Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Avi KParticipant
Divrei, that is not how we pasken regarding women. Here is the language of Rambam (Hilchot Issurei Biah 14,10):
?????????? – ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ???????? ?????????, ?????? ?????????????? ??????????? ???????? ???????????? (?,?), ????? ?????? ???????? ????????? ?????.
Even for Jews there is a machloket as to the nature of the prohibiition. We pasken that it is a lav but there is no obligatory punishment by a bet din (as it is not explicit in the Tora). Here is the language of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 20:2).
???? ???????? (????? ??????? ?????????) ?? ??? ????, ?????? ??? ????? ???????? ????, ????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ??, ????? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ????
Apparently according to Rambam (Hilchot Issurei Biah 20:8) the lashes are rabbinic:
???? ???????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ???????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ????? ?? ????. ???? ????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????[?] ???. ???? ???? ???? ?????. ??”? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????. ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???. ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????. ????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????:
Avi KParticipantJoseph, an eved Ivri could not be married against his will. However, if he was sold by the bet din he could be compelled to live with a shifcha Kenanit in order to produce avadim kenani’im.However, not if he sold himself. (Rambam, Hilchot Avadim 3:3).
June 30, 2015 6:13 pm at 6:13 pm in reply to: Non religious argument against same sex marriage #1089795Avi KParticipantAkuperma., you are wrong on both counts.
1. One of the earliest instances of a divorce law was in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, which created a judicial tribunal that dealt with divorce matters in 1629. Northern and Middle states followed suit very quickly. Southern states at least provided for divorce in the case of adultery. All were secular proceedings. As for Canon law, that does not exist in the Congregational or Unitarian denominations, which were dominant in New England.Some other denominations have Canon law but only for regulation of churches and ministers. Among the Protestant churches only the Episcopal church applies it to lay members.
2. Common law marriage means that there was never a ceremony. The couple lived together as man and wife and registered themselves as married. Sometimes even registration was not required. It was sufficient for them to tell people that they were married.
June 30, 2015 3:44 pm at 3:44 pm in reply to: Non religious argument against same sex marriage #1089773Avi KParticipantAkuperma,
1. While all states accepted common-law marriage until about 150 years ago there were laws against illicit relationships whether or not the couple was considered married. In VA the penalty was death. Thus, the right to marry was indirectly limited.
2. At the time of the writing of the Constitution America was almost completely Protestant – and they do allow divorce. Even Catholics may receive an annulment for certain reasons.
Avi KParticipantJoseph, Rabbenu Tam (Bechorot 2b d”h shema itchayev) and the Meiri (Avodah Zarah 2b and 6b), say that gentiles are not prohibited in avoda zara b’shituf as does the Rema (Orach Chayim 156:1).
Nishtdayngesheft,
1. Please cite the source that says that two gentile women are over. Rambam (hilchot Melachim 9:5) only says mishkav zachor.
2-4. I agree 100%.
Avi KParticipantJoseph, it should be further clarified that gentile women in the news.are not over on anything. However, it is not a marriage. A gentile woman who cheats on her friend is not over on anything.
As for polytheism, firstly there is a well-known machloket as to whether or not avoda zara b’shituf is prohibited to gentiles and secondly, not all Xtians believe in the Trinity. Unitarians, for example, do not and only consider that man to have been a great spiritual leader whose teachings are authoritative and perhaps a prophet.
Avi KParticipantAccording to the Gemara people get them at birth. However, it would seem that personality types as abstractions already exist.
Avi KParticipantThe Gemara (Shabbat 156a-b) says that personality traits are set at birth. However, a person has a choice as to how to express these traits.
Avi KParticipantAkuperma, the reason why he lived in Brooklyn is well known. In fact, he himself stated it. He worried that if he even went to visit Israel it might not have been permitted for him to leave and he thought that his presence in Brooklyn was needed. His views on EY were also well known. He ruled that it is completely prohibited to give land to a non-Jewish political entity.
June 10, 2015 4:46 am at 4:46 am in reply to: The real reason for the ban against chassidish women driving? #1086821Avi KParticipantJoseph, actually it is the Tur who says that. The Chelkak Mechakek comments that she is required to go to shiva houses and celebrations. In any case, he does not define “too much”. Obviously this depends on the time and place. For example, even several hundred years ago it was common for women to conduct business matters with men (Levush, Likutei Minhagim 36). A woman is not a prisoner in her own home (Rambam Hilchot Ishut 13:11) although she should not go out ALL THE TIME just to hang around (ibid). However, she may certainly travel frequently for the sake of mitzvot, as does Rebbetzin Jungreis, who also speaks regularly for the United States Army and Navy as well as for the Israel Defense Forces.
Avi KParticipantNewbee, there is not enough talking?
Avi KParticipantRegarding machloket, it depends. if it is l’shem Shemayim it is very important as it clarifies positions. Rabbi Yochana fired Rabbi Eleizer ben Pedat as his chevruta becuase he was a yes-man (Baba Metzia 84a). The test is whether or not they are friends outside the context of the machloket.
As for morality in general, ye, it is relative. Lying is generally an aveira. However, Hashem lied to Avraham about Sara’s laughing for the sake of shelom bayit.
Avi KParticipantMDG, YW. Your proof is not a proof. The mitzva of conquest is on Am Yisrael not on any individual. However, every individual has a mitzva to live in EY. There is also Rav Chaim Vital’s opinion that the oats were only for 1,000 years. If we say that they began with the churban Bayit Sheini that brings us to just before the Crusades.
Avi KParticipantThe proof that chazzanut is based on opera is that Yossele Rosenblatt was offered $1m to sing in the Chicago opera. He turned it down because of kol isha.
Avi KParticipantYUModerator, some Ashkenazim use matza ashira as it is “hamotzi” but does not fulfill the mitzva of matza and thus is not prohibited (Shulchan Aruch 471:2). An Ashkenazi should ask a rav if this is considered a great need (Rama OC 462:4) as ideally one should eat Seuda Shelisheet during the time of Mincha. However, l’chatchila Seuda Shelisheet should be eaten before nine hours on any erev Yom Tov.
Avi KParticipantCTLAWYER, I would imagine that if someone is involved in politics or has relatives who have businesses he can get referrals. Once he has built up a reputation no one will look at is diploma. I would also imagine that being in he top of a second-tier school is at least as good as being at the bottom of a top-tier so far as salaried jobs are concerned. The big problem is paying off the student loans. Forty years ago law school tuition was around $2K so someone could afford to take a public service job, make a decent salary and get practical experience. For someone who is interested in law but is not top level it might make more sense to get a paralegal certificate.
Avi KParticipantAkuperma, I think that my post answers your problem. However, to clarify further, their is a basic law (the basic laws form a quasi-constitutional framework) that states that when a judge cannot find a solution in positive law or deduction therefrom he should look to the principles of justice in Jewish law. Obviously, a judge who is knowledgeable in Jewish law would use it to bring more Halacha into Israeli law (in fact, the champion at that is Judge Neil Hendel of the Supreme Court, who was in Rav Soloveichik’s shiur even though he was not officially enrolled in YU). Moreover, the only real problem, as I posted, is civil suits so if one does not want a judgeship then he can simply specialize in criminal or administrative law.
Avi KParticipantRav Yaakov Ariel differentiates between civil suits on the one hand and criminal law (mishpat hamelech) and administrative law (where the court is in effect an appellate bureaucracy) on the other hand. He also allows people who are knowledgeable in Halacha and can apply it their decisions to be judges (similarly many observant Jewish lawyers perform a great service by writing contracts and wills that are valid according to both secular law, which many poskim rule has the force of either dina d’malchuta or minhag hamedina in commercial matters, and Halacha.
Avi KParticipantWolfish, he compared the structure of the chants with Tehillim taamim. You can google “Gregorian chants Jewish” and find several articles.
Avi KParticipantSam, where did you hear that? That contradicts his pesak in Yabia Omer 1:6(13).
Zahava’sdad, I once saw an article by a musicologist who was learning in Ohr Sameach that claimed that the Gregorian chants were taken form the tunes of the Levi’im so maybe that was too.
rav ovadia kol isha
Avi KParticipantMany tunes for zemirot come form non-Jewish tunes. It is well known that Rav Ovadia enjoyed the music of Um Kathoum until someone showed him her picture – then it became an isuue of kol isha.The Mishna Berura (53:82) says that only their religious tunes are prohibited. Of course, it goes without saying that if the lyrics contain nibbul peh or praise of idolatry they are prohibited.
May 29, 2015 5:14 am at 5:14 am in reply to: Would you be in favor of bringing back polygamy? #1083513Avi KParticipantI heard that some communities are pushing it because these days a family can’t live on one salary.
Avi KParticipantThe dishes are not a problem even if you hold that chalav stam is assur. See Rema Yoreh Deah 64:9.
Avi KParticipantYekke, look in the mirror when you say that. Did you ever hear the term “tinnok shenishba
Avi KParticipantGavra, so how come the Land did not eject them? The answer is that he term “rasha” has different meanings in different contexts. In Hilchot Eidut a rasha is someone who deliberately violated any halacha, even a derabban (Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 34:2-3 with Rema). As Rambam agrees with this (Hilchot Eidut 10:3) yet says in Hilchot Teshuva (3:1) that a tzaddik is someone whose mitzvot outweigh his aveirot we must say that these terms have different definitions depending on the context.
Avi KParticipantGavra, you forgot the next clause “?? ????? ?????? ??? ?????”. We do n ot know who is considered a tzaddik and who is not in Hashem’s eyes.
Avi KParticipantGavra, which original points? I was addressing your contention that the Chessed l’Avraham was referring to “people like Achitofel, Doeg, Achav and Menashe”.
Avi KParticipantGavra,
1. Rav Kook would disagree witht he Satmar rebbe.
2. How can you have a counterexample? Are you a navi? Rambam says (Hilchot Teshuva 3:1) that a tzaddik is someone whose mitzvot outweigh his aveirot. Rav Dessler says in “Kuntras HaBechira” that a person is judged on the point (“nekudat habechira”) where he has free choice. Where because of his circumstances (upbringing, life experiences, etc.) he does not have choice in either direction he is not judged. for example, a normal person does not wake up in the morning and debate whether or not he should commit murder. On the other hand, someone brought up in a secular atmosphere would not think twice about being mechallel Shabbat. This is simply the lifestyle he knows. This is the essence of being a tinnok shenishba.
Avi KParticipantGavra, he did not specify but wrote generally. However, being that you brought them up, today’s secularists do not come up to their heels in evildoing. So ?? ???, ??? ???? ?? ?? ?????
Avi KParticipant????? ?? ???????
????:
??? ????? ???? ??????? “?????” ?”??????”, ???? ??????? ???? ???????
?????:
?? ????? ??????? (?’ ?”?) “??? ?’ ????? ??????” ???? ????? ????? ??????? (?? ?”?.) “??? – ??????, ?? ??? – ?????”, ????? – ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ??, ?? ?????, ?????? ???? ????? ????? ??.
???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ?? ??? ??? ???? – ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ?????, ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??????.
So we see that the Geula itself is not dependent on our merits. Only the timing is dependent.
As for the people in EY not doing mitzvot:
??? ?????? ???? ? – ??? ??
??? ?? – ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ????? ????? ????
?? ?? ???? ????? ????? ???”? ????? ???????? ??? ???? ??????? ?????? ??? ????, ?????? ????? ???’ ??? ???? ??????? ??”? ??? ?????? ??”?, ????????? ????? ???? ??’ ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????, ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ?? ??. ???? ???? ????? ???”? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??, ?????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ?’ ?????? ?????? ?????, ?????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????, ???? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ????, ???? ???? ??”? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???????:
??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ????, ?? ????? ?????? ??? ?????, ??? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??????, ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????? ???.
Avi KParticipantMDG, as I have previously posted, the three oaths are not paskened in any of the codes. No surprise as Rav Chaim Vital says that they were only for 1,000 years. Besides, the other nations ratified our right to a state in the San Remo conference a few years after WW1. Acording to Rav Teichtal (Em HaBanim Semeicha) we were punished for NOT MAKING ALIYA. He says that this was a manifestation of the sin of the spies.
Avi KParticipantThere is a tradition from Rav Chaim Volozhiner that America will be the last galut and the Jews there will never be persecuted as Jews. Of course, this does not mean that some Jews will not be persecuted for other reasons as in Argentina., where many Jews “disappeared” because they were leftists. During the Thirties pro-Nazi groups and individuals (e.g. Henry Ford ym”s and Father Coughlin ym”s) were active and vociferous. Polls showed widespread anti-Semitism. Yet American institutions held so far as Jews were concerned. The internment of Japanese-Americans was indeed reprehensible but nowhere near a holocaust. Since then America has changed greatly. Moreover, the right wing is increasing philo-Semitic as they are starting to remember the source of traditional American values and the left is ideological incapable of persecuting groups per se (although there might be “anti-discrimination’ actions against Jews, as well as other religious people, who do not want to service same-sex “marriages”). The great danger to American Jews today is assimilation. This is a silent self-imposed holocaust.
As for Orthodox Jews receiving stiff sentences for “petty” crimes, this is not limited to any ethnic or religious group. The Federal sentencing guidelines enacted after major fraud scandals
have led to Draconian white-collar sentences. However, the pendulum seems to be swinging back as almost everyone agrees that America is over-criminalized and should not have such a high percentage of citizens behind bars.
Avi KParticipantAkuperma,
Who says that they were “heavily” taxed? In fact, individuals have an obligation not to burden the community. Rambam says (Hilchot Mattanot Aniim 10:18)
????? ????? ??? ????, ??????? ????, ??? ????? ???????, ??? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??????; ??? ???? ????? ?????, ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ???????. ?????? ??? ??? ??????, ?????–????? ???????, ?????? ??????? ??????; ??? ????? ???????: ???? ???? ????? ??????? ????, ??? ???? ???, ??? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???, ???????; ???? ???? ?????.
Even captives should not be redeemed for more than their value so as not to burden the community (Yam shel Sholomo, Gittin 4:66).
Chazal certainly would not have approved of a system that rewards breaking up families and promiscuous behavior.
May 10, 2015 5:03 am at 5:03 am in reply to: Should the wishes of racist parents that I not date their child be respected? #1076364Avi KParticipantJoseph, did they agree to keep their agreement?
Avi KParticipantAkuperma, how are Orthodox Jews left wing on Economics and if so, why? The highest form of tzedaka is to provide a person with a productive job and not just throw a money at him – and the Shach says (Yoreh Deah 249:7) that this is because being that the giver also profits the recipient is not embarrassed at all. The free market does this best. Moreover, Halacha presumes that businesses and property are private, the principle that tanai b’mamon kayam is based on the right of a person to do with his money as he pleases.
May 8, 2015 2:53 pm at 2:53 pm in reply to: Should the wishes of racist parents that I not date their child be respected? #1076350Avi KParticipantJoseph, he who hesitates is lost. While he’s waiting the first guy might find someone else and the second might not pan out.
May 7, 2015 8:44 am at 8:44 am in reply to: Should the wishes of racist parents that I not date their child be respected? #1076323Avi KParticipantOomis, TY for your lesson in moral relativism. So how far does one go with this nonsense? Suppose parents want their child to marry someone davka from the same neighborhood so that they can talk about “the good old days”? One of the marks of a wise person is his ability to find common ground with everyone. Thus, when the Chafetz Chaim found himself on a long wagon ride with some rural people (who were very much derided by townspeople) he spent the entire time discussing horses (and saved them from speaking lashon hara).
May 5, 2015 5:57 pm at 5:57 pm in reply to: Should the wishes of racist parents that I not date their child be respected? #1076312Avi KParticipantFlatbusher,
1. What do you mean “mixed kids”? Do you think that they will come out with half the face black and the other white?
2. So if the parents (not the whole family) won’t accept him because he doesn’t learn in the father’s yeshiva, is too tall, too short or any other hair-brained reason they shouldn’t get married? There would almost not be any marriages.
May 4, 2015 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm in reply to: Should the wishes of racist parents that I not date their child be respected? #1076254Avi KParticipantThere is no halachic obligation for either of you to respect their wishes. In fact, Rav Moshe Soloveichik objected to Rav Joseph Soloveichik’s choice (non-frum parents) as did her parents (frum parents). I don’t know what she said but Rav Soloveichik wrote his father a respectful halachic analysis proving that he did not have to listen. RMS told his associates that his son was right. Whether either of you is willing to take possible consequences is another matter. I suggest speaking to their rav.
May 3, 2015 12:44 pm at 12:44 pm in reply to: Seemingly ordinary things that are actually a problem in halacha or Kabalah #1085088Avi KParticipantDY, there are actually three opinions:
1. All are obligated.
2. None are obligated and there is no inyan to be machmir.
3. None are obligated but it is good to be machmir.
See http://www.torah.org.il/advanced/weekly-halacha/5761/vaeschanan.html
May 2, 2015 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm in reply to: Seemingly ordinary things that are actually a problem in halacha or Kabalah #1085072Avi KParticipantNot letting children look at pictures of non-kosher animals. So much for the flags of the shevatim and bringing them to Ashkenazic shuls (pictures of lions as well as the flags). I knew a talmid of Rav Scheinberg who decided to be makpid so he asked his parents not to bring such pictures as gifts at the bert. When the gifts were opened it was discovered that Rav Scheinberg’s wife gave pictures of bears.
As for walking between two women ,some say it is immodest. Not walking between two dogs or pigs is probably safer. BTW, just because something is mentioned in the Gemara does not necessarily mean that we pasken that way. A case in point is not leaving eggs, garlic or onions unpeeled overnight (see “The Weekly Halachah Discussion”, v.2 p. 460 ff.)
April 30, 2015 5:56 pm at 5:56 pm in reply to: "Distance Your Path from It" � The Dangers of Academic Study #1141281Avi KParticipantMDG, then why does he oppose men going to college?
Avi KParticipant1.I knew a rav (he has since passed on) who was from Galicia. He said that unlike in Lithuania, which was always poor, Galicia was well off as it had oil (also textile factories). However, the economic boycott of the ’30s wiped out many Jews.
2. I can’t understand how Rav Elchanan discounted the possibility of the Holocaust. The Chafetz Chaim said that the troubles and killing that the Jews have suffered till then will be, by comparison, “a kinder shpeel – child’s play.” Of course, there was a geenral tragic attitude on the part of each country’s Jewry that the Nazis ym”s meant another country’s. The French said that they only meant the German Jews, whom they blamed for the defeat in WW1, the German Jews thought they only meant the Ostjuden who had foreign ways and the Polish Jews thought they only meant the Jews of the Soviet Union, whom they considered to be Communists. Rav Soloveichik says that this teaches us forcefully that we are all in the sameboat.
Avi KParticipantHaKatan,
1. Of course the Holocaust was yad Hashem. Do you believe in two gods?
2. It is obvious to all that the State is a giant step toward the final Geula. Virtually everyone admits this. It is impossible to brush off regaining national independence (see Rambam at the beginning of Hilchot Chanuka), kibbutz galuyot with almost half the world’s Jews now living in EY, a strong economy and defense force, more people learning Tora than ever before. True, we still have a way to go but the Yerushalmi (Berachot 1:1)says that the Geula comes slowly in stages. We are now in one of the advanced stages.
Avi KParticipantJoseph,
1. Who says that they have enough? Moreover, the army needs precisely the type of soldiers yeshiva men would be – analytical types who can work in Intelligence. As for Shevet Levi, Rambam also says that in a milchemet mitzva (such as saving Jews) EVERYBODY goes (Hilchot Melachim 5:1 and 7:4).
2. If someone is not really learning but just goofing off besides the fact that he is robbing those who pay for his upkeep he is taking a deferment under false pretenses, which is geneivat daat.
3. What about having them do their service in an army bet midrash, and state explicitly that their learning is for the success of the troops as well as saying the misheberachs for the State (which is paying them so they should show some gratitude)and the soldiers?
Avi KParticipant1. If it is yad Hahem why does it not have “religious significance”?
2. What about the damage to their ruchniyot by not serving. Not to mention that they will either have to leave EY or live by shnorring as they will not be able to get jobs here.
Avi KParticipantJoseph, the Rashbam (Baba Batra 54b) states that dina d’malchuta dina is because anyonewho lives in a country implicitly accepts its laws. In any case, The Mechaber paskens (Choshen Mishpat 369:6) that it it also pertains in EY. This is certainly true regarding public safety and welfare laws (Responsa Chatam Sofer, Choshen Mishpat 44 – and see Ran, Derasha 11 where he affirms the power of the government in EY regarding criminal law).The obligation to pay taxes is affirmned by Rav Ovadia (Responsa Yachaveh Daat 5,63 ). Moreover, as the Israeli government was elected by the people it can be compared to communal boards (sheeva tuvei ha’ir), which have powers similar to those of the king (Rema Choshen Mishpat 2:1)
Avi KParticipantJoseph,
1. How do you define dismantling the State? Did France’s Fifth Republic
(= fifth constitution) dismantle France and create a new state?
2. Rav Wosner paskened that it is a mitzva for a police officer to ticket those who violate traffic laws. Rav Ovadia paskened (Yachve Daat 5,63 ) that the government has the power of a kingto levy taxes and therefore it is prohibited to cheat.
Avi KParticipant10 Relationships between Maran Ha-Rav Kook and Various Gedolei Yisrael that the Yeshiva World Should Know
[Collected by Mordechai Friedfertig.
Ha-Rav Aviner Shilt”a encouraged spreading its message]
1. The Praises of the Netziv
[in the Volozhin Yeshiva] [student]
[Tal Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 59-60, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 45 and Be-Derech Ha-Torah Ha-Goelet p. 189]2. The Chafetz Chaim: Know that he is holy and pure and anyone who impinges on his honor will not go unpunished.
[Bisdeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 218, Sichot Ha-Re’eiyah p. 122, Tal Ha-Re’eiyah p. 90, Moadei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 231 and 550, Bein Shenei Cohanim Gedolim pp. 32-33 and mentioned in Bishelosha Be-Elul vol. 1 p. 35]
After Maran Ha-Rav Kook had served a while in the Rabbinate in one of the holy communities in the Exile, he received an invitation from the Chafetz Chaim to help him prepare a work on the service of the Cohanim when the Temple is standing. Maran Ha-Rav replied: If his honor permits me to remove the yoke of the Rabbinate which is upon me, I can fulfill the request which is extremely dear to me. The Chafetz Chaim answered: I have not found an individual as talented as you in administering a Rabbinate in Israel!…
[Ha-Re’eiyah Kook ztzvk”l of Ha-Rav Shmuel Baruch Shulman p. 36]
At a huge Rabbinical Conference in Vienna in 5683, one of the Rabbis made disparaging remarks about Maran Ha-Rav, the Chafetz Chaim (who was sitting at the dais) stood up shocked and said: “You insulted the Mara De-Atra (Rabbinic authority) of Eretz Yisrael.” He left the conference and decided not to return to it. The Chafetz Chaim waited in his hotel to return to his city, and many people came to visit him or receive a blessing. When the members of delegation from Eretz Yisrael wanted to enter, he said: “I will not say ‘Shalom’ to those who caused dispute with the Rav of Yerushalayim (Maran Ha-Rav)!” And he added: “Know that he is holy and pure and anyone who impinges on his honor will not go unpunished.”
[Bisdeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 225-228, Sichot Ha-Re’eiyah p. 26-127, Malachim Bivnei Adam p. 211 and for additional information on the subject see Sichot Ha-Re’eiyah chap. 11 and Bein Shenei Cohanim Gedolim chap. 4]
In the year 5681, our Rabbi, Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah Ha-Cohain Kook (Maran Ha-Rav’s son) traveled to Poland to meet with Rabbis and Chasidic Rebbes to convince them to join the “Degel Yerushalayim” movement which Maran Ha-Rav established to infuse the Zionist movement with Torah and holiness. At that time, the Chafetz Chaim came to Warsaw, and our Rabbi, who yearned to see the splendor of the most righteous person of the generation, went to where he was staying. He found him surrounded by people. After over an hour, our Rabbi approached to take leave from him. The Chafetz Chaim asked: “Are you a local?” Our Rabbi responded: “No, from Jerusalem,” and he added: “Your honor was close with Reb Eliyahu David (the Aderet), father-in-law of my father.” When the Chafetz Chaim heard whose son was standing before him, his face lit up and he joyfully said: “Your honor is the son of the Rav of Zimel, the Rav of Boisk, the Rav of Yafo, the Rav of Jerusalem? Then why does he speak about his grandfather? Tell me about your father! How is he? We are long-time, dear friends.”
[Bisdei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 221, Sichot Ha-Re’eiyah p. 126, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 157-158, Be-Derech Ha-Torah Ha-Goelet p. 97, Tzvi Kodesh p. 146 and Bein Shenei Cohanim Gedolim pp. 36-37]
See Bisdei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 217-231, Sichot Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 120-133 and the book “Bein Shenei Cohanim Gedolim” which discuss the special relationship between the Chafetz Chaim and Maran Ha-Rav Kook.
3. Ha-Rav Yosef Chaim Sonenfeld: A Blessing to be the Cohain Gadol
On Shavuot morning after davening Vatikin, Maran Ha-Rav Kook was walking in one of the alleyways near the Kotel and met Ha-Rav Yosef Chaim Sonenfeld. Ha-Rav Sonenfeld blessed him that he should merit serving as the Cohain Gadol in the Temple.
[Moadei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 303-304 and see another blessing of Ha-Rav Sonenfeld to Maran Ha-Rav ibid.]
It once happened that Ha-Sonenfeld was honored to be a Mohel at a Brit Milah and Maran Ha-Rav was honored to act as the Sandak. The two Rabbis met at the door of the apartment where the Brit Milah would occur. After they exchanged friendly greetings, a problem arose: Who would enter the house first? Maran Ha-Rav respectfully suggested that Ha-Rav Sonenfeld enter first. But he responded: “His honor is a Cohain and the Chief Rabbi [of Jerusalem]
[Melachim Kivnei Adam p. 64]4. Ha-Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski: A Eulogy for Maran Ha-Rav at a Wedding
[Bisdeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 236, Chayei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 388-389, Igrot Le-Re’eiyah #316 and Melachim Kivnei Adam pp. 106-107. Maran Ha-Rav’s response is found in Shut Da’at Cohain #223]
There was a wedding in Elul 5696 in which Rav Chaim Ozer, Ha-Rav Shimon Shkop and many other great Rabbis attended. When news arrived that Maran Ha-Rav had died, Rav Chaim Ozer instructed Ha-Rav Shmuel Markowitz, Av Beit Din of Turatz to eulogize him. And this is what was done.
See Igrot Le-Re’eiyah where there are tens of letters by Rav Chaim Ozer to Maran Ha-Rav with great respect and honor, and where it is possible to see the close relationship which existed between them.
5. Ha-Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer: We are Gedolim until we reach his doorknob
Ha-Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer, Rosh Yeshiva of Eitz Chaim in Jerusalem, said: “I was young when I arrived in Volozhin, and I looked with great respect at the greater students who sat on the eastern wall, and among them were prodigies who would become Gedolei Yisrael. But I remember well that looking at him [Maran Ha-Rav Kook] was completely different – even among the special he was distinguished by his uniqueness!”
[Tal Ha-Re’eiyah p. 71, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 101 and the booklet “Az Nebabru Yirei Hashem” p. 13]
Ha-Rav Meltzer once visited Ha-Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski, and Ha-Rav Meltzer said about Maran Ha-Rav: “We are Gedolim until we reach his doorknob.”
[Mi-Toch Ha-Torah Ha-Goelet vol. 2 p. 170, Le-Shelosha Be-Elul vol. 2 p. 101, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiah p. 202, Bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah vol. 274, Malachim Kivnei Adam p. 430 and the booklet “Az Nebabru Yirei Hashem” p. 22]
Ha-Rav Meltzer said many times: “If only I could daven during Ne’eilah on Yom Kippur, with awe of holiness and feeling, like Ha-Rav [Kook] davens during weekday Minchah.”
[Sichot Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah #51, Le-Shelosha Be-Elul vol. 2 p. 102, Orot Ha-Tefillah of Ha-Rav Y. Epstein (student of Ha-Rav Meltzer) p. 26, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 200, Malachim Kivnei Adam p. 256 and the booklet “Az Nebabru Yirei Hashem” p. 29]
[Moadei Ha-Re’eiyah vol. 12, Le-Shelosha Be-Elul vol 2 p. 101, Shivchei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 15, Bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah vol. 275 and Malachim Kivnei Adam p. 430]
See the booklet “Az Nebabru Yirei Hashem” from Amichai Kinerati for the close relationship between Ha-Rav Meltzer and Maran Ha-Rav.
6. The Chazon Ish Stands During the Entire Lengthy Speech of Maran Ha-Rav Kook
As related by the founder of the city of Bnei Brak, Rabbi Yitzchak Gershtenkorn: In the year 5694, Ha-Rav Kook was invited to the foundation stone laying ceremony for Yeshivat Beit Yosef (Novardok) in Bnei Brak, and he agreed to attend. During the celebration, in which the Chazon Ish also participated, Ha-Rav [Kook] gave a lengthy speech, with great passion regarding the Torah and Chasidut in Bnei Brak. During the entire time that Ha-Rav Kook spoke, those who attended sat comfortably in their places, while the Chazon Ish remained on his feet and listened intently to Ha-Rav Kook. Only when Ha-Rav Kook finished and sat down did the Chazon Ish sit in his seat. The matter was a wonder in the eyes of those present. Ha-Rav Tzvi Kagan, who was also there, added that when the speech of Ha-Rav Kook became lengthy, they suggested to the Chazon Ish to sit down, but he refused, saying: “The Torah is standing!”
[Pe’er Ha-Dor vol. 2 p. 32, Malachim Kivnei Adam pp. 340-341, Bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 247, Moadei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 217-218 and Likutei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 417-419]
Immediately upon arrival in Eretz Yisrael, the Chazon Ish turned to Maran Ha-Rav with a postcard asking him to clarify the correct procedure for redeeming “Ma’aser Sheni” (The tithe which would be brought to be eaten in Jerusalem). He began: “The Glory of the Honor of our Master Shlit”a”.
[Igrot Le-Re’eiyah #310, bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 35, Chayei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 119-120 and Moadei Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 217-218. Maran Ha-Rav’s response is printed in Shut Mishpat Cohain #53-54 and see Pe’er Ha-Dor vol. 4 pp. 222-223]
The Chazon Ish encouraged his most gifted students to learn the halachic works of Maran Ha-Rav, and he would say: “Ha-Rav’s way of learning and clarification of the Halachah is the truth of Torah.”
[Re’eiyah Ve-chazon p. 10 and Bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah p. 145]
See Bisadeh Ha-Re’eiyah pp. 233-248 where there are letters concerning Halachah and filled with respect and honor between Maran Ha-Rav and the Chazon Ish.
7. Ha-Rav Yitzchak Ze’ev Soloveitchik: The Glory of the Generation
Ha-Rav Yosha Ber (Ha-Rav Berel Soloveitchik), Ha-Griz’s son and Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Brisk following his father, once spoke harshly against Zionism. He was asked: And what about Ha-Rav Kook? He answered: “He is a Gadol.” (from Ha-Rav Zalman Baruch Melamed).
[Ha-Rav Eliezer Melamed in the article “Ha-Rav Kook and Beit Brisk” which appeared in the newspaper “Be-Sheva” 5767 and Igrot Le-Re’eiyah #373]
8. Ha-Rav Moshe Feinstein: He was the Gaon of Geonim!
Ha-Rav Shabatai Rapaport, Ha-Rav Feinstein’s grandson, related that in the year 5739, during Sukkot in Monsey, NY, Ha-Rav Feinstein was involved with writing a contrary view to a responsa of Ha-Rav Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer). Ha-Rav Rapaport showed his grandfather a statement from Maran Ha-Rav Kook (relating to the issue) which Ha-Rav Rapaport found amazing. Ha-Rav Feinstein responded: “What is surprising, he was the Gaon of Geonim!”
[Likutei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 59]
Ha-Rav Nisan Alpert, Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University, Rabbi of Agudat Yisrael, author of “Limudei Nisan” and Ha-Rav Feinstein’s student for forty years, was one of those who eulogized his Rav in New York. He also spoke at a memorial evening for Ha-Rav Kook, on the 50th anniversary of his passing. When he was asked about the connection between his Rav and Ha-Rav Kook, he answered that Ha-Rav Feinstein was a “Chasid” of Ha-Rav Kook. Ha-Rav Feinstein said to learn his books and one will find great things. He also added, rhetorically, that he did not understand what people wanted from Ha-Rav Kook ztz”l.
[Likutei Ha-Re’eiyah p. 60]
9. Ha-Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach: I only use the term ‘Der Rov’, Maran, for Ha-Rav Kook.
[Ha-Torah Ha-Mesamachat p. 41 and Sefer Rabbenu p. 140 from the newspaper “Ha-Tzofeh”]
Ha-Rav S.Z. Auerbach said: If I say to you ‘Maran’ in Yiddish , know that I am referring to Ha-Rav Kook zt”l. I only use the term ‘Der Rov’, Maran, for Ha-Rav Kook.
[Sefer Rabbenu ibid. and the booklet “Or Shlomo” p. 24 and see note 34 where various testimonies to this fact are quoted]
Ha-Rav Auerbach honored Maran Ha-Rav with being the Sandek at the Brit Milah of his eldest son, R’ Shmuel, who today serves as the Rosh Yeshiva of “Maalot Ha-Torah” in Jerusalem.
[The booklet “Or Shlomo” p. 21]
Maran Ha-Rav’s picture hung together with pictures of other Gedolei Yisrael in Ha-Rav Auerbach’s sukkah.
[The booklet “Or Shlomo” p. 28]
Ha-Rav Chaim Shteiner related that someone once published a book about Ha-Rav Yitzchak Elchanan Spector which also included disgraceful words about Ha-Rav Kook. Ha-Rav Auerbach said that it is forbidden to buy this book until it is corrected, and he also wrote a letter to the author asking him to fix it. He also met the author a few times and would always ask if the book was being fixed.
Ha-Rav Avigdor Neventzal related that Ha-Rav Auerbach would not hear the rulings of a particular Torah scholar because he besmirched Ha-Rav Kook’s honor.
[Ha-Torah Ha-Mesamachat p. 308 and the booklet “Or Shlomo” p. 30]
Ha-Rav A. Yehoshua Zuckerman related that when someone mentioned in a talk about the horrible behavior of certain individuals against Maran Ha-Rav Kook, Ha-Rav Auerbach responded with great distress: I recommend that those who were brazen and dishonored Ha-Rav should go to his grave and ask forgiveness.
[Ve-Alehu Lo Vibol vol. 1 p. 83 and the booklet “Or Shlomo” p. 30]
And see further in the booklet “Or Shlomo” by Amichai Kinerati for the close relationship between Ha-Rav Auerbach and Maran Ha-Rav.
10. Ha-Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv Shlit”a: Ha-Rav Kook was greater than us!
[Parashah Sheet “Shevet Ha-Re’eiyah #31]
[Weekly parashah sheet “Shevet Ha-Re’eiyah #31 and #50]
It is related that Rabbanit Elyashiv once heard words which impinged upon Maran Ha-Rav’s honor, and it caused her so much pain that she physically suffered from it for many days.
[Tzadik Yesod Olam p. 232 and Parashah Sheet “Shevet Ha-Re’eiyah #50]
Ha-Rav Elyashiv once wrote a halachic ruling, and after he finished someone showed him a different opinion which Maran Ha-Rav had written on the subject. Ha-Rav Elyashiv immediately ripped up his ruling and changed his opinion to that of Maran Ha-Rav.
[Parashah Sheet “Shevet Ha-Re’eiyah #50]
Ha-Rav Elyashiv once mentioned a particular teaching of Maran Ha-Rav. Someone who was present said that Rabbi so-and-so, one of the greatest Rabbis of the generation, sayid otherwise. Ha-Rav Elyashiv simply responded: Ha-Rav Kook was greater than us!
[Parashah Sheet “Shevet Ha-Re’eiyah #50]
April 20, 2015 12:56 pm at 12:56 pm in reply to: Is Aliyah a wise choice in the nuclear age? #1073475Avi KParticipant1. Rav Kook was the mesader kiddushin of both Rav Eliashiv and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (who before he married was a regular at Rav Kook’s public seuda shelisheet and derasha). Rav Eliashiv was, in fact, married to a daughter of Rav Arye Levine, who was a talmid muvchak of Rav Kook.
2. Rav Hutner was Rav Tzvi Yehuda’s brother-in-law. he incorporated many of Rav Kook’s teachings into his own writings.
3. The “Kook shmook” statement, if the CC said it, obviously referred to what the newspaper attributed to Rav Kook (at the time falsifications of Rav Kook’s statements were being circulated in Poland). It is inconceivable that the CC, who not only literally wrote the book on lashon hara and hotzaat shem raand and received a haskama from the Sefat Emmet after the latter unsuccessfully tried to get him to say lh as a test, would have expressed himself thus on the basis of a newspaper report.
-
AuthorPosts