Dina D'Malchusa Dina

myfriend

if these is copied from somewhere, you NEED to post the source.

Midavar sheker tirchak.

Or to quote Rav Breuer zaztal, “If you want to be glatt kosher you better also be glatt yoshar.”

charlie; “Myfriend” is an ideologue. And an unrealistic one at that. He wants to earn a living (and get a government subsidy, under one name or another) in Israel. Yet, doesn’t recognize its legitimacy. Contends (ideologically) that it’s OK to steal from it. The only place that might lead to is enjoying the prison Kollel program. The judge of the non-entity will decide where he spends the next Five, Six or Seven Years. Even the Naturei Karta, who don’t recognize the State of Israel (who needs their approval, anyway?!) informed the government about some racket where Yeshiva fundraisers were involved. They were practical. They didn’t want to suffer where someone else made big bucks.

Hmm.

Sorry, I googled it and somehow ended up on this thread. I didn’t get any results for issur dmalchusa, so I guess it doesn’t exist.

Charliehall, for years the medina has been cutting back on avreichim benefits while spending on all sorts of anti-Torah activities, arresting people who encourage tznius, etc. I’ll pay their taxes in the regular course of life and to avoid their punishments, but dina de-malchusa isn’t shayach.

Rambam (Hilchot Melachim ch. 4) says that there is ddm in EY and it is even a capital offense to be over even for minor infractions such as disobeying an order to turn in a certain direction or violating house arrest (ibid Halacha 5). The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 369:6) decides accroding to Rambam and aparently Rashbam (Baba Batra 54a d”h veha’amar Shmuel), who holds that thereason is that all of the residents implicitly agree to obey the law. According to Rav Ovadia one cannot say kim li against both Rambam and the Shulchan Aruch and therefore one is obliged to pay taxes to the State (Yechaveh Daat 5:63).The Ran (Derasha 11) admits that there is ddm in EY regarding laws enacted for public order and safety.

So far as commercial law is concerned, while we do not say ddm batei din will pasken the civil law as minhag hamedina. Of course, one must go to the bet din, which will decide how to apply the secular law.

Rav Moshe’s ruling is limited to an instance where the criminal is non-violent (see Rema Choshen Mishpat 388:7 and see 388:12 regading financial crimes, Schach Choshen Mishpat 388:45 and Tzitz Eliezer 19:52) and the reporter is not obligated by law to report the crime (see Bet Yosef (see Baba Metzia 83b-84a and Bet Yosef, citing the Responsum of the Rashba, Hoshen Mishpat 388).

.

1. I don’t know which “most poskim” you are referring to, but the S”A is not among that group.

2. Don’t count Rishonim on your list of poskim.

3. You lose credibility when one of the “poskim” on your list who agrees with the Ran, is the Ran.

4. If the government of Israel is a “malchus shel risha’a”, so would every other government in the world. They are no worse to the Charedim then anyone else, and they are probably better because they give more money to them than any other government would.

It says “And…”. That a malchus risha is an additional situation where it wouldn’t apply.

?”? ???? ????? ?? ?? ???? ?

????? ????? ????? – ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?? ??? ??”? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ??????? ???? ?”? ????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ????.

The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 369:6) rules liek the opinion that there is dina d’malchuta dina in EY and Rav Ovadia (Yechaveh Daat 5:4) and Rav Eliashiv (Piskei Din Rabbaniim vol. 6 p.376-381) pasken thatt his applies to Medinat Yisrael. In addition, many poskim hold that the Knesset and Government as elected representatives have the din of Shiva Tuvei HaIr.

One who disagrees has a problem as he cannot walk on any land or use any road that was built through eminent domain.

See MInchas Shlomo on Nedarim 28a

Avikaben, the Shulchan Aruch says that one who evades taxes is a thief whether from a Goyish or Jewish king. Where so you think the Jewish king rules? In Antarctica? And if so, what is the hava amina? Obviously, this means, as Rav Ovadia understands it (and even says that one cannot say “kim li” as it is against both Rambam and the Mechaber), that there is dina d’malchuta dina in EY.

Rav Eliashiv ruled ” ???????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ??”?”.This is also the opinion of the Avnei Nezer (Yoreh Deah 312:48), who says that what is beyond the poweer of the king are dinei mamonet (although the concensus of the poskim is that they have the din of minhagei hamedina as thye are accepted by the community) and dealing with averot ben adam laMakom.