Dr. Shapiro writes:
I am happy to announce that my new book is now with the printer and should be at the distributor by May 4. Amazon and book stores will have the book not long after that. Changing the Immutable has taken quite a long time and I hope readers find that it was worth the wait. One of the main reasons it has taken so long is that some of my time in recent years has been devoted to my posts on the Seforim Blog. When I first started posting here I saw it merely as a pleasant diversion. However, I now see my Seforim Blog posts as an important part of my scholarly writing. Throughout Changing the Immutable I reference not only my posts but many others that appeared on the Seforim Blog.
I am making this announcement now rather than after the book appears because Amazon is offering a pre-order discount (link). For those who want to wait, I know that Biegeleisen will be selling it at a very good price.
Prof. Shapiro doesn't like Chareidim, He's always knocking Chareidi gedolim or relating what idiots the Chareidim are.
ReplyDelete@David please supply some examples where he criticizes and is clearly not justified.
ReplyDeleteA casual perusal of the seforim blog (and other writings of his) reveals a consistent negative opinion about Chareidim on one subject or another. At one time I used to read the seforim blog regularly and the one thing you could consistently count on was his finding all kinds of faults with Chareidim, whether their leadership or their laymen. Much of it was subtle and much of it explicit. And it was very consistent.
ReplyDeleteBut this isn't even new. He started at least as far back as during his student days. See this for an especially egregious example:
http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch//v10/mj_v10i93.html#CVZ
David, if you read what it says there it actually proves the opposite of your point. He is not "knocking chareidi gedolim." He is criticizing what thinks to be errors in the way Rav Shach acted as a gadol. He contrasts the behavior of Rav Shach to the behavior of Rav Moshe feinstein, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, and other chareidi gedolim. I do not understnd how you think that preferring the leadership of some chareidi gedolim over that of other chareidi gedolim is "knocking chareidi gedolim."
ReplyDeleteMaybe the Chareidi leadership IS full of fault?
ReplyDelete@Eddie this is not a hatchet job - Rav Lichtenstein made similar comments.
ReplyDeleteI recall that Shapiro later on apologised for his critique of R' Shach, and pointed out his personal connection to both Lubavitch and R' Soloveichik. Nevertheless, there is nothing wrong in defending one's rebbe if they are attacked by another Rav. The trap we can fall into is to get into the whole milchemet mitzva and start attacking one side or another.
ReplyDeleteThe following is very anti-Chareidi.
ReplyDeleteFrom the source posted above by David:
His views have infected the Haredi community. We all know that they dodge the draft but it is even worse. They refuse to say a mishebarakh for IDF even though the latter protect them from the Arabs.
They refuse to say a prayer for the government which gives them millions of dollars. In the diaspora they alwasy said a prayer for the government
but not in Israel. In the Diaspora they always acted patriotic and if there was a moment of silence for war dead they wouldn't dream of breaking with the practice. However in Israel while everyone stands at
attention on Yom Hashoah they go about their business. Do they realize how much of a hillul hashem this is and how it hurts the feelings of
others who are remembering loved ones. Of course they know but they don't care. Unlike Lubavitch they enjoy confrontation.
Some apology. Excuses and obfuscations more like.
ReplyDeleteit may all be very "heretical" for those who accept that R' Shach was the Gadol HaDor with true DT, however, that is just a matter of faith, just like others considered RYSB to be the Gadol haDor, and yet others the Lubavitcher rebbe, etc. In other words, in order for us to accept the anger against Shapiro, we have to accept all of the faith of his critics, ie the acceptors of Litvish DT. So it is a circular argument.
ReplyDeleteThe Haredi world is really inconsistent on such matters, for example they spent a whole period mocking the Rav, and being mevazeh his Gadlus, and in their magazine they didnt even write z'tl in his obituary, but z'l, like they would for a baal habayit or benefactor. What a joke.
So hareidim are in no position to take offence if others defend their rebbe.
Is his statement untrue?
ReplyDeleteHe occasionally does the same for MO rabbonim. Its simply that charedim are notorious for censoring (and banning) unlike MO who rarely do that. And charedim actually justify such behavior.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the chiddush.
ReplyDeleteIt was not intneded as a chidush. It was intended to show that according to Marc Shapiro's own rebbi, what Shapiro said about R' Shach, who all agree was a giant in learning, bordered on apikorsus.
ReplyDeleteIf you read deeper into what RYBS says, then logically there is a problem - but not for the Rav, but for his opponents. As far as I know, he was never attacking other gedolim, and he even collected tzedakah for the other Soloveitchiks (which I presume they accepted).
ReplyDeleteHowever, if you accept what he says, than you are in deep trouble, since what you accuse Shapiro of, you are also (by implication) accusing R' Shach and RYBS's other detractors. Since they are also questioning his motives as being outside the scope of Torah.
So you can either : a) accept what the Rav says and then apply it to others as well
or b) not accept it in which case you can't use it against Shapiro either.
I personally am not convinced of this interpretation, since it goes against the Torah which says a Tzaddik can be bribed and Hacham be distorted (or vice versa).
In principle, I would accept R' Shach's claim that a Gadol can still be wrong. However, there is no way of proving which one is right and which is wrong.
Thanks for posting this! Definitely a book to order. The discussion below only makes the book more appealing.
ReplyDeleteI repeat what I've said before, Eddie: You have an absolute genius for missing the point. You are the king of the non-sequitur.
ReplyDeletekishke, 2 things:
ReplyDelete1) do not play games, if you do not wish to discuss anything with me, then don't comment at all on what i write
2) you obviously are unable to make logical inferences -
the interpretation offered that you attribute to RYBS implies that his own motivations were also based on Torah, thus it is a veiled critique of his opponents that alleged he is an heretic.
Eddie, I will comment on whatever I please.
ReplyDelete