Comments for Torah Musings

Comment on The Missing 160 Years by wgewirtz

wgewirtz — Mon, 27 Oct 2025 14:30:55 +0000

As a student of Rav Prof. Michael Bernstein ztl, for my 4 years at YU, I was assigned to read the Anchor Bible on Esther. As is well known, Hazal did not know the interpretation of a number of words in Esther, which given Hazal’s residency in Persia is rather remarkable. It turns out those words were from the Medes (Modai) who became part of the Persian empire in the 4th century BCE. This allows us to date the book of Esther accurately, with obvious implications for dating the Persian period

Comment on Audio Roundup 2025:38 by wgewirtz

wgewirtz — Sun, 26 Oct 2025 16:14:29 +0000

It is highly unlikely that Moshe or Shlomo knew how to calculate as we began to do in Tannaic, Amoraic and Geonic periods. Saadyah Gaon’s claim to the contrary is largely believed (Rambam and Ramban) to be an attempt to dispute the position of the Karaites. Saadyah’s proofs are used by modern bible critics to prove a calendar like that of the Saducees in earlier times.

The earliest evidence of an attempt to calculate the average lunation, and a rather poor one, dates back to the first temple period. The Metonic cycle was first articulated in the 5th century BCE.

Comment on Mincha after Sunset by wgewirtz

wgewirtz — Thu, 23 Oct 2025 14:43:24 +0000

according to many/most achronim (including the Ba’al HaTanya, Rav Chaim Volozhin, the Ben Ish Hai, minhag Yerushalayim, etc.) following the position of the geonim, shikiya is not sunset but 4-10 minutes later. Shikiyah as sunset is largely a 20th century phenomenon for which there is limited to no earlier halakhic support.

Comment on Leaders and Their Roles by Akiva

Akiva — Thu, 09 Oct 2025 10:10:03 +0000

<<< The rest of the people gave up milah all those years out of real but overblown concerns, where the Levi’im continued observing the mitzvah despite the real occasional consequences. >>> My compliments on the carefully nuanced phrasing. I do not see any question here of one side being more right or more wrong than the other. My understanding is that the halacha of when something is so dangerous as to be forbidden is determined not by actuarial tables but by the local perception. As we see, there are things which people accept as normal, and therefore they do them, even though statistically they are more dangerous than other things which people refrain from, and the halacha sanctions that. In a time when each shevet had its own culture, we should not be surprised that these differences arose for bris mila as well

Comment on When a Non-Jew “Clicks” a Door Open on Shabbat by Szántó-Várnagy Binjomin

Szántó-Várnagy Binjomin — Fri, 26 Sep 2025 09:05:54 +0000

“A Jew may request of a non-Jew to provide something for him on Shabbat if it is feasible for the non-Jew to do so without violating Shabbat, even if we expect him to choose the more convenient way that includes doing a melacha (Orchot Shabbat vol. 2 p. 466; see Mishna Berura 276:31; Shemirat Shabbat K’hilchata does not discuss this concept).”

It does, see 30:65.

Comment on A Parting of Ways by Kohelet

Kohelet — Mon, 25 Aug 2025 04:30:42 +0000

Excellent analysis. On this topic of Hartman’s departure from the traditions of his mentor, Soloveichik, it is worth noting the oft quoted story of Hartman’s concern following Soloveichik’s encouragement for Hartman to work on a doctorate in philosophy at Fordham University:

“But I may go astray in such a permissive place,” the young scholar worried.

“Planes crash,” Soloveichik said, “but we take them to get where we need to go.”

The epilogue to this story is that decades later Hartman and Soloveichik attended a rabbinical gathering, and Hartman wished to have an audience with Soloveichik and reached out to one of Soloveichik’s students telling him: “Rebbe, ‘Duvie’ (as Soloveichik called Hartman) is here to see you).” And Soloveichik declined to speak with him responding: “Duvie, I don’t know of such Duvie.”

When told that Soloveichik would not speak with him, Hartman quipped: “Tell him that the plane crashed!”

Comment on Disputing the History of the Disputation by Micha Berger

Micha Berger — Mon, 18 Aug 2025 06:26:11 +0000

In reply to phin.

Actually, what Chakham Faur “shows” is that he was so biased in favor of his inaccurate reconstruction of Andalusian tradition and the Rambam that he was willing to libel the vast majority of the Rishonim to promote it.

Chakham Faur became the subject of “cancel culture”, as we would call it today. But only because he himself fired the first shot.

Personally, I do not think it coincidental that a rabbi who brought Historical School style critique to the Maimonidian Debate ended up in JTS, a descendent of that school of thought, rather than an institution within the Orthodox camp. He is not unique in being someone who himself fit within the Orthodox umbrella (at least as I would define it, there is no formal definition) who did research and taught there. But in his case, as I said, I think there is a reason why he fit there and not one of our institutions.

Comment on Talmud Torah In the Age of AI by mycroft

mycroft — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 19:56:40 +0000

Agree with your basic point 100%. FWIW I would have made a bigger deal of the invention of printing with moveable type which made sources much more available and decreased the importance of memorization. Certainly need an understanding to internalize Torah in body, however, AI continues decrease in importance of remembering where exactly one can find what one assimilated.
Perhaps Rav Lichtenstein’s crack that dibarnu dophi refers to those who cite the daf too much.

Comment on Halakhah, Kabbalah and History by nosson kamins

nosson kamins — Fri, 18 Jul 2025 14:15:19 +0000

In reply to Jr. That was how Rav Yaakov Weinberg addressed the issue

Comment on Was Rabbi Hillel a Heretic? by Dovid Gottesman

Dovid Gottesman — Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:39:22 +0000

Marc Shapiro in his new book on the thought of Rav Kook explains this very gemara according to the thought of R Kook, I recommend the whole book