This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
No, Degel HaTorah is not defunct...it is alive and well, it is no longer in alliance with Agudat Israel through United Torah Judaism and it is the latter that is no longer active but it may continue in the run-up to the next elctions (whenever it happens) IZAK 03:29, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm still not comfortable with "some people" regarding ... sounds weaselwordish
"...awe given in the past to prophecy" (isn't one of our problems that we HAVEN'T respected prophecies?) ... I'm thinking Eikha, etc.
Modern Haredi Judaism and Hasidic Judaism regard the final decisions of their respective Rosh yeshivas and Rebbes as on a par with "prophecy" in the sense that they consider the words of their holy men to be expressions of God's will. IZAK
I've left the last paragraph alone, but it has some severe problems. Not only is the wording bad, but there's some outright POV in it as well.
POV about what? The article is trying to convey what the notion is, and it can't be done without first hearing it described, subesequently you can give your critique. IZAK 03:29, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is unrelated to the text, but in the context of point 3, wouldn't it be more accurate to regard it as a return to the age of the shoftim? TomerTALK 17:25, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
It's not a return to the "age of shoftim", it is a continuation of the age of the rule of the rabbis. IZAK 03:29, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have NPOVed this a bit. Nowhere is prophecy attributed to the Gedolim. The Talmud is quite categorical that "after the destruction of the [Second] Temple, prophecy went to small children and the mentally ill". Apart from this, the article is quite allright.
Tomer, the final paragraph is indeed an inference, but I don't think it's wrong. JFW | T@lk 18:28, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It still needs NPOVing and is still horrible English. TomerTALK 18:37, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
The article was originally written by a Hebrew speaker, so don't be so snotty. I tried to fix it up once at some point. You also miss the point that the notion of Daat Torah is not about "prophecy" as such, it's that the functions of prophecy were then transmitted to the sages known as the chachamim. IZAK 03:29, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
References
This article is low on references. It should also mention that there is a sefer by Reb Yerucham by this name. JFW | T@lk 08:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I've added a reliable reference for the Haredi POV. Feitman wipes the floor with Lawrence Kaplan, who in Tradition (1980) questioned the relevance of Daat Torah and associated it with a power complex. He also criticises a Gershon Bacon who wrote similar things in Tarbitz in 1983 (although that source is more obscure). JFW | T@lk 21:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
