A guest post by MEKUBAL
What I am being accused of: mevaze talmid chochom and thus being an Apikorus.
Where am I being accused of this: Over here on the "Daas Torah" blog in the comment thread.
Why am I being accused of this: Because I posted an email that shows that Rav Shternbuch reversed his views on the Dybuk issue.
Why is this a double standard?
Well three words, Rabbi Leib Tropper. When insinuations, and accusations were being made about him, there was one lonely commenter on the "Daas Torah" blog that even said give the guy a chance to offer up an explanation. He was ridiculed. Nobody was accused of being mevaze talmid chochom, even before the fateful recordings started to appear, and there was nothing but unsubstantiated rumor about things like misappropriation of funds, and proselytizing.
So what is the difference? Well, that is fairly simple, trashing Tropper didn't infringe on anyone's mis-perceptions about "Daas Torah." There were no Rabbanim who through their super-power Ruah HaKodesh were supposed to be able to know all things, see all things, and most importantly be infallible. Never mind that this idea is found nowhere in our mesorah. In fact several famous Ahronim went so far as to state that when one of the Gedolei Yisrael admits a mistake, it only increases his Gadlut. Rav Shalom Hedayya, in his peirush on Pirkei Avot, Seh L'Beit Avot, claims sourcing of this in Pirkei Avot, and expounds upon it at length.
However, somewhere along the line it seems that certain Yidden have gotten it into their minds that the Catholics have a good thing going with the whole Papal infallibility deal, and that we should copy it over. Where they miss the plot is that the Catholics only have one person they hold as a Gadol(l'havdil). Whereas every community of Judaism has at least one, and what is more, they don't all agree... Quite the quandary really. Let's stick with the Jerusalem Hareidi world, where all of this began, and look at an not so hypothetical instance... the Shabbat Elevator. You have the Admur M'Gur and the Eida headed(at least when it fits) by Rav Shternbuch saying that they are permitted to use. You have the Admur M'Belz who says it depends on the type. Then you have Rav Eliashiv who says they are assur. So being that these are all Gedolei Yisrael, and all of their individual followers believe their particular one to be the Gadol HaDor, I have a simple question. With this new found infallibility... who is right?
Ok... let's back up here a second. Let's assume that these problems with the import of Papal... I mean Gadol infallibility don't exist. Let's just say for sake of argument that elu v'elu some how covers the ability for two contradicting opinions are both the absolute only right way. Let's then also assume that to thus call any Gadol or Talmid Chochom on their mistakes is really mevaze talmid chochom. So why is it still Ok to slander(in the same thread) Rav Batzri, with some fairly negative slurs, but to say that the person who reported Rav Shternbuch's supposed comments knowingly withheld information is mevaze talmid chochom. Right it is that same double standard coming back again.
No wonder klal Yisrael is in such trouble.
Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment