Lol, I love the way a secularist who just a few days ago agreed to someone that Chazal innovated their own religion and nowadays we all have to return to "ancient Judaism", now has the chutzpa to make arguments from from cherry-picked pshatim in Chazal. We all know your real intentions.
Folks, this post is YET ANOTHER proof that we need mass Kollel! I was waiting for someone to point out the obvious absurdity in trying to apply this chiddush in a gemara as practical halacha, yet no one has. So here goes:
First of all, the Machlokes R' Yishmael and Rashbi is not a Halachic one. It appears in the context of a aggadic passage and the halachic codifiers do not bring it down.
But more importantly, the Chassam Sofer is qualifying the machlokes between R' Yishmael and R' Shimon bar Yochai by saying that R' Yishmael only holds that one should work for a living in Eretz Yisroel, because of the mitzva of Yishuv Eretz Yisroel, but in Chutz La'aretz he agrees to R' Shimon bar Yochai. The assumption without this Chassam Sofer is that R' Yishmael applies even in Chutz La'aretz. Yet still, despite the gemara bringing support to R' Yishmael, the Rama rules based on the Tashbetz that it is permitted to take money for learning. Why is this? Because, as the Tashbetz explains, although it is preferable for one to be self-sufficient, Chazal ruled that it is permitted to and even an obligation to support Torah scholars, in order to promote Torah study.
So despite the assumption that we should preferably behave like R' Yishmael, kollel is still permitted. All this does is qualify R' Yishmael opinion to merely applying to Eretz Yisrael and not Chutz l'aretz!
In chelek 1 siman 146 he says who he is referring to
הלכך כל מי שמלאכתו מלאכת שמים ותורתו אומנותו וכל עסקו בתורה והגיע להוראות והוא חשוב בדורו למנותו פרנס ודיין מורה הוראה ודורש ברבים הוא ראוי לכל מה שפירשנו למעלה.
As you pointed out tshuva 148 is a summary of 142 -147
This is besides for the rav , dayanim and morei horaa
In 148 he explains there are four levels. A regular kollel student is the fourth level.
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
They will answer you (the 'better' the learner - the quicker he will do so and with more apparent confidence) but go check up on his answer and only 1 out 1000 will be accurate. Exactly the point of the tashbatz.
Go and do a survey of the number of 'yungerleit' outside the beis hamedrash at any one time, talking to each other, smoking (now its vaping) or on their phones. And, once you out of the realm of top-kollelim, do the same thing in the beis hamedrash and see what percentage are shmuzzing about something or other at any one time. Even 5% is disgraceful.
קהלת רבה ז', כ"ח): "בנוהג שבעולם, אלף בני אדם נכנסין למקרא יוצאין מהן מאה למשנה, יוצאין מהן עשרה לתלמוד, יוצא מהם אחד להוראה, הדא הוא דכתיב אדם אחד מאלף מצאתי
Ok, I hear. Personally, it doesn't bother me that our rabbis don't take the numbers of this Medrash literally (do you take all numbers of all Medrashim literally?) and would rather take the plain reading of the actual poskim.
There is a more fundamental issue here: Plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity. In many places in the Torah, G-d appeals to our sense of morality, asks us to remember how other people feel, reminds us that we were in the same situation, etc.
קול דמי אחיך צועקים אליי מן האדמה
האחיכם יבואו למלחמה ואתם תשבו פה
ואתם ידעתם את נפש הגר כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים
כי אם צעוק יצעק אלי שמוע אשמע צעקתו
...and many other places in the Torah. Also the Yom Kippur Haftara and many other places in the Neviim.
No religious legalistic "Pilpul" can override the plain requirement of being considerate towards others.
All the arguments given to the Haredim, namely "Ein Somchim al HaNes", "people should strive to support themselves and not rely on welfare paid by other people's taxes", etc. are straight morality arguments.
What makes you think that you can quote a bunch of out of context, unrelated pesukim, and make up your own Torah framework, that you think supersedes halacha which you disparagingly call "religious legalistic pilpul"? This is exactly what Rav Dov Lando was talking about when he told the deranged soldier that Torah is not a collection of slogans and catchphrases. He was referring to you. The fact that you dismiss halacha as "religious legalistic pilpul" in favor of your "common sense morality" makes our argument for us better than we ever did. Your position, which is completely without foundation, based on a collection of unrelated, out-of-context verses and a derogatory dismissal of halacha, is basically no different than Reform Judaism. The fact that people think it represents Judaism demonstrates more than anything else that we need more Torah study, not less.
(There are some passages that seem to contradict natural morality. I think the main ones are the Akedat Yitzhak, and commandments regarding waging war with the seven Caananite nations, Amalek, etc., including the instruction to leave no survivors.
Regarding Akedat Yitzhak, I wrote in this previous blog post about Rabbi Sacks and Dennis Prager's explanation, to which "Nachum" added support from Shadal:
Nah, but I have no problem calling Assaf Berdnash a son of the Reform movement if he actually means what I think he is trying to convey by distorting Rav Saadiah. You have to realize that the stuff you express here https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/tzaddik-or-mazzik/comment/46088824 is totally out of bounds for Torah Judaism. If you think Reform Judaism is ok or optimal, just be honest about it. No need to falsely blame Rav Saadiah.
וכיון שהקדמנו ההקדמה הזאת אומר פותח, הודיענו אלהינו יתברך בדברי נביאיו, שיש לו עלינו תורה נעבדהו בה, וכמה מצות שצוה אותנו בם, אנחנו חייבים לשמרם ולעשותם בלב שלם. הוא אמרו (דברים כ"ו ט"ז) היום הזה י"י אלהיך מצוך לעשות את החקים האלה ואת המשפטים ושמרת ועשית אותם בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך. והעמידו לנו נביאיו על המצות ההם האותות והמופתים המלאים, ושמרנום ועשינו אותם מיד. ואחר כך מצאנו העיון מחייב שנצוה בהם, ולא היה ראוי לעזבנו מבלעדי דבר. וראוי שאבאר ממה שמחייב אותו העיון לענין הזה דברים וענינים, ואומר: כי השכל מחייב להקביל כל מטיב אם בהטבה, אם הוא צריך אליה, אם בהודות, אם איננו צריך לגמול. וכאשר היה זה מחיובי השכל, לא היה נכון שיעזבהו הבורא יתברך בעניני עצמו, אבל התחייב לצוות ברואיו בעבודתו והודות לו, בעבור שבראם. והשכל מחייב עוד, שהחכם לא יתיר לגדפו ולקללו.
והתחייב עוד, למנוע הבורא עבדיו מזה להקביל בו. והשכל מחייב עוד, שימנע הברואים לחטא קצתם לקצתם, בכל מיני החטאים.
והתחייב עוד, שלא יתיר להם החכם זה. והשכל מכשיר עוד, שיטריח החכם עושה בדבר מהדברים, ויתן לו שכרו עליו, בעבור שיגיעהו אל התועלת בלבד, מפני שהיה זה ממה שמועיל לעושה, ולא יזיק המטריח. וכאשר נקבץ אלו הארבעה ענינים, יהיו כלליהם הם המצות אשר צונו אלהינו. והוא שחייבנו לדעתו, ולעבדו בלב שלם, כמו שאמר הנביא (דה"י א' כ"ח ט') ואתה שלמה בני דע את אלהי אביך ועבדהו בלב שלם ובנפש חפצה. ועוד הזהירנו, מהקבילו בקללות ובגדופים, אף על פי שאינם מזיקים אותו, אלא שאין מדרך החכמה להתירם, כאמרו (ויקרא כ"ד ט"ו) איש איש כי יקלל אלהיו ונשא חטאו. ולא התיר לקצתנו להרע לקצתנו, ולחמסם, כמו שאמר (שם י"ט י"א) לא תגנבו ולא תכחשו ולא תשקרו איש בעמיתו.
ואלה השלשה ענינים, הם ומה שנסמך אליהם, הם החלק הראשון משני חלקי המצות, ונסמך אל הראשון מהם, להכניע לו ולעבדו,
ולעמוד לפניו, והדומה לזה, והכל בכתב. ונסמך אל השני, שלא ישותף לו, ולא ישבע בשמו לשקר, ושלא יתארהו בתארים המגנים, והדומה לזה, והכל בכלל. ויסמך אל השלישי, עשות המשפט, והאמת והצדק והדין, והרחקה מהרוג המדברים, ואיסור הניאוף, והגנבה, והרכילות, ושיאהב המאמין לאחיו מה שהוא אוהב לנפשו, וכל אשר נכלל באלה השערים, והכל בכתב. וכל ענין מאלה שמצוה בו, נטע בשכלנו טובתו, וכל ענין מהם שהזהיר ממנו, נטע בשכלנו גנותו, כמו שאמרה החכמה אשר היא השכל (משלי ח' ז') כי אמת יהגה חכי ותועבת שפתי רשע. והחלק השני דברים אין השכל גוזר אותם, שהם טובים לעצמם ולא מגונים לעצמם, הוסיף לנו
הבורא עליהם צווי והזהרה, להרבות גמולנו והצלחתנו עליהם, כמו שאמר (ישעי' מ"ב כ"א) י"י חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה
ויאדיר...
ותמהתי בעת שמעי זה תמה גדול, הוא, שסבת האמיננו במשה, לא היתה האותות והמופתים בלבד, אבל סבת האמיננו בו ובכל נביא, שיקראנו תחלה אל מה שיכשר, וכאשר נשמע דברו ונראה אותו שיכשר, נבקש ממנו המופתים עליו, וכאשר יעמידם נאמין בו, ואם נשמע טענתו מתחלתה ונראה שלא תכשר, לא נבקש ממנו מופתים, כי אין מופת על נמנע.
You've clearly never met Rav Assaf Bednarsh. He is a big talmid chochom and a tremendous yerei shamayim. You should probably read the radbaz's shu"t chelek 8 siman 191. Also it's a travesty that people have clearly never read the netziv's hakdama to sefer bereishis or certainly haven't internalized the message. You can add to the sources Rav Bednarsh quoted (which included Ramban and Rambam as well), chizkuni bereishis perek 7 pasuk 21, Rav Nissim Gaon's introduction to Brachos, Radak on Yechezkel perek 14 pasuk 17, rabenu bechaye devarim 4,6. See also Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky in emes leyaakov on Yechezkel perek 16, 49. Truly disgusting how willing some people are willing to label others as reform without even reading the sources being referenced. Rav Bednarsh made it clear that there's a machlokes on the matter (although as can be seen, the rishonim seem to be mostly in the same group, certainly the philosophers amongst them) a chashuv Rav who was close to Rav Shlomo Zalman once told me that Rav Shlomo Zalman told him that nobody has a monopoly on hashkafa. The Rambam says in a few places that it's not relevant to poskin hashkafic matters and yet nowadays so many people think that if you have a different (source based) hashkafa, you're automatically reformed.
I'm not sure what you are trying to bring from all those sources, including Rav Saadiah. You really think that they are saying that your personal sense of morals, or 21st century morals, supersedes halacha? Ludicrous. There is no point in trying to refute such a position. That is the Reform Judaism position itself. If you really think those sources are good sources for Reform Judaism, be my guest. But if your personal morals are so convincing, more convincing than the Torah itself, why did you need those sources in the first place?
I never said Rabbi Berdnash was Reform, I said if he is trying to convey what I think he is trying to convey, then he is. It doesn't help that I see in the next shiur he quote Yeshayhu Leibowitz as a legitimate source. Maybe there is a difference between Torah classes and philosophy classes, which his classes are designated as, but if so, don't expect to bring him as an argument to a Torah discussion.
Rav Bednarsh has never said that personal morals supercedes halacha (other than to quote dor revii and Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky). You decided to assume that he's representing a reform position by quoting Rav Saadia. The main point he was trying to make by quoting Rav Saadia is that there are great Jewish thinkers who believed in objective morality (even if the Torah hadn't been given, we'd be expected to act based on our sechel to do the right thing). My main point in quoting those sources were to either show that there is more support for that position in rishonim (and in the case of Rav Yaakov, achronim) or to show how you were out of line to attack him based on knowing nothing about him other than that you find his read of Rav Saadia Gaon to be untenable with your understanding of Judaism. I did not come to defend Moshe M's or Gabriel's position, I don't know who they are. I only came to defend the honor of a chashuv talmid chochom, whom I know personally, from disgusting vitriol. (Considering that you didn't get what I was trying to say with my sources, I presume that you didn't take the time to read them before responding. That is disappointing.) For people obsessed with showing how their opponents disparage "their own" talmidei chochomim and therefore receive the status of apikores, it's pretty disappointing to see those same people disparage other talmidei chochomim due to their presumptions about said talmidei chochomim's views based on how the talmid chochom understood what Rav Saadia Gaon was saying.
All I know is Psukim! What can I do? Still, I'm pretty convinced I got right the gist of the Torah approach: Hashem expects us to use our own sensitivity and feel when someone is being wronged. (But see my response to Shim in the comment below, where I also bring Ramban, Rabbi Sacks, and Rabbi Melamed.)
It is true that the Torah expects compassion, mercy, charity, kindness, consideration not murdering people in cold blood for no reason, etc. Everybody knows that. But the Torah also says a Shabbos violator should be stoned to death. It also says that a poor farmer has to give a portion of his crops to the Cohen. The point is that the Torah has it's own guidelines that don't necessarily conform to the pedestrian opinion of what is kind and considerate.
I strongly object to your blithe dismissal of halachic arguments as "religious legalistic pilpul". This reflects both gross ignorance and a rejection of normal Torah Judaism, and only hurts your case, more than any opponent possibly could. I hope you didn't mean it.
I'm talking about the way Haredim dismiss the arguments about serving in the army and participating in the workforce. Haredim are clearly not taking their share of the military burden, in which soldiers fight in battle and risk their lives. Haredim also pose an economic burden on the Israeli economy, since a disproportionate number of Haredim (in comparison to other sectors of the population) consume more welfare than they pay taxes.
These are plain moral arguments: (1) We do not rely on miracles. (2) "Will your brothers go to war and you will sit here?".
The Haredi answers are: (1) Torah study miraculously overrides the laws of nature regarding both defense and the economy. (2) We are exempt from war because we're studying Torah. Even though Torah study has no natural advantage discernible to the eye, Judaism dictates a belief in a mystical effect to Torah study.
My reply to these Haredi responses are: You are justifying what is plainly an injustice, by means of religious legalistic pilpul.
Disbelief in what you call "mysticism" is disbelief in the Torah. If you don't believe in the Torah, why do you think you have a right to the Land of Israel in the first place?
There is nothing unjust here, it is simply the case that you don't believe that Torah is so important.
Regarding (1) and (2), Rabbi Slifkin addressed these issues a million times in this blog and in his books. Modern Haredi attitude deviates from the traditional approach. Traditionally (before R. Chayim of Volozhin), the main purpose of learning Torah was understood to be "learning in order to know what to do". No mystical effects.
In any case, mysticism is also a time-honored part of tradition. But you have to take everything in the right proportion -- including mysticism. Haredim are taking mysticism regaring Torah learning to an absurd extreme. How do you determine what the "right proportion" for mysticism is? You need to use שכל ישר -- common sense!
k so that kinda begs the q, isn't it 'immoral' to eat animals? there are many answers here, but these kind of discussions expose the problem with using our intuitions to build morality. Hashem does not like gay marriage, He is ok with eating animals (post mabul), He's okay with slavery, He decided that Shabbos is more stringent in its punishment than killing someone. the list goes on.
of course, ultimately, the torah is supposed to be moral, but to build morality ourselves is going to be different than the torah's because the torah has the full picture of proper priorities and its morality stems from that.
to bring out the point, morality is about giving mankind the greatest joy and relieving all of the greatest sufferings found. but, as it turns out, if there is a God, and being close to Him is more joyous than anything else, and wasting this life to frivolities ends up with a pain far greater than anything we can imagine here on this earth, the morality structure changes entirely. things which originally seem ultra important can lose their strong hold, while things which may seem trivial can rise above the rest.
case in point, it should seem quite 'obvious' that there is a "...plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity," which i think we all agree - we should not be cold to the plight of the soldiers, victims or hostages, and that we need to make sure the country runs okay or many can suffer, and we have our work cut out for us if we are far away, but at the same time, following the torah will give us a different set of values, which include a heightened sensitivity for the ultimate importance of torah learning which very much needs to be taken into account, and that through learning torah we will ultimately bring more good than focus on other things.
btw the chazon ish makes this general point in mussar v'halacha, that the torah is necessary to define the moral compass.
see his mashal about the new school opening up in town and the first school's teachers spreads letters and stuff about them because the new school is taking away their livelihood and if the halacha was on their side until theyare forced to close - these teachers would be 'morally' correct (the others taking away their parnassa are harming them) but since the gemara says that when it comes to a school קנאת סופרים תרבה חכמה and the education will be better with competition (torah education is a higher moral value than the immediate financial stability of these teachers), the "oppressed" rabbeim are actually the oppressors and they are actually terrible בעלי לשון הרע ומחלוקת!
see how he says it there with his flowery amazing way of talking
Perhaps the distinguishing quality of charedi hashkafa is that it rejects the idea of a "plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity". It senses that such "natural morality" will on occasion be in tension with some of the Torah's requirements, and therefore, devalues natural morality so that nobody will ever be tempted to choose it over the Torah's requirements.
Morality found in the Torah lining up with natural morality is not a contradiction to what I'm saying.
"further assumes that the Torah cannot possibly contradict natural morality," If anything this strengthens my point. If the torah says something is moral, it is , because it cannot possibly be otherwise.
Shim: Chas Veshalom! Generally speaking, when religious people are asked by nonreligious people "how can such and such a thing be moral according to Judaism" and they answer "that's what Halacha says, so that's it", they make a Chillul Hashem!
In contrast, see for example how Rabbi Eliezer Melamed (an important Dati-Leumi Rabbi....) in Pninei Halacha devotes an introduction to each Halachic topic explaining the general reason behind those laws.
But in addition to all the psukim I mentioned, let us look at Dvarim 6:16:
ועשית הישר והטוב בעיני ה'
Here Ramban comments
לפי שאי אפשר להזכיר בתורה כל הנהגות האדם עם שכניו ורעיו וכל משאו ומתנו ותיקוני הישוב והמדינות כולם, אבל אחרי שהזכיר מהם הרבה כגון לא תלך רכיל, לא תיקום ולא תיטור, ולא תעמוד על דם רעך, לא תקלל חרש, מפני שיבה תקום, וכיו"ב, חזר לומר בדרך כלל שיעשה הטוב והישר בכל דבר
Meaning, we are supposed to be able to extrapolate from the interpersonal mitzvot that Hashem gave us, and figure out on our own how to do "what is just and good" in other situations!
Here is another source (a bit earlier in Dvarim 4):
What are the Goyim supposed to be impressed about the Torah, if it's just a bunch of incomprehensible commandments?
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes that, more generally, the repeated use of לשמוע by Moses in the book of Dvarim means a combination of "listening", "understanding", "internalizing", and "obeying" -- as opposed to "blind obedience". See e.g. here: https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/vaetchanan/the-meanings-of-shema/
I see no contradiction to what I said , as you said we are supposed to extrapolate FROM the mitzvot. The source is the Torah.
I never said they are incomprehensible, that fact that we can or even should understand/relate to them does not undermine the fact that they are sourced in Torah. Understanding the mitzvos, is inmportant for other reasons but is not the underlying reason for doing them.
On your first point about explaining to the non religious , well you going to get really stuck when you have to explain killing amaleiki children. Or even Gay marriage. There is no general criterion in halacha that it has to be morally accepted by society.
Killing everybody including children, whether regarding Amalek, the seven nations, or Midian, follows the accepted norms of war of those days. Here the Torah is only commanding them what they deemed as something permissible (i.e. G-d turned what they saw as Milchemet Reshut into Milchemt Chova). Note that some rules of war, which in those days were deemed sufficient, apply: There is a distinction between "time of war" and "time of peace" with different rules (see e.g. David's last will to Shlomo regarding Yoav in the book of Melachim). And before starting the war, you must first call for peace (i.e. surrender) -- this applies even to Amalek and the seven nations according to Rambam.
Today that the world's nations accepted upon themselves higher war standards, those standards are binding as part of the 7 Noachide laws (according to Rabbi Melamed).
Where does Rabbi Melamed say this? I see him quoting the Kesef Mishna that they can make peace and accept the seven mitzvos. Not the part about higher war standards. If they don't make peace and accept seven mitzvos, the halacha in the Gemara and Rambam is clear that they must be eliminated, men, women, and children, inconsistent with modern morality. If you see Rabbi Melamed saying differently, please link.
"Here the Torah is only commanding them what they deemed as something permissible " Do you have a source for this? How would you explain any capital punishment/korbanos??
What about my other claims?
If shechita were deemed immoral by society , we would still be required to shecht . We cannot decide our morals based on society it would literally lead to the complete undermining of the Torah.
They can mesh.Rav Kook stated that generally accepted "natural law" accepted by society is also part of Torah and must be followed.Of course there are like limits.
When we show how important learning is for Klal Yisroel, we are rebutted with 'legalistic pilpul'. When we show how the Halacha is not against us, we are accused of using 'legalistic pilpul'. Which one do you want?
The morality of it was simple. The war is temporary, Klal Yisroel is permanent. If we don't keep a core group of high-level learners in our community, we are more doomed than from another three Oct 7s. And that level is still far from being reached. The Haskala/Zionism/Reform/Communist movements have wreaked havoc on our national Torah level, and we are barely scraping our way back. Although the Kollel system is quite successful, under the circumstances, it has a way to go before we can declare success. Yes, Torah learning has become more and more popular among religious Jews, but too many suffice with a perusal of Daf Yomi, too few analyze texts in their original format and work things out to a maskana. Too few are emerging לאסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא, from a full knowledge, understanding, and retention of the Sugya. Not because the system doesn't work, but because it is extremely difficult to become a true Talmid Chacham, and we still need to invest more energy into it.
That is why, for the future and present of Klal Yisroel, we need Lomdei Torah. It would be completely immoral to deny Klal Yisroel, and the world, this opportunity.
The Halachic part was dealt with already. But someone who refuses to accept this simple morality, either does not know what Judaism is all about, or has had a morality lobotomy.
"If we don't keep a core group of high-level learners in our community..."
Nobody will protest charedim keeping a core group of high-level learners. The problem is when it's an entire huge growing community with virtually no exceptions. You don't need 100,000 people in kollel to preserve the Jewish People. We never had anything remotely close to that before and we don't need it now.
1) You didn't address: " You don't need 100,000 people in kollel to preserve the Jewish People. We never had anything remotely close to that before and we don't need it now."
2) The army recently accepted hundreds of Charedi recruits. Why? Could it be that they are needed?
So precisely how many do we need? How do you arrive at this number? How many, precisely, did we have in the past? Where do you source these numbers from?
Of course, for those whose hearts aren't infected and diseased with hate, ignorance, and stupidity, the answer is simple and I addressed it already. The numbers are not the issue. The numbers are a product of an ethos, and the ethos is what will keep Klal Yisroel going. The ethos that places knowledge of Torah on the highest of pedestals, when that knowledge permeates the person's every action and thought. When everyone is permitted to attempt to develop himself into a true Talmid Chacham, the chances of a few such people becoming successful is higher. Right now, with the numbers as they are, they are not producing sufficient high-level Talmidei Chachamim, even though each one is precious and has achieved great things on their own. We have not yet returned to that which we were, the Seforim we see are just not on the standard.
Your clarification hasn't cleared things up. The implication is that the current hasn't succeed in some goal. That means that either there should me more (and hence, numbers are an issue) or that the system, irrespective of numbers, is insufficient. But in the latter case, you've just shown that the system doesn't justify its high numbers or its burden on the economy. If so, an argument could be made more radical than RNS. He suggested reducing the numbers. Your advocating for a different system in which reduced number may very produce another Chazon Ish, Lubavitcher Rebbe or RJBS.
The reason why no high quality talmidei chachomim are being produced is a problem with the system. Nothing to do with numbers.
It may well be one of the factors is the sheer number of mediocre learners in the system, bogging it down. It's even worse because there isn't a proper assessment system and many of the mediocre learners believe they are 'top learners" demanding resources.
In the past kollel people waited for positions to open. The latest trend is for those with enough gumption (and funds) to set themselves up as mosdos themselves, marketing themselves to even more clueless ba'alei battim as yeshivos for their children. With zero assessment as to how suitable they are for that task.
There is a reason why in the goyshe world top universities restrict numbers substantially.
It may well be one of the factors is the sheer NUMBER of mediocre learners in the system....
There is a reason why in the goyshe world top universities restrict NUMBERS substantially. "
Please clarify.
It should be noted, however, that most (many?) of the Gedolim who matured before WWII were not the products of the "system". For example, the Chazon Ish, the Lubavitcher Rebbe & the Rav were not products of the system. On that level, you may be correct that it's not about numbers. But it wouldn't be about "flaws" in the system either.
The practical ramifications will. But you are assuming a world that is many degrees removed from us. We still need a lot of work, and the side effects of such a world may make it unrecognizable to any of us.
Your yeshivot dont teach ppl to learn halacha. The focus is iyun. Many just ask their rav for psak. Your gedolim also celebrate the siyum hashas-which is daf yomi
I wasn't talking about if people fought. I was just saying how dynasties fall and the torah stays. It's sad if the Israeli secular dynasty has to follow the same path as it's non-Jewish friends
Most Phd students will eventually enter high paying jobs and will pay taxes that will more than compensate any gov't funds they receive now. A rough estimate clearly shows that there are more than seven times more kollel students than PhD students.
Your comparison fails.
"The universities are destroying this country"
Universities, especially in the sciences, are doing their part in ישוב הארץ.
"Many of these "high paying jobs" are useless government jobs or teaching the same useless subjects in the university. A net drain."
Speculation. What do you mean by "many"? How many? What about the rest?
"But many university programs are not."
How many? What about the rest?
"A net drain."
Please provide the figures. Certainly, on the bachelor's level the social sciences and humanities make up for about 25% of students. And the trend is decreasing, while engineering is increasing. Perhaps the figures are similar on the PhD level. So you have a minority of Phd students in these programs, and not all of them will be engaged in what you consider useless jobs. So, what net drain are talking about?
You use the word "many" and then conclude "net". That doesn't make sense.
Let's say, just for the sake of the argument, that I'm a hypocrite since I just complain about the Charedim but I don't say a word about the university students. Why does it matter whether I'm a hypocrite or not?? What the Charedim are doing is still wrong.
(To the point at hand, even if the university students spend 4 years studying useless things, they still go to work afterwards and contribute to the economy. So it's not the same thing.)
You're asking "What's wrong with being a hypocrite?" You think your arguments stand or fail on their own, and no one should be permitted to point out anything else besides what you chose to bring up. In other words, you are employing the current wikipedia fad argument called "whataboutery", which assumes that the first person gets to define the parameters of the argument, and anything he didn't raise is irrelevant. Indeed, by your lights, why is there even a word in the dictionary for hypocrite at all?
The answer, Gabriel, is that it undercuts the argument. If someone's reasoning is based in logic, then he should be raising those same arguments to every case in which they apply. If he doesn't do that, but only selectively applies them, it shows that his reasoning is actually being fueled by his politics, rather than logic. And once one realizes that, he can then see for himself the flaws present in every argument.
", it shows that his reasoning is actually being fueled by his politics, rather than logic. "
Don't confuse the essence of the argument with what motivates it. This is a variant of the ad hominem fallacy. Don't address the argument, but the motivations of the person who makes it.
I'm second to no one in thinking that a lot of university studies are garbage and useless if not harmful to society. (Fortunately, there's a lot less of those in Israel than in the US.) But:
-Those students all served in the army.
-They tend to hold down jobs while they study. It's not a gravy train.
-They spend a few years in studies and then get out and get jobs.
-They are not in the positions they are in because they were born into a certain community.
The army argument is the tiredest of tired arguments, and is inapplicable to anywhere other than Israel. Once someone becomes capable of seeing beyond that, he realizes that kollel avrechim are exactly the same as you describe above. Most of the guys learn for a few years and then go out to get jobs and become productive members of their communities. They're also not born into those communities, just like you wrote. And in kollelim outside of NY they all learn with members of the community, who definitely view this as a service to themselves. And, let us remind everyone, its not tuition. Kollels are supported by gvirim who have the wherewithal to do it and are happy to do it.
I think that we can all agree that there are things wrong with the Kollel system. There are also a different list of things wrong with the University system.
There are also things wrong with the political system, the courts, the police, the recycling system, the taxes and many other things in the country.
This was an article about the problems with Kollel - why do we also need to discuss every other problem in the country.
But the answer is, if RNS is trying to draw attention to issues 'destructive' to Jews and their Land, then surely more than just the chareidim should be singled out. It certainly seems there is a specific anti chareidi bias rooted deeper than just the 'problems' they pose to society.
One could even argue there are things even more pressing (Which I beleive is what Mr true Settler was trying to bring across ).
Ill rephrase, just because university students make up for some of the 'failings' of chareidi society (as you listed) doesn't mean they dont have their own issues.
Just because there's something not 100% perfect (according to your pure standards) with the universities, doesn't make any institution which is not a university immune from criticism.
I hope this message reaches you in good health. I've been an occasional reader of Rationalist Judaism for about 8 years now, and this is my first time leaving a comment. I would have preferred to send this privately, but lacking your email address, I hope this serves as a respectful platform for sharing my thoughts.
Over the years, my perception of the validity of Rationalism within Torah Judaism has undergone a significant transformation. Having embraced Torah Judaism later in life, I was initially swayed by your writings, leaning towards the belief that traditional Judaism was inherently "rationalist," with "mysticism" introduced by the Charedim and their predecessors.
However, over the past ~2 years or so (possibly with the increased acceptance of the internet in the Haredi world) I've observed a growing presence of Haredi commenters on your platform. It appears to me that you are facing serious challenges in these discussions, and more often than not, I find myself walking away with the impression that your Haredi opponents have convincingly demolished your arguments. The creation of their own well-sourced blog further solidifies their position.
At this point, I worry that each article you publish might be inadvertently harming your cause. On many occasions, the Haredim, at least on a rhetorical level, seem to be winning the round. The recent article struck me as particularly desperate, and even as a non-scholar, I recognized the weakness of bringing an aggadic drush as proof without the Haredim pointing it out.
I share these concerns with you in the spirit of constructive feedback. While sympathetic to your general message advocating for the normalization and reform of Haredi society, I believe that attempting to defeat them on their own terms is weakening your position. I suggest considering a new path—making a case for a new Judaism that addresses the challenges of the 21st century. In these extremely challenging times, such an approach may resonate more strongly with your audience.
Another commenter has pointed this out recently as well.
By presenting a convincing argument for why conventional religious Judaism may not be suitable for today, you could potentially make a more robust case, avoiding the need to defend seemingly indefensible positions.
So we have a Chasam Sofer on Chumash that seems to completely contradict the Gemara he is referring to (where Rashbi gives a different answer that is totally inconsistent with the CS's answer), and you don't even bother to try to resolve it or even point out the problem. Instead, you etch it onto the walls of your yeshiva.
If this is what your ideology is based on (and I know this is probably your best argument, all the other ones I saw are even worse, like Gabriel's comment), then little wonder that you are not convincing any chareidim, who are typically learned enough to realize how foolish this is. This post is one of the best demonstrations as to why we need more Limud HaTorah, not less.
At which point in Jewish history did we ever follow Rav Shimon bar Yochai on this? (Hint: never) As a matter of fact, throughout shas, we almost never pasken like the Rashbi in halacha. Even wonder why that might be?
Be careful before you knock one of the biggest acharonim ever.
Did you not read the Chasam Sofer, who is talking about Rashbi? That is what this post is about.
Who is knocking any acharon? Do you have a pshat in the Chasam Sofer? Did you even try to get a pshat? Are you even bothered by the obvious question? If the answer is no, then it's a joke to use this as some sort of argument.
Um, you wrote "So we have a Chasam Sofer on Chumash that seems to completely contradict the Gemara he is referring to (where Rashbi gives a different answer that is totally inconsistent with the CS's answer)".
Why does the Ch"s need to be consistent with Rashbi if we don't hold like him? There are many pesukim that explicitly talk about entering, settling, and working the land. Therefore it makes sense that the whole machlokes is referring to outside e"y.
Wait, you are telling me that when Rashbi (who lived in EY) says *בזמן ש*עושין רצונו של מקום, that you don't have to work the field, that is in Galus? And ואספת דגניך which is בזמן ש*אין* עושין רצונו של מקום, that is when you come back to EY? Does that make any sense to you whatsoever? Did you even look at the Gemara?
Nope, I was too busy working 😉. You're right, the CS is a little shver in the Gemara, but his basic position has support from many pesukim and the fact we don't hold like Rashbi. (Indeed, his view is extreme, as it often is. See cave story.)
Maybe CA was trying to avoid saying that Rashbi is wrong. It was simply never the case in our entire history, even in during the times of the neviim or malchus bais dovid.
It's more than a "little" shver. It doesn't fit at all. If you want to say Rashbi was wrong and you know many pesukim better than him, that's great, but don't start blaming it on a Chasam Sofer that you don't even understand.
1) Your description of the State as " a secular sabbath desecrating" is an exaggeration. Because that description fails to describe the population, or Knesset.
2) The חתם סופר in no way implied that מצות ישוב הארץ is contingent on the observance level of the population or gov't. (Most Israeli Jews don't eat shellfish.)
3) Had the Torah commmunity actually listened to the חת"ס and become religious Zionists, we wouldn't have what you call "e a secular sabbath desecrating state with a shellfish guzzling leader".
1) Not an exaggeration at all. Whilst some individuals may be shomer shabbos, the state as a whole is not shomer shabbos (or not shomer torah u'mitzvos at all), and government activity takes place on shabbos and involves issurim.
The population and knesset is irrelevant.
2) It is a perfectly reasonable assumption that the CS was referring to yishuv of a torah-observant EY. Not yishuv of a secular torah transgressing state. It would be odd to consider that a mitzvah.
3) Irrelevant, and you have no idea if true. But blaming the secular state on the religious jews is classic.
What do you mean "as a whole"? Do you that some part of it is not שומר שבת? Hence, you're exaggerating.
" at all"
you're exaggerating.
"and government activity takes place on shabbos"
What gov't activity takes place on שבת? (Security at מירון doesn't count as an answer.) What gov't activity is suspended on שבת?
"It is a perfectly reasonable assumption"
But it remains an assumption. And it's not reasonable to believe that the חת"ס held that a מצוה would be suspended because of the society around us. He was fighting Reform, and he never was מחדש the suspension of a מצוה. There not an iota of evidence that his advocacy for ישוב הארץ was just a הוראת שעה lasting only as long as Eretz Yisrael society would be 100% Torah observant.
" It would be odd to consider that a mitzvah."
Would ישוב הארץ have been odd to observe during the reign of אחאב? Do we see the נביאים advocating for mass emigration at such periods? Or just the threat of mass emigration?
"you have no idea if true."
No. It's true. The country was made up of the people who live in it. They vote and make up it's institutions. They direct the course of where society shall move. Those that didn't make Aliyah had little influence in such matters. Those who lived here and were opposed to development of he country also had little influence- by implicit consent.
All sorts of meetings between ministers and MKs take place on shabbos. You think Netanyohu sits doing nothing govermental all day on shabbos?
Foreign state and non-sate visits do not pause on shabbos. Been to the airport on shabbos recently? If you don't see how the state and its instituions transgress torah and mitzvos, I have nothing really to say. Keep those blinkers on.
Forget Achov. That was in the period of nevi'im. When a Novi comes along as tells us to give kovod to Netanyohu, al pi Hashem, we will revisit the situation., You chaps never give up on these tired proofs. You cannot prove anything from the period of nevi'im when they had direct communication with God Almighty.
As far your last paragraph, we can see how well the mizrachi influenced the development of the state. Not.
When push came to shove, it was the charedim that batteled literally against chillul shabbos, the opening of theatresm the autopsy scandel, giyus banos, giyus benei torah, kedushas yershalyim, grave desecrations (the real graves back then, today that is run by a mafia organisation) etc. Where were the mizrachniks? Nowhere to be seen. The charedim sufferend broken bones from what my grandfather called the 'Jewish Gestapo' on horseback during the period of demonstrations. Mizrachniks sat in the armchairs.
Ok OK. Let me put it another way. Once we have been exiled from our land, you can no longer assume that yishuv of a secular israel is considered a mitzvah. If the state was religious, there may be some grounds to do so. But an irrilegious secular state, it's a far strech to say that is mitzvos yishuv EY.
No idea what you want from the amoraim or the satmer rebbe.
Satmar can say what they like. I also have major issues with chabad. Dosent mean that they arent correct in their view of כלל ישראל. Their view of Hashem is the issue.
Rabbi Slifkin, this view of the Chasam Sofer is hardly reconciliable with anything remotely connected to a rational reading of our sources. The fact you would bring proof from this is very telling.
The charedi way of life, like others, indeed has many flaws and I have no problem with you pointing them out.
But I do object to bringing evidently flawed teachings as proof on a blog called 'Rationalist Judaism'. The Chasam Sofer and others have written many haggadic pieces which do not fit the sources they are supposedly based on. I do not understand why, and it's not my place to judge, but that is very poor evidence indeed.
In this talmudic passage (ברכות לה:), we have Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Shimon, two tannaim who both lived in the Land of Israel, discussing what’s the best way of life. According to Rabbi Yishmael, even in the best situation we still need to engage in ‘derekh erets’, whereas according to Rabbi Shimon the best situation is to only learn. Their discussion revolves around a verse (דברים יא,יד) which explicitely mentions the Land of Israel: ונתתי מטר ארצכם בעתו יורה ומלקוש ואספת דגנך ותירשך ויצהרך and proposing two ways of explaining it, either meaning it’s a good thing to work and harvest, or that if we do not follow the Thora enough we will have to (but that’s supposedly better than if we do Avodah Zarah, which will get us expelled, as described later). Now please explain to me:
1) Are we supposed to believe this verse is not talking about the Land of Israel according to Rabbi Shimon when it explicitely says ארצכם?
2) Why does Rabbi Shimon need to explain the verse in another way than its plain meaning when he could have just said that this is only for the Land of Israel and we’re discussing what to do abroad?
3) Why did Rabbi Shimon himself live this way in the Land of Israel, as described in Shabbat 11a: דתניא חברים שהיו עוסקין בתורה מפסיקין לקריאת שמע ואין מפסיקין לתפלה אמר רבי יוחנן לא שנו אלא כגון רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו שתורתן אומנותן אבל כגון אנו מפסיקין לקריאת שמע ולתפלה ?
4) Why did Rabbi Shimon himself chastise people in the Land of Israel for not living up to his standards, as described in Shabbat 33b: נפקו חזו אינשי דקא כרבי וזרעי אמר מניחין חיי עולם ועוסקין בחיי שעה?
All of this without even entering the question of is there really a mitsva of Yishuv Erets Israel.
This is par for the course of Natan. He'll dismiss dozens of ma'amarei chazal about the power of Torah learning to provide protection as "hyperbolic aggadata", but then try to apply a drush from the Chassam Sofer as Halacha l'maaseh.
I'm not sure what the problem is. All the חת"ס is doing is offering a second interpretation of ואספת דגנך which is not the subject of the dispute. The חת"ס adds that ואספת דגנך also is a מצוה of ישוב א"י. This second interpretation could be held by both תנאים, but only in א"י.
The point is that the חת"ס is not offering a new interpretation of the גמרא, he's bringing up another issue. That means that your analysis of the גמרא is not pertinent.
The question you bring up from otherגמרא in שבת are more relevant but can be answered in light of the fact that the חת"ס is not adding an interpretation relating to פרנסה per se. So עוסקין בחיי שעה would not apply to someone like בועז whose agricultural activities were not related to פרנסה- not חיי שעה, but were a fulfillment of a מצוה and hence חיי עולם.
This gibberish answers none of my points, as any intellectually honest person will see.
But let me ask you a question as well, because it’s too funny. Are you actually trying to say the work should only be done by people who don’t need it for their livelihood because “their work is done by others” and therefore their motivation can be purely the settling of the land, but anyone who needs it is suspect of abandoning the Thora?
The ברכה of ועמדו זרים applies to very few individuals. The rest, even though they are צדיקים still are blessed with ואספת דגנך but are required to work for their successful living. Both groups are engaged in מצות ישוב הארץ when engaged in productive activity. (Those who work, but who are not successful in making a living, perhaps due to sin are still engaged in the מצוה and will receive the principal of their reward in the Next World.)
Quite the opposite, actually - Rabbi Shimon is the outlier opinion that is hardly reconcilable with anything remotely connected to a rational reading of our sources. Our sources (and historical reality) don't say anything of the sort.
Very good, you agree with the Talmud and me that the halakha follows Rabbi Ishmael. No need to absurdly distort Rabbi Shimon's view, we simply disagree with him.
And the sources I was referring to is the Talmud, so Rabbi Shimon's view is recorded there like it or not.
Let me explain the true justification for Charedim not serving in the army. Parshas Bechukosai opens with the phrase אם בחוקותי תלכו, which Chazal understand to mean שתהיו עמלים בתורה. It continues with the promise ונתתי שלום בארץ ושכבתם ואין מחריד...וחרב לא תעבור בארצכם. Therefore, the fact Israel needs to fight wars is not because of the עמלים בתורה; on the contrary, if everyone would do the same, there would be no wars at all. Rather, the fact Israel needs to fight is because of those who aren't עמלים בתורה, in particular the Chilonim. So why should Chareidim put their lives on the line to solve a problem that's entirely not their fault?
I never said that our wars are מלחמת רשות. But allow me to quote from Natan's post on Sunday:
"In an English essay, Rav Lichtenstein elaborates on the idea that serving in the army is not just about a specific mitzvah of milchemes mitzvah, but rather a more fundamental idea of what Torah is all about:
….military service is often the fullest manifestation of a far broader value: g'milut hasadim, the empathetic concern for others and action on their behalf. This element defined by Hazal as one of the three cardinal foundations of the world, is the basis of Jewish social ethics, and its realization, even at some cost to single-minded development of Torah scholarship, virtually imperative. "
מלחמת מצוה is a different argument, and to that I would say that if indeed it's a case of אפילו חתן מחדרו וכלה מחופתה, why hasn't the director of the Biblical Museum of Natural History joined the army?
Yakov, represnting a community which claims to exempt itself from army service because "Torah protects" but does not itself ever rely on that protection to reduce hishtadlus with military or medical or financial matters, cannot be taken seriously.
Nope. They want the same military protection for their towns as everyone else. They want the same medical services. And they want the same government money and donations (more, actually).
Everybody wants everything in the world. I'm sure they want a big mansion in Beverly Hills also. The question is how much hishtadlus they do. And the answer is self-evidently less. They live in poverty and I'm sure very few buy private health insurance compared to seculars.
They accept a lower material standard as part of the kollel lifestyle, but when it comes to getting money - especially government money - they do full hishtadlus.
Neither I nor you have any data on private medical insurance, but it's a luxury in Israel. No charedi town has ever said that they need less hospitals or doctors than non-charedi towns.
Now you are using weasel words that make no sense. "Kollel lifestyle"- yeah, part and parcel of the kollel lifestyle is doing less hishtadlus so you can learn. There is no such thing as "full hishtadlus" when you are doing the kollel lifestyle. You mean "minimal hishtadlus", which was exactly my point.
Private medical insurance is carried by a third of the population. "Full hishtadlus" would mean that at least a third of chareidim buy it, which we all know they don't. Chareidi towns have less hospitals and doctors, that's a reality.
after ~5 years in kollel the guys who are doing every hishtadlus are no longer full time they tend to work either 1st or 2nd night seder and chip away at lunch and dinner (they don't sleep,EVER)(I don't know how they know what's flying in the sugya but they do.)
The ones who didn't worry until now still aren't worried (they're broke and don't vacation unless some gevir heavily subsidizes a getaway) if somebody tells them of a non time consuming way to cover this month's bills they'll listen but when it looks like it'll take up too much time, that conversation is over.
The less committed/serious/etc either leave to work or start some night college ( often online)
I don't represent any community, I try to articulate and explain the charedi point. And the real reason that the charedim do not serve is because the army service significantly contrubutes to the drop out problem. I don't either think that the charedim believe in "Torah protects" instead of the army, but it does protect from going off the derech and this, friends, is what not serving in the army is all about.
"I don't either think that the charedim believe in "Torah protects" instead of the army, but it does protect from going off the derech"
Their Torah doesn't protect them from outside threats, like society. It's technically incorrect to say "it does protect from going off the derech", if they're not exposed to wider society. Even a ignoramus who doesn't learn at all won't go OTD if cloistered in the ghetto. That ignoramus is just as protected as the Kollel student.
You cannot cloister people in a ghetto. Occupying themselves with Torah protects them from secularist influences. It's technically correct to say "it does protect from going off the derech", since it protects them from wider society in a way nothing else can.
"What secularist influences? When are they encountered?"
Kefirah and arayos and other anti-Torah values. If you don't know what I mean, you are part of the problem and a good demonstration of the need for the chareidi system.
"Do you consider escape a form of protection? Is isolation a form of resilience?"
Of course. Yes and yes. Why don't you go live in Gaza? Because it's unsafe? Do you consider escape a form of protection? Is isolation a form of resilience?
The modern world has it's own problems and weaknesses. I come from it and don't think it has a bright future. Judaism has outlasted many great civilizations, this is another one.
I don't believe you are correct. If that's the whole issue, why don't they ask for special hareidi hesder units that would eliminate the OTD risk?? No, they really believe that learning Torah for many years, at least at that time in life, is really important. Maybe you are calling the possibility of not learning "OTD".
We'll decline your interpretation of his words, since, as you concede, you are neither Hungarian nor a spiritual follower of the CS, you have no understanding of what he means in context and application.
But we're happy to see your acknowledgement of the CS as an authority worth following, and expect you soon to enthusiastically write a book in praise of חדש אסור מן התורה.
A more reasonable response, is that it's nice דרוש, and that the חת"ס had his own שיטה of strong advocacy for ישוב הארץ, but his views on such matters mean little to contemporary Charedi world which is lead by those not from his school.
Some of his students did become Zionists. Another trend was a fervent anti-assimilationalist conception that held that the diaspora was spiritually toxic, and an independent Torah society could only be achieved by returning to ארץ ישראל.
I think the way I said it is both fair and true. Anyone can cynically cherry pick citations. Like Ambrose Bierce said, "the Devil can cite Scripture for his purposes." A citation means nothing unless its cited in good faith. NS is not only citing the CS cynically, we don't know if even believes his own arguments or is just indulging his contrarian streak. (We've seen twice in the past month alone where he's posted "arguments" for something he then says he doesn't believe in anyway.) And even if he actually believes it today, he'll believe in something else tomorrow.
No, I don't think the Charedi world has to handle it. And if they don't need to handle it, there's no need to force a far fetched interpretation when it simple can be dismissed or ignored as being outside of contemporary Lithuanian Charedi hashkafa.
fascinating! still have to look into this now but in the first source the chasam sofer actually says that reb yishmoel only argues in ey. which means that rashbi says his opinion even in ey. while outside ey *everyone* should be following rashbi. but, even in ey the unique few should still learn, and as per chareidi ideology, we first give everyone a chance to live the lechatchila way to try learning.
the other source isn't clear to me, there it sounds like rashbi only said it in chu'l which is obviously not true cuz he lived in ey so i gotta look better when i have time
Not an old source, but it's a be'ur halacha at the beginning of siman 156 (of course, for some reason, no one bothers to read the radbaz at the end of Rambam shemitta veyovel, who is actually meyashev what he says there with what he says in talmud Torah)
I know, that's what I was saying. I was lamenting the fact that be'ur halacha ignores him. For the record though, you only said that you *prefer* an old source.
Nephew, but people used to get us mixed up all the time (I received calls on a few occasions from people who meant to call him, and then there was the time when I was 20 years old that someone asked me if I used to work for aish)
i'm not sure which way needs a source, who said it needs to be teachers? the gemara in brachos (as well as a lot of other gemaras along these lines) is talking about learning in general. but like i said to Natan earlier, these select few go on to inspire more learning and devotion to Hashem eventually, no? what are rabbis? people that have spent their life mastering torah
igros moshe YD 4 siman 36 for starters. (and you may call that a new source, but look at the rambam and other sources he is discussing for older sources)
but the answer to this is more of a discussion than just finding a source because the new system post wwii isn't what always was in the sense that you are talking about. i'd love to have this discussion if you or anyone is interested
That we need chachmei hatorah? If that wasn't coming from the Rambam nm, I'll hafta look back. But that we need chachamim you can try the famous sanhedrin 99b
I have just read a lot of these comments and noticed that many of them contain name calling and even lashon hara. I think that there is also some motsi shem ra by some people who are quoting rumours about others. Please be respectful to each other and stick to the subject. I have got a question. Is there anyone here who really thinks that every single person enrolled in charedi yeshiva is really devoting their whole life to learning? Can anyone say that they don't know anyone who studies in a rather superficial way. And can anyone explain the rationale behind bein hazmanim. Why is torah study at that time less important than at other times?
When you agree to have a debate that's based on Torah sources, you're conceding it from the start and it becomes a debate you can't win. You can quote psukim, Chazal, Rishonim and Achronim til the cows come home. But for these people, the current Gedolim and every guy's Rosh Yeshiva are the final word on every Torah-related discussion. They see this as part of Torah Sh'Baal Peh.
I would argue that sentient human beings should be capable of reevaluating who their 'Gedolim' are every once in a while, and I would argue that they should be capable of moving on from people whose statements contradict comment sense and basic human decency. (This, BTW, is something that people in other sectors do all the time, especially many in the DL world).
But the reality is that for these people, all the Torah sources that argue against the Charedi positions on major issues in Israel today are distilled through the people they see as their Gedolim. It's not that different from me telling someone that the Torah says 'An eye for an eye' and the (correct) response being that Chazal have interpreted that differently for Halachic purposes.
א"ר יצחק נפחא חובל עול של סנחריב מפני שמנו של חזקיהו שהיה דולק בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות מה עשה נעץ חרב על פתח בית המדרש ואמר כל מי שאינו עוסק בתורה ידקר בחרב זו בדקו מדן ועד באר שבע ולא מצאו עם הארץ מגבת ועד אנטיפרס ולא מצאו תינוק ותינוקת איש ואשה שלא היו בקיאין בהלכות טומאה וטהרה
Plus it's not a replacement for normal effort. Israel is already making more than normal effort. No need to draft everybody.
" Israel is already making more than normal effort. "
1) This means that Israel is doing more than necessary, and should be doing less. It also means that the soldiers are doing more than they should and probably could use a break. That could be achieved if the soldiers could be relieved by replacements. Replacements that could come from new recruits.
2) If it's true that " Israel is already making more than normal effort. ", how come after 3 months, victory hasn't been achieved? And victory is not anticipated for months? Could it be that Israel is not doing enough?
1) It could be achieved by not having as large of an army. You are proposing a larger army, which makes no sense.
2) How fast do you think victory could be achieved? If the army was ten times the size, you would expect victory in a week? I am glad the chareidi community is not swayed by your delusions.
"You are proposing a larger army, which makes no sense."
I'm not proposing a larger army, the army is. That's why the army is accepting Charedi recruits and not telling them "we don't need you". And critics of failure of Oct.7, have stated that the army needs more manpower. They claim that an over reliance on technology to replace people, became a weak point that was exploited by Hamas.
People claim lots of things. Doesn't mean they are right. Again, maybe the kollel system needs more recruits. That's why the kollel system is accepting Charedi recruits and not telling them "we don't need you".
Lol, I love the way a secularist who just a few days ago agreed to someone that Chazal innovated their own religion and nowadays we all have to return to "ancient Judaism", now has the chutzpa to make arguments from from cherry-picked pshatim in Chazal. We all know your real intentions.
Link
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/two-different-universes/comment/46320969
Folks, this post is YET ANOTHER proof that we need mass Kollel! I was waiting for someone to point out the obvious absurdity in trying to apply this chiddush in a gemara as practical halacha, yet no one has. So here goes:
First of all, the Machlokes R' Yishmael and Rashbi is not a Halachic one. It appears in the context of a aggadic passage and the halachic codifiers do not bring it down.
But more importantly, the Chassam Sofer is qualifying the machlokes between R' Yishmael and R' Shimon bar Yochai by saying that R' Yishmael only holds that one should work for a living in Eretz Yisroel, because of the mitzva of Yishuv Eretz Yisroel, but in Chutz La'aretz he agrees to R' Shimon bar Yochai. The assumption without this Chassam Sofer is that R' Yishmael applies even in Chutz La'aretz. Yet still, despite the gemara bringing support to R' Yishmael, the Rama rules based on the Tashbetz that it is permitted to take money for learning. Why is this? Because, as the Tashbetz explains, although it is preferable for one to be self-sufficient, Chazal ruled that it is permitted to and even an obligation to support Torah scholars, in order to promote Torah study.
So despite the assumption that we should preferably behave like R' Yishmael, kollel is still permitted. All this does is qualify R' Yishmael opinion to merely applying to Eretz Yisrael and not Chutz l'aretz!
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/more-important-than-learning-torah/comment/46585739
You're right! I missed that.
You're misreading the tashbaitz.
In chelek 1 siman 146 he says who he is referring to
הלכך כל מי שמלאכתו מלאכת שמים ותורתו אומנותו וכל עסקו בתורה והגיע להוראות והוא חשוב בדורו למנותו פרנס ודיין מורה הוראה ודורש ברבים הוא ראוי לכל מה שפירשנו למעלה.
As you pointed out tshuva 148 is a summary of 142 -147
This is besides for the rav , dayanim and morei horaa
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/more-important-than-learning-torah/comment/46766476
In 148 he explains there are four levels. A regular kollel student is the fourth level.
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
Even in your reading it's necessary for him to have the ability. ( He says "adayin". ) This would leave you at 1 in a 1000
Nahhh. Even according to your diyuk'ele, only 1 in 1000 have the ability to be ואם שואלין אותו במסכתא קבועה לו דבר הלכה ואומר????
Nope. Unless you are talking about some Modox Open Orthodox "kollel", in which case it is 0 in 1000.
They will answer you (the 'better' the learner - the quicker he will do so and with more apparent confidence) but go check up on his answer and only 1 out 1000 will be accurate. Exactly the point of the tashbatz.
Go and do a survey of the number of 'yungerleit' outside the beis hamedrash at any one time, talking to each other, smoking (now its vaping) or on their phones. And, once you out of the realm of top-kollelim, do the same thing in the beis hamedrash and see what percentage are shmuzzing about something or other at any one time. Even 5% is disgraceful.
Blah blah blah, when you have a serious argument, get back to me.
קהלת רבה ז', כ"ח): "בנוהג שבעולם, אלף בני אדם נכנסין למקרא יוצאין מהן מאה למשנה, יוצאין מהן עשרה לתלמוד, יוצא מהם אחד להוראה, הדא הוא דכתיב אדם אחד מאלף מצאתי
Ok, I hear. Personally, it doesn't bother me that our rabbis don't take the numbers of this Medrash literally (do you take all numbers of all Medrashim literally?) and would rather take the plain reading of the actual poskim.
There is a more fundamental issue here: Plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity. In many places in the Torah, G-d appeals to our sense of morality, asks us to remember how other people feel, reminds us that we were in the same situation, etc.
קול דמי אחיך צועקים אליי מן האדמה
האחיכם יבואו למלחמה ואתם תשבו פה
ואתם ידעתם את נפש הגר כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים
כי אם צעוק יצעק אלי שמוע אשמע צעקתו
...and many other places in the Torah. Also the Yom Kippur Haftara and many other places in the Neviim.
No religious legalistic "Pilpul" can override the plain requirement of being considerate towards others.
All the arguments given to the Haredim, namely "Ein Somchim al HaNes", "people should strive to support themselves and not rely on welfare paid by other people's taxes", etc. are straight morality arguments.
What makes you think that you can quote a bunch of out of context, unrelated pesukim, and make up your own Torah framework, that you think supersedes halacha which you disparagingly call "religious legalistic pilpul"? This is exactly what Rav Dov Lando was talking about when he told the deranged soldier that Torah is not a collection of slogans and catchphrases. He was referring to you. The fact that you dismiss halacha as "religious legalistic pilpul" in favor of your "common sense morality" makes our argument for us better than we ever did. Your position, which is completely without foundation, based on a collection of unrelated, out-of-context verses and a derogatory dismissal of halacha, is basically no different than Reform Judaism. The fact that people think it represents Judaism demonstrates more than anything else that we need more Torah study, not less.
Looks like you have no problem calling R' Sadia Goan the father of Reform judism. https://etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/issues-jewish-thought/issues-mussar-and-faith/natural-morality
Thanks! Interesting article! Yeah I go with R. Saadia Gaon :)
As I wrote, his position is supported by many Psukim. The main one is of course
חָלִלָה לְּךָ מֵעֲשֹׂת כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה לְהָמִית צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע וְהָיָה כַצַּדִּיק כָּרָשָׁע. חָלִלָה לָּךְ הֲשֹׁפֵט כָּל-הָאָרֶץ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה מִשְׁפָּט
(There are some passages that seem to contradict natural morality. I think the main ones are the Akedat Yitzhak, and commandments regarding waging war with the seven Caananite nations, Amalek, etc., including the instruction to leave no survivors.
Regarding Akedat Yitzhak, I wrote in this previous blog post about Rabbi Sacks and Dennis Prager's explanation, to which "Nachum" added support from Shadal:
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-akeida-of-2023/comments
Regarding the commandments regarding waging war, I wrote on a comment below my opinion on the matter.)
Nah, but I have no problem calling Assaf Berdnash a son of the Reform movement if he actually means what I think he is trying to convey by distorting Rav Saadiah. You have to realize that the stuff you express here https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/tzaddik-or-mazzik/comment/46088824 is totally out of bounds for Torah Judaism. If you think Reform Judaism is ok or optimal, just be honest about it. No need to falsely blame Rav Saadiah.
Here's the piece from Rav Saadia:
ספר האמונות והדעות מאמר ג
וכיון שהקדמנו ההקדמה הזאת אומר פותח, הודיענו אלהינו יתברך בדברי נביאיו, שיש לו עלינו תורה נעבדהו בה, וכמה מצות שצוה אותנו בם, אנחנו חייבים לשמרם ולעשותם בלב שלם. הוא אמרו (דברים כ"ו ט"ז) היום הזה י"י אלהיך מצוך לעשות את החקים האלה ואת המשפטים ושמרת ועשית אותם בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך. והעמידו לנו נביאיו על המצות ההם האותות והמופתים המלאים, ושמרנום ועשינו אותם מיד. ואחר כך מצאנו העיון מחייב שנצוה בהם, ולא היה ראוי לעזבנו מבלעדי דבר. וראוי שאבאר ממה שמחייב אותו העיון לענין הזה דברים וענינים, ואומר: כי השכל מחייב להקביל כל מטיב אם בהטבה, אם הוא צריך אליה, אם בהודות, אם איננו צריך לגמול. וכאשר היה זה מחיובי השכל, לא היה נכון שיעזבהו הבורא יתברך בעניני עצמו, אבל התחייב לצוות ברואיו בעבודתו והודות לו, בעבור שבראם. והשכל מחייב עוד, שהחכם לא יתיר לגדפו ולקללו.
והתחייב עוד, למנוע הבורא עבדיו מזה להקביל בו. והשכל מחייב עוד, שימנע הברואים לחטא קצתם לקצתם, בכל מיני החטאים.
והתחייב עוד, שלא יתיר להם החכם זה. והשכל מכשיר עוד, שיטריח החכם עושה בדבר מהדברים, ויתן לו שכרו עליו, בעבור שיגיעהו אל התועלת בלבד, מפני שהיה זה ממה שמועיל לעושה, ולא יזיק המטריח. וכאשר נקבץ אלו הארבעה ענינים, יהיו כלליהם הם המצות אשר צונו אלהינו. והוא שחייבנו לדעתו, ולעבדו בלב שלם, כמו שאמר הנביא (דה"י א' כ"ח ט') ואתה שלמה בני דע את אלהי אביך ועבדהו בלב שלם ובנפש חפצה. ועוד הזהירנו, מהקבילו בקללות ובגדופים, אף על פי שאינם מזיקים אותו, אלא שאין מדרך החכמה להתירם, כאמרו (ויקרא כ"ד ט"ו) איש איש כי יקלל אלהיו ונשא חטאו. ולא התיר לקצתנו להרע לקצתנו, ולחמסם, כמו שאמר (שם י"ט י"א) לא תגנבו ולא תכחשו ולא תשקרו איש בעמיתו.
ואלה השלשה ענינים, הם ומה שנסמך אליהם, הם החלק הראשון משני חלקי המצות, ונסמך אל הראשון מהם, להכניע לו ולעבדו,
ולעמוד לפניו, והדומה לזה, והכל בכתב. ונסמך אל השני, שלא ישותף לו, ולא ישבע בשמו לשקר, ושלא יתארהו בתארים המגנים, והדומה לזה, והכל בכלל. ויסמך אל השלישי, עשות המשפט, והאמת והצדק והדין, והרחקה מהרוג המדברים, ואיסור הניאוף, והגנבה, והרכילות, ושיאהב המאמין לאחיו מה שהוא אוהב לנפשו, וכל אשר נכלל באלה השערים, והכל בכתב. וכל ענין מאלה שמצוה בו, נטע בשכלנו טובתו, וכל ענין מהם שהזהיר ממנו, נטע בשכלנו גנותו, כמו שאמרה החכמה אשר היא השכל (משלי ח' ז') כי אמת יהגה חכי ותועבת שפתי רשע. והחלק השני דברים אין השכל גוזר אותם, שהם טובים לעצמם ולא מגונים לעצמם, הוסיף לנו
הבורא עליהם צווי והזהרה, להרבות גמולנו והצלחתנו עליהם, כמו שאמר (ישעי' מ"ב כ"א) י"י חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה
ויאדיר...
ותמהתי בעת שמעי זה תמה גדול, הוא, שסבת האמיננו במשה, לא היתה האותות והמופתים בלבד, אבל סבת האמיננו בו ובכל נביא, שיקראנו תחלה אל מה שיכשר, וכאשר נשמע דברו ונראה אותו שיכשר, נבקש ממנו המופתים עליו, וכאשר יעמידם נאמין בו, ואם נשמע טענתו מתחלתה ונראה שלא תכשר, לא נבקש ממנו מופתים, כי אין מופת על נמנע.
You've clearly never met Rav Assaf Bednarsh. He is a big talmid chochom and a tremendous yerei shamayim. You should probably read the radbaz's shu"t chelek 8 siman 191. Also it's a travesty that people have clearly never read the netziv's hakdama to sefer bereishis or certainly haven't internalized the message. You can add to the sources Rav Bednarsh quoted (which included Ramban and Rambam as well), chizkuni bereishis perek 7 pasuk 21, Rav Nissim Gaon's introduction to Brachos, Radak on Yechezkel perek 14 pasuk 17, rabenu bechaye devarim 4,6. See also Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky in emes leyaakov on Yechezkel perek 16, 49. Truly disgusting how willing some people are willing to label others as reform without even reading the sources being referenced. Rav Bednarsh made it clear that there's a machlokes on the matter (although as can be seen, the rishonim seem to be mostly in the same group, certainly the philosophers amongst them) a chashuv Rav who was close to Rav Shlomo Zalman once told me that Rav Shlomo Zalman told him that nobody has a monopoly on hashkafa. The Rambam says in a few places that it's not relevant to poskin hashkafic matters and yet nowadays so many people think that if you have a different (source based) hashkafa, you're automatically reformed.
I'm not sure what you are trying to bring from all those sources, including Rav Saadiah. You really think that they are saying that your personal sense of morals, or 21st century morals, supersedes halacha? Ludicrous. There is no point in trying to refute such a position. That is the Reform Judaism position itself. If you really think those sources are good sources for Reform Judaism, be my guest. But if your personal morals are so convincing, more convincing than the Torah itself, why did you need those sources in the first place?
I never said Rabbi Berdnash was Reform, I said if he is trying to convey what I think he is trying to convey, then he is. It doesn't help that I see in the next shiur he quote Yeshayhu Leibowitz as a legitimate source. Maybe there is a difference between Torah classes and philosophy classes, which his classes are designated as, but if so, don't expect to bring him as an argument to a Torah discussion.
Rav Bednarsh has never said that personal morals supercedes halacha (other than to quote dor revii and Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky). You decided to assume that he's representing a reform position by quoting Rav Saadia. The main point he was trying to make by quoting Rav Saadia is that there are great Jewish thinkers who believed in objective morality (even if the Torah hadn't been given, we'd be expected to act based on our sechel to do the right thing). My main point in quoting those sources were to either show that there is more support for that position in rishonim (and in the case of Rav Yaakov, achronim) or to show how you were out of line to attack him based on knowing nothing about him other than that you find his read of Rav Saadia Gaon to be untenable with your understanding of Judaism. I did not come to defend Moshe M's or Gabriel's position, I don't know who they are. I only came to defend the honor of a chashuv talmid chochom, whom I know personally, from disgusting vitriol. (Considering that you didn't get what I was trying to say with my sources, I presume that you didn't take the time to read them before responding. That is disappointing.) For people obsessed with showing how their opponents disparage "their own" talmidei chochomim and therefore receive the status of apikores, it's pretty disappointing to see those same people disparage other talmidei chochomim due to their presumptions about said talmidei chochomim's views based on how the talmid chochom understood what Rav Saadia Gaon was saying.
The Chasam Sofer doesn,'t agree with you !
The Chasam Sofer agrees with me. You are probably getting mixed up between Slifkin's post and Gabriel's comment.
All I know is Psukim! What can I do? Still, I'm pretty convinced I got right the gist of the Torah approach: Hashem expects us to use our own sensitivity and feel when someone is being wronged. (But see my response to Shim in the comment below, where I also bring Ramban, Rabbi Sacks, and Rabbi Melamed.)
It is true that the Torah expects compassion, mercy, charity, kindness, consideration not murdering people in cold blood for no reason, etc. Everybody knows that. But the Torah also says a Shabbos violator should be stoned to death. It also says that a poor farmer has to give a portion of his crops to the Cohen. The point is that the Torah has it's own guidelines that don't necessarily conform to the pedestrian opinion of what is kind and considerate.
I strongly object to your blithe dismissal of halachic arguments as "religious legalistic pilpul". This reflects both gross ignorance and a rejection of normal Torah Judaism, and only hurts your case, more than any opponent possibly could. I hope you didn't mean it.
I'm talking about the way Haredim dismiss the arguments about serving in the army and participating in the workforce. Haredim are clearly not taking their share of the military burden, in which soldiers fight in battle and risk their lives. Haredim also pose an economic burden on the Israeli economy, since a disproportionate number of Haredim (in comparison to other sectors of the population) consume more welfare than they pay taxes.
These are plain moral arguments: (1) We do not rely on miracles. (2) "Will your brothers go to war and you will sit here?".
The Haredi answers are: (1) Torah study miraculously overrides the laws of nature regarding both defense and the economy. (2) We are exempt from war because we're studying Torah. Even though Torah study has no natural advantage discernible to the eye, Judaism dictates a belief in a mystical effect to Torah study.
My reply to these Haredi responses are: You are justifying what is plainly an injustice, by means of religious legalistic pilpul.
Number (1) is true and something the Torah recognizes and what the entire Torah is about. It is not necessarily an open miracle. See here https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
Number (2) is also true.
Disbelief in what you call "mysticism" is disbelief in the Torah. If you don't believe in the Torah, why do you think you have a right to the Land of Israel in the first place?
There is nothing unjust here, it is simply the case that you don't believe that Torah is so important.
Regarding (1) and (2), Rabbi Slifkin addressed these issues a million times in this blog and in his books. Modern Haredi attitude deviates from the traditional approach. Traditionally (before R. Chayim of Volozhin), the main purpose of learning Torah was understood to be "learning in order to know what to do". No mystical effects.
In any case, mysticism is also a time-honored part of tradition. But you have to take everything in the right proportion -- including mysticism. Haredim are taking mysticism regaring Torah learning to an absurd extreme. How do you determine what the "right proportion" for mysticism is? You need to use שכל ישר -- common sense!
See how Rabbi Dovid Leibel says the same thing in this recent letter on the topic. He offers 4 reasons:
1,2,3 - Pilpul about the Gemara in Sotah on "Torah protects".
4 - והעיקר, פשיטא ש...
The fourth reason, which is the main one according to R. Leibel, is based on pure שכל ישר -- common sense
https://ynet-pic1.yit.co.il/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto/picserver5/crop_images/2023/12/22/HkZaIfQPp/HkZaIfQPp_0_0_738_1024_0_x-large.jpg
The Irrationalists addressed this already.
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/misleibeled
I love this conversation and I think HHH did a fine job representing our side and I don't have much to add. But I'm curious, Gabriel, are you vegan?
I'm not :)
k so that kinda begs the q, isn't it 'immoral' to eat animals? there are many answers here, but these kind of discussions expose the problem with using our intuitions to build morality. Hashem does not like gay marriage, He is ok with eating animals (post mabul), He's okay with slavery, He decided that Shabbos is more stringent in its punishment than killing someone. the list goes on.
of course, ultimately, the torah is supposed to be moral, but to build morality ourselves is going to be different than the torah's because the torah has the full picture of proper priorities and its morality stems from that.
to bring out the point, morality is about giving mankind the greatest joy and relieving all of the greatest sufferings found. but, as it turns out, if there is a God, and being close to Him is more joyous than anything else, and wasting this life to frivolities ends up with a pain far greater than anything we can imagine here on this earth, the morality structure changes entirely. things which originally seem ultra important can lose their strong hold, while things which may seem trivial can rise above the rest.
case in point, it should seem quite 'obvious' that there is a "...plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity," which i think we all agree - we should not be cold to the plight of the soldiers, victims or hostages, and that we need to make sure the country runs okay or many can suffer, and we have our work cut out for us if we are far away, but at the same time, following the torah will give us a different set of values, which include a heightened sensitivity for the ultimate importance of torah learning which very much needs to be taken into account, and that through learning torah we will ultimately bring more good than focus on other things.
btw the chazon ish makes this general point in mussar v'halacha, that the torah is necessary to define the moral compass.
see his mashal about the new school opening up in town and the first school's teachers spreads letters and stuff about them because the new school is taking away their livelihood and if the halacha was on their side until theyare forced to close - these teachers would be 'morally' correct (the others taking away their parnassa are harming them) but since the gemara says that when it comes to a school קנאת סופרים תרבה חכמה and the education will be better with competition (torah education is a higher moral value than the immediate financial stability of these teachers), the "oppressed" rabbeim are actually the oppressors and they are actually terrible בעלי לשון הרע ומחלוקת!
see how he says it there with his flowery amazing way of talking
Perhaps the distinguishing quality of charedi hashkafa is that it rejects the idea of a "plain sense of morality, humanity, and sensitivity". It senses that such "natural morality" will on occasion be in tension with some of the Torah's requirements, and therefore, devalues natural morality so that nobody will ever be tempted to choose it over the Torah's requirements.
The hashkafa is to use Torah to define morality, not the other way round.
Not according to R Sadia Goan. https://etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/issues-jewish-thought/issues-mussar-and-faith/natural-morality
Morality found in the Torah lining up with natural morality is not a contradiction to what I'm saying.
"further assumes that the Torah cannot possibly contradict natural morality," If anything this strengthens my point. If the torah says something is moral, it is , because it cannot possibly be otherwise.
According to you there is no intrinsic " good " or " right".
Then the Torah isn't עפרה לפומיהו good.
The Torah is truth.
Shim: Chas Veshalom! Generally speaking, when religious people are asked by nonreligious people "how can such and such a thing be moral according to Judaism" and they answer "that's what Halacha says, so that's it", they make a Chillul Hashem!
In contrast, see for example how Rabbi Eliezer Melamed (an important Dati-Leumi Rabbi....) in Pninei Halacha devotes an introduction to each Halachic topic explaining the general reason behind those laws.
But in addition to all the psukim I mentioned, let us look at Dvarim 6:16:
ועשית הישר והטוב בעיני ה'
Here Ramban comments
לפי שאי אפשר להזכיר בתורה כל הנהגות האדם עם שכניו ורעיו וכל משאו ומתנו ותיקוני הישוב והמדינות כולם, אבל אחרי שהזכיר מהם הרבה כגון לא תלך רכיל, לא תיקום ולא תיטור, ולא תעמוד על דם רעך, לא תקלל חרש, מפני שיבה תקום, וכיו"ב, חזר לומר בדרך כלל שיעשה הטוב והישר בכל דבר
Meaning, we are supposed to be able to extrapolate from the interpersonal mitzvot that Hashem gave us, and figure out on our own how to do "what is just and good" in other situations!
Here is another source (a bit earlier in Dvarim 4):
וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם כִּי הִוא חָכְמַתְכֶם וּבִינַתְכֶם לְעֵינֵי הָעַמִּים, אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁמְעוּן אֵת כָּל הַחֻקִּים הָאֵלֶּה וְאָמְרוּ רַק עַם חָכָם וְנָבוֹן הַגּוֹי הַגָּדוֹל הַזֶּה [...] וּמִי גּוֹי גָּדוֹל, אֲשֶׁר לוֹ חֻקִּים וּמִשְׁפָּטִים צַדִּיקִם, כְּכֹל הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי נֹתֵן לִפְנֵיכֶם הַיּוֹם
What are the Goyim supposed to be impressed about the Torah, if it's just a bunch of incomprehensible commandments?
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes that, more generally, the repeated use of לשמוע by Moses in the book of Dvarim means a combination of "listening", "understanding", "internalizing", and "obeying" -- as opposed to "blind obedience". See e.g. here: https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/vaetchanan/the-meanings-of-shema/
I see no contradiction to what I said , as you said we are supposed to extrapolate FROM the mitzvot. The source is the Torah.
I never said they are incomprehensible, that fact that we can or even should understand/relate to them does not undermine the fact that they are sourced in Torah. Understanding the mitzvos, is inmportant for other reasons but is not the underlying reason for doing them.
On your first point about explaining to the non religious , well you going to get really stuck when you have to explain killing amaleiki children. Or even Gay marriage. There is no general criterion in halacha that it has to be morally accepted by society.
Killing everybody including children, whether regarding Amalek, the seven nations, or Midian, follows the accepted norms of war of those days. Here the Torah is only commanding them what they deemed as something permissible (i.e. G-d turned what they saw as Milchemet Reshut into Milchemt Chova). Note that some rules of war, which in those days were deemed sufficient, apply: There is a distinction between "time of war" and "time of peace" with different rules (see e.g. David's last will to Shlomo regarding Yoav in the book of Melachim). And before starting the war, you must first call for peace (i.e. surrender) -- this applies even to Amalek and the seven nations according to Rambam.
Today that the world's nations accepted upon themselves higher war standards, those standards are binding as part of the 7 Noachide laws (according to Rabbi Melamed).
Where does Rabbi Melamed say this? I see him quoting the Kesef Mishna that they can make peace and accept the seven mitzvos. Not the part about higher war standards. If they don't make peace and accept seven mitzvos, the halacha in the Gemara and Rambam is clear that they must be eliminated, men, women, and children, inconsistent with modern morality. If you see Rabbi Melamed saying differently, please link.
"Here the Torah is only commanding them what they deemed as something permissible " Do you have a source for this? How would you explain any capital punishment/korbanos??
What about my other claims?
If shechita were deemed immoral by society , we would still be required to shecht . We cannot decide our morals based on society it would literally lead to the complete undermining of the Torah.
לא יחליף הקל ולא ימיר דתו
The Halacha of ועשית הישר והטוב does not change through history. We still need to follow דינא דבר מצרא, and the Halacha is still that שומא הדרא.
They can mesh.Rav Kook stated that generally accepted "natural law" accepted by society is also part of Torah and must be followed.Of course there are like limits.
Yes but he almost definitely sources that belief in Torah , it is not contradictory.
I agree.
We just can't catch a break.
When we show how important learning is for Klal Yisroel, we are rebutted with 'legalistic pilpul'. When we show how the Halacha is not against us, we are accused of using 'legalistic pilpul'. Which one do you want?
The morality of it was simple. The war is temporary, Klal Yisroel is permanent. If we don't keep a core group of high-level learners in our community, we are more doomed than from another three Oct 7s. And that level is still far from being reached. The Haskala/Zionism/Reform/Communist movements have wreaked havoc on our national Torah level, and we are barely scraping our way back. Although the Kollel system is quite successful, under the circumstances, it has a way to go before we can declare success. Yes, Torah learning has become more and more popular among religious Jews, but too many suffice with a perusal of Daf Yomi, too few analyze texts in their original format and work things out to a maskana. Too few are emerging לאסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא, from a full knowledge, understanding, and retention of the Sugya. Not because the system doesn't work, but because it is extremely difficult to become a true Talmid Chacham, and we still need to invest more energy into it.
That is why, for the future and present of Klal Yisroel, we need Lomdei Torah. It would be completely immoral to deny Klal Yisroel, and the world, this opportunity.
The Halachic part was dealt with already. But someone who refuses to accept this simple morality, either does not know what Judaism is all about, or has had a morality lobotomy.
"If we don't keep a core group of high-level learners in our community..."
Nobody will protest charedim keeping a core group of high-level learners. The problem is when it's an entire huge growing community with virtually no exceptions. You don't need 100,000 people in kollel to preserve the Jewish People. We never had anything remotely close to that before and we don't need it now.
You don't need those people in the army either.
Where in your learning have you ever covered the topic of how many people an army needs? Whether a standing army or in reserves?
1) You didn't address: " You don't need 100,000 people in kollel to preserve the Jewish People. We never had anything remotely close to that before and we don't need it now."
2) The army recently accepted hundreds of Charedi recruits. Why? Could it be that they are needed?
1) I showed he is a flaming hypocrite and has no right to challenge people with that question.
2) The kollel system recently accepted thousands of Chareidi recruits. Why? Could it be they are needed?
" I showed he... has no right"
Your rejection of his rights is not a response to his arguments.
"The kollel system..."
What the kollel system does is no proof to the needs of the military.
So precisely how many do we need? How do you arrive at this number? How many, precisely, did we have in the past? Where do you source these numbers from?
Of course, for those whose hearts aren't infected and diseased with hate, ignorance, and stupidity, the answer is simple and I addressed it already. The numbers are not the issue. The numbers are a product of an ethos, and the ethos is what will keep Klal Yisroel going. The ethos that places knowledge of Torah on the highest of pedestals, when that knowledge permeates the person's every action and thought. When everyone is permitted to attempt to develop himself into a true Talmid Chacham, the chances of a few such people becoming successful is higher. Right now, with the numbers as they are, they are not producing sufficient high-level Talmidei Chachamim, even though each one is precious and has achieved great things on their own. We have not yet returned to that which we were, the Seforim we see are just not on the standard.
"The numbers are not the issue. "
Hand waving. Numbers are an issue. Then again, what issue are you talking about?
"Right now, with the numbers as they are, they are not producing sufficient high-level Talmidei Chachamim"
But you said numbers are not an issue?
Hand waving, foot shaking, nose twitching, tongue wagging. Whatever.
I meant 'Even with the numbers as they are......' As was obvious.
Your clarification hasn't cleared things up. The implication is that the current hasn't succeed in some goal. That means that either there should me more (and hence, numbers are an issue) or that the system, irrespective of numbers, is insufficient. But in the latter case, you've just shown that the system doesn't justify its high numbers or its burden on the economy. If so, an argument could be made more radical than RNS. He suggested reducing the numbers. Your advocating for a different system in which reduced number may very produce another Chazon Ish, Lubavitcher Rebbe or RJBS.
The reason why no high quality talmidei chachomim are being produced is a problem with the system. Nothing to do with numbers.
It may well be one of the factors is the sheer number of mediocre learners in the system, bogging it down. It's even worse because there isn't a proper assessment system and many of the mediocre learners believe they are 'top learners" demanding resources.
In the past kollel people waited for positions to open. The latest trend is for those with enough gumption (and funds) to set themselves up as mosdos themselves, marketing themselves to even more clueless ba'alei battim as yeshivos for their children. With zero assessment as to how suitable they are for that task.
There is a reason why in the goyshe world top universities restrict numbers substantially.
"Nothing to do with NUMBERS.
It may well be one of the factors is the sheer NUMBER of mediocre learners in the system....
There is a reason why in the goyshe world top universities restrict NUMBERS substantially. "
Please clarify.
It should be noted, however, that most (many?) of the Gedolim who matured before WWII were not the products of the "system". For example, the Chazon Ish, the Lubavitcher Rebbe & the Rav were not products of the system. On that level, you may be correct that it's not about numbers. But it wouldn't be about "flaws" in the system either.
So once you start producing gedolim like the chazon ish, youll change your hashkafa??
The Hashkafa doesn't change.
The practical ramifications will. But you are assuming a world that is many degrees removed from us. We still need a lot of work, and the side effects of such a world may make it unrecognizable to any of us.
Gedolim like the Chazon Ish are not produced. Certainly not a self made גדול.
So what are you trying to gain back? Whats this nostalgia?
Your yeshivot dont teach ppl to learn halacha. The focus is iyun. Many just ask their rav for psak. Your gedolim also celebrate the siyum hashas-which is daf yomi
My Gedolim wear socks too, generally matching ones.
The war is definitely not temporary.
*Yes, that particular war might technically be temporary, but if not that Arab it will be another.
it is way more temp than torah. as were the babylonians, romans, [insert names of empires], nazis
Nazis?
In the ghettos/partisans etc, numerous learners/talmidei chachomuim put down their gemorohs and fought.
Not a good example.
I wasn't talking about if people fought. I was just saying how dynasties fall and the torah stays. It's sad if the Israeli secular dynasty has to follow the same path as it's non-Jewish friends
RIght, the Torah stays. Even without 100,000 people in kollel.
Most Phd students will eventually enter high paying jobs and will pay taxes that will more than compensate any gov't funds they receive now. A rough estimate clearly shows that there are more than seven times more kollel students than PhD students.
Your comparison fails.
"The universities are destroying this country"
Universities, especially in the sciences, are doing their part in ישוב הארץ.
Plus, these students in arcane fields of the arts are not raising their children to do the exact same thing.
Yes, but the children of such people are more likely to be somewhat unstable.
Many of these "high paying jobs" are useless government jobs or teaching the same useless subjects in the university. A net drain.
I agree that many sciences are yishuv ha'aretz. But many university programs are not.
"Many of these "high paying jobs" are useless government jobs or teaching the same useless subjects in the university. A net drain."
Speculation. What do you mean by "many"? How many? What about the rest?
"But many university programs are not."
How many? What about the rest?
"A net drain."
Please provide the figures. Certainly, on the bachelor's level the social sciences and humanities make up for about 25% of students. And the trend is decreasing, while engineering is increasing. Perhaps the figures are similar on the PhD level. So you have a minority of Phd students in these programs, and not all of them will be engaged in what you consider useless jobs. So, what net drain are talking about?
You use the word "many" and then conclude "net". That doesn't make sense.
"Speculation. What do you mean by "many"? How many? What about the rest?""
What do you mean be "speculation"? Why are you asking "about the rest"?
" Certainly, on the bachelor's level the social sciences and humanities make up for about 25% of students. "
Exactly. That is a useless net drain on the economy.
"Exactly. That is a useless net drain on the economy."
So you're opposed to all social sciences and humanities?
Let's say, just for the sake of the argument, that I'm a hypocrite since I just complain about the Charedim but I don't say a word about the university students. Why does it matter whether I'm a hypocrite or not?? What the Charedim are doing is still wrong.
(To the point at hand, even if the university students spend 4 years studying useless things, they still go to work afterwards and contribute to the economy. So it's not the same thing.)
You're asking "What's wrong with being a hypocrite?" You think your arguments stand or fail on their own, and no one should be permitted to point out anything else besides what you chose to bring up. In other words, you are employing the current wikipedia fad argument called "whataboutery", which assumes that the first person gets to define the parameters of the argument, and anything he didn't raise is irrelevant. Indeed, by your lights, why is there even a word in the dictionary for hypocrite at all?
The answer, Gabriel, is that it undercuts the argument. If someone's reasoning is based in logic, then he should be raising those same arguments to every case in which they apply. If he doesn't do that, but only selectively applies them, it shows that his reasoning is actually being fueled by his politics, rather than logic. And once one realizes that, he can then see for himself the flaws present in every argument.
", it shows that his reasoning is actually being fueled by his politics, rather than logic. "
Don't confuse the essence of the argument with what motivates it. This is a variant of the ad hominem fallacy. Don't address the argument, but the motivations of the person who makes it.
Oh, *that* tired argument again?
I'm second to no one in thinking that a lot of university studies are garbage and useless if not harmful to society. (Fortunately, there's a lot less of those in Israel than in the US.) But:
-Those students all served in the army.
-They tend to hold down jobs while they study. It's not a gravy train.
-They spend a few years in studies and then get out and get jobs.
-They are not in the positions they are in because they were born into a certain community.
The army argument is the tiredest of tired arguments, and is inapplicable to anywhere other than Israel. Once someone becomes capable of seeing beyond that, he realizes that kollel avrechim are exactly the same as you describe above. Most of the guys learn for a few years and then go out to get jobs and become productive members of their communities. They're also not born into those communities, just like you wrote. And in kollelim outside of NY they all learn with members of the community, who definitely view this as a service to themselves. And, let us remind everyone, its not tuition. Kollels are supported by gvirim who have the wherewithal to do it and are happy to do it.
"Most of the guys learn for a few years and then go out to get jobs and become productive members of their communities."
What percentage of Charedi adult men work?
Neither of us know.
56%
Sour grapes. Get yourself university education and you will the better for it.
I dont really get this argument? Just because you beleive the chareidim are wrong , doesn't mean there is nothing wrong with the universities ?
I don't understand this argument.
I think that we can all agree that there are things wrong with the Kollel system. There are also a different list of things wrong with the University system.
There are also things wrong with the political system, the courts, the police, the recycling system, the taxes and many other things in the country.
This was an article about the problems with Kollel - why do we also need to discuss every other problem in the country.
Im not sure why this comment is directed at me.
But the answer is, if RNS is trying to draw attention to issues 'destructive' to Jews and their Land, then surely more than just the chareidim should be singled out. It certainly seems there is a specific anti chareidi bias rooted deeper than just the 'problems' they pose to society.
One could even argue there are things even more pressing (Which I beleive is what Mr true Settler was trying to bring across ).
Go back and read my second paragraph.
Ill rephrase, just because university students make up for some of the 'failings' of chareidi society (as you listed) doesn't mean they dont have their own issues.
Correct. Noone is perfect and we should examine university statements and those of their students critically.
I find lack of. higher education reveals lack of understanding of the world
which spills over to Torah understanding often revealing ridiculous viewpoints both in religious matters as well as in general worldly matters.
I'm sorry if I'm missing something ,but I dont see it relevant to what I said above?
Sorry I was referring to Nachim:'s comment above.
Just because there's something not 100% perfect (according to your pure standards) with the universities, doesn't make any institution which is not a university immune from criticism.
Thanks , I never said it did,
Thats exactly my point, you just flipped it around and repeated it back to me .
Was I responding to you?
Shavua Tov Rabbi Slifkin,
I hope this message reaches you in good health. I've been an occasional reader of Rationalist Judaism for about 8 years now, and this is my first time leaving a comment. I would have preferred to send this privately, but lacking your email address, I hope this serves as a respectful platform for sharing my thoughts.
Over the years, my perception of the validity of Rationalism within Torah Judaism has undergone a significant transformation. Having embraced Torah Judaism later in life, I was initially swayed by your writings, leaning towards the belief that traditional Judaism was inherently "rationalist," with "mysticism" introduced by the Charedim and their predecessors.
However, over the past ~2 years or so (possibly with the increased acceptance of the internet in the Haredi world) I've observed a growing presence of Haredi commenters on your platform. It appears to me that you are facing serious challenges in these discussions, and more often than not, I find myself walking away with the impression that your Haredi opponents have convincingly demolished your arguments. The creation of their own well-sourced blog further solidifies their position.
At this point, I worry that each article you publish might be inadvertently harming your cause. On many occasions, the Haredim, at least on a rhetorical level, seem to be winning the round. The recent article struck me as particularly desperate, and even as a non-scholar, I recognized the weakness of bringing an aggadic drush as proof without the Haredim pointing it out.
I share these concerns with you in the spirit of constructive feedback. While sympathetic to your general message advocating for the normalization and reform of Haredi society, I believe that attempting to defeat them on their own terms is weakening your position. I suggest considering a new path—making a case for a new Judaism that addresses the challenges of the 21st century. In these extremely challenging times, such an approach may resonate more strongly with your audience.
Another commenter has pointed this out recently as well.
By presenting a convincing argument for why conventional religious Judaism may not be suitable for today, you could potentially make a more robust case, avoiding the need to defend seemingly indefensible positions.
Wishing you the best in your endeavors,
Tuvia (Tyler) Goldberg
So we have a Chasam Sofer on Chumash that seems to completely contradict the Gemara he is referring to (where Rashbi gives a different answer that is totally inconsistent with the CS's answer), and you don't even bother to try to resolve it or even point out the problem. Instead, you etch it onto the walls of your yeshiva.
If this is what your ideology is based on (and I know this is probably your best argument, all the other ones I saw are even worse, like Gabriel's comment), then little wonder that you are not convincing any chareidim, who are typically learned enough to realize how foolish this is. This post is one of the best demonstrations as to why we need more Limud HaTorah, not less.
At which point in Jewish history did we ever follow Rav Shimon bar Yochai on this? (Hint: never) As a matter of fact, throughout shas, we almost never pasken like the Rashbi in halacha. Even wonder why that might be?
Be careful before you knock one of the biggest acharonim ever.
Did you not read the Chasam Sofer, who is talking about Rashbi? That is what this post is about.
Who is knocking any acharon? Do you have a pshat in the Chasam Sofer? Did you even try to get a pshat? Are you even bothered by the obvious question? If the answer is no, then it's a joke to use this as some sort of argument.
Um, you wrote "So we have a Chasam Sofer on Chumash that seems to completely contradict the Gemara he is referring to (where Rashbi gives a different answer that is totally inconsistent with the CS's answer)".
Why does the Ch"s need to be consistent with Rashbi if we don't hold like him? There are many pesukim that explicitly talk about entering, settling, and working the land. Therefore it makes sense that the whole machlokes is referring to outside e"y.
Wait, you are telling me that when Rashbi (who lived in EY) says *בזמן ש*עושין רצונו של מקום, that you don't have to work the field, that is in Galus? And ואספת דגניך which is בזמן ש*אין* עושין רצונו של מקום, that is when you come back to EY? Does that make any sense to you whatsoever? Did you even look at the Gemara?
Nope, I was too busy working 😉. You're right, the CS is a little shver in the Gemara, but his basic position has support from many pesukim and the fact we don't hold like Rashbi. (Indeed, his view is extreme, as it often is. See cave story.)
Maybe CA was trying to avoid saying that Rashbi is wrong. It was simply never the case in our entire history, even in during the times of the neviim or malchus bais dovid.
It's more than a "little" shver. It doesn't fit at all. If you want to say Rashbi was wrong and you know many pesukim better than him, that's great, but don't start blaming it on a Chasam Sofer that you don't even understand.
It's not at all obvious the CS would include a secular sabbath desecrating state with a shellfish guzzling leader in his thoughts.
But me no buts.
1) Your description of the State as " a secular sabbath desecrating" is an exaggeration. Because that description fails to describe the population, or Knesset.
2) The חתם סופר in no way implied that מצות ישוב הארץ is contingent on the observance level of the population or gov't. (Most Israeli Jews don't eat shellfish.)
3) Had the Torah commmunity actually listened to the חת"ס and become religious Zionists, we wouldn't have what you call "e a secular sabbath desecrating state with a shellfish guzzling leader".
1) Not an exaggeration at all. Whilst some individuals may be shomer shabbos, the state as a whole is not shomer shabbos (or not shomer torah u'mitzvos at all), and government activity takes place on shabbos and involves issurim.
The population and knesset is irrelevant.
2) It is a perfectly reasonable assumption that the CS was referring to yishuv of a torah-observant EY. Not yishuv of a secular torah transgressing state. It would be odd to consider that a mitzvah.
3) Irrelevant, and you have no idea if true. But blaming the secular state on the religious jews is classic.
"The population and knesset is irrelevant."
We are talking about the State.
", the state as a whole is not shomer shabbos"
What do you mean "as a whole"? Do you that some part of it is not שומר שבת? Hence, you're exaggerating.
" at all"
you're exaggerating.
"and government activity takes place on shabbos"
What gov't activity takes place on שבת? (Security at מירון doesn't count as an answer.) What gov't activity is suspended on שבת?
"It is a perfectly reasonable assumption"
But it remains an assumption. And it's not reasonable to believe that the חת"ס held that a מצוה would be suspended because of the society around us. He was fighting Reform, and he never was מחדש the suspension of a מצוה. There not an iota of evidence that his advocacy for ישוב הארץ was just a הוראת שעה lasting only as long as Eretz Yisrael society would be 100% Torah observant.
" It would be odd to consider that a mitzvah."
Would ישוב הארץ have been odd to observe during the reign of אחאב? Do we see the נביאים advocating for mass emigration at such periods? Or just the threat of mass emigration?
"you have no idea if true."
No. It's true. The country was made up of the people who live in it. They vote and make up it's institutions. They direct the course of where society shall move. Those that didn't make Aliyah had little influence in such matters. Those who lived here and were opposed to development of he country also had little influence- by implicit consent.
All sorts of meetings between ministers and MKs take place on shabbos. You think Netanyohu sits doing nothing govermental all day on shabbos?
Foreign state and non-sate visits do not pause on shabbos. Been to the airport on shabbos recently? If you don't see how the state and its instituions transgress torah and mitzvos, I have nothing really to say. Keep those blinkers on.
Forget Achov. That was in the period of nevi'im. When a Novi comes along as tells us to give kovod to Netanyohu, al pi Hashem, we will revisit the situation., You chaps never give up on these tired proofs. You cannot prove anything from the period of nevi'im when they had direct communication with God Almighty.
As far your last paragraph, we can see how well the mizrachi influenced the development of the state. Not.
When push came to shove, it was the charedim that batteled literally against chillul shabbos, the opening of theatresm the autopsy scandel, giyus banos, giyus benei torah, kedushas yershalyim, grave desecrations (the real graves back then, today that is run by a mafia organisation) etc. Where were the mizrachniks? Nowhere to be seen. The charedim sufferend broken bones from what my grandfather called the 'Jewish Gestapo' on horseback during the period of demonstrations. Mizrachniks sat in the armchairs.
" If you don't see how the state and its instituions transgress torah and mitzvos..."
Wrong answer to the question, "What gov't activity is suspended on שבת?"
"When a Novi comes along as tells us to give kovod to Netanyohu, al pi Hashem, we will revisit the situation."
Who's talking about כבוד? I'm talking about ישוב הארץ and the erroneous notion that the מצוה is suspended during the reign of אחאב or להבהדיל Bibi.
"You cannot prove anything from the period of nevi'im when they had direct communication with God Almighty."
The אמוראים had no such problem. Neither did the Satmar Rebbe.
", it was the charedim that batteled literally against chillul shabbos"
No they didn't. They remained in Europe and by default, they consented to allow secular Zionists to develop the country in a non-Torah direction.
" what my grandfather"
...who probably not active in the formative years of the pre-State. Tell me about your great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather.
Ok OK. Let me put it another way. Once we have been exiled from our land, you can no longer assume that yishuv of a secular israel is considered a mitzvah. If the state was religious, there may be some grounds to do so. But an irrilegious secular state, it's a far strech to say that is mitzvos yishuv EY.
No idea what you want from the amoraim or the satmer rebbe.
Thats silly. Does a secular jew get schar for putting on tfillin or doing chesed?
Careful. You're about to step into the Satmar attack against Chabad.
Satmar can say what they like. I also have major issues with chabad. Dosent mean that they arent correct in their view of כלל ישראל. Their view of Hashem is the issue.
Rabbi Slifkin, this view of the Chasam Sofer is hardly reconciliable with anything remotely connected to a rational reading of our sources. The fact you would bring proof from this is very telling.
So you think he was having an off day?
Personally, I think the charedi way of life is not reconciliable with anything remotely connected to a rational reading of our sources.
The charedi way of life, like others, indeed has many flaws and I have no problem with you pointing them out.
But I do object to bringing evidently flawed teachings as proof on a blog called 'Rationalist Judaism'. The Chasam Sofer and others have written many haggadic pieces which do not fit the sources they are supposedly based on. I do not understand why, and it's not my place to judge, but that is very poor evidence indeed.
In this talmudic passage (ברכות לה:), we have Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Shimon, two tannaim who both lived in the Land of Israel, discussing what’s the best way of life. According to Rabbi Yishmael, even in the best situation we still need to engage in ‘derekh erets’, whereas according to Rabbi Shimon the best situation is to only learn. Their discussion revolves around a verse (דברים יא,יד) which explicitely mentions the Land of Israel: ונתתי מטר ארצכם בעתו יורה ומלקוש ואספת דגנך ותירשך ויצהרך and proposing two ways of explaining it, either meaning it’s a good thing to work and harvest, or that if we do not follow the Thora enough we will have to (but that’s supposedly better than if we do Avodah Zarah, which will get us expelled, as described later). Now please explain to me:
1) Are we supposed to believe this verse is not talking about the Land of Israel according to Rabbi Shimon when it explicitely says ארצכם?
2) Why does Rabbi Shimon need to explain the verse in another way than its plain meaning when he could have just said that this is only for the Land of Israel and we’re discussing what to do abroad?
3) Why did Rabbi Shimon himself live this way in the Land of Israel, as described in Shabbat 11a: דתניא חברים שהיו עוסקין בתורה מפסיקין לקריאת שמע ואין מפסיקין לתפלה אמר רבי יוחנן לא שנו אלא כגון רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו שתורתן אומנותן אבל כגון אנו מפסיקין לקריאת שמע ולתפלה ?
4) Why did Rabbi Shimon himself chastise people in the Land of Israel for not living up to his standards, as described in Shabbat 33b: נפקו חזו אינשי דקא כרבי וזרעי אמר מניחין חיי עולם ועוסקין בחיי שעה?
All of this without even entering the question of is there really a mitsva of Yishuv Erets Israel.
This is par for the course of Natan. He'll dismiss dozens of ma'amarei chazal about the power of Torah learning to provide protection as "hyperbolic aggadata", but then try to apply a drush from the Chassam Sofer as Halacha l'maaseh.
I'm not sure what the problem is. All the חת"ס is doing is offering a second interpretation of ואספת דגנך which is not the subject of the dispute. The חת"ס adds that ואספת דגנך also is a מצוה of ישוב א"י. This second interpretation could be held by both תנאים, but only in א"י.
The point is that the חת"ס is not offering a new interpretation of the גמרא, he's bringing up another issue. That means that your analysis of the גמרא is not pertinent.
The question you bring up from otherגמרא in שבת are more relevant but can be answered in light of the fact that the חת"ס is not adding an interpretation relating to פרנסה per se. So עוסקין בחיי שעה would not apply to someone like בועז whose agricultural activities were not related to פרנסה- not חיי שעה, but were a fulfillment of a מצוה and hence חיי עולם.
This gibberish answers none of my points, as any intellectually honest person will see.
But let me ask you a question as well, because it’s too funny. Are you actually trying to say the work should only be done by people who don’t need it for their livelihood because “their work is done by others” and therefore their motivation can be purely the settling of the land, but anyone who needs it is suspect of abandoning the Thora?
The ברכה of ועמדו זרים applies to very few individuals. The rest, even though they are צדיקים still are blessed with ואספת דגנך but are required to work for their successful living. Both groups are engaged in מצות ישוב הארץ when engaged in productive activity. (Those who work, but who are not successful in making a living, perhaps due to sin are still engaged in the מצוה and will receive the principal of their reward in the Next World.)
Well, in that case there was for sure no chastising to make, now was there?
Still waiting
Quite the opposite, actually - Rabbi Shimon is the outlier opinion that is hardly reconcilable with anything remotely connected to a rational reading of our sources. Our sources (and historical reality) don't say anything of the sort.
Very good, you agree with the Talmud and me that the halakha follows Rabbi Ishmael. No need to absurdly distort Rabbi Shimon's view, we simply disagree with him.
And the sources I was referring to is the Talmud, so Rabbi Shimon's view is recorded there like it or not.
Let me explain the true justification for Charedim not serving in the army. Parshas Bechukosai opens with the phrase אם בחוקותי תלכו, which Chazal understand to mean שתהיו עמלים בתורה. It continues with the promise ונתתי שלום בארץ ושכבתם ואין מחריד...וחרב לא תעבור בארצכם. Therefore, the fact Israel needs to fight wars is not because of the עמלים בתורה; on the contrary, if everyone would do the same, there would be no wars at all. Rather, the fact Israel needs to fight is because of those who aren't עמלים בתורה, in particular the Chilonim. So why should Chareidim put their lives on the line to solve a problem that's entirely not their fault?
That svara is not brought down in the rambams הלכות מלכים. Where is it brought down להלכה?
See רמב״ם הלכות שכנים פ״ו ה״ו
Will do bezh. Its in the context of מלחמת מצווה?
No, but Rabbi Dr Slifkin isn't arguing מלחמת מצווה, he's arguing that it's a communal obligation and גמילות חסדים, to which this הלכה would apply.
He hasnt quoted
".. הכל הולכים , אפילו חתן מחדרו"?
Even "האחיכם יצאו למלחמה" was used in the context of מלחמת מצווה. Those are the wars we have. רשות needs a sanhedrin.
I never said that our wars are מלחמת רשות. But allow me to quote from Natan's post on Sunday:
"In an English essay, Rav Lichtenstein elaborates on the idea that serving in the army is not just about a specific mitzvah of milchemes mitzvah, but rather a more fundamental idea of what Torah is all about:
….military service is often the fullest manifestation of a far broader value: g'milut hasadim, the empathetic concern for others and action on their behalf. This element defined by Hazal as one of the three cardinal foundations of the world, is the basis of Jewish social ethics, and its realization, even at some cost to single-minded development of Torah scholarship, virtually imperative. "
מלחמת מצוה is a different argument, and to that I would say that if indeed it's a case of אפילו חתן מחדרו וכלה מחופתה, why hasn't the director of the Biblical Museum of Natural History joined the army?
If hes arguing חסד then theres a clear גמרא you guys are quoting. Dont think hes arguing with that.
Shimon, can you find someone willing to put their name to such a ridiculous argument?
The fact you don't like an argument is unfortunately not enough to make it ridiculous.
Slifkin, representing a community with a 50% drop out rate, cannot be taken seriously.
Yakov, represnting a community which claims to exempt itself from army service because "Torah protects" but does not itself ever rely on that protection to reduce hishtadlus with military or medical or financial matters, cannot be taken seriously.
I think they do reduce hishtadlus for all those other things. Pretty self-evidently, in fact.
Nope. They want the same military protection for their towns as everyone else. They want the same medical services. And they want the same government money and donations (more, actually).
Everybody wants everything in the world. I'm sure they want a big mansion in Beverly Hills also. The question is how much hishtadlus they do. And the answer is self-evidently less. They live in poverty and I'm sure very few buy private health insurance compared to seculars.
They accept a lower material standard as part of the kollel lifestyle, but when it comes to getting money - especially government money - they do full hishtadlus.
Neither I nor you have any data on private medical insurance, but it's a luxury in Israel. No charedi town has ever said that they need less hospitals or doctors than non-charedi towns.
Now you are using weasel words that make no sense. "Kollel lifestyle"- yeah, part and parcel of the kollel lifestyle is doing less hishtadlus so you can learn. There is no such thing as "full hishtadlus" when you are doing the kollel lifestyle. You mean "minimal hishtadlus", which was exactly my point.
Private medical insurance is carried by a third of the population. "Full hishtadlus" would mean that at least a third of chareidim buy it, which we all know they don't. Chareidi towns have less hospitals and doctors, that's a reality.
Perhaps this is a difference between the leadership and the community.
In the US the kollel guys I know :
after ~5 years in kollel the guys who are doing every hishtadlus are no longer full time they tend to work either 1st or 2nd night seder and chip away at lunch and dinner (they don't sleep,EVER)(I don't know how they know what's flying in the sugya but they do.)
The ones who didn't worry until now still aren't worried (they're broke and don't vacation unless some gevir heavily subsidizes a getaway) if somebody tells them of a non time consuming way to cover this month's bills they'll listen but when it looks like it'll take up too much time, that conversation is over.
The less committed/serious/etc either leave to work or start some night college ( often online)
I don't represent any community, I try to articulate and explain the charedi point. And the real reason that the charedim do not serve is because the army service significantly contrubutes to the drop out problem. I don't either think that the charedim believe in "Torah protects" instead of the army, but it does protect from going off the derech and this, friends, is what not serving in the army is all about.
"I don't either think that the charedim believe in "Torah protects" instead of the army, but it does protect from going off the derech"
Their Torah doesn't protect them from outside threats, like society. It's technically incorrect to say "it does protect from going off the derech", if they're not exposed to wider society. Even a ignoramus who doesn't learn at all won't go OTD if cloistered in the ghetto. That ignoramus is just as protected as the Kollel student.
You cannot cloister people in a ghetto. Occupying themselves with Torah protects them from secularist influences. It's technically correct to say "it does protect from going off the derech", since it protects them from wider society in a way nothing else can.
"You cannot cloister people in a ghetto. Occupying themselves with Torah protects them from secularist influences"
What secularist influences? When are they encountered? Do you consider escape a form of protection? Is isolation a form of resilience?
"What secularist influences? When are they encountered?"
Kefirah and arayos and other anti-Torah values. If you don't know what I mean, you are part of the problem and a good demonstration of the need for the chareidi system.
"Do you consider escape a form of protection? Is isolation a form of resilience?"
Of course. Yes and yes. Why don't you go live in Gaza? Because it's unsafe? Do you consider escape a form of protection? Is isolation a form of resilience?
Both learning and social isolation are important factors in charedi resiliance. These are evolutionary adaptation of a group struggling for survival.
Oh, agreed!
Sounds like a weak religion
Yes, Judaism is weak when faced with the modern world. Charedim are aware of it, MO ignore it at their own peril.
Why do you observe it then?
The modern world has it's own problems and weaknesses. I come from it and don't think it has a bright future. Judaism has outlasted many great civilizations, this is another one.
I don't believe you are correct. If that's the whole issue, why don't they ask for special hareidi hesder units that would eliminate the OTD risk?? No, they really believe that learning Torah for many years, at least at that time in life, is really important. Maybe you are calling the possibility of not learning "OTD".
Yakov wins this round
Look, I'm a poshuter yid and if I see that a certain system has a 50% drop out rate and other options are available, I prefer other safer options.
For mizrochnikim serving in the army and working the land is a higher madregah the being shomer Torah and Mitzvos. Analyze this.
We'll decline your interpretation of his words, since, as you concede, you are neither Hungarian nor a spiritual follower of the CS, you have no understanding of what he means in context and application.
But we're happy to see your acknowledgement of the CS as an authority worth following, and expect you soon to enthusiastically write a book in praise of חדש אסור מן התורה.
A more reasonable response, is that it's nice דרוש, and that the חת"ס had his own שיטה of strong advocacy for ישוב הארץ, but his views on such matters mean little to contemporary Charedi world which is lead by those not from his school.
Some of his students did become Zionists. Another trend was a fervent anti-assimilationalist conception that held that the diaspora was spiritually toxic, and an independent Torah society could only be achieved by returning to ארץ ישראל.
I think the way I said it is both fair and true. Anyone can cynically cherry pick citations. Like Ambrose Bierce said, "the Devil can cite Scripture for his purposes." A citation means nothing unless its cited in good faith. NS is not only citing the CS cynically, we don't know if even believes his own arguments or is just indulging his contrarian streak. (We've seen twice in the past month alone where he's posted "arguments" for something he then says he doesn't believe in anyway.) And even if he actually believes it today, he'll believe in something else tomorrow.
No. Your way addresses why RNS cites the חת"ס, but not how the Charedi world handles it.
Do you seriously think the chareidi world needs to "handle" this CS??? You guys are much more delusional than I thought!
No, I don't think the Charedi world has to handle it. And if they don't need to handle it, there's no need to force a far fetched interpretation when it simple can be dismissed or ignored as being outside of contemporary Lithuanian Charedi hashkafa.
Better go out and get a copy before it's censored and excised from the next printing . .
fascinating! still have to look into this now but in the first source the chasam sofer actually says that reb yishmoel only argues in ey. which means that rashbi says his opinion even in ey. while outside ey *everyone* should be following rashbi. but, even in ey the unique few should still learn, and as per chareidi ideology, we first give everyone a chance to live the lechatchila way to try learning.
the other source isn't clear to me, there it sounds like rashbi only said it in chu'l which is obviously not true cuz he lived in ey so i gotta look better when i have time
Would you mind sourcing " the unique few" outside the context of rabbis and teachers?
The Rivash, Kesef Mishna, and Ramah talk about students as well.
Not an old source, but it's a be'ur halacha at the beginning of siman 156 (of course, for some reason, no one bothers to read the radbaz at the end of Rambam shemitta veyovel, who is actually meyashev what he says there with what he says in talmud Torah)
I am specifically looking for an old source.
The radvaz says that he can't put himself on the tzibbur so isn't a source pro but rather against
I know, that's what I was saying. I was lamenting the fact that be'ur halacha ignores him. For the record though, you only said that you *prefer* an old source.
Uh, do I get to make birchas mechayeh hameisim?
https://aish.com/authors/115170389/
Or are you like a cousin or something?
Nephew, but people used to get us mixed up all the time (I received calls on a few occasions from people who meant to call him, and then there was the time when I was 20 years old that someone asked me if I used to work for aish)
i'm not sure which way needs a source, who said it needs to be teachers? the gemara in brachos (as well as a lot of other gemaras along these lines) is talking about learning in general. but like i said to Natan earlier, these select few go on to inspire more learning and devotion to Hashem eventually, no? what are rabbis? people that have spent their life mastering torah
You stated "even in ey the unique few should still learn" which I took to mean learn only.
I also assumed that you meant to apply this "unique few" category to Kollel in general.
I'm asking for a source preferably an old one.
If you don't have one that's fine .
igros moshe YD 4 siman 36 for starters. (and you may call that a new source, but look at the rambam and other sources he is discussing for older sources)
but the answer to this is more of a discussion than just finding a source because the new system post wwii isn't what always was in the sense that you are talking about. i'd love to have this discussion if you or anyone is interested
I don't understand how the Rambam is relevant . Can you explain?
That we need chachmei hatorah? If that wasn't coming from the Rambam nm, I'll hafta look back. But that we need chachamim you can try the famous sanhedrin 99b
I have just read a lot of these comments and noticed that many of them contain name calling and even lashon hara. I think that there is also some motsi shem ra by some people who are quoting rumours about others. Please be respectful to each other and stick to the subject. I have got a question. Is there anyone here who really thinks that every single person enrolled in charedi yeshiva is really devoting their whole life to learning? Can anyone say that they don't know anyone who studies in a rather superficial way. And can anyone explain the rationale behind bein hazmanim. Why is torah study at that time less important than at other times?
When you agree to have a debate that's based on Torah sources, you're conceding it from the start and it becomes a debate you can't win. You can quote psukim, Chazal, Rishonim and Achronim til the cows come home. But for these people, the current Gedolim and every guy's Rosh Yeshiva are the final word on every Torah-related discussion. They see this as part of Torah Sh'Baal Peh.
I would argue that sentient human beings should be capable of reevaluating who their 'Gedolim' are every once in a while, and I would argue that they should be capable of moving on from people whose statements contradict comment sense and basic human decency. (This, BTW, is something that people in other sectors do all the time, especially many in the DL world).
But the reality is that for these people, all the Torah sources that argue against the Charedi positions on major issues in Israel today are distilled through the people they see as their Gedolim. It's not that different from me telling someone that the Torah says 'An eye for an eye' and the (correct) response being that Chazal have interpreted that differently for Halachic purposes.
Of course you are correct, but sometimes, when you show people that "The Gedolim" are going against the entire mesorah, they rethink things.
Yeah, we're against the mesorah of "ancient Judaism". We follow the mesorah of those 5th century Babylonian Charedi rabbis.
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/two-different-universes/comment/46320969
Escellent. Thank you!
Do you have a citation of a place where the Chasam Sofer says that Torah doesn't protect from danger?
Nobody before about 20 years ago ever claimed that the Torah DOES protect from danger SUCH AS to replace normal effort in war.
Sure, Chazal did (Sanhedrin 94b)
א"ר יצחק נפחא חובל עול של סנחריב מפני שמנו של חזקיהו שהיה דולק בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות מה עשה נעץ חרב על פתח בית המדרש ואמר כל מי שאינו עוסק בתורה ידקר בחרב זו בדקו מדן ועד באר שבע ולא מצאו עם הארץ מגבת ועד אנטיפרס ולא מצאו תינוק ותינוקת איש ואשה שלא היו בקיאין בהלכות טומאה וטהרה
Plus it's not a replacement for normal effort. Israel is already making more than normal effort. No need to draft everybody.
Let's break this down.
" Israel is already making more than normal effort. "
1) This means that Israel is doing more than necessary, and should be doing less. It also means that the soldiers are doing more than they should and probably could use a break. That could be achieved if the soldiers could be relieved by replacements. Replacements that could come from new recruits.
2) If it's true that " Israel is already making more than normal effort. ", how come after 3 months, victory hasn't been achieved? And victory is not anticipated for months? Could it be that Israel is not doing enough?
1) It could be achieved by not having as large of an army. You are proposing a larger army, which makes no sense.
2) How fast do you think victory could be achieved? If the army was ten times the size, you would expect victory in a week? I am glad the chareidi community is not swayed by your delusions.
"You are proposing a larger army, which makes no sense."
I'm not proposing a larger army, the army is. That's why the army is accepting Charedi recruits and not telling them "we don't need you". And critics of failure of Oct.7, have stated that the army needs more manpower. They claim that an over reliance on technology to replace people, became a weak point that was exploited by Hamas.
People claim lots of things. Doesn't mean they are right. Again, maybe the kollel system needs more recruits. That's why the kollel system is accepting Charedi recruits and not telling them "we don't need you".