tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post7505722249335282031..comments2024-03-29T09:34:59.827+03:00Comments on Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Is a talmid chachom/tzadik beyond criticism because he is presumed that he doesn't sin or because he certainly repented immediately?Daas Torahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07252904288544083215noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-78940625585115462272023-08-19T23:58:40.988+03:002023-08-19T23:58:40.988+03:00I don't see that a rasha who goes to yeshiva a...I don't see that a rasha who goes to yeshiva and learns well will come out a tzaddik. To put it another way, a narcissist or sociopath may do well in an academic environment, but that won't change their nature.<br />Similarly, there is a story in the gemara of a rasha marrying a good woman, and becoming a good man. But that is not prescriptive - the rasha will not change. Maybe someone who is chiloni, and eats treif but is otherwise a good person, can become observant. but such self delusion of dan b'kaf zchut only emboldens the rasha. elsewhere , the mishnah teaches not to sell weapons to rashaim, because it strengthens their hand - so that concept of rose tinted glasses is very limited.Kalonymus HaQatannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-74519008874119703872014-12-01T02:42:31.791+02:002014-12-01T02:42:31.791+02:00Does this ("chezkat kashrus") apply to o...Does this ("chezkat kashrus") apply to one who (is accused of ) committing the same transgession several / numerous times?<br /><br />2. Perhaps monetary transgessions are more stringent because part of tshuva is repaying the victim (and obtaining his absolution (at least three attempts, etc) )MiMedinat_HaYamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-89117923718065033852014-12-01T01:15:34.408+02:002014-12-01T01:15:34.408+02:00@Eddie - I have no idea what you are talking about...@Eddie - I have no idea what you are talking about. at this point.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-14400341341660016902014-11-30T22:51:32.360+02:002014-11-30T22:51:32.360+02:00This brings in a whole discussion about Halachi me...This brings in a whole discussion about Halachi methodology. R' Rackman, whom you referred to in a recent post, had another argument he called the "Teleological " approach to Halacha. He argued that Halacha has a teleology, ie an end point that the posek wishes to reach by his halacha. This could be justice, or some other idea. he claimed that great Gedolim like RMF and RYBS took this approach to halacha. I once had a chat with R' Bleich of YU, and he said there is no such thing as teleology. however, his own article on smoking, as well as the famous psak of RMF prove the exact opposite. RMF's psak had a teleology that the honor of the Rabbis had to be upheld, so he had to "falsify" the emes, ie that smoking kills, in order protect the honor of the many rabbis who at that time were smokers. R' Bleich's teleology was to be as strict as possible, and hence not be called a lefty by his less knowledgeable haredi colleagues. Hence he wrote a ridiculous chapter on how smoking is not proven to be harmful, and hence not forbidden by halacha. This is all sheker, in the name of "emes", ie that whatever the rabbis (tzadikim) do is by definition right, and what the secularist/scientists say is by definition wrong.Eddienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-37708258219568913542014-11-30T22:37:02.459+02:002014-11-30T22:37:02.459+02:00Thank you. From what I understand of 1) the Igro...Thank you. From what I understand of 1) the Igros Moshe is saying the Hachamim have to do their best, even though it might not be the truth of heaven - in each generation.<br /><br />2) the ktzos - I could not find, but R' H. Shachter writes "In the introduction to the Ketzos Hachoshen (aclassic commentary on Choshen Mishpat) the author points out that often one might come up with an original Torah insight or idea (i.e. a chiddush)<br />which is not correct, and such a chiddush is a distortion of the Torah and of Hashem (since the entire Torah is a veiled description of Hashem). One of the Rambam's thirteen principles of faith is that the laws of the Torah are immutable. As such, while chiddush (a new insight which deepens our understanding of the Torah) is highly desirable, the distortion inherent in a shinui (an incorrect "insight" or idea) is a violation of this principle of our faith. Rav Soloveitchik has pointed out (see note 98 in "Halachic Mind") that there is a fine line between chiddush and shinui, and one must be quite a Torah scholar to discern the difference."<br /><br /><br />If my readings are correct, then there seems to be a contradiction.<br /><br /><br />RMF seems to be saying, at least the Chachamim can reach a decision, which is worthy of reward, even though it is wrong; The Kzos, according to RHS, is saying that a new insight [ and this implies also an error] can in fact be a shinui in torah, which is essentially the same as reform.Eddienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-87577901271471679492014-11-30T22:30:56.332+02:002014-11-30T22:30:56.332+02:00Rabbi DT,
I thought you might be interested in a ...Rabbi DT,<br /><br />I thought you might be interested in a (tangentially) relevant comment of the Pri Megadim in his Sefer Teivas Gome (פ' תצוה אות ד) concerning the Gemara in Brachos 19a: <br /><br />אם ראית תלמיד חכם<br />שעבר עבירה בלילה אל תהרהר אחריו ביום... ודאי עשה תשובה<br /><br /><br />The Pri Megadim writes:<br /><br /><br />ת"ח שעבר עבירה בלילה עוה"ז אל תהרהר אחר מטתו<br />ביום ודאי עשה תשובה קודם מותו, ע"כ.<br /><br /><br /><br />Could this be applicable even for cases of Tzadikim/Talmidei Chachamim who have sinned but vehemently deny having done so - that there is nevertheless an assumption that they did Teshuva before death?<br /><br /><br />Also, I really don't mean to nag, because I respect you a lot, but - could you please make the phone call to the Beis Din in order to verify - or hopefully, dismiss - the recent charges about the Chalban שליט"א? Surely vindicating the Tzaddik is just as important as publicising a menace - so whatever the outcome, your efforts will have been worthwhile. (As I said before, I would do it myself if I was able to converse in Ivrit.)Chaimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-7822437084526021512014-11-30T21:11:16.333+02:002014-11-30T21:11:16.333+02:00@Eddie it would be helpful if you read 1) Introduc...@Eddie it would be helpful if you read 1) Introduction to Igros Moshe 2) Introduction to Ktzos - then we have something to discussDaas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-14753368912993570102014-11-30T20:55:28.293+02:002014-11-30T20:55:28.293+02:00what does R' Dessler say, that if truth oppose...what does R' Dessler say, that if truth opposes Daas of Rababnim, then it is sheker, and what the rabbanim say is emes?Eddienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-24284593788317152532014-11-30T20:45:24.514+02:002014-11-30T20:45:24.514+02:00Thank you. what do you mean by "Rav Yaakov Ka...Thank you. what do you mean by "Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky and Maharal say it regarding Truth and its not absolute nature So Rav Desser."? Truth is not absolute?Eddienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-83568593158598632152014-11-30T19:11:59.695+02:002014-11-30T19:11:59.695+02:00@Eddie sorry to rain on your parade - but Rav Mosh...@Eddie sorry to rain on your parade - but Rav Moshe Feinstein says that in the Introduction to the Igros Moshe, the Ktzos says that in the introduction and the Maharal says that in his discussion of eilu v'eilu.<br /><br />There are other places - but that should be sufficient to discredit your misunderstanding of chareidi hashkofa.Daas Torahhttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-19650383463835327302014-11-30T18:07:28.557+02:002014-11-30T18:07:28.557+02:00Rav Eidensohn - congratulations! You are not Hare...Rav Eidensohn - congratulations! You are not Hareidi. I have long suspected this, but despite your claims to the contrary you have said something which goes against the conceptual framework of Hareidism. I quote: "the principle of judging favorably is apparently going against truth."<br />What, there is an independent, rational concept of truth, which does not always agree with what Rabbanim say? This goes even beyond R' Soloveichik, who saw halacha as a kind of mathematical theorem, beyond which he would not step outside. I hope I am right, but of course many would hope I am wrong!<br />Yosher Koach!Eddienoreply@blogger.com