tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post8692080573113417508..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: International Tehillim Gathering, and my thoughts on it...joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-83632556810423049302009-03-17T07:32:00.000-04:002009-03-17T07:32:00.000-04:00"First of all, you seem a bit skeptical about the ...<I>"First of all, you seem a bit skeptical about the statement that Reb Elimelech was a tzadik. How can you talk that way?"</I><BR/>And what, pray tell, in my words implied that?? Which words? All I was commenting on was the hyper-reaction of the hamon am. There is a difference between a tzaddik and a saint, the latter of which is more a Christian concept, IMHO. I would say the same about Bach and Aruch HaShulchan. (I sometimes use stark words to get my point across, and sometimes over-equivocate, but that is a matter of style rather than substance.)<BR/><BR/><I>"I don't believe that letter was demeaning the other two huge tzaddikim"</I><BR/>I don't believe it was either. My only reason for selecting these two was because they died on the days preceding and following. Had the yahrzheit been any other day of the year, I could have selected another pair of tzaddikim.<BR/><BR/>My point was that once you select a *day* as "auspicious" (a practice which may be questionable, whether or not it is auspicious) because a tzaddik died on that day, the same can be said about *any* other day.<BR/><BR/>There is a shul in Kew Gardens Hills which never said tachnun, for a span of many years, because every day was the yahrzheit of some tzaddik or some rebbe. It would seem that the same would apply here.<BR/><BR/><I>"And Reb Elimelech even requested from above that his soul should always rest in the lowest spheres possible in order to be very connected with his brothers."</I><BR/>This may well be theology behind it. It does not reassure me; rather, it worries me more, as we now may have Hashem in the upper spheres and Rav Elimelech in the lower spheres. This theology (of tzaddik-ism) may be problematic enough when the tzaddik is alive, but may be more so once the tzaddik is deceased. Are we now creating a pantheon of lower gods, formed by deceased tzaddikim; instead of a pantheon of kochavim and mazalot?<BR/><BR/>But that, of course, is an entirely separate machloket.<BR/><BR/>kt,<BR/>joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-26428724839524431762009-03-17T01:26:00.000-04:002009-03-17T01:26:00.000-04:00First of all, you seem a bit skeptical about the s...First of all, you seem a bit skeptical about the statement that Reb Elimelech was a tzadik. How can you talk that way? Would so many people, and great people whom almost all consider holy today, believe in it, how can you question it?<BR/>Second of all, I don't believe that letter was demeaning the other two huge tzaddikim; however Reb Elimelech has become extremely renowned even-and especially-nowadays for intervening on behalf of our nation. The soul hovers in this world on a yartzheit especially. And Reb Elimelech even requested from above that his soul should always rest in the lowest spheres possible in order to be very connected with his brothers. <BR/>I hope that you don't take this as a provocation but rather use this to straighten out your misconception (which isn't only yours).<BR/>Kol Tuv!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-4035537359945826892009-03-16T18:25:00.000-04:002009-03-16T18:25:00.000-04:00indeed.perhaps another nice way of putting it is t...indeed.<BR/><BR/>perhaps another nice way of putting it is that it depends on whether it is Truth or Nonsense. If it is nonsense, it may be superstition, MeOnen, etc. But if it is Truth, then it is not nonsense. And they hold it is Truth. Once they pasken that way, then internally it is so and follows consistently as not being MeOnen.<BR/><BR/>And then it is the matter of judging it from the inside or the outside.<BR/><BR/>I am not so sure it is so borderline and ambiguous, though. It is only because of years and years of questionable declarations that we may have arrived at the present state of belief. But the true line may already lie quite far from where we now stand, and have been crossed hundreds of years ago.<BR/><BR/>kt,<BR/>joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-86624784550887608952009-03-16T17:01:00.000-04:002009-03-16T17:01:00.000-04:00I believe this all is very ambiguous and borderlin...I believe this all is very ambiguous and borderline. There is always a thin line between holiness and heresy. What about prophecy vs witchcraft? I never completely understood why Moses needs a Rod to part the sea. Bilaam also has some kind of staff. When does that become Kesem ( Kesem means rod if I am not mistaken).<BR/>Of course all the mystical approach to Judaism is liable to deteriorate into superstition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-26464065662923447582009-03-16T16:22:00.000-04:002009-03-16T16:22:00.000-04:00no, I'm not sure.and it might well depend on the m...no, I'm not sure.<BR/><BR/>and it might well depend on the meaning of "auspicious," and as intended by the authors of this notice.<BR/><BR/>regardless, the situation nowadays *seems* to be that instead of saying day X is lucky, or we will be aided in activity Z on day X, because of the influence of some Mazal, we are saying the same thing because of the influence of some tzaddik. In which case we have replaced the 12 signs of the zodiac with the several hundred tzaddikim.<BR/><BR/>But I am just asking questions. Such as, it wasn't particularly auspicious for Rav Elimelech, now was it? ;)<BR/><BR/>KT,<BR/>Joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-35453580451761351972009-03-16T16:05:00.000-04:002009-03-16T16:05:00.000-04:00I am not a good expert in halakha, and personally ...I am not a good expert in halakha, and personally not hassidic oriented, but are you sure this goes under issur meonen?<BR/>We know, for example that there is no issur meonen, when there is a logical connection. i.e. sunny day = good day to go to the beach. or new moon = good time to make a surprise attack on the enemy (we have better night-vision technology). <BR/>Maybe here we could say that it is a good day to say tehillim bzchut hatzadiq.?<BR/>Where as not pursuing an action because a black cat crossed my path would be assur?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-20319336804159998712009-03-16T10:52:00.000-04:002009-03-16T10:52:00.000-04:00someone ("cipher") asked a similar question the ot...someone ("cipher") asked a similar question the other day at Wolfish Musings. See <A HREF="http://wolfishmusings.blogspot.com/2009/03/women-stop-crying-we-cant-hear-eulogies.html" REL="nofollow">here</A>.<BR/><BR/>There might indeed be legitimate answers. But the questions were indeed intended rhetorically, and as a way of (hopefully) influencing the contours of Jewish belief and practice in a positive direction.<BR/><BR/>kt,<BR/>joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-3221101956069829662009-03-16T10:43:00.000-04:002009-03-16T10:43:00.000-04:00While your questions are all legitimate, are you r...While your questions are all legitimate, are you really asking them with the hope that there is a serious answer? You know the answer- this is what Judaism is in the 21st century. <BR/><BR/>If you don't like what it has become, you may be right, but you will soon find yourself more and more alone outside the contours of what "jewish" people are doing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com