Thanks for your kind comment. The tone of the post is not accidental. If you'd like, you can reach out to me at mecharkerbcholoz@gmail.com to continue this conversation.
The gemara is quite replete with examples of the greatest of Tzadikim and Talmidei Chachamim poking fun at heretics. But even without going there, in this case, it is particularly appropriate because the entire strength of Slifkin's argumentation is built on the smugness of the-self-annointed intellectual high ground of the secular scholar. As is evident from his blog, it is not sources nor rational arguments that seem to sway the masses, but more the culture of intellectual elitism. Well, I am sorry to say, but the Yeshivesh world is starting the counter culture. As me and my brother intentionally do on our Podcast Jewish Thoughtflow, and what this seems to be the M.O. of this blog, much fun is being made of the foolishness of the secular Judaic mind. We have always had Torah and proper thinking on our side, now is the time to make it as culturally uncool to be a heretic as it is morally uncool.
You are looking at this conflict from the inside looking out.
I am pointing out that from the outside looking in (For new viewers of the site or people that are on the fence ect) this is a fight about what is the genuine path to serve Hashem.
You are the representatives of one side so people wont just judge you based on the sources and empirical arguments but also on how you communicate.
This is a fair point. Therefore, as with any production, a person has to ask himself what is his target audience. I cannot speak for the author of this essay, so I can only relay over my thought process. The so called "independent" is a very rare consumer. If he was the target audience, the tone would certainly be different. For me, my target audience is the Yeshivesh crowd who feels intimidated by the fancy prose, and academic lingo that is prevalent on the secular side. No yetzer hora begins with kfira. It starts slowly, gaining steam until you find yourself outside the fold. The point of this literature is to create a counterculture so that the likes of Slifkin do not even get off the ground. You have already encountered him, seen his foolishness, and everyone you know makes fun of him. In this scenario, Slifkin will probably not be a safe haven for justifying one's own gripes with the yeshivesh environment, or acting out one's desires. The question is, what is the best way to convey to your average Yeshivesh crowd that Slifkin is, for lack of a better description, an intellectually dishonest, bitter man. He also is nowhere near the top tier of Torah Thinkers (He hardly can fit in the category). We want him to be off the map of intellegent honest Torah discourse (think Alex Jones for political commentary). When I first encountered Shapiro, Slifkin etc, I was on an Island. There were no resources for me in the Yeshivesh world, and I was not intellectually developed, or experienced enough in their areas of discussion to battle with them on my own. This led to a lot of needless confusion, and pain with feeling that they were peddling in falsehood but not being able to express exactly why. If I had this blog, or my Podcast, as a teenager, it would have saved me a lot of stress. Instead of seeing my Gedolim listed using their last name only, being ridiculed for Torah true ideas, I would have seen these silly kofrim put in their place.
My classic example is once walking down the main street of my town on Shabbos (not Israel). A muslim was passing dressed in their full 'ritual clothing' whatever they are called, the white trousers and long shirt thing.
A chossid, also dressed in full chassidic garb, huge spodik and the rest was also passing. He said to me 'where does that chap think he is, Mecca?'
A complete lack of self-awareness (plus a more problematic issue with the lack of understanding how we are in golus).
You constantly blur chasidim with the rest of chareidim. (like your mikva comment) Maybe we should open a new blog for that but for now stick to the point.
This IS an inside conflict. This is not Chareidi Media Explanation committee inc. This is not for confused people either. It is one group of people who think they know it all against another group and are retaliating. I don't want to speak for Micharker, but he did invite you to email him to continue the conversation why and you should take him up that.
You are not a retard. People may not care for my choice of words, but my intent is 100% in alignment with this. The reactions of retards being called out as retarded should be self-evident proof of this.
Er no. Torah scholars are supposed to be above all that. Dignified and all that. Thoughtful Jew is correct. But the constant mockery disguises a lack of confidence.
So I bring a passuk and and you say its wrong. OK. I'll bring it again with the source:
שמואל ב פרק כב פסוק כז
עִם־נָבָ֖ר תִּתָּבָ֑ר וְעִם־עִקֵּ֖שׁ תִּתַּפָּֽל:
See meforshim there and the gemara in bava basra.
The thing here is that the Slifkin/chareidi debate has nothing to do with anything intellectual, but simply poking fun, sound bites and bitterness. That does not deserve an intellectual response. Only so we don't look as dumb as Slifkin looks, we provide some sources.
"The thing here is that the Slifkin/chareidi debate has nothing to do with anything intellectual...". So you decided that was the case to support your agenda, you than cherry picked a random possuk to support your agenda. I don't see poking fund and soundbites on Slifkin blogs, I only see that on the anti-slifkin blogs. And that possuk is talking about Hashem, anyway.
I've been reading this back and forth since its inception, as well as RJ for years. I like people who think, regardless of whether I agree with them, but it became obvious what the main goal here was. I didn't decide that. I didn't cherry pick that passuk, that's the one the gemara uses, and I've never heard a counter that this is the proper way to handle leitzanim.
Here's the source in case you can't check it up, and no, the gemara doesn't use it on hashem but on Yaakov avinu. see also meiri there.
בבא בתרא דף קכג עמוד א
ומי שרי להו לצדיקי לסגויי ברמאותא? אין, עם נבר תתבר ועם עקש תתפל.
בראשית רבה - פרשת תולדות פרשה סה: אמר ר' אבא בר כהנה, לא עמדו פילוסופין בעולם כבלעם בן בעור וכאבנומוס הגרדי, אבנומוס הגרדי נתכנסו כל אומות העולם אצלו, אמרו לו, תאמר שאנו יכולים להזדווג לאומה זו, אמר לכו וחזרו על בתי כניסיות ובתי מדרשות שלהן, אם מצאתם שם תינוקות מצפצפין בקולן, אינכם יכולין להם, אם לאו, אתם יכולין, שכך הבטיחן אביהן, הקול קול יעקב, בזמן שיעקב מצווצי בבתי כניסיות - אין ידים לעשו
וכן הוא באיכה רבה - פתיחתא ב: אמר ר' אבא בר כהנא, לא עמדו פילוסופין באומות העולם כבלעם בן בעור וכאבנימוס הגרדי, אמרו להם, יכולין אנו להזדווג לאומה זו, אמרו להם, לכו וחזרו על בתי כנסיות שלהם [ועל בתי מדרשות שלהם], אם התינוקות מצפצפין בקולן, אי אתם יכולין להם, ואם לאו, אתם יכולין להם, שכן הבטיחם אביהם, ואמר להם, הקול קול יעקב - והידים ידי עשו (בראשית כז כב), כל זמן שקולו של יעקב [מצפצף] בבתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות, אין הידים ידי עשו, וכל זמן שאין קולו מצפצף בבתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות, הידים ידי עשו
You see that once Hashem has already decided to send the gezeira, Tzadikim can only save themselves, not the rest of the population (I never understood Noach, did he not save his sons? See Radak)
You are joking right? You know what the next possuk says? No doubt you happily sing the old hit 'ish l're'ehy yaazoru ulochiv yomer chazak'. Blissfully unaware of the context.
Hang on. You totally left out discussing the ramifications of the second category, regarding protection for the Torah scholar himself, along with the people around him depending on his level. What are the practical ramifications of this for Torah scholars today? Does this mean that people in full-time learning have a lesser degree of need of protection? (Note: There is a difference between saying that they need less military protection and saying that they need zero military protection.) If not, on what basis do you say that they offer Category 1 protection but not Category 2 protection? Why would take some statements of Chazal seriously and not others?
I actually did address it head on, but I guess you weren't paying attention. Yes, 100%. Torah scholars are in less of a need of physical protection. This probably explains why there have been very few terror attacks in Bnei Brak in the last 75 years. But as I said, in times of danger or in a danger zone, Torah is going to be less protective. The same way that a soldier armed to the teeth patrolling the West Bank is going to be more in danger when things are stirred up. A substantial percentage of Chareidi yishuvim straddle the Green Line - Yerushalayim, Kiryat Sefer, Beitar - and are therefore in greater danger to begin with. Also, as I mentioned in the comments of your post, in times of heavenly wrath ignited by sinners, the Gemara (BK 92a) says that everyone is fair game - lomdei Torah together with sinners.
Nowhere does it say that Torah scholars are supposed to rely on the protection of Torah. In fact, many of the sources above are clear that they employed physical protection as well. All the more so today with all the secularists putting us in such grave danger.
Okay, so they are in less need of protection. And do they also help protect others around them? That's what the sources say, right? So why don't they use this power to help others?
Also: your sources spoke about Torah protecting from all kinds of things, not just war. So presumably Toran scholars have additional protection against disease, right?
Huh? They DO use this protection to help others. By learning, they are protecting those around them.
I'm not aware of any sources that say that Torah study is a protection against disease, other than the Gemara in Kesubos which is clear that it is only a protective measure at the moment one is immersed in Torah, which puts it in category three. As I mentioned, that is not a realistic measure of protection to rely on.
No, they don't use it to help others. Soldiers take their guns and go to vulnerable places to give protection. Charedi yeshivos don't do that. (In fact, they do the opposite).
The sources that I brought were quite clear that Torah scholars should not intentionally physically endanger themselves. I mentioned this a few times already. What aren't you getting?
It's not "endangering yourself" to go to Ashdod or Ashkelon or Kiryat Shmona or Lod. There are hundreds of thousands of Jews living there. I've mentioned this before, what aren't you getting?
Nathan, Nathan, Nathan. Is your Torah sophistication really this infantile. Do you think we hold that Torah is some sort of superhero shield that deflects projectiles? Because if you do not, than I am not sure what you are asking. Torah provides protection, this is clear from the Torah itself. I do not think you actually disagree that the Torah claims this, as its fairly obvious that your misreading of sources to place your agenda in Torah is nothing more than a Kofer wearing the costume of a believer. You have a larger problem that you do not actually believe in the same God that the Torah world does. Your God seems like he has the omnipotence that would be akin to your prowess at learning. In other words, more impotent than anything else. Your so called evidence for God's inability, is some selective misreading of Rishonim, and an infantile imagination of what it means Torah protects. What anyone with an ounce of intellectual maturity understands is that protection can come in many degrees and forms. It may come in the way of a technological breakthrough, giving the IDF more advanced weaponry. It may come in the form of a "fortuitous" error on the side of the enemy. The higher the level of the learning, the less the protection needs to be cloaked in Nature (again, basic Hashkafic principles here that my first grader is already aware of). On the flip side, the lower the level of learning, the more the world will play out as expected to naturally. So, for a learner to stay in a danger zone, his learning has to be on a higher level than if he is not in a danger zone. It is not always so clear when a person can rely on zechus vs hishtadlus (obviously) so one has to make his best judgement call, which in the Torah world means asking Torah authorities. So again, just to recap for the academics among us. 1) Of course Torah learning protects. This means, if all else is equal, if one community has more Torah learning than another, they will be more protected. This is explicit in Torah Sources 2) of course our Torah learning does not grant full immunity from harm, not unless we were all the greatest of Tzadikim. This is also pretty explicit if not very implicit in Torah sources 3) in which case, Hishtadlus is necessary. 4) in some cases, even if Hishtadlus might be the best option from a security standpoint, if there were other variables that made the Hishtadlus untenable, we would not do the "Hishtadlus". A good example of this calculation would be army service for Bochurim. 5) and again this should be obvious, these calculations of how to act based on all available variables are never simple and easy. Therefore, the Torah world looks to the most qualified people to answer a Torah question, our Torah leaders.
Just because you repeat the same silly thing over and over again doesn't make you right.
Practically speaking, the protection means the Torah scholars need less physical hishtadlus to receive protection than they would otherwise. Which has practical ramifications that the chareidim are מקיים בהידור רב, and which you never cease to complain about. In your very post that Mecharker responded to, Rabbi Zilberstein was an example of him using it practically! (whether he was right or wrong in that particular application)
As Mecharker points out, this does not mean that in a war zone, they can be סומך על הנס.
And this is what precisely has no source. It's clear that Natan is wrong and that the Torah does provide protection, but one may not deduce that one can lower one's hishtadlus due to these sources, as we never see that anywhere in nach or chazal. They always had an army and went to war (and learned).
What do you mean? We see that everywhere in Tanach and Chazal. Every moment spent on limud Torah, or Tefillah, or Shabbos, or Shemittah, or tying Tzitzis, is a moment not spent on hishtadlus! And this is not a hobby, it can add up to hours a day! Every Cohen in the Bais Hamikdosh who did not go out to fight, who did not grow crops, is a person that is not dedicated to physical hishtadlus! Sure, they had an army. But guess what? They sent home all the sinners! That is certainly not maximization of hishtadlus! And Shevet Levi did not fight (says the Rambam).
The main reason why chareidim don't join the IDF is because it will cause many to go OTD. That is a price that the Jews cannot afford. Meanwhile, by not going OTD and keeping the Torah, they are protecting Israel.
Not at the expense of needing to take away almost two hours a day from learning, no way. You would really need to show why such a maximization of hishtadlus is justified in that case.
Eating, driving lessons, and gun lessons all in the same sentence trying to make a unified point. Got to love the academic style of thinking. I assume the math on this one was any level of Histadlus required=all levels of Histadlus required? Do driving lessons, and eating pose the same level of utility in one's life? Do gun lessons? I suppose in your world the following would be a good question: We eat 2/3 times a day, ergo we should take driving lessons 2/3 times a day? I am also unclear what exactly you are disagreeing with. You obviously are aware that Jew has a requirement to learn Torah and perform Mitzvos as much as he could. You also are aware that a person has to allocate time for living needs. This is in our Torah. There are also no end to sources that stress that the time spent on living needs should be carefully measured as they are merely prerequisites for our main occupation of Torah and Mitzvos. So, after knowing all that, can you honestly not figure out that not all living needs are created equal? Some may be required, some may not. And I am sure you understand it is a multi-variable equation, right? It would depend on danger posed, time it took to take care of it, spiritual danger involved in taking care of it etc. So what is the disagreement? You do not agree with R' Zilbersteins calculation? Ok. You are entitled. As long as you are aware of the reasons he is a qualified Torah mind and you are not, you are free to form whatever opinion you would like. If you are not aware why he is a Torah mind, and you are not, I would start with the brilliant equation of eating, driving lessons and gun lessons. Yeesh
1. Practically speaking, Israel has less wars, less attacks, more victories, less defeats, and the IDF is stronger than hishtadlus would dictate, due to the chareidim learning and practicing the Torah.
2. In terms of what chareidim do differently in practice, they don't join the IDF, they don't form their own militias, they don't carry guns (see story with Rav Zilberstein), they have far more political power than a population their size would warrant, and Hashem protects them.
Missed the point. of course. You wrote "Torah scholars need less physical hishtadlus to receive protection than they would otherwise". I did not ask what torah scholars in Israel (or at least the relatively small proportion of learners who claim exemption that are torah scholars) do themselves. I know that, dear.
I am asking, objectively, what your sources teach practically, about 'less hishtadlus', considering that, as you confirm, in a danger zone, all these torah protection is less effective. Sofek nefoshos l'chumrah, no? So if we do not have a novi to tell us how less is less, we should go l'chumrah and not rely on it at all, in case we are relying on it too much.
And you still haven't explained why the gates of the holy city of kiryat seifer require armed guards. Basically, any awkward questions about people not living in accordance with the emunah and bitochon and sources they preach, is answered by 'hishtadlus'. That's why the collectors who are happy to rely on 'biutachon' when not getting a job, suddenly stop relying on it when collecting for their children's marriage and go around collecting, rather than just waiting for for funds to fall from heaven.
Hmm, looks like, unlike Natan, you admit that chareidim practically treat the Torah as if it protects, doing less hishtadlus. Good, we are getting somewhere.
Now you have a new question. What are the exact parameters of the reduction in hishtadlus we need? But you go further than that, claiming that if we don't know the exact parameters, we shouldn't reduce our hishtadlus whatsoever. Well, this is extremely black-and-white, infantile thinking. It's like saying, we don't know exactly how many firefighters should respond to a fire, so we should send all the fire trucks in the city to every fire. Do you have enough baby toys where you are, or should I send you some?
Why do the gates of Kiryat Sefer require armed guards? Lol. You are literally the guy in the story who's drowning, calling out to God. God sends a boat, he doesn't take it, saying "I want God to save me" etc... I hope you know that story, do you?
As usual, no substantive answer, just a bunch of questions back. 'It's like saying....' type responses, although very yeshivish, don't actually deal with the point or provide any substantive explanation. "It's very black and white infantile thinking' is not a substantive response. It basically says 'good point, I have no response'.
Ditto responding to my Kiryat Sefer question with a well known joke. It's great for deflection, great for confusing a chavrusoh, but doesn't work against somebody who knows the tactic.
אפיקורוס כגון מאן? - אמר רב יוסף: כגון הני דאמרי מאי אהנו לן רבנן? לדידהו קרו, לדידהו תנו
אמר ליה אביי: האי מגלה פנים בתורה נמי הוא, דכתיב אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי. אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק: מהכא נמי שמע מינה, שנאמר ונשאתי לכל המקום בעבורם
רש"י
מאי אהני לן - והם אינן יודעין שעולם מתקיים עליהם
מגלה פנים בתורה הוא - שכופר במה שכתוב בתורה
אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה וגו' - שמהנין לעולם ומקיימין [אותו], והוא אומר דלא מהני מידי
Where do you see from here that one is allowed to lower one's hishtadlus due to that protection? One still needs an army and/or guns. Nowhere do we see in Nach or Chazal that they lowered their hishtadlus due to the Torah's protection.
You do tend to repeat yourself. Chareidim themselves do not believe practically speaking torah protects. Which is why the gates of the holy city of Kiryat Sefer, and the slightly less holy of Beitar, are protected by security with guns. Incidentally, when there was a heightened security alert Pesach a few years ago, Beitar residents insisted on more soldiers with guns protecting them on seider night.
I will add, I personally spoke to someone involved in security of a chareidi Moshav in the west bank, where there is a full time Kollel, and they also take security measures and carry guns themselfs, and on Shabbos as well. Which Rav did they speak to about this? drumroll please................... Rav Zilberstien. So when he's talking to someone from kiryat sefer where much less security is needed... fill in the blanks.
"As expressed by R. Chaim of Volozhin in Nefesh HaChaim, the primary function of Torah study was now seen as being to create spiritual energies and thereby metaphysically influence the universe."
I would put the emphasis on the "now," as if it was some sort of innovation, rather than further gloss for obviously long-held beliefs. I see Nefesh HaChaim and other similar works more as a sort of "spiritual mechanics" that explain at a deeper level how our actions impact the world. And that limud Torah itself is its own category that abides by a different set of rules in those same mechanics for Jews, personally and nationally.
Well written and sourced.
No need for the digs at him though.
The torah is on your side...no need to go low...
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
I like to think of someone that can quote this many sources as an erudite scholar.
The Torah speaks for itself and does not need dirty tactics to augment it.
Playing dirty is usually a sign of insecurity.
Although I believe the author is firm in his convictions, it does not come off well for visitors to the blog.
Stick to sources and logic
Thanks for your kind comment. The tone of the post is not accidental. If you'd like, you can reach out to me at mecharkerbcholoz@gmail.com to continue this conversation.
Follow how this started on rationalist Judaism and you'll see why those comments are incorrect. עם עיקש תיתפל
No. Torah scholars are supposed to be dignified and above all that. The constant mockery demonstrates a lack of confidence.
The gemara is quite replete with examples of the greatest of Tzadikim and Talmidei Chachamim poking fun at heretics. But even without going there, in this case, it is particularly appropriate because the entire strength of Slifkin's argumentation is built on the smugness of the-self-annointed intellectual high ground of the secular scholar. As is evident from his blog, it is not sources nor rational arguments that seem to sway the masses, but more the culture of intellectual elitism. Well, I am sorry to say, but the Yeshivesh world is starting the counter culture. As me and my brother intentionally do on our Podcast Jewish Thoughtflow, and what this seems to be the M.O. of this blog, much fun is being made of the foolishness of the secular Judaic mind. We have always had Torah and proper thinking on our side, now is the time to make it as culturally uncool to be a heretic as it is morally uncool.
You are looking at this conflict from the inside looking out.
I am pointing out that from the outside looking in (For new viewers of the site or people that are on the fence ect) this is a fight about what is the genuine path to serve Hashem.
You are the representatives of one side so people wont just judge you based on the sources and empirical arguments but also on how you communicate.
This is a fair point. Therefore, as with any production, a person has to ask himself what is his target audience. I cannot speak for the author of this essay, so I can only relay over my thought process. The so called "independent" is a very rare consumer. If he was the target audience, the tone would certainly be different. For me, my target audience is the Yeshivesh crowd who feels intimidated by the fancy prose, and academic lingo that is prevalent on the secular side. No yetzer hora begins with kfira. It starts slowly, gaining steam until you find yourself outside the fold. The point of this literature is to create a counterculture so that the likes of Slifkin do not even get off the ground. You have already encountered him, seen his foolishness, and everyone you know makes fun of him. In this scenario, Slifkin will probably not be a safe haven for justifying one's own gripes with the yeshivesh environment, or acting out one's desires. The question is, what is the best way to convey to your average Yeshivesh crowd that Slifkin is, for lack of a better description, an intellectually dishonest, bitter man. He also is nowhere near the top tier of Torah Thinkers (He hardly can fit in the category). We want him to be off the map of intellegent honest Torah discourse (think Alex Jones for political commentary). When I first encountered Shapiro, Slifkin etc, I was on an Island. There were no resources for me in the Yeshivesh world, and I was not intellectually developed, or experienced enough in their areas of discussion to battle with them on my own. This led to a lot of needless confusion, and pain with feeling that they were peddling in falsehood but not being able to express exactly why. If I had this blog, or my Podcast, as a teenager, it would have saved me a lot of stress. Instead of seeing my Gedolim listed using their last name only, being ridiculed for Torah true ideas, I would have seen these silly kofrim put in their place.
chareidim don't do the outside looking in.
My classic example is once walking down the main street of my town on Shabbos (not Israel). A muslim was passing dressed in their full 'ritual clothing' whatever they are called, the white trousers and long shirt thing.
A chossid, also dressed in full chassidic garb, huge spodik and the rest was also passing. He said to me 'where does that chap think he is, Mecca?'
A complete lack of self-awareness (plus a more problematic issue with the lack of understanding how we are in golus).
And the Muslim turned to his friend a minute later and said "Where does that infidel think he is, Israel?"
Human nature is to look at the world through your own perspective.
I wrote a post about this recently (shameless plug)
https://thoughtfuljew.substack.com/p/you-are-your-own-echo-chamber
Unfair to claim that this is uniquely a chareidi problem.
You constantly blur chasidim with the rest of chareidim. (like your mikva comment) Maybe we should open a new blog for that but for now stick to the point.
This IS an inside conflict. This is not Chareidi Media Explanation committee inc. This is not for confused people either. It is one group of people who think they know it all against another group and are retaliating. I don't want to speak for Micharker, but he did invite you to email him to continue the conversation why and you should take him up that.
You are not a retard. People may not care for my choice of words, but my intent is 100% in alignment with this. The reactions of retards being called out as retarded should be self-evident proof of this.
Er no. Torah scholars are supposed to be above all that. Dignified and all that. Thoughtful Jew is correct. But the constant mockery disguises a lack of confidence.
So I bring a passuk and and you say its wrong. OK. I'll bring it again with the source:
שמואל ב פרק כב פסוק כז
עִם־נָבָ֖ר תִּתָּבָ֑ר וְעִם־עִקֵּ֖שׁ תִּתַּפָּֽל:
See meforshim there and the gemara in bava basra.
The thing here is that the Slifkin/chareidi debate has nothing to do with anything intellectual, but simply poking fun, sound bites and bitterness. That does not deserve an intellectual response. Only so we don't look as dumb as Slifkin looks, we provide some sources.
see my above response
See my above as well.
"The thing here is that the Slifkin/chareidi debate has nothing to do with anything intellectual...". So you decided that was the case to support your agenda, you than cherry picked a random possuk to support your agenda. I don't see poking fund and soundbites on Slifkin blogs, I only see that on the anti-slifkin blogs. And that possuk is talking about Hashem, anyway.
I've been reading this back and forth since its inception, as well as RJ for years. I like people who think, regardless of whether I agree with them, but it became obvious what the main goal here was. I didn't decide that. I didn't cherry pick that passuk, that's the one the gemara uses, and I've never heard a counter that this is the proper way to handle leitzanim.
Here's the source in case you can't check it up, and no, the gemara doesn't use it on hashem but on Yaakov avinu. see also meiri there.
בבא בתרא דף קכג עמוד א
ומי שרי להו לצדיקי לסגויי ברמאותא? אין, עם נבר תתבר ועם עקש תתפל.
What does the Meiribsay? Really enjoying these comments
Where does it say anything about rudeness? Yackov was very polite to both lovon and pharoa.
Well said, love the pic!
בראשית רבה - פרשת תולדות פרשה סה: אמר ר' אבא בר כהנה, לא עמדו פילוסופין בעולם כבלעם בן בעור וכאבנומוס הגרדי, אבנומוס הגרדי נתכנסו כל אומות העולם אצלו, אמרו לו, תאמר שאנו יכולים להזדווג לאומה זו, אמר לכו וחזרו על בתי כניסיות ובתי מדרשות שלהן, אם מצאתם שם תינוקות מצפצפין בקולן, אינכם יכולין להם, אם לאו, אתם יכולין, שכך הבטיחן אביהן, הקול קול יעקב, בזמן שיעקב מצווצי בבתי כניסיות - אין ידים לעשו
וכן הוא באיכה רבה - פתיחתא ב: אמר ר' אבא בר כהנא, לא עמדו פילוסופין באומות העולם כבלעם בן בעור וכאבנימוס הגרדי, אמרו להם, יכולין אנו להזדווג לאומה זו, אמרו להם, לכו וחזרו על בתי כנסיות שלהם [ועל בתי מדרשות שלהם], אם התינוקות מצפצפין בקולן, אי אתם יכולין להם, ואם לאו, אתם יכולין להם, שכן הבטיחם אביהם, ואמר להם, הקול קול יעקב - והידים ידי עשו (בראשית כז כב), כל זמן שקולו של יעקב [מצפצף] בבתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות, אין הידים ידי עשו, וכל זמן שאין קולו מצפצף בבתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות, הידים ידי עשו
Thanks, YAMO! I'm going to add that when I get a chance.
For sources for individuals protecting a city here's an even better pasuk.
Yirmiyahu 5:1
שׁוֹטְט֞וּ בְּחוּצ֣וֹת יְרוּשָׁלַ֗͏ִם וּרְאוּ־נָ֤א וּדְעוּ֙ וּבַקְשׁ֣וּ בִרְחוֹבוֹתֶ֔יהָ אִם־תִּמְצְא֣וּ אִ֔ישׁ אִם־יֵ֛שׁ עֹשֶׂ֥ה מִשְׁפָּ֖ט מְבַקֵּ֣שׁ אֱמוּנָ֑ה וְאֶסְלַ֖ח לָֽהּ׃
Another good source
Yechezkel 14:13-20
־אָדָ֗ם אֶ֚רֶץ כִּ֤י תֶחֱטָא־לִי֙ לִמְעָל־מַ֔עַל וְנָטִ֤יתִי יָדִי֙ עָלֶ֔יהָ וְשָׁבַ֥רְתִּי לָ֖הּ מַטֵּה־לָ֑חֶם וְהִשְׁלַחְתִּי־בָ֣הּ רָעָ֔ב וְהִכְרַתִּ֥י מִמֶּ֖נָּה אָדָ֥ם וּבְהֵמָֽה׃
וְ֠הָיוּ שְׁלֹ֨שֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁ֤ים הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ בְּתוֹכָ֔הּ נֹ֖חַ דנאל [דָּנִיֵּ֣אל] וְאִיּ֑וֹב הֵ֤מָּה בְצִדְקָתָם֙ יְנַצְּל֣וּ נַפְשָׁ֔ם נְאֻ֖ם אֲדֹנָ֥י יְהוִֽה׃
לֽוּ־חַיָּ֥ה רָעָ֛ה אַעֲבִ֥יר בָּאָ֖רֶץ וְשִׁכְּלָ֑תָּה וְהָיְתָ֤ה שְׁמָמָה֙ מִבְּלִ֣י עוֹבֵ֔ר מִפְּנֵ֖י הַחַיָּֽה׃
שְׁלֹ֨שֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁ֣ים הָאֵלֶּה֮ בְּתוֹכָהּ֒ חַי־אָ֗נִי נְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהוִ֔ה אִם־בָּנִ֥ים וְאִם־בָּנ֖וֹת יַצִּ֑ילוּ הֵ֤מָּה לְבַדָּם֙ יִנָּצֵ֔לוּ וְהָאָ֖רֶץ תִּהְיֶ֥ה שְׁמָמָֽה׃
א֛וֹ חֶ֥רֶב אָבִ֖יא עַל־הָאָ֣רֶץ הַהִ֑יא וְאָמַרְתִּ֗י חֶ֚רֶב תַּעֲבֹ֣ר בָּאָ֔רֶץ וְהִכְרַתִּ֥י מִמֶּ֖נָּה אָדָ֥ם וּבְהֵמָֽה׃
וּשְׁלֹ֨שֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁ֣ים הָאֵלֶּה֮ בְּתוֹכָהּ֒ חַי־אָ֗נִי נְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהוִ֔ה לֹ֥א יַצִּ֖ילוּ בָּנִ֣ים וּבָנ֑וֹת כִּ֛י הֵ֥ם לְבַדָּ֖ם יִנָּצֵֽלוּ׃
א֛וֹ דֶּ֥בֶר אֲשַׁלַּ֖ח אֶל־הָאָ֣רֶץ הַהִ֑יא וְשָׁפַכְתִּ֨י חֲמָתִ֤י עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ בְּדָ֔ם לְהַכְרִ֥ית מִמֶּ֖נָּה אָדָ֥ם וּבְהֵמָֽה׃
וְנֹ֨חַ דנאל [דָּנִיֵּ֣אל] וְאִיּוֹב֮ בְּתוֹכָהּ֒ חַי־אָ֗נִי נְאֻם֙ אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהוִ֔ה אִם־בֵּ֥ן אִם־בַּ֖ת יַצִּ֑ילוּ הֵ֥מָּה בְצִדְקָתָ֖ם יַצִּ֥ילוּ נַפְשָֽׁם׃ (פ)
You see that once Hashem has already decided to send the gezeira, Tzadikim can only save themselves, not the rest of the population (I never understood Noach, did he not save his sons? See Radak)
You are joking right? You know what the next possuk says? No doubt you happily sing the old hit 'ish l're'ehy yaazoru ulochiv yomer chazak'. Blissfully unaware of the context.
Next posuk isוְאִ֥ם חַי־יְהֹוָ֖ה יֹאמֵ֑רוּ לָכֵ֥ן לַשֶּׁ֖קֶר יִשָּׁבֵֽעוּ׃
Not sure how that disproves what I'm saying. Maybe open up a jolly-old tanakh and look up the citation before shouting "out of context."
You are right - I meant the end of that possuk. And it says nothing about 'protection'.
Nice, although it’s not specifically about לימוד התורה.
Hang on. You totally left out discussing the ramifications of the second category, regarding protection for the Torah scholar himself, along with the people around him depending on his level. What are the practical ramifications of this for Torah scholars today? Does this mean that people in full-time learning have a lesser degree of need of protection? (Note: There is a difference between saying that they need less military protection and saying that they need zero military protection.) If not, on what basis do you say that they offer Category 1 protection but not Category 2 protection? Why would take some statements of Chazal seriously and not others?
I actually did address it head on, but I guess you weren't paying attention. Yes, 100%. Torah scholars are in less of a need of physical protection. This probably explains why there have been very few terror attacks in Bnei Brak in the last 75 years. But as I said, in times of danger or in a danger zone, Torah is going to be less protective. The same way that a soldier armed to the teeth patrolling the West Bank is going to be more in danger when things are stirred up. A substantial percentage of Chareidi yishuvim straddle the Green Line - Yerushalayim, Kiryat Sefer, Beitar - and are therefore in greater danger to begin with. Also, as I mentioned in the comments of your post, in times of heavenly wrath ignited by sinners, the Gemara (BK 92a) says that everyone is fair game - lomdei Torah together with sinners.
Nowhere does it say that Torah scholars are supposed to rely on the protection of Torah. In fact, many of the sources above are clear that they employed physical protection as well. All the more so today with all the secularists putting us in such grave danger.
Okay, so they are in less need of protection. And do they also help protect others around them? That's what the sources say, right? So why don't they use this power to help others?
Also: your sources spoke about Torah protecting from all kinds of things, not just war. So presumably Toran scholars have additional protection against disease, right?
Huh? They DO use this protection to help others. By learning, they are protecting those around them.
I'm not aware of any sources that say that Torah study is a protection against disease, other than the Gemara in Kesubos which is clear that it is only a protective measure at the moment one is immersed in Torah, which puts it in category three. As I mentioned, that is not a realistic measure of protection to rely on.
No, they don't use it to help others. Soldiers take their guns and go to vulnerable places to give protection. Charedi yeshivos don't do that. (In fact, they do the opposite).
The sources that I brought were quite clear that Torah scholars should not intentionally physically endanger themselves. I mentioned this a few times already. What aren't you getting?
It's not "endangering yourself" to go to Ashdod or Ashkelon or Kiryat Shmona or Lod. There are hundreds of thousands of Jews living there. I've mentioned this before, what aren't you getting?
Nathan, Nathan, Nathan. Is your Torah sophistication really this infantile. Do you think we hold that Torah is some sort of superhero shield that deflects projectiles? Because if you do not, than I am not sure what you are asking. Torah provides protection, this is clear from the Torah itself. I do not think you actually disagree that the Torah claims this, as its fairly obvious that your misreading of sources to place your agenda in Torah is nothing more than a Kofer wearing the costume of a believer. You have a larger problem that you do not actually believe in the same God that the Torah world does. Your God seems like he has the omnipotence that would be akin to your prowess at learning. In other words, more impotent than anything else. Your so called evidence for God's inability, is some selective misreading of Rishonim, and an infantile imagination of what it means Torah protects. What anyone with an ounce of intellectual maturity understands is that protection can come in many degrees and forms. It may come in the way of a technological breakthrough, giving the IDF more advanced weaponry. It may come in the form of a "fortuitous" error on the side of the enemy. The higher the level of the learning, the less the protection needs to be cloaked in Nature (again, basic Hashkafic principles here that my first grader is already aware of). On the flip side, the lower the level of learning, the more the world will play out as expected to naturally. So, for a learner to stay in a danger zone, his learning has to be on a higher level than if he is not in a danger zone. It is not always so clear when a person can rely on zechus vs hishtadlus (obviously) so one has to make his best judgement call, which in the Torah world means asking Torah authorities. So again, just to recap for the academics among us. 1) Of course Torah learning protects. This means, if all else is equal, if one community has more Torah learning than another, they will be more protected. This is explicit in Torah Sources 2) of course our Torah learning does not grant full immunity from harm, not unless we were all the greatest of Tzadikim. This is also pretty explicit if not very implicit in Torah sources 3) in which case, Hishtadlus is necessary. 4) in some cases, even if Hishtadlus might be the best option from a security standpoint, if there were other variables that made the Hishtadlus untenable, we would not do the "Hishtadlus". A good example of this calculation would be army service for Bochurim. 5) and again this should be obvious, these calculations of how to act based on all available variables are never simple and easy. Therefore, the Torah world looks to the most qualified people to answer a Torah question, our Torah leaders.
Just because you repeat the same silly thing over and over again doesn't make you right.
Practically speaking, the protection means the Torah scholars need less physical hishtadlus to receive protection than they would otherwise. Which has practical ramifications that the chareidim are מקיים בהידור רב, and which you never cease to complain about. In your very post that Mecharker responded to, Rabbi Zilberstein was an example of him using it practically! (whether he was right or wrong in that particular application)
As Mecharker points out, this does not mean that in a war zone, they can be סומך על הנס.
And this is what precisely has no source. It's clear that Natan is wrong and that the Torah does provide protection, but one may not deduce that one can lower one's hishtadlus due to these sources, as we never see that anywhere in nach or chazal. They always had an army and went to war (and learned).
What do you mean? We see that everywhere in Tanach and Chazal. Every moment spent on limud Torah, or Tefillah, or Shabbos, or Shemittah, or tying Tzitzis, is a moment not spent on hishtadlus! And this is not a hobby, it can add up to hours a day! Every Cohen in the Bais Hamikdosh who did not go out to fight, who did not grow crops, is a person that is not dedicated to physical hishtadlus! Sure, they had an army. But guess what? They sent home all the sinners! That is certainly not maximization of hishtadlus! And Shevet Levi did not fight (says the Rambam).
The main reason why chareidim don't join the IDF is because it will cause many to go OTD. That is a price that the Jews cannot afford. Meanwhile, by not going OTD and keeping the Torah, they are protecting Israel.
I was referring to R Zilbersteins psak. We spend time eating and getting driving lessons etc, we certainly should get gun lessons as well.
Not at the expense of needing to take away almost two hours a day from learning, no way. You would really need to show why such a maximization of hishtadlus is justified in that case.
The opposite. The whole concept of minimizing hishtadlus is absent in any of the sources you bring. The burden of proof is on you.
Eating, driving lessons, and gun lessons all in the same sentence trying to make a unified point. Got to love the academic style of thinking. I assume the math on this one was any level of Histadlus required=all levels of Histadlus required? Do driving lessons, and eating pose the same level of utility in one's life? Do gun lessons? I suppose in your world the following would be a good question: We eat 2/3 times a day, ergo we should take driving lessons 2/3 times a day? I am also unclear what exactly you are disagreeing with. You obviously are aware that Jew has a requirement to learn Torah and perform Mitzvos as much as he could. You also are aware that a person has to allocate time for living needs. This is in our Torah. There are also no end to sources that stress that the time spent on living needs should be carefully measured as they are merely prerequisites for our main occupation of Torah and Mitzvos. So, after knowing all that, can you honestly not figure out that not all living needs are created equal? Some may be required, some may not. And I am sure you understand it is a multi-variable equation, right? It would depend on danger posed, time it took to take care of it, spiritual danger involved in taking care of it etc. So what is the disagreement? You do not agree with R' Zilbersteins calculation? Ok. You are entitled. As long as you are aware of the reasons he is a qualified Torah mind and you are not, you are free to form whatever opinion you would like. If you are not aware why he is a Torah mind, and you are not, I would start with the brilliant equation of eating, driving lessons and gun lessons. Yeesh
What are the practical ramifications of needing less physical hishtadlus? What is 'less' in practice?
"Practical" can mean two things.
1. Practically speaking, Israel has less wars, less attacks, more victories, less defeats, and the IDF is stronger than hishtadlus would dictate, due to the chareidim learning and practicing the Torah.
2. In terms of what chareidim do differently in practice, they don't join the IDF, they don't form their own militias, they don't carry guns (see story with Rav Zilberstein), they have far more political power than a population their size would warrant, and Hashem protects them.
Missed the point. of course. You wrote "Torah scholars need less physical hishtadlus to receive protection than they would otherwise". I did not ask what torah scholars in Israel (or at least the relatively small proportion of learners who claim exemption that are torah scholars) do themselves. I know that, dear.
I am asking, objectively, what your sources teach practically, about 'less hishtadlus', considering that, as you confirm, in a danger zone, all these torah protection is less effective. Sofek nefoshos l'chumrah, no? So if we do not have a novi to tell us how less is less, we should go l'chumrah and not rely on it at all, in case we are relying on it too much.
And you still haven't explained why the gates of the holy city of kiryat seifer require armed guards. Basically, any awkward questions about people not living in accordance with the emunah and bitochon and sources they preach, is answered by 'hishtadlus'. That's why the collectors who are happy to rely on 'biutachon' when not getting a job, suddenly stop relying on it when collecting for their children's marriage and go around collecting, rather than just waiting for for funds to fall from heaven.
Hmm, looks like, unlike Natan, you admit that chareidim practically treat the Torah as if it protects, doing less hishtadlus. Good, we are getting somewhere.
Now you have a new question. What are the exact parameters of the reduction in hishtadlus we need? But you go further than that, claiming that if we don't know the exact parameters, we shouldn't reduce our hishtadlus whatsoever. Well, this is extremely black-and-white, infantile thinking. It's like saying, we don't know exactly how many firefighters should respond to a fire, so we should send all the fire trucks in the city to every fire. Do you have enough baby toys where you are, or should I send you some?
Why do the gates of Kiryat Sefer require armed guards? Lol. You are literally the guy in the story who's drowning, calling out to God. God sends a boat, he doesn't take it, saying "I want God to save me" etc... I hope you know that story, do you?
As usual, no substantive answer, just a bunch of questions back. 'It's like saying....' type responses, although very yeshivish, don't actually deal with the point or provide any substantive explanation. "It's very black and white infantile thinking' is not a substantive response. It basically says 'good point, I have no response'.
Ditto responding to my Kiryat Sefer question with a well known joke. It's great for deflection, great for confusing a chavrusoh, but doesn't work against somebody who knows the tactic.
This should be interesting. You have a question for every answer and an answer for every question.
What's wrong with that? Spitz yeshivish.
סנהדרין צט, ב
אפיקורוס כגון מאן? - אמר רב יוסף: כגון הני דאמרי מאי אהנו לן רבנן? לדידהו קרו, לדידהו תנו
אמר ליה אביי: האי מגלה פנים בתורה נמי הוא, דכתיב אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי. אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק: מהכא נמי שמע מינה, שנאמר ונשאתי לכל המקום בעבורם
רש"י
מאי אהני לן - והם אינן יודעין שעולם מתקיים עליהם
מגלה פנים בתורה הוא - שכופר במה שכתוב בתורה
אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה וגו' - שמהנין לעולם ומקיימין [אותו], והוא אומר דלא מהני מידי
מהכא נמי שמעינן - שהצדיקים מהנין לאחרים
Excellent sources that the Torah protects.
Where do you see from here that one is allowed to lower one's hishtadlus due to that protection? One still needs an army and/or guns. Nowhere do we see in Nach or Chazal that they lowered their hishtadlus due to the Torah's protection.
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect/comment/13642253
You do tend to repeat yourself. Chareidim themselves do not believe practically speaking torah protects. Which is why the gates of the holy city of Kiryat Sefer, and the slightly less holy of Beitar, are protected by security with guns. Incidentally, when there was a heightened security alert Pesach a few years ago, Beitar residents insisted on more soldiers with guns protecting them on seider night.
I will add, I personally spoke to someone involved in security of a chareidi Moshav in the west bank, where there is a full time Kollel, and they also take security measures and carry guns themselfs, and on Shabbos as well. Which Rav did they speak to about this? drumroll please................... Rav Zilberstien. So when he's talking to someone from kiryat sefer where much less security is needed... fill in the blanks.
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Can you answer the question? Yes or no?
I guess you didn't see my comment so I'll repeat it:
You are repeating the same stuff we argued about last week, I answered you.
We went through this already last week, you're repeating yourself.
"As expressed by R. Chaim of Volozhin in Nefesh HaChaim, the primary function of Torah study was now seen as being to create spiritual energies and thereby metaphysically influence the universe."
I would put the emphasis on the "now," as if it was some sort of innovation, rather than further gloss for obviously long-held beliefs. I see Nefesh HaChaim and other similar works more as a sort of "spiritual mechanics" that explain at a deeper level how our actions impact the world. And that limud Torah itself is its own category that abides by a different set of rules in those same mechanics for Jews, personally and nationally.
Excellent as usual. Enjoyed the sources.
I didn't know all that about Natan Slifkin. He essentially doesn't believe in a spiritual world?