If only they could package the baloney like Alle Processing does... They would be rich! Rich, I tell ya! Imagine if Lubavitch would say this, that the Litvishe Derech HaLimud, i.e. Reb Chaim Brisker and all other Litvishe Roshei Yeshiva, was wrong, and the only real Torah learned was in Russia! But the Satmorim get away with everything. The fact that they decided to go to Lita to acquire the derech haLimud because of a Halochoh Sefer(!) that was written decades before, no matter how "Lomdish" the Biur Halochoh is, Does that make sense to anyone out there?
?!וואס ליגט אין די קרית יואל'ער וואסער
The more sophisticated Satmarers like the Lefkowitzes of the Zalonim faction are dead embarrased with the prmitiveness of the holy Rebbe of Satmar.They would never print this kind of juvenile talk.In matter of fact they have their sons by Reb AJ in the Kemoi Brisk Reb Duvid or in aleksander by finkel. But this Aronim in upstate are not sensitive and are ill informed that it is a big world out there, will print the unvarnished rebbe zichrono livroche..
ReplyDeleteAt least they got the erliche part right :)
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yisrael_Meir_Kagan
ReplyDeleteMishna Berura
1st volume was published in 1884; 2nd volume in 1886;
3rd volume in 1891;
4th volume in 1898;
5th volume in 1902;
6th volume in 1907.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaim_Michael_Dov_Weissmandl
Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandl
b. 25 October 1903, Debrecen,Hungary
d.29 November 1957, Mount Kisco, New York
Hirshel is back, happy days are here again.
ReplyDeleteYou have a following, buddy, and at this point, you need to feed us.
The sophisticated Satmars all send their prize boys to Mir (Reb Usher) and Brisk, both of which welcome them. Mir even has a special chassidim chaburah which the rosh yeshiva, Rav Nosson Tzvi, gives private vaadim to.
When I was in Beis Hatalmud, Rav Brus's shiur was jammed with chassidim too.
דבר אחד בטוח
ReplyDeletethe Chofetz Chaim didn't say "ענק"
וד"ל
HT,
ReplyDeleteWelcome back! You are on fire the last few days. I think we were all in a little bit of haze after Leiby and other matters. So it's good to be back at work saving Klal Yisroel. Your piece on the Em of Klal Yisroel (or whatever they called the Rabbanit Kanievsky) was precious. I cannot count how many of my friends in Lakewood I told it over to.
thanks, Snagville
ReplyDeletegood to be back and to have you along for the ride...
The first part of that Baba Masseh Veyeshaker Loch,that Rav Wiessmandel left to Radin, is definitly a lie,
ReplyDelete1)the Chofetz Chaim's prewar fame was not because of the Mishnah Berura it was only because his Shemiras haloshan campaign and his Tzidkas. The Mishneh Berura started being a factor many years after the war, thnks much to the Chazon Ish's strong reliance on it pesak.
2)How many times does the MB quote hungarian poskim (that realy know how to learn)as far as I know he only quotes the chasam sofer who was universaly accepted,and even the CS is not the real ungarisher, he was closer to the German Rav Etlinger of the Orech Lener, then to Hungary.
Ein Kietz Ledivrie Ruach
PS;I dont have seforim in front of me, buy if my memory serves me right,I think he also quotes the Kesav Sofer in Hilchas sukka,on the other hand maybe I am mistaking,
Tzig. You can not write in generalizations.
ReplyDeleteWhat is learning? is it covering ground in Shaas ? Is it lasukei Shmateso aliva Dehilchoso ? Is it Bekius ? Obviously the Brisker school and the rest of the world have different opinions.
Did the Hungarians have a new derech in learning? How different was the derech in Hungary then lets say the derech in Galicia and Ukraine (yes people and bachurim studied there too) ?
In fact the place where a NEW derech was discovered in the 20th century was in Lita. Discovered by gedolim like Reb Shimen Skopf, Reb Chaim ,Rav Reines of Lida, Reb Itzikel Ponovieser and more . By the late 1930's all Litvishe yeshivoth were into this Analytic learning by virtue of the Mirer yeshiva being dominated by the students who spent a zeman or 2 with reb Velvele in Brisk. called the Brisker Derech popularized by the Soloveitchik family, Reb Shimon the Ranat and Reb Baruch Ber.
Aha but there was opposition to this in Lita too. This was NOT the way gemora was studied in Volozhin and men as different like the Ridbaz of Slutzk, rav Kuk, Rav Londinsky of Radin and the Chazon Ish were violently opposed to this derech. The Ridbaz refered to this new analytic school as the Chemiker(chemists mixing everything up like the shtei dinim and cheftza gavra talk)).The Chazon Ish mourned the removal of the Maharshaa from the new Talmudists curriculum.This is printed in his Kovetz iggros.
One could safely infer that the heilike Chofetz Chaim also was not taken by the new analytic school and perhaps saw the derech of Volozhin as the correct derecha nd may have thought that the Hungarian derech was the correct manner.
In the new derech of Lita, little importance was attached to bekius and to matters of practical halacha. rav YY Weinberghimself a real Litvishe rav of Berlin, in his michtovim writes in the late 1920's that the center of gravity for halachic decisions has shifted to Hungary rather than Lita this despite such great poskim as the Mishna Berura and Aruch hashulchan.The youth of Tora in Lita were not intereted in halacho lemaase to say the least.
Lets face it with certain exceptions Congress Poalnd, Galicia Hungary and the whole Chassidic world including Lubavitch did not accept the litvishe
(read Brisker) derech.We will not even speak of the olam hatora of the Sefardim in Iraq, Syria , Tunisia and Morocco.
So in my opinion perhaps the manner in which my Satmarer friends express their opinions is primitive but what they say certainly has standing.
By the way its almost universally acknowledged that the psychological and sociological reason for this shift in lita was the haskalah. In order to keep hold of the best young minds there, in their quest after science and Math, R. Chaim and others devised a highly logical system of Talmud study with categories and internal laws that attracted these minds. Reb Eliezer Gordon of Telz, acknowledges this fact in a letter saying that if not for this new system not one person young man in Lita would be learning Gemora!
Of course he forgot that Tomche Tmimmim was flourishing not very far away without this as it offered the old time religion without compromises.And TTL did not adopt the new chemistry either until much later.
A final note I am not negating the Brisker derech, elu velu !
schneur, what a rant. און אלעס כדי צו קענען מוסיף זיין די הערה וועגן תומכי תמימים.
ReplyDeletea. It has been proven that the Ridbaz isn't referring to the Brisker derech halimud. (unfortunately I don't remember to whom it DOES refer to).
B. If I remember correctly "the heilike chofetz chaim" invited the Ranat to head the Yeshiva in Radin.
3. It is not at all universalyy acknowledged that the Brisker derech was developed as a response to haskalah. It certainly served as a response, and a good one at that, but that wasn't rev chaims intent and motivation to develop the derech.
Schneur
ReplyDelete"Did the Hungarians have a new derech in learning? How different was the derech in Hungary then lets say the derech in Galicia and Ukraine (yes people and bachurim studied there too) ?"
yes, they definitely had a very flat (palachig)way of learning, and most of them that learned day and night, knew very little bekius and very weak.The Russian/Lithuanian even the non brisker were always more diligent then the Hungarians.
As an example take the Marcheshet who was against the new Brisker method of 2 dinim, was a great learner, his torah is clear and sharp.
At this discussion, Reb Chaim Sofer of Munkach/Pest should be mentioned,he went out of the box with his derech halimud, and according to some was criticized by his Rebbes
I guess that Hungary was a new frontier for torah and yiddishkiet, a little part of the masses were very god-fearing erliche laymen, but far from the vast and deep knowledge of the old torah centers of Poland, Russia and Lithuania.
Schneur
ReplyDelete"and the whole Chassidic world including Lubavitch did not accept the litvishe
(read Brisker) derech."
Lubavich after 1950 was aiming to learn close to the brisker method. The Rebbe was very for that style.
Schneur
ReplyDelete"By the way its almost universally acknowledged that the psychological and sociological reason for this shift in Lita was the haskalah."
It is nonsense, Reb Y Lebowitz from Woodridge is constantly harping on this theory.
Reb chaim did not come up with a new derech halimud to stop the kids from traveling to Berlin, his brain was wired that way..
Schneur
ReplyDelete"So in my opinion perhaps the manner in which my Satmarer friends express their opinions is primitive but what they say certainly has standing."
Satmar is very good to deliver fresh kosher meat,Kosher Kokosh Cake and good Kehila organizers,but have no talent for intelligence.
In their new Yeshiva in Queens they brought outside talent with brisker tendencies.It did not help much since the majority has no real learning interest,but they are facing it that the old Ungarishe derech halimud is not the future.
Blogger Hirshel Tzig - הירשל ציג said...
ReplyDeleteדבר אחד בטוח
the Chofetz Chaim didn't say "ענק"
וד"ל
The Zeitlin poem has a footnote that "etz" and "enk" was used by Poilisher yidden
See התקשרות 901-902 which shows the LR was all in favor of the brisker derech
ReplyDeleteright, JJJ, by Poylisher Yidden, not the CC
ReplyDeleteIIANM, that story about RMB Weissmandl appears in his grandson's sefer Ish Chamudos.
ReplyDeleteIf so, most of the material there is sourced
schneur said... ” So in my opinion perhaps the manner in which my Satmarer friends express their opinions is primitive but what they say certainly has standing.”
ReplyDeleteSchneur I appreciate your chronology of matters, which seems to me mostly correct.. SR z”l opinion on this so called litvish derech (although the satmere chasidim express it primitively) is correct he said it and wrote it on many occasions, also that the way they learn in litvish yeshivas (and most chasidishe) today was not and is not the original ‘litvish derech’ !
I was witness to a discussion by none other than the closes person to SR z”l his Rosh Yeshivah and מנהל הישיבה for many years when he said in the name of S”R z”l that he: מסופק אויב ר' חיים ברוסקער ז"ל האט יוצא גיווען די מצות לימוד התורה מיט דעם דרך הלימוד
Also note, in satmar yeshivous there is a big emphasis in learning shulcon oruch with all shitas from the reshonim till the acronim.. but in the list of achronim SR z”l took out the mishnah berurah and instead asked they learn shulcan orach harav.
anon said: "the Chofetz Chaim's prewar fame was not because of the Mishnah Berura it was only because his Shemiras haloshan campaign"
ReplyDeleteand his stand for the 'agudah' perhaps?
"Also note, in satmar yeshivous there is a big emphasis in learning shulcon oruch with all shitas from the reshonim till the acronim.. but in the list of achronim SR z”l took out the mishnah berurah and instead asked they learn shulcan orach harav."
ReplyDeletebogus. in satmare kollelim the limud is officially "tor shilchen urich mugen avruhom tire zuhov in mishne brireh".
So to whom is the Ridbaz refering to in his sharp criticism ? R. Reines he too was part
ReplyDeleteof the new analytic school.
Certainly to the new analytic school of study.
Take alook at Benisevei Radin and you will se that the appointment of the Ranat was not without controversy.If the CC was the force behind the appointment it was done because thats what the bachurim wanted. this was the popular derech.
Nothing will ever prove 100% that the Brisker school was formulated because of the haskalah(Zionism , Communism, Bundism, Folkism), but its a good guess that is why it was adopted by most if not all Litvishe yeshivoth at that time.
Yo'av Pearlman said... "bogus"
ReplyDeleteI did not refer to any kollelim of today which may or may not learn 'mishnah beriru' (which i think they should..) just to satmar yeshivah in brooklyn when the SR z"l was the rosh hayeshivah בחיים חיותו I know that as a un sisputible fact!
Anon
ReplyDelete"I was witness to a discussion by none other than the closes person to SR z”l his Rosh Yeshivah and מנהל הישיבה for many years when he said in the name of S”R z”l that he: מסופק אויב ר' חיים ברוסקער ז"ל האט יוצא גיווען די מצות לימוד התורה מיט דעם דרך הלימוד "
I know the person you are talking about, its Rabbi N J M, I am not denying that SR did not say it, but this gentleman in particular, is a infamous demagouge and forger.All the eldery guys that were Sands street talmidim were laughing off his soundbites in the name of SR. He had a personal agenda against the bucherim that were in to fine learning, he felt that his exsistence was weak with them around.
Anon
ReplyDelete"but in the list of achronim SR z”l took out the mishnah berurah and instead asked they learn shulcan orach harav."
this is sheer nonsense, untill 68,(the year the SR fell ill) the Mishne berura was not so famous (especialy in the US, Reb Moshe and Rav Henkin were Orech Hashulchon people) that he had to eliminate it from the curiculum, how old are you?
Yoav
ReplyDelete"in satmare kollelim the limud is officially"
not in the keap street kolel, all the others are most not even satmar talmidim, like bistritzky of BP
Yo'av Pearlman said: Bogus!
ReplyDeleteיואב ההרג proclaims "חותמו של הקדוש ברוך הוא אמת" therfore his (bs)'Science in Talmud' is emes to, what a leap in reality!
anon: "this gentleman in particular, is a infamous demagouge and forger"
ReplyDeleteinfamous to whom? if he was good enough to SR he is good enough!
"What's good for the goose is good for the gander,"
anon said: "he felt that his exsistence was weak with them around."
ReplyDeleteI feel your opinion is even weaker.
Anon
ReplyDelete, "that story about RMB Weissmandl appears in his grandson's sefer Ish Chamudos.
If so, most of the material there is sourced"
I assume the source is that Bachi from the nursing home
BTW,
ReplyDeletedid you ever ask Reb NJM if the SR said that Reb Mechel Lebowitz is the new shabsi tzvi?
anon declared: "this is sheer nonsense, untill 68,(the year the SR fell ill) the Mishne berura was not so famous"
ReplyDeletesorry buddy in that year there was one (famous set) in my house, so must have been one in SR house! he referes to it in the V'yoel M'oshe, eat your weeties.
anon: "the Mishne berura was not so famous that he had to eliminate it from the curiculum"
ReplyDeletehe did not 'elimnate' it just that it was never 'in' the curiculum, just like you admitt "(especialy in the US, Reb Moshe and Rav Henkin were Orech Hashulchon people)" read your sentences and 'mine' before you comment.
I was born and raised in willi,and never ever remembers that it was quoted by the More horoah in those years,
ReplyDeleteDid the Kapisher ruv quote it?
Did the Sharmasher Ruv quote it?
they were the dayanim for the satmar crowd,
The non Satmars went to Reb fishele herskowitz, and he never was in to mishna berura
Please dont argue, this are the facts....
Anonymous said... "did you ever ask Reb NJM if the SR said that Reb Mechel Lebowitz is the new shabsi tzvi?'
ReplyDeleteIDK what you're talking about, I didnt ask him who ML is or who you are either, it just doesn't matter to me.
anon: "Did the Kapisher ruv quote it?Did the Sharmasher Ruv quote it?
ReplyDeletethey were the dayanim for the satmar crowd,"
so was landsberger ruv and puper ruv z"l
tziki kedera said...
ReplyDelete"See התקשרות 901-902 which shows the LR was all in favor of the brisker derech"
The LR was a talmid from the רידב"ז who was against the brisker derech halimid are you saying he was a תלמיד המחכים ?
Anon
ReplyDelete"so was landsberger ruv and puper ruv z"l"
to be factual
the 2 were not dayanim for the masses.
the Pupar ruv was a machmir,the Landsberger was a weak possek, In matter of fact SR was very mad on his lack of darkei horoa...
Anon
ReplyDelete"The LR was a talmid from the רידב"ז "
nonsense
Anon said: "The LR was a talmid from the Ridvaz nonsense”
ReplyDeleteMy apology, I meant a talmid In Berlin of rabbi YY Weinberg (Seridei Eish) who apparantly was against the derech halimid of brisk.
anon: "In matter of fact SR was very mad on his lack of darkei horoa..."
ReplyDeletemaybe so but he was נתמנה by him to answer שאלות for the averichem in those days.
Anon
ReplyDelete"maybe so but he was נתמנה by him to answer שאלות for the averichem in those days."
there was a certain pesak of his that got the Sr mad....no reason to refresh it.
hirshel asks: "וואס ליגט אין די קרית יואל'ער וואסער "
ReplyDeleteH2O, two hydrogen atoms "stuck" to an Oxygen atom
you're sure it's only 2 hydrogen atoms? it seems like there's alot more "gas" there...
ReplyDeleteThe filtration of the Bies Haschita Hamehuderes, obviously is not working too well, and alot of Chicken manure seeps in the KJ water source
ReplyDeleteHirshel: "it seems like there's alot more "gas" there..."
ReplyDeleteThe seemingly gas issue there are more from the culent שנתבשל או שלא נתבשל כל צרכו However the perceived gas in the water is only gas bubbles (like in Saratoga water) which is actually helpful but maybe in short supply in KJ
anon: "alot of Chicken manure seeps in the KJ water source"
ReplyDeleteצואת עוף אם יש בהם ריח רע הרי הם כצואת אדם, ואם אין בהם ריח רע מותר .... אע"ג דריחן קשה אין להם דין צואה ואין צריך להתרחק מהם
I've heard that the Soloveichicks would flip if someone mentioned Ridvaz.
ReplyDeleteSeems they understood him to be referring to their ancestor...
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"I've heard that the Soloveichicks would flip if someone mentioned Ridvaz."
Some flip on... but flip can flop like inhale-exhale!
“How many times does the MB quote hungarian poskim (that realy know how to learn)”
ReplyDeleteHe quotes the Machena Chaim! In fact that is (as far as I know) the latest Sefer he quotes. Although said quote is a bunch of curses etc, at which Hungarian excel, so who know?
“At this discussion, Reb Chaim Sofer of Munkach/Pest should be mentioned,he went out of the box with his derech halimud, and according to some was criticized by his Rebbes”
Any source for this?
Twistleton
ReplyDeletetnx for your info
Rabbi Lebowitz of Woodridge claims that the Satmar Ruv said that the CS was against his Derech Halimud,
it is printed in a book on the Lichtenstien family
"Rabbi Lebowitz of Woodridge claims that the Satmar Ruv said that the CS was against his Derech Halimud"
ReplyDeleteHard to imagine. He was rather young (like 18) when the CS was nifter
"it is printed in a book on the Lichtenstien family"
Where and which please?
Twistleton
ReplyDeleteI always had the same feeling that you are correct, I had the same questions on the story and I think he was much younger by the CS petirah then 18,
I think he was a Yelid Pressburgh and his father was already a talmud of the Cs, he is from the same family of the Likutie Chover Ben Chaim, that wrote must of the customs of the CS,so they knew that lad but not his derech halimud.
I heard rumors that the CS family did not like the Machne Chaim because he left the Pressburgher yeshivah after the CS Petirah to go to Reb Chaim Hersh Mainhiemer and to the Sharie Torah, they were all considered bigger lomdim then the Kesav Sofer.Eventough his Derech Haliimud is the opposite then those 2, but it is a different subject what his attraction was to them.He also comes across disrespectful to the Kesav Sofer by the famous tielung saga, if you read Yankel Katzes book on this subject.
If am not mistaking the Lichtenstien sefer is Avnie Oir