Its all about identity. The same thing which angers non-charedim about chareidi refusal to serve is actually the same thing which scare chareidim from serving. The chareidim often give the impression thay see themeselves apart from the rest of the country calling them "ציונים" for example as well as refusal to formally recognize them in their tefilot or to identify with their achievements such as ה' באייר. The reason they do this is the fear of what identifying as Israeli will do to their religious identity. Many Datim go off the derech and dont see this as a פגיעה in their jewishness because what defines their jewishness is חיבור לאומה. Thats what terrifies chareidim. This friction needs to be addrressed among Israelis. Till then were wasting our time.
Correct. Things are going in a positive direction. But some chareidim may be afraid of what this very spirit can bring. אחדות here is considered dangerous. Hopefully the חששות will fall away or be drowned out.
That's just PR mate. The second the guns fall silent, it will be business as usual. The 'gedolim' have not said very much of substance (other than the two previously discussed, one of which could not even bring himself to approve of davening for soldiers)
Funny how Hurricane Nathan is busy quoting the Maharsha, with all his brilliant fans cheering him on. As if they really give a hoot what the Maharsha has to say
Look at the rules for Milchemes mitzva. A truly Jewish army would not include anyone who is engaged but not married, has built a house but not lived in it, or planted a vineyard and hasn't eaten it's produce.
Most importantly, it wouldn't include anyone who is afraid that they will die in battle because of their sins.
So everyone would have to volunteer at first, but the force would be self selected and only include those who fear G-d.
True. Not necessarily only chareidi. There are many righteous non-chareidim, like the person who wrote "voice from the front". But those rules are for a milchemes reshus. And the Rambam pasken "one who is afraid" means of the battle.
The Rambam paskens only capturing EY is מלחמת מצוה but not expanding. He doesn't say anything regarding protecting the borders but the לחם משנה says protecting is still רשות, as it is משמע בגמ' סוטה דף מ"ד . I cited this in full a few posts ago.
צר means a siege. The לחם משנה clearly says fighting by the border is still רשות.
עזה is part of EY, but that would only be if they plan on keeping it, which doesn't seem to be the case here. Additionally, since עזה is not part of the גבולי עולי בבל as mentioned in Gittin and ברייתא דתחומין, and the poskim question how to bring about the kedusha when Ezra left it out.
The לחם משנה is on the Rambam you quoted. I agree that fighting the terrorists on October 7 and 8 would apply to the rambam but not a counter invasion. I'm no supporter of a cease-fire but it is still a מלחמת רשות . see the Gemara in sota too. It may be a מחלוקת but ע"פ הלחם משנה the halacha isn't so, and I think the pashtus of the gemara is this way.
If you are referencing the ציץ אליעזר regarding the kedusha, yes I've spent a lot of time on it, he has a big chiddush there with 600000 Jews entering the land. Just looked now and yes, he talks about it and brings two sides. The Yaavetz has a long piece on this in מור וקציעה אורח חיים סימן שו and brings both sides as well. There's another question if that can make a kedusha without Jews settling there, such as what's called הניחו למס. see the yaavetz there and חזון איש שביעית סימן ד'. Basically one would have to say all this applies with regard to Gaza, and that the Gov. will hold on to it. To call that מלחמת מצוה is a bit of a stretch, but I guess can't completely be ruled out.
He used to brush off criticism that results in banning today.
Ironically, I'm actually the good cop in my tochacha.
All I did was cite Rabbenu Yonah in accurate translation. I even said recently that being Shomer Shabbos probably brings on the protection of others' Limud Torah to him as well, regardless of other things he does or believes.
Other than you, who said nothing about him, the comments are much harsher. Comparing him to Jesus? Calling him a rasha? Ouch.
It's a bit ironic that he now banned Sender Goldberg, who was actually one of the people who stuck up for him by the ban 20 years ago, as he's written about on Nathan's blog. All he did was call Natan Jesus. Why does Natan consider that an insult?
I thought using Jesus was a little much, but if he defended him back in the day, a drop of hakaras hatov should be expected and turn a blind eye here. BTW, he's been calling him jesus for years, so the only reason he banned him now is because he's getting very paranoid at people undermining his Chareidi Draft rant.
I'm serious though. As a Rationalist, Natan should have no issue with Jesus. He wasn't Hitler. His main problem was that he went against the Chachomim, which Rationalists obviously have no issue with.
Goldberg is not a troll, and is not just calling him a name. He is bringing out a very valid point, that Natan and Jesus have many similarities.
As far as your first point, a rationalist (or any historian for that matter) will question if the gemara is referring to Jesus, since ישו הנוצרי was at the time of יהושע בן פרחיה way before the common era, and the guy killed in lod by the name of בן סטדא who had a mother mary was מחויב מיתה for regular aveiros. So if there was a Jesus who died in the year 40, after סנהדרין stopped killing, it was either someone else, misdated, or a fictitious character.
Also, slifkin doesn't deny Torah shbeal peh as Jesus did, he just is against the current chareidi leadership, but Jesus wouldn't have been orthodox given his reject of chachamim. So that is an insult.
Ok guys, here's what you do if you get banned. You don't need to create a new account with a new email address each time. Use your own email address, just add +1 after it, and it will go to your regular email address. For example, if someone's email address is johndoe@gmail.com, johndoe+1@gmail.com would go to that exact same address. +2, +3, +4 etc, as well. So basically you can just create a new account each time, with your same username, and your same email address.
I am trying it now on this comment. I created a new account with my same email address, just added a +1 after it.
Edit: Was a success, I now have 2 accounts with the same email address. This can work for as many bans as you want.
Did you try posting on RJ? I'm pretty sure substack recognizes that and still enforces the ban. There is a different way to have unlimited substack accounts and evade bans indefinitely, I can tell you via email, but you definitely shouldn't do it.
Where did you explain what the maharsha meant? I only see a question on what puroniyos means. ( which ignores the suffering of survivors of war famine and plague).
I happen to think that he means dying early in a non-calamitous manner, but explaining exactly what the Maharsha means is not necessary to rebut Nathan's amaratzus
do you have an answer to Happy's questions? that the maharsha earlier says cherev and raav are included? you tell me what how to reconsile the maharsha please and we'll take it from there. but beware, try not to say anything too "yeshivish" in response
People don't alwayd die from hunger. There is just enough food to mantain life but its jolly uncomfortable. 'Cherev' in that poetic phrase means the threat of the sword. Ie constant fear for one's life.
'Cherev' when used throughout tanach in the context of punishment generally means a maurauding army wielding swords and suchlikr. It doesn’t generally mean A sticking a sword into B.
But if you have a better peshat more than happy to hear.
'Cherev' when used throughout tanach in the context of punishment generally means a maurauding army wielding swords and suchlikr. It doesn’t generally mean A sticking a sword into B.
But if you have a better peshat more than happy to hear.
this is exactly when things get "dodgy" though. that's precisely my point. what you constantly call dodgy and yeshivish is simply because there are real stiros in plenty of sugyos and we try our best bet. as we build up the sugya we can be more confident in some tzdadim over others but to an outsider it seems dodgy.
in this particular case we can offer many answers on either side of the coin, and to really get down to the bottom if we'd have to spend hours learning all the hundreds of different calculations taken in this sugya and come out with our best bet. for natan, let's say, to assume the maharsha is the final say without answering the basic questions means is no way to come to a maskana a nd say that we "ignored" this maharsha. reb elyashiv knew maharsha chidushei agados by heart, because he learned them the real way. unfortuantely we can't ask him, but i'm pretty sure he would be on our side here
What nonsense. He says clearly 'vlo mimissh' and that answers the question he posed.
You have no idea what reb elyashiv would say. Clearly you are approaching the sugyoh with clear bias which is not a great way to learn. Try typing a step back and actually reading the words.
Excellent post, thank you.
Its all about identity. The same thing which angers non-charedim about chareidi refusal to serve is actually the same thing which scare chareidim from serving. The chareidim often give the impression thay see themeselves apart from the rest of the country calling them "ציונים" for example as well as refusal to formally recognize them in their tefilot or to identify with their achievements such as ה' באייר. The reason they do this is the fear of what identifying as Israeli will do to their religious identity. Many Datim go off the derech and dont see this as a פגיעה in their jewishness because what defines their jewishness is חיבור לאומה. Thats what terrifies chareidim. This friction needs to be addrressed among Israelis. Till then were wasting our time.
It looks like that this is being addressed right now, much to the dismay of a certain person...
What do you mean?
There is apparently a huge spirit of achdus now, which certain people are adamantly denying
Correct. Things are going in a positive direction. But some chareidim may be afraid of what this very spirit can bring. אחדות here is considered dangerous. Hopefully the חששות will fall away or be drowned out.
That's just PR mate. The second the guns fall silent, it will be business as usual. The 'gedolim' have not said very much of substance (other than the two previously discussed, one of which could not even bring himself to approve of davening for soldiers)
happy, check this out https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/torah-protects-who-and-from-what/comment/43572407
Funny how Hurricane Nathan is busy quoting the Maharsha, with all his brilliant fans cheering him on. As if they really give a hoot what the Maharsha has to say
thx for the shout out! ;)
I would argue in the opposite direction.
Look at the rules for Milchemes mitzva. A truly Jewish army would not include anyone who is engaged but not married, has built a house but not lived in it, or planted a vineyard and hasn't eaten it's produce.
Most importantly, it wouldn't include anyone who is afraid that they will die in battle because of their sins.
So everyone would have to volunteer at first, but the force would be self selected and only include those who fear G-d.
So really, a Jewish army is totally Haredi.
True. Not necessarily only chareidi. There are many righteous non-chareidim, like the person who wrote "voice from the front". But those rules are for a milchemes reshus. And the Rambam pasken "one who is afraid" means of the battle.
Thats a מלחמת רשות. The rambam says by מלחמת מצווה that everyone goes out.
The Rambam paskens only capturing EY is מלחמת מצוה but not expanding. He doesn't say anything regarding protecting the borders but the לחם משנה says protecting is still רשות, as it is משמע בגמ' סוטה דף מ"ד . I cited this in full a few posts ago.
A. He writes that עזרת ישראל מיד צר is a מלחמת מצוה
B. עזה is part of ארץ ישראל
צר means a siege. The לחם משנה clearly says fighting by the border is still רשות.
עזה is part of EY, but that would only be if they plan on keeping it, which doesn't seem to be the case here. Additionally, since עזה is not part of the גבולי עולי בבל as mentioned in Gittin and ברייתא דתחומין, and the poskim question how to bring about the kedusha when Ezra left it out.
צר means אוייב as in the
המצילנו מצרינו
איש צר ואוייב המן הרע הזה
צרי יהודה ובנימין
הצר הצורר אתכם
The לחם משנה where?
The question of keeping עזה is currently in dispute in the govt.
There's a תשובה in ציץ אליעזר about these issues
The לחם משנה is on the Rambam you quoted. I agree that fighting the terrorists on October 7 and 8 would apply to the rambam but not a counter invasion. I'm no supporter of a cease-fire but it is still a מלחמת רשות . see the Gemara in sota too. It may be a מחלוקת but ע"פ הלחם משנה the halacha isn't so, and I think the pashtus of the gemara is this way.
If you are referencing the ציץ אליעזר regarding the kedusha, yes I've spent a lot of time on it, he has a big chiddush there with 600000 Jews entering the land. Just looked now and yes, he talks about it and brings two sides. The Yaavetz has a long piece on this in מור וקציעה אורח חיים סימן שו and brings both sides as well. There's another question if that can make a kedusha without Jews settling there, such as what's called הניחו למס. see the yaavetz there and חזון איש שביעית סימן ד'. Basically one would have to say all this applies with regard to Gaza, and that the Gov. will hold on to it. To call that מלחמת מצוה is a bit of a stretch, but I guess can't completely be ruled out.
No those are only in מלחמת רשות.
Two more bans at RJ today, so far. I think that's now six in about a week. Natan is on an absolute tear.
He is scared
He used to brush off criticism that results in banning today.
Ironically, I'm actually the good cop in my tochacha.
All I did was cite Rabbenu Yonah in accurate translation. I even said recently that being Shomer Shabbos probably brings on the protection of others' Limud Torah to him as well, regardless of other things he does or believes.
Other than you, who said nothing about him, the comments are much harsher. Comparing him to Jesus? Calling him a rasha? Ouch.
Hes becoming a חרדי.
Not to say anything pro or con what happened 20 years ago, but the people who banned him then felt just as threatened as he does now.
It's a bit ironic that he now banned Sender Goldberg, who was actually one of the people who stuck up for him by the ban 20 years ago, as he's written about on Nathan's blog. All he did was call Natan Jesus. Why does Natan consider that an insult?
I thought using Jesus was a little much, but if he defended him back in the day, a drop of hakaras hatov should be expected and turn a blind eye here. BTW, he's been calling him jesus for years, so the only reason he banned him now is because he's getting very paranoid at people undermining his Chareidi Draft rant.
I'm serious though. As a Rationalist, Natan should have no issue with Jesus. He wasn't Hitler. His main problem was that he went against the Chachomim, which Rationalists obviously have no issue with.
Goldberg is not a troll, and is not just calling him a name. He is bringing out a very valid point, that Natan and Jesus have many similarities.
As far as your first point, a rationalist (or any historian for that matter) will question if the gemara is referring to Jesus, since ישו הנוצרי was at the time of יהושע בן פרחיה way before the common era, and the guy killed in lod by the name of בן סטדא who had a mother mary was מחויב מיתה for regular aveiros. So if there was a Jesus who died in the year 40, after סנהדרין stopped killing, it was either someone else, misdated, or a fictitious character.
Also, slifkin doesn't deny Torah shbeal peh as Jesus did, he just is against the current chareidi leadership, but Jesus wouldn't have been orthodox given his reject of chachamim. So that is an insult.
An unprecedented FIFTH banning.
Am I no. 5 or no. 6?
Either way, I finally made it.
Ok guys, here's what you do if you get banned. You don't need to create a new account with a new email address each time. Use your own email address, just add +1 after it, and it will go to your regular email address. For example, if someone's email address is johndoe@gmail.com, johndoe+1@gmail.com would go to that exact same address. +2, +3, +4 etc, as well. So basically you can just create a new account each time, with your same username, and your same email address.
I am trying it now on this comment. I created a new account with my same email address, just added a +1 after it.
Edit: Was a success, I now have 2 accounts with the same email address. This can work for as many bans as you want.
Did you try posting on RJ? I'm pretty sure substack recognizes that and still enforces the ban. There is a different way to have unlimited substack accounts and evade bans indefinitely, I can tell you via email, but you definitely shouldn't do it.
You are correct. I just tried, and it didn't go through.
I ddressed how it can be done here (since most regular email providers like gmail require a phone number and have a limit on the amount of accounts you can have) https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/of-assemblies-and-evasions
But I also write that I discourage the practice, as it is contrary to derek eretz (proper ethical conduct).
Is there a point?
In 24 or so hours, give or take, you are the fifth!
I made it as well, finally. Was I one the 5?
...and now a FOURTH!
Now a third ban today!
Did you miss the bit where the maharshoh says ולא ממיתה?
Or shall we just give the yeshivish answer 'it's a bit 'lav davka'?
Read the post again. I addressed that
Where did you explain what the maharsha meant? I only see a question on what puroniyos means. ( which ignores the suffering of survivors of war famine and plague).
I happen to think that he means dying early in a non-calamitous manner, but explaining exactly what the Maharsha means is not necessary to rebut Nathan's amaratzus
Where exactly?
do you have an answer to Happy's questions? that the maharsha earlier says cherev and raav are included? you tell me what how to reconsile the maharsha please and we'll take it from there. but beware, try not to say anything too "yeshivish" in response
I asked him 'where exactly' did he address the point and he couldn't respond.
People don't alwayd die from hunger. There is just enough food to mantain life but its jolly uncomfortable. 'Cherev' in that poetic phrase means the threat of the sword. Ie constant fear for one's life.
your pshat in cherev, you'll hafta admit, is pretty dodgy and super yeshivish :/
Yup 🤣🤣🤣
'Cherev' when used throughout tanach in the context of punishment generally means a maurauding army wielding swords and suchlikr. It doesn’t generally mean A sticking a sword into B.
But if you have a better peshat more than happy to hear.
Tanach, lol
Yirmiya
וְהָעָ֣ם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֣מָּה נִבְּאִ֣ים
לָהֶ֡ם יִֽהְי֣וּ מֻשְׁלָכִים֩ בְּחֻצֹ֨ות יְרוּשָׁלִַ֜ם מִפְּנֵ֣י ׀ הָרָעָ֣ב וְהַחֶ֗רֶב וְאֵ֤ין מְקַבֵּר֙ לָהֵ֔מָּה הֵ֣מָּה נְשֵׁיהֶ֔ם וּבְנֵיהֶ֖ם וּבְנֹֽתֵיהֶ֑ם וְשָׁפַכְתִּ֥י עֲלֵיהֶ֖ם אֶת־רָעָתָֽם׃
Yechezkel
שְׁלִשִׁתֵ֞יךְ בַּדֶּ֣בֶר יָמ֗וּתוּ וּבָֽרָעָב֙ יִכְל֣וּ בְתוֹכֵ֔ךְ וְהַ֨שְּׁלִשִׁ֔ית בַּחֶ֖רֶב יִפְּל֣וּ סְבִיבוֹתָ֑יִךְ וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית֙ לְכׇל־ר֣וּחַ אֱזָרֶ֔ה וְחֶ֖רֶב אָרִ֥יק אַחֲרֵיהֶֽם׃
Lol, dodgy yeshivish whataboutism. Keep on digging your hole!
test
just now
'Cherev' when used throughout tanach in the context of punishment generally means a maurauding army wielding swords and suchlikr. It doesn’t generally mean A sticking a sword into B.
But if you have a better peshat more than happy to hear.
I"m more than happy if you have a better one. But the maharshoh is clear 'lo mimisah'
this is exactly when things get "dodgy" though. that's precisely my point. what you constantly call dodgy and yeshivish is simply because there are real stiros in plenty of sugyos and we try our best bet. as we build up the sugya we can be more confident in some tzdadim over others but to an outsider it seems dodgy.
in this particular case we can offer many answers on either side of the coin, and to really get down to the bottom if we'd have to spend hours learning all the hundreds of different calculations taken in this sugya and come out with our best bet. for natan, let's say, to assume the maharsha is the final say without answering the basic questions means is no way to come to a maskana a nd say that we "ignored" this maharsha. reb elyashiv knew maharsha chidushei agados by heart, because he learned them the real way. unfortuantely we can't ask him, but i'm pretty sure he would be on our side here
What nonsense. He says clearly 'vlo mimissh' and that answers the question he posed.
You have no idea what reb elyashiv would say. Clearly you are approaching the sugyoh with clear bias which is not a great way to learn. Try typing a step back and actually reading the words.