However, aren't we told (I don't know where) that any tragedy that comes to the world comes because of the Jews and Rashi says on this that its purpose is to make the jews do teshuva from fear of the tragedy.

So to say that the 'reason' the tsunami happened is because of some idol worshippor in Indonesia; instead of saying that it happened because x,y or z is wrong with MY behaviour and i am going to change x,y or z because of the tsunami, would be a "waste" of the tragedy.

Let's understand, and attempt to change, what is wrong with our individual behaviour and may we merit to see no more suffering. Amen

R' Chaim:
Could you please elaborate on your statment: "The Gedolim in all generation gave reasons for certain desasters and tragedy."
The emphasis of my question being on "all generations", ie. other than recent history.

Some of Rav Chaim's objections are dealt with by Rav Aharon Soloveichik in his writings about the Holocaust. Here is an excerpt from it:

"There can be no license to impute transgressions to the Jewish people who suffered or to blame the victims for the Holocaust. Unfortunately,many who do try to point a finger at the victims mistakenly claim as support for their theories the teachings of the eminent Rabbi Meir of Divinsk, who lived immediately prior to the Holocaust. They wrongly cite his Meshech Chochmah (parshat Bechukosai)as a theological explanation for the cause of the Holocaust.
However , Rabbi Meir Simcha is not,God forbid theologically rationalizing the cause of such an incomprehensible tragedy, but is theorizing from an historical and logical perspective(according to the Torah) upon such an occurence.

Indeed Chazal tell us "Chacham adif minavi-."
"Historically Biblical criticism ,which emerged in Berlin helped fuel hatred of the Jews and thus was a cause of the Holocaust.In the middle ages he writes, Jews were persecuted but even their Gentile persecutors did not despise them. However, once the Bible critics began to chip away at the very credibility of Torah Judaism hatred of the Jews began to swell in the hearts of their Gentile neighbors.
As the Midrash on the last verse of Lamentations states, "Because we were made disgusting, they became angry with us"
This is the true intention of the Mehshech Chochmoh.

sir
the name of the airport in sumatra where the earthquake took place is named kelila which is
hebrew meaning of divine feminine in judaism.this earth quake has to do with lilith the one who was created by the almithty before eve.

Rav Chaim,

Of course when Gedolim give reasons we absorb it. If the Chofetz Chaim or Reb Moshe were to have given a reason I would remain still. However, who is qualified to understand Hashem's ways? Furthermore, the gemareh in Succah says Ain peronus bu lolem eleh bshvil Yisroel.

Why it happened - who knows - what we are left with is the responsabilty to reflect upon a) Our own repentenance b) Greater appreciation for what we have. Not the need for others to repent.

I do not see why you must say that it's dependent of being the greatest Gadol in the world. Are we now supposed to give a new Smicha for saying the reason about Paronious? (Yorah Yorah Yadin Yadin Mater b'choros yater, Pitui Paronieos Yifateh.)Even on your assumption that one must be someone at a certain Madrega to be able to say such a thing, but what makes you the arbitrerer who's on such a Madregah? (i.e. in the same vain,who are you to tell who is fit or not) especially on someone that you don't know. I don't think I'm going out on a limb making an obvious connection between idol worshipping and punishment. Is there any gaurentee it's the right P'shat? of course not, neither any peice of Torah there is no such gaurentee, but we still have a right to make an educated guess. For good measure, I heard the same thing from a gadol baTorah

With regards that Paronious comes for yisrael does not mean that the ones that recieve it don't deserve it. Rashi in Va'ea when brought this concept brings it down about paroh, who definitly deserved it. the meaning of paronious comes from porea, a pay back, like Rashi in this weeks parsha says. It's done in such dramatic nature to teach us a lesson. But what kind of lesson can we learn from something that's a random act of violence? Obviously, it's our duty to understand why it's a punishment for sin and learn from it.

Personaly, I think this whole notion that we can't say anything is for punishment is based on Western sentiment that nobody can claim that anyone else's behavior is immoral (because they don't want people passing judgement over their behavior)and not from a Jewish perspective.

Rav Chaim said:
"Personaly, I think this whole notion that we can't say anything is for punishment is based on Western sentiment that nobody can claim that anyone else's behavior is immoral (because they don't want people passing judgement over their behavior)and not from a Jewish perspective." :

Are you saying that Rav Aharon Soloveichik and other Rabbonim I have quoted are saying things which are not based on a Torah perspective? You may disagree with other Gedolim, but should their words be disparaged?

I don't mean anything against rav S. or the others, but I think that this is the Mekor of such sentiments. Not that the Gedolim above was trying that people shouldn't point out htere faults. It's just why America has this attitude. I just feel that this attitude somehow came into the Orthodox circles, because of the political correctness, but I never would suggest that this is the intentions of those RY.

BTW, I think Rav Ahron's above explanation to be a tremendous Docheik, from the very fact that it's in the middle of the Tochucha, I think it's obvious that's what he's referring to. So what forced RAv Ahron to say thatP'shat. We always see that Chazal and Gedolim never shyed away from giving reasons, what forces us to say not that way in the Mesech chuchma?

I Don't quite understand what you are saying. If you believe that Rav Soloveichik"s view on this matter was from a Torah perspective, then what forces you to say that the same view held by other Orthodox people come from an "American perspective". Why can't you say their mokar was the view of Gedolim Like Rav Aharon?

Rav Chaim, I am not sure I agree about the "political correctness" being the reason for tolerance of others having come into Orthodox circles. Such balance between the "right" and the "left" wings is what keeps the dialogue going since the times of Hillel and Shammai. The truth is in the middle, as always, I think. And "right" is not always the antonym of "wrong"; sometimes it is just an antonym of "left". It is great if the Tsunami tragedy has made you and other Jews once again think about repentance, but using their tragedy for preaching repentance to the Sumatrans and South-East Indians is not very sensitive, don't you agree?

After all, wasn't Jonah angry that G-d did not destroy Nineveh? But Hashem had His reasons not to. The whole ordeal was to teach Jonah some valuable lessons - and to get Ninevehans to turn to the ways of righteousness, not to convert them from idol worship, or to Judaism. One of the lessons that Jonah learned was that he, himself, is responsible for his own sins, and that there is no way out of this responsibility. But the city of Nineveh would be spared even if the people had not repented en masse (if there were 10 righteous men found in it: Bereishith 18:32)

To Rabbi Kacev,
I brought my Hechruch from the very fact that I don't know any Mekor in Chazal with such a sentiment (and Lhepech, there is so many examples like that) and the P'shat in the Meshech Chuchma is a extreme Doichek. this is my problem. Would you please explain both.

To Alex,
I don't think just going to the middle makes it automaticly the truth. You need to judge each case under the microscope of truth, not from the point of cutting between right and left.

My main objective is getting to the truth, and not being per se sensitive to the Aisain people, who by and large don't come tot his forum, so I don't know whom I'm offending. Our main thing is to analize what happen to be able to understand as much as we can the ways of Hashem

I'm not so sure that Jonah is a proof in any case. Jonah was upset that he would be considered a false prophet. Who said that Ninveh didn't reverse their idol worshipping? and even if they would spare a mass tragedy for some Tzadikim, as in Sadom, but that doesn't mean there wouldn't be indivisual punishments.

To Rav Chaim;
I think you still have not responded to the point I was making. If you admit that the views of a Godol like Rav Aharon are basen on Torah Hashkfoh and does not represent "American moralistic values,why cannot the same be said of those who wish to follow his views?

I'm saying that I think there is an influence from Western culture into this view. I feel this is the need to Medachik the words of the M.C. and not learn K'pshuto in his words and throw in bible criticism. I think your avoiding answering the question why did Rav Ahron forced this explanation. Of course I'm trying to avoid bringing to the obvious conclusion, because, even if ther are Taynas on some Shittos, he still was a Gadol BaTorah and be treated as such. When Ahron burnt the Korbanos, Moshe blamed his children for it to push the blame away from Ahron. this is why I'm trying to avoid this question and not go there. That's why I'll leave it at that.

I am not in a position to explain as to why Rav Aharon felt this was the true Pshat in the Meshech Chochmah.You can ask his children if you are interested. You do not have to agree with his understanding of it. However for you to even imply that the views of such a Godol were tainted, due to American culture, comes under the category of Bizui Talmedei Chachamim.

That's mu whole point in avoiding the question, until you cornered me into saying it. As far as calling a Gadol's view tainted, both the rashba (quoted in darchai Moshe in hilchus Talmus Torah) and the Gaon (in Hilchus M'onen U'Michasef) said the Rambam' views in certain areas where tainted from philosiphy. I'm sure you're aware about that. I'm sure on one hand, they wanted to avoid saying anything about the Rambam, but on the other hand, they felt the view of the Rambam was very harmfull that they were obligated to say that you can't take those views seriously, and can't count them as a valid Shitas haRambam, like you would in Hilchus Shabbos or the like. this is through necessity. I don't think now anybody can even have such views and say Kim Li like the Rambam. Even Rav Ahron's grandfather, I heared, didn't let his children learn the Morah Nevuchim. If on the Rambam they said it, whom can we say is Putter from it.
When you're left with someone saying something that doesn't seem to "jive" with the rest of Torah (Lfi Aniyas Daati) and then say that we all must accept the view, because a Gadul supposedly held of such a view, thus the discussion is over, and there is Yesh Al Mi Lismoch, or whatever. The person who brought it cannot even explain the Mudna shita, but "hides behinds it." What are we supposed to do? We're left to do what the Rashba and Gaon had to do. that's why it's better not to quote Gedolim where the Shita is Mudna then to have it out in the open. I don't mean any disrespect Chas V'shalom, I just mean that we must go after Emes even if it's politically incorrect on many bases.

I see it is possible even to rationalize Bizui Talmeidei Chachamim. Of course Gedolim on the level of the Rashbah and the Vina Goan have the right to criticize the views of other Gedolim.
However for one of us to impugn the views of the Rashbah, or the Goan would be completely out of line.(Unless of course you view yourself on their level).
None of us are anywhere close to the level of Rav Aharon, to be considered a colleague whose views we can impugn, and if one does it simply comes undre the issur of bizui Talmeidei Chachamim.

Are you saying that the Rashba and the Goan were Over on Mivazeh talmid chachum? (Who's being Mivazeh Talmidai Chachumim now.) Uffer Lapeh to say such a thing. Talmidai Chachumim don't have a right to mivazeh other Talmidai Chachumim. So in order to say such a thing, you must imply that the Rashba and goan was Over this severe Averah Chalilah Vachas.It's because the issues itself was too important to pass over and needed to very firm on it.

What you quoted me is an obvious corruption of the explanation of the Meshech Chachma, that you already said that you have no way of defending. Whoever did it (which I have no reason that R' Aharon ever said it, SHemma Eizeh talmud To'eh) was definitely trying to take it out of context in order to push it off it's real meaning.

I still don't see any Torah sources for this view, and I see it very prevalent in our society. I can't draw that conclusion? Even if there is someone who believes this, I brought a proof that even the Rambam was affected by his S'viva, that someone nowadays, from something that is not Mifairush Mamush in Shas and Poskim could not have been affected to lean that way from his S'viva is not that off.

I'm afraid that you have misinterpreted what I said . The Rashbah and the Goan were not transgressing the issur of being mevazeh a Talmud Chacham because THEY were on a level to see and understand what the mistake of the Rambam was. Unless one is certain of the accusation one is making, it would just be conjecture and be considered a defamation of character. You who did not know Rav Aharon and are certainly not on a level to surmise with certainty about how his opinion was formulated has no right to assume such a derogatory and insulting conclusion. This would be bezui.

Secondly as to your accusation against me that I corrupted the words of Rav Aharon or took them out of context,the Passages I quoted were a DIRECT quote from his sefer. If you would of inquired furhter you would not have come to this additional hasty and incorrect conclusion

First of all, whoever said that the Rashba and Gaon were as great as the Rambam in learning? It would seem that the Rashba was quite a bit after the Rambam, and in Halacha is not as accepted as Rambam (not 1 of the 3 Amudai Horah of Bais Yosef, also, most of the P'sakim of BY are based on Rambam Shita) Rav Chaim Valozen said on Gaon that he's Ulei a Ramban, but yet not the rambam. Yet, when something was obvious wrong, they cannot keep quiet, and even if a Talmud chuchum greater than them gave weight to that cause, and their was a reason for that, they needed to say it out.
In the case above, where whoever said this, obviously is trying to mislead the meaning of the Meshech Chuchma, which everyone realizes this. I went through the Meshech Chachma today to make sure there are no way around it. He's talking about leaving the Torah and Mitzvos and joining the Goyim's ways, saying Berlin is Yerhushalayim (unless their bible criticism was that all stories mentioned in Tanach that happened in yerushalayim happened in Berlin.)
I would like to Don L'kaf Z'chus that was not really what he wrote, but someone was mistaken, either the quoter, or a talmud that helped put it together for publishing. It's all part of the T'miah "Peh Kodesh Yomar Davar Kazeh?" (I feel saying it's in his S'farim is Loshen Haroh!) Whichever way, I'm not trying to attack anybody, but the idea, which is obviously meant to mislead.
Another thing from what you quoted, also seems to be, besides wrong, but also mivazeh talmedai chachumim. (I hope that this is also a misquote.) I didn't want to make a thing about it L'man Hashalom, but since you're making a Jihad about this, I feel obligated to bring it up. Your quoting Rabbi Blech that those who say why tragedies happen are practicing bad theology which is worse than bad behavior. This is the thrust of these words that are being quoted from him. Which, if you think of it, saying that it's worse than being Michallel Shabbos. So besides being wrong, but basically calling Gedolim that do say such things, in fact, Apikorsim, Chas V'shalom. Uffur Lapeh. I don't know where you come up with these quotes, but they're obviously outlandish and wrong. I have the right, and obligation, to dismiss them out of hand.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Rav Chaim,

I will try to explain this one more time. I never said you had no right to disagree with what Rav Aharon said. What I complained about is that you persoanlly berated him by saying his opinion did not come about thru his Daas Torah but thru being influenced by American culture.This was a baseless attack on him personally,and not a just disagreement with his view.
I never said tha Rashbah was as great as tha Rambam. My point was that people like that would not have attacked the Rambam personally unless they knew with CERTAINTY that what they were saying was true.
You however do not know for certain as to what the mokor was for the view of Rav Aharon and to make such an accusation out of supposition because you disagree with his views is nothing more than bizui chachomim