The Torah and Capital Punishment

[Ehav4Ever]

One last thing that I think would be helpful. Using the American court system to give an example of how the Torath Mosheh judicial system works for capital punishement.

Being as general as possible, in the American system you have a defendent, the defense attorney, the prosecutor, witnesses, a judge, jury, etc.

Again being as general as possible, In the American system the defender/defense attorney is trying to either a) prove the defendent did do the crime, b) did the crime but the punishment should not be severe in a particular extreme, or c) that the prosecutions evidence is sketchy in order to cast doubt. The prosecutor on the hand is trying to a) prove that the defendent did the crime, b) the defendent deserves a particular type of sentence depending on the severity of the crime, or c) to make a deal that will assist another case or that makes this case end faster in a paricular way.

Torath Mosheh using the American model Example:
In Torath Mosheh model you have the defendent/defense representative, 71 judges, witnesses, and the court management of the case - all of which has to take place in Jerusalem. In a sitaution where there is a king of the Davidic line they can take part in judicial maters, in the case of a non-Davidic line king they cannot.

Yet, using the general American model built above, In the Torah Mosheh judicial situation you have to place the presecutor in a different role. In a capital case the prosecutor would be trying to prove the defendent innocent first rather than working off of the evidence that makes him/her out to be guilty. The prosecutor would be seeking to invalidate witnesses who attest to the guilt of the defendent. The prosecutor would be seeking to caste a reasonable doubt that the defendent did the crime or that the defendent understood the nature of the crime and punishment for it. Essentially, it would be up to the defense to prove that the defendent did it, understood what he/she was doing, and that their reasoning was akin to national treason for them to be executed. Further, the goal of the entire court would be to try and convince the defendent of a better path of life management and to try have them work out ways of restitution.

Thus, it is cosnidered in Torath Mosheh thinking that if an execuation takes place, after all of the above, it is a failure of that generation that such a person could exist in Israeli society and that things progressed to the point where someone must be executed.

 

[Sedim Haba]

Right, and if you look at some countries today the execution rates for one year is enough for them to be considered bloodthirsty by the standard given in the Mishnah. Here are a few example.

But the numbers don't relate very well. What's the populations of 2021 USA versus say First Temple
period population? The laws don't either, I guess Treason in both States could both have death penalty,
but the acts considered treason are very different.

Plus the entire societies are different in crime rates and prison systems Would the ancient world even
HAVE a prison for long term incarceration? If not, setting a murderer free is equally harmful to a society.

 

[Sedim Haba]

I see. Well, my next question may be a bit too speculative: So, if you did currently have a temple and a proper court, would Jews practice Torah-based capital punishment?

If there is a proper Temple in every regard, like Solomon's first Temple instead of the Second (Herod's) Temple, the entire society would be different.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

But the numbers don't relate very well. What's the populations of 2021 USA versus say First Temple
period population?

According to Torath Mosheh even with a high population there should be no industry of incarceration or execution. In some modern countries there is now an "industry" of imprisonment. Thus, the difference is the goal. So, a person can't say that the Israeli/Jewish Torah based method is barbaric if it anciently produced a lower amount of execution as compared to a modern and supposidly more advanced system.

Would the ancient world even HAVE a prison for long term incarceration? If not, setting a murderer free is equally harmful to a society.

In the Torah based system, the closest thing to a prison would be such a person being forced to live in a city full of Torah scholars w/o the ability to leave said city. I.e. if they are going to live the goal is not the imprisonment but instead the ability to become a different person. Thus, there is a statement made by Hazal that if an Israeli goes into exile his rabbi has to go into exile with him. Meaning, that if he goes into exile he can't be in a situaiton where the Torah learning is distance from him. i.e. Torah learning has to be near to him, around him, etc.

 

[rosends]

Yes, the following:

1. Anything that is of a national Israel Torah based governmental nature.
2. Anything dealing with the division of land based on tribel heritage.
3. Anything dealing with institution of the Temple.
4. Anything dealing with a national Israel Torah based military.

Essentially, this is the reason why even though Jews can live in the land of Israel and even though there is a state that calls itself a "Jewish state" BUT because of the fact the entire situaiton is not Torah based it is considered, by Torath Mosheh, that Jews are still in exile.

Just as a coincidence, the following paragraph was in the Halacha Yomi email I get -- it doesn't have a list but an interesting number:

"The Chofetz Chaim in Sefer Hamitzvos Hakotzer calculated, that upon the loss of the Bais Hamikdosh, we are left with seventy-two of the two hundred and forty-eight positive mitzvos and only one hundred and seventy-four of the three hundred and sixty-five negative mitzvos remain functional. In essence, the majority of the mitzvos were lost to us upon the churbon of the Mikdosh! "

 

[Heyo]

You can try, but given that the conditions for ever having a Temple depend on something completely out of anyone's control I don't see how you personally have any say on what happens here in the Middle East.

Yes, and I wasn't wasn't all serious with my answer. But when someone wants to throw away all developments in moral, rights and customs and go back to a more primitive time, I think it is at least a moral obligation to oppose such attempts. Some forces in the US want to go back to 50s, which isn't very clever or nice. @rosends wants to back to the bronze/iron age. Has the Mosaic faith not changed in the last 2200 years? Is it frozen in time?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Yes, and I wasn't wasn't all serious with my answer. But when someone wants to throw away all developments in moral, rights and customs and go back to a more primitive time,

There are some who may consider modern society to be extremely primitive. There are those in Western cultures that are seeking a more simple lifestyle off the grid as compared the heavy infrastructures of modern Western societies. There are even those who say that modern Western society has been the source of loads of modern western suffering. I.e. there are some who define many elements of western society as not being moral to other cultures defintion of moral and even being primitive in its outlooks.

I think it is at least a moral obligation to oppose such attempts.

Again, you can try but I don't think your success rate will be very high at all. Especially if this is something being discussed on a forum. Further, one problem may be with your definition of a moral obligation. Who is to say that someone doesn't feel a moral obligation to oppose your moral obligations? Who is to say you are a good judge of what is moral? Further, who is to say that the society you currently live in, grew up in, etc. is even moral according to your definition or someone else's?

Has the Mosaic faith not changed in the last 2200 years? Is it frozen in time?

This is the problem that comes up with discusing such a topic using terms that are not from to the Hebrew language and culture. There is no such thing a "Mosaic faith" there are a number of culture and linquistic problems with such a statement.

Next, in terms of something being frozen in time. Let's unpack that a bit. First, if one goes back through thousands of years of Israeli/Jewish history one finds that capital punishment has never been a priority. Israeli and even non-Israeli sources show that it was very rare.....extremely rare even more rare than most modern Western cultures in the last 500 years.

 

[metis]

According to the OP the question is not asking about Catholicism. The OP states:

I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews: Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?​

I just posted it for comparison's sake.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I just posted it for comparison's sake.

Why? There was no reason for the comparison and the two aren't compariable. The OP stated, "I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews:" A comparison didn't fit with the OP in any way.

 

[metis]

Why? There was no reason for the comparison and the two aren't compariable. The OP stated, "I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews:" A comparison didn't fit with the OP in any way.

Because the implementation of the death penalty is controversial, especially in today's day & age.

Within Judaism, there's an extensive commentary system that takes Torah references and often provides varying commentaries, which is exactly what I did. Applications of Torah on a great many subjects are often varied, not only within Judaism but also as compared to other faiths, and I do believe these comparisons can often be quite enlightening.

In my morning prayers/meditation, I use excerpts from Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, and I find nothing wrong with doing that.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Because the implementation of the death penalty is controversial, especially in today's day & age.

Within Judaism, there's an extensive commentary system that takes Torah references and often provides varying commentaries, which is exactly what I did. Applications of Torah on a great many subjects are often varied, not only within Judaism but also as compared to other faiths, and I do believe these comparisons can often be quite enlightening.

In my morning prayers/meditation, I use excerpts from Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, and I find nothing wrong with doing that.

But the OP stated

"I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews: Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?​

I.e. the OP was asking Torath Mosheh Jews about something that only involves Torath Mosheh Jewish society. The OP did not ask a question about "Judaism, as you defined it, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any contraversies outside of Torath Mosheh Jewish society. None of that is relevent to the OP.

 

[David Davidovich]

Next, in terms of something being frozen in time. Let's unpack that a bit. First, if one goes back through thousands of years of Israeli/Jewish history one finds that capital punishment has never been a priority. Israeli and even non-Israeli sources show that it was very rare.....extremely rare even more rare than most modern Western cultures in the last 500 years.

I never knew that...

History[edit]
Israel's rare use of the death penalty may in part be due to Jewish religious law.[1] Biblical law explicitly mandates the death penalty for 36 offenses, from murder and adultery to idolatry and desecration of the Sabbath. However, in ancient Israel, the death penalty was rarely carried out.

click here: Capital punishment in Israel - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

But the OP stated

"I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews: Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?​

I.e. the OP was asking Torath Mosheh Jews about something that only involves Torath Mosheh Jewish society. The OP did not ask a question about "Judaism, as you defined it, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any contraversies outside of Torath Mosheh Jewish society. None of that is relevent to the OP.

Fine, but it is both common and even expected here at RF that sidebars develop out of an OP, and since the issue still applies today, I saw nothing wrong with adding a view from another source that can apply.

Either way, this is my last post on this thread.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Fine, but it is both common and even expected here at RF that sidebars develop out of an OP, and since the issue still applies today, I saw nothing wrong with adding a view from another source that can apply.

Either way, this is my last post on this thread.

Sidebars are fine if the OP is written in a way where the sidebar is relevent or when the question is presented to all. This OP was written in a way where the sidebars you brought are not relevent in this thread and don't at all address the question that was asked.

The OP was directed at Torath Mosheh Jews about Torath Mosheh Jewish culture. (From what I understand the new way to ask a direct question instead of the DIR's) Sorry, but what you brought up doesn't relate to the topic.

 

[Heyo]

Again, you can try but I don't think your success rate will be very high at all. Especially if this is something being discussed on a forum. Further, one problem may be with your definition of a moral obligation. Who is to say that someone doesn't feel a moral obligation to oppose your moral obligations? Who is to say you are a good judge of what is moral? Further, who is to say that the society you currently live in, grew up in, etc. is even moral according to your definition or someone else's?

Those are all questions which can be answered in an open discussion. I don't expect you or anyone else to change your opinion because of one argument I bring. I expect you to form your opinion taking my and others contributions into consideration.

This is the problem that comes up with discusing such a topic using terms that are not from to the Hebrew language and culture. There is no such thing a "Mosaic faith" there are a number of culture and linquistic problems with such a statement.

Next, in terms of something being frozen in time. Let's unpack that a bit. First, if one goes back through thousands of years of Israeli/Jewish history one finds that capital punishment has never been a priority. Israeli and even non-Israeli sources show that it was very rare.....extremely rare even more rare than most modern Western cultures in the last 500 years.

All civilized countries have banned capital punishment. That is a result of a long process of debating morality and human rights. Conservative forces like the RCC have tried to hinder progress every step but overall we have developed morally. Judaism, according to @rosends, has not participated in the development, as it was "frozen in time" and would have to do it all over once a new temple was established.
I'm not very interested in the symbolism and the tradition but I think 1. Jews wouldn't go back to Mosaic laws, and 2. it would be wrong if they did.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Those are all questions which can be answered in an open discussion. I don't expect you or anyone else to change your opinion because of one argument I bring. I expect you to form your opinion taking my and others contributions into consideration.

What you have described is an incorrect method of forming an opinion. A person should first form an opinion based on understanding the reality of where they live, what it means to live there, and what logically progresses the society. The problem that people who don't know Hebrew and have never learned what is actually in practice in Torath Mosheh, the topic of the OP, have in discussing Torath Mosheh topics is that they often discussing what they know from christianity and reading the christian bible.

This, in part is the fault of us Jews for allowing Torath Mosheh topics to be discussed using non-Hebrew/non-Jewish terminology which some people connect to things that are actually christian ideas or understandings and not Jewish ones. For example, the whole Judeo-Christian thing which is a huge problem for Jews since there is no such thing as Judeo-Christian for us - the term is usually describing christianity.

Thus, I don't accept an "opinion" on a topic where the real topic hasn't really been discussed. See my explaination below. If we are discussing what has "proven" to be correct then that is a different story.

All civilized countries have banned capital punishment.

Is the USA a civilized country? They still have capital punishment. Also, what about the societies whose current supposed "moral" culture was built on the back of hundreds of years of colonization and world wars? If that factored into the picture also?

That is a result of a long process of debating morality and human rights.

Does this include western style prison institutions and coloization? Also, debating morality in most societies is often one class of people telling the populace what morality is while often not holding it by it themselves.

Conservative forces like the RCC have tried to hinder progress every step but overall we have developed morally.

That still doesn't mean that any of the groups are moral or are not moral. It also doesn't prove that your concept of "developed morally" is actually moral and doesn't produce cultural and environmental effects that someone else can claim are not moral. Again, this is not the place to discuss it but because your idea of "morality" is ambigious currently and because it hasn't been proven that the society you live is actually moral in a "univeral way" that all of humanity would agree on then it is just words the term is theoretical.

Judaism, according to @rosends, has not participated in the development, as it was "frozen in time" and would have to do it all over once a new temple was established.

First of all, the topic is about Torath Mosheh not what your understanding of Judaism is, I state this for a very specific reason that was already discussed with David in another thread, and not as a put down.

I.e. you weren't involved in the discussions that led to this thread and thus missing some very important data. David used very specific terms in his OP due to that previou discussion you missed.

Second, you didn't understand what rosends wrote. It is because you don't understand Torath Mosheh and you don't understand Judaism. Basically, everything I stated in all of my responses to David Davidovich was what rosends was trying to say. I am simply detailing, it in more detail than rosends, because I know that most non-Hebrew speakers are coming from a Christianized mindset and what they learned from Christians/christinity they think is what Jews hold by.

Thus, what rosends was trying to say was that when there was, past tense, a Torath Mosheh based government in the land of Israel there was "legally" the "possibility" for execution for "very particular and extreme" sitatuations that are basically what modern Westerns would term as national treason or state terrorism. The only way someone could be executed during the 1st Temple period was:

• if it was proven that Hashem was supporting the Torah based nation,
• if there was a Torah based Supreme Court in Jerusalem,
• if said suspected person was openly admitting and w/o a shadow of a doubt seeking to destroy Jews/the Jewish nation/and themselves, and
• they would have to literally admit they were trying to destroy themselves and others Jews and proven to be sane/while seeking to go back and do worse if released. I.e during the 1st Temple period executions were very rare.

During the 2nd Temple period, executions were also very rare and the most well known one was of a Jew who was openly seeking to cause the Roman government, that was occupying the land of Israel, to go to war against Jews in and outside of Israel. That same person was willing to cause millions of Jews to be killed in conflict with the Romans and thus the Torah based Supreme Court had no choice.

Needless the say that same Jew was responsible for creating something that later caused countless numbers of Jews to be killed in numerous countries for centuries. I.e. again, very rare and an extreme situation.

I'm not very interested in the symbolism and the tradition

No one is asking you to be. Besides, the topic being discussed here is not about symbolisim and tradition. It is purely historical. David asked something that is a historical question about how Torath Mosheh Jews functioned, function, and will function. It is based on a another thread topic that you were not involved in.

but I think 1. Jews wouldn't go back to Mosaic laws, and 2. it would be wrong if they did.

Again, you can think that just like I don't think that pineapples on a pizza is a pizza. Needless to say that people all over the world are putting pineapples on pizza irregardless of what I think.

Torath Mosheh Jews have been doing Torath Mosheh for thousands of years non-stop, you may have missed the memo. Again, maybe due to christian influence you may have been thinking that Jews are just sitting around waiting to execute people. The reality is that is not how the Torah has ever worked nor is the way that any Jew in history ever wanted it to work. I will stress very strongly. You didn't understand what rosends was talking about.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews: Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?

One other important to add to what rosends wrote when he responded to you. The only way that a Torath Mosheh governmental and societal system will ever exist is in the land of Israel would be if it were proven without a shadow of a doubt, in a scientific way, that Hashem is supporting/approving of what is established. Again, another high standard.

As was mentioned before, the goal of such a situation is not executions. The Torah presents realistic scenarios that can exist in a society based on human free-will choices. Those choices can lead to a world where people correctly uses all of the resources available to humanity or a degredation of the world due to misuse of resources.

In terms of Torath Mosheh, if executions, even in limited sitautions, are happening it means, in terms of Torath Mosheh, that the generation that they are taking place in have failed in some way. Kind of like a pilot who has a well made/designed plane and how the pilot has been provided with a parachute. The pilot may hope to never use a parachute, and the plan is that the parachute should never be used, but if the plane is not maintained correctly, due to some reason either in the direct control of the pilot or outside of the direct control of the pilot (maybe by other pilots, mechanics, part manufacturers), the parachute is only used when there are no other options.

This kind of thinking is actually covered in the Torah in several places.

 

[rosends]

All civilized countries have banned capital punishment. That is a result of a long process of debating morality and human rights. Conservative forces like the RCC have tried to hinder progress every step but overall we have developed morally. Judaism, according to @rosends, has not participated in the development, as it was "frozen in time" and would have to do it all over once a new temple was established.

A couple of things (not the least of which is a thank you to Ehav who is willing to write out much more detail than I am -- I point out simple facts and hope that people are willing to ask followup questions instead of drawing fallacious conclusions - Ehav goes into more detail anticipating people's mistakes):

First is that clearly you are against capital punishment and have decided that the hallmark of a "civilized country" is the lack of capital punishment. I happen not to agree. But if you start with that notion, then you will feel comfortable painting anyone who disagrees with a broad brush. What if i were to say "all civilized countries have contextualized capital punishment in a continuum of jurisprudence which does not over rely on life-long incarceration at the expense of the taxpayer"? Then I could look at some other country and call it uncivilized. You find what you look for and speak through the lens you unconsciously have adopted.

Second is the idea of being "frozen in time." This is not my statement, it is yours. Judaism is incredibly dynamic, but its changes are not the function of whim or the direction of the wind. So your statement that Judaism has not participated in some sort of "development" is predicated on your not understanding Judaism and your bias about what "development" must include.

Third is the actual role of capital punishment in Judaism (and why, as I stated, when the third temple is built and a theocracy reigns, the number of judicial death penalties will be very low). The process which led to a death sentence was difficult and intentionally so (in fact, if the proper court was convened and unanimously voted for a death penalty, the decision was thrown out). One death penalty in 7 (some say 70) years was considered excessive. And to demonstrate the changing nature of Judaism, the talmud explains that in the year 30CE, the court moved itself to another location from which it is impossible for it to sentence anyone to death. One explanation was that there was so much crime and they didn't want to execute anyone so they moved to where it would be impossible.

Your idea about what is "moral" is not some transcendent truth, but just an expression of your belief system.

 

[Heyo]

A couple of things (not the least of which is a thank you to Ehav who is willing to write out much more detail than I am -- I point out simple facts and hope that people are willing to ask followup questions instead of drawing fallacious conclusions - Ehav goes into more detail anticipating people's mistakes):

Thank you for clearing up the misunderstandings.

First is that clearly you are against capital punishment and have decided that the hallmark of a "civilized country" is the lack of capital punishment. I happen not to agree. But if you start with that notion, then you will feel comfortable painting anyone who disagrees with a broad brush. What if i were to say "all civilized countries have contextualized capital punishment in a continuum of jurisprudence which does not over rely on life-long incarceration at the expense of the taxpayer"? Then I could look at some other country and call it uncivilized. You find what you look for and speak through the lens you unconsciously have adopted.

Yes, in the case of capital punishment I happen to agree with a vast majority of moral philosophers and legislators, e.g. the signers of the UNHR declaration.

Second is the idea of being "frozen in time." This is not my statement, it is yours. Judaism is incredibly dynamic, but its changes are not the function of whim or the direction of the wind. So your statement that Judaism has not participated in some sort of "development" is predicated on your not understanding Judaism and your bias about what "development" must include.

The idea of Judaism being frozen in time stems from your short post in answer to the OP. It sounded to me like "we don't have a temple now, but when we get one, we'll pick up exactly where we left". I didn't assume you meant it that way, but it sure sounded so.

Third is the actual role of capital punishment in Judaism (and why, as I stated, when the third temple is built and a theocracy reigns, the number of judicial death penalties will be very low). The process which led to a death sentence was difficult and intentionally so (in fact, if the proper court was convened and unanimously voted for a death penalty, the decision was thrown out). One death penalty in 7 (some say 70) years was considered excessive. And to demonstrate the changing nature of Judaism, the talmud explains that in the year 30CE, the court moved itself to another location from which it is impossible for it to sentence anyone to death. One explanation was that there was so much crime and they didn't want to execute anyone so they moved to where it would be impossible.

I'm not a fan of the "only a few" excuse. You either have a position or you don't.

Your idea about what is "moral" is not some transcendent truth, but just an expression of your belief system.

All moral is subjective and relative. Nice that we agree on that.
Each moral system has a set of axiom from which morals derive (ideally). My moral system has human well being as one of it's pillars and capital punishment is not compatible with that. On which moral pillar are you willing to kill a defenceless person? (And would you do it by stoning them to death?)

 

[rosends]

Yes, in the case of capital punishment I happen to agree with a vast majority of moral philosophers and legislators, e.g. the signers of the UNHR declaration.

Refworld | Capital punishment seems to indicate that even among signatories, there is a possibility of capital punishment.

I'm not a fan of the "only a few" excuse. You either have a position or you don't.

Yes, and the moral position would be "if you have safeguards to make sure that ANY punishment fits the crime and is applied subject to a consistent and fair process, ending up with a death penalty in a few cases is acceptable."

I don't see that the only things considered "a position" are "always" and "never." "sometimes" is also a position.

Each moral system has a set of axiom from which morals derive (ideally). My moral system has human well being as one of it's pillars and capital punishment is not compatible with that. On which moral pillar are you willing to kill a defenceless person? (And would you do it by stoning them to death?)

Any good (social) moral system also has, as a pillar, the good of the community and a pillar of that might be the refusal to make the society pay for the upkeep of someone who has done something which destroys the community. As to whether a mass murderer who is arrested is now "defenseless" or not, that is a silly question. Do you mean to say that a death penalty can work if it is exercised at the moment that the person poses an imminent threat, without judicial process? Why would you incarcerate someone who isn't currently robbing your house? He is now innocent. Punishments are consequences, not just reactions.

The process of something like stoning adds a layer of psychology -- the biblical requirement demands that the accuser be involved in the process. If anything, this would dissuade some people from testifying or pursuing the death penalty as the individual might NOT want to be involved. So the biblical requirement actually reduces the implementation of capital punishment.