In this video, Shmuel Poppenheim, the editor for the Eidah newspaper, "debates" with Yaron Yidan, the Director of an organization called Daat Emet, about the law permitting Chametz to be sold openly in jerusalem. The debate gets into what tradition is more historically correct, and Poppenheim ends up refusing to argue his point.
Ironic NOTE: if you pay attention, the first few seconds, when the bar describes who Poppenheim is, it describes him as the Acting Prime Minister. After that it corrects it to say he is the editor of the Eidah newspaper.
Poppenheim has a good reason not to answer Yidan's question - it was antagonistic. (It wasn't really phrased as a question, but as an attack.) Yidan picked a few examples of things which are discussed in the gemara and shulchan aruch and based on them wrote off all of halacha as anachronistic.
ReplyDeletePoppenheim was correct in not responding, but he could have taken the high ground and pointed out that Yidan was attacking him and not really interested in hearing an answer, instead of comparing himself and Yidan to, respectively, the Ramban and a priest.
What I do have a problem with is that Poppenheim on the one hand describes very beautifully that there were 12 sons of Yaakov, and there are many valid traditions (Yeminite, Hungarian, Ashkenazi, etc.) within halachik Judaism. But when asked by the moderator why he has a problem with Otniel Shneller's law regarding organ transplants, especially in view of the fact that he [Shneller] himself is religious and has consulted with rabbis before proposing the law, Poppenheim went off and attacked the law as being against halacha. What happened to the different valid traditions that exist within halachik Judaism?
I also would not have argued against that chiloni. The chiloni newsreporter never would have given the yerushalmi the last word and the chiloni would have come out on top. Never would he (either) admit defeat - so what is to be gained.
ReplyDeleteHis basic mehalech is that there is a mesorah and you reject it. There is nothing to talk about.
In response to Yoni r - i imagine he would say - as he alluded to - that there are poskim and there are poskim. The poskim on top of klal yisroel have come out against this. He mentioned the eidah rabbonim, and also the rabbonim accepted by klal yisroel. Who are the names of those that accept this new law as halachic? RHS from YU doesnt. Neither did RMF according to what he wrote in his Tshuva sefarim. Neither does RSZA or RYSE. Do the RZ / DL poskim hold of it?
Anon,
ReplyDeleteI haven't done a review, so I don't know who holds what (and I certainly don't know their initials). I was merely pointing out an inconsistency in Poppenheim's views. There cannot be many valid halachik approaches, and at the same time, "poskim on top of [sic] klal yisroel".
There could be poskim generally accepted by a certain public, but organizing protests against those poskim who disagree seems to indicate that when he said that there are many valid traditions within halachik Judaism, he was merely paying lip service.
There is a lot to talk about- The "Mesorah" is a bunch of lies! The gemora sais: "Hachacham einav berosho", and having no questions means having no brain. Remember who is the last son in the hagada, he comes even after the RASHA...
ReplyDeleteIf your faith is strong, visit www.daatemet.org.il
and try to answer the good questions!
Simon,
ReplyDeleteYour a bunch of lies, we pasken mesorah.. we have a mesorah not to eat certain birds, not to do certain stuff..
I like the acting prime minister part lol