Semichah in the Talmud and Today

 https://outorah.org/p/27206/

The Rivash (cited by Rama Y.D. 242:14) writes that the new “semichah” is a form of permission to issue rulings in the vicinity of his rebbi. As we know one is not allowed to issue halachic rulings in the vicinity of one’s rebbi unless the rebbi grants him permission to do so. This semichah is formally granting the student permission to issue halachic rulings. Therefore, notes the Rama, if the rebbi has passed on it is unnecessary for the student to receive semichah.

Remah (Y.D. 242:14) Every scholar who is capable of deciding halachic questions but doesn’t is whithholding Torah and causing problems for the public And it is said about him (Mishlei 7:26), And numerous are her victims  Remah  The nature of semicha that we have today is that all those who are competent to decide issues of halacha will decide them and that it will be known that what they teach is with the permission of their teachers who gave them semcha. Therefore, if their teacher had already died, no semicha is required to decide halacha. Similarly if he is viewed as a talmid chaver he doesn’t need semicha to decide halachic issues. In any situation which doesn’t require permission from his teacher he doesn’t need semicha (this is according to Rivash #271, and not like the view of the Nachlas Avos) Some say that one who lacks semicha but issues Gittin and Chalitzos – his action are viewed as invalid. One should be concerned for this view unless it is clearly known that they are clearly highly competent but they are they are self effacing because of humility. Others disagree and are lenient. In situation that might produce an Aguna one should be lenient if the Get and Chalitza has already been given but not otherwise since the customs of Jews viewed as Torah. It also seems to me that to give the title of Moreinu to one issuing Gittin even though this is not the way semicha was done originally because today today it simply has the significance of the person being authorized to do this 

Semicha: Then and Now by Rabbi Hershel Schachter

 https://download.yutorah.org/2014/1053/817656/semikhah-then-and-now.pdf

The institution of semicha was introduced to the Jewish people when Hashem commanded Moshe to designate Yehoshua as his successor by placing his hands on his disciple’s head (Bamidbar 27:23). The Gemara (Sanhedrin 13b) comments that from that time on, semicha is no longer given in this manner, but rather through a declaration, by a teacher calling his student “rebbe” and giving him permission to impose fines ordained by the Torah. That same passage also informs us that we no longer have the concept of genuine semicha in our days. The transmission of semicha must be done by someone who himself received semicha through a continuous chain dating back to Moshe Rabbeinu. At some point in history, this chain was interrupted. Though we no longer have this genuine semicha, both its original characteristics and its absence have ramifications for us today.  

On a more practical level, how does the absence of genuine semicha manifest itself in our time? The answer depends on how we determine which situations actually require a rabbi with semicha to decide. This discussion seems to revolve around a disagreement between Tosfos and the Rambam. Tosfos (Yevamos 47a) appear to assume that semicha is a requirement for membership on a beis din. Any time a beis din is needed to rule on a case, only individuals with  semicha can sit on the beis din. The Rambam disagrees and rules that semicha is not a requirement for the beis din. Rather, any hora’ah, or halachic decision, can only be made by one who has received semicha. Let us consider some cases in which this disagreement is relevant.

If we don’t have genuine semicha, what is the purpose of the semicha that is issued nowadays? Even though we no longer confer the original semicha, we may still fulfill Rebbe's institution(Sanhedrin 5b) that one cannot issue rulings (or for the Rambam, even recommendations) without asking permission from his rebbe first. When a rebbe feels that his student is qualified to give halachic advice, he will give the student permission to do so. Semicha today authorizes new musmachim to respond to halachic questions. Its purpose is more to adhere to the statement of Rebbe than a commemoration of what semicha used to be

Finally, the Mishna (Sanhedrin 86b) states that the punishment of a zaken mamre (one who rules against the Beis Din Hagadol) does not apply to a "talmid." Rashi explains that a talmid cannot be a zaken mamre because zaken mamre is someone who issues a formal hora’ah against the Beis Din Hagadol. Yet in defining a talmid, Rashi writes that a talmid is someone under the age of forty. At that age, one is not old enough to issue a hora’ah and therefore one is not considered worthy of hora’ah. The Rambam, however, (Mamrim 3:5) has a different definition of who is worthy of hora’ah. For these purposes, it is one who has semicha. This would appear to be based on the Rambam's understanding that a hora’ah requires one with semicha. If the individual who rules against the Beis Din Hagadol does not have semicha, then his decision is not classified as hora’ah. Any ruling that this individual issues would be considered good advice or a recommendation as to where to look for further guidance, but not a binding halachic statement.

Authorities are few in order that people listen to them

 Maharal (Tiferes Yisroel #69): It is not proper that the words of the Torah, which are words of wisdom, should be in the hands of fools so that each person can think they are just as competent as anyone else to say what is in the Torah. I discussed this in my sefer Be’er HaGolah. I explained that our sages have deliberately concealed their words in many places in order that fools should not have ready access to them. Therefore if the Torah had been written clearly and explicitly – it would be difficult to distinguish who is truly wise from one who is lacking in wisdom. As a consequence it would produce great disputes. This is the opposite of the intent of the Torah that everything in it should make connection, order and unity in creation. It is in order to prevent dispute and schisms that the Torah says that a rebellious elder is deserving of capital punishment (Sanhedrin 88a).  Therefore it is proper that the Torah be in the hands of the few in order that they be listened to. This would prevent the many disputes that we have our day in which everyone imagines that they are a scholar and outstanding religious authority. They believe this because they say, “I can also read seforim.” This causes a number of bad thing which I don’t want to write about. Therefore the Torah is written in a manner that only the elite will comprehend it and so it will be inaccessible to the masses. This universal access to Torah was the cause that the Sanhedrin was not utilized and everyone built a private sanctuary for himself and there was no connection or unity. Thus Devarim (17:11) commands us that when there is a difficult matter it should be dealt with by the Sanhedrin. Thus we see that not writing down the Oral Torah and that it be given to the Sages (rather than the masses) is something inherently necessary for our well being.

Shulchan Aruch is the default view only when Achronim are deadlocked

from Daas Torah - translation is copyrighted

Chazon Ish (C.M. 1:1 Likutim): Concerning the matter of the dispute over semicha in post-Talmudic times, the deciding factor in halachic matters is always according to which side has proofs which are stronger and more reasonable. Even though we normally follow the Shulchan Aruch – nevertheless were are accustomed to deviate from the Shulchan Aruch because the Achronim deviate from its rulings with correct proofs according to the understanding of the gedolim in each generation. So therefore for each halacha we are forced to study the analysis of the Achronim because intellectual reasoning is the decisive factor. However when the matter is deadlocked because the sides are equal – then we follow the disputant who is greater and that is why we accept the rulings of the Beis Yosef and Rema. So therefore in the dispute concerning semicha – according to our understanding those who rejected the new semicha are more cogent and understandable. Those who supported it are not understandable. 

‘Playing the Man’: Global Diplomacy in the Trump Era Is All About Flattery

 https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/08/world/europe/trump-diplomacy-flattery-world-leaders.html

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel handed a letter to President Trump nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize. But it’s not clear whether stroking the president’s ego has long-lasting effects.

The flattery was as obvious as it was effective. Seated at a dinner table in the Blue Room of the White House on Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel handed President Trump a piece of paper.

“I want to present to you, Mr. President, the letter I sent to the Nobel Prize committee,” Mr. Netanyahu said, with the news cameras rolling to capture the moment. “It’s nominating you for the Peace Prize. It’s well deserved, and you should get it.”

Mr. Trump declared the gesture from the prime minister “very meaningful,” though he has long said he believes the Nobel committee would never give him the prize.

The effort to curry favor was the latest evidence that many of the world’s leaders have figured Mr. Trump out. Heaping praise on the American president is the best way to manage him — even if it’s not entirely clear that the schmoozing leads to concrete benefits for their countries.

France: US overstated Iran strike impact, nuclear program only set back by months

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

French intelligence chief says Iran’s nuclear program delayed by only a few months, not destroyed as claimed by Trump and Netanyahu; only a small portion of enriched uranium eliminated, Paris has indications about their whereabouts

The statement aligns only partially with the U.S. assessment. Last week, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the Israeli and American strikes likely set Iran’s nuclear program back by one to two years. He reaffirmed that key facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan had been destroyed.

Hegseth did not inform the White House before he authorized pause on weapon shipments to Ukraine

 https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/08/politics/hegseth-did-not-inform-white-house-ukraine-weapons-pause

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth did not inform the White House before he authorized a pause on weapons shipments to Ukraine last week, according to five sources familiar with the matter, setting off a scramble inside the administration to understand why the halt was implemented and explain it to Congress and the Ukrainian government.

President Donald Trump suggested on Tuesday that he was not responsible for the move. Asked on Tuesday during a Cabinet meeting whether he approved of the pause in shipments, Trump demurred, saying only that the US would continue to send defensive weapons to Ukraine. Pressed again on who authorized the pause, Trump replied, “I don’t know, why don’t you tell me?”

Donald Trump Drops Below Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton in Popularity Ranking

 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-popularity-ranking-joe-biden-hillary-clinton-2095914

In the Q2 rankings, Trump ranks as the 17th most popular with 37 percent of adults having a positive opinion of the president. Vice President JD Vance ranks above Trump, at 14th on the list, at 38 percent.

Hillary Clinton ranks sixth on the list, with 47 percent, while Biden is ninth with 42 percent.

Former President Jimmy Carter, who died in December 2024, ranked number one. Second on the list was former President Barack Obama, while former Vice President Kamala Harris held the position of fourth most popular.

Deadly Texas floods leave officials pointing fingers after warnings missed

 https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/5388538-texas-floods-flash-flooding-camp-mystic-dhs-nws-warnings/

Local, state and federal officials are all pointing fingers in the wake of the deadly Texas flooding, but one thing is certain: The warnings weren’t heard by the people who needed them.

After the catastrophic Independence Day floods that killed at least 90 across central Texas, state and county officials told reporters that the storm had come without warning. But a wide array of meteorologists — and the Trump administration itself — has argued that those officials, as well as local residents, received a long train of advisories that a dangerous flood was gathering.

Some — like Sokich — argued that one possibility is that after rounds of staff reductions, NWS offices that may have had enough staff to issue accurate predictions didn’t have the personnel for potentially life-saving outreach. “If you don’t have the full staff, then you can’t do that,” he said. “People are just focusing on issuing the watches and warnings.” 

University of California, Los Angeles meteorologist Daniel Swain wrote on X that such outreach is “one of the first things to go away when offices are critically understaffed.”

Musk Leads MAGA Meltdown Over Trump Administration’s Epstein Review

 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/musk-leads-maga-meltdown-over-trump-administration-s-epstein-review/ar-AA1I6Kkg?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=e65e9148c21d4014ee182428979a8fa2&ei=53

Elon Musk led a MAGA freak-out after the Justice Department and FBI shot down claims about a so-called “client list” belonging to late child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Conspiracy theories about Epstein have run wild for years, with many Trump supporters hoping explosive details, such as a list of high-profile names Epstein might have had incriminating dirt on, would surface now that Donald Trump is back in office. Two Trump loyalists at the FBI—Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino—have previously pushed the unsubstantiated claim that Epstein didn’t kill himself in his Manhattan cell.

Musk, who previously claimed—and then apologized—for suggesting the reason the DOJ hadn’t released the Epstein files was because Trump featured in them, has lashed out at the agencies’ findings.

Conservative activist Robby Starbuck added: “Pam Bondi said the Epstein client list was on her desk to review for release to the public just a few months ago. Now the DOJ she leads claims that there’s no Epstein client list. Sorry but this is unacceptable.

“Was she lying then or is she lying now? We deserve answers.”

JD Vance’s old tweets show why the ‘Epstein client list’ is becoming such a problem for Trump

 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jd-vance-s-old-tweets-show-why-the-epstein-client-list-is-becoming-such-a-problem-for-trump/ar-AA1I9mTs?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=e65e9148c21d4014ee182428979a8fa2&ei=27

President Donald Trump’s team spent a good deal of energy on Monday in unfamiliar territory: on the wrong side of a losing battle against America’s extreme online conspiracy theorists.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was the face of the effort at her daily news briefing. But if Leavitt is looking for who is fueling the speculation around the dead New York financier and sex criminal who appeared on camera yucking it up with her boss, she needs to remember: the call is coming from inside the (White) house.

Musk tweaks Trump with Jeffrey Epstein post

 https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5387380-elon-musk-trump-jeffrey-epstein/

Trump’s feud with Musk came to a head last month, when the Tesla chief executive said it was time to drop “the really big bomb.”

“[Trump] is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public,” Musk wrote on X at the time.

“Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,” he followed up minutes later.

Trump to Resume Sending Weapons to Ukraine - Trustworthy Friend

 https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/trump-told-zelensky-he-wasnt-responsible-for-weapons-holdup-f684444b?mod=hp_lead_pos1

The U.S. will send additional defensive arms because Moscow is hitting Kyiv ‘very hard,’ the president says

President Trump said Monday the U.S. would resume providing Ukraine with arms to help it withstand Russian attacks after months of trying without success to draw Moscow into negotiations on ending the war.

Q&A: Iranian War, Investments & Seminary (HaRav Yitzchak Breitowitz)