- This topic has 84 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
For those of you who have read One People, Two Worlds (a debate on Orthodoxy vs. Reform, by R. Yosef Reinman and Amiel Hirsch), here’s my idea.
1. Let’s nominate two articulate, mature mambers, one MO, one UO, to debate the issues in a brand-new thread. No ad hominem attacks, no whining, just facts, and opinions based on fact.
2. Only these two will have access to that thread. (Perhaps the mods can give them a password.) We will be the privileged onlookers, watching the debate unfold. If we have arguments for either side, we’ll have to suggest them (or fight them out) in other threads.
3. When the debate becomes book length, we’ll go to print. It’ll be a bestseller. (Now please don’t start fighting over the $$$!)
Mods, Lefties, Righties, what do you think?
I nominate msseeker as the UO representative.
Are you suggesting that msseeker is Joseph?
I don’t think that it’s appropriate for Motzei Tisha B’Av. Eilu V’Eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim! No need to debate. Everyone should abide the rules that was determined by his/her Rabbi and the unity will bring Moshiach.
And, don’t ever compare any Orthodox sect to the Reform…
Lefty? someone called for a leftie?
Nope.
I think you should shut down this thread. DIDN’T WE HAVE ENOUGH OF THIS NONSENSE ALREADY? What is this obsession about? If you have such a major issue about MO you need to see a therapist. Mods again please shut this down.
I don’t see why it has to be just one person from each side, I wouldn’t mind if Feif Un, Charliehall, cantoresq, and SJSinNYC all represent their side.
As long as it is a bunch of civil people who knwo how to debate and listen properly it could be a great discussion.
The question is who are the articulate, mature rightys?
The question is who are the articulate, mature rightys?
Bar Shattya and Joseph.
Aries, I think the point is to have a mature, articulate discussion without everybody putting in their two cents to pretend to be a kannoi. I don’t see any problem with that, it sounds much better than the previous discussions. No need for people to scream for it to be shut down.
Sorry, but I vote “no”
1) I’m afraid it would degenerate into “what’s bad about your side” and cause hard feelings.
2) This would be more appropriate from talmidai chachomim / rabonim presenting opposing points of view, not us.
3) The true “OU” perspective probably has many proponents who avoid the internet completely. Yes, this site, too.
If (for example) Rav Belsky and Rav Tendler would have such a debate, I’d be quite interested.
I think a one-on-one has a lot of merit, as the OP suggested. A free-for-all where anyone can debate is basically what we have with every thread.
And, stop calling us “Ultra-Orthodox” Jews!
(See article in Forward about this)
edited
This discussion has taken place so many times. When has it turned out “nicely”?
I think Moderator 80 is another highly qualified candidate to represent the UO. I don’t think he would accept the nomination though due to his humility.
The most articulate and knowledgeable righties are in the Bais Medrash and are not on ANY internet forums, even the most kosher ones such as this!!
I think mod 80, WIY and Daas Yochid all qualify to represent the UO.
And if I may vote for the MO (although I’m not MO), I think charliehall would do a good job.
Can’t wait for the debate to start… Seems pretty exciting!:)
observanteen, I am surprised at you. You said that you feel so close to Hashem and yet you want to see another knock out drag down fight? You know it doesn’t belong here on the internet where everyone is anonymous and not face to face. Where no one knows the other person or even cares to respect them or even tolerate them. Were you NOT the one that started the sensitivity thread?
msseeker, at first I thought your idea was cute and innocent. I even would vote you as the UO rep. However, although I myself am a Satmar lady I am questioning why you would insult MO by offering them to represent the Reform side of the debate?
Only a reform type should be offered such a position as it would coincide with his beliefs, no?
WHy should a shomer shabbos, torah observant Modern orthodox jew be interested to defend and pronounce Reform Judaism as valid?
Reform is like a church.
aries… Ouch. Correct me if I’m wrong. But I didn’t see it that way. On the contrary. I thought that two mature adults who know the ins and outs of both AND are talmidei chacomim will CIVILY debate this issue. I figured we’ll nominate people who DO respect and tolerate others. I don’t think there’s anything wrong in debating without bashing or calling names. I thought it was a nice thing… But again, maybe I’m wrong.
msseeker, at first I thought your idea was cute and innocent. I even would vote you as the UO rep. However, although I myself am a Satmar lady I am questioning why you would insult MO by offering them to represent the Reform side of the debate?
Only a reform type should be offered such a position as it would coincide with his beliefs, no?
WHy should a shomer shabbos, torah observant Modern orthodox jew be interested to defend and pronounce Reform Judaism as valid?
Reform is like a church.
Read the OP again. He (She?) used the example of an Orthodox vs. Reform debate but is proposing a UO vs. MO debate, NOT an Orthodox vs. Reform debate.
In other words, the UO person would represent the UO position and the MO person would represent the MO position, not the Reform position.
Observantteen I don’t think you’re wrong. Authentic Judaism has always been about debates. Debates get the truth out. Men argue points in their learning in Yeshiva to arrive at points.
Aries just has an over active imagination visualizing knock outs and “drag down fights” as she put it.
msseeker: I still think you would be the best rep for the UO. Regarding your reason #1 above in declining, your opponent wouldn’t be that either.
Sorry, comprehension is not my best subject at 1 am something in the morning.
Nu? Mods, it’s time you say who the two are. Let the debate begin! Okay guys… Everybody otta here!
I wouldn’t mind being one of the debaters on UO side. Although I’m very opinionated and feel very strongly about my Hashkafa, I’m still try to be respectful to others. Maybe I can be nominated? I can only grow from getting more insight of other peoples outlooks, and also more clarity of my own outlook.
My vote for the UO side be a true charedi who follows the rabbonim who claim the Internet to be assur, and actually follows that without question. That includes no excuses like I use it because I need to make parnasa or I use filters… When we find this person, we can get him or her a heter to come online to debate….
In fact before the MO/UO debate, I’d like to see a charedi debate. One who follows that the Internet is assur and the other says it’s ok ( with filters of course ;)…
As silly as the above sounds that’s what I think of this thread…but I hope I made my point..
But if I’m forced to choose debators. I select The Wolf for UO and CharlieHall for MO
Mike, I agree with you. Thanks for proving once again how ludicrous this is. BTW UO usually stands for “unorthodox”. So much for labeling.
I would still like to understand the need for the separation and labeling.
I would never participate in such a debate here. The mods are clearly leaning towards one side, and they’d censor too many of the things coming from the MO side.
will the book be banned?
I nominate MSSEEKER for the MO side.
I was discussing “what makes someone MO” with Ittisa, and we decided that Chassidim are “Modern” according to most definitions of the term.
So for the MO side, MSseeker.
Barring her, I think Dr. Hall would be a good choice suing the “standard” definition of MO (whatever that is).
For the Charaidi side, Derech Hamelech. I may not always agree with him, but he argues based on halacha and seforim, not personal opionions, hearsay and bias. I would not want one side to lose based on the inability to debate based on the facts.
If (for example) Rav Belsky and Rav Tendler would have such a debate, I’d be quite interested.
I think too many people would consider Rav Belsky to be MO, so he is not a good choice. Dr. Rabbi Meiselman the same. I would like to see Rav Shmuel (from Philly, since Rav Elya is no longer with us) & Dr. Rabbi Lamm.
In truth, I think a better idea would be to do the exact opposite. Have the MO side argue for Charaidism, and have the Charadi side argue for MO. I think it would be much more informative.
(Disclaimer: I don’t consider myself either side in the standard sense of the terms)
If the right people were to be selected to participate, it could prove informative. But I question the point of such an exercise. Would not each side merely be preaching to their respective choirs?
I will vote bad Idea
see the example and why its a bad idea and why you dont debate religion or politics
Lets say the debate is about Zionism and the UO (Maybe they are even Satmar) person says The Satmar Rebbe says its Forbidden because of the 3 Oaths
And the MO person says I dont hold by the Satmar Rebbe and the 3 oaths. Exactly where does that get you.
And you will find thats where the debate will lead, One person will quote a Godol and their poskim and the conversation might degenerate into whose godol is bigger and insulting another godol
Zahavasdad: How about each side only bringing Torah sources from Chumash, Gemara, Midrash etc. to prove their point, and not quoting from their Rebbe or Rav. May I ask, is the point of the debate to prove the other side wrong, or is it to show why their side is right?
GAW, but you see such a debate would never happen in the REAL world because Rav Shmuel and R’ Lamm respect each other and would never, ever go there!
aries2756…thank you
Nahmanides debates…am I the only one that this rings a bell with?
zahava what is the problem. delve into the sugya and do not just say ploini said so. ploini only said so because he learned the sugya. I think it is a bad idea because how can you argue about it if nobody can define it.
Going back to the Zionism.
The MO would likely quote Rav Kook and the Charedi might quote the Satmar Rebbe.
Both I am sure read the same sugya and came to differnt conclusions and it would not be fair to the supporter.
If a supporter of the Satmar Rebbe heard the differing opions of Rav Kook he might get a different opinions of him and vice versa a supporter of Rav Kook.
I am only using the example of the Satmar Rebbe and Rav kook because their opionions are totally the opposite and i think most would accept that both were gedolim
aries: Rav Shmuel and Rabbi Lamm respect each other? Are you just guessing about that?
satmar is not the mainstream chareidi opinion.
The mainstream Chareidi opinion does hold zionism is treif.
The mainstream Chareidi opinion does hold zionism is treif.
Correct. Satmer just has other methods of obtaining gelt, and/or can stick to their morals. Others can’t afford to do so (literally).
I select The Wolf for UO and CharlieHall for MO
Thank you for considering me for this and also for considering me worthy to be a debate partner of Dr. Hall.
Nonetheless, without commenting on whether or not I believe this debate is a good idea in the first place, I will have to recuse myself as I do not self-identify as “Ultra-Orthodox” or “Modern Orthodox.”
The Wolf
Zahavsdad: We are not trying to turn the Satmar chosid into a Zionist or vice versa; the point for such a discussion would be for someone neutral/unaffiliated to decide for him/herself, after hearing both sides of Rav Kook-Satmar Ravs’ arguments, which side seems more convincing to them. Also, if Rav Kook or Satmar Rav would be alive today and see how their respective communities deviated from what they originally intended for them to look like, they might also change their mind or at least make ammendments to their Shittos.
In effect you might cause a Satmar to be a Zionist or a Zionist to be a Satmar
Your goal in neutral, but non-neutral people WILL read it.
What if a Satmar read about Rav Kook and said, Hey this sounds good, I think I will become a Zionist.
One could also say its Lashon Harah against the Satmar Rebbe or Rav Kook.
If I am a zionist Is it Lashon Hara to hear what the Satmar Rebbe Said about Israel?
If I am Charedi is it Lashon Hara to hear about the Heter Mechira from Rav Kook? (I just picked on issue where Rav Kook was controversial, but pick any)
Zahavasdad: As far as Loshon Hara is concerned, I don’t think hearing the reasoning of Rav Kook/Satmar Rav could be considered additional Loshon Hara, since everbody knows already their respective Shittos. If anything, hearing their reasoning may give one more understanding of their shittos and cause to be less judgmental of them.
Are you really concerned A Satmar Chosid will turn Zionist after reading a discussion on the internet? If the Chosid is really afraid of that, then he would not be on the internet to begin with, since the internet is full of information a sheltered Chosid would want to keep away from.
SGold; In response to your first post; I don’t think ms seeker or anyone else compared any Orthodox group to Reform, or graded anyone’s devotion to Yiddishkieit. You are (deliberately or unwittingly) reading interpretations that are just nonexistent. Possibly, due to your own slant or bias. He/she used the debate between Orthodox and Reform representatives for comparison (as opposed to judgment or grading.) only.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.