https://mobile.kikar.co.il/article/320551
ספרו של הגר"נ קמינצקי שנפטר לאחרונה, 'עשייתו של גדול', עורר חרם רבתי וטקסי שריפה המוניים, ויצר סערה אדירה גם בתוך משפחתו; הכל, לטענתו, משום שנגע במונח הרגיש שנקרא 'גדול'
it is important to know that he revealed a very important fact i.e.,
that there are two different and distinct traditions
that of gadolim and that which is constructed for the masses
The making of a gadol is simply an account of what he personally heard from his father and other gadolim as Rav Nossen himself said in reply to Rabbi Breurer critique that it was not history. His crime was that he revealed this version to the masses
The Torah tells us of the crimes of the tzaddikim, eg Shlomo, Shimshon etc. There is no secret Torah, there is Hakhel, it's a communal , true Torah, that doesn't lie.
ReplyDelete"His crime was that he revealed this version to the masses"
ReplyDeleteIt is not Purim every day. Masks are for Purim, but we need to have Yashrus and exactitude. RNK ztl had these middos, and that is why he was set upon by a pack of hungry wolves.
The interview is very Interesting
ReplyDeletethe stories very enlightening too bad the book is unavailable.
בחודש אדר תשס"ג פורסם ברבים נידוי שהטילו הרב ליפקוביץ ובית דינו על הרב קמנצקי, בנימוק שהוא "מבזה תלמידי חכמים".
ReplyDeleteשולחן ערוך יורה דעה שלד, סעיף ג
מנודה שמת, בית דין שולחין ומניחין אבן על ארונו, ואין קורעין עליו, ולא חולצין, ולא מספידין
political
ReplyDeleteas Rav Sternbuch noted at the time - it has no halachic validity
ReplyDeleteWhat halacha did Rav Sternbuch base his psak on?
ReplyDeletePlease show us a source in the Shulchan Aruch, that we question the motives of the one declaring the Niddui.
ReplyDeleteRambam does say that a rav or dayan who receives a bribe, is invalid, and must withdraw. He also says that a davar is also a bribe, eg if somebody is helped in one matter or other, it is a bribe. So halacha does question the motives of dayanim.
ReplyDeleteThe halachos of Niddui are concentrated in Shulchan Aruch YD 334
ReplyDeletehttps://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9A_%D7%94%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%97%D7%9F_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94_%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%94_%D7%A9%D7%9C%D7%93
so you don't have to search too far.
Niddui doesn't require a beis din, so "Hilchos Dayanim" are not germane to the discussion.
I never mentioned Rav Elyashev. The Niddui was declared by Rabbi Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz, a great person in his own right.
https://daattorah.blogspot.com/2017/03/rabbi-yitzchok-adlerstein-and-editors.html
ReplyDeleteAnd this link is relevant to the discussion because...?
ReplyDeletethe basis of the phoney niddui was "מבזה תלמידי חכמים".
ReplyDeleteYet, in a parallel discussion, someone is mocking Avraham Avinu, by comparing him chas v'shalom to a menuval, and you say, oh it was all based on lack of information.
RNK's book was not "מבזה תלמידי חכמים". it was just giving factual accounts of Hachamim when they were youngsters. Perhaps it was busting the mythology of Hareidism, which is that Gedolim are perfect beings, like yashke, never made a mistake. This mythology is central to the business and parnasso of the Hareidi interests, hence the Nidui was based on monetary interests - and is thus null and void.
http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2011/08/interview-with-rav-nosson-kamenetzky.html
ReplyDeleteInterview with Rav Nosson ztl
Your comment is an example of "מבזה תלמידי חכמים".
ReplyDeleteRav Nosson lectures on the Making of a Ban
ReplyDeletehttps://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/731293/rabbi-nathan-kamenetsky/making-of-a-ban-a-look-at-the-banning-of-making-of-a-godol/
listen to his lecture, on his version of events-
ReplyDeleteThe original signatories didn't speak English and hadn't read the book. Rav Strenbuch, who grew up in England, and did read it , twice, said there was nothing wrong with the book.
R' Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz didn't need to read the book personally, nor did he need Rabbi Sternbuch's agreement to declare a Niddui.
ReplyDeleteok, so on what basis did he declare the ban, not having read the book?
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that RMYL declared RNK in Niddui, and it's not our business on what basis. The bottom line is, that a Niddui was issued, and AFIK was not rescinded before RMYL passed away.
ReplyDeleteשולחן ערוך יורה דעה שלד, סעיף ג
מנודה שמת, בית דין שולחין ומניחין אבן על ארונו, ואין קורעין עליו, ולא חולצין, ולא מספידין
all halacha is our business, whether it is pleasant or not.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I understand, the original letter was by Rav Elyashiv, and RNK did finally meet with him and comply to some editing.
Even if not rescinded, not everyone has to comply with that niddui, and it may have been on the book and not the person, as far as Rav Elyashiv was concerned.
If i don't follow RMYL, I am not concerned with the validity of his niddui, especially if there are other gedolim who did not recognize it.
Yes, all halacha is our business.
ReplyDeleteI guess that you haven't read the Shulchan Aruch yet.
A Niddui can be issued by one person, and he doesn't need a Beis Din or a consensus of his peers.
so any niddui , whomever gives it , obligates everyone to accept it?
ReplyDeletewhat if everyone puts everyone else in nidui?
LOL. You're proving again that you're not adverse to shooting off your mouth about things that you're clueless about. If you would have read the Siman in Shulchan Aruch, you wouldn't have made this comment.
ReplyDeleteYes I also agree
ReplyDeleteFalse
ReplyDeletetoday we dont have Bais Din
ReplyDeleteWhat does that mean, and what relevance does it have to the rest of the paragraph that אין קורעין עליו, ולא חולצין, ולא מספידין?
ReplyDeletethat's a miracle!
ReplyDeleteWhat is false, and why?
ReplyDeleteDo you know how to write full sentences?
I'm presuming Rav Shternbuch knows a lot more halacha than I do, and he did not accept this niddui - as he blessed RNK publicly in Shul and told him to write many more books. Perhaps there are commentaries and other halachic principles which do not obligate Rav Shternbuch shlita, or Rav Aharon Lichtenstein ztl to keep to that particular niddui. An interesting spectrum. Rav Elyashiv did not put RNK in personal niddui, only the book.
ReplyDeleteYour argumentation is not actual argumentation, it is the fallacy of authority.
ReplyDeleteI doubt it was a real niduio
ReplyDeleteshoiteh
ReplyDeleteI went through that Siman last night -
ReplyDeleteI did not see where it deals with a) a Niddui which is based on an error
b) if everyone puts everyone in niddui.
In halacha, we have to know the basis of any ruling. Going back to Avodah zara, and the sadducees - and of course Horayot. If there is an error or irreularity on a decision, then it is up for review.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, niddui is not, as far as I can see, anything d'oraita. So there is plenty of room for safek. Remember, even doraita Safek mamzer is not assur d'oraita.
I remember RMYL's words quite clearly.
ReplyDeleteMaybe You're too young to remember the story?
When I see someone resorting to insults to make their point, then I know they've lost the argument.
ReplyDeleteThere is no safek about the facts.
ReplyDeleteRNK admitted as much in his "Walla" interview:
שנים חלפו מאז יצא ספרך והוחרם. האם כיום אתה עדיין חש פגוע?
"בהחלט כן. אני עדיין מרגיש פגוע. לא מזמן נפטר מי שקרוא בכל העיתונים 'צדיק הדור' ו'גאון הדור', הרב מיכל יהודה לפקוביץ, ראש ישיבת פונוביז' לצעירים, שפגע בי וקרא להחרים אותי במכתב שכתב. כשהוא נפטר, הרגשתי שאני עדיין כועס עליו, ובוודאי שאני כועס - גם על אלה שעדיין חיים מבין מחרימיי".
If you could present an argument that is well constructed, it is a million times more powerful than your standard "shoiteh" response.
ReplyDeleteEducate yourself.
ReplyDeleteHe would need to read it or have a verified translation. However, it seems you are right. It is open season for niddui, anyone can do it.
ReplyDeleteI would also add that it is very well to cite the SA as end of story - but I don't think halacha is like that. There were important sources before and after the SA, which a current posek would consider. I have no expertise in halacha - but it didn't stop with the SA.
ReplyDeleteFrom the linked interview:
ReplyDeleteNine years have passed since the publishing and banning of your book. Are you still a little hurt?
“Absolutely. I still feel hurt. Someone died, who everyone called the ‘Tzadik HaDor’ and ‘Gaon HaDor,’ Rav Michal Yehuda Lefkowitz, Rosh Yeshivat Ponevitch L’Tzeirim, who hurt me and called for me to be banned in letters that he wrote. Since he died, I have continued to feel anger towards him, and I certainly am still angry with those still living who issues bans against me.”
that's right
ReplyDelete"Niddui doesn't require a beis din, so "Hilchos Dayanim" are not germane to the discussion."
ReplyDeleteBribes are assur d'oraita - so ifther eis a personal or financial motive behind a niddui,presumably it would also affect it. However, trying to understand what niddui actually is? Excommunication, is it only a social stricture, or takkana? Or is it a curse?
Nothing to do with bizayon. For example, one young gadol had Russian books, and had other disagreements. Now, where is the bizayon? He wasn't yet a gadol b'yisrael. Achieving gadlus doesn't take away ones youthful historyy. And vice versa.
ReplyDeleteOn What Halacha? He just read the book!
ReplyDeleteMotives? --'Mistakes' that is the correct wording
ReplyDeleteShoiteh!
ReplyDeleteShock treatment
ReplyDeleteif you cant win on the meritsThen
ReplyDeletetry to win thru process
Like you are now doing!
I was present 30 years ago when Reb Dovid Soloveitchik Lambasted Rav Shackh for saying over untrue statements in the name of his father the Griz when he came to visit and literally chased him out of his house
ReplyDeleteMaybe rav shach is now in nidui?
correct
ReplyDeleteI've looked for it on line, and haven't been able to locate it. It could be that I have someplace in my files, but I don't have access to it now. From what I remember, he put him (not the book) in Niddui, and also said that people are likely to forget this fact, so he asks that from time to time people should make a reminder that the person is in Niddui.
ReplyDeleteMy arguments stand on their merits, while you have yet to present a cognizant point.
ReplyDeleteRemember, insults don't count as an intelligent argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_of_a_Godol
ReplyDeleteIndeed, the Holy Rambam was ostracized and banned by many opponents, some even desecrated his grave, and burned his books. Didn't stop anyone learning Halacha from him.
ReplyDeleteThe official hareidim history is that the Griz chose Rav Shach and the steipler to go over all his halachic decisions with. Just before he was niftar.
ReplyDeletePhantom niddui? Lol
ReplyDeleteTotally irrelevant to the discussion, which is the aspect R' Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz in the story.
ReplyDeleteThe page is devoted to the book, and was presumably written from the Kamenetzky perspective, which I don't blame them for. However of conspicuous absence is any mention of RMYL, whose involvement in the story was carefully airbrushed out.
We know that RMYL was involved, as RNK himself noted in the interview with him:
https://news.walla.co.il/item/1840163
http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2011/08/interview-with-rav-nosson-kamenetzky.html
I understand that RNK was still sore about it, but he never tells us the why & what which was driving R' Michel Yehuda.
I'm only joking, stealing your terminology, haha.
ReplyDeleteDepends on how you define political. There is no bizayon of Torah, but it weakens the Christ-like image of Gedolim. The gra opposed chassidism, in part because of the Christ like image of the leaders. Ironic that the mitnagdim have now adopted this business model.
ReplyDeleteTypical maamar on the subject
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48954961.html?mobile=yes
Sees the concept of rebbe as being close to idolatry
I've heard it 100 times. I've no time to educate you about your phantom nidduis, where are your sour sources? On your phantom hard drive?
ReplyDeleteplease send a copy of the ban
ReplyDeleteall it says is that he wanted to ban him
The joke is on you.
ReplyDeleteIn the interview with him, RNK himself noted RMYL's call for a Niddui.
https://news.walla.co.il/item/1840163
http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2011/08/interview-with-rav-nosson-kamenetzky.html
I understand that RNK was still sore about it, but he never tells us the why & what which was driving R' Michel Yehuda.
You're the one who mentioned "political motivation".
ReplyDeleteIt's not irrelevant. The first letter was written by Rav elyashiv, and then he gathered more signatories. There's a distinction between calling for action, and taking the said action. We want to see evidence of the actual niddui.
ReplyDeleteYour comment should be directed to Berel, who claimed that this was all politically motivated.
ReplyDeleteI've studied the Gra, his history, and and his teachings for several decades, and have never seen any mention of such a reason for his opposition to Chassidism.
Source?
The idea of the importance of having a rebbe is not idolatrous, and is mentioned in the Mishnah (Avos 1:6).
ReplyDeleteTe article you cited is a poor source of the debate, and does not provide references. I have no desire to serve as your tutor for things you have have half-baked information about.
What is the "Christ-like image of Gedolim" that you refer to?
What proof do you have that it existed in the time of the Gra, and that the Gra opposed it?
Christ/ Pope -divine/infallible
ReplyDeleteYou're mischaracterizing the Gra's stance.
ReplyDeleteExcept for the Lubavitcher, who claimed that a rebbe is divine [“Essence and Being of God enclothed in a body”], nobody else dared to make such a radical suggestion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elazar_Shach
See comment by Rabbi Chaim Dov Keller:
http://www.chabad-mafia.com/idolatry
Maybe you are right
ReplyDeleteMaybe ben Chaim is right:
http://www.mesora.org/chassidism.html
When I said Christ in the context of hareidi leaders, the book and the ban, I meant "perfect", the false notion of perfection that xtians hold. Rnk book on gedolim smashes this myth. So the opposition are holding on to this myth.
ReplyDeleteI pointed to the irony of the claim of the misnagdim to be following the Gra, when in fact they have adopted a hassidic view of the rebbe for their own gedolim. That is why nosson K calling one teenage gadol a "sore loser" when losing a chess game is such a sin. The idea that gedolim are not human is sheker.
See here also, where he quotes the Aruch Hashulchan, that exclusion from a minyan must be stipulated in the niddui for it to be effective, thus if it s not part of the niddui, the subject is not excluded from a minyan
ReplyDeletehttps://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8XBjccyzdL8C&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=niddui+aruch&source=bl&ots=jqK741hLBP&sig=ACfU3U1giEUQloKJpEa6r4S3uY-Ue_It1A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjGn--Jif7iAhUMilwKHVA_A8AQ6AEwAXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=niddui%20aruch&f=false
Due to his passing, the point is moot. But regardless, I don't recall ever mentioning about whether or not he was to be excluded from a minyan...
ReplyDeleteIs Shabbes over in USA, or are you in the UK?
ReplyDeleteit is not moot, I am bringing that article to show that there are various opinions outside of the SA. This article was discussing other cases, but there are also various restrictions to the niddui, how it was (if at all written), etc.
ReplyDeleteNo, and no, and I didn't G-d forbid desecrate Shabbos!
ReplyDeleteI didn't suggest otherwise. Israel?
ReplyDeleteCurrently.
ReplyDeleteAre you from Edgware or Finchley?
The latter
ReplyDeleteNext time you are in town let me know, can meet in Kehilas Kodesh Golders Green, or even Daniels bakery.
ReplyDelete