Firstly , thank you for finally putting out that not all Chareidim fall under 1 umbrella. Secondly I think you could maybe learn from this disagreement how to respectfully disagree with other Rabbonim instead of being downright condescending. It would do a great deal for your reputation amongst those you speak against.
Took the words out of my mouth. The only thing this post shows is what we've known forever, viz, that there is healthy and robust diversity of opinion amongst שומרי תורה ומצות. The intolerance of NS, who says קבלו דעתי, that only my way is right, is not authentic Torah Judaism.
When these rabbis respect rabbis who think differently, quote them and express a reasonable reservation then they will be worthy of respect. When they do not behave like this, then their Torah is not the Torah of Moses ho was, "עָנָיו מְאֹד מִכֹּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה", but the Torah of Balaam "אֲשֶׁר מַחֲזֵה שַׁדַּי יֶחֱזֶה נֹפֵל וּגְלוּי עֵינָיִם" and they know directly from God who is to be cursed. Indeed, that rabbi did what God forbade Balaam, "וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם... לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא"
"When these rabbis respect rabbis who think differently, quote them and express a reasonable reservation then they will be worthy of respect." Do you have a Torah source for this positionas well ? Seriously. Because you are being no better than them? The rest of the comment is an incredibly vile accusation. I urge you to reconsider.
the Kozker: דרך ארץ הוא הקדמה לתורה, כמו בהקדמת הספר יוכל אדם לידע מהות הספר כמו כן ניכר מתוך התנהגות דרך ארץ של האדם מהות תורתו". ('שיח שרפי קודש' חלק א' אות שי ;'אמת ואמונה', מהדורת תשפ"א
This means that a person's teachings are at the level that he respects the other. Since this rabbi has zero respect for anyone whose view is not Agudaic, then his teachings are zero. Therefore, he should be treated like any person who is not the most pleasant.
"The response of the American charedi Gedolei Torah to the March for Israel rally... created a lot of upset."
"Rav Aharon Feldman’s infamous letter "
"it makes rabbis and the Judaism that they represent look ridiculous."
"Subsequently, R. Whitman released another recording, very long and repetitive, in which he tries to save himself from the backlash that occurred after his first talk"
======
From Page 11 of R Eiseman's article: "However, by Wednesday, people started (most were not even present at the Event) to quote to me that so and so said not to go, and the "WhatsApp" recordings were alive and viral with claims and counterclaims condemning and condoning the Event- and suddenly, the end of that sentence crept into my mind. "Halo L'Mishma Ozen Da'Ava Nafsheinu"- "The words my ears now hear cause my soul to be distressed and pained." The "hok", the tumult, the accusations, and counter-accusations had begun in earnest. With all the post-event tumult, I felt that nothing was gained and much was lost. I took ill on Wednesday and crept alone with my thoughts into my bed. Yet, respite from the "fallout" was not to be. The Frum world seemed more consumed with the latest developments on the tumult on Yeshiva World News than with the hostages' plight. What was a day of connecting with fellow Jews had become a tumult of "my Rebbe said this, and your Rebbe said that."
Suddenly, the hostages no longer mattered.
The murdered Jews no longer mattered.
All that mattered was the "hok," the tumult, the gossip.
Right. It turns out that being a non-bitter non-ex-charedi allows one to write a lengthy article arguing against an approach without coming off as a guy who can't stop writing about the demise of kollel, about how charedim are an existential threat to the state of Israel, and about how charedim are hypocrites for hiring an exterminator to deal with a rat infestation. Who'da thunk?
Come to think of it, it's probably even possible for a non-bitter non-ex-charedi to praise hesder yeshivos without feeling the need to include the grotesque claim that charedi yeshivos 'essentially teach selfishness.' https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/a-tale-of-two-tefillin-bags
There are other rabbi's that were pro rally. There is a Rav of a very large Shul in Flatbush who told his kehila to go and went himself. On the bus on the way there the news from the Moetzes Gedolim his first step was to announce to the bus that he disagreed. If anyone feels uncomfortable it is on his (the rav's) head. Next, he called Rav Brudney and got him to issue a partial retraction. (If you already left it's ok) Unfortunately, this Rav got push-back and requested his name not be made public because he does not want to deal with the fallout. Which is a shame. Very likely there are others as well.
The Moetzes never put out a statement against the rally. Four (out of thirteen, I believe) put out their own private letter not to go. That should have no effect on anyone who does not consider himself to be a follower of those rabbis.
Back when I was a senior at MTA (YU's boys' high school), our rebbe (who had additional responsibilities as a dean of one of YU's graduate schools) would be out once a week and a semikha student named David Hirsch would substitute. (R' Hirsch is now a YU rosh yeshiva himself.) So one day we were learning- I recall it was hilkhot aveilut- and R' Hirsch casually said, "Rav Soloveitchik holds..." etc.
A week later, R' Hirsch said, in relation to something related, "Rav Chaim says..." etc.
"But rebbe!" we called out. "Last week you said the Rav said X, and it's the opposite view if you think about it!"
"Nu, so the Rav argues with R' Chaim."
"But he's his own *grandfather*!"
"Well, R' Chaim is an Acharon and the Rav is an Acharon."
That blew me away at the time. Growing up, we were of course taught the whole "An Amora doesn't argue on a Tanna, a Gaon doesn't argue on an Amora, etc." formula. (Of course, that's not really true itself, but leave that aside.) But we had a hard time thinking that we weren't living in our own era. The Torah Umesorah chart on the wall of Acharonim ended with the Chafetz Chaim, and we thought we were in something new. (This is hardly limited to Judaism- for example, technologically we're still technically in the Iron Age but no one thinks we are, and I can think of other examples.)
But no: We're still in the era of Acharonim. (Indeed, if the past is anything to go by, the era will probably have been over for centuries before we recognize that fact.) A modern posek has a "right" to argue with, say, the Vilna Gaon. He will, if he's any good, do so only very carefully and respectfully and only if he's sure of himself, but he has the *right*.
Now, obviously, we're not all Rav Soloveitchiks that we can casually argue a halakhic point with R' Chaim. (Although R' Schachter often talks of the obligation of people who are convinced they correct to argue even with such gedolim. Then again, he may be speaking from *his* perspective.) But you know what? Lots of non-gedolim out there have a good practical knowledge of the Jewish people, of Israel, of Zionism, and so on far above the level of the "gedolim." And I'll take their word first.
When Chabad publishes books breathlessly describing how Israeli politicians consulted with the Rebbe on military and political matters, I'm not encouraged. (I also don't really believe they're true, but let's say they are.) I don't *want* that happening. When people speak in awe about how R' Soloveitchik demanded an official inquiry into Sabra and Shatilla, ditto. Not his call, no, and not his place.
I hear your last point, although I'm not sure how it's connected to your first point. But I disagree strongly. Since our nation is a Torah nation first and foremost, you really do want to consult with Torah leaders on matters of national importance. It is their call and is their place. Otherwise you are saying Torah is confined to the realm of individuals and has no significance to national concerns, which I believe is self evidently false.
Sorry if my point wasn't clear: It was that people are overly cautious in arguing on halakhic matters (or, to be clear, overly cautious in whether *actual gedolim* can so argue); kal v'chomer their caution for non-halakhic matters is even more undeserved.
And no, it's no "self-evident". If a doctor tells you there are two courses of treatment and you should get a second opinion, do you ask a medical professional or a rav? Should the IDF Chief of Staff be asking his rabbanim how to fight this war?
Thanks for the further explanation. Maybe I misunderstood you but it sounded like you were claiming that there is no place to for da'as Torah regarding national political or military issues. That's what I was saying was self evidently not true, and would be relegation of the Torah to the private realm, which would be the opposite of Zionism. I agree that there is no need to consult rabbanim regarding how to treat a sickness or plan a battle in most case
Reading these last few posts of yours -- I come away with the idea that charedim are simply an embattled group, mainly in Israel. Like almost any embattled group, they bristle at criticism. They rebuff anyone condemning for being insincere, or self serving.
I am an American, and this reminds me a bit of groups here that feel embattled. Black Americans, and lately, Jewish Americans.
Because I am a free speech maximalist, I enjoy your take on the topics you cover. I think it a powerful and trenchant critique - your take on charedi narratives -- which simply put, are designed to serve the group. I've never been much of a group think type or a conformist - so I generally don't want to see critics squelched, period.
Living in NYC, I find it amazing how important it has become to quash criticisms of Israel, and even of Jews.
Let it be known: I am very Zionistic! I believe Palestinians should be sent packing, for better futures in a dozen other countries. Like all refugees before them. I think Gaza and the WB should be cleared of Palestinians! Like 100 million refugees after WWII, they should be resettled, never to return.
But, I have zero problem with people finding Israel the villain, or Jews the villain. Touching a hair on a Jew's head is a police matter - but almost all speech is constitutionally protected.
Don't let the squirts that squirm when you criticize them influence you. You have a right to see things as you see them. So do they. Let free speech open doors to better conversations. They almost always follow the wild howling and bellowing that immediately follow tragic dates like 10/7.
Not the same. I would compare to politics. Like how the left thrives on the week points of the left and how the left thrives on the week points of the right. Some things are black on white wrong like mein kamft but most things are not
No the maala of this blog is seeing the negatives. This is the only place where you can find the issues spoken loud and clear - which has its importance. But you always leave or the other half of the story. You never explain the root of the culture and subculture which explains a whole lot more than the points you cherry pick (not necessarily wrongly). Context is a huge party of the story.
Barry here, clearly getting the wrong impression, sees only what you present.
I have haredi family - here and in Israel. I love seeing them, but many many points of view are simply not welcome around them. It’s not an open forum for free discussion, that is for sure.
I wouldn't wanna talk to you either by a shabbos table about many subjects which I am perfectly comfortable discussing with friends or in this blogosphere. I have very close irreligious relatives who I wouldn't discuss these things with ever
shabbos tables are contextually not the place for open discussions, I would agree. I have studied mass movements - they cannot tolerate open discussions, generally. One of the most interesting features of a free society is it thrives on and guarantees our "G-d given" natural right to free speech. It's a place of open inquiry, of emmes, not "EMMES (TM)," the religious version...not "cherem," and "apikorsos." Those lovely nuggets are the domain of all organized religions claiming "TRUTH (TM)"....it's a paradox...
Rabbi Slifkin, on Yeshiva World one sees a diversity of viewpoints in the chareidi world on many subjects, including this very rally, without the distorted lense of resentment and enmity that seemingly clouds this blog.
I agree with slifkin here to a large extent. Yeshiva world, mishpacha etc are strongly one sided
I always say that the liberal has the liberty to point out the flaws without concern for destroying the entire system. We can usually only get the unadulterated version of criticisms from the outsider
But there were a whole bunch of YW articles highlighting the rally in a positive way, as well as articles about the kol korei. That is what diversity looks like. Not endless articles condemning the chareidim or the Gedolim.
Im a NY secular Jew whose entire immediate family are Biden supporters, and whose high school friends are all life long Democrats, and very involved with Democrat politics, including professionally. My oldest friend was a top aide to a Dem US VP at one time. I'm probably decades older than you....
You could list an entire page of credentials. But if you think fox news is enough to learn the other side, that says as whole lot more than they entire resume, brother
I also read The NY Times and watch left wing commentators on YouTube. I’m a free speech maximalist - a Zionist who thinks it’s okay for Palestinian students to bark out “from the river to the sea,” even though I find it offensive.
At the end of the day, youre thankfully raising your kids in an environment where they never heard of Rav Aharon Feldman or even of Rav Aharon kotler (in my yeshiva they havent got a clue). Names like Rav Shach dont mean much to most Israelis. Just leave be. Ignoration is the best medication. This obsession is unique to ppl close enough to the chareidi world as to view them as a big deal. The quicker they realize that nobody is forcing them to conform the quicker theyll be to join כלל ישראל.
Why is there already a trend of chareidim already opening up? Read the website צריך עיון. It seems quite revolutionary. The old narrative of being a persecuted minority dosent hold water anymore. Now the left feels like theyre under attack!
For the public: many, many people feel this way and while obviously it is in no way as reason to change communities - we're still the best there is - but hopefully more insiders will wake up and figure out how to fix these glaring issues
Whilst I very much appreciate Rabbi Whitman and his Torah, I think it is important to point that to the best of my knowledge he is not a Maggid Shiur in the Mir. He gives the Shiur in his apartment and I do not believe his Shiur was ever officially registered in the Mir (or at least since I heard about it). I was in his Shiur for a brief period and during that period the Rosh Yeshivah specifically tried to force the Shiur away from the Mir (not allowing seats in the Beis HaMedrash etc); famously he gives Shiur from his smartphone - something which obviously isn't accepted in the Mir and for many years now he has been sending emails and speaking out vigorously against the Charedi community.
Just to re-iterate I have much respect for Rabbi Whitman and he is undoubtedly a major Talmid Chacham, however I just wanted to clarify that this is not a case of an insider speaking out, but rather something already on the outside speaking out.
Incorrect. He is a regular chareidi person regardless of if he actually has an official position in the mir. It may not be as prestigious as if an official magid shiur would've spoken out but he is a chareidi speaking out, not an outsider. Don't conflate his alleged smart phone ownership to now label him as an outsider
The second, longer recording of Rabbi Whitman is extremely important (especially towards the end in which he differentiates between Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz And Rav Berl Soloveichick in their disagreement) in understanding Chareidi controversies, and what the real Mesores Yeshivos is. Thanks for sharing.
If no one has mentioned it yet. Rav R.Y. Eisenman does not even seem to be Charedi. His essay was very erudite and I began to wonder about his background. His main Smicha is from YU and Rav Lichtenstein at Har Etzion. Certainly not Charedi institutions. I have vistited Ahavas Yisrael a few times. It has Charedi members; but it also has a very large contingent of centrist Orthodox members. And I'd also be willing to bet it has a few families that are Open-Orthodox. It's very much a big tent schul.
Good point. It looks like the Rabbi understated matters quite a bit when he wrote that Rabbi Eisenmann is "far from mainstream in the American charedi world". Nevertheless, it is a testament to the open-mindedness of the American chareidi community that Rabbi Eisenmann, with his background, is a considered a valued voice in the primary chareidi publication, the Mishpacha.
Reading comments, about how criticism works in Orthodox Judaism - what is permissible criticism, what is forbidden - I am reminded of a Mormon I know. I did some business with him, not knowing him at all. We got to talking. He was a gay, very well off lawyer. He was young. He had a boyfriend at his law firm - they were thinking about marriage and children. He told me that it mattered to him to live near a major Mormon church, but then said he was no longer a Mormon. I asked why live near the biggest Mormon church in town? He said that all of his friends were still very active in the church. He had been raised Mormon in Utah, and many were in NYC now. I asked him if it was an issue that he was gay? He said it was not. Why? Because he LEFT the church. He did not try to criticize or change the church. His friendships would have been imperiled if he had done that. By leaving, he was "playing by" some unspoken set of rules. He could keep his friends, and they could keep him as a friend.
I don't think OJ plays by the precise same rules. I get the sense leaving is frowned upon, and may lead to social distancing. But, I can't help but see: all systems have as their prime directive the idea of survival. Every rule is built to sustain the system. Every one who abides the rules does so, perhaps unwittingly, because the system must continue.
Rules are what the Enlightenment called in to question. Freud came from another angle and called in to question our motives and drives. Jews were important to the advent of modernity. - they were unafraid to "lift the lid," in all areas. But, this kind of Jew - who thought outside the box - could destabilize and cause the system to crash.
The young Church of Mormon gets this. I think all mass movements and religions get this. I remember a character in Bonfire of the Vanities -- a Wasp - saying something about the way to keep Wasp culture in NYC? "Insulate, insulate, insulate..." It's a common theme.
Firstly , thank you for finally putting out that not all Chareidim fall under 1 umbrella. Secondly I think you could maybe learn from this disagreement how to respectfully disagree with other Rabbonim instead of being downright condescending. It would do a great deal for your reputation amongst those you speak against.
Took the words out of my mouth. The only thing this post shows is what we've known forever, viz, that there is healthy and robust diversity of opinion amongst שומרי תורה ומצות. The intolerance of NS, who says קבלו דעתי, that only my way is right, is not authentic Torah Judaism.
When these rabbis respect rabbis who think differently, quote them and express a reasonable reservation then they will be worthy of respect. When they do not behave like this, then their Torah is not the Torah of Moses ho was, "עָנָיו מְאֹד מִכֹּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה", but the Torah of Balaam "אֲשֶׁר מַחֲזֵה שַׁדַּי יֶחֱזֶה נֹפֵל וּגְלוּי עֵינָיִם" and they know directly from God who is to be cursed. Indeed, that rabbi did what God forbade Balaam, "וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם... לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא"
"When these rabbis respect rabbis who think differently, quote them and express a reasonable reservation then they will be worthy of respect." Do you have a Torah source for this positionas well ? Seriously. Because you are being no better than them? The rest of the comment is an incredibly vile accusation. I urge you to reconsider.
the Kozker: דרך ארץ הוא הקדמה לתורה, כמו בהקדמת הספר יוכל אדם לידע מהות הספר כמו כן ניכר מתוך התנהגות דרך ארץ של האדם מהות תורתו". ('שיח שרפי קודש' חלק א' אות שי ;'אמת ואמונה', מהדורת תשפ"א
That says nothing about respecting someone only if you are respected in return .
This means that a person's teachings are at the level that he respects the other. Since this rabbi has zero respect for anyone whose view is not Agudaic, then his teachings are zero. Therefore, he should be treated like any person who is not the most pleasant.
Which Rabbi are you referring to that has zero respect for any rabbi hose view is not Agudaic?
"Therefore, he should be treated like any person who is not the most pleasant" where exactly do you see that last point??
Quotes from this post:
"The response of the American charedi Gedolei Torah to the March for Israel rally... created a lot of upset."
"Rav Aharon Feldman’s infamous letter "
"it makes rabbis and the Judaism that they represent look ridiculous."
"Subsequently, R. Whitman released another recording, very long and repetitive, in which he tries to save himself from the backlash that occurred after his first talk"
======
From Page 11 of R Eiseman's article: "However, by Wednesday, people started (most were not even present at the Event) to quote to me that so and so said not to go, and the "WhatsApp" recordings were alive and viral with claims and counterclaims condemning and condoning the Event- and suddenly, the end of that sentence crept into my mind. "Halo L'Mishma Ozen Da'Ava Nafsheinu"- "The words my ears now hear cause my soul to be distressed and pained." The "hok", the tumult, the accusations, and counter-accusations had begun in earnest. With all the post-event tumult, I felt that nothing was gained and much was lost. I took ill on Wednesday and crept alone with my thoughts into my bed. Yet, respite from the "fallout" was not to be. The Frum world seemed more consumed with the latest developments on the tumult on Yeshiva World News than with the hostages' plight. What was a day of connecting with fellow Jews had become a tumult of "my Rebbe said this, and your Rebbe said that."
Suddenly, the hostages no longer mattered.
The murdered Jews no longer mattered.
All that mattered was the "hok," the tumult, the gossip.
And that made me sick, lonely, and frightened."
And yet, he wrote a long article to condemn and refute Rav Feldman's approach.
Right. It turns out that being a non-bitter non-ex-charedi allows one to write a lengthy article arguing against an approach without coming off as a guy who can't stop writing about the demise of kollel, about how charedim are an existential threat to the state of Israel, and about how charedim are hypocrites for hiring an exterminator to deal with a rat infestation. Who'da thunk?
Come to think of it, it's probably even possible for a non-bitter non-ex-charedi to praise hesder yeshivos without feeling the need to include the grotesque claim that charedi yeshivos 'essentially teach selfishness.' https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/a-tale-of-two-tefillin-bags
Well said, bravo!
What happened to your allowance?
There are other rabbi's that were pro rally. There is a Rav of a very large Shul in Flatbush who told his kehila to go and went himself. On the bus on the way there the news from the Moetzes Gedolim his first step was to announce to the bus that he disagreed. If anyone feels uncomfortable it is on his (the rav's) head. Next, he called Rav Brudney and got him to issue a partial retraction. (If you already left it's ok) Unfortunately, this Rav got push-back and requested his name not be made public because he does not want to deal with the fallout. Which is a shame. Very likely there are others as well.
The Moetzes never put out a statement against the rally. Four (out of thirteen, I believe) put out their own private letter not to go. That should have no effect on anyone who does not consider himself to be a follower of those rabbis.
Many others
Back when I was a senior at MTA (YU's boys' high school), our rebbe (who had additional responsibilities as a dean of one of YU's graduate schools) would be out once a week and a semikha student named David Hirsch would substitute. (R' Hirsch is now a YU rosh yeshiva himself.) So one day we were learning- I recall it was hilkhot aveilut- and R' Hirsch casually said, "Rav Soloveitchik holds..." etc.
A week later, R' Hirsch said, in relation to something related, "Rav Chaim says..." etc.
"But rebbe!" we called out. "Last week you said the Rav said X, and it's the opposite view if you think about it!"
"Nu, so the Rav argues with R' Chaim."
"But he's his own *grandfather*!"
"Well, R' Chaim is an Acharon and the Rav is an Acharon."
That blew me away at the time. Growing up, we were of course taught the whole "An Amora doesn't argue on a Tanna, a Gaon doesn't argue on an Amora, etc." formula. (Of course, that's not really true itself, but leave that aside.) But we had a hard time thinking that we weren't living in our own era. The Torah Umesorah chart on the wall of Acharonim ended with the Chafetz Chaim, and we thought we were in something new. (This is hardly limited to Judaism- for example, technologically we're still technically in the Iron Age but no one thinks we are, and I can think of other examples.)
But no: We're still in the era of Acharonim. (Indeed, if the past is anything to go by, the era will probably have been over for centuries before we recognize that fact.) A modern posek has a "right" to argue with, say, the Vilna Gaon. He will, if he's any good, do so only very carefully and respectfully and only if he's sure of himself, but he has the *right*.
Now, obviously, we're not all Rav Soloveitchiks that we can casually argue a halakhic point with R' Chaim. (Although R' Schachter often talks of the obligation of people who are convinced they correct to argue even with such gedolim. Then again, he may be speaking from *his* perspective.) But you know what? Lots of non-gedolim out there have a good practical knowledge of the Jewish people, of Israel, of Zionism, and so on far above the level of the "gedolim." And I'll take their word first.
When Chabad publishes books breathlessly describing how Israeli politicians consulted with the Rebbe on military and political matters, I'm not encouraged. (I also don't really believe they're true, but let's say they are.) I don't *want* that happening. When people speak in awe about how R' Soloveitchik demanded an official inquiry into Sabra and Shatilla, ditto. Not his call, no, and not his place.
I hear your last point, although I'm not sure how it's connected to your first point. But I disagree strongly. Since our nation is a Torah nation first and foremost, you really do want to consult with Torah leaders on matters of national importance. It is their call and is their place. Otherwise you are saying Torah is confined to the realm of individuals and has no significance to national concerns, which I believe is self evidently false.
Sorry if my point wasn't clear: It was that people are overly cautious in arguing on halakhic matters (or, to be clear, overly cautious in whether *actual gedolim* can so argue); kal v'chomer their caution for non-halakhic matters is even more undeserved.
And no, it's no "self-evident". If a doctor tells you there are two courses of treatment and you should get a second opinion, do you ask a medical professional or a rav? Should the IDF Chief of Staff be asking his rabbanim how to fight this war?
Thanks for the further explanation. Maybe I misunderstood you but it sounded like you were claiming that there is no place to for da'as Torah regarding national political or military issues. That's what I was saying was self evidently not true, and would be relegation of the Torah to the private realm, which would be the opposite of Zionism. I agree that there is no need to consult rabbanim regarding how to treat a sickness or plan a battle in most case
"National political or military issues" takes in a lot. That's not really what I was referring to.
Reading these last few posts of yours -- I come away with the idea that charedim are simply an embattled group, mainly in Israel. Like almost any embattled group, they bristle at criticism. They rebuff anyone condemning for being insincere, or self serving.
I am an American, and this reminds me a bit of groups here that feel embattled. Black Americans, and lately, Jewish Americans.
Because I am a free speech maximalist, I enjoy your take on the topics you cover. I think it a powerful and trenchant critique - your take on charedi narratives -- which simply put, are designed to serve the group. I've never been much of a group think type or a conformist - so I generally don't want to see critics squelched, period.
Living in NYC, I find it amazing how important it has become to quash criticisms of Israel, and even of Jews.
Let it be known: I am very Zionistic! I believe Palestinians should be sent packing, for better futures in a dozen other countries. Like all refugees before them. I think Gaza and the WB should be cleared of Palestinians! Like 100 million refugees after WWII, they should be resettled, never to return.
But, I have zero problem with people finding Israel the villain, or Jews the villain. Touching a hair on a Jew's head is a police matter - but almost all speech is constitutionally protected.
Don't let the squirts that squirm when you criticize them influence you. You have a right to see things as you see them. So do they. Let free speech open doors to better conversations. They almost always follow the wild howling and bellowing that immediately follow tragic dates like 10/7.
Dude, learning about chareidim from reading slifkin's blog is like learning a leftie position from fox news.
Actually, this is pretty much the only place where you can find out about all viewpoints in the charedi world.
Here and mein Kampf.
(User was BANNED for this comment. The truth hurts).
Not the same. I would compare to politics. Like how the left thrives on the week points of the left and how the left thrives on the week points of the right. Some things are black on white wrong like mein kamft but most things are not
Have you ever read Mein Kampf? He was also exploiting weak points of the Jews, exactly like our good Doctor does for a living. Everything is politics.
Not quite getting the difference. (Other than the fact that Doctor Natan is not calling for genocide).
Extreme comparisons lose credibility even if you can explain the similarities
No the maala of this blog is seeing the negatives. This is the only place where you can find the issues spoken loud and clear - which has its importance. But you always leave or the other half of the story. You never explain the root of the culture and subculture which explains a whole lot more than the points you cherry pick (not necessarily wrongly). Context is a huge party of the story.
Barry here, clearly getting the wrong impression, sees only what you present.
I have haredi family - here and in Israel. I love seeing them, but many many points of view are simply not welcome around them. It’s not an open forum for free discussion, that is for sure.
I wouldn't wanna talk to you either by a shabbos table about many subjects which I am perfectly comfortable discussing with friends or in this blogosphere. I have very close irreligious relatives who I wouldn't discuss these things with ever
shabbos tables are contextually not the place for open discussions, I would agree. I have studied mass movements - they cannot tolerate open discussions, generally. One of the most interesting features of a free society is it thrives on and guarantees our "G-d given" natural right to free speech. It's a place of open inquiry, of emmes, not "EMMES (TM)," the religious version...not "cherem," and "apikorsos." Those lovely nuggets are the domain of all organized religions claiming "TRUTH (TM)"....it's a paradox...
Rabbi Slifkin, on Yeshiva World one sees a diversity of viewpoints in the chareidi world on many subjects, including this very rally, without the distorted lense of resentment and enmity that seemingly clouds this blog.
Nowhere near as much diversity as you see here.
Well, if you continue banning your most articulate critics, you can't really claim fair diversity.
I agree with slifkin here to a large extent. Yeshiva world, mishpacha etc are strongly one sided
I always say that the liberal has the liberty to point out the flaws without concern for destroying the entire system. We can usually only get the unadulterated version of criticisms from the outsider
But there were a whole bunch of YW articles highlighting the rally in a positive way, as well as articles about the kol korei. That is what diversity looks like. Not endless articles condemning the chareidim or the Gedolim.
It never called out a flaw
Exactly, just what I was thinking
I think Fox does ok with Lefties. Not perfect, mind you. But they have a few on even (and have an open invitation for more, which is admirable.)
That shows how much you know about leftie positions
Im a NY secular Jew whose entire immediate family are Biden supporters, and whose high school friends are all life long Democrats, and very involved with Democrat politics, including professionally. My oldest friend was a top aide to a Dem US VP at one time. I'm probably decades older than you....
You could list an entire page of credentials. But if you think fox news is enough to learn the other side, that says as whole lot more than they entire resume, brother
Today I read an article in The Nation, by an Arab lawyer in Israel: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/harvard-law-review-gaza-israel-genocide/
I also read The NY Times and watch left wing commentators on YouTube. I’m a free speech maximalist - a Zionist who thinks it’s okay for Palestinian students to bark out “from the river to the sea,” even though I find it offensive.
"Zionist," please.
you are still worried what the players in the team you weren't allowed to join are thinking.
leave them alone and concentrate on learning.
what these people think or do is their problem not yours
It's everyone's problem. We have to do what we can to change it.
Writing endless nasty unconstructive posts will only have an adverse effect.
It does keep him busy though while business at the museum is slow.
He probably never learned how to play tic-tac-to, so this is the only thing he can do to keep himself busy.
He took numerous lessons in tic-tac-toe, but eventually he gave up and realized it just wasn't for him.
At the end of the day, youre thankfully raising your kids in an environment where they never heard of Rav Aharon Feldman or even of Rav Aharon kotler (in my yeshiva they havent got a clue). Names like Rav Shach dont mean much to most Israelis. Just leave be. Ignoration is the best medication. This obsession is unique to ppl close enough to the chareidi world as to view them as a big deal. The quicker they realize that nobody is forcing them to conform the quicker theyll be to join כלל ישראל.
The Chareidim would absolutely love if you left them alone.
Not just that. Leaving them alone would have Natans desired affect. They open up when theyre not threatened.
I dint think itll go that far
Why is there already a trend of chareidim already opening up? Read the website צריך עיון. It seems quite revolutionary. The old narrative of being a persecuted minority dosent hold water anymore. Now the left feels like theyre under attack!
Knock knock:
Who's there?
Natan.
Natan who?
Natan Slifkin! haha
get it? Because hes a joke, but he's not funny
(Official troll account. Mushroom calzone)
Thank you reb beryl for expressing my thoughts.
For the public: many, many people feel this way and while obviously it is in no way as reason to change communities - we're still the best there is - but hopefully more insiders will wake up and figure out how to fix these glaring issues
Whilst I very much appreciate Rabbi Whitman and his Torah, I think it is important to point that to the best of my knowledge he is not a Maggid Shiur in the Mir. He gives the Shiur in his apartment and I do not believe his Shiur was ever officially registered in the Mir (or at least since I heard about it). I was in his Shiur for a brief period and during that period the Rosh Yeshivah specifically tried to force the Shiur away from the Mir (not allowing seats in the Beis HaMedrash etc); famously he gives Shiur from his smartphone - something which obviously isn't accepted in the Mir and for many years now he has been sending emails and speaking out vigorously against the Charedi community.
Just to re-iterate I have much respect for Rabbi Whitman and he is undoubtedly a major Talmid Chacham, however I just wanted to clarify that this is not a case of an insider speaking out, but rather something already on the outside speaking out.
Incorrect. He is a regular chareidi person regardless of if he actually has an official position in the mir. It may not be as prestigious as if an official magid shiur would've spoken out but he is a chareidi speaking out, not an outsider. Don't conflate his alleged smart phone ownership to now label him as an outsider
If I see another post about this, I'm goin' bananas!
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/to-go-or-not-to-go-that-is-the-question
The second, longer recording of Rabbi Whitman is extremely important (especially towards the end in which he differentiates between Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz And Rav Berl Soloveichick in their disagreement) in understanding Chareidi controversies, and what the real Mesores Yeshivos is. Thanks for sharing.
If no one has mentioned it yet. Rav R.Y. Eisenman does not even seem to be Charedi. His essay was very erudite and I began to wonder about his background. His main Smicha is from YU and Rav Lichtenstein at Har Etzion. Certainly not Charedi institutions. I have vistited Ahavas Yisrael a few times. It has Charedi members; but it also has a very large contingent of centrist Orthodox members. And I'd also be willing to bet it has a few families that are Open-Orthodox. It's very much a big tent schul.
Good point. It looks like the Rabbi understated matters quite a bit when he wrote that Rabbi Eisenmann is "far from mainstream in the American charedi world". Nevertheless, it is a testament to the open-mindedness of the American chareidi community that Rabbi Eisenmann, with his background, is a considered a valued voice in the primary chareidi publication, the Mishpacha.
Reading comments, about how criticism works in Orthodox Judaism - what is permissible criticism, what is forbidden - I am reminded of a Mormon I know. I did some business with him, not knowing him at all. We got to talking. He was a gay, very well off lawyer. He was young. He had a boyfriend at his law firm - they were thinking about marriage and children. He told me that it mattered to him to live near a major Mormon church, but then said he was no longer a Mormon. I asked why live near the biggest Mormon church in town? He said that all of his friends were still very active in the church. He had been raised Mormon in Utah, and many were in NYC now. I asked him if it was an issue that he was gay? He said it was not. Why? Because he LEFT the church. He did not try to criticize or change the church. His friendships would have been imperiled if he had done that. By leaving, he was "playing by" some unspoken set of rules. He could keep his friends, and they could keep him as a friend.
I don't think OJ plays by the precise same rules. I get the sense leaving is frowned upon, and may lead to social distancing. But, I can't help but see: all systems have as their prime directive the idea of survival. Every rule is built to sustain the system. Every one who abides the rules does so, perhaps unwittingly, because the system must continue.
Rules are what the Enlightenment called in to question. Freud came from another angle and called in to question our motives and drives. Jews were important to the advent of modernity. - they were unafraid to "lift the lid," in all areas. But, this kind of Jew - who thought outside the box - could destabilize and cause the system to crash.
The young Church of Mormon gets this. I think all mass movements and religions get this. I remember a character in Bonfire of the Vanities -- a Wasp - saying something about the way to keep Wasp culture in NYC? "Insulate, insulate, insulate..." It's a common theme.
As a Mancunian, you might be interested to know that R Whitman is the step-son of Reb Lipa Rabinowitz z"l.
My brother married into his shul. :-)
My sentences r short and I write in parallel with learning.
All therapy is a complete waste of time.