- This topic has 285 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Walking up to the temple mount is not the same as someone yelling in a religious ferver kill the jews
If R’L some “Rabbi” would give a firery speech yelling kill the infidel muslims, then THAT would be incitement
DY, usually a ???? is ???? because of “???? ???? ???? ??????”. However, where the ???? is known to be willing to commit the crime or does not think that it is prohibited the ???? is ???? (Rema Choshen Mishpat 388:15). In any case, the inciter is certainly morally responsible and may even be executed by the secular authorities (Rambam, Hilchot Rotzeach 2,2-4). However, this obviously has nothing to do with some third person’s actions. For example, if a person testifies against a criminal and then a contract is put on him neither he nor the prosecutor is responsible.
DY: Of course not. By your logic, though, it would be the right thing to do to stop violence against Jews. (Well, it wouldn’t because it would defeat the purpose, which is why I said locking up in the house.)
My apologies to the moderator for my false assumptions and attitude. Thanks
How refreshing, you’re welcome
MW13, I hate to burst the bubble you are living in, but I worked as a physician in Yerushalayim for 7 years, only recent back in the US. I treated many arabs there FOR FREE, with hundreds even thousands of $s spent on often single patient medications and interventions…many weren’t even citizens of Israel. My observation being a “neutral” care giver while Jewish myself, is that 99.9%, while not actively violent and committing crimes against Jews…actually hate their guts and given the opportunity and convenience would gladly participate in harming Jews. That point aside, there are rare arabs, who are educated, smart and actually really like the Jews in Israel…funny how those three go together.
Walking up to the temple mount is not the same as someone yelling in a religious ferver kill the jews
Indeed it is not. The cleric has a great deal more culpability, but the terrorist being guilty does not absolve him. Nor does it absolve the one who goes to HH”B of his (lesser) culpability.
Avi, see above.
Well, it wouldn’t because it would defeat the purpose
Precisely. It’s about weighing the benefits vs. the risk/loss, and the same holds true for locking ourselves up or disguising ourselves.
Israel should implement a policy prohibiting any Jew from ascending to the HH”B.
Israel should implement a policy prohibiting any Jew from ascending to the HH”B.
Such a law would be impossible to enforce, you cant ask everyone person what their relgion is and some might very well lie
Sure you can. Israel already arrests any Jew on Har HaBayis who prays.
Sure you can. Israel already arrests any Jew on Har HaBayis who prays.
They already do that, if you are caught praying you are asked to leave immediately
Joseph
What does a jew look like?
If the person does not have a beard, Peyos or dress like a jew, how are they supposed to know who is a jew?
DY
“If someone knowingly does something which is likely to lead to harm to others, of course they take some blame and culpability when it happens.”
To what extent. For example as I asked earlier
“If I smack some guy named Joseph, because I feel Jospeh is obnoxious. Is he (at all) responsible for my smacking Joseph?
Even if I warn and say hey Joseph youre not nice If you make a snide comment again Im smacking my neighbor Jospeh Smith.” would Jospeh be bear blame or culpability for his namesake’s pain?
Or as a coworker once asked do you think that by rejecting oso hoish we incited violence against ourselves over the centuries bear some blame or culpability for our persecution?
When it makes sense to lay blame like here, not when it doesn’t, like in any ridiculous example you choose to use.
And see my point to Sam above (which should be obvious and and I think I’ve been saying all along).
zd: The same way the police know who to identify and arrest who prays on the site, they can identify those same people to prevent them from ascending to the site in the first place.
DY
Calling them ridiculous doesnt make them ridculous. Granted my Jospeh example was made up, but the quote form The Independent and the question from my coworker were both real.
I get that in both those cases (ie killing terroists and rejecting oso hoish) there is no othe roption. ut that is just dodging the issue.
namely in those cases is their blame to be had by the police or us.
The blame may be mtigated somewaht or even completly since thier is no other choice, fine. But do you beleive their is any blame at all to be had for rejecting oso hosih? If not why is it different han ascending har habayis?
You gave a vague answer
“Precisely. It’s about weighing the benefits vs. the risk/loss, and the same holds true for locking ourselves up or disguising ourselves.”
but I dont follow?
Joseph, Israel should also implement a policy that no Jews are allowed in Jerusalem period…since we don’t know the exact location of HH”B…technically it could be anywhere, so at least we can throw out the kotel…that’s waaay too close.
technically it could be anywhere, so art least we can throw out the kotel…that’s waaay too close.
See the teshuvah from R’ Moshe referred to above, where he says that in theory, there are parts of HH”B which are muttar, but we don’t know where they are (partially based on a machlokes Rishonim), and that would include the Kosel (because perhaps it’s an interior wall), except that we have a mesorah that the Kosel is muttar.
Ubiquitin, think through the benefits vs. losses. You said yourself that your cases are impossible.
We do know that the BH”M was on the HH”B, and we know where the HH”B is. The only thing we don’t know is how the BH”M was situated on HH”B.
DY
again I dont quite follow are you saying that the soldiers and those who reject oso hoish are partly to blame for terror/persecution but their is no other option?
Joseph: We kinda do. We know the measurements from the Mishnayos. If the Dome of the Rock is the Makom HaAron, then we for sure can extrapolate everything. If it isn’t, there are still parts of Har HaBayis that we know for sure are Muttar. There are just a lot fewer of them.
Sam, your “if” shows we don’t…
No, blame is a wholly inappropriate term when someone does the correct thing.
DY
Thanks though that seems like an arbitrary divide beacuse you are uncomfortable with the outcome of your position.
In cases where it isnt correct but was accidental (like Yosef lipshutz hitting Gavin Cato ultimatly resulting in Yankel Rosenbaum’s death) does that carry “blame” albeit accidental?
Should I be angry at someone for something he didn’t want to do? Is there a lesson not to do it again or that nobody else should do it? You’re making blame pointless when it isn’t.
BTW, I haven’t noticed you answer my question:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/har-habayis-revisited/page/4#post-583911
DY
thanks for your patience i think i got it. (i still think you are wrong, and your view is offensive, but I think I get it)
though to be clear, the Charlie Hebdo people are to blame for their own deaths. correct?
and it wouold seem from the christian perspective that we are wrong for rejecting odso haish, we are to blame for our persecution. In other words my coworker who beleives in oso hoish and thinks we are wrong for rejecting him is right when she said we are to balme for our persecution. correct?
DY, the only culpability of a Jew who goes up on HHB is going there – and that is only according to the opinion that it is prohibited. That is clear to any thinking person. If someone shakes a lilav before the time (let’s say that he follows a different definition of netz) and someone else hits him is the shaker to blame for anything but possibly shaking the lulav before the time?
Again, ubiquitin, I think you’re exaggerating my view, because presented accurately my view is completely sensible.
Saying they “take the blame” implies that they’re 100% responsible and that the terrorists are not. That’s far from true, and not what I’m saying.
Yes, the CH people were stupid for inciting Muslims, but that doesn’t absolve the terrorists one iota.
If someone walked through a high crime area at night wearing flashy jewelry at night and is mugged, is the mugger not responsible? Of course he is, but the victim, with his/her stupidity, takes some blame as well.
As far as your coworker is concerned, sometimes people are wrong simply because they’re wrong. If I told you the sky was pink with yellow polka dots, would I be correct because from my perspective it is?
DY, was Yankel Rosenbaum responsible for his own murder for walking in Crown Heights visibly Jewish?
No
Joseph and chareidimolim: I said “if” because there are a few minor assumptions that have to be made. We’re pretty sure where it was. Even if you factor in a few doubts, we can definitely still go up on 70-80% of Har HaBayis, not the 95% that some claim.
DY, why not lesheetatcha?
If you’re asking, you’re apparently not understanding “my shittah”, as spelled out here in numerous posts.
DY
“BTW, I haven’t noticed you answer my question:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/har-habayis-revisited/page/4#post-583911″
sorry I missed it.
However you answered your question:
“No, blame is a wholly inappropriate term when someone does the correct thing.”
Inciting people to commit violence is wrong, thus they are to blame. Walking on har habyais is not wrong (again I’m not talking halachicly) so as you say “blame is a wholly inappropriate term when someone does the correct thing.”
ditto for all the example Ive cited rejecting oso hoish, dressing Jewish, killing terrorists, walking on har habayis. All of these are correct actions . Therefore anybody who uses it to justify or explain terror is wrong (I dont mean you I mean the media and the terroists)
No, walking on Har Habayis is incorrect, aside from tumah (despite the false information some have given here), gufa because it incites the enemy, and there’s not sufficient benefit to justify that.
@ubiquitin Charlie Hebdo people are to blame for their own deaths
An excellent own goal. Indeed the Charlie Hebdo people should take blame for inciting Muslims and probably causing extra deaths including in the Hyper Cacher shooting where r”l 4 yidden were killed.
This doesn’t detract from the absolutely blame of the terrorists, their backers, handlers and enablers but the Charlie Hebdo staff were culpable too for incredible stupid goading of dangerous hateful terrorists.
If the Palestinians/Muslims would make as big a fuss of say Kever Rochel and turn it in a cause for incitements and death threats r”l, I would stop going there too.
@chareidimolim the area where … religious people go up today is 100% OK …. And most Rabbanim who are willing to address the matter at all agree to this.
Nonsense. And your implied argument that the majority of chareidi rabbonim who disagree are “not willing to address the matter” is disingenuous, to say the least.
@Sam2, @chareidimolim etc. regarding your assertions that you know roughly where the heical “must have been” and therefore where’s definitely mutar to go. Surely you’re not basing anything on the location of the dome of the rock? Where in our mesorah does it state that the dome of the rock or its platform definitely intersects with the heichal or azorah? We don’t know for sure even what part of the HH”B the kosel was except for our mesorah that standing in front of it is definitely OK. (Some, including myself don’t even touch it).
Notwithstanding this, I continue not to understand the point of going up there? Leshitoschah, the kosel (or perhaps kosel hakatan) must surely be as close to the kodesh hakdoshim as some (Northern?) parts of the Har Habayis where you say is definitely muttar to go. And you’re not even allowed to daven there. So why go? In what way are you acheiving more than davening at the kosel? If it’s just for Zionist goals of establishing Jewish rights there then indeed this is a fatal (literally) error that stirs up a hornet’s nest.
DY
You are coming dangerously close to circular reasoning. It is incorrect becasue it incites, but if it is correct (like killing terrorists or practicing Judaism) the fact that it incites would be irrelevant yet it is incorrect BECAUSE it incites…
Ash
“If the Palestinians/Muslims would make as big a fuss of say Kever Rochel and turn it in a cause for incitements and death threats r”l, I would stop going there too”
I’m really sorry to break it to you, but they do! thats why a fortress was constructed around it!
You are coming dangerously close to circular reasoning.
Well, sure, if you skip the part about weighing the positives against the negatives (which, agav, is how anything in life is decided).
Also, you avoided answering my question.
I’m sorry which question
if you meant this one
“Just curious, all those who say that since it’s the terrorists’ fault, there’s no culpability for incitement: do you hold the muslim clerics who get up in public, waving a knife screaming to kill the Jews, responsible, or are they entirely blameless if they do no actual stabbing? “
I did in fact answer it
“”No, blame is a wholly inappropriate term when someone does the correct thing.”
Inciting people to commit violence is wrong, thus they are to blame. Walking on har habyais is not wrong (again I’m not talking halachicly) so as you say “blame is a wholly inappropriate term when someone does the correct thing.””
If you mant another question, Id be more than happy to answer
So if you would only have the common sense to realize that provoking and inciting our enemies unnecessarily is wrong, we could be in agreement.
“The bark on the tree was as soft as the skies.”
While the wolf waits below, hungry and lonely,
Crying to the moo-oo-oon,
DY, you are stonewalling. Your sheeta is that it is prohibited to do an action that provokes antiSemites. Thus, it is prohibited to walk in an area where there are anti-Semites, certainly during a riot, wearing clothes that identify one as a Jew. Thus someone who does so is responsible for what happens to him. Mendelsohn agreed with your sheeta and counseled assimilation but the Dreyfus affair showed that he was wrong. Being that we are discussing it, was Dreyfus responsible for being sent to Devil’s Island because he provoked anti-Semites by joining the French army?
DY
Or If only you could realise your “shita” is offensvie , blames the victims and is based on non-factual circular reasoning (it is wrong becasue it incites and it is considred incitemnet because it is wrong) we too could be in agreement
Rabbosai,
Due to my submission to the majority of contemporary poskim who prohibit ascending Har Habayis, I do not advocate ascending Har Habayis. But…
If a yid ascended Har Habayis AFTER receiving permission from his Rav, would you still accuse the yid of bloodshed?
If you do, then would you accuse the rabbonim who advised their followers to remain in Europe in 1939 as guilty of bloodshed?
Emunas chachamim does not mean that rabbonim’s decisions are infallible. Torah lo nitna le’malachei hashareis.
Ubiquitin, it’s time to stop misrepresenting what I’m saying.
Avi Gordon, I’m not following. It’s okay for someone to follow his rabbi and incite the arabs, causing Jews to die, because rabbis make mistakes?
Ash: Ah, see, that is where our opinions will diverge. I do think we know what part of Har HaBayis the Kosel was. It was the outer retaining wall built by Herod. There is some confusion about that because some earlier Poskim (a few hundred years ago) were misinformed as to what the Kosel was, so now people think it’s a “Machlokes”. But it’s not. We know what the wall is.
Many, most prominently Chabad, hold that it’s a wall from the Beis HaMikdash because of the “Midrash” (that doesn’t appear in any pre-17th century source) that the roman general refused to destroy it to leave a Zecher for what Titus ruined and the other “Midrash” (again, also with no early source) that David HaMelech started to build the Beis HaMikdash and that this was the one wall he built so it could never be destroyed. Again, though, we know for a fact that that’s just plain not true.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.