 |
| Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt of the CER (Arutz Sheva) |
Rabbi Ephraim Wachsman had addressed the
assembled before introducing the late R’ Shmuel HaLevi Wosner, ZTL – a major Israeli Posek
that spoke via satellite from his home in Bnei Brak. Rabbi Wachsman quoted a Rabbenu
Yona which stated when a Gadol addresses the masses of Klal Yisroel and makes a
declaration about public policy, those that do not listen to him lose their Olam Haba (their share in the world to come)! That quote prefaced Rav Wosner's ban on internet which followed.
That was later modified somewhat to allow for use in matters
of Paranssa. But for the most part the attitude was that the internet was evil.There were threats made by Yeshiva heads at the time about those that violated the decree and allowed the internet into their homes. They would not allow their children into their schools. (That may in fact still be the case in some circles)
Fast forward to today. Does the fact that the vast majority of observant Jewry in of
all of Orthodoxy use the internet for personal use mean that we have all lost our
Olam Haba?
The answer is of course we haven’t.
In fact I would even say that internet use is up in most observant homes well beyond
what it was at the time of that Asifa in 2012. Despite Rabbi Wahcsman’s warning. Especially now that it can be easily and quickly accessed in the palm of our hands anywhere in the world. I don’t know if he ever publicly
retracted his dire warning. But he should if he didn’t.
As well intended as that Asifa was - and as serious of a problem
that the internet presents, it is not only a force for evil. It is also a force
for good. As I said at the time - it is all about responsible use. When used
responsibly it can be life saving. And in no way should it ever be banned,
despite Rav Wosner’s decree.
But that
hasn’t stopped the naysayers form insisting that it would be best of it were
not used at all. Which is why up until recently Agudath Israel of America did not have their own
website*. Although they did have one they used unofficially. Unofficially - for purposes of deniability. And they used it profusely. They were then able to still deny it – thus underscoring their view that the evil
outweighs the good while at he same time using it to their advantage.
It is difficult for me to understand the fine line they tried to draw. Let us contrast this with a relatively new development in Europe. From
Arutz Sheva:
A group of leading, senior Rabbis, representing over 700 synagogue communities throughout Europe, have invested in technology to aid social progress, through the Conference of European Rabbis’ Internet Prize.
The event, which is under the patronage of the Prime Minister of France, Mr Édouard Philippe and Mrs. Anne Hidalgo, the Mayor of Paris, brings together talented and ambitious entrepreneurs together with Europe’s most senior Rabbis to encourage using the internet for social good. As many within society are focusing on the increased online abuse, CER are harnessing the positives as previous winners have impacted the worlds of education and healthcare.
The Conference of European Rabbis (CER) is not a Conservative
or Reform Group. They are probably the equivalent of Agudah, RCA, and the OU
combined. If I understand correctly they represent all of Orthodoxy in Europe.
They now embrace the internet. They understand what most of the rest of us have
understood for many years now. That that the internet is a tool that when used
wisely can be lifesaving. And that everyone should have it in their homes.
This demonstrates that even great rabbis can be wrong. The idea that Daas Torah is infallible is
thereby refuted. Of course those loyal to that idea have always admitted fallibility, but in practice they will follow Daas Torah as though it were infallible. The argument being that the great rabbis of our day are the best representation of Daas Torah. Since they have no one better to listen to - they follow their decrees.
I am not sure there has
ever been an instance where Daas Torah (as they define it) was shown to be in error (unless it was somehow admitted by them - if it ever was). Well, this is
one such instance.
I believe the Agudah would did well to
change their minds - thus tacitly admitting they were wrong about it too and now seem to be embracing it the way their European
counterparts have. Better late than never.
*Update
I have modified the post from the original. I was not aware that Agudah had changed course on this issue. I was informed about it by an Agudah official. It is located here. I'm not sure when they had a change of heart. But I am glad to see that they have. And I apologize for my original assumption that things had not changed.
*Update
I have modified the post from the original. I was not aware that Agudah had changed course on this issue. I was informed about it by an Agudah official. It is located here. I'm not sure when they had a change of heart. But I am glad to see that they have. And I apologize for my original assumption that things had not changed.
