Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wonder how much would even be left over once a winning frum family put aside funds for tuition for 8+ kids, a house and weddings… That makes it more likely that it would just be a Brocha and not ruin their lives by encouraging them to be non productive.
That’s one answer… There is another based on my understanding of what I learnt but since I can’t point it out in one neatly packaged rashi etc im hesitant to explain it if you find the other satisfactory.
Yup yup
OK I can try. My gut reaction points me to the Rashi on vayinochem Hashem al haadam asher asa” as addressing your question but I haven’t fully fleshed it out in my mind yet. Lmk if this helps.
The Rashi discusses an apikores who came to one of our chachamim and asked/ stated that this posuk proves that Hashem is unaware of the future. Otherwise why would He mourn what man did? He could have prevented it from the beginning.
The chacham answered, have you ever had a baby boy? He said yes. “So, what did you do?” “I celebrated and partied with everyone.” “Wait a second didn’t you know he will die someday? Why celebrate?” “Right now its a joyful event so we rejoice, at a time of mourning we mourn.” “So same with Hashem. He doesn’t not create people because of the future crimes they’ll commit. He knows, but takes things one step at a time.”
Your question to me is a form of the bechira question just in the opposite way it is usually asked. Ie. If Hashem foresees everything why doesn’t He mix in with our free choice by stopping it from the beginning?
In any case I can attempt to go deeper than this, lmk if this is satisfactory.
Rebyid23, (doingmybest)
No that’s not the point at all. At least my point. Its definitely easier to have a real deep relationship with Hashem when one is poor as you need to cry to Him to provide you with your needs. No one wants to be in that position. It’s a position people are placed in. The ideal is not to have to rely on such circumstances to remember Hashem constantly. I’ve had to go through some of this recently (I was told that when I reach a higher spiritual level than it won’t be this way) so it’s been on my mind…In laskerns defense, I think he really is on point. Your question is really a form of the bechira chofshis question. And the other thing also answered your question. There are other answers but this was one and I don’t think he deserved you yelling at home when he was trying to be helpful.
@neville he certainly isn’t says the female lubavitcher!
Hmm maybe rethink what you’re looking to keep up with, there is a chasidishe saying that works for me in this regard : the reason we have two eyes is one to look down and one to look up.
How so? In physical matters we should look at those who have less than us and praise and thank Hashem for giving us more. In spiritual matters we should look up at others who are holding at a higher level than we are and strive to be like them, and not be satisfied with our current spiritual state.
When things are this way, its all good and we’re happy. The problems start when people reverse them (admittedly that’s the norm which is why the teaching exists…)
Yeah Joseph, your second comment was true. I find it easier to be poor personally, but I don’t like relying on crutches. Maybe soon I’ll reach the level where I can be rich. And Joseph your first comment made me laugh. Good one.
Avik: it is possible especially as I was not there personally although the people came home saying the above. I don’t generally defend murderers or their ilk so I have no problem being proven wrong :). In any case I just thought it was an interesting note and perspective to introduce to the discussion
Joseph and avik: to be of the caliber of pinchas one would have to be a normal (healthy emotionally) person who usually abhors violence and in this one case his tremendous yiras shomayim would not allow him to countenance an outrageous chillul Hashem, so he went against his normally peaceful nature to defend Hashem’s honour. I don’t think anyone would classify shlissel as such as he had been in jail just before, aside from questions on his mental health.
However an act of pinchas denotes an act that would normally be abhorrent but in this specific case is justified to the the extreme circumstances : in this case having an unashamedly proud immoral parade in the heart of the holy city.
Avik he was not referring to thus instance rather by the stabbing at the immoral parade in the heart of the holy city. Sorry I thought that was obvious. Glad I clarified.
Joseph, I appreciate the compliment but I have not been attacked. I think the reason is that people find it unacceptable when they sense someone is out to look for the bad in other communities or enjoy violence and are eager to use Torah to condone extremism, cause conflict or strife, violence or judgment when in truth the ways of Torah are peaceful. In truth we are meant to overlook individual faults of others and focus on where we need to grow so that Hashem will look at klal Yisrael in the same light.
However sometimes urgent situations arise which may necessitate extreme actions, even cause conflict by taking a stand against what is popular and what the community pretends is fine when it isn’t.
Since there are such legitimate situations which are not ideal, people get all the more upset when people who just enjoy violence and conflict try to guise their own character flaw by finding a source in Torah to condone it.
Generally the Rebbe’s approach was not to condone extremism, conflict or violence (pinchas was a rare instance that happened once, not an everyday desert
occurrence), and the Rebbe constantly looked and empowered the good in every Jew and person although there were situations where the Rebbe had to take a strong stand against popular notions.I and the others were quite surprised when we heard of the Ravs words, because he is not an extremist who enjoys violence / machlokes at all and is a very special holy person. Precisely because it was so out of character it opened us to seeing that this may be the truth in this situation, an exception to the usual rule.
No and that’s one reason why picking up the girl on the date (especially with safety reasons involved) seems very much in line with Jewish values and not goyishe values that have crept in. (Another reason is that the man is playing the leader/ protector, also in line with Jewish values).
Avik I will freely admit that I didn’t hear it myself but heard it from someone who was there. If I remember correctly(and there was no broken telephone) what was stated was that this was an act of pinchas, not that the man himself was like pinchas. There’s a distinction.
Yeah the Rav said it was an act of pinchas in shul the week after it happened
@ mods did my post with the answer come through?
The Alter Rebbe explains it to mean (in light of the contradicting gemara) that it means he created people who have the potential to be tzaddikim (and thus are different from others from a very young age) and those who have a greater potential to be reshaim due to their stronger yetzer / affinity for wordly things which can easily lead them to be coarser people and even reshaim.
However the intention of creating these people is so that they will overcome their yetzer for Hashem in a way that is more meaningful than even a tzaddiks Avodas Hashem in a way because he doesn’t have these struggles so its not as big of a deal when he overcomes it.
(This corresponds to the yoshev ohel vs. Ish sodeh of esav and Yaakov and why Hashem gifted yitzchak and Rivkah with esav. I can elaborate if desired.)
Hashem likes two types of avoda symbolized by the maatamim Yitzchak requested: there’s sweet food = Avodas hatzaddikim and food that starts out bitter and ends up sweet like onions = Avodas baalei teshuva who transform darkness and bitterness into light and sweet by overcoming their yetzer hara.
This should answer op
Joseph why is one more goyish than the other? Both are accepted cultural norms and both aren’t the way yidden married (no dating) in the time of chazal.
Correction not perek 14. I was thinking of 13, and 13 addresses how one can view themselves as a rasha without getting depressed or apathetic (which was brought up as a question in the same perek as this one.)
Regardless the Alter Rebbe does answer this question and I’ll be happy to write it up soon
Well op is true. Baba basra perek beis if my memory doesn’t fail me says Ribbono shel Olam borosa tzaddikim borosa reshaim.
The Alter Rebbe asks on this in perek aleph : vhu tzaddik vrasha lo komar- echoing baishatalmuder (except the ignorant part because it is a gemara).
He also answers the question later on in perek 14
Although with my username CS I should clarify that this is highly unusual and is not the typical Chabad approach at all (to condone extremism in the name of kanaus). That’s why it stuck with me until today.
Unless it was justified by the admiring of perversion in our times. Was pinchas a murderer? Yes but he was chareidi. I didn’t come up with this one. The Rav was Rav Dovid Schochet of Toronto – not a regular person at all. Aside from being a Rav, he interprets dreams and the Rebbe told him to give brachos on simchas Torah. He’s predicted how the year will go then, truthfully, for people I know, in his Brocha. In other circles he would probably be a Rebbe himself. In any case since he said it I can respect that it may be the truth.
There is a well known respected Rav who called this man a pinchas. So could be he is chareidi…
“The Palistinians only had a problem with the Jews living there when the Jews started taking control of the land.”
The 1929 massacre disproves this.
“They did live there before the land was taken over and if they were given a say in how it should be divided up I truly believe that more moderate voices would prevail.”
So what happened to the partition plan in 1948
Another problem with your native American comparison : the people of NY are innocent civilians who never harmed the native Americans. The same cannot be said of the Arabs living in Israel who constantly attack and murder Jews at the first opportunity or gleefully celebrate when innocent Jews are murdered. Also there are no current native Americans living in NY so what gives them a right to kick out the civilians there who did nothing to them because their ancestors were kicked out? That is another hole. There were always Jews living in EY abd the Arabs attacked them before they even had a state (1929 chevron massacre for one)
So here’s your analogy rewritten : the people of NY constantly attack indigenous native Americans simply because they don’t want them living there. One day the native Americans rise up and expel the new Yorkers.
Yes that would be great. You would expect the new Yorkers to have faced the same lynchings the NA had undergone beforehand at the hand of the new Yorkers. They are lucky to just get off with expulsion.
Also the only counterpoint you have made to the incentivized immigration plan is that no one will take them. 2 counter points to that:
A) what makes you so certain no one will take them? Has it ever been tried? Especially if they’re coming with money given to them by Israel they are good additions to poor or rich Arab countries besides for the Arab loving Sweden, Canada eu etc? It is definitely worth a try.
Besides the main reasons why the Arab countries keep them in refugee camps is to further the rage against Israel but also because economically they make allot of money off all the aid given to them. Close unrwa and all aid, give the Arabs money to emigrate and most probably they’ll sing a different tune.
B) A only applies to Arabs who pose a demographic threat but not a security risk. For the violent terrorists and their supporters, we can just expel them. They are a danger to our lives and if they are penniless wanderers for the rest of their lives – they deserve it. Their actions caused it.
Besides the Arab countries didn’t waste a second before expelling their peaceful, non terrorist, Jewish populations
as soon as the state was founded. They certainly didn’t worry to see who would take them in. Non peaceful terrorists certainly do not deserve any better.In any case i think I will now heed nevilles advice as it seems Joseph himself isn’t interested in discussion (as hasn’t responded to the points brought in response to him, just brings more sources to prove things that no halachic authority today endorses) and I mainly respond to these twisted posts to begin with to show that this is not Torah hashkafa for the sake of those people who may come across this and be misled / result in unnecessary chillul Hashem.
Joseph if you post these things just to troll and generate more posts for the coffee room please consider choosing a topic less likely to create a chillul Hashem.
Yes in that society it was dishonourable to go out unless there was an urgent cause, as it was a man’s world. In today’s society it is arguably dishonour able to make women stay inside with no good use of her time. Especially as women are expected to be seen out and about. Even if you would argue she shouldn’t be out without cause, there are many causes today that warrant her going out on a day to day basis so there’s no argument there.
Regarding Sara Imeinu that was in her home (maybe a separate tent) the equivalent today would be not walking into a mans shiur being hosted in your living room and yes tznius women stay out of mens sections etc.
“CS & laskern, you’re entirely incorrect. I have the Torah, Chazal and literally all the poskim on my side (as demonstrated and cited) whereas you only have your boich svaras on why things are or should be different and changed today than all of Jewish history from Avrohom Avinu until relatively very recently.”
Joseph firstly I referenced many other sources for what I was saying. Secondly its completely irrelevant. I can cite sources on polygamy and divorce without consent from today till tomorrow all over Torah etc. It makes not a whit of a difference since Rabbeinu Gershom made the gezeira against both. There is the basis and core values of halacha which never change but halacha very much adapts to circumstances and many times varies for different situations and people. What matters is what the masses of frum yidden do as supported by the poskim. The reasoning behind it we can discuss as I have attempted above. But the fact you can quote many sources from past times its irrelevant when the Torah authorities of today (and people with common sense who see context) don’t see it as an issue.
As a matter of fact, the Rebbe held that the feminist revolution was in essence a positive thing and is preparing is for the times of moshiach which are also known to be more feminine. (He also stressed that the current expression of the feminist revolution was misguided because it encouraged women to be like men whereas true feminism is empowering and admiring women who live and value feminine values such as family over careers etc.)
Neville apparently you didn’t understand the nuance
in what I was saying. At least I think so otherwise I don’t understand your post. I guess you’re thinking that if I admit that society is less modest/ moral today than in the time of the mechaber, then that means egalitarian society =immorality which means that Joseph is right.But it doesn’t. The same way male dominated society doesn’t equal modesty (as seen from the ancient Egyptians, babylonians, Romans etc) egalitarian society does not automatically equal immorality and immodesty.
We see this very well in the frum community where women freely go out, but don’t have long chatty conversations with men in the street and certainly don’t attend mixed parties etc. There are mens events and women’s concerts and events, there are shabbos tables where both sit together. There is a Yeshiva I know where there is a woman’s office for the women who work there. There are women’s businesses and there are frum midwives and nurses who work
in regular hospitals. Where exactly to draw the boundaries is subject to the decisions of contemporary poskim who unilaterally agree on some things (like men not attending a womens show) and some things where they disagree (like whether to use girls voices in videos – not singing.) but egalitarian society can definitely work very well with modesty- and no one considers a woman leaving the house every day in this society, immodest000646 me and avik have already answered your questions and questioned your conclusions and facts. Repeating the same thing again doesn’t warrant a new response. The only new thing I will reiterate is that all the Arabs together – Israeli Arabs, gaza and West Bank – amount to 5.8 million (at most. They do tend to inflate their numbers for the sake of foreign aid etc so not necessarily true,) Jews number over 6.5 million. Those are the numbers as you say whether you like it or not.
And we wouldn’t have all of them living in Israel according to to the plan mentioned. And yes it is perfectly fine to expel people who would like to lynch you (which isn’t all but a significant portion). They can go live in other like minded violent Arab countries.
Although if you really have nostalgia for the past Joseph as opposed to the majority of us who are grateful for the new reality we live in, all is not lost.
You can join lev tahor or move to Iran where you may even be able to marry 3 wives. And they only leave the house in a burka. Just keep in mind before you make your choice that your wife will only wear black shapeless clothes. If that’s what you want then by all means go aheadJoseph yes since the mechaber modesty has decreased. That has to do more with the mingling of women and men and the lack of importance placed on dressing and acting modestly and yes that should change. But women being treated as human beings and as equal members of society is a good thing.
Also another way the world has changed for the better is that we now have many machines that do menial work. This has made a huge difference in everyone’s quality of life. In the mechabers time, it was normal for men to be away from home for months at a time working morning to night. For women this has made a massive difference to their workload.
Laundry machines, fridges and freezers (no need to shop everyday and cook from scratch) dishwashers save hours of time. In the past, since there was enough work to keep a woman busy at home from morning to night, it would give her a bad reputation if she was seen outside, without good reason for hours everyday.
Nowadays we also have Torah education for all boys and girls as well and women have time to become knowledgeable in Torah themselves which was mostly unthinkable throughout history.
Historically women have always been encouraged to leave the home for good reasons among them : taking / accompanying their children / husbands to and from school / beis midrash (mentioned in Rambam and gemara), working so their husbands can learn / to help out with parnassa (the maharals wife was a shopkeeper), simchos or other social events (mentioned by the Rambam as one of the needs a husband must allow his wife to leave the house for.
Just now more women are able to do more of that on a day to day basis. And women actually have time to smile at their kids as they play with them in the park.
The Rambam mentions that even if a woman can hire out all her work because her husband is wealthy she should not sit idle all day as it is bad for her character. Today when women have many hours a week they could spare from house work, there certainly is no inyan to sitting in the house staring at the wall.
Rather they take part in more of the above more often.
So tznius of course applues nowadays just the discussion is about WHERE she goes, WHO and HOW she talks to people, WHAT environment she works in etc instead of how often she leaves the house
I think any sane pertain is thrilled with these modern inventions that free up so much time to devote to better things and would not advocate returning to a time where you had to work day and night – men outside the house, women in the house just for survival.
Neville so comment about the hats. Seems like they’re all covered.
Joseph exactly the opposite. The world has changed for the better in this way. It is better that the mere presence of a woman in the street is not provocative any longer and she does not risk being kidnapped by some random noble (paroh by Sarah and onwards) etc. That was the world atmosphere that these halachos were applicable to. I hope you don’t disagree. Many things still need to change but this is one way the world has changed for the better.
In any case its not we don’t hold by halacha anymore cvs. It’s just the circumstances have changed so the halacha is different and that is why you won’t find any Rav today talking about how often the woman should leave the home.
Oh my Phil, I think you take him too seriously. Your really believed that?!
Now to correct the facts:
“Forcing people to take compensation or move is not practical or moral solution.”
The plan avik mentions and I endorsed does not involve forcing people. You can read it again. Many many Arabs have moved out on their own without compensation to other countries. The plan involved OFFERING them financial compensation to move which many would likely accept. The only ones forced to move would be those who are disloyal just like any other country. There is nothing immoral about evicting people who would gladly lynch you given the chance.
” Besides where would they even move to?”
Any choice of the numerous Arab countries starting from Jordan which is anyway Palestinian, the Muslim loving Sweden, Europe…
“They were living in what is now Israel for hundreds of years.”
That is false. If you look up history you will see that there were very few people living there and it was mainly in ruins. The vast majority of Arabs only arrived once the Zionists began cultivating the desert land and there was therefore more business opportunity.
And anyway, regardless, no one would be forcing loyal Arab Israelis out. the Arabs who would agree to remain and be loyal to the Jewish state (no terrorism etc) would get citizenship. No other country harbours traitors whose elected representatives call for destroying the country.
“If you gave the Palestinians in Gaza and the west bank
full Israeli citizenship Israel would not be a Jewish state
within a year. All the Laws that make it Jewish would be voted out.”False. We demographically outnumber the Arabs so for sure not within the year, our birthrate is higher, and as for the concern for the future, the main concern is harbouring a large disloyal, bent on terrorism minority, which wouldn’t happen according to the plan. The Arab growth has anyway been slow (the PA inflates statistics) due to many Arabs moving out, without incentive, to live a better life elsewhere.
The other concern would be that the birthrate may change and it could eventually be a demographic issue. But with the financial incentive to leave,and the removal of traitors, there wouldn’t be so many as to pose the threat.
“Again if you want Israel to be a Jewish state you either need to have an apartheid state where the Palestinians have no voting rights etc, kill all the Palestinians, or give them
a state.”Nope. Although better an apartheid state (as every Arab country is to its Non Muslims, and apartheid is the wrong word, the Druze have no issues because they’re loyal to the country, its not due to racism as denoted by apartheid, its due to security concerns.
No one said kill all the Palestinians although with the current situation more Arabs area being killed due to their violent riots, stabbing attempts, rock throwing etc so if you’re really worried about that, you’d be loudly advocating for a feasible plan to change that.
Or give them a state- well yes they had that option in 47. If that’s all they wanted there would be no trouble. They don’t want another state. They want that we should not be independent, no matter the borders. Ie. No Israel. They also have a state we have them in gaza, a terror state bent on our destruction. We definitely have no reason to give them another state to level more missiles at us.
“Maybe this is why some of the Gedolim were against the idea of a Jewish state. It’s a real problem.”
The gedolim were against it was because of halachic problems. But once it was established the Rebbe for example spoke many hours about the importance of not even talking about giving away Eretz Hakodesh as it endangers Jewish lives. There were some who thought otherwise but after the gaza experiment I don’t think there is any major Torah authority today that advocates giving the murderous Arabs more of our land. (No neturei karta doesn’t count.)
That’s why I was surprised to see your posts which are a page out of the lying Arabs/ anti semites ways of talking.
One last thing there are no millions of Arab refugees. Refugees are people displaced by war. Not their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren who have been living in other countries. Unrwa lists them as refugees to keep the demographic threat going. Nowhere else would these people be counted as refugees just as the Jews children etc expelled from Arab countries aren’t counted as refugees. The ones who suffer from this lie the most are the Arabs who are detained in the PA, gaza, Jordan, and syria by their fellow Arab brothers in refugee camps, and are not allowed to lead normal lives, just to keep this hatred and threat going.
00046
Its sad to see a Jew sounding like they’re reading off a page from Unrwa which even the USA left because of its blatant anti semetism. Or al jazeera. Regardless, unfortunately your posts reflect the above which is a mix of inflated (read false) numbers, falsehoods and distorted facts. I’ll be happy to address one by one. But even if you were correct with the facts, personally I find your misplaced rachmonus to be most appalling. One who is kind to murderers is cruel to the rest of society because any can now be his next victims…So let’s say you were correct with your facts. The way they have behaved (intifadas, lynchings, knife attacks etc) has disqualified them from claiming another state ( besides for the fact that it wouldn’t be possible to live side by side within a few miles, peacefully, with barbarians.)
If a wife wants to divorce her husband, and he feels it is completely unjustified, so he throws acid in her face or honour kills her (as these barbarians do), would you feel bad for him and say its unfortunate she decided to get divorced when it was unfounded? Or would you say lock him up and better yet if there’s clear evidence etc, put him to death?
Any moral person would say the latter (ok the death penalty is controversial but not the removal from society). No matter what his grievance is, he cannot harm or murder her. He needs to take her to court.
Same here. When these people say there is a grand injustice going on (which is 99% false) and then go stabbing, blowing up or lynching innocent civilians, they lose any claim to a peaceful side by side state. And having mercy on them is just endorsing the next murder.
Besides even expelling the Arabs by force is better than what they do – stab and lynch innocent civilians. We can also start by expelling families of terrorists who have been shown to support the terrorists ideologies by education/ incitement, practically, or not trying to prevent it if they knew about it. If we’d get some leaders with some real leadership capabilities when enough Israelis get fed up with the status quo of murders, attempted murders and rockets / balloons/ tunnels etc. it may happen sooner than later
The plan avik mentions seems to be the only feasible one. The compensation will encourage many to emigrate and that, combined with the greater Jewish majority and higher Jewish birthrate, not to mention aliya, would ensure it stays a Jewish state.
00646 I don’t know how any smart Jew living on this planet would think a two state solution is a feasible let alone ideal solution. The only thing it is ideal for is collective Jewish suicide. Show me one Arab country who’s minority population is growing, not diminishing. They even murder each other. And we mini experimented (bad idea when then) with Gaza. Not exactly utopian relations with Israel although they had all the self determination they wanted. Jordan is anyway 78% of the original Palestine.
Laskern thanks for the context saved me the trouble of writing it up myself. And refreshing to hear it from other quarters.
@sechel thanks for the support. Although I wouldn’t have expected any less from you, and any other lubavitcher. I would think/ hope also that would be the reaction of any never married man, besides Joseph I suppose.Neville you don’t have to admire it justify everything we do to be respected by us. We all don’t necessarily agree on the same things. We just don’t like when people look out to attack for no good reason… The difference is evident.
With regards to your last post, shorts and a t-shirt are a problem halachically. It’s not tznius. Tznius applies to men too just women more so. So i don’t see the comparison between something halachically not ok and something that just looks unkempt.
Joseph yes abba chilkiyas wife stayed at home all day. All jewish women of the time did. Nevertheless, she left the house to greet her husband dressed in the equivalent of shabbos clothes to the point where his companions asked him why, as surely as a righteous woman she wasn’t doing it to attract their attention. He replied that she was doing it to direct his attention to her. And she is praised for that. Which proved my point. Not that women shouldn’t dress beautifully but they shouldn’t look to attract other mens attention and flaunt.
I don’t want to respond over much as to derail the thread but if it goes quiet I can address the Rambam and shulchan aruch although it’s a separate thing. You first brought up how women dress outside, now you’re bringing up how often they’re outside. And anyway this isn’t the main topic.Joseph abba chilkiyas wife, among others went out to greet her husband fully dressed up and is brought as a positive example in gemara. So it seems its more intention than looks. Obviously with tznius limits. Chazal allowed women to wear jewellery in public. And hey ever heard of ain haisha ela lyofi?
Lol sechel agreed!!
Someone mentioned noach lo ladam shelo nivra. When I was younger and had time to contemplate (mothers are constantly constantly distracted) I spent a few days contemplating if I would have been better off being created as the door in my school. After all, it absorbs Torah and can’t do anything wrong. It just stands there and gets pushed open and everyone is happy with it.
Meanwhile us people have the questionably enviable position that every single action we take affects all the worlds above us and also this world. We either cause tremendous damage or bring life force down to the worlds with every action we casually commit. The malachim who are aware of the power of our every action – they shake with fear, but meanwhile were just oblivious. And we have to be oblivious or we wouldn’t move for fear of the destruction we might wreak.
Then we get to face it all Upstairs.
So, maybe I would be better off being a door…
That was my contemplation for several days. If you’re curious I’ll post my conclusion
@neville noted. May it continue 🙂
@joseph @rso the mashpiims wives are definitely tznius. In general the Rebbe encouraged us women to dress beautifully and tzniusly. Afaik this is the Jewish approach not just Chabad, although we may differ on particulars such as sheitels. In any case the chassidishe couples – the men watch their eyes and don’t look out for not tznius pics vdal and the women dress beautifully and tzniusly.Yes there are others who struggle. There are also Beis Yaakov graduates who dress the same but somehow no one calls them beis Yaakov girls, whereas all of our graduates are termed full on lubavitch so that’s not a fair comparison.
I really shouldn’t necessarily respond to that post as it was just meant to provoke, but I didn’t want to allow that slander against mashpiims wives to pass and shtika khodoah…
@non political
“The Masilat Yesharim is saying that the very purpose for which man was created is pleasure and the place for experiencing pleasure in the most perfect way is in olam haba. ”
Aha thanks for context. So then this could be answered by Olam haba referring to olam hatechiya as elaborated above where we’ll all have the ultimate of pleasure as it says kol Yisrael… Yes?
Knaidlach yes there is a description of the chassidishe farm settlement in the times of the Mitteler Rebbe (born 1773) proudly wearing their talis koton over their shirts as they worked.
The consensus on the untucked shirts is that it’s a bochur shtick which is given tacit encouragement (no one makes it a thing and tells them too that would defeat the purpose) by the fact that some older mashpiim also don’t tuck in…
And Im sure that even the Menahelim that give knasim for untucked shirts and tell the bochurim they need to look respectable, would prefer that this is the bochur shtick than taking it in the other direction, for example, not dancing with abandon on simchas Torah because they don’t want to scuff their shoes (There are many chassidishe stories scorning such behavior) or even worse caring about brand names etc.
Teenagers tend to take things to an extreme.when they grow up a bit, they get the fine lines. We’d all rather they overdo the not being into Gashmius than the opposite as that is the role of a bochur – to be fully mufshat
from Gashmius Olam hazeh and fully immersed in the Olam HaTorahAgreed sechel. Your last post expresses the reality well. Good to hear from you again. Gutte voch!
Before my earlier post gets lost for reference I think I should revise. There is definitely the emphasis on bittul and not priding oneself for ones wealth or even spiritual standing (you would see that expressed practically with the lack of kovod people attribute for themselves and the lack of classes with the rich or not, everyone mixes without airs, for the most part) but I guess the rich / poor thing neville was saying isn’t the reason for current lubavitch dress as all the other Rebbeim wore streimlach or the like and only our Rebbe dressed differently the reasons for which were brought earlier in the thread. We just go after our Rebbe.
As far as the tie thing to me it makes perfect sense but that’s for another post.
Sechel youre addressing from your perspective and circles and I’m addressing from the discussions I’ve heard between my father and brothers who were in Yeshiva and my husband and brother in law who is a shliach in Yeshiva… There is that way of thinking or all bochurim would just tuck in. It is a topic of conversation and discussion among lubavitchers and its silly to make it sound as if everyone tucks in because you do, when that’s not the case. There are different approaches in different yeshivos as well. My brother is in a Yeshiva where the married Mashpia doesn’t tuck in apparently (and its mainstream, not detroit and not Queens etc) although that is rare. Some of my other brothers have attended another Yeshiva where the bochurim would get a knas for an untucked shirt
As for the tie thing, there’s a balance between looking menschlich and between jewish pride and the Jewish look. So the older chassidim belong to a time where if you didn’t wear a tie you were seen as uncivilised and not a mentch.
So the Rebbe wore and shluchim wore but when an eltere chossid wore to a farbrengen, the Rebbe said you’re wearing this rag too?! And encouraged him to take it off.
At the same time shluchim don’t try to look cool and trendy at all. Full beard dress code etc.
Younger shluchim live in an era where formality is down the drain and ceos wear torn jeans. So some feel a tie is unnecessary veltishe hanachos and they’re fine without