Avodah Mailing List

Volume 02 : Number 032

Monday, October 26 1998

• Re: TV's in Yeshiva
• That certain yeshiva that people like to badmouth.
• YU and TV
• Re: Cheftza of T"T
• Re: Cheftza of T"T
• Re: Avi Feldblum is back, are there mail-jewish people still out there
• TV's in Yeshiva (& YU)
• Re[2]: Kehillo Questions
• Re: South Park

Reb Yosef Bechhoffer challenges the picture presented in the last
Comentator concerning the South park minyan. Reb Avi Pechman followed by
accidentally assuming it was RIETS students who were attending. Allow me
as a student at RIETS to respond:

	Fact: The source cited, "The Commentator" is not a newspaper of
RIETS nor are the students it refers to in its articles students of RIETS.
The Yeshiva University system has many schools, some undergraduate, some
graduate and RIETS which is an affiliation. Yeshiva college, home to many
undergraduates from a wide spectrum of Jewish religious ethnicity and
identity, is the school that publishes "the commentator". RIETS students
were outraged by the story that appeared in the commentator and upon
investigation, it seems that the "so called South Park minyan" is a group
of almost 10 regulars who may watch the vile program. There is no
consistency nor recognition to this minyan by any member school of YU or
its affiliates. 
	But I think there is a greater issue here: often we are quick to
condemn certain yeshivos because of hashkafos of some members of their
administrations (perhaps presidents etc) that are somewhat unique in
scope. While there are 10 young men (all of whom are non-RIETS members nor
members of BMP or MYP, the undergraduate feeder schools of RIETS) who are
watching South park, there are 3 packed battei medrash, and over 450
students sitting for night sedorim every night of every week at RIETS. We
often forget to examine the positives.

	As for drawing references to articles and deciding Yeshiva policy,
Rabbosai(Reb Yosef, Reb Av) look in Netzach 5756 (you know there are
others too), where students of our yeshiva, the one where you, Reb yosef,
received semicha, made references to going home to watch soap operas on
TV. I didn't recall either of you citing our own ala matter's yeshiva
situation as "disturbing indeed" Please check your facts.....

JS
  

Dear Mr. Wolpoe:

    You asked if a certain Telshe rosh yeshiva once attended YU.  As it
happens, two Telshe rosh yeshivas attended Y.U.:  Rav Gifter in Cleveland
and Rav Keller in Chicago.  Not to mention a famous chaver of the Lakewood
Kollel, two highly-esteemed rebbeim in Brooklyn "black hat" yeshivas, not to
mention Rabbi Avigdor Miller, the late Rav Bick, and a few others whose
names escape my memory at this time.  And while we are at it, let us not
forget some of the rebbeim who taught there, such as the late Reb Yeruchem
Gorelik, Reb Moshe Shatskes, Reb Dovid Lipshutz, Reb Menachem Zaks, etc.,
etc.  Living in "yeshivishe" Midwood, I can tell you that beneath many of
our black hats are heads that were educated in YU., including at least one
shtiebl-rov that I know.

    There were always two sides to the institution; I don't see why today,
it should be any different.  Yes, there is something wrong, but there is
also something right.

Best wishes as ever,

Levi Reisman

I am not sure I understand why hacles are raised on this issue. My
intention, as I stated explicitly, was not C"V to denigrate RIETS,its
Roshei Yeshiva or Musmachim. As mentioned, my brother in law - and, other
relatives, and dear friends as well - are products of the extraordinarily
high level of scholarship that one can attain in YU. I merely was
attempting to substantiate a statement made by R' Elie Ginsparg that R'
Teitz questioned. 

Nevertheless, I find the distinctions made between RIETS and the other
schools somewhat questionable, at best. The reality is that the physical
plant is one large indivisable unit run by one administrative entity. It
seems that an institution dedicated to cultivating yiras shomayim among
its entire student body should not afford them with cable TV in its
lounges and allow public groups to engage in watching questionable
programs. I fail to understand what rationalization there can be for
enabling this behavior no matter who is engaged therein.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

With my brother in law, I permit myself certain liberties, as he doubtless
does with me, so let me accuse him publicly of being "Brisko-centric."

I believe this denigration of other areas of Torah is a direct product of
the Brisko- (I would say Lithno-, but Lithuanian mesora encompasses Telshe
as well, and I regard myself, as an heir to this tradition - of which
Rebbitzin Dr. Brown is a part, of course, as well - and Shiurei Da'as
certainly indicate the high regard for Machashava that the Telzer Derech
assumes) -centric attitude that everything other than Halacha is second
class.

R"E Luntshitz's attitude is incomprehensible to me, and I wonder if he has
any proofs. Surely the study of Lashon HaKodesh is an essential component
of understanding Tanach, and is Torah!

On Sat, 24 Oct 1998 C1A1Brown@aol.com wrote:

> 1. Regarding YGB's assertion that if by way of studying grammer one
> comes across pesukim or gemera that this too is a kiyum of T"Y, I' quote
> a teshuva of R' Ephrayim Luntshitz, AB"D of Prag, which I saw in R'
> Aharon Kahn's article (beit Yosef Shaul vol. 3 p 326), in which the AB"D
> of Prague criticizes a melamed who used pesukim as a vehicle for
> teaching 'lashom kodesh', writing, "...he could have taught lashon
> kodesh without a text as one learns any foreign language.  I am suprised
> if the teaching of lashon alone should be considered talmud Torah.  Is
> this Torah?!"  While R' Kahn puts his own spin on the teshuva, may we
> not infer that the mere citation of pesukim agav teaching other subjects
> is not T"T? 
> 

One need not have mastered all of Bavli and Yerushalmi to be concerned
with Yesodos Ha'Emuna. do you think the Ramchal wrote Dereech Hashem for
people who are already Ge'onei Torah?

It is essential to distinguish between the study of Mussar, that may not
be considered Talmud Torah, but rather as essential study for the soul,
and Machashav - the understanding of the underpinnings of the Beri'ah and
its components. Mussar was considered always as essential - but secondary.

But, among the Rishonim, at least, Machashava was paramount, as the Rambam
writes at end of the Periush HaMishnayos on Berachos:

"Ki yakar b'einai lilmod ikkar mei'ikkarei ha'das ve'ha'emuna yoseir
me'kol asher elmadeihu."

Rav Kook in Oros HaTorah Chap. 9 stresses that this was the attitude of
all the Rishonim, citing the famous letter of the Rambam to Ibn Vaknin:

"Ve'lo techaleh ve'tovad zemancha b'peirsuh u'massa u'mattan shel Gemara."

The Medrash in Mishlei, 10 (all these sources, BTW, come from the Beis
Yechezkel, by my Mashgiach in Sha'alvim, R' Tzuriel) says that when comes
to Shomayim, after asking about Tanach, Shas and Aggada Hashem asks about
Ma'aseh Merkava, for he only has true pleasure in THis World when tlamidei
chachomim indulge in this limud:

"Kisei kevodi heich hu omeid, regel rishon bameh hu mishtamesh... chashmal
heich hu omeid... keruv heich hu omeid..."

He brings many more sources, Rishonim v'Acharonim, but I would
particularly like to cite again R' Kook, Igros 25 Elul 5673:

"Ve'kol zman she'ha'Ortodoktzia omeres, b'akshanus davka: 'Lo, rak Geara
u'Poskim levadam!' Lo Agada, lo Mussar, lo Kabbala, ve'lo Mechkar, lo
Da'as Olam ve'lo Chassidus!... harei medaldeles es atzma..."

> 2.  Even were one to argue that there is a kiyum of T"T in reading
> various works of mussar, hashkafa, etc. one cannot ignore the assumption
> of ALL achronim that there is a heirarchy of importance in what should
> be studies to fufill T"T.  The simplest proof to such a position is the
> well known gemara in Megillah that 'Mevatlin T"T to hear mikra megilla".
> While there even exists extreme shittot who argue that mikra megilla is
> indeed NOT T"T (e.g. R' A.Z.  Margoliyos, see Avnei Nezer 517:10), we
> most temper the approach and argue that relative to the obligation to
> learn gemara etc. mikra megilla is of secondary importance.  For a
> similar apporach see NEfesh HaChaim on saying Tehillim vs. learning
> (4:2) or the Chazon Ish in Emunah U'Bitachon on reading sifrei mussar.
> Even were one to grant that contemplating the bechira of angels is T"T,
> can one honestly say one has mastered all of Bavli, Yerushalmi, etc. and
> can spare the time to delve into such matters?
> 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

In a message dated 10/25/98 11:12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:

<< "E Luntshitz's attitude is incomprehensible to me, and I wonder if he has
 any proofs. Surely the study of Lashon HaKodesh is an essential component
 of understanding Tanach, and is Torah!

Clearly others disagree with you.  See also Shut R' Ya'akov Emden #10
regarding studying dikduk in the bathroom - were it not for the fact that it
inevitabvly involved hirhureim in pesukim it would be permitted, indicating
that the study itself lacked inherent kedusha or a kiyum of T"T, see R" Kahn's
article for further elaboration and marei mekomos.

>>>The Medrash in Mishlei, 10 (all these sources, BTW, come from the Beis
Yechezkel, by my Mashgiach in Sha'alvim, R' Tzuriel) says that when comes to
Shomayim, after asking about Tanach, Shas and Aggada Hashem asks about
Ma'aseh Merkava, for he only has true pleasure in THis World when tlamidei
chachomim indulge in this limud: "Kisei kevodi heich hu omeid, regel rishon
bameh hu mishtamesh... chashmal heich hu omeid... keruv heich hu omeid..."<<<

The Midrash in Mishlei is cited in the chapter of Nefesh haChaim (4:2) that I
already referred to yesterday.  What is crucial to note is the progression of
the Midrash - Hashem firsts asks was mikra mastered, then mishna, then talmud,
finally culminating in ma'aseh merkavah.  While ma'seh merkavah (and I note
AGAIN that that term refers to a specific section of nistar, not to all
matters esoteric!) stands at the pinacle of the din v'cheshbon, it is
knowledge that must be preceded by studying all the previuosly mentioned
catagories, which in effect proves exactly the point I raised yesterday - the
heirarchy of subject matter in T"T.  For the overwhelming majority of us who
work 8-10 hours a day, have family responsibilities, etc. are the few hours of
week left to learn better spent contemplating angels or mastering Shas?  The
assumption of Rambam, Chovos, and Chinuch is that faith must be predicated on
reason rather then kabbalah and hence  the Rambam felt justified in inquiry
that was a kiyum of the mitzva of Emunah.  The key point here is not that
learning yesodei emunah is not valuable, as a cursory reading of the intro. to
chovos helevavos underscores the ignorance of most people in these areas and
the value of such study - what is crucial is that the scope of such study lead
to a better kiyumim of chiyuvei chovos halevavos and not just 'havanah' or
other nebulous goals.   

Regarding Briskerness, I haven't a clue what it has to do with this
discussion, so I'll drop it - to each his own derech.

-CB

Of interest to the Avodah Virtual Community:

I assume many of you received this e-mail. For those who did not, or were
not around in the MJ days, the baistefila/avodah list was meant as a
complement to MJ, to serve a somewhat higher (and less public) level of
discourse. Perhaps with the return of MJ we can, in fact, move closer to
that goal!

YGB

On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Avi Feldblum wrote:

> 
> Hello All! 
> 
> After being missing in action for a LONG time, I'm finally back. It's a
> bit of a long story which I will not go into here (the final piece of
> which for those following such things on the market, I work (worked?) 
> for the Philips Consumer Communications joint venture between Philips
> Electronics and Lucent Technologies which just was announced that they
> were dissolving this past Thursday, and that Lucent was closing it's
> wireless portion of the joint venture. As that is what has been taking
> up much of my time, I'm now back) but I do think I'm back for the long
> haul to things like mail-jewish. 
> 
> The fundimental question I have is, I may be ready to come back to
> mail-jewish, but as things have progressed in the Internet and Jewish
> Internet world, is there still an interest in mail-jewish. 
> 
> If you would like to see mail jewish return from it's long hibernation,
> please send me an email letting me know. Once I get more than 30 or 40
> positive responses, I start the ball rolling again. If you have found
> sufficient alternate resources that have filled it's place, you can also
> let me know, and I'd be interested in knowing what those resources are.
> I would like to try and join some of those, and get a feeling for what
> is out there. So please feel free to tell me what lists or Web spaces
> you think I should visit.
> 
> Enough for now, and thanks to the many people over the year or so who
> have inquired as to my state of existance. It's nice to know that there
> are many people out there that really care about others. It's nice to be
> back to the Internet/Email world again! 
> 
> Avi
> 
> 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

     Dear Chevra,
        I will give you my theory and ealborate upon request...

1) Most Yeshivos are an "extention" of their Rosh Yeshivo.  As such they 
croeespond to a "one Party" system.  ALL officials are expected t otow the party
line.

2) YU has "multiple Roshei yeshiva" and in fact and in hashkofo very closely 
resemble a multi-party system.  It's a LOT like the Knesset in Israel

What many yeshuivish people do not understand is that the statements of the 
Presedint of YU or of various clubs and associations within YU does NOT 
constitute THE YU party line.

The fact is there are numerous Mizrachists and Agudists within YU, and many 
hashkofos co-exist.

I send this out in order to make some Sholom out there.  I am not so much taking
sides in this post, I am attempting to clarify a commom mis-understading about 
YU that might lead a yeshivish type to make inaccurate assumptions regarding 
individual YU people.

Best Regards,
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.come


     

     To add to the list of questions:
     
     1) How does a shul in America establish a minhog?
     
     2) How does it alter an existing minhog?
     
     3) When a shul relocates or branches, how loyal must it be to its 
     predecssor? 
     
     4) If there is no ONE answer to this, are there seforim that deal with 
     these issues directly?
     
     5) To echo a previous post of mine... What gives Ashkenazim or 
     Sephardim the right to start a separate minhog within the precincts of 
     an existing kehillo?  (EG Amsterdam)
     
     6) I understand that there is a kehillo in Bnai Brak that davka 
     follows Minhog Frankfort.  What allows them (what source what 
     precedent, etc.) to deviate from Minhog Eretz Yisroel?
     
     7) What if a shul says it follows Minhag haGro and then it deviates.  
     Can one demand that they comply?
     
     8) How does a shul change from Nusach Sfard to Nusach Ashkenaz?  (I am 
     a member of a shul in Teaneck that was originally consituted as nusach 
     sfard and then changed to ashkenaz about 20 years ago.)
     
     Regards,
     Rich Wolpoe

<<
But, in a
recent issue of "The Commentator" supplied to me by our Chaver
(honorific!) Steve Katz, there was a long essay about the "South Park"
minyan - an under five minute Ma'ariv Minyan to enable its participants to
be in time for the beginning of a TV Show that, by the essay's
description, has X-rated humor, that is watched b'rabbim in student
lounges.

With all due respect to Rabbi Teitz, there is something wrong with this
picture...
>>

What I see from this picture is the two sides of YU.  Yes, some students do
inappropriate things, but they daven with a minyan.  Also, it is unfair to
paint the Yeshiva together with the college.  Those who enter the s'micha
program are not the college students at large.  They are a small subset of the
greater population.  I challenge anyone who casts aspersions about YU to enter
their Bais Medrash and talk to the bachurim there, and see if they can tell
which Bais Medrash they are standing in.

And let not any yeshiva cast stones, as all have graduates they are less than
proud of.

Eliyahu Teitz

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.           ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                 ]
[ For control requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]