You are confusing "talmidei chachamim" with "Torah scholars". If you are learning full time, you are a "Torah scholar". You may also be a "talmid chacham".
Exactly. You really believe the vast majority of yeshiva bochurim who are currently exempted meet that criteria? For a start, a few select perokim in each of the three bovos and a few selected perokim of a few mesachtos in noshim do not not qualify as שיודע לישא וליתן בתורה ומבין מדעתו ברוב מקומות התלמוד. If so, I have a bridge to sell you.
(setting aside all the other debate about the relevance of that particular halochoh).
How many learn 'full time'? Bein hazmanim is about 20% of they year! Besides, I know many who 'learn' 'full time' and know very little torah. Memorising a bit of lomdus on noshim/nezikin does not a 'torah scholar' make. However many hours a day they spend.
Evidence for this is (and don't nit-pick) despite the explosion in those 'in learning', shuls that need rabbonim struggle just as much as 50 years ago in finding suitable candidates. In addition, the sheer number of 'likut' seforim rather than original thought is particularly telling.
Rude or otherwise off topic responses will be ignored.
Strangely, when the chareidim scream and shout when stipends are cut, and fund raise all over the world, they ignore those words of the ramabam. They, as a group, spend a considerable amount of time arranging financial support, rather than learning. Like ALL other groups, they can hear a dollar bill landing on a plush carpet a mile way. Don't tell me the Rambam is referring to groups like that.
The Rambam defines who is included in "Lo shevet levi bilvad", and it's not dependent on learning all day. He seems to say that it is dependent on A) Keeping Torah and Mitzvos properly with honesty and truth B) Studying Torah and C) to not have a parnassah.
The pashtus is that this exemption of lo shevet levi bilvad isn't because he is a Torah scholar, because why is the fact that he has no parnasah necessary? Someone can be considered a Torah scholar and still have a parnasah (E.G. the Rambam, who spent most of his day as a doctor later in his life, but had a set 2 hours of learning in the evening ), yet he will not be included in the definition of "lo shevet levi bilvad". Therefore, this halacha of lo shevet levi bilvad is clearly not referring to halachically defined Torah Scholars. As a side point, we clearly see from here that someone who doesn't learn for 20% of the year can still be considered a Torah scholar.
(So what is the definition of a Torah scholar? It is someone who is shokuah (invested) enough into talmudic studies that he makes sure to A) Have a kivi'us in Torah, and B) Spend as much spare time possible learning Torah).
It also does seemingly does not depend on if they are learning all day, which is the different halachic category of toraso umnasoh, a category that is not mentioned by anyone in the discussion of lo shevet levi bilvad. Furthermore, why does the Rambam go into extreme detail about the definition of those included in lo shevet levi bilvad if he could have just said the words "those who's Torah is their umnus is included in lo shevet levi bilvad"? It therefore seems that this exemption of Lo shevet lei bilvad is not due to being Toraso umnaso, I.E. learning all day. This means that someone does not have to be learning in all of spare time to be included in lo shevet levi bilvad.
Thus, it must be a separate category of its own; that anyone who behaves like shevet levi is treated like shevet levi. What does it mean to act like shevet Levi? It means to follow their behaviors and fulfil the jobs tasked to shevet levi - behaviors such as an extreme want to do what is correct (see, for example, the Kana'us of Pinchas), being meticulous in the commandments of God (See, for example, How Levi reacted to the golden calf) etc. And what does it mean to fulfils the jobs of shevet levi? It means to be the Torah teachers and studiers of klal Yisrael, and to rely entirely on God for sustenance (which is why shevet Levi had no Land in Israel).
And guess what - these are the exact character traits that the Rambam uses to describe someone who is included in "lo shevet levi bilvad" - because the exemption isn't dependent on how much Torah you learn, nor on if you are a Torah scholar, but rather if you act like shevet levi does or not.
Lemaskana, the fact that charedim "only" learn for 80% of the year does not exclude them from either the category of Talmud scholar or lo shevet levi bilvad.
How many of those 'in learning' do that, like the rambam describes sheivet levi? Learning with a chavrusoh doesn't cut it. Neither does chadorim claiming IT grants, trash burning, stone throwing, burning down bus stops or blocking roads.
See my other comment. The Rambam is not clear, but conveniently kvetching the chareidi 'in learning' lifestyle into the words of the Rambam is a shtus and typical yeshivish kvetching. For a start, most are not 'teachers'. Try actually reading the words. He says nothing about parnossoh. And why is a stipend and benefits different from parnossoh anyway?
And the chareidim are not meticulous in their service of god. Look at gur on gur violence and minyan factories. Shulman writes consistently that he concedes that there are substantial issues in chareidi society. You are presumably defining 'service of god' as being 'in learning', hence a beautiful circular argument. Spending a bit more on an esrog, and spending $$$$$$ on headware made out of the tails of Canadian or Russian sable, beech marten, baum marten (European pine marten), or gray fox imitating Polish nobles of a two hundred years ago is not 'meticulous in their service of god'.
And the vast majority of yeshivah bochurim, in their early years, do not meet even your kvetched interpretation. Even according to you, you need to extend the rambam to 'sheivet levi in training'!
Firstly, calm down. I have been polite and civil even though I
(and lots of serious Talmidei Chachamim) disagree with your points. I assume you have the decency to be polite and civil back, especially when ad hominin attacks against streimlach do not get us anywhere.
I saw your other comment. In regards to it, I would like to point out that the Rambam does not include being a teacher into his definition of those who are exempt due to lo shevet levi bilvad. It is logical to assume based off this that according to the Rambam being a teacher of Torah is not necessary to be included in lo shevet levi bilvad, even if it is a characteristic of shevet Levi.
In regards to parnassah, you are technically right. He does not use the word "parnassah", and instead uses the loshon of "וּפָרַק מֵעַל צַוָּארוֹ עֹל הַחֶשְׁבּוֹנוֹת הָרַבִּים אֲשֶׁר בִּקְּשׁוּ בְּנֵי הָאָדָם", which he couples with "וְיִזְכֶּה לוֹ בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה דָּבָר הַמַּסְפִּיק לוֹ". I took this to mean that one who doesn't rely on the accounting that most men rely on (I.E. parnassah) will merit anything that he needs in this world. If you have another more exact explanation, please let me know.
There is also a difference between working for a living (parnassah) and living off stipends and tzedakah, even if both are forms of monetary gain. Someone who lives off their family is not considered a mefarness (I invoke the Rambam over here yet again, as he spent most of his life relying entirely off his brothers money, until his brother died). Unless you are suggesting that stipends from yeshiva/kollel is a type of parnassah?
You seem to have a very skewed view of charedi society. Yes, there are groups which identify as charedi which do not act like charedim, but these are outliers. For similar reasoning, I do not conflate R' Kook and Ben Gurion, even though both identified as zionist. The majority of charedi society are very meticulous about being shomer Torah and Mitzvos al pi shulchan aruch v'noser kelim.
As for the definition of the "service of God", I am not defining anything. I am using standard halachic definitions of 'עבודת ה, of which constant limud Torah is the most important thing one should do (Talmud Torah k'neged kulam, V'higisah bo Yomam Valilah, yoser talmud torah me'hatzalos nefashos etc). If you have a problem with this, take it up with the Rambam and R' Yosef Karo.
I genuinely do not understand your "levi-in-training" comment.
Lastly, I will concede that "charedim" who do have a proper parnassah or who deliberately act against halacha are not included in the exemption of lo shevet levi bilvad, and, if there is a halachic war happening, will not be exempt, just like all working Jews who live in America.
"I took this to mean that one who doesn't rely on the accounting that most men rely on (I.E. parnassah) will merit anything that he needs in this world."
Ask any Rosh Yeshivah, ask any Rosh Kollel and ask any avreich how much accounting they do. Probably more than most ba'ali battim. And how they notice when the stipend is not paid. All your talk about parnossoh is a red herring.
I am not sure what yeshivish hair splitting you are using to differentiate between 'parnossoh' and 'stipend' and I don't think it is particularly relevant. All but a miut shb'miiut of avreichim are concerned about the money flowing in versus the money flowing out of their households. Even if they claim not to be. And yes, I do believe a stipend is a form of parnosshoh. How many would really stay in learning if all forms of support stopped, and how many would start looking for work? Exactly.
The next two paragraphs of yours is just apologetics. I do not have skewed view of chareidi society - you do. You claim the 'majority' are meticulous. That still leaves 49% that are not, which is a very high percentage. And no, chassidim do not care about shulchan oruch, they have their own mesorah which generally goes back to whatever some rebbe did sometime. Chassidim account for a vast percentage of chareidiland. Read the Rambam slowly, he says and means a lot more than merely 'avodas hashem', with your convenient ecplanation shoehorning into typical chareid life. Your soundbites 'talmud torah k'negged kulom' etc ignore how all the rishonim explain that phrase and their context. And practically talmud torah is not yoser m'hatzolos nefoshos.
By Levi in training, I meant how many 18 year old yeshiva bochurim reach the threshold of the rambam?
I have no doubt lots of 'serious talmidei chachomim' disagree with my points. I once discussed this with one serious talmid chochom who had just lectured on 'sheivet levi' and asked him why he coincidentally married off ALL his children into wealthy families, and why all these 'sheivet levi' bochurim all seem to 'look for money' at shidduch time? He hummed and hummed and then said, well they are not really ba'alei bitochon. So not really interested in the 'serious talmidei chachomim'. They obviously have an agenda of supporting the cult. The 'serious talmidei chachomim' can also hear a dollar bill landing on a plush carpet a mile away, not quite like sheivet levi.
"Myth #6: “According to the majority of rabbinic authorities, it is indeed a milchemes mitzvah!!”
FACT: This is probably untrue, but in any case, it is dishonest posturing since according to the majority of rabbinic authorities, Torah scholars are exempt, whatever the status of the milchama is."
I oppose the draft, but this doesn't work. Even Yair Lapid supports exempting scholars from the draft. The issue is should draft age haredim not engaged in full time learning, and there are a lot of them, be drafted. Haredi society is firmly taking the position of, "no".
Re #8: For some humor I would recommend listening to this podcast where Rabbi Shlomo Brody explains that we are b"H not in a situation where people from America need to come serve, but for Lomdei Torah not to serve goes against all Torah values. How can learning Torah possibly be more important than allowing people to stay in the U.S.?
אלא אמר רבא תורה כו' בעידנא דלא עסיק אגוני מגנא כו'. ק"ק דאכתי כיון דמגנא לעולם למה מתו דואג ואחיתופל קודם זמנם כדאמרינן פרק חלק אמאי לא הגינה תורה עליהם וי"ל דלא קאמר תורה מגנא אלא מפורעניות ויסורין ולא ממיתה וק"ל:
קרן אורה מסכת סוטה דף מד עמוד ב
(בהקשר ל#3 ו#6)
גמ' אמר ר' יוחנן רשות דרבנן כו'. ומסקנ' הש"ס בזה לפי פי' רש"י ז"ל דבעיקר הדין הכא לא נחלקו. ואין הכל יוצאין אלא במלחמ' יהושע. אבל בשאר מלחמו' אפי' למעוטי עו"ג דלא ליתו עלייהו לא יצא החתן כו'. אלא דרבנן קרו להאי נמי רשות. ונפ"מ לעוסק במצוה. ור' יהודה קרי להאי מלחמ' מצוה ופטור מן המצו'. אבל בירושלמי (פ"ח ה"י) איכא מ"ד דמחלוקת ביניהם לרבנן מלחמת מצוה. כגון מלחמת דוד. מלחמת חובה זה מלחמת יהושע. ולרבנן אפי' במלחמת מצוה הכל יוצאין אפילו חתן מחדרו. ולר' יהודה מלחמת הרשות. היינו דאזלינן עלייהו. ומלחמת מצוה דאתיין אינון עלן. וס"ל לר' יהודה דבמלחמת מצוה אין הכל יוצאין, אלא במלחמת חובה דוקא. כן נראה גירסת הירושלמי. ולכ"ע איכא ג' מיני מלחמות. רשות. מצוה. וחובה. אזלינן עלייהו רשות. אתיין אינון עלן מצוה. מלחמת יהושע חובה. ואמרי רבנן דאפילו במצוה הכל יוצאין. ור' יהודה ס"ל דאין הכל יוצאין אלא במלחמת חובה.
והרמב"ם ז"ל בפ"ה מהל' מלכים כ' דמלחמת מצוה היא מלחמת עמלק וז' עממין ולהושיע להם מצרים הבאים עליהם. ולכאורה הוא נגד מסקנא דשמעתין. דלמעוטי עו"ג דלא ליתו עלייהו הוי רשות לרבנן. ומד' הלח"מ ז"ל שם משמע דיש חילוק, כי היכי דלא ליתו עלייהו הוי רשות. אבל עזרת ישראל אם כבר באו עליהם זה ודאי מצוה היא. ומסתבר כן. אבל פשטא דשמעתין לא משמע הכי. אבל לפי דברי הירושלמי דלעיל נראה כד' הרמב"ם ז"ל, דאתיין אינון עלן הוי מלחמת מצוה לרבנן ג"כ. ובכה"ג ג"כ הכל יוצאין אפי' חתן מחדרו. אלא דמהא דאמרינן לעיל גבי אסא המלך שנענש מפני שעשה אנגריא בת"ח. והשמיע אין נקי אפי' חתן מחדרו. והרי התם היה מפני אויב דאתא עלייהו, מפני בעשא מלך ישראל. ואפ"ה שלא כדין הוי. וי"ל דהתם כבר הלך בעשא ממנו ע"י מלחמת ארם. כמבואר בקראי התם. ומשמע הכא דבמלחמת מצוה הכל יוצאין, ואפי' ת"ח צריכין ליבטל מלימודן. וא"כ יש לדקדק מהא דשבע בן בכרי דאמרינן בסנהדרין (מ"ט ע"א) דעמשא דריש אכין ורקין ואשכח לרבנן דפתחי במסכתא. והא התם הוי מלחמת מצוה משונא הבא עליהם, ואפילו ת"ח צריכין לצאת. וצ"ל דעיקר מרד שבע בן בכרי היה בכבוד מלכות. וזה לאו בכלל מלחמת מצוה הוא. ועי' בד' הרע"ב ז"ל והתוסי"ט ז"ל במתניתין.
בהקשר ל#4, עי' כל הסוגיא שם שמדובר במיתת הסוטה ואין טעם להכחיש המפורסמות ע"פ דקדוקי עניות, ועי' מהרש"א שם שמבאר איזה פורעניות מדובר "כן המצות בעוה"ז שדומה ללילה , מצלת את האדם מפורעניות המתרגשות בעוה"ז שהם *דבר* *וחרב* ורעב" ועי' כל המקורות הובאו כאן ואין שום מקום להסתפק https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
בהקשר ל#6 ו#3, הנה מבואר שהוא חולק על הלחם משנה בענין מהי מלחמת מצוה, ולדעתך הוא גם חולק על כל הני גדולי ישראל שת”ח פטורים מיציאה לצבא בכל אופן (או שדעתם שאין זו מלחמת מצוה), וגברא אגברא קא רמית? ועוד עי’ קרבן העדה על הירושלמי דמבואר שאנגריא של אסא היתה מלחמת מצוה, דלא כקרן אורה. ואעפ”כ חזינן שנענש.
Judging my the screaming and shouting that goes on (in the k'nesset and outside it) whenever stipends are cut, chareidim definitely do NOT meet that condition.
And of course all those that are only 'in learning' to avoid the army - and believe me there are thousands like that - do not qualify. Just look at the number of chareidim that leave kollel as soon as they are too old to be drafted and start some form of work.
Amongst other errors, you seem to be confusing 'chareidim' with 'torah scholars".
Exactly my thought too!
You are confusing "talmidei chachamim" with "Torah scholars". If you are learning full time, you are a "Torah scholar". You may also be a "talmid chacham".
בהקשר ל#3, ראה רמ"א יורה דעה סימן רמג סעיף ב ע"פ התרומת הדשן
Exactly. You really believe the vast majority of yeshiva bochurim who are currently exempted meet that criteria? For a start, a few select perokim in each of the three bovos and a few selected perokim of a few mesachtos in noshim do not not qualify as שיודע לישא וליתן בתורה ומבין מדעתו ברוב מקומות התלמוד. If so, I have a bridge to sell you.
(setting aside all the other debate about the relevance of that particular halochoh).
I am neither a Torah scholar nor a talmid chacham. Would you mind explaining in English?
How many learn 'full time'? Bein hazmanim is about 20% of they year! Besides, I know many who 'learn' 'full time' and know very little torah. Memorising a bit of lomdus on noshim/nezikin does not a 'torah scholar' make. However many hours a day they spend.
Evidence for this is (and don't nit-pick) despite the explosion in those 'in learning', shuls that need rabbonim struggle just as much as 50 years ago in finding suitable candidates. In addition, the sheer number of 'likut' seforim rather than original thought is particularly telling.
Rude or otherwise off topic responses will be ignored.
וְיִזְכֶּה לוֹ בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה דָּבָר הַמַּסְפִּיק לוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁזָּכָה לַכֹּהֲנִים לַלְוִיִּם
Strangely, when the chareidim scream and shout when stipends are cut, and fund raise all over the world, they ignore those words of the ramabam. They, as a group, spend a considerable amount of time arranging financial support, rather than learning. Like ALL other groups, they can hear a dollar bill landing on a plush carpet a mile way. Don't tell me the Rambam is referring to groups like that.
The Rambam defines who is included in "Lo shevet levi bilvad", and it's not dependent on learning all day. He seems to say that it is dependent on A) Keeping Torah and Mitzvos properly with honesty and truth B) Studying Torah and C) to not have a parnassah.
The pashtus is that this exemption of lo shevet levi bilvad isn't because he is a Torah scholar, because why is the fact that he has no parnasah necessary? Someone can be considered a Torah scholar and still have a parnasah (E.G. the Rambam, who spent most of his day as a doctor later in his life, but had a set 2 hours of learning in the evening ), yet he will not be included in the definition of "lo shevet levi bilvad". Therefore, this halacha of lo shevet levi bilvad is clearly not referring to halachically defined Torah Scholars. As a side point, we clearly see from here that someone who doesn't learn for 20% of the year can still be considered a Torah scholar.
(So what is the definition of a Torah scholar? It is someone who is shokuah (invested) enough into talmudic studies that he makes sure to A) Have a kivi'us in Torah, and B) Spend as much spare time possible learning Torah).
It also does seemingly does not depend on if they are learning all day, which is the different halachic category of toraso umnasoh, a category that is not mentioned by anyone in the discussion of lo shevet levi bilvad. Furthermore, why does the Rambam go into extreme detail about the definition of those included in lo shevet levi bilvad if he could have just said the words "those who's Torah is their umnus is included in lo shevet levi bilvad"? It therefore seems that this exemption of Lo shevet lei bilvad is not due to being Toraso umnaso, I.E. learning all day. This means that someone does not have to be learning in all of spare time to be included in lo shevet levi bilvad.
Thus, it must be a separate category of its own; that anyone who behaves like shevet levi is treated like shevet levi. What does it mean to act like shevet Levi? It means to follow their behaviors and fulfil the jobs tasked to shevet levi - behaviors such as an extreme want to do what is correct (see, for example, the Kana'us of Pinchas), being meticulous in the commandments of God (See, for example, How Levi reacted to the golden calf) etc. And what does it mean to fulfils the jobs of shevet levi? It means to be the Torah teachers and studiers of klal Yisrael, and to rely entirely on God for sustenance (which is why shevet Levi had no Land in Israel).
And guess what - these are the exact character traits that the Rambam uses to describe someone who is included in "lo shevet levi bilvad" - because the exemption isn't dependent on how much Torah you learn, nor on if you are a Torah scholar, but rather if you act like shevet levi does or not.
Lemaskana, the fact that charedim "only" learn for 80% of the year does not exclude them from either the category of Talmud scholar or lo shevet levi bilvad.
וּלְהוֹרוֹת דְּרָכָיו הַיְשָׁרִים וּמִשְׁפָּטָיו הַצַּדִּיקִים לָרַבִּים
How many of those 'in learning' do that, like the rambam describes sheivet levi? Learning with a chavrusoh doesn't cut it. Neither does chadorim claiming IT grants, trash burning, stone throwing, burning down bus stops or blocking roads.
See my other comment. The Rambam is not clear, but conveniently kvetching the chareidi 'in learning' lifestyle into the words of the Rambam is a shtus and typical yeshivish kvetching. For a start, most are not 'teachers'. Try actually reading the words. He says nothing about parnossoh. And why is a stipend and benefits different from parnossoh anyway?
And the chareidim are not meticulous in their service of god. Look at gur on gur violence and minyan factories. Shulman writes consistently that he concedes that there are substantial issues in chareidi society. You are presumably defining 'service of god' as being 'in learning', hence a beautiful circular argument. Spending a bit more on an esrog, and spending $$$$$$ on headware made out of the tails of Canadian or Russian sable, beech marten, baum marten (European pine marten), or gray fox imitating Polish nobles of a two hundred years ago is not 'meticulous in their service of god'.
And the vast majority of yeshivah bochurim, in their early years, do not meet even your kvetched interpretation. Even according to you, you need to extend the rambam to 'sheivet levi in training'!
Firstly, calm down. I have been polite and civil even though I
(and lots of serious Talmidei Chachamim) disagree with your points. I assume you have the decency to be polite and civil back, especially when ad hominin attacks against streimlach do not get us anywhere.
I saw your other comment. In regards to it, I would like to point out that the Rambam does not include being a teacher into his definition of those who are exempt due to lo shevet levi bilvad. It is logical to assume based off this that according to the Rambam being a teacher of Torah is not necessary to be included in lo shevet levi bilvad, even if it is a characteristic of shevet Levi.
In regards to parnassah, you are technically right. He does not use the word "parnassah", and instead uses the loshon of "וּפָרַק מֵעַל צַוָּארוֹ עֹל הַחֶשְׁבּוֹנוֹת הָרַבִּים אֲשֶׁר בִּקְּשׁוּ בְּנֵי הָאָדָם", which he couples with "וְיִזְכֶּה לוֹ בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה דָּבָר הַמַּסְפִּיק לוֹ". I took this to mean that one who doesn't rely on the accounting that most men rely on (I.E. parnassah) will merit anything that he needs in this world. If you have another more exact explanation, please let me know.
There is also a difference between working for a living (parnassah) and living off stipends and tzedakah, even if both are forms of monetary gain. Someone who lives off their family is not considered a mefarness (I invoke the Rambam over here yet again, as he spent most of his life relying entirely off his brothers money, until his brother died). Unless you are suggesting that stipends from yeshiva/kollel is a type of parnassah?
You seem to have a very skewed view of charedi society. Yes, there are groups which identify as charedi which do not act like charedim, but these are outliers. For similar reasoning, I do not conflate R' Kook and Ben Gurion, even though both identified as zionist. The majority of charedi society are very meticulous about being shomer Torah and Mitzvos al pi shulchan aruch v'noser kelim.
As for the definition of the "service of God", I am not defining anything. I am using standard halachic definitions of 'עבודת ה, of which constant limud Torah is the most important thing one should do (Talmud Torah k'neged kulam, V'higisah bo Yomam Valilah, yoser talmud torah me'hatzalos nefashos etc). If you have a problem with this, take it up with the Rambam and R' Yosef Karo.
I genuinely do not understand your "levi-in-training" comment.
Lastly, I will concede that "charedim" who do have a proper parnassah or who deliberately act against halacha are not included in the exemption of lo shevet levi bilvad, and, if there is a halachic war happening, will not be exempt, just like all working Jews who live in America.
"I took this to mean that one who doesn't rely on the accounting that most men rely on (I.E. parnassah) will merit anything that he needs in this world."
Ask any Rosh Yeshivah, ask any Rosh Kollel and ask any avreich how much accounting they do. Probably more than most ba'ali battim. And how they notice when the stipend is not paid. All your talk about parnossoh is a red herring.
I am not sure what yeshivish hair splitting you are using to differentiate between 'parnossoh' and 'stipend' and I don't think it is particularly relevant. All but a miut shb'miiut of avreichim are concerned about the money flowing in versus the money flowing out of their households. Even if they claim not to be. And yes, I do believe a stipend is a form of parnosshoh. How many would really stay in learning if all forms of support stopped, and how many would start looking for work? Exactly.
The next two paragraphs of yours is just apologetics. I do not have skewed view of chareidi society - you do. You claim the 'majority' are meticulous. That still leaves 49% that are not, which is a very high percentage. And no, chassidim do not care about shulchan oruch, they have their own mesorah which generally goes back to whatever some rebbe did sometime. Chassidim account for a vast percentage of chareidiland. Read the Rambam slowly, he says and means a lot more than merely 'avodas hashem', with your convenient ecplanation shoehorning into typical chareid life. Your soundbites 'talmud torah k'negged kulom' etc ignore how all the rishonim explain that phrase and their context. And practically talmud torah is not yoser m'hatzolos nefoshos.
By Levi in training, I meant how many 18 year old yeshiva bochurim reach the threshold of the rambam?
I have no doubt lots of 'serious talmidei chachomim' disagree with my points. I once discussed this with one serious talmid chochom who had just lectured on 'sheivet levi' and asked him why he coincidentally married off ALL his children into wealthy families, and why all these 'sheivet levi' bochurim all seem to 'look for money' at shidduch time? He hummed and hummed and then said, well they are not really ba'alei bitochon. So not really interested in the 'serious talmidei chachomim'. They obviously have an agenda of supporting the cult. The 'serious talmidei chachomim' can also hear a dollar bill landing on a plush carpet a mile away, not quite like sheivet levi.
"How many learn 'full time'?"
It's not my job to do your research. You are the one making assumptions, not me.
Our mesorah emphasizes learning. Those who can excel, do. You are constructing a false dichotomy, as is to be expected from you and those like you.
One can be a "university student" and still be a total retard. This was the case in my college days in the 1980s, and far more so today.
You always promise to ignore, but rarely follow through.
"Myth #6: “According to the majority of rabbinic authorities, it is indeed a milchemes mitzvah!!”
FACT: This is probably untrue, but in any case, it is dishonest posturing since according to the majority of rabbinic authorities, Torah scholars are exempt, whatever the status of the milchama is."
I oppose the draft, but this doesn't work. Even Yair Lapid supports exempting scholars from the draft. The issue is should draft age haredim not engaged in full time learning, and there are a lot of them, be drafted. Haredi society is firmly taking the position of, "no".
Excellent!
I think I could even mostly agree.
Re #8: For some humor I would recommend listening to this podcast where Rabbi Shlomo Brody explains that we are b"H not in a situation where people from America need to come serve, but for Lomdei Torah not to serve goes against all Torah values. How can learning Torah possibly be more important than allowing people to stay in the U.S.?
https://halachaheadlines.com/episodes/neturei-karta-is-hatzalah-allowed-to-save-them-on-shabbos-halacha-perspective-on-warfare/
NOTE: I don't generally recommend listening to this podcast but in this dire day for democracy perhaps some comic relief is necessary.
Glad to see you're back!
מהרש"א סוטה כא עמוד א
(בהקשר ל#4)
אלא אמר רבא תורה כו' בעידנא דלא עסיק אגוני מגנא כו'. ק"ק דאכתי כיון דמגנא לעולם למה מתו דואג ואחיתופל קודם זמנם כדאמרינן פרק חלק אמאי לא הגינה תורה עליהם וי"ל דלא קאמר תורה מגנא אלא מפורעניות ויסורין ולא ממיתה וק"ל:
קרן אורה מסכת סוטה דף מד עמוד ב
(בהקשר ל#3 ו#6)
גמ' אמר ר' יוחנן רשות דרבנן כו'. ומסקנ' הש"ס בזה לפי פי' רש"י ז"ל דבעיקר הדין הכא לא נחלקו. ואין הכל יוצאין אלא במלחמ' יהושע. אבל בשאר מלחמו' אפי' למעוטי עו"ג דלא ליתו עלייהו לא יצא החתן כו'. אלא דרבנן קרו להאי נמי רשות. ונפ"מ לעוסק במצוה. ור' יהודה קרי להאי מלחמ' מצוה ופטור מן המצו'. אבל בירושלמי (פ"ח ה"י) איכא מ"ד דמחלוקת ביניהם לרבנן מלחמת מצוה. כגון מלחמת דוד. מלחמת חובה זה מלחמת יהושע. ולרבנן אפי' במלחמת מצוה הכל יוצאין אפילו חתן מחדרו. ולר' יהודה מלחמת הרשות. היינו דאזלינן עלייהו. ומלחמת מצוה דאתיין אינון עלן. וס"ל לר' יהודה דבמלחמת מצוה אין הכל יוצאין, אלא במלחמת חובה דוקא. כן נראה גירסת הירושלמי. ולכ"ע איכא ג' מיני מלחמות. רשות. מצוה. וחובה. אזלינן עלייהו רשות. אתיין אינון עלן מצוה. מלחמת יהושע חובה. ואמרי רבנן דאפילו במצוה הכל יוצאין. ור' יהודה ס"ל דאין הכל יוצאין אלא במלחמת חובה.
והרמב"ם ז"ל בפ"ה מהל' מלכים כ' דמלחמת מצוה היא מלחמת עמלק וז' עממין ולהושיע להם מצרים הבאים עליהם. ולכאורה הוא נגד מסקנא דשמעתין. דלמעוטי עו"ג דלא ליתו עלייהו הוי רשות לרבנן. ומד' הלח"מ ז"ל שם משמע דיש חילוק, כי היכי דלא ליתו עלייהו הוי רשות. אבל עזרת ישראל אם כבר באו עליהם זה ודאי מצוה היא. ומסתבר כן. אבל פשטא דשמעתין לא משמע הכי. אבל לפי דברי הירושלמי דלעיל נראה כד' הרמב"ם ז"ל, דאתיין אינון עלן הוי מלחמת מצוה לרבנן ג"כ. ובכה"ג ג"כ הכל יוצאין אפי' חתן מחדרו. אלא דמהא דאמרינן לעיל גבי אסא המלך שנענש מפני שעשה אנגריא בת"ח. והשמיע אין נקי אפי' חתן מחדרו. והרי התם היה מפני אויב דאתא עלייהו, מפני בעשא מלך ישראל. ואפ"ה שלא כדין הוי. וי"ל דהתם כבר הלך בעשא ממנו ע"י מלחמת ארם. כמבואר בקראי התם. ומשמע הכא דבמלחמת מצוה הכל יוצאין, ואפי' ת"ח צריכין ליבטל מלימודן. וא"כ יש לדקדק מהא דשבע בן בכרי דאמרינן בסנהדרין (מ"ט ע"א) דעמשא דריש אכין ורקין ואשכח לרבנן דפתחי במסכתא. והא התם הוי מלחמת מצוה משונא הבא עליהם, ואפילו ת"ח צריכין לצאת. וצ"ל דעיקר מרד שבע בן בכרי היה בכבוד מלכות. וזה לאו בכלל מלחמת מצוה הוא. ועי' בד' הרע"ב ז"ל והתוסי"ט ז"ל במתניתין.
בהקשר ל#4, עי' כל הסוגיא שם שמדובר במיתת הסוטה ואין טעם להכחיש המפורסמות ע"פ דקדוקי עניות, ועי' מהרש"א שם שמבאר איזה פורעניות מדובר "כן המצות בעוה"ז שדומה ללילה , מצלת את האדם מפורעניות המתרגשות בעוה"ז שהם *דבר* *וחרב* ורעב" ועי' כל המקורות הובאו כאן ואין שום מקום להסתפק https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
בהקשר ל#6 ו#3, הנה מבואר שהוא חולק על הלחם משנה בענין מהי מלחמת מצוה, ולדעתך הוא גם חולק על כל הני גדולי ישראל שת”ח פטורים מיציאה לצבא בכל אופן (או שדעתם שאין זו מלחמת מצוה), וגברא אגברא קא רמית? ועוד עי’ קרבן העדה על הירושלמי דמבואר שאנגריא של אסא היתה מלחמת מצוה, דלא כקרן אורה. ואעפ”כ חזינן שנענש.
Thank you for doing this. I happened to complies my own set of responses to the article and it is interesting to compare the two.
I would be interesting in seeing your responses
My feed is coming up with your response below, starting as quoted, but for some reason I cannot see the full comment (did you delete it?)
"The Rambam defines who is included in "Lo shevet levi bilvad", and it's not dependent on...."
The Rambam's criteria there exclude almost all chareidim apart from a few yechidei segulah, and is therefore not relevant. It requires;
וּפָרַק מֵעַל צַוָּארוֹ עֹל הַחֶשְׁבּוֹנוֹת הָרַבִּים אֲשֶׁר בִּקְּשׁוּ בְּנֵי הָאָדָם
Judging my the screaming and shouting that goes on (in the k'nesset and outside it) whenever stipends are cut, chareidim definitely do NOT meet that condition.
And of course all those that are only 'in learning' to avoid the army - and believe me there are thousands like that - do not qualify. Just look at the number of chareidim that leave kollel as soon as they are too old to be drafted and start some form of work.