(The Eitz Chaim Yeshiva in Volozhin)
When discussing the closing of Eitz Chaim in Volozhin a quote is brought in the name of the Chofetz Chaim. As is known to many, the Netziv did not buckle to the pressure of the Czarist regime and would not implement the teaching of secular studies in the Yeshivah. The Chofetz Chaim was said to have claimed that "had Volozhin implemented secular studies, the Torah would have been forgotten".
Much has been said here and in other forums about the so-called "superiority" that Lubavitch claims when discussing other groups, how they're the only "true" Chassidus, and how they try to "chap arein" Neshomos. It is true that it has become part and parcel of the upbringing of a Lubavither Bochur to try and bring others into the fold, whether they're currently religious or not. The superiority factor is what gets me peeved.
How does this differ from what the average "Lithuanian" Bochur is taught, namely, that The true way is his, and that a Chasidishe Bochur wastes his life away by eating Kugel at the Tish of his favorite Rebbe? How does it differ from the fact that the CC opined that although there were thousands of Bochurim in Poland, Hungary, and in non-Misnagdic Yeshivos with hundreds destined to become the leaders of the next generation, there would be no continuity of Torah?
What about the fact that in most Litvishe circles the derech of Pilpul in Peylishe Yeshivos was considered not toiling in Torah, and basically Bittul Torah? Yes, I can understand that he worried about the effect that the new decrees would have on other Yeshivos in Czarist Russia, but what about the others not in the Russian sphere of influence? Did he think it would spread to other countries? Otherwise, why make such claims?
Oh, and don't get me started on the beginning of Chassidus, what was thought of Chasidim at THAT time.
18 comments:
Rabbi Tzig,
You have a propensity for rambling posts, with no clear point. Maybe you can sum it up with a direct summary? What is your primary question?
Ich bin nisht kan Rabbi.
are you dense, or have no patience?
As documented in Mekor Baruch (AKA My Uncle the NeTzIV), it is simply not true that Volozhin had no secular studies. It had them, and didn't close down until the government demanded that the secular studies take up most of the day, which would essentially convert the institution from a yeshivah with secular studies to a university with a few shiurim in the evening. The former was acceptable to the NeTzIV, but he saw no point in running the latter.
What is the picture of?
And does anyone know what the sefer on the Netziv said that got it pulled off the shelves?
1)The picture is a current one of the Yeshivah in Volozhin.
2) it said a lot of things about a lot of people.
Milhouse
had Artscroll printed "my uncle" 10 years later it too would've been banned.
It said that the NeTzIV allowed secular studies in Volozhin, and that he read newspapers.
Many scholars have already come to the conclusion that many things that the Mekor Boruch wrote as facts are actually fiction.
Chaim,
I hadn't heard that before. Do you think the Mekor Bruch was simply mistaken?
The Netziv was the Mekor Boruch's uncle, but "scholars" know more about the Netziv than does his own nephew.
Is Mekor Baruch from the Torah Temimah?
Your not getting the point, its not about what he knows, its about what he wrote. Kapitch??
Yes the same author, the son of the Aruch Hashilchon.
HT,
Ego is a problem everywhere.
The difference between the heat Lubavitchers take for this as opposed to others, is that they are the only one's taking the message to the world.
I am not excusing it, but a smug litvak is also less bothersome than a smug chossid... but that's just me.
One of the early Slonimer or Kobriner rebbes said that Mashiach can not come until Volozhin closes. It closed yet ...
Can you find a Mekor for that, Kurenitzer?
Kurenitzer
so why was the Slonimer Rebbe in Baranovich soo friendly with Reb Elchonon Wasserman?
Oh, maybe because he wasn't a Volozhiner Talmid?
Post a Comment