Joining Litvishe

“There is a teshuva from the Chasam Sofer about beards.”
Its the same Teshuva that he mentions that the Italian rabbis affiliated with Kabala shaved, particularly the רמ”ע מפאנו

“Nu lets assume we can pasken from a “painting” but how did verify their Chassidic” status?
Did you see them holding siddurim marked Siddur HGra or Ashkenaz”…”
For starters, you could look at the paintings of the Gra, Chasam Sofer, Ksav Sofer, etc. What was the point of this discussion, again? Surely you’ll find a lot of bearded Jews if you go back to the pre-electric shaver days, right?

Nev,

“For starters, you could look at the paintings of the Gra, Chasam Sofer, Ksav Sofer, etc. What was the point of this discussion, again? Surely you’ll find a lot of bearded Jews if you go back to the pre-electric shaver days, right?”

Asides that the discussion pertains to laymen not Rabbanim, so you can’t compare, – even many MO Rabbis wear beards to this very day. (Note, it is certain, there was no such concept as a Rabbi w/o a beard in those times), but lets take it a step further, even the typical Non-Jew in Poland and in Russia, most were ‘bearded’ until the early 1900’s.

So the mere fact that every Jew went with a beard is non-applicable as proof of Mesorah, unless you back it up. Chassidim in Poland they wore Spudiks on Shabbos because they couln’t wear Shtriemels at one point so that became their “mesorah”, According to many Shtreimels developed from a ‘Gezero’, same with Yerushalmi garb, the striped Zebras etc, was also a result of one of the Ottoman decrees..

If you look at all Chabad Rabbis, starting from the Baa’l Ha’tanya, Tzemech, then Rashab you will see a change of dress code as well…

Joseph: You’re opposed to discussing halachic questions that are directly addressed in the S”A?!
Of course not, I’m just opposed to ignorant people making false claims as facts.

As to what the S”A paskens: If you’re truly interested you can look it up yourself, E”H 1:10.

שו”ת חתם סופר חלק א (אורח חיים) סימן קנט
אשר מלא פיו תוכחות, קדוש יאמר לו, ובודאי כן הוא בכמה מנהגים שנתקלקלו אצל ההמונים ונעשה להם היתר בעו”ה, אבל אשר שם פניו נגד מגולחי
הזקן, לא ידעתי מה הרעש הגדול הזה, לכו נא ונוכחה אי משום חוקת הגויים אשאלהו ויודיעני מי התיר לנו נעלים שחורים המבואר בש”ס לאסור מסאני
אוכמי ולהפליא ענין אמרו במס’ תענית כ”ב9 ע”א דהוה מסיים מסאני אוכמי, ויעיין ב”ק נ”ט10 ע”ב ובתוס’ שם ד”ה דהוה מסיים, ובשיטמ”ק שם מחלק
בין שחור לאוכם וזה מסכים קצת לפי’ ה”ג דמייתי תוס’ פרק אלו טרפות מ”ו ע”ב ד”ה אוכמי, הנאמר שהוא מקור משחת, כאשר כתב על עם ה’ אלו, לא ניחא למרייהו למימר הכי, והוא דבר דלא נמצא בש”ס ופוסקים וגם לא בשום ספר מספרי חצונים שיהי’ הפרש בין ישראל לאינו ישראל בגילוח הזקן כי אז גם כל האומות היו מגדלים זקניהם, ויעיין בש”ס שבת קנ”ב ע”א תלת אמרת לי תלת שמעת וכו’, וברבה בראשית פ’ י”א סי’ ז’ פילוסוף שאל את ר’ יהושע וכו’ מפני מה אותו האיש מגלח פאת ראשו ומגדל זקנו וכו’ יע”ש, אבל לא נמצא בשום מקום שיהיה בזה משונה מנהג גוים. ומה שרמז לספרי מקובלים שכתבו שלא להושיט ידים בדקני כלל אין לי עסק בנסתרות, אבל מהם ומהמונם הותרה הרצועה לגמרי בכל ארץ אטלי’ שכל חכמיה מגולחי זקן ונתלים באילן גדול ר’ מנחם עזרי’ בעל עשרה מאמרות אבי המקובלים שהוא היה מגולח מבלי השאיר שערה א’, וכן העיד עליו היש”ר מקאנדיא באילים שלו, והיה אומר שעפ”י חכמי המקובלים אין חוץ לארץ ראויה לכך, ומה אאריך במה שאין לי יד ושם בו, אבל אבותינו הנהיגו עצמם כן על צד ההכרח הגדול ולא מקור משחת ח”ו אלא בקדושה יתירה, והוא בימי גזירת תתנ”ו, והרועים וכדומה התירו גדוליהם להמכתתים רגליהם לשנות מלבוש ולגלח זקנם שלא יכירום האויבים כי אז כבר גלחו הגוים זקניהם עפ”י מעשה ממלך פולין א’ שהי’ סריס כמבואר בספרי הימים והתירו חז”ל שהיו בימים ההם לעשות כן, ולהיות גלוח הזקן דבר שאי אפשר להשתנות והיו נכלמים מאוד האנשים ההמה בשובם לביתם, על כן נשתרבב המנהג שלא לגדלו כלל רק סימנא בעלמא שזה יגולח ויגדל בקוצר זמן שבן לילה היה ורק אך מופלגי תורה היושבים בביתם הם מגדלים אותו, ואותן שלפני גזירה ההיא שברחו לארץ פולין לא באו לכלל זה. והנה זה ברור ונכון כי אילו היה תחלת מנהגו באיסור היה משום חוקי הגוים, אבל אחר שכבר נהגו ישראל לגלח, תו אין בו שום נדנוד ופקפוק כלל אפילו ריח איסור אין בו, אבל הך דמסאני אוכמי לא ידעתי איך נתפשט11 ע”כ צריכין אנו ללמוד זכות ולומר שנתפשט ג”כ בתחילה בהיתר וכיון שהותר הותר. והנה יעיין ביורה דעה סימן קנ”ז ס”ב ויעיין ש”ך סי’ קע”ח סק”ד הקשה אמהרי”ק, ובחידושי למסכת חולין12 ישבתי ת”ל יתברך באופן הנאות, ואי משום מספריים כעין תער זהו חשש רחוק ושרשו פתוח מתרומת הדשן13 כשהזוג חדוד מאוד יש לזהר אולי יחתוך בתחתון לחוד וידענא שהוא מידי דלא שכיח, גם מההשחתה תחת הגרון המעיין בש”ס [מכות כ’ ע”א] וראשונים יראה כי ממש לית מאן דחש לדברי ר”ח14 בזה, והמחמיר קדוש יאמר לו והמקיל לא יאמר עליו מקור משחת ח”ו. כללו של דבר, כל מה שאמר מכ”ת באגדת ריב”ח15 הנמשל הוא טוב וקדש קדשים, והמשל שהיסב פני’ על חטא קל וקטן לא יקרא ח”ו בשם חטא ועון חלילה וחס, והאומר כן עתיד ליתן הדין בלי ספק, והייתי יכול להמשיל משל אחר אבל ועמך כולם צדיקים כתיב,
-ויהי’ ממחוז פלוני או פלוני:

DY on: And who started the Litvish Yeshiva minhag of a “hoicha kedusha” at mincha to save time of Chazoras HaShatz so we can get back to learn and not “waste time” on a proper mincha?! DT – Very possibly Chazal.

Which Chazal said that is the minhag of klal yisroel to abridge mincha (and if so, mima mafshoch) why do all shuls (outside of Litvish Yeshos) NOT follow this Chazal and have a proper chazoras haShatz?!

Regarding shaving, there is a sefer that collected ALL the shitos,

Not all, just the machmirim.

Haman said: Yeshno Am Echad, Mefuzar U’Meforad Bein HaAmim.

Some take this a chiyuv to make yidden “Mefuzar U’Meforad” by causing pirud and sinas yisroel from within.

I guess they are at Ad Dlo Yada – they don’t know that it Haman is the one that is Orur. It is a curse mission that impacts them and their loved ones negatively – r”l, Hashem ya’azor.

Additionally, the Rebbe  himself showed that there is room to be mefakpeik mitzad hadin on the issue of shaving. See the very first holy letter in Igros Kodesh where He shows that there is room to disagree with the Tzemach Tzedek’s teshivah on the matter.

edited

Its Time wrote “Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky, Explained that one already years ago He said that always was the custom of full time elevated Scholars It wasn’t meant to be imitated by lay people or youth though”

“Full time elevated scholars” like the Rashbi and his disciples are completely pottur from tefillah! But I guess these Litvak Yeshivas think they are “part way” to the madgreiga of “toraso umnoso”, there whole life is spent every minute learning, so no time to waste on a proper mincha, unless of course they are shaving – for that avoda there is plenty of time!

I daven mincha many times in a litvish yeshiava that does heicha kidusha, and the first time I davend there it took me by surprise , (since I never of such a thing before). so I went over to the Roshe Yeshiva nicely asked what’s the reason for this, and he said this is ongenumen from amol because of bitul Torah. Then I walk outside and lo and behold I see all the bochurim playing basketball.
This might be only one case,I’m not saying this is all the yeshivois, but wondering does this make sense at all and mutar Al pi haloch? I find it funny that the Roshe Yeshiva make the whole Yeshiva wait for him to finish his extra long shemoina esrie, but the they can’t sacrifice 3 minutes for Chazoras hashats.
If they’re so worried about bitul Torah then it would only make sense that they should sacrifice time from their break, Instead of cutting ends on davaning

I can’t help hating those who hate any frum yidden.

Do you hate yourself, or are you not frum?

Writer
You just missed it again.
I’m not saying your bochurim are bad in anyway, nor am I saying that Lubavitcher bochurim don’t play basketball, all I’m saying is, actually asking what exactly is the heter?

“Many (perhaps even close to a majority) who today call themselves Litvish are actually from Chasidish/heimish families. They come from Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Austria, Czechoslovakia, etc., where their grandfathers or great-grandfathers were Chasidim or Oberlander.”

1) The population (Jewish and general) and land area of of modern Lithuania is a lot smaller than that of Poland, where Hasidism was more dominant.

2) Oberlander are like Litvaks in that they both rejected the new Hasidic movement and stuck to old fashioned Yiddishkeit.

“Rav Chaim of Volozhim was the prime student of the Gra, yet he did not sign the Cherem against chassidim! The LItvish of today follow the ways of Reb Chaim, yet the haters keep bringing up the Gra’s cherem (that Reb Chaim had no part of”

Rav Chaim Volozhin was a Misnaged. The Chasidim try to make up and sell a bobbeh mayseh in which Rav Chaim Volozhin differed with the GRA and refused to sign the cheirem, based on the fact that his signature is not on it. As if he was not a Misnaged.

So why didn’t Rav Chaim Volozhin sign it?

A few reasons are given, see sefer Hagaon by Rav Dov Eliach shlita.

For example,

1) The cheirem was put out by large kehillos, such as Vilna, Brisk….R. Chaim was in a small rural town, Volozhin, so he was not part of it. It wasn’t like a heter meah rabbonim, when people might go around to get signatures from all over. Also, in the old days travel and communication were much more difficult than they are today.

2) R. Chaim Volozhin didn’t want to sign along with his Rebbe, that could be seen as disrespectful, as if he was on par with him.

Later on, the government of Czarist Russia legalized Hasidism, so the cheirem could not be enforced.

Chossid, it is a minhag like all minhagim. It was originated at a time when Bitul Torah was precious and even if its not anymore as it once was, the minhag stayed on. Same way chassidim daven late because once upon a time, chassidim in Peshischa and Kotzk purified their minds and souls many hours for davening, starting from the early hours, which is totally not relevant today…

The yeshivas that do heicha mincha still say tachanun by mincha?

Yes

I know it’s anecdotal, but I have never heard anyone use the word “oberlander” outside of internet forums. I’ve met true Oberlanders and they either describe themselves as Heimish, Chassidishe (even when they aren’t), or Hungarian (even when they aren’t from within the boarders of modern Hungary).

DY:
I do not merit to understand how tachanun, which poskim make a point of saying is a reshus not a chiyuv, would take precedence over chazaras hashatz once you’re in the business of deleting stuff for bitul Torah. Even with the explanation you gave (which I’m sure is correct), how could that really apply in America? Unless the beis medrash had a “no aino buckis allowed” sign, there could always be someone who needs it.

Joseph – “Oberland, i.e. the Chasam Sofer, etc., did not reject Chasidim. They were on very friendly terms and interactions with them even though they never joined the movement.”

It is true that they didn’t put Chasidus into cheirem there at that time, but by then the cheirem already had become history even in Lita, as the Czarist government had legalized Hasidism. That era had passed.

However, that doesn’t mean that Hisnagdus ended. It most definitely continued, just in different forms and ways.

The Chasam Sofer and those who followed him clearly rejected Chasidus (see teshuvos Chasam Sofer), even if they talked to its followers. If you don’t join a movement that wants you to join it, that means that you rejected it.

“And after the war large segments of Oberlander Yidden (i.e. Vien, Dushinsky, etc.) joined the Chasidic movement.”

Dushinsky became semi-Hasidic a long time ago, however, they still retain some Oberlander characteristics.

To say that Vien joined the Hasidic movement after the war is incorrect. R. Yonason Shteif, R. Ezriel Lebovits z”l, led an Ashkenaz kehillah.

The leader afterward, R. Katz, who is Hasidic background, who is still there, broke the condition(s) that they set with him when he was hired, put on a shtreimel and changed the nusach of their Williamsburg congregation to Sfard for the most part. But that is a relatively recent development, like within the last 10-15 years. However, other Vien branches stayed Ashkenaz (with exception of a small Flatbush branch). The changes by R. Katz aroused great controversy. By no means are all Vieners approving of them. Many of the Ashkenaz Vieners have given up on Vien it seems, and joined other kehillos.

Lit: Rav Levovits also wore a shtreimal. The Williamsburg shul switched to Nusach Sefard a longer time ago than the other Viener shuls, I think. And the reason they switched was because the klal was already changing nusach. The shuls changing to Sefard wasn’t what caused so many of the Viener people who switched earlier.

A similar trajectory towards greater Chasidim could also be seen by Nitra, Kashau, Tzehlim, Krasna and Pupa.

Joseph: “Lit: Rav Levovits also wore a shtreimal.”

The fact that you call him “Rav Levovits” shows that you are ignorant about him. Levovits (usually spelled Levovitz) is a Litvishe name. The Viener Rav was not Litvish.

R. Lebovits z”l kept minhagei Ashkenaz, such as wearing tefillin on Chol Hamoed openly.

Joseph – some of your historical info is still incorrect. In the know, astute readers will notice that.

Yes, there has been some movement to Hasidism. However, the picture you are painting misses large numbers of Oberlander who have joined other segments of Klal Yisroel, such as Yeshivish, Litvish, regular Ashkenaz Shuls, as they voted with their feet and left when some Oberlander institutions came under Hasidic domination (e.g. R. Katz of Vien was/is Hasidic, not Oberlander who converted, and he violated agreement when he was hired to keep things as they were). In Williamsburg Vien there were like no old Vieners left, so R. Katz brought in Hasidim. It was not that old Vieners converted to Hasidism there.

Furthermore, even those Oberlander who allegedly became Hasidic often retained some Oberlander Ashkenaz identity and minhagim, so they did not totally leave where they came from. E.g. I think Dushinsky says bameh madlikin Friday night, people put on tefillin on Chol Hamoed, etc.