Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ DaMoshe
Your last post was excellent. It will, unfortunately, go underappreciated
@AAQ
“Do you have a document from Hashem guaranteeing lack of challenges for your community specifically?”
No. The Dati Leumi community needs full time learners as well. Every Jewish community does. There are plenty of challenges that go along with that. No one is exempt from challenges in olam hazeh.
“Maybe you feel that you are doing so much for Hashem by learning and wearing dark clothes on a hot day”
I see lots of people wearing suits in the summer. Fedora hats go better with suits then baseball caps, no? People tend to dress similarly to other people in their communities. No big chidush there. Not sure what this has to do with the subject we are discussing
@ AAQ
We have various models for that in Judaism. One is Yissachar/Zevulun – that is a valid contract between two willing participants. There are, B’H people willing to support learning. Not when one of them forces the other to pay. Another is – live on bread and water. Another is – work and learn at night. Another – get a profession, work several hours a day and learn.
You forgot 2 other options:
1) Recognition of the vital role full time learning plays in the preservation of the Jewish Nation and taxation by a Torah True government to fund it.
2) Under a democratic government, political advocacy for financial allocations by constituents who recognize the same.News flash. In a democracy you are “forced to pay” for lots of things you don’t personally agree with
@ UJM
Thank you for the link to the letter
@ Sechel
Will you answer the 3 questions I asked you?
@ Sechel
“I just watched Manis Friedman’s video and qwerty (Rav aharon Feldman) completely distorted it.”
Rav Ahron Feldman is an ish emes. He doesn’t distort things. That’s some chutzpa for you to speak that way about one of the Gedolei Yisroel.
“He says “there’s not a Jew in the world who deserves punishment” that does not mean there is no שכר עונש”
Really? Oh, you mean that there is schar and onesh but there is no Jew today who commits any willful transgressions. Every transgression by every individual is a ones or shogeg? Thank you for clearing that up. But, it’s Rav Aaron Feldman who is guilty of distortion??
“I even wonder who has more faith: the heretic who cannot accept the existence of G‑d after the Holocaust, or the believer who attributes such horrors to G‑d’s appetite for punishment.”
This is what is known as a fools choice. How about option “C” None of the above
“the “retribution for sins” approach is an unbearable affront to the holy Jewish nation and their G‑d.”
You may want to re-read the Asereh Dibros.
@ none
Never read “the part about Bris Mila” but is comfortable arguing with Chazal and Rishonim. This isn’t even apikorsis at this point, it’s just sad.
@ AAQ
Couple of things
1) Full time Torah Learning is a Civic Contribution of the Highest Order.
2) There are sizeable kehilos in EY who do not take a penny from the Government. Many, from families who came well
before 1948. They never asked for anything from the State.For the above two categories military service is a none-starter. There is a caveat regarding category 1. In America, most frum yidden don’t stay in learning full time past 3-5 years in Kollel. The matzav in EY in the Chareidi communities is different then in the US but it is changing.
One of the obstacles to this change is mandatory military service for men who are not learning full time. Because…
3) Putting our sons (and daughters) under the authority of people who are at best ambivalent and at worst outright hostile to the Torah is not acceptable. And, unlike Hatzala, we can’t just pick up and make a private army.
In spite of the above, for those who are not learning full time a path to be able to be contribute economically and militarily needs to be found.
Do you have a realistic solution?
Regarding the whole Chabbad is Kfira / A”Z thing.
There is a case that has been made that the Gedolim of the previous generation where not aware of certain statements made by the last Lubavicher Rebbe and had they been aware they would have certainly considered Chabbad Kfira / A”Z. The thing is that, as of today, all the Rebbeim are aware of the controversial statements. Still, every major Kashrus organization relies on Chabbad mashgichim (even Moshichist ones). Even Rav Aaron Feldman, who holds not to rely on them, is clear it is not because we have to be Choshed them as being Ovdei A”Z.
That being said, believing in the tooth fairy isn’t Kfira / A”Z either. Now if someone insists of believing in the tooth fairy that is their business, and nobody who values there time should try to argue with them. On the other hand, if someone (or many someones) are engaged in a mass media campaign to pass off belief in the tooth fairy as normative Jewish belief and leaving teeth under ones pillow as normative Jewish practice this should rightly be fought against.
@ Sechel
You wrote that Rabbi Brietawitz teaches the last Lubavicher Rebbe’s Torah. Can you please specify what shiur(im) you are referring to?
@ Sechel
Signed Psak Dins are a-dime-a-dozen today.
Also, what sugya? My questions where:
1) To your knowledge, did the last Lubavicher Rebbe declare that he was speaking as a Prophet in the name of Hashem?
2) Do you believe that the last Lubavicher Rebbe was a Prophet (in the full Halachic sense of the word)?
These are simple yes or no questions
You raised an interesting point about classes for like minded, capable, motivated girls who want to learn. I can think of a couple of issues:
1) What we have is Halachic precedent for is girls / women learning Talmud as individuals.There where even (rare) cases of exceptional women who gave shiur (from behind a mechitza) to men. Organized Talmud classes for girls / women is unprecedented. To be sure, that is not insurmountable. After all, Beis Yaacov was also unprecedented. However, like Beis Yaacov, such an innovation should have broad support from Gedolei Yisroel to be considered legitimate.
2) Such initiatives will surely be highjacked by people with a Feminist agenda.
@AAQ
Can you unpack what you mean about “the analysis of Mitzvot”
There are different ways to analyze Mitzvot. Do you mean: (1) legal parameters, like the Talmud. (2) reasons, like the Chinuch. (3) Something else…@ Sechel
Are you going to answer my question?
Did the last Lubavicher Rebbe claim, as a Halachic Navi, to be speaking in the name of Hashem?
Do you believe that the last Lubavicher Rebbe, was a Navi, in the full, Halachic sense of that word?
Also, as an aside
I saw you wrote that Rabbi Brietawitz teaches the last Lubavicher Rebbe’s Torah. I have heard a number of his shiurim and have not heard this. Can you specify what shiur(I’m) you are referring to?
@AAQ
Nice to see you bringing the thread back to the subject of the OP
You wrote regarding HaKatan’s post: “the only permissible way for them to learn is completely on their own with no teacher?”
I don’t think that’s what he meant. The objection is to a program of formal instruction on a community level. I think it’s obvious that a girl or woman who pursues learning would need competent instruction.
@ none 2.0
Your pop-humanist ranting does not pass for an answer to any of the questions that I and other posters have asked you.
I am taking this very rare opportunity to completely agree with what HaKatan wrote
@ none
You wrote in another thread that everything written in the Torah is symbolic. Please be clear. Do you believe the Torah to be a prophetic work? Prophecy here means that what is written in the Torah is the word of G-D. A simple yes or no answer to this question will suffice.
@ YB
“these are very major discussions to be had”
This is why I am asking Sechel to please clarify, unambiguously, his position on this very point.
.@ none2.0
I certainly did not say, or imply, that free will is evil. Your misunderstanding my post doesn’t change it’s meaning. If you take the time to read and think about what I wrote you will see that, on the contrary, I think that free will is essential for morality, it just isn’t moral in and of itself.
I agree with your premise in linking Morality and Consequences. I also agree that people can use law to justify very vile behavior. Where we part ways is your rejection of Rabbinic Authority.
One issue is that your rejection of Rabbinic Authority is arbitrary. For example, you advocate perusing the simple meaning of prophetic texts. Without the Rabbinically transmitted principal that the simple meaning of the text is true what grounds do you have for asserting that the simple meaning is intended by the Author? How do you know that the text was not meant to be understood allegorically? Will you say that some parts are literal and some allegorical and each person should interpret the text based on the cultural moral norms of that particular time and place?
Cultural norms can vary and so can ideas about morality. The Greeks did not see any negative consequences in pedophilia and deemed it moral. For a Utilitarian it is moral for 5 people to kill 1 person if it will make 5 out of the 6 people happy. Cyrenaics considered the pursuit of immediate physical gratification the highest moral virtue. Protagoras famously said that man is the measure of all things, renouncing any objective standard of morality altogether.
@ Sechel
I think you understand that we have not had prophecy for the last 800 years. What you are trying to do with the I.T is to establish that the Rambam holds that the return of prophecy happens before Moshiach comes and is an indication of his imminent arrival / revelation. You believe that the last Lubavitcher Rebbe was, in fact, a prophet (in the full, halachic sense) and that he had prophecy indicates the imminent arrival / revelation of Moshiach, the last Lubavitcher Rebbe himself.
Is this what you believe?
Also, do you agree with Y.B that the last Lubavitcher Rebbe declared himself to be a prophet?
@ none 2.0
Please clarify your position. At what point do you reject humans teaching Divine Will to others.
Are you starting with
1) the Rabbis of the Mishna and Talmud
2) The Prophets
3) Moshe Rebbeinu himselfAre you claiming that every person ought to be the arbitrator of Divine Will for themselves based on their own conscience?
@ none2.0
I never implied that free Will is evil. You misunderstood the point of my posts. To clarify
1) Free Will is very important because it is what enables us to be the agents of what ever moral choices we do make. Because this may be a bit abstract let’s use examples to make it concrete.
Suppose a person, acting on a motivation to do kindness, stops off at the side of the road during a snow storm to help someone with car trouble. Since the helper made a free willed choice we can speak of the helpers act in terms of morality and say that the action was virtuous.
Suppose a person tortures innocent people for fun. Since the torturer made a free willed choice we can speak of the act in terms of morality and say that torturers action was vicious.
Now suppose you would take free will out of the equation and posit that the people in the above examples acted as they did in a way that was totally deterministic, meaning they had no agency in what they did. We would have no grounds to talk about their actions in terms of morality.
So, the point is that while free will is what enables people to make moral choices it is not moral in and of itself.
.@ Sechel
Here is an English translation of a part of Igeres Taimon that is important to the conversation
“prophecy will return to Israel in the year 4976 after Creation (1216 CE). Undoubtedly, the return of prophecy will be a portent of the coming of the anointed one.”
So, are you proposing, per the above that we have had prophecy and have been living in the Messianic Era for the last 800 years now?
No. I don’t think so. You cherry picked a section of Igeres Taimon that suited your purposes.”
But, here is the thing. I am open to the return of Prophecy before Moshiach comes.
Did the last Lubavicher Rebbe openly claim that he was speaking as a Prophet of Hashem? Because, you know, that’s what all the established Prophets did. Then we can move on to the verification process because, unfortunately, lots of none-prophets also did.
@ none2
Free Will is itself a sacred moral? Really? Let’s see. What about a person who chooses to torture innocent people for fun? He is using his Free Will to do this. Does that make it a moral action?
Here is another question. How many Free Will decisions did you make before the age of five? How great of an impact does what happened to you before that age have on the choices you make now?
@ none 2.0
The very sheeple are the ones who do not even recognize that they, and their whole heard, are being lead. All the while they imagine that they are thinking for themselves.
@ aheimishe
It’s either disingenuous or ignorant to quote one side of a nuanced issue then accuse people who disagrees with you of making things up. There where some excellent responses to the OP. You may want to go back and re-read the thread.
@none2
AAQ did give you an example.
Causation is a fun subject. Google David Hume – Causation.
I love how HaKatan consistently names The Satmar Rav, The Brisker Rav, and Rav Elchonon by name and then writes “and all the rest”. This is is no doubt to indulge in the fantasy that all the rest of Gedolei Yisroel agreed in all matters pertaining to the subject under discussion with the 3 Rebbonim mentioned.
The OP wrote:
“the majority of women are not intellectual prepared to be taught”
There are 2 distinct points:
1) A minority of women do have the motivation and ability to learn. Those women should learn, and always have.
2) Should there be a curriculum in schools teaching women aspects of Torah that are not needed for practical observance (including da’os). Here the answer is no.
However, the crux of the question is what is, in fact, needed for fully engaged, practical observance. This will depend on the level of literacy women have in a particular time and place. One thing is certain. There is no virtue in perpetuating ignorance.
@ AAQ
“As gemora says in Kiddushin ~ 29 – a father not teaching his son a profession is teaching him robbery (listut).”
Do you think that all the Rebbeim who advocate Kollel somehow missed this Chazal? Also, why are you cherry picking? The Tana Kama over there holds that teaching iska is sufficient. R’ Nehorai at the end of the tractate says he sets aside every trade and doesn’t teach his son anything except for Torah. R’ Moshe holds that Today that we have Kollelim, learning in Kollel is a profession.
@ UJM
You wrote: “You’re splitting hairs when it is directly and implicitly the same thing. Chazal’s criticism of Bruria for her mocking of the truth about Nashim Da’atan Kalos”
The gap between the hairs I spit is the size of an elephant.
The criticism was for mocking the general principal. There have been many, many exceptions.You misquoted Chazal based on a personal boich svara. I called you on it. But that’s ok. Carry on.
To be clear, I am
@ ZSK
You wrote: So Charedim can insist that the RZ Tzibbur follow their Rabbonim, their minhagim, etc.? No, two can play that game.
I never said anything of the sort. My position has consistently been that each community should follow it’s own Rebbeim. I’m not aware of any Chareidi Gedolim insisting that that all shailos should be directed to them.
You wrote that “two can play that game”. From my point of view it’s a dumb game. Why would anyone want to play? It’s not emes.
It is for the above reason that I don’t understand where you are coming from with the whole takana thing. No one today has the authority to issue at takana that would be binding on all communities.
I think you know this already.
As far as Chareidim believing they are the only ones who represent authentic Judaism. No doubt there are chareidim who think that way. There are also DL chevra who think this way. This is unfortunate and demonstrates a paucity in self awareness.
@AAQ
You wrote: “Anyone who resolves in his heart to engage in Torah and not to do work and to be supported by charity, this person profanes the Name and disgraces the Torah, for it is forbidden to benefit from the words of Torah. Any Torah that is not accompanied by work leads to sin and in the end he will steal from people”
I see you are a fan of the Rambam. Couple of things to be aware of:
1) The Rambam himself was supported by his brother until he died at sea. He clearly didn’t equate receiving support from willful patrons of Torah scholarship with “being supported by charity”.
2) The Rambam writes that not only the tribe of Levi but anyone who commits sincerely to Limid HaTorah will have their parnassa provided for by Hashem.
3) Rav Moshe wrote that once the Kollel system was established, joining a Kollel is a form of gainful employment (albeit not one suited for the persute of material wealth).Yeshivos and Kollelim are essential to ANY community (Litvish, D”L, Chasidish, Ashkenazi, Sefardi) that wishes to thrive Judaically.
@ UJM
You wrote: “Bruria failed because she was a woman who engaged in learning that a woman is not permitted to learn. Her suicide serves as an example and reminder of what can happen to a woman who learns what she is not permitted to”
Where did you get the above explanation? Not Chazal. Chazal said that Buria mocked a general statement made by the Chochomim that Nashim Da’atan Kalos. THAT was the catalyst for the subsequent tragic events. Where do you see that Buria was criticized for learning? Nowhere does it say that general principals don’t have exceptions. The opposite is, in fact, the case. Posters in this thread and others have brought ample precedent from Poskim and L’Maaseh that women (on a case by case basis) are permitted to learn Talmud.
Thats some chutzpa for you to criticize Buria for something Chazal didn’t.
A strong emphasis on reverence certainly can be taken too far and cause people to idealize those who they revere. This is not deification and sainthood. Idealize and Idolize are not synonyms.
Next
I don’t understand why you think it’s reasonable that the Chareidi tzibur should, pitom, disregard the instructions of their Rebbeim and follow psakim of R”Z Rebbeim. I am speaking here about your contention that everyone should join the IDF. What does the absence of a formal, binding takana have to do with this?
@ AAQ
How many lawyers and carpenters in the real world do you know that support their family by working part time?
@ ZSK
You wrote: “Charedim have deified Rabbis (see Artscroll hagiographies as blatant examples of that) to the point of the Charedi community replacing the Torah with something else entirely.”
It’s not good form to paint the entire chareidi community as “deifying rabbis”. HaRav Aaron Feldman devotes a chapter in his book “Eye of The Storm” to the problem with how Gedolim Biographies are presented. Publishers will publish what sells and what sells is larger then life. the larger, the better. That being said don’t confuse reverence for deification.
You wrote: An actual Bais Din is required for a Gezera or Takana, not what currently occurs in Israel or the Aguda, and certainly not what gets slapped on Pashkevilim)
What would be an example of such a Gezera or Takana enacted by recognized Gedolei Yisroel?
Pashkevilim are dvarim betailim, usually not worth the paper they are written on. Unfortunately, today the means to manipulate public opinion has gone far beyond pashkavilim.
You wrote: bad actors – also known as Askanim – who provide partial or false information for their own personal gain.
No doubt there are, and always were such askanim, There is a reason that כל העסקים בצרכי צבור באמונה get a special bracha. There are also askanim who are selflessly devoted to khal work and are worthy of the above bracha.
You wrote: This is a known thing, and it is unfortunately only the Charedim who don’t see it or the harm it brings.I lament this state of affairs where I am forced to question what Rabbonim say…”
The chareidim I know see it quite clearly. The solution is to speak to Rabbonim directly.
“Without minimizing what the Charedi community has done during the last war, more needed to be done, and that more is specifically serving in the army and giving the RZ community a chance to rest.”
In this people will follow the psakim of their respective Rebbeim. That is as it should be.
@ UJM
Does it feel good to pound a straw man? Its the intellectual equivalent of pounding on a punching bag. You can win every fight without having to go toe to toe with an actual opponent.
@ SR
You and HaKatan seem to have quite a bit in common. But I guess that’s inevitable. Ze L’Umat Ze…
@ Sechel83
You wrote: “i imagine rabbi feldman learned a lot of gemara, but when it comes to these topics, Rabbi Freidman learned much more.”
The key word here is “imagine” How do you know who learned more about “these topics”?
Do you really believe that there are no competent detractors and that if we would all just learn Chabbad Chassidus with an open mind then we would surely see the light? Are you serious?
Next
You wrote: “i already said to say there is no schar veonesh today is like saying no nevuah”
Are you saying there is no schar today either? Probably not, you mean just no onesh, right? So, there would be infinite reward for our Torah and Mitzvos, but no negative consequences for out failures? Is that the position you are seeking to defend?
@ Nope
You wrote: “how many arguments against them in this thread and all of the previous ones – which I’m not about to go and start hoovering up and analyzing – are based on similar misrepresentations, misunderstandings, or (as above) flat-out lies”
No doubt a great many arguments are based on misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and lies. However that does not detract from a substantial number of well reasoned arguments and objections.
@ Chachmas Nashim and @ Yeshivaman613
Excellent posts. I would also add that R’ Itzel’s daughter, the Natziv’s wife also learned Gemara (including Yerushalmi).
@ Coffee Addict
The Prisha, R’ Itzel also knew the Rambam and Sh”A.
@ AAQ
I enjoy reading your thought-out and well articulated posts. You may already know this but I think it’s important to reiterate that what R’ Shteinzeltz’s wrote about the Tana R’ Eliezer where strongly condemned. For good reason.
@ Nope
שהוא יתברך עלת הכל, ואי אפשר לעלה שלא ישפיע, וכאילו הוא דבר מחויב…
You translated: “He is the Cause of everything, and it is *impossible* (emphasis mine) for a cause to not give forth; it is as though he is *required to do so…
Are you suggesting, per the above, that the Maharal supports a reading of Rashi where anthropomorphic terms referring to Hashem should be taken literally?
@ Qwerty
I also read Dr. Bergers book. It’s a good book. More people should read it.
@ qwerty613
I don’t have anti-Rebbe zingers. Coffee Addict’s joke trades on the asinine belief, held by a number of Lubavicher’s that the previous Lubavicher Rebbe was / is Moshiach. However
1) You will not find in my posts anything disrespectful towards the last Lubavicher Rebbe. Also,
2) It is the policy of the major kashrus organization to rely on Mashichist mashgichim. Even HaRav Aaron Feldman, who holds not to rely on them doesn’t claim it’s because they are avdei A”Z or founders of a new religion.@ coffee addict
That last post was classic
@ sechel83
If we are going to to go down this path let’s at least do it right.
Anyone can make true predictions some of the time.
It would be more relevant to ask did the Rebbe make predictions that turned out to be unambiguously false?
@ SomeJew
On this thread, I am trying to understand UJM’s point of view. He seems to say Pikuach Nefish would permit joining the IDF and that Zionism is not A”Z / Kfira. I am well aware what you have written about this. But, UJM, objected when I attributed your point of view to him. This could be because:
1) He doesn’t agree with you that Zionism is A”Z / Kfira, or
2) He does agree with you that Zionism is A”Z / Kfira bit since he hasn’t written that openly he objected to me attributing this view to him without evidenceHoping that he will clarify his position on this so we proceed with the conversation.
I did respond to one of your posts in the Lubavich / Zionism thread. That conversation got detailed into other unrelated matters.
@ UJM
Please try to keep your eye on the ball
The OP claimed that “All Jews are Forever Forbidden from the IDF”
I responded that there have been prominent poskim who instructed people to join
You posted that their reasoning is Pekuach Nefish (like eating trief and Chiilul Shabbos)
You also took umbrage with me saying that you hold Z is Kfira / A”Z
Based on the above, my understanding is:
1) you disagree with the OP and hold that in cases of Pekuach Nefish one should join the IDF
2) you disagree with the contention of HaKatan and SomeJew that Z has a halachic status of Kfira / A”ZThere are other ways to understand what you said as well. So, please clarify
@ somejew
“The core of zionism is heretical “self-determination” as THEY define it: a rejection of reliance on Hashem both in the gulis (galus) as well as to take us out of gulis.”
Since you obviously know that hishtadlus does not contradict reliance on Hashem. What your argument boils down cam be summed up in the following 4 steps:
1) Premise A. The 3 oaths preclude hishtadlus in establishing and perpetuating a Jewish State before the coming om Meshiach
2) Premise B. That the 3 oaths are binding today is obvious
3) Premise C. The rejection of what is obvious per the Torah is a Kfira.
4) Conclusion. Zionism, including R”Z, advocates hishtadlus in establishing and perpetuating a Jewish State before the coming om Meshiach therefore per the above it is Kfira.Note that for the Conclusion to be correct all 3 Premises must be true.
Let’s go one by one
Regarding Premise A. It is true that this was the Position of a number of Gedolei Yisroel. It has also been amply demonstrated in multiple posts that this is subject to dispute by other Gedolei Yisroel. YB and others have cited the Avnei Nezer. I have mentioned in a number of posts that HaRav Gedaliah Nadel personally enlisted in the IDF to fight during the 6 day war. Those are 2 of many solid examples.
Regarding Premise B. Your interaction with many posters on this forum should have provided you with more then sufficient evidence that what you claim to be obvious is not, in fact, obvious to most people. it is true that something which is clear to Rebbeim need not be obvious to the laity. That won’t help you here because this contention rests on the fact that a person who is making an error in a matter regarding which there is a consensus among the Rebbeim can ask them. That does not apply in our case since there is no consensus on this matter among Rebbeim.
That brings us to the heart of the matter. the position you advocate NECCESITATES that the opinion of the Satmar Rav actually represents the consensus of Gedolei Yisroel (past and present). You seem to understand that quite well which is why you opened a thread claiming that there is no detractors from the Satmar Rav’s opinion among Gedolei Yisroel. This is simply not the case.
Regarding Premise C. This premise is correct. I specifically worded it as a did since (as you have pointed out multiple times and I agree) we are discussing if a belief is Kfira not if people holding that belief are kofrim.
Since neither Premise A or Premise B has been established the Conclusion is not warranted