Thank you for your service and i hope your son has a refua sheleima.
Whilst I do not subscribe to everything you wrote, I am not sure there is anything there that directly argues or contradicts what I wrote?
I would just comment none of this directly is my experience, I am far from the best example, but I have been zoche to know people who live up to what I wrote, and they far from learnt a wee bit of torah. My friend Elisha Hy"d poured through mishneh torah, in Khan Yunis, better than I did in Yeshiva.
Of course. And when a 'kollel guy' (for some reason they like calling themselves in demeaning language) or 'yeshivah guy' consistently shows up for shacharis 10 minutes late, it undoes hours of learning.
Thank you for your good wishes. My son is fine thank God, his injuries were relatively minor. 5 days after his APC was struck by an RPG, he was already back leading his soldiers in Gaza.
I appreciate your communicating your feelings regarding my essay. It seems like you are focusing on two points, the first is that you are not sure exactly in what way I meant to disagree with you. The second is that you held forth your friend Elisha hy"d as an example of someone who was able to undertake serious learning during combat conditions, and therefore stands in contrast to my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your second point, Rambam famously points out that one cannot apply oneself properly to gaining wisdom while one is constrained by the various obligations of this world. He specifically uses the example of warfare. Even without Rambam pointing this out, this is self-evident from widespread human experience. While Elisha may have been one of those very unique individuals who can apply himself at all under those circumstances, it stands to reason that he would still have accomplished much more had he been applying himself in the rarified environment of the beit medrash. So for the overwhelming majority of people combat conditions are incompatible with any serious learning, and even for the very rare individuals such as Elisha combat conditions are a great constraint on their ability to obtain wisdom. Hence my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your primary question of in what way I meant to differ from what you wrote, I believe that we differ on a fundamental point. While I acknowledge that properly applied, going to war with all that that entails can be a great mitzvah, it is not an end in its own right. It is a means to accomplish a greater end. And that greater end is the revelation of Hashem's glory in this world, primarily through revealing the wisdom that he revealed in the Torah. And so those who apply themselves to studying Torah in the beit medrash, are actually accomplishing the goal which gives meaning to the sacrifice of those who engage in combat. It is true that those who are fighting are performing a mitzvah with מסירות נפש, which greatly enhances its value, but it is still only a means to allow for the greater end of those who are studying Hashem's Torah in the beit medrash.
And therefore the resentment that you seem to feel towards those who are applying themselves to the very goal for which you are making such great sacrifices, seems very out of place.
That is my response to the points that you made. But in addition I think there is another issue here that you didn't express, but may lay at the root of what is disturbing you. It is a vital condition of studying Torah that one study with the intention of fulfilling that which one has studied. You believe that the state of Israel has some sort of religious meaning, which implies an obligation to fight on its behalf whether or not one would define its wars as a מלחמת מצווה. Therefore, it seems absurd to you that one would dedicate themselves to studying Torah, but not to fulfilling one of The commandments that is derived from that study.
While there are great Jewish scholars from the past two or three generations who indeed felt that the political state of Israel has religious significance, they are a small minority of the great Jewish thinkers of the past few generations. The great majority of great Jewish thinkers did not believe that the state of Israel has any Jewish significance, and it is their opinion that is followed by the majority of the Charedi community.
So according to that understanding, that there is no Jewish significance to the state of Israel, then there is no cosmic meaning to its wars. Fighting on behalf of the state of Israel is no different than fighting on behalf of any other state. A position that a Jew may one day find himself in, but not something to seek out by any means. Therefore the obligation to fight in Israel's wars does not derive from any obligation to the state itself, or any desire to promote its greater glory. It derives from the obligation to help other Jews, in other words the mitzvah of chesed, which itself is derived from the commandment ואהבת לרעך כמוך.
There is great significance to this distinction, because the rules of the obligation to fight on behalf of a Jewish state are very different than the rules of the obligation to perform chesed. Without going into the specifics, I think the root of what is disturbing you about the Charedi attitude towards fighting in Israel's wars derives from your fundamental understanding of the significance of the state of Israel. But when you appreciate that they have a very different understanding of that significance, then it all begins to fall into place.
While I don't know you, and haven't had the opportunity to discuss this issue with you, in my experience it has often been the case that when well-meaning people are at a loss to understand the Charedi attitude, the root of their wonderment lies in their not appreciating this distinction. Often times when they come to appreciate this distinction, it makes perfect sense to them and the resentment evaporates. I am speculating that what I have learned from experience with others applies to you as well.
Be well, and may the merit of your מסירות נפש stand by you and keep you safe.
A quote “To know God is to be intimately bonded with the idea of God. Like the marriage of a man and a woman, this knowledge transforms one’s identity and dictates behavior.”
This article was taken from Rabbi Pesach Wolicki’s new book, Verses for Zion. Verses for Zion offers a profound exploration of devotional Bible teachings, intricately woven around the land, people, and God of Israel.
"Hashem chose the Jewish people to reveal his glory in the world. This is explicit throughout tanach. The primary way that we do this is by studying his revelation (which we generally refer to as the Torah"
Where is it explicit throughout tanach that "The primary way that we do this is by studying his revelation (which we generally refer to as the Torah"
The phrase "k'neged kulam" is a concept in Jewish tradition, often translated as "equal to all" or "corresponding to all." It is most commonly associated with the idea that "Talmud Torah k'neged kulam," meaning "the study of Torah is equal to all [other commandments]".
This concept appears in various Jewish texts and discussions, including the Talmud and other rabbinic literature.
In some interpretations, "k'neged kulam" suggests that the study of Torah is not only equal to but also foundational to the other commandments. For example, one interpretation posits that Torah study is "towards all of these things; out of our learning comes these other things".
This view emphasizes that learning Torah leads to the performance of other mitzvot and contributes to a more just and holy society.
Could one visualize a teeter/totter in playground for children? If the child on one side is the same weight as the child on the other side, there is equal balance. I think also the word “keneged” means opposite. So, the idea that emerges from this picture is if one studies some Torah, one can perform the Commandments in It. If one studies more Torah, one can do more or a better job of performing them. No?
Your last seven lines summarize my view which is hardly learned, the author's view is that there's not a balance, those who study are the weight that provides defense or deflection, thus they are exempt, right?
See Dvarim 22:4 and also note Yissachar , who had rich territory, preferred to give tribute rather than leave his farm and take up the sword.—Dvarim 33:18–and Ibn Ezra:: The tribe would give payments (I Samuel 8: v. 15= ten percent) to the government of Israel so that they would not have to go to war.
The writer's view, although as vague as most of the stuff that comes out of Yeshivaland, seems to be that the phrase means, a torah learner can dispense with any other obligations of mankind, as TT is equal to it all. A complete distortion of course.
AI is not rishonim, mate. You know as well as I do that in Shas you can't translate phrases literally like chatGPT does.
Tell me, do torah learners exempt themselves from all mitzvos whilst they are learning. No. Why not? TT k'negged kulom. Can they steal to fund torah learning? Why not? TT kneged kulom. Can they make copies of otzar hachochmoh to help them in their learning? Why not? TT k'negged kullom.
Thank you for your good wishes. My son is fine thank God, his injuries were relatively minor. 5 days after his APC was struck by an RPG, he was already back leading his soldiers in Gaza.
I appreciate your communicating your feelings regarding my essay. It seems like you are focusing on two points, the first is that you are not sure exactly in what way I meant to disagree with you. The second is that you held forth your friend Elisha hy"d as an example of someone who was able to undertake serious learning during combat conditions, and therefore stands in contrast to my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your second point, Rambam famously points out that one cannot apply oneself properly to gaining wisdom while one is constrained by the various obligations of this world. He specifically uses the example of warfare. Even without Rambam pointing this out, this is self-evident from widespread human experience. While Elisha may have been one of those very unique individuals who can apply himself at all under those circumstances, it stands to reason that he would still have accomplished much more had he been applying himself in the rarified environment of the beit medrash. So for the overwhelming majority of people combat conditions are incompatible with any serious learning, and even for the very rare individuals such as Elisha combat conditions are a great constraint on their ability to obtain wisdom. Hence my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your primary question of in what way I meant to differ from what you wrote, I believe that we differ on a fundamental point. While I acknowledge that properly applied, going to war with all that that entails can be a great mitzvah, it is not an end in its own right. It is a means to accomplish a greater end. And that greater end is the revelation of Hashem's glory in this world, primarily through revealing the wisdom that he revealed in the Torah. And so those who apply themselves to studying Torah in the beit medrash, are actually accomplishing the goal which gives meaning to the sacrifice of those who engage in combat. It is true that those who are fighting are performing a mitzvah with מסירות נפש, which greatly enhances its value, but it is still only a means to allow for the greater end of those who are studying Hashem's Torah in the beit medrash.
And therefore the resentment that you seem to feel towards those who are applying themselves to the very goal for which you are making such great sacrifices, seems very out of place.
That is my response to the points that you made. But in addition I think there is another issue here that you didn't express, but may lay at the root of what is disturbing you. It is a vital condition of studying Torah that one study with the intention of fulfilling that which one has studied. You believe that the state of Israel has some sort of religious meaning, which implies an obligation to fight on its behalf whether or not one would define its wars as a מלחמת מצווה. Therefore, it seems absurd to you that one would dedicate themselves to studying Torah, but not to fulfilling one of The commandments that is derived from that study.
While there are great Jewish scholars from the past two or three generations who indeed felt that the political state of Israel has religious significance, they are a small minority of the great Jewish thinkers of the past few generations. The great majority of great Jewish thinkers did not believe that the state of Israel has any Jewish significance, and it is their opinion that is followed by the majority of the Charedi community.
So according to that understanding, that there is no Jewish significance to the state of Israel, then there is no cosmic meaning to its wars. Fighting on behalf of the state of Israel is no different than fighting on behalf of any other state. A position that a Jew may one day find himself in, but not something to seek out by any means. Therefore the obligation to fight in Israel's wars does not derive from any obligation to the state itself, or any desire to promote its greater glory. It derives from the obligation to help other Jews, in other words the mitzvah of chesed, which itself is derived from the commandment ואהבת לרעך כמוך.
There is great significance to this distinction, because the rules of the obligation to fight on behalf of a Jewish state are very different than the rules of the obligation to perform chesed. Without going into the specifics, I think the root of what is disturbing you about the Charedi attitude towards fighting in Israel's wars derives from your fundamental understanding of the significance of the state of Israel. But when you appreciate that they have a very different understanding of that significance, then it all begins to fall into place.
While I don't know you, and haven't had the opportunity to discuss this issue with you, in my experience it has often been the case that when well-meaning people are at a loss to understand the Charedi attitude, the root of their wonderment lies in their not appreciating this distinction. Often times when they come to appreciate this distinction, it makes perfect sense to them and the resentment evaporates. I am speculating that what I have learned from experience with others applies to you as well.
Be well, and may the merit of your מסירות נפש stand by you and keep you safe.
I think that you should learn the Sefer published by Encyclopedia Talmudis about the Halachos of Milchama There are many Halachos therein that you would be shocked at are adhered to by the IDF
Thank you for your service and i hope your son has a refua sheleima.
Whilst I do not subscribe to everything you wrote, I am not sure there is anything there that directly argues or contradicts what I wrote?
I would just comment none of this directly is my experience, I am far from the best example, but I have been zoche to know people who live up to what I wrote, and they far from learnt a wee bit of torah. My friend Elisha Hy"d poured through mishneh torah, in Khan Yunis, better than I did in Yeshiva.
I would also add Rav Asher Wiess shlita recent comment about the "wee bit of torah"
https://www.inn.co.il/news/672334
Of course. And when a 'kollel guy' (for some reason they like calling themselves in demeaning language) or 'yeshivah guy' consistently shows up for shacharis 10 minutes late, it undoes hours of learning.
Lol, you guys are pathetic (test test and Alan).
Why exactly?
Hey test. I guess you couldn't troll Chananya Weissman's substack anymore, so you're back to your old stomping ground at the first opportunity.
Happy, he was banned there. Pathetic can be grounds for banning here.
Hello Eitan,
Thank you for your good wishes. My son is fine thank God, his injuries were relatively minor. 5 days after his APC was struck by an RPG, he was already back leading his soldiers in Gaza.
I appreciate your communicating your feelings regarding my essay. It seems like you are focusing on two points, the first is that you are not sure exactly in what way I meant to disagree with you. The second is that you held forth your friend Elisha hy"d as an example of someone who was able to undertake serious learning during combat conditions, and therefore stands in contrast to my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your second point, Rambam famously points out that one cannot apply oneself properly to gaining wisdom while one is constrained by the various obligations of this world. He specifically uses the example of warfare. Even without Rambam pointing this out, this is self-evident from widespread human experience. While Elisha may have been one of those very unique individuals who can apply himself at all under those circumstances, it stands to reason that he would still have accomplished much more had he been applying himself in the rarified environment of the beit medrash. So for the overwhelming majority of people combat conditions are incompatible with any serious learning, and even for the very rare individuals such as Elisha combat conditions are a great constraint on their ability to obtain wisdom. Hence my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your primary question of in what way I meant to differ from what you wrote, I believe that we differ on a fundamental point. While I acknowledge that properly applied, going to war with all that that entails can be a great mitzvah, it is not an end in its own right. It is a means to accomplish a greater end. And that greater end is the revelation of Hashem's glory in this world, primarily through revealing the wisdom that he revealed in the Torah. And so those who apply themselves to studying Torah in the beit medrash, are actually accomplishing the goal which gives meaning to the sacrifice of those who engage in combat. It is true that those who are fighting are performing a mitzvah with מסירות נפש, which greatly enhances its value, but it is still only a means to allow for the greater end of those who are studying Hashem's Torah in the beit medrash.
And therefore the resentment that you seem to feel towards those who are applying themselves to the very goal for which you are making such great sacrifices, seems very out of place.
That is my response to the points that you made. But in addition I think there is another issue here that you didn't express, but may lay at the root of what is disturbing you. It is a vital condition of studying Torah that one study with the intention of fulfilling that which one has studied. You believe that the state of Israel has some sort of religious meaning, which implies an obligation to fight on its behalf whether or not one would define its wars as a מלחמת מצווה. Therefore, it seems absurd to you that one would dedicate themselves to studying Torah, but not to fulfilling one of The commandments that is derived from that study.
While there are great Jewish scholars from the past two or three generations who indeed felt that the political state of Israel has religious significance, they are a small minority of the great Jewish thinkers of the past few generations. The great majority of great Jewish thinkers did not believe that the state of Israel has any Jewish significance, and it is their opinion that is followed by the majority of the Charedi community.
So according to that understanding, that there is no Jewish significance to the state of Israel, then there is no cosmic meaning to its wars. Fighting on behalf of the state of Israel is no different than fighting on behalf of any other state. A position that a Jew may one day find himself in, but not something to seek out by any means. Therefore the obligation to fight in Israel's wars does not derive from any obligation to the state itself, or any desire to promote its greater glory. It derives from the obligation to help other Jews, in other words the mitzvah of chesed, which itself is derived from the commandment ואהבת לרעך כמוך.
There is great significance to this distinction, because the rules of the obligation to fight on behalf of a Jewish state are very different than the rules of the obligation to perform chesed. Without going into the specifics, I think the root of what is disturbing you about the Charedi attitude towards fighting in Israel's wars derives from your fundamental understanding of the significance of the state of Israel. But when you appreciate that they have a very different understanding of that significance, then it all begins to fall into place.
While I don't know you, and haven't had the opportunity to discuss this issue with you, in my experience it has often been the case that when well-meaning people are at a loss to understand the Charedi attitude, the root of their wonderment lies in their not appreciating this distinction. Often times when they come to appreciate this distinction, it makes perfect sense to them and the resentment evaporates. I am speculating that what I have learned from experience with others applies to you as well.
Be well, and may the merit of your מסירות נפש stand by you and keep you safe.
Thank you for eloquently discussing this topic with great civility and clarity.
A quote “To know God is to be intimately bonded with the idea of God. Like the marriage of a man and a woman, this knowledge transforms one’s identity and dictates behavior.”
This article was taken from Rabbi Pesach Wolicki’s new book, Verses for Zion. Verses for Zion offers a profound exploration of devotional Bible teachings, intricately woven around the land, people, and God of Israel.
"Hashem chose the Jewish people to reveal his glory in the world. This is explicit throughout tanach. The primary way that we do this is by studying his revelation (which we generally refer to as the Torah"
Where is it explicit throughout tanach that "The primary way that we do this is by studying his revelation (which we generally refer to as the Torah"
Have you ever learnt nevi'im acharonim?
"An extension of this idea is the fact that it is only Torah study that preserves the Jewish people as Hashem's unique treasure"
Are you so confident that applies when the 'Torah study' is a norm for a large segment of society, for pay? A job basically.
Devarim 22: V.4. “Do not see your brother’s carrier or worker fallen on the road , and hide yourself from it; you must raise it together.”
https://open.substack.com/pub/moralclaritynewsletter/p/judaism-is-different-from-other-religions?r=9p06v&utm_medium=ios
Where in TaNaKh does It say, “Teach your son a trade (a job to earn pay)”? Bereishis also writes “Six days you should work.”
Many Rabbis in Europe during the past several centuries worked hard and ALSO studied Torah/Talmud.
Where does he differ from this?
The phrase "k'neged kulam" is a concept in Jewish tradition, often translated as "equal to all" or "corresponding to all." It is most commonly associated with the idea that "Talmud Torah k'neged kulam," meaning "the study of Torah is equal to all [other commandments]".
This concept appears in various Jewish texts and discussions, including the Talmud and other rabbinic literature.
In some interpretations, "k'neged kulam" suggests that the study of Torah is not only equal to but also foundational to the other commandments. For example, one interpretation posits that Torah study is "towards all of these things; out of our learning comes these other things".
This view emphasizes that learning Torah leads to the performance of other mitzvot and contributes to a more just and holy society.
“Talmud Torah === keneged kulam.
Could one visualize a teeter/totter in playground for children? If the child on one side is the same weight as the child on the other side, there is equal balance. I think also the word “keneged” means opposite. So, the idea that emerges from this picture is if one studies some Torah, one can perform the Commandments in It. If one studies more Torah, one can do more or a better job of performing them. No?
Your last seven lines summarize my view which is hardly learned, the author's view is that there's not a balance, those who study are the weight that provides defense or deflection, thus they are exempt, right?
https://open.substack.com/pub/moralclaritynewsletter/p/judaism-is-different-from-other-religions?r=9p06v&utm_medium=ios
See Dvarim 22:4 and also note Yissachar , who had rich territory, preferred to give tribute rather than leave his farm and take up the sword.—Dvarim 33:18–and Ibn Ezra:: The tribe would give payments (I Samuel 8: v. 15= ten percent) to the government of Israel so that they would not have to go to war.
The writer's view, although as vague as most of the stuff that comes out of Yeshivaland, seems to be that the phrase means, a torah learner can dispense with any other obligations of mankind, as TT is equal to it all. A complete distortion of course.
AI is not rishonim, mate. You know as well as I do that in Shas you can't translate phrases literally like chatGPT does.
Tell me, do torah learners exempt themselves from all mitzvos whilst they are learning. No. Why not? TT k'negged kulom. Can they steal to fund torah learning? Why not? TT kneged kulom. Can they make copies of otzar hachochmoh to help them in their learning? Why not? TT k'negged kullom.
Where is he drawing from as a Torah learner to conclude what he's concluding or is it conclusively clear that he's confused and wrong?
No, he's just parroting standard chareidi yeshivish dogma. 99% of which will be alien to any traditional Jewish sources pre 1970.
There's a level of sanctimony and because I said so hearing this read out that reminds me so much of the jezeusian mythologists delusional spewings 🤭
hareidim studying are winning wars 🙃
Jewish warriors are and were a thing and in the third millennium of Israel are a normal thing except for those who are abnormal 🙄
"But the primary way that we reveal his glory in the world is by studying his Torah. That is why talmud Torah is keneged kulam."
Source please.
PS none of the rishonim interpret 'talmud torah keneged kulom' like you do.
Hello Eitan,
Thank you for your good wishes. My son is fine thank God, his injuries were relatively minor. 5 days after his APC was struck by an RPG, he was already back leading his soldiers in Gaza.
I appreciate your communicating your feelings regarding my essay. It seems like you are focusing on two points, the first is that you are not sure exactly in what way I meant to disagree with you. The second is that you held forth your friend Elisha hy"d as an example of someone who was able to undertake serious learning during combat conditions, and therefore stands in contrast to my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your second point, Rambam famously points out that one cannot apply oneself properly to gaining wisdom while one is constrained by the various obligations of this world. He specifically uses the example of warfare. Even without Rambam pointing this out, this is self-evident from widespread human experience. While Elisha may have been one of those very unique individuals who can apply himself at all under those circumstances, it stands to reason that he would still have accomplished much more had he been applying himself in the rarified environment of the beit medrash. So for the overwhelming majority of people combat conditions are incompatible with any serious learning, and even for the very rare individuals such as Elisha combat conditions are a great constraint on their ability to obtain wisdom. Hence my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".
Regarding your primary question of in what way I meant to differ from what you wrote, I believe that we differ on a fundamental point. While I acknowledge that properly applied, going to war with all that that entails can be a great mitzvah, it is not an end in its own right. It is a means to accomplish a greater end. And that greater end is the revelation of Hashem's glory in this world, primarily through revealing the wisdom that he revealed in the Torah. And so those who apply themselves to studying Torah in the beit medrash, are actually accomplishing the goal which gives meaning to the sacrifice of those who engage in combat. It is true that those who are fighting are performing a mitzvah with מסירות נפש, which greatly enhances its value, but it is still only a means to allow for the greater end of those who are studying Hashem's Torah in the beit medrash.
And therefore the resentment that you seem to feel towards those who are applying themselves to the very goal for which you are making such great sacrifices, seems very out of place.
That is my response to the points that you made. But in addition I think there is another issue here that you didn't express, but may lay at the root of what is disturbing you. It is a vital condition of studying Torah that one study with the intention of fulfilling that which one has studied. You believe that the state of Israel has some sort of religious meaning, which implies an obligation to fight on its behalf whether or not one would define its wars as a מלחמת מצווה. Therefore, it seems absurd to you that one would dedicate themselves to studying Torah, but not to fulfilling one of The commandments that is derived from that study.
While there are great Jewish scholars from the past two or three generations who indeed felt that the political state of Israel has religious significance, they are a small minority of the great Jewish thinkers of the past few generations. The great majority of great Jewish thinkers did not believe that the state of Israel has any Jewish significance, and it is their opinion that is followed by the majority of the Charedi community.
So according to that understanding, that there is no Jewish significance to the state of Israel, then there is no cosmic meaning to its wars. Fighting on behalf of the state of Israel is no different than fighting on behalf of any other state. A position that a Jew may one day find himself in, but not something to seek out by any means. Therefore the obligation to fight in Israel's wars does not derive from any obligation to the state itself, or any desire to promote its greater glory. It derives from the obligation to help other Jews, in other words the mitzvah of chesed, which itself is derived from the commandment ואהבת לרעך כמוך.
There is great significance to this distinction, because the rules of the obligation to fight on behalf of a Jewish state are very different than the rules of the obligation to perform chesed. Without going into the specifics, I think the root of what is disturbing you about the Charedi attitude towards fighting in Israel's wars derives from your fundamental understanding of the significance of the state of Israel. But when you appreciate that they have a very different understanding of that significance, then it all begins to fall into place.
While I don't know you, and haven't had the opportunity to discuss this issue with you, in my experience it has often been the case that when well-meaning people are at a loss to understand the Charedi attitude, the root of their wonderment lies in their not appreciating this distinction. Often times when they come to appreciate this distinction, it makes perfect sense to them and the resentment evaporates. I am speculating that what I have learned from experience with others applies to you as well.
Be well, and may the merit of your מסירות נפש stand by you and keep you safe.
I think that you should learn the Sefer published by Encyclopedia Talmudis about the Halachos of Milchama There are many Halachos therein that you would be shocked at are adhered to by the IDF
Amen!!! To the third to last paragraph.