[Avodah] Mechallel Shabbos to destroy a non-kosher phone?

[Chanar Luntz]

I wrote:
>> So even if there is a power of vigilantism that would allow one to
prevent
>> another person from eating treif food (and not just an obligation on beis
>>  din)

And RZS replied:

>There certainly is:  http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/7110.htm#25

As someone posted recently from Rav Shternbach, there is a dispute between
the Ketzsos HaChoshen and the Nesivos HaMishpat on this subject, one cannot
just posken from the Rambam.

Note by the way that the Rambam's source for allowing one to tear off a
kilyaim garment is (according to the Radvaz there and the Beis Yosef (Yoreh
Deah siman 303)) - this ma'asah regarding Rav Ada bar Ahava that you have
quoted previously (Brochos 20a) - ie the majority of the halachic
authorities appear to understand the issur that Rav Ada bar Ahava was
responding to was that of wearing kilyaim d'orisa, not that of wearing an
untzniusdik garment (although that is the Maharashal's understanding).  This
fits in better with the sugya that went before, and also makes more sense -
because let's face it, if somebody is wearing a garment made of shatnez, and
you take it off them, then they are no longer violating the prohibition of
shaztnez.  But if a woman is out in public wearing a bikini, and you take it
off her, that hardly exactly helps.  And it also explains why, when it was
discovered that the woman was a Cuthite woman, that there was clearly no
issue - a Cuthite woman is not commanded on Shatnez, so of  course he should
not have taken it off.  But if it was a matter of pritzus, that might cause
improper thoughts as the Maharashal suggests, then why was it so OK once it
was realised she was a Cuthite woman?  Men don't have improper thoughts from
Cuthite women? And does anybody say wearing red is a lav d'orisa (which
everybody agrees is the minimum requirement needed for any form of
viligantism to happen).

In any event, neither the Rambam nor the essential ma'aseh says anything
about stealing or damaging the garment, only about removing it (the use of
kriya does not necessarily imply damage or stealing).  And indeed it seems
clear that Rav Ada bar Ahavah did not in fact damage the garment in any way.
Because once it was discovered that this woman was a Cuthite woman, the fine
he was assessed to pay was 400 zuz.  Now that is the fine that one has to
pay if one strips a cloak off a person or removes a woman's head covering in
the marketplace (Mishna Baba Kama Perek 8 Mishna 6) - due to shaming them
(which again provides support for the idea that this was actually a case of
shatnez, not improper clothing).  If he had actually damaged her garment
then there would have needed to be additional payments made for this over
and above 400 zuz.  So this case, while it might be able to be used to
demonstrate that certain viligantism is allowed, doesn't at all demonstrate
that one can do it by stealing or damaging the property of the person in the
process.

And Rachel stealing the terafim, even if you hold that this was a
meritorious act, does not help, because the terafim clearly have no value
being objects that are the subject of an issur hana'ah.

>And in our case, we are talking about shluchei beis din, who are certainly
>allowed to do so:  http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/7102.htm#13

But, as others have raised, the Rambam here is referring to a Beis Din of
smuchim.  What gives the Rebbe the power of a beis din, or a melech (as you
have stated), bizman hazeh to punish shelo k'din is precisely the question I
am asking?  I suspect you have again to get back to the powers of a kahal,
and takanos hakahal etc, and it may well be that Toldos Aharon Chassidim
fall into a well defined enough group to be considered a kahal for these
purposes - but then you get into the question of opt in and opt out that
others are raising.  And  again it involves putting ones head between the
mountains of Rabbanu Tam and the Maharam and the various attempts to
reconcile them in circumstances where we are dealing with an issur d'orisa
(and the Bene Banim quotes a braisa quoted by various rishonim (see Bnei
Banim Chelek 2 siman 48 p 196) which has Rabbi Meir saying that gezel is
also something that pikuach nefesh is not doche).
-- 
Zev Sero
zev at sero.name

Regards

Chana