Dr. Marc Shapiro: Be careful not to call others ignorant because of hashkofa statements - there are often conflicting statements coming from major authorities

Seforim Blog  post by Dr. Marc Shapiro

3. In my post here I quoted R. Moses Isaac Ashkenazi in his Ho’il Moshe that King David is not to be regarded as a prophet as he only had ruah ha-kodesh.

One of the commenters wrote:

Rashi Megilla 14a quotes a Halachot Gedolot which names David as [a] prophet. Rashi speaks specifically about prophets as opposed to Ruach Hakodesh, and excludes Daniel based on Megilla 3a.

Another commenter was more strident:

Wonderful example how modern scholars have no place in the Torah world! As first commenter pointed out, Dovid Hamelech is prominent in the list of 48 neviim, and there are scores of sugyos based on the nevuah of DH. The makom mizbeach, etc. Pure AmHaaRatzus!

I am not sure if I am the am ha-aretz he is referring to, which in any case would be uncalled for since I never said that David only had ruah ha-kodesh and was therefore not a prophet. All I did was point out that R. Moses Isaac Ashkenazi said this. When I called the commenter’s attention to the fact that his strong words were directed against R. Ashkenazi, he wrote:

I wouldn't start up with Hoil Moshe, but was pointing out the danger of someone reading this post, and then taking it at face value. For anyone fluent in Shas they will find numerous references to DH's nevua. Ruach HaKodesh wouldn't work for all the halachos we learn out from DH. . . . I do thoroughly enjoy your posts, but find them quite dangerous. I would prefer my children at least stick to Artscroll and have their basics –DH's nevua – straight!

Now let me say something that I did not put in the comments because I want the entire audience to see it, not just the tiny group that reads the comments. The commenter just quoted is a perfect example of one who is certain of something, and certain that the opposing position is incorrect, and this leads to very harsh language. Let’s leave aside R. Moses Isaac Ashkenazi who is not an important scholar. All would agree that R. Moses Sofer, the Hatam Sofer, is important and certainly not an am ha’aretz (which is the term the commenter used). Yet the Hatam Sofer is explicit that David was not a prophet and only had ruah ha-kodesh, which is exactly what R. Ashkenazi states and what the commenter so harshly attacks. Here are the Hatam Sofer’s words in Torat Moshe ha-Shalem, Ba-Midbar, p. 74.

הנה לא מצינו לישראל מלך שיהי' גם נביא משולח לעם כי אם משה רבינו ע"ה, דכתיב גבי' (דברים ל"ג ה') ויהי בישורון מלך, אבל שארי נביאים לא היו מלכים והמלכים לא התנבאו, ודוד המלך ע"ה רה"ק הו"ל ולא נבואה, ולכן אחז"ל (גיטין נ"ט ע"א) מימות משה עד רבי לא מצינו תורה וגדולה במקום אחד, דאלו כל הנביאים היו עליהם בגדולה השופט והמלך שבימיו, וכל המלכים אפי' דוד ושלמה היו הנביאים שבדורם גדולים מהם בתורה . . . שהרי אין מלך נביא.

This notion, that the kings were not prophets (other than Moses), is also stated in Zohar, Terumah, p. 154a, and this is presumably the Hatam Sofer’s source. I don’t deny that there are other authoritative sources that contradict this, including passages in the Talmud. Some of them are cited by R. Reuven Margaliyot in his note to the Zohar, ad loc., and we can speculate as to why the Hatam Sofer preferred the Zohar over these other sources. I cite this only to show that commenters should be very careful before labeling something as am ha’aratzus, as you never know whom you might be insulting with this comment.

Hamas Threats to Kill Hostages Could Weaken Group’s Hand in Negotiations

 https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-threats-to-kill-hostages-could-weaken-groups-hand-in-negotiations-8c2c14f7?mod=hp_lead_pos7

Of the remaining 97 hostages taken on Oct. 7 to Gaza, 33 of them have been declared dead by Israel. In talks with mediators, Hamas has said it might have no more than 30 living hostages in total, including 12 women, elderly or injured people, according to Arab mediators. 

U.K. Ban on Some Weapons to Israel Signals Diplomatic Shift

 https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/uk-ban-israel-weapons-export-licenses-eeef7fdd?mod=hp_lead_pos8

The U.K.’s decision to bar the export of some weapons to Israel shows how even staunch Western allies are looking for ways to press Israel to end the war in Gaza without depriving the country of the weapons it needs to defend itself.

“When a country that is considered one of Israel’s major allies, comes and says, ‘we can no longer sell you weapons,’ it points to a shift in Israel’s international reputation,” said Neve Gordon, a professor of human-rights law at Queen Mary University of London. “This political shift can have a domino effect.”

Mirvis says it ‘beggars belief’ Labor announced partial arms ban to Israel

 https://www.ynetnews.com/article/rjiwjrvh0

In stinging criticism, UK chief rabbi condemns timing of government statement 'at the very moment six hostages murdered in cold blood by cruel terrorists were being buried by their families'

US Anger After Britain Suspends Arms to Israel

 https://www.newsweek.com/uk-israel-arms-suspension-white-house-backlash-1947975

Sources in the White House said they felt let down by the decision, reported said.

"They assured us they wouldn't do this," a government source told British broadcaster ITV's political editor Robert Peston.

A source inside the foreign office informed The Daily Telegraph of London that the US had been informed of the decision before it was announced on Monday.

Netanyahu blasts ‘shameful’ UK freeze of arms sales earmarked for Gaza

 https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-817548

The suspension was not a judgment on whether British arms were being used for human-rights violations in Gaza, but rather was based on a conclusion that there was a risk this could happen, Lammy said.

Nukhba terrorist who commanded Netiv Ha'asara massacre eliminated

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/395599

IDF, ISA, announce the death of terrorist Ahmed Fozi Nazer Muhammad Wadia, who led the massacre in Netiv Ha'asara on the morning of October 7, 2023.

Divination vs Sign

 Rabbeinu Bachya (Kad HaKemach Mezuza) The common practice of the world, that they do not marry women with a partial moon but only with a full moon, there is no prohibition in this, and it is not significant, since it is nothing but simply a sign, and the intent is merely a good sign that the marriage will be complete and not lacking, and this is similar to what we practice on the night of Rosh Hashanah, and it is the custom of the Gaonim. This is also similar to the custom of anointing the kings next to a spring. as a good sign that their kingdom would last. And anyone who views the matter of marriage and the success of homes other than a sign, this is the way of the Amorites, and it is the custom of the nations who think that the success of homes depends on the star system... 

Mazel and Mezuza

 Rabbeinu Bachya (Kad HaKemach Mezuza) And you should observe, the mezuzah has the special name of G-d on the inside and the name Almighty on the outside, and it was because the nations of the world think that success is not found in houses except by luck according to the dictates of the stars that lead this lowly world, such as those who say, from the day so-and-so bought this house or married a wife from that hour they became enriched. It is known that it is not appropriate to accept such a view. because there are no special moments and seasons except what G-d decides.

Hamas is demanding the Philadelphi Corridor for a reason

 https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-817386

It stands to reason that the control of the border was a key ingredient in Hamas’ strength and this is why it wants it back. 

Hamas Official Says Guards Have New Orders in Dealing With Hostages

 https://www.newsweek.com/hamas-guards-new-orders-israel-american-hostages-1947762

"Let it be clear to everyone that, following the incident in Nuseirat, new instructions have been issued to the Mujahideen tasked with guarding the prisoners," Ubaida said in the statement, which was also reported on by the Jerusalem Post. "These instructions outline how to handle the situation if the occupation army approaches the location where the prisoners are being held."

On Day 330, Rachel Goldberg-Polin’s Long Fight to Free Her Son Ended in Tragedy

 https://www.wsj.com/us-news/on-day-330-rachel-goldberg-polins-long-fight-to-free-her-son-ended-in-tragedy-f94f3276?mod=hp_lead_pos7

Speaking with Arutz Sheva-Israel National News last month, Rachel, Hersh's mother, recounted the last time she saw her son: “We are a religious family and Hersh came to us a couple of years ago and said he's not going to be keeping Shabbat the way that we keep Shabbat for now. He's always been very respectful, and he had said on October 6th, ‘I'm going to come with you to beit knesset (synagogue), I'm going to come with you to Shabbat dinner.’ He came with us and he said, ‘But I'm bringing my backpack, because after dinner I'm going to go with Aner, who was his best friend, and we're going to go do something fun. We're going to go camp somewhere.” We said fine. I'm very happy that he still wants to do things like that, so he came with us to beit knesset. He danced with the Torah. He came with us to Shabbat dinner. At 11:00 pm he kissed John, he kissed me. He turned around in the doorway, and he looked at me and said, ‘I love you, see you tomorrow.’ That was 311 nights ago.”

Hersh-Goldberg-Polin's mother: 'My sweet boy, finally - finally you're free'

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/395544

US President Joe Biden lamented the murder: "I am devastated and outraged. Hersh was among the innocents brutally attacked while attending a music festival for peace in Israel on October 7. He lost his arm helping friends and strangers during Hamas’ savage massacre. He had just turned 23. He planned to travel the world. I have gotten to know his parents, Jon and Rachel. They have been courageous, wise, and steadfast, even as they have endured the unimaginable. They have been relentless and irrepressible champions of their son and of all the hostages held in unconscionable conditions. I admire them and grieve with them more deeply than words can express. I know all Americans tonight will have them in their prayers, just as Jill and I will. I have worked tirelessly to bring their beloved Hersh safely to them and am heartbroken by the news of his death. It is as tragic as it is reprehensible. Make no mistake, Hamas leaders will pay for these crimes. And we will keep working around the clock for a deal to secure the release of the remaining hostages."

The Steipler: The correct understanding of the mitzva to love one's wife Igros Kodesh #1

Noticed that this post has gotten a lot of attention. It is found with many other authentic sources in my book on Marriage which is available from Amazon (See sidebar)

Igros Kodesh (#1): 1) While it is true that asceticism in dealing with the lusts of this world is an important thing [assuming that it is done for the sake of heaven to give pleasure to G-d and not just to be more developed in spirituality] but that is only if it is done after he has already fulfilled is Torah obligations. However if by being ascetic he nullifies the slightest of his Torah obligations then his deeds are credited to the Sitra Acher [evil] - G-d forbid and he doesn’t advance in true spirituality. So even though he views himself as becoming a more elevated being by his asceticism he in fact is burying himself in the grave of pride by considering himself a very spiritual person when in fact his spirituality is seriously defective. And this frequently manifests itself as degradation in that it leads him to committing an actual Torah prohibition and he is not able to restrain himself at all as we know from a actual case where this happened – G-d should preserve us!

Conjugal rights of the wife is a Torah commandment just as serious as eating matzo. And even ignoring it when she is pregnant [when the wife has not truly excused him wholeheartedly from his obligations] makes into a complete sinner. And sins like this which are between two people are not atoned for even by Yom Kippur. He is like a robber or mugger who steals from his wife what is owed to her. This is comparable to killing his wife since it is known that the prime hope of a woman in this world is that she have a husband who loves her. Therefore when she see that he doesn’t love her, it is almost life threatening (pikuach nefesh) because of the great upset and anguish he causes her by making her like a widow while her husband is still alive.

The conjugal obligations of workers is twice a week, for a talmid chachom it is once a week. The Achronim write that in modern times we do not have people who are called talmidei chachomim according to Chazal [that is because in modern times we are not properly careful about not nullifying ourselves from Torah study and there are other reasons], nevertheless the reason why a talmid chachom only has an obligation once a week is because the Torah weakens his physical strength. That reason would therefore apply also a talmid chachom in modern times. However a talmid chachom who knows that he has the strength retains the obligation of having intercourse twice a week. This is how it is explained in the Biur Halacha (O.C. 240). This was the practice of the Chasam Sofer as is known – see the Mishna Berura there. It is also the practise of most talmidei chachomim in modern times ]before they reach old age ] It is obvious that she married with the understanding that her husband would follow the accepted practise. And furthermore the husband is obligated by the kesuba to conduct himself according to normative practise [for those similar to himself]. It is obvious that if he wants to exempt himself by have intercourse only once a week and not twice that this is close to creating a situation of a genuine uncertainty regarding a Torah obligation. Aside from that there is a separate obligation for the husband when he is aware that she desires to have relations – even if she indicates this by very slight hints as is explained in Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 240:1 which is from Pesachim 72 and in a number of other places.

2) The details of sexual intercourse of the mitzva of conjugal obligations are explained in the Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden in the section of the laws of Shabbos night. It should be studied carefully because these are actual halachic obligations. Because according to the Torah it is prohibited to have intercourse in circumstances where the woman is not interested and therefore it is necessary to get her interested with intimate activities such as hugging and kissing until she is sexual aroused and desires intercourse. Because if this is not done first – it is like placing her before a lion who mauls and eats as is explained in Pesachim (49). [It is a terrible sin to deprive her of her sexual rights even if he is doing it for the sake of piety and asceticism. Taking what belongs to his wife can not be the basis of piety by theft and treating her as a slave]. Furthermore to have sexual intercourse against her will results in having children who are sinners and rejecters of Torah – they are call bnei anusa (children of rape).

A husband who grabs and has intercourse immediately without preliminary intimacy and then separates immediate after ejaculation and leaves her, might think that he is acting like a highly spiritual angel. But in actual truth he has not lowered his lust at all even though he definitely has placated his desires for the time being sine he has in fact obtained full pleasure from this intercourse. In contrast his wife felt no pleasures at all from this abrupt sexual act. In fact she has been hurt and shamed and the tears she sheds in private will not go unanswered. That is because our Sages(Bava Metzia) tell us that the Gate of Tears has not been closed. They say that a man should be very careful with his wife honor because she readily cries. There is no question that such a brutal act arouses Divine judgment against him. Furthermore he does not merit to have Divine help either in spiritual or material issues. And this that he mistakenly thinks he becomes a highly spiritual person by trying to be insensitive to his wife in sexual matters – this is a worthless fantasy and a lie. That is because from sins and transgression, one becomes blemished and spiritually impure – not elevated.

And this is stated in Shulchan Aruch (240:8) that it is done only after his wife is placated and is interested in doing it. Because otherwise it is prohibited to have intercourse without her consent as is explicit there in the Shulchan Aruch (240:3) and as is explained in the Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden and this is actual Torah halacha. [In particular what is written in Shulchan Aruch (68). We see in Orchos Chaim in the name of Neziros Shimshon who writes that according to the Zohar and the writings of the Arizal – the halacha is in accord with the first explanation [that one should not have intent for the sake of pleasure but only for the sake of doing a mitzva]. However according to the second and third explanations [that they should be dressed during intercourse and that it should be done quickly] the opposite is true and there is a prohibition in doing this according to kabbalah. Nevertheless even according to the view of the Shulchan Aruch this is only if done with the full agreement of the wife. And thus is my understanding.

3) One who is intimate with his wife with hugging and other things for the sake of Heaven because he wants to have mercy on her that she shouldn’t be pained and feel abandoned – this will not cause the slightest weakening of his fear of Heaven or succumbing to lust. The opposite is true – it will bring him to holiness (kedusha) and he will be fulfilling the Torah command of imitating G-d. Just as He is merciful so to you should be merciful. Besides that hugging and kissing or any other act of intimacy is an inherent part of the mitzva of onah (conjugal duties) as is explained by the poskim regarding Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 184:10) concerning the obligation when a man goes on a trip just before the time for his wife’s menstrual period. 

4) While it is true that many talmidei chachomm conduct themselves in an ascetic manner in a number of intimate things – but that is only with the complete agreement of his wife and with her forgiveness with a full heart. And this agreement comes in most cases after it is explained to her that in truth her husband loves her and it is only for the sake of heaven that he is restraining himself. Or alternatively she married someone who is known as a tzadik whose reputation compensates for her loss of intimacy with him. But G-d forbid that the husband should conduct himself as an ascetic when it causes pain to his wife who is dependent upon him and does not forgive him whole heartedly concerning that which he is obligated to do for her.

5) Our Sages (Yevamos 62b) say, One who loves his wife as himself and honors her more than himself…is described by the verse "You should know that you will have peace with your wife…." It is important to note that our Sages are not saying to love one's wife with the natural love that man is attracted to a woman but rather to love her with the love that friends have for each other - as someone he knows and has a covenant with him and that they are partners in many things and each one helps and receives help from the other. In addition the love he feels for her should also come from gratitude. He needs to have the clear image in his mind that if he had not gotten a wife and would have remained alone and isolated - how much suffering and pain he would have from this. But now that he has a wife his life is in place and functioning. The significance of gratitude is immeasurably important. In fact our Sages state in the Mishna Rabbi Eliezer (Chapter 7) that all those who lack gratitude to their fellow men will eventually lack gratitude towards G-d. If you look there you will see how extremely stringent they are in this matter. This type of love is what our Sages say a man is obligated to have towards his wife. And again this love does not come from the lust a man has for a woman at all but from one of the good attributes which he is obligated to have. He needs to have this type of love and feeling towards her when he strives to cause her rejoicing at the time of intercourse and well as before and afterwards. Such a relationship is not disgusting – chas v'shalom – but rather it is a mitzva. In fact he should conduct himself in this manner even if he were not obligated by the Torah and surely now that the Torah does obligated it - as we mentioned before.