Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 232

Thursday, December 30 1999

• Re[2]: The Logical Response
• Heschel
• Re: Modenity
• re: Rav Dessler's Shita on Kollel
• Re: Avodah V4 #231
• Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
• No Subject
• Re: Avodah V4 #231
• Re: Academic scholarship By Orthodox Jews
• Seridei Eish
• Re: School visits/inspections
• Re: MZ and animals
• Bes Din (2)
• Academic scholarship
• Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
• Rav Dessler and gedolim
• ger toshav
• sephardi minhag

Reflecting upon this, isn't this what happened more-or-less; that the massive 
martyrdom of 6 million kedoshim brought about a global revulsion of the Nazis as
manifested in the Neurenberg Trials and the establsihment of Israel?

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
 Gandhi proposed
that the Jews in Germany commit collective suicide in order to 
"arouse the world and the people of Germany to Hitler's violence." 
<<


Akiva

>  The only reason R' Heschel took a job at JTS was because he couldn't get a
>  job in an Orthodox yeshiva (Jobs in Chinuch were hard to come by back then).
>   >>

According to the standard biography of Heschel's early years, by Dresner &
Kaplan, H' chose to attend the Reform (more like Conservative in some
respects) Rabbinical Seminary in Berlin rather than the Orthodox.

His first position in the US was at the Reform Hebrew Union College in
Cincinnati. This was not a matter of choice. It was a matter of getting an
invitation and a visa. He was unhappy there, both spiritually and
gastronomically isolated. He then moved to JTS. A later lecture at HUC was
severely critical of Reform Judaism, with no holds barred, but prefaced
his remarks with thanks to the institution that had given him haven in
time of trouble.

H's views on Torah min ha-Shamayim and Halakha are dubious from an
Orthodox perspective. Other aspects of his thought are not beyond
criticism. Substituting dry scholarship for the living religious quest was
not one of his faults. If his writing still attracts readers, including
Orthodox ones, it is largely because he did not forget the passion.

--- moshe rudner <mosherudner@hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Has history not shown us that "halacha limoshe
> misinai - eisav soneh et 
> ya'akov" is a truism?

I don't know if you heard about it but Arabs are not
Eisav.  They are Yishmael. :)

Furthermore that Rashi you quote can be learned simply
as reffering to Eisav himself, not all his subsequent
generations.  Although, I will admit that throughout
history Eisav has done a yeomans job in proving
himself the "Hater" of Yaakov, especially in the
twentieth century.

But every situation has to judged on it's own merit
and ultimately one has to do what is best for Klal
Israel. There are arguments which support either side
of the Pikuach Nefesh issue as to which approach to
take with the Arabs.  Some say a pacifistic approach
(i.e. land for peace) is the best way to reach
ultimate peace and security, and others say a
militaristic approach is the best way to have peace
and security (i.e. Hold on to the Golan Heights so
that when war breaks out we will have that advantage).
 It is a tough call for a Prime Minister, who has all
the facts at hand, to make, but it is an even tougher
call for the ignorant masses of which I include myself
and the rest of us lay people. 

My sense of it is that honorable people on both sides
have very strong views and we can hang our hats on
either side of the issue.  Generally speaking, I would
argue that our views on holding on to land are more
influenced by emotion than by facts.

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com

--- Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com> wrote:
> Carl Sherer understands the Michtav Me'Eliyahu as
> saying <<< better
> someone should go off the derech than that we should
> miss the chance to
> produce a talmid chacham. >>>
> 
> Can someone explain to me why this does not
> consititute an issur d'oraisa
> of Michshol? (or at least m'sayea, since there are
> other ways to get off
> the derech?)
> 
> Why does anyone think that "the chance to produce a
> talmid chacham" is
> important enough to risk pushing someone "off the
> derech"?

I feel funny defending R. Dessler's point since I
don't agree with him on the more substantive issue,
but... you can't say that attending a Yeshiva like
Voloshin is a Michshol.  That would be absurd.  His
point was that even if statistcally there are more
apikursim resulting from Voloshin, that is certainly
NOT what they taught you there.  Voloshin is not a
michshol nor a Mesaye'ah. It was simply the greatest
yeshiva of its time, producing a tremendous amount of
Gedolei Torah and Roshei Yeshiva.

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:29:00 -0500
From: "Clark, Eli" <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
Subject: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews
Akiva Atwood writes:
>The only reason R' Heschel took a job at JTS was because he couldn't get a
>job in an Orthodox yeshiva (Jobs in Chinuch were hard to come by back
then).
Personally, I try to avoid making blanket statements about the "only
reason" a particular person did a particular thing, even if I know that
person intimately.  I did not know Heschel intimately, but I know the
following:
Despite having received Orthodox semikhah at age 16, Heschel went on to
study at Hochschule fur Wissenschaft des Judentums, a decidedly
un-Orthodox institution, where he earned a Liberal ordination.  His
scholarly writings reflect that he accepted the conclusions of higher
biblical criticism.  He came to America in 1940, not to JTS but to HUC,
where he taught for five years before moving to JTS.
<<<AND WHERE HE ATE ALL HIS MEALS IN HIS PRIVTE ROOM BECAUSE HE KEPT
KOSHER.>>>

Kol tuv,
Eli Clark
------------------------------

The two create tention only if one doubts the ultimate truth of his or her
beliefs.  For example, while I am by far not the paradigmatic Jew, and
indeed many of my personal practices are not ideal from a Jewish
perspective, I do have an underlying and unshsakable (I think) belief in the
ultimate and absolute truth of Judaism and its' teachings.  Beneath the
exterior appearance of quasi heresy born of ignorance, is a grund norm of
belief.  Therefore, even when confronted with doctrines which stand contra
to my basic beliefs, I am prepared to encounter and engage them since
ultimately there are certain beliefs outside of mine I will always reject
(i.e. the notion that there is no diety, or that Klal Yisrael fell from
grace when G-d chose Jesus to be his "son" etc.).  But that which I believe
I can reconcile with my beliefs, I will, that which I cannot, I will reject.
And even that which I reject, I may or may not choose to use for my own
purposes.  I reject the idea that the Bible be simply read as a work of
literature devoid of sanctity; but I will use literary analysis to better
understand and appreciate the Torah (i.e. reading literature made me aware
of certain emotions conveyed in the Torah).  The real problem is defining
what is Jewish donctrine; that muct be accomplished before begining "step
two" outlined above.  The determination of authentic Jewish doctrine is to
say the least complicated.  For me personally, the issue is one of
intelectual honesty.


----- Original Message -----
From: <richard_wolpoe@ibi.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>; <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: Academic scholarship by Orthodox Jews


> While I have my own pet "derech" on this, I would be fascinated in
learning from
> the spectrum of Avodah Chaveirim.
>
> With all due sincerity, how does one combine or synthesize or harmonize
emuno
> and shmiras Torah umitzvos with academic freedom and scientifically based
> inquiry?
>
>
> Rich Wolpoe
>
>

I know that many people on this list have an interest in R. Yehiel Yaakov 
Weinberg, especially since he has been the subject of a good deal of 
controversy recently. I would therefore like to inform everyone that my 
biography of this great scholar has just appeared. It is titled "Between the 
Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy" and can be ordered directly from the 
distributor by calling 1-800-944-6190. I would love to receive any comments, 
corrections etc. from readers.

                            Sincerely,

                            Marc Shapiro
                            shapirom2@uofs.edu

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:48:10 +0200
From: "Rabbi Yaakov Shemaria" <shyaakov@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #230
>
>The only reason R' Heschel took a job at JTS was because he couldn't get a
>job in an Orthodox yeshiva (Jobs in Chinuch were hard to come by back
then).
>>According the late Dayan Yosef Apfel, who knew R' Heschel in Berlin, he
was
>>already associating with non-Orthodox Jews.

associating?! is that justification for speculating on the deeds of one no
longer here to defend himself, were this a group to demand accountability of
anyone?! Why do we seem to toss away the Shmiras HaLashon every time someone
whips out the old frumometer?

He also taught at H.U.C. before
he taught at J.T.S. The late Orthodox theologian was very critical of his
theology,especially his work G-d in Search of Man, see Berkovits philosophy
of Judaism.Yaakov Shemaria
Shemaria Judaica
P. O. Box 15
Bet El
D. N. Mizrach Binyamin 90631
Israel
tel./fax:  972 2 997-2663
email:  shyaakov@netvision.net.il
>
>
------------------------------

I think that there are distinctions between Wolfson, Kellner and Idel who are 
academics and not yirei shamaim and Sperber who learned at Chevron and is 
equaly versed with medieval European society.Clearly, there is an 
undercurrent of tension between the Maimonedean and non/anti Maimonideans 
which is reflected in these posts. Afterall, the Rambam, The Gra and RYBS 
were not afraid of the intellectual trends of their respective tekufos. 
Yehuda Halevi and Rav Elchanan Wassserman HaShem Yimkom damo reflect the the 
opposite side of this equation. Where would list members place the Ramban?

I would like to order the book, even though the title make me cringe :-).

Marc, how much does it cost?
Mazal Tov on the publication.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org


----- Original Message -----
From: <Maylocks1@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 5:44 PM
Subject: No Subject


> I know that many people on this list have an interest in R. Yehiel Yaakov
> Weinberg, especially since he has been the subject of a good deal of
> controversy recently. I would therefore like to inform everyone that my
> biography of this great scholar has just appeared. It is titled "Between
the
> Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy" and can be ordered directly from the
> distributor by calling 1-800-944-6190. I would love to receive any
comments,
> corrections etc. from readers.
>
>                             Sincerely,
>
>                             Marc Shapiro
>                             shapirom2@uofs.edu
>

On Tue, Dec 28, 1999 at 11:38:13AM -0500, gil.student@citicorp.com wrote:
> See the back-and-forth between Rabbi Yehudah 
> Parnes and Rabbi David Berger in the first few issues of the Torah U'Madda 
> journal.  Even RD Berger agrees that these topics are only mutar for yechidim 
> who are prepared to handle these issues.  RY Parnes assurs them entirely.

When I read this exchange a couple months ago with some others, we had the 
sense that they were reaching quite broadly and discussing limits on
all academic discourse, not just that of directly religious nature.  Its
placement in Torah UMadda seemed ironic, at any rate.

Janet

On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 12:13:10PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> I don't know of such a medrash, but in a Hilchos Nida shiur that I 
> heard yesterday, the magid shiur cited a Gra which says that 
> where people are bored because they have no restraints on their 
> desires (and therefore become bored with normal outlets of 
> expressing them) they turn to MZ, and when they become bored 
> with MZ they turn to animals.

i think this is definitely a good point (cf, mz in prison, in kinsey et al.)

still, this kind of behavior is more analogous to experimentalism.  
it's fairly easy to imagine a world-weary someone seeking diversity
later in life, but there's no reason why they would give up on their
previous.  nor does it explain the large proportion of those who never
had the chance to become bored.

> Agav last week's discussion, the same Gra also says that there is 
> no natural taava for MZ. If I find a mareh makom, I will let you know.

if it refers only to mz, i don't think this is a point of controversy.

janet

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:42:28 -0500
From: "Daniel B. Schwartz" <SCHWARTZESQ@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Bes Din

<< A Contrere amaci caro (to the contrary my dear friend).>>

	I am pleased to see that this discussion remains on a friendly basis. 
<snip>

<<The rest of us merely have a general obligation to be honest and shun
dishonesty; but there is no specific injunction for doctors or lawyers
like there is for dayanim.  That is the difference.  The world expects
more from the judiciary and confidence in it is only as good as the worst
judge.>>

	I don't believe that this is true.  A bad judge is a bad judge,  and it
is not fair to the judiciary to lose confidence on the basis of one
member.  Many people draw similar,  unfounded conclusions based on a
sample size of one,  for any group of people you may wish to name.

<<Indeed a catch 22.  But, this list does not exist in a vacume.  We are
all members of the Jewish community and with a small bit of independant
research can come to know a great deal about this issue.>>

	You should pardon my saying so, but fat chance.  Messieurs Schwartz and
Klagbrun, with first hand knowledge and hard facts about the situation, 
refuse to do more than wave their hands and state that there are no
honest dayanim.  So the rest of us should walk into shul,  bang on the
bima, and ask if anyone has any juicy loshon hora about batei din?   I
don't follow how the process is supposed to work.


Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:31:39 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re[2]: Beis Din 

<<Would Zavlo botei dinim circumvent this?>>

	The Novominsker Rebbe,  several years ago, spoke at an Agudah convention
about batei din and peoples' conceptions of them.  If I remember
correctly,  he seemed to indicate that zablo batei din were a large part
of the problem.

Gershon

Some of the criticism of Eli Clark's thoughtful postings on
academic
scholarship smacks of the long-abandoned notions in
scholarly
circles of the possibility of value-free intellectual
investigations.
Today it is probably safe to say that no serious students of
either
the logic or the socio-psychology of scholarly exploration
believe
that it is possible to separate intellectual content from
the values of
the scholar; the best that we can achieve is the making of
belief
positions conscious and public and attempting to minimize
their
effect on the analysis of the data.  Often, perhaps most
often, it
is not possible to make the implicit assumptions explicit or
the
scholar involved does not even treat them as assumptions
rather
than truths.  (Try getting a psychologist studying mystical
experience
to entertain "hashroas ruach hakodesh" as a possible
explanatory
variable.)

Reading such literature, much less being trained in such
scholarship,
inevitably runs the risk of either accepting the values of
the scholar
as givens/truths or at least as decreasing the probable
truth value of
traditional positions.  Also, accepting the givens makes one
less
critical of the results of studies which ought in truth to
be criticized
and rejected.  Simply reading repeatedly certain
non-traditional
positions, of which the scholarly literature is full, makes
one more
likely to believe them to be true even when no evidence of
truth is
presented.  (This is the psychological principle which
politicians
know so well - if you hear enough commercials asserting
ploni is
the most honest candidate, research has shown that people
come to
believe it even in the absence of proof.)

This is not to  oppose scholarship - I confess to being an
avid reader
thereof.  It is to assert, however, that the conclusions of
scholars are
not separable from their intellectual positions and that we
are not immune
to many conscious and unconscious influences by exposing
ourselves to
that material.  However we justify it Halachically, let us
not pretend
that we are not treading through minefields of the religious
imagination.

Melech

M. Press, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology, Touro College
mpress@ix.netcom.com or melechp@touro.edu

RDFinch wrote: << Heschel is a
non-person in the Orthodox world. If one mentions his name in Orthodox
circles, one gets perplexed frown, or more politely, a quick change of
subject. But his work, qua work, reflects an extraordinary spirituality that
is in every sense Torah-true, even if it emphasizes aspects of prayer and
connection to HaShem that are not traditionally discussed within the
mesorah.
(Personally, R'Heschel was punctiliously observant.)   >>

IMHO, Heschel  wrote the most beautiful English prose of any Jewish thinker
in this century.  Tears form in my eyes every time I re-read his "The Earth
is the Lord's". Which is absolutely amazing considering that he learned most
of his English as an adult after he immigrated to America (reminds one a bit
of Joseph Conrad, whose "momma loshon" was German, but composed
outstanding English prose).  I once spoke to a Rav from one of the Gateshead
institutions who confirmed that this was his opinion as well (subject to the
reservations listed below).

However, Heschel's thinking was not "chalak".  Consider, for example, the
following quote from his seminal work, "God in Search of Man: A
Philosophy of Judaism", pp. 302-303:

"vast numbers of Jews loyal to Jewish Law feel that many of
the rabbinic restrictions tend to impede rather than to inspire greater
joy and love of God . . . excessive regard for the hedge may spell ruin
for the vineyard."

That, my friend, reads like classical conservative Judaism.  (Or was
he just throwing a bone to his employer?)

Heschel's book "The Prophets", with its emphasis on the "Divine
Pathos", prompted R. Eliezer Berkovits to write a stinging essay
in his "Major Trends in Modern Jewish Thought" (I believe that is the
title) in which he basically accused Heschel of expounding the
doctrines of Marionite Christianity!   (This is probably an
exaggeration, but don't forget that JTS is across the street from
the Graduate Theological Seminary, where Heschel had a number
of Protestant professional acquaintances, and the opportunity for
cross-pollination was there.)   Take a look at that essay - it's an
eye-opener.

So, to return to your words: "his work, qua work, reflects an extraordinary
spirituality" - definitely true - " that is in every sense Torah-true" -
unfortunately not true.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

Carl Sherer writes
> 
> I found it hard to accept too. But I just read the letter (and there are 
> actually two of them) inside the Michtav (it's in Volume 3 starting 
> on page 355), and Rav Dessler zt"l specifically cites a Maamar 
> Chazal (source not given) that 1000 go in and one comes out.
> 
> But he goes much further. From what I can gather (and there are 
> no names so you can't tell what institution was involved), he was 
> apparently asked about setting up some sort of a seminary which 
> would teach people how to be teachers. At first they wanted the 
> seminary to grant academic degrees, but he vetoed that. Then he 
> told them that they had to make a tnai with the bochrim who 
> learned there that they would not pursue academic degrees while 
> they were learning there, and that they could only take bochrim 
> who might otherwise go straight to university. Finally, in the second 
> letter, he tells the people who wanted to open the seminary that he 
> discussed it with the Chazon Ish and that the Chazon Ish said they 
> should close the seminary even at a monetary loss to the people 
> who proposed to open it and to those who had enrolled.
> 
> What is more striking is the reason given. The reason he gives (and 
> I had heard it before without attribution from the Mashgiach of one 
> of the Yeshivos here) is that if the questionners were to open such 
> an institution, it would tempt people who might otherwise stay in 
> learning and who might otherwise become talmidei chachamim to 
> leave learning and go get academic degrees. He says explicitly 
> that those who leave the Yeshivas should better become 
> storekeepers and not have professions, because if they had 
> professions it would be too tempting to others to leave the 
> Yeshivas. He even admits that Frankfurt, because many of the 
> bochrim did go to college in a fruhm environment, produced fewer 
> people who went off the derech, but he also argues that it also 
> produced fewer talmidei chachamim. He argues that better 
> someone should go off the derech than that we should miss the 
> chance to produce a talmid chacham. Powerful stuff....
> 
> I continue to believe that there are other shitos (notably RSR 
> Hirsch) that argue otherwise and are supportable. I also think R. 
> Dessler's shita can be attacked as not applicable today because 
> the percentage of the fruhmmer velt that was in Kollel in his time 
> was so much smaller than it is today, and therefore it had to be 
> guarded more zealously and it did not face the economic realities 
> that we face today. But I don't think it's possible to deny that R. 
> Dessler's shita was (and is) as it was characterized on the list a 
> few days ago.
>
First the shita of Frankfurt is based on the Chatam Sofer (at least
from the days of R. Breuer Sr) that stressed yeshiva as a way of
making well rounded ballei batim. As part of this shita the yeshiva
in Pressburg always had some secular studies including German, which
is usually overlooked in the discussion about Voloshin. Nevertheless,
the yeshiva in Pressburg did produce gedolim.

While Carl has shown that this is the shita of Rav Dessler, Chazon Ish
and others I have grave doubts that it actually works.
In terms of roshei yeshivot I suspect that YU has produces as many as
any American yeshiva. Certainly R. Schacter and R. Lichtenstein are
equal to other graduates of American yeshivot.
In Israel there is no real equivalent so it is hard to contrast.

However, with all the increase in people learning in yeshiva both in Israel
and abroad I don't see any great increase in gedolim.
To me a gadol is someone more than just a talmid chacham who knows shas
and poskim. There is a certain, undefinable spark that sets him above
the crowd. This is something that cannot be taught in yeshiva.

In the period before world war II there were gedolim like the
Rogatchover, Rav Meir Simcha (rabbis in the same town!), R. Shimon
Shkop, R. Boruch Ber, the Soloveitchik family, Chazon Ish etc (apologies for
the many left out no offense meant). Today I see anyone of that caliber
though there are probably 10 times as many talmidim in yeshiva compared
to 50-70 years ago. The older generation of gedolim, Rav Feinstein,
Rav Auerbach, Rav Soloveitchik etc, all learned in Europe.
One of the top gedolim in Israel is R. Chaim Kanevsky who got his
learning mainly from his father. Though R. Feinstein, R. Auerbach,
R. Yosef has sons who are great talmidei chachamim I don't think any
of the present generation have that special extra that will be 
remembered years from now.

Why this is true can be discussed. However, establishing elite yeshivot
has not changed the trend. Many of gedolim of the last generation
learned in Slobodka. I think that yeshiva produced so many gedolim
because of the personality of the Rosh yeshiva.

Eli Turkel

> 
> I'd suggest you go back and re-read the Ramban on "l'sikim." 
> "V'achar kach 'vtzoriru eschem'  (and after that they will torture you) 
> SHEYILOCHAMU BACHEM V'YAVEU ESCHEM BAMATZOR 
> (they will fight with you and place you under siege - sure sounds 
> like a  war to me) v'ani agaleh eschem mipneihem galus shleima 
> (and I will exile you totally from before them). That, according to the 
> Ramban, is what happens if we fail to drive the seven nations out of 
> Eretz Yisrael. That sounds like a lot more than just that the goyim 
> will entice us to idol worship (which is no small thing either). It 
> certainly doesn't sound like he thinks it's "okay" for us to live 
> alongside them, let alone desired. That may not be PC, but they 
> didn't have PCness inthe Ramban's time.
> 
Whatever, the Ramban many have felt about theoretical halacha
(almost) all poskim hold that it doesn't apply today when Israel
is not free to do what it wants. This in fact was true throughout
all of Jewish history that the Jewish givernment in Israel was
never strong enough to ignore outside forces (possibly except for
David and Shlomo).

Eli Turkel

> 
> Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> 
> 
> > I admitted that may well be the case. The point that I think WAS 
> > well taken (and I have found it to be true as well), is that as a 
> > group, Sephardim seem to place a lot more importance on Minhag 
> > than do most Ashkenazi communities (the Yekke's being a notable 
> > exception).
> 
> 
I just finished an article that claimed the opposite. That R. Ovadiah
Yosef has been battling for Sephardim to pasken like the Mechaber
even when it is against Ben Ish Chai or other established minhag.
The article also claims that frequently R. Yosef is not successful
in his battle against minhag (based on on sephardi poskim).

Eli Turkel

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]