[Avodah] More on what constitutes chilul hashem

[Arie Folger]

There is a simple resolution to your problem abot whether or not the
violation of a local secular law engenders a 'hillul haShem. I think
that we can pretty much all agree that not putting a coin in the meter
while parking for 10 minutes is generally not a chillul haShem, nor
double parking for thirty seconds while offloading passengers in a
quite street. It should also not be difficult to accept that to
offload passengers on a busy street where such stopping is disallowed,
and for which legions of people idling behind your car suffer, is a
'hillul haShem.

Perhaps, by using the yardstick of law as a single, unified yardstick,
we make it impossible to make reasonable statements, since, in a
manner analogous to halakhah with the differences between minhag and
halakhah, derabbanan, deoraita, lav sheyesh bo karet, etc., likewise,
secular law recognizes different types of laws and different types of
infractions. In addition, secular law is not a matter of bein adam
lamaqom, and hence, there is some freedom in guessing the intent of
the legislator and the reasonableness thereof.

I suggest a possibly more reasonable standard: Secular law exists to
regulate society fairly aand productively. At any given time, an
actual law may deviate from these ideals, and society does discuss
such matters. Let's ignore such kinds of deviations for now.

So, an action which is either inherently unequitable or which, on
account of having become law reflects a widely held standard of
appropriate behavior in a society, does, when violated, engender a
'hillul haShem. However, minor infractions, which the legislator
intends to overlook, which is generally not enforced, or otherwise not
even considered a real nuissance, do not engender any 'hillul haShem.
There are many borderline cases, and I don't think that incurring a
parking violation for which you may sometimes be fined, since traffic
wardens may fine people indiscriminately - lo plug ;-) -I don't think
such infractions would engender a 'hillull haShem insofar as they do
not contribute to a deterioration of societal standards.

In short, in the US, where people jay walk all the time, doing so is
not a 'hillul haShem, despite NYPD's occasional ticketing blitz.
However, jay walking in Zurich, where such behavior is just not
tolerated, does create a 'hillul haShem. And money laundering for the
mafia, or protecting and enabling child abusers, engenders a 'hillul
haShem regardless of whether or not there is a legal loophole that
might allow one to claim not to have violated any laws. Speeding a
little bit is no 'hillul haShem, as practicallly everybody does it and
the police tolerate it, up to a point. Driving at 30 miles an hour
above the speed limit, OTOH, is wrong and you doon't need any detailed
halakhic analysis to realize that.

In short, I think that we can intuitively grasp the notion that (a)
unequitable behavior and behavior that violates societal standards of
decency, do give rise to a 'hillul haShem, and (2) laws do indicate
what may be considered equitable and decent in a particular society,
and that a society may indeed desire and enact higher standards of
civility, which such laws may manifest. I don't think that the
application of common sense, once we grasp the earlier statements, is
so difficult. I do believe that using such a common sense definition
of 'hillul haShem will deal with the objections both RZS and
RProfLevine raised.

If the idea of a common sense definition of a matter of halakhic
import ofends your sensibilities, I apologize.

Kol tuv,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Helping Patients Face Death, She Fought to Live
* Neuer Audio-Schi'ur, zum 91. Psalm
* Significant Recent Manuscript Finds
* Ansprache anlässlich des G”ttesdienst in der historischen Synagoge
von Endingen
* Burgeoning Jewish Life in Central Europe
* Raising Consciousness by Dressing Babies Outrageously