I thank the Ba`al ha-Blog, Rabbi Dr. Natan Slifkin, for sharing this clarification of the position of the Rashbaz. It is a travesty that this ga'on is cited in support of something that so vividly contravenes the values that he held and the life that he lead. For yet another powerful expression by the Rashbaz on this topic, see his autobiographical comments on being forced to take a salary as a dayyan, rather than earn his wage as a physician, after he fled to Algiers (commentary on Avot 4:5).
And now for some links that may be valuable to people who are interested in the topic of this post and things related to it.
1. For more on Rabbi Shimon ben Zemah Duran's attitudes towards Torah and Science, see here:
2. Here is a current (functional) link to download my dissertation of the philosophy of the Rashbaz (the ones at the webpage linked to by Rabbi Slifkin are no longer current (see page 10 for some brief comments and references on this topic):
4. And finally here is a link to the autobiographical comments by Rashbaz on this topic at the end of his commentary to Avot 4:5 (see the end of his comment on that segment):
Yes. There isn't even a הוה אמינא that this היתר could apply to anyone in whom the community doesn't see a need for their paid public service.
The autobiographical comments also bring the point home: Here is an extraordinary Torah scholar who never took a single coin from his community in Spain, but rather earned his livelihood as a expert physician or surgeon. He later faced life-threatening danger in a massive, vicious שמד (in 1391, known as גזירות קנ"א). In order to remain both alive and loyal to the Torah, he literally sacrificed *all* of his extensive wealth and voluntarily became an exile from the only land he ever knew (namely Spain). In a completely new land (Algeria) he faced a choice between starvation or becoming a paid dayyan (at the new community's explicit request). He chose the latter, but never ceased to apologize for it, and instead declared that were he able to return to medicine as a livelihood he would do so in order to honor the Torah. The difference between this and the currently reality is so vast that it boggles the mind.
I don't know about your הוה אמינא, but I'm sure the Tashbetz wouldn't approve your ignorance or willful ignoring of his מסקנה in 148.
ואחר אשר השיכותי מעל החכמים הראשונים והאחרונים ז"ל את תלונו' בני ישראל הרב הגדול הרמב"ם ז"ל והנמשכים אחריו ז"ל אכתו' קצרו של דבר כפי העולה בידינו ממקומו' מפוזרי' בתלמוד הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (חולין קל"ד ע"ב) ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע
Couldn't be more clear, eh??
Also, I don't know if Tashbetz would approve of current chareidi practice in a vacuum. I DO know that neither he nor the Rambam would approve of the current alternative, a secularist, MO, LGBTQ-supporting society that can't even get its kids to keep Shabbos.
Why is a secularist, MO, LGBTQ-supporting society the ONLY alternative. What about Yeshivish society in America? Overwhelming majority of people there realize they need to work and don't stay in Kollel their whole lives.
I agree that Yeshivish society in America is better. The question is, how do you propose that would work in Israel? Inducting 18-yr old bachurim into the army, under the supervision of commanders who are kofrim, mechallelei Shabbos, etc for every waking minute of the day, for weeks or months at a time? Will you get something like Yeshivish society in America?
Would you kindly give us your English translation of The Tashbetz’ entire responsa. I’m not sure you’re ignorance is any less than your accusation of Seth’s .
That passage has been quoted up and down this comment board.
This is my third time giving my impression of it:
“I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your [RNS’s] quote of his [Tashbetz] in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t.”
Incidentally, I wonder why everyone keeps cherry picking this one passage to quote.
What the Rambam and all the Poskim who emphasized that taking charity to enable one to learn full time is wrong, has nothing to do with the modern Kollel system. They were talking about someone who supports himself as an ANI by knocking on doors. But when a community Kollel opens an institution that people knowingly support, that is not the same thing at all. As has been proven in the past 50 years, community Kollels have strengthened Yiddishkite tremendously everywhere they have been established. People support them because they recognize the benefit to the community. There is no Posek on earth who would dispute that model. However, if someone who learns in that Kollel comes to the point that he can't make it financially anymore from the Kollel and/or family support, then he should get a parnasa rather than have to beg for his supplemental needs. It has also been generally accepted that Kollel people take full advantage of government public assistance programs, as long as they honestly meet qualifications. After all, Jews pay taxes; may as well the funds go for something worthwhile than only to support criminal breeding factories!
This is a crucial distinction: voluntary community support vs. mandatory support via taxes. You should make a post stressing it. Chazal's mandatory taxes for support clearly only refer to individuals, not to a whole society. In contrast, community driven support via tzedaka is perfectly fine, since its not mandatory
The vast majority of Kollel youngerlite in E"Y do not have to schnorr. They figure out how to make ends meet from Kollel stipends, and/or from their wives working (wives who married them on that condition) or from legitimate programs that they qualify for, exactly as in America. Their learning and sacrifice (they are not living it up) is the Zechus Kiyum of Medinas Yisroel. Furthermore, even from a "Zionist" perspective, the Charedim, including full time learners and those who have jobs, have a lot of Jewish children. At the rate secular Jews multiply (and abort), the Medina would have been rov Arab by now.
However, I do agree that men who have to come to America to go door to door schnorring should not be learning full time, they should seek employment. On numerous occasions Israeli Kollel guys have come to my door to schnorr and they reeked from tobacco. I gave them a piece of my mind. "You want money from me because you are hard up, have 10 kids to marry off and you want to stay in learning. Why the hell are you burning up hundreds of dollars a month in cigarettes, and then you will die at 50 from cancer and leave your family even more destitute?"
Rabbi Goldberg, the kollel system in Israel could not be more different than your local kollel in Baltimore. It's hundreds of thousands of people receiving all kinds of welfare benefits and tax exemptions and likely to never being able to get professional employment and raising their children without an education. Rather than being the "zechus kiyum of Medinas Yisroel," it is a growing drain on Israel's economy (see https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/do-charedim-live-off-state-really-really) and a threat to the entire country (see https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/rosenblum-we-all-need-charedim-to-get). And I don't blame the guys who come to your door for smoking; they are the victims and products of a culture that you are defending.
Raising their children without an education?? What in the world are you talking about? Their kids are getting the best Torah education in the world, which is by far the most important education for the Jewish people. What education are secularist kids getting? That Creation and Yetzias Mitzrayim are sacred myths? That Chillul Shabbos and homosexuality are acceptable? Of course the Chareidim are the zechus kiyum of Medinat Yisrael. They are the ones who deserve to be there, if anybody.
I don't live in E"Y and you don't live in America, therefore both of our analyses of the other's Kollel systems is based on relying on what others say and applying reason. I highly doubt that Kollel is causing a serious drain on Israel's economy; Israel is in reality a pretty rich country. Without doubt, it has the highest average IQ and business acumen in the world, and those factors usually are a harbinger for wealth. I am an anti-Zionist, but a realist, look where Israel has come (in gashmius) in the last 70 years. It is really incredible. What is a drain on the economy is the Arabs, because of the cost of security. And, what really (behind the scenes) protects Israel, and despite that most people, apparently including you, don't recognize that fact, is the zechus hatorah and kiyum hamitzvos; the more the better.
However, admittedly, we have some (a small number of) "korbonos" that should be out there working and not being mechalel shem shomayim by schnorring or attacking cell phone stores!
" I highly doubt that Kollel is causing a serious drain on Israel's economy; Israel is in reality a pretty rich country." I invite you to read the following news report that just came out: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/365792
But you are correct that I don't consider there to be a zechus in Torah learned at the price of fulfilling one's responsibilities to one's family and the nation.
Reb Nosson, ever since the bottom feeders of the Chareidi world screwed you over 17 years ago, you have (to an extent) lost it. The article you cited above doesn't say a word about the Chareidi demographics of poverty in E"Y. I recall an article written about Kiryat Yoel (all Satmar town near Monroe) NY. It was rated as the most impoverished city in America. The journalist included a photo showing ladies walking down the street in the commercial district pushing strollers... all Bugaboos and the like! What people report is often bunkum and poverty lines are relative!
“What is a drain on the economy is the Arabs, because of the cost of security. And, what really (behind the scenes) protects Israel ... is the zechus hatorah and kiyum hamitzvos; the more the better.”
So if Kollel was reduced the cost of security would rise. So Kollel is financially worthwhile.
I love the way liberals are able to pull racism out of thin air! I am amazed and astonished every time without fail. It puts David Blaine to shame! Note that Mr. Goldberg did not even mention the color or ethnicity of anyone receiving welfare. He simply pointed out that many low-income populations are endemically involved in crime (and that the welfare state further encourages such a lifestyle), in contrast to the lofty lives that Kollel students live. Walla - racism!
“Lofty” lives of kollel vs and calling others criminal breeding factories….clearly whatever efforts were made to inculcate you with words of Torah and its values were wasted, null and worthless…
Judgey much? Seriously first it's your childish "someone's a racist" bs and then you decide that someone's observation of what is going on in the world nullifies someone's Torah as worthless. Maybe, stay off of the internet for a while and do some introspection.
There is nothing wrong with saying that welfare breeds crime. Because it's a proven fact that it does. So I guess the problem is that I'm not woke? Yeah, I would've needed to go to Stanford for that. BH Shehivdilanu min hato'im! See the comment section here
RNS says that Kollel is not necessarily lofty if you neglect "ones family and national responsibilities." You wouldn't know that? Mitzvah habah baveirah!
Serious people don't get their Torah from "source sheet" internet blogs, especially those which are entitled with 80s pop rock songs.
That's what I was saying in the previous post. This type of "analysis" is unproductive. Stick to what you know (animals), and leave the learning to the experts.
Actually, serious people appreciate good scholarship wherever they find it, and disdain shoddy scholarship no matter how revered the source. Parshablog, for example, has superior analyses of the Chumash than that found in many a yeshivah.
Ah, so you're backing down from your original claim that serious people don't get Torah from blogs, and now you're saying that it's just my blog which shouldn't be take seriously. Well, I'm sure you'll appreciate that given that I have many years of yeshiva learning and a Master's in Jewish Thought and a doctorate in Jewish history and numerous scholarly publications under my belt, whereas you are some random anonymous guy providing exactly zero arguments as to why my lengthy analysis of Tashbetz is flawed, some people might have a different view as to what should be taken seriously and what shouldn't. Have a great day!
If that's what you took out of my comment then you *really* don't know how to learn. Parshablog is Mikrah, a completely different field than TSHBP. What goes for one doesn't go for the other. And that's aside from the הלכה למעשה aspect. And still further I never said it was the medium of blogs that was the problem, I said "source sheet" internet blogs, and the same is true of "source sheet" learning in general. If you don't even understand what that means then I can't help you, but I assure you a real talmid chacham does. Are you familiar with a single other Tashbetz (which is how people who actually know it refer to it, not "Tashbatz" or "R. Duran") than the one you "analyze" here? How about a single other Drisha? Cherry picking sources doesn't mean a thing. That you have a masters and doctorate in others areas is very nice indeed, but meaningless to learning. Maybe it impresses the עם הארץ, but not those who actually know something.
Look at it this way: Would you be impressed by an accountant that reads the encyclopedia entry and a few things online about amphibians and then writes about it? Would you take seriously even for a moment his advice about how to care for and manage the frogs? Or would you just smile?
Nobody here is claiming that there are other responsa in Tashbatz which lead to different conclusions. In fact, *I'm* the one who brought other sources in Tashbatz which further reinforce my analysis!
As for academic qualifications - what they mean is that I have been trained to analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying, rather than merely relying on my yeshiva training, which taught me how to completely isolate texts from context and make them conform to charedi ideology.
You are welcome to claim that I am cherry-picking, but unless you actually have other cherries to exhibit, your claim is meaningless, and as an anonymous critic, it's not as though you actually have any credibility.
Very good line about the accountant! Accountants will also claim they know a few things about amphibians, since they have been trained to "analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying, rather than what those dumb marine biologists do."
Actually 'dumb marine biologists' are also taught to analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying.
Typical yeshivish instant response without much thought. 90% of yeshivah people have no idea how to present ideas, no structure, no beginning, no middle, no end, no signposting, just a bilbul of source texts, some sevoris, some more source texts, proofs jumbled up in
the middle, no summaries etc etc etc. Anybody trained in both academia or litigation who also has a yeshivah kollel background can produce a much better 'shtickle torah' than most kollel peope. Why do you think that is?
Cue for the yeshivish response 'are you saying rav chaim k/rav shlomo zalman etc, cannot learn'?
The real problem is when such limited allowance for scholarly support is mixed with the belief espoused in Chareidi circles and mussar books, that anyone can become a gadol hador - if only they worked hard enough. Thus everyone has a right to support and why would anyone in their right mind give that up when celestial pie is up for grabs (in any event there is no correlation between hishtadlus and paranassah - provided one has the requisite bitachon of course!). Based on this view, of course it is sacrilege to teach secular studies to a child as who knows what greatness may be in store for him? Despite the financial ruin bred by this form of intellectual communism - as noble as it sounds - people continue to prop it up at the behest of the leaders/politicians/askanim at the top who have an interest in perpetuating it. Can't help but be reminded of Boxer in Animal Farm.
Rav Moshe also wrote that the name "Draizel" is not a real name. I know many women named Draizel. And he never heard of Menachem Meili either. Are you equating the rare factual error by the gadol hador to his halachic analyses?!
Ah, there we go again! If I recall correctly, it wasn't a forgery, just written by his son Shmuel (I believe) who seems wasn't such a Talmid Chacham. So R' Moshe was close enough. And there is a massive difference between knowing a Halachic sugya, in which R' Moshe was a towering giant, to being able to research historical finds which was not his specialty.
Once we are ignoring what Rav Moshe actually writes, and we are speculating that he would change his mind in 2023, it makes much more sense to speculate that the Rambam would change his mind and approve of kollel in 2023, which is a generation of rampant secularism, materialism, and kefira, even among אחינו בני ישראל ר"ל. And among the many places where this is apparent is this blog!
This is an exceedingly surprising commment. You (always?) champion the timelessness of the views of the rationalist Rishonim, now you seem to be adopting the approach of your opponents.
One of your opponents is fond of citing an authority from a few centuries back in Eastern Europe that Rambam לא כתב אלא לדורו. (But that authority himself who recognizes time limits, was talking *לדורו.* That authority might agree that our דור is closer in nature to the Rambam's דור than to his—we should benefit to select elements of Rambam's views even those that were detrimental in centuries-ago Eastern Europe of his day.) Now you're doing that about R' Moshe.
Let me add that R' Moshe's children and students support Kollel today also. They believe his 1962 Teshuva either timeless or at least currently unexpired. If it ever expires they'll let us know. Till then we're to stick with it.
Read the end of R Moshe’s teshuva. He clearly says it should not be limited. To the Slifkins of the world, we quote from last week’s parsha; וכאשר יענו אותם כן ירבו וכן יפרוץ. Keep it up!
I'm not sure who this post was intended for. If it was intended for Natan's target non-Kollel-alumni undereducated MODOX audience, he could just say gobbly gobbly gook and they wouldn't know the difference. If it is intended for a more educated crowd, if they get involved and look up the sources, they will see immediately how Natan is skewing and misrepresenting things, but if someone doesn't have the time, take a look from this comment https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/defying-chazal-is-not-holy/comment/11555117 and on to see how we dealt with this piece as it was concocted. I did notice a couple of new things in this post that weren't mentioned there and hopefully will address them later.
Not being familiar in depth with any of these sources, I would be interested to hear your refutation of Rav Slifkin's arguments. What, in your opinion, is the strongest rebuttal of anything he's said here?
After establishing that a congregation is obligated to support the 'elite' Talmidei Chachamim in their midst, he goes on to say:
ואפי' התלמידים העוסקים בתורה כל ימיהם אף על פי שאינן ראשי ישיבות חייבין הצבור לפרנסם דרך כבודם כדאמרינן בפרק ואלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א) איזהו ת"ח שבני עירו מצוין לעשו' מלאכתו כל שמניח עסקיו ועוסק בחפצי שמי' למאי נ"מ למיטרח לי' בריפתיה.
He then proceeds to bring proofs from Chazal about supporting seemingly ordinary sounding Talmidei Chachamim. And in s. 148, which Natan conveniently omitted, where he sums up the bottom line of his very long six siman treatise, after talking about the obligation to support 'elite' Talmidei Chachamim, he says:
ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א). ואם יש פרנס בעיר ראוי לכל זה והוא עשיר וגדול מאליו ויש בעיר חכם אחר שצריך שיגדלוהו מדרך ענוה וחסידות הוא שיאמר להם שאותו חכם אחר ראוי לישב בישיבה כדי שיגדלוהו כדמוכח בפ' ואלו נאמרים (מ' ע"א) וכן חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב) זהו חיוב הצבור.
There are other things as well, but this is possibly the strongest rebuttal. Also, the way the Poskim throughout the generations have understood this heter is simply not as how Natan is trying to misconstrue it. I hope to provide some solid examples later.
No, you cherry-picked one line of it that said עדיין and tried to build a mountain out of it. Every beginning avreich is not yet a moreh hora'ah or Talmid Chacham yet hopes to get there one day. And you conveniently omitted the line that says that every community has to set aside money for all the talmidim who are sitting and learning.
ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב) זהו חיוב הצבור
I think this means that more talmidim (even of a lower caliber than the elite who are the source of the obligation) are a benefit for the elite scholars and therefore the community's obligation to support the elite extends (even) to their weaker students.
As long as a students presence in yeshiva adds to the learning of the elite he should be supported by the community according to the tashhbetz.
From the sequence, it does not sound like it. Here is how he sums up all the responsa on the subject:
(א)
הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (קל"ד ע"ב)
(ב)
ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו
(ג)
ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו
(ד)
ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א).
(ה)
ואם יש פרנס בעיר ראוי לכל זה והוא עשיר וגדול מאליו ויש בעיר חכם אחר שצריך שיגדלוהו מדרך ענוה וחסידות הוא שיאמר להם שאותו חכם אחר ראוי לישב בישיבה כדי שיגדלוהו כדמוכח בפ' ואלו נאמרים (מ' ע"א)
(ו)
וכן חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב)
זהו חיוב הצבור.
So, it sounds like the reason for the communal obligation to set up a fund to support Torah scholars is for the COMMUNITIES benefit to have more Talmidei Chachamim. Part of the reason Natan is having such a tough time with this is because he sees zero value in Talmidei Chachamim and Torah study, so he keeps trying to go back to his 'elite scholar' talking point.
And don't think that 'elite scholars' mean bench pressers who learn to themselves the whole day, like R' Elyashiv. It means 'elite scholars' who are providing 'a service for people', and capable of giving entertaining Torah related zoology lectures.
Yes, we're talking about students, not the whole community! Name one community in Europe where everyone sat and learned and no one worked. How about in the time of the beis Hamikdash? Nope. The time of the Tannaim? Nope again. Throughout Jewish history, most people always worked. It's that simple.
We're talking about whoever sets aside their entire day for learning, as is clear in the sources. The Halacha does not give a quota cap on it. We've almost never had it in history, but the world has never been as wealthy as it is now.
Throughout Jewish history (excluding from the Haskalah and on), most people have always been faithful to Halachah. It's that simple.
Name one community in Europe that had cars and phones and air conditioners. How about in the time of the beis Hamikdash? Nope. The time of the Tannaim? Nope.
It's amazing that the people who are always crowing about how we need to change the Torah suddenly become a stickler for MINHAG (not halacha, and not even a strong negative minhag) when it comes to the thing they dislike the most- Limud Torah (I'm not talking about you Weaver. I am dan l'kaf zechus that you got this talking point from one of the secularist intellectual leaders)
1. I'm translating הרחב גבולם as the gevul of the elite scholars.
I'm in agreement that the ultimate purpose is the community's benefit however I'm arguing that the immediate michayiv is to increase the learning of the elite.
2. A benefit of my reading is that it could be argued that even according to rabbi dr slifkin any yeshiva that contributes to creating an atmosphere conducive to producing elite talmidei chachamim should recieve as a matter of -obligation- (i.e. community taxes) support.
(I don't think he will actually end up agreeing with this . Maybe he will say " atmosphere conducive " is to indirect or some such however it should be stressed that the tashbetz is talking about chiyuv, and below chiyuv(obligation) is mitzva (not necessarily obligation type command i.e. sort of good deeds) of various levels.)
I know that's how you are reading it, but to me it does not sound like that's what the Tashbetz means. He breaks it down into separate categories and it sounds like it's a unique obligation independent of supporting 'elite scholars'.
I wrote this morning about the same passage to RNS:
“I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your quote of his in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t.”
What is the point of quoting this gemara or that tshuva or another midrash? Each side will interpret the material in the way that suits them. There r enough different citations available for every1 to prove their own point.
So perhaps in addition to Mark Twain’s (or maybe Benjamin Disraeli’s) “Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics” we can add “citations to Gemaras, tshuvot, and midrashim”. 😜
Might as well add kabalas. Of course. Jewish tradition is at least 2500 years old, and it contains more recorded opinions than u can shake a stick at. In addition, most of those quotes can be interpreted in a very broad range. "Oh, the citation cannot possibly mean THAT literally! Surely it is an allegory--a teaching point! What it REALLY means is THIS: 'shelo asani isha' means it is HOLIER, noch besser, to be a woman!"
Disputant A says I’m correct and Disputant B is wrong. Disputant B accuses Disputant A of faulty interpretations of Disputant B’s and A’s “proofs”. And round and round we go. What do we say about a religion whose sources are so easily manipulated strained and/or farfetched so as to easily allow folks like HappyGoLucky and מכרכר make them fit with their menacing confirmation bias.
By definition, every ancient religion cannot possibly discuss future events and societal changes, so the plethora of opinions is to be expected without divine intervention.
Indeed, no set of laws can be relevant for over 2000 years. It is absurd to try to stretch Talmudic law into today's society. For 1, women r no longer considered chattel property.
The leading reason that frums go OTD is because of halachic treatment of women. Halacha is so out of touch in this domain, that we lose complete faith in halacha in other areas as well. What can shechita possible mean for animal welfare if we hang them by their hind legs, without sedation, and slash their arteries till they slowly exsanguinate to death.
If I recall correctly, the Ramban in his introduction to "Milchemes Hashem" a work defending the positions of the Rif from critics, states that in gemara there are no absolute proofs as in mathematics. One must rather use context and logic to arrive at the most reasonable explanation.
Needless to say, Nathan is misreading and distorting the Tashbetz. Here is my comment from that thread regarding "VIII Conclusion" here:
"The Tashbetz has a different balance of the value than you do. He says explicitly one can take money for learning Torah. He says explicitly that it is a middas chassidus to not. That is how he balances the values.
Not your baseless, nonsensical "balance" of saying it applies to 1 or 100 people but not to 100,000, which he doesn't mention a word about.
It is your society, full of amei ha'aretz at best and mechalellei Shabbos who transgress the entire Torah at worst, that reject 1 and 3. Chazal never meant to approve of an entire society of ignoramuses and Torah transgressors like yours. "
In addition, anybody who would read the Tashbetz in 148 would immediately see he is NOT only talking about elite scholars. Here is the full paragraph that Nathan neglected to bring:
ואחר אשר השיכותי מעל החכמים הראשונים והאחרונים ז"ל את תלונו' בני ישראל הרב הגדול הרמב"ם ז"ל והנמשכים אחריו ז"ל אכתו' קצרו של דבר כפי העולה בידינו ממקומו' מפוזרי' בתלמוד הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (חולין קל"ד ע"ב) ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע"א).
There are 4 levels.
1. If he is a Gadol Hador, everybody must enrich him, and he can even take for himself.
2. If he is an elite scholar who can answer any halachic question, he should be appointed in a leadership position over the entire Jewish nation or as a Rosh Yeshiva, and everybody must enrich him.
3. If he is a not-so-elite scholar who can answer any halachic question in ONE tractate of Talmud, he should be appointed a leadership role over his city, and his city should enrich him
4. If he has not reached that level yet, but has no other business but learning Torah, his city is required to at least support him, but not enrich him.
The rest of Natan's post is filler to distract from the real issue. He says Tashbetz's "focus" is on elite scholars, which is baseless, and even if true, irrelevant, since the Tashbetz mentions students EXPLICITLY several times, and this is brought in the Kesef Mishna and Rama. As I told Mecharker, the "focus" of the Shulchan Aruch in Hilchos Shabbos is the issur of carrying, not the heter of a city of less than 600,000, which he only mentions briefly in a few places. But it would be a total fool who thinks that this is an argument to disallow it.
Nathan is taking advantage of your lack of learning to put something over your head.
By any objective standard, it is Chareidi society that is fulfilling Chazal's values, and not Natan's secularist Israeli society that is mostly complete amei ha'aretz at best, and mechallelei Shabbos at worst (which is most of them).
Looks like you didn't read my post carefully enough. I dealt with that quote. He says that this is someone who is not at that level YET but is on the way. And elsewhere, as noted, he makes it clear that he is referring to select people. In section 146 he addresses the topic of who is a Talmid Chacham, and referring back to the same terminology used here (בני עירו מצווין למטרח בריפתיה ולעשות מלאכתו ולכבדו בפסיקתו כראוי) he concludes that is referring to הגיע להוראה.
Also, here's an important update. I noticed the following in his commentary to Avot:
מכל אלו המעשים נראה שאדם חשוב וצבור צריכין לו מותר ליטול ממון מהם
There we have it in black-and-white. It's about an important person that the community needs.
As for your bizarre and repeated claim that the only alternative to the modern charedi way of life is "secularism," I've decided to just start ignoring it.
Yeah, you are also misreading 146 and ignoring 148. 146 is referring to the elite scholar who is entitled to the *maximum* level of enrichment and support. 148, which you neglected to quote in full, makes it clear that even non-elite scholars are entitled to some support.
You can ignore your secularist society, but nobody else will.
"You can ignore your secularist society, but nobody else will." What does those words even mean?! The fact that you keep mentioning that anyone who isn't charedi is "secularist," which is not only nonsense but also completely irrelevant to this post, just shows that you are incapable of honestly evaluating this topic.
"Frequently, I criticize the charedi mass-kollel system, or stories of people in kollel who are praised even as they need to beg for charity because they have no way to support themselves. I DO SO IN LIGHT OF CHAZAL’S NUMEROUS STATEMENTS ABOUT THE VALUE OF WORK AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND THE PROBLEM OF POVERTY AND OF FORCING THE COMMUNITY TO SUPPORT ONESELF IN POVERTY."
BS. Gimme a break. You do so because it bothers you that they are 'a threat to national security' and other terms you've used in the past. If it were really for such a holy reason you can start looking in your own backyard for much bigger sins, even if kollel was arguably wrong. YOU ARE FOOLING NOBODY!!!!
Your first source that you bring is the BS. I assume here that you are referring to the בכור שור. Now he predates the רשב"ץ by some 200 years and was one of the Baalei Tosfos. He was close with ר"ת and מהר"י קרא. Now not wishing to cause any more confusion than you have already caused, I'm sure everyone knows that ר"ת is Rav Yaakov Tam. But just to be sure, מהר"י קרא, who is Rav Yosef Kara, is a Talmid of Rashi, and should not be confused with Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Shulchan Aruch.
So coming back to your reference from the BS, I was wondering whether you are referring to a particular Tosfos, his פירוש על התורה, or one of the סליחות that he composed.
I know you think you're some brilliant prankster who's gonna pull a good joke on that dumb Charedi troll, but besides for your humor being inappropriate (referring to the בכור שור as the bull), it's extremely juvenile and not quite as clever as you think!
There is simply NO ancient source stating that anyone who feels like it is entitled to sit and learn and force other people to support them, whether through begging, collecting, government welfare, or any other means.
That is currently the system in E"Y. This has never before been the case in Jewish history, and that is what Rabbi Slifkin (along with any other objective person) has a problem with. Why is this so complicated?
(Their reason for not working is actually probably not hashkafic, rather historical and sociological - Chareidim are simply scared/unsure/threatened by the thought of interfacing with the larger Israeli economy, and are unsure how to do it. Similar to their lack of participation in the army, though in that case their real concern legitimate.)
There is also simply NO ancient source stating that anyone who feels like it is entitled to write ridiculous, ignorant blog posts, like Natan does. There is also simply NO ancient source stating that thousands of MO people are entitled to have TVs in their house, filling their kids minds with non-Jewish culture. But that's where we're at.
How about this- all of the Modern Orthodox and secularists agree to only do things that have an ancient source from the Gemara and Halacha. That means no TV, no movies, no internet, no LGBTQ, no chillul Shabbos, you get it - and all the chareidim will agree to not have as much kollel as they have now. Sounds like a good deal?
??? It's a false choice and the issues have nothing to with each other. Are you allowed to make a claim on someone else's money because he has a TV?
I'm glad to see that you agree with my basic point though.
Again, contrast with the kollel system in America, which NS has no problem with. In E"Y, I might even be in favor of a national support system for an elite few learners, say the top 5%.
Oh, I thought you were just making a rhetorical point, not a halachic argument.
If you are making a halachic argument then "There is simply NO ancient source stating that..." doesn't make sense. There is no issur, and to the contrary, it is totally consistent with Chazal's extreme pro-Limud Torah, anti-secularist values. Unlike Natan's distortions.
Don't hide behind attacking NS and anti-secularist rants. Stay on topic.
So you're saying the halacha is if anyone wants to sit and learn, they can force people to support them. Not a town Rav, rosh yeshiva, or an outstanding scholar. Just anyone? Like one- third of the country in Israel today? (And don't fool yourself - most Chareidim don't not work because all consider themselves holy unique individuals who are somehow pattur from working. They don't work because the government give them free money not to!)
And again, if that is the halacha - and this is the point which you always ignore - why was this this never done in the entire Jewish history? Even in the times of the Bais Hamikdash, the Tannaim, Malchus beis Dovid, most people worked for a living!
Why should I not bring in anti-secularist rants, is this entire post not part of Slifkin's 17 year extended anti-Chareidi rant? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I don't consider a political negotiations to be forcing. The secular parties agree to it. Are you saying that the halacha is that such political negotiations are assur? What is your source? Are you now a Neturei Karta Satmar guy? As I said, Chazal were EXTREMELY pro-Torah and anti-secularism, so it is definitely comfortably within their value system.
I will tell you why this wasn't done throughout history, but first tell me why observant Jews throughout history weren't tolerant of secularism, like the Modern Orthodox are today. Did you ever find a Tanna who said homosexuality is ok? Who said kol isha is ok? Did you ever find a Tanna who called Creation a "sacred myth"? Who said the Torah was written by J, E, D, and P? And then, after that, tell me why YOU think kollel has been instituted today.
It's so bizarre how you constantly claim that the only alternative to the modern charedi system are the most fringe parts of Orthodoxy. You really need to get out more and see the vast range of Orthodox communities that are not Israeli charedi.
Meanwhile, there were observant Jews throughout history that did things that you (and sometimes even I) would find absolutely shocking. Like girls going to dance in the vineyards and boys checking them out for wives, or tannaim dancing with brides on their shoulders, or Rishonim adopting Greco-muslim philosophy and massively adjusting the Torah to match, or Rishonim and Acharonim writing love songs, etc., etc.
1. The point isn't power politics - do you want to poll most non-chareidim in EY and see what think about supporting chareidim who don't work? Would YOU want money taken out of your paycheck to give to people who refuse to work? I don't think so.
2. No one said everything else they do is ok, and again, it's irrelevant to this discussion.
3. Mass kollel was encouraged as a hora sha'ah after the Holocaust. I thought everybody knew that. In EY, state funding was set up when there were 400 yeshiva guys in 1950, which has nothing to with today's situation. The status quo has continued because of unthinking ideological inertia (people are in the habit of protesting whatever their fathers protested for), and the fact that chareidi parties keep on forcing more funding because of their increased political clout, i.e., *because they can*. Why do you think this isn't the case in the U.S.? Different history.
4. Did you even read NS's article?? It's abundantly clear that forcing support for joe shmo to sit and learn is a *daas yachid* who is probably not even saying that!
"And it is better that they would cancel some of their time from studying day and night rather than relying on the community to support them."
The words "it is better" doesn't imply something is obligatory.
"“And if he is not yet in this category, but is busy with his studies and leaves his business, the city is required to buy themselves with his sustenance.”
The word yet doesn't imply the person is learning to become a leader. The person is learning. The goal of the support may be to produce leaders but there's no way to tell who will become one.
I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your quote of his in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t; which you mention in brief in your post and @Happy expands on in his comment about 45 mins ago.
ואפי' התלמידים העוסקים בתורה כל ימיהם אע"פ שאינן ראשי ישיבות חייבין הצבור לפרנסם דרך כבודם כדאמרינן בפרק ואלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע"א) איזהו ת"ח שבני עירו מצוין לעשו' מלאכתו כל שמניח עסקיו ועוסק בחפצי שמי' למאי נ"מ למיטרח לי' בריפתיה.
I'm not sure if your suggestion is tenable in light of this.
I think Rabbi Slifkin is often criticized by fanatics, or should I say this is just his ... Ordinary World?... But why couldn't he... Dance into the Fire..?.
I just needed to contribute to these quotes, I felt... Hungry like a Wolf... I feel relieved now, I gotta say.
An interesting topic of conversation would be if Rabbi Slifkin's Cofrut is the consequence of a Timtum Halev caused by 90's pop music. I guess we need to... Save a Prayer... for him, okay, I've got to stop with this.
About the subtitle, you raised the stakes very high for whoever gets things wrong. The way you're putting it, one side is right, while the other side is creating a new religion. Perhaps there's nothing you should know, and your opponents are creating a new religion. Or perhaps there's something you should know, and you are creating a new religion.
Very interesting topic but are there statistics, for the States and/or Israel, to quantify the problem of unemployment/poverty in the chareidi/yeshivish system? It seems in Israel that there are many chareidi men working in businesses and community ventures likes schools. Perhaps they entered the work force later (having learned in Kollel) or are under employed. In the states, most Kollel learners go on to have jobs albeit in their late 20's. Are the collectors knocking on doors really impoverished or just scamming the system. Many of the poverty statistics are hard to interpret as the chareidi communities are younger than other benchmark communities, rely on gemachs for many items and don't have or need cars (in Israel) to the degree of other communities.
The bottom feeders started the flap, the choshuva rabbonim who joined in felt if they didn't jump on the band wagon, the bottom feeders would go after them too. This is exactly what happened to Reb Aharon Feldman. After he issued his initial letter after speaking with Rav Elyashiv, the bottom feeders called him a liar. I was among the first to speak with him when he got back to Baltimore. It was clear that at the time (winter 2005) he still supported you. Then he sent me his ill-conceived diatribe of your science to review for him, and I wrote my critique of it. I was expecting him to totally revise it or not publish it at all. He published it and then I released my comments on it. For a few years after that he didn't speak to me. We are on OK terms now, about three years after our falling out, he sent me a couple to be mesader their keddushin because he was going to be out of town.
By the way, I am well familiar with bottom feeders, they went after me in 2000 when I published Aleph Shin. They did exactly the same thing, they sicced Rav Matisyahu Solomon on me. Then they went after him when he supported Reinman's One People, Two Worlds. They caused him to stab Reinman in the back. Baryonim Mushchasim!
I thank the Ba`al ha-Blog, Rabbi Dr. Natan Slifkin, for sharing this clarification of the position of the Rashbaz. It is a travesty that this ga'on is cited in support of something that so vividly contravenes the values that he held and the life that he lead. For yet another powerful expression by the Rashbaz on this topic, see his autobiographical comments on being forced to take a salary as a dayyan, rather than earn his wage as a physician, after he fled to Algiers (commentary on Avot 4:5).
And now for some links that may be valuable to people who are interested in the topic of this post and things related to it.
1. For more on Rabbi Shimon ben Zemah Duran's attitudes towards Torah and Science, see here:
https://jtr.shanti.virginia.edu/vol-13-no-1-jan-2022/%E1%B8%A5asdai-crescas-and-simeon-ben-%E1%BA%93emah-duran-on-tradition-versus-rational-inquiry/
2. Here is a current (functional) link to download my dissertation of the philosophy of the Rashbaz (the ones at the webpage linked to by Rabbi Slifkin are no longer current (see page 10 for some brief comments and references on this topic):
https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dropbox.com%2Fs%2Fu7w87sz3grrobm0%2FBook-of-Abraham-2011.pdf%3Fdl%3D0%26fbclid%3DIwAR1mjgbAUObq1im2aeoJo6_F-QGWh-YLw9e2LDMW_LjryWdutKvyjHxiKLs&h=AT3DWEphX8eUGe1nCyxVqN_3nCCLzaD7UUcKpzZE1ODF5m2-_0ubZ8HruWnXw_RMGU_c8-9u7YUOzfyaA6EQfZP_5DF2uQhJ6w8reM14_gBGDVC2oNTJblIVoIB7qkJ6u0ATpKK9Irs
3. And here is a direct link to my guest blog on the "Torah Encylopedia" of Rashbaz (an earlier and easier-to-read version of link #1 above):
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/guest-post-r-shimon-b-tzemach-durans
4. And finally here is a link to the autobiographical comments by Rashbaz on this topic at the end of his commentary to Avot 4:5 (see the end of his comment on that segment):
https://mishna.alhatorah.org/Dual/R._Shimon_b._Tzemach_Duran/Avot/4.5#m7e1n6
Thank you so much for those links. I noticed the following in his commentary to Avot:
מכל אלו המעשים נראה שאדם חשוב וצבור צריכין לו מותר ליטול ממון מהם
There we have it in black-and-white. It's about an important person that the community needs.
Yes. There isn't even a הוה אמינא that this היתר could apply to anyone in whom the community doesn't see a need for their paid public service.
The autobiographical comments also bring the point home: Here is an extraordinary Torah scholar who never took a single coin from his community in Spain, but rather earned his livelihood as a expert physician or surgeon. He later faced life-threatening danger in a massive, vicious שמד (in 1391, known as גזירות קנ"א). In order to remain both alive and loyal to the Torah, he literally sacrificed *all* of his extensive wealth and voluntarily became an exile from the only land he ever knew (namely Spain). In a completely new land (Algeria) he faced a choice between starvation or becoming a paid dayyan (at the new community's explicit request). He chose the latter, but never ceased to apologize for it, and instead declared that were he able to return to medicine as a livelihood he would do so in order to honor the Torah. The difference between this and the currently reality is so vast that it boggles the mind.
Seth,
I don't know about your הוה אמינא, but I'm sure the Tashbetz wouldn't approve your ignorance or willful ignoring of his מסקנה in 148.
ואחר אשר השיכותי מעל החכמים הראשונים והאחרונים ז"ל את תלונו' בני ישראל הרב הגדול הרמב"ם ז"ל והנמשכים אחריו ז"ל אכתו' קצרו של דבר כפי העולה בידינו ממקומו' מפוזרי' בתלמוד הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (חולין קל"ד ע"ב) ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע
Couldn't be more clear, eh??
Also, I don't know if Tashbetz would approve of current chareidi practice in a vacuum. I DO know that neither he nor the Rambam would approve of the current alternative, a secularist, MO, LGBTQ-supporting society that can't even get its kids to keep Shabbos.
Because in reality, THAT is the alternative.
Why is a secularist, MO, LGBTQ-supporting society the ONLY alternative. What about Yeshivish society in America? Overwhelming majority of people there realize they need to work and don't stay in Kollel their whole lives.
I agree that Yeshivish society in America is better. The question is, how do you propose that would work in Israel? Inducting 18-yr old bachurim into the army, under the supervision of commanders who are kofrim, mechallelei Shabbos, etc for every waking minute of the day, for weeks or months at a time? Will you get something like Yeshivish society in America?
@HappyGoLucky,
No it could not be less clear.
Would you kindly give us your English translation of The Tashbetz’ entire responsa. I’m not sure you’re ignorance is any less than your accusation of Seth’s .
Uriah,
That passage has been quoted up and down this comment board.
This is my third time giving my impression of it:
“I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your [RNS’s] quote of his [Tashbetz] in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t.”
Incidentally, I wonder why everyone keeps cherry picking this one passage to quote.
What the Rambam and all the Poskim who emphasized that taking charity to enable one to learn full time is wrong, has nothing to do with the modern Kollel system. They were talking about someone who supports himself as an ANI by knocking on doors. But when a community Kollel opens an institution that people knowingly support, that is not the same thing at all. As has been proven in the past 50 years, community Kollels have strengthened Yiddishkite tremendously everywhere they have been established. People support them because they recognize the benefit to the community. There is no Posek on earth who would dispute that model. However, if someone who learns in that Kollel comes to the point that he can't make it financially anymore from the Kollel and/or family support, then he should get a parnasa rather than have to beg for his supplemental needs. It has also been generally accepted that Kollel people take full advantage of government public assistance programs, as long as they honestly meet qualifications. After all, Jews pay taxes; may as well the funds go for something worthwhile than only to support criminal breeding factories!
You're talking about a community kollel in the US. Not the kollel system in Israel.
This is a crucial distinction: voluntary community support vs. mandatory support via taxes. You should make a post stressing it. Chazal's mandatory taxes for support clearly only refer to individuals, not to a whole society. In contrast, community driven support via tzedaka is perfectly fine, since its not mandatory
The vast majority of Kollel youngerlite in E"Y do not have to schnorr. They figure out how to make ends meet from Kollel stipends, and/or from their wives working (wives who married them on that condition) or from legitimate programs that they qualify for, exactly as in America. Their learning and sacrifice (they are not living it up) is the Zechus Kiyum of Medinas Yisroel. Furthermore, even from a "Zionist" perspective, the Charedim, including full time learners and those who have jobs, have a lot of Jewish children. At the rate secular Jews multiply (and abort), the Medina would have been rov Arab by now.
However, I do agree that men who have to come to America to go door to door schnorring should not be learning full time, they should seek employment. On numerous occasions Israeli Kollel guys have come to my door to schnorr and they reeked from tobacco. I gave them a piece of my mind. "You want money from me because you are hard up, have 10 kids to marry off and you want to stay in learning. Why the hell are you burning up hundreds of dollars a month in cigarettes, and then you will die at 50 from cancer and leave your family even more destitute?"
Rabbi Goldberg, the kollel system in Israel could not be more different than your local kollel in Baltimore. It's hundreds of thousands of people receiving all kinds of welfare benefits and tax exemptions and likely to never being able to get professional employment and raising their children without an education. Rather than being the "zechus kiyum of Medinas Yisroel," it is a growing drain on Israel's economy (see https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/do-charedim-live-off-state-really-really) and a threat to the entire country (see https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/rosenblum-we-all-need-charedim-to-get). And I don't blame the guys who come to your door for smoking; they are the victims and products of a culture that you are defending.
Raising their children without an education?? What in the world are you talking about? Their kids are getting the best Torah education in the world, which is by far the most important education for the Jewish people. What education are secularist kids getting? That Creation and Yetzias Mitzrayim are sacred myths? That Chillul Shabbos and homosexuality are acceptable? Of course the Chareidim are the zechus kiyum of Medinat Yisrael. They are the ones who deserve to be there, if anybody.
I don't live in E"Y and you don't live in America, therefore both of our analyses of the other's Kollel systems is based on relying on what others say and applying reason. I highly doubt that Kollel is causing a serious drain on Israel's economy; Israel is in reality a pretty rich country. Without doubt, it has the highest average IQ and business acumen in the world, and those factors usually are a harbinger for wealth. I am an anti-Zionist, but a realist, look where Israel has come (in gashmius) in the last 70 years. It is really incredible. What is a drain on the economy is the Arabs, because of the cost of security. And, what really (behind the scenes) protects Israel, and despite that most people, apparently including you, don't recognize that fact, is the zechus hatorah and kiyum hamitzvos; the more the better.
However, admittedly, we have some (a small number of) "korbonos" that should be out there working and not being mechalel shem shomayim by schnorring or attacking cell phone stores!
" I highly doubt that Kollel is causing a serious drain on Israel's economy; Israel is in reality a pretty rich country." I invite you to read the following news report that just came out: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/365792
But you are correct that I don't consider there to be a zechus in Torah learned at the price of fulfilling one's responsibilities to one's family and the nation.
Here’s another article stating the same
https://www.timesofisrael.com/state-study-finds-nearly-1-million-israelis-suffered-from-food-insecurity-in-2021/amp/
Reb Nosson, ever since the bottom feeders of the Chareidi world screwed you over 17 years ago, you have (to an extent) lost it. The article you cited above doesn't say a word about the Chareidi demographics of poverty in E"Y. I recall an article written about Kiryat Yoel (all Satmar town near Monroe) NY. It was rated as the most impoverished city in America. The journalist included a photo showing ladies walking down the street in the commercial district pushing strollers... all Bugaboos and the like! What people report is often bunkum and poverty lines are relative!
“What is a drain on the economy is the Arabs, because of the cost of security. And, what really (behind the scenes) protects Israel ... is the zechus hatorah and kiyum hamitzvos; the more the better.”
So if Kollel was reduced the cost of security would rise. So Kollel is financially worthwhile.
Someone’s a racist….
I love the way liberals are able to pull racism out of thin air! I am amazed and astonished every time without fail. It puts David Blaine to shame! Note that Mr. Goldberg did not even mention the color or ethnicity of anyone receiving welfare. He simply pointed out that many low-income populations are endemically involved in crime (and that the welfare state further encourages such a lifestyle), in contrast to the lofty lives that Kollel students live. Walla - racism!
Keep up the magic!
“Lofty” lives of kollel vs and calling others criminal breeding factories….clearly whatever efforts were made to inculcate you with words of Torah and its values were wasted, null and worthless…
Judgey much? Seriously first it's your childish "someone's a racist" bs and then you decide that someone's observation of what is going on in the world nullifies someone's Torah as worthless. Maybe, stay off of the internet for a while and do some introspection.
There is nothing wrong with saying that welfare breeds crime. Because it's a proven fact that it does. So I guess the problem is that I'm not woke? Yeah, I would've needed to go to Stanford for that. BH Shehivdilanu min hato'im! See the comment section here
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/which-politicians-are-a-chillul-hashem/comments
for more about where our values are supposed to come from.
RNS says that Kollel is not necessarily lofty if you neglect "ones family and national responsibilities." You wouldn't know that? Mitzvah habah baveirah!
Judge Rabbi Goldberg, to you.
That's very woke of you. Where did you even find mention of race in what he said?
Maybe something about comparing humans to breeding factories….
That "someone" is a realist!
Real racist that is….
@David Ilan,
When you insert non-existent racism into your contention, it reflects poorly on you.
Serious people don't get their Torah from "source sheet" internet blogs, especially those which are entitled with 80s pop rock songs.
That's what I was saying in the previous post. This type of "analysis" is unproductive. Stick to what you know (animals), and leave the learning to the experts.
Actually, serious people appreciate good scholarship wherever they find it, and disdain shoddy scholarship no matter how revered the source. Parshablog, for example, has superior analyses of the Chumash than that found in many a yeshivah.
I agree completely, I've used it many times, it's excellent. But this isn't parshablog, and you're not Josh Waxman.
Ah, so you're backing down from your original claim that serious people don't get Torah from blogs, and now you're saying that it's just my blog which shouldn't be take seriously. Well, I'm sure you'll appreciate that given that I have many years of yeshiva learning and a Master's in Jewish Thought and a doctorate in Jewish history and numerous scholarly publications under my belt, whereas you are some random anonymous guy providing exactly zero arguments as to why my lengthy analysis of Tashbetz is flawed, some people might have a different view as to what should be taken seriously and what shouldn't. Have a great day!
If that's what you took out of my comment then you *really* don't know how to learn. Parshablog is Mikrah, a completely different field than TSHBP. What goes for one doesn't go for the other. And that's aside from the הלכה למעשה aspect. And still further I never said it was the medium of blogs that was the problem, I said "source sheet" internet blogs, and the same is true of "source sheet" learning in general. If you don't even understand what that means then I can't help you, but I assure you a real talmid chacham does. Are you familiar with a single other Tashbetz (which is how people who actually know it refer to it, not "Tashbatz" or "R. Duran") than the one you "analyze" here? How about a single other Drisha? Cherry picking sources doesn't mean a thing. That you have a masters and doctorate in others areas is very nice indeed, but meaningless to learning. Maybe it impresses the עם הארץ, but not those who actually know something.
Look at it this way: Would you be impressed by an accountant that reads the encyclopedia entry and a few things online about amphibians and then writes about it? Would you take seriously even for a moment his advice about how to care for and manage the frogs? Or would you just smile?
Nobody here is claiming that there are other responsa in Tashbatz which lead to different conclusions. In fact, *I'm* the one who brought other sources in Tashbatz which further reinforce my analysis!
As for academic qualifications - what they mean is that I have been trained to analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying, rather than merely relying on my yeshiva training, which taught me how to completely isolate texts from context and make them conform to charedi ideology.
You are welcome to claim that I am cherry-picking, but unless you actually have other cherries to exhibit, your claim is meaningless, and as an anonymous critic, it's not as though you actually have any credibility.
Very good line about the accountant! Accountants will also claim they know a few things about amphibians, since they have been trained to "analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying, rather than what those dumb marine biologists do."
Actually 'dumb marine biologists' are also taught to analyze texts and understand the ramifications of their context and draw conclusions as to what they are actually saying.
Typical yeshivish instant response without much thought. 90% of yeshivah people have no idea how to present ideas, no structure, no beginning, no middle, no end, no signposting, just a bilbul of source texts, some sevoris, some more source texts, proofs jumbled up in
the middle, no summaries etc etc etc. Anybody trained in both academia or litigation who also has a yeshivah kollel background can produce a much better 'shtickle torah' than most kollel peope. Why do you think that is?
Cue for the yeshivish response 'are you saying rav chaim k/rav shlomo zalman etc, cannot learn'?
By the way, Avigdor Lieberman also understood the Tashbetz like you. So at least you have SOME company.
@מכרכר
So what drives you to assert that Avigdor Lieberman is wrong and you’re right?
UW, I know you're a kofer and a letz, but I always thought you at least had a sense of humor. But it seems the irony of this joke was lost on you.
Whether anybody "gets" your "humor" or not, facetious comments distract from serious discussion of serious issues.
Lol, facetious. Coming from Howard Schranz. You mean comments like this one?
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/duran-duran/comment/11914634
I always wonder what avowed kofrim are doing on this site. If you have no interest in Judaism, aren't the discussions boring?
The real problem is when such limited allowance for scholarly support is mixed with the belief espoused in Chareidi circles and mussar books, that anyone can become a gadol hador - if only they worked hard enough. Thus everyone has a right to support and why would anyone in their right mind give that up when celestial pie is up for grabs (in any event there is no correlation between hishtadlus and paranassah - provided one has the requisite bitachon of course!). Based on this view, of course it is sacrilege to teach secular studies to a child as who knows what greatness may be in store for him? Despite the financial ruin bred by this form of intellectual communism - as noble as it sounds - people continue to prop it up at the behest of the leaders/politicians/askanim at the top who have an interest in perpetuating it. Can't help but be reminded of Boxer in Animal Farm.
Rav Moshe (IM YD 2:116) justified kollel men receiving stipends as a necessity to preserve Torah. I do agree, though, that it should be limited.
Do you also object to the taxpayers being forced to subsidize sporting events and films?
LOL, here is the real reason why he thinks that R' Moshe isn't a proof:
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?"
Because he knows better than R' Moshe!🤣🤣
No doubt you also believe that the commentary of R. Yehuda HaChassid is a forgery.
This is a good example of what is considered proper halachic reasoning by many of the more LW MO so-called "poskim".
-Find somewhere where it seems R Moshe is wrong
-Think he can argue with R Moshe anywhere else
Rav Moshe also wrote that the name "Draizel" is not a real name. I know many women named Draizel. And he never heard of Menachem Meili either. Are you equating the rare factual error by the gadol hador to his halachic analyses?!
Ah, there we go again! If I recall correctly, it wasn't a forgery, just written by his son Shmuel (I believe) who seems wasn't such a Talmid Chacham. So R' Moshe was close enough. And there is a massive difference between knowing a Halachic sugya, in which R' Moshe was a towering giant, to being able to research historical finds which was not his specialty.
Actually, as it happens, I don't think that Rav Moshe was wrong here. I just think that he was writing for the reality of 1962.
Once we are ignoring what Rav Moshe actually writes, and we are speculating that he would change his mind in 2023, it makes much more sense to speculate that the Rambam would change his mind and approve of kollel in 2023, which is a generation of rampant secularism, materialism, and kefira, even among אחינו בני ישראל ר"ל. And among the many places where this is apparent is this blog!
This is an exceedingly surprising commment. You (always?) champion the timelessness of the views of the rationalist Rishonim, now you seem to be adopting the approach of your opponents.
One of your opponents is fond of citing an authority from a few centuries back in Eastern Europe that Rambam לא כתב אלא לדורו. (But that authority himself who recognizes time limits, was talking *לדורו.* That authority might agree that our דור is closer in nature to the Rambam's דור than to his—we should benefit to select elements of Rambam's views even those that were detrimental in centuries-ago Eastern Europe of his day.) Now you're doing that about R' Moshe.
Let me add that R' Moshe's children and students support Kollel today also. They believe his 1962 Teshuva either timeless or at least currently unexpired. If it ever expires they'll let us know. Till then we're to stick with it.
Not just Natan! Seth Kadish in the above comment also knows better than Rav Moshe! I'm telling you, we live in a generation of geonim!
Read the end of R Moshe’s teshuva. He clearly says it should not be limited. To the Slifkins of the world, we quote from last week’s parsha; וכאשר יענו אותם כן ירבו וכן יפרוץ. Keep it up!
Yes, he writes that in order to save Torah from being lost, kollel students should be supported, and he wishes that there were many more.
Note that he wrote this in 1962.
People like you said the same exact thing in 1962 as well! Like I said, they failed and so will you!
I'm not sure who this post was intended for. If it was intended for Natan's target non-Kollel-alumni undereducated MODOX audience, he could just say gobbly gobbly gook and they wouldn't know the difference. If it is intended for a more educated crowd, if they get involved and look up the sources, they will see immediately how Natan is skewing and misrepresenting things, but if someone doesn't have the time, take a look from this comment https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/defying-chazal-is-not-holy/comment/11555117 and on to see how we dealt with this piece as it was concocted. I did notice a couple of new things in this post that weren't mentioned there and hopefully will address them later.
Not being familiar in depth with any of these sources, I would be interested to hear your refutation of Rav Slifkin's arguments. What, in your opinion, is the strongest rebuttal of anything he's said here?
These lines:
After establishing that a congregation is obligated to support the 'elite' Talmidei Chachamim in their midst, he goes on to say:
ואפי' התלמידים העוסקים בתורה כל ימיהם אף על פי שאינן ראשי ישיבות חייבין הצבור לפרנסם דרך כבודם כדאמרינן בפרק ואלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א) איזהו ת"ח שבני עירו מצוין לעשו' מלאכתו כל שמניח עסקיו ועוסק בחפצי שמי' למאי נ"מ למיטרח לי' בריפתיה.
He then proceeds to bring proofs from Chazal about supporting seemingly ordinary sounding Talmidei Chachamim. And in s. 148, which Natan conveniently omitted, where he sums up the bottom line of his very long six siman treatise, after talking about the obligation to support 'elite' Talmidei Chachamim, he says:
ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א). ואם יש פרנס בעיר ראוי לכל זה והוא עשיר וגדול מאליו ויש בעיר חכם אחר שצריך שיגדלוהו מדרך ענוה וחסידות הוא שיאמר להם שאותו חכם אחר ראוי לישב בישיבה כדי שיגדלוהו כדמוכח בפ' ואלו נאמרים (מ' ע"א) וכן חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב) זהו חיוב הצבור.
There are other things as well, but this is possibly the strongest rebuttal. Also, the way the Poskim throughout the generations have understood this heter is simply not as how Natan is trying to misconstrue it. I hope to provide some solid examples later.
"which Natan conveniently omitted" No, I discussed it in detail. Read the post again.
No, you cherry-picked one line of it that said עדיין and tried to build a mountain out of it. Every beginning avreich is not yet a moreh hora'ah or Talmid Chacham yet hopes to get there one day. And you conveniently omitted the line that says that every community has to set aside money for all the talmidim who are sitting and learning.
Rav Slifkin:
“ No, I discussed it in detail. Read the post again.”
מכרכר:
“No,you cherry-picked one line of it that said עדיין and tried to build a mountain out of It”
LOL ! I haven’t heard such vigorous logical disputations since the era of Lincoln-Douglas.
ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב) זהו חיוב הצבור
I think this means that more talmidim (even of a lower caliber than the elite who are the source of the obligation) are a benefit for the elite scholars and therefore the community's obligation to support the elite extends (even) to their weaker students.
As long as a students presence in yeshiva adds to the learning of the elite he should be supported by the community according to the tashhbetz.
If I'm wrong please tell me.
From the sequence, it does not sound like it. Here is how he sums up all the responsa on the subject:
(א)
הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (קל"ד ע"ב)
(ב)
ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו
(ג)
ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו
(ד)
ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (קי"ד ע"א).
(ה)
ואם יש פרנס בעיר ראוי לכל זה והוא עשיר וגדול מאליו ויש בעיר חכם אחר שצריך שיגדלוהו מדרך ענוה וחסידות הוא שיאמר להם שאותו חכם אחר ראוי לישב בישיבה כדי שיגדלוהו כדמוכח בפ' ואלו נאמרים (מ' ע"א)
(ו)
וכן חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחב גבולם בתלמידי' כדמוכח ההיא דפ' הניזקין (ס' ע"ב)
זהו חיוב הצבור.
So, it sounds like the reason for the communal obligation to set up a fund to support Torah scholars is for the COMMUNITIES benefit to have more Talmidei Chachamim. Part of the reason Natan is having such a tough time with this is because he sees zero value in Talmidei Chachamim and Torah study, so he keeps trying to go back to his 'elite scholar' talking point.
And don't think that 'elite scholars' mean bench pressers who learn to themselves the whole day, like R' Elyashiv. It means 'elite scholars' who are providing 'a service for people', and capable of giving entertaining Torah related zoology lectures.
Yes, we're talking about students, not the whole community! Name one community in Europe where everyone sat and learned and no one worked. How about in the time of the beis Hamikdash? Nope. The time of the Tannaim? Nope again. Throughout Jewish history, most people always worked. It's that simple.
We're talking about whoever sets aside their entire day for learning, as is clear in the sources. The Halacha does not give a quota cap on it. We've almost never had it in history, but the world has never been as wealthy as it is now.
Throughout Jewish history (excluding from the Haskalah and on), most people have always been faithful to Halachah. It's that simple.
Name one community in Europe that had cars and phones and air conditioners. How about in the time of the beis Hamikdash? Nope. The time of the Tannaim? Nope.
It's amazing that the people who are always crowing about how we need to change the Torah suddenly become a stickler for MINHAG (not halacha, and not even a strong negative minhag) when it comes to the thing they dislike the most- Limud Torah (I'm not talking about you Weaver. I am dan l'kaf zechus that you got this talking point from one of the secularist intellectual leaders)
1. I'm translating הרחב גבולם as the gevul of the elite scholars.
I'm in agreement that the ultimate purpose is the community's benefit however I'm arguing that the immediate michayiv is to increase the learning of the elite.
2. A benefit of my reading is that it could be argued that even according to rabbi dr slifkin any yeshiva that contributes to creating an atmosphere conducive to producing elite talmidei chachamim should recieve as a matter of -obligation- (i.e. community taxes) support.
(I don't think he will actually end up agreeing with this . Maybe he will say " atmosphere conducive " is to indirect or some such however it should be stressed that the tashbetz is talking about chiyuv, and below chiyuv(obligation) is mitzva (not necessarily obligation type command i.e. sort of good deeds) of various levels.)
I know that's how you are reading it, but to me it does not sound like that's what the Tashbetz means. He breaks it down into separate categories and it sounds like it's a unique obligation independent of supporting 'elite scholars'.
Hey, that quoted passage from 148 looks familiar.
I wrote this morning about the same passage to RNS:
“I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your quote of his in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t.”
What is the point of quoting this gemara or that tshuva or another midrash? Each side will interpret the material in the way that suits them. There r enough different citations available for every1 to prove their own point.
@Howard,
So perhaps in addition to Mark Twain’s (or maybe Benjamin Disraeli’s) “Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics” we can add “citations to Gemaras, tshuvot, and midrashim”. 😜
Might as well add kabalas. Of course. Jewish tradition is at least 2500 years old, and it contains more recorded opinions than u can shake a stick at. In addition, most of those quotes can be interpreted in a very broad range. "Oh, the citation cannot possibly mean THAT literally! Surely it is an allegory--a teaching point! What it REALLY means is THIS: 'shelo asani isha' means it is HOLIER, noch besser, to be a woman!"
@Howard Schranz,
Yes indeed. It’s called unfalsifiability.
Disputant A says I’m correct and Disputant B is wrong. Disputant B accuses Disputant A of faulty interpretations of Disputant B’s and A’s “proofs”. And round and round we go. What do we say about a religion whose sources are so easily manipulated strained and/or farfetched so as to easily allow folks like HappyGoLucky and מכרכר make them fit with their menacing confirmation bias.
We say it’s baloney.
Which religion is different?
By definition, every ancient religion cannot possibly discuss future events and societal changes, so the plethora of opinions is to be expected without divine intervention.
Indeed, no set of laws can be relevant for over 2000 years. It is absurd to try to stretch Talmudic law into today's society. For 1, women r no longer considered chattel property.
The leading reason that frums go OTD is because of halachic treatment of women. Halacha is so out of touch in this domain, that we lose complete faith in halacha in other areas as well. What can shechita possible mean for animal welfare if we hang them by their hind legs, without sedation, and slash their arteries till they slowly exsanguinate to death.
If I recall correctly, the Ramban in his introduction to "Milchemes Hashem" a work defending the positions of the Rif from critics, states that in gemara there are no absolute proofs as in mathematics. One must rather use context and logic to arrive at the most reasonable explanation.
Needless to say, Nathan is misreading and distorting the Tashbetz. Here is my comment from that thread regarding "VIII Conclusion" here:
"The Tashbetz has a different balance of the value than you do. He says explicitly one can take money for learning Torah. He says explicitly that it is a middas chassidus to not. That is how he balances the values.
Not your baseless, nonsensical "balance" of saying it applies to 1 or 100 people but not to 100,000, which he doesn't mention a word about.
It is your society, full of amei ha'aretz at best and mechalellei Shabbos who transgress the entire Torah at worst, that reject 1 and 3. Chazal never meant to approve of an entire society of ignoramuses and Torah transgressors like yours. "
In addition, anybody who would read the Tashbetz in 148 would immediately see he is NOT only talking about elite scholars. Here is the full paragraph that Nathan neglected to bring:
ואחר אשר השיכותי מעל החכמים הראשונים והאחרונים ז"ל את תלונו' בני ישראל הרב הגדול הרמב"ם ז"ל והנמשכים אחריו ז"ל אכתו' קצרו של דבר כפי העולה בידינו ממקומו' מפוזרי' בתלמוד הצבור חייבים לגדל משלהם מי שהוא חשוב בדורו כר' אמי בדורו וגם החכם עצמו נוטל מעצמו הראוי לו לגדולתו כדמוכחא ההיא דפ' הזרוע (חולין קל"ד ע"ב) ואם הוא חכם ששואלין אותו דבר הלכה בכולה תלמודא ואומ' ראוי למנותו פרנס על כל ישראל וריש מתיבתא וכל ישראל חייבים לגדלו ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר ראוי למנותו פרנס בעירו והם מגדלין אותו ואם אינו בגדר זה עדיין אלא שהוא עוסק בלימודו ומניח עסקיו בני עירו חייבין למטרח בריפתיה כדמוכח בפ' אלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע"א).
There are 4 levels.
1. If he is a Gadol Hador, everybody must enrich him, and he can even take for himself.
2. If he is an elite scholar who can answer any halachic question, he should be appointed in a leadership position over the entire Jewish nation or as a Rosh Yeshiva, and everybody must enrich him.
3. If he is a not-so-elite scholar who can answer any halachic question in ONE tractate of Talmud, he should be appointed a leadership role over his city, and his city should enrich him
4. If he has not reached that level yet, but has no other business but learning Torah, his city is required to at least support him, but not enrich him.
The rest of Natan's post is filler to distract from the real issue. He says Tashbetz's "focus" is on elite scholars, which is baseless, and even if true, irrelevant, since the Tashbetz mentions students EXPLICITLY several times, and this is brought in the Kesef Mishna and Rama. As I told Mecharker, the "focus" of the Shulchan Aruch in Hilchos Shabbos is the issur of carrying, not the heter of a city of less than 600,000, which he only mentions briefly in a few places. But it would be a total fool who thinks that this is an argument to disallow it.
Nathan is taking advantage of your lack of learning to put something over your head.
By any objective standard, it is Chareidi society that is fulfilling Chazal's values, and not Natan's secularist Israeli society that is mostly complete amei ha'aretz at best, and mechallelei Shabbos at worst (which is most of them).
Looks like you didn't read my post carefully enough. I dealt with that quote. He says that this is someone who is not at that level YET but is on the way. And elsewhere, as noted, he makes it clear that he is referring to select people. In section 146 he addresses the topic of who is a Talmid Chacham, and referring back to the same terminology used here (בני עירו מצווין למטרח בריפתיה ולעשות מלאכתו ולכבדו בפסיקתו כראוי) he concludes that is referring to הגיע להוראה.
Also, here's an important update. I noticed the following in his commentary to Avot:
מכל אלו המעשים נראה שאדם חשוב וצבור צריכין לו מותר ליטול ממון מהם
There we have it in black-and-white. It's about an important person that the community needs.
As for your bizarre and repeated claim that the only alternative to the modern charedi way of life is "secularism," I've decided to just start ignoring it.
Yeah, you are also misreading 146 and ignoring 148. 146 is referring to the elite scholar who is entitled to the *maximum* level of enrichment and support. 148, which you neglected to quote in full, makes it clear that even non-elite scholars are entitled to some support.
You can ignore your secularist society, but nobody else will.
"You can ignore your secularist society, but nobody else will." What does those words even mean?! The fact that you keep mentioning that anyone who isn't charedi is "secularist," which is not only nonsense but also completely irrelevant to this post, just shows that you are incapable of honestly evaluating this topic.
Unfortunately, as a younger teenager, we are only able to distinguish between good and bad, right and wrong and there is nothing in between.
For those who mature past this stage of adolescence, normally around age 16, we discover a whole range, continuum, spectrum in between.
However, not everyone moves into this late-teenage / adult way of thinking.
RNS: please have respect for those, despite their apparent adult age, are still in that early teenage way of thinking.
Not everybody who isn't chareidi is secularist, but most are. See your post about generalizations.
If you don't see the relevance to the post, you are blind.
"Frequently, I criticize the charedi mass-kollel system, or stories of people in kollel who are praised even as they need to beg for charity because they have no way to support themselves. I DO SO IN LIGHT OF CHAZAL’S NUMEROUS STATEMENTS ABOUT THE VALUE OF WORK AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND THE PROBLEM OF POVERTY AND OF FORCING THE COMMUNITY TO SUPPORT ONESELF IN POVERTY."
BS. Gimme a break. You do so because it bothers you that they are 'a threat to national security' and other terms you've used in the past. If it were really for such a holy reason you can start looking in your own backyard for much bigger sins, even if kollel was arguably wrong. YOU ARE FOOLING NOBODY!!!!
To: מכרכר בכל עוז
Your first source that you bring is the BS. I assume here that you are referring to the בכור שור. Now he predates the רשב"ץ by some 200 years and was one of the Baalei Tosfos. He was close with ר"ת and מהר"י קרא. Now not wishing to cause any more confusion than you have already caused, I'm sure everyone knows that ר"ת is Rav Yaakov Tam. But just to be sure, מהר"י קרא, who is Rav Yosef Kara, is a Talmid of Rashi, and should not be confused with Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Shulchan Aruch.
So coming back to your reference from the BS, I was wondering whether you are referring to a particular Tosfos, his פירוש על התורה, or one of the סליחות that he composed.
I know you think you're some brilliant prankster who's gonna pull a good joke on that dumb Charedi troll, but besides for your humor being inappropriate (referring to the בכור שור as the bull), it's extremely juvenile and not quite as clever as you think!
We're going around in circles here.
There is simply NO ancient source stating that anyone who feels like it is entitled to sit and learn and force other people to support them, whether through begging, collecting, government welfare, or any other means.
That is currently the system in E"Y. This has never before been the case in Jewish history, and that is what Rabbi Slifkin (along with any other objective person) has a problem with. Why is this so complicated?
(Their reason for not working is actually probably not hashkafic, rather historical and sociological - Chareidim are simply scared/unsure/threatened by the thought of interfacing with the larger Israeli economy, and are unsure how to do it. Similar to their lack of participation in the army, though in that case their real concern legitimate.)
There is also simply NO ancient source stating that anyone who feels like it is entitled to write ridiculous, ignorant blog posts, like Natan does. There is also simply NO ancient source stating that thousands of MO people are entitled to have TVs in their house, filling their kids minds with non-Jewish culture. But that's where we're at.
How about this- all of the Modern Orthodox and secularists agree to only do things that have an ancient source from the Gemara and Halacha. That means no TV, no movies, no internet, no LGBTQ, no chillul Shabbos, you get it - and all the chareidim will agree to not have as much kollel as they have now. Sounds like a good deal?
??? It's a false choice and the issues have nothing to with each other. Are you allowed to make a claim on someone else's money because he has a TV?
I'm glad to see that you agree with my basic point though.
Again, contrast with the kollel system in America, which NS has no problem with. In E"Y, I might even be in favor of a national support system for an elite few learners, say the top 5%.
Oh, I thought you were just making a rhetorical point, not a halachic argument.
If you are making a halachic argument then "There is simply NO ancient source stating that..." doesn't make sense. There is no issur, and to the contrary, it is totally consistent with Chazal's extreme pro-Limud Torah, anti-secularist values. Unlike Natan's distortions.
Don't hide behind attacking NS and anti-secularist rants. Stay on topic.
So you're saying the halacha is if anyone wants to sit and learn, they can force people to support them. Not a town Rav, rosh yeshiva, or an outstanding scholar. Just anyone? Like one- third of the country in Israel today? (And don't fool yourself - most Chareidim don't not work because all consider themselves holy unique individuals who are somehow pattur from working. They don't work because the government give them free money not to!)
And again, if that is the halacha - and this is the point which you always ignore - why was this this never done in the entire Jewish history? Even in the times of the Bais Hamikdash, the Tannaim, Malchus beis Dovid, most people worked for a living!
Why should I not bring in anti-secularist rants, is this entire post not part of Slifkin's 17 year extended anti-Chareidi rant? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I don't consider a political negotiations to be forcing. The secular parties agree to it. Are you saying that the halacha is that such political negotiations are assur? What is your source? Are you now a Neturei Karta Satmar guy? As I said, Chazal were EXTREMELY pro-Torah and anti-secularism, so it is definitely comfortably within their value system.
I will tell you why this wasn't done throughout history, but first tell me why observant Jews throughout history weren't tolerant of secularism, like the Modern Orthodox are today. Did you ever find a Tanna who said homosexuality is ok? Who said kol isha is ok? Did you ever find a Tanna who called Creation a "sacred myth"? Who said the Torah was written by J, E, D, and P? And then, after that, tell me why YOU think kollel has been instituted today.
It's so bizarre how you constantly claim that the only alternative to the modern charedi system are the most fringe parts of Orthodoxy. You really need to get out more and see the vast range of Orthodox communities that are not Israeli charedi.
Meanwhile, there were observant Jews throughout history that did things that you (and sometimes even I) would find absolutely shocking. Like girls going to dance in the vineyards and boys checking them out for wives, or tannaim dancing with brides on their shoulders, or Rishonim adopting Greco-muslim philosophy and massively adjusting the Torah to match, or Rishonim and Acharonim writing love songs, etc., etc.
1. The point isn't power politics - do you want to poll most non-chareidim in EY and see what think about supporting chareidim who don't work? Would YOU want money taken out of your paycheck to give to people who refuse to work? I don't think so.
2. No one said everything else they do is ok, and again, it's irrelevant to this discussion.
3. Mass kollel was encouraged as a hora sha'ah after the Holocaust. I thought everybody knew that. In EY, state funding was set up when there were 400 yeshiva guys in 1950, which has nothing to with today's situation. The status quo has continued because of unthinking ideological inertia (people are in the habit of protesting whatever their fathers protested for), and the fact that chareidi parties keep on forcing more funding because of their increased political clout, i.e., *because they can*. Why do you think this isn't the case in the U.S.? Different history.
4. Did you even read NS's article?? It's abundantly clear that forcing support for joe shmo to sit and learn is a *daas yachid* who is probably not even saying that!
"And it is better that they would cancel some of their time from studying day and night rather than relying on the community to support them."
The words "it is better" doesn't imply something is obligatory.
"“And if he is not yet in this category, but is busy with his studies and leaves his business, the city is required to buy themselves with his sustenance.”
The word yet doesn't imply the person is learning to become a leader. The person is learning. The goal of the support may be to produce leaders but there's no way to tell who will become one.
RNS,
I am certainly no expert on Tashbetz, but your quote of his in section “VI” that: חייבים הצבור ליחד תיבה לתלמידים העוסקי' בתלמוד כדי להרבות בישיבה ולמען הרחבת גבולם בתלמידי'
Suggests to me that he may have been referring to the community supporting /subsidizing the yeshiva tuition for such students (merit based or need based scholarships) not subsidizing a yeshiva student raising their whole family on and supporting their whole lifestyle.
And relatedly, I wonder if that might also be a distinction in 148 between למנותו פרנס for those who actually WORK in leadership positions and EARN that level of support and למטרח בריפתיה for those who don’t; which you mention in brief in your post and @Happy expands on in his comment about 45 mins ago.
Jeffrey, in 142 he says
ואפי' התלמידים העוסקים בתורה כל ימיהם אע"פ שאינן ראשי ישיבות חייבין הצבור לפרנסם דרך כבודם כדאמרינן בפרק ואלו קשרים (שבת קי"ד ע"א) איזהו ת"ח שבני עירו מצוין לעשו' מלאכתו כל שמניח עסקיו ועוסק בחפצי שמי' למאי נ"מ למיטרח לי' בריפתיה.
I'm not sure if your suggestion is tenable in light of this.
Happy,
RNS quoted that passage in part “V” of the post. Again, I’m not an expert in Tashbetz, but his analysis seemed reasonable.
You don't need to be an expert. He is not doing an analysis, he is just making things up on the fly.
I think Rabbi Slifkin is often criticized by fanatics, or should I say this is just his ... Ordinary World?... But why couldn't he... Dance into the Fire..?.
I just needed to contribute to these quotes, I felt... Hungry like a Wolf... I feel relieved now, I gotta say.
An interesting topic of conversation would be if Rabbi Slifkin's Cofrut is the consequence of a Timtum Halev caused by 90's pop music. I guess we need to... Save a Prayer... for him, okay, I've got to stop with this.
About the subtitle, you raised the stakes very high for whoever gets things wrong. The way you're putting it, one side is right, while the other side is creating a new religion. Perhaps there's nothing you should know, and your opponents are creating a new religion. Or perhaps there's something you should know, and you are creating a new religion.
Very interesting topic but are there statistics, for the States and/or Israel, to quantify the problem of unemployment/poverty in the chareidi/yeshivish system? It seems in Israel that there are many chareidi men working in businesses and community ventures likes schools. Perhaps they entered the work force later (having learned in Kollel) or are under employed. In the states, most Kollel learners go on to have jobs albeit in their late 20's. Are the collectors knocking on doors really impoverished or just scamming the system. Many of the poverty statistics are hard to interpret as the chareidi communities are younger than other benchmark communities, rely on gemachs for many items and don't have or need cars (in Israel) to the degree of other communities.
The bottom feeders started the flap, the choshuva rabbonim who joined in felt if they didn't jump on the band wagon, the bottom feeders would go after them too. This is exactly what happened to Reb Aharon Feldman. After he issued his initial letter after speaking with Rav Elyashiv, the bottom feeders called him a liar. I was among the first to speak with him when he got back to Baltimore. It was clear that at the time (winter 2005) he still supported you. Then he sent me his ill-conceived diatribe of your science to review for him, and I wrote my critique of it. I was expecting him to totally revise it or not publish it at all. He published it and then I released my comments on it. For a few years after that he didn't speak to me. We are on OK terms now, about three years after our falling out, he sent me a couple to be mesader their keddushin because he was going to be out of town.
By the way, I am well familiar with bottom feeders, they went after me in 2000 when I published Aleph Shin. They did exactly the same thing, they sicced Rav Matisyahu Solomon on me. Then they went after him when he supported Reinman's One People, Two Worlds. They caused him to stab Reinman in the back. Baryonim Mushchasim!