- This topic has 276 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 2 days, 4 hours ago by .
-
Posts
-
yankel> he regularly distorts hazal and disforms their message by adding his own ‘sevarot keres’
translating back into yinglish: he quotes chazal that sometimes my teachers did not; and I disagree with his logic emotionally and I am looking for the logical argument to present.
and, yes, please can we move to other threads
@ujjm
i like the thread’s titleAAQ – translating back into yinglish: he quotes chazal that sometimes my teachers did not; and I disagree with his logic emotionally and I am looking for the logical argument to present.
The Gedolei Hador know all the Chazals that you quote, and then some, yet for some reason they don’t agree with you… So, yes, you very often can be caught processing the words of Chazal through your own ‘boich sevaros’…
@ AAQ
The fact that there is such a vast disagreement among Gedolim on a number of substantial related issues makes it all the more compelling when they agree regarding the point under discussion. You wouldn’t treat any other matter of consequence the way you are treating this one. For example if the vast majority of structural engineers told you a particular bridge is near collapse I don’t imagine you would be packing the fam in a car for a drive across. This is true even if there would be a small number of very competent engineers who disagree. Even if you dabble in engineering and the minority position makes sense to you. Refusing to cross in the above case is the reasonable thing to do, no?
YYA> The Gedolei Hador know all the Chazals that you quote,
we are mixing up themes here – another poster did not like my posts, I’ve never get any complaints from the gedolim about my posts (unless one of them is posting here anonymously to enjoy an honest back-and-forth with yungelite without flattery, and I doubt that).
IRL, I might have said something out-of-line in front of some Rabonim and they either (unexpectedly) agreed or laughed with me or expressed disagreement. Did not call me “naive” or “sofek mezid” though. The worst was probably when I tried jokingly flatter R Steinsaltz with an obscure literary reference and my tongue worked faster than my brain and it turned out an insulting reference. He understood what I said faster than I did and laughed whole-heartedly. I have only one excuse – he made a pun on my name earlier on 🙂
NP > The fact that there is such a vast disagreement among Gedolim on a number of substantial related issues makes it all the more compelling when they agree regarding the point under discussion.
I am glad that we agreed on the first part. I just disagree on the second – that everyone know agrees. As I mentioned, I feel more comfortable to reason about past issues first as we understand them a little better before jumping into great unknowns of today. On past similar issues, R Soloveitchik seemed to disagree with many rabonim of his time on the issues of relations to the world, including some of the issues of army service. In my mind, current issues is similar to previous ones, but I am open to the arguments.
I already got one push back: I talked with one of the RJBS great students (I would not call him a “follower” as he is his own Rav) and he is as unsure as some of us are here. He says it is a legitimate issue in halakha that Talmidei Chachamim might be exempt from the Army. When I tried to clarify to whom it applies as not everyone is, he did not reject that but did want to discuss this aspect further. I think that means that he is moved by seeing so many religious Jews coming out together (and getting reports from people who enjoyed the meeting) that he finds it hard to argue against it even when it should be. I asked privately another Rov, whom I do not know well, who lives in two worlds – being both a very charedi and doing kiruv in somewhat “modern” environments. He praised the beauty and unit of the demonstration. When I asked him, with some reserve, whether he had any concerns – his face became red and he said “this is a discussion for another time”. I gave him a slightly funny look, and he added, unprompted “we can’t fully understand politics of another country”. After another funny look, he rushed into another excuse … So, here a person with more charedi bias seems also somewhat confused. So, here are my best attempts at collecting rabbinical responsa. I hope others can find someone they can ask and receive honest answers.
NP> This is true even if there would be a small number of very competent engineers who disagree.
This is a legit question. I understand that when we lack a Sanhedrin, we are not obligated to follow the majority. In this case, I and many others decided to follow a shita different from you. Hopefully, we did it with intellectual integrity, not just because we enjoy kulos of a particular school. [the difference between me and others with same shitah is that many others do not bother to have discussions on YWN, and enjoy talking between each other. I am just happened to be a person who likes to hear from different sides directly].
Note also gemora avoda zara that explains the difference between sakanah and tumah. In your case of sakanah, you might need to follow majority. In many cases, you may want to follow the most conservative engineer. How well rabbis understood these halochos was revealed during first days of Covid. Not counting rabbis who ignored it, there were several outstanding teshuvos that I heard that demonstrate how a Talmid Chochom can apply his learning to a urgent and novel issue. Here is my short list. Maybe you have other:
R Henneman: when it was forbidden to gather in the same yard, he did not allow minyanim that consist of people in nearby yards which would be legal. Not because they do not form a minyan, but because of moris ayn – a passerby may not appreciate the minute detail, conclude that Jews violate the order, and then an Yid in the ER will not be given a ventilator.
R Mayer Twersky: Rambam says to consult a doctor and follow his instructions. Many Rabbonim followed this to a letter. Some invited frum or Jewish doctors or epidemiologists to consult. R Twersky noted that due to a high uncertainty, several doctors need to be consulted and the most conservative opinion should be followed. This is right from the book on robust statistics!
R Willig: on a question whether camps should refund tuition: Do your best right now. We are busy with dinei nefoshos, we will deal with dinei mamonos after the emergency.
Oh hello mr somejew …
have not seen you for a long time …..
.@AAQ
…. yb quotes chazal and his rebeim in a way that sometimes run against my preconceived ideas and I disagree with his logic because of those ideas and I am looking for the logical argument to present.
—-
the above would be an accurate self description of AAQ ….
.
.aaq:
rav to aaq : we can’t fully understand politics of another country
—————————–if the nail could talk , he would say: oh , my head hurts , someone banged it so hard …
seems that this rov knows you well …
or is zocheh that shamayim put the right words in his mouth ….
—-
baruch shekivanti – aaq is not sufficiently acquainted with reality in ey .
it shows in nearly every second comment he makes about the situation there
.rav> we can’t fully understand politics of another country
yankel> seems that this rov knows you well …wrong guess. To clarify: the first Rav I mentioned knows me well, this person was a visitor. And he did not insist on that. After my further response, he retreated and tried another defence. He himself is pretty familiar with Israeli politics – he just used this wording to evade an honest answer. He either was conflicted himself or, more likely, was afraid to take a position either way. Left me a little sad how afraid people are to express their opinion even while they are giving lecture about Toirah and emes.
@ AAQ
You wrote: “Note also gemora avoda zara that explains the difference between sakanah and tumah. In your case of sakanah, you might need to follow majority.”
There is a well known principal that sakana is more stringent then an issur. That principal does not apply here. The active efforts to make Torah observant men (and women) more secular is not analogous to tuma. . It is, in fact, considered more stringent then Sakanas haguf.
Also, you are making another mistake. In cases of sakana one has to be concerned even for a minority view.
@AAQ
you left out part of my post
seems that this rov knows you well …
or is zocheh that shamayim put the right words in his mouth ….
…………..
that was the correct guess , it definitely is one of those two.=================================================================
re this rav ‘s reaction to your query ….hazon ish writes in letter that if there is no common starting point between two divergent opinions , then arguments are futile
it seems that this rave sized you up – even without reading your posts – as someone with whom he has no common starting points
thats why he withdrew from the argument …..
.
NP > lso, you are making another mistake. In cases of sakana one has to be concerned even for a minority view.
I apologize for misspeaking, thanks for the correction, hope nobody followed my posts and drank the waters poisoned by the snake in the meantime.
yankel > it seems that this rave sized you up – even without reading your posts – as someone with whom he has no common starting points
> thats why he withdrew from the argumentI don’t think so, and I was pretty polite and reserved and made sure to express my agreement on the good points he made. I did not even say what bothers me. I asked whether anything bothered him … He continued looking for an explanation.
> hazon ish writes in letter that if there is no common starting point between two divergent opinions , then arguments are futile
this may be the core problem. This presumption that if someone does not agree with your (group) conclusions that they “have no common point” – and presumably your is a Torah point and the other is not is the core problem here.
AAQ
I rather think that the problem with our arguments is
or
that we lack a common starting point
or
that the arguments are not being conducted in good faith [changing subjects and ignoring reality]
or
both
.
.The title of this discussion is a MOTZI SHEM RA against MILLIONS of Jews.
Since non-Jews sometimes visit Jewish web sites,
title of this discussion is also a CHILLUL HASHEM
and giving a free propaganda victory to those
who want to commit GENOCIDE against ALL JEWS.But please, do not listen to me, even though I speak the truth.
But please, do not listen to me, even though I try to help Am Yisrael.
> Court emphasized that promises of future legislation cannot serve as an excuse for nonaction today.
this sounds like a straight legal ruling. How can one argue with this, whether you agree or not with the previous actions. Hopefully, this will lead to a faster agreement on the new law.
MK Porush > Not to abandon children aged zero to three to unsupervised daycare centers or family daycares without any regulations or safety guidelines.
Where are all anti- and non-Zs protesting this invitation to deliver our precious babies to the Zionist state?! From age ZERO – worse than the Teimeni affair.
This sounds like he is advocating state supervision of the daycare centers, but I would presume he is really demanding the state to pay for all daycare and schools and not much state supervision.
The title of this discussion is a MOTZI SHEM RA against MILLIONS of Jews.
Since non-Jews sometimes visit Jewish web sites,
title of this discussion is also a CHILLUL HASHEM
and giving a free propaganda victory to those
who want to commit GENOCIDE against ALL JEWS.“The Chazon Ish encouraged people from overseas
to settle in Eretz Yisrael as it is a positive commandment,
and he felt that Yiddishkeit was more prevalent
and easier to practice there than in the diaspora.”SOURCE: Rav Chaim: The Life and Legacy of the
Sar HaTorah Rav Shmaryahu Yosef Chaim Kanievsky
(chapter 5, page 56), by Naftali Weinberger,
Mesorah Publications, February 2023,
ISBN-10: 1422632873 * ISBN-13: 978-14226328713 PERSONAL COMMENTS:
[1] The Chazon Ish ZTL ZYA encouraged Jews
to make aliyah, even though Israel was ruled
by a Secular Zionist government, at that time![2] The Chazon Ish ZTL ZYA felt that Yiddishkeit
“was more prevalent” in Eretz Yisrael, in his times,
even though Israel was ruled by a Secular Zionists, at that time![3] The Chazon Ish ZTL ZYA felt that it was
“easier to practice” Yiddishkeit in Eretz Yisrael,
even though Israel was ruled by a Secular Zionists, at that time!QUESTION:
Rabbi Moshe Sherer (born 1921 CE, died 1998 CE) was the President of Agudath Israel.
What did Rabbi Moshe Sherer ZTL ZYA say about the modern State of Israel?
__________________________________________
ANSWER:Rabbi Moshe Sherer ZTL ZYA said these
statements about the modern State of Israel:__________________________________________
from the ArtScroll History Series biography
of Rabbi Moshe Sherer, chapter 13, page 321:“He [Rabbi Moshe Sherer] assured [Prime Minister Yitzhak] Rabin…
that he could always count on Agudath Israel of America
to be strongly supportive of Israel’s security needs.”PERSONAL COMMENT:
This is the 1st quote of 4, which proves that Rabbi Moshe Sherer
was deeply committed to Israel’s security, even though Israel
was a Secular Zionist state with Secular Zionist leaders!NOTE: This conversation occurred in, or close to, year 1975 CE.
Yitzhak Rabin was Prime Minister from June 1974 to June 1977 CE.
__________________________________________
from from the ArtScroll History Series biography
of Rabbi Moshe Sherer, chapter 15, page 356:“Rabbi [Moshe] Sherer responded at length.
He pointed out that the opposition to religious umbrella groups
did not preclude Jews joining together on issues as
Israel’s security or combating anti-Semitism.”PERSONAL COMMENT:
This is the 2nd quote which proves that Rabbi Moshe Sherer
was deeply committed to Israel’s security, even though Israel
was a Secular Zionist state with Secular Zionist leaders!
__________________________________________
from from the ArtScroll History Series biography
of Rabbi Moshe Sherer, chapter 22, page 545:“Rabbi [Moshe] Sherer’s summary of a confidential
June 17, 1970 [CE] meeting with Israel’s
Ambassador to Washington Yitzchak Rabin
reflects his lifelong approach to Israel’s security needs.”PERSONAL COMMENT:
This is the 3rd quote which proves that Rabbi Moshe Sherer
was deeply committed to Israel’s security, even though Israel
was a Secular Zionist state with Secular Zionist leaders!
__________________________________________
from from the ArtScroll History Series biography
of Rabbi Moshe Sherer, chapter 22, page 546:The offer of political support Rabbi Sherer made
to Yitzchak Rabin was one he would repeat
on many occasions to Israeli leaders.In a 1981 [CE] letter to Israeli Ambassador Ephraim Efron,
for instance, he described Agudath Israel’s grassroots
constituency as a “reservoir of manpower which is
totally committed to the safety and security of Israel.”PERSONAL COMMENT:
This is the 4th quote which proves that Rabbi Moshe Sherer
was deeply committed to Israel’s security, even though Israel
was a Secular Zionist state with Secular Zionist leaders!this headline is totally different from another article:
“Ben Yeshiva” from Beit Shemesh “Arrested” For Draft DodgingUJM’s comments in this YWN Coffee Room reveal
that he wants to GAMBLE with the lives and possessions
of 8,000,000+ Jews who live in Eretz Yisrael,
by completely dismantling The State of Israel
and completely dismantling the Israeli Army.If UJM wants to GAMBLE, then he should
GAMBLE with his own money, not with
with the lives and possessions of
8,000,000+ Jews who live in Eretz Yisrael.This GAMBLE that UJM wants is especially evil and
blameworthy because it has ZERO CHANCE of succeeding.This GAMBLE that UJM wants
with Jewish lives makes his a RODAIF.This GAMBLE that UJM wants
with Jewish lives makes his MOSAIR.Finally, I recommend AGAINST GAMBLING.
Halachah prohibits a gambler from testifying in Beth Din.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.