"I would like to share extracts from a letter that he sent to HaModia a decade ago and which they did not publish, and which at the time he sent to me to publicize"
For an article which calls for an issue to "be examined very closely and dispassionately," it does anything but. It attacks a straw man, rails about other people's ingratitude, and proves its theological case by talking about the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda.
(Yehi zichro baruch. I don't mean to dump on the recently departed niftar. But you chose to highlight the piece by posting it.)
HaModia is not a a straw man. It is the uncontested voice of דעת תורה. It's not some samizdat produced by an irrelevant sub-sect or דעת יחיד blogger who rants in the name of the גדולים.
"rails about other people's ingratitude"
Sounds like a good idea. I rail at myself when I forget to express thanks.
"and proves its theological case by talking about the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda. "
The נביאים predicted that the גאולה would be signaled by "the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda." Of course, there may other interpretations, but Rav Gold's assessment is fully within mainstream tradition.
"HaModia is not a a straw man. It is the uncontested voice of דעת תורה. It's not some samizdat produced by an irrelevant sub-sect or דעת יחיד blogger who rants in the name of the גדולים."
He was critiquing a specific point of view. He quoted that point of view. Not sure what Hamodia has to do with anything.
"Sounds like a good idea. I rail at myself when I forget to express thanks."
Wonderful. And.....?
"The נביאים predicted that the גאולה would be signaled by "the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda." Of course, there may other interpretations, but Rav Gold's assessment is fully within mainstream tradition."
Right. Especially the horrendous cheap wine which tastes like it came from a vineyard planted on a swamp which the chalutzim didn't properly drain. That's exactly what the neviim foresaw. That, the chocolate milk bags, and the petel which tastes like floor cleaner. The land has given forth its bounty.
I don't deny that there are some very wonderful products grown in EY, but there's no need to get carried away. The state of Israel isn't some modern day Gan Eden.
I know, I know. I never said otherwise. The economy of the state of Israel, like other free(ish) market economies, tends to provide a wide range of products with varying levels of quality.
If you’re too cheap to buy premier products and excellent wine don’t come crying to me. In fact don’t even bother buying my wines, you wouldn’t appreciate them or the effort that went I tot hem anyways….
This comment is fully of bald assertions e.g. "attacks a straw man". Maybe flesh it out. Cite the article he was responding to and show how he was not really attacking then article, but a straw man. Otherwise, you seem to be attacking a straw man.
The letter was written "a decade ago." It doesn't matter what the original article was about that it responded to. No one is impugning Rabbi Gold ztz"l. Natan is dredging up this letter, metaphorically while the author's body is still warm, to bash charedim and using the author as a shield. Also, he in conflating a nice article about the rav in JPost last year with the article written in HaModia a decade ago which the letter responded too. Manipulative and deceitful.
No. The letter became an instant classic. The attitude expressed therein has been in the forefront of the minds who express gratitude to the Almighty for the great miracle of our time. The letter has never been occluded or buried. It never has been dredged out of anywhere since it always has been in our consciousness since the day it was publicized.
"Manipulative and deceitful."
You haven't bothered to listen to Rav Gold's shiurim, and the themes expressed therein are consistent with those expresses in the letter. The letter does express in a nutshell much of what Rav Gold would discuss more expansively in his shiurim.
You [EDIT: The comment that you are defending ] said that letter "attacks a straw man". That means that the letter mischaracterizes the article that it is commenting on and attacks something that the article never said. I don't see how [you can defend a comment that says] "attacks a straw man" [by saying] "It doesn't matter what the original article was about that it responded to." The strawman assertion depends on what the article said and whether or not the letter mischaracterizes it.
"he in conflating a nice article about the rav in JPost last year with the article written in HaModia a decade ago which the letter responded too". Can you explain further? He posted a link to an article about R Gold and then a letter which Rabbi Gold asked him to publicize. What do you mean by conflation here?
"This comment is fully of bald assertions e.g. "attacks a straw man". Maybe flesh it out."
Okay, here goes: The article attacked a straw man, because the quoted position it attacks doesn't have anything to do with the arguments purported debunking of it. No one was asserting that Jews in Israel are being burned at the stake or gassed to death. The point was that it's worse because the persecution (such that it is) is being done by Jews. That might be right or it might be wrong. You can even argue there was no persecution of any sort going on at all. That would be responsive to charedi complaints about the situation. Carrying on about how marvelous the selection at machaneh yehuda is isn't relevant to anything, isn't dispassionate, and isn't a serious argument.
"No one was asserting that Jews in Israel are being burned at the stake or gassed to death. The point was that it's worse because the persecution (such that it is) is being done by Jews. "
You're entitled to your opinion. I don't find it particularly compelling. But maybe the hordes blocking ayalon highway with gay pride flags can be likewise convinced to shut up and be grateful for the produce available in machaneh yehuda.
But aside from the alphabet people, you're grateful for the (possible) fulfillment of the prophecy that the land would give forth its bounty?
Or do you subscribe to the position (assuming you heard of it) that redemption comes suddenly and not gradually? In which case, material blessing would still be worthy of giving thanks but not necessarily a messianic harbinger?
I'm hopeful that the geulah shleima come soon. Till then I'm what I've termed 'fanatically ambivalent' about what's going on. Is this the first stage of geulah kimah kimah? Maybe. I tend to think the jury is very much out.
I'm not sure why it is not a serious argument. His argument is a standard one: God promises us various things as rewards including a return to the land and success in agriculture. We say it twice a day in the second paragraph of Shema. We have it good exactly as it is stated. His anecdote about the market is related to his experience in youth when food was hard to come by: it is easy to take something for granted when you don't realize that it wasn't there before. Again just saying that something is "carrying on" or "isn't a serious argument" doesn't make it not a serious argument.
Not sure what you're trying to say. The situation in America was wonderful too. People went from starving during the great depression to having an abundance of food in the 50s. So what?
That's a very nice poetic way of putting it. I just don't think it squares with the more prosaic reality on the ground. Yoker ha'michya, aino yachol ligmor et ha'chodesh etc.
America (and the rest of the industrialized world) went through a temporary economic downturn. Israel was a desert land under British and Arab control that could not support anywhere its current 10 million citizens which was turned into an land of agricultural bounty under Jewish rule, something that most people including Jews though impossible, yet seemingly in fulfillment of a prophecy we recite twice a day. In any case, feel free to disagree, but it's a serious argument and has the agreement of conservatively 50% of Jews who believe in prophecy. It's probably much higher; the complaints about the terrible Galus in Israel are the ones that aren't serious, especially among the non-Eidah Charedim where it is about political posturing and tribalism. The non-Eidah have always recognized the great importance and Providence of the re-establishment of the state even if they remained politically azionist.
"something that most people including Jews though impossible, yet seemingly in fulfillment of a prophecy we recite twice a day."
I'm not sure how that contradicts anything I said. It could be the fulfillment of a prophecy while still being a deeply distressful galus at the same time. I think that that's largely the view of R Shlomo Wolbe Zt"l in bein sheishes le'asor.
In any case, if you're going to appeal to prophecy, you should probably be more concerned about the people who are doing the kinds of stuff which the torah warns will get us spit out from the land.
That was precisely his argument. When you just say "what is being done by Jews now is worse than what was being done by Gentiles" it's nonsensical precisely because you are comparing e.g. the plastic plate tax or reduction in the child allowance to the physical extermination by the Germans or the spiritual extermination by the Soviets. He knows very well that they are not complaining about comparable acts and that is his precise point; whatever you are complaining about less than 1/1,000,000 of what we had under the gentiles even if I factor in that internal persecution is in some way worse than external persecution. He is saying they are obviously wrong. You seem to be critiquing his style and not his actual argument.
It's not ridiculous at all. If a family member swindled you out a few thousand dollars, it would much more painful than if some shadowy Russian hacker group stole millions from you. Not financially, but emotionally.
You don't even need to be a charedi to make this point. The disengagement was seen by many with the DL community as uniquely horrific precisely because of *who* carried it out. If we adopted R Gold's reasoning, we could dismiss the whole thing as much ado about nothing. 'So you lost neve dekalim. Boo-hoo. You can move to Ramat Ha'golan. Jews expelled from Spain would have loved to have such an option. It's not like Sharon sent anyone to the gas chambers.'
This latest comment is a repetition of the one above.
What he is saying is that "whatever you are complaining about less than 1/1,000,000 of what we had under the gentiles even if I factor in that internal persecution is in some way worse than external persecution". His argument is that In fact no only do Israeli Jews not have it any were nearly as bad as in Europe but in fact the Charedim have it better than than the last 2000 years and probably all of Jewish history based their own value system: a far higher percentage of people devoted to full time learning, all on the dime of the supposedly disappointing relative. Beside the fact that while we can never tell what is Providence and what is not, the fulfillment of many prophecies has to bring that to the fore, especially for a group where the mainstream philosophy is aligned with those who think that almost everything that happens is direct Providence.
He was not criticizing somoone who says "Thank God we live in such a wonderful land under such a wonderful Jewish state and it's so much better than when we're in Golus. Just when a Kenneset does "X/Y/Z" policy I disagree with, is is much more painful than when the Polish Parliament does it. I expect so much better of our MK's." He is also not arguing that if your loved ones actions have a greater emotional impact on you than those of someone you don't know.
Your comments seem to be directed against a strawman.
Again, the quote which *he* cited read, ""The most difficult golus to endure is a golus suffered from other Jews and therefore we plead for a final redemption from this terrible golus."
It explicitly said that this galus is painful because of *who's* doing it.
"It's not ridiculous at all. If a family member swindled you out a few thousand dollars, it would much more painful than if some shadowy Russian hacker group stole millions from you. Not financially, but emotionally."
Those are you words, not the words of the Hamodia editorial. I would call this an "iron man" argument- misrepresenting the indefensible original position as a more justifiable one in order to discredit the critique.
BDE. R. Gold was a tremendous force for Jewry. He founded the Bnai Torah shul in Toronto, which today has fallen on hard times but was THE most vibrant shul in the city throughout the entire 1980s. A great man.
I once heard him ask: In Numbers 13:27 the Spies said about the land of Israel וְגַם זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ הִוא וְזֶה פִּרְיָהּ. R. Gold explained that they used the word וגם in the sense of, "just like Egypt". (In 16:13 it says הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר) It was a deliberate attempt to insult the land by comparing it to Egypt. (R. Gold noted similarly that some people try to trivialize the word "Holocaust" by applying it to all sorts of events of lesser magnitude.) This is why Joshua and Caleb pointedly responded in 14:8 אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִוא זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ, ISRAEL was the blessed land (היא), not anywhere else. He further observed that this is why the Torah reading sometimes ends, in the middle of a narrative, when the phrase זבת חלב ודבש is used, to make one focus and reflect upon it.
Re the letter - if he asked you to publicize it, then you were right to post it. And what the man said, as quoted by R. Gold z"l, assuming accurate, was ugly. Its ugly when you bash Charedim, and its ugly when Charedim bash Mizrachim. All of it is ugly, ugly, ugly. I don't think I ever heard R. Gold say bad about other people, he focused only on the good. In the three week period, could there not be a better time for us to learn from his example?
R. Gold ztz"l was openly critical of satmar and anti-zionist charedim. Listen to his lecture on the very topic of this letter and you will hear how harsh he was and rightly so.
One can be critical of a person or movement, it its used as a means to draw a contrast. One's focus, in speeches or writings, should be on PROMOTING something one believes in. As part of that speech or article one might cite a foil and criticize it, to use as a means of illustrating differences. But it should be sandwiched between positives:
* Our approach is the way to go b/c of X.
* (We don't subscribe to the other guy's approach, which believes in Y, bc of Z.)
* And that is why our model of X is the way to go.
That's how I see it too. Yes, it's ugly, Garvin. But publicizing this letter now, taking advantage of a man's death to do so, is not virtuous. It's divisive.
What bothers you and the other Chareidi commentators on this blog is that Rabbi Gold advocates a DL philosophy while he has Chareidi credentials,Smicha, Ponevitch, etc..Also the letter cited Rav Pam and Rav Dessler,. Chareidi stars. This stands in contradiction to the Chareidi narrative expressed at this blog that DL are all Reform,irresponsible poskei halacha and terribly responsible for the corruption of Jewish religious youth. This followed by epithets such as apikores,choteh omachte etc., as stated in this blog.
Lot of projection. I didn't say that, word twister. I have Eim HaBanim Semeicha by Rav Yissachar Shlomo Teichtal hy"d. It's too bad the charedim whom he wrote the sefer for ignore it at best. I don't need you to explain wrongly what I think or what bothers me.
Semicha is a Charedi credential? This is the first time I am hearing of this.
The Chafetz Chaim was Gadol Hador, yet did not have Semicha. Semicha, especially since 'college Yeshivos' were started, is pretty much meaningless as a credential.
"taking advantage of a man's death to do so, is not virtuous."
The letter was 100% Gold. Quintessential. Those who are familiar with Rabbi Gold's shiurim, know that the letter is representative of his views.
And I don't think that you, who hangs around the blog of someone who consistently maligns great rabbonim from all streams of the Torah world without uttering a peep of protest, has any standing to protest the faithful quotation of one of Rav Gold's most famous articles.
I can see how one feels that way, especially given this blog's track record. In this case though, it seems appropriate, a timely opportunity to publicize something the מנוח asked to publicize.
I know nothing about the departed; I'm sure he was a wonderful man despite this inane piece of literature. But it is no kavod to his memory to put this up as a monument to him.
Hamodia writes a typical chareidi anti-Zionist statement and he responds with 15 paragraphs of classic Zionist rhetoric. Why not just chop it down to one line: "I, Shalom Gold, personally align with the Zionist position on this matter"...
What's weird and arrogant and narrow minded about the whole thing is the assumption that regurgitating a volley hackneyed Zionist talking points that everybody knows already and those who disagree with disagree with, serves as some kind of tayna on Hamodia for ascribing to an alternative point of view. Typical Modox myopia, if you don't mind my saying so.
It's not a tayna on Hamodia, he was making a מחאה against what he (and many others) saw as a repugnant attitude. When a Rabbi isnt moche, we say שמע מינה דניחא ליה and he is held accountable. And why he should he be limited to a single line? If that were the standard, most of the קובץ מאמרים of RE Wasserman would be worthless, along with all the Satmar Rebbe's works, and about 80% of RSR Hirsch's writings. For they could have sufficed with a single line, whether against Zionism or Reform or anything else, to write simply that they didn't ascribe to it.
This goes too far. There's nothing wrong with writing passionately and at length about meaningful topics (tho granted it might cost you readers.) And occasionally one might criticize others too, that's part of it. But bashing others should never be seen as the focus. It shouldn't be overly frequent, and when it happens, it should be sandwiched between a more positive POV the writer or speaker subscribes to. The טפל and not the עיקר. More אהבה, less שנאה. The stronger right hand is מקרבת, only the weak left is דוחה.
Anyways, my point was that this is rehashed talking points that have been debated for well over a hundred years. He may have articulated one side very beautifully, and it may be an excellent article to educate or inspire the base in a Zionist journal. But he didn't present it as such; he quite explicitly presented it as if he was responding to the other side and calling them out on their statement - or better yet "examining it in a dispassionate manner".
Which is inane. They didn't say his opinion because they have a different view of these matters, a view which he neither acknowledged nor addressed. Their statement was actually a fairly basic sentiment of a worldview that has been articulated and argued for generations. He may find it repugnant, but instead of actually recognizing its existence, dealing with it (which at this point would be an exercise in redundancy) he chose to simply put the words "a statement of authentic Torah-true hashkafah" in sneer quotes and go on to intone the classic Zionist observations, which we all know already and those who disagree with disagree with because they consider other considerations more relevant.
So the entire piece of flowery verbiage amounts to a statement of how dare you chareidim hold on to your anti Zionist viewpoints, when I, Rabbi Gold, agree with the pro Zionists on this matter.
In my experience most ( i.e. average Joe ) chareidim don't know the basic zionist or modox talking points.
For those uneducated masses who've never made a decision because they never recognized a choice rabbi gold can have a real impact - even with basic talking points-.
(I think this is true for run of the mill followers of many movements; there is a minority of relatively educated who know the opposing talking points on a basic level , and then there is a smaller minority who know them on a deeper or even complete level).
The same same logic as found in the previous comment can be applied to the repetitious sometimes long anti-R. Slifkin/anti Rationalist/anti-DL/anti Modern Orthodoxy/anti-Medina & IDF/ anti-etc etc pro Chareidi comments.
Again, applying the logic of the previous comment, this is a blog started by Rabbi Sifkin whose purpose is, I imagine, to discuss the various aspects and applications of a Rational Hashkafa and comparing it to the other hashkafa. As mentioned in the previous comment, any opposition should not be repeated over & over. One sentence would suffice.
My comment is to show that we sometimes do the very thing we accuse the other side of doing. And at times. we do it with righteous indignation.
To protest something requires more than just the bare words, "I protest!" You have to articulate a position, and that's just what R. Gold did. If boiled down to its core, as you suggest, every debate on anything can be reduced to "How dare you hold X, when I hold Y."
(I appreciate the love, brother, and send it right back at you.)
Slifkin can't even honor the passing away of a rabbi without attacking the charedim. What charedim mean is that spiritually to be in a secular Jewish state is more painful then in Russia, Germany etc., not that they had more fruits and vegetables in Poland.
I once said that every rabbi is zocheh to one good line in his career. Mine is, "If you want to speak to G-d, go to the Kotel, but if you want to see Him, go to Shuk Machaneh Yehudah."
Today we pray at the makom kadosh but we see Hashem so clearly from His magnificent bounty, especially food. Did you ever open a Tehilim? Did you ever learn Chovos Halivavos? Walking through the marketplace is a way of seeing Hashem.
You seem to be taking things very personally. I get a kick out of the halva guys hawking their wares. I also think it's okay to poke fun at them without it being akin to the sin of the meraglim. I think Machaneh Yehuda is a charming place. But I go there for the entertainment, not as part of some spiritual pilgrimage.
R Slifkin didn't write those lines. R Gold did. Quoting someone is Kavod to them. He is saying that whatever you think about the plastic tax or reducing the child allowance pales in comparison with the physical destruction by the Germans and the spiritual destruction by the Soviets. We read twice a day in Shema that we will be rewarded by product of the Land of Israel. He is taking that seriously. Also, as he points out, in his youth, food was not in such abundance. We are taking that for granted.
As usual, the background is ignored, and ignorance reigns supreme.
The non-Zionists and anti-Zionists have no reason to give up their opinions because of the availability of delicious fruit and vegetables in Machane Yehuda. The basic idea behind their Hashkafa is that the golus is primarily spiritual, the pain is primarily spiritual, and the redemption will be primarily spiritual. לא נתאוו החכמים לימות המשיח וכו' אלא שיהיו פנוים לתורה ולחכמתה כדי שיזכו לחיי העולם הבא. The gashmiyus of the geula is incidental.
We can survive the ghettos, crusades, inquisition, and pogroms. Those are all physical manifestations of galus. The spiritual problem is our primary concern, and a Jewish secular state is worse than Goyim burning Seforim on Erev Shabbos Chukas. There is no justification for upward of 50% of Klal Yisroel not keeping Mitzvos, there is no excuse for the Torah ignorance of the vast majority of our nation. When those ignorant have the upper hand and get to make rules for all of us ראיתי שרים הולכים על הארץ ועבדים רוכבים על סוסים, we are doubly pained.
The Geula may happen gradually. First, these people will lose their power, then they will realize that their lives are unjustifiable. Eventually, all will return to Hashem.
Setting the starting point at how many publicly traded companies are started in Israel misses the point of the golus and is a distraction from its true problems.
The Torah itself recognizess the inseperable connection between the physical and spiritual. You posit a life amongst angels. The Neviim spoke in physical terms about Moshiach. Shmuel said אין בין ימות המשיח לגלית אלא שיעבוד מלכות בלבד.
Exacty, the galut is about punishment about not keeping the Torah ,primarily בין אדם לחברו as expressed by the Neviim. The Torah was meant to be fulfilled in EY . The Torah is about doing Mitzvot in this world by living the Torah in the physical world. The spirituality is in the physical world. There is no real Torah spirituality for the angels who are robots. The Mitzvot are for humans who make choices.That is the spiritual greatness of man.We don't expect it in one day.The final Redemption will be even if the Jewish Nation does not deserve it according to the Neviim. Eventually there will be a Teshuva by everyone.. Our non- religious brothers have begun the Teshuva by helping to make E Y , State of Israel,as per Rav Kook Zatzal.
R' Slifkin, unrelated to the arguing in the comments. I think the picture of you with Rabbi Gold should be removed form this article. Of course you should keep it as a memento, but since he didn't make it, I just think in hind site its just in bad taste to post it here. Best wishes.
Cellulitis, despite its initially minor appearance, is a very serious life-threatening infection. I had it once in my leg about 15 years ago and I remember it being taken very seriously at the time even though I had never heard of it before.
About 10 years ago, one of my neighbors died from it. I saw him in shul shacharis seeming just fine and he died that night.
To clarify, the man who died was much younger than Rav Gold. Probably in his 50s at most. Very little gray hair. Those who are blaming the hospital without knowing anything else look foolish.
This case is even more indicative that he died from being in the hospital than Rabbi Gold's case. Maybe you should think twice before simply accpeting the hospital's blame on cellulitis. For someone who puts a lot of effort into proving the Earth is flat, this shouldn't be too hard for you.
A few words of the little I know? I believe he was suffering already from the ailment, didn't respond to it with the seriousness it called for, and died soon after.
This case sounds very similar. Cellulitis, visit to the ER, dead within a day. If he was visiting the ER, it was already bad.
I'm first in line to come down hard on the medical establishment for all sorts of reasons, but reflexively blaming the hospital when a dangerous infection is evident is not called for. And the derisive linkage to what I do or don't do (how much effort do I go into proving the shape of the earth?) is weird.
I've had cellulitis. It's easy to overlook. It looked like a rash on my leg and was not that painful. But it spreads rapidly. I only had my case looked at quickly because my wife had blood clots and her fear was that I was suffering from that. I had not heard of it before and certainly was not aware of how serious it was. Until the doctors told me, and I looked it up online.
Some years back, I spent a week in the same hospital because of a bout with keratitis (not pleasant, also life threatening). By your logic, if my infection had not been stayed by treatment (which was extremely aggressive: two different antibiotic drops every half hour 24/7 for two days before reducing to a more normal schedule), the hospital would have been blameworthy too.
"And the derisive linkage to what I do or don't do (how much effort do I go into proving the shape of the earth?) is weird."
I wrote that line in response to your line that I look foolish for suspecting the hospital is to blame for an outcome which hospitals are routinely proven to be rightly blamed.
Golden rule: If you don't like derisive references being thrown your way, don't make any.
I don't care. I think it's weird. If I cared, I wouldn't talk about it. At least you admit to the effort to disparage.
I have researched more about the shape of the earth than you have about Rav Shalom Gold's passing. Yet you confidently conclude a hospital-induced infection did him in. I didn't take you for a retard but that's pretty retarded.
Did you know that on July 8th every year at 1115 UTC, 99% of the world's population is illuminated? More pertinently, 70% of the earth's surface is illuminated. Care to explain this?
While our mesorah is indeed compatible with a flat or ball earth, one thing it is not compatible with is a revolving or moving earth. The Heliocentric model has corrupted our mesorah.
One example. The English translation of the Hebrew original “Signs of the Times: The Zodiac in Jewish tradition” by Gad Erlanger, in the chapter on Scorpio/Cheshvan he writes the following: “Seforno explains the tilting angle of the earth as an additional result of the flood.” in reference to the idea that before the flood there were no seasons but after the flood Hashem created seasons.
Except Seforno said NO SUCH THING! What Seforno actually says is that Hashem changed the pathway of the sun!
This is perversion and corruption, because well-meaning retards, even if Talmidei Chachamim, choose to bend our mesorah to the claims of modern science. I can't read a single English translation of a sefer nowadays that references cosmology even a little bit without the translator bending himself into contortions trying to square our mesorah with modern theories that will ultimately be exposed for the great frauds they are, no different than evolution. That's preferable to wrong translations of course. I just want a correct translation without editorializing about how if chaza"l knew then what Nasa knows today, they would have said things differently.
Who knows how long it will be before the ORIGINAL Hebrew commentaries are edited the way secular publishers are editing literary classics to align them with modern sensibilities?
"Except Seforno said NO SUCH THING! What Seforno actually says is that Hashem changed the pathway of the sun!"
The Seforno does discuss the path of the sun in relation to the equator, and how it's now tilted. In modern terms, we now understand that the phenomenon described by Seforno is in fact caused by the tilt of the earth's axis.
As such your response, is clever but wrong. The Seforno is simply writing from the earth's perspective. He is describing the cause of season which is the tilt of the axis, whether or not he was aware of it. All that in the context of the seasons mentioned in the פסוק.
To sum up: After מבול -> seasons -> caused by tilt in sun's path = tilt of earths axis.
Hence Gad Erlanger summed up the Seforno accurately using modern terminology. He did not distort anything.
Once someone has had cellulitis once, he is more susceptible to it in the future.
Make sure to keep your legs clean, don't scratch them even if they itch, and when you see the slightest redness contact your doctor. He can prescribe antibiotics to be taken by mouth if the infection is not too advanced, and you will save yourself a hospital visit.
Until you can get to the doctor, soak your leg in a cloth that has been soaked in Hydrogen Peroxide or alcohol for about half an hour. Afterwards, your skin may get dry, inviting more infections, so be sure to use a moisturizer on it.
Losing weight can help, as well as wearing surgical stockings that will prevent swelling and fluid build up.
In my experience and interactions with him, Rav G. was a pleasant person, as were his sons. (Last I heard, my dear R' Menachem was devotedly providing spiritual uplift for our brothers in Afula. May he and the entire family have a Nechama.) My father was friends with Rav G. from the olden days. Fortunately, we never discussed politics, so we had a nice 'Chutz la'aretz' relationship in which you don't wear your religion on your sleeve, and find nice things in common.
Rav G. might have had Chareidi credentials in his youth, but Chareidim fail to keep all their youth, and Rav G. is one of those. Chareidim (and probably anyone) also invite outsiders to their educational institutions for the prospect that they might make them into insiders. Not everyone who passed through a Chareidi (or any) institution remains a card holder.
Rav G. quotes what Rav Dessler said in the early days of the state, (as he only lived for about five years after it was founded). It is to be speculated if this was before he sent his students at Ponovizh to rescue immigrant children facing Akiras Hadas in the Machanot Klita, at which point he was confronted with a darker aspect of the state. Quotes from Chareidi authorities need to be dated. As one would be hard pressed to find a Chareidi authority today to say such a thing at all, or at least without quantification, or not in the interest of expressing that the cup is half (or whatever fraction) full as beneficial under the circumstances.
I would be interested also to know the date of Rav Pam's statement. We had Rabbonim whose sympathies with (religious) zionism held strong until the episode of Rabbi Rubenstein and the Vilna Rabbonus, when they walked out on it. We had Rabbonim whose sympathies with (secular) zionism held strong until the zionist congress (in Basel, I believe) voted that the proposed state would have no religious character. Those Rabbonim walked out on the congress and founded the Mizrachi movement. We had some prominent, devoted students of Rav Soloveitchik who outed on him when he did not participate in the prohibition against joining Heterodox 'Judaisms'. And in the other direction, Rav Soloveitchik himself had once been a part of Agudah and left it for Mizrachi.
Rav Pam, as was his Rebi Rav Mendelowitz, was soft towards zionism. This is the Torah Vodaas approach, also exemplified by Rav Belsky joining the OU. Certainly the Modia's sentiments, which they explicitly attribute to one rav, also fall within the umbrella of Chareidi thought, while Rav Pam's is quite absent in Modia's Israel.
The post omits a crucial bit of context, and SHAUL SHAPIRA's comment bringing it into the conversation is therefore the TOP COMMENT of all so-far over 200 of them. That the Modia comment was prompted by the Lapid government consideration to jail Yeshivah students who refused to serve in the army. We're being told that Rav G. often gave a shout-out for the state. We're curious how often he gave one for Yeshivah students not serving in the army, and if he did so during Lapid's threats.
WADR to the revered Rav Pam, firstly I'm curious to see his statement about Medinas Yisroel in context. Rav Pam happens to repudiate, as his Rebi Rav Mendelowitz did before him, the Mizrachi formulation Eretz Yisrael L'am Yisrael al pi Toras Yisrael. They found that lopsided. Rather it should be Toras Yisrael L'am Yisrael B'eretz Yisrael. (This happens to a by-line of the Shuvu educational network that he founded.) I trust the reader to understand the subtlety distinguishing the two (maybe I shouldn't!), and see how a simple turn of a phrase can make all that difference.
Anyway, however one wants to extrapolate from Rav Pam regarding the Modia statement, another Chareidi leader, Rav Avraham Kalmanowitz (d. 1965?) opined on the VERY ISSUE, as reported by an eyewitness in בוצינא קדישא pages 138-139.
A few prominent Hungarian Rabunim, accompanied by the Litvack R Kalmanowitz, visited Israel consul Shlomo Argov in New York during the 'Yoselleh' episode. Argov was prepared for the visit and had a thick pile of papers (evidence for what he wanted to say) on the table, including newspaper clippings in which various parts were underlined in red ink.
The Voidislav Rav spoke on behalf of the visitors and as soon as he finished, Argov started complaining how the state is maligned in the Chareidi press. He pulled out an article from Der Yid (Satmar) and read from it that the state harrasses religion and the religious, and that the state conducts itself LIKE COMMUNIST RUSSIA.
Before anyone else had a chance to say anything, R Kalmanowitz, the 'outsider' among the Hungarians, said he would like to respond. He said that his name is Avraham Kalmanowitz and would like to introduce himself and what he did in his life, so the consul should know with whom he is talking. He told Argov, you can confirm with the heads of the state of Israel and of the various zionist organizations, and they'll tell you about my past activities—my efforts in Washington, in the state department, in the pentagon, and my influence there during the first years of the state of Israel; and about my intense Hatzalah efforts during WWII; and how during the war of Israeli independence I put in great effort to assist and protect our Jewish brothers in the holy land.
R Kalmanowitz continued, I say to you regarding the statement in Der Yid EQUATING the state of Israel with communist Russia—listen to what I say, that the state of Israel is EVEN WORSE THAN COMMUNIST RUSSIA. I say this with full responsibility! I LIVED UNDER COMMUNIST RULE in Russia for a number of years and suffered there from terrible troubles and harrassments. I say that the hatred for Chareidim in Israel is NO LESS than the hatred of the communists. Rather, it EXCEEDS it. This is told to you by a Jew who has done much for the Jews in Israel!
(The rest of the rabbis were Hungarians who had no experience with the Russians.)
R Kalmanowitz continued with more sharp words and Argov was left speechless and dumbfounded ....
So take the Modia article in context of בוצינא קדישא's FIRST HAND account of R Kalmanowitz'es FIRST HAND experience. And in the context of him being a Chareidi authority.
First my condolences to Rav Gold family. I skimmed the link and it references the 'prophecies' Yechezkel Chap 36, 37, 38 as being fulfilled with the emergence of the State of Israel over 2000 years from the when the prophecy was made. However, many of the terms in those prophecies have not been fulfilled nor likely they will ever be. In addition, it seems the Chapters are referring to a near term event, not one thousands of years later. ACJA
"I would like to share extracts from a letter that he sent to HaModia a decade ago and which they did not publish, and which at the time he sent to me to publicize"
For an article which calls for an issue to "be examined very closely and dispassionately," it does anything but. It attacks a straw man, rails about other people's ingratitude, and proves its theological case by talking about the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda.
(Yehi zichro baruch. I don't mean to dump on the recently departed niftar. But you chose to highlight the piece by posting it.)
"It attacks a straw man,"
HaModia is not a a straw man. It is the uncontested voice of דעת תורה. It's not some samizdat produced by an irrelevant sub-sect or דעת יחיד blogger who rants in the name of the גדולים.
"rails about other people's ingratitude"
Sounds like a good idea. I rail at myself when I forget to express thanks.
"and proves its theological case by talking about the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda. "
The נביאים predicted that the גאולה would be signaled by "the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda." Of course, there may other interpretations, but Rav Gold's assessment is fully within mainstream tradition.
"HaModia is not a a straw man. It is the uncontested voice of דעת תורה. It's not some samizdat produced by an irrelevant sub-sect or דעת יחיד blogger who rants in the name of the גדולים."
He was critiquing a specific point of view. He quoted that point of view. Not sure what Hamodia has to do with anything.
"Sounds like a good idea. I rail at myself when I forget to express thanks."
Wonderful. And.....?
"The נביאים predicted that the גאולה would be signaled by "the great selection of produce available in machaneh yehuda." Of course, there may other interpretations, but Rav Gold's assessment is fully within mainstream tradition."
Right. Especially the horrendous cheap wine which tastes like it came from a vineyard planted on a swamp which the chalutzim didn't properly drain. That's exactly what the neviim foresaw. That, the chocolate milk bags, and the petel which tastes like floor cleaner. The land has given forth its bounty.
Don't drink cheap wine.
Don't drink chocolate milk.
Don't drink petel.
And, for Heaven's sake, no matter how sophisticated your palate is, don't drink floor cleaner even if has been refined in the gut of a civet.
"it came from a vineyard planted on a swamp which the chalutzim didn't properly drain."
This is a libel. The chalutzim did a fine job of draining the swamps. They just didn't drain the swamps of the mind.
The נצי"ב put on fancy שבת clothing before drinking new wine produced in ארץ ישראל.
"The land has given forth its bounty."
You ain't tasted nothin' yet.
I don't deny that there are some very wonderful products grown in EY, but there's no need to get carried away. The state of Israel isn't some modern day Gan Eden.
"The state of Israel isn't some modern day Gan Eden."
Then you should invest some of your time to improve the county instead of slandering.
I'm not slandering. But maybe you should go tend to your lush fields rather than wasting time sniping at me.
"Not sure what Hamodia has to do with anything."
HaModia published the article that Rabbi Gold responded to.
You're a מרגל.
Please don't blow my mossad cover.
Don’t buy the cheap wine. There are some excellent wines.
I know, I know. I never said otherwise. The economy of the state of Israel, like other free(ish) market economies, tends to provide a wide range of products with varying levels of quality.
Rasha to talk that way about Eretz Yisrael!
I appreciate the ahavas yisrael oozing from your comments...
If you’re too cheap to buy premier products and excellent wine don’t come crying to me. In fact don’t even bother buying my wines, you wouldn’t appreciate them or the effort that went I tot hem anyways….
Okay.
"I don't mean to dump on the recently departed niftar."
You just did.
No I didn't.
This comment is fully of bald assertions e.g. "attacks a straw man". Maybe flesh it out. Cite the article he was responding to and show how he was not really attacking then article, but a straw man. Otherwise, you seem to be attacking a straw man.
The letter was written "a decade ago." It doesn't matter what the original article was about that it responded to. No one is impugning Rabbi Gold ztz"l. Natan is dredging up this letter, metaphorically while the author's body is still warm, to bash charedim and using the author as a shield. Also, he in conflating a nice article about the rav in JPost last year with the article written in HaModia a decade ago which the letter responded too. Manipulative and deceitful.
"Natan is dredging up this letter"
No. The letter became an instant classic. The attitude expressed therein has been in the forefront of the minds who express gratitude to the Almighty for the great miracle of our time. The letter has never been occluded or buried. It never has been dredged out of anywhere since it always has been in our consciousness since the day it was publicized.
"Manipulative and deceitful."
You haven't bothered to listen to Rav Gold's shiurim, and the themes expressed therein are consistent with those expresses in the letter. The letter does express in a nutshell much of what Rav Gold would discuss more expansively in his shiurim.
You [EDIT: The comment that you are defending ] said that letter "attacks a straw man". That means that the letter mischaracterizes the article that it is commenting on and attacks something that the article never said. I don't see how [you can defend a comment that says] "attacks a straw man" [by saying] "It doesn't matter what the original article was about that it responded to." The strawman assertion depends on what the article said and whether or not the letter mischaracterizes it.
I didn't say that.
I fixed my comment to refer to your defense of the other comment.
I cut and pasted the quotations from your comment. Which parts are inaccurate?
My friend, you are confused. You are fighting with two separate people and accusing one of saying something the other one said.
"he in conflating a nice article about the rav in JPost last year with the article written in HaModia a decade ago which the letter responded too". Can you explain further? He posted a link to an article about R Gold and then a letter which Rabbi Gold asked him to publicize. What do you mean by conflation here?
"This comment is fully of bald assertions e.g. "attacks a straw man". Maybe flesh it out."
Okay, here goes: The article attacked a straw man, because the quoted position it attacks doesn't have anything to do with the arguments purported debunking of it. No one was asserting that Jews in Israel are being burned at the stake or gassed to death. The point was that it's worse because the persecution (such that it is) is being done by Jews. That might be right or it might be wrong. You can even argue there was no persecution of any sort going on at all. That would be responsive to charedi complaints about the situation. Carrying on about how marvelous the selection at machaneh yehuda is isn't relevant to anything, isn't dispassionate, and isn't a serious argument.
"No one was asserting that Jews in Israel are being burned at the stake or gassed to death. The point was that it's worse because the persecution (such that it is) is being done by Jews. "
Yes. And it was a stupid and ungrateful point.
You're entitled to your opinion. I don't find it particularly compelling. But maybe the hordes blocking ayalon highway with gay pride flags can be likewise convinced to shut up and be grateful for the produce available in machaneh yehuda.
But aside from the alphabet people, you're grateful for the (possible) fulfillment of the prophecy that the land would give forth its bounty?
Or do you subscribe to the position (assuming you heard of it) that redemption comes suddenly and not gradually? In which case, material blessing would still be worthy of giving thanks but not necessarily a messianic harbinger?
I'm hopeful that the geulah shleima come soon. Till then I'm what I've termed 'fanatically ambivalent' about what's going on. Is this the first stage of geulah kimah kimah? Maybe. I tend to think the jury is very much out.
I'm not sure why it is not a serious argument. His argument is a standard one: God promises us various things as rewards including a return to the land and success in agriculture. We say it twice a day in the second paragraph of Shema. We have it good exactly as it is stated. His anecdote about the market is related to his experience in youth when food was hard to come by: it is easy to take something for granted when you don't realize that it wasn't there before. Again just saying that something is "carrying on" or "isn't a serious argument" doesn't make it not a serious argument.
Not sure what you're trying to say. The situation in America was wonderful too. People went from starving during the great depression to having an abundance of food in the 50s. So what?
Because it's ארץ ישראל that's awakened from her slumber after centuries of somnolence.
Consider replacing the word America with ארץ מצרים, and maybe you'll get the point.
That's a very nice poetic way of putting it. I just don't think it squares with the more prosaic reality on the ground. Yoker ha'michya, aino yachol ligmor et ha'chodesh etc.
America (and the rest of the industrialized world) went through a temporary economic downturn. Israel was a desert land under British and Arab control that could not support anywhere its current 10 million citizens which was turned into an land of agricultural bounty under Jewish rule, something that most people including Jews though impossible, yet seemingly in fulfillment of a prophecy we recite twice a day. In any case, feel free to disagree, but it's a serious argument and has the agreement of conservatively 50% of Jews who believe in prophecy. It's probably much higher; the complaints about the terrible Galus in Israel are the ones that aren't serious, especially among the non-Eidah Charedim where it is about political posturing and tribalism. The non-Eidah have always recognized the great importance and Providence of the re-establishment of the state even if they remained politically azionist.
"something that most people including Jews though impossible, yet seemingly in fulfillment of a prophecy we recite twice a day."
I'm not sure how that contradicts anything I said. It could be the fulfillment of a prophecy while still being a deeply distressful galus at the same time. I think that that's largely the view of R Shlomo Wolbe Zt"l in bein sheishes le'asor.
In any case, if you're going to appeal to prophecy, you should probably be more concerned about the people who are doing the kinds of stuff which the torah warns will get us spit out from the land.
https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.18.22-28?lang=he&with=Commentary%20ConnectionsList&lang2=he
וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא׃
וּבְכׇל־בְּהֵמָ֛ה לֹא־תִתֵּ֥ן שְׁכׇבְתְּךָ֖ לְטׇמְאָה־בָ֑הּ וְאִשָּׁ֗ה לֹֽא־תַעֲמֹ֞ד לִפְנֵ֧י בְהֵמָ֛ה לְרִבְעָ֖הּ תֶּ֥בֶל הֽוּא׃
אַל־תִּֽטַּמְּא֖וּ בְּכׇל־אֵ֑לֶּה כִּ֤י בְכׇל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙ נִטְמְא֣וּ הַגּוֹיִ֔ם אֲשֶׁר־אֲנִ֥י מְשַׁלֵּ֖חַ מִפְּנֵיכֶֽם׃
וַתִּטְמָ֣א הָאָ֔רֶץ וָאֶפְקֹ֥ד עֲוֺנָ֖הּ עָלֶ֑יהָ וַתָּקִ֥א הָאָ֖רֶץ אֶת־יֹשְׁבֶֽיהָ׃
וּשְׁמַרְתֶּ֣ם אַתֶּ֗ם אֶת־חֻקֹּתַי֙ וְאֶת־מִשְׁפָּטַ֔י וְלֹ֣א תַעֲשׂ֔וּ מִכֹּ֥ל הַתּוֹעֵבֹ֖ת הָאֵ֑לֶּה הָֽאֶזְרָ֔ח וְהַגֵּ֖ר הַגָּ֥ר בְּתוֹכְכֶֽם׃
כִּ֚י אֶת־כׇּל־הַתּוֹעֵבֹ֣ת הָאֵ֔ל עָשׂ֥וּ אַנְשֵֽׁי־הָאָ֖רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לִפְנֵיכֶ֑ם וַתִּטְמָ֖א הָאָֽרֶץ׃
וְלֹֽא־תָקִ֤יא הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ אֶתְכֶ֔ם בְּטַֽמַּאֲכֶ֖ם אֹתָ֑הּ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר קָאָ֛ה אֶת־הַגּ֖וֹי אֲשֶׁ֥ר לִפְנֵיכֶֽם׃
That was precisely his argument. When you just say "what is being done by Jews now is worse than what was being done by Gentiles" it's nonsensical precisely because you are comparing e.g. the plastic plate tax or reduction in the child allowance to the physical extermination by the Germans or the spiritual extermination by the Soviets. He knows very well that they are not complaining about comparable acts and that is his precise point; whatever you are complaining about less than 1/1,000,000 of what we had under the gentiles even if I factor in that internal persecution is in some way worse than external persecution. He is saying they are obviously wrong. You seem to be critiquing his style and not his actual argument.
It's not ridiculous at all. If a family member swindled you out a few thousand dollars, it would much more painful than if some shadowy Russian hacker group stole millions from you. Not financially, but emotionally.
You don't even need to be a charedi to make this point. The disengagement was seen by many with the DL community as uniquely horrific precisely because of *who* carried it out. If we adopted R Gold's reasoning, we could dismiss the whole thing as much ado about nothing. 'So you lost neve dekalim. Boo-hoo. You can move to Ramat Ha'golan. Jews expelled from Spain would have loved to have such an option. It's not like Sharon sent anyone to the gas chambers.'
This latest comment is a repetition of the one above.
What he is saying is that "whatever you are complaining about less than 1/1,000,000 of what we had under the gentiles even if I factor in that internal persecution is in some way worse than external persecution". His argument is that In fact no only do Israeli Jews not have it any were nearly as bad as in Europe but in fact the Charedim have it better than than the last 2000 years and probably all of Jewish history based their own value system: a far higher percentage of people devoted to full time learning, all on the dime of the supposedly disappointing relative. Beside the fact that while we can never tell what is Providence and what is not, the fulfillment of many prophecies has to bring that to the fore, especially for a group where the mainstream philosophy is aligned with those who think that almost everything that happens is direct Providence.
He was not criticizing somoone who says "Thank God we live in such a wonderful land under such a wonderful Jewish state and it's so much better than when we're in Golus. Just when a Kenneset does "X/Y/Z" policy I disagree with, is is much more painful than when the Polish Parliament does it. I expect so much better of our MK's." He is also not arguing that if your loved ones actions have a greater emotional impact on you than those of someone you don't know.
Your comments seem to be directed against a strawman.
Again, the quote which *he* cited read, ""The most difficult golus to endure is a golus suffered from other Jews and therefore we plead for a final redemption from this terrible golus."
It explicitly said that this galus is painful because of *who's* doing it.
"It's not ridiculous at all. If a family member swindled you out a few thousand dollars, it would much more painful than if some shadowy Russian hacker group stole millions from you. Not financially, but emotionally."
Those are you words, not the words of the Hamodia editorial. I would call this an "iron man" argument- misrepresenting the indefensible original position as a more justifiable one in order to discredit the critique.
Okay, quote the words from Hamodia. I'll wait.
It's time for a new word: Charediopathy.
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/its-time-for-new-word-israelopathy
BDE. R. Gold was a tremendous force for Jewry. He founded the Bnai Torah shul in Toronto, which today has fallen on hard times but was THE most vibrant shul in the city throughout the entire 1980s. A great man.
I once heard him ask: In Numbers 13:27 the Spies said about the land of Israel וְגַם זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ הִוא וְזֶה פִּרְיָהּ. R. Gold explained that they used the word וגם in the sense of, "just like Egypt". (In 16:13 it says הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר) It was a deliberate attempt to insult the land by comparing it to Egypt. (R. Gold noted similarly that some people try to trivialize the word "Holocaust" by applying it to all sorts of events of lesser magnitude.) This is why Joshua and Caleb pointedly responded in 14:8 אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִוא זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ, ISRAEL was the blessed land (היא), not anywhere else. He further observed that this is why the Torah reading sometimes ends, in the middle of a narrative, when the phrase זבת חלב ודבש is used, to make one focus and reflect upon it.
Re the letter - if he asked you to publicize it, then you were right to post it. And what the man said, as quoted by R. Gold z"l, assuming accurate, was ugly. Its ugly when you bash Charedim, and its ugly when Charedim bash Mizrachim. All of it is ugly, ugly, ugly. I don't think I ever heard R. Gold say bad about other people, he focused only on the good. In the three week period, could there not be a better time for us to learn from his example?
R. Gold ztz"l was openly critical of satmar and anti-zionist charedim. Listen to his lecture on the very topic of this letter and you will hear how harsh he was and rightly so.
One can be critical of a person or movement, it its used as a means to draw a contrast. One's focus, in speeches or writings, should be on PROMOTING something one believes in. As part of that speech or article one might cite a foil and criticize it, to use as a means of illustrating differences. But it should be sandwiched between positives:
* Our approach is the way to go b/c of X.
* (We don't subscribe to the other guy's approach, which believes in Y, bc of Z.)
* And that is why our model of X is the way to go.
Natan likes to bash Charedim. So he found this letter to use as an example of Rabbi Gold's writings. Homerun.
That's how I see it too. Yes, it's ugly, Garvin. But publicizing this letter now, taking advantage of a man's death to do so, is not virtuous. It's divisive.
What bothers you and the other Chareidi commentators on this blog is that Rabbi Gold advocates a DL philosophy while he has Chareidi credentials,Smicha, Ponevitch, etc..Also the letter cited Rav Pam and Rav Dessler,. Chareidi stars. This stands in contradiction to the Chareidi narrative expressed at this blog that DL are all Reform,irresponsible poskei halacha and terribly responsible for the corruption of Jewish religious youth. This followed by epithets such as apikores,choteh omachte etc., as stated in this blog.
Lot of projection. I didn't say that, word twister. I have Eim HaBanim Semeicha by Rav Yissachar Shlomo Teichtal hy"d. It's too bad the charedim whom he wrote the sefer for ignore it at best. I don't need you to explain wrongly what I think or what bothers me.
Semicha is a Charedi credential? This is the first time I am hearing of this.
The Chafetz Chaim was Gadol Hador, yet did not have Semicha. Semicha, especially since 'college Yeshivos' were started, is pretty much meaningless as a credential.
Smicha from Rav Herzog and Rav Elyashuv
Yes, and therefore?
Reb Moshe Feinstein and Reb Yaakov Kamenetzky would also give Semicha. It is still not a 'Charedi credential'.
Rabbi Gold is entitled to be a Zionist. He is not entitled to speak in the name of the anti-Zionists and the non-Zionists amongst us.
"taking advantage of a man's death to do so, is not virtuous."
The letter was 100% Gold. Quintessential. Those who are familiar with Rabbi Gold's shiurim, know that the letter is representative of his views.
And I don't think that you, who hangs around the blog of someone who consistently maligns great rabbonim from all streams of the Torah world without uttering a peep of protest, has any standing to protest the faithful quotation of one of Rav Gold's most famous articles.
Not what I said, word twister.
I can see how one feels that way, especially given this blog's track record. In this case though, it seems appropriate, a timely opportunity to publicize something the מנוח asked to publicize.
I know nothing about the departed; I'm sure he was a wonderful man despite this inane piece of literature. But it is no kavod to his memory to put this up as a monument to him.
Hamodia writes a typical chareidi anti-Zionist statement and he responds with 15 paragraphs of classic Zionist rhetoric. Why not just chop it down to one line: "I, Shalom Gold, personally align with the Zionist position on this matter"...
What's weird and arrogant and narrow minded about the whole thing is the assumption that regurgitating a volley hackneyed Zionist talking points that everybody knows already and those who disagree with disagree with, serves as some kind of tayna on Hamodia for ascribing to an alternative point of view. Typical Modox myopia, if you don't mind my saying so.
It's not a tayna on Hamodia, he was making a מחאה against what he (and many others) saw as a repugnant attitude. When a Rabbi isnt moche, we say שמע מינה דניחא ליה and he is held accountable. And why he should he be limited to a single line? If that were the standard, most of the קובץ מאמרים of RE Wasserman would be worthless, along with all the Satmar Rebbe's works, and about 80% of RSR Hirsch's writings. For they could have sufficed with a single line, whether against Zionism or Reform or anything else, to write simply that they didn't ascribe to it.
This goes too far. There's nothing wrong with writing passionately and at length about meaningful topics (tho granted it might cost you readers.) And occasionally one might criticize others too, that's part of it. But bashing others should never be seen as the focus. It shouldn't be overly frequent, and when it happens, it should be sandwiched between a more positive POV the writer or speaker subscribes to. The טפל and not the עיקר. More אהבה, less שנאה. The stronger right hand is מקרבת, only the weak left is דוחה.
Well said. Inspiring. Bravo. And I love you.
Anyways, my point was that this is rehashed talking points that have been debated for well over a hundred years. He may have articulated one side very beautifully, and it may be an excellent article to educate or inspire the base in a Zionist journal. But he didn't present it as such; he quite explicitly presented it as if he was responding to the other side and calling them out on their statement - or better yet "examining it in a dispassionate manner".
Which is inane. They didn't say his opinion because they have a different view of these matters, a view which he neither acknowledged nor addressed. Their statement was actually a fairly basic sentiment of a worldview that has been articulated and argued for generations. He may find it repugnant, but instead of actually recognizing its existence, dealing with it (which at this point would be an exercise in redundancy) he chose to simply put the words "a statement of authentic Torah-true hashkafah" in sneer quotes and go on to intone the classic Zionist observations, which we all know already and those who disagree with disagree with because they consider other considerations more relevant.
So the entire piece of flowery verbiage amounts to a statement of how dare you chareidim hold on to your anti Zionist viewpoints, when I, Rabbi Gold, agree with the pro Zionists on this matter.
Like I said, classic Modox (or whatever) myopia.
And of course: I love you.
In my experience most ( i.e. average Joe ) chareidim don't know the basic zionist or modox talking points.
For those uneducated masses who've never made a decision because they never recognized a choice rabbi gold can have a real impact - even with basic talking points-.
(I think this is true for run of the mill followers of many movements; there is a minority of relatively educated who know the opposing talking points on a basic level , and then there is a smaller minority who know them on a deeper or even complete level).
YidPoshut
The same same logic as found in the previous comment can be applied to the repetitious sometimes long anti-R. Slifkin/anti Rationalist/anti-DL/anti Modern Orthodoxy/anti-Medina & IDF/ anti-etc etc pro Chareidi comments.
Again, applying the logic of the previous comment, this is a blog started by Rabbi Sifkin whose purpose is, I imagine, to discuss the various aspects and applications of a Rational Hashkafa and comparing it to the other hashkafa. As mentioned in the previous comment, any opposition should not be repeated over & over. One sentence would suffice.
My comment is to show that we sometimes do the very thing we accuse the other side of doing. And at times. we do it with righteous indignation.
To protest something requires more than just the bare words, "I protest!" You have to articulate a position, and that's just what R. Gold did. If boiled down to its core, as you suggest, every debate on anything can be reduced to "How dare you hold X, when I hold Y."
(I appreciate the love, brother, and send it right back at you.)
"Hamodia writes a typical chareidi anti-Zionist statement"
It wasn't typical. And neither was Rabbi Gold.
Don't forget that Rabbi Gold was part of the Chareidi world. There was a time when it was common for Chareidim to be Zionists.
As someone who knew R Sholom Gold and his family in RBS, he was a great man and will be missed.
Slifkin can't even honor the passing away of a rabbi without attacking the charedim. What charedim mean is that spiritually to be in a secular Jewish state is more painful then in Russia, Germany etc., not that they had more fruits and vegetables in Poland.
I once said that every rabbi is zocheh to one good line in his career. Mine is, "If you want to speak to G-d, go to the Kotel, but if you want to see Him, go to Shuk Machaneh Yehudah."
I let this speak for itself.
Huh? It's a fantastic line.
Today we pray at the makom kadosh but we see Hashem so clearly from His magnificent bounty, especially food. Did you ever open a Tehilim? Did you ever learn Chovos Halivavos? Walking through the marketplace is a way of seeing Hashem.
This is true of any market place, but it's not what being said here.
Yes it is. Hashem sent a bounty of shefa to Eretz Yisroel, and like R' Pam pointed out, Hashem sent it on the heels of the war. Don't be an ingrate.
You Rasha! You are like the 10 evil spies!
Am I allowed to mock the halva sellers? or is that off limits too?
I love the halva sellers! They're fantastic!
I never considered for a second to mock them.
Am I missing some tiny subtle flaw that you've perceived in them?
You seem to be taking things very personally. I get a kick out of the halva guys hawking their wares. I also think it's okay to poke fun at them without it being akin to the sin of the meraglim. I think Machaneh Yehuda is a charming place. But I go there for the entertainment, not as part of some spiritual pilgrimage.
R Slifkin didn't write those lines. R Gold did. Quoting someone is Kavod to them. He is saying that whatever you think about the plastic tax or reducing the child allowance pales in comparison with the physical destruction by the Germans and the spiritual destruction by the Soviets. We read twice a day in Shema that we will be rewarded by product of the Land of Israel. He is taking that seriously. Also, as he points out, in his youth, food was not in such abundance. We are taking that for granted.
Plastic tax?
Baruch Dayan HaEmes
As usual, the background is ignored, and ignorance reigns supreme.
The non-Zionists and anti-Zionists have no reason to give up their opinions because of the availability of delicious fruit and vegetables in Machane Yehuda. The basic idea behind their Hashkafa is that the golus is primarily spiritual, the pain is primarily spiritual, and the redemption will be primarily spiritual. לא נתאוו החכמים לימות המשיח וכו' אלא שיהיו פנוים לתורה ולחכמתה כדי שיזכו לחיי העולם הבא. The gashmiyus of the geula is incidental.
We can survive the ghettos, crusades, inquisition, and pogroms. Those are all physical manifestations of galus. The spiritual problem is our primary concern, and a Jewish secular state is worse than Goyim burning Seforim on Erev Shabbos Chukas. There is no justification for upward of 50% of Klal Yisroel not keeping Mitzvos, there is no excuse for the Torah ignorance of the vast majority of our nation. When those ignorant have the upper hand and get to make rules for all of us ראיתי שרים הולכים על הארץ ועבדים רוכבים על סוסים, we are doubly pained.
The Geula may happen gradually. First, these people will lose their power, then they will realize that their lives are unjustifiable. Eventually, all will return to Hashem.
Setting the starting point at how many publicly traded companies are started in Israel misses the point of the golus and is a distraction from its true problems.
The Torah itself recognizess the inseperable connection between the physical and spiritual. You posit a life amongst angels. The Neviim spoke in physical terms about Moshiach. Shmuel said אין בין ימות המשיח לגלית אלא שיעבוד מלכות בלבד.
Klal Yisroel keeping all the Mitzvos is not 'angels'. That should be the default, and the שעבוד מלכיות prevents that.
This is all in the Rambam, readily available. I wonder why some people would choose to ignore it.
Exacty, the galut is about punishment about not keeping the Torah ,primarily בין אדם לחברו as expressed by the Neviim. The Torah was meant to be fulfilled in EY . The Torah is about doing Mitzvot in this world by living the Torah in the physical world. The spirituality is in the physical world. There is no real Torah spirituality for the angels who are robots. The Mitzvot are for humans who make choices.That is the spiritual greatness of man.We don't expect it in one day.The final Redemption will be even if the Jewish Nation does not deserve it according to the Neviim. Eventually there will be a Teshuva by everyone.. Our non- religious brothers have begun the Teshuva by helping to make E Y , State of Israel,as per Rav Kook Zatzal.
R' Slifkin, unrelated to the arguing in the comments. I think the picture of you with Rabbi Gold should be removed form this article. Of course you should keep it as a memento, but since he didn't make it, I just think in hind site its just in bad taste to post it here. Best wishes.
Cellulitis, despite its initially minor appearance, is a very serious life-threatening infection. I had it once in my leg about 15 years ago and I remember it being taken very seriously at the time even though I had never heard of it before.
About 10 years ago, one of my neighbors died from it. I saw him in shul shacharis seeming just fine and he died that night.
To clarify, the man who died was much younger than Rav Gold. Probably in his 50s at most. Very little gray hair. Those who are blaming the hospital without knowing anything else look foolish.
This case is even more indicative that he died from being in the hospital than Rabbi Gold's case. Maybe you should think twice before simply accpeting the hospital's blame on cellulitis. For someone who puts a lot of effort into proving the Earth is flat, this shouldn't be too hard for you.
A few words of the little I know? I believe he was suffering already from the ailment, didn't respond to it with the seriousness it called for, and died soon after.
This case sounds very similar. Cellulitis, visit to the ER, dead within a day. If he was visiting the ER, it was already bad.
I'm first in line to come down hard on the medical establishment for all sorts of reasons, but reflexively blaming the hospital when a dangerous infection is evident is not called for. And the derisive linkage to what I do or don't do (how much effort do I go into proving the shape of the earth?) is weird.
I've had cellulitis. It's easy to overlook. It looked like a rash on my leg and was not that painful. But it spreads rapidly. I only had my case looked at quickly because my wife had blood clots and her fear was that I was suffering from that. I had not heard of it before and certainly was not aware of how serious it was. Until the doctors told me, and I looked it up online.
Some years back, I spent a week in the same hospital because of a bout with keratitis (not pleasant, also life threatening). By your logic, if my infection had not been stayed by treatment (which was extremely aggressive: two different antibiotic drops every half hour 24/7 for two days before reducing to a more normal schedule), the hospital would have been blameworthy too.
"And the derisive linkage to what I do or don't do (how much effort do I go into proving the shape of the earth?) is weird."
I wrote that line in response to your line that I look foolish for suspecting the hospital is to blame for an outcome which hospitals are routinely proven to be rightly blamed.
Golden rule: If you don't like derisive references being thrown your way, don't make any.
I don't care. I think it's weird. If I cared, I wouldn't talk about it. At least you admit to the effort to disparage.
I have researched more about the shape of the earth than you have about Rav Shalom Gold's passing. Yet you confidently conclude a hospital-induced infection did him in. I didn't take you for a retard but that's pretty retarded.
Did you know that on July 8th every year at 1115 UTC, 99% of the world's population is illuminated? More pertinently, 70% of the earth's surface is illuminated. Care to explain this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3RBCV1swpk
While our mesorah is indeed compatible with a flat or ball earth, one thing it is not compatible with is a revolving or moving earth. The Heliocentric model has corrupted our mesorah.
One example. The English translation of the Hebrew original “Signs of the Times: The Zodiac in Jewish tradition” by Gad Erlanger, in the chapter on Scorpio/Cheshvan he writes the following: “Seforno explains the tilting angle of the earth as an additional result of the flood.” in reference to the idea that before the flood there were no seasons but after the flood Hashem created seasons.
Except Seforno said NO SUCH THING! What Seforno actually says is that Hashem changed the pathway of the sun!
This is perversion and corruption, because well-meaning retards, even if Talmidei Chachamim, choose to bend our mesorah to the claims of modern science. I can't read a single English translation of a sefer nowadays that references cosmology even a little bit without the translator bending himself into contortions trying to square our mesorah with modern theories that will ultimately be exposed for the great frauds they are, no different than evolution. That's preferable to wrong translations of course. I just want a correct translation without editorializing about how if chaza"l knew then what Nasa knows today, they would have said things differently.
Who knows how long it will be before the ORIGINAL Hebrew commentaries are edited the way secular publishers are editing literary classics to align them with modern sensibilities?
'I have researched"
You have parroted crackpots without researching their claims with a critical eye.
"Did you know that on July 8th every year at 1115 UTC, 99% of the world's population is illuminated?"
Population≠geography.
"More pertinently, 70% of the earth's surface is illuminated."
That's because it includes twilight. That will give you between 12°-18° on either side of sunrise or sunset.
" The Heliocentric model has corrupted our mesorah."
Except, that גדולי ישראל disagree with you. See for example, R' Moshe Shternbuch, who I doubt anyone normal would condemn as being on the left.
"Except Seforno said NO SUCH THING! What Seforno actually says is that Hashem changed the pathway of the sun!"
The Seforno does discuss the path of the sun in relation to the equator, and how it's now tilted. In modern terms, we now understand that the phenomenon described by Seforno is in fact caused by the tilt of the earth's axis.
As such your response, is clever but wrong. The Seforno is simply writing from the earth's perspective. He is describing the cause of season which is the tilt of the axis, whether or not he was aware of it. All that in the context of the seasons mentioned in the פסוק.
To sum up: After מבול -> seasons -> caused by tilt in sun's path = tilt of earths axis.
Hence Gad Erlanger summed up the Seforno accurately using modern terminology. He did not distort anything.
You owe him an apology.
Never confidently concluded. Only strongly suspected. I maintained this cautious position throughout my comments.
Please try to be accurate and not tempt me to disparage you again.
"how much effort do I go into proving the shape of the earth?"
Given the unconvincing results of your latest escapade, not enough effort.
Just enough. You're hopeless.
Once someone has had cellulitis once, he is more susceptible to it in the future.
Make sure to keep your legs clean, don't scratch them even if they itch, and when you see the slightest redness contact your doctor. He can prescribe antibiotics to be taken by mouth if the infection is not too advanced, and you will save yourself a hospital visit.
Until you can get to the doctor, soak your leg in a cloth that has been soaked in Hydrogen Peroxide or alcohol for about half an hour. Afterwards, your skin may get dry, inviting more infections, so be sure to use a moisturizer on it.
Losing weight can help, as well as wearing surgical stockings that will prevent swelling and fluid build up.
They couldn't publish it because they had no meaningful response
Oh, sure. That was probably the reason.
false. what a distortion "from one extreme of six million slaughtered to the other extreme of the settling of our people in their own medina"
He misses out a 'Nun' It is His Medinah. nothing do do with a zionist state.
1-
In my experience and interactions with him, Rav G. was a pleasant person, as were his sons. (Last I heard, my dear R' Menachem was devotedly providing spiritual uplift for our brothers in Afula. May he and the entire family have a Nechama.) My father was friends with Rav G. from the olden days. Fortunately, we never discussed politics, so we had a nice 'Chutz la'aretz' relationship in which you don't wear your religion on your sleeve, and find nice things in common.
Rav G. might have had Chareidi credentials in his youth, but Chareidim fail to keep all their youth, and Rav G. is one of those. Chareidim (and probably anyone) also invite outsiders to their educational institutions for the prospect that they might make them into insiders. Not everyone who passed through a Chareidi (or any) institution remains a card holder.
Rav G. quotes what Rav Dessler said in the early days of the state, (as he only lived for about five years after it was founded). It is to be speculated if this was before he sent his students at Ponovizh to rescue immigrant children facing Akiras Hadas in the Machanot Klita, at which point he was confronted with a darker aspect of the state. Quotes from Chareidi authorities need to be dated. As one would be hard pressed to find a Chareidi authority today to say such a thing at all, or at least without quantification, or not in the interest of expressing that the cup is half (or whatever fraction) full as beneficial under the circumstances.
I would be interested also to know the date of Rav Pam's statement. We had Rabbonim whose sympathies with (religious) zionism held strong until the episode of Rabbi Rubenstein and the Vilna Rabbonus, when they walked out on it. We had Rabbonim whose sympathies with (secular) zionism held strong until the zionist congress (in Basel, I believe) voted that the proposed state would have no religious character. Those Rabbonim walked out on the congress and founded the Mizrachi movement. We had some prominent, devoted students of Rav Soloveitchik who outed on him when he did not participate in the prohibition against joining Heterodox 'Judaisms'. And in the other direction, Rav Soloveitchik himself had once been a part of Agudah and left it for Mizrachi.
Rav Pam, as was his Rebi Rav Mendelowitz, was soft towards zionism. This is the Torah Vodaas approach, also exemplified by Rav Belsky joining the OU. Certainly the Modia's sentiments, which they explicitly attribute to one rav, also fall within the umbrella of Chareidi thought, while Rav Pam's is quite absent in Modia's Israel.
The post omits a crucial bit of context, and SHAUL SHAPIRA's comment bringing it into the conversation is therefore the TOP COMMENT of all so-far over 200 of them. That the Modia comment was prompted by the Lapid government consideration to jail Yeshivah students who refused to serve in the army. We're being told that Rav G. often gave a shout-out for the state. We're curious how often he gave one for Yeshivah students not serving in the army, and if he did so during Lapid's threats.
2-
WADR to the revered Rav Pam, firstly I'm curious to see his statement about Medinas Yisroel in context. Rav Pam happens to repudiate, as his Rebi Rav Mendelowitz did before him, the Mizrachi formulation Eretz Yisrael L'am Yisrael al pi Toras Yisrael. They found that lopsided. Rather it should be Toras Yisrael L'am Yisrael B'eretz Yisrael. (This happens to a by-line of the Shuvu educational network that he founded.) I trust the reader to understand the subtlety distinguishing the two (maybe I shouldn't!), and see how a simple turn of a phrase can make all that difference.
Anyway, however one wants to extrapolate from Rav Pam regarding the Modia statement, another Chareidi leader, Rav Avraham Kalmanowitz (d. 1965?) opined on the VERY ISSUE, as reported by an eyewitness in בוצינא קדישא pages 138-139.
A few prominent Hungarian Rabunim, accompanied by the Litvack R Kalmanowitz, visited Israel consul Shlomo Argov in New York during the 'Yoselleh' episode. Argov was prepared for the visit and had a thick pile of papers (evidence for what he wanted to say) on the table, including newspaper clippings in which various parts were underlined in red ink.
The Voidislav Rav spoke on behalf of the visitors and as soon as he finished, Argov started complaining how the state is maligned in the Chareidi press. He pulled out an article from Der Yid (Satmar) and read from it that the state harrasses religion and the religious, and that the state conducts itself LIKE COMMUNIST RUSSIA.
Before anyone else had a chance to say anything, R Kalmanowitz, the 'outsider' among the Hungarians, said he would like to respond. He said that his name is Avraham Kalmanowitz and would like to introduce himself and what he did in his life, so the consul should know with whom he is talking. He told Argov, you can confirm with the heads of the state of Israel and of the various zionist organizations, and they'll tell you about my past activities—my efforts in Washington, in the state department, in the pentagon, and my influence there during the first years of the state of Israel; and about my intense Hatzalah efforts during WWII; and how during the war of Israeli independence I put in great effort to assist and protect our Jewish brothers in the holy land.
R Kalmanowitz continued, I say to you regarding the statement in Der Yid EQUATING the state of Israel with communist Russia—listen to what I say, that the state of Israel is EVEN WORSE THAN COMMUNIST RUSSIA. I say this with full responsibility! I LIVED UNDER COMMUNIST RULE in Russia for a number of years and suffered there from terrible troubles and harrassments. I say that the hatred for Chareidim in Israel is NO LESS than the hatred of the communists. Rather, it EXCEEDS it. This is told to you by a Jew who has done much for the Jews in Israel!
(The rest of the rabbis were Hungarians who had no experience with the Russians.)
R Kalmanowitz continued with more sharp words and Argov was left speechless and dumbfounded ....
So take the Modia article in context of בוצינא קדישא's FIRST HAND account of R Kalmanowitz'es FIRST HAND experience. And in the context of him being a Chareidi authority.
This one is for you Natan:
https://vinnews.com/2023/07/11/rabbi-dov-landau-attacks-new-yeshiva-combining-secular-studiesdont-send-there-or-support-in-any-way/#comments
First my condolences to Rav Gold family. I skimmed the link and it references the 'prophecies' Yechezkel Chap 36, 37, 38 as being fulfilled with the emergence of the State of Israel over 2000 years from the when the prophecy was made. However, many of the terms in those prophecies have not been fulfilled nor likely they will ever be. In addition, it seems the Chapters are referring to a near term event, not one thousands of years later. ACJA
Being that you're an alter cocker, I thought I would let you know that Amazon is having a massive sale on Depends for Prime Day:
https://www.amazon.com/Depend-Incontinence-Underwear-Absorbency-Packaging/dp/B01N6J36E6/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1CNKPUIXBALQM&keywords=depends+diapers&psr=PDAY&qid=1689172455&s=prime-day&sprefix=depends+diapers%2Cprime-day%2C122&sr=1-1