Sunday, January 23, 2011

Interesting Posts and Articles #299

  1. This week's Haveil Havalim.
    .
  2. Considering whether Tu Beshvat is a Sabbatean holiday:
    Ya'ari, however, notes the first mention in connection to a celbration or the like is in the 16th century. Specifically, R. Issachar ibn Susan (c. 1510-1580) in Ibur Shanim, published in 1578 (the book was published earlier, in 1564, this was done without the knowledge or R. Issachar and according to R. Issachar, with numerous errors) he mentions "the Ashkenazim have the custom [on Tu-beshevat] to eat many fruits in honor of the day." Mention of this custom also appeared in a Jedeo-German Minhagim book first published in 1590. "The custom is to eat many fruits as it is the New Year of the trees."
    This precedes Shabtai Tzvi.
    .
  3. Rav Elyashiv tells the author of Meshaneh Halachos that we cannot pasken that mashiach should come.
    Rav Elyashiv politely refused, stating, “We cannot pasken [that the geulah should come], but rather, we should believe in and anticipate [the coming of the geulah].”
    .
  4. Rabbi Ginzberg in the Five Towns Jewish Times:
    On a personal level, I have always supported the efforts to help Reb Sholom Mordechai and his family, whose suffering is beyond comprehension. When I was asked to join the steering committee in planning this event, I felt that in order to involve others in the cause, I needed a directive on a personal level. I called HaGaon Rav Chaim Kanievsky’s son-in-law and asked him to go himself and ask his shver whether I can tell people that this is pidyon shevuyim—which the Torah prescribes as the highest level of tzedakah.

    Several hours later, he called me from his cell phone in Rav Chaim’s private study, put the phone on speaker, and presented my question clearly and simply. Reb Chaim responded as clearly and as unequivocally as possible, “Bevadai, bevadai” (certainly, certainly). For me, that was enough. The Amram, the gadol ha’dor of our generation, spoke and K’lal Yisrael responded. The mashgiach of Lakewood taught us that this is the greatest manifestation of kiddush Hashem.

    I am confused as to why people, public and private figures alike, can still say things like “It may be excessive punishment, but not a cause for the community to rally behind,” when all the gedolim tell us and show us that it is.
    This would seem to suggest that once "the gedolim" tell us that it is X, there is no room for disagreement.

    In a Letter to the Editor, Zeev Gold writes at length, but as part of it, asks:
    I have a few follow up questions: From your article it appears that your conversation with Rav Chaim did not last very long. [If the Igros Moshe and the Chasam Sofer’s and others SH’UT been written in Rav Chaim’s style, I would have much more room on my bookshelves!] Can you tell us if Rav Chaim was told all the pertinent information before issuing his psak?

    Did you tell him that SMR is guilty? [I don’t know this for sure, but since the Noviminsker Rebbe, shlita and Rav Feiner, shlita both said it, I defer to them.]

    Is he aware of the conditions of Otisville prison? [While it is not somewhere anyone wants to end up, it is not exactly the hole-in-ground that Pollard and presumably Gilad Shalit are sitting in.]

    If these two questions are not important, can I assume the psak applies to any Jew sitting in any jail for any crime?
    And so on and so forth. In that same piece, Rabbi Ginzberg replies at length, but his response includes:
    What I found personally disturbing is the tone of your letter, but I don’t fault you for it, because this is one of the tragedies of our generation. And I’m referring specifically to the cynicism that exists in our own Torah community about the psakim of the gedolim today. Too often do we hear the refrain that the gedolim “never really said it,” and “if they signed their name to it, then it must be a forgery.” And then when you actually ask them personally for their opinion and you get an unequivocal response, then it’s probably that “they don’t know the whole story. And if they would hear the whole story, then they would say like me!” I have been zocheh to ask Reb Chaim [Kanievsky] over the last 25 years perhaps hundreds of shailos in all areas of halacha and hashkafah, and he has never hesitated or been too embarrassed to respond that he doesn’t know the inyan and cannot give an opinion. When I chose to call him regarding this particular matter, his answer was clear and to the point (something that you found to be a source of ridicule). I have too much kavod for Reb Chaim (as well as all the gedolei ha’dor) to start questioning them that maybe their answers are shallow and without understanding of the full ramifications of their advice and of the complete inyan.
    Bolding is mine. There is also an halachic analysis by Rabbi Yair Hoffman. See there. But I'd like to focus for a little bit on the paragraph above, and what it reveals. Too often we hear the refrain that gedolim never really said it? What about the statement cited in Rav Chaim Kanievsky's name, the same gadol he is relying upon, that כל מה שאומרים בשמי הוא שקר!? Unless he wants to say that Rav Kanievsky never said this?
    .
    This rav has been asking Rav Kanievsky questions for 25 years, and does not see fit to make certain that Rav Kanievsky is aware of the nuances of the case?! Certainly there have been instances in which gedolim have not looked sufficiently into matters. For example, just as he is paskening that Rubashkin is a case of pidyon shevuyim, so too Rav Kanievsky paskened that Elior Chen was a marbitz Torah, and is innocent of all charges! I am certain that where he thinks he does not know something, and needs clarification, he is unabashed to ask for it. However, in this particular case, the chareidi press in general has put forth a concerted campaign in favor of his innocence, in terms of the anti-Semitism of the judge, in terms of the horrible conditions he is being subjected to, etc., etc. It is quite possible that Rav Kanievsky is unaware that there is another side to it. And in posing the question, there is no devil's advocate. By way of comparison, there is no Rav Belsky presenting his side regarding anasakis worms in fish. A dayan is supposed to hear both sides, but for an emotionally charged case such as this, it makes a lot of sense that it is possible that only one side is being heard. And so, to ask a brief question and accept the be-vaddai? And to assert that it is a lack of kavod to start questioning Rav Kanievsky to make certain that he is aware that there is another side -- that he could well be guilty, that the prison sentence is within guidelines and that the lengthy sentence compared to others convicted of the same crime likely came about because he refused to plea bargain, that the jail conditions may not be comparatively bad, that over-the-top assertions of this sort may harm the American Jewish community in the future, etc., etc. -- I have my doubts that Rav Kanievsky has been exposed to any of this, or is aware that there are even those who say this. It is certainly something to check into. It is not a lack of kavod to ascertain this. Rather, to consciously NOT ask this is to create a situation of Garbage In, Garbage Out. And if one refuses to ask, then one should not be surprised that people won't listen to the proclamations of Gedolim, as put forth by you.
    .
  5. Courtesy of DovBear, a bill put forth by a rabbi with some rather strange views.
    .
  6. Hirhurim with a statement from the Agudas Yisroel of America regarding brain death. And Hirhurim with musings on taking a hat into the bathroom. The interesting twist, IMHO, is this:
    Some people wear a hat and jacket whenever they go outside. For them, their hat and jacket are not designated specifically for prayer. Therefore, they may presumably wear them into a bathroom. Other people wear a hat and jacket only for prayer. I don’t wear mine back and forth everyday but leave it in my office for mincha and have a separate set at home. People like me, who generally wear a hat and jacket only for prayer, presumably should not take it into a bathroom.
    Meanwhile, the basis of a requirement of wearing a hat and jacket for davening is that it is what people wear to be respectable when they go outside. See the relevant siman in Aruch haShulchan. Yet it has been fetishized, or else severed from its halachic basis. In which case one can turn around and wonder if it is now meyuchad le'sfillah.
    .
  7. Mystical Paths notes a free Moshe Yess album, in his memory.
    .
  8. According to Vos Iz Neias, an account of the freed bachur's meeting with Rav Kanievsky:
    Last Thursday Bando was given a twenty four hour furlough from prison and went to R’ Kanievsky for a bracha in anticipation of his upcoming release.  In addition to R’ Kanievsky divrei bracha, he cautioned Bando to be a law abiding citizen, with an extra warning in the words of the Gemara, “don’t steal the taxes”.
    .
  9. At Rationalist Judaism, methodologies for analyzing Chazal.
    .
  10. Here at parshablog, some thoughts on the authenticity of the Zohar, on the basis of Rabbi Yesa, Rabbi Abba, and Cappadocia, as mentioned in the Zohar.

30 comments:

S. said...

>This would seem to suggest that once "the gedolim" tell us that it is X, there is no room for disagreement.

It would seem to suggest that you can tell a godol your opinion, and upon receiving a one word assent with your facts as you see them, it becomes what "all the gedolim tell us and show us."

joshwaxman said...

true, true

S. said...

RCK is his own personal Urim ve-Tumim that he feels free to make say what he wants. I get the impression that he sees RCK as a kind of Magic 8-Ball. All you have to do is tilt it a little and then the result you want turns up. And he thinks others treat the words of the gedolim lightly?

S. said...

RCK is his own personal Urim ve-Tumim that he feels free to make say what he wants. I get the impression that he sees RCK as a kind of Magic 8-Ball. All you have to do is tilt it a little and then the result you want turns up. And he thinks others treat the words of the gedolim lightly?

Anonymous said...

I have got a new one for you

Shabbos sends a letter to Ibn Ezra
http://mi.yodeya.com/questions/5469/shabbos-sends-a-letter-to-ibn-ezra

Anonymous said...

Remind you of a Medrash

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6187320/Snake-with-foot-found-in-China.html

joshwaxman said...

regarding Shabbos, I think I've heard it before. it seems, though, that this fits best to Rashbam, rather than a student of Ibn Ezra. *He* was the one who innovated the peshat of vayhi erev vayhi voker, that erev is the end boundary of a period of light, while boker is the end boundary of a period of darkness, such that in maaseh bereishit, night followed day. (and it became evening, and then it became morning, one day.) of course, Rashbam kept the halachic period of Shabbos. (and conversely, we do find this sort of order when it comes to the korbanos.)

Ibn Ezra writes on that pasuk:
ערב -
קרוב מטעם חשך ונקרא כך, שנתערבו בו הצורות.

ובקר -
הפך ערב, שיוכל אדם לבקר בינות הצורות.

which of course is not Rashbam's peshat. I am surprised it would

You can see a discussion here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=HvCns2cU6f0C&lpg=PA49&ots=jaf7DPtjvy&dq=ibn%20ezra%20letter%20shabbos&pg=PA49#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Rashbam writes:
ויהי ערב ויהי בקר -
אין כתיב כאן ויהי לילה ויהי יום, אלא ויהי ערב, שהעריב יום ראשון ושיקע האור, ויהי בוקר, בוקרו של לילה, שעלה עמוד השחר, הרי הושלם יום א' מן השישה ימים שאמר הקב"ה בעשרת הדברות, ואח"כ התחיל יום שני, ויאמר אלהים יהי רקיע. ולא בא הכתוב לומר שהערב והבקר יום אחד הם, כי לא הוצרכנו לפרש אלא היאך היו ששה ימים, שהבקיר יום ונגמרה הלילה, הרי נגמר יום אחד והתחיל יום שני.

kol tuv,
josh

B said...

MISHNEH HALACHOS,NOT MESHANEH.

joshwaxman said...

i've heard it both ways.

;)

kt,
josh

B said...

YOUR MAKING FUN?!

b said...

What's the matter with your blog?!!!Having do you want to be "saved" notzri ads on it?

joshwaxman said...

if you see such an ad, please let me know, preferably with the URL to which it links. Google serves up these advertisements automatically, but has a Competitive Ad Filter I can feed in URLs to block. I block most of them, but sometimes some slip by.

thanks,
josh

b said...

It was on page 2 of this blog,and i didn't click on how to be "saved".

b said...

Were you making fun of that rav?

joshwaxman said...

that's not going to help me find it. i guess i'll have to wait until i spot it.

kol tuv,
josh

b said...

Why do you insist to cleverly poke fun by saying meshaneh halochos?And where did you get your heter for making fun of a talmid chochom b'rabim?

b said...

T'u b'shevat is alrady mentioned in the writings of the geonim and i think the mordeachai.See moadim b'halacha.

joshwaxman said...

the question is HOW is it mentioned. the Mishna mentions it. but is there mention of eating fruits? is there mention of a Tu B'Shvat seder? specifics would be helpful. (i don't often go on treasure hunts.)

kol tuv,
josh

joshwaxman said...

Also, is Rav Klein's first name not Menashe, rather than Minsheh?

b said...

You continue to poke fun,why?

joshwaxman said...

i think it would be a lot less to his kavod if i would explain what i find objectionable about his specific halachic reasoning and conclusions. as it is, i am just poking fun at the name of his sefer.

kt,
josh

b said...

You mean baecause you find things objectionable,you can make fun on a public forum?Which shulchan aruch do you have?Obviously not the orthodox one.p.s.can you give a halachic basis that your "only" poking fun on the title?

b said...

No fruits are mentioned in early sources.p.s. the way to learn is to go looking up things.

joshwaxman said...

so what IS mentioned, that is relevant? i look up things plenty, especially when someone or some source i respect suggests it. if Tosafot says "see this gemara", I take care to see it. but plenty of people leave cryptic messages, look up this, look up that. if you give me a summary of what i can expect to find, i'll know that i am not going on a wild goose chase tracking down a sefer and page to find an obvious point which is irrelevant to the topic at hand. i could spend my time in much better ways, thank you very much.

"You mean baecause you find things objectionable..."
from what i have read of his non-objectionable teshuvot, i was not impressed with the methodology or understanding of sources. that is an understatement, and i came to this realization well before I had heard of his 'objectionable' pesakim.

as for the "objectionable" statements, here is a sample, about reporting sexual abuse of a rebbe:

"Since the administration can stop him in this manner they have no right to punish him by given him to the secular government since he is no longer a rodef. Furthermore if he is now pursued after he has been fired then the victim becomes the rodef and the rodef becomes the victim."

Also "objectionable" is his oppressing agunos via abuse of heter meah rabbonim, in which the wife is clamoring for her get but they won't give her access to it, and is purportedly behind the infamous kiddushei ketanah case of a while back, in which a fellow held his daughter hostage by claiming that he had married her off to an unnamed man when she was a ketanah, in order to blackmail his wife. This is a perversion and abuse of halachah, and is properly called meshaneh halachos.

Did you know this about Rav Menasheh Klein before you started blasting me for making fun of him in public? Do you think that there might be a justification to do so?

kol tuv,
josh

b said...

The way to learn is to search for the truth.That means looking up all sources,so you could learn all you can.Even wwhen it busts your ideas of something.I gave you a respected easly accesible source.

b said...

Purportedly.So you rely on rumors,no hard facts to go against the shulchan aruch.to be cont.

b said...

So that give you a right to poke fun.Based on your opinions even before.Do you know even 1% of his sources,or do you learn that hard?.P.S.i don't consider him my posek at all.But that doesn't give you or me license to thow insults.And be mevazeh a talmid chochom b'rabim.

b said...

You mean because some rabbonim turn a blind eye or support women who go to court against halacha by a divorce(as all over the web).That means i can insult them as much as i like,ignoring halacha?

b said...

I'll probaly post more later.

joshwaxman said...

"The way to learn is to search for the truth."

i know that. but to be honest, i have been rather underwhelmed with your commenting thus far. your objections are silly, and often seem like you are just searching for reasons to nitpick.

i don't respect you at all. if i wanted to get that sefer from my father's library, look through pages (since you gave no page number), and see what it said, i could. but i don't go on wild goose chases from commenters I don't respect.

I don't know if you understood enough of the linked article that what you pointed to is relevant. one simple summary sentence from you could help me assess that. the common wisdom is that since the modern kabbalistic Tu Beshvat seder was originally printed in Chemdas Yamim, a Sabbatean work, it was a Sabbatean kabbalistic ceremony. The article I pointed to notes an earlier precedent for the fruit aspect of it. What does the Mordechai say that is relevant to that? Why not tell me one sentence, before I spend half an hour or more?

I similarly don't respect your assessment with regards to my comment about Rav Menashe Klein. I made a passing reference to the name of his sefer, obliquely noting my objection to him. There would be three groups. (a) Some would just pass this by without notice, or would not be familiar enough with dikduk to notice. (b) Some who would notice would think I erred. (c) Those who would know better would be familiar with the reasons he is 'controversial'. Until, of course, you pressed the issue and made all of this overt!

I follow Chazal who referred to one colleague as Geneiva. If your religion and your Shulchan Aruch is one which causes you to champion the kavod of an oppressor of agunos and victims of child molestation, then I want none of it.

I feel sorry for you, and not at all ashamed of what I have written. I don't value your input in the slightest.

kol tuv,
josh

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin