- This topic has 30 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
does anybody know if the Hakirah publictions editor is frum?
and
Is it your contention that Modern Orthodox Jews are not frum?
Or is it your contention that they are no more frum than Conservative Jews?
The Wolf
I vaguely heard of this publication before. I just took a look at some of their articles and noticed it has a strong left-wing leaning in both the topics covered as well as the authors published.
What difference does it make who put it out? If you don’t agree with the hashkafas that are expressed in the publication, just throw it out (or put it in genizah if appropriate).
Wolf,
Your point is valid; classifying MO as not frum is inaccurate as well as insulting.
To be dan l’kaf z’chus, maybe the OP meant that the choices are:
1) Frum (including MO)
2) Conservadox (not really Frum, but pretending to be)
I am hopeful that the OP will clarify that this is what he meant (although pashut’e p’shat is like you).
I read the OP like DY, with a slight twist.
The first choice is “frum” and obviously includes MO.
The second choice is MO/conservative, which is a term apparently coined by the OP for lack of better term, to refer to the 5th column which call themselves (Open) Orthodox in an attempt to fool people, but are essentially the conservative of the 1950’s.
Pba,
That was nichlal in my #2.
Do you read it like that l’chatchila, or b’shaas had’chak?
I did a little search.
An article in a recent edition of Hakirah was written by a guy named Adam Mintz, who is a fellow at the Tikvah Center. The pictures of the guys who run the Tikvah center do not show kippot. The mission statement of the Tikvah Center is dubious.
This Mintz guy is also founding rabbi at Kehilat Rayim Ahuvim, which calls itself Modern Orthodox. On Jan. 26th, “rabbi” Ayelet Cohen is scheduled to speak there.
Draw your own conclusions.
R’ Dr. Mintz is a YU musmach and a professor at City College. I intend on taking courses with him in the near future.
He seems to be well-respected in the Modern Orthodox community.
BTW, the word “tikvah” in a congregation’s name almost always means toavah. I think they hope that they don’t die of AIDS.
Rd,
He should not be allowing Ayelet Cohen to speak in his shul.
DaasYochid:
Why should we care if the fellow who runs the Tikvah center wears a yarmulka? And why shouldn’t he allow her to speak in his shul?
It doesn’t look like anyone answered the original question. I believe the answer is yes, the editor is frum.
From Tikvah Center’s site:
The foundational premise of the Center is 1) that the study of Jewish law can profit immensely from insights gained from general jurisprudence
Sorry, but Abaye and Rava, the Ri”f and Ramba”m, the Ketzos and Nesivos, don’t need any help from secular jurisprudence.
And if I need to explain why a female rabbi (or any rabbi from a non-orthodox stream) should’t be given the podium in an Orthodox shul, then I’m on the wrong website.
I am familiar with the publication. (There is a dot under the ‘H’ to make it pronounced Chakirah).
It is a somewhat off-the-books Orthodox – Mo-orthodox magazine, since they welcome views from all over the spectrum, including very left-wing. Their purpose of this is to add innuendo to the letters to the editor, which many a time make a most interesting reading. Having said this, many articles are head-on in concurrence with the Yeshiva Oilam. Rav Hershel Shacter shlit”a writes an article in one volume destroying conservadox practices.
On the other hand, most contraversial is an article from Rabbi Natan Slifkin attempting to prove that Rashi was a corporealist.
I would ask my rav before visually placing the book on my bookshelf.
DaasYochid:
1. Are you arguing that the study of Jewish law cannot benefit from insight gained from general jurisprudence?
2. You didn’t answer my question of “why shouldn’t he allow her to speak in his shul?”
Machshavos:
1) Yes
2) I did better than that. I ridiculed the question. If I must spell it out, nobody should be legitimizing people and organizations who don’t believe in Torah shebaal peh. He’s also oiver on lifnei iver (it’s assur to say and assur to hear words of kefirah).
DaasYochid:
1. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the book The Soloveitchik Heritage, but if I remember it correctly, R. Aaron Soloveichik differed with you on Jewish law and other jurisprudence.
2A. I don’t know that he’s legitimizing anything.
2B. That sounds like a pretty strong statement, assuming (as I am) that you don’t know if what you’re saying is true.
“BTW, the word “tikvah” in a congregation’s name almost always means toavah.”
I always thought rayim ahuvim was a euphamism for the same.
1. I never read it and probably never will. I’d like to think that you either don’t remember it correctly or never understood it correctly to begin with.
2a. I don’t know if he does either, but he is.
2b. Which part is strong – that kefirah is assur or that there’s something called lifnei iver?
Apy,
I doubt it. Maybe I’m just naive.
? MDG ?
lol, but not funny. they’re still Jews. Even if they don’t act that way.
Machshavos,
1) I can’t speak for them, but it is understood by most that trying to conform to secular world is not the correct approach to viewing Halacha.
2) by having it out there it’s lifnei iver, as DY pointed out.
not understanding “why a female rabbi (or any rabbi from a non-orthodox stream) should’t be given the podium in an Orthodox shul, then I’m on the wrong website” is borderline troll.
To Yeshivish7-you are making up stories. The only orthodox congregations that officially let people drive to shul on shabbos are basically Lubavitch ( obviously hoping down the road that they will eventually start walking).
borderline troll
I’ve been called a full fledged troll, that’s ok. This website is called Yeshiva World, you know.
DaasYochid,
it was directed to Machshavos
Yitzchokm,
Oh, ok, sorry. So I’ve only been called a troll, not a borderline troll 🙂
If you think that a talk on Tu B’Shvat (which the Rayim Ahuvim website currently says is the topic) will contain kefirah and will therefore also be lifnei iver, that’s your right. I guess no-one will really know until they hear the speech.
With regard to “legitimization,” I don’t know. Is anything more than a speech legitimized when a speaker is given a podium? When politicians speak at yeshiva dinners, are the yeshivas endorsing every value and action of the politician?
The politician is not a religious figure.
Machshavos,
yes, if a politician would give that kind of speech at a yeshiva dinner, then, yes, i’d say that they agree.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.