- This topic has 292 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
LU, I can categorically state without fear of contradiction that if I were to ask any of my many frum Israeli dati friends if they considered themselves Chareidim, they’d fall down from laughing so hard. You clearly move in much different circles
how you define which change is “the type that takes place on a regular basis” and which is “a new movement” new depends on if you support that change.
This
“how you define which change is “the type that takes place on a regular basis” and which is “a new movement” new depends on if you support that change.
This”
No. That is not true regarding the type of changes that were being discussed. They were talking about sociological changes that had nothing to do with hashkafa. There is nothing to support or not support there.
The type of change that would be a different type of change would be a hashkafic change. Chassidism was such a change whether or not you support it.
I think that the Americans need to have a better sense of how Israelis use the term before they can start throwing it around and arguing about its meaning.
I think Israelis should also have a clearer definition of the term before they start using it for Americans, who don’t fit into any of your categories.
IITFT – As a few examples, Rav Malkiel Kotler, Rav Aaron Satmer, and the Skverer Rov.
In order to qualify as a new movement, there has to be a change that is a change from the type of changes that take place on a regular basis (that are not really changes since these changes have been taking place since Sinai, and there is no change in the type of change taking place.)
No True Scotsman.
But if you say “I am Dati (using the word Dati by itself) not Chareidi”, then you are saying that you are less Frum.
If we are at the point of arguing what the colloquial usage of the term is in Israeli society, I will note the absurdity of the question and bow out.
LU
” Chassidism was such a change whether or not you support it.”
Again, chassidim deny this. I deny that religious zionism was a change. You deny Daas Torah was a change. that is my point
LU
Before World War 2, the Gedolim forbid going to the US or Israel or any other Anglo country (Canada and Great Britain)
What would you call the change that moved the center of Charedism to the US and Israel. Is that a Hashfakic Change or a sociological change?
gavra_at_work,
QED
Rav Kook was towards his end attempting to form a new Movement
frummer than Mizrachi
(as Avi K mentioned)
gavra_at_work,
Let’s avoid getting into the Nitty Gritty of Lakewood endorsements
and who is really in control
The Lakewood Voting patterns of every state and national electio of the past decade ought to say it all
And the fact that Rav Y Neumann has been very perturbed and refused to sign
????? ????”? ????”? ???? ??”?, ???? ????? ?????? ????
?????? ?????? ????? ????? ?????? ???????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ???
????? ?????? ???? ???? ???, ?? ???? ???? “???? ?????? ?????”
???? ???”? ???? ?? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ?????, ????? ?? ????”?
???? ??”?, ????? ???? ???? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ???? ?????? ???
?? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ?????, ??? ?? ???”? ???? ????? ??
?????”? ???? ???? “????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??? ????”, ???????
???? ??????, ??? ??? ???? ??”?, ???? ???? ???? ????, ????”? ????
“??? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ?????? ?’, ?? ?? ??? ??
????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ???”, ??”?.
The type of change that would be a different type of change would be a hashkafic change.
That should include hisnagdus and anti-zionism.
“No True Scotsman.”
What does that mean?
“But if you say “I am Dati (using the word Dati by itself) not Chareidi”, then you are saying that you are less Frum.”
“If we are at the point of arguing what the colloquial usage of the term is in Israeli society, I will note the absurdity of the question and bow out.”
As opposed to what? The word only means what society uses it to mean.
I may agree with you about the absurdity of the question. So we may actually agree on something. Which would be nice, because I really hate arguing, and this whole discussion is starting to make me nervous. I think I must be a girl after all.
But what did you think the discussion was about if not the usage of the term in Israeli society? (And btw, what does colloquial mean)?
“The type of change that would be a different type of change would be a hashkafic change.”
“That should include hisnagdus and anti-zionism.”
That is another argument. My whole svara the whole time was that not joining a new movement is not called creating a new movement. Chareidi are simply Frum people who did not join the Mizrachi movement, although they may be zionists.
“What would you call the change that moved the center of Charedism to the US and Israel. Is that a Hashfakic Change or a sociological change?”
Sociological. It wasn’t even by choice, so it can’t be hashkafic.
Hisnagdus and anti-zionism aren’t simply not joining a movement.
LU :” Chassidism was such a change whether or not you support it.”
“Again, chassidim deny this. I deny that religious zionism was a change. You deny Daas Torah was a change. that is my point”
Are you sure that Chassidim deny that? I never discussed it with a Chassid, but I would find it hard to believe. I brought that as an example because I assumed it was something that everyone agreed to.
Saying something is a change doesn’t necessarily make it wrong. Not the way the term “change” is being used here. Unless the word “change” is being used to mean that chasv’shalom someone is trying to change Torah and Mitzvos, which is not the way the term “change” was being used in this thread.
I think that the Dati-Leumi would agree that the Dati-Leumi movement was a new movement even though they think it’s correct. I think that Lubavitchers would agree that Lubavitch was a new movement even though they think it’s good (I don’t want to say “correct” because I don’t know if they say that everyone should be Lubavitch). And the same with every Chassidus.
“Hisnagdus and anti-zionism aren’t simply not joining a movement.”
I didn’t define “Charedi’ism” as anti-zionism because I don’t think that’s what it means. It simply refers to those Frum Jews who didn’t join the Dati-Leumi movement.
Can we all find something we agree on? I hate arguing. Thank you.
GAW- I would be interested in knowing how you define “Charedi’ism”. I don’t think you have said anything in this thread about your own definition.
I thought I saw in another thread that you wrote that you would consider R’ Hershel Schachter to be Chareidi. If so, I would have thought that you must be defining “Chareidi” the same way as I am. If you are not defining Chareidi the same as I am, how are you defining it (and how does it include R’ Schachter?)
Most changes are not done by choice, They are done because they are forced
LU
“Are you sure that Chassidim deny that? I never discussed it with a Chassid, but I would find it hard to believe. I brought that as an example because I assumed it was something that everyone agreed to.”
I am certain they deny it. (Obviosuly not all but generally speaking) Speak to a chassid ou will be told how the zohar was written prior to Sheishes yemei Beresshis but was only written by Rashbi and ten put into practice by the ARIZAL and the Besh”t but on some deeper levels all the Taanamim and Amoraim were secretly Chassidim.
(Full disclosure: This is what I was taught in cheider)
“Saying something is a change doesn’t necessarily make it wrong.”
Of course not, then all forms of Judaism would be wrong, since as Ive been trying to explain to you they all involve change.
“I think that the Dati-Leumi would agree that the Dati-Leumi movement was a new movement even though they think it’s correct.”
new because the circumstances are new, but We are what traditional judaim would look like if faced with an opportunity to form our own country.
“Can we all find something we agree on? I hate arguing. Thank you”
then whats the point of this forum? But ok Pizza is delicious. Maskim?
ZD – I’m not sure that I agree with that. At least not in this context. It was a choice to start Chassidus. No one forced the Baal Shem Tov to start Chassidus. It was a choice to start the Mizrachi movement. They weren’t forced to.
The Nazis killed the Yidden in Europe and destroyed the Yeshivas there. We didn’t do that.
In any case, it was a sociological change and not a hashkafic change.
ubiquitin at al: Maskima
Chassidism was not exactly a voluntary option. There was a massive crisis of faith at that time due to The Cheminksi Massacares, the Shabbtai Tzvi false Messiah and the general situation of persecutions and poverty.
People were losing hope
Maybe the Baal Shem Tov wasn’t forced, per se.
Still, from what I learned, it sounded like he could have done nothing, or found a way to make those who didn’t belong, belong so much so that their divine service grew strong.
Serving Hashem with joy the Jewish world a throng.
Add a tune and this becomes a song.
“Before World War 2, the Gedolim forbid going to the US or Israel or any other Anglo country (Canada and Great Britain)”
Another tired ,mostly false cliched assertion
There were those who permitted many jews to immigrate.Those who could face the trials and succeed
R’ Yisroel Salanter, the Kelmer maggid, S. Zeitlen the frum Warsaw journalist, the Torah Temimah, R’ Elchonon Wasserman all foretold the coming catastrophe.
Where should the go? Moisville, Argentina?
where the Jews have long since assimilated?
The US?
Where Rav J.B. was so dispirited in the ’30s, that he wanted to go BACK to Europe?
GAW- I would be interested in knowing how you define “Charedi’ism”. I don’t think you have said anything in this thread about your own definition.
I believe it is a societal construct, specific to Israel, and doesn’t really mean its original meaning (a Charad L’devar Hashem) in normal usage anymore. Americans don’t really have the concept in the same way that Israelis do, because the societies are much more fluid (as an example, Lakewood davens and speaks in Young Israels).
For example, Rav Shachter would be an “original definition Chareidi” (AKA a Charad L’Devar Hashem), not what we call a “Chareidi” in Israel in the normal day to day usage of the term. There are (mistama) many “Chareidim” who are not “Charad L’devar Hashem”.
Therefore, if we can agree that as a term in every-day use it only applies in Israel, I’ll agree to allow you to define it. Once you claim it applies to us here in America, you will have to change the definition 🙂
But ok Pizza is delicious. Maskim?
Agreed 🙂
IITFT – Just means Lakewood doesn’t follow its own Daas Torah!! Perhaps even for good reason (al pi Torah) 😛
Ubiquitin – I don’t like pizza.
LU: What about chocolate pizza?
Chocolate in the shape of a pizza inside a pizza box.
It’s still pizza because it’s surely has a printed label, SKU number, and online reviews –all of which prove its legitimacy.
Litebrite, regarding Chareidim who are not chreidim l’devar Hashem read Rav Kook’s essay “Massa HaMachonot” in “Maamarei HaRaya”. There he discusses how these labels prevent teshuva. The proof is the fact that every Israeli prison has a”Torani wing”. For that matter, I read that there is a prison in America that has two minyanim – Aguda and Young Israel. There is also a prison in upstate NY that has a kosher kitchen run by a man who murdered his wife and child (but is shomer Shabbat). He also blows the shofar on Rosh HaShana for himself and the other Jewish inmates.
Some can belive whatever they want, but by the year 1900 NYC was by far the largest jewish community in the world , it was more than double of Warsaw, Yet the largest jewish instutitions in NYC at that time was JTS . It wasnt until 1917 that Torah Vodass was founded about the same time as Yeshiva Of Brooklyn.
Things in the US would have been alot different had things been started to be built in the 1900’s rather than the 1950’s and 1960’s
Zahavasdad,
1. In 1900 JTS was an Orthodox institution. As late as the 1980s it had several Orthodox rabbanim on its faculty (they resigned over the ordination of women).
2. American Orthodox institutions began to be built much earlier. Young Israel was formed in 1912 and YU was established by the merger of Yeshiva College and RIETS in 1915.
Part of the demographic difference inherent between Israel
and Chu”l is because
In the hashgafa of Rav Kook and early religious zionism,Galut about the individual,Israel is about the Collective KlaL That is why in Israel we ought to have a centralized top down control, while in Chu”L the individual communities could afford to make individual decisions
Young Israel and YU are not Charedi institutions . Torah Vodass and Yeshiva of Brooklyn are
” Torah Vodass and Yeshiva of Brooklyn are “
What year did they become ” Charedi”?
Were they nominated ?What is the process?
IiTfT: Wiki states that Torah Vodass is a chareidi yeshiva.
“‘Torah im Derech Eretz’ historically influenced the yeshiva’s philosophy,[9] but today it is strongly influenced by the haredi or, ultra-orthodox philosophy.
However, Torah Vodaas is one of the many major haredi yeshivas that allow its students to attend college while studying at the yeshiva.
The great majority of the yeshiva’s graduates go on to work in fields that are not related to the torah education that they received in yeshiva.[10]” (Wiki)
Sources:
9. Ben Zion Weberman (1896-1968): Life and Legacy of an Orthodox Jewish Attorney in New York City During the Interwar Period and Beyond, Moshe Rapaport, University of Hawaii
10. Helmreich, William B. (2000). The World of the Yeshiva: An Intimate Portrait of Orthodox Jewry. KTAV Publishing House, Inc. p. 268. ISBN 9780881256420.
If you concur, please feel free to update the page and references accordingly 🙂
Ask Rav Savitsky or Rav Reisman if they think Torah Vadaas is modern orthodox or charedi?
Zhavasdad, mi hu Chareidi?
lightbrite,
There used to be and probably still is a modern guy in LA who writes up hundreds of Jewish articles on Wikipedia as per his slant
Just who is writing up on Wikipedia?
zahavasdad,
Is your/the vocabulary so limited ?
I was under the impression that anyone can write whatever they want on Wikipedia. Is that true? If so, it would mean that Wikipedia is no more autoritative than the posts by anonymous posters in the CR.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.