Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“and saying how correct it is”
Huh?
So now in your frenzy to refute things, you’ll say that Rishonim are saying that a Yerushalmi is correct!? Is that better than saying it is Masiach Lefi Tumo?
Did you actually learn through that Ritva, or were you satisfied reading whatever article you pulled this from, knowing that there’s a Ritva out there?
The Ritva actually says how our Gemara can NOT be referring to that case, where there was a Lachash. (So much for saying how correct it is.)
Besides, to make believe that you have a Ritva as a source saying that these two names are of one person, is a lie. You are trying to trick people into thinking that you aren’t depending on one Yerushalmi (or a particular article or shiur). And to go and claim that Tosafos didn’t have the Yerushalmi — while one Daf before, he says, “ואמרינן בירושלמי דמכילתין” — and that Tosafos would have buckled had they only known what you are privy to, is that not arrogance?
Shouldn’t it strike everyone weird how our Gemara (and Yerushalmi elsewhere) has a certain way to call someone and they don’t mix? Sure, the story is similar, which is why there is an approach to work out how it can work. I’m sure you must know where Tosafos is coming from, the issue with Papus ben Yehuda. This has to be worked out.
There is another view, actually. The Ramban, in his introduction to the debate does imply that it is one. In fact, within the debate as well he says that they have the wrong date, meaning that their hero is the former disciple of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Prachia. The Shalsheles Hakabalah, too, takes this approach.
First off, the Ritva was merely quoting the Yerushalmi. (וכן אמרו בירושלמי ובא יעקב איש כפר סעיא לרפאתו משמו של יש״ו בן פנדירא)
Second, it is very odd that you consider the Yerushalmi more reliable than Bavli. It is a known fact that the opposite is true. There are more חילופי נוסחאות in Yerushalmi than Bavli. In fact, even in Bavli, the less a Masechta was learned, the more mistakes were able to creep in. This is why we have much more Hagaos in Kadshim. You must have seen the Meiri, where he describes how those Masechtos were not often learned. We find very often how Tosafos would quote a Yerushalmi which turns out to be different than what we have.
Don’t overdo the censoring. That was a self-censor and we know exactly what was taken out. And actually, in Eretz Yitzroel the Christians were way more extreme in the early days.
Thirdly, I believe you misunderstood my random internet forum comment. And first, let me inform you: to you I might be a random, anonymous person, but to me, you are a random guy who read an article somewhere and decided to get mad.
Anyhow, the story that the Yerushalmi is speaking of (which is not the same as that in Bavli) is about a grandson of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi. The Yerushalmi is not trying to teach us anything about the Christian hero. It is merely relating the “Shem” used by the witch doctor. He invoked Yeshu ben Pandira, because that was how they already referred to him.
And yes, I said, “The Yerushalmi is merely (mis)quoting the name that was used“. Perhaps you misunderstood that as well. The name ben Pandira is not a name by which a follower of the guy would refer to him. It is the biological father, and would have been used as an insult. Most likely, the Yerushalmi nicknamed him as such, paraphrasing the actual “Shem” used by the practitioner.
I see. Thanks.
Two things, though:
This is a long time after both of them. The Yerushalmi’s story is about a grandson of רבי יהושע בן לוי. At this point, the religion with all its legends kicked off. They are the ones who conflated the two. The Yerushalmi is merely (mis)quoting the name that was used.The other thing is that we aren’t given the name of בן סטדא. It may well have also been ישו, which helped in weaving the big story.
I’ve come across some odd and disturbing details, too. However, once you let yourself into conspiracy land, it is a bottomless pit. There is nothing stopping you from going completely wild.
I’d rather obediently wear a mask every other Tuesday night, than to start free-falling into the conspiracy hole.
Time Immemorial is a pro Zionist book, which is aims to refute the claims that Zionists stole the land from the Arabs. Its focus is on the last two centuries.
I really do not want to get into another pro/anti Zionism discussion here (start a new thread, if you’d like), but you’d confuses me.
@Reb Eliezer, it’s a conspiracy theory. Don’t worry, you won’t get the treatment now.
Positive conversations can only go so far. So, here’s for a מחלוקת לשם…
Reb Eliezer, that’s ridiculous. Bees don’t collect honey.
“pathogens and viruses were less and less frequent among people”
And again, you are missing the point. The Medrash is saying that they did not get sick, and you are trying to explain how they got sick.
“not sure if they died by sneezing though”
That’s from Pirkei d’Rebbe Eliezer.
But again, the point is that they died suddenly–with just a sneeze, not that people would randomly die as soon as they sneezed. In fact, that is the opposite of the main intention. The Gemara and Medrash are describing a world in which people remained healthy, and it is being taken to mean that people got sick easily.
“A sneeze might need an immune system as bacteria is being released and infect on the way out.”
So, while bacteria is inside, no problem. It comes out — instant death!
____
“As stated above the neshama was blown in through the nose, so it would be blown out through the nose.”
If you put a balloon on a dying man’s nose, the Neshama will go into the balloon? Will it become alive and smile?
This reminds me of the discussion Rebbe Yehoshua had with the elders of Athens.
@shlucha22, a sneeze doesn’t require an immune system. You might mean to say that a light cold was able to take then down. But that would mean that they actually got sick.
1) That’s not the way things work in the natural world as we know it. And Hashem generally works within the realms of nature.
Whatever happens on a constant basis is nature. This was obviously not a small sneeze, but a sneeze-like sound of the wind leaving the lungs.
2) If Hashem changed that nature, we should have historical evidence of such a radical change form other cultures.
How do you know it was radical? There always existed a concept of sickness, and people got weaker as they grew older.
Nor is there reason to think we have such a good understanding of what went on before the Avos.
3) People sometimes do not get sick before they die; they die suddenly. Even great people.
Right. There was no promise that every single person will know when it’s time to go. Even great people get treated harshly, we all know.
4) People definitely had physical weaknesses when they got older, even before Yakov’s time. (Yitzchak became blind, as an example)
Yes. They got predictably weaker and weaker as they grew older. This has nothing to do with the dying sickness.
5) There’s a concept in Pirkie Avos about doing teshuva one day before your death, which the commentaries expound upon to mean that one should do teshuva every day, since one doesn’t know their day of death. This seems a direct contradiction to what Yakov was trying to accomplish.
Are you trying to make the case that people don’t get sick before they die? People don’t know when they will get sick, and when they are sick they don’t know for a fact which sickness will be the last, and even if they know that they don’t know the day.
And, as you mentioned, not everyone is lucky enough to get a warning.
Why do you think they died fron sneezing? The point of the Medrash is that there was no prior sickness warning the person that his time is nearing.
Rather than dying from sneezing, they sneezed from dying.
For what it’s worth, airplane air is not recycle again and again. Fresh air comes in, compressed, from the engine and air is let out through a valve.
“As the Torah forbids cruelty to animals (tzaar baalei chaim), it has been shown that our shechita is the most humane way to kill them without any pain.”
That is not the reason, but it works out. The animals are lucky, and so are we.
“Fair. Just because he did not have an opportunity. History of last 100 years: whenever socialists had a chance to take power by violence, they did or tried.”
That’s an argument against communism but doesn’t speak to this point.
“The issue with Trump’s incitement, as I see it, was that he stood in front of the rioters knowing that they will march on the Capitol and start a fight.”
How can he know what no one else knew? Nobody what suspected large scale trespass, which is evident from the lack of defence. From your own team you’d expect it even less.
UJM, I haven’t joined any shiduch conversations here.
Holding a door (for a person down the block) has become a behavior of decency in this society. It wasn’t always. I don’t need anyone holding it for me, I can usually open it myself. In our own culture it was never a big deal, since we hardly focused on formal stuff.
And so, per original Jewish outlook there was no need to behave that way. Now there is, and by doing so and not being a barbarian (בַּרְבְּרוֹן) it is a Kidush Hashem.
The media machine is very powerful. They can create a whole reality in which even those who disagree with them end up within the same framework.
Right after the elections, many people spoke about the oddities. The media create a narrative of how dangerous that talk is, how absurd it is and a big lie. They did this without outright arguing the case, for then you would simply disagree. They went way past this and used these ideas for the backdrop of future discussions.
This causes everyone to be ashamed to ever bring it up. It is hard to make an informed decision in such an environment. But at least keep an eye out to these methods and don’t fall prey.
To me it seems that the whole Jan6 committee was created for thus purpose — to stamp out any remnants of the annoying election critics, that isn’t dying fast enough. Notice that nothing was ever put out to directly contradict the claims, just counter-lawsuits, arrests, service denials, committees, and ridicule.
Wait a minute. Zionism is a topic for itself. Why not start as new thread, or seven of them?
But then again, you can just copy and paste from the old ones. I doubt anything unsaid will be said now (besides for my own opinions, obviously).
To quote a 20th century philosopher: Never trust a fool’s version of what a smart person said, for he had to translate it into something he can understand.
Now, with that out of the way, all these one-issue activists are crazy. Obviously there is a kernel of importance but they are the wrong guys for the job.
“It is just as clear that we (i.e. Yidden) do not hold by that a man should hold a door open for a woman moreso than a woman should hold open a door for a man, as it is clear that we do not hold by vegetarianism.”
Notice that I did not mention this weirdness about man for a women. It is normal decency to hold the door for someone not far behind you, and not let it slam shut as soon as they arrive.
You must be so steeped in goyish culture that this is what came to mind when I mention holding a door. Or so obsessed with doing the opposite, which amounts to being steeped in it.
____
“You cannot makeup for yourself what “ideals that we clearly do not hold” and what “we” do.”
True. At a certain point you’ll need to judge what is a sensibility that wasn’t around or stressed, and what is contrary to the Torah’s priorities. Formula cannot supersede wisdom.
Like Reb Shimon ben Shetach said, מַה אַתּוֹן סָֽבְּרִין שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח בַּרְבְּרוֹן הֲוָה.
When Chazal say that we could have learned proper behavior from animals, would we have roared and barked at people? No. We would use our minds to judge.
Just because a sensibility for a certain behavior, or Middah, didn’t exist in the past, that does not make it wrong. It the past it was not expected to return a list item, and so neither did we — unless there was a Mitzva — but today that is called being a normal person. To keep it is cheap and selfish, in the eyes of decent society.
If you need a formula, let this be it: We cannot expect less from ourself than what we expect from others.
“The Ritva on Shabbos 24b says they are the same person. Yerushalmi also. It’s night likely that the bavli too was clear on that point but removed by censor.”
You probably mean 104b (קד not כד), but it’s not there, either. That is where Tosafos says that it’s not the same person. You didn’t point to a Yerushalmi, and I would be surprised if Tosafos missed that.
Now, the Ramban in his debate, as well as Seder Hakabalah of the Raavad, do say that our counting is 100 years before theirs. This may be because they are only referring to ישו הנוצרי and not to בן סטדא at all. Or perhaps, and actually unlikely, they conflate the two since both are assumed to be referring to the Christian founder.
“Avraham Avinu wore tzitzis, so if he is Jewish, it is not carrying but if he is not Jewish, than he would be carrying.”
Yes yes. UJM already referenced this vort. The premise is questionable.
“If becoming a vegetarian, to avoid killing animals, impresses Goyim who then say בריך אלקהון דיהודאי, you think that’s a Kiddish Hashem?”
To the Red Herring Chief: If you cannot differentiate between ideals that we clearly do not hold by and sensitivities that formed over time, there is no use discussing this further. אם אין הבדלה…
“HaLeiVi: He can wear kosher tzitzis, too, since he isn’t obligated in it and therefore it is carrying for him.”
That’s a famous Yeshivish fun topic to which I do not subscribe.
Did you notice anyone here promoting smoking?
“should we not accept 100 immigrants for one Talmid chacham”
That’s a very odd take. A non-Jewish Talmid Chochom? When he converts, we’ll admire and love him. But are we missing outsiders do the degree that we should allow such mix-ups?
He is the one who will be gaining when he joins. It is also a tremendous Kidush Hashem when someone converts (אוהב ה’ שמות גרים), but for us, does it make a difference?
Now for the caveats. Personally, I believe that potential Geirim are pushed too hard and too long. Many times, they are put off even after recognizing their sincerity. That is a very big problem. The Gemara (in Yevamos, I believe) describes it as a punishable offence to have waited to join. Why is it ok for others to make him wait? Rav Belsky ztl used to complain about this.
“Let him eat Chopped Liver and Herring”
No. That’s Sakkana. He shouldn’t transgress any of the שבע מצוות, either. In truth, he shouldn’t be doing any Aveira, if he’s trying to become Jewish. But he can wear Pasul Tzitzis on Shabbos. But he’ll have to find an area without an Eiruv.
“HaLeiVi, why is it/isn’t it a Kiddish Hashem for a woman to hold open a door for a man?”
Who does that impress? Who will say בריך אלקהון דיהודאי because of that?
This male-worship really got to you, did it not. Now you’re going to equate your קדושת הזכר to Kiddush Hashem?
“It obviously cannot be referring to people who only appeared at the end of Bayis Sheni to explain why the maamados bizman habayis didn’t fast on Sunday.”
The student of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Prachya was known as Notzri, Ben Sitda is not associated with that name. Whether Christianity stems from the earlier or the latter, it is the earlier one who is referred to as Notzri. He was over 150 years before the destruction.
“The original girsa was like maharsha, “gelilim”, but later ppl changed to notzrim cuz they thought the censors changed, but didnt. thats why we have it.”
Every single manuscript, including the Munich manuscripts, all say נוצרים. To make up a story that people came and changed words to match an idea that they liked, is way of the mark.
“Racism etc…i agree with ujm; i do agree though that hating a particular race would be contrary to torah values and calling attention to that is fine”
I guess you have your own definition of racism
“I really don’t understand your example from the chofetz chaim – having a beard always was a Jewish value. ”
Not hard to find. It’s a footnote in the beginning of his pamphlet on Hadras Panim. He referring to not cutting it at all.
Who’s talking about walking in front or behind? You guys excel in monkey wrenches.
Yes, it applies to holding a door open, returning things, honoring freedom, being against racism, and according to the Chafetz Chaim growing a beard.
Avira, it is impossible for me to include every possible nuance and caveat to everything I say. And it’s usually unnecessary.
@theshadchansays, great response!
AAQ, I agree with what 100%. This approach will settle all the stories of Chazal and the present. Obviously, we aren’t supposed to be behind others in moral issues, even when they are newly adopted and developed ideas.
The Chofetz Chaim suggests this in his Kuntres on shaving.
Keep in mind that Reb Yochanan is the one who says in Shabbos, אם ברור לך כאחותו שהיא אסורה לך אמרהו, ואם לאו אל תאמרהו. He didn’t shoot suggestions.
I don’t really get the idea that to conflate ישו הנוצרי with בן סטדא. Nowhere does the Gemara put them together.
I’m every over occasion we purposefully do things to show apostates and heretics that we don’t follow their believes. What is different in this case that we buckle to the heretics?
My assumption is that there was a movement begun by ישו הנוצרי, a student at one point of רבי יהושע בן פרחיה. He was powerful and well connected to the royal family. There must have been many legends about him and he was likely very charismatic.
Then, about 150 years later, there arose this guy בן סטדא, who began a movement based on the previous one. He might be the famous Christian messiah, or perhaps he is Paul who spoke of this imaginary person and began a religion with that.
Either way, while we were not physically afraid of Ben Sitda’s movement and we composed litergical pieces to excise them, we were afraid the earlier powerful movement.
UJM, you admire a Cohen?
“BTW It should be feel good and not feel well which refers to feeling with the hand.”
Nope. Good is an adjective; well is an adverb.
Kuvult, if people hate it why would you say it?
I’m sure you’re aware that this has been spoken about and dealt with. It isn’t black and white. We’ve seen many Gedolim and Rishonim refer to those killed for being Jews, as Kedoshim.
Your statement about race is misleading and a misunderstanding. The Nazis were not worried about the long nose pool. They were worried about the Judaism gene.
Oh my. So this is what you’ve been holding in?? I’m glad you got that out. I hope you are much more relaxed now, Your Maleness.
Willing to die for the cause will sanctify His name. People will take note of your dedication. If they think lowly of a certain Mitzvah, then you do not have this benefit. In fact, there is no point of splashing currently unpopular ideas in their face. They will say the opposite of ברוך… This is why, throughout the generations, we’ve had many apologists giving contemporary reasons (or excuses) for Mitzvos.
This whole idea — that simply doing any Mitzva openly, even when it’s despised, is a Kiddush Hashem — seems to be a reaction to the opposite idea, that we should be ashamed of Mitzvos deemed inappropriate by the outsiders. However, you shouldn’t allow yourself to redefine your own ideas in order to win over someone else.
עם חכם ונבון is not about Muktzah (as of now), it’s about things that impress others, Chazal explain.
Returning money, is not a Mitzvah (and can even be an Aveira), and yet it is the prime example of Kiddush Hashem.
I find it odd that people are triggered by this Bracha, when it’s actually a recognition of the hardships of being a woman. It’s the most ‘woke’ Brachah, and likely the earliest record of such sentiment.
“In our days…”
Blah blah. This is the all-too-common cliche of how we are so different than the past in our respect of Gedolim, because, after all, the Tanach has criticism of great people.
For some reason, nobody notices that no person in Tanach or Torah Shel Bal Peh criticizes Gedolim of previous generations. So, just like today, contemporaries and colleagues will critique and criticize, while those who follow retain the respect of the greatness and superiority of knowledge.
I think that derisive terms like these about the little bit of respect that that has survived among us, sets a person apart more than hashkafic ideas on study and culture.
“Doing a mitzvah, particularly in public, and particularly when it’s not comfortable, brings glory to Hashem’s name.”
What is the difference whether it was in public or private, if it was not appreciated? Hashem sees what you do regardless. So do the angels. The benefit of the public is how it raises Hashem’s glory in their eyes.
If it doesn’t, then obviously you gotta do what you gotta do, but there is no ברוך אלקי שמעון there.