Reader continues: The Rov is distressed about a top bochur not getting his ‘deserved’ gashmius, when the top bochur was created for this; yet the regular bochur, who needs to have even more mesiras nefesh to be in yeshiva, getting far less material sustenance than a top bochur wouldn’t elicit the same tears. I would have omitted this story. It's not flattering at all to R. Isser Zalmen.
the only thing thing unflattering is saying r isser zalmen grumbled. otherwise a moving story.
ReplyDeleter isser zalman didnt realize a bocher was left hungry and felt bad about it years later. end of story.
agav, simcha raz in his biography of kook reproduces some of the paskeviln put out against him and admits the quotes are accurate, such as soccer playing is holy and ki mitziyon tetzei tora refers to heeb brew you r"l
a pox on you, a fadreiter kup...your mind really is shot (i dont know if its from reading the blog or not). this is what we call nowadays "bass-ackwards thinking"
ReplyDeletesnuffalupagus
non mouse
ReplyDeleteI assume you meant to write Rav Kook, right?
just checking.
Tzudreit.
ReplyDeleteA kashe ayf a mayseh.
The writer hot nit vos tzu tohn, er zucht chesraynes, where there was just an noble feeling of a RY to ask mechila, even when it may have not been needed, he finds fault. Efser (vadai) er darf yetzt betten mechila.
Y,
ReplyDeletehave you ever heard of "rav" moses mendelson?..... vda"l
How do I know that the reader wasn't a top bucher himself?
ReplyDeleteR U KIDDING ME? Chazal tell us that we know that the Megilla was written with Ruach Hakoesh because of the Posuk of Vyomer Haman Belibo. It doesnt say anywhere that Simcha Raz has Ruach Hakodesh. He makes an assumption about why RIZM was upset and then you ran with it. RIZM never stated explicitly that if you were good then I must have given you a good place to eat. In fact, if that was the case and the policy was "shvacher" bochur equal "shvacher" supper, RIZM should have assumed that perhaps RAL was a Shvacher bochur and only developed later. This is a classic mountain out of a molehill.
ReplyDeleteTzig,
ReplyDeleteDid the Lubavitcher Rebbe spend as much time at dollars with every single yid or perhaps at times more time with a more prominent person, such as Israeli Prime Minister ?
The point is that more attention has to be given to those who will be the mashpi'im in the future, not because they are more choshuv.
It is a slant on a gadol byisrael to say otherwise.
Preference is given to those who are seen to be the 'torchbearers' or 'lamplighters'
A shliach with complex issues may have been given more time than a simple bochur going on mivtza tfillin or a girl going out to promote candle lighting.
Is that a fair analogy and explanation?
Those turned-off by this story are looking at it from the perspective of today's economic realities and social attitudes. In those days, they simply couldn't afford to feed and house all the bochurim. Various communal entities (such as hachnosas orchim) would also give preferential treatment to visiting talmidei chachomim, the greater the lamdan, the better the treatment. This protocol was age-honored, quite specific and strict.
ReplyDeleteWith that in mind, what is so strange that R. Isser Zalman would be upset that he had inadvertently shortchanged and mistreated this bochur who must have just quietly accepted the unfair treatment?
More importantly, it seems from the story that RIZ was upset to find out that RAL went a few days a week without food all together, which was not the treatment any bochur was supposed to get! In all likelihood, these teg were mistakenly never arranged and the young RAL didn't complain about it to anyone in the yeshiva administration, but simply went hungry. Now, that RIZ found out about it, he was guilt-ridden. Which speaks well of him, very well indeed.
actually you are all quite pathetic.as Thoreau once wrote, most people talk about other people,greater people talk about events,and great people talk about ideas. for a jew substitute the word torah for ideas in thoreau's statement. the question is: why is so much orthodox talk these days about people? the orthodox live in a vacuum created by the destruction of a once great civilization.it is hard to live in a vacuum.there is a constant effort to fill it.some of that effort is weak and comical such as the culture of story-telling about past rabbinic figures, in pursuit of authenticating oneself in the vacuum by reference to past precedent. since ezra and nekhemia there has been only one form of effective renewal afetr khurban.it is shmirat mitzvot, limud torah, and brilliant political leadership. ma'asei avot siman l'banim does not refer to 'maiselekh'.
ReplyDeleteAnon
ReplyDeletesince you are the great scholar and we are the simpletons the laymen, so please inform us with the daas torah on the above matter and maybe we will have some benefit out of a scholar joining the blog..
Anon 2:54
ReplyDeleteHirshel has a certain luck to have idiots as you, to link every discussion with the Rebbe
It's an inspiring piece
ReplyDeleteWhat do you find wrong with this?
This piece is classic disgruntled bochur syndrome. Anyone who had a mamzer for a rebbi or menahel will at one time or another develop a talent for dreying chisreynes in any gadol story he can find. Most grow out of it pretty quickly.
ReplyDeletenon mouse: I am sick and tired of correcting every blackhatted ignoramus who knows nothing about his own history. Moses Mendelson was a frumme yid. He was obviously a shtickle am ha'aretz because he had to comission his translation of the chumash instead of doing it himself, but that's about the worst you can say about him and still be honest.
As for Rav Kook, the full quote was "it is holier to play soccer in Eretz Yisrael than to sit and learn in Lita" Yes. He blasphemed your Eretz HaKoydesh of Europe.
--Der Moderne Shaygetz
modeh,
ReplyDeleteare you out of your mind to think that moses mendelson ימ"ש was a frummeh yid?! if thats the case he is "rabon shel rov klal yisroel" r"l....
secondly, kook didnt blaspheme europe, he blasphemed torah. period.
and yes even though he was a talmid of volozhin and the son in law of the aderes he was as krum as a bagel.
moderneh sheygitz, a sheygitz you are. but your comments are usually more on the ball..
ReplyDeleteModeh bemiktsas!
ReplyDeleteYou are such a &**(% retard!(sorry Tzig will not let vulgarity thru, but I"m sure you can fill in the blank)
Moses Mendelsohn was anything but an am hooretz! Dufus.
He was a star talmid of R'Dovid Frankel Rov in Desau where Mendelson was from and later Chief Rabbi of Berlin.He wrote the commentary Korban Haeido, the Rashi style perush on the side of the Talmud Yerushalmy.In fact Mendelson moved to Berlin together with his rov to study with him.Mendelsons claim to fame in his early years was as a talmid chochom!
Regarding the famous Biur:He was the translater of ALL the text.This translation was very highly regarded and feared because though it was written in Hebrew Letters was in a High Literary German that Mendelson wanted to "educate" the Jews with.He wanted them to know how to speak German as an entrance to an enlightened world.
On top of the translation, he wrote the commentary on the whole of sefer Shmos and some other parshiyos, plus he edited the whole work.
The Biur was widely used and quoted by choshuve talmidei chachomim.
I don't think Mendelson was such a "frummeh yid".Of his six kids, only two(!)did not convert, including the father of his famous composer grandson Felix, of his grandchildren, only one died a Jew!
So true him himself was what we would call Orthodox, but based on the movement and kids that sprouted from him, the rabbis were right to very skeptical.
Modeh, you are the typical MO ignoramus that I cannot respect.So yes,I do respect Moses Mendelson much more than you or your "rabbis"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Mendelssohn
ReplyDeleteReally, and I suppose you believe the yekum purkan story too?
ReplyDeleteplease elaborate,
ReplyDeletewhat's the yikum purkan story?
Tzig you totally lost my respect with this post, the logic is flawed, and you show a total disrespect to a one of the leaders of klal yisrael in the last century, who happpened to have a netieh to chasidus. It is a well known fact that he used to go to Reb Ahrele Belzer etc. (not that changes anything, just I figured that you took a swipe at him due to his being part of the slobodka r' ahron mir etc chaburah which you despise, so your wrong even in the historical perspective).
ReplyDeleteanonymous
ReplyDeleteit was sent to me by a well-meaning young man who showed no disrespect. He wanted an answer. You'd do much better by explaining it to him, not knocking me.
I"m shocked that you couldn"t explain it yourself...
ReplyDeletewell, think of this:
ReplyDeleteif I put it out there for you all to answer then I get new material for another day!
See what I mean?
I have my reasons after all
well, think of this:
ReplyDeleteIs having material for another day worth making a rag doll out of RISM.
oh stop!
ReplyDeleterag doll? puh-leez.
slow comment day...
ReplyDeleteno major thread defending kook and his ilk..
Ya gotta love American Snag zealots. They're Israeli wannabes. But they forget that Kanoyim need to be consistent; you can't ONLY be a zealot when it comes to RAYHK.
ReplyDeleteTo the tsaddik (with a pey) who couldn't think of a name so had to adapt mine, grow up. If I'm such a boor, then why are you the one with the comic-book cusswords?
ReplyDeleteTo address your points one by one:
1- I did not say ehrlich, I said frum. You can be frum and still as one commenter eloquently put it, "krum as a bagel"
2- He learnt by his local rov.
3- The chofetz chaim also had a grandaughter who was not Jewish. Go passul him.
4- I'm not defending the guy, all I'm saying is if you want to pin reform and/or haskala on one figure you can pick any number of other people including another Mendel.
5- You have no reason to respect me. I'm an anonoschmuck just like you. But if you had any clue who my rov is you would leave him out of it.
nonmouse(who is probably the guy I just spent way too much time on): In yeshiva we were told that "Moses Mendelson started reform by taking out the second yekum purkan and from there he went on to have women rabbis"
Tzig: what snag zealots? By defending Rav Kook I was not being a kanoi. I was simply going with my stated shita of not bashing any gadol b'yisroel who has not ordered yidden physically attacked.
the kanoyim detested r arye levin for assisting lechi and his association with kook. they didn't like his eydim either referring to him as a sefer torah in kloyster, because his greatness in torah can't be dismissed...
ReplyDeleteModeh
ReplyDeletenot you!!
the ones bashing him!
mendelson is by all historical accounts given the most credit for starting the reform movement, though it may have been spawned by the times withiut his help..
ReplyDeletemodeh, what's your definition of frum? forget ehrilch. the rambam's definition of frum, regardless of your aveiros litei'avon, is a belief in the 13 ikarim. mendelson didn't qualify. kook probably didn't either, because he included the kefira of hebrew U in "ki mitziyon tetzai torah" as he so eloquently expressed shamelessly in public at its founding
ReplyDeleteoh finally someone is stirring the sleeping souls here!
ReplyDeletecmon kookies come defend your hero!
what's the lubab talking points opinion regarding kook? no sichas or letters about him ?
ReplyDeleteNope, no Lubab talking points about him
ReplyDeletebut plenty of SNAG talking points and revisionist history going on!!!
Like
1)the Posek of all generations being married by him (mesader kiddushin)
2) Tzaddikim like Reb Shlomo Zalman having the GREATEST respect for him
3) Reb Leib Chasman telling the thousands who assembled at the Levaya that even if they combined all the heads they would not come to RAYHK's Kup.
The list goes on and on.
Even Meller in the latest Brisk letters has to begrudgingly print a letter from the GRIZ to him in 1935 that has the greatest titles in the letter
what happened by the funeral was a continuation of what happened in his life. he was connected to the purse strings. besides for r shlomo zalman, most else can be atributed to that... read enough history from all angles and that's the likely conclusion.
ReplyDeleteAnd the when he came to meet the chazon Ish the latter didn't usher a word to him,and he never visted yerushlayim becaue he didn't want to visit him.
ReplyDeleteThe Periodical Yeshurin wrote that Rav Bengis of the Eida Hacharaidis said that he was siting next to Rav Kook in Valoizhin,and under his table he had some item that he was often looking into it while learning, since reading Bicher was infested in Valozhin so he accused of such, he spoke to the hanhola and they tracked it down to a simple Shivisi that he was constantly reminding himself,this is all from his official counterpart nemesis
ReplyDeleteNonmouse: I mean frum in the most pejorative sense of the word. Having no hasogah of ol malchus shomayim or emuna or even acceptance of the ikkarim (which were not agreed on by all or even most rishonim) do not disqualify. If he lived in flatbush today he would wear a hat and in boro park a rekkl and in Teaneck a srugi. He kept shabbos and kashrus and the only public abrogation of halacha that he has on record is something to do with kavod hameis -- I don't know the whole story.
ReplyDeleteRe Rav Kook: I won't get into apologetics but how many whacko statements do today's rabbonim make that are explained as "people say things in the heat of the moment" etc. THe real reason the velt hates him is also one of the reasons they have problems with Lubavitch: Here is a yid in full levush with a groisse kup that dares to talk to people who "everyone knows" we shouldn't give the time of day!
Hirshel
ReplyDeleteAlot of american Snags pass the revolving door of AJ Soloviechig a pathetic arrogant Jew hater that tubefeeds them his demagogy sandwiched in his Chumash Rashi shiurim. The american snags dont go to Chevron/Ponovich.They are coming from being yankee/mets fan straight into his nonsense.
Anon 9:42: rephrase coherently, please.
ReplyDeletedisclaimer
ReplyDeleteI never learned by aj.
no current rabbi that is widely known and respected has created a collection of wacky quotes as kook has. no disclaimer of being out of context. he said what he meant was off the wall and stuck to his guns. check the documents in his own biography where they reproduced the pashkiviln, proudly.
ReplyDeleteYes. He was proud of it. There is a reason I said I wouldn't engage in apologetics. Now that you've retreated down to that one thing tell me why it's kfira and better yet, try to deny with a straight face what I said was your real problem with him.
ReplyDeleteA modern day variation of this story:
ReplyDeleteHanholo:You want your star child to learn in our Yeshiva but you can't pay full tuition? where do you have your lodgings?
Parents: we own a house, and the majority of our disposable income goes to the mortgage and to food.
Hanholo: scrap the food purchases, and start eating "teg". Monday you can go to foodbank A, Tuesday to foodbank B, etc. Refinance your home, default of the mortgage payments, and move into an apartment.
modeh, the enemy within is always the worst as the torah proclaim "maharsayich umachrivayich mimcha yetze'yu"
ReplyDeleteyes, that is the main thing wrong with kook. a wolf in sheeps clothing. a spodik with samet and dayos kozvos. an undeniable talmid chochom who was into haskalah... truly a tragedy
his indivual statemets can each be picked apart and spun to look like kfira or not. but as a whole collection. rather than just one or two odd statements..... he put himself off the map.
ReplyDeletejb's torah is more widely peeked into in olam hayeshivos than kook.
btw, did u read kooks biography?
Rav Kook issue is a touchy one amongst Chabad
ReplyDeleteThe Rebbe went to his house special to meet with him
and
Hid views were influenced by Chabad chasidus, If he would've been purely Litvish, he wouldn't have supported the rishaim based on 'ends justify the means' arguments.
Therefore, Chabad has nigiyot do defend him, right>
Who was it that when he travelled to EY he specifically avoided Rav Kook.
ReplyDeleteThey asked him if he 'arumh gikooked' and he said 'nein nein, arum Kook"
I think my first ever comment on this blog was taking another shoteh v'gas ruach to task for calling Rav Soloveichik "jb." You have no kavod hatorah, you have kavod hacult. By off the map you mean "he doesn't sound like I say he should." Nothing more.
ReplyDeletere the biography: which one?
btw did you read oros hatshuva? I'm not a big "chosid" of Rav Kook or Rav JDB Soloveichik for that matter, but Oros hatshuva was the mussar sefer I picked for last elul. Not only will you not find such a baki in our generation but I doubt you'll find such a davuk either.
Modeh
ReplyDeletehave you ever read the play that Rav Kook wrote?
You won't find anything like it in this generation
nobody was able to fantasize as well as kook either.
ReplyDeleteMAL, I haven't but I can borrow it from probably half the people in my shul.
ReplyDeleteAnon 1:41, Plenty of people can fantasize better vda"l. Though how many people do you know who had a nazir for a talmid.
(To which you reply how off the wall does someone have to be to take a nazir for a talmid?)
the nazir is a parsha far zich
ReplyDeleteNer Izzy
ReplyDeletethe Rav Kook issue is a touchy one in the Yeshivishe world. He's a product of their best Yeshivah, so they have to condemn him to show that he didn't learn it from them, right?
Rav Kook is a MO icon, yet he publically slapped a congregant who didn't have his shel rosh on strait.
ReplyDeleteIt is called inconsistency, right?
And they love him in Chabad even though the TEfilin on the shvartzes is never strait.
It is called inconsistency, right?
Nice try Tzig
ReplyDeleteR' Chaim was not mikarev him in Volozhin. Therefore, the new brisk/yeshivishe velt doesn't have to defend him. Regardless of the fact that the Netziv liked him. Because after all, the Netziv was the zeydeh that never existed, right?
(or as they say it 'ehr iz oych given ah zeydeh')
Anon: No, he's an aliyah fahr zich -- half of רביעי
ReplyDeleteTzig: and they say his yarmulke was from the tzemach tzeddek's kapote, so why doesn't chabad have a problem with him?
reb Chaim was not much older than him.
ReplyDeleteI was speaking about the whole Yeshivishe world, Brisk is not the only thing out there, you know?
Why is my comeback a "nice try?" I think it's a slam-dunk stuff.
Right?
Tzig
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong
It is obvious that his warped thinking was a result of Chasidic thought and not a product of anybody in Volozhin. Therefore the Litwaks can still be machsshiv his learning, but the Hasids have to take respon sibility for the Haskfas, right?
עפרא לפומיך
ReplyDeletewarped thinking comes from thinking אני ואפסי עוד and I'm the biggest Lamdan, aka Litvishe Gayveh
Ner Izzy, make up your mind. Is he toroso l'mazikin or ah geyin eilim?
ReplyDeleteRav Kook is a MO icon, yet he publically slapped a congregant who didn't have his shel rosh on strait(sic).
ReplyDeleteIt's called inconsistency right.
Have you ever davened in an MO shul on a weekday? The only people with crooked tfillin are older people whose hands shake.
He was a goan, thanks to his Litwak chinuch, but he lost touch of reality due to his Chabad influence.
ReplyDeleteAge was not a significant factor regarding who R' Chaim was mikarev. Example: he was mikarev Rav Bengis, but not the playwright, right?
The Brisker sent him letters with laudatory language, as did many others, because they needed favors from him. He had a lot of power, Haifa was a cosmopolitan city and was the Mercaz (no pun intended) and the playwright viewed himself Rav of the whole Eretz Israel, because of his vast influence, right? Because all the farkalede people fealt a chavershaft with him and seeked his advice, right? I wonder why? Reminds me of a different similar person who lived not too long ago, right? A lot of commonalities, hence the need to defend, right?
For the sake of honesty, he didn't go so far as pumping up the soccer players, just a cheder yingel in Tomim vis a vis a man who couldn't lift his feet off the ground (sometimes) after he learnt, bimisiras nefesh, biritziyfus (Oh, I am sorry, you guys are not as familiar with the concpet of Teyre b'ritziyfus, maybe is has to do with the fact that the Rebbe was not a 'masmid in the conventional sense, right?)
Afruh To Your Mouth,
fech
Modeh
ReplyDeleteChuchum
The point, regarding MO, the point wasn't about the tefilin, it was about slapping the congregant. Violent extremist charadi behavior, right?
And yes, I have been to BO shuls in the week and the tefillin are miraculously strait on top of the bangs. (Anyways, it is not a kuntz to keep it from moving throughout a shorter-than-a-sitcom type of davening)
and E-z off oven cleaner in your mouth
ReplyDeleteThe Tzig can't handle too much substance
ReplyDeleteThe Tzig can't handle morons who take names of yeshivos which they never learned and then decide 130 later which aspects came from which part of his upbringing, that's what the Tzig can't take.
ReplyDeleteI guess all the Maskilim in the Lita also got their ideas from Chabad, right?
don't OD on the oven cleaner, my friend
Hirshel/ Ner
ReplyDeleteThe new snag historian as Eliach have a new version that guys as Bialik famous product of Valoizhin turned out to whatever, is because he was from Chasidic parents, but Valoizhin is as the Loshen Hakaliri "Kol Tinoifois Loi Yetanficho"
Ner
ReplyDeleteIf Reb Chaim hasnt Mekarev Rav Kook in yeshiva, then how would the son the great Brisker Rov beg him for a favor to get him papers to get to the Treifene Medina, do you consider the Brisker Rov for such a low life? a cheap Chonef?but since I hold Brisker Rov to a higher level I would be forced to say that it is Lie.
Ner
ReplyDeleteBTW, is the story about Kook/Bengis/ Valoizhin in Yeshurin True? or they are just a pack of liars?
Modeh bemiktsas,
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, you show you are a man of many words and very little knowledge or logic.
Let us address some of your points.
POINT No 2)He learned by his local rov.
What are you trying to say by this?>
I attacked your absolute ignorance about Mendelson and your not being ashamed of showing it by calling him a "bit of an am-horetz".True he "learned by his local rov".His local rov was one of the greatest scholars of his generation!Who later went on to become the rov in Berlin and wrote Korban Haeido on the Yerushalmy!Mendelson continued to study with him in Berlin.
I also pointed out that Mendelson in fact was the translator of the whole Five Books into German known as the Biur and wrote the commentary on sefer Shmois.Make no light of the Biur, it was used by many leading rabbonim and also widely quoted.Besides for being a talmid chochom he was a mostly self taught but brilliant philosopher who was very close with the some of the greatest philosophers of his time.He also published widely read and translated books on philosophical subjects.
In summary, you calling him an am hooretz shows how little YOU know.
I later pointed out that 4 out of his six kids converted out of Judaism and only one grandson died as an ADULT Jew.Basically that means that none of Mendelsons descendants are Jewish as opposed to the Vilna Gaons 12 thousand Jewish descendants and similarly the Baal Hatanyas thousands of Jewish descendants.
How, in the most twisted logic could that compare to your claim NO 3)That the Chofetz Chaim had a ONE non Jewish Granddaughter.Firstly, I don't know that what you are saying is true and your track record on "facts" is weak BUT how do you compare a guys whole family converting out of Judaism??That surely is not a sign of Frumkait.
Don't give me your nonsense about "your rov".If you want you can share who he is with us, if not just keep quite, you are adding nothing to the discussion with immaterial nonsense like that.
After your analogy to the Makilim, I see why you avoid substance
ReplyDeleteHaskala was an outgrouth of Litvishe thinking, right?
You can't deny that Rabbi Kook's erroneous thinking and the disastrous affects it had was because of hasidic ideology. RIGHT?
DO YOU DENY THAT?
"Nope, no Lubab talking points about him
ReplyDeletebut plenty of SNAG talking points and revisionist history going on!!!
Like
1)the Posek of all generations being married by him (mesader kiddushin)"
Hey,Tzig
Why the uncalled for attack against Horav Elyoshiv?
You are implying cynically that the oilem hayeshivos sees him as the "posek for all generations".Nobody is the posek for all generations.You are right that many consider him as having the mantle of psak today.You also surely know that he does not issue many psakim and it's more a sign of outmost respect.
I mean, you realize that mocking him does not make your guys claim that the late Rebbe is Nosi hador (whatever that means)even though he passed away 15 years ago,right?
I seem to remember that he was mesader kidushin by Rav Shlomo Zalman.Am I wrong?
The relationship between Rav Kook is obviously not very simple.Brisk is a major force in America but much less so in E.Yisroel.Brisk is very opinionated and has is in for Rav Kook and many others including Lubavitch.Yes, I said Lubavitch!Brisk are the biggest misnagdim to Lubavitch.
The rest of Oilem Hayeshivas has a more complicated relationship.Firstly most of the works he left and that have been published in recent years are "machshovo" and it's more difficult to get a widespread appreciation in yeshivas which are mostly built around Talmud.B)His spiritual talmidim many of the Mizrachi are very far from the chareidi outlook regarding the state of Israel etc.So his image has been in a way taken over by the Mizrachi and the Mizrachi and the Chareidim have not had a good relationship, to say the least
rav elyashiv is rav arye levins son in law... so big deal that he had kook be mesader.
ReplyDeletemodeh=mo ignoramus said
ReplyDelete'Unfortunately, you show you are a man of many words and very little knowledge or logic.'
The reason why it makes people nervous, I am refering to the nonfiction works of Rabbi Kook, is that he uses R' Tzadok to find the good in Cheteh.
That is very dangerous; (especially when we are talking aobut a man whose primary audience is shkotzim)
first geshmake thread in a while
ReplyDeleteI love loshon horah almost as much as you, I'm just unabashed about it.
how come you deleted my comments about BO shuls?
ReplyDeleteas for chabad talking points. The Rebbeim respected RAYK personally, but did not hold of his shitos. R. Zevin wanted to do something in his honor and the Rebbe told him that if he does, the Rebbe would have to come out publicly against R.K. (b/c R.Z. represented chabad). The Rebbe said that he did not come out against him before b/c there was no point but if R.Z. participates ....
ReplyDeleteSo Chabad has an opinion but does not always find it necessary to make it public, for the simple reason that it would interfere with bringing people closer to Torah U'mitzvos.
The Moderne Shygetz aka Modeh bemiktsas is the epitome of many in the Modern Orthodox world.Arrogance, looking down on others,and ignorant.
ReplyDeleteThis ignorance is of the worst kind.It's ignorance born out of the fact that they know a little.Enough to make them not eant to learn a bit more.A newcomer to Judaism comes with an open mind:He is ignorant and he knows it,therefore he is open to be educated,a typical MO "knows it all" .This is the definition of a "grobbeh am hooretz" the kind the Talmud relates "mutar lenochroi beyom hakippurim shechal beshabbos", the kind that Chazal warned of marrying ones daughter off to :"As if he is tying her down as prey in front of a lion"
"(b/c R.Z. represented chabad)"
ReplyDeleteRav Zevin did NOT represent Lubavitch.He was his own man, very Zionistic, still back in Russia and learned in the Mir.He later studied by R'Shmaryohu Noach Schneerson of Bobroisk.Many of the talmidei chachomim that Lubavitch managed to "claim" learned in Bobroisk, and belonged to Kopust the father of R'Shmaryohu Noach .
Rav Telushkin was also "claimed" in this way, though he to was no Lubavitcher.
A careful check of the leading Lubavitcher talmidei chachomim claimed by Lubavitch were actually alighned to the Kopuster, such as the Rogatchovers father.
Yes, Rav Zevin had shaychus with Lubavitch, but was no Lubavitcher chosid, which can clearly be seen by his correspondence with the Rebbe.He was also quite a bit older than the Rebbe
To the moron who can't think up his own name: See my definition of frumkeit above. It is not one that is defined by "zara di lo yifsok" It is that definition I was referring to. All I was saying is that he was not a goat-footed demon (no offense tzig, it's an expression) and that he both grew up looking like a frumme yid and lived that way all his life. Your telling me he was a talmid chochom too. Your proof? he learnt by his local rov who was also a gadol atzum. My sources are maskilishe historians who lived shortly after. Yours? About my rov, he's not exactly famous so and he wears a down hat and short jacket (as do I) so I guess you're allowed to be mevazeh him all you like? You were the one who brought him up anyway.
ReplyDeleteNer Izzy, some of us don't have a problem respecting chareidim. Though most of us do enjoy making fun of empty hats. The problem with a lot of chareidim is that they confuse ehrliche MO's with their own "bums" True we have those too, but it's by no means all of us. BTW BO shuls refers to shteeblach not Young Israels.
Martin:
ReplyDeleteKnow it all? Me? where did I give that impression? And thanks for associating me with MO. Last time somebody tried to niche me on this blog they thought I was Lubavitch. Neither is right, MO is closer.
NER
ReplyDelete"Haskala was an outgrouth of Litvishe thinking, right? "
who said that if you don't know the Sheva Chochmas u have no hand in Torah? Reb Zishe? or his brother the Noam Elimelech?
ZEV Micheal
ReplyDelete"A careful check of the leading Lubavitcher talmidei chachomim claimed by Lubavitch were actually alighned to the Kopuster, such as the Rogatchovers father"
Did you ever of a Rav Rivkin, Rav Landau,Reb Chaim Shaul, Reb Yudel Eber, where did they learn?
you are sucking facts out of the blue. Or Reb Chaim Noe? didnt learn in lubavich but definitely no babroisker.
Zev
ReplyDelete"ut was no Lubavitcher chosid, which can clearly be seen by his correspondence with the Rebbe"
If he argued with the rebbe in a sugya makes him a lesser chosid, the Rebbe was open and begged that you should argue in his torah.
His articles he wrote about the Rebbe he comes across as quite a chosid given the fact he was older and coming from a different branch of Chabad
Modeh= Mo
ReplyDelete"Brisk is a major force in America but much less so in E.Yisroel"
Brisk is a factor in Derech Halimud ( usualy the minmum learning for the max time) but its roishei hayeshivois have no respect, AJ is considerd a universal phony
Anon 7:14, when people say "Brisk" they don't decide whether they mean the derech, the current roshei yeshiva, or the previous ones until after the argument has been going on a while and they've been pinned down to one or the other.
ReplyDelete'"Brisk is a major force in America but much less so in E.Yisroel"
ReplyDeleteBrisk is a factor in Derech Halimud ( usualy the minmum learning for the max time) but its roishei hayeshivois have no respect, AJ is considerd a universal phony'
Wash your mouth out with soap.
Next time you go to Israel, make sure you go ask him mechila face to face
"Or Reb Chaim Noe? didnt learn in lubavich but definitely no babroisker."
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious from his sefarim that he never saw the light of Brisk. His coyach hasevra was weak.
But the Chazon Ish on the other hand- you gotta hurver on every peace
It is not easy reading like Ketzos Hshulchan. (different target audience, heh?)
NER
ReplyDelete"Haskala was an outgrouth of Litvishe thinking, right? "
who said that if you don't know the Sheva Chochmas u have no hand in Torah? Reb Zishe? or his brother the Noam Elimelech?"
Who quotes repeatedly from Science before he explains it based on Chasidus.
The Alter Rebbe, right?
Ner
ReplyDeleteI don't know who? can you give one an example please, But I can tell who said the other statement
MAL,
ReplyDeleteWriting comlicated does not make you more deeper, the Maharam Shif is not deeper then Marsha just bad editing.
Not Brisk
ReplyDelete"Mechila face to face",is this AJ terminology.
Does AJ have extra soap in his dispenser since I beleve he rinses his mouth after the infamous Chumash Rashi shiurim
"Ner
ReplyDeleteI don't know who? can you give one an example please, But I can tell who said the other statement"
Look how he explains rainbows. Look how he explains the central nervous system.
MAL,
ReplyDeleteWriting comlicated does not make you more deeper, the Maharam Shif is not deeper then Marsha just bad editing.
I am speaking about the deepness of the sevaras. You can add the complications of the cheshbon. Not a lot of that in Ketzos Hashulchon. No geoynes
"Does AJ have extra soap in his dispenser since I beleve he rinses his mouth after the infamous Chumash Rashi shiurim"
ReplyDeleteInfamous?
You will not find a source of better maysalach and the vertlach aren't bad, as long as you appreciate Brisk.
The problem with him is that what he says about people and the way he teyches them up, are usually true
Rav Zevin was a Chabad Chossid and a MAJOR Chossid of the Lubavitcher Rebbe/ period. You wanna say he wasn't a Lubavitcher? fine. But don't make him out to be some kind of malach who never recognized the rebbe.
ReplyDeleteRav Telushkin was a Lubavitcher after the FR arrived in America, no matter what he was in Bobruisk.
Nice try.
Ner: Are you a Jew with strong emuna who believes in Torah k'nisuna etc. and therefore any science which contradicts it is wrong, or are you entirely bivchinas stubborn === v'lo chamoro shel pinchas ben Yair who hates science and everything else that operates on sechel? Your 11:01 comment makes you sound like the latter.
ReplyDeletehey dr. impersonater. go do what v.p. cheney told senater leahy to do.
ReplyDeleteeverybody knows that in spite of kooks wacky deyos he had quite a respectable following . . .
"who said that if you don't know the Sheva Chochmas u have no hand in Torah? Reb Zishe? or his brother the Noam Elimelech?"
ReplyDeleteWow, talk about revisionism! That is a quote of the Vilna Gaon cited by his talmid R. Yisroel of Sklov in his Pe'as Hasodeh!
No chassidim (and many others) approve of the hashkofoh of the Vilna Gaon and his thoughts re Chasidism, yet does anyone question his greatness or tzidkus? Likewise re RAYK: You may reject his hashkofos but that does not belittle his tzidkus and ge'onus. R. Elyashiv and RSZ Auerbach referred to him as a kodosh. RIZ Meltzer had the geratest respect for him. The Chazon Ish remained standing throughout a lengthy sheur by RAYK because, as CI said, there stands the Torah itself! The Imerei Emes and the Reyatz, along most other gedolim coming to EY made a point to visit him (and they certainly did not come for favors like it is said of the Litvishe gedolim with their alleged chanifah etc.). RYC Sonnenfeld was a "politcal opponent" but showed him the geratest respect and admiration. And so the list goes on. Any shmeggegy who speaks disparanging re RAYK is not just a shoteh rosho and gas ru'ach, but simply a crude "boor" (way below an am ha'arets).
as a certain gadol proclaimed during the tragic expulsion of gush katif. they are shomer torah umitzvos but are oved avoda zara called "aretz".
ReplyDeleteagav it was in the context of , we ARE in gokus, even in eretz yisroel. if the umos haolam let us be there, fine. when they tell us to leave, we must. we are after all in golus. that entity is not reishis tzmichas anything but tzaros.
and as the imrei emes said. ".....kooks ahavas yisroel hut em upgeforen".
anon1
ReplyDeletethe imrei emes came to try to make shalom. he visited kook on his first 2 trips to EY but not on the last, you know why? because he saw az siz nishtdu mit veimen tzu handlin.
any one have any REAL info on why the rayatz visited him?
ReplyDeleter elyashiv is a eidim of his chosid r arye levin
and rsz aurbachs father was a follower as well. so the kasha isn't that shver. remember, the hunger and misery of those days befor the state after the tzionim wrested control of the tzedoka money coming in from chutz laaretx. anyone who wasn't on their side went hungry... as r hirsh pesach admited candidly, he lost a child to hunger so he took a paying job on kooks besdin....
remember desperate times call for desperate measures and the great ones who followed kook have to be judged in that context. he helped feed their hungry children.
ReplyDeleteYOU ARE REALLY A BUSHA TO CHABAD
ReplyDeleteYOU ARE A SHOTEH ACCORDING TO ANY
WAY YOU EXPLAIN IT
KEEP IT UP BECAUSE YOU ARE A REAL
GOOD SITE FOR US LITVAKS
WE GET TO SEE WHAT YOUR AHAVAS YISROEL LEADS TO
Tzig can you explain what he wants with
ReplyDelete"YOUR AHAVAS YISROEL LEADS TO"
non-mouse: what does kook and whatever following he did or didn't have have to do with what i said? at least we know your category.
ReplyDeletehey doctor!
ReplyDeletejust remember trhat
כל דבריהם כגחלי אש chazal
almost every scientific theory of one hundred, two hundred etc. etc. years ago has been disproven, if not totally, then partially. in ani maamin we say
ReplyDeleteshezos hatora lo sihei muchlefes... fun a ksha shtarbt men nisht. the torah and chazal are eternal.
"Ner: Are you a Jew with strong emuna who believes in Torah k'nisuna etc. and therefore any science which contradicts it is wrong, or are you entirely bivchinas stubborn === v'lo chamoro shel pinchas ben Yair who hates science and everything else that operates on sechel? Your 11:01 comment makes you sound like the latter."
ReplyDeleteRead the whole conversation. I was not criticizing the Alte Rebbe, chas v'sholom. I was responding to a comment that the Gaon, who mentioned the study of the 7 wisdoms, was responsible, chalilah, for Haskala. I merely showed that the Alter Rebbe also knew a lot of it.
LITVAK NOT FROM LKWD
ReplyDeletewhat do you mean by your nonsensical statement and who are you referring to also is your finger stuck to the caps lock?
True. Which is why Torah is emes and you don't have to feel threatened by science, especially when it isn't saying anything kneged torah
ReplyDeleteBTW, I think Rav Frank lost more than one child to hunger.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, Satmar Rav points that out before he shrays against him
ANON3
ReplyDeleteI WAS REFFERING TO YOU AND TZIG
Non Mouse,
ReplyDelete"and as the imrei emes said. ".....kooks ahavas yisroel hut em upgeforen".
Which Issur did Rav Kook do, by interpreting the deeds of the Zionist as positive,? Is there a Issur Deoraisoi or Derabonan to love a rosha, You can find mamorie chazal probably but it aint halachic, But the avalanche of Sinas Yoisroel that the satmar anti zionist dogma had wrought on us is a cause for 10's of thousand of jews hating other jews shomrei torah umitzvohs, just for disagreeing on some minor non halachic matter. Sinas yisroel is one of the yesodois halacha, it involves lavim as loshon hora, oiver on loi sisno es ochichio. This kook story is brought up constantly with nobody thinking you are transgressing on a issur deoiraso every second. you are not a apikoras if you have a certain biur in a aviroi lishmo, the concept of Avieoro lishmo has sources in chazal, You can disagree with him but what is this mudslinging ?
Non mouse
ReplyDelete"r hirsh pesach admited candidly" is there proof for that or Yosele shienberger and his SIL Gerlitz fabricated that story, is there a letter in his manuscript admitting that.
"Look how he explains the central nervous system."
ReplyDeleteMost of the Alte Rebbes sources are from Reb tovia harofeh book that the Chasam sofer and the AR used in hilchois nidah, In hilchois nikur this kind of seforim were used too. Its a far strech to giving a door for the haskala movement in Shklov. what a idiot.
Non mouse
ReplyDelete"but are oved avoda zara called "aretz".
as you are a Non mouse he is A Non Godul for spewing that statement
Non Mouse
ReplyDelete"any one have any REAL info on why the rayatz visited him?"
because he had no problem with him, and he didn"t need the Marmorisher/Hungarian cabal to dictate him. His emuna vediois was as solid as theres to make his own decision
aveira lishma is only with nevuoh.
ReplyDeletetalmid chochom sh'ain bo daas , neveila tova hemenu.... as the shiniver said because he can give a hechsher and be machshil people all ove while a single piece of nevela sits right where it is.... kook was machshir zionism/mizrachi/hertzel etc. the repercussions are still spreading their poison in klal yisroel to this day....
ANON3
ReplyDelete"I WAS REFFERING TO YOU AND TZIG"
In your infinite wisdom can you please enlighten us as to why?Again whats with the caps lock?Is your finger stuck to it with "crazy" glue?
Those of you who take every opportunity to belittle the great Tzaddik, Rav Kook, will answer in due course. I suggest you go to his kever and ask for forgiveness.
ReplyDeletenon-mouse, in particular, shame on you. feh.
Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach had no negios or netiyos, ledivrei hakol, and he absolutely venerated Rav Kook and the neo-publisher's attempts to disembowel the link have been shown to be plain artscroll like "scholarship"
isaac
ReplyDeleter shlomo zalmans father was close to kook. he didn't allow him to be denigrated in his presence. tops he insisted he be referred to as r kook. that's a far cry from venerated.
RSZA and R' Elyashiv etc. expressed admiration and veneration for RAYK in very recent years, thus far beyond any need for toives etc., and cite his halachic rulings as authoritative. Obviously RAYK's detractors know as little of these authorities as they do of RAYK and are just a bunch of boorish nitwits who picked up some ignorant garbage in their yeshivos from equally ignorant boors and think themselves heroes by repeating that rubbish.
ReplyDeleteAsuming that RAYK was nichshal because of exessive ahavas Yisroel etc. as they claim, this is ANY TIME better than being nichshal in so many issurei de'oraysso etc. by excessive sinas chinom, ignroance and boorishness. Go wash your mouths and "brains" with terpentine and maybe this will allow a ray of taharo and teshuvah into your metumtdamdike heads and hearts.
Is anyone here aware of the famous picture of Rav Elyashiv standing for the playing of the Hatikvah?
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, after the Hatikvah was for some reason played at a Lubavitcher yeshiva banquet,the late Lubavitcher Rebbe officially severed his relationship with TT.So what does this all prove about Rav Kook,Rav Elyashiv and the Rebbe? Who was/is a Tzioni and who wasn't/is not?
Rav Kook printed an enigmatic statement and the Imrey Emes asked him what he meant.
ReplyDeleteR' Kook said it would take two hours to explain it.
The Gerrer said, if it takes 2 hours to explain it to him than it is irresponsible to print it to the public and he agreed
read the letter of the Chafetz Chaim regarding the Hebrew U
You have to know history
The plan was that that should be the center of all Jewish studying.
"Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach had no negios or netiyos, ledivrei hakol, and he absolutely venerated Rav Kook and the neo-publisher's attempts to disembowel the link have been shown to be plain artscroll like "scholarship" "
ReplyDeleteBalbin,
Let me be ask you something.Is it proper to defend someone by attacking another??
You defend Rav Kook, which is great but then take an unwarranted swipe at Artscroll, which has done an impressive job of disseminating Torah in English?
Quite childish of you,I think.
So you think Artscroll is not perfect? Great, so do I.Any other Jewish publishing house done a job even close? Don't think so.
You see, when a young yeshiva boy posts some ignorance, or a very partisan stance it's to be forgiven.
I get nervous when adults throw around silly inorant insults.
think b/4 u write should make u tzig a little bright!
ReplyDeleteif u would use your own advice things here could of bin nice!
all what u have to say is full of betray
against all the jews unless u think the last rebbi is at stake then your jewesness is awake!
day and night u are full of negativity, unless for the maski
ilim u are pro their activity!
u bash all jews alike litvish chasidish its all alright!
but never challenge your belief of chabad's b/c thats the way u go astray!
Anonymous of June 13, 10:23:00:
ReplyDeleteplease spare us your revisionist sciolistic nonsense.
Did you ever pick up an original edition of RSZ Auerbach's sefer on Shmita and the Heter Mechira? I didn't think so. Anyone who concludes that the posek par excellence wrote that way because of his father was "close" to RAV Kook is living in a world far away from ours.
What is it that we call those who are Mevazeh Talmidei Chachamim? I don't want to curse.
I bless you with "excessive" Ahavas Yisroel, I hope it disembowels the excessive Sinah that your world is seemingly enveloped by. Thanks to Artscroll, the process that creates a single crystalline Weltanschauung by ignoring the humanity in individuals and the disenfranchisement of others grows exponentially and in inverse proportion to the intellectually dishnest journey of the clone-generation.
To use Rav Kook's observation on the Menora from the Parsha we just read, I'd have to say, that if we had the clone-generation design a Menora, Hashem could show it to them explicitly but they would be smarter than Hashem. They wouldn't have seven branches chas veshalom. Na, that would represent an element of plurality and what a dirty word pluralism is, even bsoch daled amos shel veholachto bidrochov. Instead the clone generation would make do with one gevaldik single branch down the middle cutting off all the "kfirah branches" to the left and right, even if those branches were all aimed towards the common middle.
Even Rav Y.D. Soloveitchik, who was no fan of Rav Kook's philosophy, said that after he met Rav Kook he felt that he was mamash in the presence of an Ish Kadosh and Ish Eloki. Rav Soloveitchik said that despite him not at all agreeing with the piskei halocho they had been discussing.
You may not agree with someone's Shita let alone understand too much about that Shita, but to issue such mechuzofist revisionist and vituperative bile is beyond the pale.
MAL,
ReplyDeleteI don't believe this story, did he write it in his famous letter? There was alot controversial stuff thats written by chasidim that needed much mamorim of six hours to explain, and there are many hanhoges of Kotzk that you cant explan never,
Non Mouse
ReplyDeleteIn my gemora Masechte Nozir page 23 there is no mention of Nevia, I looked in the Meforshim and I haven"t seen it either.
Shimon
ReplyDeleteArtscroll a bunch of Balie Batim askonim versus a Talmid chochom muvak,
Anon 3
ReplyDeletewhere can I see Eliashev standing by the Hatikva?
look in the shu"t for "aveira lishma"
ReplyDeletebesides, your recognizing an aveira....
"Anon 3
ReplyDeletewhere can I see Eliashev standing by the Hatikva?"
I think Hershel has access to the picture.
Balbin,
ReplyDeleteYou've taken a page out of the Neturei Karta handbook with your dark curse implications ,
eh?
Please show some maturity.
Please show younger boys that one can educate them about people they don't know anything about without resorting to crude manipulative "curses".I think Rav Kooks case can stand on it's own merit
And it's not that I disagree with you about Harav Kook.Btw, you mentioned Rabbi Soloveichiks comments that he felt he was in the presence of holiness, he said it about R'Menachem Porush to.
You also continue to be aggressive in your sweeping criticism of Artscroll, seems to personal.A book deal gone awry?Also interesting to note that you are prepared to use your own apologetics and sweeping underneath the carpet for a certain group you feel close to and named your youngest after.The thread with R'Menashe Kleins ruling is where for example you showed an unbelievable ability to write pure unadulterated bunk
"Did you ever pick up an original edition of RSZ Auerbach's sefer on Shmita and the Heter Mechira? I didn't think so"
ReplyDeleteThere are so many other juicer examples of the nefarious Charedi secret society of revisionist history.
MAL,
ReplyDelete"I don't believe this story, did he write it in his famous letter? There was alot controversial stuff thats written by chasidim that needed much mamorim of six hours to explain, and there are many hanhoges of Kotzk that you cant explan never,"
There is a letter printed in R' Elchunun's letters regarding the establishment of the tiflah
The critical difference with Rav Kook was that he had a large target audience of people who were off.
"And it's not that I disagree with you about Harav Kook.Btw, you mentioned Rabbi Soloveichiks comments that he felt he was in the presence of holiness, he said it about R'Menachem Porush to."
ReplyDeleteActually, if I remember correctly, the Rav didn't mention holiness, but rather, the presence of someone who felt a responsibility for the whole Klal, like Porush
Balbin is quoted from the new book by Rabbi David Holtzer:“The Rav Thinking Aloud: Transcripts of Personal Conversations with Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik.” I don't remember the exact words but the idea was that though he was not overwhelmed by Rav Kooks learning he felt in a special presence of a holy person and gave R'Porush as another example.
ReplyDeleteMaybe someone can give the exact quote.Maybe Balbin can post something useful for once?
Ah "Shimon", the maturer one ...
ReplyDeleteDo you have a real name? What are you hiding from?
I didn't curse anyone.
I wouldn't dream of writing for artscroll. Never did.
You are 100% I was recalling what I read in Rabbi Holtzer's new book.
Happy to restart the R' Menashe Klein thread. Did the issue strike a personal nerve or was it his method of psak which so offended your sensibilities.
Let's look at your logic
- I am a big fan of Rav YD Soloveitchik (absolutely unashamedly true)
- I mention something the Rav said about Rav Kook (not verbatim, but close enough)
- what I claimed is now tainted/questionable?
You call that logic? By all means, if you want to defend Kvodo Shel Torah (eg Rav Kook) do so, and do a better job than me ...
Please don't lecture me about our clone generation who willingly drop titles from Rabonim Gedolim and show a huge bizuy talmid chacham because they have been artscrollised in the cloning process.
Balbin,
ReplyDeleteFirstly why the obsession with a "name".Does the blog writer have a "name"?So why is it that you can't handle a simple moniker?
If the reason you need a name is because you think I know you personally, then you are mistaken.I have never ever been to "Kadur haoylom hatachton" (I think that's what the Lubavitcher used to call "down under"?)and don't know you personally at all.
I have seen your postings on the web in various places and usually disagree with you (and your apologetics...).
Now, I'm not sure what part of my logic you are attacking.I never said your quote from Holtzers book was tainted.The opposite actually, when I asked that you do something "useful for once "I meant that you post the actual quote because I surmised that you have the book which I don't, and I remembered the gist of Rabbi Soloveichiks words to be what YOU said.So we actually agree on something.
About the "curses"
ReplyDeleteExamples of what I call "dark implications"
"What is it that we call those who are Mevazeh Talmidei Chachamim? I don't want to curse."
"Those of you who take every opportunity to belittle the great Tzaddik, Rav Kook, will answer in due course."
Childish and immaterial in my opinion
About Artscroll:
ReplyDeleteThey have done as I mentioned, a great job in disseminating Torah and quality literature but are not perfect.Just like the rest of this world where nobody is perfect
I find your criticism to be interesting since you are a big Lubavitch supporter and alumnus and they in Lubavitch have taken hagiography to new heights.Upon reading any of their historical publications or biographies one is assailed with such a powerful whiff of rewriting of history and the painting of "perfect" people that a thinking person cannot rush for the exit.
On top of their massive publishing house which only publishes Lubavitch works, many Lubavitchers are always criticizing Artscroll for not being inclusive enough when the fact is that Artscroll, though not perfect publishes a wide array of publications, Lubavitch is inclusive of nobody.
As a thinking person I'm obviously bothered by this
There is no greater form of historical revisionism than thinking that the Ketzos Hashulchan was in the same league as the Chazon Ish.
ReplyDeleteYou wanna make the tenous argument that is comprised of a hybrid of two taynus
1) he was at least a bar pluktah
2) he was our Posek, so the rule is that we follow him
Maybe
But don't fool yourself into thinking that they are comparable
Shimon, you are right. I don't care who you are let alone whom you or are not, least of all whether you have visited Australia.
ReplyDeleteAs to "curses". I explicitly avoided doing so and your quotes prove it once more.
You are right, Chabad has also taken hagiography to a "great" height. I don't defend that for one minute. In fact, it's something I'm known to be very critical about and have written about in context many times.
There is someone who still doesn't talk to me after I suggested that Ein Tzadik B'ooretz asher yaaseh tov velo yechto" may apply to holy people.
So, whilst you seem to want to paint me as an apologist for Chabad (something I and those who do know me would find amusing), this does not diminish the damage that some publishers did and do. Of course they have also done fantastic things, and been a source of harbotzas hatorah but so have Chabad :-)
The attacks on Rav Kook are something I find very hurtful. The dropping of the title "Rav" has halachic ramifications for those who think they can do so. If that is a curse, so be it.
Did you read the original (or parts) of RSZA's sefer on Shmita? Do you or does anyone else really want us to believe that RSZA (who used to go to Rav Kook's house to hear his Torah on Shabbos afternoon, I believe) only did so, or wrote what he did because of kavod for his own father?
I take RSZA over cloned homogeneity any day, any time.
The trend to paint Rav Kook as anything other than a most heylige yid is horrible and yes, a bizuy talmid chacham. Does anyone seriously entertain the thought that the Gerrer and Lubavitcher Rebbes would be "quiet" if their Chassidim decided to drop the title "Rav" in respect of Rav Kook? Even those who make the allegation that the Chafetz Chaim said something that sounded negative, know very very well the public high esteem that the Chafetz Chaim displayed to Rav Kook (well before he had any so called political clout).
I bless everyone to have at least 1/10000000th of Rav Kook's Ahavas Hashem and Ahavas Yisrael. This was a man who was totally consumed by his love of the people, the land and the Torah.
"Artscroll, though not perfect publishes a wide array of publications, Lubavitch is inclusive of nobody.
ReplyDeleteAs a thinking person I'm obviously bothered by this"
Kehos, the publication arm of Lubavitch,was founded by the Rebbe RAYAT"Z with the distinct mission of publishing the various kesovim of the Lubavitcher Rabbaim and chassidus in general going back to it's founder the BESHT and has never made a secret about it.In addition they have put out such publications as Talks and Tales the precursor to Torah Umisohre's Olomeinu as well as the first English translations of a number of Marcus Lehmans novels,various books on Jewish History,Chagim and many more publications dealing with topics that are not speciffically connected with Chabad and are to numerous to mention.
As "a thinking person" are you also "bothered" by the fact that Breslov, to name but one amongst many, publishes pamphlets "that are truely not inclusive of anybody" except for Breslov? While your doing your "thinking"please give us some examples of Lubavitch published revisionist history, that you so elegantly denigrate in your above post.The publications of Art Scroll which are supposedly "inclusive of everyone" are rife with outright lies and distortions that are an embarrassment to so called Torah publications and no one denies it.Are you also"obviously bothered by this"?
isaac,
ReplyDeletenobody denies kooks book knowledge or good intentions, remember, however that his books were placed in cherem by the gedolei yisroel and even the chofetz chaim protested his outrages statements by the hebrew U. . .
nebach an apikorus iz oich an apikorus.
nebach a machshil es harabim iz duch a machshil es harabim.
had he stayed in yaffo things would have been almost fine. ( charomim not withstanding)
however he created a tishtush hamochin and placed a hechsher and legitimacy on that wich should have remained and is forrbidden.
I'm harav dome lemalach .... bakesh torah mipihu. v'im lav AL TIVAKESH!!!!!
al tivakesh torah mipihu.
Non Mouse
ReplyDeleteWhy do u call him Kook if your rebbe Tietelbaum calls him Harav Kook in the Teshuvahs Divrie Yoel,?
non Mouse
ReplyDelete" chofetz chaim protested his outrages statements by the hebrew U. " are you sure the CC was still alive then?
Shimon
ReplyDelete"Lubavitch is inclusive of nobody."
Can you answer me why did the Lubavither Rebbe spent so much time and effort by getting the funds and himself doing a big index on the Sdie Chemed? a huge set with 9 volumes, he didn"t do for his people or financial reasons , he did it that the Rov should have in front him all the poskim (INCLUDING every Rov)on every matter,
Can you answer me why was the Lubavicher Rebbe so involved in the publishing of Encyclopedia Talmudith (INCLUDING every Misnagdisher Rosh Yeshivas sevora)Befor you fix up the flawed chabad History get your facts straight.
Non Mouse
ReplyDeleteWhy do u call him Kook if your rebbe Tietelbaum calls him Harav Kook in the Teshuvahs Divrie Yoel,?
Monday, June 15, 2009 5:41:00 PM
1st, i aint no satmer. 2 why do u call him teitlebaum? arent you on the kovod hatora/derech eretz patrol?
anon 542 there is a COPY of the chofetz chaim machaa in "mara d'ara dyisroel...
in short. bear in mind that in a greast historical context, kook will not go down as a seminal figure in history. in 100 years from now he will be remembered as the founder of the rabanut, (wich is not very respected... ) in a cluster of names with other mizrachi leaders etc.
on a personal level he has no current legacy. his family is off the map, progeny wise and his sforim were not niskabel in the olam hatorah...
Does mara dara have a ksav yad? or a shemua, I think it was written by Sheinberger or under his auspices,by me and must truth seeking people he is muchzak a shakran, if I want to have a real biography of rav Zonenfeld I read what his family has to say in Hoish Al Hachoima,
ReplyDeleteAfter all the rabinut will be have a nice and proud page in history with people as rabbis Yosef,Herzog,Eliashev etc.. maybe in your rechilus world you will find some rotten apples since rotten smells rotten, I will find you rabonim or rebbes outside the rabinut also rotten.
Non Mouse
ReplyDeleteIf the Satmar Rebbe the arch anti zionist could call him harav why don"t you have the decency? are you from the Netuai karta that consider them selves more pope the the pope?
You are getting me wrong I don"t profess to be in the Kevoid hatorah business since its anyway relative, If I want to denigrate any godul I will disbar him from the Gedolim list and he is free for all.
yes mara dara has a photo copy of the CC handwritten letter. it also has a tremendous amount of fascinating docs that haish al hachoma doesn't come close by a mile....
ReplyDeleteand yes , ofcourse the first thing is ois "godol" and then u can say what u want. others have done that before, for me me and hence the lack of title for "R" kook.
happy now?
non mouse
Anon 5:42 said
ReplyDeletenon Mouse
" chofetz chaim protested his outrages statements by the hebrew U. " are you sure the CC was still alive then?
non mouse has already proven that the only thing less than his derech eretz is his knowledge of history. I don't know about the chofetz chaim's letter but consider the source.
Well, even I know that Hebrew U was in '25 and the CC passed away in '33.
ReplyDeleteAs far as dates go it could've happened...
I have a correction to
ReplyDeletemake. I made a mistake! (shocked, huh?) the hand written letter was a
couple pages later in mara dara dyisroel then a letter in the text
decrying kooks speech. . . so if its forged I don't know. u have to
trust gerlitz for that but oh is there a treasure trove of documents
in that book.
Non mouse
ReplyDeleteWe started out this discussion that Gerlitz and his FIL Sheinberger are a pack of liars.Just an imbecile that will drink their koolaid will buy anything they offer. I am restating my fact anything thats not in Hoish Al hachoma is Bechezkes Sheker.Your knowledge of Jewish history is basically too poor that even a simple person should argue would .
besides a lot more documentation. there are very little in substantive differences between hoish al hachoma and mara dara dyisroel besides that sz sonenfeld paints kook as being a lot more gullible and having gotten a lot more manipulated. I have both.
ReplyDeletewhy is gerlitz muchzak shakran? proof anyone?
ReplyDeleteI am restating my fact anything thats not in Hoish Al hachoma is Bechezkes Sheker.
ReplyDeletewhat is your "fact" based on?
I would start with Sheinberger on the Oilomas Shechorvi, that was a laughing stock in the world
ReplyDeleteboth are not in front of me but someday I hope to get to it
ReplyDeleteI'm not familiar with oilamos shechrvi
ReplyDeletebut u still didntvdemostrate any falsehoods...
non mouse. Your responses are very very sad. I worry about a generation that trades in revisionism, bizuy tamidei chachomim and outright sheker.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather be in a dor that was kooloi zakai then the one which is chutzpe yasge.
If I ever needed proof that our Dor was the latter one, your outrageous comments on the heilige tzadik Rav Kook are that proof.
Even if you truly believe what you write, one wonders exactly what you are achieving in stating such hurtful things. M'sanecho Hashem Esneh?
If you tell me that you consider Rav Kook "M'sanecho" then I will klap al cheit for wasting time responding to you.
go klap
ReplyDelete