Reb Moshe’s self-effacing description of how he rose to prominence, while accurate, is not the whole story. As Ori Pomerantz surmised, the previous generation of Gedolim are those who tell us upon whom to rely.

Noam is mistaken — while I am undoubtedly a student of the “charedi school,” my point was that, as a charedi Jew who respects the larger consensus of Gedolei Torah, I did not know to what degree Rav Goren ran against that consensus until reading the comments here. Meir’s link to the Yated Ne’eman article is even stronger stuff than what we have published.

[I also see much less dividing our communities than C.L. appears to describe. My first years as an observant Jew were as part of a small "modern Orthodox" college community. My paternal grandfather-in-law, father-in-law, and ylctv"a one of my brothers-in-law comprise three consecutive generations to have received smicha from RIETS. Aside to the aside: my father-in-law and his chavrusa used to take their chiddushim in Hil. Shabbos to RSZA for review.]

I concur with Rabbi [sic] Rosenblum that it is “time to move on.” The signal-to-noise ratio of the current discussion has declined sufficiently, on all sides, that we will close comments here. All that can be reasonably said has been said once already, and what remains is invective heaped upon individuals and entire communities. The last paragraph of Mike S.’s comment above, in particular, deserves a second reading.

If this long, unsavoury thread proves anything, it is that machlokes only escalates. It is clear that the participants have long since given up any hope of convincing anyone of anything, and we should move on to more important matters.

I am accused of having dissed Rabbi Dr. Aaron Rakefet. Last I checked, Rabbi Rakefet and I were friends, albeit ones who find much to disagree about. (We were once the two panelists at an OU convention, and found almost nothing to disagree about to our mutual embarrassement.)

Yes, I knew that Rabbi Rakefet has semicha from Rav Soloveitchik, as does anyone who has ever heard him speak even briefly. I don’t, however, generally use the honorific rabbi, except in reference to one who is filling a rabbinic post of one sort or another. I do not know Rabbi Rakefet in that capacity. In fact, until I listened to his tape on the Langer case, I had no idea he taught at the Gruss Kollel at all. But even there he is not listed by YU as one of the roshei yeshiva, but as a lecturer in Jewish History and Responsa Literature.

Now, as it happens, I do not view Rabbi (in the sense of the having semichah) as necessarily the highest honorific, and even though Rabbi Rakefet states in his lecture that chareidim disdain secular education and “that’s stupid,” I do not view Dr. (in the sense of possessing a PhD.) as an insult. In many Litvishe yeshivos, the semichah track is for the less advanced learners, or those who intend to enter the marketplace (not necessarily the same thing.) And in the Israeli yeshivos with which I am familiar very few students ever bother to be tested for semichah, even after years of Kollel. It simply is not relevant for what they wish to do. (Let me repeat, I do not have semichah, and everytime I read about the nefarious/or glorious R’JR, I have to pause and ask who is being discussed.)

So if I insulted Rabbi Rakefet, I’m sorry. But for all of those who chose to make a federal case out of the use of doctor instead of rabbi, get a life.

- well … an opinion. which is what blogging is all about.

Likewise, Haskamos often do not reflect the considered view of the author.

Nidrei z’rizin do not create a claim of ona’ah because everyone is supposed to understand their role in negotiations and not take them literally. Words said in haskamos and in the heat of a machloket should be taken in light of their context.

At the beginning of the three weeks, perhaps we all should focus more strongly on our service to Hashem than on defeating those who have a different hashkafa. With most Jews remote from Torah and Mitzvot, it is a shame that we who accept Torah often focus more on the minor differences among us than on the acceptance of Torah that unites us.

Ori: Who decides if somebody is a Gadol or not? Do the Gedolim of each generation appoint those of the next, the way Moshe appointed Yehoshua?

http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/archives5763/TZV63features2.htm

and Contemporary Halachik issues page 169 for RAbbi J. D. Bleich’s overview and analysis.

(After reading these works one can see some differences between the Langer case and the AShdod case).

“There is a long honor list of people who had the had the zechut of being mocked by the same group”

“Of course it could just be that ethical judgement is no longer trendy in the yeshivish world. I really would not know.”

“The defence of a gadol baTorah from attacks by members of a community who tend to be fast and loose with bizui Gedolim who are not in their camp”

“enjoy your made up stories which give you the double wammy of both mocking a gadol NOT in your camp while at the same time turning the CI into a prophet.”

“All thanks to the askanim, oops, I mean gedolim, who run the show.”

“When somebody believes that their gedolim are infallible, there is no means to argue with them.”

All the above quotes are irrelevant diversions from the fact that RSG was clearly an incompetent Posek, whose name should be listed, perhaps, along with Doeg, Korach, and Acher as Torah scholars who had a history of positive accomplishments who then proceeded to throw it all away in defiance of those who were greater than they. That your bias, if not outright hatred of the Yeshiva world, shows through in virtually every comment of yours means that you should recuse yourself from discussions about RSG, since your Sinas Chinam for anyone who might affiliate with the world you so despise causes you to make irrelevant statements.

[My turn for commentary, though, as an aside. It is one of the truly baffling things about those who are not from the Yeshiva world, complaining that they have this hang-up that the Avos were not plain Joes with flaws just like the rest of us. No, they say! Avrohom, Yitzchok and Yaakov had serious flaws and defects and psychological disorders just like everyone else in today's contemporary society. No need to be careful when discussing them - how else can we relate to these people if not "B'Govah Ho'Einayim"?

But Korach, Doeg, Yerovom ben Nevot - fantasy characters, the epitome of evil on earth, little Hitlers as heads of the Sanhedrin, who cannot possibly have anything to do with the scholars of today, who are all above condemnation. RSG had flaws, but no one deserves to be discredited by a broad consensus of those greater than them.]

Now, this is an outright lie:
“Rav Goren is accepted by most frum people in EY as a gadol baTorah.”

As is this:
“His psakim are part of the messorah.”

And this is just nonsensical wishful thinking:
“In 100 years no one will remember this incedent and his work will be learned along side Rav Moshe’s and all the other works of Torah, and all that will be left of your attitude is the sinas chinam you created for no contructive purpose.”

No, in 100 years everyone will remember that even someone considered a Talmid Chacham, can be corrupted and lose his ability to Pasken, and that people in EY still think 100 times before pulling something like RSG did again.

It is nice that you cite Malki BaKodesh and R Hirschenson ZTL’s discussions with R TP Frank ZTL. Yet, when one reads many of the Teshuvot in Malki BaKodesh, one senses a willingness to have halacha accomodate to the surrounding society, as opposed to having a society whose Jewish members live in accordance with Halacha. Teshuvos about shaving with a razor, businesess staying open on Shabbos via a Shtar Mcirah and allowing Kohanim to study medicine are merely three of many cases. Your own comments prove that “most did not agree with his conclusions.” Yes, the US of the 1920s was not the US of the 1950s forward,but I think that one can argue that since the US has changed with respect to its openness to religous observance, then the considerations and conclusions set forth in what his peers viewed as distorted and convoluted views voiced by R Hirschenson ZTL may no longer be valid and thus would best be of interest to historians.

Let’s talk about Poskim of a more contemporary vintage. RAL viewed RSZA as the RMF of Israel. RAL has written that many RZ viewed the Psak of RSZA as far more reliable and authoritative than Psak issued by an increasingly politicized CR. One can argue that the heirs of RTP Frank ZTL were RSZA and R E Wasldenberg ZTL. R Goren ZTL was a tremendous success as CR of the IDF. Halevai that R Goren ZTL would have matched his record as CR of the IDF when he served as CR of Israel. I think that any objective review of the evidence will show that R Goren ZTL was a dissapointment as CR of Israel.

Do you know that RMF was related to RYBS and spent many a Yom Tov wih R MD Tendler in his decidedly MO shul? RMF had far more impact and contact with MO Jews than you can begin to imagine, especially within the unique world of the Lower East Side where RMF attended simchos and smachos among many people who were not Charedi and was known to that world as a resident of the community who happened also to be one of the Gdolei HaDor.

When I was in yeshiva, someone quoted an extremely sharp statement, supposedly said by a pre-war gadol about R. Kook ztl, the type one says about sonie yisrael. I told him that I did not beleive it without a source(which is a prudent policy in general, I think), but I was upset about how one simply quotes something of such import(even if accurate), without being sensitive to what one is saying over, and at least trying to put it into context.

Can you see past your own bias?? The “greatest gedolei Torah” is something so subjective as to be meaningless. Obviously, if the majority of the RZ world felt that these were the “greatest gedolei Torah” they would not be RZ, now would they? As I wrote above, the “greatest gedolei Torah” of the RZ world did not attempt to critisize R’ Goren as a posek, even when they disagreed with him. How the poskim from the chareidi world are relevant to this is beyond me.

>I discarded C.L.’s attempt to use a haskama from Reb Isser Zalman as a rationale for setting up Rav Goren as a posek on a par with Rav Elyashiv

I never did any such thing? Did you read the thread. The contention was the R’ Goren did not know how to learn. I said that R’ Meltzer’s haskama proves otherwise (he had a personal relationship with R’ Goren, it was not some sort of anonymous haskama). How that plugs into your gadlus-a-meter is not a question that I am concerned with.

>The irony is that Reb Moshe zt”l was “a fiercely independent posek” who would not withhold his opinion of the Emes merely because someone else disagreed.

Agreed, how is this relevant or even ironic?

>But Gedolei Torah are not elected by popular vote, and the fact that a Tzibbur loves someone doesn’t make him a leading scholar of the generation.

Now this is ironic! Especially since R’ Moshe’s answer in the famous interview to the question of how did he become the “posek haDor” was precisly that the tzibbur accepted him.

Nowhere in my comments did I mock, or intend to mock, Rav Goren. I discarded C.L.’s attempt to use a haskama from Reb Isser Zalman as a rationale for setting up Rav Goren as a posek on a par with Rav Elyashiv, RSZA, and/or Reb Moshe. It is not mocking the man to say that he wasn’t of the same stature as any of these three — it is merely a fact.

The irony is that Reb Moshe zt”l was “a fiercely independent posek” who would not withhold his opinion of the Emes merely because someone else disagreed. But Gedolei Torah are not elected by popular vote, and the fact that a Tzibbur loves someone doesn’t make him a leading scholar of the generation. Let’s not forget that Korach was also an outstanding Talmid Chacham, but one who couldn’t let his personal desires go, even for the sake of Heaven.

Its absurd. Show me ONE Gadol from the RZ (and there were MANY who disagreed with the Langer Psak) who stated that R’ Goren should not be considered a posek. Even if you find one, (which I don’t think you will), it will be batel baShishim to all the other rabbanim who continued working with R’ Goren in all matters.

All you are doing is sowing machloket for know constructive purpose. I hope you are proud of yourself!

You focus on Nero Yair?? What about “HaRav HaGaon haCharif and fluent in Shas and Rishonim, Moreinu veRabeinu Shlomo ben HaRav Avraham Gorenchik [Goren]“??

And besides, I never meant to use the haskama to show that R’ Meltzer somehow anointed R’ Goren as one of the “poskei hador” but only to counter the ridiculous assertion attributed to the CI that R’ Goren could not learn. To say such a thing is an insult to all the Gedolei Olam who both gave him semicha and praised him as a Gaon. To say that they were somehow fooled by R’ Goren who really could not learn. Its absurd. I gave you haskamos to his ability to learn by Rabbanim who were his TEACHERS and knew him well. Who were considered gedolei Olam by any stretch of the imagination. And the response to this is a [probably] made up story about the CI and a phrase by Rav Moshe who never met Rav Goren nor probably learned any of his sefarim.

Mazal Tov!

Look, it is pointless to argue this with Moshe Blum and apparently Yaakov Menken as well. When somebody believes that their gedolim are infallible, there is no means to argue with them. So unless any of the posters here are willing to concede the possibility that R’ Elyashiv, R’ Moshe, and RSZA were all wrong about the Gavra of R’ Goren - there is NOTHING to talk about.

Anyone who knew R’ Goren knows he was a fiercely independent posek. He cared not one iota what other poskim felt on the matter if he felt that his opinion was the Emmes. This was both his greatest strength and his greatest weakness. If he felt there was room to be matir, he would be matir even if every other gadol in the oilam was osser and the reverse is true as well. I understand that such independence threatened the chareidi mindset but the reality is, that there are large swaths of frum Jews who simply don’t fit in to the chareidi world and really never will. Such people just don’t consider Rabbi like R’ Moshe, R’ Elyashiv, or even RSZA to be our “poskei haDor” in any way whatsoever. Out of those names, the only one who really has ANY influence in our communities is RSZA and it is simply NOT enough influence to make pasul another gadol baTorah!

R’ Goren’s psak in the Langer case was upheld by two of the big authorities in the RZ world, R’ Zvi Yehuda Kook and R’ Avraham Shapiro (the latter wrote a whole letter defending the psak). R’ Henkin felt that R’ Goren was a posek of stature and that his opinion should NOT be mocked under any circumstance. R’ Goren had a personal impact on MANY individuals in the RZ, (myself included – of COURSE I am biased – you should do well to admit the same) and nothing ANY of your rabbanim could ever say will change that. The tales of his messirus nefesh are legendary. His work in the Army as well is something every religious soldier has haKaras haTov for. You can pull out all your rabbanim from today until tomorrow and it will simply not change the reputation of a great man in the eyes of a tzibbur who accepts him as a Gaon and a Posek [who was NOT perfect and who did have flaws - something which I guess the chareidi world would never fess up to regarding their own gedolim].

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world where R’ Elyashiv is THE poske haDor [even though no Chassidim, Sephardim, or RZ really care what he paskens] or you can realize that you get NOWHERE but publicly being meVazeh someone who is accepted as a gadol by another community.

The choice you make says much more about your own middos than about any objective truth about the Gavra of R’ Goren - which is something none of you are qualified to do, and neither are the gedolim from your camp which you “rely” upon.

So the best you can do is to cast aspersions on Rav Goren’s ability to learn. I really don’t know why R’ Moshe wrote what he did and the way he did. Frankly, its none of my concern. I do know this. R’ Goren was not the first Gadol to suggest a Heter for kohanim to study medicine. The earliest such heter [that I am aware of] was by R’ Chaim Hirshensohn zt”l in the 1920s. In Malki BaKodesh he also prints the responses of other gedolim to which he sent his book, and while most disagreed with his conclusions regarding this matter (and many others) - none of them in any way criticized his ability to learn (and his arguments overlapped with MANY of R’ Goren’s which R’ Moseh criticized. NO ONE who responded to his work claimed he was not a posek for making such arguments nor did they say that he knew not how to learn. R’ Tzvi Pesach Frank has a whole debate with him that never crosses the bounds of propriety.

So in the end. I have to see each and every person on this thread who is mevazeh Rav Goren as someone who is really pouring out the darkness in their own hearts. Nothing more, nothing less. At the very least, if they had some irr’at cheit, they would sit down and be quiet and err on the side of caution.

I entered the conversation when it was quoted above,(July 1, 2007, 12:45 PM) that “the Steipler and the Tchebiner mocked him…”. To me, that sounded an alarm bell, as far as the direction of the thread. I thought that the issue was contentious enough as it was, and the part of “mocking”, as well as the point of “intentionally distorting the Torah”(mentioned by a commentator) should have been left out, with the focus simply being on whether or not the consensus of poskim of the past generation considered him authoritative as a poseik on the issue in question, or on other matters. I don’t know if the question of whether Rabbi Goren knows how to explain Tosophos, or whether he is able to opine on what beracha to make on pineapples, adds anything to the discussion, as it currently needs to take place in 5767.

Even if one decides to objectively quote sharp statements of Gedolim whom we trust to have noble intent, I think that one must also do something to counter the possible collateral effect, of having ninth-graders referring to Rav Goren as an “am haaretz, an oisvorf and a koifer”(quoted by Chaim Klien above). The fact is that when Gedolim of the past made sharp statements in defense of Torah, it becomes a problem when the masses do the same; similarly, when it comes to “mitzvos” such as mocking, the fact is that the masses can not do it l’sheim shomayim(I know I can’t), which is a requirement by such an “averiah l’shmah”. Furthermore, as happened elsewhere on the internet, the issue then became entangled in at least another painful event, which anyone will admit(no matter what their hashkafa) has been a difficult issue for the Torah Community in a more than one way, and has never fully healed.

I agree that truth is an objective in of itself, but if it will detract from the goal, then same goal should be achieved without going into every detail. Apparently, there are people who view Rabbi Goren–rightly or wrongly– as a leader(although I’m unsure how great his following is), and I think that one must therefore be careful how one goes about “removing him from his pedestal”. Rav Moshe himself might have chosen to respond differently if he was commenting in this column which is then spread elsewhere on the internet; just because a certain approach was used years ago, does not mean that it should be used now. Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblum once noted(I can’t find it on the internet), how a protest was once organized in Europe to defend the honor of the Chafetz Chaim, but it was ruined because a personal attack was used ; he also wrote about how he himself at one time made an off-the-cuff remark in a public debate, and then lost the impact of a good position that he spent time developing.

If someone wants to tell me that I’m overly-cautious, because tomorrow the internet will have something else to discuss, in theory, I have no problem deferring to that approach. I will just say that history has shown that such issues need to be handled very gently and differently each time, and I suppose, time again will clarify the issue either way, as well as any similar future issues that undoubtedly will arise(although the effects of these things are not always seen immediately).

ולא יתבזו תלמידי חכמים אלא אם כן יבזו זה לזה תחילה
Torah scholars will not be degraded unless they first degrade each other.
(For the rest of the quote, see my post at http://rabbiwithoutacause.blogspot.com/2007/07/we-do-it-to-ourselves.html)

In an age of bizayon talmidei chachamim, we ought to be most careful of this.

I am going to phrase this as delicately as I can. While you may not have a “strong horse” in the specific case of Rav Goren or the Ashdod Beit Din, you certainly have a ’strong horse’ in the overarching issue of Chareidim vs. Religious Zionist/Modern Orthodox. So, I think that the initial statement of your comment does not accurately portray your involvement or stake in the issues, and seems to indicate an impartiality that probably is not all that impartial.

If anything is true, Haskamos are nice for historians’ reference but don’t shed any light on the merits of a sefer-regardless of the hashkafic orientation and/or the logic, arguments and conclusions presented by an author. One can argue that most of them testify to the Yiras Shamayim of the author, as opposed to whether the Gadol giving the Haskamah has checked the sefer’s contents in any serious fashion.

That being said, I think that the historical record will be very favorable to R Goren ZTL as CR of the IDF but not as CR of Israel. Who could not be inspired by a Chevron trained CR of the IDF who was qualified to jump with paratroopers and who arrived at the Kosel upon its liberation? OTOH, who could not be upset by Piskei Halacha that noone else in the Halachic world accepted, who fought constantly with ROY and who did not enhance respect for the CR? RAL noted that many RZ viewed the Psak of RSZA as far more authoritative than that of an overly politicized CR.

- not sure how CL’s comments can reflect badly on anyone other than CL. How can you blame Rav Goren for what a blogger writes years later?

My then havrusa told me that his parents came from the same town in Europe as Mrs. Langer’s husband and he was considered to be frum.

A critical point for this specific case and for the general case of giur is that if the person genuinely accepted mitzvos, not just verbally, but with the intention of doing them, the geirus is good and is permanent even if the person subsequently does aveiros or subsequently wants to be a goy again.

The problem case is the case of the person who never intended to keep mitzvos and it is obvious to everyone that that is the case.

In such a case, Rav Moshe and others hold that the person is a goy l’chol davar. He also said that he doesn’t see the benefit for c’lal yisroel to have such geirim even if the geirus is good.

I have heard b’sheim Rav Soloveitchik (even though I didn’t hear it directly from him) that he held that true kabballas mitzvos was the main part of giur.

These russians and others whom Druckman ud’imei wish to help
he is helping thm get married, but he is not helping them to be jews and he is not helping the c’lal yisroel with the quality of Jews.

The problem arose with the Jewish agency and the Israeli government b’meizid bringing in goyim g’murim, and the solution is a) stop letting them in and b) encouraging the goyim who are here to go to Amalaka.

It is known that Reb Moshe zt”l gave haskamos to sefarim freely, to help Torah to be published and read. I think it no insult to Rav Isser Zalman zt”l to say he did the same, though I don’t know this to be true one way or the other.

But the text of the haskama is clearly not that given to a gadol baTorah or even one whose divrei halacha should be considered authoritative.

“May his candle shine” — Nero Ya’Ir — is a blessing given after anyone’s name. It is hardly the same as “shlit”a”, which, although merely a Hebrew acronym for “that he should live to good and long days,” is appended after the name of an established Rav. From just these two letters (nun yud, the acronym of Nero Ya’ir), we see that Reb Isser Zalman considered Rav Goren a young and aspiring talmid chacham. That, he undoubtedly was.

Furthermore, C.L. puts in bold (and in the original Hebrew as well) the words “truly one of the few remarkable ones in this generation” — without similarly highlighting what Reb Isser Zalman found to be unique about Rav Goren: “who already in the days of his youth has already achieved great stature and has ascended the steps of the Torah.” Once again, this hardly indicates that he deemed Rav Goren to be a great Rav, much less one of the authorities of the generation, with the necessary stature to disagree with Rav Elyashiv shlit”a in a Halachic matter.

They also said nice things about Shlomo Carlebach’s learning when he was a young man. When he was older he wasn’t allowed to set foot in a yeshiva.

It is true that peace is a great objective, but it is not the ultimate goal. Rav Goren’s good intentions are also not the issue. We are supposedly discussing Halacha, Divrei Elokim Chayim (the Words of the Living G-d) — the Truth. Truth is more important. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt”l tore kriah at the “p’sak” of Rav Goren, and C.L. dismisses this as Rav Auerbach being “infuriated”? That is not truth or the search for truth.

The truth is that Reb Moshe zt”l was famously apolitical, and also reluctant to condemn. So his words in the Teshuvah mentioned by Moshe Blum are quite exceptional. He doesn’t usually go out of his way to dismiss the scholarship of another — in fact, he doesn’t say who wrote “the pamphlet” under discussion. If C.L. is going to put kind words about a young Rav Goren in bold, let us at least confront the words of Reb Moshe in translation:

“Even if he were a Talmid Chacham it would be nothing, but this itself testifies that the writer has no connection to Torah or wisdom, but to haughtiness…”

Concerning anyone who followed “the pamphlet:” “If they wanted to know the true law they would know whom to ask, for there are B”H Morei Hora’ah [Teachers of the Teaching, i.e. the Torah] who are fit to teach in accordance with Halacha — but they aren’t concerned about the prohibition at all, and to mislead themselves that they should not be inspired to turn back at all, they found some pamphlet upon which to rely…”

“And this is insanity and nothingness, that is not given to a person of intelligence to say at all… and since the source of his leniency is words of nothing like this, anyone can see that it is nothing and it is not possible to say that they rely upon it.”

When it comes to the psak itself, we know Rav Elyashiv shlit”a said the opposite, and Rav Shlomo Zalman shlit”a was so distressed that he tore his clothes. Reb Moshe’s words make it clear what his opinion was of anything the author of “the pamphlet” had to say.

If you were to tell me that the other side of the dispute was the Satmar Rav I would call it machlokes gaonim. But the only argument here was whether Rav Goren should be considered a scholar — Rav Henkin zt”l said he was, according to his grandson as above. Concerning the psak itself, Rav Henkin agreed it was meaningless without the support of others — and it got anything but support.

There are a host of journals where the words of any of Reb Moshe, Reb Shlomo Zalman, or ylctv”a Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv shlit”a — or all three together — would be no more “authoritative” than those of any random Beryl and Shmeryl. B”H Cross-Currents isn’t one of them.

As I’ve shown to the satisfaction of any objective person, which excludes you, RSG was personally discredited by the most prominent members of this community, read, the universally accepted Poskei Hador in EY (RSZA and the Tchebiner) and the US (RMF), who were the furthest thing from being Mevazeh Gedolim who were not in their camp.

I have great respect for R’ Avraham Shapira, R’ Shaul Yisraeli, R’ Hershel Schachter, and others not in the yeshivish camp. The fact that there are people in your camp who continue to defend RSG does your camp nothing but a disservice.

> Way to show kavod to Rav Melzer

I should have phrased that more elegantly, but the fact is that he gave Haskamos freely.

> Yes, enjoy your made up stories which give you the double wammy of both mocking a gadol NOT in your camp while at the same time turning the CI into a prophet.

Again, your biases show in full color.

> Ahhh, now comes the made up positive results of a disgusting episode in Jewish history. All thanks to the askanim, oops, I mean gedolim, who run the show.

Boruch Hashem a hundred times over for it. And if you think askanim made RSZA tear Keria, or RMF write a Teshuvah which basically said RSG’s Psak was nonsense, well, that’s three strikes of bias against you.

> and a statement by Rav Moshe who neither knew Rav Goren nor was he familiar with the corpus of his work.

And you’re happy with quoting Haskamos from the 1950s before he showed the Poskei Hador how incompetent he really was. Mazal Tov, you have successfully opened the gates for shenanigans regarding Chamurei Chamuros for the sake of a political appointment, as per the Steipler and others.

The Shulchan Oruch writes (Choshen Mishpot 8:1)
וכל דיין המתמנה בשביל כסף או זהב, אסור לעמוד לפניו. ולא עוד אלא שמצוה להקל ולזלזל בו

So one who pays for his position not with money, but with a promise to be ‘Mattir’ a Mamzer when virtually all the Poskim of the day hold it to be devoid of Halachic meaning…?

In fact, I am confident that this Shulchon Oruch is precisely what motivated the Steipler to take the time out of his schedule, where every minute was accounted for, to write a Leitzonus of RSG, since that piece in the Karyono D’Iggarta is titled “All Leitzonus is Ossur except for Leitzonus of Avodoh Zoroh”, and the Nesivos says the following on that Shulchon Oruch:

שמצוה להקל. כי הכתוב קראו [שמות כ' כ"ג] אלהי כסף, וכל ליצנותא אסור לבר מליצנותא דעבודת כוכבים דשריא].

And it is that Seif in Shulchon Oruch which grants the right, nay, the Mitzvah, to mock him.

Rav Moshe may have not recognized Rabbi Goren as a posiek, but he himself, might have advised more tact when writing in this forum, such as recognizing Rabbi Goren’s good intentions. Indeed RJR, himself, wrote that “one of Rabbi Goren’s other halachic innovations, recognized by no other posek…”, and did not feel it necessary to focus at this time and place on the opinions about Rabbi Goren’s learning abilities.

Fine, he was more than upset. He was infuriated. How you think this gives you the right to mock Rav Goren is beyond me.

>I don’t. And the Tchebiner never said such a thing, and that’s not an accurate quote of what Rav Shach said either.

Its a direct and accurate quote. Read the actual letter.

>This is laughable. Maybe we shouldn’t put murderers in jail – how would you like it to be in jail?

Oooh, what a retort. So the fact that ma deSanei Alach is not the ONLY criteria used means that it is irrelevant. Brilliant.

>Thanks for the heads up that your defense of Rav Goren has nothing to do with political stances.

It has to do with one thing and one thing only. The defence of a gadol baTorah from attacks by members of a community who tend to be fast and loose with bizui Gedolim who are not in their camp (did you REALLY have an ava-amina that I was anywhere near your chugim since the begining of this dreadful thread?)

>It is well known that R’ Isser Zalman freely gave Haskamos without batting an eyelash

Way to show kavod to Rav Melzer! And you say I am the one with the credibility problem!

>It also makes it all the more perceptive of the Chazon Ish to know what was coming

Yes, enjoy your made up stories which give you the double wammy of both mocking a gadol NOT in your camp while at the same time turning the CI into a prophet.

>Because Boruch Hashem nobody in EY has tried to pull a stunt like RSG did since he got castigated for it

Ahhh, now comes the made up positive results of a disgusting episode in Jewish history. All thanks to the askanim, oops, I mean gedolim, who run the show.

>Here is what Rav Moshe zt”l had to say about RSG’s learning abilities (in the Teshuva regarding Kohanim studying medicine):

Now you are dragging Rav Moshe into this??? Give it up. Rav Goren is accepted by most frum people in EY as a gadol baTorah. His psakim are part of the messorah. In 100 years no one will remember this incedent and his work will be learned along side Rav Moshe’s and all the other works of Torah, and all that will be left of your attitude is the sinas chinam you created for no contructive purpose.

(of course, it doesn’t matter to you that gedolim who actually KNEW rav Goren such as Rav Meltzer, Rav Kook, Rav Amiel and others testified to his gadlus. That hundreds can testify to his mesirus nefesh. No, what matters to you is a questionable statement by the CI quoted in a questionable biography and a statement by Rav Moshe who neither knew Rav Goren nor was he familiar with the corpus of his work. Mazal Tov, you have successfuly torn another brick off the beis haMikdash)