Long, Detailed Conversation on the Scootering to Shul on Shabbos Issue

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FGQsM6rgF/ 

Image from the Forward article that sparked the conversation:

Daf Yomi Yerushalmi Seder Nashim Begins on Sunday!

DafYerushalmi.com wishes Mazel Tov on the completion of Seder Moed this coming Shabbos! 

Click here for the FREE DOWNLOAD of the Schottenstein English Edition & Hebrew Edition Yerushalmi on the ArtScroll Digital Library

Join our Talmud Yerushalmi WhatsApp group!

https://chat.whatsapp.com/LHnRjczZBgNKT51A6dqyV7

Torah Im Derech Eretz: Rabbi Dr Isaac Breuer's Moriah pt 7: The Tower of Babel, Nations vs. Justice

Fathom Summary:

Moriah by Rabbi Dr Isaac Breuer 

Meeting Purpose

Reviewing Rabbi Dr. Isaac Breuer's philosophy on the modern state.

Key Takeaways

• The Sovereign State as a "Tower of Babel": Modern states are a materialization of the Tower of Babel's "let us make a name for ourselves" ethos, making them the primary source of war by recognizing no law higher than their own.
• International Law Is Powerless: "International law" is not true law but an arbitrary arrangement, powerless to compel strong nations because it lacks a sovereign enforcement mechanism.
• Sovereignty Corrupts Justice: The state's claim to absolute sovereignty replaces justice with loyalty ("my country, right or wrong"), creating both internal social conflict and external war.
• The Democratic Dilemma: Democracy's attempt to temper sovereignty with a separation of powers (Montesquieu) is fragile, especially in states without a written constitution, as seen in Israel's current judicial crisis.

Topics

The Sovereign State & International Anarchy

• Breuer (d. 1946) views the modern sovereign state as a materialization of the Tower of Babel's "let us make a name for ourselves" ethos.
• This sovereignty makes the state the sole source of law, recognizing no higher authority.
• Result → International relations become a "society of nations" based on might, not law.
  • Treaties are mere ceasefires, not true peace.
  • "International law" is an arbitrary arrangement, not true law, because it lacks a sovereign enforcement mechanism.
  • This powerlessness is evident in forums like the League of Nations and the UN.

Sovereignty vs. Justice

• Breuer argues that sovereignty replaces justice with loyalty ("my country, right or wrong").
• This creates a "double war":
  • Internal: Social conflict from a lack of absolute justice.
  • External: War between states.
• Breuer's 1940s perspective contrasts with earlier optimism (e.g., Rav Kook, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch) about society's ethical evolution, recognizing that nationalism was not being superseded.

Types of States & Citizenship

• Breuer categorizes states by their national composition:
  • National State: Homogenous population; the state fully absorbs the nation's will.
  • Multi-National State: Multiple nationalities (e.g., Austro-Hungarian Empire); the state limits its will to benefit member ethnicities.
  • Covenantal State: A multi-national state formed by agreement among its constituent nations.
• Citizenship: A legal concept from the French Revolution intended to create unity by treating all people as equals.
  • Breuer's Critique: This ideal fails in practice, as states still grant different rights to citizens vs. non-citizens.

State Constitutions & the Democratic Dilemma

• Breuer identifies three constitutional structures:
  • Absolute State: Will is determined by a single leader (monarch, president).
  • Democracy: Will is determined by the people via a parliament.
  • Totalitarian State: Will is determined by a single party's ideology (e.g., Nazi, Communist).
• The Democratic Dilemma:
  • Democracy's attempt to temper sovereignty is the separation of powers (Montesquieu).
  • Purpose: To prevent the state's will from completely absorbing the individual.
  • Fragility: This system is vulnerable, especially in states without a written constitution, as seen in Israel's current judicial crisis.

Next Steps

• Continue the discussion, focusing on Breuer's concept of a "Torah state" and how it could function in the modern era.

 

Of Bein HaZmanim and of Rabbi Sorotzkin, a Podcast with Rabbi Mayer Schiller and Rabbi Ben Waxman

Rischa Audio version:

Rischa D'Araisa Summer Special:

The Charedi Bein Hazmanim

The Battle Weary Bochur on "Military" Leave

https://listen.jewishpodcasts.fm/yeshivaofnewark/121021

Fathom Summary:

Meeting Purpose

Analyze recent Haredi rabbinic statements and their underlying worldview.

Key Takeaways

• Recent rabbinic statements (by R' Aaron Levy, R' Sorotzkin) infantilize yeshiva students, creating a self-serving mythology that elevates their Torah study above all other service, including IDF duty.
• This worldview is rooted in an extreme interpretation of Torah Lishma (study for its own sake), which justifies a positive form of gaiva (pride/arrogance) to maintain social status and insulate the community.
• The resulting cognitive dissonance—e.g., supporting right-wing politics while rejecting the IDF—is enabled by extreme insularity, which fosters ignorance and moral blindness.
• The community's silence on these statements may signal indifference, a response to the perceived ineffectiveness of constant criticism.

Topics

The Problem: Recent Rabbinic Statements

• R' Aaron Levy (Video):
  • Advice: Pamper yeshiva students during Ben Hazmanim (vacation); don't ask them to help or criticize late sleeping.
  • Analogy: Compared students to IDF soldiers returning from a war zone, implying their spiritual struggle is equivalent to physical combat.
• R' Sorotzkin (Mishpacha Podcast):
  • Contradiction: Stated students are "partners with God" for creating a chiddush (new insight), yet also advised parents to tell them to help with dishes if idle.
  • Political Stance: Voting for a Haredi party by choice is "destroying Torah"; the only valid vote is blind obedience to rabbinic instruction.

The Root Cause: An Extreme Worldview

• Positive Gaiva (Pride/Arrogance):
  • The yeshiva system is based on gaiva, a strategy to elevate the status of students who were historically looked down upon.
  • This pride is framed as a necessary tool for waging "war" against external pressures (e.g., army service) and internal competition.
• Extreme Torah Lishma:
  • The worldview stems from R' Chaim Volozhin's interpretation of Torah Lishma as study purely for its own sake, detached from worldly application.
  • Contrast: Other views see Torah Lishma as a guide for life (R' Samson Raphael Hirsch, Kotzker) or a means to dveikus (connection to God) (Baal Shem Tov).

The Consequences: Contradictions & Insularity

• Cognitive Dissonance:
  • Politics: Supporting right-wing politics while rejecting the IDF, which executes those policies.
  • Curiosity: Encouraging independence in Torah study while demanding conformity in all other areas of life.
• Infantilization:
  • Treating grown men as children who need to be told whether or not to help at home.
  • Analogy: The Gra vs. Baal Shem Tov debate on prioritizing study over family needs, highlighting the tension between these worldviews.
• Insularity & Denial:
  • Physical separation (Haredi-only cities) fosters ignorance of external realities.
  • Example: A Haredi boy unaware of ongoing conflicts in Israel.
  • Example: MK Maklev's claim that one cannot be both a soldier and a serious learner, despite evidence to the contrary.
  • Example: The Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah's letter to the Supreme Court, rejecting the court's authority while simultaneously engaging with it.

Parashat Ekev: Start Easy!

A BHP Productions video on the Parasha.

https://chat.whatsapp.com/I4CFQwInPXNATfQSMNOeRV