Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ CS
“how bout you tell me what the criteria are for establishing who are the tzadikim?”For starters here are some things to look for:
1) He is regarded as a Gadol b’Torah by the Gedolim already established as such. This means that they give serious weight to his opinion in their own Halachic rulings*.
2) His Torah is studied widely in Yeshivos and Kollelim
3) Community Rebbeim (of various communities) turn to this person with there own shailosAs a postscript to point 1, I would point out that things like addressing him with honorary titles, speaking his praises, attending his levaya, being a Rosh Yeshiva in his yeshiva, ect. doesn’t cut it.
I also want to stress that the subject was never “establishing who the Tzadikim are. The discussion was who is a Gadol B’Yisroel. Nevertheless we can be certain that such a person is a Tzadik and if someone would wish to claim otherwise the burden to bring compelling evidence would be on them to substantiate their claim.
One more thing. The above is useful for determining who is a Gadol. As far as determining who is “THE Gadol” even Shmuel HaNavi couldn’t do that without prophecy.
@ The Frumguy
“I would venture to say that your number 1 is quite universal. All frum Jews believe in that. It’s not necessarily a Lubavitch idea.”
The words are universal. The way the concept is developed was/is subject to great controversy.
This matter was discussed in the 1st of the 3 post series.
@ CS
“Lubavitch was the only Torah outreach movement. (Not anymore today bh)”
I have a different perspective on this point.
After the war most of the Gedolim in E”Y and America where focusing on rebuilding Yeshivos and Beis Yaacovs. This is very much in line with the priorities expressed by ריב”ז when he famously asked for Yavneh and it’s scholars. This was a two pronged project. (1) The establishment of major Torah centers and (2) the establishment of day schools and later kollelim in many “out of town” communities. Their efforts where blessed with tremendous success and today we are all the beneficiaries of their foresight and mesiras nefesh.
I think you would be hard pressed to demonstrate that the last Lubavitcher Rebbes shlichus initiative had a greater overall impact on Klal Yisroel.But I digress. I will be happy to address the other question shortly.
@ TT
“All I said was that anyone who doesn’t ACKNOWLEDGE who the Rebbe is will be sorry when it’s too late”
How do you propose someone outside Chabbad should come to do that?
@ CS
“Np by your reasoning, Eliyahu hanavi and har hacarmel would have never happened. We have a clear mitzva of listening to our chachamim which was applied then (source Rambam Sefer hamitzvos:) If someone is known to you to be a tzadik, then you follow everything he says, EVEN IF he tells you to temporarily stop doing a mitzvah.”
Not sure what you mean. My point was what criteria we use for determining who is a Tzadik. Nothing in my post contradicts that one follows the hora’ah shah of an established leader of the generation.
Next
Me: “The determination is not made based on the number of adherents. For example, the Karaites outnumbered traditional Yidden in many communities for a not insignificant period of time. The Rambam controversy was resolved in large part due to the Rambans involvement and R’ Yona’s retraction. It is true that ultimately there is historical closure but it often takes multiple generations to happen and is therefore not a useful criteria.”
You: Note that I wrote Torah true yidden. Your rebuttal about the karaim is like me looking to the reform or even other religions.
You missed my point. To use your example. Even though there are many reform jews the number doesn’t matter because they are not Torah True Yidden. Torah true Yidden follow the Torah as it is transmitted by the Chochmai HaDor. Now, WHO the chochmai hador are cannot be determined based on how many adherents they have. My example for this was the Karites who had lots of adherents for quite a while.
@ TT
“And note that you dont either disagree with anything I’ve said”
Do you not read English?
SH said: HaMayonois doesn’t mean making people Lubavitch, it means spreading the teachings of Chassidus to the general public, and that is not limited to Chassidus Chabad, other Chassidus also perfectly fits the bill, whether it be Noam Elimelech, Kedushas Levi or Sfas Emas, doesn’t make a difference.
CS said: And youre upset I call him Rav Shach? Guess what? If he was Joe Shmoe he wouldn’t warrant a mention of any type at the Rebbe’s farbrengen. It was precisely because he was a Torah leader that the Rebbe cared to strongly disagree with his words.
@ CS
Me: “Step 1 – None of those abilities are unique to a Tzadik (meaning that even non-tzadikim can have them)
Step 2 – Therefore having these abilities does not establish one who possesses them as a Tzadik.”You: “I am not sure about this – I have seen inside shaar hayichud vihoemuna where the Alter Rebbe states that Hashem increases emuna in this world by revealing His abilities through the tzadikim and the miracles they do. This would imply that only tzaddikim do miracles but I’m open to hearing other sources that show otherwise, if you have. In a similar vein, tzadik gozer vHKBH mekayem etc. Yes every Jew has the ability to rise above nature by adhering to Torah and mitzvos, but to promise and come through on miracles, and to decree them with the certainty that Hashem will fulfill seems to be something unique to tzaddikim.”
You know that it is not unique to Tzaddikim from the Parsha in Chumash re: Navi Sheker. The point is that EVEN a navi sheker can affect miracles and know hidden things. One does not have to intentionally seek to use the s”a, one can be misled (and himself not even realize it). Now, I’m NOT saying that the last Lubavitcher Rebbe was misled in this way. What I am saying is that since such abilities are not unique to Tzadikim they cannot be used as a criteria.
The above quote from the first Lubavitcher Rebbe does not contradict this at all. The fact that Hashem increases emuna in this world by revealing His abilities through the tzadikim and the miracles they do has nothing to do with what criteria ought to be used for accepting them as Tzadikim in the first place.
Next
Me: “What does exist is that numerous Gedolim who were contemporaries of the Lubavitcher Rebbe did hold him in very high esteem and regarded him as a Gadol B’Yisroel. This is a matter of record and is undisputable. You have cited many examples of this in previous threads. So, if your proposition would have been “The Lubavitcher Rebbe was a Gadol B’Yisroel” I would agree that the evidence you cited in previous threads is relevant to accepting THAT proposition. But that is not what you are proposing.”
You: “Ironically that’s what I was meaning to propose, I just used a more lubavitch term which truly means more what you say.”
Given you posts in this (and the last 2 threads) don’t believe that you are proposing to regard the Last Lubavitcher Rebbe as merely a peer of the other Gedolim of his generation. I think what you actually mean is this
1) The last Lubavitcher Rebbe was a Gadol B’Yisroel (as per the above criteria), and
2) Hashem increases emuna in this world by revealing His abilities through the tzadikim and the miracles they do
3) Given point 1 and 2 above (IN THAT ORDER) the miracles and accomplishments of the last Lubavitcher Rebbe where indicative of unique greatnessYou: My point was to explain why I hold of my Rebbe as I do…
It’s true that we shouldn’t determine what is right and wrong based on winning debates and skilled rhetoric. However, the standard one proposes to adapt should be objectively reliable and applied consistently. Having the matter be a personal decision doesn’t change that.
You: In fact that’s precisely how we’ve determined who’s who in the Torah world, who’s a tzadik etc throughout all the generations: generally by two categories:
1) how many Torah yidden accept their teachings and follow them long term (the Rambam was originally highly controversial but is now universally accepted and acclaimed as a tzadik)The determination is not made based on the number of adherents. For example, the Karaites outnumbered traditional Yidden in many communities for a not insignificant period of time. The Rambam controversy was resolved in large part due to the Rambans involvement and R’ Yona’s retraction. It is true that ultimately there is historical closure but it often takes multiple generations to happen and is therefore not a useful criteria.
You: 2) other tzaddikim who can see soul levels testifying about the status of said individual.
Since we regular people have no way of knowing who can actually do this I don’t see how this can be a criteria.
You: But it is done because it resonates with the neshama…
Everyone over the age of 15 has had experiences with things resonating with them and later realizing that they were objectively 100% wrong. So that criteria is not reliable either.
@ IITFT
Me: “numerous Gedolim who were contemporaries of the Lubavitcher Rebbe did hold him in very high esteem and regarded him as a Gadol B’Yisroel.”
You: “And also Delusional”
Why is that relevant? Rav Yaakov Emden held Rav Yonasan to be a follower of Sht”z. The Rambams seforim were burned in the streets by leading Rabbis as works of heresy. The fact that numerous Gedolim who were contemporaries of the Lubavitcher Rebbe held him in very high esteem and regarded him as a Gadol B’Yisroel is a matter of historical record.
@ Out Of Towner
I was thinking of the Chazal he was referring to. Thank you for providing the nimshal.
@ SH
“Goes to show that you’re not actually so familiar with Lubavitch:)
I never heard this person being nicknamed “Shofech Domim” but I got the inference right away”The fact that you got the inference right away reflects very poorly on the company you keep, far worse than TTs post in fact.
@ TT
That was pretty much neo christianity.
Nebech
Oh, and the 19th bracho was enacted against minim ie. the early christians
Go figure
Maybe the shofech damim he was referring to is a reference is to Titus, who is mentioned in the same gemara as being judged in gehenom ldorei dorot along with oto haish (if you look at the uncensored version)
Guess every group has there “special cases”. I was a bit surprised by CS’s rather mild response, Ahavas Yisroel is the least of his problems.
@ CS
You: “How do you know if someone is not normal?” Has reached a spiritual height that is out of your league but precisely because of that can help you in ways the “regular” Rabbanim etc can’t? When you see evidence that…they can sense and see things normal people can’t. They can read thoughts and see straight into ones soul. That’s what u mean by that proof.meaning its proof that the Rebbe is beyond our league.”
Me: “No, even if all of the above would be 100% verifiably true this would prove nothing at all. This is very important. In fact Rav Yaacov Hillel wrote “Faith and Folly” precisely to combat this misconception (among others). He wrote it at the behest of just about all the gedolim Sefardi, Litvish, Chassidish (see haskamos to his sefer).”
You: I don’t understand your point here. Please elaborate.
I’ll be glad to
In a nutshell. You are advancing the following proposition: The Lubavitcher Rebbe (subject) is Unique in his, and subsequent generation in that the following is true specifically and exclusively regarding him
a) He is the Nassi HaDor (predicate)
b) He is the Moshe Rebbeinu of the Generation (predicate)
c) He is a Tzadik as per the Tanya (predicate)you cite 2 categories of positive evidence as grounds for accepting the above proposition
1) The types of accomplishments you listed above.
a)Has reached a spiritual height that is out of your league but precisely because of that can help you in ways the “regular” Rabbanim etc can’t
b) Can sense and see things normal people can’t.
c) Can read thoughts and see straight into ones soul.2) That he was regarded as such by many contemporary Gedolim.
My point is that:
The 1st category of evidence is not evidence because even if was 100% verified and accepted as fact it would not be relevant to accepting your proposition. It’s not relevant because:
Step 1 – None of those abilities are unique to a Tzadik (meaning that even non-tzadikim can have them)
Step 2 – Therefore having these abilities does not establish one who possesses them as a Tzadik.The 2nd category of evidence would in fact be very relevant to accepting your proposition if it in fact existed. But it doesn’t. What does exist is that numerous Gedolim who were contemporaries of the Lubavitcher Rebbe did hold him in very high esteem and regarded him as a Gadol B’Yisroel. This is a matter of record and is undisputable. You have cited many examples of this in previous threads. So, if your proposition would have been “The Lubavitcher Rebbe was a Gadol B’Yisroel” I would agree that the evidence you cited in previous threads is relevant to accepting THAT proposition. But that is not what you are proposing.
@NCB
“Chabadshlucha seems to have created an account on an obviously predominantly Litvish forum for the express purposes of propagandizing Chabad and arguing against all other shittas.”
I’m not convinced of this. Why do we have to assume negative intent? Judging by her posts on other types of threads she seems sincere. She may also be expressing what she learned in order to hear the responses. Maybe she herself struggles with these issues and it is through such a forum that she can hear other points of view. She is who many of us would be if raised / educated in the way that she was.
“Do you think we would lauded for good intentions if any of us did this on a Chabad site?”
Maybe not, but we are not them.
“I just hope that people like Seckel hayashar are silently cringing”
I don’t think they’re cringing. I think they”ll say Shmuel b’doro…Yiftach b’doro…ect.
.
“OK I can see where you base your assumption non political as I have heavily emphasised the miracles and ruach hakodesh aspect to show that the Rebbe was not a regular person/ Rav (or tzadik as per non lubavitch perlance). But I was writing that assuming we shared a certain common knowledge or ground which I now see is lacking. So I’ll back up.”
Ok, I’m game let’s hear
“The Rebbe from his childhood on, was not typical…”
1) How do you know
2) How was he less typical then say the Gaon of Vilna
3) Even if he really was super duper not typical why is that relevant? Shabbsai Tzvi wasn’t typical either. In fact not only his knowledge of nigla was impressive but even more so his knowledge of nistar. The way he prayed was said to be especially impressive.“By the time he arrived in America in 1940, and the Frierdiker Rebbe sent chassidim to greet him at the port here was where he was holding, by the Frierdiker Rebbes description: “My son in law knows the entire shas with Tosfos, Rosh and Ran as well as all printed chassidishe seforim.”
This would be a accolade equally applicable to many of the Gedolim of pre war Europe until (and including) our current day.
“The Rebbes tremendous knowledge of Torah is evident by his Farbrengens, where he would sit for hours on end, quoting from kol HaTorah Jul by heart with no notes, a fact that greatly impressed Rabbi JB Soloveitchik zatzal.”
Same as above
“The chassidim got to know the Rebbe and see how he was careful with every detail in halacha as would of course be expected from such a tremendous gaon.”
Same as above
“Not just chassidim, people from all walks who met the Rebbe beforehand knew he was a very special young man and a tremendous gaon.”
Same as above
That all went without saying. Within lubavitch, it is impressive to be a tremendous gaon, but we’re not overly impressed if it’s something the average person could do, with the time and investment put into it. We have plenty of very learned people within lubavitch, Geonim (by today’s standard for sure) etc, not like the Rebbe of course, that’s highly unusual”
Still waiting for evidence of the highly unusual part
“We have tens of people like this within lubavitch. But we are not overly impressed with them, although we respect them greatly, because we know they are still regular people like me and you, just much farther along avoda wise”
I don’t agree. I think that If someone is a Talmid Chochom and “farther along avoda wise” that is the very reason to be impressed. The greater they are in Torah and the “farther they are in Avodah” the more impressive they are.
“And this is the respect I see paid by other chassidim and litvaks to their own Roshei Yeshivos Rabbanim Rebbe’s etc for the most part.”
In other words all the Gedolim are in the same category as the tens of Talmidei Chachamim in Lubavich who “we respect but are not overly impressed with”. Got it
“How do you know if someone is not normal?”
I don’t know if we can drill it down precisely. Those darn shrinks keep changing the definition. The DSM-5 standard has drawn some heavy criticism. But if we avoid the grey areas and stay within commonly accepted usage of the concept we should be ok. Let’s see how it goes 🙂
“Has reached a spiritual height that is out of your league but precisely because of that can help you in ways the “regular” Rabbanim etc can’t? When you see evidence that…they can sense and see things normal people can’t. They can read thoughts and see straight into ones soul. That’s what u mean by that proof.meaning its proof that the Rebbe is beyond our league.”
No, even if all of the above would be 100% verifiably true this would prove nothing at all. This is very important. In fact Rav Yaacov Hillel wrote “Faith and Folly” precisely to combat this misconception (among others). He wrote it at the behest of just about all the gedolim Sefardi, Litvish, Chassidish (see haskamos to his sefer).
“If I would tell you “Anochi omed bein Hashem uveineichem” and “I will provide all your Gashmius needs if you listen to My commands,” you would think I’m a narcissistic lunatic or apikorus. However knowing who Moshe Rabbeinu was, no one of course describes him that way. In fact, he wasn’t even boasting about himself, as the Torah testifies that he was the humblest of all time..with Moshe, it was simply Shechina midaberes mitoch grono shel Moshe, and the I and Me were in fact referring to Hashem and not Moshe as an individual.”
Right, we “know who Moshe Rabbeinu was” in this regard because the entire nation stood on Har Sinai and heard Hashem speak to Moshe Rabbeinu. That was a direct national experience, quite possibly the strongest category of evidence there is.
“Get my point?”
Unfortunately, I do.
“Basically, when your talking of someone acknowledged by many many Torah leaders, Rabbanim etc. as a Nassi Byisrael or similar terms”
No such thing. We have addressed that claim in 2 previous threads, no reason to rehash it here.
CS, I want to reiterate that nothing in my post is meant as an attack on you personally. I continue to have the utmost respect for you and appreciate your sincere effort in clarifying your position.
It comes down to this:
Once a person has chosen to believe that a certain person is a Tzadik who has no Yetzer HaRah and any of his statements are a direct expression of Divine Will no further discussion (on any matter pertaining to the Tzadik or his teachings) is possible. The strength of such a belief is precisely in the fact that no positive evidence is presented for it and therefore there is nothing to refute. Instead the focus is on wonderous and miraculous stories about the Tzadik. Combine with a personal investment of time and resources and strong social proof and you have the makings of very strong faith which becomes self reinforcing. Make no mistake about it, this formula works.
“if the community generally doesn’t do something, but it is permitted al pi halacha, that won’t stop me from doing it privately.”
You seem to be under the impression that an individual is not halachically bound by community custom and can privately disregard it if he / she sees fit. This is generally false. It is true in the the following scenarios:
1) When a custom varies from community to community AND the individual is a visitor who is privately acting in accordance with the custom of their home community (or a talmid keeping the practice of his rebbe).
2) When a custom is a boorish error
Neither of the above apply to our case since there are no communities where women had a custom to wear tzitzis and no Rabbonim who instructed that they ought to adopt such a practice. In fact the opposite is true, Rabbonim have objected to them doing so.
Also, I am aware that the Rema holds that if a woman puts on tzitzis she would make a bracha. This is in line with The Rema’s psak (and Ashkenazik custom) that women make a bracha on time bound mitzvot as opposed to the Shulchan Aruch’s psak that they do not. This has no bearing on the fact that women did not in practice wear tzitzis, a practice which the Rema considered a show of arrogance. You should also be aware that the Levush holds (based on Targum Yerushami) that a woman who wears tzitsis transgresses the Torah prohibition of wearing male garments.
“I am pretty much done with this topic, so if you rebut anything here, I will let you have the last word.”
Ok, will do
“There are plenty of circumstances under which women wearing tsitsis is permitted. I am not talking about Women of the Wall.”
What would those circumstances be exactly??
“I doubt R Moshe used the exact verbiage you presented. He may have been referring to Women of the Wall types who put on a rebellious show.”
Rebellion means – the act or process of resisting authority, control, or convention. Wearing tzitzis by women certainly runs contrary to past and present convention and halachic authority. Are you aware of of any top tier poskim who sanctioned this practice? Any community where this practice was the accepted custom?
“He didn’t know of all the women in the world who wear tsitsis in halachically acceptable ways with hearts consumed with a isas hashem.”
All the heartfelt sincerity in the world wouldn’t make this practice acceptable
“My mission here is not to appear smart or to argue. I just would like people to err on the side of kaf z’chus”
Judging lkaf zchus means acknowledging that we are not privy to another person’s subjective experiences and therefore not committing the error of attributing negative motive and / or intent to their actions. So in our case that would mean assuming that a woman who is wearing tzitzis is most likely a sincere albeit misguided individual (as opposed to a willful rebel). It certainly does not include turning and unacceptable practice into an acceptable one.
“Who can read these girls, and ladies’ minds, for it is their kavonos that are the deteminant.”
Nope. Doing the wrong thing with pure intentions is still wrong. Just like if someone would want to introduce organ music on Shabbos in Shuls even with the purest of intentions it would be wrong.
But when night becomes day and bassar chazir becomes kosher then all bets are off, עין לא ראה אלוקים זולתך
@ It Is Time For Truth
“For one who however promotes them and and attempts to influence in public (e.g a parade)
there never Can be categorized as such”Interesting. What does this have to do with whether one is considered a tinok sh’nishba or not?
I think that it’s obvious that:
gun control laws that would ban small arms would not keep these weapons out of the hands of criminals because:
1) It is the tool of their trade
2) Laws don’t deter criminals, that IS why they are criminalsSuch ban(s) would do a GREAT job of keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens thereby increasing the criminals advantage.
On the other hand, obviously some form of gun control is necessary (can’t have the criminally insane walking into the corner 7/11 and buying an AK-47 with a slurpee).
As usual the devil is in the details
1 and Joseph are obviously not aware that the Hazon Ish has already weighed in on this matter and disagreed with them. Or maybe they disagree with the Hazon Ish. So which one is it guys?
What do you expect at a time when chiropractors, applied kinesiologists, energy healers, ect.., are viewed by large segments of the tzibur as legitimate members of the medical community.
Here is the recipe:1) Good use of the tools of influence (marketing / PR)
2) A prevailing “anti-establishment” bias (overall, not specific to our community)Mix the above and serve
Joseph,
Would you ask a strong able bodied person how content he would be if he found himself sickly and weak for the foreseeable future? How about a sighted person, how content he would be if he found himself losing his sight? Sure, people born that way become accustomed to their lot (as do most people as we age) but a sudden loss of one’s abilities is traumatic.
The money a person is blessed with is their strength how one uses it and how it affects ones midos is a nisayon. Like the Masilas Yesharim says, everything in this world is a nisayon, weath on one hand and poverty on the other. So you can also turn the question on it’s head and ask how content you would be if you found yourself tomorrow in the top 1%.
Also, it has been my observation that wealth does not seem to be a prerequisite for preoccupation with money and social status.
@ square root of 2
“An underlying difficulty I have is that if the mesillas yesharim is correct, then why is the world so prone to bad and not good? If the entire point is to get sechar, why is it that “noach lo leadam shelo nivra”–why did Hashem not make it that it would be easier to get gan eden than gehenom?”
This is an excellent question. So excellent in fact that the RAMCHAL made it the primary subject of a whole sefer which he wrote called Daat Tvunos.
“Why is it that those who get saved from gehenom are one in many, and those that make it to gan eden are the minority”
As someone already pointed out above getting saved from gehenom is one thing making it to Olam Haba is another.
@ anonymous jew
“our alphabet uses Aramaic letters”
False. There is no evidence that Ksav Ashuri was used by gentiles in Aram (or anywhere else). The Gemara gives a different reason for the name. So this statement is not supported by archeological or Talmudic evidence.
“They were adopted during Galus Bavel.”
What you mean to say is adopted by Ezrah at the end of Galus Bavel
There is a 3 way disagreement among the Tannaim regarding Ksav Ashuri. The above statement may be true according to R’ Yossi, however
1) The Geonim who appear to understand R’ Yossi that way write that the Halacha is not like him
2) The Ritva and Ridbaz write that even R Yossi agrees that Ksav Ashuri goes back to the time of Matan TorahCentral to the whole discussion is a Yerushalmi that states the the Ayin in the Luchos was supported miraculously. The Bavli says it was the Samach and the Ritva disregards this Yerushalmi. The Ridbaz distinguished between the 1st and 2nd Luchos. The Yaevitz learns that even the Yerushalmi is using the familiar Ksav as a mashal to explain the nes and isn’t meant historically.
Prior to that, we used Paleo-Hebrew, which is shaped totally different.
This is TBI (true but irrelevant). We used Yiddish in Europe, and all the seforim where written in Lashon Kadosh
“The Samaritans, who copied every we did, still write their ( tref ) sifrai torah in Paleo-hebrew which leads me to believe we did too before the first churban.”
It might be that during the 1st Beis HaMikdash writing Sifrai Torah in Ksav Ivri (Paleo Hebrew) was permitted. This has no bearing on the antiquity of Ksav Ashuri.
“Paleo-hebrew was still in use 2000 years ago as it appears on coins minted by Bar Cochba…”
Once again, TBI
The Masilat Yesharim is saying that the very purpose for which man was created is pleasure and the place for experiencing pleasure in the most perfect way is in olam haba. This is not just “baby steps”, according to RAMCHAL it is the very tachlis of the whole project. Please do not try to read Chabbad Chassidus into RAMCHAL.
Another thing to consider.
Even relationships with people our feelings for them are built on what they do for us and what we do for them. Our sensory experience of people (how they look, sound, smell) is secondary to this.
I saw above the Rabbi Kaplan’s book(s) on meditation were recommended. He has 3 books on the subject. If you do decide to pursue his books you would be well advised to FIRST read “Faith and Folly” by Rabbi Yaacov Hillel. Rabbi Yaacov Hillel’s book (originally in Hebrew) was written at the behest of Gedolai Yisroel (Chassidic, Litvish, and Sefardi) and bears their approbations.
See Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb’s wonderful audio shiur on this very topic. It’s called “Speaking About G-D” and is in english. It’s available free on simpletoremember.com
(If the direct link is disallowed I’m writing out the website name: simpletoremember dot com)
Once on the site click on Audio/Video Shiurim (top of page), then click on Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb (right of page).
“The negative side must be directed to the kelipos”
Yes, clearly this is accessible to all.
@ Avi K
“See Pitchei Teshuva YD 116:10 that there is an opinion that someone who does not accept an observant Jew’s word that his food is kosher is a heretic as he opposes Chazal, who said that a single witness is believed regarding prohibitions. As for his kashrut not being up to “your standard”, what about one’s standard in ben adam l’chaveiro, avoiding mechzi k’yuheira, etc.”What exactly is it about upholding your community’s or family’s custom in Kashrus would make you heretical, machzi k’yuhara, and lacking love of another Jew?
@ Avram in MD
“Hold your heretic hurling horses there. DovidBT and knaidlach were very clearly talking about non-observant Jews”And if they where talking about Observant Jews would you agree with Ai K’s statement?
I never learned Yiddish. Recently I discovered the HaRav Chaim Kanievsky has a Daf shiur on the Hebrew Kol HaLashon site, unfortunately I could not understand it. I Had the same problem understanding HaRav Malkiel Kotler at the internet assifa a few years ago.
And another thing. A yerushalmi avreich told me years ago while learning the Mishna Brura that while the Chofetz Chaim wrote in Hebrew he thought in Yiddish and someone who is not fluent in that language will miss the nuances of his intent.
Not sure why “chassidish” is equated with “move to the right” It’s certainly a great (profitable) perception for the haimish food businesses but it is false. That is unless ones idea of “to the right” is limited to wearing a strimel and bekisheh.
@ IITFT
“Kiruv is for Tinokos She’nishba…”This is the second time you said this in this post. Just stop. This is just plain wrong. Have a look at the work being done today by kiruv professionals (and addiction recovery professionals such as Amudim) . A huge amount of work is being done (and more needs to be done) reaching out to people who come from frum backgrounds. You, who are zealously protesting the perversion of the Torah, what do you think you are doing? Do you have any Halachic basis for your assertion? I know that you do not.
That said, I do want to be clear that nothing in this post should be construed as support for an Orthodox Rabbi taking a position in a LGBT temple. Especially given the current cultural climate, I don’t know how anyone can possibly support such a position. A quick google search brought me to (Rabbi) Mike Moskowitz’s website which says:
“Rabbi Moskowitz explored academic Talmud at Yale and at Jewish Theological Seminary, where he is currently completing a Doctorate in Hebrew Literature”
I am unaware of any Orthodox Rabbi who is affiliated with JTS
@ DY
“I think performing a civil ceremony falls into category 3”
How? When a person is working on Sh’vis they are doing a prohibition. What prohibition is occuring during the preparation and execution of civil legal documents?
@ DY
“It’s certainly no better than wishing success to someone plowing during Sh’viis.”
I’m not so sure
1) The Mishna’ot in the 5th Perek of Shv’is permit selling / lending farming implements to people who are choshud al Sh’viis provided that there is some other possible use for the tool. Those farming implements are obviously used for farming most of the time, still Chazal where lenient mpnai darchai Shalom. Only those tools which have no uses other then farming are prohibited to sell / lend. There are benefits to being civilly married even if the couple is celibate.
2) Even those farming implements that where permitted to sell / lend mpnai darchai shalom did enable working the land. Given the current societal standards (lack of standards) it’s doubtful that a civil marriage enables anything.
3) Wishing someone success at the time that they are actively engaged in a prohibited behavior is another matter altogether.
Your posts are generally very thought out, I assume you considered the above and disagree. I would be interested to know why.
Even by the Torah prohibition of לפני עיור (and certainly by מסייע) there is considerable discussion in the contemporary halachic works when dealing with not yet religious person if failing to provide a service will cause animosity and the issur is one which they are not aware of.
Don’t you guys think CTL would have asked his Rav a Shaila about something like this?
@ NCB
““1) Negative stereotypes about the groups”
You mean like saying Chassidim spend too much on weddings and don’t give tzedakah?Yep. That’s a great example. Couldn’t agree with you more.
“3) When assimilation is only regarded as such when it cuts to the left”
What does this even mean? Religious left or political left?”Both actually. Assimilation means adapting non-jewish ideas / culture. Somehow assimilation to the right is given a pass.
“I don’t even know that CTL denies that his views might mesh well with parts of the MO”
He denied it loudly and clearly.
“he admitted that he poskened like Rabbi JB Soloveitchik, so how could he not?”
Um, as I pointed out above HaRav Meiselman considers himself a talmid or RJBS. I don’t know anyone (in their right mind) who considers HaRav Meiselman MO.
@ Midwest2
“the whole business of labeling other Jews with denigrating labels – MO, Chassidish, Litvish – or any label at all, is revolting”
For the most part the above labels are not denigrating. People tend to self identify with certain kahilot. What is revolting is
1) Negative stereotypes about the groups
2) Historical revisionism
3) When assimilation is only regarded as such when it cuts to the left
4) When a 9TH GENERATION frum Yid self identifies as a classic litvak and is being told by people who don’t know him personally that he is MO. And then not a single shred of evidence is provided to substantiate their statements save for some obscure references to “other posts”.@ Joseph
“NP, it is you (not I) who is repeating yourself. I’ve already refuted all your repetitive points.”Ok, if you say so.
You do realize that there are many MANY yidden who are talmidim of Ponovich, Brisk, and Mir who are currently very successful businessmen and professionals. They learn, work, and offer (substantial) support for their Yeshivos as well as their local community institutions. Not to mention the many small frum businesses and tradesmen in their communities.
@ It’s Time For Truth
The Classic Litvak has/had a disinterest for money, as well an aversion for ostentatious goods.I’m sure we can all agree that the raison d’etre of a Yid is coming closer to Hashem through Torah and Mitzvos. What does that have to do with a disinterest in money? We do pray for parnassa 3 times a day. Ostentatious goods is relative to your peer group.
@ Joseph
“NP, I explained above the answer to your questions.”
Why are you repeating yourself? Your “explanation” was not overlooked or misunderstood. It was rejected.
“The application of the term Classic Litvak, as defined here, is a historical revisionism.”
No it isn’t (see CTL’s post on page 1). You are the one doing the revising.
True Classic Litvaks are Rav Moshe Shternbuch, the Brisker Rov, Rav Elchonon Wasserman, the Chofetz Chaim…”
The above statement in TBU (True But Useless). Yes they are classic Litvaks and there where / are others as well (see my post on page 1).
”
@ It is Time for Truth
“The Classic Litvak has/had a disinterest for money, as well an aversion for ostentatious goods”
Having money is not the same as having an interest in money. One does not take an oath of poverty in our religion. Growing up / living in poverty is a nisayon it is not a prerequisite. I know some low income people who are very interested in money. They are always talking about “the waste” when wealthier people have nice cars, clothing, houses, weddings, etc. If they had the resources they would most certainly conduct themselves like the prototypical nouveau riche. They just don’t have the opportunity. One who is blessed with wealth has their nisyonos, some do better then others. This has nothing to do with being a “classic litvak”. Have you taken a ride through the nicer parts of Lakewood lately?
@ Is it time for truth
I’m not following. First you respond that Rabbi Moshe Meiselman and Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb are “1000% not” MO them you say “if they are anything they’re either anti MO or very Far right wing MO”
Is that contradiction or just legal speak?
Also,
I wasn’t setting up a strawman or putting phrases in peoples mouths. Just trying to figure out why CTL was labeled MO when he identified himself as a classic litvak. Based on his posts
1) Hw has an advanced secular education (law)
2) He has a profession (attorney)
3) He is financially successful
4) He is politically active
5) He likes nice cars (Jaguar) and quality furniture (based on a previous post)So, let’s turn this into a multiple choice question. Based on the above why would someone be compelled to label him MO?
take your time…
The answer is #1.
No one thinks having money posuls you from classic litvishkeit. Political activism doesn’t either (think Agudah in America and Degel is EY). So cross off 3&4.
I know that #5 is a tempting contender but it’s the wrong answer. Here is why. To give that answer you would have to compare the vehicle and furniture choices of successful politically active attorneys in his locale amd determine that the possession of such items is not the norm.
Surely having a job (#2) doesn’t disqualify CTL from being a classic litvak.
He doesn’t claim to be a famous Rosh Yeshiva who make large weddings for his grandkids so that can’t be the problem.
That leaves #1, having a secular education. So that’s what I addressed.
So let me see if I follow. Anyone with a secular education is MO. Is that the criteria?
There was a historic conversation between the Or Semaich and the Chofetz Chaim where the CC traveled to speak to the OS regarding the government edict that Yeshivas would be forced to include Russian in their curriculum. The OS responded “Nu, what’s so terrible if bachurim learn to speak russian?” The meeting ended at an impasse. Was the Or Semaich MO?
Rabbi Moshe Meiselman and Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb both have PHDs. Are they MO?
@ Time Time For Truth
“Name one classic Litvak who had positive views of the Upheavals and ‘liberation’ of the ’60s”Why? Who expressed a positive view of the upheavals and liberation of the ’60s? Surely you don’t think that stating the HISTORICAL FACTS that: 1) there was widespread discrimination, 2) the Civil Right Act helped = a positive view of 60s era upheavals and liberation.
“an unfortunate of families like yours is after striving and treading water for long they fall into an inertia”
This is certainly not the impression I get from reading CTLs posts. What gives you the impression that they are treading water?
@ NCB
“Non-Political: It’s not circular logic It’s years of being on the CR, and talking to people outside and observing how consistantly petty the MO is when talking about those more frum than them. It’s to the point of being boringly predictable.I certainly can’t claim the coveted credential of years being on the coffee room. I can say that having likewise gone outside and even occasionally talked to people my experience differs from yours.
In this very post CT Lawyer wrote that he “may be a classic Litvak” only to be told that his world view would give classic Litvaks indigestion. Where does that rate on the pettiness scale?
Also, I wasn’t really trying to say that the logic was circular. There was no logic of any sort, It was just a blanket attack on a whole segment of Klal Yisroel. And given what some people seem to regard as MO (per attack on CT Lawyer above) it may be a pretty large segment.
@NCB
” This thread is making the entire Litvishe velt look like a petty, jealous joke”Why are you assuming that the attacks are coming from people associated with the Litvishe velt and not disgruntled chassidim?
@ Joseph
“It is generally the modern crowd that comes up with threads and pathetic arguments like this; not the Litvaks (whose Torah world is very close to and even integrated with the Chasidim”I get it
1. ONLY the modern crowd EVER makes pathetic arguments
2. litvaks are close to and integrated with chassidus, they are NOT “the modern crowd” and are therefore incapable of making pathetic arguments
3. this is a pathetic argument so it must be made by the modern crowdThe above is truly the holy grail of logic and reasoning
Nebach
@ SCS
“as the Re’ma states that you need to be over 40 and full of Shas and Halacha. Look it up.”You do know that The ARI and the RAMCHAL where both nifter before the age of 40 right?
Also, isn’t the over 40 criteria from the SHACH?
Also, why is the Gorel HaGRA being given the same criteria as the starting age for learning Kabala?
I will just point out that given the descriptions we have of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s wealth and lifestyle you would say the same about him. Forget grandchildren, his stable hand was richer then Shivur Malka (the king of Bavel in the time of Rav and Shmuel).