Grubber Yung

Haleivi, well put.

Halevi, thank you for your well written comment.

Health, allow me to explain why exactly this is not the mag’s decision.

When i say a ‘controversial topic in hashkafa’, it means there are sources who regard this as borderline heresy (Reb Aaron Kotler zt”l, for example, related in the name of the Vilner Gaon that this is not the correct view). Such a questionable concept should not be sold by ANYONE as a dovor poshut, without giving the slightest mention of those who vehemently disagree. When we are dealing with hashkafa, the danger is twofold: 1) relying on a daas yochid is a little more scary when you are forming your belief system. 2) most people – especially children – don’t even know the problem with this statement, and it remains ingrained in their minds.

I personally think that the Ami should stick to recipes, and leave sensitive topics in Judaism to everyone’s respective rebbeim. But evidently the editorship disagrees, they seem to deem it their job to set the tone on our beliefs. Being that they embroiled themselves in many hashkafic faux-pas, I think it is safe to say it wasn’t an accident.

Mod, you’re right, I was busy until I got back and the thread had taken on a whole new identity.

I was just trying to point out that originally the discussion wasn’t about bungalows. (It didn’t help me much.)

I’m having trouble seeing how exactly this discussion got derailed, but I will explain which article was discussed, and what the issue was. (i will ask those who wish to discuss the effects of bungalow living on marriage, to open a thread on that, 🙂 thanks.)

It was an article regarding the Kletzky incident, in which the writer suggested that we can tell our children that “it wasn’t G-d who did it, someone else killed him on his own decision.” That was the basic outline. I do not know the name of the article, or its author.

To say that a human being has the free will to do something which G-d has not destined him to do, is definitely a controversial approach to the area of hashgacha and bechira.

This hashkafically controversial topic, was so ingeniously slipped into a nondescript article tackling a tragedy. Needless to say, most frum Yidden with knowledge in basic emuna would be appalled with such a concept being sold as acceptable. that was the fiery discussion I overheard.

These were not mere ‘hockers’, they were upstanding mature yungerleit, who were genuinely bothered by this infiltration of questionable literature and values into their homes.

i should comment that there are a number of sources in the rishonim and acharonim, which suggest that such a belief (i.e. that someone can go and kill another person even if it is not ‘bashert’ that the other should die) is acceptable. Many Rishonim and Achronim vehemently oppose this position.