Talk:Shlomo Aviner

Kuntres sh'lo yaaleh ke'chomah

BS"D

He misquotes the Ohr Someach, taking a shtark anti-tzionus rov's words, bending them to his own will and destroying yiddishkiet. --Shuli 23:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe he just understands it differently than you... Dillouz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dillouz (talk • contribs) 21:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Controversy

Anon, unfortunately, I'll comment here since you have not registered and have no user page or email. There are advantages to registering, I recommend you do so (as I do to others as well).

Given that, biographical pages are not always 'puff' profiles by fans. Often, people in the public eye are not 'perfect', or rather they say or do things that might be accepted by certain people but are questioned by others - and all this is legitimate information on WP. Now, in your attempt (a suspicious thing to do on wp since every edit is visible and recorded literally forever) to snuff a critical site (if it is libellous, you should discuss here why the information is not true or perhaps point us to another forum where this might have already been discussed), you've actually made it more visible to a wider audience. Sometimes, it is best to let little things go by rather than draw attention to them. One person tried, in ignorance though, to erase Rabbi Froman from a small mention in WP. Instead, they got a whole article instead, see Menachem Froman.

Personally, I am not either a fan or opponent of Rabbi Aviner, though there seems to be credible criticism from others to warrant this information being known. I do not like to see many biographical pages turned into 'anti' pages, so I suggest that you improve the article with more information on why Aviner, even with these minor controversies, is still very-highly regarded by many, many people. What are the rabbi's past accomplishments? Now's your turn, if you feel it your responsibility to remove 'anti-aviner' URLs, than certainly, you would take time to add better information to the article rather than the resume-like format it is now. --Shuki 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Shuki, can you explain what is the reliability of the anti - Aviner web site, which was written by hus political opponents. BTW - talking about anonymous editing --- on the above mentioned site - don't you find it unusual that such severe claims are made by an anonymous site? There is no record of who has put together the pile of lies. And you list it as a reference??--212.150.188.226 16:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

So you are saying that political opponents claims aren't reliable? The point is that you yourself can now rectify this injustice by finding sources (even in Hebrew) that prove this 'anti' site is wrong and spreading false information. You can find notable people who are refuting the claims, it could now be recorded here on wp. Now, frankly, I find it unusual that you refuse to register for a proper username and choose to remain semi-anonymous yourself. --Shuki 19:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No, they are not, at least not in a vacuum. Find another source that talks about him and put it in. If there is even a remote chance of the allegations, it shouldn't be hard to find. The onus is on you to find evidence to support your claims, not on others to find evidence to disparage those who make the claims. Also, do not disparage the user for not registering. That is his right as well. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

This is unbelievable, whoever edited this page, completely removed all reference to his tremendous writings, teachings and work over 40 years. Someone who will read the english site gets a completely one sided picture based on the hatred that some people hold for him. A quick look at the hebrew article will emphasis the difference. I made some small edits, but I hope that someone will have the time to give this page the content it needs. Avizar biv (talk) 21:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I also removed the so called facts such as a rabbinical court that list Rabbi Eliyahu, Rabbi Shapira and others made a ruling against Rabbi Aviner. Such a court never existed and never ruled. The fact that Rabbi Yakov Yoseph is the some of the Rabbi Ovadia is not relevant since the son opposes many of his fathers decision/ --Avizar biv (talk) 21:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLP

In the strongest terms I must urge you all not to reinsert the link to the attck site or the insinuation of sexual abuse. Lobojo (talk) 03:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

In the strongest terms we all urge you to stop POV pushing and censoring publicly known info. and testimonials. Thanks. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 04:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you please read ther policy, the bit about attack blogs and sourcing of negative information and revert yourself. 04:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lobojo (talk • contribs)

I'll ask a simple question. What the hell is the allegation? All you have "became controversial"? Given the WP:BLP concerns, you should try to find a neutral source that verifies the information. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The allegation is that he sexually abused congregants, which was formerly cryptically insinuated in the article. Lobojo (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You might want to eliminate the mention of accusations, but the site you also want to ignore has scans of signed publicized documents from major rabbis requesting that he stop dealing with certain issues. Regardless of the rest of the site content, that is a fact, referenced to the site. --Shuki (talk) 22:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, well that's another angle, but those are still allegations. Other rabbis asking him to stop doing things are not admissions of guilt. Can you find reliable sources quoting the other rabbis? I'm still talking newspaper articles or something similar? It would help me immensely if they happened to be in English. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

For the record, those allegations were not included and frankly might have seen to be cooked up over highly exagerated since it never went to court and was mainly used by opponents to slander the rabbi. In fact, Lobojo is way out of line in removing the 'anti' site because there is other legitimate information there and the site does not centre on those 'allegations'. The controversy(s) that were discussed are unrelated to those accusations and refer to some of Rabbi Aviner's judgements that seem too avantgarde and run against the 'consensus' of his peers and the majority of the segment he belongs to or is considered to be part of. There is no admission of guilt, in fact, it's reported that Rabbi Aviner refused to meet the rabbis to discuss the issues. The signed documents themselves are worthy of mention, not POV, and legitimate info for BLP. --Shuki (talk) 09:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, shuki, you're putting it very nicely calling it "avant garde." He declared women who had clearly bled real blood to be permitted to their husbands, which is considered a most grievous sin in Judaism. This led prominent rabbis of all groups to declare that he must not be consulted, and some even put him in cherem. It's true that the main opposition in the documents posted on the site is due to his intentional, flagrant causing of Jews to sin by violating the laws of niddah, but here it is also mentioned in a rabbinic document that he used unprintable profanity in classes to women, etc. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 12:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. I havn't used that word in a while and it just popped out. --Shuki (talk) 14:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Gush Katif "soldiers"

Man, I know I'm going to regret getting this into this, but is the term "soldiers" Aviner is using referring to the settled who were forced to evacuate? If so, the term soldier is very POV and would settlers be more neutral? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Aviner was refering to soldiers refusing orders, not settlers. I am not aware of him motivating settlers to obey or violate the government 'orders' to leave before the mandated deadline, if that is what you were asking. --Shuki (talk) 13:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, just wanted some clarification. Was he was saying that the soldiers should not refuse orders forcing the evictions? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that was his point. 17:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The Awareness Center page

Well, I found this page everyone. Now, I noticed that The Awareness Center has some copies of newspaper articles but it doesn't seem to largely cited on Wikipedia [1]. I can see why; it's obvious that the first article they cite (the Haaretz Daily) is an excerpt only. I've already looked for the Jerusalem Post article and the abstract seems very different than the article posted. Either way, those concerns are still allegations and gossip which is still not enough to pass BLP concerns, to me at least. If there was some indictment or convictions, then I'd feel comfortable. If anyone is curious, I was looking at Talk:Shlomo Carlebach (musician) which seems like the closest situation. Comments? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

At the time Maariv published an expose on the same subject. However afterwards Maariv asked an independent expert to investigate the incidents and he came to the conclusion that Rabbi Aviner was innocent, though maybe guilty of practicing therapy without the backing of a professional. The expert also said that the Rabbi's intentions were honorable. After that Maariv published a retraction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.151.58.224 (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Improvement needed

The current article definitely does not project the stature that Rabbi Aviner enjoys in the Israeli national religious community. Psring attempted to add some welcome colour though heavy on POV and without sources. I hope that his editor can improve his/her wiki exertise so that an changes are made properly and don't have to be disputed. --Shuki (talk) 23:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC) This is unbelievable, whoever edited this page, completely removed all reference to his tremendous writings, teachings and work over 40 years. Someone who will read the english site gets a completely one sided picture based on the hatred that some people hold for him. A quick look at the hebrew article will emphasis the difference. I made some small edits, but I hope that someone will have the time to give this page the content it needs. Avizar biv (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

his opinion of Baruch Goldstein

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1070070.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by McKay (talk • contribs) 08:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Political Dweeb's message

I want to start to explain here to all wikipedians that I understand there are controversies this individual called Shlomo Aviner has been involved in and the only reason I am asking questions on the controversies he has been in is to make the party [Ahi] supported by Shlomo aware of this and see what approach they are going to take on this issue.

I want to explain here that from looking at the talk page and article of Shlomo Aviner and the article of the Israeli political party he supports, I can see his positions on issues contradict those of the party called [Ahi].

The Wikipedia article about the Israeli political party, [Land Society and Judaism] indicates it ‘’is supported by Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, who could be seen as its spiritual leader’’ and also that this party makes ‘’calls to respect the rule of law’’. However the Wikipedia article on Shlomo Aviner says that ‘’a booklet’’ which uses Shlomo’s teachings called the ‘’ Go Fight My Fight: A Daily Study Table for the Soldier and Commander in a Time of War was published especially for Operation Cast Lead’’. The Operation Cast Lead I think seems to be the continuing conflict in Gaza and what was wrong with this booklet was highlighted by a ‘’group of Israeli ex-soldiers’’ who had made an accusation against Shlomo that he was ‘’encouraging Israeli soldiers to disregard the international laws of war aimed at protecting civilians’’.The Independent [The Independent World], which is a British newspaper, the source of this quote, said that the army rabbinate called Avi Ronzki read a section of the booklet to the ‘’soldiers’’, that promoted one of Shlomo Aviner’s beliefs, namely, that they should ‘’disregard the international laws of war aimed at protecting civilians’’.

Therefore my first question is why does Aviner not realize that what he promotes in this booklet - the disregarding of international law, contradicts the policy of the party called [Ahi/Land, Society and Judaism] which was the rule of law that Ahi supports?

The second question is: does the political party called [Ahi/Land, Society and Judaism] know that Shlomo Aviner, who supports them, has promoted ideas and has taken positions on issues that are contrary to what they believe? Shlomo’s position promoting the teachings of the booklet mentioned above, where it encourages a disregard for the international laws of war aimed at protecting civilians, seems contrary to [Ahi’s] belief in ‘’social justice’’.

Aviner promotes other harmful ideas in this booklet that are contrary to the beliefs of the political party called Ahi since he supports the idea ’’that all Palestinians are their mortal enemies’’, a ‘’good attribute’’ sometimes is cruelty and also promotes the view of the renowned medieval Jewish sage Maimonides who said "one must not be enticed by the folly of the Gentiles who have mercy for the cruel’’.[The Independent].

Apart from that, on the [talk page] of Shlomo Aviner, a user called Yehoishophot Oliver explained he had found a source which was a [‘’rabbinic document’’] that showed that Shlomo Aviner had ‘’used unprintable profanity in classes to women, etc’’.

The Wikipedia article on Shlomo explained he was opposed by people because Shlomo supported the Israel unilateral disengagement plan ‘’mass eviction of Jews from Gush Katif. However the article mentions that in response to this position of Shlomo, his opponents ‘’republished accusations of sexual abuse.’’ They appeared originally in Maariv and after the outcry in response to this newspaper article of Shlomo’s activities of sexual abuse, ‘’an independent investigator’’ was ‘’appointed’’ by Maariv who finally explained that Rabbi Shlomo Aviner ‘’was innocent, though maybe guilty of practicing therapy without the backing of a professional’’ as well as having ‘’honourable’’ ‘’intentions’’, with the result that Maariv issued a ‘’retraction’’ . The problem is that on the discussion page of the Wikipedia article of Shlomo Aviner a user whose IP address was only called ‘’213.151.58.224’’ with an inaccessible talk page chose to explain a bit more about the controversy of Shlomo Aviner and the Israeli newspaper, Maariv. The user seemed to say some of the same things that were said on the Wikipedia article on that controversy of Shlomo Aviner.

I wanted to ask if this user had typed information onto the Wikipedia article of Shlomo Aviner, because I saw no sources or references to support the controversy in the article on Shlomo and Maariv. To cut a long story short, have all these controversies of Shlomo been solved and has he revised his views so they don’t contradict with the policies of the political party [Ahi] he supports?

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.235.192.242 (talk) 21:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Shlomo Aviner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070206211545/http://www.havabooks.co.il:80/Hava2Root/static/About.asp to http://www.havabooks.co.il/Hava2Root/static/About.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shlomo Aviner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060613201013/http://ateret.org.il/new/yeshiva.php?id=166 to http://ateret.org.il/new/yeshiva.php?id=166

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 8 December 2017 (UTC)