Home › Forums › Bais Medrash › Question re: Ben Sorer U Moreh
- This topic has 51 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by koma.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 13, 2009 5:30 pm at 5:30 pm #590566YW Moderator-80Member
The Ben sorer u moreh is killed not because he has incurred a liabilty of death but because it is a Chesed to remove him from the world now, before he inevitably WILL commit terrible sins. Why then does he get the worst kind of death (skilah). Yes the sins that he will commit perhaps might incur skilah (i don’t know if this is true, but even if it were true) but he is NOT being punished now for future sins; he is being killed to PREVENT him from committing those sins.
Why does he get skilah?
October 13, 2009 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm #664702JosephParticipant80 –
One of the sections of Parashah Ki Seitzei sets out the laws of the ben sorer u’moreh who steals meat and wine from his parents and is put to death. Rashi explains that a ben sorer u’moreh is killed to save him from his own destiny, since he is destined to be a murderer and a thief.
Several meforshim observe that this appears to contradict another well-known statement of Rashi, specifically his comment to Bereishis 21:17, that even though Hashem knew that Yishmael would one day oppress the Jewish People, He saved Yishmael from dying of thirst because, at that moment, Yishmael was righteous (or innocent). Is a person’s future taken into account when he is judged, or not?
The Maharal answers that there is no contradiction. Rather, different rules apply to judgments in the Heavenly court (Yishmael) and a human court (ben sorer u’moreh). Specifically, the role of the human court system is to save wrongdoers from the punishment that they will obtain at the hands of Heaven. If it will further that goal, a human court can take a person’s future into account. (Gur Aryeh)
Elsewhere, the Maharal observes that the Heavenly court takes into account in its judgment whether the sinner has repented. However, a human court may not do that. Maharal explains that the role of the human court is to distance a person from evil. A human court is charged solely with looking at a person’s “dark side.” In contrast, the Heavenly court judges the whole person. (Netiv Hateshuvah ch.2, as explained by R’ Yehoshua Hertman shlita, in his annotated edition of the Maharal’s writings) [Torah.org]
October 13, 2009 5:45 pm at 5:45 pm #664703YW Moderator-80Memberunique punishment assigned for the entire LIFE of cold-blooded murder that would have been
Thank you Dovid but I believe it doesn’t answer the question.
According to my understanding of the Gemorrah in Sanhendrin, and I’m pretty sure this is the pashut pshat, he is NOT BEING PUNISHED, the Bais Din, both m’ailah and m’ata does not punish for future sins! This is clear, i.e. Yishmael.
It is is clear that this misah is a chesed to PREVENT him from carrying out these potential sins. That is the key to the kasha.
October 13, 2009 5:53 pm at 5:53 pm #664704YW Moderator-80MemberSpecifically, the role of the human court system is to save wrongdoers from the punishment that they will obtain at the hands of Heaven. If it will further that goal, a human court can take a person’s future into account. (Gur Aryeh)
The Bais Din cannot punish for sins a person will likely commit. They can take that into account in deciding whether or not to punish a person, in order to benefit the whole of the community. For example, there is a case in the Gemorrah where Bais Din cut off a thiefs hand because thievery was rampant then. This is not nogayah to the question here. The sentence of the BSuM is given in the Torah. Regardless of this side issue it is clear from the Gemorrah that this case is NOT A PUNISHMENT.
Why skilah?
October 13, 2009 5:55 pm at 5:55 pm #664705JosephParticipantYet the Gur Aryeh that was quoted states a Beis Din can take a person’s future into account.
October 13, 2009 6:03 pm at 6:03 pm #664706YW Moderator-80MemberJoseph, fine, but the Bais Din takes nothing into account here except whether or not the child fits the criteria to be poskined a BSuM. His din is already established specifically in the Torah.
Why did the Torah poskin skilah? Again THIS IS NOT A PUNISHMENT for future sins.
October 13, 2009 6:06 pm at 6:06 pm #664707JosephParticipantIf I am understanding the Gur Aryeh correctly, he is saying the Beis Din can take into account the child’s future behavior and punish him for that future behavior.
October 13, 2009 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #664708YW Moderator-80MemberJoseph, your understanding could be correct (though it needs a lot more explanation of what he meant, as on the surface it contradicts all the principles found in Sanhedrin), but that has nothing to do with the kasha I presented.
Again: …the Bais Din takes nothing into account here except whether or not the child fits the criteria to be poskined a BSuM. His din is already established specifically in the Torah. The Bais Din is taking nothing into account except whether or not the criteria for BSuM have been met. They are not deciding a punishment.
Why did the Torah poskin skilah? Again THIS IS NOT A PUNISHMENT for future sins.
It is a PREVENTION of future sins.
October 13, 2009 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #664709JosephParticipantThe Bais Din takes nothing into account here except whether or not the child fits the criteria to be poskined a BSuM. His din is already established specifically in the Torah. The Bais Din is taking nothing into account except whether or not the criteria for BSuM have been met. They are not deciding a punishment.
Why did the Torah poskin skilah?
What I am postulating is that, per the Gur Aryeh’s understanding, the reason that the Torah poskin’s skilah, is because the Torah is taking into account the BSuM’s future behavior and punishing him for that future behavior now.
October 13, 2009 7:07 pm at 7:07 pm #664710YW Moderator-80MemberWhat I am postulating is that, per the Gur Aryeh’s understanding, the reason that the Torah poskin’s skilah, is because the Torah is taking into account the BSuM’s future behavior and punishing him for that future behavior now.
I like postulation, but I may have mentioned before, the Gemorrah in Sanhedrin, (7th Perek?, a few blatt, I don’t recall which) makes it clear that it is not a punishment.
In case I didn’t mention it, it is not a punishment.
In case I didn’t mention it it here, please see every one of my preceding six posts.
the Gur Aryeh is fascinating though. I’d love to know more about it.
October 13, 2009 7:09 pm at 7:09 pm #664711SJSinNYCMemberPerhaps its done as a warning for any future BSU? Also, BSU is really theoretical right? There never were any…
October 13, 2009 7:11 pm at 7:11 pm #664712JosephParticipantIs it not in lieu of future punishment?
October 13, 2009 7:11 pm at 7:11 pm #664713JotharMemberFrom Rav Shimshon Pinkus, hat tip to Hebrewbooks.org:
???? ???? ????? ????? – ???? ?? ???? ?????. ?????, ?? ???? ?????,
??? ???”? “??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???”, ???? ?????? ! ??????
???? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????, ?????? ???
?????”?!
?????
“????, ??? ???? ?????? ???? : ??? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ???
??? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ! ???, ????? ???? ????
???? ?? ?? ???? ?????, ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ????? ????,
????? ??????? ????? ?????? ?? ??????. ???? ???? : ???? ???? ??? ????
????” ????? ?? ?’?.
??????? ??? ???? ??? : “??? ????? ????”. ?? ??? ???, ??? ??? ?????,
????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? – ???? ?????? ?? ????
???? ??????. ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????
??? ?? !
Sounds like, the Torah is saying he will Vadai be chayav skilah in the future, so we give it to him now and save lives in the process.
October 13, 2009 7:13 pm at 7:13 pm #664714YW Moderator-80MemberSJ
That makes a lot of sense.
According to the Sages, it never happened and never will. There is one Amora (Tanna maybe?) who states not only did it happen but he saw it and sat on the grave of the BSuM
October 13, 2009 7:31 pm at 7:31 pm #664715YW Moderator-80MemberJothar, If your interpretation is correct, it sounds exactly like what Joseph was suggesting in his last post. It would take me ten minutes to read it, but I’ll accept your summary. That’s not what the Gemorrah seems to say in Sanhedrin, but I would never presume to disagree with Rav Pinchus, tz’l, Chas v Shalom.
October 13, 2009 8:03 pm at 8:03 pm #664716JotharMemberI found a Yalkut Yehuda quoting a chizkuni- a ben sorer umoreh has a din of rodef, and we kill him to save others. But this still leaves your question- why sekila? For that we have Rav Pinkus- he will be a vadai killer, so we give him the sekila now.
?????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ???
??? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?? ???
?????? ??? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ???
??? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?????, ?????
?? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???????
???? ??? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????
????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??? ????
???? ?????, ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ???
???? ???? ??? ?? ????? ???????? ????? ????
?????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ??
??????
October 13, 2009 8:12 pm at 8:12 pm #664717YW Moderator-80Memberhe will be a vadai killer, so we give him the sekila now.
The only problem with that is that we don’t give skilah for murder (or theft either)
but we do give it for chillul Shabbos and I believe Rav Pinchus mentioned this (though I don’t believe the Gemorrah in Sanhedrin does)
October 13, 2009 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm #664718A600KiloBearParticipantBS”D
Isn’t skila the most serious of the big four and therefore covers all offenses? Maybe we assume that a ben su”m will grow up to violate just about everything (what we expect from a shababnik or bum today) so we give him a little preventative medicine as in the harshest possible punishment before the offense(s) presumed and expected are even committed.
October 13, 2009 10:32 pm at 10:32 pm #664719YW Moderator-42ModeratorI think that skila is the most “public” type of misa give by beis din and that one of the reasons for it is “v’kol yisrael yishmi’u v’yira’u”. I don’t have time now to check if the Torah ever uses that lashon by any misa other than skila. The fact that he is being put to death is a chesed for him; the way that it is done is as a warning for others.
October 14, 2009 4:07 am at 4:07 am #664720bein_hasdorimParticipantAcording to most ben soirer “Loy Hoyah v’loy yihyeh!”
so why is it a parsha in the torah? Drush V’kabel Schar.
Thank you mod 42 for pointing it out.
The reason is for us to learn from it. Getting the harshest(acording to some)Misah
is L’man Yishme’uh V’yiro’uh. To show how bad it is what he will become,
he will not be able to control himself. & also as mentioned, it is the misah
he would’ve been mechuyav. We are just giving it to him L’mafreah.
Al Shem Soifoy. This in itself should discourage such behavior in its
premature stages.
October 14, 2009 5:03 am at 5:03 am #664721mybatMemberThe daat zekenim says that even if he would kill in the future his punishment would be with the sword not sekila?
The answer is because he doesn’t listen to his parents and that’s considered cursing them, the punishment for cursing the parents is sekila. So he is being punished for this sin. Baal tosfot.
October 14, 2009 1:45 pm at 1:45 pm #664722JotharMemberThe Ramban says like mod42- he doesn’t deserve misa but he gets skila to have a chastising effect on those watching. He compares this to a zakein mamrei and a meisis, both of whom didn’t do anything to deserve their deaths but get it for the sake of the onlookers to be chastised.
October 14, 2009 1:56 pm at 1:56 pm #664723NY MomMemberUm, doesn’t say by Yishmael “Basher hu sham”, that Hashem judged him as he was at that moment, and not for what he would do in the future? I just heard a dvar torah regarding this during Y”T as an explanation for why people would be justified in taking on extra chumros that they don’t usually do during aseres ymei teshuva. Because Hashem is judging us as we are now, so if they are only eating pas Yisroel or chalav Yisroel now, though they don’t usually do so it is proper bec. of “basher hu sham”.
So how might this tie in to what is being said about the bs”u?
October 14, 2009 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm #664724JotharMemberNY Mom, it sounds like from Rav Shimshon Pinkus ZT”L (and from the Chinuch ) that Yishmael’s descendants didn’t have to do that, while a Ben sorer Umoreh will definitely commit bad aveiros in the future. Hashem knows what evryone will do in the future. However, that doesn’t mean they don’t have bechira. A ben sorer umoreh, by contrast, has already started down a path which will DEFINITELY lead to the reprehensible actions. He no longer has a bechira, and he sealed his own fate.
October 14, 2009 4:44 pm at 4:44 pm #664725YW Moderator-80MemberThanks mybat
(and everyone else)
October 14, 2009 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #664726WolfishMusingsParticipantThe answer is because he doesn’t listen to his parents and that’s considered cursing them, the punishment for cursing the parents is sekila. So he is being punished for this sin. Baal tosfot.
That’s very nice, except for the simple fact that there are definite parameters to cursing one’s parents and simple disobedience or even direct disrespect, while being forbidden, does not equate with cursing. We don’t stone people who simply disobey their parents.
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #664727WolfishMusingsParticipanthe will be a vadai killer, so we give him the sekila now.
So then where’s his bechira?
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:06 pm at 5:06 pm #664728WolfishMusingsParticipantHe no longer has a bechira, and he sealed his own fate.
Ah, I didn’t see this before I put up my last post.
Even so, how can you say that? Don’t we have it as a tenet that a person is *always* capable of doing teshuva (as long as your name is acher 🙂 )?
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:07 pm at 5:07 pm #664729YW Moderator-80MemberIf the Ben Sorer Umoreh is killed because of the act of murder that he will commit, why is his death penalty through stoning, if the Torah states that one who murders is put to death by Sayif – the sword? Daas Zekainim MiBaalei HaTosfos answers, since the pasuk states that the Ben Sorer Umoreh is “Einenu Shomei’a B’Kol Aviv U’BKol Imo. “He does not listen to the voice of his parents” – that is considered as if he was Mikallel Aviv V’Imo – he cursed his parents. The Torah states that one who curses his parents is Chayiv Skilah – death by stoning.
October 14, 2009 5:08 pm at 5:08 pm #664730YW Moderator-80MemberWolf you need to understand how to answer the Kasha between bechira and Daas Hashem.
Rambam gives the classic teretz
October 14, 2009 5:11 pm at 5:11 pm #664731YW Moderator-80MemberRabbi Avigdor Miller, tzl states that anyone, like Paroh, can have his bechirah taken away by HaKodesh Barchu in certain inyonim. How that relates to Acher, ben Dosai and others, I don’t know.
October 14, 2009 5:14 pm at 5:14 pm #664732WolfishMusingsParticipantThe Torah states that one who curses his parents is Chayiv Skilah – death by stoning.
Yes, you said that before. But the fact of the matter is that that is *not* the halacha. We don’t stone people for simple disobedience. We do so if they hit their parents or if they curse them — but not for simple disobedience.
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:16 pm at 5:16 pm #664733YW Moderator-80Memberwolf
yes your logic is impeccable
so go argue with the Daas Zekainim MiBaalei HaTosfos
October 14, 2009 5:17 pm at 5:17 pm #664734WolfishMusingsParticipantso go argue with the Daas Zekainim MiBaalei HaTosfos
I thought that’s what I was doing….
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:21 pm at 5:21 pm #664735JotharMemberWolfish, does a crack addict have bechira if he will take the next hit or not? His earlier actions sealed his deal.
October 14, 2009 5:21 pm at 5:21 pm #664736mybatMemberI asked my husband for the answer. 😉
October 14, 2009 5:22 pm at 5:22 pm #664737YW Moderator-80MemberI was hoping that wasn’t what you were doing.
The same problem bothered me, however my approach to things I don’t understand is apparently much different than yours.
October 14, 2009 5:26 pm at 5:26 pm #664738WolfishMusingsParticipantWolfish, does a crack addict have bechira if he will take the next hit or not?
Not comperable. Stealing a tarteimar of meat and drinking some wine is not physically addictive.
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:27 pm at 5:27 pm #664739YW Moderator-80Membermybat
so?
You think I don’t also go to a Talmid Chochom when I need an answer?
October 14, 2009 5:30 pm at 5:30 pm #664740YW Moderator-80MemberWolfish, does a crack addict have bechira if he will take the next hit or not?
Not comperable. Stealing a tarteimar of meat and drinking some wine is not physically addictive.
The Wolf
The sugya in Sanhedrin makes it very clear over and over again that the BSuM IS addicted to these pleasures. This is the basis for the inevitability of his future actions, which is necessary for his skilah. I don’t know whether his addiction is considered physical or mental.
October 14, 2009 5:30 pm at 5:30 pm #664741WolfishMusingsParticipantRabbi Avigdor Miller, tzl states that anyone, like Paroh, can have his bechirah taken away by HaKodesh Barchu in certain inyonim. How that relates to Acher, ben Dosai and others, I don’t know.
I’m not familiar with ben Dosai, but I always had my own thoughts on the other two cases.
Pharaoh’s free will wasn’t taken away from him — rather it was restored to him.
Acher’s free will to do teshuva wasn’t taken away from him — rather the bas kol said that even if he did do teshuva it would not be accepted. (I have problems with this approach too, but that’s for another time).
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:31 pm at 5:31 pm #664742WolfishMusingsParticipantThe sugya in Sanhedrin makes it very clear over and over again
Does it? I have to admit it’s been several years since I learned that perek of Gemara. Can you point to one specific place?
The Wolf
October 14, 2009 5:33 pm at 5:33 pm #664743mybatMemberI didn’t know 80 was baal hatosfot! I thought he/she was kapusta!!;)
My husband likes it when I ask him these type of questions, he really has a good head, ba’h.
October 14, 2009 5:33 pm at 5:33 pm #664744YW Moderator-80MemberPharaoh’s free will wasn’t taken away from him…
That’s simply not true. There is an opinion that “hardening” of his hard enabled him to maintain his Bechira, and that is the pshat that I personally prefer. But the simple pshat, Rashi’s pshat, and that referred to my most commentators is that his Bechira was removed
October 14, 2009 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm #664745YW Moderator-80MemberCan you point to one specific place?
No, I haven’t the time.
Relearn it if you’d like.
October 14, 2009 9:30 pm at 9:30 pm #664746JotharMemberWolfish, if the idea that his career path is defined for him doesn’t sit well with you, you can always go with the Ramban’s pshat.
October 30, 2009 5:43 am at 5:43 am #664747HaLeiViParticipantMod-80, the whole assumption of this thread, that the Misa is not a punishment is a mistake. Wherever you will look, you’ll see it being referred to as a punishment. Also, although it will never happen, we must understand it as if it will.
The Gemara asks how we can punish him for eating and drinking, and the Gemara answers that it will never happen. Don’t take this to mean that it doesn’t make sense. It is more an answer to an emotional question. Although the logic is pure that he will definately end up killing people, it is still something that is not in front of our eyes, and therefore it is a hard pill to swallow.
Being that we have a klal that Diracheha Darchei Noam, that the Torah is sweet and peaceful, this is one Mitzva that won’t fit that bill. therefore, Hashem sees to it that it will never happen.
Please learn through the Gur Arye on this issue. He answers all these questions raised. He says, as mentioned above, that Beis Din Shel Matta punishes to prepare the person for Beis Din Shel Maala. Also, he says that this is the Din of Torah. Beis Din is merely doing the Din of Torah.
The Gur Arye also answers your Skila question. He says that when we kill a murderer, it is for a single murder. On the other hand, this person is being judged because of his future, which contains multiple murders.
In order to better to understand the addiction, we must keep in mind that what makes the Ben Sorer Umorer impossible is the fact that he must be brought up in the most perfect conditions. That is the reason, the Maharal says, that his parents must have the same height and voice (whatever that means). In such a circumstance, when he steals from his father in order to eat Davka special meat and special wine, he is walking the path of complete evil. If it were for hunger or sweets, that would be a different story.
October 30, 2009 2:17 pm at 2:17 pm #664748YW Moderator-80MemberThank you
October 30, 2009 4:37 pm at 4:37 pm #664749Pashuteh YidMemberThe inyan of having the same voice I have heard is that both his parents teach him the same values, and he doesn’t get mixed msgs. Because nobody is ever brought up under optimal conditions, it is only a hypothetical, and never happens. Drosh vkabel schar.
My main question is that it seems to take a pessimistic view that some people have no hope. I believe I heard in the name of the Baal Shem Tov that the worst aveira in the whole Torah is to think one is too big of a sinner to do tshuvah. So I am not sure how that fits here. I prefer the Baal Shem’s viewpoint.
October 30, 2009 7:45 pm at 7:45 pm #664750HaLeiViParticipantPashuta Yid,
You might like the Baal Shem Tov better than the Torah, but he liked the Torah better than himself. The proof that it is never too late to fix up, is that Hashem kept you alive. The proof that it is too late for the Ben Sorer Umore is that Hashem said to kill him.
What you say about mixed messages is very nice, although it’s a drop out of the pshat. The reason I wrote “whatever that means” is simply because I’m not sure what it means. It might mean literally the same voice. That, however would be a Mum on the part of one of them. It might mean the same kind of voice, or the same voice had they been on the same pitch.
The point is the same, though, as what you said. Their message must be the same, and they must be working together with one plan.
In stead of switching or reverting to other dimensions of Torah, first understand the Omek Hapshat. Sometimes, after learning through the Drush, Remez and Sod, you can come back to the Pshat with a new understanding.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.