Comments on: Feldman’s Folly (Part One)

By: Yehoshua Friedman

Yehoshua Friedman — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 05:20:35 +0000

Was the CC really familiar with the Meiri? It was only published from MS in the 20th century, probably after the CC was no longer around. Check out the dates. The Chazon Ish opposed figuring the Meiri into psak for the very reason that there was no masoret limud over the generations. If the CC had had it to take into account, it might have made a difference.

By: michoel halberstam

michoel halberstam — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:22:00 +0000

Regarding the question of healing non jews on Shabbos. It is well known among Poskim in our generation that both The Chasam Sofer and the Divrei Chaim were Matir this. In fact many poskim are amazed at how little credence these psakim received from the Mishna Berura. The Divrei Hayim says that this practice derives from the Heter of the Vaad Arba Hoarotzos. I have hear it repeated by a prominent rav in Eretz Yisroel that R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbcah stated that given the nature of communication in our world, it borders on pikuach nefeh were a Jewish doctor to refuse to treat a non-Jew. The list of Gedolai Yisraoel who are matir this practice is very long. Unfortunately the halacha does not proceed uniformly in its development. Nevertheless one does not address an issue like this by simply citing the Mishna Berura

By: Y.E. Skaist

Y.E. Skaist — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:06:20 +0000

Menachem Daum,
Isn’t it clear from the Mishna Berurah that you quoted-
“The Chafetz Chaim, who was undoubtedly familiar with the Meiri, nonetheless castigates Jewish doctors who violate Biblical prohibitions in saving the lives of gentiles on Shabbos: “Know that the doctors in our time, even the most observant, are not careful about this at all, for every Sabbath they travel beyond the borders of the Sabbath domain to heal those who worship the stars, and they write [prescriptions], and grind substances [to prepare medicines]”
— that it was the widespread practice of Jewish doctors in Poland to transgress Shabbos for gentiles?

By: Yehoshua Friedman

Yehoshua Friedman — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 01:52:40 +0000

As for the literary hardball of the NYT, it is part and parcel of the nature of the power elite which latches on to every Henry Kissinger or Noah Feldman that they can get their hands on. Prof. Feldman is not only a professor at Harvard, he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which generates US bipartisan foreign policy. Every US Sec. of State since 1919 has been a member. The renegade Jew is approached with favors and playing up to his ego. He knows where his bread is being buttered. The Ford, Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations place their money where it will be detrimental to Israel and the Jewish people. But we have Hashem on our side. Our job is first to recognize the enemy.

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 18:33:28 +0000

How many such embarrassments will the NY Times, The New Republic and other such publications have to create for themselves before they try doing responsible journalism?

The Times’ declining circulation has already led its brain trust to shrink the paper, but that’s not quite all they need to do.

I have little expectation that they will ever catch on.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 00:56:10 +0000

If you have read the exchange of letters between the OU and the N Y Times, the Times is playing editorial and literary hardball with respect to the utter lack of evidence of photocropping. I would not lose sleep waiting for a Public Editor’s note on this article.

By: Shawn Landres

Shawn Landres — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:38:25 +0000

I apologize for reading too quickly and missing the fact that Menachem Daum was taking part in the conversation! My fault for starting to skim after the 50th or so comment. But my point, and my respect for the film, of course remains the same.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:01:25 +0000

Now that the dust has settled after the intellectual tornado caused by this article, IMO, we should think about some long term means of addressing the issues raised by the article. While I certainly advocate a halacha by halacha and mitzvah by mitzvah response, the same belongs in MO schools, shuls and camps begining with the article, the responses and then proceeding to each of the mitzvos and halachos raised in the article. The same does not belong in the secular media.

By: Upset

Upset — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 19:00:14 +0000

I am quite disturbed by RAK’s post regarding the denial of a certain so called Rabbi regarding the statements that were attrubuted to him. Although I never heard him directly speak about any of these issues, I heard from at least ten different people that he said the comments that were attributed to him regarding tax evasion and I know of at least one person of impeccable integrity that this rabbi made the statement that was attruibuted to him regarding gezel akum. A number of people (including myself) have urged this person to go public to prevent this rabbi from continuing to espouse his heretical and very dangerous views but he has resisted this because of a concern of further spreading the exisitng chillul hashem that this rabbi has created. Someone should tell this rabbi that his words of sheker in denying what he said (some of it publicly) might lead some of us to be forced to go public to expose his lies.

By: Anon

Anon — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 16:58:09 +0000

Rak, the rabbi in question absolutely said what was attributed to him and there is more than one source that can confirm it. I am sure that the rabbi in question is upset that his statements are known as he knows that people will not react kindly to his views. In fact at a public lecture he said that he will lie about his views in respect of these issues if he is asked about it.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 15:03:00 +0000

Having read and reread the article and the responses, including the letters in today’s NY Times Magazine as well as the absence of any corrective or Public Editor’s notes therein, IMO, I think that a stronger response is necessary. I think that a mitzvah by miztvah, halacha by halacha response , without any apologetics on any of the mitzvos and halachos, is important and can be written by any committed MO person who is a Yodea Sefer-regardless of whether he or she attended YU or an Ivy League school.

By: Shawn Landres

Shawn Landres — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:11:33 +0000

I’ve been thinking about where to post this - here seems as good as any. With respect to Jewish attitudes toward non-Jews, far more powerful than anything Professor Feldman has written in the NYT is a documentary by Menachem Daum (himself Orthodox) called “Hiding and Seeking: Faith and Tolerance After the Holocaust” (2004). Essentially the film tells the story of Daum’s realization that his sons and grandchildren (also Orthodox) were beginning to have and express uncomfortable opinions about the essential human worth of non-Jews. In response, Daum took his sons to Poland to introduce them to the Catholic family which had saved the Daum family’s life during the Shoah. It’s a powerful film which does not shy away from revealing multiple perspectives on the issue.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:28:58 +0000

For those following the aftermath of Feldman’s admission that he was not photocropped, the OU has just sent a statement to the Times requesting and demanding that the NY Times terminate the services of Feldman as a contributing editor to the NY Times Magazine.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 13:43:56 +0000

Menachem Daum-We all know that Chasidei Umos HaOlam Yesh Lahem Chelek BaOlam Habaah. However, one can argue from an objective reading of history, as opposed to even relyong in a secondary nature on drush, etc. , that Chazal emphasized “Chasidei Umos HaOlam” as opposed to stating that “Kol Umos HaOlam” because the Chasidei Umos HaOlam represented exceptional individuals of high moral character and courage who went against the tide to help Jews in times of persecution or who served as political allies of the Jewish people. Given the rather unrelenting presence of anti Semitism in pre WW2 Poland and all of Europe, IMO, the claim that if we had revised our opinions about non-Jews in chederim strikes me as both unrealistic and not borne out by the historical evidence and facts available to any student of history of that period.

By: rak

rak — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 11:01:15 +0000

regarding anon’s comments it was difficult for me to believe the stories regarding this rabbi, as he would be paskening against the gemara. In fact, on mail-jewish, the attribution of this position to the rabbi in question was challenged, and he denies that this is his position and is reported to be upset that this is being repeated in his name.

By: Robert Lebovits

Robert Lebovits — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 03:23:55 +0000

Re: Charedi Insularity vs. MO Interactivity

Does anyone recognize how different the Jewish experience is for those of us living “out of town” as opposed to the NYC/NJ area? Regardless of level of observance and presentation, engagement with non-Orthodox and with the Gentile community is a way of life. The concept of Kiruv is not reserved for professionals but is the province of every observant family. In the work place there is a keen awarenes that one’s actions are representative of what Torah is about.
So be careful when making generalizations about who does and who does not “mix”. Out here we ALL do.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:39:57 +0000

For those interested, R D N Lamm has a wonderful column in this week’s Forward. As many know or should know by now, Professor Feldman admitted that there is no evidence whatsoever supporting his claim that he was photocropped out of the picture at issue. Once again, the credibility of an author in the NY Times and the lack of fact checking by the NY Times rears its head. Paging Jason Blair anyone?

By: Anon

Anon — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:37:01 +0000

Rabbi Adlerstein, I agree with you that Noah Feldman may have done us a favor in forcing us to deal with some of our texts in an honest way and to remember to teach our children that not every Talmudic statement regarding gentiles is meant to be taken literally or is meant to apply to contemporary gentiles. The problem that I am struggling with is how we should deal with Rabbis who go the opposite extreme. Specifically, I am familiar with a very prominent charedi Rabbi who tells people that tax evasion and outright gezel akum are both permissible as long as there is no realistic possibility that you will get caught and cause a chillul hashem. This Rabbi has told people that the fact that the Shulchan Aruch (as well as all of the other major sifrei halacha) paskens that gezel akum and tax evasion are forbidden should not be taken seriously as they had to worry about anti-semitism so they sometimes said things were forbidden in respect of gentiles that are truly permitted. In other words, he goes to the other extreme — he says that we have to reinterpret sources in our tradition that say that it is forbidden to steal from gentiles. How should I deal with such a Rabbi? I (as well as others) have heard him say this on a number of occassions. He is obviously a lone opnion in this regard but some people have told me that “elu velu” should apply to him as he is a big talmid chochom so he has a right to his opinion. Others have told me that he is no different than a Reform rabbi (and perhaps worse because he presents himself as an Orthodox Rabbi) because he is willing to simply disregard the accepted halachik mesorah on this matter by simply saying that the rishonim and acaharonim did not mean what they said. I would be grateful to hear from others as to what our attitude towards this Rabbi should be and how we should respond to his statements.

By: dr. william gewirtz

dr. william gewirtz — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:48:56 +0000

“Or perhaps if we had saved a few more Poles, or at least if our chayders in Poland taught that Polish people are fellow human beings created in G-d’s image who are worthy of being saved, then more Poles would have been inclined to reciprocate and save Jews during the Nazi occupation.”

Comment by Menachem Daum — August 1, 2007 @ 1:57 am

I do not know if there is any evidence that Jewish doctors in Poland ever did anything other than save gentiles on the Sabbath.

I also assume they taught Pikei Avot in cheydar and they learned “Chaviv Adom … ” that includes Gentiles. How they explained the differences with “Chavivin Yisroel …” and what they taught about the reasons for saving gentiles on the sabbath was and is the real issue. However, what we taught/teach pales in significance, given the centuries of persecution and hatred. Think twice about blaming the victim, to any degree, regardless of what we ought be teaching.

Before I read “the” article that shabbos, a young man, who had also not read the article, but was teaching the perek that afternoon, asked for pshat in the mishnah above (which is why I remember it in this context). I told him, i am not sure, but I think that the singular versus plural should give him enough to darshan.

Despite what I would like the accepted MO position to be, given that anti-semitism is hardly a solved problem, coupled with the nature of the halachic process, it would be difficult to expect much beyond utilitarian heterim from the majority.

By: mycroft

mycroft — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:52:50 +0000

Furthermore, in the United States, any physician who treated non-Jews differently from Jews for any reason would lose his or her medical license. mycroft: Should be irrelevant to an Orthodox Jew
Perhaps not. Acting to evade severe consequences MAY turn the action into a derabbanan

One can’t put oneself into a position where one would be required to violate halacha.

Ori: Wouldn’t doctors be a special case? A medical license isn’t just a way to make more money. It’s a tool that lets you practice medicine, saving lives as part of your daily job. Preserving the ability to perform this Mitzva is not the same as having a higher standard of living.

Lets assume air traffic controllers work on Shabbos, utility workers also work on Shabbosthey clearly save lives-Ori would you say a Jew can become an air traffic controller, utility worker-or other positions.

By: Yitzchok Adlerstein

Yitzchok Adlerstein — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 23:55:40 +0000

It might be appropriate to mention that more Righteous Gentiles - non-Jew who saved Jews during the Shoah - came from Poland than any other country. To be sure, there was no shortage of vicious antisemites in Poland, but that should not negate our recognition of the opposite as well.

Life is complex. People are complex.

Furthermore, in the United States, any physician who treated non-Jews differently from Jews for any reason would lose his or her medical license. mycroft: Should be irrelevant to an Orthodox Jew
Perhaps not. Acting to evade severe consequences MAY turn the action into a derabbanan. Some have compared the situation (I don’t recall who, and whether they are people who really figure in the overall halachic conversation) to that of the Maharik #137

By: Menachem Daum

Menachem Daum — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 23:37:27 +0000

Menachem Daum-welcome aboard! I enjoyed both of your documentaries immensely.

[Co-Editor’s Note: Me too!
Yitzchok Adlerstein]

Comment by Steve Brizel — July 31, 2007 @ 4:56 pm

Thank you for your kind words.

By: Ori Pomerantz

Ori Pomerantz — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:16:09 +0000

Charles B. Hall: Furthermore, in the United States, any physician who treated non-Jews differently from Jews for any reason would lose his or her medical license.

mycroft: Should be irrelevant to an Orthodox Jew-IF we were following the Chafetz Chaim. Too often, one hears explanations from certain professionals-otherwise I couldn’t make a living. The Torah answer of course-is do something else-even if not earning what Brahmins earn. Torah should take precedence.

By: Menachem Daum

Menachem Daum — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:57:51 +0000

Perhaps if we saved fewer Poles, a few more Jews would have survived the Shoah. Dr. William Gewirtz

Or perhaps if we had saved a few more Poles, or at least if our chayders in Poland taught that Polish people are fellow human beings created in G-d’s image who are worthy of being saved, then more Poles would have been inclined to reciprocate and save Jews during the Nazi occupation.

By: mycroft

mycroft — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 02:50:47 +0000

Furthermore, in the United States, any physician who treated non-Jews differently from Jews for any reason would lose his or her medical license.

Should be irrelevant to an Orthodox Jew-IF we were following the Chafetz Chaim. Too often, one hears explanations from certain professionals-otherwise I couldn’t make a living. The Torah answer of course-is do something else-even if not earning what Brahmins earn. Torah should take precedence. I am not saying that we are following the Mishna Brurah-but the reason cited by Charlie Hall is not a legitimate reason. I suspect a lot of paskening for professionals may be simply that they go to who paskens the right way for them.

including some members of the Ivy League athletic conference, have very strong and vibrant Orthodox communities today. Ironically, much of this is due to the efforts of YU President Richard Joel, whose efforts of Hillel before he came to YU have ironically have his biggest competition

Hillels serve all Jews-a Hillel Director ike a chaplain can’t let his personal beliefs influencd how he serves his clienteld. Of course, Hillels were big decades before Joel at Hillel. I used the services of some of them during my post YU time decades ago.