Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Natan Slifkin
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to download my dissertation of the philosophy of the Rashbaz (the ones at the webpage linked to by Rabbi Slifkin are no longer current (see page 10 for some brief comments and references on this topic):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):
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!
Holy smoke! It seems Rav Moshe Feinstein, The Chazon Ish, Rav Shach, The Steipler ect ect ect all got it wrong! I cant believe we'v been led by tricksters the whole time. All hail Rav Nosson for being the only mevakshei emes around!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
"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!!!!
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.)
"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.
Holy smoke! It seems Rav Moshe Feinstein, The Chazon Ish, Rav Shach, The Steipler ect ect ect all got it wrong! I cant believe we'v been led by tricksters the whole time. All hail Rav Nosson for being the only mevakshei emes around!
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.
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.
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
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!
Holy smoke! It seems Rav Moshe Feinstein, The Chazon Ish, Rav Shach, The Steipler ect ect ect all got it wrong! I cant believe we'v been led by tricksters the whole time. All hail Rav Nosson for being the only mevakshei emes around!
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.
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?
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.
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.
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).
"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!!!!
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.)
"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.
Holy smoke! It seems Rav Moshe Feinstein, The Chazon Ish, Rav Shach, The Steipler ect ect ect all got it wrong! I cant believe we'v been led by tricksters the whole time. All hail Rav Nosson for being the only mevakshei emes around!
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.
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.