser).

Science: Wringing water out of cloth on Space Station

Boston Marathon Bombers: Is Terrorism a distortion of Islam?

The following video was brought to my attention by a reader. It charges that the Western World is collectively avoiding facing the true nature of Islam because of the desire to be tolerant and non-judgmental regarding religion and life style issues i.e., politically correct. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of terrorist acts in the modern world are carried about by Muslims - we are told that we should view this as a perversion of Islam which is claimed to be inherently a peaceful religion and tolerant of other religions and lifestyles. There is no question that the overwhelming number of Muslims and their leaders are peaceful people and do not support terrorism. Therefore I welcome reasoned debate and refutation of the thesis presented in this and similar videos that are on the Internet. I am well aware that some of my readers are Muslims - and I am not presenting this to be offensive. The arguments and backlash against Islam already exist - at least from the time of the attack on the Twin Towers on 9/11. I would like to hear the other side. This is obviously not just a theoretical issue or an exercise in compartive religions. It strongly impacts Jews and in particluar Israel

Haifa's Chief Rabbi: Police say to indict him for fraud & bribery

YNET   The National Fraud Unit recommended that Haifa's Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Shlomo Shlush be prosecuted for offences related to bribery, fraud, breach of trust, misuse of a public position and transgression of the Law Forbidding Kosher Fraud.[...]

The rabbi insists that he was the one who was subjected to extortion.[...]

In 2010, the attorney general ordered the government to investigate the rabbi, prompting numerous investigations of both Shlush himself and his aides. Though investigators found that the rabbi was receiving bribes and threatening businesses with loss of their Kosher certificate for reasons unrelated to religious law, no indictments were filed.

The Limits of Empathy: Critique of Stephen Pinker - It doesn't make you a better person

NY Times   By David Brooks. We are surrounded by people trying to make the world a better place. Peace activists bring enemies together so they can get to know one another and feel each other’s pain. School leaders try to attract a diverse set of students so each can understand what it’s like to walk in the others’ shoes. Religious and community groups try to cultivate empathy. 

As Steven Pinker writes in his mind-altering new book, “The Better Angels of Our Nature,” we are living in the middle of an “empathy craze.” There are shelfloads of books about it: “The Age of Empathy,” “The Empathy Gap,” “The Empathic Civilization,” “Teaching Empathy.” There’s even a brain theory that we have mirror neurons in our heads that enable us to feel what’s in other people’s heads and that these neurons lead to sympathetic care and moral action. 

There’s a lot of truth to all this. We do have mirror neurons in our heads. People who are empathetic are more sensitive to the perspectives and sufferings of others. They are more likely to make compassionate moral judgments. 

The problem comes when we try to turn feeling into action. Empathy makes you more aware of other people’s suffering, but it’s not clear it actually motivates you to take moral action or prevents you from taking immoral action. 

In the early days of the Holocaust, Nazi prison guards sometimes wept as they mowed down Jewish women and children, but they still did it. Subjects in the famous Milgram experiments felt anguish as they appeared to administer electric shocks to other research subjects, but they pressed on because some guy in a lab coat told them to. 

Empathy orients you toward moral action, but it doesn’t seem to help much when that action comes at a personal cost. You may feel a pang for the homeless guy on the other side of the street, but the odds are that you are not going to cross the street to give him a dollar.[...]