- This topic has 182 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
I think you’re misunderstanding me as doubting kabalah, chas veshalom – otherwise i don’t understand why you quote gedolim who simply extole the greatness of kabalah. I never questioned the divinity of chochmas hakabalah. I said that no gedolim have advocated spending hours on it if you’re not a master of shas and poskim and that remains true regardless of how great kabalah is. Just because something is very holy doesn’t mean you can skip the less “fun” parts of shor she’nagach es haparah, negaim, and karbonos.
Also, are you implying that the shu “a harav was not written with ruach hakodesh? Because i believe it was, and that Hashem guided the baal hatanya to learn the sugya of hilchos talmud torah and to reach the correct rulings on that subject. Do you think he was mistaken? If so, have you not violated your own principles?
Emunas, we are a Chazal-defined religion, not an Arizal-defined one.
Also, what is your definition of kesher with H’, and why, according to you, it is possible only through tefilah (at least, in our time)?Avirah…, how do you know that the Sh”Aruch ha’Rav was written with ruach ha’kodesh?
Avirah…, LUbavitch goes with the Ba’al Ha’Tanya’s opinion on shkiyah from his siddur (later in his life) against the psak of his Shulchan Aruch.
Did at least some of R Salanter’s students spend a lot of time on mussar rather than gemora? This illustrates a difference between mussar/middos that might precede learning and kabbala that should come later.
Frankly, in our times, nigleh gives us so much new material: interactions w/ colleges, science, psychology, medicine, medinas isroel, etc I can not see getting to nistar until I am 80, bli neder
Spoken like a true misnagid with an arrogant, holier-than-though attitude. Tefillah is definitely the ikar avodah nowadays. And you know what? It’s really amusing being lectured on Tanya from someone who says they barely learn Chassidus.
Yes. There are significant discrepancies between the siddur and the SA harav. Ending time for shabbos and fifth bracha of shema in maariv are two examples that come to mind immediately.
I’m done here. I have no desire to be verbally abused by an arrogant, holier-than-thou misnagid two days before Rosh Hashana.
Is it really different than verbally abusing someone else 2 days before Rosh Hashana?
Mdd, i think the shu”a harav was written with ruach hakodesh the same way i believe every gadol in every generation is guided by ruach hakodesh, because that’s what chazal say in numerous places, like in gittin(daf…5?) with rebbe evyasar.
As for changes in psak, following what he said in the siddur makes sense, and poskim change their shitos all the time – my issue is with what was said that chabad(or rather, this poster) can ignore a halacha in shu”a harav just because it was written earlier in the baal hatanya’s life, without him paskening differently. It was the posters own opinion(and perhaps their rabbi) that we in our time can decide what psakim to follow and what not to, based on our understanding of chasidus.
I don’t see how there’s verbal abuse in anything i wrote, but if you’re offended, it’s probably best not to be on here, or to engage in discussions with anyone outside of crown heights. I simply raised objections to what was said here based on clear sources and reasoning; if that is “abuse,” i really don’t know what to tell you.
Avirah, that Gemorah talks about Amoroim. Plus, it lav davka implies that his opinion was guided by ruach ha’kodesh. Also, with your understanding of ruach ha’kodesh, how can one ever argue on an opinion of an Achron?
Mdd, poskim can argue because ayin panim latorah.
As for how it applies to every talmid chacham, see shu”t divrei chaim YD 242(i forgot the exact number) where he says that it’s apikorsus to say that the ohr hachaim was not written with ruach hakodesh.
Emunas: “It’s really amusing being lectured on Tanya from someone who says they barely learn Chassidus.”
Is that really your best answer to someone who quotes Tanya to argue with what you say?! If he’s wrong in his understanding in Tanya, show him how and why. But to say that you know more than him therefore you’re right is an escape and pure gaavah. Seems to me that’s the same manner Lubavichers decided that their rebbe is a navi, nassi and the Mashiach. “We just know more than you, so there’s no point in you arguing!”
“There are significant discrepancies between the siddur and the SA harav. Ending time for shabbos and fifth bracha of shema in maariv”
Therefore? Oh, I get it. Because at times the Baal Hatanya changed his mind later in life, that means that we can discount anything he wrote in Hilchos Talmud Torah if we decide that it’s ‘good’ to do otherwise. Did I get that right?
Makes sense. It’s the same thing you do when it comes to maamarei Chazal and the words of Rishonim that don’t quite suit what you want to believe, e.g. when it comes to the criteria of Mashiach.
Avirah, the way they argue it is clear that, at least, sometimes they consider the other shitah plain wrong and not a 70 panim le’Torah.
Why only Or Ha’Haim? And what — a Yid who thinks that is a real apikores?Mdd, the DC was talking about all gedolei torah in every generation, that when one learns Torah lishma, they are guided by Hashem to understand the sugya properly.
Regarding hashgocha in the Torah transmitted through gedolei yisroel, the chazon ish says the same thing about using kisvei yad of rishonim to overturn achronimc’s Torah; he says that whatever the achronim had was min hashomayim intended to be transmitted to us, and we cannot change it.
And yes, i think if a yid believes differently, it ultimately amounts to a belief that the Torah is hefker, that we’re just riding through history without hashgocha, perhaps sinning because our poskim may have erred
As for ayin panim latorah, that’s from our perspective; what was “wrong” in the eyes of one posek is because he learned the sugya differently, but to us, both are divrei elokim chaim.
Avira, you are wrong, but I am not going to start a long argument with you.
but if you’re offended, it’s probably best not to be on here, or to engage in discussions with anyone outside of crown heights
Judging from his previous posts, Emunas disagrees with everyone in Crown Heights as well.
Just pointing this out.
That’s it then. Avirah, you are wrong! I always thought so, but now I know it as a fact because mdd said so.
@avaira funny you bring in sh”u harav, yes medrash, look at any maamer chassidus, thats what it is usually, an explanation on medrash. (and pilpul/raid – comes later according to sh”u)
Please tell me the specific place where The Baal HaTanya allegedly poskins that you are not supposed to learn more than a half hour of chassidus per day.
Avira
While skimming through this thread I saw that you posed a question to emunas about learning a lot of Chassidus and how it goes against the Shulchan Aruch Harav and that it comes from neo-Chabad.
I’m not that involved in reading this thread so I don’t known if an answer was posed, but the notion that learning a lot of Chassidus is a neo- Chabad thing and very recent is completely off target.
There are countless stories of Chassidim of previous generations that would think Chassidus for hours at a time way before your “neochabad” coined phrase can be applied to.
We don’t even have to bring proof from earlier Chassidim, the rebbe rashab instituted learning Chassidus for four hours a day in tomchai temimim- obviously they also had an 8 hour non stop nigleh seder- but the fact is that they learned Chassidus a big part of the day, and these were young bochurim in yeshiva, not very old and pious Chassidim over the age of forty.
I’m sure the rebbe rashab knew hilchos Talmud Torah of the alter rebbe, and if you’d ask him I’m sure that he’d be able to give a proper reconciliation to your problem, and if you think he wouldn’t and that you attribute “neo-Chabad” all the way back to the rebbe rashab, than I’m a proud neo-chabadnik.Ps i didn’t read everything on this thread so I do t know if I align with emunas with regards to his hashkafos, but the fact is that learning a lot of Chassidus is not a recent invention.
I must say that I like 741’s point
It’s all in perek 2 of hilchos talmud torah, where he says how much we have to toil to know kol hatorah kulah, which he says is mikrah mishnah and talmud…once a person knows the material, he’s supposed to spend the rest of his time on svara, lashos and terutzim, what we call “lomdus”
במה דברים אמורים בתחלת תלמודו של אדם אבל כשיגדיל בחכמה
וירבה בה במאד ולא יהיה צריך לא ללמוד תורה שבכתב ולא לעסוק תמיד בתורה שבע”פ מפני שכבר חזר על לימודו פעמים רבות מאד עד שנחקק היטב בזכרונו כל התורה שבכתב ושבע”פ כולה אזי יקרא בעתים מזומנים תורה שבכתב ודברי תורה שבע”פ כדי שלא ישכח דבר מדיני התורה ויפנה כל ימיו לעיון התלמוד לסבור סברות בהלכות ולפלפל בהן בקושיות ופירוקים לירד לעומק הסברות וטעמי ההלכות להבין דבר מתוך דבר ולדמות דבר לדבר ולחדש חידושי הלכות רבות לפי רוחב שיש בלבו וישוב דעתו כמו שאמרו ליגמר אינש והדר ליסבר.He’s talking about someone who was not taught, and this is how he is supposed to teach himself. Someone who has a chinuch, is supposed to go from mikrah, to mishnah, to gemara, like chazal say in avos. Then he says to be meshalesh, but not in equal times, because he says gemara is a lot harder than mikrah.
Nowhere in any of the prescribed times or limudim is there any mention of chasidus. Not one. The only time he mentions it is when he says to learn kabalah-based mussar seforim, but he clearly says that it’s a side thing.
As for the rashab – alecha lehavi raya. If he in fact did that, then fine; you’d also have to ask a few questions once we verify the story:
Did all Lubavitcher boys go to this Yeshiva, or was it like elsewhere in Europe, where only yechidim did, and if so, what was bis reason – and why did he have to institute it? When he made the change, what was before, what caused it, and what happened afterwards? Then we can see if there’s any way of applying what he may have done to our times.
Because when i see chabad boys learnihg chasidus for hours, all i see is that it makes them confused about basic yiddishkeit and way too conceptual, while influencing their way of thinking halachikally. They also don’t really know what they’re talking about, because if you ask enough times “what does ain sof mean,” and proceed to ask what the definition is of the words they use to describe it, you’ll see that they’re not actually knowledgeable about kabalah….since it’s, after all, kabalah!
Can anyone really profess that chabad did not undergo a significant metamorphosis under the last Lubavitcher rebbe? That’s why i refer to it as neo chabad.
Old chabad were extremely separate from goyin, antizionist, presumably wouldn’t do kiruv with goyin, would sleep in a sukkah in eretz yisroel, would wash for shalosh seudos, wouldn’t pray to a rebbe, carry around his picture and think he knows their thoughts, and many, many other things. Regarding the omniscient thing and hiskashrus, the last Lubavitcher rebbe admitted he didn’t see it in sifrei chasidus and it’s a chush that he gets from them.
Hence, i refer to present day chabad Lubavitch as neo-chabad.
OK, so I repeat, where does he specifically say that you’re not supposed to learn chassidus for more than a half an hour?
You agree, of course, that this sefer was written early in his life before he was mekabel everything from the magid. It’s the Baal HaTanya himself who speaks in almost every maamar in the last 12 years of his life about hisbonenus in elokus. It’s very clear that a person is supposed to spend significant amounts of time on hisbonenus.
Why are you so willing to say that he can change his pesak on things he wrote in the siddur, but something that appears clear in every single maamar transcribed from him at the end of his life can’t mean what it says?
As for modern-day chabad, I have no love for modern-day lubavitch. It’s interesting that you chose אין סוף out of all of the possible terms, since by definition, no created being, human or malach, in any olam, can understand the אין סוף. There are significant problems with modern-day lubavitch, and it certainly has changed greatly.
In all of my comments, I am not talking about the system as it is practiced by modern-day lubavitchers. I am referring to the system as envisioned by the Baal HaTanya himself for someone who has the proper hakdamos in nistar.
And I still hold that the best way to obtain this hakdama is by learning from Reb Aharon Strusele, something that no modern day lubavitcher would do (or anybody from the 2nd rebbe on, for that matter).
And Ii am in agreement with you that the ikar is nigleh, not nistar. It’s just an absolute fact that you cannot possibly hope to make any progress in nistar if you never learn it for more than a half an hour. It requires going slow, thinking about things, learning things over and over to gain new insights, and (especially at the beginning) constantly making sure not to have any hagshama, C”V.
It is impossible to fathom that the Baal HaTanya, once he was megaleh his deep chassidus, would tell his talmidim to limit it to only 30 minutes a day. It all depends on the person and what they need.
Emunas, At least we now know where we stand; you’re not claiming that chabad holds like your view of the baal hatanya – you just essentially formed your own Hasidic ideology based on your own reading of seforim that were meant to be given over to chasidim of a particular rebbe.
As for why he doesn’t say to not spend hours on chasidus, he also doesn’t say to not stand on your head while singing mah yedidus – he says what you “should” do and מכלל הן אתה שומע לאו, he gives a step by step guide to how to spend one’s day in learning and does not mention chasidus or kabalah, except for mussar. Granted he doesn’t give a time allotment, but it’s clear from the amount of time necessary to learn kol hatorah kulah that he wouldn’t advocate for it, and if he did, it would have been mentioned in the curriculum for Torah study, but it’s completely left out.
As for changing his mind, he’d have to say so openly for such a claim to begin to be taken seriously. He doesn’t, so just as the ramchal extoled mussar but never said to spend hours a day on it, the baal hatanya can sing the praises of chasidus and it has no bearing on how much time he believed should be spent.
I do agree that just like mussar, the amount of chasidus a person should learn depends on themselves; this is exactly why rav chaim brisker was against a mussar seder, because he said that some need more, and some need less – as in, some need 10 minutes, and some need 40, or maybe an hour, but more than that is almost certainly bitul Torah.
Avirah, not sleeping in the sukkah started with the second Rebbe.
Mdd, it started way before that; it’s brought in the rema! The issue is eretz yisroel; until the last Lubavitcher rebbe, no one refrained from sleeping in a sukkah in eretz yisroel, because there is no issue of mitztayer there.
Avirah, their not sleeping in the sukkah has nothing to do with that Ramo. We’ve discussed it here!!
@avaira
all his things he claims the rebbe changed, were all answered many times on this forum, actually the only thing that changed in the last 70 yrs since the rebbe became rebbe, is that being mixed with other jews, some misnagdim learned a lot of things about chassidim that he didn’t know before, and decided that they are new, just open up a keser shem tov, likutai diburim etc. (shalosh seudos? youre kidding? the alter rebbe paskened you dont need to wash even for the day seuda, his brother the maharil writes about this!)edited
Maybe lack of a rebbe is the problem? If one spends time learning esoteric topics, he at minimum needs close personal guidance. Sichos are not sufficient
this argument of spending time on chassidus, actually chabad finishes rambam – the halachos of kol hatorah kulah every year, the alter rebbe speaks about this is sh”u, (unlike litvaks who spends most of the day on “lumdus” and maybe finish shas at age 25 or 30, and never learn the rest of kol hatorah kulah. so……
(and as mentioned before chassidus is a explanation of medrash like
the medrash that hashem created the world because he wanted a dirah bitachtonim for example, or leolem hashem divarcha nitzav bashamayim etc, so if you have a issue spending time of chassidus, you should also have an issue learning gemarah in depth before you finish kol hatorah kulah)
as mentioned, people with these complaints never learned chassidus, if they said they did, usually they mean they read thru tanya if your lukky. its like someone who read a few mesechtos of gemarah from artscroll, and thinks he knows gemarah like a rav or rosh yeshiva who spent 20 yrs learning gemara,
chassidus is very deap, and there are currently probobly over 150 seforim of chassidus printed from the chabad rabaim, someone who didn’t learn the maamarim of the rebbe rashab, simply does not understand chassidus, hes like learning chumash or gemara without rashi.
torah or, likutai torah, these seforim need the rebbe rashabs maamarim, (the alter rebbe said these maamarim for chassidim who knew kisvai ari zal)
the rebbe explains alot of conceps of chassidus in likutai sichos vol 1-4 for those honestly interested in learning chassidus (btw the frierdiker rebbe said that the rebbe knew 300 sifrai kabala)@Emunas
Which seforim did Rav Aron Strusaleh write? I sincerely would be interested in learning them bezh
Rav Aharon wrote the following:
1) שערי היחוד ואמונה – first published in תק”פ, approximately seven years after the death of the Baal HaTanya. This sefer discusses many of the basics of the הקדמות that you need to properly understand the kaballah behind the Baal HaTanya, and it can also serve as an introduction to עץ חיים for those more kaballah oriented. It was recently reprinted (just this past year) after being out of print for a long time. The reprinted version is truly a pleasure to learn from.
2) The continuation to that sefer is called שערי עבודה. It takes the hakdamos from the שערי היחוד ואמונה and brings them into the realm of actual avodah. Having a basic understanding of Tanya, in addition to the first sefer, is important in this sefer. It has not yet been reprinted, but I believe that it will be soon IYH.
3) He has what was originally a 3-volume sefer called עבודת הלוי which are maamarim על התורה. Until recently it has been very hard to come by, but it is in the process of being republished. My information may be a little out of date, but I believe they have published two of what will ultimately be a four volume set.
your kidding me i thought i was done receiving these emails saying that thought on chabad has a reply
c
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.