Home › Forums › Controversial Topics › Shmuly Yanklowitz, Novominsker and OO theology › Reply To: Shmuly Yanklowitz, Novominsker and OO theology
PAA: If you’re going to use the “machlokes” angle, then 1) you surely should have no objections calling Yanklowitz an apikorus based on *us* holding of the Rambam (and CS) and 2) you apparently accept finding and practically holding from any or every quaint and generally unaccepted halachic opinion buried anywhere in the sources to basically hold whatever you happen to find, however rejected that opinion is (such as the corporeality of Hashem.)
zd: The Novominsker wasn’t concerned with his followers falling for these deviants. He was primarily concerned with the out of town communities where these malcontents are taking rabbinic pulpits and/or otherwise influencing local Orthodox communities.