August 8, 2012 8:17 pm at 8:17 pm #890176mddMember
Mamin, “live and let live” is a posul, non-Torah principle.
Shlishi, Ramban held le’ma’ase not to do it and even not to talk about it.
Women going to Ukraine? It is an unsafe, anti-Semitic country.August 8, 2012 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #890177shlishiMember
mdd: So then why did Rambam allow it? And why did Rav Yaakov Emden allow it?August 8, 2012 8:40 pm at 8:40 pm #890178WolfishMusingsParticipant
while the directive to visit the Rebbe’s kever on RH is not against halacha
There are those who say it *is* against halacha to leave EY to go to the kever for RH.
Is that relevant to you, Wolf? I guess that would make you quite a sinner.
It’s not the specific case, but the general rule that he derives from the specific case that have nothing to do with sexual impropriety. See “V’Kama Maasiyos B’shas…”
The WolfAugust 8, 2012 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm #890179shtarkzichMember
I wonder if The Breslover Rebbe, who I hold in some regard though not at all a Chasid, meant that people should come to his kever even from distant countries at great cost, leaving their families for yom tov and enriching a nation that hates us and him. It is understandable for him to have expressed what he did to fellow yidden in his day but would he have wanted the same thing under the above very different circumstances?August 8, 2012 10:24 pm at 10:24 pm #890180tajikpashutMember
Sorry for going “off” topic but I heard that R’Nachman promised anyone that said Tikun Klalli at his Kever on Rosh Hashanah is going to Olam Habah.August 8, 2012 10:54 pm at 10:54 pm #890181
I don’t think Kedusha translates as inspiration.
The Sefer Maggid Meisharim says that Reb Shimon enjoys when you learn at his Tzion. The Gemara is clear about the merit of praying by Kvarim. The Arizal expounded on the Kedusha one gets from being Mishtatei’ach on Kivrei Tzadikim, and Talmidei Habaal Shem even more so.
This thread has taken a turn from questioning going to Kivrei Tzadikim on Rosh Hashana to poking fun at the words of Gedolei Achronim, Rachmana Litzlan.August 9, 2012 1:24 am at 1:24 am #890182
yytz – its nice of someone to finally quote some sources. I have a few kashas on those sources though.
First, does “Everyone, without exception, who counts himself as one of my followers or takes heed of what I say” exclude wives? I’m curious as to when R’Nachman was alive if it was only men who visited him or whole families.
Second, everything you quoted from his words sounds as if it would be relevant to only while he was still alive. You mention he “indicated” that it should apply even afterwards. Did he say it or did he not say it, and if he didn’t then why not?
Third, the quote I mentioned above clearly excludes people who were not his followers. I don’t see where his followers get reshus to collect money from non-Bresluvers to sponsor the event and tell them it’s for tzedaka. Is it tzedaka for someone to sponsor a minhag that their own posek holds is not allowed? Is it a mitzvah to recruit someone to practice a minhag that isn’t their mesorah?August 9, 2012 2:33 am at 2:33 am #890183choppyParticipant
Wolf: It doesn’t apply as a general rule, only the specific case he mentioned. Despite some liberals trying to matir abortion by misinterpreting it via a broad reading of the term pain.August 9, 2012 2:58 am at 2:58 am #890184mddMember
Shlishi, double-check the sources.August 9, 2012 3:19 am at 3:19 am #890185WolfishMusingsParticipant
It doesn’t apply as a general rule, only the specific case he mentioned. Despite some liberals trying to matir abortion by misinterpreting it via a broad reading of the term pain.
Oh, for heaven’s sake, I’m not talking about abortion. The portion I’m referring to is not the portion that deals with abortion. It’s the portion that declares that someone who would otherwise be liable for the death penalty can atone for their sin through suicide.
And, for the record, I’ve *never* heard anyone make the halachic case for abortion by mentioning this siman.
The WolfAugust 9, 2012 3:19 am at 3:19 am #890186
Tajik: Not exactly. He didn’t exactly promise Olam Haba, and it’s not specific to Rosh Hashana. Here’s the main quote from Sichos Haran 141:
“Bear witness to my words. When my days are over and I leave this world, I will still intercede for anyone who comes to my grave, says these Ten Psalms and gives a penny to charity. No matter how great his sins, I will do everything in my power, spanning the length and breadth of creation , to save him and cleanse him….”
In addition, in Chayei Moharan (a collection of various oral traditions about Rebbe Nachman from Rabbi Nosson of Breslov), the following sentence is added: “I will pull him by his peyos out of gehenom.”
A little unusual? Yes. But the Zohar says a tzaddik is greater after death than while living, so it’s conceivable that a tzaddik could “intercede” in some way with one’s soul after death. And I think it’s obvious that the part about the peyos is meant to be figurative, not literal. Obviously, peyos don’t come with you to the afterlife. It may sound like he’s promising Olam Haba, but I don’t think that’s the intended meaning.August 9, 2012 3:30 am at 3:30 am #890187Sam2Participant
Choppy: I’m not sure where that came from, but re-read Yabia Omer Yoreh Deah 4:1:8. He comes a lot closer to being Mattir an abortion than anyone else I’ve heard. Or is R’ Ovadiah just a “liberal” that you can write off?August 9, 2012 4:04 am at 4:04 am #890188
Curiosity: Good questions. Here’s the answer about women. From a Breslover website:
“Some newcomers to Breslov assume that the Rosh Hashana gathering in the city of Uman, near Rebbe Nachman’s gravesite, was always a ‘for men only’ event. However, prior to the Stalinist purges, women also attended prayer services in the Breslover Kloiz on Rosh Hashana, as well as on Shabbos and the Yomim Tovim. In fact, it was the personal custom of Rav Avraham Sternhartz, the Baal Tokei’ah and Baal Musaf, upon leaving the synagogue to offer holiday greetings to the women waiting outside for their husbands and sons.
The main reason women today are discouraged from traveling to the Rosh Hashana gathering in Uman is because under present circumstances, it would be impossible to accommodate large numbers of women without serious breaches of tznius (modesty). However, groups of women travel to Uman throughout the year, where they, too, recite the Tikkun HaKlalli, the ten psalms prescribed by Rebbe Nachman to heal the soul.”August 9, 2012 4:24 am at 4:24 am #890189
Curiosity, on the “indicated” issue, that was a quote from Chayei Moharan, written by Rabbi Nosson Sternhartz, who was the closest chasid to the Rebbe and served as his defacto successor (though Breslov gedolim have never used the title of rebbe). Rebbe Nachman must have known he was dying — his yarzheit is on 18 Tishrei, not very long after his last Rosh Hashana — and made it clear to Reb Nosson that he wanted people to visit his kever.
I see what you’re saying about tzedakah. But from the quotes I provided, it’s clear that Rebbe Nachman believed visiting him on Rosh Hashana would benefit the entire world. So it’s understandable to collect tzedakah. If I were in charge, however, I wouldn’t raise funds for Uman trips from non-Breslovers, because it might send the wrong message (that mystical pilgrimages are more important than helping the poor with their basic needs.)
One more thing about women. Rebbe Nachman asked, “Why don’t you make your wives Chasidistehs (chassidim)?”(Siach Sarfei Kodesh 2, 1-14). So he wanted women to follow his derech too.August 9, 2012 7:01 am at 7:01 am #890190
Yytz – I suspected what you said – that Rav Nachman WANTED husbands to come with their wives when visiting him. I was setting the conversation up for my next kasha:
A classic step in learning is the principle of “smallest machlokes”. Whereby, if you have two opinions who argue about a specific point you assume the point of argument that causes the disagreement is as small as possible and that both opinions agree on everything except the point of conflict. Thus, if you know what Rabbi A holds legabey x and y, and you what Rabbi B holds only legabey y; you should assume that they both agree on x, and you may use this assumption as a tool in uncovering what the root for the machlokes on y is, and for clarifying each opinion.
That being said, you quoted reliable sources that display R’ Nachman’s daas Torah was for husband and wife to come together when they visit him in life. He did not predict the impracticality of wives coming after his death, and therefore did not discuss it. As was mentioned on the thread earlier, there are great poskim whose daas Torah is that husbands should NOT separate from wives for Rosh Hashana to go to kivrei tzadikim. In context of the previous paragraph, what halachic right do we have to assume that Rav Nachman would have argued with the Daas Torah of these poskim, when we don’t know explicitly that he did?August 9, 2012 7:12 am at 7:12 am #890191
???”? ????: ??? ??? ???? ????
If an extra delicacy falls under this category, how much more so following his Rebbe’s directive.August 9, 2012 10:21 am at 10:21 am #890192mobicoParticipant
In response to the OP – this discussion is really moot. If you’re Chassidish, then no explanation is necessary; if you’re not, then no explanation will suffice.August 9, 2012 11:46 am at 11:46 am #890193interjectionParticipant
Curiosity: He wanted anyone who believed he/she could gain from the experience to come. Any woman who wants to go, can. Most prefer not to go for Rosh Hashana when it’s swarming with men.August 9, 2012 12:19 pm at 12:19 pm #890194NaftushMember
Why is it assumed that husbands visiting Uman are disserving or violating the wishes of their wives? Wouldn’t one expect them to be in harmony about something like this?August 9, 2012 1:09 pm at 1:09 pm #890195
Is it also an Issur Gamur for Bachur to stay in yeshiva for Shavuos?
What about a woman going to a Rebbe herself on a Shabbos or Rosh Chodesh?
You quoted one Tshuva, which was expressing a feeling rather than a Halacha, and you are trying to use that against many thousands of Yidden who travel, men only, to their Rebbes every Rosh Hashana. This is going on for hundreds of years, by many great and famous Rebbes and Poskim. If you have an issue with the fact that Reb Nachman is not alive, keep the argument to that, please.August 9, 2012 2:17 pm at 2:17 pm #890196
Curiosity, when he was alive, I don’t think his chassidim’s wives visited him on Rosh Hashana. He wanted the husbands to instruct their wives in chassidus. This is explained on the website I previously quoted from.
Regardless, your argument doesn’t work. Gedolei Breslov, not Litvishe and Sephardi poskim, are the ones Breslov chassidim should listen to, regarding how and whether to follow Breslov minhagim. If it were otherwise, Breslov chassidus (and for that matter all the other streams of chassidus) would not exist.
Rebbe Nachman believed in following the Shulchan Aruch, and criticized other chassidim for not following it (such as those who davened after zman tefilah). He also spoke strongly against unnecessary chumros. The Shulchan Aruch does not say men should always be with their families on Rosh Hashana.
In any event, it makes no sense for non-Breslovers to come forward and say, but Rebbe Nachman would have wanted you to do X, not Y. Breslov traditions have been passed down faithfully from generation to generation, and the leaders of each generation of Breslov chassidim are necessarily empowered to determine how minhagim are to be followed.
I personally think it would be nice if women and children could come with their wives to Uman on Rosh Hashana, but 1) the presence of large amounts of women and men together in the same place would be unacceptable because of tznius, and 2) who am I to argue with the consensus of gedolei Breslov?August 9, 2012 3:27 pm at 3:27 pm #890197
“In response to the OP – this discussion is really moot. If you’re Chassidish, then no explanation is necessary; if you’re not, then no explanation will suffice.”
mobico- Speak for yourself and keep your ignorance to yourself.August 9, 2012 4:12 pm at 4:12 pm #890198
Kozov, he speaks for exactly what took place on this thread. Not much was added to the conversation,a pertaining to the OP, after BPT so eloquently answered the question.August 9, 2012 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #890199
Yytz, that’s a fair answer. Yasher Koach.August 9, 2012 4:26 pm at 4:26 pm #890200ItcheSrulikMember
yytz: And why are there bigger tznius concerns on Rosh Hashana? Because of the way people act.August 9, 2012 5:49 pm at 5:49 pm #890201
HaLeivi, speak for yourself. There are a number of things wrong with your statement.
Mobico is demonstrating guilty-consciense, blatant, closed-mindedness. He’s almost saying, if there is an appeal and quality that Chassidus has over non-Chassidus, then why are there still non-Chassidim (good question in a non-rhetorical context)? That is biased ignorance at its best.August 9, 2012 6:35 pm at 6:35 pm #890202ovadiayosefrocksParticipant
I apologize but I personally saw men who went even though their wives didn’t ‘let’, Not one person a bunch of people! Chutzpa!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.