I am a Jew. Not frum, not reform, not conservative. I have 2 adult children and 2 grandchildren. All are Jews. Thank you for this essay. I watch a lot of archeology and history YouTubes and I recognized what you're writing about. I'm sick of it too. Yesterday I discovered a video ( from one of those Christians who celebrate Shabbat) that Torah discusses healing and he wrote a book about it. Kol Ha Kavod for writing about this.
The problem faced by the MO world as to its level of Avodas HaShem has been noted by both RYBS and CI as well as by RAL ZL All are with reading As far as R Riskin is concerned when he was in the US when he was pioneering and great Rav and rebbe he consulted with RYBS RMF R YK and the Lubavitcher Rebbe Zicronam Livracha It is unfortunately true that after giving into the demands of LW MO on gender issues and moving to Israel R Riskin never found a rebbe in the same way as RAL ZL did with R SZA zZL
I'm not sure what you meant by "All are with reading". Did you leave out words?
I'll be honest about RYBS. I thought of writing this as a piece, but I never did. I may still.
In Pirkei Avot, it says that Antigonus Ish Socho, who received the Torah from Shimon HaTzaddik, said not to be like a servant who serves a master for the sake of a reward. Be like a servant who serves a master *not* meaning to get a reward.
In Avot D'Rabbi Natan, we learn that Antigonus Ish Socho had two talmidim before Yosi ben Yoezer and Yosi ben Yochanan. Tzadok and Beitus. And that they understood Antigonus incorrectly, and concluded that there *is* no reward. And the Tzdukim and Beitusim were their students, with all the damage they did to Klal Yisrael.
Years later, Avtalyon said, "Sages, be careful with your words," and I've heard it said that he was referring to Antigonus.
RYBS was a gadol. But he taught a Torah of the yachid. Not one of the am. And we have dinei yachid and dinei tzibbur, and I understand why, given the times in which he learned, why he would have put such a large focus on the yachid. But I believe that he made the mistake of Antigonus Ish Socho. Because the rabbis who have been pulling away from Torah in the Orthodox world have been almost exclusively students of his.
Thankfully, there are many students of his who have not gone the way of Avi Weiss and Shlomo Riskin and the like, but I don't know what the ratio is. I do think that the whole "Open Orthodox" pgam in the frum world traces itself back to RYBS even if he never said anything in his life that actually justified such a thing.
Just like Tsadok and Baitus, who I suspect used their misinterpretation of Antigonus's statement to justify what they already wanted to do, I think much the same is true for many of RYBS's wayward students. But some of them simply never learned a Torah that dealt with Am Yisrael as an Am. As a tzibbur with a corporate identity running parallel to our identity as individual Jews. And that, tragically, made them completely unprepared to deal with challenges like the ones I mentioned in my article.
Rabbi Wein’s books which are published by an offshoot of ArtScroll are a great introduction to Jewish history
Yes, but they also start around the time of Alexander the Great. Even Rabbi Wein doesn't dare touch the third rail of pre-Alexandrian Jewish history.
I don’t understand. Rabbi Wein starts with Avraham. What do you mean?
I'm not sure which book you're talking about. I'm talking about the "Jewish History Trilogy" he wrote, which goes back to 350 BCE.
At one point many years ago I listened to all of his hundreds of tapes. The tapes actually start with Noach, I believe.
Oh, I'm sure. And I bet he covers our history according to Chazal, as he should. But he's never made an effort to fight against the dominant paradigm.
I'm not criticizing him. It's simply not a place he went to, because he doesn't have the tools of that particular trade.
While I agree with the critique, I hardly think that this causes many of the adult OTD community.
From my experience most ultra orthodox jews are not even aware of the historical discrepancy let alone bothered by it.
Rabbi Riskin? Jewish “mediocrity “?
Perhaps you would like to reassess that particular label.
I am a Jew. Not frum, not reform, not conservative. I have 2 adult children and 2 grandchildren. All are Jews. Thank you for this essay. I watch a lot of archeology and history YouTubes and I recognized what you're writing about. I'm sick of it too. Yesterday I discovered a video ( from one of those Christians who celebrate Shabbat) that Torah discusses healing and he wrote a book about it. Kol Ha Kavod for writing about this.
The problem faced by the MO world as to its level of Avodas HaShem has been noted by both RYBS and CI as well as by RAL ZL All are with reading As far as R Riskin is concerned when he was in the US when he was pioneering and great Rav and rebbe he consulted with RYBS RMF R YK and the Lubavitcher Rebbe Zicronam Livracha It is unfortunately true that after giving into the demands of LW MO on gender issues and moving to Israel R Riskin never found a rebbe in the same way as RAL ZL did with R SZA zZL
RYBS never approved of what is called Open Orthodoxy in practice or hashkafa
I'm absolutely sure he never did. But Antigonus Ish Socho never, as far as we know, approved of Sadduceeism in practice or hashkafa.
I'm not sure what you meant by "All are with reading". Did you leave out words?
I'll be honest about RYBS. I thought of writing this as a piece, but I never did. I may still.
In Pirkei Avot, it says that Antigonus Ish Socho, who received the Torah from Shimon HaTzaddik, said not to be like a servant who serves a master for the sake of a reward. Be like a servant who serves a master *not* meaning to get a reward.
In Avot D'Rabbi Natan, we learn that Antigonus Ish Socho had two talmidim before Yosi ben Yoezer and Yosi ben Yochanan. Tzadok and Beitus. And that they understood Antigonus incorrectly, and concluded that there *is* no reward. And the Tzdukim and Beitusim were their students, with all the damage they did to Klal Yisrael.
Years later, Avtalyon said, "Sages, be careful with your words," and I've heard it said that he was referring to Antigonus.
RYBS was a gadol. But he taught a Torah of the yachid. Not one of the am. And we have dinei yachid and dinei tzibbur, and I understand why, given the times in which he learned, why he would have put such a large focus on the yachid. But I believe that he made the mistake of Antigonus Ish Socho. Because the rabbis who have been pulling away from Torah in the Orthodox world have been almost exclusively students of his.
Thankfully, there are many students of his who have not gone the way of Avi Weiss and Shlomo Riskin and the like, but I don't know what the ratio is. I do think that the whole "Open Orthodox" pgam in the frum world traces itself back to RYBS even if he never said anything in his life that actually justified such a thing.
Just like Tsadok and Baitus, who I suspect used their misinterpretation of Antigonus's statement to justify what they already wanted to do, I think much the same is true for many of RYBS's wayward students. But some of them simply never learned a Torah that dealt with Am Yisrael as an Am. As a tzibbur with a corporate identity running parallel to our identity as individual Jews. And that, tragically, made them completely unprepared to deal with challenges like the ones I mentioned in my article.
My mistake-all are worth reading
Ah, thanks.