[Avodah] Counting a Wife Beater Toward a Minyan

[Daniel Eidensohn]

 R Dmitry Kreslavskiy
>     So how does this work? If a person is a home abuser, G-d forbid, and
>     hits his wife, that means he cannot be counted towards a minyan? So
>     what happens if he davens with another group of 9 unsuspecting
>     people? Is such davening not considered davening with a minyan?
>   
*The Shulchan Aruch* says:

*Shulchan Aruch**^ **(C.M. 420:1-2): *It is prohibited for one Jew to 
hit another. If he does hit someone he has transgressed (Devarim 25:3): 
which prohibits punishing a person with more blows than he was sentenced 
to receive. Since the Torah prohibits hitting a wicked person more than 
his wickedness deserves, it is even more obvious that it prohibits 
hitting a righteous person. Anyone who even raises one's hand to strike 
another -- even though he doesn't hit him -- is called a wicked person. 
*Rema: *Also see 421:13. Furthermore concerning a man hitting his wife 
see E. H. 154. There are some who say there is an ancient cherem 
(ostracization) if a man hits another and this cherem has to be removed 
in order for the person to be counted as part of a minyan. As soon as he 
has accepted to follow the law he is removed from this cherem -- even 
though he hasn't yet placated the person he hit. If a person hit another 
with a blow that caused damage less the value of a peruta he receives 
the punishment of lashes -- since there is no obligation to pay for such 
damage. Even if a person gratuitously hit a non-Jewish slave -- he 
receives the punishment of lashes since this slave is obligated to keep 
mitzvos.


*Rashba(#244 - Attributed to Ramban):* Question: It is practise in these 
lands is that someone who is seen acting improperly and he doesn't 
listen to rebuke he is placed in nidoi (banned) and is not counted for a 
zimun for birchas hamazone and he is not counted as part of a minyan and 
his dead are not buried -- even if it is a child or someone born after 
the ban was pronounced and his son is not circumcised. Do these 
prohibitions of burying the dead and circumcision constitute taking an 
oath to nullify a mitzva or not? Answer: All those who include things 
that are permitted with things that are prohibited such as this case the 
oath applies on the mitzva as reshus (Shavuos 22)... Furthermore these 
are decrees for the welfare of society (migder milsa) for which beis din 
has the right to uproot even Torah laws in order to make a protective 
decree. As R' Elazar ben Yaakov said, "I heard that beis din can beat 
and punish not in accord with the Torah. This is not done to abolish the 
Torah but rather to protect the Torah. There was a case of a man who 
rode a horse on Shabbos... And another case of a man who had intercourse 
with his wife under a fig tree...The gemora concludes that these are all 
permittted for the sake of the welfare of society (miger milsa) [Yevamos 
90b].

*So your question is actually "What exactly was the condition of the 
cherem?" since it was a decree for the benefit of the community.  If it 
were to prevent a rasha from joining a minyan - but not to punish those 
who needed a minayn - then he would be counted in the minyan bedeved. 
However if the community felt that no one would take the cherem 
seriously unless it was absolute - then they could decree that he 
doesn't exist even bedeved. That would make the cherem much more serious 
and people would take care to never utilize such a person.*





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100203/f076fdd2/attachment-0002.htm>