Speaker 1: Welcome to Jewish History Uncensored with Mark Shapiro. This is
Speaker 1: season sixteen, episode thirty two.
Speaker 2: We're in part uh, this is part thirty two. We're
Speaker 2: two thirds of the way done. So you've been with
Speaker 2: me so far. We'll take it to the end of
Speaker 2: theres Sesshia. I, since you read the Rabbi Calman mentioned rabi,
Speaker 2: you know, I had an epiphany that I raised the
Speaker 2: question why it's called Robunniat, like I'm not talking about
Speaker 2: today when they rabbit sens they called him rabb Neat.
Speaker 2: And also I said, refers to like women, rabbis is
Speaker 2: rabunnique women tell Meami, So he's using a femine and
Speaker 2: why not Rabba? Why because that Rabba is with someone
Speaker 2: that picked today. And I had the epiphany that it
Speaker 2: comes uh, like, how do you see a righteous woman? Well,
Speaker 2: there's two ways to say it. One is sadekas and
Speaker 2: one is sad khan eat. In fact, we would talk
Speaker 2: about the nushing sudcannios. So it's obvious to me and
Speaker 2: I didn't know I because I raised the question a
Speaker 2: number of questiones ago, where did they get the studia
Speaker 2: rob Anita. I think it's parallel to sud Khanat. Strangely enough,
Speaker 2: I checked the gestro, and so you have Sadekas. The
Speaker 2: poor of sadekas is Suddi cot you think there'd be
Speaker 2: a woman female sadi Ka, but it's not. It's Sadeep
Speaker 2: Sadekas or khan Eat. So I think rob Anat is
Speaker 2: along the model of Khanat. So thank you, Rabbi kilvin Uh. Okay,
Speaker 2: a couple of things before we get going. Oh and
Speaker 2: I hope melts with us, because if he is met
Speaker 2: with us, text MeMail. If not, I'm going to hold off.
Speaker 2: I'm with you, okay now, borfisham. But before we get
Speaker 2: to that, I'm want to show you something here it's
Speaker 2: relevant to we spoke about last week when I mentioned
Speaker 2: young orthodox public intellectuals, and if I had more time,
Speaker 2: I'd play you something from one of my favorite public intellectuals,
Speaker 2: Glenn Lowry, speaking to one of my other favorite public intellectuals,
Speaker 2: John mcwarder of Columbia, and he gives his definition of
Speaker 2: what a public intellectual is and why Abram Kindy, if
Speaker 2: you know the culture wars, why he is not he's
Speaker 2: an empty suit? He calls him. He's not. But this
Speaker 2: Rabbi Harie Lamb. I don't know if anyone knows him
Speaker 2: from the Lamb family. He is I guess grandson of
Speaker 2: Norman Lamb. He is also one of these young up
Speaker 2: and coming public intellectuals doing or by Sachs said to
Speaker 2: do right for you know. I don't know if he's
Speaker 2: in Walls a journal yet, but Newsweek other things. So
Speaker 2: this appeared just two weeks ago when I just saw
Speaker 2: it By, I saw it randomly. And what I want
Speaker 2: to share with you and why it's relevant to what
Speaker 2: we were doing is uh, he's he doesn't. He's talking
Speaker 2: about how the base Medriss. He quotes how with George
Speaker 2: will went to the yu Yshia University based Meatris. She said,
Speaker 2: how can anyone learn anything in here? There's too much noise.
Speaker 2: So he talks about the idea of rabbis and the
Speaker 2: base meadress through arguing, and that's as long as you
Speaker 2: accept certain basic presumption. Is nothing wrong with having strongly
Speaker 2: held opinions, et cetera. But Denny says in the middle,
Speaker 2: he says, you're talking about the Gamarra. He says, one
Speaker 2: might imagine that discussions among such a stem and holy
Speaker 2: rabbis will be conducted in hushed, respectful tones. Instead, the
Speaker 2: ancient sage just cracked jokes, traded vicious puns, and insulted
Speaker 2: each other's appearances. And then he goes on with another example. So, uh,
Speaker 2: that's exactly what I mentioned, that all these insults and
Speaker 2: other things. When you look at it, you're like, why
Speaker 2: would they speak this way? But rabbi speaking to other
Speaker 2: rabbis is like a club we when we look in
Speaker 2: and it's like strange because we're we're sort of on
Speaker 2: the outside looking in. That was at least my point. Okay,
Speaker 2: now you got to ring the bells here because it's
Speaker 2: correction time. And I always very hap there's no embarrassment
Speaker 2: making corrections, especially maybe if it was an area I'm
Speaker 2: expert in. But what I'm gonna tell you now is
Speaker 2: something I'm just there's a few experts areas. I guess
Speaker 2: I can say I'm sort of expert, but this is
Speaker 2: just derivative from what I've learned and what I've seen.
Speaker 2: And it's not my mistake. It's all the people, even
Speaker 2: online you see a lot of people. It's what I
Speaker 2: was always under the assumption. And I think Howard Handler
Speaker 2: for this, and uh, now raised the question about I
Speaker 2: don't know what you know that uh biro that's what
Speaker 2: it should be. And I said, well, look at the rhyming.
Speaker 2: It's obviously you're ah. And I played you the MW
Speaker 2: the the different uh renditions of a dono lum. Also
Speaker 2: I showed you how uh in the first line it
Speaker 2: goes and there's a name for this, uh this where
Speaker 2: you do unstressed stressed, unstressed stressed uh do oh lum,
Speaker 2: and then you get to melech. So it has to
Speaker 2: be lech and uh so if you look around the
Speaker 2: way I described it is exactly how it's described that
Speaker 2: uh uh. In fact, if you google it, you see
Speaker 2: in the old Wikipedia before it was corrected that they
Speaker 2: give this example for the special type of figure what
Speaker 2: they call it, of type of poetry where it's unstressed, unstressed, unstressed.
Speaker 2: They give that very line of adno um. You can
Speaker 2: find all sorts of other examples, and you can also
Speaker 2: find exactly what I said, discussions of it that uh.
Speaker 2: It has to be the last syllable, even though it's
Speaker 2: from a grammatical standpoint, it's a bira ach birah. Okay,
Speaker 2: now what Howard uh. And and based upon that, I
Speaker 2: said that this is an example like we see later
Speaker 2: with poets that even though the grammatical rule is one thing,
Speaker 2: they intend you to pronounce it the way I said.
Speaker 2: And as I said, that's not my idea, that's what's
Speaker 2: out there. And all, well, thank you, Howard Handler, he
Speaker 2: points out to me and Raymond Schindlin. I don't know
Speaker 2: if Schindlin or Shandlin taught for many years at the seminary,
Speaker 2: an expert in Hebrew poetry. He takes up this issue
Speaker 2: and he says it's not true. He believes this is
Speaker 2: an achronistic thing. You can see, and I thank you
Speaker 2: Howard Howard, who himself studied this years ago. You can
Speaker 2: find an essay of Schindlin, a guy to Golden age
Speaker 2: Hebrew Prosiby. He basically says his follow what his point was.
Speaker 2: And I saw also in the encycled A Jahica, because
Speaker 2: then I started investigating it that the Spanish poets were
Speaker 2: not at all interested in rhyming the way I mentioned,
Speaker 2: And that's that comes later. Schindlan says stress plays no
Speaker 2: role in rhyme. Thus a stressed syllable may rhyme with
Speaker 2: an unstressed syllable. The point is that for the Spanish poets,
Speaker 2: the only thing that was important was the meter yet
Speaker 2: tayed to Noah, et cetera, and that when you sing
Speaker 2: it it has to be recited the way we do,
Speaker 2: because when you sing it, that's the way it has
Speaker 2: to be. But the idea, so the idea that I said,
Speaker 2: that I expressed in which I've seen, it's all. It's
Speaker 2: all out there. It's according to stress of Scheindlin and others.
Speaker 2: It's not true at all that all they cared about
Speaker 2: was tayd and and therefore what I said was incorrect.
Speaker 2: That the poet did not intend you to intend it
Speaker 2: to be read as be raw rhyming, because for him
Speaker 2: the only thing that mattered was the meter. And I
Speaker 2: take Professor Schindlin, he's the expert, the real expert. Furthermore, then,
Speaker 2: so then I looked back again at the Judah lady,
Speaker 2: and also with parjon Uh in his work, because they
Speaker 2: what are they doing. They're criticizing all the people who,
Speaker 2: for the sake of poetry are putting uh mila l
Speaker 2: migla all the things I mentioned. If you read it,
Speaker 2: you see though he's only referring to where where for
Speaker 2: the point set where for the meter you add let's say,
Speaker 2: an extra vove that then turns at Mila l or
Speaker 2: Mila raw. He's not referring to the rhyming that will
Speaker 2: come about two hundred years later. But it's not. It's
Speaker 2: so mel I I correct myself and uh, it's uh.
Speaker 2: I take back what I said that it's obvious that
Speaker 2: the poet had to have that rhyme. And as I
Speaker 2: said you, the funny thing is that when I Google
Speaker 2: and I found that in the old Wikipedia, they say this,
Speaker 2: But then you have these chats. I don't know if
Speaker 2: you ever noticed Wikipedia. They have discussions chats and someone
Speaker 2: explains to the person in road just that no, that
Speaker 2: this form of poetry you're speaking about it's not chanistic.
Speaker 2: The Spanish poets didn't use it. They only used and
Speaker 2: no one has yet corrected that. So uh, there you go.
Speaker 2: So I will thank I'm thankful that I could uh
Speaker 2: correct that we spoke about this. Citter Well on behold,
Speaker 2: these classes are now having an impact on the next
Speaker 2: version of the arts. Gul Sitter. I don't know how
Speaker 2: many people actually get it, how many shows, but you'll
Speaker 2: see it. Why because I told you that in the
Speaker 2: Brookol in the morning it says the art sport sitter
Speaker 2: says sally called Sarki. And I said that not the
Speaker 2: art spoil. The Koran which has followed the vocalization in
Speaker 2: the RCA is exactly from Korn, and I said it
Speaker 2: should be uscily called Sarki. So they put it first.
Speaker 2: So they booked at all the differently durium and they
Speaker 2: put it to the expert professor Richard Steiner, and he
Speaker 2: concludes that what I said is absolutely correct. So the
Speaker 2: next version of the RCA, sitter it's to us so Lee,
Speaker 2: because remember Lee, it's you push back in the previous word,
Speaker 2: the syllaba goes one back. Since I just gave a correction,
Speaker 2: gave credit for art scroll, let me tell you something.
Speaker 2: You know, I went with this that the art scroll
Speaker 2: gets it wrong and Coryn and RCAA gets it right.
Speaker 2: In Kiddish, where is it in Kiddish Friday Nights, we
Speaker 2: say ki hum terrilla? What comes after that? Well, in
Speaker 2: the song sort of quasi song, we say, let me
Speaker 2: karai kodish. That's how arts girl has it. The Koran
Speaker 2: has it let me kra Kodish. Now this one. It's uh,
Speaker 2: it's not so problematic here. It's time to figure this out.
Speaker 2: All you have to do is look here in the hummish.
Speaker 2: There you go, Loo can post peak houff gimo there
Speaker 2: Pussoka base it says it explicitly mikra kodesh and then
Speaker 2: look down, Uh Meladashian mikra ko dish. Now, so why
Speaker 2: isn't it Why is it this not with nasoka hor
Speaker 2: Why because ko dish the accent's on the first syllable,
Speaker 2: so you would expect the previous word to be mekry
Speaker 2: like artsrow has it. Well, that's it's an exception, and
Speaker 2: people have offered reasons why. Uh, there's an exception there
Speaker 2: the olive so whatever. But whatever it is, we see
Speaker 2: clearly that Corn is right and RCA is right, and
Speaker 2: uh we can get into this if you want. Maybe
Speaker 2: next class, I'll talk about hamote cy or homoe c
Speaker 2: because they get another big mahokus. There is it? How
Speaker 2: most the kamin arts or homoz arts and it's not
Speaker 2: Israelis versus Americans because again for syllables, then you'd expect
Speaker 2: nasoga hor in the previous one. The last thing I
Speaker 2: want to do before we begin is I've created a
Speaker 2: lot of questions about the Dryasneh situation. Before I do, though,
Speaker 2: just let me show you a few things on your own.
Speaker 2: You can look at I mentioned Bosnian SS troops. By mistake,
Speaker 2: I said Serb officers. It's crows. You can, for instance,
Speaker 2: look at your whole big article here in Wikipedia, and
Speaker 2: this is called the Hanshard Division. These are Croatian officers
Speaker 2: Bosnian Muslim uh fighting on the side of the Nazis.
Speaker 2: Here you have a picture of there's the Mufti he raised,
Speaker 2: these SS office, these SS soldiers among the Muslim population.
Speaker 2: You can also, as I found another article on this
Speaker 2: is another division of the SS, also Bosnian Muslims. Here
Speaker 2: are German officers and Bosnian Muslim soldiers. The other thing
Speaker 2: I wanted to show you is if you look in
Speaker 2: the we spoke about the your good, if you look
Speaker 2: at the the terrorist attacks in the thirties, you have
Speaker 2: all sorts of things that I'm not prepared to defend.
Speaker 2: For example, bombs thrown into crowded marketplaces, bombs detonated in buses.
Speaker 2: This is exact sort of thing that the Rabbis were
Speaker 2: very opposed to. If you start from the during the insurgency.
Speaker 2: Then you notice they're all attacks on soldiers. You have
Speaker 2: the the incident I mentioned last class, the Sergeant affair,
Speaker 2: where in response to Jews being executed for their underground activities,
Speaker 2: they executed two sergeants, which by the way, led to
Speaker 2: five Jews being killed by British policemen taking revenge. So
Speaker 2: this is a different sort of You know, they thought
Speaker 2: they were fighting a war, a battle to a free
Speaker 2: Israel from imperialists, which explains, by the way, why they
Speaker 2: were interested in allying with the Soviet Union over Shampas.
Speaker 2: I finished up Heller's book on and let's let me
Speaker 2: just read to you page three forty seven. This is
Speaker 2: a letter from L. Dodds in which he writes in
Speaker 2: nineteen forty eight he says add was one of the
Speaker 2: leaders of him Manuel and of Rechi. He says, there
Speaker 2: is no doubt that there will be a world war
Speaker 2: between the USSR and the USA and Britain. We shall
Speaker 2: fight on the side of the USSR. So that that's Lech,
Speaker 2: that's not your good. I already mentioned that for Lechi
Speaker 2: the most important thing was freeing the land of Israel,
Speaker 2: and they were prepared even to ally with the Nazis,
Speaker 2: if the Nazis would help, would stop their extermination the
Speaker 2: Jews and would help them free the land of Israel.
Speaker 2: But if you do go further during the war, it's
Speaker 2: civil war itself. You do have examples again of bombs
Speaker 2: at the Damascus gate, at the cinema, et cetera. I'll
Speaker 2: leave it for other people to discuss the morality of this.
Speaker 2: What I do want to mention, however, is the Dieocen situation,
Speaker 2: because I don't know if the word I use massacre,
Speaker 2: which is the word you often use, is the correct word.
Speaker 2: No one was ever taken out and shot against the
Speaker 2: wall things like that, But I think you know, if
Speaker 2: innocence were killed, I guess you can call it a massacre.
Speaker 2: So did it happen or not? The number in Daria
Speaker 2: scene is one hundred and fifteen. You have two different
Speaker 2: versions of what happened here. Now, first of all, understand
Speaker 2: the Israeli government, of the Proto government, the Jewish Agency
Speaker 2: and Haganah, they acknowledged that they were innocence killed and
Speaker 2: they sent a letter of apology, et cetera. So normally
Speaker 2: people would say that's an acknowledgment by the government. It's
Speaker 2: a little more problematic for the defenders of the other
Speaker 2: side in that the claim could be made that they
Speaker 2: were very interested in getting rid of the your good
Speaker 2: and you know, having them discredited so attributed to them
Speaker 2: a massacre which they didn't take part of, would serve
Speaker 2: those purposes. Incidentally, the number you might hear of two
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty people killed, that's a phony number, but
Speaker 2: that's near good number. They're good wanted to make it
Speaker 2: seem as if we want to scare the and say
Speaker 2: they killed all these people. So a couple of you
Speaker 2: emailed me and that There's been two books that have
Speaker 2: challenged this. One is by Ury Milstein and the other
Speaker 2: is Eliezer Talbert. Yes, they all acknowledge that innocedence were killed,
Speaker 2: but in what context were innocence killed. Their argument is
Speaker 2: that these were all in houses, and to get into
Speaker 2: the houses they through hand grenades and things like that,
Speaker 2: so they were all killed in that way. Although Eliezer
Speaker 2: Talbert does say he gives he says as follows and
Speaker 2: the heat that the only example he thinks of innocence
Speaker 2: being killed was this one family that came out with
Speaker 2: their hands raised and an individual, your good fighter shot
Speaker 2: at them, killing eleven, and he did this in his
Speaker 2: mind for revenge. But other than that, there were no examples.
Speaker 2: So look at the end, as I said, I don't know.
Speaker 2: I'm not an expert in this. This is a debate
Speaker 2: between people. RYE. Bulstein, who's a you know, a renowned
Speaker 2: and important historian of of the War of Independence. He's
Speaker 2: not some like orthodox type person trying to put forth
Speaker 2: a position. He's a real historian and he totally rejects.
Speaker 2: On the other I'm Benny Morris, who's done important work. Uh,
Speaker 2: he thinks differently. Everyone acknowledges there were war crimes. There's
Speaker 2: no question there were war crimes. But we're not you know,
Speaker 2: if an individual killed here were a woman rape, we're
Speaker 2: not talking about that. We're talking about more, you know,
Speaker 2: more people were killed. So the point I wanted to
Speaker 2: make though, is that I don't care really it's it's
Speaker 2: not it's not really important for my purposes. What I
Speaker 2: was saying is that number one, you don't discredit Zionism
Speaker 2: based on that if you have soldiers who behave improperly.
Speaker 2: And remember I was responding to our anti Zionist person
Speaker 2: who was saying here you want you and your state,
Speaker 2: look what it did. I mean, I can go down
Speaker 2: the list of the Arab massacres out. Do you know
Speaker 2: what happened when he going up to Hebrew University was
Speaker 2: at seventy eighty people killed? And go to Professor Freeman
Speaker 2: who is the editor of the Chuva Tarambam. They were
Speaker 2: simply how many times Jews were just stopped and massacred
Speaker 2: like that. I can go down a very very long list.
Speaker 2: So the fact that let's assume it did happen, Nah
Speaker 2: for the sake of argument, it doesn't discredit it's not
Speaker 2: an original sin. It's not it's it's people doing the
Speaker 2: wrong thing. And and my other point is that we
Speaker 2: shouldn't be afraid of the truth. If this thing can
Speaker 2: never be proven one way together, then it remains a
Speaker 2: dispute teku as we would say. But if it's true,
Speaker 2: and if it is, it isn't we we should be
Speaker 2: able to look look in Tanach, you see Jews and
Speaker 2: the Danah did bad things. If Jews can do bad
Speaker 2: things too, it doesn't we can we can accept that
Speaker 2: and understand know that we're pained by this. If it is,
Speaker 2: if it did happen, and we're bothered by this. We
Speaker 2: don't celebrate this, we don't like this, we don't want this.
Speaker 2: And I have to say, I think that makes us
Speaker 2: different than the other side, which celebrate these sorts of things.
Speaker 2: But so what is it authentic? Did it happen or not? Again,
Speaker 2: leave it to Milstein and Benny Marris. Benny Morris, by
Speaker 2: the way, he argues, I mean he is the one
Speaker 2: who uncovered, based on the government documents, that Israel actually
Speaker 2: expelled many Arabs, contrary to what we were told growing
Speaker 2: up that you know, they all left on their own
Speaker 2: because they were told by the Arab governments. And Mars
Speaker 2: claims that they should have expelled more because then they
Speaker 2: would have been an end to this whole problem, because
Speaker 2: the two populations would have been so normally you think
Speaker 2: of people denying the expulsions for political reasons. Bennie Morris argues, basically,
Speaker 2: I don't think it's argument anymore. I mean it's factual
Speaker 2: based on government documents. This is hog and I we're
Speaker 2: talking about now. And he says that the mistake of
Speaker 2: Ben Gurion was not expelling more Aros because in a
Speaker 2: wartime this is a fifth column and uh, these things
Speaker 2: happen and then you have to look at the larger pictures.
Speaker 2: So it's not like Benny Morris is some I'm believing
Speaker 2: heart liberal here arguing when he talks about Daria scene.
Speaker 2: So well, let's say that. Let us now pick up
Speaker 2: on where we are. As I said, we are about
Speaker 2: two thirds of the way done. We're picking up Simon
Speaker 2: Kufio tests number one, nineteen page race Mamazie and the
Speaker 2: question I had and this went. We're going to be
Speaker 2: interest to be introduced to some new people soon. But
Speaker 2: their high rappaport is as follows the Tanya. Question about
Speaker 2: the Tanya both about a textual matter and an ideological
Speaker 2: sort of position. I want to show you what appears
Speaker 2: in the Tanya. I don't know if we have any
Speaker 2: people here who learned Tanya, anyone who spent any time
Speaker 2: in Kabad. Of course, this is their their major text.
Speaker 2: It's been published basically every place on earth where I
Speaker 2: don't know what that means. When I talk about publishing,
Speaker 2: like in the North Pole, or if they did go there,
Speaker 2: I don't know. I don't know how you publish, how
Speaker 2: you set up Maybe they published too, they set up
Speaker 2: a portable printer. I don't know what they do, but
Speaker 2: you now, in the end of the time, ya, you
Speaker 2: have something called e garatta kodish and from the Balatoni
Speaker 2: or Shani Zamnavaladi, and I want to read you something
Speaker 2: that he says here in section twenty two. He says,
Speaker 2: an open rebuke out of concealed Come now and let
Speaker 2: us a judge. Remember the days of old, consider the
Speaker 2: years of every generation. Has such ever happened since the
Speaker 2: days of the world? And where, oh where you have
Speaker 2: found such a custom in any one of the books
Speaker 2: of the earlier and latter stages of Israel, that it
Speaker 2: should be usage and regulation to ask for advice in
Speaker 2: mundane matters. He's saying he was asked a question like like, well,
Speaker 2: what type of house should I buy you? Something like that?
Speaker 2: And the Balatonia says, whoever heard of such a practice?
Speaker 2: That you asked the rabbi a question like this in
Speaker 2: mundane matters? Such was not a even of the greatest
Speaker 2: of the sages of Israel at the time. When I'm Ryan,
Speaker 2: you never would. The only people you would ask things
Speaker 2: like this about is maybe he've had a real profit.
Speaker 2: So he says the Valatania says, we don't have this
Speaker 2: concept of asking questions of great rabbis, So already you see,
Speaker 2: this is very much an odds with what do you
Speaker 2: think of him today? Hassein him today? Including obabachers who
Speaker 2: would go to the rebbe ask about everything. Should I
Speaker 2: take a new job, should I go to the university?
Speaker 2: Uh in lebamacha Rebby. I knew someone who Obabaca Rebbi.
Speaker 2: I was in Brandeis with him. I was a student
Speaker 2: and he was a student with me. Dobabacarebbi told him
Speaker 2: to go to university and told him. I guess he
Speaker 2: told him to go to Brandeis too. I don't remember
Speaker 2: if he did, but he told him to go to university.
Speaker 2: So uh, I'm assuming he asked him which university. Uh.
Speaker 2: This was a guy who's a Baltuva. He was a
Speaker 2: Russian and he was very good at mathematics. So the
Speaker 2: rebbe would give different answers to different people, but they
Speaker 2: would ask the rebbe everything. And in the Hasidic world,
Speaker 2: you can't get married, of course, unless you get approval
Speaker 2: from the rebbie and all sorts of things. So here
Speaker 2: you see, uh, maybe marriage is not mundane but in
Speaker 2: terms of jobs, in terms of all sorts of stuff,
Speaker 2: you see the Bollatonia giving a very different perspective. Now
Speaker 2: that that's not what I there's a question I asked,
Speaker 2: although this is important because this text is always cited.
Speaker 2: Maybe if you have some habbotniks, they can say, well,
Speaker 2: you have to read it differently, but this text is
Speaker 2: always cited as showing how things are different today than
Speaker 2: in the past from the Balaton and I'll read your
Speaker 2: mazous in a second. My question was, as follows that
Speaker 2: if you go back, if you go to the Hebrew,
Speaker 2: it says, as follows, He says the beginning line for
Speaker 2: he says, where have we found Where did you find
Speaker 2: min hugs at of macaroni? Where did you find such
Speaker 2: a practice? And all the whole Jewish holby books leos
Speaker 2: min hug the tikun. It's a goshs cads malos. I
Speaker 2: go back and forth, phardacushions, I can't keep trying. He says,
Speaker 2: where do you find in all the holy writings that
Speaker 2: there's a minhug vitikun to ask advice some great rabbis
Speaker 2: what to do if it's you know, mundane matters oh magashi.
Speaker 2: Oh magashi means you know, I want to get a
Speaker 2: new house, should I buy here or here? Or should
Speaker 2: I get a four bedroom house or a two bedroom house,
Speaker 2: et cetera. Well, what about this word minhuk fatiquin. So
Speaker 2: if you look at the English translation, he translates it
Speaker 2: as usage and regulation. But I don't know if you
Speaker 2: read it, it's it's obvious. If you know we're beIN
Speaker 2: a keeper, it should be minhug vatikan a sikhin. Now, well,
Speaker 2: we have this phrase the vasikin. They referred to the pious,
Speaker 2: the pious people pious of old in particular. Uh, that's
Speaker 2: where we get the expression dovin vasikin. And you have
Speaker 2: the expression minhug masiqui in all over rabbinic literature. That is,
Speaker 2: you have minhug of the harmonam, which often the rabbis
Speaker 2: tried to get rid of. But then if they think
Speaker 2: that it's a min hug of good standing, where even
Speaker 2: if it's problematic, but the earlier rabbis vouched for it
Speaker 2: or established it, they then they always say, well, this
Speaker 2: is a minigma sekin, so you can we can keep
Speaker 2: this minhak. So if you read it here it's seems
Speaker 2: to me, at least I thought it should be clear
Speaker 2: that it says where did you find the KOs minigma sekin?
Speaker 2: Where do we find it? This is, you know, an
Speaker 2: authoritative type of minihal. So I asked her by clime
Speaker 2: Rappidport clime rapport. We spoke about it. Show this picture again.
Speaker 2: What's going on here?
Speaker 1: Is this?
Speaker 2: Uh should this? This is a printing error in the
Speaker 2: Tanya Isntania. Every single person uses they were print over
Speaker 2: and over again. So he writes to me, and he
Speaker 2: says that I'm not the first person to suggest this.
Speaker 2: The Kousenberger Rebbe also uh quoted it and changed it
Speaker 2: to the Sikins. We're gonna deal with the Kousenberger Rebbe
Speaker 2: and a couple classes. But then he points out that
Speaker 2: in the first printing of this letter it does say
Speaker 2: nan ask. So it seems apparently that there's a that
Speaker 2: in all the standard tanya is now, including the one
Speaker 2: of they just translated. It's it's a mistake. It is
Speaker 2: a good possibility. It's a mistake because the Levavic authorities
Speaker 2: they know about this, but they still they changed it.
Speaker 2: It's so I'm really not sure, but Roby Ropmore thinks
Speaker 2: it's a mistake. A few weeks ago in Rabbi Mazous,
Speaker 2: we know rebeen Mazoo's. We'll come back to Massoo's in
Speaker 2: a couple of weeks again, or a few weeks. But
Speaker 2: in his number two thirty nine, I think that's four
Speaker 2: weeks ago, his weekly Torah newsletter, Lo and behold, he
Speaker 2: deals with this very same passage passage, and I'll read
Speaker 2: you what he says. He says, this is on a
Speaker 2: section nine. He speaks about how the time has printed
Speaker 2: every single place, uh, everywhere, and then he mentions this
Speaker 2: letter and he quotes this letter which I just quoted
Speaker 2: you from the Ballatania, And he says, after quoting, whoever
Speaker 2: heard is such a thing that you ask the great
Speaker 2: Rabbis about matters of goshmush mundane matters? And he says,
Speaker 2: how you coolam? Demon say? He says, today everyone knows this.
Speaker 2: What do you mean? Ever? No, no, he says, he
Speaker 2: says today everyone knows it. Says everyone knows the opposite
Speaker 2: that that you do go to the rabbis. And he
Speaker 2: gives the example, if you have a he's a slower,
Speaker 2: if you have any if you have a problem if
Speaker 2: you didn't get a business question, et cetera. Or if
Speaker 2: there's someone who's ill, poet miracles say late, so you
Speaker 2: go to the rabbi who bosses you and gives you advice.
Speaker 2: You have people in the Haadi world who won't take
Speaker 2: the vaccine unless they go ask the rabbi. The rabbi,
Speaker 2: where's the rabbi know about the vaccine house? Since when
Speaker 2: is the rabbi an expert in medicine that you're supposed
Speaker 2: to ask him? It's there's what the dying from Brooklyn
Speaker 2: who listens to the show. He was shocked because on
Speaker 2: you you now have people going to the Monorthodox rabbis,
Speaker 2: and you have the well, I don't know if they're asking,
Speaker 2: but you have the modern Northnox rabbis for Shafter and
Speaker 2: the others. They're out there saying to take the vaccine.
Speaker 2: And he's astounded by this. He comes from a casenic world,
Speaker 2: because what us in the modern Orthodox world, we care
Speaker 2: whether the rabbi says take the vaccine or not. Raschachter
Speaker 2: himself says, you have to do what the doctors say.
Speaker 2: But the whole concept that we put a rabbi up
Speaker 2: to tell us uh at listen and part what people
Speaker 2: I know, they care what the doctor's saying. They're not
Speaker 2: deciding one way or the other based upon even a
Speaker 2: go to biser like for Shachter. So it's it's sort
Speaker 2: of like bleed in maybe from the Haredi world, but
Speaker 2: in the Hairadi world. You needed the ministers of health
Speaker 2: in Israel. They need to go to bed Brock, they
Speaker 2: need to get the do and they need to get r.
Speaker 2: Kondievski to announce you have to take the vaccine. It's astounding,
Speaker 2: but that's that's the way it is. Uh so Ramazusa
Speaker 2: quote he says, but in the days the Balataanya, this
Speaker 2: was a new thing. It meeans because the Balatania doesn't understand.
Speaker 2: What are you asking me a question about goshnias uh
Speaker 2: i'm our Indemarca said along the balata such concept uh
Speaker 2: lohaya minato the Bollatonia saying there's no such man ugain,
Speaker 2: don't ask. And then he says, and what it says
Speaker 2: in the letter minavatikun. This is not the tikun. It
Speaker 2: should be minatikin and uh and then he goes on
Speaker 2: and and he says at the end, he says, I
Speaker 2: recently saw in a hover that's like a little booklet.
Speaker 2: Melli it's higham America, say irsha mia fatikun ski.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: He says, I recently saw in a pamphlet, uh, it's
Speaker 2: high from America. That someone pointed it out. There is
Speaker 2: no It's high American journal. Why that's not true actually,
Speaker 2: but that's not where he saw this. He saw this
Speaker 2: in this book. How do I know this because he
Speaker 2: sent me four pages of notes, Borrow said. One of
Speaker 2: the notes is on this letter of very by bapp Board,
Speaker 2: in which he said, I too agree that it should
Speaker 2: be Vasikin. So I believe he's just forgetting now. In
Speaker 2: the note here, Rabbi Mazeus says he gives a story
Speaker 2: an example. He says, he says, once they uh, they
Speaker 2: woke up. He says, these people go and ask the
Speaker 2: rabbi everything he goes. Sometimes they really go crazy. Once
Speaker 2: they woke up with Vinci and abash Vince was from
Speaker 2: Poat Yosei Yeshiva Big Startagrabbi in the middle of the
Speaker 2: ninety three am, and he said, he said to them,
Speaker 2: what do you want? And uh, he said, tomorrow I
Speaker 2: have he must have heard this from reventure. Oh tomorrow,
Speaker 2: I have a brist of my grandson. Which color sweater
Speaker 2: should I uh bring to him for the the you know,
Speaker 2: to dress the grandson?
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 2: Well, he wants to know is sagua? What? What? What
Speaker 2: type of sweater should he dress the child? Who's gonna
Speaker 2: have the bristle? So the rabbi said to him the
Speaker 2: color of a sweat or why is that important? And
Speaker 2: he says, well, there's a dispute between me and my wife,
Speaker 2: that is between this grandma and grandpa. Uh, what the
Speaker 2: child should wear? So they go into the rabbi to
Speaker 2: ask him what to do. How one of them says
Speaker 2: it should be yellow and the other says it should
Speaker 2: be white. What should we do? And uh, rebby Bench
Speaker 2: says to them he feels it I wrote night because
Speaker 2: of this you woke me up. And the man said
Speaker 2: to him, an I thought that you don't sleep. You're
Speaker 2: like an angel, you don't sleep.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: And then Red Mazul says, is a shoot a slut?
Speaker 2: Is a bahroot? What idiocy? And then he says it's
Speaker 2: good sometimes that your phone is off or that no
Speaker 2: one knows your phone number.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: So they don't drive you crazy, Matifa, what is this craziness?
Speaker 2: I'll ze me to name Khan Balatanya And this, he says,
Speaker 2: is what the Balata is complaining about. That people were
Speaker 2: starting this nonsense that every little thing, you need to
Speaker 2: ask the rabbi what sweater you're gonna wear, because he's
Speaker 2: supposed to decide work it out with your wife. That's
Speaker 2: why you're in. You don't need to go to the
Speaker 2: rabbi to decide. Uh, but uh what sweater to wear?
Speaker 2: Let's see, uh, Simon. And it's just a protests that
Speaker 2: uh we we came that Revos happened to speak about that.
Speaker 2: If we didn't have all these tangents, we probably would
Speaker 2: have spoken about it the same week that he dealt
Speaker 2: with it. So is that just random? Nothing in this
Speaker 2: world is random? According to some According to the summary
Speaker 2: show okay on to Simon Koff and the title of
Speaker 2: this is called, Oh We're back to the vavin Air.
Speaker 2: One of the leading rabbis of the religion of the
Speaker 2: Hardal world in the cob the right wing religious Zionist
Speaker 2: the world, but of the the Mamachti type. The uh,
Speaker 2: the real connection to the state can do no wrong
Speaker 2: type of I don't know how else to describe it.
Speaker 2: But the very influential of Evinir, one of the most
Speaker 2: influential of the hard Delhi rabbis in both camps, who
Speaker 2: lives in bay Tel. Instantly they say he doesn't get
Speaker 2: along with the other side of Beakedel has Rebbisama Muhammed
Speaker 2: also Hardhal, but from the other side of the card
Speaker 2: doll and apparently they don't get along. But if my
Speaker 2: son and daughter right before the lockdown had a tour,
Speaker 2: if any of you go to Israel when we're able to,
Speaker 2: you want to get the best tour of the old city,
Speaker 2: it's by Rabbaillo. Let me show you a picture of this.
Speaker 2: He's a good friend of mine. And but if you
Speaker 2: want a tour, hold on. Maybe some of you have
Speaker 2: even heard him in lectures Robiio gold Hubber. This is
Speaker 2: Rabba Llachio gold Hubber, and he's a he's stolen Carlin,
Speaker 2: stolen Hassen. He's he's an expert in so many areas
Speaker 2: and uh and one of the areas he's an expert
Speaker 2: in is the Yshev Hayasham, the old community of Erisistah
Speaker 2: and Jerusalem. So it gives these tours of the old city.
Speaker 2: I had it and I paid for my son and
Speaker 2: a few Shiva friends and my daughter and they went
Speaker 2: on the tour. And one of the site places they
Speaker 2: go to is the the Yeshiva Revavimir used to be
Speaker 2: at Tara Koni and now the Quanitaria shall Line. It's
Speaker 2: in the Muslim quarter of the old city. But I
Speaker 2: told the boys to wear their baseball hats and uh.
Speaker 2: Although walking with Yeo Goldhamber, it doesn't I don't know.
Speaker 2: But if you've never been, if you've never seen the
Speaker 2: Koto Katan, there's a section of the Koto Marv which
Speaker 2: is in the Muslim quarter which people don't know about.
Speaker 2: It's the actual Kotel except we see it on the
Speaker 2: left side. It doesn't end there. It continues and it
Speaker 2: picks up. I remember when I was in Israel once
Speaker 2: in the summer a tishaba. People go there. But if
Speaker 2: you want to take your tour with uh, he gives
Speaker 2: he gave the Mormons a tour last year. Of course,
Speaker 2: obviously the Torri gave the Mormons will be if he's
Speaker 2: not talking about Rafemul Savant and other things and showing
Speaker 2: them the Yeshiva's but he's really he's really something else.
Speaker 2: Uh so Revvener Yeshiva's in you know, in the Moslim
Speaker 2: quarter a territoryhal Alum, and uh that was one of
Speaker 2: the places they visited. The question I asked for Wavinaire
Speaker 2: is as follows. I don't want to get into really
Speaker 2: he's he's quoting of Cook. I don't want to get
Speaker 2: it's about Ari and uh. In his book he quotes
Speaker 2: ROF Cook that the prophecy of Adricho was above that
Speaker 2: of mosh Ravino. So I don't want to get into
Speaker 2: rough Cook is how he understands Adam Maricio. Is this
Speaker 2: a historical person that we're reading stories about? Is this
Speaker 2: an archetype? Went to the new book and uh, you'll
Speaker 2: see uh. But uh, this but the idea that he
Speaker 2: says that uh, anyone's prophecy could be greater than Mosha said,
Speaker 2: it's very problematic the Rumbum seventh principle. This is his
Speaker 2: e car that no profit, either before Mosha or after
Speaker 2: Mosha would be greater than him. And that that means,
Speaker 2: for instance, that you can't you can't have Mohammed come
Speaker 2: and say, well, he's greater than Mosha or anything like that.
Speaker 2: There's a disagreement with the round bumb Some speak of
Speaker 2: the mashiach as being greater than Mosha, a being that's
Speaker 2: the round Boumbs principle. So what he says his follows
Speaker 2: is very short note. But ad Hariso is not included
Speaker 2: in history. He's before history. He's outside of what we
Speaker 2: regard as history. He's the showish of everyone. And there's
Speaker 2: a sites, there's a passage and it's a famous cabalistic
Speaker 2: idea called the Zierra Rico, the the special shine, as
Speaker 2: it were, of Adam Harisio. So he's sort of I
Speaker 2: don't want to get too cabalistic things amy Aspinistar, as
Speaker 2: the expression goes, I don't know about cabalistic stuff or
Speaker 2: what I do know, I really, I mean, I might
Speaker 2: read stuff, but I don't really know it. But there's
Speaker 2: some concept of Ada marishown as being like encompassing all
Speaker 2: of humanity, which again this is going to be part
Speaker 2: of the issue of you know, as an archetype and
Speaker 2: you know what is the what is the serpent? Is
Speaker 2: this on all these sorts of things that I'll deal
Speaker 2: with in the book, But that this I thought an
Speaker 2: interesting concept that history doesn't begin in prime the primeval,
Speaker 2: it begins later. So when the round Bump speaks the
Speaker 2: counter of Cook at least speaks about prophets. He's not
Speaker 2: referring to first man. Okay, just a small point. The
Speaker 2: next point, though, was a big one. And that's another
Speaker 2: letter to Evolving Air. And I can't remember why I
Speaker 2: wrote to Revolving This is the last the letters to
Speaker 2: Revolving Air. I think I wrote to him, if I recall,
Speaker 2: because has this idea which I don't buy at all,
Speaker 2: and it shows that the hard delim are really, uh
Speaker 2: quite fundamentalist, even more often than the hari Ding. In fact,
Speaker 2: soon we're going to see something by ravari Leabe or
Speaker 2: friend rabari Ela, which is pustle in the eyes of
Speaker 2: Revavin Air. And he's coming from the Haredi world. Revolvinair.
Speaker 2: When I say fundamentalist in the sense that to the
Speaker 2: point that he refuses to acknowledge that are reshown. Maybe
Speaker 2: even an apron I don't know could be influenced by
Speaker 2: his environment to come up with ideas this this. Uh
Speaker 2: I mentioned this example already because he was asked about
Speaker 2: a Barbonelle shocking idea that the only men are created
Speaker 2: with Soma came, not women because success men, because men's
Speaker 2: job is to understand matters intellectually, and that's not the
Speaker 2: job of women, and they don't have that ability. And
Speaker 2: uh so, I mean, so someone raised the point, which
Speaker 2: appears perfectly logical to me, that he was influenced here
Speaker 2: by Christian views about women, et cetera. I don't see
Speaker 2: why that's a problem. But Ravaviner won't say that. He says, no, no,
Speaker 2: we say we don't accept the Barbonelle, but we will
Speaker 2: never never say that he was influenced by non Jewish ideas.
Speaker 2: He came to this idea through his reading of Torah.
Speaker 2: It's too we just don't accept it and we have
Speaker 2: a different approach. I don't know why. I know, for
Speaker 2: a fact, for Salvechik, who didn't think very highly of
Speaker 2: the Barbonelle, I do think highly of him. But I
Speaker 2: know that for Slovezchich wouldn't have that opinion about the Barbonell.
Speaker 2: Maybe Baltosos, but not the Barbonell. But Sofavinier. So I
Speaker 2: wanted to give an example of something to Avavinir that
Speaker 2: what he would say about this. If you're going to
Speaker 2: say that everything derives from too sources. Then what about
Speaker 2: what I'm going to throw you now, what I'm going
Speaker 2: to show you out now and I'm going to show
Speaker 2: you inside. This really fits in with what we spoke
Speaker 2: about last week as well about the rambam and different
Speaker 2: truths for different people. What I'm going to show you now,
Speaker 2: no rabbi would ever mention from the pulpit, and for
Speaker 2: a good reason. And I don't think most rabbis, even
Speaker 2: in a sheer, would mention it because it's problematic and
Speaker 2: raises questions. I don't have the answers to the questions.
Speaker 2: We'll try to work through the answer possible approaches now,
Speaker 2: but first you need to be shocked a bit. But
Speaker 2: I'm going to show you and and then we're gonna
Speaker 2: hear a very interesting explanation from Herbie league. Let me
Speaker 2: get it handy. He even wrote it up in a
Speaker 2: I don't know if you could see it here. He
Speaker 2: wrote it up in Hebrew, in Hebrew. When he publishes
Speaker 2: his on he's already published a number of sorry, but
Speaker 2: when he publishes his on Torah, he can perhaps include
Speaker 2: it in. And look, I'm honored already that Mahaber Safer
Speaker 2: sorry of session really valuable works is listening to us.
Speaker 2: But let me play you something. You're gonna look at it,
Speaker 2: and then I'll read you my questioner. Okay, this is
Speaker 2: the tour. Actually I don't want you to see this
Speaker 2: and yet, because let me just tell you something about
Speaker 2: the tour. We have Jakobinasher is important medieval authority, the
Speaker 2: son of the great Rush. His father comes from Germany,
Speaker 2: comes to Spain. The arbitur Arbiturim, so we that's where
Speaker 2: abother the order of comes from. Or ohaian Kosha mishima
Speaker 2: your day, it comes out of the tour. He also
Speaker 2: a commentary on hummush. We're familiar with it because if
Speaker 2: you read the Mikroscadolos, you have the Balaturim Balladerium is great,
Speaker 2: you get the gamatrias and all sorts of interesting stuff.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: He points out to you, like Remnis Tora has this
Speaker 2: four parts to Taurium shot of the Drashia of the Rems.
Speaker 2: And so many people assumed for a long time that
Speaker 2: this is it that the great Polatarim, who are such
Speaker 2: important Altic works, that he spent all his time with
Speaker 2: gamatrias and things when he were in a hummish. But
Speaker 2: that's just what happened, is when he wrote a long
Speaker 2: commentary and the printers, however, they just they just pulled
Speaker 2: out those what he called these are like the spices.
Speaker 2: And so that's what everyone knows about the Gumatrias, and
Speaker 2: not just Camatria's the first the first letter and the
Speaker 2: last letter of words. He finds all the remas. But
Speaker 2: he also wrote a parish on Tomra and it was
Speaker 2: published in nineteenth century and recently reprinted in a nice
Speaker 2: goood edition. They call it a parash. So well, it's
Speaker 2: a regular commentary, just like all the great other great
Speaker 2: and shooning. He wrote a commentary on hush. So I
Speaker 2: want to read you something here, show you something. This
Speaker 2: is uh in the story with Leah. And we all
Speaker 2: know the story that Yakhov married Leah. Let me first
Speaker 2: show you the Pussek's commenting and let's see Eric this okay, Lhamad,
Speaker 2: sorry Lamad the page that I need, okay. So it
Speaker 2: says that uh, you know the story how he got uh.
Speaker 2: He was supposed to marry Rachel and he said he
Speaker 2: married Leah. Now in in puss Lamad Alif, it says
Speaker 2: that God saw that Leah was hated, and he opened
Speaker 2: up her womb and then look. In verse three two,
Speaker 2: it says Leah conceived Naboora's son that called his name Ruvin.
Speaker 2: What what does she say, camera kira ah ashm on ye,
Speaker 2: God has looked upon my affection and then uh, and
Speaker 2: now she said, my husband loved me. In the next puscle,
Speaker 2: it says that, uh, she conceived again and she had
Speaker 2: a son. And what does it say, he shamma sham.
Speaker 2: God has heard because I'm hated, He's there forgiving me
Speaker 2: another sum. So let's look at what the tour says.
Speaker 2: Here hirosham, you got to see my affliction, it says
Speaker 2: the ruven A mark regarding Ruvein, it says he saw
Speaker 2: and with shim own he heard. God heard her affliction
Speaker 2: with shim Ruven. He saw why lu At the beginning
Speaker 2: Kodu Shanoa moving before Ruven was born, hayamakaba Yakov would
Speaker 2: hit her, beat her omishlak, and once uh Ruven was born,
Speaker 2: Yakov stopped hitting her. And that's why the alan I'm
Speaker 2: that's uh, you know, it's when he was hitting her.
Speaker 2: That's what it means. God saw this and therefore gave
Speaker 2: her the child moving and he stopped. But he's still
Speaker 2: I would uh ma contra of environment. He still would
Speaker 2: speak badly to her, rebuke her, et cetera. And when
Speaker 2: Shimoh was born, nim Nagai stopped this. And that's why
Speaker 2: it says that by Shimoh that God heard, because he
Speaker 2: wasn't beating her anymore. He was only saying dead things.
Speaker 2: Torresto says God heard her affliction before if you remember
Speaker 2: before it says God saw my affliction. And now it
Speaker 2: says God heard that I'm hated. He heard because he
Speaker 2: heard Yakov saying all these terrible things to me. And
Speaker 2: then it's but he still wouldn't have relations with her
Speaker 2: until she had Okay, So how can you say, I
Speaker 2: don't mean to be disrespectful about Yakobanasha. How can you
Speaker 2: say this about Yakovino, that he would hit his wife.
Speaker 2: It's it's shocking, and I and I actually come straight
Speaker 2: to her by your leg. I like his shock, which
Speaker 2: I'll read you in a minute. But uh, this must
Speaker 2: be some mid rush. I can't imagine a rashow making
Speaker 2: this up to me. It just it has to be.
Speaker 2: And people were troubled by this because the first printing
Speaker 2: of the tour this was left out. If you read
Speaker 2: my book you get the details. They didn't include this
Speaker 2: because in the nineteenth century this is two shocking. But
Speaker 2: it's in all the manuscripts, and now it's in the
Speaker 2: new editions. I think this has to be some mid rushing.
Speaker 2: No one would come up with this on their own.
Speaker 2: It's interesting that a similar type of passage from the
Speaker 2: Rush is found in the standard bollator and commentary that
Speaker 2: the Pussi says, we show you the pusser a little different.
Speaker 2: Actually this goes the other direction. Who's doing the hitting?
Speaker 2: But look in in Pussa. This is part of Gimmel
Speaker 2: plus your baze, that says the man said, the woman
Speaker 2: you gave to be with me, she gave me of
Speaker 2: the tree, and I did eat. In Hebrew wits he
Speaker 2: means it doesn't say she gave me of the fruit
Speaker 2: of the tree. She gave me of the tree. So
Speaker 2: the Volatorium says that Hava took a branch of the
Speaker 2: tree and kept hitting me with it until I agreed
Speaker 2: to eat the fruit. Okay, this, by the way, though,
Speaker 2: was not unique to the Balturium it's found in numerous
Speaker 2: other passages. Well, what to do with this, uh message?
Speaker 2: I asked this through revolving here before reading you. What
Speaker 2: revolving here said, do I want to read you or value?
Speaker 2: Label ham in residence? So one of we have a
Speaker 2: number of telling me how in residents writes because I
Speaker 2: think your price surprising. Find it surprising also perhaps me.
Speaker 2: He begins very much to moving me old. This is
Speaker 2: very strange because we know we've seen it throughout Hazao,
Speaker 2: and we received from Rabu Saint Rosseau, and how great
Speaker 2: the others were, especially Yakov, and how could he do
Speaker 2: something like this? But he says, as follows Cocree differing
Speaker 2: the most open to busin my name, he says. Modern
Speaker 2: scholars have written about that. It was accepted in medieval
Speaker 2: times among the non Jews that the husband, in order
Speaker 2: to quote educate his wife just like he has to
Speaker 2: educate his son, just like the son. The father would
Speaker 2: occasionally hit a child. I mean, I think parents still
Speaker 2: do that unless the new parent king has conquered the world.
Speaker 2: So too, it was taught by many medievals in the
Speaker 2: Christian world that the husband has to do this to
Speaker 2: the wife as well. Not want me talkas not because
Speaker 2: of anger, just because that that's it's a toe ell it.
Speaker 2: And then he says, Oosa, you must be a Simona.
Speaker 2: He says that the the culture of the non Jews
Speaker 2: influenced the culture of the Jews. In other words, in
Speaker 2: that time where the Tour was living in Spain, it
Speaker 2: was thought that this is how you train a woman,
Speaker 2: not because you hate her or because you're punishing her.
Speaker 2: This to keep her in line. Viking is so therefore
Speaker 2: the Toro also did this. And he thought that it's
Speaker 2: possible to explain that Yakov occasionally would hit his wife
Speaker 2: Rockney Schanto, only I guess to rebuke her and give herrino.
Speaker 2: And this is and he thought, this is not a
Speaker 2: Mysa Chaffel, but this is my shoe book. And he
Speaker 2: sent me your by. They've sent me an article, a
Speaker 2: summary of a lecture in which you have various medieval
Speaker 2: uh scholars here you can. It's called spare the rod,
Speaker 2: spoil the bride, and it's all about how the Christian's
Speaker 2: loving Christian husband's duty is to maintain order. And a
Speaker 2: man may he quotes one of the medieval uh walkotes,
Speaker 2: a man may chastise his wife and Peter for her
Speaker 2: own correction, for she is of his household, et cetera,
Speaker 2: et cetera, and uh Srevalulpe says that this is an
Speaker 2: explanation with Ramafimer would not accept that this is in
Speaker 2: those days, this was thought to be acceptable and therefore
Speaker 2: for the tour it makes sense that he would give
Speaker 2: such a druss about. I mean, I don't I think
Speaker 2: this probably goes back to earlier. But let's say he
Speaker 2: did like a violet things he derived himself. Because this
Speaker 2: is in line with contemporary Moorish and all the passages
Speaker 2: on us all that speak about how terrible it is
Speaker 2: to hit a wife and all these things. That's not
Speaker 2: referring to like uh, to correct her from her bad actions.
Speaker 2: It's referring to you know, just bad people just lose
Speaker 2: their tempers and things like this. Not no different than
Speaker 2: a child, though, you know you could some people go
Speaker 2: crazy and they hit their child. They have to have
Speaker 2: the children taken away from them. Others do it carefully
Speaker 2: organized uh, you know, a punch when they feel what's needed.
Speaker 2: So and that's that's and especially in those days that
Speaker 2: the women were often viewed as like children because they
Speaker 2: had no education, et cetera. So uh yeah, that's her bale,
Speaker 2: it says. But it's still a shock. You tell this
Speaker 2: to people, you show this to people, they won't know
Speaker 2: what to make of this. How could even Ravie Thede
Speaker 2: gives the best possible explanation, I think you can. Revaviner
Speaker 2: didn't give this explanation. I asked Revviner's phones again. He
Speaker 2: I knew he couldn't come up with that sort of explanation,
Speaker 2: which is makes sense to me. I said, how can
Speaker 2: we explain to people in our day and age what
Speaker 2: the tour says? I say that these words that he
Speaker 2: says by yachtkov a nuncupl hime on le's money, who
Speaker 2: don't really work for contemporaries, the low Rock's money. No,
Speaker 2: are not just people today already, as I told you
Speaker 2: one hundred and fifty years ago, they they censored this out.
Speaker 2: Revolviniers stumped and the awful shap shift shout of their own.
Speaker 2: She says, I don't think we can explain it, and
Speaker 2: then he give in parentheses he gives I mean, he
Speaker 2: says in I mean, he says he was angry at
Speaker 2: her because she forced him to be married with her.
Speaker 2: I mean, what's he is He offers that like in
Speaker 2: parentheses that I think he's trying to say, like that's
Speaker 2: the best we could say, perhaps, and it doesn't that's
Speaker 2: not going to solve the problem. So he doesn't have
Speaker 2: an answer. And this is a sort of passage that
Speaker 2: I think it bears in mind what reb Yaka couple
Speaker 2: Schwartz said, and he said it about us, all about
Speaker 2: rashowing me leave aside the explanation of of Rabaria lab
Speaker 2: which I hadn't thought of. He sent it to me
Speaker 2: a week ago. A couple short that, a couple of
Speaker 2: shorts said that there are certain passages that we just say, well,
Speaker 2: we don't accept it. It's not ours. That's how I
Speaker 2: looked at it before I saw Rabario Lede's understanding. You know,
Speaker 2: Rabbinic literature was full of all sorts of things. We
Speaker 2: saw the passage about uh, the the man. The grandson says,
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna help you, grandpa, I'm not obligating keep
Speaker 2: it all they sa couple. Schwartz says, fine, but we
Speaker 2: don't accept that as a way to lead our life.
Speaker 2: What is he even saying by that? Because we have
Speaker 2: all the other passages say otherwise, it's not we're not
Speaker 2: rejecting it because it doesn't fit in with our morality.
Speaker 2: We have a total morality and this is sort of
Speaker 2: not in line with it. So it's like one of
Speaker 2: these out of the way, unusual passages. We don't have
Speaker 2: to answer for every passage. And I always think when
Speaker 2: you see passages like that, it's the same thing that
Speaker 2: it's uh, these are just they're outliers, they're unusual, and
Speaker 2: I don't feel that we need to explain every passage.
Speaker 2: Sometimes you can say we say, well, we don't accept that.
Speaker 2: That's not the way we look at it. Again, we
Speaker 2: can't be an appronistic. You know, this country in America,
Speaker 2: there's all this anacronism. Now they have to judge people
Speaker 2: we have two hundred years ago. So even Abraham Lincoln,
Speaker 2: all the great things he did, because he didn't have
Speaker 2: a twenty first century view of you know, of men
Speaker 2: and women, of whites and blacks, and all of a
Speaker 2: sudden he's canceled, he's out. You got to be realistic
Speaker 2: here and how generations have changed and people think differently. Nevertheless,
Speaker 2: there will be times when I think you'll say, I
Speaker 2: guess the tour said it. Of course we love the tour,
Speaker 2: we look up to him the tour, but not everything
Speaker 2: a tour says is all of a doros. And I
Speaker 2: think we can say that either by elibe, I think
Speaker 2: either of this. He doesn't think that's a day you're
Speaker 2: gonna do this in those day and day in that
Speaker 2: time though, that was what was done. And uh, we
Speaker 2: do believe that we've advanced, to be honest, it's not
Speaker 2: that we think it's just a different culture that in
Speaker 2: their days it was okay and today it's not okay. No,
Speaker 2: I think we all agree that it wasn't right then either,
Speaker 2: just like it wasn't right to have slaves in the
Speaker 2: eighteen hundreds. But those people had a different perspective, so
Speaker 2: you know, you can't really judge people. You know, they
Speaker 2: were convinced that this is how you do things. Mcavelly
Speaker 2: has a passage in which he says that the way
Speaker 2: to get people just to learn in school is to
Speaker 2: humiliate them, because they'll be so humiliated. And if anyone's
Speaker 2: heard stories about certain great roaching achieve including our favorite,
Speaker 2: the way in the forties and fifties when they would
Speaker 2: rebuke people. That was enough that learning today we would
Speaker 2: never do not do it. And I don't know if
Speaker 2: we wouldn't do it just because we think it wouldn't
Speaker 2: work for us. I think we think it's it doesn't
Speaker 2: you know, it's uh, it might work for some people,
Speaker 2: but the average person, it's just this isn't the way
Speaker 2: to I think we recognize that's not the way to educate.
Speaker 2: So I think that's the thing. Passages like I just
Speaker 2: saw with the tour and your passages in a round
Speaker 2: bum And I even spoke to a well known radio
Speaker 2: of every person basically listening to us. Now I would
Speaker 2: know the name of this rabbi, but I don't. I
Speaker 2: didn't ask them if I could say it's I don't
Speaker 2: want to say. But I gave him one of these
Speaker 2: sort of passages, not the tour, but another one. And
Speaker 2: he says, he says, what's the problem. You don't accept that?
Speaker 2: And I said, I I probe further. I said, so
Speaker 2: you think that our morality is different? He says, I
Speaker 2: have no problem saying that we have a different approach
Speaker 2: to this. I said, would you say as publicly? He said, no,
Speaker 2: I want to say it like that. He said it
Speaker 2: has to be phrased in a certain way. But he says,
Speaker 2: we approach matters differently, we view as incorrect. The Reshow
Speaker 2: name could have a different view. But here's an example
Speaker 2: of where you have these hard passages, these troubling passages,
Speaker 2: which in yeshivas we all struggle with them. I don't
Speaker 2: think it's such a struggle once you recognize that we're
Speaker 2: more let's say it, and if Cook sees this as
Speaker 2: part of the move to to the Messianic hero, that
Speaker 2: we're more for for example, we're more sensitive to certain
Speaker 2: matters of human rights, and you know, slavery. None of
Speaker 2: us can imagine having slaves or anything like that. But
Speaker 2: three years ago, who thought of that? This is us
Speaker 2: four years ago. That's just the way the world. As
Speaker 2: Aristotle said that some people are just born to slavery.
Speaker 2: So how is it that we today are more sensitive
Speaker 2: to things that others weren't in the past. We're not
Speaker 2: greater than that. Or if Cook develops the idea that
Speaker 2: as we get closer to the Messianic ear, or more
Speaker 2: and more holy sparks, or let go so that in
Speaker 2: certain areas we actually are moving in the direction of
Speaker 2: a of a, I guess more refined sense because when
Speaker 2: the Mahia comes, that's where we need to be. Doesn't
Speaker 2: mean we're better than the p on the past, but
Speaker 2: we're in this circumstance and we're standing on top of them.
Speaker 2: We're the midgets on top of the giants. Here the
Speaker 2: rough Cook explains very well, how is it that people
Speaker 2: in our day and age seem to have these more
Speaker 2: sensibility sensitive approaches that previous generations in, including non Jews,
Speaker 2: which is a problem because don't the generations the collides
Speaker 2: and seeing ice, or of Cook's explanation, which is very
Speaker 2: capitalistic that explains that if you don't adopt this explanation,
Speaker 2: then you have a problem, because how do you explain
Speaker 2: when you see passages, let's say in the Ahronyme, which
Speaker 2: strike you as just they don't work with your ethics,
Speaker 2: and you can't tell someone, well, your ethics are not
Speaker 2: pro ethics because your ethics are coming from Torah in
Speaker 2: many areas. And so I think for Cooks, well, wait,
Speaker 2: wait to the book Commared Sasha, and you'll see Rough
Speaker 2: Cooks is this point explicated. I see it's already nine
Speaker 2: twenty nine. Next week we're going to I'll introduce you
Speaker 2: to a couple new figures, including this individual who unfortunately
Speaker 2: well he was ninety eight years old but died of corona.
Speaker 2: Schmuwashkenazi tell you about one of the most interesting people
Speaker 2: lived in Jerusalem for many, many decades. And then we're
Speaker 2: going to finish the section of the book where this
Speaker 2: section we'll do that next class. This section of the
Speaker 2: book we called it Tiko Sofri. Then we move on
Speaker 2: to India. Name show name that basically all sorts of
Speaker 2: other stuff thrown together that we didn't have a good
Speaker 2: place to put them. We'll here our first question from
Speaker 2: a dove, answer from Kiam Dovid Halav. Great great figure.
Speaker 2: And okay, I see we we've gone long enough. Lots
Speaker 2: of good stuff coming. As I said, this is class
Speaker 2: thirty two. I'm estimating fifty five fifty classes. I say
Speaker 2: fifty classes, but who knows. I will get Robert sent
Speaker 2: me something really interesting. I'll get to that next class, Robert,
Speaker 2: and I'll tell you is tell the class exactly what
Speaker 2: I told you, and I think they'll agree with me
Speaker 2: and you. But we'll get to that next class. Let
Speaker 2: me take the questions. Yes, Susanna, tell me. This is
Speaker 2: what I said. Well, people often say tell me do
Speaker 2: ham or tell me it's this is a constructor. What
Speaker 2: it's saying is female students of the wise. It just
Speaker 2: so happens that today all these great figures, the women
Speaker 2: that we know who are right beginning to write starring,
Speaker 2: they all trained under men. Given another thirty years, and
Speaker 2: you could have like the like my daughter's generation and
Speaker 2: Nerabaikelman's daughter, they're training at schools. Well they'll they could
Speaker 2: be telling me do haamot because their teachers are the women.
Speaker 2: So that that's all it's not, that's all it is.
Speaker 2: Michael said. By the way, fully I to you in
Speaker 2: g pats it's still uh more men than women teaching.
Speaker 2: But okay, we're we're we're on the way, we're getting there. Okay.
Speaker 2: But I don't believe that it's is positive that should
Speaker 2: be old women. I believe that, But I also believe
Speaker 2: that men should be able to learn from women also, Okay,
Speaker 2: Yellen Michael says, Yellen Moore became or maybe always was
Speaker 2: an extreme leftist. Yes, he was an extreme leftist, as
Speaker 2: was l Dudd Chamir. Really and I said last week's
Speaker 2: Gula Cohen was not. She was also Uh Shamir wasn't
Speaker 2: so into the the the ideology, and in fact, forty
Speaker 2: six to forty eight he was out of the country.
Speaker 2: That was the point I made, unlike you're goun Uh.
Speaker 2: I don't look anyone who could say that if there's
Speaker 2: a war between the USSR and America, we're going to
Speaker 2: side with the USSR because we don't like these Western
Speaker 2: imperiodists who are controlling the land of Israel. That that
Speaker 2: is like so uh backwards and force. I don't look
Speaker 2: unlike you're good, which I mean, who doesn't admire bacon?
Speaker 2: But to look to these lacky people, I understood they
Speaker 2: were nationalists and everything, but they were they were Marxists,
Speaker 2: and uh they I don't see them at all to
Speaker 2: be admired, uh, other than the fact that they were
Speaker 2: dedicated to the land of Israel. But iPad says, there's
Speaker 2: really got the Labor government to discredit You're good. Transformed
Speaker 2: one of the greatest successes prison break of a British
Speaker 2: prison into a mental hospital. The same population in Pakistan India.
Speaker 2: But refugee status was not hereditary. We know that the
Speaker 2: Labor government, although at the end it seems that Ben
Speaker 2: Gurion came to a different viewpoint. He was able to
Speaker 2: tolerate Bacon, but at first they could not. They hated them,
Speaker 2: we know that. And would they would they acknowledge a
Speaker 2: massacre in order to make them look bad? Perhaps we
Speaker 2: you know, they in the house of the Haganah, they
Speaker 2: put uh what was it pottery or something? They put
Speaker 2: bombs underneath a boat to prevent it from sinking to
Speaker 2: like put it out of commission, so the British wouldn't
Speaker 2: take these refugees and send them to where cypress wherever
Speaker 2: they're send them to. And it's they put too much
Speaker 2: explosives and they killed like twohundred and fifty people. Uh
Speaker 2: hold on, is it the uh Patria affair? Is that
Speaker 2: what it is? Oh? Yeah, the Patria disaster? How many here?
Speaker 2: Let me show you if you haven't heard this, but
Speaker 2: they're the hot they had them had your gun done this?
Speaker 2: Then here you look up where the Patria disaster? This
Speaker 2: is nineteen forty they what did it say? You're two
Speaker 2: hundred sixty seven people the the Hakaak killed. Of course
Speaker 2: it was an accident. They didn't try to do it
Speaker 2: on purpose. But uh so, yeah, you know what everyone.
Speaker 2: There's the problems. I guess on all sides read a
Speaker 2: frime harsh. Michael says, Palestine betrayed for and there's awesome
Speaker 2: treatment of how the Arabs and their leaders, Jews and
Speaker 2: the leaders behaved during the forty eight forty nine war.
Speaker 2: Felix email me and I'll tell you. I'll connect you
Speaker 2: to Ramasu's weekly total letter, Or says, have I learned
Speaker 2: through the Lavavatur Tanya as opposed to the original medieval
Speaker 2: Tani Rabatti with commentaries? How old do you know it? No?
Speaker 2: I've just read sections of it, and I tried. It
Speaker 2: happens to be a very profound work and very complicated work.
Speaker 1: And I.
Speaker 2: There have been times when they've offered to teach to me,
Speaker 2: and I have to say that I just I'm not
Speaker 2: attached to it. I'm not attracted to it. But so no,
Speaker 2: I have not learned other than certain sections of it.
Speaker 2: I have not studied it. So I guess that means
Speaker 2: I'm lacking in like the essence of being a Jew
Speaker 2: because I haven't learned the Tan yet. So but okay,
Speaker 2: I can email me private agity that information from ya.
Speaker 2: Feel Goldhubbor Schmoel says to him, Report discussed how and
Speaker 2: when the Bodneckt started to ask the rebbies about the
Speaker 2: Pakashimia's thing. I'm assuming some Casidum always did. Yes, somehow
Speaker 2: about Assidum did always, because we see they were coming
Speaker 2: to the Bladonia and he was saying, what's going on here?
Speaker 2: Whoever heard of this thing? Perhaps they just wore the
Speaker 2: rebbies down. The Rebbi's acquiesced to such demands. I don't
Speaker 2: know him. Repport does not discuss it. I don't I
Speaker 2: don't know if they wore them down. I think many
Speaker 2: rebbies are happy to do that. It gives them a
Speaker 2: position that they have this power to I think this
Speaker 2: says that Ronolviner think that the Rama was not influenced
Speaker 2: by Aristotle. No, no, he would acknowledge the Rama's influenced
Speaker 2: by Aristotle. Rome tells you, he quotes Aristotle. He tells
Speaker 2: you that. But the issue with the Barbonelle, you're dealing
Speaker 2: with like a moral issue of how to you know, Torah,
Speaker 2: the place of a woman in tower, that sort of thing.
Speaker 2: That's I think that's least how I see the difference there.
Speaker 2: Ellen says, wife beating. So why was Leah distressed if
Speaker 2: it was the normal thing. Uh, well, it could be
Speaker 2: the normal thing, but I think he could still be distressed.
Speaker 2: Or maybe she assumed she's marying a nice Jewish boy
Speaker 2: and therefore he would treat her like the ironyans treated her.
Speaker 2: I don't know, I have a Zachary asks the notion
Speaker 2: that Leah was relieved with the hitting by God answering
Speaker 2: her prayers suggests that the hitting was bad. Yes, it does,
Speaker 2: but and the tour is not necessarily saying that the
Speaker 2: hitting is right. But Marie laid Is is well. I
Speaker 2: guess Rbaria the Aide's explanation is putting into the context.
Speaker 2: Maybe you could say, in the context it's understandable. But
Speaker 2: in that circumstance, she didn't need the rhino or something,
Speaker 2: so she won't likes Baragave's explanation. But is there any
Speaker 2: indication that Yakov would ever beat Ruccia. No, he would
Speaker 2: not beat Raa if not their affects poor Lenyakov as
Speaker 2: well as raven Era suggests, almost as Yakov was annoyed
Speaker 2: with Leah because he has to be married to her. Yes,
Speaker 2: there's no indicationation that, Uh, there isn't. But there is
Speaker 2: he does say. I mean, there's another passage where he
Speaker 2: says he suspected Lea of sexual immorality before their wedding.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: I think, Uh. The lady quotes in the book, mh
Speaker 2: these are strange things here. I think if you look
Speaker 2: in yes, looking, if you look in the tour in
Speaker 2: the tower a huff, Teslam and Alice, it says that
Speaker 2: Yakova suspected her, that that suspected Leya, that that she
Speaker 2: had engaged in uh, sexual immorality. Uh A very strange.
Speaker 2: I don't understand what's going on, Or says perhaps you
Speaker 2: should add, sir along the following lines. Maybe she was
Speaker 2: a relative child. How well was she then? That's an
Speaker 2: interesting point. At least from the tour we don't know
Speaker 2: these things. But from the tourist perspective, yes, he would
Speaker 2: regard her for leaving out madrashic things. Even I'll be
Speaker 2: up shot, what is she thirteen? Fourteen? That's true? Twelve
Speaker 2: even we can say that, as with hitting a child,
Speaker 2: what was meant was not out of anger, as Roman says,
Speaker 2: not in the rage, but a controlled measure way. Yes,
Speaker 2: And you know that's that's the explanation. You know, when
Speaker 2: we think of Leah as equal, like a romantic partner
Speaker 2: the same age, then it's more striking than if we
Speaker 2: think of it more a child. But he doesn't. Ravinair
Speaker 2: doesn't say that these are all good explanations. In the end,
Speaker 2: they might not be completely satisfactory, but these are good explanations.
Speaker 2: And some on emails me privately that when as a
Speaker 2: husband allowed it is why you. In my book Change
Speaker 2: and Immutable, I cite all the passages and I have
Speaker 2: to say, though, it's a little bit this distressing because
Speaker 2: all these people who claim, well, you know you can
Speaker 2: do it for free enough, we all know where that
Speaker 2: leads to. And uh, it's not, and the and the
Speaker 2: you know it's not. Maybe it was taken over from
Speaker 2: the Muslims. This is this is the Jewish way, at
Speaker 2: least not today. Burrow says times have changed, society has changed,
Speaker 2: and se Us has changed. Lea did not go to Basankov. Now,
Speaker 2: she didn't go to Basanciv. She didn't go to bas
Speaker 2: alcoh word based Beth Jacob or anything. Incidentally, what you
Speaker 2: say is it is funny because we get the pa
Speaker 2: the tour. He's trying to understand how Leya. Remember Leyo
Speaker 2: went out, not Lea, Dina went out to dressed inappropriately.
Speaker 2: I guess this today is not appropriate to either blaming
Speaker 2: the victim, and that led to the whole business with Shlim.
Speaker 2: And so the tour connects this to Laya that maybe
Speaker 2: just because it's unusual, and then there's someone privately mentions
Speaker 2: and maybe yacol indications or father's behavior that he did
Speaker 2: unconventional methods for review. We can give all sorts of
Speaker 2: explanations at the end of the day, though, if you
Speaker 2: ask me, I don't believe it. I don't believe Jacko
Speaker 2: Evert did this. What we're all trying to do, though,
Speaker 2: is explain the tour his understanding, what he could be thinking.
Speaker 2: These are all good explanations, says. Some people will be
Speaker 2: a believe that our sense will be a poll that
Speaker 2: we ate meat. You know, when they get this this
Speaker 2: fake meat, this lad grown meat, and then we don't
Speaker 2: have to eat meat. You're right? Uh? Then will people
Speaker 2: walk back and say that we are barbarians. We'll meet
Speaker 2: our rabbis. Don't tell us is it meat? Is it
Speaker 2: busser that can't be with Hallover or not? I know
Speaker 2: there's a big mahocus. Now, if you grow this beef
Speaker 2: in a lamb, what is it? I bet you it's
Speaker 2: gonna end up being a mahookus. Some in the end
Speaker 2: of the day, David says, it's interesting to note that
Speaker 2: thema Ram, the rede of the Taurus' father, writes that
Speaker 2: any husband who beats his wife should be excommunicated, and
Speaker 2: the court may even cut off his hand. If you
Speaker 2: look in yeah, you see lots of sources. One of
Speaker 2: the big ones is the rumbum. The rumbum says, if
Speaker 2: the woman doesn't do what she's told, the kofin until
Speaker 2: you can force her, even with a rod. So the
Speaker 2: wife on the spot there says, we never heard of suching.
Speaker 2: He's writing from you know the ash consequence, We never
Speaker 2: heard of such a thing beat your wife, And the
Speaker 2: commentary say, though the rumbum's not referring to most of
Speaker 2: the commentaries say he's referred to basset him because he
Speaker 2: uses the word koffine the robum. But there's an offer.
Speaker 2: Em Grossman has written about this, and Rock Shapiro has
Speaker 2: written about it. So if you don't mind being a
Speaker 2: little bit distressed that some of our great figures Flan
Speaker 2: Pallacchi and others didn't see it as a problem if
Speaker 2: there was good reason. I think today we realize this
Speaker 2: thing is good reason. Like what they say that if
Speaker 2: the husband also curses out the wife's parents, the wife's
Speaker 2: allowed to beat the husband, and if the wife person
Speaker 2: at the husband parents, husband beat the wife. But in
Speaker 2: the real world, we you know, to hit him in
Speaker 2: a real way. We know it's not how it works,
Speaker 2: it's not even and uh uh So I'm totally comfortable
Speaker 2: in saying that in earlier times people didn't see wife
Speaker 2: beating as the horror that we see it today. And therefore,
Speaker 2: when you see a rabbi, a woman comes that she
Speaker 2: wants to get a gett because the husbands beating her,
Speaker 2: and the rabbi says, well, go back, try to make
Speaker 2: show him val yous. So things don't work out in
Speaker 2: another year. I mean today, she goes back to kill
Speaker 2: her the next week. So I quote it in one
Speaker 2: of my blog posts the case of the mens arheim
Speaker 2: been Venisti in Turkey, where the husband was chasing the
Speaker 2: wife around with a knife, and they didn't think that
Speaker 2: basedon didn't think that was enough of a reason to
Speaker 2: order a divorce because the husband promises he'll be good
Speaker 2: and he won't do it again. I mean we we've
Speaker 2: learned I guess maybe through bad experience, and also we
Speaker 2: understand things I think differently. I don't. I don't see
Speaker 2: anything unquote orthodox about saying that someone asked me about
Speaker 2: the picture of Rabbi Felder. I said, I said, show
Speaker 2: you it now. The picture of right Felder will be
Speaker 2: in my blog post that comes up tomorrow. But since
Speaker 2: you ask and you're with me, and it's on my
Speaker 2: screen because I sent it in, I will show you it. Uh,
Speaker 2: and even how I'll explain to you what's what is
Speaker 2: being referred to here? We just got one more minute.
Speaker 2: I think maybe you'll appreciate this, all of you since
Speaker 2: since I was asked about it. Right now, let me
Speaker 2: show you something. I'm gonna show you a screen now
Speaker 2: of when I was in osh. I was in Philadelphia.
Speaker 2: So here is a picture of Can you see it
Speaker 2: to me and Rebbie I will. He was the love
Speaker 2: of show in Philadelphia. He was the Hallak consultant for
Speaker 2: the huff K. He made all the decisions the huff K.
Speaker 2: He unfortunately passed away. Wasn't that old seventy, I think,
Speaker 2: and he's a hobbre Safer. He's a pulpit rabbit and
Speaker 2: the Haber Safer. So now I want to show you
Speaker 2: something though, I mean this will be my Bob post
Speaker 2: that appears tomorrow. I want to show you a different picture.
Speaker 2: When the Aeshiva World News and also when the Keystone
Speaker 2: Kosher that's the Kastious Organization of Philadelphia wanted to use
Speaker 2: a picture by Felder the the Shiva World News after
Speaker 2: he passed away, and the other one after he's on
Speaker 2: their website. Now this is the picture they used. It's
Speaker 2: my picture, but I'm cut off. I'm on the well
Speaker 2: with you. I'm on the left. They cut me out.
Speaker 2: I get it. It's not a problem they but that's
Speaker 2: what I'm referring to the person who asked me that
Speaker 2: they use. This is now the picture used on the
Speaker 2: Internet of Rabbi Arounfelder, but yours, truly is has been
Speaker 2: deleted from the picture. Okay, just two more things here.
Speaker 2: Who's ever sending me private things? Mail it to my
Speaker 2: email and I'll send you all the contact information of
Speaker 2: Rebbie Goldhopper. You can hear good talks from our Goldhopper
Speaker 2: also on when it comes to America, I'll give a
Speaker 2: talk in Lakewood, let's say, in Yiddish, in Yu in
Speaker 2: English or another place in Hebrew. You can see some
Speaker 2: of them on on a serrogame. He is an expert
Speaker 2: on a thro game. You can see it on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Varses the Bala dosa kay name speaks of friction Giyakovleya
Speaker 2: because they're going on with her father's deception. Okay, Uh,
Speaker 2: she and love un engaged in a terrible check. You're
Speaker 2: you're right, that's it doesn't seen Lea went out just
Speaker 2: in appropriately. It says that the idea is that Dina did.
Speaker 2: So if you hold on a second, as long as
Speaker 2: you're here, wait one more minute, I'll read it exactly
Speaker 2: what he's says there with me for one more minute.
Speaker 2: You gotta finding papers with you know. It's in volatorium
Speaker 2: huff tests uh lamed Olof and it says as follows,
Speaker 2: I was looking at it earlier today, I was looking
Speaker 2: at the Derris Leo de Robinetz Tayomi. He has shocked
Speaker 2: his commentaries in the back. But this is what he
Speaker 2: says in lamed Olaf that what does it say that
Speaker 2: God saw that Leah was hated and opened up her womb,
Speaker 2: it says Yakhov. Yakov suspected that because she uh chief
Speaker 2: kiro low, because she gave herself willingly. I guess uh
Speaker 2: without even knowing him. I guess you could say to
Speaker 2: uh had sex with him just on the first date
Speaker 2: sort of thing, without even knowing him. So forth, If Kira,
Speaker 2: because remember Leya, I mean she was supposed to be
Speaker 2: rockall and then all of a sudden she just jumps
Speaker 2: in bed with him. So, he says, Yako suspected that
Speaker 2: she's a cup of woman? Is she she was? If
Speaker 2: kirats Malo so too, If Kira are so too, she
Speaker 2: must have been sexually immoral with others as well. Uh
Speaker 2: So the book at the adoris his commentary in the
Speaker 2: back of the edition. I'm reading it right now, is
Speaker 2: hold on? So, he says, uh his the Adoris's commentary.
Speaker 2: He says his follows. He he ties us into Leya,
Speaker 2: he says, I mean ties us into Dina. He at
Speaker 2: first he says, this is this is shocking. How could
Speaker 2: how could anyone say this? Hold you gotta find you.
Speaker 2: I'll read you what the Adora says? Adaris or Cook's
Speaker 2: father inlawer's a bit of stone. So this is an
Speaker 2: answer to Borrow's question problemise doesn't give you the It
Speaker 2: doesn't tell you here in the pages and the back
Speaker 2: here what uh parrot we are? What? Uh? What parrot?
Speaker 2: Is this? Haf tess Uh, I'm just gonna doesn't doesn't
Speaker 2: get it? Okay, it's on pages yes, okay, pages forty
Speaker 2: two and forty three, so uh yeah, Dearis says this
Speaker 2: is uh, this is strange. Where does he? Where did
Speaker 2: he get this thing? And then he develops the idea
Speaker 2: here that I don't want to spend too much time here,
Speaker 2: that I believe it's here? Yeah, where does he? Where
Speaker 2: can he say this about Leya? I think it's here.
Speaker 2: I can't see find and I'm just gonna leave it here.
Speaker 2: He he. He makes some connection between uh Dina Dina
Speaker 2: went out looking that way and calling uh attention to herself.
Speaker 2: So therefore he connects it to where did I believe
Speaker 2: it's here? Where does Dina get this from? She must
Speaker 2: have got it from her mother, and that's I don't
Speaker 2: see it here, but I think that's what it is. Okay, now, Barak,
Speaker 2: when I say jump into that I'm not saying. I'm
Speaker 2: saying that that's what that's what bollatur maybe that's the
Speaker 2: language I should use. But he says, she kira otzmolo
Speaker 2: what is he f kiratslo. It means that she just
Speaker 2: gave to him in more like she has garas like
Speaker 2: just like that. So what he's saying is it's like
Speaker 2: he's never met her, there's never any dealings. He wakes
Speaker 2: up and who's he's next to. Somebody's never been with
Speaker 2: the nor known. I mean she did the sister. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's like it's a shocking thing. And and the language
Speaker 2: that the bollaturm uses he kira is that's the implication
Speaker 2: just you know, jump into dead. That's that language. And
Speaker 2: that's uh now, of course, uh we know this was
Speaker 2: done and there's all sorts of reasons, but that's it's
Speaker 2: still a shocking thing for the vouchering uh to say
Speaker 2: the language he uses, Uh, let me just do two
Speaker 2: more minutes. We can go on. Yes, that's what I mean.
Speaker 2: Sure you like Dina's behavior, Okay, start talking to hum.
Speaker 2: He might quote it. I couldn't find it and I don't.
Speaker 2: But he he connects the two, because he begins by saying,
Speaker 2: how is this going? How could he say this about
Speaker 2: uh Leya. He's not saying Yakov is right, but where
Speaker 2: yall could get this idea and it could be uh
Speaker 2: from that? Yeah, well we know that you used to
Speaker 2: be permitted for husbands to rape. Wise, Yeah, I published
Speaker 2: the photo previously. Yes, I published my photo with Rebee
Speaker 2: Felder exactly. But I just saw that I was cut off.
Speaker 2: So Schmol says that Dina is called boss leaas Yaku.
Speaker 2: But I mean, the whole thing is I don't get
Speaker 2: I have to look at it again because why would
Speaker 2: he I mean again, that's it's disparaging Yakov to say
Speaker 2: that something happened years later because of Dina, that you
Speaker 2: see that, because then you're implying that Leia did have
Speaker 2: these bad characteristics, because if Dina adopted these characteristics, I
Speaker 2: thought we're supposed to say even according to that. I
Speaker 2: don't like these explanations that the Adaris it might be
Speaker 2: someone else I saw, because I think we're supposed to
Speaker 2: say that this is what Yakov flowed according to the tour.
Speaker 2: But Yakov is wrong. Lead Obviously Leia doesn't have these
Speaker 2: bad characteristics But if you're going to connect the Laya
Speaker 2: with Dina, then aren't you concluding that, really that there
Speaker 2: were some of these bad characteristics. Maybe that makes Yakov
Speaker 2: look a little better because it shows that his suspicions
Speaker 2: were not just out of thin air or a crazy thing.
Speaker 2: But still you're gonna say this about one of the
Speaker 2: ems about Leya. Either way you go, it's a problem
Speaker 2: because if you if you reflect poorly on Leya, you
Speaker 2: spare Yakov because you don't want to say that Yakov
Speaker 2: suspected such a terrible thing of ley On the other hand,
Speaker 2: if you make Yakov look good and you make lay
Speaker 2: look terrible, So it's a it's a my email is
Speaker 2: Shapiro M two at Scranton dot ed or. But you
Speaker 2: say it was it was a proper wedding. How could
Speaker 2: it be a proper wedding from the standpoint that we
Speaker 2: do it because you can't get married. Do you have
Speaker 2: to see someone before he get married? Precisely, when you
Speaker 2: make a wedding, you have to have kavana who you're
Speaker 2: gonna marry. He didn't have a Kovna Lea. Now grant
Speaker 2: this is before Matintara, so it's a different situation. But
Speaker 2: how could you say it's a proper wedding. He didn't
Speaker 2: have kavanas for marrying her, and how could she fool him?
Speaker 2: If you look in the verses, you see the word
Speaker 2: the word mishta is used. Uh, it's it's it's used
Speaker 2: also by Lot and the daughters. This word is used
Speaker 2: by by not missed the route. Shata is used with
Speaker 2: drinking of wine. So if you read carefully the psukia,
Speaker 2: you can see that he was presumably drunk, that that
Speaker 2: word shata was used, and he didn't know what was
Speaker 2: going on. But how could that be a proper way?
Speaker 2: Uh uh? Find chose afraid you can match up to asum.
Speaker 2: Granted we know all these things, but the I'm trying
Speaker 2: to explain why the tour says that Yakov thought he kira.
Speaker 2: He kira is a negative term to say about a woman.
Speaker 2: You don't say that about a woman if you want
Speaker 2: to respect her. And he's saying that, So it's it's
Speaker 2: a strange, strange passage. And the the acronym don't know
Speaker 2: what to make of this. I don't know what to
Speaker 2: make of it either. I'm just sharing it with you.
Speaker 2: I'm putting it out there. But I like your explanations,
Speaker 2: all of them. And uh, I was just trying to
Speaker 2: explain why the tour would use that word if kira,
Speaker 2: because Yakov wakes up and he sees his wife's sister
Speaker 2: in bed with him. What's incidentally, I'll just send with
Speaker 2: this one thing. I also think we're a little more
Speaker 2: sophisticated because in some areas I found a tuva where
Speaker 2: the cases as follows, someone walks in and a man
Speaker 2: and a woman is in bed with a man's with
Speaker 2: her husband's brother, literally in bed under the blanket, and
Speaker 2: the rabbi sock was They claimed that they were just
Speaker 2: doing it. It was cold outside and they and they
Speaker 2: and the rabbi thought that that was a good Uh. It's,
Speaker 2: you know, we don't break up a marriage because of that.
Speaker 2: It's you know, I don't know. Maybe maybe we're too cynical,
Speaker 2: but I don't. If I don't, I can't imagine a
Speaker 2: rabbi today, knowing what goes on in the world, would
Speaker 2: see something like that. And Uh, okay, Barth, you're right.
Speaker 2: They didn't have modern heating.
Speaker 1: This series was originally recorded in twenty twenty and twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one as part of an ongoing lecture series. To
Speaker 1: sign up to attend the lecture on Zoom, please visit
Speaker 1: toronmotion dot org. Please rate and review us in your
Speaker 1: favorite podcast app, or even better, tell a friend to
Speaker 1: give a podcast to listen