The Impact of Hashkafa on Halacha Part 3 - Chazal, Torah and Science

Speaker:
Ask speaker
Date:
June 17 2019
Length:
45min 51s
Downloads:
138
Views:
436
Comments:
3
More from this:
Comments
3 comments
Leave a Comment
Title:
Comment:
Anonymous: 
  1. Title: Rav Soloveitchik’s shiur on chazakos not changing
    Author: False == 1 ? Anonymous : Moshe Greenberg &##44;

    I think this is the shiur you were referring to: https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2019/ryds_rietsalumni.html#_ftnref15 “And let me add something, this is very important. Not only the halachos, but also the chazakos which chachmei Chazal have introduced are indestructible. We must not tamper, not only with the halachos, but even with the chazokos, for the chazokos which Chazal spoke of rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality, in the metaphysical human personality, which is as changeless as the heavens above. Let us take for instance, let's take an example, the chazaka, for instance, that's what I was told about. The chazaka "טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו" [9] has absolutely nothing to do with the social and political status of the woman in antiquity. The chazaka is based not upon sociological factors, but upon a verse in Bereishis, "הרבה ארבה עצבונך והרנך בעצב תלדי בנים ואל אישך תשוקתך והוא ימשל בך - I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy travail; in pain thou shall bring forth children, and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."[10] It is a metaphysical curse rooted in the feminine personality; she suffers incomparably more that the male while in solitude. Solitude to the male is not as terrible an experience, as horrifying an experience, as solitude to a woman. And this will never change, כימי השמים על הארץ, it will never change, because this is not a psychological fact; it is an existential fact. It is not due to the inferior status of the woman, but is due to the difference, the basic distinction, between the female personality and the male personality. Loneliness frightens the woman, and an old spinster's life is much more miserable and tragic than the life of an old bachelor. This was true in antiquity; it is still true, and it will be true a thousand years from now. So to say that טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו was due, or is due, to the inferior political or social status of the woman is simply misinterpreting the chazoka of טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו. And no legislation can alleviate the pain of a single woman; no legislation can change this role. She was burdened with that by the Almighty after she violated the first law. And, let me ask you a question. Ribbono shel Olam - God Almighty - if you should start modifying and reassessing the chazokos upon which a multitude of halachos rest, you will destroy Yahadus! So instead of philosophizing, let us rather light a match and set fire to the Beis Yisrael; we will get rid of all problems! And I also was told that it was recommended that the method of אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה [11] be reintroduced. If this recommendation will be accepted, I hope it will not be accepted, however if this recommendation will be accepted, then there will be no need for a get. No need for a get. "האשה נקנית...בכסף בשטר ובביאה...וקונה את עצמה בגט ובמיתת הבעל"[12] we will be able to cross out this mishna, this halacha; every rabbi will suspend the kiddushin. If such a privilege exists, why should this privilege be monopolized by the Rabbanus HaRoshis of Eretz Yisrael? Why couldn't the Rabbinical Assembly do just as well as the Rabbanus HaRoshis, if the problem is אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה?! Ribbono d'alma kula, what are you out, to destroy everything?! I will tell you frankly, I will be relieved of two masechtos. I will not have to say shiurim on Gittin and Kiddushin, and then Yevamos as well.”

  2. Title: Rav Soloveitchik’s shiur on chazakos not changing
    Author: False == 1 ? Anonymous : Moshe Greenberg &##44;

    I think this is the shiur you were referring to: https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2019/ryds_rietsalumni.html#_ftnref15 “And let me add something, this is very important. Not only the halachos, but also the chazakos which chachmei Chazal have introduced are indestructible. We must not tamper, not only with the halachos, but even with the chazokos, for the chazokos which Chazal spoke of rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality, in the metaphysical human personality, which is as changeless as the heavens above. Let us take for instance, let's take an example, the chazaka, for instance, that's what I was told about. The chazaka "טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו" [9] has absolutely nothing to do with the social and political status of the woman in antiquity. The chazaka is based not upon sociological factors, but upon a verse in Bereishis, "הרבה ארבה עצבונך והרנך בעצב תלדי בנים ואל אישך תשוקתך והוא ימשל בך - I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy travail; in pain thou shall bring forth children, and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."[10] It is a metaphysical curse rooted in the feminine personality; she suffers incomparably more that the male while in solitude. Solitude to the male is not as terrible an experience, as horrifying an experience, as solitude to a woman. And this will never change, כימי השמים על הארץ, it will never change, because this is not a psychological fact; it is an existential fact. It is not due to the inferior status of the woman, but is due to the difference, the basic distinction, between the female personality and the male personality. Loneliness frightens the woman, and an old spinster's life is much more miserable and tragic than the life of an old bachelor. This was true in antiquity; it is still true, and it will be true a thousand years from now. So to say that טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו was due, or is due, to the inferior political or social status of the woman is simply misinterpreting the chazoka of טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו. And no legislation can alleviate the pain of a single woman; no legislation can change this role. She was burdened with that by the Almighty after she violated the first law. And, let me ask you a question. Ribbono shel Olam - God Almighty - if you should start modifying and reassessing the chazokos upon which a multitude of halachos rest, you will destroy Yahadus! So instead of philosophizing, let us rather light a match and set fire to the Beis Yisrael; we will get rid of all problems! And I also was told that it was recommended that the method of אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה [11] be reintroduced. If this recommendation will be accepted, I hope it will not be accepted, however if this recommendation will be accepted, then there will be no need for a get. No need for a get. "האשה נקנית...בכסף בשטר ובביאה...וקונה את עצמה בגט ובמיתת הבעל"[12] we will be able to cross out this mishna, this halacha; every rabbi will suspend the kiddushin. If such a privilege exists, why should this privilege be monopolized by the Rabbanus HaRoshis of Eretz Yisrael? Why couldn't the Rabbinical Assembly do just as well as the Rabbanus HaRoshis, if the problem is אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה?! Ribbono d'alma kula, what are you out, to destroy everything?! I will tell you frankly, I will be relieved of two masechtos. I will not have to say shiurim on Gittin and Kiddushin, and then Yevamos as well.”

  3. Title: Rav Soloveitchik’s shiur on chazakos not changing
    Author: False == 1 ? Anonymous : Moshe Greenberg &##44;

    I think this is the shiur you were referring to: https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2019/ryds_rietsalumni.html#_ftnref15 “And let me add something, this is very important. Not only the halachos, but also the chazakos which chachmei Chazal have introduced are indestructible. We must not tamper, not only with the halachos, but even with the chazokos, for the chazokos which Chazal spoke of rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality, in the metaphysical human personality, which is as changeless as the heavens above. Let us take for instance, let's take an example, the chazaka, for instance, that's what I was told about. The chazaka "טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו" [9] has absolutely nothing to do with the social and political status of the woman in antiquity. The chazaka is based not upon sociological factors, but upon a verse in Bereishis, "הרבה ארבה עצבונך והרנך בעצב תלדי בנים ואל אישך תשוקתך והוא ימשל בך - I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy travail; in pain thou shall bring forth children, and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."[10] It is a metaphysical curse rooted in the feminine personality; she suffers incomparably more that the male while in solitude. Solitude to the male is not as terrible an experience, as horrifying an experience, as solitude to a woman. And this will never change, כימי השמים על הארץ, it will never change, because this is not a psychological fact; it is an existential fact. It is not due to the inferior status of the woman, but is due to the difference, the basic distinction, between the female personality and the male personality. Loneliness frightens the woman, and an old spinster's life is much more miserable and tragic than the life of an old bachelor. This was true in antiquity; it is still true, and it will be true a thousand years from now. So to say that טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו was due, or is due, to the inferior political or social status of the woman is simply misinterpreting the chazoka of טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו. And no legislation can alleviate the pain of a single woman; no legislation can change this role. She was burdened with that by the Almighty after she violated the first law. And, let me ask you a question. Ribbono shel Olam - God Almighty - if you should start modifying and reassessing the chazokos upon which a multitude of halachos rest, you will destroy Yahadus! So instead of philosophizing, let us rather light a match and set fire to the Beis Yisrael; we will get rid of all problems! And I also was told that it was recommended that the method of אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה [11] be reintroduced. If this recommendation will be accepted, I hope it will not be accepted, however if this recommendation will be accepted, then there will be no need for a get. No need for a get. "האשה נקנית...בכסף בשטר ובביאה...וקונה את עצמה בגט ובמיתת הבעל"[12] we will be able to cross out this mishna, this halacha; every rabbi will suspend the kiddushin. If such a privilege exists, why should this privilege be monopolized by the Rabbanus HaRoshis of Eretz Yisrael? Why couldn't the Rabbinical Assembly do just as well as the Rabbanus HaRoshis, if the problem is אפקעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה?! Ribbono d'alma kula, what are you out, to destroy everything?! I will tell you frankly, I will be relieved of two masechtos. I will not have to say shiurim on Gittin and Kiddushin, and then Yevamos as well.”

Learning on the Marcos and Adina Katz YUTorah site is sponsored today by Judy & Mark Frankel & family l'ilui nishmos מרדכי בן הרב משה יהודה ע"ה and משה יהודה ז"ל בן מאיר אליהו ויהודית and by the Polinsky Family to commemorate the 5th Yahrzeit of Gil Polinsky, Gedalyahu Gootmun Chaim ben Yaakov Dov