“ This is what happens when one learn Torah without remembering and internalizing that There Is A Nosen HaTorah.
Rabbi Billet, before one opens up a sefer and learns, especially before one writes a "commentary", remember we are mere mortals, dust, insignificant etc.
In Chassidic terms this is called "bittul".
Then remember that the Rishonim including Rashi had Ruach HaKodesh.
So if there is something that our minds does not comprehend, realize that the deficiency is with US.
We can definitely discuss the different Meforshei HaTorah,
just without offering our own preferences.
Please Rabbi Billet learn some Chassidus, eg. Tanya Maamorim and you will see
the Torah in a whole new light. ”

“ To # 2,
did you even bother reading the article. He quotes tosfos that quotes the Sifei that put Rivkah at 14 and always back into 14 with the another source tying her to Kehas. Maybe your question should be, how could Rashi disagree with the Sifrei? Or the question is, how could Tosfos disagree with Rashi and quote a differing opinion. Just because your morah taught you in kindergarten the Rivkah was 3, it doens't necessarily make it so. The only thing apparent is, that you don't appear to have improved in your learning beyond the kindergarten level, if you don't understand that there could be other opinions. Would you also say that tosfos is right when he says that you can be koneh an elephant by making it jump? ELEPHANTS CANNOT JUMP, it is a fact. ”

“ Anon,

How about specifically pointing out the issue with facts rather than name calling? In other words, if you feel that the article writer is wrong, how about clearly and calmly stating why. Perhaps quote the Raban (did you mean the Ramban?) so that we can all know what it says.

The Wolf ”

“ Putting Rivka at 14 based on other Midrashim is not a problem, but trying to get her older then 3 because it doesent fit with todays world is wrong. ”

“ #2

Please define the word "apikorois"? ”

“ How about if it doesn't fit with the world even then?

Yes, there have been child marriages in history, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of marriages did NOT happen at age three. Likewise, I'm willing to put dollars to donuts that three-year-old, even then, were generally not physically able to water ten camels.

The Wolf ”

“ How about shimshon hagibor picking up two mountins and grinding them together. ”

“ This is what happens when one learn Torah without remembering and internalizing that There Is A Nosen HaTorah.
Rabbi Billet, before one opens up a sefer and learns, especially before one writes a "commentary", remember we are mere mortals, dust, insignificant etc.
In Chassidic terms this is called "bittul".
Then remember that the Rishonim including Rashi had Ruach HaKodesh.
So if there is something that our minds does not comprehend, realize that the deficiency is with US.
We can definitely discuss the different Meforshei HaTorah,
just without offering our own preferences.
Please Rabbi Billet learn some Chassidus, eg. Tanya Maamorim and you will see
the Torah in a whole new light. ”

“ Why do you jump to call R. Billet an apikorus? Ibn Ezra also gives a different age for Rivkah Is Ibn Ezra an apikorus? You are much too fast to point fingers and call people names for not being "religious" enough. I think in our community many of us have turned off our brains and in place of thinking we just shout slogans at each other mostly to accuse others of not being frum enough. Or maybe our minds were never turned on to begin with. It is a real shame. A tragedy of our dor. ”

“ To # 22 and others,
Are you saying that rashi is wrong? dont we know that Rashi and all other rishonim wrote with Ruach Hakodesh?
what is next? that the gemara is wrong? ”

“ To # 22 and others,
Are you saying that rashi is wrong? dont we know that Rashi and all other rishonim wrote with Ruach Hakodesh?
what is next? that the gemara is wrong? ”

“ I am sure others can bring proof, but could it e possible the Rashi never wrote that she was 3 but rather wrote shlosh-esreh and there was a printing mistake. There are other places in shas where this has been proven (I don't know where off hand) that something was written and the printers either made a mistake or truncated the original to the point where the written words are wrong. Hence we have hagahos habach, hagahos hagra, the frankel rambem, the oz v'hadar print that brings all diferent nuschaos. To say that it makes no sense to me that Rivkah was 3 but what do I know because the Rishonim wrote it, it must be so, is not derech hatorah. I can't say Rashi is wrong, but I can say it doesn't make sense to me and prove from elsewhere that my "disagreement" is correct. Yisikheit does not beleive in infalibility, (wich is the current definition of daas torah, see JO article written for the passing of R' Chaim Ozer Grodzensky for proof) to say a kadmon was never wrong is cathalosism, and I don't belong to that religion. ”

“ Why do you jump to call R. Billet an apikorus? Ibn Ezra also gives a different age for Rivkah Is Ibn Ezra an apikorus? You are much too fast to point fingers and call people names for not being "religious" enough. I think in our community many of us have turned off our brains and in place of thinking we just shout slogans at each other mostly to accuse others of not being frum enough. Or maybe our minds were never turned on to begin with. It is a real shame. A tragedy of our dor. ”

“ Didn't Yitzchak not have children for 20 yrs? That makes Rivkah 23 yrs old when she gave birth. ”

“ I agree.

Apikorus is the wrong word (perhaps).

The right word, I think, is "Ba'al Gayva" because he doesn't even feel the need to bring Ibn Ezra -- or does not want to, because he wants to make this seem like his own chiddush.

(I'm speaking as someone who is well-aware of the Ibn Ezra, find it quite plausible, and have used it in my own teaching. My problem with this piece is that it's dripping with gayva.) ”

“ #18 Merkin: "The tragedy of our dor" is putting ourselves on the same level as the holy Rashi, while our morals and values are probably more appropriate to the time of the Flood. Just like you can't imagine Rivka Imenu at 3, you cannot fathom who Rashi was. If you don't understand Rashi, that doesn't mean he's wrong. Whoever doesn’t believe that Rashi wrote everything with ruach hakodesh is an apikorus, as anonymous #2 meant to say. ”

“ "Why do we also accept blindly that Avraham was three when he discovered G-d?"

"Rabbi" Billet, did you ever wonder why the (mature?) Yidden accepted the Torah "blindly" & said Naaseh V'nishma before they knew what the Torah says? Or would you not take this Midrash at face value either? ”

“ How about if it doesn't fit with the world even then?

Yes, there have been child marriages in history, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of marriages did NOT happen at age three. Likewise, I'm willing to put dollars to donuts that three-year-old, even then, were generally not physically able to water ten camels.

The Wolf ”

“ to anonymous # 2 - does this mean that you consider Tosafos, who claim that she was 14 based on other midrashim - apikorsim? ”

“ I don't have a problem with "Rabbi" Billet bringing sources to quote that she was 14. I am concerned with his idea that Rashi must be mistaken that she was 3, because it makes no sense.
The torah is not about what we understand. Does Rabbi Billett understand how a father sells his daughter as a slave and then she's forced to marry her owner or his son?
The Torah is eternal, and it would be more appropriate to leave it un-understandable then to try to make sense of it.
To his credit, I assume that he is in a similar predicament to the Rambam's Moreh Nevuchim. There the rambam writes very contreversial statements, which are explained that he only wrote them to alleviate the questioning folk attempting to "modernize" the torah, but not necessarily accurate. For example, the Rambam writes there that the reason for karbonos was because G-D was jealous of the other G-D's whose followers were offered sacrifices. Its obvious that G-D isn't jealous, but nonetheless the Rambam wrote it to ease the minds of the people of those times.
Rabbi Billett serves a community that is liberal and attempts to align Torah values with modern values, hence his need to explain it the way he did. It also helps that he has a mekor for it.
Let's refrain from calling him names. ”

“ How about if it doesn't fit with the world even then?

Yes, there have been child marriages in history, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of marriages did NOT happen at age three. Likewise, I'm willing to put dollars to donuts that three-year-old, even then, were generally not physically able to water ten camels.

The Wolf ”

“ well if the torah says thats what happened then thats what happened.... and because YOU THINK that even in those days its not possible then continue "CRYING WOLF" bec thats the only thing you seem to be good at ”

“ Well, clearly *someone* is wrong. Either Rashi, or Tosfos, or the ibn Ezra. And please don't tell me "Eilu V'Eilu..." she could only be three or fourteen or some other age, but not both at the same time.

Or, you can simply say that not every Rishon who wrote meant for his words to be taken 100% literally.

The Wolf ”

“ Here we have a learned man, Rabbi Billet, who is studying Chazal and Torah and he has a thought about something that is hard to understand, and instead of praise for learning and being Oisek in Torah, the people on this blog hurl invectives at him and call him names. Where have we gone wrong, rabbosai? There is a world of Jews out there, 95% never heard of Rashi and 99% never learned a blatt gemorah. A fellow Jew comes along and offers an opinion and you jump down his throat like he is a Cossak. We are in galus gentleman for one reason and one reason only: Sinas Chinum. And it is apparent right here on this blog. I say Kudos to Rabbi Billet for learning Torah and thinking into Torah and writing about Torah. Talmud Torah k'negged coolam rabbosai, and we should not be attacking our scholars even if we have a different opinion. ”

“ The Ramban said he didn't believe a certain medrash.

So, if I had a view on that point, would I be an apikorus for rejecting the medrash, or an apikorus for disagreeing with the Ramban?

Just need to know for my peace of mind.

”

“ Hey! even i know that the same midrash that states avraham was 3 when he discovered hashem also states the opposing opinions of two other tanaim. get a life. the good rabbi only stated the opposing opion of tosafos backed by a sifrei. We have thousands of factual midrashic contradictions and we dont get bent out of shape when we encounter them. To say that tosafos's pshat sits better with common logic and sense then the pshat of rashi is no crime. ”

“ According to the Rashi and the code of laws, an Apikores is someone who laughs at the words of Chachamim. Rabbi Billet is clearly laughing between the lines at the old fashion approach rashi has taken which makes no sense. He starts looking for new pshatim so he can explain the pshat to a gentile without having him laugh. He is clearly an Apikores. ”

“ You dont believe in Eilu Veilu Divrei Elokim Chayim either? that is exactly what i said, fist you question Rashi then the Gemara and then.... ”

“ well was/is it ever possible to have 12 stones come together as one..... hmmm no way well thats what happened to yaakov avinu if you like it or not or agree with that too bad this is what we have and will continue to learn your all a bunch of tzidokim....... how about is it physically possible to go without any sleep for 14 YEARS yes YEARS not seconds or minutes or hrs or days or weeks or months........ well this is what we got to accept and believe because thats our mesorah so who ever doesnt like it there are other religions that mike make more sense to you little brains ”

“ well was/is it ever possible to have 12 stones come together as one..... hmmm no way well thats what happened to yaakov avinu if you like it or not or agree with that too bad this is what we have and will continue to learn your all a bunch of tzidokim....... how about is it physically possible to go without any sleep for 14 YEARS yes YEARS not seconds or minutes or hrs or days or weeks or months........ well this is what we got to accept and believe because thats our mesorah so who ever doesnt like it there are other religions that mike make more sense to you little brains ”

“ I once heard R' Shalom Shvadron tell a story. He had an uncle that told him, "When Chazal say that when Moshiach comes 'gluskaos' (cakes, bulkelach) will grow from trees, it does not mean literally. Only that the great Shefa Tov that will be in the world at that time will make it seem like that." R" Shalom responded, Apikorus! The uncle then said, "But it's a Rambam!" and he quoted the Rambam where he says just that. R' Shalom responded, "Du bist noch altz an apikorus". But the uncle asked, "Ay, the Rambam?" R' SHalom's response, which fits here as well, was "The Rambam has no shailos in believing Chazal. If Chazal say that bulkelach will grow, then bulkelach will grow. As it happens, The Rambam DArshans a possuk that it means something slightly different. But you, who have never seen bulkelach growing on trees and can't imagine it happening, and therefore you look for alternative pshatim that fit your small mind a little better, you are an apikorus!"

According to R' Shalom, to quote the author above, the concept of Rivka getting married at 3 is "unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking." he is not arguing on Rashi because of the Sifri, but because it conflicts with his weltanschaaung (or however that is spelled). That is apikorusus.
(The full vort can be found in Lev Shalom on pasrshas Vayechi, on the topic of Yaakov Avinu lo mes) ”

“ I didn't say that I don't believe in Eilu V'Eilu. Please don't put words in my mouth.

What I said was that it cannot apply in this situation. She could only have been three, or fourteen or some other age. She could not have physically been more than one age at a time. As a result, one of the opinions *has to be* incorrect on a purely physical, historical level.

The Wolf ”

“ As you failed to cite a source I assume you refer to the Gemara in Sanhedrin.

As The Ramabam clearly defines an apikoiros in הלכות תשובה פרק ג
and הלכות ממרים פרק ג,
the gemarah is obviously illustarting the "symptom of the disease" as opposed to offering a rather broad definition.

Don't you think to determine if someone rises to the level as described in the Ramabam, you want to delve a bit deeper than just 'reading between the lines'.

It appears at times that Apikoiros has become in some circles akin to what the "tzioyni" invective used to be in Satmer. ”

“ As I re-read the article, it just hit me what a lousy job yeshivas must be doing in educating us in reading comprehension. Rabbi Billet says: "Please do not misunderstand: there are no hard feelings against Rashi. I believe there are many ways to look at things and Rashi does not always have to be the bottom line. There is a reason why we have other commentaries and approaches which are considered valid, and we cannot continue to be satisfied with only one approach...."
NOWHERE does Rabbi Billet say Rashi is wrong, the most he says is that he likes other pshatim better. Is everyone here ready to tell me that you never preferred on pshat in the gemarah over another? I do not see how anybody can read into the dvar Torah (discounting lousy reading comprehension) as there being any attack on Rashi. Rabbi Billet didn't like Rashi's explanation so, he found others he did. It is no difference than not liking Rashba's expalnation and saying you like Ritvah's better. Just because Rabbi Billet doesn't agree to the pshat your morah told you, does not mean he is wrong. ”

“ I wasn't aware that believing in the "divinity" of Rashi's writings was one of the ikkarei emunah.

The Wolf ”

“ Anon,

I'm not disputing the fact that Rivkah watered the camels. What I am saying, however, is that since there are other (valid) opinions that state that she was older, and we generally don't find three year olds who have that sort of strength, there is room to conclude that the other opinions may be more correct than Rashi.

Now, do you think we can possibly continue discussing this like adults, rather than you issuing ad hominem attacks?

The Wolf ”

“ shame on you how dare you speak like this about rashi which was writteb in ruach hakodesh do you think your on the same level as hin or bring him dowm like just another commentary I'm shaking while reading this article ...you are to fly to rashi's kever with a minyan and ask mechila. ”

“ The Gemara clearly says Eilu Veilu even in a case of opposing views in what happened, it may be on different levels however it is definitley eilu veilu! ”

“ yes we can disagree like adults but for someone that chooses to disagree with Rashi hakodesh who we cant even comprehend who he was and to say that Rivka couldnt carry the water for the cammels is just going aginst the torah and rivkah is one of our 4 matriachs and to even think to say let alone say that it cant be is truly an apikores even if there are other opinions and then to say that we should go according to the othe ropinions that say she was older just because it makes more sense has no right discussing torah your name says it all ”

“ I guess you don't say the Ani Maamins. So let me write it for you. Ani Maamin #8 "I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses". What Rashi wrote is toras emes and if you don't believe your an apikores according to the Rambam. ”

“ This may be a just matter of different manuscripts of the Seder Olam having a different age. The manuscripts that were available to Rashi said Rivkah was 3 years old. However, manuscripts from the Middle East, where Seder Olam was written, say she was 14, which is more consistent with Sifrei and also with a baraita in Talmud Bavli Yevamot 61b which says she was a "naarah" which clearly means age 12 from the discussion there. How can we simply dismiss these other opinions, which seem to be the majority? I wish the rabbi had brought forth these sources that support his point.

Source: *Seder Olam: The Rabbinic View of Biblical Chronology*. Translated and with commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Aronson Press, 1998. ( I've been told this is now out of print; I hope that is incorrect.) ”

“ That's fine. But on a purely physical level (which is what we're talking about - her physical age), only one can be right. Rivkah could only have been three, or fourteen, or some other age. She could not have been more than one.

You can say "Eilu V'Eilu" in that perhaps the other opinions have some deeper meaning that we can learn from - I'm not disputing that. But you can't say it with regard to her physical age.

The Wolf ”

“ I guess you don't say the Ani Maamins. So let me write it for you. Ani Maamin #8 "I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses". What Rashi wrote is toras emes and if you don't believe your an apikores according to the Rambam. ”

“ My dear Mr. Rescue. I suggest that YOU reread the srticle. He says that Rashi's pshat is "unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking." THAT is what everyone is complaining about. Not the machlokes rishonim. ”

“ Ey ey, I disagree with Rabbi Billet, but you're adding something to the Ani Mamin. You're adding that Rashi is the Torah that the Ramabam meant, that's not exactly true. There are others that added that Toras Habal Shem Tov is included as well. Where do you end? Can I add whomever I want?

Rabbi Billet may be a progressive Jew, but this article does not make him a Kofar in Toras Moshe. I would say more he's more like an Apikores who pokes fun at Chazal when he says that it cant be that Avraham literly realized Hashem at the age of 3 because children are meant to be cute and Avraham the father of three religions was just another cute child, nothing exceptional. ”

“ Thanks for quoting the source, I didn't remember or have the time to look for the source.

What I meant between the lines, was because, one could always argue in such that they didn't write anyware that Rashi was wrong and old fashioned. That's why I wrote that it's between the lines, beacuse his overall approach becomes clear when he writes "A child at 3 in MY opinion is meant to be cute". He is saying my approach to Rashi is that if doesn't conform with todays society, I'll go with an alteranative view. That is in essence saying Rashi was outdated and stupid for even thinking that marrying a small child was possible. He could have explained Rashi in a different light, but chose not to because he believed Rashi and some Merashim are just old fashion. That is an Apikores.

To make you happy, I would say Rabbi Billet is an Appikores between the lines. He's not a forthcoming Apikores, he's still afraid of himself to admit that's what's bothering him. ”

“ How about if it doesn't fit with the world even then?

Yes, there have been child marriages in history, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of marriages did NOT happen at age three. Likewise, I'm willing to put dollars to donuts that three-year-old, even then, were generally not physically able to water ten camels.

The Wolf ”

“ So are we the ones to decide which one is meant literally? if both are divrei elokim, you have the audacity to say one is right because the other does not make sense to us!!!!! ”

“ Yes, even Toras Habaal Shem is Toras emes and if you dont believe that your an apikores according to the Rambam. In regards to you adding to the Torah, if you mechadesh a Torah or say a pshat in a gemora and you do it lshem shomayim than according to the Rambam it is part of Toras Moshe that was given on Har Sinai. ”

“ I once heard R' Shalom Shvadron tell a story. He had an uncle that told him, "When Chazal say that when Moshiach comes 'gluskaos' (cakes, bulkelach) will grow from trees, it does not mean literally. Only that the great Shefa Tov that will be in the world at that time will make it seem like that." R" Shalom responded, Apikorus! The uncle then said, "But it's a Rambam!" and he quoted the Rambam where he says just that. R' Shalom responded, "Du bist noch altz an apikorus". But the uncle asked, "Ay, the Rambam?" R' SHalom's response, which fits here as well, was "The Rambam has no shailos in believing Chazal. If Chazal say that bulkelach will grow, then bulkelach will grow. As it happens, The Rambam DArshans a possuk that it means something slightly different. But you, who have never seen bulkelach growing on trees and can't imagine it happening, and therefore you look for alternative pshatim that fit your small mind a little better, you are an apikorus!"

According to R' Shalom, to quote the author above, the concept of Rivka getting married at 3 is "unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking." he is not arguing on Rashi because of the Sifri, but because it conflicts with his weltanschaaung (or however that is spelled). That is apikorusus.
(The full vort can be found in Lev Shalom on pasrshas Vayechi, on the topic of Yaakov Avinu lo mes) ”

“ well i dont know about you but i have read all the posts up to this point and know has been hating him they are just giving their own opinions and sticking up to what they learned from their rebbes so i think your jumping way ahead of yourselves unless maybe i am sensing you have some sinas chinom on all the ppl that posted.... have you ever heard of machlokes lshem shomayim or that either doesnt make sense so you decide to disagree because it was only Rebbe hakodesh that wrote the mishnayos??????? ”

“ well was/is it ever possible to have 12 stones come together as one..... hmmm no way well thats what happened to yaakov avinu if you like it or not or agree with that too bad this is what we have and will continue to learn your all a bunch of tzidokim....... how about is it physically possible to go without any sleep for 14 YEARS yes YEARS not seconds or minutes or hrs or days or weeks or months........ well this is what we got to accept and believe because thats our mesorah so who ever doesnt like it there are other religions that mike make more sense to you little brains ”

“ Furthermore, it is permitted to say that a particular Rishon or Achron made a mistake (not that that is what the author is saying, nor is it relevant to the article)

The Torah discusses what happens when ALL SEVENTY ONE members of the Sanhedrin make an erroneous psak, al achas kamo vekamo a single Rov a thousand years later.

Infallible clergy are not part of our religion. ”

“ My dear Mr. Rescue. I suggest that YOU reread the srticle. He says that Rashi's pshat is "unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking." THAT is what everyone is complaining about. Not the machlokes rishonim. ”

“ your explanation is thoughtful but still misses the point.

one can say and even believe (foolishly) that Rashi is 'old fashioned' (whatever that means), that does not however put one in the category of apikoiros as described by the Rambam.

I don't mean to split hairs, but this tendency to demonize those with contrary views with apikoiras and kiofer and the like is contributing to the 'dumbing down' of our society, particularly those once considered to be out intelectualy elite. ”

“ Appearantly you have a reading issue. Most if not all posts have said they are taking exception to Rabbi Billets artice only because of the underlying reason why he disagrees with Rashi no with the fact that he disagrees. We all know that there are machlokes in Rishonim and we can choose whichever one we like when learning Gemarah or Chimush. It's what's bothering him that is Apikorses. ”

“ Does tosafos say that Rashi was wrong and makes no sense???? No he had a Different opinion.
One may want to go with tosafos but to say Rashi makes no sense???? comon. Did he learn all of the medroshim? Bavli? yershalmi? Sifri? sifru? ......
Well rashi did!!!
I rest my case ”

“ Yes, even Toras Habaal Shem is Toras emes and if you dont believe that your an apikores according to the Rambam. In regards to you adding to the Torah, if you mechadesh a Torah or say a pshat in a gemora and you do it lshem shomayim than according to the Rambam it is part of Toras Moshe that was given on Har Sinai. ”

“ Let me repeat a story written in the Gemora. (I dont remember where it is written, maybe you can enlighten me I do have a very short memory when it comes to sources, names and dates.)

The Gemora says that R' (Yochanen)? once told his Talmidim that when Mashich will come the stones of the Bais Hamikdash will be made of Dimonds as big as (?). One talmid didn't questioned the accuracy of such a statement. The talmid once was traveling by boat and saw angels carrying dimonds as large as big as his rebbe said. He came back and told his R' (Yochanen) ? "I now know that you are right, because I saw it". R (Yochanen)? looked at him and said "you are guilty of laughing on the words of chachamim, if you would have not seen, you would not have believed" he gave him a look with his eyes and the Talmid died.

Now this is a Gemora, and the words used by Rabbi (Yochanen)? is the exact same as Rashi in Sanhedrin and the Rambam. The talmid didn't even say anything to the degree of disrespect, he just questioned it in his mind and this is what his Rebbe called him. Can you imagine if he would write an article in the paper questioning how it's possible? He would say since it's not related to a specific law, why cant he disagree. I'm sure he could've found sources that disagree, i.e the Rambam that nothin will be out of the ordinary when Mashiach comes. ”

“ So are we the ones to decide which one is meant literally? if both are divrei elokim, you have the audacity to say one is right because the other does not make sense to us!!!!! ”

“ Yes, even Toras Habaal Shem is Toras emes and if you dont believe that your an apikores according to the Rambam. In regards to you adding to the Torah, if you mechadesh a Torah or say a pshat in a gemora and you do it lshem shomayim than according to the Rambam it is part of Toras Moshe that was given on Har Sinai. ”

“ So are we the ones to decide which one is meant literally? if both are divrei elokim, you have the audacity to say one is right because the other does not make sense to us!!!!! ”

“ I guess you don't say the Ani Maamins. So let me write it for you. Ani Maamin #8 "I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses". What Rashi wrote is toras emes and if you don't believe your an apikores according to the Rambam. ”

“ You made 2 points you didn't intend to:

1. The stones and the not eating were a NESS as recorded in chazal. No mention of a NESS regarding Rivka being underage.

2. Just as we have differing chazals regarding the 2 Nissim you mentioned so too has the good rabbi mentioned a second opinion of the rishonim and earlier chachomim. ”

“ Rashi is very hard to understand in this weeks Parsha. Sara was bas 20 kbas 7 in beauty. ”

“ And here's the crux of the matter: We are not laughing. I may think that Tosfos' opinion on the matter is more logical than Rashi's. That doesn't mean that I'm "laughing at" Rashi (as the student in your story did WRT R. Yochanan).

I can respect someone deeply and still disagree with them at the same time. I have the utmost respect for Rashi, but, in this case, I'm forced to conclude that Tosfos' opinion if more logical.

Respect does not mean that I have to agree with everything they say.

The Wolf ”

“ Ramban specifically says that there is no chiyuv to accept the literal truth of any specific midrash. ”

“ Are Ibn Ezra, Tosafot, and Ramban also apikorsim? They argue with Rashi quite a lot! ”

“ So now u claim most of the commentators here are like todays rebbelich who have ruach hakodesh and know everything that people think! ”

“ perhabs the rambas was an apikores too because he went to become a doctor and join kollel. he also studied astrolgy. that's science and science is apekursis.it does say v'heegessa yomam valyla. should I throw out my set of rambam? ”

“ Again as many have written before. You are entitled to learn Rashi and Tosfos and say that you have a question on Rashi or for whatever logical reason you disagree. However, R' Billet disagree, becuase he has a foundation that anything you cant fathom happened, you disagree with. He questions the rest of Klal Yisroel why they believe something unlikely as Avraham, a regular child in his opinion, or Rivkah being so mature at the age of three. That's not arguing logic, that's laughing at something someone, who is smarter and greather then you are, is telling you. Tosfos never says it's impossible, Tosfes says my rebbe taught me otherwise; or I have a question from another Gemora. Question Rashi's logic with a question that was clearly on his mind is considered laughing.

R ? (Yochanen's) talmid never laughed or evein disagreed loudly, he just thought to himself that is impossible. Of course in a secular world I can disagee with Einstein if my logic is better then his, but in torah we must have humility and accept it as truth even when you're inclined to disagree. You can go along with another commentary, but only if you dont add anything of your own as a premise for why the first one is wrong. Keep that question in yourself and believe that either you didn't understand well or that things were different at that time, but to write an article like this? ”

“ Are Ibn Ezra, Tosafot, and Ramban also apikorsim? They argue with Rashi quite a lot! ”

“ The author is wrong for the way he presents his arguments. One is not an apikoros for suggesting that there are alternative pirushim to Rashi's view. However, this article was written in a manner that is highly disrespectful to Rashi and seems to indicate that the author believes that Rashi and he are on the same level. I don't that the author is an apikoris for writing these views, but he is a shoteh presenting it in this manner. ”

“ So, let me ask you a simple question -- were any of the Gemaras that mention Moshe's death given to him on Har Sinai?

The Wolf ”

“ * There are midrashim that Avrohom recognized God at age 40 or 48. How does that play into his being three? (Which is based on the pasuk "eikev asher shama avraham b'koli" that Avraham listened to me for the numerical value of 'eikev' which is 172 out of his 175 years)
בראשית רבא 95:3
ובן כמה שנים הכיר אברהם את בוראו? בן מ"ח שנה הכיר את בוראו. ריש לקיש אמר בן שלש שנים דכתיב עקב מנין עק"ב

* Yes, they lived to be in their nine hundreds (let's nit pick and argue vociferously against those who say they lived to be 1000 because we just want to argue nonsensically and act like three year olds. O, excuse me, three year are olds are so sophisticated), and yet they didn't have children until they were in their 120s and 130s.

* Don't raise illogical arguments from a few generations prior. If anything, their sophistication was LESS in those days, if they didn't have children until 130 years of their being on earth, when now we usually pull off this feat by the time we reach our mid-twenties, if not earlier.

* The line about "untenable" in context, is this:
"To think that Rivka is three years old and understands the idea of offering water to camels, can physically shlep water back and forth tens of times to feed 10 camels, is given respect to make her own decision whether she’ll go with Avraham’s servant, is viewed as a marriageable prospect, and is appreciated by Yitzchak, as his wife, to fill the void in his life left by his mother’s passing is, unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking."

This is NOT saying Rashi did not consider all this. This is saying that Rabbi Billet is explaining why he prefers to side with the approach of the other commentaries he quotes because, just as Tosafos had a problem with Rivkah being three for - perhaps - all these reasons, calling her three and accepting that as pshat is very difficult to understand.

I know about Yitzchak waiting for her to be "r'uayah l'biah" but, honestly. How is a three-year old, no matter how sophisticated, going to be giving comfort to Yitzchak over the loss of his mother? (unless you'll argue that years pass in the same pasuk that says ותהי לו לאשה ויאהביה וינחם יצחק אחרי אמו - in which case you're agreeing with Rabbi Billet.)

And finally I find it fascinating how many people suppose they KNOW what Rabbi Billet is thinking, and how many are so quick to call him an apikores for jumping on Tosfos' band wagon over Rashi's.

Fools. Absolute fools attack a person instead of debating the merits of ideas. And of thinking differently than you do. ”

“ And here's the crux of the matter: We are not laughing. I may think that Tosfos' opinion on the matter is more logical than Rashi's. That doesn't mean that I'm "laughing at" Rashi (as the student in your story did WRT R. Yochanan).

I can respect someone deeply and still disagree with them at the same time. I have the utmost respect for Rashi, but, in this case, I'm forced to conclude that Tosfos' opinion if more logical.

Respect does not mean that I have to agree with everything they say.

The Wolf ”

“ You made 2 points you didn't intend to:

1. The stones and the not eating were a NESS as recorded in chazal. No mention of a NESS regarding Rivka being underage.

2. Just as we have differing chazals regarding the 2 Nissim you mentioned so too has the good rabbi mentioned a second opinion of the rishonim and earlier chachomim. ”

“ You made 2 points you didn't intend to:

1. The stones and the not eating were a NESS as recorded in chazal. No mention of a NESS regarding Rivka being underage.

2. Just as we have differing chazals regarding the 2 Nissim you mentioned so too has the good rabbi mentioned a second opinion of the rishonim and earlier chachomim. ”

“ You call name calling and accusations of being an apikores intelligent discussion. Soon you will call molestation love r"l. ”

“ Better yet, not in the Gemora but in the Chumush. Moshe Rabbeinu wrote on himself "vayomos Moshe"; he wrote as he was told by HaShem. ”

“ Sigh. So, let me ask this question, I can choose two options: 1. Rashi was right and she had miraculous super-strength, or 2. The ibn Ezra and Tosfos are right and she didn't. Why do I *have* to take Rashi's view over other Rishonim? Why can't I be somech on other perfectly held views?

Secondly, again, I asked you to stop the ad-hominem attacks. Address my point, not my name, which was given to me b'ruach hakodesh.

The Wolf ”

“ Furthermore, it is permitted to say that a particular Rishon or Achron made a mistake (not that that is what the author is saying, nor is it relevant to the article)

The Torah discusses what happens when ALL SEVENTY ONE members of the Sanhedrin make an erroneous psak, al achas kamo vekamo a single Rov a thousand years later.

Infallible clergy are not part of our religion. ”

“ And here's the crux of the matter: We are not laughing. I may think that Tosfos' opinion on the matter is more logical than Rashi's. That doesn't mean that I'm "laughing at" Rashi (as the student in your story did WRT R. Yochanan).

I can respect someone deeply and still disagree with them at the same time. I have the utmost respect for Rashi, but, in this case, I'm forced to conclude that Tosfos' opinion if more logical.

Respect does not mean that I have to agree with everything they say.

The Wolf

Who are you to offer your opinion between these 'Rishonim'. These rishonim are malochim we have no 'hasogo' what Rashi and Tosfos were but the mesora handed down through all the generations from the Rishonim on is that Rash's pshat is the accepted version. Of course there are other medroshim (that Rashi knew) but the pshat is what he wrote. Somone who questions Rashi is lacking in their beliefs. We know the saying 'Im rishonim Lemalochim Onoo Kivnei odom Vim Rishonim kivnei Odom onoo kechamorim' This does not just mean thousands of years ago but a generation before us. for someone to say 'he likes this rishons opinion because it makes more sense' he is in fact saying that chas vesholom the other rishon is wrong or made a mistake, these rishonim are like malochim in human clothing they do not make mistakes it is us who are like chamorim who make the mistakes we do not understand what these rishonim are saying. ”

“ "Achronim are not allowed to argue with Reshonim."

Actually, that's not true. Acharonim *do* argue against Rishonim. For example, the Rishonim said Akdamus on Shavous *after* the first pasuk was lained. The Taz, however, argues on this and maintained that Akdamus should be recited before laining starts. And guess what? We hold like the Acharon.

"you knuckleheads"

Once again, is it too much to ask for civil discourse? Is it too much to ask that you act like an adult and not engage in ad-hominem attacks?

The Wolf ”

“ I once heard R' Shalom Shvadron tell a story. He had an uncle that told him, "When Chazal say that when Moshiach comes 'gluskaos' (cakes, bulkelach) will grow from trees, it does not mean literally. Only that the great Shefa Tov that will be in the world at that time will make it seem like that." R" Shalom responded, Apikorus! The uncle then said, "But it's a Rambam!" and he quoted the Rambam where he says just that. R' Shalom responded, "Du bist noch altz an apikorus". But the uncle asked, "Ay, the Rambam?" R' SHalom's response, which fits here as well, was "The Rambam has no shailos in believing Chazal. If Chazal say that bulkelach will grow, then bulkelach will grow. As it happens, The Rambam DArshans a possuk that it means something slightly different. But you, who have never seen bulkelach growing on trees and can't imagine it happening, and therefore you look for alternative pshatim that fit your small mind a little better, you are an apikorus!"

According to R' Shalom, to quote the author above, the concept of Rivka getting married at 3 is "unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking." he is not arguing on Rashi because of the Sifri, but because it conflicts with his weltanschaaung (or however that is spelled). That is apikorusus.
(The full vort can be found in Lev Shalom on pasrshas Vayechi, on the topic of Yaakov Avinu lo mes) ”

“ firstly again just like the rabbi (so called) you will take sides or some other rishon's opinion so it fits your understanding thats apikorses i am and no one else that is disagreeing with the rabbi and u and some other apikorsim are not saying that rishonim and achronim dont argue or ppl hold like this one or that one we are saying you cant chose whats best for u or that this one makes more sense to me so i will go with this opinion that is your mistake which you keep avoiding.

secondly i chose not to go according to your opinion that your name was bruach hakodesh their are other opinions that say differently... thats the only way you understand so i will talk on your level ”

“ I'm not familiar with the exact details of the machlokes you mention. Nevertheless, the fact remains that Achronim are not allowed to argue with Reshonim. If you find one or two instances to the contrary, that doesn't change the fact. There are many questions one may have regarding the Torah, i.e. your question regarding how is it possible that Moshe knew about his death at Har Sinai and your example of Akdamus. I at least know that I don't know everything and even though I may have questions, I know there are answers and that greater men than me questioned and answered those questions. You, however, it seems, use questions in order to contradict sound arguments.

I felt compelled to use word "Knuckleheads" when I see people arguing with Reshonim as if they could comprehend even 1/100th of 1% the knowledge and kedushah of the Reshonim. Civil discourse is good for the goyim arguing sports, not when you hear Jewish people making Rashi sound like some regular man on the street. Not when you hear people with the title "Rabbi" argue with Rashi as if he is on Rashi's level. That should make any erlicher yid blood boil with anger at the chutzpah of todays generation. Like it says in Yeshayah "Bikvusah dimshicha chutzpah Yasge" BTW, when I used the term "Knuckleheads" I was trying to be polite.
”

“ Abarbanel, in his intro to one of the books of the chumash (although I can not for the life of me remember which one and as we moved recently my Abarbanel is not available) pokes fun at other commentators. He refers to Rashi as "a simple grammarian". Apikoras? No. Well known and studied torah scholar.

Now, I am not saying the author is on par with the Abarbanel or any of the other rishonim/achronim/tanoim/etc. I am saying that perhaps many of you are using "Apikoras" a little too liberally. Soemone who looks at things differently may be wrong, but he is not necessailry an apikoras!

I would be very, very careful before tossing aroun that sort of label. ”

“ The gemara in the 7th perek of sanhedrin makes a calculation that Batsheva was 6 when she had the dead baby and 7 when she had shlomo hamelech
the gemara later also brings a story with the granddaughter of the Roman Caesar that got married at a young age and when she heard that she could get married at 6 lamented the fact that she wasted years in her fathers house
The Gemara in the former case specifically says that "Nishtanu hativim" aka "the times have changed" ”

“ My goodness, so many angry Jews!

Why are there so many people willing to take the time to attack the writer (BTW, #2, clearly identified!)and so few that aren't afraid to even identify themselves? Could it be that deep down, inside, they know they're just being silly and venting their suppressed anger here? Certainly it is valid to prefer one opinion when the rishonim offer several...

Yossi Ginzberg ”

“ Charlie it's Ramban not Rambam. You should not throw out the Ramabam anyhow, because, you wont understand it.

The Rambam was a doctor and there are many frum doctors. ”

“ There are plenty of instances where Acharonim pick and choose between Rishonim depending on what makes more sense to them. E.g. R Akiva Eiger rejecting Rashi and Tosafos' explanation of anatomy because Rambam's view has been proven correct. Or Malbim saying that all the Rishonim who believed in celestial spheres have been proven wrong. Etc., etc., the list is endless. Are they all apikorsim for disagreeing with the views of the Rishonim? Of course not, it's absurd to even raise such a possibility. We generally don't dispute halachos from an earlier period that have been canonized, but one is certainly allowed to disagree on non-halachik matters. Rav Shlomo Fisher writes this explicitly in Derashos Beis Yishai. And the notion of yeridas hadoros does not necessarily mean that earlier generations were more intelligent. Were non-Jews more intelligent too? ”

“ "However, you cannot disagree with something they say based on a verse in the torah even though you have a better phsat. "

Of course you can. The Rishonim themselves often disagreed with Chazal as to peshat in pesukim. And the Acharonim often take issue with the Rishonim. Rabbi Billet's reasons are perfectly legitimate. ”

“ "However, you cannot disagree with something they say based on a verse in the torah even though you have a better phsat. "

Of course you can. The Rishonim themselves often disagreed with Chazal as to peshat in pesukim. And the Acharonim often take issue with the Rishonim. Rabbi Billet's reasons are perfectly legitimate. ”

“ To all those quoting the Gemara about how a student was punished for disagreeing with Rav Yochanan merely because he couldn't believe it to be possible - you should know that some of the Rishonim and Acharonim understand that Gemara completely differently. And the reason why they explain it differently is that THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE IT EITHER. See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Slifkin.pdf
It's really frustrating to see people calling Rabbi Billet disgusting names based on sources that they haven't even learned properly. ”

“ This is not "borderline" apikursos this IS apikursos! This is what happens when small minds get all full of themselves in this day and age and chas v'shalom think they can challenge Rashi with their own reasoning as if Rashi was just one opinion and theirs is another. Shame on you VIN for reprinting such an article (even if it is not your view). ”