Dear Yuval,



Your question is not clear, so I don’t know what you want me to say.

I will cite for you a paragraph from the essay The Secular Jew’s Place in Halacha which deal with the words of the Chazon Ish:

Thus ruled the Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah paragraph 158 section two: “It was customary in Eretz Israel to kill Jewish apostates — those who worship idols or who transgress for spite, even if one ate unkosher meat or wore sha’atnez for spite, and apikorsim who reject the Torah and Jewish prophecy. If one has power to kill them with a foil he does so in public, and if not, he should act against them with cunning, until he causes them to be killed. If he sees one [of them] fall into a well and the ladder is in the well, first he should remove the ladder and say, ‘I must take my son down off the roof, I’ll bring it back’ or some such thing.” Again, the blood of a secular Jew is worth nothing!

Since secular Jews in these days have become numerous, a problem has arisen: On the one hand, religious Jews would not think of killing the [majority of] Jews, but on the other hand there is a clear halacha which states an obligation to kill secular Jews! How do our rabbis deal with the contradiction between Halacha and the public’s Zeitgeist?

This is how the Chazon Ish settles it in Yoreh Deah, Laws of Ritual Slaughter paragraph two, section 16: “And it seems that this law applies only in those times when His supervision is clear, like in the time when there were miracles and a Heavenly voice and the righteous of the generation were under clear personal supervision. Heretics were then especially perverse in swaying the impulses towards lust and lawlessness, and at that time clearing out the evildoers was protection of the world, for all knew that pushing the generation away [from the ways of the Torah] brings punishment to the world and causes pestilence, war, and hunger to come upon the world. But when Divine supervision is hidden and faith has been uprooted from the doorways of the nation, such acts do not build a fence against lawlessness but add to the lawlessness, for thwill see it as an act of destruction and violence, G-d forbid. Since we are supposed to fix things, we should not apply this law when it does not lead to correction. But we must return them through ties of love and put them in the rays of light as much as we can.” (See what we wrote in pamphlet 8 on the topic of “Reality changes and so Halacha Changes.”

If you study the Chazon Ish’s words in depth you will see that in his opinion the reason the secular are not now killed is only because the Divine supervision is not explicit, but in the ideal, appropriate, and correct situation “when His supervision is clear” there is a commandment to kill all the secular.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet

Dear Yuval,



Your question is not clear, so I don’t know what you want me to say.

I will cite for you a section of the essay The Secular Jew’s Place in Halacha which deals with the words of the Chazon Ish:

Thus ruled the Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah paragraph 158 section two: “It was customary in Eretz Israel to kill Jewish apostates — those who worship idols or who transgress for spite, even if one ate unkosher meat or wore sha’atnez for spite, and apikorsim who reject the Torah and Jewish prophecy. If one has power to kill them with a foil he does so in public, and if not, he should act against them with cunning, until he causes them to be killed. If he sees one [of them] fall into a well and the ladder is in the well, first he should remove the ladder and say, ‘I must take my son down off the roof, I’ll bring it back’ or some such thing.” Again, the blood of a secular Jew is worth nothing!

Since secular Jews in these days have become numerous, a problem has arisen: On the one hand, religious Jews would not think of killing the [majority of] Jews, but on the other hand there is a clear halacha which states an obligation to kill secular Jews! How do our rabbis deal with the contradiction between Halacha and the public’s Zeitgeist?

This is how the Chazon Ish settles it in Yoreh Deah, Laws of Ritual Slaughter paragraph two, section 16: “And it seems that this law applies only in those times when His supervision is clear, like in the time when there were miracles and a Heavenly voice and the righteous of the generation were under clear personal supervision. Heretics were then especially perverse in swaying the impulses towards lust and lawlessness, and at that time clearing out the evildoers was protection of the world, for all knew that pushing the generation away [from the ways of the Torah] brings punishment to the world and causes pestilence, war, and hunger to come upon the world. But when Divine supervision is hidden and faith has been uprooted from the doorways of the nation, such acts do not build a fence against lawlessness but add to the lawlessness, for they will see it as an act of destruction and violence, G-d forbid. Since we are supposed to fix things, we should not apply this law when it does not lead to correction. But we must return them through ties of love and put them in the rays of light as much as we can.” (See what we wrote in pamphlet 8 on the topic of “Reality changes and so Halacha Changes.”

If you study the Chazon Ish’s words in depth you will see that in his opinion the reason the secular are not now killed is only because the Divine supervision is not explicit, but in the ideal, appropriate, and correct situation “when His supervision is clear” there is a commandment to kill all the secular.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet

Dear Lior,



Most of our answer was citations from the sources. If, in your opinion, the sources we cited are not appropriate to our conclusion, please send us a detailed list of reasons. If you think there are other citations which lead to different conclusions, we would be pleased if you would bring them to the public’s attention.

Try to gain control over your anger and the shock you feel and act in a controlled and reasoned manner.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet

Dear Achiad,



We cited the words of the Chazon Ish and you ignore them. Do you think we erred in our understanding of a word or sentence? If so, please tell us which so we can discuss it. If your conclusion that an apostate is one who “do[es] precisely the opposite only to anger others” comes from some other source, please bring it so our discussion will not be like that between the deaf.

I will cite for you the words of Maimonides which show that a secular person has the fate of an apostate (Laws of Apostates 3:1-3): “Once it has become known that a person rejects the Oral Torah [he is lowered into the pit] and not raised, and he is like all other apostates and those who say there is no Divine Torah, like the informers and the heretics, for all these are not included in the community of Israel and there is no need for witnesses nor for warning nor for judges. [Rather, anyone who kills one of them does a great good deed and removes an obstacle.]”

“This speaks of a person who rejects the Oral Torah because of his thoughts and that which was seemly for him; he followed his thoughts and his heart’s arbitrary whims and rejected the Oral Torah.”



That is, a secular person who has invested thought in the matter and concluded that the Torah is not Divine is judged an apostate.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet