Zumba=Not Tzanuah?

HaKatan: Saying that “MO” takes “liberties” with Halachah and then refusing to discuss what those liberties are is just asking to have your opinion dismissed out of hand. In my experience, people you would term “MO” have the same Mekoros and the same Halachos as anyone else. What differentiates “MO” from “traditional Orthodox” (whatever that means, you refuse to explain that too) in most people’s eyes, and I will assume in yours too until you actually explain the differences, is probably nothing more than a few inconsequential Halachic decisions (yes, Halachic decisions, even if you feel that one of the opinions is completely right), mostly ones that affect external appearances.

HaKatan: And I am saying that “MO” takes no liberties with Halacha and allow nothing to trump the Torah. Your anecdotal stories don’t prove anything. Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar. These are Halachic decisions, all of them. And as I said before, yes there are people who claim to be “MO” who aren’t completely Shomer Halacha. That still doesn’t at all prove that “MO” takes liberties with Halachah. No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.

Sam2 and Feif Un: In truth, it is likely the lack of an unadulterated Torah education that causes MO to take the liberties they do. Were they educated in mainstream traditional orthodox yeshivos then they would know better. Again, I am trying to not judge people and am trying to give all the benefit of the doubt.

Speaking of co-ed schools, parents with students in a co-ed school are placing them in a veritable minefield of issurim and even your Rav JBS was against it, and he himself wrote that his Maimonides in Boston was a particular exception. Yet there are plenty of MO co-ed schools. On what valid halachic basis? None, except in very limited circumstances.

While on the subject of Rav JBS, nobody has yet answered why MO ignore their Rav JBS and shun modern society to the greatest possible extent as Rav JBS advised.

So even if there were no innate issurim, being a slave to the decrepit culture around us would still be wrong, even according to Rav JBS. How do you explain the reviews of bars and other places of pritzus (yes, any bar, club, etc) in YU publications?

If you read any issue of the YU Commentator, an official publication, it is quite obvious that they must have a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional orthodoxy does. Going to a Jazz performance at a Harlem apartment? And then writing about how it mentions Yeshu HaNotzri’s birth and everyone sang along? Students writing publibly how they’re upset that your Rashei Yeshiva have too much influence on the school in that the school agreed to put in Internet filters in the dorms? And on and on and on. It is disgusting, to those not de-sensitized (presumably like yourselves) or not part of the MO world.

As I said, I am not interested in listing other people’s “liberties”. I have provided small samples over the last few posts to convey a point and it is clear from those samples that there is an underlying root cause and that is MO.

The point remains that either MO is working with a different set of rules than traditional orthodoxy is or else their Rabbis are simply uniformly ignored, which is difficult to believe. So for non-MO, ask a traditional orthodox Rabbi about Zumba rather than asking an MO Rabbi.

Feif Un:

I believe I could easily explain to you what is halachicly wrong with co-ed schooling, and even your Rav JBS was against it. So why argue with him? But you can look up Rav Moshe’s teshuva and the other responsa on the topic and you will see the multiple issurim in attending a co-ed school. “Touching between the genders” is only one problem. Histaklus, Kalus rosh and other issues are equally severe. Again, MO obviously must have a different Shulchan Aruch if it can go against all those issurim, diOraysa and otherwise, including of their own Rav JBS.

Once again, you fail to distinguish between traditional orthodox and chareidi. I spoke of the former, not the latter which is irrelevant to this discussion.

But while I am no fan of chareidi chumros, if you look up those same teshuvos and you see how separation of the genders is, essentially, the more the better, you will see that the Chareidi chumras have much more basis in halacha in fortifying those borders of separation than MO does in destroying them.

I could also argue that the standards of 50 years ago, even *if* appropriate then, does not automatically make them still appropriate now. Unlike MO which believes that Torah bends for secular culture, traditional orthodoxy does not. But it does believe that secular culture can change, and it has certainly changed for the worse in a big way, and such changes may call for new takanos. So when the culture you proudly celebrate (against your own Rav JBS and Rav SRH who is “rolling over in his grave” from the way you corrupt his teachings), has become so hyper-sexual, that calls for an appropriate measured response that was not needed 50 years ago. Quite possibly, that means separate seating, or whatever else that was not done 50 years ago. It’s not my decision, but the logic is certainly there. You certainly don’t have to worry about aveiros that way, but you sure do if you mix the genders the MO way.

Sam2: I’m okay with no further response from you, though I certainly did provide examples. The “student dynamics of YU”, whatever possible explanation there could theoretically be for those dynamics, have nothing to do with co-ed MO schools and other gender mixing, and the resultant aveiros (chamuros) that result from that laxity yet the laxity is intentionally not fixed thus allowing the aveiros (Chamuros) to continue.

Quote from your previous post:

“Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar.”

Again, there are numerous issurim that come up when you mix the genders. In other words, if you care at all about the Torah, you do NOT want to needlessly mix the genders. Yet, as you admit, MO (proudly) does mix the genders and you claim they believe that “they are halachic decisions”.

But they can’t be “halachic decisions” if they go against halacha (or many halachos). So either they’re using a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional Orthodox does, or else it must be that they let modernity trump the Torah. The name is MO. The halacha is not like their alleged piskei halacha. What else could it be that causes them to claim something is “muttar” when it clearly is not? MO.

Your last quote:

“No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.”

While I believe this to be theoretically true, people do transgress. And people then rationalize those transgressions with anything from plausible to outright foolish reasons. And the ones who transgress biShitah (gender mixing, social kissing, women wearing pants, et al.) still consider themselves Orthodox. How? The rationale is that MO says so.

As for the other examples, like the story, et. al., that I brought: again, these are indicative of a lack of sensitivity and Torah hashkafos and a corresponding immersion in secular culture, which your own Rav JBS decried and which MO still holds by despite Rav JBS’s position.

I’ve been waiting to hear your answer to why MO ignores the Rav (and traditional orthodox poskim), but none has been forthcoming. It seems obvious that the answer is that simply the lack of proper Torah education is the cause.

Neither you nor Feif Un have offered any answers to anything I’ve posed. All you’ve done is ignore the evidence and attempt to halachicly justify that (co-ed) which is not halachicly justifiable and then attack chareidim for “chumras” when those “chumras” have far greater basis in halacha than any kula you’ve come up with.

Once again, whether you claim it’s halachicly valid or it’s like my position that MO shitos are clearly halchicly invalid, you’ve still proven my point, with the above admission, that when it comes to these matters, a traditional orthodox Jew should not ask an MO Rav as he will get an MO answer which, at least in these matters, is not in accordance with traditional orthodoxy. Like I said a number of posts back, if you ask a Satmar Chassid if you can daven mincha well past shkiah, he will say that you can; a traditional Rav will not. That’s just the facts. So, too, here. As per your own admission, MO is more tolerant of mixing of the genders than is traditional orthodoxy.

So you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point.

HaKatan, I wrote to you that you are mistaken, and that the majority of MO schools do NOT have mixed classes except at the very young age levels. Don’t attack a problem that doesn’t exist.

As for the YU Commentator, I don’t read it very often, so I can’t comment on specifics. The only thing I can say is that it’s a newspaper, which will often print a minority opinion just to gain readers. I highly doubt the letters written represent the majority of students in YU.

You also wrote how society has changed, so we must be more stringent, and have more takanos. How can you then claim that you practice “authentic Judaism” if you admit that it changes with the times? If anything, the Judaism YOU practice has changed with society, while MO has remained constant.

As Sam2 said, you are quite convinced that your way is correct no matter what. You are not open to an intelligent debate. That is why this will be my last response to you in this thread.

Feif Un:

>> “I wrote to you that you are mistaken, and that the majority of MO schools do NOT have mixed classes except at the very young age levels.”

Mixed classes are not the only problems in MO; mixed schools, even with separate classes are still a problem, and that is certainly not the only “liberty” MO takes. So that problem and others very much do exist.

>> “You also wrote how society has changed, so we must be more stringent, and have more takanos. How can you then claim that you practice “authentic Judaism” if you admit that it changes with the times? If anything, the Judaism YOU practice has changed with society, while MO has remained constant.”

The Torah doesn’t CH”V change with the times; that’s MO’s department; they bend the Torah to fit their pursuit of godless modernity. And MO has remained “constant” only in its mistaken “compromise” approach to our faith.

Rather, Takanos are made to address the shortcomings of the times. This, unlike MO, is authentic Judaism (Pirkei Avos: Asu Siyag LaTorah), part of our living Torah.

I’m sorry you can’t at least distinguish between authentic traditional Judaism and the unfortunate mistake (in hindsight, certainly, and bidieved even according to Rav JBS at the time) that is MO.

I don’t expect any response as, unfortunately, there really is none to give when your own Rav JBS agrees you are wrong.

Once again: you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point, not to “attack anything”.

May we all be zoche to the geulah sheleimah BB”A, when this will all be crystal clear to everyone.

“One thing Shua did mention was that many of the women who left still wanted a Zumba class, and ended up going to non-Jewish, mixed gyms. This just goes to show that once again, adding unnecessary chumros ends up causing more harm than good, and pushes people away.”

Seems to me that these people have issues with basic halacha, never mind the chumros.

And there are frum women who go to Curves wearing their work clothes, which are really nice, lift weights in those clothes, and swap their work shoes for tennis shoes. I hate to say it, but with the rise in prominence of technology, people feel so much more free to do what ever they want whether it is in their online persona, or in real life.