Who wants to bet that our best friend's next post will be about how the judicial reform flies in the face of Isaiah's message, and this is what Tisha b'Av is all about?
בית הלל אומ' מגביהין מעל השלחן עצמות וקלפין, בית שמיי אומ' מסלק את הטבלה כולה ומנערה. זכריה בן אבקילס לא היה נוהג לא כדברי בית שמיי ולא כדברי בית הלל, אלא נוטל ומשליך לאחר המטה. אמ' ר' יוסה ענותנותו של ר' זכריה בן אבקילס היא שרפה את ההיכל
It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today. The purpose of the navi was to expose even the smallest flaw, with the hope that this flaw would be corrected. The navi was merciless in his exposures. He showed no favoritism, and no one was immune from his harsh exposures.
A proper reading of the pesukim actually shows this. The people were not judged for not bringing the korbanos, they were criticized for bringing the korbanos insincerely. The one pasuk that is cited to show 'giluy arayos' speaks about young women walking flirtatiously. It does not say that they actually slept with each other! The pasuk cited to show bloodshed, speaks about King Menashe, who was more than 30 years before the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh.
They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem. They served Hashem, brought the korbanos properly, and gathered in the Beis Hamikdosh to daven. The Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh were set aside as holy days. (Yeshaya 1:11 - 13)
The gemara says that there were more than 1,000,000 prophets among our people!! The requirements for becoming a prophet are not easy!
The prophet called out the interpersonal sins of the people. This is not as the 'reformers' would have us believe that they were too religious, that is a ridiculous claim. Has the people been less religious in any other area, the prophet would have called them out on that as well!
This is R' Avigdor Miller's shittah, which he gets from R' Yitzhak Isaac Halevy Rabinowitz in the Doros Harishonim, but it is a tremendous chiddush, and it is clearly against the opinion of several Rishonim.
No idea what RES said about these things, but if you have RAM's books, some of them have on the bottom of the title page that the book is based on RYEHLR's Doros Harishonim.
He was definitely very influenced by RYEH, I meant that he got his approach originally from RES. He definitely expounded on it afterwards.
It's not only RES, it's actually the opinion of all baalei mussar, that the aveiros mentioned in Pesukim or Chazal aren't literal. Esav was really a huge tzaddik, so was Lot, etc., see for example chochma umussar from the Alter of Kelm. RES went with this approach, and wrote kuntereisim about it. There are very interesting letters from the chazon ish to Rav Eizik Sher, criticizing this approach, printed in one of the volumes of גנזים ותשובות חזו"א.
This number I can believe, over the 800 years before the churban. They clearly abounded in great numbers in Shmuel's time. Roving bands of them. People seeking them to find lost objects and other seemingly minor concerns. Same thing. Rav Miller says they weren't originally called prophets. They were called others terms like seers. The difference is the role. Something about the transition to malchus and assuming a role of rebuker brought about the change in terminology. Something like that.
It does seem like this was a national aspiration. Not material abundance or prosperity. A deep connection to Hashem. In the absense of prophecy and the ability to aspire, the charedim aspire to what we can today.
There were 48 so to speak world class Neviim. Then another [1,200,000] lesser ones. The 48 are way past our description (I assume you acknowledge their literal existence); the lesser ones too. As we accept the incredible 48 we can accept the incredible others.
I can't really address you, only feel for you & wish you the best. I write to share with other readers my thoughts on what you wrote
We assume a large number is an exaggeration when the literal reading does not make sense. When the gemara (gitin 58b) speaks about the huge number of people killed in the fall of Beitar, we can say that the numbers are exaggerated, because it does not make sense to take them literally.
In this case, there is no reason to assume the numbers are exaggerated. There is no problem with taking the numbers literally.
"It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today."
This is what Rav Miller demonstrated over and over. Even the wicked among them abided by the Torah in ways that would be unexpected to us. And not just in ritual matters. Bein adam l'chaveiro too.
"They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem. They served Hashem, brought the korbanos properly, and gathered in the Beis Hamikdosh to daven. The Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh were set aside as holy days. "
Are you familiar with the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom? The shomrim at the borders to stop people from the Northern Kingdom going to the beis hamikdosh with their karbonos?
"They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem". So where is that hetter brought down? Avodah Zoroh is Avodah Zoroh, mate.
"It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today". Source please. Next you will be telling me they spent 90% of the waking hours in the beis hemdrash learning torah, and there were numerous yeshivas scattered around just like today. Some may have strayed into wearing blue shirts but the majority was faithful to the mesorah of white shirts and borsalinos. And sandals without socks, a few more mizrachi types may have gone that way.
There were some periods were there was torah knowledge throughout the land, true, but a very small proportion. Why exactly was the Northern Kingdom exiled, if they were such tzadikim, far greater than today?
See Melachim 1, perek 18 pasuk 21. The pasuk says clearly that the people worshipped Hashem and the baal.
See also Melachim 2 perek 10, where Yehu destroyed the baal worshippers. 70 guards with swords were enough to surround the building and kill all of them. The building was obviously not very big, and there were obviously not very many people inside if 7- guards with swords were expected to kill all the people inside. In that same perek it describes how they destroyed the house of baal, it uses the singular, there was only 1 such place.
See also Melachim 1 perek 20 pasuk 31, that wicked King Achav had a kindly reputation.
When there were prophets among the people, Hashem had very high expectations from the people. Even a small amount of idol worship was enough to bring punishment to the people.
And the American people have 'In God we trust' on their bank notes. I have no doubt people flitted between Hashem and the Ba'al. When Ba'al let them down, they may well have tried the old God of the Jews, as the academics call him YHWH. Menashe tried him too, and the pot broke.
Presumably Melachim 2 perek refers to a small ba'al shteible type of arrangement. Maybe a ba'al minyan factory. They may also have had numerous private ba'al minyonin in their homes.
It's not the mainstream view. The mainstream view was that AZ was rampant throughout the land, it was irresistible force so much that menashe (again) told Rav Ashi that Rav Ashi would run after it had he lived in that era. The anshei knesses hagdeolah davened that it should be removed, they succeeded in subduing it (they didn't remove it, as is often erroneously believed). If it was only a few, it wouldn't have been such a problem.
Need I quote to you your own words about saying things without sources, or making things up? They were rather uncomplimentary.
You did not say anything about the pasuk saying 70 guards with swords killed ALL of the baal worshippers. The pasuk itself says that he eradicated the baal worship. There could not have been too many of them.
Even a few idol worshippers is a problem in Hashem's eyes. When the shechinah was tangibly present, and when prophets walked the land, Hashem had VERY high standards for His holy people.
"This same theme repeats itself all throughout the Latter Prophets. Far from a description of religious hypocrites who keep all the ritual commandments but are otherwise wicked rogues, they paint a picture of a "Reform-movement" sinful nation that has abandoned Hashem, has forsaken His Torah, that engages in idolatry, that doesn't observe any of the Mitzvos, whether those between man and God or those between man and his fellow."
Clearly you haven't learned much nevi'im acharonim. Mitzvos between man and God are hardly mentioned other than AZ. Sometimes shabbos, the odd mention of failure to keep shmittah, but you won't find much about learning more torah and not having enough chumras. They were meticulous in hilchos karbonos, as a matter of ritual, you find no criticim there, because Yehudah controlled the BH and with a few exceptions their kings were ok.
On the contrary, go and ask a 'poor guy' about his experiences in 2023 trying to take a 'rich guy' to beis din, or parents who cannot get their kids into a school due to the supposed elitisim of the machers and similar, consider how the rabbonim will never critise gevirim and go of there way to flatter them, consider the violence of charedi society, the tone of the pashkevilim etc and the criticisms of the neviim ressonate perfectly with today's scene.
Clearly you didn't read the post including the very line you pasted. "...has forsaken His Torah, that engages in *idolatry*, that doesn't observe any of the Mitzvos, whether those between man and God or those between man and his fellow."
" They were meticulous in hilchos karbonos, as a matter of ritual, you find no criticim there, because Yehudah controlled the BH and with a few exceptions their kings were ok"-uh..no. The wicked kings were NOT meticulous in hilchos korbanos. And the Neviim were generally not complaining about the righteous kings. I can tell you never went through Neviim even once.
To the contrary, I hear lots of rich guys complaining about how Beis Din messed them over. But we still have a lot of work to do. "The violence of chareidi society"-LOL!!!!
"The criticisms of the neviim resonate perfectly with today's scene"- many of them indeed do (but not your ta'anos, which I can only believes comes from a place of mental illness), which is why the Geulah hasn't come yet. Indeed, this is why for chareidim, Tisha b'Av is a day of introspection, rather than trying to blame the problems on other, barely-observant communities.
I am not sure why you think gerrers bashing up gerrers, trash burning, stone throwing, store burning, violence in Beis Shemesh, violence in Ponevez etc etc is something to LOL about. The most violent Jewish group in Israel today are chareidim. That is a non debatable fact.
Yehudah, that controlled the beis hamedrash had very few bad kings.
And you of course missed my caveat 'apart from AZ".
You nitpick my words of course, looking for silly little points you can go to town on and score little points. For obvious reasons, you nevel deal with my main point. I'm not interested in debating like that. Good bye.
"Yehudah, that controlled the beis hamedrash had very few bad kings.", yes, and the Neviim were not generally complaining about the good ones. I guess you missed that part? 😂
"The most violent Jewish group in Israel today are chareidim. That is a non debatable fact."- this just shows how deluded and mentally ill you are. Seek help.
What is "apart from AZ"? They abandoned Hashem completely. AZ was just the worst sin, but it is very clear that they forsook Hashem and transgressed the entire Torah.
"It is very clear that they forsook Hashem and transgressed the entire Torah". Indeed, the question is why the stress on interpersonal matters (plus AZ) and not the entire torah? Why does the navi talk constantly about ivus hadin, bein odom l'chaveiroh, corruption of leadership, affliction of the poor and downtrodden, and never things like not learning enough torah? Keeping too many kulos? Not hearing brisker tekias?
What do you think is the lesson for us (because the novi talks to every generation)? Maybe it to tell us what we should be focussing on?
It's not "plus" AZ. AZ means they abandoned Hashem. The same terrible middos that caused them to treat Hashem poorly caused them to treat their fellow man poorly as well.
One of the lessons is that there is no such thing as an ethical secular Jewish state. If you abandon Hashem, that means you are a terrible person.
The lessons for the chareidim is that we need to do better in all areas, both bain adam l'Makom and bain adam l'chaveiro.
You've lost the Lamed, the first letter of the first word of the passage you quoted from chapter 1 of ספר ישעיהו. Please fix that. Not מה, but למה. Thanks.
There were some comments at RJ about the strategy of the gedolim was to keep genuine scholars away from the position of Chief Rabbi, and mentioned Shlomo Goren in particular as a reason to do so, because they have an inclination to innovate. They want relative lightweights in the position who won't damage things. I think that's a reasonable summary of what I read. I agree. I honestly don't know anything about him except for this.
After the (obviously faked) Apollo 11 moon landing, he proposed a changed to Bircas Levana, because, obviously, the moon can be touched, and chaza"l got that one wrong.
That's actually not what he said (the media got it wrong, as usual).
Anyway, there were many מחלוקות about him, and I don't recall reading (I wan't born yet when he was elected, since I'm 47 years old) that this issue was one of the main problems raised.
WRT to the רבנות הראשית, AFAIK some of the Gedolim (esp. the גרי"ש אלישיב זצ"ל) didn't want certain canidates bec. they were worried about their שיטות פסיקה והנהגה, not bec. they wanted lightweights ח"ו.
Unfortunately, מחרחרי ריב spread false information about one of the greatest ת"ח and פוסקים (מורינו ורבינו הגאון רבי יעקב אריאל שליט"א and prevented his election.
I was close to one of the lesser known רבנים involved (who told us wha we needed to know לתועלת) to know this.
I admittedly put my own color on whatever did transpire. And that is not appropriate. Nonetheless, it seems reasonable to assume, regardless whatever color media added, that there was a proposal to emend the accepted tefilla for Bircas Levana. That there was a variant previously in use does not justify reviving it.
Even if you don't know the actual story, was such a proposal proffered? That's what I want to know.
Because, look, from my perspective, how the Tzadokim and Beitustim could twist around straightforward hashkafic advice into a worldview where there is no s'char v'onesh is beyond me, yet they did.
Also, from my perspective, while Rabbi Shlomo Goren's gadlus may be self-evident, it is also self-evident how such a seemingly inconsequential proposal could, 50+ years on, take root among his most ardent talmidim and supporters, and produce rotten fruit (and I don't know anything else he might have said). Consider how the idolization of science and human achievement has made inroads into former strongholds of Torah.
I don't know the politics or machinations or history, but if there were efforts by the gedolim to keep him out of office or something to that effect, I support it. Even if their justifications are not my justifications. And if I understood that wrong, well, then I don't.
Here is a link of my own. Consider, if you will, the 28 minutes of this video (from a BBC anthology series at the time), aired in 1968, 55 years later.
Here's a way to put it that I think you can understand. As far as me. I wasn't really there, but I was almost three at the time, and I definitely have some vague memories watching things like that (and first run Star Trek). My dad watched it on our then-enormous 25" COLOR with remote (!!!) TV. I think it weighed like 200 or more pounds. So, I grew up in a Jewish and spellbound (like much of but certainly not all of humanity) home. A well-off enough one at the time to see it on what was then I think the biggest TV you could get. They were huge and expensive.
You weren't there either, as far as I know.
However, in answer to a serious shaila, more time and more thought could have been given to a response. There were serious scientists of the time maintaining that the moon was plasma, not something we could land on, and it was all nothing, years before the landing. BBC aired one we know of, at least. Who was Nasa helmed by? Who was JPL founded by? A gadol should not respond in a flippant manner to a question of potentially deep theological import. I don't think this requires hindsight to believe he should have delved deeper into the subject before responding.
It sounds like something transpired. Whatever it was, I hope this addresses it fairly, regardless of what the media reported.
Is it possible to get a b'ktizur of my original question? Did he propose a change to the nusach or not?
I see a shaila asked about the posuk and he replied that an astronaut isn't "touching" the moon because he's encased in a spacesuit. Something like that. That's still disingenuous and not what our mesorah says, of course. Technically, if we can land on the moon, we can touch it. There is no "going" to the moon, period. The rest, I can't follow.
If the media got it wrong, then I would very much appreciate to know what really happened regarding this specific incident.
I don't know what issues were raised about him. It's irrelevant if this issue was not one of them, if it was still an actual issue. Which depends on what actually transpired, of course.
I didn't know the Rambam held the moon is a spiritual, ie angelic, form.
From our limited understanding of how the world actually is, most people I know in the flat earth community who investigate these things (and there are some) hold the sun and moon to be projections of some sort, not physical bodies we can touch.
Before I realized I was banned at RJ, I had penned this comment in response to דוד™️:
"Read the Psukim along with our mesorah..."
Our mesorah clarifies and explains all the criticisms of Yeshaya in a way that WE can understand what he means, beyond meaningless tripe like, "He says that we have to increase our devotion to justice." Spoken like a true Social Justice Warrior. Our mesora is specific to what offenses and injustices his stirringly poetic words refer to, and what we need to work on and correct.
He reads and understands Nach similarly to the way Christians do, which is superficially.
END
He really does sounds more and more like a Reform rabbi or even a Christian than a Ben Torah.
It is hard to believe that Natan was granted smicha from Ohr Sameach, a fine institution with many excellent rabbis that I spent almost all of 1991 at. How could he emerge from there with such a warped hashkafa? And note, his hashkafa was warped before he became controversial. It has only gotten more warped since then. If a concept like mekach ta'us exists for marriages, it should exist for smicha as well.
"And note, his hashkafa was warped before he became controversial."
How do you know?
(As an aside, everyone who later becomes controversial was controversial earlier for the things that were later discovered. I think you mean that, just that it's hard to find the exact words for it. I'm agreeing with you on that. I'm understanding that you're saying he was controversial for earlier issues than the ones he was later condemned for. But briefly, what were they and how do you know?)
I think he came to OS years later. I don't think they had a smicha program at the time.
You should read his post where he describes the rather cruel prank he was subjected to in, I think, high school. At the same time, it sounds very much like it was coming to him. In his own words, he exhibited a certain unhealthy arrogance and smugness even then.
Where is this mesorah written down? Certainly the meforshim on the page do not attempt to reintrepret the criticism of the navi'im to match today's charedi version of the mesorah. You can add to interpretations as you wish - you certainly cannot dare to exchange the prophecies that written l'doros do what you fancy.
The novi very much says we have to increase our devotion to justice. It means what is says, it says what it means, it speaks to every generation (that is why it was written down) and you show me where it has been reintrepreted to mean something else.
You are right. Justice in Chareidiland means favouring the gevirim in their disputes because they support lots of mosdos and the community structures such as botei dinnin cannot afford to alienate them. It's for the greater good. Tough luck on whoever has a claim against them (unless he is richer). BD will just endlessly delay the case, fabricate all sorts of obstacles, delay for years until the poor guy gets the hint and goes away. Exactly what the nevi'im wrote about.
And then complain when the poor guy goes to the secular system, because that is shell k'halocho.
Mind you, the Satmar brothers have no problem going to the secular courts.
I actually had a great experience taking a gevir to bais din.
They twisted the gvir to agree to a compromise, even though he was a muchzak, since they knew I was right. (I'm pretty sure I would've lost the case otherwise, based on my conversations with a few choshen mishpat experts).
Has it occured to you test that perhaps those mysterious and amorphous gvirim you keep referring to, to the extent they exist, are not so different than Natan Slifkin, who even now clings in a very perverse manner to the group he once considered himself a part of? Every group among our fractious people have gvirim like you speak of.
As mentioned many times, I've lived among the dati-leumi for several years now. They too have their own gvirim who think they are above consequences or restraint. They too lord it over those with less influence.
The "Zealots" at the time of the Chruban Sheini considered themselves the true inheritors of the mantle of the Torah too. But our mesorah doesn't have kind words about them.
You are pathetic with a very large axe in need of griding.
Yes, but chareidim claim to be better than the rest. Stating the DL do rhe samecis just whatshoitism. And the DL beis din systen is not as open to abuse.
We do? I haven't really experienced that. We claim to aspire more than the rest. This is patently obvious, as many of Natan's rantings have to do with voluntary (and it is voluntary for many) state of penury of many charedim. Yours too.
He finds this deeply offensive. Even though the plain words of Yeshaya indicate material wealth is not something to strive for, and is in fact singled out for opprobrium in highly poetic (and thus symbolic and in need of proper interpretation which chazal provide) language. Enjoy and be grateful for as a gift from Hashem, yes. Strive for? No. Absolutely not. And Natan won't stop with his absolute heresy, even in the plain language of the navi.
"Truly, you shall be shamed Because of the terebinths you desired, And you shall be confounded Because of the gardens you coveted."
The overinflated sense of self is the source of all injustice. Of everyone. But the powerful and influential in particular.
Some people here argue the DL are no different. I don't. I have noted from firsthand observation that Charedim are far more successful in imparting their values, whether you agree or disagree, to the next generation. The DL have serious issues. There are serious DL families here, but they are few and stand out as being more like the Charedim (even as they bristle as the comparison). Their children will have kosher phones. They will send them to different schools. And in particular, the wives and daughters tend dress noticeably more like the charedim. The rest struggle. There is incredible surface prosperity where I live (which is undoubtedly propped up by much debt), but there is a great deal of spiritual distress. The youth are far less engaged than the parents and grandparents. They follow fashions and are very materialist. From a young age they have and are very attached to their smart phones.
Does this make us better? In that our hashkafa is more in line with spiritual reality and we are more successful in imparting it to the next generation, yes. But not better people. No.
That you care what Rav Avigdor Miller has said about slavery is telling. His Torah-true outlook shouldn't bother you in the least, even if you personally have a different opinion, that has no basis in Torah. You think you are correct in your outlook. How successful are you or will you be in imparting your values to your children, assuming you have them?
Obviously it's written down. Don't be obtuse. You could read Behold a People, like I just did again after a 30 year break, which collates what our mesorah says about the time, and renders it into a "Didactic History."
I keep raising his name and this particular work because:
1. I happened to just finish reading it.
2. Natan's idiotic Chrisitian-infused post cites the same pesukim in Yeshaya, so referencing a well-written and easily digested book as suggested reading material is appropriate. It gives Chaza"l's gloss on those peskim and provides a Torah-true viewpoint on those times, unlike Natan, Jewish Reformers, and Christians.
To say Rav Miller is not chaza"l is a category error. He's not innovating anything, just repeating over our mesorah. In that way, by continuing in Chaza"l's footsteps, he is now part of them.
Depends which בית. Regarding בית שני, Theres a חז"ל which discusses a father whos son was stabbed during the עבודה being relieved that the knife wasnt טמא yet. Chazal explain that this demonstrates how the laws of טומאה וטהרה were more חביב to them then שפיכות דמים. Sounds far from Reform Judaism.
That is true, you already have the Gemara that says during the first Bais Hamikdash they were doing Torah, Avodah, and *Gemilas Chasadim*. So most of the complaints of Yeshaya and the other Neviim didn't apply then.
Who wants to bet that our best friend's next post will be about how the judicial reform flies in the face of Isaiah's message, and this is what Tisha b'Av is all about?
Haha, you will enjoy this https://garyrosenblatt.substack.com/p/the-israel-we-know-has-fallen
I think that the first מפרש we should use in יונתן בן עוזיאל. After all, he was a תלמיד of הלל הזקן
When we learn his תרגום, we can see how the early תנאים taught נביא
His תרגום here is esp. clear.
בית הלל אומ' מגביהין מעל השלחן עצמות וקלפין, בית שמיי אומ' מסלק את הטבלה כולה ומנערה. זכריה בן אבקילס לא היה נוהג לא כדברי בית שמיי ולא כדברי בית הלל, אלא נוטל ומשליך לאחר המטה. אמ' ר' יוסה ענותנותו של ר' זכריה בן אבקילס היא שרפה את ההיכל
https://www.sefaria.org/Tosefta_Shabbat_(Lieberman).16.7
This is a good proof that some sort of overemphasis on Halacha, caused the churban.
That's proof that there was a problem with הכרעה במחלוקת not overemphasis on הלכה
It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today. The purpose of the navi was to expose even the smallest flaw, with the hope that this flaw would be corrected. The navi was merciless in his exposures. He showed no favoritism, and no one was immune from his harsh exposures.
A proper reading of the pesukim actually shows this. The people were not judged for not bringing the korbanos, they were criticized for bringing the korbanos insincerely. The one pasuk that is cited to show 'giluy arayos' speaks about young women walking flirtatiously. It does not say that they actually slept with each other! The pasuk cited to show bloodshed, speaks about King Menashe, who was more than 30 years before the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh.
They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem. They served Hashem, brought the korbanos properly, and gathered in the Beis Hamikdosh to daven. The Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh were set aside as holy days. (Yeshaya 1:11 - 13)
The gemara says that there were more than 1,000,000 prophets among our people!! The requirements for becoming a prophet are not easy!
The prophet called out the interpersonal sins of the people. This is not as the 'reformers' would have us believe that they were too religious, that is a ridiculous claim. Has the people been less religious in any other area, the prophet would have called them out on that as well!
This is R' Avigdor Miller's shittah, which he gets from R' Yitzhak Isaac Halevy Rabinowitz in the Doros Harishonim, but it is a tremendous chiddush, and it is clearly against the opinion of several Rishonim.
I would say he got it from his rebbe Rav Eizik Sher
No idea what RES said about these things, but if you have RAM's books, some of them have on the bottom of the title page that the book is based on RYEHLR's Doros Harishonim.
He was definitely very influenced by RYEH, I meant that he got his approach originally from RES. He definitely expounded on it afterwards.
It's not only RES, it's actually the opinion of all baalei mussar, that the aveiros mentioned in Pesukim or Chazal aren't literal. Esav was really a huge tzaddik, so was Lot, etc., see for example chochma umussar from the Alter of Kelm. RES went with this approach, and wrote kuntereisim about it. There are very interesting letters from the chazon ish to Rav Eizik Sher, criticizing this approach, printed in one of the volumes of גנזים ותשובות חזו"א.
RES zt"l had an entire שיטה about it.
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=11&hilit=%D7%93%D7%95%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%95+%D7%A2%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%95&sid=9707e7d7f8ee70709f2ea5b900e3bdc5#p24
And also see here
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=60940&hilit=%D7%93%D7%95%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%95+%D7%A2%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%95&sid=9707e7d7f8ee70709f2ea5b900e3bdc5
"The gemara says that there were more than 1,000,000 prophets among our people"
Do you accept the gemoroh often exaggerates numbers? Have you seen the numbers of dead the gemoroh states occurred during the churban?
This number I can believe, over the 800 years before the churban. They clearly abounded in great numbers in Shmuel's time. Roving bands of them. People seeking them to find lost objects and other seemingly minor concerns. Same thing. Rav Miller says they weren't originally called prophets. They were called others terms like seers. The difference is the role. Something about the transition to malchus and assuming a role of rebuker brought about the change in terminology. Something like that.
It does seem like this was a national aspiration. Not material abundance or prosperity. A deep connection to Hashem. In the absense of prophecy and the ability to aspire, the charedim aspire to what we can today.
There were 48 so to speak world class Neviim. Then another [1,200,000] lesser ones. The 48 are way past our description (I assume you acknowledge their literal existence); the lesser ones too. As we accept the incredible 48 we can accept the incredible others.
I can't really address you, only feel for you & wish you the best. I write to share with other readers my thoughts on what you wrote
So do you accept the gemoroh uses exaggerations in its numbers? Artscroll does.
מהר"ל, a rather more important source than Artscroll
I am aware, but some people know Artscroll better.....
I assume that the readers of this blog (and the authors of the blog) learn מהר"ל
We assume a large number is an exaggeration when the literal reading does not make sense. When the gemara (gitin 58b) speaks about the huge number of people killed in the fall of Beitar, we can say that the numbers are exaggerated, because it does not make sense to take them literally.
In this case, there is no reason to assume the numbers are exaggerated. There is no problem with taking the numbers literally.
"It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today."
This is what Rav Miller demonstrated over and over. Even the wicked among them abided by the Torah in ways that would be unexpected to us. And not just in ritual matters. Bein adam l'chaveiro too.
You really do need to brush up on your nach.
"They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem. They served Hashem, brought the korbanos properly, and gathered in the Beis Hamikdosh to daven. The Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh were set aside as holy days. "
Are you familiar with the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom? The shomrim at the borders to stop people from the Northern Kingdom going to the beis hamikdosh with their karbonos?
"They did serve avoda zarah, but that was never as a replacement to serve Hashem". So where is that hetter brought down? Avodah Zoroh is Avodah Zoroh, mate.
"It is important to realize, that as evil as the pesukim make the people out to be, they were far greater than we are today". Source please. Next you will be telling me they spent 90% of the waking hours in the beis hemdrash learning torah, and there were numerous yeshivas scattered around just like today. Some may have strayed into wearing blue shirts but the majority was faithful to the mesorah of white shirts and borsalinos. And sandals without socks, a few more mizrachi types may have gone that way.
There were some periods were there was torah knowledge throughout the land, true, but a very small proportion. Why exactly was the Northern Kingdom exiled, if they were such tzadikim, far greater than today?
See Melachim 1, perek 18 pasuk 21. The pasuk says clearly that the people worshipped Hashem and the baal.
See also Melachim 2 perek 10, where Yehu destroyed the baal worshippers. 70 guards with swords were enough to surround the building and kill all of them. The building was obviously not very big, and there were obviously not very many people inside if 7- guards with swords were expected to kill all the people inside. In that same perek it describes how they destroyed the house of baal, it uses the singular, there was only 1 such place.
See also Melachim 1 perek 20 pasuk 31, that wicked King Achav had a kindly reputation.
When there were prophets among the people, Hashem had very high expectations from the people. Even a small amount of idol worship was enough to bring punishment to the people.
And the American people have 'In God we trust' on their bank notes. I have no doubt people flitted between Hashem and the Ba'al. When Ba'al let them down, they may well have tried the old God of the Jews, as the academics call him YHWH. Menashe tried him too, and the pot broke.
Presumably Melachim 2 perek refers to a small ba'al shteible type of arrangement. Maybe a ba'al minyan factory. They may also have had numerous private ba'al minyonin in their homes.
I know you follow Rav Avigdor Miller in this matter, fine. And this book -https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1946351466/ which is quite apologetic.
It's not the mainstream view. The mainstream view was that AZ was rampant throughout the land, it was irresistible force so much that menashe (again) told Rav Ashi that Rav Ashi would run after it had he lived in that era. The anshei knesses hagdeolah davened that it should be removed, they succeeded in subduing it (they didn't remove it, as is often erroneously believed). If it was only a few, it wouldn't have been such a problem.
Need I quote to you your own words about saying things without sources, or making things up? They were rather uncomplimentary.
You did not say anything about the pasuk saying 70 guards with swords killed ALL of the baal worshippers. The pasuk itself says that he eradicated the baal worship. There could not have been too many of them.
Even a few idol worshippers is a problem in Hashem's eyes. When the shechinah was tangibly present, and when prophets walked the land, Hashem had VERY high standards for His holy people.
"This same theme repeats itself all throughout the Latter Prophets. Far from a description of religious hypocrites who keep all the ritual commandments but are otherwise wicked rogues, they paint a picture of a "Reform-movement" sinful nation that has abandoned Hashem, has forsaken His Torah, that engages in idolatry, that doesn't observe any of the Mitzvos, whether those between man and God or those between man and his fellow."
Clearly you haven't learned much nevi'im acharonim. Mitzvos between man and God are hardly mentioned other than AZ. Sometimes shabbos, the odd mention of failure to keep shmittah, but you won't find much about learning more torah and not having enough chumras. They were meticulous in hilchos karbonos, as a matter of ritual, you find no criticim there, because Yehudah controlled the BH and with a few exceptions their kings were ok.
On the contrary, go and ask a 'poor guy' about his experiences in 2023 trying to take a 'rich guy' to beis din, or parents who cannot get their kids into a school due to the supposed elitisim of the machers and similar, consider how the rabbonim will never critise gevirim and go of there way to flatter them, consider the violence of charedi society, the tone of the pashkevilim etc and the criticisms of the neviim ressonate perfectly with today's scene.
Clearly you didn't read the post including the very line you pasted. "...has forsaken His Torah, that engages in *idolatry*, that doesn't observe any of the Mitzvos, whether those between man and God or those between man and his fellow."
" They were meticulous in hilchos karbonos, as a matter of ritual, you find no criticim there, because Yehudah controlled the BH and with a few exceptions their kings were ok"-uh..no. The wicked kings were NOT meticulous in hilchos korbanos. And the Neviim were generally not complaining about the righteous kings. I can tell you never went through Neviim even once.
To the contrary, I hear lots of rich guys complaining about how Beis Din messed them over. But we still have a lot of work to do. "The violence of chareidi society"-LOL!!!!
"The criticisms of the neviim resonate perfectly with today's scene"- many of them indeed do (but not your ta'anos, which I can only believes comes from a place of mental illness), which is why the Geulah hasn't come yet. Indeed, this is why for chareidim, Tisha b'Av is a day of introspection, rather than trying to blame the problems on other, barely-observant communities.
I am not sure why you think gerrers bashing up gerrers, trash burning, stone throwing, store burning, violence in Beis Shemesh, violence in Ponevez etc etc is something to LOL about. The most violent Jewish group in Israel today are chareidim. That is a non debatable fact.
Yehudah, that controlled the beis hamedrash had very few bad kings.
And you of course missed my caveat 'apart from AZ".
You nitpick my words of course, looking for silly little points you can go to town on and score little points. For obvious reasons, you nevel deal with my main point. I'm not interested in debating like that. Good bye.
"Yehudah, that controlled the beis hamedrash had very few bad kings.", yes, and the Neviim were not generally complaining about the good ones. I guess you missed that part? 😂
"The most violent Jewish group in Israel today are chareidim. That is a non debatable fact."- this just shows how deluded and mentally ill you are. Seek help.
What is "apart from AZ"? They abandoned Hashem completely. AZ was just the worst sin, but it is very clear that they forsook Hashem and transgressed the entire Torah.
"It is very clear that they forsook Hashem and transgressed the entire Torah". Indeed, the question is why the stress on interpersonal matters (plus AZ) and not the entire torah? Why does the navi talk constantly about ivus hadin, bein odom l'chaveiroh, corruption of leadership, affliction of the poor and downtrodden, and never things like not learning enough torah? Keeping too many kulos? Not hearing brisker tekias?
What do you think is the lesson for us (because the novi talks to every generation)? Maybe it to tell us what we should be focussing on?
It's not "plus" AZ. AZ means they abandoned Hashem. The same terrible middos that caused them to treat Hashem poorly caused them to treat their fellow man poorly as well.
One of the lessons is that there is no such thing as an ethical secular Jewish state. If you abandon Hashem, that means you are a terrible person.
The lessons for the chareidim is that we need to do better in all areas, both bain adam l'Makom and bain adam l'chaveiro.
Yep, I forget the regular shouts of "Nazi" - also something to LOL about? Maybe I imagine it, being 'mentally ill'.
I am woefully uneducated when it comes to Gemara but what about what it says here?
https://www.sefaria.org/Yoma.9b.8
Sure, that was the second Bais Hamikdash. I was talking about Yeshaya who was talking about the first Bais Hamikdash.
WRT to בית שני I recently saw a ref. to the תוספתא, which says - שהיו אוהבים את הממון ושונאים זה את זה
So the שנאת חינם was mainly a problem of the rich assimilated people.
Where does it say assimilated? I think there are a lot of non-assimilated אוהבים את הממון today...
https://forum.otzar.org/download/file.php?id=39831
Um... can you summarize?
I did, above
Ah gotcha. Thank you!
You've lost the Lamed, the first letter of the first word of the passage you quoted from chapter 1 of ספר ישעיהו. Please fix that. Not מה, but למה. Thanks.
There were some comments at RJ about the strategy of the gedolim was to keep genuine scholars away from the position of Chief Rabbi, and mentioned Shlomo Goren in particular as a reason to do so, because they have an inclination to innovate. They want relative lightweights in the position who won't damage things. I think that's a reasonable summary of what I read. I agree. I honestly don't know anything about him except for this.
After the (obviously faked) Apollo 11 moon landing, he proposed a changed to Bircas Levana, because, obviously, the moon can be touched, and chaza"l got that one wrong.
https://opensiddur.org/prayers/lunisolar/roshei-hadashim/kiddush-levanah/emendation-to-the-kiddush-levanah-in-light-of-the-first-moon-landing-by-shlomo-goren-1969/
That's actually not what he said (the media got it wrong, as usual).
Anyway, there were many מחלוקות about him, and I don't recall reading (I wan't born yet when he was elected, since I'm 47 years old) that this issue was one of the main problems raised.
WRT to the רבנות הראשית, AFAIK some of the Gedolim (esp. the גרי"ש אלישיב זצ"ל) didn't want certain canidates bec. they were worried about their שיטות פסיקה והנהגה, not bec. they wanted lightweights ח"ו.
Unfortunately, מחרחרי ריב spread false information about one of the greatest ת"ח and פוסקים (מורינו ורבינו הגאון רבי יעקב אריאל שליט"א and prevented his election.
I was close to one of the lesser known רבנים involved (who told us wha we needed to know לתועלת) to know this.
I admittedly put my own color on whatever did transpire. And that is not appropriate. Nonetheless, it seems reasonable to assume, regardless whatever color media added, that there was a proposal to emend the accepted tefilla for Bircas Levana. That there was a variant previously in use does not justify reviving it.
Even if you don't know the actual story, was such a proposal proffered? That's what I want to know.
Because, look, from my perspective, how the Tzadokim and Beitustim could twist around straightforward hashkafic advice into a worldview where there is no s'char v'onesh is beyond me, yet they did.
Also, from my perspective, while Rabbi Shlomo Goren's gadlus may be self-evident, it is also self-evident how such a seemingly inconsequential proposal could, 50+ years on, take root among his most ardent talmidim and supporters, and produce rotten fruit (and I don't know anything else he might have said). Consider how the idolization of science and human achievement has made inroads into former strongholds of Torah.
I don't know the politics or machinations or history, but if there were efforts by the gedolim to keep him out of office or something to that effect, I support it. Even if their justifications are not my justifications. And if I understood that wrong, well, then I don't.
Also, what I wrote about מחרחרי ריב was about a different election and other גדולים (sorry if wasn't clear enough)
Please see here
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?t=4302#p32497
And here
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=12885&hilit=%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%9F&sid=76c8155409097461235ba2d8e2e81b7c#p120276
And here
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=11777&hilit=%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%9F&sid=76c8155409097461235ba2d8e2e81b7c#p110844
And here
http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12946&hilit=%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%9F&sid=76c8155409097461235ba2d8e2e81b7c#p120928
Here is a link of my own. Consider, if you will, the 28 minutes of this video (from a BBC anthology series at the time), aired in 1968, 55 years later.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuKPg0mT408
This is fact, presented as fiction.
Can you kindly send me a link to an article or a book?
I usually can't understand anything from videos
Here's a way to put it that I think you can understand. As far as me. I wasn't really there, but I was almost three at the time, and I definitely have some vague memories watching things like that (and first run Star Trek). My dad watched it on our then-enormous 25" COLOR with remote (!!!) TV. I think it weighed like 200 or more pounds. So, I grew up in a Jewish and spellbound (like much of but certainly not all of humanity) home. A well-off enough one at the time to see it on what was then I think the biggest TV you could get. They were huge and expensive.
You weren't there either, as far as I know.
However, in answer to a serious shaila, more time and more thought could have been given to a response. There were serious scientists of the time maintaining that the moon was plasma, not something we could land on, and it was all nothing, years before the landing. BBC aired one we know of, at least. Who was Nasa helmed by? Who was JPL founded by? A gadol should not respond in a flippant manner to a question of potentially deep theological import. I don't think this requires hindsight to believe he should have delved deeper into the subject before responding.
It sounds like something transpired. Whatever it was, I hope this addresses it fairly, regardless of what the media reported.
As I said, I was never מעמיק in this topic, so I don't think that I have much to say about it.
Is it possible to get a b'ktizur of my original question? Did he propose a change to the nusach or not?
I see a shaila asked about the posuk and he replied that an astronaut isn't "touching" the moon because he's encased in a spacesuit. Something like that. That's still disingenuous and not what our mesorah says, of course. Technically, if we can land on the moon, we can touch it. There is no "going" to the moon, period. The rest, I can't follow.
I was never מעמיק in that סוגיא
I do know that the opposition to him was not because of that פסק
It predated the פסק
And the heaviest מערכה was about ממזרות
Thank you for the clarification. That makes sense.
If the media got it wrong, then I would very much appreciate to know what really happened regarding this specific incident.
I don't know what issues were raised about him. It's irrelevant if this issue was not one of them, if it was still an actual issue. Which depends on what actually transpired, of course.
https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/109779/how-did-gdoley-israel-react-to-the-landing-on-the-moon
I didn't know the Rambam held the moon is a spiritual, ie angelic, form.
From our limited understanding of how the world actually is, most people I know in the flat earth community who investigate these things (and there are some) hold the sun and moon to be projections of some sort, not physical bodies we can touch.
Before I realized I was banned at RJ, I had penned this comment in response to דוד™️:
"Read the Psukim along with our mesorah..."
Our mesorah clarifies and explains all the criticisms of Yeshaya in a way that WE can understand what he means, beyond meaningless tripe like, "He says that we have to increase our devotion to justice." Spoken like a true Social Justice Warrior. Our mesora is specific to what offenses and injustices his stirringly poetic words refer to, and what we need to work on and correct.
He reads and understands Nach similarly to the way Christians do, which is superficially.
END
He really does sounds more and more like a Reform rabbi or even a Christian than a Ben Torah.
It is hard to believe that Natan was granted smicha from Ohr Sameach, a fine institution with many excellent rabbis that I spent almost all of 1991 at. How could he emerge from there with such a warped hashkafa? And note, his hashkafa was warped before he became controversial. It has only gotten more warped since then. If a concept like mekach ta'us exists for marriages, it should exist for smicha as well.
Was he in OS when you were there?
"And note, his hashkafa was warped before he became controversial."
How do you know?
(As an aside, everyone who later becomes controversial was controversial earlier for the things that were later discovered. I think you mean that, just that it's hard to find the exact words for it. I'm agreeing with you on that. I'm understanding that you're saying he was controversial for earlier issues than the ones he was later condemned for. But briefly, what were they and how do you know?)
I think he came to OS years later. I don't think they had a smicha program at the time.
You should read his post where he describes the rather cruel prank he was subjected to in, I think, high school. At the same time, it sounds very much like it was coming to him. In his own words, he exhibited a certain unhealthy arrogance and smugness even then.
Where is this mesorah written down? Certainly the meforshim on the page do not attempt to reintrepret the criticism of the navi'im to match today's charedi version of the mesorah. You can add to interpretations as you wish - you certainly cannot dare to exchange the prophecies that written l'doros do what you fancy.
The novi very much says we have to increase our devotion to justice. It means what is says, it says what it means, it speaks to every generation (that is why it was written down) and you show me where it has been reintrepreted to mean something else.
"Justice" is a meaningless word. It means one thing to heretics and another to us.
You are right. Justice in Chareidiland means favouring the gevirim in their disputes because they support lots of mosdos and the community structures such as botei dinnin cannot afford to alienate them. It's for the greater good. Tough luck on whoever has a claim against them (unless he is richer). BD will just endlessly delay the case, fabricate all sorts of obstacles, delay for years until the poor guy gets the hint and goes away. Exactly what the nevi'im wrote about.
And then complain when the poor guy goes to the secular system, because that is shell k'halocho.
Mind you, the Satmar brothers have no problem going to the secular courts.
I actually had a great experience taking a gevir to bais din.
They twisted the gvir to agree to a compromise, even though he was a muchzak, since they knew I was right. (I'm pretty sure I would've lost the case otherwise, based on my conversations with a few choshen mishpat experts).
"based on my conversations with a few choshen mishpat experts"
Such as who?
Has it occured to you test that perhaps those mysterious and amorphous gvirim you keep referring to, to the extent they exist, are not so different than Natan Slifkin, who even now clings in a very perverse manner to the group he once considered himself a part of? Every group among our fractious people have gvirim like you speak of.
As mentioned many times, I've lived among the dati-leumi for several years now. They too have their own gvirim who think they are above consequences or restraint. They too lord it over those with less influence.
The "Zealots" at the time of the Chruban Sheini considered themselves the true inheritors of the mantle of the Torah too. But our mesorah doesn't have kind words about them.
You are pathetic with a very large axe in need of griding.
Yes, but chareidim claim to be better than the rest. Stating the DL do rhe samecis just whatshoitism. And the DL beis din systen is not as open to abuse.
We do? I haven't really experienced that. We claim to aspire more than the rest. This is patently obvious, as many of Natan's rantings have to do with voluntary (and it is voluntary for many) state of penury of many charedim. Yours too.
He finds this deeply offensive. Even though the plain words of Yeshaya indicate material wealth is not something to strive for, and is in fact singled out for opprobrium in highly poetic (and thus symbolic and in need of proper interpretation which chazal provide) language. Enjoy and be grateful for as a gift from Hashem, yes. Strive for? No. Absolutely not. And Natan won't stop with his absolute heresy, even in the plain language of the navi.
"Truly, you shall be shamed Because of the terebinths you desired, And you shall be confounded Because of the gardens you coveted."
The overinflated sense of self is the source of all injustice. Of everyone. But the powerful and influential in particular.
Some people here argue the DL are no different. I don't. I have noted from firsthand observation that Charedim are far more successful in imparting their values, whether you agree or disagree, to the next generation. The DL have serious issues. There are serious DL families here, but they are few and stand out as being more like the Charedim (even as they bristle as the comparison). Their children will have kosher phones. They will send them to different schools. And in particular, the wives and daughters tend dress noticeably more like the charedim. The rest struggle. There is incredible surface prosperity where I live (which is undoubtedly propped up by much debt), but there is a great deal of spiritual distress. The youth are far less engaged than the parents and grandparents. They follow fashions and are very materialist. From a young age they have and are very attached to their smart phones.
Does this make us better? In that our hashkafa is more in line with spiritual reality and we are more successful in imparting it to the next generation, yes. But not better people. No.
That you care what Rav Avigdor Miller has said about slavery is telling. His Torah-true outlook shouldn't bother you in the least, even if you personally have a different opinion, that has no basis in Torah. You think you are correct in your outlook. How successful are you or will you be in imparting your values to your children, assuming you have them?
Obviously it's written down. Don't be obtuse. You could read Behold a People, like I just did again after a 30 year break, which collates what our mesorah says about the time, and renders it into a "Didactic History."
Rabbi Avigdor Miller is hardly chazal. Quite extreme in some ways. He believes abolishing slavery was a bad thing.
I keep raising his name and this particular work because:
1. I happened to just finish reading it.
2. Natan's idiotic Chrisitian-infused post cites the same pesukim in Yeshaya, so referencing a well-written and easily digested book as suggested reading material is appropriate. It gives Chaza"l's gloss on those peskim and provides a Torah-true viewpoint on those times, unlike Natan, Jewish Reformers, and Christians.
To say Rav Miller is not chaza"l is a category error. He's not innovating anything, just repeating over our mesorah. In that way, by continuing in Chaza"l's footsteps, he is now part of them.
He thinks that the שנאת חינם during בית שני was only one sided because the צדוקים hated the פרושים. Where's the מסורה for that?
The Tzadokim were motivated by lust for power and honor, not ideology. They crucified 800 of their opponents, among many atrocities committed.
Exactly. You define chaza"l. Have you read the book? It's 100% mesorah. It's not a book of halacha. Show me where there's a contradiction.
Free of context, what you claim he believes is irrelevant.
Yes I have read the book.
Consider rereading it.
Depends which בית. Regarding בית שני, Theres a חז"ל which discusses a father whos son was stabbed during the עבודה being relieved that the knife wasnt טמא yet. Chazal explain that this demonstrates how the laws of טומאה וטהרה were more חביב to them then שפיכות דמים. Sounds far from Reform Judaism.
That is true, you already have the Gemara that says during the first Bais Hamikdash they were doing Torah, Avodah, and *Gemilas Chasadim*. So most of the complaints of Yeshaya and the other Neviim didn't apply then.
Yep, ritual over sensibilities and menchlichkeit. Look at the tone of this blog for a classic example.
Tone of the blog? You can't be as specific as Avraham was or cite an actual example? No, you can't, because there isn't one.