Daas Torah | Imamother

↑ gonewiththewind ↓

Wed, Dec 12 2007, 8:09 am

Motek wrote:

miriamf wrote:

You clearly believe that the Sanhedrin ruled only in halacha, while I believe they did not keep only to halacha (as in the case of deciding whether or not it was better for people to be born) You seem to feel listening to Mordechai was not a case on daas torah, while it seems obvious to me.

Is that about our beliefs and feelings? I'd like it not to be since I find them irrelevant to the discussion.

did you get your perspective on Megillas Esther from Michtav M'Eliyahu?

I am not sure I understand your first question. I thought this discussion was on whether or not we believe in Daas torah? How is belief irrelevant? If you define "feel" as in emotion without any imput from the mind, then it would be irrelavant. I was using it as a synonym of believe, but if you do not like that word I suppose I could not use it. If you
like I can instead say "based on my research it seems clear that Sanhedrin ruled on matters other than halacha. Or I can say, Intellectually, it appears that the Chazon Ish is correct when he writes that saying we must only follow chachamim with regard to halacha and not matters of the world is the derech of the heretics etc... but it is really only playing with words. Perhaps that is not what you meant, but I tried to understand.

The answer to your second question is no

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Dec 13 2007, 4:34 pm

miriamf wrote:

I thought this discussion was on whether or not we believe in Daas torah?

I didn't start the thread to find out what people believe. I started the thread on the topic to discuss what it is and isn't.

miriamf wrote:

it appears that the Chazon Ish is correct when he writes that saying we must only follow chachamim with regard to halacha and not matters of the world is the derech of the heretics etc...

It is not consistent with the traditional Litvishe view. In earlier generations, the Litvishe gedolim mocked this concept. He is the one, more than any other person in the Litvishe world, to treat Litvishe gedolim like Chassidishe Rebbes. It's not like the Litvishe world today follows all the Chazon Ish's piskei halacha. Most don't learn his sefarim. So it's pick and choose. Where's the consistency?

shalhevet wrote:

And how did they know to make a chag and make brochos with shem Hashem? Again - da'as Torah.

This undermines your position, for "daas Torah" today certainly cannot institute a holiday with brachos. Chanuka is one of the 7 mitzvos d'rabbanan! The rabbonim, up until a certain point, were able to institute yomim tovim with brachos and other mitzvos ha'yom.

This has nothing to do with the topic since Daas Torah is about non-halachic questions such as: should a bachur learn in this yeshiva or that yeshiva, should a man leave kollel for a job in chinuch or business. Daas Torah, as it's used today, is about an opinion without a makor in Torah.

↑ gonewiththewind ↓

Thu, Dec 13 2007, 6:05 pm

Motek wrote:

I didn't start the thread to find out what people believe. I started the thread on the topic to discuss what it is and isn't.

Why do we discuss what is and what isn't with regard to topics in hashkofo such as daas torah if not to know what to believe. I would very much like you tell me what other purpose you could possibly have!!

motek wrote:

This is probably one of the most astounding things you have written, and that's saying a lot. Do you have any idea as to the greatness of the Chazon Ish? To dismiss him offhandedly like that?!? I guess you could say I am shocked. It is pick and choose, no consistency? Throughout our history our leaders have disagreed, surely you know that. Should we dismiss Hillel and Shamai because it is pick and choose and there is no consistency?! Yes, the Chazon Ish can disagree with R' Chaim and Reb Chaim can disagree with the Chazon Ish but the doesn't mean that women on Imamother can. And I am not so sure they disagree. I am certain Reb Chaim would have thought the advice of someone who is seeped in torah and is drawing his wisdom only from there is worth listening to. I think you are misunderstanding R' Caim's milchemto shel torah which certainly exists in Litvishe yeshivios as anyone can try to shlug up the Rosh Yeshiva's shiur. Do you know what the greatest of his era such as Reb Chaim Ozer and Reb Elchanan Wasserman said about the Chazon Ish? He treated Litvishe gedolim like Chassishe Rebbes?-where did you get that from? Do you know how most LItvishe homes have sefarim of his letters and every word he wrote is analyzed and learned? If there ever was anyone with daas torah in recent times it was the Chazon Ish. He was known to give precise instructions as to the best method to do surgery based solely on his torah knowledge, as he knew how to learn all types of wisdom from the torah. As Rav Greineman said at his levaya:

The Chofetz Chaim would say that in the torah lies the answer to every problem, only that we must know where in the torah to find a particular answer and then approach the matter with pure daas torah which is absolutley free of any foreign attitudes or personal interests (Motek, was the Chofetz Chaim also inconsistent with the traditional Litvish view?) It is for this reason that so many people, among them scores of Roshei yeshiva, sought his counsel. Always they came away with the definitive torah view.

If this is your attitude towards people who were so great we can not even fathom it, there really is no point to this discussion.

And I know you said this this to Shalhevet but I just gotta say something
like NO! Daas torah is not about an opinion without a makor in torah. As the Chofetz Chaim said, everything can be found in the torah. That is why we ask questions of people great in torah, because even though we do not know how to find the answer in the torah, they do.

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Dec 13 2007, 7:44 pm

miriamf wrote:

Posters should ask their own rabbis what to believe, if they have a question.

Quote:

This is probably one of the most astounding things you have written, and that's saying a lot.

Have you read all of my posts? shock

I'm impressed Wink

If you reread my post you might notice that I did not dismiss the Chazon Ish. Maybe you misunderstood though, if you think that I meant that HE picked and chose. I meant that people quote the Chazon Ish on this point but don't consistently follow everything he said. Otherwise, I don't understand what you wrote.

Quote:

Yes, the Chazon Ish can disagree with R' Chaim and Reb Chaim can disagree with the Chazon Ish

I don't get it. R' Chaim Volozhiner lived 1749 - 1821, how could he disagree with the Chazon Ish?

Quote:

He treated Litvishe gedolim like Chassishe Rebbes?-where did you get that from?

That's the concept of "daas Torah", precisely what you quoted from him!

Tell me this - do you agree or disagree that before say, 1900, nobody regarded a Litvishe gadol in this way?

Quote:

Do you know how most LItvishe homes have sefarim of his letters and every word he wrote is analyzed and learned?

Some read the letters, some don't. That doesn't mean most Litvishe people follow his piskei halacha or learn his Torah (on Gemara). But I don't see what any of this has to do with the topic.

As for the quote from the Chofetz Chaim - tell me where it is and I'll look it up bli neder and then respond to your question. I'll say this for now - that this view was beginning to be promulgated with the formation of Agudas Israel and R' Elchonon Wasserman hy'd certainly regarded the Chofetz Chaim in this way.

Quote:

then approach the matter with pure daas torah which is absolutley free of any foreign attitudes or personal interests

this came up earlier in the thread - how is the average Jew able to know whose non-halachic views are absolutely free of negios? Why is it that people who were unknowns for decades, even into old age, "became daas Torah" when even older rabbis passed away? How does that work? They acquired the lack of negius at that point in their lives?

Quote:

It is for this reason that so many people, among them scores of Roshei yeshiva, sought his counsel.

That doesn't say whether they followed every piece of advice he gave.

Quote:

Daas torah is not about an opinion without a makor in torah. As the Chofetz Chaim said, everything can be found in the torah. That is why we ask questions of people great in torah, because even though we do not know how to find the answer in the torah, they do.

I think you're confusing things here. If you asked a person who you think has daas Torah about where to live and present two options, two cities, and he tells you, can he show you where in Torah it says where you should live? Of course not. That is what I meant by an opinion without a makor in Torah, meaning there is no Torah source he can point to and say: here, this is why I think your son should attend yeshiva X etc.

↑ gonewiththewind ↓

Thu, Dec 13 2007, 8:17 pm

Motek wrote:

Posters should ask their own rabbis what to believe, if they have a question.

You did not answer my question. so what is the purpose of discussing the topics in this section then?

Quote:

This is probably one of the most astounding things you have written, and that's saying a lot.

Have you read all of my posts? shock

I'm impressed Wink

You are 100% right. I did not read all your posts. I thought it was obvious I was referring to the posts in this thread, but perhaps I should have been clearer.

Quote:

But here you are 100% wrong. The chazon Ish clearly says that seperating listening to gedolimonly in some matters is the derech of those who began the reform movement in Germany, and not the derech of Livish Jewry until 1900, as you claim. You completely dismiss his statement

Motek wrote:

I don't get it. R' Chaim Volozhiner lived 1749 - 1821, how could he disagree with the Chazon Ish?

Jeepers creepers, picky,picky. I meant gedolim can disagree. Sheesh.

Quote:

He treated Litvishe gedolim like Chassishe Rebbes?-where did you get that from?

Quote:

That's the concept of "daas Torah", precisely what you quoted from him!

At this point you lose me. the concept of daas torah is not treating Rabbonim like Chassidishe Rebbes! Those who may do so do not know what they are talking about. again I will post an explanation of what it is:

The gifts of Torah excellence – Years of Torah study yield some obvious benefits: knowledge of what to do, a mind sharpened by deep thought. Because Torah is unlike any other discipline, some less obvious benefits are part of the package. Torah is a window to the Divine Mind. The more quality time a person has spent engaging it, while fully living the prescribed Torah life, the more his own mind begins to absorb some refining characteristics. This does not mean that he becomes a demi-god, or prophetic. It does not mean that he is correct about every question put to him. It does not even mean that he is guaranteed to know more than people with special knowledge in a given area. It does mean that the most seasoned and deepest Torah scholars are well worth consulting in any issue that they themselves feel they may have some insight worth considering. That insight is regularly available to the truly accomplished talmid chacham; you can take its availability to the bank. This gift sometimes can be described as special depth and perception; at other times, it may be in the form of siyata d’shmaya – special Divine assistance. It means, minimally, that an opportunity to take counsel with Torah giants is not one to be dismissed or squandered.

Quote:

I'll say this for now - that this view was beginning to be promulgated with the formation of Agudas Israel and R' Elchonon Wasserman hy'd certainly regarded the Chofetz Chaim in this way.

This idea is a mainstay of Modern Orthdoxy and was invented by them and they are the only ones I have ever heard promoting it....until now.

Quote:

I have never heard of this and do not know what you are talking about

Quote:

That doesn't say whether they followed every piece of advice he gave.

No one says they had to. He was not a chassidic Rebbe.

Quote:

Do you not believe what the Chofetz Chaim said that everything can be found in the torah. Deciding what yeshiva to attend and where to live, OF COURSE the torah has what to say on the subject. We have to know how to apply the wisdom of torah to our situation. I thought chassidim also believed every decision in our life is guided by torah principles.

And yes, Jews before 1900 did believe this:
Torah leadership was consulted on all matters important to Jews at all times in history. Meandering through shas, one is struck by the central role of Beis Din in areas we don’t usually associate with a court of law. Rather, the Beis Din appears as the supervisorial voice of Torah experience, whether in declaring a state of war, or approving protocols of professional organizations, or setting price controls. The responsa literature from the Middle Ages and on overflows with questions put to local and regional rabbinic leaders concerning every conceivable issue that Jews faced. At each and every juncture, traditional Jews routinely turned to their Torah scholars for guidance and advice. I will not attempt to clarify whether they had a veto or only a vote, but it is clear that they were consulted. Those who would limit the voice of talmidei chachamim to more garden-variety “halachic” questions of mutar/ assur, chayav/patur (allowed/ disallowed, liable/exempt) are not being consistent with history or with Torah literature.[/quote]

↑ Motek ↓

Fri, Dec 14 2007, 4:58 am

miriamf wrote:

so what is the purpose of discussing the topics in this section then?

What is the purpose of discussing any topic in the Judaism or Intellectual section? I don't understand the question. Anybody who sees no purpose, doesn't have to join the discussion.

Quote:

Listening and following? It's simply not the metzius and you quote that later in your own post! So what do you do when you think a gadol's statement contradicts the metzius? 1) You can say you misunderstood him 2) You can say he worded it that way, despite knowing the metzius, for reasons unknown 3) you can say ______ (fill in the blank), but the metzius is what it is.

Quote:

I meant gedolim can disagree. Sheesh.

Can a contemporary gadol disagree with a Rishon too? How far back in time do you go?

Quote:

This does not mean that he becomes a demi-god, or prophetic. It does not mean that he is correct about every question put to him.

That's HIS opinion and is not how "daas Torah" is used in the frum world today. As you are well aware, many people in the frum world treat "daas Torah" as the final, correct word. It is not treated merely as an "insight worth considering." If it was, we wouldn't be having this conversation since I agree with that.

Quote:

I have never heard of this and do not know what you are talking about

Think of some current gedolim who are considered world-class gedolim in the Litvishe world who were unknowns outside their small circle 20 years ago. Did they have daas Torah 20 years ago but nobody knew it? Did they acquire it when they stepped into the position upon the passing of other gedolim?

Quote:

No one says they had to. He was not a chassidic Rebbe.

As I wrote earlier, you are not talking about daas Torah as it is commonly used in the frum world. You have a modified version of it.

Quote:

Of course I believe the Chofetz Chaim's statement. I don't think he meant that he could open up the Torah and then tell a person that his son should attend mesivta A rather than B.

Quote:

Torah leadership was consulted on all matters important to Jews at all times in history.

Of course! R' Chaim Volozhiner doesn't disagree with that. He disagrees with taking their advice as the Word of G-d.

Quote:

At each and every juncture, traditional Jews routinely turned to their Torah scholars for guidance and advice. I will not attempt to clarify whether they had a veto or only a vote, but it is clear that they were consulted.

Ah, he won't attempt to clarify etc. That's the crux of the issue we are discussing. He is saying what I am saying, that gedolim were consulted but not obeyed unquestioningly. OBEYING simply because THEY SAID SO is the new phenomenon of our times.

↑ gonewiththewind ↓

Fri, Dec 14 2007, 7:23 am

Motek wrote:

What is the purpose of discussing any topic in the Judaism or Intellectual section? I don't understand the question. Anybody who sees no purpose, doesn't have to join the discussion.

I do see a purpose. It is to gain and grow and to know what to think. You refuse to say what the purpose is though you have been asked. You say people should just just ask a Rav. That really is very funny for someone who is in the middle of arguing against daas torah to say you should ask a Rav about any questions you have instead of thinking and seeking knowledge on your own. Were you joking? I can hear it now: Uh...Rabbi..do I need to listen to you and follow what you say?

Quote:

Can a contemporary gadol disagree with a Rishon too? How far back in time do you go?

I am not sure how far back it goes back as they were both acharonim he can certainly disagree with him.

Quote:

I still don't know who you are referring to. But surely you realize that things are not black and white. A small child does not have daas torah. At what age is a person recogized as having it? It is a process, and unfolds with each person differently. When and why was each person who is considered a rishon or an acharon "voted" into their position? It is not like becoming a Rebbe which is a one day to the next thing.

Quote:

As I wrote earlier, you are not talking about daas Torah as it is commonly used in the frum world. You have a modified version of it.

My father is considered ultra yeshivish by all who know him and this is what he taught me. I have heard similarly from other talmidei chachamim. NOT that their word is the word of G-d. A main difference between Litvish and chassidish is that Litvish think a Rav has daas torah only based on the torah knowledge that he has learned that gives him a clearer insight into the torah perspective on how to act. There is nothing mystical or kabbalistic about it. There is no knowing what someone is thinking or what will happen or neshama klalis or special rebbe-chassid connection. Though I do agree that some treat Rabbonim too much like Rebbes. I personally do not and have never gone for a brocha. You seem intent on believing that daas torah means treating a rav like a Rebbe, while there are many differences. Most yeshivish people unfortunately to not even have a specific Rav, so they could not treat them like a Rebbe if they wanted to.

Quote:

Of course I believe the Chofetz Chaim's statement. I don't think he meant that he could open up the Torah and then tell a person that his son should attend mesivta A rather than B.

You do not open up a torah and tell anyone anything. They base it on the wisdom they have earned from learning torah. And there is not a respectable person who will say that if you ask where to send your child you have to treat the answer like the word of G-d.

Quote:

Of course! R' Chaim Volozhiner doesn't disagree with that. He disagrees with taking their advice as the Word of G-d.

Again, no one claims that we must take their personal advice as the word of G-d. Maybe you are thinking of times when the gedolim put out a kol korei on certain matters, and then people feel it is incumbent on the community to follow, or perhaps with regard to halacha.

Quote:

Actually, in Europe the Rav of the town generally had much more power than today- his word was law in all matters. Read some history.

↑ gonewiththewind ↓

Sat, Dec 15 2007, 5:41 pm

About the comment that the Chazon Ish believed in treaing Rabbonim like Chassidic leaders. Note Reb Moshe's understanding of daas torah:

Rav Moshe Feinstein was once asked about the propriety
of a talmid chacham's opening a yeshiva in Bnei Brak,
home of the Chazon Ish, when the rabbi knew that at times
he would take positions disagreeing with the opinions of
that legendary sage. With his characteristic sweetness of
character, Rav Moshe assured him that there would not be
any problem with this, inasmuch as he cannot imagine
that the Chazon Ish assumed no one would ever disagree
with him! Moreover, as a lover of the truth, the Chazon
Ish would certainly have rejoiced if a talmid chacham
revealed depths of Torah which he himself had not seen.

In this straightforward responsum, we see no hesitation
about disagreeing even with a great sage, "albeit with proper
respect." Which is to say that in the view of this great
Torah luminary, Daat Torah is neither monolithic nor
infallible. Nowadays there is no single group of all great
Torah leaders, such as the Sanhedrin of old. In practice,
then, people may choose (in personal, not communal
matters) to follow the directives of this gadol or that gadol;

Iggerot Moshe, Even HaEzer II:11. See also Iggerot Moshe,
Yoreh Deah I:101, p. 186.

The following is taken from Rabbi A. Cohen's paperon Daas Torah:

The Gemara says that "a talmid chacham is preferable
to a prophet."8 What does this mean, in what sense is he
superior? Commenting on this dictum, the Rashba notes,

Although "prophecy was taken away from the
prophets," this refers to prophetic visions, but the
prophetic insight of the wise men, which [comes]
via wisdom, that has not been nullified; rather they
[talmidei chachamim] know the truth through the
Divine spirit which is within them.9

Following in the same path, the Ritva10 also understands
Divine wisdom as having been given to Torah scholars,
explaining that "they perceive through their intellect many
things which, with natural intelligence, it would not be
possible to apprehend." The Maharal reaches a similar
conclusion:

[T]he wise man [talmid chacham], based on his
intellect...can grasp matters which are exceedingly
obscure.11

8. Bava Bathra 12a.
9. Rashba, ibid. The Zohar, Sh'mot 6:2 writes, "The Divine
spirit rests upon a wise man always, [but] upon a prophet, [only]
at times."
10. Ibid.

According to Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik zt"l, one of
the most difficult burdens placed upon a Jew is subjugating
his will to the dicta of his religious mentor ("lehitbatel
le-rabo"). In his view, the entire structure of Judaism is
predicated on this acceptance of the teachings of one's rabbi;
a Jew should ask himself, when a new challenge arises,
"How would my Rebbe have responded?" Rav Soloveitchik
taught that this was the essence of the clash between Korach
and Moshe. Korach claimed that "all the congregation are
holy," all of them were present at the giving of the Ten
Commandments, and therefore, in essence each Jew was
entitled to interpret the Torah as he saw fit. To Moshe
Rabbenu, this spelled the destruction of Judaism; for this
reason, he reacted as strongly as he did, begging Hashem
to wipe out Korach and his entire entourage from the face
of the earth.

It is clear that Judaism cannot survive with each
individual picking and choosing which rules he wants to
follow and which to reject. Everyone must have his rabbi
or his mentor, whose directives he is prepared to accept
even when he finds them difficult.