Rolling Up Our Sleeves for Passover Preparation – A Response to Rabbi Haim Ovadia

You may also like...

137 Responses

  1. Chochom B'mah Nishtaneh says:

    Looking at Ovadia’s ‘article” in the Forvertz, it seems that there a re quite a bit of additional non kosher kashruth advice he is dispensing.

    I suspect that in his case the title of Rabbi he is using, is most certainly “Kosher Chazzer Feesil”

  2. JM says:

    This Rabbi is not a posek. He was kicked out of the Brooklyn Syrian community bec of his unorthodox practices. He is on record saying that if one doesnt keep any of the misvot like Shabbat, Kosher, family purity, one is still 90% observant if they are ethical, care for the environment, etc. See his conversation on You tube with shmuly Yanklowitz really shows C.O. true colors.

  3. dr. bill says:

    On a short trip to Israel for a family wedding, i again observed what is becoming an unstoppable and welcome future. in the US, the orthodox left is intellectually light, with a limited number of scholars/talmidei chachamim, and an oversupply of attention seekers, as illustrated.

    in Israel, brick by brick a new liberal traditional Judaism is quietly forming. 1) many significant scholars. 2) tolerance – a leading mesorati scholar lecturing at a modern orthodox synagogue, even i was surprised 3) accepted levels of feminism, the CR notwithstanding. 4) the integration of academic Talmud without fanfare.

    from where will go forward? i have little doubt.

    • rkz says:

      WADR, as I commented on a similar (not identical) comment that you posted on another thread, what you wrote is not correct. wrt to the situation in Israel.
      1) There are few significant scholars on the liberal side (the Rabbis associated with liberal viewpoints are usually halkhic lightweights or worse).
      2) An MO synagogue which has a C scholar, r”l, is b”h considered out of bounds.
      3) There is an ongoing struggle against the feminist attacks on derekh Hatorah and retzon Hashem (and the CR is a minor player is this issue, as in many others, for the well known reasons)
      4) Academic Talmud is accepted where it was accepted 20 years ago, not more and not less
      (I think that your connection with the Gush, which is certainly legitimate on the personal level, is having a certain skewing effect on your overall view of the situation here in Israel, i.e. a case of an honest but mistaken judgement)

      • mycroft says:

        “I think that your connection with the Gush, which is certainly legitimate on the personal level, is having a certain skewing effect on your overall view of the situation here in Israel,”
        An interesting comment which is relevant to all who quote facts on the ground or reality wo quoting studies. Meimad certainly had important gush people behind it, yet it did not receive a single seat.
        However, certainly much of South Jerusalem reflects what Dr Bill states, not merely Gush.
        RE your 1 must be careful about circular reasoning but in general there is IMO truth to what you say.
        Re 2 it would depend what the person was scholar in, if expertise modern Zionism no problem, but can see your point in general. i WOULD NOT WANT TO BE CATEGORICALLY OPPOSED .but in general for most C and most topics would agree
        State the attacks on dereck hatorah and ratzon hashem. What is or not.

        • rkz says:

          Mycroft, when I wrote the Gush I meant the shita the beit midrash the worldview and ideology, not the geographical location. (That’s the usual usage in Israel in this context). Some of Yerushalayim is ad Gush as Efrat.
          Wrt to attacks on derekh haTorah and retzon Hashem- semikha for women, pnas that lead to get meusa, divorce on demand, war against tzniut etc. etc.

      • dr. bill says:

        1) i am not in the habit of naming scholars to have folks on the blog have a field day on their reputations.
        2) as i walked by 2 days ago, the shul looked thriving. maybe the devil’s mirage at work,
        3) within the last few hours, at a frum wedding i attended, with a broad cross-section of Orthodox leaders and RY having various kibbudim (not one with known left-wing leanings,) the newly minted couple was addressed under the chuppah after the ketubah was read by a leading Israeli educator who was wearing a longish dress. Perhaps you can take up rabbi Gordimer’s American job; even with an army of assistants, you will be kept busy.
        4) wrong quantitatively by a large margin. just count the number of Ph.D.s and faculty. qualitatively, the growth is non-trivial. unlike the yeshiva world, where yeshivot can be opened by almost anyone who can find financial support, the academic world has better-defined and enforced standards in any number of critical areas.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          If you meet the academic worlds standards and dont disagree with their POV on any subject or issue you can write and decend your thesis which will be acceoted in that world. Whether it will be accepted in a Beis Medrash even in Gush remains a very problematic issue.

          • mycroft says:

            Of course, you certainly don’t advocate a Beis Midrash listening to people who don’t exactly accept their point of view. See eg your complaint of even a YU unit having James Kugel as a guest speaker

          • rkz says:

            Mycroft, in the yeshivot that I know here in Israel, there are different shittot on that issue, and there is no reason to mock the shitta (which is followed by many, perhaps most yeshivot) not to allow someone who is not part of the general derekh of traditional limmud torah to teach in a yeshiva (Some yeshivot are more makhmir on this issue)

          • mycroft says:

            “Mycroft, in the yeshivot that I know here in Israel, there are different shittot on that issue, and there is no reason to mock the shitta (which is followed by many, perhaps most yeshivot) not to allow someone who is not part of the general derekh of traditional limmud torah to teach in a yeshiva (Some yeshivot are more makhmir on this issue)’
            A yeshiva is trying to openly inculcate a certain viewpoint which I have no problem with. I was disagreeing with another poster who wrote” If you meet the academic worlds standards and dont disagree with their POV on any subject or issue you can write and decend your thesis which will be acceoted in that world”
            If one attacks academic world for supposedly not letting in viewpoints contrary to their beliefs and assumptions one should be honest and realize Yeshiva world does that even more.

        • rkz says:

          1) I did not refer to anyone by name, and I think that there is no reason to do so here.
          2) When I wrote “considered out of bounds”‘ I meant that it is considered by bnei Torah to be out of halakhic bounds. I am a well aware of the fact that there are many sincere people who do not know this, and make wrong choices. We all daven everyday that Hashem will lead us all in derekh hatshuva, kal had lefum darga dilie.
          3) I already wrote an article against such practices, which I linked to in the past. Barukh Hashem, there are many takmidei chahcamim, lead by gedoley Yisrael, that a leading this struggle here in Israel. There is no need for someone like me to do so. [BTW, Rabbi Gordomer deserves a big yasher koach (and certainly not derision) for spending so much of his precious time defending derekh hatorah.] I am certainly aware of the constant stream of baseless innovations hurled at derekh hatorah, but it does not change the emet of our mesorah.
          4) WADR, totally irrelevant. I was referring to your claim that in Isarel “the integration of academic Talmud without fanfare.” I understood that clause to mean “integration” in batei midrash, not the number of PHDs issued in the universities. To that, I responded that in the yeshivot (i.e. DL and Chardal yeshivot) there is no change in the last twenty years.

    • Bob Miller says:

      Earthly success and apparent waves of the future come and go. If you think you can make a convincing case that a group of Jews has a belief system conforming to the Will of HaShem, have at it.

      • dr. bill says:

        the emergence of a next-gen traditional form of Judaism is not an earthly success, but an important heavenly one.

        i mentioned to friends a few days ago that in the 12th and 13th century, the previous cross-currents that lived during the times of the rishonim 1) burnt rambam’s books for their obvious greek influence, 2) thought that the next version of esoteric teaching by ramban, raavad (secretly,) and rabbeinu yonah had minimal connection to more anthropomorphic esoteric teachings of the past, 3) were appalled by the rejection of mesorah implicit in changing the order of parshiot of one’s ancestor’s tefillin 4) bemoaned the obvious scientific influence on the writings of some chachemai Lunel and Provance. 5) etc.

        there were many gedolai Olam of that era who adopted more conservative stances cleaving closer to historical thinking and behavior. Their names are known primarily to scholars of medieval Jewish history.

        we have transformed our beliefs more than a few times. not surprisingly, those changing fundamental practice had a dismal track record. those updating our thought paradigms with relatively minor refinements to practice, all within reasonable halakhic boundaries, created a reinvigorated tradition that carried us forward. i find it hard to believe that the current intellectual rigidity and lifestyle of the Charedi world is a formula for future success as Adam I and perhaps not even Adam II.

    • Steve Brizel says:

      What would your rebbe ZL say about all of these developments if you mentioned them from tbis retrospective?

      • dr. bill says:

        as he advised on many such matters, nothing. his moderating influence is sorely missed in the US; in Israel, it was never an issue.

        • Mycroft says:

          Why I have maintained that the Aliyah of RAL in 1971 had Avery negative indirect impact in the US,. Since he left there was a vacuum which was filled to a great extent by people who would not have been able to take their non moderate positions as reflecting mesorah had he still been around.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Try thinking of what your rebbe would have said about such trends. We know from a shiur on gerus how RYBS viewed using external disciplines to the transmission and learning of TSBP.

          • mycroft says:

            Try thinking of the RYBS who insisted on addressing people outside of our machene politely. Think of a RYBS who typed a letter in English to a Conservative Rabbi rather than in Hebrew-in English had no problem writing Rabbi as title in Hebrew would have been forced to use Rav but would not have used insulting Hebrew Rabbi. Thus, typed the letter in English.
            Think of the Rav who even saw something positive in Rand C synagogues as Jewish Centres.

    • lacosta says:

      for numbers 1,2,3, and 4, kindly give specifics—names, places, individuals referred to

      • dr. bill says:

        why? so you can have a list to attack? i appreciate that the changes happening in Israel across the masorati, academic, liberal orthodox, etc. communities are growing without the angst, failings, and attacks present in the states. why disturb what is being accomplished.

        • rkz says:

          Please see my response above.

          • dr. bill says:

            i am pleased by your feeling “nothing to see here.” change has a way of creeping up on people, something that enhances its long-term impact. i could be wrong, but everything i am seeing makes me more confident.

  4. Chana Rachel says:

    R’ Ovadia’s suggestions appear to be far from the minimum requirements that I have ever seen suggested for pesach cleaning, but I must strongly disagree with the notion that pesach preparations must be painful to be authentic (“if cleaning is easy you are doing it wrong”). This is not only because it contradicts the entire concept of simchat Yom Tov, but because over zealousness in pesach preparations can cause real damage as well. What if -G-d forbid- your 110 year old great great grandmother had fallen from the ladder one year? The entire family narrative would have been different.
    People tend to go beyond what Halacha requires in pesach cleaning. That’s fine for a family with older children, including several teenage or young adult children home from Yeshiva. Everyone pitches in, and it all gets done.
    However, think of these other –not at all unusual– scenarios:

    The person who does most of the cleaning (PWDMOTC) is pregnant and on bedrest.
    The daughter of the PWDMOTC is pregnant on bedrest.
    The family had 5 kids under the age of 10, and the grandparents live in a different country, or aren’t in the peak of health.
    The PWDMOTC is undergoing chemo, or is taking care of someone undergoing chemo.
    The PWDMOTC broke his or her arm/leg..
    The PWDMOTC is taking care of elderly parents, and must prepare two households for pesach, and the parents have dementia and don’t quite understand why the child is messing with their kitchen. In addition, two of the TPWDMOTC’s grown children are pregnant, and one is on bedrest and the other due to give birth days before pesach

    These situations, and many others, are all common and normative, and probably apply to everyone at some point. Is the message that these people are all doing it wrong if they try to keep preparations as simple as possible within halachik bounds? Rather than wasting so much ink on the Rabbi Ovadia, I think it would be more helpful to provide a guide for pesach cleaning including mehudar, normative, and minimal acceptable standards.

    • Avrohom Gordimer says:

      You are correct that Pesach cleaning should not be tortuous and a resented burden. And for people who can’t do it with full vigor, there are numerous solutions. But at the same time, it has to be done halachically. Overdoing it is not good, for sure. Yet people should not be misled about what the halachic requirements are; that was my point here. (By the way, the title of my article as it appeared in the Forward was not chosen by me. I would not have used such a title, due to the message it can convey.)

    • Steve Brizel says:

      RCP Scheinberg ZL gave an annual shiur for women that emphasized that Pesach cleaning need not be confused with spring cleaning. I think it is available on line.

      • mycroft says:

        His brother and RAL used to give summer shiur at YU. They didn’t charge for it. One could even stay in dorm for free if attending shiur in summer, they charged for dorm if taking summer school.

      • mycroft says:

        I read some of what is represented to be from him. It is relatively easy if one “sells ” chametz. I personally have never sold chametz, I don’t own liquor. It would not be hefsed meruba for me to get rid of chametz. Months in advance we start monitoring chametz supply, few dollars worth left over we either give away or worse comes to worse put in fire department biur chametz erev Pesach.
        There are those who are big believers in mechiras chametz as practiced and those who are not. Debate goes back at least two centuries.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Whatever chametz gamur or bein we have that is open goes to the Sanitation Department. We also minimize having any unopened chametz gamur and try not rely on the mecirah except when necessary. I always give an address where keys are available. What I really want to do next year BEzras HaShem is be part of a good friend’s chabura who bake hand shmura matza.

          • mycroft says:

            We may be close in practice, we just don’t have much chametz. If I were in an area of hephsed meruba certainly for Chametz Drabbanan I’d accept heter. Note the Rav used mechira for chametz drabbanon only.
            FWIW I spent two years at Yeshiva studying Psachim amd remember being taught that if you have $25-$50 worth of chametz just get rid of it. That was dollars of half a century ago. We don’t have any valuable chametz and thus follow that tradition. FWIW my family advice was always similar unless one is in of hefsed merubah don’t consider it.
            Obviously, there are those who don’t see problems in current mechira as practiced but I come from background that sort of wishes it was left with original heter for whiskey producers.

          • mycroft says:

            Hand shmura-I prefer machine shmura-less likely to become chametz. I certainly respect your interest in trying to be directly involved in mitzvah

    • Bob Miller says:

      Are you assuming nobody else can or will pitch in?

  5. mycroft says:

    Reason for US lack of Orthodox moderate and left may well be explained ” It may well be that Modern Orthodox rabbis, including those ordained at RIETS in the latter part of the twentieth century, were considerably more to the right than were their predecessors. In other words, the move to the right may have been within the RIETS semikhah (ordination) program, under the influence of a revisionist approach to the thinking of its revered head, the late Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (“the Rav”), rather than within Orthodoxy as a whole, but is so glaring because rabbis are much more visible than the laity. On revisionism with respect to the Rav, see Lawrence Kaplan, “Revisionism and the Rav: The Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy,” Judaism 48,3 (Summer 1999): 290-311. Footnote from Chaim Waxman
    and the following from Turetsky and Waxman Sliding to the Left Contemporary American Modern Orthodoxy
    Another academic suggested that,
    the major change is the revival of liberal Orthodoxy in the form of
    YCT and the continuing pressures from the feminist front, which has
    now led to quasi-egalitarian halakhic minyanim [prayer quorums]. At
    the same time, Rabbi Herschel Schachter (RHS), Rabbi Mordechai
    Willig, and some others, have emerged as the leaders of what can be
    called Centrism. RHS is the most important rabbi in America and the
    fact that he can be seen as the successor of Rabbi Joseph B.
    Soloveitchik is fascinating, since he is so different from his teacher
    and has no interest in relating to the wider intellectual trends … I
    think that Modern Orthodoxy is stable and probably even grow

    BTW-the changes in YU to the right during Rabbi Lamms presidency can show how President personal hashkafa does not change YU. Of all Presidents of YU that have been Rabbis- Rabbi Lamm was probably the most to the left yet during his tenure RIETS went to the right

    • Steve Brizel says:

      This has nothing to xo with tbe subject matter of R Gordimets response. As i walk down my block returning from Maariv the still yet uncollected garbage cans xue to lSt weeks srorm.show much evidencecthat the preparation for Yetzias Mitzrayim.is well underway in tbe traditional manner.

      • mycroft says:

        It is relevant to a whole thread of responses in this blog.
        “evidencecthat the preparation for Yetzias Mitzrayim.is well underway in tbe traditional manner”
        So what, Rabbi Gordimer is maintaining the method advocated by some other Rabbi does not follow Halacha. How some people may or may not be doing spring cleaning in one area of Metro NY is not responsive to Rabbi Gordimer’s halachik point.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Like it or not most of us who stay home for Pesach do what is necessary to get rid of not just Chametz whether on a Torah or rabbinical level but also enjoy the uniquely educational and family centered even known as rhe Seder as well. Rhat being stated RGordimwr has restated normative Psak Halacha with his own allowances that heterim.are available when necessary.

          • mycroft says:

            stay home for Pesach, every Seder has either been at parents/inlaws or our own house. For better or worse, much of my bedikah cleaning goes back to the years that learned Pesachim in YU

  6. mb says:

    I think R.Ovadia is correct in everything he says. And surely R.Gordimer agrees, k for p food cooked before Pesach in non ben yomi pots is k for p? I, as a matter of custom do kasher stainless steel pots, but i know they don’t absorb. So why lock up the non-kashered ones?
    R.ovadia is following a well known posek. you may not like it, but in r.Ovadia’s Sephardic world, he has a huge following. This is just another senseless hit piece. I call upon you to retract it.

    • Avrohom Gordimer says:

      R. Haim Ovadia permits cooking Pesach food in chametz pots before Yom Tov, without a ben yomo requirement (and even then, it would only be acceptable b’dieved): “You can therefore clean your kitchen the way you normally do, and then, before Passover, use your everyday dishes and utensils to make freezable food from kosher for Passover ingredients. Freeze and enjoy on Passover.”

      This is not a hit piece. It is impersonal and addresses only the halachic issues.

      • mb says:

        If a utensil is not a kli rishon or absorbs, ben yomi is not relevant. You know that. You may have a dispute with what is kli rishon, or what absorbs but that doesn’t mean he is wrong and you are right. Different opinions. You posting it on CC only encourages more hatred. Look at the other responses.Think about.

        • Avrohom Gordimer says:

          No posek permits this lechatchilah without kashering, and nearly all poskim hold it is not kosher even b’dieved. I am quoting Shulchan Aruch and normative Halacha. If you feel that is an attack, I’m sorry, but I did nothing wrong, and I stand by my words.

          • mb says:

            No need for Sephardim to kosher non-absorbent cookware such as glass pyrex etc.

          • Yitzchak Kolakowski says:

            Ashkenazim require keilim to be einam bnei yomam. Sefardim consider it to be nosein taam lefgam if it is washed with soap. There is considerable machlokes about which keilim are boleia. In general, the Syrian Rabbonim were meikel about blios, allowing the same cold keilim for milchigs and fleishigs, chometz and pesach. There are many things the Mechaber is machmir on that other Sefardi poskim are meikel on. Also there are many things the mechaber paskens that only chassidishe yidden follow, like wearing a gartel or wearing tallis katan on top of clothing. I myself do these things, but i am not so rude to say that those who are meikel are not following al pi shulchan aruch. It is very tenuous to say Rabbi Ovadia is wrong. We do not have a Sanhedrin bizman hazeh. He has sources to back himself up. His own kehillah can follow his psak, and yout kehillah can follow your psak. Eilu veilu divrei Elokim Chaim.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Do you all year round follow all Piskei Piskei halacha nd minhagim of the Sefardic Poskim?

          • mycroft says:

            Non Israeli in Israel, two day yom tov , not only Rov Poskim but was almost universally accepted, now you will resurrect minority viewpoints, Chacham Zvi, Shulchan Aruch Harav. Just a matter of who is changing accepted psak.
            Other people don’t have to follow your changer, they can follow their own. We don’t have a Sanhedrin.

        • Rafael Quinoaface says:

          Where is Ovadia’s disclaimer that his psakim (assuming they are correct) is meant only for Sefardim? A: he wrote these enormous kulos for the general public, including Ashkenazim and didn’t qualify it like you and others are trying to do.

          • Mycroft says:

            I am not aware of people generally stating that my psak is of course based on Lita tradition, Hungarian tradition, tradition of my Rebbe etc. people should attempt to follow their own traditions. People who are aware of different traditions as Talmeidei chachamim must, should disclose what they are basing it on. Thus, length of time to wait between meat and milk, I wait six hours but I am aware of traditions of one and three hours.
            If one criticizes someone for paskening lekulah on basis of their tradition one should also criticize one paskening lechumra when based on a tradition that others may not have.

          • Rafael Quinoaface says:

            Mycroft – he wrote for the general public, and relies on position that are outside the mainstream, certainly for Ashkenazim. All those defending him and on forward.com keep pointing to his reliance on what is acceptable for Sefardim, yet I have seen nothing from Ovadia to indicate that he intended his extremely controversial positions only for Sefardim. Your comment is therefore irrelevant.

          • mycroft says:

            “All those defending him and on forward.com keep pointing to his reliance on what is acceptable for Sefardim, yet I have seen nothing from Ovadia to indicate that he intended his extremely controversial positions only for Sefardim. Your comment is therefore irrelevant”
            It will be irrelevant when RY from lita tradition start stating their positions are relevant for those from Lita,others can rely on their Traditions.
            If attempt to make klalI Israel one minhag a la zahal of Rav Gorens day who says Ashkenazic Lita prevails.

          • mycroft says:

            Representing an Ashkenazic viewpoint .Certainly,there are those who are of Ashkenazic descent whose scholarly work revolves around Jews from Yemen and Orient who have great Ashkenazic yichus. Including one who is a great grandson of both R abbi Moshe Soloveichik and Rabbi Isaac Breuer.
            We are way too much Lita centered.Yahadus was found there and elsewhere

          • rkz says:

            I come from a litvish family background (all of my grandparents came from Lita), but I have friends from many other backgrounds. I am also close to our mara de-atra, who is Sephardi. I have never heard or saw any posek who permits the use of chametz utensils lechatchila. There is no such tradition in any shittat psika

          • mycroft says:

            .” I am also close to our mara de-atra, who is Sephardi. I have never heard or saw any posek who permits the use of chametz utensils lechatchila”
            I am not aware of Sefardic psak,but evenmore than Ashkenaz where Hungarian, Lithuanina, German Dutch all have different traditions. Sefaradim not a monolith-Morrocan, Rhodes, Syrian, Egyptian , Yerminite, Iraqi, Iranian all have different traditions

          • rkz says:

            Mycroft, I am well aware of that (I actually have a course about Psika and Minhagim, which deals extensively with the issue that you raised)

  7. mycroft says:

    If the issue is the halachic issue, write a simple guide to what you believe are requirement for Pesach preparations footnoting sources and include the sources claimed by others and state why they are not legitimate.
    Rabbi Gordimer I have written this before you have a lot to say when you write on topics without explicitly attacking others. We are close to Pesach write your lechatchila and bidieved rules. I would use it.

  8. Shades of Gray says:

    Two articles, available online, listing a balanced approach to Pesach cleaning are:

    “Clean For Pesach And Enjoy The Seder” by Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg zt”l

    “Reduce Pre-Pesach Stress Through Understanding Hilchos Pesach” reviewed and approved by Rabbis Elozor Barclay, Yitzchok Jaeger, and Zev Smith.

  9. Steve Brizel says:

    None other than RSZA rhought that the Chacham Tzvi was correct despite the rov poskim to the contrary.

  10. mycroft says:

    Irrelevant-the accepted minhag has been two days for at least hundreds of years. Want to change accepted halacha don’t accuse others of improper actions when they change halacha that you choose not to change.

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Agaun look at it tgis eays. For centuries spending YT in EY was a purely lomdishe question as was keeping Mitzvos Hateluyos BaArtez,which Rambam.incluses as part of stating what was Psak in Kol HaTorah Kulah. ThecTur and SA did not include these halachos possibly because of their very uncommon application. This is what RAsger Weiss srote in his great sefer on Shemittah. Interest in these mitzvos certainly revived as settlement in EY in the 19rh Century and the in reased travel to EY after 1948 made such mitzvos and queries such as the timing of meciras ,hametz for a chutznik on Israel for his property in EY halachic realities. RsZA understood the minhag but like many other Acharonim dound the Chaxham Tzvis arvuments very compelling .

    • Tal Benschar says:

      Who do you claim “wants to change halacha?’ Most people I know who visit EY keep two days.

      I am talking about the usual situation where someone just visits for a Yom Tov or is there for a year of learning. The modern condition has now added new situations which arguably (and some poskim accept these arguments) may change things. For example, a wealthy person lives in America, but owns a house in EY and spends every Yom Tov (with his wife and family) in his EY apartment. That situation was unthinkable until quite recently. I am told that a very prominent poseik, who generally held one keeps two days, in that particular case ruled he keeps one day. IMO, that is not changing a minhag, that is dealing with a new metsius.

      • mycroft says:

        “Who do you claim “wants to change halacha?’ ”
        Visitors to Israel who go only for YT and keep one day.Some have even arrived back in US when still YT in US-thus do not miss school in US. Heard example from Rabbi who teaches in a MO school in neighborhood but not even most Modern where Rabbi and other Rabbi who both taught there noticed students in school from vacation in Israel, asked when did you get YT in US. It has gotten so bad that I have left Israel a couple of days before YT so as not to get into problem.Tfillin-not to do melachah no problem I can be machmir but if not YT ho w do I avoid putting on tfillin

        Most people I know who visit EY keep two days.
        It was universal in 70s and 80s-now just another change in practice

        I am talking about the usual situation where someone just visits for a Yom Tov or is there for a year of learning. The modern condition has now added new situations which arguably (and some poskim accept these arguments) may change things. For example, a wealthy person lives in America, but owns a house in EY and spends every Yom Tov (with his wife and family) in his EY apartment. That situation was unthinkable until quite recently. I am told that a very prominent poseik, who generally held one keeps two days, in that particular case ruled he keeps one day. IMO, that is not changing a minhag, ”
        that is dealing with a new metsius”
        I am limiting myself to the case of visitors. As I wrote very few people in Israel own apartm,ents,most are part of 99 year leases. BTW in the 70s I knew people who fitted that situation-so not new and then all kept two days.
        I have discussed issue with Rabbonim and most agreed that test would be where does one spend most of time.
        I am not dealing with complicated issues,someone one year spending more time in Israel,m next year reverse.I am not challenging psak onpeople there for multiple years just challenging the outrageous reopening of accepted psak.

  11. mycroft says:

    Nothing that you wrote changes one iota from the fact that until recently essentially it was unknown for visitors for YT to Israel to observe one day YT. BTW,another custom that is essentially developing against Rabbinic advice. In my area vast majority of Rabbis hold two days, most people ,have picked one day.
    Vast majority of chareidim keep two days-custom has begun in the relatively small demographic that you follow.
    When my wife and I last were in Israel YT-over 30 years ago it was unheard of for diaspora Jews to only keep 1 day

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Look at the number of Chutzniks today not 30 years ago who own or rent dirot or villas in Israel today. Real estate for Anglos and others looking for such deals is booming especially for those who have the bucks and desire to spend Sukkos and Pesach in Yerushalayim Ir HaKodesh and allow others to stay there during the year. I have a friend in Yerushalayim who is a broker and whose phone rings constantly in response to and in search of such deals. As I pointed out, many of the halachos affecting Chutzniks who have property in Chutz LaAretz and EY the Mitzvos haTelyous BaAretz and even living in Israel were almost Hilcasa LMishichasa or of a theoretical nature until the rise of the Yishuv in the 19th century, the establishment of Israel and the Six Day War where today whole communities are being built and you can spend your YT as do good friends of mine, in the Ir HaAtikah, as opposed to an exclusive resort in a nice locale. That has led to the phenomenon of some keeping two full days, one day only and one day with no melachos dorraisa and Tefilin BTzina on Yom Tom Sheni. There are and probably will be more sefarim written on this issue as the numbers of such residences and leases continues to increase. The entire issue of YT Sheni, wherein in past centuries, a chutznik in Israel kept two days is far more fluid because the Chacham Tzvi’s POV which both RYBS and RSZA thought was very compelling, but not the view of Rov Poskim is now being viewed by many Gdolei haPoskim as far more than a Daas Yachid but a POV that reflects a different metzius on the ground. A similar change happens in the case of many such issues in Psak -such as whether one should use machine shmura or hand shmura- I am familiar with the machlokes and the arguments for both machine and hand. For years I used machine shmura but in recent years ( as did RSZA ) but in recent years I have used hand shmura because under proper supervision hand shmura represents the baking of the matza in the most traditional and authentic manner that was so done throughout the ages. I look forward to baking my own matzas mitzva next year.

      • mycroft says:

        Show me where owning property determines where one lives. You want to follow a changed halacha of at least a few hundred years standing fine.But show me where either one of the big 3 MB, AH,or CA take your position.There is more halachik precedent being violated by observing one day YT as a visitor to Israel than by having female Rabbis.I am not stating that I am in favor of them. Maybe it is the false God of anti feminism that leads one to accept one change in halacha but not the other change which may or may not be a halachikchange

        • Steve Brizel says:

          If you don’t think that the view about YT Sheni in Israel for chutzniks changes , then ask yourself why the view of CZ which RSZA and RYBS was a compelling view notwithstanding the view of Rov Poskim to the contrary is undergoing a renaissance. Owning or leasing property in Israel for a chutznik in Israel creates halachic consequences as to zman biur chametz and who may be responsibe for kvias mzuzah

          • mycroft says:

            “was a compelling view notwithstanding the view of Rov Poskim to the contrary is undergoing a renaissance. ”
            Just strange to see you state about a change is compelling , notwithstanding Rov Poskim. So Rov Poskim is important when you agree with them, otherwise there are compelling views. Thus,difference between OO and you is just what changes you wish to make. Rov Poskim is OK as long as you agree with them.It is usually easy to determine Rov Poskim , but apparently, it is not a consistent ideological belief for you.
            “Owning or leasing property in Israel for a chutznik in Israel creates halachic consequences as to zman biur chametz and who may be responsibe for kvias mzuzah”
            These are separate dinim.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          “Owning or leasing property in Israel for a chutznik in Israel creates halachic consequences as to zman biur chametz and who may be responsibe for kvias mzuzah”
          These are separate dinim.

          Yes-but the halachic consequences the nafkah mina lhalacha may very well depend on a common factor-owning or leasing property for 99 years or less in Israel.

          • mycroft says:

            Are you maintaining that whether or not one keeps two days of Yom Tov depends on how wealthy you are ?
            Thus,, apparently according to you owning property and b eing present in Israel for 20 days a year celebrates 1 day YT, while renting property and spending 180 daysa year observes 2 days YT. Source, for mere wealth takes away requirement of 2 days YT.

          • mycroft says:

            “They basically follow the Chacham Tzvi: davening tefillat chol on the second day, putting on tefillin with a bracha, but by way of compromise, they do not do any melacha on the second day to be choshesh for the other opinions. This is what Rav Soloveichik used to advise talmidim. He mentioned that his family tradition was that basically the Chacham Tzvi’s opinion was more correct. (On some occasions he would even suggest that the idea of observing issur melacha on the second day might not merely be by way of compromise, but possibly based on pure halacha). (4)
            Others have adopted an opposite style of compromise which some humorously refer to as “two and a half days.” They follow what was always the majority opinion and observe two days of yom tov, abstaining from melacha on the second day and davening tefillat yom tov, including the reciting of kiddush and observing the second seder; but at the same time are choshesh for the opposing view and putting on tefillin the second day without a bracha, and listen to havdalah in shuI at the end of the first day. (On the several rare occasions that I was visiting in Eretz Yisroel for yom tov this was indeed my personal practice and that of my family.) The rationale behind this practice is not to always be on the lookout for every possible chumra under the sun, as some unlearned individuals have incorrectly understood; but rather to follow the classical majority view that visitors must observe two days, and at the same time be tolerant enough to show respect for the minority view”
            It is the doing of melacha that is the issue, I do not see in RHS personal practice or what he describes of the Rav the permission to do melacha. Such as flying back to US in last day of YT in diaspora from US.

  12. Steve Brizel says:

    Mycroft wrote in part:

    “Try thinking of the RYBS who insisted on addressing people outside of our machene politely. Think of a RYBS who typed a letter in English to a Conservative Rabbi rather than in Hebrew-in English had no problem writing Rabbi as title in Hebrew would have been forced to use Rav but would not have used insulting Hebrew Rabbi. Thus, typed the letter in English.
    Think of the Rav who even saw something positive in Rand C synagogues as Jewish Centres”

    1) show us where RYBS addressed a R or C clergyman as opposed to RSL as HaRav RYBS constantly used the terms heterodox and deviationist which were elegant ways of saying that R and C had clearly broken away from any fealty to halacha. Where RYBS differed from the other Gdolim as to R and C was solely as to Klpaei Chutz vs Klapei chutz issues and membership in the SCA so long as the Ou and RCA had a right to veto any discussions that smacked of religious pluralism. RYBS did not support belonging to the NY Board of Rabbis .
    2) the bottom line of the letter is what counts-RYBS declined attending a C shul’s dinner despite acknowledging its positive presence because RYBS refused to legitimize a deviationiist movement.You always refer to context and nuance-the letter was written in the late 1950s and 1960s when the C movement was at its highwater and MO was just beginning to move away from its defensive posture thanks to RYBS’s own statements on staying home rather than attending a mixed seating house of worship and ecumenical theological dialogue. Show is a letter other than the letter you constantly refer to where RYBS “saw something positive in Rand C synagogues as Jewish Centres”
    3) RIETS, despite your claims to the contrary, which you have admitted are not based on your having been on campus for many years and seeing things from your own personal POV, has wonderful RY who are all products of RIETS and its kollelsm who have very different darchei halimud and many of whom spend their spare time and Shabbosim lecturing and learning bchavrusa with, and hearing chaburas all over the US and Israel from audiences that are well beyond the daled amos of the RIETS Beis Medrash . The 1984 teshuvah that you view as evidence of the same merely echoed the views of RYBS on feminism as a threat to the Jewish family notwithstanding RYBS’s giving the inaugural Talmud shiur at SCW and the teaching of Talmud to both genders ( but as R A Schiff mentions women were taught those sections of Talmud so as to properly keep a Kosher home) . Despite your claims to the contrary, rumors of RIETS even remotely approaching BMG the Mir or Ponevezh in hashkafa nay make nice conversations at one’s Shabbos table or a kiddush but are greatly if not totally exaggerated. Take a look at RAL ZL’s own comments about the RIETS of the 1950s and the vast improvements that he observed in the 1990s as well as Dr T Lichtenstein’s observations about the reasons why RAL ZL and family made aliyah. It should also be noted that RAL ZL himself encouraged RHS to enter the field of chinuch.

  13. mycroft says:

    .” Where RYBS differed from the other Gdolim as to R and C was solely as to Klpaei Chutz vs Klapei chutz issues and membership in the SCA so long as the Ou and RCA had a right to veto any discussions that smacked of religious pluralism. ”
    Misleading-Rav was different than other gedolimin terms of his attitude towards R and C synagogues and clergy. He believed that one should allow them touse mikvaot when they wanted to. He was much more interested in Judaism as a people, not only in western terms a religion. Bris Avraham exists even for those who deny Brit Sinai.

    “RYBS did not support belonging to the NY Board of Rabbis .”
    Of course it was not only the lack of veto-majority rules but SCA also had lay membership,OU, and United Synagogues, UAHC

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Other Gdolim took a more militant stance than RYBS on the issue of allowing R and C to use mikvaos. RYBS first and foremost described himself as a mlamed and viewing Jewish identity through the prism of Bris Avos and Bris Sinai as defined by adherence to and the study of Torah. WADRm RYBS should not be confused with the founder of Reconstructionism who Lhavdil wrote about Judaism as a civilization. RYBS in Kol Dodi Dofek clearly sided with the covenant of destiny as opposed with the covenant of fate as determining Jewish identity. Perhaps, RYBS viewed use of the mikva by R and C as possibly being permitted not under any vague notion of Klal Yisrael but simply that of MTosch Lishmah Bo Lishma-that a person would be inspired by the mikvah to become a Shomer Torah UMitzvos. RYBS viewed the NY Board as improperly engaging in discussions of pluralism with no safeguarding of the Orthodox POV as opposed to the SCA where the RCA and/or the OU could veto, but rarely needed to , any discussion of any issue that remotely smacked of religious pluralism

      • mycroft says:

        ” RYBS first and foremost described himself as a mlamed”
        One has to realize that Rav Chaim Brisker thought of himself as a melamed. It does then not have the connotation that some give to it.

        ” and viewing Jewish identity through the prism of Bris Avos and Bris Sinai as defined by adherence to and the study of Torah.”
        Unlike some other RY the Rav emphasized our obligations to all Jews even if they reject Torah.

        “WADRm RYBS should not be confused with the founder of Reconstructionism”
        I doubt I have ever compared the two
        …”RYBS in Kol Dodi Dofek clearly sided with the covenant of destiny as opposed with the covenant of fate as determining Jewish identity.”
        RYBS emphasized both covenants of faith and fate
        ” Perhaps, RYBS viewed use of the mikva by R and C as possibly being permitted not under any vague notion of Klal Yisrael”
        Vague notion of klal Israel? Concept is an essential part of Yahadus.
        ” but simply that of MTosch Lishmah Bo Lishma-that a person would be inspired by the mikvah to become a Shomer Torah UMitzvos.”
        I don’t understand how you derive such a thought from the Rav advocating letting R and C use communal mikvaot for their conversions

        ” RYBS viewed the NY Board as improperly engaging in discussions of pluralism with no safeguarding of the Orthodox ”
        Irrelevant to his reasoning. He was opposed to structure as he was to similar organization in Massachusetts

        “POV as opposed to the SCA where the RCA and/or the OU could veto, but rarely needed to , any discussion of any issue that remotely smacked of religious pluralism”
        Veto was just one of the reasons

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Mycroft-
          1)It is well known that ,as documented by R Zevin ZL in Ishim v Shittos, RCS argued that Jewish children or adults who had not undergone Bris Milah should not be penalized for the omissions of their parents. Perhaps, RYBS was following the same in his view re allowing C and R to use mikvaos as well.
          2)RYBS in Kol Dodi Dofek emphasized that the covenant of destiny was far more important and the basis of Jewish cont8inuity than the covenant of fate.
          3) The BY Board and similar groups legitimized “the three branches of Judaism”
          4) Without the veto the RCA and OU would have no way to avoid discussions of theological pluralism.

          • mycroft says:

            BTW it was not discussions that were forbidden it was negotiations,trading off of faith positions.Many times people close to the Rav participated in explanatory discussions entirely different from discussing issues with potential to get together on unified positions.

  14. mycroft says:

    “the bottom line of the letter is what counts-RYBS declined attending a C shul’s dinner despite acknowledging its positive presence because RYBS refused to legitimize a deviationiist movement.”
    RYBS declined attending a C shul’s dinner despite acknowledging its positive presence
    End of discussion the Rav acknowledged its positive presence.What other gadol would ever do that?

    “You always refer to context and nuance-the letter was written in the late 1950s and 1960s when the C movement was at its highwater and MO was just beginning to move away from its defensive posture thanks to RYBS’s own statements on staying home rather than attending a mixed seating house of worship ”
    If anything the exact reverse is true one could make an argument which was raised in this millennium by someone who was closer to the Rav than anyone writing on this blog that the fight against mixed pews is over and thus perhaps the Rav would not have then ruled today better not hear shofar than attend a mixed pew synagogue to hear shofar.It was not a pure halachik psak it was made partly for extra halachik reasons
    and ecumenical theological dialogue. Show is a letter other than the letter you constantly refer to where RYBS “saw something positive in Rand C synagogues as Jewish Centres”

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Mycroft wrote in part::

      “an argument which was raised in this millennium by someone who was closer to the Rav than anyone writing on this blog that the fight against mixed pews is over and thus perhaps the Rav would not have then ruled today better not hear shofar than attend a mixed pew synagogue to hear shofar.It was not a pure halachik psak it was made partly for extra halachik reasons”

      That argument IMO is flawed because RYBS issued his statement about mixed seating when CJ was at its highwater mark and Orthodioxy was being written off. The Psak was rendered based on the sugya in Sanhedrin and of Arksana Dachsanya-preserving Jewish identity . Thinking about how RYBS would have acted today is tantamount to and borders on speculation-especially when the author’s statement failed to see the fact that C and R were declining in membership except by punped up numbers of quasi gerim , are empty on Shabbos , are merging their houses of worship , and failed to see the large number of communityh kollelim and BTs in the US as having changed the landscape in many Jewish communities throughout N America-especially in Dallas and similar communities

      The letter in question IMO explained why RYBS would not be attending because he refused to grant legitimization to a deviationist movement. We disagree as to what the letter meant-you underscore what I consider RYBS’s being polite in the late 1950s and 1960s to a local heterodox house of worship and IMO the letter emphasizes why RYBS declined to attend a major function sponsored by the same.

  15. mycroft says:

    , “has wonderful RY who are all products of RIETS and its kollelsm who have very different darchei halimud and many of whom spend their spare time and Shabbosim lecturing and learning bchavrusa with, and hearing chaburas all over the US and Israel from audiences that are well beyond the daled amos of the RIETS Beis Medrash .”
    RIETS RY speak outside of RIETS-why not-Lakewood RY also do that

    ” The 1984 teshuvah that you view as evidence of the same merely echoed the views of “RYBS on feminism as a threat to the Jewish family notwithstanding RYBS’s giving the inaugural Talmud shiur at SCW and the teaching of Talmud to both genders ”
    The Rav did not have opposition to women that the dicta in the psak shows

    • Steve Brizel says:

      We differ, RYBS publicly rejected the feminist critique of halacha and TSBP in his drasha on Korach and a shiur on Gerus in the 1970s, which was in no small part one of the hashkafic bases of the psak, which recognized the threat to the Jewish family posed by femiinism. IMO the feminist ideology in its classic and regnant form was and is remrkaably similar to the opposition by Jewish Communists in Russia under the communist regime to the Jewish family.. Both of these shiurim have been transmitted as volumes in the Norasos Harav series. Take a look at the website of the NCSY Kollel program-take a look who spends their time not just giving shiurim but learning bchavrusa and listening to chaburas from many who are not the greatest students in their yeshiva high schools and going on tiulim and many other aspects of the program as well. The RY of RIETS spend much of their spare time teaching Torah in venues that are decidedly nowhere as rarefied as the Daled Amos of their Beis Medrash and shiur rooms. They are following the Mesorah of RYBS who also engaged in what Chasidus calls Tzimtzum to transmit TSBP to the next generation. BMG and other yeshivos every summer have many talmidim who participate in SEED programs teaching Torah in many North American communities and have helped develop community kollelim all over the US.

  16. mycroft says:

    “( but as R A Schiff mentions women were taught those sections of Talmud so as to properly keep a Kosher home)”
    The Rav taught Gemarrah to women outside of helping keeping a kosher home

    .” Despite your claims to the contrary, rumors of RIETS even remotely approaching BMG the Mir or Ponevezh in hashkafa nay make nice conversations at one’s Shabbos table or a kiddush but are greatly if not totally exaggerated.”
    When did I state that RIETS RY are equivalent to BMG or Ponovezh

    “. It should also be noted that RAL ZL himself encouraged RHS to enter the field of chinuch.” RHS has been a master teacher for over half a century. Different skill entirely from being a manhig Israel .

    • Steve Brizel says:

      You implied that RIETS had moved to the right. Please provide details as to what you mean.

      • mycroft says:

        It is self evident. For a good explanation of the whole topic listen to the series on YU Torah by Alan Brill on Modern Orthodoxy.He discusses a lot. Worthwhile background and facts that any person interested in Orthodoxy of past 200 years should listen to,

        • Steve Brizel says:

          I have read Dr Brrill’s blog sporadically over the years. I would be remiss if I did not note that the annexed post and a link were posted with no permission for comments.https://kavvanah.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/the-rise-of-interfaith-marriage-in-the-modern-orthodox-mo-community-ruvie/ One wonders why.

          • mycroft says:

            I suggested listening to his series-it appears to have been originally a series of classes at YU.

          • mycroft says:

            Sadly, intermarriage is now more frequent for day school graduates than it was for the general Jewish population 100 years ago in the US.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          https://kavvanah.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-one-percent-solution-modern-orthodoxy/ Time will tell . MO has always had a noisy LW a a large apathetic center and a RW that wishes MO was more mdakek bmitzvos.

          • mycroft says:

            ” (Orthodoxy rapidly declined from 60% in 1950, to 22% in 1960 to 9% in 1970; now we trumpet growths back up to 11% as world-changing). The decisions in the field by pulpit rabbis played a bigger role than any real or imagined ideological decision”

          • mycroft says:

            “MO has always had a noisy LW a a large apathetic center and a RW that wishes MO was more mdakek bmitzvos”
            Ideology need not be correlated with shmiras hamitzvot.One must differentiate ideological MO from sociological MO .
            MO where M is a noun or when M is an adjective.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          Certain psukim in the Hagadah require no explication orhers require Drashas Chazal. Your comment re RIETS which is a fairly constant comment requires details. Again rhe notion that RIETS has evolved or lurched towards becoming similar to a RW yeshiva is easily dispelled by spending time in the yeshiva instead of offering claims that you claim like the Declaration of Independent are “self evident”

          • mycroft says:

            The RY have a public record of statements and misstatements.I in general I rely on their public record

    • Truth says:

      “RHS has been a master teacher for over half a century. Different skill entirely from being a manhig Israel .”

      The exact same statement can (and should) be made with regard to the Rav. Something for you to think about.

      • mycroft says:

        Precisely, the Rav was far from being mere RY. Usually he only spent 2 nights a week in NY. Most of his time in Boston where he dealt with real issues outside the Yeshiva world.
        In fact what we have lost is not so much the Shas knowledge the Rav knew more but there are current RY who know close enough,it is the lack of shrewdness, diplomatic skill and ability not to stick ones foot in the mouth that is missing. Not skills crucial for RY but crucial for a manhig `

      • dr. bill says:

        you clearly know neither individual. the Rav ztl electrified crowds and was the acknowledged leader of modern orthodoxy for half a century ordaining thousands of rabbis. RHS is learned RY and posek, but certainly not head and shoulders above many others. the rav was circumspect and measured; RHS is spontaneous and given to rather provocative statements.

        • mycroft says:

          Agreed
          My” it is the lack of shrewdness, diplomatic skill and ability not to stick ones foot in the mouth that is missing. Not skills crucial for RY but crucial for a manhig ” IMO is not inconsistent with your formulation” RHS is learned RY and posek, but certainly not head and shoulders above many others. the rav was circumspect and measured; RHS is spontaneous and given to rather provocative statements.”
          I recognize yours as better making clear that the Rav was head and shoulders above his contemporaries while no current RY is head and shoulders above their contemporaries. I emphasize the other aspects of the Rav as a manhig.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          No RY or Gadol should ever cowtow to the PC demands of their generation
          Their job description it can be argued inherently requires provacatove statements. If you read the 1943 Yahrtzeit drasha snd l8sten to the shiur on gerus you can hear RYBS venting his spleen over the issues that he discussed inn both.

  17. mycroft says:

    ” as well as Dr T Lichtenstein’s observations ”
    For our discussion what is relevant is the following from Dr T Lichtenstein:

    “And yet, there are former students,
    notable among them a number of faculty members or former faculty
    members at RIETS, who have not only turned their backs on the complex
    worldview the Rov espoused but are anxious to claim that the Rov himself
    turned his back on this view. It has even been claimed that “Whatever
    he (the Rov) did aside from learning Torah came to him coincidentally.”xxx
    It is, indeed, preposterous to think that his major philosophical essays,
    which interweave general philosophy and science, are “coincidental”

    • Steve Brizel says:

      See DR T Lichtenstein’s comments at Lehrhaus as to why RAL ZL and family decided to make aliyah.

      • mycroft says:

        I quote comments,.Please quote what you want me to read

        • Steve Brizel says:

          .thelehrhaus.com/commentary/countering-counter-history-re-considering-rav-aharon’s-road-not-taken/ the same journal has this articlehttps://www.thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/rav-lichtenstein-on-wissenschaft-in-his-own-yiddish-words/ about RAL ZL, who despite his affinity for English literature , was very much not in favor at all and very much against Academic Talmud . RAL ZL in the YU Judaica Book also stauncly defended the traditional study of Talmud with emphasis on the Sedarim of Nashim and Nezikin which paraelled RYBS’s comments as stated in R Rakkafet’s book that the best sefarimby Acharonim were on Nezikin,.

          • mycroft says:

            Thanks-Dr Tovah Lichtenstein naturally looks at the positive aspect of their moving to Israel.I agree with her comments. I have written before why due to age alone Rabbi Rackman was not really a viable candidate to replace Dr Belkin. Of course, one can note that the only two Rabbis who served in pulpits who later became President of YU were Rabbis at the Jewish Center in Manhattan

          • dr. bill says:

            in contrast to one of his sons who is an academic talmudist and his own weakening opposition over time. academic talmud is beginning to become more accessible.

            i agree that academic talmud is much too difficult for almost all yeshiva students; that is a comment on its attractiveness as a derech halimmud, not a comment on its validity and insights.

            there are an emerging set of areas where academic approaches open up the study of otherwise esoteric areas.

          • mycroft says:

            “RAL ZL in the YU Judaica Book also stauncly defended the traditional study of Talmud with emphasis on the Sedarim of Nashim and Nezikin which paraelled RYBS’s comments as stated in R Rakkafet’s book that the best sefarimby Acharonim were on Nezikin,”
            Here again you people on the quote people on the Rav.Look at the curriculum of Maimonides which he was in charge of-most of Talmud studied was Chullin,Moed,Brachos.

          • rkz says:

            Dr. Bill, please define what you mean by “academic Talmud.” Do you mean Judaic studies in general, or Talmud in particular?

    • mycroft says:

      I assume the Rabbi Noach Goldstein is a grandson of the late Rabbi Dr Noach Goldstein who taught in MTA `

  18. Steve Brizel says:

    https://yivo.org/cimages/ral.pdf Mycroft-check out this article as well.

  19. mycroft says:

    A quibble BMG wanted to be outside NY but they went to Lakewood because a Rav in Lakewood who was a student of Rav Issar Zalmam Meltzer offered to support the Yeshiva. Lakewood was a big Jewish area even before BMG-not NY,Baltimore,but not a Midbar

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Lakewood may have had a laege Jewish lopulation with shuls etc. RAK was looking for a community that would not be distracted by the temtations of an urban community.

      • mycroft says:

        He chose one where he could be supported. There were already many Yeshivot in Metro NY.During RAKs lifetime BMG wasa small enterprise.See eg even after his ptirah look at figures from the American Jewish Yearbook from the year of Charles Leibmans big article about Orthodoxy, circa1964,1965

        • Steve Brizel says:

          That is your opinion. RAK always.stressed that his yeshiva needed a quiet suburban environment to develope and grow. Not all considerations indeed most are not rooted In rhe idea that Hakesef Koneh Es HaKol.

          • mycroft says:

            I know which Rav made the offer and the acceptance. Never underestimate the impact of money on decisions.In this case perfectly legal.

        • Steve Brizel says:

          All true but BMG today has many buildings named after prominent MO donors.

          • mycroft says:

            Alllyour showing that they have been led to believe inMO but wish to keep the MO lifestyle. `

  20. Steve Brizel says:

    At Torah Musings RBasil Herring translated a 1943 Yahrtzeit Drasha of RYBS that is also in Pninei HaRav IIRC wherein you will see much of The beginnings of Kol Dodi Dofek and a very strong rejection of and analysis by RYBS of the negative effects of Haskalah on pre war European Jewry. I would highly reccomend downloading all parts of tbis drasha for its powerful indictment of Haskala and the need to not engage in theodicy but to build a Jewish state with secular Zionists and to always be aware of the grave damage caused by ersatz varieties of Judaism and Judaic studies.

  21. mycroft says:

    ” RBasil Herring translated a 1943 Yahrtzeit Drasha of RYBS that is also in Pninei HaRav IIRC wherein you will see much of The beginnings of Kol Dodi Dofek and a very strong rejection of and analysis by RYBS of the negative effects of Haskalah on pre war European Jewry”
    Read Farber’s book about Maimonides and see how by 1944 the Rav was apparently involved in trying to set up a second day school Rashi school affiliated with Mizrachi.
    There is no dispute that Haskalah from late 1700s destroyed the belief of vast majority of European Jewry’s traditional faith the question is what do you do about it.Answer per Rav is not transfer European model to US.See his letter in Helfgotts book a b ou t smicha program where he states we certainly should not copy European model in US

  22. Steve Brizel says:

    Ain haci nami. RIETS always has follow3d Volozhin in terms of which masecta is learned as opppsed ro focussing on either Nashom or Nezikin and required all would be musmachim to know SA OC and YD as well together with a working k owlwdege of machshavah. Ramban on Chumash is far often a sefer cited bt many RIETS RY rhan Maharal .

  23. Steve Brizel says:

    Mycroft wrote in relevant part:

    “The RY have a public record of statements and misstatements.I in general I rely on their public record”.

    How about setting forth the purported and alleged “statements and misstatements”? That would give us all an opportunity to examine whether the same are all “statements and misstatements” or whether some or all merely constitute and represent statements that you find not to your liking, for a variety of reasons. You don’t have to set forth all of the “statements and misstatements”, just some of the more purportedly egregious “statements and mistatements;, from your POV.

    • mycroft says:

      I have quoted some over the years. If from your heroes automatically good,same action by a LWMO Rabbi bad

      • Steve Brizel says:

        You mentioned “statements and mistatements” When you get a chance, why not just post some of the most purportedly egregious from your POV? Again, speaking in generalizations without links or other corroborative data doesn’t aid the discussion.

  24. Steve Brizel says:

    Mycroft wrote:

    ” (Orthodoxy rapidly declined from 60% in 1950, to 22% in 1960 to 9% in 1970; now we trumpet growths back up to 11% as world-changing). The decisions in the field by pulpit rabbis played a bigger role than any real or imagined ideological decision”

    You are comparing the defections from the immigrant generation of Orthodox affiliated Jews whose sons and daughters joined C shuls as part of their move to the suburbs and many of whose grandchildren have assimilated completely. The rate of assimilation among today’s yeshiva educated ( K-12) is far less. Such stats and studies always downplay Orthodox communities, rarely if ever look at the communal facts on the grounds and the vitality today of Orthodoxy in the MO and Charedi worlds and lump all Orthodox in the stereotype of immigrants.

    • Mycroft says:

      The rate of intermarriage among those attending twelve years of Orthodox day schools is greater than the intermarriage rate of general Jewish population in US one hundred years ago. The attitude that you are proud of raising the bar has much costs. A kashrut example from Kosher USA, when OU switched to glatt, kosher meat consumption in US decreased. Change in meat business as a result of glatt decreased producers. Many other examples of how the insular, demanding approach with both economic barriers and extra demands cause people to leave Yahadus, you treat all or nothing. Yosei Sefer or nothing. I disagree.

      • Steve Brizel says:

        Being an Am HaAretz never was considered an admirable station in life. You cannot transmit the Torah to the next generation if you are an Am HaAretz and are proud of it , let alone someone who thinks that chumros are a contemporary invention or that the Gdolim of each generation have the knowledge and tools to tell us how the TSBP and Halacha dictates how you live. Please tell us the “economic barriers” and “extra demands” that you think cause people to leave Yahadus. The Talmud tells us that even though our income is fixed from one RH to the next RH that fact has no bearing on how a Jews should live his life with a focus on Torah Avodah and gmilus Chasadim.

        Comparing Jewish life 100 years ago when intermarriage among the immigrant generation was low, but not rare to today’s Jewish community is an improper comparison.

      • Steve Brizel says:

        A member of the OU Kashrus Commisiion is in the Olam HaEmes once told me that people who consumed products from a prominent non-glatt purveyor ate a higher standard of tarfus than a very popular undeniably treif purveyor. Glatt, whether defined by the OU or by Satmar , is a uniformly accepted standard.

        We all make choices how we live our lives and the priorities therein and that entails the sacrificial acts of both being insular and demanding in what counts, what is important in our spare time and what is a luxury. Being a Yodei Sefer does not mean that you are a talmid Chacham Gadol or Gaon Olam,but rather that you have some fundamental awareness of and textual literacy with the most important texts of the transmission of Yahadus such as Chumash with classical Mefarshim, Mishnah, Talmud and Halacha. We live in a generation where Talmud Torah, like so many other aspects of life, i has been rendered available to anyone who has the desire to open the book and who has a reasonable intelligence. Sure, ArtScroll is a crutch, but if you want to , you can throw away the crutch, anyone with a reasonable intelligence can graduate to “it and not about it” because we have wonderful editions of Rishonim and SA and a wonderful aide in learning Gemara called Mesivta which presents Rishonim and Acharonim to the reader in easy Lashon HaKodesh. All it requires is desire and recognition that everyone can and should learn on his level- and that the arner-learner is a lchatchilah like yourself, dr Bill and many others here.

  25. Steve Brizel says:

    Mycroft- take a look at Only Simchas-that site features mazel tovs for engagements, chasunahs, births, etc. You should take a ride to any catering hall or shul in the metropolitan area -there are simchos ranging from a Bris to a Chasunah to communal dinners all week long. Yet, dempgraphers never mention these facts on the ground.

    • mycroft says:

      Data please.

      • Steve Brizel says:

        Go look at Only Simchas. Go see how busy caterrs are and the numner of claasses per grade in day schools . When tbe demographers look at this data let us know. Most LORs in Orthodox communities have a steady calendar of simchos to go to both innand out of their communities ranging from brisim bar and bas mitzvos and chasunos.

  26. mycroft says:

    Demographers do look at day school attendance. Chareidim have a highpercentage of population under 20

    • Steve Brizel says:

      Day school attendance is only one aspect of demography. You have to look at factors like classes per grade, buildings being built, communal dinners, summer programs, and gap/Beis Medrash/seminary programs, which any sociologist can find and document. None other than Dr Kack Wertheimer has profiled both BMG and the response of the O community in terms of where it spends its Tzedaka and chesed dollars. Some LW MO critics of the Charedi world and some aspects of YU and RIETS would benefit from reading Wertheimer’s astute observations on this issue and his views on the decline of CJ as well.

  27. Steve Brizel says:

    Mycroft wrote:

    “Alllyour showing that they have been led to believe inMO but wish to keep the MO lifestyle.”

    If that was the case, they would not given to BMG and YU. There are very prominent Baalei Tzedaka who give to both BMG and YU because these families view both as important means of Harbatzas Torah in America, despite their hashkafic differences. FWIW, I would note that one of the chairs of the Agudah dinner is an NCSY alumnus and YU grad who is very active in Torah UMsesorah.

    • mycroft says:

      How many BMG alumni give to YU and BMG?
      “very active in Torah UMsesorah.” consistent with Agudah. The Rav was not on their RabbinicalAdvisory Board while Rav Lessin, Rav Mendel Zachs, and R David Lifschitz were.

      • Steve Brizel says:

        Not relevant. We are talking about today.20% of BMGs talmidim are from.MO families.

        • mycroft says:

          So what people change from their families,some become more traditional, some less. To see that people change from their grandparents is easy to show, the Rav was certainly different than R Chaim Brisker and he has grandchildren who are to the right of him.

Pin It on Pinterest