Something good is happening to Gafni. Very good.
From one of the most unpopular politicians among members of the ultra-Orthodox-Sefardi community, and probably also among quite a few ultra-Orthodox-Lithuanian community, the assertive young man from Ofakim became the most popular figure in the ultra-Orthodox community on the street.
In recent weeks, only superlatives have been attached to his name: Gafni, he is the only one who works. Gafni is the only one who understands finances. Gafni knows how to answer 'them'. He is not afraid of 'them'. The secularists also love him. Even Yair Lapid has long loved him. Gafni doesn't just care about the ultra-Orthodox, that's why 'they' love him. Gafni is suitable to be Minister of Finance [even though he is ultra-Orthodox], and so on.
Several of Shas's former ultra-Orthodox supporters, and even of the 'Mafdal', declared to me that they are voting for 'United Torah Judaism' this time: because of Gafni. 'I love Gafni.'.
Shas Chairman Aryeh Deri previously held this status, and today President Reuven Rivlin and Ahmed Tibi also hold it.
What are the criteria that make these Knesset members graceful, acceptable, and beloved by an audience that crosses sectors and parties?
The ability to speak and express oneself appropriately is obviously an advantage enjoyed by friends Deri and Tibi, for example, but it is less relevant in relation to Gafni and Rivlin – not necessarily the natural successors of Martin Luther King.
So maybe proven ability to do things and execution? It's a bit hard to be impressed by these criteria when we remember our slightly whiny President Reuven Rivlin.
It is possible that 'adherence to the mission' and 'adherence to principles', something that certainly characterizes the entire list (with slight scoldings towards Rivlin recently), give these elected officials points, but here too we must remember that Zehava Galon and Elazar Stern have principles, and even adherence to the mission, and they are, how to say, not exactly the most popular people in the world.
So what is it?
For a mass communication specialist who also serves as a social psychologist and political sociologist in his training - solutions.
Lick your fingers. And every now and then, when we studied a Sugiya, and we would seemingly see that the Rambam contradicted the Sugiya, and not only that but also contradicted himself, and was attacked from all sides, and we would spend the nights in which we would delve into the Rambam, we would ultimately see our lack of understanding of what we were reading, compared to the Rambam's understanding.
Things got to the point that my teacher and rabbi, of blessed memory, would give several lessons to say at the end: "And with this I have defined what I do not understand in Rambam." This was the purpose of the lesson...
From time to time, I come across articles that too easily accept the thesis, and even take it for granted, that the Rambam in Halacha is one Rambam, and the Rambam in philosophy is another Rambam.
[youtube url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2TvENuHa6M" width="600" height="400" responsive="yes" autoplay="no"]
In fact, among the scholars of Maimonides' mishnah, there are very few monists, and I think in many cases this stems from the fact that they were in the first stage of my studies back then - in the yeshiva.
In the days when we discovered a contradiction between the Rambam and the Gemara, and a contradiction between the Rambam in Halacha and another Rambam in Halacha, and we thought it was the end of the world - and then we discovered that we simply don't understand the Rambam.
And I think this is happening more and more, because as my teacher and rabbi said: Maimonides reads differently [Adv. Yaakov Weinroth in the opening of the lesson].
Join the Haredim 10 Facebook page >>
Join the X page of Haredim 10 >>
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
