Torah Im Derech Eretz: Rabbi Dr Isaac Breuer's Moriah pt 9: Adam Chose Autonomy Over God's Will

Fathom Summary

Meeting Purpose

To analyze Rabbi Dr. Isaac Breuer's philosophy on the state, religion, and the Jewish people's mission.

Key Takeaways

• Modern State's Origin: The modern state's separation of church and state is a Christian concept, stemming from early Christianity's focus on individual faith over societal engagement.
• The Jewish Mission: The Jewish people's purpose is to bring the "gospel" of divine justice to the world, serving as a historical protest against humanity's self-appointed authority.
• Adam's Original State: Adam was created with a divine image (Tzelem Elokim) and free will (Demut), intended to be a partner with God in creation.
• The First Sin: Adam's sin was an act of ethical rebellion—seizing authority to define good/bad and justice/injustice—which fundamentally altered history from harmony to strife.

Topics

State & Religion: A Modern View

• State's Scope: A country's authority is limited to governing acts, not beliefs.
  • It can mandate hand-washing for hygiene but not for religious ritual.
  • This ideal state is tolerant of all religions, ensuring peace among citizens.
• Breuer's Origin Theory: This ideal is a Christian concept.
  • Early Christianity focused on the individual's faith, not the state.
  • Its core message ("Render unto Caesar...") separated religious life from civic life.
• Marxist Critique: Religion is the "opiate of the masses."
  • It's a tool of the ruling class to suppress workers, offering "IOUs" for the afterlife instead of demanding justice now.
• Totalitarian State: The party is the religion.
  • It demands total devotion, competing for the hearts and minds of the people.
  • This leads to the suppression of all other religious expression.

The Jewish Mission & History's Trajectory

• The Torah's Narrative: The Torah begins with history, not law, because the Jewish people (Am Yisrael) are a historical phenomenon.
  • Purpose: To protest against history's flawed path and influence it toward divine will.
• Adam's Original State: Created with Tzelem Elokim (divine image) and Demut (free will).
  • Tzelem (Image): The independent self-realization that allows recognition of others and, ultimately, God.
  • Demut (Likeness): Free will, the choice between spiritual and material influence.
• The First Sin: A Rebellion of Authority:
  • Adam ate from the Tree of Knowledge, seizing the authority to define good/bad and justice/injustice.
  • This was a rejection of divine authority, replacing God's will with his own.
  • Result: History shifted from harmony to a struggle between divine and human will.
• The Jewish Solution: Humanity cannot define good/justice alone.
  • The Jewish people's mission is to bring the "gospel" of divine justice to the world.
  • This requires humility before God, as expressed in Micah 6:8: "Do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with your God."

The Gemara About Rosh HaShanah (and Judgment in General) part 3, Rosh HaShanah 16b - Uganda Shiur

Meeting Purpose

To study Rosh Hashanah 16b and Parashat Kitetzi.

Key Takeaways

• Shofar's Purpose: The Shofar on Rosh Hashanah confuses the Satan, preventing prosecution by signaling our eagerness for God's judgment.
• Judgment Principle: God judges based on present actions, not future potential. This is illustrated by Ishmael's salvation, as he was innocent at the time.
• Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh: The "wayward son" law is a theoretical lesson to stop bad habits early, not a practical command. It's justified by the son's inherently defective character, unlike Ishmael's.
• Divine Scrutiny: Three actions trigger divine scrutiny: self-endangerment, expecting prayer to be answered, and asking God to judge others.

Topics

The Shofar's Role on Rosh Hashanah

• Primary Function: To confuse the Satan and prevent prosecution.
• Mechanism: Our eager acceptance of God's judgment signals confidence in His mercy, which disarms the Satan's accusations.
• Consequence of Omission: A year without a Shofar blowing will end in misfortune, as the Satan is unconfused and can prosecute freely.
• Broader Significance: The Shofar also serves as a reminder of the Akedah (binding of Isaac), the giving of the Torah, and the future redemption.

The Principle of Present Judgment

• Core Principle: God judges a person based on their deeds at the time of judgment, not on future potential.
• Case Study: Ishmael (Genesis 21)
  • Scenario: Ishmael was dying of thirst in the desert. Angels argued against saving him, citing the future wickedness of his descendants.
  • Divine Decision: God saved Ishmael, stating, "God has heard the voice of the lad where he is." Ishmael was innocent at that moment, so his prayer was answered.

Apparent Contradiction: The Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh

• The Law (Deuteronomy 21:18–21): A "wayward and defiant son" (glutton, drunkard) can be brought to the elders by his parents and stoned to death.
• The Contradiction: This seems to violate the principle of present judgment, as the son is punished for future potential (becoming a robber/murderer), not for his current actions.
• Resolution 1: Scope of Potential
  • Ishmael: Future wickedness was distant and from descendants.
  • Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh: Future wickedness is an immediate, inevitable outcome of his own character.
• Resolution 2: The "Defective Ink" Analogy
  • Halacha: A Torah scroll written with disappearing ink is invalid now, even if the ink is currently visible. The ink's formula is inherently defective.
  • Application: The Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh's character is inherently defective now, making his future crimes an inevitable consequence. He is judged for this present defect.
• Practical Application: The law is a theoretical lesson ("never happened") to stop bad habits early, not a literal command.

Three Actions That Trigger Divine Scrutiny

• 1. Self-Endangerment: Recklessly entering danger prompts a divine assessment of one's worthiness of salvation.
• 2. Expecting Prayer to Be Answered: Overconfidence in prayer's acceptance triggers a review of one's merits.
• 3. Asking God to Judge Another: Requesting judgment on someone else causes one's own deeds to be examined first.
  • Example: Sarai's request for judgment on Abram resulted in her dying before him.

Q&A: Animal Damage & Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh

• Animal Damage: In Jewish law, the owner pays the difference in the field's value before and after the damage, not just the value of the consumed crops.
• Ben-Sorer-U'Moreh Punishment: The stoning is a theoretical lesson to stop bad habits early, not a practical command.

Rischa D'Araisa Season 14 Premiere: From 26 to 3: A Week of Yartzheits: The Satmar Rav; The Netziv; Rav Kook, Ztvk"l

 (I did not participate in this episode.)

Rischa D'Araisa Season 14 Premiere:

From 26 to 3:

A Week of Yartzheits: 

The Satmar Rav; The Netziv; Rav Kook,

Ztvk"l

https://listen.jewishpodcasts.fm/yeshivaofnewark/121479

The Gemara About Rosh HaShanah parts 1&2, Rosh HaShanah 16a - Uganda Shiur

 

Fathom Summaries:

Uganda Shiur - August 10

Meeting Purpose

To study the Gemara's discussion on Rosh Hashanah judgment.

Key Takeaways

• The Mishnah (Rosh Hashanah 16a) states four annual judgments: grain (Passover), fruit (Shavuot), water (Sukkot), and humans (Rosh Hashanah).
• The Gemara resolves a contradiction between the Mishnah and a Baraita by concluding crops have two judgments: one for the pre-Passover growing season and one for the post-Passover harvest.
• The Mishnah's author is identified as Rabbi Ishmael, whose view reconciles the Mishnah's text (judgment begins Rosh Hashanah) with the Baraita's (judgment is sealed Yom Kippur).
• Daily prayer for the sick is justified by Rabbi Yossi's view that Jews are judged daily, allowing for mid-year changes to a person's fate.

Topics

The Mishnah's Four Annual Judgments

• The Mishnah (Rosh Hashanah 16a) outlines four annual judgments:
  • Passover: Grain
  • Shavuot: Tree fruit
  • Rosh Hashanah: All creatures (humans)
  • Sukkot: Water (rainfall)
• Significance: Rosh Hashanah is the primary judgment for human fate; other festivals cover specific natural resources.

Resolving the Grain Judgment Contradiction

• Problem: A Baraita contradicts the Mishnah's Passover grain judgment.
  • Mishnah: Passover judges the upcoming year's grain.
  • Baraita: An incident before Passover was judged the previous Passover.
• Solution: Rava concluded each crop has two judgments.
  • Judgment 1: Covers the period from sowing until Passover.
  • Judgment 2: Covers the period from Passover until harvest.
• Application: Abaye advised farmers to sow fast-growing barley after Passover if earlier crops showed favorable growth, leveraging the current year's positive judgment.

Identifying the Mishnah's Author

• The Gemara identifies the Mishnah's author by comparing its text to four Tanaim (Mishnah-era sages):
  • Rabbi Meir: Judgment on Rosh Hashanah, sealed on Yom Kippur.
  • Rabbi Yehuda: One judgment on Rosh Hashanah, sealed at four different times.
  • Rabbi Yossi: Humans judged daily.
  • Rabbi Natan: Humans judged hourly.
• Conclusion: The Mishnah's author is Rabbi Ishmael.
  • Reconciliation: The Mishnah describes the start of judgment on Rosh Hashanah, while the Baraita adds that the judgment is sealed on Yom Kippur.

The Daily Judgment of Rabbi Yossi

• Rabbi Yossi's view (Jews judged daily) is based on the verse "to make the judgment of his servant and the judgment of his people Israel at all times, as each day may require."
• Significance: This daily judgment is a favor for Jews, allowing mid-year changes to fate through prayer and good deeds.
• King's Judgment: The verse implies the king is judged first.
  • Reason 1: To show respect and avoid having the king wait for the people.
  • Reason 2: To judge the king before the community's sins intensify God's anger, ensuring a fairer outcome.

Daily Prayer and the Power of Judgment

• Question: Why do we pray daily for the sick if fate is decided on Rosh Hashanah?
• Answer: Daily prayer is justified by Rabbi Yossi's view that judgment is continuous.
• Rationale: This allows for mid-year changes to a person's fate, making prayer effective at any time.

Uganda Shiur - August 17

Meeting Purpose

To explain the spiritual significance of Rosh Hashanah and its associated rituals.

Key Takeaways

• Daily Prayer Justified: Daily prayer for the sick is justified by two views: Rabbi Yosef (daily judgment) or Rabbi Yitzchak (annual judgment, but prayer can still alter the decree).
• Holidays as Judgment Days: Pesach (grain), Shavuot (fruit), and Sukkot (rain) are judgment days with specific rituals (Omer, Two Loaves, Water Libation) to secure a good decree.
• Rosh Hashanah's Core Ritual: The shofar blast on Rosh Hashanah is a spiritual tool to secure a favorable judgment by evoking the Akedah (Binding of Isaac) and crowning God as King.
• Pre-Musaf Shofar's Purpose: Blowing the shofar before the main Musaf prayer is a strategic act to "confuse the Satan," demonstrating eagerness for judgment and disarming the accuser.

Topics

The Principle of Judgment & Prayer

• Problem: Why pray daily for the sick if judgment is annual?
• Solution 1 (Rabbi Yosef): Judgment is a daily process, making daily prayer directly relevant.
• Solution 2 (Rabbi Yitzchak): Judgment is annual, but prayer can still alter the decree post-sentence, though it is harder.

Judgment Days & Their Rituals

• Pesach (Passover): Judgment for grain.
  • Ritual: The Omer offering (barley).
  • Rationale: Barley is a humble offering, distinct from wheat, to secure a blessing for the grain harvest.
• Shavuot: Judgment for tree fruits.
  • Ritual: The Two Loaves offering (wheat).
  • Rationale: Wheat is offered to atone for the sin of Adam, who is traditionally believed to have eaten from a "wheat tree."
• Sukkot: Judgment for rain.
  • Ritual: The Water Libation.
  • Rationale: Pouring water on the altar is a symbolic prayer for abundant rain in the coming year.

Rosh Hashanah: The Main Judgment

• Core Ritual: Reciting verses (Malchiyot, Zichronot, Shofarot) and blowing the shofar during the Musaf prayer.
• Purpose: To crown God as King, prompting a favorable remembrance.
• The Shofar's Significance:
  • Akedat Yitzchak (Binding of Isaac): Evokes Abraham's ultimate devotion, inspiring us and prompting God's mercy.
  • Matan Torah (Giving of the Torah): Recalls the shofar at Sinai, linking our devotion to receiving the Torah.
  • Geulah (Redemption): Foreshadows the shofar that will announce the final redemption.

The Shofar's Sounds & Timing

• The Sounds:
  • Tekiah: A long, continuous blast.
  • Teruah: A staccato series of short blasts.
  • Shevarim: A series of three broken blasts.
  • Why all three? The Torah's command for a "teruah" is ambiguous. We blow all three sequences (Tekiah-Shevarim-Tekiah, Tekiah-Teruah-Tekiah, Tekiah-Shevarim-Teruah-Tekiah) to ensure we fulfill the mitzvah.
• The Pre-Musaf Blowing:
  • Why? To "confuse the Satan."
  • How? By blowing the shofar before the main prayer, we demonstrate eagerness for judgment, disarming the accuser and securing a favorable decree.

Rischa D'Araisa Summer Special 2: Toxic Landscapes: Ideology, Antipathy, and Betrayal: The Israeli Electoral System

Rischa D'Araisa Summer Special 2:

Toxic Landscapes:

Ideology, Antipathy, and Betrayal:

The Israeli Electoral System

https://listen.jewishpodcasts.fm/yeshivaofnewark/121257

 

An Amazing Solution When You Don't Know If You Have to Recite a Beracha

For example, if you were in doubt if you made a Borei Pri Ha'Etz you would say

(with the Shem): וַיְבָרֶךְ דָּוִיד אֶת ה' לְעֵינֵי כָּל הַקָּהָל וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִיד בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אָבִינוּ מֵעוֹלָם וְעַד עוֹלָם: לְךָ ה' הַגְּדֻלָּה וְהַגְּבוּרָה וְהַתִּפְאֶרֶת וְהַנֵּצַח וְהַהוֹד כִּי כֹל בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ לְךָ ה' הַמַּמְלָכָה וְהַמִּתְנַשֵּׂא לְכֹל לְרֹאשׁ בורא פרי העץ

A recording for the BHP daily Halachic Whatsapp group https://chat.whatsapp.com/Gz8rrxqRcfy9rMOXRLG6GS

 

Torah Im Derech Eretz: Rabbi Dr Isaac Breuer's Moriah pt 8: The State vs. Idolatry & Christianity

Fathom Summary:

To trace the historical evolution of religion's relationship with the state.

Key Takeaways

• Ancient Religion: A nationalized, state-sanctioned force with no conflict between religious and secular justice.
• Christianity: A messianic movement that, after its founder's failed return, became a Church. It separated religion from the state, offering only personal salvation and dismissing national law as irrelevant.
• Modern State: The state's power eclipsed the Church's. The French Revolution then introduced liberalism, making religion a private matter of conscience and separating belief from state-enforced law.

Topics

The Ancient State & Nationalized Religion

• A state requires three independent authorities for checks and balances:
  • Legislative: Determines laws (e.g., parliament).
  • Judiciary: Judges are independent, guided only by conscience.
  • Executive: The governing body (e.g., cabinet).
• Ancient religion was nationalized, serving as the state's official divinity.
  • This created no conflict between religious and national justice.
  • The state's priests were essentially civil servants.
• Example: The Tower of Babel was an attempt to create a universal, authoritarian nation. Its failure led to the "nationalization of divinity," where each nation adopted its own gods.

Christianity: From Messianic Hope to Church

• Christianity emerged from a historical "giving up of hope" after Rome's conquest proved the weakness of national gods.
• Core Beliefs:
  • Accepted the Jewish concept of a merciful Creator.
  • Rejected the concept of God as the "King of the nations" (Hashem Tzva'o).
  • Focused on personal salvation for the oppressed, symbolized by a single "son of man."
• Initial Stance: A messianic movement focused on an imminent end-of-days.
  • This led to a separation of religion and state: "Give to God what is God's, and to Caesar what is Caesar's."
• Evolution into a Church:
  • When the end-of-days did not arrive, Christianity became an institution.
  • It offered personal salvation for the afterlife, dismissing this world's affairs as a "veil of tears."
  • It mocked the importance of law, creating a gap between the "holy" and "profane."

The Modern State & Private Religion

• Medieval Power Struggle: The Church demanded supreme governance over states, leading to centuries of conflict.
• Reformation: Protestantism subordinated the church to the state, creating national churches (e.g., Anglican).
• Enlightenment & French Revolution:
  • The state's power eclipsed the Church's.
  • The French Revolution introduced liberalism, making religion a private matter of conscience.
  • Key Principles: Freedom of conscience and religious tolerance.
  • Rationale: Belief cannot be compelled; forced religious activity is unethical hypocrisy.

 

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.