Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I just saw your previous post, too. I do not CH”V hate MO **people**, and I further believe that they are tinokos shenishbu. But that does not justify kashering the ideology.
Incidentally, figuratively bowing down to the egel hazahav of Zionism makes it two out of the big three, Arayos and A”Z.
I’m also amused that you can’t fathom why “even” being mattir Broadway shows, which I mentioned before as being absurd to even try to get a heter for, is enough for any Torah Jew to know that MO is not in keeping with the Torah.
“Sam2”, you’re really serious that I claimed MO is wrong “only” because of intentional and flagrant violations of one of the 3 aveiros chamuros SheBiChamuros?
Come on. I’ve mentioned this many times before. Rav JBS himself wrote that the more one can distance himself from secular culture the better he is for it. “Modernizing” was, in his view, a horaas shaah that felt was necessary because he mistakenly believed that traditional orthodoxy would become a museum piece. Now, tell me that MO follows this shunning modern culture. They don’t.
For starters.
yichusdik, you ignored 50% of what I wrote and “missed the boat” regarding the rest. I did not claim the Jews lived as Americans when they lived in Arab countries. But they were far better off physically than their brethren in lands run by the religion of brotherly love.
And they were not subject to anything like that which the “Israel Tinea Capitis Compensation Law” covers them for. The Zionists admit to this, though they compound that particular rishus, kidarkam bakodesh, by doing all they can to NOT compensate. But that’s really par for the course for the evil Zionists.
Again, regarding Chevron, Rabbi Kaplan stated that it happened because of “religious zionists”, NOT that the Yeshiva boys were Zionists.
And on and on.
Zionism and the State have been unbelievably horrific disasters for our people. You can debate your Rambans and Rambams all you want, but, in addition to the clear multiple violations of the Torah that is Zionism, the facts on the ground are that Zionism and the State, as the holy Chafetz Chaim and many others said it would, has caused far more problems than the wicked Zionists thought they would solve.
Here’s a very quick and very much-abbreviated list. Before Zionism means before Zionism, not “Before 1948”.
Before Zionism, Teimanim had their mesorah and yahadus since bayis rishon and tens of thousands of sefardim were also still observant Jews, as would have been their descendants today and beyond.
Before Zionism, the Arabs did not virulently hate the Jews, and were generally cordial and even friendly. Even post-Zionism, some Arabs still recognize the fraud that is Zionism and correctly do not equate Zionism with, lihavdil, Judaism.
Before Zionism, Jews and Arabs lived peacefully in Eretz Yisrael (Just to head off the uninformed question, the Chevron Massacre was a direct result of *religious* Zionism – please excuse the paradox – according to Rabbi Baruch Kaplan who was there.)
Before Zionism, Jews were not seduced into becoming “post-Jewish” and culturally manipulated by (Zionist) Jews into giving up their faith in favor of Zionism.
Before Zionism, there was no need to send every young man and woman of 18 years old into the anti-Torah army that is the IDF nor was there the need for them to risk their life and limb by doing so.
May Hashem redeem us all, bringing the true Geulah, BB”A.
I think Kollel_Wife makes a good point, that there are (older) people who don’t cover their hair, etc. due to the upheaval from the transition from Europe to America.
But, Sam2, Rav JBS founded the MO of today and MO today is not a result of that upheaval.
It is, as mentioned above, the distortion of the ideals of Rav JBS, some of which, in retrospect and as held by other gedolim who were his peers, were mistaken to begin with, that are responsible for the various MO avlas that have occurred and continue to occur.
MO is eventually going to head either in, CH”V, a “YCT –> Conservative —> Lost to Yahadus” direction, or, hopefully and BE”H, more likely, in a Traditional Orthodox direction. “Chareidi”, based on Chassidic mesorah and practices, is not part of the equation nor is it a greater or more authentic level of observance than Traditional Orthodoxy.
ItcheSrulik, I think you must be joking. Nobody wants disunity; but by choosing to dilute and distort, CH”V, the Torah’s laws, MO de facto makes itself into its own sect. May we all be zoche to the geula sheleimah, when we will all be part of a true Aguda Echad serving Hashem the way He wants us to, BB”A.
Off the top of my head:
Rav JBS, in his 13 addresses, said “the more one can distance one’s self from secular culture the better one is for doing so…” and that the reason for creating this new MO movement was that he (incorrectly) feared that traditional Orthodoxy would become a museum piece and couldn’t exist in the new America. B”H, this did not happen.
Therefore, it is quite clear that Rav JBS himself felt that MO was NOT lichatchila in any way.
So since Traditional Orthodoxy CAN and does, B”H, not only exist but even thrive, in this (not anymore so) new America, there is no valid reason to “modernize” Judaism when doing so is at best a bidieved according to Rav JBS, its founder.
Does that help?
musser zoger, it’s not CH”V a kitrug but rather a shevach and limud zechus on those who recognize that Hashem has not yet redeemed us from Galus. And there are prominent Rabbanim et al who, themselves, have secular names.
The difference, lihavdil, between us and other ethnicities is that only WE are subject to the halcha yadua sheEisav Sonei Es Yaakov. It has nothing to do with shame, CH”V, especially in a multi-cultural society as OP pointed out.
So if using a name not common to secular culture will make any/some (normal and decent) non-Jews uncomfortable, then it makes perfect sense to give children American legal names to be used in the workplace, et al. (No one is suggesting it is typically dangerous, CH”V, to use Jewish names as legal names, but that doesn’t lessen the concerns with doing so. YH”R, Hashem Yishmireinu, viyigaleinu BB”A)
The reference was to the movie, though.
I agree with the OP that these particular references should not have been used, if possible, particularly references to mushchasim and menuvalim.
Gavra:
I don’t think one can predict the future. It is just as (im)possible to support a family and pay tuitions on a Rabbe’s salary with a spouse’s income as it is if the husband were working in a typical white-collar office job. The additional income taxes, alone, are almost punitive.
Regardless, Parnassa, like everything else, is from Hashem, not from the profession you choose. I know many klei kodesh professionals who are managing just fine and, on the other hand, non-klei kodesh professionals including lawyers, who, unfortunately, are not doing all that well, financially.
Avi K: I was discussing those who are in school for a Master’s or Doctorate-level Rabbinical degree who hope to then use that to earn a living in a chosen profession, whether or not that job is in the religious world. I know plenty of people with semicha who went on to be successful business-people and career workers in the secular world.
My only point, which I still maintain, regardless of any objections posted thus far, is that if you are trying to earn a degree which you hope to earn an honest living from, I respect that whether it’s Torah or lihavdil a secular field.
I don’t believe people become a Rebbi with the goal of also receiving food stamps. If they can’t find a job that pays enough and they have to rely on programs like these to supplement their income to support their respective families, then that is unfortunate, even though it’s perfectly legal to do so, if qualified. But I do not at all believe it is lichatchila for them.
And just because a doctor will pay more taxes after he gets his degree does not give him any more of a right to rely on govt. programs than anyone else who needs them, regardless of future earning potential. The point of these programs is for the here and now, to allow one to live like a normal human being while in difficult straits, regardless of one’s chosen (future or current) profession.
I don’t know the numbers (in BMG or anywhere else), but it can’t be more than yechidim who can learn their whole lives. Someone has to pay the bills, and all the programs just can’t do that unless you pay 0 tuition and before your family grows beyond 1 or 2. So the goal must be to get a job at some point, whether that’s a Rebbi, Rabbi or something else entirely.
Did all the kollel-bashers stop to consider that, lihavdil, a doctor also has to go through years of training before getting his professional degree?
Would you also say that a doctor has no right to fall back on govt. programs while he is in school? I would not. Therefore, I don’t hold Kollel people to a lower standard than doctors. So if they can’t make ends meet while learning towards their Rabbinical degree(s), then let them legally and ethically apply for whatever programs the government offers until they do get that degree and find a position in the Rabbinate.
Whoa, what’s with all this ganging up against (the bearer of) an inconvenient truth (or truths)?
First, it is important to distinguish between what, on the one hand, is/was halachicly correct and, on the other, what can be done given the present reality.
Regarding the latter, there is no question that the State of Israel exists and that since they have (foolishly) assumed responsibility (sad as that has been) for so many of our brethren, they cannot simply pack their bags. As well, the State of Israel is the only country who cannot (and does not) claim “to the victor go the spoils”, and this is a black mark on the nations of the world. This is clear.
However, it is just as, if not even more, important to know the truth and what is right and what is wrong, EVEN IF PRESENT REALITY DICTATES A DIFFERENT APPROACH. Zionism was, is, and likely always will be, a major disaster for OUR people. This is indisputable, regardless of the ability to visit the kosel and whatever other chasdei Hashem we are blessed with that are “benefits” of having a State of Israel. The war miracles and other tired arguments are all irrelevant in asserting Zionism was a priori correct. It was not and only proves that more and more as time goes on.
The Zionists have inflamed the Arabs (and others in the world, EXACERBATING Esav Sonei LiYaakov) to hate us FAR, far more than they ever did. They were always Pereh Adam, and never loved us (though they did revere the Baba Sali and stood reverently for him when he passed in the streets). This doesn’t excuse their behavior at all, and the Arabs are still 100% at fault for every drop of blood they savagely spilled. But the Zionists are still far from blameless.
Trying to justify Zionism with “Esav Sonei LiYaakov” is absurd as breaking down a fence to fight a pit bull based on a rationale that the pit bull is violent anyways…so might as well seek to fight it?
Which is precisely why the smart thing to do was to do what we’ve always done in galus, and which has B”H, sustained us through today and will continue to do so, BE”H, until Beas Goel Tzedek BB”A, which is to lay low and NOT fight neither Eisav nor Yishmael, unless CH”V compelled to do so. The Zionists did not and do not care what the cost was as long as it furthered their agenda of gaining a State and keeping that State, and post-Jewish, CH”V, as well.
Most gedolim, including the Chofetz Chaim who died well before the State of Israel was established, knew and publicly made known that Zionism was and is a disaster.
Next, this is not a “Satmar shita”. It is reality, and it is also what most every gadol held prior to the State’s founding. Once the State was founded, some gedolim said to deal with the egel hazahav that has been hatched. But the position did not change, just the method of dealing with the reality at hand. Zionism was and is just as anti-halacha now as it was before the State’s founding.
It is painfully obvious that Jews would have been far better off without Zionism. That is, it is obvious if you are objective and read up on the history of the matter and open your eyes to the events of recent history.
I hope that clarifies matters, though it seems some have the wool of Zionist fallacy and fantasy pulled way too tightly over them.
realist: There are the proverbial silver linings in the cloud. That doesn’t mean we prefer a rainstorm to sunshine.
But the answer to your rhetorical questions are, unfortunately, yes, there would have likely been more Torah in E”Y had Zionism never existed.
Granted, there are many yeshivos in Eretz Yisrael, and those are theoretically protected by the State of Israel. But witness the tens of thousands of Jews including their descendants who the Zionists intentionally stripped of their Judaism, and, through the IDF and other cultural organs continue to CH”V de-Judaize them today. Many had their mesorah intact from Bayis Rishon! Are they not part of the cheshbon?
And there are many Torah communities outside Eretz Yisrael, Lakewood for example, that are malei Torah viLomideha. They were built with Jewish blood, sweat and tears (and money). There were many areas in Eretz Yisrael that were purchased and built up by Jews well before Zionism entered the world stage. There is every reason to believe such enterprises would have multiplied had Zionism not reared its traitorous and disastrous head.
Even after Zionism became a force on the world’s political scene, Jerusalem would have become a UN-run “International city”, at worst, as envisioned in the mid 1900s. The Kosel would thus have been just as accessible, if not more so, had Zionism never come about.
Chasdei Hashem Ki Lo Samnu, there are still benefits that the State of Israel does provide, including access to the Kosel, despite the many travesties wrought by Zionism. And if you live in Eretz HaKodesh under their protection then I don’t dispute the Hakaras haTov that would then come up. But none of that justifies Zionism nor is any of these benefits possible solely because of Zionism. They hijacked the course of our history, to our tremendous detriment, and this point is largely unknown.
Besides, NK doesn’t care that the government is not run kiHalacha. Because there is no way to run, kiHalacha, a government in Eretz Yisrael until Moshiach comes BB”A. It’s like attempting to run a beis haBaal according to halacha. It’s paradoxical and absurd.
BTGuy, I’ve never met any, personally, and their methods, as portrayed in the media, are obviously not halachicly appropriate (unless they consider it pikuach nefesh to do so?), and what you propose that there’s an ulterior agenda does seem possible.
But their point that Zionism has wrongly decided to append itself to Judaism and that the two are fundamentally not compatible with each other (but, whatever your thoughts are on the pros and cons of Zionism, Zionism is certainly not part of the Jewish faith, and (both the Jews and) the goyim should know that) is still valid even if their methods for conveying that aren’t.
Josh, I believe your post’s assertions have no basis in reality, for a number of reasons, including that many people do not subscribe to that fine publication. So, it seems, perhaps you meant:
“The Left Wing is busy creating a new Maseches Kulos shelo birshus HaTorah vi-she-afilu lo birshus Rav JBS.
Rule 1: All views to the Left of traditional Orthodoxy’s base line are not Assur, but all views to the Right are.”
Your post was a little cryptic, but it seems you are concerned why people don’t all have beards.
I was told that, early-to-mid last century in Europe, the gedolim were mesakein that guys should shave (obviously in a kosher way), perhaps for shidduch reasons.
My assumption is that the reasons for that takana are even stronger today, for most places/people.
In addition, our society today does not operate like that of yesteryear, and what may have worked then does not necessarily work now; provided there are no halachic objections (as in none at all), then Rabbanim can make adjustments to non-halachic areas, as per the societal needs (not its wants, but its needs) and shaving in a kosher manner does not appear to violate halacha.
The mishna berura actually brings certain people who should have beards. One can derive from here that there will be those who don’t have beards; he’s not implying, CH”V, that those who do not have beards are therefore ovrei aveirah.
Finally, typical klei kodesh do indeed have beards.
Sam2 and Avi K.
No, it is the Zionists who are “shocking and repulsive”, though I did not blame them for the Holocaust, ch”V.
Incidentally, they did a pretty good job of “explaining” themselves, though.
The web is full of the expose of this dirty and shameful (if you are a Zionist) history, but I know links aren’t allowed here.
So please Google “Zionists declared war on Hitler”, without the quotes. Take your pick of the results, though some sites are more suitable than others. That will explain the reference above.
Read R’ Michoel Ber Weismandel’s Min Hameitzar.
Google the following quote from Ben-Gurion:
“If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative.”
And this one from Chaim Weizmann:
[for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world … Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it.”
And from Yitzhak Gruenbaum, the chairperson of the committee set up by the Zionists, nominally to investigate the condition of European Jews:
“When they come to us with two plans – the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land – I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraisation of the land. If there would be a possibility today of buying packages of food with the money of the Karen Hayesod [United Jewish Appeal] to send it through Lisbon, would we do such a thing? No. And once again no!”
That’s for starters.
Avi: He said so himself. The Rasha Mufti told Rav Yosef Chaim that if the Jews simply continue to live here then there will be no problems. But if they try to rule over the Arabs then there will be war.
The Zionists had no problem with that, and in addition, again contrary to the gedolim’s correct advice, foolishly “declared war” on Hitler YM”Sh, too, which only enraged that rasha more and he at some point changed his plan from expulsion to lihashmid (vi)laHarog uLiAbeid, ch”V.
The Zionists do not care to admit they are responsible for all the bloodshed since 1948 and that they *intentionally* perpetrated massive spiritual destruction, and those who do admit these travesties are proud of both of those facts. Nor do Zionists manage to recall that almost every gadol said, very correctly, that the State will be a disaster (“they will create more problems than they think they are solving”, were the Chofetz Chaim’s words).
Rav Kook can’t blame the frum Jews of Europe for following halacha and ignoring Rav Kook’s daas yechidi and refusing to be “oleh bichoma” (regarding which Shlomo HaMelech wrote such dire consequences), especially when they were busy learning Torah instead, thus keeping the world going.
Regarding the reality as it is, this is an entirely different matter. As BTGuy wrote, no, the NK are obviously not correct in being mischaber laRasha and in endangering any Jews. But whatever may need to be done today, bishas haDchak, as a matter of practical need, has ZERO bearing on whether or not the Zionists were correct in creating a State (they were clearly, in every way, NOT correct).
Essentially, the Zionists started a world-wide “forest-fire”, and now, other than the Zionists, everyone (including NK, misguided as they may be) wants to put out that fire. So just because we don’t want their fire to burn any more, does not mean we agree with them for foolishly and brazenly starting this conflagration when everyone else knew all along what an out of control disaster Zionism was and is.
Sam2:
Your “argument” is not valid for a number of reasons. One is as Doswin pointed out. As well, every single drop of blood spilled in Israel over the last 60 years is the Zionists’ responsibility. Every single drop. As is the loss of their souls, except in this regard the Zionists actively and intentionally stripped them of their religion, not merely allowed it to happen under their watch.
Holocaust conjectures are even more foolish. In all the years of our galus, there never was a holocast. To presume that the same thing would have happened again after the unimaginable blood bath that was the holocaust, had there been no State, is beyond the realm of possibility.
On the other hand, there could not have been the wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, et al. had Jews NOT been concentrated in Eretz Yisrael. That is for sure.
As is clear to anyone who has not had the wool of Zionism pulled over their eyes, Zionism has been a tremendous disaster for our people.
ROB, you’re comparing the Zionist reshaim with Ezra and Nechemiah, a Navi Hashem? You’re beyond reason and living in a fantasy world.
The solid opposition to Zionism WAS Halacha then and IS Halacha now, Zionist fantasies not withstanding.
BE”H, when Moshiach does come (may it be BB”A), that egel haZahav and malchus haRisha will be no more; it will definitely NOT be forever.
Avi K:
Evidently, 99% of the gedolim disagree with your presumption of halacha, and it is also clearly not safer for Jews in Eretz Yisrael than anywhere else. Start with the mandatory draft, the never knowing a day of peace in its mistaken existence, et al.
Rather, the Zionists convinced everyone to have this perverted anti-Torah belief that it’s worth ch”V dying for the land. As the secular Zionists who’ve abandoned the Torah don’t have much spirituality if any to live for, it’s understandable in a perverse way for them to do so. But it’s not Torah. It’s Anti-Torah. The Torah says VaChai BaHem, just for starters.
HaLeivi:
We don’t know who people would have lived under in Eretz Yisrael, but if not for the wicked Zionists, it would have been no worse than living in England, France or even Morocco and Yemen at the same time period *minus* Zionist provocations and the reactions that caused.
Zionism completely changed the way Arabs and the world view Jews, Zionism is responsible for massive amounts, R”L, of innocent Jewish dam haShafuch and they continue to be like the chazir that puts on a show but is really just lipstick on the same.
HaLeiVi:
“Had a group of Frum, sincere people been the ones to try and legally gain the land, I’m pretty sure that all Rabbonim would have enthusiastically backed them.”
Instead of assuming, ask a Rav if that’s true (it’s not). Frum and sincere or otherwise (and the Zionists were certainly “otherwise”), there is no heter to take the land and it’s also outright stupid to do so, as history has shown. Just for starters, who needs every 18 year old kid to risk their lives in an army?
There were Arab countries where Jews were able to keep their mesorah intact since the FIRST Beis Hamikdash. Naturally, the wicked Zionists (in multiple ways) forced them (in multiple ways) to throw it all away upon their arrival to Eretz HaKodesh.
Witness the “Arab Spring” now. Who knows what the Arab world would look like if they never had an Israel upon which to blame their problems on? But that is conjecture. The point is that many Jews lived for centuries under Arab rule, and while it was not always pleasant and at times the savages would go on a blood-thirsty rampage, it was far better than the “religion of love”.
“HaKatan, if not for the Zionists the Arabs would have slaughtered whatever few Tora learners there were in Eretz Yisrael (as they did in Tarpat). Rav Soloveichik said that if not for the State almost all the surviviors of the Holocaust would have assimilated out of fear and depression. “
Avi, this is clearly not true. Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, not a Zionist, had a cordial relationship with, lihavdil, the Mufti YM”Sh.
According to Rabbi Kaplan who was there, the Chevron massacre was a result of “Shema Yisrael HaKosel shelanu HaKosel Echad” and other Zionist provocations. When you provoke animals, they get violent. These animals happen to be human (“Pereh Adam”, in that order), so there is no excuse for these savage murderers. But the Zionists knew better but didn’t care.
With all due respect to Rav Soloveichik, even if that is true, which I am not at all convinced it is, that doesn’t justify the numerous aveiros and evil deeds committed and allowed in order to make that egel haZahav rise in Eretz Yisrael.
Bottom line is that Zionism is assur (always was, as noted above, according to almost everyone) and in hindsight Zionism is a terrible disaster for our people, so it’s not only assur but also foolish in and of itself.
Feif Un:
>> “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.
akuperma, excellent post!
It is so painfully obvious that Zionism has been a colossal tragedy for our people. Without Zionism there also would be just as much, if not much more, Torah learned in Eretz Yisrael than there is now. (Look at all the “Israelis” who were (in multiple ways) and still are shmad-ed by these reshaim or tinokos shenishbu. Many of these innocent Jews used to be, and still would be, frum jews, if not for the Zionists.)
Look up the facts on WW II. The lie that had Israel been around that the Holocaust would not have happened or would not have been as bad, is a lie worthy of, ironically, Goebbels YM”Sh, himself.
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.
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.
Feif Un:
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.
Sam2:
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.
Sam2:
But you’re not being realistic. If you hold of the outdated (and, clearly in hindsight, now known to be mistaken) belief/ideology that Rav JBS proposed that traditional orthodoxy will become a museum exhibit so you must be more “modern” to survive as Torah Jews, and therefore you now do things that you otherwise would not do and klal Yisrael never did, then that mindset and practice is guaranteed to color your halachic opinions. Again, for at least the third time, this is pashut.
Practically speaking, MO means “compromise” in certain areas. It would seem that these can only be achieved by distorting and/or ignoring established halacha. You can call it apikorsus or whatever else you want to call it, but that’s your call. I, however, am interested in the facts on the ground, not to judge anyone else. So rather than damning anyone as an apikores, ch”V, I simply call a spade a spade and say that since MO ideology allows for “compromise” that means that an MO Rav will issue an MO psak and that the psak may not be appropriate for a traditional orthodox Jew.
This is the danger of “anything-orthodox” rather than just plain “orthodox” (i.e. traditional orthodox). Once you add something to the Torah, you’re bound to mess up and cross lines that you are not allowed to when there is ever a possibility for conflict between, liahvdil, the two parts. Rav JBS felt it was necessary then. Regardless of who agreed or disagreed then, it certainly is not necessary now and, as history continues to show, it is harmful for many people’s spirituality. That’s the reality, as recently shown by the Beacon incident.
By the way, this bias-in-psak applies not only to MO. If any Rav, of any stripe, has a particular weakness in a certain area, say honesty in mamonus, then it’s likely his psakim will inadvertently be colored by this too, unfortunately. But how much more so if the weakness is not a weakness but an intentional stance.
Feif Un:
Wrong.
MO, as founded by Rav JBS, admittedly and intentionally (attempted to) change(d) the practice of orthodox Jewry. He spoke about it at length, and it is disingenuous of you to imply that MO is the “standard” when it is traditional orthodoxy that is the standard and MO is the (mistaken, in hindsight) experiment.
“Chareidi”/”Chassidic” Jewry is also a change, and I never claimed it is a positive one, but that is not the topic of this discussion. Notice, I compared MO not to Chareidi Judaism, but rather to traditional Orthodox, as in the way it was always done.
Again, I am not interested in discussing the liberties that MO takes, nor, as you point out (and I agree), the additional chumros that Chassidic Judaism has imposed. But MO is very certainly not the way things were always done; traditional orthodoxy is. That’s for sure.
In case this isn’t clear, I do not mean to imply, Ch”V, that a Rav of an MO community is any less respectable than one of a traditional orthodox community. But if that Rav agrees with MO changes to halacha then a traditional orthodox Jew should ask elsewhere if he wants psakim not colored by that ideology. Face the facts like a big boy: if you, the Rav, take halachic “liberties” nobody outside MO does then your psakim are colored by that. If you feel your liberties are at least muttar if not lichatchila then you have nothing to be ashamed of. If, however, you realize your liberties are certainly not lichatchila, then it should be understandable why traditional orthodox Jews should ask elsewhere.
Once again, the point of all this is that if an MO Rav says Zumba is muttar, then if you are traditional orthodox then you should ask your LOR and not rely on the psak as this is part of a broader area that MO and traditional orthodox do not agree on. No condemnations, et al. Just the facts.
Sam2: You were the one who called them(/yourself) apikorsim, not I. First, I was speaking of rabbanim/poskim, not the hamon am. Second, please “don’t put words in my mouth” as I did not say nor do I believe any such thing.
To be clear, any posek/Rav who identifies as MO, assuming he is not schizophrenic, will likely issue psakim in accordance with MO shitos, as this is his ideology. Otherwise, he would seem hypocritical. Are you suggesting either of the above?
This is, again, pashut.
As to the issue at hand, I guess you’ve conceded the point(s) since your only response was a wild and unfounded accusation. Also good to know.
Sam2:
Yes, I am assuming the Rav is also “MO” based on the sub-title. You can believe whatever you’d like about MO (which I believe you identify with), but the reality speaks for itself.
I happened to be in an MO school recently, and I saw something thin and light fall out of a young teenage girl’s pocketbook. Her classmate, a boy, casually joked (I hope it was a joke) to her “Was that a [male contraceptive]?” This is, of course, a crying shame on a number of levels, and this kind of thing just doesn’t happen in a traditional orthodox Yeshiva and is indicative of a larger underlying rot that occurs when Torah occasionally takes a back seat to secular culture. You can’t intelligently argue with facts. I’m really not interested in listing people’s “liberties”, so please look up the Beacon thread (I understand that’s not representative of your entire MO world, and neither is this story, but neither are they irrelevant) and others if you need further examples (you don’t).
The point I am trying to convey to a “Yeshiva World” audience is that just because someone claims his Rav said Zumba is muttar, that is to be taken completely differently if that Rav is MO because MO proudly takes liberties with halacha/hashkafa that traditional Orthodox does not. So unless you also wish to take those liberties, you are better off asking a non-MO Rav. It’s somewhat like if you ask a Satmar Chassid when the latest time for Mincha is. Your Rav will not allow you to daven that late, but his does. That’s the essential point (though I am not implying Satmar is taking liberties with Halacha, CH”V), and if you’re offended then I’m sorry but I still maintain what I’ve written as it is pashut uvarur.
Again, I respect his Torah and learning and attempted fidelity to halacha, but it is fantastical to presume his being MO will not affect his piskei halacha, as I explained above.
Gavra:
Yes to the (?), and Amein to Shalom Al Yisrael.
Gavra:
I agree that just because the goyim breathe and do lots of other things, that doesn’t forbid us from doing the same, B”H. But if something will cause someone to think of forbidden things, as I wrote in my hypothetical perfume example and as is the reality with pole dancing for many people, then we agree that it is forbidden, as you wrote.
So I feel that Zumba is problematic for a number of reasons including this one. If you don’t agree that Zumba dances will cause a person to think inappropriate thoughts, then I respectfully disagree, though I do respect your opinion. But there are other problems with Zumba as noted above, principally the music and the public sensuality, and probably, for those reasons, uvichokoseihem lo seleichu as well.
Sam2:
I would quote to you “kol haposel, bimumo posel”, but we’ll leave that issue aside, I guess.
Please explain to me how someone who identifies with an ideology, such as MO, will not issue piskei halacha in accordance with that ideology? That would be hypocritical, would it not? Are you accusing this Rav of being hypocritical?
Of course, if a Rav identifies as traditional Orthodox (of whatever stripe/faction) then if he issues a psak I disagree with, I still respect his psak as being 100% Torah-based. But not if he identifies with another ideology that de facto goes against the Torah as that ideology naturally will influence his psak. This is a dvar pashut and simple reality.
CherryBim:
And I guess you’ve now raised it too far. The Mishna Berura in chelek Beis certainly does not agree with your contention that “hakol mutar”, though I certainly agree with no “tznius police” other than one’s self. For example, “Lo Yishte Adam BiKos Zeh viYitein Ainav BiKos Acheir”.
I’m sure many people would be interested in knowing who argues with the MB and claims “hakol mutar”, though. Please let everyone know.
CherryBim:
MyTake made an excellent point, and I commend her for trying to reach out to those who are trying to be mattir issurim, and you chose to ruin its effect with an inane remark.
No, you would not be “shocked beyond words” to see your Rav playing golf in anywhere close to the same degree as you would be if she saw a rebbetzin engaged in this nivalah.
More precisely, you would not be “shocked beyond words at how terrible it is” for your Rav to play golf. But she would be if she saw a Rebbetzin engage in this nivalah.
The koach of the yetzer hara is truly awesome. She is telling you that she has the sensitivity to appreciate that it’s wrong, and she understands it is hard to stop, but you make light of the whole thing and deny it outright so that people should go on thinking it’s perfectly okay to engage in this nivalah.
It is wrong. It is inappropriate. It is assur.
Sam2:
Although you probably meant it differently that I understand it, I agree with your statement that “just because someone may or may not be “MO” (whatever that even means to you anyway), their potentially vast Halachic knowledge is inherently irrelevant.”
This is true. The greatest talmid chacham in the world is capable of doing aveiros and also of being biased. And if such a person is mattir one or more aveiros due to his ideological bias, then it’s quite understandable that he would also be mattir a different issur due to that same ideological bias. Again, I wrote this and the above with all due respect to him, as indicated. I was sincere in that respect and equally sincere in its irrelevance to the topic at hand.
I felt the need to *respectfully* but unequivocally explain away this chilul Hashem that a Torah authority allegedly permitted this nivalah. In truth, by chilul Hashem, “Ain cholkim kavod laRav”, but I tried to be cholek kavod regardless and explain that it’s likely an ideological bias that could cause one to issue such a psak, yet with all due respect to his potentially vast Torah knowledge.
So I’m sorry you feel offended. But what is truly “disgusting” and “divisive” is when some who claim to be orthodox choose to trample on our Torah in the misguided pursuit of base and decrepit secular culture. Especially since your own Rav JBS said so himself that one should *avoid* secular culture if at all possible. Yet you proudly proclaim your religious pursuit of secular culture even when such pursuit is clearly kineged halacha.
Gavra:
What about the rest of it which is not Kadosh? Sensual music could, theoretically, be used to serve Hashem, as you posit. But sensual music created in tumaah without that requisite kedusha cannot. It reminds me of “Lama li rov zivcheichem amar Hashem”.
Regarding your second point referencing my point about pole dancing and your bringing up perfume, perhaps this will help explain it.
Say there were a perfume that was heavily and solely marketed to zonas. And for years, ever since its introduction, everyone who smells that perfume knows that the wearer is a zona. Not a businesswoman nor anything other than a zona.
Say some guy decides he likes the scent and buys it for his wife. Lets grant that he doesn’t want his wife to be a zona, but is buying it lisheim mitzva. But here is the problem. The brain knows this is a zona’s perfume. So there’s no way that improper thoughts will not go through his (and her) mind if she wears that perfume, even if the overwhelmingly vast majority of those thoughts will be pure.
The only exception to this is if he (and she), personally, *never* knew that this perfume is a zona’s perfume. Then, it would serve its purpose appropriately as it is, after all, only perfume.
The same goes for pole dancing.
The problem with Zumba, however, unlike the above hypothetical perfume and pole dancing, is that no such prior knowledge is needed for the music to negatively affect you. Music, as I wrote earlier, is the language of the soul. Again, you don’t need to have prior exposure to anything to be negatively affected by impure music. Nothing can save you from being negatively affected by impure music, other than not listening to it.
And the Zumba dances, too, if they were choreographed to be sensual, then that’s certainly inappropriate in public, as written above (even *if* the ultimate purpose is to enhance one’s individual relationship between man and wife).
Feif Un, with all due respect to both your Rav and you, given your sub-title of “Proudly Modern-Orthodox” and also not knowing who your Rav is, it is safe to assume your Rav’s opinions are most likely not halachicly relevant to non-MO Torah-observant Jews.
Non-Jewish music of any sort (other than Classical, perhaps) is problematic on a number of levels, and, how much more so, music that was specifically intended to be sensual is clearly not something for a Jewish neshamah to imbibe and assimilate.
But since MO proudly attends Broadway shows, MO is not, unfortunately, in this case, working with the same baseline as Traditional Orthodoxy. So there doesn’t seem to be what to discuss with MO on this issue as this is one of the areas where they allow their misguided (according to Rav JBS, too) pursuit of secular culture to trump the Torah, CH”V.
cherrybim and ultimateskier:
1. As is well known, we are living in an increasingly decrepit and morally bankrupt society, one that in NY actually legalized toeiva marriage despite the terrible psychological risk this poses to the innocent children in these relationships, to say nothing of the toeiva itself. All of this affects everyone to at least some extent. So just because Orthodox shuls do something, that doesn’t mean it’s right.
2. Nobody said YBC dances are muttar either. And just because you don’t, personally, think of Zumba as “slutty”, doesn’t mean it’s not. And just because you think it doesn’t affect you (even if you are really correct in that notion), that doesn’t mean it won’t affect anyone else.
3. All-women’s pole-dancing is obviously (I hope) not considered muttar even though it’s all women and it’s vigorous exercise. So an exercise certainly can have something wrong with it even if it’s all women.
Feif Un:
“(provided it isn’t against halachah)”
But Zumba is against halacha; that’s the point.
“Variety is the spice of life”, goes the expression. That does not mattir wife-swapping CH”V. (It’s like wanting to be cultural and modern so – completely contrary to Rav JB’s wishes, too – we trample on the Torah and attend Broadway shows to do so.)
But that’s not the point; Zumba is anyways not uniquely “marriage-enhancing” any more than any other aveira and/or a muttar form of exercise might be.
Music is an expression of the soul. There is no way listening to that kind of music (Latin) is good for your neshama. And I’d be embarrassed if anyone I knew went to Zumba.
It sounds like a question of whether it is an issue of lo sichanem or darkei shalom. I’d imagine a small gift would fall under the latter, but ASK YOUR LOR.
Feif Un:
That might be true, except that it’s *inappropriately* sensual. Sensuality cannot contradict the Bas Melech essence. I don’t want to bring other hypothetical examples to illustrate the point, but HaMeivin Yavin.
Besides, even if Zumba were as you propose, it would be highly inappropriate to publicly engage in physical sensual marriage-enhancing activities. Marriage is private, and public Zumba, even in your perception, is therefore a gross violation of tznius to turn most anything to do with marriage into a group activity (certain types of lectures not withstanding). Again, I don’t want to bring other hypothetical examples, but HaMeivin Yavin.
Comparing smoking to a limp, CH”V? WTH? Are you serious? There is ZERO excuse to smoke. Ever. Not even a casual once in a while cigarette. It is chemically ADDICTIVE. That means that even if you think it’s only once in a while (which is anyways assur), it will become more than that.
Smoking is the only substance that, taken as directed, kills. On the ohter hand, Alcohol, which it is often compared to, does not kill, and in fact is supposed to be healthy in moderation. Like anything, it can be abused. But that’s different than smoking, which is addictive, *completely* unhealthy AND is also unhealthy for those around the smoker.
Also, a limp is noticeable on a first date. Smoking can be hidden until the first stress incident long after the marriage under false pretenses has occurred. And not every girl will ask, so that can’t be counted on.
Unless a reliable Rov says otherwise, do not withhold this information from a girl (or boy). It will just spread misery, CH”V, and is almost certainly violating lo saamod al dam reiacha as these poisons will be spread to the wife and babies (if the marriage makes it that long).
Shvartza Wolf:
Why is it so hard to believe he “called the shots” at the various Touro campuses? By the way, schools don’t get bought and sold overnight so I imagine he could easily have had some input into that new school as well. Would the YU board and President Joel not “call the shots” at YU satellites as well, like the Torah MiTzion Kollels?
I believe Rav Daniel Lander is the new Chancellor, so that should resolve that question.
I’m sure you know that Lishon HaRa is an aveirah even if true, so your post about Motzi Shem Ra was irrelevant as it’s still assur by your own implication.
Sam2, in case the prior responses have not sufficed to make the point, I humbly offer the following notes on your response.
>> My remarks should begin with these characters at the beginning of each paragraph.
HaKatan: I don’t even know where to begin with this.
>> I was sincerely hoping that you did; I’m sorry to hear that.
>> For instance, I was hoping you might start by addressing the terrible hashkafa these incidents portray and especially the point I made at the end about the objection being the attitude more so than the practice.
You are taking an article by one Overes Aveirah as an indictment on a whole community. I would hope that someone who knows what Jews have gone through throughout our history would be able to see past that.
>> I will begin by reiterating that I know many YU people who are fine Binei Torah, and I am happy to believe the kaf zechus that much of that population is likely tinokos shenishbu. So none of this was or is an attempt to besmirch any person(s), CH”V, but rather to address the ideology and its practice.
>> First, as I indicated, any serious talmid from YU that I have asked about these scandals, simply brushes it off as not nogeia to them, but not that it’s *wholly* non-indicative of the school’s hashkafa. Anecdotal comments bear this out, though that is not proof, of course.
>> As well, from reading the various intellectual pseudo- (and actual) kefirah plus azus neged HaTorah combo pieces that spring forth from various student publications, it clearly is a serious indictment of the community even if not its individuals. I’m sorry that’s too hard for you, but a pattern tends to indicate the underlying reality. When you have one “winner” after another, it *almost* gets to be predictable and, as stated, indicative of the underlying ideology.
Rav Schachter talks about when the cardinals visit and why and why YU lets them in the Beis Midrash. Before they come, someone always announces in the Beis Medrash that they should be ignored and that learning should continue as normal.
>> Seriously? And therefore? The Commentator still glowed how the Cardinals had such nachas from seeing how the talmdim “sharpen their minds” in the Talmud as the Cardinals engaged them in conversation. So maybe Rav Schachter gave some students permission to be Mevatel Torah and those did not have to follow the directive you mentioned?
>> Besides, it’s still a Bizayon HaTorah (and bittul Torah), and my understanding is that the R”Y there were not exactly BiSimcha about it. A Beis Midrash is a Makom Torah, even more so when seder is in session, and not an object of interest for curious observers, not to mention the Avodah Zarah issues. I suppose it made for some good halacha limaaseh shu”t. Hashem Yiracheim.
>> Honestly, you really expect anyone to believe that when a handful of regally attired Catholic Cardinals walk into the Beis Midrash that it will have absolutely no impact on anyone’s learning even if the Commentator hadn’t reported as it did and even with Rav Schachter’s alleged directive?
>> This is another example of modernity *trumping* CH”V the Torah. Let’s be egalitarian, regardless of what happens to seder; we’ll just have Rav Schachter issue edicts that we know won’t solve the issue. I’m sure Rav Schachter did his best so I mean no disrespect towards him, CH”V, but that doesn’t make the issue disappear.
>> As I said in my previous post, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionists don’t claim fidelity to OUR Torah; MO does, so MO has the uniquely impossible job of reconciling our holy and pure Torah with, lihavdil, the incredible cultural morass around us. This would be extremely comical if it weren’t just as extremely sad. (At least by Rav JB’s times there might have been a hava aminah so it’s understandable why he said what he did, given the prevailing winds at that time. But clearly traditional orthodoxy is quite obviously not a “museum piece”, B”H, despite his prediction to the contrary.)
I cannot answer why Broadway shows are Muttar. I know people have been given Heterim (I also know of several people who bring iPods to listen on during Kol Isha parts), but I do not know why they would be Muttar.
>> People are given legitimate heterim for all sorts of things (within limits), but that doesn’t therefore make it generally acceptable halachic practice for anyone and everyone. I happen not to believe anyone ever received a heter to attend a typical Broadway show. But, regardless, the arguments they put forth for Broadway shows have nothing to do with heterim other than inventing ones that never did, and never will, exist.
>> Please forgive my cynicism here, but should those people be applauded for bringing an iPod for the Kol Isha parts? First of all, the whole proposition of doing so is farcical at best and I’d be embarrassed to try to rationalize such behavior to anyone, even to a school-child.
>> But even suggesting such a “solution” only underscores the point I made in my last post of secular culture de facto trumping halacha. It’s assur, but since secular culture is more important than, er, also important in addition to, Torah, let’s find some laughable pseudo-solution and fool ourselves that we’re following halacha. And we wonder why non-MO disagrees.
>> Second, what about the seviva and the visuals in the theater, even with an iPod to somehow protect against Kol Isha? I guess that’s muttar lichol HaDeios? Or do they not watch the shows and also come in a protective bubble-suit? This is absurd.
>> I assume further that “Uvikuseihem lo seileichu” is also, CH”V, moot in favor of elevating secular culture?
You seem to have a very strong complaint against a group of people and are not giving a real support for your indictment of a large group of Frum Jews, unless you think that Broadway shows are enough to Passul an entire group.
>> As I stated, the whole *attitude* of Modernity trampling the Torah (as most recently indicated in the Beacon incident where they are not even apologetic for publishing such nivalah and azus) is deplorable, even if the overwhelmingly vast majority of individuals mean well, and I would be open to that possibility.
>> By way of example, and not to open another can of worms, just because some people really believe Rabbi Schneerson Z”L is, CH”V, their “Borei” doesn’t make the opinion in any way tolerable. It’s still absolutely unacceptable. So is any intentional dilution of our Torah, large or “small” by anyone.
>> So you have a group that openly ignores their own Rav JBS (and does the same with Rav SR Hirsch – who really has nothing to do with MO – by ignoring his Austritt provision and misunderstanding his whole philosophy to begin with – on top of that convenient omission of Austritt). This group has no shame in publicly glorifying their toeivos and their worst aveiros (the editors had no problem publishing it in the name of intellectual opinion and other non-svaras, so it wasn’t just the baalas aveirah’s clear mistake in writing the piece, particularly the way it was written).
>> Incidentally, going to Broadway shows (in addition to the clubs and other mekomos hatinuf they unabashedly and proudly speak of patronizing and even review in their publications) would likely make them Prutzim BaArayos, which means, for example, that it would be assur for a woman to be miyacheid with (not only 1 man) but even 2+ men who attend these shows, as the heter of 2+ only applies to kisheirim and not to prutzim.
>> This *attitude* is obviously a big problem, though of course each individual stands in his own chezkas kashrus. Regardless, the point is that you’re playing with dinei nifashos, as in ruchnius, by ignoring all this.
I didn’t see either thread, nor do I know who’s involved here, but, to try to answer your question, I would say that when Daas Torah (or anyone) does something wrong then you are not supposed to follow nor condone that.
So I fail to see how you juxtapose his criticizing this organization for doing something wrong to either of the other points. If anyone does something that is clearly forbidden then they are not to be condoned. Which would explain why he criticized them, if you say he did.
Why should it then follow that Daas Torah is not any more reliable in any and every other case?
Shvartza Wolf, please explain your previous remarks where you wrote:
“[Responding to ‘Health’]:
B. You say “Rabbi, Dr. Lander A’H, is the one whom instituted all policies in any Touro school. These are all acc. to Halacha. The school carries on his tradition to this day.”
First, this is blatantly false. Second, as he is no longer president, I’m not sure why he’s relevant. You say that “[t]he school carries on his tradition to this day”, but I’m not sure what that means.
“
I have many friends who attended (respectively) both Touro and YU. I never heard of any violations of halacha at Touro. Yet you seem to claim this to be the case when you wrote “blatantly false”. How so? Please explain.
Also, you write that since Rabbi Dr. Lander Z”L is no longer president that you’re “not sure why he’s relevant” and, at the same time, you admit you’re not sure what “carries on his tradition” means. Might one explain the other?
His philosophy of allowing a Ben Torah (and also a Bas Melech) to acquire a college education without compromising on his (or her) Torah values seems to continue in Touro despite Rabbi Dr. Lander having passed away. That would make him relevant. And that is probably what it means.
As for YU/MO:
The typical line I hear from current YU students, when asked about a given YU/MO affront to our holy Torah, is that the students don’t care for that nonsense and they are instead interested in learning and a quality degree.
That includes the Catholic Cardinals’ visit, Crosses blazing in the reflected lights, to the Beis Midrash for some good ‘ol bittul Torah (and assorted other issurim that came along for the ride). Or more recently, about the toeivah rally.
I do believe my acquaintances that they are sincere in that reasoning, and they certainly seem like good Bnei Torah who are kovei ittim, et al. and that they truly do have no interest in these travesties.
But the latest Beacon story, unlike the Toeivah rally, is, in my opinion, much worse than the toeivah rally and the Cardinals’ visit. As written, it portrays a gross lack of sensitivity to, and Chashivus of, the Torah on the part of both the writer and the editors of that publication. (I don’t mean to judge them personally, CH”V, as they are all likely tonikos shenishbu to a very large extent.) This is unlike the Toeivah rally (and letters by those struggling with this issue) where they claim they were trying to be understanding and caring, working within the Torah’s values, even if they were misguided as Rabbi M. Twersky clearly explained.
(In truth, other YU papers have written things that are highly inappropriate and convey the same lack of chashivus, but to a far lesser degree, with HaMevaser coming in a fairly competitive second place after the Beacon. Yet people contaminate the sanctity of shuls with Hamevaser editions, Hashem Yiracheim)
Whatever struggle(s) the author of that article was dealing with, there was no excuse to glorify the experience of violating BiMeizid (and, as written, seemingly BiSimcha, too!) a number of issurim chamurim including one of the “big 3”. Again, no excuse to write it like that. At least in the Toeivah articles, it is written in the context of them wishing they could be like everyone else, etc., how much of a struggle they have, and not how, CH”V, excited they would be to violate issurim chamurim as in the Beacon story. On the other hand, a (valid) point in the Beacon story could have been made by glossing over much of the terrible occurrence and then explaining the experience to have been empty and regrettable after all that, in addition to the aveiros committed.
In other words, the aveirah/aveiros, terrible as it is/they are, is/are not so much the concern to others, as people do stumble, CH”V, and that’s why Hashem graced us with the gift of Teshuva. So confessing to a student newspaper, while perhaps anyways not appropriate in the final analysis, is not what is shocking. But the writer’s glorification of committing one of (speaking of Cardinals) the 3 “cardinal” aveiros is inexcusable and shocking, even for MO (who proudly ignore their own Rav’s (as in Rav JBS) words that “the greater they can distance themselves from culture the **better** they are for it” and instead whose students proudly proclaim that, for example, it must be muttar to go to a Broadway show because everyone does it and that Kol Isha and other issurim must not apply).
So it is not so much the halachic concerns that arise. Because those can be avoided (if you care to). But it’s the attitude and hashkafa that holds secular culture to be, not in the running with, or even on par with, but (de facto if not de jure) outright *trumping*, our holy Torah, CH”V and the resultant matir issurim that accompany that belief, denials to the contrary not withstanding. Breathing in that air is poisonous to the soul and is the biggest travesty of that ideology no matter how much learning goes on anywhere.
(At least Conservative Jewry claims they can make up and discard what they please, and Reform and Reconstructionist do not claim any fidelity to Torah MiSinai. So if they were to engage in such behavior then it would not reflect on their being Jews and would be a simple reflection on the decrepit society and culture they are surrounded with. But regarding one who claims to be anything-orthodox, it most certainly does reflect on their being Jews and this is a terrible chilul Hashem.)
Wolf, I appreciate your sensitivity, but I don’t think there’s a problem to lip-sync on Simchas Torah, unless you do so in such a way that really draws attention to your “singing”.
In other words, moving your lips in a way that conveys you are singing loudly when in fact you are silent, seems to be an issue when viewed through this sensitivity. But merely moving your lips to the tune is a legitimate expression in joining in the simcha, just as dancing animatedly with your mouth closed would be participation.
So I don’t think it’s sheker to lip-sync at Simchas Torah as part of the kahal, because people participate in different ways, and one way of participating, in the case of a sore throat, cold or other need to protect the vocal chords, is by utilizing lip-sync. Seems okay to me.
I think both Popa and BTGuy are correct, but depending on the time.
There is certainly much to be thankful for, B”H, at this point in this galus. That includes the things Popa mentioned.
However, there were gedolim of yesteryear who went so far as to demonstrate and rally in Washington (for Pikuach Nefesh purposes, true, but there is such a precedent) and did not instead bow down and ignore the danger.
So I think a balance must be struck between the two, and sometimes one attitude may be called for while, at others, the opposing attitude may be the correct one.
“pet peeve”, I think you’re wrong.
Men, who have spent many years learning halacha and other areas of Torah are quite capable of expressing an opinion on this matter, though there should always be sensitivity.
Back to the topic:
Again, Zumba is “sensual” in nature. You simply cannot argue around that and it is therefore not justifiable for anyone no matter who they are or are not in front of. For other types of womaen’s dances/exercises, too, there’s no reason to use perverted motions and/or non Jewish music.
There’s no reason you can’t do fast dances, to fast Jewish music, that exercise your entire body in a dignified manner befitting a bas melech without resorting to disgusting animalistic imports from the land known for this particular form of pritzus.
I did not see anyone discouraging exercise for either gender, and that would be a mistaken notion if anyone did. But find a way to exercise that fits with kol kevuda bas melech penima, not to mention simple kavod haAdam and don’t resort to the many impurities from the street.
I’m curious how many defenders of this disgusting practice would feel if they heard the Queen of England takes Zumba lessons. Would they not think it’s at least tacky? Why is a Bas Melech not given *at least* that much chashivus?
kollel_wife, Stern and Touro are not comparable in terms of potential issues. For starters, Stern is (proudly) “Modern Orthodox” while Touro is not.
If you went to an army ceremony, it would also be hard to pick people out due to the uniformity (pun intended) of the dress. Is that also objectionable?
There is an appropriate way to dress for each occupation.
In a business setting, you will likely find the same dark suits, etc.
While there is room for some variety in many professions, a (married/Kollel) Ben Torah, lihavdil, should look at least as professional as a business man, and this is probably what you saw in Lakewood.
As far as the raincoat, I only know of one that covers the felt hats that Bnei Torah wear, so that would explain the uniformity of that choice.
Vayeitzei, the shirt color is NOT “meaningless”. Shabbos demands a more fine mode of dress than during the week. But for during the week, it would seem perfectly reasonable for a Yeshiva boy to wear a “conservative” (i.e. non-flashy) colored shirt.
I never heard of this whole business, but the only reason I could think of to *not* wear a white shirt is *IF* by wearing a white shirt it makes you think you’re an automatic Gadol HaDor. So if by not wearing a white shirt you maintain a balance and sense of perspective of who you are and where you’re holding, then it makes sense to not wear a white shirt (until it’s appropriate for you). Same goes for a tie and suit.
Imagine 4th graders coming into Yeshiva with suits on every day; it just doesn’t befit them, as nice as it may look.
However, if the standard dress is now to wear a white shirt, NOT because of the above, but simply because that’s the normal decent dress mode even for teens, then it makes sense that they would require white shirts even if they had not previously done so. BTW, this could also be extended to ties and even suits, if that’s what the (non-“faker”/”macher”) norm happens to be.
Just speculation…
I think “a mamin” made an excellent point.
A poster further back said “as long as its only women, who cares what they do”? There is a clear lack of thought that went into that statement? What if they had pole-dancing classes, women only? Is that okay, too? Obviously not.
To be blunt, dancing like a zona is 1000% assur even if nobody is watching. It’s even worse if others, particularly men, are watching. But it’s still 1000% wrong even in total privacy.
But as someone else wrote, anyone (regardless of gender) who condones this terrible lack of tznius is clearly lacking in sensitivity to what it is to be tzanua.
To spell it out further, if you participate in immoral dances “with women only”, you’re guaranteed to be overall changed by this and, therefore, in front of men, too, you will also (to some extent) FOR SURE, dress/behave/act inappropriately (to some extent).
As to the ridiculous comment about tennis and house-cleaning, tennis is not intended to highlight the body and is not inherently non-tznius even if *might not* be advisable to play in front of men. On the other hand, Zumba and Latin American body dancing are clearly intended to highlight the body, which is completely antithetical to tznius.
kfb, I’m not sure what your statistical sample is, but from a quick survey of my own “network”, the recent Touro grads in my network did get jobs in businesses large and small, depending on the individual. I don’t think it’s true that you have to go to YU if you want to get a job; that sounds a little absurd.