- This topic has 35 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I think, if it were up to most CR people, there would not have been such a Yom Tov as Chanukah. What are we celebrating, after all? A group of extremist Jews commited acts of violence against Yevonim amd misyavnim. Terrible, according to them.
Also, why do we venerate Pinchas ben Elozar ben Aharon ha’Cohen? Was not he very violent? What about Yehoshua bin Nun, who presided over the slaughter of the freedom-loving(read: aveiros-loving) Kena’anim?
Straw man.
No one suggested abolishing channukah.
The Wolf
No brain! (er)
Wolf,
No one suggested abolishing Chanukah.
His point was that the reasoning behind posters’ condemnation of zealotry would, if followed through consistently, lead to that conclusion, not that anyone actually suggested it.
I don’t know which posts he’s referring to, so I can’t agree or disagree.
oy vey noch a muhl
IF the secular (frei,hiloni, Reform, whatever) actually knew the history of Chanukah they would not want to observe it. They think it is about eating latkes and giving gifts, and when they become frum enough to know better, they wouldn’t want to abolish it since they understand the holiday was about the Hareidi winning bigtime over the Misyavanim (secular, free, hiloni, Reform, whatever).
they wouldn’t want to abolish it since they understand the holiday was about the Hareidi winning bigtime over the Misyavanim
Actually, it is about the Chanukas Hamizbayach (Hence, Chanuka)(as per the original source, the Megilas Ta’anis. Ayin Shom). As pointed out to me, if the Nes of shemen had been for four days, Chanuka would still be eight days, due to the length of time that it took for the chanukas HaMizbayach.
Not as if the Chilonim would like that any better (animal sacrifice?! Call PETA!), but just to be factual.
Also, why do we venerate Pinchas ben Elozar ben Aharon ha’Cohen? Was not he very violent? What about Yehoshua bin Nun, who presided over the slaughter of the freedom-loving(read: aveiros-loving) Kena’anim?
Irrelevant comparisons unless you are suggesting that Pinchas ben Elazar spat on an 8 year old Jewish girl who had committed no sins, or that spitting on a modestly dressed girl is codified in the Torah, heaven forbid!
Zimri ben Salu was a prince in shevet Shimon, and Cozbi bas Tzur was a princess of Midian. How exactly do they compare to a little Jewish girl?
His point was that the reasoning behind posters’ condemnation of zealotry would, if followed through consistently
So, in other words, he’s comparing fighting back against an armed force that is preventing people from learning and performing Mitzvos to people who scream “prutzah” and “zonah” to six, seven and eight year old girls?
Or is it possible, just possible, that some zealotry is good and others are bad?
The Wolf
Actually if a RELIGIOUS jew knew about the history of Chanukah, they would want to abolish it
The Hashmoneon Disobyed the Rabbis because they wanted to become kings
The LOVED Rome and made a treaty with them (This treaty was the real reason they won) and if you read the Megilah of the Maccabees they PRAISE Rome
Actually the treaty allowed Rome to make Judea a province of Rome
Also The Hashmoneon killed most of not all the Rabbis of their time and were Sadducees
There were many similar holidays observed durng the times of the second beis hamikdash, and all of the others were abolished. The question is asked, what was special about chanukah that it remained, and was not abolished when the beis hamikdash was destroyed. The asnwer given is that Chanukah was abolished as well, but the jews as a group decided to continue observing it. Chanukah is not observed because it was decreed by the “zealous rabbis”, but rather it is observed despite the fact that it was abolished with the destruction of the beis hamikdash.
mdd: +1
Wolf: They are using the individual who screamed prutza to the eight year old girl as their rallying cry to break all boundaries of tznius.
They are using the individual who screamed prutza to the eight year old girl as their rallying cry to break all boundaries of tznius.
Nonsense.
First of all, it’s not one individual — have you seen the vidoes where the men shout at the girls as they come and go to and from school?
Secondly, you’re implying that the whole incident was manufactured to “break all boundaries of tznius,” therefore requiring a zealous response. That’s clearly not the case as the parents at OROT would have rather none or this would have happened in the first place.
The Wolf
So, in other words, he’s comparing fighting back against an armed force that is preventing people from learning and performing Mitzvos to people who scream “prutzah” and “zonah” to six, seven and eight year old girls?
He didn’t say what he was referring to.
Or is it possible, just possible, that some zealotry is good and others are bad?
That’s not only possible, it’s true.
If indeed, he was defending spitting on and yelling at eight year old girls, I also think it’s despicable and that Pinchas would never do such a thing.
Zahavasdad,
Chanukah is not about admiring the Chashmonaim throughout their history.
I don’t really get your point. Are you trying to say, chas v’shalom, that Chaza”l were mistaken to institute Chanukah?
Gavra, that is very wrong. Are you saying that the Gemara, that quoted the Megillas Taanis, didn’t get it!? It takes something to argue with a Gemara.
As I pointed out on a different thread, if you read the Megillas Taanis you will see that it says that Chanuka was established because of the Ness of eight days. Then it continues to ask why the Chinuch was eight days, to which it answers that it simply took that long to repair everything.
The Ohr Zarua explains in the name of his Rebbe that the reason the Ness had to go on for eight days was because they were too busy repairing to be able to get new oil.
There is actually no reason to celebrate the repairing of the Beis Hamikdash. If anything you should celebrate the day after Chanuka.
When that spitter is of the caliber of a Pinchas ben Elazar Hakohein, Yehoshua bin Nun, or any of the Chashmonaim, we’ll talk again. Until then, he is a real bulvan and deserves to be tossed in jail for assault on a minor female child.
MDD: There are Muttar ways to be Kannai and Assur ways. That changes based on a lot of factors. In this situation, most people seem to agree that this was Assur. Pointing out one Issur (which involved a Chillul Hashem) is in no way glossing over a separate Issur (if one was committed in this case).
MDD: I hope not. Everyone agrees that there are circumstances in which one must protest a Chillul Hashem. I think the disagreements are just about what scenarios should create such a reaction.
Mdd,
Your original post said “most CR people”. I’m glad I didn’t take you literally, and now you’ve modified it to “a lot of people” which is hopefully more accurate.
Everyone agrees that there are circumstances in which one must protest a Chillul Hashem.
You’d be surprised.
I think the disagreements are just about what scenarios should create such a reaction.
Also about what the reaction should be.
DY: No, I think everyone agrees that physical assault (of any type) is never an appropriate response unless it’s a specific case of Matzilin Oso Benafsho or Kana’in Pog’in Bo.
Sam2,
I meant what type of reaction, short of physical assault.
MDD: Source please?
mdd,
I don’t think we’re discussing any situation in which physical assault is justified.
But you’re right to question the use of the word “never”; that would exclude Pinchas as well!
Gavra, that is very wrong. Are you saying that the Gemara, that quoted the Megillas Taanis, didn’t get it!? It takes something to argue with a Gemara.
Of course not. The Pach Hashemen was the Nes that showed that the Shechina was back in the Beis Hamikdash, and that is the reason why we celebrate the Chanukas Hamisbayach (as MT & the Bavli state). Had it been only for the War, or the Chanuka, we would not have celebrated.
It is possible, though, that the Bavli did not have a full copy of the Megillah. The Beis Yosef seemingly did not when he asked his “famous question” regarding the 8 days. I am aware of the OZ, and assume the BY did not have one either? (at the very least, the BY’s Kasha is Shver, since it is Offen a MT).
mdd: If stam they were serious about protesting Tznius, they should have done so in Tel Aviv, against those who really are not Tznius L’halacha (not chumra). The protests are about Power, not Tznius (which is only an excuse).
The same chazal that faulted the chashmonaim for making a treaty with rome and ttaking over the kingdom also considered them to be great tzadikim. Just because they were true tzadikim, much bigger tzadikim than anyone here will ever become, doesn’t mean they didn’t have faults. also, a few faults doesn’t make someone not a tzadik.
Herod was a slave to the Chashmonaim and he killed his masters, he wasn’t a chashmonai.
The torah holds of kanaus, if it’s done properly for the right reasons. spitting on little girls isn’t proper and probably wasn’t for the right reasons
fighting the greeks is one thing. But harrassing a fellow Jew is not right. I understand if you want to help someone improve, you nicely talk to them about how to improve. you don’t harrass them, because it’s a chillel Hashem, they won’t listen to you, the media gets on the story and people start hating us. A better way is to positively help them improve. we don’t fix a sin by sining against someone. We do it by gently helping them
The Bavli doesn’t mention Chinuch as A reason. The Bavli, obviously had the Megilas Taanis, too. It is constantly referenced. The Bach quotes it and so did the Ohr Zarua. The print that I downloaded is a very old one. There is no reason to think the Beis Yosef didn’t have it.
There is no mention in the Megilas Taanis of the Yom Tov being Zecher Lachinuch. The Ohr Zarua, who mentioned the MT in passing, suggests that the name Chanuka comes from Chinuch, but doesn’t call it the reason for Chanuka. He quotes the Gemara as the reason for Chanuka. Then he quotes the other part of the Megilas Taanis to show that they were busy for eight days.
There is no reason to celebrate the process of cleaning up, which is what the MT describes as the function of those eight days. Someone became excited upon bumping into the Megilas Taanis, which has been around for years, perhaps always, and decided that nobody had it and he now knows the REAL reason for Chanuka.
If you have to tell me that the Gemara only had the Raisha — which it quotes word for word — in order to protect a theory, it isn’t worth protecting.
The Tur had the Ohr Zarua, at least. And yet, he still says that the name Chanuka comes from Chanu Chaf Heh. That’s how insignificant the Chinuch aspect was to the Tur as to the essence of Chanuka.
The Bach quotes, and therefore had, the Megillas Taanis. He deals with the Beis Yosef’s (and Re’em, Me’iri and Maharal’s) Kasha, and doesn’t mention Chinuch as even a viable Terutz. (Perhaps he had the Bavli’s manuscript!)
So, if you want to mention the fact that the cleanup took eight days, as a Terutz, I can’t stop you. But don’t knock the whole premise of the Kasha by saying what the Gemara, Rishonim and Poskim don’t say.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.