Rodef and the right of self-defense

One of the difficult issues in dealing with abuse is the issue of rodef (pursuer) and the associated issue of self-defense. Rodef has acquired a problematic status because Rabin's assassin used the concept as justification for killing Rabin.

1) Is rodef a commonsense expression of the right to self-defense or is it a special halacha which we would only have because of a Torah verse and Chazal's explanation.

2) Does the status of rodef require a beis din or can anyone make the decision (extra-judiciarly) and consequently kill or maim someone who is a threat?

3) Does rodef require a clear and present danger or is it enough for a reasonable person to suspect that his life is at stake.

4) Can anyone stop a rodef or is it only permitted for the potential victim.

5) A pregnant woman who is having a difficult birth which endangers her life is allowed to kill the baby - but only until it's head comes out. At that point the baby is no longer considered a rodef - but Heaven is. What is the distinction?

6) If abuse doesn't cause the victim to commit suicide or involve a sin punished by kares or death - is the abuser still a rodef and thus can be killed or maimed if that is the only way to stop him?

7) Does it matter which of the sources the law of rodef is derived 1) Rape of a betrothed maiden (Sanhedrin 73a). 2) Burglar breaking into one's home (Sanhedrin 72b). 3) Don't stand idly by the blood of your brother (Vayikra 19:16) 4) Two men who are fighting (Devarim 25:11). 5) Difficult labor (Shulchan Aruch 425:2) 6) Commonsense- self defense.

8) Does the threat have to be direct or can it be indirect?

9) If the rodef model is used - can the abuser only be threatened before committing abuse - or even afterwards.

10) What is the difference between viewing abuse as rodef and viewing it a threat to public welfare?

11) Is the status of rodef severely limited by the laws of modern secular society? For example can anyone maim or kill someone trying to commit rape [of a man woman or child] according to secular law?

Geirus - R' Eisenstein's observations

The item on the left is a transcript of R' Eisenstein's comments from the 2007 Washington convention as it appeared in the Yated magazine section.
================================================
Observations from an interview in Bakehila August 13, 2009 page 6 - (my translation)

1) "A large part of invalid geirim originate in Israel"

2) Regarding those who were converted by R' Druckman - "It is necessary to correct the statement that they were invalidated retroactively. There was no disqualification of the geirus. Does anyone really think the thousands of geirim from these special courts accepted to do mitzvos? Go and see that that the absolute majority continued to live as non-Jews immediately after the conversion. Even those converts who genuinely accepted to do mitzvos are in fact invalid because this beis din that they used was invalid. You will note that in the case that caused all the upset - the woman did not even observe the first Shabbos. Is this called conversion?"

3) It is only Reform and Conservative conversions which are not such a problem because everyone knows that they are not the paper they were written on. The real problem is the Orthodox rabbis..."

4) "It is not just once or twice but much more than that in yeshivos and Beis Yaakovs that it has been revealed cases of young people whose mother had an invalid conversion. The problem is revealed when they want to get married and they turn to us to examine the conversion. But how many cases are not revealed? From the time that kiruv organizations have done their holy work the numbers of these cases have constantly increased. This is also from baalei teshuva who come to marry with us and then it is discovered that they are not Jewish."

5) "In most cases where it is discovered that these people who mistakenly thought they were Jews we convert them secretly. However there have been cases of a young lady about to be married and it is discovered that her mother was not converted properly. So even though we convert them according to the halacha - but since the chasan was a cohen - the engagement is destroyed."

Circumstantial evidence & lashon harah

Shabbos (56a): But Samuel maintained: David did not pay heed to slander, [for] he saw self-evident things in him,22 For it is written, And Mephibosheth the son of Saul came down to meet the king; and he had neither dressed his feet, nor trimmed his beard, nor washed his clothes, etc.23

This gemora is used as the justification that if there is clear circumstantial evidence then it is not considered lashon harah to believe negative things about another.

Semag (Negative #10) :If a person sees in another aspects and circumstantial evidence which seems to validate the claim then it is proper to believe and accept that which is said as is stated in Shabbos (56b)…

Shulhan Arukh ha­Rav(O.C. 156:10): One who accepts lashon harah is punished more than the one who says it unelss he sees clear cirucmstantial evidence.

However the Chofetz Chaim(Hilchos Lashon Hara, kelaI 7:10-11): takes a much more stringent view

חפץ חיים (הלכות אסורי לשון הרע - כלל ז:י-יב): י. וְאִם יֵשׁ עָלָיו (כב) דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים, שֶׁנִּרְאֶה עַל יְדֵי זֶה, שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁמְּסַפְּרִין עָלָיו הוּא אֱמֶת, דִּינָא הָכֵי (הַדִּין כָּךְ), אִם יֵשׁ בָּעִנְיָן הַזֶּה, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הַדָּבָר אֱמֶת, (כג) לְשָׁפְטוֹ לְצַד זְכוּת, אוֹ בְּעִנְיְנֵי שְׁלִילַת הַמַּעֲלוֹת, אוֹ בְּכָל שְׁאָר הַפְּרָטִים, הַמְבֹאָרִים לְעֵיל בְּסָעִיף ז', לֹא שַׁיָּךְ בָּזֶה דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים, דְּוַדַּאי אָנוּ מְחֻיָּבִין לְדוּנוֹ לְכַף זְכוּת (כד) כֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא אִישׁ בֵּינוֹנִי כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְבַּזֶּה עַל יְדֵי זֶה בְּעֵינֵינוּ וְכַנַּ"ל, אֲבָל אִם הוּא דָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֵין לִמְצֹא צַד זְכוּת עַל הָעוֹשְׁקוֹ, (כה) מֻתָּר לְהַאֲמִין וּלְקַבֵּל:

[הגה"ה - וּבְכָל זֹאת צְרִיכִין לְהִזָּהֵר מְאֹד וְלַחֲקֹר בְּשֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת, אִם הֵם בֶּאֱמֶת דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים, וְלִזָּהֵר בְּכָל הַתְּנָאִים שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לָזֶה וּכְדִלְקַמָּן, כִּי הַיֵּצֶר מַטְעֶה אֶת הָאָדָם בָּזֶה מְאֹד וּמַרְאֶה לוֹ כַּמָּה דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים שֶׁהֵם אֱמֶת, כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּאֲמִין בָּזֶה וְיִלְכְּדֶנּוּ עַל יְדֵי זֶה בְּרֶשֶׁת שֶׁל עֲוֹן קַבָּלַת לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, וְעַל כֵּן אַל יְמַהֵר לְהָקֵל בָּזֶה]:

יא. וְדַוְקָא אִם הֵם נִכָּרִים מַמָּשׁ, דְּהַיְנוּ (כו) שֶׁהֵם מַגִּיעוֹת לְעִנְיַן הַסִּפּוּר, וְגַם רָאָה אֶת הַדְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים בְּעַצְמוֹ. אֲבָל אִם הֵם רְחוֹקִין מִזֶּה רַק הוּא כְּעֵין דָּבָר הַנִּכָּר קְצָת, אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא רָאָה אֶת הַדְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים בְּעַצְמוֹ (כז) רַק שְׁמָעָן מִפִּי אֲחֵרִים, אֵין לוֹ בָּזֶה שׁוּם יִתְרוֹן כְּלָל:

יב. וְדַע, דַּאֲפִלּוּ דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים מַמָּשׁ, אֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל רַק לְעִנְיַן, שֶׁעַל יְדֵי זֶה יִהְיֶה מֻתָּר לְהַאֲמִין בְּעַצְמוֹ אֶת הַדָּבָר שֶׁמְּסַפְּרִין לוֹ, אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן לֵילֵךְ אַחַר כָּךְ וּלְסַפֵּר דָּבָר זֶה לַאֲחֵרִים, לֹא מְהַנֵּי (לֹא מוֹעִיל) דְּלֹא עָדִיף, מֵאִם רָאָה בְּעַצְמוֹ דְּבַר גְּנוּת עַל חֲבֵרוֹ, (כח) שֶׁאָסוּר לְסַפֵּר אַחַר כָּךְ לַאֲנָשִׁים, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּבֹאָר לְעֵיל בִּכְלָל ד' סָעִיף ג' וְד'. וְדַע עוֹד (כט) דִּבְכָל אֹפֶן אָסוּר לִסְמֹךְ עַל הֶתֵּר זֶה שֶׁל דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים מַמָּשׁ (ל) לְהַפְסִידוֹ עַל יְדֵי זֶה בְּמָמוֹן (לא) אוֹ לְהַכּוֹתוֹ:

Rav Moshe Sternbuch - Elul

Elul

Obamacare & Death Counseling

Washington Post Charles Krauthammer

Let's see if we can have a reasoned discussion about end-of-life counseling.

We might start by asking Sarah Palin to leave the room. I've got nothing against her. She's a remarkable political talent. But there are no "death panels" in the Democratic health-care bills, and to say that there are is to debase the debate.

We also have to tell the defenders of the notorious Section 1233 of H.R. 3200 that it is not quite as benign as they pretend. To offer government reimbursement to any doctor who gives end-of-life counseling -- whether or not the patient asked for it -- is to create an incentive for such a chat.

What do you think such a chat would be like? Do you think the doctor will go on and on about the fantastic new million-dollar high-tech gizmo that can prolong the patient's otherwise hopeless condition for another six months? Or do you think he's going to talk about -- as the bill specifically spells out -- hospice care and palliative care and other ways of letting go of life? [...]

EJF - why are they desperate for praise?

R' Tropper's Blog - A strange comment which leaves out the essential point i.e., the Bedatz has severely condemned the EJF
==============

Question:

Rabbi Tropper, is it true that someone from the Badatz spoke with Hagaon Rav Dovid Feinstein, shlit"a regarding Eternal Jewish Family?

Yitzchok R. Philadelphia, Pa


Rabbi Leib Tropper Responds:

It was reported to me by this Rav from the Badatz that he spoke with Hagaon Rav Dovid, shlit"a and Hagaon Rav Dovid, shlit"a said positive things about Eternal Jewish Family. This same respected Rav from the Badatz spoke with Hagaon Rav Reuven Feinstein, shlit"a. This happened to my recollection, close to 2 years ago.

Another Rav in Flatbush called me who is very close to Rav Dovid, Shlit"a and told me that he also spoke with Rav Dovid, shlit"a and that only nice things were spoken.

This Rav in Flatbush also reported this conversation to Rav Nochum Eisenstein, shlit"a.

Harav Yom Tov Stern also heard the same from this Rav who is from the Badatz.

Doctors who deliver bad news

NYTimes

[...]Most doctors do not excel at delivering bad news, decades of studies show, if only because it goes against their training to save lives, not end them. But Dr. O'Mahony, who works at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, belongs to a class of doctors, known as palliative care specialists, who have made death their life's work. They study how to deliver bad news, and they do it again and again. They know secrets like who, as a rule, takes it better. They know who is more likely to suffer silently, and when is the best time to suggest a do-not-resuscitate order.

Palliative care has become a recognized subspecialty, with fellowships, hospital departments and medical school courses aimed at managing patients' last months. It has also become a focus of attacks on plans to overhaul the nation's medical system, with false but persistent rumors that the government will set up "death panels" to decide who deserves treatment. Many physicians dismiss these complaints as an absurd caricature of what palliative medicine is all about.

Still, as an aging population wrangles with how to gracefully face the certainty of death, the moral and economic questions presented by palliative care are unavoidable: How much do we want, and need, to know about the inevitable? Is the withholding of heroic treatment a blessing, a rationing of medical care or a step toward euthanasia?[...]

Lockerbie Bomber freed for compassion!

NYTimes

The Scottish government announced Thursday that it was freeing the only person convicted in the Lockerbie bombing, permitting Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, a 57-year-old former Libyan intelligence agent, to return home on compassionate grounds after serving 8 years of a 27-year minimum sentence on charges of murdering 270 people in Britain's worst terrorist episode.

The decision to release him early on compassionate grounds was made against strenuous American opposition after Mr. Megrahi's lawyers said he had little time left to live because he is suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

The announcement at a news conference by Scotland's Justice Minister, Kenny MacAskill, came almost 21 years after a bomb smuggled onto Pan Am Flight 103 exploded at 31,000 feet over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on Dec. 21, 1988, killing 259 people on board and 11 on the ground.

Of the dead, 189 were Americans. The Scottish decision was certain to provoke anguished protest from American families of the victims who had demanded that he serve his full sentence. [...]

EJf - June 2009 conference in Jerusalem

EJF Blog

IT WAS BY ALL accounts an unprecedented gathering of leading kiruv rabbanim from around the world, as well as rabbanim in cities and towns throughout Israel. The event took place from June 15–17, 2009 at Jerusalem's Inbal Hotel. The sponsor was the Eternal Jewish Family International, which is in the midst of a major global expansion of its activities to support rabbanim and batei din involved with intermarried couples who genuinely strive for a halachic conversion to Judaism. It also assists kiruv organizations that are on the front lines in the fight against assimilation, such as the co-sponsors of the event: Arachim Ohr Somayach Hidabroot Lev L'achim Shuvu Nefesh Yehudi In the U.S., it also includes the Gateways organization.

The rabbanim deliberated on such topics as "Worldwide Assimilation: Today's Spiritual Holocaust", "Building Barriers Against Fictitious Conversions to Judaism," Anti-Semitism and Assimilation: Cause or Effect?", and "Determining the Status of Certain 'Jews' in the Community". The rabbanim, who represented numerous cities around the globe, expressed their deepest concern over the grave issue of world-wide assimilation. In addition, they addressed a growing problem in Israel where many young people return from study abroad with non-Jewish spouses. Kiruv experts spoke of the dangers facing Israeli youth in Israel. They resolved to step up the educational efforts to hopefully thwart this growing trend. The tone of the historic conference was set by Eternal Jewish Family's chairman, Menachem Yitzchak (Tom) Kaplan who noted that "in my wildest dreams I could not imagine such a rapid and broad acceptance by rabbanim all over the world of the vision we laid out with the help of the leading Torah authorities". Kaplan said that he was "committed to do whatever it takes to take on assimilation and problematic conversions to Judaism wherever the problem exists". Rabbi Leib Tropper, the organization's chairman of the Halachic Committee, spoke of the successes of Eternal Jewish Family in "raising the bar on conversions to Judaism and successfully uniting rabbanim and dayanim from disparate backgrounds in preserving kedushas yisroel". The theme of kedushas yisrael was also addressed by some of the notable gedolei yisrael and leading rabbanim who participated in the conference. [...]

When cancer changes your appearance

NYTimes

I have survived over 40 years of ill health. Even so I have learned to live a life of chronic patienthood where I am not dominated by illness. I have managed to focus on goals that have nothing to do with illness. Living life for me is learning to surf above the uneven terrain of my health.

My health history is so involved I have created a Google document to keep track of it. I've had three kidney transplants, a pancreas transplant, 27 years of Type 1 diabetes, and four-plus years of metastasizing cancer. I've broken my leg, elbow, wrist, both feet, hands, skull and ribs (yes, I might be accident prone from time to time). Plus, I've coped with all the secondary illnesses that waltz along with these problems, including osteoporosis, gastroparesis, cataracts, gallbladder failure, impacted bowel and chronic bleeding.

Today, my most obvious issue, a side effect of treatment for head and neck cancer, is chronic facial swelling, also known as moon face. The removal of several lymph nodes from my neck and subsequent radiation treatments have rendered my lymphatic system unable to drain fluids from my head. I get up each morning and remind myself that I'm going to be swollen, tired and nauseous. So if I get something done, like epoxy the hatches of the kayak I'm building, it's a great day. Or if I get through all my (liquid) food, it's a great day. Or if one of our cats comes up to say hello, rubs itself on my leg and settles down for a nap near me … yep: great day! [...]

Is child abuse pikuach nefesh?

Roni commented to a previous post - I am making it a separate post & moved other comments

Shalom!

Lean"d regarding 2 (and then 3), it is clear lefu, rihatoh that at best the C is applicable:

I have to check all M"M; but lefm ruhatoh it is barur, that there are two cases of refuah. a) where there is no sakanah whatsoever, b) where there is chashash sakonoh, especially if it is a safek or sfek sakanah.

It would appear clearly, that whereever there is a sakanah or safek sakanah, that we have an issue of pikuach nefesh! where it is much more than avedat gufoy!

The m"m that you cite are mostly for a) cases where there is no sakanat nefashot. A proof for that is: that at the beggining of YD 336 it says (after it states that it is reshut, it adds that it is ) Mitzvah "ubichlal pikuach nefesh!". It seems pashut that pikuach nefesh does not require the parsha and obligation of of "hashvat aveda"; it is a chiyuv on it's own.

It would appear that the reference that are cited later in the posskim (or the rishonim) refer to a situation where there is clearly no sakanat nefashot; there it is under the parsha of "hashavat gufoy"; but if it is akin to "roeh chaveroy toveah bayam..." or nochrim having a bad thought on a Jew (CM 426) then it falls under "loy taamod al dam reecho" and if it is a case of sakanat nefashot it falls under pikuach nefesh.

Wrt to three: It seems clear that there is an additional obligation of "atrichoy veoygureh" (to add tircha and hire experts) that is not under the general obgliation of a regular "hashavat gufoy".

the question will have to be analyzed what is the geder of molestation: "pikuach nefesh" sakanat nefesh or just "hashvat gufoy" (I would tend to a go with the former. But let's hear the discussion on it).

Regarding Chemdat Shlomoh. I don't have the mareh mekomot in my mind now, but I remember a LOT OF ACHRONIM MATMIHA ON THIS PATICULAR CHEMDAT SHLOMOH and disagreeing harshly with him.

Bechavod uvrachah,