Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 272

Sun, 27 Jul 2008

• 1. infallibility of chazal (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: women giving testimony in court [was: police misdeeds and mi... (hankman)
• 3. Re: police misdeeds and trial evidence (Simon Montagu)
• 4. Re: Alei Shur: "Mussar is not hashkafa" (Richard Wolpoe)
• 5. Re: Differences between Charedism and Modern Orthodoxy (Richard Wolpoe)
• 6. Re: TIDE and Austritt (Richard Wolpoe)
• 7. Re: TIDE and Austritt (T613K@aol.com)

For some reason I can't cut and paste your post but I have to disagree
that believing that chazal were fallible is tantamount to heresy.>>

One has to be very careful what the phrase chazal means.
Does it refer to every individual rabbi that appears it the Talmud or
does it mean some consensus from the Talmud or perhaps decisions
of a sanhedrin?

It is clear that individual Tannaim and Amoraim can err. The Gemara itself
uses phrases like "he must have been sleeping when he said this"
or other phrases indicating that the idea is mistaken. When Rav Hillel states
that the Moshiach already came R. Yosef says he will need a kapparah.
The geamara indicates that some amoraim never saw the inwards of a cow
and so made halachic errors.
As many have mentioned (including the Chatam Sofer) the concept of a
par helem davar shel tzibbur implies that a Sanhedrin can err and there
are indications that this did indeed happen.
Even Dovid Hamelech make mistakes like counting the people.

In a slightly differenr vein I heard in the name of Rav Elyashiv
(from his s-i-l) that one needs to accept the opinion of modern medicine but
not of individual doctors
i.e. one distinguishes between universally accepted truths and individual
opinions and theories.

-- 
Eli Turkel

CM wrote:

PS: RnTK wrote: "And another reason is concern for the dignity and modesty of women, not to  
subject them to the hurley-burley of court."

CM comments: Tos.  San. 30a d"h "Col Kevooda Bas Melech Penima" seems not to agree with this reason

-----------------------------------



Sorry, the reference should have read: Tos. Shovuos 30a d"h "Col Kevooda Bas Melech Penima" (not San.). 

Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080725/e405f413/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 7:49 AM, hankman <salman@videotron.ca> wrote:
>
> I asked our magid shiur at daf yomi if he new of any source for a sevara
> why nashim can not testify. He directed me to the following Chezkuni in Gen.
> 18:15 quoting a Yalkut Shimoni:
> Vatekachesh Sarah Laimor: Mikan shehanashim pesulos l'aidus, lefi
> shemekachshos mipnai hayiroh.
>
>

This can surely be intended as no more than an asmachta. By the same logic
one could quote Gen. 37:32 and say "mikan shehagevarim pesulim le`edut, lefi
shemeviim rayot kozevot".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080726/ca82e9a4/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:01 PM, Michael Kopinsky <mkopinsky@gmail.com>wrote:

> In Alei Shur, Chelek Beis, Maareches Hamussar Perek Aleph, Rav Wolbe goes
> through several things of what mussar is not. Mussar is not philosophy,
> mussar is not "Jewish thought", mussar is not
>

FWIW, Rav Gorelick would make remarks about current events in the news or in
the Yeshiva. And he would insist this is NOT Mussar but hashkafah.

Partially due to Re Micha's influence, I have been working on Midrashim
lately. Right now I am focused on Tana Devei Eliyahu. Loads of hashkafa
including a lot on ahavas yisroel. I guess a lot might be considered Mussar,
too.

I am also doing a bit of Shemiras Halshon Yomi and it is chock full of
Midrashim and some Aggadic passages. Seems to me as about 50% Haskafah at
least.

Often , the darshan starts with the conclusion, and searches around for
> sources for said conclusion.
>
> Saul Mashbaum
>

In Shemiras Halashon this is definitely the case. The author is a master at
arranging Miodrashim BY TOPIC. it kind of reminds me of what the Rambam did
for Halachah, he arrange the Talmud by topic. The Shemiras Halashon arranges
Midrashim to fit into a structure,. Very nicely done.

FWIW, Bialik's Sefer Aggadah tries to arrange Aggadah by subject.  Caveat: I
am told that he often paraphrases instead of quotes.

Maybe we can get authors to arrange  Midrashim by other topics as the
Shemiras Halashon did.   An Encylopedia Midrashit perhaps?





>

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080726/3b53a06b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Yitzhak Grossman <celejar@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> It is one thing to say that Hazal can error, which is undeniable, but
> quite another to say that "They were human beings subject to the spirit
> of their time and that influenced how they created rabbinic law".  [I
> take no position here as to whether the latter belief is true, false,
> pernicious or heretical.]
>
> Yitzhak
> --
>

I am wondering if we can ever get a Centrist position on this matter:

C's and R's and others fro mte hCritical school think of Hazal [and
Rishonim] as completely subject to sociological pressures]

OTOH Ortho's refuse to see ANY impact of Society to their statments either
in Aggadah or Halachah.

Isn't it possible that Hazal and Poskim were sometimes impervious to what
was going around them and sometimes influenced?  how about the Bar Yochai
ma'aseh where he criticized rome, one Tanna Parised Rome and one was
silent.  Dosn't this show various legitimate degrees of Hashkafic latitude
on the outside universe?

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080726/5a58a03d/attachment.htm>

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:58 AM, <T613K@aol.com> wrote:

>
> >>>>>
> Non-recognition of Reform and Conservative RABBIS and MOVEMENTS is austritt
> of the first degree, and that is what I'm concerned about.
>

I agree

>
> Non-recognition of Orthodox rabbis who reject first-degree austritt is
> second degree austritt.
>
>
I agree  Icall it asutritt squared


> Nobody seems to advocate that in America anymore, for various reasons.
>

I don't agree. YU , OU< RCA have been shunned DAVKA because of some dgre of
co-ioepration with R's an C's.  with regard to both military and hospital
types of chaplaincy such co-operation is indispensable. It simply works that
way.  And you seem to suggst in an earlier post that it can be avoided. It
is virtually impossiblei



>   Partly it has to do with the totally different communal structure we have
> in America vs Germany, where there is no one united community anyway and no
> one rav who is the authority of the community.  To reject the authority of
> Rav Hirsch or his successor /in Frankfurt/ would be the height of chutzpa,
> and to many it would be literally unforgivable.    No rav in America holds
> such a communal position.
>

What we do her imn America is NOT related to Hirschian Austritt



>
> Personally I advocate austritt of the first degree but not of the second
> degree, partly because that is the position that my father and other
> advocates of austritt held and partly because it is quite literally
> impossible to carry out a policy of austritt in the second degree -- you
> would have to be a hermit living in a cave.
>

But that was Hirsches point. rmember [3rd time] an Austritt butcher in
Frnakfort ws not awaere of "frum Geminde O's until he went out of town on
vacation. Shortly before his passing he reported this story to me and said
it was "wrong" in a very stern Yekke way. To be shut-off rom frum
Talmud-loving Observant Jews in the same town was wrong. It was doubly so in
teh Nazi era.




>
> BTW I don't remember my father ever using the word "austritt" and I am
> using it rather loosely as a short-hand way of saying "Don't give C and R
> rabbis or their movements any public recognition as rabbis or as movements
> within Judaism."  If somebody can come up with a better word please let me
> know.
>

But hat is not a Hirschian model


>
>   *
> *
> *--Toby Katz
> =============
>
> *
>

Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080726/8a1483af/attachment.htm>

Old  TK:  Non-recognition of Orthodox rabbis who reject first-degree austritt 
is  second degree austritt.  Nobody seems to advocate that in America 
anymore, for various  reasons. 



RRW:  >>I don't agree. YU , OU,  RCA have been shunned DAVKA because of some 
degree of co-ioepration with  R's and C's.  With regard to both military and 
hospital types of  chaplaincy such co-operation is indispensable. It simply 
works that way.   And you seem to suggest in an earlier post that it can be 
avoided. It is  virtually impossible.
TK:  YU and the RCA have been "shunned" because the  rest of the Torah world 
considered them to be dead wrong about some very  important issues, but the 
"shunning" is nothing like what went on in  Frankfurt.  It's more "coolness" 
than actual shunning.  The boundaries  between YU/Modern Orthodoxy and 
yeshivish/black hat Orthodox are extremely  porous in America, quite unlike the wall 
that separated gemeinde from austritt  Orthodoxy in Frankfurt.  I personally 
advocate a degree of coolness towards  YU that falls far short of "shunning."  
Some of my best friends.....
 
As for the chaplaincy, it is questionable whether it is  permissible for an 
Orthodox rabbi to be an army chaplain, since it is almost  impossible to avoid 
interacting with R and C chaplains as colleagues  and fellow officers.  In a 
hospital setting it is easier to avoid the  "other" rabbis.
 






Old TK:    Partly it has to do with the totally  different communal structure 
we have in America vs Germany, where there is  no one united community anyway 
and no one rav who is the authority of the  community.  To reject the 
authority of Rav Hirsch or his successor /in  Frankfurt/ would be the height of 
chutzpa, and to many it would be literally  unforgivable.    No rav in America 
holds such a communal  position.



RRW:  What we do here in America is NOT  related to Hirschian Austritt

 
TK:  Not related at all?!  I don't know how it's possible to say  such a 
thing.








Old TK: Personally I advocate austritt of the first degree but not of  the 
second degree, partly because that is the position that my father and  other 
advocates of austritt held and partly because it is quite  literally impossible 
to carry out a policy of austritt in the second degree  -- you would have to be 
a hermit living in a  cave.



RRW:  But that was Hirsch's point. Remember  [3rd time] an Austritt butcher 
in Frankfort was not aware of "frum" Geminde  O's until he went out of town on 
vacation. Shortly before his passing he  reported this story to me and said it 
was "wrong" in a very stern Yekke way.  To be shut-off from frum 
Talmud-loving Observant Jews in the same town was  wrong. It was doubly so in the Nazi 
era. 

TK:  It was the Gemeinde O's who did wrong originally in the 19th  c. by not 
accepting the authority of the Rav of their community, who was  also one of 
the Gedolei Hador, Rav Hirsch.  If you have read about the  kinds of pitched 
battles that went on between O and R and the pure evil  perpetrated by the Reform 
in Germany, it makes your blood boil to think that  there were Orthodox Jews 
who were prepared to turn their backs on a tzaddik  yesod olam like Hirsch and 
make common cause with the Reform -- sworn enemies of  Torah.
 
 
 









Old TK:  BTW I don't remember my father ever using the word  "austritt" and I 
am using it rather loosely as a short-hand way of saying  "Don't give C and R 
rabbis or their movements any public recognition as  rabbis or as movements 
within Judaism."  If somebody can come up with a  better word please let me 
know.



RWW:  But that is not a Hirschian  model

 
TK:  You mean that is not a Frankfurt model.  But my father was  very much a 
Hirschian Jew.  He derived his principles from Hirsch.  
 


--Toby  Katz
=============






**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for 
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.      
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20080727/3a15adac/attachment.htm>

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 272
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."