tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post5674680543908977082..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Interesting Posts and Articles #145joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-37082725159500180892009-05-22T11:05:29.996-04:002009-05-22T11:05:29.996-04:00Often times people get confused and think that Cro...Often times people get confused and think that Crown Heights is representative of Lubavitch, when in fact it is not. Just because something goes on in CH, or certain behavior is exhibited, does not mean that this is Lubavitch behavior. It's CH behavior.Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-84070881402037737032009-05-22T07:41:32.176-04:002009-05-22T07:41:32.176-04:00"Crown Heights is..."
sorry, i don't follow.
shab..."Crown Heights is..."<br />sorry, i don't follow.<br /><br />shabbat shalom,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-64386420950271568982009-05-21T19:14:53.593-04:002009-05-21T19:14:53.593-04:00Crown Heights is Baruch Hashem not Lubavitch.Crown Heights is Baruch Hashem not Lubavitch.Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-28149773010341653242009-05-21T16:26:49.844-04:002009-05-21T16:26:49.844-04:00indeed, ahavas yisrael is a laudable goal, and we ...indeed, ahavas yisrael is a laudable goal, and we should strive for it.<br /><br />one thing to watch out for is how some people misuse ahavas chinam as a way of dismissing legitimate concerns. e.g. <A HREF="http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=3261&catid=26" REL="nofollow">here</A>:<br />http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=3261&catid=26<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-47837059117789460292009-05-21T00:17:25.123-04:002009-05-21T00:17:25.123-04:00Well, I have my rebbeim and mashpiim and whatnot w...Well, I have my rebbeim and mashpiim and whatnot who I trust, and you have yours, and hopefully there can be enough ahavas yisroel between us that... of course, if you don't think I'm Jewish, or a kofer, then that's another problem, but whatever.Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-36941081197570474192009-05-20T21:48:12.053-04:002009-05-20T21:48:12.053-04:00real:
"Nu, which do I subscribe to?"
not that what...real:<br />"Nu, which do I subscribe to?"<br />not that what i think matters (for who am i, anyway). but i don't know. it strikes me as a continuum, and i don't think i know entirely where you stand. do rationalizations help in this regard? perhaps. but christians who believe in a trinity also have their fancy rationalizations. and if not idolatry, it strikes me as dangerously close to it.<br /><br />fkm:<br />it is an interesting idea. i am sure, though, that rabbinic figures in history have opposed even long-standing movements. ramban opposed shlugging kapparos as problematic, and despite it being in existence for hundreds of years afterwards, rav yosef karo also condemned it.<br /><br />there is also the danger of simply letting ideas (memes) and flourish on their ability to last and spread, and then declaring them legitimate. one can declare it yad Hashem at play, but this is perhaps avoiding responsibility. it also lets us stay comfortably in the ideas we grew up with, without grappling with them. i am not sure turning this into an ideal and declaring it legitimate by virtue of it existing is not a cop-out.<br /><br />furthermore, think of all the other groups. can they say this as well? about 2000 years ago, a bunch of crazies thought their rebbe was the mashiach and god. and they flourished, and people voted with their feet that it was acceptable and not heretical. christians now number in the *millions*. Which people are voting with their feet? can they claim legitimacy on this basis?<br /><br />we mentioned karaites. well, they are few, fewer than Jews, but jews are fewer than christians. they voted with their feet. for a karaite, can he use this approach to declare his set of beliefs legitimate and non-heretical?<br /><br />how about reform and conservative? has it been long enough? can reform now say that people have voted with their feet and so they are non-heretical. do we have any ability to counteract these claims?<br /><br />let us say in 100 years, chabad is still maintaining that the rebbe is mashiach, or (ch"v) Hashem? will it then magically become legitimate?<br /><br />who is the traditional community? who gets to define it, even if such an approach to determining things were legitimate?<br /><br />kt,<br />josh<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-65824304182992812009-05-20T19:58:03.660-04:002009-05-20T19:58:03.660-04:00rambam felt that many of his coreligionists who ma...<I>rambam felt that many of his coreligionists who maintained the corporeality of God were heretics. the gra felt that the Baal Shem Tov, and chassidim, were heretics, and presumably would consider this to be the case even more today. Ibn Ezra felt that Karaites (even to modern day Karaites) were heretics. Rav Yaakov Emden felt that Sabbateans and Sabbatean Kabbalists, such as Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz, were heretics. They all had their standards for inclusion.</I>Nice list.<br />The answer I was given is that the traditional community in it's broadest sense, eventually votes with it's feet about which is acceptable and which is heretical.<br /><br />There is "historical closure" on most of these debates within a few hundred years --these groups become clearly marked by the traditional community "in" or "out".Freelance Kiruv Maniac (Mr. Hyde)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10298176204317506218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-19888584013163759692009-05-20T15:18:01.499-04:002009-05-20T15:18:01.499-04:00"Regardless, there is a difference between maintai..."Regardless, there is a difference between maintaining a false and problematic theology and maintaining an idolatrous one."<br /><br />Nu, which do I subscribe to?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-13955134567135615482009-05-20T15:08:34.921-04:002009-05-20T15:08:34.921-04:00i am just saying that if you want to hide behind s...i am just saying that if you want to hide behind sources for newly innovated heresy, then those sources themselves become fair game.<br /><br />rambam felt that many of his coreligionists who maintained the corporeality of God were heretics. the gra felt that the Baal Shem Tov, and chassidim, were heretics, and presumably would consider this to be the case even more today. Ibn Ezra felt that Karaites (even to modern day Karaites) were heretics. Rav Yaakov Emden felt that Sabbateans and Sabbatean Kabbalists, such as Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz, were heretics. They all had their standards for inclusion.<br /><br />Regardless, there is a difference between maintaining a false and problematic theology and maintaining an idolatrous one. I am pretty certain I would eat of the Gra's shechita (except that he has passed on, so might not be a valid shochet). I am pretty certain I would not eat of <A HREF="http://rebbegod.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">this fellow's</A> shechita. Would you?<br /><br />There is a difference between thinking someone's theology was wrong (you presumably agree that the Gra was wrong about at least one ikkar in his theology) and writing them entirely out of Judaism.<br /><br />Tangentially, to cite an interesting comment I saw elsewhere:<br /><I>In the times of the GRA there were 'valid' fears behind the claims of the Misnagdim . . . They were afraid of Sabbatianism, etc. Time however has shown that these fears were baseless</I><BR>If people are now being meshichists and Elohists, then the Gra's fears have indeed been borne out.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-46935675822688013362009-05-20T13:42:13.890-04:002009-05-20T13:42:13.890-04:00Exactly my point. Leading us to wonder what the st...Exactly my point. Leading us to wonder what the standards for inclusion in Josh's Judaism are. Agreeing with everything Josh says?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-29180704160531904952009-05-20T12:48:53.087-04:002009-05-20T12:48:53.087-04:00fkm:
interesting idea. interestingly, Ramchal's bo...fkm:<br />interesting idea. interestingly, Ramchal's books were banned in his time, for writing at such a young age and at the purported direction of a maggid. Mesilas Yesharim was what he wrote when he could not write the kabbalah sefarim he wanted.<br /><br />real:<br />nu, so indeed he does. :) after all, the gra was a kabbalist.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1195527265974127522009-05-20T12:33:09.572-04:002009-05-20T12:33:09.572-04:00Josh: nu, so he argues against the Gra.Josh: nu, so he argues against the Gra.Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-82188745367236010452009-05-20T12:25:44.958-04:002009-05-20T12:25:44.958-04:00I think the Ramchal's writings had a very normali...I think the Ramchal's writings had a very normalizing and mainstreaming effect on kabbalah. He was very organized and focused on setting clear ground rules about God which are very Maimonidean to my view.<br /><br />He avoids most of the heretical tendencies that can easily be spun off from kabbalistic thought, and historically I believe, he was the one who made it okay for the masses of misnagdim (that's me) to learn kabbalah safely.Freelance Kiruv Maniac (Mr. Hyde)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10298176204317506218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1087411168835870732009-05-20T12:11:31.155-04:002009-05-20T12:11:31.155-04:00and who are you to decide that what the Jews for J...and who are you to decide that what the Jews for Jesus folks are saying is not idolatry?<br /><br />by the way, would you agree that i am taking an interesting tack? rather than admitting to all sorts of axioms and arguing within chassidus, i am questioning the very axioms.<br /><br />this is what shadal did in his vikuach al chochmas hakabbalah. he initially suppressed this sefer, but published it to combat chassidus, which he deemed heretical as well. You can read large portions of it <A HREF="http://parsha.blogspot.com/search/label/vikuach%20al%20chochmat%20hakabbalah" REL="nofollow">here</A>:<br />http://parsha.blogspot.com/search/label/vikuach%20al%20chochmat%20hakabbalah<br /><br />He argues against the authenticity of e.g. the zohar. Check it out.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-31733431195778293072009-05-20T12:05:52.426-04:002009-05-20T12:05:52.426-04:00And who are you to decide what is idolatry and wha...And who are you to decide what is idolatry and what is not? Is everything Lurianic, or indeed zoharic, indeed not true?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-73759253575759147622009-05-20T10:35:09.860-04:002009-05-20T10:35:09.860-04:00the rambam was quite an innovator in that regard. ...the rambam was quite an innovator in that regard. he distinguished his own position from that of Chazal; and the popular, frum position that everyone maintains nowadays is the one he ascribes to certain religious Arab philosophers.<br /><br />there is no real room for innovation which *contradicts* previous generations when you are calling all of this "kabbalah," or "received" wisdom.<br /><br />also, there is no room for innovation in my religion where such innovations plots a steady course towards greater and greater avodah zara. again turning to Rambam, see how he claims idolatry developed: from a worship of Hashem to a worship of His created servants, and on from there. See a nice translation <A HREF="http://naftali.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/early-history-of-the-jewsih-people-a-translation-of-rambams-laws-of-idolatry-chapter-1/" REL="nofollow">here</A>, halacha 1 and 2.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-28633300597841605682009-05-20T09:40:01.103-04:002009-05-20T09:40:01.103-04:00Correct you are-the Gra was a major proponent on t...Correct you are-the Gra was a major proponent on tzimtzum k'pshuto, just like the Rambam was a major proponent of Hashgacha klalis-do we follow these today? No. Since when is there no room in your religion for innovation?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-61669824696228233802009-05-20T07:20:50.819-04:002009-05-20T07:20:50.819-04:00corruption of thought. as an example, you mentione...corruption of thought. as an example, you mentioned the idea that "it's long been established that tzimtzum is not k'pshuto, so everything is G-d, and G-d is everything." This used to be a dispute, and an upheaval, within chassidus. and this was in turn based on other innovations, called interpretations. as someone related to me, purportedly when the gra was going to dispute this with the baal shem tov, they first were going to set ground rules -- that is, axioms. and the gra refused to take Arizal as axiomatic, which was why the dispute fell through. that is, this new innovation was supportable by a previous innovation.<br /><br />if it is truly kabbalah, there should not be this major development of thought. another example, out of left field, is how the Sefirot was apparently originally understood to be the numbers from 1 to 10, rather than the Divinity or something related to it, just like the Hebrew letters. (See Kuzari.) At different strata in history, we have these major figures of works that set the tone and discourse.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-9098805977141383022009-05-19T20:16:05.213-04:002009-05-19T20:16:05.213-04:00Corruption of which classic texts?Corruption of which classic texts?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-15773970109017187372009-05-19T17:16:39.261-04:002009-05-19T17:16:39.261-04:00and if i were at that fabrengen, i would hopefully...and if i were at that fabrengen, i would hopefully not yell back. but you are probably right. each perversion of authentic jewish theology is rooted in a previous heretical corruption. thus, kabbalah to zoharic kabbalah to lurianic kabbalah to chassidus to chabad to modern chabad to meshichist chabad.<br /><br />this does not mean that i am conceding the argument. i am pretty sure that at each stage, one could show how the next stage is wrong. and one could presumably argue accepting certain things as given, and working from there. i know people do engage in such debates. i have no real interest in doing that, though.<br /><br />btw, i don't agree that kabbalas ol malchus shamayim means subscribing to certain avodah-zarahdik interpretations of classic jewish texts.<br /><br />kol tuv,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-77195391542296057022009-05-19T17:09:58.944-04:002009-05-19T17:09:58.944-04:00If we were sitting at a farbrengen right now I'd b...If we were sitting at a farbrengen right now I'd be screaming, "You have to learn chassidus and have a little kabbolos ol!" Oh well. This is, by the way, the distinction Zushe Posner made by the farbrengen I blogged (which was posted here) between chabad and lubavitch.Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-77171757800320025342009-05-19T17:01:00.000-04:002009-05-19T17:01:00.000-04:00good point on the distinction between panentheism ...good point on the distinction between panentheism and pantheism.<br /><br />but the big deal with Avraham, Daniel, etc., would seem to be that afaiu this given theology, they are the unique ones, the yechidim of the generation, in the apparently special equation of one Rebbe=one moshiach=one Hashem.<br /><br />i don't accept, btw, that everything is God is necessarily nonheretical. But you are right that there can be degrees. And one can draw fine lines. not that i feel like doing so. :)<br /><br />iirc, in Sabbatean kabbalah, Shabtai Tzvi was incorporated into the Sefirah.<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-31753930760502583552009-05-19T14:43:00.000-04:002009-05-19T14:43:00.000-04:00Since it's long been established that tzimtzum is ...Since it's long been established that tzimtzum is not k'pshuto, so everything is G-d, and G-d is everything, why can't you worship a tree?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-62890373912065386472009-05-19T07:18:00.000-04:002009-05-19T07:18:00.000-04:00Not lihavdil, Jesus said he was the son of God, an...Not lihavdil, Jesus said he was the son of God, and Pirkei Avos, based on a pasuk (uvneui elyon kulechum) calls all Jews Banim LaMakom. Surely there is a difference. And that same distinction appears intended here.<br /><br />It is strange how all these midrashim are off the mark. Why did Yaakov fear being turned into an avodah zarah by the Egyptians, if as the tzaddik, he was =mashiach and =Hashem, such that the would be worshiping Hashem? Why did Daniel and Avraham discourage the king of Bavel from worshiping them?<br /><br />kt,<br />joshjoshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-48568843212532389372009-05-18T18:54:00.000-04:002009-05-18T18:54:00.000-04:00This is where you go into korach's question-isn't ...This is where you go into korach's question-isn't every Jew holy?Just like a guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14680468025321981540noreply@blogger.com