Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
GAW – Thanks!
chance – You tell them! And all World Leaders are giant alien lizards in disguise. And JFK was assassinated by the alien that the CIA found in Roswell, but it was hushed up by the Bilderberg group who needed it kept secret as part of their Nazi-designed plan to force the Euro on the world (which they’re only really doing because the Knights Templar told them to). And cancer was invented by the Freemasons as an excuse to put flourine in the drinking water so as to make everyone stupid, paving the way for the Illuminati to form a New World Order backed by the Mossad, KGB and Stasi. And now the people are revolting by not vaccinating their children! Up the revolution! Freedom! Justice! And a hard-boiled egg! However, I regret that I have only one life to lay down for Whalebone Lane.
</sarcasm>
HaLeiVi – I kind of assumed that someone who learned Sefer yetzira and wrote a pirush on it had, in doing so, learned Kabbalah. I never said he was a mekubal. Ditto R’ Crescas.
Derech Hamelech – I never painted you as a conspiracy theorist but you are starting to sound a bit like one…
Derech Hamelech – A few points. What could have been a conspiracy? That the Rambam was chozer or that he wasn’t? Also, just to be pedantic, it couldn’t stretch back a thousand years as the Rambam hadn’t been born then. He lived slightly over 880-800 years ago, so who was making conspiracies about his deathbed confessions 200 years before his death?
Finally, what you write answers none of the questions I asked, especially not the one from his son (who, even if there was some sort of secret letter would have been one of the few to have seen it), it is simply an excuse once you already believe. Saying ‘maybe this, maybe that’ is all very well if you have a belief and need to reconcile it but to create the belief in the first place ‘possibly the letter was secret’ just isn’t convincing. The weight of evidence points to the Rambam not being chozer and if you choose to believe otherwise then that’s your prerogative but please don’t state your belief as fact (“even though he was chozer at the end of his life after he learned nistar”).
Torah – Possibly, possibly not. It’s a quite complex issue. Rav Hirsch had a special ceremony in his school for the centenary of Schiller, at which he gave a whole long drosho about how inspiring Schiller was and what lessons we can learn from his poetry and his life.
HeLeiVi – The point I was making from that was that during the entire course of the controversy not a single mention of the chazoro was made, something which would have calmed the situation immensely. Sure, it might not have saved the whole book-banning thing but the more sordid parts of the affair would have been avoided. So the question must be asked: why no mention?
I think your point about how open the learning of Kabbala was pre-Ramban is quite a good one, except for the fact that two of the people quoted as being against reincarnation definitely studied it (Rav Saadiah Gaon, R’ Crescas) one of whom was post-Ramban (R’ Crescas) so I’m not sure it entirely explains why some were against reincarnation.
Derech Hamelech – I find it easier to believe that someone can give over a report that they have heard (he simply says “shomati” and not that it was something that he knows to be the case) and be mistaken about its validity than all the mental contortions that you have to go through to believe that the Rambam was chozer. I mean, apart from all the questions I’ve asked you (to which you have offered no response) there is the issue of the Ramabam controversy which, if you are correct, should have been very easily sorted out by someone standing up and saying “it’s alright, he was chozer.” And yet it took decades to sort, during which time nobody even thought about saying this, instead the Ramban had to make it clear that those were the Rambam’s shittos and he was entitled to them. So the controversy that could have ended because of the supposed chazoro ended because the Ramban said that the shittos that the Rambam was supposedly chozer from were his shittos that could not be denied validity. Again, seems a little strange.
Furthermore it seems like even after the Abarbanel nobody really believed that the Rambam was chozer; the Gra, for instance, had a lot to say on the Rambam’s shittos on the supernatural and doesn’t mention the chazoro. Nor do any of the seforim that deal with Moreh Nevuchim, nor the nosei keilim on Sefer Hamadah, nor pretty much any sefer that quotes the Rambam’s shittos.
Please explain how you find all this, and what I have asked above, easier to understand than simply someone (granted an exceptional someone) making one mistake. Doesn’t your position entail believing that all these people – R’ Avraham ben HaRamban, the Ramban, Ra’avad III, Rabbeinu Yonah, everyone else involved in that controversy, the Gra, all the nosei keilim etc. etc. etc. – made multiple mistakes? And yet you find that easier to believe than one or two people making one mistake?!
I think that instead of wearing black leather boxes and carrying blinged-up sifrei torah the WoW should start wearing black leather skirts and carrying blinged-up double-headed battle-axes. And maybe put some ribbons in their beards.
Derech Hamelech – Look, I’m sorry but the claim is an extraordinary one and asking me to just trust an anonymous pirush on the Ramban (which places him over 100 years later than the story supposedly happened, at the very least) who says a nice story without any corroborating evidence is asking me to take a huge leap of faith that I am unwilling to do, especially seeing as the claim is so out of character for the person involved. Again, I ask you if someone was to tell you that b’sof yamov the Satmar Rav was chozer and became a tzioni would you believe them? The fact that this supposed letter is not mentioned for so many years after the death of the Rambam, during which time his shittos on the supernatural were discussed at length, is suggestive of the fact that it may not be 100% accurate. Why does R’ Avraham be HaRambam repeat his father’s shittos in this regard without ever mentioning that he was chozer? Furthermore, if he was chozer don’t you think his son would have followed? Instead we find that he goes along with his father’s known shittos, and quotes them as being his father’s shittos and as being yodua as his father’s shittos and never once mentions a word about this supposed chazoro. It’s a little hard to swallow…
GAW – Of course I’m not going to concede defeat to you. I’m biding my time until I find a thread I can get a decent run in…
HaLeivi – Sorry, Rav Saadiah, you’re right. I may also have worded it a little wrong, what I meant was that he says the belief comes entirely from avodah zorah belief systems and is as such completely incompatable with Judaism. Also Rav Crescas does not say that, what he says (according to the best of my understanding) is that he does not believe in it despite the fact that people tell him that it is kabbala, however if someone can prove the truth of it to him then he would.
Derech Hamelech – And the mekor of the “echod mimeforshei haRamban” is? I didn’t think you were making it up – I had heard the claim long before I’d heard of the CR. What I was saying is that I find it extrememly hard to believe historically. Could you please answer me how when the Rambam, the famous rationalist who dismissed much of the supernatural as non-existent, suddenly turned around completely and said that he now did in fact believe in it absolutely no-one batted an eyelid. Nobody even took the time to write a letter to their acquaintance saying “have you heard the news?”?! How is there not a single note of this momentous chazoro?
GAW – Bother. You got the bikkit line in before me…
HaLeivi – Added to Sam2’s Rambam we have Rav Hai Gaon (who held it was avodah zorah gemurah), Rav Crescas and the Ralbag. Although in the case of the Ralbag you could arguably claim he held it to be as Jewish as bechira…
Derech Hamelech – I really don’t get the whole “the Rambam was chozer at the end of his life” thing. So he was vehemntly angainst something all his life, wrote copious amounts in his seforim about why he didn’t hold of it, and then was suddenly chozer and never told anyone about it? He never wrote his retraction? I mean that’s a pretty big chazoro and he never actually publicized it?! There is no contemporary evidence that he was chozer, neither from him nor even from someone who was simply around at the time. Surely a chazoro as big as that would have got some sort of mention somewhere. It would be like one of the Satmar Rebbes turning round and becoming a tzioni, not going to pass without comment… And yet you would have me believe that it did… Hmmmm…
Shopping – Then the correct term is “them”.
just my hapence
a penny for your thoughts, minus some change
You know nowhere? In the middle of it.
Shopping613
The Awarder, President, and founder of SUC (Single Username Certificates). Contact me to join.
No, i dont, is he a person?
I dunno about you, but I don’t generally refer to people as “it”…
You know nowhere? In the middle of it.
Syag – Nope, I’d have cared very much. It isn’t about how frum a person is, it’s about how you can dehumanise the entire opposite gender (and, what is worse, on the mistaken basis that they apparently dehumanise you).
GAW – I’m astounded, absolutely flabbergasted. It’s not simply Halacha, it’s the attitude. If we’re going to talk about Halacha well then there’s nothing wrong with boys rating girls either, even thinking that they find certain girls attractive is not Halachically problematic, but Heaven fore-fend the shallow, external-obsessed boy who does so… Girls? Now apparently it’s fine for them to be shallow and obsessed with the way a guy looks…
As an aside, it may be worth me noting that in every case that I personally know of it was the girl that instigated the relationship, not the guy. In the two cases I know of where it went beyond ‘first base’ it was the girl that pushed for it, not the guy. And this, I believe, is trace-able to the attitude that it is the guy’s problem, that girls are faultless and are allowed to rate guys’ attractiveness with impunity.
Ok, so now that I’ve calmed down a bit it’s time to respond to individual posts rather than just ranting generally. Here goes:
SaysMe –
so well said!thanks for sharing!
Bored –
yup so well said!
mitzvagirl –
That was amazing!!! i agree with saysme so well said and in such a nice way!! no criticizing involved!!!
batseven –
I am a girl, and I can relate to what you wrote in a very positive way.
Its so true!!!
So all you girls know what’s going on in our male brains better than us males… Do you mind telling us how?! How on earth do you know what our thoughts, feelings and motivations are?! I’m telling you as a male (and one that was a teenager not so long ago) that it’s just not true, how dare you tell me that you know better?! From what experience are you talking, from whose first-hand knowledge are you gleaning your information?
And as for ‘no criticizing involved’… Seriously?! So what do you call the following:
those teens
Only treat us girls as toys…
But when it comes to caring about whats inside
Their hormones won’t let them see much
They know how to talk to us
And which buttons to press
To make us fall in love with them
And how to make us feel our best…
their only interest
Is the clothing that you wear
Your size skirt, and style shirt
And how you wear your hair
They can’t see past your curves and shape
And the makeup on your eyes
They could care less about how you feel
As long as you’re by their side…
We’re responsible for blinding them
From anything internal
And if one day you eat to much
And your skirt size jumps a bit
He’ll no longer appreciate you
And to a relationship he won’t commit..
using you for his games…
They come and go and break your heart
And make you suffer and cry…
That’s not criticising?! No, that’s outright bigotry. That’s making all guys out as animals. That’s beyond nasty. And ‘written in a positive way’?! C’mon! Positive for whom? Certainly not us poor benighted guys…
batseven –
No one is saying that boys are pigs, or terrible animals or something
See above.
its just a fact that they have a very strong yetzer hara, and therefore may very likely be looking at the girl not for who she is
And girls don’t have a yetzer horah?! The trouble is you see that us guys at least know about ours and, for the most part, learn to deal with it. Yes of course we see girls in the street and like the look of them but please don’t tell me you’ve never found a guy attractive. When my sisters were teenagers (not that long ago either) they’d talk quite openly about the kind of guys they fancied, it just wasn’t seen as wrong to them. But G-d help us poor guys who’d even think about admitting what kind of girls we found attractive because then we’d just be one of those shallow, external guys who can’t appreciate that females are more than just bodies. And because we’re aware of our ta’avos we can appreciate that there’s more than just the ta’avoh.
ultimateskier –
When speakers like R’Orlofsky, R’Mechanic, R’Wallerstien, etc come to speak to us girls they bash how terrible guys are amd thats why we shouldnt talk to them….so what do they tell you?
Pretty much the same thing. And then I told them that they’re talking rubbish (well R’ Orlofsky and R’ Mechanic anyway, I’ve never heard R’ Wallerstien). There weren’t many people in the room who took it sitting down, you can’t really tell a room full of guys something they know from experience to be untrue and expect them to believe it just because you said so…
mammele –
this poem is discussing those boys that are “hanging out” and trying to woo girls, not necessarily your average yeshiva bochur
No, it’s not. This poem is about boys in general. See above quotes.
P.s. Mods, sorry about the long post, just had quite a bit to say that needed saying.
This is all kinds of wrong, wrong, wrong. It’s ‘all boys are evil animals and all girls are pure, demure and need protecting’. It’s this kind of misandrist claptrap that creates the kind of atmosphere where girls feel perfectly comfortable taking pictures of guys dancing behind the mechitza so they can rate them and guys feel so uncomfortable with the thought of even accidentally seeing a girl that they walk so bent over they end up looking like Quasimodo by age 20. Ok, so I’m exaggerating that last bit but I saw the girls rating guys with my own eyes. Imagine if a guy would write a poem about not talking to girls because all they’re after is your money, now what kind of reaction would that engender? This is pretty much the same thing. How on Earth does some high-school morah know what guys are thinking?! How on Earth can they make such ridiculous, stupid comments?! Yes, I’m ranting a bit but this seriously gets my goat. I’ve never ever met a guy who was remotely like the kind described in this poem or as commonly portrayed by some in the ‘chinuch industry’, and I’ve known a fair few over the years, what with all my friends being male, not to mention the fact that I think I know myself better than some high-school morah or sem rebbetzen. </rant>
Cat seems non-phased
Much like Schrodinger’s cat then…
John Donne… Wow, the CR has suddenly gone all literary…
Hello to Jason Isaacs!
things that put blue label to shame.
Winkle’s Old Peculiar.
I was trying to find something amusing to say about Detritus and the leaving thereof, but I couldn’t quite make it work…
I’m not British – I’m English (and part-Scottish and a teensy bit Welsh but apart from that….).
Just Emes, mdd etc. – There’s no point arguing history with trolls, everyone knows that trolls see time backwards.
So what perks would I get if I were, hypothetically speaking, to join?
Those of us honest enough to have one user-name are going to have that even without a certificate, those who have more than one aren’t going to stop just to get a certificate. I don’t see what you’re attempting to achieve here…
DY – I know you meant it derech s’chok but it’s not cute, or even a proof for two reasons:
a) The rhyming supposition is unfounded, as the words “shabbos” and “sorosecha” definitely do not and will never rhyme with “chelko[y]”
b)The two siddurim generally held to be grammatically most accurate (and those most widespread in the Germanic kehillos for the last 250 years) – siddur Sfas Emes and siddur Avodas Yisroel – both have “Sinai” with a patach and not a komatz in sight.
I wanna be a man, mancub,
And stroll right into town
And be just like the other men
I’m tired of monkeyin’ around.
Oh, oo-be-doo,
I wanna be like you-hoo-hoo
I wanna walk like you, talk like you
woo-hoo-hoo…
GAW – If the Monstrous Regiment got semicha would they wear Frock coats? (BOOM! Reference, satire and pun all in one post!)
Watched it during lunch in work today. Being more of a Gaiman fan than a Who fan I really quite enjoyed it, mostly due to the fact that it was a Gaiman story that happened to be Who (and not a Who story written by Gaiman). The ending was a bit meh though…
Hear, hear. From a non-feminist male.
OOC = “Out Of Curiosity”
GAW – If you do switch to a Golem-based workforce there may be the complications of chain-smoking Golem-rights activists and whatnot to deal with.
Sam2 – 2 problems: 1. If the Rashba is assuming something then that doesn’t mean we have to run with it if we know that this assumption is incorrect (especially as the Rashba is not addressing the issue we are talking about and it has been ‘retcon’ed into his words). 2. If these things were defined with chasimas hatalmud, what do we do about things that were only invented afterwards?
Sam2 – I have re-read it the teshuva and whilst I think you are possibly correct in how the Rashba reads it now makes no sense to me whatsoever, for the reasons I originally read it. The last line seems to assume that the first person or persons to do it are Jewish but when this is not the case ‘kol beged ha’raui l’isha’ seems to have no definition except that which women wear at any given point. Who decides what is r’aui?
!!Upcoming Gaiman Doctor Who episode alert!!
For the Whovians out there Gaiman’s episode is coming up this motzei shabbos (in UK, not sure when it airs in US).
Got it. I win. Where’s my trophy?
notasheep – So what you’re essentially saying is that feminists want humans to be like dwarves… Well that would make shidduchim interesting – basically it would be asking, quite sheepishly, underneath the beard and chain-mail what gender the other person actually is…
Yes. Anyways, these are three separate references, albeit to the same book.
notasheep – Only after they have seen the spoon…