Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Litvish is what I am, it describes my religious leanings and perhaps my family origins
Misnagdish is the rest of the family who emphatically oppose chassidik philosophy. (I am more ambivalent to chassidik thought). see the difference?”Yes, but Chabad makes no such distinction. As you can see here, they treat it as a general term for all non-Chassidish Ashkenazim. To be honest, I thought that was how you were using it as well.
“apparently he doesn’t see it as an insult either”
That quote proves nothing. He’s clearly using it in an ironic manor like I was when I called RSo an “evil misnaged” earlier on this thread (or perhaps one of the other ones; I can’t keep track).
“so it is OK to define oneself as negative to something.”
Sure, it’s “OK,” but it’s silly and kind of sad. We COULD have started identifying as “Anti-Christians” two thousand years ago instead of continuing to identify as Jews, but we didn’t change our self identity on the basis of sectarianism for hopefully obvious reasons.
“After all, the litvish derech is the only real derech”
Then call yourself a Litvisher or a Litvak. Using a term that’s based around Chassidim feels like a major inferiority complex.
“And that, my friend, is the final word on the subject.”
Hurray! OK, so, moving on. What do you guys think about Zionism?
“I guess I am a nobody by your logic….”
I mean, sort of, yeah. Not in a mean-spirited sense, just in the sense that you seem to be the only person in existence who defines their affiliation on the basis of a machlokes that happened centuries ago. You’re definitely the exception, not the rule.
Avira:
Nobody self-identifies as “misnagdish,” and I mean nobody. Maybe a few baal teshuvos here and there who learned the term from Chabad then graduated from Chabad without learning proper yeshivish terminology. Even if someone genuinely opposed Chassidus, why would they make their entire identity defined around their stance on a movement they don’t hold of?
If you want to say other Chassidim use the term also, fine, but they’re also being derogatory. It’s not comparable to Yekke which is a clearly defined term and is used proudly as an identity. Misnaged has no clear definition and basically just refers to anyone Chassidim don’t like, much like when socialists use the word “bourgeois.” Are non-Chassidish sphardim misnagdim? Are yekkes misnagdim? Was the Chasam Sofer misnagdish even though one of his rebbeim was the Baal HaFlaah?
““i love all misnagdim, im sorry if anyone gets offended by the term snag, its just short for misnagdim“
We know what it’s short for, and they’re both slurs. Thank you for offering proof that Chabad uses those terms so often that many in Chabad don’t even realize they’re meant to be offensive anymore. This directly refutes Menachem Shmei’s claims about how they’re never used, and how we’re just making stuff up.
Calling people misnagdim is basically calling them “the enemies.” So, the people who kept following the traditional Ashkenazi mesora somehow became “the opposition” overnight because they opted NOT to join a sectarian movement and change their minhagei avos. The entire concept is extremely one-sided and derogatory.
“You seem to have understood him to say, “the Rebbe is Moshiach, look, even Rabbi Schochet agrees”.
In that case, I agree. It doesn’t make any sense to say that.”Yes, this is exactly what I thought he meant, but I think you’re correct. Sorry about that. I thought he was bringing him as a proof, not just telling people to look up an existing rebuttal from Chabad.
“In general, I wouldn’t give too much credence to any RCA statement.”
Honestly, agreed. It’s a bit two-faced of us to ally with Chabad when it’s a chareidi vs. MO discussion, then ally with the RCA when it’s a Litvish vs. Chabad discussion. We should just be steadfast in our opposition to everyone everywhere all the time.
So many good indie rock band names here:
-Guys Running Up and Down Easter Parkway with Yellow Flags
-The Guys Running Up and Down Eastern Parkway with Yellow Flags Expression
-The Long-Standing Surrogate Terminologies
-Rayos From Here to Timbuktu
-The Fringe Opinions
-The Colons and Periods in RashiI think we should start by forming “The Guys Running Up and Down Eastern Parkway with Yellow Flags Expression.” I feel the extra word “Expression” gives it that little extra post-modernist hipster zest. Then, Gadolhadorah will form the breakaway band “The Long-Standing Surrogate Terminologies,” and he will be remembered as the real breakaway star from the whole thing.
Menach:
So, bringing Avi Weiss as a proof that the Open Orthodoxy and totally legit and truly Orthodox would be reasonable? It would be “ludicrous” to suggest otherwise, according to you.
“Google rabbi Yitzchok schochet response to RCA resolution that was published in Jewish chronicle.”
The first thing I see after googling Yitzchok Shochet is that he used to be a principal at Ohelei Torah, the main Chabad school in Crown Heights.
You can’t bring Chabad rabbis to defend Chabad views. How are you not getting this? If we raised problems with Catholicism (lehavdil), it would be silly to say “well, the Pope doesn’t seem to have any problems with it.”
“It will be hard to prove otherwise”
I can offer just as much proof as you have for your argument: none at all.
Just because it’s popular in baby boomer circles to talk about the “decline of youth” doesn’t mean there’s actually any truth to it. The old have always complained about the young since the dawn of time.
“the “guys running up and down eastern Parkway with yellow flags” expression”
We should start an indie rock band with this name.
“I expected better from someone who claims to be of superior Torah learning”
When did I ever claim this? I’m openly an am haaretz.
“This is again, the illogical argument of guilt of similarity.”
You were the one who made the comparison, not us. In fact, I didn’t even word my response in a degrading way. My point was that you misspoke so atrociously that you did your side more harm than good, and by digging your heels in you’re making it worse. I think your best bet is to just admit that you shouldn’t have brought up Shabbatei Tzvi/false moshiachs. It didn’t help your case by anyone’s standards, presumably even those of other Lubavitchers.
RSo: Many in Chabad seem to think he’s still alive in some capacity (eg. writing “shlita” after his name). I guess that’s another way of getting around the issue. I’m not sure which is worse. From my experience, internally in Chabad “mishichist” refers to the “still alive” camp, and “non mishichist” refers to the resurrection camp. The assertion that there are Lubavitchers who believe the moshiach will be someone other than the Rebbe is purely mythological from my observations.
“It is used mainly by immature bochurim in yeshiva”
That’s still an issue. It’s not normal for yeshiva bochrim to use slurs about other types of yidden. That’s not “kid’s being kid’s.” That’s a serious problem that your community needs to address. Also, if no adults ever use it, then where do the kids learn it? They re-invent the word every generation?
“The claim that no false moshiachs or moshiach cults ever claimed this isnt true and shabtai tzv would be a valid example of what was claimed here as the words “false moshiach” and “moshiach cults” were used.”
OK, so perfect. You agree that Chabad fits perfectly in line with all prior false moshiach cults. Can we be done then?
Why don’t people listen to me?
“Larry, Curly and Shemp.”
Don’t you mean Larry, Curly, and Moe? Or, Larry, Shemp, and Moe? Shemp replaced Curly.
““i think every chabadsker loves rav shach“
Well you’re mistaken”
Of course he is, and he knows it. Dishonest comments like that aren’t actually directed at people like you and me who obviously know better. They’re for the clueless onlooker who might still have a chance of being fooled.
Don’t take the bait, guys. We don’t need another thread for this.
Oh my… Did he seriously just use Shabbatei Tzvi (and implicitly also Yushke and any other dead moshiach) as an argument in FAVOR of Chabad meshichism?
Dude, unless you’re a double-agent for the anti-Chabad side, you might want to take a little break from this thread. You know it’s bad when RSo (the evil misnaged) is more strict about saying “lehavdil” so people won’t think he’s comparing the Rebbe to SZ than you are.
CTL:
And the Bureau of Labor statistics seems to be suggesting inflation went up by a magnitude of about 10 since 1965 based on what their calculator gave me when I put in $204. If anything, that’s a conservative estimate; as you pointed out, car prices have gone up more than that, and you could do the same with houses, candy bars, gasoline as well probably.
In any case, if the camp now costs $6000 a month (1500 * 4), and it used to cost ~200 a month, that would be 30 times more expensive, not 7. If that’s all correct, then that would way exceed anyone’s estimate for inflation.
“Problem #4886 with Lubavitch:
There is a Lubavitcher who doesn’t know who Reb Shamshon Refael Hirsch is.”You joke, but I actually believe these things are more of an issue than the philosophical stuff that gets people worked up here. Chabad claims to be all accepting and interacts with everyone, yet within the frum tzibbur, Chabad is super isolationist. And, no, it’s not “everyone else’s” fault.
“When I went to camp in 1965 it was $204 for each month. Now the charge exceeds that per day.”
This can’t possibly be true, right? Over 204 per day would make summer camp cost more than school tuition for an entire year, wouldn’t it?
Also, I just checked, and $204 in 1965 is the equivalent of around $2000 today. So, two months of camp would cost 4000 after indexing for inflation. Is that really that much less than today?
“i hope one day soon chabad’s love for every jew”
Except for actual frum yidden.
Akuperma:
If the Arab world thought they could destroy Israel, they would do it in a heartbeat. The reason they aren’t constantly trying is because they tried and failed, not because they have even a shred of morality.I’m not really Zionist either, but going to the extreme of actually humanizing the Islamic world and talking like they’re reasonable people is just nonsense. Their strategy is very simplistic: they blow people up who they don’t like, and sometimes get stuff in return. Rinse and repeat. There’s no nuance or intellect to it.
“Your just shooting from the hip, and have no idea what I am referring to.”
Yes, I’m aware of what you’re referring to because we’ve had others* come here and make the same argument before, and it’s not only me that shoots them down. Unless you live in some obscure state with no Jews, you obviously interact with other yidden enough to know that your shittos are extremely out of the ordinary. You could say that at this point I’m just bullying you for being different rather than making real arguments, and that might be a fair criticism, but given how much you changed the tone of this thread for the worse, I don’t really care.
The thing you quoted me seems to be a quote within a quote, and it seems like Rav Shlomo Kluger’s quote ends before it gets to the conclusion about places like Paris and London. What sefer is the whole thing actually from?
“You clearly meant that the issue is cut and dried, and that is why one should ask his rav.”
So, me telling him to follow his own rav is trying to convert him to my way, but you straight up telling him what to do is giving him options? Are you actually insane?
*edit
AAQ:
Your wording still makes no sense. Why don’t you just say “ask a random person” thus leaving it open ended whether or not they’re Jewish. Why are you insisting on them davka approaching goyim? You surely realize the purpose is to find Jews, not to annoy goyim.I’m not arguing that they’re doing a bad thing, but the ikker is not to talk to goyim. That’s just an inevitable side-effect.
I almost didn’t comment the first time as I assumed it was just a typo, but now that you’ve doubled-down it’s sounding dangerously close to suggesting that finding secular Jews is secondary to advertising to non-Jews in your mind.
You’ll find just as many threads if not more about Zionism, YU, the MO in general, etc.
The YWN CR is like a never ending cage match between sects. By now, most of the people here have an understanding that that’s the primary focus.
As for there being some feeling of bias, you guys really want to act shocked that Yeshiva World News has a yeshivish bias? The Chabad sites will have a Chabad bias, the Modern sites will have a Modern bias, etc. If you want unbiased you probably have to go to a place altogether unassociated with frumkeit.
As for the assertion that this happens in real life as well… If the immediate topic of discussion every time you talk to people is issues with Chabad, you may need to ask who the real problem is. Could it be that you aren’t being quite as subtle with your agenda as you think?
“Every minute a chabadnik asks a goy “excuse me are you Jewish”, he is fulfilling a mitzva of ahavas yisroel and is pikuach nefesh”
Ummm, what? Did you mean to say “asks a Jew who otherwise appears to be a goy?”
If not, I fail to see how asking random goyim if they’re Jewish has anything to do with ahavas yisrael.
” Additionally, the Mishkenos Yaakov’s/Mishnah Berurah’s list has been superseded”
With all due respect, I’m going to trust their counts over your’s. Obviously it isn’t purely quantitative.
“So the Rishonim and Achronim who maintain that there is no reshus harabbim today are just a, “crowd?””
Unless they were time travelers, they didn’t say anything about reshusei harabim “today.”
“We follow the Rama who it was accepted allowed the criterion of shishim ribo”
You can’t confidently say “we” when you have no idea what the questioner is. Hence why I told him he needs to go by his mesora/rav. You did the same thing with n0mesora regarding the OP; why can’t this discussion just be theoretical for you? Why do you insist on trying to convince people to be more meikel in actuality?
“No there is only am haaratzes.”
Call it what you must.
“Thanks for clarifying – seems that the question is – is the majority of the anti-eruv yidden consider the issue m’duaraisa? seems like there are 2 opinions.”
By definition, you can only build an eruv where the issue of hotzaah would be d’rabbonon. If it’s a reshus harabim m’doraysa, it would be unfit according to everyone. So, the discussion comes down to what makes something a reshus harabim. There are far more than 2 opinions. On the one extreme, there is the “reshusei harabim literally don’t exist” crowd as you can see here. On the other extreme, there are those that reject the 600K definition which would make every single city eruv pasul (I assume this is the “anti-eruv” crowd people keep alluding to).
L’maaseh you just have to go by what your mesora/rav says on the issue, and you should know that there are some extremely far-out, non-mainstream opinions being shared on this forum and elsewhere on the internet.
“Actually Rav Moshe wrote (IM, O.C., 1:186) that when follows one’s rav on any issue, even on issurei chilul Shabbos, albeit the halachah is not like their rav’s interpretation, no aveirah is transgressed. Hence, they are not classified as mechalal Shabbos.”
OK, I’ll concede. I was wrong in my wording of this statement. I though I was clear enough that they aren’t considered machallel shabbos, but if not I apologize.
“Actually, as most poskim maintain that there is no reshus harabbim today, they would need to grapple with this issue. ”
You’re using “rov,” or most way too loosely. The statement “there are no reshus harabim today” was generally made way before Brooklyn or Manhattan were a reality. If there aren’t reshusei harabim today, then there never can be.
“hat is, if we have some allowing, others – not, would carrying be always considered hillul shabbos by those who do not allow, or it maybe something like “ok b’dieved” or “ok when going for a mitzva” or “ok when not observed by public”?”
Depends on the machlokes, and it’s really a question for your rav. Even by those who hold Brooklyn is a Reshus Harabim (the mainstream yeshivish opinion), those who carry in the eruv probably don’t get the status of not being shomer shabbos since they’ve been “mislead” into believing it’s ok. That’s usually how we get around these things, but on a theoretical level, yes, they are being machalel shabbos according to the machmirim.
As far as the “ok when going for a mitzvah,” no. There is no heter to be over an isser d’oraisa on Shabbos for a mitzvah. This is exactly why we don’t blow shofar or take arba minim on Shabbos.
“but your “imaginary friend version of Rav Moshe that you concocted” would oppose a Brooklyn eruv even if he knew the correct facts.”
Like I said earlier on this thread, if there were a change in metzius, I think he would reevaluate. You have not offered up any evidence or theory that there has been such a change. It seems like Brooklyn today is fully analogous to the Brooklyn of his times for these purposes.
“and you have no problem projecting into Rav Moshe”
What?! Do you not realize I’ve been the one simply repeating his psak on Brooklyn over and over, while you put your random nonsense in his mouth?
“The difference between me and you is you do not know Rav Moshe’s shitos in eruvin”
No, the difference is that you are so obsessed with Brooklyn having an eruv that the idea of the posek hador not allowing it is too emotionally difficult for you to grasp. So, rather than shaking and crying in a corner, you have created a wild rationalization whereby even he agrees with you despite his well-known stance to the contrary. The rest of us, on the other hand, are mature enough to live in the real world where some people matir things, and others don’t. We pick and lane, and deal with it rather than having to convince ourselves that everyone agrees with us.
“I am defending the mattrim who argue that even according to Rav Moshe’s shitos an eruv would be allowed for the entire Brooklyn”
No such group exists. It’s just you, Richmond, and that nutty website.
“Unfortunately, most of the anti-eruv debaters”
We aren’t anti-eruv. We’re anti misrepresentation.
“Neville, you clearly misunderstood the sources”
What I’ve been saying is not an anti-Shmini-Atzeres-sukkah specific approach; it is the standard understanding of this halacha. You clearly know enough to have heard what I’m talking about. I don’t know why you keep avoiding the issue of doing it l’shem mitzvah.
You told me to look at the sources, I did. When those sources didn’t end up saying exactly what you wanted them to say, you decide to just accuse me of not understanding them.
Ubiq:
In other words yes, you guys are still pretending it’s a good thing.
Has there been any organized recognition of the fact that this is likely worse than anything the Open Orthodoxy ever did? If there’s no condemnation of this, it can only mean one of two things:
1) The only reason the Open Orthodoxy was criticized was because it changed its name. Had they kept identifying as MO, they would have flown under the radar forever. I think this theory is likely given that the main people condemning them were MO institutions, while the chareidi stance was “not my monkey, not my circus.”2) Alternatively, the MO has lost so much respect that their institutions can completely endorse violations of halachah without anyone batting an eye because everyone has just given up on pretending to legitimize them at this point.
“However, Rav Moshe would disagree with you.”
Stop speaking for him, jeesh. How is this stuff OK? Reb Moshe was asser Brooklyn, n0m wants to be asser Brooklyn. B’pashtus they agree, so I don’t know why the imaginary friend version of Reb Moshe that you’ve concocted conveniently sides with you on everything.““I thought you came here just defend the poskim who were not accepted by their own peers.”
As I said you made up your mind and do not want to be mixed up with the facts.”No, as you should be able to tell from this thread, we would not be arguing if you were just defending the matirim. There’s nothing wrong with that. This thread no longer has anything to do with the Brooklyn eruv except in a superficial sense. This has become about you representing Reb Moshe as you fantasize him with no respect for the reality.
“I cared for some Old Litvaks in a nursing home. All of them except for one, ate before shacharis. One of them had dementia. If he didn’t eat first, he would start davening maariv.”
You’re proving our point, not hurting it. This is like saying your wife had to be driven to the hospital on Shabbos to give birth, therefore it must be mutar to drive on Shabbos for everyone. This is a perfect example of the idiom: “the exception that proves the rule.”
“Neville, just look in Shulchan Aruch Orech Chaim 666 and 668 and in Mishnah Brurah there also”
OK, not sure why you thought it would change my mind as I’ve learned it before. Addressing the topic of sleeping and even eating foods that wouldn’t normally require a leisheiv basukkah, the MB (and everyone but the Gra) are meikel and seem to confirm the reasoning that you would only be doing these things l’shem mitzvah, whereas eating a meal you might do on an ordinary day anyway. The same logic works for not taking arba minim. If the whole reason for holding l’halacha that you must eat in the Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres hinges on it being normal to eat outside anyway, then it seems perfectly reasonable that that norm could change based on time and location.
There is only one group I’ve ever seen that really treats it like a chiyuv and will even refuse to drink water outside the sukkah on Shmini Atzeres; ironically, that group is Chabad.
“Almost nothing by itself is objectively a kula or chumra.”
OK, I disagree, but I glad you finally stated this outright. We just define it differently.
“Chalav Hacompanies from it’s origins was considered to be chalav yisroel.”
People like to say this, but I’ve never heard a real rav claim that this is actually what he meant, and in fact I’ve had several specify that this is definitely not what he meant.
“Once the Bach/Rema/Others? were not rejected, it has become precedent.”
Lack of rejection doesn’t mean it’s not a kulah. Any real kulah is, by definition, accepted. Otherwise it would just be considered an isser (eg. the Conservative “kulah” to drive to shul on Shabbos).
“And I would be uncomfortable calling that a kula until it could be demonstrated that the earlier sources were of the opinion to be machmir in such a scenario.”
I’ll try to provide sources when I get the chance, but it’s relatively widely known. The gemara explicitly discusses chodosh in chutz l’aretz. The Rema’s lashon is clearly that of someone reluctantly trying to be matir something. The reason there is somewhat of a yoshon revivalist movement today is due to how shaky the heterim have always been, and people are just now learning that.
Oh wow, I didn’t even realize there were other versions of this thread with more comments. We should bump all of them.
Also, I still have no idea what the original vent was.
It’s been over 6 months. Are the modern people still pretending that the meeting club for gay people is somehow supposed to discourage gayness, or are they finally admitting that YU just straight up condoned one of the most serious issurim because their liberalism is more important to them than Torah?
Me too.
“blaming the messenger?”
Ha, no I’m blaming myself don’t worry. Just observing that it’s here specifically where suddenly I have strong opinions on these things, whereas in real life I couldn’t care less.
“The reason being because of the lies being presented as fact on this forum.”
The only ones doing that here are you and Richmond, to the degree that I’m surprised it’s even allowed.
“No one denied that Rav Moshe objected to a Brooklyn eruv and you cannot demonstrate that I said otherwise.”
And, then a mere few sentences later you say this:
“Actually, I offered several reasons why Rav Moshe would allow an eruv in Brooklyn”“Rav Moshe is not a rebbe”
Why do you feel the need to keep saying this?“Only when the issue is eruvin, do people have a problem that we peruse the teshuvos to see if they are applicable. ”
Actually no. We recently had a thread on here where posters were using a very similar argument that the poskim didn’t have the right facts, therefore they were wrong. In that case, the debate was about electricity on Shabbos, but it’s the same idea.
“A bunch a gibbrish. I never said any such thing.”
It doesn’t feel good to have someone publicly misrepresenting your opinions, does it? Maybe you should think about that next time you speculate about what went on in Reb Moshe’s mind.
“Neville, about sukkah on Shmini Atzeres double-check your Halochic facts, ok? It is a chiyuv.”
How can it be both Sukkos and Shmini Atzeres at the same time? The reason we don’t take arba minin without a bracha on shmini atzeres is exactly this reason. The only reason it’s ok to sit in the sukkah is because it’s something one might do anyway for pleasure.
You’re actually just wrong on this, so I don’t know why you feel like speaking with such confidence.
“When there are different opinons that are all firmly justified, there is no stam halacha. That is a machlokes. Neither opinion is objectively a kula or a chumra.”
If this were true, nothing would ever be called a kulah or chumra. Give me one example of something you actually consider to be a kulah, and if you really want to show integrity, let it be one that you personally rely upon, otherwise you’re likely just making the standard MO point: “everything I do is the stam halacha, everyone to the right of me is doing chumros, everyone to the left of me is not ‘firmly justified’ (as you put it).”
Even within your current description, you depart from what you actually say in previous arguments. The Bach’s heter for chodosh is openly a limud zechus, not just an alternative opinion in a machlokes. The masses were openly eating chodosh with no existing heter, so the poskim were forced to figure something out. Same thing with cholov stam.
“Excuses. You simply do not know the inyan”
Wasn’t meant as an excuse, just a reminder to n0m and any passerbys that we are the normal ones here and you guys are the cooky ones, as I’m sure you are fully aware if you’ve ever gone off on these unhinged rants in front of normal frum people before. One doesn’t have to be an expert on eruvin to know that Reb Moshe was asser Brooklyn. You just have to not be a crazy person. And before you start whining that I’m not arguing in good faith by saying all of this, let me just remind you that you have concluded almost every single paragraph with an insult to the intelligence of whomever you were addressing.
““And it is close to the core of the Brooklyn Eruv as can be demonstrated by the original need for the Boro Park Eruv.”
Gibberish”I think his point was that the need for a BP eruv (and even Flatbush) proves that one could not put one all the way around Brooklyn, as they did last year. As stated earlier several times, we don’t have a problem with the BP eruv; it has its rabbonim with their reasons. The discussion is of the new, all-Brooklyn eruv. There’s no way you can apply your “comparable to KGH” logic to it.
“It is not that Rav Moshe c”v didn’t know what he was talking about, but only that the metzius was not as he was led to believe.”
He obviously had easy access to census data. This is an example of an “excuse,” if there ever was one. Any time people don’t like a Rav’s psak, but still want to respect the Rav, they come up with a wild conspiracy that he was purposely lied to about the facts or some such nonsense.
N0m:
As much as I don’t want to really get involved here, do you have any evidence at all that eating before davening was regional? I’ve never heard of anyone other than Chabad claiming that it’s ok. By the way, the Baal HaTanya was not matir. It’s a later Chabad minhag.
Not sleeping in the sukkah is not in-and-of itself controversial. It’s Chabad’s insistence that they are “machmir” to not sleep in the sukkah. As you know from the other thread, it bothers me when people are too insecure to just admit the fact that they’re relying on kulos.
“The Shulchan Aruch says that one sits in the sukkah on Shmini Atzeres.”
Nobody can call it a chiyuv. To get around stira and bal tosef, poskim are forced to say you just eat in the Sukkah because it’s nice, not because it’s a mitzvah. It might have been minhag klal yisroel, but if it’s not a chiyuv what’s the big deal with Chassidim not doing it?“I define stam halacha as the unanimous agreed upon concept.”
None of the examples we have been discussing here are “unanimously agreed upon.” Essentially, it sounds like you are agreeing to my description of your take. You go by majority. Unanimous consensus almost never happens.