The latest addition to the successful chabad on campus phenomenon is creating quite a bit of a stir in the modern orthodox community. Critics are calling on chabad to pull out of its latest venture, a chabad house on the Yeshiva University campus, which they deem as purely a way to make their students into chabadnicks, since most of them are already frum.
Why else would chabad open up shop on the YU campus? For 4 years now Ohelei Torah yeshiva buchrim have been infiltrating the YU beis medrish to test the waters, to see if modern orthodox students from places like Tenack and Brookline were open to learning chassidus and many have taken to it.
But many are incensed at the idea, many are claiming that Chabad probably thinks YU kids are like any other college kids, sort of frum, but not really. This is simply not the case, under their slightly assimilated clothing styles and colorful yarmulkes, the YU student is a religious being, he is usually shomer negiah and will most likely wear a suit on shabbos, but for chabad this is isn’t good enough, for many chabadnicks the simple fact that someone is in college and not in yeshiva is a clue that this person simply isn’t at their learning potential, but is opening a chabad on the campus of YU really necessary?
Hat Tip Rabbi Harry Maryles
{ 121 comments… read them below or add one }
Obviously, Chabad is now going to have someone from YU give a chaburah on Halakhic Man in Morristown.
That t-shirt is awesome.
I know of dozens of bochurim and yungeleit, myself included, that listen to shiurim from YU Roshei Yeshivah on a regular basis.
You’re evading. I don’t care what yechidim do. I care about the policy. And while I like Chabad Torah, and Lubavitchers in general, I believe that the attitude towards all other factions’ views is entirely lacking in basic respect.
In Chabad, it’s not Eilu v’eilu. It’s we’re right, and you’re wrong. The various pc terms used are “misguided”, “not exposed to chassidus”, and the like, but it all means the same thing underneath.
I’m not evading. I’m telling you that many Lubavitchers, on their own, already have a respect for the Rav and his talmidim.
As no one from YU has as of yet offered to learn Halakhic Man in Morristown or some other Chabad Yeshivah, any speculation as to the outcome is just that – speculation.
What is more, however, is that I bring you examples from yechidim because the bachurim visiting YU are themselves yechidim. I’ve spoken to the Bochur who arranges the program this year. It is an entirely grass-roots effort to bring achdus through limud hatorah and (in his words to me) ” reinforce the bonds of unity between what are today two major forces in the Jewish community.”
There is no official headquarters initiative to infiltrate YU, to secret organization to target YU students. This is a group of bochurim who travel to another beis medrash to learn with fellow Jews.
In all honesty, the potential here, to shed previous assumptions and stereotypes, to show both sides how much in common we have through Toras Hashem, is amazing. It is nothing short of tragedy that others have used it a source of Sinas Chinam.
From what I’ve hear, Rav Aaron Rakeffet adressed the issue in a recent shiur – and did not seem to be bothered by it. I have as of yet to hear it, so perhaps someone can let me know exactly what he says.
I didn’t realize it was grass-roots for the purpose of promoting achdus. That is very nice.
“Achdus”?
How naive do you think people are?
This is all about standard Chabad “Let’s convert the lost frei sheep into practicing Jews”. Except now you guys are getting creative.
Chabad has had it’s success primarily with secular Jews. These people are often wholesomely unsuspecting, and are receptive to new ideas in general. Most of them don’t really have pre-existing beliefs which they inherited, and are pretty much willing to go with anything that talks to them.
The area of “mainstream Jews” has always been undiscovered territory for Chabad. A dream which is talked about and sighed over. The general attitude is “I guess we’ll just have to wait until the big day. Then these stubborn ‘snags will finally realize they were wrong all this time”. Aside from the initial period of growth durring the time of the first three Rebbes (as well as a small movement in the Rebbe’s early days), Chabad has never had much success in winning over the already-observant.
The simple knowledge of what Judaism always was and what it continues to be, is more than enough to fend off the tactics of the Chabad missionaries. And after the whole R’ Shach thing – forget it. Chabad was no longer “Different and not for us”. It took on a negative light stronger than ever before in the eyes of the yeshiva world.
Eventually, chabad themselves realized the reality of the situation, that the only chance they had at anyone who went to yeshiva – was if he wandered into chabad in search of “emes”, and in his vulnerable state he was “chap-able”. As for the rest – they usually don’t see any more than the pamphlets on shul tables and the Rebbe videos in Meron.
But now we’re seeing a brave but subtle revival of the old dream. Using the ‘open-mindedness’ of YU to get a foot in there.
Well guys, good luck. But seriously, don’t get your hopes up about anything past YU.
yankel, u always seem 2 have a chip on yr shoulder when it comes 2 chabad
My relationship with Chabad is very interesting. On a personal level, I am in awe of some of the individuals I know who are Lubavitch. Seriously, with some of them it makes you wonder how a human could possibly be so special.
My feelings of animosity are mainly for the ‘philosophy’ per se, which is so prevelant in Chabad today. It is a living manifestation of the obnoxious “My way or the highway” – for no reason other than “This is what we believe”.
What’s worse, is that when anyone calls them on their messed up mentality, or on the ideas which according to Jewish tradition are against the Torah, they almost instinctively cry “Sinas Chinam”. As if someones issue with them can’t possibly have anything to do with their attitude or what they believe.
But of course, this is all because of the “Chip on my shoulder”.
I forgot…
Rule #1 Chabad is always right.
Rule #2 If anyone thinks otherwise, it’s because of a chip on their shoulder.
Nevertheless, when I’m talking to a chabadsker I know, all my feelings disappear. It’s like my brain automatically separates the person from the philosophy I know he believes in.
Likewise, I would never mistreat anyone, unless he pushed his conversion agenda too much. Nor would I give kedima to a non-Chabadsker over a chabadsker for anything, even though I know any lubab would help another lubab before helping me.
The cult of daas Torah, and the abuse of power exhibited by many of the askanim, who work with gedolim, is every bit as reprehensible as the meshichist issues in chabad.
But Chabad is far and away the best of the chareidi jews: the Lubavitcher Rebbe actually reached out to jews outside of his enclave, (unlike many other gedolim), and chabad schluchim exhibit greater mesiras nefesh for their fellow Jews. Yeshivish chareidim lack the intellectual chassidus–it’s all lombdish gemorah, no real deep hashkafah, and it produces spiritually shallow people. Chabad bothers them, because inside they know they lack the passion, and depth, that Chabad has. Sorry haters!
I’m guessing this is satire, but it’s really hard to know. The fundamental philosophy of Chabad is that there are only two kinds of Jews in the world: Those who are Chabad and those who are not Chabad YET. (I was told this by a former Chabad rabbi who stayed totally frum, but left the movement.) Given that philosophy, the story could easily be true. I could see them happily doing that without giving it a second thought. So, to me, assuming this is satire, and not true, it’s a just a little to sad to be funny.
Batsheva who told you that “the fundamental philosophy of Chabad is that there are only two kinds of Jews in the world: Those who are Chabad and those who are not Chabad YET?”
Frankly it’s one of most ridiculous statements I’ve ever heard!
The Rebbe said, upon assuming leadership of the movement almost 60 years ago, that there are three loves, the love of G-d, of the Torah and of a fellow Jew. I don’t know where a division in Jewry, especially as arbitrary as a “Chabad” Jew and one YET to be one, figures in there.
(The fact that a “chabad rabbi” who left the movement told you is entirely inconsequential, in so much as – besides the fact that all great anti-semitic tracts use a similar ploy to defend their lies vda”l – if he truly left the movement, his impartiality is seriously called into question, and his statement in any case rendered void in the face of the Rebbe’s, the sole arbiter of what Chabad “believes”)
I’m sorry, but I know this man well, and have every reason to believe what he said, and this sort of thing completely proves it. I loved the Rebbe, z”l. He was a great, great man who did great, great things. I don’t know if that was his personal philosophy or not, but I do know that he is deceased, and I also know that the way Chabad is being run today supports my friend’s statement. However, it is quite possible that it was the Rebbe’s philosophy, because if you are really thinking about what I wrote, you’ll see it fits perfectly, IDEALLY even, with what the Rebbe publicly said. The two kinds of Jews premise is simply saying that the only legitimate Judaism is Chabad, which means there is no division in Jewry, except those that Jews create by not being Chabad. Hence, loving fellow Jews helps them see that Chabad is the right path, thereby eliminating division. There’s no contradiction at all, when you look at it that way. Obviously, Chabad is not going to publicly make a statement to that effect, because then it would cause division. As long as they don’t publicly talk about it, and just keep trying to love Jews to Chabad, it makes perfect sense.
I don’t understand what you mean that “and this sort of thing completely proves it.”
In any event, may I ask you Batsheva, does the presence of thieves, lowlifes, perverts and the like in the Jewish and even Orthodox community mean that their life choices are supported by the Torah?
The Rebbe would often reiterate that he alone had the authority to say what Chabad is. The fact that others today may act otherwise, does not give legitimacy to their actions.
I hate to disappoint you, but I know and have worked with many prominent Lubavitchers involved in the upper echelons of the organization, and attended Lubavitcher Yeshivas, and not once did anyone suggest the kind of outlandish, and frankly hateful, statements you make.
If you choose to cling to your outlandish conspiracy theories, there is little I can do to help you.
Hateful?
These kind and loving Jews want nothing more than to benefit the world by showing them the real face of truth. By bringing them to the lifestyle which will connect them to the Eibisht-r.
How can you call them hateful?
Wouldn’t you use ‘clever tactics’ to convince someone to take the medicine which you know will save his life?
Obviously, Chabad is not going to publicly make a statement to that effect, because then it would cause division.
Chabad in general may not make that statement but Shnueli Boteach did.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=194526
Yes, Rabbi Shmueli has a singularly effective way of convincing rational people to continue to ignore him. What are you trying to prove?
That’s ridiculous. Not everyone is shaiach to joining Lubavitch. Anyone that knows even a bit about the founding of Tomchei Temimim will tell you that.
You’re either being naive, or “not shayach” is your way of saying “Not fortunate enough”.
Okay not fortunate enough. I wouldn’t use such a loshon in a public forum but if it suits you than that’s fine. The end result is the same.
Then you agree with the basic premise, you just don’t like the wording Batsheva’s using.
She’s saying, Lubavitchers believe that in theory – the best thing every Jew can do with his life is become Lubavitch.
Your ignorance is showing !!!!!
Chabad- Lubavitch–Philosphy is as follows:
Ch-Chochma
B- Bina-
D -Daas
The Mind / Intellect supremacy over the emotions…
Wisdom reigns supreme…
Which means in simple terms that at any time a person can decide not to engage in loshon hara, evil thoughts or actions just by refusing to get involved with them in any shape or form…
Reb Yid, you make me laugh. I probably went through Tanya this past year alone – more times than you ever did in your life.
I’m not refering to what Chabad philosophy SHOULD IDEALLY be all about. I’m talking about the mentality of today’s average Lubab.
The attitude we’re discussing here, is not something the Alter Rebbe preached. It’s something which formed and developed within Chabad all by itself. Probably stemming from nothing other than gaavah.
You won’t find anywhere in the Baal Hatanya’s seforim or derashos, a statement like “In chabad we have the truth, and everyone else missed the boat”. That junk started shortly afterwards, and not by the Rebbes.
The Apter Rav ZY”A complained to the Mittler Rebbe that his chassidim were making fun of his Torahs. This mentality began with the yeridos ha’doros in Chabad. Gradually turning them from a beautiful chassidus full of Ovdei H-shem B’emes, into a group of obnoxious elitists who don’t have any respect for anyone other than their own Rebbes and Mashpi’im.
Granted, Chabad has one of the most developed and ingenious mehalchim of success in Avodas H-shem. But the “We’re the only true Jews” attitude really spoils it big time.
I truly doubt that you understood or had any comprehension of what you read…
just as I truly doubt that you have anything but a basic understanding of Rashi !!!!
If you truly want to get into the meat and potatoes of Chabad take a look into the Mid -section of Tanya — Shaar Yichud V’Emunah…
that will give you something to chew on…
along with that try something basic like Adin SteinSaltz’s Thirteen Petalled Rose,
and some good translations of ariyeh Kaplan’s books..
Get into a world where there is truly a wonderment of life…
They’re not letting me reply to Ariyeh Leib’s post, so pardon me for replying here:
Dude, I must interject. Read Yankel’s statement again. We are not talking about ideal Chabad as delineated by books. You, my friend, speak of Tanya, Steinzaltz, and Kaplan. The Tanya issue Yankel dealt with above. Steinzaltz and Kaplan, great authors I’ve perused my share of. But you are COMPLETELY missing Yankel’s point!
There is a difference between Chabad on paper, as described by the Tanya, as proscribed by the Alter Rebbe, et al., as intended by the enlightened! It is only natural, given how many people have been brought into Chabad, that many would distort its true intentions. I forget who it is who once said “if even one of my Talmidim even understood my words, I could die happy”, or something along those lines. It goes without saying that a large organization like Chabad is going to have many leitzim amongst themselves who don’t follow their books.
Again, reading selection you are recommending there. But get your head out of the books and see how your typical Mitzva Mobile Meshulach behaves. Go ahead, try to have a rational discussion with your typical tefillin pusher. and you tell me how open-minded they truly are. Here’s a hint. I tell them I was raised MO, their immediate response (like clockwork) is “you haven’t really experienced Judaism”. So I tell them of my travels, my many shabbosim in Me’ah She’arim, living in Boro Park, tish hopping I’ve done, the books I’ve read, the Kabbalah I’ve perused, etc. Nope, not good enough. I tell them about the many Shabbosim I’ve spent at Chabad houses. The farbrengens I’ve crashed. I tell them about how many close friends I’ve had who are Lubob. Not good enough. I still “haven’t truly experienced Judaism yet”.
I let you decide for yourself. Side note: I consider it a grand insult that I really “haven’t experienced Judaism”. I’ve experienced more brands of Judaism than most frummies care to even think about.
Of course I agree. Who would even deny that? I’m just saying that hofatzas hamaynos does not necessarily mean you need to start davening with a TH. It’s enough for us if more people learn (chabad) chasidus.
If you think that learning chabad seforim is ideal for EVERYBODY, then you don’t believe that there’s any true derech other than Chabad, which is krum, as well as disrespectful and insulting to the mesorah Klal Yisroel has kept alive since Har Sinai.
Now that was an interesting conversation. You attacked that “not shaiach” comment and uncovered the euphemism. Not bad.
The truth is, for very many Jews, learning some of the Alter Rebbe’s maamarim would have a very nice impact on the way they serve H-shem, and what they value in this world.
On the other hand, learning a mesechta b’iyun would do lots of good for any lubab as well.
But saying “Each and every Jew with out exception NEEDS chabad , and is obligated to have chabad in their lives”, is a display of closed-mindedness and ignorance.
I think it would have been a disaster if the Chazon Ish would have learnt Chassidus and invested time in it. He had his tafkid, and he worked towards it.
Likewise, I think it would have been a disaster if R’ Yoel Kahn would have gone in the Litvish derech, and not contributed to the world of Chassidus like he did.
Everyone has a direction which G-d wants them to go in, and that’s the life which can be considered to have been “Lived properly”. Discrediting other derachim only takes away from ones own true attatchment to his own.
When you realize and appreciate a Jew who serves G-d in a way which is different than yours, and who has Rebbeim and schools of thought different than yours, then you can begin to relate to your own derech with the right perspective and growth.
Every Yid must learn Chabad Chassidus, not because it’s the only derech, but because it’s a cheilek of the larger Yiddishe Derech. In other words, in order for a Yid to properly learn Pardes Ha’Torah, he/she must learn the Sod aspect as well…don’t get me wrong, but Chabad Chassidus explains a lot of the Sod much better/clearer than any other form of Chassidus. It’s your choice which Sod you want to learn, but if you want to make your life a tad bit easier and more comprehensible, then pick up a maymar and start layning (ps, there’s enough maymorim that for you to find something that suits you).
@Anonymous
That is most asinine and bigoted thing I have heard in a while.
Anon,
The concept of “Sod” is not in any way limited to Chabad. Toras Chabad just puts a unique perspective on combining sod and practical avodas H-shem. This perspective/mehalech – like all others, is suitable for some and not for others.
Agav, not everybody is supposed to be busy with sod by default. True, every neshama must have gone through Pardes at the end of all his gilgulim, but one cannot know which chelek he is supposed to involve himself with in any particular lifetime.
That’s why we’re given a basic model of what we are supposed to start with, and we’re supposed to decide – with direction from our mentors, where to go from there.
Even the Arizal, (who understood the tachlis and esscence of nistar, as well as the Tafkid of neshamos in general better than anyone) did not allow the Alshich to learn nistar, because he was not destined to learn it in that gilgul.
If you were born and raised in a Chabad family, then chances are you are meant to be putting your efforts into Toras Chabad. (Although the shameful neglect of nigleh in Chabad is far worse than the neglect of nistar outside chabad.)
Likewise, if you we’re born to a Brisker family, then your tafkid is probably to serve H-shem with the mehalech set forth in Nefesh Hachayim.
It’s only if one finds that he is not finding satisfaction and fulfillment in his own derech, that he should start exploring other derachim.
Actually I heard that philosophy expressed by a prominent non-yechi shaliach quite a number of years ago. It’s completely accurate.
What’s wrong with adding a little spice to the student’s learning…!!!?
After all doesn’t it say In Pirkei Avos — Gematrias, etc provide an added spice ? Chassidus, KabbaLah, etc.. enhances your learn and broadens your mind…!
Contrary to what the ‘Frum’ Yid will encounter on his visits to the internet.. I would say it is refreshing to see some constructive use of the mind !!!
Sorry but Chabad AT YU has to be an oxymoron–you can be one and know something about the other but you can’t be both at one and the same time. If information about what Chabad is and does is the purpose, that could be served in a far different manner. Just what is YU saying about all of this?
ProfK:
What do the two have to be mutually exclusive…?
Chabad coexists on many University Campuses –
And on some the Chabad Rabbis are Adjunct Professors —How’s that for having your cake and eating it !!!
unless someone is truly searching for something new i dont think that chabad at yu makes any difference. so you might like to learn a little chassidus it still does not make you all out lubavitch. it takes a lot more to actually turn someone lubavitch . i think that chabad would do better to place themselves where non observant jews are if they want to be productive, but thats just me. i have been approached by chabad on a summer afternoon wearing long sleeves a long skirt and stockings as i was opening the door to kosher delight on 37th st in manhattan if i was jewish. of course to that i said ‘what do u think?’ i think they were just trying to flirt with me.
I have to say, one of the most offensive things ever said to me was “Are you Jewish” by a middle age chabad guy – when I was wearing long skirt, stockings, and an obvious shaitel, after I had already introduced myself to him with my very very frummy name. He was my patient, so I couldn’t be too rude, but I called him on it and said “really, looking the way I do, and with the name I have, you still have to ask?” That turned me off so much more than all the moshiach craziness.
Seems to me he was slow on the uptake…his powers of observation left much to be desired…
Unfortunately, there are those that need more than a dose of common sense…
when you ask 100 people a day if they are jewish you stop noticing the details it comes to a point that you ask people with crosses on their necks if they are jewish and you would even ask a clearly frum jew if they are jewish its not like he was trying to be rude and i am sure that if you explained to him that you are very offended that he asked a frum dressed jew if they are jewish he would make sure to pay more attention
i’d rather have shluchim at YU than proselytizing at secular colleges.
What do you care?
This post is turning gay….I’m sorry, but it’s Sunday evening and the comments have gotten way to serious. This site is supposed to have some entertaining sh!t and this didn’t cut it. I aint hatin on you, Heshy-the post was ok, its the gay comments that followed.
how would you like to suck my balls?
I would rather stroke them, but if the only action I will get is via sucking, I will do it. Seeing that you offered, though, makes me wonder if you are a rebbe or Rav in our community. Please identify the yeshiva or shul you teach/are a rabbi at. It’s ok, I don’t judge. Even rabbis need some c0ck as evidenced by the actions of many in our community. …so u r no different…lol
thats called ownage http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ownage, courtesy of Shrink
:^O !!! Oh dear me.
You’re funny, but I think the question was rehtorical.
However, considering the lack of humor this post is experiencing, thank you.
No thanks for the “rabbi” thing.
Sure. I am the Rebbe of Congregation Kehilath Sholom al Yisroel, located in the Gay Hinnom Valley. And please, don’t tell my Rebbitzen; he gets very jealous. He might make me miss next karaoke night or make me go contra dancing all by myself!
Karaoke night? Is that what your, um, Rebbitzen does instead of mikveh night? LOL! ;^D
This reminds me of the story about Starbucks opening a new Starbucks store inside another Starbucks store.
I thought the exact same thing.
fortyfrumthing : care to share?
I don’t see the big deal. When I was in YU, there were PLENTY of Chabadniks on campus, and yes, they had a “Chabad Club”. And they used to hold events as well. They were constantly advertising monthly farbrengins, guest speakers, Tanya chaburahs, and the occasional concert. This was no official Chabad house or anything, but trust me when I say, 10 years ago there already was a Chabad contingency on campus, and they were quite active.
A few of them were Meshichists. I got into my share of heated arguments with them, all ended in a deadlock: that I can’t convince them the Rebbe isn’t moshiach any more than they can convince me he was. But yes, they were out there. I never saw one of them waving a yellow flag and breaking into a sporadic “Yechi Adoneinu”, they weren’t the Yechi happy types you find at 770 or driving the Mitzva Mobiles. But they were pretty candid about the fact that they were Meshichist.
I should also add that one of the founders of the club, who had graduated by the time I got there, is from my hometown of Fair Lawn, NJ. This wasn’t just some dude from Morristown or Crown Heights who came solely for the purpose of infiltrating YU. He was an MTA graduate raised in the heart of MO New Jersey whose mother became Chabad, so he got into it as well (I know his sister used to try teaching me Tanya when we were in high school). So this was a YU student who got a few other Chabadniks like himself together and simply started trying to do their Chabad thing. I never saw it as intrusive or infiltrating.
Where I go now, City College, there is a Chabad on Campus. But this is another story; the Jewish community at CCNY’s campus definitely isn’t what it was when my father went there in the ’70s. Serge Kadinsky, if you’re reading this, feel free to comment, I remember you being into the Chabad club.
you poor poor people. much adu about nothing.
First of all I agree with the above comment that I rather have chabad nuts go to YU and leave the secular and want to continue being secular people alone. secondly, you guys are all out of your minds for believing ridiculous myths and are sick for supporting a racist chauvinistic religion that doesnt even allow women to demand a divorce etc etc.
and thirdly, chabad is a completely nutty messianic cult. it happens to be jewish but its messianism is a much more important characteristic than anything else so it is much closer to Mormonism and Shiitism than to jewish orthodoxy. you poor lost souls. good night.
If it’s my comment you are agreeing with, I appreciate that, but do you really think it is necessary to reduce all Jews to being “all out of [their] minds” and all Chabad to being a “completely nutty messianic cult”? Understand, I am an Atheist, but I think you are taking it a bit far here.
If it’s not, then please be clear whose comment it is you are conceding with, or at least REPLY to their comment. Better yet, a bit of grammar and punctuation check, my dear? Such things exist for a reason, and not for the gratification of some sadistic English teacher trying to be Cpt. Hook: it is to make your comments more readable (and I must say that yours was far from it). I’m an Atheist, and I’m embarrassed to be counted amongst you.
p.s., it’s Much Ado About Nothing, how dare you insult Shakespeare like that.
p.p.s. Messianism is closer to Shiism? PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME? I understand the analogy to Mormonism, which I happen to find pretty laughable (and so do the creators of South Park, cf. their new Broadway show). But what connection does Shiism have to do with Messianism? Do you mean, perhaps, the concept of Tawassul, where they try to use the merits of a person, alive or dead, to intercede on their behalf to Allah? Because if so, then you can include many groups of Chassidim as well. In fact, even some non-Chassidim pray at the graves of Tzaddikim, or even family members, to intercede on their behalves. So unless I’m missing something, how is Chabad like Shiism?
Gottistyx,
You’re an athiest? How in the world?
You’re such a smart guy, how can you believe in such refuse?
How can a smart guy believe in Atheism? Quite the contrary, some of the shtarkest Atheists I know are very smart people. A person who’s an Atheist out of ignorance can be easily quashed. But the type who actually have explored and concluded that it doesn’t add up, well, they tend to make for better discussions (methinks).
Perhaps the closest thing I’ve found to explain my brand of Judaism is Mordacai Kaplan, though I’d never become a Reconstructionist: in the words of a dear friend of mine who is going for his PhD in Jewish History, “no one distorts the teachings of Mordacai Kaplan more than the Reconstructionist Movement.” I know, according the the RaMBaM et al., belief in God is the most fundamental thing to being Jewish, and if one can’t even do that, they should simply violate the whole Torah altogether. But this is another discussion for another time. I’m sure I’ve posted elsewhere on this site my views on this.
Just so I can understand, let’s skip all the doctrine stuff, and go straight for the big questions.
Can existance come from non-existance? ie: Can a thing create itself?
I never was able to get past this very simple and basic point.
As for the more technical, but surprisingly more comprehended question: Do you really believe someone shuffled a trillion decks a trillion times, and picked out aces from every one every time?
Sorry to go off topic here, but I am just frustrated at not being able to ever get answers to these questions.
Again, I’m not suggesting that they prove it black on white, (I think they do), but my question is, don’t you agree that one who insists that they have no significance is making the Mormons look like hardcore rationalists?
I see there’s a heated discussion going on further below, so I’m going to keep this one short and sweet.
Can something come from nothing: I don’t claim to be an expert on cosmology, but who said there ever was a nothing to begin with? My understanding of the Big Bang (which may be faulty) is that the Universe was once infinitesimally condensed. The Universe wasn’t completely void. Anything I say past here will be completely half baked, and based on a complete am ha’aretz’s understanding of Physics, so please allow me to apologize to anyone here who knows better than I do, I am about to make an ass of myself trying to explain my understanding of Time.
Time is a function that’s directly related to Space, and when space is infinitely small (as close to Zero as it can be), then so is time. Therefore, to ask what was time before the Big Bang is not a valid question. Time and Space as we know it did not exist before the Big Bang. I have toyed with the theory that the “ain sof” of Kabbalah could be a metaphor for this, and the “tohu va’vohu” of Genesis could be the chaos that ensued once the Universe began expanding.
So where does my Atheism come in? My refusal to believe that it was all some Grand Design by a greater intellect, an entity known by many names in many different cultures, let us call him Hashem for the sake of argument. That the whole Universe was created just so Hashem could eventually create a small rock in some remote Spiral Galaxy somewhere on the far end of this Universe that’s probably still expanding, and then create a specimen known as Man to serve Him/Her/It, and then give a small population of this Man something called a Torah. You’ll have a much harder time proving this to me than I will have proving that there’s anything special about mankind to begin with.
Can a thing create itself? In the realm of logic, no. But Science doesn’t always behave logically. Just look at the whole wave/particle theory. There is ample proof that energy behaves like waves (a string being rotated really fast), but there’s also ample evidence that it behaves like particles (marbles being shot really quickly). NOW THIS DEFIES LOGIC, doesn’t it? And scientists aren’t proud of it, but they have to own up to the fact that science doesn’t always follow what’s logical. The hope is that one day, they find a theory that amply explains both. But until then, let’s just say that the logical answer isn’t always the right answer.
As for your last question, I can answer that more simply. Just because something is improbable, that doesn’t mean it’s impossible! Chances are it didn’t happen, I’d find it hard to believe. But that doesn’t mean it’s impossible.
Gottistyx,
I think the discussion below is “Missing the point” a bit.
You didn’t answer my main question.
I have seen you ripping on the Mormons quite a few times. Now let me ask you, is what they believe impossible?
No.
Yet you still “see clearly” how idiotic and farfetched their beliefs are.
So my question again:
Do you not see how you are the Mormon here?
Honestly, no. Though I do have to admire some of the novel replacement theories the Atheist cosmologist has come up with instead of God (cf. “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking), I don’t see how it can compare with Mormonism. At least science attempts to empirically prove itself using evidence. The theories are not completely perfect, but if you were to ask a scientist (unlike me) how they can prove it, they can give you evidence that can be demonstrated.
Now the doctrines of Mormonism. You’ll find it much harder to prove to me that Paradise is somewhere in Dayton, Ohio. Or that the truth if found in these tablets that only Joseph Smith ever saw while wandering out in the woods somewhere in Upstate New York. Faulty comparison between them and science.
I don’t believe that Science and God are necessarily mutually exclusive. Both are different approaches to understanding the world. Both are manmade (yes, Judaism as we practice it, whether you believe in Ruach HaKodesh or not, is still Rabbinic, MEN!) The two don’t necessarily preclude each other. I still prefer Science; I have as of yet to be satisfied with the answers any form or organized religion provides.
Gottystix,
I’m not making a comparison between the particulars of the two.
The fact is, what they believe is possible, but irrational. It’s a rediculous belief. It’s like believing Darth Vader is G-d.
Now, what makes their belief so rediculous (despite it’s being possible), is the fact that even the most elementary level of logic would strongly suggest that their view of reality is way off.
Similarly, one who is asked “How did this watch get here on this store shelf” and he replies “There was this huge hurricaine, and then a tornado….” and he proceeds to give a whole – scientifically logical – explanation of how it COULD theoretically have been created and formed, with the glass, and battery, and hands on the right time, and the company name etc. This person is undoubtedly an irrational person. He believes in far-out and outrageous things, logical scientific explanations and all.
Now the example I gave of the watch might throw you off a little, because it’s something which you know how is generally formed, but in reality, mathematically speaking, the chances of a watch forming itself is infinitely greater than our universe coming into being as it is.
Taking this irrationality into account- are you really any different than any Mormon?
Actually, there’s one of the most common arguments out there used by creationists. There are many people more learned than me who have parsed this one out. If you really want to read the hard-liner Atheist’s analysis on this, I’d recommend “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins or “God Is Not Great” by Christopher Hitchens. Both are a lot more uncompromising about their beliefs than I am.
My take: Darth Vader being God, not a bad idea. There actually is a movement going around called “The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster”. A nice simple Google search, you can find all kinds of websites devoted to this meme. Point taken: who said that Hashem has to be the answer? Try, just try reading the stories of the Torah objectively, pretend you were not raised a Yid, and read them as just stories. If you were reading them for the first time in your 20s, do you really think you’d be able to take them seriously as a mythos? I can tell you honestly that for something as powerful and merciful as he is, Hashem comes across numerous times as a kid on an anthill with a magnifying glass!
So really, substitute the Burning Bush with the Angel Jibril covering the illiterate 40 year old merchant’s eyes and suddenly making him able to write an elaborate piece of Arabic prose known as the Qur’an; or the Angel Moroni appearing to Joseph Smith in Upstate New York showing him 2 Golden Tablets; or Jesus being killed to repent for our sins, and then coming back to (depending on your denomination); or Xenu the Evil Warlord from Outer Space using our planet as a prison system for these entities called Thetans whose essences are what cause all the problems in this world. Seriously, is our Torah any less harder to swallow? If you weren’t raised on it, can you see yourself taking it seriously?
Ghotti,
I specifically didn’t want this to merge with a doctrine argument. My question to you was only regarding Atheism. Once there is a conclusion one way or another you can start asking other questions. But I’m not discussing that here.
If you recall, this started with me asking you how an intelligent individual like yourself can possibly believe that the universe, and all it contains, and all it’s workings, and everything which developed within it, all came about by itself, notwith standing the infinite odds against that ever coming close to being a rational possibility.
I don’t think that everyone who doesn’t believe in Judaism is unintelligent. I have no question that smart people can be Budhist, or Hindu. The truth is, I’m not even surprised with intelligent Christians or Muslims for that matter.
Maybe with Mormons – I’m just a little surprised.
What surprises me is how an intelligent person like you can really believe that:
a) The substance which the world came from “created itself”, or “was always there”.
b) The universe was formed through completely random occurances, with no intent behind any of it, despite the extreme statistical impossibility of this happening, and even more so, despite common sense.
What you choose as an answer to the question is another subject entirely.
Furthermore, what people throughout history have believed as answers to this question, should in no way invalidate the question itself.
I am aware of the (excuse me) pathetic answers given to these questions by some of the individuals you mentioned. To say the least, scientology seems quite normal in light of them.
Realize that these individuals have some serious flaws in their thinking, and are often even more biased than most of the religious folks out there.
The first time I heard Hawkins, (aside from being in awe of the personality and genius), I was flabbergasted. I kept thinking “This is who they consider to be the “Gadol”?
He is a genius, but lacks common sense. Most of his conclusions are based on his own flimsy premises, which they themselves are “Lav davka”, and he even admits it most of the time.
I thought I was listening to a very well written science fiction speech, based on real ideas and facts, but ultimately going in the direction of the writers imagination, rather than towards logical truth.
You can come up with theories from here to the wazoo. The questions still tower infinitely higher than any of the answers. And for anyone to believe them, an admitance of irrationality is necessary.
Now you can believe whatever you want. Just like a Mormon, just like a scientologist, just like a Darth Vaderist. But admit that it’s nothing short of “Emunah pshuta” in your religion.
For one to claim to believe in a frame of intelligence and rationality, he must keep what he believes within the lines of logic.
I think that given the facts we clearly percieve, “believing in a frame of intelligence and rationality” would entail believing in a pre-existing intelligent being, free of all time and physical limitations, who purposely created and arranged for creation to come about.
Again. How, why, when, the nature of this being, his relationship to his creations, his plan, what he wants – are entirely different topics.
But I still wait to find anyone who can argue – rationally – with the above.
I, too, would like to see Noam come back and specifically address the “closer to Shiism” remark, LOL. ;^D
ha!!!! lmao. i believe he was referring to my comment. but your reply makes me laugh bc when i’m not posting online, i’m an english teacher (and i use correct capitalization!) and i really dig shakespeare. AND i’m also an atheist. just had to share. carry on.
Noam, your opinion of Judaism seems to be so low that I am genuinely surprised your opinion of Chabad seems to be even lower.
If his opinions are as well developed as his grammatic skills, I wouldn’t put much stock into them at all.
are sick for supporting a racist chauvinistic religion that doesnt even allow women to demand a divorce It has for the last thousand plus years, since the gezera of Rabbeinu Gersshom.
No Rabbenu Gershom forbade ASHKENAZI Jewish men from divorcing their wives without their consent.
Actually his gezeira was quite complex. One may not marry more than one woman at a time. One may not divorce one’s wife against her will, and one must grant his wife a divorce is she demands it. Those are the three things that were included in his Gezeira. Maran Yosef Karo considered the gezeira by his time(500yrs ago) to also be binding upon Sephardim, and that is the way that Sephardi hold today.
So how come there are ‘Agunot?
Agunot is an extremely complex issue. In the US the problem is that the Beit Din is powerless to enforce its decisions.
In Israel, it is a different story. There while there is a never ending supply of agunot, they are “cleared” through the system within 3yrs. However, the B”D has the ability to impose imprisonment, seizure of assets, and other punishments to enforce its will in that area.
In essence the Gezeira states that a man is required to give a get to his wife if she demands one. If he refuses, the B”D is then supposed to coerce him. Beyond that the issue gets very complex.
Does the Bet Din have its own police force?
No but the Israeli Police will inforce whatever the court tells them to.
For a guy to avoid giving his wife a get, he literally has to go into hiding, and some of them do, but virtually all are found pretty quickly.
Yes, there are a few stories where the guy got away, but it happens VERY seldomly.
What on Earth would possess any man to refuse his wife a get, to the point of ~going into hiding~? That is just plain crazy. If he somehow avoids giving the get does it relieve him of the need to pay child support, alimony, a settlement or the like?!
Divorce can unfortunately get very ugly, and sometimes it becomes a pride thing.
Like, “I lost so much from this whole thing, there’s no way I’m letting you get away without more anguish than me.”
Either way, I would imagine these men are quite sick from the start. Probably people you could’ve guessed would be crazy enough to do it.
And no it doesn’t relieve him of anything. Legally they can be divorced even without a get. She just can’t remarry without it.
So the only answer to a system that considers women to be the property of their husbands is to set up a quasi-theocratic system to control the husbands?
The idea of a woman being able to demand a divorce for certain reasons goes back to the Gemarra.
Let’s be clear, a woman can refuse to divorce her husband, and a husband can do the same for the wife. In both cases the Beit Din must intervene. It typically takes about a year to clear that up.
In the US(depending on the State) one spouse can refuse to divorce another. There it takes 1-5 yrs to clear up. So I am no so sure that the civil law of that enlightened democracy is better than the Torah based system found in the Shulhan Arukh.
YU got a Chabad house! Mazel tov!
I seriously need to go back to the deli post’s comments and grab the names of those recommended books both for and against Chabad! It’s amazing (or maybe it isn’t really) the number of comments, and the vehemence of comments, any Chabad post seems to generate.
Heshy’s done his share of posts on this as well, about why people hate Chabad so much, and how he gives it to them for putting themselves out there.
Intentions aside, this is in poor taste. The Chabad shluchim should have approached the menahel and rabbanim of YU, politely asking for permission. There’s a fine line between zealotry and bigotry, and I think it’s been crossed.
Do you know for a fact that they didn’t do so?
Now that Chabad has broken the ice, how about opening a Shabtai Tzvi house at YU? Shmuel Butman and Nathan of Gaza can compete in promulgating Messianic death cults.
I’d be happy to address my previous comment.
First of all, before you get all smug about spelling mistakes, English isn’t even my first language. I’d like to you you converse in your second language. Second, I wrote it in a hotel room with the lights off with y kids sleeping and without spell check, so excuse me for not writing in the king’s English. Finally, to the point, I mean to write Shiite-ism, although I know it s not a word. I am referring to religions that draw a lot of power out of the promise that a savior will come any second. Christianity has it with the evangelicals of different sorts, Islam has it with the Shiites, which is why Ahmadinajad says things like ‘Israel will be wiped off the map’. He doesnt mean that he will do it in today’s world. HE believes, much like you guys (except for the closet atheist) that some being will arrive from heaven(?) and change the rules of the game. Judaism has Chabad… And to me, since all religions are basically the same, Chabad is more similar to messianic Christianity and Islam than to Lithuanian (or german) Judaism.
Incidentally, had I not gone to YU and wasted all my electives on Talmud and my year in Israel, might know more Shakespeare and spell ado and not adu. I hope you had a goood laugh. although what is really laughable is that you have thousands of people who live an entire life planning for an afterlife that is a figment of their imagination. Although it may be more sad than funny.
Noam
Noam, thank you so much for returning to expand upon your point, particularly the point about the messianic nature of Shia Islam. :^)
My family are Shia Muslims, and I actually do see a great deal of similarity between Chabad’s relationship with their Rebbe and the the Twelver Shiite beliefs about Muhammad al-Mahdi, the Hidden Imam.
Granted. I overlooked the aspect of Shiism believing in the 12, and the Imam who will come back and rescue all.
Dude, I too went to YU and wasted electives on Talmud. I too spent a year and a half in Israel. Trust me, if there’s hope for me, there’s plenty of hope for you.
I’m not criticizing you for not being able to speak the King’s English, quote Shakespeare, or anything like that. I don’t know how good/bad your spoken English actually is, but you are right that my Hebrew does get laughed at (though I’ve been told I speak it pretty good for an “Americai”, I still make comical mistakes). I’m just going to leave it at if I didn’t know any better, I thought your comments would have been made by some angry Lakewood rebel trying to troll by haphazardly comparing Chabad to two dogmatic faiths he might have learned something about in passing.
You’ll also have to pardon my slight impatience for angry Atheists who speak of those who believe as wasting their lives. This is why so many people have trouble believing that I myself am an Atheist, and this is why I don’t get along with many Atheists I meet. Now put aside your pipe dream of a world where Richard Dawkins is Gospel. Do you really propose that being the Jeremiad on an internet forum is really going to convince anyone to question their beliefs, or even to change them?
And to all the Rabinu Gershopm fans out there, I don’t are how you slice the BS, what is a fact is that a frum woman who gets up one bright morning and wants a divorce, I don’t care why, let’s say because it it Tuesday, cannot get it without the man’s agreement. Whereas the man can give a divorce at his own will. I will be damned if I raise my daughters into such an injustice.
Sorry, but that simply is not true. Both of your premises are covered under the ban of Rabbeinu Gershom.
1) A man has to give his wife a get if she demands it
2) A man cannot divorce his wife against her will.
Your “electives” in Talmud and year in Isrel did not profit you much in the knowledge of Jewish law.
Atheism is not a belief. It is a conclusion based on knowledge. Belief is the suspense of knowledge. (or a cheap substitute for knowledge.)
You seem so educated – but lack common sense !!!!
conclusions based on knowledge — sounds a lot like BS to me !!!!
Scientific knowledge is based upon proofs…
so…Mr. Smart Guy…..
show me proofs that there is no such thing as G-D !!!!
Anyone looking at that wonders of theuniverse and human body would conclude just the opposite…!!!
What came before the big – bang – theory ?
Even Einstein made references to G-D – such as ‘G-d does not play dice with the Universe !!!
Or perhaps— Mr. Smarty Pants…
Explain the existence of the Jewish people—after all you are ‘supposedly’ one of them …!!!
How did The Jews survive, one extermination attempt after another.. till this very day…?
When asked what God did before he created the Universe, legend has it that St. Augustine answered “He created Hell for people who ask such questions”. Sorry, your questions just reminded me of this anecdote.
Hi Ariyeh Leib,
You obviously ask good questions but I want to keep it short and sweet bec otherwise everyone loses interest.
a) with your permission, we should start with disproving hashem as a god. Since (I assume) we both agree that Jesus was not half god we don’t need to waste time on other gods. to prove that hashem doesn’t exist I will bring exhibit #1; The Bible. Are you agreeable to this approach?
b)Meanwhile, how come you are curious what was there before the big bang but you don’t ask what was there before god? is that being intellectually honest?
Einstein did not believe in hashem. He was more of a pantheist, which is really not much more than saying that god=energy and exists in a hot lump of coal.
The Jews survived and that is why you are here to ask that question. we were not the onlypeople who were persecuted and survived. take the Armenians for instance. i know you will say we survived longer but what’s 1200 years in the scheme of things? in 1000 or 2000 years some other sect will say it. it proves nothing.
Since you mentioned Einstein, Let’s start here.
Einstein’s formula proves that mass can become energy.
That is what led us to separate the electrons from the nucleus, losing mass and thereby leaving an explosion of energy.
The thing is, the formula goes both ways. It seems that if we can accelerate energy, a photon, to a certain speed, it will throw off mass. That’s what the CERN nuclear accelerator is trying to do.
So when trying to figure out what was around before the big bang, we can probably confidently say: Energy. We don’t have all the answers but we are working towards them. It is a work in progress and it shows promise. It certainly is a more scientific approach than saying ‘hashem was always around’.
Since we are humans with a finite existence we cannot wrap out brains around that answers so for the time being we must continue questioning and searching.
How are we doing so far?
Noam
Short questions… to begin..
where did that first particle come from ?
How did time & space come about…?
How come these objects called planets are somewhat circular — ?
How did we get to this thing called gravity…?
If some evolutionists say we evolved from the apes…How come we have stopped evolving in that physical sort of way–?
Why do we have 2 eyes,1 mouth and 2 ears…?
The Bible – Torah as we know it today – contains within it patterns of words.. that we are just deciphering today…that refer to current events,etc..
****
The jist of what I am getting at is… there is some creative force at work…
The wonders of nature just did not happen !!!!
The snallest particle — just did not appear by itself…
New theories abound…
For instance: String Theory….
But ….
We all can fathom some sort of starting point…
Only the very gullible will say that it just appeared…
The very existence of the smallest particle testifies to its Creator…
We can agree to disagree on what form that Creator takes on….
*”Evolutionists” don’t say that humans came from apes, but rather that we and the great apes have common ancestry, who in turn have common ancestry with primates, and so on and so forth all the way back to single cell organisms.
*I’m using quotations because I’ve only heard that term used by people who deny evolution.
Mekubal,
Are there agunot out there today? (ones who’s husbands refuse to give them a Get?)
Are there men in that same position? Do you know the statistical differences between Agunot(both male and female) in Israel and the various states(NJ, NY, PA ect.) that require consent in divorce?
The Aguna issue is an easy strawman argument, but when actually analyzed you will find that it is more smoke and mirrors than a stage magicians show.
Ariyeh,
)
Let’s not jump to conclusion. These topics aren’t answered in one sitting. Let’s just take one step at a time.
Why do you say we have stopped evolving? the several decades you have spent on earth hardly give you a chance to see evolution in progress.
The torah codes have been disproved many times over. I really don’t think we should spend any time on it. the reason it worked is because you know what you are looking for. The Christians find whatever they want there and you can do the same to Dostoevsky.
It takes an knowledge of biology to understand how both we and todays apes came from a common ancestor.
Before biology there was physics. I would want to discuss some aspects of physics and how we go about trying to determine how the process came along billions of years ago but I sense that we are already on divergent paths and barely listening to one another. All I hear you saying s that the wonder of existence overwhelms you and you cannot even step for one moment off the premise that it must have been done by intelligent design. is that correct? if you are able to suspend that conclusion for a few moments we can continue to explore. forget the many theories, let’s just concentrate on one. ok?
(Also, let’s try not to throw insults like calling one another ignorant. this will go nowhere quickly
Noam
I would really like to see a respectful debate with no name-calling or appeals to ridicule conducted along just these lines.
Thanks Mahla,
I appreciate your insight, that is a very interesting background you have.
I was shocked when studying Islam to see how much of the initial Islamic practices were derived from Judaism. Like Ramadan from Yom Kippur and that Muslims prayed to Jerusalem for the first 10 months before turning to Mecca.
Noam, thanks much, on this blog just the other day we were talking about the whole Rambam / Islam connection. :^) Some agnostics and atheists feel that organized religion is inevitably a force for bad in this world; I personally do not agree, nor do I think that Ghottistyx believes so (he can correct me if I’m wrong) — but having looked at your site, I think that you may. Of course, that is a totally different kettle of fish than whether or not a deity exists in the first place, LOL! :^)
Anyway, as I say, it’s rare to find a forum where people can speak even halfway respectfully to one another despite their differing and possibly passionate beliefs; that’s one of the things I enjoy so much about the comments here on Frum Satire. :^)
In essence, yes. I hold along the lines of Freud: not believing in God or religion myself, but still admitting that belief in these things has its function, and thus not pushing for its abolition. Freud considered religion the Superego for grown-ups. As kids, our Superego is our parents, our teachers, etc. But who to enforce the rules once we move out on our own?
To an enlightened person, needing a Torah or a God to tell us “Do Not Murder” is an insult. Seriously, people, do we really need the Torah to point this out? Of course, there are plenty of God fearing people who still have trouble adhering to this. To this I say that being religious doesn’t make a person moral, and being irreligious doesn’t make a person immoral. But of course, there are plenty of sheeple (as Jon Stewart would say) who do need a Torah to tell them Murder is wrong. It is because of these sheeple that I’m not pushing for a complete abolition of the God institutions. If ever we enter this ideal hyper-enlightened pipe dream world where everyone is enlightened, then I would say God has completely overstayed his welcome.
Sof Davar: It’s not the religion in of itself that’s evil, it’s what people do with their religions!
Doesn’t Judaism consider “Do Not Murder” to be a Mishpat (an obvious law that every culture has)?
Yes. But it needed to be stated. To plenty of people out there, it plain and simply isn’t obvious.
Which begs the question: should the Torah be the Alpha and Omega of morality? Can we really assume that a book that was probably compiled in the Bronze age is so universal, that we can learn morality for all time from it?
For those who for some reason still have a problem with Yidden coming together for limmud hatorah, I’m passing on a clip of Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet’s latest shiur where he address the issue head on. You may be surprised.
Oh my goodness Mottel, I am no expert on Judaism, but just the premise of that website itself was something else!
So Mottel, since you seem to agree with his shita I have to ask, do you also think that he is right that a woman should be allowed to be a Rabbi, and even and Admur?
Good stuff, ghottistyx. Really good stuff.
I guess the only thing that keeps me wanting to abolish religion and the idea of god is that it being a net negative to the world. I see that there are people who are good without religion and people who are bad with religion. the exception is that there are good people who do bad things because of religion and that’s a shame. If we can all call a spade a spade, religious leaders who try to get away with doing bad things under the vale of religion would face the judgment of the masses. Since they don’t, more bad is brought upon our here planet earth… That’s all. I don’t think religion stops bad people from doing bad things. 98% of prison population claims to be believe in god. so so much for the theory of religion causing people to be better…
noam
True. I’ve perused Dawkins and Hitchens, both of whom have some interesting polemics on this. It is actually thanks to Dawkins that I even have the beitzim to call myself an Atheist to begin with; before that, I was forever floating on Agnosticism (Atheism without balls, the kind who was past suspension of belief and was simply willing to throw up his arms and ask “does it even matter?”). The best one I’ve seen so far is Julian Baggini’s “Atheist: A Very Short Introduction.”
Now let me ask you this. What of the many people out there who are genuinely good people, despite what their religious leaders tell them what to do/not to do? I can honestly say right now that I know many Catholics out there who I find to be genuinely good people. Some of them will spew crap such as “Jews are Christ Killers” out of ignorance, but when it comes down to the bottom of it, I find that they don’t mean any personal ill-will against Jews or anyone. They will speak of Jews not being able to inherit the Kingdom of God, but they would still invite me in their homes and make me feel completely welcome even if I am born of sin.
The same goes to the Chareidim I know. I am about as anti-Chareidism as one can get, but I’ve experienced some very good hospitality by them. I’ve wandered onto Chus-busses with no yarmulke, looking as goyyish as goyyish comes (many people can’t tell I’m Jewish at first): the whole bus was giving me directions, helping me get to my destination, even though they weren’t completely familiar with the side of Williamsburg I needed to get to. I have found that even though plenty of people will use religion as a cover to do some pretty nasty things, deep down inside many of them have good inside them.
Are religious leaders any worse than secular leaders? With power comes a lot of responsibility. It is only natural for one who has power to abuse it. How are the religious leaders using their religious powers any worse than people like Richard Nixon, who maintained that “if the President does it, that means it is not illegal”?
Well, I do think religious leaders have greater immunity to poor behavior. Look at the chrch for pete’s sake. The pope is infallible! the poor bastard CAN’T do anything wrong. Even if he tried! Now all the Jews will say; Oh, we don’t have that. But they do. Like when the brothers sell their own little brother into slavery because they didn’t like that he was favored by Jacob (not that this really happened, but the lessons are real) Rashi goes and says they were justified by law. He makes up some stories about aiver min hachay and malshinus. How sick is that? and Abraham, that guy tried to kill both his sons. One by throwing him out in the desert with no (little) food and drink, and the other with a big f___ing knife. and is he criticized for this??? no no. he is exulted! If he lived today he’d be in prison (or maybe in a mental institution for hearing voices.) anyway, my point is that religion lets people good and bad, leaders and laymen, get away with stuff that otherwise would be viewed critically by society. That is one of the great ills that religion gives us. Although I still consider the brainwashing to be religions worst crime. Look at our people, so many talented smart people went and wasted their life in yeshivas trying to explain away the terrible things the bible says. how many medicines could they have come up with? inventions? thoughts? and instead, nothing. Akiva Aiger could have been (they say) a world class mathematician. instead he wrote some obscure books that are read by a few hundred unemployed people in lakewood. that isn’t a waste?
Anyway, I’m getting nasty so I’ll stop.
Noam
You bring up a few very interesting points. Without getting too deeply into them:
Morality of the Avoth. Dubious indeed. Kierkegaard labored under the assumption that Abraham was responding to some higher morality than we do. The question he asked was whether or not the order received was a genuine order from God, and does this mean we have to follow it? Woody Allen, in his twisted parody of the story, said no; the moral of the story, according to him, was similar to Stanley Milgram’s experiments–that humans are willing to do even the most asinine things if ordered to do so by an authoritative, well modulated voice.
But of course, let’s put aside the Avoth, and the fact that they are still taught to every Jewish child as being a paragon of virtue. There are plenty of people out there who would better discuss these stories for what they are, and how we can possibly redeem the brothers selling Yoseph into slavery (even if he did or didn’t deserve it in their eyes for being a snitch).
Like Acher, you’d go into the Yeshivot and tell Akiva Eiger to become a Mathematician instead of a Rabbi. Honestly, that would be like “what if Hitler never failed out of art school?” What’s been done has been done. I say if someone’s going to be a Rabbi, better it be someone who actually has the brains for it than one who doesn’t (and trust me, I’ll be the first person to say that there’s plenty of Rabbis out there who aren’t worth the piece of paper their semicha is written on).
A world without religion: I would argue that if humanity were to just completely dump religion right now, they probably would return to this “state of nature” Hobbes spoke about. They need to be eased into it. Think of what Russia was like in 1917, that yearlong period between when Czar Nicolai II was deposed and when Lenin took the helm. Russia was this big tumultous vacuum, led by this really unspectacular bloke named Kerensky I could tell you almost nothing about. I would definitely argue that Russia simply wasn’t ready to suddenly become a Communism. The world, similarly, is not ready to suddenly just dump God. The chaos that would ensue…
But I’d say the movement has been somewhat in a positive direction. We have come a long way from the days where sacrificing was acceptable. Just look at the myths that were concurrent. Ever read some of those ancient Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, and Phoenician myths? They were just as dubious (if not more) than the Bible itself. Judaism has thankfully evolved quite a bit from the Bronze age, even if it still teaches those stories as being a paragon of virtue. Of course, I don’t condone those who hope that one day we sacrifice animals again. My hope is that we continue to move in this forward direction, one where all is illuminated. Amen.
Nietzsche understood this best. There was no need for the old definition of God with it’s slave morality. That God was dead. Unfortunately, he made the jump to say God is dead, period, and it was only a matter of time before everyone else saw it (illustrated in the scene with the wise old hermit in the beginning of Zarathustra).
We see today that he was wrong. Otherwise free people, who understand Freud and the superego, are searching for Divine connection. Nietzsche’s substitutions of the superman and eternal recurrence are hollow. Invented substitutions, like causes ending with “ism”, are 1) fundamentally pointless without a real purpose, and 2) easily corruptible and evil. There’s a reason that there’s no good substitute for God. You can try to fool yourself, but it’s not just for the amharatzim. It’s for all of us.
Noam, you sound so much like my partner. Probably his second major argument as to why he believes organized religion is inherently a force for bad is, look at people spending all their time studying these religions and just think of what they could have achieved for humankind if they were doing something else with their time and intellect.
However, many scientists, writers and thinkers who have added so much to what we’d consider the secular or humanist canon were not only religious but inspired by religion. Like Milton in the humanities, or Newton when it comes to science.
Better they learn Chassidus after classes than go out to the bars or watch sports on t.v. And since the Rebbe and the Rav were friends since back in college, I do not see what the problem is.
Secondly, any group on campus will want to try an influence people to spend some time with them and ascribe to their ideals. If you’re on the Maccabeats you have to practice and sing on the beat. If you’re on the baseball team you have to try out and go to regular practices. I do not see how a Chabad on Campus is causing the end of life as we know it. I am sure if we saw a list of all the student groups, we would think many of them have no real point and are a distraction.
It’s not a ‘problem’, Chassidus is great. But please, do me a favor and call it what it is. These are nothing other than hopeful plantings of future Lubavitcher converts. Kiruv in YU instead of a secular college campus.
“If we don’t get anyone? Oh well. At least we learnt some chassidus.”
Stop making it sound like “Learning chassidus” is the real incentive here.
I found my place in Torah in the hashkafah of Rebbe Simcha Bunim of Peshischa ZTL. He had huge tainas on the derech the other Rebbes had taken Chassidus — a focus only upon Sefiros and Kabbalah. Rebbe Bunim taught that it is the Lev that is the focus of our avodah. As the Kotzker Rebbe ZTL taught: Who is a Chassid? Someone who asks why he is doing something before doing it ! Not being a robot. Having kavanah. HKBH desires our HEART. It is our heart that leads us. Our minds are overruled by our heart. Therefore, CHABAD is not the ruling factor in our avodah. Our heart is !!! There is an excellent sefer written by Rav Eliezer Miller Shlita called Rachmanah Liba Bai, based on the Gemarah Sandhedrin 106a. It was translated into English and is called A Heart to Know Me. Read this Sefer and you will learn what Avodas HaShem truly is.
Peshischa Chassid, define “translated into English” — like exactly how much of a background in Hebrew and / or Yiddish would someone need to read the English translation, LOL? ;^D It’s online for less than $14 but there is no preview on Google Books to show one what one’s getting into. :^)
FYI-There are many students who go to YU who are frum, Shomer Shabbos & Negiah etc… However there are many that are there for NON-TORAH classes. Although most of us hear the word Yeshivah or YU think that it is frum students however MANY are not! Many dress like but aren’t. I could tell you numerous students who are not shomer shabbos but don’t want to be an odd ball in a secular college or are foreigners that need sponsorship etc… they arrive in USA through Jewish orgganizations who send them there.
I Know Rabbis ” ” who ran Synagogues with Treif Kitchens and graduated from there I know Students who dressed the part (Frum attire) but did not know laws pertaining to man and wife and graduated YU.
It is not the fault of YU – It is a misconception of the people who are not familiar with the various programs at YU. It also gives students from not Frum backgrounds exposure to Judaism.
I myself have grown up in the Yeshiva world and after 45 have begun to study Lubavitch Chassidus!
I wish I was receptive at a younger age!
If YU allows them on campus I am sure it is better than having Gay or Transexuals exposing themselves as a staff member in front of the eyes of the world at YU.
Dumb Post. As the president of Chabad of Yeshiva University, this article has been been nothing more than a bad attemp at satire. Also, Chabad has been on the YU campus since Yud Shvat, and I mean the original Yud Shvat.
Mr. Levin,
Your whole religion is a joke and you don’t even know how to speak nicely.
{ 1 trackback }