questions about the yeshivish world

If you want a serious answer, I’ll be happy to provide, but it seems that you’re asking from animosity. Still, I’ll be dan lekaf zchus, but either way the questions are valid regardless of your intention, and people might be interested to know about the issues you raise.

Re, chazaras hashatz; rav yaakov kaminetzky said that chazaras hashatz was instituted in a beis hakneses, where amei haaretz would daven together with chaverim. But in a beis medrash, no amei haaretz would daven, so there was never a full takanah of chaz”hash…still we do hoicher kedushah to be yotzei. That, together with the cheshbon of bitul Torah was bis justification for the minhag – in his Yeshiva, however, we did not make hoicher kedushah.

Re, hilchos talmud torah; there were different shitos in the rishonim and achronim in general about derech halimud, and what the yeshivos do is more about results than about ideology. It works for our generation, and that’s the main thing.

Re, kavanah; this is precisely why briskers daven fast, in order to not be masiach daas. In ger they have a similar approach, but vriskers take a very long time for krias shema, משא”כ ger.

While I don’t consider myself “yeshivish”, I’ll still attempt to answer these:
1) There is a machlokes regarding shaving. R’ Moshe Feinstein zt”l, who was considered the undisputed gadol hador in the US (except for by Chabad), held that an electric shaver is permissible.
2) Ok, so what? Does anyone really think that the way they daven is 100% correct? Do you think that learning chassidus, then davening after the zman makes your davening any better? I think we all realize that the davening of the average person leaves a lot to be desired. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t daven at all. We do our best, however flawed that may be.
3) Again, this is obviously a machlokes. There are yeshivos that learn in different ways, each according to its own leadership. So what exactly is your point?
4) R’ Yaakov Kamenetsky said that the reason is because chazaras hashatz was instituted for amei haaretz. Since in yeshivos they are not am haratzim, there is really no need for chazaras hashatz at all. However, since we don’t want to do away with it entirely, as it’s the minhag Yisrael, they do a short one. I will note that not all yeshivos do this. When I learned in Darchei Torah, they did NOT daven a short Mincha. R’ Bender once told me he had asked R’ Elya Svei (I think that’s who it was) when he started the Mesivta, and was told not to do it.
R’ Aharon Kotler had paskened that in Lakewood they daven a short Mincha, except on Chanukah and Purim, since there is a mitzvah of pirsumei nisah, and repeating Al haNisim fulfilled this.

1) Rabbi Kanievsky is not the Litvish equivalent of the Rebbe. America has its own poskim.
2) Are you suggesting this is a bad thing to have kavana while davening? I don’t see your point.
3) We’re at the mercy of what the yeshivos decide to do. Most American yeshivas (not all) tend to follow some variation of the Slabodka derech halimud. Nonetheless, most places have both a seder b’iyun and b’kius. Are you suggesting people should do away in learning b’iyun altogether?
4) Not without controversy even within the Litvish community. Many if not most Yeshivos don’t do this, but it’s popular in Chofetz Chaim communities which is what many people see.

“i know some will answer, that thats “our minhag/ mesora”, ok so why do you guys criticize chabad”

Because Ashkenaz and Sphard are real mesoras based on poskim of previous generations. Chabad is an invented mesora based on hashkafa and the whims of its Rebbes. I know you were probably baiting one of us to say this, but why shouldn’t we? It’s just the historical reality.

I think this thread is extremely disrespectful and lekanter.
The fact that others may write in this style about Chabad is not a reason to descend to this level.

However, I am wondering about a statement by Neville:
“Because Ashkenaz and Sphard are real mesoras based on poskim of previous generations.”

Really? Is it the Ashkenazi mesorah for over 200 years ago to shave their beards?

When Reb Moshe (who is also accepted by Chabad as major posek, although we don’t follow all his psakim, just as Litvishers don’t) rules a chidush, you accept this as Ashkenazi mesorah for generations.
Yet you mock (in disgusting fashion) the psakim and minhagim of 200 years of the holy Chabad rebbes.

“Whims”!?
Richman litzlan that we live in a generation that people open their mouths in such a manner.
מסימני משיח – חוצפה יסגי

Reb Moshe held that it’s asur gamur to use a shaver. He never said it’s mutar, rather he said that it’s not the same level isur as a razor

“Is it the Ashkenazi mesorah for over 200 years ago to shave their beards?”

Yes, trimming beards is the long-standing halacha. We have the technology to trim extremely close today; if they’d had the ability 1000 years ago, they would have used it too.

Sorry I pressed submit before I finished my post. That last sentence should have said
“The mishna berura writes if it’s not such a shas hadchak, the congregation can start quietly after Kedusha.”

The koach of heter was expressed by Reb Hersh Pesach Frank, the Rav of Yerushalayim zal. We will not forget . Also, many rabbonim at Yitzchak Elchanan permitted, among them Harav Paleyeff who was a Slutzker and gave shiur from 1920-1966. RHPF was a Telzer.

While I could answer all the issues raised by the OP, I won’t. Not only that I will concede that there is some merit and truth behind what is being said there. I’ll even take it a step a further and acknowledge that there is truth and merit in some of the other criticism of the Yeshiva World not mentioned in the OP.

In fact whatever group you are part of you should realize that there is probably some truth behind the criticism other groups have of yours that you shouldn’t just ignore or assume they are wrong because you and your leaders know better.

Now back to Chabad. As a secular historian discussing the frum world of the 20th century put it. Chabad in the 1950s was unique among the frum groups that they were the only group who was only answerable to their rebbe and was willing to ignore the VEHEMENT opposition of other frum groups. This in turn led to serious problems among the movement which by the end of the century had raised their rebbe almost to the point of deification (R’L) L’havidil Rav Hutner in the 1950s also predicted where Chabad was heading because of the above assessment. I mention a secular historian only because he would be thought of as more neutral.

There is what to complain about Chabad even without the messianic and borderline deification of the rebbe. But admittedly when it comes to that you can brush it off by saying that other groups also have what to criticize, complain and say they are doing the wrong thing about. Those things however don’t push anyone behind the pale of Orthodox Judaism. The messianism and borderline deification of the rebbe R’L do. It’s absolutely unacceptable. It’s not a question of relying on non mainstream shittos in halacha or questionable haskafa . It’s a question of the Ikerey Emunah and Avodah Zora R’L. You just can’t ignore the vehement opposition of so much of Klal Yisroel when it comes to a thing like that.

Wait! Wait! The Litvaks built their yeshivos on the premise that by the time their sons are bar mitzva they would have completed most of chumash with rashi as well as the mishna. I could go on, but the point is that knowing Kol Hatorah Kula was a given by the Litvaks. Also learning slow isn’t an issue.

Rav Chaim didn’t actually write what the OP claimed. The Litvaks considered those that forbade shavers to be completely wrong on the issue. It’s not worth debating because all the militant ignorami come out with their nonsense. If you like your beard you can keep it. I’m taking it away from you.

Being at your gemara before dawn is an excellent way to be prepared for davening. Litvaks have a full chazaros hashatz at their workplaces. I know several Litvaks that do not leave their gemara to daven mincha with a minyan. If no minyan shows up, they daven alone.

I would like to point out, that the OP has not posted since. It’s not about Chabad as much as his own thin skin. Every group has their issues. Okay, outsiders don’t get Chabad. They are not expected to. They measure Chabad by their own standards, not Chabad’s standards. Why is it a big deal to you if you claim to only know Chabad?

Everyone is invited to read the sefer in English called
“Rite (Minhag) and Reason”
It’s a sefer filled with hundreds of all the minhagim in klal yisroel and the reason behind each one. If you read it then you will clearly know that nothing was just made up or stupid or because a Rebba just decided to do it etc…..

Then you won’t have any more questions on the minhagim in klal yisroel no matter what kind of yid you are from Aschkenaz to Syrian Jews as Sefardim to Israelis etc…..

sechel83,

“i figured why not keep litvaks busy about there own “minhagim””

Though I may have missed stuff, the debates here have largely not been about “minhagim”. The closest I’ve seen was on another thread with AviraDeArah regarding sleeping in the sukkah. Even that debate wasn’t about actual practice, however, as many Litvaks and other Jews also do not sleep in the sukkah because of discomfort. That debate was about Chabad’s removing the idea of sleeping in the sukkah completely. Rather the debates are more about hashkafa and beliefs, some of which may manifest themselves into certain practices.

“(i know some will answer, that thats “our minhag/ mesora”, ok so why do you guys criticize chabad (for just believing in gemaras, tzadikim) “

I hope you noticed that, despite the insulting premise of your questions, you received unequivocal and non-defensive answers. Challenges and debates are not the same thing as hatred and persecution.

DaMoshe:

To be fair, the Gra also made changes to minhagim, nusach, and zmanim. On those specific issues, [non-Chabad] chassidim end up keeping the old Ashkenazi mesora better than most Litvishers.

I agree with parts of what you’re saying, but focusing on nusach changes made by the Baal Hatanya is kind of throwing stones in a glass house.

Ujm, he said it on Shabbos, and it was never recorded; you can ask anyone from the hanhalah there. You can also ask stam talmidim of his; the story is very yaduah in both circles, but i don’t think it’s written up anywhere due to obvious reasons

Dear Da,

I couldn’t disagree with you more.

Very little of the Toras Habesht has been preserved and none of it is novel for his day. He wasn’t an innovator in what he was teaching. The controversy was who he was teaching it to. There is nothing in the entire breadth of early chassidus that can be considered a new teaching in terms of a scholastic method. Though there is a lot of taking one known scholastic method and disregarding all the others. For example, exclusive use of Kavanos HaAri.

I don’t know who you are quoting about the Beshtian Teachings. Either you are understood it wrong or I strongly disagree with ‘pretty much everybody’. Along the lines of Neville’s point, it’s been noted that it difficult to distinguish the core teachings of the Besht from those of the Gra, AndSefer Tanya from Nefesh Hachaim. Later on we have Rav Nachman, The Kotzker, and others who incorporated many novel ideas into their teachings. These were not transmitted to them from the Early Chassidim. It is clearly their own approaches.

Us Litvaks lived ina very unique situation. The Litvishe Mesorah does not go back thousands of years. There is no model for the litvishe set up among the Rishonim or Gaonim. THe Jews settled in Lita for just five or six centuries. It is justified by what it produced. Not where it came from. Other than Iran or Yemen (And even then most of them are ignorant of their own traditions what is ancient and what is modern.), nowhere and nobody can claim anything close to a thousand year mesorah since the formation of the State of Israel. (The first half of the nineteenth century saw all the other ancient communities of the Mid East go through foundational changes.)

It can be debated if there was an original nusach or not. But the more we go back through the last millenium, the more we find even larger differences among the European Congregations. So it’s more likely that the Chassidim and the Misnagdim created their own uniform nusach than there having been any standard before them. Anyways, every nusach follows the same basic structure that the Misha speaks about. It’s all just minor changes to whatever nusach was used in the early days of European Jewry. It seems petty to me. As long as they daven for real, it’s fine with me.

You have to be kidding that observance in halachah wasn’t in constant flux throughout the time Yidden settled Eastern Europe. The entire history of Poland etc. is one timeline of seeking an exact code for communal practice. The is no correlation between the minhagim of the same town in 16th century, the 18, and the 20th. The bottom line didn’t change much but the communal bar for normative observance was never stable.

I hope everyone understands that this is a historical disscusion and is not about the yiras shamayim of previous generations. First we avoid any conclusion about Chasidim and all other groups. Second, we examine what actually ocurred. And third, we try to see what changed and why. Only then is possible to attempt an evaluation of what was a ‘better’ approach toward the future that we now live in.

Dear Neville,

Which is ‘the Ashkenazi Mesorah’ I have five different candidates. Not including Lita.

Again, Lithunia was very unique. The spiritual environment and the living conditions were much different than the rest of Europe. Lita was not part of the Four Lands. The Rabbonim had more control over their communities than anywhere else in Ashkenaz.

If laypeople just make changes to the nusach it doesn’t go anywhere. It needs to be someone influential, or at least a printer. (But then the consumers have to not protest.) Do you think that the Shelah could change the nusach but not The Baal Hatanya? It would really depend on how much changes were being made in their days. My theory is that the fight over Nusach Ari is what stopped the constant changes. But a close observer will tell you that these things are still changing.

As far as I know, those minhagim where more regional, and are not specific to Chabad. When we discuss Chabad, Litvish and Ashkenaz differences matter. Because Chabad was more aligned with Lita. Most of the other Rebbes were Polish and not Litvish and were more like the rest of Ashkenaz in their locale.

@neville, what are you talking about? “Keser” is mentioned in rishonim. Putting baruch sheamar in the middle [of shabbos psukei dezimra] is brought down in the Tur.

Sechel83, very many Litvishe ba’alei battim learnt all of Shas — by learning Daf ha’yomi. I hope you understand that it is not worth a lot. So, I wonder how well you learnt the part of Shas that you learnt. Especially, that you are not into lomdus.

““Keser” is mentioned in rishonim. Putting baruch sheamar in the middle [of shabbos psukei dezimra] is brought down in the Tur.”

I never said they had no basis in the rishonim, just that they weren’t the Ashkenazi minhag before. I’d be happy to be proven wrong, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it.

n0m:
” Do you think that the Shelah could change the nusach but not The Baal Hatanya? ”

No, and I made the same point about the Gra’s changes to nusach. Why do you think I’m disagreeing with you on this? Was I really that unclear on this thread, or are you just assuming based on other threads that I always take the anti-Chabad position?

My stance is nuanced because that’s the historical reality. Many people think all Chassidishe minhagim are innovations when they are, in reality, just reflecting regional differences in Europe that would have existed even without Chassidus. This seems to be the point n0mesora is making, and I agree. However, to take it a step further and claim that NO chassidishe minhagim are innovations would be false. It’s very rational to have a problem with some but not with others.

“As far as I know, those minhagim where more regional, and are not specific to Chabad.”

100% agree. This is probably why there’s so much overlap between the stances of the Gra and the Baal Hatanya. I was criticized by Gra-fans for making this point here years ago. This being said, “those minhagim” are not the ones people are criticizing Chabad for.

mdd:
“very many Litvishe ba’alei battim learnt all of Shas — by learning Daf ha’yomi. I hope you understand that it is not worth a lot.”

Sigh, ok, it’s time for us to collectively disavow of mdd’s crazy, unhinged statements again. Yes, it’s a big deal to learn all of shas. It is not the normative stance of the yeshivish world that learning all of shas is “not worth a lot.”

Neville, while the baalabatish litvishe world(like agudah) believes what you say about shas, the yeshivos do not. My Rosh Yeshiva knocks superficial learning of daf yomi all the time; this is how most roshei yeshiva speak when talking to non-baalei batim. It’s not mdd’s opinion or even a minority; you will not find any roshei yeshiva who advocate for superficial learning, unless the alternative is not learning at all, lack of motivation etc..

Neville > It is not the normative stance of the yeshivish world that learning all of shas is “not worth a lot.”

This was an objection when Daf Yomi was starting – that participants will think they now know the Shas ..

Menachem Shmei, to whom is it degrading — to Sechel83 or the ba’alebattim?

DaMoshe: And your point is _______ ?