In R. Ya'aqob Menashe's daily email for Sunday, April 29, 2012 (http://www.atorahminute.com/2012-04-29), we are told that "Maran Yosef Qaro, z"l, states in the Shulhan 'Arukh that if one is drunk (and therefore unable to pray the "Amidah), and as a result misses the time for prayer, he is considered to be Anoos (that these were circumstances out of his control). He can, therefore, pray a make up prayer (Tashlumin) for the 'Amidah prayer that he missed." (Emphasis mine.)
By that logic, a person who gets drunk and drives a car into a group of people, killing and maiming them, should be given a pass; no penalty for what I would term premeditated murder. After all, the driver knew the probability of killing someone by driving under the influence before the first intoxicant was consumed..
Getting intoxicated normally is a voluntary thing to do.
Rarely is any one forced to drink intoxicating liquids or consume mind-altering drugs.
Most prescription and Over-The-Counter (OTC) drugs that might have an effect on a person's cognitive abilities are clearly marked with warnings not to drive or engage in any dangerous activity.
So how does Maran find a way to not only excuse a drunk's inability to say his prayers at a specified time but to provide the person with an excuse that these were circumstances out of his control?
At one point in my life I was a newspaper reporter.
I have seen, first hand, the effect a drunk driver has on the life not only of his (or her) immediate victim, but on the lives of the victim's family and community as well.
I see, all too often, judges who let impaired drivers off and I have seen drivers whose licenses are revoked leave a courtroom, get into a car, and drive away as if the court was a figment of my imagination.
Because I follow Moroccan traditions, I know there are times when Maran's decisions are set aside for another hakham's ruling. While I am not a rabbi - and certainly not a hakham - nor do I play one on tv, I think this is one time when Maran's ruling needs to be reconsidered.
