- This topic has 156 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
@sechel83,
Litfaks these days are more connected to a rebbe than chasdim. Dad Torah and having a rebbe is a crucial part of litfaks today . It wasn’t that way 100 years ago.The chumros that litfaks do today are not anymore just based on fear or sachar rather it’s now because of a deeper inner love of Hashem.
And again litfaks are centered today on being connected with a rebbe or as they call a rosh yeshiva. And so again the litfaks are more chasidish than chasdim
Many Litvaks learn chassidus, too. Some openly, some secretly. I know a “closet Breslover” in a kollel, for example. Others can be found in Uman.
The Litvishe rabbonim I know love to give over chassidishe torah in Shabbos morning drashos.
This isn’t anything new. Reb Shraga Feivel (a big rav before WWII, founder of Torah uMesorah) was yeshivish. Yet he studied the Tanya, Likutei Moharan, etc. And Rav Hirsch to boot. He learned everything and taught it to his students too.
Pick up an unfamiliar sefer now and then and see if it speaks to you. You may realize you had a void that needs filling after all.
From the first Mishnah in brachos read simply, one would think that when he reads krias Shima by maariv he fullfils the mitzvah. Rashi comes and says that “we” who daven early are not fulfilling the mitzvah rather we are yotze with krias shma sheal hamita. So why do we read shma by maariv, he brings a yerushalmi that explains – to stand up to davening – shmoneh esre – from divrai Torah. Tosfos has many questions on Rashi and explains different.
Point being is that everyone realizes that you can’t conclude a halacha from learning a Mishnah simply.
How much more so with chassidus which is penimius hatorah,
(Those who think chassidus is just a dress code or a “matzav” to feel a part of, Does it make sense to say the baal hatanya or kedushas Levi or the hundreds of the other chavraya kadisha went to the mazritcher magid to learn a dress code??!!)@sechel83, So it sounds like we agree that litfaks today in many ways are chasdish.
I also think your defintion of chasidish is very narrow based (Mostly the chabad based) Your defintion that its about the mindset , “penemis Hatorah” etc. and that its almost an intellectual mindset approach is too narrow. Being chasdish is also about a feel for judaism vs doing this robotically because it says in the torah. That means a few things. Firtsly, doing a mitzvah with a fire and happyiness. Whether its davening or lighting a menora or shaking luluav. We don’t just light a m enora and go back to the germara. We dance and farbriegan plus learn a little by the menora. Thats not so much an intellectual aspect rather its just a physcal connection where you ” enjoy” the mitzva because its part of our life and isn’t just a book a of codes. Its also about kedusha and being extra tznuis, because its not just a book of codes rather its about living for something higher we strive to observe more than just the halcha. The same is about kashrus. Pure halacha perhaps allows cholov stam. But we can do better and be more stringent. Many chasdim only ate meat from their shochet or ruv. Again they live for a higher being and its a way of life vs just a book of rules lehavdil. All this, is to say its more than just an intllectual exercise. Perhaps the earlier seforim and chabad focus on that but once you get to rebas of 150 years ago like the Tsanzer ruv or Belza it;s focus isn’t about the deep thinking rather its more about a way of life that’s more inetrnalized.
yytz: A majority of today’s so-called “Litvaks” are of Chasidic heritage.
Including Reb Shraga Feivel. (Although he preferred to be called “Mr. Mendelovich”.)
Chaim, you’re incorrect. Litvaks always had a connection with a Rebbe, we just have a different definition of what a Rebbe is.
Litvaks look at a Rebbe as the person who teaches you Torah – usually the person’s primary teacher is referred to as his Rebbe. Chassidim look at the Rebbe with the chassidish definition – referred to as “The Tzaddik” in the teaching of the Besht. A person may have never actually met the Rebbe in his life, but since he’s a part of the chassidus, he will still claim him as his Rebbe.
In my case, as people here may have noted, I learned in Darchei Torah, and look at R’ Bender shlita as my Rebbe. There is one other Rebbe in Darchei who I am very close with, and also look at as a primary Rebbe, but I can honestly say that I am the person I am today because of R’ Bender. I don’t believe that he was born without a yetzer hara, or that he needs to descend into the levels of tumah in order to elevate his students (the Besht taught those things about the Tzaddik).The Steipler considered himself a chosid [did not eat gerbroks wore a gartel etc.]
DaMoshe: Did any set of your grandparents ever live in Lita?
Damoshe has a good point. There is a mitzvah to connect to talmidai chachimim. The rambam writes to eat and drink with them do business with them marry into their family etc. The reason is to learn from their ways.
Chassidus takes this further that thru connecting to a talmidai chacham (which chassidus explains he is a talmid – student – of chacha diatzilus, – which there shines אא”ס) the student – chassid can receive from the tzadik his lofty spiritual levels יחודא עילאה. Which a neshama of בי”ע can not reach on their own. See Torah or parshas yisro, Tanya perek 2, perek 35, היכל הבעל שם טוב vol ?@DaMoshe
If you study history you will see that the idea of Das torah and that you must follow your rebbe without disputing him (like chasdim) is a new thing. In the big yeshivas a rebbe taught them torah but they were not mevtal to the rebbe. Research what it was like in Telz, Slabodka, Volozhin etc. Even in the Mir. The litfisha view of a rebbe was limited to just being someone who you learned torah by and not that you were mevatl to him. The whole das torah movement started by R Chaim Ozer but even then it wasn’t like today. Most were independent thinkers. (The exception was the close talmidum of R Chaim maybe). Mnay old rosh yeshivas even held that they need to keep distance and not get too warm with talmidim. If you never study history this will be hard to believe. the fact that you feel attached to R Bender shlita is because litfisha today aren’t what they used to be. its a great thing but its not old school litfaks. Re your point about chasdim not even meeting a rebbe yet follwoing his every word, I don’t see why The tzadfik R chaim Kaneivsky zl was so different. Yes I was zocheh once or twice to get a bracha vahatzlacha from him but I really never saw him yet follow his every word like a reba. R chaim was part of the “litfisha” chasdis” and my reba.the question is “what came first” – a Litvak or a Chossid. You can obviously say that Chasidim started a revolution so that they can came later. But you can’t easily dismiss the argument that Litvak attitude was emphasized as a response to Chasidut and may not be same now as then.
Still, I quoted before a gemora about an amorah who silently refuses a shidduch with his Rebbe’s (Tanna!) daughter that probably means that at least THAT amorah was a Litvak.
I heard that R Zelig Epstein was asked how did Mir Yeshiva decided to travel through USSR in apparent violation of Daas Torah of R Ozer who apparently advised them not to go. He answered – it was not a problem because this was before the Daas Torah…
Given that Mir students were getting Sugihara visas up to September 1940, and R Ozer was niftar in August 1940, it seems that DT was not yet operational during R Ozer’s lifetime. Maybe, out of modesty, the Rav authorized DT to start after his own petirah so that people would not think that he is doing it for his own aggrandizement?!
Sechel: the idea that a person can’t get to higher levels on their own without a Rebbe lifting them up in preposterous. It’s one of the main issues I have with chassidus.
Chaim, I agree that the whole idea of Daas Torah is a recent innovation. R’ Bender once bemoaned to me that people were asking their Rabbeim about things that had nothing to do with their Rebbe, and they should have been consulting experts in the field instead. As he said to me, “some people won’t blow their nose without asking their Rebbe first!”
As for R’ Chaim, people should not have been mevatel to him, at least not in every issue.
I only once went to a Rebbe for a bracha, because my Rebbe told me to go see him, and it would benefit me. I visited a different Rebbe once, only because he knew my wife’s family, and my wife asked me to go see him and mention the connection (this was while he was visiting my community once). While I was seeing him, he asked me how many children we have, and I told him 2. He asked me if we considered having more, as it would be a big bracha. I explained that we needed fertility treatments for the 2, and I’d be thrilled to have more. He then offered a bracha to me.Reb Shraga Feivel was a chossid through and through. His father was also a chossid. There was no such thing as Yeshivish.
What came first? The Rema & Minhag ashkenaz. Litfaks started slighlty after chasdim under the GRA (unless you say that the Besht wasn’t really the same as the current chsdisha movement which started more under he Magid)
@damoshe:
“Sechel: the idea that a person can’t get to higher levels on their own without a Rebbe lifting them up in preposterous. It’s one of the main issues I have with chassidus.”
1) this idea is mentioned in Tanya perek 14 by the end, so just putting it clean that’s it’s an old idea.
2) I see here and before too, that you make fun of teachings of the baal hatanya or the baal shem tov, you really think you have better comments sences than them?!
If you would say you follow the opinion of I.e. nefesh hachaim that one should not focus as much as chassidim on kavana, hachanos, or not contemplating yichuda ilaah rather only yichuda tataa (as he writes in שער ב), ok, I understand you,
But how can you – by yourself – decide that teachings of the baal shem tov or the baal hatanya (who I’m sure you know were baki in kol hatorah kula – niglah, and nistar) is preposterous?!?
I think that’s called an apikores!!Following a rebbe and not challenging.
There are different types of following
1) pshat in Torah, one is encouraged to ask questions and not accept pshat if he doesn’t understand or argues but one needs to realize that (by a real rebbe and talmid) his rebbe knows much more than him (if not find a new rebbe). So i.e. if my rebbe – who is baki is shas and rishonim – says a pshat in gemarah, if I don’t understand it I shouldn’t make fun of his pshat just because In my limited knowledge it doesn’t Make sences, i should ask the rebbe my questions and he will explain to me – that’s the way of learning (and in lubavitch the rebbe encouraged people to ask questions on the sichos – they were printed in הערות וביאורים, and the rebbe would discuss the questions the next farbrengen. And many of the footnotes in likutai sichos come from questions the chassidim asked and the rebbe answered.)
2) following advice in physical matters, there is a letter in Tanya about this, and different mesorahs about it.@ sechel83
Again litfaks believe in a rebbe too. And exactly how you describe Chabad. I will say though that just because someone is crowned Reba because his father was doesn’t make him Reba. The idea that it’s an inheritance doesn’t stem for chasdim. Historically it went to the most esteemed student and not yerusha. Some of the rebas today are clowns and certainally not the most ehrlicha chasdim. P.S. sadly in litfish a circles it starting to become this way too. Although if you totally can’t strong together a shtickel Torah on the Gemara and say a shuir it’s still impossible to be a rosh yeshiva .sechel: arguing with someone who lived just a few hundred years ago, especially when you have someone like the Gra who actually called their teachings apikorsis, is not being an apikores. The idea of the Tzaddik being born without a yetzer hara and incapable of sinning is apikorses, because it says that there is no person who lives without sinning. We all have bechirah, even the Lubavitcher Rebbe had bechirah, and even he sinned at times.
Chaim,
my question is whether Litvaks are a reaction to Chassidus or their reaction to Chassidus was based on their previous positions. Other groups had somewhat different reactions to Chassidus, so it is more than just minhag ashkenaz. And please fix your keyboard, not sure why you are calling Litvaks Litfaks, there is no Litfa country.DaMoshe: Are saying that Rabbi Bender sins at times?
@Damoshe I didn’t write that arguing is apikores, I wrote that saying a talmid chachams teachings are preposterous is apikores. (It’s a clear gemarah, if you can’t find it, then for sure you have no business making fun of teachings of a talmid chachams)
The gra may have argued with CERTAIN teachings, that doesn’t give you the right to make fun of things they say when you have no proof.
Can you bring exactly what the gra called apikores?
You know they agree at least on one thing – zmanim, who said he argued on עיבור נשמות – כתבי ארי
You know the gemarah says 4 died בעטיו של נחש – they had no sin. Is that also apikores?In Tanya אגרת הקודש אגרת כז-כח it also talked about receiving אמונה אהבה ויראה thru the tzadik, thru being connected to him. It’s a zohar
Sechel, who made fun? All I said is that a belief is preposterous. Quoting Tanya to back up a chassidic belief doesn’t make sense. Get a proof from before the Besht.
It’s pronounced litfaks but ok. I don’t think the gra minhag or Shita had to do with chasidus. But it was a change in the pure halacha followed in Europe as the rema.
More about connecting to a tzadik and receiving from him higher understanding and revelations in g-dliness see עמק המלך הקדמה שלישית פרק ג-ה
משנת חסידים מס’ היחודים
Do you agree with these seforim or you argue with them too?I’ve never learned Emek haMalech, so I can’t really comment one way or the other. Being that it predated the Besht by quite a few years (it was published in 1648, the Besht wasn’t born until 1698), I’d guess that the definition of “tzaddik” isn’t the same.
I also agree with what you quoted – you should definitely connect with a Rebbe, and gain higher understanding and revelations in Godliness. But that’s not what the Besht taught – he taught that the tzaddik has to lower himself into realms of tumah in order to lift others out. Do you not see the difference between having a Rebbe to learn from, and the claim that people are incapable of lifting themselves? A person can learn Torah on their own, and grow from it. Having a Rebbe to guide you makes it easier and quicker to grow, because he will guide you in regards to what is correct and what isn’t.@da “Quoting Tanya to back up a chassidic belief doesn’t make sense. Get a proof from before the Besht.”
Wow real misnaged
What do you believe in? Is gemarah good? Zohar? Kisvai ari?
Would you also write that about anything the vilna gaon write – that it’s preposterous – if you dont know of a makor for it in whatever you believe in – I would assume at least tanach Mishnah and gemarah.Amazing how the came 2/3 people manage to hijack any thread with the word chasidim in it, they are so off topic its pathetic
DaMoshe, you have a point – pointing that tzadik, and other terms, change their meaning over time, so quoting a source with a word in it maight be anachronism. I know a Rav that when Gemorah mentions “chassid”, he clarifies “real chassid”
The Gra didn’t make radical changes to Judaism – he continued in the Mesorah of his father and his Rabbeim. The Besht did not have a mesorah. He claimed that he learned with Achiyah haShiloni, and that’s where his ideas came from.
One of my rabbayom said that a lot of yeshiva bochurim turn to Chassidus or Breskiv because they feel void they in the Yeshiva System. Thr coldness and musser being taught does not work well in today’s generation. Those who can’t fill the void, goes OTD
@da
It’s hard to discuss rumors or quotes that I don’t see the context
Can you bring me where you get this quote from “But that’s not what the Besht taught – he taught that the tzaddik has to lower himself into realms of tumah in order to lift others out.”
To say the baal shem tov changed the mesorahs 1) you need to. Point out an example and show how it’s a new idea not mentioned in any proceeding seforim (otherwise you can’t claim it’s new) 2) even if the baal shem tov taught an idea which you say was never practiced before, 1) what’s the issue of not following mesorahs (unless you claim it’s AGAINST Torah) 2) the baal shem tov new more Torah than me and I’m sure he had his mekoros, he also had talmidim geonim adirim who accepted his ways and did not attack him for changing mesorah.
The gra did not change mesorah?? 1) he argues with shulchan aruch??!!
What exactly is mesorah in the first place? I need to follow everything exactly the way my father did? What if my father got a heter to be makil in something, I can’t be machmir? How in the world should I know everything what to do just by growing up in my father’s house for 20 yrs or less? What if my father was not the biggest tzadik, I should follow him? What about all the new things happening in the world – internet, radio, technology, etc?sechel, I believe it’s in Toldos Yakov Yosef on Chukas, and Noam Elimelech on Balak.
There are plenty of things that the Besht taught that were new. Changing things so that learning Torah was no longer the main avodah. Proclaiming the primacy of d’veykus over all else, to the point of ignoring hilchos zmanim.
As for your question of “what’s the issue of not following mesorahs”, that actually comes way closer to apikorsus than anything I’ve ever said. In Judaism, Mesorah is everything. No, the Gra did not change Mesorah.
What is Mesorah? It is the tradition that is passed down from parent to child, from Rebbe to student. If someone’s father does things which are wrong, no, you shouldn’t follow it, because his actions are not from a Mesorah. If there is something where you don’t have a Mesorah from a parent, then you follow your Rebbe. (I don’t mean a chassidic Rebbe, I mean the person who taught you Torah.)The Besht claimed that he learned his new ways from Achiyah haShiloni, and also that Mashiach told him that when the whole world followed his teachings, Mashiach would finally come. Torah was given at Har Sinai to all the Jews, because only through a mass revelation could it be truly believed. We don’t believe in someone speaking with a Navi who died thousands of years before, and coming away with a new way of serving Hashem. The ways of serving Hashem were there from Har Sinai, and were passed down through the generations. Torah doesn’t change. Not even the Besht could change it, and to believe he could is apikorsus.
The founder of the Chassidic movement was The Baal Shem Tov.
The successor of The Baal Shem Tov was Rabbi Elimelech of Lizhensk.
Rabbi Elimelech of Lizhensk clearly taught that every Jew must study
Talmud with Rashi and Tosefos, followed by Poskim and Shulchan Aruch.DaMoshe: I know nothing about the Chasidus you’re describing or whether any of your claims are accurate or not.
But I do know that Modern Orthodoxy has no mesorah and MO started many new things. Including many things against the Torah. So how is it that not only have you no complaints against MO, but you actually self-identify as one?
The rambam writes in his hakdoma of Mishnah Torah that when there was a Sanhedrin everyone needed to follow it, whatever is in shas everyone needs to follow, anything after, one kehilla can’t force another kehillah to follow .
Da ill check it up iyh
Can you bring me a makor for your statement of mesorah? Or it’s just your own mesorah that I need to accept?
Your saying that the baal shem tov leaned new ways, example please? Saying something is more important is not a change. And there are different מאמרי חזל about it. See hilchos Talmud torah of the shulchan aruch harav where he says dvaikus in tefillah overrides learning Torah (he brings mekoros and we all know he knew shas better than me and you)
Overriding zmanim we already discussed this , there are mekoros, פרישה on the tur. It’s not against shas against the michaber and tama? The gra argued too!!@sechel83
Litfaks today are very connected to a rebbe too. Litfkas today do things on a deeper level than schar and onesh too. Everything you say is very much what “Litfish” lakewood is today. Follow the aderi torah event and its all about a simcha and depper way of life vs just the old approach.Meanwhile many chasidm today are about schar and onesh whether its baout taknos and rules that a kehila has are just in general how they teach tznuis today. Your description of chasdim is the old chasdim of 200 years ago. Read for example the sefer torahros hkodesh from the shomeri emunim about tznuis. Its more about schar and onesh . Satmar and mnay chasdim follow that.
@da checked up the Toldos Yakov Yosef on Chukas, it’s not clear to me what he is referring to, but he mentions it in many places (I saw in the מפתח,) and they bring in the sources from kisvai arizal פרי עץ חיים פרק ו,
So why don’t you learn the arizal? You don’t hold of arizal?
How did you understand the idea of a tzadik lowering himself into the levels of tumah? And what is your issue with that?
@chaim could be maybe I’ll watch the adirai hatorah speeches and see what they are saying and tell you what I think about it .
I definitely agree with you that many chassidim focus too much on schar and onesh, I’m not sure where it comes from. Maybe the lack of learning chassidus.Sechel: No, I don’t learn the Arizal, not because I don’t hold of it (God forbid!), but because his teachings are kabbalistic, and I am not nearly on the level to learn Kabbalah. It says that one shouldn’t learn Kabbalah at a young age, and even at an older age, one needs a firm foundation in learning before venturing into it. If one does learn it without the proper foundation, it will be misused.
As for a source on the importance of Mesorah – Avos, 1:1.@da, oh I get you, you don’t learn kabalah, and make fun of the baal shem tov, toldos and the baal hatanya because they teach cabalistic ideas that you never heard of! Correct?
Avos 1:1, in other words there is no source. R’ Yehuda hanasi saw that Torah was being forgotten so he wrote it down, still looking for where this “mesorah” idea comes from.
Jews always learned kabalah,
Btw mesilas yeshorim is based on kabalah, and the first perek the purpose why a jew was created comes from eitz chayim.DaMoshe: Where did your Modern Orthodoxy alleged mesorah come from? Moses Mendelsohn?
sechel: you’re correct, you don’t get me.
I am not sure DaMoshe’s mesorah, but some form of “MO” is how most of our ancestors lived for centuries. They all worked, some learned, many went to shul when the shul was accessible subject to working hours. They dressed as others, unless goyim forced some other dress on them. In places where it was possible, some of them got medical and philosophical education, and they got jobs with the government.
@ujm,
Modern orthodox today from a religious perspective is really just what many litfaks or litvaka in the USA used to be. Strictly halacha and an emphasize on not being farfrumt. Obviously introducing chasidus changes the outlookDaMoshe: Way to go!
Anyone who visits Lubavitch HQ on Eastern Parkway today, where their late leader held forth before he passed on, and sees the matzav there, will be able to easily understand why גדולי ישראל with foresight like Rav Schach, Rav Hutner, the Brisker Rav zt”l, and others spoke out so strongly against them.
@Lemayseh
Right go to 770 and see hundreds of buchurim learning. Ask around how many are baalai tshuvos,
Go on gimmel tamuz, see thousands of baalai tshuvos..
The fact that some people took control of signs or doing some things is like in the time of the 2nd bais hamikdash many of the kohanim gedolim paid there way in.
Focus on the ikur not a minor detail.
I would like to see the talmidim of the gedolim you mentioned and what’s left of them – % of original talmidim and their talmidim and familys who actually follow in the ways he thought them!sechel: Learning what? Sichos of the Rebbe? How many are actually learning Gemara?
I once heard a few Chabad people “learning”. They were having a discussion about which was a bigger miracle, 3rd of Tamuz or 12-13 of Tamuz. That’s not learning.I once heard a few MO guys in YU “learning” with a discussion of what is a bigger miracle, Yom Hatzshmutz or Purim.
I don’t have much of a dog in this fight, as I believe there is value in every group and that there is also troubling voids in every group as well. But when I’m in the five towns and see the doctors and lawyers learning with hasmada on shabbos, because they’re busy during the week, and see their children growing in the penimiyus of their yiddishkeit, I get the impression that their homes are built on a solid foundation in which the children see a love for Hashem and the torah, and often either are more “Shtark” than their parents.
Conversely, when I’m in Tri-State Chasidish communities, and I see the levels and pursuit of materialism unmatched in practically any community in the world, Jewish or otherwise, and see how young couples getting married know which lines to fit into but are practically devoid of any yiddish fire or meaning, I wonder if their path was proper
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.