Even Jewish Criminals Deserve Kosher Food

[Rubystars]

I believe that the court operates the same whether the victim is Jewish or non-Jewish. Jewish law does not hold Jews above non-Jews except in regards to obligations a Jew has...

Nevertheless I would want such a person tried in a secular court, not one that could even be perceived as being potentially more friendly to him.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I think it's ridiculous to think that a Jewish person should only be reported to a Jewish justice system.

 I dont think that was said. I certainly did not say that. A gentile court that is based on fair justice is valid, good and even a Mitzvah (part of 7 Noahide laws). I did mention that in some cases (like financial) where the Jews ( Jew vs. Jew) can, they should resolve the dispute in a Jewish court based on Halacha (Jewish law). These courts also do have legal recognition by the U.S. government and their rulings hold power if the parties agree beforehand that the decision of the court is to be upheld.
 About secular (as in secular Jewish) courts (as opposed to Jewish religious courts) run by Jews (as in the land of Israel today) that's an even more complicated and more complex matter.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

So the entire justice system is evil and illegitimate if it is not Sanhedrinic? How come Chaim has never said this?

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

So the entire justice system is evil and illegitimate if it is not Sanhedrinic? How come Chaim has never said this?

 I dont think anyone said that. I think you misunderstood the whole matter. Read my posts here and you will understand.

[muman613]

So the entire justice system is evil and illegitimate if it is not Sanhedrinic? How come Chaim has never said this?

How did you arrive at this conclusion? That is not what the Jewish view is...

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I think it's ridiculous to think that a Jewish person should only be reported to a Jewish justice system. What if his victims were non-Jews? How would you feel if a Muslim murdered a Jew and the only other witnesses to it were other Muslims, and they wouldn't report him to the regular police but only to a Shariah court? Do you think that the victim's family would stand a chance of getting justice that way? If a Jewish person does something evil he should have to face the same secular justice system that anybody else faces.

I think people in this thread are either confusing the issue, or you have misinterpreted what they said (or both).  I don't want to go back and read it all to find out which it is.    But the whole idea is a nationalist idea - in a time when we had a court and legal system and the legal system of those either around us or occupying us were designed to purposely persecute us.   What people in this thread are referring to doesn't even apply today for several reasons 1.  We don't have a Jewish legal/justice system with law enforcement.  2.   We live in a time and place (America right now) where we are not persecuted by the legal system itself - we have a fair chance at a trial just like any other citizen - with some notable exceptions (ie Jonathan Pollard) there aren't "Show trials" meant to humiliate 'the Jew' and there will not be collective punishment on Jewish citizens if a Jew is convicted of a crime.       All of those factors have to do with why you cannot report on a Jew to the gentile, but most importantly, it's because that was treason in Eretz Yisrael where our enemies were trying to impose their laws and take over our society.    That would be like a law today saying americans are forbidden to report another american and stand before a sharia court!   

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

If I am victimized by a criminal I don't want him to be tried by a court that would be more likely to acquit him because they share his culture and religion.

That is a twisted form of corruption and injustice and is definitely not the point of the Torah laws certain people are referencing here.

[Rubystars]

That is a twisted form of corruption and injustice and is definitely not the point of the Torah laws certain people are referencing here.

Ok thanks for explaining that.

[Rubystars]

I think people in this thread are either confusing the issue, or you have misinterpreted what they said (or both).  I don't want to go back and read it all to find out which it is.    But the whole idea is a nationalist idea - in a time when we had a court and legal system and the legal system of those either around us or occupying us were designed to purposely persecute us.   What people in this thread are referring to doesn't even apply today for several reasons 1.  We don't have a Jewish legal/justice system with law enforcement.  2.   We live in a time and place (America right now) where we are not persecuted by the legal system itself - we have a fair chance at a trial just like any other citizen - with some notable exceptions (ie Jonathan Pollard) there aren't "Show trials" meant to humiliate 'the Jew' and there will not be collective punishment on Jewish citizens if a Jew is convicted of a crime.       All of those factors have to do with why you cannot report on a Jew to the gentile, but most importantly, it's because that was treason in Eretz Yisrael where our enemies were trying to impose their laws and take over our society.    That would be like a law today saying americans are forbidden to report another american and stand before a sharia court!   

That makes a lot more sense now. You explained it a lot better.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

The whole argument over this thread, is completely asinine!

 Who cares, if he gets kosher food or not? A 15 year old is facing 75 years for a murder that he did not commit, he was a lookout. And we don't know anything more than that. He could of been bullied into it, we don't know. A homeboy would of  got 5 for the same crime, if that!

 So by saying someone should get the death chair, we should probably know a little bit more about the actual incident...

 One more thing, we constantly are attacking anyone that is different from us! We're never gonna get anywhere that way...

Most 15 year olds, especially Jews that come from a law-abiding, kind, gentle culture, do not get involved with serious felonies.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I dont think anyone said that. I think you misunderstood the whole matter. Read my posts here and you will understand.

One person implied that, and I never said it was you.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I think people in this thread are either confusing the issue, or you have misinterpreted what they said (or both).  I don't want to go back and read it all to find out which it is.    But the whole idea is a nationalist idea - in a time when we had a court and legal system and the legal system of those either around us or occupying us were designed to purposely persecute us.   What people in this thread are referring to doesn't even apply today for several reasons 1.  We don't have a Jewish legal/justice system with law enforcement.  2.   We live in a time and place (America right now) where we are not persecuted by the legal system itself - we have a fair chance at a trial just like any other citizen - with some notable exceptions (ie Jonathan Pollard) there aren't "Show trials" meant to humiliate 'the Jew' and there will not be collective punishment on Jewish citizens if a Jew is convicted of a crime.       All of those factors have to do with why you cannot report on a Jew to the gentile, but most importantly, it's because that was treason in Eretz Yisrael where our enemies were trying to impose their laws and take over our society.    That would be like a law today saying americans are forbidden to report another american and stand before a sharia court!   

Thanks KWRBT. As a sidenote do keep in mind that this putz got a lighter sentence than Jonathan Pollard!

[nessuno]

The system worked for him. 

[muman613]

Nobody here implied that there should be special treatment because he was Jewish. What was discussed is Jewish Halacha concerning Jews handing over Jews to a non-Jewish court which historically has been a bad deal for the Jew. No non-Jew has ever been found guilty or has been persecuted by Jewish courts but quite the contrary. Many Jews have suffered persecution because of non-Jewish nations subjecting us to cruel and wicked laws, such as the Romans and Greeks who made it illegal to study the Torah or to circumcise our male children. Even in the last century the non-Jewish nations created systems where the Jew was persecuted legally by the Gentile legal system. In Russia until the last few decades a Jew could be thrown in a Siberian prison for studying and teaching Torah. Any Jew who would  turn in such 'criminals' is cursed three times a day in the Shemonie Esrie prayer which Chaim is always talking about, this is the curse on Informers and traitors to the Jewish people.

That anyone twisted this into saying that Jews should have preferential treatment just goes to show where some people are coming from..

[muman613]

And regarding the case which brought this up... Many people here are making judgments without knowing facts. That is a very bad thing to do as the Torah commands us to not judge others without knowing the particulars about the situation. I will not comment on whether this guy deserves the punishment he received or not... But I will again say it is a GREAT THING that US courts have realized that a Jew should not be denied Kosher food.

[muman613]

I hope that this clears up some questions about the discussion of 'informers' :

http://www.torah.org/learning/mlife/LOR3-12.html

Maimonides on Life

Collaborating with Gentile Authorities
Chapter 3, Law 12

"There are two types of informers (lit., 'giver overs,' Heb: 'moser'): (a) One who gives his fellow over into the hands of the Gentiles to kill him or to hit him. (b) One who gives his fellow's property to the Gentiles or to a seizer who is [considered] as a Gentile. Neither [type of person] receives a share [in the World to Come]."

For the past several weeks, we have been covering the Rambam's very short list of sinners so evil as to merit no share in the World to Come. This week the Rambam discusses the informer, one who turns over his fellow Jew to the temporal authorities.

In rabbinic writings and throughout the ages, the "moser"/informer has been considered one of the most evil and despicable characters in Israel, the Jewish Benedict Arnold who sics our worst enemies on us. Either to avenge his own petty hatreds or to curry favor with the authorities, he snitches on his fellow Jews, generally giving the all-too-willing authorities all the excuse they need to go in for the kill.

An important counterpoint to this is in line. Judaism is not against informing because it makes it difficult for Jews to evade the law. Abidance to the secular law is a Torah obligation ("dina d'malchusa dina"). Jews are obligated by the Torah to pay taxes and obey the law of the land. Rather, informing is viewed so negatively because throughout most of our history, informing on a fellow Jew was tantamount to killing him -- as well as endangering the greater Jewish community once suspicion is aroused on its behavior. Not only is snitching in itself viewed as a very lowly and cowardly act, the danger is real, immediate and more than likely to get terribly out of hand.

In more recent years, scholars have debated to what extent this law applies today. Some are of the opinion that the law is virtually inapplicable in countries whose governments serve to uphold just laws rather than capriciously oppress and discriminate. Others are less sure of this -- arguing in part that although many governments today are just (for the most part), the punishments they administer may not be justified according to Torah law. Incarceration, for example, in itself very dangerous, is almost never warranted in Jewish law. According to virtually all opinions, however, if a person is a direct danger to society -- say a physically-abusive father -- the authorities must be involved almost immediately.

(It should be noted that throughout our history there have been many societies in which the Jews were given a fair degree of legal autonomy -- the authority to rule over religious issues in particular, but almost never were they granted a police arm to enforce the courts' decisions. To enforce compliance, courts would often resort to such means as applying social pressure to the recalcitrant -- ostracizing him from the Jewish community. Yet there was much less they could do against a person who posed a physical threat to his surroundings. For such, the temporal authorities would generally have to be involved.)

Throughout history, there have been fascinating, if tragic, applications of this law. There is a Mishna (Terumos 8:12) which discusses the following scenario. A group of women are out standing together. A gang of Gentiles approaches them, saying "Hand over one of you or we'll violate you all!" Are they permitted to willingly cede one for the sake of the many? Or should we never go along with the evil wishes of such people in any way, regardless of the consequences?

Needless to say, scenarios of this type have repeated themselves throughout history more times than we'd care to know. During the Holocaust the Nazis, in the process of liquidating the ghettos, would require of the Judenrat the orderly handing over of say, 1000 people a day for "deportation". Failure to comply would result in not only the deaths of the Judenrat members and their families, but perhaps the wholesale and immediate destruction of the entire ghetto. Should they comply in the hopes of slowing down the process? Or should they never condescend to collaborate with the enemy?

Of course, far be it from us to judge the behavior of people in such trying and tragic circumstances. As might be expected, there were those refused to cooperate in any way, shape or form, there were those who collaborated in the sincere hope they were ultimately helping the Jewish cause, and there were those who collaborated primarily in the hope of saving their own skins at the expense of their brethren. In fact, many who did collaborate subsequently committed suicide -- on account of the terrible burden of guilt placed upon them, and especially once they recognized that all their noble efforts were utterly futile.

What I *will* do below, however, is offer a few of the primary relevant sources, providing some of the basic framework underlying so difficult and tragic an area of Jewish law.

Returning to the case I quoted above, in which a Gentile gang demands a Jewish girl, the mishna concludes: "Let them violate them all, and let not one Jewish soul be handed over."

It thus seems fairly open and shut. We may never collaborate with the Gentiles whatever the consequences. We may never willingly hand over a single Jew to the enemy come what may.

We must now, however, turn to a second relevant source. In II Samuel 20 we read of Sheva ben (son of) Bichri, who fomented a rebellion against King David. Towards the end of the chapter, he was besieged in the town of Availa which sided with him. Yoav, David's chief general, came with his men to destroy the entire rebellious city. A wise woman -- whom the Midrash identifies as the extremely long-lived Serach daughter of Asher (whom Jacob had earlier blessed with a long life) -- called out to Yoav asking why he wanted to destroy an entire city on account of one man. Yoav demurred, stating that he was really only after Sheva ben Bichri. The townsfolk, on the wise woman's behest, delivered.his head and the rebellion ended with minimal bloodshed.

The classical commentators deduce an important law from the above episode. Yoav was prepared to destroy the entire city of Availa for harboring a rebel to the throne. In the eyes of the townsfolk, who sided with Sheva, Yoav was the temporal authority wrongly demanding one of their number. Could they deliver him over? Does not the Mishna state that a Jew must never be unjustly handed over the the authorities? Yet that is precisely what they did in order to save themselves! What was their justification?

(Note that although the Availites (whatever) were engaged in open rebellion against the King of Israel, the commentators assume we can infer Jewish law from their behavior -- especially from that of the wise woman at their helm. They may have been wrong about Sheva, but the general assumption is that the behavior of the Israelites was fully in accordance with Jewish law.)

Many of the commentators, based on a source contemporary to the Mishna, answer based on the following distinction (see Rashi and Yad Ramah to Talmud Sanhedrin 72b). In the case in Scripture, Sheva himself was holed up in the city with the townsfolk. Had Yoav attacked, not only would the rest of them have perished, but he would have as well. Thus, it was not a matter of handing over one Jew in order to save others. It was a matter of either having him *plus* them killed or having him alone killed. The wise woman rightly realized nothing would have been gained by sacrificing them all.

By contrast, in the case of delivering a woman to the Gentiles, the Gentiles were not asking for a specific woman; any one would have done. And if the women would not comply, they were going to attack them all. Well, perhaps the Gentiles would have been sated without violating every last one of them. If so, willingly handing over a single one is not a case of violating one versus violating all. It is a case of handing over one woman who may have been spared in order to protect the others. And that the Sages never condone.

This discussion actually gets far more complex than this first taste of Talmudic logic. And likewise the application to Holocaust scenarios is far from clear. (Would they have all been killed or deported had they not complied? Perhaps some of those who would have been delivered would have managed to save themselves. Or perhaps refusing to comply would have confused and slowed the entire process. Usually not really answerable questions.) Regardless, I will not attempt to build further upon this discussion. I thought, however, it was valuable to provide this brief introduction into the process of determining Jewish law in so sensitive an area -- as well as appreciating both the legal and ethical dilemmas Jews, both simple and great, have been faced with throughout the ages.

[Nachus]

                                                                                                                                              


 It is criminal not to give them Kosher food!