tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post8003287279886129617..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Interesting Posts and Articles #248joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-62350130535066461382010-01-19T08:48:23.749-05:002010-01-19T08:48:23.749-05:00See also the New Testament. It depends how you loo...See also the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonic_possession#Demonic_possession_in_The_Bible" rel="nofollow">New Testament</a>. It depends how you look at it. Spirit possession as a concept certainly didn't arise only a few hundred years ago, but probably the specific formulation here, dybbuk as a soul in need of tikkun, did.Mississippi Fred MacDowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02734864605700159687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-45770985230226908462010-01-18T22:16:10.799-05:002010-01-18T22:16:10.799-05:00"Do you think that there used to be?"
n..."Do you think that there used to be?"<br /><br />no. i think the idea did not really exist in Biblical times (Shaul and Navos being misunderstood); that the concept *might* have existed in the time of the Tannaim and Amoraim, in a slightly different form (see e.g. Tobit, and one or two gemaras); that kabbalistic concepts of dibbuk, ibbur and gilgul neshama gave it new life force; and that it apparently came back into play at about the same time it became popular among Catholics.<br /><br />i don't think it makes sense to say that they were paskened out of existence, so if they don't exist now, then they never existed.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-54248882305962074132010-01-18T19:26:10.378-05:002010-01-18T19:26:10.378-05:00"This is totally aside from the fact that I t..."This is totally aside from the fact that I think there *are* no such things as dybbuks"<br /><br />Do you think that there used to be?<br /><br />"How about that it promotes a strain of superstitious Judaism, which is not necessarily a good thing."<br /><br />not *necessarily*. Some think it to be great! :)Yosef Greenberghttp://blog.yachdus.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-42395587032640508252010-01-18T18:43:10.901-05:002010-01-18T18:43:10.901-05:00Well, halacha can be weird in the first place. My...Well, halacha can be weird in the first place. My wife put some A1 sauce on her plate, and I was looking at the ingredients. One is ingredient is raisin paste. I remmarked that grapes are ha'eitz, but the bracha achronah is Pri-haeitz, if it's raisins, some say the bracha achronah is borei nefashos. If it's squeezed into juice, the brachah changes to a Borei Prei Hagafen, and an al Hagafen. If even simple things like a brachah can be so confusing and seemingly nonsensical (imagine being a baal teshuva), than things like dibbuks and other ideas we don’t encounter in everyday life SHOULD be subject to interpretation. Another factor is the frum community as a whole is not half as well informed of Jewish history-even, and maybe especially of the last 300 years. How many kids in Chaim Berlin know who Dreyfus was?Lakewood Falling Downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14483392684657880997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-67064598713049614732010-01-18T18:41:24.992-05:002010-01-18T18:41:24.992-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Lakewood Falling Downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14483392684657880997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-8466820142955385622010-01-18T15:44:12.441-05:002010-01-18T15:44:12.441-05:00Absolutely.
But I'll give an example of anot...Absolutely. <br /><br />But I'll give an example of another creepy phenomenon related to total deference to the roshei yeshiva. While it is true that people used to formulate a hashkafah that they believed to be true, great people and seforim of the past were not taken to task for failing to conform with the current hashkafah. But recently I've heard comments from yeshivaleit to the effect as follows: R. Shabbesai Bass's Sifsei Chachomim is in countless editions of the Chumash. It has been a fixture for nearly 300 years. Yet someone recently told me that it contains some "wild" stuff, "wild" not being a good thing. I didn't receive any examples, but it appears that merely offering non-mainstream, speculative explanations is grounds for suspicion. The Torah Temimah, as everyone knows highly regarded a generation or two ago, is similarly viewed with a jaundiced eye, and not because of My Uncle the Netziv. Someone else deplored, in the name of two rabbis, one a lesser light and one a godol, that there was a translation of the Chida's Maagal Tov, and indeed that it was published in the first place. Another example, someone like R. Eliyah Bachur and his critical approach is viewed with suspicion, even though the Pri Megadim wrote of him "ha-tishbi ne'eman yoser me-meah edim." But his views and hashkafos are far afield from the one authorized hashkafah these days (see, eg, a newish post on my blog, where the Tishby basically calls the Vachtnacht a minhag pashut). Indeed, people --in these cases young people-- are reaching back and attacking great people of centuries past for their failure to conform to the hashkafah of the roshei yeshiva, which they have been taught to believe is the one true monochromatic emes; R. Adlerstein surely knows otherwise, but what can he do? The roshei yeshiva believe in dybbuks or at least say it's permitted to tell phony dybbuk stories. What is there to do besides privately think it's hooey? Certainly not to publicly say so, evidently.Mississippi Fred MacDowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02734864605700159687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-25352259694879478622010-01-18T13:07:32.853-05:002010-01-18T13:07:32.853-05:00To borrow from On the Main Line's comments: &q...To borrow from On the Main Line's comments: "at least is that there in yeshiva circles there is no accepted precedent for disputing something which is plainly taken as true by the roshei yeshiva."<br />The narrow views by many in the Yeshiva world are even whispred against by many of their own followers leading to people getting frustrated and going off of the derech all together. I'm seeing it too often on a personal level. Even if outher unusual stories are true, there needs to be a better public way to deal with it, without creating such a backlash against Daas Torah.Lakewood Falling Downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14483392684657880997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-58486742773171383882010-01-18T10:59:01.110-05:002010-01-18T10:59:01.110-05:00true, that.
interesting. i'll try to check it...true, that.<br /><br />interesting. i'll try to check it out.joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-53847624397411661212010-01-18T10:00:05.710-05:002010-01-18T10:00:05.710-05:00Did you happen to notice the reference to the Chof...Did you happen to notice the reference to the Chofetz Chaim's dybbuk in Emes Le-ya'akov on Vaerah? Quite timely.<br /><br />I think the issue for Rabbi Adlerstein at least is that there in yeshiva circles there is no accepted precedent for disputing something which is plainly taken as true by the roshei yeshiva. Although hisnagdus is not so alive any more, you can certainly hear skepticism and light ridicule of Chassidic stories in the yeshiva world. But once R. Elchonon Wasserman and the Chofetz Chaim (and subsequent endorsement by leading light roshei yeshiva, like R. Ya'akov) enter the picture, at most you can get "I won't say it's nonsense, but I admit that I can't imagine a scenario where I'll be persuaded that there's a dybbuk."Mississippi Fred MacDowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02734864605700159687noreply@blogger.com