Avi K:

“”The point is that you are making the Zionists (who are among the victims)scapegoats for the crimes of our enemies.”

I believe the correct term is “blame”. And yes, I am.

Oh, and I’m going to have see a reliable source for that story about the Satmar Rebbe before I even consider taking it seriously.

tahini:

“The Satmar Rebbe describes the hate towards Israel today, whom does he blame for the hatred that has existed for the last few thousand years, were the zionists to blame for pogroms, for the Chomnetzki massascre, for the blood libels?”

You are comparing apples to oranges. All of those events took place in Europe, thousands of miles away, and were not the fault of the Arab nation. A better comparison would be to the various Sephardi communities spread throughout the Arab Middle East, who lived in relative peace with their neighbors for thousands of years. (Until 1948 when they were, as a direct result of the founding of the State of Israel, all robbed, mobbed, and kicked out. Add them to the list of casualties caused by Israel’s creation.)

Now, no doubt there were instances of Arab persecution of the Jews pre-1948; but it never occurred on the scale that it happened on after 1948. Never did all the Arabs join together with the stated goal of pushing all the Jews into the sea. Never did the Arabs murder 15,000 of our brothers and sisters in a mere 60 years. Never were all the Sephardim expelled from their ancient communities. This only happened after, and due to, the creation of the State of Israel.

Naftush/Sam2/oomis:

Yes, there is indeed a full sugya about what does and does not constitute sheilas shalom. I am not denying that, nor am I suggesting that those who wish members of the opposite gender a “Good Shabbos” have no poskim to rely on; far from it. I was merely responding to Naftush’s comment that called the concept of forbidding interactions between the genders an “outrage”, and demanded a mekor for it in halacha. I was simply pointing out that this idea does indeed have a mekor in the Shulchan Oruch, and as such should not be bashed and branded an outrage so quickly.

twisted:

“everyone else’s hat at 800 shekel and up get worn for way too long, gets faded and ratty looking and represents a bizayon of Torah.”

…or, of course, it be could taken to just represent poverty. But hey, why pass up a chance to bash the black hat crowd?

zahavasdad:

“There was a story a few years ago about a talking fish in Monsey, I am sure the same people who are calling this a “Bubba Meinser” are the same people who claim the Fish in Monsey talked.”

I have long had a theory that those who scream “sinas chinom, stop being so judgmental” at every chumra often have far more animosity in their hearts towards the “frummies” than anybody on the right has towards them… and as much as I’d love to be wrong, all the recent comments and threads denigrating anybody and everybody who is more makpid than you are sure doesn’t point in that direction.

Naftush:

“Please show me a requirement in halacha, or in plain logic, to police, segregate, and intimidate young people to the extent of forbidding the exchange of the words “gut Shabbos.””

With pleasure. Shulchan Oruch, Even Ha’ezer, siman chuf aleph, sif katan alef: “Tzurich adam lisrachaik mei’hanushim moed moed, a man must distance himself from women very, very much.” Sif katan vav: “Ain shoelin bi’ shalom eisha klal”, which, simply read, means “do not greet a woman at all”.

Sam2 & oomis1105:

“Hevei makdim shalom li’kol adam” could easily be translated as “greet every man”, not “every person”. (The Mishna is obviously addressed only to men; however, one would imagine that the same would apply to a woman greeting a woman.)

ROB:

As Health pointed out, the Satmar Rebbe clearly says that having a state in Eretz Yisroel is assur (as in halachicly assur), on the basis of the three shavous. I quote: “Every single moment that they hold on to their State and government they are reviling G-d in their violation of the Three Oaths through their provocation and rebellion against the Nations, which is prohibited by the Torah, and which brings about the severe punishment for violating the Oaths, as it is written in the Talmud in the tractate Ketuboth, p. 111:”

“as far as your imaginary friends that we could just hand over the medinah- have you been following the world news these past -oh,thirty years- do you know what has been happening in every arab country with other minorities? the bahai and X-ians are murdered in iraq, the copts are persecuted in egypt, look what happened to the maronites in lebanon…and how about those wonderful turks taht you trust- cyprus is still divided, the X-ians in turkey feel very uneasy…”

Some people here seem quite irked at this episode, and I’d like to know why. These men in Lakewood did not go around forcing their chumros on anybody else; they were merely machmir on themselves. What issue could anybody possibly have with that?

SL1:

“This is one of the causes of the modern day OTD syndrome. When instead of making logical and sensible rules like one may not browse indecent websites or use the internet at all we go overboard and make insensible and unreasonable rules like one may not even hold a smartphone, then eventually the rule will be questioned and abandoned totally. But if the rule was sensible in the first place then it is more likely to last. Anybody agree or disagree?”

I agree that making unreasonable rules leads people to abandon the rules entirely; however, that’s simply not what happened here. Nobody tried to enforce their chumros on anybody else here; they were only machmir themselves. And to do so is a beautiful thing that should be commended, not bashed.

more:

The very first Mishna in Avos says “uhsue siyug la’Torah”, make a fence for the Torah. To suggest that the Medrash about Chava is meant to tell us not to have chumros (or to have less chumros) is simply not true, and is a gross distortion of the values put forth by the Torah.

Sam2:

“mw13: This was done for religious purposes. That’s the difference.”

Fair enough. Still, what you’re saying seems pretty extreme… have you ever asked a Rov about it?

Mods, thank you for deleting that MO vs Chareidim thread.

“We can’t judge anyone, you don’t know anybody’s nisyonos and upbringing. You can’t say whether it’s likely or not because you haven’t been to shamayim and taken a census of who is sitting next to R’ Akiva. Saying it’s not likely isn’t something that you can say with any certainty.”

True, one should never be judgmental because we can never know what somebody’s situation truly is. However, your post seemed to insinuate that one could get to the same place in olam haba by trying to be a businessman who keeps the halacha as someone trying to become the Godol Hador. And that’s simply not true.

All I was saying is that if you try to become (the wife of) a Rosh Yeshiva, the odds of you ending up in Olam Haba are much larger than if you set out to be (the wife of a) businessman.

“I do agree with you regarding the whole entitlement problem.”

Thank you.

WAJ:

“There is nothing inherently wrong with going to a sporting event or following a sports franchise. If you attend an event does that mean you will ultimately gawk at an immodest woman or start to speak profanity?”

It is assur to go to a place with pritzus if you don’t need to go there. The Gemora says that if someone has two ways to get somewhere, one where he will pass by immodestly dressed women and one where he won’t, and he chooses the first path, he is a resha, even if he doesn’t look at the women.

“By that logic we should not be allowed to walk outside nor live in New York City.”

If it is feasible to avoid these places, then by all means one should do so.

“Don’t we have the ability to make the best judgements for ourselves and if we don’t suffer the consequences.”

Perhaps, but it must be done inside the parameters of Halacha.

“If there is one aspect of something someone does not approve of we need to ban it outright, (see: Citi Field Asifa).”

Oh, come on. There is not just “one aspect” of unfiltered internet that “some disagree with”; it’s massive and obvious problem, and I have never heard anybody put forward a rational argument that a frum Jew should have access to unfiltered internet.

“Is this the way Hashem wants the Jewish community to behave themselves? It is embarrassing to see Jew against Jew, battle over the most insignificant of issues.”

Who do you see battling anybody else? Nobody was condemned, much less battled against, at CitiField.

Saying something is wrong does not necessarily mean that one is condemning all those who that thing. For example, I think we’d all agree to the simple statement “loshon hara is wrong”; but that does not mean we are condeming or doing battle with anybody who has ever said loshon hara.

Same here. We are having a fairly objective debate of whether or nor one is, al pi halacha, allowed to go to a ball game. That is not at all the same thing as opening up a conversation condemning anyone who does go to a ball game.

Actually, the only one I see here who wrote a post with the exclusive purpose of “battling against” others is… you.

“If a father wants to take his children to a ballgame in order to spend time with his children, why does that concern you? Why is it your business to get involve in affairs that have zero meaning in your life?”

If a father wants to tell his children that going to a ballgame is assur because he believes that’s the halacha, why does that concern you? Why is it your business to get involve in affairs that have zero meaning in your life?

“if most orthodox jewish people are against going to sports venues then why would 60000 Jews be willing to gather in Citi Field, home of the “goyishe”, NY Mets, for the purpose of banning the Internet and why are 90000 Jews attending MetLife Stadium for the Siyum HaShas on Wednesday Night if that building outside of this event also houses vulgar concerts, Jets cheerleaders, Profanity and males who get drunk and take their shirts off? I guess the those who follow the edict of not attending stadiums are willing to compromise their morals and principles if the circumstances are ideal. I get it now. I guess convenience takes precedence over integrity.”

I’m sorry, but that made absolutely no sense. True, “that building outside of this event also houses vulgar concerts, Jets cheerleaders, Profanity”… but when it’s full of Frum Jews, none of those things are an issue. So what hypocrisy could there possibly be here?!

Oh, and remember how you were condemning those who “battle over the most insignificant of issues”? Well if this last paragraph of yours doesn’t fit the bill, I don’t know what does.

kodesh:

“If you think about it; why is the rate of divorce so much lower in the frum world than in the ‘non-frum’ world. Don’t tell me it is just because of the upbringing/outlooks that people are raised with”

Why on earth not? Today’s society tends to view marriage in a much lighter way (to put in nicely) than we do; therefore they simply do not take it as seriously. Also, today the ideal of self-control is often a completely foreign concept, so people will do whatever they feel like doing at that particular moment; is it any wonder that a marriage will find it difficult to survive in such an environment?

Also, I am disturbed by your automatic assumption that the Frum society must have a lower divorce rate than everyone else because of some hidden defect of ours. Why can’t it be because we are more in tune with Hashem’s Torah, and higher moral ideals? Why can’t we hold this up as an example of the passuk “mi ki’amcha yisroel, got echad b’uretz” and being our an ohr la’goyim? Why must we assume the worst, instead of being dan li’kav zchus?

Though shall not cause an interesting (pronounced controversial) thread to become [closed]…

Sam2:

“Using this format is Chukas Hagoyim, right? It’s from the King James translation. No one would ever speak in the “thou shalt not” or “thou shall” form nowadays otherwise. I actually think speaking (maybe you could be Mechalek for posting but I don’t hear that) like that is an Issur D’oraisa.”

Why is it different from using any other phrase made by goyim (ie, whats up, that rocks, etc)? Heck, the whole English language was made up goyim – does that mean it’s an issur di’Oraysa to speak English?

repharim:

“Totally not tzinus women everywhere.”

I believe that this is the biggest problem with going to a sports game. If a man goes to a stadium during the summer, he will see things that he absolutely may not be seeing.

“the core reason of why people like sports is because they want to be part of a winning team. Why do people need to feel that? Because they’re losers in the parts of their life where they feel they should be winners.”

I don’t believe that’s true at all. Everyone enjoys winning.

Toi:

“its actually a rashi mifureshes on the passuk of ubichukosaihem lo seileichu. a”s.”

True, Rashi does say it is assur to go to a stadium. But you have to realize, the program in the stadiums then quite literally consisted of giluy arayos, shvichas dumim, and avodah zarah. Today its just some ball.

zahavasdad:

“Why not ban riding the subway in the summer too, there is Prizut”

If it can be avoided, by all means stay away from it.

Toi/Git Meshige:

Petty insults have no place here. Or anywhere, for that matter.

zahavasdad:

All you’ve done is prove that people do go to ball games, not that it’s okay to do so.

Sam2:

“(I have at different times called someone who would argue with R’ Moshe’s P’sakim L’ma’aseh (in America, at least; not necessarily in Eretz Yisrael) a Zaken Mamrei or a Mored B’malchus.”

Didn’t R’ Moshe hold it was assur to listen to music?

mdd:

“To be fair, the State did provide a refuge for the Jewish people where they could live proudly as Jews.”

Yeah, if they didn’t sink your ship first…

“The truth is that it was all the persecution in Europe which caused the creation of the Zionist movement and the support it has had among the Jewish people.”

I don’t know about that. Persecution of the Jews had existed for thousands of years, in Europe and across the globe, without giving rise to Zionist movement. I believe Zionism was mostly just a Jewish take on the rise of nationalistic movements all across Europe in the late nineteen and early twentieth century.

The Chassidishe Gatesheader:

You have eloquently explained the Agudah view of Zionism and the State of Israel, which I completely agree with.

Naftush:

I’m not sure how Israel’s economic success proves that Zionism is morally correct.

ROB:

“When people question some ideas or decisions of Gedolim, it is in “milei de-alma”- matters that are not relevant halachically.”

And it is precisely in that context that R’ Dessler wrote that “It is forbidden even to listen to words like these, let alone to say them… the amazing agility of their minds could be perceived even by puny intellects such as ours; the depth of their wisdom penetrated down into he very abyss; there was not the slightest chance that anyone like you or me could follow completely the crystal-like clarity of their understanding… it would be wrong to set aside his words, much less to reject them, because of what we puny people think that we see with our own eyes. Our Rabbis have told us to listen to the words of the Sages “even if they tell us that right is left,” and not to say, God forbid, that they must be wrong because little I “can see their mistake with my own eyes.” My seeing is null and void and utterly valueless compared with the clarity of their intellect and the divine aid they receive… This is the Torah view concerning faith in the Sages.”

Sam2:

Again, I don’t believe that anybody is suggesting that the Gedolim are all-seeing and all-knowing; only that we cannot claim to be wiser than they were so as to decide that they were wrong.

After much time spent on Google, I have managed to locate an article that quotes the aforementioned letter from R’ Dessler on Emunas Chachamim:

Rabbi Dessler’s letter concerning faith in the sages (emunat chakhamim) opens with criticism of the questioner:

This introduction gives us a fairly clear idea of the question that had been posed to Rabbi Dessler. Since the letter is dated 1944, the issue was a burning, fraught one: at this very time the annihilation of Jews was proceeding at full speed. News of what was going on in Europe was circulating, but precise information had still not made its way to many places. Thus, for example, further on in the same letter Rabbi Dessler speaks of Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman in the present tense, while in fact he had been murdered three years previously. Rabbi Dessler sets forth his reply as follows:

“First of all I want to tell you that I had the merit to know several of these great ones personally, and I have observed them at meetings on matters concerning Klal Yisrael; such as the Chafetz Chaim of sainted memory, Rabbi Chaim Brisker of sainted memory and Rabbi Chaim Ozer of sainted memory; and I can tell you with all sincerity that the amazing agility of their minds could be perceived even by puny intellects such as ours; the depth of their wisdom penetrated down into he very abyss; there was not the slightest chance that anyone like you or me could follow completely the crystal-like clarity of their understanding. And more: whoever was present at their meetings could see with his own eyes the extent and depth of the sense of responsibility with which they approached these matters; it could be seen on their faces, when they deliberated for the sake of Heaven and devoted their minds to considering the problems of Klal Yisrael. Anyone who did not see this has never seen feelings of responsibility in his life. Whoever had the merit to stand before them on such an occasion could have no doubt that he could see the Shekhina resting on the work of their hands and that the Holy spirit was present in their assembly. One could certainly make the blessing “He Who separates between holy and profane” on the difference between their meetings and the kind of meetings we are used to nowadays.

I expect you are aware of what Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman (may he live a long life) relates concerning the spiritual power of his teacher, the Chafetz Chaim of sainted memory. You must know, my revered friend, that Rabbi Elchanan is certainly very great, and it would be wrong to set aside his words, much less to reject them, because of what we puny people think that we see with our own eyes. Our Rabbis have told us to listen to the words of the Sages “even if they tell us that right is left,” and not to say, God forbid, that they must be wrong because little I “can see their mistake with my own eyes.” My seeing is null and void and utterly valueless compared with the clarity of their intellect and the divine aid they receive. No Beth Din can revoke the decrees of another Beth Din unless it is greater in number and in wisdom; failing this it is very likely that what they think they “can see with their own eyes” is merely imagination and illusion. This is the Torah view concerning faith in the Sages.”

Rabbi Dessler’s response adopts a virulent tone quite uncharacteristic of his writings in general. He devotes his main efforts to describing the greatness and righteousness of such leaders as the Chafetz Chaim, Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky, and Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman, who negated Zionism and discouraged aliya. By virtue of their greatness, he argues, their guidance as leaders should not be viewed as the advice of mortal leaders; rather “the Holy Spirit is present in their assembly.” In other words, when such great and righteous Jewish sages gather together, it is impossible for their conclusions to be mistaken.

YiddisheMamma:

“I am a mid-twenty year old married woman and I can tell you honestly that when I get dressed to go out in the morning, I say a small tefillah to HKBH asking Him to help that no man sin at my fault.”

Wow. I can only hope and pray that I end up near you in the next world.

Yellow123:

“Oh my goodness. Enough with the tzniyus rants already… everyone is here in this world and working on their own struggles.”

True, and among those struggles are a) being mekayim the chiyuv of hochayach tocheiach es amisecha and b) standing up for Hashem’s Torah when it is being publicly and blatantly disregarded.

And just out of curiosity, if every is here in the world to work only on their own struggles, why are you so busy ranting about other people ranting?

Sam2:

“…there is a second issue, aside from just being Halachically “naked” in public, that any clothes that are too attracting are not allowed. That there is no source for and is probably dictated by societal standards and common sense (i.e. even if society accepts something that is objectively too attracting, that wouldn’t make it okay; but if society says that something is too attracting, it would be problematic to wear even if it’s objectively not too attracting). And even though it would not be inherently Assur to say D’varim Shebikdusha in front of a woman wearing, for example, tight pants, the problem with that is obvious.”

Very well put, and I couldn’t agree more.

“Many people have serious Kashyas. It’s hard to say reality is one way when Eineinu Ro’os that it’s different.”

What do you mean by “Eineinu Ro’os”? All of scientifically accepted fact is merely a series of guesses (albeit educated guesses) based solely upon observation. It has been wrong before many, many times. Remember when the world was flat? Or when the earth was the center of the universe? How about when all cognitive activity took place in the heart? None of these “scientific facts” were true, and who says that today’s are any different?

The Torah, on the other hand, is a description of the world by its ineffable, infallible Creator. He knows how the world works because He made it. He is never wrong.

YRK:

“Why is this a “problem” to YOU feel is incumbent upon YOU (and others who love to jump on the tznius bandwagon at every opportunity) to rectify? I don’t know if you are male or female so I can’t speculate as to your motives. Are you a female that feels other women are getting more attention than you? Or, are you a male that feels his wife is not “up to par” in looks and cant control his wandering eyes? Either way, you seem to have a personal issue and want other to conform to you. You will not get women in Flatbush, Manhattan,or Beverly Hills to conform to your standard. If this has become such an issue for you, then move to Ramat Bet Shemesh where these things get enforced. Or, stay home. Then, with this important issue out of the way, you can concentrate on some lesser important issues like; gezeila, sinas chinam, loshon hora, and Shmiras Shabbos just to mention a few.

Or, you can simply control your eyes like every real talmid chochom that walks the street and work on yourself to become a better person.”

Why is somebody else being concerned about the tzniyus of a third party a “problem” to YOU feel is incumbent upon YOU (and others who love to jump on the mind-your-own-business bandwagon at every opportunity) to rectify? … you seem to have a personal issue and want other to conform to your ideology of what others can or can’t be bothered about. You will not get everyone on this site to conform to your standard. If this has become such an issue for you, then move to a different website where nothing besides “being judgmental” can ever be branded as being wrong. Or, stay home. Then, with this important issue out of the way, you can concentrate on some lesser important issues like; gezeila, sinas chinam, loshon hora, and Shmiras Shabbos just to mention a few.

Or, you can simply calmly and respectfully disagree like a true baal middos who posts on this site and work on yourself to become a better person.

lesschumras:

“Newsflash! Not everyone agrees with your hashkafa or is obsessed with knees! There are np tznius police so get over it. You are free to practice your view on tznius ; you are not free to impose your views on others.”

Newsflash! Not everyone agrees with your hashkafa or is obsessed with never ever criticizing anybody else! There are np mind-your-own-business police so get over it. You are free to practice your view on “being judgmental”; you are not free to impose your views on others.

Although I realize the thread is now way past this point, this particular comment has irked me into responding anyway.

Naftush:

“nothing happening today deserves this kind of rhetoric. Believe it or not, there were times when Am Yisrael didn’t have 60,000 full-time learners, and the world spun on its axis anyway.”

True. And throughout all those thousands of years, life has never, ever been half as good for then is it is now. Then, we often literally did not have food to eat; now we live in wealth and comfort that could not have been dreamed of a mere 50 years. Then, the goyim made our lives miserable with anti-semitic laws, beatings, and pogroms (by many names); now we can practice our Religion in all but complete peace and security. Coincidence? I (and apparently, R’ Chaim Kanievsky) think not. Torah is the source of everything we have; weaken it, and we will end up with more problems, not less.

yichusdik:

“If Moshe Rabeinu could make mistakes, and Dovid hamelech could make mistakes, so could the holiest people of our generation.”

This is completely true. The Torah explicitly tells us that Moshe Rabeinu, one of the greatest men of all time, made a mistake. (By Dovid Hamelech it’s not quite as simple – kol ha’omer Dovid chateh aynoh elah tu’ah.) But if you look through the Torah, you’ll find that every single person who thought that Moshe was wrong ended up on the wrong side of history, and more often then not ended up dead. Seriously, take a moment and think about all the different groups that, at one point or another, decided Moshe was wrong. Korach, Dosson and Aviram, the Miraglim, then the ones who decided to go into Eretz Yisroel after the miraglim, etc, etc, etc. All of them – dead. And the time that Moshe did indeed make a mistake, the only one who realized was Hashem. So can Gedolim make mistakes? Absolutely. But it is still far from our place to think that we can decide when that happens.

“”No one believes in godol infallibility. That accusation is merely leveled by those who don’t like being told by rabbonim on how to act. Though, I don’t know how any non-godol can purport to know when a godol is incorrect.”

So, in other words, you’ll agree that they’re not infallible, but, nonetheless, give them functional infallibility (i.e. treat them as if they are right, even if everyone else agrees that they’re wrong).

The Wolf”

Precisely. As R’ Ahron Feldman put it , disagreeing with the Gedolim does not make us heretics, merely arrogant fools (paraphrased).

lesschumras:

Do you really, honestly believe that you are smarter than pretty much all of the Gedolim of the last 100 years? If the answer to that question is no, I have no idea how you can possibly say the things you’ve just said… and if the answer is yes, you might just be the most arrogant fool I’ve ever met.

On the pre-Holocaust immigration issue, Rav Dessler wrote an extremely sharp letter against the people who had these exact taynos on the Gedolim… y’all may want to look it up.

Could you source that?

Can the mods please remove lesschumras’ post, I highly doubt the family (who I know personally) in question wants such information made public.

i also know them, and it already is public. and they probably think its cool

yitayningwut:

“mw13 – Feel free to argue on the Midrash Rabbah.”

Chas v’shalom. The Midrash says that from here we learn not to take Chumros more seriously than din; nowhere does it say that we should have “lesschumras”.

lesschumras:

“My name is less, not no chumras. To the extent that I have an agenda, it’s the proliferation of chumras to the point peolple start believing a chumra is tha actual halacha ( as happened when Chava thought simply touching the tree was the ikar, not the chumra”

I agree that chumros can, in some cases, be harmful; but that does not mean that “the proliferation of chumras” in general should be opposed. Just the opposite; being machmir in halacha is a wonderful thing.

“However,it’s gotten to the point where my machutten won’t eat anything cooked in my wife’s pots because we ea gebrocht”

I don’t see how that is confusing minhag with halacha. If their minhag is not to eat pots used to cook gebrokts, than that is the minhag; following it does not mean that they believe it is halacha.

Sam2:

“I oppose any Chumra being passed off as a Chiyuv/Issur D’Oraisa.”

So do I.

“Doing so is itself an Issur D’Oraisa of Bal Tosif.”

Incorrect. Baal Tosif is only adding to an actual mitzva; the classic example is adding a fifth parsha to Teffilin. Claiming that a chumra is a chyuv may be wrong, but it’s certainly not Baal Tosif.

And might I point out that while calling for less chumros, perhaps you should make sure that you’re not being unappropriately machmir yourself.

First of all, I do not see anybody (sane) calling MO “apikorsim and tzidukiim”. They may vehemently disagree with certain positions or segments of MO, but I don’t think anybody goes so far as to call it apikursis.

Second, there is such thing a thing as standing up for what’s right, and that usually requires pointing out what’s wrong. If the president of a certain institution insults and demonizes full-time learners, and if the said institution doesn’t so much as blink an eye at open chillul Shabbos, homosexuality, and kol davur usar, it must be pointed out that such an institution cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called Orthodox, Modern or not. This does not mean that anybody who steps foot into YU is a rasha gamur, but that YU as an institution is not shomer Torah u’mitzvos. And that is a problem. Again, there are many wonderful Bnei Torah and Yirai Shumayim in YU, but that does not take away from the many legitimate taynos against the place.

OVKTD:

“what is an apikorus? The gemara in Sanhedrin 99b gives the following definition: “Rav and Rabi Chanina both said, ‘He is one who degrades a talmid chacham.'” There are some very big talmidei chachamim, gedolei hador, who would consider themselves Modern Orthodox.”

And there are many universally accepted Gedolei Hador who have said things about MO that, would they have been said by a charedi on this site, would have generated accusations of sinas chinom and, apparently, starting milchemos gog u’magog. R’ Shimon Schwab, R’ Aharon Kotler, and R’ Elchonon Wasserman, to name a few.

mikehall12382:

“MO bashing seems to get past the MODs no problem.”

I have a funny feeling that if you saw all the MO-bashing posts that didn’t get through you’d be singing a different tune.

Sam2:

“I’m not sure what your story proves.”

The story proves that the Chazon Ish held that it is absolutely crucial that becoming a Godol, not a baynoni, is held up as the highest ideal. A movement that aims to produce merely “good Jews”, not great Jews, is inherently flawed.

Dr. Seuss:

“The Chazon Ish’s point isn’t that hard to understand.”

…unless you’re trying no to understand it.

“The Chazon Ish saw that the Mizrachim had no respect for the Chofetz Chaim and other Gedolim.”

I wouldn’t say that they didn’t respect the Gedolim, only that they did not hold of teaching their students to try to become Gedolim.

OVKTD:

All those quotes address only whether or not R’ Hirsch’s Torah im derech eretz was intended solely for his generation (although I’m fairly certain that there is some disagreement over that). However, that does not mean that adopting secular culture or values is in any way an ideal situation. Torah im derech eretz refers only to secular knowledge (ie science, history, etc) not secular culture and ideals.

So my question stands: What reason is there to mix modernity (today’s secular culture, values and ideals) into Judaism?