I don’t have a blog of my own, but the kind of readers here are most likely the ones that would be interested if I had one. Thus this post will be a little long.
I like to think of myself as a Rational Jew, like Noson. I have carefully learned Moreh Nevuchim and I must thank Noson for opening my eyes on numerous issues of Jewish Thought. I have been close with Rav Aharon Feldman since 1969. I highly respected the fact that he, at one time, tried to plead in Noson’s defense. But I was taken aback when he jumped ship and wrote his ill-founded response in the summer of 2005. He showed me the first draft and I wrote a critique of it. He responded to my critique, seemingly to agree with many of my points and disagree with some. I responded to his response and sent it to him. He then went ahead and published his original article without modifying it by addressing my cogent arguments. I then shared my critique with Noson who published it. After that Rav Feldman broke ties with me for a few years. We have since then sort of reunited.
I have published four Historical/Hashkafa/Halacha novels and one sefer on Torah subjects (in Hebrew). In the past two years I was encouraged to translate a long piece I wrote on Hashgocha from a rational perspective. I added to it three other pieces from my sefer that I translated and rewrote in English and put them together in a 60 page book, Creation and Divine Providence.
When you feel you have come to an understanding of something, often that becomes a springboard for another thought, and that one for another, etc. My thoughts on how Divine Providence works from a rational perspective gave me an insight into a new (for me) conclusion.
We all have heard that Ben Gurion predicted in 1948 that within a few generations there wouldn’t be any Torah Jews left. Hah! Seemingly, there is more Torah being learned today by more Jews than ever before in history.
I asked a question: What is the one most significant factor that has generated the plethora of Torah study, Yeshivos, and Kollelim in Eretz Yisroel as of today?
My answer: The Israel Army Draft! I’m not comparing the phenomena to the upsurge of Yeshivas in America to evade the idiotic Viet Nam war draft. In E”Y, the Gedolim (from Agudah and on right) insisted on exemption from the draft for full time torah learners to create (concomitant with the Zionist state) a “culture” of Torah learning. It was “Zeh L’umat Zeh.” The Zionists morphed the Army Draft into a “national culture,” that has become the “holy grail” of Zionism. Torah learning has always been recognized by the elite stratified class of Torah Sages in past generations as the focal point of Judaism, but now that the Zionist wanted to change that to “Nationalism” it had to be countered in the most effective and extreme manner to prevent Zionism from making Ben Gurion’s erstwhile prediction a reality.
Thus I am contending that it is two way street (in a sense). The ardent Draft as a Zionist cultural artifact, has strengthened the resolve of the Torah world to save, preserve and grow its culture of Limud HaTorah.
On the other hand, the potent opposition to the army draft by the “Torah World” has worked to harden the resolve of the Army culture. That means, the Army must be the most moral army in the world (which I think it is), it must be the most potent Army in the world (for its size) and in successful defense of its people, which I think it has proven to be. Thus, the Torah world in its opposition to the draft has been a major factor, by its cultural war in making the Israeli army so formidable. In that case, it is indeed very true that sincere Torah learning acts to protect Klal Yisroel by its indirect impetus making the IDF the best it can be. Kinas Sofrim Tarbeh Chochmah. The Kulturkampf between Torah and the Draft, has strengthened both.
At this point in history, I think both are highly sophisticated as institutions and have momentum and motivation to continue without the animus of all-out Kulturkampf. That means each should respect the other, and allow this successful formula remain in place as it is.
Great article, your books are classics. Again you have to realize that R' Slfikin can't listen because he has a agenda, and it is not the truth. The truth stands tall, agendas don't.
He will do teshuva, because I think he does like the truth. The pain must be so great for him. Only Hashem knows. But a man must remember to always go with the truth.
I'm happy that you're cued in on the pain. But then your first thing to do before addressing the truth for the one in pain, Pirkei Avos gives examples where that is counterproductive, is to brainstorm how to relieve the pain itself.
And if there hadn’t been opposition to the draft from the Torah world cowards, then the IDF would still be one of the best militaries in the world due to the fact that their lives and those of their families depend on it as well as the strong support of American Jews and the wealth of weapons given to them from the American government. Yet they might be even stronger had all the Cheridim been part of it.
Once upon a time, in a high-security prison filled with the most hardened of criminals, a group of convicts hatched a plan to escape. They started collecting the wrappers from their prison meals, as one does when they're preparing to break out of jail. After much brainstorming, they decided to use the wrappers to pick the lock of their cell door. It was a brilliant plan, or so they thought.
But there was one prisoner who instead spent his days on the phone, speaking with his mysterious friend named "DA". While the others were busy planning their escape, he was busy schmoozing with this guy. When the big day finally arrived, the other inmates were ready. They had managed to mold the wrappers into a giant key that they hoped would unlock their freedom.
As they inserted their makeshift key into the lock, the door suddenly swung open. The prison warden stood before them and announced that all charges had been dropped, thanks to the DA's intervention. The DA's friend was thrilled, but his fellow inmates were less than pleased.
"Chutzpa!" they cried. "You freeloading ingrate! We worked tirelessly to plan this escape and you just sat there on the phone all day. You should have helped us, instead of just mooching off our hard work."
Natan, it's amazing how much you're lacking in self-awareness not to realize how big a theological fraud you are. You've spent the last 10 years DENYING THAT THE TORAH OFFERS ANY PROTECTION. AT ALL. I can show many posts where you've written that very clearly. Just over a week ago, you were ridiculing R. Zilberstein for telling someone that the Torah protects and he does not need to buy a gun. But now you're saying that the Chareidim don't believe that the Torah protects or else they would not have fled the south. So then why did R. Zilberstein tell the fellow not to buy a gun??
After we showed you the overwhelming evidence from the contrary, you've completely changed your tone. The parable that you wrote above is from a secularist standpoint which denies the essence of Torah and Mitzvos at all. As my friend HGL wrote, you could have replaced "sat down to pray" to "played with toys".
At least you're starting to show your true colors and don't claim to be representing "classic Judaism" anymore. I'm glad we're making progress.
In your parable, the prisoner on the phone had no interest in the wrapper plan. But the charedim, on the other hand, are absolutely interested in there being soldiers. They just don't want to be the ones to do that job.
Also, however much you insist that I denied that Torah protects at all, it's still not true. You can look in my book published two years ago where I discuss sources to that effect. The fact that I interpret these sources differently to you does not mean that I deny their existence.
"The same is true for Torah. According the rationalist approach, learning Torah imparts valuable knowledge, improves our character, and teaches us how to improve society (see my post on The Rishonim on Torah Study.) That is it, and that is all."
"There was his statement that the best protection against being blown up on a bus is to learn Torah on the bus, which he derived from the Gemara, but which I argued was (A) not at all what the Gemara is saying, according to several commentaries, and (B) not actually true"
"Practically Speaking, Torah Does NOT Protect"
"It's just as well that the Gemara does not make any such claim, because such a claim is quite clearly not true. All such claims about the protective value of Torah and mitzvos - "Torah scholars do not need protection," "Someone on their way to do a mitzvah (shaliach mitzvah) cannot be harmed," "When you're learning Torah, you can't be harmed," might be true in some abstract or hyper-qualified aggadic sense, but are clearly not true in any practical sense today."
"There is no claim in the Gemara that a yeshivah student learning Torah provides any protection from Arabs."
"In summary: According to classical Judaism, the primary way of defending ourselves against our enemies is with military means. The primary spiritual defensive tool is prayer. You can also create a merit for yourself by learning Torah, and you can pray on behalf of anyone. But you can't export the merit of your Torah to other people."
"Based on the Gemara in Berachos 5a, the protection appears to be from physical illness. Other sources that speak about the protective value of Torah make no mention of specifically military threats, and indicate that it provides protection equally from illness, famine, etc."
"'We will not convince secular Israelis that kollel students protect Israeli society no less than IDF soldiers.'
Never mind secular Israelis - you won't convince anyone of that. On a theoretical level, it has a very shaky foundation. On a practical level, nobody really believes it - not even charedim."
"Second, and most significantly: Regardless of the sources that someone might dig up/ reinterpret to claim that yeshivah and kollel students are protecting Israel, the bottom line is that (a) the facts on the ground demonstrate otherwise, and (b) when push comes to shove, the charedim don't even believe it themselves."
You keep saying that you understand Torah protecting different than me, yet you have not explained how you understand it. I understand it as I've described here:
I agree, the parable wasn't great. I should have used a parable where their efforts at least seemed to play a role in their success. So let's reconstruct it that our protagonist was in cahoots with the prison guards and coordinated with them to not be around when his fellow inmates picked the lock. Or something to that effect.
"This did not go down well with my ideological opponents, who keep the comments section lively and have even started an entire blog dedicated to rebutting this one (the third such anti-Slifkin blog to have been created!)"
Natan, as the proprietor of the aforementioned blog, I can predict with a large degree of confidence that you will outlast our blog as well. Unlike you, the three of us have lives and day jobs and just don't have the same manic hateful obsession over you that you have about us.
Touché. There's another reason why he's outlasted all his critics. When you have a hangup over making only arguments that are internally coherent and generally consistent, there's a finite amount of material you can put out. When you're just throwing words at random, whatever sounds snappy in the moment and with an ever evolving set of underlying principles, you can outlast the energizer bunny.
See downstream where he solemnly informs us that although Rationalism teaches it doesn't, for today Torah does indeed protect but it's selfish to learn Torah (that protects) to protect, and Torah learned selfishly does not indeed protect so therefore it doesn't so it's probably other mitzvos that are doing the protecting despite rationalism teaching that mitzvos are very rational stuff that don't necessarily protect and besides Chareidim are so dumb haha. Or something like that.
Then extrapolate the methodology to twenty years of ever changing yuks. Do you think you can compete with that?
Natan, I'm really in good faith trying to figure out what you're saying (with an ulterior motive of course, I can only argue with you if I understand your position), but I'm completely baffled. You've claimed that:
1. Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect.
2. Torah in fact does protect.
3. R' Zilberstein is silly for telling a guy not to buy a gun and to rely on Torah protection.
4. Chareidi yeshivos should not have fled the south and should have relied on Torah protection.
5. Saying Torah protects is like the silly old man who 'played with toys' while his friends built a lifeboat.
Now, silly me, of course I thought you were flip-flopping! But you insist that you are not and that I am just putting a 'spin' on things. So maybe you can write a post explaining how this all adds up so I can get back in the ring?
You're telling me that you consider yourself something of a talmid chacham who can learn complicated Reb Chaim but you really don't understand my view? I'll explain how you are misquoting and misunderstanding me if you want but it won't reflect well on your skills at understanding texts. Other people here seem to have no problem understanding what I am saying.
Ok, I never said I'm a talmid chacham. After you've calmed down from your ad hominem attacks, perhaps consider indulging us all with a post clarifying how this all adds up. The only one here I've seen who seems to claim to understand what you are saying is David Ohsie, who actualy went off on a wild tangent about hashgacha pratis and did not at all address how all your statements add up, or how all the maamarei Chazal I've brought fit with what you say. But I've posed the same question to him. If you can't make sense of all of this, perhaps he can.
Yes, I say more. It's not a secret, that's why I published it. You can look it up. You can also read David Ohsie's comment below, like others he is capable of understanding what I write.
I've already written this a few times what the obvious distinctions are, but I'll write it again here:
1) Incorrect. The Jewish Nation Keeping and Studying Torah is part of the reason that the nation receives Divine Providence in general including protection against complete destruction and likely the apparent miraculous establishment and flourishing of the State of Israel despite enemy attacks.
2) Correct as stated above. Not as a substitute for an army.
3) Yes, if in fact buying a gun does provide significant protection from injury, then not buying one because one learns Torah makes no more sense than avoiding the doctor because you learn Torah. (Of course if what R Zilberstein meant was that owning a gun isn't giving significant benefit and the Torah part was just rhetoric, then it could be sensible).
4) From a moral perspective, if you are claiming that your part in the fight is manning the spiritual ramparts while others risk their lives to do the fighting, then you may have a moral obligation to stay where you are to continue to provide that support among all the others that stay there. You will likely not be protected by your Torah any more than anyone else living there, but taking that risk may be part of your moral obligation. Fleeing does inidicate you don't believe the learning is really protecting you directly, if that was your position.
5. A person says his learning is a substitute or even more important than your risking your life in the army or security forces and then claims that your participation in the security forces is actually God's Providence resulting from his learning, then he is like that guy.
I thought you were defending Natan, not disagreeing with him.
2. See ibid.
3. But Natan didn't ridicule him for not wanting to make hishtadlus. He ridiculed him for thinking that Torah protects. He mentions that R. Zilberstein says that one must do hishtadlus but ridicules him anyways for suggesting increasing in Torah study because of terror attacks.
4. I agree that they should not have fled. I just don't get how the man who said "Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect" can make such a complaint. (Incidentally, I've been doing some research into this claim of Natan, and it seems that most yeshivos did NOT flee. Tifrach and most of the other yeshiva gedolos remained and such was the directive of R' Chaim Kanievsky, but some high schools, where the boys were not mature enough to cope with the situation did leave. Not because the hanhala was scared, just because the yeshivos were not functioning there).
5. Uh, obviously no one is saying that it is a SUBSTITUTE to the army. What they are saying is that it is instrumental to its success, just like the many sources that I bring from Chazal make very clear. As opposed to the guy in Natan's parable, who was portrayed as not doing anything useful.
Come on, David. Natan seems to have given up so we're all counting on you at this point. I hope you don't let us down!
1. You've take that quote out of context. Repeating what I wrote: "There seem to be many confused comments here about R Slifkin's position. He fully supports the idea that the nation observing and learning Torah protects the nation as a whole in a general way. IMO, what he questions is a very specific direct connection between an a group of individuals learning providing protection from military or terrorist attacks. Some people claim that they need not serve in IDF because their specific actions in learning Torah is providing the same or better protection than they would by serving. R Slifkin is questioning that direct connection; he is also questioning whether the proponents of this argument really believe it themselves or are just using it as a cover to avoid IDF service for other underlying reasons."
2. Same
3. He took issue with this statement: “a person who learns Torah knows that when he learns Torah, he spreads the perfect protection of the Torah over himself and his entire city which protects from all harm, like it says in the Gemara in Sotah, that the Torah protects and saves.” This is completely inconsistent with both the Rambam, Rambam, and Ran on how Hashgachah works, and as pointed out by R Slifkin, no one really believe it, and it if was taken seriously, would require Yeshivas to move towards dangerous places instead of away from them.
4. Asked and answered. If you think leaning is your contribution, then you take on the risk to stay where you are helping: "From a moral perspective, if you are claiming that your part in the fight is manning the spiritual ramparts while others risk their lives to do the fighting, then you may have a moral obligation to stay where you are to continue to provide that support among all the others that stay there."
5. Yes they do. They say that this is the real protection and everyone who can learn should do that instead of fighting. I don't want to spend more time on the parable which I already explained and which you did not ask any new question on.
Thank you David for saving me some time that I can use for writing more posts. Though I must say that it seems that Mecharker isn't interested in finding out what my position actually is, he just wants to interpret my statements in the most unreasonable way so that he can accuse me of being contradictory.
Oh dear. If you are the one guy who supposedly understands Natan here, then he is in really bad shape.
1. "You've take that quote out of context." Uh huh. Out of context. He literally said it dozens of times over the last ten years, and even devoted entire posts to it. There is even a post with that very title where he speaks about it at length. See my comment above that I linked to where I compiled a bunch of such statements from him. Nice try though.
I'm quite confused. You write Natan acknowledges that Torah protects, but is questioning if more Torah = more protection? If Torah protects, then why wouldn't it? You can check out the many sources that I've brought in my post they say both that Torah is a way of protecting wars from occurring to begin with, and also that we win our wars in its merit. Does Natan agree with these statements from Chazal? If he does, then what's his question?
3. This has nothing to do with some Rishonim's shita on hashgacha. The fact that you keep trying to spin it as such shows that you are really stuck. What those Rishonim say is that only tzadikim merit personal Heavenly protection (whatever that means, and how it conforms with many statements from Chazal). What we are discussing here is Heavenly protection on AN ENTIRE CITY, or THE ENTIRE JEWISH NATION, a result of limud haTorah clearly described by Chazal. See my post.
4. I agree. But it seems that was not the reason why they left. See what I wrote above.
5. No, they NEVER said that. That's a LIE. The very context that Natan wrote this silly parable was a comment on HGL's post where he specifically wrote that the army is the physical hishtadlus that one must make. Natan posted his comment to ridicule that. The reason why you don't want to discuss it anymore is because you don't have anything to say.
Can you ever stick to one topic without resorting to your dizzying whataboutism?
Are you kvetching about bitachon, or about the army? Or do you always like changing the subject 10 times within one post?
With regards to the army, it is shameful that Israel has a draft to begin with. They would do just fine with a professional army, like the rest of the civilized world. The only reason they have the draft is to force their way of life on others. It is more of an indoctrination camp than an army. As an aside, I believe they are the only country in the world besides North Korea that forcefully drafts women. Additionally, they well understand that if they have a professional army, it would end up looking more religious. Many DL's would join, but not many chilonim, who don't give a shnozzle about the country. So the entire draft is in reality just in order to keep the country secular. Got nothing to do with sharing the burden.
Sorry, the chareidim will not be joining a secular indoctrination propaganda reeducation facility.
The numbers don't work for a volunteer army. The population is too small. You are also forgetting that the IDF's strength and the only way it can fight a full scale war (as it has in the past) is the reserve army. How do you maintain a mass reserve army with only a volunteer army?
You say the with a professional army the DL would be overrepresented - but here's the thing - almost all DL go to the army NOW! And if, as you claim less, nonreligious would join, who would make up the shortfall? It just won't work without a draft.
I agree about the women draft though - completely unnecessary.
I'm not sure. There will still be women volunteers, though I admit they will have to offer incentives if they abolish the draft for women. I just don't think that will work for the men's draft - much harder to incentivize people to join dangerous combat units. Also, I don't think the issue about miluim applies to women like men (as far as I know, women don't do miluim). I'm not an expert on these things and I was just pointing out that on the face of it a women's draft seems unnecessary, even though abolishing it overnight may not be feasible either. My main point was about the men's draft and miluim.
If I'm not mistaken, the US Military has reserves as well, so this has nothing to do with a draft.
They would have no problem getting people to serve in dangerous combat units, especially since the DL community views it as a very important mitzvah.
Most soldiers do not serve in dangerous units, if I'm not mistaken. They would have no problem incentivizing people to join, the same way any employer finds employees. Especially since vets will obviously receive many benefits over the years.
The military would look different than it does today, with many soldiers staying for longer than they currently do, and DL soldiers going up in the ranks. As opposed to now where they are unwanted. But at the end of the day, it would all work fine.
At the very least, they should make a study to see if it would be possible. But they have no interest in that, as the draft is there to serve a purpose, that has nothing to do with protecting Israel.
Yes DL enlist and don't evade. They are held back from rising up through the ranks. For every Ofer Winter, who is hounded relentlessly by his "peers" for being a proud Jew, there are probably 100x who leave, bitter and disillusioned.
Jul 3, 2019 — Brig.-Gen. Ofer Winter, who has been *passed *over *for *a *promotion *twice, was appointed to commander of the 98th “Fire” Division by Chief of ...
i think the idea is that religious people, like all people who have joined a committed, passionate, mass movement - lie. to themselves. to the world. it is simply a feature of mass movements, and their disciples, the "true believers." We see it in environmental movements, who conveniently ignore so much. we see it in politics all day long, and in people's political commitments.
you like being religious - and so whatever you say, or think, or do regardless of its logical inconsistency - is fine. things don't really add up? who cares!
It's more fun. I know from personal experience. we all want direction. many younger people are entranced by guidance and inspiration. just look at college campuses in the US. everyone is heresy hunting the latest heresy, in this political climate on campus - with more chumras, and changing standards, weekly. religion does exactly the same thing.
the sociology of religion is what would be interesting to hear you expound on. your notions about a professional vs a draft army -- are perhaps not as informed as your tone suggests.
Mar 19, 2023·edited Mar 19, 2023Liked by Natan Slifkin
i was commenting more on the idea of trust in Torah and in contrast fleeing a bad situation where the IDF needs to step in to restore safety. No one really believes anything they say. They just "feel" it when times are good, and "feel afraid" when times are not, and flee for safety. It's fun to be Torah true - and feel it is protective - until it feels "scary," and then, of course, RUN.
All mass movements run by the same clock. All talk and lots of inspiration. Occasional blips and people do things they say they would NEVER do, due to their "beliefs," (which check out the minute the shells start falling...)
We are human, after all...
I was reading about a rabbi in New Haven who had consensual sex with his talmidim. How did he justify it? He felt one way in the beis medresh, and another way, when he had too much time on his hands. We are human, we play games with our own stated convictions, our own "most deeply held" convictions. I know a guy who married a girl he loved. He became frum in order to do so. Did he believe? He did once he fell for her, that's for sure...I know a Jew who married a non-Jew. Suddenly, his keeping Judaism felt less a big deal - once he found a woman who "understood" him. His convictions followed his love.
Lying to ourselves and rationalizing is at the core of the human condition.
"The only reason they have the draft is to force their way of life on others."
OK... so the reason my children are in the army and doing reserve service is because they are part of a secret plan to send haredim to shmad? I'd better tell my son to stop volunteering his time to the secret shmad apparatus when he thought he was defending the country in hundreds of hours of his not-so-spare time.
And the reason that everyone is so worried that the recent letters of pilots and other elite units that they will not turn up for their reserve duty, is not because it would leave us unprotected, but because the dastardly plan to get the haredim will be thwarted?
I wrote that is the only reason they have a DRAFT, not an ARMY.
And I was very clear that the alternative to not a having a draft, would be to have a professional volunteer army.
And I also explained why they have the DRAFT- to indoctrinate all Israeli's with their secular culture. They understand that secular Israelis would have little feeling towards the state without it. Additionally, they understand that if there was a volunteer army, the DL community (such as your family, I assume) would be overrepresented.
"it is shameful that Israel has a draft to begin with. They would do just fine with a professional army". This is really poor reasoning. It is possible that Israel could get by without a draft; it is also possible that this would be a disaster. No one knows with certainty. Claiming that something is shameful just because it doesn't confirm to your prediction on how it would work out is the equivalent of saying the it is shameful that you are not the dictator of Israel. Even if you were right that the draft is a suboptimal way for the IDF to staff, that would not making sticking with what we know works shameful. In fact, it is very understandable.
There is a difference between recognizing the general relationship between Torah observance and learning and Hashgacha and saying that we know that these specific people learning is sufficient to protect against a military attack from Hamas. I don't think this is very difficult to understand. See my comment on the main thread for more detail.
South Korea have an active draft and the Korean people view it as a great honour to serve in the army. Even superstars such as Seung Hon-Min (Tottenham footballer) serve.
It doesn't stop there either. Brazil, Russia, Greece, Singapore to name but a few.
Noson has really gone off the deep end. It's a shame. I would compare him to Jesus. He was a man who wanted to bring the message of Torah, that is, love of fellow man to the Am HaAretz, the ignorant, but mostly observant, working class people that did not appreciate the importance of Torah learning. The Torah class of Chachomim, meaning the Prushim, or Chaverim, continually hounded Jesus and admonished him that he was not doing the Am HaAretz any favors by denigrating the Chachomim to them. Jesus continued to reprove the Chachomim and preach to his following that the Chachomim lacked "love". But, in the end, it was Jesus who generated the greatest hatred for fellow man the world has ever witnessed when his movement morphed into Christianity.
Jesus was also originally a talmid of the Chachomim, just as Noson was. And just as Jesus did in his day, Noson publicly and arrogantly finds fault with the "Charedim" and makes up interpretations of Chazal to support his ill-founded animosity toward Charedim.
Noson, my friend, the future does not bode well for you, just as it didn't for Jesus, whom after 2000 years is still boiling in tzo'ah in Gehinom! But you can still do Teshuva!
I must say that I find it very funny that someone can compare me to Jesus (for having views that are perfectly normative in the Dati-Leumi world) and simultaneously claim that it's ME who's going off the deep end!
I wasn't referring to your views, I share many of them. You went off the deep end by your public ridicule of sincere Bene Torah, even if they lack OUR rational approach.
Jesus’ original missives weren’t all that heretical. In fact, during his lifetime Jesus didn’t consider himself God. Only in the later Gospels, many years after his death, did Matthew, Luke, John, Paul etc. name him as God or Son of God. Many tall-tales were concocted. Indeed some of those Gospels have been shown to be forgeries, so you really can’t believe much of what they profess. That his later disciples morphed his messages into a religion of hatred and intolerance wasn’t Jesus’ fault.
As for ridicule of those “sincere”
Bene Torah, I don’t see ridicule, just deserved condemnation for their refusal to put their lives at risk like all chilonim and many army-serving shomrei mitzvot do.
But in his defense, what you are describing sounds very similar to how chassidus started as well. And one can argue that the chassidim are doing just fine.
The difference was, the Baal Shem expressed true love toward all Jews, even those that suspected him. I am not aware of him attacking or ridiculing his opponents. No one made him into a deity.
The real chachamim today are the people who are connected to reality and realize that Jews need real protection -- armed guards, guns, Iron Dome, an army -- from the anti-Semitic rashaim.
Do you view any critiquing of the ultraorthodox community as wrong, or depends on who is doing the critiquing? If the latter, then, can you point me to any critique of the ultraorthodox community that you do find acceptable? How about critique of Lev Tahor, are they also beyond reproach, because they appear to be sincere and very religious?
Ah I see you were referring to this blog. Well, if Slifkin feels inspired to respond here, מרכבות פרעה noted correctly, HGL is getting under their (not just his) skin. But he forgot to note, it's reptilian skin.
There seem to be many confused comments here about R Slifkin's position. He fully supports the idea that the nation observing and learning Torah protects the nation as a whole in a general way. IMO, what he questions is a very specific direct connection between an a group of individuals learning providing protection from military or terrorist attacks. Some people claim that they need not serve in IDF because their specific actions in learning Torah is providing the same or better protection than they would by serving. R Slifkin is questioning that direct connection; he is also questioning whether the proponents of this argument really believe it themselves or are just using it as a cover to avoid IDF service for other underlying reasons. Incidentally, this aligns with the view of Rishonim such as Rambam, Rambam and Ran of how Hashgachah works. A very tiny percentage of people are directly protected by personal Hashgachah -- according to Rambam only when those select people's thoughts are directed towards God. The rest are protected by a general Providence over the nation and are subject to the impact the evil intentions of other people as well as the general tendency of the physical world to decay. Rambam states the overriding importance of putting effort into physical defense in his letter on Astrology: "This is why our kingdom was lost and our Temple was destroyed and why we were brought to this; for our fathers sinned and are no more because they found many books dealing with these themes of the star gazers, these things being the root of idolatry, as we have made clear in Laws Concerning Idolatry. They erred and were drawn after them, imagining them to be glorious science and to be of great utility. They did not busy themselves with the art of war or with the conquest of lands, but imagined that those studies would help them. Therefore the prophets called them 'fools and dolts' (Jer. 4:22). And truly fools they were, 'for they walked after confused things that do not profit' (I Sam. 12:21 and Jer. 2:8)."
Looks like you are the confused one. Nobody is talking about hashgacha on individuals, we are talking about hashgacha on the nation as a whole, in the merit of people who learn and keep the Torah (most of whom are chareidim).
Your assertion that the majority of Torah Observances is performed by Charedi Jews seems false. Also, you are counting a bunch of Eidah Chareidis folks who think that the state is illegitimate and would dismantle if if they had the power. I hardly think that their leaning is contributing to success by the IDF or the Security forces, although no one really understand how Hashgachah works, so I don't want to be too confident. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/
So then you agree that R Slifkin is not contradicting himself as asserted by various commenters when he denies a specific verifiable connection between specific people learning and specific protection. As far as your comment, if you are talking about general Hashgacha, then this classically has been interpreted to mean that all people, whether they are learning or not, can absolutely still be killed by rockets or terrorist incidents and that stopping that requires specific effort towards protection and that this is a matter of Pikuach Nefesh. So drafting up to say 90% of Charedim would be completely consistent with this view as general Torah Learning and Observance protecting in a general way.
You are wasting your time. Happy and his crew are not interested in reasoned arguments. They don't do them. They do insults, word salads and silly pictures. I don't know whether it was 'happy' or the other chap who confidently told me 'yichud' does not mean 'seclusion' (and he did so with the usual insults) to support his incorrect opinion.
It is not just 'yichud' it is 'yichud b'almah' and it can't mean bi'oh (even with kvetching) because that is the next clause. So I'm afraid it means the traditional meaning of the word however many insults you wish to throw.
Nobody was ever talking about specific people and specific protection. Chareidim are not "specific people". The most specific we were getting was that perhaps chareidim learning in Ashdod protect Ashdod, and shouldn't run away, for instance. As for "verifiable", well, it's a clear and fundamental theme in the Torah. That's all the verification we need. See Mecharker's post.
Here's a deal. Let's get 90% of the secularists to be otherwise completely chareidi (keeping Shabbos, kosher, tznius, halacha, learning Torah, being anti-mishkav zachar, not spreading kefira in the universities or online, etc), and then we talk about drafting 90% of chareidim.
Your figures from Pew include left-wing so-called dati, which are the Torah-corrupting, pro-mishkav zachar, pro-Biblical criticism secularist folks. They don't count and may be worse than the completely secular (who at least don't pretend). The right wing righteous DL folk like Smotritch and Rabbi Tau definitely count, though. The Eida are good righteous Jews if a bit misguided (IMHO), certainly their Torah and Mitzvos are protecting.
"Nobody was ever talking about specific people and specific protection." Of course that is the argument. The argument is that if you draft this specific set of people instead of letting them sit and learn, the security level is going to drop. It is a very specific claim about specific people and how Hashgachah works. It's both arrogant and misaligned with the traditional understanding of how Hashgacha works.
I think that you are supporting the thesis of this post and of R Slifkin in general. The real approach here is "we count and you don't, so you go risk your lives while we sit in relative security". You also help explain the the bad feelings that some Chilonim and DL feel toward the Charedim.
I'm afraid you don't understand the argument at all. The argument is that people who are Shomer Torah (not just chareidim) are saving the nation with their Torah and Mitzvos, which would suffer greatly if they sent their young men to go OTD in the secularist army. The secularists are ALREADY making the security level drop, just by being secularist, whether they are in the army or not.
I'm afraid you have no understanding of what "traditional" means. And "arrogant" is somebody who tries to corrupt the Torah.
It is not Slifkin's thesis that people who don't follow the Torah don't count as religious Jews. It is the Torah's thesis. It is their choice to be religious or not. ובחרת בחיים
One argument is that is made is that it is more important to learn because that is the real protection. I guess then that we agree that argument doesn't stand up scrutiny. That is the one R Slifkin is addressing. The argument you cite is also made by some. But it doesn't stand alone because with the right support from the Rabbis they could easily create Charedi segregated units. It also doesn't explain why people in uniform will not go into charedi areas where they are attacked (both men an women soldiers BTW; my neighbors son's won't go into those areas). The real issue is what you described before: "the people in our shtetl count and others don't so lets learn while they fight and worry about security and the economy which we will ignore and rely on others to solve for us. If they don't want to fight either, let them join our shtetl."
It's not a rebuttal. It's an unhinged rant against me.
(By the way, it's just so strange how they keep insisting that I originally said that Torah doesn't make any claims about protecting. I never said any such thing. You can see my book published two years ago in which I discuss the sources.)
Another graduate from the Bill Clinton School of Technical Truth.
Right: he says Torah protects. But in a "Rationalist" way - it makes people wise and then there's more peace in the world.
Good for making fun of Chareidim and doubles as a ready foil whenever hit by accusations that he is ignorant of basic Jewish texts (which say Torah protect - in a real and practical intrinsic way): "Look I said it protects, right?"
You don't need to subscribe to a rationalist approach to recognize that saying that "Torah protects the nation" is not the same as saying "The particular Torah learned by a charedi yeshivah student instead of going to the army offers significantly equivalent protection."
My God how do get this thing to stop? It's excruciating.
First he says to go check the book. When pointed out that in the book (and certainly on the blogposts which are the actual subject of the discussion) it says essentially what he's being quoted as saying and he's just telling you to check the book to obfuscate the debate by flipping between usages of the word 'protect', he brings up an ENTIRELY NEW argument and throws it back as if that proves him right all along.
It's getting to the point that I'm pretty sure it's unintentional - he honestly has no clue what the conversation is about (other than the fact that Chareidim are bad guys).
The distinction is pretty clear based on the blog posts and comments that R Slifkin has made. I posted something on the main thread in the same vein. But if blog posts are too brief you can go and read his book. The distinction is pretty obvious between these two things: A) "Torah Learning and observance helps generate Providence". B) "Drafting 50% of Charedim will reduce the security of the country because there will be less protective learning". B doesn't follow from A and it is very very easy to see how you can agree with A and disagree with B. In fact most of the DL follow this path.
I don't know what his position is, but I would say that you have an elite, say, 1-5% (not just charedim) that continue to learn and that can be supported by public funds properly (not living in poverty) and the rest serve and work in addition to their learning. Practically speaking, since this isn't going to happen, they should just let Charedim skip the draft and to directly to work or school, then work. Unfortunately the Charedi leadership would prefer they not be able to work to speak nothing of school.
Rabbi Slifkin, you're getting me dizzy with your ever-changing stance on this. You went from the Torah not protecting last week and R. Zilberstein should not be relying on it, to the Torah protecting and the Yeshivos should not have fled the south, to the Torah not protecting and those saying that it does are like the silly old man praying on the rock.
When you figure out what your position really is on this, give me a buzz.
I'm sorry that you don't understand my position. Perhaps take a look at my book, published two years ago, in which I discuss the varied statements in Chazal about Torah protecting, and what they mean.
Yeah, I saw your comment. It did not clarify Natan's position at all. It goes off on to a tangent about Hashgacha Pratis. In the last week and a half, Natan has made the following statements:
1. Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect.
2. Torah in fact does protect.
3. R' Zilberstein is silly for telling a guy not to buy a gun and to rely on Torah protection.
4. Chareidi yeshivos should not have fled the south and should have relied on Torah protection.
5. Saying Torah protects is like the 'silly' old man who 'sat and prayed' while his friends built a lifeboat.
where I show that Chazal are unequivocally clear in many places that Torah study provides REAL protection from harm. Increasing Torah study translates into increasing Torah's protection. Natan says he never denied that (spoiler alert: he did. Just a week ago https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/guns-terrorism-and-torah).
If you feel you can answer how all this adds up, I'm all ears.
Not satisfactorily at all. Unless Slifkin has some hocus pocus in his book (which no one here is going to spend money buying) you guys lost this round.
I believe that the Rabbi’s statement about the Charedim fleeing the South was a rhetorical question on if their believe that Torah study protects then why wouldn’t they want to prove that by staying in the danger zone? Well, obviously they don’t really believe it lol
First, don't compare or even talk about Lev Tahor. It is a total outlier, that is on its own. My own assumption about it is that it is not as bad as portrayed and not as "pure" as it purports. The bottom line is that has no involvement outside its doled amos.
I have no problem with a knowledgeable Jewish individual critiquing another Jewish train of thought and as mentioned I did openly critique Rav Aharon Feldman. I also, privately critiqued another member of the Moetzes in a letter. He had endorsed a Torah Mosad that had gone into a particular profit-making business to raise funds, but this was a business that directly competed with many frum Jews that earned a living from that business. I admonished him saying, "a non-profit mosad can legitimately fund raise seeking donations. But a Jew who toils to feed his family cannot, unless he is desperate; he should not have to compete with a mosad that you endorse, because you are telling the public to not give their business to a baal habos trying to earn a living, only to the mosad. The day he received the letter, he called me up and accepted the musar I had given him.
My problem with how Noson goes about it is that he is cynical and even surreptitiously derisive. If my critique of Rav Aharon Feldman is still on Zoo Torah, you will see that I argued on Rav Aharon with respect, only bringing cogent proofs. As I noted in another comment on this post, I compared Noson to Jesus. The Talmud tells us not to be like Rebbe Yehoshua ben Perachia that pushed away Jesus with two hands, only he should have been pushed with the left (weaker) hand and brought close with the right hand. This drove Jesus off the deep end, and Rebbe Yehoshua gets part of the blame. I would concur that the Talmidei Chachomim, and yes even some Gedolei Torah, bear the same responsibility for Noson's transformation. Even Dovid Hamelech was held responsible for the debacle at Nob (San. 95a).
There are many different opinions of Torah thought and Halacha, argue all you want but recognize that there exists a legitimate range of thought (albeit some is outside the range). Rav Aharon Feldman readily admitted to me, even after he had jumped ship from Noson, that the affair was handled poorly by the mainstream Torah world. Before he jumped ship he had gone to E"Y to speak with Rav Elyashiv and came out with a letter stating that Noson's approach was indeed the accepted approach of many Gedolim of the past, and Rav Elyashiv noted explicitly that it was not apikorsus, but it wasn't the best for the Yeshiva world in our day. Rav Feldman told me personally even more than that in defense of Noson. But the day his letter was published, the bottom-feeder kanoyimlach came out that Rav Aharon was a liar! After that he jumped ship. I never found out why. All the while, Rav Shmuel and Rav Shalom Kamenetsky whom I am friendly with, continued to support Noson, and only jumped ship in the following year. As far as I know Rav Chaim Malinowitz never jumped ship. I also never did in terms of the credibility of Rational Frum Judaism, but I recognize it is wrong and counterproductive (for Yiddishkite in general) to cynically castigate "the other approach" as Noson has been doing for years.
"Rav Shmuel and Rav Shalom Kamenetsky ... continued to support Noson, and only jumped ship in the following year."
It doesn't seem that they verily 'jumped ship'. Rabbi S. writes here "Comments regarding Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, shlita... He told them that he still stands by his endorsement of the books, but that he wanted to indicate a certain level of disassociation from me...."
But it seems you're not really adding anything with the parable. This is indeed what chareidim believe - that Torah protects, and armies are often the shliach, so everyone should do their part. The parable puts a negative letzunaus spin on it, but does not seem to address anything substantive.
I thought the discussion was about if the facts are true - does Torah protect? You said no, the people on that blog provided a good deal of evidence that the Torah itself seems to think that Torah protects. Do you have a response for that?
No, much as they tried to spin it, the discussion was not about whether Torah protects (in some sense) or whether the Torah itself says that Torah protects (of course it does). The discussion was about whether charedim believe their own interpretation of what it means - i.e. that anyone learning Torah provides an added degree of protection that is a replacement for their serving in the army. And the fact that they fled the south shows that they don't.
"Gosh. If only our ancestors in Biblical times had known that! Instead of responding to dangers with soldiers and weapons, they could just have learned Torah!"
-Natan Slifkin
אין החי יכול להכחיש את החי
The claim that Chareidim themselves don't believe Torah protects was not introduced until close to the end of the post. (Last three paragraphs)
Is that Yanki or RCK? Your post provides no sensible response re the guards of Kiryat Sefer. Just a word salad. Some sort of crazy response along the lines off although chareidim believe torah protects mystically, in practice the way they believe torah protects is through them demanding guards every time a security situations warrants it. And the fact that others provide the guarding shows that really they believec torah provides the guarding and are acting in accordance with those beliefs. They are also consistent with same sources and act as if torah provides protection from disease, by, well, still waiting for a response to that one.
They were the ones who brought up the parable of the drowning man to try to claim that it's about what bitachon really means. I re-cast the parable to show that for charedim it's not about bitachon, it's about getting other people to do the things that you don't want to do.
You appear to be new here. The goal is not to "show" anything. The goal is to vent his bitterness at Chareidim by trying to make them look foolish. He then relies on useful idiots like the guy downstream to cheer "this is so good!" and that's all there is; move on to the next knock.
Asking him to explain why basically repeating himself in a more snide tone in any way serves as a response to the fact that his "arguments" have been effectively demolished in two substantive posts is a total boat miss. Welcome aboard.
I can’t believe that I’m sitting here wasting my life reading the comments of a bunch of grown ass men arguing whether reading a book helps protect Israeli citizens from terrorist attacks or Hamas rockets a lot or a little. I’m done with this. 🤦♂️
Difficult issues like that are addressed by happy and co as 'tzadik v'rah lo'. Just like 'hishtadlus' answers awkward questions about why chareidim never practice what they preach re bitochon/emunah. Dispite all the pas b'melech, Hashem will provide blah blah blah they can hear a $100 bill falling on a carpet 10 miles away, like everybody else. They run after rich families for marriage like everyone else. Why 'hishtadlus' of course. You can never beat a chareidi in an argument because there are three answers to everything. 'Hishtadlus', 'the mesorah' and 'tazadik v'rah lo'.
PS forgot about another one. When da'as torah doesn’t work 'it was a time of hester ponim'. How they know when and when not is a time of 'hester ponim' and hence when and when not can rely on daas torah, I don't know. Maybe the mesorah teaches us that.
I don’t have a blog of my own, but the kind of readers here are most likely the ones that would be interested if I had one. Thus this post will be a little long.
I like to think of myself as a Rational Jew, like Noson. I have carefully learned Moreh Nevuchim and I must thank Noson for opening my eyes on numerous issues of Jewish Thought. I have been close with Rav Aharon Feldman since 1969. I highly respected the fact that he, at one time, tried to plead in Noson’s defense. But I was taken aback when he jumped ship and wrote his ill-founded response in the summer of 2005. He showed me the first draft and I wrote a critique of it. He responded to my critique, seemingly to agree with many of my points and disagree with some. I responded to his response and sent it to him. He then went ahead and published his original article without modifying it by addressing my cogent arguments. I then shared my critique with Noson who published it. After that Rav Feldman broke ties with me for a few years. We have since then sort of reunited.
I have published four Historical/Hashkafa/Halacha novels and one sefer on Torah subjects (in Hebrew). In the past two years I was encouraged to translate a long piece I wrote on Hashgocha from a rational perspective. I added to it three other pieces from my sefer that I translated and rewrote in English and put them together in a 60 page book, Creation and Divine Providence.
When you feel you have come to an understanding of something, often that becomes a springboard for another thought, and that one for another, etc. My thoughts on how Divine Providence works from a rational perspective gave me an insight into a new (for me) conclusion.
We all have heard that Ben Gurion predicted in 1948 that within a few generations there wouldn’t be any Torah Jews left. Hah! Seemingly, there is more Torah being learned today by more Jews than ever before in history.
I asked a question: What is the one most significant factor that has generated the plethora of Torah study, Yeshivos, and Kollelim in Eretz Yisroel as of today?
My answer: The Israel Army Draft! I’m not comparing the phenomena to the upsurge of Yeshivas in America to evade the idiotic Viet Nam war draft. In E”Y, the Gedolim (from Agudah and on right) insisted on exemption from the draft for full time torah learners to create (concomitant with the Zionist state) a “culture” of Torah learning. It was “Zeh L’umat Zeh.” The Zionists morphed the Army Draft into a “national culture,” that has become the “holy grail” of Zionism. Torah learning has always been recognized by the elite stratified class of Torah Sages in past generations as the focal point of Judaism, but now that the Zionist wanted to change that to “Nationalism” it had to be countered in the most effective and extreme manner to prevent Zionism from making Ben Gurion’s erstwhile prediction a reality.
Thus I am contending that it is two way street (in a sense). The ardent Draft as a Zionist cultural artifact, has strengthened the resolve of the Torah world to save, preserve and grow its culture of Limud HaTorah.
On the other hand, the potent opposition to the army draft by the “Torah World” has worked to harden the resolve of the Army culture. That means, the Army must be the most moral army in the world (which I think it is), it must be the most potent Army in the world (for its size) and in successful defense of its people, which I think it has proven to be. Thus, the Torah world in its opposition to the draft has been a major factor, by its cultural war in making the Israeli army so formidable. In that case, it is indeed very true that sincere Torah learning acts to protect Klal Yisroel by its indirect impetus making the IDF the best it can be. Kinas Sofrim Tarbeh Chochmah. The Kulturkampf between Torah and the Draft, has strengthened both.
At this point in history, I think both are highly sophisticated as institutions and have momentum and motivation to continue without the animus of all-out Kulturkampf. That means each should respect the other, and allow this successful formula remain in place as it is.
Great article, your books are classics. Again you have to realize that R' Slfikin can't listen because he has a agenda, and it is not the truth. The truth stands tall, agendas don't.
I am hopeful he will do teshuva. I consider him essentially a fine person who just couldn't overcome his embitterment.
He will do teshuva, because I think he does like the truth. The pain must be so great for him. Only Hashem knows. But a man must remember to always go with the truth.
I'm happy that you're cued in on the pain. But then your first thing to do before addressing the truth for the one in pain, Pirkei Avos gives examples where that is counterproductive, is to brainstorm how to relieve the pain itself.
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/6394930
Dat you? ☝️
And if there hadn’t been opposition to the draft from the Torah world cowards, then the IDF would still be one of the best militaries in the world due to the fact that their lives and those of their families depend on it as well as the strong support of American Jews and the wealth of weapons given to them from the American government. Yet they might be even stronger had all the Cheridim been part of it.
"the Army must be the most moral army in the world (which I think it is),"
Alas, the Israeli Army ranks too highly in the world rankings for women complaining of sexual abuse and all that goes with it.
Perhaps that's because there are relatively more women as compared to armies of other countries, but in terms of concern for life, IDF is more moral.
Wait, you wrote that critique on Zoo Torah? Cool.
No those are from others, but his is cool too, not sure where I found it a long while ago.
www.zootorah.com/controversy/ravaharon.html
Meir Ben Tzvi isn't him?
The one I read that had RSZG's name on it was different. But soon RSZ will (hopefully) come by and clarify.
No, you got the parable wrong. Here it is:
Once upon a time, in a high-security prison filled with the most hardened of criminals, a group of convicts hatched a plan to escape. They started collecting the wrappers from their prison meals, as one does when they're preparing to break out of jail. After much brainstorming, they decided to use the wrappers to pick the lock of their cell door. It was a brilliant plan, or so they thought.
But there was one prisoner who instead spent his days on the phone, speaking with his mysterious friend named "DA". While the others were busy planning their escape, he was busy schmoozing with this guy. When the big day finally arrived, the other inmates were ready. They had managed to mold the wrappers into a giant key that they hoped would unlock their freedom.
As they inserted their makeshift key into the lock, the door suddenly swung open. The prison warden stood before them and announced that all charges had been dropped, thanks to the DA's intervention. The DA's friend was thrilled, but his fellow inmates were less than pleased.
"Chutzpa!" they cried. "You freeloading ingrate! We worked tirelessly to plan this escape and you just sat there on the phone all day. You should have helped us, instead of just mooching off our hard work."
Natan, it's amazing how much you're lacking in self-awareness not to realize how big a theological fraud you are. You've spent the last 10 years DENYING THAT THE TORAH OFFERS ANY PROTECTION. AT ALL. I can show many posts where you've written that very clearly. Just over a week ago, you were ridiculing R. Zilberstein for telling someone that the Torah protects and he does not need to buy a gun. But now you're saying that the Chareidim don't believe that the Torah protects or else they would not have fled the south. So then why did R. Zilberstein tell the fellow not to buy a gun??
After we showed you the overwhelming evidence from the contrary, you've completely changed your tone. The parable that you wrote above is from a secularist standpoint which denies the essence of Torah and Mitzvos at all. As my friend HGL wrote, you could have replaced "sat down to pray" to "played with toys".
At least you're starting to show your true colors and don't claim to be representing "classic Judaism" anymore. I'm glad we're making progress.
In your parable, the prisoner on the phone had no interest in the wrapper plan. But the charedim, on the other hand, are absolutely interested in there being soldiers. They just don't want to be the ones to do that job.
Also, however much you insist that I denied that Torah protects at all, it's still not true. You can look in my book published two years ago where I discuss sources to that effect. The fact that I interpret these sources differently to you does not mean that I deny their existence.
So how do you explain the following statements:
"The same is true for Torah. According the rationalist approach, learning Torah imparts valuable knowledge, improves our character, and teaches us how to improve society (see my post on The Rishonim on Torah Study.) That is it, and that is all."
"There was his statement that the best protection against being blown up on a bus is to learn Torah on the bus, which he derived from the Gemara, but which I argued was (A) not at all what the Gemara is saying, according to several commentaries, and (B) not actually true"
"Practically Speaking, Torah Does NOT Protect"
"It's just as well that the Gemara does not make any such claim, because such a claim is quite clearly not true. All such claims about the protective value of Torah and mitzvos - "Torah scholars do not need protection," "Someone on their way to do a mitzvah (shaliach mitzvah) cannot be harmed," "When you're learning Torah, you can't be harmed," might be true in some abstract or hyper-qualified aggadic sense, but are clearly not true in any practical sense today."
"There is no claim in the Gemara that a yeshivah student learning Torah provides any protection from Arabs."
"In summary: According to classical Judaism, the primary way of defending ourselves against our enemies is with military means. The primary spiritual defensive tool is prayer. You can also create a merit for yourself by learning Torah, and you can pray on behalf of anyone. But you can't export the merit of your Torah to other people."
"Based on the Gemara in Berachos 5a, the protection appears to be from physical illness. Other sources that speak about the protective value of Torah make no mention of specifically military threats, and indicate that it provides protection equally from illness, famine, etc."
"'We will not convince secular Israelis that kollel students protect Israeli society no less than IDF soldiers.'
Never mind secular Israelis - you won't convince anyone of that. On a theoretical level, it has a very shaky foundation. On a practical level, nobody really believes it - not even charedim."
"Second, and most significantly: Regardless of the sources that someone might dig up/ reinterpret to claim that yeshivah and kollel students are protecting Israel, the bottom line is that (a) the facts on the ground demonstrate otherwise, and (b) when push comes to shove, the charedim don't even believe it themselves."
- Natan Slifkin
There were many more, but let's start with these.
You keep saying that you understand Torah protecting different than me, yet you have not explained how you understand it. I understand it as I've described here:
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect/comment/13764306
How do you understand it?
I agree, the parable wasn't great. I should have used a parable where their efforts at least seemed to play a role in their success. So let's reconstruct it that our protagonist was in cahoots with the prison guards and coordinated with them to not be around when his fellow inmates picked the lock. Or something to that effect.
"This did not go down well with my ideological opponents, who keep the comments section lively and have even started an entire blog dedicated to rebutting this one (the third such anti-Slifkin blog to have been created!)"
Natan, as the proprietor of the aforementioned blog, I can predict with a large degree of confidence that you will outlast our blog as well. Unlike you, the three of us have lives and day jobs and just don't have the same manic hateful obsession over you that you have about us.
Touché. There's another reason why he's outlasted all his critics. When you have a hangup over making only arguments that are internally coherent and generally consistent, there's a finite amount of material you can put out. When you're just throwing words at random, whatever sounds snappy in the moment and with an ever evolving set of underlying principles, you can outlast the energizer bunny.
See downstream where he solemnly informs us that although Rationalism teaches it doesn't, for today Torah does indeed protect but it's selfish to learn Torah (that protects) to protect, and Torah learned selfishly does not indeed protect so therefore it doesn't so it's probably other mitzvos that are doing the protecting despite rationalism teaching that mitzvos are very rational stuff that don't necessarily protect and besides Chareidim are so dumb haha. Or something like that.
Then extrapolate the methodology to twenty years of ever changing yuks. Do you think you can compete with that?
Lots of luck pal.
Natan, I'm really in good faith trying to figure out what you're saying (with an ulterior motive of course, I can only argue with you if I understand your position), but I'm completely baffled. You've claimed that:
1. Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect.
2. Torah in fact does protect.
3. R' Zilberstein is silly for telling a guy not to buy a gun and to rely on Torah protection.
4. Chareidi yeshivos should not have fled the south and should have relied on Torah protection.
5. Saying Torah protects is like the silly old man who 'played with toys' while his friends built a lifeboat.
Now, silly me, of course I thought you were flip-flopping! But you insist that you are not and that I am just putting a 'spin' on things. So maybe you can write a post explaining how this all adds up so I can get back in the ring?
You're telling me that you consider yourself something of a talmid chacham who can learn complicated Reb Chaim but you really don't understand my view? I'll explain how you are misquoting and misunderstanding me if you want but it won't reflect well on your skills at understanding texts. Other people here seem to have no problem understanding what I am saying.
By all means, explain your position instead of just throwing out insults.
Ok, I never said I'm a talmid chacham. After you've calmed down from your ad hominem attacks, perhaps consider indulging us all with a post clarifying how this all adds up. The only one here I've seen who seems to claim to understand what you are saying is David Ohsie, who actualy went off on a wild tangent about hashgacha pratis and did not at all address how all your statements add up, or how all the maamarei Chazal I've brought fit with what you say. But I've posed the same question to him. If you can't make sense of all of this, perhaps he can.
Don't you have my book, Rationalism vs. Mysticism? See pages 113-114.
Believe it or not, I don't. Did you say anything there more than what you've written on the blog? If yes, why is it such a secret?
Yes, I say more. It's not a secret, that's why I published it. You can look it up. You can also read David Ohsie's comment below, like others he is capable of understanding what I write.
Actually, he did not effectively explain your position at all. Perhaps you can point me in the direction of the "others" that understand you.
I've already written this a few times what the obvious distinctions are, but I'll write it again here:
1) Incorrect. The Jewish Nation Keeping and Studying Torah is part of the reason that the nation receives Divine Providence in general including protection against complete destruction and likely the apparent miraculous establishment and flourishing of the State of Israel despite enemy attacks.
2) Correct as stated above. Not as a substitute for an army.
3) Yes, if in fact buying a gun does provide significant protection from injury, then not buying one because one learns Torah makes no more sense than avoiding the doctor because you learn Torah. (Of course if what R Zilberstein meant was that owning a gun isn't giving significant benefit and the Torah part was just rhetoric, then it could be sensible).
4) From a moral perspective, if you are claiming that your part in the fight is manning the spiritual ramparts while others risk their lives to do the fighting, then you may have a moral obligation to stay where you are to continue to provide that support among all the others that stay there. You will likely not be protected by your Torah any more than anyone else living there, but taking that risk may be part of your moral obligation. Fleeing does inidicate you don't believe the learning is really protecting you directly, if that was your position.
5. A person says his learning is a substitute or even more important than your risking your life in the army or security forces and then claims that your participation in the security forces is actually God's Providence resulting from his learning, then he is like that guy.
1. I agree it's incorrect. But that was literally a quote verbatim from Natan himself. See here where I complied a bunch of quotes from Natan where he says this. https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-drowning-man/comment/13778765
I thought you were defending Natan, not disagreeing with him.
2. See ibid.
3. But Natan didn't ridicule him for not wanting to make hishtadlus. He ridiculed him for thinking that Torah protects. He mentions that R. Zilberstein says that one must do hishtadlus but ridicules him anyways for suggesting increasing in Torah study because of terror attacks.
4. I agree that they should not have fled. I just don't get how the man who said "Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect" can make such a complaint. (Incidentally, I've been doing some research into this claim of Natan, and it seems that most yeshivos did NOT flee. Tifrach and most of the other yeshiva gedolos remained and such was the directive of R' Chaim Kanievsky, but some high schools, where the boys were not mature enough to cope with the situation did leave. Not because the hanhala was scared, just because the yeshivos were not functioning there).
5. Uh, obviously no one is saying that it is a SUBSTITUTE to the army. What they are saying is that it is instrumental to its success, just like the many sources that I bring from Chazal make very clear. As opposed to the guy in Natan's parable, who was portrayed as not doing anything useful.
Come on, David. Natan seems to have given up so we're all counting on you at this point. I hope you don't let us down!
1. You've take that quote out of context. Repeating what I wrote: "There seem to be many confused comments here about R Slifkin's position. He fully supports the idea that the nation observing and learning Torah protects the nation as a whole in a general way. IMO, what he questions is a very specific direct connection between an a group of individuals learning providing protection from military or terrorist attacks. Some people claim that they need not serve in IDF because their specific actions in learning Torah is providing the same or better protection than they would by serving. R Slifkin is questioning that direct connection; he is also questioning whether the proponents of this argument really believe it themselves or are just using it as a cover to avoid IDF service for other underlying reasons."
2. Same
3. He took issue with this statement: “a person who learns Torah knows that when he learns Torah, he spreads the perfect protection of the Torah over himself and his entire city which protects from all harm, like it says in the Gemara in Sotah, that the Torah protects and saves.” This is completely inconsistent with both the Rambam, Rambam, and Ran on how Hashgachah works, and as pointed out by R Slifkin, no one really believe it, and it if was taken seriously, would require Yeshivas to move towards dangerous places instead of away from them.
4. Asked and answered. If you think leaning is your contribution, then you take on the risk to stay where you are helping: "From a moral perspective, if you are claiming that your part in the fight is manning the spiritual ramparts while others risk their lives to do the fighting, then you may have a moral obligation to stay where you are to continue to provide that support among all the others that stay there."
5. Yes they do. They say that this is the real protection and everyone who can learn should do that instead of fighting. I don't want to spend more time on the parable which I already explained and which you did not ask any new question on.
Thank you David for saving me some time that I can use for writing more posts. Though I must say that it seems that Mecharker isn't interested in finding out what my position actually is, he just wants to interpret my statements in the most unreasonable way so that he can accuse me of being contradictory.
Natan, he doesn't seem to have been able to shed any light on your opinion. Perhaps you can weigh in and help us out?
You're being deliberately obtuse and trying to waste my time. Not interested.
Oh dear. If you are the one guy who supposedly understands Natan here, then he is in really bad shape.
1. "You've take that quote out of context." Uh huh. Out of context. He literally said it dozens of times over the last ten years, and even devoted entire posts to it. There is even a post with that very title where he speaks about it at length. See my comment above that I linked to where I compiled a bunch of such statements from him. Nice try though.
I'm quite confused. You write Natan acknowledges that Torah protects, but is questioning if more Torah = more protection? If Torah protects, then why wouldn't it? You can check out the many sources that I've brought in my post they say both that Torah is a way of protecting wars from occurring to begin with, and also that we win our wars in its merit. Does Natan agree with these statements from Chazal? If he does, then what's his question?
3. This has nothing to do with some Rishonim's shita on hashgacha. The fact that you keep trying to spin it as such shows that you are really stuck. What those Rishonim say is that only tzadikim merit personal Heavenly protection (whatever that means, and how it conforms with many statements from Chazal). What we are discussing here is Heavenly protection on AN ENTIRE CITY, or THE ENTIRE JEWISH NATION, a result of limud haTorah clearly described by Chazal. See my post.
4. I agree. But it seems that was not the reason why they left. See what I wrote above.
5. No, they NEVER said that. That's a LIE. The very context that Natan wrote this silly parable was a comment on HGL's post where he specifically wrote that the army is the physical hishtadlus that one must make. Natan posted his comment to ridicule that. The reason why you don't want to discuss it anymore is because you don't have anything to say.
1. Out of context had nothing to do with how many times a person says something. The rest of your comment is just disagreeing with him
3. Again just disagreeing.
5. Again just disagreeing.
Nope. Read my post again.
I win!
Can you ever stick to one topic without resorting to your dizzying whataboutism?
Are you kvetching about bitachon, or about the army? Or do you always like changing the subject 10 times within one post?
With regards to the army, it is shameful that Israel has a draft to begin with. They would do just fine with a professional army, like the rest of the civilized world. The only reason they have the draft is to force their way of life on others. It is more of an indoctrination camp than an army. As an aside, I believe they are the only country in the world besides North Korea that forcefully drafts women. Additionally, they well understand that if they have a professional army, it would end up looking more religious. Many DL's would join, but not many chilonim, who don't give a shnozzle about the country. So the entire draft is in reality just in order to keep the country secular. Got nothing to do with sharing the burden.
Sorry, the chareidim will not be joining a secular indoctrination propaganda reeducation facility.
The numbers don't work for a volunteer army. The population is too small. You are also forgetting that the IDF's strength and the only way it can fight a full scale war (as it has in the past) is the reserve army. How do you maintain a mass reserve army with only a volunteer army?
You say the with a professional army the DL would be overrepresented - but here's the thing - almost all DL go to the army NOW! And if, as you claim less, nonreligious would join, who would make up the shortfall? It just won't work without a draft.
I agree about the women draft though - completely unnecessary.
Before I discuss the valid points you brought up, let me throw the question back at you.
You wrote that the women draft is completely unnecessary. Yet who would fill all those important roles that the women currently fill? (Such as telling everyone to run to the shower stalls https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-adventures-of-commander-slifkin).
I think mandatory drafting of women is unnecessary so long as there is a regular draft.
Well there is currently a mandatory draft, as well as a draft for women. So obviously just drafting men isn't enough, no?
I'm not sure. There will still be women volunteers, though I admit they will have to offer incentives if they abolish the draft for women. I just don't think that will work for the men's draft - much harder to incentivize people to join dangerous combat units. Also, I don't think the issue about miluim applies to women like men (as far as I know, women don't do miluim). I'm not an expert on these things and I was just pointing out that on the face of it a women's draft seems unnecessary, even though abolishing it overnight may not be feasible either. My main point was about the men's draft and miluim.
Norm, do you even know how the IDF works? You already have to volunteer for combat units.
If I'm not mistaken, the US Military has reserves as well, so this has nothing to do with a draft.
They would have no problem getting people to serve in dangerous combat units, especially since the DL community views it as a very important mitzvah.
Most soldiers do not serve in dangerous units, if I'm not mistaken. They would have no problem incentivizing people to join, the same way any employer finds employees. Especially since vets will obviously receive many benefits over the years.
The military would look different than it does today, with many soldiers staying for longer than they currently do, and DL soldiers going up in the ranks. As opposed to now where they are unwanted. But at the end of the day, it would all work fine.
At the very least, they should make a study to see if it would be possible. But they have no interest in that, as the draft is there to serve a purpose, that has nothing to do with protecting Israel.
Yes DL enlist and don't evade. They are held back from rising up through the ranks. For every Ofer Winter, who is hounded relentlessly by his "peers" for being a proud Jew, there are probably 100x who leave, bitter and disillusioned.
Jerusalem Post
https://www.jpost.com › Israel News
Jul 3, 2019 — Brig.-Gen. Ofer Winter, who has been *passed *over *for *a *promotion *twice, was appointed to commander of the 98th “Fire” Division by Chief of ...
i think the idea is that religious people, like all people who have joined a committed, passionate, mass movement - lie. to themselves. to the world. it is simply a feature of mass movements, and their disciples, the "true believers." We see it in environmental movements, who conveniently ignore so much. we see it in politics all day long, and in people's political commitments.
you like being religious - and so whatever you say, or think, or do regardless of its logical inconsistency - is fine. things don't really add up? who cares!
It's more fun. I know from personal experience. we all want direction. many younger people are entranced by guidance and inspiration. just look at college campuses in the US. everyone is heresy hunting the latest heresy, in this political climate on campus - with more chumras, and changing standards, weekly. religion does exactly the same thing.
the sociology of religion is what would be interesting to hear you expound on. your notions about a professional vs a draft army -- are perhaps not as informed as your tone suggests.
Just pointing out there is a big 💙 "Liked by Natan Slifkin" on this post. As if I needed any more evidence for my post here (of course I didn't).
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/are-we-trying-to-convince-the-atheists
Many of those points are also true of the massive western culture.
I am not quite following your train of thought.
My point was to compare an army that has a draft, vs a voluntary army, such as what exists in America. I apologize if I used the wrong words.
i was commenting more on the idea of trust in Torah and in contrast fleeing a bad situation where the IDF needs to step in to restore safety. No one really believes anything they say. They just "feel" it when times are good, and "feel afraid" when times are not, and flee for safety. It's fun to be Torah true - and feel it is protective - until it feels "scary," and then, of course, RUN.
All mass movements run by the same clock. All talk and lots of inspiration. Occasional blips and people do things they say they would NEVER do, due to their "beliefs," (which check out the minute the shells start falling...)
We are human, after all...
I was reading about a rabbi in New Haven who had consensual sex with his talmidim. How did he justify it? He felt one way in the beis medresh, and another way, when he had too much time on his hands. We are human, we play games with our own stated convictions, our own "most deeply held" convictions. I know a guy who married a girl he loved. He became frum in order to do so. Did he believe? He did once he fell for her, that's for sure...I know a Jew who married a non-Jew. Suddenly, his keeping Judaism felt less a big deal - once he found a woman who "understood" him. His convictions followed his love.
Lying to ourselves and rationalizing is at the core of the human condition.
"Lying to ourselves and rationalizing is at the core of the human condition."
What do you lie to yourself about?
Are you speaking of disgraced Rabbi Greer? That was not consensual sex, but sexual assault on minors. He was convicted and is in prison now. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/New-Haven-rabbi-convicted-on-felony-charges-gets-14875542.php
Ok, I wasn't discussing any of that stuff. Feel free to hit it up with happy go lucky or mecharker.
I was simply explaining why chareidim don't serve in the army
"The only reason they have the draft is to force their way of life on others."
OK... so the reason my children are in the army and doing reserve service is because they are part of a secret plan to send haredim to shmad? I'd better tell my son to stop volunteering his time to the secret shmad apparatus when he thought he was defending the country in hundreds of hours of his not-so-spare time.
And the reason that everyone is so worried that the recent letters of pilots and other elite units that they will not turn up for their reserve duty, is not because it would leave us unprotected, but because the dastardly plan to get the haredim will be thwarted?
Can you read English?
I wrote that is the only reason they have a DRAFT, not an ARMY.
And I was very clear that the alternative to not a having a draft, would be to have a professional volunteer army.
And I also explained why they have the DRAFT- to indoctrinate all Israeli's with their secular culture. They understand that secular Israelis would have little feeling towards the state without it. Additionally, they understand that if there was a volunteer army, the DL community (such as your family, I assume) would be overrepresented.
What didn't you understand?
It's not secret, it's pretty open. The army is full of commanders who have the same attitude towards Torah as Slifkin does, or worse.
what's wrong with his attitude to the torah?
If you have to ask that question, you're part of the problem
Count me as part of that same problem.
👍 Better subscribe to Irrationalist Modoxism!
Wow that’s quite some rationalization to make yourself feel better for not joining the army. Thanks for the laugh
"it is shameful that Israel has a draft to begin with. They would do just fine with a professional army". This is really poor reasoning. It is possible that Israel could get by without a draft; it is also possible that this would be a disaster. No one knows with certainty. Claiming that something is shameful just because it doesn't confirm to your prediction on how it would work out is the equivalent of saying the it is shameful that you are not the dictator of Israel. Even if you were right that the draft is a suboptimal way for the IDF to staff, that would not making sticking with what we know works shameful. In fact, it is very understandable.
There is a difference between recognizing the general relationship between Torah observance and learning and Hashgacha and saying that we know that these specific people learning is sufficient to protect against a military attack from Hamas. I don't think this is very difficult to understand. See my comment on the main thread for more detail.
South Korea have an active draft and the Korean people view it as a great honour to serve in the army. Even superstars such as Seung Hon-Min (Tottenham footballer) serve.
It doesn't stop there either. Brazil, Russia, Greece, Singapore to name but a few.
Pretty sure at this point most Russians don’t want to serve
Honey,read what I wrote. I said Israel and North Korea are the only 2 countries that forcefully draft women.
I just googled every one of the countries you mentioned, and none of them have a draft for women.
Next.
Really? I stand corrected. Always thought the South Koreans drafted women. My mistake. Sorry.
I see now that as of 2017, Sweden drafts women as well.
Like the typical anti semites, jews are too poor, too rich, too strong, too weak, etc.
So now they have too much bitachon, and not enough bitachon, all within one week. Keep it up, Natan!
Noson has really gone off the deep end. It's a shame. I would compare him to Jesus. He was a man who wanted to bring the message of Torah, that is, love of fellow man to the Am HaAretz, the ignorant, but mostly observant, working class people that did not appreciate the importance of Torah learning. The Torah class of Chachomim, meaning the Prushim, or Chaverim, continually hounded Jesus and admonished him that he was not doing the Am HaAretz any favors by denigrating the Chachomim to them. Jesus continued to reprove the Chachomim and preach to his following that the Chachomim lacked "love". But, in the end, it was Jesus who generated the greatest hatred for fellow man the world has ever witnessed when his movement morphed into Christianity.
Jesus was also originally a talmid of the Chachomim, just as Noson was. And just as Jesus did in his day, Noson publicly and arrogantly finds fault with the "Charedim" and makes up interpretations of Chazal to support his ill-founded animosity toward Charedim.
Noson, my friend, the future does not bode well for you, just as it didn't for Jesus, whom after 2000 years is still boiling in tzo'ah in Gehinom! But you can still do Teshuva!
I must say that I find it very funny that someone can compare me to Jesus (for having views that are perfectly normative in the Dati-Leumi world) and simultaneously claim that it's ME who's going off the deep end!
I wasn't referring to your views, I share many of them. You went off the deep end by your public ridicule of sincere Bene Torah, even if they lack OUR rational approach.
@sender
Jesus’ original missives weren’t all that heretical. In fact, during his lifetime Jesus didn’t consider himself God. Only in the later Gospels, many years after his death, did Matthew, Luke, John, Paul etc. name him as God or Son of God. Many tall-tales were concocted. Indeed some of those Gospels have been shown to be forgeries, so you really can’t believe much of what they profess. That his later disciples morphed his messages into a religion of hatred and intolerance wasn’t Jesus’ fault.
As for ridicule of those “sincere”
Bene Torah, I don’t see ridicule, just deserved condemnation for their refusal to put their lives at risk like all chilonim and many army-serving shomrei mitzvot do.
What do you have against Jesus?
Nosson as Jesus, that's a new one.
But in his defense, what you are describing sounds very similar to how chassidus started as well. And one can argue that the chassidim are doing just fine.
Baal Shem Tov wasn't a mechalel Shabbos who held himself to be a diety, like Jesus.
Neither is Natan.
I thought that was pshita
The difference was, the Baal Shem expressed true love toward all Jews, even those that suspected him. I am not aware of him attacking or ridiculing his opponents. No one made him into a deity.
Yet Tzaddikism is a thing
The real chachamim today are the people who are connected to reality and realize that Jews need real protection -- armed guards, guns, Iron Dome, an army -- from the anti-Semitic rashaim.
Do you view any critiquing of the ultraorthodox community as wrong, or depends on who is doing the critiquing? If the latter, then, can you point me to any critique of the ultraorthodox community that you do find acceptable? How about critique of Lev Tahor, are they also beyond reproach, because they appear to be sincere and very religious?
What would you respond to an anti semite who asks that question- just about all Jews?
You forgot to link the posts
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-parable-of-the-drowning-man
It is not an anti-Slifkin blog, it is anti LW MO and so-called academic "Torah", you were just the motivator. We have plenty of other material.
A response will come soon! Stay tuned!
I'm sure that your three readers will be thrilled!
Wow HGL you're really getting under their skin
Would that that were true. According to Substack, he has "over 3,000 subscribers". I'm sure many more than 0.1% of them read the posts.
Ah I see you were referring to this blog. Well, if Slifkin feels inspired to respond here, מרכבות פרעה noted correctly, HGL is getting under their (not just his) skin. But he forgot to note, it's reptilian skin.
So cute, Happy. You’ve got groupies
There seem to be many confused comments here about R Slifkin's position. He fully supports the idea that the nation observing and learning Torah protects the nation as a whole in a general way. IMO, what he questions is a very specific direct connection between an a group of individuals learning providing protection from military or terrorist attacks. Some people claim that they need not serve in IDF because their specific actions in learning Torah is providing the same or better protection than they would by serving. R Slifkin is questioning that direct connection; he is also questioning whether the proponents of this argument really believe it themselves or are just using it as a cover to avoid IDF service for other underlying reasons. Incidentally, this aligns with the view of Rishonim such as Rambam, Rambam and Ran of how Hashgachah works. A very tiny percentage of people are directly protected by personal Hashgachah -- according to Rambam only when those select people's thoughts are directed towards God. The rest are protected by a general Providence over the nation and are subject to the impact the evil intentions of other people as well as the general tendency of the physical world to decay. Rambam states the overriding importance of putting effort into physical defense in his letter on Astrology: "This is why our kingdom was lost and our Temple was destroyed and why we were brought to this; for our fathers sinned and are no more because they found many books dealing with these themes of the star gazers, these things being the root of idolatry, as we have made clear in Laws Concerning Idolatry. They erred and were drawn after them, imagining them to be glorious science and to be of great utility. They did not busy themselves with the art of war or with the conquest of lands, but imagined that those studies would help them. Therefore the prophets called them 'fools and dolts' (Jer. 4:22). And truly fools they were, 'for they walked after confused things that do not profit' (I Sam. 12:21 and Jer. 2:8)."
Looks like you are the confused one. Nobody is talking about hashgacha on individuals, we are talking about hashgacha on the nation as a whole, in the merit of people who learn and keep the Torah (most of whom are chareidim).
Your assertion that the majority of Torah Observances is performed by Charedi Jews seems false. Also, you are counting a bunch of Eidah Chareidis folks who think that the state is illegitimate and would dismantle if if they had the power. I hardly think that their leaning is contributing to success by the IDF or the Security forces, although no one really understand how Hashgachah works, so I don't want to be too confident. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/
So then you agree that R Slifkin is not contradicting himself as asserted by various commenters when he denies a specific verifiable connection between specific people learning and specific protection. As far as your comment, if you are talking about general Hashgacha, then this classically has been interpreted to mean that all people, whether they are learning or not, can absolutely still be killed by rockets or terrorist incidents and that stopping that requires specific effort towards protection and that this is a matter of Pikuach Nefesh. So drafting up to say 90% of Charedim would be completely consistent with this view as general Torah Learning and Observance protecting in a general way.
You are wasting your time. Happy and his crew are not interested in reasoned arguments. They don't do them. They do insults, word salads and silly pictures. I don't know whether it was 'happy' or the other chap who confidently told me 'yichud' does not mean 'seclusion' (and he did so with the usual insults) to support his incorrect opinion.
I agree. But it seemed some people were genuinely confused so I want to answer those basic questions.
30 years in kollel and still doesn't know what else ייחוד could mean? Keep trying, you might get it eventually 😜
It is not just 'yichud' it is 'yichud b'almah' and it can't mean bi'oh (even with kvetching) because that is the next clause. So I'm afraid it means the traditional meaning of the word however many insults you wish to throw.
Lol, still didn't get it!
Of course he is contradicting himself. See my post:
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/are-we-trying-to-convince-the-atheists
Nobody was ever talking about specific people and specific protection. Chareidim are not "specific people". The most specific we were getting was that perhaps chareidim learning in Ashdod protect Ashdod, and shouldn't run away, for instance. As for "verifiable", well, it's a clear and fundamental theme in the Torah. That's all the verification we need. See Mecharker's post.
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
Here's a deal. Let's get 90% of the secularists to be otherwise completely chareidi (keeping Shabbos, kosher, tznius, halacha, learning Torah, being anti-mishkav zachar, not spreading kefira in the universities or online, etc), and then we talk about drafting 90% of chareidim.
Your figures from Pew include left-wing so-called dati, which are the Torah-corrupting, pro-mishkav zachar, pro-Biblical criticism secularist folks. They don't count and may be worse than the completely secular (who at least don't pretend). The right wing righteous DL folk like Smotritch and Rabbi Tau definitely count, though. The Eida are good righteous Jews if a bit misguided (IMHO), certainly their Torah and Mitzvos are protecting.
"Nobody was ever talking about specific people and specific protection." Of course that is the argument. The argument is that if you draft this specific set of people instead of letting them sit and learn, the security level is going to drop. It is a very specific claim about specific people and how Hashgachah works. It's both arrogant and misaligned with the traditional understanding of how Hashgacha works.
I think that you are supporting the thesis of this post and of R Slifkin in general. The real approach here is "we count and you don't, so you go risk your lives while we sit in relative security". You also help explain the the bad feelings that some Chilonim and DL feel toward the Charedim.
I'm afraid you don't understand the argument at all. The argument is that people who are Shomer Torah (not just chareidim) are saving the nation with their Torah and Mitzvos, which would suffer greatly if they sent their young men to go OTD in the secularist army. The secularists are ALREADY making the security level drop, just by being secularist, whether they are in the army or not.
I'm afraid you have no understanding of what "traditional" means. And "arrogant" is somebody who tries to corrupt the Torah.
It is not Slifkin's thesis that people who don't follow the Torah don't count as religious Jews. It is the Torah's thesis. It is their choice to be religious or not. ובחרת בחיים
One argument is that is made is that it is more important to learn because that is the real protection. I guess then that we agree that argument doesn't stand up scrutiny. That is the one R Slifkin is addressing. The argument you cite is also made by some. But it doesn't stand alone because with the right support from the Rabbis they could easily create Charedi segregated units. It also doesn't explain why people in uniform will not go into charedi areas where they are attacked (both men an women soldiers BTW; my neighbors son's won't go into those areas). The real issue is what you described before: "the people in our shtetl count and others don't so lets learn while they fight and worry about security and the economy which we will ignore and rely on others to solve for us. If they don't want to fight either, let them join our shtetl."
Be sure to see HGLs rebuttal
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/are-we-trying-to-convince-the-atheists
It's not a rebuttal. It's an unhinged rant against me.
(By the way, it's just so strange how they keep insisting that I originally said that Torah doesn't make any claims about protecting. I never said any such thing. You can see my book published two years ago in which I discuss the sources.)
Another graduate from the Bill Clinton School of Technical Truth.
Right: he says Torah protects. But in a "Rationalist" way - it makes people wise and then there's more peace in the world.
Good for making fun of Chareidim and doubles as a ready foil whenever hit by accusations that he is ignorant of basic Jewish texts (which say Torah protect - in a real and practical intrinsic way): "Look I said it protects, right?"
You don't need to subscribe to a rationalist approach to recognize that saying that "Torah protects the nation" is not the same as saying "The particular Torah learned by a charedi yeshivah student instead of going to the army offers significantly equivalent protection."
My God how do get this thing to stop? It's excruciating.
First he says to go check the book. When pointed out that in the book (and certainly on the blogposts which are the actual subject of the discussion) it says essentially what he's being quoted as saying and he's just telling you to check the book to obfuscate the debate by flipping between usages of the word 'protect', he brings up an ENTIRELY NEW argument and throws it back as if that proves him right all along.
It's getting to the point that I'm pretty sure it's unintentional - he honestly has no clue what the conversation is about (other than the fact that Chareidim are bad guys).
The distinction is pretty clear based on the blog posts and comments that R Slifkin has made. I posted something on the main thread in the same vein. But if blog posts are too brief you can go and read his book. The distinction is pretty obvious between these two things: A) "Torah Learning and observance helps generate Providence". B) "Drafting 50% of Charedim will reduce the security of the country because there will be less protective learning". B doesn't follow from A and it is very very easy to see how you can agree with A and disagree with B. In fact most of the DL follow this path.
So should we remain with Eilu V'eilu?
In Natans ideal world would all Chareidim go to the army? Or most, but a minority would not in order to get the Torah's benefits?
I don't know what his position is, but I would say that you have an elite, say, 1-5% (not just charedim) that continue to learn and that can be supported by public funds properly (not living in poverty) and the rest serve and work in addition to their learning. Practically speaking, since this isn't going to happen, they should just let Charedim skip the draft and to directly to work or school, then work. Unfortunately the Charedi leadership would prefer they not be able to work to speak nothing of school.
HGLP's post= good, reasonable, enlightening
The entire RJ= 18-yr long unhinged rant against chareidim
RJ started in 2009. Your math seems off.
Also, thanks for the publicity! We can almost start charging for subscription!
Rabbi Slifkin, you're getting me dizzy with your ever-changing stance on this. You went from the Torah not protecting last week and R. Zilberstein should not be relying on it, to the Torah protecting and the Yeshivos should not have fled the south, to the Torah not protecting and those saying that it does are like the silly old man praying on the rock.
When you figure out what your position really is on this, give me a buzz.
I'm sorry that you don't understand my position. Perhaps take a look at my book, published two years ago, in which I discuss the varied statements in Chazal about Torah protecting, and what they mean.
There you go. Can't 'esplain it. See my published works. I wondered when we'd come to that.
See my comment on the main thread. It is pretty clear what R Slifkin is saying. If the Blog posts are not enough, you can consult his books.
Yeah, I saw your comment. It did not clarify Natan's position at all. It goes off on to a tangent about Hashgacha Pratis. In the last week and a half, Natan has made the following statements:
1. Practically speaking, Torah does NOT protect.
2. Torah in fact does protect.
3. R' Zilberstein is silly for telling a guy not to buy a gun and to rely on Torah protection.
4. Chareidi yeshivos should not have fled the south and should have relied on Torah protection.
5. Saying Torah protects is like the 'silly' old man who 'sat and prayed' while his friends built a lifeboat.
Additionally, see my post here
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
where I show that Chazal are unequivocally clear in many places that Torah study provides REAL protection from harm. Increasing Torah study translates into increasing Torah's protection. Natan says he never denied that (spoiler alert: he did. Just a week ago https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/guns-terrorism-and-torah).
If you feel you can answer how all this adds up, I'm all ears.
I answered point by point in your other comment.
Not satisfactorily at all. Unless Slifkin has some hocus pocus in his book (which no one here is going to spend money buying) you guys lost this round.
I believe that the Rabbi’s statement about the Charedim fleeing the South was a rhetorical question on if their believe that Torah study protects then why wouldn’t they want to prove that by staying in the danger zone? Well, obviously they don’t really believe it lol
First, don't compare or even talk about Lev Tahor. It is a total outlier, that is on its own. My own assumption about it is that it is not as bad as portrayed and not as "pure" as it purports. The bottom line is that has no involvement outside its doled amos.
I have no problem with a knowledgeable Jewish individual critiquing another Jewish train of thought and as mentioned I did openly critique Rav Aharon Feldman. I also, privately critiqued another member of the Moetzes in a letter. He had endorsed a Torah Mosad that had gone into a particular profit-making business to raise funds, but this was a business that directly competed with many frum Jews that earned a living from that business. I admonished him saying, "a non-profit mosad can legitimately fund raise seeking donations. But a Jew who toils to feed his family cannot, unless he is desperate; he should not have to compete with a mosad that you endorse, because you are telling the public to not give their business to a baal habos trying to earn a living, only to the mosad. The day he received the letter, he called me up and accepted the musar I had given him.
My problem with how Noson goes about it is that he is cynical and even surreptitiously derisive. If my critique of Rav Aharon Feldman is still on Zoo Torah, you will see that I argued on Rav Aharon with respect, only bringing cogent proofs. As I noted in another comment on this post, I compared Noson to Jesus. The Talmud tells us not to be like Rebbe Yehoshua ben Perachia that pushed away Jesus with two hands, only he should have been pushed with the left (weaker) hand and brought close with the right hand. This drove Jesus off the deep end, and Rebbe Yehoshua gets part of the blame. I would concur that the Talmidei Chachomim, and yes even some Gedolei Torah, bear the same responsibility for Noson's transformation. Even Dovid Hamelech was held responsible for the debacle at Nob (San. 95a).
There are many different opinions of Torah thought and Halacha, argue all you want but recognize that there exists a legitimate range of thought (albeit some is outside the range). Rav Aharon Feldman readily admitted to me, even after he had jumped ship from Noson, that the affair was handled poorly by the mainstream Torah world. Before he jumped ship he had gone to E"Y to speak with Rav Elyashiv and came out with a letter stating that Noson's approach was indeed the accepted approach of many Gedolim of the past, and Rav Elyashiv noted explicitly that it was not apikorsus, but it wasn't the best for the Yeshiva world in our day. Rav Feldman told me personally even more than that in defense of Noson. But the day his letter was published, the bottom-feeder kanoyimlach came out that Rav Aharon was a liar! After that he jumped ship. I never found out why. All the while, Rav Shmuel and Rav Shalom Kamenetsky whom I am friendly with, continued to support Noson, and only jumped ship in the following year. As far as I know Rav Chaim Malinowitz never jumped ship. I also never did in terms of the credibility of Rational Frum Judaism, but I recognize it is wrong and counterproductive (for Yiddishkite in general) to cynically castigate "the other approach" as Noson has been doing for years.
"Rav Shmuel and Rav Shalom Kamenetsky ... continued to support Noson, and only jumped ship in the following year."
It doesn't seem that they verily 'jumped ship'. Rabbi S. writes here "Comments regarding Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, shlita... He told them that he still stands by his endorsement of the books, but that he wanted to indicate a certain level of disassociation from me...."
http://www.zootorah.com/controversy/mike.html
R' Slfikin of course knows way more than me. However this is not a website of truth and objectivity.
Gut gezugt.
But it seems you're not really adding anything with the parable. This is indeed what chareidim believe - that Torah protects, and armies are often the shliach, so everyone should do their part. The parable puts a negative letzunaus spin on it, but does not seem to address anything substantive.
I thought the discussion was about if the facts are true - does Torah protect? You said no, the people on that blog provided a good deal of evidence that the Torah itself seems to think that Torah protects. Do you have a response for that?
No, much as they tried to spin it, the discussion was not about whether Torah protects (in some sense) or whether the Torah itself says that Torah protects (of course it does). The discussion was about whether charedim believe their own interpretation of what it means - i.e. that anyone learning Torah provides an added degree of protection that is a replacement for their serving in the army. And the fact that they fled the south shows that they don't.
"Gosh. If only our ancestors in Biblical times had known that! Instead of responding to dangers with soldiers and weapons, they could just have learned Torah!"
-Natan Slifkin
אין החי יכול להכחיש את החי
The claim that Chareidim themselves don't believe Torah protects was not introduced until close to the end of the post. (Last three paragraphs)
so your argument shifted from "Torah does not protect" with proofs from Wikipedia to "Torah does protect if you are learning it the right way"
bait and switch.....(yawn)
In that case, the chareidi yeshivos that didn't flee the south proves they do!
Torah protects. Mitzvos protect. Tefilah protects. Hashem protects.
Ok, so at the very best (for you) it seems to be some sort of machlokas in the chareidi world. Certainly not as clear cut as you pretend.
So are those that flee or insist on armed guards at the gates of kiryat sefer kofrim in the torah's power to protect?
R' Chaim Kanievsky instructed yeshivos not to flee. What is clear cut is that chareidim do believe Torah protects.
About kiryat sefer guards, look at my post.
Is that Yanki or RCK? Your post provides no sensible response re the guards of Kiryat Sefer. Just a word salad. Some sort of crazy response along the lines off although chareidim believe torah protects mystically, in practice the way they believe torah protects is through them demanding guards every time a security situations warrants it. And the fact that others provide the guarding shows that really they believec torah provides the guarding and are acting in accordance with those beliefs. They are also consistent with same sources and act as if torah provides protection from disease, by, well, still waiting for a response to that one.
Addressed all that. You still don't understand the parable. See my post.
Just reread. Certainly seems like you were claiming Torah doesn't protect, but ok I hear the clarification.
On the blog they addressed the question of the parameters of the protection, and why [they feel] that fleeing south was not a contradiction to it.
Now I'm completely confused. If the discussion is about why they fled south, what does this parable add at all?
They were the ones who brought up the parable of the drowning man to try to claim that it's about what bitachon really means. I re-cast the parable to show that for charedim it's not about bitachon, it's about getting other people to do the things that you don't want to do.
But how have you shown that?
You appear to be new here. The goal is not to "show" anything. The goal is to vent his bitterness at Chareidim by trying to make them look foolish. He then relies on useful idiots like the guy downstream to cheer "this is so good!" and that's all there is; move on to the next knock.
Asking him to explain why basically repeating himself in a more snide tone in any way serves as a response to the fact that his "arguments" have been effectively demolished in two substantive posts is a total boat miss. Welcome aboard.
I can’t believe that I’m sitting here wasting my life reading the comments of a bunch of grown ass men arguing whether reading a book helps protect Israeli citizens from terrorist attacks or Hamas rockets a lot or a little. I’m done with this. 🤦♂️
Orur atoh b'tzeisecha.
אני לא מבין. האמ אתה רוצה לכתוב את זה ועברית
Az ata yachol lasot targum google. Yoter kef l'kalel otcha b'rabim machorei gabecha. K'mo oznei chamor.
What are you like five years old? You got something to say, write it in Hebrew or say it in English or go take a shit in the ocean.
Adif li la'asot gedolim b'yam hagadol.
Now you’re just being a pussy
If Torah and frumkeit truly protects, explain the the destruction of many religious communities or Torah communities during the Holocaust?
Difficult issues like that are addressed by happy and co as 'tzadik v'rah lo'. Just like 'hishtadlus' answers awkward questions about why chareidim never practice what they preach re bitochon/emunah. Dispite all the pas b'melech, Hashem will provide blah blah blah they can hear a $100 bill falling on a carpet 10 miles away, like everybody else. They run after rich families for marriage like everyone else. Why 'hishtadlus' of course. You can never beat a chareidi in an argument because there are three answers to everything. 'Hishtadlus', 'the mesorah' and 'tazadik v'rah lo'.
PS forgot about another one. When da'as torah doesn’t work 'it was a time of hester ponim'. How they know when and when not is a time of 'hester ponim' and hence when and when not can rely on daas torah, I don't know. Maybe the mesorah teaches us that.
Judging by the way you asked the question, this blog or any blog is an awful place to ask it. Sit down with a rabbi and talk it over.
I don't need to. it's a very simple question, if Torah protects, then why didn't it
How much have you read on the subject? Iyov spends close to 40 chapters on it, for starters.