profile | register | search
|
|
profile | register | search |
| Forums | Different Types of "Orthodoxy" | A rosh yeshiva at YU...very puzzling | Post Reply | Send Topic To a Friend |
| Author | Topic |
| Matisyohu28 | Posted - 08 May 2008 18:09
I found some statements made by one of the roshei yeshiva at the yeshiva college at YU that I simply do not understand...maybe these were taken out of context? Fabricated? They were foud on a blog which was disproving(even though I think a cheder student would know better than this) his ideas. This rabbi said, and I really hate to write it because it sounds like pure apikorsus: "The question is on events prior to matan Torah, how much must be read historically? I'm not 100% sure about yetsias mitzraim. I want to make it clear from the start I believe that yetsias mitrayim happened and happened as the Torah described it. But if someone were to come along and say ' I believe that the story of matan torah more or less happened as described but I'm not sure if yetsias mitzrayim happened,' I'm not sure if he crossed the line on ikarei haemunah. I don't think it's black and white. I'd like to call it a safek of heresy, I'm not really sure. In theory even though there are lot of pesukim that speak of the basis of a mitzvah being yetsias mitzrayim…could one allegorize and say 'it means the IDEA of yetsias mitzrayim' maybe...." "What is the purpose of Breishis then? And I believe that the answer lies, I will say this carefully, the way I might term a divinely dictated creation mashal ( myth) ***. Hashem told us metaphysical truths, whether it’s Breishis or parshas Noach, that were meant to teach us fundamental truths." --this is just a taste; is MO really spinning out of control so much that their rabbis actually espouse total kefirah? I hope someone can clarify this for me. Mussar teaches you how to live. But learning bava kama is living! - Rav Avigdor Miller ZT'L |
| hi from me | Posted - 09 May 2008 0:01
Yeah - after Pesach, we were having a discussion in a class, and one girl who had been at a hotel over Yom Tov told of a very disturbing incident during a speech - also by a big Rabbi in YU. He was saying that it's a "machlokes" (between who, I don't know) whether a Jewish person really has a special neshama, etc. My friend, baruch Hashsem, had the courage - and guts, really - to say something about what he was saying right then and there, in front of everyone, but the whole thing really concerned me. What am I supposed to think? I know a lot of wonderful, frum (who cares what "level" they're on - who am I to judge - but they ARE shomrei Torah u'Mitzvos, and are dedicated to Yiddishkeit) people who went to YU, or are involved with it. But lately I've been hearing things that have just gotten me really confused... If someone could shed a little light on the matter, I'd appreciate it! |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 09 May 2008 1:19
If you hear stuff like that from a Modern Orthodox rabbi you should not be surprised. This is nothing new, and nothing surprising. I know Modern Orthodox rabbis who even believe in evolution. Seriously. And dont be surprised, either, when you find Jews who follow Halachha but believe kefirah. That, too, is nothing new. As the Chazon Ish said, there are Jews in whose homes you can eat anything because they are so strict about Kashrus....with one exception. You can not drink their wine because they make it into yayin nesech. ;-) |
| taon | Posted - 09 May 2008 2:34
First, we should go with the assumption there was some kind of misunderstanding. This site alone has been misquoted multiple times. But since we are also obligated to protect ourslves, it may also be importanrt to see the chances of them being real. Before anyone comments, I have grown up in a very modern orthodox enviroment, met a lot of YU Rabbeim and roshei yeshivos, i'm not just making this up. 1 This is clear-cut apikorsus and not defendable. I've known Rabbi's who are between the secular world and Judaism to try to come up with apologetics, but no one could go this far and claim to follow the Torah. it's ridiculous. I remeber, a few years a go, there was some similar statement made in a "modernized" community, and it caused a lot of uproar. The person who said it wasn't religious, however. I don't know why he would be speaking to religious people, but anyway, it's possible this is the same thing attributed to the wrong person. I don't remember the whole story. 2 sadly likely.When i was going trough a whole what's-real-and-true stage, i read plenty of these kinds of statements, ranging from pure apikorsus to slightly-buyable apologetics. here on Frumteens, we don't bend anything to fit in with the world's view, but many people do. This produces wild theories, usually involing obscure and non-trustworthy sources, and the tendency to overuse the concept of a mashal and a lack of understanding of what Midrashim are. Your hypothetical cheder child could see through this, people like myself, who were brought up being told such beliefs were accepted and that the ones saying them were undisputable gedolim, often can not. Or worse, assume this is the best excuse we have and dump it altogether. taon questions? go here: www.frumteens.com/forum.php?forum_id=65 |
| Matisyohu28 | Posted - 11 May 2008 14:57
Mod, I know plenty of MO people, who I disagree with on many things, however I have never heard them say thigns that are so off. I always thought MO was just about assimilation, watching TV, movies, having girlfriends, think that secular stuff is valuable, and want girls to learn gemora - all that is wrong, but I dont think one can call it real kefirah - ignorance yes, but to say the torah is cv's wrong like this person did, is a totally different universe. MO tries to say the torah says what they're saying - which means they accept the torah and are not apikorsim, but this is not what I expect from an orthodox rabbi, modern or not. reform say the same thing about yetzias mitzrayim. My father, and I really hate to say this because he's grown since then, used to talk that way, that he thought the 'message' or whatever behind torah was true, and I expected it from a man who did not know aleph-bais, but from a rabbi, with smicha, supposedly holding a chair of 'talmud' study in a yeshiva..sickening. How can we put up with this? Shouldn't there be stronger opposition? Not all of MO is like this, at all, by and large they do not think this way, but if some do, something has to be done, maybe cherem, or whatever, or at least beig thrown out of the RCA or whoever they're affiliated with. Mussar teaches you how to live. But learning bava kama is living! - Rav Avigdor Miller ZT'L |
| trying2shteig | Posted - 11 May 2008 23:04
i've given up on evolution a long time ago because it has absolutely no evidence but rav kook holds that evolution isn't necessarily a stira to the Torah. so why do you say that some "MO people even believe in evolution"? |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 12 May 2008 0:06
Because (a) the reason they believe in it has nothing to do with Rav Kook - as they say themselves - they believe the scientists; (b) for those that are relying on rav kook - that is the kashya, not the teretz - to ignore evidence of the entire torah that says evolution could not have happened (not enough time), and rely on the scientists against the torah because a rabbi in the 20th century said something to the contrary, with no convincing evidence at all - is their own choice, and (c) it wasnt just not just a rabbi in the 20th century, it was a man as controversial as rav kook, who said so many inexplicable things, things clearly against that torah (even his staunchest supporter, the gerrer rebbe, defended him by saying that his "love for jews" caused him to say things against the torah - things that make tameh tahor and tahor tameh), and others said he was either an apikores or in some way or manner had fallen into the hands of the Sitra Achra, or some such discrediting assessment - to take a statement from someone like that which they have no idea how to defend, no idea why it makes sense, and decide against all they know about the torah --- thats their own choice, and according to the halachic due process they should not be doing it. the only reason they do is because they independently want to believe in evolution. it was not a torah-based decision, because from a torah perspective, it makes no sense for them to believe it, rav kook notwithstanding. |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 12 May 2008 0:12
matisyahu -- The reason there is not as much opposition to modern orthodoxy as you suggest, is because modern orthodoxy poses no danger to anyone nowadays - it is completely irrelevant and not taken seriously by bnei torah. it's just some deviant group of confused groups of jews, and everyone knows that. in the days of rav aharon kotler ZTL, when modern orhtodoxy posed a danger because there were those who said that the traditional style torah life is not livable in america and that things need to change - and in those days, after the war many ppl believed that - rav ahron did in fact strongly oppose it in all forms and manner. but nowadays? no need. theyre harmless - except to themselves. that having been said, even something as baseless as what they call modern orthodoxy can fool some of the people some of the time - and if you see that happening to someone you know, you should of course oppose it in that context, as strongly as necessary. but on a general global scale, theres no need. |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 12 May 2008 16:07
"hi from me", you're confusing apikorsim with someone who believes apikorsus. nobody is discussing whether these people are apikorsim - instead, the discussion is whether their position is apikorsus. one does not necessitate the other. for details, see my post of Oct 11, 2000 (!) at: http://www.frumteens.com/topic.php?topic_id=159&forum_id=33&Topic_Title=Proper+Hashkofos%3A+An+Halachic+Obligation&forum_title=Halachah+vs.+Hashkafa |
| Matisyohu28 | Posted - 13 May 2008 21:56
taon, for klal yisroel's sake I hope it was fabricated or taken our of context, but these statements dont seem to fit in <i>any</i> context whatsoever, unless maybe he was drunk on purim or something. Mussar teaches you how to live. But learning bava kama is living! - Rav Avigdor Miller ZT'L |
| FightForEmes613 | Posted - 14 May 2008 13:24
I would like to point out the sefer ikkarim written by the Rishon R "Yosef Albo where he writes in 1:2-- that as long as one doesnt disagree with the main ikkarei immunah that even if he says something we are supposed to believe (although its not a ikkar in the Torah per se)is not correct he is not a heretic because he is not trying to reject the Torah rather to give an explanation as he seee's fit -- Mod please explain me you believe this is refering to ??? |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 14 May 2008 13:26
I dont understand your question. Please explain what the sefer haikarim you cite has to do with anything that was said |
| Matisyohu28 | Posted - 15 May 2008 23:20
one of the ikkarim is to accept that g-d gave us the torah at sinai - after...yetzias mitzrayim, otherwise why would moshe and klal yisroel be there? denying yetzias mitzrayim, which actually is described by rishonim as the basis of our emunah, is kefirah and makes one an apikores - if a person denies one word of torah he denies all of it, and the torah says that yetzias mitzrayim happened, if he disagrees with torah, he is an apikores, if he thinks torah says what he says..then he's insane. Mussar teaches you how to live. But learning bava kama is living! - Rav Avigdor Miller ZT'L |
| get high | Posted - 19 May 2008 23:50
hi from me, there is a machlokes as to wether a jew is automatically born with all four neshamos or wether he is just born with the potential to attain all four levels. |
| MODERATOR | Posted - 20 May 2008 4:25
you mean 5 neshomos. but nobody holds that a jew is born with more than 3. 4 and 5 have to be earned. |
| get high | Posted - 26 May 2008 1:05
well many hold the 5th is basicly unatainable, hence i said 4. |
Click Here To Close Thread, Administrators & Moderators Only.
Show All Forums |
Post Reply