In 1992, Lawrence Kaplan wrote an article called “Daas Torah: A Modern Conception of Rabbinic Authority". In it, he makes a whole to do about when the term "Daas Torah" first appeared, and includes a halachic analysis if the Gedolim have the same status as the Bes Din Hagadol. There is no need to guess what his conclusions are.
But these are all side points which distract from the overall issue.
The bottom line is that #1- the Torah contains instructions and hashkafos- meaning there is definitely a Daas of the Torah on all sorts of different matters, and #2- those who understand the Torah better are more qualified to determine what that Daas is. The secularist rejection of these two principles explains why they reject the concept of Daas Torah.
But the term is usually limited to specific rabanim. One can also argue on the scope of this "daas". Whether i should start college is a much more personalized question than the עיקרי אמונה.
Furthermore, there may be gedolim who dont learn all the sources in depth. For example ספרי אמונה such as מורה נבוכים and מהר"ל. Even Tanach. Its no guarantee that every Litvish Gadol was מעיין in Tanach.
One can argue about a lot of things, just like in every area of halacha and hashkafa. But if you agree with #1 and #2, then you agree with Daas Torah.
If you trust your own Gadol more than Rav Dov Lando- that's one thing, I can respect that, because you still agree with #1 and #2. But if your argument against Daas Torah is that you speculate that maybe the Gedolim are not baki enough in Tanach (I am pretty sure people regarded as Gedolim do have a good working knowledge of Tanach), that's just you saying you understand the Torah better than them. It's like me arguing with my Rav in halacha because maybe he didn't see this mareh makom I found on Otzar Hachachma- ridiculous.
That's like asking who decides who's a posek/rabbi. Just because there is an element of subjectivity doesn't mean there's no such thing as a posek/rabbi, or no such thing as psak halacha.
Oh I agree. But you will find, for example, that a massive established talmid chochom who makes an eruv will happily be 'defrocked' by the anti-eruv kannoim. Again, we need to distinguish between theoretical chareidiland and practical.
Which community? The Modox? The Yeshivish community values Limud Tanach, it is just not part of the yeshiva curriculum. Just like they value Seder Taharos, but it is not part of the yeshivah curriculum.
But the entire direction of your questioning is faulty regardless. Let's say our community doesn't value Tanach, and by some bizarre stretch of reasoning, you imagine our Gedolim therefore don't know Tanach, and therefore you imagine you know Torah hashkafa better than our Gedolim- still, what does that have to do with anything?- Do your own Gedolim from your own community know Tanach?- If so, do you hold of their Daas Torah? Then you hold of Daas Torah. You just think your Gedolim (and yourself) knows Torah better than Chareidi Gedolim. Shkoyach.
Tosfos states clearly amoroim don't know pesukim in the torah. It's a mystery why they are not banned, but it's not a big deal if a godol doesn’t know who Iyov's 'friends' were. It's a more of a big deal that some believe chareidim can't possibly be paedophiles.
I don't get this attitude. I don't know if Rav Chaim learned the MN in depth or in enough depth to satisfy you. I don't know if he learned the Tanya or Zohar in depth either.
But who is your Gadol? Let's say Rabbi Thau. You know he learned the entire ספר חסידים in depth? You know he learned אור ה from Rav Chasdai in depth? You know he learned עץ חיים from Rav Chaim Vital in depth? You know he learned the Abarbanel on Yeshaya in depth? What is with the MN that you arbitrarily made it the yardstick for qualifying as a Gadol all of the sudden?
Very nice breakdown, anonymous fellow, shkoyach! And thank you again for helping keep klal ysroel safe!
I have a different way of explaining, not to contradict yours, that without the guidance of the Torah, many people will see certain concepts and since they seem right, assume them to be the foundation of truth and the only thing that matters. For example, the idea of compassion towards another human being is really important, and no one would or should ever deny that. But if compassion is all there is, you can find yourself in some really weird and twisted places, like being anti-Israel, "pro-choice" and so on. You'll definitely be anti the idea of stoning people who willingly violate Shabbos.
The Torah teaches when to apply all the different concepts, and more importantly, when *not* to apply them. The Torah provides a framework larger than ourselves which we can learn from constantly about what *really* is best for mankind as a whole and/or every individual personally.
Those who deny the importance of learning values from the Torah will always have other values in their place (such as bashing chareidim, just saying) because their daas never appreciated Hashem's larger view of what's important. (I'm not saying there isn't anything wrong with he chareidi culture, but, as we always say, the chareidi value system is where it's at...)
That's easy.The torah says about the vaccine, go discuss with doctors you trust (first hand, not what some Rebbele claims doctors have told him, or what some askonim told the rebbeleh the doctor said.
Just like eating on YK.
PS the article seqways into 'torah' rather than 'da'as torah'.
Again, it's not about you. There are many many people out there who will consider their rebbelahs as daas torah over doctors, when the rebbelah know gurnisht about vaccines.
My question to you is where do you draw the line? We both accept rabbonim are there for kitchen sheilas, the converse with vaccines at the other end of the scale. So where is the line?
It's also not what unspecified many many people out there will do, but about the concept of Daas Torah. You think vaccines are poshut, and so do I. So that is personally where I would draw the line, I don't ask my shul rov about vaccines, let alone Gedolim.
The concept of da'as torah in that rabbonim cannot make mistakes (like the Pope)? Rabbonim can never be held to account as they are not accountable to anybody? Da'as Torah in that a rabbi has a unique insight from his learning to enable him to tell you whether or not to go into a particular business deal? Da'as torah to tell you how to name your baby or who to marry? Da'as torah to give sensitive and critical marriage counselling? Da'as torah to create a new mitzvoh of who to vote for?Or da'as torah that the rabbi knows his kitchen shailos?
You have not defined the term at all well, so any discussion is a complete waste of time.
PS It's well established in the chassidish world that a Rebbe can have da'as torah without particularly good torah knowledge at all (mumbling about nitzozos whilst eating tzimmes does not count) so that also needs explanation.
Are you saying that if I have a question on the safety of the COVID vaccine the torah says I should go ask for advice from a Talmid Chcohom with Yiras Shomayim who I have a personal relationship with?
"The polar opposite of that is one who sets out to impose his own agenda, ideas and values that he derived from other sources, upon God's revelation. Such a person corrupts the Torah and destroys any possibility of being in relationship with God. As such, he is completely rejected from God's eternity."
Can you give us an example? I'm not sure what you are saying here
It's well known that the DL (even the Chardali version) do not hold of 'da'as torah' in the way understood by charedim. It's a little odd that your friend should pen such an article. Odd indeed.
Ok, if you say so. I'm not convinced it is the same form of 'da'as torah' - do some of them really believe that their rabbis can opine on the Covid vaccine because of their 'da'as torah'? Or is it merely narrow political matters concerning 'yishuv eretz yisroel'?
Walder. Yeah. The Yated Ne'eman, the mouthpiece of Litvshe da'as torah refused to say anything. Can we assume Litvishe 'da'as torah' therefore states he was innocent? Says it all really.
This whole abuse issue, which chareidiland has been grappling with for the last 20 years or so, says everything you need to know about 'da'as torah'. Torah, yes. Da'as, the Jury is still out.
The meforshim already deal with the question, that is good advice shouldn't require 'permission'. I believe Rav Moshe Shapiro answers that in this particular case, because moshe was a novi hashem when delivering the halochoh, special permission was needed from Hashem to adopt Yisro's approach. In any event, it's a little obvious when setting up a system of dayonim to administer mishpot, there are halochos that need to be kept, and this is why Moshe went to Hashem.
In 1992, Lawrence Kaplan wrote an article called “Daas Torah: A Modern Conception of Rabbinic Authority". In it, he makes a whole to do about when the term "Daas Torah" first appeared, and includes a halachic analysis if the Gedolim have the same status as the Bes Din Hagadol. There is no need to guess what his conclusions are.
But these are all side points which distract from the overall issue.
The bottom line is that #1- the Torah contains instructions and hashkafos- meaning there is definitely a Daas of the Torah on all sorts of different matters, and #2- those who understand the Torah better are more qualified to determine what that Daas is. The secularist rejection of these two principles explains why they reject the concept of Daas Torah.
But the term is usually limited to specific rabanim. One can also argue on the scope of this "daas". Whether i should start college is a much more personalized question than the עיקרי אמונה.
Furthermore, there may be gedolim who dont learn all the sources in depth. For example ספרי אמונה such as מורה נבוכים and מהר"ל. Even Tanach. Its no guarantee that every Litvish Gadol was מעיין in Tanach.
One can argue about a lot of things, just like in every area of halacha and hashkafa. But if you agree with #1 and #2, then you agree with Daas Torah.
If you trust your own Gadol more than Rav Dov Lando- that's one thing, I can respect that, because you still agree with #1 and #2. But if your argument against Daas Torah is that you speculate that maybe the Gedolim are not baki enough in Tanach (I am pretty sure people regarded as Gedolim do have a good working knowledge of Tanach), that's just you saying you understand the Torah better than them. It's like me arguing with my Rav in halacha because maybe he didn't see this mareh makom I found on Otzar Hachachma- ridiculous.
So who decides who is a 'godol'? Seems rather subjective, which defeats the whole purpose.
PS We all know the answer. Anybody who disagrees with my hashkofos or not chunradik enough is not a 'godol'
"By the chassidim' torah knowledge is not a pre-requisite to have da'as torah, so that also raises difficulties.
That's like asking who decides who's a posek/rabbi. Just because there is an element of subjectivity doesn't mean there's no such thing as a posek/rabbi, or no such thing as psak halacha.
Oh I agree. But you will find, for example, that a massive established talmid chochom who makes an eruv will happily be 'defrocked' by the anti-eruv kannoim. Again, we need to distinguish between theoretical chareidiland and practical.
Machlokes, including vicious machlokes, has always been a part of our culture.
What about a gadol coming from a community which dosent value לימוד תנ"ך?
Which community? The Modox? The Yeshivish community values Limud Tanach, it is just not part of the yeshiva curriculum. Just like they value Seder Taharos, but it is not part of the yeshivah curriculum.
But the entire direction of your questioning is faulty regardless. Let's say our community doesn't value Tanach, and by some bizarre stretch of reasoning, you imagine our Gedolim therefore don't know Tanach, and therefore you imagine you know Torah hashkafa better than our Gedolim- still, what does that have to do with anything?- Do your own Gedolim from your own community know Tanach?- If so, do you hold of their Daas Torah? Then you hold of Daas Torah. You just think your Gedolim (and yourself) knows Torah better than Chareidi Gedolim. Shkoyach.
Tosfos states clearly amoroim don't know pesukim in the torah. It's a mystery why they are not banned, but it's not a big deal if a godol doesn’t know who Iyov's 'friends' were. It's a more of a big deal that some believe chareidim can't possibly be paedophiles.
What does that Tosafos have to do with anything.
We know that rav chaim learned מורה נבוכים in depth?
I don't get this attitude. I don't know if Rav Chaim learned the MN in depth or in enough depth to satisfy you. I don't know if he learned the Tanya or Zohar in depth either.
But who is your Gadol? Let's say Rabbi Thau. You know he learned the entire ספר חסידים in depth? You know he learned אור ה from Rav Chasdai in depth? You know he learned עץ חיים from Rav Chaim Vital in depth? You know he learned the Abarbanel on Yeshaya in depth? What is with the MN that you arbitrarily made it the yardstick for qualifying as a Gadol all of the sudden?
Very nice breakdown, anonymous fellow, shkoyach! And thank you again for helping keep klal ysroel safe!
I have a different way of explaining, not to contradict yours, that without the guidance of the Torah, many people will see certain concepts and since they seem right, assume them to be the foundation of truth and the only thing that matters. For example, the idea of compassion towards another human being is really important, and no one would or should ever deny that. But if compassion is all there is, you can find yourself in some really weird and twisted places, like being anti-Israel, "pro-choice" and so on. You'll definitely be anti the idea of stoning people who willingly violate Shabbos.
The Torah teaches when to apply all the different concepts, and more importantly, when *not* to apply them. The Torah provides a framework larger than ourselves which we can learn from constantly about what *really* is best for mankind as a whole and/or every individual personally.
Those who deny the importance of learning values from the Torah will always have other values in their place (such as bashing chareidim, just saying) because their daas never appreciated Hashem's larger view of what's important. (I'm not saying there isn't anything wrong with he chareidi culture, but, as we always say, the chareidi value system is where it's at...)
The article itself, about da'as torah, offers no definition of 'da'as torah'. Quite typical really.
Does the author include in 'da'as torah' that Rabbonim are able to opine on the Covid (or any) vaccine? Yes or no?
PS - Moshe checked with Hashem, not with da'as torah. Details matter.
The whole article defines Daas Torah.
What do you think, does the Torah have what to say about taking the vaccine? Does the Torah have what to say on any matter of life and death?
Daas Torah is the idea of trying to determine what Hashem wants- the Torah is Dvar Hashem.
That's easy.The torah says about the vaccine, go discuss with doctors you trust (first hand, not what some Rebbele claims doctors have told him, or what some askonim told the rebbeleh the doctor said.
Just like eating on YK.
PS the article seqways into 'torah' rather than 'da'as torah'.
So the news is you think some Torah questions are more easily answered than others? I think most would agree with that.
Again, it's not about you. There are many many people out there who will consider their rebbelahs as daas torah over doctors, when the rebbelah know gurnisht about vaccines.
My question to you is where do you draw the line? We both accept rabbonim are there for kitchen sheilas, the converse with vaccines at the other end of the scale. So where is the line?
It's also not what unspecified many many people out there will do, but about the concept of Daas Torah. You think vaccines are poshut, and so do I. So that is personally where I would draw the line, I don't ask my shul rov about vaccines, let alone Gedolim.
The concept of da'as torah in that rabbonim cannot make mistakes (like the Pope)? Rabbonim can never be held to account as they are not accountable to anybody? Da'as Torah in that a rabbi has a unique insight from his learning to enable him to tell you whether or not to go into a particular business deal? Da'as torah to tell you how to name your baby or who to marry? Da'as torah to give sensitive and critical marriage counselling? Da'as torah to create a new mitzvoh of who to vote for?Or da'as torah that the rabbi knows his kitchen shailos?
You have not defined the term at all well, so any discussion is a complete waste of time.
PS It's well established in the chassidish world that a Rebbe can have da'as torah without particularly good torah knowledge at all (mumbling about nitzozos whilst eating tzimmes does not count) so that also needs explanation.
Are you saying that if I have a question on the safety of the COVID vaccine the torah says I should go ask for advice from a Talmid Chcohom with Yiras Shomayim who I have a personal relationship with?
"The polar opposite of that is one who sets out to impose his own agenda, ideas and values that he derived from other sources, upon God's revelation. Such a person corrupts the Torah and destroys any possibility of being in relationship with God. As such, he is completely rejected from God's eternity."
Can you give us an example? I'm not sure what you are saying here
I think he means people like DNS and DMA and DBL and PDS
It's well known that the DL (even the Chardali version) do not hold of 'da'as torah' in the way understood by charedim. It's a little odd that your friend should pen such an article. Odd indeed.
https://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=63224&hilit=%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%AA+%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94
Some chardal do. Like Har Hamor.
Ok, if you say so. I'm not convinced it is the same form of 'da'as torah' - do some of them really believe that their rabbis can opine on the Covid vaccine because of their 'da'as torah'? Or is it merely narrow political matters concerning 'yishuv eretz yisroel'?
They are pro-vax. They opined on chaim walder.
Walder. Yeah. The Yated Ne'eman, the mouthpiece of Litvshe da'as torah refused to say anything. Can we assume Litvishe 'da'as torah' therefore states he was innocent? Says it all really.
This whole abuse issue, which chareidiland has been grappling with for the last 20 years or so, says everything you need to know about 'da'as torah'. Torah, yes. Da'as, the Jury is still out.
The meforshim already deal with the question, that is good advice shouldn't require 'permission'. I believe Rav Moshe Shapiro answers that in this particular case, because moshe was a novi hashem when delivering the halochoh, special permission was needed from Hashem to adopt Yisro's approach. In any event, it's a little obvious when setting up a system of dayonim to administer mishpot, there are halochos that need to be kept, and this is why Moshe went to Hashem.