quote:

Originally posted by Elazar:
To Laurence Shore: If people think that there were Rabbonim who argued on each other and they agreed with each other at the same time on the things they were arguing about, then this is lying and twisting the Rabbonon's words. They argued on each other and searched for truth, but they respected each other of course.

Dear Elazar,

I of course do not agree with revisionist, holostic approaches to Jewish history. However, we are talking about a group that forced a Rosh Yeshiva to withdraw his book because he mentioned that his uncle read newspapers. They believe that the tremendous failure of the Rabbis to answer the enlightenment can be solved by creating a close knit group in which no "extraneous" information reaches them. They can then create a revisionist world, which may be lacking in a critical approach, gives the group an extremely strong source of identity and feeling they are a member of HaShem's community (Sociologists call this the Good Fellowship phenomenon.) This system has been very successful and they are gaining the loyalty of a large number of religious jews. If I were a social Darwinist, I would say that that makes them right.
Look who says the Saduccim were wrong. The Pharasees out survived them and who wrote the history books did.

Aryeh Shore

I found the book "Soul Searching" by Yaakov Astor, Feldheim, to be fascinating. Reincarnation is one theme to many of the topics.

Perhaps if others also have found that book fascinating we can discuss some things in another thread, or in another life.

quote:

Rabbi Y. Kacev
GY Teacher



Rav Chaim says:

quote:

quote:

Rav Chaim says:

quote:
so we must seek in Torah Shebaal Peh what was his Shita was, and the Zohar says it does exist, and if the Zohar came from the Torah that Moshe handed down at Sinai, so then that was Moshe’s Shita.


Why do you assume as a dovor poshut that the Zohar was handed down at Sinai?

According to the basic accepting nowadays from the Poskim (BAis Yosef, Magen Avraham, Shach, TAz, Gra, Mishna Brurah, etc. that all quote it) that the Zohar is authentic as a Medrish, then it is Torah Shebal Peh, just like any other Medrish like Mechilta or Toras Kohanimand is thus from the Mesorah from Sinai.

Quote Elazer

quote:

To Rav Chaim: I never said that he can paskin for someone else. I was saying that the person can follow his mind after analyzing all the sources. He can follow it for himself but he cannot tell someone else to follow him if he isn't a posek.

What's the difference between you and someone else? If it's proper Halacha it should be proper for both of you, if not, then you don't have a right to follow it. And logic dictates that the chances are that it's not proper Halacha.

quote:

Also, your not proving your points and answering my questions on you, so its the opposite as you say. You are not being honest and truthful with yourself.

Do I need to cut and paste all my answers again
If you goto my posts on page 4 and 5, which one of your questions weren't answered? (Not that you just say I don't accept the answer (since you won't accept any answer I would give anyhow, since you're too attached to your opinion), but that wasn't answered at all.

Zohar, Torah Shebal Peh? Really?!!!

I did not realize that EVERYONE had accepted Zohar as part of Torah Shebal Peh. I thought perhaps only among the Chassidim?

This is only true if you accept that the Zohar was written by Rav Shimon Bar Yochai. There are some who say it was written much later.

That poskim and mepharshim quote the zohar, does not mean it has the status of torah shel baal peh in toto. There are clearly ancient sources in the Zohar which are authentic and it does reflect the views of Jews. It does not require that one accepts that Shimon Bar Yochai was the author to appreciate its ancient sources.
This distinction is clear in the various halachic debates where we say we take the halacha above the kaballah. Some say that we accept the zohar in cases where there is no halacha or to quote the Pachad Yitchak, I don't care if Rashbi appeared to me in a dream and told me to change my minghag, I would not do it. (Actually he lost as later generations accepted the zohar (not putting tephillin on Chol shel Moaed) over the halacha.

Aryeh Shore

quote:

Originally posted by MosheYisraeli:
I did not realize that EVERYONE had accepted Zohar as part of Torah Shebal Peh. I thought perhaps only among the Chassidim?

The Chassidim are a form of Judiasm totally based on the kabballah and its system of metaphysics instead of reserving its knowledge to the select few. As we mentioned before, the GRA was a Kabbalist.

Aryeh Shore

quote:

This distinction is clear in the various halachic debates where we say we take the halacha above the kaballah.

I always felt, that Bavli is before Zohar is because it's the main Chazal. The same way we would PAskin like Bavli over a Tosefta or aYerushalmi or a Michilta etc.

Since the Rambam doesn't deal much with midrash let alone the zohar, it is hard to compare the zohar with lets say the tosephta. However, the Rambam often poskins like the yerushalmi, the tosephta and midrash halacha (sifre, safra)e.g. his proscription against lesbians. This of course give the supercommentaries a great opportunity to explain why (and the Brisker rabbis would have nothing to do). The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch, which are basically rewrites of the Mishneh Torah follow in his path. However it is correct as a general rule we follow the babli. The split between Askenazi and Sephardic halachists is over the Gaonim. The Sephardic rabbis felt that the Gaonim were the determiners of halacha and took exception to the activities of the tospehot, especially Rabbeinu Tam,in poskinim directly from the gemara.
A good example of not poskinim like the midrash is the law to divorce one's wife after 10 years without children (no longer enforced). Afterall Sarah got pregnant a lot more than ten years after the marriage. The midrash attempts to deal with as it is not enforced when one moves from place to place.
However we do not rely on miracles to determine halacha, e.g. maybe Leah can change sex by prayer but we do not pray for a baby to change sex as it is considered a worthless prayer.


Aryeh Shore

“A good example of not poskinim like the midrash is the law to divorce one's wife after 10 years without children (no longer enforced). Afterall Sarah got pregnant a lot more than ten years after the marriage. The midrash attempts to deal with as it is not enforced when one moves from place to place.”

Actually, this Halacha is actually learnt from Avraham’s marrying Hagar 10 years after moving to Israel (Since living in Chutz L’Aretz doesn’t count) as the Gemarah says in Yevamos 64a. Without that, there is no source to such a Halacha.

“However we do not rely on miracles to determine halacha, e.g. maybe Leah can change sex by prayer but we do not pray for a baby to change sex as it is considered a worthless prayer.”

The Gemarah in Brachos 60a asked this on that Halacha and answers it (see there for a Nafka Minah L’Halacha regarding this.)

To Rav Chaim: I cannot paskin for someone else unless I recieved smicha and am a Posek. Only a Posek can paskin for another person.

All my questions weren't answered. You take certain sources and twist them to fit your hashkafa, such as trying to understand the Ritva in Pesachim as saying that a person that says yes and a person who says no to a question that they are both right. This is not true because he held that there is only one true answer to the question. The Chovos Halevovos as I mentioned is just one of the Rishonim who say one should use his mind. Your not using rational argument in your posts. The Torah, Gemara and Rishonim used rational arguments when espousing an opinion. If something is totally disproven such as reincarnation, how can you even suggest that its rational when its obvious it is not? your just lying to yourself when you say it does make sense. The fact is it does not and you know it doesnt.

Dear Elazer,

Since one can not prove or disprove reincarnation and one is using logic, then one has to accept that although some rishonim show it to be illogical if not downright heresy, other perfectly rational people accept it as correct. This mean it is an acceptable belief and one has to respect those who hold it as valid. This is equally true for the other side and what you find annoying is someone claiming that only their side is acceptable as Judiasm.

Even if we could test reincarnation scientifically, it wouldn't help as the reincarnation people would say it is some spiritual thing that can't be measured. Since scientific fact means that you can measure and test it, it would be the argument outside the purview of science. Actually scientists spent a lot of time looking for the soul uptil 1920 or so before concluding that it is not something that can be measured or tested and therefore not scientific fact. (Up till that time, it was still thought that some sort of life force maintained the nervous system.)

A.S.

The book "Soul Searching" by Yaakov Astor reports some strong statistical results by scientific skeptics on reincarnation and near death experiences which might be helpful to guaging what scientists have in fact said about this matter of reincarnation.

I'm pretty sure that I must have found this topic interesting in a past life.

Elazer,
Laurence is right, it's not scientific to prove, all we have to go for matters of spirituality is our Mesorah. If our Mesorah tells us one way, then we must accept it as fact. If it's a Machlokes if it's our Mesorah, so then it's like any other Machlokes. I'm also warry about those with limited Torah knowledge deciding these things that were already argued by Gedoilei Olam and to say "Kim Lee" like one side because your mind with the limited knowledge says so, I can't believe that that's enough to solve the problem.

About P'sak, if your P'sak doesn't help for others, since you don't have Smicha, How can it help for yourself? It's either right and right for all or not proven to be right just because you think it is, so it's wrong for him and you. I can't see why it can be split up that it's proven to be orrect for you but not for others.

Nobody is suggesting that an unqualified person declare a suspecious chicken kosher or say that a get isn't valid, what we mean that one poskins for oneself and family is more like one chooses a pesack for himself and family. For example, some people hold you can't eat turkey. They would not do this in a public forum or would they demand that their son's school stop serving turkey. Similarly, not eating Indian cows is a chumra which they said is just for Litaim. If someone else wanted to follow it, it is their decision.
There are many instances in the halacha where two options are given, usually in the language of שומר נפשו or תהיה עליו ברכה . These are things people decide for themselves. I also have to decide that to use kashrut certifications I know to be reliable and if political consideration are a concern or not. Even the choice to eat somewhere where there is no hasgacha certificate but I know the owner is יראי שמים (not unusual in Bnei Brak) or visa versa. I may decide to change my minhag or nusach because of the yeshiva my parents sent me too or I decide to become a chasid. I think it extreme to start putting on tefillin at mincha when my parents or any of my ancesters didn't and many similar things but that doesn't stop people from doing it.


Aryeh Shore

Tanach is theocentric so it doesnt talk about transmigration. Paganism/theosophy is anthropocentric so you hear alot of talk about transmigration. Post- Tanach writing on transmigration... I dont know. But where it exists you can be sure they were infected by non theocentric thinking. Is the basic reality God or man? If its God, then He showed us the parameters of inquiry in Tanach- and it didnt include transmigration. Kabbalah is basically a compendium of the whole anthropocentric infection in Jewish life. Many Jews including many so-called great rabbis were not above being totally infected with the slime of the snake. As far as transmigration as a study, I enjoy it. Its interesting(ala Raymond Moody). But when it creeps into Jewish religious writings I just shake my head.

To Laurance:

I have no objections for that, but that’s not what we’re dealing here (since these posts get long, it’s hard to follow  and you have to go a few pages back to find out, maybe I’ll do it tomorrow to find the quote.) Elazer claims that we are supposed to use our own heads and therefore be the final arbitrator of the Halacha. Just learn the Sugya yourself and that’s what you should do Halacha L’Maaseh, even though the Chazon Ish comes out differently, since we shouldn’t blindly listen to rabbis, but think for ourselves.

To Elazer,
To take this out of the range of the question if there is P’sak for Hashkafa, I’ll show you a Halacha ramification to this. See O.C. 23 Mishna B’rurah 5, where he brings from the Elya Rabbah that you cannot go with your Tzitzis out by a grave of a minor, even though he was never obligated in Tzitzis, thus it’s not insulting to him that he’s not obligated now. The reason is, since he could be a Gilgul from an adult. (The Pri Migadim says that a woman’s grave don’t have that problem since it’s not probable that they were men in a past life.)

According to you, would you Paskin against this Elya Rabbah, Pri Migadim, Mishna B’rurah, and allow your Tzitzis to drag on the graves of minors?

Well off hand I can't imagine a situation where I need to poskin something (and my various family members ask me things fairly often) that there isn't already a variety of opinions available. I evaluate the various opinions on the basis of my knowledge of the sugiah. I would not do anything that I couldn't find someone who agreed with me. If it is something new like IVF or transgenic animals, there are numberous rabbinic discussions available for one to base one's decision (and I been asked for my expert opinion in such discussions). In the final analysis we are talking law and law relys on precedence not necessarily logic. In a more ordered world, it would be nice to be able to consult in real time with a rabbinic authority but usually it is not practical. In any event, I prefer to ask a Rav with some expertise in the topic and it takes awhile to contact them.
Rav Vozner in a Shut on Killayim answers someone who thinks he found a new issur (something forbidden) in the Chazon Ish. Rav Vozner answered, I can not accept your argument. You can follow it if you wish, but do not tell anyone else, even if you think they would listen.

Aryeh Shore