Monday, August 11, 2008

Chabad - Rav Schach/Disputing attack on him

The following is a refutation of the criticism of Rav Shach. I have edited some of the angry language to make it more acceptable. I personally agree with most of what is expressed here.
===========================
Yonah L has left a new comment on your post "Chabad - Rav Schach & Lubavitcher Rebbe":

Shlomie's post serves as an excellent example of the kinds of [misinformation] Chabad has perpetrated in its attack against Rav Schach. Failing to mention that Rav Schach's views were also the views of many other major rabbonim and also having utter disregard for facts.

I will illustrate a few of the misrepresentations he made. Incidentally, some one else claimed that R' Nochum Partzovits (this was heard from"reliable sources") claimed that he was fond of the Rebbe's depth(!). There is no end to the errors.
>>Unfortunately, the post and some of the articles linked therin contain some rather absurd fallacies. It is, however, important to remember that Rav Shach represented a very extreme view that was not shared by most gedolim, and that was often simply wrong.
Rav Schach's views were in fact shared by almost everyone of significance. And your opinion as to whether it was wrong is meaningless. It was their opinion.
>>It is easy to call anybody we disagree with 'apikorus', but that doesn't make it so.

And yet the Rebbe called people who did not agree with him messengers of the Samach Mem, and accused them of wearing possult tefilin.
>>Here is an article from awhile ago, making some very valid points:
These are not valid points.
>>There has been a lot of talk about gedolim and especially about Rav Shach. Before people make any judgements I think it is important to know something about the man and his teachings. If what I say appears harsh, let me assure the readers that I have said the same things to many rabbis and they have agreed with me. Since the views I will be expressing are also those of numerous others it would be best for the moderator not to censor it. I realize that others are afraid to speak out so I will say what everyone else is thinking. Needless to say, the Lubavitchers have spoken out and been a great deal harsher than I will be but that is for good reason. Rav Shach has branded the rebbe a heretic.
[...]
>>>>Furthermore, he has branded the entire movement as heretical.
Those who believe the Rebbe is God are heretics.
>>Most people respond harshly when they have been called heretics, Especially since the other gedolim seem to have no great problem with Habad.
Like whom? The Brisker Rav, Rav Hutner, Rav Ruderman, R' Yaakov and Rav Shach obviously had a problem with him. So did Rav Yaakov Weinberg and Rav Ahron Soleveitchik. Even today, Rav Ahron Feldman, Rav Zev Leff, and even more modern orthodox Rabbis like Norman Lamm and David Berger have a problem with Chabad and its Rebbe. The list is actually significantly longer. So, exactly what do you mean by "the other gedolim" who don't have a problem with Chabad?
>>They don't support everything Habad does but you don't have other gedolim using the inflammatory rhetoric of R. Shach.
Inflammatory rhetoric was the problem? I thought the problem was how they viewed Chabad. Its not that they don't support what Chabad has done--they think its "repugnant," "misse", and not in accord with the mesorah. This is not inflammatory language, perhaps, but they certainly condemn their behavior.
>>In fact he is very inconsistent
In your ignorant mind, that is.
>>He mocks the Lubavithcher rebbe's Rambam learning program saying that people knew about the Rambabm before Lubavitch came around and that no one should follow Habad's program and it is forbidden to innovate
This is not the real reason. Please read the Michtav.
>>and yet he praises Daf Yomi.
Not quite, either.
>>Well, people knew about learning Talmud before R. Meir Shapiro. The difference is that when Rav Shach likes something, when it comes from his circles, then it is ok. However if an innovation, no matter how good, comes from another circle then he viciosly attacks it.
This is not true at all. You have not read your sources and you have made a false and ignorant conclusion. Pathetic.
>>In general, everything that comes out of his mouth is criticism.
I don't know what you mean by this. Have you learned by him? Have you talked with him for many years? How do you know this? Perhaps you meant his writings? Well, you have demonstrated so far that you have not actually read them. Otherwise, aside from having a strange agenda and no problems with misrepresenting the facts, you are doing fine.
>>He does not believe in building but in destroying.
What a generalization. There are so many yeshivos and institutions, so many seforim and talmidim, so many shuls and battei medrashim, which attribute their success and methods to him. The only one being destructive here is you.
>>All of his volumes of letters are attacks against everything from Lubavitch, to religious Zionism, to Hesder yeshivot, to Rav Goreh (who has no yirat shamayim according to Shach), to R. Steinsaltz (another heretic).
You did not know who Rav Goren is? This is obviously a made up essay from an otherwise knowledgable scholar. There is no way he could have made such a mistake. But I would add that Rav Yoel, Rav Reuven Grozovksy, Rav Baruch Ber, Rav Chaim Brisker, Rav Elchonon Wasserman, the Chofetz Chaim and many others had far stronger views against Religious Zionists. Rav Goren's shiur in YU was STRONGLY argued with by the Rav himself. And his extremely bizarre and controversial rulings have been assaulted by everyone as being shallow. The fact that he made such concessions in halacha would lead anyone to think he had little yiras shomayim. None of the gedolei yisroel in Amercia--at least the Charedim--held of him at all. He loved Chacham Ovadia, though. As for Rav Steinzaltz, R' Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer also places his books on cherem. So, again, Rav Shach was hardly ever alone on any of these issues. You can only be willfully ignorant about this. Anyone who did ANY research on these issues would know better.
>>When the rest of he Jewish world was celebrating the Entebbe raid and R. Moshe said it was an open miracle Shach gave a talk saying that what the Government did was forbidden.
[...]
>>This is exactly what the Satmar rebbe said! He gave his famous talk last year viciously attacking the kibbutzim. Why? We all know that they don't keep kosher there but why attack them.
This is just a strange argument. Then you admit Rav Shach was not alone on this position, either. . . In your opinion, it is muttar to attack Rav Shach but not muttar to attack people who know better but refuse to keep halacha--people who are kofrim biikkar?
>>Is this the way to bring people together and bring them to Yiddishkeit?
Is that what this article is aiming to do?
>>Is this love?
I ask the same question back to you. I personally think that it is love to instruct followers the difference between right and wrong. YOu obviously need a lesson on this important distinction.
>>Lubavitch knows how to be mekarev, they do it through love.
This is completely untrue. Chabad has refused to do kiruv work to those who won't be Chabad. And they are turning people into mindness messiah worshipping ignoramouses. Aish does Kiruv. So does Ohr Someach. Their people did not turn out that way. Chabad does it because they think it will make their Rebbe the moshiach. That is not love of kiruv; it is the product of indoctrination.
>>Shack simply attacks.
[...] And what is this generalization? Do you not know how the Rebbe attacked the Chazon Ish for not learning Tanya? He had no idea whether he did not or not. And yet, a young man who spent 15 years aimlessly in Europe on community funds had the nerve to unilatterally attack an undisputed gadol hador of an earlier generation!! What do you call that?
>>And then he attacked President Herzog for no reason. Herzog did more for religious Jewry than any president and he is a fine man but Shach viciously attacks him just like he attacks the kibbutzniks who have laid down their lives so that he could live in peace.
This makes no sense. Explain exactly how kibbutzniks laid down their lives so that Rav Shach could live in peace? Do you have any legitamite yiras shomayim at all?
>>And he expects the secularists to keep subsidizing the yeshivot at the massive rate they have been?
The Rebbe lived off community funds for 15 years doing nothing in Europe. Ask his people how he can do that.
>>Rav Shach has no value in his life other than that of learning Torah. People can't feel good about anything other than learning Torah.
This is actually a legitimate Torah approach--one the Rebbe attempted to replicate.
>>There is no value to the State of Israel other than that it enables us to learn Torah and its destruction would be no great tragedy if Torah continued to be learnt.
This is the view of pretty much every gadol in the Charedi world before him.
>> He opposed the annexation of East Jerusalem and Golan because it will get the goyim mad. He doesn't recognize the concept that Jews should see something positive in annexing our capital-- East Jerusalem.
Actually he does, but he ruled differently.
>>He also speaks of not provoking the Gentiles, a concept which has no validity when Jews have a state, although he thinks that the State is just as much a galut as N. Y. and London.
It is. Read the news. Did you forget that thousands of people were kicked out of their homes by their own government? WE ARE IN GOLUS. Get it through your head.
>>He says that Jews in Israel should act as if they were dancing before the Polish nobleman. In other words, the fact that Jews now have a state means nothing about how they relate to the world.
This is the view of every religious charedi. This is a criticsm? This only indicts your ignorance!
>>They still must have this inferiority comples. There is something wrong with having pride and holding one's head up.
Yes there is, actually. [...]
>>His views have infected the Haredi community. We all know that
they dodge the draft but it is even worse. They refuse to say a mi
shebarakh for IDF even though the latter protect them from the Arabs.
And Chabad refuses to say a mishaberach, as well. They were also deeply anti zionist--did you ever know this?
>>They refuse to say a prayer for the government which gives them millions of dollars. In the diaspora they alwasy said a prayer for the government but not in Israel.
So now its not a Jewish state? I am sorry, but YOU are inconsistent.
>>In the Diaspora they always acted patriotic and if there was a moment of silence for war dead they wouldn't dream of breaking with the practice.
Its a non Jewish concept. Did you ever learn anything?

>>However in Israel while everyone stands at attention on Yom Hashoah they go about their business.
They do other things lizecher nishmas the kedoshim who were killed. And far more meaningful things than the evil michallei shabbos who have instituted these goyish practices.
>>Do they realize how much of a hillul hashem this is and how it hurts the feelings of others who are remembering loved ones.
Everyone knows that learning lizecher nishmas the kedoshim means more. Except goyim.
>>Of course they know but they don't care. Unlike Lubavitch they enjoy confrontation.
There is no faction in the entire jewish community which does not ENJOY confrontation more than Chabad. They have the most fights. They have the most machlomes. Even according to their own spin story, the greatest messhugennim have taken over 770? How? By hostile force? And what do they fight over, a zatzal? And now you are writing out against the entire charedi community? What do you know about these issues? You obviously know nothing about them, what they practice, what they do and feel.
>>For R. Shach there is only one truth.
Mr. Olver said the same thing about the Rebbe. So, why is this a problem. In the end, there really is only one truth!!!
>> He has no conception of Jewsh history and doesn't realize that there can be disputes in matters of hashkafah,
COMPLETELY untrue. You have never read his works.
>>as long as we all accept Torah and halakhhah.
The problem he has with those who criticizes is that they do not accept Torah and Halacha. See above.
>>Thus when R. Ovadiah decided to join the government he threatened to ban all of the latter's books
No other? Are you sure? Do you know Chabad has banned Rav Shach books? Did you know they banned Rav Kotler's books?
>>No other gadol has ever made such irresponsible statements and acted in such a dictatorial manner.
Rav Shach did not make any irresponsible comments. You never read anything he ever wrote. As was mentioned above, everything he said was in keeping with traditional charedi--frum and ehrlich Jewish--hashkafa and was backed by nearly if not everyone in his camp. The Rebbe on the other hand was a dictator. He demanded the greatest level of respect, called those against him messengers of Satan or wearing non kosher tefillin.
>>Everything I have described so far is written in his books.
You have some nerve. You have never read his books!!! That much is clear from his post.
>>I have not made any of it up
As was demosntrated this whole thing was made up.
>>and if gets you mad hearing what he believes trust me that this is only the tip of the iceberg and there is no way that anyone who reads this line should regard him as an important gadol
He was regarded as a gadol hador by every gadol in his time, save [...] the Rebbe.
>>since everything most of us view as important he mocks (he even says its forbidden to form rabbinic organizations).
The Rebbe mocked many things I hold important--mitzvos, for example, learning, another. But his mocking what is important to me is not what makes him not a gadol. It is what he mocked which renders him possul.
>>To give one final example of this let me refer to Rav Shach's attack on R. Soloveitchik in vol. 4of his letters. As everyone knows, there were always disputes in hashkafah between the Rav and other gedolim. However this never stopped the Lubvavitcher rebbe or R. Moshe or R. Aharon Kotler from being on close personal terms with the Rav and respecting his gadlus.
Hillarious. Read Larger than Life. The Rebbe was not at all close to the Rav. In fact, the Rav visited him once in 40 years--and they lived in the same city!!! If that does not show you enough, read the book. R' Ahron held the Rav was responsible for half the tumah in America. Other than that, sure, they respected his gadlus as a genius lamdan.
>>Obviously R. Moshe and the Lubavticher Rebbe, as well as the Rav, believed that their own approach was correct and the others were wrong.
This is not true. R' Moshe saw the good in every Jew and Jewish path. The Rebbe HATED anyone who was did not learn Tanya. And this we know from what he wrote about the Chazon Ish even when the Rebbe was a relative kid.
>>But they never said that the approach of the other's was forbidden.
The Rebbe held that Chabad is the most superior. He was the greatest ethnocentrist in the world. [...] with the silly notion that Chabad is the center of yiddishkeit and that the Beis Hamikdosh would be build in 770.
>>It was just misguided.
The rebbe, you mean. . .
>> similarly, the Rav never said that everyone had to learn secular studies, that other aproaches were invalid.
But his talmidim did. Read Rav Lichtenstein's essays on this topic.
>>Rather, only that his approach was also legitimate.
Everyone believes this. Except for the Rebbe.
>>Rav Shach has a different approach, one which shows all of his feeling of knowing everything and his belief that he, and only he, knows the truth, the one and only truth.
Mr. Oliver said that the Rebbe saw truth, and this is why he was unequivocal about this. Why is Rav Shach held to a different standsrd?
>>In discussing the Rav's book Hamesh Derashot he doesn't say that we have a different view or that the Rav is wrong. No, what he says is that it is forbidden to listen to what the Rav says. Forbidden. the Rav goes against Daat Torah and the Rav has completely distorted Daas Torah (one wonders whose Daas Torah. Doesn't the Rav have his own Daas Torah?)
No, he does not. Because he and his talmidim to not BELIEVE in daas torah.
>>Since anyone who goes against Daas Torah speaks heresy it is forbidden to listen to what the Rav says!
This was the opinion of many on him. Rav Hutner did not allow his talmidim to go to the Rav's yartzei shiur for relatively smaller reasons.

>>Does he realize who is talking about? This is not some Mizrachi functionary he is mocking (not that this is forgivable either). He is speaking about R. Soloveitchik, whom R. Tendler called the greatest Rosh Yeshivah of our generation, whom the Lubavitcher rebbe stood up for etc. etc.
And you are not writing a hatchet job on just anyone--not that THAT would be forgivable--but against an undispute gadol hador that eeryone from Rav PAler to Rav Mosdhe Shmuel Shapiro, from Rav Shmuiel Barenboum to Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky, from Rav Moshe Feinstein to Rav Isser Zalman, from Rav Ahron KOtler to the Brisker Rav--had the GREATEST respect for!!! And that means a lot more than what Rav Tendler, a relative novice in learning, held of the Rav. I would say the Rav was the real deal and that would mean more. Rabbi Tendler wrote, said, and did a lot of crazy things in the past. He is not someone I would bring up. Even in his letter "defending" the Rav, he disorted things--claiming the Rav was the greatest Rosh Yeshiva in his generation--a generation where Rav Chaim SHmuelevitz and Rav Shmuel Rozovsky--separately--had more talmidim both in theiy shiur and more who learned their seforim. The fact the Rebbe stood for him means nothing. No one cares about the Rebbe's empty gestures. He was greatful someone showed him respect after 40 years.
>>May God forgive him for degrading our teacher!
[...]
>>Furthermore, R. Shach continues, it is the Rav's secular studies which are responsible for these distortions. Woe are the ears which hear such nonsense.
Nonsense? This is the view of just about every gadol preceding Rav Shach's generation. You may not like it or have another view, which is something you would claim to respect. But Rav Shach's views are nonsense? HYPOCRITE.
>>What chutzpah, to say that secular studies distorted the Rav's Torah!
But this is another view. . . does this not mean that you are. . .not respecting . . .another person's views? That is terribly inconsistent.
>>Rav Shach goes on for a few pages without any respect for the fact that the Rav was a gadol and he is entitled to have different hashkafah
But you just did that!!!
>>also throwing in some irrelevancies about how Hesder yeshivot have destroyed
any notion of striving for greatness in Torah learning.
Mark his words: there will never be a gadol produced by a hesder yeshiva.
>>(He also hates hesder because their students actually get a job. For R. Shach, and Israeli Haredim, as oposed to American haradim, there is something negative about actually working for a living. There is no concept of a Baal ha-Bayit. That is why he put Leo Levi's book Shaare Talmud Torah in Herem, since it advocates a Torah im Derekh Eretz [i. e.earning a living] approach).
This is irrelevant commentary.
>>Shach is also confused how come the rabbis in the U.S. did not protest The Rav's opinions and furthermore that they contributed to the book Kevod ha-Rav .
Its Rav Shach to you. And plenty did not. Most did not, in fact.
>>This is a great hillul hashem since by giving the Rav a book in his honor and praising him the yeshivah students will see this and think that is ok to follow in the Rav's path, God forbid, and will absorb his views which are completely "pasul".
And yet Chabadniks like you can lie about a gadol because you want to emphasize that his views about the rebbe are pasul. And that's ok?
>>I could go on but I think everyone gets the point. When it comes to gedolim we should consult R. Eliashiv, R. Shlomo Zalman, the chief Rabbis, R. Ovadia etc. We should not even take Rav Shach's opinion into consideration. By adopting such a hateful tone and being so opposed to everything we consider decent he is not really different than the Satmar rebbe, who was, as R. Aharon Soloveitchik told me, a great scholar who made a terrible blunder. So too with Rav Shach. He has slandered great gedolim and for his sake we should hope that it was all done le-shem shamayim. When I asked R. Aharon why we don't put him in Herem in accordance with the pesak of the Rambam re. anyone who slanders a gadol all he could say was that we no longer use the Herem. One thing must be said for Lubavitch, even thought R.Shach says they are heretics and that their rebbe is one of the greatest sinners alive, and going straight to gehinnom, they have not lost their cool. I don't think there will be any rejoicing in Crown Heights when he passes away. They realize that this whole affair is very sad. Unfortunately, however, when the rebbe passes away there will be rejoicing in Ponovezh because one is supposed to rejoice at the death of a heretic. What have we come to!
First, since Rav Eliashiv did not pasken the way you wanted him to about Slifkin and others, I am sure you would retract that, too. this is because you don't know what it means to have respect for talmidei chachomim. You only care about them doing what YOU want them to do. No one in Ponoves danced when he died. In fact, Rav Shach davened for him to get better because he was only against his false views, nothing more. But shlomie, Tzig, Albert and others in the blog world have stooped so low in fighting Rav Shachs views that you have shown no respect for yourself. The entire Chabad was giddy with laughter when Rav Shach passed away. They hate him, hate anyone like him, and they hate anyone who is not like them. That is Chabad. That is what you defend.
>>P. S. As I already pointed out, everything I have said in this letter has met with the approval of rabbis, none of whom are in the Lubavitch camp.
This is obviously untrue as no one would endorse lying about Rav Shach.

17 comments :

  1. I would have to say that I agree one hundred percent with this guy's rebuttal. Whoever wrote that hatchet job on Rav Shach clearly knows nothing about the issues. In addition, he is clearly not interested in being consistent in his own letter!

    ReplyDelete
  2. The stark contrast between the author of the article criticizing R'Shach, namely Marc Shapiro, and the author of this sputtering attempt at a rebuttal, is this:
    Marc Shapiro is a serious academic, as well as a tremendous talmid chochom. While I personally do not agree with many of his positions, it's hard to argue with the facts. Dr. Shapiro doesn't make this stuff up- he quotes from R'Shach's michtavim u'mamarim directly. All the hate is printed black-on-white for all to see. You may try to 'explain' it away, but it's existence is undeniable. Why not analyze the facts for what they are, instead of looking like brainwashed clones by denying what's printed in plain view ?!
    "Milsa d'avida l'iglui , lo meshakri inshi", so Yonah L - are you a man or a robot ?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whoever wrote this vile litany of vicious slander about Chabad and the Rebbe clearly knows nothing about Chabad and the Rebbe, except what they read on crude hate sites.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That any rational being could consider this screed a 'rebuttal' of anything is amazing. All that Yonah L does here is scream "lies, lies, lies..." without providing a single shred of evidence to support any of his claims. Contrast this with Marc Shapiro, who relies directly on R'Schach's own letters to establish his position, and the contrast is rather stark. Is this the way of 'daas torah', Rabbi Eidensohn ?
    Last I checked, daas torah was that "lo rainu eino raaya" !

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Did you forget that thousands of people were kicked out of their homes by their own government? WE ARE IN GOLUS. Get it through your head."

    In the context in which this was written, this is utter Chutzpa, or a stupifiying example of the writer's ability to deny reality. It was Rav Elyashiv who signed a pact with Ariel Sharon regarding the expulsion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I love how Chabad pundits say that anyone who demonstrates clearly the truth is doing so without evidence!!! Its hillarious. Everything Yonah said was backed up!

    ReplyDelete
  7. So S. Klimowitzer,

    Yonah L is both an academic and a scholar, as well. He pointed out that Marc's letter was filled with inconsistencies, generalities, and demosntrated a lack of familiarity with Rav Shach's writings. So aside from showing that YOU are a robot who cares only for mindless trashing of people [edited]]he shows great knowledge on the subject and courage for arguing against a peer. You, on the other hand, well, that's another story.

    The same goes from Mr. Oliver's or Shlomies rants: Yonah L did not just say lies, lies, lies, he clearly is familiar with Rav Shach's writnigs and demonstrated Marc's lack of familiarity with Charedi positions from Religions Zionists (he did not even know that Rav Goren's name was Rav Goren as opposed to Goreh!) to Chabad. Marc, on the other hand, shows he knows nothing about Rav Shach. Mr. Oliver, the Rebbe did state all those things. They are in black and white.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think, and any honest researcher would agree, that it's best to let people speak for themselves. So the best way to analyze Rav Shach's writings is to post them verbatim. Here are some quotes:

    On Rabbi Joseph Ber Soloveitchik

    Michtavim U-Ma’amarim (Bnei Brak, 5848 -5755), vol. 4 pages 36-40. [RJBS’s article is full] “of things that it is forbidden to hear”. See also ibid. p. 107 [in reference to RJBS’s work: “the book contains heresy, in the literal sense of the word. The mind is boggled by such a sight.”

    It must be emphasized that R' Shach was strongly apposed to communal disharmony, as he himself asserted many times. Yet, in such a situation he felt compelled to speak out in order to safeguard the Jewish heritage. For Rabbi Shach it was better to cause ruptures in the Jewish community than to allow thousands of Jewish hearts and minds to be poisoned by RS heresy.


    On Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz

    R' Shach, Michtavim U-Ma’amarim. vol. 4 pp. 65-7. [In a letter written two days before Rosh HaShanah in the year 5749]: “…All his works contain heresy. It is forbidden to debate with Steinsaltz, because, as a heretic, all the debates will only cause him to degenerate more. He is not a genuine person (ein tocho ke-baro) and everyone is obliged to distance themselves from him. This is the duty of the hour (mitzvah be-sha’atah). It will generate merit for the forthcoming Day of Judgement.”

    See also ibid. vol. 5 pp. 163. There, Rabbi Shach declares that it will be impossible for Rabbi Steinsaltz to do Teshuvah (repent) and make right the colossal damage that his edition of the Talmud has wrought. See also ibid. p. 28-9. R' Shach explained that he was not lacking in Ahavas Yisrael.On the contrary he was saving the souls of all the Jewish people who had the potential to be influenced by the impure works of Rabbi Steinsaltz.


    On Rabbi Shlomo Goren

    R' EMM Shach Michtavim U-Ma’amarim, vols.1-2, pp.73-4; vol. 6, pp.78-9. “He [Rabbi Goren] is not a Rabbi and his Halachik rulings are worth nothing. One may not eat food manufactured under his supervision or carrying his seal of approval. He belongs outside the camp (michutz la-machaneh mo’shavo)…he is worse than the Reformers. One must mourn for the Sefer Torah that was burned”.

    R' Shach acknowledged that Rabbi Goren claimed that he was not violating the law and had authored a book in which he justifies his opinion. However, although he himself had not read it, those who had, had informed him that it was no more than “a joke, falsification of facts and lies”.

    On Rabbi Yehudah Levi

    Michtavim U-Ma’amarim vol. 1, pp. 107-8. [Book expressing ‘Hirschian’ philosophy was banned and the author severely chastised for expressing views that are held to be wrong in certain circles.]


    On Religious Zionists

    Michtavim U-Ma’amarim vols.1-2, pp.75-6. [Although Rabbi Shach was most passionate in his views on the secular Israelis, he also spoke strongly against religious Zionists (or ‘quasi aggudists’: “agguda’im le-machatzeh”). Rabbi Shach once said:] “I am compelled to tell you”, that they are essentially no different. It is “the same pot” of Tereifah meat; “the only difference is that their [the religious Zionist’s] pot is covered with a knitted yarmulke (Kippah Serugah)!” Religious Zionists have done nothing for the benefit of Torah causes in Israel. They are void of Torah and the fear of Heaven and are not capable of producing any gedolim. Any success that we – the Torah world have – is despite, not because, of them. Those quasi-aggudists who harbor pro-Zionistic sympathies may be observant Jews but they are guilty of Shittuf! (‘metaphorical idolatry’). They include Yeshivah high schools in the ambit of their interests – “Oy! What a sharp sword on the soul of the Yeshivos!”



    Of course there are also Rabbi Menachem Kasher, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchok HaKohain Kook, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Rabbi M. Schneerson, and many others.
    Personally, I think Shlomo Goren made terrible mistakes, but nothing like what Rabbi Belsky has pulled in the last few years.... Also, to condemn a man without actually reading his justifications yourself - is that the Torah way ?

    What say you, Rabbi Eidensohn ?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You are all fanning hate and sinash chinom by continueing this discussion, especially online for all the world to see and read.

    I suggest that the owner of this blog ask a Rov if this blog is mutor after showing him what is being written here and let us all know who that Rov is that gives you a heter!

    Just because you are doing this online on the internet doesn't make rechilus, loshon harah, moitzi shem ra, etc. mutor.

    All that is happening here is on your achraius.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Just because you are doing this online on the internet doesn't make rechilus, loshon harah, moitzi shem ra, etc. mutor. "

    I agree. There is no doubt in my mind that the Chofetz Chaim would have condemned this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This entire post sounds like an exchange between two agenda-driven people, who disregard anything that doesn't fit the narrative. The only difference is that Yonah L at least seems to have familiarity with Rav Shach's statements but with regard to the Rebbe he cares little for the truth; his opponent is not familiar with what either says.

    ReplyDelete
  12. For those more familiar with the Michatavim--as in all the volumes--as Yonah L is, I think it is clear the Shlomie's points mean nothing. In fact, Rav Shach's positions are very consistent with mainstream Charedi hashkafa. To insult these views, in the main, is to insult all Charedi Hashkafa.

    I am glad it was clarified that Marc acknowledged that he made some mistakes. Yonah L highlighted them here. Well done

    ReplyDelete
  13. "R' Moshe saw the good in every Jew and Jewish path. The Rebbe HATED anyone who was did not learn Tanya. And this we know from what he wrote about the Chazon Ish even when the Rebbe was a relative kid."

    Of all the distortions in this post, this one is the most objectionable. Referring to such a great ohev Yisroel as lacking in ahavas Yisroel is the most despicable chutzpah. To set the record straight and show with what ignorance you write, the Rebbe didn't write it, he said it. He said it when he was well into his 50's, not a "relative kid". And the Rebbe simply supported the statement of a Chosid that someone who hadn't learnt Tanya would feel that he missed out when reaching Gan Eden. That's all. Nothing about hate, ch"v, but rather love: revealing to us that even one very learned in halacha will feel that he missed out if he doesn't learn pnimiyus haTorah, and so we shouldn't neglect this study. Along these lines, the Ramak and R' Chaim Vital speak very sharply about those who neglect this study, although they were great Tzadikim and ohavei Yisroel.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Despite Rav Shach's opposition to Rav Schneersohn he nevertheless recited Tehillim when Rav Schneerson fell ill. Rav Shach explained “My battle is against his erroneous approach, against the movement, but not against the people in any personal way. I pray for the Rebbe’s recovery and simultaneously, also pray that he abandon his invalid way.”[12]

    Rav Shach wrote [13] that he was not at all opposed to chassidim and chassidus (including Chassidus Chabad from the previous generations[14]); he said he recognized them as "yera'im" and "shlaymim" and full of Torah and Mitzvos and fear of heaven.[15] Shach often said and wrote that the slander spread against him about his persecution of chassidim was something he could never forgive, for it had transformed him into a baal machlokes, a disputant, at a time when he loved peace and pursued it to the nth degree.[12] He is quoted as saying, "We are fighting against secularism in the yeshivas. Today, besiyata deShmaya people are learning Torah in both Chassidic and Lithuanian yeshivos. In my view there is no difference between them; all of them are important and dear to me. In fact, go ahead and ask your Chassidic friends with us at Ponevezh if I distinguish between Chassidic and Lithuanian bochurim."[16]

    12 ^ http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/archives5766/eikev/olubvlornczekv66.htm

    13 ^ Michtavim U'Maamaromim 5:533 (pg. 137)

    14 ^ Michtavim U'Maamorim 2:23 (pg. 31) 1986 edition.

    15 ^ Michtavim U'Maamaromim 5:534 (pg. 138)

    16 ^ http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/archives5763/TZR63features2.htm

    ReplyDelete
  15. Regarding the macha'a against R' Shlomo Goren, check out these links:

    1. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=28315&pgnum=36&hilite=

    2. http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/archives5763/TZV63features2.htm

    ReplyDelete
  16. and here:

    http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/archives5763/beshalach/BSH63features2.htm

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=12319&st=&pgnum=26

    ReplyDelete
  17. Regarding macha'a against R' Steinsaltz, check this out:

    http://www.yoel-ab.com/katava.asp?id=115

    http://www.yoel-ab.com/katava_print.asp?id=115

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.