onionsoupmix: Don't Worry About That Silly Ten Commandments Thing. Really.

onionsoupmix (

onionsoupmix) wrote,
@ 2009-11-09 11:32:00

Entry tags:

chabad, crazy, criminals, gentiles, rabbis

Don't Worry About That Silly Ten Commandments Thing. Really.

So my last two posts focused on the Rambam and whether Torah morality is eternal. The vast majority of my commenters here clearly thought the rambam's principles applied to his day and time and do not apply to ours and should not be taken out of context. The consensus was that those chapters are essentially...irrelevant to modern society.

Now we have Rav Yitzchak Shapira and Toras HaMelech, a recently-published sefer in which this Rosh Yeshiva explains that Jews are actually allowed to murder gentiles, even Chassidei Umos HaOlam, even women and children, even if they are not responsible for a threat to the Jewish people. From here.

YWN, of course, tells us that this is all exaggrerated and silly nonsense, the book is a work of theoretical halacha and should not be used as permission to take the law into one's own hands. Good to know.

So here are the questions for today.

1. Do you think this guy is just a crazy extremist whom we should just write off? It shouldn't matter that he's a Rosh Yeshiva of a big ~~chabad~~ school? We should just hide our head in the sand and pretend only Islam has problems with crazy extremists? Should we also dismiss Rav Yitzchak Ginsburg, another famous chabad rabbi associated with this whole lunacy, who goes on world-wide speaking tours?

2. Do you think these books & pamphlets are a cause of actual crimes against gentiles? If not, why not? Why should inciteful material somehow have no bearing on behavior? If they are a cause of actual crimes, how are these sefarim different than the Rambam's works? So why should we all learn Daily Rambam and his halachos of rape and murder, but we should not learn Toras Hamelech?

3. Why did Rabbi Shapira choose to give us frum yidden a heter for murder, instead of say, something more practical, like a heter for cheeseburgers? Maybe he can write a sequel about how yidden can eat treife food on shabbos for the purpose of protecting the Holy Land or something like that. I would buy that book. Heck, I'll help him write it.

(37 comments) - (Post a new comment)

sethg_prime
2009-11-09 05:34 pm UTC (link)

Tradition had an article some years back quoting various religious-nationalist rabbis, people who (according to the article's author) are highly respected among West Bank settlers, saying... things about non-Jews that I would not quote on the public Internet, let's put it that way. So this news item surprises me not in the least.

The Frankel edition of the Mishnah Torah, which is based on more reliable manuscripts than previous editions, has Rambam saying that the mitzvah of lo tirtzach applies specifically to murdering Jews. I assume that people like Rabbi Shapira are using that line to overturn centuries of well-established halakha to the contrary. So find me a Rambam manuscript that matirs cheeseburgers, and we'll talk. Over lunch.

(Reply to this)

ymarkov
2009-11-09 05:37 pm UTC (link)

Are you sure about the context? Near as I can tell, he's discussing military action against Israel's enemies and collateral damage. What he is saying, then, is that it's OK to, say, shell a house from which Hamas fighters are firing even if there are innocent people in that house. Rules of war.

vast majority of my commenters here clearly thought the rambam's principles applied to his day and time and do not apply to ours
Correction: that's another sweeping statement. As far as I'm concerned, the Rambam's (really halakha's) principles generally apply universally. Some may not apply because the situation has changed.

I do not believe that these books cause crime to any detectable level. Note the hullabaloo over this Yaakov Teitel - it's because they find such people once in a blue moon.

BTW, that Jews can eat non-kosher food and desecrate Shabbat in defense of the Holy Land doesn't need a "sequel" - it's all in Rambam's Hilkhot Melakhim, and Israeli rabbis have written a load of teshuvot on how that works in today's Israel.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

onionsoupmix
2009-11-09 06:44 pm UTC (link)

"It is permissable to kill the Righteous among Nations even if they are not responsible for the threatening situation."

"If we kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven commandments - because we care about the commandments - there is nothing wrong with the murder."

How did you get the shelling house from which Hamas are firing from that?

And do you really think there is nothing wrong with shelling a house with innocents? I thought rules of war included the part about how we try to leave civilians out of it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

sethg_prime
2009-11-09 07:24 pm UTC (link)

The rules of war don't allow targeting civilians.

IIRC, if attacking a legitimate military target would inevitably lead to some civilian deaths, you're still allowed to attack the target as long as the risk of civilian casualties is proportionate to the importance of the legitimate military objective. (Yes, this is a very fuzzy standard. I don't know how military lawyers apply it in practice.)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	onionsoupmix 2009-11-10 12:37 am UTC (link)
	In any case, I have not seen anything which limits his response to an active battlefield. In fact, the opposite. According to at least one source, he now allows for pre-emptive killing of children of 'reshoyim' so as to "put pressure" on their parents. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	bringing_peace 2009-11-11 03:56 am UTC (link)
	have you read the book? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	onionsoupmix 2009-11-11 04:32 am UTC (link)
	no one has the book, not even the people living in yitzhar. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	bringing_peace 2009-11-13 04:50 am UTC (link)
	this is frustrating. nobody read the book but everybody quotes it. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	onionsoupmix 2009-11-11 04:32 am UTC (link)
	I guess a good question would then be why I could care less, being that the book is so difficult to get. (Reply to this) (Parent)

ymarkov
2009-11-09 11:04 pm UTC (link)

Check this out, then: "Скорее всего, как обычно - не он убил, а его убили, не в Жмеринке, а в Егупеце, и не вчера, а 50 лет назад."

Nobody is dealing with the actual text. Even so, this account says regarding your quote: "the author then stresses that this is possible only following a legal edict to this effect."

This discussion is so out of context that it can't be a reasonable one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

onionsoupmix
2009-11-10 12:33 am UTC (link)

I tried to click on your first link and it told me I am not allowed to view this protected entry.

I clicked on your second link and was even more disgusted. I have no idea why you would be defending someone who writes this: Наконец, Ицхак Шапиро рассматривает ситуацию, в которой разрешается убивать "детей злодеев". Он говорит, что это можно делать в том случае, если ясно: когда они вырастут, они не смогут укрепить еврейский народ. Разрешается убивать детей нееврейских лидеров для того, чтобы усилить давление на родителей, говорится в его книге.

He is essentially advocating infantacide here. For the non-Russian speakers here, the above cite from the book apparently allows Jews to kill children of the wicked if it is clear that when they grow up, they will not be able to strengthen the Jewish people. It is permitted, moreover, to kill the children of gentile leaders to increas the pressure on the parents.

Your arguments in his defense, as I understand them, are that 1) we don't have the actual text here so we could be misinterpreting all of it and taking it out of context and 2) He is speaking theoretically.

I find both of these answers inadequate. With regard to the first suggestion, it is difficult for me to imagine a context that would make advocating killing the children of "reshoyim" pre-emptively morally acceptable. With regard to the second suggestion, he does speak theoretically. But only because otherwise he would be promptly arrested. His theoretical accounts are just like those of the white supremacist and stormfront groups who speak "theoretically" about how nice it would have been if Hitler had finished off the Jews. Moreoever as a Rosh Yeshiva, his behavior is simply irresponsible.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

ymarkov
2009-11-10 10:50 pm UTC (link)

I have no idea why you would be defending someone who writes this
That's my point: who says he wrote this? Does the phrase "когда они вырастут, они не смогут укрепить еврейский народ" make any sense, even? I don't trust the authors of these articles.

I'm not defending anything; it has not been established that there is anything to defend. Nobody can even lay their hands on the book, it all seems to be hearsay. See also http://aronin.livejournal.com/817693.html

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

onionsoupmix
2009-11-11 12:46 am UTC (link)

According to another internet correspondent,a woman who lives in Yitzhar and knows all these people personally, apparently this is the press release put out by the yeshiva:

In the book one can see there are clear halachas concerning war with the enemy. This issue is very relevant. Sadly there exist twisted approaches and we suffer from them.It is enough to see the sorry stance taken by the country's leaders concerning Gilad Shalit who suffers in captivity because they refrain from firm and simple actions. While the Arab heads of the snake sit safely behind the cover of the 'civilian population' and laugh in our face.

She says she translated this from some hebrew site. It seems highly unlikely that they are talking about human shields when their press release is speaking about Shalit and "firm and simple actions."

(Reply to this) (Parent)

onionsoupmix
2009-11-11 01:01 am UTC (link)

From the press release from the yeshiva:
בספר ניתן לראות שקיימת אמירה הלכתית ברורה בנושא המלחמה באויב. זהו נושא אקטואלי ביותר, שלצערנו קיימות בו גישות מעוותות אשר אנו סובלים רבות בגללן. די לראות את הפוזה העלובה של ראשי המדינה בסוגיית גלעד שליט, הסובל בשבי האויב בגלל המנעות מפעולות תקיפות ופשוטות, בעוד ראשי-הנחש של האויב הערבי יושבים לבטח תחת מחסה של 'אוכלוסיה אזרחית' ולועגים לנו בכל פה

(Reply to this) (Parent)

onionsoupmix
2009-11-11 01:07 am UTC (link)

These two are totally incompatible:

Дорогой М! Речь идёт об "академическом" исследовании - о "высшей математике" , о теоретическом обсуждении талмудических толкований, а не о популистике and
בספר ניתן לראות שקיימת אמירה הלכתית ברורה בנושא המלחמה באויב. זהו נושא אקטואלי ביותר, שלצערנו קיימות בו גישות מעוותות אשר אנו סובלים רבות בגללן. די לראות את הפוזה העלובה של ראשי המדינה בסוגיית גלעד שליט, הסובל בשבי האויב בגלל המנעות מפעולות תקיפות ופשוטות

(Reply to this) (Parent)

sethg_prime
2009-11-10 01:55 am UTC (link)

Is there any restriction as to what kind of government has the moral authority to issue such a "legal edict"? If, chas v'shalom, the Israeli government is toppled by a military coup and the ruling junta believes in expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank at all costs, would an edict from that government automatically matir pre-emptive strikes against Gentile civilians?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	correction (Anonymous) 2009-11-09 07:25 pm UTC (link)
	Od Yosef Chai is not now, nor was ever a "Chabad Yeshivah." - cfkaMP (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: correction onionsoupmix 2009-11-09 07:50 pm UTC (link)
	OK, why is R. Ginsburgh teaching there? How does that work? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: correction
(Anonymous)
2009-11-09 11:08 pm UTC (link)

How does what work? Are you asking why Ginsburg taught in a non-Chabad yeshiva Od Yesef Chai (I believe that was even a Rosh Yeshivah there)?

The answer probably lies in the fact that Ginsburg – in addition to being a self-professed Chbadnik (I do no mean in a derogatory way, just that he has no official position within the movement and is somewhat of an independent "player", ala Shteinzatz) – also has a very strong connection to the settler movement.

However, the possible reason behind Ginzburg's connection to Od Yosef Chai is not so relevant here, what's relevant is the simple fact that Od Yosef Chai – contrary to your statement – is not now, nor was ever a Chabad institution.

- cfkaMP

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: correction onionsoupmix 2009-11-10 12:19 am UTC (link)
	Yes, that's what I meant. And as you can see, I changed my post to reflect your correction. (Reply to this) (Parent)

You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה

24816
2009-11-09 08:53 pm UTC (link)

The enemies are purposely gather civilians to get advantage over moral Israeli soldiers.
http://www.7kanal.com/news.php3?id=266354
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123171179743471961.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=7536409
When Clinton got in trouble he sent planes to bomb Serbia, but when Olmert got in trouble he sent Jewish boys to fight door-to-door. I wouldn’t want anyone I know in this situation and hope that neither would you.
http://ymarkov.livejournal.com/207547.html
http://www.7kanal.com/article.php3?id=260669
http://www.jewishisrael.org/views/feiglin/68/feiglin_6833.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20bernstein.html?_r=1&em
http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=3698367

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה

onionsoupmix
2009-11-10 12:34 am UTC (link)

Did you see this: Наконец, Ицхак Шапиро рассматривает ситуацию, в которой разрешается убивать "детей злодеев". Он говорит, что это можно делать в том случае, если ясно: когда они вырастут, они не смогут укрепить еврейский народ. Разрешается убивать детей нееврейских лидеров для того, чтобы усилить давление на родителей, говорится в его книге.

Nothing to do with enemies, civilians, etc. He does not use the term Arabs in his book at all, according to that article.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה 24816 2009-11-10 12:48 am UTC (link)
	These people also pose questions and come up with uneasy answers. Are they crazy, evil, etc.? http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/05/05/who_should_mds_let_die_in_a_pandemic_report_offers_answers/ You must be really desperate to steal lamerkhav's headlines. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה onionsoupmix 2009-11-10 01:00 am UTC (link)
	Lamerkhav and I both got the story from the same 3rd source... What does the doctor list have anything to do with this topic? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה 24816 2009-11-10 01:09 am UTC (link)
	I would hope you and lamerkhav are not that closely related. To sort our issues theorists have to take bird view of the problem and explore limits of ranges. But you rea really stretching truth to its opposite. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1126890.html "...who threaten Israel..." "...if they pose a threat to the nation..." (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה stjust 2009-11-13 05:29 am UTC (link)
	lamerkhav?! you guys should really try to make some efforts with your hebrew. (actually how to transliterate it). merkhav - would be for vehicle kh being for khaf refuya (as in mar"ke"botav - kaf degusha) merchav - for ashkenazim is for 'geographical space' as in lamerchav with a chet -(for those who can't utter 'het properly). (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: You know very well that, ב‘ ’ה 24816 2009-11-13 12:57 pm UTC (link)
	this is name of some lj user, I don't know much of Hebrew (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2009-11-09 10:39 pm UTC (link)

Hmmmm....looks like he must know Rikal, since they are both in Yizhar.

'Nuff said.

I do wonder about the chicken-and-the-egg question with religious fanatics. Do the teachings cause otherwise normal people to do crazy things, or do people with pre-existing issues tend to be attracted to extreme religious theologies?

I do think that it is important to challenge extreme views - I told you before that the purpose of some of my marathon debates that you've seen wasn't to change the other person's mind, but to show that their view was not the only legitimate Jewish one.

JRKmommy

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	onionsoupmix 2009-11-10 12:44 am UTC (link)
	I'm waiting on her to reply to the thread. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2009-11-10 03:45 am UTC (link)
	Have you ever googled Yitzhar? I'm glad that we can get a view from within, but don't let familiarity cloud the fact that some views are downright scary. JRKmommy (Reply to this) (Parent)

inconsistencies
(Anonymous)
2009-11-09 11:47 pm UTC (link)

What I always wonder, in response to the "it doesn't apply to our era" kind of answer, is who decides what applies when? If you can say that murdering non-Jews doesn't apply today, then how come we can't also say that the rules about homosexuality shouldn't apply today?

Additionally, isn't it a contradiction to say "it only applied in his generation", and then the next day tell students that "the torah is timeless, and its truths apply to every generation"?

The Hedyot

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: inconsistencies onionsoupmix 2009-11-10 12:17 am UTC (link)
	Yes, your last line is what I find very confusing. Some people try to respond in terms of general principles applying always but the specifics change with each generation- I have no idea what that means either. (Reply to this) (Parent)

"the torah is timeless, and its truths apply to every generation"?

stjust
2009-11-10 04:38 am UTC (link)

la qashia,
there is such concept as "nishtanu pnei hadvorim".
the torah didn't change. the practice did.
since "bechabad asqinan" i heard from one of theirs commenting
on rabin's assassination 1996 or so. he said in stride quoting BT Sotah, 'misherabbu hameratzchin, batla egla arufa.' (like what do u expect? these being extraordinary times).
since u also have 'misherabu hamenaafin, batlu mei sotah.'
leaves the gate open to many things.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	hamaskil 2009-11-10 12:38 am UTC (link)
	nstead of say, something more practical, like a heter for cheeseburgers? Сheeseburgers ? Maybe you'd want him to give a heter for "cholov akum" ? It could be permitted to kill a couple of goyim, but eat a cheeseburger, rachmono litzlon !!! (Reply to this) (Thread)

	actually, cheese burger should be ok, de-oraisso... stjust 2009-11-10 04:27 am UTC (link)
	....as long as u don't grill the cheese along with the burger, just add it before consumption! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Od Yosef Chai is not now, nor was ever a "Chabad Yeshivah." stjust 2009-11-10 04:25 am UTC (link)
	says anonymous i say sure, bad for fundraising. but seriously, is shapiro chabadnik? how about ginzburg, dov lior, vospo, manis friedman? apart from that, is anonymous a chabadnik? (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Od Yosef Chai is not now, nor was ever a "Chabad Yeshivah."

stjust
2009-11-10 09:30 am UTC (link)

further on this topic, from ywn
"Rav Yitzchak Shapira’s Sefer Makes Headlines in Eretz Yisrael
November 9, 2009
"Rabbi Yitzchak Shapira, the rosh yeshiva of Ohd Yosef Chai Yeshiva in Yitzhar"......"The sefer enjoys approbations from HaGaon HaRav Dov Lior Shlita,-identified with chabad- Rabbi Yaakov Yosef,-the only freak son of R' Ovadia Yosef identified with chabad- and Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh -identified with chabad- ....... Rav Shapira, the rosh yeshiva, is a long-time resident of Yitzhar, a Chabad chossid, and a talmid of Rav Yitzchak Ginsburgh - identified with chabad- who is a known authority on kabala and runs the Gal Eini Institute."
so is the yeshiva identified with chabad?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(37 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs