Unable to save comment (key failed)
He said the Egyptians hired soldiers from other countries, and also magicians and sorcerers who used all their power and might to pursue them "at the speed of lightning [sic]"
please don't tell me there is an actual source for this. Or at best, that people don't take it literally.
Bad science on the internet? What would Rav Mattisyahu claim to be good science - the notion that dinosaurs coexisted with people?
50% Chassidim and 90% hats and jackets? Wow charedim really are above science, they can have 140% of one thing.
LOL
and 90 millions Egyptians? Intresting that one country had more than double the worlds population at that time. See here http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/wo...w/
worldhis.html
I was there at the time and he seemed to be thinking it was to be taken literal.
Rabbi Waxman
did you mean
rabbi "wachsman"
shlita
admor
raskbhg
master chef
So much mention of blogs? Excellent, he's spreading the word! "Blog? What's a blog?" [starts googling] "Ahhh..interesting." [posts comment]
Our plan is working!
My number one goal is to get banned. That will bring me fame and fortune!
> Again, he mentioned the danger of science and of blogs,
Did he mention the danger of having a bunch old dodderers who are completely clueless about the outside world claim absolute authority over our hearts and minds?
> He closed by encouraging all of us to trust the Gedolim and to submit to their authority
I guess not.
I'm annoyed he mentioned you. (Obviously laytzones hador is a GH reference.)
Why aren't I on RMS's buddy list?
DB, try some more kefira. It's like pheremone for gedolim; they can't resist it. ;-)
More kefira? I'm fresh out. I guess that's a good thing. At the next Asifa I'm going to hire some guy to stand outside with a sign showing my URL.
DB, try some more kefira. It's like pheremone for gedolim; they can't resist it.
And once thats done, you can get your own T-shirt.
You know, from reading this stuff, and reading comments by Lakewood Yid, my emunah is literally almost gone. It's so depressing.
>and 90 millions Egyptians? Intresting that one country had more than double the worlds population at that time.
Well, if you count up the fingers and toes of the Egyptians then maybe you'd get 90 million. Sort of like how "yesh shishim ribuy osios latorah" (from the Zohar) is explained on a literal level if you do things like making an aleph into two yods and a vav etc.
S got me wondering...
Egypt -
Population (July 2005 est.): 77,505,756.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn...ei/bgn/
5309.htm
Egypt's population, estimated at 3 million when Napoleon invaded the country in 1798, has increased at varying rates. The population grew gradually and steadily throughout the nineteenth century, doubling in size over the course of eighty years. Beginning in the 1880s, the growth rate accelerated, and the population increased more than 600 percent in 100 years. The growth rate was especially high after World War II. In 1947 a census indicated that Egypt's population was 19 million. A census in 1976 revealed that the population had ballooned to 36.6 million. After 1976 the population grew at an annual rate of 2.9 percent and in 1986 reached a total of 50.4 million, including about 2.3 million Egyptians working in other countries. Projections indicated the population would reach 60 million by 1996. http://countrystudies.us/egypt/55.htm
S., if you count their cells individually, the numbers are even MORE amazing! And by atoms? Oh, the mind boggles! Don't even talk about particle physics or I might pass out from joy.
It's interesting that this issue has been taken head on, and in such a frank and public manner
I couldn't tell if you were being serious or sarcastic here.
In what sense was this meeting a 'taking on' of an issue? It seemed more like "making sure the masses got the message".
Squealer from animal farm, anyone?
>and 90 millions Egyptians? Intresting that one country had more than double the worlds population at that time.
Those were just the soldiers who chased the Bnei Yisrael. Extrapolation would require us to believe there were about 400 million egyptions in total.
And if you don't beleive it you are a kofer. All midrashim are true.
Is there an actual source for the 90 million figure?
The Wolf
> He mentioned a Rabbi in Flatbush who made a speech someone didn't like, so it got put on the Internet where it attracted 300 posts!
What was that referring to?
And I agree, Shine that spotlight. Maybe if there'd have been an Internet a few hundred years ago, things would not have gotten this warped.
go to www.torahweb.org to hear the MO version.
KT
Raboisai,
We are witnessing history in the making. Last night's Brigade of the Two Blathering Mullahs is going to go down in this century's Divrey Hayamim as the most meaningless and ineffective sermon on the evils of the internet. My prediction: this feeble effort will serve to expand the readership on these leitzanus blogs. Hallelujah!
What was that referring to?
http://godolhador.blogspot.com/2...e-
chareidi.html
http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2006...nd-
moetzes.html
http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2006...m-of-
right.html
http://boroparkpyro.blogspot.com...st-
century.html
http://
failedmessiah.typepad.com...vil_of_har.html
he found that Yeshiva kids are much more likely to talk to strangers on the Internet than Jewish day schools kids.
Doesn't that show that having more more restrictions on the internet exacebrates the problem instead of solving it?
It shows that kids whose parents don't realize they use the internet are more likely to use it in an unsafe way. Well, duh.
My understanding is that residential yeshivas generally don't provide internet access. So yeshiva kids normally would only be able to use it during brief visits home. Day school students OTOH probably use it on a regular basis.
He (Rabbi Wachsman)was also very concerned with loshon hara and mentioned a Rabbi in Flatbush who made a speech someone didn't like, so it got put on the Internet where it attracted 300 posts!
It isn't Lashan Hara if: a) the Rav made his statements in a public forum (more than three people) and b) there is a Toeles.
When a respected Rav calls call other Orthodox Rabbanim Apikursim... what are we supposed to do? Just sit there and say: Hmmmm... If he said it... it must be true?! Kavod HaTorah demands that we set the record straight, and label such accusations against Modern Orthodox Rabbis Motzie Shem Ra that it is.
Rabbi Wachsman should have been more concerend about the Motzie Shem Ra of that "Flatbush Rav" then he was about my critcizing that Rav for saying it.
"It shows that kids whose parents don't realize they use the internet are more likely to use it in an unsafe way."
Just like sex.
"nusach ashkenaz which is very rare for a hasidic town like Monsey. You could see many confused faces in the crowd when the Chazan started with vhu rachum and not shir hammalos."
That sounds exaggerated. There are various types of minyonim that daven Ashkenaz in Monsey. Yeshivish, Yekkish, MO....... You mean to say that Hassidim there never were in a place that davened nusach Ashkenaz in their lives before the asifa ??? Sounds like it might be a reflection/projection of the reporter.
He called them misyanvnim, on Chanukah. Not apikorsum. But misyavnim implies kill 'em even though he could hardly have meant that literally. But it was a fighting comparison.
>Sounds like it might be a reflection/projection of the reporter.
Might be. In fact, the whole report is obviously slanted towards a point of view--although I don't assume that quotes or the basic content is fabricated.
As for the topic of the Asifa, the concerns they mentioned have merit. I don't think anyone can deny the real dangers outlined by these rabbinic figures. But what they fail to acknowledge is that the benefit is equal to the detriment. They did not speak to the wonderful resource the internet is for all types of knowledge inculding Torah knowledge.
Yes, children need to be protected and adults with problms that are exacerbated by internet use should avoid usage. But for the rest of us, it is too valuable a tool to throw out.
This has always been the solution of the right. The slightets possibility for misuse of anything... ban it!
Thank God I don't live in the east coast :)
R' Wachsman is given to hyperbole and loud, impassioned rhetoric. He's also a 100% bona-fide charedi who speaks English moderately well, so he's going to be on the roster when they want to get a RW message out.
Who's volunteering to attend the women's version of this asifa?
>But what they fail to acknowledge is that the benefit is equal to the detriment. They did not speak to the wonderful resource the internet is for all types of knowledge inculding Torah knowledge.
I would assume that this is in part because they have no knowledge of such resources. It may well be that the speakers use email or online banking and do appreciate to some degree the internet's utility, but its likely that none of them have ever really used or even seen the kinds of resources you speak of.
IIRC R. Wachsman delivered a great speech at the Siyum Hashas in MSG. He spoke (loudly!) about how the Talmud belongs to ALL JEWS and I sat their thinking, "Right on!"
"It isn't Lashan Hara if: a) the Rav made his statements in a public forum (more than three people) and b) there is a Toeles."
My version of the Sefer Chofetz Chaim has, I believe, 7 steps necessary before revealing loshon hora for toeles reasons. Maybe you got the abridged version.
Woohoo i'm quoted!
Hey, anyone know why Yekkes also begin Maariv with Shir Hamaalos? Maybe i should just ask Lipman...
>But what they fail to acknowledge is that the benefit is equal to the detriment
The same kind of argument was used against the Gutenberg press, too. Fundamental religion has always missed the mark in its opposition to new technlogy. If UO rabbis want to be effective, they have to be knowlegeable not just about the internet, but history, too.
"Hey, anyone know why Yekkes also begin Maariv with Shir Hamaalos? Maybe i should just ask Lipman...
Steg (dos iz nit der šteg)"
IIRC, that is only when they daven 'maariv bizmano', not always.
Rabbi Wachsman should have been more concerend about the Motzie Shem Ra of that "Flatbush Rav" then he was about my critcizing that Rav for saying it.
Ia m not surprised REW chose to protect his own kind. Am I naive or realistic?
>I'm not surprised REW chose to protect his own kind. Am I naive or realistic?
The idea that what rabbanim say to their congregants or students can be dissected by hundreds of anonymous strangers must, rightly, scare the bejeebus out of them. Truth to tell, I wouldn't want my words broadcast and dissected without my control. But such is life today, so hopefully the positive result is more responsible speech.
So R' Wachsman says it "was not a real ban", but R' Solomon says "the only solution was to ban it"?
And why is it automatically LH to have a blog post about a speech? Why is that LH? If we can talk about it, why can't we blog about it?
Loved that bit about the standing up. Wish I could have seen it!
This account is a more accurate one than the account that appears on DovBer, but it still leaves much to be desired. The powerful word picture of the forces of tumah in pursuit of Klal Yisrael at the Yam Suf has been bastardized into something unrecognizable. The central point of the parallel between the end of Galus Mitzraim and the end of out galus has been dropped.
The point of the post regarding the Rabbi that garnered 300 posts, was that those were posts of bizui, spewed anonymously, and archived forever. That is maasim bichol yom to you fellas, but an intolerable state of affairs to those who have not yet been "zocheh" to discover blogs.
The words "Rabbi Waxman closed by defending the idea of Internet bans," are almost the diametric opposite of what he actually said. He said that there was no ban in Lakewood. People were not told simply to uproot [their web connections.] The reason some people [not "the media"] described it as such is that it makes it easier to then portray the rabbonim as ayatollas.
The description of Norman Lowenthal's presentation does not mention that he described how his surveys were done and that he will make the questionnaire available for anyone interested. He was the model of straightfowardness.
I don't remember R' Mattisyahu speaking about science in the slightest. Maybe I missed half a sentence as I was trying to write down other points, but it could not have been a major topic at all.
R' Mattisyahu did speak about blogs and their correspondents. I was close to the front and heard him clearly.
[clears throat]
You know, a lot of the discussions that transpire on these blogs come down to credence in content providers: Whose content do you trust?
I love S. and Gil because they provide trustworthy content regularly. No one can be 100% and still post frequently, but they are consistent. I have a certain respect for GH because he is true to his feelings or his thoughts of the moment.
In this particular discussion, there are two topics I know personally and well: The nature of blog comments and the asifa last night. And we have two sides providing content:
R' Mattisyahu described blogs [and their comments] as a moshav leitzim. That is substantially correct all the time and dead-on much of the time.
The reporter and the commenters on this post [up to 2:11 pm when I began this] described last night's asifa as an extremefest. I know that's false.
That is characteristic of many false or falsified statements made on blogs.
There is another way. There is life beyond cyberspace. You can hang around people who try to live and study the truth.
"Remember, all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more."
Take the red pill.
"This account is a more accurate one than the account that appears on DovBer"
Sorry, on "Yeshiva World."
Thanks for the presentation of another view.
My version of the Sefer Chofetz Chaim
My source is the Gemarah in Eruchin 16A: Anything which is said by an individual in front of three people (Api Tlasa) is not considered Lashon Hora, because the person revealing this information knows that it will be repeated many times. The Rashbam in Bava Basra 30A explains it the same way, i.e. that any one of the three people there is permitted to repeat what he has heard and not be concerned that it is Lashon Hora. WADR to the CC, he is very Machmir. BVut in any case, the Rav involved spoke about it in front of a lot more than three people. He wanted people to know what he said and tyhat this was his view. I don't see how this can be interpreted as LH, Rabbi Wachsman's protestations not withstanding.
You'll note that the LH this Rav said about an entire group of Orthodox Rabbanim did not elicit a single comment from Rabbi Wachsman. It was me (and others who posted about it) that he accused of Lashon Hara.
This account is a more accurate one than the account that appears on DovBer,
NCO, I see you always are thinking about me. How nice. And it's DovBEAR.
[Note: There is absolutely no account of the Asifa on DovBear.]
S. - Wow, thanks. The big time. [I guess the Matrix reference was not shaveh lichol nefesh?]
DovBEAR - You are right and right, as noted above.
If you are saying that you determine normative halacha by the gemora, so be it. But if you are defending your actions as against Rav Solomon, which you were, you should probably be supported by at least one contemporary posek. Your reading of the gemorah's halacha of al pi tlas simply is not.
Holy Hyrax,
Please email me.
lakewoodyid@hotmail.com
Yechezkel 34
Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of HaShem:
8
As I live, saith the L-rd GOD, surely forasmuch as My sheep became a prey, and My sheep became food to all the beasts of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did My shepherds search for My sheep, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not My sheep;
9
therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of HaShem:
10
Thus saith the L-rd GOD: Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require My sheep at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the sheep; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; and I will deliver My sheep from their mouth, that they may not be food for them.
11
For thus saith the L-rd GOD: Behold, here am I, and I will search for My sheep, and seek them out.
12
As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are separated, so will I seek out My sheep; and I will deliver them out of all places whither they have been scattered in the day of clouds and thick darkness
But if you are defending your actions as against Rav Solomon, which you were, you should probably be supported by at least one contemporary posek. Your reading of the gemorah's halacha of al pi tlas simply is not.
First of all it was not Rabbi Salomon. It was Rabbi Wachsman.
The Rambam in Hilchos Deios (7:5): If someone repeats things that were said in front of three people, it has become public knowledge and is not considered Lashaon Hara, as long as there is no additional information revealed. The CC was very Machmir.
Rabbi Norman Lowenthal (a cousin of mine)
:+: You rock, man. Keep the faith.
I'm not sure what the difference is whether you were refering to R Solomon or R Wachsman, unless you are holding them to different standards.
The problem with interpreting the Rambam as proposed and stating that the CC was very machmir is as follows:
1. Even according to the Rambam, you need to have been one of the three (or more) who heard it first hand.
2. The CC's conditions are not on any of the more machmir opinons but are specifically directed at employing the Rambam's leniency.
3. I believe, according to all opinions, repeating LH in a permissible al pi tlas situation is limited to repeating it in the "city" in which it was originally spoken. I'm betting spreading it across the internet doesn't qualify.
4. We haven't even addressed the issue of possible Rechilus (which may not be applicable if the Rashbam's opinion is properly applied).
BTW, the CC is in good company, your interpretation of al pi tlas also fails according to Tosfos, Rashi, Rabbeinu Yonah, and Rabbeinu Gershom. The Rashbam agrees with the Rambam but also only as regards the actual people who heard the statement.
BTW,
I'm not in agreement with an internet ban (obviously). On the other hand, I simply can't understand why people can't discuss an issue without dragging up something that someone did in the past and then trying to find a practical or halachic rationale. Can't we just discuss the issue?
Based on the accounts I've read from Monsey last night, it seems that many Rabbonim object to the term "ban" when referring to their internet ban. They claim that if this were a true ban, the internet would be prohibited at work as well as well as at home.
My question is, if the net is so evil, why allow it at work? The same porn and blogs can be accessed at work as at home. A frum man can still run off with a Non -Jew he met on the net at work.
I will admit that the following is pure speculation, but I believe this rule is based on the presumption that people are in public at work due to the presence of their coworkers and traceable network histories. The idea is that people are less likely to view the darker side of the net while in the public eye than they are in the privacy of their bedroom And that may well be the case.
But what does that fact say about their communities? I was often reminded in Yeshiva that a person who is willing to do an averah in private that he would not do in public is illustrating his rejection of G-d. Such a person obviously either believes that G-d can not see him in a closed room OR that he is more afraid of what people think than what G-d wants! Either option represents a true rejection of belief in the power and majesty of G-d.
If the public use of the net is permitted because people will be embarrassed to access inappropriate things in front of others, shouldn't the Rabbonim be much more concerned about what that fact means than attacking the medium used to access the material? Address the disease not the symptoms. Acknowledging that the net poses a much greater danger in private than public IS acknowledging a FUNDAMENTAL lack of bitachon and Yiras Shamayim. If people would abuse the net at home and not at work, they, by definition, do NOT believe in G-d. If this is the case, why are we wasting our time attacking the net? We have a much more basic problem to deal with; an apparent widespread rejection in Orthodox circles of the belief in G-d!
This is the equivalent of attacking the concept of glasses because without them, shortsighted men couldn't see inappropriate material. The solution to such a problem is NOT to outlaw glasses.
I guess its easier to attack a faceless entity than the shortcomings of one's community. I'll collect and burn everyone's glasses on Lag Boemer while some people with hashkafic questions find them answered on Frumteens.
Dag
I simply can't understand why people can't discuss an issue without dragging up something that someone did in the past and then trying to find a practical or halachic rationale
That's not what happened. Rabbi Wachsman made an accusation of lashon hara. Those accused, have every right to defend themselves.
It seems to me that at least one of the problems charedi leaders have with internet, is that anything they do or say can immediately get reported outside of their immediate circle and they are put into a position to defend themselves. They aren't used to that, and are reduced to bans (or whatever term they want to apply to them).
check out the last paragraph of
http://
chareidi.shemayisrael.com...satmaremr66.htm
funny how the Rav and YU Roshe Yeshiva don't qualify but Satmar does.
Rabbi Norman Lowenthal (a cousin of mine)
Gil | Homepage | 05.10.06 - 7:10 pm | #
Sorry. I know him from way back when and just sort of slipped into that mode.
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Rabbi Ephraim Wachsman hosts dinner tonight
Rabbi Ephraim Wachsman, from Monsey, the known overpriced badchen and internet hypocrite, will be hosting a dinner tonight at Ateres Charna. Rabbi Wachsman, who is known to take over 'tzen toazent tuler' to do his badchunis at a single chasunah, has lately been the center of controversy. The issue came up for Rabbi Wachsman when shortly after signing a clear statement against internet use by people of the heimishe community, he was found to be guilty of hypocrisy by launching a full-fledged internet fund-raising campaign. I'm actually shocked that this time he has decided to make the dinner at a bricks and mortar establishment rather than online.
Leave Comment ---This article posted by Chaptzem : 11:11 AM
Comments:
He doesn't badchen and hasn't for the last ten years. He didn't launch any internet drive, one of his honorees did. You are nothing but a bored letz, and you aren't even good at it.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by Anonymous : January 29, 2006 12:24 PM
Firstly, his name is Wachsman. Secondly he doesn't do badchanus, and thirdly he did not, and never would, put anything on the internet
for any reason, except possibly Pikuach Nefesh. He is not a hypocrite. You are a liar, a fraud and a jerk to boot!
Comment Credit ---This article posted by Anonymous : January 29, 2006 3:24 PM
Why don't you straight forward ask him why he did that online campaign before you ar emotzi shem rah?????
Comment Credit ---This article posted by baal darshan : January 29, 2006 10:07 PM
He didn't launch any internet drive, one of his honorees did.
--------------------------------
I dont care if he had his reasons for that online fundraiser.
Bottom line is that he knew about it. IF YOU TALK THE TALK YOU GOTTA WALK THE WALK.
He`s an outright fraud and phony and lots of money people and lakewooders lost total respect for this Effy (IFFY) Wachsman guy.He came to Lakewood to make a whole Raash and Tumult about internet and here he goes and utilizes it for his own agenda . Of what? Of making MULA!
Rabbi IFFY.
If you have your reasons to use internet, then i have mine . Dont you dare tell me i can or can not use internet,you hypocrite what you are.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by Anonymous : January 29, 2006 11:24 PM
If I'm not mistaken, Effie Wachsman would charge $10,000 as a donation for Vien. Gramming was a way to raise money for the yeshiva.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by Anonymous : January 30, 2006 7:19 AM
Whay can i say? You are not just a idiot but also a "ROSHA"!
Shame on you!!
Rabbi Wachsman is a well known "Godol" by all means!
Respected by all Gedoile Yisroel! if you like it or not! And he also deserves credit for forcing you to get rid of your computer that you had at home...!
And all i can tell you is that:
אית דין ואי
"He said that there was no ban in Lakewood. People were not told simply to uproot [their web connections.] The reason some people [not "the media"] described it as such is that it makes it easier to then portray the rabbonim as ayatollas."
But they are using kids' education to force compliance among parents, and those who think that's a form of blackmail are unlikely to be swayed by p.r. moves in either direction. It's the enforcement strategy that strikes people as ayatolla-ish, not the location of permissible useage.
I hesitate to use the word ayatollah because, frankly, real ayatollahs condone torture and murder and war (or at least this was the sort of ayatollah the West became acquainted with when it learned of the title and position).
So its an unfair prejorative in my opinion. But "we didn't ban it, we only told people to uproot it" is a meaningless distinction. R. Wachsman correctly perceives that the word "ban" has an ugly cache these days. But it isn't about what word is used, its about the action, its about coercing communities. And yes, its about rabbinic authority and personal autonomy (tm).
i remember the apologetic and gentle speaking of reb yaakov or reb moshe who would apologise 5 times before suggesting any advice . How times have changed... for example our newest gadol in training is ephraim wachsman of monsey
a tireless self promoter, he married the daughter of the richest jew in england and flew in half the world for his chaasunah at a 5 star english hotel. When he got married he built the first giant house in lakewood setting a new standard for kollel yungerlite. He is now the agudah spokesperson to scream against fancy weddings. In yeshivah he was considered quite chasidesh and pedestrian in learning, and never commanded any respect as a talmud chachom. He does have one great talent. He speaks in ear splitting shreiks and screams at a remarkable decibel level with sweat spattering off him due to his energetic gesticulations. This remarkable talent has made him the speaker or screamer du jour and has made him a "gadol"
Isnt this absurd?
This self promoter has now become the person giving mussar to klall yisroel.
how absurd and how healthy to question this egomaniac charlatan
2:09 PM
kudos to all of you for this helthy debate!
all this beshing of Rabbi Waxmen is terrible. He is a big tzadik i give him a lot of money and ask him advice on all my taxes and things
My number one goal is to get banned. That will bring me fame and fortune!
Eh. It's not all it's cracked up to be.
Long before the "bans" on R Slifkin and Net usage, R E Wachsman had a well-deserved rep as a RW speaker and writer whose rhetoric and opinions on matters such as Torah and science and shidduchim were extreme-even for the Charedi world. Such asifos can only be considered as attempts to cure a brain tumor with aspirin-ignoring the root causes which require radical changes in attitudes within our communities while offering palliative treatment at best.
Commenting by HaloScan
