based on the above, citing the blog in your name, would imply that we feel you are not a heretic. Hmmmmm. well, ok. :-) have an excellent yontif
dilbert | Homepage | 10.06.04 - 2:38 pm | #

Look at HaMoadim BHalacha. R ZevinZTL quoted Tosefta Kipeshuta , an excellent work that some might reject because R D S Lieberman ZL of JTS was the author, regardless of the excellent nature of the sefer,
Stevev Brizel | 10.06.04 - 3:08 pm | #

I don't know that Prof. Lieberman is a good example.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.06.04 - 3:11 pm | #

"R. Stern argues that one is only prohibited from learning directly from a heretic but that one is permitted to learn from his writings ... The implication of all this, which he does not state explicitly, is that one may quote heretical sources in writing but not in speech."

I fail to see how this follows. How is quoting someone in speech more direct than quoting him in writing? I also question the general principle: some scholars are much more charismatic on the printed page than in person.
Simon Montagu | Homepage | 10.07.04 - 3:39 pm | #

The implication of his letter, in which he defends his citation of Mendelssohn, is that one may quote such a person in writing.

It is harder to fudge in writing because intelligent readers will see through it fairly easily.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.09.04 - 10:45 pm | #

how can you differentiate between the beis medrash and the classroom. does one leave their yiras shamayim behind when one leaves the beis medrash. can torah be studied, God forbid, as just another scholarly pursuit? that, frankly, is ten times more problematic to my mind than quoting someone whose personal observance may have been somewhat lacking.
yarei | 10.10.04 - 1:02 pm | #

The difference is in the reverence and respect given to the source in the beis midrash that is lacking in the classroom.

As for the academic study of Torah, like it or not it is done. There are world-class talmidei hakhamim who teach Torah in college and law school classrooms.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.10.04 - 3:23 pm | #

I remember telling R' Moshe a vort I saw in Casuto's "Torat Hate'udot" without attribution. The vort, I thought, was excellent, connecting Yakov's experience with Rachel and Leah and his having misled his father when he received the brachot. He, out of character, vehemently rejected it. I've always felt that he intuited the unkosher source.
Leizer | 10.10.04 - 11:16 pm | #

See Yoel Oz's blog from August.
mykroft | 10.11.04 - 10:27 pm | #

SImcha - what does this mean for quoting non-Jews (let's assume that the ones we want to quote are good people)?
kochav | 10.12.04 - 9:27 am | #

Good question! Can one quote a hasid me-umos ha-olam on a Torah matter? I would suspect not in the beis midrash.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.12.04 - 10:00 am | #

I assume the Hertz chumash disagrees with you (since it quotes lots of non-Jews)...
kochav | 10.12.04 - 3:16 pm | #

For what usage, though?
Simcha | Homepage | 10.12.04 - 4:27 pm | #

I was not aware Kasutto is a kofer-his ideas are unconventional but not heresy.
Male Repellant | 10.13.04 - 8:12 pm | #

You don't have to be a kofer to be considered unkosher by someone.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.13.04 - 8:47 pm | #

Wait a second. Cassuto, in his Torat Hate'udot, says, and I quote from a thirty some year old memory, that "the consistency and brilliance demonstrated in the Torah understandably would lead one to believe,if not for the impossibility, that the Torah is min hashamayim." R' Yakov Weinberg gave me his copy to show me that a mummar knows he's wrong deep inside. Is there more than one scholarly Cassuto?
leizer | 10.14.04 - 1:34 am | #

According to The Debricener Rav ZTL, would he also prohibit the use of Rishonim published underMossad HaRav Kook such as Toras Chaim, R Chavel's editions of Ramban,etc and the editions of Ritva and Rashba ? Would this also ban the use of Enclyclopedia Talmudit? IIRC, there is a shita of the Rema that prohibits the use of a Sefer Torah that has not been reviewed and corrected. RHS once compared this idea to the use of the new editions of Rishonim and Acharonim and observed that one cannot rely on the old editions
Steve Brizel | 10.14.04 - 4:13 pm | #

Yes. That what the whole point of his teshuvah. He bans the use of anything by Mossad Ha-Rav Kook.
Simcha | Homepage | 10.14.04 - 4:22 pm | #

Obviously, if you follow such a teshuvah and sevara to its logical conclujsion, much ink will be devoted to "chiddushei Torah" that merely reflect the fact that the suthor did not see the most correct text or a ksav yad, regardless of the "politics" of the publisher.
Steve Brizel | 10.15.04 - 11:35 am | #

Regarding learning the Torah of Apikursim there is another problem.
THe Rambam says(Yesodai Hatorah 6:8) that the reason why the Sefer Torah of an Apikorus is burned is not
to leave a name for him & his actions. Rav Moshe writes that this only applies to a mitzvah which he did. The case of Aivu was not dealing with an Apikorus.
Ploni Almoni | 04.18.05 - 8:58 pm | #