מדברי מחאה של הגאון ר' א. י. סולובייצ'יק שליט"א
ראש ישיבת בריסק
נפל דבר בישראל
באמריקה התירו אשת איש לשוק רח"ל בלא גט -
זהו נבלה ממש
וחוץ מעצם הענין שאין רצוני ליכנס בזה שהוא באמת חמור מאוד
הרי אף במקום שצריך ליכנס להתיר עגונות ישבו רבותינו האחרונים שבעה נקיים עד שהוציא פסק
וגם בזה לא היה להם די והתנו ההיתר בהצטרפות עוד גדולים
וכאן עושים כאילו הוא דבר של מה בכך
ורשעים במחשך מעשיהם התירו ולא התירו
כאן בארץ ישראל כשרצו להתיר שני ממזרים הפכו את העולם
חובה גמורה על הרבנים וראשי הישיבות באמריקא לזעוק צעקה גדולה על זה
והרי זהו אחריות עצומה על כל המשך הדורות באמריקה כי זה פתח לכל מיני רבנציקעש שיוכלו לעשות ככל העולה על רוחם
הכל בא מהקולדז וכו'
ואסור ללמוד אצל ראש הישיבה כזה וכמבואר ברמב"ם על הרב שאינו הולך בדרך טובה
Rav Soloveitchik of Brisk is of the extreme right wing Eda ideology - and is bemoaning the fact that the American yeshivot are not being as vociferous in their condemnation as they were in the 70s againsr Rav Goren ztl.
ReplyDeleteThis is because RAV Kamenetsky is pretty much a major Haredi figure, and even now RAF is making a polite disagreement with RNG.
SO I am in agreement with Rav Sloveitchik that it pays to be hareidi if you get involved in a controversial psak.
Now that's news. R' AJ condemned something! And blamed it on college!
ReplyDeleteAVRUM-YESHUA כצ"ל
ReplyDeleteWhat is "rabintzikash"?
ReplyDeleteAvrum-Yeshua כצ"ל
ReplyDeleteand WHAT is 'Hakoldz'?
Was this in Chumash shiur? Conversation? Not to take away from this point but; Anyone that learned there knows he was never a big fan of Philly to begin with.
ReplyDeleteParty affiliation is just superficial perception. He rightfully condemned him even though he was a 'nosi' and didn't care about what party he went to. ......
ReplyDeletePerhaps had Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky been chastised in public for the "minor" mistake he made by writing a letter ( seen here http://1drv.ms/1OAjDZI ) requested of him by the crooked head of Young Israel he would have known better than to ask Rabbi Greenblatt to do something even worse.
ReplyDeleteWhen he says college he means shalom is a professor in upenn
ReplyDeleteMost on the blog don't know - RNG learned by AYS's uncle (Reb Michel Feinstein) when he lived in America. I wonder if AYS himself knows this. If you can get ahold of RNG sefer on chumash that was published 50+yrs ago i think there may be a haskama from him there. So RNG is cut from the same cloth Hareidi/Brisk.
ReplyDeleteWhat did he have against Philly before this whole fiasco?
ReplyDeleteI am not disagreeing with RAv Soloveitchik, I am actually agreeing with his point, that there is a lack of outrage. he wants there to be equality, regardless of being in one party orr other.
ReplyDeleteHa-college
ReplyDeleteRabbi Eidensohn,
ReplyDeleteThis letter smacks of the chicanery that you have been working so hard to expose:
1. You cut and pasted the wording from a digital copy of the letter (as opposed to a scan of an original document). Who really wrote this? Is the source authentic?
2. The is no signature from the Brisker Rosh HaYeshiva himself
I suggest that if you want to call out forgeries, then your own documents should pass the same sniff test.
For those who were wondering about the source
ReplyDeleteNot commenting on the substance, but for those looking to know the source of the elegantly lovely and nuanced way Rav Avraham Yehoshua expresses his disagreement with his colleague:
ReplyDeleteבראשית רבה
(תיאודור-אלבק) פרשת בראשית פרשה א
ד"א והוא גלי עמיקתא אילו מעשי הרשעים דכת' הוי המעמיקים מי"י
לסתיר עצה (שם /ישעיהו/ כט טו), ידע מה בחשוכה (דניאל שם שם /ב' כ"ב/), אילו
מעשי הרשעים דכת' והיה במחשך מעשיהם (ישעיה שם שם /ד' ו'/), ונהורא עימיה שרי
(דניאל שם שם /ב' כ"ב/), אילו מעש' שלצדיקים שנ' אור זרוע לצדיק וגו' (תהלים
צז יא),
And a precedent:
שו"ת
באר משה כבוד חכמים סימן כח
האיש הזה ימ"ש אל"ב
המתועב והמשוקץ, היה בתחילה שו"ב וש"ץ בעיר סייני ואח"כ נתקבל בעיר
לונא סמוך לעירי ג' פרסאות פלך הוראדנא, שמה נתברר לעין כל מעשיו הרעים כי אכל חמץ
בפסח ובכל ש"ק מימי החורף בביאתו מבהכנ"ס היה מתקן הלאמפ להגדיל המדורה,
ואף כי כל מעשי הרשעים המה במחשך, אך כי כן הוא הסוף מכל
הפושעים ומורדים בתוה"ק אשר היא מפרסמת את הרשעים, וכאמור אם יסתר איש
במסתרים ואני לא אראנו, ובהיותו בע"ר פלך קאוונא הלך לבית הזונות וכו', ובפירוש
אמר שאינו חפץ בבת ישראל וכו', ובפיו מלא בלשון רוסיא לחרף ולגדף אומה הישראלית
וכו'
Talmidim of a Rav Michel I wouldn't say are classic briskers. Even his own SIN R Tzvi isn't a classic brisker.
ReplyDeleteHe studied by Rabbi JB Soloveichik.
ReplyDelete1)* Midivrei* machoe, is only quoting of what he said in public, hence,
ReplyDeleteno scanning involved.
2) There is no signature on his quotes.
And if he said it in public, hamafursem eini tsorich raya, just ask the public!
3) No sniff test necessary.
*rabiner*
ReplyDeleteBoth Reb Michel and Rabbi JBS were together in Boston, so technically you are correct. However, he wound up by Reb Moshe specifically because of his kesher with Reb Michel.
ReplyDeleteThe incoherent rambling starts after the first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteBecause only classic briskers know who are classic briskers!
ReplyDeleteA yeshiveshe fellow such as yourself ought to know better than to trust unsigned quotes or pashkvils.
ReplyDeleteIf you want rumors and word of mouth, by all means, go to the coffee room and shmooze. I have admired this blog for holding a higher standard of authenticity.
Yup
ReplyDeleteI am far from being gullible, but this is a dovor poshut. With a little arithmetic you can add up 1+1. You had a poster the other day from Bnei haYeshivos for demonstarting in front of Binyanei haUma, do you now figure? Nehirei li shvilei deyerushalmi kishvilei deMeah Sheorim. In no time shall you have it verified from this authentic blog.
ReplyDelete"Mide devidei leisgaliyei lo meshkrei bei inshei". unless of course a "midechotsuf kulay hay, shma minah...". Never joined the coffee roomers/rumors, but you have here RAY's talmidim, and not ish mipish.Have a great Shabbos!
ReplyDeleteRabbanitzkish, like rabbanilach. Little, insignificant rabbis.
ReplyDeleteand for the major mistake in getting involved in the friedman case - when there was a bais din. why did rabbi kaminetskty authorize the demonstrations???
ReplyDeleteIt is all because of college. Of course, it is all so clear to me know. Why didn't we think of it before?
ReplyDeleteYou'd rather that YU views be expressed?
ReplyDeleteI'd rather that rational views be expressed.
ReplyDeleteGutsy move to tape this. Back in my days this was a major no no. I didn't learn by him but I hung out with that crowd.
ReplyDeleteYou're showing your ignorance , he's referring to Shaloam being a professor in upenn,
ReplyDeleteStill no relevance. By turning this into a discussion about college rather than about simply the distortion of halacha, he is turning this into a joke and doing more harm than good to his cause.
ReplyDeleteJust listened to this recording. Perhaps someone can inform Rabbi Solevetchik that Rav Sholom Kamenetzky did not learn in Chaim Berlin or go to college. He is talmid of Rav Berel and Brisk. Perhaps he should think twice before carrying on with his America, America bit.
ReplyDeleteThere was no protest, was there, by Brisk when Dayan Shermand and R Attiya "annulled" conversions, allowing women to remarry without a get.
ReplyDeleteAnd therefore?
ReplyDeleteDraw your own conclusion..
ReplyDeleteWow! I am simply overwhelmed by your arguments
ReplyDeleteI know your arguments, and you know mine.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Soloveitchik mentions a storm in the case of the freeing of mamzerim in the 70s. He calls for an equal storm for this case.
There was also a storm in the case of the conversion annulments 10 years ago, but the storm was from the national religious side, and not the Hareidi side.
Even in the case of dayan Sherman, he was arguing against the opinion of Rav Daichovsky, and rav amar. He didn't actually succeed in the rabbanut Beit din, so he set up his own private BD.
To be more precise - in the 1970s case, the safeik Ger could not name the BD that covnerted him, or the rabbi that married him, or even complete "Shema Yisrael..."
ReplyDeleteYet there was a storm that this conversion was annulled.
In the case of the Druckman BD, the converts could name
the BD, they had records of their ketubah, for example, and one lady wanted a Get lefi halacha. She was told she doesn't need one becasue her covnersion isn't valid!
So it is very clear, even by kal v'chomer, that the case R' Goren had to annul was much much stronger, and halachically valid than the case of D' Sherman or Attiya.
How many times are you repeating this nonsense?
ReplyDeleteWhat is nonsense about it?
ReplyDeleteYou are not convincing anyone about Goren
ReplyDeleteyou are not convincing anyone about Sherman.
ReplyDeletebut another thing you are not doing, is answering the question I ask you.
Look at Rav Eliyahu, do you think he was convinced by Sherman?
Even his father, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu ztl, said that R Druckman's absence form some of the BD sessions does not invalidate the giur, and this was also stated by Rav Shapira ztl.
Also, regarding rabbi Goren, there is and was a dividing line between the tzioni world and the hareidi world. Basically, 99% of Dati leumi support him, maybe 80% of American mo. I'm not qualified to convince anyone, but I am scientifically trained, and there is a clear and obvious perversion of logic in the pro -Sherman camp. I don't know rav Sherman himself. Or if he has addressed this question. He did say he was in the rabbanut under rav Shlomo Goren. If and why he disqualifies rav Goren is not known to me.
ReplyDeletetotally irrelevant1
ReplyDeleteWow so you are scientifically trained -so am I. Totally irrelevant
ReplyDeleteWow, so you follow rav shach ' view that rambam learnt his logic from Talmud alone?
ReplyDeleteI've met plenty of rabbis who suppress their academic studies.
are you saying that external logic has no place in halacha?
ReplyDeleteNo but it is not the issue in geiros
ReplyDeleteGeirus is no different from any other area of halacha, you cannot say that kal v'chomer does not apply in this or that area.
ReplyDeleteI presented a kal v'chomer - that in the Langer case, there was no recolelction of which BD converted the man, or which rabbi married him.
In the Atiiya case, the BD was known, the rav was known. In that section of the conversion (which does not exclude other sections), the case for doubt is much stronger in Goren's psak than in Atiiya/Sherman. This is not even external logic, it is internal kal v'chomer, which is Talmudic logic.
Nope!
ReplyDelete