Sunday, December 06, 2009

Kollel for everyone was a reaction to the Holocaust

and a swing of the pendulum in one direction.

These are not my words these are Yonasan Rosenblum's words in his latest column.
Living with the Tension

After every catastrophic event that destroys the previous equilibrium, there is a pendulum swings until a new equilibrium is found. Let us take one contemporary example. The period between the beginning of World War I and end of World War II completely destroyed a European Jewish civilization built over nearly two millennia. In order to rebuild the entire world of Torah learning destroyed by the Nazis, Rabbi Aharon Kotler in the United States and the Chazon Ish in Eretz Yisrael declared a societal ideal of long-term Torah study for all males that had few precedents in Jewish history. The pendulum swung in one direction, as part of the rebuilding.

As the original small flock of dedicated idealists who rallied to the banner of Reb Aharon and the Chazon Ish has miraculously swelled today to an entire community of hundreds of thousands, encompassing a wide range of abilities and spiritual levels, the pendulum has begun to swing in the other direction in search of a new equilibrium.

It is heartening to read that he understands that Kollel only is not a sustainable model and that the pendulum is starting to swing back in search of equilibrium.

What is absolutely fascinating is that this piece was published in 3 different places, Cross Currents, English Mishpacha, Hebrew Mishpacha, and each one it was changed to fit the venue. For an analysis of this see my post Different messages for different people.


Baruch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Baruch said...

Cross-Currents seems to have an odd habit of putting my comments in "moderation limbo" for awhile. My comment came in before everybody else's who have had their comments put up and is still awaiting moderation.

Here's what it says:
I don’t understand how the first part of this article connects to the second part. In the first part, R’ Rosenblum argues for broadmindedness and trying to look at issues from the perspective of the Loyal Opposition and engage in dialogue as opposed to simply censoring the other side. In the second part, he makes an argument that his way of looking at the initiatives of the Chazon Ish and R’ Kotler is — lo and behold — “absolutely” correct!

Still, I am pleased that R’ Rosenblum is calling for dialogue and I can remark that such refreshingly open dialogue has taken place on this very blog (e.g. my recent dispute with R’ Menken on his post, “The Right to Disrupt Your Prayers). Nevertheless, I feel that my own attempts to express concern with some of R’ Rosenblum’s own assertions have been rebuffed through silence.

In a recent article in the Yated which was reprinted here on Cross-Currents, R’ Rosenblum argued against what he referred to as Obamacare with a number of arguments which I felt were incorrect, but most importantly, incorrectly asserted that nobody in Britain over 59 is allowed to have an artery stent…which is verifiably and factually not true. Although I asked R’ Rosenblum in two correspondences to retract, I have to date received no response.

In addition, I have written a letter to R’ Rosenblum expressing my concern about his presentation of the Synagogue Council of America controversy in his new volume where he quotes R’ Sherer to the effect that all the gedolim concurred and that the OU and the RCA were simply not following Judaism’s proper dictates regarding deferring to those rabbinic authorities (I’m paraphrasing). We know that the Rav and R’ Eliezer Silver disagreed with this assertion and that they did not in fact concur with the judgement of the other gedolim, but R’ Rosenblum omits that fact in a presentation of the RCA and OU as organizations which were acting against the wishes of all the gedolei yisrael with regards to the SCA issue. I felt that this made the Rav and R’ Silver look bad and I expressed my concern; I have received no response from R’ Rosenblum regarding this very important issue.

Comment by Baruch Pelta — December 4, 2009 @ 9:03 am Your comment is awaiting moderation.

no one said...

kollels in israel that are geared for tur beit yoseph and rabanut or for pure gemara rashi tos seem to be to be ok

as opposed to kollels and rabbis in america that claim all divine and human knowledge with barely a ounce of understanding of any gemara at all.
so as not the best i woul have to say i agree with the rabanut geared kollels

bluke said...

This comment on Cross Currents says it all:

Do you have backing of the Gedolei uManhigei Yisroel on your side? Did you consult with RYSE? RAYLS? RMYL? RCK? RNK? Anyone of stature?

Truth is, you can think what you want… but how can Mishpacha claim to be a chareidi magazine and print a baalebos’ opinion on a communal level without consulting with gedolim?


Caren May said...

how can Mishpacha claim to be a chareidi magazine and print a baalebos’ opinion on a communal level without consulting with gedolim?

#1 How do you know that they did not consult with gedolim?
The popularity of Mishpacha magazine comes from 'Diverse Writers writing POV on various subjects'. Rabbi Horowitz can post his view on education, child rearing, etc. and it may clash with what Gedolim are saying or encouraging.