[Avodah] dina demalchuta

[Micha Berger]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:28:52PM -0400, I wrote:
: Let's see, in the post to which you're replying, I mention Rashi's
: obligation to follow all secular laws that are legislated in fulfillment
: of the 7 mitzvos...

I was referring to Gittin 9b, d"h "kesheirin" and "chutz migitei nashim".

The gemara (top of the amud) says that contract be'arka'os shel aku",
even if signed by aku"m are kesheirim, chutz migitei nashim veshikhrurei
avadaim.

Rashi:
    kesheirin: deDDD, ve'af al pi shehanoshein vehameqabeil Yisraelim
	heim
    chutz migitei nashim: because they aren't benei kerisus, they aren't
	shaykhi in Toras gitin veqidushin,
	aval al hadinim nitztavu benei Noach...
	(and then Rashi discusses why get shichrur)

Pretty clear -- the reason why their contracts are binding is because
DDD includes "hadinim nitzavu benei Noach". The gemara happens to be
an application to dinei mamunus, but Rashi's reason for why it works
includes everything the 7BMN makes applicable to them in general.

Not only R' Broyde (whose article I was summarizing in the post I linked
to earlier this thread) reads it that way. RHS has a similar understanding
of Rashi (Nidah 61a), that had Rabbi Tarfon actually determined the guilt
of the Jews who asked them to hide him, he would have been obligated
to turn them in. (Sidenote: Realize that R' Tarfon was facing the Roman
authorities of the period between churban bayis and Hadrian y"sh!)

Also, R' Benzion Uziel in Pisqei Uziel 71 takes Rashi this way.

Since RZS didn't reply, I have no idea why he thinks the Rashi is
irrelevent, but whatever his rationale is, it would seem his understanding
of Rashi is idiosyncatically his.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The true measure of a man
micha at aishdas.org        is how he treats someone
http://www.aishdas.org   who can do him absolutely no good.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Samuel Johnson