Great new shiur from Rav Bar Hayim

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

qq thanks for the articles.   I'm going to look them over.

Just one important point, it is unfair to portray that Rambam was in any way "not serious" about aggada (or that he 'didn't take them seriously').   He certainly did take them seriously as sources of immense wisdom from the sages.  But he didn't posken halacha from aggada, which seems logical to me, and he also had a very instructive opinion about the words of the sages in general, which can be found I think in intro to perek chelek, where he describes the 3 general approaches taken by people - with one approach of the 3 being the only praiseworthy approach and truly valid approach in his eyes.    When the words seem not to square with reality, one is advised to look deeper for a hidden meaning in them, which he suggests is surely there whether the person can recognize it or not.

[q_q_]

qq thanks for the articles.   I'm going to look them over.

Just one important point, it is unfair to portray that Rambam was in any way "not serious" about aggada (or that he 'didn't take them seriously').   <snip>

I didn't. 

I'm talking about some maimonideans(I don't know if most are like that).

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Now for part 2 summary for Rav Bar Hayim's keziath shiur.   I will preface again with the following:  All of this is in the name of Rav Daweed Bar Hayim, from his audio shiur, and if I have conveyed anything incorrectly it is due to my own mistake or my own misunderstanding.   Feedback, opinions, corrections, etc are welcome.  Hopefully I am conveying accurately the message Rav Bar Hayim sought to present.

At times I have added my notes in parentheses for clarifications, translations, etc.

Part 2:  Rather than “discarding the Rambam” as someone suggested before, [Rav Bar Hayim is] following the instructions of Rambam as to how one should approach any Torah/halachik issue, as he wrote in hakdama (introduction) to Mishne Torah (after explanation of how Talmud and mishna were all written and edited by the chachamim etc)  - When one chacham (wise Torah scholar) determines a certain halacha as “x,” and comes along a different chacham or beit din (court) later and they see it apparent as being “y” based on their own study, and they say “this is not the correct understanding of what it says in the Talmud” (they say this in reference to the first chacham/ first opinion, which said x).   [In other words they see original view as mistaken, and now you have in front of you at some later date and a different reality both of these opposing opinions], Rambam says you don’t go by who came first and decide based on that, rather you go by whichever opinion stands up to reason and analysis of the sources, “whether it’s the latter or the earlier opinion.”   

Rambam thus tells us the final deciding factor in halachic matters:  analysis of the sources and which interpretation fits best with the sources.  This also suggests that many commonly thrown-around axioms such as “halacha is like the latter opinion” used as a rule in of itself is not the correct way in which one makes a decision in halacha according to Rambam’s view.   R Bar Hayim states that it is clear from the Rambam’s opinion that “Truth and reason and intellectual honesty are the very lifeblood of the halachic system.”   And Rav Bar Hayim claims that since he (Rambam) was an intellectually honest person and a man of truth, he would apply the same system to himself.   Of course this applies only to a person who has the capability of looking into a halachic matter deeply and making a decision, not just the average person who knows very little, not the average Yossi on the street.   Only someone knowledgable and qualified – a posek.    As when Rambam says, “the opinion which seems more reasonable” who is to say what is more reasonable?   A certified doctor decides medical matters, and a qualified posek/Talmud scholar decides halachik matters.   To claim that no one in this generation (or even previous generations) can possibly understand such matters, is simply not true.   This subjugates halachic process to a claim that we cannot make rational assessments by looking into the sources, and this effectively shuts down Torah She Baal peh (Oral Torah)!   And this is what has happened over the past 500 years, particularly after the appearance of the Shulchan Aruch.   People believe themselves obligated to a certain book, or certain minhag, or certain posek, or community, and this allegiance overrides anything else, including the truth.  This is not right.   If you take any one book and say, whether it’s a work by Rambam or the Rosh or Shulchan Aruch or Gra or anyone else, and you say, “Everyone must follow every single thing in this particular book.   This is what you must do and it is incumbent upon you” – This means that even if a great chacham understands quite well that there is a mistake in this halachic work that everyone is obligated to follow, he (the chacham) is forbidden to say so.   He is forbidden to state his opinion.   (And such a scenario is pernicious and a distortion of Torah).

Rav Bar Hayim relates a story regarding Rav Yisrael Salant (founder of “Mussar movement”), pertinent to this issue.  Just to preface the story, the "Shach" who is mentioned in the story is a reknown Torah scholar and posek who is revered by all Jews as a source of great wisdom in halacha, and who published his work before the time of Rav Yisrael Salant.  The Shach wrote a commentary on the Shulchan Aruch in the 1600's.  Rav Yisrael Salant lived in the 1800's.  The Shach's work was heralded by the Jewish people and many declared it "binding" or "universally accepted" like what happened earlier with the Shulchan Aruch.  And Rav Bar Hayim seems to be arguing that such tremendous work like the Shach's when it receives distinctions like this, but people then distort Judaism and say/teach that no rabbi can now argue against a given opinion and that every single thing that one person writes is infallible and there is no room for debate, that this is damaging to Judaism and Torah, it uproots and nullifies the process of Torah she baal peh and restrains the rabbis from doing what they are supposed to do.

This story is brought down in book by a dayan (judge) of Yerushalayim (Rav ____ Raphael, difficult to make out audio).  Rav Salant was not only baal hamussar but also a great lamdan (genius in Torah learning) and baal halacha (masterful in halachic renderings), but wished not to be appointed an official rabbi of a East European city as was common amongst others who came from Vilna like he did.   Someone asked why do you never take a position of chief rabbi anywhere?  He responded, and I am paraphrasing here:   “Baruch Hashem, I know how to learn, and I know how to distinguish true from false, and I know for example that on certain issues the Shach is mistaken.   That because people think the “halacha is like the Shach,” and I know I’m going to get asked questions about these issues, I will find myself in the following position:  Either I’m going to have to say the halacha is like the Shach because that’s what everyone expects you to say, or if I say otherwise (and tell my real opinion instead – the honest truth), people will say, ‘What kind of rabbi is this, he doesn’t even know the Shach.’   In which case I’m going to be lying, [because] I know that it’s not true but I’m going to tell people to do what I think is not true.   Or I’m going to tell them honestly what I think is correct and then people will say how can I disagree with the Shach.   Since I don’t want to be in such a position, I choose to avoid that situation altogether.”   That is result of a halachic system that has been shut down.   Whether Shulchan Aruch or the Shach.   Once a claim is made that everyone must follow what the Shach says, any real lamdan who understands the issues is in a bind if he’s an intellectually honest person.   Probably very few are really in that position today and feel that way like Rav Yisrael Salant did because so many talmidei chachamim of today have been “dumbed down.”   And so many today really believe they cannot formulate an opinion of their own, cannot understand anything for themselves, and so they must only quote from other books like a machine.   The rabbi has been turned into a computer program.   Punch in question, and get right answer, all standardized.   That’s the end of halachic system, the end of Torah she baal peh, if such a system is accepted.

Yes there are some chachamim past and present who have believed in such a system, but there are many who never believed in such a thing.   As one example, The Rambam as we just quoted him.   In fact, ALL rishonim would not have believed in that kind of system (which Rav Bar Hayim asserts is a corruption of our tradition).   All of them felt compelled to say what they thought was truthful, as they saw things.  Rashi never felt compelled to agree with Rabenu Gershom (the greatest chacham of France and arguably all Ashkenaz in the generation preceding that of Rashi), just because it was said by Rabenu Gershom.  Rashi never felt that he could not disagree if he understood things differently, and the proof is in Rashi’s commentaries.  When he disagrees he says so explicitly, and Rav Bar Hayim presents an example:    He says in many places “rabothai pershu kacha… and I don’t think so.”   [This translates loosely to Rashi saying in his manuscript “my rabbis explain thusly, and I think differently.”]   On a number of issues Rashi feels himself at liberty to say such things.   The Rabenu Tam and the other Baalei Tosafoth also did not feel obligated to agree with their grandfather, Rashi.   They often disagree with him plainly in their commentaries on the gemara, as anyone who learns Talmud can see.   

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

All the rishonim did not feel obligated to follow a certain person’s opinion if he thought it was incorrect.   That was the rule of Torah learning, not the exception.   They, all the chachamim, were set out to reach the truth of the matter before them by examining the sources.   It was only much later that a new rule came into place whereby some people assert that there is not a pursuit of truth, or that most issues you cannot find the truth because it has already been discussed, so this leaves very few topics open to examination.  All else has been “canonized” so to speak, there’s a “definitive” opinion that exists out there, and you as a Talmid chacham have no right to disagree or say anything different.   This is relatively new development and a pernicious one.  And many chachamim thought so, similarly to Rav Bar Hayim, that it was indeed a pernicious development.   Interestingly, the Maharshal, a contemporary of the Beth Yosef in Poland, who lived at the time the Shulchan Aruch became publicized, the Maharshal felt that the Shulchan Aruch was a negative influence on the study of Torah.   The Maharal was also critical of this influence, as he is quoted as saying it is preferable for talmidei chachamim to learn the sugiya of the gemara with rishonim and reach his own conclusion even if he’s wrong, than to just skip all of that and go straight to Shulchan Aruch to quote a psak, even if it happens to be a correct one!  Because to make their job to just look up a book and whatever is concluded/written there it is there job to just repeat it, you have minimized the Torah She baal peh and their whole purpose which is to seek the truth and act upon it.  (my comment:  You've turned the rabbi into a reference librarian, or as R Bar Hayim said, a robot).

Now to address a question with connection to Talmud Yerushalmi with this topic.  Many comparisons can be made to draw distinctions between the Yerushalmi and the Bavli, but one of them is that Yerushalmi lends itself more to the approach of the rishonim and that which we quoted from the Rambam.   Again, this is not about necessarily just (as discussed in part 1) the size of an olive or when to say mashiv haruach umoreed hageshem (He makes the wind blow and the rain descend – an insert to the shemoneh esray’s 2nd bracha), it’s about the entire approach to the Torah.   It’s supposed to be a living system that guides the Jewish people.   Can a nation live according to a system of Torah that is based on intellectual dishonesty, dumbing-down, denial of things we know to be truth (because one work or one opinion says otherwise), and if it chooses to do so, can this nation succeed in its purpose and what it’s supposed to achieve?  Can we achieve purpose and destiny working within a system based on falsehood and cognitive dissonance, with a dichotomy between truth-and-facts-and-reality on the one hand, and Torah-and-halacha on the other hand?

No.  True Torah and true halacha fits reality and works with reality.  It does not operate in a separate realm divorced from reality, logic, and common sense.   We all know what an olive looks like, and yet you tell someone he must eat bread on the night of Sukkoth 10 times that amount to fulfill eating the size of an olive (60 grams rather than 6 grams – from part 1 of the shiur), you are asking him to accept something which he knows is inane, but he has to convince himself that olives used to be giant to somehow make sense of it.   This type of system trains people not to appreciate truth or understand things but only to accept that Torah and halacha are beyond understanding, just to be accepted, and whether or not it makes sense is irrelevant.   But in Rav Bar Hayim’s words “nothing overrides truth, reality, or the Torah.”  The Torah does not intend for people to believe things that are not true, just because our forefathers (or certain of our forefathers) may have believed it or acted in a certain way.  The principle of ‘following the custom of your forefathers’ in the way that it is usually thrown around in modern-day discussion leads to this scenario where truth is set aside and Torah is portrayed as if it requires us to live in denial of the truth or denial of the obvious.  (And this is not so).   Case in point is the following example:

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

About 20 years ago, Rav Bar Hayim met a young yeshiva student at a Shalom Zachor, and the Rav explained to him many proofs about the proper pronunciation of Hebrew letters, including waw (not vav), teth, etc.   The student was actually impressed and convinced.   He admitted the Rav was probably correct.   So then the Rav asked him, so are you going to start learning to speak in this manner?  To make it easy on yourself you can even do one letter at a time, starting with the easiest ones to adapt – to change gradually.  And the student said “no, the halacha requires me to pronounce Hebrew as my grandfather pronounced it.”  So this student believed and was trained to think that halacha requires him to mispronounce Hebrew.  Just because his grandfather may have mispronounced it since he didn’t have all the information about it, and people around him mispronounced in a certain way, this student is convinced that therefore, halacha requires and obligates him to now continue mispronouncing it himself even when he knows or is convinced that it is the wrong pronunciation.  As if the Torah requires you to do something incorrect or incompatible with proof and logic.

Question from the crowd:   Well, maybe it’s not just mispronunciation, but he is just going by his mesorah which he received.

Rav Bar Hayim says:  If you bring a minor point about a specific letter or vowel and it’s not entirely clear as to how it should be pronounced correctly, then you could have an argument that perhaps it is unclear and then a person could go with his “mesorah” as a reliable fallback option.   But there is almost no occurrence such as this if one looks into this matter.  The facts are very clear.  For example the waw (not vav) is very clear and straightforward that it is pronounced as a waw from all sorts of proofs.  (like an English “w”).  There is nothing to debate.   And this is true of most/all other letters/vowels.

Question from crowd:   But the Teymanim (Yemenites) for example, they have a tradition of pronouncing the gimmel with a dagesh in it (dagesh is the dot sometimes appearing in the middle of Hebrew letters) as “jah” sound.   They’ve got a mesorah for doing that.   Would you say no, they are incorrect?  That they are doing it wrong?

Rav Bar Hayim responds:   Some Teymanim pronounce gimmel-with-dagesh as “jah,” and some Teymanim pronounce gimmel-with-dagesh [as Rav Bar Hayim does], as “guh.”
Secondly, since within the Teymanim themselves there is a machloketh over this aspect of pronunciation and they themselves do not all agree on how it should be pronounced, that in itself already makes that particular issue somewhat suspect.  Then with outside information and proofs by investigating this matter, Hebrew grammar, etc, it is very easy to prove on that issue that the “Jimmel” is incorrect.  In Rav Saadiah Gaon’s commentary on Sefer Yetzirah, he says explicitly that Hebrew has no “jin” which is the Arabic letter with the sound “jah” and would correspond to a “jimmel” if there was such a thing.   R. Saadiah Gaon says there is no such letter in Hebrew.   The Saadiah Gaon lived 1100 years ago, spoke Arabic and Hebrew, one of the greatest grammarians and chachamim of all time, and he said this clearly.   But it is also true from common sense and logic, as Rav Kook writes in a teshuvah when asked about pronunciation, every letter should be distinct from other letters and every vowel should have a distinct sound from other vowels.

But the point here is that this student never claimed the jimmel was correct or that the waw was not right and true.   He said he would like to do what Rav Bar Hayim was describing because he believed it was true and that Rav Bar Hayim was right, but he felt the halacha prevented him from doing so.  That halacha is separate from reason and truth and never mix.   This approach is unacceptable, irrational, and impossible, and it leads to a type of paralysis of the Jewish people.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

As a side note, Rav Bar Hayim learned the pronunciation as taught by Rabbi ben Tzion HaKohen who wrote a sefer describing with about 30 proofs for each item how to correctly pronounce Hebrew based on the textual sources, and later a second book which was abridged, and had about 4 proofs for each item.   Rav Bar Hayim learned under this rabbi for some time many years ago.

Now relating back to Talmud Yerushalmi and how this anecdote about the pronunciation relates back to the overall subject.   If you ask the majority of religious Jews, will there be a Beth Hamikdash (Holy Temple) in the future, they will say yes, and if you ask how will it get there?  The majority will say ‘it will fall from heaven.’  The Rav has tried this many times.   Rav Bar Hayim also surveyed people many times asking do you or anyone you know ever avoid eating bread just to avoid having to say birkath hamazon (blessing of thanks for sustenance) afterwards.   So many people say, almost everyone asked, that either they do it or they’ve heard of their friends doing so.  This was in reference to the Rav’s revival of nusach eretz Yisrael for birkath hamazon in the birkon (prayer sheet) available on machon shilo website (it happens to be shorter than the standard nusach of Ashkenaz and Mizrachi prevelant today, which are quite lengthy).  It is a big problem that people avoid a positive deoraissa (from the Torah) misswah because they want to avoid saying very lenthy berachoth (blessings) afterwards.   And this proves something has gone wrong with the nusach in use (many additions were added over the generations to make it more wordy and longer than necessary). 

The overwhelming majority also believe the Temple will fall from the heaven.   Maybe they will say the gemara says it somewhere or Rashi does, but they are usually not exactly sure – just convinced that that is their belief.    And it is true that Rashi does say such a thing.  Without a doubt.  But “I must tell you, with all the cavod in the world for Rashi… I do not believe such a thing for one moment… [it is just not] possible… I completely categorically deny that such a thing will ever happen, and I believe that to believe such a thing is ridiculous.  Based on:  Based on the fact that I am a rational, reasonable person, who knows that is not how the world works… I know that the Torah tells us (quotes a verse) the first mikdash – that is to say, the mishkan – was built by human beings.  I know the first Beth Hamikdash was built in Yerushalayim by Shlomo Hamelech by human beings – it didn’t fall out of Heaven.  I know the second Beth Hamikdash was built by humans and did not fall out of Heaven.   I have no reason whatsoever to believe that the third Beth Hamikdash will be any different from the first three buildings (mishkan plus first & 2nd Beth Hamikdash).”

Questioner in crowd:  Are you saying Hashem can’t do that?

Rav Bar Hayim:  “Of course not.  Hashem can do anything, He can create the universe from nothing, He can do anything He likes.”  But that is not the issue.  “The issue is whether it is rational and reasonable for us to think, that the world as we know it as Hashem has created it and as we experience it, is it rational to assume first of all that that is what Hashem does?  We see (from the Torah) it’s not what Hashem does.”  It is not rational to believe the world operates in this way.  And when the Torah tells us it is our job to do so, that to build the Beth Hamikdash is a misswah, like any other misswah from the Torah – how is it rational to assume that at some point in history this misswah ceased being a misswah and somehow instead it is now Hashem’s job to take care of it for us.   This uproots a major principle of the Torah.   Hashem gives US misswoth in the Torah.  He tells us our obligations.   It is not directed at Hashem, and He is not talking to Himself.  He is telling us what to do.  We therefore have to act in this world in a systematic manner and organized way to bring about a scenario where we are able to fulfill the misswoth.   They apply to us, the Jewish people, and we are commanded to do them.   

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

It is equally irrational for a Jew to refrain from building a Sukkah on erev Sukkoth, expecting it to fall from Heaven, and then when it doesn’t fall from the sky, he gives the excuse for why he is not eating and living in a Sukkah on the chag, that he was expecting G-d to build it for him and send it down to him from heaven.   About such a person you would probably say he should see a medical professional, that there is something wrong with him.   And you would be right.   It is equally wrong and irrational to expect the Third Temple to fall from heaven.   This contradicts the entire thrust of the Torah.  The Torah tells us the misswah, describing for us there and in Torah she baal peh and in Rambam etc how to build a certain building in a certain place for a certain purpose, all described for us – that the Jewish people are obligated to carry this out.  That we should expect it to be done for us and fall from the sky is a ridiculous claim and goes against the whole Torah.   

(Some inaudible grumbling in the crowd, and Rav Bar Hayim asks them to hold their question for a moment).

Now, there is a connection between this and the Yerushalmi as follows.  Rashi is not making this claim out of nowhere or from nothing.  He makes it based on a certain sugiyah (discussion) in the Talmud Bavli where it is not said explicitly but it is implied between the lines that the mikdash will fall from Heaven.   Rashi read between the lines and based himself on that.  And the Tosafoth say the same thing.  Rav Bar Hayim asserts that this interpretation of what is being implied by the sugiyah there in the Bavli is “quite right.”  That that is the message the Bavli is trying to convey, although one mustn’t agree with the idea, and has room to interpret otherwise.   But the Rav agrees with the interpretation of this Bavli passage.   Of course there is also the Meiri who knew the sugiya and the Rashi and Tosafoth, but was not happy with this response and gave a more rational and down to earth explanation instead, that the Temple would not fall from the sky, which is a more far-fetched explanation of this gemara, but a more rational approach to life nonetheless. 

But the Talmud Yerushalmi does not say this idea of a Temple falling from Heaven, and in fact says the exact opposite.  It makes it clear that it will be built by human beings and in a time and place when things are far from perfect.    The discussion of details of what is said there in the Yerushalmi is a topic for another shiur.   But certainly it is made very clear it will be built by humans BEFORE the time of Moshiach (the “messiah”), and it shows the Yerushalmi is not making this assumption of buildings, or the Mikdash, falling from heaven…  And in a letter written to Rav Kook by someone asking him “Isn’t it accepted fact that the Third Temple will fall from heaven?”  Rav Kook writes a response, “heaven forbid such a thing should be an accepted rule of thumb in Judaism,” especially considering we know this gemara in the Yerushalmi says the opposite, chas vshalom (G-d forbid) to claim there is some fundamental concept in Judaism that is contradicted plainly by an express Yerushalmi.  That was Rav Kook’s response.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Rav Bar Hayim says in his opinion the Yerushalmi on many issues presents a more intellectually honest, down-to-earth and common sense approach to things, but Torah in the galuth (exile/Diaspora) becomes degraded.  (Ie, the Talmud Bavli is the Talmud of the galuth, and reflects Torah-of-galuth, while Talmud Yerushalmi is the Talmud of Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) and reflects Torah-of-Eretz Yisrael rather than Torah-of-Galuth).  And this is not such a big chiddush (new idea).   This is not a new idea and should not be a surprising thing at all to you.  In megillath eichah (Lamentations, which we recite on Tisha B’Av, our national day of mourning where we lament all of the terrible tragedies that have befallen us in our history, including the Temple being destroyed and our being exiled from our land and sent into galuth).  The verse says – the king of the Jewish people and her leaders are in galuth, and therefore there is no Torah.   From this we see that in galuth you will not find “real Torah.”  By definition Torah in the Galuth goes wrong.  It is like planting a tree in soil that is not fit for that kind of tree.   In Masecheth Hagiga in Talmud Bavli, it says, “Once the Jewish people went into galuth, ‘ain licha betool Torah gadol mizeh’ (translation: there was no greater nullification of Torah than this).”   How can it say this when there were certainly great yeshivoth in Bavel, tremendous gaonim, at some point in history they were more numerous than the institutions in Eretz Yisrael and with more talmidim (students), so how can the Bavli say this statement?  Rav Bar Hayim says, “Because real, authentic Torah, which is very much connected to the real world and about how to apply the Torah in the real world, rather than creating some kind of virtual system for maintaining Jewish existence in a galuth reality – that is a different kind of Torah altogether, a different magnitude altogether.”   

Talmud Bavli is in many ways and many instances discussing a Judaism that is divorced from the real world – a system that worked fairly well in the galuth in the past, but in the future, an approach is needed that is rooted in the real world in a down to earth and rational understanding of the Torah and misswoth.  (Talmud Yerushalmi being the alternative in cases like this).  So when the Torah says to build a mikdash it means to build it, and not to wait for it to fall from heaven, and not even to assume that it might fall from heaven just because we only have three data points of historical precedence (even when all three indicate it will be built by people).  It should be assumed, like every other misswah, it is a misswah for us to do because it says exactly so.   And like it says in Rambam, it is a misswah aseh (positive commandment) for the Jewish people to build a Beth Hamikdash.  And when Rambam says based on the gemara, all Jews men and women are required to pitch in to this national project of building it, that is exactly what it means.   Not speaking about a virtual mikdash but a real one.   And it will require a great amount of work and planning, engineers, money etc.

In jest, Rav Bar Hayim says to consider the public train system fiasco (has been planned for Jerusalem/Israel for a long time now) and what a disaster that has been, and all the more so something so much more important how difficult it will be with the engineers, planners and workmen we have in this country.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Someone in crowd asks:   Is the Rambam’s opinion on this issue a minority opinion?  Where does he stand relative to other chachamim on this issue to build a mikdash?

Rav Bar Hayim responds:  It is difficult to say minority vs majority opinion etc because that would require collecting all the data and deciding who is to be included and who should not be.   But the bottom line is that Rambam holds this opinion, and I (Rav Bar Hayim) know Rashi does not, but the Abarbanel holds also this position just explained (agrees with Rambam), and perhaps some of the baalei Tosafoth do not.  Kuzari (Rav Yehudah Ha Lewi) also agrees with Rambam.  Towards the end of his greatest work “The Kuzari,” the Kuzari King asks the Chacham when the Jewish people will go back to Israel, build the mikdash and do all these things already- things which they are clearly required to do?  The chacham (ie Rav Yehudah ha Lewi) responds, “when the Jewish people decide they want to do it, and they get up and do it, that is when it will happen.”   He did not imagine it would happen any other way, because it cannot happen any other way.   Rav Bar Hayim adds, “And one would imagine that 2,000 years of bitter experience would also perhaps indicate that that opinion is correct.   It did not happen by itself and it will not happen by itself.”   

Therefore when Rav Bar Hayim hears people say “moshiach will come at any moment” the Rav always chuckles.    “Because I know for a fact the moschiach is not going to come tomorrow or the day after because I know that is not how it works.   It is not some miraculous advent of some individual who falls from Heaven on a white donkey and says ‘hello, I’m the moschiach.’ ”   According to Judaism, that is a x-tian and false understanding of the concept of the melech hamoschiach (literally, the anointed king).  If you look in the sources, including the Rambam, you will see it is an evolutionary historical process which occurs in the real world, propelled forward by human agency.  “If I see at this moment in time we are not anywhere near getting ourselves on track and moving in that direction, then I know it is not going to happen tomorrow or anytime soon.  Because I know that we have a long way to go before we even get ourselves on the right road.”

Inaudible question from audience (probably, why can’t you expect miraculous redemption)

Rav Bar Hayim responds:  For the same reason I don’t expect my lulav to fall from heaven.  (Note by KWR BT: Lulav is a species of plant that is used for a misswah on holiday of Sukkoth.  It is grown usually in Israel and some places in Turkey from what I understand, and then harvested and purchased by Jews all over the world to perform the yearly misswah).

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Audience member:  But Hashem split the Red Sea!

Rav Bar Hayim responds:  Fine but that is not a misswah.  There is no misswah for me to split the Red Sea.  Hashem can split the Red Sea any time he wishes.  But I’m not commanded to split the Red Sea.  If I’m commanded to do it, I have to figure out a way to do it, but because I can’t (humans cannot do this), we were not commanded to do this.

Audience member:   But I don’t know how it (ie, the advent of the Beth Hamikdash) will happen…

Rav Bar Hayim:  But I do know.  Because the Torah tells us.  It’s very easy to know.  (Quotes the verse from the Torah).   And it says in the Rambam as a halacha that it is a chovah (obligation) from the Torah for the Jewish people to build the Mikdash.  And I don’t know who exactly disagrees with this Rambam.  It goes without saying that this won’t happen because you or I want it.  We can’t decide tomorrow we want it up and then have it up automatically within a year.   It has to happen first that the Jewish people organizes itself as a nation in its own land with its own state with a Torah-oriented leadership leading the nation, who will be interested in moving forward with such a project.  And they will decide to embark on this process.   It’s clearly a project of massive proportions.  But that is how it will happen.  If you want to build a mikdash the first step is to get a Jewish government in place.

End of shiur.  Enjoy.   Shabbath Shalom.

[Flechette]

R.Bar Hayim was one of those who signed Barry Chamish's petition in Tel Aviv January 1999 for the Israel Police to reopen the Rabin conspiracy investigation.

Does the Rabbi still hold there was a conspiracy?

[judeanoncapta]

R.Bar Hayim was one of those who signed Barry Chamish's petition in Tel Aviv January 1999 for the Israel Police to reopen the Rabin conspiracy investigation.

Does the Rabbi still hold there was a conspiracy?

Absolutely.

He told me so within the past few months.

[galileerat]

3rd Temple expert Chaim Clorfene http://www.jewishmag.com/16mag/temple/temple.htm
states that if the Redemption is b'ittah it will be built by human hands. If it is b'achishenah, it will come down from Heaven built by Divine Hands.

[muman613]

3rd Temple expert Chaim Clorfene http://www.jewishmag.com/16mag/temple/temple.htm
states that if the Redemption is b'ittah it will be built by human hands. If it is b'achishenah, it will come down from Heaven built by Divine Hands.

You mean that if we merit redemption it will be built by human hands, if redemption comes when we don't deserve it the Temple will come down from heaven?

[Moshe92]

3rd Temple expert Chaim Clorfene http://www.jewishmag.com/16mag/temple/temple.htm
states that if the Redemption is b'ittah it will be built by human hands. If it is b'achishenah, it will come down from Heaven built by Divine Hands.

That article was kind of confusing but very interesting. Thanks for posting it.

[galileerat]

Chaim Clorfene's book on the Third Temple is well worth reading.

[wonga66]

Does R.Bar Chayim's view about ascending the Temple Mount today differ from R.Eliyashiv's? http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1119724.html



Or do current exegencies and the Chillul/Kiddush Hashem of the Jewish right to ascend the Har Habayis today transcend even Halachah?!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Or do ... Jewish right to ascend the Har Habayis today transcend even Halachah?!

What halacha exactly?   Can you point out which one?

Yes I believe it is highly likely that Rav Bar Hayim's opinion differs from that of Rav Eliyashiv on this issue, but I honestly have never asked him so I don't know what his position is.   I only say it is likely because the Manhigut Yehudit group often organizes trips up to Temple Mount (with appropriate preparations, mikveh etc beforehand), and I know that they consult with Rav Bar Hayim among others for their Torah positions.    That being said, they may not always do according to Rav Bar Hayim's opinions, so it's not a great proof.

But the Haredi position has always been that it is 'assur' to go onto Temple mount.   I have not seen a good explanation for the reasoning behind that, in light of the rather good explanations given by the opposing side that argues it is permitted, nor does the article you cited give any reasoning behind Rabbi Eliyashiv's opinion.   They only quoted the soundbite that fits their agenda.   But there have always been other Torah authorities, some National religious rabbis, and some haredi rabbis, who have differed in their opinion and have given good reasons that it is NOT forbidden.   So why are you so quick to say it's "the halacha" ?  Let's see if you can point out in what way it is the halacha or what halacha you are relating it to.   You can't necessarily guess at what Rav Eliyashiv's reasoning is, but since you are so convinced, I assume you have some other information not available to us.  So please share.

[wonga66]

A formal request has been made to R.Bar Chayim as to his opinion, so let's see if he posts it up on his "Ask the Rav" page http://machonshilo.org/en/index.php

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

A formal request has been made to R.Bar Chayim as to his opinion, so let's see if he posts it up on his "Ask the Rav" page http://machonshilo.org/en/index.php

Excellent, I almost made a request to the Rav, myself... Kol Hakavod.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

btw is there an actual function on that site where one can submit a question for "ask the rav" ?    Or is it just certain questions people ask the Rabbi in person or otherwise get posted up there if they are interesting?

[wonga66]

No reply or updates at all from R.Bar Chayim about going up to the Har Habayis or even his Halachic view on the separate-seat buses: a bit disappointing.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

No reply or updates at all from R.Bar Chayim about going up to the Har Habayis or even his Halachic view on the separate-seat buses: a bit disappointing.

I did get something relevant actually.  On the machon shilo listserve they are organizing a trip to Temple Mount and sent out some documents containing in hebrew and in English instructions, psak halacha with sources etc.

Is it possible to post pdf documents here?

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I did get something relevant actually.  On the machon shilo listserve they are organizing a trip to Temple Mount and sent out some documents containing in hebrew and in English instructions, psak halacha with sources etc.

Is it possible to post pdf documents here?

 Why don't you copy/paste?

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Bli neder, let me look for it and see if I still have that document, and if so, I will put up the information with copy paste, if possible.