- This topic has 94 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 5 days ago by .
-
Posts
-
R’ Yisroel Loebel, who was a Rav at the time Chassidus was founded, wrote that he had corresponded with the Rav of Medzhybizh regarding the Besht. The Rav decided to farher the Besht, and see if he actually was a talmud chacham. He wrote to R’ Loebel that he found the Besht was “an empty cistern, without a drop of learning in him.”
R’ Dovid Makov, another Rav at that time, wrote that the Besht had a thirst for power, but because he lacked Torah knowledge, he had to invent a new path for himself to attract followers.
R’ Chaim Volozhin reportedly said that the Besht purposely claimed to be a tzaddik, and not a talmud chacham. He compared it to a child who doesn’t want to go to school. He said, if a child claims to have a headache and a fever, the mother can feel the child’s head and determine if he really has a fever or not. But if a child claims to have a stomachache, there’s nothing the mother can do to check that, and the child gets to stay home. So too, someone claiming to be a talmud chacham can be tested, to see if it’s a legitimate claim. But claiming to be a tzaddik is something that can’t be verified. He said that the Besht claimed to be a tzaddik because it would have been obvious that he was an ignoramus.To ujm
Please explain how they misguide others.
AAQ:
R Moshe Soloveitchik, Chaim Brisker’s son—
why does AAQ persists in calling gdolei hador by their first name ??
this is against shulhan aruch hilchot kvod rabo
it is …. RAV CHAIM BRISKER
.
qwerty: The entire MO movement is misguided; and that’s being very charitable.
The modus operandi of MO is to water down Judaism to its lowest common denominator to make it palatable and acceptable to anyone.
qwerty, if Rabbi Schachter or Rabbi Willig ever said the State and Zionism was an error or that women should be strongly encouraged to not have a career and be stay at home or that women should not be learning Torah Shebal Peh or that people should not be going to universities these days due to the rampant apikorsus and pritzus or that young men should be strongly encouraged to go to Kollel or that everyone is required to have a strong filter on any Internet connection or that mixed seating at weddings are not permitted, they’d be run out of town by the MO crowd faster than you can say goodbye and be out of their job. They know where their bread is buttered and most toe the line.
Just a couple of weeks ago Rabbi Schachter publicly apologized for a letter he wrote to a judge encouraging that a Jewish prisoner be released. Nothing changed between the time he wrote the letter until he apologized other than the MO crowd got angry at him for writing it.
Ujm, you know firsthand about the Beis Ha’Levi? You met him? Sober up, please.
Given how much Torah and Torah-observant Jews came out of chassidus, it is clear that the foundations were true. It is quite possible that the opposition at the time did not see why these innovations were needed; or/and initial movement made some bad moves first and they were corrected, whether on their own or under Gaon’s pressure. In any case, a founder could not be have been totally wrong.
Joe, I don’t bother engaging much with you anymore, as it’s pointless to engage with a troll. However, in this case I must publicize the circumstances in the case you’re referring to.
R’ Schachter shlita withdrew from a letter asking for the release of a Jewish prisoner, it’s true. Who is this prisoner? A man who was masquerading as a therapist, although he had no training in this area, and no certification. He used his position to horribly abuse numerous young girls. He was rightly sentenced to an extremely long prison sentence, which he is now appealing. Nobody should be advocating for his release – he has shown no remorse for his actions whatsoever, and would likely be a threat to continue abusing young girls. He should rot in prison.UJM & MDD, there are no Chassidim buried in Slutsk because there were no Chassidim living in Slutsk. A relative of mine who grew up in Slutsk said there was an acronym of כרפס for four towns/cities in Lithuania/Belarus with no Chassidim at all. (ס for Slutsk, would anybody know the others, as a side point? He didn’t remember.)
The Beis Halevi saying not to bury Chassidim in Slutsk is a red herring because it would be hypothetical and probably was never seriously discussed. Does anyone have a source for this being asked in the first place?
(I would personally be surprised if such, because normally someone would need to be as major as Spinoza or his type to not get buried in a Jewish cemetery. Not just any yutz would get that refusal. So if correct, I could hear someone saying the Besh”t should not get buried in a Jewish cemetery, but not for every follower.)DaMoshe – Do you know anything about the Machlokes against Rav Yehonasan Eibschitz זצ״ל or the Ramchal זצ״ל? Very great Gedolim accused them of even worse things than you mentioned. Yet no one nowadays questions their Tzidkus and Gadlus. Certainly no one would dare repeat over the language used against them ח״ו, even בשם אומרו (which in these types of things is often hearsay with additional spices and flavorings added.)
DaMoshe,
This “Jewish prisoner”, convicted on 59 counts of abuse was appointed by his ultra-tznius community as a “therapist” and they allowed him to “treat” these young girls behind closed doors.
You can expect Joseph Goebbels, the twisted Nazi troll, to defend all Jewish murderers and abusers since they’re his heroes. He’s wildly infatuated with this monster as well as with Lev Tahor since he loves what they do.
yankel> calling gdolei hador by their first name
maybe rav vilna gaon?
in my stylebook, when name is personalized with a place or another marker, it is used without rav. I might be wrong, but this is why I say that.
If I recall correctly, R Kotler called R Soloveichik – Bostoner Rav, not Rav Bostoner Rav, and R Soloviechik called R Kotler Kletzker Rosh Yeshiva, not Rav Kletzker Rosh Yeshivaon the other hand, R (just for you) Chasam Sofer called Moses Mendelsohn RaMaD – rav Moshe mDasau even when denouncing him, and other Rabbis of that generation did not all hold by the denouncing – while posters here use his name without rav and with bad words and protest putting him in the same list as R Hirsh – even as R Hirsh puts him on the list with Rambam (both respecting and criticizing – both of them). And mods seem to be not even allowing posts with his name in the title when the post is entirely a quote from R Hirsh (unless mods are simply overworked and do not start any new threads).
chiefshmerel: There were a small community of Chasidim in Slutsk (mostly Chabad but some Polishe as well.) They were there already before the Beis Halevi become Rov in 1865 and remained there during his entire Rabbanus there. They had a Shteeble near the train station in Slutsk. And the Beis Halevi permitted their burial in the Slutsk Bais Hachaim.
Chiefsmerel, not being buried in a Jewish cemetery means not being buried next erlache Yidden. The Halochah is that we bury even Jewish reshoim in a Jewish cemetery — just not next to the erlache Yidden.
DaMoshe: You are confirming what I said. Rabbi Schachter wrote a letter to the judge requesting the Jewish prisoner be released. When his MO crowd heard about it they got angry at him. Since they got angry at him, and he needs their patronage, he issued an apology for writing the letter — even though nothing changed between the time he wrote the letter and the time he apologized for it.
Debating whether the Jewish prisoner should be released is irrelevant to the point. Whether you think he should or think he shouldn’t, nothing changed for Rabbi Schachter to suddently change his mind — other than he needs his crowd so he needs to toe their line.
I think karpas also includes ponevezh and kosova, hometowns to some well-known rabbis!
When looking for info about Slutsk, I found this funny story:
Rabbi Yoshe-Ber used to give the following explanation about why Misnagdim fast on the day of yahrzeit, and Hasidim make a feast with a lechayim.Before the giving of the Torah, when Jews did not know how to learn, and they saw that Moses our Teacher was late, they surmised that he had passed away, and they made a feast: “And the people sat down to eat”. Year later, when Moses our Teacher indeed passed away, it was already after the giving of the Torah. Jews knew how to learn, and they did not make a feast. They only observed mourning, as it states in the verse: “And the Children of Israel wept over Moses.
chief > saying not to bury Chassidim in Slutsk is a red herring
this is not a good argument, who knows what was the original cause – if there was animosity and even no burial place, then chasidim will not live there.
Joseph Goebbels,
Liar; R. Schachter explained that he wasn’t initially aware of the full story regarding what your monstrous hero, the “Jewish prisoner” was convicted of. You love that sort of thing but everyone else is disgusted by it.
You should be tuned over to Germany for prosecution as an anti-Semitic Nazi, just like your close relative was. You’re not even Jewish!
Does any Litvish Godol living today actually believe the “cherem” against Chassidim is still in force? If the answer is no, but in the time of the Beis Haleivi supposedly it still was in effect (שקר גס, but for argument’s sake…) so when did it suddenly stop? Or maybe it wasn’t so in force even then? Or maybe never really legit to begin with…
YYA: If there are, they don’t publicize it. I highly doubt there are any, because as I said earlier, Chassidus as the Besht taught it is long gone. It wasn’t accepted by the Rabbonim at the time, and it changed significantly before it became accepted.
Shimon Katz – The son-in-law was Rav Tzvi Hirsh Glickson, who was married to Sarah Rashe the daughter of Reb Chaim Brisker. He was a Talmid and Chossid of the Avnei Neizer of Socatchov, and Reb Chaim, who met him while visiting Warsaw in 1913, was profoundly impressed by his clarity in learning. He lived for a time in Brisk and became a close Talmid of Reb Chaim, aside from being his son-in-law. After Reb Chaim’s passing he returned to Warsaw and opened a Yeshiva there named Toras Chaim. There he taught mostly Chassidish bochurim according to the Brisker derech halimud… He tried to move with his family to Eretz Yisroel in 1935, but could not get the necessary “certificate”. Tragically, he was killed together with his entire family when the Nazis ימ״ש invaded Poland, so he doesn’t have descendants today. השם ינקום דמם.
At any rate, it is absurd to suggest that the Beis Haleivi held the “cherem” against Chassidim to still be in effect, and then a generation later his son makes a (very successful) shidduch with Chassidim. (For those wondering, the original cherem explicitly prohibited “intermarriage” with Chassidim.) What changed all of a sudden and when? אלא מאי, as often happens when stories about machlokes pass through the grapevine and through the sands of time, people tend to embellish them and add things that להד״ם…
DaMoshe – So, you hold that at the time of the Beis Haleivi “Chassidus as the Baal Shem Tov taught it” still existed, and therefore it was assur to bury Chassidim in the regular cemetery, and then a generation later it was OK for his own granddaughter to marry a Chossid? Unlike your Bubbe Maiseh, the marriage of Reb Chaim’s daughter to Reb Hirsh Glickson הי״ד is well documented. So according to you Chassidus died out at some point between 1892 and 1913 and with it the “cherem”. Very interesting…
Have you ever read any of the easily available Seforim containing the recorded teachings of the Baal Shem Tov זי״ע and tried to check what he did and didn’t say based on his own words, not just those of his opponents? Then you could judge for yourself whether his Derech still exists and if it really was so “scary” to begin with. That’s what real Litvaks do right? They think independently and draw their own conclusions… Except when a Negiah of machlokes clouds their brains and they become more closed-minded than what they accuse Chassidim of being… Maybe you should learn some Mussar to gain clarity and self-awareness, that’s Kosher by you? Or are you uber-Litvak and anti-Mussar also?
Dear “DaMoshe”,
You have asserted more than once on this thread that “Chassidus as taught by the Baal Shem Tov זי״ע no longer exists”, or was changed due to the influence of those who opposed him. Could you please provide some concrete examples, backed up by מראי מקומות that can be fact-checked (עדות שאתה יכול להזימה), of ideas beliefs or practices innovated by the Baal Shem Tov, which were adopted by his Talmidim, but stopped later due to the influence of the Misnagdim? Please don’t forget to provide written sources from the Baal Shem Tov זי״ע himself or his first-generation Talmidim that the Baal Shem Tov in fact held of these ideas or practices, not claims made by the Misnagdim.
Thank you.
DaMoshe:
Apparently Rabbi Schachter “forgot” who the Jewish prisoner was, despite the fact he was all over the news for years in a highly publicized and a highly reported trial; and Rabbi Schachter claims he wrote the letter to the judge asking the prisoner be freed and to end his imprisonment because he thought a 50 year or 100 year sentence was highly uncommon for the crime he was convicted — and that Goyim don’t get such long sentences but this Jew got such a sentence because he was discriminated against as a Jew, which Rabbi Schachter said he found “scandalous”, so he advocated for his freedom.
Now, such a sentence is in fact highly out of the ordinary for this kind of conviction and it exceeds similar convictions by a very great deal, so Rabbi Schachter was in fact correct about his original reasoning (as he explained himself) in writing the letter advocating for the Jews freedom.
But once he got pressured from his crowd, and he needed a face saving excuse to explain why he’s suddenly withdrawing his letter despite nothing changed since he wrote it, so he suddenly decided such prison sentences are really very common, so he explained his original reason no longer applied.
Makes a whole lot of sense, doesn’t it?
As per page 136 of Making of a Gadol, The 4 towns of Karpas were: Kosovo (Chazzon Ish hometown), Ruzhinai, Pruzhin (hometown of RMF’s FIL), Slutzk. It also records there how the Chazon Ish zt”l would wear a nice shirt on the day that the Gra put the chassidim in cheirem. Finally, Making of a Gadol has a story about how the Besht was flogged in Slutzk for davening chassidish style, and he cursed the town that no chassidim should ever dwell there. There was a stone in Slutzk that was known as the stone upon which the Besht was flogged, and 150 years later they still knew the particular stone.
This story from Making of a Gadol should help dispel any claims about the Chazon Ish being favorable to chassidus or a particular Rebbe.
The Torah History podcast from Rabbi Aryeh Ganz ( recent episode – maybe season 2 episode 41?) has a story where a certain Rebbe said that the derech of the Besht no longer exists. A bunch of Rebbes from different sects made a mechaah. The Rebbe replied, “Every Rebbe says that the way of the Besht is lost EXCEPT in their own sect. I am just saying the same thing , but adding my own sect as well”.Joseph Goebbels,
You’re a sick, twisted Nazi who loves defending molesters and murderers! How’s your other hero doing, the “Jewish prisoner” who butchered a boy from Boro Park?
LerntminTayrah:
The Chazon Ish held the Imrei Emes in awe. When the Imrei Emes visited Bnei Brak, the Chazon Ish pushed through the crowds to catch a glimpse of him.
The Chazon Ish had a famously close friendship with the Beis Yisrael (Rav Yisrael Alter). The Beis Yisrael (who was younger) would frequently visit the Chazon Ish’s home. They would speak for hours in private. The Beis Yisrael, in turn, sent his elite Chasidim to discuss Halacha with the Chazon Ish.
The Chazon Ish famously said about the Belzer Rebbe: “He looks like a Malach of Hashem.” When the Belzer Rebbe arrived in Eretz Yisroel after the Holocaust, the Chazon Ish went out of his way to honor him, signaling to the Torah world that this man was royalty. There is a famous account where the Chazon Ish sent a student to observe the Belzer Rebbe’s Tisch. When the student reported back that the Rebbe sat in silence for hours and barely ate, the Chazon Ish remarked, “That is how a Rebbe eats.”
one of the interesting things about the baal shem tov is the he himself never wrote any books.
however there is a book sold today called “baal shem tov al hatorah” which is a collection of letters written by him,(in hebrew) organized by the parshah.
the book is transcribed on the Sefaria website (and translated to english) so you can see it if you want.
with all the debates going on chasidut these days its helpful to understand the seed torah which started it all.
hope this helps.
DaMoshe and LerntminTayrah – You both are apparently not aware that the main Machlokes against Chassidus, and particularly the involvement of the Gra זי״ע, began more than a decade AFTER the passing of the Baal Shem Tov.
“The Torah History podcast from Rabbi Aryeh Ganz ( recent episode – maybe season 2 episode 41?) has a story where a certain Rebbe said that the derech of the Besht no longer exists. A bunch of Rebbes from different sects made a mechaah. The Rebbe replied, “Every Rebbe says that the way of the Besht is lost EXCEPT in their own sect. I am just saying the same thing , but adding my own sect as well”.”
The Rebbe was the Divrei Yoel זצ״ל, who did not make that statement in the context you are using it. He held that later generations weren’t living up to the lofty ideals of the Baal Shem Tov זי״ע, not that there was something “wrong” with the Derech of the Baal Shem Tov ח״ו that was “corrected” later. Neither of you seem to be capable of anything other than repeating over old Maaselach from Lita. Can you provide any actual examples of things the Baal Shem Tov זי״ע said to do, that Chassidim did then, but stopped doing later, because the Litvaks told them to stop? Not stories, not podcasts, real documented facts.
WRT the Chazon Ish זצ״ל, he is also said to have attributed the success of Bnei Brak to the Chassidish Baalei Batim and mayor (Reb Yitzchok Gershtenkorn ז״ל), who treated the Chazon Ish as a de-facto Rebbe… and followed his every word with great devotion, as opposed to Vilna itself (his previous home) where the (Litvish…) Baalei Batim ignored the Gedolei Torah and went head over heels after the Haskalah and other secular movements… Did he change his outlook after moving to Bnei Brak and meeting Chassidim firsthand? I don’t know. But his very friendly and positive relationship with the (mostly Chassidish) founders of Bnei Brak is well known and documented. More than your stories are. (What was the date the Chazon Ish supposedly celebrated the “cherem”? Why is a cherem something to celebrate (even if ח״ו necessary)? When the Sanhedrin executed someone they had to fast, not celebrate. The whole “maaseleh” smells “off”.)
35TQ,
The sefer בעל שם טוב על התורה is not a “collection of letters”. The teachings of the Baal Shem Tov were written mainly by his close Talmid Rav Yaakov Yosef HaKohen of Pollonoeh, who incorporated them into his own Sefarim תולדות יעקב יוסף, צפנת פענח, בן פורת יוסף, כתונת פסים. Other teachings were recorded and given over by Rebbe Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezeritch (who by the way was a Talmid Muvhak of the P’nei Yehoshua and a great Gaon even before he became a Talmid of the Baal Shem Tov). The third primary source is דגל מחנה אפרים by the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov. During the 1930s two Rabbonim in Poland collected almost all of the quotes from the Baal Shem Tov from the above works and a few smaller sources, and arranged them by Parshiyos, Moadim, and sometimes by subjects. There is also a recent reorganized edition of this Sefer arranged by subjects in alphabetical order, published by מכון אור שבעת הימים. Anyone who seriously is interested in finding out what exactly the Baal Shem Tov really said should definitely get a copy.
Ujm, stop with your propaganda. Even if you find some Litvishe Gedolim who held of certain Rebbes, IT DOES NOT MEAN that those Gedolim were not opposed to the Chassidishe shittos. And Chozon Ish was a Misnaged.
chazon ish was a mitnaged who put aside his hitnagdut in the cause and benefit of judaisn overall
you cannot whitewash that
he wrote a critique of the baalei mussar – entitled emuna uvitachon
he also wrote a critique of the hasidim
when asked why he did not publish it – he answered that he was afraid of the reaction
when challenged that he did publish a critique of the ba’alei mussar ?
he answered that that they are –after all , baalei mussar ….
vedai lemeivin
.
.mdd1 – Although I frequently disagree with ujm on other issues, including the idiotic doubling down on defending a disgusting unrepentant pervert, but his last post about the Chazon Ish is correct. No one ever attempted to claim that in his Shittos and Derech the Chazon Ish was anything other than a Litvak, but he didn’t hold that Chassidim or their Rebbes were פסולי קהל ח״ו the way some mechutzafim posting here seem to suggest.
mdd: Get over it. In the last one hundred years there might have been only ten “Misngdim”; they virtually do not exist and haven’t for over a century.
The Chazon Ish most absolutely was not a misnaged; he was certainly a full Litvak and not Sephardic, not Chasidic and not Teimani. Of course he had different shittos than Sephardim, Chasidim, and Teimanim. But in no way, shape or form was he ever “against” Sephardim, Chasidim, or Teimanim.
Despite any fantasies you might have.
Yankel Berel – “chazon ish was a mitnaged who put aside his hitnagdut in the cause and benefit of judaisn overall”
Well, the original Misnagdim did not put aside their “hitnagdut”… If someone theoretically is opposed to the ideas of Chassidus, but in practice respects Chassidim and Rebbes, they respect him back, has no problem working together with them, even admires and praises certain things that he admits they do better than most Litvaks, so is this person really such a “Misnaged”? I don’t think anyone realistically expects more than that or needs more than that from anyone who doesn’t hold of their Shittah (saying this in both directions.) It’s fine to disagree, even Gedolei Yisroel can disagree, but the Chazon Ish was not מבטל the legitimacy of Chassidim (and probably Chassidus, he didn’t hold they were Kofrim or in Cherem ר״ל or other nonsense suggested here.) He certainly wasn’t מבטל the legitimacy of Mussar, even if he had a different Derech.
דרך אגב, the Kuntres Emunah Uvitachon of the Chazon Ish was published posthumously, and apparently wasn’t even finished. So it is impossible that the Chazon Ish ever had such a conversation… Like so many other apocryphal quotes and maaselech used to promote Machlokes, it’s just another figment of someone’s imagination… I’ve learned אמונה ובטחון of the Chazon Ish, and I would never have known that it’s a “critique” of anything until you said so… In theory every statement of a “shittah” could be seen as an implicit criticism of another shittah, but then אין לדבר סוף. Better to look for less Machlokes and more Shalom.
YYA: You’re confusing me with Rabbi Herschel Schachter. He’s the one who wrote in defense of the convcit you’re referring to. I never wrote anything supporting him.
I probably misquoted what I heard re emuna uvitachon
He was asked why did you write against the baalei mussar and not against the hasidim ?
– he answered that he was afraid of the reaction
when challenged that he did write a critique of the ba’alei mussar ?
he answered that that they are –after all , baalei mussar ….
.
I heard it from a mekor ne’eman .
.YYA, I, have never said they were psulei K’hal, chas ve’sholom.
Ujee, get over it — you are wrong.yankel > he answered that that they are –after all , baalei mussar ….
funny, thanks!
There is a story about one R Salanter’s dvar Torah. He would usually post maarei makamos on the door before the speech. So, someone who did not like mussar that much changed that message to different sources. R Salanter was standing quiet for several minutes and then started speaking using the posted sources. Someone who noticed tiold him after – this is real gaonus that it took you just several minutes to come up with the speech according to new sources. Oh, no, he answered – I spent those several minutes pondering whether speaking to the new sources would be a sign of gaavah. If it were, then I would have just left the bimah.
Yankel Berel – All the vertlech and maaselech used to perpetuate Machlokes are always from a “mekor ne’eman”… No one is claiming that the Chazon Ish was a “Chossid” or even agreed in theory with (some of) the principles of Chassidus. (We do all agree on at least 613 things, don’t we?) It is well documented that he did have a very positive relationship with many Chassidim during the last Tekufah of his life, when he lived in Bnei Brak, something that was crucial to the success of Bnei Brak as a Chareidi city, as he himself noted. There were also Chassidim and people from a strongly Chassidish background who were members of his inner circle. Not the least of which was his brother in law the Steipler Gaon זצ״ל, who’s parents were Chassidim, who attributed his own birth to the Bracha of a Chassidish Rebbe, and who was נוהג many Chassidish minhagim throughout his life (despite telling his son Reb Chaim זצ״ל to change most of them himself.) Why can’t we all understand this in terms of בית שמאי and בית הלל that Chazal say לא נמנעו מלישא נשים אלו מאלו ולא נמנעו עושין טהרות אלו על גב אלו שהיו נוהגין אהבה שלום ורעות? Chassidus has stood the test of time and is here to stay. The Litvishe Velt does their thing, they aren’t going anywhere, and they are not “under attack” from Chassidus as some may have felt 250 years ago. So why dig up old מחלוקת that has long since died of old age and ceased to be relevant, if it ever was? Even if all the sharfeh vertlech from “mekoros ne’emunim” really were said (a sketchy proposition to say the least…), תכלית למעשה who cares? There are Yidden who absolutely gain from Chassidus, and there are Yidden who absolutely gain from the “Yeshiva World” (the real one, not the web site…) There are also Yidden who absolutely gain from Sephardic Chachamim. (I could add some more groups and subgroups, but I don’t want to start more conflict…) We can all respect each other and love each other and even learn from the things that the “other” groups do better than we do. If, for whatever reason, there were some heated exchanges between different חכמי וצדיקי הדורות over the centuries, we don’t need to get hung up on that, or חס ושלום to disrespect one of the sides. These are very פשוט things that I think we can all agree on. And again, always remember that even before this, there are always at least 613 things we definitely all agree on…
Yankel Berel – I’m not sure the Chazon Ish ever wrote “against” the בעלי מוסר. He had his own Shittah, which he formulated in some of his letters and to some extent in אמונה ובטחון, but any “criticism” of מוסר was at most implicit.
אגב, it has also been said that נפש החיים is a great Chassidish Sefer… There are many places where It is particularly close to the lashon and shittos of the Tanya, to the point where those not strongly familiar with both Sefarim could be fooled into thinking that a particular quote came from the “other” Sefer… Which goes to show כי אב אחד לכולנו…
mdd1 – The original nusach of the infamous “cherem” (that some here suggest still is in force, if it ever was legit to begin with…) prohibited “intermarriage” with the ״מוחרמים״, among other extremes. That’s called פסולי קהל. Look before you shoot. For some reason the many Maskilim who operated within the Volozhin Yeshiva several decades later were never treated so harshly… But Klal Yisroel has moved past this stuff. On both sides. So why dig it up? Like I wrote to Yankel Berel, we all have at least 613 things we can agree on…
Here is what I read in the name of Chazon Ish about mussar:
some people make a mistake thinking that middos are important for mitzvos bein adam lehavero, and yiras shamayim is important for mitzvos towards Hashem. And this is a mistake – if you did not work on your middos, it means you are in total power of yetzer hara. It is that yetzer hara is more often showing up in relationships with people than towards Hashem. But if you don’t know how to deal w/ yetzer hora in general, then the moment you have a difficulty in mitzvos to Hashem, this person will fail also.YYA, both, Rav Chaim Volozhiner and Ba’al Ha’Tanya based themselves on Kabbalistic sources. How to interpret them was (is) a matter of great dispute. The Gra held that the Chassidim dangerously misunderstand them. He was afraid (one the things) they may make their Rebbes into avoda Zora’s ( as happened with some in Chabad).
correct , no need to look for unnecessary divisions. totally agree
but we can explore the facts as they are , without being divided
we are not served by living in a factless make believe lala world either
am just stating the facts as they are
I b’h get on in real life with anyone regardless of background or shitah
even with people who belong to shitot I really disagree with
.
.
.chazon ish disagreed with the ba’alei mussar , this is widely known and not a secret at all
the steipler was not chassidish even though he came from chassidish stock
his was the litvish outlook on 95 % of the issues
you are correct that chazon ish was even more litvish than him
these are the plain facts and they are not ‘perpetuating’ machloket at all
I am the last to suggest that hasidim should disappear as you somehow tried to insinuate
neither did I disrespect any of them ….
there is no need of historical revisionism in order to keep away from machloket …
.
.Like earlier mentioned, there are virtually no “misnagdim” today; and this has been the case for the last 100+ years. Any so-called misnaged today is simply a Litvak who holds by Litvish shittos; and he’s no more misnaged against Chasidish shittos than he’s against Serfardish or Teimanish shittos. The Litvaks daven Nusach Ashkenaz, the Chasidish daven Nusach Sefard and the Sefardish daven Nusach Spanish & Portuguese or Edot HaMizrach and Mizrachim daven Edot HaMizrach and Teimanin daven Nusach Baladi or Shami and Persians daven Nusach Paras. And all of them have unique shittos and minhagim of their own. None are against the others.
> there are virtually no “misnagdim” today;
not fully so. I heard from some yeshiva yidden when mentioning “chosid” in gemora clarifying “real chasidim”. This might be be real misnagdus, but a reaction to those who claim to be “chassidim” but then not demonstrating appropriate middos. I did not see such attitude towards chassidim who are mentchen.
The old fight against the Chasidim is the same idea as the old fight against Rambam and the old fight against Rav Yonosan Eybeschutz.
The entire Torah world eventually accepted the Rambam, the Chasidim and Rav Yonosan Eybeschutz.
UJM said:
Like earlier mentioned, there are virtually no “misnagdim” today;
and this has been the case for the last 100+ years.
__________________________________________
MY RESPONSE:There are also no [or very few] Zionists today.
Even in the early 1990s, the Jewish newspapers mentioned many times
that we are now living in “the post-Zionist era”, meaning that
most Secular Jews in Israel were no longer Zionists, even in the early 1990s.The Chareidi Gedolim condemned the Zionists of the 1930s to 1950s,
not their grandchildren and great-grandchildren who are alive today.When will you stop living in the 1950s?
The fight against Chasidus was also very similar to the fight (Kovner Rov, etc.) against the Mussar Movement (Rav Yisroel Salanter, Slabodka, Novardik, etc.). The fights are long over. The Torah velt has long accepted the Mussar Movement and Chasidus. They are all part and parcel and one in unison.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.