Browsed by
Genre: Response & Rejoinder

R. Hayyim Soloveitchik’s Attitude Towards Girsaot: A Response to Dr. Marc Shapiro

R. Hayyim Soloveitchik’s Attitude Towards Girsaot: A Response to Dr. Marc Shapiro

Comments 4 comments

R. Hayyim Soloveitchik earned his towering stature in Jewish intellectual history for his revolutionary methodology of Talmudic analysis, but scholars have also noted another aspect of his insights, which is a disinterest, bordering on disregard, for textual veracity. In general, traditional Talmudists were not overly concerned with bibliographic issues and girsaot (textual variants), but even within this tradition R. Hayyim stands out as extreme. One of the most glaring, and by extension often quoted, examples of R. Hayyim using a…

Read More Read More

Breaching the Walls of History with Postscript

Breaching the Walls of History with Postscript

Comments 42 comments

This essay first appeared in the Jewish Review of Books (Spring 2026) and is republished here. Its postscript appeared in the magazine’s Substack newsletter, which you can subscribe to here. Last December, on the eighth day of Hanukkah, the American haredi newspaper of record Yated Ne’eman published a long, impassioned article titled “Ufortzu Chomos Migdolai Vetimu Kol Hashmanim,” by Rabbi Michoel Sorotzkin. The Hebrew title is from the fifth stanza of the famous Hanukkah standard Maoz tzur, which many of…

Read More Read More

Quiz Answers; Response to Criticism; Rav Schwab Writes to the Rogochover

Quiz Answers; Response to Criticism; Rav Schwab Writes to the Rogochover

Comments 27 comments

1. Let me begin with the riddles from my last post here. A. Where do we find that Shammai not only disagrees with Beit Shammai, but also agrees with Beit Hillel? B. In the days of the tannaim a certain item was unquestionably muktzeh. However, in the post-talmudic period, some hold that this item is no longer muktzeh. What item am I referring to? Provide the actual source in the Talmud and later authorities to justify your answer. The answer…

Read More Read More

Final Response

Final Response

In response to Rabbi Herschel Grossman’s strong criticisms of my Limits of Orthodox Theology, I wrote four responses on the Seforim Blog. You can view them here, here, here, and here. I then stopped responding even though there are still many criticisms I could have commented on. Readers can compare Grossman’s arguments with my replies and draw their own judgment. Grossman has recently responded to my posts and offered further criticisms in an article published in Dialogue. See here. I…

Read More Read More

R. Yudel Rosenberg, R. Mordechai Elefant, and Sexual

R. Yudel Rosenberg, R. Mordechai Elefant, and Sexual

1. Many readers of the Seforim Blog are aware of R. Yudel Rosenberg, the fascinating talmid chacham and posek who for some reason was also drawn to forgeries. Ira Robinson has recently authored a complete biography of Rosenberg, A Kabbalist in Montreal: The Life and Times of Rabbi Yudel Rosenberg. This wonderful book is certainly deserving of a complete review on the Seforim Blog, but here I would just like to comment on a criticism of me. On p. 219…

Read More Read More

Response to Criticism Part 4; Rabbi Zvi Yehuda and the Hazon Ish

Response to Criticism Part 4; Rabbi Zvi Yehuda and the Hazon Ish

Comments 37 comments

Continued from here. 1. In Limits,p. 14 n. 55, I write I should call attention to a significant philosophical and halakhic point which appears to have gone unnoticed. The Vilna Gaon (R. Elijah b. Solomon Zalman (1720-97) apparently believed that the First and Second Principles are the only true Principles in Judaism. According to him, one who believes in God’s existence and unity, despite his other sins, is regarded as a Jew in good standing and he is thus able…

Read More Read More

More on “New Notes Added in the Koren Talmud”

More on “New Notes Added in the Koren Talmud”

Comments 2 comments

In what seems like another lifetime but was just over a year ago, the Jewish world celebrated the 13th Daf Yomi Siyum HaShas. The beginning of the 14th cycle led to a revisiting of the Koren Talmud Bavli that had appeared in print for the first time in concert with the previous cycle. In a Seforim Blog post, Chaim Katz pointed out that the new English edition included some additional notes based on Rav Kook’s Ein Aya, and I responded…

Read More Read More

Of Twice-Told Tales and Ockham’s Razor: A Response to R. Moshe Haberman

Of Twice-Told Tales and Ockham’s Razor: A Response to R. Moshe Haberman

Comments 19 comments

Elli Fischer is an independent writer, translator, and rabbi. He is editor of Rabbi Eliezer Melamed’s Peninei Halakha series in English and cofounder of HaMapah, a project that applies quantitative analysis to rabbinic literature. He is a founding editor of The Lehrhaus, a web magazine of contemporary Jewish thought, and his writing has appeared in numerous Jewish publications. He holds degrees from Yeshiva University, rabbinical ordination from Israel’s Chief Rabbinate, and is working toward a doctorate in Jewish History at…

Read More Read More

Response to Criticism, Part 3

Response to Criticism, Part 3

Comments 21 comments

Continued from here. Let me continue with Rabbi Herschel Grossman’s review. This post will complete my response to around a quarter of his review, so we still have a long way to go. Grossman writes (p. 42) According to Shapiro, “Maimonides would be surprised that . . . later generations of Jews . . . latched onto his earlier work;” and it “is certainly one of the great ironies of Jewish history that the Thirteen Principles became the standard by…

Read More Read More

Reuven Elitzur, Saul Lieberman, and Response to Criticism, part 2

Reuven Elitzur, Saul Lieberman, and Response to Criticism, part 2

Comments 55 comments

Since I mentioned R. Reuven Elitzur in my post here, let me note two other interesting items from his posthumously published book, Degel Mahaneh Reuven. On pp. 304-305 we learn that when Elitzur studied in Ponovezh, one of the students joined the Irgun. When some other students found out about this, they grabbed the Irgun student one night, covered his head with a blanket, and beat him terribly. The result of this was that the student not only left the…

Read More Read More

Response to the Recent Discussion Relating to the Emden-Eibeschuetz Controversy

Response to the Recent Discussion Relating to the Emden-Eibeschuetz Controversy

Comments 59 comments

Whatever else the world may require, it certainly doesn’t need more bans emanating from the Emden-Eibeschuetz controversy. No one is insulted and no apologies are necessary. All sober comments and criticisms are most welcome – איזהו חכם הלומד מכל אדם. I try to learn from everyone. I’m also a card-carrying member of the class of כל אדם, and I am a teacher, and pray that – at least on occasion – the passage in Pirkei Avos licenses others to learn…

Read More Read More

Reply from Haym Soloveitchik to the JQR Interview with Robert Brody

Reply from Haym Soloveitchik to the JQR Interview with Robert Brody

Comments 103 comments

Editor’s Note: As a recap of a recent exchange between two scholars on a nuanced debate within medieval Jewish history (see the first footnote), we present this final note by Professor Haym Soloveitchik. Part One Dr. Robert Brody advances no new arguments against my thesis in his recent interview at the blog of the Jewish Quarterly Review (https://katz.sas.upenn.edu/blog/jewish-quarterly-review/jqr-contributor-conversation-robert-brody-origins-talmud-study). I have addressed all his points in my original essay and my reply in the Jewish Quarterly Review and online on my…

Read More Read More

Correction and Apology For an Earlier Post

Correction and Apology For an Earlier Post

Comments 64 comments

A few months back we featured a fascinating two-part post about newly discovered documents from Rav Herzog’s Archive. One of the discoveries of the post was a document about Meir Kahane written to President Chaim Herzog by Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik in the summer of 1984 which was surprisingly supportive of Kahane. A careful examination of the document by the family of Rabbi Soloveitchik reached the opposite conclusion. This letter is a crude forgery. Their conclusion was not derived because…

Read More Read More