(Reb Yaakov Yosef of Skver, whose Yohrtzeit is today, Beis Nissan)
(Photo by Alter Zeide, Bechatzroys HaChassidim)
Friend of Skver responds to Circus Tent: Mein Shtetele Skver
Your take on Skver is remarkably trite, with an odd udercurrent of irrational dislike. Skver has many problems, some unique to their community, some in common with other Chasidim/Charedim. But you mentioned very few substantive issues. The way you protray it, you'd attribute no merit at all to a community that is--as a whole--largely devoted to higher ideals of Yiddishkeit.
Skver has committed some egregious blunders over the years, and the leadership has shown itself quite myopic in many respects. The PELL grant fraud was one such instance. In addition, the Skverer Rebbe and his sons are extremely insecure--an insecurity shaped and fostered historically by aides committed to delusional visions of grandeur for the community--and they fear loss of control to the slightest degree, which impels the imposition of draconian ordinances to reinforce the community's homogeneity.
But none of this discounts from the remarkable fact that Skver has managed to sustain a core of yingeleit and bachurim who are committed to "avodas hachasidus" as very few other communities in the U.S. Contrary to your outright ignorant assertion, the shtetl was not built for housing purposes. The previous Skverer Rebbe had a vision for establishing a community that would mirror that in which he was raised in Eastern Europe. His stated motive was to build a shtetl "vie es velen oifvaksen yingerleit mit pnimius." For you to doubt that fact is to know absolutely nothing about its founder and his legacy. You might find ome Netflix customers in NS. You'll certainly find plenty of residents swept into 21st century materialism on par with the best (or worst) in BP, with their Lexus SUVs and their complete disregard for matters spiritual. Heck, nowadays I wouldn't be surprised to find a TV or two. But the overall atmosphere in NS is by far one of living simply and being dedicated to ideals of Torah and chasidus--Chabad's patronizing moniker of "poilesher chasidus" notwithstanding.
Skver has its challenges, no doubt. And perhaps they're at times over-romanticized by their sympathizers. But the problems aren't the boots or the gender-separated streets or the Netflix customers. It's most significant shortcoming is a failure of vision to re-imagine their ideals in the face of 21st century challenges; a problem for which, it just so happens, few other charedi communities have proven any better.
Why the Shocker?
ReplyDeleteTzig hates all Jews.
I had no idea there was a moron parade today! Is that only in cyberspace? Can anyone march, or do you need to be a certified moron?
ReplyDeleteThe moron thinks that March has only 20 days, so that for him today is April 1.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I agree with the criticism of your piece on Skver. Es pasht nisht.
Given the problems in CH, it would not be a bad thing if Postville, Iowa becomes a sort of Chabad version of New Square (without the strong isolationism) where those of us who are tired of NY and tired of the nonsense in CH can live in a community where there is fresh air, more real achdus (as opposed to the phony achdus that the nutter fringe cries about and which consists of truckling down to their yellow flag nonsense) and where, thanks to modern communications, we can keep in touch with the rest of the world as well as find parnosso.
By the way, I don't think Skverers wear their boots except on Shabbos, Yom Tov, and special community occasions.
That would be true if ANY of his Chassidim were actually part of his "Alte Heim." The fact is they were ALL Hungarians, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3. That would make it kinda difficult to rebuild what they had in Skver.
ReplyDeleteThe Skverrer Rebbe also didn't grow up amongst Skverrer Chassidim; having left when he was a teenager, and moving to Kolorash, Bessarabia. Not exactly a hotbed of "Penimius at that time.
He also spent years amongst the much Frimmer Belzer Chassidim; having married the granddaughter of Reb YD of Belz. All in all not a very Skverrer/Ukranian education. But Alte Heim neverthless.
As the Yiddish speaking therapist at the mental health facility up the road from New Square, I got to know several residents when members of the family went into psychotic episodes. It was pathetic to see people who could not get help becasue relatives would "Freg di rebbe" who would veto anything that might restore mental health. That's not Judaism, that's ignorance and cruelty.
ReplyDeleteThat's somehwat surprising to me; with the Skverer Rebbe having a reputation as very medically savvy. Or does that not extend to mental health?
ReplyDeleteI have a lot to say about "chasidus" of the current Skvira (not Skver how many call it Skvira it is).
ReplyDeleteThere are almost no real Russian Chernobylers there. The core of today Skvira comes from misnagdishe hungarishe mishpochos from Serdiholi. Their attitude towards chasidus was always cool. They liked the traditionalism of the shtetl, but they never had chasidic values. On the contrary! The values were thoroughly misnagdic. Unfortunately such mentality dominated today Skvira. It is nowhere near to Skvira and Chernobyl in Ukrain in there values!
Such things as separate streets for men and women is nothing to do with chasidus! It is thoroghly hungarishe-misnagdishe mentality. Poverty caused by anti-working mentality is also nothing to do with chasidus at all.
Opposition to learning anything "strange" is totally non chasidic. In Skvira and Chernobil in Russia chasidim learned Sifrey Chasidus, and Kabolo and had no problem with it. Try to say it to today so called Skvirers.
This is the situation today unfortunately.
At least this critique is more substantive than a visceral adverse reaction to Terkishe Talesim.
ReplyDeleteBut aren't you claiming that the tail wags the dog? Don't the Rebbes who are true Chernoblers and, one would expect, schooled in Chasidic philosophy and values, the ones setting policy? Chasidic socail strucure is, unless I err, very Hierarchal and Tzadik/Rebbe-centric.
PS I don't believe that they had gender segregated street back in Serdiholi either.
Chaim g. - you could expect that, but it is not the case. I don't believe that Skvirer Rebe is himself too happy with the situation. But Russian Skvirers are no more. He has now chasidim from Romania, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. And they have there views. While Skvirer Rebe keeps Chernobyler minhogim accurately I believe, many today Skvirers hold - Chernobyl is one thing, Hungarishe mesoyro is another. They wouldn't go for taking everything from Chernolbyl. Some even called Serdiholi - "Der emeser Ashekenaz". So with this feeling why would they change? It doesn't only go about minhogim. It is more the mentality issue.
ReplyDeleteSkvirer Rebe prefered melamdim to use Ukrainisher Yiddish "Burich Eloykeyni". His own chasidim wouldn't go for it only "Burich Eloykayni". And other things too. So Skvirer Rebe doesn't really complain. He can do nothing about it.
I have to correct myself - in the issue of Yiddish. Loshn Koydesh Skvirers do try to pronounce according to Ukrainsher tradition, but Yiddish they use like in Romania or Hungary.
ReplyDeleteSzerdahely (both of them actually) are nowhere within boundaries of Lita , where there was no hisnagdus for all intents and purposes, so the "misnagdishe hungarishe" is a [deliberate] misnomer.
ReplyDeleteAs far as learning "strange" (a/k/a Breslaver seforim), it was treated same way in Belz and Karlin, not to mention Slonim - who carry such sinah to Breslav that it doesn't belong on a blog. Not that I am a big fan of Skvira, but every self-respecting Skverer has a steady shiur in sifre chassidus and their shtibelech are full of all kinds of sifrei chassidus, bar those mentioned above.
Duke
ReplyDeleteThere was plenty of Hisnagdus in Hungary, although it was a quiet type. Rabbonim like the Machne Chaim were quite Misnagdic to Chassidic custom and dress.
The Duke of Nyírbátor:
ReplyDeleteBreslov might be a separate case, because of old hisnagdus in Skvira, but it goes much further than Breslov. Chabad is also banned, and most serious sforim which aren't in the usual classical list are looked upon like most suspicious. Such attitude has nothing to do with Chasidus. About Slonim I would say black kina instead of sina ;).
Also today "hisnagdus" in Skvira towards Breslov is a complete nonsense, because they don't even know why it should exist.
Like HT mentioned, misnagdim weren't limited only to Lita. If you prefer - say Hungarishe Ashkenazim, non chasidim. You can't deny the difference in system of values between chasidim and non chasidim (even if they aren't misnagdim per se). Such as overboard chumroys ("screws tightening"), universal non working mentality (prushim) and etc. aren't a chasidic approach at all.
Regarding shuls full of Chasidishe sforim. And how many learn them all?? And how many look at those who learn like at lunatics?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous :
ReplyDeleteDepends what you mean by Chabad. AR and TT are there, others are not. Never heard of anything being banned though - it's just not there for the same reason it's not in your neighboring stiebl, and for the same reason that your local Chabad shul doesn't stock Al haGeulah veal haTemurah - nobody cares.
Classic seforim, like Toldos, Degel, Meor, Noam Elimelech or Ohr haMeir - and even more exotic ones, like Meor veShomesh, Tiferes Shlomo or Sfas Emes, are all in "very used" condition. There is actually a whole seforim schaffe full of Toldos'n, all of them with tzukneitchte dafn.
All that said, the heiliger Yarme rov shlit"a once stated
פֿאַרװאָס הײסט אַ סקװירל אַ סקװירל - נישט אַ סאַטמאַר'ל אָבער אַ װיזשניץ'ל ? װײל ער האָט אַ קלעיִנע קאָפּ און אַ גראָיִסע שװאָנץ ...
I am shocked and at the same time disgusted. I always respected Chabad, but if you Hirshel, Anonymous that comes from the mental facility, and Anonymous the expert on "chasidus" and "skvira", represent Chabad, then that respect is now gone. When I was reading this garbage, i thought that I by mistake came across an anti-semetic blog. How dare you as jew, talk like this?
ReplyDeleteFirst of all you are just misinformed. I can see that you never saw the skver chasidus from up close. I am not a Skverer, but i've been there a couple of times, and all this junk that was written here is pure nonsense. Go there and see for yourselves. If you have questions ask them and i'm positve that they will answer you. Secondly, where is your derech eretz? how dare you question a rebbe? any rebbe? would you question YOUR rebbe? you think that YOU are smarter? you think that YOU have more Torah? you dare to think that YOU am H'oretz have more Chasidus?
Woe to Chabad that has such people under its wings......
1) I've been there a few times too, just like yourself. I even had a Yechidus!
ReplyDelete2) I never criticized the Rebbes, past or present. I spoke about the idea of moving out there, and what it did or didn't accomplish.
Anonymous 205
ReplyDeleteWake up and smell the coffee, The Tzig is a very,very classic Chbdsker, sheoiseh retzoin rabboi,nobody is worth anything besides Chabad, in Chabad they learn NO chasidishe seforim besides their own!They are as partisan as can be.They will kiss up to anybody who has gelt, REFORM,CONSERVATIVE 'Rabbis' vechuleh.
Obviously when this Chbdsker sees how matzliach the Skverer is,his jealousy is aroused.I speak from experience:The Chbdskers zenne di gresteh oomfarginners oif der velt!
They are almost all the same.
(All this besides their questionable status as being frimmeh yidden.Believing that their Rebbe is a sufek getschkeh sufek moshiach is widespread and even those that supposedly disagree are still in one machaneh with them)
I'm going to copy this post in case the shmendrick does not post it and post in on another site
So let me get this straight:
ReplyDeleteI'm jealous of the Skverrer Rebbe? What exactly that he has do I want?
Saichel Hirshel, thats what he got and you want...
ReplyDeleteTo disgusted anonymous: Don't get so emotional. It is not easy to look the truth in the eyes. Firstly I'm not from Chabad. Secondly, I didn't question any Rebbes or the like. I just said, that chasidus of majority of today Skvira isn't chasidus, or more exactly, many things which are posed as being "chasidish" has nothing to do with chasidus at all. It has something to do with Hungarishe Ashkenazic approach.
ReplyDeleteI do greatly respect authentic chasidus. I know about Chernobylers (mostly of Tversky family themselves) who are true to the Chasidus in reality, and not just on words. Who care to live up to true chasidic values, and not up to what is sold today as very "chasidish".
Reb Pinchos Koritzer zy"o said, that increasing amount of chumros is prolonging our Golus and is the sign of hisgabrus hadinim. Many of today "chasidish" world tend to fall into mentality of morashcornikes (the term Reb Pinchos Koritzer zy"o used), thinking that chasidus means chumro upon chumro, and 10 chumroys on top. But it is not what chasidus is, sorry to disappoint you about it.
The Duke of Nyírbátor: They do have sforim in shul. I didn't say they don't have them. But people who actually learn them get a very cold (to say lightly) treating. Or you'll try to deny it?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous : if you think that anyone will look weird at anyone learning Toldos or Muor, you're very wrong. It's a normal daily routine. Like saying tehillim on Shabbos morning. Some periferal shul full of bums may be different, but not the mainstream ones.
ReplyDeleteDid you see the article posted on Crown Heights info yesterday?
ReplyDeleteIt's about the lubab giving out pamphlets around Times Square.
Lubavitch as a member of Torah Judaism is on it's last legs.That's why the Tzig is burning:He knows that he''ll have to leave Lubab if he wants to be a yid.Although he denies it, the reason he lives in Boro Park is because he knows that Lubab as a Jewish movement is doomed:As a goyish one, they''ll be very, very succesful, just like yoizels movement was!
The Duke of Nyírbátor: Toldoys may be isn't looked with suspect, but can be ridiculed as being to much for common man, when someone tries to talk in his terms in a practical way.
ReplyDeleteMy friend's wife for example lived in New Skvira before they married. He himself is a Lubavitcher, and he sent her Shiurim in Tania (with translation). Her hosts didn't like it at all, saying such things shouldn't be learned (however for women assumable).
Meshiggener Shoproner
ReplyDeleteI never spoke about the Skverrer Rebbes, I spoke about the Choshuve Aynvoyner of the Heilge Shtetel, the Shtetel that has Kedishas Eretz Yisrooeyl. I think making a town of welfare recipients is a bad thing.
Please stop with your Natzrus statements, you're being Machshil my readers.
In Skveeeer they daven Mo'or veShomesh every week. They have this Minhag to "learn" the whole Torah on the Parsha, which is quite difficult, so they mumble it. Where are the Chabad-bashers who complain about the "Rambam davening?"
ReplyDeleteIn Skveeeer they hate Breslov with a passion only matched by Muslim hate for Jews. Women in Skveeeer were forced to demand a DIVORCE from their husband (by the old Rebbetzin Traneh) because he was "caught" learning Sifrei Breslov.
So please don't talk to me about the Heilige Skverrer who put Lubavitch to shame with their Meshugassen and K'Peydes.
Skverer Rebe met with Reb Gedalya Kenig ztz"l while he was in America. After the meeting Reb Gedalya said that he told over to the Skverer Rebe about his mesoyro from Reb Avrohom Shternhartz ztz"l, that any machloykes between Skver and Breslov had no basis and reasons. After the meeting Reb Gedalya said, he managed to reduce the machloykes greatly.
ReplyDeleteReb Elozer Mordechai Kenig (Reb Gedalya's son) met with Skverer Rebe several times in the recent few years. Skverer Rebe said, that he finished what his father started (in sense of ending machloykes). Any skverer today, hating Breslov has nothing to do with chasidus and such sina is totally crooked and loy lishmo.
Much less people know (and in Skver in particular) about another thing. When communists came to power, Chernobyler tzadikim of Ukraine held a meeting, to discuss the situation. One of the issues discussed was to stop any machloykes with Breslov. They agreed, that from all Yiddn in Russia, Breslov were the most steadfast against persecutions of bolshevikes, and therefore any machloykes had to be ended once and forever.
When Machnovke Rebe ztz"l came to Eretz Yisroel, coming out of communists Gehenom, he was asked, who held strong against communists in Russia. He answered - Breslovers and Lubavitchers. And Breslovers were the strongest.
About chumros and kpeidos - this will probably fly over your head, but still : they did not pick up all their chumros out of love to them. They did it because this was the Rebbe's way. Lehavdil, by a"z, פוער עצמו לבעל פעור זו היא עבודתה ; עאַכו" . This was his thing. It may look ridiculous to you wherever you are, just like the thing with animal pictures looks and sounds ridiculous to pretty much everyone - but when things come from a rebbe , it's different. I'm sure it's hard to understand for those who never had any shaychus to a real rebbe (the kind that talks back).
ReplyDeleteDuke Bacsi:
ReplyDeleteI had more respect for you before that last comment.
Here's A Little something for you about Skver.
A Great Kiddush Hashem, no doubt.
As I said, it flew right over your head.
ReplyDeleteIf you insist on drawing conclusions about chassidishkeit of people from from fire departments and zoning board meetings as publicized in local papers, surely nobody in Crown Heights has ever violated any fire code and Chabad is well known to get only positive reactions from national and regional tabloids. But do save your respect for some more deserving brown-nosers.
The Duke of Nyírbátor: All this doesn't change the fact, that these over-chumros - aren't a part of chasidus at all and are even anti-chasidus. But it will probably fly over you head...
ReplyDeleteDragoh:
ReplyDeleteThe link to the SVFD piece was an after thought, not the point of my response. It does, however, prove the point of NS being overcrowded and a fire hazard.
I was referring to the statement you made about talking to Rebbes who can answer back.
Why, is it so incomprehensible that having a shaychus with a live Rebbe is qualitatively different from otherwise ?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous : would you say that an over-chumra of not having pictures of unclean animals and an over-chumrah of not eating gebrokts or garlic, and the over-chumrah of not carrying in a town which has an eiruv is anti-chasidus and is not a part of chasidus ?
ReplyDeleteDuke
ReplyDeleteYou are a breath of fresh air.Please keep it up.
Tzig:You are so farchapped in your ways that you don't even realize how silly Lubavitch looks when they continue to insist that a departed rebbe is just as good as a leybediker one.
Why can't you guys be normal?
The Duke of Nyírbátor: Issue of looking at unclean animals is discussed in Kav haYoshor. It is not a chasidic innovation at all.
ReplyDeleteGarlic was eaten, or not eaten on Pesach by different families. So it is kept as family tradition depending on how it was done in family. (Asked from Rav Bick - some families in Mezhbuzh ate garlic on Pesach, some didn't. There was no universal practice for this. Possible reason - garlic was kept together with flour). Nothing to do with Chasidus also.
Non carrying with a good eiruv is a litvishe thing per se.
Gebrokts is at a side of this, and it's a long subject, including the fact, that there are those amongst chasidim (R' Yeshaya ShU"B) who claim that the practice of not eating gebrokts was introduced shortly AFTER the Baal Shem Tov (however many question the validity of this claim), together with the unusual switch in the method of producing matzos by Ahkenazim (this is a fact, and isn't questioned by anyone, however it is an event unimaginable to many today). Before the switch matzos were soft and not flat as crackers. The innovation was a very fast, almost instant baking time, very thin and wood-hard matzos.
All these were practices of old at least. Streets for men and women were never a case anywhere and is very recent.
What was said before, from Reb Pinchos Koritzer zy"o, that the more Golus is lasting, the more chumros are coming a long, from the shoresh of the din.
I've heard such story. Reb Hillel Paritcher was a very big machmir. Chasidim used to cheper him for it, and he answered, that he has a heter for chumros - it helps him to become a keyli for understanding Chasidus. But he had to look for a heter for being machmir.
Chasidus is not "taking all chumros there are out there".
sholy: As one non Lubavitcher and non Breslover said - at least it is better to have a Rebbe who isn't alive, however he is a tzaddik and you have a hiskashrus to him, from having someone who you don't even know if he is a tzaddik at all.
ReplyDeleteThe Alter Rebbe writes explicitly that avoiding shruyoh is a very recent hiddur, necessitated by the recent change in the way matzos were baked.
ReplyDeleteBut the innovation he's talking about is not that matzos became hard and thin, but that the entire baking process became fast, so that an entire batch is done in 18 minutes. Until what the AR calls מקרוב זה עשרים שנה או יותר, they used to work the dough for a long time, and make the dough very elastic; this made it unlikely that there was any flour left unmixed into the dough. But when, within the AR's own memory, the minhag changed, and they started rushing the process so as to finish everything within 18 minutes, there was no longer time to knead the dough properly, and so it became not uncommon to see specks of flour on the surface of matzos, and therefore shruyoh became a real issue.
Milhouse: Thanks for the reference. Can you give an exact place to look it up?
ReplyDeleteShu"t #6.
ReplyDeleteMilhouse: Thanks! Innovation included very thin matzos, in order to ensure fast baking, to fit in time. This made them hard. Before that they were thick and soft, (pita like), and their baking took quite a while. Why do you think korech is called korech? Because the matzo could be rolled with the filling inside, as it was soft.
ReplyDeleteWhat about the chumrah, if you wanna call it that, of eating in the sukka when it rains??
ReplyDeleteCholov yisroel is also a chumra,many poskim were matir, it's an old machloykes vein kahn hamokom, but it's an issur derabonon and typically you are lenient besofeok issur derabonnon.
Listen, it's admirable to be machmir, after all, the defintion of a chosid is someone who goes 'lifnim meshras hadin' above the letter of the law.,so I don't get Lubavitchers who criticize other yidden who are careful and are machmir.
Btw, the animal pictures, garlick etc,what did the guy mean to prove by saying 'it's already mentioned' in other seforim?It's not a mainstream approach and it has much less mention than some Lutvishe chimres, like issur chodosh that is ossur medoyraysa leroiv poskim.C'mon check out stuff before stam posting
I think my point was again missed. Every Skvere chumrah or minhag has a root, nothing is arbitrary. Having separate streets is not something out of ordinary, especially if you consider what Kingston Avenue looks like on yoma depagri. If one wants to do so, he could root it in sh"a alone. But that's beside the point. The point being, you can't critisize Skver for their chumros as anti-chasidus while your own chumros are somehow not so. That not looking at unclean animals is brought in kav hayoshor is irrelevant - there are dozens of other things brought in kav hayoshor or tzvoas r' yehuda hachosid, and nobody runs to do them all. This chumrah is not brought down in any chassidishe source and is for the most part an invention - a harmless one, but still. For someone to say that Kise haKovod had inappropriate imagery on it is, well, not quite accepted across the board.
ReplyDeleteThe much more harmful "chumrah" of being not moide be-eiruv is specifically noted as non chassidish. Importance of Eiruv is brought down numerous times all over Talmud, Zohar, Ari Z'L and chassidishe sources - and - and yet some people insist on this malicious litvization. So to critisize Skver for "anti-chassidic" chumros and kpeidos and other "meshugasn" all the while defending this and other arbitrary meshugasn of one's own is very high on the scale of hypocrisy .
Hersh Meilech: Don't be in denial. Today approach of making chumros "the essence chasidus" is very common. Just look at Satmar.
ReplyDeleteI.e. - every day some new proclamation - this osur, that osur etc. etc. Nothing positive.
ReplyDeleteA YID
ReplyDeleteanother breslover lie, that was unfortunatly omitted from the Breslover Siach Sarfie Kodesh thats full of fantasies.
Just to get they facts straight, when did all this Kenig/Squarer Rebbe meetings happen, before the infamous Mermelstien Get or after?
There was always in every shtetel Yiden that were extreme machmir like Reb Hillel Paricher or Reb Itche Masmid etc.. but you can not make this chumras a way of life, it will eventualy explode in your face.
ReplyDeleteDuke
ReplyDeletethere is other stuff that can not be discussed here, as the after Chatzos, and the Chumras Habach that is being enforced in a ludicrous fashion, many rabonim approached the Rebbe that the know from personal stories that these brings a Michshol Horabim but to no avail, this could be kept as chumras beis horav but not for a 1000 families with evreyones different flavor of Yetzer Hora.
Tzig, just for your information: to the best of my knowledge Reb Mendel Futterfass also went with a terkishe talles, adjusted to Chabad standards.
ReplyDeleteUm, what is a "terkishe talles"?
ReplyDeleteAnonimous: I see no need pay much attention to those who can only cry "lies", because they like machloykes and hate the truth which puts the end to it. But for your referece - Reb Gedalya Kenig ztz"l met with the Skvere Rebe around 1979.
ReplyDeleteThose who hate Breslov today - not just aren't chasidim, they are simply blinded and spiritually handicapped. They simply "don't remember" what Chaza"l say about Koyrach. Just look in Rash"i - why did children died together with Koyrach and others? Machloykes goyrem. Never ask kashyes, why the horrible churbon in Europe happened. Those who strive on machloykes don't deserve to ask such questions.
Anonymous: Also, I personally don't hold "Siach Sarfie Kodesh" to be very reliable. Don't be surprised. Talmidim of Reb Avrohom Shternhartz ztz"l and Reb Gedalya Kenig ztz"l find it being to mebulbol and containing stiroys to Breslover mesoyro itself. So your venom against SS"K is going to a wrong address.
ReplyDeleteMilhouse, a "terkishe talles" is a Turkish prayer - shawl.Now seriously, it is a carpet - like talles, who was originally manufactured in Turkey and was preferred for some ( well founded )reasons by many chassidim. For a lengthy explanation look in "Minhag Ysroel Toiroh".
ReplyDeleteYid
ReplyDeleteI chs vesholem have noting against Breslov and no connection to chernobel/shpole/ squarer/ chasisdim, just Emes is still a sacred cow in my eyes and I would like to preserve it.
Anonymous: I hope you aren't a misnaged. You can verify the fact of those meetings from different people if you are interested.
ReplyDeleteThe thing with Breslav is not the simple. Virtually all tzaddikim from around there were very strong in their opposition to post-R' Nachman's Breslav; are we to write off their concerns alltogether because it's suddenly not politically correct ?
ReplyDeleteAnother note - the "their Lexus SUVs and their complete disregard for matters spiritual" memra is utterly disgusting. Not that there are many Lexii in Skver, but to imply that a nice car means "disregards for matters spiritual" is yet another malicious mussorism, brought to you by snags with kapotes.
Virtually all tzaddikim - wrong. Who are these "virtually all tzadikim"? It is a distortion of the truth.
ReplyDeleteDistortion of the truth ? The only reason Breslav was not put in "Ches" was that R' Levy Yitzhak z'l, kedarkoy bakoydesh, intervened and didn't let that happen. Other then that, all those who were around wherever Breslav thing was going on were very strong in their opposition, with different degrees of vocality though. Shpolyer Zeyde, who in the beginning liked Breslav and R' Nachma in particular very much by the way, was the oldest in his days - hence the "Zeyde". But also Karlin, all of tzaddikei Czernobyl, Savran, Slonim, Lechowicz, Lutzk, Ryzhin, Belz - you name it. Wherever they popped up, there was opposition.
ReplyDeleteDuke
ReplyDeleteIts not so simple, the biggest Polishe Rebbes gave haskomes to Likutie Maran as the holy see of lublin and the maagid of Koznitz, unless you believe the breslov detractors that even the haskomes are not true which is hard to believe,also the next genarations of talmidie Peshische were not biased against Reb Nachman,
I'll tell you more, I'm not aware of any of the Poilishe tzaddikim opposing Breslav. I think there were three factors here :
ReplyDelete1. Haskomos were given to R' Nachman's name; opposition started chiefly with R' Noson et al;
2. Poilishe tzaddikim haven't seen Breslav en masse; it was all books and theory for them, and on paper everything looks good.
3. Poilishe tzaddikim allowed for a bit further leeway from the accepted derech then Volyn' and Podolye, where a more direct connection had place.
Peshischa is a separate story alltogether. For the record, I personally have nothing against or for Breslav. But history is history.
I still haven't got a picture of what a Turkish talles looks like, and how it differs from a normal talles. Is it just a rough homemade material, as opposed to a fine material made on a commercial weaving machine?
ReplyDeleteLubavitch/Chabad was very mainstream chassides at the time.Geb a kook haynt!!Todays Lubavitch would for sure be in 'ches' while mainstream Breslov sans na nach, who are stam meshguem,would be considered the 'smetenah' of chassides, I mean, is Ger for example any different than Lutvackes? Forget about the levush and sus, Ger is basically Lutvackes.
ReplyDeleteJust to add:Satmar, is basically Chasam Soifer, with a shtreimel.Again, same basic idea as Lutvackes with different levush
ReplyDeletehersh meilech, you're funny.
ReplyDeleteHersh Meilech, that's a lie. Chasam Soifer and ungarishe rabbonim (not to mention) are anything but litvakes with Shtreimels; it's yet another lie invented in the grand factory of lies. Chasam Soifer, his children and rabbonim who counted themselves amongst Ch"S's talmidim never roideft chassidim; most of them were very close with Chassidishe rebbes and even considered themselves chassidim. Their only "litveshkeyt" is Nusach Ashkenaz. There are plenty of haskomos to Chassidishe seforim given by ungarishe rabbonim and they always had only warm words towards the Baal Shem Tov ha"K and talmidov. For the most part they were shayach to either Belz, Tzans, Zidichov/Komarno, Uhel/Siget or Kosov/Vizhnits. Doesn't sound very litvish.
ReplyDeleteDuke
ReplyDeleteNisht farmishen di Yotzres, bitte.
The Rabbonim from the Sofer family were quite anti-Chassidim. Maybe they ween't vocal about it, but they were. The Hisorirus Tshuvah would check his grandkids' Peyos when he could no longer see to check if they had gone to the Mikveh on Shabbos morning, a practice he was totally opposed to.
Some Rabbonim, like the Puper Rov were Belzer Chassidim, but those were not Ashkenezish anymore, they full-fledged Chassidim.
We speak here of Hungarian, not Transylvanian and Rumanian, so Vizhnitz/Kosov would be out, unless you speak of the time that the Ahavas Yisroel lived in G'dein.
R' Hershel,
ReplyDeleteMe'farmisht nisht de yotzres, men ferdrey zei.
What makes you say that Rabbonim of the Soifer family were "anti-Chassidism" ? Everything indicates to the opposite, especially so from the Ksav Soifer times and on. Lichtenstein, Baneth, Friedlender, Grunwald, Landau, Fisch - all these are as Hungarian as it gets, and all of the Rabonim with these last names were very warm towards chassidim if not full fledged chassidish.
Of course it is an important pillar of faith in certain circles to claim that "hungarians are snags with shtreimels", but those propagating this are Full of Tish. What surprise ...
By the way, just for your information the Erloier Ruv which is a direct Einikel of the Hisorirus Tshuvah (his son's son), doesn't go himself to the mikva Shabbos morning, but doesn't hold back his talmidim/chasidim from going. And he himself is a ardent follower of the present Skverer Rebbe who is 15 years yis junior...
ReplyDeleteDuke: I think they didn't mean, that the school of Chasam Soyfer are anti-chasidim in the sense of being misnagdim. They were neutral in a sense (to some degree). I think what was said is, that their system of values are non chasidic, and that is what Satmar today uses.
ReplyDeleteAbout Breslov - you are totally on the moon. Poylishe Rebbes who had real chasidim, and didn't let chasidus to turn into a farce and complete hitzoynius always respected Breslov. This includes especially Izhbitz, Kozhnitz, Grodzisk, Pyasetchno and others.
Reb Tzodek haKohen miLublin ztz"l wrote a whole pirush on Likutey Moharan.
About the cheyrem - Shpoler Zeyde himself almost was put into cheyrem because of his attacks to the Rebbe. However in further generations machloykes was caused mainly by Savran which dragged along to some degree - Rizhin, Chernobyl and Karlin/Slonim. However the machloykes with Savran itself was caused by totally twisted and crooked loshn hores, which no one bothered to verify.
Other Russian chasidim like Lubavitch, Zvil, Zbarezh, Skolye/Sudilkov, Monistritch/Linitz, Koretz/Bershad/Slavita etc, always had good relations with Breslov.
So your claim about "vrtually all" tzadikim is a crooked lie.
Reb Arn Chazan (he used to be a baal koyre for Machovke Rebe ztz"l) once told a story about his uncle - Reb Yankl Zhitomirer za"l. When communists came to power, he couldn't find a quiet place to continue his life of avoydas Hashem. He came for an advice to Reb Shloymke Zviler ztz"l. He told to Reb Yankl, that he should move to Uman, where a whole chaburo of oyvdim is active and is relatively left in piece by authorities (it was before the persecutions there intensified). Reb Yankl moved to Uman and found what Zviler Rebe told him. When the time came for him to look for a shiduch, and a proposed shver found out that Reb Yankl was Breslover, he wanted to cancel the tnoim. "In Uman they dance with women around the tziun!" he exclaimed. There was another relative - a Karliner chosid, who said - "so what do you lose, if you go to Uman and see it for yourself. It is not easy to find a good shiduch now, when communists are all around, as such bochurim in these time are priceless".
The proposed shver came to Uman for Yom Kipur, and found it full with chasidim and normal kehilo life. He had to admit that he believed all kind of crooked lies without even ever verifying them. The shiduch was kept.
A yid,
ReplyDeleteI am sure the local oilom will appreciate your "Poylishe Rebbes who had real chasidim, and didn't let chasidus to turn into a farce and complete hitzoynius" memra.
And thank you very much for clarifying who did and who did not let chassidus turn into farce. Now I have a simple rule - Slonim, Karlin and Czernobyl was farce. Zwyl, Linitz and Pyaseczna was not. Whoduthunk.
Now, let me repeat. The more Breslaver chassidim were in a region, the more hisnagdus to Breslav there was. You know full well that Karlin, Czernobyl , Ryzsin and Savran covered some 90% of all non-Chabad chasidishe oilom.
Hisnagdus to Breslav was a kaboloh thing, tzaddikim did not just come up with it but were mekabel from their parents or their rebbes that it's not for them. Why was it so in the beginning ? Breslavers will tell you all about the kin'a and sin'a and how they were infriging onto these fake rebbes turf. The other side claims that from their beginning (that is, from after R' Nachman's death) they reeked of Frankism to high heaven and falsified chassidus. Who was right ? I have no idea. I do know that I'm not the one to judge.
Poilishe rebbes did not, in large, oppose Breslav. They did not have such kabboloh, they came to the chassidishe tish much later and even then betoiras talmidim and did not see a reason to drag themselves into another machloikes - especially as it wasn't nogea in Poilin. They had their own wars to fight - Yehidi ha'K vs Choize, Kotzk vs. Everyone Else, Ger vs Alexander etc etc. Notably, the ones who did have it bekabboloh - Belz - did pasel Breslav.
As far as Satmar is concerned, Satmar never tried to parade itself as a place to shepp Chassidus. There are some very dedicated yungeleit in Satmar the kehillah, but they usually go elsewhere for Chassidus. In that, Satmar is unique and remarkable - you can have a Breslaver, a Skverer and a Neitraner all under same roof and with relative degree of peace. It is that way because Satmarer Rov zy"a did not shove any particular kind of chassidus down anyones' throat; his prime concern was Yiddishkeit, not Chassidus. Give credit where it's due.
> Now I have a simple rule - Slonim,
ReplyDelete> Karlin and Czernobyl was farce
That's what you may want Breslover position to be, however it is a distortion. In Russia Rizhin, Chernobil, Karlin and Slonim were real and serious Chasidus'n, whether they had machloykes with Breslov or not. Don't say for others what they didn't say. Today Karlin preserved probably the most amongst them their values.
Machloykes could be passed over because of kabolo - which can turn pretty crooked, when people persecute others because of some "kabolo" having no idea what it's based on and whether the people they persecute have anything to do with it. There is no justification for such persecution at all and it is against Toyro.
Blames in frankism and falsified chasidus etc - are simply a product of sick minds of those, who were overcome with too much hatred and had nothing else to imagine to say against Breslov. This have nothing to do with reality and never had.
Amounts say nothing about the essence. So were it 90% or not, people who wanted truth - found truth. People who preferred to believe common libels and lies, believed it like in the story above.
Duke
ReplyDeleteIf gelbmans books has some historic value, he claims that reb Yoel had a prefrence for some chasidic seforim VS. others.
You are 100 % accurate in your observation of the sofer family the chasam sofer was the last misnaged of the family eventough he was friendly with the Yismach Moshe and had talmidim that traveled to rebbes, Its amazing that his grandson became a skwerer chosid
The Duke:
ReplyDeleteMy statement that Satmar is basically Lutvackes with a shtreimel was meant to portray that the study of chasides is a minor detail in their lives, the same can be said about Gerer chasidim. Your statement implying that Hungarian rabbunim were not roidef chassidim is very true A)for very self serving reasons, that is chassidim were a strong force and it did not pay and B)Because everybody realized that chassidem were not the bogey men they were made out to be and chasidem had cleaned up their act by getting rid of some extreme elements,BUT,Herr Duke, the same was true about Lita!Chasidim coexisted peacefully with misnagdim in der Litta! See Slonim, Karlin etc....(just for example R'Moshe Feinsteins father was of chasidic stock, and yes that was Russia, but the Litviseh part)The reality was that the real machloikesen were between the different chasidic hoyfen in Poland.
About tevila bemikva on shabbos:This is not an inherently chasidic subject, i.e, the basic halocho is that a man may not go to the mikva on shabbos, however chasidim have heteirim,so the Hisoreris Teshivas opposition does not mean he was against chasidim, rather he held that it was not permitted
Duke: Yes, Satmar poses itself as preserving Yiddishkayt. About chasidus of his chasidim, Satmar Rebe ztz"l himself said - "nishkachas Toyras haBaal Shem Tov". However I don't agree with totally non chasidic methods of such "preservation", as well as with various things posed as "Yiddihkayt", which are quite questionable from chasidic point of view. Others may like it.
ReplyDelete"a yid" - Satmarer rov zy"a never said such thing, certainly not of his chasidim. He stated a sad fact - "nishtakach Toiras haBa'al Shem Tov" - which is not limited to his or any other chassidim. But if you don't afree with his methods, I am sure that you can gather a couple dollars and send him a fax describing your disagreement.
ReplyDeleteWho are you to tell Shpolye Zayde that his claims of Frankism were "product of sick mind" ? You haven't the first clue of how Breslav looked like in their beginnings; he did full well. For one, there are several "Breslaver" stories that were "borrowed" from the "Zbor slow panskiech".
Duke
ReplyDeleteIts stupid of you to speak of Reb Nachman in a degrading manner becauase you want to defend the Shpoler Ziede.
1. Satmar Rebe meant his chasidim in particular, and sitation in general. I even agree with his statement, with addition to the fact, that they were and are those who didn't lose Toyras haBaal Shem Tov. He even wasn't the first to make a similar statement.
ReplyDelete2. Who said claims of Frankism have anything to do with Shpoler Zeyde? Bring proofs if you think so. Such claims are a product of sick minds, who liked to spread lies and losn hores. Shpoler Zeyde and Savraner heard many of such kind. For some reason it was common not to check whether they were real or not. But Shpoler himself never made such accusations (which are false anyway). And whoever did them - was a rosho and a malshin.
Duke: I don't think Satmar needs anyone's disagreements. They are doing what they want. The problem is, they often try to push it on others, and this one has to disagree vocally - for sure.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 6:33
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I didn't see anyone "speak of Reb Nachman in a degrading manner".
Second, I would love to see your measuring stick to see how you decide who is better or worse off, to "degrade Reb Nachman" or to "defend the Shpoler Ziede"
My gut feeling that satmar rov being the ultra rigid person would never be for breslov, just he liked his quote on kefira Beachtith Hayomim,so he used for his pet cause.
ReplyDeleteHT wrote “Rabbonim like the Machne Chaim were quite Misnagdic to Chassidic custom and dress.” He must have ment custom, they dressed the same
ReplyDeleteDuke of nirybarta claims the chasam sofer and followers wer ‘neutral’ toward Chassidim. Like all hisnagdus it disappeared over time, but anyone who can claim the CS himself was not a misnagged (and his talmidim) is fooling himself. Even the Divrey Chaim writes the CS was a misnaged.
BS"D
ReplyDeleteThe Satmar Rov zy'a said the only Chasidus today on the derech of the Besht is Breslev...
David assaf writes in his serer that the savran rebbi wanter to marry rebbe nachman's daughter edel in zivug 2. This was a power play to take over ukranian hassidus. She asked rav nossan and he said in no way. Then savran declaied war. See david assaf for a detailed account.
ReplyDeleteThere is a guy freidman who declared himself hornstiple rebbe. He hates breslov very much and says in public. Maybe because his brother is a famous breslover artist in צפת. Mayve xause his FIL is a twersky.
ReplyDelete