- This topic has 121 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
Cantoresq,
“Feel free to brand me an apikoires if you wish”.
Chalila, I’m not branding YOU with any title, I’m am merely of the opinion that your OPINION ON THIS MATTER may be apikorsus.
As far as your esteem for Kaplan is concerned we are just going to have to agree to disagree. (Or disagree to agree – or whatever).
I’m also from oberlander background. It is not Chassidish but not litvish either. It is sort of a blend of hungarian and yekkish. My grandfather wears a litvish levush but davens with a havara similiar to chassidim but with a touch of yekkish.
I think it is virtually extinct at this point so many “became” chassidish. Look at Mt. Kisco. that is a real oberlander town and yet the people there pretty much became chassidish because nowadays you have to fit into a certain group. If s/o asks you if you are chassidish or litvish and you say oberland, they will have no clue what you’re talking about.
Bogen
Member
cantoresq,
Thanks for all that. Were the Neolog’s religious practices closer to today’s Orthodoxy or Conservative/Mosarati? And are there any meaningful practicing Neolog communities left? (BTW, the “status quo” practiced Judaism like the Orthodox [i.e. it was just a political division]? And what has become of them?) What caused the rift in 1868?
Where can I get Weinberger’s writing?
Posted 10 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
In theory, Neolog practice was akin to Orthodoxy with some very important exceptions. They had organs and mixed choirs in many of theior schuls. Although if little consequence today, that they moved the almemar from the center of the schul to the front, wore canonicals and had a sermon in the verncular, were considered serious Halachik breaches when they were institutued. In practice though, I assume there were more non-observant Jews among the ranks of the neolog than among the Orthodoxy. Although, my aunt (by marriage) had a grandfather who was Rosh Hakahal in a neolog schul in Nagyvarod, who had a big beard, closed his business on shabbat, davened “tallis iber’n kop” and went a daily to a two hour shiur. Conversly the Rosh Hakahal in Kisvarda, a big Orthodox kehilla, was known to step foot in the schul exactly four days a year; Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur and when he had yahrzeit for his father. Another example, I have a photo copy of a techines buch published by the Neolog community of Budapest. I doubt the most chassidic women today would be familiar with some of its contents. But I doubt any Neolog women ever used it and it was probably published to show the Orthodox that Neology is also Jewish. The division between the status quo and the Orthodox was purely political, although the Maharam Schick did make it a religious issue. As I said before the status quo did not want to be under the thumb of rabbinic hegemony, and they had not objection to the establishment of a seminary with the proceeds of the tax plaaced on the Jews after the 1848 revolt which was converted into an eductional fund. One might call them “Modern Orthodox” in some limited sense. They did adopt certain “reforms” in their schuls. their chazzanim wore robes, their rabbis spoke the vernacular, they did away with most of the piyuttim (although R. Hildesheimer always said all of them), had choirs and did away with the weekly auction of kibbudim. They also studied secular studies. I believe that had R. Esriel Hildesheimer not been chased out of Hungary by the “Zaddik of Kolomea,” R. Hillel Lichtenstein, and his coterie, either there would have been no status quo movement, or he from his yeshiva in Eisenstadt, would have been its spiritual leader. I’m sure an Amazon search will produce results for R. Weinberger’s writings. Or you can contact the Sehper Hermon Press, the publisher of the volume.
MY name is XXX XXXXXXX XXXXX. I live on XX XXXXXXX XX, XXXXXXXX, XX XXXXX
my ttellophone number is XXX-XXX-XXXX celluer 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX
social security XXXXXzXXXXX [ had to change it to a z so not even one can be correct]
shoe size 10.5
nusach askenaz
Occupation- posek dayan or a bochu in yeshiva with an ego.
what other nosy questions are you going to ask
i was born in **** tommorow is my hebrew bday [that is actually true]
my age is **
maybe your cia/ fbi/ mossod/ gss/mi6 supervisor will be able to decipher my xxx and***
Just read through my last post. It sounds like I think I know exactly what I am talking about. I am not actually sure if it is accurate. But I think it is the basic idea.
To Bogen, Cantoresq, intellegent,
Thanks to Cantoresq for his illuminating comments on the Neologs. For an excellent and comprehensive treatment of the split within Orthodoxy in Hungary 1868-9, refer to Jacob Katz’s book, “Hakera Shelo Nitachah”, “The Unhealed Breach: The Secession of Orthodox Jews from the General Community in Hungary and Germany”. For those who are unfamiliar with Jacob Katz (1904-1997), he was the preemininent Jewish historian of the last generation, in addition to being a student of the Hungarian and German Yeshivos and a talmid chochom in his own right. His stature is such that not only did he write books of history, but history books are now being written about him.
proud jew!
Blue shirt, I based most of my comments on Katz’s book. What I also found interesting was Katz’s demonstration of Rabbi S.R. Hirsch’s personal involvement in the Hungarian issue. According to Katz, Hirsch lent instrumental support to the secessionist Orthodox in Hungary. Although he doesn’t come out and say so, the implication is that Hirsch realized that his movement had, to a large degree, failed in Germany; that the majority of Torah observant Jews in Germany would not follow him and form independat kehillot, but rather adhered to the POV of the Wurzberger Rav and stayed part of the EinheitsGemeinde, albeit in orthoprax schuls. (Even Frnkfurt, the seat of the doctrine of Austritt, had such a schul, presided over by the famed and learned Marcus Horvitz, a close talmid of R. Esriel Hildesheimer. That schul was bigger than Hirsch’s IRG and remained so literally until WWII) Rav Hirsch therefore lent his efforts to Hungary where there was a better chance to attain the seperatism he wanted for German Orthodoxy. Perhaps R. Hirsch thought that if he were successful in influencing Hungarian Orthodoxy to secede, German Jews would follow the Hungarian example. All in all Hirsch failed in his attempt to create a real separate Orthodox community in Germany; which was his main quest. He succeeded however in demonstrating that a Jew can be religious, in the fullest sense of the word, both in deed and in creed, and yet be fully engaged in the world at large. I think it was that internal contradiction in his thought that doomed Austrittism from the get go. By contrast, seperatist Orthodoxy succedded in Hungary because, at least in theory, Hungarian Orthodox Jews rejected Hungarian society as well.
cantoresq, By Rav S.R. Hirsch supporting Hungarian Orthodoxy’s position, does not demonstrate any “implication” (your words) that his approach in Germany failed. It merely demonstrates that he felt it important to extend this principle across Orthodoxy worldwide. Additionally, you are fond of (correctly) repeating that there is no truth in numbers (i.e. being numerically larger doesn’t demonstrate being right), so even if most of German Orthodoxy didn’t follow Rav Hirsch in seceding (I don’t know the veracity of this), it would not demonstrate the correctness of his position.
Regarding the Status Quo Ante, they were merely an agglomeration of varied interests, and not any coherent or even organized group. Many Chasidic Kehilas, Debrecin included, were Status Quo. As time passed some of them formally joined organized Orthodoxy in Hungary.
As far as the Neolog, they’ve all but disappeared (something that DOES demonstrate their falseness.) They still have a large temple in Budapest, that may seat thousands, but I’d wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t have a minyan on Shabbos.
Joseph
Member
cantoresq, By Rav S.R. Hirsch supporting Hungarian Orthodoxy’s position, does not demonstrate any “implication” (your words) that his approach in Germany failed. It merely demonstrates that he felt it important to extend this principle across Orthodoxy worldwide. Additionally, you are fond of (correctly) repeating that there is no truth in numbers (i.e. being numerically larger doesn’t demonstrate being right), so even if most of German Orthodoxy didn’t follow Rav Hirsch in seceding (I don’t know the veracity of this), it would not demonstrate the correctness of his position.
Regarding the Status Quo Ante, they were merely an agglomeration of varied interests, and not any coherent or even organized group. Many Chasidic Kehilas, Debrecin included, were Status Quo. As time passed some of them formally joined organized Orthodoxy in Hungary.
As far as the Neolog, they’ve all but disappeared (something that DOES demonstrate their falseness.) They still have a large temple in Budapest, that may seat thousands, but I’d wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t have a minyan on Shabbos.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph, where did I once mention anything about the “correctness” of R. Hirsch austritt? I mentioned the success of it. It is clear that R. Hirsch intended for every religiously observant Jew in Germany to join the separatist community. That the majority did not, speaks to the success of that endeavor, not whether it was a good idea. As far as the status quo, indeed they were not as organized as Neologs or the Orthodox. then again, that was their point. They did not want to be part of a larger organization. I didn’t know that Debrecen was a status quo kehilla. And you are wrong the Neologs have not disappeared. The Seminary never shut down and supplied rabbis to the Soviet Bloc during the communist regimes. When I was last in Budapest, the Dohany drew a crowd of several hundred worshippers on a Shabbat morning; about half of them tourists or foreigners, the rest locals. The Kazincy does about as well.
Precisely, the Status Quo didn’t have any particular common beliefs, as they were just any kehila that didn’t want to join a larger organized movement that was essentially fostered upon Hungarian Jewry after the “emancipation” in 1867. I take it that you were one of the hundreds of worshipers in the Dohany, for you to know their size, that Shabbos morning?
i’m orthadox/litvish/semi yeshivish/heimish
davened askinaz in school, davens sefard now
size 5 1/2-6 shoes
moderators never let us post occupations, so u’ll never know(would be interesting though)
i love the personal threads(thanx will hill-my topics they never wanna add)
………..we could go on & on but the moderators would just delete so….bye 4 now!!!!!!
Was Pressburg near the Neolog Community?
intellegent: thanks for the clarification–no wonder i get so many “whats oberlander???” lol.
and i agree with mw13: we all have the same, true lineage, and a common goal.
were all jews and proud of it
yankdownunder, Pressburg was very strongly Orthodox. It was of course under the tutelage of the Chasam Sofer, who strongly fought the reformers.
I love this question, because it just shows how people think 🙂
I’m litvish and ashkenazik, but after that, I firmly believe that labels are for suits. I much more prefer the 20 q. game, i.e. Do you learn? If so, b/c you want to or b/c you have to? etc. etc.
But, just to satisfy everyone else, if I had to label myself, it would be liberal yeshivish. I’m in Yeshiva, and I learn when I can, but I believe in going to college to get a parnasa and not having to rely on others. At the same time, I believe in growing for growing’s sake, and I’m into Kiruv. So put your own label if you’d like.
intellegent, I think that that is exactly what Oberlanish is. I also think that this might be the definition to Heimish. Where you are not chassidsh nor Litvish. Many Heimishe Yidden do not wear a chassidish Levush, yet they have chassidishe minhagim such as a chassidishe Havara, Mitzva Tanz etc. Similarly, the Heimishe sect is alomost extinct since most are either becoming Litvish or chassidish.
Joseph
Member
. . . I take it that you were one of the hundreds of worshipers in the Dohany, for you to know their size, that Shabbos morning?
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Indeed I walked over to the Dohany after davening for the amud in the Desewfy Ut schul. I liked to daven in the Desewfy or at Visgrady since in those schuls they said the Mi Sh’beirach for Medinat Yisrael, while in the Kazincy, the don’t. Ad BTW, although the spiritual capital of Orthodoxy in light of its yeshiva, Pressburg had a sizable neolog community as well, and a chor schul replete with an organ.
cantoresq-
i asked you this once before but the thread got closed before you could reply- you sound exactly like my uncle and, to clarify, i just wanted to know- what type of law do you practice? Please answer,
from your almost niece in lakewood.
chasid-of-Hashem
Member
cantoresq-
i asked you this once before but the thread got closed before you could reply- you sound exactly like my uncle and, to clarify, i just wanted to know- what type of law do you practice? Please answer,
from your almost niece in lakewood.
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
My main specialty is domestic relations. And I have a niece in Lakewood. If you are my niece, cool.
I’m a Yekke, and proud to be!!!! 🙂 🙂 🙂
Chatty, I’m half yekke!
She protesteth too much.
SJSinNYC: Half, as in your mom is a Yekke and your Father is not? So you don’t do all the Yekke Minhagim?
My father’s parents are both from Germany, My mom’s parents aren’t. But I consider myself a real yekke!
yup, canatoresq, it does sound to me like you are my nunc!! i guess the next ywn thread will be entitled “looking for family members…”
seriously, its nice to hear from you. and regards from your niece’s daughter who is named after your grandmother!!
Chatty: Yes my mother is 100% yekke, my father not at all. We dont really follow yekke minhagim, but there are a few things that we do. I got married under a talis. We say “maltzeit” after bentching (you may not know what this is – its a more minor yekke custom). You can consider yourself a “real” yekke because you follow all the minhagim. 🙂
chasid-of-Hashem
Member
yup, canatoresq, it does sound to me like you are my nunc!! i guess the next ywn thread will be entitled “looking for family members…”
seriously, its nice to hear from you. and regards from your niece’s daughter who is named after your grandmother!!
Posted 39 minutes ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Well now, isn’t this an interesting turn of events. YWN is now a family affair. Perhaps someone might want to write a graduate school thesis on the family dynamic of yeshivish internet blogs. You have a case study right before your eyes.
I’m getting all teary eyed. 🙂
notpashut-thanks for the moment of humor – we could use it nowadays…
(BTW, I never replied to one of your early posts of some days ago- too much happening. I’ll try to do it IYH in due time)
SJS: Yup I’m a real Yekke, although I never heard of “maltzeit” what is that? Interesting that you got married under a Tallis, my sisters did not have that, being that their husbands are not Yekkes, though we did have Shir Hamalos sung under the chuppah. Did you also face the wall?
Thanks Rabbi,
I was getting nervous you had actually been convinced by my words. Oh well, I guess I’ll just have to prepare myself for round two. 🙂
Chatty: the maltzeit thing is a declaration that the meal is over. Its the “start counting time” for waiting between meat and dairy. Its a minority yekke minhag.
We didnt get married facing the wall, but we got married outside. So there technically wasnt a wall 🙂 We did face the crowd though. And we sang shir hamaalos.
notpashut don’t get emotional. It’s really ok. Every family has it’s non-conforming branch.
I have VERY much enjoyed following this thread and I will add my opinion too…
Firstly, I am of pure yekke lineage, but was brought up more litvish as is usual in todays world.
The “malzeit” minhag is actually a shortened version of “gezaigtne malzeit” (or something like that) which basically translates to “until the next meal”, something more understandable as a sign-off after a meal.
Dear Rabbiofberlin, yet again you have found your kindred spirits or twin brothers as you continue to insist that daas Torah is non-existent. We have been through this line before and you too admitted then (as Cantoresq has in this thread too) that you envy the belief of the true believers in daas Torah. Your assertion that this is a new phenomana in Am Yisroel is ludicrous. Of course there are no seforim written with all the daas Torah of previous generations as unlike Halacha which is fixed, daas Torah changes with every slight variation in the story and even if not, what may be correct for one generation is not necessarily true for another time. However, look at all the Kol Koreh’s that the Chofetz Chaim wrote (as printed in Ma’amorim Umichtovim Mibaal HaChofetz Chaim) for an idea of what was usual in yesteryear. Perhaps the Gedolim’s fight against translating the Torah into German by Mendelsohn was also meddling in your opinion as there is no issur or halachic issues involved (even Artscroll do it nowadays!). Well maybe had you lived then and had your opinions then too, you may have turned out a reform rabbi (of Berlin too). The need to write down daas Torah for the future is unnecessary and even dangerous and therefore was not done in previous generations but that does not mean that clal Yisroel didnt follow daas Torah nor that the Gedolim didnt involve themselves in non-halachic issues.
As we have mentioned before, if you would only use equal levels of your intelligence to try to understand the holy words of our Gedolim as you seem to use to try to belittle and refute them, your life would improve dramatically!!
I wish all of us the fulfillment of the words of the Novi “????? ???? ??? ?? ???”.
cantoresq, are you the only branch of the family that is non-conforming?
Truehonesty, Yasher Koach.
cantoresq,
Who’s the non-conformist, you or your niece.
Joseph
Member
cantoresq, are you the only branch of the family that is non-conforming?
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph, I think this forum has gotten a healthy enough glimpse into my personal life for now. But to answer your question with a question, why do you assume I am the one who doesn’t conform?
notpashut
Member
cantoresq,
Who’s the non-conformist, you or your niece.
Posted 2 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
We are both conformist. We conform to the dictates of our heritage, the way we were raised and, most importantly, our consciences. Now enough of my family dynamic. Let’s get back to fighting the age old internecine Milchemet Hashem.
OY,oy,oy!!! I am not sure why I continue to be a masochist and read the postings of people who, while being very well-intentioned, limit their knowledge to the happenings of the last fifty years- the blink of an eye in our history and truly have no concept of Jewish history.
True honesty and notpashut- let me repeat my contentions and also my basis for asserting that “ddas torah’-as you interpret it- is of very recent vintage and has never been the norm in our history.
The idea that a Godol or Rov has the ABSOLUTE knowledge for everything and that one has to acccept all his sayings is ABSOLUTELY not the Jewish way. No one is infallible in our tradition. No one- not even Moshe rabbeinu- has absolute knowledge.
If you deny that- then you belong to a different religion.
This is my view, and everything else follows naturally. I have to accept the “PISKEI halocho” of poskim (at least the ones I take on as Posskim)by the fact of “lo sossur”, which deals exclusively with Piskei halocho.
However, on matters of everyday life and general conduct, no one has the absolute knowledge and I am not obliged to cast aside my own feelings and thoughts about this.
Note that I am saying I am not “obliged”. If I want to,sure I can accept this fact. That is why chassidim of all kinds do listen to their rebbe and why many of the yeshivaleit feel that they must listen to their roshei yeshiva.This is their privilege.
HOWEVER- it does not obligate ME or anyone else that does not accept this “yoke”.
Hence, to scream “daas torah” or “emunas chachomim’ is totally irrelevant. If I have not accepted that person’s leadership, this does not obligate me at all and I am not a worse jew for it.
notpashut- you mentioned “going to the bathroom”. well, many chassidim do not lift their finger without consulting their rebbe. Whether on business deals, shidduchim, jobs, houses, etc, they consult their rebbe. Does that mean I have to accept it too? NO- because I have not accepted that person’s yoke. It may be a good advice , but it is not obligatory for me.
tru honesty- I have no clue what you are trying to say with your examples of yesteryear. As a matter of fact, your examples support MY view of “daas torah”. I don’t know if anyone objected to translating the Torah in German but the fact is that it is being traslated in every language,starting many years ago. SO, where is your “daas torah” on this? if this would be an absolute “issur’ it could not be changed.
The fact is that the opinion of gedolim of yesteryear and today on “matters of general life’ are just that, opinions. They do not oblige me to follow this line at all.
I can- and will- vote for the candidate that I feel is right. The directive of any Godol by itself is only an opinion and does force me to follow it.
This never changed and has been so for thousands of years. You find time and time again in the gemoro that tannoim and amoroim had opinions that were not followed or , if they were followed, ended up wrongly.
SO, this is why I maintain that the concept of “daas torah’ that you espouse-namely that it is IMMUTABLE and MUST be followed, is a modern invention. only Piskei halocho have to be followed and ,even then, only if you accept this Possek.
I have not even started delving into the question of which godol is the one to follow.
true honesty- you, yourself admit you cannot fidn anywhere a basis for this idea. I wonder why this is so….could it be that it never really was a real concept?
The fact is that your concept of “daas torah’ is an invention of the twentieth century.
Rabbiofberlin,
I think we’re making some foward progress here. (I feel like a therapist.)
I don’t think any normal person would contend that any Gadol has ABSOLUTE knowledge of anything. (I’m not Chasiddish so I can’t speak for them, but I’d assume that even they agree – they just feel that the Rebbe will always have siyyatta d’shmaya to make the correct decision).
As to “lo sassur” dealing exclusively with piskei halacha I can not dispute that point until I research the issue.
I think a big part of our machlokes here is narrowing down the type of issues to ask da’as torah.
For instance, sometimes when asking a Rosh HaYeshiva a question as to weather or not do go ahead with a business deal, the questioner merely is looking for reassurance or for a bracha.
I’m mostly dealing with the issue of things that are nogaiah to the tzibbur. When it comes to such an issue, us in the da’as torah camp are simply saying that when Rabbiofberlin (& myself for that matter) is giving his opinion on the matter he is coming to his conclusions based on all the shtusim that his head is filled with & his opinion is not really worth any more than the other semi-intelligent guy next door.
However when an Adam Gadol offers HIS opinion on the matter, he is coming to his conclusion based on the TORAH outlook of the situation – NOT the New York Times outlook.
In other words, the odds are that HIS opinion is much more in tune with Hashem’s opinion than YOUR opinion.
THEREFORE common sense dictates that when attemting to come to a decision as to how to proceed, it would behoove (not obligate from a halachic perspective, rather from a moral perspective) the thinking orthodox jew who is interested in acting in accordance with G-D’s will to follow the opinion of Gedolai Yisroel & not the opinion of every baalabos & his mother-in-law.
As I stated previously, this is not a “twentieth century invention”, this is basic common sense which has been in existence since Adam HaRishon.
ROB is of course correct that no leader is infallible. There is even a korban – the Par He’elem Davar, that is brought when people transgress the Torah based on a mistaken ruling by Beis Din. But that means that the people followed Beis Din!!!
I’m mostly dealing with the issue of things that are nogaiah to the tzibbur. When it comes to such an issue, us in the da’as torah camp are simply saying that when Rabbiofberlin (& myself for that matter) is giving his opinion on the matter he is coming to his conclusions based on all the shtusim that his head is filled with & his opinion is not really worth any more than the other semi-intelligent guy next door.
However when an Adam Gadol offers HIS opinion on the matter, he is coming to his conclusion based on the TORAH outlook of the situation – NOT the New York Times outlook.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
First of all, as cited by Kaplan, the Rambam holds otherwise. Moreover, this assumes that Gedolim have access to better information than do we. Otherwise, how can we assume that their Torah perspective is actually correct, since it might be based on mis-information. My favorite example of this is R. Elya Svei, when he called R. Norman Lamm a “soneh Hashem” bsed on wrong information. Had R. Lamm said that R. Svei was told he said, the appelation would have been correct. But in fact R. Lamm did not say what R. Svei was told he said. Thus the Da’as Torah was faulty. It is my understanding that most Gedolim do not actually engage in investigating facts. Rather, they rely on information supplied to them by trusted sources. As such the information that Gedolim recieve is only as trustworthy as those sources, which we know can be dubious (recall the misinformation surrounding Lipa Schmelczer and concerts). Thus, arguably people are not hearing Da’as Torah, but rather the da’as of those “trusted sources.” Even in those cases where a Gadol might be directly familair with the facts since they are readily available (i.e. elections), for his Da’as Torah to be dispositive, he would have to be an expert on the subject about which he opines. Else again we may be the victims of the Gadol’s misapprehension of the facts. I’ts not the “Torah” of the Da’as Torah I question, it’s the Da’as.
notpashut— maybe the gap is not that far…
but we might well still differ on whether any Godol’s words can be wrong. I don’t want to arouse the ire of a number of our posters but the Holocaust has been put forward as an example where the words of the gedolim of that generation – who advised not to leave europe – proved to be disastrous. G-d forbid for me to make an issue of this but it is obvioust that this is one instance where advice of Gedolim was proven to be erroneous.
Another might be the issue of the State of Israel- I use the name ‘state’ on purpose because I believe that the approach of Rav Kook and his talmidim is the right one (in spite of recent events). Which ‘daas torah’ do you follow: Rav kook or the Satmarer rebbe? Both great people, both Gedolim. So, which one ‘s words are to be followed?
In short- on issues which don’t touch upon direct halacha, I feel there is no such thing as ‘daas torah’ which you have to follow blindly. Remember that the Lubavitcher rebbe insisted not to give back one inch- whereas some of the present Gedolim are more flexible. Whom do you follow?
There is no unitary authority in yiddishkeit and there is no infallibility either. Only history shows what is the right approach.
Rabbiofberlin,
A number of issues you mention I adressed in previous posts. (Holocaust)
Follow the Da’as Torah of whoever your Rebbe, Rosh Yeshiva or Rav may be…JUST FOLLOW DA”AS TORAH!
‘Cause our da’as is da’as baalabatim, which is hepech da’as torah.
Cantoresq,
Allow me to point out that most often our information is coming from newspapers,t.v., internet, what our friend told us during laining etc…the point is, there is no reason to assume that our information is more accurate than theirs.
Last time I checked most of us were not either engaged in investigating facts. We just rely on whomever we heard it from. So it’s not like our da’as is such hot stuff.
When it comes to elections & other such matters, 99% of the time we are arriving at our conclusions based on what we consider to be our own brilliant analyzation of the situation, but again, Hashem’s opinion is nowhere in the equation.
Someone who lives, breathes & sleeps Torah will have a knack, sixth sense, innate ability or chush to “feel” the ratzon Hashem in any particular situation with which they are somewhat familiar.
This is not blind, foolish faith. As I pointed out before, this is common sense & true to any proffesion in the world.
Can a Gadol make a mistake?
Sure. But the odds of him making a mistake as to the ratzon hashem are about 5% (maybe), while the odds of us making a mistake are somewhere between 50-100%.
My erstwhile “Rabbi” of Berlin: Your comments are a little muddling but I will try o make some sense! Indeed there was great opposition to Mendelsohn’s translation of the Chumash into German from all orthodox circles led mainly by the Chassam Sofer. My point is that this is indeed not a point of halacha but hashkafa (for that generation and that generation ONLY). The Gedolim took a stand, and believe it or not, the balabatim accepted and followed their call to ban the Mendelsohn translation. I am sure that had you lived in those times you would have vehemently protested against the Rabbis and proudly displayed a leather-bound copy in your study!! Even during he Chassam Sofer’s lifetime he was asked about Reb Shimshon Refoel Hirsh’s books in German and indeed over the years the daas Torah changed to fit and apply to the relevant generation. Sometimes 2 people can ask a Rabbi the same hashkafa question and get told different advice. What is correct for Reuvain is not necessarily correct for Shimon.
Your comments about infallibility are correct, nobody suggests that the Rabbonim are Gods and that they cannot make mistakes etc etc. Our point is, and continues to be even when you try to twist around, that in a similar way that even you agree that one may go to a Godol for a bracha and his bracha is worth more than a simple person BECAUSE he is a Godol and his relationship with HaShem is closer than you or me and therefore he is included in the saying “???? ???? ????”? ?????”. So too a Godol has the siyatta dishmaya (a concept that you always totally disregard) to answer in the way that is correct for that person. Just because the business deal might fail afterwards does not mean that the advice given was wrong for that person. Can you know the cheshbonos of shomayim? Maybe this loss saved him from other worse scenarios or maybe even the zchus of following the Rabbi and not losing his bitochon after the loss, gained him untold merit in Olam Haboh.
The akeida is commonly known as “akeidas yitzchok”, however it really was Avrohom who had this major nisayon. The meforshim explain that Avrohom was told directly from HaShem and therefore the nisayon was somewhat easier as he was sure he was doing the right thing. Yitzchok only knew about it from Avrohom and he still happily accepted the instructions because he had emunas chachomim and didnt try to argue that maybe Avrohom misunderstood, didnt know all the facts, wasnt an expert, got bad information, and who knows what else but trusted blindly even to the extent of mesiras nefesh literally. For this reason it is called akeidas yitzchok. Food for thought dear rabbi…
I have much more to say but enough for now…
notpashut,
Yasher Koach for defending THE TORAH.
1. Allow me to point out that most often our information is coming from newspapers,t.v., internet, what our friend told us during laining etc…the point is, there is no reason to assume that our information is more accurate than theirs.
2. Last time I checked most of us were not either engaged in investigating facts. We just rely on whomever we heard it from. So it’s not like our da’as is such hot stuff.
3. When it comes to elections & other such matters, 99% of the time we are arriving at our conclusions based on what we consider to be our own brilliant analyzation of the situation, but again, Hashem’s opinion is nowhere in the equation.
4. Someone who lives, breathes & sleeps Torah will have a knack, sixth sense, innate ability or chush to “feel” the ratzon Hashem in any particular situation with which they are somewhat familiar.
This is not blind, foolish faith. As I pointed out before, this is common sense & true to any proffesion in the world.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
I added numbers to nopashut’s comments to me to make it easier to respond to them.
1. I never claimed to have better information on secular isues than Gedolim. I simply posited that Gedolim often have inaacurate or incomplete information, and act accordingly, yielding imperfect or inaccurate results.
2. Same as 1 above.
3. How do you know for sure that G-d does not influence what we all do? Where is it stated in our tradition that the gift of Divine intervention is reserved only for the spiritual elite amongst us? Indeed one pasuk in Tehillim seems to reserve it for fools (“shomer p’taim Hashem”). You say this is common sense. I say it is a sychophantic cop out. Is it not possible if not highly probable that someone who truly yearns for G-d to “show him the way” will get such a “signal” in a way that compels him to act as G-d wants him to act?
4. This notion is unfalsifiable and I therefore cannot accept it. Moreover, I don’t need it to have a legitimate and fulfilling spiritual system. And when you think about it, it removes the possibility for any disparity of opinions; which is systemically invalid. The contemporary formulation of Da’as Torah is that Gedolim, by virtue of their scholarship and advanced spirirtual development are better able to discern or intuit the singular Divine will in any given situation. That construct asumes that G-d has only one will or desired result. Thus if two Gedolim disagree about who should be president, for example (and I assume no ulterior motives in this hypothetical dispute), one per force has to be wrong since G-d can only truly prefer one candidate. Never minding the impossibility of determining who is right, such a secenario violates the axiom of “Yesh harbeh panim laTorah.” As such it’s simply a false ideology.
cantoresq:
1 & 2. I understood notpashut to mean that the information YOU heard on the grapevine about how the Gedolim treated any certain matter (R’ Lamm, Schmeltzer, etc.) is just that; grapevine and half-inaccuracies. So YOUR assumption the Gedolim based ANYTHING on misinformation, is just your assumptions based on what you heard on the grapevine.
3. That heavenly “signal” is far more likely to reach a Godol than a Koton (like ourselves.)
4. Sure there are disparities of opinion amongst Gedolim. YOU just follow YOUR Rov.
cantoresq, To insure clarity, essentially the point (or one of them) is thus:
YOUR information on what the Gedolim based a certain action upon (that you claim was disinformation fed to the Gedolim by their trusted advisors), is misinformation. YOU heard that “Godol Aleph” received “Information X” (that is clearly disinformation.) But the grapevine where YOU heard that Information X was fed to the Godol is false.
(Additionally, remember that the Gedolim choose who to trust as their advisors, and what information — that they are given — is indeed accurate. I would certainly trust their judgment that they are confident information they are told is accurate prior to acting upon it. Remember, they are Gedolim, and you can be sure they take all these considerations into account.)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.