Avodah Mailing List

Volume 01 : Number 035

Tuesday, September 1 1998

• Re: How to implement our mission
• [none]
• "hashem umeshicho"
• Re: Minhagim
• Minhagim
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• RE: Nida Program
• Re: How to implement our mission

> The idea is for people
to explore the derech that best suits them, to promote the notion that one
ought search for meaning, and not just follow halachah out of habit or
upbringing. (FFH: Frum From Habit) <
Seconded.  For a recent, cogent opinion piece related to this topic, see
the Summer 5758 issue of "Jewish Action," p. 144; to use its terms, may we
all make the effort to achieve spirituality in our observance of Torah,
mitzvos, and t'fillos.

                                         Michael

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 23:55:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: Cheryl Maryles <C-Maryles@neiu.edu>
Subject: Re: minhagim

Elie Ginsparg writes

>> Just to add a few other examples---If one stands or sits for kidush would
>> seem to be minhag 

cbrown writes (based on the Chikrei Lev)

>> Minhag cannot be used to decide an issue about which there exists a 
>> machloket haposkim.  We today have lost our ability to be machriya on 
>> such a machloket and must rely on rov (I assume he means rely on 
>> 'klalei hora'ah', not exclusively rov). 

>> Two examples (of my own): Since 50 vs. 72 minutes or a heter for chalav
>> stam is a function of psak and hachra'ah, it would be meaningless for
>> example to say that if I grew up in Passaic where a 50 minute shiur is kept
>> or went to a school where they served chalav Yisrael only I am bound to
>> that psak.  For generations Sefardic Jews have eaten kitniyot; it would be
>> meaningless for a sefardi jew to choose to be machmir like Ashkenazim who
>> don't eat kitniyot bec. the minhag sefarad has been machriya on this long
>> ago.  If the Rama writes to sit for kiddush, even if there be poskim who
>> disagree, we interpret the generations of Ashkenazim who chose to follow
>> the Rama as a hachra'ah.

Note that these two comments disagree.
However, it seems to me that opinion of Elie Ginsparg is much more reasonable.
First, many minhagim arose because different communities follow different
poskim. For example, Lithuania tended to follow the Schach while Poland
tended to follow the Taz.

Rav Moshe has a long teshuva about standing/seating for kiddush and
havdala. He certainly does not simply accept the Ramah as is but has a
extended discussion. He concludes that he hopes that his children and
students will follow his custom. He certainly does not say that everyone
else should give up their customs.
I come from a hasidic background and so stand for kiddush as do most
hasidim. I firmly reject the idea 
>> If the Rama writes to sit for kiddush, even if there be poskim who
>> disagree, we interpret the generations of Ashkenazim who chose to follow
>> the Rama as a hachra'ah.
These generations of ashkenazim do not include my ancestors and their
communities!

With regard to kitniot remember that among sefardim there are myriads
of minhagim concerning rice, beans etc. The phrases we use of ashkenazim
and sefardim are very misleading as in reality there are tens if not hundreds
of communities.

One more example is the wait between meat and milk. It is well known that
Dutch communities wait 1 hour from meat to milk while the german
communities wait 3 hours. I find it ludicrous to accuse these communities
of ignoring halacha because the ashkenazi community has accepted the 6 hours
of the shulchan arukh. Poland can't decide for german jewry.

Rav Soloveitchik was very insistent that everyone should follow the customs
of their families, with only a few exceptions that he felt were minhag
shtut (one minhag I did change because of his insistence was to not use
the double dalet of the chasidim for the back of the head tefillin).
I assume that this is based on the position of the yeshiva in Voloshin that
also insisted that all talmidim keep the customs of their communities.
I assume that this included questions like standing/seating for kiddush,
wait bewteen meat&milk etc.

It is intersting to note that Rav Ovadiah Yosef frequently seems to go
by the rov. He lists many positions on both sides and then paskens like
the majority. My own small research indicates that he does this only when
it he agrees with the majority. Otherwise he can ignore 99% of the poskim.

One example is whether women can make a beracha on lulav, shofar etc.
He insists that modern sefardi women are bound by the Shulchan Arukh
and not allowed to say such berachot. Then he continues to state that
ashkenazi women should also stop reciting these blessings and quotes
a Chacham Tzvi who says that the sefardi minhag is more correct !????
Somehow, Rav Ovadiah Yosef finds one ashkenzai opinion among thousands
od dissenters and the overwhelming custom of generations of ashkenazi
communties and he paskens like that lone opinion.

I apologize in advance for the following divisive and cantankerous remark
but I feel it needs to be said. Yesterday one poster lamented the fact that
this list has tolerated "unorthodox" posts and went on to express the hope
that this list would not be like others which tolerate remarks against
"hashem umeshicho". (I'm citing from memory because I've already deleted
the post.) Perhaps I'm over-sensitive (and I confess to being biased by the
poster's surname), but I understand "meshicho" here as a reference to a
particular deceased individual. If I'm not misreading, it follows that this
post is vastly more theologically threatening and "unorthodox" than
anything else I've ever seen on this list.
And that's something the Mishnah Berurah and Aruch haShulchan (and Ger and
Satmar) would surely agree about.

--Moish

>>>If the Rama writes to sit for kiddush, even if there be poskim who
disagree, we interpret the generations of Ashkenazim who chose to follow
the Rama as a hachra'ah.These generations of ashkenazim do not include my
ancestors and their communities!<<<

I'm don't think you understood me correctly.  To reiterate the Chikrei Lev:
If a minhag is based on hachra'ah from ages ago (e.g. kiddush, milk/meat
wait time), we abide by it.  If it is a new issue (e.g. how long till tzais
in USA) we must abide by the poskim and not attempt to decide it based on
minhag.  (Note: the examples are mine).  If your family comes from a
community that has an ancient minhag of standing for kiddush no posek (Rama
included) has the right to undermine it. I do not understand what R' Moshe
had to discuss on this issue, see below.

>>> First, many minhagim arose because different communities follow
different poskim. For example, Lithuania tended to follow the Schach while
Poland tended to follow the Taz.<<<

Exactly why lomdus/hachra'ah play no role here.  "Basrei d'Rav avid k'Rav,
b'asrei d'Shmuel avid k'Shmuel".

>>>Rav Moshe has a long teshuva about standing/seating for kiddush and
havdala.<<<

If R' Moshe was from Lithuania, how is it that he feels the need to discuss
minhag - wasn't the practice in Lithuania or his father's practice binding
as "al titosh torat imecha"?  I find this approach difficult; it also
contadicts your comments regarding milk/meat wait time.

>>>One more example is the wait between meat and milk.<<<

Bad example.  Old minhagim which have been decided generations ago are not
subject to psak, see above.

Just out of curiosity: how many of R' Ovadya Yosef's tshuvot did you read
before daring to assert that "he does this [follows rov] only when he
agrees with the majority. Otherwise he can ignore 99% of the poskim."?

-Chaim B.

P.S. Obviously there are other formulations besides that of the Chikrei
Lev.  I just threw it out bec. I saw it yesterday morning and have not come
to any personal conclusions on this issue.

>>>If the Rama writes to sit for kiddush, even if there be poskim who
disagree, we interpret the generations of Ashkenazim who chose to follow
the Rama as a hachra'ah.These generations of ashkenazim do not include my
ancestors and their communities!<<<

I'm don't think you understood me correctly.  To reiterate the Chikrei Lev:
If a minhag is based on hachra'ah from ages ago (e.g. kiddush, milk/meat
wait time), we abide by it.  If it is a new issue (e.g. how long till tzais
in USA) we must abide by the poskim and not attempt to decide it based on
minhag.  (Note: the examples are mine).  If your family comes from a
community that has an ancient minhag of standing for kiddush no posek (Rama
included) has the right to undermine it. I do not understand what R' Moshe
had to discuss on this issue, see below.

>>> First, many minhagim arose because different communities follow
different poskim. For example, Lithuania tended to follow the Schach while
Poland tended to follow the Taz.<<<

Exactly why lomdus/hachra'ah play no role here.  "Basrei d'Rav avid k'Rav,
b'asrei d'Shmuel avid k'Shmuel".

>>>Rav Moshe has a long teshuva about standing/seating for kiddush and
havdala.<<<

If R' Moshe was from Lithuania, how is it that he feels the need to discuss
minhag - wasn't the practice in Lithuania or his father's practice binding
as "al titosh torat imecha"?  I find this approach difficult; it also
contadicts your comments regarding milk/meat wait time.

>>>One more example is the wait between meat and milk.<<<

Bad example.  Old minhagim which have been decided generations ago are not
subject to psak, see above.

Just out of curiosity: how many of R' Ovadya Yosef's tshuvot did you read
before daring to assert that "he does this [follows rov] only when he
agrees with the majority. Otherwise he can ignore 99% of the poskim."?

-Chaim B.

P.S. Obviously there are other formulations besides that of the Chikrei
Lev.  I just threw it out bec. I saw it yesterday morning and have not come
to any personal conclusions on this issue.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chana Luntz [mailto:heather@luntz.demon.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 1998 3:43 PM
> To: 'avodah@aishdas.org'
> Subject: Nida Program
> 
> Avi Pechman asked:
> 
> >> ...Chana Henkin said at the conference, in response to 
> >> her new program to
> >> train women to be "halachik decisors" (her words) in areas of 
> >> niddah,...
> 
> >Does anyone know what types of questions these "halachik decisors"
> >will handle? Are they looking at bloodstains, or calculating 
> vestos, or
> >finding kulos for a woman with a twelve day cycle?
> 
> I haven't really discussed this with Rabbanit Henkin, but my 
> impression
> is all of the above (and others, eg was a tevila a kosher etc).
> 
> Basically the problem is (and this is a problem that 
> stretches across the
> frum community) that women do not like (actually, the word is hate)
> going to a man on such questions - you are talking about matters that
> are extremely intimate and private.  Most women I know try, as far as
> possible, to go through their husbands, but that is not 
> always possible. 
> Basically what happens is that shialas are not asked (and depending on
> the frumkeit of the woman that means that either they are not 
> being with
> the husbands as often as they could, or more often than they should).
> 
> Thus the program is being set up to deal with all the questions that
> women feel uncomfortable asking or talking about to men, into which I
> believe that all of the matters you mentioned fall.
> 
> Clearly if the question is out of the ordinary, or not within 
> the limits of
> their experience, they have rebbeim to whom to turn - but they will be
> knowledgeable enough to ask sufficient questions and obtain sufficient
> detail that the woman herself does not have to deal with anyone other
> than a woman.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Chana
> 
> 

Does being a posek carry with it an element of 'shrara', and, if so, would
women be disqualified (the same way that women can't be kings or judges or
shul presidents)?

Avi Pechman

>>>Does being a posek carry with it an element of 'shrara', and, if so,
would women be disqualified (the same way that women can't be kings or
judges or shul presidents)?<<<

If a women is kashering a chicken and sees a bruise on it but recognizes
that it is not a treifa, I doubt we would call that serara.  If a women
looks over a 'mareh' shown to her by another women (I think this is the
type of sheila most women would like a poseket for) why would you think
that involves serara?

-CB

Because in your second situation she's being consulted. For consistency, you
have to compare your chicken case with a woman looking at her OWN stain.
That would, of course, not have shrara implications.

AP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cbrown@bestware.com [mailto:cbrown@bestware.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 4:35 PM
> To: avodah@aishdas.org
> Subject: RE: Nida Program
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >>>Does being a posek carry with it an element of 'shrara', 
> and, if so,
> would women be disqualified (the same way that women can't be kings or
> judges or shul presidents)?<<<
> 
> If a women is kashering a chicken and sees a bruise on it but 
> recognizes
> that it is not a treifa, I doubt we would call that serara.  
> If a women
> looks over a 'mareh' shown to her by another women (I think 
> this is the
> type of sheila most women would like a poseket for) why would 
> you think
> that involves serara?
> 
> -CB
> 
> 

What about the husband and guests of the women who kashered the chicken,
who now sites down to Shabbos dinner relying on his wife's ability to do
melicha properly, to reecognize what is and isn't a treifa, etc.?  Aren't
they implicitly 'consulting' her, or relying on her knowledge to make a
detrmination of what they can and cannot eat?


                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           



          Please respond to avodah@aishdas.org

          To:   avodah @ aishdas.org
          cc:
          Subject:  RE: Nida Program




Because in your second situation she's being consulted. For consistency,
you have to compare your chicken case with a woman looking at her OWN
stain. That would, of course, not have shrara implications.

          AP

          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: cbrown@bestware.com [mailto:cbrown@bestware.com]
          > Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 4:35 PM
          > To: avodah@aishdas.org
          > Subject: RE: Nida Program
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > >>>Does being a posek carry with it an element of 'shrara',
          > and, if so,
          > would women be disqualified (the same way that women can't be kings
          or
          > judges or shul presidents)?<<<
          >
          > If a women is kashering a chicken and sees a bruise on it but
          > recognizes
          > that it is not a treifa, I doubt we would call that serara.
          > If a women
          > looks over a 'mareh' shown to her by another women (I think
          > this is the
          > type of sheila most women would like a poseket for) why would
          > you think
          > that involves serara?
          >
          > -CB
          >
          >

Let me rephrase my question:

Everyone agrees that eid echad ne'eman b'issurim.

Is R. Henkin's program to train women to issue authoritative decisions about
women, for women, within the parameters of eid echad ne'eman, or is it
giving women a position of shrara?

However, to address your point, the fact that we rely on people within the
parameters of eid echad ne'eman b'issurim does not mean we are getting a
psak from them.

AP


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cbrown@bestware.com [mailto:cbrown@bestware.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 4:47 PM
> To: avodah@aishdas.org
> Subject: RE: Nida Program
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about the husband and guests of the women who kashered 
> the chicken,
> who now sites down to Shabbos dinner relying on his wife's 
> ability to do
> melicha properly, to reecognize what is and isn't a treifa, 
> etc.?  Aren't
> they implicitly 'consulting' her, or relying on her knowledge 
> to make a
> detrmination of what they can and cannot eat?
> 
> 

>>>Is R. Henkin's program to train women to issue authoritative decisions
about women, for women, within the parameters of eid echad ne'eman, or is
it giving women a position of shrara?

However, to address your point, the fact that we rely on people within the
parameters of eid echad ne'eman b'issurim does not mean we are getting a
psak from them.<<<

Exactly my point.  Please define psak as you wish to use it in the context
of serara.  What sort of decisions do you have in mind that you think would
be a serara problem?

I don't think the type of question has any bearing on shrara; it's the fact
that one is in a position of authority. I believe R. Moshe Feinstein
disallowed women from being shul presidents, even though there's no psak
involved. My question is - if we institutionalize women issuing psak (which
is R. Henken's plan, if I understand it correctly), do we run into a problem
of having women in positions of authority (irregardless of the accuracy of
the psak)?

AP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cbrown@bestware.com [mailto:cbrown@bestware.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 5:03 PM
> To: avodah@aishdas.org
> Subject: RE: Nida Program
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >>>Is R. Henkin's program to train women to issue 
> authoritative decisions
> about women, for women, within the parameters of eid echad 
> ne'eman, or is
> it giving women a position of shrara?
> 
> However, to address your point, the fact that we rely on 
> people within the
> parameters of eid echad ne'eman b'issurim does not mean we 
> are getting a
> psak from them.<<<
> 
> Exactly my point.  Please define psak as you wish to use it 
> in the context
> of serara.  What sort of decisions do you have in mind that 
> you think would
> be a serara problem?
> 
> 

Do you, Reb Avraham, assume that this type of decisionmaking (for lack of
a better word) should be assur for geirim as well?

On Mon, 31 Aug 1998, Micha Berger wrote:

> What can we offer people who want to join? To put it another way, what
> services could we, or ought we, provide frum people looking for a forum in
> which they can find intellectual and emotional connection to observing
> halachah?
> 

As one of the rare individuals who actually has an aishdas e-mailing
address, I guess this issue is one in which I have personal interest. In
this vein, I am forwarding two passages from essays, one on Telshe, and
one on Dr. Nosson Birnbaum (separate cover) in the hope of sparking some
discussion on what a society might focus on. The Telshe text is below.


Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila


Telzer Activism

     In the classic Telshe method, Reb Yosef Leib defines Malchus (shiur
da'as: Melucha) in our times as a scale model of the kingship of Melech
haMoshiach after the ultimate redemption. Secular governments and their
leaders are but an awful caricature of that exalted state. In Klal
Yisroel, however, even individuals often manifest qualities of that lofty
kingship.  Reb Yosef Leib's paradigms for Malchus are Yosef and Yehuda. He
cites the pesukim and midrashim that describe the mightiness of da'as and
courage of heart that imparted them the unique qualities of Avodas Hashem
essential to kingship: Complete self-control and restraint (Yosef's yiras
shomayim); and true humility and willingness to concede error (Yehuda's
confession). Reb Yosef Leib acknowledges that few individuals are capable
of ruling over themselves, transcending their surroundings, and remaining
strong in their da'as. He concludes that Telshe, however, was determined
to develop such qualities in its students, to train the leaders of the
generation. 

     Reb Yosef Leib evidently delivered some shiurei da'as to a small
group. The shiur da'as "KeAnavim BaMidbar", for example, was given to a
va'ad of bnei hayeshiva who had undertaken to follow Reb Yosef Leib's
derech in Avodas Hashem in all aspects of their lives. Clearly, if Telshe
was a yeshiva for the elite, there was an elite within the elite! 
     The Agudas Emes veShalom, founded in 1914, consisted of the cream of
the yeshiva. The Agudah had a formal constitution and structure, including
several committees and sub-committees, headed by members of the yeshiva's
hanhala and veteran talmidim. The Agudah issued an internal annual report
of its activities. The Agudah, however, was not a "club". In the Agudah's
1931 report, for example, we find much inspiring material. To the best of
this author's knowledge, these gems have never before been published. The
following sections are but short excerpts: 

Tikkun haMiddos uShemiras haMitzvos
     At the conference on 1 Rosh Chodesh Iyar the General Assembly
expressed its opinion concerning the imperative for the Agudah in general
and each chaver specifically to interest themselves in rectification of
their deeds and conduct, the improvement and perfection thereof... 
     It is clear to us that straightness of mind is contingent on inner
purity of heart. This Agudah, that has set Emes and the pursuit of
activity solely for the sake of Heaven as its goal, is obliged to
constantly and alertly assess the deeds and activities of all our
chaverim...

The Essence of Yirah and the Pathways of Teshuva
     On 27 Elul and 3 Tishrei very valuable lectures concerning the way of
yirah and the way of teshuva were heard. Through long deliberations on the
on the matters that the lectures addressed, the chaverim clarified and
defined these issues. Basic resolutions that express the emotions of the
chaverim and the extent to which they recognize the essence of the paths
that lead to complete teshuva and true yirah were attained:  1. One derech
leads to both yirah and teshuva. Both emanate from one source.  2. Their
true quality is the restoration of the neshoma to its innocence, to its
state in the holy source from which it was quarried. A direct ramification
of this quality is that the requirement of teshuva is not completed when
one repents for a sin. A person must constantly strive for teshuvas
hanefesh, to draw closer to Hashem, "so he finds that all his days he is
involved in teshuva."  3. The basis of the capacity to do teshuva is the
elevation of one's self [the "hbt"] above one's sins.  [This is achieved
when one] connects with the lofty part of one's self, [the part of the
soul] that unites a person with Hashem. When one sins, then does teshuva,
his internal self pulls him higher, breathes in him new heart, and
illuminates him with a new, divine light.  4. The best tool for teshuva
[and] deveykus in Hashem is the enlightenment of one's soul and the
enhancement of one's da'as with da'as of Hashem and of His Torah. One thus
merits "to witness the pleasantness of Hashem and visit in His sanctuary."
In this way, a person can sever himself from his low state and dwell in
higher worlds.  5. To remain on such a high level, however, it is
necessary to arrange one's daily life according to the demands that the
new level places upon one. One must prepare a throne for Hashem and live
with Him.  6. For this purpose it is necessary to fulfill and love all the
mitzvos in all their details, so that they may remove the barriers that
separate us from our Father in Heaven.  7. Since the light and radiance of
all the mitzvos is to be found in each of them, we are obliged to find the
pleasantness and sweetness of all 613 mitzvos in every mitzva. If instead
we isolate mitzvos and consider each a matter unto itself we serve only
our own deeds, not our G-d.  8. We must always connect our studies to our
activities. We must derive the ramifications lima'aseh from all that we
learn, and apply them to our lives. Thus we will fulfill the words of
Torah with love.  We will consequently be enabled to penetrate deeper into
our studies, to understand and sense them properly, with the requisite
clarity.  9. To achieve all this in life, to not be embarrassed to change
our old paths in life and walk in new ways, requires courage of heart and
strength of da'as. If we develop these traits, then even if we find
ourselves occasionally in a state of decline, our convictions will anchor
us, we will, eventually, rise again.  10. Da'as demands that all deeds be
congruent with our current spiritual state [as it is written]: "And
balance the routes of your feet." Nevertheless, we must constantly be
alert and analyze whether we have perhaps reached some higher level that
requires improvement and betterment in deed.  11. We must also know that
the definition of a Telzer derech haTorah does not negate other pathways
of Avodas Hashem. We reject only narrow and erroneous ways. The general
derech haTorah, however, is the "candle for our feet." We may, therefore,
use various darchei avoda, each in its proper place and time. 

     While most of the members of the Agudah were older and more
accomplished talmidim, formal and informal efforts were made to influence
younger students to strive to the same lofty avoda. To a lesser extent,
the Agudah attempted to bring its darchei avoda to the Mechina and other
educational institutions in the city as well. The Agudah was so
significant, its goals so important, that after Reb Yosef Leib's petira,
the Hanhala of the yeshiva had to bring new ideas to the Agudah for
approval! 
     As the chaverim left Telshe to take positions throughout the world,
the primary focus of the Agudah was to spread the derech ha-emes of Telshe
throughout the world. A 1935 protocol details the various ideas and
approaches that the Agudah used in promulgating yirah and da'as throughout
the world. (In that protocol Reb Avrohom Yitzchok explains how the name
"Emes veShalom"  underlies those approaches.) The passage of time since
then does not diminish the thrill of inspiration and elevation felt
contemplating the remarkable idealism and dedication of the Telzer
talmidim! 
     Within the elite of the Agudah there was an even higher elite: those
who bore the "degel"  (flag) of the yeshiva. To join this circle, a chaver
had to undergo a nisayon, a test, for a certain period. The test seemed
simple: Consistent kevias ittim leTorah, setting daily time for Torah
study, with no exceptions at all, even and especially for chaverim already
out in the field. In a 1926 lecture, Reb Avrohom Yitzchok undertook to
explain why an Agudah that demanded:  "unique, original and comprehensive
self perfection in Torah and life, and much avoda for our whole nation;
whose ultimate purpose is to bring new life to our nation's spirit; to
reveal a new light in Torah and da'as Hashem; and, through all this to
renew the life of the nation upon its ancient foundations and return the
crown to its old lustre, had chosen as its flag a matter that is
universally accepted? That, it seems, reveals none of our special
character and ultimate purpose?" 
     In response, Reb Avrohom Yitzchok quotes Reb Yosef Leib (shiur da'as: 
"LeOlam Yehei Adam Rach KeKaneh"): "...This is analogous to a person that
occupies a certain place by chance gloating over another who
circumnavigated the entire globe and then chose to dwell in that same
place. Although the latter person, who uncovered much chochma and da'as in
his attempts to know the characteristics of the entire creation, now
chooses that same place which the first person occupies by pure
coincidence, bereft of da'as... there is a great distinction between them.
[The second individual] knows the character of that place. He knows how to
love it and he will never leave it. The first person, who finds himself in
the same spot by chance [has no such connection to that place]... This is
also true in relation to middos... Occasionally the simple understanding
meets up with the wise understanding that follows much study. In fact,
however, there are great distances and infinite extraordinary differences
between them..." 
     Thus, at first the chaverim had seen such a test as too simple, but
then they realized, said Reb Avrohom Yitzchok: "...That complete sheleimus
brings an individual to conclusions that correspond very closely to a
simple, straight common sense... Not like those who say that profound
wisdom must be the opposite of common sense... On the contrary, the deeper
a person delves into wisdom, the more uplifted he becomes by it, the more
he understands the straight dei'os that are implanted in man's mind... The
loftiest wisdom is therefore that which is closest to simplicity. In
truth, this principle is one of the foundations of Torah. One Torah was
given to all of Israel, for all levels, from the simplest Jew to the
highest prophet. The Torah laws and mitzvos that are suitable for the
simple Jew are also suitable for the greatest scholar. Each one finds a
taste in them according to his personal achievements... All the middos and
kochos that reside in a simple person are to be found in the greatest and
loftiest person, but, as the latter's character and soul are higher and
loftier, they are illuminated in him by a different light..." 
     In a personal letter from 1933, the executive committee clarifies
that the actual kevias ittim is only the external manifestation of
kabbolas hadegel: "The internal tzura of this acceptance is that you thus
express out of a pure and refined recognition that you are sanctifying a
significant portion of your life's time to be sacred for Hashem... Not
only that, but this hour must be the focal point of all hours. All hours
must turn to and be directed toward this hour, and illumination and
influence must spread out from it to the entire day." 
     Of course, much more was demanded of the Telzer alumni. In 1934 it
was decided to require chaverim in the field to write essays according to
the Telzer derech; to read and critique essays that were sent to them from
Telshe; to correspond at least once every three months with the center in
Telshe; to give regular reports on their spiritual states and on their
influence on local educational and communal institutions; and to ever
prepare the field for newer, more creative avoda. In short, as clarified
succinctly in the 1935 protocol: "The inner nekuda of our avoda in all
branches of life must be the Agudah..." 

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.           ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                 ]
[ For control requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]