I haven't seen the sources but I presume Rambam would strongly disagree. But I must say that a great many Chareidi and otherwise religious Jews certainly seem to take this sacrifice seriously, as they are not only brain-dead morons who educate their children and followers to be likewise, but virulently attack any Jew who isn't as well.
Yes, since being frum is irrational, as are the many additional halachos which were created by very great Humans, who nevertheless did not have the foresight as The Creator HaKodosh Baruch Hu! If you reverse engineer how halacha has developed, you will see it is essentially meaningless. Look at having separate cutlery. This isn't a torah commandment, and we do not need to be more kosher than Yehoshua, or Eliyahu HaNavi or David Hamelech. But that is one example, there are many more which actually drive us nuts. Ibn Ezra goes so far as to say that even the Torah mus be understood rationally, whilst HaMeiri says that a gezeira disappears once the original reason for it has disappeared. So it is ~crazy~ to keep a halacha if there is no reason for it.
Sorry, I am being an apikores, but this is the logical conclusion of the question you ask.
Does one have to be brain dead to be frum? Certainly not! Sadly, however, much of frumkeit as practiced today by Chareidim requires various degrees of brain death. At Sinai, we sacrificed the independence to guide our lives SOLELY by our intelligence. Anyone who sacrifices more of the God-given intelligence than Hashem requires is lacking intelligence!
Wow. DT is back for exactly one day and the mud slinging begins. I don't recall seeing your posts before. What's your background? Why the hate? Talking about virulent attacks....
Yes, but that is precisely the question being asked - so don't shoot the messenger. Th question is whether one has to be non-thinking to be frum.
However, I think your statement about the Torah/Mitzvot is mistaken. Rambam specifically addresses this issue , and points to the verse that says they are "Hachamt'chem v binatchem" So there is Chochma to the written Law.
Again there is also Chochma to the Oral Law, but it is on an entirely different level. I am suggesting in some cases, eg 2nd day Yom Tov b'galuta, there is no reason for it now, or when there is a fixed calendar. There is reason to keep 1st day Sukot, but no logical reason for 2ns day yomtov.
So Rav Abramski and RJBS both agree that Judaism mandates -- and by extension, in order to be a kosher religiously observant Jew, one must agree -- that all of the Torah, Judaism and Halacha are irrational and that we must believe in G-d and in His Torah and Halacha even if it makes absolutely zero sense to our minds and logic.
You say it's the logical conclusion. But the only tool you have is your own mind which can be biased, and also can miscalculate. You refer to certain rabbis as very great humans. That's very gracious of you, but is that what you really believe? Do believe that they had logical minds? Or would you not go that far? It seems to me that you believe your logic to be far superior to that of those to whom you refer as great humans.
Chazal were absolute giants, greater even than giants like the Rambam. Where does it say that all of their decisions were logical? They were not philosophers. My logic more superior? No. Their halachic decisions were not based on western philosophy. Look at the Raavad on Rambam, I think in mamrim. He refutes the requirement for a Bd to be greater in numbers/ wisdom. Cites a case to support it.
I absolutely agree that I am biased and can very easily miscalculate. we have to analyse what's the topic of discussion is and whether we did in fact or are required to surrender our minds.
It is not all irrational. The issur of Murder is not irrational, neither is building a Maakeh, or the issur of mishkave zachar etc. (I don't know why some people think it is fine, perhaps the brainwashing of the younger generation).
But, I agree with your inference Moe. Many people believe the Torah is irrational, many frum people and Gedolim. But the great names in Seforim, Saadia, Rambam, Ibn Ezra, Bahya ibn Pakuda, Meiri, Ralbag , and even Ramchal, hold that it is very rational.
Ibn Ezra and Rambam certainly fit far closer to Chareidi than any other contemporary Jewish group or denomination. But RJBS simply cannot be ascribed as Chareidi.
I'm a regular guy consider frum by today's standards, and have by no means surrendered my mind nor have been required to do so. But sometimes fools are told to know their place, and a first grade student who just learned 1+1=2 shouldn't therefore think he's in the league to argue with a calculus professor. Not that it's illegal to do so, just very stupid.
Ok. I understand what you are saying. I misunderstood before. You're not ch'v speaking badly. On the contrary you're saying that Torah is above and beyond logic and not bound by it's limitations, and we must therefore capitulate, regardless of our logic.
I agree with that.
But I don't agree that we must surrender our minds. We must condition and teach our minds to know the parameters of The Torah, when logic is to be applied and when not. This, however, is a highly logical process which requires thorough logical analysis of those parameters.
The question is already risky. I agree about parameters of logic, but I have no sefer that describes these. Often a rabbi will make a statement which seems odd. Then a greater Rav will reject that as being nonsense. I have to be careful what I say about the Sanhedrin, but they would examine, debate and disagree. And question previous decisions. I also say that what we know about chazal is just the tip of the iceberg. We have a few statements, but they knew much more than we can infer from their statements in the gemara. And we can be from and still question everything.
You say you have no sefer that describes the rules. I can see that you truly don't know the rules. I don't mean to insult you, but before anything, you must recognize what lever you're at. These rules are learned over time through diligent Torah study with the proper hashkafa, by following a worthy and legitimate rebbee. And even so, not every student will eventually grasp it. What you say about Sanhedrin, needs perspective. It is absurd for the first grader who just mastered 1+1=2, to think he's in the league of arguing with a calculus professor, but another calculus professor would be in place to do so. We can question things with intention to learn, but not with intention to ridicule, and in the case of higher level Torah scholars, the parameters of which I won't get into now, not with intention to disagree.
Harry, you are getting into a side discussion, and evading the title of this post. In Sefer Yirmiyahu, he says "Tofsei Torah Lo Yedao'ni" the Torah scholars did not know Hashem. Rashi writes there "Sanhedrin". So get off you high hareidi horse that says the Sanhedrin was infallible, and that's what the Pope copied. The Sanhedrin was human, flesh and blood, and was subject to Korbanot if/when they erred. Also, which Sanhedrin are you talking about? Do you know who its members were? The idea of science professor is usually brought by people who know nothing about science or professors. Professors become professors after they have published a number of books or papers, and have some academic record. That doesn't mean they know everything, nor does it make them infallible. It also doesn't mean that their students cannot show them to be wrong. Remember the Mishnah when 2 Tannaim asked some garbage men a question, and the garbage men were right, they were wrong.
There is a book written by r. Chaim Zimmerman "Torah and reason" on this issues. as i remember he says a few times: all the torah and every halachah is pure logic, which is only a insided can fully comprehend. he calls non-logical religions - avoda zora!
I heard a vort about rav Isaac Bernstein ztl. In yeshiva, he was asked why he spends so much time studying Chumash. He answered "im learning Hakadosh Baruch Hu's commentary to the Talmud "
I haven't seen the sources but I presume Rambam would strongly disagree. But I must say that a great many Chareidi and otherwise religious Jews certainly seem to take this sacrifice seriously, as they are not only brain-dead morons who educate their children and followers to be likewise, but virulently attack any Jew who isn't as well.
ReplyDeleteI assume this means that B"H you have recovered from your illness. Baruch Rofeh Cholim. You were sorely missed. Welcome Back.
ReplyDeleteYes, since being frum is irrational, as are the many additional halachos which were created by very great Humans, who nevertheless did not have the foresight as The Creator HaKodosh Baruch Hu! If you reverse engineer how halacha has developed, you will see it is essentially meaningless. Look at having separate cutlery. This isn't a torah commandment, and we do not need to be more kosher than Yehoshua, or Eliyahu HaNavi or David Hamelech. But that is one example, there are many more which actually drive us nuts.
ReplyDeleteIbn Ezra goes so far as to say that even the Torah mus be understood rationally, whilst HaMeiri says that a gezeira disappears once the original reason for it has disappeared. So it is ~crazy~ to keep a halacha if there is no reason for it.
Sorry, I am being an apikores, but this is the logical conclusion of the question you ask.
I am so grateful you are back! I missed your topics and input immensely. May you enjoy a speedy refuah shelaima and a happy long life.
ReplyDeleteDoes one have to be brain dead to be frum? Certainly not! Sadly, however, much of frumkeit as practiced today by Chareidim requires various degrees of brain death. At Sinai, we sacrificed the independence to guide our lives SOLELY by our intelligence. Anyone who sacrifices more of the God-given intelligence than Hashem requires is lacking intelligence!
ReplyDeleteWow. DT is back for exactly one day and the mud slinging begins.
ReplyDeleteI don't recall seeing your posts before. What's your background? Why the hate?
Talking about virulent attacks....
You should be sorry you're an apikores. I hope one day you'll see error in your ways.
ReplyDeleteThe entire Torah, all mitzvos have no reason, other than Gd saying so. Your belief otherwise is steering you wrong.
Yes, but that is precisely the question being asked - so don't shoot the messenger. Th question is whether one has to be non-thinking to be frum.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think your statement about the Torah/Mitzvot is mistaken. Rambam specifically addresses this issue , and points to the verse that says they are "Hachamt'chem v binatchem" So there is Chochma to the written Law.
Again there is also Chochma to the Oral Law, but it is on an entirely different level. I am suggesting in some cases, eg 2nd day Yom Tov b'galuta, there is no reason for it now, or when there is a fixed calendar. There is reason to keep 1st day Sukot, but no logical reason for 2ns day yomtov.
Welcome back. May you enjoy good health.
ReplyDeleteQED.
ReplyDeleteSo Rav Abramski and RJBS both agree that Judaism mandates -- and by extension, in order to be a kosher religiously observant Jew, one must agree -- that all of the Torah, Judaism and Halacha are irrational and that we must believe in G-d and in His Torah and Halacha even if it makes absolutely zero sense to our minds and logic.
ReplyDeleteClearly this isn't just a Chareidi position.
ברוך רופא חולים
ReplyDeleteMay it be the will of Hashem that your health and well being continue to thrive
לאורך ימים ושנים טובים
You say it's the logical conclusion. But the only tool you have is your own mind which can be biased, and also can miscalculate. You refer to certain rabbis as very great humans. That's very gracious of you, but is that what you really believe? Do believe that they had logical minds? Or would you not go that far? It seems to me that you believe your logic to be far superior to that of those to whom you refer as great humans.
ReplyDeleteDT, Can you post the discussions of the 2 rabbis you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteChazal were absolute giants, greater even than giants like the Rambam. Where does it say that all of their decisions were logical? They were not philosophers.
ReplyDeleteMy logic more superior? No. Their halachic decisions were not based on western philosophy. Look at the Raavad on Rambam, I think in mamrim. He refutes the requirement for a Bd to be greater in numbers/ wisdom. Cites a case to support it.
I absolutely agree that I am biased and can very easily miscalculate. we have to analyse what's the topic of discussion is and whether we did in fact or are required to surrender our minds.
ReplyDeleteThey were both hareidi background. Ibn Ezra, and rambam were, therefore, not hareidi.
ReplyDeleteIt is not all irrational. The issur of Murder is not irrational, neither is building a Maakeh, or the issur of mishkave zachar etc. (I don't know why some people think it is fine, perhaps the brainwashing of the younger generation).
ReplyDeleteBut, I agree with your inference Moe. Many people believe the Torah is irrational, many frum people and Gedolim. But the great names in Seforim, Saadia, Rambam, Ibn Ezra, Bahya ibn Pakuda, Meiri, Ralbag , and even Ramchal, hold that it is very rational.
Ibn Ezra and Rambam certainly fit far closer to Chareidi than any other contemporary Jewish group or denomination. But RJBS simply cannot be ascribed as Chareidi.
ReplyDeleteI'm a regular guy consider frum by today's standards, and have by no means surrendered my mind nor have been required to do so. But sometimes fools are told to know their place, and a first grade student who just learned 1+1=2 shouldn't therefore think he's in the league to argue with a calculus professor. Not that it's illegal to do so, just very stupid.
ReplyDeleteOk. I understand what you are saying. I misunderstood before. You're not ch'v speaking badly. On the contrary you're saying that Torah is above and beyond logic and not bound by it's limitations, and we must therefore capitulate, regardless of our logic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with that.
But I don't agree that we must surrender our minds. We must condition and teach our minds to know the parameters of The Torah, when logic is to be applied and when not. This, however, is a highly logical process which requires thorough logical analysis of those parameters.
The question is already risky. I agree about parameters of logic, but I have no sefer that describes these. Often a rabbi will make a statement which seems odd. Then a greater Rav will reject that as being nonsense. I have to be careful what I say about the Sanhedrin, but they would examine, debate and disagree. And question previous decisions.
ReplyDeleteI also say that what we know about chazal is just the tip of the iceberg. We have a few statements, but they knew much more than we can infer from their statements in the gemara.
And we can be from and still question everything.
They were rishonim. Rjbs was modern but still very frum. He opposed all change.
ReplyDeleteYou say you have no sefer that describes the rules. I can see that you truly don't know the rules. I don't mean to insult you, but before anything, you must recognize what lever you're at. These rules are learned over time through diligent Torah study with the proper hashkafa, by following a worthy and legitimate rebbee. And even so, not every student will eventually grasp it. What you say about Sanhedrin, needs perspective. It is absurd for the first grader who just mastered 1+1=2, to think he's in the league of arguing with a calculus professor, but another calculus professor would be in place to do so. We can question things with intention to learn, but not with intention to ridicule, and in the case of higher level Torah scholars, the parameters of which I won't get into now, not with intention to disagree.
ReplyDeleteHarry, you are getting into a side discussion, and evading the title of this post.
ReplyDeleteIn Sefer Yirmiyahu, he says "Tofsei Torah Lo Yedao'ni" the Torah scholars did not know Hashem. Rashi writes there "Sanhedrin". So get off you high hareidi horse that says the Sanhedrin was infallible, and that's what the Pope copied. The Sanhedrin was human, flesh and blood, and was subject to Korbanot if/when they erred.
Also, which Sanhedrin are you talking about? Do you know who its members were?
The idea of science professor is usually brought by people who know nothing about science or professors.
Professors become professors after they have published a number of books or papers, and have some academic record. That doesn't mean they know everything, nor does it make them infallible. It also doesn't mean that their students cannot show them to be wrong.
Remember the Mishnah when 2 Tannaim asked some garbage men a question, and the garbage men were right, they were wrong.
Second day -- simple reason: watch your parents customs.
ReplyDeletethere is a book written by r. Chaim Zimmerman on this issues - Torah and reason.
ReplyDeleteThere is a book written by r. Chaim Zimmerman "Torah and reason" on this issues. as i remember he says a few times: all the torah and every halachah is pure logic, which is only a insided can fully comprehend. he calls non-logical religions - avoda zora!
ReplyDeleteHuh? Where does this excerpt say anything of the sort? It says the opposite!
ReplyDeleteI heard a vort about rav Isaac Bernstein ztl. In yeshiva, he was asked why he spends so much time studying Chumash. He answered "im learning Hakadosh Baruch Hu's commentary to the Talmud "
ReplyDelete