Always_Ask_Questions

> Are you really that unknowledgeable?

I am not discussing the Army, I am discussing the position of the religious Jews. We are not dhimmis at this point. Instead of saying “we can’t because …”
have a constructive position: we will join (in some limited way) under these conditions. For example, why not create a cyber unit first, or a support unit that drive supplies, or a sepahrdi arab-speaking unit of terrorist interrogators. And then negotiate the terms.

somejew > all gedolai poskim spent so much time and ink in writing the lengthy responsa that makes up the massive library of Shu”T we have since Chasimas haShas.

And that is why we have gedolei yisroel discuss whether R Kanevsky nodded or not and whether he was answering the right question. Things happen. There is a lot you can learn from responsa but also a lot from oral conversation. Gemora was completed several centuries after most opinions were expressed.

I wonder what are we thinking about “observant” people that Rebbe is mentioning that (1) sent out false rumors about R Kook (2) sent out false letters in the name of the Rabonim of Yishuv. Are such people considered part of Torah and just sinned because of their zealotry or they are simply liars and worse than honest people who may not be shomer shabbos? Here I am getting dangerously towards R Kook’s position and not comfortable with that!

On the eve of Succos 1973, while the Yom Kippur War raged, the late Rosh Yeshiva of the Mirrer Yeshiva in Jerusalem, addressed his students. These students were not part of the physical war effort, and Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz z”l – who in deference to the war had effectively cancelled the students’ scheduled time off for the holiday – regularly spoke with them about their spiritual role in the war effort and their attitude towards those fighting on their behalf. Rav Chaim told his students that he viewed the soldiers as modern day versions of the Papus and Lulianus of the Talmud. In the period following the destruction of the Second Temple, a Roman princess had been found murdered, an event that generated a blood libel against the entire Jewish community. These two young men – Papus and Lulianus – stepped forward and took responsibility for the act and in that way deflected responsibility from the Jewish community, averting a massacre. The Talmud (TB Bava Basra 10b) refers to them as Harugei Lud, those murdered at Lud, and sees them as occupying an absolutely exclusive and vaunted place in the World to Come. Rav Chaim believed that the young men of the IDF falling in battle would occupy that same exclusive and vaunted place because of their readiness to sacrifice everything for their people.

Every day, someone would drive Rabbi Auerbach from his home in the Sha’arei Chesed area of Yerushalayim to his yeshiva in the suburban neighborhood of Bayit Vegan. The rabbi would occasionally ask the driver to make a detour for a few moments outside Har Herzl, the burial site of Israel’s fallen soldiers, which was on the way to the yeshiva. There he would pray, reciting Tehillim (Psalms) for important matters concerning the Jewish people.

What motivated this venerated sage to choose Har Herzl for his prayers? I think the answer lies in the following story which is so revealing of his and the Torah’s outlook on your question.

A student once approached Rav Shlomo Zalman and asked for a short timeout from his studies so he could travel to the north of Israel, where many holy, righteous Jews of old are buried, to pray at the graves of these tzaddikim (righteous people). Rav Shlomo Zalman looked perplexed but didn’t immediately answer. Sensing hesitation from his rabbi, the student elaborated, explaining he had some important personal issues to think through and he felt praying at the graves of the righteous would help him to receive the insights and guidance he was seeking. Rabbi Auerbach replied that he fully understood what the student wanted to do and why he wanted to do it, but could not understand why he would travel for hours to a faraway place to pray at the graves of a few tzaddikim when there were thousands of tzaddikim buried on Har Herzl (the graves of all the fallen Israeli soldiers), just 5 minutes from the yeshiva!

Chaim > All we need to establish was that he was a gadol.

Right. I think many people get carried away that the whole world needs to agree with their hashkofa – or else. Indeed, I listened to a talmid chacham, and he said – this is the way to live life, and if you do not agree – you are disrespecting my teacher! Note that 200 years ago, a simple Yid, like most of us, would not get exposed to such cases – you might spend most of your life dealing only with people who follow same minhagim as you do. Scholars might get exposed to other opinions, but others did not.

It is clear that gedolim disagreed on major issues. From B Hillel and B Shammai disagreeing on who is a mamzer. Can you imagine someone who is considered a mamzer by the other group?! And in our times, it is really expected that different Talmidei Chachamim would have different opinions on topics that are so complicated and different from what we had to deal over centuries. They themselves are aware of this and are able to have discussions. See the quoted discussion where R Kotler came to convince R Soloveitchik (whom he calls Bostoner Rav) to join him in protesting drafting girls into Tzahal, and conversations ends with firm but polite disagreement “gutten tag, Kletzker Rosh Yeshiva”.

somejew, thanks for the Gerer Rebbe quotes. I think if you were to pose your disagreement with R Kook in terms and reverence as the Gerer Rebbe, nobody would have a problem with that. Notice Gerer Rebbe mentions the falsehood of accusations about R Kook and that even Old Yishuv leaders were not comfortable about something that was posted “on their behalf”.

Also, how do you understand Gerer Rebbe’s position on the oaths? He seem to be advocating for charedi aliya.

Also, I did not fully understand how he views Beltzer Rebbe’s position about not joining Agudah.

> i have never rejected the Ohr Someach or the Netziv.

I did not say you rejected them. I don’t know where you stand. They are seemingly not as anti-Z as you think is kosher. I also mentioned other rabbis that you simply ignore for unknown to me reasons. You finally addressed R Kook in this letter by Gerer Rebbe, and it seems that Gerer Rebbe is way more respectful than you are. Also note that some things that Gerer Rebbe disagrees with in R Kook – such as praising on-religious Jews – are quite reasonable from the POV of pro-Z thinkers. For example, I think R Soloveitchik would be closer to Gerer Rebbe than to R Kook in the issues mentioned in this letter. Also, many of these issues are of historical interest, but are not relevant today as the anti-religious Zionists are almost extinct.

somejew, first we already found here that Ohr Sameach was not an extremist towards religious Zionists. Same with Netziv. Then, there are gedolim that you refuse to acknowledge as gedolim without an explanation, despite those gedolim being accepted by other gedolim.

ard> muslims let us live for hundreds of years much better than the christians even with all these quotes,..[H]ashem is the one who decides how they act toward us,

It would be also kefira to say that Hashem’s decision is not dependent on our behavior .. So, maybe we have to admit that sephardim were less annoying to their neighbors than Ashkenazim. We see it in Israel also – Sephardi observant Jews are in less conflict with non-observant ones. And non-observant ones are much more prone to stop by a bet knesset, put a kippah on and daven. Maybe, it is because Sephardim did not go thru haskalah with all resulting bitterness between camps (for example, R Berel Wein suggests that negative attitude of Israeli Labor to religion can be traced back to Russian government forcing religious kahal to select candidates for army recruitment with resulting corruption and suffering by the poor) .

So, we can look at that and try to see when our behaviors are called by that history of bitterness that we do not have to replicate in every generation.

Chesky, thanks for the info. Could you ask your Rav to publicize that letter from R Chaim, or at least to send it to those gedolim who are not aware of it and are making decisions based on seemingly incomplete information.

Talking, except maybe worth listening to great experts on the issue instead of your high school Rebbe. R Pliskin, for example, has great books about marriage and middos in general.

by halakha, I think, you can’t get it back from a child. (discussed in halochos of lending lulav on the first day)

smerel, exactly. So, according to this shita (that we seem to understand R Landau supports but maybe we are wrong) – daas Torah is not working unless you agree to the decision l’hathila. This is a problem, so I am surprised nobody asked R Landau about this.

Avram > ? Why not have a desktop or laptop computer to access the Web if needed, and then if you really need to tap around town rather than having a flip phone, get smartphones from a company like KosherCell,

this is a reasonable idea.

You could also make that computer into a server and have all devices in a house use that one filter. Check T&C whether filter companies will let you, or they would rather have you pay for each device separately. Maybe, they don’t care about rare computer-savvy users. Of course, having filter on the router would also solve this (except connecting via mobile or starbucks).

Avram, a great duolingo example, lets see what we can learn from it:
first, when the account has no admin privileges, you may not be able to install the app. So, you would have to ask the parent whether it is a good idea.
2nd – the kid should know basics of cybersecurity and not give his contact list, etc. As this is really low risk – a great place to check your skills.
3) I am guessing video ads are for the free version, pay $10/month and let your kid learn the languages without distractions. Take it out of his college fund. He’ll thank you later.
4) if you see the screen in the living room, you will notice if ads are becoming too much or inappropriate. Generally, ads follow what they learned about you and what can be sold. Do not go to bad sites and buy,or just search for, several computer items and books from that account to ensure boring ads for years to come.
5) looking up stuff – great time to teach about sources – which ones are reliable, which ones can be biased and why, which ones are true Torah sources and how to determine what the derech is
6) latest challenge – kids go by GPT answers without even going to the source. Still working on this – showing them how to be sceptical with the answer, how to double-check them.

GH,
I think the middle ground is to get children engaged themselves, rather than recite materials they were given. You can simply go through those materials in advance and select some or see how you can direct that material to a topic you think they should be paying attention to.

how about this solution that might work for some kids in some families:
the kid gets a fancy computer and any other presents he wants. In exchange, the rules are – he uses computers for 1-2 hours a day, after he did homework, in the living room with the screen towards the public. Preferably, a parent or an older sibling is there also, so that they can discuss interesting things they learn online.

kako, if it were for you, R Akiva would not have been able to add his opinion to Hagadah, and probably others too.

Avram, in terms of true need –
you are aware that cars kill more people than internet, right? Do most people think twice before taking a ride to a store? I think we are relying that Hashem protects simple people doing routine activities. Internet is still news for some communities, but you can be sure that in one more generation, it will be like cars. Do I need to be careful looking for Torah lectures? for historical information? stock prices? kids doing SAT? And, of course, I don’t think you are accessing YWN via a dialup, so this discussion is highly theoretical.

somejew > Netziv strongly advises against complete separation even from those within the community who may seem lax or different in their observance, arguing that such division weakens the Jewish people, especially in exile, and makes them vulnerable. However, his solution is not to actively collaborate with outright heretics (apikorsim or those who deny the Talmud – like today’s “religious” zionists). Rather, he advocates for strengthening the entire observant community – including the less meticulous – through widespread, communal Torah study, even if initially pursued shelo lishmah.

Look, I can see one of the today’s heads of schools in Israel writing what you wrote. But I think this is not what Netziv wrote and your understanding is a little off historically. This is not how others understood Netziv: he is against cooperating of the anti-religious (Bundists, Communists, maybe anti-religious Zionists), aso Reform “culturalists” – these are those who claim that they are for the Torah but “deny Talmud” and mesorah in general. At the same time, he is for cooperation with those who are observant, what they call “traditional” in Israel, and surely other observant groups. Where on earth you found that “religious Zionists” deny Talmud, I don’t know. It seems at worst, there is a disagreement about one agadta about 3 shevuous. So, you are doing opposite of what Netziv is suggesting – you are looking for a machlokes and then try to make as much fire from this little machlokes.

As I mentioned on WZO, even authors of Kol Koreh admit that there are Talmidei Chachamim with opposite view. And you refuse to show respect to those who your leaders recognize as T’Ch?! Imagine you are a antiZ and also a student of R Feinstein and you come and see him talking to his cousin R Soloveitchik – are you going to show respect to one and not another? If they are having a halachik discussion – would you listen to one of them and close your ears not to hear the other? I am really curious.

Damoshe, thanks for this. Simcha, what they say is relevant – there are 3 types of slavery – to non-Jews, to Jews, and to yourself. Some people enslave themselves to their pre-fixed ideas and do not respond even to information that comes from the sources they trust.

Kuvult, great idea. Sounds like your construction company pays well.

Some jew > I hope you learn

I am patiently waiting for your help that will come as your scholarly comments to the works of r Soloveitchik that I referred you to. Until then, I will have to follow the mesorah from him.

DaMoshe, R Landau clearly disagrees with you.

I looked up local tag materials, and they are not just offering filters. They also talk about multitasking and brain reactions to notifications, suggesting blocking out time periods to concentrate on important things. Do they write differently in other places ? It could be, of course.

right, so how do you react to a possibility that R Chaim was giving psak based on people around him giving him incomplete information? Presumably, this is not the only case. So, Rav’s psak is reliable when he is talking about Torah of which he is a master, but not about other little stuff where he can be mislead? This is a throwback to the heilike times when Litvishe Rabonim were only responsible for teaching Torah, not for voting!

To be more precise, we did have time periods when Rabbis were making social rulings – and times when they did not feel like that. For example, Sanhedrin 90+ describes a simpleton who (after asking Rabbis for permission) successfully wins cases against kenaanim, mitzrim and yishmaelim in Alexander’s court regarding EY. Rabbis did not jump at the opportunity to go to the court themselves. Maybe he was a Zionists using convincing real life arguments about Jewish “nation” (making kenaanim salves; deserving payment for work from mitzrim, etc) that the Rabbis were not willing to make …

PS R Gershon Kamenetsky makes a similar claim about R Eliashev – at some point, he and the Rav agreed that Rav is not issuing a ban and asking someone to review it, while R GK pauses dissemination (he says, luckily the printer already sold out the first edition and did not lose anything). Then, suddenly, while R GK was in US for medical treatment, Rav issued a ban (or somewhere posted/published it in his name, I think). When R GK immediately came back to EY and asked the Rav in person why the ban was issued despite the agreement. Rav said – but you continued selling the book. When told “not”, he said – sorry, I was told you did, what can I do, I am not a Navi (sic!) (and, if I understand correctly), Rav did not rescind the ban at that point also, for some reason. If someone knows/remembers more details about this fascinating episode, please correct me. So, this story seems to support R Landau’s position that R Chaim could have been misled.