Forum Replies Created
I see. From what I understand, since MTA is so large and has such a wide variety of students, your chevra is really based on which shiur you’re in and who you choose to associate with. However much you put in in terms of commitment and putting yourself on the right path, that’s what you’ll get out of it. Because of the wide range, it’s not possible to say that every student or aspect of MTA is a good environment, but it’s easy to only stay in those places that do have a good influence on you. What I’m trying to say is, unlike other yeshivos where maybe the overwhelming student body and therefore feeling of the yeshiva is positive (or chas veshalom negative), in MTA it isn’t set for you, you can find both and you need to make a small effort to seek out the right chevra. I know a BT who went to MTA and it really worked for him.
I know a lot about MTA because many of my friends went there. If you have any other specific questions, please feel free to let me know.
It’s modern but there’s a very wide range of students. They accept very serious and bright talmidim as well as less motivated ones, through a multiple track system and many different level shiurim for each grade. All of the rebbeim are fantastic, many different styles and levels. Many many students come from Teaneck but there are also buses from Monsey, Brooklyn, Riverdale and others. There is a small group of people who dorm, either because they live too far away or because of convenience. What specifically do you want to know?
The aruch hashulchan mentions a minhag to make put saffron in foods on shavuos, because it has a good smell, like torah which is compared to a rei’ach tov. He also brings some lesser-heard but interesting explanations of why we eat dairy on shavuos. For example, we find a remez to this in the rashei teivos of the last three words of the pasuk “????? ???????? ???????? ???? ???? ??’ ??????????” (????? ??,??). Also, another interesting reason:
??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ?????, ??????? ?????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ?????? ??? ??????? ???, ????????: ?? ???? ????? ???. ??? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??????.
Sam: I can testify that it is, indeed, quite a sight to behold.
ItcheSrulik: I don’t know what you’re referring to, but in YU they have the minhag (I believe started by Rav Dovid Lifshitz) to sing odeh la’keil right before shacharis. It’s in some bentchers for friday night.
Sam: Rav Schachter said that Rav Soloveitchik thought they might be, but then he (Rav Soloveitchik) said since they’re worn by everyone nowadays and not just one particular nation, they aren’t. I am 100% serious.February 12, 2016 3:47 am at 3:47 am in reply to: Gut chodesh! Are we supposed to be marbeh b'simchah now? #1137278
My rebbi told us a dvar torah about simcha in adar. He said, we see a connection between the sadness of Av and the simcha of adar, because the gemara says “k’sheim shemishenichnas av m’ma’atin b’simcha, kach mishenichnas adar marbim b’simcha” implying a connection between them. What is the connection? He quoted a pshat that we know the sadness of av was caused through the cheit hameraglim. What was that? According to one understanding, the meraglim were so used to having nissim geluyim done for them in the midbar, they couldn’t accept going to eretz yisrael where they would see less nissim geluyim and more of just seeing hashem’s yad in nature. So, the flip side of that is adar, where we davka emphasize the hidden nissim hashem does every day, as in the story of the megillah. According to this pshat, marbim b’simcha means seeing hashem’s influence on the world more (which makes sense because simcha is often used in the torah in context of serving hashem, such as usmachtem lifnei hashem) My rebbi ended with, if seeing hashem more in teva is how we increase simcha (and not through shtick or bittul torah) then kol hamarbeh, harei zeh m’shubach and I don’t think there’s any problem of doing this in adar I too, or indeed, any time of year.
I actually have done just that. It’s quite interesting how when I look at a lightbulb through the side of my glasses, I see the individual pieces instead of just a bright shining light.
Yes, of course yeshivish and chareidi mean different things to different people. But generally speaking, it’s usually about a type of person who dresses a certain way, holds certain shittos, and attends certain types of institution, while there isn’t that universality in “Modern orthodoxy” – YU calls itself that, fully observant people call themselves that, but YCT and Yeshivat Maharat call themselves that too (they use “open orthodox” and “modern orthodox” pretty interchangeably, see both of their websites), as well as do non-fully observant people. So it is a very bad identifier for colloquial usage.
Quote from the Shtefanesht Rebbe, R’ Menachem Friedman (son of Ruzhiner Rebbe): “Personally I do not know at all what is the meaning of the word frum also my father did not mention such a word to me. But it appears to me that it is a type of garment whose outward cover is pride, whose lining is anger, and which is sewn with the black of depression.” (The House of Rizhin, by R. Menachem Brayer)
I believe that instead of judging people by their label (whether it’s imposed on them by someone else or self-chosen), look at their actions and beliefs instead. There is less of a difference in the different people who call themselves chareidi or yeshivish than there is in the words Modern Orthodox, which mean different things to different people. To quote Rav Schwab (when asked a question in which someone who was embezzling money was referred to as a frum yid), “If he is embezzling from the government, he is not a frum Yid!”
Even if someone claims they don’t keep whatever aspect of halacha because they’re “Modern Orthodox,” that no more implicates other Modern Orthodox people who don’t feel the same way as he than that “frum yid” who was an embezzler represents all shomer torah yidden.
mik5 – it doesn’t take almost any more time than the way most people do it.
I agree with RebYidd. We still have tisha b’av once a year even though we’re supposed to mourn over the destruction of the beis hamikdash all the time.
#3 just means saying your own bracha instead of being yotzei with the ba’al habayis. I’m not from chabad and I have this minhag too, though we pass the challas to everyone to say hamotzi before they are cut.
I just wanted to see the url. I do like tennis, though.
Joseph, does the fact that YU is both a college and a yeshiva change it from being those things into a “business”?
Ok then, so probably “modern orthodox” was used by chareidim to describe those they saw as acting too modernish.
I don’t know why the RCA accepts him, and I can’t speak for them. That still doesn’t mean they actually approve of his actions
Joseph, allow me one more post, and then I will b’n not stray off topic anymore.
I respect your opinions, and your right to them. However,
A) The fact the the Oxford Dictionary does not contain the etymology of some obscure words is irrelevant to any of our discussion. We see the terms “ortho-” and “orthodox” used many times in various languages, such as orthopedist, orthodontist, “orthodoxie” in French, related words in other Euroean languages, “orthodox” as the word referring to standard/normal, “orthodox” as referring to a sect of christianity, and lehavdil orthodox referring to frum judaism. I am unaware of any argument amongst historians as to the origins and definitions of these words. Therefore, to say that reform or any other position disagreeing with orthodox judaism would use the term “orthodox” as reffering to frum judaism, is implausible as I see it.
B) Now, the term “chareidi” is the way that many more right wing jews refer to themselves. It is accepted to be taken from “chareid l’dvar hashem” – trembling at the word of hashem, to perform His will properly. If you ask me, that sounds like a nice label; and I don’t see, again, why anyone who disagreed with chareidim or wasn’t part of their klal would coin this extremely complementive term. Once it’s in use, it is in use by all, except certain news sources who like to call them “ultra-orthodox”, which to me and Rabbi Lamm sounds perjorative (Seventy Faces: Articles of Faith, KTAV Publishing House, 2001, p. 1. “…I prefer the Hebrew term Haredi because it is not pejorative and is the one used by the Haredim to identify themselves”); but who would coin this term if they were not trying to complement and raise up this form of judaism as the best.
Now on your previous post:
C) The “cavemen” quote was taken out of context and misused. This may have been unintentional, but if you actually know of what Rabbi Lamm said, it’s quite clear as to what he means. Could he have been more careful? Yes. Was he calling bnei torah cavemen? Absolutely not.
D) I agree that BMG is yeshiva and not a business, because regardless of its techinical status, its mission statement is that of a yeshiva. The same goes for YU, regardless of its slightly different philosophy of what a yeshiva should teach, so it appears we are now in agreement
E) When Avi Weiss taught at YU (I apologize for not knowing this occured; it was at Stern actually) he was not (at least known as) “Avi Weiss” in all of his neo-conservative glory we see him today.
F) Last: charedi judaism is absolutely a movement and a label (as much as MO is). Members feel a pride in doing the things mostly exclusive to them, such as wearing white shirts, black hats and jackets. They would not be caught dead mistaken for MO. They need a clear dissociation from MO jews; not just because they don’t agree with them, but because they need to preserve the individuality of their movement. This (and vice-versa for MO jews) has kept us from achdus all these years
PS: I like your response that you are simply “a Jew” and would concur for myself.
“Orthodox” = “right opinion” in Greek. Where is your proof that this was made by non-orthodox, and why does that make any sense to call them the “right opinion”?
Chareid = tremble. I’m pretty sure chareidim gave themselves that name, to show that they “tremble” in their service of hashem
Joseph: I have no time for this now. I will bring a few quotes. We don’t need to debate points, because it’s futile – you want to see Modern Orthodoxy as bad, and find a way you shall.
“Modern Orthodoxy is nothing but a label.” True, in the sense of yeshivish or chareidi being nothing but a label.
“The only coherent explanation of Modern Orthodoxy comes form (sic) Rav Soloveitchik in his Five Addresses, which is, in a nutshell, we must compromise our standards in America because traditional Torah standards will not survive here.” Completely untrue. Rav Soloveitchik never once advocated compromising standards, chas veshalom. Read the quotes you yourself provided, and see how he is not compromising anything.
“Rav Aharon Kotler ZT’L, and Rav Schneur ZT’L after him, would under no circumstances even walk into YU.” Source? A) I know that Rav Aharon gave a shiur there B) Certainly someone who wouldn’t enter YU would not meet with the Rosh Yeshiva of YU; yet strangely, I recall several stories and pictures which show the mutual respect between Rav Soloveitchik and both Rav Aharon and Rav Schneur. (see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/ou-mo )
“Please understand, YU is a business, not a Yeshiva” If you make the terms exclusive, so is BMG (Rav Aharon Kotler’s position was “CEO”)
“In YU, Dr. Lamm, though he was merely President, and not Rosh Yeshiva,” – Let me stop you there: patently false. Rabbi Dr. Lamm held the official title of Rosh HaYeshiva
“The unacceptable socializing that goes on between the YU boys and Stern girls” – How much do you know about it to deem it unacceptable?
“the partying” – huh?
“the teaching of Gemorah to girls” – they hold it’s ok; that’s what this thread is about
“the Zionism” – come on, now.
“the allowance of toeiva clubs” – see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/ou-mo to understand how this is not true
“The fact that the President of a “Yeshiva” can get up and refer to Bnei Torah as ‘cavemen'” – a hateful twisting and misquotation of his words
“And you can have an Avi Weiss and others like him teaching under its auspices” – Excuse me. I must be on another planet.
“Not all roshei yeshivos are equal” means what to you, exactly? That Rabbi Rakeffet was lying?
I also saw your “modern orthodox judaism” thread, riddled with sinas chinam, misinformations (I didn’t want to say lies) and utter disrespect for gedolim. Pasting the link to a thread doesn’t prove anything, if it’s a bad and inaccurate thread.
Another story: It was Motzei Tisha B’av, and Rav Lichtenstein was learning (he hadn’t broken his fast yet). Someone was sent to get him, but he said he wanted to finish the sugya and would be there in a few minutes. The boy asked, “Rebbi, but aren’t you hungry?” Rav Aharon said, “I missed more than just food today.” (because we can’t learn torah regularly on tisha b’av)
Because on a weekday, you could say the day starts with maariv or shacharis – since it’s circular, it doesn’t really matter. But shabbos starts with maariv.
I heard another story today: Someone was walking in the halls and saw his friend, whose name happened to be aharon. He called out “Aharon, can I borrow a pencil?” Rav Aharon Lichtenstein was in the hallway also, and turned around and said, “Sorry, I don’t have one with me.” He wasn’t trying to be funny; he was such an anav that he thought people would call him by his first name. I can only imagine the bachur’s mortification!
Sam, would that depend on what type of halel you say? I also heard quoted from Rav Schachter that only things that are specifically celebratory in relation to the day would be permitted, i.e. dancing, but not haircuts which we don’t generally do to celebrate.
Sorry to interrupt but on an unrelated note, the person who started this thread is Ivdu Es Hashem Bisimcha, while I am IvduEsHashemBsimcha, and a helpful mod has added a subtitle for me: BauLfanavBirnana (I like it!). So don’t confuse us.
I think depends on what the thing is, and the person involved. For example, many talmidim of R’ Schachter wear what he believes to be techeiles. Many others who are not his talmidim also do so. I feel like it may depend on the individual’s opinion and analysis on the issue, whereas by yeshivish rabbonim people may be more likely to follow no matter what.
DaasYochid and PBA: Without knowing too much on the matter, I believe your paradox can be solved in this way: YU Roshei Yeshiva and YU people may not believe in “Daas Torah” when it comes to non-torah related matters, but they certainly (at least, the majority who are truly “modern orthodox”, not the small minority of non-frum people trying to keep themselves called “orthodox” who make everyone else look bad) believe in daas torah (aka Psak) in halachic matters! If a YU rosh yeshiva tells his talmidim to do something halachically required, they would do so. (I have not seen that this agreement was portrayed as something everyone must do)
Side note: the prenup website also lists Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l as being supportive of their prenup
Joseph, I am well aware of the contents of the letter, and have read them previously. I was just pointing out that when you call “your” translation “closer to the authors intent” than “mine”, we were both using the same translation: that which you so kindly provided.
This thread is not about YU. Rav Elchonon’s letter could have any number of explanations (see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/ou-mo/page/3 ) but regardless, he was not endorsing death over YU, and to say he was is dishonest, both in general and as a telling over of a halachic shittah.
Joseph, I was quoting your translation. And yes, people may have had the impression that YU is such a grave place – we have discussed on previous threads how this has no practical bearing on anything.
Joseph, your translation does not match what you read out of it. To quote,
“[YU and Beis Midrash L’torah] are places of danger in terms of spirituality because they conduct themselves in a spirit of freedom. And what benefit is there to flee from a physical danger to a spiritual danger.”
Note that he said there is danger in both, but he does not say (or imply) that if one has a specific choice: Be killed or go to one of these places, that they should choose being killed. Rather, he says that the danger is similar in both places, and there is no use to flee because danger is at those places too, but he doesn’t say that the choice between certain death and YU, as it were, is death.
Joseph, you are lying when you say that Rav Elchonon Wasserman said it is better to die than be saved physically and go to YU. He said “what’s the use?” to be in danger physically than to be in (what he believed to be) danger spiritually. There’s a big difference.
PBA, I have always liked your hilarious posts. This, though, is my favorite post of yours. Thank you, and I’m impressed.
Everyone else: Like Sam said, I beg you not to argue on this thread. Please, as a favor to a fellow Jew.
Another story: When Rav Aharon became ill and as a result gave less shiurim, he went to the hanhala of the Yeshivas Har Etzion and asked them to reduce his salary because of it. This made me think: how many of us, in a similar position, would act with such a love for emes?
Another time, Rav Aharon had a “press conference” – basically, a chance for the talmidim to ask their questions, halachic and hashkafic. One wanted to be very careful in the phrasing of the question, because Rav Aharon would take the questions very seriously and took every word into account. A talmid wanted to ask a question about learning tanach, and how to balance it with other sedarim. Because of his fear and awe of Rav Aharon, however, he lost his composure and it mistakenly came out as simply, “Why do we learn?” Rav Aharon reacted instantly. “Why do we learn?!” he thundered. “Why do we breath?!?! ‘Ki haim chayeinu v’orech yameinu!'”
Rav Aharon had hip surgery and was absent from yeshiva for a short while. Soon after his return, he gave a two hour long shiur klali, as we would normally do during the year. By the end, he was visibly exhausted. A talmid asked him, “Would the Rosh Yeshiva like a glass of water?” Rav Aharon responded with thanks, but said he tries not to drink water in the Beis Medrash. He also would try not to answer his phone in the Beis Medrash.
Another Rav told over how once when Rav Aharon was still in YU there was some sort of rally at Washington D.C., and Rav Aharon was in attendance. After the bus returned to Washington Heights very late at around 1:00 AM, this then-talmid was to take Rav Aharon home, a few blocks away. He exited the bus, but couldn’t find Rav Aharon. Bewildered, he wondered if Rav Aharon had left on his own. He went back into the bus to double-check, and there was Rav Aharon: on his hands and knees picking up the garbage the boys had left on the bus so the driver wouldn’t have to.
When Rav Aharon was still in YU (before he moved to E”Y), he once visited Rav Soloveitchik zt”l’s apartment in the Morgenstern dormitory. It was late at night, around 12:00, when suddenly everyone in the dorm was woken and urgently sent out by security – there was a bomb scare. My rebbe was there, and everyone including Rav Aharon was waiting on the street. Suddenly, a “kol korei” went around: Rav Aharon was going to give a shiur. Everyone was woken up, kicked out of the dorm, worried about what would be, but Rav Aharon’s first priority was to pass the time properly with a shiur.
Once, there was a three-day Purim in Eretz Yisrael. This talmid would be spending shabbos with a chevra, and for some reason was convinced by someone to invite Rav Aharon and his family for shabbos lunch. Rav Aharon said he had to check with his wife. As it turned out, that week was not a good time to come because he had a lot of guests. However, he offered to come and schmooze on shabbos afternoon. In shocked awe, the talmid accepted. Rav Aharon came and answered the questions of the chevra, which had somehow expanded from four or five guys to about 15.
Baruch Dayan Ha’emes. Yasher Koach to YWN for realizing that the loss of R’ Lichtenstein zt”l is a loss for the entire torah world.
ubiquitin, I wouldn’t describe myself as chassidish (not my community, attire, etc) only that my ancestors were and I have some of their minhagim. Now I’m thoroughly confused: first you speak against schlissel challah, then you say you do it too?
I have “shabbos secrets”; that’s where I was bringing the special challahs from. Yet you didn’t respond to my post…
Also, I know these minhagim didn’t come from moshe rabbeinu or anytime near then, and wasn’t implying that at all.
ubiquitin, I’m not worrying about the rabbit, I’m worrying about this minhag. I come from a chassidish background and have this minhag, and it would be terribly upsetting to learn if it really did stem from christian practices because of, in my opinion, its beauty and meaning (besides even the halachic aspect, which I am completely ignorant about). And many chassidish people have minhagim regarding challahs yearround – round (dunno why), bird shaped (alluding to passuk in yeshaya “like birds appearing form nowhere, so will hashem’s help arrive”), shofar, or hand shaped challah (dunno why) for rosh hashana, round challah with outstretched arm for hoshana rabba (to accept a “good kvittel”), crown or torah challah for simchas torah, menorah challah for chanukah, fish or hamantash shaped challah for purim, etc. These are events with more symbolism to put on a challah than the time between pesach and shavuos, which could be why the key challah is specifically at this time. In any event, just because there could be other times this minhag could apply doesn’t mean it isn’t appropriate here. I’m not trying to fool myself, but I am skeptical about believing that the minhag stems from a non-jewish source. If there is a problematic correlation, anyway, why didn’t previous rabbonim point it out and stop the practice?
The thing is, ubiquitin, that the minhag isn’t really so similar: the dough is merely pierced with a key, and another form of the minhag is just shaping the dough or some seeds like a key. Also, who’s to say that the christians didn’t get their idea from us? And not all similar things come from one another; for example, some old haggadas have a picture of a rabbit by yaknehaz, because “haz” means hare or rabbit in german or something like that (at least, that’s what I’ve been told.) But would you suggest that due to the proximity in time of pesach to lehavdil easter, it means that the rabbit was taken from the christians? Of course not, because we have a separate reason to explain the rabbit, or in this case, the key.
And. when you say that yidden make schlissel challas specifically this time of year: it’s true, but the time of year is the source of the minhag. At least one explanation is that the key is to remind us that we have the “key” to unlock great spiritual achievements in this great time leading up to matan torah.
shtark4ever: I for one have never heard of a metzitzah b’peh chol hamoed trip.
I have heard Rav Schachter say that there is absolutely no mekor for saying that eliyahu comes, and that to say that to children is l’havdil like christians telling their kids santa claus comes on christmas (Rav Schahcter’s own example).
We use a blowtorch. It’s pretty cool, actually.
Chag kasher v’sameach – a gut yom tov!
Joseph: exactly my point. People decide what they think is right and then do it. They don’t say “I don’t know if I’m right or wrong”. You just have to think hard about what you’re doing and whether you consider it proper. And what Sam said holds true: if you’re supposed to wait until you get accepted, the Rambam wouldn’t have been the Rambam at all, because he wasn’t accepted very much close to his lifetime.
mw13, two points.
1) “Being unfaithful” implies someone is actively committing adultery, “Being gay” means one has desires, but doesn’t necessarily mean they are acting upon them. Isn’t there a difference?
2) I am not trying to defend the event; I know that several roshei yeshiva whom I respect greatly spoke out about it, and I therefore suspect it wasn’t a good idea. However, again, they spoke out because they thought it was inappropriate to publicize these nisyonos, but not (and this was really my point) because it legitimized a toeiva lifestyle. That was not the intention.
Joseph: Did the chasidim say “I don’t know if I am right or wrong”? Or did they do what they thought was appropriate?
Joseph, I read the thread you posted. There’s a reason the mods closed it. I don’t know about the quote you provided from Mishnas Aharon, but even assuming it is being interpreted correctly, “MO” was prevalently used as an excuse for people who weren’t shomrei halacha (sadly, this still happens nowadays). Perhaps that is what Rav Aharon was referring to. Or maybe the quote is taken out of context/misinterpreted; I don’t know because I have never seen the sefer. Also, I have heard that some of Rav Kotler’s hespedim are purposefully omitted from Mishnas Rav Aharon, so I have my misgivings about it.
Please read my post. I have seen pictures of a) Rav Aharon with Rav Soloveitchik at a chinuch atzmai event which Rav Aharon invited Rav Soloveitchik to be the keynote speaker b) Rav Aharon’s son, Rav Schneur Kotler, walking with Rav Soloveitchik c) Rav Schneur, Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Rav Soloveitchik sitting together. I also have knowledge of d) Rav Moshe, Rav Feinstein, and Rav Soloveitchik “officiated” at a wedding (neither of them was the Mesader Kiddushin) e) The eyewitness story I mentioned above where Rav Soloveitchik’s respect for Rav Aharon was revealed and Rav Malkiel Kotler agreed that he should have been at Rav Soloveitchik’s funeral, but couldn’t f) Another eyewitness story where Rav Soloveitchik and Rav Aharon met discussing a halachic issue to which they radically opposed each other. Rav Aharon referred to Rav Soloveitchik as “Bostoner Rav” and Rav Soloveitchik called Rav Aharon “Kletsker Rosh Yeshiva” (note: and the chinuch atzmai event was not long AFTER this disagreement between Rav Aharon and Rav Soloveitchik). e) A talmid of Rav Soloveitchik who says that Rav Soloveitchik would call Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Aharon (and later, Rav Schneur) before a yom tov.
Do you have a source for your comment regarding Rav Schneur Kotler? If you want to throw around sourceless comments, I have also heard (not from an eyewitness) that Rav Schneur actually attended a shiur at YU for some time, so there.
There are also the posts of others, which I can not confirm, which say that many other gedolim respected Rav Soloveitchik while vehemently disagreeing with him. How? Because it’s a machlokes l’sheim shomayim.
I honestly don’t know what to say about Rav Elchonon’s letter. Maybe there was a different situation at YU than there is today, and kefirah was more easily accessible, or perhaps Rav Elchonon was misinformed about the situation (as we see with some gedolim today). I don’t know.
I just found a picture of Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Schneur Kotler zt”l sitting with Rav Soloveitchik zt”l.
mw13: in this context, you are using the words “tolerance and support” in a way not intended. Not tolerance or support of the aveirah CH”V; rather an understanding of the challenges these individuals face and an attempt to make them not feel less ostracized just because of their urges. Of course, active baalei toeivah are a completely different story, though still I don’t think we should judge them in the way of “He’s a bad person” because HaShem takes into account the nisayon. It’s absolutely terrible, but it’s not our place to judge. All we can do is try to have them be machzir b’tshuva, which might be achieved by trying to understand their challenges. We can also daven.
What you say about not having this kind of club at a chareidi yeshiva may be correct, but I have a feeling there aren’t any clubs there to begin with.
Regarding mixed events, I meant it was fine not if one merely “believed” it based on their own logic, but if they are following a legitimate halachic opinion. Keep in mind the often non-social nature of these events.
Regarding Rav Aharon and Rav Soloveitchik, I quote (1st result when you google “remembrances and reflections rav Aharon and the rav”):
“In 1954 or 1955, Rav Aharon reached out again to him and enlisted him in efforts to raise funds for Chinuch Atzmai.” That would indicate Rav Aharon wanted Rav Soloveitchik to be involved, and wasn’t forced into that situation.
“On a hot and humid night – I think it was a Tuesday – during the shiva for Rav Shneuer Kotler, I was at his home in Lakewood when at around 8 pm in the evening a car pulled up in front of the house. Several men got out and virtually carried Rav Soloveitchik who was quite frail by then into Rav Shneuer’s home. He sat next to Rav Malkiel Kotler and said the following: “I was a friend of your grandfather, I was a friend of your father and I will be your friend.” When Rav Soloveitchik died, I called Rav Malkiel Kotler and asked that he go to the funeral in Boston as an expression of hakoras hatov. He responded that I was right that he should go and then told me why he could not do so.”
Also, there’s another picture of Rav Soloveitchik and Rav Schneur Kotler walking together.
Last point: even if your eyewitnes is in fact correct that Rav Aharon “waged a war” against Rav Soloveitchik, that doesn’t have to mean anything other than their radically different halachic opinions on many issues, but not necessarily an indicator of mutual respect.
EretzHaK: Exactly what simcha613 said. It may have been a terrible idea, and I’m not endorsing or opposing it, but to say it actively said “Toeivah is ok” is not correct.