The story goes that when he was running for re-election to the Senate in 1954, Lyndon Johnson was opposed by a couple of non-profits that urged voters to reject him and his radical communist ideas. (And you thought things were crazy today.) In response, Johnson had new language inserted into the section of the IRS code, which defines a tax exempt entity. His addendum declared that an exempt organization “does not participate in or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.”
Now, in the middle of the 2008 election, several dozen pastors are challenging the amendment by speaking out in the pulpit in favor of a candidate (usually John McCain) and by sending the IRS copies of the sermons in which they openly cross the line the law has drawn since 1954. At the same time, a bill (H.R. 2275) repealing the Johnson amendment has been introduced by Walter Jones, Republican of North Carolina. The bill has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee where it awaits action.
The debate over Jones’s bill and Johnson’s amendment reveals once again how confusing and confused church-state jurisprudence is and has always been and will always be. Both sides claim that the other is violating the separation of church and state. Barry Lynn, a minister who is executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, argues that “We just can’t have sermons converted into political advertisements for candidates,” and he warns against using “church collection plate money on an ad telling people” to vote for one candidate rather than another.
Lynn here follows in the tradition of John Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration, a tract in which Locke declares that the civil magistrate has no warrant to meddle in the affairs of the church, and churches, on their part, have no warrant to meddle in the affairs of state. The church, says Locke, tends to men’s souls; the state to men’s worldly needs. (He also says that in the event of a clash between them, the state’s interests must prevail; but that’s another essay.)
But the logic and force of Locke’s arguments depend upon his conceiving of religion as a private matter, as a relationship between one’s soul and one’s God, and therefore as a practice exercised in the church or synagogue or mosque rather than in the arena of political action. If, however, your religious beliefs take a more robust form than Locke’s and require that you labor to bring the world into conformity with God’s word and will, the Johnson amendment, or any other limitation on the free exercise of what you take to be your religious duty, will be seen as an unconstitutional interference by the state in the proper business of the church.
That’s how Erik Stanley, legal counsel and head of the Pulpit Initiative for the Alliance Defense Fund, sees it. In his reply to Lynn he insists that any law “that requires government agents to parse the words of a pastor’s sermon” in order to “determine when a pastor’s speech becomes too ‘political’” constitutes an “excessive …government entanglement with religion” and is on its face a violation of the separation of church and state. In other words, it is a violation of the separation of church and state for the state to inquire into whether a pastor is violating the separation of church and state.
This is not so odd an argument as it might first seem; for everything depends on just how religious activity is defined. If you assume, as Lynn does, a Lockean definition (religious belief is essentially private), separation means hands off in both directions. But if you assume, as Stanley does, a definition that demands corrective action when you see the world departing from godly principles, separation means hands off the church by the state and hands on the state by the church.[...]
The bottom line is that there is no rational or principled or constitutional resolution to this conflict. The resolution, if there is one, will have to be political. Either the Johnson amendment will be repealed or it won’t be. And when one or the other happens, the boundaries between church and state, at least with respect to this issue, will have been settled — for a while.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Can your Rabbi tell you how to vote?
Lebanon -"Israel stole our felafel"
YNET reports:
Lebanon is planning on filing an international law suit against Israel for violating a food copyright, Fadi Abboud, president of the Lebanese Industrialists Association, told the al-Arabiya network. The Lebanese claim is that Israel markets original Lebanese food like tabouleh, kubbeh, hummus, falafel and fattoush which the Lebanese considered their trademarks prior to the establishment of the Jewish state.
Abboud explained that the fact that Israel has been marketing Lebanese delicacies under the same names and ingredients around the world has caused great losses to Lebanon, and that while, “the full extent is unknown, it is estimated at tens of millions of dollars annually.” Abboud, who prepared a memo on the subject, based his case on the, ”feta cheese precedent” that occurred six years ago. At that time, France, Denmark and Germany asserted that Greece cannot have a monopoly over the production of this type of cheese. Greece managed to prove in international institutions that it is the cheese’s “originator” and won the case. Until that point, the three prosecuting countries produced 12,000 tons of cheese a year. The court ruled that from then on, other countries could not use the name “feta”, as this cheese is “largely associated with Greece’s history and has been produced under this name for 6,000 years.”
Thus, the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs decided to grant Greece the sole right to produce and market the cheese under that name. The Lebanese official claims that not only does Israel use the names of Lebanese foods but it also markets them in ready-to-eat plastic boxes for European and US consumers as if these were traditional Israeli foods. [...]
Lebanon is planning on filing an international law suit against Israel for violating a food copyright, Fadi Abboud, president of the Lebanese Industrialists Association, told the al-Arabiya network. The Lebanese claim is that Israel markets original Lebanese food like tabouleh, kubbeh, hummus, falafel and fattoush which the Lebanese considered their trademarks prior to the establishment of the Jewish state.
Abboud explained that the fact that Israel has been marketing Lebanese delicacies under the same names and ingredients around the world has caused great losses to Lebanon, and that while, “the full extent is unknown, it is estimated at tens of millions of dollars annually.” Abboud, who prepared a memo on the subject, based his case on the, ”feta cheese precedent” that occurred six years ago. At that time, France, Denmark and Germany asserted that Greece cannot have a monopoly over the production of this type of cheese. Greece managed to prove in international institutions that it is the cheese’s “originator” and won the case. Until that point, the three prosecuting countries produced 12,000 tons of cheese a year. The court ruled that from then on, other countries could not use the name “feta”, as this cheese is “largely associated with Greece’s history and has been produced under this name for 6,000 years.”
Thus, the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs decided to grant Greece the sole right to produce and market the cheese under that name. The Lebanese official claims that not only does Israel use the names of Lebanese foods but it also markets them in ready-to-eat plastic boxes for European and US consumers as if these were traditional Israeli foods. [...]
Birth oath - Be righteous and not wicked (Nida 30b)
Niddah (30b): [Soncino translation] R. Simlai delivered the following discourse: What does an embryo resemble when it is in the bowels of its mother? Folded writing tablets. Its hands rest on its two temples respectively, its two elbows on its two legs and its two heels against its buttocks. Its head lies between its knees, its mouth is closed and its navel is open, and it eats what its mother eats and drinks what its mother drinks, but produces no excrements because otherwise it might kill its mother. As soon, however, as it sees the light the closed organ opens and the open one closes, for if that had not happened the embryo could not live even one single hour. A light burns above its head and it looks and sees from one end of the world to the other, as it is said, then his lamp shined above my head, and by His light I walked through darkness. And do not be astonished at this, for a person sleeping here might see a dream in Spain. And there is no time in which a man enjoys greater happiness than in those days, for it is said, O that I were as the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me; now which are the days’ that make up ‘months’ and do not make up years? The months of pregnancy of course. It is also taught all the Torah from beginning to end, for it is said, And he taught me, and said unto me: ‘Let thy heart hold fast my words, keep my commandments and live’, and it is also said, When the converse of God was upon my tent. Why the addition of ‘and it is also said’? — In case you might say that it was only the prophet who said that, come and hear ‘when the converse of God was upon my tent. As soon as it, sees the light an angel approaches, slaps it on its mouth and causes it to forget all the Torah completely, as it is said, Sin coucheth at the door. It does not emerge from there before it is made to take an oath, as it is said, That unto Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear; ‘That unto Me every knee shall bow’ refers to the day of dying of which it is said All they that go down to the dust shall kneel before Him; ‘Every tongue shall swear’ refers to the day of birth of which it is said, He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart, who hath not taken My name in vain, and hath not sworn deceitfully. What is the nature of the oath that it is made to take? Be righteous, and be never wicked; and even if all the world tells you, You are righteous’, consider yourself wicked.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Kollel V - Response to LazerA's Response
Guest Post: Bartley Kulp's response to LazerA's Kollel IV-Response to criticisms.
I would just like to respond to LazarA's post. There are some points which I am in agreement with him but I would strongly diverge on other issues. We are both in agreement that the communities in Israel and the US have their own unique sets of circumstances and that they cannot be compared 100 percent. We both agree that the Israeli kollel paradigm is presently much more difficult to sustain than the American one. Fine, let us examine the American one.
First of all I would like to question the validity of LazarA's assertion that men who stay in kollel for five years generally do not have a large economic disadvantage to men who don't. LazarA has to be living in some parallel universe. Most hareidim who are married for five years have at least two children with a third that will be on the way in one to two or three years. Only now this couple is going to take major steps to climb the economic ladder. Am I supposed to believe that in general they are not going have a significant social-economic disadvantage compared with someone who has made an investment during that same time period towards economically bettering themselves, starting on that path before they have had children?
In the modern serviced based global economic model that exists in North America today, even non religious Jews and goyim a like are having a hard time even with their time invested education and work experience qualifications (not to mention businesses). These people do not even have the extra expenses that are shouldered by frum yidden like kashrus, tuition and in many cases having to live in more expensive neighborhoods because that is where the kehilla is. This is not to mention that secular people time there pregnancies and limit the amount of children that they have for economic reasons at their personal discretion and convenience.
Frum Jews do not have that convenient luxury. Now LazarA wants to purport that leaving kollel with a wife, two kids(the couple will probably have their third within a couple of years or so b'ezrat Hashem) and in many cases today not even having rudimentary grammar, writing, math, office computer skills or a blue collar vocation, merely involves a simple transition period of playing catch up?
Now I am not suggesting in any way that economics alone is strictly a reason on why not to learn in kollel. On the contrary, if a couple is ready to make sacrifices for Torah then they should be praised. This in of itself is a big Kiddush Hashem. Their family will be spiritually off in the long run by setting the course of its values early on in the marriage by putting Torah first above all else. So why am I rambling about economics and arguing with LazerA's assertion that learning in kollel does not generally have its significant economic ramifications? Because I do not believe in white wash and gilding the lily. It is that kind of talk that lead people to make decisions based on misguided assumptions that they will only come to learn as false when it is too late. Unless a couple have well off parents who are enthusiastic about supporting them or that the husband has some sort of Yissaschar/Zevulin arrangement, the idea of preparing for potentially hard times is in order.
Now while I am on the issue of being mussar nefesh for Torah, I would like to discuss another issue that has not yet been addressed in this discussion. While it is obviously praiseworthy to be mussar nefesh for Torah, in my opinion it is not so when it comes to be mussar other peoples nefesh for the same pursuit. What am I talking about? I am talking about the parents who in many cases who are not young and are not wealthy (this is not to mention the fact that they are might still be raising other children at home). What about the increasing number of parents who are being beleaguered by excessive financial demands in the name of marrying off their children. Granted that there is a great merit in being able to marry one's daughter to a talmud chacham. Also having one's offspring learn in kollel. For some this is a giant financial Siamese white elephant. Granted that there are a lot of parents who consider this a personal avodah. However there are a lot of parents who socially get forced into it for the benefit of their kids and the situation is analogous to being dragged by a pick up truck on a bumpy road. This has also (as it has in Israel) greatly contributed to what is called the shidduch crises. Families only marrying their sons to daughters who's families can provide an apartment and vice versa. That is already a subject well written about so I will not tarry on about it here. This seems to be the rapidly expanding trend across the American frum landscape.
This is where I agree with LazerA's comment on social engineering and personal choices. However my issue with the current model that is being increasingly presented in American Chareidi society is that much of those choices are already being maid for individuals by the society that they belong to. The truth is that the American community is following the same path as the Israeli one which has a hashgafa that I personally disagree with. Not the part about learning in kollel. The part of being more than somewhat obliged to. Also the increasingly total disregard for secular education for boys. When I say secular education I do not mean the humanities and what is called well roundedness. I mean basic skills that can later be built upon in order that these children will be able to work as something besides cashiers or moshgichim. Again we are taking away the variables for people to make personal choices.
My understanding of what rabbis like the Chazon Ish were trying to accomplish was giving young men the opportunity to extend their Torah learning and spiritual growth into their marriages. The key word being "opportunity". What has happened 50 years since then in Israel and is rapidly being deployed as the standard in the US is one of social obligation that has no regard for personal circumstance or preference.
Granted that a lot of challenges that we are socially facing today do not have a singular cause and the issues are not so simplistic. However it is obvious to anybody who has eyes that can see that we took a wrong turn at Albuquerque and we cannot continue to head in this direction. There are major changes to be made and I mean major. May it be Hashem's will that this year we should be enlightened towards a proper path.
I would just like to respond to LazarA's post. There are some points which I am in agreement with him but I would strongly diverge on other issues. We are both in agreement that the communities in Israel and the US have their own unique sets of circumstances and that they cannot be compared 100 percent. We both agree that the Israeli kollel paradigm is presently much more difficult to sustain than the American one. Fine, let us examine the American one.
First of all I would like to question the validity of LazarA's assertion that men who stay in kollel for five years generally do not have a large economic disadvantage to men who don't. LazarA has to be living in some parallel universe. Most hareidim who are married for five years have at least two children with a third that will be on the way in one to two or three years. Only now this couple is going to take major steps to climb the economic ladder. Am I supposed to believe that in general they are not going have a significant social-economic disadvantage compared with someone who has made an investment during that same time period towards economically bettering themselves, starting on that path before they have had children?
In the modern serviced based global economic model that exists in North America today, even non religious Jews and goyim a like are having a hard time even with their time invested education and work experience qualifications (not to mention businesses). These people do not even have the extra expenses that are shouldered by frum yidden like kashrus, tuition and in many cases having to live in more expensive neighborhoods because that is where the kehilla is. This is not to mention that secular people time there pregnancies and limit the amount of children that they have for economic reasons at their personal discretion and convenience.
Frum Jews do not have that convenient luxury. Now LazarA wants to purport that leaving kollel with a wife, two kids(the couple will probably have their third within a couple of years or so b'ezrat Hashem) and in many cases today not even having rudimentary grammar, writing, math, office computer skills or a blue collar vocation, merely involves a simple transition period of playing catch up?
Now I am not suggesting in any way that economics alone is strictly a reason on why not to learn in kollel. On the contrary, if a couple is ready to make sacrifices for Torah then they should be praised. This in of itself is a big Kiddush Hashem. Their family will be spiritually off in the long run by setting the course of its values early on in the marriage by putting Torah first above all else. So why am I rambling about economics and arguing with LazerA's assertion that learning in kollel does not generally have its significant economic ramifications? Because I do not believe in white wash and gilding the lily. It is that kind of talk that lead people to make decisions based on misguided assumptions that they will only come to learn as false when it is too late. Unless a couple have well off parents who are enthusiastic about supporting them or that the husband has some sort of Yissaschar/Zevulin arrangement, the idea of preparing for potentially hard times is in order.
Now while I am on the issue of being mussar nefesh for Torah, I would like to discuss another issue that has not yet been addressed in this discussion. While it is obviously praiseworthy to be mussar nefesh for Torah, in my opinion it is not so when it comes to be mussar other peoples nefesh for the same pursuit. What am I talking about? I am talking about the parents who in many cases who are not young and are not wealthy (this is not to mention the fact that they are might still be raising other children at home). What about the increasing number of parents who are being beleaguered by excessive financial demands in the name of marrying off their children. Granted that there is a great merit in being able to marry one's daughter to a talmud chacham. Also having one's offspring learn in kollel. For some this is a giant financial Siamese white elephant. Granted that there are a lot of parents who consider this a personal avodah. However there are a lot of parents who socially get forced into it for the benefit of their kids and the situation is analogous to being dragged by a pick up truck on a bumpy road. This has also (as it has in Israel) greatly contributed to what is called the shidduch crises. Families only marrying their sons to daughters who's families can provide an apartment and vice versa. That is already a subject well written about so I will not tarry on about it here. This seems to be the rapidly expanding trend across the American frum landscape.
This is where I agree with LazerA's comment on social engineering and personal choices. However my issue with the current model that is being increasingly presented in American Chareidi society is that much of those choices are already being maid for individuals by the society that they belong to. The truth is that the American community is following the same path as the Israeli one which has a hashgafa that I personally disagree with. Not the part about learning in kollel. The part of being more than somewhat obliged to. Also the increasingly total disregard for secular education for boys. When I say secular education I do not mean the humanities and what is called well roundedness. I mean basic skills that can later be built upon in order that these children will be able to work as something besides cashiers or moshgichim. Again we are taking away the variables for people to make personal choices.
My understanding of what rabbis like the Chazon Ish were trying to accomplish was giving young men the opportunity to extend their Torah learning and spiritual growth into their marriages. The key word being "opportunity". What has happened 50 years since then in Israel and is rapidly being deployed as the standard in the US is one of social obligation that has no regard for personal circumstance or preference.
Granted that a lot of challenges that we are socially facing today do not have a singular cause and the issues are not so simplistic. However it is obvious to anybody who has eyes that can see that we took a wrong turn at Albuquerque and we cannot continue to head in this direction. There are major changes to be made and I mean major. May it be Hashem's will that this year we should be enlightened towards a proper path.
R' Eliyashev vs. R' Yosef - election upset
Last week, elections took place to choose the state-empowered body - the Chief Rabbinate Council - that is supposed to answer these questions.
The elections were an upset. The non-hassidic, Lithuanian-haredi rabbinic leadership, which gradually has been gaining more power within the Chief Rabbinate, suffered a major setback. Two of its veteran members, Rabbi of Rehovot Simcha Hakohen Kook and chairman of the Neighborhood Rabbis Council Moshe Rauchverger, who is also a neighborhood rabbi in the Haifa area, were voted out of the council.
Rauchverger and Kook, both connected to the Degel Hatorah party and adamantly backed by Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the supreme halachic authority of the haredi Ashkenazi community, were replaced by two rabbis who do not necessarily adhere to his decisions.
One of them, Rabbi Ya'acov Shapira, is a symbol of religious Zionism. He is the son of former Ashkenazi chief rabbi the late Avraham Shapira, considered the most important halachic authority of religious Zionists until his death a year ago. Shapira inherited from his father the position of head of Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, the flagship educational institute for religious-Zionist rabbis.
The other new face is Ya'acov Ruzah, rabbi of the Tel Aviv Burial Society and the L. Greenberg Institute for Forensic Medicine at Abu Kabir. Ruzah's halachic decisions permitting autopsies in cases in which foul play is suspected has raised the rancor of more zealous elements of Orthodoxy, who argue that any mutilation of the body is desecration and blasphemy, since man is created in God's image.
But the major victor in last week's elections was Shas. The Sephardi-haredi party - led by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, considered the preeminent halachic authority for Sephardi Jewry - managed to get Yosef's son, Avraham, into the Chief Rabbinate Council, despite the opposition of the Lithuanian-haredi rabbinic establishment.
In a battle between two rabbinic titans, Yosef won out over Elyashiv. Since its founding in the early 1980s, Shas has been deferential to the Lithuanian rabbinic leadership. The very establishment of the party was orchestrated under the tutelage of Rabbi Elazar Shach, the charismatic, fiery leader of Lithuanian-haredi Jewry before the more low-key nonagenarian Elyashiv.[...]
However, in last week's vote, Shas could not back down to Ashkenazi demands. According to sources close to the rabbinate, Yosef is grooming his son, Avraham, rabbi of Ashdod, for the chief Sephardi rabbi slot in four years. Getting him elected to the Chief Rabbinate Council is an important step in that direction.[...]
The battle between Ovadia Yosef and Elyashiv will probably have little impact on the wider public. With or without Avraham Yosef on the council, heter mechira will continue to be implemented by the Chief Rabbinate. Jewish farmers would lose too much money if it were not. And the Supreme Court has already ruled in favor of these farmers against the previous Chief Rabbinate Council.
Rather, the struggle between Yosef and Elyashiv is for influence and power, and ultimately, for rabbinic hegemony. Yosef, the son of a grocer, wants to "return the crown to its rightful owner." Slowly but surely, he is succeeding. [...]
Modesty Squad & American press
In Israel's ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, where the rule of law sometimes takes a back seat to the rule of God, zealots are on a campaign to stamp out behavior they consider unchaste. They hurl stones at women for such "sins" as wearing a red blouseand attack stores selling devices that can access the Internet.
In recent weeks, self-styled "modesty patrols" have been accused of breaking into the apartment of a Jerusalem woman and beating her for allegedly consorting with men. They have torched a store that sells MP4 players, fearing devout Jews would use them to download pornography.
"These breaches of purity and modesty endanger our community," said 38-year-old Elchanan Blau, defending the bearded, black-robed zealots. "If it takes fire to get them to stop, then so be it."
Many ultra-Orthodox Jews are dismayed by the violence, but the enforcers often enjoy quiet approval from rabbis eager to protect their own reputations as guardians of the faith, community members say. And while some welcome anything that keeps secular culture out of their cloistered world, others feel terrorized, knowing that the mere perception of impropriety could ruin their lives.
"There are eyes and ears all over the place, very similar to what you hear about in countries like Iran," says Israeli-American novelist Naomi Ragen, an observant Jew who has chronicled the troubles that confront some women living in the ultra-Orthodox world.
The violence has already deepened the antagonism between the 600,000 haredim, or God-fearing, and the secular majority, which resents having religious rules dictated to them.
Religious vigilantes operate in a society that has granted their community influence well beyond its numbers — partly out of a commitment to revive the great centers of Jewish scholarship destroyed in the Holocaust, but also because the Orthodox are perennial king-makers in Israeli coalition politics.
Thus public transport is grounded for the Jewish Sabbath each Saturday, and the rabbis control all Jewish marriage and divorce in Israel.
In recent years, however, the haredim have eased up on their long campaign to impose their rules on secular areas, and nowadays many restaurants and suburban shopping centers are open on the Sabbath.
These days, most vigilante attacks take place in the zealots' own neighborhoods. Israel police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said the modesty police are not an organized phenomenon, just rogue enforcers carrying out isolated attacks. But Israel's Justice Ministry used the term "modesty patrols" in an indictment against a man accused of assaulting the Jerusalem woman. [...]
Friday, October 3, 2008
Justice Ministry asks CR Amar to stop converting non-Israelis
Out of concern that Israel will be labeled a proselytizing nation, the Justice Ministry this week asked Chief Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar to stop converting citizens of foreign countries. But Amar is proving reluctant to do so.
In a meeting on Sunday, attorney Harel Goldberg of the Consultation and Legislation Department in the Justice Ministry requested that Amar halt these conversions. Goldberg had sent a letter to Amar more than a month ago warning of the legal problems involved with the practice.
But an aide to Amar who deals with the conversions said that, together with the ministry, they still hoped to find a way to continue the practice.
Legal experts in the ministry and in the Attorney-General's Office have opposed drafting any regulations that would give a religious authority the power to convert citizens of foreign countries.
They argue that such legislation, unprecedented in other Western countries, would give the impression that Israel was actively encouraging the conversions of non-Israelis, even though the conversion candidates come of their own free will.
If the conversion is part of the naturalization process to become Israeli, then it is less problematic from a legal perspective. But Amar has presided over dozens of conversions of people who came here solely to be converted, and who then returned to their countries as Jews.
The case underlines the complexities created in Israel, where religion and citizenship are so closely related.
About five years ago Amar drafted a list of directives governing the way conversions are performed in Israel. At the behest of the Justice Ministry, these directives did not include rules regarding the conversion of foreign citizens who had no intention of becoming Israeli.
Nevertheless, Amar continued to perform these conversions at a rate of between 30 and 50 a year, with candidates coming from all over the world.
A senior administrator in the Conversion Authority who has been at odds with Amar for several years complained to the Justice Ministry that the directives did not grant Amar the power to perform these conversions.
The ministry issued a written request that Amar stop, but Amar's aides ignored the request. A few weeks ago, when a prospective convert from Hong Kong was scheduled to arrive for a conversion, the administrator complained again.
On Sunday, in the meeting with Goldberg, Amar was personally advised to stop.[...]
Ignorance of secular knowledge is Chillul haShem
Shabbos(75a): Bar Kappara said that whoever knows how to calculate the cycles and planetary movement but doesn’t is described in Yeshaya (5:12):”But they don’t pay attention to the work of G‑d and don’t see the activities of His hands.” R’ Yochanon said: “How do we know that it is a mitzva for a person to calculate the cycles and planetary movement? Because it says in Devarim (4:6): ‘For this is your wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the nations of the world.’ What is the wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the nations? It is the calculation of the cycles and planetary movement.
Rashi(Shabbos 75a): In the eyes of the nations of the world - because it is a recognized wisdom. It is provides readily verifiable information concerning the movement of the sun and constellations in that it predicts that a particular year will be bountiful and it is in fact so or that a particular year will have little rain and it is so. That is because all is determined by the movement of the sun and the constellations. Ultimately everything is determined by mazel. It depends upon the time that the sun enters into the mazel.
Netziv(Devarim 32:2): ... an elevated person is nurtured through the study of talmud which is compared to rain. And by means of his understanding of Bible which comes through the study of agada which is compared to dew. He then can come to proper ethical sensibilities and knowledge of how to conduct himself in society and to elevate himself by means of knowledge of secular wisdom which is compared to the sun. This is expressed in Koheles where is says, “What is the benefit for a person who labors under the sun?” This indicates that knowledge of natural science and society brings honor to a person in the eyes of the nations of the world and thus serves to elevate the stature of Jews. However the critical issue is the order of the education. First comes rain (talmudic studies) and afterwards knowledge of agada which is compared to dew. It is only afterwards that it is appropriate to enhance ones abilities through secular knowledge which is comparable to the sun. However prior to talmudic studies, secular studies do not serve to elevate the honor of Jews at all. This is also true even if the secular studies are preceded by the in depth study of the Bible which is compared to dew. That is because without mastering talmudic studies the secular studies will serve to pervert and distort the understanding of the Bible.
Ramchal(Derech Chochma p116): A person who needs to mingle with the non‑Jewish scholars should learn that which causes them to respect him. Consequently G‑d will be sanctified through him.
Vilna Gaon(Kol HaTor 5:2- Cited by R’ Hillel of Shklov):[[It is well known that the eminent R Eliyahu occupied himself extensively with natural phenomena and mundane investigations to gain a better understanding of the wisdom of the Torah, to sanctify G-d’s name in the eyes of the nations and to hasten the final redemption. Even in his youth, he excelled in all seven wisdoms and sought ever more knowledge. He also ordered his disciples to learn whatever they could about the seven wisdoms by which the world is investigated, so that that science of Israel – in conjunction with the wisdom of the Torah – would achieve great recognition in the eyes of the nations, as it is written, “For this is your wisdom and your insight in the eyes of the nations.” Thus , Israel would achieve spiritual superiority, as Scripture states: “To exalt you above all the nations,which He did for praise, for fame and for glory.” He often asked us rhetorically: how are the contemporary Torah figures sanctifying G-d’s name, as many of the earlier authorities did, by their great knowledge of the secrets of nature and the wonders of the Creator? Many righteous gentiles also extolled the wisdom of Israel, possessed by the Torah scholars, the members of the Sanhedrin, the Tanaim and Amoraim, etc. In later generations, there were such giants as our teacher, Rambam, R’ Yomtov Lipman Heller and others who sanctified G-d’s name abundantly in the eyes of the nations through their knowledge of secular research.
Rashi(Shabbos 75a): In the eyes of the nations of the world - because it is a recognized wisdom. It is provides readily verifiable information concerning the movement of the sun and constellations in that it predicts that a particular year will be bountiful and it is in fact so or that a particular year will have little rain and it is so. That is because all is determined by the movement of the sun and the constellations. Ultimately everything is determined by mazel. It depends upon the time that the sun enters into the mazel.
Netziv(Devarim 32:2): ... an elevated person is nurtured through the study of talmud which is compared to rain. And by means of his understanding of Bible which comes through the study of agada which is compared to dew. He then can come to proper ethical sensibilities and knowledge of how to conduct himself in society and to elevate himself by means of knowledge of secular wisdom which is compared to the sun. This is expressed in Koheles where is says, “What is the benefit for a person who labors under the sun?” This indicates that knowledge of natural science and society brings honor to a person in the eyes of the nations of the world and thus serves to elevate the stature of Jews. However the critical issue is the order of the education. First comes rain (talmudic studies) and afterwards knowledge of agada which is compared to dew. It is only afterwards that it is appropriate to enhance ones abilities through secular knowledge which is comparable to the sun. However prior to talmudic studies, secular studies do not serve to elevate the honor of Jews at all. This is also true even if the secular studies are preceded by the in depth study of the Bible which is compared to dew. That is because without mastering talmudic studies the secular studies will serve to pervert and distort the understanding of the Bible.
Ramchal(Derech Chochma p116): A person who needs to mingle with the non‑Jewish scholars should learn that which causes them to respect him. Consequently G‑d will be sanctified through him.
Vilna Gaon(Kol HaTor 5:2- Cited by R’ Hillel of Shklov):[[It is well known that the eminent R Eliyahu occupied himself extensively with natural phenomena and mundane investigations to gain a better understanding of the wisdom of the Torah, to sanctify G-d’s name in the eyes of the nations and to hasten the final redemption. Even in his youth, he excelled in all seven wisdoms and sought ever more knowledge. He also ordered his disciples to learn whatever they could about the seven wisdoms by which the world is investigated, so that that science of Israel – in conjunction with the wisdom of the Torah – would achieve great recognition in the eyes of the nations, as it is written, “For this is your wisdom and your insight in the eyes of the nations.” Thus , Israel would achieve spiritual superiority, as Scripture states: “To exalt you above all the nations,which He did for praise, for fame and for glory.” He often asked us rhetorically: how are the contemporary Torah figures sanctifying G-d’s name, as many of the earlier authorities did, by their great knowledge of the secrets of nature and the wonders of the Creator? Many righteous gentiles also extolled the wisdom of Israel, possessed by the Torah scholars, the members of the Sanhedrin, the Tanaim and Amoraim, etc. In later generations, there were such giants as our teacher, Rambam, R’ Yomtov Lipman Heller and others who sanctified G-d’s name abundantly in the eyes of the nations through their knowledge of secular research.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Kollel IV - Response to criticisms
Guest Post: LazerA's comment to "Kollel & the needs of the Times":
Given that such studies cannot even begin until the student is a fully matured Talmudic scholar, the idea that we could readily produce such experts in "few years" is simply not realistic.
First, on the facts, while there are certainly some kollel yungerleit who never really settle down to learn seriously, the vast majority of such fellows leave kollel after only a few years. From my observation, the vast majority of kollel fellows leave kollel after only a four or five years regardless of how well they are learning. (I am, obviously, only talking about America. Israel is an entirely different story.)
As for the idea of "expertise", the basic ideology of Torah l'shma expoused by R' Aharon Kotler and others is that the purpose of learning Torah is simply to learn Torah. Expertise in any specific area - including semicha - is, for the most part, a by-product of this endeavor. Obviously, there are many bnei Torah who, for whatever reason, find themselves attracted to a particular area and become experts, but that is not the primary function or goal of a yeshiva or kollel.
To say that bnei Torah who are studying b'hasmada for years and are, in many cases, bekiim in shas, are learning "aimlessly" because they haven't gotten semicha demonstrates a basic ideological difference. This difference may well be the most critical distinction between the "chareidi" worldview and that of the "Modern" Orthodox.
A) A very substantial portion of kollel yungerleit receive their primary support from their families and from their wive's employment. Just as an example, when I was in kollel, I never received any government funds nor did I get any kollel checks. (I also did not receive money from my family.)
B) Those who take tzedaka while in kollel are taking it from fellow Jews.
C) It is questionable whether taking government money is considered public. The standard definition of בפרהסיא is in front of ten men. It seems to me that getting a check in the mail is certainly not בפרהסיא. Cashing a WIC check or using one of those government cards at the checkout counter would probably also not be, but it might depend on how obvious it is.
D) Even if it is, you have to determine whether or not they have the ability to do otherwise. Such a determination can only be made case by case.
E) In my opinion, it is questionable whether taking government money is considered taking charity in the first place. (Briefly, as our government moves more and more in the direction of socialism, taking government money is just how the system works. Almost everyone takes government money in some form or another. Entire industries, e.g. agriculture, are based on government handouts.)
F) There is no connection, to my knowledge, between being kosher for eidus and being counted for a minyan.
--------------------
While I don't agree with much of Bartley Kulp's comment, he does raise an important issue regarding the economic viability of the kollel system. It seems to me that while this is a major issue in Israel, it is much less so in America. I simply know too many former kollel fellows who went off to law school (or similar) and/or got good jobs. At the same time, I know even more fellows who never learned in kollel who are working as checkout clerks (some with college educations). I am not convinced that spending three to five years in kollel creates that great an economic disadvantage. (As for those who chose to stay in kollel for much longer, in that case we are dealing with a relatively small and very committed group that will either stay in kollel permanently or go on to the rabbinate (or related fields) or into education. The next generation will need roshei yeshiva also, after all.)
Again, it seems to me that the bulk of these criticisms are rooted less in actual practical issues but in basic differences in ideology. For those who truly believe that limud haTorah, in of itself, is the key to all of klall Yisrael's success materially and spiritually, these arguments are, for the most part, non-sequiturs. Perhaps the most dissonant idea is the apparent underlying assumption that we already have "enough" talmidei chachamim. I'm not sure if that is even possible, but, even if it is, I certainly don't think that we are anywhere near that point yet.
I would add an additional point. There are a fair number (I won't guess at percentages) of yeshiva students who don't really "come into their own" in learning until they are in their twenties. (I was one such, and I wasn't alone.) To rule out kollel for such students would mean eliminating their most productive years of Torah study.
Quite frankly, many of these complaints sound too much like social engineering. Ultimately we are talking about private decisions made by individuals. Who is going to decide who gets the chance to become a talmid chacham and who doesn't? Who is going to decide when someone has "lost his chance"? Without answering those questions, all of this is just kvetching.
Garnel Ironheart said...While you might be able to produce people with reasonable competence in various areas, you would not be producing experts. I think we are dealing here with a different standard of expertise. For example, in my opinion (which I believe is shared by most bnei Torah), an expert in kashrus has a ready knowledge of all of relevant Tur/Shulchan Aruch, with the sugyos in Shas and a wide range of knowledge in the relevant shailos u'teshuvos.
For one thing, if the yeshivos actually had dedicated tracks and students had to choose one, you could produce experts in various areas after only a few years.
Given that such studies cannot even begin until the student is a fully matured Talmudic scholar, the idea that we could readily produce such experts in "few years" is simply not realistic.
It's because most guys sit and "learn" aimlessly (well, they won't admit it but if you haven't learned enough to get semichah after 10 years and you're still just "learning" it's aimless, I mean, they even given you only so many years to get a PhD!) instead of towards a defined goal of expertise.Here we are dealing with an obvious major difference in ideology.
First, on the facts, while there are certainly some kollel yungerleit who never really settle down to learn seriously, the vast majority of such fellows leave kollel after only a few years. From my observation, the vast majority of kollel fellows leave kollel after only a four or five years regardless of how well they are learning. (I am, obviously, only talking about America. Israel is an entirely different story.)
As for the idea of "expertise", the basic ideology of Torah l'shma expoused by R' Aharon Kotler and others is that the purpose of learning Torah is simply to learn Torah. Expertise in any specific area - including semicha - is, for the most part, a by-product of this endeavor. Obviously, there are many bnei Torah who, for whatever reason, find themselves attracted to a particular area and become experts, but that is not the primary function or goal of a yeshiva or kollel.
To say that bnei Torah who are studying b'hasmada for years and are, in many cases, bekiim in shas, are learning "aimlessly" because they haven't gotten semicha demonstrates a basic ideological difference. This difference may well be the most critical distinction between the "chareidi" worldview and that of the "Modern" Orthodox.
Earner said...I am not sure I am following this. The youth that are off the derech are not former kollel fellows. While divorce is rising throughout the Orthodox Jewish world, I suspect that it is probably lowest amongst those engaged in long-term Torah study. It certainly isn't higher. The same thing is true with regard to "drug use, sexual problems etc etc". I can't say that kollelim will save the general community from these problems, but they certainly aren't contributing to them in any significant way.
Whatever these yungerleit are learning in kollel after their chassunas it is not worth much as an unprecedented number of our youth are off the derech, there are a record number of divorces and our communities are plagued by drug use, sexual problems etc etc in our communities is a real Chillul Hashem.
The widespread practice of defrauding the government of both Israel and the US to support our families so men can "sit and learn" is stealing. To raise an entire generation to steal tzedakkah from the sick and disabled in the name of "Torah", is a crime against the Torah and a chillul Hashem.I agree with you that defrauding the government is stealing. Any yeshiva or kollel that engages in such forbidden practices should be shut down. But this problem is not inherent in the idea of kollel. I don't know how widespread these forbidden practices are. I, personally. did not encounter such fraudulent practices when I was in kollel. Granted, many yeshivos and kollelim are very adept at working the system to get as much money as is legally possible from the government. There are also kollelim (in America, at least) that specifically prohibit their members from taking any money from the government.
A man who receives tzedakka cannot even qualify as a kosher witness, so what does that say about the generation of learners who live off of the gov't and the tzeddaka of our communities? That they should not even be counted for a minyan.This is a pretty radical statement to make without supporting it. To my knowledge, only a person who publicly takes charity from non-Jews when he could do so privately is invalid for testimony. (Yoreh Deah 34:18) Applying this to kolleleit is obviously problematic for many reasons:
A) A very substantial portion of kollel yungerleit receive their primary support from their families and from their wive's employment. Just as an example, when I was in kollel, I never received any government funds nor did I get any kollel checks. (I also did not receive money from my family.)
B) Those who take tzedaka while in kollel are taking it from fellow Jews.
C) It is questionable whether taking government money is considered public. The standard definition of בפרהסיא is in front of ten men. It seems to me that getting a check in the mail is certainly not בפרהסיא. Cashing a WIC check or using one of those government cards at the checkout counter would probably also not be, but it might depend on how obvious it is.
D) Even if it is, you have to determine whether or not they have the ability to do otherwise. Such a determination can only be made case by case.
E) In my opinion, it is questionable whether taking government money is considered taking charity in the first place. (Briefly, as our government moves more and more in the direction of socialism, taking government money is just how the system works. Almost everyone takes government money in some form or another. Entire industries, e.g. agriculture, are based on government handouts.)
F) There is no connection, to my knowledge, between being kosher for eidus and being counted for a minyan.
--------------------
While I don't agree with much of Bartley Kulp's comment, he does raise an important issue regarding the economic viability of the kollel system. It seems to me that while this is a major issue in Israel, it is much less so in America. I simply know too many former kollel fellows who went off to law school (or similar) and/or got good jobs. At the same time, I know even more fellows who never learned in kollel who are working as checkout clerks (some with college educations). I am not convinced that spending three to five years in kollel creates that great an economic disadvantage. (As for those who chose to stay in kollel for much longer, in that case we are dealing with a relatively small and very committed group that will either stay in kollel permanently or go on to the rabbinate (or related fields) or into education. The next generation will need roshei yeshiva also, after all.)
Again, it seems to me that the bulk of these criticisms are rooted less in actual practical issues but in basic differences in ideology. For those who truly believe that limud haTorah, in of itself, is the key to all of klall Yisrael's success materially and spiritually, these arguments are, for the most part, non-sequiturs. Perhaps the most dissonant idea is the apparent underlying assumption that we already have "enough" talmidei chachamim. I'm not sure if that is even possible, but, even if it is, I certainly don't think that we are anywhere near that point yet.
I would add an additional point. There are a fair number (I won't guess at percentages) of yeshiva students who don't really "come into their own" in learning until they are in their twenties. (I was one such, and I wasn't alone.) To rule out kollel for such students would mean eliminating their most productive years of Torah study.
Quite frankly, many of these complaints sound too much like social engineering. Ultimately we are talking about private decisions made by individuals. Who is going to decide who gets the chance to become a talmid chacham and who doesn't? Who is going to decide when someone has "lost his chance"? Without answering those questions, all of this is just kvetching.
Kollel III - Community Kollel
Jewish Action published a discussion by Rabbi Feitman of the necessity and impact of the community kollel
[...] Today, boys graduating high school almost automatically proceed to at least a year of study in a yeshivah gedolah (post high school yeshivah) in Israel or closer to home. They will return, almost invariably, with a deeper appreciation of Yiddishkeit, more committed to a lifetime of Torah study and permanently imbued with a profound respect for scholars and the unique world of the beit midrash. But some of them—more and more with each passing year—take the additional step of joining a kollel.* Instead of pursuing the formerly derigueur Jewish professions of medicine, law, business, and education, they will continue with full-time Torah study, beginning their married lives immersed in learning. (Kollelim are specific to married men; unmarried men can, of course, learn full time in a yeshivah but they are not formally members of a kollel.) ...
In addition to the traditional kollel, generally associated with a yeshivah gedolah, a new kind of kollel has developed, widely known as the community kollel. Here the yungeleit can pursue rigorous Torah study during the morning and afternoon with their own peers in the traditional manner. They then return home to join their families for a few hours and are back in the kollel by 8:00 PM. At this point, they study with members of the community on a one-to-one basis or deliver lectures and shiurim. Studying at the kollel are those ranging from sophisticated Torah scholars to people with minimal Jewish knowledge. Often the kollel becomes the new focal point for all Jewish events in the community. Furthermore, many of these kollelim hire outreach directors who are responsible for reaching out to all segments of the community and delivering lectures on college campuses, as well as in JCCs and senior citizen centers. Invariably the community kollel succeeds in having an enormous impact. For instance, the Toronto kollel, under the leadership of Rabbi Shlomo Miller, has influenced thousands of lives in its 34 years of operation. It has been instrumental in the opening of five yeshivot, five metivtot and even spawned another kollel last year. [...]
Kollel II - Rav Moshe Feinstein
:(אגרות משה (יורה דעה חלק ב סימן קטז
בענין קבלת פרס לפרנסתם מהכוללים כדי שיוכלו להתגדל בתורה ט"ז אלול תשכ"ד. מע"כ ידידי מר אהרן יהושע דאראבנער שליט"א.
הנה בדבר ת"ח הרוצים להתעסק בתורה ולהחכים בה בידיעת התורה בכמותה ואיכותה ונהנים לפרנסתם ממה שנוטלים פרס בכוללים וכן הרבנים הנוטלים פרס והמלמדים עם תלמידים וראשי הישיבות הנוטלים פרס לפרנסתם אם שפיר עבדי או שיש מה להרהר אחר זה ויהיה מדת חסידות שלא להתפרנס מזה אלא ממעשה ידיו. הנה ודאי שפיר עבדי דכן איפסק ברמ"א יו"ד סימן רמ"ו סעיף כ"א שאפילו בריא מותר ומותר לחכם ולתלמידיו לקבל הספקות מן הנותנים כדי להחזיק ידי לומדי תורה שעי"ז יכולין לעסוק בתורה בריוח. והש"ך סק"כ הביא אף מהכ"מ שפסק כן אפילו אם נימא שאין כן דעת הרמב"ם משום שכל חכמי ישראל קודם זמן רבנו ואחריו נוהגין ליטול שכרם מהצבור, ואף אם לדינא הלכה כרמב"ם הסכימו כן חכמי הדורות משום עת לעשות לה' הפרו תורתך שאילו לא היה פרנסת הלומדים והמלמדים מצויה לא היו יכולין לטרוח בתורה כראוי והיתה התורה משתכחת מישראל ובהיותה מצויה יוכלו לעסוק ויגדיל תורה ויאדיר והוא לשון הכ"מ בפ"ג מת"ת ה"י בסופו. וכן הביא ממהרש"ל שכתב ואמת שאם לא כן כבר היתה בטלה תורה מישראל כי א"א לכל אדם לעסוק בתורה ולהחכים בה וגם להתפרנס ממעשה ידיו, ומסיק יותר דעון הוא בידו אם לא יקבל מאחרים אפילו יודע חכמה ומלאכה שיוכל ליגע בה ולהרויח כדי לפרנס את ביתו בוז יבוזו לו באהבת התורה ולומדיה כי א"א שיבטל מלמודו עיי"ש, ולכן הוא דין ברור ופשוט שנתקבל בכל הדורות אם מדינא אם מתקנה דעת לעשות לה' הפרו תורתך שמותר לעסוק בתורה ולהתפרנס מקבלת פרס או ממה שהוא מלמד תורה לאחרים או שהוא רב ומורה הוראה, ואין להמנע מזה אפילו ממדת חסידות. ואני אומר כי אלו המתחסדים מצד שיטת הרמב"ם הוא בעצת היצה"ר כדי שיפסיק מללמוד ויעסוק במלאכה ובמסחר וכדומה עד שלבסוף הם שוכחים אף המקצת שכבר למדו ואינו מניחם אף לקבוע זמן קצר לת"ת, כי אם הראשונים כמלאכים אמרו שא"א לעסוק בתורה ולהחכים בה כשיעשה מלאכה להתפרנס ממעשה ידיו, כ"ש בדורנו דור יתמא דיתמי וגם אין לנו הנשים צדקניות שירצו לסבול עוני ודחקות כבדורותם, שודאי א"א לשום אדם להתגאות ולומר שהוא יכול לעשות מלאכה ולהחכים בתורה. לכן לא יעלה על מחשבתך עצת היצה"ר שיש בקבלת פרס דלומדים בכוללים ופרס דרבנים ומלמדים וראשי ישיבה איזה חטא וחסרון מדת חסידות, שהוא רק להסית לפרוש מן התורה. ומי יתן והיו נמצאים אנשים מתנדבים לפרנס הרבה ת"ח היו מתרבים בני תורה גדולי ישראל ובעלי הוראה כרצון השי"ת שאין לו בעולמו אלא ד' אמות של הלכה
--------------------------------------------------
אגרות משה (יורה דעה חלק ד סימן לו.ד):
נמצא לפי זה דלהרמב"ם מחוייב כל אדם ללמוד כל התורה ולידע אותה, ורשאי אף להתפרנס מצדקה - באם כשיעבוד לפרנסתו במלאכה איזו שעות לא יוכל ללמוד בהבנה ישרה ונכונה כל מה שלומד. ואף שיש לו למזונות ע"י הדחק, רשאי ליקח צדקה למזונות בני אדם בינונים, ואף לבשר וכדומה. אבל אם כבר למד עד שעבר הזמן שבו יכול ללמוד כל מה שילמוד - בהבנה ישרה ונכונה, אסור ליטול מצדקה כשהוא ראוי מצד כוחותיו לעבוד איזו שעות במלאכה כדי חייו וחיי בני ביתו. וכן אם כשרונותיו נמוכים, ולפי מה שחושבין אינשי המכירין אותו ורבו - לפי מה שמכירין אותו - גם כשלא יפסיק מלימודו לא יוכל להבין בעצמו, ולא יפסיד כלום באיכות לימודו, צריך לעשות מלאכה לפי מה שצריך לו ולבני ביתו ולא ליקח מן הצדקה אף שהוא בשביל לימודו. ומעלה גדולה ומדת חסידות הוא אף למי שרשאי ליטול מן הצדקה כדי שיוכל ללמוד כל התורה ולידע אותה, לדחוק את עצמו ולימנע מבשר וממאכלות בריאים וטובים כדי שלא ליהנות משל צדקה ולא ממתנות. אבל נראה פשוט שאינו רשאי אלא בשביל מזונות עצמו, ולא כשיש לו אשה שחייב במזונותיה כשלא הודיעה ונתרצית. וכשיש לו בנים ובנות אינו רשאי לדחוק אותן אלא שרשאי שלא לעבוד, וליקח בעדם מצדקה אם יתנו.
-------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
אגרות משה (יורה דעה חלק ד סימן לו.ד):
נמצא לפי זה דלהרמב"ם מחוייב כל אדם ללמוד כל התורה ולידע אותה, ורשאי אף להתפרנס מצדקה - באם כשיעבוד לפרנסתו במלאכה איזו שעות לא יוכל ללמוד בהבנה ישרה ונכונה כל מה שלומד. ואף שיש לו למזונות ע"י הדחק, רשאי ליקח צדקה למזונות בני אדם בינונים, ואף לבשר וכדומה. אבל אם כבר למד עד שעבר הזמן שבו יכול ללמוד כל מה שילמוד - בהבנה ישרה ונכונה, אסור ליטול מצדקה כשהוא ראוי מצד כוחותיו לעבוד איזו שעות במלאכה כדי חייו וחיי בני ביתו. וכן אם כשרונותיו נמוכים, ולפי מה שחושבין אינשי המכירין אותו ורבו - לפי מה שמכירין אותו - גם כשלא יפסיק מלימודו לא יוכל להבין בעצמו, ולא יפסיד כלום באיכות לימודו, צריך לעשות מלאכה לפי מה שצריך לו ולבני ביתו ולא ליקח מן הצדקה אף שהוא בשביל לימודו. ומעלה גדולה ומדת חסידות הוא אף למי שרשאי ליטול מן הצדקה כדי שיוכל ללמוד כל התורה ולידע אותה, לדחוק את עצמו ולימנע מבשר וממאכלות בריאים וטובים כדי שלא ליהנות משל צדקה ולא ממתנות. אבל נראה פשוט שאינו רשאי אלא בשביל מזונות עצמו, ולא כשיש לו אשה שחייב במזונותיה כשלא הודיעה ונתרצית. וכשיש לו בנים ובנות אינו רשאי לדחוק אותן אלא שרשאי שלא לעבוד, וליקח בעדם מצדקה אם יתנו.
-------------------------------------------------
אגרות משה (יורה דעה חלק ד סימן לז.ז
ואולי אף להרמב"ם יהיה מותר לת"ח ליקח מתנות, אם האמת הוא שא"א לו ללמוד כשיצטרך לעשות מלאכה לפרנסתו ופרנסת בני ביתו, דחיוב לימוד התורה דוחה את המעלה שלא ליקח מתנות
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)