Russian Host Says Biden Should Be Ousted for Moscow 'Partner' Donald Trump

 https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-putin-popov-partner-donald-trump-1693210

A Russian state TV host has said that President Joe Biden should be removed from office and replaced by his predecessor Donald Trump, whom he described as a "partner" for Moscow.

Cawthorn’s orgies-and-drugs comment stirs trouble within Freedom Caucus

 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/29/cawthorn-orgies-freedom-caucus-00021548

Kevin McCarthy isn’t the only senior Republican who wants to have a talk with Rep. Madison Cawthorn about his claim that some of his colleagues invited him to orgies and used cocaine.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), who chairs the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus to which Cawthorn belongs, said he plans to speak to the North Carolina Republican one-on-one about the incendiary comment. Perry further indicated that Cawthorn should identify the individuals he alleges engaged in that behavior.

COVID-19 booster essential, even among individuals previously infected

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/324752

A long-term, cohort study led by researchers at the Azrieli Faculty of Medicine of Bar-Ilan University and Ziv Medical Center in Safed has produced further insight regarding the interplay between COVID-19 infection and vaccination in providing protection over time.

Seven to nine months after the second dose of the vaccine, antibody levels throughout the cohort dropped and were comparable in all groups including among young people and those infected before vaccination. The booster, however, led to antibody levels ten times higher than after the second dose in all groups within the cohort.

The study, recently published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, further showed that all individuals, including those with hybrid immunity (infected and vaccinated) require subsequent boosters beyond the two initial COVID-19 vaccine doses.

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. 

Majority rule of halacha is not relevant in most cases

from Daas Torah - translation copyrigthed

Chazon Ish (Beginning of Kelayim): It is well known that the requirement to follow the majority applies only to a beis din which is in session, but regarding scholars holding different views who lived at different times or in different places, the question of majority or minority is not relevant. In a particular area where most of the Torah derives from a particular rabbi and his disciples, and the disciples' disciples, it is correct to follow their rabbi even in a matter in which the majority (of authorities) holds a different opinion. In recent generations most of our Torah has come to us through the specific sefarim in our own teachers like Rif, Rosh, Rambam, Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, Ran, Maggid Mishne, Mordechai, and the commentaries of Rashi and Tosfos, and whenever there is a difference of opinion (and as mentioned above, majority ruling does not enter) it is in the hands of every individual Torah scholar to decide whether to take a strict view or to select particular authorities to follow; likewise, in the case where no decision has been taken and the question is still open (sofek). In addition to the fact that majority rule does not apply in the above situations, we do not even know what the majority view is, since many scholars did not put their views in writing, and many written views did not reach us. (Therefore Jewish law does not change when new manuscripts are printed which convert a minority into a majority. Despite this, the courage and insight needed to decide on a logical basis are sometimes lacking, and decisions are taken on the basis of numerical majority; but it would be better to rely on those authorities whose views have reached us in all branches of Torah. Even though we do not presume to decide between different Rishonim by conclusive logical arguments, nevertheless, the study of their arguments is a major factor in reaching a decision, and many times our master z"l (Rabbi Yosef Karo) decides in favor of one authority because his argument is convincing and removes difficulties. Our Rabbis have taught us not to abandon the use of our own intellect, and we must place great weight on intellectual comparison which is the connecting link between Creator and created.

Chazon Ish said he can disagree with Rishonim except in psak halacha

ר' אליעזר פלצינסקי (בשלום יהודה של חלק מועד, בעירובין או סוכה): יש כמה ויכוחים ארוכים עם החזו"א ובא' המכתבים כותב החזו"א : "כי אומנם לקחת חבל בתורה הוא ענין קשה ובעל גוונים רבים, לקחתי לי לחפש לעיין בג"מ עד כמה שאפשר, אף שיהיה נגד הראשונים ז"ל, ולהסתפק בידיעה לחוד שדברי רבותינו עיקר ואנחנו יתמי דיתמי, ומ"מ לא נפרוש מלברר וללבן מה שאפשר לנו לקטנותינו, וגם לקובע כן להלכה במקום שאין מפורש להיפך לענין פסק הלכה, ואם לא כן היה חסר לי עסק התורה, ואומנם זה נוגע לי לעצמי, אבל כמובן אחרים אין להם זיקה לדברי וחובתם לבחור דברי הראשונים ז"ל שהמה עיקר".

Majoririty rule in halacha

 Rosh(6:7): When a community agrees on some matter an individual has  no right to protest. Concerning this the Torah  states that one  must  follow  the majority. If you don’t agree to this principle than the community would never  have the ability to make binding  rules because you will never get unanimity on an issue.

 Shabbos (60b)       R. Mattenah — others state, R. Ahadboi b. Mattenah in R. Mattenah's name — said: The halachah is not as R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon. But that is obvious: [where] one disagrees with many, the halachah is as the majority? — You might argue, R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon's view is logical here; hence we are informed [that we do not follow him].

 Chazon Ish(150.8): In this letter he takes issue with the idea that in deciding what the halakha is poskim are bound to follow the majority opinion of previous poskim. The idea of a majority rule, he says, has no place outside of a beis din, and therefore the only place where a majority rule can determine the general psak halakha is in the Sanhedrin of 71. He points out that such a method is not found among any of the prior great poskim. Rather, he writes that in absence of a complete consensus on an issue among the early significant rishonim each posek is entitled to adopt any interpretation of the halakha that is supportable by the gemara and that has not been eliminated by a total consensus of prior poskim.

 Chazon Ish Kelayim – beginning):It is well known that the requirement to follow the majority applies only to a beis din which is in session, but regarding scholars holding different views who lived at different times or in different places, the question of majority or minority is not relevant. In a particular area where most of the Torah derives from a particular rabbi and his disciples, and the disciples' disciples, it is correct to follow their rabbi even in a matter in which the majority (of authorities) hold a different opinion. In recent generations most of our Torah has come ot us through the specific sefarim in our own teachers like Rif, Rosh, Rambam, Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, Ran, Maggid Mishne, Mordechai, and the commentaries of Rashi and Tosfos, and however there is a difference of opinion (and as mentioned above, majority ruling does not enter) it is in the hands of every individual Torah scholar to decide whether to take a strict view or to select particular authorities to follow; likewise, in the case where no decision has been taken and the question is still open (safek). In addition to the fact that majority rule does not apply in the above situations, we do not even know what the majority view is, since many scholars did not put their views in writing, and many written views did not reach us. (Therefore Jewish law does not change when new manuscripts are printed which convert a minority into a majority. Despite this, the courage and insight needed to decide on a logical basis are sometimes lacking, and decisions are taken on the basis of numerical majority; but it would be better to rely on those authorities whose views have reached us in all branches of Torah. Even though we do not presume to decide between different Rishonim by conclusive logical arguments, nevertheless,the study of their arguments is a major factor in reaching a decision, and many times our master z"l (Rabbi Yosef Karo) decides in favor of one authroity because his argument is convincing and removes difficulties. Our Rabbis have taught us not to abandon the use of our own intellect, and we must place great weight on intellectual comparison which is the connecting link between Creator and created.

 Chazon Ish (Choshen Mishpat Likutim #1 or Maaseros #13): halacha follow intellect and one must examine the decision of the achronim. If it is not clear what to do than it is accepted to follow the Shulchan Aruch/Rema

 Rambam[1](Introduction to Mishna Torah)

---

[1]

רמב"ם יד החזקה - הקדמה לספר יד החזקה

 נמצא, רבינא ורב אשי וחבריהם, סוף גדולי חכמי ישראל, המעתיקים תורה שבעל פה, ושגזרו גזירות, והתקינו התקנות, והנהיגו מנהגות, ופשטה גזירתם ותקנתם ומנהגותם בכל ישראל, בכל מקומות מושבותם. ואחר בית דין של רב אשי, שחיבר הגמרא, וגמרו בימי בנו, נתפזרו ישראל בכל הארצות פיזור יתר, והגיעו לקצוות ואיים הרחוקים, ורבתה קטטה בעולם, ונשתבשו הדרכים בגייסות, ונתמעט תלמוד תורה, ולא נכנסו ישראל ללמוד בישיבותיהם אלפים ורבבות, כמו שהיו מקודם, אלא מתקבצים יחידים השרידים, אשר ה' קורא, בכל עיר ועיר, ובכל מדינה ומדינה, ועוסקין בתורה, ומבינים בחיבורי החכמים כולם, ויודעים מהם דרך המשפט היאך הוא. וכל בית דין שעמד אחר הגמרא, בכל מדינה ומדינה, וגזר או התקין או הנהיג, לבני מדינתו, או לבני מדינות רבות, לא פשטו מעשיו בכל ישראל, מפני ריחוק מושבותיהם ושבוש הדרכים. והיות בית דין של אותה המדינה יחידים, ובית דין הגדול של שבעים ואחד בטל, מכמה שנים קודם חיבור הגמרא, לפיכך אין כופין אנשי מדינה זו לנהוג כמנהג מדינה האחרת, ואין אומרים לבית דין זה לגזור גזירה, שגזרה בית דין אחר במדינתו. וכן אם למד אחד מהגאונים, שדרך המשפט כך הוא, ונתבאר לבית דין אחר, שעמד אחריו, שאין זה דרך המשפט הכתוב בגמרא, אין שומעין לראשון, אלא למי שהדעת נוטה לדבריו, בין ראשון בין אחרון:

ודברים הללו, בדינים גזירות ותקנות ומנהגות, שנתחדשו אחר חיבור הגמרא. אבל כל הדברים שבגמרא הבבלי, חייבין כל ישראל ללכת בהם, וכופין כל עיר ועיר, וכל מדינה ומדינה, לנהוג בכל המנהגות, שנהגו חכמי הגמרא, ולגזור גזירותם, וללכת בתקנותם. הואיל וכל אותם הדברים שבגמרא, הסכימו עליהם כל ישראל. ואותם החכמים שהתקינו, או שגזרו, או שהנהיגו, או שדנו דין, ולמדו שהמשפט כך הוא, הם כל חכמי ישראל, או רובם, והם ששמעו הקבלה בעיקרי התורה כולה, דור אחר דור, עד משה רבינו עליו השלום:

 

After the tribunal of Rab Ashi, who compiled the Talmud, which was completed in the days of his son²⁷ Mar. G., the extent of Israel's dispersion throughout the lands became more general, its extreme points reaching out to distant isles, in the midst of which universal unrest became alarming, making the highways unsafe on account of military operations, as a result of which the study of the Torah was neglected, and the sons of Israel ceased flocking to their schools in the thousands and in the tens of thousands as theretofore,

save only the gathering of a remnant few, who ever hear the call of God in each and every city and in each and every country and study the Torah and understand all the works of the scholars and learn to know therefrom the path of the law as it is.

Thus, every tribunal, founded during the post-Talmudic era in each and every country which issued edicts, or enacted statutes, or established customs, either for the inhabitants of its own country alone or for the inhabitants of many countries, did not have its authority extended throughout all Israel, because of the great distances between their habitations and the unsafe condition of the highways. Moreover, as the tribunal of a given state consisted of individual scholars only, for the Great Tribunal of seventy one had ceased to be many years before the compilation of the Talmud,

the people of one state could therefore, not be forced to inaugurate the custom of another state; neither could one tribunal be told to issue edicts similar to the edicts issued by another tribunal for its own state. Likewise, if one of the Gaonim instructed concerning a given law in a particular way, and it became clear to another tribunal which rose up after him, that such was not the way of the law according to the text of the Talmud, the first one is not supported but the one whose interpretation is based upon sound reasoning, whether he be the first one or the last one.

These rules apply only to laws, edicts, statutes and customs which were inaugurated during the post-Talmudic era; but all matters named in the Babylonian Talmud itself, are mandatory upon all Israel to follow, and each and every community and each and every state must be forced to inaugurate the customs which were promulgated by the Talmudic scholars, to proclaim their edicts and to obey their statutes,

because to all such matters so named in the Talmud, all Israel assented. Moreover, those scholars who enacted statutes, issued edicts, inaugurated customs or made judicial pronouncements and instructed that such was the law, constituted all, or a majority of the scholars in Israel, and they were the recipients of the traditional interpretation of the precepts of the whole Torah, generation after generation, even unto Moses our Master, peace be unto him!

All of the scholars who rose up after the compilation of the Talmud and builded upon it, thereby gaining fame for their scholarship, are called Gaonim. All the Gaonim who flourished in Eretz Yisrael, in the land of Shinar, in Spain and in France studied searchingly the path of the Talmud, and brought to light its hidden mysteries, and clarified its treatises, for its path is an extremely deep path, Moreover, being written in Aramaic, blended with other languages, a vernacular understood by the inhabitants of Shinar when the Talmud was compiled; whereas in other places, and even in Shinar during the period of the Gaonim, no man understood that language unless he received special instructions therein.

In addition the people of each and every city propounded many questions to their contemporary Gaonim for the elucidation of impenetrable texts in the Talmud, to whom the latter responded according to their wisdom, and such interrogators collected the responsa in book form, out of which they gained understanding.

The Gaonim in each and every generation compiled also exegetical works on the Talmud, some of among them interpreted particular laws; of among others particular chapters which had been the subject of inquiry in his days, and of among still others, whole Tractates and Orders.

They also compiled treatises on judicial decisions concerning that which is forbidden, or permitted, guilt or innocence, matters which were the need of the hour, so as to keep in touch with education, even he who is not capable of penetrating the depths of the Talmud. Of such was the Godly work of the Gaonim in Israel from the close of the Talmud even till this time, which is in the eighth year after the eleventh century since the destruction of the (Second) Temple, and which is also the year four thousand nine hundred and thirty-seven since the creation of the world.

In this age, with afflictions mightily intensified, the pressure of the hour weighing heavily upon everybody, when the wisdom of our wise did perish and the prudence of our prudent was hid, all commentaries, treatises, and responsa which the Gaonim compiled and considered by them as clear text are preplexities in our day and only a select few comprehend the subject matter thereof, not to speak of the Talmud itself, both the Babylonian and the Jerusalemean, the Sifra, Sifre and Tosefta, which require a broad understanding, a soul endowed with wisdom and lengthy reflection whenafter one may find the right path therein, to ascertain the things which are forbidden and the things which are permitted, or to fathom the how and why of the other laws of the Torah.

Chazon Ish: Ruach Hakodesh is intellect joined with the Divine

from Daas Torah - translation copyrighted

Chazon Ish (Letters 1:15):.. It is at the roots of our faith that all that is said in the gemora whether it is in the Mishna or gemora whether it is halacha or agada - all these things were revealed to us through the medium of prophetic power ... There is in fact a major distinction between the power of prophecy and ruach hakodesh. Prophecy transcends the human intellect entirely. Therefore, someone who has reached the level of prophecy is able to acquire wisdom directly without any intellectual effort or involvement. In contrast, ruach hakodesh requires tremendous thought and analysis until he is given additional supernatural understanding. Without this effort, this special understanding is never achieved. One of the fully accepted foundations of faith is that ruach hakodesh is critical to properly understanding the truth in the Torah that was given through prophecy. That is because Torah is not just probably true but is absolutely true. Consequently we are greatly distressed to hear any aspersions cast on the words of Chazal whether it is Halacha or agada. It is equivalent to hearing blasphemy. A person who deviates in this way is according to our tradition as one who denies the words of Chazal and his shechita is invalid and he is unfit to serve as a legal witness and other issues.

A Taste of the Chazon Ish Torah Study Method

 https://www.hyehudi.org/a-taste-of-the-chazon-ish-torah-study-method/

Broadly speaking, two “Batei Midrash”, or common learning methods are prevalent today; ‘Brisk’ and ‘Chazon Ish’. The respective approaches clearly preceded these individuals, thus Rabbi Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz and Rabbi Chaim Solevechik are not the ‘Founding Fathers’ of the methods that bear their names.

Nevertheless, their powers of exposition and persuasion, their commanding scholarship, and the unique devotion displayed by each toward their own school of thought effectively turned them into the “mascots”. By now, their very names are synonymous with the various approaches (Reverse Eponym).

Sizing up Shiurim: Modern-Day Measuring—Up or Down?

 https://www.halacha2go.com/php/h2go/home2.php?number=724

Another contemporary posek, Rav Chaim Na’eh (early 20th century), extensively researched the matter, and among other calculations, based his measurements on the weight of a certain dirham (mid-Eastern coin)—a tradition going back in time to the Rambam (12th century early halachic authority). He reached an opposite conclusion: we should downsize our shiurim based on the current physical reality. Rav Chaim Na’eh’s revi’is measures 86.4 ml. At that time in Yerushalayim (where Rav Chaim was rav), this shiur was universally accepted. Today it is the common shiur in most of the world, and the Chazon Ish shiur is categorized as an extra chumrah (stringency).

The Real Shiurim – They’re Smaller Than You Think

 https://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/jewish-columns/the-real-shiurim-theyre-smaller-than-you-think/2018/03/22/

Today, many charts outline exactly how much matzah, maror, and wine must be eaten at he Seder. These shiurim, however, are significantly larger than what longstanding minhag requires.

Rav Shurkin told me that a group of Bachorim had their seder with the Steipler. He gave them matzoh which they hid and asked for more. In other words they disagreed with his view of the amount of matza needed

68 US senators press Blinken to quash open-ended UN probe into Israel

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/68-us-senators-press-blinken-to-quash-open-ended-un-probe-into-israel/

The initiative, which was led by Democrat Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, was backed by 31 Democrats and 37 Republicans.

The Biden administration rejoined the UNHCR earlier this year, after former president Donald Trump withdrew the US from the council over its alleged anti-Israel bias. Seeking to justify the reversal, the current White House has argued it was unable to influence the international dialogue on human rights without a seat at the table.

Biden administration officials have insisted they will use the renewed US membership to oppose one-sided measures targeting Israel and speak out against the 125-8-34 vote to launch the open-ended probe into Israel following last May’s war against the Hamas terror group.

Why do Putin, Trump, Tucker Carlson and the Republican party sound so alike?

 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/29/putin-trump-tucker-carlson-republican-party

Reduced to basics, today’s oligarchs and strongmen (along with their mouthpieces and lackeys) are trying to justify their wealth and power by attacking liberal values that have shaped the west, beginning with the enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries – the values of tolerance, openness, democracy, self-government, equal rights, and the rule of law. These values are incompatible with a society of oligarchs and strongmen.

'Treachery'—Donald Trump Faces Backlash for Asking Vladimir Putin a Favor

 https://www.newsweek.com/trump-putin-hunter-biden-business-russia-1693198

Speaking to Newsweek, Thomas Gift, founding director of University College London's Centre on U.S. Politics, added: "As the rest of the world looks on at Russia's aggression in horror, Trump, in typical Trumpian fashion, sees a golden opportunity to keep his name in the headlines—and it's working.