Monday, July 25, 2022

Putin Ally Viktor Orbán, Praised by Tucker Carlson, Bashes Mixing of Races

 https://www.newsweek.com/putin-ally-viktor-orban-praised-tucker-carlson-bashes-mixing-races-1727448

Orbán's speech was meant to address the local Hungarian minority in Romania, according to Jonathan Eyal, an associate director at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) for Defence and Security Studies.

"Hungary's Viktor Orban each year goes to Romania's Transylvania to deliver nationalist speeches designed to galvanise the considerable local ethnic Hungarian minority. Few governments would allow such an open appeal to irredentism, but the Romanians have tolerated this," he tweeted Sunday.

Viktor Orbán sparks outrage with attack on ‘race mixing’ in Europe

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/24/viktor-orban-against-race-mixing-europe-hungary

The Romanian MEP Alin Mituța also responded angrily to Orbán’s comments. “Speaking about race or ethnic ‘purity’, especially in such a mixed region such as central and eastern Europe, is purely delusional and dangerous. And so is Mr Orban,” he wrote on Twitter.

Far-right Hungarian PM Orban decries European ‘race-mixing,’ sparking outrage

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/far-right-hungarian-pm-orban-decries-european-race-mixing-sparking-outrage/

Hungary’s conservative leader Viktor Orban denounced the “mixing” of races in a controversial speech on Saturday that has generated backlash.

Speaking in Romania, the Hungarian prime minister defended his vision of an “unmixed Hungarian race” as he criticized “mixing” with non-Europeans, The Guardian reported.

“We [Hungarians] are not a mixed race, and we do not want to become a mixed race either,” Orban said.

Habituation

 


Habituation

 https://nafshi.org/mishlei-13-20-habituation/

Thus, after a period of repeated sinning, the process of habituation desensitizes him to the seriousness of the sin, and it is no longer a struggle. Mishlei describes the phenomenon of habituation in terms of being pursued by the evil that the person has created through his own sin. Something similar is happening when he becomes desensitized to the value of the good that he is doing. However, it is not quite the same.

Rav Moshe Tendler

 https://mishpacha.com/brilliant-mind-golden-heart/

 As a son-in-law of the posek hador, Rav Moshe Tendler quickly became a major figure in Rav Moshe Feinstein’s positions on Jewish law and bioethics, writing many articles in prominent medical and Torah journals alike.

 

 This was a major problem in the yeshiva world as he and his son would assert that a certain view was from Rav Moshe and it wasn't accepted as such.

I once net him at a simcha and said to him,"Since you are the main source of Rav Moshe's knowledge of scientific information Why did Rav Moshe state that Natural child birth  is merely a trick to convince the woman she is not experiencing pain?" He replied that he "was not Rav Moshe's main source and that though he was not aware of this particular tshuva which is in Igros Moshe he agreed fully with it."

 

When Rav Moshe was niftar I was told that a number of major poskim went to Rav Dovid and asked him to clarify the major disputes regarding Rav Moshe's true views. He replied "let them believe what they want but I refuse to get involved in a public dispute in these matters." I was also told that this was in fact Rav Moshe' own attitude toward public disputes. As a consequence there is still not a clear view on many issues.

Interview with Rav Ephraim Greenblatt from 1990

 When I lived in Har Nof I met with Rav Ephraim Greenblatt in July 12 1990. I asked him questions regarding Rav Moshe and the Igros Moshe. He was very open with his comments. The question is whether I should publish them now. They might shock some while others will say this is well known or at least assumed. I have asked a posek and am waiting his decision. 

I just received psak that I should publish the interview.  which I will when I reformat it for greater readability.

 ---------------------------------------------------------

Reb Moshe believed that if you understood the gemora properly it was possible to posken directly from it. That the Shulchan Aruch itself was written for people that did not have time to learn the gemora properly. His avoidance of achronim was not because he didn't have the seforim but because he felt they were not necessary for him to posken. When confronted with acontradiction to his psak from the Yavetz he answered thathis psak was meant to be from shamayim.

Reb Moshe told on himself that he had a strong temper by nature but that he worked on himself not to express it and to remain calm.

Reb Moshe held that what he poskened was valid and he had no problem with his views being publicized. There were issues he felt however should not be made known to the general public such as his views on Hatzola returning on shabbos which were eventually published in the Igros.

Reb Moshe viewed his main halachic work to be the Dibros Moshe not the Igros Moshe. He felt that it was necessary to have a record of his opinions available- the Igros Moshe. Reb Moshe was aware that non Talmidei Chachamim read the Igros.That is why he did not posken on Gas on Yom Tov there because of the possibility of confusing gas with electricity.

He mentioned that Reb Moshe always emphasized the importance of understanding Metzius to posken properly. He assumed that Reb Tendler was the source of medical issues and was surpirsed when I told him that Reb Tendler said that hewas not the sole source of this.

He was not aware of Reb Moshe being against going to a doctor for preventitive check ups but said that it was possible that there was such a position since his uncle nevers goes to doctors.

There were times that Reb Moshe poskened on a personal level against the Igros. For example in Memphis, he allowed a short mechitza because he felt that that was all they would take and that he hoped that later it would be possible to increase the hight. Similarly he allowed mixed classes up to sixgrade for Memphis. He agreed that the level of observance today might mean that Reb Moshe would be more machmir l'maaseh than for tshuvah's from 40 years ago.

I asked that Reb Moshe's attitude towards psak be written down. He replied that his uncle Reb Notah Greenblatt would be the one to do that and that he would ask when he returns to Memphis. He said that there has been much talk about collecting stories and Hashkofa from Reb Moshe's talmidim but that no one is willing to take charge and get it done. He said he once asked Reb Moshe what had been decided at an Aguda Convention. He replied, like always that we should have another meeting next year. He said that he is planning to retire soon to Yerushalayim and that perhaps he would be able work on the project the project.

On a related point, he mentioned that he was recently in Lakewood and was asked to speak about Reb Moshe. When he said he wanted to learn something in the Igros, they told him that everyone know the Igros and that they wanted to hear some stories. He took out an Igros and asked them what Reb Moshe held on a particular Issue. He said that he got 20 different versions of something stated in the Igros.

Reb Moshe felt that there was nothing he could do to help a person with cancer. In general he would not accept a kvittel for such a person unless he felt it would upset the family.For other illnesses however he would pray for recovering.

It was not unusual for people to understand Reb Moshe in different ways. There for he always tried to taperecord his sessions with Reb Moshe. There were instances where he was able to demonstrate to people that they had misunderstood Reb Moshe's position from these tapes.

Validity of the Igros. There is a definite problem with the last two volumes. He has been told by a number of big talmidei chachamim that there is there are things written which are definitely not Reb Moshe's language. In addition the last couple of years in which Reb Moshe's replies were typewritten by Mordechai Tendler are not reliable. People also got confused when Mordechai Tendler said things and assumed that it was from Reb Moshe when in fact some things were not. 10 years ago when he went to get a Beracha for his son-in-law.

Reb Moshe had to send Mordechai Tendler out of the room because he kept answering their questions - not letting Reb Moshe reply. Mordechai Tendler felt that he knew Reb Moshe well enough that he could provide the same answer as Reb Moshe- which was not always true. The problem of editing -have words or sections left out - could easily change the meaning of a tshuva.

Reb Moshe used to write over a copy of his tshuva before sending out a reply. When he was asked why not let a bachor do the copying, he replied that copying provided a chance for chazora and that here were times that he changed the original replay based upon his chazora.

Newspapers: Rabbi Tendler claimed that Reb Moshe read the newspaper regularly. He replied that he never saw Reb Moshe read a newspaper. Reb Moshe did buy Der Tag regularly from a poor Jew who used to come into M.T.J. but then he would put in on a bench. He said he only bought the paper to provide parnosa for the Yid and that anyone could take the paper.

When I told him the problem of time of death, he agreed it was a major problem. He agreed that Rav Tendler feels that he knows what Reb Moshe would have said and that there is no actual evidence to support his interpretation as being what Reb Moshe held or would have held.

Sunday, July 24, 2022

HALACHIC ARBITER IN A MEDICAL MAZE

 https://mishpacha.com/halachic-arbiter-in-a-medical-maze/

Among the many burdens shouldered by Rav Moshe Feinstein was his role as halachic arbiter in the rapidly-developing field of medicine. An astounding number of innovations spawned an equal number of questions. No matter what that subject – be it hearing aids, cancer drugs, reproductive medicine, or end-of-life issues -- Rav Moshe ruled with clarity and authority. Three physicians who merited personal access to Rav Moshe recall the giant who served as the era’s halachic beacon

47 House Republicans vote to write same-sex marriage into law

Attitudes concerning same-sex marriage have shifted rapidly in recent years. Republicans have largely moved on from their adamant opposition to same-sex marriage in cultural wars. A record 71 percent of people in the U.S. support gay marriage, according to a June poll from Gallup.

GOP freezes up on same-sex marriage

 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/20/gop-freezes-same-sex-marriage-00046924

The 47 House Republicans who supported the legislation represent what would’ve been an unthinkable number just a decade ago, but still a solid minority of the GOP conference. Explaining his vote for the bill, ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) focused on its non-LGBTQ elements: “I don’t think that interracial marriages should be outlawed.”

Collins and Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) are co-sponsoring Baldwin’s legislation, which aides say is identical to the House’s version. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said he’s likely to support it, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she’s “absolutely looking at how we can support marriage equality.”

Does The United States Have A Free Speech Problem?

Bannon Verdict Shows No Defense Sometimes Isn’t the Best Defense

 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-23/bannon-verdict-shows-the-best-defense-sometimes-isn-t-no-defense

Steve Bannon’s lawyers chose not to call defense witnesses, submit evidence or let the jury hear directly from the longtime Donald Trump adviser in his contempt of Congress trial.

It was a gamble that didn’t pay off.

“Bannon talked a big game about his trial but could hardly have played it smaller,” said Lisa Griffin, a professor of criminal procedure at Duke University’s law school. “The arguments his counsel ultimately made were inconsistent with the evidence and focused on the most minute of technicalities.”

An Unsuccessful Defense of the Beit Din of Rabbi Emanuel Rackman: The Tears of The Oppressed by Aviad Hacohen

 https://www.torahmusings.com/wp-content/uploads/2005/08/4_2_Broyde.pdf

The Tears of the Oppressed was introduced at a press conference on October 22, 2004 as a solution to the agunah problem. It proposes that the doctrine of kiddushei ta`ut* (error in the creation of marriage) be expanded to include blemishes that arose after the marriage was entered into and that this doctrine then be used by rabbinical courts to solve the modern agunah problems related to recalcitrance. This review essay demonstrates that such an expansion is supported neither by Jewish law sources nor by the responsa cited in the book itself. This review essay also addresses the procedural pitfalls of the book as well as its impact on marriage theory, and explores other solutions to the agunah problems.
In 1997, Rabbi Emanuel Rackman and a small group of rabbis who were not widely recognized as rabbinic decisors (poseqim)1 formed a beit din (rabbinical court) that claimed to be freeing agunot2 without requiring that a get be given by the husband to the wife; this beit din is now called “The Rabbi Emanuel Rackman—Agunah International Beit Din L’Inyanei Agunot.”3 A great many rabbis denounced this beit din, which was defended in a text advertisement placed in the New York Jewish Week by Agunah International.4 Nearly no Orthodox rabbis accept the pronouncements of this beit din as valid; one of the consistent criticisms of this court over the last seven years has been the absence of a serious scholarly work to demonstrate that the theoretical legal underpinnings of the mechanisms employed by the bet din are consistent with generally accepted halakhic

Grappling With the Problem of Agunot, Flaws in the Proposal of Rabbi Emanuel Rackman

Even if Rabbi Rackman's idea were acceptable in theory, its implementation contains a significant practical problem. It is often very difficult to formally produce incontrovertible evidence that someone physically abused his spouse (see Rama, E.H. 154:3). Proving that someone had an abuser personality is even more difficult, if not impossible. Similarly, it is exceedingly difficult to prove that one who denies his wife a get had a sadistic personality at the time of marriage. At the very least, the dayanim must see psychological records documenting these tendencies from before the marriage. In Rav Moshe's responsa regarding impotent and institutionalized husbands, official medical records proved the women's claims. On the other hand, The Jerusalem Report (August 3, 1998) disclosed that Rabbi Moses Morgenstern issues his rulings merely based on the woman's word, undoubtedly an unacceptable practice.3See, for example, Teshuvot Noda Biy'hudah (vol. 1, E.H. 54), cited in Pitchei Teshuvah (E.H. 157:9). Rabbis can rarely obtain private medical files in today's litigious society, for doctors do not generally release these records to clergy with the same ease that they may have done in Rav Moshe's time.