Shmuly Yanklowitz, Novominsker and OO theology

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Controversial Topics Shmuly Yanklowitz, Novominsker and OO theology

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 289 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #612927

    gavra_at_work
    Participant
    #1095027

    bhe (Joseph)
    Participant

    It shouldn’t have taken this long to figure them out. It was pretty obvious from the get-go.

    #1095028

    Question is, does he represent the opinions of OO, or are these just his twisted, delusional,( apikorsish) views?

    #1095029

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I loved best where he goes totally unhinged and starts attributing things that never happen in kosher slaughterhouses (dragging in sick animals) to kosher meat.

    He obviously knows less about slaughtering than he does about Torah (meaning, he knows negative about slaughtering since not only does he not know what does happen, but he even thinks things happen which don’t, as opposed to Torah where he just doesn’t know anything).

    I also am bemused by the YCT model of having their poor innocent students reply to criticism instead of meeting it themselves. Because we’re supposed to feel sorry for the students. Well, I do feel sorry for the students, and I hope they are chozer b’tshuva soon, together with their teachers.

    #1095030

    HaKatan
    Participant

    tbontb:

    I wouldn’t say that’s really “the” question, though it is an interesting one.

    Given other OO behavior such as Rabbi Avi Weiss’s local mixed-gender Christian Baptist Choir singing in front of his Aron Kodesh, the answer seems pretty obvious.

    The question is how any “Yeshiva graduate” could possibly even consider such views, let alone spout them to the world.

    The answer should further clarify itself if Rabbi Avi Weiss does not issue that retraction for the WSJ, as Rabbi Hoffman suggests they do.

    #1095031

    Sam2
    Participant

    This is far, far from the worst thing that Shmuly Yanklowitz has ever written. He is an actual Apikores, no question about it.

    #1095032

    Matan1
    Participant

    What has he said or done that makes his an apikores?

    #1095033

    “What has he said or done that makes his an apikores? ”

    he denies that there will be a moshiach, being that that is one of the yud gimmel ikrim that qualifies as apikorsus.

    #1095034

    Matan1
    Participant

    Interesting. Where did he say that? (i’m not trying to be antagonistic, i’m just curious)

    #1095035

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Matan1, from the article linked in the OP:

    “The following quotes are from an article he had published in the Jewish Week, February 1, 2012.

    #1095036

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “he denies that there will be a moshiach, being that that is one of the yud gimmel ikrim that qualifies as apikorsus.”

    ?’ ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ?????

    (Sanhedrin 99a)

    #1095037

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Popa,

    He obviously knows less about slaughtering than he does about Torah (meaning, he knows negative about slaughtering since not only does he not know what does happen, but he even thinks things happen which don’t, as opposed to Torah where he just doesn’t know anything).

    I don’t understand the chilluk you’re making. He’s in negative territory on both, for the same reason.

    #1095038

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    PAA, someone who holds that way today is an apikores.

    #1095039

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    DY:

    Of course, but good lines don’t play by all your formalistic rules

    #1095040

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “PAA, someone who holds that way today is an apikores”

    By definition, fundamentals of the religion cannot change. If the religion was able to exist without it then it can’t become a fundamental. This is precisely why the Sefer Haikkarim is very particular about limiting the number of things that are absolutely fundamental to the existence of the religion. And yes I know the Chasam Sofer.

    #1095041

    bhe (Joseph)
    Participant

    PAA: How do you answer the CS? And how do you answer Rambam?

    #1095042

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    It doesn’t have to be a fundamental of the religion to make the denial of it an apikores (or an edited — as some mods took to calling it).

    And I’m sure you must be aware of the myriad of Meforshim who explain that Reb Hillel was obviously not going against the Pesukim and he only meant that the Kibutz Galuos and Binyan Habayis will go straight to Hashem Melech and bypassing the stage of a Melech Basar Vadam. Right?

    Let’s also not forget the Gemara’s reaction to his statement. The Gemara is essentially saying that he needs a Kappara. If you say it after this, then you can be at best an ???? ?????.

    #1095043

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    bhe:

    Something can be a machlokes. One need go no further than the hasagos haRaavad to see this.

    #1095044
    #1095045

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Haleivi:

    So define Apikorsus and then explain how something can at one point not be apikorsus and then become apikorsus.

    DISCLAIMER:

    I am not advocating any non-belief. I am just pilpuling on the technicality of whether it is apikorsus or not.

    #1095046

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    PAA

    L’dvarecha, if a person beleives in most of Islam (if not all) he is also not an apikores, but odu li mihas that he isn’t practicing judaism.

    This dude can’t daven a single tefillah without saying things he doesn’t believe.

    #1095047

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “Let’s also not forget the Gemara’s reaction to his statement. The Gemara is essentially saying that he needs a Kappara. If you say it after this, then you can be at best an ???? ?????.”

    It wasn’t the Gemara’s reaction; it was R’ Yosef’s reaction. That might be a difference.

    #1095048

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    If he made a mistake and it was pointed out, then insisting on that refuted view is going against the Pesukim.

    I am not that enthralled with Apikursus to think about it all day and ponder who’s in and who’s out. As I pointed out another time, people research topics that interest them. I keep on seeing this conversation, over and over again, of how far exactly may one go and not be, or be called, an Apikores. Is it really that interesting?

    #1095049

    Free translation from the rambam, hilchos melochim perek yud aleph halacha aleph;

    “In the future, the Messianic king will arise and renew the Davidic dynasty, restoring it to its initial sovereignty. He will build the Temple and gather the dispersed of Israel…Anyone who does not believe in him or does not await his coming, denies not only the statements of the other prophets, but those of the Torah and Moses,” i.e., apikorus

    #1095050

    charliehall
    Participant

    “By definition, fundamentals of the religion cannot change. “

    I don’t think that is the case. There were rishonim who clearly rejected HaShem’s non-corporeality. And most of us pray to angels these days.

    #1095051

    “I don’t think that is the case. There were rishonim who clearly rejected HaShem’s non-corporeality” really!! can you quote me one of them I’d like to see it inside and see exactly what THEY ment

    “And most of us pray to angels these days” I most certainly don’t, and if you do then you should check which religion you are part of

    #1095052

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “I don’t think that is the case. There were rishonim who clearly rejected HaShem’s non-corporeality. And most of us pray to angels these days.”

    That just means that it is a machlokes whether it is a fundamental belief.

    #1095053

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    To be or not to be:

    Free translation from the Sefer Haikkarim Maamar Rishon Perek 1:

    (referring to the Rambam’s statement about Mashiach) “And this is very astounding, for we find in Sanhedrin that R’ Hillel who was one of the sages of Israel that are are mentioned in the Talmud said ‘there is no Mashiach for Israel…’ Now according to the Rambam this sage would be in the category of heretics and those who have no share in the world to come. This begs the question – If this is so why does the Gemara mention him if he is exluded from the congregation of Israel and did not believe in the fundamentals of the religion?”

    #1095055

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “”And most of us pray to angels these days” I most certainly don’t, and if you do then you should check which religion you are part of”

    Did you ever say Machnisei Rachamim or Malachei Rachamim or Torah Hakedosha in Selichos?

    #1095056

    HaKatan
    Participant

    Dr. Hall:

    Nobody prays to angels.

    Regarding Machnisei Rachamim, for those that say this piece, it is asking the angels to do their job, so to speak.

    But the only address for prayer, as in when asking to be granted anything or to change anything, etc., is Hashem.

    #1095057

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “PAA

    L’dvarecha, if a person beleives in most of Islam (if not all) he is also not an apikores, but odu li mihas that he isn’t practicing judaism.

    This dude can’t daven a single tefillah without saying things he doesn’t believe”

    I never offered my opinion on this specific individual.

    #1095058

    as mentioned before A)The Gemara is essentially saying that he needs a Kappara B)there are rishonim about what hillel meant. I will check out the sugya during night seder im yertze hashem and regarding machnesei rachamim, a pshat I heard is that we are asking the malachim that we create through our mitzvos to bring our zchusim to hashem ( remember those malachim you learnt about in school? wholehearted mitzvos get healthy malachim and vice versa?)

    #1095059

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Forget the specific individual. A person who doesn’t believe in mashiach cannot daven a single tefillah without it being half stuff he doesn’t believe in.

    Like someone who believes Mohammed is a prophet, they may not be an apikores but they sure aren’t practicing Judaism.

    #1095060

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    Hakatan:

    The Rambam includes using them as an intermediary even if you are not directly praying to them.

    #1095061

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “there are rishonim about what hillel meant”

    Obviously. The Sefer Haikkarim brings R’ Hillel as a kashya on the Rambam.

    “a pshat I heard is that we are asking the malachim that we create through our mitzvos to bring our zchusim to hashem”

    See my response to Hakatan.

    #1095062

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “Forget the specific individual. A person who doesn’t believe in mashiach cannot daven a single tefillah without it being half stuff he doesn’t believe in.”

    If I don’t care that he doesn’t believe in Mashiach you expect me to care that he doesn’t say every word in davening?

    #1095063

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    The Rambam himself says (Melachim 12:2):

    ??? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?????. ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ???????. ?? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???. ??? ??? ???? ???????. ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ???. ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???????? ???? ???. ?????? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??????. ??? ????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ??? ?????? ???. ??? ????? ????. ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????. ??? ?? ???? ?????. ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?????. ??? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ??????

    (Not that this diminishes what he holds about belief in Mashiach)

    #1095064

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    R’ Dovid Sinzheim in Sheva Chakiros writes:

    ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ???”? ????? ????? ??? ??”? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?????????? ?? ?????? ????”? ??? ??? ????? ?”? ???? ???? ??????? ?????? ?”? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????? ????? ???? ?????????? ????

    #1095065

    Sam2
    Participant

    PAA: This thread is about him, though, and he is an Apikores. This is not the place to debate technicalities of Apikorsus. We can start a different thread for that.

    #1095066

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    Although this Nareshkeit of how we pray to Malachim was refuted here, since it is so much fun to bring it up again, nothing will stop it from being repeated. The same goes for the famous Shita of “rishonim” that we only know existed from a reference of the Raavad who disagreed anyhow.

    #1095067

    Oy. I will admit that I really did not realize quite how radical Open Orthodoxy has become. This is sad.

    #1095068

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “Although this Nareshkeit of how we pray to Malachim was refuted here”

    Tell that to the Maharal who wrote: ??? ???

    ?????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????

    ??? ?????? ???’, ???? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????

    ????? ?? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??? ?????

    ??

    and he concludes and says: ???? ?? ????

    ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ??????, ??????

    ???? ?????? ???????, ?????? ???? ??????

    ????????, ???? ?????? ????? ????? ?????

    ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??????? ?????

    ?????? ??????.

    Also see Chasam Sofer O.C. 166

    #1095069

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    the fact of the matter is Open Orthodoxy is small and basically unimportant. I seriously doubt many followers of the Novominsker Rebbe are attracted to Open Orhtodoxy

    #1095070

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    There are still some people who don’t say ?????? ????? or make that change, but in the majority, the ???”? is not followed.

    ???”? believing in ????, which was universally accepted.

    #1095071

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    “The same goes for the famous Shita of “rishonim” that we only know existed from a reference of the Raavad who disagreed anyhow.”

    I posted some other sources but apparently the moderators did not allow it.

    #1095072

    bhe (Joseph)
    Participant

    PAA: If you’re going to use the “machlokes” angle, then 1) you surely should have no objections calling Yanklowitz an apikorus based on *us* holding of the Rambam (and CS) and 2) you apparently accept finding and practically holding from any or every quaint and generally unaccepted halachic opinion buried anywhere in the sources to basically hold whatever you happen to find, however rejected that opinion is (such as the corporeality of Hashem.)

    zd: The Novominsker wasn’t concerned with his followers falling for these deviants. He was primarily concerned with the out of town communities where these malcontents are taking rabbinic pulpits and/or otherwise influencing local Orthodox communities.

    #1095073

    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    ZD: It does matter, because OO is growing (especially outside of the NYC area). It is important that the Orthodox world does not give legitimacy to that movement if (and yes, that is a big if, but it seems to be the case) it does not follow Halachah.

    #1095074

    Patur Aval Assur
    Participant

    bhe:

    I think we need some clarification. I never said that disbelieving inMashiach or believing in corporeality is acceptable. I also never said that it is ok to rely on buried sources. My only point is that it doesn’t make sense (to me) that the definition of heresy can change over time. Therefore, if the Rambam is right then there were Rishonim (perhaps an amora) who were heretics, and if the Rambam was wrong then the people nowadays are not heretics.

    #1095075

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    zd: The Novominsker wasn’t concerned with his followers falling for these deviants. He was primarily concerned with the out of town communities where these malcontents are taking rabbinic pulpits and/or otherwise influencing local Orthodox communities.

    OO isnt getting many pulpit positions out of town either, but if the was really concerned instead of condeming OO, why doesnt the Agudah send people to these communities to take these jobs.

    Chabad does this and has alot of influence than OO does.

    #1095076

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    How about if he doesn’t wear techeiles, then would you care?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 289 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.