August 11, 2011 7:48 pm at 7:48 pm #798560
Mikehall: Why can’t you just choose a candidate to represent your community, and then maybe we’ll begin a constructive debate. Guys, I think I’ve had enough of this; either someone from MO starts debating or I’m resigning.
Gavra: I apologize for my sharp tone. I respect your point of view; your posts are often very insightful.August 11, 2011 7:59 pm at 7:59 pm #798561gavra_at_workParticipant
Gavra: I apologize for my sharp tone. I respect your point of view; your posts are often very insightful.
Thank you, but it doesn’t change my mind that you (and I) are not the right people for the job.
May you have Hatzlacha.August 11, 2011 8:01 pm at 8:01 pm #798562
“if mosherose and zahavasdad will agree to debate, i will moderate and disallow others from posting.”
Why them? Is this a joke?August 11, 2011 8:16 pm at 8:16 pm #798563
Lomed Mkol Adam….Because I don’t speak for the MO community…nor Do I necessarily fall into it as well…I sprinkle a little bit from everyone….I guess I’m kind of like a salad…August 11, 2011 10:58 pm at 10:58 pm #798564
This thread is not worthwhile as it stands for the following reasons:
1- I never agreed to debate. I like debating, which is why I spend time on forums 🙂 but I appreciate being asked first.
2- The rules are clearly not being enforced.
3- The sides never agreed to the rules.
4- msseeker is moderating and s/he has no power to enforce his decisions. One actual moderator with mod priveleges should agree to take the job so he can delete all the posts from other users and posts by the parties in the debate that violate the rules.
5- The debate will be useless until we have some assurance from the moderator that only posts which violate predetermined and publicly available rules for the debate will be deleted. If we have the usual at-discretion system, the debate turns into a sick joke.August 12, 2011 12:14 am at 12:14 am #798565aries2756Participant
5. The debate is useless anyway, it is already just bating each other into nonsense.
Please explain why there has to be a UO vs MO. Don’t we have enough “vs” from the outside world?August 12, 2011 12:33 am at 12:33 am #798566
ItcheSrulik, I mostly agree. Unless and until, forget it.August 12, 2011 1:08 am at 1:08 am #798567☕️coffee addictParticipant
you forgot 6
Because Will Rogers is a sock puppetAugust 12, 2011 1:44 am at 1:44 am #798568oyveykidsthesedaysMember
just use debate.org!!! it will make this much simpler, and the rules can be enforced too!August 12, 2011 2:05 am at 2:05 am #798569
Am I too late? Did I miss the debate? How did Wolf do??August 12, 2011 2:18 am at 2:18 am #798570cantoresqMember
Include me out.August 12, 2011 2:19 am at 2:19 am #798571
coffee: No big deal. We can ignore him until a mod gets around to banning him and the parent account. *hint hint*August 12, 2011 2:20 am at 2:20 am #798572
How about Lomed Mkol Adam and ItcheSrulik start fresh, agree to the ground rules, and make a debate thread only they post in?August 12, 2011 4:29 am at 4:29 am #798573mw13Participant
From the OP:
“May the best team win.”
Actually, I don’t see anybody “winning” here. As LMA pointed out, this is (or at least should be) about comparing and contrasting our respective hashkafos, not trying to prove that “we’re better Jews than you are”.
“LMA: Before you start, please define UO & MO. No one yet has been unable to define the terms definitivly”
That’s because the terms themselves aren’t that definitive. Many people with many different hashkafos fall under the Chareidi/MO umbrellas. That said, I believe there are several key arguments:
1) Attitude towards the secular world. The Chareidim view any influence from the secular world as inherently dangerous, while the MO view the (intelligent parts of) the secular world as having inherent value.
2) Scope and bindingness of the Mesorah. The MO are much more willing to add or change things in (non-Halachic) Yiddishkeit than the Chareidim are.
3) Zionism. The Chareidim are against it, while the MO are for it. But that’s a little bit of a side issue, and I don’t expect it to receive much attention here.
“im personally curious – does anyone posting here actually think that somehow the representatives of these two sides will be chosen by an unknown force, and that this friendly, informative debate will actually take place?”
No. But some of us were hoping that the mods would pick “teams” (for want of a better term) from the members that have been nominated and open a thread where only they would be allowed to post. What would you say the odds of that happening are?August 12, 2011 5:13 am at 5:13 am #798574HaLeiViParticipant
I think we should have a Tzans vs. Rishin debate. BPT will stand for Rishin and alwaysRunning will be for Tzans. Ready? Let’s go!
This thread is so funny that just thinking about it made me laugh out of nowhere.August 12, 2011 11:55 am at 11:55 am #798575☕️coffee addictParticipant
Unless he’s a mod in disguiseAugust 12, 2011 2:49 pm at 2:49 pm #798576
cofeeaddict: I think Will Rogers is Mod-42 and then Mod-80 opened the thread for everyone.August 12, 2011 8:34 pm at 8:34 pm #798577
I’d stick to 5 broad areas for defining hashkafa:
1- The values of isolation
2- The values of secular culture (they are not two sides of the same coin, at least not to this MO)
3- What is a gadol
4- The definition of minhag yisrael. (MO see it more in terms of what acharonim call “minhag” and what actual kehillos actually practiced “bshita” while charedim see it more broadly)
5- The dreaded “Mem” word.August 14, 2011 2:18 am at 2:18 am #798578
Why don’t Itche and LMA start fresh, agree to the rules among themselves, and debate.August 14, 2011 2:52 am at 2:52 am #798579
LMA, do you agree? Mods, will you delete all posts except those of LMA and Itch? Let’s go!August 14, 2011 2:57 am at 2:57 am #798581
They could start a new thread, if that is easier.August 14, 2011 2:59 am at 2:59 am #798582WolfishMusingsParticipant
5- The dreaded “Mem” word.
OK, I must be slow this evening… what is the “dreaded ‘Mem’ word?”
The WolfAugust 14, 2011 3:29 am at 3:29 am #798583oomisParticipant
The dreaded “mem” word – menschlechkeit???August 14, 2011 3:45 am at 3:45 am #798584socialyeshivaworkerMember
Is anyone going to really debate? I would suggest discussing these issues with Rabbi Ephraim Buchwald, he is very knowledgeable in both the MO circles & the UO circles. I never spoke with him in my life, i once heard a tape from him regarding this. I wouldnt mind debating though.August 14, 2011 12:06 pm at 12:06 pm #798585
Msseeker: I’m ready to debate/discuss (however Sundays I’m not always available to respond).
Itchsrulik: Regarding your first issue: The value of isolation in the Chareidi community.
The Chareidim believe that physical separation from the secular world is a central point in Judaism. This concept has it’s origins from the Tena”ch and Gemara, as well as being the tradition of Klal Yisroel dating back to the times they accepted the Torah on Har Sinai.
1) The Possuk in Tehilim says: “Hein Am L’Vudud Yishkon U’Bagoyim Lo Yischashuv”, meaning that the Jewish nation dwells alone separated from all other nations of the world.
2) The Baal Hagaddah on Pesach states “Va’yihi Shum L’Goy”-Milamed Sh’huyu Yisroel Mitzuyanim Shum” meaning that the Jews guarded their physical separation from the Egyptians, as the Gemara explains that they wore unique clothes, had unique names, and spoke unique language. (The Mahar”l explains that for this merit they were redeemed from Egypt.)
3) The Gemara in Migilla explains that in the times of Mordechai and Esther, the reason why it was decreed from heaven that the Jews be destroyed from the world, was because “Nehenu M’Si’uduso Shel Achashveirosh” they participated in the banquet which Achashveirosh made. Not that they committed actual issurim there; but rather the mere participation alone was enough to cause on themselves the terrible decree.
So we see how the Torah stresses such importance for Jews to keep a physical barrier between themselves and the secular world. Charedim understand this concept of separation, that it is in order for Jews to internalize that they are a special nation who is connected to Hashem. If Jews would be integrated into Goyish society it would be very difficult for them to feel the truth of this central belief of Judaism that the Jewish people are indeed the chosen people by God to be forever unified with Him.August 14, 2011 1:28 pm at 1:28 pm #798588
Zahavasdad: I appreciate your imput, but I can only respond to ItchSrulik whom I’m debating with now. I can’t debate multiple people at once.August 14, 2011 1:33 pm at 1:33 pm #798589
I’m discussing the value and purpose of the concept of separation/isolation. As to what extent the separation/isolation should be is a different discussion. IthchSrulik questioned the validity of the actual concept of isolation which the Charedim believe in.August 14, 2011 2:09 pm at 2:09 pm #798590
lma: we can add the Rambam who writes that when society is corrupt one should move to the isolated desert.August 14, 2011 2:42 pm at 2:42 pm #798591socialyeshivaworkerMember
LMA: Well put. There’s a famous saying that when we don’t make kiddush (referring to to separating ourselves from the goyim, see kiddushin 2b) the goyim make havdala. Much has been written on the holocaust & other tragedies in klal yisrael that came about when we tried to join the goyim, as the ???? says ??????? ????? ?????? ??????? ??? .August 14, 2011 3:20 pm at 3:20 pm #798593Josh31Participant
If insularity is the goal, then a strong financial self sufficiency is an essential requirement.
The most successful insular community in the USA that I am aware of is the Amish; and they are very self sufficient.
We see more mentioning of our Avos’ efforts for self sufficiency then their efforts for insularity.August 14, 2011 3:43 pm at 3:43 pm #798594ToiParticipant
it’s R Yakov Galinsky Shlita’s LineAugust 14, 2011 4:42 pm at 4:42 pm #798595
Way to go, LMA. Clear, concise, no-nonsense arguments. I can’t wait for Itche’s response. I think you should start a new thread with that post, and Mods, Please delete ALL other posters.August 14, 2011 5:18 pm at 5:18 pm #798596
Msseeker, iv never seen active cheering during a debate, makes me feel like I’m at a ball game….August 14, 2011 8:47 pm at 8:47 pm #798597
LMA: I wasn’t challenging. I thought we agreed that we were comparing and contrasting hashkafos. Now, I will present an MO perspective on the value of isolation. To do so, I will have to restate some of what you already said.
First, MO Jews don’t view it as a
central value of Judaism
but as one of many parts of Judaism and far from the most important one. For example, we consider knowledge of tanach (Hen am l’vadad yishkon is in parshas Balak and refers to the special hashgacha that the Jewish people have) much more important. In fact, we probably agree on that, but that’s a side point.
Charedim and MO differ in both their attitudes and practice of the “metzuyanim sham” of the hagada. First, MO don’t view isolation qua isolation to be a worthy goal. Isolation is meant to preserve us as a people in galus. To that end, chazal instituted many harchakos from gentiles that apply equally to assimilationist Jews (stam yenam, bishul akum etc). These harchakos are to preserve our distinction and separateness while living in the secular world and they work. In contrast, you present the Charedi view of isolationism as a way to preserve the idea of Jewish exceptionalism in the minds of individual Jews.
The fact that the goals of each stream are different lead to different practices. MO wear kippas, visibly identify as Jewish wherever they may be and — most importantly — keep the harchakos chazal instituted specifically for this issue. Charedim, however, must create a much more aloof image to meet their goals, hence the differing practices.
mikehall: Good thing we’re ignoring all sock puppets then, no?August 14, 2011 8:48 pm at 8:48 pm #798598
Try this experiment: Define what is meant by someone being “Very Chareidi”, and define what is meant by someone being “very modern”.August 14, 2011 9:36 pm at 9:36 pm #798599StamperMember
Nobody is questioning the fact that there are people who would be willing to be MO or not religious at all. The issue is, What is MO and is it the preferable mode of Judaism? The fact that it is, to some, the only version or the maximum that they are willing to accept does not address the issue at hand. If Modern Orthodoxy would be a Kiruv stage for people who aren’t yet ready for real Torah life, that would be fine. The problem is that they consider themselves not a b’dieved, but a l’chatchilah – a full fledged legitimate lifestyle. They often even make claims of being superior to Torah Judaism. That is the problem – compromises sometimes have to be made for individuals who are on their way up. But to take those compromises and make believe they are not compromises at all, thereby fooling people who WOULD be able to go higher that they need not, or worse, that they are already the highest, is a terrible crime. While it is true that on an individual, private level, we are allowed to even proactively cause someone to sin if by doing so we will have prevented him form committing a greater sin, nevertheless, we may never, ever institutionalize those sins, making a b’dieved into a l’chatchilah, making the exception into the rule.August 14, 2011 9:57 pm at 9:57 pm #798600
Thanks, Itche. Very clear, straightforward and civil. May I suggest now that both parties try to defend their hashkafa: Is it working IRL?August 15, 2011 12:54 am at 12:54 am #798601
ItchSrulik: To summarize your point in your last post; the contrast between Chareidim and MO in regard to the Torah concept of separation is that Chareidim believe isolation is a worthy goal for itself in order to preserve the idea of ‘exceptionalism’; whereas MO believe the Torah concept of separation is only a measure to prevent assimilation but not a worthy goal for itself.
In my above post I brought three sources from the Torah/Gemara which mentions the requirement for Jews to keep a physical separation from gentiles:
The first source, the posuk in Parshas Balak (thanks for correcting me) “Hein Am L’vudud Yishkon” is describing the character of Jewish nation. This posuk would seem to infer that separation is a goal for itself worthy of praise, since Bilam wouldn’t define [and praise] the Jewish nation by their behavior of separation if this act of is merely a practical means of preventing assimilation and not a defining character of the nation.
The second source I brought from the Baal Hagadah “She’huyu Mitzuyanim Shum” also indicates that separation is a worthy goal for itself; the Mahar”al on the Hagaddah explains that Ge’ula/salvation was only possible by God once the Jews became in essence a separate entity from the Egyptian nation through their acts of separation; otherwise redeeming the Jewish nation would have been a practical impossibility even for God.
The last source which I brought from Mesechte Megillah, “Nehenu M’Si’udaso Shel Achashveirosh, also indicates that separation is a worthy goal for itself. God would not punish the Jews for merely violating the separation barrier without them committing any actual sins, if the purpose of separation was only a means to prevent real sins and assimilation. Only if we explain the concept of separation as a goal for itself, is it possible that God punished the Jews for this mere act of not having preserved within themselves this defining feature of separation.
Lastly, the fact that Hashem punished the Jews for attending the banquet of Achashveirosh, proves that the parameters of separation is not only defined by the prohibitions which Chaza”l enacted, since the Jews did not drink Yayin Nesech at this banquet.
The first source, the posuk in Parshas Balak (thanks for correcting me) “Hein Am L’vudud Yishkon” is describing the character of Jewish nation. This posuk seems to infer that separation is a goal for itself worthy of praise, since Bilam wouldn’t define the Jewish nation by their behavior of separation if this act of is merely a practical means of preventing assimilation and not a defining character of the nation. “Ma Tovu Ohalecha Yaakov” is definitely words of praise of the Jews for their modesty, so “Hein Am L’vudud Yishkon” is likewise words of praise of the Jews for accomplishing the feature of separation.
The second source which I brought, the words of the Baal Hagadah “She’huyu Mitzuyanim Shum” also indicates that the separation is worthy goal for itself. The Mahar”al on the Hagaddah explains that the Jews merited salvation precisely because through their acts of separation they became in essence a separate entity from the Egyptian nation. If the Jews would not have made themselves into separate entity through their acts of separation, then they would have remained in essence part and parcel of the Egyptian nation and “Ge’ula” would not have been possible.
The last source which I brought from Mesechte Megillah, “Nehenu M’Si’udaso Shel Achashveirosh, also indicates that separation is a worthy goal for itself. God would not punish the Jews for violating the separation barrier without actually committing any sins, if the purpose of separation is only to prevent future sins and assimilation. Only if the concept of separation is a goal for itself, is it possible that God harshly punished the Jews for not preserving this special feature of separation.
lastly, the fact that Hashem punished the Jews for attending the banquet of Achashveirosh, proves that the parameters of separation is not only defined through the prohibitions which Chaza”l enacted. The Jews did not drink Yayin Nesech at this banquet.August 15, 2011 1:42 am at 1:42 am #798602
Stamper…MO is not a Kiruv stageAugust 15, 2011 1:56 am at 1:56 am #798603
Ithchsrulik: You claim that MO believe that knowledge of Tena”ch is more important than the Mitzvah of separation from Gentiles. Let me explain why. Chareidim define their Judaism with their “Hergesh”/feelings, whereas MO defines their Judaism with their intelligence. This is why a Chareidi will tell you that separation from Goyim is a far more important in Judaism than learning Tena”ch, and MO will tell you mastering Tena”ch is far more important in Judaism than keeping a separation from Goyim.
May I ask; according to MO, is the purpose of Judaism only possible for people with capacity for intelligence? How about learning disabled people, were they placed on this world for no purpose, since they are not capable of attaining any knowledge? And women who are not obligated to learn Torah; is their role in Judaism inferior to that of men since they are less knowledgable of the Torah?August 15, 2011 2:25 am at 2:25 am #798604
Mod 80, are you still laughing at my idea? Even if you are, PLEASE delete everyone’s posts (incl. mine) except LMA’s and Itche’s. Thanks.August 15, 2011 2:28 am at 2:28 am #798605
Stamper, you have good point. Let’s take it to a new thread: “Pro-UO Arguments for The Great Debate. (MO are welcome to start their own thread.)August 15, 2011 2:29 am at 2:29 am #798606oyveykidsthesedaysMember
Someone who is debating should reply to stamper. if no one does, I will.August 15, 2011 3:23 am at 3:23 am #798607
Itchsrulik: The Gemara in Megilla I quoted above indicates that the Torah concept of isolation is a central part of Judaism like the Chareidim believe. Hashem decreed for Klal Yisroel to become completely destroyed from this world for the mere sin of eating at Achashveirosh’s banquet. This can only be understood if the mitzvah of keeping a separation from Gentiles is in fact a central part of Judaism.
Like I explained above, that the idea is that Jews cannot preserve their feelings of connection with God unless they keep themselves emotionally separated from the Gentile world. Therefore since the Jews ate at Achashveirosh’s banquet and integrated into Gentile society, they subsequently lost their feelings of connection to Hashem; and once they felt emotionally disconnected from God, they caused that God likewise felt disconnected from the Jews and was therefore unable to save them from the ‘Kitrug’ of the Satan and Haman’s evil plans.August 15, 2011 5:06 am at 5:06 am #798608HaLeiViParticipant
Why is the medina brought up? It is far from being central to the identity of a Chareidi. Take a look. All (English) Chareidi papers stand up for the Medina.
Lomed, he did not say separation is not important. He said it is a means not the end. Therefore, the separations that Chazal instituted are enough for him. Why are you piling it on him?August 15, 2011 5:18 am at 5:18 am #798609
ItcheSrulik: “To that end, chazal instituted many harchakos from gentiles that apply equally to assimilationist Jews (stam yenam, bishul akum etc).”
First of all, stam yainam is primarily due to yayin nesech which is a concern of takroves avoda zara, not a harchaka from assimilation. That is why it applies to a mechalel Shabbos, because we are concerned he also does avoda zara.
Secondly,bishul akum which IS a harchaka, does NOT apply to any Jew, no matter how assimilated.August 15, 2011 5:21 am at 5:21 am #798610
Lma: “Chareidim define their Judaism with their “Hergesh”/feelings, whereas MO defines their Judaism with their intelligence”
I’d strongly disagree with that characterization, unless you only consider Chassidim “Chareidi.” The Litvishe world defines Yidishkeit by subjugating emotions to the intellect.August 15, 2011 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm #798611
hello99: I agree with you that Litvish world believes in subjugating emotions to the intellect. However, the ultimate purpose of it all is to attain [through this subjugation] an elevation of emotions for God, and not the actual mastering of intelligence. As the Mesilas Yishorim states in the first chapter of his sefer, that the ultimate purpose of Judaism is “Deveikus Bo Yisborach”, which is in essence emotions not intelligence.August 15, 2011 1:09 pm at 1:09 pm #798612
Haleivi: Itchsrulik clearly differentiated between MO and Chareidim, that MO believe the goal of separation is to prevent assimilation, whereas Chareidim believe the goal of separation is to feel connected to Hashem. I then brought sources to prove the Chareidi point of view, that the purpose of creating a separation from Goyim is in order for Jews to become holy and connected to Hashem, and not to merely be one of the practical means to help prevent assimilation.August 15, 2011 1:09 pm at 1:09 pm #798613zahavasdadParticipant
LMA you still have not answered how you retify speaking the language of the goyim
One of the reasons the bnei Yisroel deserved to be redeemed in Egypt was not speaking the language of the goyim.
There are many things we can debate on what is integration with goyim, however language is key (as shown in Egpyt).
In fact in many yeshiva language of the goyim is not spoken anymore and learning takes place in yiddish
- The topic ‘The Great Debate: Ultra-Orthodoxy vs. Modern Orthodoxy’ is closed to new replies.