Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Anyone know where one can find the old style kippot; the ones that sort of stand up straight and cover most of the head?
To those who believe that contemporary “Jewish music” is distinctly Jewish becuase it quotes from the Bible, pleae answer this: Is the song, To everything Turn Turn Turn There is a Season by the Byrds Jewish music? It too quotes the Bible, Kohelet chap 3 to be specific. What about Don Maclean’s By the Waters of Babylon? How about Handel’s Messiah?
The Rav zt”l said it the the best when he decided to leave the Agudah and join the Mizrachi. He said that gedolim of the Agudah repreented the glorious but fading Jewish past. The Mizrachi represented the Jewish future. My take on his words is as follows: Indeed in those days the great rabbis were part of the mature and aged past. But every era has its apotheosis and then its inevitable decline into obscurity. Those great and venerable rabbanim who opposed the clear manifestation of our future as a people did so becuase they were mired in the old ways. Indeed precisely becuase the Mizrachi was in its infancy and is still but a “babe in arms” as far as Jewish history goes, it cannot boast a roster of rabbinic greats among its ranks. But like every promising young child it’s potential is manifest to all who are willing to consider it. The Rav zt”l was such a person. He saw the future and alligned himself with it. History has shown that pioneers were always ridiculed and even vilified in their days. But eventually their views came to be conventional wisdom, and their clairvoyance the stuff of legends. I only pray that i live long enough to see that happen to the Rav and those who walked with him.
I’m told that there is a huge crisis looming, which stands to literaly devastate millions of people. The quality of schwarma has declined dramatically in the past 18 mos. This is a natioal crisis.
flatbush27
Member
cantor: “I think G-d is glad I came”
so why not on shabbos and yom tov?
Posted 9 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Mostly for social reasons. The schul where I daven tends toward the slightly more formal; at least on Shabbat and Yom Tov mornings. Friday night, I tend to wear a pair of trousers and a sport jacket with a tie. Shabbat Mincha, I lose the tie. By Maariv, which is in a neighbor’s house, the jacket is usually gone too. On a slightly related note, I’m very influenced by the aesthetic of my surroundings. I daven better in a beautiful schul sanctuary. I feel uplifted by seeing a rabbi and other officiants in canonicals or a “hoich tzilinder.” A good chazan and choir brings me closer to the Almighty. It’s rather difficult for me to act and dress formally in a schul lacking aesthetic appeal. I get nothing from a room full of tables and odd matched shtenderlech, and from people at the amud who generally lack good voices and proper nusach. My sartorial choices reflect that attitude.
Joseph
Member
“When I’m working around my yard, or putting up or taking down the sukkah, or shoveling snow etc, jeans seem the perfect clothing. Once I’m wearing them, I rarely change outof them, unless I’m going out where I need to be more formally dressed.”
cantoresq,
Two questions barrister:
1. Would you appear before a Judge in Court on behalf of a client in jeans?
2. Would you appear before G-d in a Synagogue in jeans?
The truth counsel.
I rest my case.
Posted 3 hours ago #
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. No because it’s socially not accepted. But truth be told, i think court is too formal. If judges can wear khakis under t heir robes, and many of them do i’ve seen it, I fail to understanad why I can’t get away with a nice pair of trousers and a blazer. Why the need for a suit and stiff collar?
2. Yes, but not on Shabbat or Yom Tov. I think G-d is glad I came, wardrobe notwithstanding.
Context seems to control here. When I’m working around my yard, or putting up or taking down the sukkah, or shoveling snow etc, jeans seem the perfect clothing. Once I’m wearing them, I rarely change outof them, unless I’m going out where I need to be more formally dressed. As to dressing in a mechubad way, those who feel a clean pair of jeans and a freshly laundered sport shirt is not mechubad, please explain how the uniform of many a yeshiva leit, consisting of a wrinkled white shirt, often unlaundered, a pair of trousers that have not seen an iron in months, and worn out unpolished loafers, mismatched with an ill fitting jacket and topped by a frayed worn hat, is mechubad.
Joseph
Member
Jothar – Indeed, Yiddish is not “intrinsically” holy, as is Loshon Hakodesh (which is certainly the loshon of the highest kedusha), it obtained that status by its usage.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
And what happened to that acquired kedusah when Yiddish was, at the same time, used for commerce, the writing of haskalah literature, the writing of plays, the translation of non-Jewish literature, Shakespeare amongst it, writing outright heresy etc.? C’mon Joe, say it’s so. Yiddish has no intrinsic special significance.
ames,
Yiddish is used by the Gedolim and has a holyness to it (certainly less than Loshon HaKodesh) since it was used by Yidden for 1,000+ years to learn Torah. It also allows Yidden from across the Globe to communicate with one another, despite other linguistical and cultural differences. And this is why in (many) Yeshiva’s the Rosh Yeshiva’s shiur, if not all shiurim, are given in Yiddish and it is used as the primary language by the Gedolim and Rabbonim.
(BTW “ivrit” is a treif language invented by a secular Torah despising zionist.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
It was also the language of the Maskilim, the lingua franca of Jewish criminals in the Europe, and I daresay, I once saw a volume of inappropriate poetry in Yiddish. It was published in Vilna just before WWII. I happen to like Yiddish. I am literate in it (self taught), and speak it farily often. But just because Jews speak it, does not imbue it with holiness.
Also Joseph your logic is ridiculous. If you maintain Yiddish is “holy” because Torah was learned in that language, please note Torah is also learned in Ivrit.
To all of you who wrong your hands and tut tut about the internet and the need to asser it, consider the following: When printing was first invented (and printing was its generation’s internet in terms of making information, including “bad stuff” available to the masses) did rabbonim protest and try to forbid it?
This thread raises another very important question. If one has only enough money to buy a tallis or a hat, which should he buy?
Azi, while you are technically correct, you are substantively wrong. You are correct since YU did not really exist in its current form during Kaplan’s student days. He did however study in Yeshiva Etz Chaim, which eventually morphed into YU.
Unterer geshirer, who was the Ner Israel ordinate who had a position at JTS? Hey if YU has to “take credit” for Mordecai Kaplan, the Arukh Laner for Abraham Geiger and Volozhin for C.N. Bialik (among others) New Israel should step up to the plate too.
I’m not going to argue about wehter the Rav zt”l said something or didn’t. I’m too young and by the time I got to YU he was completely incapacitated. I therefore have no actual knowledge. But Aryehm, brings out the crux of the issue in his designation of only R. Herschel Schachter and R. Aaron Kahn as examples of the Rav’s exemplary talmidim. I don’t discount that they are close and important talmidim of the Rav zt”l. But is R. Heshy Reichmann, someone with a slithgtly more liberal bent, not a close talmid of the Rav? What about the Rav’s grandson, R. Meyer Twersky? Is. R. Yosef Blau not an important talmid? What about R. Shalom Carmy or R. Dr. David Schatz? As I recall it, R. Schachter is against women learning Talmud. Yet the Rav zt”l gave the first Talmud shiur at Stern College. Who’s derech then is R. Schachter following in his stance? What of the thousands of pulpit rabbis who learned under the Rav? Is Aryehm not able to list even one of them as an examplary Talmid of the Rav? But the fact is as I put it. Determining the Rav’s close talmidim depends who you ask and what you want to hear.
Since the original question is not limited to Jewish singers, my favorites voices are Jussi Bjorling, Benianimo Gigli, Riccardo Stracciairi, Josepf Schmidt, Maria Callas, Nellie Melba, Titto Ruffo, Sam Ramey, Richard Tucker, Beverly Sills and Leontyne Price. Sorry, but opera singers are jsut better singers than anyone else out there. My favorite Jewish voices singnig Jewish music are Leib Glantz, Moshe Ganchoff, all the Koussevitsky brothers, Pierre Pinchik, Samual Malavsky, Israel Alter, David Moshe Steinberg, David Roitman, Moshe Stern, Zvee Aroni and many other great chazzanim.
To answer Joseph’s question, I pay $17k a year for two kids; one in 3rd grade the other in kindergaarten. They go to the cheaper of the two schools in my area that are acceptable to me and my wife. The other school costs around $20k. The tuition issue will be resolved by lesser committed parents who will opt to send their kids to public school. I think when that happens, Orthodox schuls will re-start the after school talmud Torahs of yore in order to keep those families afiliated with the community. Other paretns may decide to go for that option also, and that is when tuition will start to go down. It’s all about competition and supply and demand. And it’s already happening; both in places like the Five Towns, NYC and “out of town.”
Joseph
Member
cantoresq, are you maintaining that R’ YB Soloveitchek was the final arbiter for YU policy?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
I did not say that. What I said is that it is wrong to say that all the Rav z”l did was “come and say shiurim.” and that he was the spiritual guide of the institution. As to policy decisions, it is my understanding that the Rav z”l had a say, along with R. Belkin and others in positions of authority. Given his intellect, stature and charisma, i’m sure his opinions carried great weight, far greater than most others who also had a “seat at the table.” I think that vis-a-vis R. Belkin, he was a first among equals.
squeak
Member
CH”V, of course not cantoresq. There is limud hatorah there. But as long as those loimdei torah continue to associate themselves with those who criticize the Torah CH”V, I begin to question what is going on. Are they ignorant of it? Complicit? Do they just need the space and have a heter for using YU?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
I’m not sure to what you refer, Squeak. Two issues come to mind, but I won’t prognostocate. If you want address specifics, we can, but you have to first articulate your issue. I assume however that you are addressing yourself to YU’s teaching of biblical criticism as part of its Bible studies. If that is the general nature of your concern, are you prepared to write out of Orthodoxy and thus out of legitimate Judaism, R. Esriel Hildesheimer, R. Dovid Zvi Hoffman and the Seridei Eish since Biblical criticism was taught and highly respected in the Berlin Seminary?
Aryehm, as I understand it, the only time the Rav ever publically disagreed with R. Dr. Belkin was over changing the school’s charter to that of a university. Even then the Rav said his concern was not R. Belkin but for the future. Moreover, to suugest that the Rav simply “came and said shiurim” is wrong. He set the curriculum for getting smicha (ref the famous summer when he held a summer zman on Mikvaos and said he would not sign any klaf unless the student passed a bechina in mikvaos). He was and by proxy still is the guiding spiritual authority of the institution.
Cantoresq-YU hmmm…I asked for a yeshiva!
_____________________________________________________________________________________
And I suggeested one. You may disagree with TuM, and that disagreement may even be intellectually honest and not merely a “party line” which you don’t understand or even adhere to. But you cannot EVER take away or deny the serious high level limud haTorah that occurs in that certain Bet Midrash on Amsterdam Avenue and 185th St. every day.
YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU YU
Victor Geller, who headed rabbinic placemnet in YU for many years, addressed the issue placing RIETS rabbis in mixed pew synagogues in his book about R. Samuel Belkin. They allowed it under certain conditions and would continue to place rabbis who took such schuls. I assume that the policy was enacted with the Rav’s consent.
Joseph, did you ever see the mechitza in Lincoln Square Synagogue? Additionally, the Rav zt”l did not strenuously object to his talmidim taking a schul without a mechitza, so long as the understanding was that the rabbi would work toward implementing one and his remaining there would be reviewed on a periodic basis. As regards Coed school, the Maimonides School he founded in Boston is and always was coed.
Joseph
Member
canoresq, thats the wrong havara for a Hunarian 🙂
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph, you’ve never heard me speak Yiddish. That standard transliteration for Hebrew (i.e. in schoarly journals) is to Sephardic; Yiddish is the Lithuanian Klal Shprach.
Oib si’z ossur oder pas nisht, halevai zol es zein unzere greste avaireh.
Notpashut:
i’ll very briefly addresds your post, since there is very little there that is new, and I’ve addressed your theses in other posts.
1. There is a huge difference, from your perspective, between a doctor and a gadol. A doctor does not ever claim to be offering counsel because he knows what G-d wants in a certain situation. Your formulation of Da’as Torah is precisely that. Moreover, no competant doctor ever acts based on instinct. There is always a lab result, a physical examination etc. upon which s/he bases his/her medical opinion.
2. Regarding knavery, how can you be so blithe about it? Do you honestly believe that G-d assits a thief, or a kidnapper or othr criminal in discerning His will? I’m sorry, but when I know first hand about a prominent rosh yeshiva is Israel who assisted his niece in kidnapping her daughter from her father, it is impossible for me to accept that this man is worthy of such Divine grace. When I see roshei yeshiva in New York lie and obfuscate both the truth of an issue and the hunt for truth of the ultimate issue in a case simply to protect the kavod of a family member, how am I to accept that they are divinely inspired? When I see hoi poloi of the Torah world venerate these people, and I know them to be scoundrels (yes Joseph, in these two instances I actually have first hand knowledge. I’ve seen the evidence in both cases), when I sit at a din Torah and hear well resepcted local chareidi dayanim give advice to people how to make the Section u fraud acceptibile Halachikally, aside from getting sick to my stomach, I can’t help but reject the entire system that support belief that these people are on a “different channel” than the rest of us. We all put our pants on one leg at a time.
3. Since you are adamant that each situation has to have a “correct” solution, that gedolim disagree about what is the correct solution, deflates the entire notion of their authority. If the rabbis can’t get their collective act together and come to a uniform conclusion, I an outsider, not alligned with any of them, have no choice but to take a jaundice eye at the whole gestalt. To me this looks like little more than the entirety of chareidiut not wanting to take resopnsibility for their individual choices, and opt to chase their tales instead.
4. My seeking advice from rabbanim is just that, advice. I don’t consider myself bound to adhere to it. I don’t beleive I am sinning if I reject it. BTW, the same rebbe who encouraged me to marry my wife, also tried to discourage me from accepting a particular case early in my career. He felt I wasn’t up to the task and was convinced that either my client would remain a permanent agunah or worse, that I would create an intractible get meusa. I proved him wrong and won. The women get her get which was officiated by a universally accepted dayan, remarried and as far as I know, lives happily ever after. And he was proud of me for it. Advice is just that; advice. Stop trying to make something it was never meant to be.
Truehonesty might be true and honest, but he also a master at sophistry. But a careful reading of his last post reveals that rather than actual deal with the systemic problems I raised, he incorporates them into the system, thereby seemingly resolving them. In truth, his post is a reductio ad absurdum. He relegates my problems to matters of faith, which in the language os philosophy and logic is absurd, since faith cannot, but its very nature, be held up to scrutiny. But his post is significant when compared to notpashut’s. Truehonesty, like me, as opposed to notpashut entertains the fact that any situation calling for da’as Torah might have multiple correct answers and G-d’s will is fulfilled regardless of the result. But he calls the confusion created by the disparities part of the system, since no one really knows what G-d’s agenda is. To be honest I always preferred the Ravaad’s criticism of the Rambam in Hilchot Teshuva on the issue of bechira/Divine omniscience.
I suppose that the those who believe in Da’as Torah take a Kirkegaardian “leap of faith” and find contentment in having done so. But that leap is based on a mistranslation of Fear and Trembling. Soren Abaye Kirkegaard advocated not a “leap OF faith” but rather a “leap TO faith” One has to percieve the faith before taking the leap, and for all the reasons I’ve written, I just don’t see the faith.
Certainly this go around on the topic is raising subjects not previously addressed.
YW Moderator-72: Certain issues and certain interloquitors deserve lengthy treatment.
I am going to approve your two lenghty posts shortly, however, please try to keep future posts to a more managable length. (3026 words in 2 posts alone) I also request that this dialogue be stopped on this thread as the whole conversation has been discussed here in great length as well as in other threads previously. Thank you. YW Moderator-72
TH:cantoresq: Your answers were a delight to read and I will honestly say that they made me think….
CESQ replies: Then I was a success. The ides is to stimulate thought. Non thinking dialogue is a waste of time.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH:1) I do not understand your train of thought, why must daas Tora have to be absolute for everyone?
CESQ: Because in the system of Da’as Torah, there is only one right answer to any problem.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH:Why can’t it be Divine will that A should vote X and B to vote Y? Who HaShem wants should win is a different question and HaShem will insure that His desired candidate will win anyway.
CESQ: Then you need to explain why He would want someone to vote for the wrong guy. Moreover, the Gedolim who proclaim Da’as Torah in an election (to use this very easy and appropos hypothetical) tend to say “G-d wants “X” to win.” Not “G-d wants you to vote for “X” and he might not be the one He wants to win.”
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: This idea that we must do what is right anyway regardless of the consquences and HaShem will worry about the outcome is all over in Chazal.
CESQ replies: I’m no baki in Shas and Midrash, but the examples of doing the right thing even if it leads to a wrong result that come to mind tend to be about reaffirming the integrity of the Halachik process and the need for continuity and predability within the law (i.e. the execution of R. Eliezer’s son, and the Ramban in Sanhedrin on whether Beth Din should ever admit to having made a mistake if it executes a innocent man). Perhaps you know of an instance where people were told to do the wrong thing becuase G-d wanted them to do the wrong thing and for no other reason. If you do, give me the reference.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: Tomor was prepared to die so as not to embarrass Yehuda even though she was carrying the future of Klal Yisroel (the ancestors of ????? ??? ??? and ??? ?????), to cite one example.
CESQ replies: Sorry, but the text doesn’t say Tamar was ready to die. Quite the contrary when her silence didn’t save her, she produced the walking stick, the evidence of her innocence, and Yehuda had to admit the truth and said “Tzodka mimeni” Nor does it say that she knew who her progeny would be.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: Our job is not to ensure results but to act in the correct way and the results will follow.
CESQ replies: You’re not really saying anything here
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: Once you accept this basis then, I think, your arguement falls away. It is not a contradiction in Divine will for one Gadol to say vote X and another to say vote Y as nobody is saying that they are telling us who HaShem wants should WIN but how HaShem wants us to act and vote. Therefore it can be correct that Ger should vote X and Litvaks Y as I have argued all along.
CESQ: For the reasons above I don’t accept your basis.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: 2) Here you touch on another very valid point. Chazal tell us “??? ?? ??”, how to choose is another subject BUT once you have chosen then stay there and dont move around at your own convenience.
CESQ replies: You didn’t read my hypotheical. I posited that the person is question picks a gadol to follow to his detriment, i.e. against his personal interest but out of a real desire to act truthfully; even if it harms him.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: If you are a Gerrer then follow the Gerrer Rebbe ALWAYS etc.
CESQ: Always? What should a Spinka chasid do? (I don’t mean to muck rake or cast aspersions. But TH says one much always follow his rav. What is one to do when it is proven that his rav is a knave?) What does the recent indictment of the Spinka Rebbe, which was based wire taps and the testimony of co-conspirators, say about his “Da’as Torah” and his past pronouncements? What about other chassidic groups and their rebbes who have been embroiled in similar scandals? (PARDON me for asking.) What am I, an outsider, to make of the Da’as Torah of roshei yeshiva who have built their institutions on basis of benefits fraud perpetrated by their avreichim, said fraud either encouraged or tolerated by the leadership? Who are the people we are “making” into leaders and then imbuing them with Divine insight? For G-d’s sake!!! Where is the integrity that ought to be the undergirding and the key linchpin to this entire belief system? Assuming this absurd notion had any validity, those who espouse it have made a mockery of it. The schorah is there, but where’s the Torah?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: 3) This question was once asked to the Ponovhez Rov ztl after a speech where he compared the Jews to an army. Just as an army has different units for different duties – a navy for sea fighting, an airforce, tank units, foot soldiers – each to his purpose but combining to win the war, so too the Yidden have chassidim, litvaks, sephardim etc. each to his purpose but combining to do Divine will. The question was then asked about the position of Conservative and Reform as they too are part of the “army”. The Ponovhez Rov ztl answered on the spot, of course they are part of the army, they are the deserters…. Need I add another word!
CESQ replies: Now you’re contradicting yourself. Above you suggested that G-d’s plan might include people doing the wrong thing. You further posited that proclamations of Da’as Torah are not about what G-d ultimately wants, but are about what G-d wants individuals to do, His ultimate agenda notwithstanding. Now as regards heterodox Jews, you cast them either out of the pale of fulfilling Divine will, or as evil doers, depending on how you understand the Ponevizher’s use of the term “deserters.” Which is it? Does G-d intend for people to defy him (an idea I’m becoming attracted to. I’m not considering it as I’m looking for an easy out for my shortcomings. Rather I like it because ot makes it easier to forgive others who leave the folds of observance, which makes it easier for me to understand the world. It also makes G-d an entity I can better relate to. Just like I give my kids controlled opportunities to be a little “bad” (i.e. a raucous water fight on a hot summer day, which I know will ultimatly result in someone getting hit or kicked and crying) because they need the release of those “mischief endorphines” G-d does the same with us. Rav Kook has an essay on the Akeidah which touches on this theme.), or are those do so “deserters?” You can’t have it both ways.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: 4) Your final comment was indeed the hardest to answer!! You phrased it very well!!
CESQ: Thanks
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: It is however answerable from both sides. Reb Moshe Feinstein ztl was once asked by a journalist what made him so famous to all Jews? He replied that a lady once asked him a shaila, liked his answer, told her friends who then came too and they continued to spread the word until he became world famous.
CESQ replies: I like that answer. It fits with the injunction of “Asei lecha rav” More importantly, it’s true.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: Gedolim are not born gedolim but become Gedolim.
CESQ replies: Not according to the Artscroll biographies hehe 🙂
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: This is a lifetime work of continuous effort in avodas HaShem and something that is almost impossible to imitate (Exceptions like Shabetai Tzvi deserve a separate thread). Gedolim dont know Divine will because they are gedolim but because they are living their whole lives bekedusha ubetahara and immersed continuously in divrei Torah and yiras shomayim. This entitles them to the siyata dishmaya and ability to judge situations according to the Torah and its Writer.
CESQ replies: Do you know that, or do you believe that? There is a big difference. I happen to believe you are probably right. I believe that there are holy people in the world, and that they become holy as a result of great spiritual effort. I think that such people might be able to intuit the right answer to big issues more often than others, assuming they have accurate facts before them. And that’s where this all breaks down. Time and time again it’s been shown that Gedolim make Da’as Torah pronouncements without first learning all the facts from all points of view. Garbage in, garbage out.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TH: Similarly, HaShem plants in every generation a select few to be these leaders of klal Yisroel – ??? ??? ????????. This is included in the brocho of ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ???’ and therefore HaShem ensures that His leaders are available and accessible in each generation and it is OUR job to follow them.
In short, a Godol knows Divine will because he has worked on himself all his life to be a fitting messenger of HaShem AND because HaShem has chosen him.
CESQ replies: That’s all well and good, but it doesn’t resolve anything. It does not address trhe problem of accurate facts, the problem of disputes between gedolim, nor what I will dub the “deserter issue.”
As a postscript, I hope I’m accomplishing two things in this conversation (which I might add is extremely enjoyable). First, that people realize the side of non- acceptance of Da’as Torah is grounded in legitimate Jewish doctrine. Second to paraphrase the Rav zt”l religious moderation does not equal religious ambivalence. People should know that too.
NP:Finally, in your last post you CLEARLY stated that “G-d had a preference for either Barkat or Porush, or for Obama or McCain”.
CESQ REPLIES: I never said that. I said that for those who believe in Da’as Torah, they would have to accept the premise that G-d had a clear preference as to who should be president. I’m not sure it makes any difference to G-d who was elected, and I’m certain that His will will manifest itself unchanged regardless of who occupies the Oval Office.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP:Now, I imagine that you would agree that when the average balabos (like me & you & RoB) is attempting to determine who to vote for, our considerations include things like
1) Who’s better for Israel?
2) Who’s better for the economy?
3) Who’s better for education? etc. etc.
However most of us never think in terms of “Who’s better for Hashem”? Or, “Who does Hashem want us to vote for”?
CESQ replies: Imagine all you want. You have no idea what goes through anyone’s mind. I posit to you, some people don’t even understand their own thoughts. Besides aren’t weall taught from kindergaarten on that we have to be avadim of Hashem and we must always strive to do His bidding? Is the yeshiva educaion so bad that most of us fail to get the message?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP:That’s the difference between Da’as Torah & Da’as Balabayis. Da’as Torah is thinking on a totally different channel then me & you.
Da’as Torah is thinking on Hashem’s channel.
CESQ replies: How do you know? Forgive the sarcasm which pervades much of this post, for all you know a particular gadol preferred Obama’s ties, or Palin’s Biden’s voice. Moreoever since it is imperative to you, in your weltanschaung, for G-d to have a preference, how can you know that a Gadol got it right? Sheesh I mean talk about wasting a vote. Not only could the wrong guy potentially win as a result of a meta-physical miscommunication between G-d and the Gadol, but G-d’s cosmic agenda, which was hanging in the balance, would be jeapordized as a result of some poor Yid voting the wrong way. Perdition could come to the world in the form of Divine retribution becuase Rav so and so or the “Xer” Rebbe didn’t pay close enough attention to G-d’s signal. A modern day Yonah situation might be catacalysmic. In a close election the cosmic stakes are way too high. I’d rather not vote. Fortunately the truth is, G-d could care less who wins any election. His will gets done regardless. G-d’s will can alwasy assume two trajectories; one good one bad. How we act does not shape His will, but might determine if the outcome comes with joy or via pain and suffering. Your assumption that there is a right or wrong course of action for every situation, is problematic in terms of the effect of teshuva. Of what use is our regret once our actions have reshapen our destiny? But in my system of belief, where it makes no difference what we do in terms of G-d’s ultimate will, teshuva is very effective. It puts us back on the track of getting to the end result through prosperity and joy.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP:Therefore being that the question here is, “Who does Hashem want to be President”? & NOT “Who do WE think will make a better President”? the Gedolim are eminantly more suited to make such a decision than ourselves.
CESQ replies: As I said before I don’t think G-d cares who is president. But I would have less trouble accepting this if all the “Gedolim” (which is also a nebulous term, but that’s a discussion for a different day) always intuitively and independantly agreed and came to the same conclusion. That they don’t, given the precarious position in which culmination of G-d’s plan is placed by this ludicrous system, I reject it.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP:As I stated earlier, does this mean Gedolim can never err? Of course not.
CESQ replies: But when they do, why should I trust them again? Is your belief based on nothing more than playing the odds? Pascal’s wager was always repugnant to me for the same reason that a mesachek bkubya is invalidated as witness. There is something . . .so very. . .well sleazy about people who live their lives by playing the odds, the winners all the more so. My relationship to G-d is not formed in a casino and not based on statistics. That a Gadol may have a better chance of knowing what G-d wants is not a legitimate basis for me to put my faith in him. I’d rather make the honest effort on my own and perhaps grow as a result.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP: Does this mean the Gedolim can never disagree? Of course not.
CESQ replies: But those disagreements, assuming they are l’shem Shamayim (and I’m skeptical VERY skeptical about that assertion) colapses the entire house of cards.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP:However the people who ask Da’as Torah such questions are asking for the same reason they ask Rabbanim Halacha questions – because they want to do Ratzon Hashem.
CESQ replies: This is not about acting in good faith. This is not about the hamon am. This is not even about the Gedolim, and it certainly is not about G-d. It’s about what is proper Jewish belief. I’ve poked hole after hole in this silly notion called Da’as Torah. All you do in response, is repeat the doctrine in different ways. Sorry, the emperor has no new clothes, he is as naked as he was the day he was born.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP: For example, I remember reading in the biography of R’ Pam Zatza”l about how someone once came to R’ Pam with the following scenario, He lived in Brooklyn & had a decent job & made enough money to get by with no problems at all.
He was now being offered a job out of town with a HUGE salary. What should he do?
You would say, R’ Pam is not any more qualified to answer such a question than me or you. However that is only correct if the question is, “What’s best for me”?
If the question is “What does HASHEM THINK is best for me”?, suddenly R’ Pam is in first place.
CESQ replies: Why? Because he’s a Gadol and knows Da’as Torah? That leads us back into the circular reasoning I pointed out on Friday.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
NP: It would be worth your while (you too rabbiofberlin – & everyone for that matter) to purchase the Sefer “Derech Sicha” which is a compilation of non-halachik questions (hashkafa) which were asked to R’ Chaim Kanievsky Shlit”a. It is absolutely incredible to see how every single query was answered with a Passuk in Chumash or a Midrash etc.
Because a Gadol is in tune with what HASHEM wants – we are not.
So it is with all such issues.
CESQ replies: AHA!!! GOTCHA!!!! You now have posited something different entirely. R. Kanievsky answered non-Halachik questions based upon aggadaic and other SOURCES. In other words, he was erudite and applied his erudition, keen intellect and powers of inductive reasoning to a situation presented to him and gave sage advice to a questioner. That’s all well and good. Believe it or not, on the big questions in my life, I too seek out sage advice from Torah luminaries. I too believe they have unique and significant input to give. I intuitively feel that their expertise in Baba Batra or in Arvei Pesachim gives them profound insight into my mundane personal issues. It was a rav, in consultation with other greater rabbanim, who determined when to pull the plug on my father. It was a rav who’s advice I followed in choosing a profession. I proposed to my wife only after I took her to meet my rebbe (he told me if I wasn’t engaged to her when he next saw me, he was finished with me) But getting advice from great people, is a far cry from positing that such advice comes directly from G-d via the Gadol. We no longer have the Urim vTumim and it’s time we stopped trying to replace it with an ersatz imitation. Moreover, we didn’t always understand what G-d imparted to us via the Breastplate either.
notpashut
Member
Cantoresq,
NP:I’m going to give this one last try.
Finally, in your last post you CLEARLY stated that “G-d had a preference for either Barkat or Porush, or for Obama or McCain”.
CESQ REPLIES:
Now, I imagine that you would agree that when the average balabos (like me & you & RoB) is attempting to determine who to vote for, our considerations include things like
1) Who’s better for Israel?
2) Who’s better for the economy?
3) Who’s better for education? etc. etc.
However most of us never think in terms of “Who’s better for Hashem”? Or, “Who does Hashem want us to vote for”?
That’s the difference between Da’as Torah & Da’as Balabayis. Da’as Torah is thinking on a totally different channel then me & you.
Da’as Torah is thinking on Hashem’s channel.
Therefore being that the question here is, “Who does Hashem want to be President”? & NOT “Who do WE think will make a better President”? the Gedolim are eminantly more suited to make such a decision than ourselves.
As I stated earlier, does this mean Gedolim can never err? Of course not. Does this mean the Gedolim can never disagree? Of course not.
However the people who ask Da’as Torah such questions are asking for the same reason they ask Rabbanim Halacha questions – because they want to do Ratzon Hashem.
For example, I remember reading in the biography of R’ Pam Zatza”l about how someone once came to R’ Pam with the following scenario, He lived in Brooklyn & had a decent job & made enough money to get by with no problems at all.
He was now being offered a job out of town with a HUGE salary. What should he do?
You would say, R’ Pam is not any more qualified to answer such a question than me or you. However that is only correct if the question is, “What’s best for me”?
If the question is “What does HASHEM THINK is best for me”?, suddenly R’ Pam is in first place.
It would be worth your while (you too rabbiofberlin – & everyone for that matter) to purchase the Sefer “Derech Sicha” which is a compilation of non-halachik questions (hashkafa) which were asked to R’ Chaim Kanievsky Shlit”a. It is absolutely incredible to see how every single query was answered with a Passuk in Chumash or a Midrash etc.
Because a Gadol is in tune with what HASHEM wants – we are not.
So it is with all such issues.
Truehonesty
Member
cantoresq: Your point that all Gedolim must agree if that is Divine will is ludicrous. In the same way that there can be machlokes in halacha which even you agree is under the auspicies of the Rabbis, because ??? ???? ???? ?????? ???? so too in matters of hashkafa and secular subjects.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
A few points in response:
1. The Halachik system allows for disputes and deals with them systemically. “Divine will” vis-a-vis Halacha is to have disputes. One cannot legitimately say as proper hashkafa that G-d does not want/accept disputes in Halacha. Now, either Jewish thought accepts the possibility of Halachik dispute or it doesn’t. We happen to know the definitive answer to this question. As to other issues of hashkafa or decisions not expressly goverened by Halacha, whether we know the answer or not, there has to be a definitive divine will for those who believe in Da’as Torah. They have to understand that G-d had a preference for either Barkat or Porush, or for Obama or McCain. (It is unknown if Divine will was fulfilled in those instances) That’s what is meant when a Gadol pronounces Da’as Torah as opposed to simply offering his mere opinion or giving advice. I don’t think you or any other proponent of Da’as Torah believes that it is another term for a rabbis opinion. You take it as something far more authoritative. But for it to be that authoritative, there cannot be any dispute among the conduits of said Divine will or else Divine will is a nebulous concept.
2. If you accept such heterodoxy (i.e. Ger must follow the statements of the Gerrer Rebbe as they are correct for Ger, Satmer the Satmer Rabbe, Litvakcs, those of R. Shteinman etc.) and since you readily accept the possibility of disputes between authorities, what stops an individual from choosing which Da’as Torah to follow, and doesn’t the ability to make that choice defeat the entire philosophy since it is no longer Da’as Torah being followed, but rather an individual doing as he pleases under the cover of chosen rabbinic legitimacy? And before you make response based on intellectual honesty, assume the individual chooses to follow a particular Gadol in a particular instance to his (the individual’s) detriment.
3. Given your ready acceptance of both the legitimacy of disputes in the area of Divine will, and you’re postulating that such disputes are in fact a fulfillment of Divine will, are you prepared to extend the same ideological largesse to non-Orthodoxies? Perhaps Conservative Judaism is a fulfillment of Divine will for Conservative Jews. After all, it was the Haskalah and Zionism, not any change in ideology, that led to the current unity between chassidim and mitnagdim under the umbrella of Orthodoxy. Certainly the GR”A never enviviosned such detante.
I’ll cut to the chase. Da’as Torah, as currently formulated and applied, is entirely circular. The Da’as Torah of a particualr rabbi is accepted becuase he is a Gadol and thinks the way G-d wants people to think. He thinks the way G-d wants people to think because he is a Gadol and therefore what he says is Da’as Torah. To be a Gadol one must think the way G-d wants one to think. To think the way G-d wants one to think, one must be a Gadol. Never minding the obvious quandry of which comes first the status or the epiphany, the entire notion is circular and therefore just so much sophistic nonsense.
Joseph
Member
cantoresq:
1 & 2. I understood notpashut to mean that the information YOU heard on the grapevine about how the Gedolim treated any certain matter (R’ Lamm, Schmeltzer, etc.) is just that; grapevine and half-inaccuracies. So YOUR assumption the Gedolim based ANYTHING on misinformation, is just your assumptions based on what you heard on the grapevine.
3. That heavenly “signal” is far more likely to reach a Godol than a Koton (like ourselves.)
4. Sure there are disparities of opinion amongst Gedolim. YOU just follow YOUR Rov.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
1 & 2: I don’t think that’s what notpashut meant, but it is plausible. However my experience (i.e. the R. Svei/R. Lamm episode) tells me otherwise. Regarding the Lipa Schmelczer and concert debacle, the Rav of my schul, who is a close talmid of R. Shmuel Kaminetzky told me that R. Kameinetzky admitted that the signatories to the proclamation did not have all the facts. Moreover, unless there is more transparency to the process how can we really know what information the Gedolim have? But I do know that the organizers of the Madison Square concert were not given an opportunity to address the Gedolim prior to the proclamation and address the issues. Why weren’t they? That they weren’t given that opportunity tells me that the Gedolim didn’t have all the information available and decided the issue in a [partial] vacuum.
3: Why?
4: How can there be disparities? Halachik practice can have differences of opinion. The system allows for it and has systemic mechanisms to deal with it. But doctrine is different. Notice how nowhere in the Halachik literature does a posek declare that G-d wants us to do “X.” Indeed Tanur Achinai tells us that the Halachik system does not allow for that type of argument. But claims of Da’as Torah are precisely that; a claim that G-d wants us to believe X or do Y or refrain from doing Z due to some meta-halachik consideration. Once there is so absolutist a claim as to having ascertained Divine will in a given situation, there can be no room for dispute. While indeed counseling that one just “follow YOUR Rov” is good advice in how to deal with such issues, it does not solve the philosophical problem I’m trying to address.
1. Allow me to point out that most often our information is coming from newspapers,t.v., internet, what our friend told us during laining etc…the point is, there is no reason to assume that our information is more accurate than theirs.
2. Last time I checked most of us were not either engaged in investigating facts. We just rely on whomever we heard it from. So it’s not like our da’as is such hot stuff.
3. When it comes to elections & other such matters, 99% of the time we are arriving at our conclusions based on what we consider to be our own brilliant analyzation of the situation, but again, Hashem’s opinion is nowhere in the equation.
4. Someone who lives, breathes & sleeps Torah will have a knack, sixth sense, innate ability or chush to “feel” the ratzon Hashem in any particular situation with which they are somewhat familiar.
This is not blind, foolish faith. As I pointed out before, this is common sense & true to any proffesion in the world.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
I added numbers to nopashut’s comments to me to make it easier to respond to them.
1. I never claimed to have better information on secular isues than Gedolim. I simply posited that Gedolim often have inaacurate or incomplete information, and act accordingly, yielding imperfect or inaccurate results.
2. Same as 1 above.
3. How do you know for sure that G-d does not influence what we all do? Where is it stated in our tradition that the gift of Divine intervention is reserved only for the spiritual elite amongst us? Indeed one pasuk in Tehillim seems to reserve it for fools (“shomer p’taim Hashem”). You say this is common sense. I say it is a sychophantic cop out. Is it not possible if not highly probable that someone who truly yearns for G-d to “show him the way” will get such a “signal” in a way that compels him to act as G-d wants him to act?
4. This notion is unfalsifiable and I therefore cannot accept it. Moreover, I don’t need it to have a legitimate and fulfilling spiritual system. And when you think about it, it removes the possibility for any disparity of opinions; which is systemically invalid. The contemporary formulation of Da’as Torah is that Gedolim, by virtue of their scholarship and advanced spirirtual development are better able to discern or intuit the singular Divine will in any given situation. That construct asumes that G-d has only one will or desired result. Thus if two Gedolim disagree about who should be president, for example (and I assume no ulterior motives in this hypothetical dispute), one per force has to be wrong since G-d can only truly prefer one candidate. Never minding the impossibility of determining who is right, such a secenario violates the axiom of “Yesh harbeh panim laTorah.” As such it’s simply a false ideology.
tzippi
Member
re cantoresq: by mischief I assume you don’t mean healthy outlet, but a way to bend the rules without getting into trouble (or, unhealthy outlet). I can’t believe that this is the concern of the yeshivas. Do they think that then the boys will turn to other unhealthy outlets, like drinking or girls? Why not focus on giving them healthy outlets? Actually, I think the words I’m groping for are, breathing room.
Posted 2 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
I should confess that the idea was expressed to me by more than one mechanech and a rosh yeshiva in New Jersey. And yes smoking is considered to be a “kosher” unhealthy outlet. After all it’s safer (at the time of doing it)than drikning or drugs, not nearly as religiously problmatic as girls or inappropriate media entertainments and not illegal like vandalism etc. Regarding healtht outlets, they lack the “bad” aspect and therefore don’t fulfil a teenage boy’s desire to act out of the box. Personally, I think a clandestine newspaper would be a great substitute for smoking in yeshivot.
I can’t take the pressure. I admit it, I’m the Editor.
I’m mostly dealing with the issue of things that are nogaiah to the tzibbur. When it comes to such an issue, us in the da’as torah camp are simply saying that when Rabbiofberlin (& myself for that matter) is giving his opinion on the matter he is coming to his conclusions based on all the shtusim that his head is filled with & his opinion is not really worth any more than the other semi-intelligent guy next door.
However when an Adam Gadol offers HIS opinion on the matter, he is coming to his conclusion based on the TORAH outlook of the situation – NOT the New York Times outlook.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
First of all, as cited by Kaplan, the Rambam holds otherwise. Moreover, this assumes that Gedolim have access to better information than do we. Otherwise, how can we assume that their Torah perspective is actually correct, since it might be based on mis-information. My favorite example of this is R. Elya Svei, when he called R. Norman Lamm a “soneh Hashem” bsed on wrong information. Had R. Lamm said that R. Svei was told he said, the appelation would have been correct. But in fact R. Lamm did not say what R. Svei was told he said. Thus the Da’as Torah was faulty. It is my understanding that most Gedolim do not actually engage in investigating facts. Rather, they rely on information supplied to them by trusted sources. As such the information that Gedolim recieve is only as trustworthy as those sources, which we know can be dubious (recall the misinformation surrounding Lipa Schmelczer and concerts). Thus, arguably people are not hearing Da’as Torah, but rather the da’as of those “trusted sources.” Even in those cases where a Gadol might be directly familair with the facts since they are readily available (i.e. elections), for his Da’as Torah to be dispositive, he would have to be an expert on the subject about which he opines. Else again we may be the victims of the Gadol’s misapprehension of the facts. I’ts not the “Torah” of the Da’as Torah I question, it’s the Da’as.
notpashut
Member
cantoresq,
Who’s the non-conformist, you or your niece.
Posted 2 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
We are both conformist. We conform to the dictates of our heritage, the way we were raised and, most importantly, our consciences. Now enough of my family dynamic. Let’s get back to fighting the age old internecine Milchemet Hashem.
First of all, my personal experience is that smoking is not addictive. I smoked for about five years in high school and into college. I wasn’t a chaim smoker, and went thgough about a pack of cigarettes a week. I also smoked a pipe, which I much preferred. When I got seriously into singing and was told that smoking can ruin a voice, I stopped cold turkey, and never looked back. I suffered no pangs of withdrawal, never craved a cigarette and never looked back.
People are right to yeshivot must do more to curb smoking. I’ve heard of various yeshivot banning it outright, which is the correct thing to do. But doing so creates other problems. Kids are kids and they naturally gravitate towards mischief. Smoking has, for a long time, been the accepted yeshivish mischief. After all society frowns upon it, and smoking flouts that norm. But it isn’t dangerous in a ruchniout sense. Thus it was tolerated in yeshivot; as a “kosher” way to be bad. Remove smoking, and kids will replace it with something else. I think that is a big concern in yeshivot and why they don’t do more to ban smoking.
Joseph
Member
cantoresq, are you the only branch of the family that is non-conforming?
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph, I think this forum has gotten a healthy enough glimpse into my personal life for now. But to answer your question with a question, why do you assume I am the one who doesn’t conform?
notpashut don’t get emotional. It’s really ok. Every family has it’s non-conforming branch.
chasid-of-Hashem
Member
yup, canatoresq, it does sound to me like you are my nunc!! i guess the next ywn thread will be entitled “looking for family members…”
seriously, its nice to hear from you. and regards from your niece’s daughter who is named after your grandmother!!
Posted 39 minutes ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Well now, isn’t this an interesting turn of events. YWN is now a family affair. Perhaps someone might want to write a graduate school thesis on the family dynamic of yeshivish internet blogs. You have a case study right before your eyes.
chasid-of-Hashem
Member
cantoresq-
i asked you this once before but the thread got closed before you could reply- you sound exactly like my uncle and, to clarify, i just wanted to know- what type of law do you practice? Please answer,
from your almost niece in lakewood.
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
My main specialty is domestic relations. And I have a niece in Lakewood. If you are my niece, cool.
My children get one big gift a year period. They get to choose if it’s for their birthday or Channukah. The other occaiaions, they get smaller gifts (i.e. in the $20.00 – $25.00 price range) so as to not recieve nothing when their siblings are getting something. This year my oldest son asked for an Ipod for his birthday. Since he had a great year in school, we agreed to get it for him. For Chanukah, he’s getting a small Lego set. My daughter wants a new doll house for Channukah. For her birthday, she’ll get something small. Afikoman presents are usually something bigger for the whole family. Last year, we got a trampoline. This way I hope to give my kids some treats (which they deserve as they are, for the most part wonderful children who do well in school and behave nicely), but not serve them the world on a silver platter. Thank G-d my wife and I can afford to live this way, so long as we’re careful. Grandparents, however mess the whole thing up as they spoil my kids rotten. It’s a constant struggle to keep them in check. But I prefer that to parsimonious grandparents.
Joseph
Member
. . . I take it that you were one of the hundreds of worshipers in the Dohany, for you to know their size, that Shabbos morning?
Posted 11 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Indeed I walked over to the Dohany after davening for the amud in the Desewfy Ut schul. I liked to daven in the Desewfy or at Visgrady since in those schuls they said the Mi Sh’beirach for Medinat Yisrael, while in the Kazincy, the don’t. Ad BTW, although the spiritual capital of Orthodoxy in light of its yeshiva, Pressburg had a sizable neolog community as well, and a chor schul replete with an organ.
Joseph
Member
cantoresq, By Rav S.R. Hirsch supporting Hungarian Orthodoxy’s position, does not demonstrate any “implication” (your words) that his approach in Germany failed. It merely demonstrates that he felt it important to extend this principle across Orthodoxy worldwide. Additionally, you are fond of (correctly) repeating that there is no truth in numbers (i.e. being numerically larger doesn’t demonstrate being right), so even if most of German Orthodoxy didn’t follow Rav Hirsch in seceding (I don’t know the veracity of this), it would not demonstrate the correctness of his position.
Regarding the Status Quo Ante, they were merely an agglomeration of varied interests, and not any coherent or even organized group. Many Chasidic Kehilas, Debrecin included, were Status Quo. As time passed some of them formally joined organized Orthodoxy in Hungary.
As far as the Neolog, they’ve all but disappeared (something that DOES demonstrate their falseness.) They still have a large temple in Budapest, that may seat thousands, but I’d wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t have a minyan on Shabbos.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph, where did I once mention anything about the “correctness” of R. Hirsch austritt? I mentioned the success of it. It is clear that R. Hirsch intended for every religiously observant Jew in Germany to join the separatist community. That the majority did not, speaks to the success of that endeavor, not whether it was a good idea. As far as the status quo, indeed they were not as organized as Neologs or the Orthodox. then again, that was their point. They did not want to be part of a larger organization. I didn’t know that Debrecen was a status quo kehilla. And you are wrong the Neologs have not disappeared. The Seminary never shut down and supplied rabbis to the Soviet Bloc during the communist regimes. When I was last in Budapest, the Dohany drew a crowd of several hundred worshippers on a Shabbat morning; about half of them tourists or foreigners, the rest locals. The Kazincy does about as well.
Blue shirt, I based most of my comments on Katz’s book. What I also found interesting was Katz’s demonstration of Rabbi S.R. Hirsch’s personal involvement in the Hungarian issue. According to Katz, Hirsch lent instrumental support to the secessionist Orthodox in Hungary. Although he doesn’t come out and say so, the implication is that Hirsch realized that his movement had, to a large degree, failed in Germany; that the majority of Torah observant Jews in Germany would not follow him and form independat kehillot, but rather adhered to the POV of the Wurzberger Rav and stayed part of the EinheitsGemeinde, albeit in orthoprax schuls. (Even Frnkfurt, the seat of the doctrine of Austritt, had such a schul, presided over by the famed and learned Marcus Horvitz, a close talmid of R. Esriel Hildesheimer. That schul was bigger than Hirsch’s IRG and remained so literally until WWII) Rav Hirsch therefore lent his efforts to Hungary where there was a better chance to attain the seperatism he wanted for German Orthodoxy. Perhaps R. Hirsch thought that if he were successful in influencing Hungarian Orthodoxy to secede, German Jews would follow the Hungarian example. All in all Hirsch failed in his attempt to create a real separate Orthodox community in Germany; which was his main quest. He succeeded however in demonstrating that a Jew can be religious, in the fullest sense of the word, both in deed and in creed, and yet be fully engaged in the world at large. I think it was that internal contradiction in his thought that doomed Austrittism from the get go. By contrast, seperatist Orthodoxy succedded in Hungary because, at least in theory, Hungarian Orthodox Jews rejected Hungarian society as well.
Bogen
Member
cantoresq,
Thanks for all that. Were the Neolog’s religious practices closer to today’s Orthodoxy or Conservative/Mosarati? And are there any meaningful practicing Neolog communities left? (BTW, the “status quo” practiced Judaism like the Orthodox [i.e. it was just a political division]? And what has become of them?) What caused the rift in 1868?
Where can I get Weinberger’s writing?
Posted 10 hours ago #
_______________________________________________________________________________________
In theory, Neolog practice was akin to Orthodoxy with some very important exceptions. They had organs and mixed choirs in many of theior schuls. Although if little consequence today, that they moved the almemar from the center of the schul to the front, wore canonicals and had a sermon in the verncular, were considered serious Halachik breaches when they were institutued. In practice though, I assume there were more non-observant Jews among the ranks of the neolog than among the Orthodoxy. Although, my aunt (by marriage) had a grandfather who was Rosh Hakahal in a neolog schul in Nagyvarod, who had a big beard, closed his business on shabbat, davened “tallis iber’n kop” and went a daily to a two hour shiur. Conversly the Rosh Hakahal in Kisvarda, a big Orthodox kehilla, was known to step foot in the schul exactly four days a year; Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur and when he had yahrzeit for his father. Another example, I have a photo copy of a techines buch published by the Neolog community of Budapest. I doubt the most chassidic women today would be familiar with some of its contents. But I doubt any Neolog women ever used it and it was probably published to show the Orthodox that Neology is also Jewish. The division between the status quo and the Orthodox was purely political, although the Maharam Schick did make it a religious issue. As I said before the status quo did not want to be under the thumb of rabbinic hegemony, and they had not objection to the establishment of a seminary with the proceeds of the tax plaaced on the Jews after the 1848 revolt which was converted into an eductional fund. One might call them “Modern Orthodox” in some limited sense. They did adopt certain “reforms” in their schuls. their chazzanim wore robes, their rabbis spoke the vernacular, they did away with most of the piyuttim (although R. Hildesheimer always said all of them), had choirs and did away with the weekly auction of kibbudim. They also studied secular studies. I believe that had R. Esriel Hildesheimer not been chased out of Hungary by the “Zaddik of Kolomea,” R. Hillel Lichtenstein, and his coterie, either there would have been no status quo movement, or he from his yeshiva in Eisenstadt, would have been its spiritual leader. I’m sure an Amazon search will produce results for R. Weinberger’s writings. Or you can contact the Sehper Hermon Press, the publisher of the volume.