[Avodah] lifnei iver/kanaus

[Doron Beckerman]

RnCL writes:


> >> Without wanting to put words into his
> mouth, my guess would be that RDB would hold no, on the grounds that if
> the Rav is patur from galus if he kills the talmid, then surely he
> should be patur from paying if he confiscates the talmid's property
> intending to do so for a short time, and the property gets lost, stolen
> or damaged, even without swearing (which presumably a Rav would not want
> to do). But then that would appear to take it out of the category of
> shomer chinam or shoel, so it would sound like you hold differently. <<


R' Zalman Nechemia Goldberg holds that the Rav has the status of a Shomer
Chinam in this case. The Ptur from golus is because it was done in the
context of what the Rav deemed necessary for chinuch, but in the case of
taking the item - taking the item serves the purpose of chinuch w/o the Rav
being negligent in making sure he could return it. (Of course, if the Rav
thought that the necessary objective of chinuch would be best served by
destroying the object, he is within his rights according to RZNG.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070920/586be5f3/attachment.htm>