Reply To: Continuation of Discussion on R' Slifkin and Weiss from Manchester Eiruv Thread

Home Forums Controversial Topics Continuation of Discussion on R' Slifkin and Weiss from Manchester Eiruv Thread Reply To: Continuation of Discussion on R' Slifkin and Weiss from Manchester Eiruv Thread

#1002027
Ben Levi
Participant

PAtur Avul Assur.

You seem to be having a difficult time understanding that I have no position.

None.

I am not fool enough to take a position on certain things, or think I am qualified enough to evern reaffirm positions by Gedolei Rishonim and Achronim.

All I have done is two things.

a) I have pointed out that Slifkin is twisting things and being intelectually dishonest when he attempts to claim his approach is based on “classical sources” when the totality of his approach has been condemned by virtually all of the very sources he claims to lean on for support.

There is nothing new under the sun.

The approach of Slifkin either in totality or many chunks of it has been called either “foolish” or Kefira by the overwhelming majority of Rishonim and Achronim throughout History.

Some of these include

1) The Rambam (Foolish)

2) Ramban (Kefira or borderline Kefira)

3) The Maharal (Kefira)

4) Yam Shel Shlomo ( Ignorant)

5) Rav Yackov Emden ( Foolish)

6) The Vilna Gaon (Foolish and Dangerous)

7) Rav Shamshon R. Hirsh( Dangerous, Foolish, Worse then Reform)

8) The Chazon Ish (Kefira)

So the point is merely that Slifkin himself shopuld have known that he expressed a view on Chazal that has been called either foolish, ignorant, or Kefira by Rishinim and Achronim throughout the centuries.

If he did not know that he is even more of a fool.

The Gedolim of today merely reaffirmed the view thoughout the centuries.

Now if you do not understand why they said said what they said I urge you to either open up seforim where they wrote it and attempt to understand what they said or go to someone such as Rav Moshe Shapiro shlita who can explain it to you.