Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yehudis – if someone tells me that they think rav moshe feinstein was moshiach, I don’t have to disprove them – i have absolutely zero reason to think that he is. I have zero reason to think anyone today or earlier is/was moshiach. It really doesn’t matter who moshiach is, but putting the lubavitcher rebbe in that equation is effectively saying “well, you can’t prove that he ISN’T, therefore he might be, and really what I’m saying is that i think he is or is likely to be, and you can’t prove me otherwise!”
It’s like saying someone believes in the tooth fairy. Upon questioning, they remark – “sir, you’ve shown me that there’s no oroof to the existence of a tooth fairy, but….can you prove that there isn’t one?” That’s not how logic works. We assume the non-existence of unknown things until they are proven at least to some degree.
Yehudis, perhaps because the content of the posts themselves – disagree or agree with them – aren’t in the category of opinions that run contrary to normative Jewish thought, while feminism in all of its incarnations definitely is. I don’t agree with ujm fully on his views on women, but the difference between him and the overwhelming majority of bnei Torah are pretty small, whereas any inching towards feminism is a deviation from the mesorah and kovod hatorah.
The proof to this is that conservative and reform have no respect or tolerance for racists, climate change skeptics, anti-legbt or anti feminists. When it’s something they care about they are just as… Actually more discriminatory than we are, albeit for the wrong reasons.
Right; it’s easier to have a false sense of unity when one is not interested in the subject matter. Conservative and reform jews have no problem getting along with Christians, atheists, and buddhists, because they don’t consider these beliefs to be anathema. It is not due to any love, but rather due to a lack of love of and conviction in Torah and Hashem.
We respect any person because of kovod habrios, he is a tzelem elokim regardless of belief. Whether or not you want to be around a specific person will depend on that person’s influence and potential to cause harm to one’s self or family.
Or perhaps the study was flawed and only had those 2 groups? By goyim, teenage mothers and 35 year olds are common, 21-23 isn’t
Rabbi shechter mentions that story multiple times; if you call kol halashon you should go to “previous shiurim” snd go to vayetzei, there are 5 shiurim…2 or 3 of them have this story on it
Regarding the health issue, it seems that it’s only a concern if the woman waits until the aye of 35; common among goyim, extremely uncommon among yidden
This was clearly a carry over; let’s be honest.
Yukel, telling people who disagree with you that they don’t “know the first thing about (insert topic)” only shows insecurity. Also, chasidus is not part and parcel with “Judaism” or even kabalah. There are hundreds of thousands of jews who practice judaism who are not involved in either. I don’t claim to be an expert on chasidus, but the satmar rov definitely was, and he criticized the lubavitcher rebbe frequently, referring to him as a “shoteh”.
That being said, I believe I know the first thing about judaism, which is that there is one G-d, infinite, non-physical, indivisible, and “one”, with nothing else in the universe comparable to Him. Your words contradict that clarion monotheism one appreciates from having a sound chinuch and keeping away from false ideologies, from within or without.
The fact that you have to distinguish your beliefs from Christianity (or rather, your understanding of Christianity, more on that soon) is telling. I do not have any beliefs on Hashem which run close enough to Christianity that i need to explain the difference. Christianity does not believe that god was “somewhere else” when he was cv”s in yushke. Christianity believes in a Trinity, a god that has 3 manifestations, one being the “father”, the “son”, and some sort of spirit. It’s nonsense, because Hashem’s oneness is indivisible, and they accept that He is one, not three. But lishitasam, the “father” part was there running the world while the “son” part was busy saving humanity from sin by dying on a cross.
What Christianity and neo-chabad have in common is that they are ascribing divinity to something else besides the one true G-d. Neo-chabad saying the words “running the world” are very specific. We don’t say that the area between the badim “runs the world” either. Never in Jewish history has anyone said that something runs the world besides Hashem himself. No one said it about Moshe rabeinu, or any of our other tzadikim.
Hashem reveals himself in many ways. When you see hashgocha pratis in your dealings with goyim, Hashem has revealed himself through the goy – are you going to now look at him as a tzinor for shechina? As someone who enjoys chasidus, it definitely has shown me ways of seeing hashgocha that I wouldn’t have otherwise known – chasidus is beautiful, rebbe-worship is not.
According to your explanation that when you say a man “runs the world” it really means that he is a kli to show the revelation of godliness…what does that have to do with running the world? Tzadikim sit in gan eden and enjoy the ziv hashechina. They’re not any more meyuchod with Hashem than any other neshoma.
Another Interesting quote from moshe Kotlarsky. “Therefore, we are notifying Shluchim, that this year’s Kinus will not be in person and will be entirely virtual. There will not be any in person programming, meals or hosting. In order to avoid any potential of a Chilul Hashem or Chilul Shem Lubavitch, we are asking Shluchim to please not come to New York during the Kinus dates.”
Until now i thought kidush / chilul chabad were colloquialisms that only the hamon am used – i was mistaken. The conflation between the honor of Hashem and the group of chassidim one affiliates himself with are standard even on the leadership level…
Also, i wonder how the lubavitcher rebbe reconciled his shitoh that the secular torah-trashing state must not give “even one inch” of land back to the arabs with the gemara that says ( Sanhedrin 98a) that moshiach doesn’t come until even the smallest rulership of yisroel is depleted. The lubavitcher rebbe framed his activities around bringing moshiach, but here if israel insists on not “giving one inch”, won’t that delay bias hamoshiach?
After thinking about those questions, i think that an honest lubavitcher will admit that they want achdus….so long as everyone is chabad, or at least acknowledges the superiority and the “nesius” of their late rebbe. Similar to how north korea wants “unity” with the south.
Will you honestly say that you do not wish or think it’s best if everyone were lubavitch? Will you say openly that a lubavitcher is not better, more enlightened, or more authentic than a litvak who never heard of the sefiros, and that all forms of avodas Hashem are equally valid?
Ask yourself these questions and think about them for a while; they’re part of the reason why chabad complain about achdus and ahavas yisroel whenever they’re confronted with opposition.
They’re also part of the reason why true achdus will not he achievable so long as one segment believes themselves to have a monopoly on Torah, so much so that they brazenly send missionaries into yeshivos and shuls to convert young, impressionable jewish men to their beliefs.
Cooperation on kashrus has proven to be an achdus driving force. The same could be said of a yichus registry, once kehilos can come up with a system wherein all parts of the kehilos are represented. I don’t see it happening anytime soon though.
Having individual cities run their own yichus logs sounds a lot more doable to me. If they could do it in Europe without computers, I’m sure it can be done easily nowadays.
Halevi, chazal also say “הכל צפוי והרשות נתונה”.
Are you bothered by why the rishonim use a logical proof instead of pesukim, maamarei chazal etc? They do that for a number of issues – the rambam in moreh nevuchim is trying to explain everything from a philosophical perspective; he isn’t trying to source hashkofos.Ober chochom – if you’re going to take things personally on an anonymous forum, it might not be in your best emotional interest to participate. I get a lot of personal attacks for my statements on “the big three” (zionism, MO, and chabad) but it doesn’t bother me. Partially because it’s an online forum, as well as because in my line of work I have to deal with all forms of disrespect and bad attitudes.
As it happens to be, halevi wasn’t even attacking you, or trying to upshlug you. Asking you for a source is just a question one asks when unconvinced by a statement without textual proof
Syag, we ask tzadikim (and malachim) to intercede on our behalf TO Hashem, that He should grant our requests. Kotlarsky said that the rebbe should “grant our requests” – him looking down from shomayim is not the issue here, as any good Jew looks down from shomayim at times when they are permitted to do so (a descendent’s wedding, etc). I think you may have missed that part in the statement he made. He also said it in front of thousands of shluchim; representatives of chabad literally all over the world.
Also, please give us one – just one – example of a sefer which uses ain sof in any other context besides talking about Hashem, not written by the last lubavitcher rebbe. Not interpretation, actual, clear evidence.
Syag is right – no one is “bashing” or “hating”. We are bringing up issues that we have either encountered personally or learned about elsewhere (in my case it’s both). Messianics claim that they are the majority, and so-called “antis” claim that they are.
Chabad.org is run by many types of people, it is not monolithic, but even most messianics are smart enough not to advertise their beliefs to people who aren’t frum, that website’s main clientele. Also, I’m sure they’ve come to an agreement whereby they don’t deny or confirm the messianic message on their main website.
Many major chabad organizations are messianic. Can you explain why at the kinnus hashluchim, Moshe kotlarsky (vice president of chabad’s chinuch organization) said a corrupted version of veyehi noam as “”may the Rebbe look upon our gathering favorably, his presence is here with us now and may he grant our requests”
A prominent chabad rebbetzin named Leah Lipszyc said in a 98″ magazine called “horizons”:
“Rebbe,” I thought. “I know you’re here with us. I know you help people in difficult situations. I think this fits the criteria – please help us now. And do it quickly, please, before one of these guys snaps and decides to shoot.”Shlomo cunin, head of west coast chabad, said in a video that the world will see “that it is the rebbe who runs the world”
The lubavitcher rebbe himself writes in toras menachem volume 1 162-163, that one should have no doubt that the rebbe is “the baal habayis of the world, can do anything” and that one should not think that one can “hide from him”. Granted this material is in parenthesis; i do not know if the rebbe himself actually wrote it, or if the man responsible for printing it included it, but either way it is found in the sefer, and not contested – maybe one of our chabad apologists can shed some light on this specific statement?
Either way, go to crown heights and see how many yarmulkahs have yechi on them if the above isn’t sufficient. I also know of chabad expatriates who say that even the “antis” (the fact that they identify themselves based on their non-affiliation with messianism is telling) really think that he’ll be moshiach when he returns, but that people aren’t “ready” for his “revelation”.
Participant; it probably is correct, but it doesn’t change the cultural association
Health; slang has use and is defined by its common usage. I’ve never heard Harry used to describe a litvak, OTD or MO person. I’ve only heard it used to describe people who are shomer torah umitzvos fully, but dress more American, don’t use yeshivish lingo, go by English names(that’s a given), and are otherwise removed culturally(but not religiously) from the Yeshiva world
AAQ is right that congrary to Are R, we don’t find poskim overturning psak or inventing their own psak based on rishonim to go against established achronim. Are R also claimed that the MB follows kisvei yad as opposed to the chazon ish. The chazon ish wrote this explicitly, that it is against the belief in hashgocha that Hashem has given raboseinu ha’achronim the correct text of the rishonim. He says whatever rev akiva eiger had is emes, even if we find a different version. He says we can use them to augment our understanding of a sugya and shed light on things, like to answer a kasha on a tosfos, but not to overturn the established halachik decisions. Can you point to a place where the MB says anything different than the above?
Rav moshe feinstein often paskened like some rishonim over, say, the psak of the magen avrohom, but he didn’t do so because it’s better to follow rishonim – he did it because he learned the sugya that way and came out like those rishonim, but there were always lther achronim like him. It wasn’t as if for 500 years we’ve all paskened one way and then rav moshe came and overturned it because of rishonim…no one outside of MO would attempt such a thing (i.e. digging up rishonim to try and defend not covering hair). To their credit, when it comes to shabbos and kashrus, MO seems to follow normal halachik jurisprudence.
What AAQ said amounts to the rationale behind “halacha kebasrai”, that we follow the later opinions because they saw the earlier ones and paskened whichever way despite that.
When you want to know halacha lemaysoh, do you open up a rambam or a mishnah berurah? I should hope it’s the latter.
As for the discussion regarding hishtadlus, it’s not an issue of psak din. Hashkofa matters, while extremely important, are often decided on mesorah, including oral tradition. Actually, I’d argue that of all things, mussar and hashkofa are the most dependant on mesorah, because of not knowing when to apply which aphorism of chazal. Rav hirsh makes this point very well in the mishnah in avos “lo am haaretz chossid”, where he asks why it doesn’t say “tzadik”, since if he is unlearned he can’t even keep basic halacha, let alone be a chossid (who goes beyond the letter lf the law). He answers that we’re talking about someone who learned shas and poskim, but was not meshamesh talmidei chachamim. Chazal call such a person an am haaretz – so halacha he can keeo, and be termed a tzadik, but a chosid he can’t be, because for middos, hashkofa, mussar, etc…you absolutely need shimush to know how to apply daas torah to your life.
I agree with Midwesterner too
Halevi, what is the difference between the two? You have a choice that is unhindered and not dictated by hashgocha. That choice is limited to good vs bad, which is what we’ve been saying all along. Free will for other matters doesn’t exist.
I made an error – the last teshuva says a kiddush is fine, and not worse than making a kidush for any other simcha, even with saying some words for the bas mitzvah, is all fine. He says that if one can abolish the bas mitzvah celebration itself (not kiddush) in shul without making a machlokes or “zilusa” then it is a good thing to do, but not if it will cause a machlokes or “zilusa”
O.c. 1, 104
O.c. 2, 97
O.c. 4, 36In the last one he says to have a kidush in shul is preferable to having a machlokes in the issue
Ujm… He does not use the word kefirah. He says that we ought not do it, and says that it’s an import from reform/conservative without any halachik basis in chazal for a celebration or ceremony. He further writes that one cannot do anything in a shul for a bas mitzvah because of kedushas bais hakneses (since it amounts to nothing more than a birthday party).
He does not call it kefirah; chachamim hizharu bedivreichem.
It’s beferush…. first pasuk in parshas re’eh. Hashem says “I have placed before you blessing and curse etc… – uvacharta bachaim, and you shall choose life!
Like any other chiyuv mamon, a kesuva can be nimchal; kolel is not negating a ksuvah, it’s merely a choice that some people (valiantly) make. As for the ideal of a woman being at home, it’s just that – an ideal situation, but not always feasible. Especially nlwas6, as AAQ wrote – the pitfalls of batalah mayviah lidei znus/shigaon are worse than the chisaron of being “out” a lot.
Health, that’s not accurate. A “tuna bagel” refers to one who grew up chasidish and has become westernized, save for his pronunciation which remains chasidish.
A “Harry” typically refers to a completely observant but Americanized Jewish person. He will dress in non- yeshivish clothes, and will be unaware of yeshivish customs and social norms. He is characterized by a specific way of talking, typically nasal and always with an “o” for a cholam instead of an “oi”.
Ubiq… You don’t see an issue combining the name of the avodah zara holiday of kratzmich with chanuka?
So let’s be clear; questioning why satmar dresses a certain way and why some people check tefilin every 7 years (Halacha is you never have to check tefilin as per shu”a o.c. 39;10) is equivalent to the charges of negating a mirzvah deoraysoh and being poretz geder in eretz yisroel? That’s not too mention the other issues of akiras hadas that have been discussed on here, the likes of which one cannot ever find even among the fringe extremes of other groups. No breslov chossid believes that rav nachman is the essence of god wrapped in a body, etc.
That’s not hateful, it’s just the sad reality.
.
Are R – many seforim hold exactly the opposite, that Shidduchim is the area where you require the least hishtadlus – the brisker rov is quoted as saying so in the 4 vol biography, where he says that rhe reason why we do hishtadlus at all is “far der nerven”
I’m sure such a thing existed, but i don’t think anyone has a mesorah for it nowadays
Ujm, while some people claim to have a mesorah about nigunim that were sung in the beis hamikdash, I don’t know of any other mesorah in crafting tunes that is distinctly”Jewish”. Apart from if we define jewish music as aidel, refined, joyous, uplifting, solemn, or other emotions that we use music to convey in a kosher way.
Rav Belsky told me once that a non-jewish melody can be used for a jewish song as long as it wasn’t used for a love song. He also said that the kashrus of a song depends on the kind of middos that it elicits and excites. A song which evokes a feeling of hefkerus, or makes you want to dance wildly, is not kosher, no matters who composed it.
One exception to this seems to be the famous story about the old kalover rebbe who overheard a farmer singing a song of longing for his wife – the rebbe “purchased” the song and was mekadesh it, writing Hungarian words to the tune about longing for moshiach. I know the yiddish version, but while i can’t speak Hungarian, I’m told it’s amazing.
The simple meaning of ביתו is the same as the way the tanna refers to his clothes as מכבדותא in the list of things that he called by their purpose – not that the clothes are kavod thensleves, but that they honor the one who wears them… Referring to his wife as beisa was because she was the akerew habayis.
Your interpretation is in the realm of drush, that not only is she the homemaker, but she is the “home” of the family
I think the root of the drive for “progress” in most social movements has been the understanding that the most important goal in life is freedom to do what one pleases and the opportunity to pursue material success. I think idealistic feminists who champion the causes of female autonomy and their religiously kinded detractors do not understand each other and have different value systems. To a feminist, the absolute sum of one’s life is olam hazeh and how much one can materialistically, creatively, and intellectually accomplish. This is severely diminished by the established gender roles and society formula of most civilizations which have existed until recently. It is therefore an unforgivable crime against the female gender to inhibit them, pay them less, expect them to marry and reproduce, relegate them to certain fields of occupation and expect them to fulfill a traditional role in a family dynamic raising children and keeping house. The feminist is enraged at depriving women that which he/she believes to be the greatest achievement of their lives. Any progress towards the goal of this Integration into corporate/working society is lauded as a step closer to a messianic redemption from subjugation.
The religiously minded person looks at things very differently. For us, the world is merely a corridor to olam haba. Our activities in olam hazeh are worthwhile only insofar as they lead us to our purpose, as outlined in mesilas yeshorim perek 1. A job can and usually is part of that mission; not because of the independent importance of success, but because it is fulfilling a mitzvah that men have to provide for their families; it also offers a person the opportunity to fulfill the mitzvah of being honest in business, not wasting time while working on the boss’ cheshbon, paying workers on time, not charging interest, and a slew of other mitzvos that relate to work. It also occupies our minds and keeps us from sinning.
If that is the value of work, to a ben Torah it matters not what sort of job he has. It is helpful for self esteem to have a “bakavodik” job if one is affected by such things, but that is tangential.
In this value system, when a woman who had a massively successful career comes to shomayim, it will matter not how honorable her position was, how much she made, the sacrifices she made to get there, the extensive effort and years spent in school…all will not count towards her reward. “אין יתרון לאדם”, koheles says that one does not benefit from hard work in the end…all that matters is sof davar, hakol nishma, es haelokim yirah…fearing God and fulfilling his mitzvos, ki zeh kol haadam, for this is the entirety of man.
Then, what is the cause of celebration if a woman is now able to find employment more than 50 years ago? Does it matter at all in the olam ha’emes? Does it help her get more olam haba and serve Hashem? Or is it self service – the pursuit of success for one’s honor and the amassing of wealth, at the expense of sacrificing the joys in this world and the next of children and a family.
Syag…the halachik requirements a woman has to her husband and children would support the understanding that a woman has the role of a homemaker. The sources for this I’m sure have been reiterated on this forum many times, so I’m not going to bother quoting them. It doesn’t mean that women are not supposed to work in addition to their household duties…women had income in the times of chazal as well.
The obvious sources are vetaytzei leah, dina, the rambam on not leaving the house often, meforshim on the Pasuk “where is sara your wife? To which avraham said “be’ohel”…
AAQ – it’s in nazir 59a, that women cannot carry arms. We see that yael killed sisra with a peg instead of a sword, and the meforshim say it was because of this reason. Some allow a woman to carry a gun for self protection; see igros moshe o.c. vol 4 75.
Amil – what ujm is referring to is a push by the liberals to lower the requirements imposed by employers in fields like firefighting, the military, and others which until now excluded most women by default.
AAQ – the army is a whole different story…it is assur for a woman to carry arms, and it is very contrary in itself to tznius for a woman to be in the military, in any capacity.
User – there is absolutely no halachik obligation to wear black/navy and white; these are the identifying characteristics of the current day yeshiva world, but are not obligatory in halacha. Wearing a hat while davening or for shabbos is an obligation according to many poskim, but those who don’t have what to rely on.
What I meant is that the way a man dresses is a clear “statement” regarding how he associates himself. A man, especially under 40 (the yeshiva world adopted this universal mode of dress about 30 years ago) who wears colored shirts, light suits etc, is communicating that he sees himself in the “baalhabatish” world, or MO. I’m not saying this is right or wrong – I personally don’t have an opinion on the matter, but this is the current state of affairs.
Gadolha, you’re referring to the material side of things; this whole conversation thusfar has been about spiritual nisyonos, so if you want to argue with ujm about domestic responsibilities this isn’t the time and place
Ujm – I don’t know; I’ve heard that it’s the opposite of what the litvishe velt has
I agree with the premise of this post, but not the details – there is a vast difference between a woman who wants to be a doctor, and a woman who wants to be a construction worker, electrician, plumber, car mechanic, etc…the masculinity attached to blue collar work is not arbitrary, or the result of western definition of gender roles. I would also add stress-related jobs such as surgeons, CEOs of companies..people whose quick decision making abilities have dramatic consequences and who need to be able to work well under pressure. Psychologically, studies show that women have a lower threshold for stress and are more easily overwhelmed (experience tells me this as well).
Women are also naturally more passive, so leadership roles generally are not appropriate – women who are aggressive tend to be more disliked by their employees (specifically their female employees) than men, because a man who is assertive is the norm, and for a woman it is feigned or exaggerated beyond socially acceptable parameters. I can quote the peer-reviewed studies I’ve seen to this effect if necessary.
Rav nachman of breslov, one of if not the foremost sources on kedushas habris writes even about himself that he was only able to reach the point where he detected no difference in his speech when speaking with women after many, many years of tireless work…the likes of which the average man comfortable with his miserable state can not fathom
I just passed by a sign advertising a Shidduchim crisis asifah in Williamsburg
User, there’s a lot to unpack in those statements. Smoking, especially casually, is widespread in the yeshiva world, and was common among roshei yeshiva until recently. One of the ziknei rosh yeshivos still smokes. it has nothing to do with going off the derech as far as i can see. At worst, it is a poor life choice and a possible violation of venishnartem meod es nafshosaychem (though continuing to smoke if one was unaware ot the danger is allowed according to most); it will also limit one’s success in shidduchim.
Being involved in olam hazeh, as you put it, doesn’t mean one is off the derech either – if someone is involved in futile pursuits that have no redeeming spiritual value, then it is against the Torah, and according to some rishonim is an issur asei of veahavta es Hashem elokecha. I would agree that here there is a connection – everyone who goes off violates this precept, but not everyone who transgresses it is off the derech.
Going off could be described as engaging in consistent behavior that is contrary to the minimal norms of Torah observance according to one’s upbringing. Meaning if an MO kid is with girls, his aveirah is of course unacceptable, but one cannot term him “off the derech”, since to him, this “lifestyle” isn’t a contradiction to shmiras hamitzvos, whereas such behavior definitely would place a mainstream student who is aware of the severity of this action in that group.
I’m not convinced that the line is clear cut for women, actually, the more I think about it, I believe it’s the opposite Women have a multitude of dress choices, none of which make a statement necessarily about their frumkeit, whereas a man who wears even a grey suit has made a statement about where he sees himself, certainly if he’s wearing colored shirts, tan, green suits etc.
Women are also encouraged to engage in hobbies and have interests. Their viewpoints are also more “open minded” and they are not held accountable for deviant hashkofos, because people don’t notice them..men are taught by rebbeim not to be medayak and address hashkofic problems in what women say on dates, because “they don’t learn gemara, so how can you expect them to have daas torah?”. Of course there is a line drawn regarding things like feminism, or castigation of rabbinic authority.
Reb E, teshuvaso betzidah – that was the lofty madrega of an amorah. No one today is capable of this; if memory serves, the neiri says already in his time that it’s unattainable
I agree that if we were to compare the nisyonos themselves (tznius vs learning/davening) it might be a toss up. A possible proof that men “have it harder” is that chazal say “gadol hahavtacha”, the guarantee (of acquiring olam haba) that Hashem gave to women is greater than that which He gave to men, since men have to learn diligently to earn olam haba, while women just have to enable their sons and husbands to learn.
I think the communal thought process of being more willing to accept the shortcomings of men vs women is due to the aforementioned spiritual and emotional differences between the genders.