tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post5296942626458614253..comments2023-05-11T04:38:06.086-04:00Comments on Analysis of the Post-chareidi Phenomenon : Gaonim and the Ban on Talmudic MedicineUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-32866588571523530902014-01-27T08:41:32.087-05:002014-01-27T08:41:32.087-05:00This blog has it backwards. It's the Charedim ...This blog has it backwards. It's the Charedim who have invented radical new theologies, and who take quotes out of context and distorted sources, to justify and defend a new movement at odds with classical Jewish thought.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07652682205118901254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-44167099949278472852014-01-23T22:55:13.599-05:002014-01-23T22:55:13.599-05:00>>>>> We must inform you that our S...>>>>> We must inform you that our Sages were not physicians. They may mention medical matters which they noticed here and there in their time, but these are not meant to be a mitzvah. Etc …<br /><br />I assume that this post is not denying this quote is correct, i.e. that Rav Sherira Gaon said this. <br /><br />So then, to us simple-types, the text seems straight forward and thus there is little doubt in my mind that he held that Chazal were not to be considered expert in medicine and hence one should not or cannot rely on their suggested treatments. By him saying that they were NOT physicians is just a polite way of saying they really shouldn’t be trusted for their remedies.<br /><br />Further, while it may be commendable to expend all this effort and erudition to explain this quote from Sherira Gaon in a manner that might to defend you beliefs about Chazal superiority in science? or is it infallibility in science?, it seems to me that explaining text in a fashion that obviously belies or distorts its plain meaning simply creates a situation that all text read by the uninitiated becomes text that is basically meaningless or at best bereft of useful implication.<br /><br />OTOH, why don’t you try to provide some support to your belief on this matter (i.e. Chazal superiority in science? or is it infallibility in science?) by providing several examples of where Chazal made a statement about nature that apparently was unknown to their secular contemporaries that turned out to be exceptionally perceptive or prescient.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09178305201800567522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-10193843401793254822014-01-20T20:56:57.678-05:002014-01-20T20:56:57.678-05:00I think he has a valid point here, unlike the qout...I think he has a valid point here, unlike the qoute from rav hai, rav sherira says nothing to even hint about chazals remedy having worked then but not now or us lacking info about the remedy, he just said that all chazal"s remedies needs independant verification, which like he pointed out is a respectful way of saying that chazals remedies should not be taken as authoritive.anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05933934213141428258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-90794276715658609822014-01-20T15:50:27.878-05:002014-01-20T15:50:27.878-05:00At this point it is not a requirement but my perso...At this point it is not a requirement but my personal preference.YSOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05388331841479384468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-2650296416200829662014-01-20T14:28:25.924-05:002014-01-20T14:28:25.924-05:00YSO,
I didn't know anonymity was an issue on ...YSO,<br /><br />I didn't know anonymity was an issue on this blog, which is fine, but perhaps you might want to indicate it so people know before posting. <br /><br />Kol tuvShades of Grayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03029177164921795725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-43870203495040156822014-01-20T14:13:46.294-05:002014-01-20T14:13:46.294-05:00Thanks for your comments. Please provide us with y...Thanks for your comments. Please provide us with your actual name.YSOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05388331841479384468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-82631720733519787272014-01-20T10:36:35.879-05:002014-01-20T10:36:35.879-05:00When I read R. Hai Gaon's statement, I see a m...When I read R. Hai Gaon's statement, I see a man who is genuinely respectful of prior generations of sages, who doesn't want to directly contradict them, but who doesn't want anyone to die following their medical advice. <br /><br />Sometimes it's appropriate to disagree with earlier generations. We don't follow their medical advice. We revere Rabban Gamliel, but we don't test for virgins by making them sit on barrels of wine (Kesubos 10b). It isn't mocking. <br /><br />-Andrew Fenster<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12994751553407813216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-85047401337912549232014-01-20T01:15:41.505-05:002014-01-20T01:15:41.505-05:00"It is unsound for R. Slifkin to base his re... "It is unsound for R. Slifkin to base his revolutionary new approach to Torah upon this controversial sub-section of the ma’aamr"<br /><br />1) The approach came before RNS, and was said, for example, by R. Dovid Orlofsky, a student of R. Moshe Shapiro("There have been many important Jewish thinkers over the years who have suggested that the chazal worked with the knowledge available at the time when they lived, and maybe they were wrong. For a more thorough discussion of this approach you can see Nosson Slifkin's "The Science of Torah").<br /><br />2) R. Aharon Feldman wrote, <br /><br />"R. Yosef Shalom Eliashiv, a signatory to the ban, was asked: if he considers Slifkin’s approach wrong how could so many earlier authorities have held it? "He answered: “They were permitted to hold this opinion; we are not.”<br /><br />This implies that there are Rishonim that agree with RNS.<br /><br />3) R. Shimon Schwab in Note 6 of his "Comparative Jewish Chronology" essay writes, "For methods of Aggadic explanations ...ayin maamar al ha'aggados l'Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam". <br /><br />At least RSS saw no issue with RABH being forged or corrupted(although he advised against publishing RSRH's letters on Chazal and science because "the letters are controversial and likely to be misunderstood, and that his publishing them would just bring him unnecessary tzorres", as quoted by Dr. Lawrence Kaplan).Shades of Grayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03029177164921795725noreply@blogger.com