Q&A: Communal Ordinances — According to Haredi Halakhic Decisors
Communal Ordinances — According to Haredi Halakhic Decisors
Question
I was told in the past that the Haredim do not accept “the law of the kingdom is law.”
I wanted to ask whether their view is the same regarding communal ordinances, and if not — does that obligate them like a halakhic ruling?
Answer
The Haredim do not accept anything that does not suit their goals. Don’t look there for justifications or theoretical consistency.
I’ve already written here more than once that relying on the Ran’s view that “the law of the kingdom is law” does not apply in the Land of Israel is completely unfounded in several respects. First, the kings of Israel did have the status of “the law of the kingdom is law.” Second, this is a lone opinion with no real source. Those who are stringent in every halakhic dispute — for some reason here they are lenient.
Beyond that, I also wrote in the past, as you suggest, that one can ground the authority of the state and its laws in communal ordinances, but they choose to ignore that too.
Above all, there is also theft here as well (making use of state services without paying the required consideration and without obeying the rules of the game).
This is a society that is morally, socially, and humanly distorted — parasitic and destructive, with infantile outlooks. The ridiculous justifications come after the fact, and they look exactly like that.
Discussion on Answer
This has nothing to do with communal ordinances. When the parliament is made up like a puzzle of different, extreme parts, who exactly is the “community” that legislates? By whom is it accepted?
Take a referendum.
In addition, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef rules that “the law of the kingdom is law” applies even in the Land of Israel, and if I remember correctly, Rabbi Elyashiv as well.
But I join Rabbi Michi’s criticism of the thuggish manner found among many in this public, though of course not all of them, and even more than a common minority do not fall under these descriptions.
I didn’t understand.
What does it mean to ignore it?
With “the law of the kingdom is law” there is the Ran — has anyone argued against the validity of communal ordinances?
If there isn’t even a lone dissenting opinion, then this is a great way to get them to obey the laws.
They just won’t listen?