Saturday, February 3, 2007

Origins of "Kiruv"

Honest Litvak writes in response to Merkos Shlichus 5711

"A historical view of Judaism shows that they were not the first. Rav Hirsch made Kiruv an "official" part of his agenda as he was involved in engaging the non-frum, same for Rav Salanter and Rav Kook and Rav Sonnenfeld."

You don't seem to get it. Rav SR Hirsch made this his agenda by means of polemics and other writings, not by going out to be Mekarev people. He hoped that his writings (!!!) would be sufficient to persuade others. This has been done throughout the ages,as I mentioned re R' Saadiah Gaon, R' Yehudah Halevi, Rambam etc. etc. with their writings.

The "lecture-tours" of Rabbis Salanter, Kuk, Sonnenfeld etc. were just that, hoping to bring a "hisorerus", but again not dealing with people directly. One who can be said to deal with people directly was the mediaeval (!) R. Mosheh of Kutzi, author of Sefer Mitzvos Godol (Sma"g), who was the innovator of mivtza tefillin, to put on tefillin with people (as he writes in his intro). As for R. Yossef Yoisel of Nevardok, yes, indeed, he made a wide and succesful campaign to found talmud-torahs/yeshivos in Russia during the first world war, and sending his students all around to bring children into them - more often than not without their parents' consent. But this can be said to have been done already earlier by the Rebbe Reshab among the Sefardim, sending his shluchim there. I have no doubt that others did the same still earlier,in various places and various times throughout the ages. As I said earlier, every truly religious Jew who takes seriously the Kol Yisroel areivim etc. etc. would feel compelled to do whatever he can in this regard, so that we cannot talk re who was first etc.

The kiruv-work as an organizationl effort, dealing with people directly, families and individuals, part of an official program going out into the streets, campuses, groups, homes etc. - as we know it today - was most definitely an innovation of Lubavitch. Again, as stated, it was officially opposed by pretty much the full span of the orthodox establishment (roshei yeshivos) for the reasons mentioned, until they saw the success (and some would argue nowadays - once they had augmented and fortified their own circle and felt safe). And even now, there remains a vital distinction: to this day, none, I repeat NONE, goes to places, towns etc., where they would have to do the ground-work to establish a base for religious life. They move only into towns where these are existing already, more often than not founded by Chabad. Aish Hatorah is notorious for not going even into places like that unless they see first a solid basis for financial sustenance, to raise local funds not only for their local institution but also beyond that for their "headquarters." I challenge anyone to name a single presence of Aish that does not fall into this category.

Dovid says "Also Lubavitch targeted frum Poylishe Chasidim, with their Lithuanian style Yeshiva." I don't deny that, but the same applies to the other Yeshivos, including Nevardok before they started their network of talmud-torahs for others. R. Yossef Yoisel made it an essential part of his agenda to infiltrate existing yeshivos to establish there his derech in mussar. For details see the excellent history of the Mussar-movement "Tenu'as Hamussar."

So we are back to square one, the blatant attempt at revisionism, with irrelevant arguments about earlier generations.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

For "completeness" I should add another significant point. Chabad never denied or belittled the significant contribution of Nevardok. The Rebbe Reyatz publicly attributed the success of orthodoxy and Yiddishkeit in Latvia to the efforts of R. Yoel Barantchik - a Nevardiker! (Incidentally, R. Yoel was the principal mentor of R. Hodakov - in charge of Jewish religious education in Latvia, and later charged by the Rebbe Reyatz to lead the educational arm of Chabad in America - and influenced his his hashkafah!)

Honest Litvak

Anonymous said...

Why then did all the Novardikkers give up their Kiruv work? Why did the Steipler stay confined to his Daled Amos and not spread Teyreh? Why is Novardok in America a small shul and a supposed Beis Din?

who will be Machzir Atoras Novardok LeYoshnoh?

Anonymous said...

To Yaffen
I think that in France their are Institutions Otzar Hatora inspired by Navardokers. The Stiepler in Eretz Hakodesh was totaly immersed in his brother in law the Chazon Ish, that was against Anshie Mussar as you can see in the censored parts of Emuna Ubitachon.

To Honest
RSR was writing his philosophy for his own quite small circle to keep them in the faith,but on the other hand he was fighting fiercely Rav Bambarger for trying to be more inclusive, check it out in the lately printed forword to Bambargers seforim.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how you drop all your Rebbes taught you just because you married somebody's sister....

besides: is it wrong to spread Torah if it's being done by Mussarniks?

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how you drop all your Rebbes taught you just because you married somebody's sister....

besides: is it wrong to spread Torah if it's being done by Mussarniks?

Anonymous said...

Just to add, that kiruv rechoykim is an integral part of Toyras haBaal Shem Tov, and Chabad didn't invent it of course. Just many weren't interested in doing it. Breslov for example was always active in kiruv.

Anonymous said...

As in everything in Toras HaBesht, Chabad is the smetene of his teachings.

Anonymous said...

"the blatant attempt at revisionism"

I am afraid it is the author of this blog who is engaged in revisionism. The purpose of his post was to belittle the efforts of AISH and to belittle the efforts of the Litvish world in Kiruv.

This post does not respond to my criticism, it simply states that it 'doesnt count' if Rav Kook and Rav Sonnenfeld went to non-frum kibbutzim to do kiruv with non-frum (directly and in person) because it did not have the same scope of Chabad. This is known as moving the goal-posts.

In the end, the Litvishe world DID engage in Kiruv (though not as wide a scope as Chabad) and also focused much of their Kiruv internally during the 50s and 60s, creating Talmud Torahs and Day Schools which were populated by many borderline frum and kids of non-frum as well as their own.

The reason your response is silly is because it misses the point. My point was not that Chabad do not do a unique and broad form of Kiruv, but that Chabad takes credit as if they invented the concept, and that all others opposed the whole idea which is demonstrably false.

Hirshel Tzig - הירשל ציג said...

It's Aish and co. that does the revisionism and worse, leeches off Chabad wherever they can. Even the day school movement was started in 1943, three full years after the Frierdige Rebbe started to open Chadorim in America.

Anonymous said...

Let's start with history and facts, Mr. anonymous nameless: How often did Rav Kook and Rav Sonnenfeld do this? How often did they speak of this to their talmidim? How often did they write about this? Did they instruct all of their Talmidim to do so?

Anonymous said...

Revisionism??
Novardok were the first who reached out to unaffilated young men to come to yeshiva.This is a fact.They had tens of yeshivas for older boys and many mechinas for younger kids.
Why does it bother you that this is true?If you truly cared about the Bashafer, why would you mind agreeing that Lubavitch was not the first in everything.This does not take away from their credits.It becomes childish when you demand recognition for everything, from inventing kiruv, to kollelim, to day schools.C'mon now, don't you think this going overboard?

Anonymous said...

For those who think that Kiruv is an important part of RSRH's legacy, I direct them to a post by R' Bechhofer who may actually know a bit of R' Hirsch's derech. Regarding Torah im Derech Eretz approach to kiruv he says: "Positive attitude, but separation from Reform institutions is more important".

Anonymous said...

For those who think that Kiruv is an important part of RSRH's legacy, I direct them to a post by R' Bechhofer who may actually know a bit of R' Hirsch's derech. Regarding Torah im Derech Eretz approach to kiruv he says: "Positive attitude, but separation from Reform institutions is more important".

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, you keep going around in circles. You mention various incidents or persons re trying to strengthen and spread yiddishkeit. By doing so you are redefining what we mean by kiruv, to the point of making it in effect so broadand universal a term that it becomes meaningless on its own. By your definition all the maggidim who for hundeds of years went from town to village etc., for that matter every rabbi who ever gave a sermon, or every author whoever wrote some ethical tract, or every maggid she'ur etc. etc. - was engaged in kiruv. YES INDEED, they were, but we are discussing it here on a completely different level of an organizational agenda etc.
For that matter, we could add that a major aspect of Chabad-kiruv is still not done by anyone else - i.e., the going out into the street (lietrally in the cities or on campuses etc.) - to go to the people and not wait until they come to you or your events.

Anonymous said...

boropark, I don't want credit, I don't want recognition, I don't want anything from you but to be left alone, not to be spoken about by those who hate us, not to be spoken to. At the very least, be polite. Not to have Aish deliver an official seminar to its people telling them Chabad is evil. Just go away and leave us alone.

Hirshel Tzig - הירשל ציג said...

Hmmmm

What was the seminar you speak of? details, please.

Anonymous said...

You are missing the boat. It is not true to say that all maggidim and Rabbonim are engaged in Kiruv. I limited my examples to cases where the target audience was specifically non-frum (aka kiruv).

Again, you insist on moving the goalposts. If your entire point is that Chabad does some things that no-one else does, gesunteheit. However, I was responding directly and specifically to the disrespectful and hateful blog post which attempted to disparage other kiruv organizations and which implied that until Chabad came along and created Kiruv no-one had thought of it. I demonstrated that this was absolutely false and that all sorts of people engaged in direct kiruv long before Chabad was doing it. The fact that Chabad has a broader scope has no bearing on my point and is a diversion.

It is also quite amusing to watch Chabaskers try to take credit for almost any Jewish concept. Now they invented day schools too? Next thing you know, we will hear how Chabad invented Tefillin...

IT is this attitude that is part and parcel of why Chabad has caused itself to be mechutz lamachane from the rest of Klal Yisroel. Aside from all the Meshichist meshugass, its also these ridiculous "Chabad is the only real form of Judaism" and "we invented all of this" attitudes which lead to their disparaging of others and refusal to work with any other forms of frum yidden.

But we've gone through all that already.

Anonymous said...

anonymous, you are so ashamed of your opinions that you can't even pick a nickname?

You demonstrated your points one by one and they were refuted.

You know what, Chabad will never claim to have invented putting on Tefillin. But give it 10-20 years, and Aish will claim to have pioneered Mivtza Tefillin - guaranteed.

Tzig, this class was cancelled after it became public knowledge, but there are recordings of it floating around, claiming among other things that Lubavitchers do not fast on Asarah B'Teves. There was a more recent session also recorded which was a one time thing. I'm not sure what is publicly available or where.

Anonymous said...

wikipedia on Day Schools (article on Torah Umesorah):

The organization [Torah Umesorah] was set up at a time when another major Orthodox group, the Hasidic Chabad-Lubavitch movement under Rabbi Joseph Isaac Schneersohn (1880-1950) began to establish its own North American network of Chabad schools after Rabbi J.I. Schneersohn's arrival in the United States in 1940. Subsequently this spurred-on those not affiliated with Chabad, as they began a parallel process of recruiting students and establsihing Jewish schools in whichever Jewish communities they could do so.

Any more questions on 'who started the Day School movement'?

Anonymous said...

Thanks Berl, in about 20 minutes we'll get to see the Wiki change...

Anonymous said...

Re the Aish seminar: I have a tape of a seminar at Aish in Jerusalem where Noah's brother, the late Jacob Weinberg of Baltimore, pontificates on the heresies of Chabad and their alleged violations and ignorance of Torah. As a typical example he notes that Chabad has a "rosh hashanah for Chassidus" when the Mishnah states explicitly that there are only 4 rosh hashanas...
As a famous Chabad-rabbi once pointed out, that is indeed a serious problem. The only thing is, it's not a problem with Chabad, but a problem with the mishnah: how could the mishnah make such a "mistake"??? Just to realize how serious this problem is, is the fact that the Gemara itself asks this "kasha" on the mishnah by pointing out that there are so many more rosh hashanahs! Thus an interesting insight into the mind-frame and scholarship of a prominet rosh yeshivah.

Jonest Litvak

Anonymous said...

Hmmm,
'You want no recognition, you just want to be left alone'

Ok, so how about telling Ginsberg to go home and stop trying to brainwash frum kids in Boro Park, by all kinds of means?
How about telling Greenwald in Lakewood to stop trying to target yeshiva guys and do real work in New Jersey? Are you so bothered that a Lakewood yungerman has been very succesful in opening up Shalom Torah Centers?
How about telling R'Yoel to keep his shiurim in Crown Heights and not bother us in Boro Park???
You guys are just unbelievable!You are out in full force trying to brainwash frum people to join you, however when you are challenged about your motives or facts 'you just want to be left alone'??

My friend, I promise you that had Lubavitch focused on the real job of being mekarev non religous jews to yiddishkait and cleaned up their act regarding the various meshichist/elokist groups nobody would have anything besides praise!

BTW,I almost fell off the chair from laughter reading your claim that Aish was going to claim 'Lubavitchers don't fast on on Assarah beteives' Listen, my friend, nobody needs to make up stories about certain segments in Lubavitch.A small tour of 770 would suffice.Do you think there is anybody (besides lubavitchers)who thinks calling the Rebbe alive 13 years after.....is a normal thing? Repeating this folly numerous times after every davening, giving the Rebbe an aliyah,.....having major fistfights, and to beat it all...........Saying the Rebbe created the world???
Nu, nu,
AS USUAL I don't think that Tzig will allow this through...

Anonymous said...

Boropark: "My friend, I promise you that had Lubavitch focused on the real job of being mekarev non religous jews to yiddishkait and cleaned up their act regarding the various meshichist/elokist groups nobody would have anything besides praise!"

You left out a few more pre-conditions: cancel Lag Baomer parades, kept silent about Mihu Yehudi, stop the Rambam Yomi, close down the Reshet Oholei Yosef Yitzchak and join them to Chinuch Atzmoi etc. etc.
The so-called meshichist etc. problem is a development of 1990 onwards, so how come there was all the bad-mouthing, ridicule, condemnations etc. in the 50's' 60's 70's and early 80's??? Bnei Brak started the "war" way before the Mashiach-campaign. Satmar started its open war in the mid-60's because Chabad was too "Zionist" and specifically re Tefillin-campaign. Lakewood started already in the 40's. I can go on and on. Talk about revisionism in the extreme!

Anonymous said...

boropark, you are drowning in your delusions and making a fool of yourself. Claim that Aish was GOING to say such? Aish has ALREADY done so, in a then ongoing class that everyone attended. Of course, it never happened, right? Lubavitch was critisized every step of the way, for the very concept of what you call kiruv and we call Hafotozos HaYahadus.

We will continue to teach Chasidus wherever and whenever we want, and do so proudly. You can leave us alone by not critisizing us, and we won't critisize you or have to correct your historical revisionism.

Do you think Tzig won't let your idiocy through because you censor anything threatening to yourself? Don't worry, you're not a threat.

Anonymous said...

do any of you know how in the early 40`s chabad took control of release time at public schools from other yeshivas and after getting the Kavod let it fall apart. this was of concern to many and the then Eidem Shlita asured talmidim of rav hutner that were involved that "we will handle it-we will be in charge" they then did not invest in it.

Anonymous said...

Talmidim of RIH? in the '40's? sure, sure. And my name is Bruriah David.

Anonymous said...

Mine is Celeste Kartuffel.

Anonymous said...

This is going from bad to worse. Lubavitch took away the release-hour??? They founded the Jewish release hour against the wishes and rulings of all the roshei yeshivos at the time who argued that it will destroy the Talmud Torahs by offering the kids a substitute 1-hour Jewish education. Others got involved only in the middle or late seventies when for reasons unknown to me the NCJE somehow slackened and it weakened!!

Anonymous said...

Ok Lubavitchers you win.
Happy?
You have no Meshiguim,no Meshichists (not even heads of the bais din)no Elokists either.You sleep in the sukkah, you learn (some)talmud (but not cholilo on shabbos)no 7 foot tall portrait of the Rebbe in the bais medrash of Oholei Torah.
Yes, Novardok never existed (neither did anybody else)and....yes you invented kiruv (even before the Mormons)
Nu,nu....gai dingenzech mit meshiguim

Milhouse said...

Anonymous Monday, February 05, 2007 9:54:00 AM:

The maggidim were not involved in kiruv but in richuk. That's why the Baal Shem Tov fought so hard against them.

Anonymous said...

Milhouse said... Anonymous Monday, February 05, 2007 9:54:00 AM:The maggidim were not involved in kiruv but in richuk. That's why the Baal Shem Tov fought so hard against them.

a) The Baal Shem Tov fought only the "fire-and-brimstone, you will all burn in hell etc." type of maggidim. Many of his talmidim and talmidei talmidov were maggidim, and known as such.
b) Even the fire-and-brimstone maggidim aimed at kiruv, thinking that their way will be effective in getting people to toe the line. In reality, of course, they became counter-productive, and that is why the BST fought them.

Anonymous said...

They aimed at "kiruv"? Lol. They aimed to raise the standard of already frum people, which was the large percentage of the time.

boropark, I'm glad to see that was all it took. You're easy.

Anonymous said...

Actually, lubavitch, is more a jewish PR organisation, than a kiruv one. Lighting public menoras, putting jewish content in the media, getting movie stars too address judaism, and making meals for srudents and Israeli emigrants, accomplishes the overall jewish population to be more aware of their jewishness. However, lubaviches ability to change individual people, from non frum to frum, is not so strong. A established group of frum people, like the non chasidic have, actually has a better result.

Anonymous said...

zalmy, really? You mean the hundreds of Chabad houses with minyonim from once a week to every day, shiurei Torah of the same, teaching people how to perform practical Mitzvos, Yeshivos that change young men from secular to G-d fearing over the years by the hundreds if not thousands, is all a PR stunt? I wonder what an actual kiruv organization is? Or what an actual established group of frum people are?

Oh, I know! It must be only those that swear allegiance to the Gedolim and to reading Gemoro with no head! Toisi!

Anonymous said...

Read gemarra with no head. Interesting.
hmmmm, your the one who called it a stunt. I said it was a PR org. Some would be proud of that

Anonymous said...

Is there a substantive reply that you have, or is that lame post all you've got?