There were many Roshei Yeshiva who would not allow Tehillim to be said for RAYHK back in 1935. They felt that he was a tzadik, brilliant talmid chochom etc. etc., but that his policies and actions were causing Klall Yisroel much damage. Do you feel that this is not similar - or do you feel that a different way is appropriate?
"There were many Roshei Yeshiva who would not allow Tehillim to be said for RAYHK back in 1935" and Rav Yitzchok Hutner was NOT one of them, even though in 1935 he was not a Rosh Yeshiva yet, that would happen in 1936 when he became the Menahel of the first ever High School class at Mesivta Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin and then founded the Bais Medrash in 1940, followed by the founding of the Kollel Gur Aryeh in 1956 (or thereabouts). During all this time Rav Hutner had a large photo of Rav AY Kook hanging in his home, and on Sukkos he would have a portrait of Rav Kook in his Sukkah, that he only took down in the 1950s (or 1960s?) when the debate over Giyus Banos broke out and he swung in public towards the Chazon Ish (whom he never met) while he was personally and Hashkofically very close to Rav Kook in the years he was in Eretz Yisroel in the 1920s and 1930s and sought out and added Rav Kook's Haskoma to his (Rav Hutner's) famous Toras Hanazir Sefer.
If, as Rav Scheiner in his recent letter asserts and as you have implied it was Rav Belsky who proposed a Heter Kiddushei Ta'us in 2002-2003 based on the notion of Mekach Ta'us and even though he (Rav Belsky) ruled for it and favored it, yet once he got word that Rav Elyashiv opposed it he (Rav Belsky) then retracted in writing by sending a letter to Rav Elyashiv withdrawing his prior ruling of Mekach Ta'us then we can without any shadow of a doubt say that Rav Belsky has the added title of Baal Teshuva Gamur and was Mesaken and Mechaper for his actions even though he is a very great Adam Gadol himself but he was Machnia himself to the RASHKEBEHAG Rav Elyashiv who was an even greater Gadol than he, and he therefore deserves even MORE respect and certainly no degradations Chas VeShalom! Therefore, knock it off "Honesty" because it makes you look mean spirited and small and instead give a Yasher Koach to Rabbi Eidensohn for having a better take on the current situation!
Although I think it's obvious that we should daven for him for the people with questions your attendance by the leviya is not sufficient information at least for those who weren't there. If anything I would think the other way. Are you able to explain further ?
Why would you post this?
ReplyDeleteThere were many Roshei Yeshiva who would not allow Tehillim to be said for RAYHK back in 1935. They felt that he was a tzadik, brilliant talmid chochom etc. etc., but that his policies and actions were causing Klall Yisroel much damage. Do you feel that this is not similar - or do you feel that a different way is appropriate?
I posted it after returning from the levaya of Rabbi Ronnie Greenwald - that should be sufficient explanation
ReplyDelete"There were many Roshei Yeshiva who would not allow Tehillim to be said for RAYHK back in 1935" and Rav Yitzchok Hutner was NOT one of them, even though in 1935 he was not a Rosh Yeshiva yet, that would happen in 1936 when he became the Menahel of the first ever High School class at Mesivta Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin and then founded the Bais Medrash in 1940, followed by the founding of the Kollel Gur Aryeh in 1956 (or thereabouts). During all this time Rav Hutner had a large photo of Rav AY Kook hanging in his home, and on Sukkos he would have a portrait of Rav Kook in his Sukkah, that he only took down in the 1950s (or 1960s?) when the debate over Giyus Banos broke out and he swung in public towards the Chazon Ish (whom he never met) while he was personally and Hashkofically very close to Rav Kook in the years he was in Eretz Yisroel in the 1920s and 1930s and sought out and added Rav Kook's Haskoma to his (Rav Hutner's) famous Toras Hanazir Sefer.
ReplyDeleteIf, as Rav Scheiner in his recent letter asserts and as you have implied it was Rav Belsky who proposed a Heter Kiddushei Ta'us in 2002-2003 based on the notion of Mekach Ta'us and even though he (Rav Belsky) ruled for it and favored it, yet once he got word that Rav Elyashiv opposed it he (Rav Belsky) then retracted in writing by sending a letter to Rav Elyashiv withdrawing his prior ruling of Mekach Ta'us then we can without any shadow of a doubt say that Rav Belsky has the added title of Baal Teshuva Gamur and was Mesaken and Mechaper for his actions even though he is a very great Adam Gadol himself but he was Machnia himself to the RASHKEBEHAG Rav Elyashiv who was an even greater Gadol than he, and he therefore deserves even MORE respect and certainly no degradations Chas VeShalom! Therefore, knock it off "Honesty" because it makes you look mean spirited and small and instead give a Yasher Koach to Rabbi Eidensohn for having a better take on the current situation!
ReplyDeleteDisgusting comment
ReplyDeleteRabbi RG was a telzer, not TV.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I think it's obvious that we should daven for him for the people with questions your attendance by the leviya is not sufficient information at least for those who weren't there. If anything I would think the other way. Are you able to explain further ?
ReplyDeleteThere is a hesped on rabbi Belsky that you can listen to at (951) 262-3752
ReplyDelete