Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
JT, he might have gotten the cue from Chazal who were stringent about it as well.
My Shita is very different. I am Meikil. Also, Dina Demalchusa is to be Meikel. And as we’ve learned in the hallowed chat chambers of the CoffeeRoom, nothing trumps that.
Yekke, indeed. Randomness of that type will only have the benefit of avoiding an Hasroas Vadai. If allowing water to flow is a Gramma does it make a difference of I know how far up the road the water is now?
Your second point was addressed. Look at the Teshuva from Reb Moshe, links to above.
As for sources in the Gemara, as I said, you won’t get open ones because it was a Sod. However, there are certain references that can be taken to be alluding to, or based on, Gilgul. We have the Gemara in Bava Kamma that describes what happens to one who doesn’t bow by Modim. After seven years he turns to one animal, then another and another. Unless you want to totally conceptualize this Gemara and make Adobe lesson out of it, it is hard to think it means that his body will transform. Therefore, many learn that it is referring to him becoming Megulgal.
Then we have these statements of this one being that one, for example, Bilaam being Lavan. In this case, the ibn Ezra points out how hard it is to accept that Lavan lived that long. Therefore, the ibn Ezra says it is a Sod. The Maharal likewise explains, in his own terminology, that this is what Chazal mean when they say Memuchan is Haman. This is also the only way to reconcile the many conflicting statements about Eliyahu Hanavi. Is he a Kohen? Pinchas? From Gad, as he testified in Tanna Dibei Eliyahu? From the children of Rachel?
Now about the Gemara.
You mentioned a Gemara earlier that seems to contradict the one you mentioned later. The first one says that if you are suffering you should check for sins or Bittul Torah, and as a last resort, Yissurim Shel Ahavah. The other Gemara says that we don’t know why good people suffer.
So, we must say, and it is obvious to learn, that the latter is about those few cases where everything was ruled out (including, perhaps, Yisurim Shel Ahavah), while the former is the general rule.
Now, the Gemara says that Moshe Rabbeinu asked for three things, one of which was to understand Tzaddik Vera Lo Rasha Vetov Lo. The Gemara first says that he was answered that only those who are children of Reshaim suffer. Then the Gemara says that the answer is that only a Tzaddik She’eino Gamur will suffer.
If you look at the Gemara you see that Reb Meir didn’t actually address the suffering of good people. He said that Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t get his answer on the issue of Tzaddik Vera Lo Rasha Vetov Lo because a Rasha can get completely undeserved goodness. As the Ramban explains in Shaar Hagemul, Hashem is good and will sometimes dole out undeserved goodness.
The Ramban seems to learn that this Gemara is the usual answer. Usually only a Tzaddik She’eino Gamur will suffer for those few sins that he has, as the Gemara explains in Keddushin. However, says the Ramban, Sefer Iyuv is about even a Tzaddik Gamur suffering.
According to this Ramban, both Gemaros are in league. They are both saying that all, or almost all, suffering is from sin, however few and small. The very uncommon completely undeserved suffering, without any sin whatsoever, is what Sefer Iyuv is addressing. And Elihu’s answer is Gilgul according to the Ramban (and any other Mekubal), or Malach Meilitz mentioned in Shabbos 32 according to the Rambam IIReadC.
Others learn that the Gemara is hinting to Gilgul by referring to the Tzaddik with baggage as Eino Gamur. This satisfied the Derech of the Rama Mifano, quoted and promoted by the Shela Hakadosh, that the Maskana doesn’t really throw away the Havva Amina. In this case, Tzaddik ben Rasha refers to his previous Gilgul.
Interestingly, Iyuv himself has a reason for his suffering according to the Gemara. He was quiet by Paroh when they were discussing the Jews. He didn’t speak up up in their benefit. So what is his question? Perhaps that was in a previous Gilgul. I have another Pshat as well, though.
Why do you come back to points that were addressed?
I explained that a past life is not him. It is a Neshama that he got from someone else, which needs a Tikkun. As the Ben Ish Chai I quoted put it, he is suffering for someone else.
The Medrash at the end of Shemos describes how, when Moshe Rabbeinu saw Jewish children being killed, he complained to Hashem. Hashem then told him to take one out, who then turned out to worship an idol during the Krias Yam Suf. Does that make Paroh right? Obviously not. It merely means that in the big picture, nothing escapes Hashem’s will.
Toras Hagilgul shows us that there is a plan and a big picture. It’s not about how this person deserves it. I stressed this above. There is more than one dimension. And as Zahavasdad mentioned, what about everyone else who suffers along?
Wow, PAA. In a one sentence quote from Rabbi Rakkefet you managed to get ‘maledict’ in there.
Hey, that’s a great suggestion for his subtitle.
argue/debate/dispute/fight/bicker/etc. me?
I get a 404 error.
The Goq’s point is exactly why it doesn’t answer every angle, as I stressed. It might explain global justice and Tikkin Haneshama, but locally there is no apparent point in the suffering. This is what the Gemara is addressing and perhaps Iyuv and his friends.
The Daas Tvunos speaks about Tzaddik Vera Lo without over mentioning Gilgul.
Did you ever try Google Translating a page of a Sefer that isn’t popular common day Hebrew? When I’m in the mood of laughing I put in something from Gevuras Hashem of the Maharal. You’d be hard pressed to find three coherent words.
Like other things, Zilzul seems to us like an undefined entity and based on emotion. But from Reb Moshe’s Teshuva it looks like he had a clear Hagdarah. In this case I think it is clear to anyone.
What you get is a ‘somehow kosher’ way to do whatever was Assur yesterday. There is no difference to the outside observer between one and the other. It is clear even from advocate right here that they don’t really grasp what’s behind it. It’s just a Melacha become Muttar.
It was not mentioned openly because it is part of Nistar. That is why it is not an argument when you don’t find it in Nigleh, openly. Why it became public is a great question.
Gilgul is from Toras Nistar. It wasn’t mentioned openly until after the Ramban. The Ramban himself spoke about it but refused to do so openly. Therefore, lack of point blank reference in the Gemara is not an argument. However, the Ramban does read this into the words of the Gemara.
Any and all students of Kabbalah know of and hold of Gilgul. It is in the Zohar Hakadosh. Without Kabbalah we wouldn’t know of it, wrote the Ramban. To quote a Gadol who might have been unaware of Kabbalah, and is drawing exclusively from Nigleh, does not prove any point.
Moreover, as I said, it doesn’t solve the whole issue. It is merely one piece in the puzzle. Also, this is used to answer Tzaddik Vera Lo, which is very uncommon, according to the Ramban.
Don’t view it as if this guy did something wrong that he, or anyone, doesn’t remember. He has a Neshama that needs rectification, because of whoever had it last. See again what I quoted from the Ben Ish Chai.
Yissurim Shel Ahava also serves a purpose. Why would you feel bad for the guy. Do you feel bad for a laborer who is getting paid nicely? On the other hand, even if know how someone actually earned a punishment that is not a reason not to feel bad for him. We feel bad that he did whatever it is that he did, and earned and received this punishment. That is how the Medrash Eicha describes the crying of HKBH.
Besides, this person is not a Rasha now no matter what he was in the past life. Should we view him any worse than a person who did Teshuva? Often, they also get Yesurim to be Mechaper or to elevate them, which is part of Yesurim Shel Ahava.
This has nothing to do with Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi. He is merely letting you know what the Sefarim say about this. His style is very black and white which leaves little room for nuisance.
The Ben Ish Chai writes a story of a person suffering for a past Gilgul and concludes that we see that ?? ????? ????? is not only with your own generation, it is even with past generations.
The Arizal expanded on the concept of Gilgul and it became much more complex. There is a while network of relationships between Neshomos.
There are different questions to answer about suffering. Why it exists, why this person, what is gained, what causes it, why this time, and why these people. There are different answers to the different questions. Gilgul is but one answer. It is part of the picture. It is meant to be aware that it is not random not as an explanation to any particular case.
It is wrong to think that ‘this person did something wrong last life.’ That is not what it means. This person, if he didn’t do Aveiros, is a Tzaddik no matter what his past Gilgul did. He was put here to rectify something and that’s that. It answers one dimension of seemingly undeserved suffering.
The reason you seem insincere is because you started out as asking an innocent question while following up with ammunition, making it look like you came to fight. I understand, you simply wanted to start a conversation and started it show. But that’s probably the reason you seemed insincere.
Now, it is no secret that the only source for this is in Kabbalah. Rabbeinu Saadya Gaon does not discuss Kabbalah in his Sefarim, whether he mastered it or not. Therefore, it is irrelevant in this topic. Besides, I sort of explained elsewhere that it is not really a Stira.
Mood is your body’s tuning. Your mindset can obviously shape your mood but so can your stomach. It does help to realize during a bad mood that you don’t really think this way it is merely a feeling malfunction. If you think of it, and deal with it, this way it becomes much more manageable.
And on the flip side you’ll have academia base it all on some church’s half-reminiscent custom, and backing up the claim with historical snippets.
Challah is not a word like Teruma. It is used also as Chalos Devash.
There is another point to be made. Because of the value we put on Mesorah and Minhag, we should be careful about starting new ones. It is upsetting when people sometimes start something and create their own ‘family Minhag’. This waters down the whole concept of Minhag and Mesorah.
Sure you can bring in Yiras Shamayim into that choice. Do you want to curtail your Tayva now just a bit as a tiny step in the way of Avoda, or perhaps should you take what you enjoy most so that you have one satisfaction that you feel unhindered. Perhaps take what is sweeter because ????? ?????? ??????? ?? ????? ????? ????, or maybe one is healthier.
The fact is that what we are doing is not what they are doing, nor exactly what they did. At most it is related. How it went over, if it did, nobody knows. It probably went through a few generations. Perhaps someone came home with that shape that they got from somewhere else. Perhaps a child remembered this from a parent’s house. Who knows. Who cares?
We know that it is not the oldest Minhag. Either someone established it and it took off or it slowly spread. Either way, no matter what level of Am Haratzus might have existed, one thing every Jew knew: not to make crosses, on your bread or on your head. So, if it somehow did trickle over through osmosis, it isn’t exactly a copy and was never meant to be. At most it is an influence.
To harp on the technical grandfather of a custom is as silly as finding that Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t wear a Streimel, enlightening. In either case something was adopted and evolved and incorporated into the Jewish people while its meaning followed and became part of it.
Just like a Gadol can create a Minhag or Hanhagah because of a certain invention or meditation, he can just as well add this meditation to an existing Hanhagah.
I see that Ubiquitin and Joseph are not really discussing the same thing. Joseph is describing a Messorah of Minhag while Ubiquitin is responding about the Messorah of Halachah.
There is no doubt that there are and were many unwritten customs. Some of them are only known to us through passing statements in Sefarim. The Purpisa is one such example.
Who’s saying that it didn’t develop or evolve later on? A Minhag becomes sanctified with use.
There are many customs that started however they did and the intention was added later. Nobody made this into a Mitzvah. It is a custom that has beautiful ideas behind it (or ahead of it). At this point it becomes part of a Messorah.
Apushatayid, now that you mention Kibui, I was wondering recently why Kibui would apply to a gas flame in the first place. Doesn’t the Gemara describe Kibui as Osse Pecham?
Daas, in this case. But I hear the delay business being pushed in other inventions, like the electric delay scooter, for example. I think the Shabbos app I’d based on the same notion.
Another two issues with the delay factor:
First, the reason we don’t turn volumes up and down, although according to the reasoning of the Issur for electricity should not apply to that is that we don’t use the devices. Why would a delay operated device be any different?
Second, the Issur of turning something on is either Binyan, Tikkun Manne, Makke Bepatesh or Nolad. The problem is not having a blade soon around making you cool, if that could be done by hand. In this case you are likewise turning it on. It is in operation regardless of its effect. Is turning on a cellphone or computer — that takes time to initiate — any more Muttar than turning on a fan?
Nittel is actually a great example of a Minhag that was around long before it was written. Chassidim value Mihagim and kept it. Yeshivos let it pass and get forgotten. The Chassam Sofer discusses it, as a Mihag he had, and quotes his Rebbe on it. The Mekor Chaim mentions it as a topic on his table of contents, although we don’t have the content.
A Minhag only gets into a Sefer if something came up. The Maharil is one Sefer where a Talmid decided to write down his Rebbe’s Minhagim. We get hints of Minhagim from side references quite often. What was the Minhag of the Baalei Tosafos to eat on Purim? They don’t write it to let us know, but they do discuss the Bracha.
Toss a smoke bomb and obscure the view from the camera.
I don’t get this, since when was Gramma Muttar? Was there some general assembly, ???? ????? ??????, that I missed? And what kind of randomness game is this anyhow? You slid the switch to get it to turn on and it will. Who cares when? Random would help if you aren’t trying to turn it on and it might not turn on at all. That would be classic Ein Mis’chaven.
Personally, I take issue with considering an electronic delay as a Gramma. Is it really not ???? ??????
The Zilzul Shabbos aspect is self evident. To most people it will look no different than a regular switch that just happens to include a ‘Halachic twist.’ In fact, it makes more a Zilzul Hatorah in general, for that matter.
Golfer, not every tree that will blossom, did blossom.
It’s a list of fruit trees, not of blossoming trees.
It’s a sin to pass up a Mitzvah that came your way.
Not all the problems. The biggest problem of annexing the whole thing and granting citizenship to all at once is that they will suddenly have free passage and will make trouble. If you take it piece by piece and control those areas before you move on you wouldn’t have this problem.
Mw, you left out one: annex piece by piece. Take one neighborhood and normalize its education and relations. Then you can move on. This is obviously not realistic since they can’t (or don’t) even control actual Israeli Arab institutions to that degree.
Who said every problem had an immediate solution? The current policy send to be to take it day by day, which is the best approach for now.
The Medrash says whoever tried to make peace with these people end up with embarrassment. The Rambam applied to them the Pasuk ??? ????…??? ??????. The Satmar Rebbe held we should not give it back to the Arabs since that is too dangerous. He held they should Daven for the Medina to end safely.
I don’t think Israel would mind either approach, to annex them or to have another state worked out. The problem is that it’s not what the Arabs want.
C’mon Sam, when Moshe Rabbeinu built the Mizbei’ach and called it Hashem Nisi, He was following Avoda Zara? As you really telling me that the Rambam’s reasoning is that the Torah went against the norm here, while his whole purpose in the Sefer is to give rational?
Secondly, you agreed in the past not to call this Avoda Zara because even the originators of the non Jewish custom in question weren’t worshipping anything by doing it.
But really, it makes no difference how it seeped in. It’s not even an exact copy. The claim is merely that it can be traced to that other custom/ritual. When I draw a key shape on my Challah I am not following any Chukas Hagoy, whatever a history book might say. Eating Turkey on thanksgiving, perhaps, but this?
ZD, you mean to say that you don’t see the difference?! Black straps on shoes was a Minhag while the shoes being made of leather was not. Do you get that difference?
Now, actually when the new look came in many were against changing to fit the outside world. Now that it is normal, no difference how it happened, it is not an issue. I don’t know of any Chassidus which prohibits buttons, btw.
Don’t you realize how silly, or even desperate, it sounds? He went combing through every and any cultural custom and found something that rhymes. This now becomes ‘proof’? Yes, making an specific shape using among other items, a key, is a far cry from making a key out of the whole bread.
If indeed the only reference found is from Ireland then the joke and bias is obvious.
Regardless, as I said earlier, it really doesn’t make any difference how it originated historically. It was never meant to follow their customs and surely today it is being done with Yiddish intentions.
Many of those complaining or ridiculing this Minhag probably subscribe to the reason given in Moreh Nevuchim for Korbanos. That would be way worse. In that case the custom was in itself an act of worship, and still it becomes sanctified through reinterpretation.
Do you use the English word G-d? Do you know where that comes from? I can definitely think of some non complimentary reference in Tanach.
We go through this every year. If people are following a Jewish custom, we are not Mechuyav to become historians and make sure it originated purely at home. We aren’t copying and following Chukas Hagoyim.
The way these references are tied in are do typical if these biased “research” articles. It’s actually quite easy. Find anything you want to attach, comb through the details, find a match, and bingo the connection is ‘crystal clear.’
Oh. Good question. The trick is that I put empty em tags between the & and trade. &<em></em>trade;
My children asked if he really drinks from it. I told them, the more you shake the table the more he drinks.
Perhaps Israel can annex piece by piece and enforce the curriculum enough that they should be able to safely become citizens or safely become their own state. This can’t happen in actuality for many reasons, though. There’s little doubt that this situation won’t be rectified before Moshiach. They are serving the same purpose the Plishtim served in the time of Shlomo Hamelech, to be pests. This is what keeps us in check, keeping us from being too proud.
eXISTENTIAL, that is dangerous stuff.
If you want to hate the early Zionist even better we can come up with some theoretical what ifs that’d shake their whole undertaking.
Think about it, without Zionism or the White Paper the British would still be in charge of Palestine. Jewish people looking for a place to run would naturally go to Eretz Yisroel, especially being in Western hands. Being that this would not have been organized the Arabs would not have galvanized against the influx, perhaps. Thus the British wouldn’t have closed their doors to the Jews, which means that many more Jews would have come. We would also have much more religious Jews coming, since it is not about Zionism.
Once the land has a majority of Jews perhaps a natural two state concept would have come into place. Y’never know…
So here we can shoot the messenger and keep the message.
I don’t have much invested in this topic because I am not in any particular camp on this issue, neither were most Gedolim. Rav Ovadia Yosef mentions the merits of a state alongside the many flaws, calling it a far cry from Yemos Meshiach. The Steipler as well responded to someone trying to push The Shita on him. He agreed that perhaps they violated the Shalosh Shvuos but didn’t agree that it remains forever a cursed outcome.
Most Chasidishe sects did not subscribe to Satmar ideology. In fact only those connected to Satmar took it on. And did this without signing on to the Zionist camp. This is why part of the Satmar handbook is about how even most Gedolim and Tzadikim can be wrong and be unknowingly worshipping Avoda Zara. Is this an opinion mentioned by their earlier Rebbes?
I didn’t include war casualties because that doesn’t make it a dangerous place per se. A place where people are randomly killed wicks be a dangerous place to live. A place that has a war every decade is not the same thing. Besides, BH as time goes on casualties are less not more. Most of casualties you mention are from 48 to Yom Kippur war. And yes, a victory that defies nature or most estimates shows Hashgacha, and put most of the world in awe. That is all besides atheists, Jew haters and Shita pushers.
I’m not sure what you think I mean by quality of life but there is more than a world of a difference between living in Israel and living in an Arab country, or even in Europe. Israel is the safest place for a Jew. And if you are afraid of a random terrorist attack, then according to present day Satmar Rebbe it would help to keep away from certain areas.
Joseph, the fact that you use that quote of Reb Elyashiv shows what I am saying, that you cannot separate the two issues.
Almost all Gedolim were against the Zionist groups for the same reason they were against the Jewish communist groups. This has little to do with the discussion about Israel being a great thing that we are thankful for. The Brisker Rav was thankful for it, but not to them. Satmar is the exception. They took it all the way and forced themselves into new ideologies that they hadn’t had until then, in order to back up the anti Zionist stance. As I said, it doesn’t have to be that way, but that’s the way they took it.
The Chazon Ish didn’t either like them, but did he rather live under Arabs?
I understand, there is a big Kasha: If it is really a good and important thing, how could it have come about through such people? It’s a good question indeed. The Tzitz Eliezer discusses it. Besides, you can’t make sweeping decisions based on a Kasha.
The Satmar Rav mentions three reasons for the Nissim. Either that HKBH simply helped since Yidden were in trouble; due to many Tefillos; lastly and most famously, Sitra Achra. And again, you set a criteria for what will be allowed to be considered a Ness? Was the victory of Chanukah a Ness? People died there too.
Joseph, you are playing with my words, and I hope it is not purposely. I said that the type of reasoning given to make light of Nissim and open Hashgacha is what is used by Apikursim. I’m not calling anyone an Apikores (or an Oved Avoda Zara for that matter). As we see, the Brisker Rav and the Satmar Rav didn’t say that it just happened our that they were stronger. Yet, I do hear that from many or most.
People should realize that there are more than two sides to this story. Satmar framed it that you are either on board with their entire ideology or an ardent Zionist. It is not that way. Many Gedolim and Rebbes stood behind the state although they disparaged of the organizations. They didn’t yell or broadcast their opinion on television so it isn’t out there. Most Chareidim actually have that approach. This website does.
DY, I don’t know that story.
I’m not talking about believing hearsay. In talking about making light of something that the whole world is in awe of besides for atheists, Jew haters and those with a Shita to push.
Actually, accepting a Ness and special Hashgacha does not require one to subscribe to Zionism. The two are not related, which is where I come in. But since nodding to anything at all that can be seen as acknowledgment is out of the question they start Fahrenfering everything they won’t refute — by using the same arguments any Apikores would use to explain away or make light of miracles if TaNaCh.
You set a criteria for Nissim? Unless every single person is saved there was no Ness. Does that mean that Chanukah was not a Ness? Look, they were a militia, they got them by surprise, they were good fighters etc.
If you are training your children to think like Apikursim in one area, don’t be surprised when they expound on it.