I was recently having a conversation with one of my precocious five year old grandchildren about what he had learned in Cheder. He proudly told me that he learned not to speak lashon harah. "Even if a thief was in the house I won't tell the police."
While the Dark Ages of cover-ups in the Chareidi world is behind us, it is clear that the control and censoring of thought and information is still alive and well. In fact it is still a central pillar of our society and learning what not to think about and what not to know about - starts at an early age.
I am now rereading Dr. Marc Shapiro's book, "Changing the Immutable", and was reminded of Rav Schwab's comment regarding censoring Jewish history to exclude unpleasant information about gedolim and only leave that which is inspirational.
Rabbi Shimon Schwab(Selected Writings (Lakewood, 1988) page 233-234)
There is a vast difference between history and storytelling. History must be truthful, otherwise it does not deserve its name. A book of history must report the bad with the good, the ugly with the beautiful, the difficulties and the victories, the guilt and the virtue. Since it is supposed to be truthful, it cannot spare the righteous if he fails, and it cannot skip the virtues of the villain. For such is truth, all is told the way it happened. Only a נביא mandated by his Divine calling has the ability to report history as it really happened, unbiased and without praise.
Suppose one of us today would want to write a history of Orthodox Jewish life in pre-holocaust Germany. There is much to report but not everything is complimentary. Not all of the important people were flawless as one would like to believe and not all the mores and lifestyles of this bygone generation were beyond criticism. A historian has not right to take sides. He must report the stark truth and nothing but the truth. Now, if an historian would report truthfully what he witnessed, it would make a lot of people rightfully angry. He would violate the prohibition against spreading Loshon Horah which does not only apply to the living, but also to those who sleep in the dust and cannot defend themselves any more.
What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic picture? Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell ourselves and our children the good memories of the good people, their unshakable faith, their staunch defense of tradition, their life of truth, their impeccable honesty, their boundless charity and their great reverence for Torah and Torah sages. What is gained by pointing out their inadequacies and their contradictions? We want to be inspired by their example and learn from their experience.
When Noach became intoxicated, his two sons Shem and Japhet, took a blanket and walked into his tent backwards to cover the nakedness of their father. Their desire was to always remember their father as the Tzaddik Tomim in spite of his momentary weakness. Rather than write the history of our forebears, every generation has to put a veil over the human failings of its elders and glorify all the rest which is great and beautiful. That means we have to do without a real history book. We can do without. We do not need realism, we need inspiration from our forefathers in order to pass it on to posterity."
Of course we have more recent examples of removing unpleasant information from discussion. That of course is that deafening silence about the Kaminetsky-Greenblatt heter which is currently causing a couple to be transgressing the horrific sin of adultery.
We also need not to forget the immortal words of Rav Aaron Feldman, that if he had known that his emails about the perverted heter would become public - he would not have written anything about it. After all he claimed, the degradation of a gadol (resulting from that public discussion) is significantly worse than the crime of adultery which the heter produced.
“Kaminetsky-Greenblatt Heter: Sabbah I learned not to speak lashon harah. Even if a goniv was in my house I won't tell the police.”
ReplyDeleteI quote:
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: When a person sins and commits a trespass against the Lord by dealing deceitfully with his fellow in the matter of a deposit or a pledge, or through robbery, or by defrauding his fellow, or by finding something lost and lying about it; if he swears falsely regarding any one of the various things that one may do and sin thereby—when one has thus sinned and, realizing his guilt, would restore that which he got through robbery or fraud, or the deposit that was entrusted to him, or the lost thing that he found, or anything else about which he swore falsely, he shall repay the principal amount and add a fifth part to it. He shall pay it to its owner when he realizes his guilt.” (Leviticus 5:20-24)
“If a person incurs guilt— When he has heard a public imprecation and—although able to testify as one who has either seen or learned of the matter—he does not give information, so that he is subject to punishment; (Leviticus 5:1).
ויקרא פרק ה פסוק א
וְנֶפֶשׁ כִּי תֶחֱטָא וְשָׁמְעָה קוֹל אָלָה וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה אוֹ יָדָע אִם לוֹא יַגִּיד וְנָשָׂא עֲוֹנוֹ:
Here’s proof, that if you witnessed a goniv in your house, you must speak up וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה אוֹ יָדָע אִם לוֹא יַגִּיד וְנָשָׂא עֲוֹנוֹ
According to R' S we should rewrite the Torah. This type of thinking is a distortion of Torah. Mistakes are an essential part of learning - לא עומדים על דברי תורה עד שנכשלים בהם ץ
ReplyDeleteTorah is about falling and doing teshuvah , failure is not in the falling but not getting up. When we don't welcome mistakes and see mistakes as our friends and opportunities for growth, we cover up , we deny and certainly don't do teshuvah, make amends and correct mistakes.
I totally disagree with Rabbi Schwab. If I am to be made or even allowed to believe that the great men were flawless, then it means that I am hopeless and can not learn from them or be inspired, because they were perfect like angels and I am only a mortal man. If we are not the same breed then similar expectations cannot be expected of us.
ReplyDeleteso are you disagreeing with rav shwab zt"l?
ReplyDeleteRav Hutner's perspective
ReplyDeleteYes it is interesting that he disagrees with Rav Hirsch
ReplyDeleteRe: "I am now rereading Dr. Marc Shapiro's book, "Changing the Immutable"," - Excuse me for getting sidetracked but this "admission" is very interesting. Not only did you devote time to read the book once, but you are even making a chazarah! Furthermore, it is now the Aseres Yemei Teshuva - aren't there more important things to be doing than rereading "Changing the Immutable"?
ReplyDeleteI would suggest you read it to understand.
ReplyDeleteDoes truth really matter or is the main thing for people to be inspired? Or alternatively do we define truth as that which inspires us?
My father used tell me, when I was a kid, "The idols have clay feet."
ReplyDeleteHe knew that children have a tendency to consider their parents perfect and he didn't try to hide his imperfections. As he used to also say, "I'm an open book."
My father was concerned that if as a kid I idealized him, that I might one day observe something about him, or learn something about him, that would shatter that belief and lead to my being crushed and devastated.
In retrospect, my father's complete openness only made me idolize him more.
I actually have seen the book, however I became disenchanted with it after reading just the first page. The preface begins with an example of so-called censorship, when a certain Yiddish newspaper removed Mrs. Hillary Clinton when republishing the famous picture of senior government officials being updated on the bin Laden assassination. The author writes that this highlighted for him the need for a detailed investigation into the rewriting of history by some in the Jewish World.
ReplyDeleteFor me, this highlighted the fact that the author was either being extremely disingenuous or wasn't thinking clearly. The Yiddish newspaper wasn't trying to rewrite history, and hide the fact that Mrs. Clinton was there, in order to make people think she wasn't there. That is ludicrous. They obviously didn't want to have a picture of a woman for tzniyus reasons.
After seeing the book's very first example of "censorship" I didn't think it very likely that the rest of the book would reveal much truth.
That being said, I believe that the Shaarei Teshuva and other sifrei kodesh deliver both truth and inspiration - and in a much larger dose than that book.
G'mar Chasima Tova
@Adam n all
ReplyDeleteWe are not talking about shochnei ofor, rather of those beod shehaner dolek. Do tshuva and retreive and tell the pair to depart since they are living in sin. That goes for sha'ar yemos hashana, al achas pi kama in Asseret yemei Tshuvo. Ve'eino dome meah peamim lemeah ve'echad. Never mind Shmuel and Yiftach, Hashem told Moshe Rabenu his mistake and refused to let him into EY.
Wow! You figured out the entire book based on the first page. Yes this is a good example of why he wrote the book
ReplyDeleteThe truth is that there were some examples he raised which distracted from his main thesis.
After the Chofetz Chaim passed away, there were several inaccurate biographies written about him. This prompted his son to write his own biography about his father. (His son was also missing a lot of information. These gaps were filled in the 5 volume Meir Einei Yisroel.)
ReplyDeleteRav Yeruchem Levovitz was upset for a different reason. He was concerned that people would think that lightning struck and the Chofetz Chaim was created. They would not appreciate all his struggles (including being burnt-out for a while and possibly suffering from depression for a while) which had to overcome. More than that, navigating his personal struggles may even be what turned him into he was.
On the other hand, when people feel a close affiliation with people who have passed on, they seek to emulate all of their behaviors. If we highlight their human weaknesses and negative traits, that will either cause people to emulate it or to dump the baby with the bathwater and reject that person's whole way of life.
Positive aspects of a person can be recorded, while being truthful, and without discussing their negative character traits. To lie about their negative character traits, though, is completely wrong. But why highlight the bad, unless necessary?
Shapiro himself writes that this is the purpose of his book. It says a lot about Shapiro and his goals. Is Shapiro himself a truth-seeker, or is he primarily trying to preserve the dying brand of Modern Orthodoxy through attacking "Chareidim"? OK, so along the way he makes some valid points, which are certainly worthwhile to discuss and consider. But in the spirit of the way he would like biographies to be written, we should certainly highlight who Shapiro is and what his primary goal is.
ReplyDeleteShapiro's primary goal is clearly to attack "Charreidim" in order to promote the undefined brand Modern "Orthodoxy"..
It bothers me to no end that way Rabbi Belsky has been portrayed after his passing. There are many psakim of his that very few people would consider while he was alive. Now that he is being portrayed as a perfect person - while forgetting his deep emotional side and how it manifested itself in just about every aspect of his life - people are beginning to consider all of his psakim, without giving proper weight to all the poskim who opposed them. If people would only be honest about who he was, things would be a lot different.
ReplyDeleteNot to beleaguer the point, but this was not a random example that ended up in the book - it was the focus of his "hakdamah", and according to his own words was THE incident that brought home to him the importance of his work. I think this demonstrates quite clearly that the pursuit of truth was not really what was driving his research. Unfortunately, his real agenda seems to have been along the lines of what 'Honesty' writes in his comment.
ReplyDeleteAnybody who reads the book will learn important principles and issues concerning the nature of truth and how it is handled in the Orthodox community. If it doesn't concern you whether current hashkofa decides what views of Rishonim and Achronim should be printed or erased - then there is no need for your to read the book.
ReplyDeleteTo claim that because he has an "agenda" or brings examples you disapprove of - that the whole book is worthless or worse - is a good example of the Chareidi mentality. Clearly the Rambam would disagree with you. But it is obvious that the Rambam was not a Chareidi Jew. If you can get this information in a more acceptable form - then go for it. If you know of such a book please let me know about it.
it's "Haredim", lol
ReplyDelete" immortal words of Rav Aaron Feldman....he claimed, the degradation of a gadol (resulting from that public discussion) is significantly worse than the crime of adultery which the heter produced."
ReplyDeleteThis is the same stance he took with the Slifkin affair. That the lack of respect of the Gedolim caused by their unfair criticism of Slifkin was somehow his fault!
Acharay Mos - Kedoshim
ReplyDeleteWhen you are telling a story, a particular specific episode, it can be just a good story if that was the case with that story. But when telling the entire biography, to miss the imperfections would be a lie. Divray Yayomim was a sefer written for the honor of malchay Bais David, but it also tells the negatives.
ReplyDeleteMost biographies clearly leave out certain time-periods of the subject's life. Often it's because they don't have proper information about it. Most of these biographies are a collection of stories and not a comprehensive review of the person's life. As long as they choose not to discuss certain character traits of the person and do not make the person more perfect than they were, I don't see the issue with it. These books are for entertainment, motivational and inspirational purposes; they are not academic works.
ReplyDelete"The degradation of a gadol is significantly worse than the crime of adultery which the heter produced."
ReplyDeleteWe have the expression of *Toivel vaSheretz beyado*, where the perpetrator is at least trying cover up with mayim vetimros oshon, aka smoke and mirrors, trying to convince himself and others that his tvilah is effective.
You then have one that is *Metaher sheretz bekuf nun ta'amim*, claiming that the whole Sheretz along with a kupah shel shrotzim is not tamei to begin with. The latter is much worse, since he is a *Megale Ponim baTorah shelo keHalacha* opening the doors of being a chotei umachti es Yisrael, vegorem kilkul beyisrael ad sof kol hadoros, meuves asher lo yuchal litaken! We the People ask ourselves and all, is the Godol any greater than the Torah itself of which is the essence and main ingredient in *Making of a Godol?*
Furthermore, when one that recognized that he erred since he was misled, is he not obligated to chozer on the psak and chozer bitshuva? How can you mislead people living in sin in front of all of Klall Yisrael, as if all is fine and dandy? There is no bigger Chillul haShem then stepping all over the Torah, veod yodom netuya!
Therefore, you cannot respect such, as if being a Godol. No one is above Torah, and no one is above the Law. *Bemakom sheyesh chilul haShem, ein cholkin kavod leRav* prevails. How much more when you are meifitz mayim achurim letalmidim Pirchachim berabim in a Yeshiva with unsuspecting young impressionable minds? Im hoRAv dome lemalach H'... veim lav prosh haymeno. Hochiach tochiach is applicable even for a Nasi BeYisrael, afilu meah peamim, more so when being Megaleh Ponim before hundreds and so much more. As Poskei UGedoilei olam already paskened, we are mechuyev to Protest more and much more until they retract and do what they need to do. May haShem send a Ruach Tshuva in these yemei hoRachamim vehaSlichos migdolim vead ktanim, bimhera beyomenu Amen!
Where does harav Hirsch say otherwise?
ReplyDeleteRav S. R. Hirsch(Bereishis 12: 10 – 13):. The Torah does not seek to portray our great men as perfectly ideal figures; it deifies no man. It says of no one: “Here you have the ideal; in this man the Divine assumes human form!” It does not set before us the life of any one person as the model from which we might learn what is good and right, what we must do and what we must refrain from doing. When the Torah wishes to put before us a model to emulate, it does not present a man, who is born of dust. Rather, God presents Himself as the model, saying: “Look upon Me! Emulate Me! Walk in My ways!” We are never to say: “This must be good and right, because so-and-so did it.” The Torah is not an “anthology of good deeds.” It relates events not because they are necessarily worthy of emulation, but because they took place. The Torah does not hide from us the faults, errors, and weaknesses of our great men, and this is precisely what gives its stories credibility. The knowledge given us of their faults and weaknesses does not detract from the stature of our great men; on the contrary, it adds to their stature and makes their life stories even more instructive. Had they been portrayed to us as shining models of perfection, flawless and unblemished, we would have assumed that they had been endowed with a higher nature, not given to us to attain. Had they been portrayed free of passions and inner conflicts, their virtues would have seemed to us as merely the consequence of their loftier nature, not acquired by personal merit, and certainly no model we could ever hope to emulate.
ReplyDeleteSee also R' Hirsch's comments on Yitzchak in the beginning of Parshas Toldos.
ReplyDeleteR' Schwab took on many Eastern European perspectives in his time at Telz and Mir.
ReplyDeleteBut could be also that today our top people aren't so top anymore. And since they are the best we have, we may have to dress it up a little.
If they are for entertainment, that must be clear to the reader. What I'm saying is that there needs to be somewhere in our education system where the truth can be found and learned from. Otherwise one ends up with a religion of baloney Santa Claus legends.
ReplyDeleteDon't fool yourself. Charedim have agendas, Marc Shapiro has an agenda, you have agendas etc. We all have agendas and end up acting accordingly. Having agendas is not the issue it is how and what you do to further your agenda that matters.
ReplyDeleteWho appointed you RDE's personal maggid? And for that matter, don't you have more valuable things to do during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah than read and post on blogs?
ReplyDeletePerhaps I don't have more valuable things to do during the Aseres Yemei Teshuva, but I do not run a blog that calls itself Daas Torah.
ReplyDeletebut I do not run a blog that calls itself Daas Torah.
ReplyDeleteIf you're not a purveyor of Daas Torah, quit offering opinions on how it should be practiced, and if you are one, then by your own words, you need to stick your nose in a Mesillas Yesharim, not in this or any other blog.
Common sense dictates that if you are spending your time during the Aseres Yemei Teshuva rereading that book, then there is not a chance in the world that you possess authentic Daas Torah.
ReplyDeleteCommon sense dictates that if a person of no standing as a talmid chachom or chachom - thinks he can know what information should be important to others and what isn't and therefore feels a need to publicly criticize others - that proves that there is not a chance in the world that he knows what he is talking about
ReplyDeleteWow! Are you really saying that only a recognized talmid chachom, who can know what is truly important, is able to publicly criticize others?!!
ReplyDeleteTo quote a certain blogger - We have come a long way!
no - just that your comment about me and the significance of what I read is nonsense
ReplyDeleteWho decided that biographies are academics? As far as I know, they are not used in classrooms unless a student does a book report on it - which would work in a public school as well.
ReplyDeleteEverything that is taught is true, as it is Torah that is taught and not pop culture, philosophy or "mada". (Well, that is the intention but I'm sure human mistakes happen and are corrected when brought to attention.)
Biographies are entertaining, motivational and inspirational. In reality, no account of history is accurate. It is almost impossible to get honest accounts of the American Civil War, even though it was just 150 years ago. The winners write the history books. The fact that there were abolitionist States in the Confedrecy is ignored or explained away in order to box the Confederates neatly into the corner of undoubtedly being wrong. Had the confederates won, history books and courses would look a lot different.
Since historical works are not accurate, they are here to serve a purpose. Rav Schwab's point is that unless there is a tangible purpose in highlighting wrongdoing s or failings of those who have passed on, we should not do it.
Torah and Nach are in a completely different league as they are 100% accurate and clearly have lessons for all generations. Those prophecies and historical accounts that are not relevant for all generations have not been included in Tanach.