JTF.ORG Forum
Torah and Jewish Idea => Torah and Jewish Idea => Topic started by: Tag-MehirTzedek on October 18, 2012, 08:23:03 PM
-
http://youtu.be/mKZqQdlS_Cg
My reply
1)Writing to a dead Rebbe does not sound Jewish to me
2) Got banned for 1
3) he replied (In link)
4) What my reply would be (and did send him email with this reply as well)
No as well. But with a person it is different and borderline Avoda Zara. The best way is to address G-D directly and not even write a note into the wall. Secondly even the people who do that write the note to G-D and not to a person. In this case you are saying to write a note to a dead person (any person Rabbi, or Rebbe including) is wrong because we are supposed to pray to and worship only the 1 and only G-D and no intermediaries.
-
You are correct. I have never heard of anyone claiming that we are supposed to pray through intermediaries. I do not know the rabbi you posted here so I cannot comment on his response or his outlook. But I find it hard to believe that anyone who claims to be a Jewish Rabbi would suggest that we pray to a man.
The concept of the Tzadik is a complex one and often many people misunderstand what it going on. The Torah does express the concept that some of our fore-bearers were righteous and if we prayed at their kever we would benefit in the merit of the tzadik, and our prayers would be received with the tzadiks merits. I can understand this, and I can understand how an observer who was not fully aware of this could misunderstand the practice.
Here is an explanation from Torah.org @ http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/shlach.html
VISITING GRAVES of TZADDIKIM: HOW and WHY?
The ancient minhag yisrael of visiting and davening at graves of tzaddikim during times of tribulation has many sources in Talmudic literature(1). Indeed, Shulchan Aruch records in several places that it is appropriate to do so on certain public fast days in general(2) and on Tishah B'av after midday in particular(3). Erev Rosh ha-Shanah, too, is a day when it has become customary to visit graves(4). But what is the reason for this? How does it help us(5)?
The Talmud(6) cites two explanations: 1) To serve as a reminder of man's immortality so that one repent while he still can; 2) To ask the dead to pray for mercy on our behalf. [A practical difference between these two reasons, says the Talmud, is whether or not it is appropriate to visit graves of non-Jews [when there are no Jewish graves near by] since even a non-Jew's grave reminds man of his immortality. Nowadays, however, when non-Jews mark their graves with religious symbols, it is no longer appropriate to visit non-Jewish graves even if there are no Jewish graves in the area(7).]
The second reason quoted in the Talmud - to ask the dead to pray for mercy on our behalf - demands clarification. Many people assume that this means that we are allowed to pray to the dead to ask them to help us. This is a serious mistake and strictly forbidden. One who prays with this intent transgresses the Biblical(8) command of "You shall not recognize the gods of others in my presence"(9). It may also be a violation of the Biblical(10) command against "one who consults the dead"(11).
If so, what does the Talmud mean when it says that we "ask the dead to beg for mercy on our behalf"? We find two schools of thought concerning this matter:
Some(12) hold that it means that it is permitted to speak directly to the dead to ask them to daven to Hashem on our behalf. This is similar to the prayers that we find throughout Selichos which are addressed to the malachim. Although the malachim - who are merely G-d's messengers - do not posses the ability to do anything of their own accord, still we may ask them to "deliver" our prayers to Hashem. So, too, it is permitted to address the dead directly and ask them to intercede on our behalf at the heavenly throne.
Others(13) strongly disagree and maintain that this, too, is strictly forbidden. In their opinion, addressing a dead person is a violation of "consulting the dead". What the Talmud means by "asking the dead to pray for mercy on our behalf" is that we daven directly to Hashem that in the merit of the dead He should have mercy on us. We visit the graves only to remind Hashem of the merits of the holy tazddikim who are interred there.
The practical halachah is as follows. Most of the classical poskim(14) rule in accordance with the second view. Mishnah Berurah(15) also clearly writes: We visit graves because a cemetery where tzaddikim are interred is a place where prayers are more readily answered. But one should not place his trust in the dead. He should just ask Hashem to have mercy on him in the merit of the tzaddikim who are interred here.
But other poskim rule that it is permitted to talk to the dead [or to angels] to intercede on our behalf. In a lengthy responsum, Minchas Elazar(16) proves from a host of sources throughout the Talmud and Zohar that not only is this permitted but it is a mitzvah to do so.
But as we said before, all opinions - without exception - agree that it is strictly forbidden to daven directly to a dead person [or to angel] so that they should help us. The most that is permitted [according to the lenient views] is to ask them to act as our emissaries to Hashem, so that Hashem will look favorably and mercifully upon us.
THE VISIT: PROPER CONDUCT
Upon entering a cemetery, the blessing of Asher yatzar eschem badin is recited(17). The full text is found in many siddurim. This blessing is recited only once within any thirty day period(18).
Before visiting at a grave, one should wash his hands(19).
Upon reaching the grave, one should place his left hand on the marker(20).
It is forbidden, though, to lean on it(21).
Within four amos [7-8 feet] of a grave(22):
The tzitzis strings should be concealed(23).
Levity, eating, drinking, greeting a friend or engaging in business is prohibited(24).
Learning, davening or reciting a blessing is prohibited(25). Many poskim, however, hold that it is permitted to recite Tehillim(26) or the burial Kaddish(27).
One should be careful not to step on any grave(28).
Before taking leave of a grave it is customary to put a stone or some grass on the marker(29).
The same grave should not be visited twice in one day(30).
Upon leaving the cemetery, it is customary to take some soil and grass from the ground and throw it over one's shoulder(31). There are many different reasons for this custom. On Shabbos, Yom Tov and Chol ha-Moed this may not be done(32).
After leaving a cemetery and before entering one's home(33) or another person's home(34), one should wash his hands three times from a vessel, alternating between the right and left hands(35). There are different customs concerning the method of washing(36): The water should drain into the ground and not collect in a puddle. After washing, any water that remains in the vessel is poured out. The vessel is turned upside down and placed on the ground, not handed to the next person(37). Some let their hands air dry and do not use a towel(38). Some wash their face as well(39).
FOOTNOTES
1 Yosef cried at his mother's grave before going to Egypt (Sefer ha-Yashar); Before being exiled, the Jewish people wept at Kever Rochel (Rashi, Vayechi 48:7); Kalev prayed at Meoras ha-Machpeilah before confronting the meraglim (Sotah 34b). See also Ta'anis 23b.
2 O.C. 579:3.
3 Rama O.C. 559:10.
4 Rama O.C. 581:4. Some go on Erev Yom Kippur as well (Rama O.C. 605:1) while others oppose going on that day; Elef ha-Magen 605:39 quoting Ya'avetz; Divrei Yoel 99:4.
5 Our discussion focuses on visiting graves on fast days and at other times of strife. Do not confuse this with the custom of visiting graves of parents and other relatives (on their yahrzeits and other occasions) whose primary purpose is to elevate the soul of the deceased and to give it "pleasure".
6 Ta'anis 16a.
7 Mishnah Berurah 579:14. See also Kaf ha-Chayim 559:81.
8 Shemos 20:3.
9 Sefer ha-Ikarim, mamar 2, quoted in Gesher ha-Chayim 2:26.
10 Shoftim 18:11.
11 Eliyohu Rabbah 581:4.
12 See Shalah (quoted by Elef ha-Magen 581:113), Pri Megadim O.C. 581:16 and M'haram Shick O.C. 293.
13 The source for this view among the Rishonim is Teshuvos R' Chaim Paltiel (quoted by the Bach and Shach Y.D. 179:15) and Maharil, Hilchos Ta'anis, (quoted by Be'er Heitev O.C. 581:17).
14 Including the Be'er Heitev, Chayei Adam, Mateh Efrayim and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch.
15 581:27.
16 1:68. See also Gesher ha-Chayim 2:26 and Minchas Yitzchak 8:53.
17 O.C. 224:12. This blessing is recited only at a burial plot that contains at least two graves.
18 Mishnah Berurah 224:17.
19 Mishnah Berurah 4:42.
20 Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 128:13. See there also for the text that should be recited at that time.
21 Shach Y.D. 363:3.
22 Note that according to the Arizal (quoted by Mishnah Berurah 559:41) one should never go within four amos of a grave [except at interment]. In Igeres ha-Gra he writes that one should never enter a cemetery at all, and especially not women. [It is commonly accepted that a woman who is a niddah does not go to a cemetery at all (Mishnah Berurah 88:7). Under extenuating circumstances a rav should be consulted; see Beis Baruch on Chayei Adam 3:38.]
23 Mishnah Berurah 23:3. Tefillin, too, must be concealed.
24 Y.D. 368:1; Rama Y.D. 343:2.
25 Y.D. 367:3; 368:1.
26 Birkei Yosef Y.D. 344:17.
27 Gesher ha-Chayim 1:16-4.
28 Taz Y.D. 363:1.
29 Be'er Heitev O.C. 224:8.
30 Mishnah Berurah 581:27.
31 Y.D. 376:4. Some do this only after an interment.
32 O.C. 547:12.
33 Kaf ha-Chayim 4:80.
34 Mishnah Berurah 4:43. It is permitted, however, to enter a shul or another public place before washing; Harav M. Feinstein (Moadei Yeshurun, pg. 58).
35 Mishnah Berurah 4:39.
36 Some of these customs do not have an halachic source; they are based on Cabalistic writings and customs.
37 R' Akiva Eiger (Y.D. 376:4). See Zichron Meir, pg. 450.
38 Several poskim write that this does not apply during the cold winter month when the hands will become chapped; see Kaf ha-Chayim 4:78.
39 Mishnah Berurah 4:42.
-
Deviant Jews – Praying to the Dead
Moshe Ben-Chaim
Reader: By the grace of G-d. Shalom u’Brocha! Perhaps you have no obligation to believe the Lubavitcher Rebbe or the Besht were prophets, but those who witnessed their prophecies and miracles have such an obligation. Brocha ve’hatzlocha! Ariel
Mesora: First off, let me offer you a sampling of reality regarding the Rebbe: a close friend went to the Rebbe and asked him a question about the condition of her sick relative. The Rebbe told her that her relative would live, but she died. The Rebbe was wrong. All humans are bereft of absolute knowledge, and of future events.
Furthermore, to suggest the Rebbe, the Besht or anyone is a prophet, never having produced the Torah’s required proofs of prophecy; you display a severe lack of adherence to the Torah, which destroys Torah. For you will most certainly follow your self-proclamation of their prophecy with the view that “all they said is Torah.” Suggesting man is infallible and is always speaking “prophetic truths” leads many astray. These men were never proven as prophets, so your claim exposes you as a very poor judge of Torah principles. Based on God’s words, we do not accept what an unproven prophet speaks, lest he mislead Jews from God. So until a man produces the phenomenon required by Torah to be a prophet, he is not considered one. You seem to be living in a fantasy world, simply to maintain your idols as leaders of “holy” status. Be mindful: when Moses died, the Jews accepted his death. They did not say he was returning. So why do you place your Rebbe higher than Moses?
I visited your website “www.kingmessiah.com” where under a picture of the most recent Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, you write, “The Lubavitcher Rebbe - King Messiah may he live for ever”. You feel the Rebbe is Moshiach, but he never satisfied any requirements that he might be considered the messiah. Your credibility as a voice of Torah is thereby completely stripped from you. But the most disgusting element of your website is where you encourage others to violate a Torah prohibition of consulting the dead, where you write, “Write to the Rebbe and Behold Miracles.” You openly tell Jews they may consult the dead, and that they will receive miracles. You are no different than a devout Christian waiting for Jesus to perform miracles from HIS grave. You do not practice Judaism, but idolatry. We just celebrated our liberation from the idolatrous, Egyptian culture, but you intend to return the Jews to the Egyptians’ primitivism.
In contrast, what is accurate Torah? What does God say? God tells us “[do not] inquire of the dead. For it is an abomination to God, all who do such things, and on account of these abominations, Hashem your God wiped them out from before you.” (Deut. 18:11,12) God also says, “do not lie” (Lev. 19:11) but you violate this too, and lie by telling others they may talk to the dead. Not only can the dead not hear our words, they cannot do anything. They know nothing, as King Solomon said, “for the dead know nothing.” (Ecclesiastes, 9:5) This is why God prohibited this action, for it is useless, false, and breeds hope in that which cannot be. Your views cause many to become distressed.
You suggest that a minority, which claims to have seen a miracle, may be believed, such as with regards to the Rebbe or the Besht. If so, may I believe anyone today who says he saw someone perform a miracle? Perhaps someone today, I will claim, outperformed the supposed miracles of the Besht and your Rebbe. According to your view, you must allow me to believe this new miracle worker has surpassed the Besht and your Rebbe. Let us say this new miracle worker, I claim, outperformed Moshe Rabbeinu. Again, you must defend your position that I must be right in following this new miracle worker. According to you, I must then be allowed to believe a Christian, who believes he saw Jesus do a miracle, or a Muslim, that Mohammed is a true prophet. You see, your opinion allows anyone to attain a status of a prophet. But this is not Judaism. You are following your devotion to the Besht and the Rebbe and fake stories, and not a devotion to truth and Torah. As a Rabbi once said, you are attached “man”, not God.
God created the event of Har Sinai – precisely in the eyes of ALL Jews – that such ‘mass witnesses’ be the singular proof of His will and selection of the Jews, and no others. But your opinion negates the need for this mass event of Sinai, as you suggest, one may believe miracles, even with few “witnesses”.
What is the Torah’s position? It is this: we must deny all stories of the Besht’s and the Rebbe’s miracles – of anyone’s miracles – (Jew or gentile) and follow what God intended through His miracles at Sinai: we are to follow only that which is “comprehensively proven in front of masses”. This is the story God wishes all mankind to follow, and to abandon all other impostors. Only such a phenomenon removes all possibility of fabrication and ignorance. And when fabrication and ignorance do not enter a story, the story must be true, as there is no other possibility that a massively attended event, communicated throughout history, can be false. When all possibilities of falsehood have been removed the story must be true. Regarding Sinai, all possibilities have been removed: fabrication is refuted, as masses cannot all share one common motive to lie. Ignorance is refuted, as the event was simple in nature: all know what fire is, and what mountains are. Thus, regarding Mount Sinai’s fiery revelation, there is no possibility that this event was false. It must have occurred. But regarding other stories of reported miracles, if there are no masses, we know that the story may have been fabricated. This applies to your stories of the Rebbe and the Besht performing miracles. God does not demand that we accept any story some religious Jew reports, be he a Rabbi or less. It is precisely because God desires we live based on proof, that He orchestrated Sinai: an event, which cannot be shown to be false.
There is no excuse for your blatant Torah violation, as you entice Jews to violate idolatry, the prohibition of “consulting the dead”. It is essential that others condemn the views of such factions who freely malign God’s Torah and cause Jews to violate not merely small sins, but sins that God refers to as “abominations”.
-
Tag,
What you posted is a straw man argument, in my opinion. Who is claiming that the Rebbe was a prophet? Who is claiming he is a miracle worker? Who is claiming that we should pray to him? I have never seen such things, nor do I understand who the writer of the piece you posted is addressing.
As I posted above, there is a Torah precedant which says that one may pray at the grave of a tzadik, in the merit of the Tzadik. That was your original comment. What you just posted has no connection to this question. What this piece you just posted states is the obvious.
But why post it? Who is saying that we are supposed to pray to the dead? Could you please show that these ideas are expressed anywhere?
I also disagree with the idea that a miracle can only happen if it is before all of Israel. We all experience miracles {as I have} which pertain to us personally. Just because a miracle was not seen by all of Israel doesn't mean it did not happen. There are many miracles in the Torah which were not witnessed by many people. For instance it is said that the fact that Sarah had Yitzak was a miracle, because she was barren and did not even have the biological ability to bear children, yet she had Yitzak. The Torah also doesn't mention the event when Abraham was thrown into the fiery furnce, yet the story is related in the midrash and was surely a miracle yet not many people witnessed it.
http://www.torah.org/learning/ravfrand/5768/toldos.html
Avraham Avinu wanted to sanctify the Name of G-d (Kiddush Hashem) and publicize the great miracle that G-d did for him. Avraham made this big celebration for just that purpose, but the cynics were sitting there having a field day. They joked that Yitzchak could not possibly be Avraham's child. Sarah must have become pregnant from Avimelech. We know how it goes: A roll of the eyes, a twist of the n ose, a mocking smile.
In truth, this cynicism was illogical. They were saying that "Sarah was pregnant from Avimelech" because he could not possibly be Avraham's child. The wonder here wasn't that Avraham had fathered a child. Avraham had already fathered a son from Hagar! The wonder was that Sarah, barren all her life, indeed conceived after she reached the age of ninety!
What then was the nature of this cynicism? Why did G-d respond in such a miraculous fashion to counteract this patently false type of mocking?
The point is that cynicism (leitzanus) has exactly this power. Cynicism does not need to be precise or accurate. The effect of a "one-liner" is basically that of a pin that, in a moment, bursts the balloon. The "press" will write it up. The fact that anyone with intelligence who thinks about this for 30 seconds will recognize it as nonsense is irrelevant. The damage has already been done. Such is the power of leitzanus.
Could you please show me that there are those who suggest we should pray to the dead? I have never seen these people..
-
Another thing the writer of that piece neglects to account for is that we celebrate another miracle, the miracle of Chanuka... But according to the Talmud there is a question as to what the miracle of Channukah was. Was it the fact that the oil burned eight days, or was it the war? In the case of the Candles , which most conclude was the reason we celebrate Chanukah, was not a miracle that all of Israel witnessed. It is a miracle which we were told about by the sages. Thus the premise of the Moshe Ben-Chaim seems to evaporate. Here a miracle which all of Israel did not witness is celebrated every year. Are we to conclude that the sages of the Talmud too were wicked?
-
There is also a special Bracha which we say when we witness a personal miracle:
http://www.torah.org/learning/integrity/menorah_brachos.html
Grabbing the Moment
Every night of Chanuka we sing the piyut Maoz Tzur, which mentions the principal redemptions throughout the history of the Jewish people. It is clear why we specify Chanuka, for that is the holiday that we are currently experiencing, but why do we mention all of the other periods?
We have a similar situation when one comes to a place where a personal miracle occured. He recites the bracha, "Blessed is He Who made a miracle for me in this place." If he had a number of miracles transpire, he should add "in this place and this place ..." (Shulchan Aruch 218:4-5). If the main bracha is for the miracle that happened at the place that he is actually looking at, why must one mention all the other miracles that happened to him?
The same question can be asked with regard to Birkas Hamazon. Why isn't it enough to thank Hashem for the food and sustenance that He has given us, which has occasioned our gratitude at this moment? Why must we also express our gratitude for Torah and Eretz Yisrael as well?
Our Sages understood that when a person reaches a state of inspiration about one of Hashem's miracles, he should not let this opportunity slip through his fingers. Rather he should use this valuable moment in order to thank Hashem for all of the kindness that he has done for him (Rav Yoel Shwartz as cited in Mizmor LeSoda, p. 40-41). After thanking Him for the entire gamut of Jewish history, he will see clearly that Hashem's Hand is the one and only force guiding it, and he will realize that the same is true about his personal life. This will bring tremendous closeness to his Creator.
Through the recitation of the extra tefillos and brachos of Chanuka, may we all be inspired to recognize Hashem's glory and splendor at every moment and be motivated to serve Him with a fresh surge of inspiration during the rest of the year.
-
Read Sotah 34B:
And they went up by the South and he came unto Hebron16 — it should have read 'and they came'! — Raba said: It teaches that Caleb held aloof from the plan of the spies and went and prostrated himself upon the graves of the patriarchs, saying to them, 'My fathers, pray on my behalf that I may be delivered from the plan of the spies'. (As for Joshua, Moses had already prayed on his behalf; as it is said: And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun Joshua,17 [meaning], May Jah save thee [yoshi'aka] from the plan of the spies.) That is the intention of what is written: But My servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him.18
-
One more which attempts to explain why Hashem creates miracles:
http://www.neveh.org/winston/undwhy/undwhy04.html
In Need of a Miracle
Rav Papa said to Abaye, "What is the difference between the former generation and us, that miracles happened for them, and yet not for us?"... He replied, "The former generations sacrificed themselves for the sanctity of the name [of God]; we do not sacrifice ourselves for the sanctity of the name [of God]."
Talmud Brochos 20a
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
What provokes an obvious miracle? (There is a distinction between overt miracles and covert miracles. The latter happen all the time and are camouflaged to appear like acts of ‘nature’ (e.g., the entire process of birth); the former clearly break all the known patterns of creation in a way that does not suggest a random occurrence.) What draws out obvious Divine intervention? The Talmud’s answer: willingness to sanc-tify the name of God, even if it means giving up one’s own life. But is this true? Is self-sacrifice enough to be a source of miracles? Consider the following midrash:
Rabbi Samuel, the son of Rabbi Isaac said, ‘Abraham would not have been saved from the furnace of fire had it not been for the merit of his future grandson, Jacob.’ A parable explains this: once a man was brought before the Sultan to be judged, who subsequently ruled that the man should be burned to death. However, by way of astrology, it was revealed to the Sultan that in the future, the man, should he not be killed, would father a daughter who would one day marry the king. The Sultan said, ‘It is worth saving this man’s life for the daughter that will one day marry the king!’ Thus Abraham was judged to be burned in Ur Kasdim, and when it was revealed before God that in the future, Abraham would have a descendant Jacob, God said, ‘It is worth saving Abraham in the merit of Jacob!’ (Midrash Rabbah on Genesis 63:2.)
Tradition tells us that from an early age, Abraham was a truth-seeker. Though he was raised in an idol-worshipping society, he still believed that if there was a God, He had to be beyond physical limitation, not made of stone, wood, or metal.
It did not take long before Nimrod, king and self-proclaimed god of Babylonia, heard of Abra-ham’s belief. As a result, Abraham was brought before Nimrod and challenged. Abraham’s choice: give up his belief in God, or burn to death. Abraham chose to stand by his belief in God.
The day Abraham was to enter the furnace was a festive day for the Babylonians. (In fact, donations to cover the cost of the burning were plenty and generous.) But in spite of the fact that Abraham spent three days and nights in the fiery furnace, he did not burn. The servants of Nimrod opened the door expecting to find only ashes, but instead found a healthy Abraham to their utter shock and disbelief.
It was a great miracle that saved Abraham from certain death, and it earned him the respect of the people of Babylonia, including Nimrod himself. But why did Abraham warrant such a miracle in the first place? Was it because of his willingness to sacrifice his life to sanctify God’s name?
No, says the midrash. Abraham should have and would have died that day had it not been for Jacob.
This does not mean, however, that had Abraham died he would not have received ample reward for his self-sacrifice. (This is an important point that often gets overlooked in the discussion about suffering.) Perhaps he would even have been rewarded for what he would have achieved had he not been a ‘victim’ of man’s free-willed choices. In the end, Abraham’s death would have been the world’s loss, not his own, for eternal reward in the World-to-Come would have more than compensated him for what he had suffered in this world. (‘Ethics of Our Fathers’ teaches that one hour of eternal reward is far more pleasurable that an entire life of pleasure in this temporal world. This will be dealt with in more detail in Section Two.)
From the midrash, it seems what ‘forced’ God to make a miracle, even though it lessened the opportunity for free will choice of those who witnessed it, was the future birth of Jacob. The potential loss of Jacob weighed greater in the heavenly scale than the loss of the free-will of the Babylonians who witnessed the miracle.
(The Midrash indicates elsewhere that the philosophy of the Babylonians probably wouldn’t have permitted them to seek truth. However, even after the miracle, there were many who refused to accept Abraham’s explanation of the miracle, and instead attributed his redemption from the flames to magic. And by the splitting of the sea (Exodus 14:21), God employed and east wind to bring the miracle about, leaving enough room for doubt to remain in the mind’s of disbelievers as to the involvement of God.)
This principle is by no means absolute, (In the book, The Way of God, Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzatto, in the essay titled, ‘Miracles,’ states various reasons for the occurrence of a miracle, but concludes by saying, "It is possible that miracles should occur for many other reasons that are not comprehensible to us at all." It is a fundamental of Judaism that as much as we’re able to detect logic behind God’s actions, there is always an element of mystery that remains. An anology of this may be, as much as people understand Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, there is still much they don’t understand about it. Even that which they think they understand they probably don’t completely relate to. If this true when understanding the ideas of humans, how much more so is this the case when trying understand Divine wisdom!) but it does give an indication as to what might lead to an obvious miracle in some situations. Thus, if a person is indispensable to creation because of what he or she will eventually produce if he or she survives, then, though man’s free will choices might lead to their death, God may interfere on his or her behalf to save them.
This of course does not mean that if a miracle is not performed to save a person’s life, he is not viewed as righteous in the eyes of God. It just means that the open miracle necessary to save the person would have a negative net effect on history as a whole, and this is an accounting only God can make. (Likewise, to be saved by an open miracle suggests a responsibility to the future of mankind. It is also the belief in this idea that prompts people, when in dangerous situations, to make vows to God that depend upon their personal salvation, to justify a miracle being done for them.)
Thus, in the end, the will of man creates the need for miracles, but the ultimate purpose of creation sometimes demands that God not get so involved in the affairs of humans, at least not in an obvious way. The net result of these two opposing needs may be suffering, even for the righteous. However, this does not mean that the suffering that does occur does not accomplish something positive.
-
I have been searching for any site which comes up via my Kosher search engine which suggest that praying to the dead is acceptable. I have found none although I have found others who accuse Chassidim of doing this. I have scoured the Chabad site and other Chassidic sites and always they state the known Halacha, that it is forbidden to pray TO THE DEAD, but we are permitted to pray in the merit of the dead.
Here is another example of this Halacha:
http://www.atorahminute.com/2009-07-06
Praying to the deceased, Heaven forbid
Rabbi Ya'aqob Menashe
Monday, July 6, 2009/Tammuz 14, 5769
When visiting a cemetery, we have to be very careful not to pray directly to those who are buried there, since we are forbidden to pray to the dead to do anything for us. Rather, we have to increase our repentance and pray to G-d that for the merit of the righteous person who is buried there, He will have mercy on us, (or do such and such for us according to our requests).
We are, permitted, however, to make a request at the grave of the soul of the person who is buried there, especially of the Saddiqim (righteous), that the soul will intercede on our behalf with Haqqadosh Barukh Hu (the Holy One Blessed be He).
(See Rab Pe'alim, Heleq Beh, Yorah De'ah, Lamad Aleph, and Ben Ish Hai, Shanah Aleph, Parashath Nisabim, Oth Beh)
-
I do not understand this... "but you violate this too, and lie by telling others they may talk to the dead. Not only can the dead not hear our words, they cannot do anything. They know nothing, as King Solomon said, “for the dead know nothing.” (Ecclesiastes, 9:5) "
What do they mean, the dead cannot hear anything, and they cannot do anything? So when you die your soul goes nowhere in just vanishes into thin air, that's it there's nothing else on the other side?
-
I do not understand this... "but you violate this too, and lie by telling others they may talk to the dead. Not only can the dead not hear our words, they cannot do anything. They know nothing, as King Solomon said, “for the dead know nothing.” (Ecclesiastes, 9:5) "
What do they mean, the dead cannot hear anything, and they cannot do anything? So when you die your soul goes nowhere in just vanishes into thin air, that's it there's nothing else on the other side?
I am looking into what the commentaries say about this line in Ecclesiastes (One of my favorite books of Tanach)...
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16470/jewish/Chapter-9.htm
Apparently the line is taken out of context. The original context is reproduced below:
4. For whoever is joined to all the living has hope, for concerning a live dog [it is said that] he is better than a dead lion.
5. For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for their remembrance is forgotten.
6. Also their love, as well as their hate, as well as their provocation has already been lost, and they have no more share forever in all that is done under the sun.
My basic interpretation is that this is saying that the dead are incapable of making any changes in the future of the world. They cannot accumulate more reward, and they are not knowing about the current state of the world. If their soul is forgotten they have no part of this world.
I will find what the sages say about these lines...
Here is Rashis comment on this line:
For the living know that they will die: and perhaps their hearts will return on the day of death and they will repent of their ways, but after they die, they do not know anything, and they have no more reward for the actions that they do from their deaths and onwards, for whoever toils on the eve of the Sabbath will eat on the Sabbath.
It appears that my reading of it corresponds to Rashis understanding {that after death we are incapable of accumulating any more reward}...
Here is a story in the Talmud which relates this idea [that the dead are incapable of performing commandments, thus we should not torment them by going to the cemetery with our tzit-tzits (fringes) out..
http://halakhah.com/berakoth/berakoth_18.html
18a
.
.
.
R. Hiyya and R. Jonathan were once walking about in a cemetery, and the blue fringe of R. Jonathan was trailing on the ground. Said R. Hiyya to him: Lift it up, so that they [the dead] should not say: Tomorrow they are coming to join us and now they are insulting us! He said to him: Do they know so much? Is it not written, But the dead know not anything?19 He replied to him: If you have read once, you have not repeated; if you have repeated, you have not gone over a third time; if you have gone over a third time, you have not had it explained to you. For the living know that they shall die:20 these are the righteous who in their death are called living as it says. And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a living21 man from Kabzeel, who had done mighty deeds, he smote the two altar-hearths of Moab; he went down and also slew a lion in the midst of a pit in the time of snow.22
18b
'The son of a living man': are all other people then the sons of dead men? Rather 'the son of a living man' means that even in his death he was called living. 'From Kabzeel, who had done mighty deeds': this indicates that he gathered [kibbez] numerous workers for the Torah. 'He smote two altar-hearths of Moab'; this indicates that he did not leave his like either in the first Temple or in the second Temple.1 'He went down and also slew a lion in the midst of a pit in the time of snow': some say that this indicates that he broke blocks of ice and went down and bathed;2 others say that he went through the Sifra of the School of Rab3 on a winter's day. 'But the dead know nothing': These are the wicked who in their lifetime are called dead, as it says. And thou, O wicked one, that art slain, the prince of Israel.4 Or if you prefer. I can derive it from here: At the mouth of two witnesses shall the dead be put to death.5 He is still alive! What it means is, he is already counted as dead.
.
.
.
R. Jonathan also retracted his opinion. For R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: Whence do we know that the dead converse with one another? Because it says: And the Lord said unto him: This is the land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying.28 What is the meaning of 'saying'?29 The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Say to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: The oath which I swore to you I have already carried out for your descendants.
-
The next folio of Tractate Berakoth is very interesting:
http://halakhah.com/berakoth/berakoth_19.html
Folio 19a
Now if you maintain that the dead do not know, what would be the use of his telling them? — You infer then that they do know. In that case, why should he need to tell them? — So that they might be grateful to Moses. R. Isaac said: If one makes remarks about the dead, it is like making remarks about a stone. Some say [the reason is that] they do not know, others that they know but do not care. Can that be so? Has not R. Papa said: A certain man made1 derogatory remarks about Mar Samuel and a log fell from the roof and broke his skull?2 — A Rabbinical student is different, because the Holy One, blessed be He, avenges his insult.3
R. Joshua b. Levi said: Whoever makes derogatory remarks about scholars after their death4 is cast into Gehinnom, as it says, But as for such as turn aside5 unto their crooked ways, the Lord will lead them away with the workers of iniquity. Peace be upon Israel:6 even at a time when there is peace upon Israel, the Lord will lead them away with the workers of iniquity.7 It was taught in the school of R. Ishmael: If you see a scholar who has committed an offence by night, do not cavil at him by day, for perhaps he has done penance. 'Perhaps', say you? — Nay, rather, he has certainly done penance. This applies only to bodily [sexual] offences, but if he has misappropriated money, [he may be criticised] until he restores it to its owner.
-
This article on Parasha Haazinu mentions the Talmud Berakot sections I quoted above with a little bit of commentary in an attempt to make more sense of what was said..
http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/peninim/archives/haazinu71.htm
In the Talmud Berachos 18a, Chazal quote the pasuk in Koheles 9:5, "'For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all.'" Chazal say that this pasuk is a reference to tzaddikim, righteous people, and reshaim, the wicked. "'For the living know that they will die,'" refers to the righteous, who in death are also called 'alive.' "'But the dead know nothing at all," is a reference to the wicked who, even in life, are considered 'dead.'" Chazal's exegesis begs elucidation. The pasuk refers to the living and the dead. While it makes sense that the wicked do not really live, from where do Chazal derive the notion that the righteous are called alive even in death?
Here is more clarification of what is meant by "The Dead Know Nothing at all":
http://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the-rabbi-category/the-basics-of-judaism/heaven-and-hell/page/2/?p=995
What departed souls know
I would like to know a little bit more about our souls. When we leave this physical world and we go to the nest world, can our souls see what happens in the physical world? Can souls there see the past of the lives of people in this world?
According to the conclusion of a long debate in the Talmud (Tractate Berachos 18b-19a), the dead are aware of events transpiring in this world. Exactly how many details they can detect, I am not sure, but I expect they can see the important things (I don’t know if they’ll still be able to follow the Yankees). At least one authority understands from this Gemara that not every soul will be able to see down into this world after death, though. Only those who were concerned and actively involved in helping people in this world will merit the vision to keep up with those for whom they sacrificed while alive.As far as soul being able to look into the past lives of others, I’m not aware. But it would seem that we will be able to see our own past lives (for those of us who have had them) as part of our personal judgment process.
For further reading on the topic of our souls, the best source I’ve seen in English are the incredibly accessible writings of Rav Aryeh Kaplan ob”m.
Good reading!
Shlomo Shulman
-
Tag,
What you posted is a straw man argument, in my opinion. Who is claiming that the Rebbe was a prophet? Who is claiming he is a miracle worker? Who is claiming that we should pray to him? I have never seen such things, nor do I understand who the writer of the piece you posted is addressing.
As I posted above, there is a Torah precedant which says that one may pray at the grave of a tzadik, in the merit of the Tzadik. That was your original comment. What you just posted has no connection to this question. What this piece you just posted states is the obvious.
But why post it? Who is saying that we are supposed to pray to the dead? Could you please show that these ideas are expressed anywhere?
The first video for example. Listen to that guy and see for yourself. Their are others like him (and even worse) as well.
-
The first video for example. Listen to that guy and see for yourself. Their are others like him (and even worse) as well.
Shalom Tag & Shavuah Tov,
I have not watched the entire video but I did watch about 5 minutes of it. I suppose I should really watch the entire video before making an opinion I would first like to express some concerns.
It seems sometimes that you only rebuke those who follow these practices if they are Ashkenazi, or specifically Chassidic. The thing that concerns me is that not only to Ashkenazi and Chassidic Jews pay special attention to their Rebbes, but so do Sephardic Jews show such reverence to their Rebbes.
In that article you posted last Erev Shabbat, the 'attack' seemed solely aimed at Chabad, and Chassidus through Baal Shem Tov. But I did some research and found that there are several Sephardic Rebbes who promised miracles, and stories about miracles performed by these Sephardic Rebbes, and the reverence of their disciples who would regularly travel to the graves of the Rebbe in order to pray in their merit. But this is the same thing that the Talmids of the Chassidic Rebbes do... So where is the rebuke against these Sephardic Rebbes? Why only rebuke against Chassidus and Chabad? That is what I find troubling.
Let me quote things said about the Baba Sali, a great Sephardic Kabbalist of the last generation.
The Baba Sali, Rav Yisroel Abuchatzeira ZT"L
This article originally appeared in Yated Neeman, Monsey NY. and is reprinted here with their permission
Rav Yisroel Abuchatzeira, the great Moroccan tzaddik, was commonly known as the Baba Sali, or "Praying Father," because of his ability to work miracles with his prayers. This title, however, actually originated with an incident that occurred in Rav Yisroel's childhood.
Unlike most children his age, the young Rav Yisroel never longed for toys or sweets. All he wanted was a new siddur, the kind with large, shimmering letters.
One day his father, Rav Mas'ud Abuchatzeira, brought home such a siddur. But he was reluctant to give it to Rav Yisroel, fearing that its glitter might divert his son's attention from his prayers.
Rav Yisroel offered his father a proposition. "Let's make a deal," he said. "You give me the siddur, and if I pray with less fervor, you take it back."
"It's a deal," Rav Mas'ud replied.
Rav Mas'ud never did ask for that siddur back. Rav Yisroel prayed with great devotion and eventually became a pillar of prayer on whom Klal Yisroel rested.
ILLUSTRIOUS STOCK
Rav Yisroel Abuchatzeira descended from an illustrious family of Sephardic chachamim and tzaddikim, beginning with Rav Shmuel Abuchatzeira, who was known for his piety and scholarship.
Although Rav Shmuel was born in Eretz Yisroel, he lived in Damascus for a time, where he studied with Rav Chaim Vital. In Shem Hagedolim, the Chida refers to Rav Shmuel as an "Ish Elokim kadosh. Wise people speak of his might and wonders in saving the Jewish community from many difficulties."
The Abuchatzeira family eventually moved to the Moroccan city of Tafelatlech, where Rav Shmuel's son Mas'ud served as a rav. Rav Mas'ud's son Yaakov, known as the Abir Yaakov, succeeded his father as rav of Tafelatletch. Rav Yaakov was a great scholar who was known to be a baal mofeis.
The Abir Yaakov's oldest son, Mas'ud, followed in the family's footsteps and became an av beis din in Tafelatlech. It was there that his son, Rav Yisroel, the Baba Sali, was born.
A UNIQUE UPBRINGING
Rav Yisroel was born on Rosh Hashana 5650, and grew up in a home permeated with Torah and kedusha. The examples his parents set had a profound influence on him.
His family lived on a large estate. One wing contained a yeshiva, where budding scholars studied day and night. Rav Mas'ud's beis din was situated in another wing, and Rav Yisroel's oldest brother, David, studied in a room on the other side of the house.
Young Yisroel was eager to see how his father and brothers conducted themselves at mealtime. However, he hardly saw them at mealtime because they ate very little, in keeping with their ascetic lifestyles.
One of the main lessons Rav Yisroel learned in his home was that one should guard his tongue and use his power of speech only for Avodas Hashem.
Once, when Rav Yisroel was 10, he encountered a group of children who were fighting, and he denounced the child who started the fight. Later that day, he recounted the incident to his father.
"I was so angry at those children," he told him, "that I nearly cursed the instigator."
Rav Mas'ud listened carefully to Rav Yisroel's story, and used it as a springboard to teach him a lesson that eventually became the cornerstone of Rav Yisroel's way of life.
"My son," he said. "You are destined for greatness, and one day, all that escapes your lips will be fulfilled. As a result, you must only bless and speak well of others, and never curse anyone."
From that day on, Rav Yisroel was particular to always guard his speech.
Rav Mas'ud not only trained his children to guard their tongues, but also their eyes. On the rare occasions in which Rav Mas'ud went outside, he would cover his eyes with his cape to prevent himself from seeing inappropriate sights. From this behavior, Rav Yisroel learned the importance of Shmiras Einayim, guarding one's sight.
.
.
.
IMPACT ON NETIVOT
Rav Yisroel had a profound impact on Netivot and its surrounding settlements. Many residents of these settlements changed their entire lifestyles due to his influence and began to observe the mitzvos hateluyos ba'aretz. In time, the Negev began to bloom spiritually.
From the moment Rav Yisroel arrived in Netivot, large numbers of people lined up at his door, seeking his help. His prayers led to many miracles and resulted in great kiddush Hashem. Many people also returned to their roots as a result of his influence.
.
.
.
And there is Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer Alfandri about which is written:
Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer Alfandri
Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer Alfandri, known as the Saba Kadisha, was born in 5580.He stemmed from a distinguished family of sages. His great-grandfather, Rav Yaakov Shlomo Eliezer, was the author of Mutzal Mi'Eish. His grandfather, Rav Chaim Shlomo Eliezer, wrote Maggid Mi'Reishit, and his father, Rav Yaakov, was an outstanding talmid chacham who passed away at an early age. His mother, Chana, also came from a prominent family.
.
.
.
Appreciating his greatness, Istanbul's Jews founded a yeshiva for him, and many outstanding scholars studied there. One of Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer's most distinguished students was Rav Chaim Chizkiyahu Medini, author of the encyclopedic Sedei Chemed, who was to become the chief rabbi of Hebron .
The Sultan Abed El Chamid was also very impressed by Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer; so much so that he accorded him the title of Chacham Bashi, granting him the authority to issue amendments and edicts in the Jewish community.
The Earthquake
Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer was once seated at a celebratory meal at the home of one of the most prominent members of Istanbul's Jewish community, when he heard two secular Jews discussing the "natural" causes of earthquakes. His face ablaze, Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer rose from his seat and vehemently countered their arguments.
"According to your scientific theories," he cried, "an earthquake can't occur here at this moment. But if the Al-mighty wills it, an earthquake will occur here this moment, in defiance of the laws of nature."
At that very moment, an earthquake shook the entire city. And that was when Istanbul's Jews came to regard Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer as a miracle worker.
In 5664 (1904), the elderly Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer Alfandri resigned his position as chief rabbi of Damascus and moved to Eretz Yisrael. He settled in Haifa, where he studied undisturbed for the next several years. When the sages of Tsfat (Safed) learned that Rabbi Shlomo-Eliezer had made aliyah, they invited him to serve as their city's chief rabbinical judge.
Rabbi Shlomo Eliezer accepted the position, even though he was already nearly 90 years old. And he served in this position for nearly twenty years! He was referred to fondly as Sabba Kadisha, the "holy grandfather," a title he has already acquired before his decades in Tsfat.
And Rabbi Papo:
Rav Eliezer Papo, author of Peleh Yoetz and Damesek Eliezer (1785-1828). Born in Sarajevo, he led the community of Selestria, Bulgaria, and died early at the age of 41. He is considered the exemplary spokesman of the Sephardic musar tradition of the eighteenth century. He promised in his will that, “Whoever comes to my grave in purity after immersing in a mikveh, and prays with a broken heart, I guarantee him that his prayer will be accepted.” As such, his kever in Silestra, Bulgaria, is the destination of hundreds of visitors annually. His talmid muvhak was Rav Yoshiyahu Pinto.
Anyway, I agree that praying TO THE DEAD is forbidden by all authorities, and by common sense. What I often think is that because people don't understand why some daven at the grave of a tzadik is because they daven in the merit of the tzadik.
I was thinking about this as I was davening the Amidah today. Don't we daven every day in the merit of Abraham, Yitzak, and Yaakov? Maybe others may think we are actually davening to them, and not in their merit, G-d Forbid...
-
but so do Sephardic Jews show such reverence to their Rebbes.
(Responding to reading this before going on and reading the rest)
Equally appalled. Doesn't matter for me if its Askenasi or Sefardi, I am against such things. By the way I do "bash" if you will what I see as deviant practices by "Kabbalists" which seem to have more influence in the Sefardi communities. Soo this is in no way a Sefardi vs. Askenasi debate.
But I'll move on.
-
Here is the 1st blessing of Amidah...
Ba-ruch a-tah A-do-nai, E-lo-hei-nu vei-lo-hei a-vo-tei-nu, E-lo-hei Av-ra-ham, E-lo-hei Yitz-chak, Vei-lo-hei Ya-a-kov, Ha-eil Ha-Ga-dol Ha-Gi-bor v'Ha-No-rah, Eil El-yon, go-meil cha-sa-dim to-vim, ko-nei ha-kol, v'zo-cheir chas-dei a-vot, u-mei-vi go-eil liv-nei v'nei-hem l'ma-an sh'mo b'a-ha-vah.
Blessed are You, L-rd our G‑d and G‑d of our fathers, G‑d of Abraham, G‑d of Isaac and G‑d of Jacob, the great, mighty and awesome G‑d, exalted G‑d, who bestows bountiful kindness, who creates all things, who remembers the piety of the Patriarchs, and who, in love, brings a redeemer to their children's children, for the sake of His Name.
Me-lech o-zeir u-mo-shi-a u-ma-gein. Ba-ruch a-tah A-do-nai, ma-gein Av-raham.
O King, (You are) a helper, a savior and a shield. Blessed are You L-rd, Shield of Abraham.
It is clear here that we are davening in the merit of the patriarchs because we say "who remembers the piety of the Patriarchs"...
-
But I did some research and found that there are several Sephardic Rebbes who promised miracles, and stories about miracles performed by these Sephardic Rebbes, and the reverence of their disciples who would regularly travel to the graves of the Rebbe in order to pray in their merit. But this is the same thing that the Talmids of the Chassidic Rebbes do... So where is the rebuke against these Sephardic Rebbes? Why only rebuke against Chassidus and Chabad? That is what I find troubling."
First off Chabad unfortunately took it to a whole new level. Secondly, and you can go search my posts I did "attack" if you will these practices being done in the name of Torah with these soo-called "miracle workers.
-
"His prayers led to many miracles and resulted in great kiddush Hashem. Many people also returned to their roots as a result of his influence."
Notice it is HIS prayers, and not Prayers TO him.
then you say
"Anyway, I agree that praying TO THE DEAD is forbidden by all authorities, and by common sense. What I often think is that because people don't understand why some daven at the grave of a tzadik is because they daven in the merit of the tzadik."
Then where is the argument, you are only agreeing with me, but I guess you have an issue if I'm not being fair enough with the "Askenasi vs. Sefardi" ?
-
Here is a thread on some of the things happening in the and affecting the "Sefardi world" that I opened .
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,63053.0.html
-
"His prayers led to many miracles and resulted in great kiddush Hashem. Many people also returned to their roots as a result of his influence."
Notice it is HIS prayers, and not Prayers TO him.
then you say
"Anyway, I agree that praying TO THE DEAD is forbidden by all authorities, and by common sense. What I often think is that because people don't understand why some daven at the grave of a tzadik is because they daven in the merit of the tzadik."
Then where is the argument, you are only agreeing with me, but I guess you have an issue if I'm not being fair enough with the "Askenasi vs. Sefardi" ?
Yes, my primary concern is that it seems to me {and I may be wrong} that you seem to only be concerned with Ashkenazi or Chassidic groups which do things which seem against the Torah.
This is why I bring examples that this practice, of praying at graves, is not only a Chassidic thing. And my other point is that often praying at a grave is not praying to the tzadik, or asking him for things, but asking Hashem to grant us our request in the merit of the Tzadik.
In the movie Ushpizin, when the wife is davening for a miracle, she mentions Rabbi Nachman in her prayer, and I am pretty sure she did not ask Rebbe Nachman, but said something along the lines of asking Hashem in the merit of Rebbe Nachman {but I will check this again}...
PS: My point was about 'miracle workers' because one article you posted seemed to say that only the miracle which we all witnessed is a miracle which can be believed. And I argued against that in several of my posts above this.
-
I just checked the movie (if it really matters?) and I was right... Here is what Mrs Belanga said in her prayer for a miracle...
"Our Holy Rebbe Nachman, from Breslev, G-d Almighty, in his virtue , hear our prayer, give us a miracle..."
When I hear that I have no problem understanding that she is not praying TO Rebbe Nachman, but she mentions his name in the hopes that his merit will cause her prayers to be heard.
-
Tag,
What you posted is a straw man argument, in my opinion. Who is claiming that the Rebbe was a prophet? Who is claiming he is a miracle worker? Who is claiming that we should pray to him? I have never seen such things, nor do I understand who the writer of the piece you posted is addressing.
It is not a straw man argument. The person who wrote in his question (named Ariel) made the argument. People like him really do exist. There are websites devoted to this. There are many people like him in Israel. They openly express their beliefs and display their flags proudly (unlike in chutz laaretz where they usually do not openly admit these beliefs or don't advertise it).
The fact that you continue to deny such people exist absolutely astoundsme. What are you afraid of exactly? And if tag is just "stating the obvious" according to you, then what's the problem? The "obvious" can't be stated? Its clearly not obvious to those who share ariel's beliefs and so too it may not be obvious to beginners or more secular Jews who could be confused by what they hear from meshichists. Some of the stuff you post is "obvious" to very learned Jews or even to yourself. Other stuff is less known. But to a beginner reading here NONE of it is obvious, and you are helping inform such a person. Tag is helping inform people on this issue. The fact that its so basic is why its so very important to stress and clarify these matters. So I suggest to stop obstructing discussion of these issues.
-
It is not a straw man argument. The person who wrote in his question (named Ariel) made the argument. People like him really do exist. There are websites devoted to this. There are many people like him in Israel. They openly express their beliefs and display their flags proudly (unlike in chutz laaretz where they usually do not openly admit these beliefs or don't advertise it).
The fact that you continue to deny such people exist absolutely astoundsme. What are you afraid of exactly? And if tag is just "stating the obvious" according to you, then what's the problem? The "obvious" can't be stated? Its clearly not obvious to those who share ariel's beliefs and so too it may not be obvious to beginners or more secular Jews who could be confused by what they hear from meshichists. Some of the stuff you post is "obvious" to very learned Jews or even to yourself. Other stuff is less known. But to a beginner reading here NONE of it is obvious, and you are helping inform such a person. Tag is helping inform people on this issue. The fact that its so basic is why its so very important to stress and clarify these matters. So I suggest to stop obstructing discussion of these issues.
Shalom KWRBT,
I do not deny that there are those who believe these things. I have addressed this before and I will say it again here. I have discussed this issue with my Rabbis and it concerned me greatly. It is my belief that Moshiach will come, and it may be soon, but I am sure that he has not already arrived and died.
The question then is this. What do we do about those who do believe these things? I am sure that my personal Rabbis, and I have a good relation with three Chabad Rabbis at this time, do not believe that the Rebbe is Moshiach. Those who are saying things which run against the more rational teachings of the Torah must be silenced gently. What am I saying here? Only that we should point out their error without being cruel or arrogant in our rebuke. Isn't it taught that we should only rebuke our brothers and sisters if they will be willing to listen to the rebuke, and how to ensure this, to not be unfair in judgement?
As I stated above, my issue with this whole thread is primarily the appearance that only Chabad and Chassidut were the ones engaging in these practices. While I pointed out that there are similar things which the Sephardic Jews do and yet I see little criticism of such practices.
Having made these points I would also like to point out that I am not 'obstructing' or 'attempting to prevent discussion', I am simply trying to make clear that these threads seem overly judgmental of the Ashkenazi Jews often giving few examples of non-Ashkenazi Jewry.
Aside from that I said I agree that TALKING or PRAYING to the dead is forbidden by the Torah. As I also posted there is Talmudic evidence that praying in the merit of a tzadik is permitted.
-
I just looked into the guy who made the video Tag posted, as the example, and it seems that he has an interesting story. I think I heard about him on a Tamar Yonah show or something (I may be mistaken)....
I don't think he is Chabad, though I don't know what Yeshiva he claims to go to....
After a near death experience Alon Anava has changed his life from one end to the other.
Alon Anava is a man blessed with a wide scope of talents. He has an artistic as well as an entrepreneurial spirit that have allowed him to be successful as an artist and as a businessman. He possesses vision paired the ability to realize that vision through focus and determination.
Alon is currently a successful Photographer and web developer.
Alon grew up in Ra'anana, Israel, where he was intensely trained in martial arts. He later pursued his training in Denmark under the tutelage of one of the greatest fighters known day. Through intense training, Alon further developed his innate ability to be in control of his environment. Where others might break under pressure, Alon Anava thrives and rises above all chaos maintaining balance at all times. He radiates a sense of completeness and humility without any false pretense whatsoever. In other words, 'what you see is what you get'.
This was not always the case. Before his life-altering experience, Alon would describe himself as simply put, not nice. After facing death, and realizing the purpose of life, Alon transformed his very being. He diligently attends Yeshiva studying every day, exploring the depths of Torah, refining and elevating himself on a daily basis.
Alon has come back with a gift. He is able to connect to our creator in a very intimate way, allowing him to also connect intimately with others and really help them overcome their questions and concerns.
During his free time, he spends his time sharing his story in an attempt to make it as real for you as it is for him. Our hope is that you as the listener will absorb Alon's story and wake up to the reality of this world. We hope that you will have the strength within you to rise above what seems like the prevailing darkness and choose light. We encourage you to connect to your maker and begin your spiritual journey to better yourself and humanity as a whole. We encourage you to see the miracle of you!
-
It appears I am correct that he was discussed on Tamar Yonahs blog:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/4602#.UIRRmSGRyiI
He was the most secular Israeli you could imagine. Alon Anava's choice of long hair, tattoos, and ear piercing made him look more 'rebel' than 'rabbi'.
"Religion didn't interest me, I didn't believe in G-d. ...I didn't have any interest in religion, even more than that, religion looked to me ridiculous, religious people looked insane, ...I didn't want to have any connection." As soon as he could, Alon swapped Tel Aviv for New York. He dropped out, and enjoyed his youth to the hilt in the city that never sleeps. He spent his time on drugs and partying, not thinking about the future. That was 9 years ago. Today, the earrings are gone, he sports a long beard, short hair and a big black yarmulke (skull cap) on his head - because he had a Near Death Experience (NDE).
He was riding with his girlfriend in the back seat of a taxi, when the drugs he took over powered his abused body and he succumbed. There he was, dead. His girlfriend freaking out in the taxi. He floated above them both, seeing his body hunched over on her lap. Hovering over and witnessing his death, thoughts began spinning around in his head and he says to himself,
"This is how Alon dies? This is like, ...the end? In a cab in New York? This is ...the story of 'Alon'? And it [a voice] tells me, "Yes. You're dead. This is how it ends."
Alon Anava will describe his meeting with what he describes as, 'The Black Thing' or the 'Angel of Death' and how he experienced tremendous pain -physical as well as emotional, in a type of 'hell' that he was thrust into from his NDE. He knew he had to change. How he changed is the dramatic story he will tell us today at 7pm HT (Holy Time) ;-) or 12 noon EST. Call in with your questions. From the USA, Canada & Israel, call toll free: 1-800-270-4288 or if from another country, send an 'instant message' (not an email) to: [email protected] (text your first name and telephone number including country code, and our engineer will call you for the show).
I suppose for my own sanity I should watch the original video, so I can judge whether he is right or wrong {according to my understanding} on this issue.
-
Alright, this time I watched the 1st 8 minutes of the video and I have to say that I don't exactly see anything worth condemning here.
What he said was the truth, that there are those who believe that the Tzadik never dies, and there is Talmudic evidence for this belief. I did not hear him say that one should PRAY TO the tzadik for anything, I heard him say pretty much what I have been saying all along here, that we should pray that the Tzadik's merit be used to assist our prayers in reaching Hashem. This is what most Chassidic and Sephardic communities believe about their great Rabbonim. This is not something to be alarmed about. Not according to my opinion.
Also , KWRBT, this thread is not talking about who is Moshiach or not, just whether a communities Rabbi rose to the level of a Tzadik (A purely righteous individual who influences others to do good). I do believe that there are Tzaddikim in the world, and as a teaching suggests that the entire world exists in the merit of the 36 hidden righteous individuals.
http://www.oztorah.com/2009/08/36-hidden-saints-ask-the-rabbi/
This fascinating topic of 36 hidden saints of each generation, the Lamed-Vav Tzaddikim, has four principles: The world rests on righteousness, especially on righteous people. They are often not aware of their own greatness: Moses “knew not that his face shone” (Ex. 34:35). If their greatness were known, the spell would be broken. Each generation has 36 such tzaddikim.
I believe that we need righteous individuals in the world in order to help those who are less righteous, to provide a way to envision what true holiness is. We do not believe that a Holy person is completely above nature, as the word Kadosh is often interpreted as being UNIQUE or SPECIAL.
Now for the Talmud which discusses the idea that Jacob never really died, even though the Torah says that he was buried and mourned. This is not the Kabbalah, but straight from Talmud Taanit 5b:
http://halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Taanith.pdf
R. Nahman and R. Isaac were sitting at a meal and R. Nahman said to R. Isaac: Let the Master expound something. He replied: Thus said R. Johanan: One should not converse at meals lest the windpipe acts before the gullet and his life will thereby be endangered. After they ended the meal he added: Thus said R. Johanan: Jacob our patriarch is not dead. He [R. Nahman] objected: Was it then for nought that he was bewailed and embalmed and buried?-The other replied: I derive this from a scriptural verse, as It is said, Therefore fear thou not, O Jacob, My servant, saith the Lord; neither be dismayed, O Israel,- for, lo, I will save thee from afar and thy seed from the land of their captivity. 12
The verse likens him [Jacob] to his seed [Israel]; as his seed will then be alive so he too will be alive.
What I heard Alon say is that because of this idea, that a Tzadik's spirit never really dies, and that through the Torah which he taught to his disciples, and the example of Torah and Mitzvot he made to his students, that his spirit is alive and that the Tzadik can still assist his students after his death in this world.
I understand this, and don't see a contradiction to what the Torah has taught concerning not consulting the dead, or not using an intermediary.
Although I do believe it is wrong to put too much faith in a human being, because as the Torah teaches there is no man who has been born who does no evil. And as such even a tzadik has human failings. So I do not engage in these kinds of devotion towards a Rabbi. But I do have compassion and understanding for Jews who do feel a special connection to a person they believe to be holy.
I am just giving my opinions, and hope everyone is finding this discussion amiable.
-
Muman if you heard his video and heard it well and still don't have a problem with what he said then you have bigger problems to resolve (for example the oneness of G-d).
I also cant believe you make it out to be a Sefardi vs. Askenasi thing when it has nothing to do with these "racial" if you will differences, NOT AT ALL. And Like I told you before I do and did criticize what I see wrong in the Sefardi world of "Mekubalim" yett you ask it, then ignore it and repeat the same line.
-
Do you seriously justify the fact that he says to write to the DEAD Rebbe?
Check at 13:10 for example.
Or check the Title even before watching the video
"Asking the advice of a tzadik that has passed from this world"
-
Muman if you heard his video and heard it well and still don't have a problem with what he said then you have bigger problems to resolve (for example the oneness of G-d).
I also cant believe you make it out to be a Sefardi vs. Askenasi thing when it has nothing to do with these "racial" if you will differences, NOT AT ALL. And Like I told you before I do and did criticize what I see wrong in the Sefardi world of "Mekubalim" yett you ask it, then ignore it and repeat the same line.
Please tell me at what point you feel he says to pray to the tzadik? I have said that I find the belief of praying in the merit of a tzadik as supported by valid Talmudic sources.
-
Do you seriously justify the fact that he says to write to the DEAD Rebbe?
Check at 13:10 for example.
Or check the Title even before watching the video
"Asking the advice of a tzadik that has passed from this world"
Very well let me listen to that section... And I agree that the title leaves questions... But there is no harm in questions, they often make one watch the video...
-
Please tell me at what point you feel he says to pray to the tzadik? I have said that I find the belief of praying in the merit of a tzadik as supported by valid Talmudic sources.
I'm not going to watch the video now. You can watch it again. and about his "life after death" experience. I have to tell you that I do not believe in his story. What he says is taken from places like the Zohar and Midrashim he could have easily known these things, put them together and just say this story to the public. No real solid proof. Besides when i started challenging him he banned me and usually an honest person would not ban others when they question them.
-
Please tell me at what point you feel he says to pray to the tzadik? I have said that I find the belief of praying in the merit of a tzadik as supported by valid Talmudic sources.
Did I ever contest that? Sorry, but I often feel by your replies that you put words in my mouth saying as if I said a b or c and didn't say a b or c.
-
And as I have said previously, I fully recognize the Oneness of Hashem, as the single source of all that exists in this world. I do not see a contradiction in believing in the Oneness of Hashem and the belief that there are people in this world who have higher and lower connections to Hashem. I do not believe everyone has the same connection to Hashem mainly because they do things which separate them from him. I do believe that the Torah suggests the way we establish a bond with Hashem is through the performance of mitzvot.
-
This whole "Tzaddik, Tzaddik, Tzaddik" connection and obsession does and will lead to something like this that I just got on youtube. That is where ChaBad is unfortunately leading to. Just wait in a few generations what will happen (G-D forbid).
Did you know that Jesus is your King Jew?
Did you know that Jesus also is G-d in human flesh?
Did you also know that Jesus said that he is the Sabbath?
Who made is Sabbath?
You Orthodox Jews, you reject Jesus because Jesus said he is the Sabbath and made a claim he is G-d. You Orthodox Jews have to accept Jesus your King king of humanity because you Jews are Gods people why are you Disobedient to G-d?
That's why you Jews get prosecuted in all those many thousand of years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNMGmFL7gEs&lc=iPP0Z-I6Ql-tD29wbWYCYg6ZOwf9WeKHU9wQrhiwG3Q&feature=inbox
-
Did I ever contest that? Sorry, but I often feel by your replies that you put words in my mouth saying as if I said a b or c and didn't say a b or c.
I am sorry Tag, I have no personal issue with you... I fully believe that you have no ulterior motives at this time, but let me be honest in saying I have felt otherwise previously. I really do feel close to both you and KWRBT because of the depth of discussions we have here. I do spend a lot of my life dedicated to JTF, and a friend was saying she thought I spent too much time here. These discussions do have an impact on my spirit, and when we have disagreements I truly feel bad about it. I am sometimes a tough guy but I am also a very emotional guy too.
I really respect your opinion and I apologize if I was accusing you of only attacking the Ashkenazi.
Yes, if he says that we should consult with dead rabbis then he is veering off the path which I have learned, and from my better judgement.
-
This whole "Tzaddik, Tzaddik, Tzaddik" connection and obsession does and will lead to something like this that I just got on youtube. That is where ChaBad is unfortunately leading to. Just wait in a few generations what will happen (G-D forbid).
Did you know that Jesus is your King Jew?
Did you know that Jesus also is G-d in human flesh?
Did you also know that Jesus said that he is the Sabbath?
Who made is Sabbath?
You Orthodox Jews, you reject Jesus because Jesus said he is the Sabbath and made a claim he is G-d. You Orthodox Jews have to accept Jesus your King king of humanity because you Jews are Gods people why are you Disobedient to G-d?
That's why you Jews get prosecuted in all those many thousand of years.
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say in this post. Who wrote that? Is this a comment on a youtube video?
Chabad does not teach that Rebbe was Moshiach. We all say the Amidah and pray for the coming of Moshiach, the restoration of the Kingdom of David. I have studied with Chabad and the only sources I have learned have all roots in Jewish sources. I have not studied Tanya though, although my friends who have said it, like Rabbi Nachmans Likutie Moran, is just commentaries on the Talmud.
-
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say in this post. Who wrote that? Is this a comment on a youtube video?
Yes, I was debating with Muslims and some Christian (supposedly I dont know) wrote that. Look at the link. I just read it soo I though why not share it with you. At the end of the day a person is a person. We can look up to certain individuals who accomplish great things. But to then deify people, they are people, mortals. The 1 and only 1 true G-D is immortal, is the Creator and Sustainer of the world. Is the 1 to who'm Worship is owed to exclusively.
-
Yes, I was debating with Muslims and some Christian (supposedly I dont know) wrote that. Look at the link. I just read it soo I though why not share it with you.
Mercy,
I think I know exactly how you feel. I posted something on a Chabad youtube video and got into a four day quarrel with some Christian who was talking about Blood Sacrifice and claiming we were not the "REAL JEWS" which the Bible talks about.
We are attacked by virtually every other religion, while we are the ones keeping the Torah... They read into it other things which are not there. Obviously not all Christians believe this {replacement theology} but their beliefs can be unsettling to us.
I do not feel that Chabad will lead us to this belief in a dead moshiach. My personal experience with the Chabad organization has been one of Torah. They do talk of their Rebbe, as the master of the Chiddush (hidden secrets) of the Torah. They do talk about great things he did, which I agree he did great things in putting together an organization which has done much good in this world. But they have not made me engage in their minhagim, they respect my minhagim, and they do not teach me to worship the Chabad Rebbe. I have much respect for him, and I believe he was a tzadik, so maybe I am a little more understanding of them.
Indeed I am aware there are Meshichists, but they are obviously the smallest minority {at least in all the Chabad Rabbis I have met over Shabbat lunch}. I have consulted with my Modern Orthodox Rabbi to see if there is something to be concerned with concerning the Chabad organization and I was told not to worry.
So I understand standing up against those who teach or do things against the Torah. And I support you in your effort to clarify Jewish observance of Mitzvot by questioning certain practices. I hope that you don't let those youtube comments get to you. I ended up telling the guys I said what I had to say, and lets leave it at that... I ignored his responses for two days after that before he gave up posting...
-
I'm not going to watch the video now. You can watch it again. and about his "life after death" experience. I have to tell you that I do not believe in his story. What he says is taken from places like the Zohar and Midrashim he could have easily known these things, put them together and just say this story to the public. No real solid proof. Besides when i started challenging him he banned me and usually an honest person would not ban others when they question them.
I totally believe in these near death experiences! How do people all over the world throughout time have the same experiences? Where did the story come from, it had to come from somewhere, so at the least it has happened once. I have even heard of people having these experiences without a near death experience. Are they all lying?
-
Tag, I just backed you up on that youtube page... I hope this doesn't start another week-long argument...
You are so messed up. The Sabbath is the Seventh Day, the day Hashem created in order to bring REST to the world. We will never bow to a G-d of flesh and blood, neither one of wood and stone. G-d commanded what is done concerning the false prophet, and warned us against the likes of your phony-baloney. G-d never commanded we worship a man, just the opposite. The redeemer will come and destroy all those who believe in flesh and blood.
-
I totally believe in these near death experiences! How do people all over the world throughout time have the same experiences? Where did the story come from, it had to come from somewhere, so at the least it has happened once. I have even heard of people having these experiences without a near death experience. Are they all lying?
Soo do I, but people can very well twist these things for their own purposes. I have heard these "stories" from different groups as well all claiming that their version and their religion is true etc.
My point is that not to follow someone blindly even if they have a great story (supposedly). We need to use our Sehel
-
Shalom KWRBT,
I do not deny that there are those who believe these things. I have addressed this before and I will say it again here. I have discussed this issue with my Rabbis and it concerned me greatly. It is my belief that Moshiach will come, and it may be soon, but I am sure that he has not already arrived and died.
The question then is this. What do we do about those who do believe these things? I am sure that my personal Rabbis, and I have a good relation with three Chabad Rabbis at this time, do not believe that the Rebbe is Moshiach.
And therefore your point is what? That your 3 chabad rabbis do not need to hear from tag? Great but many people read this forum, not just your 3 chabad rabbis.
Those who are saying things which run against the more rational teachings of the Torah must be silenced gently.
. Its not a question of rational vs mystical. If someone is praying to a dead rebbe or asking questions to him and expecting answers they are committing averahs plain and simple. Nothing to do with legitimate rationalism vs mysticism debates. It's way over the line and beyond the pale.
What am I saying here? Only that we should point out their error without being cruel or arrogant in our rebuke. Isn't it taught that we should only rebuke our brothers and sisters if they will be willing to listen to the rebuke, and how to ensure this, to not be unfair in judgement?
Pointing out that something is avoda zarra is not a form of arrogance.
You seem to think that anyone who mentions or disputes the insane claims of chabad meshichists are being arrogant or wrong in doing so. On the contrary, such a person is clarifying what Judaism is and is not.
Do you also believe chazal erred in insulting the minim?
As I stated above, my issue with this whole thread is primarily the appearance that only Chabad and Chassidut were the ones engaging in these practices. While I pointed out that there are similar things which the Sephardic Jews do and yet I see little criticism of such practices.
The vast numbers of chabad meshichists incriminate themselves. However it is equally wrong no matter who does it. But again consider the numbers. Its chabad meshichists who pull out a sefer of the rebbe ask it a question then open to a random page and get an "answer." Etc. They are a sizable group.
Having made these points I would also like to point out that I am not 'obstructing' or 'attempting to prevent discussion', I am simply trying to make clear that these threads seem overly judgmental of the Ashkenazi Jews often giving few examples of non-Ashkenazi Jewry.
It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with beliefs. Your response in turning it into a race thing reflects insecurity but there is no need for this. Nobody is attacking your ethnic group.
Aside from that I said I agree that TALKING or PRAYING to the dead is forbidden by the Torah. As I also posted there is Talmudic evidence that praying in the merit of a tzadik is permitted.
Then I really don't get what your problem is. Like I said, why can't the obvious be stated?
(And keep in mind what's obvious to u isn't obvious to everyone).
-
KWRBT,
I appreciate your reply and hope to be able to explain why I am involved in this discussion.
You may disagree with what I say, and that is OK, just please try to understand why I am saying this.
1) I believe that rebuke should be directed to those who need to hear it. This is one of the first rules of rebuke.
2) I believe that rebuke should be done between two Jews, not in the public, and not in a manner intended to be humiliating or shameful.
3) I believe that speaking of fellow Jews in a public forum, without allowing the other Jew to explain himself, is a form of Lashon Hara. Now you will argue about what is Lashon Hara, but I have studied the laws, and only in the most obvious cases of heresy or self-hatred, is it permitted to openly speak derogatorily of another Jew.
Do you believe that these are Jews? I do... When I read some kook on youtube who started to deface my youtube page claiming that Chassidic Jews are not Jews, and that all Chassidic Jews pray to their rebbe, I thought to myself who was this punk to decide who is a Jew and who is not a Jew. A Jew is born a Jew if his mother was a Jew, by birth or through a legitimate conversion. What the Jew believes does not ultimately decide whether he is a Jew, because this aspect of the Soul remains regardless of whether he is secular , religious, or believes in the tooth fairy.
What is my purpose KWRBT? I will tell you what I envision my real purpose in life, and my involvement with JTF...
I would like to help bring Moshiach. I believe that through Jewish unity we can actually help hasten the arrival of Moshiach. While some may think this is just talk, I do take every chance to help every Jew I can help, through money and through time, and I believe that we need to work together to bring us to put our entire faith in Hashem.
As I said, I do not excuse the false beliefs that some of these Jews express. And I doubt that my rebuke alone will bring about any Teshuva. But I am now inspired to ask that Alon personally via a comment on youtube to explain to a fellow Jew what his reasoning is considering the prohibition of consulting the dead. I do not understand why Tag was banned from his page, except for maybe he was not asking in a way which seemed sincere, without a pre-judgement.
Do not have any anger at me for my Ahavat Yisroel. I really think that we have something going on here, and I always take your opinions to heart.
-
KWRBT,
I appreciate your reply and hope to be able to explain why I am involved in this discussion.
You may disagree with what I say, and that is OK, just please try to understand why I am saying this.
1) I believe that rebuke should be directed to those who need to hear it. This is one of the first rules of rebuke.
2) I believe that rebuke should be done between two Jews, not in the public, and not in a manner intended to be humiliating or shameful.
3) I believe that speaking of fellow Jews in a public forum, without allowing the other Jew to explain himself, is a form of Lashon Hara. Now you will argue about what is Lashon Hara, but I have studied the laws, and only in the most obvious cases of heresy or self-hatred, is it permitted to openly speak derogatorily of another Jew.
This is all totally absurd.
Whom did I rebuke?
When you put up an informative article about Sukkot or the laws of Shabbat, are you rebuking someone? In my opinion, you are not, and it wouldn't make sense to rebuke people here. The point of this section of the forum is to inform people about what Judaism is (and contrarily, also what Judaism is not!).
Am I supposed to chase after every single Chabad meshichist (there are thousands of them!) and take each one aside individually and say to him why it is wrong to pray to his dead rebbe? Like that's humanly possible? And like any of the cultists will listen to me? And otherwise, I can't dare mention that they exist or what crazy beliefs they are promoting to warn people against falling for their tricks and mistakes? Please.
Instead, what I am interested in is not rebuking chabad people (meshichists or otherwise) or standing on a pulpit like I am "holier than thou" since I do not view myself that way, but instead to contribute to this section of the forum, whose goal (or so I thought) is to INFORM JEWS ABOUT JUDAISM.
Informing Jews about Judaism INCLUDES stressing fundamental beliefs (even if YOU muman613 think those fundamental beliefs are so obvious as to be self-evident - they still need to be said) and also discouraging certain cults and idol worship beliefs or mistakes that draw some Jews astray. For example, we openly refute and denigrate "Jews for Yeshu." Any cult which leads Jews astray is a terrible danger to the Jewish soul and to the Jewish people as a whole since we suffer when potentially good individual Jews go astray and follow foreign beliefs and foreign religions.
Furthermore, I want to stress right now that CHAZAL cursed the minim. In fact they instituted in our prayers to curse minim every weekday, three times a day. Minim do not have a right to defend themselves or explain themselves. Foreign cults which lead Jews astray are not a legitimate side of a "debate" - they are beyond the pale.
I will say it again: Minim were not given the "right" to explain themselves in response to the Amidah which curses them thrice daily.
If you are not aware of what the minim were, please look it up!
Do you believe that these are Jews? I do... When I read some kook on youtube who started to deface my youtube page claiming that Chassidic Jews are not Jews, and that all Chassidic Jews pray to their rebbe, I thought to myself who was this punk to decide who is a Jew and who is not a Jew. A Jew is born a Jew if his mother was a Jew, by birth or through a legitimate conversion. What the Jew believes does not ultimately decide whether he is a Jew, because this aspect of the Soul remains regardless of whether he is secular , religious, or believes in the tooth fairy.
Not sure how this is relevant. I never debated what a Jew is or is not.
As I said, I do not excuse the false beliefs that some of these Jews express. And I doubt that my rebuke alone will bring about any Teshuva. But I am now inspired to ask that Alon personally via a comment on youtube to explain to a fellow Jew what his reasoning is considering the prohibition of consulting the dead. I do not understand why Tag was banned from his page, except for maybe he was not asking in a way which seemed sincere, without a pre-judgement.
Or maybe the simpler explanation - A person who is distorting Judaism will not allow his beliefs to be questioned publicly. That is almost always the reason someone bans another person from responding!
Do not have any anger at me for my Ahavat Yisroel. I really think that we have something going on here, and I always take your opinions to heart.
I have no anger at you whatsoever.
Now I ask you for a third time, if what Tag is saying here is obvious according to you (you used that word to describe it), then WHY CAN'T THE OBVIOUS BE STATED HERE? Do we censor the Torah because certain obvious/basic principles are not comfortable for certain people? That is outrageous.
-
And only in the most obvious cases of heresy or self-hatred, is it permitted to openly speak derogatorily of another Jew.
Muman- I did contact him personally and privately. By the way what I wrote (I believe first response here is exactly word for word that I wrote to him). I also later sent him an email (after being banned). But the banning is not the issue, not at all.
This guy speaks publicly. He gave at least a couple of lectures in public and at least in this video his message is to the public. The public many times includes ignoramuses who withh either accept these things and do them or think that these things are Judaism itself and laugh and ridicule all of Judaism because of what they see being said or done by some in the name of Judaism.
About wanting Moshiah etc. Who does not want that here? Of-course we (me, you, KahaneWasRightBT) and most people want that, but the way to move forward is to discard those things that are actually holding us back. Besides this thing for example being a form of heresy it definitely does not bring us forward to the complete redemption process of having a complete Jewish state, run under Jewish law and with Sanhedrin and national leader directing it appropriately. Sitting and propagating and believing in fairy tales (I'm being blunt) takes us back and not forward.
-
Very related from the Rambam. Read it, re-read it again and again. Internalize it and understand.
(Except in today's case, the list would include more things besides astrology, which is also still around today). For astrology you can and should add all "superstitious" beliefs and practices- red strings, "segulot", etc.)
This is what abolished our kingdom, destroyed our Beit HaMikdash, prolonged our exile, and brought us to our present predicament. Our fathers sinned and are no more.
For they found many astrology books, followed them, and went astray. They imagined that these wisdoms were glorious and greatly beneficial, and they did not study warfare and land conquest. Instead, they imagined that these wisdoms would help them. Therefore, the prophets called them fools; and they certainly were fools, for they followed vanities which cannot avail nor rescue, for they are vain. (Iggrot U'Teshuvot LeRambam, Iggrot Shonot, p. 21. 204)
-
Serious question... Rambam lived in the 1100's, were there other Torah scholars before him that spoke about the minim? Rambam was a man, so why does his teachings of oral law override the others before him, that's if they do? I hope this doesn't come off rude!
-
Serious question... Rambam lived in the 1100's, were there other Torah scholars before him that spoke about the minim? Rambam was a man, so why does his teachings of oral law override the others before him, that's if they do? I hope this doesn't come off rude!
I have posted about what the minim were in previous threads. The word 'minim' basically means 'kind' as it is also the word for the species which we shake on Sukkot (The Four Species/Arba Minim).
http://www.akhlah.com/holidays/sukkot/sukkot_arba_minim.php
But in the context of this discussion the word 'minim' refers to the three specific kinds of heretics which are described as having no place in the world to come.
Here is the law according to Rambam, who doesn't exactly provide the sources for his laws... But I believe they come from the Talmud...
http://www.shemayisrael.com/rabbiforsythe/personalgrowth/tshuva.htm
6. These are those who have no portion in the world to come, who are cut off, eternally lost and judged according to the enormity of their evil and sins, dead forever and for eternity: heretics, those who deny G-d; those who deny prophesy or G-d's omniscience; those who deny or replace Torah; deny resurrection of the dead, coming of the redeemer [Mashiach]; rebellion against or abandoning Torah; those who cause the public to sin; those who separate from the ways of the Torah community; those who sin with a high hand and impudent attitude in front of other people, like Yehoyakim; those who inform or turn a Jew in to non-Jewish authorities without advance Torah-sanctioned permission; those who frighten a community without Torah-sanction and purpose; murderers; speakers of loshon hora (slander, gossip, defamation - even if the harmful speech was true); and one who undoes his circumcision.
7. There are five who are called minim (heretics, those who deny G-d). The one who says that there is no G-d or that the world has no Leader. The one who says that the world has a leader but there are two or more [i.e. not one]. The one who says that there is One Ruler but that He has a body or a form. The one who says that He is not the First Cause and the Rock Of The Universe alone. The one who worships any idol, star, constellation, ideology or anything besides G-d, or to be any intermediary between any human being and the Master of the universe. All of these five are guilty of being a heretic.
8. There are three who are called apikorsus (those who deny prophesy or G-d's omniscience). Those who say that there is no prophesy at all and that there is no knowledge that reached from the Creator to the heart of man. Anyone who contradicts the prophesy of Moshe our Rabbi. The one who says that the creator does not know the deeds of human beings. All three of these are guilty of being an apikorus. There are three kinds of people who are deniers or replacers of Torah. The one who says that the Torah is not from Hashem, even one verse, even one word. Or if he said that Moshe said on his own [and not from prophesy from G-d], this is one who denies Torah. Likewise, anyone who denies [the Torah's] explanation, being the Oral Torah; anyone who contradicts its instructors; as, for example, Tzadok and Baitus did. The one who says that the Creator exchanged one commandment for a second commandment and this nullified or replaced the first unit of Torah, even though the "first Torah" was from Hashem, for example Christians or Moslems, all of these are deniers of Torah.
9. There are two categories of Jew who are called those who rebel against or abandon Torah [moraid, mumar, meshumad - different terms in different manuscripts; in any event, Rambam is about to clearly define exactly what he means]. The mumar le'avaira achas [one who removes one commandment to "legitimize," in his mind, violation of the one commandment to permit one sin] and mumar lekol haTorah kula [one who removes the entire Torah to "legitimize," in his mind, violation of all of the commandments, to permit any and all sins]. One who abandons one commandment to permit one specific sin to himself is one who determines in his mind to do a given sin intentionally and to be habituated in it and has become well known for it. This even includes relatively light transgressions, such as being characterized as continually wearing shatnez [a garment containing wool and linen, Deuteronomy 22:11] or lihakif pe'ah [he cuts the hair at the corner of his head, Leviticus 19:27]; so that it is as if he nullified the particular commandment out of the world, as far as he is concerned. He is a "mumar" with respect to that thing, if he did it with intent to spite the Torah. A mumar lekol haTorah kula [is one who abandons the entire Torah]. For example, those who pursue idolatry or who convert to another religion. This might happen at a time that there is decree of legislation [demanding abandonment of Judaism for another religion] and then the Jew joins them [if there is no decree, moving to another religion is all the more unjustifiable because there is no jeopardy contributing to the motive]; and the Jew says, "What profit do I have to cling to Israel? for they are downtrodden and chased after; it is better for me to leave the Torah and to cling to these other people because they have more power." One who does the likes of this is an apostate against the entire Torah.
Talmud Sanhedrin 38 has good discussion of how to deal with heretics concerning certain misquotes of Torah.
http://www.halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_38.html
-
Very related from the Rambam. Read it, re-read it again and again. Internalize it and understand.
(Except in today's case, the list would include more things besides astrology, which is also still around today). For astrology you can and should add all "superstitious" beliefs and practices- red strings, "segulot", etc.)
This is what abolished our kingdom, destroyed our Beit HaMikdash, prolonged our exile, and brought us to our present predicament. Our fathers sinned and are no more.
For they found many astrology books, followed them, and went astray. They imagined that these wisdoms were glorious and greatly beneficial, and they did not study warfare and land conquest. Instead, they imagined that these wisdoms would help them. Therefore, the prophets called them fools; and they certainly were fools, for they followed vanities which cannot avail nor rescue, for they are vain. (Iggrot U'Teshuvot LeRambam, Iggrot Shonot, p. 21. 204)
Tag, Could I get some more resources on this please?
-
Tag, Could I get some more resources on this please?
What exactly? Would you like the whole letter of the RambaM ?
-
Serious question... Rambam lived in the 1100's, were there other Torah scholars before him that spoke about the minim? Rambam was a man, so why does his teachings of oral law override the others before him, that's if they do? I hope this doesn't come off rude!
Yes, the minim were mentioned in the Talmudh. The sages some time later as well established the prayer against the minim in the Shemono Esri prayers. Rambam came some time later and codified the laws in his book Mishna Torah.
Not rude at all, and his laws don't necessarily override anyone else's. Just that he codified the laws very well and codified ALL of the laws dealing with probably every issue that his work hold's a lot of weight. He was also a great genius both in Torah -or "religious" and "secular" realms.
-
What exactly? Would you like the whole letter of the RambaM ?
No, I would like to know where the Rambam derived his response to astrology from?
-
Yes, the minim were mentioned in the Talmudh. The sages some time later as well established the prayer against the minim in the Shemono Esri prayers. Rambam came some time later and codified the laws in his book Mishna Torah.
Not rude at all, and his laws don't necessarily override anyone else's. Just that he codified the laws very well and codified ALL of the laws dealing with probably every issue that his work hold's a lot of weight. He was also a great genius both in Torah -or "religious" and "secular" realms.
Ok, thank you!
-
No, I would like to know where the Rambam derived his response to astrology from?
The reason I ask is... Using astrology to tell the future is inappropriate, I understand that, but in a simple form it can be very useful. You kind of can tell the future with astrology, by paying attention to the moon phases and the seasons, represented by the Stars. You can tell the affects on the earth, and the habits of animals and their movements.
-
The reason I ask is... Using astrology to tell the future is inappropriate, I understand that, but in a simple form it can be very useful. You kind of can tell the future with astrology, by paying attention to the moon phases and the seasons, represented by the Stars. You can tell the affects on the earth, and the habits of animals and their movements.
I think your describing ASTRONOMY, this is talking about ASTROLOGY. These are different things. In fact Astronomy and the movements of the stars etc. is highly praised and actually needed and used in Jewish law. Astrology on the other hand (those who say that this and this is going to happen because the stars are positioned in a certain way is wrong).
-
Tag, Could I get some more resources on this please?
That is from the Rambam... Look it up on the Chabad site...
-
That is from the Rambam... Look it up on the Chabad site...
No, I want the original teachings! I want to know where the Rambam got it from!
-
Regarding Astrology there is some support for it in the Talmud. I have also posted this before...
A Jew must never put his trust in Astrology because a Jew is above nature. This is the reason we must not consult the stars...
It is fascinating to note that the rabbis of the Talmud gave considerable credence to astrology. The Talmud states that “upon entry into the month of Adar one should become increasingly joyous. Rav Papa said: ‘Therefore a Jew should avoid litigation with gentiles in the month of Av, because his mazal is bad; and he should move the court case to the month of Adar, when his mazal is good.’”1 The Hebrew word which Talmud uses here, mazal, is usually translated “luck” but literally means “constellations.”
Astrology is not only a factor to be taken into account when planning future events—it also influences human nature. According to the Talmud, one born under the constellation of the sun will achieve eminence, and one born under Venus will become wealthy and immoral. One born under Mercury will be wise and have a retentive memory. One born under the Moon will suffer evil. One born under Saturn will suffer frustration, one born under Jupiter will be righteous, and one born under Mars will become either a surgeon or a slaughterer.2 A birthday is therefore viewed by the rabbis as a day on which personal astrological fortune is at its most potent.3
.
.
.
2. Talmud, Shabbat 156a. Although rabbinic consensus holds that Jews are not affected by mazal, the great medieval Talmudist Ritva (Rabbi Yom Tov ibn Asevilli, circa 1300) suggests that in this context the word mazal is to be understood as a generic term for “decree” rather than constellations. He thus suggests that when the rabbis of the Talmud say that Jews are not affected by mazal, they mean that they can subvert divine decrees through the performance of good deeds (Taanit 29a).
3. See Jerusalem Talmud, Rosh Hashanah 3:8, regarding the Amalekites: in their war against the Israelites they used soldiers who were celebrating their birthday that day, so that they would have an astrological advantage over the enemy.
-
No, I want the original teachings! I want to know where the Rambam got it from!
Thank may be difficult... Rambam died many centuries ago...
He also, regretfully, did not source a lot of his halachas...
Read this for some background on Rambams writings:
http://www.tzemachdovid.org/gedolim/rambam.html
OPPOSITION TO YAD HACHAZAKA
In Yad Hachazaka, the Rambam cites only halachic rulings, without presenting the sources from which he derived them, or the shakla ve'tarya surrounding them. His purpose was to enable all Jews, even those who were not outstanding scholars, to learn how to conduct themselves in daily life.
Even though the sages of the Rambam's time were aware of his intentions, some still opposed the Yad Hachazaka, fearing that many scholars might lose their initiative to probe the Gemara in depth.
The Rambam, however, stated that he never said that Torah scholars should refrain from engaging in deep Gemara study, and that Yad Hachazaka was meant for those unable to probe the Talmud's depths.
Still, gedolim such as the Raavad staunchly opposed it. He published his comments on Yad Hachazaka in a special book called Hasagos Haraavad.
Despite his opposition to the Rambam's approach, the Raavad held the Rambam in high esteem. In turn, the Rambam was not offended by the Raavad's opposition to him.
Although the Rambam didn't respond to the Raavad's claims, his student, Yonasan of Lunil, wrote a treatise in which he proved that the Rambam's rulings, as opposed to the Raavad's, were correct. Rav Yosef Caro also defended the Rambam in Kesef Mishneh.
Despite the criticism, Mishneh Torah was accepted all over the world, in all generations, as the seminal sefer of Halacha.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/75991/jewish/Maimonides-His-Life-and-Works.htm
In this area, Maimonides was more than a trailblazer; to this very day the Mishneh Torah remains the only work of this scope. No other work – authored beforehand or afterwards – covers the entire corpus of Jewish law. (Even the commentaries on Jewish law authored before Maimonides omit the laws that were not germane at the time.)
Maimonides also placed great emphasis on making his works available and understandable to all Jews, scholars and laymen alike. He also omitted sources, for brevity's sake, though later scholars compiled sources for every statement in the Mishneh Torah. Because of his unique style and clarity, he became known as "The Golden Tongue."
Since Maimonides, many subsequent scholars have analyzed every word and even letter in his volumes. They discuss at length why Maimonides chose to include certain laws, wrote one law before another, and why he chose to include laws in one volume but not the other. Some have speculated that the body of commentary on Maimonides' volumes could reach the same quantity as Talmudic commentary.
-
Serious question... Rambam lived in the 1100's, were there other Torah scholars before him that spoke about the minim? Rambam was a man, so why does his teachings of oral law override the others before him, that's if they do? I hope this doesn't come off rude!
Rambam gets his halacha from the Talmud. Jews follow the Talmud because it's the embodiment of the other part of Torah (Oral Torah) which was given along with written Torah.
He quoted Rambam's opinion about the destruction of the Temple, not about minim. So your question was unclear. However, we can quote Rambam about minim too if you like.
-
Rambam gets his halacha from the Talmud. Jews follow the Talmud because it's the embodiment of the other part of Torah (Oral Torah) which was given along with written Torah.
He quoted Rambam's opinion about the destruction of the Temple, not about minim. So your question was unclear. However, we can quote Rambam about minim too if you like.
I believe I reproduced it above...
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,64653.msg565775.html#msg565775
See also:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/911896/jewish/Chapter-Three.htm
Halacha 7
Five individuals are described as Minim:
a) one who says there is no God nor ruler of the world;
b) one who accepts the concept of a ruler, but maintains that there are two or more;
c) one who accepts that there is one Master [of the world], but maintains that He has a body or form;
d) one who maintains that He was not the sole First Being and Creator of all existence;
e) one who serves a star, constellation, or other entity so that it will serve as an intermediary between him and the eternal Lord.
Each of these five individuals is a Min.
-
Rambam gets his halacha from the Talmud. Jews follow the Talmud because it's the embodiment of the other part of Torah (Oral Torah) which was given along with written Torah.
He quoted Rambam's opinion about the destruction of the Temple, not about minim. So your question was unclear. However, we can quote Rambam about minim too if you like.
KWRBT, I was talking about two different things. What I'm wondering is if Rambams interpretation of the Talmud may have been influenced by the times in which he lived, or he was competing with other Jewish scholars, and he didn't know anything about astrology or Kabbalah, therefore he put a negative spin on it.
Just a thought...
-
KWRBT, I was talking about two different things. What I'm wondering is if Rambams interpretation of the Talmud may have been influenced by the times in which he lived, or he was competing with other Jewish scholars, and he didn't know anything about astrology or Kabbalah, therefore he put a negative spin on it.
Just a thought...
I have said this a million times in the forum. A JEW is NOT to put his trust in the stars, no matter if the Astrology is real or imagined. The issue, according to my understanding, is that the Talmud implies that there is something to the effect the stars have on events. This is evident in the Torah in the story of Exodus where the Pharaoh consulted his astrologer and it was predicted that the Jewish redeemer would be born, and they knew his downfall would be caused by water, so they threw all the Jewish boys into the Nile.
The reason we are commanded to not consult astrology is because Jews are supposed to believe that we are not influenced by the MAZAL (Constellations) because HASHEM is the ultimate source of everything, so even if the MAZAL indicates a bad omen a Jew should pray to Hashem to over-turn the bad mazal (sometimes translated as luck).
The idolatrous cults established the heavenly bodies as something to pay homage and worship to. Judaism rejects this practice because Hashem has made his will known through the giving of the Torah to the Jewish people. He has told us to ignore the stars as signs and place our entire trust in him.
-
http://ohr.edu/ask/ask044.txt
The word Mazal does not literally mean "luck." "Mazal" is literally associated with the 12 signs of the Zodiac, which are called the "Mazalot," but we use the word in a way which means more than just the Zodiac. Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzatto explains that there is a multi-leveled conceptual system through which G-d interacts with the physical Creation. In other words, "energy" which originates with Hashem travels through this system and eventually reaches us. At some point along the way, this energy is said to pass through the Mazalot, the stars and the planets, which then transfer it to the rest of Creation. This explains how people trained in astrology may know what will happen to an individual in the future. They are "reading," through the configuration of the Mazalot, the energy that is yet to be delivered. However, we are actually forbidden to engage in the prediction of the future via astrology even though it may work. The source of this prohibition is, "You shall be tamim (pure, perfect, simple) with the L-rd your G-d."
The Talmud cites three life-issues which are directly affected by the Mazalot: life, children and livelihood. Elsewhere the Talmud seems to contradict this and states that "There is no Mazal regarding the Jewish People." The classical sources explain this to mean that the influence of Mazalot can be overcome by the Jewish People through prayer and other great merits.
-
It is Rambam who asserts that there is nothing to Astrology. I am not sure of the sources he uses for this.
-
KWRBT, I was talking about two different things. What I'm wondering is if Rambams interpretation of the Talmud may have been influenced by the times in which he lived, or he was competing with other Jewish scholars, and he didn't know anything about astrology or Kabbalah, therefore he put a negative spin on it.
Just a thought...
No, not at all. He said (in his letter on astrology-search it and if you need it and cant find it let me know I'll get it for you), that he investigated this matter deeply and found that it has absolutely no validity.
By the way the Talmudh mentions many ideas that are rejected by the sages themselves. If you read further from those sources you brought about "mazal" the decisive conclusion is "Ein Mazal LeIsrael"- their is no Mazal for Israel. Some take it to mean that for Israel their is not, but for others their is, but it is open to interpretation of what it was meant exactly. Fine. But in those cases the conclusion that the Rabbis came with is NOT to rely on astrology/zodiak etc. and that Teshuva and good dead's triumph any and all "Mazal" or luck. (for example the story of Rabbi Akiva's daughter) .
-
The Month of Av: Unlucky or Misunderstood?
Matt Schneeweiss
Introduction
This past Shabbos was the first day of the month of Av. There appears to be a fairly prevalent belief that the month of Av is an "unlucky time." People rearrange their plans, pushing off certain "risky" endeavors until after the month of Av (or, at least, until after Tisha b'Av). They avoid things like traveling, surgery, and business ventures because they feel that undertaking these activities during the month of Av are dangerous and destined for failure. I have even heard and read the words of rabbis who refer to the month of Av as an "inauspicious (i.e. unlucky) time of the year for Jews."
But as we know, it is unwise to assume that a belief or practice is correct just because it is widespread. Let's see what the Torah has to say on this topic.
The Source of the Misconception
As far as I can tell, the source of this notion is a statement in the Gemara: "a Jew who has a court appointment at a non-Jewish court should try to avoid it during the month of Av because it has a bad mazal" (29b-30a). This statement is not just aggadah, but an actual halacha (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 551:1). On the surface, this halacha would seem to support the popular belief. Why else would we be cautioned to avoid non-Jewish courts during the month of Av if not for the fact that Av is an inauspicious time for Jews? It even uses the word “mazal,” which OBVIOUSLY means “luck”! (hint hint: that was intended to be facetious and thought-provoking)
The first step in investigating such a statement is to analyze it in its context. The full statement of the Gemara reads: “At the onset of the month of Av, we diminish our rejoicing: Just as we diminish rejoicing at the onset of the month of Av, so too, we increase rejoicing at the onset of the month of Adar. Rav Pappa said: Therefore, a Jew who has a court appointment at a non-Jewish court should try to avoid it during the month of Av because it has a bad mazal, but he should be present in court during the month of Adar because it has a good mazal.”
Even before we analyze this statement, we can see that the popular notion is not supported by the Gemara. According to the popular belief, we avoid court appointments with non-Jews because the month of Av has some unlucky quality. We see from the Gemara, however, that this is not the case. Rather, the month of Av generates a halachic obligation to diminish rejoicing, and THEREFORE we avoid court appointments with non-Jews. In other words, avoiding non-Jewish courts is an expression of our diminished rejoicing during the month of Av - not a precaution that we take in response to some harmful property inherent to the month itself. Granted, we must still explain the meaning of "bad mazal," but it is clear from the Gemara that avoiding non-Jewish courts stems from the obligation to diminish rejoicing.
Moreover, the Gemara only says to avoid non-Jewish courts. It does not say to avoid all "risky" ventures. Not only that, an exhaustive search throughout the halachic literature reveals no support for the common practice to avoid all “risky” activities during the month of Av. If the month of Av were truly "unlucky," the halacha would certainly tell us to avoid all forms of perilous activity, not just appointments at non-Jewish courts. According to halacha, there is no more reason to avoid "risky" activities during the month of Av than any other time of year.
Thus, although we haven't explained idea behind the Gemara's statement, we clearly see the lack of support for the popular interpretation. But before we try to understand the meaning of the Gemara's statement, I would like to discuss a major problem with the popular belief. According to my understanding, the popular belief is not only false, but may actually violate a biblical prohibition.
The Prohibition of Meonein
There is a bibilcal prohibition called "meonein." I haven't managed to find an adequate English translation of the term "meonein," so we'll stick with the Hebrew. The Sefer Ha'Chinuch (Mitzvah #250) provides the following definition of meonein, based on the words of the Sages: “The explanation of this subject is as it was given in the Midrash Sifra: [the Hebrew verb, te'oneinu, denotes] the sense of onah, a designated time - i.e. that we should not determine set times, to say that this hour is ‘good’ for doing that activity in it, and whoever does it at that time will succeed, and whoever does it at this other time will not succeed - as the deluding masters of sorcery say.”
In other words, meonein is the prohibition to designate a period of time as "good" or "bad" for certain activities; one who acts in accordance with this designation is liable for the penalty of whiplashes. The Rambam, in the Mishneh Torah (Laws of Idolatry and the Statutes of the Gentiles 11:9), elaborates on this prohibition of "designating times," and mentions additional examples: one who says that a specific day is a "good" or "bad" day for doing a particular activity, or a particular year, or a particular month.
The most common form of meonein is astrology. One who consults horoscopes or astrologers and acts on the basis of their counsel transgresses the Biblical prohibition of meonein. According to the Sefer Ha’Chinuch’s definition, not only astrology but any designation of a time period as "good" or "bad" for a certain activity falls into the scope of this prohibition.
Thus, the problem with the popular belief is clear. If a Jew believes that the month of Av is an “unlucky time” (thinking that this is what the Gemara meant) and avoids certain activities based on this belief, then he would seem to be in violation of the Biblical prohibition of meonein. In order to appreciate the severity of this transgression, let us analyze the harm of meonein.
What is Wrong with Me'onein?
There are several other Biblical prohibitions which belong to the same class as meonein. These include nichush (omen reading), koseim (fortune telling), chover chaver (reciting incantations), doreish el ha'meisim (consulting the dead), kishuf (sorcery), and others. The Rambam concludes his exposition of these prohibitions with the following explanation:
“These practices are all false and deceptive and were means employed by the ancient idolaters to deceive the people of various countries and induce them to become their followers. It is not proper for Israelites, who are highly rational, to allow themselves to be deluded by such inanities or imagine that there is anything in them, as it is said, "For there is no enchantment with Jacob, neither is there any divination within Israel" (Bamidbar 23:23), and further, "For these nations that you are to dispossess hearken to soothsayers and diviners, but as for you, the Lord your God, has not suffered you so to do" (Devarim 18:14). Whoever believes in these and similar things and, in his heart, holds that they are true and scientific but forbidden by the Torah, is nothing but a fool with a deficient mind, who belongs to the same class with others whose intellects are immature. Intelligent people, however, whose rationality is intact, know by clear proofs that all these practices which the Torah prohibited have no scientific basis but are senseless and empty; and that only those with deficient minds are attracted by these follies and, for their sake, leave the ways of truth. The Torah, therefore, in forbidding all these follies, exhorts us, "You shall be wholehearted with the Lord your God" (ibid. 18:13).”
The Rambam's characterization of these prohibitions can be summed up in one phrase: all of these beliefs and practices are forms of magical thinking. There are three major problems with magical thinking: magical thinking constitutes a denial of the laws of nature, a denial of hashgacha pratis (particularly, reward and punishment), and a withdrawal from reality into the world of infantile fantasy. Let's examine each of these problems in detail.
Denial of Natural Law
The Torah maintains that Hashem created the entire universe with wisdom, as it is stated, "How great are your works, Hashem, You make them all with wisdom" (Tehilim 104:24), "Hashem founded the earth with wisdom; He established it with understanding" (Mishlei 3:19). The Torah refers to this concept as “Malchus Shamayim” (Kingship of Heaven) - the universal lawfulness that governs all of nature, including man. The premise of every scientific inquiry is that there is a universal lawfulness underlying all natural phenomena.
Magical thinking constitutes a denial of Malchus Shamyim because it posits the existence of supernatural forces which undermine Hashem's natural law. Magical thinking leads a person away from objective scientific knowledge into the realm of subjective imagination. The Rambam, far ahead of his time, recognized that these magical beliefs and practices have no scientific basis, and modern science supports his conclusion. Today the mainstream scientific community regards magic as a primitive product of human imagination and does not grant it any legitimacy.
A person who, in spite of his practical precautions, is afraid of the influence of harmful forces lacks trust in God. After Tisha b’Av we will recite the blessing over the moon, "Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who with His utterance created the heavens, and with the breath of His mouth all their legion. A decree and schedule did He give them that they not alter their assigned task." Natural law was created by the Word of Hashem, and the Word of Hashem is trustworthy and reliable. To assume that supernatural forces can overpower or undermine His law is to deny His Malchus, and to lack true emunah in His Word.
Denial of Reward and Punishment
The Sefer Ha'Chinuch agrees with the Rambam, but takes one step further. In his explanation of the prohibition of meonein (which can be found under the prohibition of menacheish, Mitzvah #249) the Sefer Ha'Chinuch writes:
“At the root of this mitzvah lies the reason that these things are matters of utter lunacy and folly, and for the truly holy people that God chose, it is not fitting that they should pay regard to false words. Moreover, they are a factor that thrusts a man away from conviction in the Eternal Lord and from His sacred Torah, to set him going from their midst to complete heresy: For he will reckon that all his good and bad fortune, all that happens to him, is a matter of chance occurrence, not by the hashgachah of the Creator. In consequence, he will thus abandon all the principles of the religion. Therefore, since the Eternal Lord desires our good, He commanded us to remove this thought from our heart, and to set firmly in our heart that all evil and good issue by the word of the One on high, according to a man's deeds, be they good or bad. And omens [and all forms of magic] neither help nor hinder - as it is written, "For there is no augury with Jacob, nor divination with Israel" (Bamidbar 23:23).”
"The Eleventh Fundamental Principle," according to the Rambam, is that Hashem "rewards with good those who fulfill the commandments of the Torah and punishes the one who transgresses its admonitions, and that the ultimate reward is the World to Come, and that the ultimate punishment is kareiss." Everything that happens to us is in accordance with Hashem's perfect justice, from which we can neither hide nor escape.
According to the Sefer Ha'Chinuch, one who subscribes to magical thinking ipso facto denies the principle of reward and punishment. What, exactly, does the meonein hope to accomplish by planning his activities around his so-called "unlucky" time? Does he believe there is some evil force out there that will harm him, contrary to Hashem's system of reward and punishment? Does he think that he can avoid Hashem's reward and punishment by simply rescheduling his activities for a different period of time? Either way, his maneuvering is premised upon a denial of reward and punishment. “Ein ohd milvado” – there is no other force out there which acts contrary to His Will and Wisdom.
Retreat into Infantile Fantasy
The Rambam writes that "only those with deficient minds are attracted by these follies and, for their sake, leave the ways of truth." On the surface, this doesn't seem to follow: Does the Rambam mean that just because a person believes in a false, unscientific idea, he will end up forsaking the "ways of truth"? Would the Rambam say the same thing about one who believes that the earth is flat, or some other theory that has been falsified by science?
In my opinion, the Rambam is referring specifically to those beliefs which can be described as magical thinking. All magical thinking caters to the egotistical, infantile fantasy that "I am the center of the universe, and everything revolves around my desires." This belief is infantile because it hearkens back to the period in one’s life in which this was, to some degree, true. In the infant’s world, he IS all-important. If the infant desires anything, reality (i.e. his parents) will respond to that desire. All he has to do is wish and cry, and all of his needs will be addressed.
Just as the infant exists in a world where his own existence has a primary importance, so too, the meonein views his own existence as having primary, cosmic significance. His belief in lucky and unlucky times is premised on the notion that the whole universe revolves around him. He believes that TIME ITSELF takes interest in his personal aspirations and plans, and aims to thwart them or to bring them to success.
This delusion is far from the truth. In reality, we humans are very insignificant. The days where we were the center of the world and where our desires were of primary importance have long since passed. "Olam k'minhago noheig." The laws of nature continue to operate in accordance with their set patterns, regardless of our personal strivings and ambitions. The period of time which the meonein believes is lucky or unlucky is nothing more than a position in the orbit of the earth around the sun. Our planetary position has no bearing on whether we will succeed or fail in our personal endeavors.
Thus, I do not believe that the Rambam would say that any scientifically disproved theory leads to a forsaking of the "ways of truth." The Rambam refers specifically to those unscientific beliefs which reinforce our deep desire to return to a state in which we are at the center of the universe. This is the root of avodah zarah.
For all these reasons (and more), Hashem – in His Wisdom and Kindness – sought to distance us from all forms of magical thinking, and to firmly establish in our hearts and minds the concept of Malchus Shamayim: there is no power other than Hashem, and everything happens in accordance with His Wisdom.
The Explanation of the Gemara
Unfortunately, it looks like I won’t have time to write an explanation of the Gemara’s statement in this issue. Check out my blog (http://kankanchadash.blogspot.com/) later on in the week. God willing, I will merit to understand the halacha and will write about it there. May we merit to do teshuvah from this and all other forms of avodah zarah, and bring about the restoration of Malchus Shamayim in the minds of all human beings.
http://mesora.org/UnluckyAv.htm
-
Predictions
Rabbi Moshe Ben-Chaim
Reader: Could you tell me what is the Jewish opinion and belief of Nostradamus and his writings?
Mesora: If you ask, what is Judaism's view on man's ability to predict the future, the response is as follows: Man's mind is limited, primarily to the functions of comprehension, memory, comparison, analysis, induction, deduction, reason, intuition and imagination. Man cannot function outside of his limitations. Just as man cannot fly, as flight is outside our range of physical ability, so too is knowledge of the future outside the range of our mental ability. Without God informing us of the future, it is impossible for us to know it.
The reasons why predictions are impossible are three;
1) Foreknowledge: Our minds can only work with knowledge, and knowledge is always about something which already exists. The future does not exist, so we cannot know it with our minds' design.
2) Cause and Effect: We reason based on cause and effect relationships, and our minds cannot grasp the vast number of factors contributing to future events.
3) The Freewill Factor: The future of Earth is most certainly centered around man, who functions outside of cause and effect, as we each have freewill. This precludes our cause and effect reasoning from arriving at any accuracy of prediction.
Reader2: I read your answer to the question about Nostradamus (I have copied it below). I was surprised to read the answer. The 1st paragraph was correct but left out the possibility that man can predict the future, although that future is changeable. We say that Adam HaRishon told Hashem that he would not have children and he learned this from the Mazalot. We have cases in the gemara where men predict the future. The whole idea of MAZAL applies to individuals (eyn mazal l'yisrael is only applicable as a nation). We know of Rabbi Akiva's fear about his daughter's possible death on her wedding night... The list goes on. We now shy away from learning from the Mazalot but they were a way of telling the future even though they were not 100 percent effective.
Mesora: 3 Points:
1) You take midrashim literally, this is an error.
2) You also contradict yourself when you say, "even though they were not 100 percent effective..." Prediction, by definition, means 100% accuracy. Anyone can be partially correct. This is precisely why the Torah demands 100% accuracy for determining one a prophet of God. The Torah realizes that people can be partially correct, and that foreknowledge is humanly impossible. The Torah thereby teaches that the only valid proof that one has future knowledge, is that it is divine in origin.
3) You have also not shown any flaw in my reasoning.
http://www.mesora.org/predictions.html
-
Astrology (With sources)
http://www.mesora.org/astrology.htm
Pharaohs astrologers 1
http://www.mesora.org/pharaohsastrologers.html
part 2
http://www.mesora.org/PharaohsAstrologersII.html
for more related posts go to
http://www.mesora.org/search/
and put in search either "Astrology" or " predictions" or any related words.
-
I disagree with Rambam and this rabbi on several topics.
The revealed miracle is a change in the natural laws, so that we can see the hand of Hashem revealed in this world. We learn that the generation of the Exodus witnessed things at Mount Sinai which even the highest prophet was unable to see. The splitting of the sea was so powerful that even the hand-maid said "This is my G-d" and pointed with their finger, so much they could feel the presence of Hashem.
The Jew is above the natural law. This is learned from next weeks Parasha where G-d takes Abraham out of his tent, and tells him to count the stars, the point being that the Jewish people are above the stars {and through this we learn that all of Israel has no Mazal {The Astrology has no real power over the Jew}}.
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/578569/jewish/Above-the-Stars.htm
"Mazal" does not mean "luck", as is usually understood. Rather it refers to the sefira of keter from which divine energy flows forth (in Hebrew, "nozel", directly related to the word "mazal") to the other sefirot, and ultimately to the physical world. The practical implications of this outflow can be foretold using the science of astrology (as known to the Sages), which examines the position of the heavenly constellations (mazalot) at the time of a person's birth.
We deduce that Abraham saw in his constellation that he would not have a son. But the Holy One "took him outside", which the Rabbis interpret as meaning: "Dissociate yourself from your astrological predictions." He thus raised Abraham above the stars [i.e. beyond the realm of reason and nature] and told him, "Now gaze at the heavens and count the stars…," promising him that his offspring would be as numerous as the stars.
We must now explain these words of the Rabbis: Before the Torah was given to Israel all creatures were dependent upon their mazal, including children, health and livelihood. But when G-d gave the Torah to Israel, He removed the control of the stars and constellations over them [for the Torah itself transcends the world].
This we learn from Abraham, for his descendants would in the future receive the [Hebrew letter] hei from his name, alluding to the five books of the Torah.
I do believe that there is power of the stars over the activities of man. It is a rational belief, not an irrational one as some suggest. It is obvious that everything in the world has some influence over other things, we are all inter-related. To say that my neighbor doesn't have influence over me and my world is ignoring the fact that we don't exist in a vacuum.
Our planet is influenced by gravitational forces, by x-ray radiation, and spiritual forces which we cannot even measure. Science has only recently discovered some of these forces, and even the quantum physics are discovering forces which have an effect on all of life. The fact is that these are natural forces. Hashem has instructed us, the Jewish people, to not rely on these natural forces, and to look to him to be able to save us from the effects of nature.
So I disagree with a good deal of what was posted above..
Here is Rabbi Lazer Brody explaining some of these ideas (in relation to the miracle of Purim):
http://www.breslev.co.il/video-stream/asx/brody51.asx
-
Ephrain- What, What and again what? I didnt understand anything you said.
Muman-You contradict yourself from what you said in the beginning (of the last post) and later on in that same post.
"The splitting of the sea was so powerful that even the hand-maid said "This is my G-d" and pointed with their finger, so much they could feel the presence of Hashem."
Exactly it was G-D and not no star or constellation. That is precisely the point.
"{The Astrology has no real power over the Jew}}."
Great point. and you know why? First off even by your claims the astrologers have no real power period. It is the stars that supposedly do. Secondly your answer, answers the point. The astrologers have no real power, and real power over the Jew because the Jew is not supposed to believe in their soo-called "power". They are powerless, and the only "power" that they do get is the power of influence on the people's mind's that accept their influence. It is very connected to the "power of suggestion" if you will. That is why a Jew who follows the Torah and realizes that this is non-sense cannot be influences by them in the slightest way. The nations of the world, traditionally believed in all of these "powers" and the vast majority were literally star worshipers. It is those silly beliefs that actually gave "power" to the astrologers and those who spoke and speak cryptically with things extremely open to interpretation.
-
I disagree with Rambam and this rabbi on several topics.
Disagreement of the Rambam on this is not just a matter of outlook. It also deals in the realm of Halacha and the RambaM and sefer Hachinuch for example bring things connected to this in the laws against "Avoda Zara" -foreign worship. p.s. ( I know their are those who try to claim, well avoda zara is real, but we are not allowed to "tap into that power" I heard this first hand from a "rabbi") What a foolish statement, because our Torah ridicules anything and everything connected to idolatry in the extreme.
-
Muman-You contradict yourself from what you said in the beginning (of the last post) and later on in that same post.
"The splitting of the sea was so powerful that even the hand-maid said "This is my G-d" and pointed with their finger, so much they could feel the presence of Hashem."
Exactly it was G-D and not no star or constellation. That is precisely the point.
"{The Astrology has no real power over the Jew}}."
Great point. and you know why? First off even by your claims the astrologers have no real power period. It is the stars that supposedly do. Secondly your answer, answers the point. The astrologers have no real power, and real power over the Jew because the Jew is not supposed to believe in their soo-called "power". They are powerless, and the only "power" that they do get is the power of influence on the people's mind's that accept their influence. It is very connected to the "power of suggestion" if you will. That is why a Jew who follows the Torah and realizes that this is non-sense cannot be influences by them in the slightest way. The nations of the world, traditionally believed in all of these "powers" and the vast majority were literally star worshipers. It is those silly beliefs that actually gave "power" to the astrologers and those who spoke and speak cryptically with things extremely open to interpretation.
Shalom Tag,
Im sorry you feel I contradicted myself, but obviously that could not be the case. What it seems is that I was not clear enough to express my thought to you.
1) I have never discussed 'Astrologers' or those who engage in Astrology. I am just pointing out that I do believe that there is a thing called 'Mazel' or an influence on this world by the Constellations and Heavenly bodies.
2) I do not consult the stars, nor do I ascribe any power of their own to them. My belief is not avoda zara but the belief that everything Hashem created is inter-related and has an influence on its surroundings, both physically and spiritually.
3) I was trying to explain, against what it seems the Rabbi you posted says, that miracles are not just the big events which the Torah brings (such as the Abraham being rescued from the fiery furnace, or the fact that Noah was able to fit all the animals in the Teivah, or even the Ten Plagues and the Splitting of the Sea). Miracles happen at a personal level (at least according to my experience) if a person merits such providence in the 'eye' of Hashem.
So let me re-iterate my understanding, in case there is confusion:
1) It is PROHIBITED to consult with the dead, this is clear from the commandments.
2) It is PROHIBITED to consult the stars, or other ways of discovering the future, as this too is a clear commandment.
3) It is PERMITTED for a Jew to pray to Hashem in the merit of a righteous Jew.
4) The Jew must have absolute trust and faith in Hashem which is why, according to my understanding, that we are prohibited from engaging in the practices the nations engage in to determine providence. A Jew can, through Teshuva, alter any 'decree' which Hashem has on our people {this too is learned from Purim}.
If I have not been clear about my understanding, please allow me to clarify.
Thank you,
-
KWRBT, I was talking about two different things. What I'm wondering is if Rambams interpretation of the Talmud may have been influenced by the times in which he lived, or he was competing with other Jewish scholars, and he didn't know anything about astrology or Kabbalah, therefore he put a negative spin on it.
Just a thought...
There is nothing up for debate about there being such a thing as minim and a role for such people in halacha.
About astrology: if I remember correctly, there were statements throughout the Talmud, some in acceptance of astrology or at least seemingly certain aspects of it, and some clearly against. Rambam used his sound judgment to reject astrology entirely as a worthless endeavor. And he was way ahead of his time intellectually. It was only in a later period in history that the world at large came to reject astrology as a baseless "witch craft" like farce and not real science.
Rambam described "kabalah" as the transmission of the Oral Torah (ie talmud and mishnaic halachic parameters were the kabalah accepted by the Jewish people upon themselves). Kabalah you refer to and referred to today is something else entirely. He could certainly be unaware of something that was not in written form until at least a century after he died! But the presumption of certain people that had he become aware of the modern day kabalah he would "accept it" is absurd. He had his own hashkafic system and not all of us have to follow the worldview of modern day kaballah. And he very clearly did not preach those concepts.
-
I disagree with Rambam and this rabbi on several topics.
The revealed miracle is a change in the natural laws,
Be aware that the nature of miracles is a huge machloketh among the rishonim. You are not going to simply disprove one side of that argument based on what you feel "has to be" (and of course quoting from the other point of view in that discussion). I can easily cite Rambam's and ibn ezra's statements as "proof" that you are wrong. See how that doesn't make sense to do that?
-
The Rambam did reject a book today referred to as "Kabbalah" if I'm not mistaken its "Pardes Rimonim". It has similar concepts and things as the zohar as well. About the Zohar, the Rambam did not reject it, because it wasn't written yett.
-
Be aware that the nature of miracles is a huge machloketh among the rishonim. You are not going to simply disprove one side of that argument based on what you feel "has to be" (and of course quoting from the other point of view in that discussion). I can easily cite Rambam's and ibn ezra's statements as "proof" that you are wrong. See how that doesn't make sense to do that?
KWRBT,
You constantly seem to be trying to prove something here. I have brought both sides of the argument, and you are trying to 'prove me wrong'? This is the kind of behavior that I do not expect from a Jew. I have been completely honest with you, I have given you credit when you make good points, and I continue to treat you as an ally. But you seem to see me as a threat to your self esteem, as everything I say is a point for you to disprove.
You may get enjoyment out of this little game, but I think it is foolish.
I have brought Rambam when Rambam expresses the idea I am trying to convey, but unlike you and Tag, I don't consider Rambam to be the ONLY authority on Jewish law or thought. He is greatly respected, and as I point out, Chabad studies Rambam just like most other religious Jews. But one should really learn more than just Rambam.
You try to say that I am stating something wrong, yet you do not clearly say what it is you think is wrong with what I say. My defense of Jews who may be misunderstood is something for you to disrespect me for? I take very literally the concept of giving a Jew the benefit of the doubt, and not speaking derogatorily about Jews before non-Jews but it seems you scoff at these ideas. I take very dear the idea of Ahavat Yisrael and feel very sad that you have consistently seen me as an opponent, or someone to try to insult. It is sad that this seems to be the case, and it is fine with me, because this is another challenge in its own right.
If I could impart to you these concepts I would be satisfied. You do not need to agree with what I say, nor do you have to be happy with what I say, but you could attempt to communicate your feelings in a way which moves the discussion forward instead of concentrating on the disagreement.
Regarding the original topic I have clearly stated my position. I accept the Talmud, and a variety of lessons learned from the Talmud. I learn from many Rabbis, and attempt to reconcile any differences by accepting that each has its own truth. This is one lesson that the Talmud teaches, that there can be differences of opinion {look at Hillel and Shammai} and yet both can be true.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/hillel_and_shammai/
A heavenly voice declared: “The words of both schools are the words of the living God, but the law follows the rulings of the school of Hillel.”
So why does the law follow the rulings of the school of Hillel? The Talmud explains that the disciples of Hillel were gentle and modest, and studied both their own opinions and the opinions of the other school, and humbly mentioned the words of the other school before their own.
-
I have brought Rambam when Rambam expresses the idea I am trying to convey, but unlike you and Tag, I don't consider Rambam to be the ONLY authority on Jewish law or thought. He is greatly respected, and as I point out, Chabad studies Rambam just like most other religious Jews. But one should really learn more than just Rambam.
??? neither of us never said we only accept the Rambam.
And about Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel. Beit Hillel was accepted as the Halacha because it was established as such (I believe it was by majority, I could be mistaken).
-
??? neither of us never said we only accept the Rambam.
And about Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel. Beit Hillel was accepted as the Halacha because it was established as such (I believe it was by majority, I could be mistaken).
Ok, sometimes it seems to me that this is the case... I apologize if I misrepresented your position...
Read that Talmud portion, I think it is Eruvin 13b.... This is one case were a 'Bat Kol', or heavenly voice decided the Halacha... I will reproduce it here..
http://halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Eiruvin.pdf
R. Abba stated in the name of Samuel: For three years there was a dispute between Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel, the former asserting, ‘The halachah is in agreement with our views’ and the latter contending, ‘The halachah is in agreement with our views’. Then a bath kol 22 issued announcing, ‘[The utterances of] both 23 are the words of the living God, but the halachah is in agreement with the rulings of Beth Hillel’. Since, however, both are the words of the living God’ what was it that entitled Beth Hillel to have the halachah fixed in agreement with their rulings? Because they were kindly and modest, they studied their own rulings and those of Beth Shammai, 24 and were even so 25 [humble] as to mention the actions 26 of Beth Shammai before theirs, (as may be seen from27 what we have learnt: If a man had his head and the greater part of his body within the sukkah 28 but his table in the house, 29 Beth Shammai ruled [that the booth was] invalid but Beth Hillel ruled that it was valid. Said Beth Hillel to Beth Shammai, ‘Did it not so happen that the elders of Beth Shammai 30 and the elders of Beth Hillel went on a visit to R. Johanan b. Hahoranith and found him sitting with his head and greater part of his body within the sukkah while his table was in the house?’ Beth Shammai replied: From31 there proof [may be adduced for our view for] they indeed told him, ‘If you have always acted in this manner you have never fulfilled the commandment of sukkah’). This 32 teaches you that him who humbles himself, the Holy One, blessed be He, raises up, and him who exalts himself, the Holy One, blessed be He, humbles; from him who seeks greatness, greatness flees, but him who flees from greatness, greatness follows; he who forces time 33 is forced back by time 34 but he who yields 35 to time 36 finds time standing at his side.37
PS: I also meant to say that I don't think KWRBT only reads or follows the Rambam... What I said was due to my own frustration due to a misunderstanding.
-
Just what is a 'Heavenly Voice'? This may help understand...
http://ohr.edu/364
Heavenly & Human Voices
If a "bat kol" is heard announcing that a certain man has died, says the mishna, we permit his wife to marry another man on the assumption that she is indeed a widow.
This "bat kol" is clearly a sound coming from a mysterious source unknown to us. We encountered such a sound earlier in this mesechta (Yevamot 14a), in which a "bat kol" was interpreted as a Heavenly declaration that we must rule according to Beit Hillel in their disputes with Beit Shammai. Is the "bat kol" in our mishna of the same nature?
Definitely not, says Tosefot Yom Tov in his commentary on Mishnayot. The "bat kol" heard in regard to Beit Hillel, and in the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Sages (Bava Metzia 59b), was the Divine communication which was occasionally received in the form of an echo of a Heavenly voice after prophecy came to an end. The "bat kol" in our mishna was the voice of a human whom we failed to locate after hearing his announcement.
As support for this approach, he cites Rambam in his commentary on the mishna, who writes that the "bat kol" is explained in the cases which follow in that mishna. One case is that of a person who stood atop a hill and identified himself, announced that he had been bitten by a snake and died. But when they reached the source of the voice the corpse they found was disfigured beyond recognition. In both cases the wife of the man identified by the voice as having died was permitted to remarry. Rambam is thus suggesting that the "bat kol" in the mishna is not the Heavenly voice we have encountered in the aforementioned disputes of the Sages, but rather the untraced human voice mentioned in the ensuing cases. It is interesting to note that the Shulchan Aruch (Even Haezer 17:10) refers to our case as hearing a "kol" -- a voice -- rather than a "bat kol." This seems to support the approach of the Tosefot Yom Tov.
Another support put forward by the Tosefot Yom Tov -- that we do not heed a "bat kol" in halachic matters -- is challenged by Rashash who points out that Tosefot (Yevamot 14a) states that this is only the view of Rabbi Yehoshua and not of the other Sages.
Yevamot 122a
-
Muman that is a great question (I had it recently) about the Bat Kol and why in this case it decided (seemingly) the Halacha yett with the story of the "oven like the snake" where it did not.
Here is the answer.
http://www.dafyomi.co.il/bmetzia/insites/bm-dt-059.htm
59b----------------------------------------59b
2) TORAH IS NOT IN HEAVEN
QUESTION: The Gemara relates the incident of "Tanuro Shel Achna'i" and the miraculous ways in which Rebbi Eliezer attempted to convince the Chachamim that the Halachah was in accordance with his opinion. He miraculously uprooted a carob tree, had the waters of a river shift direction, and caused the walls of the study wall to lean inwards, and still the Chachamim did not change their mind. He then declared that Heaven should prove that he is correct, and a Bas Kol emanated and pronounced, "Why are you challenging Rebbi Eliezer, when the Halachah is like him?" Rebbi Yehoshua stood up and declared, "Lo ba'Shamayim Hi" -- "It (the Torah) is not in the heavens!" (Devarim 30:12).
TOSFOS (DH Lo ba'Shamayim) asks that the Chachamim had a different reaction to the Bas Kol which decided the question of whether the Halachah should follow the view of Beis Shamai or the view of Beis Hillel. The Gemara in Yevamos (14a) relates that when the Bas Kol declared that the Halachah should follow Beis Hillel, the Halachah indeed was established in accordance with the view of Beis Hillel. Why does the Gemara here say that the Halachah is not decided based on a Bas Kol?
The MAHARAM explains that Tosfos is not asking his question on the view of Rebbi Yehoshua, as the Gemara in Yevamos itself cites Rebbi Yehoshua who said there as well that we do not rely on a Bas Kol. The question of Tosfos is on the Gemara in Yevamos (and other places) which follows the view of Beis Hillel because of the Bas Kol. If the Gemara there follows the view of Beis Hillel because of the Bas Kol, why does the Gemara here not follow the view of Rebbi Eliezer because of the Bas Kol?
ANSWERS:
(a) TOSFOS answers that in this case, the Bas Kol contradicted the Torah's principle of "Acharei Rabim l'Hatos" -- "turn after the majority" (Shemos 23:2). In the case in Yevamos, the Halachah presumably followed the view of Beis Hillel, whose opinion was that of the majority. However, the fact that the students of Beis Shamai were sharper caused a doubt to arise about whom the Halachah should follow. The Bas Kol resolved the doubt when it proclaimed that even in this case the verse of "Acharei Rabim l'Hatos" applies.
(b) In another answer, Tosfos explains that the Bas Kol in the case in Yevamos was spontaneous, and therefore considered more "neutral." In contrast, the Bas Kol in the case of "Tanuro Shel Achna'i" was in response to Rebbi Eliezer's demand that "Min ha'Shamayim Yochichu," and therefore the Halachah does not follow its declaration. (Y. Montrose)
-
Tag,
Yes I learned that one also, about the attempt by Rabbi Eliezer to establish his decision about the Oven through the bat kol. Indeed Halacha is determined by the majority, I did not intend to suggest that is not the case. But it is an interesting demonstration about how both schools can be the way of Hashem, even while one is the Halacha today.
-
http://www.steinsaltz.org/learning.php?pg=Daf_Yomi&articleId=37
After quoting the baraita which suggests that a person can choose to follow either the position of Beit Shamai or of Beit Hillel (6b), the Gemara is disturbed by the fact that the selfsame baraita opens by stating that in arguments between Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel, the opinion of Beit Hillel prevails. Several possible answers are suggested by the Gemara:
1) The section of the baraita that offers a choice in the matter was taught prior to the Bat Kol.
2) The baraita is presenting the position of Rabbi Yehoshua, who does not believe that one should pay attention to a Bat Kol
3) The baraita did not mean that one could choose to follow either Beit Shamai or Beit Hillel; rather it was using their argument as an archetype. When two Sages argue ? like Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel ? one cannot choose the leniencies or stringencies of both; one must choose to follow one or the other.
The "Bat Kol" (=heavenly voice) mentioned here refers to a Gemara later on in Eruvin (13b) that describes how Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai argued for three years, at which time a Bat Kol came out and declared that while both opinions are true, the halakhah follows Beit Hillel (Elu v'Elu divrei Elokim hayyim, v'halakhah K'Beit Hillel.)
The Ritva and Rabbi Nissim Gaon explain this difficult statement by referring to a Midrash that appears in the Jerusalem Talmud. According to the Midrash, when the Torah was given to Moshe on Mount Sinai, he was also given 49 ways to declare something pure and 49 ways to declare it impure, indicating that within the Torah itself there are levels of meaning that allow for the possibility of contradictory conclusions, leaving it to the leaders of the generations to choose the appropriate ruling for their time. According to this explanation, each position has its place in the Torah as it was given, so "both opinions are true."
The second suggestion made by the Gemara ? that the baraita is presenting the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua who does not believe that one should pay attention to a Bat Kol ? is a reference to the story told in Masechet Bava Metzia (59b), where all of the Sages disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer regarding the ritual purity of an oven that could be taken apart. Rabbi Eliezer brought a series of miraculous proofs to his position, culminating with a Bat Kol that declared the halakhah to be like Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua's response was "Lo ba-Shamayim hee" (a reference to Devarim 30:12) ? halakhah is not decided by heaven, rather by human courts.
-
A little more on this topic, Beit Hillel vs Beit Shammai:
http://www.halachabrura.org/parsha-e.htm
Nitzavim
Deciding Halacha by Prophecy or Bat Kol
(based on Birur Halacha, Bava Metzia 59b)
When there was a dispute between R' Eliezer and the Sages (Bava Metzia 59b), and a Bat Kol from heaven declared that the Halacha is always as R' Eliezer says, R' Yehoshua brought the pasuk in our parsha "It is not in heaven", to show that a Bat Kol is not to be relied upon.
On the other hand, in Yevamot (14a) the gemara states that the rule that Halacha is like Bet Hillel against Bet Shammai is based on a Bat Kol.
Tosafot give two explanations to reconcile the sources: A) In the case of R' Eliezer it was clear that the Halacha was like the Sages since they were the majority, and a Bat Kol cannot overcome a clear Halachic rule; whereas in the case of Bet Hillel, it wasn't clear if Halacha is like Bet Hillel since they were the majority, or like Bet Shammai since they were more sagacious, and a Bat Kol is decisive where the halacha is unclear. B) In the case of R' Eliezer the Bat Kol came out only to honor him, after he requested "Let heaven prove me right", and not as a true decision, and therefore it is not to be reckoned with.
R' Nissim Gaon explained that in the case of R' Eliezer the Bat Kol was disregarded since it was worded generally: "Halacha is always like R' Eliezer", which could be construed to mean that Halacha is always like him except here. This can explain why the Bat Kol in the case of Bet Hillel is decisive: because it had exact wording.
The Rambam brings the pasuk "It is not in heaven", to show that a prophet cannot add or omit a mitzvah, nor interpret a mitzvah in a manner not delivered by Moshe Rabbenu. Ma'ase Rekach explains that the Rambam agrees with the first opinion in Tosafot, that where Halacha is unsettled, a Bat Kol or prophecy can be used to settle the halacha, since this does not contradict anything in the Torah. But Pri Chadash holds that in the Rambam's view, in no case can prophecy decide Halacha, and the reason for the rule that halacha is like Bet Hillel isn't because of the Bat Kol, rather because they were the majority, and the Bat Kol came only to honor them.
-
KWRBT,
You constantly seem to be trying to prove something here. I have brought both sides of the argument, and you are trying to 'prove me wrong'? This is the kind of behavior that I do not expect from a Jew. I have been completely honest with you, I have given you credit when you make good points, and I continue to treat you as an ally. But you seem to see me as a threat to your self esteem, as everything I say is a point for you to disprove.
You may get enjoyment out of this little game, but I think it is foolish.
I have brought Rambam when Rambam expresses the idea I am trying to convey, but unlike you and Tag, I don't consider Rambam to be the ONLY authority on Jewish law or thought. He is greatly respected, and as I point out, Chabad studies Rambam just like most other religious Jews. But one should really learn more than just Rambam.
You try to say that I am stating something wrong, yet you do not clearly say what it is you think is wrong with what I say. My defense of Jews who may be misunderstood is something for you to disrespect me for? I take very literally the concept of giving a Jew the benefit of the doubt, and not speaking derogatorily about Jews before non-Jews but it seems you scoff at these ideas. I take very dear the idea of Ahavat Yisrael and feel very sad that you have consistently seen me as an opponent, or someone to try to insult. It is sad that this seems to be the case, and it is fine with me, because this is another challenge in its own right.
If I could impart to you these concepts I would be satisfied. You do not need to agree with what I say, nor do you have to be happy with what I say, but you could attempt to communicate your feelings in a way which moves the discussion forward instead of concentrating on the disagreement.
Regarding the original topic I have clearly stated my position. I accept the Talmud, and a variety of lessons learned from the Talmud. I learn from many Rabbis, and attempt to reconcile any differences by accepting that each has its own truth. This is one lesson that the Talmud teaches, that there can be differences of opinion {look at Hillel and Shammai} and yet both can be true.
Wut?
I seriously think you are reading things into my post which are not there. My whole point was that I was not proving you wrong and there is no way to do so. Note my use of quotation marks.
You stated something about the concept of miracles in a way as if its incontrovertible fact that they are as you describe them. I'm merely pointing out that the nature of miracles in the Torah is a basic machloketh rishonim. They all bring points to support their own views which are all plausible. This is hashkafa, different opinions are valid, and bringing up hillel and shammai and deciding halacha lemaaseh in this context really has no bearing.
And of course it goes without saying that your accusations (that I'm playing games, I'm snickering, and so on) are totally off base and inane. Why do you bother with these personal attacks?
-
KWRBT,
I don't want to go on and on about this. I think we agree for the most part.
I'll accept that you really don't intend to do any of the things which I have perceived as being 'personal'. And please understand that I do not intend to say anything which is insulting to you.
I often post things which are not entirely on the topic. But I post them in the hopes of clarifying what I tried to say.
Anyway, thank you for this response, and lets move on..
-
Soo do I, but people can very well twist these things for their own purposes. I have heard these "stories" from different groups as well all claiming that their version and their religion is true etc.
My point is that not to follow someone blindly even if they have a great story (supposedly). We need to use our Sehel
Although I believe that Judaism is the most righteous path. Do you ever wonder if G-d shows himself through the persons own personal beliefs? This is one of my problems with Christianity, If a righteous Hindu doesn't know who Jesus is, is he going to hell? If a good righteous Buddhist, does not realize that G-d is one, is his soul cut off from the promise land?
-
Although I believe that Judaism is the most righteous path. Do you ever wonder if G-d shows himself through the persons own personal beliefs? This is one of my problems with Christianity, If a righteous Hindu doesn't know who Jesus is, is he going to hell? If a good righteous Buddhist, does not realize that G-d is one, is his soul cut off from the promise land?
I dont know exactly. But the sages (Jewish sages) at least do show tolerance and even understanding towards even idolaters especially outside and far from the land of Israel. This is why they were allowed to come to the Holy Temple and even offer their sacrifice to G-D even though they also believed in other things and "gods".
Also Eliezer is sent to get a wife for Yitzhak to (modern day Iraq) even though they were idolaters, yett it is told that their behavior was better and midot (ways/manners etc.) even though they were idol worshipers. At the time better then the one's in Canaan.
-
I'm no expert on this, but from what it seems- even though the Torah is extremely against idolatry and even many of the commandments and ways are to completely nullify such belief from the Jewish people (who were steeped in idolatry by being in Egypt under foreign rule which promoted it) their is a sense of tolerance and understanding by the Jewish sages that those born in certain cultures and locations do these things since they do not know any better and that is the society they live in- People are many times products of their society.