Last week you received a letter from an irate man decrying an article you wrote about a boy who went to Europe to collect for his sisters chasuna, only to have the money stolen as 'deeply upsetting' and 'tragic'. But it was not the plight of the protagonist that he found so 'tragic'. It's the fact that the boy's father was learning and not providing for his family, contrary to the maamar Chazal that one should even take on a humiliating trade to earn a living, rather than rely on charity.
The fact that many Poskim qualify that maamar Chazal as someone not learning Torah, (as for one learning Torah there are numerous mamarrei Chazal that espouse supporting Talmidei Chachamim from Tzedakah) is irrelevant to the author. He seems to have done zero research into it as a halachic topic. Because in fact, the Halacha and defying Chazal is not actually what irks him. If it were, he would stop in horror at the numerous disregards and ignorance for not only Chazal but also Mitzvos Doiraysa that so define the community to which he belongs. He would at least express some pause at the fact that its educational system seems absolutely broken. He himself has absolutely no issue with posting Reformist 'halachic articles' which attempt to permit issurim that are possibly D'oraysa. What infuriates him is the same thing the infuriates Avigdor Lieberman and all the other haters of Torah. They see zero value in Torah study and absolutely loath those who devote their lives towards it, especially when they don't contribute to secular Israeli society. They can't wrap their minds how people can live such ascetic lives, devoid of gashmius and shmutz and yearning only 'fluffy spirituality'. Luckily, he conveniently was able to find a purported maamar Chazal to hide behind. But other than perhaps himself, he is fooling absolutely no one.
"The fact that many Poskim qualify that maamar Chazal as someone not learning Torah, (as for one learning Torah there are numerous mamarrei Chazal that espouse supporting Talmidei Chachamim from Tzedakah) is irrelevant to the author. He seems to have done zero research into it as a halachic topic." Actually, I've done plenty of research into it as a halachic topic, and I've even written a study of it - https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/economics-of-torah-scholarship-in. Please quote sources for all the Poskim and Maamarei Chazal to which you refer.
Dude, it's literally a Beis Yosef (יו"ד סי' רמו ד"ה ומ"ש כל המשים). The Biur Halacha (סי' רלא ד"ה בכל) brings down from the Dvar Shmuel that if by working one will be an Am Ha'aretz by going to work, then it does not apply. As does the Igros Moshe ( יו"ד ח"ב סי' קטז). The famous Tashbetz (סי קמ"ז) that we pasken like (יו"ד סי' רמו) literally addresses this very Gemara in Psachim! Seriously. Look it up.
If you are not an am ha'aretz, that's beautiful. I'm very proud of you. Maybe you can even attribute it to your Charedi upbringing. The fact of the matter is, the ignorance in Torah in the community to which you belong is astounding. I'm talking about ignorance about Mitzvos and Issurei D'oraysa. So I just find it amusing that you strut around like a proud peacock seeking to draw attention to relatively minor imperfections in the society of Jews attempting to follow the Torah as well as possible, while you guys are at large clueless about the most basic things.
Responding is great. But resorting to insults at the end of you comment proves nothing and accomplishes nothing. It might make you feel good but it turns off the opposing side.
I wonder if such insults are עובר on being מלבין פני חבירו ברבים.
I'm well aware of these sources, I discussed them in my monograph and blog posts, and they do not at all undermine Chazal's directives in the way that you claim. And in September, I pointed out that even Tashbetz, who is presented by Ramoh as a "yesh omrim" at the most pro-taking money end of the spectrum, STILL says that it is better for them to spend less time learning and work to support themselves rather than rely on the community. And you claimed that "Es la'asos" means that we don't follow Tashbetz on this. So the bottom line is that you believe that the current circumstances justify being even more lenient than the most lenient views on this topic, and I do not. But don't claim that you are accurately reflecting the view of Chazal and the Rishonim.
Uh, no. That's not what happened. First of all, I pointed out to you then that you MISREAD the Ramoh. The machlokes quoted in the Ramoh is whether one being supported in learning is permitted to take enough money to live comfortably, or whether he must suffice with the bare minimum. It is not whether or not we pasken like the Tashbetz. If this is not clear enough to you from the Ramoh, look up his primary sources, as well as the Poskim which quote him such as the Aruch Hashulchan.
You then made up that the reason why the Beis Yosef and Tashbetz ruled that it is permitted to take money for learning (as opposed to teaching) is because they were talking about 'eras where it was so rare to have someone dedicated to Torah that it was Eis Laasos to bend the rules and support them'. This was completely fabricated by YOU and YOU only. I countered that first of all, if you would ACTUALLY READ THE TASHBETZ INSIDE, you will see that he quotes dozens of maamarei chazal which imply that supporting Torah scholars is a notable and worthy cause. And I added, that even following your fabricated caveat, nowadays is also an Es La'asos, just look at how unsuccessful other societies are that don't have a Kollel system.
Being that you don't seem able or willing to actually look up all the ma'amarei chazal quoted by the Tashbetz, IYH tonight when I have a chance I will copy and paste as many as possible, with their English translations, from Sefaria.
Hey! Here's a good joke! Natan, who seems incapable of reading a Ramoh correctly or looking up a Tashbetz which he knows exists to find his sources, knows this topic better than R' Moshe Feinstein!
Ok, doc. I'm back. There are so many ma'amarei Chazal that support the concept of providing financial assistance to those sitting in learning that I did not know where to start. Below is a random sampling.
Rebbi Jonah gave his tithes to Rebbi Aḥa bar Ulla, not because he was a Cohen but because he studied Torah. What is the reason? (2Chr. 31:4) “He said to the people, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to give the part of the Cohanim and the Levites, so they should be strong in the Torah of the Eternal.”
On a similar note, you say: The verse states: “To love the Lord your God, to hearken to His voice, and to cleave to Him” (Deuteronomy 30:20). But is it possible for a person to cleave to the Divine Presence? Rather, anyone who marries his daughter to a Torah scholar, and one who conducts business on behalf of Torah scholars, and one who utilizes his wealth to benefit Torah scholars with his property, the verse ascribes him credit as though he is cleaving to the Divine Presence.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who once brought to Rav Anan a basket of small fish [gildanei devei gilei]. He said to him: What are you doing here? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you. Rav Anan would not accept the basket from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to your actions.
The man said to him: I do not need the Master’s judgment. However, let the Master accept my gift anyway, so that the Master does not prevent me from presenting first fruits. What does the mitzva of first fruits have to with this situation? As it is taught in a baraita: “And there came a man came from Ba’al Shalisha, and he brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of corn in his sack” (II Kings 4:42). But did Elisha, the recipient of these gifts, eat first fruits? After all, he was not a priest. Rather, this verse comes to tell you: Whoever brings a gift to a Torah scholar, it is as though he has presented first fruits. This visitor to Rav Anan wished to fulfill this mitzva.
By the way, I just want to put it out here for the record, that everyone agrees that the most optimal level is for someone learning to be self-sufficient. However, if he is UNABLE TO BE SO and to learn, the Poskim rule that it is permitted to learn and be supported than to not learn and remain an am Ha'aretz. The Biur Halacha brings down from the Dvar Shmuel that it is optimal to do so (and that is the implication of the Ramoh in 246 as well).
So if someone goes to cheder, yeshivah high school, yeshiva gedolah, then divides his day between learning Torah and studying/working, he is an am ha'aretz?
The Gemara asks a question with regard to the above verse: Why should there be smoke in a canopy? Rabbi Ḥanina said: It is because anyone whose eyes are narrow, i.e., is stingy, toward Torah scholars in this world, his eyes fill with smoke in the World-to-Come.
(For this one Sefaria did not have a translation, so the translation is my own)
Rabi Tarfon gave Rabi Akiva six hundred kantarin of silver and told him to purchase a field in order that they can toil in Torah and profit off the field. Rabi Akiva took the money and distributed it to scribes and teachers and to those toiling in Torah. After a few days Rabi Tarfon approached Rabi Akiva and asked him, ‘did you purchase the field that I told you’? Rabi Akiva responded, “Yes”. Rabi Tarfon asked, “Can you show it to me?” Rabi Akiva responded “Yes”. He brought him and showed him the scribes and teachers and those toiling in Torah. Rabi Tarfon asked, “do people give out their money for nothing? Where is the sales contract on this?” Rabi Akiva responded, It is with King David, as it says, “He distributed his wealth to the poor and his righteousness stood him forever.
This was just a drop in the bucket and their were many, many more. It’s astounding how one can so confidently proclaim the most profound ignorance in public!
It is told that a certain scribe went to Jerusalem each year, and the people of Jerusalem knew that he was an outstanding student of the law. They said to him: “Take these fifty pieces of gold and dwell among us.” “I have only a single vine,” he replied, “but it is more valuable than anything you can offer me, for it provides me with three crops a year from which I gather six hundred barrels of grapes. The first crop produces three hundred barrels, the second, two hundred, and the third, one hundred; and I am able to sell them at a considerable profit.” What did he do? He left them and returned to his vine. He received this reward because he poured the wine as on offering upon the altar. If he had failed to pour the wine, the good things of the world would have been withheld from him.
Rabbi Yose ben Kisma said: Once I was walking by the way when a man met me, and greeted me and I greeted him. He said to me, “Rabbi, where are you from?” I said to him, “I am from a great city of sages and scribes”. He said to me, “Rabbi, would you consider living with us in our place? I would give you a thousand thousand denarii of gold, and precious stones and pearls.” I said to him: “My son, even if you were to give me all the silver and gold, precious stones and pearls that are in the world, I would not dwell anywhere except in a place of Torah; for when a man passes away there accompany him neither gold nor silver, nor precious stones nor pearls, but Torah and good deeds alone, as it is said, “When you walk it will lead you. When you lie down it will watch over you; and when you are awake it will talk with you” (Proverbs 6:22). “When you walk it will lead you” in this world. “When you lie down it will watch over you” in the grave; “And when you are awake it will talk with you” in the world to come. And thus it is written in the book of Psalms by David, king of Israel, “I prefer the teaching You proclaimed to thousands of pieces of gold and silver” (Psalms 119:72), And it says: “Mine is the silver, and mine the gold, says the Lord of Hosts” (Haggai 2:8).
The Tashbetz (s. 142) points out that R. Yosi ben Kisma seemingly had no issue taking money to be supported, the only reason why he turned the man down is because he did not want to live in his city.
Once a passenger aboard a ship, on which many were traveling, was asked by them: “What kind of merchandise do you possess?” He answered: “My merchandise is superior to yours.” Whereupon they searched the boat to examine his merchandise. When they were unable to find anything that belonged to him, they began to scoff at him. Shortly after, pirates attacked them, and carried the men and everything they found in the ship away. After some time they reached port, and all the men were brought to the city, without food to eat or clothes to wear. What did the one passenger do? He went to the schoolhouse, where he sat and studied. When the residents of the town discovered that he was a learned student of the law, they treated him with the greatest respect. They made a collection in his behalf, as was customary and proper for a man of distinction. The important men of the community would walk at his right and his left, accompanying him wherever he went. When the merchants saw what was happening, they went to him and pleaded: “Please, we beg you to help us, speak in our behalf to the men of the city, for you know what has happened to us and how much we lost in the ship. We implore you to ask them to give us some bread, that we may live and not die of starvation.” He answered: “Did I not tell you that my merchandise was better than yours? Yours has been destroyed, but mine endures.” Therefore it says: For I give you good doctrine.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Who is the Torah scholar for whom the inhabitants of his city are commanded to perform his labor for him? This is one who sets his own matters aside and engages in matters of Heaven. It is therefore fitting for the community to support him. And that applies only to exerting themselves to provide him with his bread, as it is appropriate that they sustain him.
(Deut. 14:22:) “You shall surely tithe.” Tithe ('sr) so that you may become rich ('shr),35In Hebrew letters the roots translated “tithe” and “become rich” are identical. before you are in want (hsr).36PRK 10:10. [Here is] a hint (remez) for those who sail the seas to take out one tenth for those who labor in Torah.
--
חולין דף קלד ע"ב
ההוא שקא דדינרי דאתא לבי מדרשא קדים רבי אמי וזכה בהן.
§ In relation to the discussion of a case where the owner of a field takes gifts left for the poor for himself, the Gemara relates that there was a certain sack of dinars that was brought to the study hall to provide financial assistance for the students. Rabbi Ami rushed and acquired them.
Rabbi Yoḥanan raised a contradiction: It is written: “And you shall make for yourself a wooden Ark” (Deuteronomy 10:1), implying that Moses alone was commanded to construct the Ark; and it is written: “And they shall make an Ark of acacia wood” (Exodus 25:10), implying that the Jewish people were all commanded to be involved in its construction. The apparent resolution to this contradiction is that although only Moses actually constructed the Ark, everyone was required to support the endeavor. So too, from here it is derived with regard to a Torah scholar that the members of his town should perform his work for him to support him and allow him to focus on his studies, since it is also the town’s responsibility to enable him to study.
This seems to be a topic near and dear to your heart, yet you seem to have done astonishingly little research about it from primary sources. I suggest you take a sabbatical from your museum and research it well instead of continuously showing off your ignorance in public.
All your sources are either about doing business with a Torah scholar, or supporting teachers, or the voluntary support of select students. They are not about a entire section of society saying that they will learn and demanding that everyone else support them and not having the ability to support themselves.
HUH?? Of the more than a dozen sources that I quoted, ONE of them is talking about doing business with a Talmid Chochom, NONE of them say that they are talking only about teachers and are explicitly referring to Torah learners. 'Voluntary support of select students' is entirely a fabrication! Some of the sources say that it is an obligation, and 'select students' is your own projection.
I agree that the Kollel phenomenon in Israel today is at almost an unprecedented scale in history. But to claim that Chazal were not referring to such a scenario is conjecturing. It's absurd to say that an individual Torah scholar being supported in Kollel is defying Chazal, as you ignorantly claimed in this post, when Chazal explicitly encourage supporting Torah learners!
As I've said in the past, I do agree that Kollelim should not be taking money from an anti-religious government and secularists, but that is more from a pragmatic standpoint. To the best of my knowledge, there is no reference anywhere in Chazal about their standpoint on the issue so it's impossible to claim that doing so is 'defying Chazal'!
Look. You know full well that Chazal decry Talmud Torah that isn't accompanied by work, and that they insist that a father has to teach his son a trade. And I'm pretty sure that you're not going to say that these statements are wrong. So you'll claim that even though these seem like blanket statements, they don't apply to special select individuals. Fine. And the various sources that you cite here are talking about special select individuals. But you can't seriously claim that the vast majority of the charedi world are special select individuals.
If you honestly don't know the difference between 'a chavrusa or daf yomi' and full time dedication to learning, how about retiring your rights to have an opinion? You obviously are quite unlearned in the Sugya, so leave it to those who do know something about it.
Your comment makes less sense than the question 'why do we need doctors when we have Hatzala drivers?'.
I'm very familiar with the Sugya. B"h I have a successful job from which I can support a family and I learn several nights a week. I have no problem if you want to be a fill time learner, just don't come to me for handouts and don't ask the government for help. If there is a parent, in-law or wife that wants to support their son/in-law or husband then they are a very special person.
Mecharker and Happygolucky I would like to appeal to you and everyone who contributes to the blog to do so with respect for those who oppose your view.
If each side would recognise or at least be דן לכף זכות that those he disagrees with, make their arguments לשם שמים then this should lead to
Attacking the argument
Not attacking any individual
Admitting when those you disagree with make some valid points worthy of consideration
No argument is black and white.
Don’t we learn from the plague which killled 24,000 of Rabbi Akiva’s students that Hashem is not happy with even the highest quality of Talmud Torah if if comes at the expense of ahavas chinam - unconditional love (or at least respect) for those one disagrees with?
Sam, you write so poignantly and in fact have a good point. But I would advise you to point this out to Natan. He (as well as his sycophants who love his blog) seem to feel that it is Ok to obsessively attack and besmirch an entire segment of the population with nasty and ad hominem attacks (although admittedly masked behind superb and witty writing skills) and then react in utter bafflement when people come and fight back. See my comment here, item 1:
Then why do you assume that Slifkin hates learning? The point he is making that if someone wants to have 10 children, they should be able to support them without relying on tzedakah. The story is definitely tragic, but it never should have happened.
Why do I assume he hates Torah? I am not assuming; he tells us that loudly and clearly almost daily! That is the THEME of this blog. He complains about people pursuing 'fluffy spirituality'. He complains about people learning Torah as not contributing to society. He doesn't seem to give a d@mn about a society that is extremely ignorant about Torah and Mitzvos and transgress on the most basic prohibitions, with nearly 30% - 40% of their kids leaving the path, because they are contributing to the GDP.
This sums up the absurdity of the 'extreme' anti charedi postion. Is Charedi society flawed? Obviously, as is any social system in that has ever existed, or will exist until moshiach. Is it by far the best at ,for all intents and purposes, sustaining Judaism. YES. Nothing even comes close.
Its totally fine to have individual gripes, and trust me most people even within that world do. But in the big picture religious Judaism would likely have died out if it wasnt for Charedi society.
Yaacov, unfortunately Substack only allows me to give you one like, but I would give you ten. You're eloquent and on the ball, as always.
Let me say it again: I am not saying that Charedi society is perfect. Nothing is perfect. But Natan's vicious and obsessive assault against Charedi society, when all they are trying to do is fulfill the Torah as best as possible is obviously not coming from a 'holy' place, which he sometimes likes to pretend in posts such as these. If he were so concerned about Judaism, he would at least dedicate SOME occasional posts to the severe shortcomings of MODOX society. But not a word. And then he wants us to believe that he is just trying to be helpful and constructive and not because he bears a tremendous grudge or has psychological damage. Sheesh! Gimme a break!
From what I've read, he has an issue with the learners that are a burden on society. You don't get extra olam habah for being a mooch. If you can learn full time and support how ever many kids you want without being dependent on the government or tzedakah....kol hakavod. I'm not saying that the modox community doesn't have its share of problems, but don't ignore the chareidi community's problems mainly the issue of so many of them being reliant on handouts
'You don't get extra olam habah for being a mooch.'
Where did you get that from? Netflix? SNL? Your boich? I admit that people should NOT be taking money from secularists or the government to be supported in learning, but there is nothing wrong with being supported in learning from other Jews who are willing and eager to support it.
You haven’t read enough then. Not that you’re missing anything worthwhile on this topic. He has an issue with people being supported to learn Torah period.
True, I think we all agree it’s important to work and that’s part of the curse of man. But you really need to read the Mishpacha story (if you haven’t yet) and then the article. https://mishpacha.com/payback-time-3/
When I read the Mishpacha story I walked away with a feeling of wow, look what a sibling was willing to do for his sister, and look at the power of forgiveness.
R’ Slifkin calls it a “tragic story,” and harps on the one fact that the family was poor because the father didn’t have proper education, etc.
He calls it defying Chazal. The only one defying Chazal is R’ Slifkin who is clearly writing, angrily, to bring out a point that we all already agree on.
If everyone agrees you have to try to work hard to make money why is he writing his article other than to stir his own pot and cast shadows on naive Jews who haven’t read the actual article he is attacking.
This is a manipulative and dangerous way of writing.
R’ Natan Slifkin, I ask for your honesty and integrity, that’s all.
Haredi society (not individual haredim, to be clear) care more about their community norms than they do about the law. It doesn't matter how many times we show them Abot or Mishne Torah, it's always "eis laasois!" And the reason these excuses and pilpulim fly is because they're never even taught in yeshiva/kollel how to analyze a sughya properly and come out knowing a law with actual brevity, instead it's all pilpul to get desired outcomes.
This is one of the most insightful comments ever on this blog. And it applies in all directions and not just to chareidim. It’s cuts through and beyond the back and forth bickering, and focuses on a real lack that exists - the lack of real analysis (whether by choice or by limit of ability).
I would qualify that (at least from my own perspective) I don’t know if it’s “because they’re never taught in yeshiva/kollel how” or for some other reason, but the lack of analysis is a real issue.
From my perspective there is a lack of analysis and understanding of the halakhic legal system in all modern branches of Judaism (meaning the sects that have a name - modern orthodox, haredi, conservative etc). With haredi society I think there's an added element why it's like this, and that's because a lot of the leadership (with exceptions) want control over the people, whether consciously or not, so in order to keep the members of haredi society "in line" they don't teach them the law in a "halakhah pesuqah" type of way but rather put more effort into "shlugging up tosfos" but that doesn't actually help the people come out with a knowledge of the law
Lol, you demonstrated above that you don't know the first thing about the sugya, you think you're the first person who discovered the Mishna in Avos, and now you are pontificating about "lack of analysis and understanding" and indulging in conspiracy theories. You're not even wrong, just clueless. Reminds me of this guy:
Point out what I'm missing. Haza"l said what they said and only more recent sources have really tried to pilpul out of it. I didn't even say specifically this sughya, but have you ever asked most yeshiva guys for a bottom line halakha?
Also it's not a conspiracy theory I'm pointing something out about haredi society, which I have enough experience actually having lived in to know
Your talk of "pilpul out if it" just reveals ignorance about learning in general. You clearly didn't engage in the sugya at all, you didn't look at the Rishonim or Poskim or any of the statements that Mecharker cited above, you just have your "simple understanding of Hazal" that you think you discovered five minutes ago, and you dismiss the halachic analysis of all the Poskim as "pilpul". I don't know if yeshiva guys can tell me "bottom line halacha", but I definitely know that amei ha'aretz can't tell me any halacha at all, whether "bottom line" or not. And yet they persist in doing so!
About your conspiracy theory, you clearly don't have enough experience living in chareidi society. I live in it now, and I can tell you that it is simply a paranoid conspiracy theory, equal to the most deranged lizardmen/covid 19 vax microchip/ New World Order theories.
I read all his sources and they do not refer to people getting paid to learn torah. They are about helping out talmidei hakhamim even financially, but this does not negate the they cannot get paid for learning/teaching torah. The idea that it refers to kollel was just read into there. One of the sources even says to do business with a talmid hakham!
And Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: God said to Moses, “Ascend to me on the mountain and be there, and I will give you the stone tablets and the Torah and the mitzva that I have written that you may teach them” (Exodus 24:12), ... “That you may teach them” refers to the Talmud/Gemara, which explains the Mishna. These explanations are the foundation for the rulings of practical halakha.
Rashi:
זה תלמוד/גמרא. סברת טעמי המשניות שממנו יוצאה הוראה. אבל המורים הוראה מן המשנה נקראו מבלי העולם במס' סוטה (דף כב.):
-Refers to the Talmud/Gemara: the explanation of the reasons of the Mishnayot out of which come the rulings of practical halakha. But those who rule practical halakha from the Mishna itself are called 'those who wear out of the world' in tractate Sota.
Rambam writes about his Mishna Torah that it is written in the style of Mishna, not of scripture or Talmud.
וכן ראיתי שלא אחברהו בלשון ספרי הנבואה לפי שהלשון ההוא קצר בידינו מהשלים עניני הדינים בו. וכן לא אחברהו בלשון התלמוד לפי שלא יבינוהו מאנשי אומתנו כי אם יחידים, ומלות ממנו זרות וקשות אפילו לבקיאים בתלמוד, אבל אחברהו בלשון המשנה כדי שיקל זה לרוב
The take home of this is that for practical Halacha the way to go isn't to suffice with Mishna and Mishna Torah. It's necessary to study the Gemara, which won't always leave you with the smoothest reading of the Mishna. Some explain that this is because Mishna is only a memory device, the logic and reasoning you have to do with the methods of the Gemara. The Mishna is so to speak anticipating that you'll do so before deciding the practical Halacha.
So Aboth is good as Talmud Torah, the greatest Mitzva. But for practical Halacha, you have to factor others things also.
The Gemara itself leaves much unexplained, many difficulties. These are resolved by the Poskim. At that point we arrive at the Halacha.
What's wrong with "Et Laasot"? There's such a thing. We need to look at the success of the alternate systems. If they don't pass the bar, then the "baseless" Et Laasot will have to be the only way to go.
I don't know where you were taught the Sugya. I'd love to learn a Sugya properly.
Et laasot is only really a modern reasoning. Haza"l used it in one place as the reasoning for why the Mishna was compiled. I dont even think there's a concrete issur in "writing down an oral tradition". Even if there were others, that reasoning would only be able to be applied by the beth din hagadol, not modern day rabbis who can't overturn rulings of the BDG. Et laasot as it is applied there and other places has no legal basis
Take a look at the Encyclopedia Talmudis entry הוראת שעה. You'll find extensive sources that it's much more than a 'modern reasoning'.
I can't answer for what your neighbors told you, but in our context Et Laasot is as good a reason as any to conduct ourselves not in accordance with Rambam's view.
Reb Nosson's understanding of Chazal is perfectly correct. Learning Torah is the most important pursuit a Jew is obligated to endeavor in. The vast amount of Torah studied today by so many people is a direct result of the development of Yeshivos and Kollelim. I learned full time in Kollel for 10 years. I did so because I married a woman that wanted only that and she carefully prepared for that type of life by being EDUCATED to make a good parnasa for our family. In addition, there are Kollels (usually out of town) that pay a living wage. Lastly, there are benefactors who adhere to Yissachar Zevulun protocol. That is how it should be done in accordance to Torah as per Chazal. The reasoning is simple, none who follow those various means to sit and learn becomes an a priori beggar, which Chazal decried. Tzedaka funds for poor people was meant for people who are either disabled, suffered untimely tragedies, suffered overwhelming immediate needs, etc. Chazal taught, it is better to skin roadkill in public than for one to make himself a burden on the public dole. For a major tzadik or Talmid Chochom that people want to support because of his Torah, that is not "tzedaka" that is hachzakas Talmud Torah. Hachnasas Kallah, also a great mitzva, is for a girl who is orphaned (in one way or another).
So does Yad Eliezer provide support to kollel men who choose not to work, thereby perpetuating the poverty? Or do they screen to who they give food, so that it goes to people who legitimately need help due to external factors?
The Abba is described as being from the old timers of Jerusalem whose world was only Torah. He's not describing the general community he lives in which he grew up seeing growing all around him with house extentions.
Unfortunately, the charedi community is upside down. There is a strong emphasis on bein adam l'makom over bein adam lechavairo. Strong focus on the individual growth and their daled amos and no concern for the rest of the klal. Almost no appreciation or recognition of the significance of living eretz yisrael.
Its like a half baked cake. There are three components to Judaism. The Torah, the Am, and the Land. Unfortunately the charedim are taught that only one of the three is relevant. So its not just that they perceive being poor and learning torah all day as ideal thats a problem, its actually a lot more and runs deeper to a whole slew of issues.
Not disagreeing with everything you wrote but......Chareidim are actually very strong in bein Adam Lchaveiro. Just go and see how a family is treated by their chareidi neighbors when they have a baby. Look how many gemachim their are.
I am not referring to the amount they do for their own community and neighbors or what they do as part of chessed organizations. I know that they help out one another tremendously. And so does the modern orthodox community. My comment about bein adam l'chaveir refers to the rest of klal yisrael. If you notice Haredim live in mostly only charedi communities with little to no secular jews. Secular or even modern orthodox arent welcome in their communities. They dont preach to one another about going out and having ahavas yisroel with all jews. Their primary focus is their own torah oriented community with little concern for the rest of klal yisrael. If they truly cared about bein adam lchaveiro they would be out helping and supporting all types of Jews (again, i am not referring to chessed organizations. I am referring to the individual charedi families etc.) They would be in the front lines supporting soldiers etc. Imagine a modern orthodox jew collecting tzedeka for his yeshiva in their neighborhood. How many would give tzedaka to this person? And yet plenty of satmar and other charedim come to modern orthodox communities and they do get money for their yeshivas.
Right before the recent elections I ran into a charedi couple in Ramat bet shemesh. They asked me why I am not voting for Gimmel. After all they asked, arent I concerned about the level of torah commitment for klal yisrael? What about the chilul shabbos in Tel aviv? Shouldnt I be concerned about that? I replied that its important to think about the needs of the nation as a whole with many people who arent observant than just focus on Torah observance. I also added that I am more concerned about the ongoing Chilul Hashem that goes on in Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet than the chilul shabbos that happens in Tel aviv.
This finding would seem to relate to the question that keeps popping up regarding: why should donations to synagogues churches etc. be tax deductible, after all in a large proportion of cases the donors are parishioners at those institutions and the major beneficiaries of the funds that they donated?
But if religious commitment also has other benefits to society as a whole, such as by instilling a greater likelihood that those same beneficiaries will go out and do more volunteering or other activity to benefit society in other ways, then it would be a good trade off.
You should go out read how the secular wielded state power—exponentially greater than anything the Chareidim ever got their hands on—to compel their religious Chaveiro’s “bein Adam l’Makom” to be just like their own.
IIRC, the religious never forced even one secular person to be inducted into the religious camp. While the secular did so to the religious countless times.
Poignant to me is the young holocaust survivor whose parents went to heaven through the chimneys in Auschwitz. He was left with only one memento of his parents, his father's T'fillin. But his secular counselor threw it into fire. It too ascended to heaven where it met up with the father, while the boy was left alone with nothing. Bein Adam Lachaveiro personified.
I am not familiar with that story. While I don’t doubt that it is possible to have occurred in the manner in which you stated, I have asked for sources/citations in the past and have been often ignored (as if substantiating alleged factual statements were not important to have a real discussion).
Nevertheless, I certainly agree with the sentiment that Religious coercion and compulsion through wielding the power of the State in ANY direction (secular on religious; religious on secular; anything else) leads to resentment and is problematic at least for that reason and potentially for other reasons as well.
I will try to look for it. Maybe it's in the biography of Jacob Griffel, in the end. Or maybe in one of the books about survivors staying in the Maabarot.
Just as a general observation, when a person—any person, of any mindset, I believe—reads an episode that is consistent with his culture's paradigms, he doesn't find it remarkable enough to make note of it so as to be bring it out when needed. Sometime later he encounters someone with different paradigm and tosses it on the table. The job isn't complete if he'd like that other person to accept it. Indeed, I didn't do a complete job, as it was only icing on the cake for what I was trying to say. But hey! on a more central point we agree. Nice.
Over here we're talking about someone from a community where everyone around him is having money but not his family and his father is doing what he is doing as a part of the old timers of select individuals.
Really? The MODOX are better in bein adam lechavairo? That must be why they have blogs dedicated towards hate and proportionately WAY less chessed and charity in their communities than Chareidi communities! I would rephrase what you said. Their bein adam lechavairo may or may not be somewhat passible (how many MODOX really give a tenth of their money to charity?), and their bein adam l'makom is severely lacking!
By the way, the three components of Judaism that Chazal talk about are Torah, Avodah and Gemilus Chasadim, not 'The Torah, the Am, and the Land'. I admit what you mentioned are integral parts of Judaism, but not sure who decided to cast them as the 'three components' of Judaism, contrary to Chazal's take. That's the problem with a movement whose general population has an extremely limited knowledge of Torah and of Judaic history from primary Judaic sources. When they read a couple of English books written in the 20th century by post-modern thinkers or hear a Shabbat drasha or two, they ignorantly begin to formulate their entire concept of Judaism on that! כעיוור באפלה
You obviously dont know much about the modern orthodox community. There is plenty of bein adam l'chaveiro and bein adam l'makom. But unfortunately many only see through thier charedi lenses and cant recognize this.
Both the Torah and Eretz Yisrael were given to bnei yisrael as a 'yerusha'. They are tied together and therefore and integral part of yiddishkeit. Focusing only on Torah but not on Eretz Yisrael is half baked. Both are equally important.
As for Bein adam l'chaviero in charedi communites, I am not referring to the amount they do for their own community and neighbors or what they do as part of chessed organizations. I know that they help out one another tremendously. And so does the modern orthodox community. My comment about bein adam l'chaveir refers to the rest of klal yisrael. If you notice Haredim live in mostly only charedi communities with little to no secular jews. Secular or even modern orthodox arent welcome in their communities. They dont preach to one another about going out and having ahavas yisroel with all jews. Their primary focus is their own torah oriented community with little concern for the rest of klal yisrael. If they truly cared about bein adam lchaveiro they would be out helping and supporting all types of Jews (again, i am not referring to chessed organizations. I am referring to the individual charedi families etc.) They would be in the front lines supporting soldiers etc. Imagine a modern orthodox jew collecting tzedeka for his yeshiva in their neighborhood. How many would give tzedaka to this person? And yet plenty of satmar and other charedim come to modern orthodox communities and they do get money for their yeshivas.
Right before the recent elections I ran into a charedi couple in Ramat bet shemesh. They asked me why I am not voting for Gimmel. After all they asked, arent I concerned about the level of torah commitment for klal yisrael? What about the chilul shabbos in Tel aviv? Shouldnt I be concerned about that? I replied that its important to think about the needs of the nation as a whole with many people who arent observant than just focus on Torah observance. I also added that I am more concerned about the ongoing Chilul Hashem that goes on in Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet than the chilul shabbos that happens in Tel aviv.
We need to be concerned about all of klal yisrael and not just those who are like us or live in our communities. We are no longer in the shtetl. We are finally back in Eretz Yisrael after thousands of years of exile. Its time to work together to build our nation and look out for one another instead of just keeping our head down in torah and only focusing on our daled amos.
Good letter but I'm sure you know that the chances of them printing it is exactly zero.
Dear Editor,
Last week you received a letter from an irate man decrying an article you wrote about a boy who went to Europe to collect for his sisters chasuna, only to have the money stolen as 'deeply upsetting' and 'tragic'. But it was not the plight of the protagonist that he found so 'tragic'. It's the fact that the boy's father was learning and not providing for his family, contrary to the maamar Chazal that one should even take on a humiliating trade to earn a living, rather than rely on charity.
The fact that many Poskim qualify that maamar Chazal as someone not learning Torah, (as for one learning Torah there are numerous mamarrei Chazal that espouse supporting Talmidei Chachamim from Tzedakah) is irrelevant to the author. He seems to have done zero research into it as a halachic topic. Because in fact, the Halacha and defying Chazal is not actually what irks him. If it were, he would stop in horror at the numerous disregards and ignorance for not only Chazal but also Mitzvos Doiraysa that so define the community to which he belongs. He would at least express some pause at the fact that its educational system seems absolutely broken. He himself has absolutely no issue with posting Reformist 'halachic articles' which attempt to permit issurim that are possibly D'oraysa. What infuriates him is the same thing the infuriates Avigdor Lieberman and all the other haters of Torah. They see zero value in Torah study and absolutely loath those who devote their lives towards it, especially when they don't contribute to secular Israeli society. They can't wrap their minds how people can live such ascetic lives, devoid of gashmius and shmutz and yearning only 'fluffy spirituality'. Luckily, he conveniently was able to find a purported maamar Chazal to hide behind. But other than perhaps himself, he is fooling absolutely no one.
"The fact that many Poskim qualify that maamar Chazal as someone not learning Torah, (as for one learning Torah there are numerous mamarrei Chazal that espouse supporting Talmidei Chachamim from Tzedakah) is irrelevant to the author. He seems to have done zero research into it as a halachic topic." Actually, I've done plenty of research into it as a halachic topic, and I've even written a study of it - https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/economics-of-torah-scholarship-in. Please quote sources for all the Poskim and Maamarei Chazal to which you refer.
Dude, it's literally a Beis Yosef (יו"ד סי' רמו ד"ה ומ"ש כל המשים). The Biur Halacha (סי' רלא ד"ה בכל) brings down from the Dvar Shmuel that if by working one will be an Am Ha'aretz by going to work, then it does not apply. As does the Igros Moshe ( יו"ד ח"ב סי' קטז). The famous Tashbetz (סי קמ"ז) that we pasken like (יו"ד סי' רמו) literally addresses this very Gemara in Psachim! Seriously. Look it up.
We already fought about this in September http://rationalistjudaism.blogspot.com/2022/09/tzedakah-good-bad-and-ugly.html?showComment=1664076790344&m=0#c1114899727397286675 and I brought you a bunch of Maamarei Chazal that support taking Tzedaka for learning. There are many more Maamarei Chazal about it brought down by the Tashbetz in that series of Teshuvos which support Talmidei Chachomim taking Tzedaka for learning Torah. Forgot already?
Oh, and I've got news for you: Not being in kollel for twenty years does not equate to being an am haa-aretz.
If you are not an am ha'aretz, that's beautiful. I'm very proud of you. Maybe you can even attribute it to your Charedi upbringing. The fact of the matter is, the ignorance in Torah in the community to which you belong is astounding. I'm talking about ignorance about Mitzvos and Issurei D'oraysa. So I just find it amusing that you strut around like a proud peacock seeking to draw attention to relatively minor imperfections in the society of Jews attempting to follow the Torah as well as possible, while you guys are at large clueless about the most basic things.
Responding is great. But resorting to insults at the end of you comment proves nothing and accomplishes nothing. It might make you feel good but it turns off the opposing side.
I wonder if such insults are עובר on being מלבין פני חבירו ברבים.
I'm well aware of these sources, I discussed them in my monograph and blog posts, and they do not at all undermine Chazal's directives in the way that you claim. And in September, I pointed out that even Tashbetz, who is presented by Ramoh as a "yesh omrim" at the most pro-taking money end of the spectrum, STILL says that it is better for them to spend less time learning and work to support themselves rather than rely on the community. And you claimed that "Es la'asos" means that we don't follow Tashbetz on this. So the bottom line is that you believe that the current circumstances justify being even more lenient than the most lenient views on this topic, and I do not. But don't claim that you are accurately reflecting the view of Chazal and the Rishonim.
Uh, no. That's not what happened. First of all, I pointed out to you then that you MISREAD the Ramoh. The machlokes quoted in the Ramoh is whether one being supported in learning is permitted to take enough money to live comfortably, or whether he must suffice with the bare minimum. It is not whether or not we pasken like the Tashbetz. If this is not clear enough to you from the Ramoh, look up his primary sources, as well as the Poskim which quote him such as the Aruch Hashulchan.
You then made up that the reason why the Beis Yosef and Tashbetz ruled that it is permitted to take money for learning (as opposed to teaching) is because they were talking about 'eras where it was so rare to have someone dedicated to Torah that it was Eis Laasos to bend the rules and support them'. This was completely fabricated by YOU and YOU only. I countered that first of all, if you would ACTUALLY READ THE TASHBETZ INSIDE, you will see that he quotes dozens of maamarei chazal which imply that supporting Torah scholars is a notable and worthy cause. And I added, that even following your fabricated caveat, nowadays is also an Es La'asos, just look at how unsuccessful other societies are that don't have a Kollel system.
Being that you don't seem able or willing to actually look up all the ma'amarei chazal quoted by the Tashbetz, IYH tonight when I have a chance I will copy and paste as many as possible, with their English translations, from Sefaria.
UPDATE 11:46 PM
Did not have a chance yet, IYH tomorrow.
Hey! Here's a good joke! Natan, who seems incapable of reading a Ramoh correctly or looking up a Tashbetz which he knows exists to find his sources, knows this topic better than R' Moshe Feinstein!
https://rationalistjudaism.blogspot.com/2013/05/is-it-better-to-be-supported-in.html?showComment=1367945934924&m=1#c5351836011491589833
"Lone Flame - What makes you so sure that Rav Moshe studied the topic more thoroughly than me? Have you studied my monograph?"
(Thanks to my RJ baki friend for bringing this comment to my attention)
But Mecharker, did you study his MONOGRAPH??????
1/5
Ok, doc. I'm back. There are so many ma'amarei Chazal that support the concept of providing financial assistance to those sitting in learning that I did not know where to start. Below is a random sampling.
ירולשמי מעשר שני פ"ה מ"ג ה"ז
רִבִּי יוֹנָה יְהַב מַעְשְׂרוֹי לְרִבִּי אָחָא בַּר עוּלָּא לֹא מִשׁוּם דַּהֲוָה כֹהֵן אֶלָּא מִשׁוּם דַּהֲוָה לָעֵי בְּאוֹרַיתָא. מַה טָעֲמָא וַיֹּאמֶר לָעָם לְיוֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלֵם לָתֵת מְנָת הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם לְמַעַן יֶחֶזְקוּ בְּתוֹרַת י֙י.
Rebbi Jonah gave his tithes to Rebbi Aḥa bar Ulla, not because he was a Cohen but because he studied Torah. What is the reason? (2Chr. 31:4) “He said to the people, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to give the part of the Cohanim and the Levites, so they should be strong in the Torah of the Eternal.”
--
מסכת כתובות דף
כַּיּוֹצֵא בַּדָּבָר אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: ״לְאַהֲבָה אֶת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ וּלְדׇבְקָה בוֹ״, וְכִי אֶפְשָׁר לָאָדָם לִידַּבֵּק בַּשְּׁכִינָה? אֶלָּא: כׇּל הַמַּשִּׂיא בִּתּוֹ לְתַלְמִיד חָכָם, וְהָעוֹשֶׂה פְּרַקְמַטְיָא לְתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים, וְהַמְהַנֶּה תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים מִנְּכָסָיו — מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ מִדַּבֵּק בַּשְּׁכִינָה.
On a similar note, you say: The verse states: “To love the Lord your God, to hearken to His voice, and to cleave to Him” (Deuteronomy 30:20). But is it possible for a person to cleave to the Divine Presence? Rather, anyone who marries his daughter to a Torah scholar, and one who conducts business on behalf of Torah scholars, and one who utilizes his wealth to benefit Torah scholars with his property, the verse ascribes him credit as though he is cleaving to the Divine Presence.
--
מסכת כתובות דף קה ע"ב
רַב עָנָן אַיְיתִי לֵיהּ הַהוּא גַּבְרָא כַּנְתָּא דְגִילְדָּנֵי דְּבֵי גִילֵי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאי עֲבִידְתָּיךְ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דִּינָא אִית לִי. לָא קַבֵּיל מִינֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פְּסִילְנָא לָךְ לְדִינָא.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who once brought to Rav Anan a basket of small fish [gildanei devei gilei]. He said to him: What are you doing here? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you. Rav Anan would not accept the basket from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to your actions.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דִּינָא דְּמָר לָא בָּעֵינָא, קַבּוֹלֵי לְקַבֵּיל מָר דְּלָא לִמְנְעַן מָר מֵאַקְרוֹבֵי בִּכּוּרִים. דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְאִישׁ בָּא מִבַּעַל שָׁלִישָׁה וַיָּבֵא לְאִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים לֶחֶם בִּכּוּרִים עֶשְׂרִים לֶחֶם שְׂעוֹרִים וְכַרְמֶל בְּצִקְלוֹנוֹ״. וְכִי אֱלִישָׁע אוֹכֵל בִּכּוּרִים הֲוָה? אֶלָּא לוֹמַר לָךְ: כׇּל הַמֵּבִיא דּוֹרוֹן לְתַלְמִיד חָכָם — כְּאִילּוּ מַקְרִיב בִּכּוּרִים.
The man said to him: I do not need the Master’s judgment. However, let the Master accept my gift anyway, so that the Master does not prevent me from presenting first fruits. What does the mitzva of first fruits have to with this situation? As it is taught in a baraita: “And there came a man came from Ba’al Shalisha, and he brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of corn in his sack” (II Kings 4:42). But did Elisha, the recipient of these gifts, eat first fruits? After all, he was not a priest. Rather, this verse comes to tell you: Whoever brings a gift to a Torah scholar, it is as though he has presented first fruits. This visitor to Rav Anan wished to fulfill this mitzva.
Yes, maybe for a tiny elite few - not for half the country! That has never been the case in entire history of the Jewish people.
These proofs are nonsense, as it is referring to someone who is Toraso umnaso. Think Rav Chaim zt'l and that league.
Check out my post about this fight on my blog!
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/natan-seems-completely-unaware-of
By the way, I just want to put it out here for the record, that everyone agrees that the most optimal level is for someone learning to be self-sufficient. However, if he is UNABLE TO BE SO and to learn, the Poskim rule that it is permitted to learn and be supported than to not learn and remain an am Ha'aretz. The Biur Halacha brings down from the Dvar Shmuel that it is optimal to do so (and that is the implication of the Ramoh in 246 as well).
So if someone goes to cheder, yeshivah high school, yeshiva gedolah, then divides his day between learning Torah and studying/working, he is an am ha'aretz?
5/5
מסכת בבא בתרא דף עה ע"א
עָשָׁן בַּחוּפָּה לָמָּה אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא שֶׁכׇּל מִי שֶׁעֵינָיו צָרוֹת בְּתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה מִתְמַלְּאוֹת עֵינָיו עָשָׁן לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא.
The Gemara asks a question with regard to the above verse: Why should there be smoke in a canopy? Rabbi Ḥanina said: It is because anyone whose eyes are narrow, i.e., is stingy, toward Torah scholars in this world, his eyes fill with smoke in the World-to-Come.
--
במדבר רבה בהר לד טז
וּבָנוּ מִמְּךָ חָרְבוֹת עוֹלָם מוֹסְדֵי דוֹר וָדוֹר תְּקוֹמֵם (ישעיה נח, יב), רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן יְהַב לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא שִׁית מְאָה קַנְטָרִין דִּכְסַף, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֲזֵיל זְבֵין לָן חָדָא אוּסְיָא דְּנֶהֱווֹן לָעְיָין בְּאוֹרַיְיתָא וּמִתְפַּרְנְסִין מִנָּהּ. נָסַב יַתְהוֹן וּפַלֵּיג יַתְהוֹן לְסַפְרַיָיא וּלְמַתְנַיָיא וּלְאִלֵּין דְּלָעְיָין בְּאוֹרַיְיתָא, לְבָתַר יוֹמִין קָם עִמֵּיהּ אֲמַר לֵיהּ זְבַנְתְּ לָן לְהַהִיא אוּסְיָא דַּאֲמָרֵית לָךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִית בָּךְ מֶחֱמֵי לָהּ לִי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין, נָסָאתֵיהּ וְחָמָאֵי לֵיהּ סַפְרַיָּא וּמַתְנַיָּא וּלְאִלֵּין דְּלָעְיָין בְּאוֹרַיְתָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִית בַּר נָשׁ יָהֵב מַגָּן, אַפּוֹכֵי דִידֵיהּ הָן הִיא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ גַּבֵּי דָּוִד מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל, דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ (תהלים קיב, ט): פִּזַּר נָתַן לָאֶבְיוֹנִים צִדְקָתוֹ עֹמֶדֶת לָעַד.
(For this one Sefaria did not have a translation, so the translation is my own)
Rabi Tarfon gave Rabi Akiva six hundred kantarin of silver and told him to purchase a field in order that they can toil in Torah and profit off the field. Rabi Akiva took the money and distributed it to scribes and teachers and to those toiling in Torah. After a few days Rabi Tarfon approached Rabi Akiva and asked him, ‘did you purchase the field that I told you’? Rabi Akiva responded, “Yes”. Rabi Tarfon asked, “Can you show it to me?” Rabi Akiva responded “Yes”. He brought him and showed him the scribes and teachers and those toiling in Torah. Rabi Tarfon asked, “do people give out their money for nothing? Where is the sales contract on this?” Rabi Akiva responded, It is with King David, as it says, “He distributed his wealth to the poor and his righteousness stood him forever.
This was just a drop in the bucket and their were many, many more. It’s astounding how one can so confidently proclaim the most profound ignorance in public!
4/5
מדרש תנחומא תצוה יג
מַעֲשֶׂה בְּסוֹפֵר אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה עוֹלֶה לִירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּכָל שָׁנָה, הִכִּירוּהוּ בְּנֵי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהָיָה אָדָם גָּדוֹל בַּתּוֹרָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: טֹל מִמֶּנּוּ חֲמִשִּׁים זְהוּבִים וְשֵׁב לְךָ אֶצְלֵנוּ. אָמַר לָהֶם: יֵשׁ לִי גֶּפֶן אַחַת וְהִיא חֲבִיבָה עָלַי מִכָּל מַה שֶּׁאַתֶּם נוֹתְנִים, שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה לִי שָׁלֹשׁ רְפוּאוֹת בְּכָל שָׁנָה, וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת חָבִיּוֹת עוֹשָׂה לִי בְּכָל שָׁנָה. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה הִיא עוֹשָׂה שְׁלֹש מֵאוֹת, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה עוֹשָׂה מָאתַיִם, וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית הִיא עוֹשָׂה מֵאָה, וַאֲנִי מוֹכְרָם בְּדָמִים הַרְבֵּה. מֶה עָשָׂה? הִנִּיחָם וְיָרַד לוֹ. וְכָל הַשֶּׁבַח הַזֶּה בִּזְכוּת נִסּוּךְ הַיַּיִן שֶׁהָיָה קָרֵב עַל גַּבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ. בָּטֵל נִסּוּךְ הַיַּיִן, וְנִמְנְעוּ כָּל טוֹבוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם.
It is told that a certain scribe went to Jerusalem each year, and the people of Jerusalem knew that he was an outstanding student of the law. They said to him: “Take these fifty pieces of gold and dwell among us.” “I have only a single vine,” he replied, “but it is more valuable than anything you can offer me, for it provides me with three crops a year from which I gather six hundred barrels of grapes. The first crop produces three hundred barrels, the second, two hundred, and the third, one hundred; and I am able to sell them at a considerable profit.” What did he do? He left them and returned to his vine. He received this reward because he poured the wine as on offering upon the altar. If he had failed to pour the wine, the good things of the world would have been withheld from him.
--
פרקי אבות פרק ו משנה ט
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶן קִסְמָא, פַּעַם אַחַת הָיִיתִי מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וּפָגַע בִּי אָדָם אֶחָד, וְנָתַן לִי שָׁלוֹם, וְהֶחֱזַרְתִּי לוֹ שָׁלוֹם. אָמַר לִי, רַבִּי, מֵאֵיזֶה מָקוֹם אַתָּה. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, מֵעִיר גְּדוֹלָה שֶׁל חֲכָמִים וְשֶׁל סוֹפְרִים אָנִי. אָמַר לִי, רַבִּי, רְצוֹנְךָ שֶׁתָּדוּר עִמָּנוּ בִמְקוֹמֵנוּ, וַאֲנִי אֶתֵּן לְךָ אֶלֶף אֲלָפִים דִּינְרֵי זָהָב וַאֲבָנִים טוֹבוֹת וּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, בְּנִי, אִם אַתָּה נוֹתֵן לִי כָל כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב וַאֲבָנִים טוֹבוֹת וּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם, אֵינִי דָר אֶלָּא בִמְקוֹם תּוֹרָה. וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת פְּטִירָתוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם אֵין מְלַוִּין לוֹ לָאָדָם לֹא כֶסֶף וְלֹא זָהָב וְלֹא אֲבָנִים טוֹבוֹת וּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת, אֶלָּא תוֹרָה וּמַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים בִּלְבַד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי ו) בְּהִתְהַלֶּכְךָ תַּנְחֶה אֹתָךְ, בְּשָׁכְבְּךָ תִּשְׁמֹר עָלֶיךָ, וַהֲקִיצוֹתָ הִיא תְשִׂיחֶךָ. בְּהִתְהַלֶּכְךָ תַּנְחֶה אֹתָךְ, בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, בְּשָׁכְבְּךָ תִּשְׁמֹר עָלֶיךָ, בַּקֶּבֶר, וַהֲקִיצוֹתָ הִיא תְשִׂיחֶךָ, לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. וְכֵן כָּתוּב בְּסֵפֶר תְּהִלִּים עַל יְדֵי דָוִד מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל (תהלים קיט), טוֹב לִי תוֹרַת פִּיךָ מֵאַלְפֵי זָהָב וָכָסֶף. וְאוֹמֵר (חגי ב) לִי הַכֶּסֶף וְלִי הַזָּהָב אָמַר ה' צְבָאוֹת:
Rabbi Yose ben Kisma said: Once I was walking by the way when a man met me, and greeted me and I greeted him. He said to me, “Rabbi, where are you from?” I said to him, “I am from a great city of sages and scribes”. He said to me, “Rabbi, would you consider living with us in our place? I would give you a thousand thousand denarii of gold, and precious stones and pearls.” I said to him: “My son, even if you were to give me all the silver and gold, precious stones and pearls that are in the world, I would not dwell anywhere except in a place of Torah; for when a man passes away there accompany him neither gold nor silver, nor precious stones nor pearls, but Torah and good deeds alone, as it is said, “When you walk it will lead you. When you lie down it will watch over you; and when you are awake it will talk with you” (Proverbs 6:22). “When you walk it will lead you” in this world. “When you lie down it will watch over you” in the grave; “And when you are awake it will talk with you” in the world to come. And thus it is written in the book of Psalms by David, king of Israel, “I prefer the teaching You proclaimed to thousands of pieces of gold and silver” (Psalms 119:72), And it says: “Mine is the silver, and mine the gold, says the Lord of Hosts” (Haggai 2:8).
The Tashbetz (s. 142) points out that R. Yosi ben Kisma seemingly had no issue taking money to be supported, the only reason why he turned the man down is because he did not want to live in his city.
3/5
מדרש תנחומא תרומה ב
מַעֲשֶׂה בְּחָבֵר אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה בִּסְפִינָה עִם פְּרַקְמָטוֹטִין הַרְבֵּה, הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים לְאוֹתוֹ חָבֵר הֵיכָן פְּרַקְמַטְיָא שֶׁלָּךְ? הָיָה אוֹמֵר לָהֶם: פְּרַקְמַטְיָא שֶׁלִּי גְּדוֹלָה מִשֶּׁלָּכֶם. בָּדְקוּ בַּסְּפִינָה לֹא מָצְאוּ לוֹ כְּלוּם, הִתְחִילוּ שׂוֹחֲקִים עָלָיו. נָפְלוּ עֲלֵיהֶם לִסְטִים בַּיָּם, שָׁלְלוּ וְנָטְלוּ כָּל מַה שֶּׁנִּמְצָא בַּסְּפִינָה. יָצְאוּ לַיַּבָּשָׁה וְנִכְנְסוּ לַמְּדִינָה, לֹא הָיָה לָהֶם לֹא לֶחֶם לֶאֱכֹל וְלֹא כְּסוּת לִלְבֹּשׁ. מֶה עָשָׂה אוֹתוֹ חָבֵר? נִכְנַס לְבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ יָשַׁב וְדָרַשׁ. עָמְדוּ בְּנֵי הַמְּדִינָה כְּשֶׁרָאוּ שֶׁהוּא בֶּן תּוֹרָה מְרֻבֶּה, נָהֲגוּ בּוֹ כָּבוֹד גָּדוֹל וְעָשׂוּ לוֹ פְּסִיקָתוֹ כַּהֹגֶן וְכָרָאוּי בִּגְדֻלָּה וּבְכָבוֹד. הִתְחִילוּ גְּדוֹלֵי הַקָּהָל לֵילֵךְ מִימִינוֹ וּמִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ וּלְלַוּוֹת אוֹתוֹ. כְּשֶׁרָאוּ הַפְּרַקְמָטוֹטִין כָּךְ, בָּאוּ אֶצְלוֹ וּפִיְּסוּ מִמֶּנּוּ וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ: בְּבַקָּשָׁה מִמְּךָ, עֲשֵׂה עִמָּנוּ טוֹבָה וְלַמֵּד עָלֵינוּ זְכוּת לִפְנֵי בְּנֵי הָעִיר, שֶׁאַתָּה יוֹדֵעַ מֶה הָיִינוּ וּמָה אִבַּדְנוּ בַּסְּפִינָה. בְּבַקָּשָׁה מִמְּךָ עֲשֵׂה עִמָּנוּ חֶסֶד, דַּבֵּר לָהֶם אֲפִלּוּ עַל הַפְּרוּסָה שֶׁיִּנָּתֵן לְתוֹךְ פִּינוּ וְנִחְיֶה וְלֹא נָמוּת בָּרָעָב. אָמַר לָהֶם: הֲלֹא אָמַרְתִּי אֲלֵיכֶם, שֶׁפְּרַקְמַטְיָא שֶׁלִּי גְּדוֹלָה מִשֶּׁלָּכֶם, שֶׁלָּכֶם אָבַד וְשֶׁלִּי קַיֶּמֶת. הֱוֵי: כִּי לֶקַח טוֹב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם.
Once a passenger aboard a ship, on which many were traveling, was asked by them: “What kind of merchandise do you possess?” He answered: “My merchandise is superior to yours.” Whereupon they searched the boat to examine his merchandise. When they were unable to find anything that belonged to him, they began to scoff at him. Shortly after, pirates attacked them, and carried the men and everything they found in the ship away. After some time they reached port, and all the men were brought to the city, without food to eat or clothes to wear. What did the one passenger do? He went to the schoolhouse, where he sat and studied. When the residents of the town discovered that he was a learned student of the law, they treated him with the greatest respect. They made a collection in his behalf, as was customary and proper for a man of distinction. The important men of the community would walk at his right and his left, accompanying him wherever he went. When the merchants saw what was happening, they went to him and pleaded: “Please, we beg you to help us, speak in our behalf to the men of the city, for you know what has happened to us and how much we lost in the ship. We implore you to ask them to give us some bread, that we may live and not die of starvation.” He answered: “Did I not tell you that my merchandise was better than yours? Yours has been destroyed, but mine endures.” Therefore it says: For I give you good doctrine.
2/5
מסכת שבת דף קיד ע"א
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵיזֶהוּ תַּלְמִיד חָכָם שֶׁבְּנֵי עִירוֹ מְצֻוִּוין לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ מְלַאכְתּוֹ — זֶה שֶׁמַּנִּיחַ חֶפְצוֹ וְעוֹסֵק בְּחֶפְצֵי שָׁמַיִם. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי לְמִיטְרַח בְּרִיפְתֵּיהּ.
And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Who is the Torah scholar for whom the inhabitants of his city are commanded to perform his labor for him? This is one who sets his own matters aside and engages in matters of Heaven. It is therefore fitting for the community to support him. And that applies only to exerting themselves to provide him with his bread, as it is appropriate that they sustain him.
--
מדרש תנחומא סוף פרשת ראה
עַשֵּׂר תְּעַשֵּׂר. עַשֵּׂר, בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁתִּתְעַשֵּׁר. עַשֵּׂר, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְחַסֵּר. רֶמֶז לְמִפְרְשֵׁי יַמִּים, לְהַפְרִישׁ אֶחָד מִן עֲשָׂרָה לַעֲמֵלֵי תּוֹרָה.
(Deut. 14:22:) “You shall surely tithe.” Tithe ('sr) so that you may become rich ('shr),35In Hebrew letters the roots translated “tithe” and “become rich” are identical. before you are in want (hsr).36PRK 10:10. [Here is] a hint (remez) for those who sail the seas to take out one tenth for those who labor in Torah.
--
חולין דף קלד ע"ב
ההוא שקא דדינרי דאתא לבי מדרשא קדים רבי אמי וזכה בהן.
§ In relation to the discussion of a case where the owner of a field takes gifts left for the poor for himself, the Gemara relates that there was a certain sack of dinars that was brought to the study hall to provide financial assistance for the students. Rabbi Ami rushed and acquired them.
--
מסכת יומא דף עב ע"ב
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן רָמֵי. כְּתִיב: ״וְעָשִׂיתָ לְּךָ אֲרוֹן עֵץ״, וּכְתִיב: ״וְעָשׂוּ אֲרוֹן עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים״, מִכָּאן לְתַלְמִיד חָכָם, שֶׁבְּנֵי עִירוֹ מְצֻוִּוין לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ מְלַאכְתּוֹ.
Rabbi Yoḥanan raised a contradiction: It is written: “And you shall make for yourself a wooden Ark” (Deuteronomy 10:1), implying that Moses alone was commanded to construct the Ark; and it is written: “And they shall make an Ark of acacia wood” (Exodus 25:10), implying that the Jewish people were all commanded to be involved in its construction. The apparent resolution to this contradiction is that although only Moses actually constructed the Ark, everyone was required to support the endeavor. So too, from here it is derived with regard to a Torah scholar that the members of his town should perform his work for him to support him and allow him to focus on his studies, since it is also the town’s responsibility to enable him to study.
This seems to be a topic near and dear to your heart, yet you seem to have done astonishingly little research about it from primary sources. I suggest you take a sabbatical from your museum and research it well instead of continuously showing off your ignorance in public.
All your sources are either about doing business with a Torah scholar, or supporting teachers, or the voluntary support of select students. They are not about a entire section of society saying that they will learn and demanding that everyone else support them and not having the ability to support themselves.
HUH?? Of the more than a dozen sources that I quoted, ONE of them is talking about doing business with a Talmid Chochom, NONE of them say that they are talking only about teachers and are explicitly referring to Torah learners. 'Voluntary support of select students' is entirely a fabrication! Some of the sources say that it is an obligation, and 'select students' is your own projection.
I agree that the Kollel phenomenon in Israel today is at almost an unprecedented scale in history. But to claim that Chazal were not referring to such a scenario is conjecturing. It's absurd to say that an individual Torah scholar being supported in Kollel is defying Chazal, as you ignorantly claimed in this post, when Chazal explicitly encourage supporting Torah learners!
As I've said in the past, I do agree that Kollelim should not be taking money from an anti-religious government and secularists, but that is more from a pragmatic standpoint. To the best of my knowledge, there is no reference anywhere in Chazal about their standpoint on the issue so it's impossible to claim that doing so is 'defying Chazal'!
Look. You know full well that Chazal decry Talmud Torah that isn't accompanied by work, and that they insist that a father has to teach his son a trade. And I'm pretty sure that you're not going to say that these statements are wrong. So you'll claim that even though these seem like blanket statements, they don't apply to special select individuals. Fine. And the various sources that you cite here are talking about special select individuals. But you can't seriously claim that the vast majority of the charedi world are special select individuals.
Responding is great. But resorting to insults proves nothing and accomplishes nothing. It might make you feel good but it turns off the opposing side.
I wonder if such insults are עובר on being מלבין פני חבירו ברבים.
An ignorant response from an ignorant person. Many people that have a job also learn on the side. They either have a chavrusa or do daf yomi.
If you honestly don't know the difference between 'a chavrusa or daf yomi' and full time dedication to learning, how about retiring your rights to have an opinion? You obviously are quite unlearned in the Sugya, so leave it to those who do know something about it.
Your comment makes less sense than the question 'why do we need doctors when we have Hatzala drivers?'.
I'm very familiar with the Sugya. B"h I have a successful job from which I can support a family and I learn several nights a week. I have no problem if you want to be a fill time learner, just don't come to me for handouts and don't ask the government for help. If there is a parent, in-law or wife that wants to support their son/in-law or husband then they are a very special person.
You can't even keep a conversation straight.
Your non-sequitur shows that you have not been taught simple logic and straight thinking.
If you can confuse Daf yomi with full time learning, you are ignorant.
Huh? I know that. I also have a job and learn. When did I ever say anything to the contrary??!!
Mecharker and Happygolucky I would like to appeal to you and everyone who contributes to the blog to do so with respect for those who oppose your view.
If each side would recognise or at least be דן לכף זכות that those he disagrees with, make their arguments לשם שמים then this should lead to
Attacking the argument
Not attacking any individual
Admitting when those you disagree with make some valid points worthy of consideration
No argument is black and white.
Don’t we learn from the plague which killled 24,000 of Rabbi Akiva’s students that Hashem is not happy with even the highest quality of Talmud Torah if if comes at the expense of ahavas chinam - unconditional love (or at least respect) for those one disagrees with?
Sam, you write so poignantly and in fact have a good point. But I would advise you to point this out to Natan. He (as well as his sycophants who love his blog) seem to feel that it is Ok to obsessively attack and besmirch an entire segment of the population with nasty and ad hominem attacks (although admittedly masked behind superb and witty writing skills) and then react in utter bafflement when people come and fight back. See my comment here, item 1:
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/on-being-attacked-by-sharks/comment/11972856
Then why do you assume that Slifkin hates learning? The point he is making that if someone wants to have 10 children, they should be able to support them without relying on tzedakah. The story is definitely tragic, but it never should have happened.
Why do I assume he hates Torah? I am not assuming; he tells us that loudly and clearly almost daily! That is the THEME of this blog. He complains about people pursuing 'fluffy spirituality'. He complains about people learning Torah as not contributing to society. He doesn't seem to give a d@mn about a society that is extremely ignorant about Torah and Mitzvos and transgress on the most basic prohibitions, with nearly 30% - 40% of their kids leaving the path, because they are contributing to the GDP.
MODOX Yid indeed.
This sums up the absurdity of the 'extreme' anti charedi postion. Is Charedi society flawed? Obviously, as is any social system in that has ever existed, or will exist until moshiach. Is it by far the best at ,for all intents and purposes, sustaining Judaism. YES. Nothing even comes close.
Its totally fine to have individual gripes, and trust me most people even within that world do. But in the big picture religious Judaism would likely have died out if it wasnt for Charedi society.
Yaacov, unfortunately Substack only allows me to give you one like, but I would give you ten. You're eloquent and on the ball, as always.
Let me say it again: I am not saying that Charedi society is perfect. Nothing is perfect. But Natan's vicious and obsessive assault against Charedi society, when all they are trying to do is fulfill the Torah as best as possible is obviously not coming from a 'holy' place, which he sometimes likes to pretend in posts such as these. If he were so concerned about Judaism, he would at least dedicate SOME occasional posts to the severe shortcomings of MODOX society. But not a word. And then he wants us to believe that he is just trying to be helpful and constructive and not because he bears a tremendous grudge or has psychological damage. Sheesh! Gimme a break!
From what I've read, he has an issue with the learners that are a burden on society. You don't get extra olam habah for being a mooch. If you can learn full time and support how ever many kids you want without being dependent on the government or tzedakah....kol hakavod. I'm not saying that the modox community doesn't have its share of problems, but don't ignore the chareidi community's problems mainly the issue of so many of them being reliant on handouts
'You don't get extra olam habah for being a mooch.'
Where did you get that from? Netflix? SNL? Your boich? I admit that people should NOT be taking money from secularists or the government to be supported in learning, but there is nothing wrong with being supported in learning from other Jews who are willing and eager to support it.
You haven’t read enough then. Not that you’re missing anything worthwhile on this topic. He has an issue with people being supported to learn Torah period.
You must be the new kid on the block. Welcome. This blog is devoted to every gripe possible about every possible thing connected to Charedim.
True, I think we all agree it’s important to work and that’s part of the curse of man. But you really need to read the Mishpacha story (if you haven’t yet) and then the article. https://mishpacha.com/payback-time-3/
When I read the Mishpacha story I walked away with a feeling of wow, look what a sibling was willing to do for his sister, and look at the power of forgiveness.
R’ Slifkin calls it a “tragic story,” and harps on the one fact that the family was poor because the father didn’t have proper education, etc.
He calls it defying Chazal. The only one defying Chazal is R’ Slifkin who is clearly writing, angrily, to bring out a point that we all already agree on.
If everyone agrees you have to try to work hard to make money why is he writing his article other than to stir his own pot and cast shadows on naive Jews who haven’t read the actual article he is attacking.
This is a manipulative and dangerous way of writing.
R’ Natan Slifkin, I ask for your honesty and integrity, that’s all.
Thank you my holy brother
He was being honest. It is not praiseworthy to be a parasite and beg when you could and should earn a living
I like reading the comments 'chronologically'. But when I refresh the page, it switches to 'top first'.
Annoying!
Cheers anyway!
Maybe they’d more likely to print your letter if you were to sign it “Nosson Slifkin”…
You do realize that it is the law right? And that what I said is the simple understanding of what Haza"l said?
Haredi society (not individual haredim, to be clear) care more about their community norms than they do about the law. It doesn't matter how many times we show them Abot or Mishne Torah, it's always "eis laasois!" And the reason these excuses and pilpulim fly is because they're never even taught in yeshiva/kollel how to analyze a sughya properly and come out knowing a law with actual brevity, instead it's all pilpul to get desired outcomes.
Bobby,
This is one of the most insightful comments ever on this blog. And it applies in all directions and not just to chareidim. It’s cuts through and beyond the back and forth bickering, and focuses on a real lack that exists - the lack of real analysis (whether by choice or by limit of ability).
I would qualify that (at least from my own perspective) I don’t know if it’s “because they’re never taught in yeshiva/kollel how” or for some other reason, but the lack of analysis is a real issue.
Thank you for articulating it.
Thank you.
From my perspective there is a lack of analysis and understanding of the halakhic legal system in all modern branches of Judaism (meaning the sects that have a name - modern orthodox, haredi, conservative etc). With haredi society I think there's an added element why it's like this, and that's because a lot of the leadership (with exceptions) want control over the people, whether consciously or not, so in order to keep the members of haredi society "in line" they don't teach them the law in a "halakhah pesuqah" type of way but rather put more effort into "shlugging up tosfos" but that doesn't actually help the people come out with a knowledge of the law
Lol, you demonstrated above that you don't know the first thing about the sugya, you think you're the first person who discovered the Mishna in Avos, and now you are pontificating about "lack of analysis and understanding" and indulging in conspiracy theories. You're not even wrong, just clueless. Reminds me of this guy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/badmathematics/comments/icxqek/mathematician_who_failed_calc_2_decided_to/
Point out what I'm missing. Haza"l said what they said and only more recent sources have really tried to pilpul out of it. I didn't even say specifically this sughya, but have you ever asked most yeshiva guys for a bottom line halakha?
Also it's not a conspiracy theory I'm pointing something out about haredi society, which I have enough experience actually having lived in to know
Your talk of "pilpul out if it" just reveals ignorance about learning in general. You clearly didn't engage in the sugya at all, you didn't look at the Rishonim or Poskim or any of the statements that Mecharker cited above, you just have your "simple understanding of Hazal" that you think you discovered five minutes ago, and you dismiss the halachic analysis of all the Poskim as "pilpul". I don't know if yeshiva guys can tell me "bottom line halacha", but I definitely know that amei ha'aretz can't tell me any halacha at all, whether "bottom line" or not. And yet they persist in doing so!
About your conspiracy theory, you clearly don't have enough experience living in chareidi society. I live in it now, and I can tell you that it is simply a paranoid conspiracy theory, equal to the most deranged lizardmen/covid 19 vax microchip/ New World Order theories.
I read all his sources and they do not refer to people getting paid to learn torah. They are about helping out talmidei hakhamim even financially, but this does not negate the they cannot get paid for learning/teaching torah. The idea that it refers to kollel was just read into there. One of the sources even says to do business with a talmid hakham!
Bobby, you sound like a nice guy who goes out of his way to avoid condemning individual Haredim and/or its entire leadership. I respect you for that. But I refer you to the following Gemara and Rashi https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.5a.3?lang=bi https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Berakhot.5a.3.3?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
וְאָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חָמָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, מַאי דִּכְתִיב ״וְאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת לֻחֹת הָאֶבֶן וְהַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְוָה אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְתִּי לְהוֹרֹתָם״. ..., ״לְהוֹרוֹתָם״ — זֶה תַּלְמוּד/גמרא...
And Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: God said to Moses, “Ascend to me on the mountain and be there, and I will give you the stone tablets and the Torah and the mitzva that I have written that you may teach them” (Exodus 24:12), ... “That you may teach them” refers to the Talmud/Gemara, which explains the Mishna. These explanations are the foundation for the rulings of practical halakha.
Rashi:
זה תלמוד/גמרא. סברת טעמי המשניות שממנו יוצאה הוראה. אבל המורים הוראה מן המשנה נקראו מבלי העולם במס' סוטה (דף כב.):
-Refers to the Talmud/Gemara: the explanation of the reasons of the Mishnayot out of which come the rulings of practical halakha. But those who rule practical halakha from the Mishna itself are called 'those who wear out of the world' in tractate Sota.
Rambam writes about his Mishna Torah that it is written in the style of Mishna, not of scripture or Talmud.
וכן ראיתי שלא אחברהו בלשון ספרי הנבואה לפי שהלשון ההוא קצר בידינו מהשלים עניני הדינים בו. וכן לא אחברהו בלשון התלמוד לפי שלא יבינוהו מאנשי אומתנו כי אם יחידים, ומלות ממנו זרות וקשות אפילו לבקיאים בתלמוד, אבל אחברהו בלשון המשנה כדי שיקל זה לרוב
The take home of this is that for practical Halacha the way to go isn't to suffice with Mishna and Mishna Torah. It's necessary to study the Gemara, which won't always leave you with the smoothest reading of the Mishna. Some explain that this is because Mishna is only a memory device, the logic and reasoning you have to do with the methods of the Gemara. The Mishna is so to speak anticipating that you'll do so before deciding the practical Halacha.
So Aboth is good as Talmud Torah, the greatest Mitzva. But for practical Halacha, you have to factor others things also.
The Gemara itself leaves much unexplained, many difficulties. These are resolved by the Poskim. At that point we arrive at the Halacha.
Best.
What's wrong with "Et Laasot"? There's such a thing. We need to look at the success of the alternate systems. If they don't pass the bar, then the "baseless" Et Laasot will have to be the only way to go.
I don't know where you were taught the Sugya. I'd love to learn a Sugya properly.
Et laasot is only really a modern reasoning. Haza"l used it in one place as the reasoning for why the Mishna was compiled. I dont even think there's a concrete issur in "writing down an oral tradition". Even if there were others, that reasoning would only be able to be applied by the beth din hagadol, not modern day rabbis who can't overturn rulings of the BDG. Et laasot as it is applied there and other places has no legal basis
Take a look at the Encyclopedia Talmudis entry הוראת שעה. You'll find extensive sources that it's much more than a 'modern reasoning'.
I can't answer for what your neighbors told you, but in our context Et Laasot is as good a reason as any to conduct ourselves not in accordance with Rambam's view.
Reb Nosson's understanding of Chazal is perfectly correct. Learning Torah is the most important pursuit a Jew is obligated to endeavor in. The vast amount of Torah studied today by so many people is a direct result of the development of Yeshivos and Kollelim. I learned full time in Kollel for 10 years. I did so because I married a woman that wanted only that and she carefully prepared for that type of life by being EDUCATED to make a good parnasa for our family. In addition, there are Kollels (usually out of town) that pay a living wage. Lastly, there are benefactors who adhere to Yissachar Zevulun protocol. That is how it should be done in accordance to Torah as per Chazal. The reasoning is simple, none who follow those various means to sit and learn becomes an a priori beggar, which Chazal decried. Tzedaka funds for poor people was meant for people who are either disabled, suffered untimely tragedies, suffered overwhelming immediate needs, etc. Chazal taught, it is better to skin roadkill in public than for one to make himself a burden on the public dole. For a major tzadik or Talmid Chochom that people want to support because of his Torah, that is not "tzedaka" that is hachzakas Talmud Torah. Hachnasas Kallah, also a great mitzva, is for a girl who is orphaned (in one way or another).
> food packages from Yad Eliezer
So does Yad Eliezer provide support to kollel men who choose not to work, thereby perpetuating the poverty? Or do they screen to who they give food, so that it goes to people who legitimately need help due to external factors?
See my post here very similar idea. https://jewishworker.blogspot.com/2011/09/entitled-to-tzedaka.html
https://mishpacha.com/payback-time-3/
The Abba is described as being from the old timers of Jerusalem whose world was only Torah. He's not describing the general community he lives in which he grew up seeing growing all around him with house extentions.
Chassidim work and also have lots of children.
You're talking about Israelis or Chutznikim?
Both. I have Chassidic relatives in droves.
Many indeed do, but the subject of this article is also a chassid.
Most by far do and at jobs that are needed to get society going and the diamond industry.
The protagonist in the story grew up in a Breslover family in Yerushalayim. They do not work in the diamond industry.
"His son therefore has to travel to go begging (which he describes as "earning money"). "
He did not say "earning money", but "raise that money". Don't make it sound worse than it really is.
In the article he speaks about the money that he earned with his blood.
"In the article he speaks about the money that he earned with his blood."
We'd have to see the original. It might be a figure of speech to the tune of "Damim Tarti Mashma" compounded by loss in translation.
Unfortunately, the charedi community is upside down. There is a strong emphasis on bein adam l'makom over bein adam lechavairo. Strong focus on the individual growth and their daled amos and no concern for the rest of the klal. Almost no appreciation or recognition of the significance of living eretz yisrael.
Its like a half baked cake. There are three components to Judaism. The Torah, the Am, and the Land. Unfortunately the charedim are taught that only one of the three is relevant. So its not just that they perceive being poor and learning torah all day as ideal thats a problem, its actually a lot more and runs deeper to a whole slew of issues.
Not disagreeing with everything you wrote but......Chareidim are actually very strong in bein Adam Lchaveiro. Just go and see how a family is treated by their chareidi neighbors when they have a baby. Look how many gemachim their are.
I am not referring to the amount they do for their own community and neighbors or what they do as part of chessed organizations. I know that they help out one another tremendously. And so does the modern orthodox community. My comment about bein adam l'chaveir refers to the rest of klal yisrael. If you notice Haredim live in mostly only charedi communities with little to no secular jews. Secular or even modern orthodox arent welcome in their communities. They dont preach to one another about going out and having ahavas yisroel with all jews. Their primary focus is their own torah oriented community with little concern for the rest of klal yisrael. If they truly cared about bein adam lchaveiro they would be out helping and supporting all types of Jews (again, i am not referring to chessed organizations. I am referring to the individual charedi families etc.) They would be in the front lines supporting soldiers etc. Imagine a modern orthodox jew collecting tzedeka for his yeshiva in their neighborhood. How many would give tzedaka to this person? And yet plenty of satmar and other charedim come to modern orthodox communities and they do get money for their yeshivas.
Right before the recent elections I ran into a charedi couple in Ramat bet shemesh. They asked me why I am not voting for Gimmel. After all they asked, arent I concerned about the level of torah commitment for klal yisrael? What about the chilul shabbos in Tel aviv? Shouldnt I be concerned about that? I replied that its important to think about the needs of the nation as a whole with many people who arent observant than just focus on Torah observance. I also added that I am more concerned about the ongoing Chilul Hashem that goes on in Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet than the chilul shabbos that happens in Tel aviv.
From just the other day-- https://matzav.com/observant-jews-volunteer-most/ are some admittedly vague statistics about the rates of Chareidi/religious/traditional/secular volunteer work. Undisclosed are the types of volunteer work, but Chareidim are 1/4 more involved than the closest competitor. See also here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Israel.
This finding would seem to relate to the question that keeps popping up regarding: why should donations to synagogues churches etc. be tax deductible, after all in a large proportion of cases the donors are parishioners at those institutions and the major beneficiaries of the funds that they donated?
But if religious commitment also has other benefits to society as a whole, such as by instilling a greater likelihood that those same beneficiaries will go out and do more volunteering or other activity to benefit society in other ways, then it would be a good trade off.
"Chareidim are 1/4 more involved than the closest competitor."
You seem to have forgotten about military service and sherut leumi. There is no bigger sacrifice in time and ones life than serving in the military.
That has whatever value it has. But the report from Matzav is about your own volunteering, not about being drafted by the system.
"If they truly cared about bein adam lchaveiro they would be out helping and supporting all types of Jews ..."
I imagine they think that although bein adam lchaveiro is a crucial component of observance, in such cases other considerations take precedence.
“There is a strong emphasis on bein adam l'makom over bein adam lechavairo.”
They also have a strong emphasis of wielding State power to compel their Chaveiro’s “bein Adam l’Makom” to be just like their own.
“Strong focus on the individual growth and their daled amos and no concern for the rest of the klal.”
They also have a sting focus on wielding that same State power to i trample other Jews’ daled amot in order to expand their own.
Oh wait, looks like quite a few RZ politicians are jumping on this bandwagon to do the same.
If you give a mouse a cookie…
You should go out read how the secular wielded state power—exponentially greater than anything the Chareidim ever got their hands on—to compel their religious Chaveiro’s “bein Adam l’Makom” to be just like their own.
IIRC, the religious never forced even one secular person to be inducted into the religious camp. While the secular did so to the religious countless times.
Poignant to me is the young holocaust survivor whose parents went to heaven through the chimneys in Auschwitz. He was left with only one memento of his parents, his father's T'fillin. But his secular counselor threw it into fire. It too ascended to heaven where it met up with the father, while the boy was left alone with nothing. Bein Adam Lachaveiro personified.
@Don,
I am not familiar with that story. While I don’t doubt that it is possible to have occurred in the manner in which you stated, I have asked for sources/citations in the past and have been often ignored (as if substantiating alleged factual statements were not important to have a real discussion).
Nevertheless, I certainly agree with the sentiment that Religious coercion and compulsion through wielding the power of the State in ANY direction (secular on religious; religious on secular; anything else) leads to resentment and is problematic at least for that reason and potentially for other reasons as well.
I will try to look for it. Maybe it's in the biography of Jacob Griffel, in the end. Or maybe in one of the books about survivors staying in the Maabarot.
Just as a general observation, when a person—any person, of any mindset, I believe—reads an episode that is consistent with his culture's paradigms, he doesn't find it remarkable enough to make note of it so as to be bring it out when needed. Sometime later he encounters someone with different paradigm and tosses it on the table. The job isn't complete if he'd like that other person to accept it. Indeed, I didn't do a complete job, as it was only icing on the cake for what I was trying to say. But hey! on a more central point we agree. Nice.
Chareidim are Chareidim by rote.
Their father didn't work, and so their grandfather and so their great grandfather.
Why should we do any different?
Their father was "raising funds", and so their grandfather etc., etc.
It's free money, no reason to stop.
Over here we're talking about someone from a community where everyone around him is having money but not his family and his father is doing what he is doing as a part of the old timers of select individuals.
Really? The MODOX are better in bein adam lechavairo? That must be why they have blogs dedicated towards hate and proportionately WAY less chessed and charity in their communities than Chareidi communities! I would rephrase what you said. Their bein adam lechavairo may or may not be somewhat passible (how many MODOX really give a tenth of their money to charity?), and their bein adam l'makom is severely lacking!
By the way, the three components of Judaism that Chazal talk about are Torah, Avodah and Gemilus Chasadim, not 'The Torah, the Am, and the Land'. I admit what you mentioned are integral parts of Judaism, but not sure who decided to cast them as the 'three components' of Judaism, contrary to Chazal's take. That's the problem with a movement whose general population has an extremely limited knowledge of Torah and of Judaic history from primary Judaic sources. When they read a couple of English books written in the 20th century by post-modern thinkers or hear a Shabbat drasha or two, they ignorantly begin to formulate their entire concept of Judaism on that! כעיוור באפלה
You obviously dont know much about the modern orthodox community. There is plenty of bein adam l'chaveiro and bein adam l'makom. But unfortunately many only see through thier charedi lenses and cant recognize this.
Both the Torah and Eretz Yisrael were given to bnei yisrael as a 'yerusha'. They are tied together and therefore and integral part of yiddishkeit. Focusing only on Torah but not on Eretz Yisrael is half baked. Both are equally important.
As for Bein adam l'chaviero in charedi communites, I am not referring to the amount they do for their own community and neighbors or what they do as part of chessed organizations. I know that they help out one another tremendously. And so does the modern orthodox community. My comment about bein adam l'chaveir refers to the rest of klal yisrael. If you notice Haredim live in mostly only charedi communities with little to no secular jews. Secular or even modern orthodox arent welcome in their communities. They dont preach to one another about going out and having ahavas yisroel with all jews. Their primary focus is their own torah oriented community with little concern for the rest of klal yisrael. If they truly cared about bein adam lchaveiro they would be out helping and supporting all types of Jews (again, i am not referring to chessed organizations. I am referring to the individual charedi families etc.) They would be in the front lines supporting soldiers etc. Imagine a modern orthodox jew collecting tzedeka for his yeshiva in their neighborhood. How many would give tzedaka to this person? And yet plenty of satmar and other charedim come to modern orthodox communities and they do get money for their yeshivas.
Right before the recent elections I ran into a charedi couple in Ramat bet shemesh. They asked me why I am not voting for Gimmel. After all they asked, arent I concerned about the level of torah commitment for klal yisrael? What about the chilul shabbos in Tel aviv? Shouldnt I be concerned about that? I replied that its important to think about the needs of the nation as a whole with many people who arent observant than just focus on Torah observance. I also added that I am more concerned about the ongoing Chilul Hashem that goes on in Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet than the chilul shabbos that happens in Tel aviv.
We need to be concerned about all of klal yisrael and not just those who are like us or live in our communities. We are no longer in the shtetl. We are finally back in Eretz Yisrael after thousands of years of exile. Its time to work together to build our nation and look out for one another instead of just keeping our head down in torah and only focusing on our daled amos.