Religion Magazine
This is a bit of a strange situation.
As Hurricane Irma made its approach towards Miami, some people went to Rav Chaim Kanievsky asking what to do. The question, and his answer somehow seemed unclear enough that it stirred a debate around the world as to what exactly he was asked and what he meant.
While to me it seems pretty clear what is being asked and what is being answered, I guess it was not as clear as it seemed to me.
Judge for yourself:
The question seems to clearly be asked that there was recently a hurricane that killed people and another one is now approaching Miami and the authorities are saying people should leave their houses on Shabbos because they might get killed. Rav Kanievsky responds it is a sakana and the questioner confirms that the people should leave and Rav Kanievsky nods.
Seems clear to me bu tthere were big debates what he meant.
Truthfully I am not even sure why anyone felt they needed to ask him, but ok. I am not sure who would refuse to leave until Rav Kanievsky would say so. It was clearly a situation of danger and pikuach nefesh would mandate evacuating even on Shabbos. But they asked, and it seems he answered, albeit one word but still seems clear.
The question to me is raised in an article on Behadrei berating other news media for "getting it wrong" and misunderstanding and therefore misquoting Rav Kanievsky.
The article says the JTA quoted Rav Chaim Kanievsky as having said the Jews should travel on Shabbos to flee from the path of the hurricane. Other news sites then picked that up and also reported it as such.
Behadri says they got it wrong and Rav Chaim never said that. Unfortunately the author of the article on Behadrei does not explain what Rav Chaim Kanievsky was saying if he was not saying that. He said "sakana" and then nodded when confirmed that people should leave on Shabbos. What did he mean if not that people should leave on Shabbos?
I don't actually care what he said, and I do not think it had any relevance in real-time and I saw no point in the question being asked to him. Local rabbonim, even gedolim, in the USA should have been asked any question about what to do in such a situation, if any question was even necessary. That being said, if the author thinks he has more insight than everyone else into what Rav Chaim Kanievsky actually said or meant, he should at least tell us and not just say everyone else got it wrong. Considering what the video shows and what the author says everyone misunderstood, I am more curious as to his interpretation of the conversation than anything else!
And if even one word with a nod is so difficult to understand, and so easily misunderstood, is there any value in asking the question to receive such an unclear answer?
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel ------------------------------------------------------
