Presence

I agree wholeheartedly that the existance, and widespread acceptance of blogs as a communication tool / news medium has done quite a bit to force issue like this to the forefront of public figures' conciousness.

The jury is still out, I'm sure, if the overall benefit of this medium yet outweighs the overall damage it wreaks on individuals and communities as a whole when used incorrectly.

That aside, I understand The Magen Avraham completely differently.

In any area of Torah, in order to think clearly and separate the wheat of truth from the chaff of well intended but misguided logic, one must first conquer his natural, human bias. [Thought is guided by the ratzon, not the other-way 'round](R' Dessler 101 - I never took the course in College, I cleped out of it).
Therefore, particularly when dealing in issues of halacha, one needs special siyata dishmaya to help him overcome even the small, subconcious, nuances of bias in order to reach the pinaccle of truthful clarity necessary to answer a halachic shailah completely.
That special siyata dishmaya is granted much more readily when the tzibbur needs it (ie when there is a real questioner).
When questions are posed theoritically, that element of Heavenly guidance is lacking. Thus, the ability to reach the ultimate truth of the matter is diminished.

This seems to me the direction M"A was going here.

Whether you ascribe physical or metaphysical implications to the assertion of the Magen Avraham, the end result is the same.

As with many things in life, the Internet and blogs are a double-edged sword. What you are pointing out is a neutralization of authority. It has its postives when those in postions of authority have taken that authority for granted, abuse it, and choose to hide behind it. So, we now have a more level playing field where the voices of victims and their advocates can be heard.

That being said, the downside is that authority figures and role models should play an important role in each of our lives. However, there is definitely a cynical side out there on blogs. This may go hand in hand with the tendency to paint even deserving authority figures with a broad brush. Like talk radio, bloggers can create their own predictable in-groups and out-groups. Those leaders who may express either dissenting views or render no opinion at all may be quickly relegated to the out-group.

So, balance is key here.

I commend Rabbi Gottlieb for publicly discussing this issue. Greg, I agree with your analysis. I think that the medium of the internet has certainly had an impact on the issue. Hopefully, it will ensure that in the future such issues are not just swept under the table and ignored. Is it true that only Rabbi G and Rabbi Silver addressed the issue? What about the other prominent rabbonim in the community, some of whom may have known about the particular abuse that is in the JT this week? What does it mean when only two new rabbonim in town take on the issue? Has there really been a change in attitude?

A few months ago, Rabbi Berger spoke and related that an individual asked him why he continues to speak out against the internet, shouldn't he just accept the fact that the internet has become part of society and learn to deal with it?
He responded that many many years ago, there was once a time when the Greeks tried to assimilate the Jews or at least make them live in the "modern times". He said if not for those few people (Maccabim) who stood up against the Greeks and said Mi LaHashem, we would not have survived the Greeks. Rabbi Berger said that he too is crying out Mi LaHashem and resisting efforts to accept having the internet assimilate orthodoxy.

The anonymity of the internet, and the lack of consequences for even the most vicious and deadly allegations, make any information gathered there essentially just noise, hardly of a level of verity that would justify any harm to the target of such rumors.

There are many despicable people out there whose great thrill is to watch as their vandalism snowballs and lives are ruined. There is no defense to this assault, and all of you out there, if you have any status or exposure in community matters, are targets.

You don't have to be a tzadik to know that a reasonable person will ignore whatever doesn't have a verifiable name attached, and maintain a good scepticism about that as well.

The effect of the internet in regards to the sexual abuse scandals and kashrut scandals has been only positive. Despite all the protestations of those that claim that innocent people are being accused, there has not been one that has been wrongly accused on the blogs to date. The blogs, the UOJ blog in particular, have been responsible for protecting our children from these pedophiles. In fact, four molesters were dismissed in the past year from their respective yeshivas due to the efforts of UOJ. Now this Batimore article and "action" being undertaken by the rabbonim there are also a direct result of these blogs.

How on earth can you say that no innocent person has been accused on blogs? Do you have personal knowledge about all the accused, from California to Baltimore to New York? Are you so confident that you approve of and join in the ruination of the lives of all the accused people?

CF wrote: '[Thought is guided by the ratzon, not the other-way 'round](R' Dessler 101 - I never took the course in College, I cleped out of it).'

Maybe you should have taken the course. then you'd know that R' Dessler learned it in Schopenhauer 101.

CF wrote: '[Thought is guided by the ratzon, not the other-way 'round](R' Dessler 101 - I never took the course in College, I cleped out of it).'

Maybe you should have taken the course. then you'd know that R' Dessler learned it in Schopenhauer 101.

adderabbi:
[Quote] then you'd know that R' Dessler learned it in Schopenhauer 101 [/Quote]

Actually, I am quite convinced he learned it from a Medrash Tanchuma quoted by Rashi on the Chumash(In The Desert 15:39)

However, if you'd like to ascribe one of the basic fundamental tenants of one of the greatest Torah minds and purest Torah souls of the last 100 years (btw-I am CERTAIN that he never touched anybody inappropriately) to the mental wanderings of a pessimistic, self-centered, egotistical, Buddhist-turned philosophizer like Schopenshnauzer, as opposed to crediting the Guidebook of G-d and those who have toiled to understand its depths, I suppose that is your right.
But you're wrong.

CF-
1) I assume you mean tenets, not tenants.
2) I understand that you're "quite convinced". That's fine. We can all agree, with R' Dessler and Schopenhauer, that Will precedes Intellect; so of course each of us will remain convinced of our respective positions.
3) I'm not sure why Schopenhauer's personal faults are relevant. I'm sure R' Dessler was an 'Ish Emes', and as such was willing to be 'mekabel ha-emes mi-mi she-omro'.
4) Did you know that Kelm, where R' Dessler learned, taught secular studies?
5) The dynamics of attribution is a tricky thing. People hear ideas from all kinds of places, and then see echoes of it in other sources. Perhaps he quotes the Tanchuma as a prooftext; but nobody else ever saw it there. Maybe R' Dessler was able to see that dimension in the Midrash because of his exposure to German philosophers like Schopenhauer.

can you give me mareh makom for the Magen Avraham's critique of the terumat hadeshen?

thanks

mdshoshan: still working on it; I know I've seen it. I can tell you where on the page he says it, I just don't know where the page is. ;)

How on earth can you say that no innocent person has been accused on blogs? Do you have personal knowledge about all the accused, from California to Baltimore to New York? Are you so confident that you approve of and join in the ruination of the lives of all the accused people?

I have not seen one accused molester come forward to protest the accusations against him. Instead, I have only seen more and more victims coming forward in every case. I do not want to mention names here but I will if you prefer. In the meantime, your baseless accusations against the bloggers are as bad in terms of motzi shem ra as you are accusing them. You are the prototypical Ed Zomem referred to in the Torah. Until you can name one accused molester who was wrongly accused, then I suggest you stop your vicious attacks on the bloggers. They have done only good in bringing this horrible issue to the forefront and have saved countless Jewish children from these predators. All people like you have done is try to hamper their efforts with your self righteous,ACLU inspired, molester defending attitude. Enablers like you are in some ways as dangerous as the predators themselves.

ADD-
1) I meant tenants
2) My blood boils again at an even higher degree at the direspect shown to Rabbi Dessler and to the holy Torah with the insinuation that philosophy and Torah, or Rav Dessler and

Schopy are on equal footing, which juxtaposing them in such a sophmoric laxity denotes.
3)In exactly this discussion, his personal attitudes are paramount. Since interest dictates thought, then to reach the apex of "emes" one must be at a high level of moral fiber. While he may have had ideas that are close to truth, but certainly the conclusions he draws from his tenants (you know, ideas tend to stick around awhile - they kinda "move in" you could say) were way off base - "the more intellectually-inclined person suffers most"; "all existence is ultimately futile";etc. (you tell me if he's right, do you suffer more than most people?)
4)Yes. Did you know that Rabbi Dessler relegated meals and bathroom and sleeping to the barest minimum of time so as to not take away from his learning? Did you know that the younger children used to play a game "shter der masmid" to see if any of them could produce loud enough distraction to divert young Rabbi Dessler's attention away from the daf gemara, and they were almost never successful. He probably didn't go to secular studies. In fact, he probably wasn't practicing his jump-shot or hitting up 7-11 or dunkin donuts during shiur, either, come to think of it.
5)Maybe, but check out Rabbi Carmell's assertions on pages 172-173 of Strive for Truth volume 3.

The final difficulty I have in swallowing the near-heretical pill I find you offering is that both Gemara and Kabbalah (especially) are replete with the concept that ratzon dictates thought/speech/action.
The Gemara in "hakol holech achar haratzon"
The Gr"a in Even Sheleimah perek 4 : 17 "A man, in all his ways, is drawn after his ratzon"
Zohar " Kol Milin d'alma azlinan basar machshavo v'hirhura"
just to name a few...
Even Rabbi Dessler himself, who often quotes his sources, just writes : "it's a fundamental basic principal that will is a precourser to thought"- without feeling any need to quote a source, because he doesn't feel it a chiddush.

Either way, whether he was influenced directly, indirectly, or not at all by Kant (or his younger brother Thought I Could) or any other of the "big thinkers" - the important note here is to tread quite carefully not to intimate that Rabbi Dessler was a "talmid" of any of these chevrah. It's insulting and can lead to an overall attitude of the cheapening of Torah scholarship in the eyes of the many.

As trite as it may be to do so, I'd like to quote for you from R. JJ Schachter's famous article "Facing the Truths of History":
In its 24 Teves 5754 issue, the English edition of the Yated Ne’eman
published a brief biography of Rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler by one
of his most devoted disciples in commemoration of the fortieth
yahrtzeit of that great twentieth century Jewish leader. In the course
of describing R. Dessler’s childhood, the author included a section
entitled “Torah Im Derech Eretz—Kelm Style” where he discussed
some of the influences to which “little Elia Laizer” was exposed as a
young boy. His father, R. Reuven Dov Dessler, was a student of R.
Simh.ah Zissel Ziv who, in turn, was a student of R. Yisrael Salanter.
In keeping with R. Yisrael’s desire to create Torah institutions which
would inspire “ba’alei batim filled with Torah and mussar,” R.
Simh.ah Zissel founded a yeshiva in Grobin which included the teach-
ing of Russian language, history, geography and other secular studies
as part of its formal curriculum, in addition, of course, to traditional
Jewish texts. He felt that “ba’alei batim” would need to know more
than “Torah and mussar” in order to be successful. R. Reuven Dov
studied in this yeshiva as a young boy, internalized its values even as
he became an affluent businessman, and was intent upon transmit-
ting them to his own son. During his childhood years, Rabbi Dessler
was taught at home and, wrote the author of this article, “true to the
principles of his rebbe, R’ Simcha Zissel, the boy’s father included
general studies in the curriculum. Among these were some classics of
world literature in Russian translation. One of them (so Rabbi Dessler
told me) was Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The reason for this choice is not far
to seek.”

And there's more where that came from.

Whoops, the link didn't come through, here's the full article: http://www.yutorah.org/_shiurim/TU8_Schachter.pdf

CF-
a) nobody said anything about 'equal footing'. acknowledging influences does not imply equal footing
b) yes, i suffer more than most people. i really wish that i was as absolutely sure of everything as you are.
c) i hope that you're not equating reading philosophy with playing basketball. in your scheme, is it torah here, and an undifferentiated mass of everything else over there? Torah U-Madda can mean Dostoyevsky, but it doesn't mean 'Beverly Hills 90210'. 'Probably didn't go to secular studies' is pure conjecture.
d)it doesn't take a big genius, let alone Gemara and Kabballah, to figure out that we're all influenced by our desires. R' Dessler is making an epistemological statement, however. Every act of reason perforce originates as an act of will. It was Schopenhauer who made this into a central philosophical postulate (one that can be disputed, incidentally). This is the sense in which R' Dessler seems to be using it. Granted, once you have that, you can find it implicit in all kinds of midrashim, etc. That's what chiddush is all about (at least in the works of R' Kook and R' Tzadok).
e) Who knows how conscious R' Dessler was of Schopenhauer's influence. Like I said, it's a tricky thing. There's no reason to expect that he would quote him, though.

Greg-
Thank you for that source, I have seen it before. My point was that although he had access to, and direct/indirect influence from these sources, he developed the idea from the Torah he was so engrossed in, making sure it was fully entrenched in the Source of all Life. (As opposed to accepting the words and ideas of these fellows at face value, or even at the value of his own intellect telling him that it made sense.)
The idea that true to the
principles of his rebbe, R’ Simcha Zissel, the boy’s father included general studies in the curriculum does not by any stretch mean that they felt that those subjects were independently meaningful, but just as a means to further understand and/or support their Torah learning.

ADD- (Maybe you could add the title Holy to your name and then be adHd?)
a) Quote 1
Quote 2
Both statmenets imply either a precedence, or equality, of S. with
R'Dessler. This was what I took issue with. Neither are the men equal, nor are their ideas equal.
b) :)
c)philosophy=basketball? heaven forfend. (although I did write an english paper in 9th grade equating football with art. I got an A, but the teacher told me she "vehemently disagreed with my premise and my proofs")

No, It's Torah FIRST.
Feel free to strike it from the record. The point that I am sure of is that clearly he spent the mass majority of his life in the beis medrash. Anything extra-curricular was just that - extra. It wasn't Torah-umada as we know it. It was Torah - and use the other available resources in the world as supporting cast. Not that those other resources are valuable on their own, independent of Torah.
d) epistemological ? Isn't that a sect of christianity?
e)I agree. However, my point remains that I feel it's disrepectful to Torah and to those who learn it to suggest that an basic fundamental of Torah thought is equal to or begot from a source that's not Torah.
Chachma bagoyim taamin, Torah bagoyim al taamin.

Sorry - it parsed saw the carats as html symbols I'll try to fill in

Quote 1 "Maybe you should have taken the course. then you'd know that R' Dessler learned it in Schopenhauer 101."
Quote 2 "We can all agree, with R' Dessler and Schopenhauer, that Will precedes Intellect"

"in your scheme, is it torah here, and an undifferentiated mass of everything else over there?"
No, It's Torah FIRST.
"'Probably didn't go to secular studies' is pure conjecture." Feel free to strike it from the record.