Natan if you are reading this (I know you probably will!), I wanted to comment as follows:
"The problem with your theory is that Judaism is absolutely permeated with mysticism all the way through Torah, Neviim, Kesubim, Medrash, Mishnah, Talmud, the RAMBAM and the entire Mesorah through our present day. Creation, miracles, Matan Torah, tefilah, hashgachas Hashem, s'char v'onesh, Olam Haba, Techias Hameisim, Malachim (which the Rambam calls non-physical 'intelligences"), Hashem Himself, a very large number of mitzvos, these are all obvious reflections of the mysticism you so revile. Sorry, you have invented a completely fictitious new religion.
Meanwhile, while perhaps excessive mysticism can be loosely blamed for some deaths (although only through a very twisted and convoluted thought process) , the excessive rationalism of the Haskalah can be blamed for the sorry state of Judaism today, where 80% of Jews raise their children to chillul Shabbos, znus, and functional atheism."
IYH HaRav HaGaon Mecharker will have a post tomorrow or the next day (but we hope tomorrow) debunking this new religion that Natan and his friends invented.
(This doesn't mean that you should celebrate Lag Baomer with bonfires etc. That's not my minhag either!)
The quote from Michael Avraham seems unfair. One is allowed to say whatever they want as long as they don't pasken. I don't know that Michael Avraham regards himself as a posek, so what's the problem?
Wow, what a great post! Hagaon R’ HGL shlita’s style is truly amazing and I enjoyed this post immensely! One comment I have: If Rabbi Slifkin is an apikorus, which I believe he is, why should he do the biking himself? Aren’t there many sources in Chazal about how to deal with apikursim? I’m not advocating anything, chas veshalom, especially bazman hazah, see Chazon Ish YD 2:16. No need to ban or delete anything. Nothing unethical over here. I’m just saying.... Unrelatedly, I’m curious why Chazal spoke of “moridin velo maalin?” Why not “serve him to your dog”? Maybe the answer is that an apikorus’s body is so repugnant that you shouldn’t have any benefit from it, even as dog food. In which case, maybe we shouldn’t harvest its organs either, even if it would benefit people greatly. Similarly, we could understand why it doesn’t say anything about working an apikorus until he expires. Maybe we don’t want to derive any benefit from him whatsoever (though there’s no indication that you can’t get a good laugh from him). One additional point is that we find some authorities who understand the halachah of not nursing from a non-Jew that it’s because we don’t want part of an impure non-Jew inside a Jew, not necessarily because of eating non-kosher food (see Ran, Avodah Zarah 7b, Rama YD 81:7, see also Rashi, Sotah 12b, s.v. Ess Me). According to Rambam (Hilchos Avodah Zarah 2:5, Hilchos Eidus 11:10, Hilchos Mamrim 3:2, Hilchos Eivel 1:10, and elsewhere), an apikorus is not a Jew. Thus, it makes sense not to want part of an apikorus inside a Jew. Maybe we could be meikel for serious cases, but it seems like a question for the poskim to consider. Maybe it’s comparable to the discussion about artificial insemination from a non-Jew, and maybe this angle is already addressed, I don’t know (or I don’t remember).
I’d also like to comment on what R’ HGL shlita wrote, “Natan’s robust, handsome body.” What does handsome have to do with anything? Maybe he meant Natan looks like he’s in good shape, but that’s a bit of a stretch in the definition of the word “handsome,” and also I’m not so sure if he’s right, maybe it would be worthwhile to investigate.
One final comment about the shtikel at the end on Lev 24:14. I don’t quite get why the Torah would condition the transplant on there being an attack. Is that the only way to determine if one person is more worthy than another? Especially if being an am haaretz or talmid chacham is already considered a valid metric for determinig worth, like R’ HGL shlita wrote previously, that certainly is something that can be determined other ways. Perhaps the Torah is simply giving an example where one person is less worthy than the other and the more worthy person requires a transplant? That seems a little bit of a dochek, veyesh le’ayin.
Again, this post was really terrific! Brilliant and well written as usual! Keep up the great work!
Do you treat an eight month gestation age premature baby as muktzah? Presumably you wouldn’t be mechalel shabbos for a cardiac arrest victim who has stopped breathing. After all, chazal say he is dead.
Friends, on Natan's new post, https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/are-you-a-lag-bomer-grinch, he has limited comments to paid subscribers! I wonder why? Maybe he is sick of our well-intentioned, constructive criticism?
Natan if you are reading this (I know you probably will!), I wanted to comment as follows:
"The problem with your theory is that Judaism is absolutely permeated with mysticism all the way through Torah, Neviim, Kesubim, Medrash, Mishnah, Talmud, the RAMBAM and the entire Mesorah through our present day. Creation, miracles, Matan Torah, tefilah, hashgachas Hashem, s'char v'onesh, Olam Haba, Techias Hameisim, Malachim (which the Rambam calls non-physical 'intelligences"), Hashem Himself, a very large number of mitzvos, these are all obvious reflections of the mysticism you so revile. Sorry, you have invented a completely fictitious new religion.
Meanwhile, while perhaps excessive mysticism can be loosely blamed for some deaths (although only through a very twisted and convoluted thought process) , the excessive rationalism of the Haskalah can be blamed for the sorry state of Judaism today, where 80% of Jews raise their children to chillul Shabbos, znus, and functional atheism."
IYH HaRav HaGaon Mecharker will have a post tomorrow or the next day (but we hope tomorrow) debunking this new religion that Natan and his friends invented.
(This doesn't mean that you should celebrate Lag Baomer with bonfires etc. That's not my minhag either!)
"being the source of much mirth and entertainment for us at Irrationalist Modoxism!"
Also - If it weren't for NS, we would be denied the pleasure of reading the penetrating and witty responses of Irrationalist Modox!!
Sorry, but this article has too many personal attacks for my taste. As I wrote already, this way of writing is counter-productive.
This was very funny though it was a bit over the top. (cf. Ash's comment)
The quote from Michael Avraham seems unfair. One is allowed to say whatever they want as long as they don't pasken. I don't know that Michael Avraham regards himself as a posek, so what's the problem?
(And you missed a bit in the Hebrew).
Wow, what a great post! Hagaon R’ HGL shlita’s style is truly amazing and I enjoyed this post immensely! One comment I have: If Rabbi Slifkin is an apikorus, which I believe he is, why should he do the biking himself? Aren’t there many sources in Chazal about how to deal with apikursim? I’m not advocating anything, chas veshalom, especially bazman hazah, see Chazon Ish YD 2:16. No need to ban or delete anything. Nothing unethical over here. I’m just saying.... Unrelatedly, I’m curious why Chazal spoke of “moridin velo maalin?” Why not “serve him to your dog”? Maybe the answer is that an apikorus’s body is so repugnant that you shouldn’t have any benefit from it, even as dog food. In which case, maybe we shouldn’t harvest its organs either, even if it would benefit people greatly. Similarly, we could understand why it doesn’t say anything about working an apikorus until he expires. Maybe we don’t want to derive any benefit from him whatsoever (though there’s no indication that you can’t get a good laugh from him). One additional point is that we find some authorities who understand the halachah of not nursing from a non-Jew that it’s because we don’t want part of an impure non-Jew inside a Jew, not necessarily because of eating non-kosher food (see Ran, Avodah Zarah 7b, Rama YD 81:7, see also Rashi, Sotah 12b, s.v. Ess Me). According to Rambam (Hilchos Avodah Zarah 2:5, Hilchos Eidus 11:10, Hilchos Mamrim 3:2, Hilchos Eivel 1:10, and elsewhere), an apikorus is not a Jew. Thus, it makes sense not to want part of an apikorus inside a Jew. Maybe we could be meikel for serious cases, but it seems like a question for the poskim to consider. Maybe it’s comparable to the discussion about artificial insemination from a non-Jew, and maybe this angle is already addressed, I don’t know (or I don’t remember).
I’d also like to comment on what R’ HGL shlita wrote, “Natan’s robust, handsome body.” What does handsome have to do with anything? Maybe he meant Natan looks like he’s in good shape, but that’s a bit of a stretch in the definition of the word “handsome,” and also I’m not so sure if he’s right, maybe it would be worthwhile to investigate.
One final comment about the shtikel at the end on Lev 24:14. I don’t quite get why the Torah would condition the transplant on there being an attack. Is that the only way to determine if one person is more worthy than another? Especially if being an am haaretz or talmid chacham is already considered a valid metric for determinig worth, like R’ HGL shlita wrote previously, that certainly is something that can be determined other ways. Perhaps the Torah is simply giving an example where one person is less worthy than the other and the more worthy person requires a transplant? That seems a little bit of a dochek, veyesh le’ayin.
Again, this post was really terrific! Brilliant and well written as usual! Keep up the great work!
A day where happy posts is a better day!
Wow, what pigheaded insensitivity. What happened to tikkun olam?
Why the obsession with Slifkin? He has very little relevance these days in the Jewish world......
This is extremely vicious and personal. Not a good look, happy.
You can't fight leitzanus with logic.
Do you treat an eight month gestation age premature baby as muktzah? Presumably you wouldn’t be mechalel shabbos for a cardiac arrest victim who has stopped breathing. After all, chazal say he is dead.