Jewish groups around the world condemn the ruling, which branded the writing legitimate free expression, saying it sets a dangerous precedent for condoning future antisemitism
Wednesday, March 12, 2025
Tuesday, March 11, 2025
Readership of Blog is mostly in Hong Kong and Singapore - Why?
Hong Kong 238
Singapore 191
United States 62
United Kingdom 29
Israel 18
France 16
Germany 11
Slovenia 7
Türkiye 6
Sweden 4
Romania 3
Other 150
“Ha’Rotzeh Lichanek, Hitaleh B’Ilan Gadol”: Notes on some Literary forgeries of Jewish works in the the Late Modern Period (1756-1965)
The classic source regarding literary forgeries in Jewish writing is that of the Talmud Bavli, Pesachim 112a:“Rabbi Akiva commanded Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai to do five matters when Rabbi Akiva was imprisoned […] if you wish to strangle yourself, hang yourself on a tall tree.
“This proverb means that if one wants others to accept what he has to say, he should attribute his statement to a great man.”
The Forged Yerushalmi: A 20th-Century Controversy
https://www.yu.edu/news/the-forged-yerushalmi-a-20th-century-controversy
The discussion revolved around one of the most famous recent forgeries of a sacred Judaic text. In January 1907, Shlomo Yehuda Algazi-Friedländer published in Hungary what he claimed were the long-lost tractates of Seder Kodashim of the Jerusalem Talmud, garnering praise in rabbinic circles for bringing this material to light. However, according to Rabbi Oberlander, just six months later, three articles had appeared that dissected the document and declared it a forgery. Rabbi Oberlander, a scholar who has written previously on the history of Jewish forgeries, shared evidence from Talmudic research and forensic science (for instance, proofs that the paper on which the document was written had been artificially aged) to show how Friedländer's manuscript had been thoroughly discredited by 1913. Rabbi Oberlander demonstrated how factors such as the state of the relations between the Jews in Hungary and places like Poland and Galicia and the process of buying, selling and distributing Jewish documents at the time impacted Friedlander's ability to pass the forgery off as genuine. Stereotypes about national culture and willful self-deception also played a role in making it possible for a person of questionable Talmudic skills but a gift for trickery to succeed in convincing others that he had indeed found the missing tractates. But for what purpose? Rabbi Oberlander made several guesses as to Friedländer's motives, but the one that seemed most probable to him was that Friedländer, in his odd way, was an artist. “Just as a painter must paint, a forger must forge - it was how Friedländer best expressed himself.” In addition to writing about Jewish forgeries, Rabbi Oberlander has also published works on the application of halacha to contemporary society and Jewish liturgy and customs. The event was supported by a grant in memory of Mr. Zoltan Erenyi z”l.
Forgery and the Halakhic Process
https://seforimblog.com/2007/08/marc-b-shapiro-forgery-and-halakhic-2/?print=print
Getting back to R. Moshe, as is well known, he ruled that the Commentary of R. Yehudah he-Hasid was a forgery, as he could not imagine that a rishon would acknowledge that there were some post-Mosaic passages in the Torah.[3] Only after my book appeared did Rabbi Naor tell me that the comment I quoted above in the name of R. Fisher was stated precisely with reference to R. Moshe’s positon on this issue. After R. Moshe banned R. Yehudah he-Hasid’s Commentary, R. Fisher commented that R. Moshe assumes that R. Yehudah he-Hasid has to accept the Rambam’s Principles, but in truth there were many disagreements with the Rambam, and R. Yehudah he-Hasid’s position on Mosaic authorship is one of them.
US Shunned by European Allies for Top Security Summit
https://www.newsweek.com/us-shunned-european-allies-top-security-summit-2042802
The U.S. has been shunned by European allies after it was not invited to a top security summit that more than 30 nations are attending in France on Tuesday, an unidentified French official told the Associated Press.
The security summit in Europe comes as concerns have risen regarding President Donald Trump's alienation of European allies because of rising tensions with Ukraine over peace negotiations with Russia.
The lack of a U.S. invitation could suggest that Europe and other Ukrainian allies no longer have confidence that Washington can effectively mediate negotiations and achieve peace between Moscow and Kyiv.
No Pain, No Gain? Trump Adopts New Zen-Like Approach to Stock Market Swings
https://www.newsweek.com/stock-market-volatility-recession-donald-trump-2042507
In President Donald Trump's first term, he often defined his presidency by the stock market's performance, using it as a barometer of economic success. But as market volatility surges and investor concerns that the president's policies are careening the economy toward a recession this time around, Trump is adopting a new stance—one that emphasizes long-term resilience over immediate gains.
"It takes a little time," he told Fox News in a weekend interview, responding to the sharp selloff that has rattled Wall Street since his return to office. "We're bringing wealth back to America. That's a big thing."
So far at least, Wall Street isn't buying what the president is selling.
The Art of the Deal concede everything before negotiations
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/10/marco-rubio-ukraine-concessions-end-russia-war-00223082
Ukraine must give up some of the territory seized by Russia since 2014 for any agreement to end the war, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Monday as he headed to Saudi Arabia for peace talks.
Rubio said concessions are “the only way” to end the full-scale invasion that Russia launched in February 2022 that has killed nearly a million people on both sides in the largest war in Europe since World War II.
Rubio hinted that aid could start flowing again depending on the outcome of the upcoming talks, saying the U.S. “could have good news to announce on that front.”
“All of that came about because we felt that they were not committed to any sort of peace process or not interested in negotiations,” he said. “If that changes, then obviously our posture can change.”
Two people in Desert with one container of Water
Igros Moshe (Y.D I #145) Question Why didn’t Rambam mention the halacha that one's life takes priority of that of others even though the halacha follows Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezar does not disagree? Furthermore we need to understand Ben Petura’s view citing no verse which says it is best that they share the jug of water and both die. This is difficult because only to avoid killing someone do we say it is better to be killed which is a clear act to avoid doing an act of killing. In contrast if he doesn’t have to actively kill but is being thrown on a baby he doesn’t have to die instead. This is because we have a principle “ Who says the other’s life is more important than yours?” So why does Ben Petura say that you must be willing to die of thirst because of a mitzva to give charity to the needy or even to save a life? Rabbi Akiva learns from the verse that when a person himself needs something there is no need to give it to someone else who needs it. Ben Petura just views that even when a person needs something even to save his life, he is still obligated to give it to someone else who also needs it.
Stock Market Today: Trade Threats Send Dow Down 300 Points
U.S. dollar weakens further; airline stocks in focus after outlook cuts
The Dow industrials dropped in morning trading after President Trump said he would ramp up tariffs on steel and aluminum from Canada to 50%.
Shares of industrial and financial firms were among the biggest decliners in the S&P 500. All 11 sectors in the broad index were trading lower.
Fears about a recession sparked a selloff Monday, with sliding tech shares spurring the Nasdaq Composite's biggest loss since 2022. President Trump declined to rule out a recession on Sunday and said his economic shake-up would result in a “period of transition.”
Artificial Intelligence and Psak: A Crisis?
I received an email today asking that I address the serious problem of using AI to pasken halacha.
I am not aware that there is any crisis brewing. If anyone has information to the contrary please send it to me. The problem is rather rabbinic authority - who has it and why? This is an issue which remains unclear. After the disastrous Aguna question which was seriously mishandled by poskim I have seen no evidence that AI is a bigger issue than incompetent poskim. No authority wants to address the real problems anymore. They all prefer dealing with unimportant challenges such as this. Some claim the psak requires Divine help which doesn't happen with a computer. Can't find any convincing sources. Without a clear definition of psak the issue is helplessly confused. However because of the concerned email I got, I am providing a forum for discussion.
Regarding the claim that A.I fabricates sources when it can't find a real one. Poskim do that all the time. As well as misread texts.
Tikun Sofrim
Bereishis (18:22) And the men turned their faces from there, and went toward Sodom; but Abraham still stood before the Lord.
Rashi (Bereishis 18:22) but Abraham still stood before G-d But surely it was not Avraham who had gone to stand before Him, but G-d had come to him and had said to him, “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great” and it should therefore have written here, “And G-d still stood before Abraham”? But it is a tikun sofrim (a scribal correction) such as writers make to avoid an apparently irreverent expression which our Rabbis altered, writing it thus).
Bereishis Rabbah (49:07) BUT ABRAHAM STILL STOOD BEFORE G-d. R. Simon said: This is an emendation of the Soferim, for the Shechinah was actually waiting for Abraham
HaKtav VeHaKabalah (Berishis 18:22) BUT ABRAHAM STILL STOOD BEFORE G-d It should have written that G-d stood before Avraham but this is a tikun sofrim (scibal emendation) as noted by Rashi who quotes the medrash. This does not mean that the text of the Torah was altered. Nobody forges a text and then announce that it is a forgery because I changed it. But it simply means that in context it should have been stated differently and thus it was like a scribe making a change out of respect to G-d. .
Siifsei Chachimim (Bereishis 18:22) It is tikun sofrim (an emendation of the Scribes). This does not mean that the Scribes changed even one letter of what was written in the Torah, far be it. Rather, “emendation of the Scribes” denotes that they scrutinized each of those verses, and found that according to its context, its primary meaning cannot be as written in the text, but the verse bears a different meaning. Thus it should not have written, “Avraham was still standing,” but, “God was still standing” — except that Scripture changed the wording out of respect. It is called “emendation of the Scribes” only because they scrutinized it and commented that Scripture changed the wording. (Rashba)
Tiferet Yisrael (66:12) Concerning the verse “BUT ABRAHAM STILL STOOD BEFORE G-d” the Medrash says in the name of Rabbi Simon that this is a tikun sofrim (a scribal emendation) because in fact G-d came to Avraham and therefore it should have been written that G-d still stood before Avraham. However that is not respectful to G-d and therefore the Torah wrote that Avraham still stood before G-d Furthermore Avraham was clearly not standing before G-d because he was busy feeding the guests. This was clearly a tikun sofrim (scribal change) to say that Avraham still stood before G-d. The meaning is clearly not that human scribes changed the text of the Torah after Moshe wrote it down. But it means that it was originally written that way just as we find things expressed differently for proper understanding “the language of man (Berachos 31a) so the meaning of tikun sofrim is that it is a metaphor to explain changes in the Torah saying it is like a scribal emendation. So why isn’t tikun sofrim listed as halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai? I already have discussed that and it is because this is what Moshe actually wrote in theTorah exactlt as G-d said to him – thus it was not an external act that could be described as halacha l’Moshe. Thus in fact the Torah of G-d is perfect. There were no additions at all which is appropriate for the words of the eternal living G-d
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)