לזה קוראים בעל אגדה ומקרא?

שבת סוף י’ ב’ על פרשת וירא:

אמר רבא בר מחסיא אמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב, לעולם יחזר אדם וישב בעיר שישיבתה קרובה, שמתוך שישיבתה קרובה עונותיה מועטין, שנאמר הנה נא העיר הזאת קרובה לנוס שמה והיא מצער כו’ אלא מתוך שישיבתה קרובה עונותיה מוצערין. (אגב, דוגמא להוראת חז”ל מפורסמת פחות.)

והקשה חכ”א ע”ז מיונה ד’ י’, ויאמר ד’ אתה חסת על הקיקיון אשר לא עמלת בו ולא גדלתו שבן לילה היה ובן לילה אבד. ואני לא אחוס על נינוה העיר הגדולה אשר יש בה הרבה משתים עשרה רבו אדם אשר לא ידע בין ימינו לשמאלו ובהמה רבה. ולא קשה מידי, דהקב”ה אינו וותרן להאריך אפו לעולם, אבל לא אחפץ במות המת והשיבו וחיו.

Innovation, Not Change!

In Mishpacha Magazine (after Rabbi Mendel Weinbach’s death) Rabbi Notta  Schiller said the name “Ohr Same’ach” was chosen for the Yeshiva (among four reasons) because they believed that, to have an effect, they needed innovation, not change, and they saw that principle personified in Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, author of “Ohr Same’ach.

Rabbi Meir Simcha, unlike other rabbis, didn’t oppose the government’s decree rabbis must study Russian, in spite of this being contrary to custom. He felt it was, in fact, a Kiddush Hashem and/or current need.

Castrating the Torah

Rabbi Yitzchak Brand writes the idea of silly legal fictions is a “cancer” on Judaism, wiping out every Mitzvah in its path.

When Jews wish to castrate a dog, etc., some of them came up with the “fresh” idea of first “selling” the animal to the non-Jewish vet, who does what the owner wants, then resells it back…

Do I need to explain why this chicanery doesn’t override the Torah prohibition of castration, and adds Chillul Hashem, to boot?!

The Satmar Rebbe Gives Anti-Zionism a Bad Name

The Satmar Rebbe is usually presented as not only prescient, which he wasn’t, a Torah scholar, which he most certainly was not, but also genuinely empathetic to his opponents, praying for them, giving them charity, and judging them favorably in private.

The very last tale comes not from any direct evidence but is an extrapolation made by Rabbi Sternbuch (among others) from a vort (homily) he said in this last week’s Parsha, Vayera: If he attributed something to Avraham Avinu, he must have also done the same himself. (This is actually partly logically sound because the opposite is impossible: Like most rabbis, he had no interest in a historical, factual examination of the Torah, so almost everything he said was a psychological projection, of sorts). Except the vort is bowdlerized (nor is there anything particularly creative about it), so you don’t notice that the lesson pertaining to the man himself is flatly false.

Here’s the vort (the omitted part in bold):

Bereishis 19:27: “Avraham got up early to pray where he usually did…” [referring to the plea Hashem spare Sedom]. Why did Avraham wait until morning? Chazal say it’s because a Talmid Chacham may not travel alone at night (at least according to Tosafos, Chulin 91b).

Asks the Satmar Rebbe, why couldn’t he bring people along, as he did by the Akeidah?

Answered the Satmar Rebbe, this was because he didn’t want anyone hearing him finding merit in Sedom, lest they follow in their ways. Indeed, he added, although there is a Mitzvah to oppose the wicked, as David says in Tehillim, Your hater, Hashem, I will hate, and I will fight those who rise up against You, etc, when one is speaking to Hashem himself, one should ask for mercy for them. This is since when Hashem punishes the wicked, he often punishes others as well, as the Gemara states in Bava Kama 60a.

See the difference with the added part?

I’m not going to try and comment on the ludicrous content itself (although it was just a homily).