Wow, Lord of the Rings right next to Rambam!
At least it's not next to Tanakh!
;)
>I can recall reading a book about peshat and derash
hmmmm. I wonder what it was called? ;)
:)
They're opposed to the whole concept of the marketplace of ideas. They must be afraid their ideas can't compete.
Gosh, I'm flattered.
I think you are right. Their main contention is with the subversion of control and authority in general. It's not just that certain blogs are derisive to rabbinic authority. It's the wild west nature of the web in general and blogs in particular, and the fact that they can't control it. Even the ones that tow the line represent a shift in control.
I personally think that it's a good thing. From the community perspective, it provides a bit of checks and balances that obviously are missing. And from an intellectual perspective, I think there's a potential to push things along.
It's a little hard to see, but notice that Rambam is not only next to The Lord of the Rings, it's also next to Machiavelli's The Prince. There was a little bit of thought into how the books were arranged. ;)
>They're opposed to the whole concept of the marketplace of ideas. They must be afraid their ideas can't compete.
Yes and no. I think they'd think of it more along the lines that they're sure their ideas will be spoiled.
Greg
It's a great image!
Do you think that blogging has really changed the minds of those who adhere to the daat of the gedolim on every issue anyway?Those of us who read them,at least I think, had a different perspective before we read the blogs.Some of the blogs just help us to see that there are many others who think the same,or can verbalize these opinions in an eloquent way
>Do you think that blogging has really changed the minds of those who adhere to the daat of the gedolim on every issue anyway?
Such a maximalist group is small anyway. I think we need to distinguish between actual adherence and theoretical adherence. The issue is more in which machaneh the person feels they are part of. If I may restate your question, do we think that blogging has changed what camp people feel affiliated with?
My short answer is yes, but I think it is either much less than we'd ever imagine or much more. I know that's not really taking sides, but its just my hunch: either its influence is far more negligible or far greater than any of us suspect.
Greg:
If you're interested, email me and i'll send you a link to a brilliant Judeo-Tolkienic Sukkot song.
Steg
Im interested.
holyhyrax@yahoo.com
PS- Good post S. I'll need more time to catch up to your other posts.
I find it amusing the way the more respectable frum bloggers almost try to reason with Agudah by saying, "Hey, not all the blogs are bad. There is Hirhurim and Cross Currents!" Notice that these people would never mention you, S., as an example of a "good blog," because even though you run one of the most professional and scholarly of the frum blogs, it is not hashkafically pure from an Agudah perspective. (As if any of the others are.) People like Gil and Harry will link to you, but they won't use you as a bargaining chip. :)
In fairness, I come with my own baggage that they'd probably rather not deal with. But thanks for the compliment. ;)
It turns my stomach that the convention will deal with the 'issue' of blogs, and not the real issues that the blogs bring to light.
I would like a convention dealing with, among other things, child molestation in yeshivoth, the growing interest in externals to the exclusion of internal qualities, and mikva issues...
As I said in my post, the Agudah convention is in fact more about general networking and making shidduchim than setting concrete agendas for the Orthodox community.
Just like we bloggers have issues that are really just junkfood, so do they! This year they'll have a good one that everyone can talk about.
My question is if they're still planning on holding that session Thursday night. Seems like there is a slimmer chance it will get taped and deconstructed online if they hold it on Shabbos.
I think to some extent S remains undiscovered. Hirhurim now has a mainstream audience, which means that sometimes, in addition to his intellectual, thought-provoking pieces, he has to have rehashing days in order to make sure people come back (if only to continue their heated comment definitions.) S, on the other hand, is always scholarly and simultaneously entertaining. I don't know how he does it. :)
I, for one, hope the Agudah doesn't asser blogs. I'm inordinately proud of mine, even if it sometimes seems that I'm the only person that reads it.
Of course, I could spice it up. Documentary Hypotheses! Alternative lifestyles! Those smelly hook-nosed Black hatters in Boro Park! Senile spiritual leaders! Feral Yerushalmi kids! Barbie dolls with tefillin!
>Sigh
The blogosphere *is* dangerous, you can never tell when someone from an evil blog will leave an innocuous comment on a frum blog, and just by pressing on one innocent looking link.....:-)
"That is the point: the mixture. Even that which they'd generally consider good contains admixtures that would and does shock them"
I agree.
That is the essence of the internet("web"), and the blogosphere as well. In this aspect the Agudah and Gedolim are correct for wanting people to stay away from the net. Dangers to emunah from the electronic super highway are just as potent as those of pornography.
I would not recommend the Jblogs, despite their positive points, to someone seeking to grow in Emunah Peshutah, especially a young person (yes, even Mishmar comments contain a potpourri of views :) )
I have posted elsewhere that I hope that any Agudah condenmnation of blogs will be nuanced(a favorite Mishmar word on recent posts).
Any non-nuanced condemnation will affect Charedim more than MO, and although the latter might initally be happy at the possible departure of the RW, it would make the conversation less interesting :)
"I would not recommend the Jblogs, despite their positive points, to someone seeking to grow in Emunah Peshutah..."
I think that Orthodox people have a combination of the two types of faith; one can be a thoughtful type and still have the experiential type of faith, and even be a Jblogger!
What I meant was that I would not advise a person who has had no experience or exposure to the secular and/or academic worlds to read the Jblogs. I trust many would agree with this.
"My short answer is yes, but I think it is either much less than we'd ever imagine or much more"
Since everyone always takes the same positions, it doesn't look like blogs have changed anyone. One can read the New York Times editorials day after day and still maintain the same conservative views he originally had. I posted on Mishmar ("The Hypocrisy of Appeal to Authority Diatribes") half-seriously that one day, bloggers should take the other guy's positions for variety!
However, in a more subtle way, people might have changed. Everyone is influenced by their enviornment, as the Rambam says.
The positive aspect of blogs is that people get to see different opinions than their own. I think of a blog like a subway car-- a room full of strangers with different thoughts and backgrounds, who interact with each other.
"I personally think that it's a good thing. From the community perspective, it provides a bit of checks and balances that obviously are missing. And from an intellectual perspective, I think there's a potential to push things along."
It definitely fulfills a need.
From the charedi perspective, I think that blogging fulfilled a vacuum.
The Slifkin issue provided the original impetus, and it is kept alive by both sides as long as RNS will republish his books, and reactions will be published in opposition.
However, blogging would have had an effect anyway. It is a new milieu, and one can either deal with it, or insulate one's self from it.
I believe that the charedi world needs to deal with the intellectual tzibbur, if it wants to provide an alternative to blogs. Just as frum publishers publish novels to provide an alternative to secular ones, there need to be forums where there can be high level of intellectual discussions and dissenting views, if the charedi world wants a more "controlled" discussion forum, and to make blogs less appealing.
Even Cross-Currents which is moderated and pro-charedi(in the original posts), is very different than anything that exists currently in the charedi media, and should be lauded as a positive step.
"I think you are right. Their main contention is with the subversion of control and authority in general. It's not just that certain blogs are derisive to rabbinic authority. It's the wild west nature of the web in general and blogs in particular, and the fact that they can't control it. Even the ones that tow the line represent a shift in control."
I think one just has to find a way of bridging the gap between authority and the laity. Decisions may have to be more nuanced because they will be discussed, but ultimately there has to be some final authority in the charedi or MO communities.
One way to bridge the gap would be to have discussion groups, and to deal with the intellectual tzibbur on a higher level, as I stated previously.
Being intellectually independent or individualistic, theoretically, shouldn't be a contrdiction to following Daas Torah. The Daas Torah and/or the laity side can adopt to each other.
To quote Rabbi Alfred Cohen at the end of his article in favor of a nuanced concept of Daas Torah(Journal of Halacha and Contemporary society):
"And yet, on the whole, the Orthodox Jewish community today is blessed with many fine and committed people, who are not ignorant either of the Torah or of secular matters. I think they could handle serious discussions of communal issues, or appreciate in-depth explanations of certain aspects of current hashkafa. Most importantly, I think it is time we remembered that Judaism has never demanded a unitary view; dissent and open discussion have always characterized Jewish scholarship. Disagreeing with someone is not heresy, nor even rejection of Daat Torah . There are many who seek to be enlightened. They are not challenging Daat Torah – they just want to understand it better, so as to incorporate and integrate the thinking of Torah greats into their own approach to Jewish belief and practice"
You didn't mention anonymity, like in my blog ,for example. Anonimity is something our community has not yet assimilated and it is profoundly disturbing of the old patterns of community control.
The book on Peshat and Derash is probably Weiss-Halivin's - a very problematic, superficial and not very cogent, in my view.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Dav...d_Weiss_Halivni
Not that this is the Agudah attitude per se, but remember that there are people who wouldn't learn Torah from a sefer printed by specific publishing houses!
This isn't a strictly hareidi tude. I (who am non-hareidi) will sometimes (rarely) use ArtScroll davening materials because of their user-friendliness, but if I want to learn Torah I go elsewhere. I don't necessarily consider this a good thing.
I don't know if I'm the only person who takes this approach to ArtScroll.
That's not what I meant. I meant people who think the Ritva published by Mossad Horav Kook cannot be learned from.
I see. Thank you. But is this a matter of considering the MH"K text nonkosher as text, or is it an economic boycott of a publisher who publishes disagreeable materials (e.g., works by Berkovits, Sperber, Kook himself, etc.)? If it's the latter, it seems like a nonunreasonable thing to do, even if I don't agree with the ideology behind it.
Chana:
Thank you! : )
Mike, I don't think its an economic boycott per se only because such people not only do not buy it they do not learn from if it is available.
S. There is a teshuvah by Rabbi Menashe Klein banning the use of any Sefroim published by religous Zionist publishing houses or learning Hiddushei Torah by Roshei Yeshiva associated with "a Yeshiva University," (the allusion seems to be specifically to Rav Soloveitchik)since such use might lead one to, has ve-shalom, come to view religious Zionism or "a Yeshva university" as religiously acceptable. I think the teshuvah is somewhere in Helek 7.The is no objection to the text of the Hiddudshei ha-Ritva per se.
I think your post is, as usual, vey thoughtful.
e.
Bloggers should click the Presence link. The picture is much clearer, and one can make out the names of many of the books. I see Lord of the Rings, then MT, then Guide, Part 1 (Chicago UP edition), but I can't make out the books on immedately to the right and left.
I posted on Mishmar ("The Hypocrisy of Appeal to Authority Diatribes") half-seriously that one day, bloggers should take the other guy's positions for variety!
I did that at my place a while back. I called it "Opposite Day" and posted about why Christianity is true. (Judaism would have been too boring.)
I have not seen this teshuva, but it is in Vol 8, No. 3 of Sh'ut Be'er Moshe. Gil Student cites it in footnote 92 of his "Crossroads:Where Halacha Meets Theology Essay" essay.
All the way to the left is an Asimov book, I think it is Foundation. Next is The Hungry Soul by Leon R Kass, The Basic Kafka, Yosl Rakover Talks to God by Zvi Kolitz, a volume of Gemarah, a sefer which I can't make out, a Harry Potter book, a version of Guide to the Perplexed, a slim book I can't make out, a volume of Mishne Torah, The Lord of the Rings, The Annotated Alice in Wonderland, The Bridge of San Luis Rey by Thornton Wilder, the JPS Tanakh, Existentialism From Dostoevsky To Sartre ed. Walter Kaufman, Must A Jew Believe Anything by Menachem Kellner, an Introduction To Philosophy, Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide, The Illusion of Technique by William Barrett and Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas R. Hofstadter.
In short, a horror show for the Agudah.
As for MHRK editions, thanks for the bit about the Mishne Halakhos. I had heard of it, but didn't realize it was also directed at RYBS. I know the objection is never to the content of the Ritva per se. That's what makes it so, I don't know, strident? It also isn't an economic boycott since people with such a 'sensitivity' just wouldn't use that edition if it were lying on a table in a beit midrash. I have even heard discussions about whether it is permissible to throw a book printed by MHRK out that doesn't belong to you!
Thanks for the kind word. :)
S,
"I have even heard discussions about whether it is permissible to throw a book printed by MHRK out that doesn't belong to you!"
But you should note that its used in many mainstream Litvshe Yeshivos. I know at least some authors are charedi as well. IIRC, Rabbi Adlerstein mentioned its textual analysis as an example of critical thinking, in a recent thread.
>But you should note that its used in many mainstream Litvshe Yeshivos.
Of course it is. Most of them are really more non-Zionist, rather than anti-Zionist. And even if they were the latter, I personally suspect that there is some mystical intention in this idea, that the publishing house 'matters,' and that's why its something the Litvaks would really be less concerned with. IOW expect to find such an idea in R. Menashe Klein or the Debreciner's teshuvot, but not R. Moshe's.
I said in my post that this isn't the Agudah position. I just compared it, the idea of sensitivity to things "we" might not be sensitive too.
There is no such think as a good blog in their view. The main objection to blogs is not so much the content as the idea that an anybody can instantly get his thoughts out to thousands of people. That bully pulpit (and I don't mean to use that term in a bad way) is supposed to be available only to leaders. I think the way they are presenting it as a blogger vs. daas torah is not really the full picture. It is just the way to get everyone on board.
As far as blogs changing people, I still consider myself in the same machane (to use your term) as I did before I read a single blog. I will admit, however, that I think I have grown through reading the other side of many issues. In some cases, I accept some of what I have read, in other cases I feel much stronger in my beliefs after reading the other side of the issue. For Agudah (and like minded people) that former may be a problem.
As far as MHK publications, Lakewood yeshiva has a full stock of the rishonim that they publish. I don't know the exact number but I would guess that there are more than 100 copies of the ritva and rashba on the mesechta that they are currently learning, available in each bais medrash. It is probably just the chassidim that avoid MHK.
"I personally suspect that there is some mystical intention in this idea, that the publishing house 'matters,' and that's why its something the Litvaks would really be less concerned with. IOW expect to find such an idea in R. Menashe Klein or the Debreciner's teshuvot, but not R. Moshe's."
I don't think it's mystical so much as "nusach ungarn" typical hungarian scorched earth rhetoric much like the use of "yehoreg v'al yavor" for minhagim,the casual invocation of PPK, YYN, BM for any group one has differences with etc. The level of invective in ungarishe polemics has seldom been approached and never been surpassed by any other group. By hungarian standards both these tshuvos are relatively mild
Thank you for the 'here'.
I just read Yated Neaman for this week and there is a full discussion of the upcoming convention naming all the talks and all the speakers. It seems failrly complete and there is NO mention of any symposium on blogging. Is it possible they got cold feet?
After thinking more on the topic I think if there is a symposium 1)they will mention no blogger by name. 2) Their main target are people who heap scorn on them like Dov Bear and people who keep on telling them they are insufficiently MO. They are like everyone else... they want good press and want to be loved.
Wow. Lawrence Kaplan is perusing my bookshelf. I am not worthy.
I annotated a version of this picture using Flickr (S. got most of them, this should fill in the gaps). If you hover your mouse over each book, the title and author should appear.
I think I'm going to change my blog's tagline to, "A Horror Show for The Agudah." ;)
>Most of them are really more non-Zionist, rather than anti-Zionist.
It should also be pointed out that R' Aharon Kotler's Shver, R' Issur Zalman Meltzer ZTL was a big admirer of Rav Kook.
It's a modern notion, (which some charedim mistakenly have as well), that the Yeshivishe world's view and say, the Satmar Rebbe's view is one in the same.
I'd never have that bookshelf. How would I ever find anything if I left my books like that?
It was a special, one-time arrangement.
Hate to pick nits but Foundation is a trilogy (and a great one at that)
I read quite a bit of science fiction in my long ago youth and found it to open my mind in many ways which imho was very helpful in both my professional and learning life (but hopefully not so much as to allow what little brains I have to fall out :-) )
KT
I find it interesting that so many of the non-Torah works on Greg's bookshelf are works of fantasy and the imagination or, to put it another way, deal with alternative worlds: Harry Potter, Alice in Wonderland, Kafka, Foundation, Godel, Escher, and Bach, etc.
> I can recall reading a book about peshat and derash
Dovid Weiss HaLivni is an untraditional name?
Duuuude... that looks just like our bookshelf. Freaky, eh?
Commenting by HaloScan
