Sunday, February 04, 2007

Some comments I’ve put on Hirhurim (slightly edited):

Post where people were saying “eilu v’eilu” applies to modern-day jewish groups:

me: eilu v'eilu? that was about shammai and hillel. maybe it applies later but definetly not nowadays.

Some other commenter: Ah, nowadays there can only be ONE way! And coincidentally it is the way of the group that you think is right! What nonsense. Eilu v'eilu implies that there is only one correct derekh in aovdas hashem today? This is the shoresh of the problem in your machaneh.

me: only some haredim would say eilu v'eilu in a halachic dispute nowadays b/c they feel gedolim can't err and therefore if there's a machlokes, they're both right. they r taking a unique case and applying it even nowadays. the hazon ish said it may apply to certain cases among rishonim but even he agreed it doesn't apply nowadays.
that's for specific halchic disputes. as for completely different groups of orthodox judaism, what does eilu v'eilu mean anyways? Obviously, the Jews should really be one group. making different agudos (groups) is forbidden by the torah. perhaps u can say different people can have their own derech, but that's not eilu v'eilu (there's one law, just diff. people have diff. personalities, etc. and have their own way. but there's no machlokes). the best choice is just to say like we say about our religion: we're right, e/o else is wrong. (although from left to right, they may be right enough to get a share in olam haba)
(pirchei-politics)


I heard a similar story:A russian minister asked the netziv or s/o about aggaditic gemaras and he replied: If the decrees you want were signed by the czar to expel or kill the jews, a poet might say "a drop of ink drowned a million people". e/o would know what it meant but in a thousand years they wouldn't. the same with aggadata.
(R. Yisrael Salanter on Aggadata )


some commenter (paraphrased) explaining gil student’s motives : i have books to sell. i better keep on blogging about the slifkin ban even though e/o is sick of it b/c that way they'll buy the books.
Me: it doesn't really explain y all the blogs are discussing it or y people r reading it and it seems like unlikely motives. personally, i'm tired of people saying they're tired of slifkin ban discussions. it's not like making of a gadol, the ban is implying scientific facts r kefirah. the controversy around the rambam's books lasted many decades or centuries and this seems to be a continuation of it. (of course, they didn't ban the mishnah torah for saying chazal could err, only now when science has advanced so much do they realize its kefirah to believe.) (its coming)


about the ban:
the "majority of gedolim" also believe the universe is 15 billion years old. they just say 15 billion years happened in a week, which doesn't mean anything.
the slifkin books were banned because they said chazal could make a mistake in science, not because they said the universe is old.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

YAWN! Sorry, it's just that i'm so tired of people saying how tired they are of people who say they're tired of people talking about the Slifkin ban.

Anonymous said...

Hirhurim: This came to mind recently upon reading an article about the merits of various scientific theories by a rabbi with no advanced scientific training, in which the author declared a particular scientific theory to be "illogical" and unscientific.

hmmm, sounds an awful lot like a guy whose name rhymes with flab-eye-cliff-kin

Anonymous said...

ssssshhhh! flab-eye cliff-kin might get offended!

Anonymous said...

welcome back nebach!

Anonymous said...

How does that sound like someone whose name rhymes with ...?

Anonymous said...

"At 6:08 PM, Anonymous said...
ssssshhhh! flab-eye cliff-kin might get offended!"

you'll notice what word flab-eye rhymes with...

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Eh? I don't get it. When has he declared a scientific fact to be "illogical and unscientific"? I thought the whole criticism against him was that he accepts the findings of modern science?

Anonymous said...

1.theory, not fact. 2.the general idea of discussing science. 3.ID, etc.

Anonymous said...

rav saddiah gaon,rav hai gaon stated that aggadot are not binding, people interpet them differently,the texts of the aggadot may not be recorded accurtately.
ailu vailu divrei elokim chaim simly refers to the active process of reasoned study and learning.that is why it states elokim chaim by our involvement study and use of our reason and intelligence elokim and his word become areal part of our active lives, this notion does not refer to gd given truth rather to the idea that the torah was given to the jewish people for their interpretation within the accepted mesorah and guidelines for determining the hlachah. berurim