- This topic has 257 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
This is why I love Yeshivaworld. A post that bashes Charedim will never get through, but a thread devoted to Modern Orthodoxy will.
-Baby born within the 8th month on Shabbos, Muktzah or not?
Pick and choose.
Joseph: I did re-read the posts by anonymouslysecret and modernorthodox. I even took the time to read most of the OP. Now, I will say that the tone of the OP is not mean and yes, much of it is just quotes from MO personalities.
Anonymouslysecret did say, Joseph: I want to thank you for posting the compilation of essays. It clarified many things for me.
However, I would say this to you. The length of the OP does not encourage others to actually read it, and if your intention was to begin an “intellectual argument/discussion”, it would have been wise to introduce your topic with that disclaimer. A few words dedicated to saying that you don’t mean this as an attack, but rather a springboard for discussion, might have mitigated some of the other reactions that you elicited. It is obvious that it took you a lot of time and effort to compile all that information. I think had you posted some of it and then as the discussion progressed, brought out more of the information, that would have been preferable.
Also, I think that the thrust of the discussion gives validity to your detractors, because when it comes down to it, you may not have said this, but the main message boils down to “Modern Orthodoxy = not good”. And if you don’t think that is true, re-read some of the other posts that are backing you up. The instinctive response would be defensiveness on the part of many who either define themselves as MO or have a close relationship with MO people.
I know others have said this, but if I were to begin a thread quoting the the GR”A on why chassidus is wrong, and then brought in facts to back it up, without stating my intentions, I would be targeted for attacks based on my fundamental position. You have to admit, it would seem be a divisive thing to do.
NY Mom is correct. Without knowing anything else about Joseph’s point or purpose, the OP is divisive. That Joseph is merely quoting others who state true things doesn’t make it any less divisive. Would it be any less divisive if someone were to quote true news articles about improper activities that ultra-Orhtodox have been involved in, even if true, and even if just copies of things other people said?
I am not a kiruv professional, but common sense tells me that “here’s what you could do to improve,” is a better approach than “what you are doing is wrong.”
I disagree with Joseph all the time, but isn’t the purpose of the coffee Room to debate topics? Any time there’s a debate, it’s by definition going to be divisive. Why should anyone object to open, rigorous intellectual analysis, especially if rigorous intellectual analysis, open-mindedness, and willingness to examine positions instead of being closed-minded about them is supposed to be a hallmark of Modern Orthodoxy?
NY Mom
Member
…I think that the thrust of the discussion gives validity to your detractors….
Holy mackarel, NY Mom! You. Here. How? Real, intelligent analysis in the CR? Wow!
Next thing you know, we’ll actually be having intelligent debates instead of just saying it.
OP: This is what [INSERT GADOL HERE] said about X.
Debater: I disagree.
OP: How can you disagree? You’re not disagreeing with me, you’re disagreeing with [PREVIOUSLY REFERENCED GADOL] and you couldn’t possibly disagree with him, could you?
The above is not a debate.
A600KiloBear posted:
“Sorry, but the Charedi world is not represented by a bunch of hooligans stirred up by outside agitators. That Yoilish Krauss is as authentic a kanoi as I am an authentic bear, not that kanoius represents much of the Charedi world in any event.
MO is dead. It was a horaas shooh with no real official backing, based on a misperceived need to assimilate and an underlying lack of emunah which led its founders to believe that real Torah Yiddishkeit could not be transplanted to the US – contrast that to the Rebbe Rayatz of Lubavitch ZYA who said “America iz nisht anderish,” let alone Reb Yoilish Satmarer ZYA, Rav SF Mendelowitz ZTL and others. Zionism is also dead, replaced by a vapid post-Zionism that has no connection to Judaism. If you want to see the failure of “religious” Zionism, walk on King George St in Y-m and check the name of the cross street from which taxis and sherut depart on Shabbos R”L L”A…. “
You claim that “Charedi world is not represented by a bunch of hooligans”–but you think that religious Zionism is represnted by a street name? (By the way, I would have no way of knowing from which street the taxis depart for Tel Aviv on Shabbat.)
I think that religious Zionism is represented by full Hesder Yeshivot, the young religious platoon leaders and soldiers in the IDF, etc. The streets full of dancing on Simchat Torah. The full Yeshivot. The institutions for the study of science and halacha, to actually determine the halachot of having to deal with new advances from a basis of understanding the actual workings of nature in concert with Torah. All the religious doctors to whom the Hareidi Rabbanim turn when they have medical problems.
People see what they want to see. I see the above, you see a street name, and taxis departing for Tel Aviv on Shabbat (which of course, are not occupied by religious Zionists). Would you have us adoppt the Hareidi way, and stand there and yell “Shabbes!” at them? Or throw stones?
Jothar: because Joseph isn’t conducting an analysis, or a debate. Just-a-guy got it right – Joseph is just looking to condemn. If Joseph was really up for an open debate, I’m sure plenty of people would be willing to oblige. The problem is, he’s not open to it.
Jothar, you said Any time there’s a debate, it’s by definition going to be divisive. Why should anyone object to open, rigorous intellectual analysis…
No, there is a difference between debating a controversial topic and delegitimizing someone’s way of life.
The former you can discuss dispassionately or even passionately, without taking personal offense and without feeling anger and hurt. The latter would be perceived as bashing, attacking, disparaging, maligning, and other very hurtful things and would encourage enmity and hostility amongst different groups.
Squeak: You made me smile 🙂
“jag – So are you therefore suggesting (with your last comment) that one cannot quote a Gadol? That is how your comment clearly comes across, and it is incorrect.”
You can quote a Gadol whenever you like, but if you are of the belief that the Gedolim are correct on certain (or all) matters, then I don’t see how you can say that you are initiating a debate (that’s not necessarily your word, but others here have asked what’s wrong with debate). In fact, if you believe that the Gedolim are correct on a certain issue, than you’d probably agree that its improper to invite debate on that particular point.
So the question remains, what is it you are trying to accomplish by starting a thread with statements from the Gedolim on modern Orthodoxy? I don’t think its inviting debate- what is it? Some, might reasonably conclude that the purpose is to denigrate. Please note, I don’t think the words of the Gedolim are denigrating. Rather, the act of someone else saying here, look what the Gedolim say about certain people can be denigrating. I assume you have not malintentions, but it is unclear to me, and I think to others, what the purpose of your original post is.
NY Mom, EVERY controversial topic will offend those looking to be offended. The need to get at the truth requires us to put our personal feelings aside and analyze the issue dispassionately. If we allow this topic to be “Third-Railed”, it will cast a pall on discussion of ANY controversial topic for fear of offending those who are easily offended. No more discussions about kollel vs. working, drinking, college, chassidus, hisnagdus, cholov yisroel, tznius, etc. All we’ll be left with is the “Post here to show you’re in the CR” thread, which probably suits some fine. However, I always viewed the intellectual aspect of the Coffee Room, not the social aspect, as its strong suit. A gutted, milquetoast Coffee Room where you can only smile and nod politely, and have to walk on eggshells for fear of offending someone who thinks differently is not my idea of a Coffee Room.
It looks like the consensus is to cloture this topic, and thus the mods will close it. But the Coffee Room is worse off for it. A bad precedent will have been established, as discussions start to get tabled for fear of offending.
Joseph, just for starters, based on your other thread on secular studies, note that Reb Moshe discouraged college EVEN FOR PARNASA. Yes, in his essay Atzas Reshoim his fundamental thesis is that it is possible to find a fine parnasa which doesn’t require college. He discourages medicine, as well.
Based on this, the following individuals were all modern orthodox:
The Rambam, The Ramban, Reb Saadia Gaon (all studied philosophy and/or medicine),
Rav Hutner, the Lubavitcher Rebbe and Rebbetzin David (Rav Hutner’s daughter, the head of Bais Yaakov Yerushalayim). All went to secular colleges.
Rabbi J.D. Bleich.
Rabbi Avigdor Miller is extreme modern orthodox. Not only did he go to college, he quotes the New Testament, the Koran and scientific papers on evolution, all of which contain apikursis.
There is not a single chareidi accountant, lawyer, doctor or engineer in the entire world since they all went to college or higher educational institutions. (I believe these professions all require a degree.) Note that if you see a doctor or lawyer or accountant who claims to be chareidi and wears a hat, that is only a disguise. By definition, he is modern orthodox, since Reb Moshe would not approve of his going to college. All of the above are members of the modern orthodox school of thought of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik. Reb Moshe makes no chiluk about Touro or YU or secular colleges. He says you will not become a gadol if you go to college, period.
But Joseph, in truth, when reading Reb Moshe, one has to carefully separate the mussar from the halacha. In mussar, Reb Moshe will schrei eish lehava against college. But if you look in the 8th chelek of Igros Moshe, there is a series of teshuvos about college and med school where Reb Moshe says that in truth, according to halacha, even if one is very wealthy, one is allowed to spend all of his time working (except for a short seder at night and in morning) to get even wealthier, and that there is no issur of bitul Torah for parnasa in whatever field he enjoys. I believe he also says that college should be decided on a case by case basis.
So Joseph and Kilobear, if you really believe that the entire frum world can function with only a 7th grade education, you are free to educate your children that way. Most of us know that in these difficult times, the key to being able to survive and pay tuitions and mortgages lies in getting the best possible education.
One final thought. Aside from parnasa, there is probably an inyan of not being an ignoramus about the world around us. My kids went to the mint on Chol Hamoed, and when they came back, they wanted to know why we can’t solve our problems by printing as much money as the country needs. We got involved in a whole discussion (not my field, so I couldn’t give completely precise answers) about inflation, the gold standard of the past, the Weimar republic where a cart full of money was needed to buy a loaf of bread, trade deficits, exchange rates, trading of dollars for Euros or Shekel, etc.
Now suppose a Rabbi would be interviewing for a job in a shul. Somebody asked him a question in Choshen Mishpat, it became apparent he never heard of the mint, did not know what inflation was, did not hear of the stock market, etc. Would he garner the respect of the shul? Even though he doesn’t need secular knowledge for his profession, do you think a shul would respect him or listen to him if he was totally ignorant about the world around him? There is much to be said for secular studies.
it is not controversy that gets a topic closed. sometimes a topic is closed for various reasons including but not limited to:
– the argument has become circular with each side repeatedly stating their case and nothing new being added
– the supporters on either side of the argument have become heated and instead of arguing the point, bash the other posters (as if that makes their point correct)
– the topic has gone completely off topic and there is little hope of bringing it back on topic.
…
I still don’t understand what is being “debated” here.
Is it whether Modern Orthodox exists?
Whether it is a good idea, or a bad idea?
Whether Joseph accurately quoted and transcribed what certain figures have said about Modern Orthodoxy?
From the first page: “Hashem doesn’t want us to standout like sore thumbs, to speak and dress differently, to use different names and do different things. That wouldn’t be right. That would be acting holier than thou.”
In the blessing at the Torah for each aliyah., havdalah, this past week’s haftorah, are just a few of places where we are taught that the Jewish People are different, and should be separate from the other nations. We should stick out, since by sticking out, by being obviously Jews, we are the sign-pointer to Hashem. This is being “holier than thou” because the root of the word kadosh is related to being separate, separated from the mundane/secular – either something is holy or it is secular, and the Jewish People are commanded to be holy because Hashem is Holy.
All attempts at assimilation have failed miserably, the most obvious is the German Reform movement prior to WWII. Approximately 6 million Jew shave been lost, in the US alone, to assimilation, intermarriage – unfortunately, many Jews do not know who they are, and think that Gentile values are more important than Torah values, or G-d forefend, that Torah laws are even wrong, e.g. separating from the nations.
I refuse to attack other Jews, personally, and welcome any Jew into my home, into my shul, etc. – but we should not welcome and praise official movements that present themselves as representing alternative Jewish lifestyles and seek to undermine scrupulous Torah observance and diverge from the halacha in any of its details.
When a movement seeks to attract disaffected Jews by relaxing the halacha, they are not leading them to Torah but away from Torah.
Joseph- I don’t disagree. I ask again though, what is your purpose in brining them to everyone’s attention?
Jothar: EVERY controversial topic will offend those looking to be offended. The need to get at the truth requires us to put our personal feelings aside and analyze the issue dispassionately.
Please re-read my above post. I never said don’t debate controversial subjects. I said that “there is a difference between debating a controversial topic and delegitimizing someone’s way of life”. You sound like a highly intelligent person and can therefore see a difference between these two things.
Also, if you had read previous posts by myself and others, you will see that someone’s intentions do make a difference. If one’s intent is to have an open and honest discussion, that is one thing. But when people perceive one’s intent is only to offend, then not much is being accomplished as far as dispassionate discussion and getting at the truth!
One more name to add to the list:
Artscroll is a Modern Orthodox institution, since I believe Rabbi Nosson Scherman went to college. In addition, Jerome Schottenstein is a YU alum, so it is financed by the Modern Orthodox, as well.
NY Mom, I thank you for the ego trip 🙂
I am aware that a disparaging tone can turn an honest debate into a shoutfest. I am also aware that Joseph’s intention was to dictate, not to debate. That said, I don’t see why we need to allow that to spoil the debate.
Maybe we should just do a reset- i.e., a fresh topic about modern Orthodoxy with no opening monologue from either side, and let the arguments fall where they may.
Rabbi Avigdor Miller, tz’l did not go to college
Rabbi Miller went to YU
Feivel, from Wikipedia:
At age 17, Rabbi Miller went to New York and attended and graduated from Yeshiva College and RIETS, attaining a B.A. and rabbinical ordination, respectively.
He was elected the student body president at the time, and was also the baal korei.
Rabbi Moshe Bick, known as the Mezubizher Rav, who arrived in the United States in 1927, was one of Rabbi Miller’s early study partners.
Yes, I just checked it. Thank you Feif and PY
Jothar: I say you should just hi-jack this thread! (It already has the proper title, after all.)
I am told that it has been done before! 🙂
why can’t we accept that there are different strokes for different folks? What works for some people won’t work for everyone.
Aryeh3, think about it. When you claim that 6,000,000 Jews have been lost to assimilation, why did that happen? Why did the Reform movement come about in the first place? Maybe because we made yiddishkeit so unpalatable to the masses by insisting on things that are not even halacha, that they all became turned off.
There were fights over speaking any language other than yiddish, studying secular subjects, choirs in shul, dressing in up to date clothing, as opposed to long black coats, etc. All these things have nothing to do with halacha (see Reb Moshe that American garments are not chukos akum). Because no flexibility was shown to many Jews, they said who needs this, and took off for greener pastures. The gemara says l’olam yehei smol docheh vyimin mekarev.
As always, PY is a voice of reason.
There are those who tend to see history as only going in one direction, but I have a theory. It is not going in one direction but rather constantly expanding and contracting. I’m not sure if that metaphor works, but allow me to explain-
Let’s suppose that recently in history, but prior to the present, Jews developed a movement/stream/whatever you want to call it, known as Modern Orthodoxy, in response to what was seen as an unworkable, impractical, or suffocating version of Yiddishkeit that was too close to the sthetl, and not close enough to the modern world. After a time, that movement began to flourish and grow strong and new generations were born into that movement. Eventually, those subsequent generations, as some on this thread have commented, looked at Modern Orthodoxy, and found the spiritual fulfillment that it offered to be wanting, and so they turned rightward, restoring something that more closely resembled the brand of Yiddishkeit previously rejected by the generations before them. Some may celebrate this, and others may lament it, but either way, it has happened. But what then will happen to their children? Well, I predict that eventually, after generations of wealthy father-in laws have died out, and other cultural and demographic changes occur, the children of the newly Ultra-Orthodox who are the offspring of Modern Orthodox will look at their parents and say, why do I have to dress like this, why can’t I go to college, why must my life be confined to these few blocks in this particular community, etc. And the reaction will be that they create a new modern Orthodoxy. And there will be Rabbonim who will decry this, as harmful to the Jewish people, and others still who will celebrate this development as something that will strengthen the Klal, by allowing more of them to reamin in the fold and take on important roles in the world. And then eventually, just like before, the cycle will renew again.
Now, you might ask, what is my point? I suppose its this- neither side has to get too happy, or too upset, at the demise of Modern vs. Ultra, or vice versa, as whoever is on top for the moment, will not last for long, unless of course, we figure out a way to live without these distinctions.
PY – Yiddishkeit is not unpalatable. If a Jew finds it to be so, the problem is with the Jew, not the Torah. Millions of Jews worldwide love being scrupulously Torah observant, love being obviously Jewish, and do not want to hide themselves among the Gentiles and compartmentalize their Yiddishkeit.
The Reform movement was not reacting to speaking Yiddish, they were attempting to erase the differences between Jews and the surrounding majority society they lived among. Do you know that originally Reform Jews wanted to move Shabbat to Sunday. They wished to stop eating kosher in order to go to their Gentile friends homes to eat. They wished to hide their Jewish identities in order to mix more easily. To see the halacha as The Problem, something that divides Jews from each other and from the Gentile society – is 100% wrong.
I am not sure if the whole Modern Orthodox movement is a slippery slope; I know some MO Jews who do not seem to be on a road of less and less observance, but others do, and other MO movements such as Open Orthodoxy (YCT) do seem to represent a slide away from true Torah observance.
Again, I cannot stress it too much that as individual Jews, all should be embraced, but when discussing official movements, e.g. Reform, Conservative, liberal MO – they can be and should be criticized to the extent they have denied the Torah.
aryeh3- I know you mean well, but in my opinion, your opening, “f a Jew finds it to be so, the problem is with the Jew…” to be inconsisent with your closing- “as individual Jews, all should be embraced…” A Jew who drives to “temple” on Yom Kippur, however misguided he may be, is trying to maintain a connection to Judasim, and telling him that there is a problem with him, particularly if he won’t give up his classical music, college and love of astronomy, won’t make him want to learn more and change.
Aryeh3, I doubt that there are millions of Jews today who are Shomer Shabbos. Only about 15% of Jews are frum today.
In Europe, there was constant poverty, decrees, regulations about what professions a Jew was allowed to practice, and of course pogroms and anti-semitism that made life almost unbearable. Do not oversimplify and make it seem that these Jews went off the derech simply because it was more fun to do so. They had nisyonos that hopefully we will never know.
“Only about 15% of Jews are frum today.”
15% of 12-13 million is millions.
But it does not matter what the number is; there have always been Jews who attempted to assimilate, this is what Channukah describes, and Jews who have cleaved to the Torah. There will always be a Torah true community. The Torah is eternal, it predates our world, and to the extent Jews live by the Torah, it will keep them secure and strong. Only when Jews abandon the shield of the Torah are they vulnerable to the enemies of Hashem.
Baalei Teshuvah is a growing phenomenon – when any Jew, no matter how distant from an observant life, meets a Jew who personifies the Torah – they cannot but be influenced by the chen of the observant Jew. The only way to bring Jews to Torah is by living the Torah. If you try to attract them by watering down the halacha, you are leading them away from Torah, it won’t work, nothing is as persuasive as the wisdom of Hashem – it is timeless and never outdated. Certainly nothing devised by men attempting to “modernize” the Torah has lived as long as the Torah, all of the various -isms die out sooner or later.
“in my opinion, your opening, “f a Jew finds it to be so, the problem is with the Jew…” to be inconsisent with your closing- “as individual Jews, all should be embraced…”
There is nothing inconsistent with saying that the problem is with a Jew (the problem is with his understanding of the halacha: it’s purpose and what true freedom is, not the Gentile idea of freedom) and not the halacha, but being willing to embrace that Jew nonetheless and hopefully show him, by example, the beauty of living under the yoke of the Torah.
Just-a guy, I never said to tell him there is a problem with him. You’d have to be more creative than that.
🙂
PY – You are identifying the entire charaedi world by its most extreme radicals. All societies have dregs, from the begging of time. Look at the arev rav – did that mean that the entire society dor hamidbur was fundamentally wrong?! Yes, the charaedi world has its crazies. Do you claim that the modern world doesn’t?!
“jag – aryeh’s opening and closing statements are entirely consistent with each other.”
I guess if you say so, Joseph, you are correct about my subjective perception.
Folks, this is what I’ve been saying about this is not a debate.
Just-a-guy, please keep in mind that many posters, expecially those who’ve been here longer, agree with you but choose not to engage in pitched “debates”.
mw13, the erev rav were not Jewish, they were Egyptians who joined Bnai Yisrael for opportunistic reasons. Are you implying that those chareidim who rioted are not Jewish either? If you are not implying that (and though I disagree with their actions, I don’t doubt that they are Jewish), then your analogy is faulty.
Joseph, this will be my last post on this thread, but myself and others have asked what was your purpose in making the OP. Others, but not you, have offered that this is a place to debate and that we should be able to debate issues. But now, it seems somewhat clear that your purpose was not to invite a debate, or even a discussion (a little strange for a chat room) but merely to present facts.
You may be content to tell me I’m wrong, but the presentation of facts (not the facts themselves, but the manner in which they are presented) can be divisive.
i once herd that Modern Orthodox is “want to be modern have to be Orthodox”… i think that from halchah point of veiw its not a problem just the way of looking at things is a problem.
I would love to debate this, but I have to research a bit of those sources. Specifically about the Rav saying MO is b’dieved. I do believe that MO did save many people from going off the derech in the last few generations though.
I think people look towards the past few generations of MO where many people were ignorant and say “look they don’t follow halacha.” However, many of them never learnt proper halacha (like hilchos shabbos or something) so they keep it the way they know. Today’s generation of MO is much more educated and therefore chooses to follow halacha. They are still MO.
To me, MO is keeping halacha without assering the muttar.
MW13, Unfortunately, no. The mainstream chareidi world believes the blood libel against Hadassah (I confirmed with ehrlich chareidim I trust), and in general is rife with anti-zionist views and propaganda. The only difference between the radicals and the mainstream chareidim is the use of physical violence. They both agree on the fundamental philosophy of anti-zionism and both engage in verbal violence and hatred against the State within their institutions.
The entire Chareidi attitude needs to be changed to ahavas yisroel and hakaras hatov towards our secular brethren for all that they do for us. When that fundamental shift occurs, then you won’t see “crazies” going berserk. The Chareidi world needs to realize that they have ignited these “crazies” with their constant bad-mouthing of Medinas Yisroel and all its symbols.
Joseph, you manage to dodge my points constantly. I proved above that Reb Moshe, Reb Aharon, Rav Svei and Rav Schach do not condone college in any form: Secular, YU or Touro. They do not allow it for parnasa, either. That is what Reb Moshe called Atzas Reshaim, that people think that they will only get parnasa if they go to college, when they can get good parnasa without it. These are the people who are considered to have Daas Torah by Chareidim.
They do not condone Chareidi doctors, lawyers, dentists, engineers or accountants. Therefore all these supposedly Chareidi people are relying on Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik. So the Chareidi world is again playing games. They denigrate MO and YU and Rabbi Soloveitchik, while they themselves are actually Modern Orthodox and relying only on Rabbi Soloveitchik’s view and not on their own Daas Torah. You haven’t given any response. You yourself cited these gedolim above. So how do you explain all these people who call themselves chareidim and still go to college?
EDITED
PY, not necessarily. Eilu ve’eilu, and many chareidi gedolim allow college. So a chareidi who visits a frum doctor views the doctor as someone who followed his own gedolim, not an avaryan. Furthermore,EVEN if what you are saying is true, which I don’t believe but am accepting for argument’s sake, a yid is a yid as long as he’s shomer shabbos, ie not Mechalel Shabbos befarhesya .
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.