January 2, 2012 7:56 am at 7:56 am #931320
“Yes, but which thousands of years?”
What does that mean? Do you care to be more sepcific?January 2, 2012 2:50 pm at 2:50 pm #931321
HaKatan: Saying that “MO” takes “liberties” with Halachah and then refusing to discuss what those liberties are is just asking to have your opinion dismissed out of hand. In my experience, people you would term “MO” have the same Mekoros and the same Halachos as anyone else. What differentiates “MO” from “traditional Orthodox” (whatever that means, you refuse to explain that too) in most people’s eyes, and I will assume in yours too until you actually explain the differences, is probably nothing more than a few inconsequential Halachic decisions (yes, Halachic decisions, even if you feel that one of the opinions is completely right), mostly ones that affect external appearances.January 2, 2012 5:25 pm at 5:25 pm #931322
You know very well what MO does that traditional Orthodox does not. And I did discuss (more than) enough to prove the point.
Also, take a look at the post by “QuestionForYou” one or two before yours, but I would substitute “Chareidi” for traditional orthodox.
Since you insist, however, I have indeed already provided specifics. For example, MO proudly mixes the genders (in and out of school) much more than traditional Orthodox (i.e. the Torah) allows, and much more gilui arayos of various levels results from that. A few posts back, I mentioned the “male contraceptive” story in an MO school as a small example of this.
Again, I don’t wish to list all their “liberties” and then get into a silly argument about how this particular violation of halacha is not widespread and that particular trampling of halacha is also not universal, because it’s not relevant to my original point, which still applies: an MO Rav will issue an MO psak. (I don’t know if he takes any particular liberties, but it’s very possible he does.) So for a traditional Orthodox Jew, they’re best off asking elsewhere if they want an uncompromising answer.
And no, it is certainly not “a few inconsequential Halachic decisions”, unless you consider absolute fidelity to the Torah to be inconsequential, CH”V, which is what MO seems to hold in the cases where they allow “modernity”, de facto if not de jure, to trump the Torah, CH”V.January 2, 2012 5:38 pm at 5:38 pm #931323
HaKatan: And I am saying that “MO” takes no liberties with Halacha and allow nothing to trump the Torah. Your anecdotal stories don’t prove anything. Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar. These are Halachic decisions, all of them. And as I said before, yes there are people who claim to be “MO” who aren’t completely Shomer Halacha. That still doesn’t at all prove that “MO” takes liberties with Halachah. No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.January 2, 2012 5:45 pm at 5:45 pm #931324
HaKatan: Please give some situations where MO allow modernity to trump Torah.
As for schools, most MO schools do not have mixed classes for all ages. They have them in pre-school, and maybe for the first couple of grades, but after that, it’s separate classes.
Can you explain to me why halachicly that is wrong? There is no yichud involved. The schools stress that touching between genders is not allowed. In the school my children are in, once they get to sixth grade, the schools are completely separate – different buildings, although they are under the same banner.
Chareidim have taken on many chumros over the past 50 years or so. When R’ Moshe Feinstein married off his children, they had mixed seating. At every yeshiva dinner back then, there was mixed seating. The standards of tznius back then were fine halachicly – but wouldn’t be considered so today (at least not by chareidim).
And where has this led chareidim? To a society where people are judged by how they dress, not by how they act.January 3, 2012 4:50 am at 4:50 am #931327
Sam2 and Feif Un: In truth, it is likely the lack of an unadulterated Torah education that causes MO to take the liberties they do. Were they educated in mainstream traditional orthodox yeshivos then they would know better. Again, I am trying to not judge people and am trying to give all the benefit of the doubt.
Speaking of co-ed schools, parents with students in a co-ed school are placing them in a veritable minefield of issurim and even your Rav JBS was against it, and he himself wrote that his Maimonides in Boston was a particular exception. Yet there are plenty of MO co-ed schools. On what valid halachic basis? None, except in very limited circumstances.
While on the subject of Rav JBS, nobody has yet answered why MO ignore their Rav JBS and shun modern society to the greatest possible extent as Rav JBS advised.
So even if there were no innate issurim, being a slave to the decrepit culture around us would still be wrong, even according to Rav JBS. How do you explain the reviews of bars and other places of pritzus (yes, any bar, club, etc) in YU publications?
If you read any issue of the YU Commentator, an official publication, it is quite obvious that they must have a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional orthodoxy does. Going to a Jazz performance at a Harlem apartment? And then writing about how it mentions Yeshu HaNotzri’s birth and everyone sang along? Students writing publibly how they’re upset that your Rashei Yeshiva have too much influence on the school in that the school agreed to put in Internet filters in the dorms? And on and on and on. It is disgusting, to those not de-sensitized (presumably like yourselves) or not part of the MO world.
As I said, I am not interested in listing other people’s “liberties”. I have provided small samples over the last few posts to convey a point and it is clear from those samples that there is an underlying root cause and that is MO.
The point remains that either MO is working with a different set of rules than traditional orthodoxy is or else their Rabbis are simply uniformly ignored, which is difficult to believe. So for non-MO, ask a traditional orthodox Rabbi about Zumba rather than asking an MO Rabbi.
I believe I could easily explain to you what is halachicly wrong with co-ed schooling, and even your Rav JBS was against it. So why argue with him? But you can look up Rav Moshe’s teshuva and the other responsa on the topic and you will see the multiple issurim in attending a co-ed school. “Touching between the genders” is only one problem. Histaklus, Kalus rosh and other issues are equally severe. Again, MO obviously must have a different Shulchan Aruch if it can go against all those issurim, diOraysa and otherwise, including of their own Rav JBS.
Once again, you fail to distinguish between traditional orthodox and chareidi. I spoke of the former, not the latter which is irrelevant to this discussion.
But while I am no fan of chareidi chumros, if you look up those same teshuvos and you see how separation of the genders is, essentially, the more the better, you will see that the Chareidi chumras have much more basis in halacha in fortifying those borders of separation than MO does in destroying them.
I could also argue that the standards of 50 years ago, even *if* appropriate then, does not automatically make them still appropriate now. Unlike MO which believes that Torah bends for secular culture, traditional orthodoxy does not. But it does believe that secular culture can change, and it has certainly changed for the worse in a big way, and such changes may call for new takanos. So when the culture you proudly celebrate (against your own Rav JBS and Rav SRH who is “rolling over in his grave” from the way you corrupt his teachings), has become so hyper-sexual, that calls for an appropriate measured response that was not needed 50 years ago. Quite possibly, that means separate seating, or whatever else that was not done 50 years ago. It’s not my decision, but the logic is certainly there. You certainly don’t have to worry about aveiros that way, but you sure do if you mix the genders the MO way.January 3, 2012 5:09 am at 5:09 am #931328
HaKatan: I have no further response to you. I can explain the Commentator or the student dynamics of YU, but what would the point be? You continue to claim that “MO” lets modern society trump the Torah, but have yet to provide any proof or anything other than anecdotal evidence that says… I’m still not sure what. It’s clear that you have no intention of doing anything other than explaining why whatever you want to term “MO” (which you have yet to define) doesn’t have anything to do with “traditional Judaism”.January 3, 2012 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm #931329
Sam2: I’m okay with no further response from you, though I certainly did provide examples. The “student dynamics of YU”, whatever possible explanation there could theoretically be for those dynamics, have nothing to do with co-ed MO schools and other gender mixing, and the resultant aveiros (chamuros) that result from that laxity yet the laxity is intentionally not fixed thus allowing the aveiros (Chamuros) to continue.
Quote from your previous post:
“Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar.”
Again, there are numerous issurim that come up when you mix the genders. In other words, if you care at all about the Torah, you do NOT want to needlessly mix the genders. Yet, as you admit, MO (proudly) does mix the genders and you claim they believe that “they are halachic decisions”.
But they can’t be “halachic decisions” if they go against halacha (or many halachos). So either they’re using a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional Orthodox does, or else it must be that they let modernity trump the Torah. The name is MO. The halacha is not like their alleged piskei halacha. What else could it be that causes them to claim something is “muttar” when it clearly is not? MO.
Your last quote:
“No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.”
While I believe this to be theoretically true, people do transgress. And people then rationalize those transgressions with anything from plausible to outright foolish reasons. And the ones who transgress biShitah (gender mixing, social kissing, women wearing pants, et al.) still consider themselves Orthodox. How? The rationale is that MO says so.
As for the other examples, like the story, et. al., that I brought: again, these are indicative of a lack of sensitivity and Torah hashkafos and a corresponding immersion in secular culture, which your own Rav JBS decried and which MO still holds by despite Rav JBS’s position.
I’ve been waiting to hear your answer to why MO ignores the Rav (and traditional orthodox poskim), but none has been forthcoming. It seems obvious that the answer is that simply the lack of proper Torah education is the cause.
Neither you nor Feif Un have offered any answers to anything I’ve posed. All you’ve done is ignore the evidence and attempt to halachicly justify that (co-ed) which is not halachicly justifiable and then attack chareidim for “chumras” when those “chumras” have far greater basis in halacha than any kula you’ve come up with.
Once again, whether you claim it’s halachicly valid or it’s like my position that MO shitos are clearly halchicly invalid, you’ve still proven my point, with the above admission, that when it comes to these matters, a traditional orthodox Jew should not ask an MO Rav as he will get an MO answer which, at least in these matters, is not in accordance with traditional orthodoxy. Like I said a number of posts back, if you ask a Satmar Chassid if you can daven mincha well past shkiah, he will say that you can; a traditional Rav will not. That’s just the facts. So, too, here. As per your own admission, MO is more tolerant of mixing of the genders than is traditional orthodoxy.
So you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point.January 3, 2012 3:16 pm at 3:16 pm #931330
“A husband and wife must act with modesty in front of Hashem, even when they are alone, because there are rules of the Torah that govern their behavior. They cannot do whatever they like.”
The g’mara says that for every behavior that is assur, Hashem provides a setting that allows the individual to experience the davar ha’assur in an allowable way. For instance, for every food that is forbidden, there is a kosher food with the same taste. Having a yen for arayos? The Torah provides yibum.
Want to marry a shiksa? Try an aishes yefas toar.
How about a king like the rest of the nations? Ok says the Torah, but do it the way I tell you.
You have a desire to sacrifice animals like the rest of the world? Ok but not on an alter of one stone.
You want to have a intimate relationship with the opposite gender? Ok but get married k’halacha and keep it private.January 3, 2012 3:17 pm at 3:17 pm #931331
HaKatan, I wrote to you that you are mistaken, and that the majority of MO schools do NOT have mixed classes except at the very young age levels. Don’t attack a problem that doesn’t exist.
As for the YU Commentator, I don’t read it very often, so I can’t comment on specifics. The only thing I can say is that it’s a newspaper, which will often print a minority opinion just to gain readers. I highly doubt the letters written represent the majority of students in YU.
You also wrote how society has changed, so we must be more stringent, and have more takanos. How can you then claim that you practice “authentic Judaism” if you admit that it changes with the times? If anything, the Judaism YOU practice has changed with society, while MO has remained constant.
As Sam2 said, you are quite convinced that your way is correct no matter what. You are not open to an intelligent debate. That is why this will be my last response to you in this thread.January 3, 2012 8:20 pm at 8:20 pm #931332
No wonder the majority of the world hates us, we can barely stand ourselves…January 3, 2012 11:14 pm at 11:14 pm #931333
>> “I wrote to you that you are mistaken, and that the majority of MO schools do NOT have mixed classes except at the very young age levels.”
Mixed classes are not the only problems in MO; mixed schools, even with separate classes are still a problem, and that is certainly not the only “liberty” MO takes. So that problem and others very much do exist.
>> “You also wrote how society has changed, so we must be more stringent, and have more takanos. How can you then claim that you practice “authentic Judaism” if you admit that it changes with the times? If anything, the Judaism YOU practice has changed with society, while MO has remained constant.”
The Torah doesn’t CH”V change with the times; that’s MO’s department; they bend the Torah to fit their pursuit of godless modernity. And MO has remained “constant” only in its mistaken “compromise” approach to our faith.
Rather, Takanos are made to address the shortcomings of the times. This, unlike MO, is authentic Judaism (Pirkei Avos: Asu Siyag LaTorah), part of our living Torah.
I’m sorry you can’t at least distinguish between authentic traditional Judaism and the unfortunate mistake (in hindsight, certainly, and bidieved even according to Rav JBS at the time) that is MO.
I don’t expect any response as, unfortunately, there really is none to give when your own Rav JBS agrees you are wrong.
Once again: you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point, not to “attack anything”.
May we all be zoche to the geulah sheleimah BB”A, when this will all be crystal clear to everyone.March 28, 2012 1:37 pm at 1:37 pm #931335
A friend of mine told me that yesterday, he ran into Shua Novoseller, the owner of the gym in Lakewood, and asked him about exactly what happened with the Zumba class.
Shua told him that the true facts were actually not stated properly. Most of the Rabbis in Lakewood actually had no problem with it. In particular, he mentioned R’ Matisyahu Salomon, and said that he had no issues with it. He did say that there was one big Rabbi (who he declined to name) who was adamantly opposed to it, and was trying to shut down the class.
Ultimately, R’ Salomon had told him that he should just make a business decision. If he felt he’d gain more customers by shutting down the class, he should do that. If more people would stay/join with the class, then keep it. Shua ultimately decided to shut down the class.
My friend asked him how it affected his business. He said that the month after shutting the class, they had more people sign up than any other month. However, they also had many people cancel their memberships over it.
One thing Shua did mention was that many of the women who left still wanted a Zumba class, and ended up going to non-Jewish, mixed gyms. This just goes to show that once again, adding unnecessary chumros ends up causing more harm than good, and pushes people away.March 28, 2012 3:19 pm at 3:19 pm #931338
“One thing Shua did mention was that many of the women who left still wanted a Zumba class, and ended up going to non-Jewish, mixed gyms. This just goes to show that once again, adding unnecessary chumros ends up causing more harm than good, and pushes people away.”
Seems to me that these people have issues with basic halacha, never mind the chumros.March 28, 2012 3:20 pm at 3:20 pm #931339
I cannot believe frum women joined a mixed gym and go there in non-modest dress, as a gym workout requires, in front of men.February 20, 2013 8:05 pm at 8:05 pm #931340
And there are frum women who go to Curves wearing their work clothes, which are really nice, lift weights in those clothes, and swap their work shoes for tennis shoes. I hate to say it, but with the rise in prominence of technology, people feel so much more free to do what ever they want whether it is in their online persona, or in real life.
- The topic ‘Zumba=Not Tzanuah?’ is closed to new replies.