- This topic has 157 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by .
-
Posts
-
Also, cholent without beans is a much bigger issue than soup without a knaidel.
The bottom line is that if your minhag is to not eat something, you can’t just eat it anyhow because you want to, and use simchas Yom Tov as an excuse.
It is also unhealthy. Having pure egg noodles in the soup does not help to fight cholesterol.
Nah, eggs are fine. If you’re worried about cholesterol, stay away from unhealthy fats and refined sugar and flour. Including the refined flour found in some matza balls.
Edit: to be fair, Pesach lukshen has potato starch, which I can’t imagine is too healthy.
DY, kitniyas for the askanezim is an issur even on the last day whereas gebroks is mutar
So? It’s still assur to go against your minhag
A potato cholent is very good
It’s a good stew. It’s not cholent.
שערי תשובה סימן תס ס’ק י
וממה דכתיבנא מבואר דבין המחמירין ובין המקילין אלו ואלו עושים כוונים לשמים אילו דעתם לפרוש משימצא דשימצא חימצא ובר חימצא בכדי להזהר מחמץ כל שהוא בכל חומר האפשר, ואלו משום מניעת שמחת יום טוב שלא ערב להם לחם מצה חריבה ובפרט למי
שקשה לו הלעיסה ויש שמחמירין ביותר שאין אוכלים מצה כלל אחר ליל הראשון רק אוכלים למעדנים מיני תבשילין והרבה נמנעים
oלעשות כן משום שמחת יום טוב כי פתא סעדא דלבא ועל אילו ועל אילו שלבם לשמים קורא אני ועמך כולם צדיקיOkay, but once it’s your family minhag, you can’t decide to be machmir on simchas Yom Tov at the expense of the zehirus not to eat gebrokts.
Are you saying it’s okay for someone whose family minhag is to not eat gebrokts to break the minhag and eat knaidlach?
Scenario: you’re at your doctor and he’s just given you your eighth refill for a powerful antibiotic. You worriedly ask, how sick am I?
He responds that you’re healthy, the infection is long gone. So, you ask, why the refills. He replies that even though the original reason for the antibiotic no longer applies, it’s now become your minhag and you have to keep taking it.Reb Eliezer, you picked a poor example. We’ve had a calendar for approximately 1700 years so the reason is extremely unlikely, if not impossible. to reoccur.
I also wonder how Chassidim were able to abandon centuries of minhagim, to the point of even changing nusach and th ed definition of zman tefilah. I’ve heard the reasons but all it means is that you can’t change/abandon minhag except when you want to.AJ: what’s it have to do with chasidim? The Arizal introduced those aspects long before chasidus.
AJ – interesting note. Indeed, seems like the groups that abruptly changed minhagim (to be fair – mostly towards Jewish minhagim from other groups), are now the most militant in holding to them …Could one use this as a reason to return to previous minhagim? On one hand, the new minhag is a multi-generation neder. On the other hand, someone might say that he is shocked to discover that his great-grand-father was a Litvak and, were his ancestors more aware of this fact and how the matzo balls taste, they would surely have eaten it!
PS The slippery part of this logic is that Chassidim might have tasted matzo balls on the 8th day, but one can argue that they lost the art or that matzo balls taste special on the first day of Pesach
Um, I know about the Arizal changing the minhagim. But all the people who subsequently became Chassidim changed their minhagim and nusach to do so. Did they all do ateras nedarim? Ask their fathers permission? My point about the chassidim is that they are an example of when minhagim were subject to change
AJ: The Nusach was changed/modified by the Arizal. The Arizal, as you know, was long before Chasidus started. It seems to me that your taaina/question should be against the Arizal and his students rather than the chasidim.
Don’t make Arizal responsible for Jews in Ukraine or Belorussia changing their minhagim. They made their own decisions.
How is the Arizal changing Minhagim any different than others who follow the Arizal in doing the same as he?
The Arizal was Ashkenazi. He davened in an Ashkenazic Shul in Tzefas at key times of the Jewish year, such as the ימים נוראים and רגלים, as well as at other times, and darshened there as well.
He is referred to over and over again, by his contemporaries, as the אשכנזי רבי יצחק. The moniker אר”י, by which he is known, stands for אשכנזי רבי יצחק.
They would not call him אשכנזי for no reason! you would not be called a “New Yorker”, if everyone around you were New Yorkers …. But he definitely was not a Litvak or a Galitzianer!
What’s the Arizal and his disciples justification for changing from Nusach Ashkenaz to Nusach Ari/Sefard?
Reb Eliezer, if I recall you said you’re a Viener or Matersdorfer. I presume as such you daven Nusach Ashkenaz, as they do. Although I understand that Vien may have switched from Ashkenaz to Sefard over the last 15 years or so.
>> Divrei Chaim says sefard not to ashkenaz
I presume he means Chasidic nusach, not nusach Sefardim. I think we need to recognize this as it is – innovations, not supported by previous sources. It may or may not be obvious to the reader when sources are quoted in a line without times. MA (17th cent), Pri Megadim (18th), Diveri Chaim (19th).
Also, according to the summary of the letter in YWN a couple of years ago, Divrei Chaim seems to recommend the practice (a) for refined people, (b) trusting the gedolim of the generation
>> anyone whose soul is refined can rely on the leaders of the generation,Interesting, if we accept that Chasam Sofer was a major innovator of the notion of Daas Torah, then here Divrei Chaim is using DT to overturn Chasam Soifer stand on Tefilah (“with all due respect”, I mean Divrei Chaim to Chasam Soifer). “Refined souls” footnote seem to be forgotten also, as now it is nushach recommended to the whole community. Interestingly, I don’t think Sefardim proper, at least in our times. think that it is good for Ashkenazim to switch Nusach the way (some) Chasidim do.
AAQ: It isn’t Chasidish Nusach as the Arizal, who formulated the Nusach, wasn’t Chasidish.
It is interesting that you refer to the Arizal as an unsupported innovater, nevertheless the Arizal is universally accepted across the Jewish spectrum as valid.
The Chasam Sofer did not innovate Daas Torah. Daas Torah is another expression of Emunas Chachamim. And, presumably, you know the source for Emunas Chachamim.
ujm >> presumably, you know the source for Emunas Chachamim.
In a Baraita in a list after Derech Eretz and a good heart? I would refer you to 2007 Essay by R Nachum Rabinowitch “What is “Emunat Ḥakhamim” where he defines Emunas Chachamim to include a very respectful attitude towards halakhic rulings, and a requirement to understand the reasoning behind them, as the individual himself remains responsible for his action (more so in divrei reshut, if I understand him correctly). Many people use Daas Torah somewhat differently. I am not learned enough to know whether Chasam Sofer meant that.
It is also not my intention to analyze Arizal, I’m busy understanding pshat to be so presumptuous to weigh on kabbalah. I thought you asked that question. Unless there are tw2o ujms here (maybe a sitra aherah?).
According to the Rebbe, when the 8th day of Pesach is on Shabbos, knaidlach should be made (but not eaten) on the 7th day in preparation. So Lubavitchers do so.
“say maarovis,”
Oy! what about simchos Yom tov???
“you need to get up the entire Elul for Selichot”
In the minhag of the Spanish and Portuguese synagogues, which is what we all really should be folliowing here in America because they were the only congregations for over 140 years, they recite Selichot 2x/day for all of Elul.
>> knaidlach should be made (but not eaten) on the 7th day in preparation.
this is amazing… this seem to admit that you are really ready to eat it on the 7th day, otherwise you would not be able to cook it?! then, by induction, you could cook it on the 6th day to prepare for the 7th, etc.
RebE, go eat with a friend who does not hold by gebrochts. Incidentally, I found a shocking harsh teshuva by R Twersky to a question by a Rav’s daughter married to Rav’s student: Rav eats gebrochts, SIL does not. The daughter is asking whether she fulfil kavod of parents and go for Pesach and eat at a separate table. R Twersky says – very inappropriate to create a machloket at the Pesach that is supposed to bring family together eating the same karban! And the student (forget about FIL!) coming to his teacher’s table should surely follow teacher’s minhag (and he brings solid chasidishe sources for that.
AAQ: Sorry, can’t mish.
Nahum Rabinowitz believed in: ordaining women and abolishing even the small amount of laws that the state of Israel has regarding mitzvah observance, such as the law of selling chometz, kashrus and shabbos related laws. He wishes for there to be separation of church and state, because of some philosophical garbled nonsense about the state of israel being the domain of the “body” and the batei din being the “soul”.
In this, his judaism is more depraved than the mainstream religious zionists, who wish for israel to be a theocratic halachik state. His opinions are as worthwhile as a professor in JTS.
“This year will be the problem for those who only eat gebrokts the last day which is on shabbos, when will it be made?”
Not a problem, we will do the same thing we did 2019, 2018, 2015, 2012
We will make them on Friday, don’t forget an eruv Tavshailin*(* No reason to say Hoil doesnt apply, many eat Gebrokts on shevii shel PEsach (as can be seen in this thread) kids can eat it, choleh shein bo sakana etc )
His “views” can be seen in “the Political Theology of Rabbi Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch, The Torah u-Madda Journal 18 (2021), 1-32. by Rami Schwartz”
Afra lepumei
Avira, thanks for an interesting reference and thanks for taking a year to ponder on my post, really appreciate the thoughtfulness of your research. Apologize for not taking a year to reply:
I don’t see the described approach of R Rabinovitch as controversial theoretically – respecting democratic process and pondering the power of kings, Lockean approach. Most of us who live outside of EY and, l’havdil, Russia and Persia, have no problem with co-existing with a democracy. I would think that you as non-Zionist, would appreciate his approach that tries to separate integrity of halakha from political Zionism, as often seen by R Kook’s followers. I personally also sympathize with the described empirical approach to halakha – I agree that many takonot are based on the desired societal effect (including the rule that the takanah is rescinded if society rejects it in the first year). This is not a surprise for me, as my initial respect to the Rav comes from reading his work on halakha and statistics that I found very well researched from the sttistical point of view.I see, though, how his theoretical approach is triggering in the practical Israeli context in terms of supporting kashrus and giyur outside of Rabanut. So, I can easily see how one can disagree with his practical positions, but nothing to question his limud. I hope you admit that someone could be a Talmid Chacham without following same shitot as a particular YWN poster.
His support for some role of women in some roles is mentioned in one line, so there is nothing to comment on. The line may partially be based on article author views and clearly refers to limited support on these.
One thought on his approach to church/state (again, we are reading a secondary source, it would be proper to discuss a primary source to really understand his approach): note that non-Jews world made this experiment for last several centuries and the result is that First Amendment USA has more religious people than Europe that forced people to pray and register by the community. I am not saying this should directly translate to us, but it is an empirical food for thought. Jews had this argument between Litvakim and Rov Chasidim supporting Napoleon and Alter Rebbe who supported the Czar. It seems that Chabad had merit in a short-term with Jews staying under Czar and even being more religious than in West Europe, but in longer-term Chabad shluchim are now saving Yidden from the Russian army.
So much less stressful to be debating gebrokts versus mask and vaccine mandates. As if its not already hard enough to make sedorim for a large extended family, having to prepare separate gebrokts/non-gebrokts meals for guests seems a bit over the top and warrants consideration of just adhering to the minhag of the hosts.
Gadol, looked up what R Twersky is saying:
he suggests either side accomodate if possible, for example, skip gebrochts at a particular meal. Then he calls out sitting at separate table as a problem. Korban Pesach, the first mitzva was to be a family one. “For the family to be separated by a chumrah .. seems to me to be defeating the spirit of Pesach”.And the story was about 2 Sanz chasidim at Chasam Sofer’s seder. When they came back, Sanzer said that the one who ate gebrochts got Olam Haba, and the frummer one should stand near him in davening while the Rebbe will try to get him forgiveness for trying to be frummer than the gadol hador.
AAQ:….and perhaps we might extrapolate from this wonderful story on the imperative of kavod hatorah on something as seemingly insignificant as kneidlach that there might not always be a sachar for being the smartest (or frummest) guy in the room.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.