Cardinal George Pell, once a top adviser to Pope Francis, was sentenced Wednesday to six years in prison. Pell had been found guilty of five counts related to sexually abusing two boys. Pell is the highest-ranking member of the Catholic Church to be found guilty of abuse. Network 10's Emma O'Sullivan joins CBSN with the latest.
Disgraced Dayan kicked out of London beit Din
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/dayan-abraham-s-departure-has-been-a-shameful-episode-says-chief-rabbi-1.481432
still giving a Mishna Berura shiur?
ReplyDeletehttp://toraschaim.org.uk/
loshon horah alert
ReplyDeleteIt's in the public domain, so not l.h. the man was doing eishes ish. How do you stone someone if you don't talk about it in biblical Law? 馃槶
ReplyDeleteKnowing many shuls, they probably just aren't very quick in updating their website.
ReplyDeletewhat happens to the psak given by him previously?
ReplyDeleteWhat pesak?
ReplyDeleteAs per the Chazon Ish, this doesn't fall under the rubric of "lashon hora".
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46852&st=&pgnum=122
拽讜讘抓 讗讙专讜转 讞讝讜谉 讗讬砖 - 讘, 拽诇讙
...讻讬 专讗讜讬 诇讛诪讞讝讬拽讬诐 讘转讜专转 讛', 诇讚注转 讗转 讙讚讜诇讬讛 讘讗讜驻讬讬诐 讛讗诪讬转讬, 讜讗诐 讛讜转专 诇讚讘专 诇砖讜谉 讛专注 注诇 讗讜诪谉 讘讗讜诪谞讜转讜, 诇讛讗讬砖 讛讚讜专砖 注诇讬讜 诇爪讜专讱, 注诇 诪讬 砖转讜专转讜 讗讜诪谞讜转讜, 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉 砖诪讜转专 诇讛讜讚讬注 诇讛诪讞讝讬拽讬诐 讘转讜专讛 讜爪专讬讻讬诐 诇讚注转, 讻讬 讛讬讚讬注讛 砖诇 讞讻诪讬 讛讚讜专, 诇讘诐 讜诪讬讚转诐, 讛谉 讛谉 讙讜驻讬 转讜专讛. 诪讻诇 诪拽讜诐, 爪专讬讱 诇讝讛 讝讛讬专讜转 讬转讬专讛, 讜驻谉 诪砖谞讛 讛讚讘专 讘拽讜爪讜 砖诇 讬讜讚 讜谞诪爪讗 诪讜爪讬讗 砖诐 专注 注诇 转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐...
in general terms, he was a "dayan" on a major BD, gave halacha shiur all over town.
ReplyDeleteWhy should there be a problem with piskei halakha of someone who gave into temptation and sinned?
ReplyDeleteThe question is whether you trust such a man.
ReplyDeleteteaching halacha, Yadin-Yadin, is just a job like any other, Even an electrician has to study before he learns the trade.
He resigned from his position as rabbi of the shul.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/london-beth-din-dayan-resigns-from-synagogue-he-founded-1.481199
Berachos 19a
ReplyDelete转诇诪讜讚 讘讘诇讬 讘专讻讜转 讬讟, 讗
转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇: 讗诐 专讗讬转 转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 砖注讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘诇讬诇讛 - 讗诇 转讛专讛专 讗讞专讬讜 讘讬讜诐, 砖诪讗 注砖讛 转砖讜讘讛. '砖诪讗' 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱? 讗诇讗: 讜讚讗讬 注砖讛 转砖讜讘讛.
I don't really understand your question. I don't know anything about this person's halakhic competence, or the particulars of the case, but if someone sins and repents there is no reason to be skeptical of his piskei halakha. After all, we do read Tehillim today.
ReplyDeleteA) talmid chacham of then is not like today.
ReplyDeleteB) most frum people will do teshuva anyway, in the amidah shemonah esrei.
C) this is not an isolated incident, it's an ongoing problem. In part, it's a failure of the Chazon ish project to mass produce learners in the hareidi revolution. We never had so many rabbis, as a proportion of the population.
Too many yeshivas, too many rabbis, too many halachos, but too little mussar, too little yiras shamayim.
There was another Dayan from the same bd, a few years ago, who was stealing seforim, judaica etc, including very expensive books from the library. He gave a shiur at our shul after shacharit. And, that's where my brother's tefillin was stolen. No coincidence, I don't think.
ReplyDeleteA) I believe that the Talmud is as relevant today, as when it was written. If the Talmud says, that a Torah scholar will surely have repented by the next morning, then that's true today too. All the more so, when this person was publicly shamed, I'm sure that he regrets his actions.
ReplyDeleteB) Robotic recitation of the amidah shemonah esrei, is hardly an expression of repentance.
C) You're taking a tragic incident, and are trying to use it to further some agenda that you have. Sorry, but I refuse to go along with haredi bashing.
Pure conjecture.
ReplyDeleteYou have absolutely no proof connecting this person with the theft of your brother's tefillin.
So non rabbinic frum people are robots who cannot daven, but adulterous rabbonim are the model of kavvanah and teshuva. Lol, that's precisely out of the book of sabbetai and Nathan of Gaza.
ReplyDeleteSad, how you mistake me for your nemesis on this website.
ReplyDeleteI did not discern between rabbis and non-rabbis. I merely stated that robotic praying is not indicative of repentance. That applies to all people.
This individual was apparently caught with something that prompted his speedy resignation from his rabbinical positions. He was named and shamed. I'm sure that he regrets his actions, "charata", which is a key element of teshuva.
To put it more formally, you are using the chaver/ am haaretz fallacy. But the Talmud and Torah are much more sophisticated than you give credit. Even the T'H has a heavy weight of responsibility. A stained shirt (ink from pen) in a T'H carries the death penalty. So these are Talmudic dialectics , not a simple black/white dichotomy.
ReplyDeleteThe hareidi revolution also has revolutionized the non hareidi world, this we have the terrible cases of the rabbi of the North, motti elon etc. If middot were stronger, I suggest people would not get involved in arayos.
A dayan is someone much bigger than a regular rabbi. I think you fail to see the magnitude of what took place.
A Dayan is surely closer to the "Talmid Chacham" mentioned in the Talmud.
ReplyDeleteWhat "sin" is being alluded to in Berachos 19a? Arayos!
Which 专讗讬转, you saw with your own two eyes, how the TC sinned with her.
The next morning, when you see him in shul, you're commanded to say that he surely did teshuva.
Berel is not my nemesis, he is my good friend. But needs help to learn that Rav Kook was the true tzaddik, gadol, kadosh, Gaon, ilui of the past 1000 years. From Moshe to Abraham, there was nobody like Avraham.
ReplyDeleteYou're getting carried away again (or just trying to trigger Berel).
ReplyDeleteNot to detract from the due respect to Rav Kook, but think that I can name many people who were greater than him, who lived in the past 1,000 years.
I have to be honest with you IR - I need to think through what the Gemara is saying there, and how it affects what I am saying.
ReplyDeleteOf course they were greater than him in measure of Torah learning - Rambam, Ramban, Gra, Besht etc.
ReplyDeleteI am a) exaggerating in kinnas soferim, and b) the point I am making in terms of the greatness or radical revolutionary nature of his thought. I would say he crystallized Hassidus, litvish learning, Kabbalah, philosophy, Modern orthodoxy etc. Also I am paraphrasing Rav David Bar Hayyim of Machon shilo.
It is davka this radical nature of his thought which also aroused an equal and opposite reaction to him.
But let's not get distracted - robotic prayer - how do you know who prays like a robot? And how do you know if the people who wait 7 second between each word in Shemonah esrei are really praying harder or just showing off?
While you do your research, please consider reading Rabbeinu Yonah's commentary on Avos (1:6) regarding "dan lekaf yechus".
ReplyDelete转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗诐 专讗讬转 转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 砖注讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘诇讬诇讛 讗诇 转讛专讛专
ReplyDelete讗讞专讬讜 讘讬讜诐 砖诪讗 注砖讛 转砖讜讘讛 砖诪讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 讜讚讗讬 注砖讛 转砖讜讘讛 讜讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬
讘讚讘专讬诐 砖讘讙讜驻讜 讗讘诇 讘诪诪讜谞讗 注讚 讚诪讛讚专 诇诪专讬讛:
No proof, only suspicion/coincidence. Also no names
And it wasn't ever returned.. What would the goyish caretaker do with a pair of tefillin?
You forgot the Arizal, and others.
ReplyDeleteThank you for confirming that you used hyperbole. (BTW, it is unbecoming for intellectuals to resort to it).
I'm not one to judge other people's tefilla. I will not ask you, how long your SA takes, if you focus on the meaning of every single word in the SA, or if you even manage to say every single word. That's between you and Hashem.
But I can speak for myself. Sadly, we often pray by rote, on automatic pilot. Very little kavana there. But I don't think that I'm unique. Perhaps you should organize an anonymous online survey to confirm or deny my observation.
"(BTW, it is unbecoming for intellectuals to resort to it)."
ReplyDeleteWhen I do my academic approach to things, I'm called an apikores.
btw, rav kook writes some very interesting things about Teshuva, and the dangers surrounding it. It's possible to become a teshuva junkie. worst place to learn about teshuva is in a bal teshuva yeshiva.
I agree!
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with Torah based intellectualism, which can withstand rigorous review from a Torah perspective.
ReplyDeleteSomeone who can hardly write a proper sentence in any language, is hardly qualified to judge other people.
Orot Hateshuva is often misunderstood, because like most of his writings, you don't know the sources that he's drawing from.
"You forgot the Arizal, and others"
ReplyDeleteNo, I just didn't have time to cover 100 years of mesora in one post.
Arizal was also revolutionary, although Moshe de Leon was probably more so - if he was the main proponent of the Zohar.
It could also be purely subjective - some people call the Lubavitcher one of the greatest rabbis in history, and I find that to be exaggerated, but I am making the same kind of statement about Rav Kook.
The interesting (to me) thinkers in the world today are all great fans of R' Kook, but this is also confirmation bias. The Chatam Sofer was also great in many ways, i think he is underrated in how great he really was - most people see him as a fighter of reform, and a man of chumras, but he was something much greater and deeper than that.
also the public shame is anyway a true Kaporah
ReplyDeletemay he have good future !
The same thing that you suspect the rabbi of doing with them. Sell them for a few quid.
ReplyDeleteRav Kook was also writing form inspiration or intuition, which he possibly thought might be prophetic. So some of his statements may not be based on texts or may be a more complex development of texts, ideas, kabbalah and inspiration.
ReplyDeleteTo put it another way, I used to be arch -rationalist of the Kapach/Dor deah way of thinking. I wasn't really into rav Kook at that time, but the way he explains things, have brought me into seeing aggadah and kabbalah in a different light.
True & Correct!
ReplyDelete'From Moshe till Abraham '
From Moshe Mendelssohn to Abraham I Kook
Many many
ReplyDeletethe frum person in this story was dismissed, he had amassed half a million quid worth of precious books, manuscripts etc. Not the mastermind that the caretaker would be able to do.
ReplyDeletePurim Torah fromBerel. we were just learning berachot 19a.
ReplyDelete讛诪住驻专 讗讞专 诪讟转谉 砖诇 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 讛讜讗 讛讬讛 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪砖拽讬谉
诇讗 讗转 讛讙讬讜专转 讜诇讗 讗转 讛诪砖讜讞专专转 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪砖拽讬谉 讜讗诪专讜 诇讜 诪注砖讛 讘讻专讻诪讬转
砖驻讞讛 诪砖讜讞专专转 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜讛砖拽讜讛 砖诪注讬讛 讜讗讘讟诇讬讜谉 讜讗诪专 诇讛诐 讚讜讙诪讗 讛砖拽讜讛 讜谞讚讜讛讜
讜诪转 讘谞讚讜讬讜 讜住拽诇讜 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讗转 讗专讜谞讜
Tue tefila and Sa without a moments of wandering is very difficult to achieve .
ReplyDeleteaccording to Zohar if one found that he wandered he must return to the last place of concentration and say it properly . see Mb hold differently.
for you it's jesus, on your biblecodes blogspot
ReplyDeletecount 22 letters and you get Yeshu.
He also did not know! this he said himself
ReplyDeleteThis discssion inevitably leads to the story of David haMelech and BatShevaa. On the one hand, the Holy Tenach , which was spoken by the Navi, nathan , criticises David, for his actions, and this results in his effective end of kingship - his house is split into 2, and the sword will never leave his house. The gemara says anyone who says david sinned has not understood the story. The sin was that he was the rich man who had everything, and he took away the single lamb of the poor shepherd. IR, can you explain this dialectic? (I am not applying this to the current news story, but just to learn the gemara).
ReplyDeleteI don't think your problem is so much with Rav kook, but whether he was part of the right revolution or not. If the movement you hate so much is satanic, then you would have a leg to stand on. If it is the divine smile, which mane Gedolim have said, eg RSZA, then you have a serious problem.
ReplyDeleteWas it special tefillen?
ReplyDeleteor barely kosher ones?
Public shame may help in his gehenom, the temperature will be reduced by a couple of degrees. you even tell stories of Gedolim whose hands would tremble when writing to Rav Diskin. I am not concerned with his personal merit/sin balance sheets, his pension, his mortgage or anything else which serves his ego. the issue is the chillul Hashem, how it affects ordinary jews who used to have respect for rabbis (even secular jews used to respect them) and those who struggle with keeping the shulchan aruch, whilst the alleged dayanim are the one who violate it.
ReplyDeleteI am concerned with the message of Yirmiyahu hanavi who said that even if 1 judge will make an honest judgment in jerusalem, then the city will be saved - i.e. it is the judges - the Dayanim who are the holiest and most pivotal people in Israel - the Judgement on us is based on how truthful and merciful the judgments of these people are, how honest they are or how crooked they are.
Stained shirt a deat penalty ?!
ReplyDeleteShoiteh Godol
No wonder you spew your madness all day .
its just Mussar keelu as if he gets death penalty
what does that mean? you mean the very expensive one would be discernible by a frummer, but cheapo ones by an am haaretz or worse? i am reading your mind, perhaps they were really posul, so in fact it was chesed from Hashem they went missing!
ReplyDeleteThe madness of Berel - the 3 oaths are above al the Torah, and the cause of all evil. It's an aggadah, even when rambam mentions it in his Iggeret teiman, you misquote him. he says derech mashal.
ReplyDeleteRsza was a Great Goan & zaddikj
ReplyDeletejust made a mistake on kook in his early years His son reb Schmuel veered away from this error and even more came back completely to the ways of his great grandfather the imrei binah rav of kalish who reigned in yerushliam durin the time of the holy reb yehoshuah leib Diskind ZTL
this was Raavad's criticism of Rambam's MT.
ReplyDeletePerhaps someone in Mossad har Kook will do an annotated version of his seforim.
David Bar Hayyim
ReplyDeleteis a one man show nebach on him
not in detail and may not be what we suspect
ReplyDeletenonsense, nonsense
ReplyDeleteRZSA was major league gadol hador, as was Rav Elayshiv (although RSZA was greater ). His son Shmulik was just somoene who went into the family business, but was not so great, so he wanted to find a new derech for himself to make a name and escape the burden of having such a great father.
RSZA only mistake was that he gave in to pressure from R Shach in the Goren alleged mamzerim case, and signed against him.
Rsza was fake is that what you say? Chas Visholom!
ReplyDeleteadultery is not a big problem for you guys, nor is theft. All you are worried about his a chaver, and the "profession". You read the stocks all day to see what's rising or falling, you have lost touch with the Torah.
ReplyDeleteWhen Rav Goren annulled a non-existent giur and freed safeik mamzeirim, what shtink the oilam made. RSZA did keriah becasue he felt it was such a tragedy (regardless of whose side you take). now, a major figure and Dayn does niuf, and all you are talking about is how he is a poor victim, he did teshuva even before he sinned, and if yo say he sinned,you don't really understand what happened. Same thing when Sherman annulled 50,000 giur, and Attia allowed a jewish woman to remarry without a get, he simply annulled her giur.
so for sure it wasnt the dayan
ReplyDeleteit's what you said. I'm just saying it was pressured.
ReplyDeleteWas he warned properly and were there witnesses and were the witnesses kosher ?
ReplyDeleteal tamin biazmcha ad yom mosecha
ReplyDeleteYou can make the chazakah. I bought replacement in mea shearim, in US$. I thought you'd be happy to know.
ReplyDeleteA Dayan needs warning? He warns everyone on a daily basis.
ReplyDeleteYOU see this as no different from when I eat a chocolate with chalav akum, based on the heter of Rav Moshe. It's a safeik aveira.
so he succumbed ?
ReplyDeleteI doubt it
Really?
ReplyDeleteRuach shtus / brisk. But soton/samael/Kook rz.
True. Rav Kook teaches also to believe in yourself - yetzer hatov. Source? Hashem says this to Kain before he kills his brother.
ReplyDeleteI retract my statement, but you make such claims all day long
ReplyDeleteFirst tell me about King David, and what Nathan rebuke means versus the Talmud defence.
ReplyDeleteDavid bar hayyim hates Zionism, denies he is a Zionist, and attacks the secular ideologues with a zeal much like Beryl
ReplyDeleteCrook Dayan, if it was him, he simply sold it as mehudar pair, $1000.
ReplyDeleteThe brisk educated RY I knew was saying that when Hareidim sin, they do teshuva the next day and it's over, but when zionists do teshuva, it's not real teshuva or accepted.
ReplyDeletewhat a %$&@ing joke.
You are part of the Sabbetai Zvi/Yaakov Frank cult. wake up!
depends - if you are hareidi and/or have semicha, you are immune from punishment/sin. On the other hand , if you are MO/RZ or baal habayis/am haaretz, then you are screwed in this world or the next. I know how your filthy mind works.
ReplyDeleteYou probably hold mendelsohn higher than R Kook.
ReplyDeleteYour hierarchy is quite perverse. No 10 commandments. No 3 cardinal sins (murder/adultery/idolatry). Now weighing of scales. It's all about the 3 oaths and anti-zionism. SO a chiloni in america, even if he eats chazir on YK is still a holy neshama , as long as he is not aipac or zionist. On the other hand, even a frum, Torah observant dati leumi , if tainted by Mizrochi, is worse than Christian or hindu idolater. that's why you quote arthur bloggs all the time. I know your filthy mind, Berel.
He is almost as anti-zionist as you are.
ReplyDeletepost some of that
ReplyDelete2000
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xbB6gVZXN0&t=1891s
ReplyDelete3 oaths are very dangerous to desecrate Look at the Holocaust!
ReplyDelete3 oaths are very dangerous to keep, look at the holocaust!
ReplyDeletereb Moshe once was told that he mistakenly imbibed a bit of Cholov Stam he promptly threw it up
ReplyDeleteeverything is k'ilu
ReplyDeleteis this in Igros moshe? or Igros Yoel?
ReplyDeleteHaRav HAGaon Meir Kahane Ztl H'YD
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0jlyF5NeR8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_36VfQ5nYKs 4
ReplyDeleteany haredi? doubtful only t/ch
ReplyDeletehe was murderd because of the 3 Oaths
ReplyDeletemisgareh boomois
No, he had delusions of being under divine protection, like bar kochva..
ReplyDeleteStill some cash in hand. Did you see these tefillin?
ReplyDeleteWhy only t/ch? Is that hareidi t.h? Only Ashkenazim? Only litvish? Only brisker? Soo what about Rav Shach or elyashiv? Did he do teshuva on h. Shlomo? No, he continued to support metzger.
ReplyDeletesome nice ideas mst listen fully later
ReplyDeleteEssentially taking your line on secular z.
ReplyDeleteMy Line? the Torahs line!
ReplyDeleteOh... he is separate from Rz , and hareiddi. I respect his independence. He doesn't oppose a state, but he opposed the secular ideas and institutions.
ReplyDeletestrange but he argues everything from inside the Gemara and onwards - including the Yerushalmi. Maharal said better to learn from the gemara and err than to rely on a compendium like the SA.
ReplyDeleteif I had proof back then, I would have gone to the police or the BD. I'm saying probability or likelihood, based on a known perpetrator acting in that vicinity.
ReplyDeleteor con the buyer with his imprimatur of being a "dayan".
ReplyDeleteremember a few years ago, maybe 15-20 years ago, some "dayan" in Jerusalem BD called some teenager girls to his office, then stated masturbating in front of them...
ReplyDeletewhy do you put these numbers in you posts? It is either a masonic sign, or you are doing Jesus word counts as per your bible codes blogspot
ReplyDeletehe takes into consideration also Yemenite mesora for example. So his Kashrus may be different from yours. I think he might be ok with locusts.
ReplyDeletewhy not, they tried to pressure Akavya ben Mehalelel but failed. In the Eduyot version of the story.
ReplyDeleteI'm not familiar with the story.
ReplyDeleteI know who it is that you're talking about, and I don't think that he would be so petty as to take a pair of tefillin.
ReplyDelete"Someone who can hardly write a proper sentence in any language, is hardly qualified to judge other people."
ReplyDeleteIf you are referring to me, its not easy to type sentences on my treif phone, sometimes the keyboard freezes.
Maybe look at it another way. A Dayan who has inappropriate interactions with eishet ish is hardly qualified to judge other people.
By inappropriate, I presume they don't mean he was seen playing chess with her.
"I have no problem with Torah based intellectualism, which can withstand rigorous review from a Torah perspective."
That is hardly intellectualism. Even a non-Torah based intellectualism should not be a threat to the Torah. 2 of the rabbonim I refer to, Rav Bar Hayyim, and R' lopes Cardozo, say that when you learn torah, namely gemara, you hae to think like an apikores, i.e. question everything, all assumptions, and inferences. however, other people just say apikores for asking these questions.
I'll give you a case study (in addition to King David, for which I await your learned response). Actually, i thought about this a few days ago, before I heard about the current scandal in question so it is even more pertinent.
Whereas in the Bible, we see the story of the Sons of Eli as having had relations with the women who came to them, the gemara learns it differently. The Gemara says they delayed their sacrifces, which meant they were prevented from being with their husbands, hence it was akin to adultery. Again, k'ilu.
So my apikorsus question on this - and I don't care if you like it or not: They delayed the women from their husbands, perhaps a day. at the time, they were keeping 7 biblical days. Now niddah has been stretched to 14 days, d'rabbanan. So is there in this gemara, a hint, or a criticism of those who introduced the additional 7 days? the parallel and the kal v'chomer is too obvious to ignore. We have already seen in the case of Akavya b. Mehalelel that Chazal would criticize certain edicts, even at the highest personal cost. Perhaps this was an implied snipe, to avoid nidui?
B'H, it's one of the worst.
ReplyDeleteyou mean it's small fry for that big time ganav?
ReplyDeleteNot the Torah's line - the Torah is anti-secular (if secular means anti Torah). However, certain secular matters actually are governed by Torah law - eg to leave the camp and go outside, dig a hole in the sand to conduct one's privies. that is also secular. In the Book of Joshua (not your messiah Yeshua), it says that the Plishtim had chariots of Iron, i.e. they had a military technology advantage over the Israelites. That is secular-Torah. To deny it is kefirah , since it's denying the Neviim.
ReplyDeletedoes that mean its mutar to be a menuval if nobody formally warns me?
ReplyDeletethe problem with that joke is that it is insulting Rav Moshe, suggesting his psak was fake, joke psak which he himself did not take seriously. That is the biggest insult you can give to the poseik hador.
ReplyDeleteare you British originally?
ReplyDeleteFor one, it's small fry, more appropriate for a petty thief.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, he might have rationalized that the books and manuscripts weren't being used anyhow, so they might as well sit in someone else's possession.
Maybe even make a mitzvah out of it (see Da'as Zekeinim by the Ba'alei Tosfos, Bereishis 25:34).
However these rationalizations could not be made for a teenager's pair of tefillin
I'm a fifth generation American, but have visited London and the UK numerous times.
ReplyDeletelarge number of comments for 1 day, very few of them on R Kook. we are making progress.
ReplyDeleteSounds too fantastic to be true.
ReplyDeleteIf yes, then there might have been mental illness involved.
Source?
ReplyDeleteEvery sin comes from "ruach shtus"
ReplyDeleteSotah 3a
专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专: 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讗讗"讻 谞讻谞住 讘讜 专讜讞 砖讟讜转
I think you have a problem with bias or negios b'davar (is that correct, if not forgive my poor grammar).
ReplyDeleteThere are certain chazakot in the Gemara which favour (or favor) T'H. The adultery (or other sin) committed by a T'H isn't better than the same act carried out by an am'haaretz or a boar. Psychologically/physically it's the same. Morally /Ontologically it is worse. You are looking for remez, drush and sod for frum crime, whereas for am haaretz, bal batish (BB) or chiloni crime it is always pshat.
There is a story about Eliezer ben Durdaya who frequented every w---house in town. So this was not some Kabbalistic/berland/frankist programme to bring the sparks out of the fallen women. it was pure and simple debauchery, just like if Joe bloggs goes tot eh same aveiros. It cost him his life, ok he did teshuva, but I don't like the Sabbatean approach to sin.
there was a crazy, apparently frum man who murdered a boy in NYC a few years ago. The explanation is not mystical, it is in criminal psychology. The same mental illness exists in goyim, muslims, buddhists etc. The same criminology applies to rapists, molestors whether they are frum or not. Once you get into justifying it for the frum, then that is showing favours, which is assur int he Torah anyway - do not show favours to the great or the poor in judgement.
19 讜ַ讬ִּ拽ְ专ָ讗
讟讜 诇ֹ讗-转ַ注ֲ砖ׂ讜ּ 注ָ讜ֶ诇, 讘ַּ诪ִּ砖ְׁ驻ָּ讟--诇ֹ讗-转ִ砖ָּׂ讗 驻ְ谞ֵ讬-讚ָ诇, 讜ְ诇ֹ讗 转ֶ讛ְ讚ַּ专 驻ְּ谞ֵ讬 讙ָ讚讜ֹ诇: 讘ְּ爪ֶ讚ֶ拽, 转ִּ砖ְׁ驻ֹּ讟 注ֲ诪ִ讬转ֶ讱ָ.
I have no partiality towards the rabbi who was caught stealing from the LBD. However I'm looking at the bigger picture, which includes taking into account the profile of a petty thief.
ReplyDeleteSee Rabbeinu Yonah's commentary on Avos (1:6) regarding "dan lekaf yechus". The actual sins may be the same. But that's what's being discussed. The question is when we're in doubt if a sin even occurred. Even if the sin occurred, the question is whether is this a one off deviation from the straight path, or is this who the person really is.
That's what rav Kook was doing even with the secularistim.
ReplyDeleteread what Rashi says on this verse
讜诇讗 转讛讚专 驻谞讬 讙讚讜诇. 砖ֶׁ诇ֹּ讗 转ֹ讗诪ַ专 vayikra 19
注ָ砖ִׁ讬专 讛讜ּ讗 讝ֶ讛, 讘ֶּ谉 讙ְּ讚讜ֹ诇ִ讬诐 讛讜ּ讗 讝ֶ讛, 讛ֵ讬讗ַ讱ְ 讗ֲ讘ַ讬ְּ砖ֶׁ谞ּ讜ּ
讜ְ讗ֶ专ְ讗ֶ讛 讘ְּ讘ָ砖ְׁ转ּ讜ֹ? 注ֹ谞ֶ砖ׁ 讬ֵ砖ׁ 讘ַּ讚ָּ讘ָ专 诇ְ讻ָ讱ְ 谞ֶ讗ֱ诪ַ专 讜ְ诇ֹ讗
转ֶ讛ְ讚ַּ专 驻ְּ谞ֵ讬 讙ָ讚讜ֹ诇:
讜诇讗 转讛讚专 驻谞讬 讙讚讜诇
NOR HONOR THE PERSON OF THE MIGHTY — thou shalt not say, “This is a rich
man, or, this man is of noble descent (lit., the son of great people)
how can I possibly put him to shame and be witness to his shame? There
is punishment for such a thing!” It is for this reason that Scripture
states, "thou shalt not honor the person of the mighty” (Sifra,
Kedoshim, Chapter 4 3).
I read it in the Hebrew press, but cannot remember exactly where it was published.
ReplyDeleteRabbeinu Yonah says that "dan lekaf zechus" doesn't apply to a "rasha".
ReplyDeleteHowever R' Kook may have judged the seculars, not as resha'im, but as "tinok shenishbo".
In any event, I'm unqualified to judge R' Kook's motives, since we can't know what going through a person's mind. There are allusions to his motives in some of the Iggrot, but it's beyond my pay grade to make a qualified evaluation.
This is pure slander, because IIRC in one of his letters he writes explicitly, that he has sources for everything that he writes, which his critics are unaware of due to their ignorance.
ReplyDeleteI take it you fail to see the circular argument you are using.
ReplyDelete1) A judge must be neutral and objective, and ascertain the guilt or innocence of the defendant(s)
2) The judicial process will determine the righteousness or the culpability of the individual(s) under examination.
30 Oh, but when it comes to a rasha, we do not extend him the presumption of innocence!
That is in direct violation of the Biblical injunction I cited above twice
19 讜ַ讬ִּ拽ְ专ָ讗
讟讜 诇ֹ讗-转ַ注ֲ砖ׂ讜ּ 注ָ讜ֶ诇, 讘ַּ诪ִּ砖ְׁ驻ָּ讟--诇ֹ讗-转ִ砖ָּׂ讗 驻ְ谞ֵ讬-讚ָ诇, 讜ְ诇ֹ讗 转ֶ讛ְ讚ַּ专 驻ְּ谞ֵ讬 讙ָ讚讜ֹ诇: 讘ְּ爪ֶ讚ֶ拽, 转ִּ砖ְׁ驻ֹּ讟 注ֲ诪ִ讬转ֶ讱ָ.
There is a difference between judging a person in Beis Din, and judging people in the courtroom of the mind.
ReplyDeleteIn Beis Din, all are equal before the law. When it comes to the courtroom of the mind, Rabbeinu Yonah posits that there are different rules.
One of his arguments or explanations was that the secular Zionists are kosher inside but non kosher outside, but by their project of building up EY, they are doing a mitzvah for EY, which has a greater value than in Chu'l. There are some Talmudic sayings, eg the everyday conversations in EY are greater than TT in Chu'l, etc.
ReplyDeleteThe question i wanted to raise is where does chiddush come from? When Rabbanim used to make chiddush, is that intuition, inspiration, nevuah?
I accept what you are saying - and it's an important distinction. I don't wish to read his commentary, in case i disagree with it! On the other hand, as Columbo says, whenever I get this funny feeling inside about someone or something, and I ignore, it, I always end up regretting it. So maybe part of that is that we can intuit a rasha. However, because I have been mentally and psychologically abused by "Rabbonim", in particular hareidi, but not limited to that, then my definition of rasha might be different to that of yours or Rabbeinu Yonah's.
ReplyDeleteMy criticism of this video is that he is on the one hand taking a NK/satmar view, and on the other he is taking that of Rav Kook, and Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook and Rav Kahane. Without the secular work and maasim of the "zionists" he attacks, he would either still be in Australia with the kangaroos, or dead because he relies on the zionist army fo his security.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to hear that you had some less than stellar experiences with some rabbis. However intellectual honesty (and curiosity) should still allow to read a source that you were referred to.
ReplyDeleteI'm always open to learning new things, and if you find classical sources that disagree with Rabbeinu Yonah's position, please let me know.
do you have a link for it - you are right , I should learn something new, it can only be of benefit.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, I'm not qualified to judge the controversial statements that he made.
ReplyDeleteDid he really believe what he said, based on his understanding of the sources, or was it just his way of trying to be "mekarev" them, by finding nice esoteric things to say about them?
Here you go. Enjoy!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.sefaria.org.il/Rabbeinu_Yonah_on_Pirkei_Avot.1.6?lang=he
Thank you, yes it was predictable. i'm pretty sure i've not read this before, but I could already infer from your argumentation today what you were basing it on.
ReplyDeleteIt's assuming that we come across a Tzaddik gamur and rasha gamur in or everyday lives. i accept it about Rasha gamur - i.e. one should assume that what s/he offers you is tainted and that they are a rodef in every deed.
Tzaddik gamur - what is that? To put it one way, one of my (very good) Rabbanim asked his semicha students the following rhetorical question: "how do I know if Gadol A is greater than gadol B, or B greater than A (no names of course)" . How do I know if someone is a Tzaddik gamur? Maybe they keep the Shulchan aruch in practical law better than me, eg kashrus, shabbes etc. Maybe I rely on a heter for toothpaste, and they don't. does that mean they are a tzadik gamur?
Rav Nuchem in satmar tells some very sickening stories about the mikves there. Should I believe him, or Berel, who alternately calls me (former name) an apikores, and mocks Rav Kook like I wouldn't mock a Reform rabba.
So, going back to physics, there is the Schroedinger's cat problem. How do i know the cat is x or y? Maybe I think he's a tzaddik gamur but he is a pederast or something else. I used to daven with R' Elon, and do hakafot with him ,and go to his Tisch. At the time many thought he was a tzaddik gamur.
I actually think that a rasha gamur is more common than a Tzaddik gamur. Maybe even a 95% pure rasha
or 80% rasha is worthy of this treatment.
Rav Kook was criticised for his openess to secular people. he said he'd rather err by giving kaf zchut to a rasha than to misjudge a tzaddik (or beinoni).
Secular is not necessarily the same as a rasha gamur.
A secular might be observing many laws of the Torah (theft,murder, adultery, loshon hara etc. which a frum person might not. I might add idolatry in certain cases.
Interesting, i will think it over more.
I'm sure he did believe in them or he had a system to try find a holy spark for everyone if possible.
ReplyDeleteDid Rav Moshe give his psak on chalav of the goyim, believing it? I asked my favourite Dayan in London, R' Berel Berkovits ztl this question, since Lubavitch were trying to rubbish it. Dayan Berkovits was at the Federation BD, which is supposedly frummer than the LBD. He said the psak is very clear, it has nothing to do with wartime shortages or shaas dhak. It gives the halachic status of supervised milk because of fear of the government regulations.
For R Kook, he had some inspiration which he considered a reliable source. the Gra did not accept any mystical source as reliable, even though he had inspiration and messengers.
The fallacy in this commentary , is as I've already mentioned earlier. So, if you see a Tzaddik gamur committing a sin, then make up an excuse for it.
ReplyDeleteSo R' Berland , using his cult-orthodox group to bed women, including married women, for mystical reasons. How do we know he is a real tzaddik? well the Steipler Gaon was his chavruta and called him a Tzaddik, therefore he is tzadik. therefore he must have had mystical or other reasons for doing so. thats R' Yonah's view.
The cynic will look at it another way: OK,he's a frum with a white beard, but he is basically Jacob Frank who managed to remain an otherwise orthodox Jew. All this religious claptrap is just a way of seducing people into his cult and into his bed. Every cult leader basically uses the same method, so why should he be different?
Part of the narcissistic personality is to manipulate and fool people, and what is now called "virtue signalling" is one of the oldest tricks in the book.
In any case, it contradicts what rashi says about the pasuk in Vayikra that I posted.
so a) you like and agree with R' bar Hayyim
ReplyDeleteb) You liked and agreed with my caricature of your view on Reform USA vs secular Tzionim.
From wikipedia:
ReplyDeleteJonah Gerondi came from Girona, in Spain. Gerondi was the most prominent pupil of Solomon of Montpellier, the leader of the opponents of Maimonides' philosophical works, and was one of the signers of the ban proclaimed in 1233 against the Moreh Nevukim and the Sefer ha-Madda. According to his pupil, Hillel of Verona, Gerondi was the instigator of the public burning of Maimonides' writings by order of the authorities at Paris
in 1233, and the indignation which this aroused among all classes of
Jews was mainly directed against him. Subsequently (not forty days
afterward, as a tradition has it, but in 1242; see note 5 to H. Gr盲tz, Geschichte, vol. vii.), when twenty-four wagon-loads of Talmuds
were burned at the same place where the philosophical writings of
Maimonides had been destroyed, Gerondi saw the folly and danger of
appealing to Christian ecclesiastical authorities on questions of Jewish doctrine, and publicly admitted in the synagogue of Montpellier that he had been wrong in all his acts against the works and fame of Maimonides.
As an act of repentance he vowed to travel to Israel and
prostrate himself on Maimonides' grave and implore his pardon in the
presence of ten men for seven consecutive days. He left France with that intention, but was detained, first in Barcelona and later in Toledo. He remained in Toledo, and became one of the great Talmudical
teachers of his time. In all his lectures he made a point of quoting
from Maimonides, always mentioning his name with great reverence.
Gerondi's sudden death from a rare disease was considered by many as a
penalty for not having carried out the plan of his journey to the grave
of Maimonides. However, some believe this was only a myth created by the
followers of the Rambam.[2] He died in Toledo, Spain, in November 1263.
You have disingenuously characterized Rabbeinu Yonah's words!
ReplyDeleteKK: So, if you see a Tzaddik gamur committing a sin, then make up an excuse for it.
IR: No. If you see a Tzaddik gamur committing a sin, DO NOT make up an excuse for it. Say, that it WAS a sin, but it was a one time lapse, and the person is still presumed to be a righteous person.
Note: Rabbeinu Yonah divides the cases into three.
1a. A person who we do not know whether or he is righteous or wicked. 1b. Or a person that we know is mediocre.
2. A person who we know to be absolutely righteous.
3. A person who we know to be utterly wicked.
If we see person 1a or 1b committing a dicey act, one that can be judged unfavorably, but it can also be judged favorably, then we are exhorted to judge the act favorably [Sources: Vayikra 19:15, Sifra (ad loc.), Babylonian Talmud (Shavuos 30a), and Rashi's commentaries (supra and supra)].
Regarding person 2 or 3, Rabbeinu Yonah writes that they are not included in the mitzva there, even in the case of an absolute tzaddik, the obligation does not arise from the mitzva of "justly judging", but rather from the prohibition to suspect someone who has a "chezqat kashrut".
KK: In any case, it contradicts what rashi says about the pasuk in Vayikra that I posted.
IR: This does NOT contradict Rashi's commentary to Vayikra.
讘爪讚拽 转砖驻讟 注诪讬转讱: 讻诪砖诪注讜. 讚讘专 讗讞专 讛讜讬 讚谉 讗转 讞讘专讱 诇讻祝 讝讻讜转
(Translation)
Judge your fellow with righteousness: [This is to be understood] according to its apparent meaning. Another explanation is: Judge your fellow favorably [i.e., give him the benefit of the doubt].
(Explanation)
Simply speaking, the verse speaks of commands to rabbinical court judges, and the words "justly judge your colleague", is a directive to the judge during the hearing of the court not to discriminate between the litigants and the matters between man and his fellow.
Rashi then adds a second interpretation, "Judge your fellow favorably", meaning give him the benefit of the doubt.
In brief. the first interpretation is that the verse is referring to Beis Din, a rabbinical court. The second interpretation is that the verse is referring to the courtroom of the mind.
I am ignoring the Berland straw-man, since this is intended to be an intended to be an objective discussion.
The discussion arose because of a real life case, a junior dayan, who left his job.
ReplyDeleteA tzadik gamur does not exist, and as I said, I cannot discern if someone is such a tzadik anyway. So this class does not apply to the incident in question.
The tzadik gamur who sins is an oxymoron, like a married bachelor, or square circle. So to discuss such a situation is meaningless. If he sins, he is no longer gamur.
The berland case, elon case, tropper case, netiv Meir, mercaz harav and many more cases are entirely relevant.
No man lives and sins not, fact.
讻 讻ִּ讬 讗ָ讚ָ诐, 讗ֵ讬谉 爪ַ讚ִּ讬拽 讘ָּ讗ָ专ֶ抓--讗ֲ砖ֶׁ专 讬ַ注ֲ砖ֶׂ讛-讟ּ讜ֹ讘, 讜ְ诇ֹ讗 讬ֶ讞ֱ讟ָ讗
ReplyDeleteKoheleth 7
讻 讻ִּ讬 讗ָ讚ָ诐, 讗ֵ讬谉 爪ַ讚ִּ讬拽 讘ָּ讗ָ专ֶ抓--讗ֲ砖ֶׁ专 讬ַ注ֲ砖ֶׂ讛-讟ּ讜ֹ讘, 讜ְ诇ֹ讗 讬ֶ讞ֱ讟ָ讗
ReplyDeleteKoheleth 7
he on the right path and you too!
ReplyDeleterabbi metzger!
ReplyDeleteApart from the courtroom of the mind, there is also the prison of the mind. The belief in perfect people, which contradicts tanakh. My rebbe gave a semicha shshiur where he reveals some interesting tactics to mislead people, lie to them , with the goal of breaking their resistance to (hareidi) "Torah". I suggest we all are in this prison of the mind. When great thinkers like Kook, Goren, berkovits etc try to free us from that prison, they are called heretics. I suggest Rambam also tried this.
ReplyDeleteYes, in changing halacha for Torat EY, and many other interesting ideas. Regarding Zionism, he rejects secularism and the secular ideas of those "friends" of yours. I am not interested in their social-communism. As I said before, Herzl was on the 49th gate of tumah, he raised it by a little when he learned that assimilation is not the answer. By that turnaround, he saved millions of secular Jews form assimilation. Your reform friends rejected Zionism, and the helped, catalyzed millions of assimilations. See the difference? Reform is the 100th gate of tumah.
ReplyDeleteEven Amnon doesn't agree with you, despite his disagreement with the secular state
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDu7fy7DjIE
Autobiography of the Aderet
ReplyDeletehttps://seforimblog.com/2010/05/censorship-of-aderet-autobiography/
Poor fellow. You totally misunderstood Rabbeinu Yona, and now accuse him and the Rambam of lying?
ReplyDeleteWhere have I accused either of them lying?
ReplyDeleteI suggest the opposite - I suggested that Rambam tried to free us from our mental prisons, in particular with his rationalist philosophy such as in Chelek and the Moreh Nevuchim (Guide for the perplexed => implication is that we are in need of intellectual liberation).
ReplyDeleteIf I state that there is a contradiction between the concept of Tzadik gamur and what Shlomo hamelech says there and elsewhere, does that mean I am calling one of them a liar? Much of rabbinic discussion is about contradictions, they aren't necessarily calling their colleagues liars!
Your words:
ReplyDelete"My rebbe gave a semicha shiur where he reveals some interesting tactics to mislead people, lie to them ...I suggest Rambam also tried this.
I have updated it, the context was like this:
ReplyDelete"I suggest we all are in this prison of the mind. When great thinkers like Kook, Goren, berkovits etc try to free us from that prison, they are called heretics. I suggest Rambam also tried this i.e. to liberate our minds.."
If it is chutzpahdik to compare modern thinkers to rambam, that is no problem, but my intention was completely the opposite of how it was misconstrued, . sorry, I should have been more explicit about what I was suggesting.
I've updated it, because it is open to misinterpretation. Chas v'shalom - I was suggesting the opposite - that Rambam is the excellent light, who is guiding the perplexed.
ReplyDeletehere is another example from Chelek:
"If, 0 reader, you belong to one of the first-named classes, do not pay
any attention to any of my remarks on this subject, because not a word
of it will suit you. On the contrary, it will harm you and you will
dislike it. For how can food of light weight and temperate character
suit a person accustomed to partaking of bad and gross fare? It would
really injure him, and he would loathe it. Do you not see what was said
concerning the manna by those who had grown accustomed to eating onions
and garlic, and fish? 讜谞驻砖谞讜 拽爪讛 讘诇讞诐 讛拽诇讜拽诇 “and our soul loatheth this
light bread” (Numbers 21:5). If, however, you are of those who
constitute the third class, and when you come across any of the Sages'
remarks which reason rejects, you pause and learn that it is a dark
saying and an allegory. And if you then pass the night wrapped up in
thought and dwelling in anxious reflection over its interpretation,
mentally striving to find the truth and the correct point of view, as it
is said, 诇诪爪讜讗 讚讘专讬 讞驻抓 讜讻转讜讘 讬讜砖专 讚讘专讬 讗诪转 “To find out acceptable
words, and the writing of uprightness, even words of truth”
(Ecclesiastes 12:10), you will then consider this discourse of mine, and
it will profit you, if God wills it."
if you tried other methods of chopping and changing what I wrote, you might get "George washington flew kosher pigs"
ReplyDeleteHow about this quote from IR:
ReplyDelete" If you see a Tzaddik gamur committing a sin, DO NOT....still presume to basically be a righteous person."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cz2jWDKbsI
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcJapkSE48E
ReplyDeletekoifer
ReplyDelete