Friday, August 1, 2025
Kabbalah or Litvishism
The Litvaks will tell you to stay away from Kabbalah at least until you're 40, by which time you have repressed the interest. The reason supposedly is that it will destabilize you. I say Litvishism is far more destabilizing. When they tell you to stay in Kollel forever, to delay marriage, to study only Lomdus, to hate the world, to hate yourself, that study is worth all your mitzvos, to not go a moment without study, to obey your dumb rav, that will destabilize you. They are projecting.
chizuk
"Life is too short to sit anywhere except where you're supposed to be. And if you're sitting at a table where you don't feel like you're being fed, even in you're bringing a plate of food, you politely just leave."
You leave
"Life is too short to sit anywhere except where you're supposed to be. And if you're sitting at a table where you don't feel like you're being fed, even in you're bringing a plate of food, you politely just leave."
Thursday, July 31, 2025
The frum world is no different
Kathleen Turner vividly remembers the moment Jack Nicholson leaned in and gave her a piece of advice she would carry with her throughout her Hollywood career.
She was still new to the industry, riding the high of early success, when Nicholson, already a veteran, pulled her aside at a party in the early 1980s. His words were blunt but well-intentioned: “Watch yourself. This town will chew you up if you let it. Don’t trust everyone who smiles at you.”
Turner, who was about to become one of the most sought-after actresses of the decade, was taken aback. She had already experienced the intense pressure of Hollywood, but hearing it from Nicholson made it feel real. He elaborated on what he meant, warning her about how people in the industry manipulate others, promising roles or opportunities only to take advantage of them. “They’ll tell you you’re the next big thing today and act like they never met you tomorrow. Keep your head straight.”
For Turner, who had broken through with "Body Heat" in 1981, the warning came at the perfect time. She had been getting more offers, and the entertainment world was showering her with praise. But as Nicholson cautioned, not all of it was genuine. “You’re going to get scripts you love, roles you’d kill for, but sometimes the price isn’t worth it. If someone makes you uncomfortable, walk away.”
She later reflected on this conversation in interviews, admitting that Nicholson’s advice helped her see Hollywood’s hidden dangers before experiencing them firsthand. In her memoir, she described how men in power often expected something in return for career advancement. She never named names, but she made it clear that she had encountered the kind of behavior Nicholson warned her about.
One of the biggest lessons she took from him was to never let the industry define her. “Jack told me, ‘The moment they think they own you, you lose.’” Turner saw this play out as she became an A-list star with films like "Romancing the Stone" and "Prizzi’s Honor." She turned down roles that didn’t feel right, even if they promised big paychecks or critical acclaim.
Years later, when reflecting on Nicholson’s words, Turner acknowledged how right he was. She saw actors come and go, some losing themselves in the process. She credited her ability to stand her ground to that early warning. “He told me what no one else had the guts to say. And he was right.”
Wednesday, July 30, 2025
The army breaks promises once again
A recent article on a Chabad website discussed a complaint from Lubavitch soldiers who were promised by the army that they could take mivkahs daily, as is customary in Chabad, but as it turned out the army broke its promise and doesn't allow it.
This week I learned that a Chabad bochur from a family I know had been promised that he took that he could wear white shirt and black points in his army support job. Yet, in the end, the army makes him and his colleagues wear the goyish green army fatigues.
So please know, the army lies all the time in its promises to Haredi soldiers. And once you are in, you are stuck for three years, being pressured to violate Shabbos, to sit in small transport vehicles with pretty young women, etc.
Article:
In recent days, a controversy has erupted within the ranks of the Chabad soldiers who enlisted a few weeks ago in the newly established Charedi military brigade, ‘Hashmonaim.
Several soldiers approached their commanders requesting the establishment of a kosher mikveh (ritual bath) on the base, allowing them to continue the Chabad custom of immersion before prayer. They were assured during recruitment that their Charedi way of life would be respected, with promises to “leave the army the same as they entered.” Despite persistent appeals, the soldiers were met with a firm rejection.
To their dismay, the brigade’s leadership took further action, summoning the soldiers to a disciplinary hearing for their insistence on maintaining the practice, potentially leading to their removal from the unit. The soldiers pleaded for at least temporary permission to leave the base and use a mikveh in a nearby settlement, but this request was also denied.
One soldier expressed his frustration:
“It’s unreasonable that the Air Force provides swimming pools for pilots on their bases, and other units allow soldiers to use mikvehs. Yet, in a brigade that champions Charedi identity, our basic religious needs are dismissed.”
Before enlisting, senior military officials had assured recruits that the new brigade would respect and preserve the Charedi/Chassidic lifestyle. Deputy Chief of Staff Major General Amir Baram had declared on the first day of enlistment:
“We will safeguard the Charedi way of life for our soldiers—there is no contradiction between devout Judaism and combat service. This is a strategic necessity, and the ranks must expand.”
Brigade Commander Avinoam Emunah also promised:
“The brigade will allow the Charedi public to enlist while maintaining its identity.”
The soldiers acknowledged that immersion might not be feasible during field training or operational missions. However, they argue that in a training base where significant investments have been made, there is no justification for denying them a mikveh.
A senior figure in the matter commented:
“It is deeply regrettable that what could have been a flagship initiative to bridge gaps between the military and the Charedi/Chassidic public has, at such an early stage, become a disappointment for the students and those who trusted the process.”
Today, these soldiers are scheduled for a hearing over their “insistence” on mikveh immersion. Sources in the brigade indicate they face possible expulsion but may be reassigned to non-combat roles where they can follow their religious customs.
Following initial reports by Chabad Info, Chabad media figure Rabbi Mendy Reizel shared insights:
“To my understanding, Brigade Commander Emunah supported, at least tacitly, accommodating the soldiers’ requests. However, General Zini opposed it, citing security concerns. It’s ironic that Zini fails to address the prohibited use of smartphones in the brigade but enforces a ban on mikveh immersion.”
Reizel added:
“It seems likely the brigade will opt to transfer these soldiers to other roles rather than dismiss them entirely, allowing them to immerse in a mikveh and maintain their Chassidic lifestyle.”
The Chabad Info news desk reached out to the IDF Spokesperson for a response but has yet to receive a comment. Updates will be published as they become available.
Many good goyim
A 90 year old veteran was pawning jewelry to pay bills. Just when he was beginning to lose hope, this happened.
Tuesday, July 29, 2025
Ramban on providence
Ramban appears to limit God’s direct providence to the Jewish nation as a whole – and even then, only when they are “perfect” in their Torah observance. Other generations, it would seem, need not apply.
Again in this next passage, Ramban admits that there is special providence for the righteous (and for the truly evil), but that nature governs everyone else. Interestingly, he also appears to suggest that God directly interferes only within areas covered by His explicit Torah-based promises:
The reason that the Torah uses specifically this Divine name (“the God of Plenty”) in this context is because, through it He performs hidden miracles for the righteous, to save them from death, to sustain them through famine or to rescue them from war or violence. This occurred with the miracles performed for Abraham and our (other) forefathers, and through all that the Torah promises in the blessings and curses of Levit 26 and Deut. 28. For it isn’t natural that useful rain should consistently fall specifically when we are serving God, or that the heavens should withhold rain specifically when we ignore the agricultural rest of the seventh year (as the Torah explicitly promised would occur), or that all of the Torah’s other promises should consistently be fulfilled. Rather, they are all miracles in which the arrangement of the constellations (i.e., the course of nature) is overcome. (Gen. 17:1)
The most destructive
And here they are, the most destructive words said by a rabbi in the last 400 years:
He is making the incredible statement that one letter of Torah study is worth all your other mitzvos. His argument seems to be that one can be yotzei krias shema by saying one letter, and saying krias shema can fulfill your obligation of Talmud Torah (yom v'laylah), and TT is equal to all the other mitzvos.
I believe that the statement and his defense of it are highly problematic. They constitute a slippery slope argument with faulty premises each step of the way. It could be that one letter motzeis you from the mitzvah of Krias Shema in the sense that it's taking on the yoke of shemayim, which is the main purpose of KS. You can do that with one letter not because you took in the content of the Shema, but because you had in mind the yoke of heaven and in general you know the content of the Shema, that it's all about the yoke. Similarly, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik says that one can fulfill the reading of Megillah by hearing any piece of it because that publicizes the miracle. You don't actually have to hear every word - as people drive themselves crazy to do. Similarly, a person can do teshuvah in a moment. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein says you can bury with frum Jews a guy who committed suicide by jumping from a building because during the fall he may have done teshuvah in a moment. It's the same with a Ger and taking on the yoke of mitzvahs or a woman accepting a marriage invitation for a moment and then regretting it. Too late. That one moment binds her.
Reading one letter of krias shema is not the krias shema that motzeis you from study. I would think that for that you need to read at least one sentence as that has some meaning. One letter is meaningless. We say that you get schar for reading Chumash without understanding but not so with Talmud. There you need to understand something. One letter is nothing. Even a word is nothing. If you say Shnayim without saying Shnayim ochazin b'tallis you said nothing meaningful. Even Shnayim ochazin b'tallis is meaningless in terms of Torah insight. You need to continue on to "and they split it," the halachic conclusion.
It may be the same with Chumash. You may not have to understand, but you can't say one letter. That same letter could be on the poster for a music concert or a translation of Kant. Might it be Torah only because you know it's from Chumash? I doubt it but maybe. But even then the guys who follow the Gra here don't study much Chumash. They are studying the daf, as the Gra says here, i.e. the Gemara.
How about a corner of a letter? A hey consists of a Dalet and a Yod. Is that two letters? How about a microscopic piece of a letter? And who is to say that reading the whole Shema is many mitzvahs of a sentence each? Your intent is one mitzvah, one reading. If you see Jewish life as collecting points, like some kind of financial equation, then maybe you look at it like separate items. If you look at it as connecting to G-d, as obeying his commands then it's one act. The Mabit says we connect to all mitzvahs by willing to do anything that Hashem asks of us. The willingness is the essential thing. Each act of intent would be the mitzvah, just as there is a concept of a sin requiring a korban consisting of one act of forgetting that can include many sins.
If Litvaks really believed that each letter is a mitzvah then wouldn't they do bikiyus all day? Why spend a month on three lines?
And why wouldn't each step in holding a lulav be a mitzvah? That actually means something if you are paying attention. I wave it to the left - one mitzvah. I wave it to right - another mitzvah. I crunch on a piece of matzah. I take another bite. Why would only Torah work this way?
Furthermore, his proof that not only is each letter a mitzvah, but it's a mitzvah greater than all other mitzvahs put together is shaky. His proof that it means greater than is that if somebody else can do a mitzvah, you do Torah, so Torah is greater. But that could be because Torah leads to other mitzvahs so if the action is being taken care of, then you study Torah as more mitzvahs than this one will come out of it. Or let us say that Torah is a mitzvah in itself, so you are doing a mitzvah that maybe the other person wasn't going to do. He wasn't going to study. You study. He does an act. You each are doing a mitzvah. That could be the explanation.
And even if Torah is greater than any one mitzvah, his proof that it is greater than all of them is weak. The Mishnah uses the term kneged kulam which doesn't mean equal and certainly doesn't mean greater than. It means adjacent to. This can be explained by the Gemara that says learning is greater because it leads to doing (Kiddushin). Thus, Torah is adjacent to each mitzvah. This conclusion follows a year long debate on which is greater study or action. If each letter is worth all your mitzvos, why would the rabbis in the Gemara have debated it for a year? It would be simple.
Besides that, we have other statements of Chazal that use the words kneged kulam, regarding Shabbos, tzitzis, milah, tzedukah, yishuv haaretz, and lashon hara. That can't all be taken literally because each includes the others.
In sum, I believe his arguments are faulty. He is reading his view into vague statements of Chazal that can be read differently.
The result of his view is a disrespect of mitzvos, which we see everywhere in the yeshivah world. Why would you take an interest in any mitzvah other than Talmud Torah if the latter gives you a 100 to 1 return or a 1000 to one return.
Each page of Gemara has approximately 1000 letters. If each one is a mitzvah, and working all day is just 1 mitzvah, the yeshiva will guy will see himself has 1000 times better than the baal habayis. If he does a daf, he's 2,000 times better, which is how yeshiva guys see themselves.
Yeshiva guys often tell me that they are the ones who care the most about mitzvos. But what I have found is that they only care about technicalities, not feeling, not changing the world, not connecting to Hashem. Their mitzvah doing is an extension of learning. So they only care about measurable mitzvos like matzah and esrog. They don't care about the qualitative ones like humility, chesed, and modesty.
I told one Litvak that Chasidim are far better with tznius. He said we learn modesty from the Shulchan Aruch and what Chasidim do is go beyond that unnecessarily. I responded that the Shulchan Aruch gives some technicalities for modesty, but the modesty is dependent on the era and local. It's something you need a feel for, and more is better. This is one reason that the Mishneh Torah and the Shulchan Aruch were both opposed at the beginning, they turn Torah into a technicality.
Mitzvos are life. I don't mean that poetically. Mitzvos shape your life. If you take them away, you cease to be a person. A Jew cannot be normal with mitzvos. Your discipline, character, and practices become what yeshiva guys tend to be, a blob. It's all replaced with study, not even good study but letters coming out of your mouth. And if you are condescending against mitzvos, certainly you will do much worse to people who don't study as much, to gentiles, and to the entire world. Everything becomes a joke to you. Everything is a waste of time. You become the enemy of the briah that Hashem made and see it as the enemy. Why would you engage in chesed which is said here to be one mitzvah, when you can review a daf, which is hundreds. Why would you even contemplate Hashem. There are no letters with that.
The yeshiva world has many problems that the Vilna Gaon didn't have. He didn't disparage secular studies or kabbalah. He said that students shouldn't be overwhelmed with material that's too difficult for them. He said we should study many parts of Torah, with argumentation following, not preceding, the others.
But the contemporary mess is rooted, I believe, in these 10 sentences. These sentences, which yeshiva guys point to all the time, uproot the entire system of Torah and mitzvahs. And they rot the brain because they make no sense. If you base your outlook on something that makes no sense, you become illogical.
Esav was not Amalek but the problems within Esav bloomed in Amalek, his descendent. Likewise, R' Tzvi Hirsch Kalischer only called for a small yishiv in Israel, but saying that not promoting the yishuv held back Moshiach (as he told R' Hirsch) was an error that led to Zionism. Same with Rav Kook senior, who was a pacifist who said strange things on behalf of Zionism, leading to Kook junior who was off the rails with his Zionism which led to contemporary Zionist rabbis who are fascists. I'm not saying that the VG was Esav, but you get the point. He had a flaw. His followers say that his contemporary Baal HaTanya had a flaw, so why can't we say it about him?
You want to say how dare you question the Gaon? That's what yeshiva guys certainly will say. I say you can question anybody except Moshe because he operated from direct prophecy. And even Moshe made mistakes as did the Avos, as did Dovid.
Did you know the Gaon? How do you know what he was, because somebody told you that somebody told you? This constant promotion of the Gra is suspicious. Who says he can't make a mistake?
And who says he actually wrote this? We get most of his writings through students of his. You are writing what somebody thought he heard the Gaon say. And this contradicts what he said in Even Shelaima: “Just as the prime purpose of a tree is its fruit, so is the study of Torah secondary to its fulfillment. Only the fulfillment of mitzvos qualifies a man as one of the righteous upon whom the world depends.” You never hear his students cite that statement.
The Gaon questioned the Rambam who was a Rishon and his interest in that "accursed philosophy." Rav Hirsch also questioned the Rambam and his focus on philosophy over action. The Gra actually attacked the Rambam. If he can do that, you can question him.
Tell that to a yeshiva guy. He won't process the info. He'll say, well I heard this from my rebbe, as if his rebbe is the mesorah. That's how they defend everything. The mesorah isn't in your rebbe. It's in the great scholars of every generation, and even they don't necessarily have the mesorah perfectly. It's not perfect in any one of them. It's in the group of them in general, and even that might not be perfect.
So to base one's entire life on something that the Gra might have said, but something that contradicts his own words, and doesn't make sense anyway, and contradicts teachings from the Mishnah like study isn't the main thing, actions are, that seems pretty foolish to me.
And then we have Shlomo saying that the sum of the matter is to fear Hashem and keep His commandments.
Then we have the entire Chumash which never mentions Torah study explicitly, but it mentions all kinds of mitzvos.
I'll go with the Chumash, Shlomo, and the Mishnah over something that maybe the Gra said that doesn't make sense.
And then you have his contemporary the Tanya saying that physical mitzvos are man's purpose in this world. See Epistle 20. Rabbi Yosef Wineberg in Lessons in Tanya explains:
The present epistle deals with a subject that has not been touched upon in the Tanya until now. Though it is one of the most profound and abstract principles of Chasidut, it has a practical application. It will be recalled that the introduction to Epistle 18 pointed out the benefits of ascertaining the practical lessons in Divine service—through the performance of mitzvot in general and the mitzvah of tzedakah in particular—that are to be found in each of these pastoral letters. For, as the Alter Rebbe’s sons state in their Approbation to the Tanya, the purpose of the letters is to “teach the people of G‑d the way by which they should walk and the deed which they should do.” And this letter is especially significant, for the Alter Rebbe wrote it (as the Tzemach Tzedek testifies1) “several days before his demise in the village of Piena.” What the profundity of this letter ultimately conveys is a renewed and deepened appreciation of the performance of “physical” mitzvot in general (i.e., those involving material things, such as wool for tzitzit and parchment for tefillin) and the mitzvah of tzedakah in particular. At the core of this letter is the principle that the creation of the physical derives from the Essence of G‑d Himself; it completely transcends the luminous and revelatory levels of G‑dliness from which all spiritual entities and worlds are created. For, as the Alter Rebbe writes, “Only G‑d Himself—Whose Being is of His Essence and Who is not, Heaven forfend, caused by some other cause preceding Himself—has the ability to create something out of absolute nothingness,” to create a being that seems (to the corporeal eye) to be a wholly independent entity “without any other cause preceding it.” Everything else that exists is possible and nonessential existence and consequently is totally dependent upon G‑d as the cause for its existence. By contrast, only G‑d Himself—Whose existence is an imperative and Whose being derives from His own Self and as such needs nothing to bring about His existence—has the ability to create a being so corporeal that it is entirely unaware that its existence depends on a Creator; indeed, it is satisfied with the delusion that it is responsible for its own creation. Apart from this grossly physical world, everything created has an apparent causal link with a source of existence. Light, for example, visibly owes its existence to its source—a luminary; speech, being an alul (“effect”), clearly owes its existence to the faculty of thought, which is its ilah (“cause”). When viewing material matter, however, one does not perceive that it derives from and is nullified to something higher than itself; it seems to exist as a wholly autonomous being. A being such as this, which is infinitely distant from its spiritual source—its source being Divine while the being itself is physical and hence has to be created ex nihilo (“from nothing”)—can be created only by G‑d Himself, Who is truly without limitation, and as such transcends the physical and the spiritual equally. Thus, it is specifically the physical things that were created by G‑d Himself, Who is, of course, infinitely higher than all the illuminations and radiances of G‑dliness that were responsible for the creation of all spiritual beings and entities. This principle leads us to a newfound respect for the performance of commandments involving physical things—for their creation comes about from G‑d Himself. This principle is indeed new. It supplements the explanation in the Tanya, Part I (ch. 35 ff.) of the distinctive quality of practical performance alluded to in the phrase quoted on its title page: “that you may do it.” That explanation highlights the superiority of the mitzvot performed in the realm of action over those performed with thought and speech. This superiority is explained there only in the light of G‑d’s ultimate intent: G‑d desires a dwelling place, i.e., that His Presence be revealed in the nethermost level, in this spiritually dark, physical world, which seemingly does its best to conceal G‑dliness. And this dwelling place is best built through the mitzvot involving action, for through them G‑dliness is drawn down into those aspects of this physical world that are lower than thought and speech. The same is true with regard to the refinement and elevation of the animal soul and its transformation into goodness and holiness (for which reason the Divine soul first descended into the body): the optimal refinement and elevation of the animal soul is achieved specifically through the performance of these mitzvot—donning tefillin, wearing tzitzit, etc.—for they engage the power of the animal soul to a greater degree than do the commandments that are performed only in thought or in speech. All this merely expresses the special quality of “action” as it relates to G‑d’s desire and intent; it does not, however, express the superiority of the physical object with which a practical commandment is performed. Seemingly, a commandment performed with one’s loftier soul-powers—such as the knowledge of G‑dliness, a mitzvah that engages one’s mind, or the love of G‑d, a mitzvah that engages the spiritual emotions of one’s heart—should be inherently superior to a commandment that merely engages one’s hands or feet. For as far as the Divine Will is concerned, since this is fulfilled both by the practical mitzvot and by those observed in thought and in speech, the spiritual result—being united with G‑d—would seem to be the same in both types of mitzvot. With regard to the object with which G‑d’s Will is being fulfilled, the commandments that are performed with one’s more spiritual qualities—comprehending G‑d with one’s mind and loving Him with one’s heart—would seem to be superior to the commandments that merely engage one’s physicality. However, considering (as in the letter below) the unique standing of physical mitzvot inasmuch as the physical derives from G‑d Himself, it follows that the practical commandments are superior to those performed in thought or in speech by virtue of the physical objects they involve, for these objects harbor energy that is released when they are utilized in fulfilling the Divine intent. Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe, once related that when “those few heavenly soul-words” that appear in the text below were first revealed, pointing out that it is from the infinite essence of the Ein Sof Himself that physical objects first come into being, the Chasidim of the time found that their performance of the practical mitzvot was invigorated by fresh wellsprings of vitality.
So if we question the statement printed in the name of the Gra, we have what to rely on, a contemporary of his.
Now why is this the most dangerous utterance of the last 400 years? It's because the yeshiva world took over everything. They are so merciless that they pounded Chassidus out of Chassidim and even took over the Sephardim.
And what do they all spend their time on? Brisker Lomdus, which is a type of study that the Gra didn't even do. The yeshiva world intimidated everyone into that. So much for being the true Mesorah that doesn't change anything "one iota."
I believe that even Zionism came from yeshivishness because once the mitzvos are gone you can base on entire life on one concept. The state replaced Torah study which replaced mitzvos and Hashem. The Litvaks took away Hashem more than the Zionists did.
According to the yeshivish approach of tossing away anybody who makes any questionable statement (or one they don't like) we should toss away the Gra. But I don't share that approach. Just rip this page out of his book.
What this means is that you can never go to a yeshivish rabbi for advice unless it's a choice between yeshivas. If you try to do anything else, he'll tell you to stay in yeshiva. If you want to choose where to live he'll tell you to live near a yeshiva. If you already are earning a parnassah, he'll tell you to do the one that makes the most money because you can give it to yeshivas.
The yeshiva world pounds you with this idea of having a rav and obeying him. Why is that? It's because their philosophy is so bizarre, that it needs to be pounded into you daily or you'd move on from it. Their call for a rav is essential to the indoctrination. I never got good advice from a yeshivish rabbi, and never get any insight into myself. It is always, 'study Torah.' That's all they ever have to say.
Also because this philosophy of life is so narrow, so limiting, they'll knock out any all kinds of worthy Torah scholars who say anything to counter this philosophy. They also will keep you from machshava because that might lead you to overturn this approach to life. They also will not be nice people because they don't put Torah into action, don't take lessons of musar into their hearts, and they all feel critical of anybody they deal with because of their insufficient amounts of Torah study, and because they are all in a competition since they have reduce Jewish life to a single, measurable activity.
One more thing, I never heard of this idea that one can be motzei shema with one letter. But isn't it interesting, this piece from the Gra was shown to me by a Brisker. Now that isn't that something, a Brisker relying on material that is based on saying Shema with one letter rather than their usual manic rereading of the full three paragraphs five times.
Monday, July 28, 2025
Wednesday, July 23, 2025
Moreinu Horav Moshe Dov Ber Rivkin
Moreinu Horav Moshe Dov Ber Rivkin zt”l 5652/1891 — 5736/1976 At Yeshiva Torah Vodaath from 1928 — 1976 Horav Moshe Dov Ber Rivkin was born to R’ Ben Tzion and Esther Rivkin on 21 Kislev 1891, in Zintsi, Ukraine. R’ Ben Tzion was the Rav of the town and, was considered an expert in Shas Bavli, Yerushalmi, Shulchan Aruch and sifrei Kabbalah. Many gedolim corresponded with him in halachah issues. From a very young age, Rav Moshe Dov Ber was known to be an illui. He began learning gemara at age 5. Rav Rivkin was a chassid of Chabad and most particularly, he was a beloved chasid of the “Rashab” (1860-1920). In his early years, he learned in Yeshiva Tomchei Temimim in Lubavitch, and he later followed the Rashab to Rostov where he learned with him privately and was one of the very few people that the rebbe wanted to have with him in the weeks before his petirah. During these last days, the Rebbe Rashab talked to the young Rav Rivkin in Torah and their discussions became the basis for Rav Rivkin’s first sefer, Ashkavta D’Rebbi. While yet unmarried, Rav Rivkin was invited to become Rosh Yeshiva in Tomchei Temimim. He soon married Nacha Heber of Kalisch, later a noted mechaneches, and immigrated to Eretz Yisrael where he was a founder of Yeshiva Toras Emes and developed a close connection with such luminaries as Horav Avraham Yitzchak Kook zt”l and Horav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld zt”l. He was invited to join the faculty of Yeshiva Torah Vodaath in 1928. During his time at Torah Vodaath, he gave smicha to many hundreds of talmidim. He had close personal relationships with the gedolim of the age including R’ Moshe Feinstein, zt”l, R Yaakov Kaminetzky, zt”l, Rav Yitzchak Hutner, zt”l, Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik zt”l and others. Through his years, Rav Rivkin published extensively in Torah journals and also collected a selection of his chidushim in his sefer, Teferes Tzion. Rav Rivkin not only taught Torah in the bais medrash, he was also role model to his talmidim in how to use Torah as a guide for life. When he was seen shopping for shabbos, it was a lesson in itself. Rav Rivkin’s devotion to his talmidim was unparalleled and was returned in force. Rav Rivkin’s talmidim were bound to him with such love and commitment that when he was hospitalized in his last weeks, they stayed in shifts near his hospital bed day and night. Doctors were amazed at the attachment the talmidim felt for their Rebbi, recompense for his dedication to them throughout his life. Rav Rivkin, zt”l was niftar on 18 MarCheshvon 1976. Yehi zichro boruch
Tuesday, July 22, 2025
Jews without mitzvos
Have you ever met a celebrity who behaved very badly?
Yup! My apt is on the upper east side of NYC. One Sunday morning I went running out of my home to pick up some things for breakfast at the market. I found myself walking across the street with Tony Bourdain. I looked up and said “aren’t you Tony Bourdain?”. He quickly answered me, “yes, and I don’t talk with people.” Wow!
His father was Catholic of French descent and his mother was Jewish.
The god that's going to punish someone else
Do Neo-Litvack yeshivists believe in G-d? I don't see much evidence of that. I spent 5 years in yeshivas and have been around these people for forty years. The various words for G-d rarely appear on their lips. They also rarely take hashkacha pratis into account with any situation other than keeping you in yeshiva and carry on with such arrogance and hardheartedness that there couldn't be any room for Him in their psyches. Character doesn't matter either.
I'm not talking about Litvacks. The Chofetz Chaim was Litvish and he certainly cared about character and chesed. You see it in his books and that fact that he wrote books for the public. But he lived a century ago.
Today, particularly with the influence of the least Jewish country on earth, Israel, we deal with an entirely different type of person. They believe in Torah study, as a false G-d. As for those mitzvos, you gotta do them because if you don't the god that punishes other people will punish. Yeshivists don't believe they'll be punished because after all they study Torah and that's all you need. Find me a rabbi who has ever apologized for anything. But this god punishes others. They'll threaten you with this god's punishments. They'll never tell you of his love or anything like that. This god doesn't do anything for you. He punishes. but not them, only you.
Is this not idol worship? I think it's textbook.
If
If
by Rudyard Kipling
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;
If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!
Some really nice goyim out there
Having worked in the celebrity circuit for many years covering entertainment news, I’ve met and interviewed hundreds of celebrities. Although I met a few real stinkers (although won’t name them), most celebs were nice. A few stood out as being just really lovely namely Josh Brolin, Danny Boyle, Ralph Fiennes, Jeremy Renner and Keanu Reeves.
But the story I want to share isn’t mine but rather one that I read years ago and to this day just makes me smile whenever I’m reminded of it, not just because of the content but because it stars one of my all time favourite stars, so if you don’t mind I’d like to share this story.
It’s a terrific story told by a man called Marc Haynes, who remembered meeting Sir Roger Moore at Nice Airport in the South of France as a young (seven-year-old) boy in about 1983, in the days before they had First Class Lounges at airports. He was with his grandad and saw Roger Moore sitting at the departure gate, quietly reading a paper. Marc told his grandfather that he'd seen James Bond and requested to go get an autograph from the actor. His grandad had no idea who James Bond or Roger Moore was, so they walked over and he popped Marc in front of Roger Moore with the words, "my grandson says you're famous… can you sign this?" Sir Roger was quick to ask the young boy’s name and signed the back of his plane ticket with what Marc called "a fulsome note full of best wishes." Marc was ecstatic but as they headed back to their seats, he looked at the signature and saw that it didn't say 'James Bond' but rather 'Roger Moore'. Having no idea who 'Roger Moore' was, his heart sank and Marc told his grandad that he'd signed it wrong and that he'd signed someone else's name - so his grandad marches back to this imposter ‘Roger Moore’, holding the ticket which he's only just signed telling him that he’s signed the wrong name…
When the penny dropped, Sir Roger’s face crinkled up and he beckoned Marc over who when by his knee, leaned over the young boy, theatrically looked from side-to-side, raised is famous eyebrow and said in a hushed voice: “I have to sign my name as 'Roger Moore' because otherwise... Blofeld might find out I was here…”
The actor asked him not to tell anyone that he had seen James Bond and he thanked Marc for keeping his secret. Delighted, he went back to his seat with his grandad and when his grandad asked if he'd signed 'James Bond.' Marc said he hadn’t, but that it was OK, he’d just got it wrong.
After all, he was working with James Bond now…
Many years later Marc was working as a scriptwriter on a video project for UNICEF for which Sir Roger was a longstanding and devoted ambassador and was recording a piece to camera. According to Marc, the living legend was just being completely lovely and funny, putting everyone at ease as was his way. As they were setting up, Marc told Sir Roger the story of how the two of them had meet at Nice Airport all those years ago. Moore was charmed by the story but although confessing to not remembering it, he told Marc he was glad that he had got to meet his hero, James Bond.
But then, while leaving the shoot after the filming had finished, Sir Roger walked past Marc in the corridor as he was heading out to his car and as the two of them got level, he paused, theatrically looked both ways, raised his iconic eyebrow and in a hushed voice said:
“Of course, I remember our meeting in Nice. But I didn't say anything in there, because those cameramen - any one of them could be working for Blofeld.'"
What a legend… I wish I had got the chance to meet him, even just to get his autograph.
Monday, July 21, 2025
Thursday, July 17, 2025
gentiles again
I shouldn't have to do this but OJs disparage gentiles to frequently that I find comments like this helpful to straighten out our perspective:
What is Jimmy Page like as a person?
I’ve known Jimmy’s daughter Scarlet for over 20 years - she’s a good old friend and a very well respected rock photographer in the UK. I’ve met her Dad only once in all that time, at a book launch for Scarlet’s book ‘Resonators’ which is portrait photos of famous guitar players. He was chatty, polite to anyone who approached him and mindful not to steal his daughter’s thunder. Above all else, it was very evident that he was a proud Dad. I spoke to him about Scarlet’s book and work in general, not about him or his playing and he was hugely enthusiastic about her talent and success. Scarlet does not trade on her Dad’s name or success at all. In fact for the first year or so I knew her, I didn’t know that Jimmy Page was her dad and it took someone else to tell me before I found out!
Wednesday, July 16, 2025
Tuesday, July 15, 2025
karens
yaakov feared esav because he feared that his (yaakov's) deeds weren't sufficient, he wasn't worthy of Hashem's protection
when he tried to reveal moshiach to his sons and the prophecy stalled, he feared that they weren't worthy, that's why they said shema to him, to say, don't worry we are with you
today people have barely any sense of doing the right thing, they feel no guilt, aren't worried that they aren't worthy, they are entitled to what they want
the bitachon movement plays off of this, it's mostly people sitting around expecting G-d to serve them regardless of what they have tried to do to improve their own lives
then they say if God doesn't give it to me, i guess it was poison, this is a way of pretending not to be prima donnas
no could be you didn't do enough in your life to deserve it, you didn't do your part
Monday, July 14, 2025
In praise of the Midwest
Actor Bruce Willis started as a page at NBC in New York. One of his jobs was to fill M&M plates for the actors on Saturday Night Live. After he became a megastar, he told actor Bill Murray, you and Gilda were always nice to me.
Bill Murray was born on September 21, 1950, in Evanston, Illinois, to Lucille, a mail room clerk, and Edward J. Murray, a lumber salesman. He attended Loyola Academy, an all-boys Jesuit school in Wilmette, Illinois, a northern suburb of Chicago.[5][6]
Gilda Radner was born in Detroit, Michigan, to Jewish parents Henrietta (née Dworkin), a legal secretary, and Herman Radner, a businessman.[1][2]
Raise your kids in the Midwest. It's the best bet for developing good middos.
I heard somebody say the other day, the primary reason not to live in Israel is that the kids become Israelis. Your mitzvah is to live where you can be the best Jew.
I get stressed
To say, "I get stressed," is to imply that one is the victim of some kind of stress virus that entered the body. Rather, one chooses to look at life in a way that leaves her feeling stressed. For example, if a person walks into an office and finds the bathroom light and AC on and makes a big deal about it, even though it's a rare occurrence, that's a decision to take something that's not serious and make it seem serious. Lights will be left on. Food will be left out. It happens. To get upset each time is to fail to allow people to be human. And that causes more stress than most anything. Furthermore, to press others about the incident, to accuse and say, "You were the last one in here," brings stress into a relationship and infects the other person with a problematic perspective.
People like this take pills, go to psychologists, eat special herbs in the hope that all of those external entities will provide a remedy for the "anxiety disorder."
The anxiety is not a disorder. It's a symptom of an outlook on life that needs work.
Sunday, July 13, 2025
Friday, July 11, 2025
What was Rav Soloveitchik’s halachic position regarding electricity?
https://613tube.com/watch/?v=TeMrYf4d7ek
Wednesday, July 9, 2025
then ignore it
You don't have to out argue them. If what they are saying seems wrong to you, messes you up, then ignore it.
Jews without mitzvos
…..Zero Mostel….
Got to the point no one wanted to work with him……producers were shunning him…..
As an actor…..no one could touch him……as a human being……no one wanted to touch him….
https://www.quora.com/What-actor-was-a-nightmare-to-work-with
Tuesday, July 8, 2025
Monday, July 7, 2025
Magic Jesus
Journalist Chris Hedges, who himself is an ordained minister, criticizes the Christian right which he deems nationalistic and even fascistic. He says that the billionaire class funds them because they don't make economic demands.
"With magic Jesus, you don't need labor unions. With magic Jesus, you don't need healthcare. Because magic Jesus is going to give you a Cadillac and make all your dreams come true. And that is that shift, from a reality based world, into the world of magical thinking. And once people shift into that world of magical thinking, you can't reach them through rational argument."
He adds that these people don't like discussing the Bible because they don't know it. They know enough to buttress their theology.
[Democracy doesn’t exist in the United States: Chris Hedges | UpFront, 22:02, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EDKRGkgLsI, Al Jazeera English]
Isn't the Haredi world a bit like this? Just study Torah. It's all you need. The Gemara is their magic Jesus. And it's like the Modern Orthodox too. Israel is their magic Jesus.
If middos matter
I had four yeshivish bochurim over my house for Shabbos. They were decent American kids and it went well for the most part. But over time, arguments developed, at times they got fierce, even nasty. They were not hearing each other, not learning from each other. Each was locked in a position. The goal was to defeat the other.
One of them didn't join in the arguments. He even said to me privately that he appreciated hearing my perspective as he hadn't heard it before. What was different about him? He was from Los Angeles. They were all from the New York area, Lakewood and Monsey.
I think back on that NY rabbi who told me not to live in Los Angeles because it was tuma par excellence. He didn't tell me not to live in New York.
We don't see our own flaws. We don't see the shortcomings of our group and our city.
At the end of Shabbos, the guy from Los Angeles apologized to me if he said anything to which I could take offense. I told him, "I can't think of anything. In fact, I was thinking this guy is so thoughtful in what he says to people. Those are the ones who apologize."
New York frummies see New York as the best place to raise children, the most religiously devoted place. I beg to differ. If middos matter then New York might be the worst place.
Rabbi Melamed on the Divine Spark in other religions - Alan Brill
Rabbi Melamed on the Divine Spark in other religions
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)