Grisha, I find the Burkas article quite tragic. If every group of crazies poses such a challenge to the author's basic emunah, perhaps the author should should enroll in Ohr Someach or another Baalei Teshuvah institution which has curriculum examining the fundamentals of our Emunah. The author titles himself a rabbi and seems to give shiurim. I therefore assume that he has familiarity with Talmud and Poskim. I am surprised that in the process of his learning he did not notice that large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim. Keeping that in mind I don't understand what the author is concerned about?
"large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim"
the keyword here is scholarship. But in the real world, scholarship and reality are two different things. On the day to day basis, most people who live a routine life, don't differentiate between the D'Oraitas, D'Rabanans, Minhagim, and Chumrot. They just live how they were taught to. Not that many people go into the scholarship of what's what. Once something becomes established, it becomes normative. Hence the rule of Minhag K'Halachah.
Also, if leaving a comment here for something that I didn't write, please post the comment (or at least copy it) to the original author's website/blog. I'd love to see the original author's response.
>"large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim"
I dispute this on the ground that practically speaking it is meaningless.
Allow me to repeat a story that has been making the rounds among Chareidi society in Israel and America in recent months:
A Chareidi man goes to America to collect money to marry off a child. He returns home, having successfully raised a large sum of money (say, $20,000) which he is carrying in a package on him. Already in his neighborhood, he suffers from a heart attack and falls to the ground. Hatzalah arrives to treat him, and he comes to. However, to his horror he realizes that his envelope with the money is missing! The man is lying prone on the ground and inconsolable. Hatzalah men look around to see if the money is there. It isn't. So one radios that a cache of $20,000 is missing, and only a few minutes later the money is found, a few blocks away where the man had inadvertently dropped it before his heart attack. The money is returned.
R. Chaim Kanievsky is told about this incident. His reply? The man who found it (and returned it) has to give ma'aser on the $20,000.
He "has to"? Is ma'aser kesafim a de-oraysa? A de-rabbonon? A minhag (probably)?
max - i don't think that enrolling in ohr somayach would help matters. you should know that i did not title myself a rabbi. the title was conferred by rabbis y.m lau and eliyahu bakshi doron when they were the chief rabbis of israel. i'm well aware of distinctions between de-orasyas, de-rabbanans, takkanos, minhagim, gezeiros, and chumros. probably better aware than most. that's not the issue at all. i suggest you read my post more carefully.
I think the whole problem is systamic. We have in charedi Judaism a distorted notion that chumrot and intolerance are religious virtues, they are not.
This leads to Burkas, conscripts in Zahal refusing to take instruction from female officers, or in my own Chicago neighbourhood charedi rabbis endorsing public officials at Election Time, with known integrity issues, in order to advance their own narrow interests.
Dear AddeRabbi, To start with, please consider Perkei Avos (1:11). Your impressive background makes the careless language whether with or without intent even more aggregious. One has to really bend into a pretzel: to interpret statements, such as: “I get terrified that it's really all like this, that everything we do developed like this, that some group once decided to take "and you shall bind them as a sign to your hand" literally, and so we now strap leather boxes to ourselves.” “I find that terrifying, because it generates real uncertainty about the authenticity of the narratives around which I organize my life and which I am attempting to perpetuate through my children and students.” not as an open-ended invitation to question basic foundations of Judaism. In fact I had shared the post with number of people to see if their initial impressions concur with mine. I so far have not found anybody who had explained the post favorably. Further please consider, the title our dear host, Critically Observant Jew, has given to your article “Burkas and the authenticity of Judaism”. The implication is obvious. I would think that you are aware of the environment we live in today: with large number of Jews who consider themselves Orthodox and who keep Mitzvos, but lack basic foundation of the conviction in the basic principles of our faith. You can call me pessimistic, but if you pose a question: “Why don't Burkas pose the challenge to authenticity of Judaism?” I don't think that many, including unfortunately large portion of blogging public, will not know what to answer.
So perhaps instead of fretting over Burkas and double headed coverings, you can put your vast scholarship to use in order to mehazek your brethren, by showing in simple logical manner that Burkas in fact don't pose a challenge to the authenticity of Judaism, that it is verifiable that the Torah we have now is the same we had received from Har Sinai, without adulations? This could make up for the great uncertainties your post has caused!
AddeRabbi raises an important point which leads to even scarier conclusions. 1) Look up the photo of the founding convention of the Agudah. How many people are wearing black Borsellino's? Hardly any. Nowadays, you need one just to apply for membership in one of their shuls and it's considered kefirah to suggest Moshe Rabeinu didn't have one (when he wasn't wearing his shtreiml, of course!) The concern, therefore, is that today's fanatic is tomorrow's leader. Imagine when the first major rabbinic figure endorses the burka as an acceptable "alternative" for frum women. It isn't so far from that to "You must wear the burka if you want to be considered frum". But what's more, here's the implication. Look around at the crazy stringencies, unacceptable attitudes about crime, and ugly infighting in the frum world. Is there a reason to suspect it has ever been different? If people 200 years from now look back on our "gedolim" and talk about how saintly they were, is it possible that we're doing the same thing? And isn't that scary?
I think that a separation should be made between two things. On the one hand I agree to adderabbi about the short memory the Orthodox community has, and about their misguided their belief that whatever is practiced now was always the way things were done.I agree with him because he is right. I saw pictures of the founding of a black hat yeshiva, and the sitting in the audience was mixed. And i am sure that there will be people who will jump up and down and swear that men and women were always separate in everything. On the other issue, i disagree with him entirely. Saying that Tefilin started as a literal misunderstanding of a pasuk is heresy in my eyes, and it undermines the fundamental principal of Judaism. Archeology has found tefilin's from mid bait sheini, and the mishna and gemara talk about them alot. The Torah itself say "וקשרתם לאות על ידך ולזכורן בין עיניך" If you don't feel that the mishnah and gemara are authentic Judaism, then what is? The tanach? But some of the tanach was written hundreds of years after the torah itself. maybe those mistakes were made then? and in the torah itself - there is at least 40 years from the beginning of it's writing till the end - maybe someone took something literally then? The point is, you have to trust the authentic sources of torah shebeal peh, otherwise you have nothing but your own speculations to guide you.
As for the Burkas - they don't bother me so much. We've had crazier fads.
Max, I think you are missing the point on at least two aspects here: 1st - The author talks about new observances entering into our traditions with a very flimsy basis. At its core the article suggests greater care in using midrashic sources when speaking to grown people. Also author highlights and transformations from fad of a few, to mainstream observance. Authenticity of questionable practices in contemporary observance could be the name of the article instead of "Authenticity of Judaism". 2nd - Burkas and burka-like traditions exacerbate the problem of division between Jews (especially within observant community) and encourage skeptical attitudes. I don't have a concern about Burkas in particular, but as a whole I am concerned that a large and fast growing part of our customs comes out of fads just like these.
were do I buy one anyway? are they available in designer fashion? I think it will look good on my wife... let me check with that store that were just selling the "freedom kaffiyeh"
11 comments:
Grisha,
I find the Burkas article quite tragic. If every group of crazies poses such a challenge to the author's basic emunah, perhaps the author should should enroll in Ohr Someach or another Baalei Teshuvah institution which has curriculum examining the fundamentals of our Emunah.
The author titles himself a rabbi and seems to give shiurim. I therefore assume that he has familiarity with Talmud and Poskim. I am surprised that in the process of his learning he did not notice that large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim. Keeping that in mind I don't understand what the author is concerned about?
"large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim"
the keyword here is scholarship. But in the real world, scholarship and reality are two different things. On the day to day basis, most people who live a routine life, don't differentiate between the D'Oraitas, D'Rabanans, Minhagim, and Chumrot. They just live how they were taught to. Not that many people go into the scholarship of what's what. Once something becomes established, it becomes normative. Hence the rule of Minhag K'Halachah.
Also, if leaving a comment here for something that I didn't write, please post the comment (or at least copy it) to the original author's website/blog. I'd love to see the original author's response.
>"large focus of Torah scholarship is to separate D'Oraisas, D'Rabonan and Minhagim"
I dispute this on the ground that practically speaking it is meaningless.
Allow me to repeat a story that has been making the rounds among Chareidi society in Israel and America in recent months:
A Chareidi man goes to America to collect money to marry off a child. He returns home, having successfully raised a large sum of money (say, $20,000) which he is carrying in a package on him. Already in his neighborhood, he suffers from a heart attack and falls to the ground. Hatzalah arrives to treat him, and he comes to. However, to his horror he realizes that his envelope with the money is missing! The man is lying prone on the ground and inconsolable. Hatzalah men look around to see if the money is there. It isn't. So one radios that a cache of $20,000 is missing, and only a few minutes later the money is found, a few blocks away where the man had inadvertently dropped it before his heart attack. The money is returned.
R. Chaim Kanievsky is told about this incident. His reply? The man who found it (and returned it) has to give ma'aser on the $20,000.
He "has to"? Is ma'aser kesafim a de-oraysa? A de-rabbonon? A minhag (probably)?
max - i don't think that enrolling in ohr somayach would help matters.
you should know that i did not title myself a rabbi. the title was conferred by rabbis y.m lau and eliyahu bakshi doron when they were the chief rabbis of israel.
i'm well aware of distinctions between de-orasyas, de-rabbanans, takkanos, minhagim, gezeiros, and chumros. probably better aware than most. that's not the issue at all.
i suggest you read my post more carefully.
I think the whole problem is systamic. We have in charedi Judaism a distorted notion that chumrot and intolerance are religious virtues, they are not.
This leads to Burkas, conscripts in Zahal refusing to take instruction from female officers, or in my own Chicago neighbourhood charedi rabbis endorsing public officials at Election Time, with known integrity issues, in order to advance their own narrow interests.
Dear AddeRabbi,
To start with, please consider Perkei Avos (1:11). Your impressive background makes the careless language whether with or without intent even more aggregious. One has to really bend into a pretzel: to interpret statements, such as:
“I get terrified that it's really all like this, that everything we do developed like this, that some group once decided to take "and you shall bind them as a sign to your hand" literally, and so we now strap leather boxes to ourselves.”
“I find that terrifying, because it generates real uncertainty about the authenticity of the narratives around which I organize my life and which I am attempting to perpetuate through my children and students.”
not as an open-ended invitation to question basic foundations of Judaism. In fact I had shared the post with number of people to see if their initial impressions concur with mine. I so far have not found anybody who had explained the post favorably. Further please consider, the title our dear host, Critically Observant Jew, has given to your article “Burkas and the authenticity of Judaism”. The implication is obvious. I would think that you are aware of the environment we live in today: with large number of Jews who consider themselves Orthodox and who keep Mitzvos, but lack basic foundation of the conviction in the basic principles of our faith. You can call me pessimistic, but if you pose a question: “Why don't Burkas pose the challenge to authenticity of Judaism?” I don't think that many, including unfortunately large portion of blogging public, will not know what to answer.
So perhaps instead of fretting over Burkas and double headed coverings, you can put your vast scholarship to use in order to mehazek your brethren, by showing in simple logical manner that Burkas in fact don't pose a challenge to the authenticity of Judaism, that it is verifiable that the Torah we have now is the same we had received from Har Sinai, without adulations? This could make up for the great uncertainties your post has caused!
AddeRabbi raises an important point which leads to even scarier conclusions.
1) Look up the photo of the founding convention of the Agudah. How many people are wearing black Borsellino's? Hardly any. Nowadays, you need one just to apply for membership in one of their shuls and it's considered kefirah to suggest Moshe Rabeinu didn't have one (when he wasn't wearing his shtreiml, of course!)
The concern, therefore, is that today's fanatic is tomorrow's leader. Imagine when the first major rabbinic figure endorses the burka as an acceptable "alternative" for frum women. It isn't so far from that to "You must wear the burka if you want to be considered frum".
But what's more, here's the implication. Look around at the crazy stringencies, unacceptable attitudes about crime, and ugly infighting in the frum world. Is there a reason to suspect it has ever been different? If people 200 years from now look back on our "gedolim" and talk about how saintly they were, is it possible that we're doing the same thing? And isn't that scary?
I think that a separation should be made between two things. On the one hand I agree to adderabbi about the short memory the Orthodox community has, and about their misguided their belief that whatever is practiced now was always the way things were done.I agree with him because he is right. I saw pictures of the founding of a black hat yeshiva, and the sitting in the audience was mixed. And i am sure that there will be people who will jump up and down and swear that men and women were always separate in everything.
On the other issue, i disagree with him entirely. Saying that Tefilin started as a literal misunderstanding of a pasuk is heresy in my eyes, and it undermines the fundamental principal of Judaism. Archeology has found tefilin's from mid bait sheini, and the mishna and gemara talk about them alot. The Torah itself say "וקשרתם לאות על ידך ולזכורן בין עיניך"
If you don't feel that the mishnah and gemara are authentic Judaism, then what is? The tanach? But some of the tanach was written hundreds of years after the torah itself. maybe those mistakes were made then? and in the torah itself - there is at least 40 years from the beginning of it's writing till the end - maybe someone took something literally then?
The point is, you have to trust the authentic sources of torah shebeal peh, otherwise you have nothing but your own speculations to guide you.
As for the Burkas - they don't bother me so much. We've had crazier fads.
Max,
I think you are missing the point on at least two aspects here:
1st - The author talks about new observances entering into our traditions with a very flimsy basis. At its core the article suggests greater care in using midrashic sources when speaking to grown people. Also author highlights and transformations from fad of a few, to mainstream observance. Authenticity of questionable practices in contemporary observance could be the name of the article instead of "Authenticity of Judaism".
2nd - Burkas and burka-like traditions exacerbate the problem of division between Jews (especially within observant community) and encourage skeptical attitudes. I don't have a concern about Burkas in particular, but as a whole I am concerned that a large and fast growing part of our customs comes out of fads just like these.
were do I buy one anyway?
are they available in designer fashion?
I think it will look good on my wife...
let me check with that store that were just selling the "freedom kaffiyeh"
Post a Comment