Sunday, 29 May 2011

The Empire Strikes Back? - The New Periodical: Dialogue 1:1

« § Controversy of Contrivance: The Attempted Justification for Uncovered Married Women's Hair by R. Yosef Wiener and R. Yosef Ifrah –

Two kollel guys write a lengthy article to rehash old arguments against R. Michael Broyde's article on womens' hair coverings ... »

New Periodical: Dialogue 1:1 | Hirhurim – Torah Musings

Editorial -

Is this Eid naasah Dayyan?!

The two authors brought telling proof texts which question R Broyde's entire thesis

BUT - I think they should have left the challenge as Kushiyot uVayot and not promoted themselves from testifying to JUDGING R Broyde's article EG "as Contrived."

Throwing down the Gauntlet? GOOD

Drawing Negative conclusions? Questionable

I say to leave the Judging to the Blogs and present the scholarship in the magazine.

A DIALOGUE should allow for debate. Perhaps R Broyde can answer the challenges presented?

Let's have positive feelings that we have solid sources brought to bare

And pray for withholding judgment until later. B'Tzedek Tishpot Amitecha. 



Garnel Ironheart said...

First of all, scholarship and Chareidi journal are mutually exclusive terms.

Second of all, how many times does it have to be pointed out that Rav Broyde was not issuing a psak or anything else but simply showing that there are some poskim out there who don't tow the standard party line about hair covering?

Finally, they had to call the journal Dialogue because Monologue would have been too obvious.

Anonymous said...

The article is Controversy OR Contrivance not Controversy OF Contrivance