375
edits
Abiding by Civilian Law: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
m (Ezralevy moved page Dina D'Malchusa Dina to Abiding by Civilian Law) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
#Dina d'malchuta dina applies to democracies such as the United States.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 34. see note 71 where he quotes from Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (Writings of Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin 96:8), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Maadanei Eretz 20:8), Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe CM 2:62), Shevet Halevi 2:58. This makes sense with the Rashbam and Rambam that dina d'malchusa is a social contract. One could argue that according to the Ran that the reason for dina d'malchusa is that the king owns the land, this shouldn't apply to a democracy. However, Pe’as Sadecha (165) writes that even according to the Ran, dina d’malchusa dina applies because in a democracy the country belongs to the people, and their elected representatives have the same power as a king to legislate. </ref> | #Dina d'malchuta dina applies to democracies such as the United States.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 34. see note 71 where he quotes from Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (Writings of Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin 96:8), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Maadanei Eretz 20:8), Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe CM 2:62), Shevet Halevi 2:58. This makes sense with the Rashbam and Rambam that dina d'malchusa is a social contract. One could argue that according to the Ran that the reason for dina d'malchusa is that the king owns the land, this shouldn't apply to a democracy. However, Pe’as Sadecha (165) writes that even according to the Ran, dina d’malchusa dina applies because in a democracy the country belongs to the people, and their elected representatives have the same power as a king to legislate. </ref> | ||
#Some say that dina d'malchusa doesn't apply in Israel.<ref>Ran Nedarim 28a s.v. Bamoches writes that Dina Dmalchusa is based on the fact that the king owns the land and everyone has to abide by his law. However, in Israel where Hashem gave the land to the Jewish people, there is no Dina Dmalchuta. This is quoted in Darkei Moshe CM 369:3 and Gra 369:35. Emek Hamishpat 1:31:18 writes that in his opinion we follow the Ran. The Chasam Sofer C.M. 44 says that according to the Rashbam, dina d'malchusa still applies. The Rambam (Hilchos Gezeilah 5:11), Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 369:6) all rule against the Ran. This is also the opinion of Rav Asher Weiss (Parashas Chukas, B’inyan Dina D’malchusa Dina. Shut Minchas Asher 2:121).</ref> | #Some say that dina d'malchusa doesn't apply in Israel. However, most authorities rule that it does apply.<ref>Ran Nedarim 28a s.v. Bamoches writes that Dina Dmalchusa is based on the fact that the king owns the land and everyone has to abide by his law. However, in Israel where Hashem gave the land to the Jewish people, there is no Dina Dmalchuta. This is quoted in Darkei Moshe CM 369:3 and Gra 369:35. Emek Hamishpat 1:31:18 writes that in his opinion we follow the Ran. The Chasam Sofer C.M. 44 says that according to the Rashbam, dina d'malchusa still applies. The Rambam (Hilchos Gezeilah 5:11), Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 369:6) all rule against the Ran. This is also the opinion of Rav Asher Weiss (Parashas Chukas, B’inyan Dina D’malchusa Dina. Shut Minchas Asher 2:121).</ref> | ||
==Examples== | ==Examples== | ||
# If a person or company went bankrupt they don’t have an enduring obligation to pay off their debt.<ref>Igrot Moshe CM 2:62, Halachos of Other People’s Money p. 34 fnt. 71. Rav Moshe explains that since the bankruptcy laws are for the betterment of society which the Rama 369:8 writes is binding.</ref> | |||
# If there’s a civil law to hand in a lost object that is found to a government official one must oblige because of Dina Dmalchuta Dina.<ref>Rama 259:7, Pitchei Choshen Aveidah 2:22</ref> See [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lost_property common law on Cornell.edu]. | #If a person or company went bankrupt they don’t have an enduring obligation to pay off their debt.<ref>Igrot Moshe CM 2:62, Halachos of Other People’s Money p. 34 fnt. 71. Rav Moshe explains that since the bankruptcy laws are for the betterment of society which the Rama 369:8 writes is binding.</ref> | ||
#If there’s a civil law to hand in a lost object that is found to a government official one must oblige because of Dina Dmalchuta Dina.<ref>Rama 259:7, Pitchei Choshen Aveidah 2:22</ref> See [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lost_property common law on Cornell.edu]. | |||
#Some write that if a person has a contract with a penalty that is an asmachta even though it is binding in a secular court dina dmalchuta doesn’t make it binding between two Jews.<ref>Emek Mishpat v. 1 p. 260 writes that one should not assume that dina dmalchuta obligates a person to pay a contractual penalty. He explains that they are an asmachta and dina dmalchuta doesn't apply in Israel (Ran Nedarim 28a, Darkei Moshe 369:3, Gra 369:35). Also, he adds that Mishpat Shalom 207:15 writes that dina dmaclhuta doesn't make an asmachta binding. Also, Chazon Ish CM likkutim 16:11 writes that dina dmalchuta isn't applicable for a contractual penalty since dina dmalchuta doesn’t apply between two Jews.</ref> | #Some write that if a person has a contract with a penalty that is an asmachta even though it is binding in a secular court dina dmalchuta doesn’t make it binding between two Jews.<ref>Emek Mishpat v. 1 p. 260 writes that one should not assume that dina dmalchuta obligates a person to pay a contractual penalty. He explains that they are an asmachta and dina dmalchuta doesn't apply in Israel (Ran Nedarim 28a, Darkei Moshe 369:3, Gra 369:35). Also, he adds that Mishpat Shalom 207:15 writes that dina dmaclhuta doesn't make an asmachta binding. Also, Chazon Ish CM likkutim 16:11 writes that dina dmalchuta isn't applicable for a contractual penalty since dina dmalchuta doesn’t apply between two Jews.</ref> | ||
