Charedim will never go to the army because they are afraid that the army will ruin their level of religion. They may have a point, or they may not have a point. But the only thing that will change their mind is to show them that they will not lose their level of religion by going to the army. Anything else is pointless.
Actually, it won't even help to show them that they won't lose their level of religion. They simply feel no need to join the army, because they don't identify as part of the nation. So their perspective is, just let other people do it, and who cares if they are suffering from overload.
They don't identify as part of the nation because the nation is not religious. It is identifying as part of the nation that makes so many datiim go OTD, and most of the rest have a shockingly low level of observance. Chareidim are not interested in identifying with your G-dless society. They are more than happy to help in ways that don't require this. So like Mark Rosenberg said, have separate chareidi militias, and you will see chareidim flock to them.
However, you are a disgusting, vile piece of dog excrement who has just recently written a long essay justifying the use of "parasite" for chareidim. And your followers loudly applauded it.
Are they subject to the laws and regulations of the country? Are they required to pay taxes? Are they prohibited from making their own treaties with other countries? Then they can also get privileges. But army is a tremendous negative chinuch influence that they cannot abide by.
But army is a tremendous negative chinuch influence that they cannot abide by. - Ok, let's clarify. If this is how they truly feel, then they have been poreish from the hashkafa of thousands of dati l'umi soldiers whose parents consider it the highest level of mesirus nefesh for the klal to serve/highest level of chinuch there is. And so we are left with totally different views of what Torah living is. Sad or par for the course in Judaism? Unclear.
Par for the course. We always had מחלוקות. The State of Israel, as much of a blessing it was provided a tremendous challenge for the nation, especially for the religious. We need to understand where the tension is coming from and then we can deal with it.
First of all, it's impossible from them to be "poresh from the hashkafa of the dati leumi soldiers" when that is a much newer development than chareidim, and chareidim never had the hashkafa of dati leumi soldiers in the first place. Learn what words mean. Secondly, the dati leumi community in general has a shockingly low level of observance and a terrible OTD rate. You once denied this but I showed you the numbers and anecdotes to back it up and...crickets.
Just to understand: Are not they all חייב מיתה? They are not religious! They are all dog excrement? (Except the ones who do things for you like drive the bus, take away the garbage, provide electricity….)
Should one of the g’doilim escape (now!) in a coffin and make a deal with….the Ayatoilah?
The Chazon Ish wrote a very controversial chiddush that they are considered captive children and are therefore at least not in the regular halachic category of מומר. It's questionable to what extent that is applicable today, but it certainly doesn't apply to public intellectuals who spread kefira.
Mr. Fishberg, They are not going - please don't delude yourself.
Here is the reason, " They just don't want to take that burden on themselves". What don't you understand about - I am NOT going -full stop.
I made a list of al the excuses these DRAFT DODGER use , and I did hit 20 Excuses - the last one was a duzzy. # 20 We cannot take on DOUBLE the burden, we took on learning Torah, and if you force us to the army, we will have a second burden, and it is not fair as a society to make us take on double of what the rest do.
You might have addressed the one excuse that since they might go OTD, they must have a complete religious battalion with a Rosh Chaburah as captain. However, there are 19 other reasons not to go. Have you forget about - standard of my Kashrus
- too weak to hold a gun straight - not allowed to help a Tumah Zionist organization - It is not a milchmet Mitzvah Etc. Etc.
I am willing to be wager anyone with 10 to one odds, Should the army make complete frum battalions with frum commanders (which the army is trying to do) .
Now - If they enlist I give you $100,000. if they don't go you give me $10,000, I could use some loose cash these days.
All the reasons you hear from people with your selective hearing are subordinate to the reason I gave. Every single Rosh Yeshiva says my reason. Don't delude yourself.
Yes, the fear of losing religion (really charedism) is one of those levels of explanation we get for many aspects of charedi behavior (in this case, one which isn't said aloud too much), and is about as true as all the others. Pretty much *every* explanation is, in reality, that charedism is predicated on holding oneself apart.
It also predicates that Haredi observance is precarious and weak in the face of secularism, ergo, observance can only be kept in place without common interactions with society.
Oh come on. Many more would draft if chareidi soldiers left the army as chareidi as they came in. Some wouldn't but obviously many chareidim do feel part of the country (albeit to a lower extent).
Anti-Zionism is baked into charedism. Charedism, at least as a movement, was *created* to be anti-Zionist. (Zionism and Religious Zionism both predate organizational charedism by decades.) There could be no fears at all and they'd still resist.
I assume you mean Chaim of Volozhin. Why would you pick him, of all people? You could have a much more likely candidate in, say, the Chatam Sofer.
But first, no. If we're going to use the current definition of "charedi," no, the phenomenon didn't really exist before the 1970's, 1950's at the earliest. And note well what I wrote: *as a movement* and *organizational*. Organizational charedism was founded with the Agudah in the 1920's. (Again, charedism as we know it didn't yet exist.) The Religious Zionist movement was created decades before: Indeed, the Agudah (and the da'at torah ideology that supported it to get votes) was founded specifically because Mizrachi was getting too many seats in the Polish legislature.
Firstly, the first serious religious zionist Rabbis was R Kook - all the people back then who fit with the definition of Zionism as we know it today where not religious. The first rabbis who ascribed to charedi ideology was earlier then that. We have R Chaim Brisker, Rav Kook's Rosh Yeshiva. You have the Chafetz chaim. And you have R Chaim Vilhozoner (You didn't explain why he does not fit the definition of charedi).
Secondly, the Aguda was not the first charedi organization. You had the vaad arbah arotzos and the asifas hagedolim.
Please see my experience in Shlav Bet. The new חטיבה חרדית is being built with the same ethos guiding it (I have a relative involved and have seen their guiding principles, "עשרת הדברות" as they call them).
Do you believe that a person can use the most disgusting and hateful rhetoric he wants, as long as you think he is making an important point? Is it ok, since Slifkin is "on your side" and potentially useful, so you can just ignore stuff like so as not to distract from the "real issues"? Or because you think that chareidi society is so horrible, that there no abuse that they don't deserve, even the use of anti-semitic tropes?
I think the post was in poor taste, but if you read it till the end, you'll see it was a charedi Rav (in my neighborhood no less) using the perjorative.
It is dati leumi people's job to call out dati leumi people who use the term (I have written about my opposition to name-calling). It is charedi people's job to call out charedi people who use the term. So I would hope you can condemn Rav Breuer's use of it.
It is also important to recognize that much of the Israeli charedi community has internalized an attitude of dependency. A young man came collecting this morning in my shul for his wedding--healthy, not an orphan BH. I asked if he had a plan for making a living. He said "I'm going to Kollel, why?" I said, "כדי לא להצטרך לבריות". I asked if he was healthy, he said yes. I said so you are blessed to be able to put your G-d given talents to work to provide for your family--גם זה מצוה מן התורה. He responded but the wedding expenses are very large, I need צדקה.
There is a certain inversion of Torah values reflected in this incident; I hope you can acknowledge that.
(P.S. I don't really have time for extended comments discussions, and most likely will not be able to respond further in the next few days)
The chareidi Rav was using the disgusting anti-semitic term in response to those who used it against him. I would call that in poor taste. But the main body of Slifkin's post was to argue that the use of the term is actually accurate about chareidim. So again, there is nothing that anybody can write about chareidim that you can unequivocally condemn? There are no limits? There is nothing too vile to write about chareidim, even arguing for the accuracy of anti-semitic tropes, because "It is also important to recognize..."?
Learning Torah isn't what's important to the Charedim. If it were they would say "Those who aren't learning should get jobs, defend the nation and do all those other things." But they are explicit. Even those who are not learning must never contribute to national defense or the economy. It is purity, control, and the preservation of an epistemic bubble which is central to their objections
They pay taxes. In fact, charedim pay more VAT than any other group in the country. If they where against contributing to the medinah, why would they pay taxes?
Even if they pay more VAT (seems unlikely), VAT is a small portion of overall taxes, and they pay far less per capita of other taxes like income taxes.
That might be true, but the government upped the taxes of certain products which are the most brought products for charedim whilst much less brought for other groups. For example, they introduced disposable cutlery tax, an item that most chilonim do not use at all whilst most charedim buy every week.
More VAT than any other group? That's impossible. Everyone pays VAT and charedim are 10% of the country. Yes they have a lot of kids, but there isn't VAT on food.
But there is tax on things such as disposable cutlery and large fizzy drink bottles, items that are very commonly brought weekly by charedim but are very uncommon in chiloni households. The government purposfully did this, and it means that charedim have more common household items that require VAT.
I'm sorry but if the Torah was a protection against evil, then the chredim would not have perished in the Holocaust. You know what the lesson of the Holocaust is in the end, Jews need to pick up a gun along with their Torah. It's also not as if David, Solomon and all the Kings, Judges and prophets of Israel did not fight in Israel's battles against her enemies, too.
The phrase לעסוק בתורה in this Gemara doesn't even mean "study Torah"! The phrase לעסוק בתורה has a more general meaning of "being involved in Torah matters". In this Gemara it specifically means "judging people according to Torah". The judges used to sit at the city gates. They would judge people according to Torah, thus rendering *tangible services* to society: serving justice, solving conflicts between people, and thus creating a better society. That's what Torah is supposed to do. The purpose of Torah study is to practice. ללמוד על מנת לעשות.
The phrase לעסוק בתורה also appears in Sanhedrin 49a, with the meaning of "judging people according to Torah". (That's the Gemara that talks about King David being עוסק בתורה at the time Yoav was waging wars. That Gemara specifically quotes a verse which says David judged the people, as proof that he was עוסק בתורה.)
The phrase לעסוק בתורה also appears in Avoda Zara 2b. That Gemara has a long story about a future argument between G-d and the nations at the end of days. The Gemara switches mid-story from the Jewish people being מתעסק בתורה to them being מקיימין את התורה. And at the end of the story G-d gives the nations the Mitzva of Sukkah. Hence, you see that throughout the story they are talking about the Jews *keeping* the Torah in general.
As far as Sanhedrin 49a, see maharsha. As far as AZ 2b, I see nothing that indicates anything of the sort.
There are so many proofs not like your take imho, but take a look at tosafos in brachos 11b for one.
It does bring out one point (at least the maharsha), that proper learning is supposed to be goal oriented (which is not a massive chiddush when understood properly), but to say bnei yeshiva are not doing that is mostly a lack of understanding (sometimes on their part as well...)
If i'm understanding correctly, the Maharsha is reinforcing the point here - Dovid Hamelech's asika b'Torah was specifically oriented towards his role of doing mishpat, rather than 'just' learning (maybe that's what you meant by goal oriented?), such that it wouldn't relate to a stam yeshivah bachur learning in yeshiva (even if he was learning in the style of aliba d'hilchasa - not saying that type of learning isn't valuable, just that it doesnt seem to qualify for what's being described by the gemara here).
Re AZ 2, again if i'm understanding correctly, see the end of 2b onto 3a -
שבע מצות שקיבלתם היכן קיימתם ומנלן דלא קיימום דתני רב יוסף (חבקוק ג, ו) עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים מאי ראה ראה ז' מצות שקבלו עליהן בני נח ולא קיימום כיון שלא קיימום עמד והתירן להן איתגורי איתגור א"כ מצינו חוטא נשכר אמר מר בריה דרבינא
ג׳ א
לומר שאף על פי שמקיימין אותן אין מקבלין עליהם שכר ולא והתניא היה רבי מאיר אומר מנין שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם כהנים לוים וישראלים לא נאמר אלא האדם הא למדת שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה הרי הוא ככהן גדול אלא לומר לך שאין מקבלין עליהם שכר כמצווה ועושה אלא כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה דאמר ר' חנינא גדול המצווה ועושה יותר משאינו מצווה ועושה
The gemara talks about non-Jews keeping mitzvos, but brings a beraisa about 'asika b'torah' to make the point. If asika b'torah' just meant learning, its hard to see how this beraisa relates.
I don't think its correct that asika b'torah always means torah practice rather than torah learning (after all, the brachah on learning is phrased la'asok), but it does seem that it includes a component of torah practice as well, and that element may even be primary in certain contexts
Learning Torah is, by definition, goal oriented. We are *learning* (the acquisition of knowledge or skills through experience, study, or by being taught - Oxford) His word and will. What they do in Yeshivos (though I'll admit there are those who ignore this in their shortsightedness) is learn Gemara properly. Gemara, the source of Halacha is very complex and hard and needs years of training to know how to break a sugya apart to be עומד על סודה, עומקה ובוריה, and so in the small picture it may seem like they aren't fulfilling this criteria of real learning while in Yeshiva (and this also leads to other actual issues), but the fact of the matter is that they are learning Gemara in depth, as one should. Anyone who "know how to learn," who knows how to break a sugya apart properly and be אסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא באמת understands how their year of training in yeshiva are pivotal to the final cause. Perhaps it should be made more clear and perhaps because it's not so clear many people don't think about what they are doing and just learn without understanding what they are doing, but that doesn't detract from the point that the goal is to produce חכמי התורה באמת.
Re AZ, if עסק בתורה means what this fellow is proposing, the Gemara is wonderful, but if it doesn't (and I see no indication of such and there is tons of indication otherwise), that gemara wouldn't make a dent in definition changing. The gemara sees from the fact that a Goy seems to be held in high esteem for learning which indicates that his life of Torah mean something, unlike the understanding of the previous statement. Just because they can be equated, that doesn't make them the same thing at all. הנלע"ד כתבתי ולע"ד הוא פשוט.
We know for a fact that עוסק בתורה means learning torah מיד היה עומד ועוסק תורה by דוד המלך and countless other hundreds of sources. To conjecture that it means something else as well, and on top of that to say that we can choose that a specific gemara can follow that conjecture and knock out the simple pshat, as our friend is suggesting, needs much stronger proof
It is absolutely not true ti say that learning Torah is by definition goal oriented. On the contrary, it is the primary goal of most yeshivos to stress learning for the sake of learning, and absolutely not to take it to halacha, let alone to practice.
That's a small minded understanding of what the Yeshivos are trying to do (although, I'll admit once again that many Yeshivos subvert this and share the same small-mindedness and see it how you do, and perhaps that was your experience). In truth Gemara is complicated and takes years of practice and fine-tuning, even to learn a piece of Ramban takes a long time, and that's when you're good at it. But to get there one needs to learn how to break things apart slowly and extremely carefully. And these nuances play out lehalacha all the time. The fact that the focus isn't on the final product in yeshiva is only because before coming to the final product you need to learn all the nuances that precede that halacha. What they are doing in yeshivos (at least what the good ones do, or what they should be doing in all) is learning gemara well. The fact that they don't learn enough mishna berura or other practical halacha seforim (which should be done more but since the focus is what we mentioned above, any side focuses fade away especially with teenagers) is because that's not how to learn halacha properly. the mishna berura himself before paskening broke his brain on the sugya, every line in the rashba and ramban and magen avraham etc..
What you call "for the sake of learning" is nothing other than a silly misnomer as I mentioned in other comments here, reb chaim volozhiner himself describes לשמה as "היה לשם התורה כגון לידע ולהבין ולהוסיף לקח ופלפול"
Regarding Sanhedrin 49a, yeah I see Maharsha's diyuk. I'm not sure you have to understand it that way.
Regarding Brachot 11b: What do you see there? I see an instance where לעסוק בתורה does mean study Torah, especially since it also says in this case לעסוק *בדברי* תורה.
Regarding AZ 2b, see AZ 3a (part of the same story): מנין שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול? תלמוד לומר אשר *יעשה* אותם האדם וחי בהם
Regarding King David getting up in the middle of the night: I would say in this case it means he would get up and compose psalms (which is also a type of studying Torah), as it says חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה אָקוּם לְהוֹדוֹת לָךְ עַל מִשְׁפְּטֵי צִדְקֶךָ
Where does it say there שירות ותשבחות? (I'm looking at Sanhedrin 16a.)
In any case, I'm happy we agree that learning should be first and foremost goal-oriented. That's the Pshat in Chazal (e.g. Pirkei Avot הלומד על מנת ללמד...הלומד על מנת לעשות) and that's the Pshat in Psukim (e.g. note that the famous Pasuk והגית בו יומם ולילה continues למען תשמור לעשות ככל הכתוב בו!).
The most clear formulation of this very basic principle is, I think, in Rambam's commentary to the Mishna (Peah 1:1). Rambam explains why Torah study is equivalent to all commandments in giving reward in both this world and the next world, as follows: The basis of all commandments between a man and his fellow is, as Hillel HaZaken said "Do not do to others what you hate being done to you". And the basic purpose of Torah study is to fulfill the commandments. And when you fulfill the commandments and behave nicely to other people, people behave nicely back to you. That's Rambam's explanation in short.
However, that is *not* the attitude in modern Haredi society! Rather, Haredim follow R. Haim of Volozhin, who turned the tables upside down, and said that "Torah Lishma" is actually Torah which is not learnt to fulfill anything. Thus, they define their purpose as just sitting and learning Torah at the expense of the rest of society, arguing that we must take *on faith* the claim that they are actually helping society. Haredi behavior is extremely far from Hillel HaZaken's principle, which is the basis of all the Torah!
Furthermore, as much Torah as they learn, the regular Haredi guy cannot explain to you the reasoning behind the Gdolim. When you put them into a corner with arguments, they just say "well, the Gdolim must surely know what they say". And the Gdolim do not offer any counter-arguments either. They do not write any responsa or anything. All this happens because learning Torah lost its primary purpose, which is "learn in order to fulfill".
If we could get people to go back to ללמוד על מנת לעשות we would go a long way forward!
"Rather, Haredim follow R. Haim of Volozhin, who turned the tables upside down, and said that "Torah Lishma" is actually Torah which is not learnt to fulfill anything."
Nonsense on many levels.
" Thus, they define their purpose as just sitting and learning Torah at the expense of the rest of society, arguing that we must take *on faith* the claim that they are actually helping society. "
Neither the Rambam nor anybody else dispute that learning Torah helps society. Only amei ha'aretz/apostates like Slifkin and friends.
Sorry, see Brachos 3b (same sugya with דוד is found there as well...)
What you're quoting from Reb Chaim Volozhiner is a big misnomer. He said Torah Lishma means Torah for the sake of Torah itself - as opposed to for the sake of דביקות. But he was never redefining what learning Torah itself is! He clearly means that one should learn Torah for the sake of knowing Torah, but the sake of knowing Torah means *learning* it and *knowing* it. He says this explicitly (לידע ולהבין ולהוסיף לקח ופלפול). I'm not sure how this translated into popular culture as what your describing but it's a myth.
"Accordingly, it does not follow that people who are learning Torah are necessarily doing anything of merit for the nation. It would all depend on whether they are supposed to be learning Torah in the first place. In the same way as learning Torah in the bathroom, or on Tisha B’Av in place of reciting kinnos, or on a Friday afternoon when one’s wife is desperate for help, does not generate any positive morale or spiritual merit or metaphysical protection..."
I'm not sure you've made your case here. Learning Torah in the bathroom or on Tisha B'Av are explicit איסורים. Learning when one's wife is desperate... - presumably יצא שכרו בהפסדו, although maybe כלל ישראל still benefits from his learning.
In the case of Charedim, a huge proprotion are likely to not be in circumstances where they should not be fighting and presumably their learning does generate spiritual merit or metaphysical perfection.
Those who should be fighting, I don't think the problem is that they are learning, it's that they are not fighting. As such, I would think that their learning would still provide benefit to the כלל, unless shown otherwise.
If one assumes that charedim are halachically obligated to physically assist in the war effort (something that they deny), and they decide that in order to get out of it, they're going to learn Torah, claiming that it replaces action, then they're essentially doing what this gmara criticizes and their learning would seemingly have no merit. (See also radak in Yirmiyahu 2,8 and rashi on the entirety of the first pasuk of parshas bechukosai and all of Yehoshua 1,8 and Rambam on the first mishna in pe'ah for some other examples.)
Making all these Chiddusim about not going to the army or must go. You can become a huge Talmud Chuchem on this subject alone. I am waiting for someone to come out with a Sefer with a all the chudushim, arguments, where this one said this, that one said that We can read it this way, we should read that way, etc.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS - everyone must go to the army and take on the burden of protecting Eretz Yisroel, WE are under attack to destroy us! Chadushim, Sayings, are not what we need to protect us from some horrible death.
Should you do not want to go - then either leave the country and find a better place in the World to live, OR sit in a jail for 5 years and then loose your benefits as a citizen of the state. A benefit - in jail keep looking for more chaddushim
I'm glad you're amused in your misunderstanding of my comment :) it is apparent that you didn't look up a single one of my sources, perhaps didn't even bother reading the one that I copy and pasted for your convenience... my parenthetical line that you chose to get bogged down by is not my personal position, I actually just wrote it so people wouldn't use this as a springboard for a silly debate as to whether the assumption I proposed at the beginning was correct. Shame that it was so egregiously misunderstood that I need to write this, please look up my sources and try for a second to understand what I'm saying before "arguing" with me...
I don’t really see the connection. The Yerushalmi (and all these sources, as far as I could tell) seems to be talking someone who learns not intending to apply it in practice. That’s not what the Charedim do.
It depends on how one looks at it. There definitely exists a mindset within the charedi community (just how widespread is perhaps debatable) of staying in yeshiva just long enough to get a petur. Essentially learning *in order to* avoid practice in this area, claiming that their Torah learning replaces the actions that they're supposed to be fulfilling. (Again, under the assumption that one is obligated halachically to join in the effort to protect klal yisroel against its enemies and the enemies of Hashem (see rashi on Shemos 15,7)).
Well, the context in the Yerushalmi was criticizing Rabbi Shimon's apparent neglect to say kriyas shma. It seems clear that that yerushalmi would apply to someone who learns as a way of getting out of doing an obligatory mitzvah, but you can feel free to feel like that's a kvetch, I don't really care about how anonymous people on the internet understand things. I was trying to explain why one might suggest that there's no merit to learning in order to avoid serving klal yisroel and destroying Hashem's enemies.
I understand what you are saying better now, but if the Charedim don’t think they have a halachic chiyuv, then they can’t be using learning to exempt themselves from keeping halacha. Am I wrong? (No obligation to reply to an anonymous person on the internet :) )
You forget that charedim also hold that there is no milchemes mitzva happening, based on an explicit Rambam who says there is no milchama until there is a melech, Cohen Gadol and Sanhedrin - and therefore there isno milchama until the third beis hamikdash.
I didn't forget that view, it wasn't the topic of the conversation. (I wonder whether you knew that Rav Elyashiv described the yom kippur war as a milchemes mitzvah, or was he not charedi?) I should also note that it's not a debate I'm interested in having here at this time, I was just explaining why someone might suggest that Torah learning to avoid practice has no merit.
אמנם יש לדון עפימ"ש בתוספתא מגילה פ"ג ט"ו: היוצא למלחמת הרשות חופר ויושב חופר ומכסה שנא': "וחפרת בה ושבת וגו'", משמע לכאורה דמצוה זו לא נאמרה אלא במלחמת רשות, שהרי אין יוצאין למלחמת רשות אלא עפ"י תנאים מסוימים ועפ"י בי"ד של שבעים ואחד ועפ"י מלך, אבל במלחמת מצוה אין צריך לכל זה.
ועי' רמב"ם פ"ה מהלכות מלכים: "ואי זו מלחמת מצוה - עזרת ישראל מיד צר שבא עליהם", ואנן הלוא במלחמת מצוה קעסקינן.
...
ומה גם שלפי"ד החזון - איש (עירובין לקוטים סי' קי"ב ו') ארבעה הדברים שפטרו במחנה (וה"ה מ"ש כי תצא מחנה על אויביך כו') אינן אלא במלחמת כל ישראל - מלחמת מצוה או רשות - ע"פ מלך וסנהדרין, אבל גויים שיצאו למלחמה על ישראל אף שזו מלחמת מצוה מ"מ אינן בכלל הנ"ל.)
If you are just trying to defend Slifkin's position, you don't need to invent new reasons why the Torah learning of sincere yeshiva boys/men does not confer a protective merit. Just state the "rationalist" position, that there are no miracles, hashgacha, or s'char v'onesh, and G-d doesn't magically protect people in the merit of Torah study.
Also, make sure to write a whole essay noting that it is accurate to call chareidim "parasites" or "leeches", but that even though it is accurate, you shouldn't use the term.
I get the sense here that this is similar to the Gemara's citing of the view of Shimon bar Yochai (who, as my teacher, the late, great Yaakov Elman, pointed out, is the *only* person in Chazal, Tanna or Amora, who even comes *close*- and not even *that* close- to having what we'd call a "charedi" view of of the world) that's it's not necessary to work for a living, only to learn, and then saying, politely (if you know about other places the Gemara talks about R' Shimon, you'll know what I mean), essentially, "Well, that's a lovely sentiment, but it doesn't work in the real world."
So too here, in the real world, Jews have always relied on actual action, or, if they haven't, have suffered some bad consequences.
(I can still remember R' Elman beaming as he told me that he was about to deliver a talk on his "discovery" that all of Chazal were Modern Orthodox Jews. And before the haters weigh in, R' Elman was a chassidishe Yid who was a close talmid of R' Hutner and who forgot (so to speak; he forgot nothing) more of Shas and Chazal than they'll ever know.)
If I can be permitted a bit of heresy: Yesterday morning I was shaliach tzibur and noted something to myself, not for the first time: The chazan says four Yehi Ratzons, plus Acheinu, after Hagbah. The longest is the one about Torah learners.
This morning, again as shaliach tzibur, I noted that apart from Modim, the longest bracha in Shemonah Esrei is Al HaTzadikim.
There are other examples as well. The Yekum Purkan about talmidei chachamim is longer than the one about the kahal which follows it, for example.
And all this is well and good: Judaism is all about the learning. But it pays to bear in mind that at no point in Jewish history, even today, even in Eastern Europe, and even in the time of Chazal, did any more than a relatively few percent of Jews "learn." But it was that percent which wrote Shas and the tefillah and pretty much everything else. Which, again, is all well and good, and to be expected. But it's something to bear in mind when considering their perspective.
I imagine he committed it to writing at some point, but this was a speech at the opening of an exhibit on the printing of the Talmud at the Yeshiva University Museum.
I get the sense here that this is similar to the Gemara's citing of the view of Shimon bar Yochai (who, as my teacher, the late, great Yaakov Elman, pointed out, is the *only* person in Chazal, Tanna or Amora, who even comes *close*- and not even *that* close- to having what we'd call a "charedi" view of of the world) that's it's not necessary to work for a living, only to learn, and then saying, politely (if you know about other places the Gemara talks about R' Shimon, you'll know what I mean), essentially, "Well, that's a lovely sentiment, but it doesn't work in the real world."
So too here, in the real world, Jews have always relied on actual action, or, if they haven't, have suffered some bad consequences.
I really lucked out. He mostly taught graduate classes, but the graduate professors were expected to do an undergrad course once a year or so, and I was placed, by the registrar, into his Intro to Bible class. Of course, he taught us freshmen the same way he taught doctoral students, much to the shock of some of his colleagues.
IIRC he asked to be called Dr. Ellman. He was a very unique individual. I could never get clarity on why his insights as to the realia of talnudic times should not affect psak. I talked with him several times on the matter but could not pin him down :-) bsorot tovot
My father bumped into him once and they struck out trying to figure out how they knew each other before Dr. Elman said, "Did you ever go to Rabinowitz's Bookstore?" and my father said, "Oh! You're little Yaakov!" "That was me."
I thought of the Gemara in Berachos 28b, where Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai admits that his prayers will not be as effective as Rabbi Chaninah Ben Dosa's. Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai was accomplished and learned, and he was the Nasi, but Rabbi Chaninah Ben Dosa is a different type of servant of Hashem.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is the rational one in that story. The other Rabbis are submitting to various superstitions about disease. And he is the one Rabbi that is doing his job of tending to the sick.
That some kinds of disease spread was known by every society. But none of them knew *how* it spread because they were not aware of microbes and the germ theory of disease. Instead they substituted various superstitions. Not eating eggs from an alley with Ra'atan sufferers? Not going downwind from a place where a sufferer sat? Even entering the tent was almost certainly just a superstition; most serious diseases don't spread that way and those that do, like measles, every gets anyhow. And what is the point of being a Rabbi if you are not willing to take any level of risk to help people. In fact it doesn't say that RYBL got sick. Probably because the risks were exaggerated. We should add the false belief of the time that disease sufferers deserved their fate because of sin which would add to the irrational shunning.
Not insulting them, but they were adhering to the superstitions of their times, just as Chazal and all the Rishonim did with respect to astrology (Rambam was an outlier in recognizing astrology as superstition). RYBL was the one who realized that and did the right thing. People here are getting this backwards and interpreting the RYBL as the mystic and the other Rabbis as rational. He was the rational one in this story, and also the one who realized that abandoning the sick to protect themselves is not Torah. You have have to go out and minister to the sick or what is the point? In this story, RYBL is the hesder soldier and the other rabbis are the Charedim.
The point of RYBL in the story is not about special divine protection. It is that the job of the Rabbis is to minister to the sick; if you can't do that then what good is this whole Torah thing? And the other Rabbis were giving in to various persistent superstitions about leprosy and other diseases. R Zeira seems to be going with the miasma theory of disease. RYBL is the rationalist in this story while the other Rabbis are giving in the various myths and superstitions.
It can, but not in the ways that they discuss there. They didn't know about the germ theory of disease. They were fearful and superstitious out of shared ignorance resulting in them not doing their Rabbinic jobs.
These rabbis' precautions don't sound superstitious. They have a remarkable resemblance to the disease mechanisms described by by modern medicine (flies carrying germs from feces to food, covid transmitted through aerosols, etc). They sound like exactly the measures that someone who had extensively observed disease, but didn't know about germs, would take and which would protect them most of the time. As for RYBL, at best he was placing himself in a dangerous situation to do a mitzvah while relying on a miracle to save him (an approach to which the Torah has a rather ambivalent attitude), at worse he was endangering himself for no reason because he didn't even care for the sick but rather just learned in their presence.
Not really. First off he was absolutely caring for the sick while the other Rabbi were shunning them. It says רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מִיכְרָךְ בְּהוּ וְעָסֵיק בַּתּוֹרָה. The word מִיכְרָךְ implies that he was embracing the ill and ministering to them. Also part of the prooftext implies that the Torah requires you act in a loving manner "אַיֶּלֶת אֲהָבִים וְיַעֲלַת חֵן". The others were afraid to get near.
Second, it doesn't say that he got ill. It says the others were afraid but he wasn't and he did not get ill. So a close observer would realize that the others were being overly cautious. No one knows what Ra'atan is but Preuss offers that it might be leprosy which has led to shunning in many societies way beyond any risk of transmission because it is a scary disease.
Third, as far as the disease spread mechanisms. Eggs from an alley of a sufferer is just completely a superstition. Flies can sometimes spread disease, but that is when they get on your food having come from things like feces which is true of a healthy person's feces and there is no mention of protecting food there and it wouldn't make a difference where the flies came from. They don't know how it transmits so they were forced to make guesses. The wind is not going to send concentrated virus particles in your direction. I'll admit that entering the tent has some plausibility, but given all the other "associations" I'm going to guess that was another wild guess. Most important is that they say RYBL go in and not get sick. Which I think is the whole point of listing these out. If you want to be a Rabbi, be like RYBL.
Definitely one of your best articles yet. One of the comments below notes that they do not feel they are a part of the nation. That is at the core of the ideology. Well, you can't have it both ways. If you are not part of the nation there are certain benefits that they should not have - like voting?
Halacha defines "clal yisrael" differently. Which is why chiloni zionim are not part of clal yisrael and why they have problems of stam yeinam. It is also why we do not listen to the opinions of reform Jews.
Because they put their lives and the lives of their children on the line every day and especially now to protect that nation. It’s a simple concept. If a group does not want to participate in the nation ….,
If you define clal yisrael as "anyone who risks their life to protect the nation" then yes, most charedim does not want to be part of that nation.
Halacha defines "clal yisrael" differently. For example, anyone who is mechalel shabbos befarhesiah is not included in the definition of clal yisrael - even if he is risking his life for Israel. This is why there is a serious issue of stam yeinom by a chiloni soldier. For obvious reasons, charedim will follow halcha's definition, not your made up one.
You do not get to define things when God has already defined them.
A member of clal yisrael is a Jew who keeps torah and mitzvos and is not a min, apikores, cofer, moiser, or a mechalel shabbos befarhesia etc. Any Jew who does not fulfil all of these definitions is not part of the clal. They have the definition of an AKUM in regards to many things, including shechita and stam yeinam. See the rambam in Hil' chovel umazik in regards to a moiser for one such example of this in halacha. It is the same reason why the 3 million reform jews are not part of the clal.
Therefore, the 6 million chiloni Jews are not part of clal yisrael and I can see why charedim do not want to be part of their clal.
Charedim will never go to the army because they are afraid that the army will ruin their level of religion. They may have a point, or they may not have a point. But the only thing that will change their mind is to show them that they will not lose their level of religion by going to the army. Anything else is pointless.
Actually, it won't even help to show them that they won't lose their level of religion. They simply feel no need to join the army, because they don't identify as part of the nation. So their perspective is, just let other people do it, and who cares if they are suffering from overload.
They don't identify as part of the nation because the nation is not religious. It is identifying as part of the nation that makes so many datiim go OTD, and most of the rest have a shockingly low level of observance. Chareidim are not interested in identifying with your G-dless society. They are more than happy to help in ways that don't require this. So like Mark Rosenberg said, have separate chareidi militias, and you will see chareidim flock to them.
However, you are a disgusting, vile piece of dog excrement who has just recently written a long essay justifying the use of "parasite" for chareidim. And your followers loudly applauded it.
Do you think Haredim should recieve any benefit from the state in that case?
Are they subject to the laws and regulations of the country? Are they required to pay taxes? Are they prohibited from making their own treaties with other countries? Then they can also get privileges. But army is a tremendous negative chinuch influence that they cannot abide by.
Right but they should get less than those that identify fully. It may be their right to be מסתייג from the state but the state can return the favor.
They do get less. They are very poor.
But army is a tremendous negative chinuch influence that they cannot abide by. - Ok, let's clarify. If this is how they truly feel, then they have been poreish from the hashkafa of thousands of dati l'umi soldiers whose parents consider it the highest level of mesirus nefesh for the klal to serve/highest level of chinuch there is. And so we are left with totally different views of what Torah living is. Sad or par for the course in Judaism? Unclear.
Par for the course. We always had מחלוקות. The State of Israel, as much of a blessing it was provided a tremendous challenge for the nation, especially for the religious. We need to understand where the tension is coming from and then we can deal with it.
First of all, it's impossible from them to be "poresh from the hashkafa of the dati leumi soldiers" when that is a much newer development than chareidim, and chareidim never had the hashkafa of dati leumi soldiers in the first place. Learn what words mean. Secondly, the dati leumi community in general has a shockingly low level of observance and a terrible OTD rate. You once denied this but I showed you the numbers and anecdotes to back it up and...crickets.
Just to understand: Are not they all חייב מיתה? They are not religious! They are all dog excrement? (Except the ones who do things for you like drive the bus, take away the garbage, provide electricity….)
Should one of the g’doilim escape (now!) in a coffin and make a deal with….the Ayatoilah?
The Chazon Ish wrote a very controversial chiddush that they are considered captive children and are therefore at least not in the regular halachic category of מומר. It's questionable to what extent that is applicable today, but it certainly doesn't apply to public intellectuals who spread kefira.
Not sure how you define kfira. I asked this before:
Should not one murder those public intellectuals who spread kfira?
Should you not riot and burn down neighborhoods of kofrim?
Because we aren't sickos who fantasize about doing violence to our opponents.
He said this? Didn't he apply תינוקות שנשבו on all the chilonim now that we don't have גילוי שכינה?
No, I don't think so
Mr. Fishberg, They are not going - please don't delude yourself.
Here is the reason, " They just don't want to take that burden on themselves". What don't you understand about - I am NOT going -full stop.
I made a list of al the excuses these DRAFT DODGER use , and I did hit 20 Excuses - the last one was a duzzy. # 20 We cannot take on DOUBLE the burden, we took on learning Torah, and if you force us to the army, we will have a second burden, and it is not fair as a society to make us take on double of what the rest do.
You might have addressed the one excuse that since they might go OTD, they must have a complete religious battalion with a Rosh Chaburah as captain. However, there are 19 other reasons not to go. Have you forget about - standard of my Kashrus
- too weak to hold a gun straight - not allowed to help a Tumah Zionist organization - It is not a milchmet Mitzvah Etc. Etc.
I am willing to be wager anyone with 10 to one odds, Should the army make complete frum battalions with frum commanders (which the army is trying to do) .
Now - If they enlist I give you $100,000. if they don't go you give me $10,000, I could use some loose cash these days.
All the reasons you hear from people with your selective hearing are subordinate to the reason I gave. Every single Rosh Yeshiva says my reason. Don't delude yourself.
If your kind of Rosh Hayeshivas ran the army - how long do you think we will last??
Second - EVERY Rosh Ha'yeshivas??- there are hundred that say different.
Can you try to write a coherent comment rather than just spouting off whatever comes to your head
Yes, the fear of losing religion (really charedism) is one of those levels of explanation we get for many aspects of charedi behavior (in this case, one which isn't said aloud too much), and is about as true as all the others. Pretty much *every* explanation is, in reality, that charedism is predicated on holding oneself apart.
It also predicates that Haredi observance is precarious and weak in the face of secularism, ergo, observance can only be kept in place without common interactions with society.
That's THE reason. That's what must be addressed
He must be a very religious man indeed, to call another Jew a piece of dog excrement. Only a pious Jew would say such a thing. Mature, too.
Oh come on. Many more would draft if chareidi soldiers left the army as chareidi as they came in. Some wouldn't but obviously many chareidim do feel part of the country (albeit to a lower extent).
Anti-Zionism is baked into charedism. Charedism, at least as a movement, was *created* to be anti-Zionist. (Zionism and Religious Zionism both predate organizational charedism by decades.) There could be no fears at all and they'd still resist.
Wasn't it R Chaim Vilozhoner who was the father of charedi'ism?
I assume you mean Chaim of Volozhin. Why would you pick him, of all people? You could have a much more likely candidate in, say, the Chatam Sofer.
But first, no. If we're going to use the current definition of "charedi," no, the phenomenon didn't really exist before the 1970's, 1950's at the earliest. And note well what I wrote: *as a movement* and *organizational*. Organizational charedism was founded with the Agudah in the 1920's. (Again, charedism as we know it didn't yet exist.) The Religious Zionist movement was created decades before: Indeed, the Agudah (and the da'at torah ideology that supported it to get votes) was founded specifically because Mizrachi was getting too many seats in the Polish legislature.
Firstly, the first serious religious zionist Rabbis was R Kook - all the people back then who fit with the definition of Zionism as we know it today where not religious. The first rabbis who ascribed to charedi ideology was earlier then that. We have R Chaim Brisker, Rav Kook's Rosh Yeshiva. You have the Chafetz chaim. And you have R Chaim Vilhozoner (You didn't explain why he does not fit the definition of charedi).
Secondly, the Aguda was not the first charedi organization. You had the vaad arbah arotzos and the asifas hagedolim.
Please see my experience in Shlav Bet. The new חטיבה חרדית is being built with the same ethos guiding it (I have a relative involved and have seen their guiding principles, "עשרת הדברות" as they call them).
https://chaimgoldberg.substack.com/p/shlav-bet-a-charedi-friendly-army
Talking about the state of dialogue! You seem like a reasonable person. What do you think of this? https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/can-people-be-parasites
Do you believe that a person can use the most disgusting and hateful rhetoric he wants, as long as you think he is making an important point? Is it ok, since Slifkin is "on your side" and potentially useful, so you can just ignore stuff like so as not to distract from the "real issues"? Or because you think that chareidi society is so horrible, that there no abuse that they don't deserve, even the use of anti-semitic tropes?
I think the post was in poor taste, but if you read it till the end, you'll see it was a charedi Rav (in my neighborhood no less) using the perjorative.
It is dati leumi people's job to call out dati leumi people who use the term (I have written about my opposition to name-calling). It is charedi people's job to call out charedi people who use the term. So I would hope you can condemn Rav Breuer's use of it.
It is also important to recognize that much of the Israeli charedi community has internalized an attitude of dependency. A young man came collecting this morning in my shul for his wedding--healthy, not an orphan BH. I asked if he had a plan for making a living. He said "I'm going to Kollel, why?" I said, "כדי לא להצטרך לבריות". I asked if he was healthy, he said yes. I said so you are blessed to be able to put your G-d given talents to work to provide for your family--גם זה מצוה מן התורה. He responded but the wedding expenses are very large, I need צדקה.
There is a certain inversion of Torah values reflected in this incident; I hope you can acknowledge that.
(P.S. I don't really have time for extended comments discussions, and most likely will not be able to respond further in the next few days)
The chareidi Rav was using the disgusting anti-semitic term in response to those who used it against him. I would call that in poor taste. But the main body of Slifkin's post was to argue that the use of the term is actually accurate about chareidim. So again, there is nothing that anybody can write about chareidim that you can unequivocally condemn? There are no limits? There is nothing too vile to write about chareidim, even arguing for the accuracy of anti-semitic tropes, because "It is also important to recognize..."?
What about this, which was a response to Slifkin's post? https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/can-jews-be-nazis Is that also only "in poor taste"? Or do you have double standard for these things, based on whose side you are on?
Again, do you believe that being a תלמיד חכם and a soldier is mutually exclusive?
Excellent comment
This unpaid subscriber is impersonating me.
Identity theft. This is not my message. This person is impersonating me.
This person is posting under my name.
This person is posting here under my name, and this is not the first time he has done this.
Stop impersonating other people online.
That's awful actually! Natan...
Learning Torah isn't what's important to the Charedim. If it were they would say "Those who aren't learning should get jobs, defend the nation and do all those other things." But they are explicit. Even those who are not learning must never contribute to national defense or the economy. It is purity, control, and the preservation of an epistemic bubble which is central to their objections
In a nutshell I would say it's about preserving observance of halacha as a community.
Where "halacha" means something radically different than it used to
Which change are you reffering to? The fact that we've become more meticulous?
They pay taxes. In fact, charedim pay more VAT than any other group in the country. If they where against contributing to the medinah, why would they pay taxes?
Even if they pay more VAT (seems unlikely), VAT is a small portion of overall taxes, and they pay far less per capita of other taxes like income taxes.
That might be true, but the government upped the taxes of certain products which are the most brought products for charedim whilst much less brought for other groups. For example, they introduced disposable cutlery tax, an item that most chilonim do not use at all whilst most charedim buy every week.
More VAT than any other group? That's impossible. Everyone pays VAT and charedim are 10% of the country. Yes they have a lot of kids, but there isn't VAT on food.
But there is tax on things such as disposable cutlery and large fizzy drink bottles, items that are very commonly brought weekly by charedim but are very uncommon in chiloni households. The government purposfully did this, and it means that charedim have more common household items that require VAT.
I'm sorry but if the Torah was a protection against evil, then the chredim would not have perished in the Holocaust. You know what the lesson of the Holocaust is in the end, Jews need to pick up a gun along with their Torah. It's also not as if David, Solomon and all the Kings, Judges and prophets of Israel did not fight in Israel's battles against her enemies, too.
Your missing another point. Anyone that looks closely will note The Charedim ( frummer) suffered greater in holocaust then others.
It is FAIR to ask if Torah protects - Where was the protection in the holocaust? This shows it is only an excuse for Draft Dodging.
The phrase לעסוק בתורה in this Gemara doesn't even mean "study Torah"! The phrase לעסוק בתורה has a more general meaning of "being involved in Torah matters". In this Gemara it specifically means "judging people according to Torah". The judges used to sit at the city gates. They would judge people according to Torah, thus rendering *tangible services* to society: serving justice, solving conflicts between people, and thus creating a better society. That's what Torah is supposed to do. The purpose of Torah study is to practice. ללמוד על מנת לעשות.
The phrase לעסוק בתורה also appears in Sanhedrin 49a, with the meaning of "judging people according to Torah". (That's the Gemara that talks about King David being עוסק בתורה at the time Yoav was waging wars. That Gemara specifically quotes a verse which says David judged the people, as proof that he was עוסק בתורה.)
The phrase לעסוק בתורה also appears in Avoda Zara 2b. That Gemara has a long story about a future argument between G-d and the nations at the end of days. The Gemara switches mid-story from the Jewish people being מתעסק בתורה to them being מקיימין את התורה. And at the end of the story G-d gives the nations the Mitzva of Sukkah. Hence, you see that throughout the story they are talking about the Jews *keeping* the Torah in general.
Well said - I added it to the post.
As far as Sanhedrin 49a, see maharsha. As far as AZ 2b, I see nothing that indicates anything of the sort.
There are so many proofs not like your take imho, but take a look at tosafos in brachos 11b for one.
It does bring out one point (at least the maharsha), that proper learning is supposed to be goal oriented (which is not a massive chiddush when understood properly), but to say bnei yeshiva are not doing that is mostly a lack of understanding (sometimes on their part as well...)
If i'm understanding correctly, the Maharsha is reinforcing the point here - Dovid Hamelech's asika b'Torah was specifically oriented towards his role of doing mishpat, rather than 'just' learning (maybe that's what you meant by goal oriented?), such that it wouldn't relate to a stam yeshivah bachur learning in yeshiva (even if he was learning in the style of aliba d'hilchasa - not saying that type of learning isn't valuable, just that it doesnt seem to qualify for what's being described by the gemara here).
Re AZ 2, again if i'm understanding correctly, see the end of 2b onto 3a -
שבע מצות שקיבלתם היכן קיימתם ומנלן דלא קיימום דתני רב יוסף (חבקוק ג, ו) עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים מאי ראה ראה ז' מצות שקבלו עליהן בני נח ולא קיימום כיון שלא קיימום עמד והתירן להן איתגורי איתגור א"כ מצינו חוטא נשכר אמר מר בריה דרבינא
ג׳ א
לומר שאף על פי שמקיימין אותן אין מקבלין עליהם שכר ולא והתניא היה רבי מאיר אומר מנין שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם כהנים לוים וישראלים לא נאמר אלא האדם הא למדת שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה הרי הוא ככהן גדול אלא לומר לך שאין מקבלין עליהם שכר כמצווה ועושה אלא כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה דאמר ר' חנינא גדול המצווה ועושה יותר משאינו מצווה ועושה
The gemara talks about non-Jews keeping mitzvos, but brings a beraisa about 'asika b'torah' to make the point. If asika b'torah' just meant learning, its hard to see how this beraisa relates.
I don't think its correct that asika b'torah always means torah practice rather than torah learning (after all, the brachah on learning is phrased la'asok), but it does seem that it includes a component of torah practice as well, and that element may even be primary in certain contexts
Learning Torah is, by definition, goal oriented. We are *learning* (the acquisition of knowledge or skills through experience, study, or by being taught - Oxford) His word and will. What they do in Yeshivos (though I'll admit there are those who ignore this in their shortsightedness) is learn Gemara properly. Gemara, the source of Halacha is very complex and hard and needs years of training to know how to break a sugya apart to be עומד על סודה, עומקה ובוריה, and so in the small picture it may seem like they aren't fulfilling this criteria of real learning while in Yeshiva (and this also leads to other actual issues), but the fact of the matter is that they are learning Gemara in depth, as one should. Anyone who "know how to learn," who knows how to break a sugya apart properly and be אסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא באמת understands how their year of training in yeshiva are pivotal to the final cause. Perhaps it should be made more clear and perhaps because it's not so clear many people don't think about what they are doing and just learn without understanding what they are doing, but that doesn't detract from the point that the goal is to produce חכמי התורה באמת.
Re AZ, if עסק בתורה means what this fellow is proposing, the Gemara is wonderful, but if it doesn't (and I see no indication of such and there is tons of indication otherwise), that gemara wouldn't make a dent in definition changing. The gemara sees from the fact that a Goy seems to be held in high esteem for learning which indicates that his life of Torah mean something, unlike the understanding of the previous statement. Just because they can be equated, that doesn't make them the same thing at all. הנלע"ד כתבתי ולע"ד הוא פשוט.
We know for a fact that עוסק בתורה means learning torah מיד היה עומד ועוסק תורה by דוד המלך and countless other hundreds of sources. To conjecture that it means something else as well, and on top of that to say that we can choose that a specific gemara can follow that conjecture and knock out the simple pshat, as our friend is suggesting, needs much stronger proof
It is absolutely not true ti say that learning Torah is by definition goal oriented. On the contrary, it is the primary goal of most yeshivos to stress learning for the sake of learning, and absolutely not to take it to halacha, let alone to practice.
That's a small minded understanding of what the Yeshivos are trying to do (although, I'll admit once again that many Yeshivos subvert this and share the same small-mindedness and see it how you do, and perhaps that was your experience). In truth Gemara is complicated and takes years of practice and fine-tuning, even to learn a piece of Ramban takes a long time, and that's when you're good at it. But to get there one needs to learn how to break things apart slowly and extremely carefully. And these nuances play out lehalacha all the time. The fact that the focus isn't on the final product in yeshiva is only because before coming to the final product you need to learn all the nuances that precede that halacha. What they are doing in yeshivos (at least what the good ones do, or what they should be doing in all) is learning gemara well. The fact that they don't learn enough mishna berura or other practical halacha seforim (which should be done more but since the focus is what we mentioned above, any side focuses fade away especially with teenagers) is because that's not how to learn halacha properly. the mishna berura himself before paskening broke his brain on the sugya, every line in the rashba and ramban and magen avraham etc..
What you call "for the sake of learning" is nothing other than a silly misnomer as I mentioned in other comments here, reb chaim volozhiner himself describes לשמה as "היה לשם התורה כגון לידע ולהבין ולהוסיף לקח ופלפול"
Regarding Sanhedrin 49a, yeah I see Maharsha's diyuk. I'm not sure you have to understand it that way.
Regarding Brachot 11b: What do you see there? I see an instance where לעסוק בתורה does mean study Torah, especially since it also says in this case לעסוק *בדברי* תורה.
Regarding AZ 2b, see AZ 3a (part of the same story): מנין שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול? תלמוד לומר אשר *יעשה* אותם האדם וחי בהם
Regarding King David getting up in the middle of the night: I would say in this case it means he would get up and compose psalms (which is also a type of studying Torah), as it says חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה אָקוּם לְהוֹדוֹת לָךְ עַל מִשְׁפְּטֵי צִדְקֶךָ
The gemara clearly masks a distinction between his psalms (שירות ותשבחות) and his learning.
Where does it say there שירות ותשבחות? (I'm looking at Sanhedrin 16a.)
In any case, I'm happy we agree that learning should be first and foremost goal-oriented. That's the Pshat in Chazal (e.g. Pirkei Avot הלומד על מנת ללמד...הלומד על מנת לעשות) and that's the Pshat in Psukim (e.g. note that the famous Pasuk והגית בו יומם ולילה continues למען תשמור לעשות ככל הכתוב בו!).
The most clear formulation of this very basic principle is, I think, in Rambam's commentary to the Mishna (Peah 1:1). Rambam explains why Torah study is equivalent to all commandments in giving reward in both this world and the next world, as follows: The basis of all commandments between a man and his fellow is, as Hillel HaZaken said "Do not do to others what you hate being done to you". And the basic purpose of Torah study is to fulfill the commandments. And when you fulfill the commandments and behave nicely to other people, people behave nicely back to you. That's Rambam's explanation in short.
However, that is *not* the attitude in modern Haredi society! Rather, Haredim follow R. Haim of Volozhin, who turned the tables upside down, and said that "Torah Lishma" is actually Torah which is not learnt to fulfill anything. Thus, they define their purpose as just sitting and learning Torah at the expense of the rest of society, arguing that we must take *on faith* the claim that they are actually helping society. Haredi behavior is extremely far from Hillel HaZaken's principle, which is the basis of all the Torah!
Furthermore, as much Torah as they learn, the regular Haredi guy cannot explain to you the reasoning behind the Gdolim. When you put them into a corner with arguments, they just say "well, the Gdolim must surely know what they say". And the Gdolim do not offer any counter-arguments either. They do not write any responsa or anything. All this happens because learning Torah lost its primary purpose, which is "learn in order to fulfill".
If we could get people to go back to ללמוד על מנת לעשות we would go a long way forward!
"Rather, Haredim follow R. Haim of Volozhin, who turned the tables upside down, and said that "Torah Lishma" is actually Torah which is not learnt to fulfill anything."
Nonsense on many levels.
" Thus, they define their purpose as just sitting and learning Torah at the expense of the rest of society, arguing that we must take *on faith* the claim that they are actually helping society. "
Neither the Rambam nor anybody else dispute that learning Torah helps society. Only amei ha'aretz/apostates like Slifkin and friends.
Sorry, see Brachos 3b (same sugya with דוד is found there as well...)
What you're quoting from Reb Chaim Volozhiner is a big misnomer. He said Torah Lishma means Torah for the sake of Torah itself - as opposed to for the sake of דביקות. But he was never redefining what learning Torah itself is! He clearly means that one should learn Torah for the sake of knowing Torah, but the sake of knowing Torah means *learning* it and *knowing* it. He says this explicitly (לידע ולהבין ולהוסיף לקח ופלפול). I'm not sure how this translated into popular culture as what your describing but it's a myth.
Reb Chaim Volozhin also says that the point of this world is to help others. I'm not sure how that fits with his idea of Torah lishma.
"Accordingly, it does not follow that people who are learning Torah are necessarily doing anything of merit for the nation. It would all depend on whether they are supposed to be learning Torah in the first place. In the same way as learning Torah in the bathroom, or on Tisha B’Av in place of reciting kinnos, or on a Friday afternoon when one’s wife is desperate for help, does not generate any positive morale or spiritual merit or metaphysical protection..."
I'm not sure you've made your case here. Learning Torah in the bathroom or on Tisha B'Av are explicit איסורים. Learning when one's wife is desperate... - presumably יצא שכרו בהפסדו, although maybe כלל ישראל still benefits from his learning.
In the case of Charedim, a huge proprotion are likely to not be in circumstances where they should not be fighting and presumably their learning does generate spiritual merit or metaphysical perfection.
Those who should be fighting, I don't think the problem is that they are learning, it's that they are not fighting. As such, I would think that their learning would still provide benefit to the כלל, unless shown otherwise.
I thought the point was something like the yerushalmi in brachos 1,2:
וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי הַלֹּמֵד עַל מְנַת לַעֲשׂוֹת וְלֹא הַלֹּמֵד שֶׁלֹּא לַעֲשׂוֹת. שֶׁהַלֹּמֵד שֶׁלֹּא לַעֲשׂוֹת נוֹחַ לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא נִבְרָא. וְאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הַלֹּמֵד שֶׁלֹּא לַעֲשׂוֹת נוֹחַ לוֹ אִילּוּ נֶהֶפְכָה שִׁלְיָתוֹ עַל פָּנָיו וְלֹא יָצָא לָעוֹלָם.
If one assumes that charedim are halachically obligated to physically assist in the war effort (something that they deny), and they decide that in order to get out of it, they're going to learn Torah, claiming that it replaces action, then they're essentially doing what this gmara criticizes and their learning would seemingly have no merit. (See also radak in Yirmiyahu 2,8 and rashi on the entirety of the first pasuk of parshas bechukosai and all of Yehoshua 1,8 and Rambam on the first mishna in pe'ah for some other examples.)
This is all so amusing.
Making all these Chiddusim about not going to the army or must go. You can become a huge Talmud Chuchem on this subject alone. I am waiting for someone to come out with a Sefer with a all the chudushim, arguments, where this one said this, that one said that We can read it this way, we should read that way, etc.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS - everyone must go to the army and take on the burden of protecting Eretz Yisroel, WE are under attack to destroy us! Chadushim, Sayings, are not what we need to protect us from some horrible death.
Should you do not want to go - then either leave the country and find a better place in the World to live, OR sit in a jail for 5 years and then loose your benefits as a citizen of the state. A benefit - in jail keep looking for more chaddushim
I'm glad you're amused in your misunderstanding of my comment :) it is apparent that you didn't look up a single one of my sources, perhaps didn't even bother reading the one that I copy and pasted for your convenience... my parenthetical line that you chose to get bogged down by is not my personal position, I actually just wrote it so people wouldn't use this as a springboard for a silly debate as to whether the assumption I proposed at the beginning was correct. Shame that it was so egregiously misunderstood that I need to write this, please look up my sources and try for a second to understand what I'm saying before "arguing" with me...
I don’t really see the connection. The Yerushalmi (and all these sources, as far as I could tell) seems to be talking someone who learns not intending to apply it in practice. That’s not what the Charedim do.
It depends on how one looks at it. There definitely exists a mindset within the charedi community (just how widespread is perhaps debatable) of staying in yeshiva just long enough to get a petur. Essentially learning *in order to* avoid practice in this area, claiming that their Torah learning replaces the actions that they're supposed to be fulfilling. (Again, under the assumption that one is obligated halachically to join in the effort to protect klal yisroel against its enemies and the enemies of Hashem (see rashi on Shemos 15,7)).
That’s called learning shelo lishma, but it’s a real kvetch to see that in the Yerushalmi or the rest.
Well, the context in the Yerushalmi was criticizing Rabbi Shimon's apparent neglect to say kriyas shma. It seems clear that that yerushalmi would apply to someone who learns as a way of getting out of doing an obligatory mitzvah, but you can feel free to feel like that's a kvetch, I don't really care about how anonymous people on the internet understand things. I was trying to explain why one might suggest that there's no merit to learning in order to avoid serving klal yisroel and destroying Hashem's enemies.
I understand what you are saying better now, but if the Charedim don’t think they have a halachic chiyuv, then they can’t be using learning to exempt themselves from keeping halacha. Am I wrong? (No obligation to reply to an anonymous person on the internet :) )
You forget that charedim also hold that there is no milchemes mitzva happening, based on an explicit Rambam who says there is no milchama until there is a melech, Cohen Gadol and Sanhedrin - and therefore there isno milchama until the third beis hamikdash.
I didn't forget that view, it wasn't the topic of the conversation. (I wonder whether you knew that Rav Elyashiv described the yom kippur war as a milchemes mitzvah, or was he not charedi?) I should also note that it's not a debate I'm interested in having here at this time, I was just explaining why someone might suggest that Torah learning to avoid practice has no merit.
(Good source to see inside -
קובץ תשובות הרב אלישיב חלק א סימן רמג
אמנם יש לדון עפימ"ש בתוספתא מגילה פ"ג ט"ו: היוצא למלחמת הרשות חופר ויושב חופר ומכסה שנא': "וחפרת בה ושבת וגו'", משמע לכאורה דמצוה זו לא נאמרה אלא במלחמת רשות, שהרי אין יוצאין למלחמת רשות אלא עפ"י תנאים מסוימים ועפ"י בי"ד של שבעים ואחד ועפ"י מלך, אבל במלחמת מצוה אין צריך לכל זה.
ועי' רמב"ם פ"ה מהלכות מלכים: "ואי זו מלחמת מצוה - עזרת ישראל מיד צר שבא עליהם", ואנן הלוא במלחמת מצוה קעסקינן.
...
ומה גם שלפי"ד החזון - איש (עירובין לקוטים סי' קי"ב ו') ארבעה הדברים שפטרו במחנה (וה"ה מ"ש כי תצא מחנה על אויביך כו') אינן אלא במלחמת כל ישראל - מלחמת מצוה או רשות - ע"פ מלך וסנהדרין, אבל גויים שיצאו למלחמה על ישראל אף שזו מלחמת מצוה מ"מ אינן בכלל הנ"ל.)
If you are just trying to defend Slifkin's position, you don't need to invent new reasons why the Torah learning of sincere yeshiva boys/men does not confer a protective merit. Just state the "rationalist" position, that there are no miracles, hashgacha, or s'char v'onesh, and G-d doesn't magically protect people in the merit of Torah study.
Also, make sure to write a whole essay noting that it is accurate to call chareidim "parasites" or "leeches", but that even though it is accurate, you shouldn't use the term.
Which Rambam? It's not in משנה תורה.
Sefer hamitzvos Page 202 frankel edition
In sefer hamitzvos - see the end of his hakdamas hamilin.
I get the sense here that this is similar to the Gemara's citing of the view of Shimon bar Yochai (who, as my teacher, the late, great Yaakov Elman, pointed out, is the *only* person in Chazal, Tanna or Amora, who even comes *close*- and not even *that* close- to having what we'd call a "charedi" view of of the world) that's it's not necessary to work for a living, only to learn, and then saying, politely (if you know about other places the Gemara talks about R' Shimon, you'll know what I mean), essentially, "Well, that's a lovely sentiment, but it doesn't work in the real world."
So too here, in the real world, Jews have always relied on actual action, or, if they haven't, have suffered some bad consequences.
(I can still remember R' Elman beaming as he told me that he was about to deliver a talk on his "discovery" that all of Chazal were Modern Orthodox Jews. And before the haters weigh in, R' Elman was a chassidishe Yid who was a close talmid of R' Hutner and who forgot (so to speak; he forgot nothing) more of Shas and Chazal than they'll ever know.)
If I can be permitted a bit of heresy: Yesterday morning I was shaliach tzibur and noted something to myself, not for the first time: The chazan says four Yehi Ratzons, plus Acheinu, after Hagbah. The longest is the one about Torah learners.
This morning, again as shaliach tzibur, I noted that apart from Modim, the longest bracha in Shemonah Esrei is Al HaTzadikim.
There are other examples as well. The Yekum Purkan about talmidei chachamim is longer than the one about the kahal which follows it, for example.
And all this is well and good: Judaism is all about the learning. But it pays to bear in mind that at no point in Jewish history, even today, even in Eastern Europe, and even in the time of Chazal, did any more than a relatively few percent of Jews "learn." But it was that percent which wrote Shas and the tefillah and pretty much everything else. Which, again, is all well and good, and to be expected. But it's something to bear in mind when considering their perspective.
Does R. Elman have this point in writing anywhere?
I imagine he committed it to writing at some point, but this was a speech at the opening of an exhibit on the printing of the Talmud at the Yeshiva University Museum.
Am I missing something or did Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi get out voted five to one?
I get the sense here that this is similar to the Gemara's citing of the view of Shimon bar Yochai (who, as my teacher, the late, great Yaakov Elman, pointed out, is the *only* person in Chazal, Tanna or Amora, who even comes *close*- and not even *that* close- to having what we'd call a "charedi" view of of the world) that's it's not necessary to work for a living, only to learn, and then saying, politely (if you know about other places the Gemara talks about R' Shimon, you'll know what I mean), essentially, "Well, that's a lovely sentiment, but it doesn't work in the real world."
So too here, in the real world, Jews have always relied on actual action, or, if they haven't, have suffered some bad consequences.
I am envious that you got to learn with the amazing Rabbi Elman z"l.
I really lucked out. He mostly taught graduate classes, but the graduate professors were expected to do an undergrad course once a year or so, and I was placed, by the registrar, into his Intro to Bible class. Of course, he taught us freshmen the same way he taught doctoral students, much to the shock of some of his colleagues.
IIRC he asked to be called Dr. Ellman. He was a very unique individual. I could never get clarity on why his insights as to the realia of talnudic times should not affect psak. I talked with him several times on the matter but could not pin him down :-) bsorot tovot
My father bumped into him once and they struck out trying to figure out how they knew each other before Dr. Elman said, "Did you ever go to Rabinowitz's Bookstore?" and my father said, "Oh! You're little Yaakov!" "That was me."
I thought of the Gemara in Berachos 28b, where Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai admits that his prayers will not be as effective as Rabbi Chaninah Ben Dosa's. Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai was accomplished and learned, and he was the Nasi, but Rabbi Chaninah Ben Dosa is a different type of servant of Hashem.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is the rational one in that story. The other Rabbis are submitting to various superstitions about disease. And he is the one Rabbi that is doing his job of tending to the sick.
Disease can spread. That's actually rather advanced for their time.
That some kinds of disease spread was known by every society. But none of them knew *how* it spread because they were not aware of microbes and the germ theory of disease. Instead they substituted various superstitions. Not eating eggs from an alley with Ra'atan sufferers? Not going downwind from a place where a sufferer sat? Even entering the tent was almost certainly just a superstition; most serious diseases don't spread that way and those that do, like measles, every gets anyhow. And what is the point of being a Rabbi if you are not willing to take any level of risk to help people. In fact it doesn't say that RYBL got sick. Probably because the risks were exaggerated. We should add the false belief of the time that disease sufferers deserved their fate because of sin which would add to the irrational shunning.
They were being pretty scientific for their time. I don't hold them to my standards.
Not insulting them, but they were adhering to the superstitions of their times, just as Chazal and all the Rishonim did with respect to astrology (Rambam was an outlier in recognizing astrology as superstition). RYBL was the one who realized that and did the right thing. People here are getting this backwards and interpreting the RYBL as the mystic and the other Rabbis as rational. He was the rational one in this story, and also the one who realized that abandoning the sick to protect themselves is not Torah. You have have to go out and minister to the sick or what is the point? In this story, RYBL is the hesder soldier and the other rabbis are the Charedim.
The point of RYBL in the story is not about special divine protection. It is that the job of the Rabbis is to minister to the sick; if you can't do that then what good is this whole Torah thing? And the other Rabbis were giving in to various persistent superstitions about leprosy and other diseases. R Zeira seems to be going with the miasma theory of disease. RYBL is the rationalist in this story while the other Rabbis are giving in the various myths and superstitions.
What, disease can't be communicated from one person to another? Of course it can.
It can, but not in the ways that they discuss there. They didn't know about the germ theory of disease. They were fearful and superstitious out of shared ignorance resulting in them not doing their Rabbinic jobs.
These rabbis' precautions don't sound superstitious. They have a remarkable resemblance to the disease mechanisms described by by modern medicine (flies carrying germs from feces to food, covid transmitted through aerosols, etc). They sound like exactly the measures that someone who had extensively observed disease, but didn't know about germs, would take and which would protect them most of the time. As for RYBL, at best he was placing himself in a dangerous situation to do a mitzvah while relying on a miracle to save him (an approach to which the Torah has a rather ambivalent attitude), at worse he was endangering himself for no reason because he didn't even care for the sick but rather just learned in their presence.
Not really. First off he was absolutely caring for the sick while the other Rabbi were shunning them. It says רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מִיכְרָךְ בְּהוּ וְעָסֵיק בַּתּוֹרָה. The word מִיכְרָךְ implies that he was embracing the ill and ministering to them. Also part of the prooftext implies that the Torah requires you act in a loving manner "אַיֶּלֶת אֲהָבִים וְיַעֲלַת חֵן". The others were afraid to get near.
Second, it doesn't say that he got ill. It says the others were afraid but he wasn't and he did not get ill. So a close observer would realize that the others were being overly cautious. No one knows what Ra'atan is but Preuss offers that it might be leprosy which has led to shunning in many societies way beyond any risk of transmission because it is a scary disease.
Third, as far as the disease spread mechanisms. Eggs from an alley of a sufferer is just completely a superstition. Flies can sometimes spread disease, but that is when they get on your food having come from things like feces which is true of a healthy person's feces and there is no mention of protecting food there and it wouldn't make a difference where the flies came from. They don't know how it transmits so they were forced to make guesses. The wind is not going to send concentrated virus particles in your direction. I'll admit that entering the tent has some plausibility, but given all the other "associations" I'm going to guess that was another wild guess. Most important is that they say RYBL go in and not get sick. Which I think is the whole point of listing these out. If you want to be a Rabbi, be like RYBL.
Definitely one of your best articles yet. One of the comments below notes that they do not feel they are a part of the nation. That is at the core of the ideology. Well, you can't have it both ways. If you are not part of the nation there are certain benefits that they should not have - like voting?
Who are the zionists to decide what "am yisrael" is?
There are eight million Jews in Israel. God decided.
Halacha defines "clal yisrael" differently. Which is why chiloni zionim are not part of clal yisrael and why they have problems of stam yeinam. It is also why we do not listen to the opinions of reform Jews.
Because they put their lives and the lives of their children on the line every day and especially now to protect that nation. It’s a simple concept. If a group does not want to participate in the nation ….,
If you define clal yisrael as "anyone who risks their life to protect the nation" then yes, most charedim does not want to be part of that nation.
Halacha defines "clal yisrael" differently. For example, anyone who is mechalel shabbos befarhesiah is not included in the definition of clal yisrael - even if he is risking his life for Israel. This is why there is a serious issue of stam yeinom by a chiloni soldier. For obvious reasons, charedim will follow halcha's definition, not your made up one.
You do not get to define things when God has already defined them.
You have an alternate definition? It's pretty self explanatory.
Sure. Its not my definition, it is halacha's.
A member of clal yisrael is a Jew who keeps torah and mitzvos and is not a min, apikores, cofer, moiser, or a mechalel shabbos befarhesia etc. Any Jew who does not fulfil all of these definitions is not part of the clal. They have the definition of an AKUM in regards to many things, including shechita and stam yeinam. See the rambam in Hil' chovel umazik in regards to a moiser for one such example of this in halacha. It is the same reason why the 3 million reform jews are not part of the clal.
Therefore, the 6 million chiloni Jews are not part of clal yisrael and I can see why charedim do not want to be part of their clal.
You oppose this thin reed to motivated reasoning?