August 15, 2011 1:29 pm at 1:29 pm #798614
LMA: Now do you believe me? You have taken a Chassidish Shitta (probably not even that) and made it the “Charaidi” opinion!
Chareidim define their Judaism with their “Hergesh”/feelings, whereas MO defines their Judaism with their intelligence.
I guess Briskers are MO. Quit while you are way behind, just like you should have in the other MO thread, where you said the same crazy ideas. Mitzvos are done because Hashem said so, not for any exterior motive.
You have abrogated the chiuv of Limud Torah, and made it into a side point to “feeling Jewish”. You are guilty of what the GRA accused Chassidim of doing, and what the Reform are doing today!
I would like to hear what Derech HaMelech or even HaLeiVi feels about this point. I have a feeling that they will take the other side as well (as opposed to the Chassidish MSseeker).
Finally, Devakus can only be obtained through Limud HaTorah, as per the gemorah Kesubos.August 15, 2011 1:58 pm at 1:58 pm #798615minyan galMember
Lomed, can you please give a broader explanation of “Deveikus Bo Yisborach”. I am having a bit of trouble understanding the ultimate purpose of Judaism. Thanks. BTW, the highly intelligent dialogue without animus, between both of you is amazing. It is allowing everyone to learn and absorb without being sidetracked with bickering. Everyone who is commenting is also doing so with great respect. This is a far better idea than I thought it would be.August 15, 2011 2:13 pm at 2:13 pm #798616
To All:August 15, 2011 2:21 pm at 2:21 pm #798617
Gavra: The MO philosophy disregards Hergesh/feelings altogether. Emotions are the core of every human being, without it a person has no drive/meaning in their life. To say that Judaism is identified solely by intelligence and not emotions, is like saying Judaism has no real meaning at all. God created intelligence in order to serve better one’s emotions [by giving one’s emotions deeper meaning].August 15, 2011 3:07 pm at 3:07 pm #798618yichusdikParticipant
Zahavasdad – please recall the provenance of Yiddish – it is a language of golus, composed more than 75% of German words. Not exactly loshon hakodesh either. Kind of strange that some yeshivos would see it as purer than english.August 15, 2011 3:10 pm at 3:10 pm #798619
ya ok it thats pretty dumb. briskers have a bunch of stories from the gra and r chaim volozhin about how hergesh isnt what we serve hashem with. maybe he meant that MO is colder and more scientific as opposed to a molre dveikusdik’ ruach of chareidimAugust 15, 2011 4:22 pm at 4:22 pm #798620
LMA: Sounds like you changed your mind (again). None the less, you are still not correct. Toi may be closer, but he seems to be discribing Yekkes, not MO :-), and it is not a “Philosophical” difference.August 15, 2011 4:30 pm at 4:30 pm #798621zahavasdadParticipant
I do not advocate seperation, but if you are going to advocate you need to be complete just like the bnei Yisroel in Egypt
They kept their names
They kept their Language
They kept their clothing
Yiddish might be a decendent of old german, but it is a Jewish Language, English cannot claim that and probably more Charadi jews speak english as a main language than any other language. I dont even think many Charedim in the US speak yiddish or hebrew as a second languageAugust 15, 2011 4:50 pm at 4:50 pm #798622
This debate is stupid. You are making pshetlach based on hanachos that have no source. You are wrong about MO, and as GAW points out you are very wrong about “Chareidim” unless we are only talking about Chassidim. And by the way, regardless of how many yeshiva bachurim learn Mesilas Yesharim, it is not the Litvishe primer. Nefesh Hachayim is. Therefore, citations from MY are not adequate evidence of a Litvishe Hashkafa, because they might be contradicted in NH.
At any rate, this is not the way of an intelligent debate. What you should be doing is what the gemara does. You don’t compare your view to his. First you state your view and state your source. Then he tries to upshlug it. You argue it out until you are either firmly supported in your stance or defeated, but all the while you don’t even mention his stance, because it isn’t relevant. Then, after that is done, he says his position, and you go through the process again. Look up any gemara debating the source of a halacha and you’ll see this is the way it’s done, and this is the most logical and honest way to do it.August 15, 2011 4:51 pm at 4:51 pm #798623
anonymius: one of the rishonim on last weeks parshah says that one of the reasons that moshe couldnt go into EY was because he was thought to be ish mitzri and didnt stand out as a jew.a rishon. pshat.August 15, 2011 4:56 pm at 4:56 pm #798624msseekerMember
“…you said the same crazy ideas.”
GAW, this is RUDE. Cut it out. NO insults on this great thread.August 15, 2011 4:58 pm at 4:58 pm #798625
Lomed Mkol Adam: Are you serious when you say “he MO philosophy disregards Hergesh/feelings altogether. “?? Are you saying Rabbi Shamson Rafuel Hirsch had no Hergesh or rabbi soloveitchik had no emotions??
Seriously, where do you come up with this?August 15, 2011 5:30 pm at 5:30 pm #798627
The concept of separation in the Torah is clearly in order to connect with Hashem and not just a preventive measure against assimilation.
We see the Torah uses this concept of separation not only for separation from Gentiles, but also in the Bais Hamikdash when separating Kohanim from Yisroelim etc. The Kohanim had to be separated in designated areas in order for them to become ‘Kosher’ for worship.
Additionally, we recite every Motzei Shabbos “Hamavdil bein Kodesh L’chol, Bain Yisroel L’amim”, meaning that the same way for “Kodesh/holiness” to rest/dwell on a given place/day there must precede a designated separation for it; so too God ‘separated’ Israel from Gentiles in order for them to become holy through connection with Him.August 15, 2011 5:45 pm at 5:45 pm #798628
Anonymis: We can still be a light unto the nations even if we preserve our physical separation. We definitely need to interact with Goyim in order for us to make a parnassah. When we interact with them finely and honestly, then we are being a light unto the nations. So too, when we visibly lead our lives spiritually and with deeper meaning, then we are also a light onto the nations. We don’t need to create new scientific inventions for us to be light onto the nations. Our ultimate purpose is to serve God and make Him happy, and not to just be light unto the nations.August 15, 2011 6:35 pm at 6:35 pm #798629
GAW, this is RUDE. Cut it out. NO insults on this great thread.
I didn’t call him crazy, I called the ideas crazy. Now Einstein you can get on, he called LMA crazy.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
Now, if you called me out on the Reform line, you might be correct. However, so am I (so I don’t feel to bad about anyone who says Limud is not Critical).August 15, 2011 7:34 pm at 7:34 pm #798630
Yitayningwut: I stated clearly the Chareidi point of view, that there is a Torah concept of creating a separation for Jews, and the purpose of this is in order to lay the groundwork for a Jew to become connected to Hashem. Then I brought sources from the Torah/Gemara which mention this concept with its understanding.
Also, Mesilas Yishorim and Nefesh Hachaim come from the same Bais Medrash. The Vilna Gaon, the Rebbe of the Nefesh Hachaim, said that the first ten chapters of the Mesillas Yishorim were written with Ruach Hakodesh.
Annoynimus: RSRH had no shaychas with MO philosophy; “Torah Im Derech Eretz” is a very different philosophy than “Torah Im Mada”. I wouldn’t mind at all if you claim Chareidim base their Judaism with emotions and not intellect. Emotions is the greatest gift God gave to human beings; with it one can reach the highest level of elevation.
Minyan Gal: “Diveikus Bo Yisborach” means a person’s emotional unification with God.
Zahavasdad: We don’t need to do the exact acts of separation which the Jews in Egypt did. I am just saying that there is a Torah [or at least Rabbinical] obligation to create a separation barrier between ourselves and Gentiles; and this obligation is not related to the individual ‘Harchokos’ which Chaza”l instituted in specific cases.August 15, 2011 7:40 pm at 7:40 pm #798631
anonymous: you seem to have showed up late to a two week discussion. had you beem here you would have seen that R hirschs hashkafa differs greatly and in fact disagrees with MO. he was also emphatically against zionism. see his biography by artscroll. you seem to need to brush up on your hashkafa awareness. and youre point of our leaders being MO sounds like you had an agenda b4 you went looking. you went to find examples that fit the bill. next time study the avos and come to unbiased conclusions that arent pre concieved. seriously where do you come up with this?!August 15, 2011 8:06 pm at 8:06 pm #798632zahavasdadParticipant
Language is probably the best way to make a separation. You cannot associate with the goyim if you cannot speak to them.
The Satmar hold by this, More and More Yeshivot are teaching in Yiddish as opposed to any other languageAugust 15, 2011 8:17 pm at 8:17 pm #798633hello99Participant
LMA: can you please clarify the definition of the “separation” that is a Jewish value. Some posters are interpreting your intention as “isolation” and “ghetto”, but your last post does not support that.August 15, 2011 8:51 pm at 8:51 pm #798634
Hello99: Every Chareidi Jew defines for him/herself an own definition of separation. Some sit in Bais Medrash all day and don’t speak at all to Goyim. Others join the workforce and create for themselves a separation in their workplace. Still others [like Yekkes] may even attend college, and create for themselves a separation in the college campus. My point is that a general separation barrier must be created in order to preserve our feelings for Yiddishkeit, regardless to what extent the actual barrier is; and one cannot rely on the individual ‘harchokos’ which Chaz”al instituted in specific cases, since those harchokos are not at all related to a Yid’s general obligation of creating for himself a physical/emotional barrier from secular world.August 15, 2011 8:53 pm at 8:53 pm #798635
“God created intelligence to better serve one’s emotions” LMA? could you perhaps punctuate that or rephrase that so as not to be blasphemy? Cause if you mean that the intelligence which is of the holy and non physical soul, is meant to serve the emotions which are of the nefesh bahmis, it is game over.August 15, 2011 8:59 pm at 8:59 pm #798636
Also showing up two weeks late, having been rather upset at some similar threads erev Tisha B’av. The quote “they didn’t change their language/names/clothes” is from the Sifri, and it is a incomplete/inaccurate quote. There are girsaot that don’t mention clothes, and both girsaot include ” they were not BAALEI LASHON HARAAugust 15, 2011 9:06 pm at 9:06 pm #798638
Twisted: Emotions connect man’s physical being with his soul. Through emotions one can connect himself with the spiritual world. Intelligence is just a vehicle for one’s emotions to express itself in a more sophisticated and broader way.August 15, 2011 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #798639
twisted. the verb is blasphemize. important to know when attempting big wordsAugust 15, 2011 10:02 pm at 10:02 pm #798640YW Moderator-80Member
there is no such word as blaphemize
the word is blasphemeAugust 15, 2011 10:13 pm at 10:13 pm #798641
I stated clearly the Chareidi point of view, that there is a Torah concept of creating a separation for Jews, and the purpose of this is in order to lay the groundwork for a Jew to become connected to Hashem. Then I brought sources from the Torah/Gemara which mention this concept with its understanding.
Yet you insisted on going further and saying a whole pshat in the contrast between Chareidi’ism and Modernism (If I may use those terms). That isn’t relevant to a debate. State your case, base it in something, let others try and argue, defend your position, and move on. Everything else is just politics and bashing and not the point of an intellectually honest debate.
Also, Mesilas Yishorim and Nefesh Hachaim come from the same Bais Medrash. The Vilna Gaon, the Rebbe of the Nefesh Hachaim, said that the first ten chapters of the Mesillas Yishorim were written with Ruach Hakodesh.
Be that as it may, as I said, the MY is not the Litvishe primer. Moreover, a Litvak reading MY will interpret things differently than a Chosid. Listen, if we had an argument about a halacha and your source was a mefurashe halacha in Shulchan Aruch and mine was a pasuk in Yirmiyah, you would have the better rayah. Obviously we believe in Yirmiyah, but at the end of the day our interpretation of the halacha is going to generally follow the SA and as for the rayah from Yirmiyah – “nu nu.” Nobody is arguing that the MY is a sefer accepted by the Litvishe oilam. It is no Tanya. But it isn’t the Nefesh Hachayim either. And from the way I’ve been taught in my litvishe yeshivos and from what I’ve read in Sha’ar Daled of NH, your idea of dveikus is entirely misconstrued.August 15, 2011 10:31 pm at 10:31 pm #798642
Yitayningwut: Can you please quote a passage from the Nefesh Hachaim which contradicts what I quoted from the Mesilas Yishorim?August 15, 2011 10:39 pm at 10:39 pm #798643
ouch. touche. mod has spokenAugust 16, 2011 12:15 am at 12:15 am #798644
I’ll quote you one line; the rest you can read yourself.
???? ??? ????? ????, ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ??????? ??? ??? ???
Start from the first perek in Sha’ar Daled and just keep reading, with an open mind. I think you’ll find it clear that he does not understand the concept of ????? ????? the way Ramchal does.August 16, 2011 1:17 am at 1:17 am #798645
Yes, there is a difference between RSRH and his Neo-Orthodoxy and Rabbi Soloveitchik and his Modern Orthodoxy. However, either case they are both more similar to each other than to Ultra Orthodoxy.August 16, 2011 1:21 am at 1:21 am #798646
Yitayningwut: The Nefesh Hachaim means to say that one does not need to have an actual kavana/thought of deveikus while studying Torah, and that focusing solely on understanding the Gemara when studying is not a contradiction to learning ‘Lishma’ and accomplishing ‘deveikus’. I don’t think the Nefesh Hachaim disagrees at all with what the Ramch”al explains in the first chapter of Mesilas Yishorim that the ultimate purpose of a Jew is to accomplish “Deveikus Bo Yisborach”.August 16, 2011 1:57 am at 1:57 am #798647August 16, 2011 1:59 am at 1:59 am #798648
Here is some more from the Rov of the Torah Im Derech Eretz kehilla, Rav Schwab zt”l (Selected Essays pp.160-162):August 16, 2011 2:58 am at 2:58 am #798649oyveykidsthesedaysMember
I’m not supposed to comment, since I’m not part of the debate, but shouldn’t each disputant represent their respective hashkafos, and then argue with the other’s hashkafos as presented by the OTHER SIDE? The reason I’m suggesting this apparently obvious idea, is because LMA is making claims about Modern Orthodoxy which, as far as I know, have nothing to do with Modern Orthodoxy, or at least have nothing to do with the Modern Orthodoxy which I, and many others, have been raised with.
For example: LMA said, “MO philosophy disregards feelings/Hergesh altogether.” That is simply not the case. I don’t think LMA meant that MO don’t have emotions or feelings, because that’s just ridiculous. I think he meant that MO take their Yiddishkeit on a cold, intellectual level, and don’t make an effort to incorporate any feeling or emotion into it; Toah learning is just a scientific intellectual endeavor with no spirituality involved.
Assuming that the above was indeed his intention, then I must object. Cold, robotic Judaism is certainly a problem, but it is not exclusive to Modern Orthodoxy, nor is it part of Modern Orthodox hashkafa. There are people identify with the Chareidi/Yeshivish community who have the same problem.
The Rav (R’ Yosef Dov Soloveitchik zt”l) said that one must not let his emotions get in the way of conducting himself according to halacha. Once the halacha is being followed, then one should build his Hergesh/Dveykus/feelings/emotions upon that. However, if someone just lets his emotional desire for spirituality take him over, and doesn’t make sure he is strictly following the halacha, then he is practicing, and I quote, “paganism.”August 16, 2011 8:28 am at 8:28 am #798650hello99Participant
LMA: I do not think there is necessarily any disagreement between Mesilas Yesharim and Nefesh HaChaim. However, I DO think it is clear that the Nefesh HaChaim does NOT understand the Goal of Yiddishkeit to create an “emotional” Deveikus. I think the flaw is in your assumption that the definition of “Deveikus” is emotional.
In any event, while I think you are doing an overall fine job in this debate, I don’t think your understanding of the role emotions play in Yiddishkeit is representative of Litvishe Hashkafa.August 16, 2011 11:09 am at 11:09 am #798651old manParticipant
I can find at least five different ways of defining dveikus. The term has been used by litivishe and chassidishe rabbonim and rebbes in many different ways in order for them to convey their specific message. Hence the use of the term in any debate doesn’t contribute to the understanding of either position.August 16, 2011 12:27 pm at 12:27 pm #798652
Oy Vey: You quote from the Rav: “Once the halacha is being followed, then one should build his Hergesh/Dveykus/feelings/emotions upon that.”
This is exactly the point; Chareidim begin their Judaism with Hergesh/Dveykus and then afterwards they connect their feelings with Halacha as was quoted above from Nefesh Hachaim; whereas MO begin their Judaism with Halacha, and then afterwards try to somehow create spiritual emotions upon that. How exactly do you create spiritual emotions out of practicing Halacha?August 16, 2011 1:04 pm at 1:04 pm #798653ObaminatorMember
LMA: You make your points very well. It should be noted that Mesilas Yeshorim is an almost compulsory learning in Litvish Yeshivas. It is a Yeshiva standard.
It’s also important to note that Chareidi encompasses a lot more than just the Litvish. It includes Yekkes, Chasidism, and others too.August 16, 2011 1:10 pm at 1:10 pm #798654
Stamper: MO is not apikoris or condone hersey. I do not know what R’ Shwab was talking about. However, either case, RSRH started Neo-Orthodoxy as R’Soloveitchik started MO. The current Ada Yeshruin is NOTHING like RSRH created. Please read up on the old Hilda Birn Schools (i think that what it was called) that RSRH started. Look at their derech and then tell me it is not similar (and as I stated, they are different)but call them cousins.
Lomed Mkol Adam: What you are describing is Litvaks in general. Cold and calculated Judaism, not MO. The whole chasidic movement started based upon “Ivdu Es Hashem B’Simcha”! Litvaks are known to be cold when it comes to yiddishkeit and a lot of Jews went off the derech because of it. The BaAl Shem Tov taught the Jews that one does not need to be a Talmud Chochim, but he should be “emotionally” happy, fileed with joy, when doing Mitzvas.
Since R’Soloveitchik is inherently a Brisk and learned the brisker derech, I can guess this “Hergesh/Dveykus/feelings/emotions” comes from Litvaks. However, this thread should be Chassidim versus Litvaks, not Orthodox versus MO!August 16, 2011 1:16 pm at 1:16 pm #798655
Yitayningwut: It’s clear from the Gemara that the purpose of Limud hatorah is to accomplish Dveykus with Hashem.
?”? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????? (????? ?) ???? ?????? ??’ ?????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? (????? ?) ?? ?’ ????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ???? (????? ?) ????? ?? ?’ ????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??????
Hello99: Dveykus is emotions. The pesukim in the Torah constantly compare our relationship with Hashem to the relationship between man and wife; isn’t the marital relationship emotions?August 16, 2011 1:18 pm at 1:18 pm #798656
Can we all agree (except for LMA) that the Hergesh point is invalid and move forward? 🙂 Since the “Charaidi” Toi disagrees, I move that the point be dismissed for the debate.
Gei Vayter.August 16, 2011 1:24 pm at 1:24 pm #798657
anon1m0us: Your assertions that Khal Adas Yeshurun is not Hirschean but that MO is more so that, is simply farcical.August 16, 2011 1:44 pm at 1:44 pm #798658
LMA: Circular cause and consequence fallacyAugust 16, 2011 2:03 pm at 2:03 pm #798660ObaminatorMember
LMA makes a good point vis-a-vis Chareidi and Hergesh.August 16, 2011 2:13 pm at 2:13 pm #798661
I don’t vouch for the biographical info on the Ramchal, but if you accept it, by modern definitions, he was a MO
LMA, indeed, you have left the reservation on this point. Our connection to the creator is primarily through mitzvos, and engaging in the halachic discoure about them. Most of this is Torah shebaal peh, which you are not yotze unless you understand, and the more penetrating the understanding the better. Intelligence is not just a tool, it is the main pipe. This is not to deny hergesh and dveikus, just to prioritize. Chazal had a mashal of a lame ben melech and a blind but strong servant. Guess which was which?August 16, 2011 2:16 pm at 2:16 pm #798662
Gavra_at_work: I agree. I think this whole hergesh/dvakus point is shtuss and nonsense. Move on to something substantial!August 16, 2011 2:25 pm at 2:25 pm #798663
Annoynimus: The Yekkesh community is part of the Chareidi world; RSRH was a recognized Chareidi Gadol. “Torah Im Derech Eretz” is not at all a change to the traditional Chareidi philosophy; as many MO CR members pointed out, Jews have always joined the workforce and many even had degrees like the Ramba”m and others.
However, the Modern Orthodox movement made serious changes to the traditional Chareidi Hashkafa, by negating/ignoring centuries old principals of Judaism, like this separation concept which we are now discussing.
Old Man/Annoynimus: All Chareidim believe in the same Dveykus concept; the difference between Litvaks and Chasidim is to whether Limud Hatorah is the only channel to reach the actual Dveikus or not. Also, Chasidim see the intellectual pursuit as a contradiction to one’s pure emotional Dveykus; whereas Litvaks see one’s emotions and intellect interconnecting and benefiting one the other.August 16, 2011 2:46 pm at 2:46 pm #798665HaLeiViParticipant
I would not go to a Rav that starts with his Hergesh and builds his Psak from there. We are taught to do the exacte opposite. We bend our feelings according to the Torah. We all agree that the goal of the Mitzvos is to change and form the person. We start out with animal emotions and we change it constantly by learning and actions, not the other way around. Yes, feelings are very important but they must be trained and they must follow the intellect. The Ramchal’s Daas Tvunos is set up as a dialog between the Neshamma and the Sechel. The Sechel teaches the Neshamma.
I think this whole discussion is based on the idea that you’d hear more often in the Chareidi decision making, the words, Se Paast Nisht. More modern Yidden would laugh at such talk. However, I don’t think that is because they don’t believe refraining from something based on its vibes. It has to do more with the general attitude toward modernity. If you have no problem with different modern ideas then, naturally, you won’t say, Se Paast Nisht.August 16, 2011 2:56 pm at 2:56 pm #798666
LMA: it is funny how you consider RSRH as part of the Charidi circles, when he was the FIRST orthodox Rov to preach in German, not the typical yidish. Even in Amercia, until the 1940’s, all drashas were in Yiddish. Speaking Torah in any other language was considered treif! How can you even say RSRH was a chardei?? The Volozhin Yeshiva closed in 1892 because it refused to integrate secular studies. RSRH REQUESTED the German Government to be able to teach secular studies in Yeshiva.
I agree that TODAY’S Yekesh communities are part of the Charadi world, but RSRH was a probably the first MO Rabbi! As stated, please explain the Hirschian Schools. They were NOT Charadi at all. What you are doing is comparing is Yekesh community of today and charadi of today and morphing in the past. They are distinct. RSRH provided the foundation of MO, but as stated before, R’ Soloveitchik disagreed with the synthesis of the Torah and science and thus he was the champion of MO.August 16, 2011 3:01 pm at 3:01 pm #798667
HaLeiVi, thanks for weighing in. One minor point is that even if doing a mitzva would not change the person one iota, we would still do it because Hashem tells us to do so.
I think this whole discussion is based on the idea that you’d hear more often in the Chareidi decision making, the words, Se Paast Nisht. More modern Yidden would laugh at such talk.
Interesting you mention that. I asked a Shaillah to my Rov a while back, and he (as he will do) told me to do some research and get back to him. I did so, and concluded that the action was Muttar. When reporting my results, he agreed with my research, but said I still should not do so as it’s “Paast Nisht”.
Part of being Machmir is knowing when it is Halacha and when not. For a real good reason my Rov would have probably said go ahead.
- The topic ‘The Great Debate: Ultra-Orthodoxy vs. Modern Orthodoxy’ is closed to new replies.