- This topic has 71 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Dear Syag,
“You can’t pull a “different strokes for different folks” in Judaism when halachah is not being followed.”
I can.
Lakewood Yeshivos eat before tekiyas shofar.
Briskers don’t fast on the regular fast days.
Chasidish men shave their heads.
Stolin davens the whole pisukei dizimrah out loud.
Many people daven Shacharis late in the morning. And Mincha after sundown.
Some light the menorah inside, others light outside.
It is common to dance on Shabbos. Just about everybody dances on Simchas Torah.
There is a widespread minhag to eat inside on Shemini Atzeres.
Sometimes, different Jews do things differently.
Right, per their own mesorah/rav
Dear Syag,
Those that go onthe temple mount also have their own Rav.
And they need to be very careful of who their rav is and if he is following his rav and mesorah. Which is not the case in some of the people who have been mentioned. Especially be wary of psakim that begin with disclaimers about the sudden need to reconfigure due to the changing times.
Dear Syag,
Beware of your own advice! It may apply to you as well.
Absolutely without question. I do that before I post, not when people try to shtoch me with it. To the extent that I am in a very difficult position in my life because of it. I need a different rav but the one most available to me is not of my mesorah. I am hoping to speak to an Adam gadol about it for direction.
Syag > You admit you are lacking information but your response is to tell me to do research.
to recap: I did my research – have read a number of works and heard references from others that all lead to the conclusion that the Rav is a Talmid Chacham. You and others are dismissing him based on some unclear references/rumors/opinions that claim that his views are not just something you do not agree, but unacceptable. I am pointing out that the picture of such a dysfunctional Feinstein family does not make sense and should make you ask yourself a question.
Btw, some introductions mention that a number of Igeres Moshes are addressed to R Tendler. Can someone summarize what topics are in their conversation and how is R Moshe addressing R Tendler?
“heard references from others”
Could mean anything. Whatever.“You and others are dismissing him based on some unclear references/rumors/opinions”
Absolutely not. That is trash. And if your above mentioned others are the source of that then that explains a lot. But this is false and you need to either get real information or just stop pretending you already did.
Blinders.Breaking minhag yerushalayim, even if a rov somehow thinks it’s ok to go up, would be unconscionable if not for the blindness that zionism causes. The number of jews it puts in danger should also be sufficient reason to forbid it, but zionism is an egel hazahav which does not allow these rabbis to see what’s clearly in front of them.
Comparing that to minagim based on rishonim (like eating indoors on shemini atzeres, it’s tosfos) or gedolei yeshivos (like rav yisroel saying to make kiddush before tekios) is mind boggling.
Putting jews in danger puts one outside the category of oseh al daas beis din patur, even if we were to say that the rabbis being followed are legitimate baalei horaah.
Interesting that this same supposed baal horaah was moser klal yisroel beyad akum to advance what he thought was the saving og lives that were at risk from bris milah. Tell me how a supporter of tendler justifies endangering jewish life to walk up on har habayis, which is no chiyuv, but not for bris milah, which is a mitzvah?
Religious zionism, the mamzer of the unholy union between nationalism and superficial, thoughtless judaism, was never, and will never be accepted by the mainstream. It leaves more jews dead than secular zionism, and its goals represent rhe contamination of all we consider holy.
Avira, a good question about difference between metzitza and har habayit. I presume that the thinking is that danger is allowed when there is a reason. On metzitza, one can say that H’ will be also concerned about baby’s health and will forgive skipping this tradition. Gemora says that one Rav will postpone bris due to draft from wind, so it is not too outrageous to be concerned about remote threat to a baby. On the other hand, one might claim that going to Har Habyit has a value in strengthening Jewish presence in Yerushalaim, etc rather than danger. I understand that this is questionable, and that nonsense for you, but this is a disagreement on political judgment rather than halakha.
Looking at metzitza issue from recent knowledge, Aguda’s response that “driving is more dangerous” seems to be true. On the other hand, cases of post-bris herpes is still reported in press once in a while over the years. Maybe someone wants to compute numbers to compare with covid danger per person, assuming say 10 herpes cases per NYC (of course, cases may be under-reported).
We can also conclude that, similarly to Covid, it is possible that R Tendler with his understanding of builogy and statistics understands the danger and thus osers, while a community of people who do not study that may rely on “shomer peshayim”, as they do for Covid.
Because you refuse to recognize the hostility of the world to morality in general and Jews in particular, every aspect of Torah, Mankind, and History, is subject to change and up for debate.
How sad.
AAQ – that’s exactly what i think tendler thought; and it’s evil at its core. When it comes to mitzvos “Hashem will forgive us”, nu nu, it’s only a mitzvah… But when we have non torah based political interests…. that’s a different story. For that, we’re moser nefesh.
Dear Avira,
And your problem with that thinking is that you believe it is one and the same. By your way of thinking, mitzvos are just Torah based political thoughts.
No, the other way around – politics needs to be based on Torah, which this isn’t. This is just sticking it in the face of their enemies, no kovod Hashem or kovod hatorah.
Avira and it’s evil at its core.
>> When it comes to mitzvos “Hashem will forgive us”, nu nu, it’s only a mitzvah…
We have lots of halakha of postponing bris (jaundice) or cancelling (hemophilia, empirically measured – 2 brothers dying), possibly even draft as I mentioned (Yevamos ~ 70). So, it is clear that health is a factor, the question is a matter of degree that can be rationally discussed, nothing “evil” here. The “forgive” wording is entirely mine, poorly paraphrasing the shabbos breaking rationale “live for them”.
>> But when we have non torah based political interests…. that’s a different story.
I understand that you see this as political on the context of pro- and anti-Zionism. Here we are trying to get into another person’s mind, so let’s try following him. In the context of people affiliated with Israel as a Jewish country, this is an issue of having an upper hand against the enemy who is a threat to Jewish lives. Lubavicher was quoting in this context a difference between fighting goyim in general and those who attack border cities – the latter requires extra protection, otherwise enemy will continue creeping in over time, like Russia in Ukraine. Har Habayit is an important place both in Jewish and non-Jewish minds, so prevailing there matters. You can continue arguing that his premise is wrong and Jews should evacuate from Israel, or you can disagree with the heshbon whether it is healthy to provoke a billion people, but – again, from that POV – it is a reasonable sevora.
A bigger picture – there is always a difference how we address risks coming directly from Hashem, or indirectly from our enemies:
David rightfully choose a plague v. a war, as there is no end to which evil people might go; We teach Torah in the face of Romans or Soviets, etc. But there is no chiyuv to do bris milah on a bleeding child to prove that we are big tzadikim. This was also addressed in some of teshuvos regarding Covid.Where the limits of risk are might be a subject for debate. People can indeed be affected by biases here: some because they “believe in science” and will swallow anything to show how “progressive” they are; others – because they do not trust anything “from goyim” and do not know anything themselves. Most are affected by the bias of convenience and personal finance – I don’t want to do some extras; do something my friends do not do; or that can hurt my mossad. (kiso/koso/kaaso).
AAQ- you’ve memorized the lines but have joined concept of the meaning. Danger has criteria. You seem to think forgetting to brush your teeth qualifies . If you tell your daughter not to call you at work unless it is extremely urgent and she calls you because she can’t find her socks is that urgent? You seem to use that level of personal interpretation to explain what “Hashem was probably thinking” (as if).
Syag > Danger has criteria
Right. I was just pondering this. We can put some numerical values on mixtures – 1/60, 1/100 and on preponderance of evidence (50%), but I am not seeing good definition of “danger” or just “this might happen”. Anyone knows?
Gemora has a lot of discussions weighing dangers of missing out on something v. remote risk (not necessarily to health, maybe just of public confusion). On the current page – should we allow yibum under some confusing and rare circumstances when someone somewhere might see that and not realize what exactly is happening and learn halakha incorrectly. While the weights are not clear to me, what is clear that every time we can avoid risk, we should consider it seriously. Very common solution in Yevamos – do halitzah instead of yibum, something you would not do if there was no risk at all.As to socks – what if a shidduch date is already driving? what if she is gonna steal socks from her sister or even brother, risking lives in the upcoming fight? what about mental stress on her mother?
So, I usually take such calls at work (btw, my kids consider calling rude, they text) – at least first 2-3 per incident.AAQ-i don’t really care what calls you take at work, the premise was that you told them not to call. Is this you not getting it, or just pretending you don’t?
Dear Avira,
1. Minhag Yerushalayim has been contentious throughout history. It does not do anything besides pushing off change a few years. It couldn’t even prevent Shabbtai Tzvi from enacting whatever he fancied.
2. I’m not promoting Zionism. And I’m for sure not advising anyone to go up on the temple mount. But that beyond all the personal views, there is a bona fide halachic dispute on the matter. I know this second hand from someone trustworthy.
3. Politics based on Torah sounds like an oxymoron. And I hope you know that nobody is practicing it. A very small amount of askanim claim to be doing it. But nobody asks their opinion in any other area of Torah. And this includes those that have a small following.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.