He might have possibly maybe said what? I'm appalled!

By -
Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky is now purported to have stated that anyone who uses an iPhone is invalid as a witness, or as a mesader kiddushin.

But why does Haaretz report on this story with the words "Prominent rabbi reportedly declares marriages and divorces witnessed by those who have Internet access invalid."

Why "reportedly"?

Why does Harry Maryles write in The Jewish Press that he's sure R Kanievsky was either misquoted or misled?

Why isn't there a clear process of communication for "gedolim" to communicate to the Jewish world they supposedly represent? Why is everything hearsay?

I know that the Charedi world doesn't work this way, but I wish there was a publication and verification process, like there is in the academic and reputable journalistic worlds. Otherwise, we depend on rumor and hearsay about what these rabbinic statements.

We should not be having endless conversations about whether a famous rav actually said what he is purported to have said or not. The conversation should be about agreement or disagreement with these statements. It's ridiculous that so much time is spent discussing who said what.

If a well known rav makes a statement, it should be unambiguous and he can then be called upon to defend or explain himself. Vague statements from behind closed doors reported by followers with agendas should not be taken seriously.

For those who adhere to the guidance of "Daas Torah", any directives of this sort should be disregarded unless there is a clear communication from the rabbi in question himself.



And for those of us, like myself, who do not subscribe to the concept of "Daas Torah"? We should similarly demand a clear and unequivocal statement from the source before we attack the rabbi in question for statements he only may have said.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What kind of skeptic are you?

By -
A comment on my last post got me thinking: There are 2 types of skeptics hanging out in this zone of the blogosphere. Skeptic type #1: I only believe what is proven by empirical evidence. There is no logical reason to believe in god or any divine source to Judaism, especially since one can trace the entirely social development of superstitious belief in gods or god in various cultures. Plus, in light of modern science, archeology, and historical research, the divine revelation and many other events related in the Torah could not have happened. The definition of a rational human being is one who bases belief on observation. I am such a rational being. It would make no sense for me to believe in something intangible like god. That is outside the realm of empiricism and therefore does not exist. The entire basis of Judaism is riddled with inaccuracies and ancient misconceptions. The Torah is clearly not divine. Therefore, the entire basis of the religion is a myth. Skeptic ty...
Read more

Women's ritual roles

By -
On DovBear's blog , LadyKaye wrote a post on whether women can lain from the Torah in public and discussed the reason given in the Talmud against it, that of "Kavod HaTzibur" (respect to the congregation). She discusses the 2 explanations generally given for Kavod HaTzibur. One is that women were simply held in lower regard. The other was a convoluted apologetic that involved women's educational opportunities (see her post for a full explanation.) I thin there's no question that it's the lower regard for women that accounted for Kavod HaTzibur. Women were deemed inferior. That's OK, since most of the world deemed women inferior at the time the halachot were written & codified. (Mishna & Talmud.) Actually, Judaism was more respectful of women's rights and status than the surrounding society. They were deemed inferior, but not property. Since the episode of B'not Zelafchad in the Torah, Judaism has had a tradition of working within the hal...
Read more

Israeli Democracy in Crisis

By -
What's going on in Israel is extremely alarming. The fact that they could have a constitutional crisis where the judiciary and the Knesset are staring each other down is unprecedented, with the judiciary threatening to strike down the law that's intended to neuter the judiciary. Mass protests, members of the government calling for the arrest of opposition leaders? Democracy there has never been more at risk. Of course it's easy for me to blame Bibi, and I do, for cozying up and elevating extreme elements. But honestly, one can blame the center opposition parties as well. Was it worth rejecting Netanyahu so utterly that you end up with a coalition like this? The only stable coalition that would govern from a normal center-right place, that would preserve democracy, is a national unity government with Likud, Yesh Atid, and a few others. That would be stable, would still lean to the right, as Likud voters obviously wished for. And you wouldn't have this moment of crisis. L...
Read more