Trolling Wikipedia

Home Coffeeroom Decaffeinated Coffee Trolling Wikipedia

Viewing 101 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
  • #609125

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I recently discovered trolling on wikipedia, and it is awesome! What a fun game!

    Look at the YCT article there, and see if you can spot the Popa.

  • #1048098

    Sam2
    Participant

    Was that entire gender discrimination section you?

  • #1048099

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Yes indeed. I figured they could use a taste of their own medicine. They are so high and mighty in their egalitarianism, when in truth, it is only a matter of degree and they are way way way closer to the Taliban than they are to normal American society.

  • #1048100

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    If anyone can find a citation for them talking about how women cannot be eidim or dayanim, that would be great also.

  • #1048101

    daniela
    Member

    LOL It took me a few minutes to stop laughing…..

  • #1048102

    Ðash®
    Participant

    I always suspected that it was you who edited the Pig Latin article.

  • #1048103

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    dash: Lemme see it. Which version should I look at?

  • #1048105

    Ðash®
    Participant

    dash: Lemme see it. Which version should I look at?

    Sorry, the mods won’t let me post that link but here’s another one. http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/in-telshe-they-dont-wear-tzitzis-and-other-stories#post-438137

  • #1048106

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Oh, that was a funny thread. I wonder if that was me who changed that–I certainly cannot remember.

    Note: An important point when trolling Wikipedia is to use an ip proxy. Because they track them.

  • #1048107

    squeak
    Participant

    I was wondering when you’d realize that.

    But how clever of you to answer my question from the other thread like this.

  • #1048108

    Ðash®
    Participant

    Oh, that was a funny thread. I wonder if that was me who changed that–I certainly cannot remember.

    It came from the same IP address as the recent YCT edits (and surpisingly is still there).

  • #1048109

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Add this:

    Although in June 2009, Weiss created the title MaHaRaT for Sara Hurwitz, he did not call her a rabbi, and is of the opinion that she is not as capable as a male, stating, “She can do 95 percent of what other rabbis do”.[29]

  • #1048110

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    DY: You do it. Also, reverse the guy who just deleted my two new sections. I don’t want to be doing an edit war, so I don’t want to reverse it yet.

  • #1048111

    OneOfMany
    Member

    “before vandalism attacks”

    rotflmko

  • #1048112

    I very much want to read your comments on YCT. Where can I find it??? I read through the entire article. And most of the edits section, but it was mostly left and right knee-jerk arguments.

  • #1048113

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Blast it, the admin locked the page because of the guy who was deleting my stuff, but didn’t put my stuff back in!

  • #1048114

    Brilliant (I read in the history.) Genius.

    I have a friend who is a long time editor. I will ask them about putting it back in.

  • #1048115

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    I don’t know how to use an IP proxy.

  • #1048116

    WIY
    Member

    Not sure why you find it so amusing to edit the Young Conservatives of Texas page on wikipedia.

  • #1048117

    Brony
    Participant

    you ruined it with “to their credit.” until then you were doing fine.

  • #1048118

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I don’t know how to use an IP proxy.

    Google: How to use an IP proxy

  • #1048119

    That’s pretty offensive. If anything, you should be trolling non-religious pages or terrorist pages or pages of criminals., or Satmar pages. But to go after YCT like that is just low. I don’t agree with that hashkafah but I respect it, and their commitment to Halacha 95% of the time :).

  • #1048120

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Good point. I don’t think my filter allows it.

    Anyhow, it seems you were doing edits on random articles. In three days, you should be good to go.

  • #1048121

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I’m already good to go. I made the username a long time ago.

  • #1048122

    Calling YCT similar to the Taliban is just funny. I disagree with them halachicallly but in no way are they violent or rude.

  • #1048123

    rationalfrummie: Where do you see that the Taliban is rude?

  • #1048124

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Shkoyach popa!

  • #1048125

    Torah613:

    When the Taliban were in control of parts of Afghanistan, they burned secular books sold in stores, destroyed priceless museum artifacts, and humiliated dissidents. They also ruthlessly killed many people. My apologies- calling them rude is the understatement of the century.

    Popa comparing YCT to the Taliban is so offensive, and so ignorant.

  • #1048126

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Popa comparing YCT to the Taliban is so offensive, and so ignorant.

    I wasn’t comparing them to the Taliban. I was setting up a continuum of society’s treatment of women, with one end being American society and the other end being the Taliban. And then I said that YCT is closer to the Taliban’s end, and obviously, I am even closer.

    The fact that you are reading that as an insult says a lot more about you than about me, YCT, or the Taliban.

  • #1048127

    Yserbius123
    Participant

    I had a troll that lasted a good four months before it was overwritten. I’m not even sure the overwriter knew I was trolling. It was in the article for Edah, an “orthodox” organization committed to finding heterim for everything. I simply quoted my Rosh HaYeshiva in the article, “The organization derives their name from the passage in Exodus Ad matai ha’Edah ha’ra’ah ha’zot”

  • #1048128

    Well, it was interesting reading the talk page, anyway.

    But YCT has much more people than the yeshivish world does who are internet savvy. I shudder to think of what they could do to our wikipedia pages. So on second thought, maybe it’s just as well it got edited.

  • #1048129

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    “The organization derives their name from the passage in Exodus Ad matai ha’Edah ha’ra’ah ha’zot”

    You spelled the passuk wrong. Don’t worry, I fixed it. 😉

  • #1048130

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    But YCT has much more people than the yeshivish world does who are internet savvy. I shudder to think of what they could do to our wikipedia pages. So on second thought, maybe it’s just as well it got edited.

    There’s nothing they could do on our wikipedia pages that isn’t already all over the blogosphere.

    The reason I did what I did, is that they put on a public perception which is really very different than what they are. So they pretend to be all liberal and egalitarian, and they harshly condemn any non-egalitarian practices that we have–when they actually share most of them!

    Why do you think they got upset when I posted on their page that they don’t do same-sex marriage? I’m not upset if someone says that about my yeshiva! Why do you think they deleted that they require mechitza’s? I am happy to say that my yeshiva has a mechitza and requires its graduates to have one.

    Because they want to create a perception that they have egalitarian equality. That’s why.

    yah, the talk page is kind of amusing.

  • #1048131

    So fine. They are fairly traditional, but willing to make halachic changes and be maikil, as well as misusing halachic concepts like kavod briyos and kavod tzibbur. That doesn’t mean they’re hypocritical though- I don’t think they claim to be completely liberal, or open to everything.

    The very fact that they have mechitzahs, oppose same-sex marriage, and keep Shabbos shows they do have some boundaries and generally care about Judaism and Halacha in general. Otherwise, they’d be reform or conservative, without marketing themselves as orthodox at

    All they claim is that they’re more egalitarian than most frum Jews, and that is true.

  • #1048132

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    yah, the talk page is kind of amusing.

    Kind of.

  • #1048133

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    The very fact that they have mechitzahs, oppose same-sex marriage, and keep Shabbos shows they do have some boundaries and generally care about Judaism and Halacha in general.

    Or, it shows that they’re smart enough to realize that they would not attract anyone if they were so blatantly non halachic.

  • #1048134

    That’s not being fair. They know their views are unpopular, and they would be welcomed a lot more in non-orthodox communities. However, they don’t do that because they still care about most of Halacha.

  • #1048135

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    They deleted my edits. Probably someone from here mosered me, but I understand; all’s fair in love and war.

    It is quite funny that they are deleting my edits. After all, the people deleting it know that what I said is true, and nobody would deny it, and my sourcing is good. They’re blaming it on this thread, but there is no req of motives on wikipedia. It doesn’t say much about their intellectual honesty.

  • #1048136

    lol I have no idea how wikipedia works, but according to recent studies it’s nearly as accurate as encyclopedia britannica. I guess they crack down on subjectivity in articles, especially in this extreme case.

  • #1048137

    PBA: You’re right.

    Why do you think they got upset when I posted on their page that they don’t do same-sex marriage? I’m not upset if someone says that about my yeshiva! Why do you think they deleted that they require mechitza’s? I am happy to say that my yeshiva has a mechitza and requires its graduates to have one.

    Good point.

    DaasYochid: Or, it shows that they’re smart enough to realize that they would not attract anyone if they were so blatantly non halachic.

    Deserves to be repeated.

    It is quite funny that they are deleting my edits. After all, the people deleting it know that what I said is true, and nobody would deny it, and my sourcing is good. They’re blaming it on this thread, but there is no req of motives on wikipedia. It doesn’t say much about their intellectual honesty.

    Agreed.

  • #1048138

    I don’t think you’re being dan l’kaf zechus. I have no idea what their motivations are, but overall they observe Halacha much more than non-frum do- it shows they care.

    DY says they wouldn’t attract members if they wer blatantly non-halachic- what about the non religious?? They don’t associate with those movements for a reason- they have some principles.

  • #1048139

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    If they really care about halachah, why do they distort it so terribly? They’re working straight out if the old conservative playbook.

  • #1048140

    I’ve told you. They keep Shabbos, kashrus, go to shul, fast on tzomim, some women cover their hair, teach Gemara, daven, wear kippahs and tzitzis, and many do taharas hamishpachah. Does that sound like non-religious Judaism to you?

  • #1048141

    rationalfrummie,

    there is a moshol – I think its in the Shaarei Teshiva L’Rabeinu Yona – if someone were to tell a king “I will listen to everything you ask of me and follow all your rules – except for one which makes no sense to me,” how will the king react? Will he consider him a loyal subject because he keeps 99% of the rules or will he throw him in jail for daring to suggest that he gets to decide which of the king’s rules make enough sense to be kept.

    None of us are perfect but at least we strive for perfection and understand that what we dont do right is our own shortcoming. But when we make a movement which says 95% of the Torah should be kept but the rest is outdated…that is very far from torah judaism.

  • #1048142

    Come and see how the melech hamelachim is different than a basar v’dam melech! God is merciful, we should be as well (imitatio dei). If they really sincerely follow 95% of Halacha, I think I can honestly be mochel them even though they’re wrong.

    And Comparing them to heterodox movements is just wrong, as you admit.

  • #1048144

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    If they really sincerely follow 95% of Halacha, I think I can honestly be mochel them even though they’re wrong.

    To the contrary, movements which are very similar to Judaism are the most dangerous because people have a hard time distinguishing. This is why it is said that chazal were very happy when christianity stopped keeping mitzvos. And why I will be very happy when Open Orthodoxy stops keeping all mitzvos.

    And Comparing them to heterodox movements is just wrong, as you admit.

    No, I do not admit that. If a person keeps even 100% of the mitzvos, but believes that halacha is not incumbent on him, he is just as bad as someone who keeps nothing.

    These apikorsim think that halacha is not incumbent on them, and that they can change for reasons that are not allowed. They’re right in the same camp with Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, Baptist, Catholic, Russian Orthodox, Moslem, Hindu, Zoroastrian, Niviei HaBaal, etc.

  • #1048145

    benignuman
    Participant

    “These apikorsim think that halacha is not incumbent on them, and that they can change for reasons that are not allowed.”

    What makes you think that YCT believes that halacha is not incumbent on them?

    I don’t know too many YCT aligned people, but the few I have met did not believe that.

  • #1048146

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Ben: I think they believe some sort of halacha is incumbent on them, the same way that Christians do.

    Christians are not using the same halachic process to arrive at what is incumbent, and that is why they are not part of our camp. Similarly, YCT is not using the same halachic process to arrive at what is incumbent, and that is why they are not part of my camp.

    Beis shammai was part of our camp, even though they would marry a tzaras habas, because they were using the same process and simply reached a different conclusion. The tzedukim were using a different process, and that is why they were not part of our camp. (What process the tzedukim used is not clear to me; I am skeptical of the second grade pshat that they didn’t hold of any torah sh’baal peh.)

    And I quite look forward to the day when we’ll all consider them tzedukim, and they will consider us the same. And YU guys will wonder if they can have interfaith dialogue with them.

  • #1048147

    benignuman
    Participant

    Popa,

    In what way are they not using the same process as us? Are you sure you are not confusing bad svaras with bad process?

  • #1048148

    That’s not okay. They do follow most halachos and care. The only problems are womens issues, and a few other kulahs. Are they really as bad as Zoroastrians in your opinion? Wow. That’s quite sad you feel this way about other Jews that believe in God, learn Chumash and Gemara and are shomer mitzvos.

    For the record, the Sadducees (tzedukim) did in fact reject Torah she’be’al pen, and only though Torah she’bichsav had authority.

    Durthermore, YCT uses the same halachic process many Orthodox Jews do for 90% of the issues. For that they should be respected. This is a far cry from the reform who saw Halacha as primitive, and ignored it altogether. YCT clearly does not ignore Halacha, otherwise they’d serve pork, be mechalel Shabbos, and reject the Torah as being divinely authored. The fact that they don’t do ANY of those things shows they’re a lot closer to you than you think they are.

    Broadly painting many Jews that care about their yiddishkeit and Halacha with the brush of avodah zarah is so offensive. Open orthodoxy will not stop keeping all the mitzvos, because for the most part, they ACTUALLY CARE.

  • #1048149

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Read Charlie Brown’s post again.

    None of us are perfect but at least we strive for perfection and understand that what we dont do right is our own shortcoming. But when we make a movement which says 95% of the Torah should be kept but the rest is outdated…that is very far from torah judaism.

  • #1048150

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Ben:

    They hold they can undo any halacha which is based on minhag because it doesn’t fit with their liberal ideology.

    I recently read an article by one of their top students who they insist on calling “Dayan” where he argued that we should start from the baseline that any minhag involving women is invalid because chazal and the gedolei hasoskim and acharonim were all sexist, and then one by one make the case for each why we should “readopt” it. Frankly–that person’s wine is yayin nesech.

    I more recently came across a facebook posting where a certain regarded person from their world (I have diverse friends) argued that a good solution to the agunah problems is for nobody to get married and for everyone to just live b’issur.

    Meanwhile, their big groisse scholar Linzer puts for an idea that is only slightly more sad than it is funny. He thinks that to promote equality, you should have the kalla give the chosson a ring as chalipin for the kesubah. Because the classic wedding ceremony where a chosson gives the kallah a ring is unequal and implies that the chosson is buying the kallah. And I laugh–because who are you fooling? The torah does say “ki yikach”; we do learn kicha m’sdei efron; the man is the one who does the kinyan, and it is a kinyan, and the woman does not do it. So you want to pretend that it isn’t what it really is?

    So I ask you: is it possible that a person who believes in the torah sh’baal peh, and believes in chazal (the gemara) would want to fool himself like that? Wouldn’t Occam’s razor say that he really doesn’t believe that chazal interpreted the torah correctly?

  • #1048151

    Sam2
    Participant

    PBA: That solution to the Agunah problem was proposed by Frum Rabbonim in the past as well.

    And Rabbi Linzer (my Rav says that he is still Frum and worthy of the title) admits that it doesn’t mean anything. The whole point of the double-ring ceremony is to make the woman feel good about herself. He even says that you have to explain this because he points out some problems in the Kiddushin if they think that she needs to give a ring as well.

  • #1048152

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I don’t get it. It is to make the women feel good about themselves?

    Can’t they feel good about themselves doing marriage like Hashem set up? Are women thinking differently now in a way that they can no longer feel good about themselves doing what is right? So then whose ideas are corrupted? Because he certainly never suggests that it is a problem that women can’t feel good about themselves doing what Hashem wants–if anything he’s usually suggesting that they are correct and the kasha is on chazal and Hashem.

    And I’d like to know which rabbonim suggested that we should all live b’issur.

  • #1048153

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    That solution to the Agunah problem was proposed by Frum Rabbonim in the past as well.

    That’s really hard to believe. There were agunos in the times of Chaza”l, and they never proposed it.

  • #1048154

    Sam2
    Participant

    DY: Agunos in the time of Chazal didn’t mean the same thing. The modern Agunah issue began less than a few hundred years ago when we no longer had the autonomy to beat recalcitrant husbands until they gave their wives Gittin.

  • #1048155

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Well Sam, but do tell us which normal rav suggested that. I’m arfully curious now.

  • #1048156

    Sam2
    Participant

    PBA: It was in a Sefer published in the early 20th century. Needless to say, it was roundly rejected. I don’t remember the name offhand but B”N I’ll get back to it here if I remember/see it again.

  • #1048157

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Needless to say, it was roundly rejected.

    So when a group which admits to deviating from standard Orthodoxy incorporates a whole plethora of of halachot, which, each on its own, would be roundly rejected, it shouldn’t cause surprise when the group as a whole is roundly rejected.

  • #1048158

    Ash
    Participant

    PBA: (What process the tzedukim used is not clear to me; I am skeptical of the second grade pshat that they didn’t hold of any torah sh’baal peh.)

    AFAIK this pshat is pretty clear around shas and Rashi repeats it a multiple times. Much like some ultra-Modern “Orthodox”, they knew all the halochos, learned it carefully, but rejected torah sh’baal peh.

    (OK, of course ultra-MO are not in practice nearly as extreme, and don’t reject torah sh’baal peh, just some parts of it which they see as divisible from the rest and incompatible with their worldview.)

    As an example, see end of Sukkah 43b where they purposely disrupted a mitzvah by making it impossible to use the avrovos without violating a issur derabonin. The meforshim gives various peshotim exactly which issur derabbonon were involved but all agree the Tezdokim (in this case Baisusim, specifically) knew the the intricacies of muksa very well (no doubt learned all day in a beis medrash) and used that to knock the chachomim and disrupt mitzvos.

    YCT and the ilk appear to have similar animosity to the parts of torah sh’baal peh they don’t like. Some non-ultra-MO can stray into this territory too at times; the MBP issue is an example of not just disagreeing with mesorah/halochoh if it gives a bad impression, but actually helping disrupt it instead by giving public support to its detractors, just because it’s gives a bad impression in the 21st century.

  • #1048159

    benignuman
    Participant

    Popa,

    Other than the guy that thinks we can undo all minhagim at the snap of a finger (because Chazal were sexist), the other two, while strange and perhaps misguided, are not rejections of the binding nature of halacha at all. Once again I think you are confusing bad reasoning with a rejection of a portion of the halachic process.

    What Rabbi Linzer suggested sounds like a kiruv strategy not some sort of rejection of Chazal. Also you are misusing Occam’s Razor.

    When people want very much to reach a specific outcome, their reasoning can get blinded and skewed (consider secular legal opinions). But usually they do not realize that their reasoning is skewed, they think they are making an honest effort. Such a person is not outside the pale, he is just fooling himself.

  • #1048160

    benignuman
    Participant

    For the record I believe Popa is right that the Tzedukim did not reject all of the Oral Torah (in the second grade sense). I don’t have the sources off-hand, but they have machlokisim in the Gemara with Chazal regarding dinim that are only found within the Oral Law, where the Tzedukim are more strict than Chazal were, or they reject only part of the din.

    Tzedukim put on teffilin that looked like our teffilin. They were not like the later Karaim who read the Torah literally.

    Rashi does say that they rejected Torah Sh’Bal Peh. I would suggest that Rashi was either being lav davka (i.e. the reject part of Torah Sh’Bal Peh) or, more likely, he means that they rejected the Authority of Torah Sh’Bal Peh.

  • #1048161

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    How would you like it if people vandalized Charedi entrees or delcared them as “fan Pages” (You have to write entries critically, not as a fan) which can get them deleted

  • #1048162

    Ben: the tzedukim were the ones who davka put tefillin on their hands and between their eyes, following the pasuk literally. They also didn’t light fires before Shabbos, per chazal’s interpretation but instead were cold and hungry on Shabbos. Tis is rejecting the Torah she’be’al peh.

    YCT graduates wear tefillin, follow hilchos Shabbos, and generally care about Halacha- that’s why they have a semicha program that involves intense study of Halacha.

    Its not that they don’t like Torah, or want to undermine frumkeit. They are struggling with being frum in this modern world we live in. That’s perfectly fine. Their ‘halachic’ conclusions might not be right, but their intentions are good and they want to live as frum Jews- otherwise they’d discard it all.

  • #1048163

    Shraga18
    Participant

    What were the tzedukim’s and Karaites Tefillin? How would they know what tefillin are if they didn’t accept Torah Shel Baal Peh?

  • #1048164

    benignuman
    Participant

    Rational,

    I don’t know how they put on their tefillin, but actual tefillin as black boxes with scrolls in them and straps attached, are nowhere explained in the Torah sh’bksav.

    I would like to note that I disagree with Popa’s characterization of YCT.

  • #1048165

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I don’t want to sidetrack the thread with talk about tzedukim, but in my opinion there is good reason to think that tzedukim did hold of some sort of torah sh’baal peh.

    I read an interesting article about this which speculates that the chachomim after the churban don’t consider themselves either tzedukim or perushim, and were in fact made up of both sects and it was in yavne that they all sat down together and realigned as one group. If you’re curious, it is called something like “the significance of yavneh” and is written by a certain Shaye Cohen.

    And rational: I don’t actually buy the argument of that article, I just think it is possible. And in thinking so, I am in agreement with the author (who I once discussed this with) and who also only thinks it is a theory and is possible.

  • #1048166

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Other than the guy that thinks we can undo all minhagim at the snap of a finger (because Chazal were sexist), the other two, while strange and perhaps misguided, are not rejections of the binding nature of halacha at all. Once again I think you are confusing bad reasoning with a rejection of a portion of the halachic process.

    What Rabbi Linzer suggested sounds like a kiruv strategy not some sort of rejection of Chazal. Also you are misusing Occam’s Razor.

    Ben,

    I don’t think you need to agree with me; but this is my opinion based on the extensive interaction I have with that community. I am aware of other people who disagree with me; for example Rabbi Broyde wrote an article disagreeing with me on this exact point for crosscurrents some time ago.

    I think reading that as a kiruv theory is an overly charitable reading. Why don’t you spend a few days reading Mr. Linzer’s blog and see if you still think he agrees with you and is just doing a kiruv campaign.

  • #1048167

    benignuman
    Participant

    Popa,

    While I agree with you that tzedukim did hold of some sort of Torah Sh’bal Peh, there is no way that they were not clear separate groups during bayis sheni. Tzedukim were considered apikorsim during Bayis Sheni. I haven’t read the article you are referring to, but it does not fit with numerous gemaras.

    At your suggestion I will spend some time reading Rabbi Linzer’s blog (I didn’t know he had one). But for now I will say that although I don’t know Rabbi Linzer personally, every time I have seen him he has been holding a sefer (usually a gemara), and whenever there was a spare moment he was learning. I don’t know what else he may be, but the man is a Masmid.

  • #1048168

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I’ve met absolute real apikorsim who are real masmidim also. And who know much much more than I know.

    As regards the tzedukim, yes, I am also pretty skeptical about that article. But, the question it poses really is: Are we perushim? If so, then yes, the tzedukim were considered apikorsim by the perushim. But maybe we aren’t perushim; the tannaim don’t identify themselves as perushim. So maybe the gathering at yavneh was really a new mixture of both perushim and tzedukim who came together and formed what we know as chazal.

    Again, I’m pretty skeptical myself of this. But it’s a cute theory.

  • #1048169

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I mean, I absolutely love the one where he talks about that they were learning niddah and he told his apikorsim that it is a big problem that chazal in the gemara and rishonim and acharonim objectify women, but at least when they “pasken” they will be sensitive to that.

    And I’m like, what kind of cognitive dissonance does it take to consider yourself bound by an interpretation of the torah which you think was made by people who don’t share any of your worldview?

    That’s probably why he learns so much, because every time he stops and has a chance to reflect, his head probably starts spinning trying to keep track of his dissonances.

  • #1048170

    Sam2
    Participant

    The Karaites and other groups invented their own Torah Sheba’al Peh. We know this from findings from places like Qumran.

  • #1048171

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    What were the tzedukim’s and Karaites Tefillin?

    I don’t think karaim wear tefillin.

  • #1048172

    benignuman
    Participant

    Karaim do not put on tefillin. But it seems that Tzedukim did (tefillin were found in Qumran, and I buy Dr. Schiffman’s argument that the Qumran sect was Tzedukim).

    That goes to the point that the Tzedukim did not outright reject the concept of a Torah Sh’bal peh the way that the later Karaites did.

  • #1048173

    benignuman
    Participant

    Popa,

    Maybe I am hopelessly naive, or an eternal optimist, but I read a few of his post and they sound like kiruv talk to me. There is a slight difference in tone in that it seems like when he says “many find _______ troubling today” he is trying to imply that he too finds ________ troubling.

    But even if this were so, and I finds some aspect of halacha troubling, I don’t see why that makes him and his school apikorsim. Part of yiddishkeit is keeping the mitzvos even when you don’t understand them, being mevatel your daas to that of HKB”H.

  • #1048174

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Ben, there’s huge difference between not understanding something, and finding it “troubling”.

  • #1048175

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    That goes to the point that the Tzedukim did not outright reject the concept of a Torah Sh’bal peh

    Not necessarily. Tefillin is, after all, mentioned in the Torah (shebiksav). They may just deal with the kasha differently.

  • #1048176

    benignuman
    Participant

    DY,

    I don’t think there is. I think the difference is semantics. The yeshivish way to refer to it is “I don’t understand.” The modern way to refer to it is “I find it troubling.”

    One can psychoanalyze why each uses the terms they use and maybe it reflects some underlying world outlook, but in normal parlance it is used the same way.

  • #1048177

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Yes, I think you are being a bit naive, although probably not hopelessly.

  • #1048178

    HaLeiVi
    Member

    The Tzedukim didn’t take the advice of the guy Popa mention — to start from scratch. They put on Tefillin, because everyone always put on Tefillin. Then they made the changes whenever they felt that the Chachamim injected their own desires and worldview.

    They didn’t call themselves Perushim because they called themselves Yehudim. Perushim is a title created by outsiders, who wanted normal Frum Yiddishkeit to be a certain sect within Judaism. The only time we find Chazal referring to themselves as Perushim is when they quotes Tzedukim.

  • #1048179

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Are the tzedukim the kohanim b’nei tzadok from yesterday’s haftara?

  • #1048180

    benignuman
    Participant

    Popa,

    I have wondered if they thought so. Meaning they called themselves b’nei tzadok, partially because they were started by someone named Tzadok, but also because the wanted to tie themselves to the Kohanim B’nei Tzadok who are praised by the Navi as preserving the true tradition.

  • #1048181

    HaLeiVi
    Member

    New management, same great service.

  • #1048182

    midwesterner
    Participant

    Tzadok Hakohein, mentioned many times in Navi, has no connection to Tzadok and Beitus, the two talmidim of Antignus Ish Socho, spiritual founder of the Tzedukim and Baitusim. They lived many hundreds of years apart.

  • #1048183

    benignuman
    Participant

    Midwesterner,

    That doesn’t mean that the followers of Tzadok, the talmid of Antignus, didn’t view themselves as the spiritual successors of Tzadok Hakohen from the Navi.

  • #1048184

    midwesterner
    Participant

    I’ve seen some un-thought-out silly remarks on this website over the years, but that one comes close to the top!!

  • #1048185

    benignuman
    Participant

    How so?

  • #1048186

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Or, to say it a little nicer, meiheichi teisa.

  • #1048187

    midwesterner
    Participant

    Maybe they were followers of R’ Tzadok Hakohein of Lublin? Or who knows? Maybe they don’t like NASI very much, and they are really followers of Tzadok Katz of Lakewood?

  • #1048188

    benignuman
    Participant

    Midwesterner,

    I am going to try to say this in the nicest way possible. You might want to tone the rhetoric when the basis for your comment is your lack of knowledge of something. In the future you might want to right something like: “what makes you say that, weren’t they separated by hundreds of years?”

    The answer to that politely worded question is that I hold of Dr. Lawrence Schiffman’s basic theory of the Dead Sea Scrolls (see one of my earlier posts above). If he is correct that the Dead Sea sect were Tzedukim, then my theory stands to reason because they refer to themselves as “B’nei Tzadok” and they modeled their community around how they perceived Kohanim should act, considered their adherents to be symbolically like Kohanim, viewed themselves as making up for the improper practices of the real Kohanim in Yerushalayim, and viewed themselves as keeping alive the “true” traditions.

    If this information is new to you, I would recommend reading Dr. Schiffman’s book “Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls.”

  • #1048189

    benignuman
    Participant

    As an aside, the Dead Sea Scrolls are generally very anti the powers that be in control in Yerushalayim. There is one document, however, praising one such ruler named Yochanan HaMelech.

    I wonder if this is the same Yochanan Kohan Gadol (grandson of Matisyahu) who at the end of his reign became a Tzaduki.

  • #1048190

    yehudayona
    Participant

    Popa, I see YCT is looking for a Public Relations Associate. You’re just the man. It’s on a Jewish jobs website.

  • #1048191

    WIY
    Member

    Yehuda

    They are looking for a spin doctor?

  • #1048192

    Every good business has PR. You might as well call al the more than 600,000 PR,sAd, or marketing people in the U.S. “spin doctors,” WIY. It’s not a YCT thing

  • #1048193

    RebYidd23
    Participant

    You can still look at the old edits.

  • #1048194

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Sam2:

    And Rabbi Linzer (my Rav says that he is still Frum and worthy of the title) admits that it doesn’t mean anything. The whole point of the double-ring ceremony is to make the woman feel good about herself. He even says that you have to explain this because he points out some problems in the Kiddushin if they think that she needs to give a ring as well.

    R’ Moshe in Even Ha’ezer 3:18 writes that the Kiddushin is perfectly valid. Although he does hold that it’s assur to do it.

  • #1048195

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    I liked the way they proved popa was biased and his edits vandalism because he called this thread “Trolling Wikipedia”, and popa had to explain that we use the word troll differently here on the CR.

  • #1048196

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Were you researching that for the past year?

  • #1048197

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    No, I remember from then.

  • #1048198

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Popa:

    I’m not sure if your question was meant for me or for DaasYochid. If it was meant for me, the answer is no. I just came across this thread today, and felt the need to argue with Sam, or R’ Linzer according to Sam.

  • #1048200

    How is “troll” used differently here, DaasYochid?

    http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/troling-wikipedia/page/2#post-548380

  • #1048201

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    It’s like the “n” word. If you are from a maligned group, it is ok to use the slurs. Since we’re all trolls, it isn’t an insult here.

Viewing 101 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending