- This topic has 19 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Can’t find the topic where we discussed about learning Rambam as a rationalist v. considering him as “one of the rishonim”. One of the proponents of the former approach is Rogachover.
When he was old and suffered, he told a visitor that maybe his isurim is due to his neglect of “other rishonim”, saying that even when he did look them up, he did it only to clarify the Rambam … In another argument, when someone else pointed to Shulchan Aruch, he said that he is OK with the other person standing with Sh’A, while he – with the Gemorah … edited (when someone had a nice conversation with him, he asked – I am surprised, I was told that you are pretty harsh with Talmidei Chachamim, and got a reply – yes, I am harsh with them)
The Yemenites, Temanim follow the Rambam.
RE, historically yes. But now for all intents and purposes they follow the SA.
But we have a lot to learn from acheinu hateimanim. If we had less gaava we would be mekabel from them.
False dichotomy. He was both one of the rishonim, and have rationalistic tendencies
Yabia, there is still a divide between the baladi, who still keep original rambam-based halacha, and shami community, which adopted shu”a. They get along fine socially; they have a beis hillel/bais shamai dynamic.
We can’t bemekabel things from any group which contravene our mesorah; the fact that they’re an ancient community notwithstanding.
AAQ; please provide a source for…. Everything? The rogotchover was a chabad chosid, he was far from “rationalism” in the context of how maskilim and quasi maskilim attempt to besmirch the heiligeh rambam.
The rogotchover was famous for saying that everything in moreh nevuchim is in chazal, that the rambam didn’t copy from or was influenced by the philosophers that he used to articulate his hashkofos.
Rabbi yaakov feitman has an amazing, well sourced article on the rogotchover that was published in the Jewish observer. He mentions my statement that moreh is entirely torah based
Avira, the Teimanim contravene our Mesorah?? Shomu Shamayim.
I realize how that line i wrote came across; i meant that we don’t copy other groups, be they sefardim, chasidim, yekkies, and nor should they copy us(by us i mean me, who’s litvish).
They have their own, and we have ours; not saying one is more right than the other
I didn’t say follow their Minhagim. But you could be Mekabel their Torah, etc. When I say mekabel I mean learn from it as a way to explain your horizons, not necessarily change who you are. Regarding whose is the most right, Yavo Eliyahu….
But it’s known that several groups have a direct chain to the Geonim, who have a direct chain to the Amoraim. So maybe they are the most authentic.
There wasn’t much tension between chabad and the rest of the world until the last lubavitcher rebbe took over. The chofetz chaim did say that the only chasidim who the gaon would still oppose are chabad and breslov, but in terms of relations…there was very little hardcore hisnagdus after the kotzker rebbe and the yid hakadosh. It’s not surprising at all that the very litvishe Ohr somayach got along well with the rogotchover. It would be surprising if there was at that point tension.
The rogotchover found remozim to everything in torah, and was similar to the gra in connecting everything; the ohr somayach happens to do something similar in meshech chochma
Dear Avira,
There was always tension with Chabad. They always lived among misnagdim.
The Chofetz Chaim did not say specific names. People amended what he said.
Define hardcore hisnagdus. How about the Yismach Moshe? There was a lot of opposition to Vorka/Amshinov.
P. S. Your not so correct about the Rogochover. Rationalist is not the correct term. The Rambam is more systemized thinking than the other Rishonim.
What about the yismach moshe? I don’t know what you’re referring to. He was the satmar rov’s …. grandfather, or father, i forget the chain, but what of it?
Amshinov…it wasn’t nearly as bad as during the tzlach and gaon. I think most just may have thought he was strange, but i heard a story about roshei yeshiva meeting the rebbe and being very nispa’el from his learning, and afterwards cancelled plans for opposing him publicly.
The statement of the chofetz chaim is recorded in kovetz maamarim; i dont know how you got the impression that it was amended. Source?
Chabad got along fine with the mirrer bochurim in shang hai. I don’t know where you get your information from; you almost never give sources for your claims.
Ee, liturgy; you’re bending over backwards again. They say it as a formal part of davening, however much kavanah individual messianics have in it or not, they still add it to davening, and that’s liturgical.
Why does everything turn into pro vs anti chabad around here
It doesn’t. People argue about certain behaviors, actions and/or hashkafos that may be in conflict with Torah. If you decide to take ownership or offense than you’re missing the point. If what you do aligns with Torah than who cares what they say.
I’m not around sefarim these days. I’ll get to it online.
Your right that the level of antagonism toward chassidus cooled off a lot after a hundred years. I was nitpicking. What you are thinking with the Amshinover, was personal to his activities and not opposition to his following and so on. I was talking about in Europe. Later eighteen hundreds.
Correct me if I’m confusing times and people, I recall that the Yismacha Moshe started out as a fierce misnagid.
I’m not so sure that the opposition really calmed. As much as there was too much crossover. And there was nothing to be gained by fighting. Also, there were more important fights for the last two hundred years. Along with too much infighting.
It cooled off a lot sooner than a hundred years.
Depending when the hundred years starts. And how much cooling off, is a lot.
Siyum Harambam today!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.