tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post8621606017472431687..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: On Rav Kanievsky's Ruach HaKodesh - a mezuza storyjoshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-645403519780220092009-12-31T14:32:13.936-05:002009-12-31T14:32:13.936-05:00a Mezuza provides shmira
Oh, so THAT'S why we...<i>a Mezuza provides shmira</i><br /><br />Oh, so THAT'S why we do the mitzvah - a mezuzah is really just an amulet! <br /><br />Just another example of how Rambam lost and Yehudah haLevy won. The bywords of today's Judaism are superstition, mysticism, and segulahs...zdubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06642047900508041723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-44595509956800523672009-12-31T13:04:17.304-05:002009-12-31T13:04:17.304-05:00sorry for the aggravation. but then, that is what ...sorry for the aggravation. but then, that is what makes blogging so fun. :)<br /><br />i think there is merit to both sides. there is merit to simple faith, but *if* (and it is admittedly an "if") misapplied to the wrong things, then it can end up being simple faith in superstition. see what i answer Rafi G., below.<br /><br />rafi:<br />indeed, one could say that, but i don't think it works out with the particulars of the type of mezuza stories which crop up. not to mention that even within this, i would guess Rambam would be opposed, and think it awful how people turned a mitzvah into an amulet. i should make this point into a separate post, i think.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-40955155017473138422009-12-31T11:58:27.683-05:002009-12-31T11:58:27.683-05:00No Devorah, being "simple" (tamim) means...No Devorah, being "simple" (tamim) means abandoning silly superstitions, not embracing them.Simchanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-31080391968490829932009-12-31T03:49:23.332-05:002009-12-31T03:49:23.332-05:00maybe look at it like this: the punishment is not ...maybe look at it like this: the punishment is not because of the problem with the mezuza. the person needs to be punished for something, or for whatever reason Hashem decided this specific person would have this specific tribulation, illness, test, whatever.<br /><br />We know the mezuza provides a shmira on the house. Perhaps it has a certain power to even change and protect from what Hashem would otherwise test a person with. As long as the mezuza is kosher, it provides that shmira.<br /><br />if, on the other hand, the mezuza is passul, there is no shmira and the person gets whatever it was that was coming his way.Rafi G.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00699851287106903971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-7988976949242829962009-12-31T01:46:21.141-05:002009-12-31T01:46:21.141-05:00This is why G-d said to be "simple" with...This is why G-d said to be "simple" with emunah. <br />If you're going to take everything apart and analyze it, and subject it to scientific tests, which can't be proved either way, then you are just going to make yourself, and your readers, go totally off the derech (if they're not already).<br />I have experience several miraculous events surrounding my own mezuzah. I can tell you quite a few other stories about other peoples' mezuzot, and the resulting effects on their lives.<br />Maybe I'll just blog them instead.<br />In fact, I think I'll do a whole mezuzah post now you've aggravated me with this one.Devorahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00793434651294780439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-41031419630909008942009-12-31T00:52:29.312-05:002009-12-31T00:52:29.312-05:00Just realizing that we are operating on two differ...Just realizing that we are operating on two different frames of reference... that being the case, i don't think there is to be much achieved in continuing in this fashion. I (respectfully) withdraw.<br /><br />All the bestArinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-41739986155861691722009-12-31T00:26:51.503-05:002009-12-31T00:26:51.503-05:00"regarding your last point the marriot is obv...<i>"regarding your last point the marriot is obviously not mechuyav in mezuzos whilst the house they were staying in was"</i><br />so? if the theory is that this is not *punishment* for not fulfilling, but protection afforded by a mezuzah, in either case there is no protection being afforded! why should this be a valid distinction?<br /><br /><i>"in regards to your many questions about the the three girls... it seems you are trying to figure out a formula as to how much shmira a mezuza provides, under what circumstances, to what extent etc."</i><br />not really. i think that story, if true, was a coincidence which statistically *will happen* given the many mezuzah instances which occur. i brought it down not to gauge the level of shemira. rather, to point out that this <b>type</b> of story should not occur (or rather should not be believed to be meaningful) if you truly believe the apologetic explanation you offered. that is, there is no reason to assume that three random guests all merited this <b>particular</b> punishment. and so the straightforward implication is that a pasul mezuzah is a harmful force in one's home, which will maim and kill, and that to be on the safe side one shouldn't put a mezuzah there in the first place, just in case it is or will become pasul. why invite Hashem's wrath down upon your home?<br /><br />in terms of the ship story, perhaps it happened. (and we even have midrashic cases of what i term <a href="http://parsha.blogspot.com/2004/12/vayeishev-4-shortsighted-foresight.html" rel="nofollow">short-sighted foresight</a>.) but i'm also sure the magician in the ashmedai story could present a great explanation as to why he couldn't see what was under his very feet. and regardless, my focus is on the people who place this claim, on Rav Kanievsky's behalf (note that he did not claim this ruach hakodesh for himself), without realizing the potential for coincidence due to the statistics involved, and simultaneously without realizing the glaring flaw in their derivation from the story.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-81180371671950918432009-12-31T00:08:44.691-05:002009-12-31T00:08:44.691-05:00regarding your last point the marriot is obviously...regarding your last point the marriot is obviously not mechuyav in mezuzos whilst the house they were staying in was (which is evident from the fact there was a mezuza, albeit one which was posul)<br /><br />in regards to your many questions about the the three girls... it seems you are trying to figure out a formula as to how much shmira a mezuza provides, under what circumstances, to what extent etc. I think it is somewhat futile to attempt to define these things as we have no way of understanding how exactly they operate. We do know however that we are mechuyav to have one (and a kosher one at that). G-d, in his infinite wisdom, decided not to send us a 300 page manual about all the possibilities and rules of regulations of what happens when one does or does not have kosher mezuza - he did however tell us to put them up. Even if we were to do an exhaustive, absolutely comprehensive study of every person who ever had something bad happen to them and whether they did or didn't have kosher mezuza, we STILL would not be able to come up with a conclusive description as to how 'shmira' works. 'Shmira' (and a lot of other things in Judaism) just don't lend themselves to scientific study.<br /><br />I would be interested to hear your thought on the second thing i mentioned re: the story of the previous LRArinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-36549804589427245352009-12-30T23:26:28.571-05:002009-12-30T23:26:28.571-05:00thanks. it is a good explanation, although i think...thanks. it is a good explanation, although i think rambam would still not be pleased. and that this is not how the stories often go.<br /><br />for example, from <a href="http://mezuzahstore.com/blog/index.php/2007/01/12/mezuzah-story-feet/" rel="nofollow">the mezuzah blog</a>,<br /><br />three girls are *guests* at a house, and all three develop leg injuries. and it turns out that the particular room they were staying in had a mezuzah with a hairline crack in the chof of uvelechtecha, "when you go".<br /><br />why didn't the mezuzah for the entire house afford them protection? and is it really the case that all three were coincidentally deserving of this particular punishment, but that the mezuzah didn't protect them? and if it is pasul, it is pasul in its entirety! why wouldn't all sorts of different troubles befall them? why something related to the particular error? the rather <b>clear</b> assumption is that the particular psul <b>caused</b> this mishap to these three hapless girls who stumbled into this dangerous room! (this despite the <a href="http://mezuzahstore.com/blog/index.php/2007/01/04/about-mezuzah-stories/" rel="nofollow">identical disclaimer</a> in an earlier post from the same blogger to what you said, that the pasul mezuzah doesn't cause the problem, but rather that there is a lack of Divine protection.) i just don't think the apologetics work out with the particulars of the miracle stories.<br /><br />i am sure it is possible to kvetch an answer that works with your suggestion, but it would be a kvetch. so your answer is a good one, and perhaps one fit to believe in, but in the actual world of mezuzah stories, this is not what happens.<br /><br />a related question -- why would this mishap befall these three separate girls when they stayed in a room with a mezuzah which was pasul in this way, but NOT if they stayed in a gentile hotel such as the Marriott which lacked mezuzos entirely? do we hear of any such Marriott tragedy stories. <br /><br />kol tuv,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-14988124264202516002009-12-30T20:58:25.875-05:002009-12-30T20:58:25.875-05:00I think you will enjoy this one
http://havolim.blo...I think you will enjoy this one<br />http://havolim.blogspot.com/2009/12/another-use-for-apples_30.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1485836123866221492009-12-30T20:56:10.823-05:002009-12-30T20:56:10.823-05:00a couple of points...
The whole idea of checking ...a couple of points...<br /><br />The whole idea of checking Mezuzos in certain situations was very much introduced and publicized by the Lubavitcher Rebbe (which at the time received a lot of flack). <br /><br />In regards to the idea of Mezuzos protecting there is a analogy given: A soldier is on the battlefield and is not wearing his helmet and ends up getting shot in the head. Would one say that the bullet came as a 'punishment' for not wearing a helmet, or is it more logical to say that when one is on a battlefield not wearing a helmet is conducive to getting shot. No one is suggesting that these things are punishments (G-d forbid) but rather that a Mezuza provides shmira etc. in a world where there are all sorts of things that one needs shmira from.<br /><br />In regards to R. Kanievsky ruach hakodesh (or lack thereof): There is a story about a chassid who wrote to the (previous) Lubaitcher Rebbe asking about his son who was to take a ship to america. The Rebbe told him not to do it but his son went ahead anyway. The ship sank and the son drowned. The father came to the LR and said 'why didnt you just tell me the sink was going to sink!?' The LR replied 'believe me that i didnt know that the ship was going to sink, i just knew that he shouldnt go on it!'Arinoreply@blogger.com