Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 11

Tue, 13 Jan 2009

• 1. Re: Torah Geography & Dream Brachos (Saul Mashbaum)
• 2. Re: Din Moser (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Answering "Amen" To Various Brakhoth (Akiva Blum)
• 4. Din Moser (Harvey Benton)
• 5. Re: Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on Shabbat (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 6. Recognizing The Silent Aleph (Cantor Wolberg)
• 7. "Ancient" Minhagim (Harvey Benton)
• 8. Re: Answering "Amen" To Various Brakhoth (Chanoch (Ken) Bloom)
• 9. The importance of a woman's name (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 10. Re: Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on Shabbat (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 11. Threats Against A Judge (Harvey Benton)
• 12. SHMOS "The Fall And The Rise of the Jewish People" (Cantor Wolberg)
• 13. Re: Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on Shabbat (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 14. Ramban - Love your fellow as yourself (Daniel Eidensohn)
• 15. Re: Threats Against A Judge (Zev Sero)

RMYG:

>>...see YD 210:2 ... where things that happen in dreams do have Halachic significance.

In this source, the mechaber says definitively, at first, that n'darim
in a dream have no validity whatsoever (this is the opinion of the
Rosh and the Tur). Then says that some disagree, (the Taz cites the
Rashba, who says this is a "chumra b'alma") and their opinion should
be taken into account("yesh lachush l'divreihem").

This is apparently the basis of our mentioning in hatarat n'darim vows
made "b'hakitz o b'chalom"; according to the first opinion cited by
the m'chaber,  the words " o b'chalom" are unnecessary, since such
n'darim are not binding at all, and thus do not require hatara. They
are included lachush l'divrei haRashba.

 Actually, the reference to vows made in a dream is only in the second
part of HN, which is m'sirat modaa on *future* vows. They do not
appear in the first part, which is hatarat n'darim proper, annulling
vows *already* made. I do not understand why this is so; the m'chaber
on nidrei chalom is clearly referring to hatara of vows already made.
Tzarich iyyun.

Saul Mashbaum

Harvey Benton wrote:
> I heard (second hand) that a big Rov and Dayan in my town recently spoke 
> in front of a number of people and told them that a certain person had 
> the din of a moser.  The Rov (allegedly) said that it was a clear-cut 
> case in SA, that he was chayav mitah, and that if he had been living in 
> New York, he would be dead already. 
> 
> I was quite taken back when I heard this and wondered:  1. Why would the 
> Rov tell that to a group of people?

So they should know to be careful of him, of course.  If someone is a
danger to the public, how can you *not* warn people?


> If in fact he holds that way (I 
> heard it being told over in the presence of the Rabbi of my shul) then 
> why advertise it?  If a hothead acted on it, would blood, CV, be on the 
> Rov/Dayan's head?

If in fact he holds that way, then the person's blood is muttar, so why
would it be on the dayan's head, or on anybody's?  On the contrary, maybe
someone will find himself in a situation where he can kill this person
without danger to himself.


>  2.  I do not know if the Rov consulted with any other 
> Dayanim, but wouldn't at a minimum a Beis Din of 3 be necessary for such 
> a life and death pronouncment?

If it's proposed to actually kill the person then I believe it's customary
to assemble a BD of 23, if possible.  But I'm not aware of any halachic
requirement to do so, and it's certainly not required if no actual killing
is contemplated, but merely informing people of his status.


>  3.  We do not have a Sanhedrin nowadays 
> that can pasken on such serious issues: why and to what lengths did the 
> Chachamim empower post-Sanhedrin authorities to decide on things like 
> this?

What has this got to do with a sanhedrin?  The din of rodef and moser
is up to each individual to determine.  When one sees someone about to
kill someone else, and one has a clear shot at him, one doesn't stop to
ask a shayla.


>  4. Should such pronouncements be discouraged, in light of the 
> fact that Yigal Amir's assasination of Yitzchak Rabin was possibly at 
> the least, fueled by such din moser talk?

"Fact" and "possibly" contradict each other.  And who says it was wrong?
Had it not been crystal clear that killing Rabin would only make things
worse, had it been reasonable to assume that killing him would stop the
slaughter of Jews instead of increasing it, would it not have been right
to kill him?

-- 
Zev Sero                    A mathemetician is a device for turning coffee
z...@sero.name               into theorems.                   - Paul Erdos

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jay F Shachter" <j...@m5.chicago.il.us>
To: avo...@lists.aishdas.org
Sent: 12/01/09 01:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Answering "Amen" To Various Brakhoth

> 
> One Sunday morning an obviously Sefardi fellow whom I had never seen
> before was davening for the Amud. After a moment or two Rav [Pinxas]
> Teitz stopped him and said, "You can pronounce any word the way you
> want except for HaShem's name.  You cannot say A--nai (that is,
> pronouncing a kamatz as if it were a pasach as some Sefardim
> do.). You must say A--noi (pronouncing the kamatz with an Ashkenaz
> pronunciation.) Your pronunciation is Chol for us and we cannot
> answer Amen.
> 

It is regrettable that R' Pinxas Teitz is no longer alive to defend
himself; perhaps one of his living descendants will speak for him,
because this psaq, assuming it is correctly reported, does not appear
to be well thought-out.  A brakha can be recited in any language that
you understand.  The shliax tzibbur could have recited the entire
prayer service, except for birkath kohanim (which was probably not
done in R' Teitz's synagogue), in English.  Now, if you can fulfill your
obligation by listening to a brakha in English, assuming you
understand English and understand what is being said, then surely that
is no worse than listening to a brakha in bad Hebrew, assuming you
understand what is being said.  So there seems to be no reason why R'
Teitz's congregants could not fulfill their obligations by listening
to the brakhoth of a shliax tzibbur who, like, e.g., Rashi, pronounces
the qamatz gadol like a pattax, because surely they understood what
was being said.  And yet, R' Pinxas Teitx, if this story is correctly
reported, publicly embarrassed someone rather than rely on this
normative halakha.
<<<<

The difference is that this only works for a locally recognizable language.
For example, someone in my shul davens from the amud. Most of it sounds
like nonsense, though some of it is clearly Elizabethan poetry. He explains
himself that where he comes from, everyone understands the language as
davening, and he can even demonstrate how it works. We would answer him
that unless this language is spoken amongst us, it is worthless, and
certainly if it sounds like what we do understand but with an entirely
different meaning!
If ad..nai is not said in E NJ, it is (or was) a foreign language, and certainly if we understand it but with an entirely different meaning.

Akiva

RZS wrote:
So they should know to be careful of him, of course.? If someone is a
danger to the public, how can you *not* warn people?

HB: Warning people is different than pronouncing him Chayav Mitah. You can
warn people to stay away from him, but why put a death sententence out
there on his head?

RZS: If in fact he holds that way, then the person's blood is muttar, so why
would it be on the dayan's head, or on anybody's?? On the contrary, maybe
someone will find himself in a situation where he can kill this person
without danger to himself.? 

HB:? In this case, a major Rabbinic body (the RCC), refused to issue a ruling. (And if they had, I assume it
 wouldn't be publicly, if it
 involved a din of
 moser.)? What about Dina
 D'Malchuta Dina??
 And a Chilul Hashem; people would say that even in a (pretty much fair)
 land (USA) of justice and laws, different religions could feel it
 appropriate to take matters into their own hands.? Accusations of
 Vigilante Justice and comparisons to Isalmic Hotheads would be
 forthcoming.

RZS: If it's proposed to actually kill the person then I believe it's customary
to assemble a BD of 23, if possible.? But I'm not aware of any halachic
requirement to do so, and it's certainly not required if no actual killing
is contemplated, but merely informing people of his status.

HB:? Since when is a halacha paskened with no intent to carry it out?? I am
not talking about Beit Hamikdash halacha paskening but inyanim that
currently affect us.
And even if no actual actions were planned to implement the psak, someone could take matters into his own hand.? Under USA law, would the Rav be guilty of
 incitement?

RZS: What has this got to do with a sanhedrin?? The din of rodef and moser
is up to each individual to determine.? When one sees someone about to
kill someone else, and one has a clear shot at him, one doesn't stop to
ask a shayla.

HB:? Aren't the dins of rodef and moser different?? Also and again, I would
ask about Dina D'Malchuta:? Certain cases, such as child molesting must be
reported, at least by hospital workers, etc., to the authorities.? If a
frum doctor or therapist comes accross a case of child molesting, or intent
to physically harm another, etc., are you suggesting he/she should not
follow the law (possibly lose his/her license, and allow harm to others)
and not report the issue (because of din moser)?

RZS: "Fact" and "possibly" contradict each other.? And who says it was wrong?
Had it not been crystal clear that killing Rabin would only make things
worse, had it been reasonable to
 assume that killing him would stop the
slaughter of Jews instead of increasing it, would it not have been right
to kill him?

HB:? I do not know, but please recall the case of the Alta Lena, Gedalya
ben Achikam, and others.? I think that such matters (Jew v Jew) should not
be taken lightly; nor by a single Rav or individual.? If a qualified Beis
Din actually agrees on such a psak, I believe things should be done
quietly.... HB


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090112/dbd4f531/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:23:55 -0500
Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

...

> One is about the limits of the halachic demands of the humanitarian dilemma.
> I don't think it goes very far, but I'd like to see us have that
> discussion.

Gil Student has a post on the topic, which mentions several sources
which seem interesting, although I have not yet had a chance to read
them:

http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2009/01/civilians-and-war.html

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

What I find very interesting is that one of the words for 'sin' is  
cheit, spelled ches, tes, aleph.  In addition to meaning sinning,  
distancing from God, violating the law unintentionally, it also means  
missing the target. In other words, as the Hebrew letter aleph, at the  
end of the word is silent and has no function in the pronunciation of  
the word, so too, one who misses the target, misses a ?letter? so to  
speak and can?t see what he or she has done wrong.
May we all be fortunate enough to recognize the silent aleph.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090112/201ee0ff/attachment-0001.htm>

RAMiller wrote (not exact quote) that we have no principles to guide us
other than each individuals responsibility.... to find Truth (re adoption
of new minhagim).	     HB:  What about injunctions such as Lo Taturu,
not to go against the words of the Sages, and Bal Tosef?  Has nothing been
codified in this regard?		     Further, why have
post-AKHagedola prayers been allowed into the siddur (some with the name of
Hashem)?  Ex. include Vlamalshinim, Lecha Dodi, prayer for the State,
LeShem Yichuds, etc, ?	HB

On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 05:29 -0600, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> > 
> > One Sunday morning an obviously Sefardi fellow whom I had never seen
> > before was davening for the Amud. After a moment or two Rav [Pinxas]
> > Teitz stopped him and said, "You can pronounce any word the way you
> > want except for HaShem's name.  You cannot say A--nai (that is,
> > pronouncing a kamatz as if it were a pasach as some Sefardim
> > do.). You must say A--noi (pronouncing the kamatz with an Ashkenaz
> > pronunciation.) Your pronunciation is Chol for us and we cannot
> > answer Amen.
> > 
> 
> (Parenthetically -- this is not the reason for my posting -- is there
> a reason, other than ignorance, why some people say "pasach", as was
> done by the poster quoted above?  I am looking for a way to be "dan
> l'khaf zkhuth" on those people, and so far have not found one.)
> 
> It is regrettable that R' Pinxas Teitz is no longer alive to defend
> himself; perhaps one of his living descendants will speak for him,
> because this psaq, assuming it is correctly reported, does not appear
> to be well thought-out.  A brakha can be recited in any language that
> you understand.  The shliax tzibbur could have recited the entire
> prayer service, except for birkath kohanim (which was probably not
> done in R' Teitz's synagog), in English. Now, if you can fulfill your
> obligation by listening to a brakha in English, assuming you
> understand English and understand what is being said, then surely that
> is no worse than listening to a brakha in bad Hebrew, assuming you
> understand what is being said.

I'm not sure where you get that it's OK to be shaliach tzibur if your
pronunciation is bad. After all SA OC 53:12 says not to appoint a
shaliach tzibbur who pronounces his alefs like they're ayins or
vice-versa. RDYosef confirms in Halacha Berurah 53:24 that this hakpada
is still relevant, unless there's nobody else qualified.

Furthermore regarding the permissability of having a shaliach tzibbur
daven in English, see Halacha Berura 101:17: Gedolei Yisrael in the
later generations warn forcefully not to change from what we are
accustomed to (?????????) in all kehillot of Israel to daven in lashon
hakodesh...

So I'd kinda like to see a source that you can even be yotzae a beracha
if the beracha is said in some language other than Hebrew rather than
take your word for it based on a clearly faulty line of reasoning.

--Ken

-- 
Ken (Chanoch) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090112/4a10c4a4/attachment-0001.pgp>

Twice in the course of Bereishit, Hashem seems to make a fuss about a woman's name.

The first time is Chava.  For she is Eim Kol Chai. She is not a cipher. She
is the mother of all who live. For a  book known for its brevity, this is a
long sentence.

The second time is Sara Imeinu. Or, Sarai as she was formerly known.  Oh,
she is also called Yiska.  Again, for a book known for its brevity on some
subjects, it's spending a lot of time on her name. And all this - before
Avraham gets the call for Lech Lecha.

Genesis is a book of names. We have the human family tree from Adam all the
way to Ephraim and Menashe. In most cases, we only know the father, but if
you look again, that's ALL you know about these men. They were born, they
lived, they had children and they died. Nothing they did in life was
apparently memorable.

And then you have the men who were worth mentioning. Chanoch, a worthy
personage. but for some reason he did not become one of the Avot, one of
the leaders of the Jewish nation.

If you go back,  you see a very interesting mandate that Hashem gives the
world: "Al Kein Ya'azov Ish Et Aviv VeImo VeDavak BeIshto VeHayu LeBassar
Echad". We have no idea who Chanoch married.  Apparently, his closeness to
Hashem was as an individual, not a couple.

Et HaElokim HitHalech Noach. We have the story of the flood and Noach, but
once again, Noach did not become a patriarch. He is not listed as an
Ushpizin. Midreshei Chazal make a point of limiting his level of Tzaddikut
(Ish Tzaddik BeDorotav). There is another minor point here: We have no idea
who his wife was. In fact, he is very much like the other members of the
family tree: we know when he was born, who his children were and when he
died.  Any other historical information has to do with the flood or with
Kenaan and his fate. 

Going through the rest of Genesis, these are the names that stand out: The
Avot and Imahot; Reuven - for not "becoming" who he could have become;
Shimon & Levi for an historic action they took; Yehuda & Tamar;
Yosef & Osnat; the remainder of the Shevatim and their place in history
of the others, and in the family tree.	Other figures appear as they impact
the main characters, but they did not become our national role models.

Examining Bereishit we see an interesting phenomenon. Any man who became
"something" (Av/ Jewish leader) - we have at the very least the wife's
name, usually we have even more than that. What's even more fascinating is
that this phenomenon is not limited to Bereishit - it is true for the whole
Chamisha Chumshei Torah.  When you consider that the chumash is a very
limited historical document (it covers about 2500 years plus the basic
Jewish law), each word gains added importance. Why mention Osnat at all?
And yet Yosef became a national figure - the Ge'ula is connected to
Mashiach Ben Yosef (and of course Mashiach Ben David).

There is a very important lesson to be learned here. Many think that the
Torah is chauvinistic. That addressing Hashem in the masculine is based on
this.  But we have to remember our basic Jewish axioms - Hashem is Echad.
Hashem is neither male nor female, nor is Hashem NOT female nor male. When
Hashem creates mankind "BeTzelem Elokim" Hashem makes a point of stating
:VeHaYu LeBassar Echad". That is the goal. What couples are supposed to
strive for.  And Hashem is consistant. 

Leadership in Yahadut is not given to individual heroes.  It is given to
family men, who value their wives and are united with them. Not as
Mal'achim, but as humans who live and strive, make mistakes and make
amends.  It is only when pursuing this goal, of togetherness, striving for
Echad, that a person can become a true leader of the Jewish people.

Shoshana L. Boublil

Note: This is part of an article. Comments are welcome.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090113/4f00ab3b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:23:55 -0500
Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

...

> One is about the limits of the halachic demands of the humanitarian dilemma.
> I don't think it goes very far, but I'd like to see us have that
> discussion.

More sources:

http://michtavim.blogspot.com/2009/01/scholarly-overview-of-he
sder-and-tzva.html

I had seen this, but forgotten it, and had to be reminded by Menachem Mendel:

http://menachemmendel.net/blog/2009/01/12/rabbis-in-wartime/

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

If CV a Judge/Rav/Beis Din, etc (and/or their families) are threatened so
that they should  rule in a certain way in a civil or criminal matter, what
should the Judges do?  Does Sakanos Nefashos take precedence or does
Din/Mishpat?  (Or Yirat Hashem? eg. sword over their heads mashal...). 
Does the percieved threat level affect this decision?  What about the cases
being tried, eg. Dinei Mamon v. Dinei Nefashos, Malkus, etc affecting this
decision? Is a threat to be considered as a >bribe< and
therefore categorically rejected in all cases?	 HB

The Book of Shmos (Exodus) deals first with the descent of the Jews to  
slavery and then their eventual emancipation.

The gematria of the word Shmos (shin,mem,vov,sof) is 746. There are  
only two verses in the entire Tanach with that gematria and
they are both in the Book of Psalms.  The first is 109:22 'Ki ani  
v'evyon anochi v'libi chalal b'kirbi'  'For I am poor and needy, And my
heart is wounded within me.'  That certainly would be an apt  
description of the slaves.

The other verse is Psalm 116:5 'Chanun HaShem v'tzadik veilokeinu  
m'rachem' 'Gracious is the Lord and righteous; Yes, our God
is compassionate.'

I find it intriguing that the above two verse can summarize, albeit  
briefly, the Book of Shmos.

ri

[I took the time to step in and edit this post because I wanted to aim the
replies in a particular direction. I'm letting it through as grist for the
mill of what would the Torah expect us to do. Obviously a discussion of
what a PM of England or a US president would or did do is off topic. In
particular, see the quotes from R' Cl. Warner D Farr and RMJBroyde. -mi]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:23:55 -0500 Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
...
> One is about the limits of the halachic demands of the humanitarian dilemma.
> I don't think it goes very far, but I'd like to see us have that
> discussion.

And for one more, utterly fascinating piece on the topic, see this
discussion of whether nuclear deterrence is / should be merely a bluff,
or an actual intention to posthumously (on a civilizational level)
exterminate a first striker:
http://www.slate.com/id/2208219

The third page quotes extensively from [R'] Broyde.
http://www.slate.com/id/2208219/pagenum/3

[Email #2. -mi]

Forgot the hat tip to Ross Douhat, who discusses what Reagan would actually
have done:
http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/armageddons_cho
ices.php
http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/armaggedons_
choices_ii.php

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

I am having difficulty understanding the Ramban's commentary to Vayirka 
(19:18). He starts out saying that the commandment cannot be understood 
literally because the heart can not love another as oneself. Then he 
concludes by saying that this commandment is to remove the jealousy from 
your heart so that there is no limitation on the love you have for 
another person. This seems to be a direct contradiction.

Vayikra (19:18): [R' Chavel's translation]. AND THOU SHALT LOVE THY 
NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF. This is an expression by way of overstatement, for 
a human heart is not able to accept a command to love one?s neighbor as 
oneself. Moreover, Rabbi Akiba has already come and taught, 86 ?Your 
life takes precedence over the life of your fellow-being.? Rather, the 
commandment of the Torah means that one is to love one?s fellow being in 
all matters, as one loves all good for oneself. 87 It is possible that 
since it does not say ?and thou shalt love ?eth rei?acha? 88 as 
thyself,? but instead it likened them in the word ?l?rei?acha ? [which 
literally means ?to? thy neighbor], and similarly it states with 
reference to a proselyte, and thou shalt love ?10? (him) [but literally: 
?to? him] as thyself; 89 that the meaning thereof is to equate the love 
of both [himself and his neighbor, or himself and the proselyte] in his 
mind. For sometimes a person will love his neighhbor in certain matters, 
such as doing good to him in material wealth but not with wisdom and 
similar matters. But if he loves him completely, he will want his 
beloved friend to gain riches, properties, honor, knowledge and wisdom. 
However [because of human nature] he will still not want him to be his 
equal, for there will always be a desire in his heart that he should 
have more of these good thIngs than his neIghbor. Therefore Scripture 
commanded that this degrading jealousy should not exist in his heart, 
but instead a person should love to do abundance of good for his 
fellow-being as he does for himself, and he should place no limitations 
upon his love for him. It is for this reason that it is said of 
Jonathan?s [love for David] ?for he loved him as he loved his own soul? 
90 because Jonathan had removed [altogether] the attribute of jealousy 
from his heart, and he said [to David], and thou shalt be king over 
Israel 91 etc.

*???"? (????? ??:??*) ???? ????? ???? ???? - ?????, ?? ?? ???? ?? ???? 
?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ????, ???? ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?????? 
???? ????? (?"? ?? ?): ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? 
???? ??? ????. ????? ????? ??? ??? "????? ?? ??? ????", ????? ???? ???? 
"????", ??? ????? ?? ???? (???? ??) ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? 
?????, ?? ????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? 
?????? ???, ??? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? 
????? ????? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??? 
???? ???? ??? ????, ????? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ??? 
???? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ?????. ??? 
?? ??? ??????? (?"? ? ??) ?? ???? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ????? ???? 
???? (?? ?? ??) ???? ????? ?? ????? ???':


Daniel Eidensohn
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: yadmoshe.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 103 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090113/fe0ed766/attachment-0001.vcf>

Harvey Benton wrote:
> If CV a Judge/Rav/Beis Din, etc (and/or their families) are threatened
> so that they should  rule in a certain way in a civil or criminal
> matter, what should the Judges do?  Does Sakanos Nefashos take
> precedence or does Din/Mishpat?  (Or Yirat Hashem? eg. sword over
> their heads mashal...).  Does the percieved threat level affect this
> decision?	What about the cases being tried, eg. Dinei Mamon v. Dinei
> Nefashos, Malkus, etc affecting this decision? Is a threat to be
> considered as a >bribe< and therefore categorically
> rejected in all cases?   HB

That's an explicit lav of "lo taguru".  As the Sifri says, "perhaps you will
say I am afraid of so-and-so lest he kill my son, or burn my grain-stack,
or chop down my trees".  There's no question that one may not give a false
psak, and that this overrides pikuach nefesh: the only question is whether
he may recuse himself in such a case, or whether he must take the case
despite the threats.   A discussion of that question can be found here:   
http://www.justice.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/B8DEB4F7-4F15-
4D5D-82E6-D28C1F17B9A5/11378/323.rtf
or http://tinyurl.com/8w9yqs

-- 
Zev Sero                    A mathemetician is a device for turning coffee
z...@sero.name               into theorems.                   - Paul Erdos


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 11
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."