Defense of the Talmud

Isakov has nothing to comment on because all his words were copied from Yaron Yadan's words (as I explained in response to column 664) and I wouldn't be surprised if Elboim also copied from him, directly or indirectly. In any case, Elboim really deserves comment because his words weren't just published on some website.

https://www.the7eye.org.il/529593

The similarity of the new Talmud critics to medieval and modern-day proselytes and anti-Semites does indeed cause discomfort for any Jew with a historical awareness, but it is not an answer. As Yehoyakim noted, the source of most or all of these kinds of claims today is probably Yaron Yadan, and the fact that for over two decades his words have not been taken seriously (but have been taken seriously a few times) only reinforces for me, and I believe for many others, the feeling that there really is nothing to answer. That is why I turned to Rabbi Michi, who I understand is both a Talmudic rabbi and a philosopher and scientist, and so perhaps he will finally take up the gauntlet, but if he refers me to such an article, it seems that the situation is lost.
Just so that I am not misunderstood: I am not an ultra-Orthodox or a naive believer looking for answers about how there are no scientific errors in the Talmud or how its morality corresponds exactly to that of today. This is not the main argument of Yadan and his ilk (although they certainly also use such arguments against the naive believers, who are the majority). The harsh conclusion from their words is that the Talmud is a distorted, delusional, ridiculous, stupid, confused and primitive book even in relation to its time. And that all the respect that we (from ultra-Orthodox to secular, and in fact many wise Jews in the last thousand or so years) acquire for it and for the sages in general is the result of mere education, which blinds us from seeing them as they truly are instead of attributing to them great and wonderful wisdom.

If you want to insist, then of course no answer will help you. I posted an article here that I saw now, and in my opinion it is perfectly fine. But of course I did not post it as an alternative to my full reference. Nor does it pretend to give such a full reference.
Incidentally, I recently had a debate with Yaron Yadan (who is the source of all this), and due to interruptions in the recording, it was decided not to broadcast it. But the moderator himself (who is not religious) told me that in his opinion Yaron Yadan was defeated. In my opinion, these claims are a lack of understanding from beginning to end, and the writer here certainly made some important points, even if not all of them.

On the contrary, I've been waiting for years for someone to answer properly. The fact that I'm no longer willing to be like a boy in yeshiva who studies Gemara and is amazed by the arguments but immediately convinces himself that there is genius behind them that he probably doesn't understand, doesn't mean that I like the opinion of Yadan and his students (to put it mildly) and that's why I insist on it.
Regarding the debate – It's a shame about David. But maybe that's for the best, because now you'll have to write a neat and comprehensive article. 😉 In debates, sometimes the one who is more talented and skilled in speaking wins, even if the other side has better arguments. Sometimes the less verbal side won't even get to lay out their arguments. Of course, this can also happen in writing if one of the parties is a talented writer, but in my opinion it's easier to examine arguments like that than in an oral discussion.

Menashe – Your logic is very interesting. All the hundreds of millions of Jews who lived in the past, including their righteous and wise men, were distorted, confused and immoral, and only Elboim and his friends from the "Haaretz" school, many of whom are full of sympathy for those who seek our souls and an abysmal hatred for Torah and the lumediya – are the moral compass, the representatives of absolute wisdom and truth?

I am not saying that there are no good questions. I have had difficulty with such questions more than once. But whoever steps out of the narrow and limited view of modern man, and sheds his enlightened arrogance in order to try to understand a different point of view – will develop a completely different attitude towards the whole matter.

Moshe, replace the word Jews with Christians/Muslims in your question and you will receive the answer.
Incidentally, I already answered above that according to them, the education we received from childhood that the sages were great sages blinds us from seeing them objectively.
And I will quote for you from Maimonides' words on astrology, which are also appropriate here:
“And you also need to know that the fools have already written thousands of books, and how many great people in the years – not in wisdom – have wasted all their days studying those books, and imagined that those vanities were great wisdoms, and it occurred to them that they were great sages, because they knew those wisdoms.
That the thing in which most of the world, or all of it, except for a few individuals, the remnants that God will call, is something that I inform you of, and it is the great and evil disease: that all the things they find written in books, they will initially occur to them that they are true. And even more so if the books are ancient.
And if many people have dealt with those books, and have carried and given them, the mind of a hasty person will immediately jump to say that these are words of wisdom. And he will say in his heart: Did the pen of the scribes lie, and for nothing did they carry and give these things to each other?!

And this is what destroyed our kingdom and destroyed our temple and prolonged our exile and our arrival until now. Our ancestors sinned and are not, since they found many books in these things, the words of the horoscopes, which are the essence of idolatry, as we have explained in the laws of idolatry, they erred and followed them, and imagined that they were magnificent wisdoms and that they had great benefit, and they did not concern themselves with the study of war or the conquest of lands, but rather thought that those things would benefit them.”

I think the same about Christians and Muslims. And I suggest you take into account that the generation of the year 2400 will say the same things about our generation, and will mock our wisdom and morality. I hope that the education we pass on to our descendants will succeed in preventing this arrogant and haughty perception, at least partially.

I am not impressed by the words of Maimonides. He was also sure of the truth of Aristotelian truth, and he also wrote things that our contemporaries denounce as primitive and foolish. So what?
He writes his perception and nothing more.

Moshe, what is the benefit of Chazal's preoccupation with the genitals of various sages (from here. As I think)

See Tosafot there, which is to prevent the stoning of fat people. To us, this sounds very strange, but apparently in their time the issue was socially sensitive, see Nidda 13:1, which states that it is permissible to hold one's forearm and urinate in order to prevent the stoning of one's sons.

In my opinion, the entire issue there comes to teach another insight, that there were some sages who had strong material powers (they were fat, had a strong sexual desire, special physical strength and beauty) and yet did not refrain from investing their energy in Torah, and to the minds of those who believe that one must be a person who is naturally spiritual and spiritual in order to ascend.

It should be noted that the Mishnah in Pet. Dengaim, "You are a great wise man who has the words of the sages," and the Tov explained that the wisdom was not the explanation itself that he offered, but the fact that he understood that if the sages said something puzzling, one should not belittle it or reject it quickly, but rather try to understand the logic in their words.

I think this issue has nothing to do with Judaism or religion at all. Sometimes you can find strange things in the books of ancient philosophers. The natural tendency of a person of our generation is to laugh at things and dismiss them, but logic says that if the writer was held to be a wise and intelligent person, it turns out that there is logic in his words, and the reason it seems strange is because of the gap between generations and worldviews.

Hello Rabbi,
Is there anything new on the subject?
And is the debate that was posted on YouTube (I haven't watched it yet) the same debate that was mentioned here that was decided not to broadcast?

On what topic? Yes.