update: added audo recording
Rabbi Brodsky - a rosh yeshiva in Toronto - expresses the view of many rabbis that one can not publicly criticize gedolim and he says Rav Sternbuch's words should be ripped up and thrown away. The layman should not talk about the issue at all since it is being handled properly by rabbis behind closed doors. In contrast Rav Sternbuch has clearly and strongly stated that it is the obligation of every Jew to protest against this corruption of halacha.
The fact that Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky has not rejected the heter for adultery and that Rav Nota Greenblatt has not publicly acknowledged that the heter for adultery he gave is invalid - deserves criticism - as the Rambam (Hilchos De'os 6:8) has clearly stated. It is not as if this is a complex halachic problem. They simple continue to refuse to acknowledge the obvious - that they have made a serious mistake in giving a heter for adultery - and need to publicly acknowledge it
audio recording January 16 2016
Rabbi Brodsky - a rosh yeshiva in Toronto - expresses the view of many rabbis that one can not publicly criticize gedolim and he says Rav Sternbuch's words should be ripped up and thrown away. The layman should not talk about the issue at all since it is being handled properly by rabbis behind closed doors. In contrast Rav Sternbuch has clearly and strongly stated that it is the obligation of every Jew to protest against this corruption of halacha.
The fact that Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky has not rejected the heter for adultery and that Rav Nota Greenblatt has not publicly acknowledged that the heter for adultery he gave is invalid - deserves criticism - as the Rambam (Hilchos De'os 6:8) has clearly stated. It is not as if this is a complex halachic problem. They simple continue to refuse to acknowledge the obvious - that they have made a serious mistake in giving a heter for adultery - and need to publicly acknowledge it
audio recording January 16 2016
I don't understand - if Rav Sternbuch is not allowed to criticize Reb Shmuel, then why is Rav Brodsky (whoever he is) allowed to criticize Rav Sternbuch???
ReplyDeleteIt seems quite clearly from Rabbi Brodksy's words that emotionally, he cannot accept what was done here. He is somehow under the assumption that RSK was very careful and diligent in this "heter."
ReplyDeleteI think that everyone would agree with his assessment that if Rav Elya Svei would be alive and healthy, this whole sage would not be. Just for different reasons. Rav ELya would not of allowed any of this to happen, at a much earlier stage.
Last I checked, there is no civil service test to become a Gadol. It is not their professional position - after all many gedolim either inherited or started their own yeshivas and made themselves rosh yeshiva. A gadol is someone who due to his actions, reputation and continued behavior as a leader -serves as a gadol. We are not criticizing a gadol, Rabbi Kaminetsky. What we are saying is that he is a fraud and not a gadol. He has fooled us all these years.
ReplyDeleteWhy is Rav Brodsky himself issuing this public pretest sharing another Rov (who coincidentally is one of the gedolei poskim hador) target than handled it behind closed doors, add he himself suggests?
ReplyDeleteI think the "professional courtesy" that high-level poskim extend to one another necessarily breaks down when the overall system is in chaos. Rabbi Brodsky himself is criticizing a Gadol---Rav Sternbuch! That could be more problematic than criticizing parties to this heter.
ReplyDeleteI'm not understanding why you are taking everyone's. Attention of the main problem who cares about r brodtsky Noone even heard of his speech why are you making this the discussion
ReplyDeleteYou probably realize the need to ask Rav Sternbuch to respond, explaining that he has mekoros while Rav Brodsky is without.
ReplyDeleteAND Rav Sternbuch should be maskim or get Rav Brodsky to be maskim for a debate, preferably public
and perhaps he (and preferably Rav Miller) should write letters against Rav Brodsky, if necessary. ..
Sounds like he has an axe to grind
ReplyDeleterav brodsky seems to be very bothered about the lack of kavod hatorah or is he ? It's curious how he chooses who deserves kavod hatorah does not seem bothered to tear down another Godol batorah in order to stand up for RSK . Has not RMS not at least a shining resume RS K?, arguably a far greater scholar ? And here he goes to young students and tell them to tear up this letter what gall!. Why can't he just say let's all stay out of it ?
ReplyDeleteAs a yeshiva man He shows obvious disdain for anything which is not real pshat, But he doesn't seem to be bothered by in taking another chazal and distorting it for his purposes I'm harishonim k'malachim, Obviously applies to those of previous generations not to people of the same generation and frankly of the same age and just to say that one person is greater than the rest by two generations!!! and therefore this chazal applies, is gilluy ponim batorah shelo kihalocho , especially for someone who doesn't seem to tolerate anything but pshot.
he seems to be putting RS K two generations ago , due to his unbelievable personality , just a few questions to ponder, do you or anyone saying so believe that RS K can compile a mishna berurah , or a reb chaim halevi al harambam, or a ohr someich ? what hyper bole,what about ain odom manchil sheker...... talk about importing diseases from other countries .
Would the chofetz chaim et al weave duck deny and lie, claiming he has nothing to do with something he obviously does ? is gadlus only askanus or primarily personal character?
He also seems to know something we all don't know he's the first flesh and blood person to claim that RSK is trying to clean up the mess that's news! we might be able to dream of a retraction after all.
The silver lining behind the dark cloud.he is the first person , someone who is firmly in RSKs party, who admits that RSK is behind the ruling. wow!!
ReplyDeleteWho said he is? This is a speech he gave in his yeshiva to his talmidim.
ReplyDeleteHe didn't say that R' Shternbuch is not allowed to criticize R' Shmuel. He was taking issue with the directive given by Rabbi Shternbuch that everybody should criticize R' Shmuel. Understand?
ReplyDeleteSomebody needs to explain to Rabbi Brodsky that the Torah States in a place where there is chilul Hashem, we are not concerned about honoring a rabbi. Therefore we take the gloves off in situations like this especially since many ramifications for Israel can come from a story like this
ReplyDeleteTo be fair to him I think this was an address to his talmidim in the yeshiva which is technically under his jurisdiction. We don't know if he sanctioned for this to be put out as an open protest to RMS. Maybe only for his talmidim.
ReplyDeleteAlthough his criticism is on RMS personally for quoting the Kotzker. RMS obviously meant it as a melitza. And I don't think it's a proper lesson to his talmidim to openly criticize RMS to his talmidim, when he himself is not considered on the same level as Maran Baal Hateshuvos Vhanhagos.
The note on the bottom regarding the Brisker Rav is so stupid it doesn't deserve a comment.
R Brodsky is the son in law of R Nochum Partzovitz.
BTW, R Brodsky is a mechuton of RSK.
ReplyDeleteDid he ever hear of Rabbi Goren? Last I heard, Rsk will not know when he is 120 what RG knew when he was 17
On a further thought, would it perhaps be appropriate that we make a macha'ah for Rav Sternbuch's kovod HaTorah (not too sarcastic)?
ReplyDeleteI have thought about your latter comment many times. I hope the Philly chevra realize that. ..
ReplyDeleteSo do you and I.
ReplyDeleteI don't think he was saying that no great rabbis can criticize each other. What he was saying is that it is irresponsible to invite, encourage, and demand the broader public to protest.
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing for him to handle behind closed doors. R' Shternbuch issued a public proclamation convincing people to protest. Rabbi Brodsky is publicly telling his constituents that they should not follow the proclamation.
ReplyDeleteWho is Rabbi Brodsky? Is he a Philly talmid? Does anyone know his background?
ReplyDeleteIt is indeed a horrible thing to criticize a major rosh yeshiva. Everyone understands that. In fact, it was difficult to believe the story at first. But once the evidence came out, there was no longer any way to be melamed zchus.
If it were not for the DT blog, this entire story may very well have been swept under the rug. It's not a bad thing that baalei batim are up in arms about this pirtzah. It's certainly better for things to be out in the open - even if it results in bizyonos for a godol - rather than for a psak like this to stand and for it to set a precedent for the feminists.
Not comfortable to compare, but I recall Reb Elya on one Purim, he mentioned that people are concerned about darkei sholom (when 'ChOSHUvA' Moetzes members went to be Menachem avel the Lubavitcher Rebbe, )but are not concerned about Avodah zoroh. ....here I may say that people are concerned for kovod HaTorah, but are not concerned about gilui arayos. .....or more simply, concerned for kovod HaTorah, but not the Torah itself. ...what are we then being mechabed?.....
ReplyDeleteWhere was rav brodsky when RSK and his buddies were publicly embarrassing a private individual who just wanted his rights of visitation a (properly constituted) bet din was awarding him?
ReplyDeleteDifferent $tandards for private individuals, than for fellow agudi$t$.
What about the abuse of a bet din? Doesn't that take precedence over a fellow rav?
ReplyDeleteSorry, Rabbi Brodsky. RSK lost any rights to deference as an adom gadol when he signed the outrageously false siruv against AF, together with the notorious Aryeh Ralbag. You are concerned about "shfichus dam" of RSK. Why werent you protesting against the shfichus dam of AF? Does RSK have redder blood?
ReplyDeletemaybe R' Nota Greenblatt heard this shiur and relied on a Adam ga'do without checking.
ReplyDeleteFirstly. Rabbi brdsky does not mention ravr shternbuch by name
ReplyDelete2nd. The American bnei Torah don't have (right or wrong) the same chashivus for rav shtermbuch as the ey ones do. I once heard one of the gedolie ry in america z.t.l
Refer to him as a geroiseh bokey .
This does not appear to be a public statement. He is giving a shmuess to his talmidim. His message is intended for them only (the small פינה for which he has reponsibility, as he states in his opening line).
ReplyDeleteWhat we are saying is that he is a fraud and not a gadol
ReplyDeleteI completely reject this. I have no idea who you imagine you are including in your "we," but I for one am not saying anything of the sort.
Bemakom sheyesh chilul haShem ein cholkin kovod lerav, you don't need heter horo'oh to be moiche, therefore, everyone should be moiche. When Shmuel hanavi admonished king Saul for saving Agog and the Bakar vatzon, he did this all in public. Benisuch hamayim when doing it like the Tsedoikim, the whole crowd publicly joined in to pelt him with their Etrogim, "verogmuhu KOL HA'AM beEtrogehem!" At least they should have the couple part 'ad ki yifrosh me yeossu lohem'. Divrei haRav vedivrei haTalmid divrei mi shomin? In any case, this is masse soton to divert from the main issue at hand. Likely RSK asked him as if to counter RY R'S Miller the Posek in Toronto
ReplyDeleteApparently there's a bun in the oven, complicating things further, now the question is whether it's in the early stages and to take care of it
ReplyDeleteRSK is working on it …. The last character I ever heard who deals on both sides of the aisle ,causes the sin and then punishes, is the Satan yoired umachti oleh umekatreg yored venotel neshama,hu hasatan hu hayetzer horo hu malach hamaves. I guess he's playing devils advocate triple entendere intended
ReplyDeleteWhen Zimri was doing the maaseh aveira, why didn't anyone besides for Pinchas make a machoah like he did?
ReplyDeleteIt says in Chazal the Moshe Rabbeinu forgot the halacha, but what about the rest of the people?
The answer is, that Zimri was a Nosi - an Odom Gadol, and everone must have said "he is a Gadol, he must have a good cheshbon" even though he was clearly going against the torah.
The same thing here - someone is known as a Gadol, so even when he clearly goes against the torah , everyone is afraid to go be mocheh!
It says in the gemara in chagiga that when acher who was a Gadol who went off the derech went to a zonah, she said "this cant be the great Gadol who he looks like - it must be acher - a different person who looks like him".
Why didn't she simply say "he is a Gadol so what he is doing must be right"?
She realized that it is impossible to be mattir such a thing!
Seems like R' Brodsky is trying to bring the politics of Eretz yisroel to America - by claiming that any gadol who vehmently disagrees with another Gadol is a "Baal Machlokes shelo leshem shomayim" and from the baryonim.
What about Bizui of R'M Shternbuch? He doesent care about that?
Anyone noticed that he contradicts himself by maching aveck chassidishe pshat and on the bottom says that the kotzker was an ish kadosh and not needing of r' chaim brisker's haskoma?
Another contradiction - that it seems that he realizes that a mistake has been made in the psak - so why doesent he support an immediate retraction of the heter?!
Alma deshikra! No stiyom piyot.
ReplyDeleteYou must mean, I'm not understanding why you are taking everyone's attention off the main problem. Who cares about R Brodtsky? No one even heard of his speech. Why are you making this the discussion?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, this is a good sample of what's going on in the minds of the people who advocate silence. Study it and figure out if you can refute some of its assumptions and thereby loosen some silent tongues.
i disagree with RB on a few central points as has been pointed out by other commentors. however, the main "sin" according to him is bringing it out into the open. once it's out he can go open also.
ReplyDeleteThe main question is why are his comments public if he is only addressing what he refers to as "ציבור שלנו"? It's not bad policy that his boys should stop talking about it, but does he ask that of everyone? Many people agree with all his ideas about kavod for gedolim but think that a red line has been crossed and the rules of kavod are changed.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Brodsky is a relative of Rav Kaminetsky
ReplyDeleteit was to his Yeshiva..
ReplyDeleteThere will be a live audio-hookup of the "Hespeidim" tonight (Thursday) following the petira of Rosh Yeshivas Mir, Moron Hagaon Rav Refoel Shmulewitz zt"l, which will iy"h take place at the Yeshiva Gedolah of Toronto.
ReplyDeleteTo connect to this live broadcast,
Dial-In number: 605-562-3107
Participant access code: 941091#
The broadcast will begin at 9:00pm
Did he say that Rav Shternbauchs letter should be ripped up? Is that a neutral action, or a clear action of disrespect that he is demanding from his students? Please stay on topic and honest. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteIs it responsible for R. Brodsky to What he was saying is that it is irresponsible to invite, encourage, and demand the broader public to rip up a letter from one of the great poskei hador who is up at 6:30 AM helping klall Yisroel? Hypocrisy?
ReplyDeleteIs his yeshiva behind closed doors? Are his students usually present in all his behind-closed-doors meetings? Please stay on topic and remain honest. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI happen to know Rabbi Brodsky, his wife is a Shmulevitz and he's a bigger talmid chochom than anyone posting on this blog, including the owner. His comment about not importing Israeli diseases to America is on the spot.
ReplyDeleteBesides, some commentators here seem more concerned about protecting husbands than the issur of eishes ish.
Having said that, if she is pregnant, then it's a true tragedy.
Rabbi Belsky is right on. Keep the disease of "bitul talmidei chachamim" out of North America. It is refreshing to read the words of a real adom gadol as opposed to listening to recordings of anti-America blather by the head of a certain institution.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Brodsky is right on. Keep the disease of "bitul talmidei chachamim" out of North America. It is refreshing to read the words of a real adom gadol as opposed to listening to recordings of anti-America blather by the head of a certain institution.
ReplyDeleteYes. Exactly! Rip up the letters of those that put "rav" in quotation marks and who blamed all the tragedies taking place in Eretz Yisrael on this psak. It is time to have serious disagreements on issues without charterer assassination and outrageous nonsensical accusations
ReplyDelete(How do you lump Rabbi Feldman and the Baltimore BD with the rest of the above group? Both the BBD and Rabbi Feldman have essentially publicly stated the same sentiment as Rabbi Brodsky)
You have to take it in context. He was not simply belittling the letter (and by extension its author). He clearly states that our responsibility is to figure out how to stop talking about the issue. He then tells us how to do so - destroy the letter. If someone is having trouble dieting and you tell him to destroy the food that is enticing him, that is not a personal attack on the food.
ReplyDeleteHis wife is a Partzovitz but her mother was a Shmulevitz.
ReplyDeleteSorry but you missed the boat with Rabbi Brodsky's letter - the rabbonim disagreeing isn't the issue. Inciting others to be moche and further being mezalzel in the kavod of RSK is what he's upset about.
ReplyDeleteReally, just a relative of RSK? Lets be fully honest about who and where he comes from. His father was an alter Mirrer that lived in America. Rabbi Brodtsky went to learn in EY and became the eldest son in law of R' Nochum Partzovitz, who was RY in the Mir Yerushalyim after his father in law R' Chaim Shmulevitz passed away. He is a brother in law to R Asher Arielli.
ReplyDeletecute but that is not what he says
ReplyDeleteIs that really so? What stupidity on her advisers' part not to have her use birth control until the dust settles.
ReplyDeleteIt's well within his responsibility as Rosh Yeshiva to speak to his students about a public proclamation to protest. There is not the least hypocrisy in that.
ReplyDeleteAmen
ReplyDeleteKeep most of the hateful rhetoric, anger, rage and "We know better than thou" of ISRAEL in Israel. We are doing fine in America with normative Torah Yiddishkeit without protests, rallies, holocaust uniforms, phamplets against frum soldiers & bleach thrown on tzinius girls.
We should have the public debate on the David Lichtenstein radio show. Rav Sternbuch has been a featured guest on the David Lichtenstein Show in the past. He would surely agree to be on the program again.
ReplyDeleteDavid can get Rav Brodsky to participate as well.
So I hear , Sam kam is a sham
ReplyDeleteAll those gedolim in Israel, everywhere, signed on a letter that clearly stated disgust for RSK and his heter... the letter was presented to them by rabbonim from the USA, and they signed knowing that it would be shown all over the world. I.e., this, by definition, creates incitement and zilzul against RSK and gang... so all the zilzul and bittul certainly has the permission, nay, the blessings and encouragement of gedolei hador, and their signatures deliver the identical message as RMS.
ReplyDeleteFor g-d's sake, they knew that signing on a very public statement to the effect that someone is being matir eishes ish and producing mamzerim will certainly create an uproar and zilzul against the promulgaters'...' you may be naive, maybe without the primal jewish feelingse of rage against such a once in many milleniums crime, but the gedolim took it VERY seriously and knew (most of) am Yisroel would as well
Not really sure what your problem is, but you might want to search out a higher purpose in your life than nitpicking every comment I make.
ReplyDeleteYes, a mussar talk given in his yeshiva to his students is not called a public protest.
Yes, he said it should be ripped up, because he vehemently disagrees with its directive that all people should get involved. What is your point?
ReplyDeleteand just for poetic sake... you actually did not "miss the boat", as you claim I did, rather, it seems you never realized there was a boat in the first place. Do you really think that all these leaders didn't know incitement and massive worldwide zilzul would be the direct result of their signatures, there protests, their battle cry????... that's boat, buddy, and you didn't even see it coming, r"l.
ReplyDeleteA real odom Goddol doesn't go on a rant about a letter which he claims he's not sure is a forgery he does his homework first. if it's a forgery , then he should be yelling about the respect you ought to give RMS and not forge letters in his name . But obviously so he realizes it's true so he's just throwing out a little white lie, very in vogue for the neo gedolim nowadays just giving the letter another little jibe .seems to be importing some Middle Eastern corruption,heh
ReplyDeleteThe antidote for this terrible disease of bizayon hatorah is to have our elders show us the way when they respect themselves and don't lower themselves to
ReplyDeleteCheat lie deny etc .it will do wonders for kavod hatorah , frankly I've never looked up to these people because they all have prior history of corruption the sad part is that the orthodox Jewish media been raising these people up as poster boys of scholarship and virtue and now we are paying the price!
Speak to any serious scholar and he can point out to you scholars who are greater in knowledge and character then any of these public figures. It's about time we got real!
It just shows how desperate the Kamenetsky clan is to protect the Kamenetskys. They have their people go to a small Yeshiva in far away Toronto to record a mechutan of Rabbi Kamenetsky.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Brodsky is no happy camper about that this recording went public. But the Kamenetskys would do anything.
It is also good to know that besides Rabbi Brodsky being a mechutan of Rabbi Kamenetsky, he is also a mechutan with Rabbi Yerucham Olshin, a BMG Rosh Yeshiva. As BMG has been quiet on this issue, Rabbi Brodsky is ultimately currying favor with the BMG establishment.
How nice it would be if we could all rely this would be dealt with by Rabbonim behind closed doors. But the sad reality is that if the regular simple laymen would be silent, there would be no major action taken by anyone. Maybe a few quiet letters which behind closed doors would accomplish nothing and the next thing would be that there would soon ch'v be another such a story and then another and another. And we laymen would all be respectfully silent as we stand by while The Torah is ch'v ripped to shreds. It's a good thing that plain people don't have such exemplary midos to be silent while atrocities happen.
ReplyDelete"העסק שלנו צריך להיות - שנהיה עסוקים האיך למנוע מלדבר אודות הענין. ליקח מכתב כמכתב הנ"ל, ולקרוע אותו לקרעים ולהשליחו לאשפה!"
ReplyDeleteWhat is your point?
ReplyDeleteThat he is directing people to disrespect Rav Sternbauch - all in the name of respect for talmidei chachomim. Utter hypocrisy.
I asked you to reply with honesty.
Not really sure what your problem is
ReplyDeleteReally? The problem is you defending his public protest - all in the name of not protesting publicly. Yes, the hypocrisy.
Yes, a mussar talk given in his yeshiva to his students is not called a public protest.
Really? What exactly does constitute a public protest? Was there an eidah (10 people) present? What are you basing your definition of public on?
you might want to search out a higher purpose in your life than nitpicking every comment I make.
Thank you for your advice, as well as your personal attack. So, it is permissible for you to defend attacking Rav Sternbauch - but responding to you is somehow attacking you?! Sweet logic.
What stupidity on her advisers' part not to have her use birth control until the dust settles.
ReplyDeleteWhy stupidity? If they felt that they can ram the new marriage through this way as a fait accompli - then that is precisely what they would advise. The answer to all questions would be "Oy, don't hurt this poor girl any more!"
Does the arrogance sound more like it?
Really, just a relative of RSK? Lets be fully honest about who and where he comes from.
ReplyDeleteRelevance? Where did Zimri come from? Where did all those who were angry at Pinchos come from? Right and wrong is what matters - not familial ancestry.
The American bnei Torah don't have (right or wrong) the same chashivus for rav shtermbuch as the ey ones do.
ReplyDeleteIncorrect.
There is not the least hypocrisy in that.
ReplyDeleteIf would just say - please focus on your learning and don't involve yourself, then that would be one thing. However, it is the way he said it and what he said.
1) He added that it belongs behind closed doors - yet he claims that RSK was certainly very careful about Aishes Ish.
2) He chose to defend RSK in public. A behind-closed-doors policy should go both ways.
3) He chose to throw out the "behind-closed-doors" policy in regards to Rav Sternbauch. He clearly criticized Rav Sternbauch. To me, that does equal hypocrisy.
You mean he heard it retroactively?
ReplyDeleteI'm for it.
ReplyDeleteSounds like a p'sik rasha
ReplyDeleteYou have legitimate authority to discount them? Just because of personal preference? Are you aware of the Medrash that specifically such calamities come to the world due to z'nus?
ReplyDeleteThey actually admitted to making a mistake and more importantly thye asked Mechila from a regular fellow.
ReplyDeleteDo we get the same from many other botei dinim? Why should we trust them if they cannot say the truth?
To all those refined people, the rabbis are dealing with it?!? here's some news the rabbis have no power whatsoever once upon a day people had respect today it's how many people do you have behind you without a public outcry nothing would've happened get real., There really was no choice it was either adultery or public outcry what's your pick?
ReplyDeleteD'lo nicha leih
ReplyDelete1) One has nothing to do with the other. He feels that discussing the case, and how to deal with the current situation, belongs behind closed doors. Saying that R' Shmuel is a great man does not.
ReplyDelete2) This is essentially a restatement of your first point. The answer is that a policy only goes both ways when the two sides are the same. Here they are not. One side is discussing how to handle a marriage-related case while the other side is discussing how to handle attacks on an elderly Rosh Yeshiva. Why would you think that the response should be the same to two different discussions?
3) He did not criticize R' Shternbuch. (In fact he referred to him as an אדם חשוב.) He criticized the position taken in a letter as being a bad position to implement. Since that position was publicly proclaimed for the public to see/hear, and was specifically intended for the public, it has to be publicly repudiated. The public needs to be told that they should not follow the guidelines of the letter.
R' Shternbuch made a public proclamation. R' Brodsky has the right and even the responsibility to speak to his talmidim about that. The talmidim (or talmid) should not have publicized his words without his agreement.
ReplyDeleteIt's rather simple logic, Torah is toras need, if it's false fraudulent deceitful it's not Torah ,no need to give any respect, no matter how much propaganda to the contrary
ReplyDeleteI can just imagine you biting your lip , ina total fury you simply can't tolerate this terrible travesty committed by RSK and Co,, and with tremendous self-restraint you finally get control of yourself and you declare ,no I will have kavod hatorah I will keep quiet!!
ReplyDeleteAre you aware that Arabs have been attacking Jews for the past 100 years? (You don't need authority, just basic common sense)
ReplyDeleteRabbi Brodsky is no happy camper about that this recording went public.
ReplyDeleteDo you claim and confirm that he intended it only for his students? And how do you know?
R' Brodsky has the right and even the responsibility to speak to his talmidim about that.
ReplyDeleteNo argument on that part. However, it is what he chose to say. Yes, what he said is hypocritical.
1) One has nothing to do with the other. He feels that discussing the case, and how to deal with the current situation, belongs behind closed doors. Saying that R' Shmuel is a great man does not. does not.
ReplyDeleteHe more than said "R' Shmuel is a great man". He took a position that RSK was certainly very careful about eishes ish - something that the vast majority of Gedolei Torah clearly feel otherwise (that RSK made a huge mistake.... especially in light of the fact that he is aino yodea b'tiv...)
One side is discussing how to handle a marriage-related case while the other side is discussing how to handle attacks on an elderly Rosh Yeshiva.
The attacks are due to his shameful behavior in this case. R. Brodsky is clearly defending his behavior.
He did not criticize R' Shternbuch.
He clearly did.
He more than said "R' Shmuel is a great man". He took a position that RSK was certainly very careful about eishes ish
ReplyDeleteAnd he feels that that does not need to be said behind closed doors. You can disagree with him, but the fact that he thinks that certain things belong behind closed doors while others do not is not inherently hypocritical. Obviously, there are many types of discussions in this world. Some of them belong behind closed doors; others do not.
The attacks are due to his shameful behavior in this case. R. Brodsky is clearly defending his behavior.
That is not relevant to the charge of hypocrisy.
He clearly did.
Please read the rest of the paragraph you are quoting from.
"one can not publicly criticize gedolim" -- why is that exactly? Maybe because of this:
ReplyDeleteAnd he feels that that does not need to be said behind closed doors. You can disagree with him, but the fact that he thinks that certain things belong behind closed doors while others do not is not inherently hypocritical.
ReplyDeleteIt depends. If the charge is that he is not properly knowledgeable in Gitten and Kiddushin, which can bring about worse catastrophes than the Dor Hambul, then you have to make up your mind. Either the charges and the defense shall be behind closed doors, or the defenses, as well as the charges, shall be out in the open. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Quite the hypocritical double standard. Don't say that the defenses can be made public, but the charges must remain private.
(This whole case is full of the double standard. "private!" when it comes to the Ks. "All is fair" when it comes to the Ks seeking to destroy their opponents.)
That is not relevant to the charge of hypocrisy.
It most certainly is.
Rabbi Eidensohn, you might know the answer to what everyone is asking: did RB intend for this to go public or not? Why not find out from whoever sent it to you? Did he, the sender, scalp it from a private recording or from a kol koreh posted all over town?
ReplyDeleteI have read every proclamation thus far (except the ones that were 10 pages long or so) and not one of them accused R' Shmuel of being not properly knowledgeable in gittin or and kiddushin. And R' Shternbuch himself issued a whole bunch of proclamations, none of which contained this accusation
ReplyDeleteThe charges were that this specific hetter was invalid. R' Brodsky believes that those charges should be discussed in private, rather than encouraging the entire public to denounce R' Kamenetsky. He might be right and he might be wrong but it ain't hypocritical.
A person close to Rabbi Brodsky has made that claim. I assume it is reliable.
ReplyDeletePeople with common sense realize when you say something in public it's gonna be publicized in Halacha it's called kol milsa dimisamri bvei trei, anything which was said before two people you could expect to be public knowledge it's rather juvenile to give a speech and expect it not to get out, and no telling people not to repeat it does not help
ReplyDeletePrivate recording? Heh!
ReplyDeleteRabbi Brodsky's Motsei Shabbos speech is also broadcast live via telephone hookup to his students.
We are not so stupid.
R' Chaim Mendel choose this time and venue so it should get out.
Although he gives a cute disclaimer in the beginning of his speech, that his words are only directed and intended for his Yeshiva, it is obvious that he was trying to use the opportunity to make his opinion known outside of his Yeshiva.
You probably missed all the "yosser m'dor hamabul" that Rav Shternbauch wrote. He mentions the gemara Kiddushin 13A. Look it up!
ReplyDeleteI didn't miss it. That's not what you said, and I quote:
ReplyDeleteIf the charge is that he is not properly knowledgeable in Gitten and Kiddushin, which can bring about worse catastrophes than the Dor Hambul, then you have to make up your mind.
It's not reliable at all.
ReplyDeleteRav Shlomo Miller is in full agreement with R' Chaim Mendel's "rant". In fact he is very happy about it.
ReplyDeleteCall Horav Miller and ask him, and he will tell you exactly that.
I've read and reread your incoherent ramblings. The bottom line is that Rav Shlomo Miller fully agrees with every word that came out of R' Chaim Mendel's mouth.
ReplyDeleteCute!
ReplyDeleteI didn't miss it. That's not what you said, and I quote:
ReplyDeleteYou did not look up the Gemara. Do it. Look it up!
Again, you fail to address my point. I will restate it, in case it was unclear:
ReplyDeleteYou said that the charge against R' Shmuel is that he is אינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין. I replied that none of the proclamations, including the multiple proclamations from R' Shternbuch, made such a charge. You apparently extrapolated this charge from the fact that R' Shternbuch quotes the Gemara in Kiddushin as saying המורה בגיטין שלא כהלכה גרע מדור המבול. For some reason you changed "מורה שלא כהלכה" to "אינו יודע" even though they are not the same thing. Presumably, you made this conflation because the Gemara actually says "אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול". Your mistake lies in assuming that if R' Shternbuch referenced the Gemara, he must have meant the exact thing the Gemara was talking about. In reality, though, the same reasoning which applies to אינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין applies even more so to המורה בגיטין שלא כהלכה (since the former is only a ספק תקלה while the latter is a ודאי תקלה).
As an aside, with little practical impact, the Gemara does not say that the person (either אינו יודע or מורה שלא כהלכה) is worse than the dor hamabul (as R' Shternbuch says). It says that it is worse for the world than the dor hamabul.
Are you suggesting that RSK did this purposely in rebellion against Hashem? If that's your opinion, fine.
ReplyDeleteI understand that he is not properly knowledgeable about the halachos; he allowed himself to become emotionally involved, and then allowed himself to make a huge error.
Are you suggesting that RSK did this purposely in rebellion against Hashem? If that's your opinion, fine.
ReplyDeleteThat is not my opinion. I wasn't with him when he was going through this case, so I don't know what he was thinking. I.e. I don't have an opinion as to how he came to his position. Although from what I know about him in general, and from meeting him, he doesn't strike me as the type of person to purposely rebel against Hashem.
I understand that he is not properly knowledgeable about the halachos; he allowed himself to become emotionally involved, and then allowed himself to make a huge error.
Herein lies the problem. You took your own understanding and inserted it into the words of others who had never said it. Even if someone is knowledgeable it is still eminently possible to "become emotionally involved" and then "make a huge error".
So to summarize, and get back to how this conversation started, Rabby Brodsky was saying that R' Shmuel is a great man, and the question of whether or not he made a mistake in this particular case is not something that should for the public to yell about. Nothing about anyone being unknowledgeable, and nothing hypocritical.
Oh, so that's your bottom line... RSM....?
ReplyDeleteIt's been said that one's 'bottom line' is the measure of the man...
You, and your very desperate company of friends, find yourselves in a burning building, fires raging, and instead of facing reality and exiting promptly to save your lives, you continue to search for and grab unto straws of hay hoping for some kind of delusional 'bottom line' protection....
for your own sake, humbly face reality, r"l, and run from the flames, pronto